By EIA

The Upper Midwest is facing a tight market for propane this winter, as evidenced by a 1.5-million-barrel inventory draw in the region for the week ending last Friday, January 10.

At the beginning of November, the corn harvest in the Upper Midwest (Minnesota, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nebraska) pulled large quantities of propane from distribution terminals for corn drying. Between late-November and December, supply disruptions prevented these terminals from replenishing their supplies of propane. With the onset of severely cold weather this past week, propane supplies are extremely tight, forcing emergency measures to ensure supply and increasing the Midwest spot price of propane at Conway, Kansas compared with the spot price on the Gulf Coast at Mont Belvieu, Texas. Propane prices in the Midwest will likely need to rise to keep propane in the region rather than flowing south to the Gulf Coast.

In October, EIA noted the effects of increased production of domestic oil and gas on propane flows between the Midwest and the Gulf Coast. Infrastructure changes have allowed the growing supplies of propane and other hydrocarbon gas liquids (HGL) from increased production to flow south from and through the Midwest to supply Gulf Coast petrochemical demand and also to gain access to the global market. Recently, the onset of severely cold weather in the Midwest has increased regional demand for propane and other heating fuels.

Even before the recent cold snap, Midwest propane markets were relatively tight compared with those on the Gulf Coast for other weather-related reasons. In addition to space heating needs, the Midwest uses propane for agricultural applications such as corn drying. For corn to be stored, it first needs to be dried, using large-scale heaters that often use propane for fuel. A late-2013 corn harvest, along with cold wet weather, resulted in strong demand for propane at distribution terminals in the Upper Midwest. For the week ending November 1, Midwest propane inventories dropped more than 2 million barrels, the largest single-week stock draw in November since 1993. This demand prompted a strong price response, and propane at Conway moved to a 3-cent-per-gallon (/gal) premium over Mont Belvieu during the first week of November, the first such premium in almost three years.

After the harvest, logistical problems prevented the region from fully replenishing inventories before the onset of winter. The Upper Midwest is supplied with propane by pipelines (Mid-American and ONEOK) flowing north from Conway (home to 30% of the nation’s propane storage), the Cochin pipeline coming south from Canada, and from rail deliveries (Figure 1). The Cochin pipeline, which delivers HGL from Canada to the Upper Midwest, was out of service for maintenance from late November to December 20 and unavailable to deliver supplies. Rail transportation disruptions, both due to weather and other factors, prevented deliveries from Mont Belvieu and Conway, as well as from Canada.

Since early 2010, propane prices at Mont Belvieu, the nation’s largest propane storage and market hub, were higher than at Conway by as much as 30 cents/gal, prompting propane supplies to flow south on newly expanded southbound pipelines. A large local petrochemical demand and access to the global propane market via expanded HGL export capacity supported Mont Belvieu prices and encouraged propane from the Rockies (PADD 4) and elsewhere in the Midwest to flow south.

Low temperatures and winter storms closely followed the corn harvest, and logistical problems continued. The colder weather increased residential space heating demand at a time when markets were already tight. As demand outpaced supply, inventories dropped further, by 1.5 million barrels and 1.2 million barrels for the weeks ending December 6 and January 3, respectively. By January 3 (Figure 2), prices had vaulted to a 21-cent/gal premium to Mont Belvieu.

Strong back-to-back demand surges, low inventories, and supply challenges forced emergency measures to ensure residential adequacy of propane. Several Midwestern states responded by suspending limitations on hours of service for propane delivery truck drivers. Trade press reported long waiting lines at propane distribution terminals in the Upper Midwest, as well as supply of propane by truck from as far away as Oklahoma. Since the week ending October 11, Midwest propane inventory levels have dropped by 12.8 million barrels, compared with a drop of 7.3 million barrels for the same period’s five-year average.

Because global prices for propane are significantly higher than U.S. prices, propane supplies will continue to move to Mont Belvieu for export. Midwest propane prices will rise to keep marginal supplies in the region when they are needed.

The Midwest will also need to prepare for the coming reversal of Kinder Morgan’s Cochin Pipeline, which delivers HGL from Canada to the upper Midwest. Kinder Morgan plans to reverse the flow to deliver light condensate to Canada. This reversal will change supply dynamics in the Midwest. However, this situation may also improve the economic prospects for infrastructure projects to process and transport HGL from the Bakken formation in North Dakota and Montana to Midwest markets farther east.

Gasoline price flat again while diesel fuel falls

The U.S. average retail price of regular gasoline decreased less than one cent to remain at $3.33 per gallon for the third consecutive week as of January 13, 2014, two cents higher than last year at this time. Prices increased three cents in the Midwest and Rocky Mountains, to $3.25 per gallon and $3.15 per gallon, respectively, while decreasing in all other regions of the nation. The East Coast price fell three cents to $3.41 per gallon, and prices on the Gulf and West Coasts both were down two cents, to $3.11 per gallon and $3.53 per gallon, respectively.

The national average diesel fuel price fell two cents to $3.89 per gallon, a penny lower than last year at this time. Prices decreased in all regions of the nation, with the largest decrease coming on the West Coast, where the price fell four cents to $4.00 per gallon. The Midwest price was down three cents to $3.85 per gallon, and both Gulf Coast and Rocky Mountain prices lost two cents, to $3.78 per gallon and $3.89 per gallon, respectively. The East Coast price was $3.94 per gallon, a penny lower than last week.

Propane inventories fall

U.S. propane stocks fell by 3.8 million barrels to end at 38.7 million barrels last week, 25.3 million barrels (39.6%) lower than a year ago. Gulf Coast regional inventories dropped by 1.9 million barrels and Midwest stocks decreased by 1.5 million barrels. Rocky Mountain/West Coast inventories decreased by 0.2 million barrels, and East Coast stocks fell by 0.1 million barrels. Propylene non-fuel-use inventories represented 9.1% of total propane inventories.

Residential propane price increases slightly, heating oil price decreases

Residential heating oil prices decreased nearly 2 cents per gallon to reach a price of $4.00 per gallon during the period ending January 13, 2014. This is less than 1 cent per gallon lower than last year’s price at this time. Wholesale heating oil prices increased 2 cents per gallon last week to $3.09 per gallon.

The average residential propane price increased by over 1 cent per gallon last week to $2.84 per gallon, almost 58 cents per gallon higher than the same period last year. Wholesale propane prices rose 2 cents per gallon to just under $1.71 per gallon as of January 13, 2014.

The article US Midwest Propane Markets Tighten Further On Cold Weather – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By VOR

The US House of Representatives overwhelmingly approved a $1.1 trillion spending bill for fiscal year 2014, capping a months-long negotiation that signals a truce in three years of fiscal battles plaguing Washington.

The measure, which funds federal government under the budget framework hammered out by Democrats and Republicans last month, passed 359-67, in a strong show of bipartisanship that belies the intense bickering that has marked recent debates over how – and how much – to fund government.

It now heads to the Senate, where it is expected to pass this week before being signed into law by President Barack Obama.

“It was very, very difficult, but we did it,” said House Democrat Barbara Lee, stressing that the compromise agreement “gets us out of this cycle of government by crisis.”

It also eliminates the threat of a government shutdown this month, similar to the one that paralyzed Washington for 16 days in October when Congress failed to agree on a budget.

And with nearly three-quarters of Republicans voting for the bill, it marks a rejection of the faction of Tea Party conservatives and activists staunchly opposed to virtually any increased spending.

Groups like Heritage Action, the political arm of the conservative Heritage Foundation think-tank, urged lawmakers to oppose the bill for blowing past spending levels set by the Budget Control Act of 2011.

Jenny Beth Martin, who co-founded Tea Party Patriots, noted how the 1,582-page “monstrosity” was introduced two nights earlier and was “rushed to a vote before Congress can read it.”

The high-stakes spending bill sets discretionary limits line by line for each federal agency until September 30, when fiscal year 2014 ends.

In addition to the discretionary $1.012 trillion, the measure includes $92 billion for foreign contingency operations, mainly the war in Afghanistan, and $6.5 billion for extraordinary expenses linked to natural disasters.

But the bill comes with a caveat that could prove a sticking point with Kabul. It halts aid to Afghanistan unless the country signs on to a new bilateral security agreement.

It also essentially blocks any new spending on the president’s health care reforms known as Obamacare, but it funds pre-kindergarten initiatives like Head Start to a surprisingly high level of $8.6 billion, a reported 13 percent over current funding.

“This bill is not perfect, I hate to tell you, but it is a good one,” said veteran congressman Hal Rogers, the chairman of the House Appropriations Committee who steered the spending negotiations.

Republicans hailed the deal for slashing discretionary spending for the fourth year in row.

And “by placing the power of the purse back in the hands of Congress and away from the executive branch, our representative Democracy is functioning the way our founders had intended,” number three House Republican Kevin McCarthy said in a statement.

Despite the savings trend, overall federal expenditures were set to rise slightly in 2014 as the deal erases painful and automatic spending cuts that were due to kick in on January 1 for the next two years.

The discretionary budget only represents about a third of federal public spending.

It does not include mandatory spending, such as the Medicare insurance program for the elderly and Social Security, set to reach $2.196 trillion in 2014, according to Congressional Budget Office estimates.

Overall, the deficit which reached 4.1 percent of gross domestic product in 2013 is set to drop over the next decade. The CBO said it would fall to 2.3 percent of GDP in 2015.

But despite the federal savings, US borrowing authority is expected to reach its limit by early March. That debt ceiling will need to be raised by Congress if the US Treasury is to pay its bills, setting up a potential fiscal showdown in Washington.

