Eldon-Online

The Manila Effect

There is little enough good news in the world, what with the financial Sword of Damocles sitting again over some of our heads as the threat of a second dip recession worries us all, plane crashes, the growing evidence of the dangers being posed by our population growth – and amongst it all, the too close to home impact of the tragedy that befell some innocent citizens of Hong Kong who were supposed to be enjoying the last hours of a probably hard earned holiday in the Philippines capital.

So much has been written already about the event. The grief has been recorded and the condolences given. I add mine, totally. 

This was not something that was meant to happen, and it seems that this was an occasion when the tragic outcome could have been avoided. Even as a foreigner in Hong Kong, and therefore perhaps a step removed, my tears join yours. This after all is my home too.

Of course, you sympathise with innocent Afghan women and children whose lives have been destroyed by forces external to their country. You hear of the atrocities being carried out in various parts of Africa; rape and “ethnic cleansing” killings and, although you acknowledge the tragedy, it is not so close to home that it moves you to passionate outpourings of grief, such as we have seen in Hong Kong.

 The Philippines witnesses abductions and fatal shootings as part of its daily life. A daily life that has sunk to pretty low levels from the position of prominence and esteem it once held. The wealthiest country in Asia at the end of the Second World War, it has sunk to a corrupt, poorly managed country that has just demonstrated to the world just how inept its security services have become. Not only are they lacking the proper physical equipment for the job, there are clearly no signs in some quarters of any intelligent life.

But I keep arguing for perspectives to be maintained, even in the face of serial idiocy, and this is a case where – amongst the rage and anger at what has happened – we need to also be rational. I doubt, for example, that there is anyone amongst the 150,000 or so Filipinos who have sought work and a life in Hong Kong who thinks their Government services have done well. And yet I hear of Filipina domestic helpers being sacked by their employers because of this outrage, and that of itself is outrageous. It adds insult to the injury suffered by a good number of these same Filipinas who are exploited in Hong Kong - and come on let’s not be coy, it does happen – who are made to work appalling hours for less wages than even the set minimum.

But allow me to add a different perspective to the discussion and turn this at least into something positive.

When you are wondering whom next to lash out at in the Hong Kong Government. When a policeman gives you a ticket for illegal parking and you get cross because you think they should be out chasing criminals, (or you slap them in the face and get away with it!!). When your children are out in Hong Kong at night and, actually, you generally know that many of the streets are safe. Then the incident in Manila that has affected Hong Kong lives so tragically should make us realise just how lucky we are. 

We enjoy living in a city that is reasonably well managed – although yes, sure, we all have our complaints. A city that is, at least from my experience, corruption free, and a city where our own security services have proven their worth time and again – even when faced with such people as militant Korean farmers, and demonstrations many hundreds of thousands strong where the major feature of the demonstration has been the quiet and confident manner of our police.

It should make us proud of what he have in real terms, although it takes a tragedy like this to make us appreciate that what we have in Hong Kong, and which we consider normal, is not enjoyed elsewhere.

May I quote from some of my own words taken from a longer piece that I wrote almost exactly 40 years ago, which just seemed appropriate for Hong Kong today,as it tries to recover from its loss:

The world seems far away, at present.

Everything so completely divorced from reality,

Yet still it all goes on around us.

The earth revolves in its everlasting pattern

Never stopping or pausing,

Changing day into night, night into day,

Spring to summer, to autumn and winter.

But though the pain endures,

And the memories remain,

The world still revolves

And we live on.

 

To the memory of those who died in Manila, and to the hope that is Hong Kong’s future.

Terrorism and Islam ... Don't Join Up The Dots

I must say, I have sat on this one for a few days, hence the delay. 

Anything to do with religion has the ability to provoke an outpouring of feelings - very often more negative than positive. Religion in general, and currently Islam in particular, rarely leave readers sitting on the fence. And the opinions range through the whole spectrum of emotions from the informed, the opinionated, the grossly uninformed, "the don't want to be informed because they've made their minds up already", to the minority of reflective and open-minded observers. Everyone has an opinion.

It is such an emotional issue that I was therefore a little perplexed by US President Obama's decision during an iftar breakfast last week to comment on a subject that was bound to be controversial. The subject? The building of a mosque and an Islamic Centre near to the scene of the September 11 attacks on the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York in 2001. The desire of the President? To allow this building to happen, and to demonstrate that America upholds its belief that it is a country of openness in terms of colour, race, religion and that, therefore, it is tolerant. The reaction? It seems that the majority in the USA are strongly opposed.

With upcoming mid-term elections, and looking at it all from a distance, it would seem that his expressed view is likely to work more against him than for him in those elections. After all, we are looking at a Muslim population in the USA that is probably less than 3% of the total population, so it is surely not designed as a vote catcher. And 9/11 certainly remains front of mind for the majority of the population, accompanied by the most negative of connotations. The view is that because terrorists who were of the Muslim faith carried out these acts, all of Islam is to be despised. Being a Muslim is, to many people, the same thing as being a terrorist. So his remarks were definitely not a vote-catcher and will lead many to reflect on the President's own origins, about which it seems many Americans are becoming suspicious.

