Peace for the World

Peace for the World
First democratic leader of Justice the Godfather of the Sri Lankan Tamil Struggle: Honourable Samuel James Veluppillai Chelvanayakam

Monday, January 23, 2017



 

President Trump began recasting America’s role in the global economy Monday, canceling an agreement for a sweeping trade deal with Asia that he once called a “potential disaster.”

Trump signed the executive order formally ending the United States’ participation in the Trans-Pacific Partnership in the Oval Office after discussing American manufacturing with business leaders in the Roosevelt Room. The order was largely symbolic — the deal was already essentially dead in Congress — but served to signal that Trump’s tough talk on trade during the campaign will carry over to his new administration.

Trump did not directly address the North American Free Trade Agreement on Monday as he had promised during the election. However, he repeated his threat to punish U.S. companies that build factories overseas and ship products back home — a charge he has primarily leveled at automakers with operations in Mexico. And his hard-line opening stance could portend a contentious renegotiation of the 22-year-old deal with Mexico and Canada that Trump’s senior advisers have called a top priority for the new administration.

“This abrupt action so early in the Trump administration puts the world on notice that all of America's traditional economic and political alliances are now open to reassessment and renegotiation,” said Eswar Prasad, trade policy professor at Cornell University. “This could have an adverse long-run impact on the ability of the U.S. to maintain its influence and leadership in world economic and political affairs.”

The TPP was one of former president Barack Obama’s signature efforts, part of a broader strategy to increase American clout in Asia and provide a check on China’s economic and military ambitions. Several of the executives Trump met with Monday initially had supported the agreement, while the chief architect of the administration’s trade policy, Commerce secretary nominee Wilbur Ross, was also once a booster for the deal.

But ending TPP was one of the clarion calls of Trump’s campaign, part of a global backlash against the drive toward greater internationalization that has defined the world economy since the end of World War II. British Prime Minister Theresa May, who is in the midst of navigating her country’s own break from established trading partners, is slated to visit with Trump later this week. A White House spokesman said meetings with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto are in the works.

“What we want is fair trade,” Trump said during his meeting with executives. “And we're gonna treat countries fairly, but they have to treat us fairly.”



Since the election, TPP has become politically toxic in both parties. On Monday, five Democratic senators introduced legislation that would require the president to notify each of the 11 other countries involved in the deal of the United States’ withdrawal. It would also block any so-called “fast track” approval of the agreement in the future. AFL-CIO President Richard Trumka hailed the president’s executive order and called for additional action.

“They are just the first in a series of necessary policy changes required to build a fair and just global economy,” he said in a statement.

On Monday, Trump highlighted his proposal for a border tax as a centerpiece of the administration’s trade policy. Dow Chemical Chief Executive Andrew Liveris, who was among the business leaders who met with Trump on Monday morning, said the border tax was discussed extensively. He said the executives were asked to return in 30 days with a plan to shore up the manufacturing industry.
“I would take the president at his word here,” Liveris said. “He’s not going to do anything to harm competitiveness. He’s going to actually make us all more competitive.”

Still, it remains unclear exactly how a border tax would be implemented. Testifying before the Senate finance committee last week, Trump’s nominee to lead the Treasury Department said any border tax would be targeted at specific businesses. However, the president does not have the power to levy taxes, and international trade experts have warned singling out companies could violate existing treaties.

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan has proposed allowing businesses that export goods to deduct many of their expenses, while those that import would not receive the same benefit. But in a recent interview with the Wall Street Journal, Trump dismissed the plan, known as border adjustment, as “too complicated.”

Economists have warned that many of Trump’s proposals — including suggestions that he would impose blanket double-digit tariffs on goods from Mexico and China — could backfire on the American economy by causing prices to rise or igniting a trade war. And business groups such as the U.S. Chamber of Commerce had lobbied extensively for passage of TPP, touting the deal as an engine of job growth and an important check on China’s growing ambitions.

“TPP withdrawal will slow U.S. [economic] growth, cost American jobs, & weaken U.S. standing in Asia/world,” said Richard Haas, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, said in a tweet early Monday. “China could well be principal beneficiary.”

