President Roh Moo-hyun has done well to promise to take the lead in reducing corruption and promoting transparency. A strong presidential commitment will no doubt make a big difference in cleaning up a corruption-ridden society.
Korea is more venal than other nations with similar economic strength, as Transparency International's 2003 corruption perceptions chart showed. Korea, the 11th largest economy in terms of gross national income, was ranked 50th on the chart, with Finland being perceived to be the least corrupt among the 133 surveyed countries.
If Korea is to become more transparent and efficient, it needs to fight more vigorously against corruption than it does now. That is what President Roh promised when he received a report from the Korea Independent Commission against Corruption on Monday.
He did well to decide to call law-enforcement agencies into conference every month and preside himself. If he regularly checks the progress in his campaign against corruption, the prosecution, police and other law-enforcement agencies will surely give top priority to cracking down on bribe-taking and embezzlement by public officials and politicians.
True, the prosecution, often accused of being a "maiden to power," may not have done its job properly when investigating high-profile corruption scandals in the past. But it has improved its image greatly since it recently arrested top officials of political parties and presidential aides on charges of raising illegal funds for the 2002 presidential candidates.
An agency under the control of the presidential commission would be reminiscent of a police detachment that conducted investigations on the orders of the presidential office. The police detail had been accused of being compliant with the wishes of the president until it was disbanded in October 2000.
-- The Korea Herald, Seoul Sonia Gandhi's inner voice
What India's Sonia Gandhi did is unthinkable for a modern politician: With the prime minister's post hers for the taking, in response to what she called "her inner voice," Gandhi turned it down.
Hindu nationalists had threatened to riot if she became prime minister because of her Italian birth. Now mobs of Gandhi's supporters did riot to get her to change her mind.
She quietly refused and in her place the party selected Manmohan Singh, 71, a respected economist. The choice of Singh had an immediate benefit: India's financial markets, which had plunged, recovered strongly.
One hopes that Gandhi's graceful refusal to serve will dampen an ugly streak of religious fanaticism and xenophobia that taints Indian politics.
-- The Cincinnati Post, Cincinnati, Ohio
Bush's Iraq speech
The atmosphere in the U.N. headquarters seems to be better than it has for quite some time, but there is no indication that countries like Russia, Germany and France are prepared to help the unraveling of something they went against from the beginning.
That they would help the United States in Iraq now is particularly unlikely given that Washington ignored their voices in the run-up to the Iraqi war.
And here is the dilemma that was illustrated in the president's speech this week: The more successful Bush is when it comes to getting support from those closest to him, in other words, to be re-elected, the harder it will become for the United States to get global support for Iraq.
-- Dagens Nyheter, Stockholm, Sweden
The Israel-Palestine conflict
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon destroys parts of a refugee camp in Gaza. With that, he has only destroyed Israel's chances for peace. They must instead be built.
Israel has again carried out a mini-campaign on the occupied territories, in Gaza and again says it is there to fight Palestinian terrorism and opposition. The border with Egypt is to be sealed to make arms smuggling impossible. It is also revenge, retaliation. And deterrence.
Once again, the Palestinian population is being hit. Some lose their lives, others their homes, in an action that exposes that the occupier lacks respect for the occupied. All Palestinians are made into enemies. The population is to be terrorized into not supporting those who resort to weapons. The Palestinians are to be flogged into obedience. ...
There are Israelis who see that Sharon's policies don't tempt Palestinians to anything other than resistance. But it is still Sharon who is prime minister.
-- Bergens Tidende, Bergen, Norway
A fair go for East Timor
Australia, already exploiting the wealth of the Timor Sea, has bright prospects of much more to come. East Timor, still waiting and dependent on aid from Australia and elsewhere, is impatient. Its determination to win a better deal on Timor Sea resources is straining relations with Australia in a way not seen since it won its independence, with Australia's help.
