Share This

Sunday 12 December 2010

The Leadership Secrets of Genghis Khan, one of China's Emperors


A determined and focused leader

By ANDREW LEE
starbiz@thestar.com.my

Book review: The Leadership Secrets of Genghis Khan
Author: John Man Publisher: Bantam Books

THESE days, it seems, there exists a straightforward path to becoming a leader.

You leave school with the best grades possible, gain acceptance into a good college before obtaining a discipline from a reputable university in order to achieve the best.

You then choose to enter politics as you were active at grassroots level with a party whose principles you believe in, or because your father knows someone influential.

Five or ten years down the line (20 to 30 if you are unlucky), you sweep into power on a bed of half-truths and promises, delivered to the public with empty rhetoric that would even make Socrates weep.

This method appeals directly to the middle class because; the ability to pay for high education fees aside, the future has conveniently been mapped out for them.

Sure, only a select few end up leading a party, but so what if we don’t make it to the top?
There’s no need for any social mobility, or to break through the class barrier, as we sit comfortably among many.

There’s much more to be lost than gained by pushing for change – and God forbid we should come up against the less privileged, who outnumber us significantly. No, there’s no future in change – it’s much easier to contribute to the world, one day at a time, from within the safety nets we were lucky enough to be brought up in.

Contrast such mentality with that of a young Temujin. The year is 1181, and the Mongols, bereft of culture and education, are little more than warring nomads.

It is with a rival group of these nomads that Temujin finds himself in trouble with, and, initially pursued, he heaves a sigh of relief when they decided to back off.

Temujin isn’t yet the fearsome leader that history remembers him by, as John Man puts bluntly in his book The Leadership Secrets of Genghis Khan. At this point, he is “khan of nothing and no one”.

He takes his hat off, “drapes his belt around his neck” and kneels nine times towards the sun, scattering mare’s milk with flicks of his fingers. He feels, knows at this point, that he is destined to be a great leader of his people.

Within 20 years, he would have conquered most of Asia and a large part of Europe – “the greatest land empire in history”. All these were done by a man who, if the Mongols had any social structure at that time, many would have dismissed as having “no future”.

No doubt many historians will debate about how an illiterate young man managed to achieve such a feat.
Man argues that Genghis (actually pronounced Chingis) Khan might be the greatest leader of all time – and he might have a point.

Referring to the many categories created by Jim Collins in his leadership book Good to Great, he states that many good leaders fall into the trap of getting “stuck on level four ... egotistical, charismatic, driven by short-term gains and unable to look after his succession.” Obvious examples such as Alexander the Great, Attila the Hun, Napoleon and Tony Blair all spring to mind – but not Genghis Khan.

History has decided that Genghis Khan was no more than a warmongering leader, forever looking forward to his next conquest, with little remorse for his victims.

However, as Man points out, they often forget that he had a strong bond with his close family, in particular his mother – and that he respected women. When he marched into battle with his men, he made it clear that he would share their hardship.

His methods of conquest may have been terrifying, but it should be pointed out that he did not commit genocide per se. He arrived at every city’s doorstep with a choice – surrender, or the death of every male taller than his whip. His method worked – many a city from Beijing to Baghdad crumbled under his attack.

What is astonishing about this man is not just how he conquered vast amounts of land, but how determined and focused he was on his objectives.

Many of his rivals – the Chinese to the east and the Muslims to the west – lived in highly complex societies, with their poetry, spices and afternoon tea.

They simply could not cope with Genghis and his battle-hardened men, who could survive solely on grass.
Another key factor in Genghis Khan’s success was his disregard of riches – he was not distracted by spices or silk. His only mission was to unite his people – and then conquer the world.

However, it is folly to believe that Genghis did not appreciate cultural advances. Man points out that Genghis admired the Muslims and their culture, and would not have attacked their lands had a few of their leaders not betrayed his trust.

From his throne, he also employed the most educated men from the lands that he conquered (typically from China) to be his advisors. Perhaps those unwilling to change may yet find a career – as a yes man.

Genghis Khan

Author: Mick Yates 

Biography

Genghis Khan, the creator and Leader of the Mongol empire, was born around 1165 (dates vary wildly), and died in August 1227.

Genghis Khan portrait An excellent biographical source is Paul Ratchnevsky's book "Genghis Khan: His Life and Legacy". A book written in Mongolian, straight after Genghis' death, was The Secret History. In what follows, the Leadership analysis is my own, mistakes and all.
    
Original art by G. Radnaabazar, from the Mongolia Page Culture & History web site     

 Background

At the time of the rise of Genghis Khan, the Mongol tribes were disunited. They had a fiercely independent nature, a strongly held system of social rules, and were essentially shamanistic in religious beliefs. Their nomadic existence meant they relied on barter rather than money, but because of long standing in-fighting between the tribes, they were economically poor. Stories of eating "anything that moved" and even of some cannibalism in hard times persist.

Politically, whilst the Mongols clearly recognized their own tribal connections and blood ties, there was no "Mongol Nation".

The Tartars to their east, and the Keraits to their immediate west were enemies of the Mongols. To the south-west were the Uighurs, and due south, the Chinese Chin dynasty was well established. The Chin were powerful enough to extract dues of various kinds from their northern, nomadic neighbors. And, to the far west, stretching to the Black Sea, the Islamic Sultanate of Muhammad of Khwarazm prospered.

The times were cruel, with execution being the usual punishment for transgressions. Wars were fought with no mercy for the opposing army. Slavery was the norm for conquered peoples. On the other hand, the Mongols had an intense sense of loyalty, hated theft, had a history of the acceptance of the beliefs and the way of life of others, and tended to be generous to people they trusted.

Not surprisingly, this background helped shape Temuchin, who later became Genghis Khan.

Conquests

Temuchin's first major patron was Toghrul, of the Keraits, who he saw as an adopted father. Toghrul was probably the strongest leader amongst the Mongolian tribes at that point, although he was constantly under threat both externally and from family infighting. When Temuchin's wife Börte was abducted by the Merkits, Toghrul and Jamuka (Temuchin's blood brother, his "anda", and eventually his enemy) helped rescue her (1183/84).

But not everything went Temuchin's way, with a major defeat in 1187 leading to almost a ten year gap in his life history, until 1196. That year Temuchin successfully attacked the Tartars. He then rescued Toghrul from exile, who was given the Chin title "Wang Khan". Jamuka declared against Temuchin in 1201, when he was elected "Gurkhan". In 1202 Temuchin exterminated the Tartars, and that year Wang Khan broke with Temuchin. Thus, and perhaps inevitably, Genghis was at war with the Keraits.

In 1203 Wang Khan died, and Genghis assumed his title of King of the Keraits. Jamuka was betrayed to Temuchin, and died in 1205. Thus the stage was set for Temuchin to be elected "Genghis Khan", over all of the Mongolian tribes, in 1206.

In 1209, the Uighurs submitted to Genghis, leaving him free to concentrate on the Chin and to refuse to pay tribute to them. Eventually, after many battles and even a withdrawal to Mongolia, Genghis destroyed Zongdu in 1215. This was the Chin capital (later to become Beijing), so the Chin capital moved south to Nanking (Kaifeng).