The article US House Passes $1.1 Trillion Spending Bill appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Ralph Nader

An epidemic of sky-rocketing medical costs has afflicted our country and grown to obscene proportions. Medical bills are bloated with waste, redundancy, profiteering, fraud and outrageous over-billing. Much is wrong with the process of pricing and providing health care.

The latest in this medical cost saga comes from new data released last week by National Nurses United (NNU), the nation’s largest nurse’s organization. In a news release, NNU revealed that fourteen hospitals in the United States are charging more than ten times their costs for treatment. Specifically, for every $100 one of these hospitals spends, the charge on the corresponding bill is nearly $1,200.

NNU’s key findings note that the top 100 most expensive U.S. hospitals have “a charge to cost ratio of 765 percent and higher — more than double the national average of 331 percent.” They found that despite the enactment of “Obamacare” — the Affordable Care Act — overall hospital charges experienced their largest increase in 16 years. For-profit hospitals continue to be the worst offenders with average charges of 503 percent of their costs compared to publically-run hospitals (“…including federal, state, county, city, or district operated hospitals, with public budgets and boards that meet in public…”) which show more restraint in pricing. The average charge ratios for these hospitals are 235 percent of their costs.

According to NNU’s data, the top 10 Most Expensive Hospitals in the U.S. listed according to the huge percentage of their charges relative to their costs are:

1. Meadowlands Hospital Medical Center, Secaucus, NJ – 1192%
2. Paul B. Hall Regional Medical Center, Painsville, KY – 1186%
3. Orange Park Medical Center, Orange Park, FL – 1139%
4. North Okaloosa Medical Center, Crestview, FL – 1137%
5. Gadsden Regional Medical Center, Gadsden, AL – 1128%
6. Bayonne Medical Center, Bayonne, NJ – 1084%
7. Brooksville Regional Hospital, Brooksville, FL – 1083%
8. Heart of Florida Regional Medical Center, Davenport, FL – 1058%
9. Chestnut Hill Hospital, Philadelphia, PA – 1058%
10. Oak Hill Hospital, Spring Hill, FL – 1052%

The needless complications of the vast medical marketplace have provided far too many opportunities for profiteering. Numerous examples of hospital visit bills feature enormous overcharges on simple supplies such as over-the-counter painkillers, gauze, bandages and even the markers used to prep patients for surgery. That’s not to mention the cost of more advanced procedures and the use of advanced medical equipment which are billed at several times their actual cost. These charges have resulted in many hundreds of millions of dollars in overcharges.

When pressed for answers, many hospital representatives are quick to defer to factors out of their control. It’s the cost of providing care they might say, or perhaps infer that other vague aspects of running the business of medical treatment add up and are factored into these massive charges. Cost allocations mix treatment costs with research budgets, cash reserves, and just plain accounting gimmicks. These excuses shouldn’t fly in the United States.

Few in the medical industry will acknowledge the troubling trend. One thing is undeniably certain however — the medical marketplace is not suffering for profits. Health-care in the United States is a nearly 3 trillion dollar a year industry replete with excessive profits for many hospitals, medical supply companies, pharmaceutical companies, labs and health insurance vendors.

Americans spend more on health care than anywhere else in the world. One would hope and wish, at the least, that this enormous expenditure would provide a quality of healthcare above and beyond that found in the rest of the western world. The reality is that the results on average are no better than in France, Germany, Canada and elsewhere, which manage to provide their quality treatment without all the overcharges.

Much like our similarly wasteful, bloated military budget, the U.S. spends more on health care than the next ten countries combined — most of which cover almost all of their citizens.The United States spends $8,233 per person, per year according to a 2012 figure from the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). The average expenditure of the thirty three other developed nations OECD tracked is just $3,268 per person.

It gets worse. Harvard’s Malcolm Sparrow, the leading expert on health care billing fraud and abuse, conservatively estimates that 10 percent of all health care expenditure in the United States is lost to computerized billing fraud. That’s $270 billion dollars a year!

And unlike other commercial markets, where the advance of technology routinely makes costs lower, the reverse trend is in effect when providing medical care — the prices just keep soaring higher and higher. The flawed, messy Obamacare system will do little to help this worsening profit-grab crisis, which is often downright criminal in the way it exploits tragedy-stricken people and saddles them with mountains of debt.

Steven Brill’s TIME magazine cover story from February 2013 titled “Bitter Pill: Why Medical Bills Are Killing Us” gives an in-depth and highly-researched rundown of the severity of the medical cost problem and provides some of the worst, most astonishing examples of profiteering off of the plight of the sick or injured.

Here’s a fact that puts the full scope of this troubling trend into perspective — Brill writes: “The health-care industrial complex spends more than three times what the military industrial complex spends in Washington”. Specifically, the medical industry has spent $5.36 billion on lobbying in Washington D.C. since 1998. Compare that expenditure to the $1.53 billion spent lobbying by the also-bloated defense and aerospace sector.

One line summarizes the breadth of Brill’s enormous piece: “If you are confused by the notion that those least able to pay are the ones singled out to pay the highest rates, welcome to the American medical marketplace.”

Americans who can’t pay and therefore delay diagnosis and treatment are casualties. About 45,000 Americans die every year because they cannot afford health insurance according to a peer-reviewed report by Harvard Medical School researchers. No one dies in Canada, Germany, France or Britain because they do not have health insurance. They are all insured from the time they are born.

Obamacare, which has already confused and infuriated many Americans — and even some experts — with its complexity made up of thousands of pages of legislation and regulations is clearly not the answer to the problem. Long before the internet, President Lyndon Johnson enrolled 20 million elderly Americans into Medicare in six months using index cards. Canada’s single-payer system was enacted with only a thirteen page bill — and it covers everyone for less than half of the cost per capita compared to the U.S.’s system. (Check out 21 Ways the Canadian Health Care System is Better Than Obamacare)

Enacting a single payer, full Medicare-for-all system is the only chance the United States has of unwinding itself from the spider web of waste, harm, and bloat that currently comprise its highly flawed health insurance and health care systems. It’s time to cut out the corporate profiteers and purveyors of waste and fraud and introduce a system that works for everybody.

The article Ralph Nader: Medical Price Gouging – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Paul Woodward

“The only way for interaction with Iran is dialogue on an equal footing, confidence-building and mutual respect as well as reducing antagonism and aggression,” Iranian President Hassan Rouhani said in a speech after taking the oath of office last August.

“If you want the right response, don’t speak with Iran in the language of sanctions, speak in the language of respect.”

In the following article, Nicholas Wright and Karim Sadjadpour describe how an understanding of neuroscience — or lack of it — may determine the outcome of negotiations with Iran.

The whole piece is worth reading, but keep this in mind: every single insight that gets attributed to neuroscience has been clearly established without the need to conduct a single brain scan. Indeed, everything that is here being attributed to the “exquisite neural machinery” of the brain can be understood by studying the workings of the human mind and how thought shapes behavior.

It is important to draw a sharp distinction between the examination of the mind and observing the workings of the brain because the latter is totally dependent on the output of intermediary electronic scanning devices, whereas minds can study themselves and each other directly and through shared language.

One of the insidious effects of neuroscience is that it promotes a view that understanding the ways brains work has greater intrinsic value than understanding how minds work. What the negotiations with Iran demonstrate, however, is that the exact opposite is true.

To the extent that through the development of trust, negotiations are able to advance, this will have nothing to do with anyone’s confidence about what is happening inside anyone’s brain. On the contrary, it will depend on a meeting of minds and mutual understanding. No one will need to understand what is happening in their own or anyone else’s insula cortex, but what will most likely make or break the talks will be whether the Iranians believe they are being treated fairly. The determination of fairness does not depend on the presence or absence of a particular configuration of neural activity but rather on an assessment of reality.

Treat us as equals, Iran’s president said — and that was almost 15 years ago!

Nicholas Wright and Karim Sadjadpour write: “Imagine being told that you cannot do what everyone else is doing,” appealed Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in a somber YouTube message defending the country’s nuclear program in November. “Would you back down? Would you relent? Or would you stand your ground?”

While only 14 nations, including Iran, enrich uranium (e.g. “what everyone else is doing”), Zarif’s message raises a question at the heart of ongoing talks to implement a final nuclear settlement with Tehran: Why has the Iranian government subjected its population to the most onerous sanctions regime in contemporary history in order to do this? Indeed, it’s estimated that Iran’s antiquated nuclear program needs one year to enrich as much uranium as Europe’s top facility produces in five hours.

To many, the answer is obvious: Iran is seeking a nuclear weapons capability (which it has arguably already attained), if not nuclear weapons. Yet the numerous frameworks used to explain Iranian motivations—including geopolitics, ideology, nationalism, domestic politics, and threat perception—lead analysts to different conclusions. Does Iran want nuclear weapons to dominate the Middle East, or does it simply want the option to defend itself from hostile opponents both near and far? While there’s no single explanation for Tehran’s actions, if there is a common thread that connects these frameworks and may help illuminate Iranian thinking, it is the brain.

Although neuroscience can’t be divorced from culture, history, and geography, there is no Orientalism of the brain: The fundamental biology of social motivations is the same in Tokyo, Tehran, and Tennessee. It anticipates, for instance, how the mind’s natural instinct to reject perceived unfairness can impede similarly innate desires for accommodation, and how fairness can lead to tragedy. It tells us that genuinely conciliatory gestures are more likely and natural than many believe, and how to make our own conciliatory gestures more effective.

