President Megawati Soekarnoputri marked World Environment Day

President Megawati Soekarnoputri marked World Environment Day by officiating over the opening of a special green zone for deer at the National Monument (Monas) park in Jakarta last Thursday.

The event was called the first official establishment of a green area during her term, with the ultimate goal of improving air quality in the capital.

The question of how to make Jakarta a comfortable place to live has been discussed at all levels of society. However, implementing any ideas is a whole other question. There are abundant constraints to realizing the dream of making Jakarta clean, green and comfortable.

Ideally, 30 percent of the capital should be open/green area. This would mean 20,000 hectares of the teeming 65,000 hectares of Jakarta should be left open and green.

The fact is that Jakarta has only about 5,000 hectares of open/green space. And the condition of these open spaces is not always ideal, with many city parks, for example, which were designed to provide residents a bit of fresh air, having been vandalized and generally run down. And many buildings are allowed to stand in city parks.

Rampant spatial planning violations is another saddening fact which has hampered any greening plans.

City green areas, such as the Ragunan Zoo complex, Situ Babakan and the Bung Karno sports complex, have been spoiled by various buildings.

Meanwhile, the city administration thinks a green Jakarta can be achieved through "small plants" along the median strips of the city's main thoroughfares.

-- Warta Kota, Jakarta

Koizumi meets with Jintao

It could be interpreted as a sign that the new leadership in China is getting ready to embark on new relationships with other countries.

The first summit meeting between Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi and Chinese President Hu Jintao proceeded amicably all the way through. The atmosphere at this meeting in St. Petersburg was completely different from the icy atmosphere at the meeting between Koizumi and former Chinese President Jiang Zemin in Mexico in autumn.

Hu may wish to open a new era in Japan-China diplomacy, different from the one under the rule of Jiang, in line with these new trends in his country. If that is really his intention, it could be a move that would herald a new era in China.

But it is still too early to decide that China has changed under the new president. As proof, Hu reportedly asked Koizumi to be sure to handle historical controversies and the Taiwan issue appropriately.

A quarter century after the conclusion of the 1978 Japan-China Treaty of Peace and Friendship, bilateral relations have moved beyond the framework of friendship.

Based on national interest, the government is urged to say what must be said and try to develop a new relationship by so doing. Japan-China diplomacy must evolve into one between two equal partners.

-- Yomiuri Shimbun, Tokyo

Weapons of mass destruction in Iraq

John F. Kennedy gambled in 1962 when he ordered the U.S. Navy to quarantine Cuba. When Kennedy and his advisers learned that the Soviet Union had built nuclear missile bases just 90 miles (145 kilometers) from Florida, they considered doing nothing. Instead, they moved in on the Soviets nose to nose. ...

Forty years later, George W. Bush took a gamble with Iraq over "weapons of mass destruction."

He and his advisers may have believed Saddam Hussein had them. Americans want to believe that.

We don't want to believe the president would have attacked Iraq just to protect American businesses' interest in oil or that he wanted to finish what his father started. He wouldn't have tried to sell war in Iraq to Americans and the United Nations on "proof" he didn't have, we hope.

The problem is we don't know. We can't be sure President Bush was telling the truth or twisting it. No one has found those weapons of mass destruction. ...

What real proof did the Bush administration have? Colin Powell, Donald Rumsfeld and the president skimped on the details before the war. We need to hear them now. ...

We went to Iraq to end the threat against the United States.

Was there one? ...