Could it be that the US President is prepared to put the general interests of his party aside and express his own true feelings? Rational thoughts of his own? I haven't for example seen many of his party speaking up in support of his view, but then maybe I don't read enough US newspapers.

That entire preamble aside, is the President right? Should we be separating the Muslim and the terrorist, or are they inextricably linked? Well I, for once, am on the side of the President.

I have spent over 30% of my working life in Arabia and have many Muslim friends. Genuinely friendly people who would do as much for you as your own family would if you needed help. Real people who are as disgusted by terrorism - in whatever form - carried out by whoever - as would be you and I. People who would welcome the establishment of Christian churches or synagogues in their own countries and who see the benefits of general understanding and tolerance - and who practice it themselves whilst adhering to their own beliefs.

Most of the balance of my working life, (10% was spent in the UK), has been in Asia, but included 4 years in Malaysia. A strongly Muslim country. As a result, I have acquired strong friendships amongst members of all the other religious, and philosophical groups - depending on how you view such things as Buddhism. And they too have similar non-controversial characteristics.

So to tar everyone with the same brush is not only incorrect, it could be dangerous. Tell people often enough that they are terrorists, and they start to believe it. Tell Protestant or Catholic children in Northern Ireland that members of the other religion are bad, and they grow up believing it, although not understanding that time has moved on. 

The Crusades of the 11th to 13th centuries were wars waged by the Christians against the newer religion of Islam, so that the Christians could once again dominate the trade routes that went through to Asia. In those days I imagine the Muslims thought of the Christians as terrorists. But again, time moves on.

I am very conscious in writing this that there are many facets to the whole argument, that would (as it has already) take decades to debate. Arguments for and against that would be much more lucid, academic and well reasoned than my simplistic style allows. But I am writing as someone who lives in today's world. A world where our opinions are fashioned by media reports. A world that has its terrorists, under many names, and the fact that there are many around who would like to join the dots so that Muslim = Terrorist, as if terrorism was a new phenomenon created out of Islam.

I am not an apologist for terrorism in any shape or form. I do not agree, as some would wish us to believe, that terrorists are fighting for justice. But terrorists come in all shapes and sizes. All beliefs, colours and religions, but the dots do not all lead to Islam. Some do, it is true, and some of the most devastating terrorist acts of modern times have been carried out by extremists of the Muslim faith, although the irony is that Islam is generally a passive religion. And therefore what the terrorists carry out in the name of Islam is not Islamic at all.

A penultimate point. I have not worked out the per capita income of the majority of Muslims. Set aside the riches of the Gulf rulers, but the Muslims of Indonesia, of Bangladesh and Pakistan and set it against the income of their Western and therefore – simplistically – predominantly Christian counterparts. There is a school of thought that suggests the gap would be very large indeed and that if we spent more money on educating, feeding and generally improving the lot of such people, there would be less fertile ground for the terrorists to further their cause.

Someone has to speak out. To decry terrorism. The Arab leaders by and large – with some very notable exceptions, need to speak up, or they will be the ones in the same boat as the words portrayed in Pastor Niemoller’s First They Came, and Islam will be the villain.

At least one world leader has started down that path. I hope he is not alone. 

What You See Is Not Always What You Get.

Some months ago BP, the international US/British owned and run oil company suddenly became known in America as British Petroleum. Everyone pointed fingers at them for creating an incredibly messy oil spill that has, undoubtedly and tragically, affected the lives and the livelihood of many people in the Southern USA. It was, according to the media at least, going to be a blight on the region for years - generations even. It led to the description by President Obama as being the "worst environmental disaster the USA has ever faced". Despite the heavy involvement of the US in terms of people, operating companies, investors and jobs, this "disaster" was a British creation, and nearly derailed relationships between the USA and the United Kingdom. 

Fast-forward to today though, and people are having to ask themselves - was this really the devastating event that was first thought?

The statistics from such august (adjective) bodies as the US National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration seem to support the current views being put forward by the scientists and the marine biologists, most of who now apparently think that the Exxon Valdez spill was far more serious that that created by the BP disaster. In fact, they say, nature has cleaned up much of the mess created by BP and the impact will be far less significant than originally thought. Rather supportive of the views expressed (somewhat badly, admittedly) initially by Mr. Hayward, the BP CEO.

Of course, the debate will continue over the numbers, and "experts" - professional and amateur - will continue to argue the minutiae. But the bigger picture suggests that the original reactions - prompted by a media desperate for bad news, and a US Administration desperate to show its mettle - may have been overdone.

But are we surprised? Do we not live in a world fascinated by short termism - a world where it seems to be okay to make hurried comments and move on - irrespective of the long term facts or other realities? 

