A costly dream
Liu Yunyun

Jeremy Su’s resume glows: President, Hypercom Corporation Asia-Pacific; General Manager, Sun Microsystems China; President, Bull Information Systems Greater China Operation, et cetera, et cetera.
But thanks to being laid off from Hypercom because of cost cutting, his heart, formerly crippled by his juggernaut career, is learning to beat again to the cadence of a balanced life and to the rhythm of romance.
When he’s not learning to salsa dance, Su is furnishing his new house in Beijing and considering re-marrying.
Su regrets what happened to his marriage the first time around, a matter so apparent when we met at an elegant restaurant below his hotel apartment.
Basking in the pleasant atmosphere of bonsai and the most luxurious Beijing element-quiet-I asked Su what the happiest moment of his life was.
He smiled ephemerally, and answered, “The most miserable experience in life was getting divorced with my ex-wife.”
His demeanor quickly changed from being a portly barrel of self-effacing humor to that of a deep well full of sadness.
“She was my first girlfriend, and we once led a happy life with our two children,” Su recalled.
But due to a mounting workload and his desire for success, Su scuttled his family for his version of the American Dream.
It’s a phenomenon that happens far too often, revealing a darker, perverted side of this fantasy that could lead China’s hardworking nouveau riche-foreigners included-to the depths of misery if they’re not careful.
Winning or losing?
Born of a Chinese father and American mother, Su was raised in China but educated in the United States. One day in 1980, Su observed his two passports in hand when he had to decide his nationality for good.
He chose the U.S. passport because “it was convenient to travel with a U.S. passport, and that was when I decided my nationality.”
But traveling convenience later helped dig a grave for his family ties.
While working for Sun as general manager and later as corporate director, Su seldom had a week that was marked “travel free.”
“When I worked as president and corporate director of Taiwan operations of Sun from 1992 to 1994, I had to go to the United States headquarters every three months with the rest of the time flying from this country to that country.” During that period of time, in the region Su helped to turn Sun around, boosting revenues from $24 million to $80 million per year from the combined operations of Sun and its partner business.
But his family suffered.
Su’s experience correlates with the results of a landmark study published in the November 2003 issue of Psychological Science. The first of its kind, it assessed the importance of financial success to more 12,000 college freshmen. About 19 years later, it probed their goal attainment and subjective well-being.
“The negative consequences [of the goal of financial success] were particularly severe for the domain of family life,” wrote lead author, Carol Nickerson, a psychologist with the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. “The stronger the goal for financial success, the lower the satisfaction with family life, regardless of household income. Aspiring to and achieving the American Dream of financial success may have a dark side.”
Tim Kasser, Associate Professor of Psychology at Knox College in the United States, and author of The High Price of Materialism, outlined that dark side more broadly.
“Research shows that when people place a relatively high value on the acquisition of money, possessions, image, and status-some common elements of the American Dream-there are three kinds of problems that are likely to occur,” Kasser said.
First, he said, people who are more materialistic are less satisfied with their lives, report more depression and anxiety, experience more unpleasant emotions like anger and sadness and fewer pleasant emotions like contentment. Second, they are less likely to engage in positive and pro-social behaviors. Hence, they are more competitive, less empathic and more likely to cheat. Third, they live their lives in more ecologically damaging ways, using more resources and recycling less.
Still, Nickerson’s study found that for those whose household incomes were in fact higher (regardless of their financial goals), overall life satisfaction was higher also.
“On average, wealthy individuals are somewhat happier than less wealthy individuals,” said Christopher Hsee, the Theodore O. Yntema Chair Professor at the University of Chicago Graduate School of Business. “Furthermore, what business success brings is not just financial benefits, but more important, it brings a sense of achievement.”
However, Hsee suggested desiring business success is different from being materialistic, and has different consequences.
“Various studies, including one we conducted in China, show that controlling for income, the more you believe in materialism…the less happy you are,” Hsee said. “Thus, if you are wealthy and you are not materialistic, you will be quite happy; if you are materialistic but don’t have much money, you will be quite unhappy. Our data [also from China] suggest that the more you care about ‘face,’ the less happy you are.”
In the Chinese culture, the problem of “losing face” is a kind of embarrassment and often associated with a failure in either career or life.
Indeed, Su might have suffered from that homegrown China complex.
“The questions constantly going through your mind are: Is your boss satisfied with you? Is the working pressure heavy? Have you done a good job? Do the company and your colleagues recognize your work and are they pleased?” Su said.
Su noted the work pressure in listed companies was even heavier and performance was nearly everything that mattered.
“You just didn’t have time to think whether you were happy or not,” Su said.
Back on track
Today, Su’s life appears to be improving, and thankfully, not financially.
Su currently isn’t working-taking a break for a while after he was laid off. Although headhunters are apparently after him, he has rebuffed them to date, pursuing writing a book on management in China.
A man like Su certainly needn’t worry about bread and butter. He’s one of the major shareholders of a real estate company in Beijing founded by several Taiwanese.
“I only need to attend the shareholders’ meetings and there is nearly nothing else,” he said, sounding relaxed for a change.
But Su isn’t a money-making machine anymore, and his humanity is certainly beginning to shine through.
Su joked with me, remarking that he’s part of the “57th” ethnic group of China because of his mixed Chinese-foreign blood. China is known to have 56 ethnic groups.
“Sometimes people ask me which country I come from. When I say I come from China, they will examine my face and find it hard to believe and ask me further if I was a minority like a Uygur or a Mongolian,” Su said. “Knowing they are getting confused, I will always tell them that I am the 57th ethnicity.”
Still, the cynicism of yore seems to still have a grasp, like some psychological scar of posttraumatic financial stress. Because he still flies from Beijing to Hong Kong regularly, I asked him which one he considers home.
“Home?” Su laughed, “I guess you are very young. What is home? I had many houses in the United States, Hong Kong, Beijing, et cetera. Home is just like one of your clothes.” In staging his comeback, whatever business form that eventually takes, Su might remember at least that family is not just like one of your clothes. Neither is happiness.