Distilled to their essence, nations are led by and comprised of humans, and the success of social animals like humans rests on our ability to control the balance between cooperation and self-interest. The following four lessons from neuroscience may help us understand the obstacles that were surmounted to reach an interim nuclear deal with Iran, and the enormous challenges that still must be overcome in order to reach a comprehensive agreement. [Continue reading...]

The article Understanding The Psychology Shaping Negotiations With Iran – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Robert Reich

Last week’s massive spill of the toxic chemical MCHM into West Virginia’s Elk River illustrates another benefit to the business class of high unemployment, economic insecurity, and a safety-net shot through with holes. Not only are employees eager to accept whatever job they can get. They are also also unwilling to demand healthy and safe environments.

The spill was the region’s third major chemical accident in five years, coming after two investigations by the federal Chemical Safety Board in the Kanawha Valley, also known as “Chemical Valley,” and repeated recommendations from federal regulators and environmental advocates that the state embrace tougher rules to better safeguard chemicals.

No action was ever taken. State and local officials turned a deaf ear. The storage tank that leaked, owned by Freedom Industries, hadn’t been inspected for decades.

But nobody complained.

Not even now, with the toxins moving down river toward Cincinnati, can the residents of Charleston and the surrounding area be sure their drinking water is safe — partly because the government’s calculation for safe levels is based on a single study by the manufacturer of the toxic chemical, which was never published, and partly because the West Virginia American Water Company, which supplies the drinking water, is a for-profit corporation that may not want to highlight any lingering danger.

So why wasn’t more done to prevent this, and why isn’t there more of any outcry even now?

The answer isn’t hard to find. As Maya Nye, president of People Concerned About Chemical Safety, a citizen’s group formed after a 2008 explosion and fire killed workers at West Virginia’s Bayer CropScience plant in the state, explained to the New York Times: “We are so desperate for jobs in West Virginia we don’t want to do anything that pushes industry out.”

Exactly.

I often heard the same refrain when I headed the U.S. Department of Labor. When we sought to impose a large fine on the Bridgestone-Firestone Tire Company for flagrantly disregarding workplace safety rules and causing workers at one of its plants in Oklahoma to be maimed and killed, for example, the community was solidly behind us — that is, until Bridgestone-Firestone threatened to close the plant if we didn’t back down.

The threat was enough to ignite a storm of opposition to the proposed penalty from the very workers and families we were trying to protect. (We didn’t back down and Bridgestone-Firestone didn’t carry out its threat, but the political fallout was intense.)

For years political scientists have wondered why so many working class and poor citizens of so-called “red” states vote against their economic self-interest. The usual explanation is that, for these voters, economic issues are trumped by social and cultural issues like guns, abortion, and race.

I’m not so sure. The wages of production workers have been dropping for thirty years, adjusted for inflation, and their economic security has disappeared. Companies can and do shut down, sometimes literally overnight. A smaller share of working-age Americans hold jobs today than at any time in more than three decades.

People are so desperate for jobs they don’t want to rock the boat. They don’t want rules and regulations enforced that might cost them their livelihoods. For them, a job is precious — sometimes even more precious than a safe workplace or safe drinking water.

This is especially true in poorer regions of the country like West Virginia and through much of the South and rural America — so-called “red” states where the old working class has been voting Republican. Guns, abortion, and race are part of the explanation. But don’t overlook economic anxieties that translate into a willingness to vote for whatever it is that industry wants.

This may explain why Republican officials who have been casting their votes against unions, against expanding Medicaid, against raising the minimum wage, against extended unemployment insurance, and against jobs bills that would put people to work, continue to be elected and re-elected. They obviously have the support of corporate patrons who want to keep unemployment high and workers insecure because a pliant working class helps their bottom lines. But they also, paradoxically, get the votes of many workers who are clinging so desperately to their jobs that they’re afraid of change and too cowed to make a ruckus.

The best bulwark against corporate irresponsibility is a strong and growing middle class. But in order to summon the political will to achieve it, we have to overcome the timidity that flows from economic desperation. It’s a diabolical chicken-and-egg conundrum at a the core of American politics today.

The article Fear Is Why Workers In Red States Vote Against Their Economic Self-Interests – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By James M. Dorsey

To the outside world, the Middle East and North Africa is a cauldron of intractable conflicts within intractable conflicts, much like sets of Russian matryoshka dolls of decreasing size placed one inside the other. The list of animosities is endless: Palestinians and Jews hate each other; Arabs detest Persians; Turks distrust Kurds as agents of colonialism; Sunnis despise Shiites; Israelis see black African refugees as a mortal threat; Gulf citizens envision hordes of Asian and Arab workers claiming title to their family-run states; and Muslims eye non-Muslims as impure encroachments.

Yet as disparate as the concerns of Arabs, Iranians, Israelis, Turks, Sunnis, Shiites, Christians and Kurds seem, they all are rooted in often existential fears that are frequently exploited for elites’ political expediency.

Exploiting fears

In a region in which perceptions of history dictate modern-day attitudes, those fears call into question the sustainability of anchoring a country’s national identity on the common ethnic, religious or tribal roots of one group that has the power to impose itself.

The sustainability of the model is further threatened by globalisation, enhanced mass transportation and ever greater mobility. As a result, national boundaries seem increasingly fragile as groups like the Kurds in Syria and Iraq carve out entities of their own and religious groups in Iraq find themselves caught between a sectarian government they do not trust and a jihadist force they fundamentally dislike.

To some in the Middle East and North Africa, the fears are truly-felt existential concerns. For others they are the product of historic trauma. Yet others, cynically and opportunistically exploit them to whip up national emotion in a bid to retain or enhance power. Often, these various drivers overlap to deepen the region’s vicious circle from which there seems no way out.

Pressures from trade unions and human rights groups on energy-rich Gulf states like Qatar and the United Arab Emirates to adhere to international labour standards are putting on the agenda what for many of the smaller states is the elephant in the room: the survivability of countries whose vast majority of the population have no rights and no prospect of acquiring rights over generations and whose presence is solely to enhance the wellbeing of a small minority of nationals.

It is a model that seems increasingly unviable. Yet, acknowledging this reality can be traumatic. For Qataris and Emiratis it raises the spectre of an uncertain world with none of the familiar crutches. Loss of control of their state and society shaped by their national, cultural, religious and tribal identities would set them adrift without an anchor.

They would be defenceless against the shenanigans of their bigger brothers Saudi Arabia, Iran and Iraq. Keeping those fears alive has helped ruling families run their states as family-owned enterprises.

The threat of pluralism

Fears in the Gulf are not dissimilar to those of Israelis who want to see the majority in their state to dictate its identity and culture. Maintaining that majority against whatever legitimate non-Jewish demands – Palestinian national rights alongside Israel and equal rights within the boundaries of the Jewish state, or the right to asylum of refugees from the horrors of the Horn of Africa – is written into Israel’s DNA even if Jews no longer face the existential, genocidal threats of the past. Yet, like in the Gulf demographics could be Israel’s undoing. Pluralism and inclusiveness is a double-edged sword.

Israel shares perceptions of the downside of pluralism and inclusiveness with states across the region. Those principles pose an existential threat to the staunchly Sunni Al Sauds who established and maintain control of their kingdom on the basis of a sectarian, inward-looking exclusive interpretation of Islam. They also threaten the grip on power of the minority Sunni Al Khalifas in majority Shiite Bahrain.

Deep-seated Saudi animosity towards Iran and the kingdom’s fuelling of the Sunni-Shiite divide that is ripping the Middle East apart is rooted in the challenge posed by Islamist governments like that of Iran or that of deposed Muslim Brother Mohammed Morsi in Egypt that have or had some degree of democratic legitimacy.

A true embrace of pluralism and inclusiveness would by the same token undercut efforts by the Egyptian military to preserve its perks and privileges as well as embattled Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan’s struggle to hang on to power.

Breaking the vicious circle

As the Middle East and North Africa enters its fourth year of what is likely to be a long drawn out, tortuous process of change, it is becoming increasingly clear that the hopes in 2011 of a new dawn sparked by the toppling of autocratic leaders in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya and Yemen were little more than pie in the sky. Nevertheless, the genie of inevitable change has been let out of the bottle.

What we are witnessing is the Middle East and North Africa’s most existential battle to date, shrouded by vicious sectarianism across the region, a temporary revival of autocracy and repression in Egypt, motion without movement in Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts, senseless slaughter in Syria and horrendous killings in Iraq. It is the battle of inclusiveness versus exclusiveness and for the acknowledgement that the region’s states are multi ethnic, multi-religious and multi-tribal entities.

Winning that battle is no mean feat. It means a dramatic shift in mindset that overcomes deep-seated fears – the most irrational of emotions – and seeking solutions to which all, not just a few, are parties. Surveying today’s Middle Eastern and North African landscape offers few straws of hope. But without that dramatic shift that is likely to emerge only when the alternative becomes too costly, the Middle East and North Africa is doomed to remain a cauldron of ever-more bloody conflict.

This article was published by S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University in Singapore, and reprinted with permission.

The article The Middle East And North Africa: Cauldron Of Conflict – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Eurasia Review

Hindus point out that French President Francois Hollande’s discreet escapades has degraded the institution of presidency and tarnished the image of France, a great nation at the political heart of Europe.

Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, in a statement in Nevada (USA) today, said that it was morally reprehensible for a French President to keep an “official” lover, First Lady Valerie Trierweiler, at Elysee Palace with a staff supported by public money; and then reportedly sneakily smuggle himself through the back metal gate of Elysee Palace at night-time to a flat on a scooter to meet another “unofficial” lover Julie Gayet for romantic adventures.

