Could a new carbon-capture technology really provide a viable approach to reversing the effects of climate change? That’s the ambitious claim of British Columbia-based tech company, , in a peer-reviewed that posits a methodology for capturing carbon dioxide in the atmosphere before combining it with hydrogen to create a carbon-neutral fuel.

In the past, such technologies have often been as pipe dreams with no real potential to rescue the world from the perils of man-made climate change. But as it’s increasingly clear that meeting carbon reduction goals while keeping the lights on will be harder than the upbeat predictions of the 2015 Paris Agreement have hoped for, innovations like carbon capture — as well as efforts to ramp up renewables and use fossil fuels more cleanly — could be key to solving global climate challenges.

While Carbon Engineering is by no means the first organization to consider the large-scale capture and re-use of CO₂, its claim to achieve this at a projected cost of less than $100 per ton is the real story. The paper suggests that “direct air capture” could cost between $94 and $232 per ton — compared to current estimates of $600 per ton — which, if accurate, would mean that the climate could potentially be stabilized without a complete revision of the current energy system.

News of such technological advancements is timely, as it becomes increasingly clear that meeting carbon reduction goals while providing adequate power is a tricky balance for most nations. Many scientists fear that without stripping greenhouse gases from the atmosphere on a massive scale, the chances of preventing global temperatures from rising more than 1.5 degrees Celsius are slim. Some predict that we’ll be locked in to that level of warming within just a few years, at which point CO₂ removal and storage will be the only way of changing the outcome.

Indeed, according to the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) most recent ��report, negative emissions will form an “essential component” of efforts to limit future temperature rises to between 1.5 C and 2 C. The criticality of negative emissions derives from two factors: First, it can help make up for residual emissions in sectors where direct mitigation is challenging, as in aviation. Additionally, it can help offset short-term carbon budget “overshoot” while still making it possible to meet more ambitious climate goals. As a result, negative emissions can essentially increase carbon budgets in the medium term.

When it comes to the struggle to reach zero emissions, there is some good news. In 2017, a was set for renewable-power capacity added to the grid. But it has not yet reached the scale necessary to meet total demand — as of 2016, renewable energy still accounted for only about 18.2% of the world’s total final energy consumption. Additionally, according to a recent from the financial advisory firm Lazard, initially large reductions in the levelized cost of electricity (LCOE) for renewables have started to diminish, complicating the ability to undercut traditional means of generation.

For instance, utility-scale solar LCOE fell 86% in the last eight years, while wind fell 67%. But the majority of these reductions took place in the first four years of the study, with reductions falling to the single digits last year. If this trend continues, it’s unlikely that these energy sources will be capable of replacing traditional generation anytime soon.

On top of that, global demand for energy continues to grow. Last year, demand increased by more than 2%, outpacing low-carbon capacity and resulting in a 1.7% rise in energy-related carbon emissions — the first increase in four years. It’s more evidence of a global society that still relies heavily on , deriving 80% of its energy from coal, oil and gas. And while the use of fossil fuels is stabilizing or declining in many Western countries, rates are expected to remain robust across the developing world as China, India and other emerging economies strive to meet their nations’ power needs affordably.

And while certain countries like China are expected to gradually reduce their reliance on coal, this isn’t the case in others. According to the IEA’s ��report, growth in demand for coal from India, and southeast Asian countries in particular, is expected to outweigh decreases in China and wealthier nations, resulting in a net increase in global coal demand.

Clearly, the world is not going to stop depending on carbon-based sources of energy anytime soon. Indeed, coal and gas-fired plants are expected to remain a fixture of the energy mix for decades to come, particularly in places where policymakers need to achieve energy security, environmental and economic development goals as well as ambitious electrification objectives.

These hurdles help put into perspective not just research into negative emissions technology, but also in carbon capture and storage. Last month, for instance, the White House began to examine the formation of a to advocate for the clean use of natural gas and coal technology, especially in the developing world. According to officials, the shift comes as part of an effort to export high-tech solutions to markets that are still struggling to bridge the energy gap.

Of course, the Trump administration’s plans are not popular in environmental circles. But with only clean-energy techs on track to meet global emissions targets, it will be critical to find ways to use fossil fuels more cleanly in the interim. Now, with news that “direct air capture” and other pie-in-the-sky technology could soon be feasible, there’s good reason to hope that solving the clean energy puzzle is within grasp.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:����/

The post Carbon Capture: A Bold Solution or Pipe Dream? appeared first on 51�Թ�.

When it comes to the fight against climate change, the conversation has focused nearly exclusively on how to bring down levels of one element — carbon.��But what role will the metals and the mining industry play in the drive to realize a low-carbon future? As it turns out, one larger than we might think.

At the end of November, 10 leading auto and truck manufacturers including Toyota, Honda and Volkswagen, announced a in sourcing raw metals and minerals for electric vehicle (EV) production.

In the coming years, the electric car market is expected to surge as regulators enact strict emissions limits and incentivize EV production. Already, risen 63% in the third quarter from last year, with China accounting for half of the purchases. This has helped propel skyrocketing for the raw materials that manufacturers use, such as copper, aluminium and cobalt.��

Not just any kind of raw materials, however. At a time when many metal and mineral suppliers, especially in ,��have been exposed for their poor environmental and human rights records in recent months, automakers and other firms are paying increasing attention to their supply chains and driving surging demand for low-carbon, sustainably sourced metals and minerals. Already, the market is paying higher prices for these materials, signalling the creation of a two-tiered market with higher prices for “green” metals and traceable minerals. For those in China, and many other developing countries choking under the smog-filled skies caused by irresponsible producers, this shift can only be a good thing.

In a sign of what’s to come, major suppliers have already begun to respond to the shift in demand by modifying their offerings and pricing systems. At the Asia Copper Conference in Shanghai in late November, announced a new scheme under which customers would pay varying prices for copper depending on the environmental or community impact of the production process. The initiative, which has the tentative name “feng shui copper” in Chinese, parallels similar moves taken by palm oil producers to improve the transparency and sustainability of their supply chains.

In the aluminium industry, too, major producers have also announced new offerings, often sold at a premium. Last month, launched a low-carbon certification program and a new brand known as .��Thanks in part to the fact that Rusal powers 90% of its smelters on hydropower, ALLOW’s carbon footprint, at less than 4t CO2/t Al, is roughly one-third the world average at approximately 12t CO2/t Al. According to a Rusal spokesperson, although ALLOW does not have a set premium, some customers are open to paying up to $50/ton more for these types of certified “green” metals.

More recently, also announced two low-carbon metals which will be sold at higher prices, one with a maximum of 4kg of CO2/kg and the other with 75% minimum recycled content, anticipating that customers will be open to paying a price to help combat climate change.

These industry-driven moves mirror government-led initiatives in China to crack down on domestic aluminium production, which runs on coal-fired electricity, in a bid to reduce smog levels. This year, Beijing demanded that smelters in 28 northern cities reduce output by at least 30% during the winter heating season, when smog is usually at its worst. The anti-pollution drive, by a state that accounts for half of all aluminium output, helped aluminium prices to a five-year high this autumn, offering a boost to foreign producers who already rely on renewables to power the energy-intensive smelting process.

