Categories
Environment

[1095] Of little battles in the Southern Ocean

In the Southern Ocean where the whales swim, amid tussle between Japanese whalers and conservationists, the Japanese whaling factory ship Nisshin Maru is on fire:

Feb. 15 (Bloomberg) — A sailor is missing after a fire broke out on board a Japanese whaling vessel sailing off the coast of Antarctica, New Zealand’s maritime authority said.

Most of the crew of the Nisshin Maru was evacuated to other vessels in the Japanese government-run fleet and about 20 sailors remaining on board brought the fire under control, said Steve Corbett, a spokesman for Maritime New Zealand.

With a crew missing and the ship incapacitated by fire in the rough open sea, the Japanese has called for helped. The Greenpeace’s Esperanza is responding to the distress signal and this is the third distress call it responded to in six days.

Earlier, there were clashes between the Japanese whaling fleet and Sea Shepherd Conservation Society. Sea Shepherd has been the most aggressive conservationist group so far as far as this whaling season is concerned. Its ship, the Robert Hunter and Japanese whaling Kaiko Maru, which was hunting whales in the Southern Ocean whale sanctuary, collided:

Anti-whaling activists say one of their vessels and a Japanese whaling ship have collided near the Ross Sea, sparking a distress call from the Japanese crew.

Each side is blaming the other for the collision:

The two sides blamed each other for the clash near Antarctica late on Monday which holed a Sea Shepherd Conservation Society ship, the Robert Hunter.

According to The Age:

In nearly 20 years of protest against Japanese whalers, there have been other clashes on the water. But never has such a determined attempt been made to disable the fleet.

The small US-based Sea Shepherd Conservation Society and its 60-odd black-clad activists upped the ante this week to the point that Greenpeace, the whalers’ usual foe, now risks being seen as ineffectual.

There is a decade-old moratorium on whale hunting in the area but the international ban is being practically ignored by Japan. Also this week, Japan unsuccessfully organized a forum aimed to undo the moratorium:

Only 35 of the IWC’s 72 members took part in the meeting, with 26 anti-whaling countries, including the US, Britain and Australia, deciding to stay away. Their boycott drew an angry reaction from the pro-whaling nations, which accused them of “imperialism”.

The oddest about the clashes is that, when it involves human lives, the whales and the conservationists are helping each other out. For instance, during an earlier skirmish between Sea Sheppard and Nisshin Maru when two members of the former were missing, both declared truce and directed their effort into searching for the missing persons. Call it tragic comedy in the high seas but:

Two missing Sea Shepherd activists have been found safe in the Antarctic, and hostilities have resumed against the Japanese whaling fleet.

Sea Shepherd ships have since gone back to port for refuelling.

Of all distress signals, the third latest is probably the most serious. Not only there is fire on board Nisshin Maru, the ship stranded and a sailor missing, it is possible that the ship might be drifting to the world’s biggest Adelie penguin colony at Cape Adare, Antarctica, causing environmental damage through oil leakage. Greenpeace’s Esperanza is ready to aid the stranded ship and tow it to port. The Japanese however disagrees with theat assessment:

“There’s no threat of oil leakage at all, and no worries over environmental pollution from the Nisshin Maru,” said Kenji Masuda, of the Fisheries Agency.

And refusing Greenpeace’s offer:

A spokesman for the Tokyo-based Institute of Cetacean Research (ICR), which is carrying out the whaling, said other ships in the fleet could tow it from the area if required.

According to Defending Our Ocean, Esperanza has reached Nisshin Maru. There are several other ships nearby, including the US Coast Guard ship Polar Sea.

My take?

The whalers should just take up the offer and cut the season short.

In any case, Greenpeace’s conservation mission has turned into a rescue mission.

Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Some rights reserved

p/s — the body of the missing person has been recovered.

Categories
Conflict & disaster Earthly Strip

[1094] Of Earthly Strip: Four years of credible intel

There has been talk that the Bush administration might conduct an airstrike — or something greater in force — against Iran. I do think that the President is building a case in that direction. In the New York Times earlier:

WASHINGTON, Feb. 14 — President Bush said Wednesday that he was certain that factions within the Iranian government had supplied Shiite militants in Iraq with deadly roadside bombs that had killed American troops. But he said he did not know whether Iran’s highest officials had directed the attacks.

Mr. Bush’s remarks amounted to his most specific accusation to date that Iran was undermining security in Iraq. They appeared to be part of a concerted effort by the White House to present a clearer, more direct case that Iran was supplying the potent weapons — and to push back against criticism that the intelligence used in reaching the conclusions was not credible.

I think:

Some rights reserved by Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams. Photo of President Bush by NYT. Copyrights by NYT. Fair use.

Pardon me while I burst…

Categories
Economics Politics & government

[1093] Of RM46 billion vote of confidence? I have questions instead…

In the NST today:

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysia is back on the global investment map. A record RM46 billion was invested in 1,077 approved manufacturing projects last year by local and foreign investors, a 48 per cent jump from the RM31 billion invested in 2005.