Treacherously, and somewhat stupidly, soldiers of Sultan Muhammad of Khwarazm killed ambassadors from Genghis, forcing him to declare war on that Islamic empire in 1219. Genghis won in 1221. His Empire stretched from the Korean peninsular almost to Kiev, and south to the Indus. It was the largest land empire ever seen.

Genghis was thus now able to focus his time on establishing an effective administration of the Mongol Empire, whilst keeping internal strife under check and setting his succession in place.

He died in August 1227 (the cause is not certain), having named one of his sons Ogödei Kha'an his principal successor. Ogödei is remembered by history as probably the most principled of the sons, explaining Genghis' choice.

Genghis' youngest son Tolui (by all accounts the cruelest of his sons) was not chosen - but Tolui's son became Khubilai Khan, later the first Yuan Emperor of China.

Values

Genghis Khan's value system was visible to all, and he certainly "walked the talk".

He totally shared his people's belief in the nomadic way of life, recognizing that, in war as in the hunt, booty is the main aim .. and winning was what counted. However, amassing material wealth did not matter much to him, as he shared everything with his loyal supporters. He was seen as a most generous Leader.

VaseAs an individual, he wanted power. He was a physically strong man, although he was probably not a "hero" in the sense of an outstanding hand-to-hand fighter. He encouraged his supporters to be frank and speak without ceremony, and usually moderated his passion and anger with thoughtful responses.

Genghis also demonstrated a rather liberal and tolerant attitude to the beliefs of others, and never persecuted people on religious grounds. This proved to be good military strategy, as when he was at war with Sultan Muhammad of Khwarazm, other Islamic Leaders did not join the fight against Genghis - it was instead seen as a non-holy war between two individuals.

Whilst Genghis was himself illiterate, he understood the power of spreading ideas via the written word, and used it to administer his empire. He was responsible for the spread of the Uighurs script as the common Mongolian alphabet. He was relentless in learning new things, absorbing ideas from other cultures as often as he could.

Against his enemies, vengeance was a constant theme, reflecting his Mongol cultural heritage, and he slaughtered people with ease. Terror was always one of his principle weapons of war. He laid waste to entire cities and populations that resisted his armies, although he often by-passed others that submitted.

He was clearly most perceptive about politics in rival tribes and cities, and he understood what drove individuals. Usually his strategies involved finding psychological ways to undermine his enemies, based on these perceptions

On the other hand, he recognized the values of his individual enemies. He would put to death a soldier who had tried to be disloyal to their own commander, by, for example, betraying the commander to Genghis. However, he would pardon and even bestow honours and responsibility on those who had fought loyally for their commander - even if against Genghis. In fact one of his most trusted generals, Jebe, was once a young opposing soldier who shot Genghis' horse from under him in battle.

Envision

Genghis Khan actually used the 4 E's of Leadership, even if he didn't know it!
The vision was one of economic prosperity for his people, power for himself, total destruction of his enemies and fairness for willing subjects.
At the beginning it is doubtful that he had a grand vision of building the World's biggest empire. Rather, he recognized that rich plunder was the best means of preventing the Mongol tribes from fighting each other. He also recognized that this would allow them to preserve their nomadic way of life.

Enable

His enablers included good use of military technology, a unique organization of his army, promoting leaders on merit not lineage or family, definite rules of engagement in war, and a clear administrative system for conquered peoples.

Whilst his army had no unique weapons, he put to good use the short horse stirrup, to give better control at close quarters. His elite troops were quite heavily armored, although others were more militia-like. His soldiers used the Central Asian compound bow, which had the power of a European crossbow (although they didn't know it), whilst being half the size of a long bow.
Mongolian compound bowHe organized his army into units of "ten thousand", not sorted by tribal affinity as was historically the case. This reduced the possibility of internal friction. He also had an elite "Household Guard" with hand-picked commanders, upon which he relied for the most difficult tasks. All of his officers were instructed never to abuse their soldiers.
Rules of engagement were clear to all, and rigorously enforced. For example, if a soldier deserted his troop, he was executed. If a soldier failed to stop to help a fellow warrior whose baggage fell from his horse, he was executed. If two or more members of a troop made a great advance, but were not supported by their comrades, the latter were executed. And so it goes on ...

In terms of battle strategy, it seemed that there was little unique about Genghis' approach, building as it did on the Mongolian way of hunting. He also tended to close in on the enemy only when he was sure of overwhelming them - although he did loose some battles, even then. It seems that the thoroughness, fierceness, courage and total dedication of his troops were what carried the day.

In peacetime, Genghis developed unique administrative organization structures, designed to pre-empt feuding. the unit was not the tribe, family or aristocracy - but based again on tens, hundreds and thousands - "mixed and matched". Leadership was, as ever, based on merit. And he organized a system of internal communication by horse riders. (As an aside, the way some of these riders behaved caused much distress to the populace. They were accorded first right to virtually anything they wanted from local people as they rode across the country, and often abused this right. Genghis was not perfect in his adminstration ...)

Genghis' legal code (The Yasa of Chingis Khan) was firmly based on Mongol common law, but written down and extended as cases arose. And, as for his armies, the rules were clear and tough. For example, theft of any kind led to execution, and adultery was also punishable by death for both parties. He also rigorously enforced the Mongol religious taboos, although as noted before his administration was tolerant of other people's beliefs. On the downside, it should be noted that the continual pursuit of booty and plunder meant that many valuable artifacts were destroyed as he conquered, both religious and otherwise.

In no way am I trying to justify the more uncivilized of these rules .. but I simply want to point out that the clarity and universality of Genghis' rules ensured that his empire worked.  

Empower 

It may be difficult to see that a Leader as strict as Genghis practiced "Empowerment". However if we define "Empowerment" as a contract between a leader and his followers for mutual trust and accountability, it was certainly central to Genghis' approach.

Merit was Genghis' guiding principle in choosing his leaders, both in wartime and when at peace. He did use the noble group as commanders, but his most valuable generals were solely picked on merit. He trusted these people to get the job done, although he clearly held them accountable for results

The army units were led by commanders personally picked by Genghis. His commanders could be from his immediate family, lowly sheep herders, or even conquered warriors he trusted and respected. Commanders were expected to have their troops ready for battle at all times - else they were replaced. All of the soldiers from whatever rank thus literally had the possibility before them of becoming commanders, based on their own merit.

Net, the Mongol army fully agreed with the goals of their Leader, and accepted the rules under which they fought. They totally trusted Genghis, and would rather die than let him down. In that sense, empowerment was clearly at work.

Energize 

It seems clear that Genghis was consistently reflecting the real desires of his followers. He unleashed their need to escape from a poverty cycle, rather than simply focus them on visions of world conquest. Then, he made the "enemy without" the tool to prevent internal conflict.

It is perhaps most difficult to assess exactly how Genghis Khan energized his people, as almost no speeches are accurately recorded, and he himself could not write. However, "The Secret History" and several Persian chroniclers provide a few Candleclues.

Whilst Genghis sought power for himself, he also was careful at every stage to offer his followers major gain from their conquests. He shared his animals, his clothes, his food and his plunder with his people, almost irrespective of their social position.

