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

Friday, March 24, 2017

High gold prices keep demand in check, Indian jewellers stock up for festival

FILE PHOTO: A saleswoman displays a gold earring to customers at a jewellery showroom during Dhanteras, a Hindu festival associated with Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth, in Kolkata, India October 28, 2016. REUTERS/Rupak De Chowdhuri/File Photo
FILE PHOTO: A saleswoman displays a gold earring to customers at a jewellery showroom during Dhanteras, a Hindu festival associated with Lakshmi, the goddess of wealth, in Kolkata, India October 28, 2016. REUTERS/Rupak De Chowdhuri/File Photo

By Rajendra Jadhav and Arpan Varghese | BENGALURU/MUMBAI- Fri Mar 24, 2017 

An uptick in prices kept a lid on demand for gold in most regions across Asia this week, while in India, an upcoming festival saw jewellers stocking up on the metal.

The spot gold international benchmark is set for a second week of gains, with prices supported by uncertainty surrounding U.S. President Donald Trump's economic policy and concerns over the outcome of elections in Europe.

"Demand has been sluggish this week, especially with (international) gold prices in the $1,240 to $1,250 range," said Ronald Leung, chief dealer at Lee Cheong Gold Dealers in Hong Kong.

In top consumer China, premiums fell to about $10 to $12 an ounce against the international benchmark from levels over $20 last week.

Traders attributed the drop in premiums to a rise in prices.

Premiums in China had risen last week as traders said supply of the precious metal was limited due to tightening import restrictions to stem currency outflows.

Premiums were quoted in a 70 cents to $1.20 range in Hong Kong, from the 70 cents to $1.10 an ounce level seen last week.

In Singapore, premiums were seen slightly lower, within the 80 to 90 cents range, against $1.20 an ounce in the week before.

In Japan, traders saw the precious metal at a discount of 50 cents to a dollar, unchanged from last week, attributing it to the lack of any significant move in local prices.

Gold demand in India, the world's second-largest consumer of the metal, improved this week despite a price rise as jewellers stocked up for a festival next week.

"Due to Gudi Padwa festival, sentiments have improved. Festival demand has been trickling in," said Daman Prakash Rathod, a director at MNC Bullion, a wholesaler in Chennai.
In the local market, gold futures were trading around 28,700 rupees per 10 grams on Friday, up 1 percent from a week ago.

"There is pent up demand and the money squeeze due to demonetization has come to an end," said Ishu Datwani, owner of Mumbai-based Anmol Jewellers.

The appreciation of the rupee to the highest level in nearly 17 months has made the price rise in other markets less painful for Indian consumers, a Mumbai based dealer with a private bank said.

(Reporting by Arpan Varghese in Bengaluru; editing by Susan Thomas)