Similarly with rising demand for low-carbon metals — even at a higher price point — there are growing calls for ethically sourced rare minerals, as human rights organizations, regulators and consumers become more aware of the human cost of mining for lithium, nickel and other raw materials used in rechargeable batteries. According to market analysts, miners that respond to these demands can benefit from a higher price point in exchange.

Most well known are the numerous human rights abuses that riddle the supply chains for cobalt, a key ingredient in EV batteries, more than half of which is sourced from the Democratic Republic of Congo. But there are also major concerns about the used to mine other raw materials, such as lithium, graphite and nickel. For instance, although it might not be as notorious as cobalt, the extraction methods used for nickel — the most important metal by mass in lithium-ion battery cathodes that electric car manufacturers use — is fraught with environmental and other abuses. In the , which accounted for 20% of global production in 2015, the government recently shut down 17 mines over concerns such as the spread of cancerous dust and rivers stained red with hazardous chemicals.

As a result of these issues, ambitious EV manufacturers like Volkswagen have launched initiatives seeking . Already, prices of a high-purity form of nickel used in batteries have been surging, with demand expected to grow tenfold by 2025, to 570,000 tons. Meanwhile, the industry has been seeing new, set up shop as demand for traceable materials grows.

For too long unscrupulous producers in China, the Philippines and other emerging markets have been able to get away with using environmentally harmful, abusive practices to meet ferocious global demand for metals and minerals. As governments crack down on polluting industries, and carmakers step up their commitment to sustainable sourcing and production, global commodities markets are set for a sea change.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:����/

The post Electric Cars Drive Demand for Greener Metals appeared first on 51�Թ�.

When it comes to plastic pollution, it turns out there is a list of worst offenders. According to new research, just 10 rivers — eight of them in Asia — are responsible for up to . Famed waterways like the Yangtze in China and the Ganges in India are among those contributing an estimated 410,000 to 4 million tons each year to the roughly 8 million tons of plastic waste that ends up in Earth’s oceans on an annual basis.

The discoveries come at a time when the issue of plastic pollution is becoming increasingly urgent, with discarded plastic floating for decades without decomposing. Other pieces end up glomming on to floating junkyards like the ,��which has recently become the subject of a to recognize it as an official country. Still more breaks down into smaller pieces called microplastics, which are then ingested by fish and other marine species, ending up on our dinner plates. Most worryingly of all, a recent study found that .

With these kinds of frightening findings continuing to accrue, lawmakers, NGOs and even corporations are finally taking action, from improving recycling systems in Southeast Asia to protecting marine habitats. And while this is all well and good, to truly make an impact on plastic pollution — as well as energy security, another critical environmental challenge in Asia — policymakers must expand their portfolio of solutions to include waste-to-energy as well as other novel approaches.

Many promising new initiatives were announced at the EU-backed Our Ocean 2017 conference in Malta, where the Ocean Conservancy, in partnership with industry partners like Procter & Gamble, announced a $150 million plan to fund . The initiative aims to nip plastic pollution in the bud, given that nearly half of the plastic debris choking our oceans comes from only a handful of rapidly developing Asian countries. At the same conference, Austrian polyolefin manufacturer Borealis AG launched a new $5-million project to .

The industry-backed initiatives come on top of longstanding campaigns by NGOs like program, which aims to build momentum to protect endangered ecosystems and is supported by a number of non-profits active in maritime protection, such as the Philip Stephenson Foundation and the Leonardo DiCaprio Foundation. Celebrity activist-backed initiatives, such as Sir David Attenborough’s Blue Planet 2 documentary, have also recently directed and other environmental issues.

These sorts of initiatives should indeed be welcomed. But at a time when 90% of the world’s plastic inventory is still not recycled because of insufficient infrastructure capacity, policymakers, NGOs and activists should also consider adding another weapon to their arsenal —��, where trash is burned and then is converted to electrical power by turning heated water into steam. Given that many countries in the Asia Pacific region are grappling with both plastic waste and energy shortages, waste-to-energy would be an elegant way to solve both issues simultaneously.

For instance, as the government has introduced subsidies for renewable energies without investing sufficiently in sources of backup power. The country is also grappling with thousands of tons of plastic off its coasts, even as the ,��China, has now erected barriers to imports of unprocessed scrap materials. This is no small development: Around .

Of course critics might charge that incineration is polluting and that all refuse should be recycled. But incineration methods have evolved considerably over the years, and today’s technology — in contrast with visions of smoke-belching bonfires of decades past — emits much lower levels of pollutants. What’s more, a study conducted by the found that waste-to-energy actually reduces greenhouse gas emissions by slashing the methane emissions that come from landfills. Since methane is much more potent than CO2, the process is one the only technology that actually reduces greenhouse gas emissions in lifecycle terms.

This does not mean that reducing, recycling and removing excess plastic waste should not be the long-term goal. But developing perfectly circular recycling systems for plastic materials is highly complex and might generate higher environmental impact in the long term — especially given plastics’ lengthy shelf life. In the meantime, why not generate energy from plastic that is unlikely to be reprocessed and susceptible to being thrown into the nearest gutter or trash pile?

Such an approach could help address the problem of not only in Australia but especially in developing South Asian nations like India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and Nepal,��where demand for energy has been increasing faster than governments can meet citizens’ needs. And while waste-to-energy is not a carbon-free solution, it is still preferable to the outdated coal plants that are running in many of these countries. We also must not underestimate the value of completely removing waste from our rivers, oceans and landfills while in turn reducing methane emissions from landfills, which contributes far more to climate change than CO2.

Of course, waste-to-energy, like recycling, is no panacea for the mountains of plastic we continue to manufacture and toss into our rivers and oceans. Yet combined with action from industry, NGOs and civil society, it could help reduce the plastic threatening to choke the Earth’s blue lungs before it is too late.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:����/

The post Plastic Pollution: Turning a Problem into a Solution appeared first on 51�Թ�.

It seems that three was the magic number for South Korean consumers eager to see the , the de-facto head of Samsung Group. On August 25, Lee was convicted of bribing ousted President Park Geun-hye and was sentenced to five years in prison. His toppling has been seen as a victory for the reform movement led by the new president, Moon Jae-in, and a sign of a major shift in South Korea, where business leaders have long enjoyed impunity in exchange for their role in propelling the country’s robust postwar economic growth. Many expect the verdict to embolden efforts to finally break the hold that family-owned conglomerates like Samsung, known as chaebols, have had over one of the world’s most dynamic economies.

Yet the long-overdue conviction of the business titan comes too little, too late and mirrors reforms in other Asian countries like China and India that have the appearance of making progress in the fight against corruption but have turned out to be little more than surface-level so far.

Lee’s sentencing came after two failed attempts to convict the head of a business empire that until now has been seen as untouchable. It was the culmination of a to its core. Yet even following the conviction, Lee continued conducting business from behind bars, much as Chey Tae-won, the executive of the sprawling��, did after being sentenced for misappropriating company funds. Many question whether authorities will maintain pressure on the chaebol or dust off their hands after having used Lee as a sacrificial lamb. After all, the government now has much bigger issues to address, not least Pyongyang’s nuclear brinksmanship. On top of that, some critics say that Lee’s sentence was the shortest ever handed down for his crime.