But other industry groups argued that Trump’s approach would better leverage America’s status as the world’s largest economy. Scott Paul, president of the Alliance for American Manufacturing, said his group is hoping that opening up NAFTA could provide more leeway to combat currency manipulation in countries outside the agreement. His group, which represents both industry and unions, is also seeking more stringent rules of origin that dictate how much production must occur with member countries to qualify for free trade status.

“The details are going to matter a lot,” Paul said. “Renegotiating NAFTA obviously entails some risks and some rewards.”

Abe Wants to Be the Last Free Trade Samurai

Tokyo's ready to pick up the banner of the TPP abandoned by Trump -- if China lets it.
Abe Wants to Be the Last Free Trade Samurai

No automatic alt text available.BY WILLIAM SPOSATO-JANUARY 6, 2017

In an apparent exercise in futility, Japan’s parliament last month formally ratified the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade agreement, even though the ardent opposition of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump has, in the words of Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, made the 12-nation pact “meaningless.” Trump’s promise to discard the carefully crafted deal has left its erstwhile partner nations flat-footed, having wasted more than six years of negotiations.

But in Trump’s chaos, Abe sees opportunity. With Trump’s leanings toward protectionism, the Japanese prime minister is now in a position to pick up the reins in helping to promote trade among the increasingly interwoven economies of Asia.

“The upshot of Trump shifting America to a more protectionist policy is not that Japan follows him but that Japan leads the opposition to that movement,” Gerald Curtis, professor emeritus at Columbia University, said in a briefing to foreign media in Japan in late November.

Japan has so far avoided speaking explicitly about striking out on its own, hoping instead that traditionally free-trader Republicans will somehow persuade Trump to change his mind.

“It’s very important for us, as a country, to show ideal rules that we believe the world should aim for,” Abe told parliament before the final vote. “It will also positively impact the U.S., which is now in a transition.”

Japan is a somewhat unexpected standard-bearer for free trade. Throughout its economic boom in the 1970s and 1980s (before the sudden collapse of the “bubble economy” in 1990), it was widely attacked for having protectionist trade barriers, including straightforward high tariff levels and a myriad of technical requirements and administrative hurdles that other nations decried as trade barriers in disguise. This included numerous disputes over automobiles and agricultural products and a long, acrimonious 
battle in the 1990s over the mobile phone market that pitted Japan against the now-defunct Motorola. Even with some easing measures, tariffs are still high in many areas, especially for food imports. In what must be the world record for import levies, the tariff rate for foreign rice is currently set at 788 percent.

So why does Japan want to willingly slash its own tariffs and upset a farm constituency that has been at the center of keeping Abe’s Liberal Democratic Party in power for most of the past 50 years? As Nobel laureate Bob Dylan has said: “The times, they are a-changin’.

Agriculture is now just 1 percent of Japan’s GDP, and the number of farmers has fallen by more than 60 percent since 1985. With more solid support in urban areas and two-thirds control of both houses in parliament, Abe can afford to safely jettison his former friends.

Most importantly, cutting through the myriad of red tape in agriculture and elsewhere is a critical part of the economic program he has proudly dubbed “Abenomics.” The program, built around easy money from the central bank, a heavy dollop of government spending, and attempts at structural reform, has been less successful than hoped. There has been some positive elements in pushing up nominal growth in the economy, now forecast by the Bank of Japan at 2.5 percent for next year, and modest signs of wage inflation to help employees feel more willing to spend — but not the miracles Abe promised.

TPP gives the government the handy excuse it now needs to take unpopular reform measures meant to give a new push to the Abenomics program. Blaming outsiders for such “un-Japanese” actions is a popular political maneuver that even gets a special name: gai-atsu.

“This is a classic case of gai-atsu,” said Martin Schulz, a senior research fellow at the Fujitsu Research Institute in Tokyo. “Domestic negotiations for corporate and agricultural reforms were always linked to the needs of TPP. If there is no TPP, those negotiations would have to be set on a new basis, and this would result in further delays for the Abenomics structural reform plans.”

To be sure, it’s possible that opposition to TPP may be one of the many campaign promises dumped by Trump. But with the high level of scorn leveled at TPP by the president-elect, few people see an about-face as a possibility. Instead, it would need to be repackaged for the new administration, giving Trump a chance to claim victory and demonstrate his much-vaunted negotiating skills. Trump has said he would prefer new bilateral trade deals.