In some ways it has been the same with the financial crisis, and everything that led up to it. Greed, shouted everyone - a headlong rush to jump on a short term bandwagon to make obscene amounts of money. A short term culture of bonuses. But was that the real cause? Okay, so perhaps it is a little unfair to go all the way back to the debate about - and subsequent implementation of tools such as - quarterly reporting - but maybe only a little. My memory was jogged last week by a comment from a Bank CEO (no not HSBC!), bemoaning the fact that his shareholders in general and the analysts in particular were spending all their time focusing on his quarterly results, and not giving him time to focus on building for the long term. Could the financial crisis have been the long term result of introducing regulations like quarterly reporting?

Were we any better off once quarterly reporting was introduced to the banking industry? Did it save us from the financial crisis? Of course the answer is no. In fact the British Bankers Association some four or five months ago issued an interesting paper that seemed to suggest that regulators would be much better served by taking a system-wide macro-prudential perspective. They even used the Hong Kong Monetary Authority as a good example of such a system.

So, you may think you have covered the bases, but the end result is not necessarily what you expect it to be.

Therefore the question is - why do we overreact to situations, and can we not stop it?

Probably not. Sadly. There are too many countries today that follow a "blame" culture. They want to find people doing things that are considered wrong, in their eyes, so they can blame them. And who starts everyone off on this cycle? - usually the media. And if we are not careful it is going to lead the world into a downward spiral. If you haven't read "1984"  or Huxley's "Brave New World", or have not done so recently - this is a view of the future we will be left with when we have done all the blaming we can!

Oil spills and financial crises are not nearly as bad as world wars, but the hype that can be built up around them and events like them could, one day, lead us backwards rather than forwards. 

These issues in our world need considered thinking, balance and perspective. We must weigh very carefully the effect of loose words, actions and ill thought-through regulations. 

One Eye On The World ...

I have always subscribed to the view, even before taking a break became mandatory for corporate governance and insurance purposes - "Ah, yes, if Eldon's away from the office for 15 consecutive days we can find out what malpractice he has been involved with..." - that everyone should take time off. The best sportsmen and women, the best writers all know that you have to re-charge your batteries, and it is no different in business. 

Thus I found myself last week in the southern provinces of France in brilliantly clear and blue skies, with a day time temperature of 36° C, actually enjoying big supermarkets where you could both Park and  Shop and find a huge array of goods in them, wishing that someone in Hong Kong would find a big piece of land somewhere in the old run down industrial areas in Kowloon and do something similar. But if that was the biggest of my worries last week I think I must have been truly relaxed, although the global headlines were creating enough news to make one sit up and take notice.

The dreadful tragedy of the German concert that saw such an unnecessary loss of life, the remarkable news that Barcelona was to ban bull-fighting (a move I personally applaud), the concerns that America still thinks it has the right to summon whomsoever it wants from another sovereign power to be insulted by a Senate Committee, and from the same country rising concerns that the US growth was shown to have contracted sharply in the second quarter. (I would love to say this should not exactly be a surprise - I have said as much in previous blogs - and people much more erudite and intelligent than me in Asia have had similar views for some time, but the hopeful voices of politicians still want people to believe that all is well). Get real, folks. Be cynical about the numbers - many of which are adjusted (negatively) in the small print the following quarter.

By the way - I do sympathise with those who question the release of Al Megrahi, although if the man had died within the predicted three months there would not be so much fuss today. I have a friend in Hong Kong who was diagnosed with Stage 4 cancer some 7 years ago and given less than six months to live. He is still with us! That, in his particular circumstances, is a cause for rejoicing. Al Megrahi should never have been released from prison in my personal opinion - but this "in hindsight" investigation is not going to achieve very much - but is very likely to strain relations that should not otherwise be strained.

But it's now briefly back to London and the summer (which they may actually have had before I got here), we are faced with the news of Mr Li Ka-shing's successful acquisition of a company here, the Mayor of London's "Cycle Through London" scheme (something you can get away with in the British capital because they don't have to contend with Hong Kong minibus drivers), Prime Minister Cameron's "open and frank" condemnations of Israel and Pakistan - which have won him a few new friends but lost him others - and the opening of a new bank!

Given the fact that bankers in Britain still rank in popularity somewhere between theNorth Korean World Cup soccer team in Pyongyang and BP in America, the opening of a brand new bank - the first in London for over 100 years has certainly raised some eyebrows. It may not be exciting, and its business products may not be new and innovative - but it is only going to be closed for four days of the year, will open from 8 a.m to 8 p.m, will print and give you your credit card on the spot, and take only 15 minutes to open an account. In fact, they seem to have adopted a rather unique approach to banking in that they are there to serve the customer. Now, actually, how innovative is that? - Oh, and did I mention the water bowls for dogs?

You know, holidays are a good thing but there is so much going on out there - serious and the not so serious - that you still have to keep one eye on the world!