In July 2001 East Timor's unelected leaders and representatives from the United Nations signed a provisional agreement with the Australian Government to assure East Timor 90 percent of tax revenues from oil and gas extracted from the so- called joint development area in the Timor Sea. That agreement changed the 50:50 split set down in the Timor Gap Treaty signed with Indonesia in 1989. The Australian Government says the new arrangement is generous and is dismayed that free, independent East Timor now accuses Australia of unfairness.
What has gone wrong? The Foreign Minister, Alexander Downer, says Dili is trying to shame Australia. He deplores its claims of unfairness as a tactic, surprising and mistaken "after all we've done for East Timor". The President of East Timor, Xanana Gusmao, says it is East Timor that is generous to Australia since East Timor's true entitlement is being denied it. Already, he says, Australia collects a million dollars a day in oil and gas revenues that rightfully belong to East Timor.
Production from the Corallina and Laminaria fields, both just south of Australia's border with Indonesia and just west of the joint development area with East Timor, began in 1999. The East Timor Government says revenue from this production -- now going entirely to Australia -- as well as 100 percent, not 90 percent, of what is in prospect from the joint development zone, rightfully belongs to East Timor. It wants its claim settled by the International Court of Justice and says that Canberra acted in bad faith by saying -- a few weeks before East Timor gained its independence -- that it would no longer accept that body's jurisdiction.
Many Australians will agree with Mr Downer that the present arrangements are generous and that East Timor is ungrateful. It would be shortsighted, however, in the negotiations to confirm or modify by treaty the arrangements provisionally agreed to in July 2001, to reject Dili's claims out of hand. It is not only in the interests of East Timor that it stand proud and self-sufficient, thanks to the bounty of its full, fair share of Timor Sea resources. It is in Australia's, too. -- The Sydney Morning Herald
Forum provides measure of trust
Ten years ago, members of the Association of South east Asian Nations set up a subsidiary called the ASEAN Regional Forum.
ARF, as it has unfortunately come to be known, has the vague mission of hosting meetings of the countries involved in the security of the ASEAN region. There was no grand vision back in 1994, but the ARF has become one of the most important ASEAN- sponsored groups.
ASEAN itself is designed to hold together 10 diverse nations by non-interference in one another's business. ARF holds the feet of each member to the fire in an attempt to create trust and peace through openness.
Ministers of its 24 member countries are preparing for the anniversary meeting next month in Indonesia with an important new member and an enlarged responsibility.
The outgoing government in India correctly dropped its unwarranted objection to membership by Pakistan.
Pakistan is a frontline nation in the war on terrorism, and brings much needed experience and information to the Jakarta meetings in late June.
The other troubling dispute near the top of the ARF agenda is North Korea. Thailand was instrumental in convincing Pyongyang to join the ARF at the Bangkok meeting in 2000.
Even getting Pyongyang to send the foreign minister to ARF meetings has been a trial. Indonesia hopes to convince Paek Nam- sun to show up next month.
The advantages for North Korea seem obvious. Yet the Kim Jong- il dictatorship seems oblivious to the desire of all Asia-Pacific countries to welcome a peaceful North Korea into their midst.
The ARF is not just another excuse for Asia-Pacific leaders to get together and have pictures taken for the TV news and front pages back home. The forum has an agenda, which is to promote peace and cooperation through open discussion and -- as the diplomats put it -- "frank" exchanges.
There is a time for consensus, but not at ARF meetings. Forum members must confront the tough issues head-on, even at the cost of public disagreement. -- Bangkok Post -----------------------------------------------------------
GetAFP 2.10 -- MAY 24, 2004 04:28:09
--------------------------------------------------------------
The Sacramento Bee, Sacramento, California, on President Bush's speech:
On two fronts President Bush is belatedly trying to placate critics of the U.S. occupation in Iraq - and, no doubt, to save his presidency. On Monday, U.S. and British diplomats proposed a resolution in the United Nations Security Council that would endorse the transition plan that the president outlined in a speech...