China hangs over the future of any Japanese-led trade deal. In touting TPP, U.S. President Barack Obama minced no words in calling it a way to ensure that China does not shape the new world of trade.

Indeed, although Abe may be keen to pick up the mantle of regional trade, China has its own ideas. At meetings in Beijing following Trump’s victory, the threat to free trade and globalization topped the agenda. Although Beijing distrusted TPP, which it saw — perhaps fairly — as an American-led bid to economically encircle and contain China, the country’s rulers are acutely aware that trade is the only way of sustaining the growth China needs. And with TPP potentially on its deathbed, China is pushing the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). The RCEP agreement was launched by the 10 members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations and now also includes Australia, India, Japan, New Zealand, and South Korea — and notably excludes the United States, giving it a China versus America veneer. With China left out of the first round of any TPP implementation, Beijing has been touting the benefits of RCEP, which would include no less than one-half of the world’s population. Beijing said in late December that it would like to see a deal in place by the end of this year.

But for corporate Japan, the RCEP model focusing on traditional trade barriers is less useful. With a declining domestic workforce as the nation ages, there is less interest in building plants in Japan to export goods elsewhere. Instead, the new Japan model is to build and sell locally. This works not only in Southeast Asia with large workforces at reasonable cost but also in the United States, where Toyota makes 70 percent of the cars it sells there.

In comparison, TPP represents a much more comprehensive approach that is better suited, supporters say, to today’s global supply chain, with rules on employment standards, health, and safety. Most crucially for Japanese companies, it also offers protection for investments made in any TPP country.

“TPP is the most advanced agreement in trade and investment for Asia, covering services and investor protection, which is increasingly important for investors in Asia,” Schulz said.

But in Schulz’s view, any trade pact without either the United States or China doesn’t reach the critical mass necessary in the view of potential partners. Therefore, in the absence of a eureka moment at the White House, he predicts that work will shift for now to RCEP negotiations, with TPP a potential second step.

“Japan alone will not really work. Other Asian nations will move only if it involves China,” Schulz said.

One issue, of course, is whether China and Japan can work together given their highly contentious relationship. Although public and private positions among nations can often vary, few doubt that there was real Chinese anger when a previous Japanese government in 2012 took direct ownership of the disputed Senkaku Islands, known to China as the Diaoyu, and when Abe paid a formal visit in December 2013 to the Yasukuni Shrine that includes convicted World War II-era leaders among those enshrined.

With the recent addition of the South China Sea, political and defense relations appear strained, but the picture is somewhat different in the economic sphere, with a quiet acknowledgement from both sides that they need each other.

All this leaves the incoming Trump administration in a dilemma. As the ubiquitous iPhone demonstrates, world trade is a much more complex business than making a product in one country and exporting to another. Although the phones are assembled in China, the components come from some 200 suppliers in more than 30 other countries, according to trade media (Apple does not disclose its suppliers), with many of these producing the highest-value components. With other nations having a huge stake in the current trade flows, a trade war with China will not be a bilateral affair.

“If there is a U.S.-China economic war, it is not a war between the U.S. and China; it is a war between the U.S. and every country in East Asia because of supply chains and other inter-relationships. All of the economies in this region, including Japan’s, are very much integrated with the Chinese economy,” said Columbia’s Curtis.

If he truly steps up to the plate, Abe can try to play the role of mediator in any U.S.-China dispute — or even team up with Japan’s historic rival to fight for a cause the United States has abandoned. The thought of Beijing and Tokyo standing together to defend free trade against Washington might seem surreal — but in the great geopolitical reshuffling, it may now be a reasonable course of action.

Photo Credit: David Mareuil/Anadolu Agency/Getty Images

7 takeaways from Tamil Nadu's Jallikattu protests

It shows how social media can be used as a vehicle to trigger social consciousness among the people.