However, other Asian countries are even farther behind when it comes to efforts to crack down on corporate malfeasance. In China, while President Xi Jinping’s anti-graft crusade has met with some success, including uncovering wrongdoings at state-owned companies like China Telecom and Baoshan Iron and Steel, it has still experienced a number of embarrassing failures. In the same week that news broke about Lee’s conviction in Seoul, it came to light that the Communist Party had for “serious discipline breaches,” a euphemism for corruption. The arrest of Mo Jiancheng comes amid wider scrutiny of the government’s crusade that has seen more than 1 million corrupt officials investigated — 210,000 just this year alone — but has also led to accusations that Xi is using the campaign as a .

In addition to having questionable motives for leading the campaign, government authorities have also shown themselves unable to stop graft among Western companies operating in the country. The most notorious example involves drug giant from at least 2010 to June 2013. The company was fined $489 million by Beijing and paid an extra $20 million to the US Security and Exchange Commission to put the case to rest.

One of the more recent examples involves staff employed by . Earlier this summer, employees were charged with bribing medical personnel to access patients’ files as part of a scheme to convince them to use its��infant formula. The revelations came after an earlier scoop that exposed how Nestlé staff has regularly employed aggressive marketing techniques and illegal methods like bribery to gain market access for its products.

It is because of open breaches of law such as this, and Chinese authorities’ seeming inability to stop them, that regulators in home markets are often forced to use wide-ranging legislation like the to crack down instead. Earlier this year, over allegations of engaging in bribery in China, India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand. Around the same time, Mondelez International agreed to pay fines to the US Securities and Exchange Commission to resolve FCPA offenses related to payments by its Cadbury unit in India.

Such crackdowns alone, however, simply won’t be enough without substantial action by domestic regulators. In India, despite action by outside enforcers, many sectors of the economy remain tainted by corruption. Ten months ago, the government instated a ban on high-value banknotes in an effort to fight graft, but according to a new ., bribery continues to “oil the wheels of business.” Rather than handing out money, aspiring bribers have simply shifted to handing out non-cash gifts. This month, in its latest attempt to tackle corruption, India announced new rules to stop the practice of “,” in which pharmaceutical companies pay for doctors to attend conferences in exotic locations or shower them with gifts to persuade them to prescribe their medications. After all, this kind of behavior is what got GSK in hot water in China in the first place. However, given the failure of past legislation, there is serious doubt that the new regulations will have any real effect.

It seems that for now, given the often ineffective responses of authorities across Asia’s biggest economies to tackle corruption, it might fall to foreign governments and international bodies like the to stand in. China, for one, has responded well to the UNCAC initiative that aims to establish a standard of international best practice from which member countries can draw when implementing their anti-corruption policies. Working in tandem with SFO and SEC officials, leveraging the resources of UNCAC and continuing lawsuits against even the mightiest business titans like Samsung might be what it takes to deliver the triple punch needed to knock out corruption still rampant in South Korea and among its neighboring economies.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:����/

The post Fighting Corporate Corruption in Asia appeared first on 51�Թ�.

On July 22, General Joseph Dunford, the chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff, publicly announced that North Korea’s has matured to the point that Pyongyang can now launch a “limited missile attack” against the United States, rendering the prospect of conflict not “unimaginable.” His remarks came on the back of another startling revelation that shows just how dangerous the crisis has become. At the Aspen Security Forum, where Dunford also spoke, CIA chief Mike Pompeo openly hinted that the Trump administration is actively exploring “” options. The world, all consumed with the scandals engulfing the White House, now faces the very real possibility of sleepwalking into a nuclear conflict with North Korea. And the battle lines are already drawn.

In spite of repeated vows to work together with the US on stopping the Kim Jong-un regime’s nuclear program, China has done next to nothing — other than issuing boilerplate statements about doing “everything” to prevent conflict from breaking out. China has traditionally been unwilling to impose harsher economic sanctions on Pyongyang. At present, China is by far North Korea’s largest trading partner, making up more than . According to South Korean government estimates, in 2015 China received $2.5 billion-worth of North Korean exports, not counting the across the Yalu River along the Chinese border.

This may come as a surprise since the Sino-North Korean relationship has been souring in recent times, as Pyongyang has become an increasingly petulant neighbor. The Kim regime has come to pose both a nuclear and , while being actively involved in to the value of millions of dollars each year. In May, North Korea broke a longstanding taboo when it attacked China over media stories pressing for enhanced sanctions, even going so far as to Beijing with “grave consequences” unless the reports subsided.

Even if China has the power to bring North Korea to its knees, it would cause the Kim regime to collapse and pave the way for a reunification of the Korean Peninsula under Seoul’s leadership — a nightmare scenario for the Chinese leadership.

And to top off this kerfuffle, Russia has also decided to step into the arena. Moscow and Pyongyang have taken steps to as Sino-DPRK relations deteriorate. Ready to fill the void amid the nuclear standoff, (UNSC) statement condemning North Korean missile tests, and even calling for renewed sanctions on Pyongyang. Beyond having Kim’s back in the UN, Russia has massively boosted its trade with the Hermit Kingdom by a the first two months of 2017 alone.

Already sharing a long history of ideological and economic ties, recent projects point to even closer relations between Russia and North Korea. Earlier this year, a opened between North Korea’s Rajin and Vladivostok in Russia’s far east. Furthermore, Russian military hardware has been to the border with North Korea, though Russia was quick to shoot down criticism by citing “routine” military exercises. Russia may never entirely replace China’s influence over North Korea, but much like Beijing, it is in Moscow’s best interest to maintain the North as a buffer state. By laying the groundwork for stronger ties with North Korea, Russia is now able to on the peninsula.

NEWS FROM SOUTH KOREA

North Korea’s diplomatic offensive doesn’t stop there. The plot twist comes from hitherto one of Washington’s closest allies: South Korea. Freshly-minted President Moon Jae-in is on the verge of reversing Seoul’s Pyongyang policy by embracing a more amicable approach to North Korea. Favoring a with a heavy emphasis on pursuing dialogue, Moon has sought to demonstrate his goodwill straight away. In May, the first inter-Korean civilian exchange since the start of 2016, after relations were put on hold following Pyongyang’s fourth nuclear test. As winter approaches, to North Korea are bound to increase, and Moon’s olive branch shows no sign of wavering.

That Moon’s Minjoo Party of Korea (MPK) would try to cozy up to Pyongyang is not entirely unexpected. The party has not been shy to about North Korea’s nuclear program, and some MPK elements remain overly sympathetic to the north, perhaps including Moon himself, whose on abstaining from the 2007 UN resolution on the DPRK’s human rights abuses is well documented.

But the most dangerous aspect of this détente comes from the fact that Moon is ready to allow Pyongyang to drive a wedge between South Korea and Japan. The president’s of the struck with Japan mirrors Pyongyang’s criticisms and speaks to a worrisome lack of strategic foresight that is playing into North Korea’s cards.

