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?

B52s could have started WW3

Photo credit to Global Times.

The above map is produced in Global Times and showed the flight path taken by the B52 bombers on 27 Nov 13. The heading of the B52s directly into China is an act of hostility. Given the capability of the B52s, at 200km off the Chinese coast they are able to launch cruise missiles to strike at Chinese coastal cities like Shanghai or Xiamen. As China was not given a flight path and the intent of the bombers unknown, it could assume that they were enemy aircraft with hostile intention.

Given such a scenario which was aggressively provocative, China should have scrambled fighters to intercept the bombers and force them to turn around, firing warning shots if necessary. China should lodge a strong protest to Obama (and the UN) and warning him that any military aircraft heading towards China unannounced and crosses the 200km (or 300km red line) would be declared as hostile, an act of war, and would be shot at.

With this nasty experience, China should make this clear to Japan and the US and its allies that China will take military action to shoot down unidentified aircraft acting in a hostile manner with no exceptions.

At the very least China must scramble its fighter to intercept and force any military aircraft to turn around. This is a military protocol that all nations will adopt in the face of an intrusion by unknown aircraft. The B52s are not any civilian aircraft but nuclear capable bombers and getting anywhere nearer is a very dangerous and offensive act and cannot be repeated.

The Russians shot down a civilian airliner from South Korea when it claimed to have lost it direction and flown into Russian territory. In this case, the B52s cannot be allowed anywhere nearer than a 200km radius from China's coastline. The Americans are playing with fire.

China should also raise this issue at the UN Security Council and make its stand clear, that it will shoot down military aircraft encroaching into its airspace and within a specified distance that would allow it to conduct a strike against China's mainland. This message must be made known to all countries and the American's irresponsible act must be registered with the UN that such an event had happened and would not be allowed to do so again.

The stupid act of the Americans could have started a war yesterday. A hawkish Chinese general could have fired a SAM at the B52s as a defensive act and rightful to do so. The Americans were acting irresponsibly and in a very provocative manner. This was how close the world came to the Third World War should the bombers be shot and brought down.

The crazy cowboys must not be allowed to try this again.

The Empire strikes back

China, an emerging superpower has stake its claim to its right to defend its territories and to reclaim territories lost during the years when it was weak. Its designation of an ADIZ over its air space and territorial seas that have been grabbed by Japan and used as a playground by the Empire is being challenged by both head on. The Japanese refused to recognize the ADIZ, like the Americans, and even ordered its commercial airlines, ANA and Japan Airlines not to comply with China’s request. The Americans have blatantly flown two of its biggest bombers through the ADIZ as a show of defiance, to show who is boss.
 
China is now forced to react. Not doing anything would expose its weakness and would encourage other pesky countries to dismiss its ADIZ as well. It is now a matter of how to react and how to keep an even keel without raising tension to a level when hostility is the next recourse.
 
There are many things that China can do on a graduated scale short of hitting force with force. During the days of Cold War, the USSR had repeated flown their planes into the British ADIZ unannounced. The British would respond by scrambling their fighters to meet the approaching Soviet aircraft. And they would fly side by side, waving at each other. This went on for many years until the pilots could even recognize each other as acquaintances. Both sides were just testing each other’s capability and resolve without raising the temperature. The Soviet bombers would fly in and the British would scramble to intercept. They would stay in the air until the fuel ran out. Both sides did not risk any hostile posturing.
 
This is one way China may deal with the Americans and even the Japanese aircraft in its ADIZ. The Japanese have been doing the same to Chinese aircraft in its ADIZ. At a higher level, China could do another Hainan Act when a Chinese pilot flew into the path of the American recce aircraft and allowed it to be rammed by the Americans. The Chinese pilot was killed but not before taking down the American aircraft that was forced to land and detained in Hainan. The aircraft was stripped into bits, with the Chinese having a preview of American equipment and technology. This act could be reenacted should the Americans push the Chinese too hard.
 
A variation to this could be the flying of drones into the path of the intruders and let them crash into it. Drones are difficult to control and an accident with the drones is highly possible.
 
In the case of civilian aircraft, this is a bit tricky as the safety and discomfort of many civilian lives will be at stake. Japan is willing to play this chicken game by risking the lives of its passengers. What would or could the Chinese do? When tested, the Chinese could force the civilian aircraft to land in a Chinese airport, escorted by the Chinese fighter jets. Very likely China would just send its fighters to escort the civilian aircraft out of the ADIZ, forcing it to make a detour to avoid the zone. Japan could retaliate by sending its fighters to escort the civilian planes of ANA and Nippon. Both fighters are likely to keep a comfortable distance apart like the coast guards in Diaoyu Islands. China only needs to keep up the pressure and the two airlines will loose passengers for fear of harassment, inconvenience or an accident.
 
There is always a high risk that the Americans and the Japanese would force the issue by firing at the Chinese or at the ANA or Nippon planes and accuse the Chinese of doing it, a false flag incident for an open conflict.
 
An open conflict is unlikely as the consequences would be grave. Should it happen, as a localized war, Chinese should have some advantage with the availability of SAMs, which are much cheaper to operate and less demanding on the boys in the air or in the ships. Would the Japanese and Americans push the limits? An open war would halt all economic activities in the region and aircraft and ships could be fired on. Time for testing the equipments and a prelude to the Third World War.

The benefits of hindsight

Boon Wan is churning out so many flats within a year, averaging 25,000 or more. The latest announcement was 33,568 for this year. And this is still not enough and the demand is mounting.
 
With the benefits of hindsight, we can see what happened over the last few years. We, the low down untalented citizens, only have hindsight to say our piece. Foresight is only the reserve of the supertalents. With foresight, over the horizon ability, they could predict the future, plan ahead, nip problems in the bud before they went out of control. With hindsight, we can see how problems were not nip in the bud, no proactive actions, and problems got blown out of proportion.
 
We now know the cutting down of building HDB flats to less than 10,000 units for several years prior to Boon Wan’s ramping up the building of new flats was a gross mistake. We also know that there were pent up demands by a growing population. We also know that when HDB was not building enough flats, the population was increasing like crazy with hundreds of thousands of foreigners being allowed into the island and needing more flats. Hindsight can tell the uninformed and ill informed citizens of the truth, of what really happened and what really went wrong.
 
Did the super talents with their foresight saw what were coming? Definitely. They cannot be that stupid right? And neither could they be sleeping on the job and not knowing that so many foreigners were let into the country and the cutting down in building HDB flats would cause a big shortage of housing while the demand was rising.
What actually happened then that resulted in such a huge housing shortage problem and the ballooning of housing prices? What were they thinking or planning or scheming? 

With all the foresight and hindsight, maybe someone would want to tell the people what actually went ‘right’? Got to say right, saying what went wrong would not be nice and would not get an answer. What went right?