The nine-day long youth upsurge against the ban on Jallikattu - a traditional form of bull running during the Pongal celebrations - is expected to peter out after the ruling AIADMK's stop-gap chief minister, O Panneerselvam, managed to defuse the situation, at least partially, with the cooperation of Prime Minister Narendra Modi to promulgate an ordinance to lift the ban.
The government may be able to handle it even if it is continued as sections of the agitators would seek a permanent solution through an enactment in law.
op_012017123908_012217041836.jpg
Perhaps, CM O Panneerselvam managed to get through the critical days with some smart thinking from the top bureaucracy of the state and hand-holding from a sympathetic Centre. Photo: PTI
The whole episode has seven takeaways for the governments at the Centre and states, civil society organisations and youth leaders all over the country:
1. It is much more than a lot of bull: Though the Jallikattu ban remained the core issue of the agitation, it became a vehicle for the assertion of the Tamil identity, which attracted mass participation.
Tamil identity, perhaps an amorphous phrase, describes the feeling that comes through one's upbringing with distinct language and traditions in a Tamil socio-cultural environment. It transcends religious, caste and community affiliations.
2. Non-violent mass movements possible: It is possible to conduct a non-violent mass movement without political leadership and patronage provided the cause relates to the identity and pride of the people. It requires a cause that appeals to all people to gather mass support.
The support of political leaders, popular film stars and media will automatically reach the mass movement if its voice is strident.
3. Credibility: Mass movements will gain credibility only if the demand appeals to popular beliefs and can be related to other socio-cultural grievances of the people.
4. Peaceful conduct: It will gain massive participation and clout only if lumpen elements, often goaded by political netas, are kept out to prevent them taking over the agitation. Peaceful conduct will neutralise the government's option to treat it as a law and order problem and crush it by using force.
5. Limitations of judiciary and governments: If the public feel any action of the government, civil society or judiciary is a threat to their way of life as they understand it, they will fight relentlessly. Thus, there are limits to government actions to check or eradicate traditional cultural practices as the people perceive them.
6. Keeping calm: While handling a mass movement, the government should not lose its cool but find a democratic way of resolving the core grievance.
Even a half-way solution that would prevent an explosive turn of events is better than no solution. The Tamil Nadu government as much as the organisers of the agitation should be congratulated for avoiding any major law and order confrontation resulting in the loss of life and property. It shows a rare maturity on the part of the people at all levels in the state.
7. Social media: The agitation turned into a mass movement as word spread through social media - Facebook, Twitter, WhatsApp, YouTube, et al. This only confirms the enormous power of social media even among the rural masses.
It shows how social media can be used as a vehicle to trigger social consciousness among the people; of course, Tamil Nadu has the advantage of having nearly half the people living in towns and cities - who are already using social media actively; a similar trend is visible in rural areas too.
It is to the credit of the chief minister O Panneerselvam that he managed to keep his cool all along. This is, perhaps, an achievement considering his built-in leadership limitations and internal party squabbles with "Chinnamma" Sasikala (styled by her loyalists as heir-apparent to the late "Amma" J Jayalalithaa) threatening to pull the rug from under the feet.
However, in a state that worships charismatic political leaders, it is doubtful whether he would be able to turn it to his advantage in the power struggle within the party.
It is possible Panneerselvam managed to get through the critical days with some smart thinking from the top bureaucracy of the state and hand-holding from a sympathetic Centre.
Perhaps, Prime Minister Narendra Modi also chipped in. He probably prefers the dour Panneerselvam, who has years of experience as a minister, to Sasikala, whose only credentials come from reflected glory as a companion to the late charismatic leader Jayalalithaa, who dominated the state's political scene as a colossus.
But Sasikala's powerful siblings, having created a strong support network within the party, appear to be determined to have a piece of the cake. It matters little now that they were shooed away from the scene during Jayalalithaa's last few years.
So far, the Tamil Nadu political scene is still hazy, as the AIADMK is yet to fully recover from the death of their beloved leader Amma.

Supreme Court dismisses plea to delay annual budget

A television journalist sets his camera inside the premises of the Supreme Court in New Delhi February 18, 2014. REUTERS/Anindito Mukherjee/Files
A television journalist sets his camera inside the premises of the Supreme Court in New Delhi February 18, 2014. REUTERS/Anindito Mukherjee/Files

 Mon Jan 23, 2017

The Supreme Court on Monday rejected a petition to delay the annual federal budget, which Finance Minister Arun Jaitley is scheduled to deliver on Feb. 1, dismissing concerns about potential giveaways ahead of critical state polls.