The historic comfort women agreement was considered a landmark deal to lay an old issue to rest. After grinding negotiations that even saw the US mediator, Ambassador Mark Lippert, attacked by a , Japan agreed to set up a fund worth ($8.3 million) for comfort women and issued an apology. However, Pyongyang was quick to call the accord “,” and has since attempted to undermine South Korea’s alliances with Tokyo. On July 19, the South Korean the establishment of a task force to re-examine the accord, in what is the following months of controversy that saw the of Japan’s ambassador to South Korea earlier this year.

The global failure to discourage North Korea’s nuclear program speaks volumes about the state of the anti-North Korea coalition. With the clock ticking, it is more important than ever that South Korea boosts cooperation with Japan and cements the alliance with the US. But with China and Russia actively bolstering the Kim regime, and with Seoul wavering, it’s no wonder that talk of war on the Korean Peninsula is rife.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: /

The post Tick Tock Goes the Doomsday Clock appeared first on 51�Թ�.

In response to North Korea’s fifth nuclear test in September, Chinese and American diplomats are , according to sources at the United Nations Security Council. This new effort to tighten sanctions will reportedly target Pyongyang’s ability to trade coal, iron ore and crude oil.

As North Korea’s only friendly neighbor and primary trading partner, China’s cooperation is key to establishing effective sanctions. Beijing is faced with a delicate balancing act, working to prevent a total collapse in North Korea, for humanitarian reasons, and also to avoid a potential Korean unification under American guidance.

However, continued North Korean belligerence has been taking a toll on its tenuous friendship with China. The nation’s stubborn refusal to halt advancement of its nuclear program has proved frustrating to China, leading China to with the United States and others. Pyongyang’s recent that it would��use nuclear weapons if threatened��should act as a catalyst to further US-China cooperation.

Unlike his father, who frequently visited China to ask for assistance during his last years, North Korean leader Kim Jong-un has not visited once since taking over in 2012. China’s apparent support of possible Security Council sanctions may indicate a broader , and perhaps even a new willingness for China to consider dealing with the political and humanitarian fallout of a North Korean collapse. This shift has also established new common ground between the United States and China.

Collapse of North Korea

Despite what some might think, a total North Korean collapse would be incredibly problematic for the US as well, since the country’s nuclear arsenal would need to be urgently secured in order to prevent it from falling into the wrong hands. Terrorist groups have attempted at least six times to steal nuclear weapons from Pakistan, a country with a poor security record but one that is still better than the chaos that would follow from Pyongyang’s collapse.

What’s more, the regime could even founder from centripetal forces, as the country is , a cholera outbreak and dwindling agricultural production. Even without external sanctions, North Korea could unravel, presenting .

On the other hand, while the North Korean wagon is hurtling toward collapse, it will take others down with it if left unchecked. The country has deployed both “hard” and “soft” power tactics to strengthen its aggressive posture against the rest of the world.

In terms of “hard” power, US think tanks have to develop 100 nuclear weapons by 2020. have uncovered evidence that North Korea could be constructing a nuclear submarine, increasing its ability to launch such attacks covertly and retain second-strike capability.

In September, North Korea��. Pyongyang’s arsenal is , some of which may soon be capable of reaching the continental US. The inability of the United States to prevent this proliferation has led East Asian allies such as Japan and South Korea to question whether the US “nuclear umbrella” provides adequate security from North Korean belligerence.

North Korea also has employed “soft” power as leverage, using the nuclear threat to secure continued , while maintaining its narrative of resistance to the “imperial” West. Pyongyang��has recently taken advantage of discord between US allies, especially after Washington facilitated a to the “comfort women” issue between Japan and South Korea in 2015. The deal, which included an official apology from Tokyo and established a fund for survivors, was intended to provide closure to tensions that have persisted since the end of World War II.

However, to prevent increased cooperation between US allies, North Korea has and prevent reconciliation. The Pyongyang government decried the deal a “humiliating agreement” for South Korea, and a South Korean nationalist group with alleged ties to North Korea has rallied anti-Japan sentiment there by demanding the agreement be canceled.

Well aware of the potential a united regional front against it could have, North Korea has taken every opportunity to use psychological warfare against the Association of Southeast Asian Nation (ASEAN) countries to prevent the formation of a more united front. North Korea will stop at nothing in its efforts to divide US��allies in Asia.

The Next US President and Pyongyang

Cooperation between US allies in northeast Asia is, therefore, the key to countering threats and escalation on the part of Pyongyang. Much of that ability will depend on the next US administration, which is to be elected in November.

51�Թ� provides you deep and diverse insights for free. Remember that we still have to pay for servers, website maintenance and much more. So, to keep us free, fair and independent.

[add-subscribe-form-320] Republican nominee Donald Trump’s campaign has pointed to a withdrawal from the region, calling the defense of Japan by US forces for the US, a decision that �� He also implied that both Japan and South Korea would be “better off” if they had their own nukes—disregarding the fact that it would spark a global arms race with bleak consequences. Trump’s policy proposals add an element of unpredictability to a situation with an already high potential for trouble.

With North Korea taking advantage of tensions between allies, what is needed is a cautious and diplomatic approach to bring together these nations. Furthermore, the US must secure Chinese cooperation, which has proven elusive in the past.

Only cooperation and a coherent strategy can roll back North Korea’s nuclear ambitions. A Trump administration is grossly unfit for the task.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:

The post Why US-China Cooperation is Important in Dealing With North Korea appeared first on 51�Թ�.

On August 7, Thailand held��the long-awaited referendum on its draft constitution. While the junta claims that the proposed constitution will usher in an era of peace and stability, critics argue that it will only serve to formally entrench the military’s iron rule over Thai society. The electorate finally��, with unofficial results showing that 61.4% voted in favor, with a turnout of only 59%.

In the run-up to the referendum, the military government under Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha�� and suppressed public discussion of its contents by ��against what was vaguely defined as “rude opinions.” In April, Thai King Bhumibol Adulyadej also approved a law that declared individuals who committed transgressions were punishable for up to����in prison.

The newly approved constitution also introduces a new electoral system. Formerly a mixed member majoritarian system (MMM), it will now be a mixed member apportionment system (MMA) designed to����the electoral power away from Pheu Thai Party (PTP), the party of ousted Prime Ministers Thaksin and Yingluck Shinawatra. Simulations ran under MMA with the previous election’s results showed a marked decrease in the PTP’s fortunes and the elevation of several smaller parties, thus making it more difficult to form stable coalition governments.

What’s more, the members of the senate will be��, and an “independent” commission filled with junta-appointed personnel will be in charge of overseeing the policies and moral conduct of politicians. At the same time, restrictions on the media are expected to tighten even further, according to the��Southeast Asian Press Alliance (SEAPA). The organization����that the constitution “provides the state with potentially more power to intervene on press freedom and freedom of expression,” calling the new constitution a “regression” compared to the 2007 constitution with regard to freedom of the press.

Once these changes have been fully implemented, the lingering influence of Thaksin will be all but upended. Thaksin himself����that the “drafters … created a constitution for the ‘continuity’ of the absolute power of the present coup makers to continue even after the new constitution is proclaimed,” thereby epitomizing the criticisms of the constitution and the junta’s maneuvering. But the successful referendum has paved the way for the general election slated to take place in 2017, as the outcome has contributed to the��.

Invitation to Rule

It is no wonder then that analysts are openly discussing the possibility that Prayuth Chan-ocha might stand in the forthcoming elections and emulate the so-called “,” named after General Prem Tinsulanonda, who was prime minister between 1980 and 1988.

