SAVING IS SIN, SPENDING IS VIRTUE

Saving is Sin, Spending is Virtue...

"SAVING IS SIN, SPENDING IS VIRTUE"

from Kanti Risal
Japanese save a lot. They do not spend much. Also Japan exports far more
than it imports. Has an annual trade surplus of over $100 billions. Yet
Japanese economy is considered weak, even collapsing.


Americans spend, save little. Also US import more than it exports. Has an
annual trade deficit of over $400 billion. Yet, the American economy is
considered strong and trusted to get stronger.


But where from do Americans get money to spend?


They borrow from Japan , China and even India . Virtually others save for
the US to spend. Global savings are mostly invested in US, in dollars.
India itself keeps its foreign currency assets of over $50 billions in US
securities. China has sunk over $160 billion in US securities. Japan 's
stakes in US securities is in trillions.


Result:


  The US has taken over $5 trillion from the world. So, as the world saves
for the US , Americans spend  freely. Today, to keep the US consumption
going, that is for the US economy to work, other countries have to remit
$180 billion every quarter, which is $2 billion a day, to the US !
Otherwise the US economy would go for a six. So will the global economy.
The result will be no different if US consumers begin consuming less.


A Chinese economist asked a neat question. Who has invested more, US in
China , or China in US? The US has invested in China less than half of
what China has invested in US. The same is the case with India . We have
invested in US over $50 billion. But the US has invested less than $20
billion in India.


Why the world is after US?


The secret lies in the American spending, that they hardly save. In fact
they use their credit cards to spend their future income. That the US
spends is what makes it attractive to export to the US . So US imports
more than what it exports year after year.


The result:


The world is dependent on US consumption for its growth. By its deepening
culture of consumption, the US has habituated the world to feed on US
consumption. But as the US needs money to finance its consumption, the
world provides the money. It's like a shopkeeper providing the money to a
customer so that the customer keeps buying from the shop. If the customer
will not buy, the shop won't have business, unless the shopkeeper funds
him. The US is like the lucky customer. And the world is like the helpless
shopkeeper financier.


Who is America 's biggest shopkeeper financier? Japan of course. Yet it is
Japan which is regarded as weak. Modern economists complain that Japanese
do not spend, so they do not grow. To force the Japanese to spend, the
Japanese government exerted it self, reduced the savings rates, even
charged the
savers. Even then the Japanese did not spend (habits don't change, even
with taxes, do they?). Their traditional postal savings alone is over $1.2
trillions, about three times the Indian GDP. Thus, savings, far from being
the strength of Japan , has become its pain.


  Hence, what is the lesson?


  That is, a nation cannot grow unless the people spend, not save. Not
just spend, but borrow and spend. Dr. Jagdish Bhagwati, the famous
Indian-born economist in the US , told Manmohan Singh that Indians
wastefully save. Ask them to spend, on imported cars and, seriously, even
on cosmetics! This will put India on a growth curve. "Saving is sin, and
spending is virtue." Before you follow this neo economics, get some fools
to save so that you can borrow from them and spend.


  This is what US has successfully done in last few decades......

Disobeying Immoral Laws

It was sad, painful and infuriorating when true Afrikaners' value was measured by their loyalty to the South African Apartheid Regime (from British Collonial Rule until the end of Afrikaner-only Rule in 1994 -- more than a centuary later). Those of us who resisted and refused to obey immoral laws paid a price higher than what we've "budgetted" for. But the price you pay for your brother's feedom is gaining your own life. Their freedom is freeing you from your own bondage and giving you back your own humanuity. Our collective freedom and humanity is MUCH greater than our individual freedoms.

In this fight against apartheid in South Africa, many Jews and Palestinian friends joined this resistance and struggle. Together we achieved the almost impossible. Nothing less is required today in Palestine/Israel.  

Defining the centre point of negotiations

When a partner in negotiations constantly re-defines the centre point of a just and fair outcome it destroys peace; To achieve justice, we are compelled to GIVE justice... Which requires sacrifice... But guarantees freedom... its like constantly shouting, "I want peace", but at the same time making it impossible through my actions for the other side to walk this journey with me. 

