EXTRACT from Harvard Business Review - HBR

September 2011

HBR Case Study: Culture Clash in the

 Boardroom

by Katherine Xin and Wang Haijie 

(Harvard Business Review) HBR’s fictionalized case studies present dilemmas faced by leaders in real companies and offer solutions from experts. This one is based on a teaching case at China Europe International Business School in Shanghai.

The room was already packed when Liu Peijin walked in. His flight from Shanghai to Chongqing had been delayed, and he had fretted about missing the training. But fortunately he’d gotten there in time. Liu knew his presence was important. As the president of Almond China, he wanted to show his Chongqing colleagues how much he cared about the topic under discussion: ethical business practices.

Taking his seat, Liu nodded at the head of HR, who was running the training. The two went way back: Both had been with their German parent company, Almond Chemical, since 1999, when it first established operations in China. Since then Almond China had set up two joint ventures with local partners—the only way foreigners could do business in chemicals in the country. Almond controlled 70% of the stock in one of them. The other was a venture with Chongqing No. 2 Chemical Company, in which Almond had a 51% stake and the Chinese directors were very active.

Liu sat next to Wang Zhibao, the vice president in charge of sales for the Chongqing joint venture. Wang looked skeptical. He was good at his job, having closed several key deals that had kept the business afloat during its early years. But he was also at the center of a conflict between the venture partners: The Chongqing executives were increasingly vocal about how difficult it was to operate according to European standards, particularly the rules against gifts and commissions. Such incentives were commonly accepted in China and routinely employed by Almond’s competitors. Trying to do business without them, Wang argued, was foolhardy. “This is China, not Europe,” was his refrain.

But the line between these practices and breaking the law was a fine one. Almond was headquartered in Munich and listed on the New York Stock Exchange as well as the Frankfurt Stock Exchange, meaning it was required to adhere to the U.S. government’s Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which specifically forbade the bribing of foreign government officials by U.S.-listed companies.

Liu kept an eye on Wang as the HR director explained Almond’s ethics regulations and the legal consequences of business bribery. Liu knew the rules made sales more difficult, but Almond’s policy was clear, and he wanted to make sure that every member of the sales team understood it.

He had taken the same hard line on safety and environmental practices. The production facilities in Chongqing had been built according to German national standards, and all the safety equipment—helmets, shoes, and protective clothing—had come from Europe. The Chinese partners had called these investments “wasteful” and “frivolous”—“luxurious expenditures” that the young venture couldn’t, and shouldn’t, afford. But, with backing from the head office, Liu had stood firm. Similarly, he’d insisted that the factory’s MDI (methylene diphenyl diisocyanate) waste be treated as a dangerous substance and processed with a special cleaning agent, in accordance with European standards, even though Chinese law didn’t mandate it. His partners had been dismayed at the millions of yuan this would cost. But Liu refused to compromise, because he had witnessed the consequences of lesser standards firsthand. Years before, when he was working for another Chinese chemical company, an affiliate’s chlor-alkali plant had suffered an explosion, injuring 200 staff members and residents of the surrounding area and halting production for more than a month.

The training was reaching its end, and the HR director signaled to Liu that it was his turn to speak. Liu hesitated slightly as he looked at his Chongqing colleagues. “At Almond, ethics are nonnegotiable,” he said. “We need to remember these laws as we go about our business. We are not just a Chinese company; we’re a global one.” Solemn, blank faces stared back at him.

As he left the room, he couldn’t help feeling that his remarks had fallen on deaf ears.



A DAY TO CELEBRATE...

Some reflections on

16^th SEPTEMBER 2011 - A DAY TO CELEBRATE...  DAY OF INDEPENDENCE

Preamble:

On August 31^st 1957, Malaya was detached and declared as an independent nation from the British Colonial Government. Malaya also became an ‘automatic’ member of British-created international political-economic blog which are territories formerly under British Colonial Rule called “Commonwealth”  headed by Britain.  Historically four days ago was 31^st August 2011 and which was Malaya’s 54^th year of independence from the British Colonial Rule.

The days from the date 31^st August 1957 were short of 6 years and 16 days to reach the date of Malaysia Agreement dated on 16^th September 1963. Thus, for any Malaysian (historian or academician or politician) to say and/or write and accept that August 31^st 2011 was Malaysia’s 54^th Anniversary of nationhood is deliberate in causing grievous political misnomer and gross distortion of true history.

