• 10 December 2007 - Government of Singapore Investment Corporation (GIC) pumps US$10 billion into UBS amid significant writedowns related to its subprime banking exposure in the United States.
  
  
• 1 April 2008 - UBS announces a further writedown of US$19 billion due to the abovementioned exposure and seeks a further US$15 billion of capital infusion.

The total writedown has hit US$37.4 billion, making it the biggest writedown by any bank since the credit crunch began.

Question: Did our government's investment vehicle made the right choice when it saw UBS's initial capital plea as a chance to get a 9% stake in the bank? Or was it betting on the wrong horse? Or is this the lowest it can go before bouncing back and proving GIC's investment choice correct?

A bit scary considering that GIC is investing Singapore's vast reserves. But then again, US$10 billion is a drop in the bowl when our official reserves is US$172 billion as of February this year, making us number 8 in the world.

Let's hope UBS doesn't go under and make GIC's investment a fiasco. However I do wonder whether the asset managers were aware that there could be further writedowns or were certain facts either withheld by UBS or were totally unknown by them at that time. In which case, how diligent was GIC's due diligence?

I guess this should provide our MPs new materials to base their questions on when parliament next sits on 21 April 2008.

And in other news, an outline of a deal has almost been reached for Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe to step down. The opposition says it won Saturday's general elections.

Labels: banking-finance, international, singapore

Sir Edmund Hilary, the first man who conquered Mt Everest with his Sherpa guide Tenzing Norgay, died today of a heart attack at a Hospital in Auckland, New Zealand. He was 88 years old.

Unknown to a lot of people, he was also responsible for setting up the Himalayan trust during his time as New Zealand's High Commissioner to India. This trust built schools, hospitals, bridges, etc for the Sherpas in their remote region of Nepal. Ever shy of publicity and fame, it was to this organisation that he poured in lots of time and effort. Sadly, his wife Louise and one of his daughters Belinda died in a plane crash while en route to meet him during one of his hospital building projects.

He is survived by his second wife June, son Peter, daughter Sarah and six grandchildren.

• BBC News - Life in pictures: Sir Edmund Hillary
  
• BBC News - Obituary: Sir Edmund Hillary

Labels: history, human interest, international

Wah lao... This Chavez is really one fucked up bugger. He's the rude and brutish one, and now he accuses the King of Spain for being arrogant (see post on original incident here). This guy is so unbelievably pathetic!

Here you have it folks, the face of a hooligan and recalcitrant joke of a president. Sooner of later, he is going to fuck up his country so bad they wished they had never believe his rhetoric and elected him to power.



And as a joke and an object of derision, I guess you can lump in the same league as Thio Li-Ann.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7094148.stm

Labels: international, politics

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez says, "But I think it's imprudent for a king to shout at a president to shut up. Mr King, we are not going to shut up."

Pot calling the kettle black? Chavez, you're the imprudent one. Why don't you watch the video clip of your own imprudent behaviour? Not only are you imprudent, you are rude and brutish as well. I think some of your citizens have more courtesy than you.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/7089988.stm

Labels: international, politics

So anyway, there was this Ibero-American summit in Chile that ended yesterday.

During the closing meeting, Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez levelled insults on the previous conservative prime minister of Spain, Jose Maria Aznar, calling him a fascist and added that "fascists are not human. A snake is more human."

While Aznar was noted for his strong support of Bush and is the political opposite of the left-leaning socialist current Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, that didn't stop Zapatero from defending his predecessor in a speech that drew applause from some participants during his turn at the microphone.

        "Former Prime Minister Aznar was democratically elected by the Spanish people and was a legitimate representative of the Spanish people."

        "I want to express to you President Hugo Chavez that in a forum where there are democratic governments ... one of the essential principles is respect."

        "You can disagree radically, without being disrespectful."

However Chavez being his usual uncouth self tried a few times to interrupt Zapatero's speech even though his microphone was not on.

