Walter's Blog |
|
Reflections on recent events, plus the occasional fact
free rant unfiltered by rational argument. |
|
20/10/2021 0 Comments Going Down Under "Given the rapid development in technology, how long so-called 'silent' submarines remain covert is debatable. Having spent vast sums and diluted attempts to denuclearise the world's military, Australia may get nuclear submarines too late." Don't expect to see Ozzie nuclear submarines popping up in the Taiwan strait anytime soon. Although much of the media coverage around AUKUS - the new security pact between America, Australia and the U.K. - focused on the submarine issue. Yet, it's unclear when the Royal Australian Navy will get new toys.
By cancelling the agreement to buy French diesel-electric submarines, Australia hitched its fortunes firmly to the U.S. The French then accused the Australians of stabbing them in the back and portrayed the U.K. as 'vassal state' of the U.S., going full 'your father smells of elderberries' mode. The caustic French reaction fits their policy that seeks to break away from NATO. In 2019, President Emmanuel Macron issued a dramatic declaration favouring European independence from NATO. Instead, he prefers a European military organisation accompanied by a separate diplomatic role in the world. Thus, AUKUS undermines France's vision by reasserting U.S. dominance. Meanwhile, without any nuclear industry nor expertise, the assumption is that the Australians will borrow a few spare submarines left lying around. They'll use these to build experience and capacity before getting their own. And yet, estimates suggest they won't have those hand-downs operational anytime in the next ten years. While home-grown submarines aren't likely until the mid-2040s, if then, given the usual cost overruns and delays that such projects encounter. Regardless, Australia bet the house on lasting U.S. power in Asia. In addition, military experts agree that stealthy nuclear submarines make little sense for homeland defence being more suited to an offensive role. And the target is obviously China, which can now spin this as modern Western gunboat diplomacy. Then again, given the rapid development in technology, how long so-called 'silent' submarines remain covert is debatable. Having spent vast sums and diluted attempts to denuclearise the world's military, Australia may get nuclear submarines too late. Of more significance is that the AUKUS and the QUAD alliance (US, India, Japan, Australia) feeds Beijing's narrative that the West seeks to stop the rise of China. Underpinning that mindset is Beijing's view of history: outsiders taking chunks of the country and exploiting its resources. The capture of Hong Kong at gunpoint to traffic opium, plus the seizing of ports by the Russians are examples. That Australia opted to ally itself with the U.S. and U.K. while abandoning France, strengthens Beijing's rendering of these events - the Anglo-Saxon countries are seeking to keep domination of the world order. So while the U.S. may speak of 'the rule-based world order', Chinese officials see these words as cover and tactics. For them, the West forfeited any claim to hold the moral high ground. They note with some alacrity that the U.S. follows the 'rules' when it accords with their aims; then abandons rules and principles when it suits national interests. The Chinese cite the U.S.'s frequent interventions in other nations through regime change, Guantanamo Bay, rendition, waterboarding, and allowing social media corporations to censor a democratically elected leader. How can Beijing interpret this web of actions and sentiments except to come back to a stance that 'might is right'. And as always, the Chinese are playing the long game. Moreover, in their psyche, territorial integrity is a way of demonstrating strength and confidence at home and abroad. This means no Chinese leader, communist or otherwise, can allow history to repeat and hope to survive. Current tensions revolve around Taiwan. But, again, in Beijing's mind, this is a Chinese issue as part of the unresolved aspects of the Chinese civil war. Interestingly, this month President Biden moved to reassert the One-China policy in a move to ease tensions. Nonetheless, with hawks on both sides beating the drums of war, the potential for a mishap is real. In that context, Chinese flights in the vicinity of Taiwan are signals to the U.S. rather than the Taiwanese. Likewise, claims of violated Taiwanese airspace need treating with a pinch of salt. As many commentators have asserted, the delineation of the zones is open to debate. Having travelled widely both on the Mainland and in Taiwan, I would say the people are good-natured, generous and hospitable. They enjoy a common heritage and kinship. Today, Taiwan is one of the biggest investors in the Mainland. Between 1991 and the end of March 2020, approved investment in China comprised 44,056 cases totalling US$188.5 billion. In 2019, the value of cross-strait trade was US$149.2 billion. That connection aids prosperity on both sides of the straits. In short, the people of Taiwan are prosperous and resourceful. Their economy is doing well. Likewise, the people on the Chinese Mainland are the same. Thus, away from the interventions of others seeking to stoke tension, a rapprochement between Beijing and Taiwan is possible. A greater Fujian/Taiwan Cooperation zone would be a good start. In commercial practice, the groundwork and ethnic links are already there. Such a development will take time and cool heads. Plus, it will be easier without warships, submarines and warplanes involved from both sides.
0 Comments
16/10/2021 1 Comment When is a murder, not a murder? "The UK has had six MPs murdered in the space of 42 years; on average, one every seven years. For a group that numbers 650 at any given time, would you fancy the odds?" So Jo Cox was 'murdered', but Sir David Amess 'passed away' or died. 'Passed away' — FFS, the poor man didn't fall down the stairs at work. In truth, this was a political assassination inside a church by an Islamic extremist with a history of radical conduct. Amess was stabbed 17 times in a frenzied premeditated attack. But reading and watching the initial coverage, you'd struggle to get the facts, which gives a fascinating insight into news spin, either by intent or unconscious bias. When Labour MP Jo Cox was killed in June 2016, the media soon defined her attacker as a far-right white man. However, in the Amess case, the attacker, who waited in a church, is a British national of Somali heritage. Spot the difference? Excellent use of the word 'heritage'. Granted, a few outlets had the decency to acknowledge the culprit's antecedents. Some even made it known he was on the radar through the counter-terrorist 'Prevent' programme. The agenda of the 'don't normalise' hatred journalists would have some merit if they bothered to apply it across the board. But, instead, when a high-ranking member of the opposition, Angela Raynor, calls all Tories 'scum', that's fine. Her party leader, the chinless Starmer, dismissed this remark as "It's Angela being Angela". Fair enough, because I don't buy the narrative that Rayner played a part in this killing, although a good portion of the internet is throwing blame her way. If the uncouth Rayner in any way influenced the killer, I'd be amazed. My point is that politically motivated journalists can't have it both ways. If certain words have power, as they claim, then surely that applies to all sectors of society. The UK has had six MPs murdered in the space of 42 years; on average, one every seven years. For a group that numbers 650 at any given time, would you fancy the odds? The mainstream media will continue to focus on the protection for MPs issue. Meanwhile, discussion of the underlying problem is verboten. Sir David now joins a long list; Fusilier Lee Rigby, the kids at the Manchester Arena bombing, MP Stephen Timms, the victims of the London Bridge attack and many others. God forbid anyone should mention 'Jihad'. Anyway, look out for how this murder is spun as a ‘lone wolf’ attack, entirely unavoidable, we stand united. That’s enough, nothing to see here. Move along!  11/10/2021 0 Comments Dune - The Blue Eyed Girl "Doing justice to the whole Dune epic storyline is difficult in the extreme." As a Dune fanboy, I desperately wanted this movie to work. I read the books as a teenager during my science fiction phase— after I'd abandoned the von Däniken bat shit 'Chariot of Gods' genre. Unfortunately, despite von Däniken claims, the aliens weren't amongst us or at least they'd not made it to Hull.
Adapting science fiction to the cinema is always problematic because movies struggle to capture the depth of the culture, technology, and the breadth of the rich source material. As a result, some stuff gets skimmed over. Thus, doing justice to the whole Dune epic storyline is difficult in the extreme, predominantly because author Frank Herbert paints a universe with textures that lends all the storylines and characters depth. Thus, we have the Emperor and his family, the Spacing Guild and the Navigators, House Harkonnen, House Atreides, the Lansraad, the Freman and the pivotal Spice Melange. And that's for starters. To gather all the threads is a tall order, which is why this is only part one at two hours and thirty-five minutes. Plus, Dune 2021 faces the double jeopardy of comparisons with David Lynch's 1984 version. At first, the critics panned Lynch's interpretation, which I thought unfair given the challenge. Instead, in my view, it's a commendable effort, not a great movie - but a decent film that trims the story for easy digestion. Thankfully over time, Dune 1984 gained a cult following as people recognized its strengths. I needn't have worried about Dune 2021 (Part 1). After all, director Denis Villeneuve proved his worth with Blade Runner 2049. Of course, it takes some audacity to reprise Blade Runner — one of the best science fiction movies ever made. Yet, he pulled that off with some flair. Spoiler alerts! The arc of the Dune story looks like the archetypical hero's journey. Our protagonist, Paul Atreides, initially appears to be following the path of Luke Skywalker — off on a journey of discovery as another kid with hidden powers, facing challenges he didn't want. It's classic stuff that usually ends with the protagonist triumphing. Except this is only part one, and if the sequel holds to the books, that arc is subverted. To quote Herbert, "I had this idea that charismatic leaders ought to come with a warning label 'may be dangerous to your health'" There is a nod to the 1984 version in the esthetics, but then again, you can only portray a sand planet one way — with loads of sand. Meanwhile, the technology is all understated, worn and looks credible. As this is Villeneuve, you expect superb cinematography. And he delivers in spades. The jaw-dropping set pieces of ornithopters flying, the massive space vehicles and the sweeping vistas are eye candy. This movie is the big-screen material only. There are a couple of flaws. First, an awful lot of exposition looks like it's setting up for Part 2. Also, the repetitive dream clips need trimming because we get the message that Paul will meet the blue-eyed girl. And while the casting is spot on, there is one notable exception. The fat Baron in Dune 1984 summoned up much more menace, creepiness and outright distaste. Stellan Skarsgård can't match the outrageous performance of Kenneth McMillan as Baron Vladimir Harkonnen. Skarsgård's manifestation of the Baron lacks a genuinely sinister edge. At one point, for no apparent reason, we get a brief conversation in Mandarin. Is this a weak market-placement attempt? The audience thought so as it drew titters. But for me, the absolute icing on the cake is the Hans Zimmer soundtrack. Visceral and intense, the music and sound elements carried the visuals to a new intensity. Wait for the soul-wrenching cry the Shadout Mapes exhales at the moment of revelation — disturbing. Then bath in the whine of the distorted bagpipes as House Atreides parades on Arrakis; at once familiar and haughtily strange. Where is Part 2? Well, not even in production yet as another victim of Covid. However, work is due to start in 2022. So, did I like it? Yes. This movie feels like the beginning, and I'm ready for more. 8/10/2021 1 Comment British Police need a reality check "The Couzens saga is emblematic; no one held to account, disjointed values and a failure to enforce standards." Who'd want to be a police officer in the UK? It's a tough job at the best of times, now made much worse as the political class and a fair part of society have decided that, by default, you can't trust male officers.