LOOSING MOSES ON THE HIGHWAY

LOOSING MOSES ON THE HIGHWAY: "We all stray. We all violate some commandments and do not adequately honor others. We are human. But the commandments bind us together. They work to keep us from revering the false covenants that destroy us. These false covenants have a powerful appeal. They offer a sense of security and empowerment. They tempt us to be God. They tell us the things we want to hear and believe. They appear to make us the center of the universe. They make us feel we belong. But these false covenants, covenants built around exclusive communities of race, gender, class, religion and nation, inevitably carry within them the denigration of other who we exclude. The false covenants divide us. The covenant offered by the commandments, the covenant of life, is the covenant of love. It is a covenant that recognises that all life is sacred and love is the force that makes life together possible." -- Chris Hedges

AN OPEN LETTER: Elected Members of the Sri Lankan Parliament

AN OPEN LETTER: Elected Members of the Sri Lankan Parliament
1 February 2009
From Hannes Siebert

Dear Hon Members,

Looks like the end of the sad and tragic war is in sight. I would
imagine that you are preparing for a process of negotiating a lasting
solution for the country's challenges.

You are well aware of my position that there will be NO "winners" in a
war where so much human destruction took place on both sides of the
divide. Yes, the GOSL would probably defeat the LTTE in the next days
or weeks to come, but you are going to face the same situation that
the US faced after its "victory" in Iraq; what my country, Soth Africa
faced for 40 years every time they thought they defeated the
"terrorists'; what Israel is facing when it used all its power to
destroy and neutralize Hamas. It is NOT about Hamas, or the ANC or the
Sunni's... or the LTTE. Its about the spirit of the human being and
the historical evidence of what happens when we try and eliminate a
"people" or the enemy.

I am concerned for the spirit and well-being of the Sinhalese and
Tamils at this crucial point in time. All sides severely damaged its
own humanity in order to inflict this much damage to the other. My
question is how you are going to liberate and redeem your society
after the war? How are you going to enable healing and reconciliation.
How are you going to face the "dark" truths of the past ... because if
you are not going to face it, many more lives will have to pay the
price for our damaged selves.

I want to sincerely ask you to please consider ending the war as soon
as possible. The Sinhalese Government have shown that they have the
power to destroy the LTTE. Stop now. Let the LTTE leaders and those in
the GOSL that committed war crimes face an international criminal
tribunal and pay for their hate crimes. But save the soul of the
Sinhala nation by not destroying the lives of thousands of ordinary
Tamil people. You have won. Reach out your hand now. Claim the moment
and insist an inclusive Tamil team comes forward and negotiate a
lasting solution under the auspices of India, the US, EU, Norway and
Japan. Create a strong national dialogue process that will not only
provide the space for negotiations, but also facilitate national
healing...

I understand that you do not want ceasefire now when you believe
victory is in sight. Allow me to use a metaphor of myself: When you
finally overpowered me, got me on the ground and are able to kill
me... and you let me live, does that not redeem your own and my
humanity? By letting me live, at that moment, you break the barrier
between us, our humanity connects. This act also allow for a moment of
reconciliation and healing. By killing me, the injustice and act of
destruction keeps the fire alive in my brother who will come back and
try and kill you when he feels strong enough. This is a moment the
country can start the long journey of healing the wounds and redeeming
itself. One of the most powerful instruments we posses as humans, is
the ability to be merciful to our enemy.

The responsibility of every leader at this moment is to restore the
sacredness and dignity of life. Never in history was it EVER too soon
to stop the killing of innocent human beings! If you want to find a
lasting solution that will secure the safety of all people on the
island, you will need to reach out your hand before there are nobody
left to take your hand.

I pray for your strength, wisdom and humility (at a time of victory).

In the honorable name of Peace,
Hannes Siebert
Former facilitator: Sri Lanka One-Text Initiative
Chairman: Peace Appeal Foundation

Talks for the sake of Talks; War for the sake of Peace

SRI LANKA: When Negotiations Fail…
Talks for the sake of Talks; War for the sake of Peace

By Hannes Siebert and Chanya Charles


I. Introduction

Located just a few miles off the coast of India, the island of Sri Lanka is widely recognized for its natural beauty, rich cultural heritage, and the longest continuous history of Buddhism of any predominately Buddhist nation. The country’s virulent civil war, however, is often what captures the attention of international news headlines. Sri Lanka’s Sinhalese, Tamil, and Muslim ethnic communities have been engaged in a violent internal conflict for more than 30 years. Clashes between the Sinhalese-dominated Government of Sri Lanka (GOSL) and the Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) have led to over 100,000 deaths, more than 200,000 refugees, and up to 600,000 internally displaced persons. Despite repeated attempts at negotiations since 1985, the conflict continues.