Bush's five-point plan would transfer sovereignty on June 30; establish security; continue rebuilding Iraq's infrastructure; enlist unspecified "additional international support for Iraq's transition"; and achieve full Iraqi self-government by the end of next year. But all of this has been known for some time. Missing in Bush's speech ... is any acknowledgment of serious mistakes and an appeal to the international community to play a central part in resolving a crisis that is far worse than the president can ever bring himself to admit. ...
Criticism of Bush's failure to reach out more convincingly to such critics as France, Germany and Russia, which strenuously opposed the Iraq war, is warranted. But it's not at all clear that the administration can get the level of cooperation needed, in particular the deployment of large numbers of foreign troops in the face of deadly attacks by insurgents.
The only way to find out is to take the leap: Agree to share authority in return for the allies' agreement to share the burden. That means working out a host of details - with the allies and with the interim government in Baghdad - that were lacking in Bush's speech and in the U.N. resolution as offered. One would like to think much more is going on behind the scenes.
It's unrealistic to expect the president to acknowledge the gravity of the mistakes made. It's also questionable that he would have gone as far as he has were it not for the impending election and his falling numbers in opinion polls. But for whatever reason, he has begun to move in the right direction. He needs to do more, and his critics must help, if he will let them. ---
The Florida Times Union, Jacksonville, Florida, on Japanese- U.S. beef ban:
Nearly everyone is aware of the "mad cow" outbreak in Europe during the 1980s. Yet, there was no panic when a single cow (from Canada) was found in the United States in December. Nor was there need for any.
Both consumer awareness of the problem and consumer confidence in the beef industry are at high levels. The industry has learned the mistakes made in Britain, where the problem originated, and has a "multi-fire wall" system in place to detect problems.
Still, other nations such as Japan block U.S. beef and liberal politicians in the United States attempt to heap on regulations that would do little to protect consumers but would increase the cost of beef.
The Japanese ban costs the meat industry $1.2 billion a year. ...
Nothing is risk-free, but U.S. food is safe. Americans like beef. Each year, Americans consume 67 pounds of beef each, on average. Florida, with a $330 million cattle industry, has a direct stake in the issues of food safety and fair trade.
The sooner the trade issue is resolved, the better. ---
The Tribune-Democrat, Johnstown, Pennsylvania, on Alan Greenspan:
Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan, who has guided our economy through good and bad times, has been re-nominated by President Bush for a fifth four-year term. The appointment, which is expected to sail through the Senate, was no big surprise, even though Greenspan and Bush don't always see eye to eye. ...
The Fed chairman has held the job since the summer of 1987 and has steered our nation through several potential disasters - the 1998 Asian financial crisis, the tech bust of 2000 and the recession stemming from the aftermath of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, which closed the nation's stock and bond markets for more than a week. ...
At age 78, Greenspan may not complete his full term, some pundits say. But others contend that our central banker will tough it out to the end to ensure that our nation's intricate economic machine is running smoothly. Let's hope so. --- The Dallas Morning News, Dallas, Texas, Kerry on the Democratic convention:
You could ridicule John Kerry for suggesting he may not accept the Democratic presidential nomination at his party's convention in July. What's the man thinking? A nominating convention is for, well, nominating a candidate.
But let's not be too quick here. The senator has a point. The last exciting floor battle at a national political convention was in 1976, when Jerry Ford and Ronald Reagan skirmished. Ever since, the nominee has been known way ahead of the convention.
Today, the gatherings serve mostly as a trade show for political junkies, including us journalists. Like doctors going to Vegas or Miami for their professional gatherings, the political class meets every four years, eats good food, hears speeches and talks among itself. And the thing is televised.
Oh, yes, taxpayers foot part of the bill. In an era of record deficits, maybe it's time to stop that and start selling naming rights. Couldn't you see it: the United Auto Workers' Democratic National Convention? Or the Pfizer Republican National Convention?