To prove my point, here's some official advice: If a single plainclothes officer stops a woman on the street, do not assume the officer is legit. Instead, 'wave down a bus', challenge the officer's identity, or decline to cooperate until some form of confirmation arrives. So that's going to work? Of course, this is the fallout from the Couzens case. Earlier this year, a serving Met officer tricked Sarah Everard into a car, drove her away — raped and then murdered her. Couzens then burnt the body in a futile effort to hide the crime. In a nation accustomed to seeing the police through the prism of Dixon of Dock Green and Z Cars, this case is a harsh reminder that something else is going on. Yet, this horrific crime was avoidable. I'd opine that the predicament the UK police find themselves in is of their own making. And that's not to place blame on frontline officers, although they have a role to play. Instead, the responsibility rests with senior police commanders. In Hong Kong, we worked to the principle of 'supervisory accountability'. As a result, leaders and supervisors may face investigation to determine what they knew and could have prevented when something went wrong. Of course, this system was far from foolproof, nor was its implementation always fair; on occasions, it produced faulty outcomes. But the existence of 'supervisory accountability' put senior officers on notice; be ready to explain. If supervisory accountability exists in UK policing, it's not evident. May I present exhibit one: Met Commissioner Cassandra Dick. It's a standing joke that she retains her job when her failings are the stuff of legend. For starters, she ran an operation that led to the assassination of an innocent man. Add to that criticisms for obstructing investigations into police corruption, and the list goes on. Perhaps because Dick gets away with it, her middle managers feel compelled to act the same way when assessing their subordinate officers. For example, we know from many studies that middle-ranking supervisors take the lead from the behaviours of their seniors. So do they become ambivalent about accountability when they see their seniors enjoy free rein? It's hard not to see that something went wrong, given the known behaviours that Couzens exhibited. First up, his nickname — 'The Rapist' — seriously! Second, he used 'sex workers' - a lady even complained to his station that she'd not received payment. Thus, he's called back from the beat to resolve the debt by handing over some cash. So why aren't alarm bells ringing? Third, he brought a prostitute to a police wedding and then openly boasted about it. Plus, we have the reports that he 'flashed' women on several occasions without consequences. Finally, it's known that Couzens used drugs and had an addiction to extreme porn. Incredibly, none of his supervisors acted on any of this. I've heard that a culture of not prying or passing judgement on people's private affairs held his supervisors back. If true, this is arrant nonsense and not dissimilar to allowing rape gangs to run free for fear of stoking racial tensions. In all this, I'm reminded that one of the essential qualities of a copper is to be nosey. You have got to want to investigate and get to the bottom of an issue. Then again, the UK has a Prime Minister with the morals of an over-sexed alley cat. Is the nation supposed to draw its values from him? You can see the problem. Is it a surprise that Couzens went undetected? After all, the UK police don't investigate burglaries, car thefts and most crimes, so why bother chasing down one of their own. For the record, Manchester Police failed to record 80,000 crimes in one year, with auditors suggesting this is 'the tip of the iceberg'. Not only is this a procedural disgrace, but it also denies the police access to a great deal of intelligence. Also, police officers became habitual in ignoring, covering up or walking away from their core duties. Is it right to conclude that a whole generation of officers comes imbued with a culture that ignores the evidence before them? And yet, senior officers have become skilled at switching the focus to the 'low hanging fruit' of policing language and feelings by scanning the internet for hate speech. The Harry Miller case illustrates the point. In many ways, the Couzens saga is emblematic; no one held to account, disjointed values and a failure to enforce standards. I've had some exposure to British policing; I undertook attachments and command courses. But, likewise, I've had the opportunity to see many other jurisdictions, including Singapore, Japan, Canada, the USA and Australia. One of the challenges the UK faces is they remain locked in the myth that British policing is the gold standard. Granted, the significant set-piece investigations get done well, but the mundane frontline stuff is substandard. But, then again, any police unit that is well resourced, focused with a specific remit usually does well. And there is part of the problem; underfunding. Allied to that is the toxic ideology of postmodernism and the woke culture that created unfocused and relentless mission drift. When I attended a UK command course, it soon became plain that the 'leaders of future policing' are groomed as politicians, not crime fighters. That process includes developing all the traits of deflection and double-speak. Now, I recognise police leaders need to be politically savvy - except in the UK, that's the only criteria to ascend to the top. So above all, it's hard not to conclude the UK police are not interested in tackling crime. But, instead, they're now quite happy to become the enforcer of speech codes and minority attitudes. Further, I'd argue that Hong Kong, Singapore and many other places provide better 'day-to-day' policing, not least because officers respond to calls and within strict time perimeters. And, yes, I know societal culture is a relevant factor, so making direct comparisons is problematic. Nonetheless, a bit of honesty and humility from senior UK police commanders may allow them to learn from others. I feel considerable sympathy for the ordinary UK copper. Most are decent, honest, hardworking people trying to do their best in a weird, rapidly evolving, complex environment. But, unfortunately, they come hemmed in by their leaders playing politics by pandering to agenda-driven pressure groups. Hence, the kowtowing to minority interests, and appeasing eco-lunatics who block ordinary citizens from doing their lawful business. I often wonder if the critics and senior police leaders realise the damage because without that, are they capable of repairing it? But, unfortunately, the evidence isn't encouraging. Look how is Ms Dick responding. Another study, of course. The whole notion that the UK police need more studies and inputs by self-serving academics to address these issues looks embarrassingly naive. Instead, I'd propose some straightforward leadership, accountability and crime-fighting. Too simplistic? Probably - I expect my advice will falter because it's not packaged in some fancy academic model from a pseudo-intellectual with no frontline police experience. That's enough, nothing to see here. Move along! 6/10/2021 0 Comments Policy Address in full. "It's action that counts - talk is cheap" Blah, blah, blah, housing, blah, blah, New Territories North, blah, blah, sub-divided flats, blah, blah! Innovation hub, blah, blah. Sunlit uplands, blah, blah. (subtext - this is a re-election speech).
Sound familiar? Yes, we've heard it all before. Tung, Tsang and CY all made promises to resolve the housing crisis; the result was no change. Although, this time, with Carrie getting a kick up 'la derrière' from Beijing, plus the waning power amongst the property oligarchy, we may see some action. But it's a big 'may'. Moreover, Lam can't claim that opposition forces are stalling her efforts. The Pan-Dumacratics and their lunatic independence friends have either run for the hill or are locked up. No longer can they frolic around the LegCo chamber like juvenile chimps, throwing stuff and attacking officials. And that's a good thing. Unfortunately, as I've before pointed out, Carrie has a habit of talking big, and then nothing much happens. For example, look at how she cleared up the issue of the illegal structures - or instead didn't. Add that to her occasional willful blindness and insensitivity - remember Typhoon Mangkhuk and the old folk's allowance issue? I won't bother rehashing how she was absent for the early stages of the 2019 civil unrest, leaving a hard-pressed Police Force to hold the line while she dithered. So come on, Carrie, get the job done or exit the stage so somebody with a bit of grit can take charge. And, while you are at it, how about taking down the exploitative MPF scheme - it's the biggest rip off in Hong Kong. Removing the clawback acknowledges that the MPF scheme is flawed, but you need to go further. Such boldness will show a genuine commitment to Hong Kong people. It's action that counts - talk is cheap. 1/10/2021 2 Comments Labour's love lost Dear Leader, Kier Starmer, "It's not right to say only women have a cervix." Watching the UK Labour Party conference this week, a couple of things struck me - their ‘winning’ strategy pivots on insulting the electorate, engaging in endless struggle and talking nonsense.
15/9/2021 1 Comment Nicki Minaj Talking Bollocks! “My cousin in Trinidad won’t get the vaccine cuz his friend got it & became impotent. His testicles became swollen.” Nicki Minaj isn’t on my radar. However, a quick visit to her Wikipedia entry reveals she’s a rap singer with a secondary school education and a string of sackings from waitressing jobs for rudeness to customers. Unfortunately, I don’t see any details about her medical qualifications, especially her expertise in Covid vaccines. None of this stopped her from sharing the following with her 22 million followers and the world. “My cousin in Trinidad won’t get the vaccine cuz his friend got it & became impotent. His testicles became swollen.” Ms Minaj goes on to note that the swollen testicles and alleged impotence resulted in a called-off wedding. When called out for spreading lies about vaccines by both Professor Whitty and Boris Johnson, she doubled down in a series of tweets, including mocking Witty’s British accent. But, oddly, Ms Minaj declared her love for Boris, affirming her well-developed sense of humour. And Ms Minaj doesn’t look to be showing any signs of backing down. Instead, she moved on to attacking professional big mouth Piers Moron and the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg. No wonder she couldn’t hold down a job as a waitress. Lucky break Minaj can rap and shake her ample bottom. Ms Minaj should stick to her particular area of expertise, leaving the science to the scientists. Yet, just in case she drops in, here is a message she can comprehend.
I'll get my coat.
13/9/2021 1 Comment Stand Up Straight and Make Your Bed "You have to run as fast as you can to stay in the same place," observed the Red Queen" Has it ever occurred to you that Jordan Peterson and the leaders in Beijing have much in common? Both want people, especially young people, to stand up straight, make their beds and gather some purpose in life. In other words, shape up, take on responsibility.