Westminster attack and its repercussions


by Dr SLM Rifai-
( March 24, 2017, London, Sri Lanka Guardian) Today Muslim community all over the world goes through one of toughest times in Muslim history.  Fanaticism dominates thoughts and minds of millions of Muslim youth across the globe. It is not an objective of my article here to examine, evaluate and investigate the internal and external factors that contribute to the growth of extremism in Muslim world today. Rather I will focus on the consequences of this barbaric attack on innocent people on the streets of London on 22/03/2017. 
  • Increase of Islamophobia attacks on Muslims in Europe:
This type of barbaric attack would generate far reaching reactionary backlashes in many parts of western world. This type of attack would encourage, motivate and urge far right extremist groups to attack innocent Muslims in many parts of European countries. Mosques, Muslim shops, Muslim properties and even innocent Muslims may become targets of racial attacks in Europe. Particularly, ladies with scarfs will be prime target of anti- Muslim extremists in Europe and they would fear to go out on the streets in many parts of European cities. This type of attack would no doubt increase anti-Muslim trends in many parts of Europe. Innocent Muslims will be victims of these types of Barbarism.
  • Anti-Muslim immigration policies would be introduced.
  Donald Trump has been trying to introduce some strict measures to control immigration into US from some Muslim countries. With this incident, he could easily convince US law makers and congressmen that what he is doing is a right thing to do and he may get support of public and law makers to control immigration in US. He has already banned people entering US from 7 Muslim countries. He has imposed a ban on some electronic items to take on board in US flights.  This type of attack may justify his claim.  Many EU countries will follow US in their immigration policies if they feel immigration increase is a threat for their national security. This type of barbaric attack would persuade politicians in Europe to make some dramatic policy changes in immigration and settlement visa for foreign nationals. Europe has been welcoming refugees, students, holiday makers, and skilled workers for many decades, many European countries may review their immigration policies with rapid increase in these types of barbaric attacks on innocent people. I think that this type of attack will have far reaching impacts on migrant communities in many European countries in coming years.
  • This attack gives a bad name for Islam and Muslims
This attack is carried out by a single Muslim person who was converted into Islam some time ago and yet, this attack would give a bad name for Muslims and peaceful religion of Islam. We cannot generalise this, to say that 1. 5 billion Muslims support this type of fanaticism. No good Muslim would support such attack and yet, some media may take this incident out of context and may use this incident to tarnish good names of millions of peace loving Muslims. Terrorism has no religion or faith. Terrorism is wrong whoever does it. No religion on earth would concur that killing innocent people is acceptable. Islam strongly condemns killings any innocent people. Peaceful message of Islam, its compassion, its kindness to humanity and its pluralistic vision to humanity all have been hijacked and blackmailed by this sort of brutal attack on innocent people. These radicals give a bad perception about Islam and Muslim community.
  • Victimization of innocent people:
It is reported that IS has claimed the responsibility for this attack. IS has claimed that one of their soldiers has carried out this barbaric attack. If it is true, UK government along with its allies would take all measures to wipe out IS supporters from many Muslim countries. UK will intensify drone attacks on IS targets.   Thousands of innocent people would become victims of drone attacks.      It has been reported that US war on terror has killed thousands of innocent people across Muslim world. Children in schools, people in mosques, wedding halls, markets, and in the houses, have been killed in thousands since US declared war on terror and deployed drones across Muslim world. This vicious circles of violence would continue for many years if IS does not stop this type of brutal attacks on innocent people. Eventually, it is innocent people who pay the price for this type atrocity. They have nothing to do with Western government or radical groups and yet, they become victims for the faults of someone else.  This type of innocent killing is not acceptable in Islam at all. Qur’an is very much clear about this:
“If anyone kills a person unless in retribution for murder or spreading corruption in the land- it is as if he kills all mankind, while if any saves a life it is as if he saves he lives of all mankind” (Qur’an: 6: 32). Moreover, Islam prescribes severe punishment for those who kills innocent people for no reason. This type of killing of innocent people has no justification whatsoever in Islam. This type of attack is a ruthless act of terrorism in Islam and the entire humanity should come hand in hand to wipe of this barbarism.
This man was brained washed with a radical ideology that has no place in Islam. It is unfortunate that this virus of Islamic radicalism has spoiled the minds of thousands of Muslim youths today. Islamic world has utterly failed to deradicalize Muslim youths. Muslim world has not yet developed any concrete mechanism to meet the challenges of radicalism. Radicalism is a universal problem today. It is a problem of humanity today.  It is the responsibility of entire humanity to address this issue and find an everlasting solution to this problem. I think that Muslim politicians, Muslim clerics and Muslim scholarship should take some possible steps to deradicalize Muslim minds from childhood. It is the responsibility of Muslim scholarship to address the roots cause of Muslim extremism. I think that literal reading into sacred texts of the Qur’an and Muslim tradition has greatly contributed to the growth of Muslim extremism in many ways.
Some moderate Muslim groups have been trying to wipe out extremism from Muslim communities in Europe and yet, I think that they need to take some strategic measures to reduce the challenges of Muslim extremism. I think that such measures should be taken from their homes, schools, mosques, and Arabic colleges. Muslim communities should teach their children about the danger of extremism in their homes, mosques, schools and college.  I think that some collaborative measures are needed between these institutes to counter Muslim extremism.