Formation of Malaysia

On 16^th September 1963 Malaysia Agreement was signed between four distinctive territories namely: Malaya, Singapore, Sabah and Sarawak. When Singapore left in 1966, the Federation of Malaysia was left with three signatory- territories (i.e Malaya, Sabah and Sarawak). Subsequently through the due process of the so called “referendum” and “amended” laws, Sabah and Sarawak somehow were reduced from being equal partners to Malaya in Malaysia. They were made to become states equivalent to Johor and the rest of the constituent-states of Malaya.

For Sarawak and also Sabah, 16^th September 1963 was the day when the two terrritories (I beg to differ by not calling them as states in this context) were detached and became independent from British Colonial Rule. The Declaration was full of hopes and joys then for all “Sarawakians” because of: “Sarawak’s Independence (from British Rule) within Malaysia” or “Sarawak Merdeka Dalam Malaysia”. There were records to prove the facts in Sarawak Museum Archives.

In looking backward, for me, the hopes and joys of “Sarawak Merdeka Dalam Malaysia” felt in 1963 ended when Sarawak became state equivalent to Malacca...

Some fond memories

In 1963, I was the 3^rd batch of Form One of about 60 students attended Government Secondary School Simanggang which was renamed SMK Simanggang as part and parcel of nation-building programmes termed as “Malaysianization” and “other-nization” of education system and schools, as well as other national social, economic and economic functions aimed at creating ‘new’ (Malaysian) national identity and values in line with RUKUN NEGARA. I still remember very well about many national-building events such as “Berjaya Weeks” or “National Solidarity Weeks” organized regularly (by Jabatan Keselamatan Dalam Negri and Malaysian Information Service –MIS) in various towns throughout the breadth and length of   Sarawak, including Pasar Simanggang between 1963 and 1966. The core focus of those public events was to instil Malaysian identity and loyalty in face of Indonesian military aggression along Sarawak-Kalimantan Border.

“Negara Ku” was played randomly (1963 – 1965) on purpose before the start of “tukis” or “wayang” in Simanggang Theatre (now Theatre Inn) to see who stood up indicationing of loyalty to the nation.

 “Pentas Rakyat” which proceeded from “Berjaya Weeks” focused on nation-building and fighting internal security threats posed by subversive and militant threats staged by the outlawed Sarawak Communist Organization and North Kalimantan Communist Party (NKCP) following the June 1966 Peace Accord in Bangkok (end of Indonesian-Malaysian Confrontation) until after the end of security Operation Sri Aman in 1973. Since then, the potential sources of security threats are internal. They include the elements:(i) Religious extremisms;(ii) Declaration of racial and/or political dominance and supremacy (chauvinisms) ; (iii)Presence of legal and illegal workforce (in millions) (iv) Knowledge-based society, and (v) In-coming influences of globalization.  

This forthcoming 16^th September 2011 will be the 48^th Anniversary Nationhood of Malaysia. Sarawak is blessed on being nominated as national centre of pompous celebration of the historic date. The venue of the anniversary is said to be at the latest majestic landmark - which is the new complex of Dewan Undangan Negri (DUN) Sarawak in Kuching City.  Kuchingites from all walks of life and age-groups including visitors from near and far are expected to enjoy watching the historical Sarawak Regatta fare as the highlight of daytime celebration.

Transformations

It is undeniable that much physical than non-physical transformations had already taken placed in many aspects in Sarawak during the last forty-eight (48) years. In considering   the 48 years, it is not untimely and also not wrong for us (as loyal Malaysians-of-Sarawak-Origins) to ask ourselves honestly and answer (analyze) one soul-searching question: “Is Sarawak really independent under politics of federalism?” as intended by the founding fathers of the nation in the context of the Malaysian Agreement? Secondly, must we conform to transform and move forward truly in tune with democratic processes and choices to become more peaceful, caring, tolerance, harmonious and prosperous in the literal sense of 1Malaysia National Concept? One most challenging agenda in the task of national democratic transformation is to free ourselves (minds) from clutches or stigmas of all religious, racial and political supremacy.  

