UMNO-Barisan Institutional Response To Corruption Accountability Beyond Rhetoric Transparency and Accountability in Government Procurement

Japan is excavating the site of a former medical school that may reveal grisly secrets from World War II.

The investigation begins Monday afternoon at the former school linked to Unit 731, a germ and biological warfare outfit during the war. Shadowy experiments conducted by the unit on war prisoners have never been officially acknowledged by the government but have been documented by historians and participants. It is the first government probe of the Tokyo site, and follows a former nurse's revelation that she helped bury body parts there as American forces began occupying the capital at the end of the war.

Health Ministry official Kazuhiko Kawauchi said the excavation is aimed at finding out if anything is buried in the plot.

"We are not certain if the survey will find anything," Kawauchi said. "If anything is dug up, it may not be related to Unit 731."

The former nurse, Toyo Ishii, now 88, broke 60 years of silence in 2006, saying she and colleagues at an army hospital at the site were ordered to bury numerous corpses, bones and body parts during the weeks following Japan's Aug. 15, 1945, surrender before American troops arrived in the capital.

Her disclosure led to a face-to-face meeting with the health minister and a government pledge to investigate. The digging had to wait until the scheduled relocation of residents and the demolition of apartments on the site last year.

The site is close to another area where a mass grave of dozens of possible war-experiment victims was uncovered in 1989 during the construction of a Health Ministry research institute.

Any remains found at the planned excavation site would have a stronger connection to Unit 731, said Keiichi Tsuneishi, a Kanagawa University history professor and expert on biological warfare.

"The site used to be the research headquarters of Unit 731," Tsuneishi said. "If bones are found there, they are most likely related to Unit 731."

From its wartime base in Japanese-controlled Harbin in northern China, Unit 731 and related units injected war prisoners with typhus, cholera and other diseases to research germ warfare, according to historians and former unit members. Unit 731 also is believed to have performed vivisections and to have frozen prisoners to death in endurance tests.

The 1989 find revealed dozens of fragmented thigh bones and skulls, some with holes drilled in them or sections cut out. Police denied there was any evidence of criminal activity.

The ministry concluded that the bones could not be directly linked to Unit 731. It said the remains were mostly of non-Japanese Asians and were likely from bodies used in "medical education" or brought back from the war zone for analysis at the medical school.

C

Yeah, how's that for a title? Only slightly obscured by the palm trees and the olive branches, here are a few choice photos laying out the blatant hypocrisy of the West when it comes to the arming of Middle Eastern dictators and autocratic regimes -- on sale now!  

Here's the sequence:

photo 1.  British Prime Minister David Cameron drops by Tahrir Square as part of an arms sales junket to the Middle East with executives of Britain's eight most prominent arms and aerospace companies, including BAE Systems, the UK's Daily Mail reports. (Just wait. BAE comes into the picture just below.)

photo 2. British Defense Minister Gerald Howarth goes on ahead to IDEX, the huge international arms bizarre (whoops, bazaar) that opened in Abu Dhabi on Saturday, with 50 British arms companies in tow.  The biannual expo hosts over a thousand exhibitors and the UAE writes about $5 billion in sales at the show alone.  English aerospace, defense and security companies did $2.85 billion in trade with the Gulf Cooperation Councilmember states in 2008. (In the photo, Howarth is surrounded by the UAE's top military and police brass.)

3.  A couple of photos from the last IDEX expo, in '09. Here we see German salesmen peddling rifles.

4.  And last but not least, the pride of BAE's booth.  Yeah, that's a Howitzer.

Also see Foreign Policy IDEX slideshow from '09 (featuring photos from Magnum, several, I believe, by the wry Martin Parr).

----------

For the latest in visual politics, visit BagNewsNotes (and follow us on Twitter).