Peterson's influential book "12 Rules for Life: An Antidote to Chaos" looks like a template for the changes that the CCP is seeking to drive with a few caveats. With growing numbers of flabby, disengaged, demotivated kids, and a looming population decline, China is starting to see the impact of an emergent middle-class. And while the speed of change in China continues at a pace unseen in history, there are favourable and negative outcomes. On the positive front, consider this. When the communists came to power in 1949, the average life expectancy was around 40. Today it is 77. Along the way, with millions lifted out of poverty, China’s economic growth startled the world. The new middle-class soon adopted the behaviours and conventions of modern advanced countries. That includes life choices such as a reluctance to marry or getting married later. Driving this is a highly competitive education system, workplace stress, and difficulty getting onto the property ladder. Does that sound familiar? In Japan, the response was the 'Hikikomor' sub-culture. People refused to leave their homes or even a single room as they disengaged from society. Usually, these are young males trapped in an online world. In China, something similar manifested with "lying flat" or tangping (躺平). Again, young people opt out of an over-worked and stressed-out life. Also, "lying flat" amounts to a rejection of the consumer society. Besides, with children spending 12-hours a day on education, not including the extra lessons after class, a marked impact on physical and mental well-being is evident. For example, more and more kids, as young as 12, need neck physiotherapy for posture problems. Likewise, severe harm to eyesight results from hours spent looking at screens. Meanwhile, lack of upper body strength is common as muscle development falters. Related to this issue is a perceived over-indulgence in the worship of celebrities followed online. From all of this, I can see that Beijing fears the current direction of society and sub-cultures that may weaken the nation. They've recognised that over-burdening youngsters with false expectations and educational pressures may cause them to 'drop out'. Besides, the costs and stress of raising children deter prospective parents from having a family. So, how to deal with these intersecting issues? Well, with a raft of measures, the government has gone to the perceived root of the problem. For starters, they've closed the private tutor centres that provided cramming sessions to boost kid's academic performance. Overnight, these centres — which employed vast numbers of so-called star-tutors — fell. This move aims to deflate the increasing competition amongst students while also reducing the cost of parenting. Cuts in school hours, a ban on weekend classes and curtailing competitive exams are likewise mandated. In addition, the amount of time that kids spend on computers and the types of games they play are under scrutiny. The under-18s will get no more than three hours of online gaming a week. And the tech companies are to be held to account for these perimeters. Some pundits surmise that part of the motivation for these sweeping changes is to constrain the influence of tech companies. For example, China sees in the West that companies such as Facebook operate as monopolistic entities beyond accountability. Beijing is signalling it is not prepared to cede control to the likes of Zuckerberg. The crackdowns on celebrity culture, the tech firms and the profit-seeking educational institutes kills several birds with one stone. First, it is a partial return to the original doctrine of the party by reducing the power of the super-rich. That segues (hopefully) into a more egalitarian society that offers dignity to workers. Hence, a work/life balance while recognising the importance of the family. But, above all, it demonstrates the party remains in control. Peterson, in his book, used the Taoist symbol shown above to represent the boundary between order and chaos. This doctrine illustrates the importance of balance. In Taoist thinking and Peterson's interpretation, you find meaning in the boundary between order and chaos. Although you should never wander too far on either side as life can go out of kilter. In support of his thinking, Peterson proposed that people must live by the same code that renders them mutually predictable. Therefore, they act in keeping with each other's expectations and desires, aimed at a peaceful existence. In conjunction with this, people must adopt individual responsibility and contribute to broader society. To start this process, Peterson proposes instilling self-discipline with predictable daily routines. It is possible to see these elements in the Chinese policies. I would argue that the leaders in Beijing are now engaged in a tacit negotiation with their citizenry. They've acknowledged that rapid growth and wealth brought forth society-wide strains. Accordingly, they now seek to reduce the negative aspects of success. But, at the same time, they pursue cooperation in advancing the notion of common prosperity. Yet, despite China's track record of turning a vision into reality, I foresee a massive challenge in driving such changes. Remember, both Singapore and Japan failed with a similar approach to encourage child-bearing. Likewise, weening people off celebrities is near-impossible because culture is an awkward force to bend. Plus, I fear the message of less pressure for kids hasn't registered with all Chinese parents. Already some are seeking to get around the government-mandated restrictions with homeschooling. "You have to run as fast as you can to stay in the same place." observed the Red Queen in Alice in Wonderland. So as China wakes to the fact that not everyone can keep up, is the pace going to slow down? I'm reminded that ‘culture eats strategy for breakfast’. The plain fact is all those Tiger mums didn’t spring from nowhere. 10/9/2021 1 Comment The Unseen Hand "The Christian Science Monitor described Sharp as 'the most influential American political figure you've never heard of" Throughout the protests of 2019, I marvelled at the ingenuity, resourcefulness and flair of the protesters. They appeared capable of constant innovation, shifting their tactics to cause frustrations and embarrassment to the authorities.
Was this accident or by design? It now appears they followed a template provided by American academic Gene Sharp. Like many other observers, I put much of their success down to youthful vigour and imagination. These traits undoubtedly played a significant role, not least because the kids harnessed social media to amplify their messages. It seemed that the protestors had the government's PR machine outflanked with clever and sophisticated use of the Internet. Also, it struck me as odd that no one emerged to negotiate with the government. Instead, well-known moderates proved unwilling to come forward — nor did they condemn the violence. The Christian Science Monitor described Sharp as 'the most influential American political figure you've never heard of". The deceased Harvard professor authored the seminal book on regime change, 'From Directorship to Democracy'. In addition, he is the intellectual weight behind many protest movements, framing his philosophy as a soft coup method that substitutes war. In a career spanning four decades, Sharp developed and refined the strategies and tactics used by protesters. Left-wing activist Marcie Smith explores Sharp's work, its impact and his motivations here. While Sharp is often portrayed as a pro-democracy advocate, his motives also point towards a neoliberal free-market agenda supporting big business. Cloaked in the mantle of democracy, Sharp sought to kick open market access. Examining Sharp's book, especially Appendix 1, you can see a template for the events in Hong Kong. Mock funerals, product boycotts, attempts at dual governance are a few examples amongst the 198 actions he recommends. Significantly, Sharp opposed any negotiations with governments. He has a whole chapter that argues under no circumstances should protesters meet with the officials to discuss a compromise. Because he asserts, such talks lead to undermining the ultimate goal of regime change. I surmise the initiation of the 2019 unrest was spontaneous. Even so, powerful forces were waiting in the wings, ready to exploit the situation; recognising an opportunity, foreign politicians egged on the unrest here. Indeed the U.S. made no secret of this. The National Endowment for Democracy gave cash as listed here. Further, don't forget that in the lead-up to the events of 2019, activists received training overseas. The BBC documented this as the protagonists attended the Oslo Forum. The clear dangers in Sharp's thinking are self-evident. First, without the possibility of compromise, protesters enter a struggle of attrition. That's a fool's errand when facing a much superior force. Also, without universal support in the local population and relentless discipline, the movement soon spun out of control with violence and terrorist activity. The Arab Spring is an example where Sharp's ideas had adverse consequences. In Egypt, the outcome was a military dictatorship. And as scholars continue to pick over the pieces of that struggle, what is certain is that the results weren't beneficial as much of the Arab world is less stable. Even though Sharp spoke of nonviolence, he acknowledged that brute force has a role in any struggle. The activists in Hong Kong echoed these sentiments. Sharp advocated for the use of attacks to provoke the authorities into taking harsh counter-measures. In addition, protesters can exploit graphic violence by the police and others for propaganda purposes to undermine the government further. In Hong Kong, creating disorder was the easy part. But this soon escalated, out of control, morphing into an attempted insurrection with the assault on our parliament. This was bound to happen with a leaderless movement having no clear direction, prone to miscalculations and fragmentation. And so it proved. The 2014 Occupy Central movement foreshadowed this failure. Professor Benny Tai planned that exercise in civil disobedience. Tai, derided as an ideas man with no practical leadership experience, was forced to start the occupation early. He soon left the scene, running back to his office at Hong Kong University, leaving mayhem on the streets. The occupiers lingered for 79 days before finally disappearing with a whimper. Throughout, the authorities remained primarily passive, allowing the blockages to continue knowing that the participants couldn't sustain their efforts for too long. The public also grew tired of the inconvenience, which undermined support. Leaderless protest looks fine on paper. But, in truth, it is a fanciful concept with no practical use. The idea prevents the authorities from targeting the movement's leaders to decapitate the organisation. But then again, it is nearly impossible to sustain an effort; a lack of control is inevitable and fragmented groups. Gene Sharp died in 2018. But, no doubt, his ideas will likely continue to shape how protesters behave. Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, China has applied its antidote with the implementation of NSL. It is tough medicine and a harsh lesson for the naive kids caught up in a futile strategy.  "All UK military personal involved had leave cancelled on 23 July, yet Raab went on holiday." He is at work, honest! The UK's foremost action hero is on the job. Or that is what he wants you to believe. So as UK Foreign Secretary, Dominic Raab, scrambles to save his career, his PR team is pumping out photographs of 'Action Raab'.
Having pleaded with the Taliban to allow orderly fleeing, Raab is running around shutting stable doors long after the camel bolted. (Surely some mistake - do camels even live in stables?) Before Raab could jet off to pose for pictures in exotic lands, the Foreign Affairs Committee wanted a word. Here are the five key takeaways from the grilling of Dynamic Raab.
Standby for more 'Action Raab’ coming to a news outlet near you. I'm guessing a few choreographed moments in a refugee camp, then a picture standing at a border pointing into the distance, before riding around on more military hardware. The only picture we need to see is Raab riding off into the sunset. 29/8/2021 0 Comments The Game Changer "There is no getting over the fact that the standing of the West has taken a significant hit." Most of the time, the tectonic plates of geopolitics creep slowly. Then, now and again, the plates jolt, convulsing, thrusting upon us dramatic swings in power that rock everything. That just happened.