He constantly demonstrated his loyalty to his trusted people, and his generosity surely encouraged all to follow. Rules were clear, rewards were many, and merit was a guiding principle of his administration.

When he went into battle, he very clearly intended to win. His people knew they followed a winner. Even in matters of vengeance, or of being insulted (as was the case with Sultan Muhammad), he very obviously put things in terms his followers could deal with and act upon.

Finally, he was totally true to his own value system, in a way that was obvious to both his friends and his enemies. This in itself must have provided significant energy to his followers.

Aftermath

Genghis Khan forged the unification of the Mongol tribes, and reversed their decline in living conditions. 

Trade flourished, and contact with distant lands, including Europe, was encouraged. He set in motion the events that created the World's biggest land based empire, including the creation of the Yuan Dynasty in China. Importantly, his firm stand on his society's ethical rules and his intolerance of misdeeds led to a marked change in the social climate. Inter family rivalry all but disappeared, and peace and order were very evident to outside visitors, including European travelers.

As Microsoft Encarta says:

"The greatness of the khan as a military leader was borne out not only by his conquests but by the excellent organization, discipline, and maneuverability of his armies. Moreover, the Mongol ruler was an admirable statesman; his empire was so well organized that, so it was claimed, travelers could go from one end of his domain to the other without fear or danger".

Or, as in the introduction to the Genghis exhibition at the Royal British Columbian Museum said:
"Genghis Khan pledged to share with his followers both the sweet and the bitter of life. In structuring his army, he integrated soldiers from different tribes, thus inspiring loyalty to the Mongol army as a whole rather than to a specific lineage. He gave his enemies one simple choice: surrender and be enslaved, or die. By consistently enforcing discipline, rewarding skill and allegiance, and punishing those who opposed him, Genghis Khan established a vast empire".

For the people he conquered, the impact was very mixed. The Chinese fields got turned into nomadic pasture, adversely affecting the Chin peasants and causing hardship. On the other hand, for the cultures that he and later Khubilai Khan ruled, like the Chin, the encouragement of the exchange of knowledge and ideas helped them develop. For example, the Chinese became acquainted with Iranian medical knowledge and astronomy, and in return the peoples of the Middle East learnt much from China.

Unfortunately, unlike earlier days, increased prosperity meant that the lifestyle of the Mongol nobles tended to edge too far past that of the commoners. And, the sheer size of the empire and the extent of the losses in Mongolian manpower meant Genghis' empire was stretched thin.

Finally, recall that warfare and booty was the order of the day for the nomadic existence. So, in gaining a stable empire, the Mongols had to get used to the money economy. And, just as the administration came under control, so the administrators themselves became less militarily capable, and more intent on self-gain.

It was perhaps inevitable that, on his death, the empire was destined to split between his three remaining sons.
Eventually, though, four Mongol Leaders became great Khans in their own right. It is a tribute the the memory of Genghis Khan that they did not war between themselves - rather they linked co-operatively together in separate Khanates to "rule the world".

Perhaps the most important Khan was Khubilai, who founded the Chinese Yuan dynasty. This dynasty flourished from from 1279 to 1368, and had a lasting effect on all aspects of Chinese life.

It is thus very clear that Genghis was a Leader with a "capital L".

China has a long record of helping Africa


WikiLeaks cables have added to the western perception of China's self-interested presence in Africa. It is far from accurate

  • zs
  • WEN JIABAO 
    Chinese premier Wen Jiabao embraces a local chief standing next to Ghana's then president, John Kufuor, in 2006. Photograph: Li Xueren/AP
    It's not surprising that the spotlight has fallen again on China's role in resource-rich Africa. Concerns have been evident recently among NGOs, the media and foreign governments, even before this week's release of diplomatic cables. This, despite the fact that the Chinese presence there goes back to the 1950s.
    There is a western stereotype that sees China as a very aggressive newcomer, disregarding human rights and only being there for narrow national self-interest. China's investment in Africa is often characterised as a plundering of mineral resources accompanied by neglect of the welfare of the local populations. And the Chinese government has been criticised for not addressing the "reform agenda" seen as essential to Africa's future stability and prosperity.
    Is there any basis to these kinds of accusation? Not at all, in China's view. Given its record of helping African people, the Chinese government and commercial sector are entitled to feel angry. In the 1950s, China and Egypt established diplomatic relations, and Beijing sent the first team of experts from various fields like medicine, agriculture, water conservation, electricity generation and engineering. Since then China and African countries have developed good long-term relationships, supporting each other politically and co-operating economically.
    Over this period, China has helped Africa develop hundreds of programmes including the establishment of textile factories, hydroelectric power stations, gymnasiums, hospitals and schools. Among the most well known is the Tazara railway between Dar es Salaam, Tanzania and Kapiri Mposhi, Zambia, which was completed in July 1976 after six years of labour by more than 50,000 Chinese workers, at a total cost of about 1bn yuan (£95m). What Africa has seen in the Chinese workers is a spirit of diligence and sacrifice.
    China's aid to Africa extends beyond the technological. China has so far sent medical teams to 43 countries, with a total number of 16,000 people involved, reaching 240 million African people in medical need. It is one way the Chinese people seek human contact with those from other nations, and it has benefited both parties.
    With the fast growth of China's economy, economic co-operation between China and Africa is increasing in all areas, alongside the traditional aid programmes. Trade volume between two sides has reached $106.8bn (£67bn) in 2008, twice that of 2006 and 10 times more than in 2000. There are now 1,600 Chinese firms based in Africa. Since 2005, China abolished tariffs for 190 items imported from over 30 of the poorest countries in Africa, thus enabling Africa to double its exports to China.
    Boosting aid and training, offering debt forgiveness and zero tariff imports from the world's poorest countries were key Chinese pledges in the September 2010 UN summit on the millennium development goals.
    Perhaps it is the very size and scale of this programme of investment and aid that risks a backlash. The west continues to query the morality of China giving assistance to countries with bad human rights records or governance problems. But those who have benefited most from China's aid programmes are the African people. Is it moral to leave African people in dire poverty because of their bad governments? The children of criminals should not be punished for the wrong they have not done. They deserve their share of things.
    Then what about self-interest? There is no denying that China will protect its own interests through trade and investment. But when has the west ever thought that free trade was harmful for Africa? And what of its own record in there? China remembers that it was its African friends who voted China into the United Nations. Africa is confident that China will not colonise Africa because China understands the humiliation of colonisation from its own experience.
    Maybe west and east should calm down and look at themselves. In the west there has been criticism of a homegrown aid policy model, which places tough terms and conditions on aid. An emerging Chinese way of supplying aid might be another possibility, a challenge to the west, but also an opportunity. It is surely more constructive for the world community to co-operate and make progress. The words of George Bernard Shaw are perhaps more important today than they were even in his own time: "We are all dependent on one another, every soul of us on earth."
    As a product of a Chinese education, I was taught about the west's past record of colonisation in Africa. But at the same time, I could also see the movie Out of Africa in which a young Danish woman, Karen Blixen, made her home in Kenya, then British East Africa, and built schools for children there. Blixen is what the west and China have in common. That is the most precious capital.
    Newscribe : get free news in real time

Saturday 11 December 2010

China opposes interference with Nobel Peace Prize



Play Video

China says it is firmly against attempts by any country or individual to use the Nobel Peace Prize to interfere in China's internal affairs and infringe on its judicial sovereignty.