Anger as Hosni Mubarak, deposed Egyptian president, walks free


A top appeals court cleared Mubarak earlier this month on charges of killing protesters in the 2011 uprising
Egypt's former president Hosni Mubarak at the Maadi military hospital in Cairo in October 2016 (AFP)

Friday 24 March 2017 
Hosni Mubarak, the Egyptian president overthrown in 2011 and the first leader to face trial after the Arab Spring uprisings, walked free on Friday, his lawyer said.
He left the Maadi Military Hospital where he had been detained, heading to his home in Heliopolis.
But while the 88-year-old regained his freedom, critics were quick to highlight the irony that several key activists in the 2011 uprising are now serving lengthy jail terms. Rights groups say hundreds of others have been forcibly disappeared.
Others compared him with the current government:
Translation: Mubarak has become a sheep along with those who are ruling Egypt now
Harriet McCulloch, a deputy director at human rights organisation Reprieve, said: “As Hosni Mubarak goes free in Egypt, thousands of prisoners still languish in horrific prison conditions.
"Many face the death penalty on charges relating to protests, in mass trials that make a mockery of due process. Some were arrested as children – people like Irish citizen Ibrahim Halawa, who has suffered terrible abuses in jail.
"The Sisi Government must now show that Egypt’s justice system is worthy of the name and release Ibrahim, and the hundreds like him," she said in a statement.
Mubarak free while hundreds face death penalty – Reprieve comment http://www.reprieve.org.uk/press/mubarak-free-hundreds-face-death-penalty-reprieve-comment/ 
Photo published for Mubarak free while hundreds face death penalty - Reprieve comment - Reprieve
A top appeals court cleared Mubarak earlier this month on charges of killing protesters in the 2011 uprising that ended his 30 year rule. 
Some who participated in the protests against Mubarak said they felt the uprising was in vain.
"Honestly, I found that all of that was useless," said Ahmed Mohamed, 29.
Mohamed had been among the thousands of protesters who took to Cairo's Tahrir Square demanding Mubarak's fall.
"Mubarak's time was a lot better in all aspects," he said after the prosecution ordered Mubarak's release.

Mubarak heads for upscale neighbourhood

"Yes, he is now in his home in Heliopolis," Mubarak's lawyer, Farid El Deeb told Reuters when asked if Mubarak had left the hospital. Heliopolis is an upscale neighbourhood where the main presidential palace from which Mubarak once governed is located.
The 88-year-old was cleared of the final murder charges against him this month, after facing trial in a litany of cases ranging from corruption to the killing of protesters whose 18-day revolt stunned the world and ended his 30-year rule.
Mubarak was initially arrested in April 2011, two months after leaving office, and has since been held in prison and in military hospitals under heavy guard. 
He was sentenced to life in 2012 in the case, but an appeals court ordered a retrial which dismissed the charges two years later.
In January 2016, the appeals court upheld a three-year prison sentence for Mubarak and his two sons on corruption charges.
But the sentence took into account time served. Both of his sons, Alaa and Gamal, were freed.
On Thursday, a court ordered a renewed corruption investigation into Mubarak for allegedly receiving gifts from the state owned Al-Ahram newspaper. 
About 850 people were killed in the 18-day uprising against the nearly 30-year rule of Mubarak. 

Cairo explosion

Also Friday, one man was killed and three others injured in an explosion in the Cairo suburb of Maadi, the Interior Ministry said in a statement.
The man who was killed, a building guard who was cleaning the property's garden, found "an unidentified metallic object." Upon handling it, it exploded, resulting in his death and the injury of his wife and two children by shrapnel, the statement said.
A security official inspects the scene of an explosionin the Cairo suburb of Maadi on 24 March (Reuters)
The injured have been moved to the hospital for treatment and the area had been cordoned off and is being combed by security forces, it added.
There was no immediate claim of responsibility.

Mosul's children were shouting beneath the rubble. Nobody came

Coalition bombs buried more than a hundred people in the ruins of three houses and raised fresh questions about US rules of engagement, Martin Chulov reports from Iraq

Men load the bodies of people recovered from the rubble of a house in western Mosul. Photograph: Cengiz Yar-- Members of an Iraqi rescue crew dig through the rubble of a house in western Mosul. Photograph: Cengiz Yar

 Men in the street as excavators dig through the rubble. Photograph: Cengiz Yar

 in Mosul-Friday 24 March 2017

By the time rescuers finally arrived no one was left alive. For almost a week desperate neighbours had scraped through the rubble, searching for as many as 130 people who lay buried after three homes in a west Mosulsuburb were destroyed by coalition airstrikes.