At the hands of the Taliban, the disorderly retreat of the West has changed the world order. When a U.S. president talks up a medieval murderous religious cult to secure their cooperation, you know things aren't going well. When the U.K.'s foreign secretary, the hapless and hopeless Dominic Raab, seeks out help from China and Russia, the game has changed. When images of the Taliban brandishing U.S. M4 rifles, wearing U.S. uniforms, while adorned with other U.S. military supplies, you know something went seriously wrong. Also, kids standing waist-deep in sewage awaiting clearance to enter Kabul airport is an unforgettable picture of failure. Then, as tired and overwhelmed young soldiers do their best, Biden skulks away from a press conference, refusing to answer questions. Alas, when Biden announced 'America is back', I didn't realise that meant he'd be showing his back. Many are now questioning his ability to lead. Following the shameful deception of G7 cooperation, that is understandable. Boris Johnson chairmanship of the G7 counted for nothing because Biden made it clear he had no desire to consider the opinions of so-called allies. Biden's policy on Afghanistan suffers the same fundamental flaw that led to the misadventure in Vietnam. It is rooted in the demands of U.S. domestic politics rather than a realistic assessment of the interests and conditions of the Afghan people. It was in American interests to invade, and that's what driven the departure — the often proclaimed 'human rights' and 'state building' a fig leaf for these ventures. Granted, the frontline operators believe their mandate is to bring democracy, a fudge their political masters are willing to sustain. Graham Greene in 'The Quiet American' summed it up with his C.I.A. character Alden Pyle, “I never knew a man who had better motives for all the trouble he caused … impregnably armoured by his good intentions and his ignorance.” A tad harsh, but the ring of truth. This latest demonstration of U.S. rationale raises questions in the U.K. and Europe, 'Do we have a common purpose with the U.S., and how can our interests be met?'. At the same time, vice-president Harris is running around Asia seeking to shore up confidence for the undertakings given to this region. For Harris, that's a tough gig when actions speak louder than words. Are Japan, Taiwan and the rest naive enough to swallow her distracting rhetoric of "China is intimidating everyone"? Indeed, Vietnam wasn't prepared to consent. The others gave Harris a polite hearing but no strong statements of unanimity. Plus, how long before China and Russia are running the evacuation from Kabul because Biden has cut and run? It's possible. Both will retain embassies in Kabul, as China is working on cutting an investment deal with the Taliban. With the end of August deadline fast approaching, the recrimination game is gathering pace. It remains baffling that the political leaders in the West believed the Afghan army would stand. Instead, a few guys in pickup trucks with A.K. 47s show up, and the entire Afghan military does a runner. Tony Blair -- the turd that won't flush — had the cheek to criticise Biden's action. Of all the people least morally qualified to comment, Blair tops any list. I do wish he'd curl up under a slime-covered rock to remain silent. In May this year, Noam Chomsky, philosopher and social critic, predicted such an outcome. With tongue firmly in cheek, Chomsky claims he benefited from 'not having any intelligence assessments'. Yet, he did have an understanding of history and hubris. Chomsky's point about intelligence assessments, although made in jest, hints at a serious matter. Remember the failures of intelligence over 9/11, the W.M.D. saga and Soviet nuclear missile lead that didn't exist. And that's far from an exhaustive list. Putting all ideology aside, there is no getting over the fact that the standing of the West has taken a significant hit. A U.S. president demonstrated scant regard for the views of supposed allies, while the U.K. and Europe proved incapable of acting without American military support. There is a reason the British army goes by the name 'The Borrowers'. Meanwhile, the U.K. Ministry of Defence P.R. machine is working overtime circulating pictures of soldiers helping kids, giving out water while sheltering them from the heat. So naturally, the B.B.C. and Sky are once again happy to fall in line, giving these heart-tugging pictures the maximum coverage. Much as they uncritically cheered on the invasion twenty years ago. At least the coverage on Aljazeera is more honest. It shows the Taliban firmly in control, maintaining order and controlling airport access — albeit by harsh methods. Hence Biden's genuflecting to them. After all, if the Taliban wish they could overrun the airport without firing a shot by allowing refugees to stream in. And not to miss an opportunity, Chinese media is running the 'graveyard of empires' narrative. Conversely, some in the U.K. appear more concerned about dogs and cats left behind in Kabul. So, in a revealing gesture, they've raised enough cash to hire a Boeing 737 to bring out these strays. So what does that tell us about sentiments towards the fate of the Afghans? From monitoring FlightRadar 24, it is possible to watch the pace of the evacuations flights in and out of Afghanistan. For much of early August, only the Turks had a regular shuttle service running from Kabul to Islamabad in Pakistan. Then the planes of the U.S.A., the U.K., New Zealand, Spain and others started crossing into Afghan airspace. An assortment of Globemaster IIIs and Hercules C130s doing the lifting, while American KC 135 Stratotankers back them up with fuel. The awful news that ISIS are back in action with suicide bombs killing U.S. Marines and Afghan civilians underline the dangers of this retreat. ISIS may now have a regained territory from which to operate, threatening us all. And thanks to the shambolic withdrawal, they have plenty of military supplies. Biden has hit back against ISIS with a supposed drone strike allegedly killing a so-called mid-level ISIS planner. There is no evidence to suggest the target is connected to the airport bombing. Call me cynical, but the scenario indicates that Grandad Biden looked weak and useless, so he had to hit something as a distraction for his manifest failings. Giving Biden the benefit of the doubt to assume he hit the right people, lashing out in this manner won't help except as a distraction. Moreover, it's worth remembering that random attacks on the enemy validate their random attacks on you, as the moral high ground is forfeit. That's the ideological price to pay. Let's be clear; I've no qualms about killing terrorists if that is what it takes to get the job done. However, it's the piecemeal efforts conducted for cosmetic purposes, adding fuel to the fire without a clear overarching objective, that earns my derision. It's often argued that the Suez crisis of 1956 is the moment that laid bare Britain's imperial impotence. So is it premature to portray the shambolic retreat from Kabul as the American equal? Only time will tell. 25/8/2021 1 Comment Echoes on the Water. "After a race, the ritual moaning starts as the crews dissect the day's events, ruminating over perceived etiquette infractions." The young men — and it was primarily men— who built the British Empire were an uninhibited lot. Shy and quiet types wouldn't cut the mustard holding the reigns of power while cajoling the natives into submission. Yet, with all that bluff and pluck came an enthusiasm for the outdoor life, sports and adventure.
Today, the sports clubs of Hong Kong are the most resilient memorial to the fact that the Brits exported their games with them. They sent cricket to India, rugby to Samoa and football to the Aborigines. In colonial times, 'the club' fulfilled a particular role; something of a refuge, a home from home, allowing the newly arrived Expat to integrate, but only with his own. It isolated him from the local community because a chap could 'go native' without proper guidance. But membership also greased the wheels of business. Jan Morris observed in Pax Britannica, '…whenever the wandering Briton wished to find the company of his kind, he'd get an invite to the club and soon be standing at the bar as if he owned it.' Pretending to be grander than they were was pretty much de rigueur. The sports clubs provided an outlet for all that youthful energy of these thrusting types. Formed as a diversionary consolation for the vexations of colonial life, today's clubs are more integrated, although still offering an intriguing window on a sub-set of Hong Kong society. My job gave automatic membership to the Police Officer's Club. This safe space allowed cops to vent, letting off steam without 'outsiders' within ear-shot. Then some 20 years ago, I joined a sailing club. As part of the process, I learnt to sail and did my bit as a volunteer. Hong Kong's sailing clubs are a significant enterprise with large clubhouses, boatyards, thousands of staff and a full racing calendar. Our superb harbour, Sai Kung's islands and the south side provide world-class sailing conditions. Whatever you fancy, from the large motor yacht — assuming you are super-rich — to the single-person dinghy, it's all on offer. These days, the clubs have dropped their colonial undertones, although the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club kept the title unchanged in a small act of defiance. Also, Expats manage all the clubs, although the membership is predominately Chinese. Would you please stay with me as I go amateur anthropologist? In recent years, exposure to the local sail-racing scene gave me absorbing insights. I've seen the petty rivalries, cliques, competitions, and the hard work that goes into this sailing malarkey. I reckon all sailors score high on the sociability index. That's the nature of the beast. Crews working together is essential even for a fraction of success in such a competitive environment. There is a hierarchy of sorts, although where you sit depends on perception. Big money super motor-yachts with top-heavy structures, adorned with every gadget, draw the disdain of the old salts. One such three-tier monster, owned by a businessman, is so out of kilter it can't turn in a moderate swell for fear of capsizing. So confined to the bays, she drifts around, never to face the open ocean. The guys who love hoisting sails by hand are another extreme, even forgoing the coffee grinder winch. Also on the fringes are the rowers and paddlers, all muscle power, with no frills. These sub-sets strongly identify, "We are Rowers" came the stern rebuke when I mistakenly called them 'paddlers'. Sorry. The crews range from the semi-professionals through to the weekend warriors. Either way, the competition is intense. Racing is a serious business. The Committee boat sits supreme, setting the course, marshalling the starts and overseeing the whole shebang. Volunteers keep wind readings, checking off the boats as these arrive on station, while the Race Officer — a semi-god for the day — sets the route. The course laying is an art, as much as a science. Position the marks (big floaty things that boats go-round), wind deflections discussed, course times estimated against wind strength and boat speed. "There is a wind shadow behind Sharp Island," "Don't forget the shift east as the afternoon arrives". Amongst the volunteers, matriarchal memsahibs seek to dominate with various degrees of success. Flags and horns command the entrants to line up for the off. Then, as the skipper's jockey for position while avoiding collisions, calls of protestation fill the air, "Give way", and less polite shouts. Then, once the fuss of the start is over, the committee boat settles to a routine, recording rounding times, and sounding horns for the finishers. After a race, the ritual moaning starts as the crews dissect the day's events, ruminating over perceived etiquette infractions. Anxious skippers await the decisions on formal protests as the committee adjudicates. Others offer a 'liquid handshake' to appease an offended party, knowing full well that role reversal awaits in the coming weeks. Mark you, the clubs are as much about the social life as sailing. For new arrivals in town, especially young women, it's an opportunity to mingle without the insidious dangers of the bar scene. One lady told me, "It's a safe 'flirting' zone because social norms hold people in check". Plus, you can soon 'belong'. The exotic appeal of dragon boating is an immediate draw to the newbie. That soon wanes. Although, even the most blatantly incompetent (that's me) can don a life-jacket, whistle and gloves to pretend you've served decades before the mast. But don't ask them to tie a reef knot. Alcohol that cools the fervour — especially after a race — is more or less compulsory. Not too much, but indeed enough to lift the mood and drive the teasing banter along. Then on departure home, it's all wild embraces and hugs, given as if some treasured aunt is off on a long trip. So while the colonial era retreats, with the illusion of Empire (Jan Morris again), and Britain is an island once more, hints of grandeur linger. The Aberdeen Boat Club displays the fire control panel from the sunken Queen Elizabeth, an apt epitaph perhaps. At the same time, the emblems of long gone warships adorn the Royal Hong Kong Yacht Club walls. How bizarre that such symbols receive scorn in the homeland while they enjoy acceptance as quaint echoes of the past in a former imperial possession. There is a good deal of easy analysis on offer these days about the merits or otherwise of the British Empire. I always wonder why the most ardent critics are found in Britain itself. Strange that. 20/8/2021 1 Comment Carry On Up the Khyber "In 2001, the war on terror began with people falling from the twin towers, and today's episode ends with Afghan kids falling from U.S. planes." I've received my final copy of The Spectator magazine, having dropped a subscription. The decision to stop putting money their way came about, in part, through cock-eyed coverage of events in Hong Kong. Their inability or unwillingness to comprehend the true nature of the events here caused me to question the integrity of other articles.