(The Daily Mail-Beijing Review Articles Exchange Item)



The blame game
Amjed Jaaved

India has once again blamed Pakistan for involvement in the Mumbai train blasts. The basis for the allegation is the decision given by the speedy trial court. Such courts are a convenient mechanism for pronouncing judgments, under India’s Prevention of Terrorism Act, congenial to the Indian government.
Two cornerstones of the Mumbai-blasts prosecution case are intercepted internet or telephonic messages and alleged hand-to-hand (hawala) money transfers linking Pakistan.
The crux of the ‘charge sheet’ against ISI, or for that matter against Pakistan, is that: (a) Two email addresses (ibn—chand@yahoo and smellofflower@yahoo.com) were used by the Mumbai-based Lashkar-e-Taiba (LeT) suspects to keep in touch with their ‘handlers’. (b) Corroborative evidence gathered by narco-tests of LeT’s Mumbai chief Faizal Sheikh, arrested two months ago. (c)The email ibn—chand@yahoo.ca was being used by Mohammad Ali Chhipa, a Lashkar member who was arrested from Hazrat Nizamuddin railway station by the Delhi Police special cell on May 8 this year along with other members with 4.5 kg of RDX. Chhipa had allegedly told the police that he and his colleagues had used both the emails for communications with Rahil. Later, Firoz Deshmukh and Noman—both from the Islamic Research Foundation and arrested for their involvement in the 7/11 blasts—also, allegedly, used the same mail IDs for communications with Rahil who by then had escaped to Dhaka. Rahil Sheikh, a prime suspect in the Aurangabad arms haul case, was later arrested. (d) Another suspected e-mail address is nmkhokar786@hotmail.com.
India’s Telegraph Act makes intercepts inadmissible as evidence. But, the POTA attaches evidentiary value to the telephonic, telegraphic and internet conversations. Any mischievous police officer with malafide intent can misinterpret a conversation to send a person to the gallows.
The brutality of the law was brought into limelight when S. A. R Geelani was implicated for attack on the Indian parliament (December 13). He was awarded death penalty by the fast-track court on the basis of wrong translation of the three words “delhi kya korua’’ , “what has happened in New Delhi”, picked up from his one-minute conversation with his brother. The police translated the three words as “what have you done’’. The Kashmiri equivalent for the police translation is “yeh kya korua” which the lecturer did not use in his conversation.
The conversation between S A R Geelani and his brother Shah Faisal was in Kashmiri. Not to speak of linguistic mastery, the police official intercepting the conversation on December 13 (date of attack on Indian parliament) did not know a single word of Kashmiri language.
Next day, the Special Cell brought in an ‘expert’ to translate the conversation. But the Special cell’s expert was a person, who knew only tidbits of the Kashmiri language, not intonations or linguistic nuances. He was educated only up to the sixth grade.
He could only read and speak Hindi, not write it. As such, his spoken translation of the conversation was converted into a written text by another person. It is this translation that was used as key evidence to charge Geelani.
The POTA usurps Constitution-of- India safeguards for fundamental rights (part 3, articles 13 – 35). The rights include “life and liberty of the person” (article 21) and “freedom of expression” (article 19). It also violates article 21 which provides that “no person shall be deprived of his life or personal liberty except according to procedure established by law”.
The POTA is also called a “draconian’ law. Verily so, as penalties under this law are akin to those stipulated in Draco’s code of 610 BC to forestall future revolts by common men. The code provided death penalty for even trivial offences like stealing an apple, or an earthenware utensil.
The POTA violates international-human-rights standards, which provide the framework for international protection and promotion of human rights. It is also incompatible with international human rights standards and treaties, particularly the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR), to which India is a party.
India has signed but not yet ratified the UN Convention against Torture and Other Cruel, Inhuman or Degrading Treatment or Punishment (CAT) to validate torture under POTA. However, notwithstanding non-ratification, adherence to international human rights standards has been upheld by the Supreme Court of India in a number of decisions (for example, Vishaka & Others vs. State of Rajasthan & Others: 1997(6) SCC24).
When asked about the POTA, in an interview to The Hindu, Dato’ Param Cumaraswamy, former United Nations Special Rapporteur on Independence of Judges and Lawyers said: “Past experience had shown that draconian legislations did not provide much safety to the state against terrorists or militants but were used only to protect the safety of the government in power”.
In Mumbai blasts case, India has tried to warp USA’s sensitivity about hawala transactions against Pakistan. But, the USA is aware of burgeoning hawala- transactions networks in India.
Washington expects India to do more to prevent financing of terror networks. USA’s Assistant Secretary of State for Economic and Business Affairs Anthony Wayne told the Senate Banking Committee, ‘In India, two accounts belonging to terrorist individuals/entities have been identified, but the Government of India has not frozen any assets to date. It is aware of the UN 1267 Committee List, however, and has conducted investigations. Wayne noted that ‘the Prevention of Money Laundering Act (PMLA) became effective on July 1. It provides the statutory basis for the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) to perform its functions. It criminalises money laundering and requires banks and other financial institutions and intermediaries to report individual transactions valued over US$ 23,000 to the FIU.’
Wayne added, ‘India has also indicated it wants to join the Financial Action Task on Money Laundering. However, at a recent FATF plenary meeting in Paris, concerns were raised regarding its ability to provide effective international cooperation in a timely manner and to extend mutual legal assistance’.
Indian government pays no regard to the recommendations adopted by the Financial Action Task Force on money laundering, set up in July 1989 by the Paris summit of the seven most developed countries. The conventional money-laundering techniques (smurfing, cover companies, etc) are used to the hilt in India. The Indians are content that imposing 0.01 per cent tax on cash withdrawals from banks is sufficient to curb money-laundering in India.