The Prem model is essentially an archaic system of governance����on the idea that a perceived threat needs to be countered by the government with “a semblance of democracy, to provide an open channel for inclusiveness of differences in opinion, while maintaining stability through a strong military presence and decisiveness.” When the parties are not able to form functioning blocs to rule—as the constitution now intends—the generals would be “invited” to step up to run the government and maintain order.

However, Colonel Piyapong Klinpan, spokesman for the��National Council of Peace and Order (NCPO), spared no time to�� is harboring such plans, or that of aiming to establish his own military-backed political party. Instead, the colonel insisted that Prayuth sought merely to resolve Thailand’s problems, but kept quiet as to whether the prime minister will be seeking any unelected official role in the next government.

Nevertheless, such vague assurances cannot invalidate the mounting body of evidence indicating that Prayuth might indeed stand after all. To begin with, there is the fact that the new party system favors political instability and deadlock as the PTP and Democrats are����to form a majority and establish a working coalition, which in turn could justify the appointment of an unelected prime minister.

Furthermore, members of the leading junta have used the recent spate of that killed four people to discredit and ostracize democratic parties. While not directly accused, suspicions are subtly����at the PTP and the United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship (Red Shirts), despite the fact that the blasts seem to follow the modus operandi of����active in Thailand’s south.

Subscribe to 51�Թ� for and we will gift you our and invite you to inspiring events.

According to Panitan Wattanayagorn, security adviser to the defense minister, General Prawit Wongsuwan, military intelligence agencies had�� from PTP loyalists ahead of the referendum with the intent of destabilizing the vote. In response, former Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra�� against those junta elements that accuse him of being behind the deadly attacks.

All is Not Lost

However, the military’s strong hand can also be traced back to the venal office holding mores of previous governments, which have managed to discredit the legitimacy of democratic rule. Faced with a choice between the corrupt figures of the past and the human rights abusing ways of the junta, many Thais chose the latter.

Indeed, the 2014 coup was preceded by huge��. What’s more, the upcoming royal transition, brought upon by the poor health of King Bhumibol Adulyadej, is bound to proceed in a smoother manner with the military at the helm.

Even if the new charter severely undermines the democratic process, it could also be an opportunity for the Thai political class to do some soul searching, unite around a common enemy (the junta) and restore the electorate’s trust in civilian institutions. Thailand might even emerge stronger after the 2017 elections.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:��

The post Thailand’s Pseudo-Democracy Has Become a Reality appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The nations of Southeast Asia have collectively achieved a degree of notoriety for their structural instabilities—the typically gradual process of political change abandoned for recurring power vacuums and institutional landslides.

In this respect, Thailand is no different, and has suffered 19 separate��coup d’états��since the absolute monarchy was abolished in 1932. Even so, there has always been cautious optimism about Thailand’s place in Southeast Asia as a liberal voice in a troubled region. With the 2014 coup, however, the same observers who have always patiently held out for Thailand’s return to the democratic fold have started to betray a significant shift in their attitudes toward its current status.

Perhaps it is the Thai electoral commission’s recently filed charges against��—accusing them of using foul language about the latest draft of the proposed constitution—that has stripped away the last remaining layers of hope. They were charged with sedition and computer crimes, and two are facing ��è����-����������é charges under the notorious article 112.

That these charges are being filed at all is a direct result of coup leader Prayuth Chan-o-cha’s����on discussing the charter. Ostensibly to deter political bodies from influencing the vote of the electorate, it has swiftly become apparent that the true motive underlying these laws is to silence any criticism of a patently undemocratic process ahead of the August referendum—a referendum that will allow Thais to vote for or against a new draft constitution.

On May 2, the 14 rules governing the limits of free speech on discussing the constitution��. “Rude, aggressive, or intimidating” interviews with government figures are banned, as well as wearing “T-shirts, pins and ribbons” that encourage others to campaign. Transgressors face up to 10 years in prison.

The law is already changing the attitudes of journalists and bloggers. In the words of one Facebook commentator quoted by Voice of America, “.”

The charges filed against the Facebook group, in tandem with a number of arrests of critics across the country and the����of international media publications, have promoted a culture of fear that is clearly far removed from the electoral commission’s pretense of organizing a free and fair election. It’s no small wonder that The New York Times����to end printing and distributing its print edition in Thailand.

The new constitution has been presented to the Thai public as the sole means to get democracy back on track—the beginning of a handover process that will see the junta’s influence recede. However, the nation’s major political parties, as well as interested human rights organizations, have been swift to criticize the most recent draft (released on March 29) as further entrenching the powers and influence of the military in Thai politics, and falling far short of the promises that Prayuth’s junta had made.

Not only has the draft given the military further scope to silence critics, with sweeping powers to arrest and detain at will, but the very possibility of returning to civilian rule is doubtful. In this new constitution, for instance, all����would be appointed by the junta, with six positions permanently open to appointments from the military. That senate would then oversee the country’s governance for the next five years, until such a time that it saw fit to hand the reins of power over to a democratically elected government.

Yet there are worrying hints that this already most unsatisfactory of situations might prove only a temporary compromise. Since the coup of 2014, Prayuth has repeatedly backtracked on his promises to organize elections and, in order to legitimize his heavy-handed approach to governance, the general now appears determined to riddle the new constitution with subversive clauses—most worryingly the introduction of legal avenues to provide for��. The details regarding these avenues are, as to be expected, intentionally vague, but it is not a great stretch of imagination given Prayuth’s recent track record that they might be utilized toward the end of the five years to further thwart the democratic process.

Beyond the Point of No Return?

A public vote in favor of the constitution this August is a distinct possibility—given the overriding desire of the Thai populace to get their lives and businesses back on track—and might seem something of a victory for Prayuth and his generals.

Sadly, even a public rejection of the constitution might play even more firmly��. Prayuth has already said that, if the draft is rejected, he will keep on making suggestions indefinitely until it is passed. The inference here is that the junta will only accept a democracy that is paradoxically governed by an unelected body and sanctioned by the military. Either the Thai public must legitimize the Thai junta through elective means, or have it forced upon them.

A return to a true form of civilian rule is now virtually impossible and the May 2014 coup should, therefore, be seen as a watershed moment in Thailand’s political history. While many observers were expecting the junta to pass the baton in short order, Prayuth’s behavior is indicative of a deep desire for a system that abides solely according to army rules and hierarchies. The ambitions of the Prayuth administration have gone beyond simply preserving the legacy of the monarchic establishment, and����provides the perfect springboard for Prayuth’s cynical ambitions of staying in power.

There has been a paradigm shift not only in the nation’s traditionally coy affair with democracy, but also in the fundamental institutions that made it possible. We are now entering a dark new era in Thai politics more reminiscent of a time when the nation had a different name: goodbye Thailand and hello again Siam.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:�� /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Thailand is Headed Down a Dark Path appeared first on 51�Թ�.

It isn’t unusual for the new year to be seen in with a bang, but when, on January 6, claimed it had successfully detonated a hydrogen bomb, reactions of an entirely unseasonal nature were elicited worldwide. Luckily, it swiftly became apparent that there was no need to run for the bomb shelters just yet, as experts assured the world that the test was made using a very small nuclear device of a decidedly traditional type, producing a decidedly��.