A minor point, perhaps. But one that, in the long term, has clear repercussions for the way people absorb facts and understand what is happening in the world. In turn, that can drive unhelpful policies and actions by governments. As I am reading this last edition, an article affirms my thinking. Former British intelligence officer Andy Owen asserts, "The war in Afghanistan will not end this year". That comment appeared in the 7th August edition; unfortunately for Mr Owen, the Taliban marched unopposed into Kabul a week later. The war is over. In fairness, Owen did acknowledge the weakness of the Afghan Army, and he's not the only one to misjudge the situation — the entire Western political elite got it wrong. Further, Owen points out that the West doesn't understand the complexities of places it elects to 'modernise' with liberal democracy. On that, we can agree. Karl Marx said history repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce. The West’s involvement in Afghanistan is now looking like a complete farce - Carry on Up the Khyber! In 2001, the war on terror began with people falling from the twin towers, and today's episode ends with Afghan kids falling from U.S. planes. The sheer awfulness of that imagery is not lost on people no matter how much spin Biden seeks to put out. And, as others have said — this is not comparable to the fall of Saigon; it's much worse. Today the women and girls of Afghanistan are at the mercy of the Taliban. Sure, the Taliban are seeking to project a more moderate image while openly talking of sharia law. That alone must make us shudder. For now, the Taliban appear to cooperate with Western forces as the airport evacuation proceeds. That may not last. Meanwhile, thanks to the U.S. taxpayer, the Taliban own more Blackhawk helicopters than most advanced nations. Biden's rushed departure gifted them 20 billion dollars worth of the most dangerous military hardware in the world. Yes, I know Trump cut the deal that kicked off the run-down of U.S. forces. But, that doesn't change the fact that Biden executed the plan - if there was one. In the three months from April to June 2021, the U.S. handed over to the Afghan forces six A-29 light attack planes, 174 Humvees, about 10,000 2.75 inch high-explosive rockets, 61,000 40-mm high explosive rounds, 900,000 rounds of .50 calibre ammo, and 20,15,600 rounds of 7.62 mm bullets. Add to that 151 helicopters (Blackhawk, MD-530s, and 56 Mi-17), 23 Super Tucano ground-attack planes, Hercules transport aircraft, C-208 utility aircraft, and assorted fixed-wing aircraft. Now, granted, some of this kit needs servicing, which may prove impossible now that the U.S. contractors have left. Further, a lack of qualified pilots means this expensive hardware is no immediate threat. Are no lessons learnt from history? After all, this is the U.K.'s fourth war in Afghanistan since 1839, each ending in defeat. Undoubtedly, Western politicians will continue to claim that girls got an education, as women enjoyed freedoms, and a fledgling democracy took hold. All true, but irrelevant now. It may all end up in the bin. Concerning the last few days, the old rule of 'Hope for the best while planning for the worst' was ignored in spades...the U.S., U.K. and NATO all went on their summer holidays hoping for the best... and copped a nasty surprise which they are now saying wasn't their fault. It must be clear now that nations cannot be bombed and coerced into becoming liberal democracies, primarily when operating on a different cultural voltage that does not align with so-called 'Western values'. Afghanistan will likely revert to civil war as the various tribal factions jostle for power. That may provide cover for terrorist groups, especially many of those displaced from Syria. Back to square one. The cluelessness about Afghanistan and Iraq (coming soon) is equally applicable to events and developments in this region. I often wonder if Western consulates reported with clarity on the 2019/2020 civil unrest here. Or did they pander to their political masters? Was judgement coloured by confirmation bias — which happens when we believe or disbelieve evidence depending on what we think to be accurate based on preconceived ideas? Likewise, the Western media elected to play down the protester violence — committed by a significant minority — to instead focus on and portray police actions to restore order as brutality. Few covered the 'burning man' or the attacks on anyone who dared to speak out against the violence. Did the foreign consulates provide honest assessments to counter biased media? We don't know. None of the coverage I saw mentioned the xenophobic anti-Mainland sentiments at the core of the unrest. On that point, you could argue the events had a tribal element as Hong Kong people struggled for an identity fearing sublimation. Instead, the West received a straightforward package narrative of peaceful protests and repression by the authorities. Is it right to surmise that the unreliability of this coverage drove politicians in the West to make un-nuanced decisions? The West's reaction, in turn, led China to believe the West supported the feckless independence movement? Looks like it. Hence the robust national security law. Once the West licks its wounds and digests the events of Afghanistan, what is needed is some candid reflection. That should include that you can't run around promoting 'values' that you have neither the capacity, will, nor a questionable right to impose. Meanwhile, we all need to be ready for the bow wave of troubles that will follow this chaotic Afghan withdrawal. So on that score, the terrorist threat just went up. 16/8/2021 3 Comments Run Away!! "A supposedly highly-trained Afghan army melted away without a fight" How to best sum up the West's war and intervention in Afghanistan; hubris, arrogance, and a complete failure? Yep, that kind of captures the big picture.
Of course, the Americans are taking most of the flak for the bungled withdraw. But, all the same, I must say that NATO countries are equally culpable for this tangled mess. Today, a ragtag army of Taliban fighters, armed only with AK47's and RPG7s, is consolidating control of the country. Twenty years of battle with the most sophisticated armies the West could field has these medieval fighters as victors. All the helicopters, jets, drones, satellites, integrated command and control systems and special forces couldn't defeat blokes wearing cheap sports shoes, riding around in pick-up trucks. Meanwhile, a supposedly highly-trained Afghan army melted away without a fight. It never had much of a stomach for battle, and with the West gone, the smell of defeat hung in the air. Soldiers abandoned their posts, changed into civilian clothes and headed home. Why did it come to this? Undoubtedly, the military staff colleges and think tanks will dwell on that question for decades to come. Pundits will earn PhDs, books will come forth, as reputations get polished and trashed in equal numbers. These assessments will throw in Sun Tzu (孫子) — 'know your enemy, understand yourself and win a thousand battles', plus a bit of 'winning without fighting'. Supplement that with some Carl von Clausewitz and a smidgen of Machiavelli, and you've got intellectual heft. Nonetheless, in the end, it comes down to a complete lack of comprehension and commitment. No amount of rumination by professors and soldier-scholars will change that assessment. Because, at its core, the mission was unclear. Moreover, holding a few remote compounds does not constitute a victory. Likewise, sitting inside a secure 'green zone' or at guarded airbases gives one the false impression of control. Still, the Taliban waited with patience outside the perimeter. Even a meagre understanding of Afghan history and past wars should give pause for caution. Perhaps they don't teach Kipling at school anymore, him being too colonial and imperial. I have no idea if the Taliban are adherents of Sun Tzu. What is clear, they've followed his guiding principle; make time your ally. They waited, knowing the West would grow tired of the war. Yet, the biggest failing is political. For that, Biden is in the direct firing line, along with Johnson and the NATO leaders. Other culprits are Bush, Blair and much of the Western establishment for gamely going along. The politicians sowed the seeds of this debacle decades ago with a failure to plan. What was the ultimate aim of the campaign? Was that goal achievable, and did anyone have an exit strategy? Because fleeing in the night doesn't work as a confidence builder for those you leave behind. To all these questions, the answer is clear. The initial mission to rout Al-Qaeda from its Afghan base succeeded. That was the time to leave. Instead, the mission morphed towards nation-building, a fraught prospect in a country that runs on tribal loyalties. Anchoring all this was much talk of getting girls into school — a worthy initiative but not enough. So the only conclusion to draw is that a failure to plan led to a failure! People scramble to Kabul airport as helicopters lift off from a U.S. Embassy once again. No matter how many times U.S. secretary of state Blinken rejects comparisons with Saigon 1975, the imagery defeats him. Whether Afghanistan reverts and becomes a base for terrorism is one worry, the other is the fate of the people who put their faith in the West. Unfortunately, the signs are not promising. If Afghanistan descends into chaos, you could argue this serves the West's geopolitical interests by stirring trouble on China's border, especially as Afghanistan abuts the sensitive Xinjiang region. Leaving also removes a distraction for the forthcoming U.S. mid-term elections. Biden would like the weight of Afghanistan off his shoulders, although Iraq may yet prove a heavier burden. All of this is at the cost of allies questioning whether they can trust the West to stay the course. As I've previously discussed, countries in Asia are treading a careful line between China and the U.S.A. as that 'cold war' escalates. So what conclusions will they draw from this sudden departure? Also asking questions are families in the West, who sent their sons and daughters, mostly from post-industrial towns, to die in this futile effort. They deserve answer. But, as the media swirl goes on, where is Tony Blair and Alistair Campbell? Always so ready to offer their sage advice, these charlatans stand damned by their silence. A mea culpa from Blair would be a start, but I'm not holding my breath.  "But, of course, he won't be sweating because, as he told us, he can't." If Andrew Windsor, the Queen's favourite son, thought his denials of abusing a teenage girl would pass muster, he's a monumental fool. His infamous Newsnight interview affirmed the man's lack of moral fibre and self-awareness. He felt the interview went well; everyone else saw a disaster. But, unfortunately, that is what you get when you live a life surrounded by sycophants.
Having stonewalled his accuser — pushing her into a corner — a lawsuit is her last option. We know that Virginia Giuffre, formerly Roberts, was trafficked by Jeffrey Epstein with Prince Andrew, allegedly taking his pleasure of this girl. The above graphic tracks the flights he took on Epstein's private jet. These include visits to the infamous island, where several minors resided under the control of Epstein. Even presence on that island shows a lack of judgement. For the record, in the U.S. Virgin Islands, the age of consent is 18 years old. On the subject of evidence against Andrew, it looks compelling. We have photographs, witness corroboration and enough circumstantial material to set alarm bells ringing. Any police officer worth his salt would be 'feeling his collar' and demanding, 'can we have a word?'. Yet the British police have failed to act, despite alleged events taking place on their soil, which is fertile ground for allegations of a cover-up. Also, we know that Andrew had protection officers with him at times: all his movements were logged with dates, times and places recorded. Any investigator would love to get their hands on that treasure trove. And if Andrew is innocent, as he claims, these details will clear his name. So, why not cooperate? I think we know why, and Andrew's attempts to avoid a full investigation isn't convincing the British public. According to the latest YouGov poll, only 6 per cent believe he's telling the truth. So, in the court of public opinion, he at minimum has a case to answer; at worst, people think he is guilty of sex with a trafficked teenager. During his car crash interview, we learnt that Andrew places much store in honourable conduct. He explained that's why he flew to New York to break off contact with a convicted paedophile personally. And yet, he doesn't have enough honour nor common decency to address these charges. In truth, Giuffre's attempts to get Andrew into court are likely to fail. As this is a civil case, extradition is not possible. So the best she can hope for is a conviction in absentia. Or a deal is done. GIuffre gets a pay-off, and Randy Andy continues to deny the allegations. Nothing to see here. Either way, for Prince Andrew, there are no good outcomes. Instead, he will carry the shame of the public's verdict with him for the rest of his life. But, of course, he won't be sweating because, as he told us, he can't. I'd venture to suggest the trajectory of events. At some point in the not too distant future, the stout heart that beats in the chest of Queen Elizabeth will stop. At that point, Prince Charles will become King after a long apprenticeship. Charles has already made it clear that he wants a slimmed-down monarchy by resisting Andrew's attempts to elevate his gormless daughters. Thus, with the label of 'Pedo Prince' hanging around his neck, Andrew will skulk off like another prince of piffle, perhaps into foreign exile. After all, Andrew has long passed his usefulness. He is now the redundant spare because the royal line of succession branched off once Prince Charles started having heirs. The Queen can't even use Andrew in the human meat market of dynastic alliances. That dismal business having faded with rickets and child-chimney sweeps Over time, as with the Jimmy Savile saga, I suspect more evidence will emerge to substantiate claims against Andrew. Then, so gradually, the cloak of protection offered by the establishment will fall away. Meanwhile, the institution of monarchy is tainted. But not to worry. It's survived killing boy princes in The Tower, beheadings galore, red hot pokers up the bum, and the Royal 'It's a Knockout'. So I reckon they'll soldier on.  "The Australians put the military on the streets ... hovering helicopters over homes, demanding compliance with Covid rules." Earlier this year, the government here raised the possibility of compulsory Covid vaccinations for some professions. Immediately, a cry went out that this is further proof of Hong Kong's freedoms under attack. The usual pundits piled in with screams of 'white terror and the end of liberty.'