Zed, who is President of Universal Society of Hinduism, argued that this episode was setting-up a very poor role model for France and the world. Hollande needed to immediately clarify his stand and apologize to France and the rest of the world, Zed added.

Rajan Zed further said that being democratically elected President, Hollande was elected with public trust and thus his rhetoric—”private matters should be dealt with privately”—did not carry much weight. In spite of indulging in such reckless frolics, Hollande should be focusing on France’s economic growth, business reforms, combating unemployment (about 10.3% of the workforce is out of work), etc.

His Holiness Pope Francis should also come out with a statement on this morality issue as Hollande was reportedly raised as a Catholic and attended Catholic boarding school, Zed noted.

Was cheating wife/partner becoming a French presidential tradition? Rajan Zed asked.

The article Hindus Term Hollande’s Escapades ‘Morally Reprehensible’ appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Said Temsamani

This week (January 17 and 18), Morocco will host the annual gathering of Al Quds Committee (Jerusalem Committee), an offshhot of the Organization of the Islamic Conference that was created in 1975 and has always been chaired by the Moroccan monarchs, late King Hassan II and now by King Mohammed VI. Not only the Muslim community but also the international community will be following this major event with particular interest especially that King Mohammed VI, the current Chairman of the Jerusalem Committee, has gained an international reputation as a moderate Muslim monarch who is seeking tirelessly a comprehensive solution to the the oldest and most sensitive conflicts in the intenrational geopolitical arena. The Moroccan monarch will certainly give a new impetus to the ongoing world efforts to reach a just peace between the Israelis and the Palestinians.

In fact, Morocco can play a significant role in brokering peace between the Israelis and Palestinians. A progressive Muslim country with both African and European influences, it is strategically located to be the center of a Western-Muslim dialogue.

King Mohammed VI represents the kind of moderate and progressive world views on which the Western world should capitalize and promote as a formidable and open-minded new brand of Islam. Under Mohammed VI, Morocco has become increasingly more democratic, and the rule of law and human rights have been reinforced. It is a haven for moderate Islam: both men and women preachers have a role in promoting an Islam based on tolerance and respect of other religions.

The King has significantly advanced the causes of women’s rights, freedom of the press, and the rule of law. In Morocco, women can vote, drive, obtain a divorce, and hold senior positions, thanks largely to a new family code which was initiated by the King. The Mourchidat are the Islamic world’s only female clerics, a program started by the King in 2004. The Mourchidat are a rare experiment in the Muslim world.

But most importantly, the King holds unique authority among both Israelis and Palestinians as a credible and honest broker, capable of facilitating a dialogue between the two. As a direct descendant of the Prophet, he possesses an authenticity within the Muslim world that sets him apart as a conduit of Islam.

Because of this lineage, Palestinians trust and respect him, despite his efforts to promote a more liberal Muslim democracy, which has earned him the condemnation of more radical Islamic fundamentalists. And as an advocate for security and coexistence between Palestinians and Israelis, he’s earned the favor of many Jewish leaders who see him as perhaps one of the only moderate Arab leaders who recognize Israel’s legitimacy.

As King, he is Commander of the Faithful, but King Mohammed VI has positioned himself as commander of all faiths, and not just Islam, which signals to Christians and Jews that he is open-minded and a natural conduit between the three faiths. His position has always been clear : security for Israel and dignity for the Palestinians. If the West focuses on these two principles, as he has, the objective has a useful clarity and direction.

Because King Mohammed VI is the literal embodiment of moderate Islam, and simultaneously promotes a Western and democratic world view, Morocco is uniquely positioned to offer the kind of insight on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that America desperately needs. While America should continue to play an integral role in establishing peace in the Middle East, the aid of a third party like Morocco would be invaluable.

Presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush both met with Mohammed VI during their terms to gain insight into the Middle East crisis, and Bush in particular relied on Morocco to promote a more democratic and progressive brand of Islam to the rest of the Arab world. When Barack Obama took office, King Mohammed VI wrote him a letter, suggesting the ways in which the president could communicate better with the Muslim world. This seems the perfect opportunity to seek the advice of someone better qualified to navigate through the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

In his speech in Cairo, Obama rightly pointed out that Morocco was the first country to recognize America as an independent nation. Perhaps Obama would be wise to repay the favor, and recognize Morocco as an important delegate in advancing Middle East peace.

King Mohammed’s s inspirational words still ring in the ears of both Palestinians, Israelis, and the world community: “The world still had a long way to go before states and peoples learn to accept diversity. It was of utmost importance that the United Nations became the standard bearer of peace, tolerance, and mutual understanding and serve as a catalyst for a new form of cooperation; one based on solidarity and dedicated to achieving the dignity and well-being of all people.”

As the President of Jerusalem Committee, King Mohammed deployed great efforts to iniate a series of social, educational projects in Jerusalem for the benefit of Muslim and christian Palestinians. On the political level, Morocco praised the United Nations General Assembly’s decision to upgrade the status of the Palestinians to that of a “non-member observer state”. Certainly, this would give a new impetus to the frozen Israeli-Palestinian peace process.

For all the Holocaust denying and minimizing in the Arab world, there is one leader in the Arab world who speaks out unabashedly about the horrors of the Holocaust, writes the chairman of the U.S. Commission for the Preservation of America’s Heritage Abroad, in the Philadelphia Inquirer:

“The leader of an Arab Muslim nation made some remarkable statements about the Holocaust – remarkable for their courage and respect for historical truth. In a largely unreported speech at the Royal Palace in Fez in 2009, Morocco’s King Mohammed VI called the Holocaust “one of the blots, one of the most tragic chapters in modern history.” The king added, “Amnesia has no bearing on my perception of the Holocaust, or on that of my people.”

Enjoying a wide credibility of the main conflicting parties in the Middle East, Morocco can be a major broker in the frozen peace process. Now the two main protagonists should show a total commitment to reach a comprehensive, just and lasting peace that would allow both Palestinians and Israelis to live side by side safely and in harmony.

The article New Impetus For Jerusalem Committee‏ – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Eurasia Review

By William T. Hathaway

This photo of my parents reveals much about their personalities (hers vivacious and outgoing, his withdrawn and closed off), their relationship (little real contact), and also the times (could be captioned Gender Roles in the 1950s: The Bathing Beauty and the Soldier).

The typicality of their lives reveals much about the USA. My mother was a farmer’s daughter whose father lost the farm to the banks, and they had to scrabble along in the slums of the big city, St. Louis. All her life she yearned for her bucolic childhood when everything was “nice.” My father was a coal miner and the son of a coal miner from West Virginia. He hated the mines so much that after the Second World War he stayed in the military as a professional soldier.

Both were imbued with the all-American drive to get ahead of the pack, to wrest advantage over others. My mother’s great-great-grandfather had gotten ahead by owning slaves, using their stolen labor to become wealthy. Although he died decades before she was born, she spoke of him with patriarchal reverence, telling what a good master he had been. His slaves loved him so much that during the Civil War they protected him from Yankee soldiers by hiding him in a well, then hauling him back up when they were gone.

She admitted that not all masters were that kind, though, and she felt slavery wasn’t a good thing. But it was the only way for the Negroes to come to America. Most of the Europeans could afford to pay their way over, but the Africans didn’t have money, so they signed up to be slaves in order to come here. Deep down my mother knew this wasn’t true, but she repeated it as a litany to shore up the family myth that great-great-grandfather had been a good man, hadn’t done anything wrong in achieving his success. When slave labor ended, so did the family’s advantage. Their fortunes declined, and her father lost the farm in the 1920s before the Depression. But they were still much better off than the descendents of the people whose unpaid work had generated the wealth.

My father managed to become an officer in the Second World War, making the leap from working class to middle class. In the 1950s he was stationed in Colorado as the state coordinator for civil defense. He organized the Ground Observer Corps, groups of citizens who gathered on the roofs of tall buildings to scan the skies with their binoculars. He gave them cards showing silhouettes of Soviet bombers, and if they saw an airplane that resembled those, they were supposed to immediately inform the authorities. He gave presentations on making basement bomb shelters: where the secure corners are, how much food and water to store, how to give first aid for radiation burns. When I eagerly asked him when we would be making our bomb shelter, he said we weren’t going to: Basement shelters were useless against atomic weapons. The whole thing was just a scare campaign to convince the public of the need for a strong military to counter the communist threat. He didn’t disapprove of the campaign, though. It was his job, providing us with food, clothing, and bombless shelter of considerably higher quality than coal mining would have.

But he chafed under the limited horizons of military life and was always seeking ways to get ahead, to get rich. One of these was through radio stickers. When the communists attacked, all the commercial radio stations were going to stop broadcasting and clear the airwaves for two military stations that would inform the public on civil defense measures. My father invented stickers that people could buy and put on their radio dial at the frequencies of these two stations so they could instantly find them. But the invention was not a great success. Since all the other stations would be off the air, anyone could just spin the dial and find the two military stations.

He also invented a clever display mechanism that would make beer bottles appear to float in the air behind the bar, circling and hovering in front of the eager customers. He journeyed to the headquarters of the major beer companies and presented it to the marketing managers, but none of them recognized its brilliance.

Although fortune eluded him, he found military success in Colorado and was promoted several times. The state was fertile ground for civil defense; the threat of war and annihilation was deeply rooted. The first defenses were forts erected against the Native Americans from whom the Europeans had stolen the land. These forts and their commanders are proudly commemorated today in the names of cities and military bases. Some have been restored as shrines for patriotic indoctrination.