However, once seismographs stopped shaking and the world’s powers finished reading their angered statements, a more clear-eyed appraisal of the situation would argue that the Hermit Kingdom’s bomb test was not a serious threat to international security. Rather, it was a ruse enacted by Pyongyang to extract the kind of financial concessions that would keep its economy from tanking.

Throughout the core months of����and��, North Korea suffered from a severe drought as a result of the lowest rainfall levels in the country since 1961. The nation’s so-called “rice bowl,” which is important for��, was largely reduced to hard-baked clay throughout the course of last year and seriously hinders its potential to sustain crops over the next 12 months. This could explain why North Korea has chosen to provoke the international community.

North Korea tried this strategy before with great success in��, when it got the United States to unfreeze $25 million in and received roughly 1 million tons of oil. This might not sound like a lot, but experts point out that alleviating North Korea’s food crisis only requires��. On the back of the successful conclusion of the Iran nuclear negotiations, it is clear that the political class fancies its chances of securing oil and food from participants in the six party talks in return for closing a nuclear program that has led to the development of the hydrogen bomb.

But negotiation, as an alternative to forcefully deal with North Korea, must be approached with a significant degree of caution. Time and again, first with the����and then again during the Bush administration, Pyongyang proved itself highly adept at twisting the particular approach of the then-negotiating party to its own advantage. It seems clear from looking back over the past 30 years of diplomatic talks that North Korea has never had any intention of discarding a nuclear program that lies at the core of its����“military-first”��policy.

After the demise of the denuclearized Gaddafi and Saddam regimes, who traded their nuclear programs for political guarantees, North Korea might very well use its arsenal as the only guarantors of its autonomy.

Chinese President Xi Jinping / Flickr

Fool me once…

However, this time around, the regime’s strategy might not bear fruit. Despite the fact that Pyongyang’s leadership is comfortable with enduring further sanctions, even at risk of impoverishing many of its citizens as a consequence, the����has voted overwhelmingly to step up sanctions already in place instead of hinting at negotiations.

North Korea, however, has learned to live in a state of isolation ever since it was forced from underneath the Soviet Union’s wings in the 1980s. It has showed time and time again that it is more than willing to allow the lower echelons of its social hierarchy to take the brunt of sanctions so that the military classes may thrive. This not only shows the futility of implementing unilateral sanctions against Pyongyang, but also undermines them as an ethically credible course of action.

There is, however, one relationship that North Korea still values and still needs: the one it maintains with . Although somewhat chilly since the nuclear tests of 2013, that relationship is still worth around����to Pyongyang and also secures it a route to the all-important foreign currency that it cannot otherwise access. In addition, given North Korea’s tendency toward political petulance, China has always been careful not to make too many demands upon its fickle ally—keeping at least one avenue open, down which the regime may be willing to travel.

If restarting negotiations would play too much into North Korea’s hands, then surely it would be more productive to apply pressure to get China more involved in the issue. After all, the presence of such a volatile nuclear threat upon its doorstep is one that should surely cause concern—should and is, according to reports on China’s��.

It would seem that even the Chinese public is in agreement with the rest of the international community: That it is time for and finally rein in that troublesome little man in Pyongyang.

Much like a medieval king, ’s regime seems to function on a toxic combination of obedience and awe. While North Korea’s weapon test is morally objectionable, its nuclear program is not directed at any particular country. Its goal is to reinforce the regime’s narrative in the eyes of its population, and to goad the international community into treating Pyongyang with respect.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post The Time Has Come for China to Rein in Kim Jong-Un appeared first on 51�Թ�.

With ’s slow road back to democracy looking like it has no end in sight, the military junta led by former General Prayuth Chan-ocha is looking for ways to divert��international attention from the country’s authoritarian turn.

Already under fire from human rights and civil society groups for�� activists,��, and driving its own top human trafficking investigator��, the “transitional” government has recently seen a spate of international incidents involving several of its most important partners, including both the United States and the (EU).

Since overthrowing Yingluck Shinawatra’s democratically elected government in May 2014, the Thai junta has seen only mild repercussions from Washington. After the coup, the Obama administration temporarily suspended military aid but ultimately decided to take part in����for fear of driving its longtime ally toward China. The US State Department also added Thailand to its����in 2014 and declined to improve its standing in the��, but that has entailed little in the way of concrete repercussions. While the US may trying to minimize the impact of the coup on bilateral relations, officials in Thailand seem to be taking the opposite approach.

On December 9, 2015, Thai police announced�� US Ambassador Glyn Davies for a speech he made at a Foreign Correspondents’ Club event in November. Speaking to international journalists present at the event, Davies expressed concern over prison sentences being handed down to civilians tried on��lèse majesté��charges by military courts. According to the investigation and the complaint that prompted it, to even bring up concerns over freedom of speech may itself be��lèse majesté��in Thailand’s tense political climate.

The US ambassador is protected from any official charges by diplomatic immunity, but that has not stopped a harsh reaction from groups who support the military government. Hard-line royalists in Thailand even����outside the US Embassy.

Davies is not the only Western envoy to find himself in hot water for offering even mild criticism of the junta’s behavior. British Ambassador Mark Kent����from government spokesmen for����that a royalist protest was allowed while student activists were prevented from pursuing corruption allegations linked to the military.

Yingluck Shinawatra © Shutterstock

In early 2015, US Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Russel also sparked����for suggesting the 2014 coup was “politically driven.”

Relations With the EU

While British and American officials are coming into conflict with the military government and its supporters, Thailand’s relations with the EU are also being impacted by political developments. As reported by NewEurope, the junta is now����with the European Parliament over its invitation to former Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra to address the parliament on Thailand’s political situation.

The Thai government reacted harshly,����Elmar Brok, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and Werner Langen, panel chair for relations with Southeast Asia and ASEAN, for not communicating through the Thai Ministry of Foreign Affairs and for not inviting the government to participate as well. The junta even suggested the invitation itself might be fake.

Brok and Langen, for their part, responded by confirming the authenticity of the invitation and their openness to the government’s participation. When the Thai leadership denied Yingluck—who is still awaiting trial—permission to travel to Europe, the two chairs declared themselves “.”

Beyond diplomatic controversy, tensions between the EU and Thailand’s military rulers could ultimately have serious economic consequences. The European Parliament����the 2014 coup “illegal,” and members of the European Parliament like Ryszard Czarnecki have argued for tying the trade relationship to Bangkok’s respect for human rights.

Those economic ties are of critical importance for Thailand, which sees��over ��and����in foreign direct investment from Europe. The EU has already����on its vital fishing industry if it doesn’t act to curtail slave labor and illegal fishing.

As Thailand’s autocratic interim government drags on, the likelihood of further disputes with the US, Britain and the EU could do serious damage to the country’s standing with its most important international partners.

Unfortunately, the political calculus that motivated both the coup and the delays in transitioning to civilian rule are likely to persist for the foreseeable future. The struggle between traditional Thai elites (who back Prayuth) and the long-marginalized rural electorate supporting Thaksin and Yingluck Shinawatra has been at the heart of Thailand’s political troubles for the past decades.