Strange that the same people are silent as France (Liberté, égalité, fraternité) mandates vaccinations. Meanwhile, CNN — that bastion of press freedom — fired three staff for failing to get the jab. So that's alright then! I have droned on about this before — you can adapt any change to claim 'freedom' is gone. Moreover, applied with skill, this can disorientate the unthinking while burnishing your credentials as a freedom fighter. It is, of course, true that on some occasions, genuine freedoms get taken away. But you need to pick your examples with care by weighing this against other dimensions such as the 'greater good'. So with cover provided by CNN and the French, Hong Kong civil servants are now compelled to take the jab or face weekly Covid tests. Discipline action is also a possibility against those who don't comply. For folks with genuine medical issues, supported by proper certification, exceptions are possible. Note: the ramblings of a friend on the internet, who acquired her medical knowledge through WhatsApp, won't suffice. Thus, with a whimper, most will people fall in line. Meanwhile, the universities are getting in on the act. As if to help, the Australians put the military on the streets while hovering helicopters over homes, demanding compliance with Covid rules. So do I sense that those sneering and calling out Hong Kong are struggling against the tide? If that's the accepted international standard, as set by Western democracies, Hong Kong enjoys a liberal regime. Lastly, as a public service, I'd like to remind you of the side effects of Covid vaccines. These include:
 "The superior man is watchful over himself, even when he is alone" "故君子愼其獨也" The Choi affair continues to rumble on. In an ignoble incident, the senior police officer was caught inside an unlicensed massage establishment and then suspended from duty.
Now cleared of any criminal charges — the right decision — he will return to work. Meanwhile, a discipline review by the Civil Service Bureau will consider his fate. That’s the proper course of action. Yet, it's obvious that Choi placed himself in a compromising position with all the attendant risks. Naturally, this saga has drawn considerable public comment, damaging the image of the Police Force at a difficult time. And because Choi headed up the new National Security Unit, the story continues to provide easy fodder for those who are intent on undermining the police. On that score, eyebrow's rose as Choi is to now lead the section that deals with internal discipline. Of all the roles that Choi could fulfil pending a decision on his future, this appointment will continue to attract attention. What is the ordinary citizen to make of this? What conclusions are junior officers to draw? After all, the Police Force strived for decades to shake off the tag of corruption, rudeness and indifferent service. It made commendable progress starting in the 1980s and gained broad public support as quality service initiatives sought to build a culture of integrity. And while recent events have seen a setback due to a demonisation of the police by hostile elements, this palaver doesn't help matters. The longer the affair drags on the more reputational harm the Force suffers. Whatever happens next, it may be worth revisiting Confucius's opening discourse in 'The Doctrine of the Mean’:- There is nothing more visible than what is secret, and nothing more manifest than what is minute. Therefore the superior man is watchful over himself, even when he is alone. 故君子愼其獨也。 Confucius saw every individual human as a sovereign actor in pursuit of happiness. And yet, he recognised that humans could indulge too much, stray from the path and therefore suffer pain. He foresaw that even what brings pleasure can induce pain. Later in 'The Doctrine of the Mean' Confucius has this to say:- In a high situation, he does not treat with contempt his inferiors. In a low situation, he does not court the favor of his superiors. He rectifies himself, and seeks for nothing from others, so that he has no dissatisfactions. He does not murmur against Heaven, nor grumble against men. Wise words indeed. I'll leave it at that. 27/7/2021 1 Comment Money Talks "China and the U.S. are shipping goods to each other at the fastest pace in years" Sometimes you have to look behind the clickbait headlines to understand what's going on. So while U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Wendy Sherman had a face like a scalded cat during her recent Beijing encounter, in truth, the U.S. and China are joined at the hip and need to cooperate.
Sherman was on the receiving end of a tongue lashing from Chinese diplomats in full wolf warrior mode. That’s something you wouldn’t have seen five years ago, affirming China’s growing confidence, or maybe that they understand the reality of world trade. Because, when you cut through the posturing on both sides, the data tells a story. China and the U.S. are shipping goods to each other at the fastest pace in years. It looks like the tariff war and pandemic never happened. Consider this: over half of the shipping going through the Port of Los Angeles is heading to Mainland China or Hong Kong. A shipping bottleneck is developing owing to the fact the port can’t handle the rising throughput. And all this congestion is happening before the pre-Christmas rush kicks in. Somebody better tell America's kids that Santa may not get through this year. The graph above, which draws on data from the Chinese authorities, tells a story of vibrant two-way trade albeit with an imbalance. As U.S. consumers continue to shop, Chinese factories are back in action pumping out products. Then when you account for the U.S. trade surplus in financial services, which it gains through the US$, that deficit in goods looks less troublesome. (More details are here in 'The Big Game') The only conclusion to draw is that both sides have learned to live with punishing tariffs, a fraught political situation, while talk of decoupling is laughable. We know that the U.S. and China use trade as a weapon in their wider geopolitical game. But, what does it say when the U.S. benefits from Chinese actions taken against Australia? As this report states, the U.S. stepped-in to fill the gap in coal supplies to China with Australian coal blocked. And I thought the U.S. and Australia stood together. Perhaps not when there is money to be made and trade to be done. 23/7/2021 1 Comment Charge Of The Granny Brigade "They'll ignore government advice, the sage words of scientists and hard data, but the possibility of a free iPhone will get them moving." The Hong Kong public has finally woken up to the need for vaccinations. A surge in jabs means we could hit 70% coverage by September. Maybe they've seen the data from the U.S., where 99% of Covid deaths are unvaccinated.
I doubt it. More likely, the incentives offered by various lucky draws are the motivation. An apartment, a new Mercedes Benz, free flights, iPhones, gold, frankincense and myrrh are all on offer. I applaud these private sector lotteries, but what does it say about Hong Kong people's mentality? Of course, they'll ignore government advice, the sage words of scientists and hard data, but the possibility of a free iPhone will get them moving. None of this should come as a surprise, given the long queues every time McDonald’s offers a free piece of shitty plastic with a burger. Back in the day, I policed those lines. And the McDonald’s cohort, while eager, couldn't match an army of pensioners scrambling for free rice distributed by local charities. Every hardened police officers stomach knotted in anxiety when 'Rice distribution crowd control' appeared on the duty list. But, let's be clear. None of the old folks are hungry nor anywhere near what could be considered destitute. Yet, that didn't stop decades of imprinting — when free food is on offer, you dash in. The years of famine in China left a deep scar; thus, it often took a platoon of the Police Tactical Unit to hold back the charging geriatrics. I reckon dealing with a football crowd was easier. After all, you can't use pepper spray to hold back a marauding mob of rampant grannies. The optics are unfavourable. A line of barriers, batching the crowd, and some humour usually did the trick. A gregarious Gwailo cop, using broken Cantonese, to entertain the crowd also helped. Thinking back, the smell of those events lingers — a mix of musty moth-balls, burning joss sticks, with a hint of Pak Fah Yeow — all mixed in that signature Hong Kong confection. Somebody should bottle and market it — Perfume de Sham Shui Po! For the discerning. 20/7/2021 1 Comment Gesture Diplomacy "When the U.S. Congress banned China from collaborating on the International Space Station, what happened? Within ten years, China had its own Space Station." In summer 1970, when the parents next door banned my brothers and me from playing British Bulldog in their garden because we were too rough, we took the game to the street. Soon more kids joined in; we had extra space, a fantastic time and went to bed exhausted. Sometimes, actions have unintended consequences.