(photo 1: Tim Ireland/AP. caption: British Prime Minister David Cameron, center, walks in Tahrir Square, Cairo, Egypt, Monday, Feb. 21, 2011. Cameron arrived in Cairo Monday to meet with top Egyptian officials and "make sure this really is a genuine transition" to civilian rule. photo 2: WAM. caption: From left: Major General Eisa Saif Mohammad Al Mazroui, Deputy Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces; Gerald Howarth, Minister for International Security Strategy of Great Britain; Shaikh Hazza Bin Zayed Al Nahyan, National Security Adviser for the UAE and Vice-Chairman of the Executive Council, Lt. General Hamad Thani Al Rumaithi, Chief of Staff of the UAE Armed Forces, and Staff Major-General Obaid Al Ketbi, Deputy Director-General of Abu Dhabi Police, at the Gulf Defence Conference, the official Idex 2011 conference, in Abu Dhabi on Saturday. photo 3 & 4: Marwan Naamani/AFP/Getty Images. caption 3: A German employee shows a German made RS8 rifle to Emirati visitors on the opening day of the International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) in Abu Dhabi on February 22, 2009. The Middle East's biggest arms show opened in Abu Dhabi, covering a larger area than ever in defiance of the global credit crisis that has hit the weapons-buying power of Gulf states. Nearly 900 exhibitors from 50 countries are taking part in the five-day event which is half as big again as the last time it was held, in 2007. caption 4: An Arab man walks past an M777 A2 lightweight 155mm Howitzer on the opening day of the International Defence Exhibition and Conference (IDEX) in Abu Dhabi on February 22, 2009. The Middle East's biggest arms show opened in Abu Dhabi, covering a larger area than ever in defiance of the global credit crisis that has hit the weapons-buying power of Gulf states. Nearly 900 exhibitors from 50 countries are taking part in the five-day event which is half as big again as the last time it was held, in 2007.)

oThe recent uprisings in the Arab world, including some regime changes, call for a meaningful reassessment of current policy. One would expect the usual demands for democracy, human rights, freedom of expression and regularly scheduled elections as well as a heightened commitment to the people of the region, that their rights and aspirations will be reflected in this new vision. Furthermore, it would not be surprising if all these were packaged as part of an initiative to address the Palestine/Israel conflict and a commitment to the establishment of a state of Palestine.

The momentous events have exposed a disturbing dearth of American influence in the region, a fact which was highlighted by President Obama's inability to convince the Palestinian President to withdraw the Security Council Resolution in exchange for terms that might, at other times, have looked reasonable. Clearly, there is greater political advantage for Arab leaders in "standing up" to the United States rather than aligning with it. While the Palestinian issue is one reason for this reality, there are others.

The common theme which remains constant among the uprisings in Tunisia, Egypt, Yemen, Bahrain, Libya and the demonstrations in other Arab countries is neither ideology, religion, foreign policy, nor simple economic deprivation. Instead, that unifying thread is poor governance and its attendant oppression and corruption flagrantly practiced by the leaders and their families and cohorts. For decades average citizens have been deprived of dignity and access to the rule of law while the kleptocratic dictators and their inner circle remained above the law. The scope of their corruption ranges from huge commissions on contracts to the more damaging naked form in which the regular citizen is dispossessed, humiliated and abused to such a degree that self-immolation becomes a viable option as a means of expression.

These leaders, their wives, and their sons established a claim on the present and future ownership of their countries and resources. What we have witnessed is not a Facebook revolution or a Twitter revolt. These have been uprisings against unjust governments which have oppressed their people with impunity. Television and social media have indeed facilitated the organization and the spread of information, but they did not ignite the human will to revolt. Injustice and indignity did that.

In pursuit of stability, the United States and the West, have tolerated, if not actively supported, tyrants and crooks. Young people of the Middle East have spoken, with dignity and in peace, as they shed their blood to earn freedom for themselves and their countries. They are seeking a future of stability and democracy and are prepared to pay for it. They want accountability and expect transparency; we should listen and must help.

The promise for help and expressions of support from the Administration are insufficient. The time has come for words backed by deeds. Because the people of these incipient democracies have rushed into their streets to demand freedom, now is the time to secure it by providing real accountability and transparency. The system of American, Western and international laws which has been mobilized to fight terrorism globally must be directed against officials who kill, or order the murder of, civilians. These laws must be invoked against corrupt individuals who steal their people's resources, rather than used to create safe havens for the loot in Western financial institutions and investments. The complicity must stop. Western global resources are now threatened by the corruption western governments have ignored. This corruption has driven societies, and not just individuals, to radicalization. The mullahs and radical ideologues have a convenient argument at their disposal to incite people whose rights and dignity have been trampled.