In the end, I guess he pissed some people off royally (unsurprising) because King Juan Carlos of Spain, who was seated next to Zapatero, leaned forward and exclaimed angrily to Chavez, "Why don't you shut up!" ("Por qué no te callas!" in Spanish) before leaving.

Chavez did not immediately respond, but later used time given to him by his close ally Nicaraguan President Daniel Ortega to answer Zapatero's speech.

        "The Venezuelan government reserves the right to respond to any aggression, anywhere, in any space and in any manner."

Hmmm... Even when you're the cause of the outburst? *tsk tsk tsk*

Check out the report and video clip of the above on BBC News.

Gosh, Chavez really comes across as a spoilt, petulant and unrepentant child more than an elected representative of a country. And when a president is the head of state and government of a country, his behaviour really reflects badly on Venezuela and its people.

Labels: international, politics

Stade de France: South Africa 15 - England 6. One full Chinese zodiac cycle later, they did it again.



The last time the Springbok won the rugby world cup was in 1995, a year after the first multi-party non-apartheid election was held, which the ANC won by a convincing majority. It was significant because rugby was an apartheid era white-only sport and the Springbok was the team that inspired protests across the world and the team at the heart of South Africa's international sporting isolation.

Their 1995 victory was truly significant, not only in the world of sports but politically and internationally. South Africa had come out of their pariah status with a huge bang.

From a leaf of history (courtesy of BBC News):


And yesterday, they finally cemented their status as one of the best rugby nations in the world. They won fairly and they truly deserved the title. And unlike the usual football hooliganism, fans of the English rose both at home and in Paris behaved admirably without violence and rioting despite the intense emotions.

I guess that's why they call it a gentleman's sport.

Labels: international, sports

Reuters today published a photo of Ibrahim Gambari shaking hands with Aung San Suu Kyi when he was in Myanmar for talks. He has since left and should be on the way back to the UN via Singapore.

This is the first photo of her in years. Gosh... She has aged so much. And yes, she, like the rest of the civilians and monks of Myanmar, has also suffered much.

I don't know if Gambari's visit will help much. This is a regime that is so insular that it is never bothered with what the world thinks.

I guess the only way things are going to change is (1) a new leader in the likes of Mikhail Gorbachev or FW de Klerk comes into power and start to dismantle the system, or (2) the US makes their sanctions even tougher and penalise countries and foreign companies that does business with Myanmar by imposing the same type of punitive embargoes on them, or (3) the common soldiers have enough of killing their own people and turn against the junta.

If not, things will just remain the same and go into a cycle. Uprising, brutal crackdown, repressed silence and repeat a decade or so later.

Meanwhile, Nyan Win, the junta's foreign minister (Comical Ali of Myanmar) in a typical show of delusion has accused "neo-colonialism", "political opportunist" and "powerful countries" for stirring up trouble. It's definitely not the language of people tuned into the reality of their own country and given to reason. How in the world do you negotiate and reason with such deluded thugs?

BBC News - UN envoy holds key Burmese talks

New York Times - U.N. Envoy Ends Myanmar Trip

Labels: international, myanmar, politics

Oh my gosh, don't you think President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan looks like a slightly younger version of our Minister Mentor Lee Kuan Yew? It's almost like a splitting image.

Interestingly, Kazakhstan has a bit of similarity with Singapore: rich country with political power concentrated in one party and one person. But one visible difference is that we don't have portraits of LKY or LHL plastered at every street corner.



According to Transparency International's Corruption Perception Index 2006 ranking, Kazakhstan ranks 111^th amongst 163 countries for corruption with a score of 2.6 (0 indicating highly corrupt state and 10 least corrupt). Nursultan Nazarbayev is believed to have transferred at least US$1 billion worth of oil revenues to his private bank accounts in other countries.

As for his family, one of his three daughters (Nursultan only has daughters) Dariga is thought to be groomed for future leadership. But their relationship seems to have soured recently, in part due to her criticism of her father's administration.

Drama? This family has that too. Dariga's husband Rakhat Mukhtaruly Aliyev who was a diplomat was accused of an alleged kidnapping and forcibly divorced by Dariga when he accused his father-in-law of vote rigging. But many believe that this incident is more about money and power rather than democratic principles.