The full picture of the carnage continued to emerge on Friday, when at least 20 bodies were recovered. Dozens more are thought to remain buried in what could turn out to be the single most deadly incident for civilians in the war against Islamic State (Isis).

Rescuers at the scene in the suburb of Mosul Jadida said they had driven the 250 miles from Baghdad but had not been able to enter the area until Wednesday, five days after airstrikes hit the houses where local residents had been sheltering from fierce fighting between Iraqi forces and Isis.

Neighbours at the scene said at least 80 bodies had been recovered from one house alone, where people had been encouraged by local elders to take shelter. Rescuers were continuing to dig through the ruins, and the remains of two other houses nearby, which had also been pulverised in attacks that were described as “relentless and horrifying”.

The destruction took place in a district that was last week a frontline in the battle for Mosul. Locals said militants had positioned a sniper on the roof of the home that had sheltered the largest number of people. 

It has raised fresh questions about rules of engagement in the war against the terror group, after two recent US airstrikes in Syria resulted in at least 90 casualties, nearly all of them thought to be civilian.
Residents in Mosul Jadida say no Isis members were hiding among the civilians, although dozens of militants had been attempting to defend the area from an attack by Iraqi special forces.

“We all know each other, and most of us are related,” said Majid al-Najim, 65, as he stood next to the corpse of his nephew in a local cemetery. Gravediggers prepared the man’s grave as people wept around him. “And all of the families were in one of three houses. We are from the Jabour, Dulaim and Tai families. On that day, the airstrikes started around 8am. We originally hid in that house, but we left before the planes came back. There was three hours between us and death.”

“The days after were horrible. There were children shouting under the rubble. Nobody came to help them. The police told us yesterday that there was nothing they could do.”

Another man, Thanom Hander, who sat watching a digger scrape through twisted piles of masonry and metal, said his son and daughter-in-law had been the only two survivors locals had been able to rescue. The couple’s two children died in the attack, and his daughter-in-law had lost both her legs.

“They thought the basement was safe,” he said. “That morning, I heard the bombing, and I ran to the house. There were civilians shouting. There was nothing I could do.”

Speaking from the clinic where he was being treated, the man’s son Ali Hander said: “There was a lot of bombing above us, and then I started to feel everything collapse around us. We were buried for 10 hours until the neighbours dug us out. I lost my children.”

The US military said it was launching an investigation. Cololnel Joseph Scrocca, from the US-led command in Baghdad, said “the coalition has opened a formal civilian casualty credibility assessment on this allegation” from Mosul.

Isis has been widely accused of using civilians as human shields by positioning guns and fighters on top of houses. Most residents at the scene said that while the group’s members were indeed on the roof of at least one of the homes, those who took shelter below did so willingly.

Mustafa Alwan, a local shopkeeper disagreed. “My cousin and my sister went to that house,” he said, pointing at hulking ruins being methodically probed by diggers. “Isis forced them to go there. They pointed guns at them and made them enter. I lost them both.”

Another man, Subhan Ismail Ibrahim, said his wife and three children had been killed in the same house. “One child was four, the other one year old and the third less than three months. Speaking with a stony calm, he added: “I have lost them all, and the world must know what happened to them.”

Iraqi officers have been largely responsible for requesting airstrikes, which are then coordinated with US-run operations centres after approval from senior commanders. Coalition air spotters often guide the bombs to designated targets.

Donald Trump earlier this year ordered a review of rules of engagement set by his predecessor, which had insisted on “near certainty” that there be no civilian casualties before airstrikes could be sanctioned. While it has not yet been completed, there are mounting concerns that the very fact a review has been ordered may have already led to the threshold being lowered.

In response to an earlier query about the reported mass-casualty airstrike on Raqqa this week, the US military command in Iraq denied any “recent changes in operational procedures for approving airstrikes under the past or current administration”. But it said that in December, the war’s commander, Lt Gen Stephen Townsend, “delegated approval authority for certain strikes to battlefield commanders” in order to accelerate aid to Iraqi forces facing a grueling battle in Mosul. Those strikes “were still subject to the same scrutiny and due diligence,” the command said.

At the graveyard, Majid al-Najim said: “Is an Isis sniper being on a roof enough of a reason to send a plane with a large bomb to destroy a house? They hit it many times. They wanted to destroy everything inside.