The Nobel Committee awarded the Prize at a ceremony in Oslo to Liu Xiaobo, who was sentenced to 11 years in prison for engaging in activities aimed at overthrowing the government.

The Foreign Ministry stressed that mutual respect for sovereignty and non-interference in internal affairs are the basic norms governing international relations.
The Ministry also said it hopes that relevant countries would abide by the norms and do more things conducive to mutual trust and cooperation.

Related stories

Friday 10 December 2010

Namewee is a young man who is ‘grossly misunderstood’, says Minister

 Nazri defends Namewee

Reports by LEE YUK PENG, TEH ENG HOCK and YUEN MEIKENG



DATUK Seri Nazri Aziz has defended Wee Meng Chee, better known as Namewee, by saying that the controversial rapper is not a racist, just “grossly misunderstood”.

The Minister in the Prime Minister’s Department said he did not think of Wee as a racist, adding that he was just a young man who was misunderstood and misrepresented.

“He has done nothing which may be considered an offence under any laws in this country,” he told a press conference with Wee present at his office in the Parliament building.

Wee had previously made a video which criticised a headmistress in Kulaijaya who allegedly made racist remarks at a school assembly on Aug 12, using obscene language.

Misunderstood: Nazri listening to Namewee’s explanation of 1Malaysia-themed movie.
 
While many were upset that no action was taken against Wee over the clip, Nazri said he looked into the case and agreed with the Attorney-General that Wee had not committed any offence.

“The only person who can take any action against him is the headmistress as she is the only aggrieved party,” he said.

Nazri said Wee was not even a politician and should not be “dragged into something that he didn’t want to be involved in in the first place”.

“He’s only interested in music and how it can spread messages to his peers,” he said.
Wee, he said, had explained to him about what he had done, adding: “I think he has potential. If we can help him, he will be able to become an artiste one day.”

Nazri further described Wee as a young man who wanted to move on with his life and that he fully supported the 1Malaysia concept propagated by Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Razak.

The minister said he would inform Najib during the Cabinet meeting today over Wee’s failure to get funding from National Film Development Corporation (Finas) to make a 1Malaysia-themed movie.

“I shall inform the Prime Minister about his visit and Wee’s request to meet him. Once I get a date (of when Najib would meet Wee), I’ll inform Wee,” he said.

Nazri added that Wee, who has the most viewed YouTube account in Malaysia, wanted to promote the muhibbah spirit via his proposed film titled Nasi Lemak 2.0.

“I think Malaysians should always sangka baik (assume what is good first).
“We are multi-racial, so we cannot afford to have the opposite,” he said.

Wee later read a statement to the press, saying that he was a patriot and had even conveyed that Malaysia was the best place in the world through his video “I Want To Go Home”.

Students and More youngers hooked on online gambling lives away to fund habit


Students turn to Ah Long to fund habit

By SHARIN SHAIK
newsdesk@thestar.com.my

KUALA LUMPUR: Students as young as 16 are turning to loan sharks to pay off their Internet gambling debts, forcing their parents to settle their huge debts.

This year alone, the MCA Public Complaints Bureau has received seven such cases with a total debt of RM874,800.

In one case, a 45-year-old mother was now being harassed by loansharks as her 21-year-old son had racked up debts of almost RM30,000 since his college days.

The mother, who identified herself as Madam Yong, said at a press conference yesterday that Ah How had been involved in Internet football gambling since last year when he was in college. She has not seen him for two months now.

Yong said she paid Ah How’s RM2,000 debt the first time.

“He promised never to gamble again, but did not keep his word,” she said. Yong said to fund his betting, Ah How sold the shares she had bought in his name.

On Dec 2, she received a call from a debt collector called “Ah Boon,” telling her that her son still owed him RM26,500.

“I am speaking out so that other parents can be aware of this issue,” said Yong at the MCA Public Complaints Bureau. “Anyone can fall victim to Internet gambling and loan sharks.”

According to bureau chief Datuk Micheal Chong, many parents had come to him with the same problem “and all involved boys aged between 16 and 20”.

“My worry is that this is mostly happening to Chinese students,” he said.
Chong said he suspected that a syndicate was working with bookies and loansharks to lure students into illegal gambling.

“It is easier to target the youngsters by commissioning other students to encourage them to gamble online,” added Yong.

Chong said these bookies and loansharks were not concerned over students not paying up because they know that their parents would.

“It is the parents who suffer the most,” he said.
“Prevention is better than cure; so please advise your children not to get involved in online gambling.”

More teens gambling lives away

By Elizabeth Zachariah , elizbeth@nst.com.my

KUALA LUMPUR: More and more young adults are turning to gambling for fast and easy money.
MCA public services and complaints department head Datuk Michael Chong revealed yesterday that his department had received seven such cases this year alone with debts totalling RM874,800.

"The cases we see nowadays involve teenagers as young as 18," he said at Wisma MCA, adding that this was just the tip of the iceberg as many cases went unreported.

Chong said one of the cases he received involved a 20-year-old student who became an online gambler, running up a debt of RM800,000.
He said as was the case with all the others, the youth had tried paying it off by lying to his parents that he needed the money for studies.

He finally confessed to his parents when the debtors called his home demanding for payment.

His parents, who could not afford to pay back, approached Chong's department for help.

Their son had since gone into hiding to escape the debt collectors' harassment.

Chong said the young gamblers, all male, were described as hardworking, obedient and studious by their families.

"But because they mixed with the wrong crowd, they found themselves in hot water."

He said most of the bookies were classmates and ex-schoolmates of these gamblers.

"Students are easily taken in by the syndicates who use their peers to lure them into gambling," he said, adding that their actions could have a detrimental effect on themselves, their families and careers.

One such student is Ah How, 21, who first became an online gambler last year while he was studying at a college in Petaling Jaya.

His mother, who wanted to be known only as Yong, said she helped him pay off the RM2,000 debt.

But the second time around early this year, Ah How found himself in debt again and borrowed RM8,000 from his friend and used up RM15,000 worth of investment to pay his debt.

Last week, Yong received a call from a debt collector who informed her that Ah How owed him RM26,500.

"He promised me that he would never gamble again after the first time, but he doesn't seem to be able to stop," she said of her eldest son.

Yong said she came forward as she wanted her son's case to serve as a lesson to other young adults who were hooked on gambling

Read more: More teens gambling lives away http://nst.com.my/nst/articles//18gamb/Article/#ixzz17h7NdlFV

Thursday 9 December 2010

Confucius Peace Prize Snubs Nose at Nobel Peace Prize, in Battle of Ideas!


Confucius Prize could be weapon in battle of ideas

By Liu Zhiqin

The Nobel Peace Prize Committee won Liu Xiaobo while losing the trust of 1.3 billion Chinese people. They support a criminal while creating 1.3 billion "dissidents" that are dissatisfied with the Nobel Committee, which is definitely a bad decision.

