Archive

Monthly Archives: September 2009

File:Bushduck.PNG

Mutadhar al-Zaidi, the Iraqi who threw his shoe at George Bush gave this speech on his recent release.

In the name of God, the most gracious and most merciful.

Here I am, free. But my country is still a prisoner of war.

Firstly, I give my thanks and my regards to everyone who stood beside me, whether inside my country, in the Islamic world, in the free world. There has been a lot of talk about the action and about the person who took it, and about the hero and the heroic act, and the symbol and the symbolic act.

But, simply, I answer: What compelled me to confront is the injustice that befell my people, and how the occupation wanted to humiliate my homeland by putting it under its boot.

And how it wanted to crush the skulls of (the homeland’s) sons under its boots, whether sheikhs, women, children or men. And during the past few years, more than a million martyrs fell by the bullets of the occupation and the country is now filled with more than 5 million orphans, a million widows and hundreds of thousands of maimed. And many millions of homeless because of displacement inside and outside the country.

We used to be a nation in which the Arab would share with the Turkman and the Kurd and the Assyrian and the Sabean and the Yazid his daily bread. And the Shiite would pray with the Sunni in one line. And the Muslim would celebrate with the Christian the birthday of Christ, may peace be upon him.

And despite the fact that we shared hunger under sanctions for more than 10 years, for more than a decade.

Our patience and our solidarity did not make us forget the oppression.

Until we were invaded by the illusion of liberation that some had. (The

occupation) divided one brother from another, one neighbor from another, and the son from his uncle. It turned our homes into never-ending funeral tents.

And our graveyards spread into parks and roadsides. It is a plague. It is the occupation that is killing us, that is violating the houses of worship and the sanctity of our homes and that is throwing thousands daily into makeshift prisons.

I am not a hero, and I admit that. But I have a point of view and I have a stance. It humiliated me to see my country humiliated. And to see my Baghdad burned. And my people being killed. Thousands of tragic pictures remained in my head, and this weighs on me every day and pushes me toward the righteous path, the path of confrontation, the path of rejecting injustice, deceit and duplicity. It deprived me of a good night’s sleep.

Dozens, no, hundreds, of images of massacres that would turn the hair of a newborn white used to bring tears to my eyes and wound me. The scandal of Abu Ghraib. The massacre of Fallujah, Najaf, Haditha, Sadr City, Basra, Diyala, Mosul, Tal Afar, and every inch of our wounded land. In the past years, I traveled through my burning land and saw with my own eyes the pain of the victims, and hear with my own ears the screams of the bereaved and the orphans. And a feeling of shame haunted me like an ugly name because I was powerless.

And as soon as I finished my professional duties in reporting the daily tragedies of the Iraqis, and while I washed away the remains of the debris of the ruined Iraqi houses, or the traces of the blood of victims that stained my clothes, I would clench my teeth and make a pledge to our victims, a pledge of vengeance. By MUTADHAR al-ZAIDI

The opportunity came, and I took it.

I took it out of loyalty to every drop of innocent blood that has been shed through the occupation or because of it, every scream of a bereaved mother, every moan of an orphan, the sorrow of a rape victim, the teardrop of an orphan.

I say to those who reproach me: Do you know how many broken homes that shoe that I threw had entered because of the occupation? How many times it had trodden over the blood of innocent victims? And how many times it had entered homes in which free Iraqi women and their sanctity had been violated? Maybe that shoe was the appropriate response when all values were violated.

When I threw the shoe in the face of the criminal, Bush, I wanted to express my rejection of his lies, his occupation of my country, my rejection of his killing my people. My rejection of his plundering the wealth of my country, and destroying its infrastructure. And casting out its sons into a diaspora.

After six years of humiliation, of indignity, of killing and violations of sanctity, and desecration of houses of worship, the killer comes, boasting, bragging about victory and democracy. He came to say goodbye to his victims and wanted flowers in response.

Put simply, that was my flower to the occupier, and to all who are in league with him, whether by spreading lies or taking action, before the occupation or after.