In the 1950s Cheyenne Mountain, a granite colossus towering above Colorado Springs and named after a nearly exterminated Native nation, was hollowed out to serve as a military headquarters during the upcoming war. Even if the rest of the country were being incinerated, the commanders could still fire intercontinental ballistic missiles on the Soviets from there. The new Air Force Academy near Colorado Springs was training the next generation of bomber pilots and missile experts. The Rocky Flats Arsenal near Denver produced hydrogen bombs and contaminated the air, land, and water with radioactive poisons. The uranium used to make the bombs was mined in the state under negligent supervision, resulting in toxic residues and increased cancer rates. Denver was also the manufacturing site for the state-of-the-art intercontinental missile, the Titan. Colorado was where the wild-west mentality merged with foreign policy.

All this is madness of course, a monstrous psychosis, and it affects our minds on the subconscious level. The psychotics among us are particularly sensitive to these signals, and they act on them. It’s no accident that Denver has been the site of so many mass murders. The first one was in 1955 at the height of the H-bomb terror. A fault line in the collective consciousness cracked under the stress, and a young man put a bomb in his mother’s suitcase as she was flying away for a trip. Everyone in the plane died. This was the first time anyone had done anything like that, and the country was aghast. But the man proved to be a pioneer; since then mass murder has become commonplace. The people follow their leaders. The Columbine School shooting in 1999 happened in the same suburb as the Titan missile factory. The Dark Knight shooting in 2012 happened only a few miles from Rocky Flats Arsenal. Colorado is also home to Guantanamo West, the new supermax prison for terrorists. And Colorado Springs has become a center of the evangelical Christian movement, fundamentalists praying to their patriarchal God to spare them from the fires of hell.

My mother was a moderate Christian, sincere in her Presbyterian faith but seeing the institution as a practical arena for getting ahead. As befitting my father’s rank, we lived in a lower-middle class suburb of Denver (Aurora, the site of the Dark Knight shooting). As their marriage crumbled, largely on account of father’s drinking, mother had the foresight to develop a strategy for advantage. Shunning the local Presbyterian church, she joined one in the old rich section of Denver and hauled her children there every Sunday for services. She became active in the church, and after the divorce she was elected chairperson of the middle-aged singles social group. One of her duties was to welcome new members into the group. When a wealthy older man, recently widowed, joined it, her ample beauty and charm soon won her a new husband. She was a dutiful and attentive wife, and he was happy, not knowing that she never loved him.

His father had owned a rock quarry and amassed a small fortune by paying his workers (miners of a sort, like my father and his father had been) just enough to keep them working. My genteel last name comes from him. I started life as a Schuster.

My mother’s leap into the upper-middle class gave her children advantages, enabling my brother and me to attend Ivy League universities. We’ve been able to get ahead. Now the family fortunes are restored to what they were in the days of slavery. Success!

The American Dream is built on the American Nightmare.

William T. Hathaway is an adjunct professor of American studies at the University of Oldenburg in Germany. His latest book, Wellsprings, concerns the environmental crisis: http://www.cosmicegg-books.com/books/wellsprings. He is a member of the Freedom Socialist Party (www.socialism.com). A selection of his writing is available at www.peacewriter.org.

The article Getting Ahead – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Jim Kouri

Superstar slugger Alex Rodriguez sued Major League Baseball and its players’ union on Monday, in a quest to overturn a suspension imposed for an entire season after an arbitrator decided there was clearly compelling evidence that the man known as A-Rod had used three banned substances and that he twice attempted to obstruct a drug investigation. Yet, according to a forensics expert who has handled hundreds of criminal and civil court cases, electronic evidence in the controversial A-Rod doping scandal that’s rocking professional baseball is the key to uncovering guilt or innocence.

According to news reports, text messages and documents detailing an elaborate doping scheme were reportedly recovered and ultimately became the crucial evidence needed by Major League Baseball in the case against the Yankees’ Alex Rodriguez.

“Merely testifying that a paper document is authentic just isn’t enough anymore”, said Digital Forensic Examiner Mark McLaughlin of the firm Computer Forensics International (CFI).

“That’s why we’re brought into all types of cases where digital evidence may be found”, McLaughlin added.

In the 21st Century, nearly all information is initially created from a digital device. Plus, it’s widely understood that by using Word or Photoshop, you can easily make anything look authentic.

“A perfect example was the Rathergate incident in which CBS News’ Dan Rather used what turned out to be forged documents created to hurt President George W. Bush’s re-election campaign,” said former police homicide detective Gary Knellman.

“Unless you’ve verified the source [of the document or the photograph], the authenticity of printouts as evidence are always questionable. That’s why digital forensic examiners establish a verifiable chain of custody to prove what you’re looking at, is an exact representation of the original,” said McLaughlin.

Forensic examiners like McLaughlin routinely use cutting edge software tools like EnCase and Lantern when analyzing computers and cellphones on civil and criminal cases. They start by making an exact forensic copy of the entire device — which includes active and deleted data. Then just the copy is searched, either visually or by using keywords for relevant hits. And those searches can produce tens of thousands of hits that all must be manually reviewed.

“That may seem daunting, but considering the alternative, it’s a walk in the park”, adds McLaughlin.

Over the last 17 years, McLaughlin has handled over 500 cases and examined over 2,000 digital items. He testifies in court as an expert and even trains attorneys on how to enhance their cases through digital evidence, according to his firm’s website.

McLaughlin says, “I really enjoy the sleuthing part of what we do. Because when we find that smoking gun, it’s pretty much game over”.

The article Smoking Gun In Baseball Star A-Rod’s Civil Case Is Digital Evidence – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Roger N. McDermott

Following the meeting of the Russian Ministry of Defense collegium in Moscow on December 10, 2013, the defense minister, Army-General Sergei Shoigu, and the chief of the General Staff, Army-General Valery Gerasimov, instructed the top brass on the priorities facing the military. In their addresses to the top brass in the newly formed “Situation Center” of the General Staff, commanders were told that the development of the plan of defense is linked mainly to the United States’ concept of “Prompt Global Strike” and the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) ballistic missile defense initiative. Voluminous Russian media coverage offers plenty of insight into the well-established objections in Moscow to the creation of missile defense in Europe, especially alleging that this has serious implications for Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrent. However, less is known on the much deeper issue of understanding US Prompt Global Strike capabilities and its possible implications for Russian defense planning (http://nvo.ng.ru/forces/2013-12-20/1 plans.html).

In a detailed analysis in RIA Novosti, Konstantin Bogdanov considers how Russian officials understand the concept of “Prompt Global Strike,” noting that Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin had sharply criticized existing US plans. Bogdanov’s starting point is to highlight in simple terms Washington’s aim to create a military capability that would allow a non-nuclear strike anywhere in the world within 60 minutes. The author suggests the most feasible implementation of the concept would be using Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (ICBM) armed with high-precision conventional warheads, while a second component may be strategic cruise missiles. A third component envisages the creation of advanced delivery vehicles capable of exiting and re-entering the atmosphere, though such developments face the problem of carrying heavy warheads and avoiding the militarization of space (http://ria.ru/analytics/20131212/983737904.html#).

Bogdanov’s analysis concedes that the US Prompt Global Strike capability is not being developed with Russia in mind, but states that it clearly does present added problems for Russian defense planners. In the event of a hypothetical use of such capabilities against Russia, the US would face the prospect of nuclear escalation and full retaliation. However, despite this, Bogdanov argues that Moscow cannot afford to ignore US Prompt Global Strike plans. Deputy Foreign Minister Sergei Ryabkov characterized such capabilities as presenting a “path to escalation” with “apocalyptic consequences.” The author also argues that Russia’s most advanced air defense systems do not offer country-wide protection against Prompt Global Strike capabilities (http://ria.ru/analytics/20131212/983737904.html#).

In order to fully protect the Russian state against this emerging potential threat, Bogdanov asserts that Moscow must create information systems for the detection and targeting of ballistic objects and the complementary firepower to counteract hypersonic targets. Although the threat of global nuclear war is greatly reduced, the author argues that the “lowering of the threshold for using tactical nuclear weapons” and the development of Prompt Global Strike can “significantly complicate the maintenance of strategic stability” (http://ria.ru/analytics/20131212/983737904.html#). Ultimately, in this context, Moscow appears to fear some form of a new and potentially crippling arms race.

Consequently, in an article in Voyenno Promyshlennyy Kuryer, Pavel Grachev, Dmitry Kornev and Alexei Ramm suggest that Russia’s Strategic Rocket Forces (RVSN), which control Russia’s land-based ICBMs, must be protected against sabotage and “Prompt Global Strike.” In fact, the two issues are interlinked in Russian security thinking. The authors state that the Russian ICBMs Topol (SS-25), Top-M (SS-27) and Yars (SS-29) in fixed silos are most vulnerable to future Prompt Global Strike advances (http://vpk-news.ru/articles/18661#).

Here, Grachev, Kornev and Ramm consider the potential to link between the remote conventional strike capability and the use of Special Forces sabotage groups. Following the US intervention in Iraq in 2003, the Pentagon developed its doctrine of operations against critical and highly sensitive enemy targets (Sensitive Site Exploitation Operations—SSEO). However, the Russian military analysts are clear about the main sources of threat to the RVSN: reconnaissance satellites and radar reconnaissance and sabotage groups. In the “near future,” this list of threats will extend to unobtrusive drones, using a mixture of saboteurs and precision drone strikes. As a result, the RVSN must strengthen its protection for mobile divisions, patrol routes, positioning areas and their starting positions, their analysis concludes (http://vpk-news.ru/articles/18661#).