Thus as the U.S. announced another round of sanctions against officials here over the perceived erosion of freedoms, I'm wondering have they thought this through? This move comes one year after the implementation of the National Security Law. And while you can argue the merits of the NSL, what is certain is the law brought a quick end to the rioting. And that is not to suggest that the NSL vanquished the extremists. On the contrary, some have transitioned to terrorist activity, with bomb plots and lone-wolf attacks on police. As a result, the police remain on alert with high levels of vigilance. Along with the sanctions came a warning about doing business in Hong Kong. That fell on stony ground given Hong Kong's stout economy that companies ignore at their peril. But the question needs asking, do sanctions work or are these moves counterproductive? When China launched the NSL, the U.S. responded with immediate measures against Hong Kong officials and individual police officers. Yet, there is no evidence of any impact. Indeed, some people see sanctions as affirmation that the U.S. sought regime change here and felt vindicated to be named. Even policymakers view sanctions as blunt instruments, more manifestations of frustration than a serious attempt to resolve differences. Moreover, when dealing with a strong opponent like China, sanctions can give rise to the very thing you intended to avoid. When the U.S. Congress banned China from collaborating on the International Space Station, what happened? Within ten years, China had its own Space Station. In responding to the perceived threat, the U.S. spurred the Chinese on, thereby bypassing the West in the process. The same is happening on a broad front; in computing, agriculture and infrastructure development. Former U.S. Consul General to Hong Kong, Kurt Tong, makes a case that sanctions and other economic prohibitions aren't working. Instead, capital flows into Hong Kong remain robust because the sheer size of the China market means banks and companies must engage. So while U.S. Neocons cling to sanctions, he concludes the U.S. and Western nations have few options to influence China because the success of Hong Kong remains essential for the global economy. Oddly, having argued that sanctions don't work, he says that the U.S. should continue to apply them against individuals. He fears stopping sanctions will 'sends the wrong signal'. And with that, he sums up how naive, disjointed and ineffective is the U.S. approach. It's all about gestures because business trumps everything. And the Chinese, who are pragmatic above all else, know this. Of course, you could argue that America's greatest asset for contesting China is its military. But I'd assert it's the U.S. dollar. Of all global trade transactions, some 41 per cent occurs in U.S. dollars. Whereas the RMB only makes up one per cent. This fact affords America leverage over the World's economy while protecting U.S. citizens by allowing them to access cheap goods. In reality, the American people are paying for Chinese goods with 'paper money' printed to keep the U.S. financial system afloat. Plus, with well over 90 per cent of global financial transactions in U.S. dollars, the Americans have an advantage. Hence the U.S. has a trade surplus in services and a deficit in goods with China. Should the RMB ever gain traction in the World's financial system, the U.S. would be in serious trouble. While China is exploring options that rival the dominant US-dollar mechanism, including blockchain, these look some way off. But if the U.S. did opt to weaponise the dollar then China would likely respond with its own system. These days China no longer shrugs off sanctions to do nothing. Instead, it is willing to hit back. Confident in the power offered by its vast market, it can deny access that hits hard. Ask the Australian wine industry, which suffered a 96% drop in exports to China, its best costumer. Ask Nike how sales are going in China; down 59% after the company became embroiled in the cotton saga. Yet, as the American Chamber of Commerce made clear, the appeal of Hong Kong remains undiminished. Excellent infrastructure, robust rule of law, safe streets and access to the Mainland all work in Hong Kong's favour. As proof, AmCham invested in a new site in Central to foster business. Equally, The Economist rated Hong Kong top of the league for 'normalcy' during Covid, while inward foreign investment is the world's third highest. At the same time, property prices continue to rise, as unemployment moves below five percent. Say no more. 18/7/2021 1 Comment The Dirty Dozen "These anti-vaccine activists operate on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and Twitter, reaching more than 59 million followers." Research from the U.S. claims that 12 people are responsible for most of the misinformation spread about Covid-19 vaccines. A report by The Center for Countering Digital Hate documents how this dirty dozen, some with medical qualifications, fostered suspicions and outright rejection of vaccines. In the process, they may have stalled efforts to counter Covid-19 by feeding on the public's gullibility.
This week, President Biden sought to blame the social media companies "They're killing people. The only pandemic we have is among the unvaccinated." Meanwhile, his spokeswomen claimed China and Russia are responsible for some of the misinformation. Given that it's a game all governments play, it's safe to say they are all at it, including the U.S. The CCDH report concludes the 12 named individuals — one a Kennedy -- harnessed existing fears within communities, including along racial lines. Hence, it's argued that Black, Latino, and Native Americans suffer disproportionately high rates of Covid-19. Further, the report highlights the profound impact when people take most of their information, unverified, from social media. After the events of 2019, this comes as no surprise to us in Hong Kong. Outright lies propagated by a few, entered the public mindset as the gospel truth; death trains and mass rapes are examples. These anti-vaccine activists operate on Facebook, YouTube, Instagram and Twitter, reaching more than 59 million followers. When you then extrapolate the trickle effects into the wider community, the footprint is global. And with plenty of conspiracy theorists and Karens out there, the appeal of the dirty dozen is clear. Here's how it works. On 19 March 2020, the website Biohackinfo.com falsely claimed that Bill Gates planned to use a Covid-19 vaccine to monitor people through an injected quantum-dot spy software. Two days later, traffic started flowing to a YouTube video on the idea. Soon it hit two million views. Then Roger Stone — a former adviser to U.S. President Donald Trump — discussed the theory on a radio show, adding that he'd never trust a coronavirus vaccine that Gates had funded. The New York Post covered the interview but didn't debunk the notion. Then that article was liked, shared or commented on by over one million people on Facebook. That's better performance than most mainstream media news stories. How you rein-in this activity to decide what is legitimate comment and falsehood, is fraught with challenges. With its much-vaunted First Amendment, the U.S. will struggle to tackle this issue. The same applies elsewhere. Moreover, given the deep-seated mistrust of governments in some sectors, any effort to 'police' the Internet may drive the lunatic fringe deeper underground. So, good luck with that. We're at the point where these influencers have persuaded many not to get a free, life-saving vaccine, and those people are dying at a rate of 99-to-1 compared to the vaccinated. You could argue that this is Darwinism at work, with the dirty dozen are killing their base. 14/7/2021 2 Comments Let Rip "The people have unlocked themselves and marked the occasion by inserting flares up their bottoms" Oh boy, this is going to be interesting to watch. Boris Johnson is intent on relaxing England's Covid restrictions on 19 July. While around 68 per cent of the British adult population has received at least one dose of a Covid-19 vaccine, and just over half are now fully vaccinated, the data on new cases is less encouraging. These surged with 221,000 people testing positive in the UK in the week to 11 July.
Am I comfortable with this approach? Not really, because the pandemic reminds us that we are all connected, and the unfolding crisis in one country can impact every country. That's especially so when Hong Kong and the UK have such close contacts. Although sitting 6,000 miles away, at least we will have time to put the barriers up if it all goes awry. But, wait a minute, aren't direct flights from the UK already banned? Yes, but we still have rare cases arriving here by around-the-houses routes. In fairness, Boris did ask that people take personal responsibility and wear masks when appropriate. Then again, why bother with any restrictions? The footage this weekend of England fans running amok in London while the boys and girls in blue skulked away suggest it's all rather academic. The people have unlocked themselves and marked the occasion by inserting flares up their bottoms. Forget all the talk of football as the beautiful game — there is nothing appealing in a lardy lad with a firework sticking out of his bum. Where do these people think they are, the PTU Officer's Mess? When this particular practice came into favour, I'm not sure. What is the cultural significance? Although, it does appear popular given the number of pictures and video clips circulating. Also, getting your kit off, waving your man-bits about and throwing beer accompanied the Hershey highway action. No doubt, an anthropologist will secure a grant to study all this. Is it a right of passage to manhood or some form of fertility dance? What also struck me was the absence of the police as the fans ran amok. Maybe the cops are adhering to Prof Clifford Stott's 'Elaborated Social Identity Model' and keeping their distance in fear of radicalising the fans. Stott is well-known in Hong Kong for advocating that the mere sight of police officers causes spasms of disorder and the breakdown of civilisation as we know it. Better to let the mob run riot than taking enforcement action that may lead to people being upset. I suppose the saving grace is that the police's absence meant they didn't need to take the knee. Moreover, some yobs balls on fire are, rightly, a lower priority. Meanwhile, with people sticking flares up their bottoms, personal responsibility for Covid-19 precautions feels like a stretch. Once again, Johnathan Pie sums it up with eloquence. 10/7/2021 2 Comments Vietnam Part Deux “I want to talk about happy things man!” protested President Joe Biden when pressed by reporters about the withdrawal from Afghanistan. Here we go again. History is repeating like a bad Chung King curry. How else are we to judge the withdrawal from Afghanistan, with troops skulking away, while the zealots of the Taliban are on the march again. The parallels with Vietnam are striking and uncanny.
I don't blame the brave men and women who bore arms. They answered the call and did their best under trying circumstances. Once again, the culprits in this shameful episode are the politicians, who send young people into battle with ill-defined objectives and no end-game. Unlike Vietnam, the Brits played a role this time as part of NATO. In 2001, Tony Blair jumped in with both feet, although, of course, none of his kids would be doing the fighting. As a consequence of Blair's decision, 457 British soldiers died for no discernible reason other than hubris. With commendable foresight, Harold Wilson, the former Labour PM, had the savvy to keep Britain out of the Vietnam war. But, unfortunately, Tony Blair lacked that critical skill of forward-planning and something called a backbone, proving all too willing to do the bidding of Bush. Iraq is another example of a shockingly misjudged invasion. These British victims join an estimated 65,600 Afghan soldiers, 2,420 Americans, 159 Canadians, 89 French, 57 Germans, 53 Italians and 321 other assorted nationalities killed. At the same time, the Taliban lost 51,000 plus. Then you have 3,937 contractors killed—finally, an estimated 47,245 civilian men, women and children. Tens of thousands were injured. According to charity Save The Children, an average of five children were killed or wounded every day for the past 14 years in Afghanistan. That data can't capture the human toll on the families, the wounded, the smashed communities. Let's remember the particular penchant for drone strikes on Afghan wedding parties. Seeking to excuse the killing of 40 plus, including several toddlers during one such strike, a U.S. spokesman asserted, "Who holds a wedding in the middle of the desert? We know what was going on". And with that statement, he summed up the clueless approach of the Western forces. A lack of cultural awareness, wilful blindness and a 'we had to destroy it to save it' attitude underscores the mindset. The U.S. has spent a stunning total of $2.26 trillion on the war. That's just under 10 per cent of the U.S. national debt in 2020. Think what you could do with that; new hospitals, refurbished roads, bridges and airports. The Defense Department's latest 2020 report said war-fighting costs totalled $815.7 billion. That covers the operating expenses from fuel and food to Humvees, weapons and ammunition, from tanks and armoured vehicles to aircraft carriers and airstrikes. Although America first invaded to retaliate against al-Qaida and rout its hosts, the Taliban, the U.S. and NATO soon pivoted to a more open-ended mission: nation-building on a massive scale. Washington has poured over $143 billion into that goal. Of that, $88 billion went to training, equipping and funding Afghan military and police forces. Another $36 billion went on reconstruction projects, education and infrastructure. Then $4.1 billion has gone to humanitarian aid for refugees—finally, the campaign to deter Afghans from selling heroin around the world cost over $9 billion. As part of the nation-building, the West sought to shoe-horn in a liberal democracy model on a tribal nation with no history nor hinterland of such systems. That failed. The so-called democratic government is corrupt to the core and so widely reviled even the Taliban look more welcome to some sectors. Plus, the reason for going to war was dubious at best. While the Taliban did shelter al-Qaida forces, it's not clear that Bin Laden was there at the time. Later, he turns up in Pakistan, a supposed U.S. ally. Not only that, he lives next door to Pakistan's top military academy. That's where Seal Team 6 caught up with Bin Laden. Did the entire enterprise prove a colossal waste of human life, capital and time? Was it an honourable effort? Did it make the world safer? Of course, the NATO forces could win battles and take ground, but without a stable, trusted government in place couldn't translate those victories into anything meaningful. It's difficult not to conclude, as a resurgent Taliban gains ground, the effort was pointless. Helpfully the West left behind a massive haul of weapons that may now fall into the wrong hands. Meanwhile, Bush and Blair, the decision-makers, are busy accounting for their missteps by twisting the history. At each attempt, Blair looks more haunted because the truth will always be there. “I want to talk about happy things man!” protested President Joe Biden when pressed by reporters about the withdrawal. In Parliament, Boris Johnson sought to produce the best spin he could. Finally, a few conservatives MPs had the decency to acknowledge "it looks a bit like the last days of Vietnam, an unprecedented and hurried exit with no commitment". Reports of flag lowering in secret and the NATO forces sneaking away from bases without bothering to tell their Afghani counterparts doesn’t sound reassuring. At one location, the local militia only knew the Americans had gone when looters entered the base. The withdrawal is out of sight of the media because the imagery portrays defeat. Here's what happens next; civil war, millions displaced, thousands dead, and a new threat from the emboldened, rearmed Taliban. As the Taliban tighten their grip, heroin production will surge to fund their rebuild of an Islamic state. Along the way, their efforts will destabilise the region, including the border with China's sensitive Xinjiang province. Before that, minority groups face the terrible decisions of either up and leave — if that's possible - to convert to Islam or face death. This ethnic cleansing is a direct result of NATO leaving. In 1992, under Taliban rule, Hindus and Sikhs had to wear yellow armbands. Expect more of the same and worse as a brutal theocracy takes over. In the West, late in the evening, a mother will sit in silence asking what her son died for? Did he make the world safer? Did he free an oppressed group? At best, she can take some comfort that for a brief window of time, Afghan girls got an education, with some semblance of order attained. Maybe you could argue that a blunted al-Qaida forestalled more attacks. But, unfortunately, all is about to be reversed. The Afghans must be asking themselves why they bothered to trust the West, given the awful fate that now awaits them. Meanwhile, the U.S. and the West emerge from Afghanistan diminished on the World-stage. So next time, and there will be the next time, the politicians need to pause, and question are we prepared to stay the course? Or will we again lower flags after dark to sneak away, leaving another bloody mess behind? Because without an integrated military and political plan, these ventures are death-producing follies of monumental proportions. Surely, we can do better. 4/7/2021 4 Comments The Changing of the Guard "What sweeping reforms did former AOs Anson Chan and Donald Tsang bring during their decades of governance? Not much." With the usual hyperventilating, critics came out in numbers to slam the appointment of John Lee to the role of Chief Secretary. Lee, a former Deputy Commissioner of Police and the incumbent Secretary for Security, is the first former member of the disciplined services to hold the position.