This has possibilities. The lobbyists already dominate conventions. They host big parties for congressmen and others. They might as well pay the whole tab. Well, it's just a thought. Whether he meant to or not, Mr. Kerry has shown that political conventions have outlived their usefulness. We need an alternative.
Whatever the alternative, today's conventions are looking as dated as the old Pong computer game. And with security so tight these days, a new format makes sense. This one definitely isn't working.
GetAP 1.00 -- MAY 28, 2004 00:22:53
;AP; ANPA ..r.. Editorial Roundup By The Associated Press= JP/
By The Associated Press= Here are excerpts from editorials in newspapers around the world: --- Straits Times, Singapore, on Taiwan:
Semantics are an essential part of the political game that Taiwanese leaders are wont to play with China. In the latest manifestation of word play, Taiwanese President Chen Shui-bian's inauguration speech last week was calculated not to infuriate China but to say - or omit - enough to keep alive its suspicions about the island's course of action.
What he must keep in mind is that, unlike pro-independence fundamentalists who can make demands without having to take responsibility for the consequences, he is mandated to ensure the security and prosperity of Taiwan. Nothing could be more important to the Taiwanese.
China's annoyed response to the speech was expected. What it will look for now is where Chen's actions lead. He would do himself and his voters a great disservice if he believed that China would not act if he crossed the line. It is not in China's interests to fight a war that sets back its amazing economic transformation, but it would have no option but to fight if the alternative is the loss of Taiwan. Unlike word play, realities can be horrendously simple." --- El Pais, Madrid, Spain, on soldiers with immunity:
The scandal over torture and mistreatment of Iraqi prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison that is shocking the world makes immoral the Bush administration's request for an extension of international legal immunity for its soldiers in Iraq. This position is not new. The Security Council already granted this benefit in 2002 and 2003. But the context has changed and the American request has become a challenge to the very raison d'etre of the newly created International Criminal Court: to put an end to impunity for war crimes and crimes against humanity, offenses which include the events that took place behind the walls of that shameful prison. --- Jordan Times, Amman, Jordan, on Israeli incursion into Rafah:
As the world sat and watched last week, Israel entered Rafah ostensibly to root out armed Palestinians and destroy smuggling tunnels.
In the process, 43 people were killed, among them ... a three- year-old girl, who died of a bullet wound to the neck. Add to the killing of children and the unarmed, the destruction of dozens of homes.
Let there be no doubt about it: Israel did not enter Rafah to protect itself; it entered Rafah to exact revenge for the killings of 13 of its soldiers two weeks ago.
It entered Rafah to collectively punish Gazans for daring to stand up, in one way or another, to the Israeli occupation. It entered Rafah to tell the world that they can criticize until their faces turn as blue as the U.N. flag: Israel can and will do what it wants to Palestinians. And what did the world do? A U.N. Security Council resolution was passed that, for once, the U.S. did not veto. Europeans complained. Arabs remonstrated. Even Israelis protested.
The response from Israel? The Israeli army denied there was a humanitarian disaster in Rafah and said the number of houses demolished were inflated by "Palestinian propaganda." Israeli Defense Minister Shaul Mofaz, meanwhile, said while troops are being redeployed, "Operation Rainbow" would continue for a couple of days. In other words, Israel simply responded to international criticism by ignoring it.
It is time the EU and the U.N., as well as the Arab world, started pushing seriously and with determination for sanctions to be imposed on Israel.