To my fellow Malaysians

 Selamat Hari Malaysia ke-48 Tahun

on 16^th September 2011 !!

aonepakkopi

To read some views

(i) www.sapp.org.my/pdf/msia_agreement_1963.pdf; (ii) en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Malaysia_Agreement - Cached;(iii)www.freemalaysiatoday.com/.../jeffrey-wants-malaysia-agreement-r...-Cached(iv) (iv) thebrokenshield.blogspot.com/2009/10/malaysian-agreement.html-Cached;(v) blog.limkitsiang.com/.../merdeka-social-contractmalaysia-agreement... - Cached; (vi) [PDF] No. 10760 UNITED KINGDOM OF GREAT BRITAIN AND...untreaty.un.org/unts/1_60000/21/36/00041791.pdf;(vii)www.sabah.gov.my/openfora/subjects.asp?group=control.rmgroup - Cached ]

ONE REAPS WHAT ONE SOWS

Qaddafi’s Libyan Loot Likely Lost

August 29, 2011

By Dan Hennessey

Daniel Hennessey, an international affairs and geography major at the George Washington University, is an outreach and communications intern at Global Financial Integrity in Washington, DC.

$33 Billion Illicitly Left Libya between 2001-2009, Says Global Financial Integrity

Since the forces of the Libyan Transitional Council entered Tripoli last week, Muammar Qaddafi has not been seen, presumably hiding or on the run from the revolution aimed at ending his 42-year rule.  But as pointed out on ABC News last Wednesday, much of the money he looted from the country over the past 4 decades is still at large as well.

Citing Global Financial Integrity (GFI) research, ABC notes that at least $33 billion dollars left the country through illicit means in the past decade.  Explaining the figure, GFI’s Monique Danziger noted:

Libya has the “spottiest” data reporting of the 162 countries that report financial figures to the IMF and World Bank.

“These are all puzzle pieces,” she said. “No one can say they have a wholistic estimate. You’re working with huge data gaps no matter what.”

Earlier this summer, GFI’s Tom Cardamone wrote a piece for  Trust Law  about the challenges of actually recouping money taken by Qaddafi and his fellow ousted dictators, Mubarak in Egypt and Ben Ali in Tunisia.  In past recovery efforts, only about 1% of the money was ever recovered, based on a UNODC report .  The U.S. and other nations were quick to apply sanctions in the case of Libya, freezing many assets which may help with the recovery process.  In fact, some of those assets have already been returned to the Libyan people, with the Netherlands turning over some of the frozen money to fund medical relief efforts.

However, the process of finding all the illicit money is far from simple.  Bank secrecy laws, the routing of money through shell companies and secrecy jurisdictions, and all sorts of other shady financial maneuvering will make the recovery process challenging.  And in this case, as Robert Powell at the Economist Intelligence Unit notes , even if accounts are registered in Qaddafi’s name, the dozens of ways his name may be transliterated into the Latin alphabet makes tracking the funds even more daunting.

In order to prevent abuses of power like this in the future, it is vital that the U.S. and other nations take stronger measures to prevent illicit financial activity.  Strong anti-money laundering programs, including greater scrutiny into the activities of Politically Exposed Persons would make tracking and preventing dictatorial graft easier.  Making it harder to hide money in shell corporations with undisclosed owners will remove a key tool used to launder dirty money anonymously as well.

*************************************************

POWER CORRUPTS - ABSOLUTE POWER CORRUPTS ABSOLUTELY !

KASHRUT

Abrahamic or Jewish dietary laws (called kashrut) are found in the Old Testament mainly in Leviticus - Chapter 11.

Leviticus is third among the five books (Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers and Deuteronomy) included in the Laws of Moses (Torah or Taurat Musa). The chapter warns and forbids practitioners of Judaism (Jews) from eating certain types of unclean animals/creatures for foods (hence for Jewish-Kosher-foods). In its strict application, the instruction also forbids direct contact between physical body and/or attires with carcasses of unclean animals/creatures.

The types of unclean animals and creatures are mentioned in verses 13 to 46 of the said chapter. Based on the descriptions in the verses, lists of unclean animals and creatures including their kinds below are found and taken from an internet-search (Reference: www.biblestudy.org/cleanfood.html).  