While the ascent of police officers to top positions in government will primarily be analysed from a security perspective, a more compelling and largely ignored aspect is perhaps the desire to bring a 'can-do' attitude to the civil service. But, of course, the upper echelons of government is traditionally reserved for members of the administrative officer (AO) cadre. So I suspect a few noses are out of joint and that fed the bleating. Most commentators agree that Beijing's trust in the AO cadre has waned because they sat on the fence during the civil unrest of 2019, biding their time. That's not to suggest that these officials took a political stance, far from it. Instead, they adopted their usual wait and see attitude. As Bob Dylan asserted, "And don't speak too soon. For the wheel's still in spin. And there's no tellin' who that it's namin'. For the loser now will be later to win." Thus, the police were fighting alone without the back-up of the rest of the civil service. It soon dawned on the heads of the other disciplined services, which way the wind was blowing. They then came out in support to provide manpower and logistics. Some of the criticisms of Lee's suitability for the job are laughable. For example, people alleged he's inexperienced and unsuited to the task. That's after four decades in government, including holding down a ministerial post during a crisis. Yet, the same people want a 24-year-old running Hong Kong, a young man who has never had a job nor organised anything beyond street protests. Lee's replacement as Secretary for Security, former Commissioner of Police, Chris Tang, sparked mutterings of a police state taking shape. Give me a break, please. That's palpable nonsense and defies reality. Are not the independent judiciary still in place? The last time I looked, the guys and gals in wigs were still there. So, it's a stretch to claim we've become a police state. After all, critics continue to voice their criticisms, including me aiming at the government's failure to tackle many issues. And while I agree Beijing has placed a greater emphasis on security, that's something to be expected after the mob ransacked our parliament. Moreover, if the powers exercised by the police in Hong Kong are the definition of a 'police state', how does that sit against the more draconian public order laws in the UK? How about the laws that curtail free speech in Scotland? I could go on. Nonetheless, the appointment of Lee and Tang represents a change. It speaks to a concern about the effectiveness and willingness of the Hong Kong civil service to do its job. What sweeping changes did former AOs Anson Chan and Donald Tsang bring during their decades of governance? Not much. Poverty remained unaddressed, while the housing shortage was never tackled in a meaningful way. Instead, these mandarins applied the usual rote consultations, a plodding approach, no real change, and then tea and medals. Moreover, while Beijing may have doubts, the AOs still are dominant. Groomed to lead Hong Kong since colonial times, I'd opine that many in this group have grown too comfortable, pompous, adept at deflection and unwilling to deliver the initiatives that Hong Kong needs. Some of these people proved more twisty shifty than a twisty shifty thing. The AO cadre continued to function after 1997 much as it had before. Endless meetings, bureaucratic machinations and disdain for anyone who dared to question their right to rule the roost. I had the misfortune to attend meetings with these people. 'Yes, Minister' came to mind, except it wasn't as funny. As a consequence for many years, it's evident that several key departments have become moribund. Loitering in their offices, locked into process and analysis to the point of paralysis, not much tangible happens. As a result, many enforcement issues remain unaddressed, as the recent fire in Aberdeen Harbour demonstrated. With some boats illegally occupied, and packed on moorings, the risk was evident. Sure, we will see a flurry of activity after such an event, but it's soon back to the office and heads down. Meanwhile, the police by the nature of their role must be on the streets, dealing with whatever lands in their lap. They need to be proactive on crime to prevent things from getting out of hand. By default, the police are in direct contact with the community without the ability to hide away. In the process, the police take the flak for matters beyond their control. Take on-street parking as an example. In crowded Hong Kong, without adequate off-street parking, street obstruction is rampant. Yet, the police could ticket cars all day and still not make a dent in the issue because such actions only have a short-term impact. Meanwhile, the policy for parking rests with the Transport Department. A failure to coordinate an approach across departments to ensure adequate off-street parking and enforcement penalties that bite creates the situation we see. The police are left holding the problem. And this applies across a raft of issues. I saw with illegal land occupation, departments shifting responsibility with breathtaking audacity. Had the same amount of time and energy been spent tackling the matter, departments could have resolved the issue years ago. That's not to say the police are themselves are incapable of shifting responsibility; they've had to learn and play that game. Plus, officers can adopt an attitude that gives a low priority to matters that citizens feel deserve a focus. So, for instance, a barking dog is hardly gripping stuff for a cops but a real issue if you live next door. I suppose if the appointment of former senior police officers to top jobs in the civil service can achieve anything, it should be shaking up the current complacency and lack of focus on results. So let's see how this unfolds. 27/6/2021 3 Comments The Modern Witch Hunters "Sorry, there is no evidence that ET is here, has been here or is likely to be here soon" When as a species we started to realise our immense loneliness in a vast universe, a deep unsettling fear took hold. Today we know that our planet is circling an unremarkable star — on the edge of the Milky Way — our position daunting and precarious against the vastness of time and space. Consider that, on average, most species last four million years. No wonder we went running for the protection of Gods in any form.
Likewise, some folks amongst us want to believe that aliens will arrive with an advanced culture and technology to save us. Hence, they hope our kind may survive into the long future by journeying out to the stars with the help of our new intergalactic friends. But, on that note, a word of caution. History tells us that when an advanced civilisation encounters a less well-developed society, the latter soon collapses. Remember the Aztecs? That’s why Captain Kirk had to follow the ‘Prime Directive'. Thus, in recent weeks, anticipation built, awaiting the US government's report on unidentified aerial phenomena (UAP). Besides the usual collection of UFO fanboys, normally rational types engaged in wild speculation. Would we finally get to see the alien cadavers from Roswell? Talk of captured flying saucers and other out of this world treasures summoned up images from Independence Day. Then, as the report dropped, the sense of disappointment was palpable. No alien bodies, no flying saucers. Nothing that rational types hadn't already concluded. Sorry, there is no evidence that ET is here, has been here or is likely to be here soon. The report produced by the Office of the Director of National Intelligence focused on 144 reports of UAP. While the investigation sought to explain events from a national security perspective, it touched upon the alien UFO thing by default. Mike West gives a detailed breakdown of the report here. He can be satisfied that the findings confirm many of his judgments. In a previous blog, I covered West's work on the famous 'Gimbal' and 'Gofast' clips. In the 144 reports considered, a good number are single observer events without any corroborating evidence—no radar footage nor video to support the claims of human witnesses. And, of course, we already know how unreliable witnesses can be, given our inability to judge distances and motion. Likewise, in instances that the detection system did spot something, anomalies and system limitations caused misinterpretations. Again, as West demonstrates, this was almost certainly the case with the 'Gimbal' clip. West faced considerable resentment when he questioned the reports of naval aviators. How dare he challenge these highly trained 'Top Guns’? Well, in truth, West was correct because even ‘Maverick’ is operating with a Mark-One eyeball and a human brain, both of which are fallible. Moreover, organs developed for hunting on the African savanna aren't well-adapted to discerning objects at vast distances moving laterally, especially when the observer is also moving at speed. Airborne clutter, such as blown litter and wayward balloons, accounted for some sightings. On occasions, because only one system tracked these objects, it proved impossible to get triangulation to measure actual speed and direction. A high percentage of these UAP/UFO reports came from the Navy, and the vicinity of military bases. These incidents raised the specter of foreign powers spying. Yet, collection bias means that such locations are more likely to spot stuff because they are looking for it. After all, guards and sensor systems are operating for that specific purpose. So, in summary, the US government is going away to do more study. But, cutting through all the jargon, it's clear they've found nothing alien or that exciting. In an established pattern, the true believers and conspiracy nut jobs will dismiss the report as another cover-up. Not for them rational analysis dwelling on hard evidence, with the crunching of data. Instead, with a zealots fever, they'll press on looking for ET in every wind-blown plastic bag or temperature inversion. These folks are the latter-day witch hunters. |
AuthorWalter De Havilland was one of the last of the colonial coppers. He served 35 years in the Royal Hong Kong Police and Hong Kong Police Force. He's long retired. Archives
October 2021
|
RSS Feed