However, the Chinese people's discontent or questioning will not change the prejudice of the proud and stubborn Noble Prize Committee members.

On the contrary, China's opposition could inspire their pride as heroes or sense of accomplishment because it has become the mind-set of the current Westerners that they will oppose whatever China supports and support whatever China opposes. In order to make them change their mind-set, more appropriate ways need to be adopted.

We often stress the need to fight for the right to speak. In fact, this is a good opportunity and China's civil society should consider setting up a "Confucius Peace Prize," launching the evaluation and selection and finding the real Peace Prize winners from all over the world.

This is the best opportunity for the Chinese to declare China's view in peace and human rights to the world.
Through such evaluation and selection, people around the world can have the most direct, sensible and comparative opportunity to observe, analyze and understand the Eastern and Western values.

With China's growing economic strength, Chinese culture and ideas will also be spread.

With the establishment of "Confucius Institutes" all over the world, the ideas of Confucius are understood and accepted by more and more people throughout the world.

Against such a good background, the establishment of a worldwide "Confucius Peace Prize" will be welcome by people in different countries. Of course, this step needs the long-term accumulation of different sides, but it is essential for China to step into the world.

While carrying out "Confucius Peace Prize" selection, China can learn more things from the world, especially how people of different cultures, different religions and different political systems think, build their nations and enable their people to live and work in peace.

We should also teach Westerners how to cultivate their own spirits and kindly treat people that have different national values and lifestyles. Only in this way could China and the West really work together to create a harmonious and tolerant world.

In a recent editorial, the Global Times looked "forward to the Nobel Prize Committee that really belongs to the world." I am afraid this good wish will not be realized. At least we should not rely on the members of the Peace Prize Committee. We have suffered too much loss already.

We would rather do something within our power than expect others to change, such as establishing through civil society a "Confucius Peace Prize" Committee and inviting internationally renowned persons to join. Thus the world will surely look at China with new eyes!

The author is the Beijing chief representative of Zurich Bank, Switzerland. globaltimesopinion@ yahoo.com

Confucius Peace Prize Snubs Nose at Nobel Peace Prize Honors

 Confucius Peace Prize - just three weeks after the idea for the honors were first publicly mentioned, isnow a reality. The Confucius Peace Prize is the Chinese snub-nosed attempt to cobble together its own peace prize - and the Confucius Peace Prize will be awarded the day before the Nobel Committee honors an imprisoned Chinese dissident in a move that has enraged Beijing.

Since Liu Xiaobo's selection, China has vilified the 54-year-old democracy advocate, called the choice an effort by the West to contain its rise, disparaged his supporters as "clowns," and launched a campaign to persuade countries not to attend Friday's ceremony in Oslo.

The government is also preventing Liu - who is serving an 11-year sentence for co-authoring a bold appeal for political reforms in the Communist country - and his family members from attending.

Amid the flurry of action came a commentary published on Nov. 17 in a Communist Party-approved tabloid that suggested China create its own award - the "Confucius Peace Prize" - to counter the choice of Liu.

Three weeks later, The Associated Press has learned, China is doing just that.

Named after the famed philosopher, the new prize was created to "interpret the viewpoints of peace of (the) Chinese (people)," the awards committee said in a statement it released to the AP on Tuesday.

Awards committee chairman Tan Changliu said his group was not an official government body, but acknowledged that it worked closely with the Ministry of Culture.

He declined to give specifics about the committee, when it was created and how the five judges were chosen, saying it would be disclosed later.

The first honoree is Lien Chan, Taiwan's former vice president and the honorary chairman of its Nationalist Party, for having "built a bridge of peace between the mainland and Taiwan." A staffer in his Taipei office said she could not comment Tuesday because she knew nothing about the prize.

Lien was chosen from among eight nominees - some of whom are regularly mentioned for, or have already won, that other peace prize: including billionaire Bill Gates, former South African President Nelson Mandela, former U.S. President Jimmy Carter, Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas and the Panchen Lama, the second-highest figure in Tibetan Buddhism.

While China regularly disparages the Dalai Lama, the religion's spiritual leader, the current Panchen Lama is a 20-year-old who was hand-picked by Beijing. The original boy named by the Dalai Lama has disappeared.

"We should not compete, we should not confront the Nobel Prize, but we should try to set up another standard," said Liu Zhiqin, the Beijing businessman who suggested the prize in The Global Times.

"The Nobel prize is not a holy thing that we cannot doubt or question. Everyone has a right to dispute whether it's right or wrong." Liu said in the phone interview that he was not involved in setting up the new awards.

Tan, who leads the awards committee, acknowledged that the new prize, which comes with a purse of 100,000 yuan ($15,000), doesn't have international recognition: "It needs to grow gradually, and we hope people will believe the award is of global significance."

China is not the first nation to be rankled by a Nobel Peace Prize. During Nazi Germany era, Adolf Hitler created the German National Prize for Art and Science in 1937 as a replacement for the Nobel. He had forbidden German pacifist Carl von Ossietzky from accepting his Nobel awarded in 1935.

This year, China's clampdown against Liu and his supporters means the Nobel medal and money won't be handed out for the first time since that period. Nobel officials say the prestigious $1.4 million award can be collected only by the laureate or close family members.

In the meantime, China is chipping away at the Nobel: It succeeded in persuading 18 other countries to boycott the upcoming ceremony, including longtime allies like Pakistan, Venezuela and Cuba as well as business partners Saudi Arabia and Iran, Nobel officials said Tuesday.

Beijing sharpened its denunciations, with Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Jiang Yu accusing the Nobel committee of "orchestrating an anti-China farce by themselves."

"We are not changing because of interference by a few clowns and we will not change our path," she said.
But Beijing's hastily arranged efforts to provide a distraction to the Nobel ceremony are counterproductive, said Oxford University China scholar Steve Tsang.

"The whole thing is too obviously being rushed to counter the Nobel Prize to Liu Xiaobo. People will see it for what it is. That being the case, it's not going to be very credible," he said.

If anything, China's heavy-handed reactions in the wake of the announcement, which include putting Liu's wife and other supporters under house arrest and barring dozens of activists from traveling to Oslo, "simply give the rest of the world the impression that human rights is really in trouble in China," he said.

American Imperialism! US declared financial war to the world Prof Dr Michael Hudson

US declared financial war to the world Prof Dr Michael Hudson 


Wednesday 8 December 2010

Asian American Men Face Discrimination in Job Market



Source: American Sociological Association (ASA)

Research Exposes Racial Discrimination Against Asian American Men in Job Market

Newswise — A new study by a University of Kansas sociologist shows that U.S. employers fail to pay Asian American men as much as similarly qualified white men.

“The most striking result is that native-born Asian Americans — who were born in the U.S. and speak English perfectly — their income is 8 percent lower than whites after controlling for their college majors, their places of residence and their level of education,” said ChangHwan Kim, an assistant professor of sociology at KU, who led the study.

Full results of the study — “Have Asian American Men Achieved Labor Market Parity with White Men?” — appear in the December issue of the American Sociological Review.