The keyword is “approved“. A more important question is, how much was actually committed?

The article is comparing approved investment in 2006 against actual investment in 2005. Why the article does not compare approved investment in 2006 with approved in 2005? Or, why the article does not compare actual investment in 2006 with actual investment in 2005?

Further, it is more likely that the figures are nominal figures. An honest analysis would use real figures for comparison purpose.

Let us compare oranges to oranges, apples to apples.

More from the article:

Domestic investments amounted to RM25.8 billion, making up 56.1 per cent of the total approved investments, compared with RM13.1 billion or 42.2 per cent in 2005.

I wonder, how much of the RM25.8 approved domestic investment are actually approved investment related to the government?

The answer should be compared against the outcome of Mundell-Fleming model.

Another question is, how does Malaysia perform against our neighbors? Regionally?

Finally, from Reuters (via):

KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) – Malaysia’s media has been trumpeting good news about the economy, and that is stoking speculation of an early election this year.

Hmm….

Categories
Liberty Society

[1092] Of liberalism, multicultural societies and multiculturalism

One of the characteristics of liberalism is tolerance. While that might be true of liberalism taken as a whole, as usual, I am interested in classical liberalism and will refer such liberalism as simply liberalism. This tolerance originates from the non-aggression axiom. While I understand the relationship between tolerance and the non-aggression axiom, I had a hard time trying to justify multiculturalism in the name of liberalism. It turns out that it is hard to justify because it is unjustifiable.

I had the impression that multiculturalism is the apex of tolerance where different people from very different backgrounds come and live together in harmony, respecting each others’ rights. This impression, that both are related to tolerance, has brought me to assume that liberalism actively supports multiculturalism by virtue that both share the characteristic of tolerance. That opinion further strengthened my opinion on the relationship between liberalism and multicultural societies; that a liberal society is a multicultural society and multicultural society is synonymous to multiculturalism.

After a couple of headaches, enlightenment rained upon me. I somehow began to realize the difference between the descriptive multicultural and the prescriptive multiculturalism. The former merely describes a state of a society without espousing what state should the society be. The latter actively advocates for a state of multicultural through policies collectively called multiculturalism. With that realization, I have come to the conclusion that liberalism is neutral of multicultural society and unsupportive of multiculturalism.

It must be noted that a multicultural society is the natural course of a liberal society. Be aware that this is not similar to stating that the only cause a multicultural society is liberalism.

Liberalism by its very nature is tolerant and a liberal society is a tolerant society. This tolerance exhibited by liberal societies attracts people from all over, especially from illiberal societies. While liberalism produces multicultural societies, multicultural societies are not the goal of liberalism. To make the idea clearer, multicultural society is a side effect of liberalism; liberalism indirectly causes the creation of multicultural societies. The relationship between liberalism and multicultural societies stops there and goes no farther.

To actively encourage the formation of a multicultural society is taking it one step farther; that is multiculturalism and not liberalism.

A pillar of liberalism is spontaneous order. The policies of multiculturalism contradict the spirit of spontaneous order. A liberal must not force to turn a society into a multicultural one. By force, I mean, the state, which has the monopoly of policing power, actively promoting multicultural society as an end. It is worth reiterating that a liberal society would sooner or later become multicultural unconsciously. Forcing the process to go faster is counterproductive. Just as we cannot force others to be free, we cannot force society to become multicultural.

While multicultural society is, depending on point of view — I certainly do see it as such — a positive unintended effect of liberalism, liberals themselves, or rather, liberal states, should be neutral on issues relating to multicultural societies. Such neutrality is essential because whether a society is multicultural or monocultural, it is not related to liberty. In an already liberal society when negative rights are secured, do we expect the state of multicultural to affect liberty in any way?

I would answer no.

I do believe that I was not the only that that had tried to say multiculturalism is part of liberalism. A lot of multiculturalists do call themselves as liberals and it is easy to understand how such confusion could occur.

As stated earlier, a creation of a multicultural society is a side effect — a symptom — of liberalism. Advanced liberal societies more often than not are multicultural societies. Those that misunderstood the relationship between liberalism and multiculturalism will try to emulate these advanced liberal societies to the letters, instead of to the spirit. The strong relationship between liberalism and multicultural societies blurs the causality and causes many liberals — I would call these liberals as neophytes — to accept multicultural societies as central to liberalism.

Again, multicultural society is a symptom of liberalism; a multicultural society is simply a sign of a maturing liberal society. Multicultural society is not central to liberalism while multiculturalism is out of the equation.

For us to emulate advanced liberal societies, we need to secure the roots of liberalism, not the symptoms of liberalism. For once the roots are secured, the symptoms will come in good time.

Categories
Photography

[1091] Of rainforest canopy from the ground

The other day, I found myself hugging trees:

Some rights reserved. By Mohd Hafiz Noor Shams.

I am too tired to say anything else. So, good night.