While the U.S. will resist, as Washington resisted when sanctions were imposed on South Africa, the sanctions eventually worked there. They may eventually work against Israel. They will certainly have more of an effect than the international community's current efforts. --- The Times, London, on Iraq:
Grand promises are not in order, even though there is still room for grander vision in the long term. Iraqis know that June 30 cannot bring a wholesale transfer of sovereignty, but they need to feel that the date will mark a material shift towards a national government. The draft resolution presented to the UN Security Council yesterday left some important details to be decided until the caretaker government is named at the end of this month. But it clearly reflects the U.S. determination to make good on its word in encouraging Iraqis to take responsibility for themselves as soon as possible. It must now be hoped that the Security Council's blessing will follow, and that such a blessing will signal a commitment by the international community to see things through, and not provide an alibi to cut and run. ...
Agreement may yet be scuppered by French and German insistence on a date for military withdrawal. But experience in Somalia and elsewhere suggests that leaving too soon would reap more certain disaster than staying too long. Setting a fixed date could be a gift for those who want to see democracy fail. ... --- The Guardian, London, on Taiwan:
The Taiwan Strait is one of the last items of unfinished business from the cold war - and it can still make us shiver. Thursday's inauguration of Taiwan's recently re-elected president, Chen Shui-bian, has been watched with very close attention.
No one can quarrel with the status quo in which Taiwan is effectively independent while everyone follows the U.S. lead in pretending that "there is only 'one China."' What worries many people is the danger that either the pro-independence fanatics in Taiwan or the pro-reunification die-hards on the mainland will unmask this charade. We can breathe a little easier now, after encouraging signals from both sides. ...
Mr. Chen has a bad record of ratcheting up his hyperbole when in domestic trouble, and China still regards him as a "slippery politician." Beijing's moderation is offset by the way it has bullied Hong Kong over political reform, and it still talks of crushing a move to independence "at any cost.". Both sides should be urged to take it easy and settle for what they have got. --- Daily Telegraph, London, on attack on the Shia:
Yesterday's American attack on the militia of the Shia extremist Moqtada al-Sadr comes not a moment too soon. But what is its purpose?
The fear must be that this is a tactical escalation of force along a broad line of strategic retreat: biff him a bit before the next round of negotiation and accommodation begins. Obviously, al-Sadr has not won in strictly military terms, but that was never his game.
Rather, his aim was to create a political aesthetic for the gratification of certain portions of the Muslim world. He has defied the coalition and got away with it for a considerable period of time, at least in the sense of avoiding total annihilation (rather after the fashion of Yasser Arafat's escape from the clutches of the Israelis in Lebanon in 1982). ...
Iraq's Shia majority, especially, was disempowered under the largely Sunni Ba'athists. Since Saddam Hussein was overthrown, they have been told by the Western powers that there must be a dramatic slow-down in de-Ba'athification for the sake of "national reconciliation"; "affirmative action" for their Sunni oppressors; and now, their political fate is to be molded by the UN special envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, a Sunni Arab nationalist of the old school who had few problems with Saddam.
Inevitably, even the least sectarian of the Iraqi Shias are asking: is the political playing field to be tilted against them once more for the sake of the West's overarching relationship with their Sunni Arab neighbors? ... --- La Repubblica, Rome, on Italian participation in Iraq:
The project of installing in Baghdad a government that represents the whole of Iraqi society that also keeps excellent relations with Washington seems to have failed.
The peace project in Iraq requires a political and military step turnaround: an authentic step backward by the Bush administration.
This step back will never happen, unless the desertion of important allies does not force the White House to rethink. That's the reason the recall of (Italian) troops ... seems a gesture of farsighted wisdom.
The choice of staying in Nasiryia or leaving has to be subject to rational evaluation, in which it would be absurd not to take into account what people actually want.
All the polls show that Italians favor a withdrawal. In the last ... 57 percent of those asked declared themselves against Italian soldiers remaining in Iraq.
Certainly it is an error to govern according to polls but it's no less absurd to blindfold one's eyes when popular opinion shows itself with such clarity.
If in this situation the authors of a mistaken war were severely punished by voters, it would be a clear sign of victory for democracies. --- MORE[
GetAP 1.00 -- MAY 28, 2004 00:22:44