Types of Swine :Boar, Peccary, Pig (hog, bacon, ham, lard, pork, most sausage and pepperoni) Types of Canine - Coyote, Dog, Fox, Hyena, Jackal, Wolf, Types of Feline: Cat, cheetah, leopard, Lion, Panther, Tiger, Types of Equine: Donkey (ass), Horse, Mule, Onager, Zebra (quagga) Others: Armadillo Badger, Bat, Bear. Beaver, Camel, Elephant, Gorilla, Groundhog, Hippopotamus, Kangaroo, Llama (alpaca, vicuña), Mole, Monkey, Mouse, Muskrat, Opossum, Porcupine, Rabbit (hare), Raccoon, Rat, Rhinoceros, Skunk, Slug, Snail (escargot), Squirrel, Wallaby, Weasel, Wolverine, Worm, All insects except some in the locust family.  Marine Animals wthout Fins and Scales: (i) Fish: Bullhead, Catfish, Eel, European Turbot, Marlin, Paddlefish, Shark, Stickleback, Squid, Sturgeon (includes most caviar), Swordfish,  (ii) Shellfish – Abalone, Clam, Conch, Crab, Crayfish (crawfish, crawdad), Lobster, Mussel, Oyster, Scallop, Shrimp (prawn), (iii) Soft body – Cuttlefish, Jellyfish, Limpet, Octopus, Squid (calamari)   Sea mammals: Dolphin, Otter, Porpoise, Seal, Walrus, Whale Birds of Prey, Scavengers and Others: Albatross, Bittern, Buzzard, Condor, Coot, Cormorant, Crane, Crow, Cuckoo, Eagle, Flamingo, Heron, Kite,  Lapwing, Loon, Magpie, Osprey, Ostrich, Owl, Parrot, Pelican, Penguin, Plover, Rail, Raven, Roadrunner, Sandpiper, Seagull, Stork, Swallow, Swift, Vulture, Water hen, Woodpecker Reptiles: Alligator, Caiman, Crocodile, Lizard, Snake, Turtle Amphibians: Blindworm, Frog, Newt, Salamander, Toad.

Apparently from the lists, it can be seen that the biological habitats and the natural feeding-characteristics of those animals and creatures are unclean. Thus hygiene is valid reason for the ‘khasrut’ against eating meats and foods from the unclean animals and creatures.

Two Significances

(i) Consuming meats and foods from the unclean animals/creatures including physical contacts with their carcasses makes practitioners of Judaism (Jews) ceremoniously unclean. Because of bodily uncleanliness they are forbidden to participate in worship unless they clean themselves accordingly. It follows that physically-clean bodies (free from contamination, sickness and/or infections) makes worshippers ceremoniously clean and holy in their worship of God for God is holy. Nonetheless, the chapter does not say that ceremoniously unclean believers are sinful or rejected by God.

(ii) The chapter is a picture of many intentional or accidental occurrences which contaminate and disqualify believers in worshipping holy God. The emphasis is believers must be well-prepared, be cleaned and holy (conduct-wise) in worshipping God for God is holy.

New Testament Concept of “bodily uncleanliness”

The New Testament teaches that “bodily uncleanliness” is not a religious restriction to appear in worship before God. Jesus clearly says what defile man before God is not what he eats but man’s heart and what comes out of his mouth:

“and He said:’ Are you lacking in understanding also? Do you understand that everything that goes into the mouth passes into the stomach, and is eliminated? But the things that proceed out of the mouth came from the heart, and those defile the man. For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. These are the things which defile the man; ....’”(Matt.15:16-20) (See also Mark 7:18-23)

The crux of Jesus’ teaching about being right with God is beyond Pharisee-taught physical and ceremonious cleanliness. At the same time Jesus did not abolish the restrictions on eating unclean foods.  

How does Leviticus Chapter 11 apply to Christians today?

This is an interesting question to discuss. To my personal knowledge, Seventh Day Adventist is one particular denomination of Christianity which observes food laws described in the chapter.

In the New Testament in Acts - Chapter 10 (verses 12 to 15), by Peter’s vision it is written: “....there were in it all kinds of four-footed animals and crawling creatures of the earth and birds of the airs ..... A voice came to him: “Arise, Peter, kill and eat!’... by no means, Lord I have never eaten things unholy and unclean .. the voice came to him again a second time: “What God has cleansed, no longer consider unholy.”