A panel headed by Chief Justice J.S. Khehar found no merit in a public interest litigation by lawyer M.L. Sharma, who had called for the budget to be delayed until after a round of five regional elections.

The case was motivated by fears that Prime Minister Narendra Modi's government could offer budget giveaways to attract votes in state assembly elections to be held in February and March.

The most important poll is being held in Uttar Pradesh, a northern battleground state with a population of more than 200 million. The election is expected to be the biggest democratic exercise anywhere in the world this year.

A good showing is critical for Modi, and his Bharatiya Janata Party, if he is to stand a good chance of winning re-election in the 2019 general election.

Separately, the election commission was due to rule on a similar call for the budget to be delayed. Its Model Code of Conduct bans governments from using administrative resources to solicit votes.

Voting kicks off in the western breadbasket state of Punjab and the western resort state of Goa on Feb. 4. It will be held in seven stages across Uttar Pradesh from Feb. 11; and will wrap up in the northeeastern states of Uttarakhand and Manipur.

Results of all the elections, which will eventually be reflected in parliament's upper house, are due in mid-March.

(Reporting by Suchitra Mohanty; Writing by Tommy Wilkes; Editing by Douglas Busvine and Clarence Fernandez)

Abused there, beggars here

Around 65,000 Rohingyas entered from Myanmar recently; home ministry asked to take action against 168 middlemen facilitating influx

Rohingyas, who failed to get into refugee camps, sit beside the Teknaf-Cox's Bazar road in Ukhia hoping that travellers would stop and help them. The photo was taken recently. Photo: Firoz Ahmed
The Daily Star January 23, 2017
Every day, streams of Rohingya people, mostly women and children, dot a 15km stretch of the road from Ukhia to Teknaf in Cox's Bazar. 
They start flocking in small groups on the roadsides after daybreak, drawing attention of hundreds of holidaymakers who traverse the highway on their way to St Martin's Island via Teknaf from the seashore town of Cox's Bazar.
Many of this “stateless” population, having been denied of their right to citizenship in Myanmar and with no official “refugee” status in Bangladesh, spend best parts of the day begging.  
Kind vacationers, aware of the recent atrocities unleashed on one of the world's most persecuted minorities on the other side of the fence triggering a fresh influx of Rohingyas, are often seen stopping by, offering help in cash or kind before heading for their destinations.
This has become a daily routine for many desperate Rohingyas. On some counts, at least 1.5 lakh of them are now living in misery in four ghettos in Ukhia and Teknaf.
Bangladesh that is playing host, officially and unofficially, to thousands of Rohingyas, is alarmed by the recent influx.
Officially, they are “infiltrators” and law does not allow them teem the streets and beg alms. Humanity is altogether another thing. 
"Benevolent people come by cars and microbuses, stop by, and give us money and winter clothes," said Samuda Khatun, a Rohingya woman aged 52 standing near the highway. 
Moulvi Bakhtiar Ahmed, a member of Kutupalong Union Parishad, told The Daily Star that people travelling to Teknaf and St Martin's tend to provide the distressed Rohingyas with whatever supports they could as an act of compassion. 
Areas by the sides of Cox's Bazar-Teknaf highway, including Kutupalong, T&T College Gate, New Forest Office, Balukhali, Thaingkhali, Domdomia, Leda and Jadimura, bear testimony of the desperation of these Rohingya people.
Cox's Bazar Deputy Commissioner Md Ali Hossain explained that charities, individuals or institutions, cannot offer any help to the Rohingyas in the slums without permission from the administration.
Official figures show over 65,000 Rohingya Muslims entered Bangladesh amid rights violations and violence in Myanmar following the killing of some law enforcers at the hands of till to be identified miscreants. The fresh inflow came on top of nearly half a million Rohingyas who have been living mostly without “refugee” status for over a decade. 