“Then after that, we needed equipment to rescue the people. Just one bulldozer. Anything. The corrupt government officials could not help us, and would not if they could. This is an enormous crime.”
In a nearby Iraqi base, a special forces major shifted uncomfortably when details of the disaster were relayed to him. “This is not in our area and we know nothing about it,” he said. “We have lost people too, around 20 colleagues fighting an enemy of all the people.” After a while, he shrugged and said: “What can we do? It’s war.”

Additional reporting by Salem Rizk and Spencer Ackerman in New York

Gruesome New Details on The Ethnic Cleansing in Myanmar No One Is Talking About

Gruesome New Details on The Ethnic Cleansing in Myanmar No One Is Talking About

No automatic alt text available.BY ROBBIE GRAMER-FEBRUARY 3, 2017

It’s a U.N. report U.N. officials themselves call revolting and unbearable. Myanmar’s security forces killed, gang-raped, and tortured hundreds of Rohingya Muslims in a wave of unprecedented violence, according to a new U.N. report released Friday. Victims included children and babies as young as eight months.

In recent months, Myanmar security forces stepped up their efforts to clear the ethnic group from the country’s borders — in a campaign of “area clearance operations” — to historic levels in terms of both scale and brutality.

“The ‘area clearance operations’ have likely resulted in hundreds of deaths and have led to an estimated 66,000 people fleeing into Bangladesh and 22,000 being internally displaced,” the new U.N. report said.
A U.N. human rights research team wrote the report after interviewing hundreds of Rohingya who Myanmar security forces drove to neighboring Bangladesh.

The U.N. human rights office called the accounts “revolting.” Of the 101 women interviewed, over half told the U.N. team they had been sexually assaulted, raped, or gang-raped. One gang-rape victim was 11 years old. Another was nine months pregnant. The U.N. also received reports of Myanmar security forces killing children aged six and younger with knives.

“The devastating cruelty to which these Rohingya children have been subjected is unbearable,” U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights Zeid Ra’ad Al Hussein said in a statement. “What kind of ‘clearance operation’ is this? What national security goals could possibly be served by this?” he added. In December, John McKissick, head of the UN High Commission for Refugees, labeled the operations, which first started in October, “ethnic cleansing.”

The Rohingya, numbering 1.1 million people in the country’s western Rakhine state, are loathed by the rest of the population and live in apartheid conditions. They’ve been called “the most persecuted minority in the world.”

Despite its brutality, the military’s campaign against the Rohingya is widely popular in Myanmar. The military claims it is fighting a Rohingya rebel insurgency, which restored the military’s popularity in the public’s eye.

One of Myanmar’s most prominent political figures, Aung San Suu Kyi, a recipient of the Nobel-Peace Prize, is facing increasing international criticism for staying quiet on the plight of Myanmar’s Muslim population — though it’s unclear how much clout she has with the military.

She refused U.N. requests to gain full access to its Rakhine state, where most of the violence reportedly took place. After the report’s release on Friday, Suu Kyi vowed to launch an investigation into the crimes and “take all necessary action” against abusers.

On Sunday, one of the country’s top legal advisers and a prominent member of Myanmar’s minority Muslim community, Ko Ni, was shot dead after speaking out about atrocities against the Rohingya. At the time he was shot, Ko Ni was holding his grandson.

This article has been updated.
President Trump addressed his plan to repeal and replace the Affordable Care Act, saying he will let Obamacare “explode,” before taking questions from the media on March 24 at the White House. (The Washington Post)

 

President Trump called me on my cellphone Friday afternoon at 3:31 p.m. At first I thought it was a reader with a complaint since it was a blocked number.

Instead, it was the president calling from the Oval Office. His voice was even, his tone muted. He did not bury the lead.

“Hello, Bob,” Trump began. “So, we just pulled it.”

Trump was speaking, of course, of the Republican plan to overhaul the Affordable Care Act, a plan that had been languishing for days amid unrest throughout the party as the president and his allies courted members and pushed for a vote.

Before I could ask a question, Trump plunged into his explanation of the politics of deciding to call off a vote on a bill he had been touting.

Republicans withdrew the American Health Care Act moments before a scheduled vote on March 24, after failing to woo enough lawmakers to support it. Here are the key turning points in their fight to pass the bill. (Jenny Starrs/The Washington Post)

The Democrats, he said, were to blame.