U.S. and international legal, economic and financial institutions, must mobilize to combat corruption if we are to gain the trust and support of the people who suffer at the hands of their thieving tyrants. The resulting economic benefit and enhanced security for us and also for the whole world will be immeasurable. Yes, it is absolutely our business to demand accountability. Radicalized and disenfranchised people and societies pose a threat to our national security interest. The legal systems, here and abroad, have to support the rights of individuals under the watch of serious, probing and sustained media attention in order to widen the circle of rights for other citizens. The recklessness and impunity which allow tyrants not just to murder and scare their own people but to threaten the countries of Europe with economic punishment or a flood of refugees if any Western nation demands accountability must be faced with the gravity they deserve. Standing by the Arab people in their quest for freedom will help dispel the prevailing narrative that we partner with the regimes of oppression. The departure of Mubarak and Ben Ali are steps in the right direction. A genuine commitment to upholding accountability would open the doors to democracy and stability.

Corruption is a threat to national security and not just a financial crime. We should not be the world's policeman, nor should we be the dictator's patron.

Ziad Asali MD is the president of the American Task Force on Palestine.

Transparency and Accountability in Government Procurement

Comment: It is natural for Malaysians to be concerned about government procurement processes and procedures. The call for greater transparency and  accountability and more competitive bidding is commendable. We all want to be sure that we, our children, and our grandchildren do not have to bear the burden of acquiring national defence and other assets at inflated prices.

So, Tony Pua is justified, as a Member of Parliament, in asking the Ministry of Defence to “practise increased transparency and professionalism in its award of contracts to ensure that the interests of the rakyat are fully protected and money taxed from the people are not wasted on over-priced projects”.

I am glad that Tony Pua did not mention the Royal Malaysian Navy  (TDLM) when he used the word “professionalism” in connection with this issue. In my view, TLDM is a truly outstanding and well managed unit of the Malaysian Armed Forces. Our Naval personnel from Chief of Navy down are thoroughly professional in their work. We can be very proud of them ,and rest assured that our territorial waters and sea lanes are safe under their care.

The decision– as to who should be awarded naval (and other) contracts and at what prices–is made at the Ministry of Defence with politicians like the Minister of Defence, Dr. Zahid Hamidi and his cronies, having the final say. Decisions taken at that level does not give us, the public, much comfort.

Let us make a distinction between those who put their lives on the line in the defence of our country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and those civilians and elected officials who run the Ministry of Defence from their air-conditioned offices.  Their motivations are different. One is concerned with getting assets that work to support their defence strategy,  whereas the other  side thinks in terms of commissions and other sweeteners from defence contractors.

Military, Air Force and Navy officers are interested in assets that can help them get their job done effectively.  Our men and women in battle must, therefore,  be given assets that work. Civilian decision makers  have no such concerns . If not, how do we account for the acquisition of military and naval assets at over-inflated prices, for example, the French  made submarines, and now the OPVs?

I respect the professional judgment of our military, air force and navy experts on what they want for our national defence and will give them the right tools to do their duty. They are entitled to the best that money can buy because they must defend our country. I expect our civilian decision makers in the Ministry of Defence to negotiate the best deals for them. They should not second guess the military; neither should we.

But we must  insist on our government to be fully transparent and accountable in their procurement decisions. Why should we as citizens be concerned to ensure that procurement policies and procedures are consistent with the best international practices? Because it is a known fact that public procurement relating to military asset acquisitions is extremely prone to “grand corruption” (to quote George Moody-Stuart).–Din Merican

http://tonypua.blogspot.com

Offshore Patrol Vessels at RM 1Billion each?

by Tony Pua

Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi announced the order for 6 units of offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) for the amount of RM6 billion from Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd two days ago.