The authors note that the RVSN received 40 mobile jammer complexes in 2013 (RP-377L) and expect more to arrive soon. These are portable, fitting in several backpacks or mounted on the base vehicle, and can cover and identify enemy saboteurs’ communications over a twenty kilometer radius. The RVSN also received new MKTK-1A “Judoka” automated electronic warfare (EW) complexes. Such complexes monitor enemy satellite communications, third-party sources of radiation, sensor guidance systems and essentially any effort to insert Special Forces. In addition, the RVSN is also procuring new EW equipment in a major effort to enhance the protection of key assets. Curiously, the article concludes by asserting that the RVSN is “actively purchasing” the “latest EW systems” capable of withstanding the spectrum of threats. In other words, the defense ministry is already taking steps to ensure that no arms race will commence precisely by investing in infrastructure protection (http://vpk-news.ru/articles/18661#).

Moreover, a plan is being drafted to deploy rail-mounted nuclear missiles as a potential response to Prompt Global Strike. On December 18, 2013, Lieutenant-General Sergei Karakaev said, “A defense ministry report has been submitted to the president and the order has been given to develop a preliminary design of a rail-mounted missile system.” Karakaev added that extensive analysis of the US system led to the conclusion that “there is a need to reconsider the issue of a rail-mounted missile system given its increased survivability and the extent of our railway network” (RIA Novosti, December 18).

Bombastic pronouncements by Rogozin and other Russian defense officials against US Prompt Global Strike may, in fact, mirror irrational concerns over missile defense plans. The fear of an arms race triggered by the United States developing conventional strike capabilities that might undermine Russia’s strategic nuclear deterrent lies more in the political realm than in the military-technical. However, at a certain level, these concerns are very real and the evidence is seen in the efforts already in progress to boost existing EW capabilities in order to ensure the protection of the RVSN against such hypothetical threats.

This article appeared at Eurasia Daily Monitor and is reprinted with permission.

The article US Prompt Global Strike Moves Center Stage In Russian Security Planning – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By RSIS

East Asia in 2014 is increasingly compared to Europe in 1914: a region beset by great power rivalry, obsessed with military power and arms races and on the brink of conflict. This is reviving new debates on the applicability of not only the European model and experiences in building cooperative security but also the EU’s greater strategic involvement in East Asia.

By Michael Raska

EAST ASIA’s emerging strategic landscape is becoming progressively more complex. There is the increasing convergence of both conventional security focused on preservation of deterrence and defence, and a spectrum of unconventional security challenges ranging from environmental, energy and human security, to cyber security issues that have a potential for unprecedented spillover effects on the entire global system.

The principal sources of regional tensions are embedded in the confluence of unresolved historical legacies, emerging great power rivalries, and intensifying territorial disputes that fuel continuing strategic mistrust. East Asia’s core security flashpoints such as the Korean Peninsula, the Taiwan Straits, territorial disputes in the East China and South China Seas, and emerging Sino-US strategic competition are also amplified by accelerating regional military modernisation and diffusion of advanced weapons platforms and technologies.

Asia-Europe security cooperation debate

Notwithstanding East Asia’s rising economic prosperity and increasingly important role in global diplomacy, its principal challenge remains intact: building more forward-looking and credible political institutions that are able to rapidly transform early warning signals into viable policy prescriptions. In other words, relying on effective multilateral security mechanisms that would not only enhance the existing regional security arrangements, but more importantly, assure reconciliation, cooperation, and stable peace in the future.

In this context, European security transformation from collective defence to cooperative security continues to resonate important lessons for East Asia. It is precisely because entrenched security problems exist in the Asia-Pacific region that more attention must be turned to enhancing preventive diplomacy, multilateral security dialogues, and addressing latent, but potentially critical, threats to regional security.

For over a decade, however, there has been a debate on the applicability of the European model and experiences in the process of building viable multilateral security mechanisms in East Asia. The predominant view has been that historical trajectories, geographical distance, and security environment in East Asia and Europe vary significantly. Thus European lessons with building co-operative security cannot simply be transferred or applied to the security building of East Asia.

In particular, for the past 60 years, strategic stability in East Asia has been maintained by robust defence alliances created and led by the United States after World War II, which included the deployment of US forces in key forward bases in South Korea and Japan, implementation of arms control initiatives to deter, contain, and minimise the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. Hence, there was no substantial need for building alternative multilateral security mechanisms and institutions.

Secondly, the institutional structure of European organisations is not in tune with the dominant political culture of East Asia. In this context, the processes associated with European integration have been perceived as too legalistic, formal, and rules-based for East Asian states that made consensus-building and informal discussions the cornerstone of their approach to regional security co-operation.

Thirdly, European process of integrating co-operative security mechanisms and collective identity has a substantial head start, with a long history of community building efforts, high degree of cultural cohesion, and dense networks of institutional, cultural and social linkages, while East Asia does not have any of these traits.

European pivot to Asia?

For its part, the European Union has been rethinking its overall diplomatic engagement with East Asia, both in terms of presence and policies. The diverse range includes unprecedented number of visits by the Presidents of the European Council and Commission; bilateral Asian Summits with China, Korea, India, and Japan; strengthening EU-ASEAN relations; joint EU-US statement on cooperating in and with the Asia-Pacific region; EU’s participation in regional security forums such as the Shangri-La Dialogue; and new policy initiatives to cooperate on security issues such as piracy and cybersecurity.

The 2012 Guidelines on the EU’s Foreign and Security Policy in East Asia are often emphasised by the European External Action Service as a roadmap for strengthening EU-Asia security cooperation, including tackling common cross-border challenges such as counter-piracy, cyber-security, maritime security, energy security, environmental security and natural disaster response. Other areas include conflict mediation, and potential military contribution in East Asia.

The key challenge for their implementation, however, remains in three major contradictions: while China perceives European security initiatives with suspicion in terms of EU complementing US strategic rebalancing vis-à-vis China, the US is skeptical about European ‘soft power’ and its ability to shape regional security, and the EU itself is divided amid lack of its military capabilities.

Convergence of interests

The modus operandi of the European experience with preventive diplomacy through a “culture of dialogue”, arms control initiatives, and confidence-building measures are still relevant for the “Asian Way” of building regional multilateral security frameworks.

Even at the height of the Cold War, when Western Europe remained firmly embedded within NATO, Europe has pursued alternative security mechanisms that emphasised dialogue, the search for a common security denominator, confidence-building measures, and the path toward more lasting security framework in Europe. In the process, European states converged their security interests in dependable expectations of peaceful change in intra-regional relations, while ruling out the use of force as means of problem-solving in inter-member relations.

Accordingly, learning to perceive security dynamics outside of the regional context, building early warning capacities that could prevent mid to longer-term problems for the region, and strengthening the Asian-European linkages can be seen as “positive security niches”. These could result in significant dividends for both Asia and Europe.

Michael Raska is a Research Fellow at the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, a constituent unit of the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies (RSIS), Nanyang Technological University in Singapore.

The article Rethinking Asia-Europe Security Cooperation – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By William Donohue

Not a day goes by without a pundit or editorial writer opining on what Pope Francis said about some controversial issue. While every pope, as well as every religious and secular leader, properly has his remarks subjected to scrutiny, Pope Francis is having his words sliced and diced far beyond anything his predecessors were accustomed to. Quite frankly, the goal of many commentators is to make the pope’s statements appear to underscore their own ideological agenda.

Nothing excites the passions of those on the left today more than gay rights. Their obsession is shown with Pope Francis’ comment, made over the summer, “Who am I to judge?” Indeed, it appears today in an editorial posted on the website of the New York Times, and in a Huffington Post piece written by an Episcopal gay priest. But that is not what the pope said.

What Francis said was, “If someone is gay and he searches for the Lord and has good will, who am I to judge?” The difference between what he is quoted as saying, and what he actually said, is not minor. Those who parse his words agree, which is why they parse them. It is important to note that the pope did not offer two sentences: his one sentence was chopped to alter his message.

A Lexis-Nexis search discloses that there are 907 articles that cite the phrase, “Who am I to judge” and “Pope Francis.” When letters to the editor and duplicates are filtered out, the final tally is 799. Of that number, 494, or 62 percent of the total, contain just the words, “Who am I to judge?” Only 305, or 38 percent, report the entire sentence. Moreover, it is becoming more common to distort what he said, not less.

The willingness of Pope Francis to reach out to homosexuals who are searching for the Lord is commendable. But attempts to parse his words are not.

The article Parsing The Pope’s Words – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Arab News

By Nawar Fakhri Ezzy

One common characteristic among extremists from all religions is their belief in one true “path” while condemning and despising all others. Regardless of their claim that they “hate the sin not the sinner,” this attitude would most likely affect how they interact with people who hold different beliefs and values and could help in planting seeds of extremism in any society that may lead to terrorism.

Religious extremism has been recognized as a serious issue in Saudi society when terrorist attacks started occurring on Saudi soil and abroad highlighted by the tragedy of 9/11. As a result, Saudi government contemplated several initiatives in order to eradicate extremism and promote moderation in understanding Islam, which included establishing National Society for Human Rights in 2004, a public awareness campaign to promote moderate Islamic values, and reforming religious education as well as training teachers and imams. In addition to that, Custodian of the two Holy Mosques King Abdullah conducted an initiative to promote interfaith and intercultural dialogue in 2008, which was followed by building “The King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz International Center for Interreligious and Intercultural Dialogue” (KAICIID) in Vienna in 2011.

