Singapore’s success with counterterrorism

Posted on by
Reply

Ten years ago, Singapore’s intelligence agencies defeated a Jemaah Islamiyah plot to attack Changi Airport. In The Wall Street Journal: Opinion Asia section, Ali Soufan writes about the success Singapore has had, balancing the country’s multiculturalism.

Soufan discusses the government’s reaction to the finding. Spooked by finding locals involved in the plot, the government came up with a plan:

The Singaporean government understood that developing programs to counter terrorist recruitment efforts is a crucial part of any counterterrorism strategy. Otherwise law enforcement and intelligence operatives can be drawn into a never ending “cat and mouse” game if terrorists are allowed to continue hijacking local grievances for support and recruits. While in some countries investing money and effort on rehabilitation programs is seen as being soft, the Singaporeans see it as an important weapon. They understand that it goes hand-in-hand with intelligence and law enforcement work, and is an important (if forgotten) tool.

If only other nations could try a similar strategy. Fortunately for Singapore, the small size of the country makes this approach far easier than most states.

‘Why do you need me to hate China?’

Posted on by
Reply

In this month’s Atlantic, Helen Gao writes about how difficult it can be to be a Chinese student overseas. Over on ChinaSmack, Christine Tan replies, talking about bonding with her first friend from the PRC.

One night, Christine writes, she kept harping on about all of the negatives of today’s China, helpfully nurtured by Western stereotypes.

Exasperated, her friend blurted out ‘Why do you need me to hate China?’

It’s a great piece, go read it.

Christine includes this brilliant bit, one that I’ve encountered many times, even when being hassled by drunk Canadians on the streets of Taiwan:

Americans abroad are often taken to task for their country’s decisions whether the individuals in question personally agree with those decisions or not, from the war in Iraq to shows like Keeping Up with the Kardashians. Dealing with outsiders’ strong opinions about your country is an unavoidable consequence of being a citizen of a country with a heavy presence on the world stage.

Yes, indeed.

Sharp drop in international student enrolments

Posted on by
Reply

After a tumultuous 2008-2010, this year, Australian international education policy started to catch up with reality.

One helpful move was a relaxation of the visa regime. But the year before, student visa restrictions were increased, creating a huge drop in new students.

A quick look at the Department of Immigration and Citizenship’s ‘What’s New in Student Visas‘ shows the message that Australia’s government is sending to prospective students:

Australia’s visa policy toward students isn’t something you can count on.

A few years ago, immigration policy allowed a pretty reasonable pathway for students to gain permanent residency in Australia after completing their course. This system wasn’t well regulated and became a target for abuse by some unscrupulous operators. In a harsh move, this ‘skilled migration pathway’ was closed down.

In the middle of a course, students found that their plans for the future were suddenly out of their grasp. Take for instance, students who were in a hairdressing course. For several years, the list of preferred occupations for skilled migration included qualified hairdressers, a profession that was apparently in short supply. In 2010, the Government decided that this wasn’t the case, and dropped the qualification from the list.

Students who had spent years studying for a degree, based on a pathway to a new life, were left out in the cold. Some transitional arrangements were available, but what was once a certain situation became less so.

The decision to send a student to Australia isn’t usually an individual decision. In many cases, it’s a decision made by the student’s family. The money? It comes from the student, their parents, their aunties and uncles, their grandparents, and even loan sharks. It’s a community investment in the future for one of their best and brightest children.

The student comes. The student adjusts to a new life. The student attends a course, and gets nearly to the end of their course. Suddenly, the policy has changed. Their qualification is no longer guaranteed to let them continue to stay in their host country. The student doesn’t meet the grandfathered requirements, and goes home. They’ve lost earning power in Australia, and now will go back to their home country. Disappointed and dejected. And like a disappointed consumer anywhere in the world, they share their experience with anyone who will listen.

Word gets around. ‘Australia’s a great place to study, but the policy changes. You never know what’s going to happen…’

With the constant changes in policy, Australia damages its reputation, compared to its competitors. American visas are pretty time consuming to get. But American immigration policy moves at a glacial pace.

If you were a parent deciding where to send your child to go to study, what would you choose? The country with a policy that has a history of changing on the fly, or the one that is more consistent?

When the cost differences between the countries are great, it’s an easier choice. But with Australia’s erratic dollar – and now the erratic visa policy – the attractiveness is lost.

And this is where you get yesterday’s news. My home state, Victoria, has had a nineteen percent drop in revenue from international education in the past year. International Education Association president Phil Honeywood said it well on the ABC programme The World Today yesterday afternoon:

Across Australia we’ve got a 15 per cent average downfall compared to 2010 to 2011 but in states that rely heavily on international education, such as Victoria, it’s as high as 19 per cent reduction in revenue and that is Victoria’s biggest export industry.