“Democratic” Sri Lanka has a history of popular elections and was one of the first countries in the world to enjoy universal suffrage in 1931. But the inability of the political leadership representing the different ethnic communities to share power equitably led to a series of broken agreements and acute mistrust between the communities. Sri Lanka’s political history chronicles the challenges of protecting minority interests in a parliamentary system in which majority-minority relations are strained by competing ethnic nationalist agendas.

Sri Lanka has earned increasing international attention due to the U.S.-India strategic South Asia partnership, growing trade relations with Iran and China, and the designation of the LTTE as a terrorist organization. Beyond strategic interests, the international community has been heavily involved in attempting to address the war in Sri Lanka. There is a well-resourced international monitoring mission, facilitation support from Norway as a committed international partner, and active engagement by countries like the United States, Japan, India, China, and many European countries.

In addition to international efforts at peacebuilding, Sri Lanka has three peace secretariats, approximately 150 local peace forums, more than 6,000 mediation boards across the country, an active and well-trained civil society, and an elaborately structured and stakeholder-owned negotiations forum, the One-Text Initiative (OTI).

After the breakdown of the formal negotiations (Track 1) brokered by the Norwegian Government in 2003, the One-Text Initiative was established as a confidential dialogue space. The key parties’ hope was to create a stakeholder-owned safety net for the formal negotiations, rebuild confidence between the parties, and jointly generate more realistic options for the parties to consider through a “single text” methodology. Most of the key parties joined – including the LTTE as stakeholder observer. In its first two years it produced more than 89 “consensus” documents despite the absence of formal talks. The confidential dialogue forum continued its work quietly throughout the period of the war since 2006 and provided a safe space for parties to search for solutions and maintain key relationships. Some of its members were imprisoned and others received death threats, but all of them continued confidentially and publicly with their efforts to resolve the national conflict.

Sadly, despite the existence of both national and international peace initiatives, including the OTI, the conflict in Sri Lanka has escalated dramatically since November 2005. As the Sinhalese Government of President Mahinda Rajapakse came to power with a strong nationalist agenda, Tamil demands for independence grew stronger and the willingness to compromise diminished. Violence in Sri Lanka has reached unprecedented levels, with more than 11,000 people killed from 2006 to April 2008.

This chapter examines the One-Text Initiative’s impact on the country’s peace and negotiations process and why the Initiative was unable to prevent the gradual breakdown of the agreed-on ceasefire of 2002. In this contribution by one of the former facilitators and co-founding members of the “One-Text” process in Sri Lanka and the Program Director from the original donor implementing agency, the authors argue that lack of trust between the parties, the non-implementation of agreements, their competing ethnic nationalist agendas, and each group’s unrealistic and unfair expectations and demands of each other, dominated and undermined both the Track 1 negotiations as well as the One-Text process. They suggest that the absence of workable links and mechanisms between the Track 1 and Track 1 ½ (OTI) processes robbed each process of mutual benefits and disabled OTI to act as an effective safety net. The result was that Norway became the dominant story, a substitute for broken relationships and the punch bag of the parties. When negotiations failed at the top, the overall process was left with a symbolic Track 1 ½ (OTI) process in the middle of an unfolding war.

Finally, this chapter explores the mistakes of the past, ways to strengthen the “One-Text” dialogue, and identifies areas that can be addressed to re-build a peace process on the island.