Although these efforts could contribute to changing Saudis’ attitudes, much more still needs to be done in order to uproot extremist views, which we still find in our society. For example, some people still believe that non-Muslims should not be greeted in their holidays or even given charity when in need, as if their lives have lost its value in our eyes when they followed another religion. Furthermore, many people do not know how to conduct a respectful dialogue with people from different religious backgrounds and refuse to accept the idea of learning about their religions in an informative way because they consider such actions to be corrupting their own faith and contradict their belief in the “truth” of their own religion.

One of the problems that are hindering the process of spreading tolerance is the absence of a legal foundation, which would reflect and enforce these initiatives, such as laws to protect freedom of religion and anti-discrimination laws. In addition, the concept of “shared values,” which celebrates diversity and is based on human rights and religious freedom, is a relatively new concept that many have not grasped yet. In Saudi Arabia, the recognized “shared values” are the ones that celebrate conformity rather than diversity because they are understood as specific Islamic values, which everybody is supposed to adhere to. Raising awareness of universal “shared values,” such as tolerance, acceptance, and respect of human dignity, would build a strong foundation for eradicating extremism and conducting a true interfaith and intercultural dialogue. Starting with children at schools is especially necessary for this concept to evolve and grow with a new Saudi generation, which could lead to a slow albeit effective change in Saudi society.

After the previous steps have taken place, interfaith dialogue should also be encouraged at the grassroots level. Creating local forums where Saudis and non-Muslim residents can discuss and learn about each other’s religious traditions, such as their rituals, ceremonies, and the reasons behind them could increase mutual understanding and tolerance not only to Saudis but also to the expatriates who live in Saudi Arabia and some of them in turn have their own misconceptions about Islam and Saudi culture. This could lead to increasing communal cohesion and peaceful coexistence in Saudi society in addition to facilitating better integration with the expatriates as well as with rest of the world. This does not contradict believing in the “truth” of one’s own beliefs, but it rather aims to acknowledge and appreciate other people’s beliefs and different ways of life.

Religion is supposed to contribute positively to a person’s spiritual wellbeing and to bring peace, justice, and morality to the world. However, one cannot underestimate the power of religion, which if manipulated can be used for destruction. The Crusades lasted for seven centuries killing thousands of people after Pope Urban II famously said, “Deus vult!” which is Latin for “God wills it!”

In that case, religion was used to claim a “holy war” by the Christian “believers” against the Muslim. Nowadays, thousands are dying as well as a result of another so-called “holy war.”

We cannot teach our children that believing in all prophets of the past is essential to their belief in God, while we warn them about loving their followers who share the world we live in because it will corrupt their faith.
All religions have commonalities, which should be acknowledged and differences that should be appreciated. More importantly, our humanity unites all of us and religion constitutes only one aspect of our human lives, which should help us live in peace instead of being an obstacle.

Email: nawar81@hotmail.com

The article Interfaith Dialogue: Only Way To Fight Extremism – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Eurasia Review

A team of scientists from the University of Leicester has demonstrated a novel treatment for Hairy Cell Leukaemia (HCL), a rare type of blood cancer, using a drug administered to combat skin cancer.

The research, which is published today (Thursday 16 January) in the New England Journal of Medicine, indicates Vemurafenib, a BRAF inhibitor that has been approved as a treatment for advanced melanomas, is also successful in treating leukaemia. The study shows the treatment, which can be taken orally, cleared the malignant cells from the patient’s blood and led to a complete clinical recovery in a number of days.

The study was led by the University of Leicester and involved treatment of a patient at the Leicester Royal Infirmary.

Dr Salvador Macip, from the University of Leicester’s Department of Biochemistry, explained: “A genetic study of the patient’s blood cells allowed us to identify a mutation in the BRAF gene that is commonly found in skin cancers. This knowledge enabled us to combat the cancer cells with Vemurafenib, which has had proven success as a BRAF inhibitor in melanomas, and showed similar success for this patient who had exhausted all other treatment options, which is fantastic.

“What was most surprising was that the drug did not work in the way we expected it to. Whilst it successfully blocked BRAF and killed the cancerous cells, there was no ability to block the downstream cascade of signals. Therefore more research is required to better understand how this drug works to ensure we are able to use it in the best possible way.

“This is one of the first clinical examples of this treatment for HCL and we are the first researchers to do a biochemical study of the samples and discover that the drug does not do what it’s supposed to be doing.”

This approach to targeting cancer is an example of precision medicine with clinicians and research scientists working side-by-side to ensure the best treatment, tailored to the individual patient, was provided.

Professor of Haemato-Oncology at the University of Leicester, Professor Martin Dyer, who is Honorary Consultant Physician, Department of Haematology at Leicester’s Hospitals, said: “Precision medicine in which clinicians and basic scientists collaborate to deliver novel and rapid personalised therapies to cancer patients like this is essential.

“We drew blood from the patient on a daily basis which was analysed back in the lab to monitor the effects of the drug. The more understanding we have of how treatments such as Vemurafenib kill cancer cells, the more effective and targeted treatments can be.”

Professor Dyer is based in the University of Leicester’s Department of Cancer Studies and Molecular Medicine and the treatment of the patient took place at the Leicester Royal Infirmary.

This research shows that drugs currently used to target certain cancers could be applied in other malignancies that share similar genetic backgrounds.

University of Leicester Pro-Vice-Chancellor and Head of the College of Medicine, Biological Sciences and Psychology, Professor David Wynford-Thomas, said: “The importance of the close working partnership between the University of Leicester and Leicester’s Hospitals is highlighted in advances such as this. World-class research at the University brings direct benefits to patients in Leicester’s hospitals in diverse areas including cardiovascular health, kidney research, lung health, diabetes, cancer research and many other areas.

“I am delighted that our research has had such a direct benefit locally – it is another first for the University of Leicester and Leicester Royal Infirmary.”

The article Breakthrough Announced In Treatment Of Patient With Rare Type Of Leukaemia appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By MINA

Three suborbital rockets blasted off on Wednesday morning on secret missions for the U.S. military, U.S. space agency NASA said.

The Terrier-Orion rockets were successfully launched within a 20-second period, beginning at 4:09 a.m. EST (0909 GMT) from NASA’ s Wallops Flight Facility in Virginia, the space agency said in a statement.

The U.S. Department of Defense has requested that NASA not provide real-time launch updates, it said.

“The launch will not be shown live on the Internet nor will launch status updates be provided on social media once the countdown begins,” according to a NASA media advisory early this week. “The NASA Visitor Center at Wallops will not be open for viewing the launch.”

Terrier-Orion is a two stage spin stabilized rocket system with a weight of about 2,900 pounds (1,315 kilograms), according to NASA. It can loft a 200-pound (91 kilograms) payload to an altitude of 200 kilometers and an 800-pound (363 kilograms) payload 80 kilometers up.

The article NASA Launches Three Suborbital Military Rockets appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By MINA

Britain will launch Friday a new analysis paper on global implications of Scottish independence, outlining a variety of international benefits for Scots to stay in Britain.

“It will discuss how the UK’s overseas network ensures the safety of Scottish people abroad, supports Scottish businesses and promotes shared values, such as democracy, human rights and the fight against poverty,” the British Foreign and Commonwealth Office announced Wednesday on its official webpage.

The paper, to be unveiled in Glasgow of Scotland Friday, will examine how Scotland-based businesses can “benefit directly” from Britain’s efforts to protect its economic interests, such as “defending Scotch whisky against counterfeits, discriminatory or excessive taxation, trade barriers and other restrictions,” according to the announcement.

“The paper will note that Scottish businesses can draw on the help of UK Trade & Investment in 169 locations in over 100 markets worldwide, and from the British Council, which is represented in 110 countries,” the announcement continued.

The paper will also analyze the implications of Scottish independence concerning “an independent Scotland’s membership of international bodies such as the European Union and NATO,” in addition to discussing “the consular support available to Scottish people as they travel overseas,” the announcement said.

“I believe that we are safer and stronger together, and that together we can do more good in the world,” British Foreign Secretary William Hague was quoted in the announcement as saying.

Scotland’s bid for independence is being watched closely recently.

The article UK To Release Paper On Implications Of Scotland’s Independence appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Trend News Agency

German Chancellor Angela Merkel telephoned Afghan President Hamid Karzai Wednesday to discuss the status of international forces in his country, including the length of time that German troops would stay in Afghanistan, German magazine Der Spiegel reported, dpa reported.

The telephone conversation covered a “possible extension” in the length of time that German forces, currently numbering about 3,100, would remain, the report said, citing government sources in Berlin.

The extension is a reference to a smaller number of German troops that could stay in Afghanistan after foreign combat troops end their mission in late 2014.

Germany is planning to contribute up to 800 troops to an international effort to advise and train Afghan government forces after the withdrawal of combat troops, depending partly on a stalled US-Afghan security pact.

New German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen, speaking in Afghanistan just before Christmas, said she was keen for Germany to “complete what has been started” in the country.

The article Merkel, Karzai Discuss ‘Possible Extension’ For Troops – Report appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By VOA

By Dan Robinson

President Barack Obama Friday will announce decisions about intelligence surveillance methods used by the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA).

In the speech at the Department of Justice, the president will address 46 recommendations of a special review panel, including those aimed at imposing more accountability and transparency.

Obama announced the comprehensive review in August, in the wake of revelations by former NSA contractor Edward Snowden.

The president stressed his responsibility as commander-in-chief to safeguard the security of Americans, but recognized escalating public concerns about how the government goes about using signals intelligence.