I wanted to defend the honor of my profession and suppressed patriotism on the day the country was violated and its high honor lost. Some say: Why didn’t he ask Bush an embarrassing question at the press conference, to shame him? And now I will answer you, journalists. How can I ask Bush when we were ordered to ask no questions before the press conference began, but only to cover the event. It was prohibited for any person to question Bush.

And in regard to professionalism: The professionalism mourned by some under the auspices of the occupation should not have a voice louder than the voice of patriotism. And if patriotism were to speak out, then professionalism should be allied with it.

I take this opportunity: If I have wronged journalism without intention, because of the professional embarrassment I caused the establishment, I wish to apologize to you for any embarrassment I may have caused those establishments. All that I meant to do was express with a living conscience the feelings of a citizen who sees his homeland desecrated every day.

History mentions many stories where professionalism was also compromised at the hands of American policymakers, whether in the assassination attempt against Fidel Castro by booby-trapping a TV camera that CIA agents posing as journalists from Cuban TV were carrying, or what they did in the Iraqi war by deceiving the general public about what was happening. And there are many other examples that I won’t get into here.

But what I would like to call your attention to is that these suspicious agencies — the American intelligence and its other agencies and those that follow them — will not spare any effort to track me down (because I am) a rebel opposed to their occupation. They will try to kill me or neutralize me, and I call the attention of those who are close to me to the traps that these agencies will set up to capture or kill me in various ways, physically, socially or professionally.

And at the time that the Iraqi prime minister came out on satellite channels to say that he didn’t sleep until he had checked in on my safety, and that I had found a bed and a blanket, even as he spoke I was being tortured with the most horrific methods: electric shocks, getting hit with cables, getting hit with metal rods, and all this in the backyard of the place where the press conference was held. And the conference was still going on and I could hear the voices of the people in it. And maybe they, too, could hear my screams and moans.

In the morning, I was left in the cold of winter, tied up after they soaked me in water at dawn. And I apologize for Mr. Maliki for keeping the truth from the people. I will speak later, giving names of the people who were involved in torturing me, and some of them were high-ranking officials in the government and in the army.

I didn’t do this so my name would enter history or for material gains. All I wanted was to defend my country, and that is a legitimate cause confirmed by international laws and divine rights. I wanted to defend a country, an ancient civilization that has been desecrated, and I am sure that history — especially in America — will state how the American occupation was able to subjugate Iraq and Iraqis, until its submission.

They will boast about the deceit and the means they used in order to gain their objective. It is not strange, not much different from what happened to the Native Americans at the hands of colonialists. Here I say to them (the

occupiers) and to all who follow their steps, and all those who support them and spoke up for their cause: Never.

Because we are a people who would rather die than face humiliation.

And, lastly, I say that I am independent. I am not a member of any political party, something that was said during torture — one time that I’m far-right, another that I’m a leftist. I am independent of any political party, and my future efforts will be in civil service to my people and to any who need it, without waging any political wars, as some said that I would.

My efforts will be toward providing care for widows and orphans, and all those whose lives were damaged by the occupation. I pray for mercy upon the souls of the martyrs who fell in wounded Iraq, and for shame upon those who occupied Iraq and everyone who assisted them in their abominable acts. And I pray for peace upon those who are in their graves, and those who are oppressed with the chains of imprisonment. And peace be upon you who are patient and looking to God for release.

And to my beloved country I say: If the night of injustice is prolonged, it will not stop the rising of a sun and it will be the sun of freedom.

One last word. I say to the government: It is a trust that I carry from my fellow detainees. They said, ‘Muntadhar, if you get out, tell of our plight to the omnipotent powers’ — I know that only God is omnipotent and I pray to Him — ‘remind them that there are dozens, hundreds, of victims rotting in prisons because of an informant’s word.’

They have been there for years, they have not been charged or tried.

They’ve only been snatched up from the streets and put into these prisons.

And now, in front of you, and in the presence of God, I hope they can hear me or see me. I have now made good on my promise of reminding the government and the officials and the politicians to look into what’s happening inside the prisons. The injustice that’s caused by the delay in the judicial system.