While it is understood that the price is yet to be “finalised”, it brings to questions the practice by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to award contracts well before the terms of the contract, including the price, have been finalised. Last year, MoD awarded another RM8 billion contract to purchase 257 8×8 Armoured-Wheeled Vehicles (AWVs) from a DRB-Hicom subsidiary when the latter has not even built a prototype vehicle for testing. These contracts were also awarded with no competitive bids which raise the likelihood of massive leakages in the process.

What is the point of making major announcements on such awards, including the value of the contracts when the Government will subsequently explain that “everything is still subject to finalisation of specifications and negotiations on price”? In that case, isn’t it better to finalise the specifications, conclude the price before the relevant announcements?

A cursory check on the prices of OPVs revealed a wide range in prices per ship. The Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) took delivery of its 85-metres 1,500 tonnes OPVs from world-renown global defence and security company, BAE Systems last year at the cost of NZ$90 million each or approximately RM210 million. The OPVs were built for maritime counter-terrorism, surveillance and reconnaissance, surface contact detection, apprehension and escort of vessels as well as maritime search And rescue (SAR).

The Irish Roisin class will cost US$34 million (RM103m), the Greek Super Vita US$108 million (RM329m), the German Type 130 US$188 million (RM572m) and the Israeli Saar V US$260 million (RM791m) each. The MoD’s price tag of RM1 billion per OPV is between 26% and 870% above the cost of the various international-class OPVs listed above.

Even at the very top of the range, ships were to be built by Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, two of the best and biggest military companies in the world were to build the US “Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)” at a budget of less than US$300 million (RM913m) in 2004. These ships are sized at 115 metres and 3,000 tonnes and fully equipped for full-scale anti-mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare as well as surface warfare. The ships will even have helicopter hangers built on its deck and equipped with the most sophisticated combat data weapons system.

The obvious question then, is whether the Government is procuring the construction of OPVs nearer the Irish Roisin class or closer to the US LCS? And if we are indeed making an order for the best-in-class LCS type ships capable of fighting a full scale surface and submarine warfare, does Boustead even have the skills and technology to make these ships?

Finally, it should be noted that even the most advanced defence countries in the world such as the United States procure military construction and defence equipment via competitive bids, open to world class international companies from Canada, Australia and Europe to achieve the best value for its money. In addition, the defence budget and expenditure is not only monitored by the Congressional Committee on Defence, it is also the approving authority for specific budgets for weapons related development including the LCS.

The MoD must practise increased transparency and professionalism in its award of contracts to ensure that the interest of the rakyat are fully protected and money taxed from the people are not wasted on over-priced projects. Otherwise, the call by the BN government for the people to absorb subsidy cuts on basic goods and services to rein in the widening budget deficit only smacks of hypocrisy.

Transparency and Accountability in Government Procurement

Comment: It is natural for Malaysians to be concerned about government procurement processes and procedures. The call for greater transparency and  accountability and more competitive bidding is commendable. We all want to be sure that we, our children, and our grandchildren do not have to bear the burden of acquiring national defence and other assets at inflated prices.

So, Tony Pua is justified, as a Member of Parliament, in asking the Ministry of Defence to “practise increased transparency and professionalism in its award of contracts to ensure that the interests of the rakyat are fully protected and money taxed from the people are not wasted on over-priced projects”.

I am glad that Tony Pua did not mention the Royal Malaysian Navy  (TDLM) when he used the word “professionalism” in connection with this issue. In my view, TLDM is a truly outstanding and well managed unit of the Malaysian Armed Forces. Our Naval personnel from Chief of Navy down are thoroughly professional in their work. We can be very proud of them ,and rest assured that our territorial waters and sea lanes are safe under their care.

The decision– as to who should be awarded naval (and other) contracts and at what prices–is made at the Ministry of Defence with politicians like the Minister of Defence, Dr. Zahid Hamidi and his cronies, having the final say. Decisions taken at that level does not give us, the public, much comfort.

Let us make a distinction between those who put their lives on the line in the defence of our country’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, and those civilians and elected officials who run the Ministry of Defence from their air-conditioned offices.  Their motivations are different. One is concerned with getting assets that work to support their defence strategy,  whereas the other  side thinks in terms of commissions and other sweeteners from defence contractors.