From Wikipedia's post:
And interestingly, one son-in-law is a First Deputy Chairman of the national holding company Samruk which manages several state-owned companies.

This is the country to watch for potential future political dramas of soap opera proportion.

BBC News - Kazakhstan's low-key personality cult

Labels: international, politics

Okay, enough about Singapore for the time being.

There were two articles I read recently that got my attention.

The first one was written by Theresa Tan of the Straits Times and was part of a multi-page feature on China's (notably Hainan in this feature) preoccupation of having male progenies over female. Story after story spoke of the desperate measures some couples resort to get a son or a village full of bachelors who are bearing the brunt of an ever decreasing pool of potential brides.

However, the bright spark was the story of the Yao couple, two peasants who are practically living hand to mouth. But what set them apart from their peers is that they have been accepting unwanted and discarded baby girls and have brought them up with hardly any outside help. Sometimes, even going by with only two meals a day, usually plain noodles or buns, but the girls would get three meals of rice and other cooked dishes.

In time, some friends and relatives chipped in by either adopting some of the girls or helping to take care of them.

"Boys and girls are the same. Both are lives".

The other is an op-ed that was written by Uzodinma Iweala for the New York Post entitled "Stop Trying To 'Save' Africa".

It is an interesting and different perspective of the whole "Save Africa" cause célèbre that is currently all the rage in first-world western nations.

His contention is that there seems to be a certain throwback to the old colonial days when missionaries were sent to Africa to introduce them to education, Jesus Christ and "civilisation."

No doubt such help is appreciated by those receiving it, but the imbalance inherent of such a programme seems rather obvious. You have the spot light cast on Bono, Madonna, Angelina Jolie or some other celebrity while Africans regardless of the amount of work they do for their brethrens are cast either as props or supporting actors.

I have to admit that my image of Africa has been coloured by the very campaigns and programmes that were set up by well-intentioned celebrities or political personalities to alleviate some of the problems they face. To me, it seems Africa is a helpless continent that needs external intervention to save them from themselves.

Yes, I, an Asian who is a descendant of the very people who were once the subject races of "well-intentioned" British colonialist have unknowingly bought into this neo-colonial belief of western superiority over the backward and infighting tribes of Africa.

And I believe that it is this very idea of western cultural and intellectual superiority that colours a lot of their views and foreign policies regarding Asia, Africa and the Middle-East. The IMF and the World Bank are prime examples.

This leads to the question of whether colonialism as we know it in history is really over. Are our minds, ideas, cultures, beliefs and perspective still colonised by the west. It seems the answer is a resounding "yes".

Then this would bring up the next few questions that remain to be answered: Is it for the better? Will the world be forever divided inequitably between the west and the rest? And is Uzodinma Iweala too unrealistic for his own good?

Labels: africa, china, human interest, international, politics

I just saw this on my friend's LJ and thought I'd share it with you all here. It's a short and precise study on the relative cost of things in the first and third world. Food for thought.

Labels: human interest, international

This is a long but beautiful and empowering speech given by Muhammad Yunus, the founder of Grameen Bank and co-winner (along with Grameen Bank) of this year's Nobel Peace Prize. The speech was delivered during the "The Nobel Lecture" in Oslo on 10 December 2006.

Full text over here: http://nobelpeaceprize.org/eng_lect_2006b.html

It brings to mind Warren Buffet's "Ovarian Lottery" idea, itself a variant of John Rawls' "Theory of Justice". Maybe Warren should invest in and disburse his foundation money to Grameen. As a matter of fact, I think Warren and Muhammad Yunus should meet if they haven't. I am sure the two of them would get along very well.

Here are some of my favourite extracts:(The underscore above in the extract is added by me for added emphasis)

Labels: international

I never thought I'd agree with what Muammar Gaddafi of Libya says. But for once, I agree with him. That's after I take the reported points of his speech out of the context of the summit and the background politics of it.