MIDDLEMEN ACTIVE

While officially Bangladesh pushed back a handful of Rohingyas, humanity played a big part allowing, one way or the other, thousands of them since October. 
But taking advantage of the situation, a syndicate of middlemen made some quick bucks by letting Rohingyas cross into Bangladesh, already a densely populated country. Bangladesh's population density is 1,015 per sqkm, which is three and seven times that in India and China.   
Recently, the issue prompted the Prime Minister's Office to ask the home ministry to take stern action against some 168 middlemen. Otherwise, the PMO cautioned, the situation might be “dreadful.”
A report by an intelligence agency recommended that apart from alerting the Coast Guard along with the BGB to stop this inflow, the government should figure out the actual number of Rohingyas who entered the country and bring them all in a single place so that they can be sent back, said sources at the PMO.
On average, over 1,000 Rohingyas have been entering Bangladesh every day since a crackdown in the north of Rakhine state late last year. The previous rate of Rohingya influx was 50 a day, according to the report.
Bangladesh shares with Myanmar a 272km border that falls in Bandarban and Cox's Bazar. Of this, a 52km stretch is by the Naf river. Some areas are so remote and impassable that BGB men cannot patrol there.
There is no barbed-wire fence along the border on the Naf river that divides the two countries, making it easy for the Rohingya people to cross into Bangladesh illegally.
According to the report, 154 of the 168 middlemen are from Cox's Bazar and the rest from Bandarban. With the help of fishermen and boatmen, they bring in the desperate Rohingya people in return for money.
Relatives of many Rohingyas live in Bangladesh and they too help their relatives in Myanmar to come here.
The middlemen used night time to dodge the BGB patrol and charged up to Tk 5,000 from each to be sheltered.
(Partha Pratim Bhattacharjee and Mohammad Al-Masum Molla in Dhaka and Mohammad Ali Jinnat in Cox's Bazar contributed to this report.)  

'Your only right is to obey': lawyer describes torture in China's secret jails

Human rights attorney Xie Yang says he was shackled, beaten and threatened, in transcripts released in protest at his continued incarceration

Lawyer Xie Yang before his detention by Chinese authorities. Photograph: Supplied

 in Beijing-Monday 23 January 2017

On day one of his detention Xie Yang claims he was shackled to a metal chair and ordered to explain why he had joined an illegal anti-Communist party network.
On day two he was moved to a secret prison and informed: “Your only right is to obey.”
Finally, on day three, the violence began.
“We’ll torture you to death just like an ant,” one inquisitor allegedly warned the Chinese human rights lawyer during a punishing marathon of interrogation sessions and beatings designed make him confess to crimes he denies.
“I’m going to torment you until you go insane,” another captor allegedly bragged. “Don’t even imagine that you’ll be able to walk out of here and continue being a lawyer. You’re going to be a cripple.”
The claims – impossible to verify but which human rights activists say are consistent with previously documented forms of abuse in China – are contained in a transcript of lawyers’ interviews with one victim of the country’s ongoing crackdown on human rights attorneys.
Xie Yang, a 44-year-old lawyer, was detained in the central city of Hongjiang on 11 July 2015, on day three of what campaigners describe as an unprecedented Communist party assault on civil rights attorneys.
More than 18 months after that crackdown began, at least four of its key targets, including Xie, remain behind bars facing trial for crimes including subversion.
Xie’s legal team decided to release the explosive and highly detailed transcript of their conversations with him last week – in defiance of authorities – in protest at the refusal to set their client free.
His statement paints a devastating portrait of the tactics allegedly being used to wage China’s so-called “war on law”.
It comes after Peter Dahlin, a Swedish human rights activist who worked with several of the detained lawyers, gave the most detailed account yet of his 23-day imprisonment in an underground jail in Beijing.
Speaking to the Guardian at his new home in northern Thailand, Dahlin claimed that after being detained by state security agents in January 2016 he was deprived of sleep and forced to endure exhausting late-night interrogation sessions; denied the right to exercise, sunlight and access to his embassy; and questioned using lie-detection equipment with the Orwellian name of a “communication enhancement machine”.
“These facilities are built to break you,” Dahlin said of the covert centre where he was held under 24-hour guard in a padded cell.
In a series of interviews with his lawyers at the start of this year, Xie, whose Chinese nationality appears to have exposed him to far more brutal treatment than Dahlin, described a range of physical and mental abuse.
After being picked up by security agents on 11 July, he said he was taken to a police station, chained up and questioned about his involvement in an “anti-party and anti-socialist” group of lawyers.
 Chinese human rights lawyer: ‘You might disappear at any time’