“We couldn’t get one Democratic vote, and we were a little bit shy, very little, but it was still a little bit shy, so we pulled it,” Trump said.

Trump said he would not put the bill on the floor in the coming weeks. He is willing to wait and watch the current law continue and, in his view, encounter problems. And he believes that Democrats will eventually want to work with him on some kind of legislative fix to Obamacare, although he did not say when that would be.

“As you know, I’ve been saying for years that the best thing is to let Obamacare explode and then go make a deal with the Democrats and have one unified deal. And they will come to us; we won’t have to come to them,” he said. “After Obamacare explodes.”

“The beauty,” Trump continued, “is that they own Obamacare. So when it explodes, they come to us, and we make one beautiful deal for the people.”

My question for the president: Are you really willing to wait to reengage on health care until the Democrats come and ask for your help?
Which Republicans forced Trump to pull the health-care bill

“Sure,” Trump said. “I never said I was going to repeal and replace in the first 61 days” — contradicting his own statements and that of his own adviser, Kellyanne Conway, who told CNN in November that the then-president-elect was contemplating convening a special session on Inauguration Day to begin the process of repealing the Affordable Care Act.

Turning to an aide, Trump asked, “How many days is it now? Whatever.” He laughed.

Trump returned to the theme of blaming the Democrats.

“Hey, we could have done this,” he said. “But we couldn’t get one Democrat vote, not one. So that means they own Obamacare and when that explodes, they will come to us wanting to save whatever is left, and we’ll make a real deal.”

There was little evidence that either Trump or House Republicans made a serious effort to reach out to Democrats.

Still, I wondered, why not whip some more votes this weekend and come back next week to the House with a revised piece of legislation?

“Well,” Trump said, “we could do that, too. But we didn’t do that. It’s always possible, but we pulled it.”
Trump brought up the vote count. “We were close,” he said.

How close?

“I would say within anywhere from five to 12 votes,” Trump said — although widespread reports indicated that at least three dozen Republicans opposed the measure.

That must have hurt after all of his attempts to rally Republicans, I said. He made calls, had people over to the White House, invited House members on Air Force One. He may not have loved the bill, but he embraced the negotiations.

“You’re right,” Trump said. “I’m a team player, but I’ve also said the best thing politically is to let Obamacare explode.”

Trump said he made the decision to pull the bill after meeting Friday at the White House with House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.).

Was that a tense, tough conversation with Ryan, I asked?

“No, not tough,” Trump said. “It’s just life. We had great support among most Republicans but no Democratic votes. Zero. Not one.”

I mentioned to Trump that some of his allies were frustrated with Ryan. Did he share those frustrations, and would he be able to work with Ryan moving forward on plans to cut taxes and build an infrastructure package?

“I don’t blame Paul,” Trump said.

He then repeated the phrase: “I don’t blame Paul. He worked very hard on this.”
And again.

“I don’t blame Paul at all.”

As he waits for Democrats, I asked, what’s next on health care, if anything, policy-wise?
“Time will tell. Obamacare is in for some rough days. You understand that. It’s in for some rough, rough days,” Trump said.

“I’ll fix it as it explodes,” he said. “They’re going to come to ask for help. They’re going to have to. Here’s the good news: Health care is now totally the property of the Democrats.”

Speaking of premium increases, Trump said: “When people get a 200 percent increase next year or a 100 percent or 70 percent, that’s their fault.”

He returned again to a partisan line on the turn of events.

“To be honest, the biggest losers today are Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer,” Trump said of the House minority leader and the Senate minority leader. “Because now they own the disaster known as Obamacare.”

Okay, I asked, they may own it, in his view, but he will at some point be tasked with shaping whatever comes forward as a partial replacement. What will that be? What kind of policy could he support?

“Oh, lots of things can happen,” Trump said. “But the best would be if we could all get together and do a real health-care bill that would be good for the people, and that could very well happen.”

Does Trump regret starting his agenda this year with health care?

“No, I don’t,” he said. “But in a way I’m glad I got it out of the way.”

“Look, I’m a team player,” Trump said of the Republican Party. “I’ve played this team. I’ve played with the team. And they just fell a little bit short, and it’s very hard when you need almost 100 percent of the votes and we have no votes, zero, from the Democrats. It’s unheard of.”