According to Kim, who co-authored the study with Arthur Sakamoto of the University of Texas at Austin, the findings show that the U.S. falls short of the goal of a colorblind society.

“As an individual, you can reach as high as president,” said Kim. “But as an ethnic group, no group has reached full parity with whites. That’s the current status of racial equality in the United States.”

Kim and Sakamoto combed data from the 2003 National Survey of College Graduates to investigate earnings — numbers that have not been used previously in research on Asian Americans.

Among their other notable findings:

- First-generation Asian American men, who were born and completed their education overseas, earn 29 percent less than white men in the U.S.

- 1.25-generation Asian American men, those who earned their highest degree at a U.S. institution, but were born and previously educated in a foreign country, had incomes 14 percent lower than those of white men.

- The only group to have achieved earnings parity with white men is 1.5-generation Asian American men. Though foreign-born, these men came to the U.S. as children, so therefore speak perfect English and have U.S. educations.

Kim said that 1.5-generation Asian American men could benefit economically from their parents’ immigrant work ethic: “They see their parents struggle, and they understand that their achievement in the United States is actually their parents’ achievement. It’s not their own goal, it’s the goal for their whole family,” he said. “They actually have a burden of success.”

Despite the disparity in income levels, Asian American men are less disadvantaged than before the Civil Rights era in the U.S. Advancement towards an end to racial discrimination continues, according to Kim.

“The 8 percent difference is large, but it is small compared to previous Asian American generations,” Kim said. “Previous generations had income levels much lower, so in this sense we’ve made progress.”

About the American Sociological Association and the American Sociological Review
The American Sociological Association (www.asanet.org), founded in 1905, is a non-profit membership association dedicated to serving sociologists in their work, advancing sociology as a science and profession, and promoting the contributions to and use of sociology by society. The American Sociological Review is the ASA’s flagship journal.

The research article described above is available by request for members of the media. For a copy of the full study, contact Daniel Fowler, ASA’s Media Relations and Public Affairs Officer, at (202) 527-7885 or pubinfo@asanet.org.

Newscribe : get free news in real time

Tuesday 7 December 2010

Google Misses You



Facebook has corralled 500 million people into an exclusive club that's out of Google's reach. There's no way Google will stand for that.
  • Technology Review By Paul Boutin
Credit: Peter Arkle
  
Last winter, Google made a run at Facebook and fell flat, fast. Google Buzz, the social network it tried to build around its popular Gmail service, failed to live up to its name: it drew only a small fraction of Gmail's more than 100 million users, and it prompted a privacy scare and a lawsuit.

But Google didn't give up. Instead, the company is trying again, on a much bigger scale. It has spent hundreds of millions of dollars buying Web companies and luring talent in hopes of stopping, or at least slowing, Facebook's dominance in online social networking. (The project has been dubbed "Google Me," according to people in Silicon Valley who claim inside knowledge.)

Why would Google--the Web's most profitable public company, an organization that has had no difficulty increasing its commissions from online advertising--have it in for Facebook?

It's this simple: Facebook, from the start, has locked Google's Web-crawling robots away from its exclusive club of 500 million members. Just try to search for yourself or anyone else who you know is on Facebook. Google probably won't deliver more than a skimpy profile page whose goal seems to be to get you intrigued enough to sign up for Facebook yourself.

Facebook lets members reconfigure their accounts to open their photos and personal information to Google, but it prevents search engines from indexing individual status updates, the site's core content.

Top 10 Scientific Discoveries



Top 10 Scientific Discoveries


Top 10 Scientific DiscoveriesTop 10 Scientific DiscoveriesBut don't worry; it's very, very slow. Yon won't see it disappear anytime soon. Scientists found that cracks in the moon's crust has cooled and shrunk over the last billion years or so.

Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
 Scientists have created a material to make fabrics that manipulate visible light to shield objects from view. However, Harry Potter fans may have to wait a long while before the storied cloak becomes reality.


Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
You can't imagine any object older than this. Astronomers have spotted the oldest galaxy ever seen, one born 13 billion years ago and just 600 million years after the Big Bang.
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Time for a real antimatter bomb like the one in Dan Brown's sci-fi thriller Angels and Demons? Hardly. Scientists have been able to trap individual antimatter atoms for only a bit more than one-tenth of a second. To a particle physicist, that's a pretty long time.
 Top 10 Scientific Discoveries



Top 10 Scientific Discoveries

Is it a biological gang fight? Hard to define. But Chinese expert Liu Chang wants to create a virus that could kill HIV, the virus causing the deadly AIDS. How could that be possible?




Top 10 Scientific Discoveries 





Top 10 Scientific Discoveries 








Top 10 Scientific Discoveries

Astronomers may have lucked into the ultimate in cosmic baby pictures: a voracious black hole fresh from its violent birth. Just how old is the newborn? About 30 years into forming.







 Top 10 Scientific Discoveries








Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Dark-averse ladies, now you may want to turn off the lights at night, not just to be green. A new study said exposure to too much light at night may lead to obesity, even without changing physical activity or eating more food.
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries


Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Researchers have found that atrazine, one of the most commonly used weed killers, can turn male frogs into females. Atrazine is known to disrupt hormones, leading to the decline of amphibians such as frogs around the world.
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Hope you are not shuddering at the news that Chinese scientists have demonstrated how arsenic fights blood cancer by targeting and killing specific proteins that keep the disease alive.
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
Top 10 Scientific Discoveries
You don't want to be, sorry, an idiot, do you? Then believe it or not, here is one more reason to kick the habit of smoking. A study finds that cigarette smokers have lower IQs than non-smokers, and the more they smoke, the lower their IQ.

Top 10 Scientific Discoveries

Newscribe : get free news in real time





Monday 6 December 2010

China to lead world in innovation by 2020: survey



LONDON - China is set to become the world's most important centre for innovation by 2020, overtaking both the United States and Japan, according to a public opinion survey to be published on Monday.

Related readings:
China to lead world in innovation by 2020: survey China welcomes int'l technological cooperation in new energy sector
China to lead world in innovation by 2020: survey A mind for innovation
China to lead world in innovation by 2020: survey Solid basis for innovation
China is already the world's second-largest economy, after establishing itself as the global workshop for manufacturing. Now it wants to move up the value chain by leading in invention as well.

Today, the United States ranks as the world's most innovative country, with 30 percent of people surveyed taking that view, followed by Japan on 25 percent and China on 14 percent.

Fast-forward 10 years, however, and 27 percent of people think China will be top dog, followed by India with 17 percent, the United States 14 percent and Japan 12 percent, according to the survey of 6,000 people in six countries done by drugmaker AstraZeneca.

The shift is not because the United States is doing less science and technology, but because countries like China and India are doing more - a fact reflected in a spike-up in successful Asian research efforts in recent years.

A study last month from Thomson Reuters showed China was now the second-largest producer of scientific papers, after the United States, and research and development (R&D) spending by Asian nations as a group in 2008 was $387 billion, compared with $384 billion in the United States and $280 billion in Europe.

Asian confidence

Working out just how fast the world's new emerging market giants are developing their know-how is critical to many technology-focused companies in the West, as they seek to redeploy R&D resources.