-- York Daily Record, York, Pennsylvania

By The Associated Press= Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers in the United States and abroad: The Guardian, London, on Bush and Iraq: In the U.S., two Senate committees have now called joint hearings on whether the Bush administration misused intelligence information to make its case for an attack on Iraq. In Australia, the Labor opposition announced last night it is taking "a long, hard look" at calling for an independent inquiry on the same issue (Australia's defense minister has already said public confidence may require such a move). In Britain, meanwhile, there is still nothing but stonewalling. Here, ministers continue to set themselves against calls for inquiry and to insult those who make them. This is both a wrong and a foolish position to adopt. An inquiry is justified, and the pressure for one is mounting. ... The Blair government should not be out of step with its Iraq war allies, never mind out of step with its own supporters and backbenchers. ... The focus of an inquiry should be the quality of the intelligence available to ministers in the period leading up to the Iraq war, and the use that was made of it. But it is important not to rule out issues that might be raised by this central theme, including the effect on British diplomacy and the implications for the government's legal position on the war. ... [ El Pais, Madrid, Spain, on the G-8 summit: That the Evian summit has gone ahead without problems and recriminations despite the rifts caused by the war in Iraq represents a success. Bush and Chirac have proved, at least publicly, that they can work together for the future (of Iraq) despite having disagreed deeply over this conflict. Disagreements have become secondary. Bush has hardly shifted his position and has imposed his agenda, including a plan of action against weapons of mass destruction, despite the central argument that Bush, Blair and Aznar used to justify the war in Iraq has yet to produce any concrete discoveries in the field. [ Corriere della Sera, Milan, Italy, on Bush agenda after the G-8 conference: Without sounding improper, the G-8 conference in Evian might go down in history as a masterpiece in slight-of-hand. George Bush has shook hands with (Jacques) Chirac and (Gerhard) Schroeder. He is once again the paladin of the Atlantic unity, pressing for a multinational collaboration. If what the international community wanted was to recover collective dialogue, then the thousands of niceties in Evian have been useful in reaching that goal. And it is surely this political result that prevails over the new promises made to the poor and ill of the world. But in the war on terrorism, as in that against the spread of weapons of mass destruction, the president of the United States has in fact imposed his agenda, challenging the others to match America's determination, or else find themselves marginalized. Alone, George Bush has abandoned the G-8 to go and defend in person the new Middle Eastern order. Anyone who attempts to remind him that Europe, the UN and Russia co-authored the "road map for peace" has been left behind. Yesterday, before the Palestinian prime minister (Mahmoud Abbas) and Israeli prime minister (Ariel) Sharon, Bush called upon both parties to take responsibility. The Palestinians, if they want a "free and peaceful" state, must stop the terror attacks or risk derailing the entire project. Israel, meanwhile, must begin dismantling its illegal settlements. Here, all the political slight-of-hand, seen in Evian, is gone. The president of the United States has come to the table. At least now we need to root for him, we need to seize the opportunity of a strong and common strategy. Even if Evian confirms that multilateralism is a desirable option for the US, it is only one option. [ Al Akhbar, Cairo, Egypt, on Iraq: We hope that the dreams of peace, stability and development in the region will not crumble because of the maneuvers of the Likud party, which believes in Israeli security concerns, Israel's interests and a Greater Israel that extends from the Euphrates to the Nile. These illusions have gained momentum and push following Iraq's occupation, its neutralization and its removal from the Arab world. Supposedly, the extensive presence of U.S. forces in Iraq, and the permanent presence of additional forces in the Gulf, should end all of Israel's illusions and fears about security risks. This strong and permanent presence provides Israel with protection by America, the world's only big power and one that guarantees Israel's security and superiority over its neighbors. It was so annoying that the United States agreed to consider Israel's reservations about the road map peace plan. If these reservations entail the rejection of the return of Palestinian refugees and of an Israeli halt to settlement building, then it means that Israel is bent on dynamiting the road map and all other peace plans - even if they are initiated by America. [ Straits Times, Singapore, on dark clouds over Yangon: The dark days of military crackdown and political subjugation are descending on Myanmar again. This is the conclusion the outside world will draw following the apparent collapse last week of the compact struck a year ago between the ruling junta and the dissident Aung San Suu Kyi, when she was freed after 1 1/2 years of house arrest. Ms. Suu Kyi, the leader of the National League for Democracy (NLD) which eclipsed the generals in a free election in 1990, is effectively back in detention after street disturbances outside the capital were blamed on her. The military authorities call the act 'protective custody.' Protection from whom? More pertinent a question might be, protection for whom? If the (junta) meant her release last year to be a full and final settlement of the 'democratic reform' it committed itself to, it should be disabused of the notion quickly. That was the opening installment. United Nations chief Kofi Annan needs to do better than make concerned noises. He should place the full weight of his office's prestige on getting Yangon to resume a serious dialogue with Ms Suu Kyi. It is unrealistic to expect the junta to turn over power fully to the NLD on the basis of the 1990 result, but a system of power-sharing seemed achievable this time last year. It is the UN's primary duty to keep the agenda alive, with support from the ASEAN nations and China, Myanmar's principal ally. [ MORE[

GetAP 1.00 -- JUN 6, 2003 00:21:41