When the upcoming royal succession takes place, this tension could become more palpable than ever. By taking power and preventing elections��, the military and its allies aim to prevent the pro-Shinawatra electoral majority from interfering with their monopoly on power and influence. While protests from the Thai public and the international community remain (mostly) muted for now, it is an open question as to how long this seemingly peaceful status quo can last.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit:�� / /��

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Thailand is Playing a Game of Smoke and Mirrors appeared first on 51�Թ�.

Territorial spats between China and its Southeast Asian neighbors over Beijing’s infamous “” dotted across the South China Sea have substantially soured the mood of its allies.

China’s insistence to play by its own rules, especially in the case of the Spratly, Paracel and Senkaku/Diaoyu islands, has put Beijing at loggerheads with virtually all littoral countries in the region and, farther afield, with the United States. As a result, the fact that China has chosen to go its own way regarding territorial claims has become a burr under the saddle of many of its once loyal allies.

Turning Tide in Malaysia

Malaysia provides a particularly good example of China’s alienation of its friends over the South China Sea. China’s incursions in Malaysia’s territorial waters have increased in frequency since 2009, when it began to more stringently adhere to the informal “nine-dash-line” area established in 1947. For many years, Malaysia considered itself in a “special relationship” with China and had chosen to handle such issues privately with Beijing, as it has done with other members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) when the South China Sea issue arose.

However, over the past two years, the incursions into Malaysia’s territorial waters have become more frequent, more open and notorious. One particularly egregious example is��the vessel currently anchored at Luconia Shoals. Situated 84 nautical miles from Sarawak, which is well-within Malaysia’s territorial waters, the vessel has been anchored for two years and counting, possibly in an attempt to establish a territorial claim on a new island forming in the area.

Rather than handling the encroachment privately as before,��the has been forced to become more public and more confrontational in its approach. High-level officials from Malaysia have had emergency meetings with their own government, Malaysian vessels have been dispatched to the area to reinforce its claim to the territory and to monitor China’s movements in the area, and the issue was on the agenda at a meeting between��heads of state this summer.

China’s actions have clearly alarmed Malaysia and threatened the “special relationship” the two parties claim to have. It has also begun to drive Malaysia into the arms of the other power in the region: the United States.

The US has already done a great deal to woo Malaysia away from China. As China’s economy experiences a slowdown, the��US is finalizing the (TPP) with Malaysia��(among others). The TPP, a paradigm-shifting agreement to which China is not a party, stands to open American��markets to Malaysia’s electronics, rubber and palm oil industries, which are expected to help make up for the recent decline of Malaysian products exported to the US, and then some.

Washington and Kuala Lumpur��have taken steps to increase the level of their security partnership as well. Malaysia has joined the US and other states in establishing the Global Coalition to Counter Islamic State. As part of this, Malaysia has pledged to establish��a ��to counter messaging from the Islamic State (IS)��by the end of 2015 with the help of Washington. Additionally, Malaysia has����with the US in the fight against IS.

Vietnam and the US

Meanwhile, another example of a close relationship gone south comes from Vietnam. After China�� an oil rig in Vietnam’s territorial waters in 2014, tensions escalated to the point that President Truong Tan Sang seemed to forgive Washington for imprisoning him during the Vietnam War, and instead lashed out at China.

In a September interview to Associated Press, he unambiguously declared that Beijing’s large-scale reclamation of submerged islands in the South China Sea “.” During the same interview, Sang talked warmly about the US, lauding the steps made by US President Barack Obama toward normalizing bilateral relations and lifting an embargo on armament sales.

While Beijing has been making overtures recently in a bid to pacify Hanoi, the damage will not be reversed easily. The two candidates vying for the top position of secretary general in the Communist Party of Vietnam are both����as having strong intentions of��deepening ties with the US. Coupled with the recent signing of the TPP, Hanoi seems set to pursue its core national interests by playing the powers against one another, in the hope of restraining China’s aggressive actions in the South China Sea.

That strategy has already borne fruit. During Xi Jinping’s two-day visit to Vietnam, the two communist countries����to solve their maritime disputes peacefully by helping each other and proceeding “hand in hand” on a path to building a “truly trustworthy” bond.

China’s assertion of its non-existent and unrecognized claims in the South China Sea, especially as it relates to Malaysia and Vietnam, is positioning the razor of fruitless aggression over the special relationships’ face. China’s incursions are making international recognition of its claims in the area even less likely. Continuing down this road will likely find many more of China’s relationships in ruins.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.��

Photo Credit:����/��

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post China is Losing its Southeast Asian Friends appeared first on 51�Թ�.

The July 2015 US State Department Trafficking in People report was met with staunch criticism both from congressional lawmakers and human rights activists after Malaysia, previously given the worst available Tier 3 ranking for modern slavery and trafficking, was upgraded to a Tier 2 status, despite the lack of evidence to justify the move. Critics were quick to note that the decision was a political one. US President Barack Obama’s newfound authority to lead the fast-track Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) negotiations essentially banned any Tier 3 countries on the trafficking list to partake in it, leading Democratic Senator Bob Menendez to “is a clear politicization of the report.”

That’s enough of a problem in and of itself, but what is even worse is the fact that, in an attempt to fast-track the deal, the US may not even include the environmentally protective measures necessary to change such harmful international business practices and ensure that obligations are enforced.

But the word on the street is the TPP, set to be the in history, affecting 792 million people and making up 40% of the world economy, could significantly slow down and even stop harmful business practices that lead to environmental damage. So far, the TPP is still a pending trade agreement between the United States and 11 nations: Canada, Mexico, Peru, Chile, New Zealand, Australia, Singapore, Malaysia, Brunei, Vietnam and Japan.

One crucial issue from the negotiations has come to the forefront of the current discussion and attracted some of the largest criticisms’ from environmental advocates: the environmental impact of the deal. According to a of the deal obtained by The��New York Times, the 12 countries “cover environmentally sensitive regions from tundra to island ecosystems, and from the world’s largest coral reefs to its largest rain forest.” The document says the deal “addresses these challenges in detail.”

In most of the countries that would fall into the agreement, illegal logging, wildlife trafficking and overfishing are common. If enforced, such a concrete chapter would be a gamechanger for these countries’ environmental landscape. For Vietnam and Malaysia, stringent environmental requirements on wildlife trafficking could oblige environmental ministries to crack down on poachers. Furthermore, for Malaysia—which not only suffers from migrant and wildlife trafficking, and deforestation from palm oil plantations, but also a —the environmental chapter of the TPP could provide incentives to regulate these industries and promote a sustainable development growth model.

Currently, Malaysia’s unregulated bauxite mining industry, having grown significantly over the past year as China seeks to (the country banned exports of raw materials in January 2014), has largely contributed to the deforestation of vast rainforests, releasing toxic gases into the atmosphere that have led to an uptick in health problems for the population concerned.

According to local media, the “leaking radioactive material into parts of the Malaysian state, turning natural green waters to a deep dark hue.” The TPP environmental chapter could play a vital role in ensuring stringent guidelines for the industry are adopted to ensure mining operators are bound by strict health and environmental regulations. This would weed out the illegal bauxite miners, loggers, poachers and traffickers. This is one instance where the controversial investor state dispute settlement clause could actually be used to force compliance from states.