What happened with the House Freedom Caucus, the hard-line conservatives he had wooed over and over again?
“Ah, that’s the big question,” Trump said with a slight chuckle. “Don’t know. I have a good relationship with them, but I couldn’t get them. They just wouldn’t do it.”

Trump alluded to long-running, simmering dramas on Capitol Hill, which he said had little to do with him, as a reason the Freedom Caucus could not back the bill.

“Years of hatred and distrust,” he said. “Long before me.”

Was Trump saying, perhaps, that the inability of Ryan and his team to work well with that caucus was part of why talks stalled?

“Well, look, you can say what you want,” Trump said. “But there are years of problems, great hatred and distrust, and, you know, I came into the middle of it.”

“I think they made a mistake, but that’s okay,” Trump said of the Freedom Caucus.

As we wrapped up, I tried to get some clarity. The president was blaming the Democrats and was willing to let the law “explode.” Yet he also seemed to be teasing the possibility of doing something bipartisan down the road, a fresh start at some point.

I asked: Would working on a bipartisan health-care deal a year from now be something he would find more agreeable than whipping the hard right?

“A lot of people might say that,” Trump said, laughing. “We’ll end up with a better health-care plan. A great plan. And you wouldn’t need the Freedom Caucus.”

What about the moderates, the Tuesday Group?

“They were great,” Trump said. “They were really great.”

He turned once more to the Democrats.

“They own it,” he said.

“You’ve said that,” I told him.

“This is a process,” Trump concluded, “and it’s going to work out very well. I was a team player, and I had an obligation to go along with this.”

As Trump tried to hang up the phone and get back to work, I asked him to reflect, if at all possible, on lessons learned. He’s a few months into his presidency, and he had to pull a bill that he had invested time and energy into passing.

What was on his mind?

“Just another day,” Trump said, flatly. “Just another day in paradise, okay?”
He paused.

“Take care.”
Will Japan really get tough on smoking or is it just hot air?
Smoking-940x580

24th March 2017

TOKYO’S Olympics in 2020 has spurred the Japanese health ministry to ponder tighter laws on smoking, in attempt to clean up the nation’s public health image as being smoke-friendly.

This month, Japan’s health ministry unveiled the country’s strictest-ever smoking restrictions, although it was a watered-down version from the original proposal. The first had envisioned a blanket ban on all indoor smoking areas across all public institutions, from schools and hospitals to municipal offices, eateries and hotels.

After vocal opposition from Japan Tobacco (JT) and small business owners, however, the ministry bowed to public pressure and relaxed some of the rules.

The new proposal, to be submitted to Parliament in June, now excludes establishments less than 30 square metres in size – making many bars and restaurants in high-density Japanese cities exempt – and allows venues to have a designated smoking room. If approved, rule-breakers would face a steep penalty of JPY300,000 – almost US$3,000.


“We decided to draft a Bill because many believe Japan is behind on preventing exposure to secondhand smoke,” the ruling Liberal Democrat party’s health director Naomi Tokashiki told the Wall Street Journal this month.

“We also want to make a smoke-free Olympics and give foreigners who come for the Games a good impression of Japan’s attitude towards smoking.”

Still, even these weakened restrictions are facing challenges as some MPs from the ruling Liberal Democratic Party have expressed opposition to the reform.

The country’s finance minister Taro Aso, considered a loose cannon by fellow MPs, has even questioned the link between smoking cigarettes and lung cancer.

Japan-VP-Finance-Min-1024x713
Japan’s Deputy Prime Minister and Finance Minister Taro Aso (C) speaks during a visit to a port in Colombo May 2, 2013. Source: Reuters/Dinuka Liyanawatte/File Photo

Kicking the habit

Historically, Japan has an entrenched culture of smoking. Nevertheless, rates of smoking in Japan have continually dropped since 1996 and smoking prevalence among Japanese men last year dipped below 30 percent for the first time since government surveys began in 1965.

In recent years, many companies and local governments have put in place their own bylaws and restrictions. Smoking while walking has become a fineable offence in many large cities since 2002.