Pakistan was elected Friday to the Board of Governors of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) against the regional seat reserved for the Middle East and South Asia (MESA) region.

Pakistan was the consensus candidate of MESA. Pakistan’s election took place by acclamation at the 53rd regular session of the IAEA General Conference which is underway in Vienna from 14 – 18 September 2009. Pakistan will now commence its seventeenth (17th) two-year term on the IAEA Board, says a statement issued by the Foreign Office.

Pakistan’s election to the Board of Governors is a recognition of its long standing commitment to the aims and objectives of the IAEA. It has pursued peaceful uses of nuclear technology, in particular nuclear power generation. Pakistan has traditionally played an active role in the Agency. During this term Pakistan will work closely with the Agency and fellow member states for further development of peaceful nuclear energy at the national, regional and international levels.

United Kingdom and Pakistan on Saturday agreed to set up UK-Pak Joint Task Force on Education which would be led by United Kingdom side with Michael Barber, a renowned and leading British educationist who played a significant role in educational reforms taking place in UK for the last one decade.

Talking to the media persons along with Foreign Minister Shah Mehmood Qureshi after the meeting with the President Asif Ali Zardari, British Foreign Secretary David Miliband said they had extensive discussions on education.

The Task Force will work on the implementation of strategy that is being developed by the government of Pakistan, he said adding that recent reports by the government of Pakistan identified the implementation gap and “we are going to use this task force to bridge the implementation gap”.

As the extra money comes from Britain, United States and other parts of the countries for education in Pakistan, it will ensured through the Task Force that the money is well spent in education, he added.

Earlier the meeting was also attended by Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, Bilawal Bhutto Zardari, Chairman Foreign Relations Committee of the National Assembly Asfandyar Wali, former senator and spokesman to the President Farahtuallah Babar, High Commissioner Wajid Shamsul Hasan and Deputy High Commissioner Asif Durani.

“We had extensive discourse about the education in Pakistan. The President has been passionate about the importance of education and the Foreign Minister as well,” said the British Foreign secretary.

This brings out the fact that our relations with Pakistan are long term one and the children who have school age in Pakistan are the future of Pakistan, Miliband said adding he looked forward the educational links are being taken forward through this task force and more extensive discussion will take place next week at the meeting.

Billing his meeting with the President Asif Ali Zardari and Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qrureshi, as excellent, the British Foreign Secretary said that they had very practical discussion about the FoDP meeting taking place in New York this week.

Referring to FoDP meeting taking place next week, he said, “we will hear from Pakistan’s President about very effective way in which the insurgency is being pushed back in the militancy-hit Swat adding, “we will hear about the strategy regarding Malakand which has really caught the imagination of the international community and has really got very strong support.

“We will hear further about the way the government wants to extend its comprehensive approach to counter the insurgency in terms of security politics and economics,” he said.

Responding to a question, he described the FoDP meeting taking place next week as unique. There are very few countries that get the sort of support Pakistan will get next week from the United States, United Kingdom and European Union Countries.

At the end of this, meeting will be important for two reasons. First of all it will be chance for international community to recognize that progress is being made in Pakistan and sacrifices being rendered by Pakistani people, Miliband said.

Secondly it will be a chance for international community to recommit and renew its commitment for Pakistan, he said adding as he is optimistic as there is no quick fix and there is never a magic bullet but it is an important step forward.

To a query, he said he was delighted to know that European Union had its first Europe-Pakistan summit in June and he came to know from Foreign Minister of Spain that he planned to have second EU-Pak Summit in the first six months of next year.

Referring to EU-Pak summit which will focus on trade, he said, “we want to escalate free trade between Pakistan and Europe and it will not happen over night. Pakistan’s entrepreneurship and Pakistani ideas need to be brought at international commercial system, he viewed.

To a question, Foreign Minister Shah Mahmood Qureshi, the world is giving recognition to Pakistan’s efforts. The people of Pakistan are united and convinced to fight extremism and terrorism. They have shown results in Malakand and swat, he added.

