Spore won’t harm Indonesia and Malaysia

Many pundits and commentators and laypeople would have thought that the revelation of Singapore assisting the Americans to tap into the communications of its neighbours would turn into a big embarrassment and also affect relations with the two countries would only find that this is not true. According to Shanmugam, the Indonesians and Malaysians know that we would not do anything to harm them. After all it is only an allegation and there is no proof that Singapore has done anything unfriendly.

We have very good relations with our neighbours and with such an assurance they would have taken our words in good faith, just like the govt will not do anything to harm the interests of its people. It is common sense and good neighbourliness.

Ok, case close. Everyone can go and party and play more golf.

The relevance of ADIZ

The need for ADIZ is not new and will grow in significance in a world when military might is the order of the day. The Americans and its allies have designated their ADIZs in many parts of their countries and dated to the early post WW2 years. The need for China to have its own ADIZ is not unfounded in view of its aggressive neighbours that it has disputes over sovereignty of islands and the military presence of the Americans in the region.

The offensive nature of military weapons like aircraft and their ability to launch an attack several hundred kilometers from the coastline makes an extended ADIZ into the sea more critical and necessary. No countries, not China or the USA or Japan would allow a potential enemy the free play to fly offensive military aircraft at a range that they can launch an attack on the country. How far is the comfort zone depends on many factors, the capability of the enemy’s equipment and weapon system, the scale of destruction it can cause, the speed they can launch an attack and also the systems and capability of the defending nation, among others. 

There is also the ‘fake’ psychological sense of vulnerability which is often used to bully weaker nations to accept an unreasonable claim of safety needs. This could be explained by what is safe to me is unsafe to the enemy or what is reasonable to me is unreasonable to the enemy.

In the China ADIZ, it is very reasonable to them but unreasonable to the Japanese and the Americans. Then why is the Japanese ADIZ reasonable to the Japanese and Americans and not to the Chinese when both extended to 130km of the other’s territory?

In the Cuba Crisis, the sense of security was extended to the placement of SAMs with nuclear capability in the island by the USSR. The Americans were willing to go to war if the Soviets did not remove the missiles. They imposed their right to their national security on the Cubans that they are not allowed to have missiles in their soil that can reach the USA and not vice versa.

This same outrageous claim of national security is extended by the Americans today to the whole world if they can blackmail or twist the arms of weaker nations to forbid them to have nuclear weapons. Only their allies, approved by the Americans, can possess nuclear weapons. My security is your insecurity. Other nations cannot possess the offensive weapons even when they are located across the other side of the earth from America. This is the extent of the American nuclear ADIZ equivalent. They forbid and attacked Iran and North Korea for wanting to have their own nuclear weapons. Is this reasonable?

Why would countries like China not be allowed to set up their own ADIZ but to allow its enemies to fly their offensive aircraft near their coasts that could easily turn around and do a pre emptive strike against them? And these ADIZ is just a short extension from their coasts? Why are the Americans allowed to claim insecurity when countries around the world want to possess nuclear weapons and be accused of being a threat to the Americans?

It is simply power play. The country that has the military power can bully those with less military power to do their bidding, to toe the line, to forgo their national security and allow the bully nation to trample all over them anywhere and anytime without protest.

When the Americans were able to fly their spy planes at a height that the USSR and China could not take them down, the Americans rudely and offensively flew over their territories to take photographs of their military installations and gathered whatever intelligence data they wished to have. Only when the USSR and China could shoot them down that the bullying stopped.

The Americans are using technology to spy on the rest of the world, including their friends, on the belief that they have superior technology and could not be found out. Not until a whistleblower blew their pants away.

It is all a game of bullying with the muscles of military power. China could only uphold its ADIZ if it is willing to confront the bullies head on and has the ability to do so. This is the only right, or wrong. Political power comes from the barrel of the gun. It is still true. The Americans and their allies have put up a military challenge and China either has to stand up or back down.

Any country that wants to have their own ADIZ must have the military muscle to keep the bullies and rascals out. It is not a matter of right or wrong. It is national security and dignity that must be defended by military prowess. Take them on and force them out or let them in. This is the same logic as acquiring nuclear weapons. Without the military strength to fight and resist the Americans, there will be no nuclear weapons without their approval.

The Americans have established a balance of power and status to their favours and to the insecurity and right to defence of other countries. They would walk along the corridors of other countries strutting their stuff, armed with the most formidable weapons they have to spite these countries. Any attempt by these countries to say no, to change the status quo is ‘wrong’ to the Americans and their allies. They only see the world in their tinted glasses, and their superiority and dominance and obnoxious rights cannot be challenged.

Who is talking about rights, and whose rights and interests should stay above others? An ADIZ is a defensive construct. Does China or any country have the right to its self defence, to protect itself from enemy intrusion and attacks? Why are the western countries and Japan allowed to have their ADIZ and not China? Why are the Americans and their allies allowed to possess WMD and others are not?

This is not a private platform for private agenda

Hi guys and gals,

By now you would have noticed why I have deleted some of a particular blogger. This is the first time I am doing this kind of thing. I try my best to keep this as free a forum for everyone to express their views and opinions, uncensored.