Nevertheless, the World Health Organisation (WHO) gave Japan’s efforts to eradicate secondhand smoke its lowest rating in 2015, calling into question if the country will be considered a responsible country according to the so-called Tobacco Free Olympics body in time for the 2020 games.

Around 1 percent of the country’s tax revenue comes from duty paid on cigarette purchases and the government still owns a 33 percent stake in JT.

Out of step with the world

In terms of advanced economies, and even nations with high rates of smoking like neighbouring China and South Korea, Japan’s tobacco policy is miles behind.

Almost 50 countries worldwide have already implemented blanket bans on smoking indoors.

Cigarettes in Japan remain relatively cheap at around JPY430 – less than US$4 – and are labelled with only modest health warnings. In comparison, an average packet of cigarettes in tobacco-loving France costs around US$7.50, 10 bucks across the channel in the UK, while Australia hits consumers for a whopping AUD20 (US$15) per pack or more.


Susan Mercado, Manila Director of the World Health Organisation (WHO), told Japan Times that “countries such as the Republic of Korea, Hong Kong, Singapore, Australia, New Zealand, Vietnam and cities including Beijing and Shanghai, China… have already introduced comprehensive smoking bans.”

Smoking kills 130,000 Japanese people every year, with some 15,000 more dying of passive smoke-related illnesses.

WHO Director Margaret Chan has declared war on big tobacco, vowing to “make sure that the tobacco industry goes out of business.” The Framework Convention on Tobacco Control (FCTC) was the first global public health treaty negotiated under the auspices of WHO, and Japan signed the convention in June 2004.

Back in 2014, a delegation of Japanese parliamentarians promised the FCTC Secretariat in Geneva a 100 percent smoke-free Tokyo and other reforms to reduce the impact of passive smoking prior to the Olympic games in 2020.

Yet Japan’s progress in implementing tobacco reform to date has been slow.

Nevertheless, Japan Tobacco International (JTI) lobbyist Ben Townsend says that “the [FCTC] process has been increasingly exclusionary and lacking integrity, balanced decision-making and transparency.” JTI’s glossy new headquarters, funnily enough, is also located in Geneva.


Big tobacco resists change

Japan’s government long controlled the tobacco industry via a state-owned monopoly which operated until the 1980s. This was converted to the publicly traded company, Japan Tobacco, in 1985.

The company created its international tobacco division JTI in 1999 with the goal of becoming “the most successful and respected tobacco company in the world.” JTI – whose best-known brands include Benson & Hedges, Camel, and Winston – is now the world’s third largest transnational tobacco company.
Just this week, JTI was reportedly in talks with Palmer & Harvey, one of Britain’s largest private corporations, to help pump funds into the ailing tobacco company.

In 2012, the Japanese government sold one-sixth of the company’s outstanding shares to raise JPY500 billion to finance reconstruction from the 2011 earthquake and tsunami. It retains around a third of the company’s shares, and JT remains a powerful company, operating also in agribusiness, food and pharmaceutical production, engineering and real estate.

According to Professor Kelley Lee, a health sciences expert from Simon Fraser University, Asian tobacco companies like JTI are ‘going global’ with their business strategies. JT began expanding into the global market in the late 1990s with the help of the Japanese government, who owned 50 percent of the company until 2013.

“Their aim is to grow their share of the world market through increased marketing, new products and lower prices. This is likely to mean more smokers worldwide,” says Lee.


Despite lobbying against the changes, tobacco firms appear to be already responding to an anticipated crackdown on smoking in Japan. JT and fellow multinational giant Philip Morris Japan have begun moving into developing the smokeless “vape” market.

President of Philip Morris Japan Paul Riley hopes that smokeless tobacco will account for half of the Japanese tobacco market by 2020.
Japan-VP-Finance-Min-1024x713  640x640-1
A customer tries a Philip Morris’ “iQOS” smokeless tobacco e-cigarette at an iQOS store in Tokyo, Japan, March 3, 2016. Source: Reuters/Toru Hanai
Given its hold in markets across Asia, Europe and Africa, JTI’s stake in the global tobacco market seems unlikely to take a massive hit from the modest smoking reforms in Japan. Still, the company appears likely to continue to wield significant influence over the debate, combating reform.

“Their success will mean a further increase to the already six million deaths [globally] caused by tobacco use each year,” says Lee.