The world is willing to engage Pakistan beyond terrorism. They are talking of helping Pakistan in energy and education. UK and Pakistan have set up a task force for education, he observed.

“If we have to deal with this menace (terrorism) we will have to change the mind set. And the best way to change the mind set is to invest in people and the education sector is the best way to do it, he added.

Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that without concrete evidence allegations cannot be leveled against India. -AP File Photo

ISLAMABAD: Federal Interior Minister Rehman Malik said that Pakistan has evidence with regard to Indian involvement for promoting terrorism in Pakistan but without concrete evidences allegations cannot be leveled against India.

‘Yes it is true the terrorists arrested from Swat and tribal areas of the country have confirmed Indian involvement in terrorist activities in Pakistan’, he said in an exclusive interview with a private TV channel.

‘Pakistan has retaliated with full force whenever India started a blame game against us,’ he said, adding that, ‘Pakistan had offered unconditional support to India after last years Mumbai attack but our sincere efforts to bring the culprits of this incident to justice are not being replied constructively.’

The interior minister went on to say the international community after listing to the stance of India and Pakistan in the Mumbai attack has backed Pakistan. He also held India responsible for the delay in investigations of the attack.

Replying to a question, he said, ‘leveling allegations against each others  would further harm relations between Pakistan and India. Here we are asking India to come to the table for talks to resolve all outstanding issues. If India has any reservation in investigating the Mumbai attack then it should come forward and hold talks with us,’ he said. -Online

Source: Dawn

Increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India, Gen McChrystal stated in his report. –Photo by Reuters

‘Indian political and economic influence is increasing in Afghanistan, including significant development efforts and financial investment. In addition, the current Afghan government is perceived by Islamabad to be pro-Indian.’

These words of Gen Stanley McChrystal, which are a part of his assessment of the war in Afghanistan, are perhaps as significant as any other in the report for two reasons. One, it is clear that peace in Afghanistan cannot prevail unless the interests of the Pakistani state are taken into account. And from that perspective, enhanced Indian interests in Afghanistan are inimical to peace in the region. Lest there be any doubt about this, Gen McChrystal has himself stated this in his report: ‘Increasing Indian influence in Afghanistan is likely to exacerbate regional tensions and encourage Pakistani countermeasures in Afghanistan or India.’

Two, several factors have combined to force the Obama administration to revisit the very purpose of its mission in Afghanistan. Most apparent is the catastrophe that is the recent presidential election in Afghanistan. The US is now faced with a very difficult choice: either let Hamid Karzai be declared the victor in the first round, notwithstanding the serious allegations of fraud, or push for a run-off, with the attendant uncertainties and risks in a place as volatile as Afghanistan.

Domestically, President Obama is facing pressure from within his own party and from the public generally as Americans grapple with the necessity of the Afghan war.
What this adds up to, now more than ever, is the Obama administration needing to at the very least convince the skeptics that the war is winnable. But that means gaining Pakistan’s full cooperation, which in turn means alleviating the national security establishment’s concerns vis-à-vis India.

The Americans appear to have finally understood this and, more importantly from a Pakistani perspective, have become increasingly vocal about it. This should hopefully have a salutary effect on relations between the US and Pakistan, relations which have in part been hostage to Pakistan’s long-standing suspicions of the US being a fair-weather friend.

But welcome as it may be that the US appears to finally be coming around to understanding Pakistan’s security outlook, there are problems. Identifying the problem doesn’t mean the US is necessarily in a position to do something about it.

There are serious questions about whether India is in the mood to listen to advice suggesting it tamp down its interest in Afghanistan and about what leverage the Americans have to try and convince India. Be that as it may, it should not be lost on Pakistani policymakers that the US is at least willing to echo their view.

Source: Reuters

CHINESE President Hu Jintao and US President Barack Obama, meeting in New York on Tuesday afternoon, pledged efforts to advance relations and called for closer cooperation on global challenges including global warming and the financial crisis.