The next day he was moved to a secret interrogation facility inside a guesthouse in the state capital, Changsha, where the alleged torture began.
Xie claimed he was forced to sit in stress positions on a stack of plastic chairs in which it was impossible for his feet to touch the floor. “I had to sit there for more than 20 hours, both legs dangling in such pain until they began numb,” he recounted.
Traditional beatings were also allegedly doled out.
“They’d split up the work: one or two would grab my arms while someone used their fists to punch me in the stomach, kneed me in the stomach, or kicked me with their feet,” Xie claimed, according to a translation of his testimony published on China Change, a human rights website.
“This is a case of counterrevolution! Do you think the Communist party will let you go?” he quoted one of his captors as saying. “I could torture you to death and no one could help you.”
Xie, who remains in custody, claimed agents also issued thinly veiled threats against his family and friends.
“Your wife and children need to pay attention to traffic safety when they’re out in the car. There are a lot of traffic accidents these days,” one agent reputedly told him.
Chinese authorities have not responded to Xie’s allegations and security officials rarely address such claims.
But in a recent editorial, Xinhua, Beijing’s official news agency, rejected criticism of China’s current human rights situation, which some observers describe as the worst since the days following the 1989 Tiananmen massacre.
“Certain western countries, while turning a blind eye to their own deep-rooted human rights issues, such as rampant gun crime, refugee crises and growing xenophobia, have a double standard on human rights, alongside a sense of superiority,” Xinhua said.
Terry Halliday, an American Bar Foundation scholar who recently published a book about China’s human rights lawyers, said the abuse described by Xie was now “par for the course” for those deemed enemies of the Chinese Communist party.
“It all rings true,” he said. “Nothing would surprise me about the degree to which the authorities will go in order to get the kind of response they want.
“It seems to me that part of the evil genius of the Chinese security apparatus has been that they have perfected forms of enormous pressure on individuals that are so powerful that they can compel almost any individual to comply, but yet they are not so manifest with broken bones, or the shedding of blood or external marks that can be used by the media or advocates around the world to criticise the government for inhumane treatment,” Halliday added.
“It’s torture behind a veil. We are left in the position of having to believe or not the person describing what happened to them, with very little evidence externally that allows us to validate that.”
Halliday said one case where there did appear to be clear and dramatic proof of abuse was that of Li Chunfu, another attorney who was seized during the crackdown and recently emerged from 500 days of secret detention.
Li, whose brother, Li Heping, was one of the operation’s best-known targets, was taken on 1 August 2015 during the initial wave of arrests of lawyers and activists. He returned home on 12 January after being granted bail.
But relatives claim nearly 17 months of severe abuse have transformed the 44-year-old lawyer into a shadow of his former self.
“His mind is shattered,” his wife, Bi Liping, is quoted as saying in one online account of the lawyer’s ordeal. A local hospital offered a preliminary diagnosis of schizophrenia.
Halliday said that in meetings Li Chunfu had always struck him as “a very poised, very articulate, sophisticated person”. In photographs taken following his release he was unrecognisable.
“He looked like a different man; someone a generation older. Five hundred days of total isolation. Who can withstand that?”
Xie Yang admitted that he, for one, had not been able to withstand it.
Speaking to his lawyers, he claimed he had suffered a “complete mental breakdown” and, facing a barrage of violence and threats, had caved in.
“I wanted to be done with the interrogations as quickly as possible … so whatever they wanted me to write, I wrote,” he said.
“I told them to type something up and I’d sign it, no matter what it said … I didn’t want to go on living.”

China: Birth rates rise following success of ‘two-child’ policy


New births in the world's most populous nation reached 17.86 million in 2016, up around 1.4 million compared to the 2011-2015 average. Source: NataliaMilko / Shutterstock, Inc.
 