Now it’s up to the states and the Federal Government to start putting serious efforts into retaining, attracting, and developing international education. It’s been easy in the past, but now it’s time to get down to brass tacks.

Phil Honeywood again:

It’s vital that the international education industry is recognised appropriately. It’s a major draw card for Australia’s various state economies and we have to do more to coordinate the approach we have to this industry similar to how we look after the tourism industry and other key industries to the Australian economy.

The Economist: Remembering the Delhi Durbar

Posted on by
Reply

From The Economist:

A HUNDRED years ago Britain’s King George V visited the jewel of his Empire, marking—it later became clear—the zenith of British colonial rule in India. The highlight of his trip, on December 12th 1911, was an enormous and colourful ceremony known as the Delhi Durbar, where local princes paid homage, a 101-gun salute was fired for the King and many thousands gathered to see him crowned as Emperor of India. Delhi had been the old Mughal capital, and also the centre of Indian resistance to British rule in the 1857 Mutiny (known to Indians as the first war of independence). At the Durbar the King announced that imperial India’s capital would shift back here, away from the eastern trading port of Calcutta. That would take another couple of decades to complete, once an elegant new city, New Delhi, was built to the designs of the architect, Edwin Lutyens.

‘iPad’ no more?

Posted on by
Reply

In a strange turn of events, Apple have lost the trademark to ‘iPad’ in mainland China.

Apparently, they bought the rights to use the name from a Taiwanese company, but never bought the Chinese rights from their mainland-based counterpart. And now the mainland counterpart is getting even.

The Apple dispute comes one day after Sir James Dyson criticised the Chinese patent system, alleging that the different tracks for local and foreign patents allow his designs to be copied and sold at far lower costs.

Any ideas on a new name for the iPad in China?

Sea Shepherd denied…

Posted on by
Reply

In an unusual move, the Sea Shepherd anti-whaling organisation has been hamstrung by Australia’s restrictive visa regime – their key helicopter pilot was denied a routine Electronic Travel Authority visa for Australia.

Australia is a bit unusual, in that all visitors save New Zealanders require a visa of some sort to land on the giant island. Americans can get an ETA through a travel agent, or online, usually within minutes. In the case of Chris Aultman, his ETA went on hold, then was rejected.

And now they’re stuck.

ETAs are usually valid for a year, I find it a bit surprising that Aultman left it so late in his travel plans. But at the same time it’s quite unusual for the Department of Immigration and Citizenship to deny an ETA to an American passport holder.

Expect more to come…

After the conference, Pakistan wants in…

Posted on by
Reply

In news I probably should have seen coming, listeners to ABC Radio’s AM were greeted with the news that Pakistan demands the same uranium sale terms as India.

(Australia’s governing Australian Labor Party voted to allow sales of uranium to India at their conference over the weekend. As Australia’s other major party, the Liberal-National Coalition supports sales of uranium to India, it’s considered a done deal)

Anyway.

As compere Tony Eastley put it this morning:

Pakistan’s high commissioner to Australia Abdul Malik Abdullah says if Australia is willing to export uranium to India then it should be open to selling it to Pakistan as well.

He says it would be discriminatory for the Government to refuse any future requests for uranium from Pakistan.

Fortunately, such claims are easily batted away. As several commentators put it this morning – India and Pakistan aren’t really equal. One is pretty close to a failed state, the other is a stable democracy.

It’ll be interesting to see how this plays out in the next few months.

As it’s the silly season in Australia (Christmas in Summer does funny things to people), don’t expect much to happen until February.

ABC keeps Australia Network

Posted on by
Reply

Tonight, after the News Ltd tabloids had gone to bed, the Gillard Government finally announced the results of the long-running Australia Network tender. To no one’s great surprise, the network was to remain in the hands of the government-funded Australian Broadcasting Corporation.

The announcement came at the beginning of one of the slowest times of the year in Australia, when federal parliament has risen for the summer and after 7pm in the evening. It ends a few years of speculation about the future direction of the network – would it be publicly run, or for-profit, with a heavy subsidy?

When I lived in Taiwan many, many years ago, I ended up watching what was then called ABC Asia Pacific. I found it somewhat dull, but when I decided to move to Australia, it became a lot more interesting – I learned some key Australian values (hello, Mateship!) and got access to some top Aussie news. Oh, and watched some episodes of Border Security, where I learned to ALWAYS FILL OUT YOUR CUSTOMS DECLARATION PROPERLY.

On my last two trips to Southeast Asia, I found myself watching Australia Network more than before, keeping up to date on events ‘back home’. Of course the Qantas industrial action probably had a bit to play in that.