The pharmaceutical industry, in particular, has been anxious to tap into China's science base and many companies, including AstraZeneca, have established Chinese centres as they try to reignite R&D productivity in laboratories at home.

The survey across Britain, the United States, Sweden, Japan, India and China found a strong sense of optimism amongst people living in China and India, in contrast to relative pessimism in the developed Western economies.

More than half of those in China and India thought their home countries would be the most innovative in the world by 2020, while just one in 20 Britons thought Britain would be able to claim this title.

There was an notable east-west divide in views of what had been the most important scientific breakthroughs. People in Asia put communications and computing top, while US and European respondents placed equal importance on the invention of vaccines and antibiotics, the survey

Newscribe : get free news in real time

U.S. chip manufacturing in the age of the iPad



Behind the fly-off-the-shelf popularity of products like Apple's iPad and iPhone are hundreds of thousands of manufacturing jobs--mostly overseas. Is it possible to create more of those jobs here in the U.S. to combat chronically high levels of unemployment?

Andy Grove's Stanford class examined the state of manufacturing in the U.S.
Andy Grove's Stanford class examined the state of manufacturing in the U.S.
(Credit: Intel)
Personal computing is moving rapidly beyond the laptop. And there's no better example than Apple, whose most popular products are now the iPhone and the iPad. The surging demand for anything Apple is causing a seismic shift in chip manufacturing to Asia, the hotbed of new silicon ecosystems. Though companies like Hewlett-Packard and Dell also play a role, they are still primarily Intel-centric PC makers, while Apple is morphing into a maker of smartphones and tablets, which is creating the alternative non-Intel silicon manufacturing ecosystems overseas. Thus the focus on Apple.

So, is there anything a U.S. gadget supplier like Apple can--or should--do to help maintain a chip manufacturing base in the U.S.? Seeking an answer to that question I recently sat in on a Stanford University class taught by Andy Grove, the former Intel chief executive, and talked to Vivek Wadhwa, director of research at the Center for Entrepreneurship and Research Commercialization at Duke University's Pratt School of Engineering.

My premise was pretty simple. The tablet and high-end smartphone are pushing chip manufacturing outside of the U.S. and away from PC chip stalwart Intel, which has always maintained a large manufacturing base here. My question: If all things are more or less equal technologically, is it a feasible business decision to source silicon from companies, when possible, that have manufacturing bases--and create jobs--in the U.S.?

One of the most prominent examples is Micron Technology and its flash memory chip joint venture with Intel, IM Flash Technologies. Micron is a scrappy Boise, Idaho-based chip manufacturer that survived Japanese chipmakers' takeover of the lion's share of the DRAM (Dynamic Random Access Memory) business in the 1980s and is still alive and kicking despite Asia's--primarily South Korea's and Japan's--preeminence in the memory chip business now.

Toshiba, in particular, is emerging as a strong presence in flash memory now. Thanks, increasingly, to Apple. In fact, to date, a sizable chunk of the flash that went into the iPhone and iPad was sourced from Toshiba. Most pointedly, Apple announced publicly in 2009 that it had cut a $500 million deal with Toshiba to supply flash.

And flash is now prominent in the new MacBook Air, which is offered with 64GB, 128GB, or 256GB flash drives. In the popular 11.6-inch MacBook Air, for example, an iFixit teardown reveals a 64GB solid-state drive supplied by Toshiba.
Cost breakdowns by firms such as iSuppli show that the flash memory component of iPads and iPhones, as percentage of a total bill of materials, ranks very high and is--depending on whether it's 16GB or 64GB--sometimes the largest single component in terms of cost.

Is this business that Micron and/or Intel--who manufacture flash at facilities in Lehi, Utah, and Manassas, Va.,--could get a bigger piece of? That's a business decision Apple has to make. But my point is that the opportunity to make that choice could vanish if trends continue.

U.S. manufacturing clusters
Grove's Standford University graduate business class focused in part on "industry clusters," which are described as "a geographic concentration of interconnected businesses, suppliers, and associated institutions focused on a particular field (i.e., Silicon Valley)," in the class handout. And one of the questions for open discussion was, "How do we make Silicon Valley an industry cluster for manufacturing technology?"

I didn't hear any good answers to that question. What I did hear were more needling questions such as, "Can you control what you don't produce? We say, no." Or statements about America's lack of focus on maintaining a manufacturing base, such as, "America is not fighting right now, at least not very hard." And, of course, the usual warnings about major disincentives: the stratospherically high U.S. corporate tax rate--a point Intel's current CEO Paul Otellini is not bashful about making--was cited as second only to Japan's at 40 percent.

The corporate tax rate is an important issue because, when it's globally competitive--that is, low--it draws business to the U.S. naturally, in the spirit of Adam Smith's oft-quoted maxim of the Invisible Hand. The U.S. government can't plan a manufacturing base into existence--capitalism doesn't work that way--but a country can do everything possible to make the conditions favorable.

Grove asserts that the U.S. government should be aggressive on all fronts to keep the international playing field as level as possible. "Is China following WTO (World Trade Organization) rules? Should you be worried about being accused of protectionism?"--Grove asked the class. He was posing questions that seemed to imply that the U.S. needs to do more to help itself.

And product giants like Apple can also do their share by turning to existing U.S. sources. "Yes, let's put pressure on Apple. If Apple bought flash from Intel or Micron, that's a great example," said Duke University's Wadhwa.

But not all manufacturing is created equal. "The vast majority of manufacturing is destructive to the environment. Like paint and toy manufacturing. And if you build more manufacturing plants here like Foxconn--which build Apple's iPhone in China--Americans wouldn't want to do those jobs. It's mindless, grunt work," he said.

Wadhwa continued. "Germany (for example) is all very high-level manufacturing. It's very high-level technology products and they pay very high salaries. It's not grunt work. By all means let's get high-end high-tech manufacturing in the U.S. Flash memory is a good example. Manufacturing the most critical ingredients of solar technology is a good example. And clean-tech manufacturing," he said.

Some manufacturing, surprisingly, is coming back to the U.S. The Stanford class cited cases of "re-shoring" of manufacturing by General Electric, Caterpillar, and Ford. In some cases, unforeseen complications make manufacturing abroad simply impractical. And China's cost of living is rising too, which will work against low-cost manufacturing in that country in the future.

Let's hope that the U.S. remains as hospitable as possible to high-quality high-tech manufacturing jobs and that companies like Apple do their share to source from U.S.-based suppliers when possible.

Saturday 4 December 2010

Malaysians are not ready to host big games

By ANN TAN anntan@thestar.com.my

Malaysains have to discard freebies mentality, says sports minister


GEORGE TOWN: Malaysians are not ready for any major multi-sports event like Asian Games despite the country being the host for the Commonwealth Games in 1998.

Youth and Sports Minister Datuk Seri Ahmad Shabery Cheek said the people’s mindset and attitude have to be changed before the country decides to bid to be the host for any such games.

“Malaysians are still looking for freebies such as complimentary tickets. They are also always asking to be paid despite volunteering to help out in a sport events.”

Citing the 590,000 volunteers during the recently concluded Asian Games in Guangzhou, China, as an example, he said over a million people had volunteered themselves to help out in the event without asking for anything in return.

