A populist policy

The common people are no more than a commodity, both to intellectuals and politicians. Their fate is often discussed in seminars. In reality however, the poor remain poor, and their number is even increasing.

Poor people are indeed an important commodity to political parties, which they to win their hearts and minds to emerge victorious in the election -- even if the parties' promises to them are merely a bluff.

Thus, we welcome the completion of the draft of the national health insurance system to be submitted to the House of Representatives on Friday.

Once it is approved by the House, the government will shoulder the health insurance of poor people to give them access to health service.

We do hope that a populist policy that takes the side of the poor would not aim only to win their hearts and minds once in five years. -- Media Indonesia, Jakarta

JP/NATIONAL NEWS

Financing of terrorism

The federal cabinet has approved amendments to the Anti- Terrorism Act 1997 and increased punishments for financiers of terrorism. Under the new laws, jail terms will be doubled for any individual or entity involved in financing terrorism. What is significant is that all societies and institutions that have a potential to act as conduits for such financing shall be obliged to establish bank accounts and maintain information about their employees and clients failing which they will face fine and revocation of their licences.

This amendment comes shortly after the signing of the Additional Protocol to the Saarc Regional Convention on Combating Terrorism. The protocol specifically deals with the issue of financing. Funding terrorism through conduits has been taken up time and again but with varying degrees of success.

A study by the Pakistan Centre for Philanthropy disclosed that five years ago, Pakistanis donated a sum of over Rs 70 billion towards various causes. A large portion of that money was believed to have gone to religious organizations. The trend of giving money to religious organizations, for building mosques or running madrassas, has not changed in the past few years.

Some of this money has found its way into promoting terrorist activities. The government undoubtedly needs to check this at the earliest, but what has also to be understood is that not all contributions to religious and charitable organizations end up in the wrong hands. Some organizations provide services that act as a social safety net. Curtailing the work of these organizations will only add to human suffering. The challenge is to punish the wrong doers and let the others function unhindered.

-- The DAWN, Karachi

JP/NATIONAL NEWS

Manipulating the poor

The common people are no more than a commodity, both to intellectuals and politicians. Their fate is often discussed in seminars, but in reality however, the poor remain poor, and their number is increasing.

Poor people are indeed an important commodity for political parties, who need to win their hearts and minds to emerge victorious in the election -- even if the parties' promises to them are merely a bluffing game.

Nevertheless, we welcome the completion of the draft of the national health insurance system to be submitted to the House of Representatives on Friday.

Once it is approved by the House, the government will shoulder the health insurance of poor people to give them access to health services.

We do hope that such a populist policy that takes the side of the poor will not simply be aimed at winning their votes once every five years. -- Media Indonesia, Jakarta

Win-win situation for air travelers

AirAsia this week launched its budget air travel operation with a bang. It is offering a rock-bottom promotional fare of Bt99 for a one-way trip to any of the major domestic destinations, including Chiang Mai, Phuket, Hat Yai and Khon Kaen. The promotional fare -- which actually goes up to about Bt250 when taxes and fees are added -- is unheard of in this country, where air travel until now has been a luxury beyond the means of the great majority. As of yesterday, about 70 per cent of AirAsias 20,000 promotional tickets were snapped up by frequent air travelers, as well as curious people who have never been in an aircraft before. Thailands first budget airline could not have found a better way to gain such huge publicity.

Cost-conscious travelers will also be happy to know that when AirAsia starts its regular no-frills flights, its tickets will be 20-50 per cent lower than for the other airlines. Consumers will have more choices when they sit down to plan their trips for business or for pleasure.

More significantly, the new budget airline will be the catalyst for a drastic change in the way airlines operate, not only in Thailand but throughout Southeast Asia.

Already competition is heating up as Thai Airways International (THAI) and other domestic airline operators have begun to offer their own promotional fares to try to keep customers. They are also known to be looking at ways to streamline their operations, something they might otherwise not have done had AirAsia not burst onto the scene.

Competitive pricing and finely-tuned market segmentation is the name of the game. Competitive pricing calls for all airline operators to lower their operating costs without compromising quality of the services that their respective customers demand.