Military, Air Force and Navy officers are interested in assets that can help them get their job done effectively.  Our men and women in battle must, therefore,  be given assets that work. Civilian decision makers  have no such concerns . If not, how do we account for the acquisition of military and naval assets at over-inflated prices, for example, the French  made submarines, and now the OPVs?

I respect the professional judgment of our military, air force and navy experts on what they want for our national defence and will give them the right tools to do their duty. They are entitled to the best that money can buy because they must defend our country. I expect our civilian decision makers in the Ministry of Defence to negotiate the best deals for them. They should not second guess the military; neither should we.

But we must  insist on our government to be fully transparent and accountable in their procurement decisions. Why should we as citizens be concerned to ensure that procurement policies and procedures are consistent with the best international practices? Because it is a known fact that public procurement relating to military asset acquisitions is extremely prone to “grand corruption” (to quote George Moody-Stuart).–Din Merican

http://tonypua.blogspot.com

Offshore Patrol Vessels at RM 1Billion each?

by Tony Pua

Defence Minister Datuk Seri Zahid Hamidi announced the order for 6 units of offshore patrol vessels (OPVs) for the amount of RM6 billion from Boustead Naval Shipyard Sdn Bhd two days ago.

While it is understood that the price is yet to be “finalised”, it brings to questions the practice by the Ministry of Defence (MoD) to award contracts well before the terms of the contract, including the price, have been finalised. Last year, MoD awarded another RM8 billion contract to purchase 257 8×8 Armoured-Wheeled Vehicles (AWVs) from a DRB-Hicom subsidiary when the latter has not even built a prototype vehicle for testing. These contracts were also awarded with no competitive bids which raise the likelihood of massive leakages in the process.

What is the point of making major announcements on such awards, including the value of the contracts when the Government will subsequently explain that “everything is still subject to finalisation of specifications and negotiations on price”? In that case, isn’t it better to finalise the specifications, conclude the price before the relevant announcements?

A cursory check on the prices of OPVs revealed a wide range in prices per ship. The Royal New Zealand Navy (RNZN) took delivery of its 85-metres 1,500 tonnes OPVs from world-renown global defence and security company, BAE Systems last year at the cost of NZ$90 million each or approximately RM210 million. The OPVs were built for maritime counter-terrorism, surveillance and reconnaissance, surface contact detection, apprehension and escort of vessels as well as maritime search And rescue (SAR).

The Irish Roisin class will cost US$34 million (RM103m), the Greek Super Vita US$108 million (RM329m), the German Type 130 US$188 million (RM572m) and the Israeli Saar V US$260 million (RM791m) each. The MoD’s price tag of RM1 billion per OPV is between 26% and 870% above the cost of the various international-class OPVs listed above.

Even at the very top of the range, ships were to be built by Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, two of the best and biggest military companies in the world were to build the US “Littoral Combat Ships (LCS)” at a budget of less than US$300 million (RM913m) in 2004. These ships are sized at 115 metres and 3,000 tonnes and fully equipped for full-scale anti-mine warfare, anti-submarine warfare as well as surface warfare. The ships will even have helicopter hangers built on its deck and equipped with the most sophisticated combat data weapons system.

The obvious question then, is whether the Government is procuring the construction of OPVs nearer the Irish Roisin class or closer to the US LCS? And if we are indeed making an order for the best-in-class LCS type ships capable of fighting a full scale surface and submarine warfare, does Boustead even have the skills and technology to make these ships?

Finally, it should be noted that even the most advanced defence countries in the world such as the United States procure military construction and defence equipment via competitive bids, open to world class international companies from Canada, Australia and Europe to achieve the best value for its money. In addition, the defence budget and expenditure is not only monitored by the Congressional Committee on Defence, it is also the approving authority for specific budgets for weapons related development including the LCS.

The MoD must practise increased transparency and professionalism in its award of contracts to ensure that the interest of the rakyat are fully protected and money taxed from the people are not wasted on over-priced projects. Otherwise, the call by the BN government for the people to absorb subsidy cuts on basic goods and services to rein in the widening budget deficit only smacks of hypocrisy.