BBC News - Gaddafi: Migration 'inevitable'

Labels: international

BANGLADESH'S MUHAMMAD YUNUS AND THE GRAMEEN BANK!!

Well, this really threw me off. It was totally unexpected given that most of the bets were being placed on the former Finnish president Martti Ahtisaari who is a UN diplomat and mediator noted for his international peace work and conflict resolution. Some had also placed their bets on Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and GAM (Gerakan Aceh Merdeka) for their role in resolving the long-standing conflict in Aceh. Or Lida Yusupova, a Chechen lawyer (and a compatriot of the recently murdered Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaja) who's been documenting human rights abuses for years in spite of death threats. Besides the above, there was also speculation that two celebrities made it to the nomination list: Bob Geldof and U2's Bono for their efforts in reducing third world debt and poverty. Of course whether you agree that these people deserve to be nominated or not is your call.

Gosh... It must have been a tough choice deciding this year's Nobel laureate as a lot of the candidates were just as deserving of the award as this year's winner.

But I have to say that the choice of Muhammad Yunus (who has a PhD in Economics from Vanderbilt University) and Grameen* Bank which he established is a great one. He is one of those unsung heroes who have been operating slightly below the world's radar; well... not entirely lah. He has appeared once in a long while in places like BBC News and other not-so-out-there publications. On top of that, he was also awarded numerous international prizes for his work over the years. The prize money of US$1.35m (split between Muhammad Yunus and Grameen Bank) is definitely going to be very welcomed by them in their quest to alleviate poverty around the world.

Good choice, a very good choice indeed.

Aftenposten - Banker for the poor wins Nobel Peace Prize

Aftenposten - Nobel Peace Prize winner came as a surprise

Aftenposten - Norwegian politicians hail Peace Prize choice

BBC News - Nobel for anti-poverty pioneers

The Norwegian Nobel Institute - Citation for the 2006 Nobel Peace Prize

(* "grameen" is Bangladeshi for "village" or "rural")

Labels: international

See lah. How like that? Was an agreement made three years ago breached? Was there any agreement to allow these accredited CSO and NGO to attend and demonstrate made in the first place?

But I also understand our government's predicament (not that I necessary agree with it) in this situation. If they allow this, they will be setting a precedent. And in that case, it would be easier for Singaporeans to publicly (and peacefully) demonstrate their discontent or grievances in future. If they clamp down on that, it will reflect badly on them. After all, if they allow it during the IMF/World Bank meeting, they would be guilty of double-standards if they disallow their citizens from doing so.

But in any case, I find it a bit extreme that they view such things in an extreme manner. To them, all public demonstrations will result in violence and damage. But is that always the case? It may seem so in the media because such drama makes for better news while most of the peaceful ones are ignored.

In this respect, I think some of these demonstrators may have to take the blame for that. Once you up the drama factor, the news organisations will start to ignore the peaceful ones because of their lack of violence and damage. And to compete for media attention, other groups will soon emulate their examples and go for the full Monty Korean-style demo to attract the journalists' attention so as to get their message across. Where does one draw the line?

But having said all that, there are still a lot of demonstrations and protest which are very peaceful by nature. Look at the Hong Kong example. Remember when they marched peacefully together to demonstrate for more democracy? That was admirable and we can strive for that. Demonstrations do not automatically have to sink to a violent form. After all, that does more damage than good to their cause.

Labels: america, imf, international, politics, singapore

I was going pass the National Museum when I came across this disconcerting sight: sunflowers growing in Singapore. Since when? I didn't even know that sunflowers can grow in Singapore. Did our DSTA guys find a way to "fix it"? Then I realised, these are just planted for the IMF/World Bank meeting and probably won't survive pass the week. (notice the pots)



Ahh... the IMF/World Bank meeting. It's going to be quite interesting, especially on the issue of demonstrations that has been disallowed by our dear government for fear of violence and terrorism but which the IMF and World Bank wants us to allow.

So who's to blame for this cock up? Singapore or the IMF/World Bank?