The two leaders met on the sidelines of the UN climate change summit and other UN sessions. It was their second meeting this year since April when they got together in London during a Group of 20 nations summit on the global financial crisis.

At Tuesday’s session, Hu said the recent US decision to impose special safeguard measures on tires imported from China contradicts the interests of both countries and such actions should not happen again.

No protectionism

Under the current economic and financial situation, both China and the US should stand firmly against trade and investment protectionism, Hu said.

On the currency issue, Hu said China has maintained stability in the exchange rate of its yuan even as the economy faced difficulties combating the international financial crisis.

Obama said the US supports free trade and is focused on further expanding trade and economic relations with China.

He said the US is willing to resolve disputes in trade and economic areas through dialogue and consultation.

He expressed appreciation for China’s efforts to expand domestic demand and maintain the stability of the yuan against the impact of the global downturn.

On the environmental front, Hu pointed out that global climate change is a common challenge that requires a response from the international community.

Hu emphasized that developed countries should continue to take the lead in reducing emissions after 2012, when the Kyoto Protocol expires, and provide assistance for developing countries in tackling global warming.

Obama also expressed a wish to strengthen bilateral cooperation on climate change, especially in the area of clean energy.

Hu also emphasized that the two countries should respect each other’s interests. He said issues related to Taiwan, Tibet and Xinjiang concern China’s sovereignty and territorial integrity and the national sentiment of the 1.3 billion Chinese people.

Source: Xinhua

Former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin addresses the annual CLSA Investors’ Forum in Hong Kong September 23, 2009. – Reuters

GROTESQUE, unprecedented, bizarre, unbelievable. Sarah Palin was all of that in Hong Kong on Wednesday. And more. Dressed in a cutsy virgin-white blouse and black skirt with the infamous bee-hive hairdo, she was a blessing to every predicting spectator.

‘There’ll be one or two self-deprecating remarks, a reference to healthcare, taxation, out-of-control spending and a poorly told joke,’ my investor companion muttered when the lady walked onto the stage of the Hyatt conference room. All he forgot was the bit about Islamic terror. Alas, she did not fail us. ‘No recording, no photography, no video tapes, no mobile phones,’ they kept shouting over the public address system. And you could see why.

It was Sarah’s trip to Asia and her first appearance since her resignation as Alaska’s top Mum. In her state capital, she told us, you could see a moose in the middle of the city. It was not a common sight in Hong Kong. Why, in Alaska, where 20,000 sq miles of the state was glacial and only two humans occupied every sq mile, ‘it seems to me that God just chucked this bucketful of resources there’.

It was then we realised that whoever wrote the Palin sermon for her, they had – mercilessly – allowed some of the real Sarah to show through. Even husband Todd got a mention. He had flown with her into Hong Kong. And – here was a reference to the Alaska fish and caviar consumed in this ‘beautiful’, ‘magnificent’ and ‘libertarian’ part of China – ‘some of the fruits of our labour, mine and Todd’s, ended up on tables here.’ The caviar at the Hyatt, it should be added, comes from Iran.

But Alaska was more than just a fish market. It was ‘the air-crossroads to the world’ where ‘Main Street, for me, it’s a small town tucked between two mountain ranges’. It went on and on. Alaska was ‘the last frontier’, a ‘place where you can still feel that pioneering mountain spirit… It has shaped me.’ We sat there, mystified. Was she trying for the presidency next time round? Or re-election to the governorship of that wretched glacial state?

To prove her shining republicanism, Sarah quoted Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. She quoted Lincoln. She quoted Thomas Jefferson. History and common sense were not on the side of liberalism and ‘utopian pipe dreams’.

But there’d been progress. In the past, we had the ‘horse and buggy business’, she said, then Ford came along with the motor car and the kids sat singing in the back, but now the kids have headsets. And what happened to the Reagan legacy? ‘Many Republicans in Washington gambled it away.’

She talked, of course, about the infamous ‘death panels’ – a big smirk here from Sarah – and “market-friendly responsible ideas’ (this must have been the speech-writer) and offered slippery advice: ‘We can responsibly develop our resources without damaging the environment.’