CHINA’S decision to allow all couples to have two children instead of one has resulted in birth rates rising to the highest level since 2000, a government official said.
New births in the world’s most populous nation reached 17.86 million in 2016, up around 1.4 million compared to the 2011-2015 average, said Yang Wenzhuang of the National Health and Family Planning Commission.
“While the total number of women of childbearing age fell by 5 million, the number of births increased significantly, showing that the family planning policy adjustments were extremely timely and extremely effective,” he told reporters on Sunday.
Worried about the costs of supporting an increasingly ageing population, China issued new guidelines in late 2015 allowing all parents to have two children.
China began implementing its controversial “one-child policy” in the 1970s in order to limit population growth, but authorities are now concerned that the country’s dwindling workforce will not be able to support an increasingly ageing population.
Yang said the number of women of childbearing age was expected to decline by about 5 million a year over the 2016-2020 period, but China was hoping to keep birth rates at around 17-20 million a year.
China has already made provisions to increase medical staff and the number of hospital beds in order to handle the rising number of births. It expects its total population to rise to around 1.42 billion by the end of the decade, up from 1.37 billion at the end of 2015. – Reuters

World's smallest MRI helps tiny babies


baby MRIThis is one of only two purpose-built neonatal MRI machines in the world
BBC
-Monday 23 January 2017
Doctors in Sheffield are pioneering the use of a compact MRI scanner for imaging the brains of premature babies.
The machine, at the Royal Hallamshire Hospital, is one of only two purpose-built neonatal MRI scanners in the world.
At present, ultrasound is normally used to scan the brains of newborns.
Prof Paul Griffiths, of the University of Sheffield, said MRI was better at showing the structures of the brain and abnormalities more clearly.

Clearer images

So far about 40 babies have been imaged in the MRI scanner, which was built by GE Healthcare with funding by the Wellcome Trust.
Baby Alice-RoseAlice-Rose was born at 24 weeks
One of them, Alice-Rose, was born at 24 weeks and had two bleeds in the brain.
Her parents, Shaun and Rachael Westbrook, said the MRI scan was very helpful.
Shaun told me: "It's a much crisper image and a lot easier to understand than the ultrasound."
Rachael added: "It's been a rollercoaster since Alice-Rose was born on 6 November: not everything was fully formed, and she still weighs only 2lb 13oz (1.28kg).
"The MRI was reassuring as it meant you got a better look at her brain."
Ultrasound of the brain is possible in newborn babies only because the bones in their skull are not yet fused.

Ultrasound v MRI

The sound waves can travel through the two fontanelles - the soft spots between the bones.
Prof Griffiths said: "Ultrasound is cheap, portable and convenient, but the position of the fontanelles means there are some parts of the brain which cannot be viewed.
"MRI is able to show all of the brain and the surrounding anatomy, making the images easier to explain to parents.
"From a diagnostic point, the big advantage is that MRI is able to show a wider range of brain abnormalities, in particular those which result from a lack of oxygen or blood supply."
scan imagesUNIVERSITY OF SHEFFIELDImage caption-Ultrasound image (left) of Alice-Rose with MR image (right). The MRI shows the structures of the brain with greater clarity
MRI scans are rarely performed on severely premature babies because the risks involved in transferring and handling a sick infant can outweigh the benefits.
Prof Griffiths said: "MRI machines are huge, heavy objects which are sited in the basement or ground floor of hospitals, whereas maternity units are usually higher up, or in a completely different building, so it can mean a complicated journey to get a baby to and from the scanner."
The compact baby MRI machine at the Royal Hallamshire is not much bigger than a washing machine and just metres away from the neonatal intensive care unit, meaning that specialist staff are on hand in case of problems.
The concept for a dedicated neonatal scanner was originally developed more than a decade ago by Prof Griffiths and Prof Martin Paley, of the University of Sheffield.
Two prototype 3 Tesla neonatal MRIs were eventually built - the other is in Boston Children's Hospital in Massachusetts - although it is no longer in use.
Neither machine has regulatory approval for clinical use, and both remain purely for research.
Prof Griffiths said the next step would be to do a trial in premature babies to show definitively that MRI produces a better diagnosis and whether it altered the clinical management of children.
It is not known how much a neonatal MRI machine would cost, should the system eventually get commercialised, but full-size scanners are typically priced at several hundred thousand pounds.
Cincinnati Children's Hospital has a 1.5 Tesla neonatal MRI scanner that was adapted from adult orthopaedic use.