I'd say all parties concerned. I mean it's not like Singapore's anal retentiveness about public demonstrations is a secret. So the IMF and the World Bank should have known better than to expect Singapore to bend the rules for them. On the other hand, the Singapore government should have known better than to offer the country as a host to these sorts of meeting if it is not willing to accommodate the demonstrators and the IMF/World Bank's request to allow these civil society organisations and NGOs to do their thing.

Then again, there may have been some misrepresentation on our government's part when it was reported (if I recall correctly) some time ago that they were willing to allow some controlled demonstrations. But to say that an outright ban on demonstrations is inaccurate, the only place these groups can do their thing now is at some designated indoor location at Suntec.

So how like that? Cancel the meeting? Wooo... that will be a big slap across our government's face.

Then again, we can't exclude the possibility that the IMF and the World Bank wanted to go ahead with the meeting here precisely because of Singapore's stance on outdoor demonstrations. In which case, they can appear as the good guys while our government appears to be the bad guys. Quite convenient if you ask me.

On a slightly different note, I wonder whether Chee and friends will turn up there too. Now that would be interesting.

Maybe these sunflowers are meant to give the illusion that everything is nice and dandy and nothing is amiss.

Labels: imf, international, politics, singapore

When "Sophie Scholl - Die letzten Tage" (Sophie Scholl - The Final Days) was released on the big screen, I knew I had to watch it. Yet, I couldn't bring myself to do so.

Why? Because I know the story and I know how it would end. And furthermore, I have a phobia of watching movies dramatising true stories of courage from the European conflict during WWII. You and I know what usually happens in such stories: unimaginable hate and cruelty, death, fear, etc. This phobia is something I developed as child when I watched a movie about a family of Dutch Jews who had to hide from the Nazis.

So on Tuesday, I bit my tongue and said "yes" to a friend who suggested watching it. And I don't regret it.

For those not in the know, Sophie Scholl is a young German female undergrad who with her brother and a few friends was members of "The White Rose" (die Weiße Rose), an underground group which carried out non-violent resistant activities against Hitler and the Nazis. Their activities were restricted to writing and distributing leaflets critical of the Nazis as well as putting up anti-Nazi graffiti. She and her brother were caught while distributing them at their university and were subsequently interrogated, tried and executed. They were the rare few Germans who actually acted on their conscience and said "No". Now, there are streets, squares and schools named after Sophie, her brother Hans and other members of the group. Of course, this is not to say that there weren't other Germans who tried to stand up against Hitler and failed - there were many in fact. But I guess not that much in relation to the entire population.

There were two other movies made about the group and her, but what made this different is the wealth of material available after the fall of the Berlin Wall; such as Gestapo transcripts of the interrogation and the trial that was kept in the former East Germany. And on top of that, they also managed to interview people related to some of the people who had met her during her last few days including the son of her interrogator Robert Mohr, Sophie's sister Elisabeth, the nephew of Sophie's cellmate Else Gebel and the sister of another resistant member Willi Graf. Of course with the availability of the transcripts, part of the work of the scriptwriters was already done.

All this made a very gripping and intense movie that kept me riveted to my seat for about two hours.

What made it even better is that the directors didn't use a lot of music or tried to over-dramatise it. The end result is like a police-courtroom drama that made the story real to me. And the worst part about knowing the story is that you know what is going to happen and yet at the back of your head, you are either dreading it or willing that some deus ex machina will intervene and make everything right again. Unfortunately, this did not happen in this real life story.

But you know, the calmness and conviction of Sophie was a really powerful statement about moral courage in the face of death - the courage to stand up and say "this is wrong" even though the rest of the country kept silent.

At the end of the show, I wondered how I will respond when I am faced with the litmus test. Will I be like her or will I try to keep my head. In the coolness of my room, of course I can say that I will stand on my principle at the risk of forfeiting my life. But when I am faced with the crunch, will I be able to say that? That's a tough one to answer.

You know, a lot of us will probably praise people who have the moral courage and conviction to do as she did, but what about those who were caught and tried to wiggle their way out of it?