She spoke too fast. She gabbled her words. Scatty was the word for it. We slalomed between the fall of the Berlin Wall, the break-up of Yugoslavia and 9/11. Then it started. The war on ‘vicious terrorism”, the war against ‘violent fanatics who wished to end our way of life’, our battle against ‘radical Islamic extremists’ with ‘twisted vision’. This was not a clash of civilisations but ‘a war within Islam’. We slalomed again. Asia – ‘what an amazing place!’ – was at its best ‘when it was not dominated by a single power’.

What on earth was happening? Had Sarah just looked up from her podium and seen China? Addressing what was surely the neo-conservative wing of the Republican party, she could not “turn a blind eye” to Chinese policies that created “uncertainty”, which supported ‘questionable regimes’ and ‘made a lot of people nervous’. America wasn’t going to impose its values on other countries, but America was going to have to ‘ramp up’ its defence spending.

Then family again. ‘I have a husband,’ she said. ‘I think I could have used a wife. He’s awesome.’ This really floored the Chinese. Poor Todd.

Courtesy From Dawn/The Independent News Service

FROM MALAYSIA

The ninth Forbes Global CEO Conference from September 28-30 in Kuala Lumpur is aimed at enhancing Malaysia’s image as an attractive business destination, through networking amongst chief executive officers and business personalities.

International Trade and Industry Minister Datuk Mustapa Mohamed said the conference, co-hosted by the government, would bring together about 450 delegates comprising successful CEOs, industrialists, academicians and prominent business people from all over the world.

The annual conference themed, “Game Change”, at the Shangri-La Hotel in Kuala Lumpur will also see 57 international and five Malaysian speakers participating, Mustapa told a media briefing on the event today.

Among the Malaysian speakers are former Prime Minister Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad, Bank Negara Malaysia governor Tan Sri Dr Zeti Akhtar Aziz and YTL Corp Bhd managing director Tan Sri Francis Yeoh.

Among the international speakers are the chairman of the Wal-Mart Stores Inc board, S. Robson Walton, the CEO and managing director of Tata Consultancy Services, S. Ramadorai, the chairman and CEO of Ssyang Yong Engineering and Construction, Kim S. Joon, the CEO of Faberge Ltd, Mark Dunhill, the president and CEO of Levi Strauss and Co, John Anderson and Emirates Investments Group vice chairman,Raza Jaafar.

The conference will focus on taking stock of the future direction of business and markets after the economic crisis.It will also provide opportunities for discussions on whether measures and policies undertaken have helped to improve the global economy.

Steve Forbes, the chairman and CEO of Forbes and editor-in-chief of Forbes Magazines, will moderate the “Meeting of Minds” session with Prime Minister Datuk Seri Najib Tun Razak and Deputy Prime Minister Tan Sri Muhyddin Yassin.

Among the important topics to be discussed at the conference are, Game Change: Taking Stock of a New Global Landscape, Changing Your Game:The Making of the Fittest, Play of the Day:Technology to Lead Recovery, Where the Action is:The New Arenas of Growth and Volatile Mix:Energy and Commodities in Flux. — Bernama

Source : Buisness Times

Chinese President Hu Jintao meets US President Barack Obama in New York on Tuesday afternoon. The two leaders pledged efforts to advance relations between the two countries and called for closer cooperation on global challenges such as climate change and the financial crisis

CHINA offered some support yesterday to US plans to build a more balanced global economy, as world leaders seek to agree on ways to nurture a tentative recovery and prevent future crises.

The European Union unveiled its blueprint for an overhaul of the way banks and financial markets are policed, with plans for a banking super-watchdog and a pan-European supervisor that it hopes can be replicated on the global stage.

Leaders of the Group of 20 countries were set to meet in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, today and tomorrow, their third gathering since the collapse of investment bank Lehman Brothers a year ago. Their focus is now shifting from combating the worst recession since the 1930s to discussing how to prevent it from happening again.