“Those who were picked were only given a uniform each and food coupons, and they even made their way to Guangzhou on their own.

“We need such a spirit before we can even consider hosting an international sport event but I am sad to note that we have yet to reach such a standard,” he told reporters after officiating the 2nd Malaysia Youth Sports and Cultural Carnival at the Universiti Sains Malaysia last night.

It was earlier reported that the Cabinet had rejected an attempt to bid for the 2019 Asian Games, which was estimated to cost of RM1.7bil.

To this, Shabery said the cost, which excluded the budget for infrastructure, was estimated before they witnessed the Asian Games in Guangzhou.

“China has set a very high standard and if we were to host a similar event, we will have to use them as a benchmark.

“We must think of something more creative and more advanced with better co-ordination and manpower as the Asian Games will definitely cost more to host than the Commonwealth Games,” he said.

Shabery said it would not be a wise to bid for the games when the Government was cutting subsidy on petrol and sugar.

“This is not an impossible task but we will need to wait until the country is more financially sound.”

Proton and a terribly flawed Malaysian Automotive Policy

A QUESTION OF BUSINESS BY P.GUNASEGARAM

Once we realise that people and productivity come first, it will be easier to solve the myriad headaches facing the car industry in general and Proton in particular.



THE problem with Proton Holdings Bhd is that it feels that Malaysia owes it a living. It wants to continue to make profits at the expense of Malaysians. It does not realise that 25 years is too old for it to be babied.

And now it wants to marry its competitor, Perodua or Perusuhaan Otomobil Kedua, which has surpassed Proton in sales and become number one, so that its future will be sort of assured by larger scale and access to a foreign partner.

But Perodua is a reluctant bride and its top management has openly, and understandably, expressed opposition against the merger because it gives no benefit to Perodua while being potentially rather harmful.

A forced marriage is a recipe for disaster, and it is high time that the Government stood up and took notice of these objections and examined clearly how irrational the reasons are for the proposed merger. The reality of the situation is that Proton, or for that matter any other Malaysian manufacturer, including Perodua, is unable to have the scale and technological expertise to be a viable world manufacturer of cars on its own.

That leaves Proton with no other choice but to find a technological partner, or merge with a reputable, large manufacturer. The first alternative would mean that it will never become competitive and will rely on the partner for its survival.

The second alternative, the only viable one, was very near to completion a few years ago when it was completing a deal with the world’s fourth largest car company Volkswagen in 2007 (and again earlier this year) but the deal was scuttled at the last minute by vested interests.

If that deal had materialised, Proton would have been well on the road to a bright future full of promise as Volkswagen geared all Proton’s excess capacity up to become a regional manufacturer.

By now, Malaysians and South East Asians could be driving the Volkswagen engineered cars at a fraction of their current price.

We could have seen the local parts manufacturing industry getting a boost from increased volumes and expertise from the German manufacturer which helped the Czech manufacturer Skoda become a major automotive power in a relatively short period of time.

The price to be paid would have been to surrender majority control of Proton to Volkswagen, but even there arrangements could have been made to keep Malaysian distribution and service operations under local majority control (as with Perodua) and let Volkswagen take majority control of manufacturing and regional operations.

That would have been win-win for both parties but pride and vested interests dictated otherwise. Since then the attractiveness of Proton and what it has to offer has diminished in the eyes of international car companies and the national car manufacturer has been unable to strike a deal with any of them.

Proton realises that it is in desperate straits because its local, home-grown models have been unimpressive, as a result of which it lost the lead to the much more reliable Perodua with its popular Myvi range of models. Perodua has not looked back since.

But the baby still wants its milk and now it is looking to Perodua to mother it and provide it with a badly needed lifeline after it desperately did a deal with Mitsubishi to re-badge the Lancer as the Inspira – hardly inspiring stuff.

Now it is turning the screws on Perodua and is applying pressure for a merger. Perodua has built itself a successful niche operation with technological help from Toyota-controlled Daihatsu and has become a regional manufacturer of sorts. Its models are more in demand simply because quality and performance is better than Proton’s.

It is a merger that Perodua clearly does not want. But will it have a choice at the end of the day? Both Proton and Perodua are essentially controlled by the Government or by Government-linked companies, with only Perodua’s manufacturing operations under Japanese control.

The Japanese, through Toyota and Mitsui and Co, can raise their objections here, especially since Toyota has already more or less made its regional plans here in Indonesia, Thailand and elsewhere.

Malaysia lost out because of – yes, Proton and a terribly flawed National Automotive Policy which favours inefficient local manufacturers and assemblers and some favoured franchise operators who rely on approved permits for their trade.

The business solution is very clear – wean the Proton baby off, and ensure that the punitive import duties on cars are progressively removed so that Malaysians don’t have to subsidise the profits of the likes of Protons and can enjoy cheaper cars.

Perodua is likely to survive that move as it has a solid technological and equity relationship with Daihatsu and is fast becoming a regional manufacturer but Proton will have to merge or go extinct. The sooner Proton is weaned off the faster it will see its predicament and sort something out.

Surely that solution cannot be pulling under the water another perfectly well established national car project which is currently flourishing under the only workable model under which a national car project will survive.

Proton lost its chance with Volkswagen. Let it go out there and find an alliance with a world manufacturer like Perodua did a while ago. Let it leave Perodua well alone.

>Managing editor P. Gunasegaram says we should not throw good companies after bad.

PROTON :  [Stock Watch]  [News]

Friday 3 December 2010

Penang houses are just ‘not affordable’



"Developers prefer to cater to investors and  speculators who buy for rent or to flip over and make money"

Making their point: Mohd Idris (right) and Dr Lim showing a chart on the percentage of the vacant house units in some states in Malaysia.

THE average price of a house on Penang Island in 2009 was RM550,000 — the highest in the country and RM160,000 more than the average price of a house in Kuala Lumpur.

State government think tank, Socio-Economic and Environmental Research Institute (Seri), said the price was eight times the average household in-come.

Its senior fellow Dr Lim Mah Hui said the house price should be between three and four times the average household income.

Dr Lim added that most houses that were built did not cater to the need of the majority of people.

“The building of super luxurious condominiums should not be encouraged. There are too many empty houses in Penang. The demand is there but it’s not affordable,” he told a press conference yesterday.

Consumers Association of Penang president S.M. Mohd Idris said house prices have soared to exorbitant levels in major cities of the country.

“Even the middle class cannot afford to own a house or apartment, let alone the lower income group,” he said.

Mohd Idris said that it was time for the government to start a public housing policy that provided affordable housing, particularly in urban areas, to people from the lower income group.

“A good example worth studying is the Singapore Housing Board where the government spearheads the building of affordable housing for a majority of its citizens,” he said.

He said the majority of Malay-sians want affordable homes but developers are supplying houses that they cannot afford.

“Developers prefer to cater to investors and speculators who buy to rent or to flip over and make money.

They also go overseas to aggressively market properties as they are still cheap by international standards.

“Unlike Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand, Malaysia is one of the few countries in Southeast Asia to allow foreigners to own landed property,” he said.

Source: The Star