I have received a friendly call by a little bird telling me that someone has been told to take down his blog as it was getting dangerous. That blog was propagating something that was undesirable and with a hidden agenda that must be stopped.

And I was told someone was trying to use my blog as his private platform to continue his insidious act. I was advised not be made use of and not to allow such dangerous people to hijack my blog for their dangerous agenda.

Please excuse me. I hope all of you would understand.

Cheers

Redbean

Our SWFs are furiously investing overseas

Recently it was reported that our SWFs were investing in micro financing in China and India, lending money to the poor to do small businesses. If the objective is to do charity and philantrophy, I think this is a worthy cause. Yesterday it was reported that one was investing in Bollywood. And there was the fame investment in a childcare chain in Australia. Last time a GLC with a niche in heavy industry and engineering went into fast food business.
 
The impression given is that they will invest in anything that they think can make money. You know what am I thinking? What’s next would they be investing, the oldest profession?
 
What is the driving force in the SWF’s investment strategy? Do they have a clearly defined mission or is the mission simply to invest and to make money? The fear of SWFs blindly investing in anything that came along is always there. There are two factors that could lead to this kind of no strategy and directionless investment strategy. One, the abundance of funds and not knowing what to do. Secondly, there are too many highly paid fund managers who have to show their worth and also to generate profit to be rewarded with big bonuses.
 
A fund that has too much money is a good thing. But this can be a dangerous thing as well when there is a fear of not investing. The money cannot be left idle. So, instead of waiting for the right opportunity, for a good investment to come along, they went shadow chasing. Anything that moves, buy. Would be wiser to only invest in the right thing, solid investment like blue chip companies, and not in anything? Even blue chips or the best of blue chips can be dangerous, just don’t be conned.
 
With so many fund managers managing the funds and needing to prove themselves and wanting to have a big share of the bonuses, and with the mentality that it is other people’s money, the tendency to invest for the sake of investing is always there. Not investing is like not working and not putting in a bet for the big bonus payout. The reward system only rewards good returns not prudence. Prudence doesn’t pay.
 
SWFs that are managed by professional managers run the risk of gambling when every fund managers are playing high stakes for high returns with OPM. A SWF may be better managed by financially trained civil servants that take a longer perspective and showing more care and prudence in handling public funds. And the reward system must take cognizance of the risk versus caution divergence. Both are equally important. 

Rewarding only big risk takers will incur the big risk of losing everything when they invest in snake oils, including you know what and when due diligence is best forgotten. Geylang would make an extremely great enterprise when reorganized under professional management. Gambling dens too will generate exceptional returns.
 
Are there moral considerations and stringent criteria and guidelines laid out to govern the way fund managers managed SWF’s money? I am very sure they have. Or is it a case of as long as it can make money go for it? Investing SWF is investing the people’s savings, the CPF money that the people slogged for a life time and cannot be lost by wild gambling and punting. The guardians of the people’s savings must be prescient and cast a watchful eye over how the money is thrown around the world. It is not Other People’s Money. It is The People’s Money. The people did not ask that the money be used for gambling, to take high risk, like private funds and hedge funds with willing investors knowing what they are in for. The SWF’s owners are captive prisoners that have no choice in how their money is being used.
 
The guidelines in how these money can be used must be very stringent and not to take high risk, not to invest when there is nothing good to invest. At times it is better to earn that little interests or dividends and wait for a better opportunity to come along. The two wrong reasons to invest are: One, a lot of money, so must invest. Two, must invest to show profit, so as to be rewarded.

The irony of FDI

Many countries are obsessed with FDI to generate economic activities in their countries. The more FDIs coming in, the more vibrant will be the economy. The Philippines are getting something like $2b to $3b FDIs annually while Singapore is getting something like $30b. No wonder Singapore’s economy is so healthy.
 
Singapore also has a reserve, unofficially it is rumoured to be around $1 trillion. Leaving this money idle is unsound as the money must generate income to pay the real owners of the money even at 2.5% or 4% pa.
I
ncidentally, how much of this reserve is being invested in Sin City and how much is being invested as FDIs in other countries? If the reserve were to be invested locally, would it mean that the $30b FDIs Singapore is getting is really peanuts?
 
Instead, Singapore is pouring FDIs all over the world and begging foreigners to invest here for a paltry $30b and so frightened that they would not come. Even worse, Singapore is throwing the billions all over without anyone begging for it but actually begging others to let Singapore pour FDIs into their countries at their terms. Heheh, the first thing that came to my mine is all the Free Trade Agreements like CECA.
 
Would it not be a better idea to pump our billions and billions of reserves back into our economy and no need to beg anyone to be here and be threatened by them or for them to discriminate and fix up our PMEs? Does it make sense? And from the reports and records, with so many failures in the tune of hundreds of millions and billions, is Singapore’s FDIs to other countries really profitable, nett nett of such heavy losses and still making billions?
 
Would Singapore be a safer alternative for our own reserves? We are trying so hard to sell Singapore to foreigners to invest here and have to kow tow to their demands. Why don’t Singapore sell Singapore to GIC and Temasek to attract their money to invest here as FDIs?
 
Does it sound funny?