On the one hand, airlines that fail to adjust to changing market conditions, characterized in this case by cut-throat competition, will fall by the wayside. Those which survive the baptism of fire will be rewarded with more business as a result of an expected rapid expansion in the customer base as more people take to the air -- and greater profitability in the long run. At present, only 10 percent of the Thai population travels by air.

Indeed, the whole transport industry, including bus and train services, which are the mainstay of domestic travelers, may well be transformed for the better as people adjust to the convenience and cheapness of air travel.

From the consumer's point of view, this increased competition which will transform the airline industry should pay dividends in terms of value for money, more choices and more satisfaction.

Behind the scenes, though, AirAsia, which is certain to completely transform domestic air travel in this country, is the result of an extraordinary deal made between powerful business groups with connections in high places in both Thailand and Malaysia.

Shin Corp, founded by Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, holds a 51 percent stake in AirAsia Aviation -- a joint venture in partnership with Malaysias Air Asia. The deal smacks of a conflict of interest given the fact that the Thaksin administration controls the government agencies charged with regulating the airline and aviation industries.

The high-profile deal, once made, cannot be undone. Although the advent of a budget airline in this country is an exception to the rule of fair competition and the concept of a level playing field, the Thaksin government must now stand back and let AirAsia compete against existing rivals and even more newcomers which will come along to share in the swelling air travel market.

-- The Nation, Bangkok

Sensitive issues

The opposition parties should stop trying to prevent debates about sensitive but important issues.

Defense Agency Director General Shigeru Ishiba's remark about the need to review the nation's three principles concerning Japan's self-imposed ban on weapons exports has the opposition up in arms.

Critics immediately reacted to Ishiba's statement by attempting to prevent arguments about the pros and cons of his proposal.

Ishiba made the remark in connection with the government's plan to partially review the three principles as a means of expediting joint efforts by Japan and the United States to develop and produce a missile defense system. He said the scope of Japanese efforts should be expanded to include other military technology and nations.

He also argued that the government should discuss what kind of approach Japan should adopt in its efforts to develop and produce military equipment in the post-Cold War era.

Weapons development around the world is progressing rapidly today. To fulfill their obligations, the Self-Defense Forces should possess equipment commensurate with the technological levels of military hardware used by other countries. Given its dire fiscal straits, this country must reduce the cost of producing military equipment.

-- The Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo ===

'Arms trader' charge nonsense

Although Ishiba's proposal is convincing in many respects, some opposition parties angrily reacted to his suggestion, saying that he was attempting to "lift the ban on arms exports." They made it sound as if Ishiba wanted Japan to become an "arms trader." This assertion is ridiculous.

In fact, Ishiba has emphasized the need to regulate arms exports, saying, "(Japan) should not recklessly sell weapons. Its arms sales must be ethically acceptable."

Many nations have reduced military expenditures since the end of the Cold War. At the same time, however, costs have risen as a result of efforts to produce more advanced weapons.

This has encouraged arms industries to integrate and realign themselves. Many countries are seeking to jointly develop and build weapons as means of reducing production costs.

This can be seen in a U.S.-led project to develop the F-35 fighter. About 10 nations have joined the project, including Britain, Italy and Denmark. Singapore plans to buy the plane.

Japan is the only major power to have fallen behind in this respect. This is due to its three principles banning arms exports. -- The Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo

===

Missile defense affected

The Type 90 tank, which Japan developed on its own, is three times as expensive as a similar U.S. tank. Is it in Japan's interest to strictly adhere to the three principles despite the various problems it faces in bringing its military technology up to par with other nations and reducing production costs? The three principles definitely have to be reviewed.

The joint efforts by Japan and the United States to develop the missile defense system is an exception to these principles. However, the two nations are finding it impossible to bring the project to the production stage because of Japan's self-imposed ban on military parts exports. This could prevent the United States from selling jointly developed equipment to other nations. If that happened, Washington would think twice before teaming up with Japan again.

In ensuring the nation's peace and security, the government must not only shore up Japan's security arrangements with the United States, it also should recognize the importance of improving the technological level of the nation's defense industry.

The three principles were laid down by the administration of Prime Minister Eisaku Sato in 1967, and revised by the government of Prime Minister Takeo Miki to ban all arms exports in 1976.

They were a product of the Cold War and were formulated to suit the domestic circumstances of those days. Therefore, it is time for Japan to create a set of new principles concerning arms exports in a manner suited to the new international situation.

-- Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo