Chemical Generation Singapore

Singapore acts as the responsible global player by helping to pick up the tab. The more we say we are first world, the more the international community would want us to help chip in. There is nothing wrong in helping out since what goes around comes around in the international arena of realpolitik karma and reciprocity, but sometimes we don’t know how and where the taxpayers’ money is spent. Just like how we are concerned about GIC investing our money and the returns Singapore is getting.

WASHINGTON — Singapore has agreed to increase fourfold its contribution to an International Monetary Fund credit line aimed at combating financial crises, the fund said Tuesday.

The island republic would increase its current contribution to the fund’s New Arrangements to Borrow (NAB) of 500 million dollars, by 1.5 billion dollars to 2.0 billion dollars.

The NAB is a set of credit arrangements between the IMF and a group of members and institutions to provide supplementary resources to the Washington-based fund to help cope with financial crises.

“I welcome the commitment by Singapore to support the lending capacity of the IMF through an increased contribution to the New Arrangements to Borrow,” said IMF managing director Dominique Strauss-Kahn.

“Singapore’s contribution will strengthen the global financial system by increasing confidence that the IMF’s resources will be sufficient to meet the financing needs of its member countries,” he said.

The leaders of the Group of 20 emerging and developed nations agreed at a summit in April in London to hike the IMF’s NAB facility by up to 500 billion dollars.

The European Union announced last week it would raise the bloc’s contribution to 125 billion euros (178 billion dollars).

Well at least Najib has the sense not to openly fuel Hindu-Muslim conflict. Still, the spectator is reminded that Malaysia is for the Malays and Muslims mainly. This sort of tension forms the bedrock of the Hindus’ frustration and one can get a better understanding of how groups like Hindraf can take to the streets with enough numbers. Race and religion, especially when we defiantly and provocatively pin the badge on our chest shouting down others in the meantime, is a formula for disaster. The majority ethnic group in Malaysia doesn’t get it nor bothers to get it, comfortable in basking in its majority status and privileges like bumiputraism.

There is a side show to this. Pakatan Rakyat is now in the hot seat as this temple controversy is in their district and the spectator can bet BN will try to play the issue to their advantage, and shaking the upstart challenger’s image that it is for a more egalitarian Malaysia.

Back the question we should ask ourselves, is  Singapore better than Malaysia in how we treat our minorities?

Malayasia PM urges Muslims not to insult other religions

KUALA LUMPUR: Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak on Saturday quoted from the Quran to urge fellow Muslims not to insult people of other faiths, after residents of a Muslim-majority area, protesting re-location of a Hindu temple to their locality, carried cow heads in a rally on Friday.

Residents of Section 23 locality in Shah Alam, capital of Selangor state, staged a protest rally against relocation of a 150-year-old Sri Mariamman temple from Section 19 to their Muslim Malay-majority area.

The protest sparked controversy when some of the participants brought along cow’s head – an animal deemed sacred by the Hindus – and placed it at the state secretariat, Star Online said.

Addressing a gathering at a mosque amid observance of Ramzan, Razak urged Muslims to follow “the true Islamic teaching of showing respect” and refrain from condemning or insulting other religions and their believers.

Both Surah Al-Maidah (phrase 8 ) and Surah Al-An’am (Phrase 108) advised Muslims that if they went against other religions, this would cause the other believers to act violently against them, he said.

Muslims were also forbidden from insulting or desecrating items considered sacred to followers of other religions, so that, in turn, they would show respect to Islam, Razak added.

“During the era of prophet Muhammad, he himself allowed followers of other religions to practise what they believed, and forbade his followers from going against them. We hope during this holy Ramzan month, we can prove that we are the most disciplined followers,” said Razak.

The attorney general’s office tasked with initiating legal action has asked the police for extensive investigation. The police have interrogated over 100 people and has identified the wrongdoers, media reports said.

Meanwhile, several Malaysians staged a peaceful demonstration outside the country’s mission in London over the government’s handling of insulting display of cows heads.

At the meeting at Malaysian High Commission at Belgrave Square Friday, the protesters gathered for three hours holding placards and distributing leaflets to the public.

Hindus form a bulk of the nearly two million ethnic Indian population of Malaysia.

The incident has also acquired political hues with charges being exchanged between the federal government ruled by Barisan Nasional (BN) coalition and Selangor, that is ruled by the opposition alliance Pakatan Rakyat (PR).

A disclaimer came from a ruling alliance youth leader who reportedly participated in the protest.

Sohaimi Shadan, an executive council member of Umno Youth, denied he was the mastermind behind the protest, saying that he joined the group after Friday prayers at the state mosque.

The government asked online portal Malaysiakini to remove footage and videos on the cow heads protest from its website immediately following numerous public complaints.

In a letter, the Malaysian Communication and Multimedia Commission (MCMC) requested the website to remove the videos as they had intentions to “annoy any person, especially Indians” – an offence under Communication and Multimedia Act 1998.

Malaysian Hindu Sangam chairman R.S. Mohan Shan said the group was firm in its stand that the best place to relocate the temple was in Section 23.

“I visited the location and I saw no obstruction and the construction of a temple will not disturb anybody,” he said.

Singapore is no longer Asean Chair.  There is no longer need to pretend to protect Burma, the spoilt retarded orphan in Asean. This is a good opportunity for Singapore and the rest of Asean to kick out Burma. Engagement has failed. Burma is quietly smiling away at how it has managed to get its own way every time. I certainly don’t believe that the Lady would just only be under house arrest for 18 months. Another supposed crime or technicality would manifest and her term would be extended. She has been in and out of house arrest since she returned to Burma in 1989 and nothing will change with this junta.

Myanmar antics pose new headache for frustrated neighbours

KUALA LUMPUR (AFP) – Myanmar’s treatment of democracy icon Aung San Suu Kyi has once again embarrassed its neighbours, and revived calls for the military state to be expelled from the regional bloc ASEAN.

The junta this week extended the opposition leader’s house arrest for another 18 months, drawing international outrage but underlining how resistant the ruling generals are to outside pressure.

The case came just a month after the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) endorsed the region’s first human rights watchdog and fended off criticism it would be powerless to tackle rogue members.

“The arrest shows that the relationship between Myanmar and its ASEAN partners is not as robust as it was in the past,” said Bridget Welsh, a Southeast Asia specialist with the Singapore Management University.

“ASEAN leaders are frustrated because they think they’ve engaged and embraced Myanmar on many different levels,” she said, including unprecedented humanitarian cooperation after a devastating cyclone in 2008.

Welsh said Myanmar’s insistence on putting its own domestic interests well ahead of those of its neighbours meant it would continue to cause real damage by constantly overshadowing the bloc.

“ASEAN does not want as an organisation to always be associated with Burma,” she said, noting that Washington’s interactions with the region have been particularly dominated by the affairs of Myanmar, which was previously known as Burma.

“Most ASEAN countries are small and they need the organisation for global representation, and when that talk is dominated by the actions of one country, it prevents regional issues from getting adequate attention.”

Suu Kyi’s legal team is expected to appeal her latest sentence, which stemmed from a stunt in which American man John Yettaw swam to her lakeside house in May.

A prison court sentenced her to three years of hard labour after finding her guilty of breaching the terms of her incarceration, but junta strongman Than Shwe commuted the punishment to a year and a half under house arrest.

Lim Kit Siang, vice-president of the ASEAN Inter-Parliamentary Caucus on Myanmar, said the junta had shown “utter contempt” for the organisation’s ideals and that regional governments must now respond with more than words.

“The time has come for ASEAN to seriously consider expulsion or at least suspension of Myanmar from ASEAN,” he said in a statement.

Analysts said the timing of the latest drama was unfortunate as ASEAN members had just forged agreement on the human rights body.

“The verdict is an embarrassment for ASEAN because it has been grappling with the issue of human rights and trying to establish acceptable norms among members,” said Tim Huxley from the International Institute for Strategic Studies.

“If political confrontation was taken to its logical conclusion, Burma could be suspended or expelled but frankly that’s not going to happen,” he said.

Myanmar’s neighbours are concerned that if Southeast Asia’s problem child is ejected from the grouping, it could be driven further into the embrace of China, which is hungry to exploit its natural resources.

There are also business interests to protect — regional states have close business ties with Myanmar, refusing to join the United States and European Union in imposing sanctions on the regime which has been in power since 1962.

And ASEAN is hamstrung by its principle of non-interference in members’ internal affairs, which during its 42-year history has prevented it from bringing errant members into line.

Despite its consensus-based approach, some of the more democratic members of the disparate grouping — which also takes in monarchies and communist states — are becoming increasingly outspoken over Myanmar.

Malaysia led calls for an urgent meeting of ASEAN members to address the latest crisis, deploring the sentence that prevents Suu Kyi from taking part in general elections next year.

And Indonesia, increasingly confident on the world stage, made a strong push to give more teeth to the new human rights body, in a stand that nearly scuttled its endorsement last month.

“The guilty verdict… is a serious blow to the standing of ASEAN both locally and internationally,” Alistair Cook and Mely Caballero-Anthony from the S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies said in a commentary.

“If ASEAN does little to improve this situation, then its credibility will be further undermined… It will be difficult for the association to portray itself as providing regional solutions to regional problems.” By SARAH STEWART/AFP)

The entire Welcome Home saga was first class in PR management and story-telling. A hungry human interest-angle media waiting at the special hanger to receive the 2 fortunate American journalists. The optimism that the North Koreans can be persuaded  out of goodwill although nobody wanted to ask what was offered to them quietly for the quid pro quo and the persistence of their blackmail strategy in the world stage.  Most important of all, the Carter-Clinton formula that former presidents can do their own Track 1.5 diplomacy, with or without the endorsement of the ruling government of the day.  I just can’t help but think of Lee Kuan Yew’s globetrotting since he stepped down.

Analysis: Bill Clinton as a diplomatic fix-it man

WASHINGTON (CNN) — It was a heartwarming sight: Laura Ling and Euna Lee landing on U.S. soil and being reunited with their families.

To their elation of their families, Bill Clinton returned to the U.S. with journalists Laura Ling and Euna Lee.

Then, after an appropriate amount of time for hugs and kisses, Bill Clinton appeared, descending from his movie-producer friend’s plane like an angel from heaven.

An emotional Ling practically referred to the former president as a messiah, describing to the media and well-wishers waiting at the airport how she and Lee thought they were being sent to a hard-labor camp, only to walk through a door to find Clinton. The crowd broke into loud applause.

For all of those who wondered what Bill would do in Hillary Clinton’s diplomatic world, wonder no longer.

As details of the Clinton mission came out, it was revealed that the North Koreans themselves asked for Clinton, promising amnesty for the women upon delivery of the former president, whose visit eluded them while he was in office. The deal was done even before Clinton stepped on the plane.

So what is next for Bill Clinton?

If the mere thought of a meeting with him is enough to move a regime notorious for never moving, can the Obama administration use that star power to rescue three American hikers who ventured into Iran and are believed to be held by Iranian authorities? Can Clinton head off two Russian attack submarines cruising in the Atlantic off the East Coast of the United States?

Former presidents are used as envoys and undertake humanitarian missions all the time.

Then-President Clinton used former President Jimmy Carter to travel to North Korea in 1994 to negotiate the end to the first nuclear crisis. Clinton and his predecessor, George H.W. Bush, were tapped by Bush’s son, then-President George W. Bush, to lead relief efforts to help Asian and African nations devastated by the 2004 tsunami and again in 2005 after Hurricane Katrina.

But the relationship between Bill and Hillary Clinton and President Obama is complex, to say the least. After a bitter-fought battle during the Democratic primaries, Hillary Clinton supporters were looking for a robust role for her in exchange for her support of Obama, with many even suggesting her as a possible candidate for vice president.

That idea was short-lived. The Obama team wanted Hillary far from the West Wing. And they wanted Bill even farther.

When Obama tapped Hillary to be his secretary of state, there was no shortage of critics who asserted that her husband’s global foundation and role as a high-paid public speaker would present a conflict of interest. The Clintons agreed to strict rules of the road to avoid such conflicts going forward.

However Hillary never demurred in her praise for what her husband has accomplished, both during his eight years in the White House or post-presidency. Hillary herself has said she considered her husband a trusted adviser and could even consider him using him where appropriate. He is a former president, after all.

Bill Clinton has largely stayed out of the limelight, quietly continuing his globetrotting on behalf of the world’s poor and downtrodden. In May, United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki Moon appointed him as the United Nations’ special envoy to Haiti in an effort to refocus international attention on the Caribbean country’s deep economic problems and environmental decay.

But with the success of his North Korean mission so quick and easy, it’s conceivable that Bill Clinton could add the role of “diplomatic cleaner” to his resume — a version of Harvey Keitel’s role as Winston Wolfe in the movie “Pulp Fiction” — a fixer of messy problems, which he solves with a combination of stylish charisma and lucid thinking under pressure.

The Obama administration has no shortage of messy foreign policy problems that Hillary Clinton knows could use a Winston Wolfe.

The Marriott was again bombed in Jarkata. Australia has warned its citizens of holidaying in Indonesia after the recent bombing. Good move considering that ever since Howard took on the role of the US’ deputy sheriff for this region, it is a prime target for JI. The bombings in Bali in 2002 made Australians sure of the bullseye on them. But Australia was never this cautious about the JI. One month before Bali 2002, some in the Australian media scoffed the idea of JI terrorism in the region and insinuated it was pure rubbish. Famous last words.

The 2009 comeback bombing is hopefully an isolated one and not a return of the yearly JI bombings in Indonesia from 2002 to 2005 which saw Bali struck twice. While life must go on and terrorism can never be prevented, and fatigue would result from constant vigilance, I think it is still unfortunately too early to dismiss the JI and the JI-inspired scourge just yet. The militants like to remind us that they are still dead set on their terrorism.

When will our turn come and can we survive it?

Travel warning as more terrorist attacks expected
Tom Allard Herald Correspondent in Jakarta
July 20, 2009 – 12:15AM

THE Australian Government has warned that more terrorist attacks could be staged in Jakarta after the twin blasts that killed nine and injured more than 50 at the JW Marriott and Ritz Carlton hotels on Friday.

By smuggling bombs into heavily protected buildings and by targeting a breakfast meeting of executives, it is becoming clear the murders were a sophisticated operation involving many people.

But there have been no arrests. The man many suspect of being the mastermind, the Malaysian-born terrorist Noordin Mohammed Top, remains a fugitive.

“There is a possibility of further terrorist attacks in Jakarta and elsewhere in Indonesia, including Bali,” a government advisory said yesterday. “Reconsider your need to travel.” It is the second-highest level of alert, below the blanket warning of “do not travel”.

Three Australians died in the attacks: Craig Senger, Nathan Verity and Garth McEvoy.

Investigators were yet to identify either of the suicide bombers, said Nanan Soekarna, a national police spokesman. They are continuing to try to reconstruct their features from their severed heads.

There was speculation late yesterday that Nur Hasbi, also known as Nur Sahid, would soon be revealed as one of the suicide bombers. The man’s father, Muhammed Sahir, was visited in his Central Java village by investigators, who may have taken a DNA sample to match the bomber’s corpse.

A room in the Marriott that was the control centre of the operation was booked under the name Nurdin Aziz. Police are still trying to establish the bona fides of that name. A terrorism analyst, Sidney Jones, said she suspected the man was Nur Hasbi, a member of a terrorism group led by Noordin.

The discovery of a laptop believed to belong to one of the suicide bombers in a room at the Ritz Carlton could be a breakthrough for the investigation.

Chryshnanda Dwi Laksana, of the Jakarta police, said it contained information and codes, believed to have been used by the bombers to communicate with each other.

Australian security forces and the Malaysian and Singaporean governments are assisting in an intensified hunt for Noordin, who has played a role in terrorist attacks in Indonesia going back to the first Bali bombings in 2002.

The bombs used on Friday were similar to one uncovered at the home of Noordin’s father-in-law in Cilacap three days before the attacks. They are also like the bombs used in the second Bali bombings organised by Noordin.

Australia’s national security committee of cabinet has met four times since the bombings as intelligence chiefs briefed senior ministers on developments.

The Prime Minister, Kevin Rudd, described the Jakarta bombings as “a violent, barbaric act of murder”. He said Mr Senger, an Austrade officer, was the first Australian civilian official killed by terrorists while on duty.

Mr Senger’s family issued a statement yesterday saying what a wonderful husband, son, brother and friend he was.

“Craig greatly enjoyed his life in Jakarta,” the family said. “He performed a rewarding job that he loved and he really valued the many friends that he had made there.”

The Minister for Foreign Affairs, Stephen Smith, visited the sites of the bombings and spoke to family members of the Australian victims, including Mr Senger’s wife, Kate.

Mr McEvoy’s family flew to Jakarta from Brisbane to reclaim his body. Mr Verity’s wife, Vanessa, and father, Peter, visited the morgue where the remains of the Perth businessman were being kept.

Mr Smith paid tribute to the staff at the embassy in Jakarta, many of whom knew Mr Senger, who had worked there. “It has been a really terrific display of sympathy and solidarity to fellow Australians,” he said.

with Brendan Nicholson

Singapore facts stranger than fiction
Age Melbourne
September 21, 2002
By Mark Baker

THE latest Singapore government revelations about a plot by local Muslim fundamentalists to launch a series of terrorist attacks give the distinct impression that the murderous reach of al Qaeda is flourishing in Southeast Asia.

Increasingly breathless media reports in recent days have fuelled suggestions that the region has narrowly escaped a ferocious onslaught and that the danger is far from over.

The truth is stranger, and tamer, than such fiction. Stripped of the emotive language of terrorist cells and jihads, of shadowy operatives and clandestine codes, the latest disclosures by the Singaporeans if anything reveal how amateurish and naive the alleged conspirators were – and how comprehensively their plotting has been exposed and defused.

In a statement released late on Thursday, Singapore’s Ministry of Home Affairs said that 21 alleged Muslim militants arrested last month had been plotting attacks on the Defence Ministry, Changi International Airport and strategic facilities including water pipelines and communications installations.

The group was said to be affiliated with 15 other men arrested last December and accused of conspiring to attack US military targets in Singapore and Western embassies, including the Australian high commission.

Almost all of those now being detained without trial for two years under the Internal Security Act are claimed to be present or former members of Jemaah Islamiyah, an Indonesian-based Muslim movement the Singaporeans and the Americans insist is the regional front for al Qaeda.

So who are these latest villains? Among a motley crew of delivery drivers and tradesmen are a butcher, a used-car salesman and a part-time foot reflexologist (who may have been pulling the leg of the earnest officers from Singapore’s intelligence agencies).

The evidence against them hardly smacks of a serious threat: a few photos of buildings and pipelines purported to be the result of surveillance operations, documents detailing a rough organisational structure and some shorthand pads with amateurish illustrations of military training. Not a weapon or an explosive device in sight.

Most improbable of all is the Singaporeans’ headline-grabbing allegation that the group was conspiring to design attacks that would be blamed on Malaysia, would in turn destabilise relations between the two countries and eventually lead to sectarian violence that would trigger the fall of the Mahathir government.

“The aim was to create a situation in Malaysia and Singapore conducive to overthrowing the Malaysian government and making Malaysia an Islamic state,” the Home Affairs Ministry reported, without a hint of incredulity.

The authorities also earnestly reported that three of the latest detainees had undergone weapons training at al Qaeda camps in Afghanistan. What was not spelled out was that that training took place in early 1990s when the US-backed mujahideen groups, including Osama bin Laden’s, had been fighting a common Soviet enemy.

Another detainee is accused of spending time at a southern Philippines training camp of the Moro Islamic Liberation Front – the main separatist group fighting for a Muslim homeland in Mindanao and a group the Philippines Government now recognises in peace talks.

Most of the incidents detailed by the Singapore authorities date back to 1999 and early 2000. No evidence has been produced that the accused militants were active in any serious way in the lead-up to September 11 last year or since.

In perhaps the most pertinent passage buried deep in the long account of alleged conspiracies released on Thursday, the authorities conceded: “None of these efforts is known to have led to a fully developed or finalised plan for attack.” Independent defence analysts are sceptical about how serious a threat Osama bin Laden’s alleged surrogates ever posed.

Future generations rewrite history and facts, and as a result, truth changes, sometimes for the better. The Malayan Emergency version of the My Lai massacre is being re-evaluated on its facts that the counter-insurgency sweep of Batang Kali, Selangor, in 1948 was (not) a massacre of unarmed villagers. Whether the villagers were indeed Communist fighters by night was irrelevant as justice was about whether disproportionate and extreme force was unnecessarily used. At a less extreme level, the Guildford Four and Maguire Seven are infamous examples of governments overzealously locking up people and throwing away the key to show that justice is served. That is the thing with security action in times of supposed crisis when there are exceptions to the rule of law. Whether these exceptions  are justified and can be rigorously substantiated still when placed under current and future public scrutiny is hard to say. Some might still and some might not. Looking back at Singapore’s history in fighting communism, what can we say?

Malaysia massacre fight goes on
Wednesday, 29 April 2009 17:31 UK
By Robin Brant
BBC Malaysia correspondent

The UK government is to review evidence about a massacre of unarmed Malaysian villagers by British troops in 1948.

At the time, Britain was war weary. But in thick, humid jungle at the end of a peninsula near the equator in South-East Asia, British soldiers still faced fierce fighting.

What was then called Malaya was a crucial source of tin and rubber for Britain’s crumbling empire.

It was on the rubber estates where an uprising was under way.

Some of the ethnic Chinese were angry at increasing unemployment.

They also resented the way they were being treated by the government of a country where they had led a resistance against the Japanese occupying forces.

An insurgency was born.

They were allied to communists in China who were on the brink of victory in a civil war.

They focused their attacks on tin mines and rubber plantations; the engine of the Malayan economy.

The Malaya Emergency lasted 12 years. Thousands died in a war which eventually ended when the Communist insurgency was quashed.

The conflict was not formally halted until a peace agreement in 1989.

The British strategy to win the conflict has gone down in the annals of military history. It was cited by advisors working with the US forces in Iraq as it tackled a growing insurgency after 2003.

But in the village of Batang Kali on 11 and 12 December, 1948, that sophisticated combination of military capability and diplomatic skill was nowhere to be seen.

A platoon of Scots Guards raided the village just outside of Kuala Lumpur.

There had been intelligence suggesting ‘bandit’ activity in the area. The British were reeling from an attack a few days earlier which left three soldiers dead.

The men of the village – unarmed – were separated from the women and children. All were questioned. It is not clear that they were ever identified as insurgents.

It ended with 24 of them being shot dead. Only one man escaped. The village was set on fire. It is claimed some of the victims were beheaded after they had been killed.

Official version

That the men were killed by the British soldiers is not disputed. Why and in exactly what circumstances they were killed is still not clear.

The official version of events claimed that the patrol of mostly newly-arrived British conscripts had no option but to shoot the men to prevent them fleeing when they tried to run into the jungle.

The unofficial version suggested that the soldiers were ordered to ‘wipe out’ the villagers. It is also claimed this may have been in retaliation for the murder of three British soldiers a few days earlier.

It was a brutal event which marked the beginning of a long campaign.

It was claimed that there was a military investigation in the immediate aftermath of the killings. All the soldiers were vindicated, but there was never a broader inquiry into any wrongdoing.

Little was known publicly about the events in that tiny village on the edge of a rubber estate until a British newspaper published in 1970 harrowing testimony of some of the soldiers who took part.

Four of the Scots Guards gave sworn testimony, confirming that the shootings took place, confirming that the victims were unarmed.

Britain’s defence secretary ordered a police investigation. That investigation was halted after a change of government in a general election later that year.

In 2008, a fresh campaign was launched for a public inquiry into what happened.

Tham Yong is at the forefront of that campaign, as she has been for previous efforts over five decades.

She was 17 when her brother-in-law was among those killed. She witnessed some of the shooting. Her husband was the only man to escape.

She wants an independent public inquiry to establish why it happened and to try to clear the names of the dead. Along with relatives of some of those who died, she also wants compensation and an apology from the British government.

Early this year, the Ministry of Defence and the Foreign Office said there would be no inquiry.

They said there was no new evidence and no need for further investigation beyond what had been carried out both in the days after the attack in 1948/49 and in 1970.

Now Tham Yong and the relatives have turned to the English courts. They want a judicial review of that decision.

As they await the outcome of that process, the government has decided to review all the evidence relating to the shootings.

Mrs Tham is approaching 80 and dying of throat cancer. Her testimony is among those which will be reconsidered by the British government.

Her memory of the event is still vivid. Her resentment of the British soldiers is still strong.

‘Terrified’

Last year she told the AFP news agency: “The soldiers came in the evening as we were preparing our meal.

“They rounded us all up and we were terrified.

“Even though we said we were not communists and we had no weapons, they killed one of the young men in cold blood in front of my eyes because he had a permit to collect durians, written in Chinese.

“I think the British soldiers must have thought it was a communist document,” she said.

“The soldiers then told him to run away but he didn’t want to, but they pushed him and when he did run, they shot him from the back.”

Tham Yong said the soldiers then locked the men, women and children in a small room overnight.

The women and children were herded into a truck and driven away the next morning. They heard gunshots as they were driven away and knew the men had been killed, she claimed.

“We were kept away for a week and when we returned we found the bloated bodies, half eaten by animals with most of them looking as if they were running away when shot.

“Even today when I think of what happens, it hurts so much.”

The British government hopes to conclude its reconsideration of the decision to deny a public inquiry in a few months time.

In a letter sent to Tham Yong’s lawyers, it emphasised that the decision to reconsider should “not be taken as any indication, one way or another, whether an inquiry will be established”.

GIC lost $33 billion or S$50 billion in 2008. The bigger more secretive of the two Singapore SWFs however is not cutting its losses by selling its share of the Citigroup and UBS pies. Instead GIC is sticking to its strategy of holding on to its preferred shares that earns interest and therefore income. In Citigroup, the interest is 7% per annum. Citigroup, in self-preservation mode and looking for funds from anywhere, seems intent on a US government bailout this time.

Once Uncle Sam sticks his hands inside the pie and nationalises banks in one way or another, common stocks are arguably less an investment compared to preferred stocks. If the Northern Rock nationalisation and share buy back by the UK government is anything to go by, GIC is better taking the risk of clinging on to its 7% per annum income to weather any fluctuating share price.

FEBRUARY 23, 2009,
GIC Wants to Keep Preferred Stock
Singaporean Fund Is Unlikely to Convert Its Citigroup Shares

By COSTAS PARIS in Singapore and NISHA GOPALAN in Hong Kong

A major Singaporean investor in Citigroup Inc. doesn’t currently plan to convert its preferred shares into common stock as part of a potential U.S. government effort to help the ailing bank, according to people familiar with the matter.

But Government of Singapore Investment Corp., a sovereign-wealth fund that has seen the value of its initial US$6.88 billion investment in Citigroup plunge in recent months, could face a dilemma if the bank reaches an agreement with U.S. officials that includes a greater government role.

The Wall Street Journal reported Monday that Citigroup is in talks with U.S. officials that could give the government a stake of as much as 40%, though talks could still fall apart. The news cheered investors in several Asian markets because of the potential for greater stability in the financial sector if an agreement is reached.

Citigroup’s ability to support its offshore businesses could be curtailed by a bigger U.S. government stake in the bank.

Still, it sparked wariness in other corners of Asia, both at the Singaporean sovereign-wealth fund and among market participants concerned that greater U.S. government participation could result in a pullback by the bank in favor of its domestic market.

A spokeswoman for the Singapore fund, known as GIC, and a spokesman for Citigroup in Hong Kong declined to comment.

As part of the plan, Citigroup officials hope to persuade some investors holding preferred shares to follow the government’s lead in converting some of those stakes into common stock, according to people familiar with the matter. That would bolster a key measure of the bank’s financial health.

Those investors include GIC and other sources of government-controlled wealth, such as Abu Dhabi Investment Authority and Kuwait Investment Authority. Representatives of the latter two didn’t immediately comment.

GIC holds preferred shares in Citigroup that represent a beneficial 5.3% stake if converted, according to a U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing late last month. The preferred shares offer an annual coupon of 7%. Converting the preferred shares into common stock would cut off that income stream.

“If GIC is to convert into common stock, the deal must be sweetened quite a lot. They want to make sure that their return will be equal or above the coupon,” said one of the people familiar with the matter.

But a greater U.S. government role could increase pressure at Citigroup to halt dividend payments. If it then converted the preferred shares to common, GIC risks being diluted or wiped out if Citigroup needs another capital injection or is nationalized by the U.S. government.

The people familiar with the matter said at least some officials were surprised by the reports that Citigroup was in talks with the U.S. government.

GIC bought the convertible preferred securities in January 2008. Based on Citigroup’s US$1.95 closing price Friday, the stake is worth US$592.4 million. Citigroup shares were up 11% to US$2.17 in midday trading Monday on the New York Stock Exchange.

Last week, people familiar with the matter said GIC had an estimated overall investment loss of 50 billion Singapore dollars (US$33 billion) in 2008 as a result of tumbling asset prices around the world.

An agreement with the U.S. government could spark regulatory reviews in some parts of Asia. Analysts also said Citigroup’s ability to support its offshore businesses could be curtailed by a bigger U.S. government stake in the bank. Banks’ lending to foreign companies can shrink when their home governments take greater roles, said Keith Pogson, partner of global financial services with Ernst & Young.

Mr. Pogson said he is advising corporate clients “to ensure that they include a locally domiciled bank in their panel of banks from which they finance themselves.”

Some analysts say Citigroup might follow other multinational financial companies in selling foreign units, including some Asian operations.

People familiar with the matter said last week that Royal Bank of Scotland Group PLC hired Morgan Stanley to explore the sale of Asian retail and commercial operations and Australian operations it acquired when it bought part of ABN Amro Holding NV in 2007.

In Japan, Citigroup is already seeking to unload Nikko Cordial Securities Inc., one of the country’s top brokerages, after spending roughly 1.5 trillion yen ($16.1 billion) in January 2008 to make it a wholly owned subsidiary.

Insurer American International Group Inc. is shopping a stake in its non-Japanese Asian business that analysts have said could be worth $20 billion.

In December, Citigroup injected $800 million into Citibank Korea Inc. — the largest Citigroup subsidiary in Asia in terms of capital and assets — in order to raise its capital base. The move was spurred by South Korea’s banking regulator. At the time, Citigroup said it was the only regional unit to receive a capital injection and that the funds didn’t come from the U.S. Treasury Department’s Troubled Asset Relief Program.