It's of course easy to call them cowards, but is it fair? Though we would like our heroes to die for their beliefs/causes, it is not fair to expect everyone who holds the same belief to do so.

Christoph Probst, her friend who was tried and executed with her, tried to deny (done with her and Han's approval) his role in their activities because of his three young children and bed-ridden wife. But was he a coward? Not in my books. After all, he was an active participant in their activities even though he may not have willingly wanted to part with his head for his own very good reasons.

Interestingly, this reminded me of a statement made by MM Lee last year about how when the young idealists grows up, start working, get married and have kids, they will be co-opted into the system and learn to "know better". Scary. Must we really be co-opted into the system and learn to know "better" before we can really contribute to making this country even better? But I digress.

Towards the end, I cried when her parents gave her the affirmation minutes before her execution. "You did the right thing," her father told her, "I'm proud of you both." That to me was a very powerful scene which released the pent up tension that has been building in me as the movie progressed and broke the dam that held back my tears.

Calmly, they shared their last cigarette given by a kind female guard and hugged each other. Calmly she walked through the courtyard where she said her last words: "Die Sonne scheint noch." (The Sun still shines). In the execution chamber, they lowered her to the guillotine and had her head secured. We see her face one last time as she looks down at the container that will hold her lifeless head later. We see and hear the blade as it rushes down. The screen goes black and I flinched.

"Es lebe die Freiheit!" (Long live freedom!) shouted Hans before the terrifying sound played out again.

And then finally, one last time for Christoph.

Did the White Rose managed to make much of a difference? Unfortunately, no. The students of Munich University did not rise up against Hitler as hoped. Were their actions then for naught? That's hard to say. At the very least, it did inform their fellow undergrads that something was amiss. And in any case, the text of the sixth White Rose leaflet were later smuggled out of Germany to England via Scandinavia and used by the allies who airdropped it over Germany in 1943. It was renamed "The Manifesto of the Students of Munich."

        Nothing is so unworthy of a civilized nation as allowing itself to be governed without opposition by an irresponsible clique that has yielded to base instinct — Do not forget that every people deserve the regime it is willing to endure! - White Rose, leaflet 1

        Every individual human being has a claim to a useful and just state, a state which secures the freedom of the individual as well as the good of the whole. - White Rose, leaflet 3

        How can we expect righteousness to prevail when there is hardly anyone willing to give himself up individually to a righteous cause? Such a fine, sunny day, and I have to go. But what does my death matter, if through us thousands of people are awakened and stirred to action? - Sophie Scholl

        Perhaps genuine heroism lies in deciding to stubbornly defend the everyday things, the mundane and the immediate. - Inge Aicher-Scholl, sister of Sophie and Hans

        The police and the court are shown to follow the law, and in the law resides either good or evil, depending on what the law says and how it is enforced. That is why it is crucial that a constitution guarantee rights and freedoms, and why it is dangerous for any government to ignore it. There should be no higher priority. - Roger Ebert, film reviewer

PS: GO WATCH IT!!
PPS: Julia Jentsch who played Sophie was excellent. Her subtle and understated portrayal was perfect for the role.

Labels: international, movies

Drama in the skies again. Thankfully it was nipped in the butt before planes could start exploding all over the Atlantic. This time round, the weapons of choice are not box cutters but liquid explosives that are almost impossible to detect. (See this scientific report on how it works)

So far, 24 people have been arrested in London, High Wycombe in Buckinghamshire and the West Midlands. Sources say that the main suspects are British-born, with some having links to Pakistan. It has also been revealed that this operation was conducted in tandem with intelligence agencies in Pakistan. Arrests were also made by the authorities there.

***

0311H: Presently, chaos reigns at all of UK's airports as flights are cancelled. And of course, share prices have gone down as jittery speculators are selling off their holdings.

BBC News - At-a-glance: UK airports

BBC News - Police probe flights terror plot

Labels: international, terrorism

5-3!!

"Italy win the World Cup 5-3 on penalties against 10-man France - who had Zinedine Zidane sent off for a headbutt." - BBC SPORT

Labels: international, sports