An Agreement Shrouded in Secrecy

However, the key issue today, in the event of the deal being successful, is the fact that the enforcement of environmental protections in the agreement would be very difficult to uphold. While promoting��“,” the environmental chapter may result in a failure of these countries to adhere to environmental standards. But ignoring obligations may result in trade sanctions, which supporters claim will discourage countries from failing to comply.

According to Jeffery Frankel, a professor of capital formation and growth at Harvard: “In , and international agreements of any sort, enforcement is always an issue because no country wants a violation of their sovereignty. But trade sanctions as part of trade agreements have turned out to be pretty effective relative to anything else in enforcing international agreements.”

Despite optimistic promises, another complaint against the TPP is the , with access reserved for certain Congress members and staffers with security clearance, essentially eradicating any method of accountability for the deal. While assurances from negotiators that agreements have been reached for the “environmental protection of some of the most sensitive, diverse and threatened ecosystems on earth,” a previous version of the agreement leaked in January 2014 poured cold water on such reports. According to the , the use of language such as “seek” or “attempt” mean that any steps taken to protect the environment would lack legal enforce-ability.

But hope still remains that challenges can be addressed and the TPP can indeed become a gamechanger agreement with positive impacts on the environment. It is up to the US to ensure that it respects its own values enough, and not bend over and sacrifice vital parts of the agreement, in the name of “fast-tracking” one of the most important trade deals the world has ever seen.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: ��/ ��

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post The Conundrum Behind the TPP’s Environmental Chapter appeared first on 51�Թ�.

As most media outlets have their attention geared toward Iran,�� and the European Union’s asylum seeker crisis, to struggle with the military government that installed itself by a coup d’état in��2014.

In April, former General and self-appointed Prime Minister Prayuth Chan-ocha lifted the country’s��martial law—which was in effect since the ouster of Prime Minister Yingluck Shinawatra—and he unveiled a ��draft constitution. This document, despite its attempt to massage the authoritarian reputation of the issuing junta, gives leeway to even heavier-handed politics thanks to Article 44, which puts a gag on freedom of opinion and political opposition.

Prayuth’s offhand comments about journalists��facing ,��and a Human Rights Watch report����that “one year since the military coup, Thailand is a political dictatorship with all power in the hands of one man,” show that this is not the time to overlook Thailand’s situation.

Sadly, the country’s democratic credentials have ebbed and flowed with regularity, with 19 coups since 1932. But what sets the latest one apart is its desire to reshape Thailand’s political framework in ways unseen before.

When Prayuth took over in 2014, he presented a “roadmap” to democracy in his first announcement, along with the promise of “sustainable .” This has caused much criticism and ridicule, particularly because Prayuth’s��many ��prove quite the contrary. The ruling National Council for Peace and Order (NCPO) defended the new constitution by saying it is only temporary and that it is a stepping stone��toward building a better democracy.

There is a stark difference between the government’s proclaimed good intentions and the tangible results of its authoritarian rule. According to��, authorities have called in 712 people for “attitude adjustments,” 159 others for��“political offense” and detained hundreds of journalists since the coup. With this in mind, one can imagine why Prayuth’s self-proclamation as a “soldier with a democratic heart” was met with derision.

Thais are eerily familiar with paternalist figures assuming power—the pinnacle of which is their monarch, King Bhumibol Adulyadej, whose “divine” image is enforced with one of the��toughest lèse majesté����in the world.

Rulers with fatherly attitudes are not new, as dictators have had similar approaches in the past. However in Thailand, this traditional style often goes hand in hand with the monarchy and, even if reluctantly so, it is still widely accepted. This is why admirers refer to Prayuth as “Uncle Prayuth,” a name triggered by his “happiness campaign” that includes a commissioned soap opera and a pro-junta��pop ��called “Return Happiness to Thailand,” which he penned himself. The ease with which Prayuth took power last year also points to a resigned population and a weak political culture where coups are almost accepted as facts of life.

The military junta’s draft constitution does its best to prevent opposition and particularly acts to weaken large parties. Siblings��and�� were deposed on separate occasions (Thaksin by a coup d’état in 2006, and his sister last year) and are now facing political charges and live in self-imposed exile. Thaksin is a telecommunications mogul-turned-politician who is accused of concealing his wealth while in power—a charge greatly used to Prayuth’s advantage. Yingluck��is indicted for a rice subsidy she offered farmers that didn’t pan out as planned.

The conflict between Thailand’s traditional elite and the new one was made clear in recent��years by the ongoing strife between Thaksin’s supporters and opponents in the lead up to the 2014 takeover. This divide is also a marker of Thailand’s economic disparity: Shinawatra supporters are usually young Thais from more rural communities, while opponents are almost exclusively older and from the urban middle-class. Neither political side envisions a country where they could both function together; instead, power is seen as a bounty that is exclusive to a single winner.

The Postponement of Democracy?

In mid-May, Prayuth’s government announced that elections scheduled for 2015 were being postponed until 2016. This set alarm bells ringing for Human Rights Watch Asia Director Brad Adams, who��that “backsliding on respect for basic rights and democratic reform seems to have no end in sight.” Indeed, prospective elections might be a safety net for anyone believing that the military junta is only as temporary as it claims.

It is perhaps because of this original deadline, as well as an alliance dating back to the Vietnam War, that the European Union (EU) and the United States have been reluctant to act. An EU council condemned the 2014 coup, while US Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Russel openly����Thailand’s lack of democracy in��January. Despite this, neither side has taken��any measures against Prayuth. Bilateral trade between Thailand and the EU is worth $30 billion each year, a relationship that could surely be used to pressure Bangkok��on grounds of human rights infringements.

The junta, under its interim constitution,����that its members “shall be absolutely exempted from any wrongdoing, responsibility and liabilities,” and in order to uphold this, the new judiciary system is hand-picked by the government from military officials, giving de facto absolute power to the NCPO. Article 44 of the new constitution allows the NCPO’s jurisdiction to override anything that it��deems to be a “national threat,” while the accused have no alternative authority to turn to in cases of mistreatment.

Immediately after seizing power, the military junta took control of satellite TV channels, radio stations and over 200 websites. Acts of defiance, usually performed by students, include singing the French Marseillaise, the Hunger Games’ three fingered salute and public readings of George Orwell’s 1984—perhaps because the junta’s title, “National Council for Peace and Order,” is almost too coincidental. Such small acts can be punished by up to two years in��prison and have provoked a ban on gatherings of more than five people.

Faithful to his politics, Prayuth was reported to have pulled a journalist’s ears and thrown a banana peel at a cameraman in 2014, which begs the question he penned in his very own hit single: “To bring back the love, how long will it take?” His government’s reaction was to invite 200 local and foreign journalists to a special conference that would teach them not to offend the loose-canon dictator.

It’s high time the West took notice of Thailand.

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect 51�Թ�’s editorial policy.

Photo Credit: /

We bring you perspectives from around the world. Help us to inform and educate. Your����is tax-deductible. Join over 400 people to become a donor or you could choose to be a��.

The post Thailand: The Land of Smiles and Dictators appeared first on 51�Թ�.