(Contact hannessiebert@gmail.com for full chapter -- available in August 2009

Imperfect Bridges To Peace

National Peace Structures Study: Nepal, South Africa, Sri Lanka, Colombia, Israel/Palestine
Berghof Foundation/ Peace Appeal Fdn: 2006-9

Introduction by Hannes Siebert

Core Elements, Approaches and Trends:

Peace Structures by its nature are vulnerable and imperfect instruments that have the burden of helping a society cross the bridge from war or serious conflict, to a shared space that promises a sustainable or acceptable peace. To the leaders in a process that carries this burden to deliver peace on behalf of the people or the ideals they represent, these structures are temporary symbols of hope. We have seen in both Nepal and Colombia that the structures changed constantly as the needs of the peace process evolves and the working relationships between the parties mature. We have also sadly seen that when the relationships between the stakeholders further erode, in countries such as Sri Lanka, the “peace” instruments become self-serving and destructive to the very process they were suppose to sustain. These instruments are constantly vulnerable to be exploited for power-politics.

It is evident from looking at the different peace processes, that each conflict and peace process demands its own unique set of mechanisms and structures to meet the needs and address the dynamics of that specific process. Although we try to explore and define trends and common approaches from the experiences in each of these processes, the most important observation is that you cannot transplant models from one country to another. Both the advisors and stakeholders in each of these processes learned the hard way that such assumptions and quick fixes cause problems later in the peace process. It is essential that each process, structure and mechanism is authentic and designed by the stakeholders themselves, or in close collaboration with all stakeholders. Without the buy-in, agreement and ownership of all keys stakeholders of such structures, the mechanisms will inevitably fail – maybe not initially, but eventually. Such failures could lead to the breakdown of an entire process.

Stakeholders facing serious conflicts and process challenges often want to explore models that worked in other countries. Good “models” can be deceptive as we don’t always know how it evolved or the nuances of its context. Sometimes we would be better served learning from our own and other’s failed models. Most cultures in the world have practices, rituals and inherent assets that they drew on for centuries to survive. Building on and strengthening the good cultural assets in societies in conflict, is as important as finding best practice models from relevant international experiences. But the structural models are as important as the design and ownership of the process. Good structures and stakeholder intension can suffer greatly in bad processes, and the reverse is similarly true. It is therefore important to learn from the successes and failures from each process and structural models, and integrate these lessons into future designs.

Generating appropriate structural options for specific processes goes hand-in-hand with adapting or changing such structures to meet the political culture(s) of the stakeholders. The characteristics of the most sustainable processes and structures were ones created through collaborative process design where stakeholders, facilitators and advisors: (1) acknowledged the context and history of each process; (2) compensated and understood the limitations and strengths of the parties to the conflict; (3) accommodated levels of trust and miss-trust between the conflicting parties and their readiness to collaborate; (4) defined how the structures should create an environment and a reasonable possibility for the implementation of agreements – including local ownership and participation in national processes; (5) mobilized people and resources that could sustain the implementation of agreements and functioning of the structures; (6) created joined structures where former enemies could work together and share the responsibility and ownership of their agreements and the implementation thereof; (7) and lastly, recognized communication breakdowns and misunderstandings and found ways to enhance effective communication and collaboration based on the strengths and weaknesses of that specific political culture.

Although the design and composition of these structures differ from country to country, their purpose and roles are generally the same. The structures are created to establish conditions for political normalization and active, inclusive participation in the peace process; set up mechanisms that will protect the negotiations from the ongoing conflict; create joint implementation mechanisms; addressing the worst effects of political conflict at local level; create and maintain mechanisms that will investigate the causes of violence and intimidation, and actively combat the occurrence of violence and intimidation; implement mechanisms to settle differences and resolve conflicts; create a safe and acceptable space for change and more specifically, the negotiations process, and improve local monitoring capacity.

Core Elements of Peace Structures

Based on the 5 case studies (Nepal, Colombia, South Africa, Sri Lanka and Israel/Palestine) and the comparative worldwide survey of 15 national peace structures we cover in this study, we identified the following core elements, roles and functions of these structures:
Facilitate Dialogue and Communications between Stakeholders; Coordinate and Administer Negotiations Process; Implementation of Negotiated Agreements; Creating Joint Structures for Monitoring and Implementation; Communicating Peace, Negotiations Process and Managing Media Relations; Securing Peace at Community Level; Monitoring of Agreements and Implementation; Promoting Common Values and Process; Drafting and/or Supporting Agreements and Legislation; Coordinating and managing IDP’s and Conflict Victim’s Resettlement, Compensation and Rehabilitation; Redressing the Past and Investigating the Disappeared…