Taliban resurgence in Afghanistan
Mamoona Ismail

A suicide bomber killed three people including the governor of Paktia province outside his office on September 9, 2006. The attacker, with explosives attached to his body ran into car carrying Governor Abdul Hakim Taniwal, his nephew and bodyguard, killing all of them. Taniwal had been governor of Paktia for about one and half years. Before that he was federal minister of mines and industry in the Cabinet of President Karzai. Taliban claimed responsibility for the suicidal attack and threatened more similar attacks.
North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) started its operation on September 2nd to disrupt insurgent activities in the Panjwayi and Zhari districts. Panjwayi is the main southern city of Kandhar. NATO forces claimed killing 94 Taliban fighters in recent string of operations in these two districts of the southern Kandahar. The Afghan Army grip on insurgents remaining in the Panjwayi and Zhari districts continued to tighten, steadily and incrementally eroding the insurgent’s ability to continue to fight. During the nine day counterinsurgency attacks approximately 420 Taliban have been killed and 6 NATO and 14 British crew of reconnaissance plane have also died.
Meanwhile, the Taliban leader Qari Yousuf Ahmadi claimed that their fighters had killed 18 government and foreign troops and destroyed three tanks and two vehicles. Moreover, Anis Sharif another Taliban commander in Ghazni claimed that their fighters had gathered in Isfandi village (located 2.5 kilometers away from Ghazni city) and had planned an attack on Provincial Reconstruction Team (PRT). He said that they fired four rockets on PRT, but had no details about any casualties. He rejected government’s claims regarding killing of Taliban militia.
In addition, in the western province of Farah, more than 100 Taliban fighters raided a government compound, killing two policemen and setting fire to several buildings. In Southern Zabul Province of Shah joy district Taliban killed three Afghan soldiers and wounded eight in an ambush. Afghan authorities also found body of a district education chief, who was kidnapped by suspected militants in central Ghazni province.
Unfortunately, as violence increases in Afghanistan, so do the baseless accusations regarding Pakistani hand behind it. There is a need to understand that the current unrest in Afghanistan and resurgence of Taliban is indigenous in nature. Pakistan is not providing any support to insurgents and is not sending them to Afghanistan. Pakistan’s role in combating terrorism is sufficient prove of her efforts to fight the menace of terrorism from the region. Mansoor Suhail, press minister at the Pakistan mission to the United Nations said, “Pakistan has captured more than 680 foreign terrorists and banned all organizations that were suspected of involvement in terrorism”. Pakistan has deployed 90,000 troops “three times as many as fielded in Afghanistan” to interdict al Qaeda and Taliban movement across the border.
Through a comprehensive military, political and economic strategy, Pakistan is succeeding in endeavour to end support for the Taliban in its frontier regions. Despite Pakistan’s sincere efforts to counter terrorism, exerting undue pressure on Pakistan by western media for Taliban uprising in Afghanistan is unfair. Instead of appreciating Pakistan’s sincere efforts to root out terrorists from its soil, a negative and hostile lobby is working to undermine its sincere efforts. Such negative propagation is creating doubts in the perceptions of the west about its support to Taliban. Pakistan has always considered Afghanistan its brotherly neighboring country sharing cultural, economic and political history. It provided shelter and support to over three million Afghan refugees despite great social, economic, cultural and demographic ramifications.