Obama also said he was mindful of how the issue is viewed overseas.

“Because what makes us different from other countries is not simply our ability to secure our nation, it’s the way we do it – with open debate and democratic process,” he said. “In other words, it’s not enough for me, as president, to have confidence in these programs. The American people need to have confidence in them as well.”

Obama has met with technology industry CEOs, civil liberties experts and government officials and consulted with Congress. Reforms would require congressional action.

There have been court rulings with judges issuing opposing statements on NSA activities, including the collection of phone records. Experts predict the issue is certain to reach the Supreme Court.

A member of the review panel, Cass Sunstein, told Congress that the group aimed to ensure that the U.S. intelligence community can continue to do what it needs to do to protect national security.

“Not one of the 46 recommendations in our report, in our view, compromise or jeopardize that ability in any way,” said Sunstein.

White House press secretary Jay Carney cautioned the media against making any presumptions about what Obama may say.

The New York Times quoted unidentified sources as saying he is likely to strike a balance between imposing additional oversight, and endorsing more far-reaching recommendations.

Among other points, the newspaper said the president would limit the number of people whose phone records can be examined through an NSA bulk data collection program, and reduce the time such information can be retained.

The newspaper also said he will increase limits on access to bulk telephone data, but not endorse having bulk data reside with telecommunications companies rather than the government.

Carney said the president has always recognized the validity of the debate sparked by the revelation of U.S. surveillance activities.

“The debates that those disclosures sparked were legitimate,” said Carney.

Matthew Aid, intelligence historian and author of a book about the National Security Agency, says indications are not everyone will be happy with what Obama lays out.

“There is a lot of concern that he is going to try to straddle the wall, try to please the critics of the National Security Agency and at the same time make nice with the U.S. intelligence community, and I don’t think you can do it,” said Aid.

Obama, and the intelligence community itself, also face pressure from lawmakers to ensure accountability.

Reported by Britain’s Guardian newspaper, a U.S. government funding bill directs the NSA to disclose the number of records it collects over a five-year period and report to key House and Senate committees within 90 days.

“I believe strongly that we must impose stronger limits on government surveillance powers and I am confident that most Vermonters agree with me,” said Democratic Vermont Senator Patrick Leahy, who chairs the Senate Judiciary Committee. “I believe that most Americans agree with me. Having said that, we want to do it right.”

Debate continues over the extent to which NSA surveillance methods have actually prevented terrorist attacks. The presidential panel said it “was not essential to preventing attacks,” a finding supported by a separate study by the New America Foundation.

Former CIA deputy director Mike Morell said the bulk data program, known as Section 215 in U.S. law, was not as useful as one aimed at foreigners, but still had value.

“It is absolutely true that the 215 program has not played a significant role in disrupting any attacks to this point. That is a different statement than saying the program is not important,” said Morell.

Morell said “it turned out be wrong” that existing oversight over the bulk phone data program would succeed in maintaining the public trust.

Polls in recent months have shown a majority of Americans believe existing laws are inadequate when it comes to oversight of NSA methods.

“The latest polling that I have seen indicates that the public continues to lose confidence, especially for those who fear or are concerned about their privacy,” analyst Matthew Aid said.

Globally, Obama’s remarks will be carefully assessed because of the controversy over NSA eavesdropping, revealed by Snowden leaks, on phone calls of key leaders, such as German Chancellor Angela Merkel.

Among 46 recommendations, the review panel called for high-level approval of sensitive intelligence requirements, including identifying “uses and limits” of surveillance of foreign leaders.

The article Obama Surveillance Speech Faces High Expectations appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By RSIS

While Thailand’s Ithmus of Kra Canal project has been long planned but not taking off, Malaysia has been quietly thinking of its own trans peninsular pipeline that will cut across Kedah and Kelantan. Will this project succeed, or face the same fate as the Kra Canal?

By Mohd Hazmi Mohd Rusli and Rahmat Mohamad

MALAYSIA’S TRANS Peninsular Pipeline Project (TPP) between Kedah on the west coast and Kelantan on the east seems to have been revived. First proposed in 1994, the project had experienced some difficulties in the initial years and came to a halt in 2010. If realised, the 310-km pipeline will move oil from the coastal city of Yan in Kedah to Bachok in Kelantan and out to the South China Sea.

The New Straits Times reported that during the Fifth World Chinese Economic Forum held in Kuala Lumpur in October 2013, China had shown interest to revive the privately-funded TPP, estimated to cost more than US$7 billion. Chinese President Xi Jinping has yet to confirm how this is to be carried out.

How the pipeline will work

To revive the TPP, the Kedah state government planned to restart the Sungai Limau Hydrocarbon Hub Project in Yan that was suspended in 2010. Estimated to cost US$15.6 billion, this project is still at the planning stage. Will this new interest from China succeed in turning the pipeline into reality?

The main driving force of this project is the rapid growth in demand for crude oil in East Asia, which is expected to double from its current level by the year 2020. The Malaysian federal government has planned to tap into this growing demand by building pipelines across the peninsula, cutting through the Titiwangsa Range.

Vessels from the Middle East will be able to unload their oil cargoes at Yan where they will be refined and subsequently transported through the Malaysian hinterland to the other side of the peninsular. At the Bachok station in Kelantan, the refined oil will be loaded onto another vessel waiting for shipment to buyers in East Asia.

This pipeline would eventually ease the congestion in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore and the burden of accommodating increasing shipping traffic. Annually, oil tankers and very large crude carriers (VLCC) comprise 26% of the total shipping transits in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. Commodities like crude oil that could pose a threat to the sensitive marine environment of the waterways will also no longer be ferried in a large amount via the Straits. Further, shipments via TPP will reduce the time to transport oil compared to the normal voyage of a vessel through the Strait of Malacca.

Once fully operational, this project is expected to save up to three days of transit time and is anticipated to reduce the cost of shipments of crude oil by US$1.50 per barrel. Ships may also be less exposed to the risk of piracy in the waterway, while shipping traffic in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore will be reduced by 25%.

Transportation of oil via pipelines is not unusual in the petroleum industry. The concept of the TPP is similar to the SUMED Pipeline in Egypt that transports oil from the Gulf of Suez to the Mediterranean Sea. The SUMED pipeline allows shipping companies to save time and costs. To reduce dependence on the Hormuz Strait, oil pipelines have also been built to transport oil in the Persian Gulf.

Challenges facing TPP

Although the TPP is generally viewed as a viable option, analysts point out that coastal waters are generally shallow near Peninsula Malaysia, making it difficult for large tankers to dock. Even worse, monsoon rains degrade the sea conditions along the Kelantan coast where Bachok is located.

Secondly, unlike the terrain in the Middle East which mostly consists of desert low lands, the northern parts of Peninsular Malaysia where the pipelines would cross are covered with thick jungles in the midst of highlands. Therefore, the construction of the pipeline would be more complicated. Oil would have to be pumped up the 2,000 m-high Titiwangsa Mountains, using a part of the transported oil to supply the necessary power for pumping.

Thirdly, the TPP project could result in adverse environmental impacts should there be a leakage of oil in any parts of the line. This would then affect Malaysian groundwater and worse still, a fire could take place along the length of the pipe, should such leakages occur. Fourthly, the TPP could also directly and indirectly pose a threat to the security of the country should there be a sabotage or terrorist attacks on any part of the pipelines.

The TPP project may face a number of challenges. With the ongoing fluctuations in global oil prices, it would possibly be difficult to attract investors, namely promoters of the project, the shippers and oil companies to make investments on the project.

While the TPP could reduce the volume of shipping traffic in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore, there are still a number of reasons to show that there is actually no need to bypass the Straits. Firstly, in the event of a blockade of the Straits of Malacca and Singapore due to accidents involving tankers or any other reasons, the Sunda and Lombok-Makassar Straits routes would be available as alternative, albeit more expensive routes.

Secondly, although traffic congestion in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore is building up, the existence of state-of the-art navigational safety facilities along the Straits would ensure the safe passage of vessels plying the waterways. Thirdly, recent records have shown that piracy activities have dropped significantly in the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. Therefore, there is no need to transport oil via the pipeline to avoid pirate attacks in the first place.

Pros and cons needed to be weighed

It is not entirely clear whether or not oil shipment using the TPP would be cheaper than going through the Straits of Malacca and Singapore. Some commentators argue that voyage time and shipping costs could be shaved if oil companies opt to use the TPP once it is ready. Nevertheless, it should be borne in mind that plying through the Straits of Malacca and Singapore would not incur any transit fee upon mariners while shipment fees will be imposed should they choose to use the TPP.

Until the cost-benefit of using the TPP is thoroughly evaluated, the economic justification to bypass the Straits of Malacca and Singapore to ship oil via the TPP would always be in question. The TPP project has experienced many challenges and difficulties owing to the recent global economic downturn and the instability of global oil price.

Although China has recently shown interest to invest in such a project, this mega undertaking has its pros and cons that should be considered carefully by the Malaysian government and the shipping industry.

Mohd Hazmi Mohd Rusli is a senior lecturer at Universiti Sains Islam Malaysia and an associate fellow at the Institute of Oceanography and Environment, University Malaysia Terengganu. Rahmat Mohamad is a Professor of international law at the Faculty of Law, Universiti Teknologi Mara and secretary-general of the New Delhi-based Asian Aftican Legal Consultative Organisation. They contributed this article specially to RSIS Commentaries.

The article Malaysia’s Trans Peninsular Pipeline Project: Will it Take Off? – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.