Central to the talks will be a US plan to correct the world’s economic imbalances by shrinking surpluses in big exporting countries like China and boosting savings in debt-laden nations including the US.

US President Barack Obama wants a framework of “mutual assessment” where the International Monetary Fund would make policy recommendations on rebalancing to the G20 every six months, according to a paper obtained by Reuters.

“We approve of countries strengthening their macroeconomic policy coordination and together pushing forward the sustainable and balanced development of the world economy,” China’s Foreign Ministry said.

The EU said its proposed banking super-watchdog would have the power to overrule individual countries, such as Britain, which is fighting to keep control over the centerpiece of its economy, the City of London financial center.

“Our aim is to protect European taxpayers from a repeat of the dark days of autumn 2008, when governments had to pour billions of euros into the banks,” European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said in a statement.

“The European system can also inspire a global one and we will argue for that in Pittsburgh,” he said.

Also up for discussion in Pittsburgh will be reforms to the IMF, trade policy, and global warming. Developing nations are becoming increasingly vocal in calling for a greater role at international bodies like the IMF.

HAN Yuzhu remembers her zeal when the country asked the people to produce steel for New China’s construction.

When told more raw materials were needed, Han, like many others, rushed home and collected her family’s extra pots and pans.

Before leaving for the smelting furnaces, she picked up a big stone and smashed a copper lock from their family’s clothes case, taking the copper.

“I didn’t want to lag behind others at that time,” said 76-year-old Han.

It was in 1958 when the government issued a declaration to “produce 10.7 million tons of steel for the Party and the people.” Steel output was only 3.35 million tons in the previous year.

Han’s efforts, together with those of millions of others, helped fulfil the production target at the end of 1958. What she knew later was that only eight million tons, 75 percent of the steel they churned out in a hurry, was any use.

That was a typical story in China’s Great Leap Forward campaign from 1958 to 1960.

Besides steel output, the other “leap” targets also included grain output, an 80 percent increase from 1957-1958, from 195 billion kg to 350 billion kg – and then a further 50 percent hike from 1958-1959.

“Everyone at that time was eager to catch up with developed countries,” said Xu Yongqi, former general manager of Shougang Group, China’s eighth-largest steel maker.

A lot was wasted in the campaign mobilizing the public to produce steel and experts believed it caused losses of about 20 billion yuan (US$2.93 billion), Xu said. Backyard furnaces were famous, and inefficient. The Great Leap Forward was corrected in 1961.

However, normal economic growth lasted for only five years before the “cultural revolution” began in 1966. After 10 years of chaos, it was in 1978 that China shifted focus in its economic build-up and introduced the reform and opening-up policy.

Baosteel Group Corp, now China’s largest steel maker, was set up in the same year with 30 billion yuan (US$4.4 billion), aiming to produce high-end steel to international standards.

China’s steel production was less than 160,000 tons or less than 300g per capita – not enough to make a kitchen knife – when New China was founded in 1949.

Since 1996, China has produced more steel than any other country in the world. Its crude steel production stood at 660 million tons by the end of 2008. This brought on worries about overcapacity as domestic demand was less than 500 million tons.

Fast economic growth helped China relieve its poverty, but also caused problems including pollution, the rich-poor gap and imbalances in regional development.

Hu Angang, an economist with Tsinghua University, said China now is experiencing unprecedented challenges in energy consumption, economic activities and environmental protection.

China put forward “scientific development” in October 2003 and turned from its growth mode focusing on gross domestic product (GDP) to coordinated and sustainable growth.

The central government fine-tuned a key economic growth slogan from “fast and sound development” to “sound and fast development” at the end of 2006, mirroring China’s beginning to shift efforts from speed to quality.

The government issued a guideline for foreign investors in December 2007, prohibiting foreign investment in resources-intensive sectors and sectors of high energy consumption and high pollution.

Zhang Yansheng, a researcher with the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC), China’s economic planner, said: “Research and development centers, operation centers or distribution centers are always welcome here, but no longer chimneys.”

Source: Shanghai Daily