Depending on situation as one-man's food may be  another-man's poision. As for many Christians, taking “unclean” meats and foods (described in chapter 11) is not an issue but a choice through faith and by “prayer of sanctification in Jesus’ name. Amen!”

By man, the tendency to look at holiness is greater ceremoniously through external look including intake of foods and drinks. How can a man be holy from the outside when the inside is infested with much thoughts of filthiness?"..For out of the heart come evil thoughts, murders, adulteries, fornications, thefts, false witness, slanders. ...."

The greatest reminder is what Jesus said (in Matt.15:16-20 and Mark 7:18-23). What defiles man is not come in and through his mouth, but what comes out from the mouth.   

IF MEN ARE SO WICKED AND CARELESS WITH RELIGION, WHAT WOULD THEY BE WITHOUT ONE?

After last Thursday’s evening devotion, the same group of friends met casually at a “kedai-pak-kopi” near Green Height Airport Road Kuching.

In starting their coffee-talk Alberto said and asked: “In reviewing history of wars, Christians were condemned for the Crusades or “Holy Wars”......In the light of what the Bible teaches, how do we seek to answer a question that: If Jesus Christ was still around during the Crusades, would He sanction the so called ‘holy wars’?”

Antonio replied: “The question is highly imaginative. However, I suppose that the question is well-intended and thought-provoking connected with real historical happening...it makes an interesting topic of open-discussions taken in the light of the recent and current happenings ....”

Earnesto was quick to explain saying: “As part of European history, Crusades had been badly misunderstood, miswritten and misinterpreted. The wars were sanctioned by Pope Urban II when he summoned the knights of Christendom through the Council of Clermont which met in 1095. Being Pope-sanctioned, the wars were portrayed as “holy wars”. In facts, the wars were direct responses to Islamic territorial conquests and expansions over Christians-inhabited lands in Europe during the 11^th and 12^th century. To “Christianize the wars” symbols of “The Cross” were used. The fighters or crusaders expressed sentiments of piety, self-sacrifices, and for the love of their Christian brethrens.....”

In joining the conversation Julio asked: “Whoever called the Crusades against the invading Muslim forces as “holy wars” were not quite right and abusive. How can any war be “holy” when it involved killings, taking women and children for sexual gratifications ... and slaves, plundering for war booths or treasury of wars.....?

Antonio said: “A war could not be “holy” in the light of what Jesus Christ said - God is God of LOVE and not of hate, revenge, slavery... not of an eye for an eye or not of a tooth for a tooth. Upon His death on the Cross, Jesus said of His accusers: Father, forgive them for they know not what they are doing.”.....There are religious scriptures...... including some parts of the Old Testament did encourage and justify killings and torturing ...also suicides as an acts of love in defending or enforcing God’s truths and honour..... Who are we as human beings proudly acted in defence of God...I believe that God is more that capable of defending His truths and honour through believers who live their lives exemplary of God’s love, compassion, mercies and forgiveness. In the Gospels (or Injeels), Jesus was in total opposition against in the use of sword (in His defence by His follower) which is readable in Injeel (Matthew: 26 verses 51- 52).

Alberto quipped: “In each of world’s greatest religion, there is interwoven golden threads of truth which relate mankind one unto another... revolving around godly love, compassion, tolerance.... Thus mankind have been turning to religion in their search for ideal life.......Religion has been one of the most powerful moving forces in human history to forge unity in diversity in nation building until today.....Theocratic government is to unite and also to segregate (disunite) people in the name of religion....... If men are so wicked and careless with religion, what would they be without one? .... With regard to the Crusades, I see it historically as united defensive-war-actions (unholy alliances) among Christians against the invaders with the objective of pushing and keeping-out the invaders out of their conquered lands.  

Earnesto added: “We can agree to agree and also disagree. So in order to understand better the reasons for “branding” the Crusades as “holy wars” , we need to be open-minded and dig deeper into the history about the relationships between Judeo-Christianity and Islam post -Jesus Christ’s era..... In looking at the history from a safe distance of many centuries, it is easy enough for anyone to scowl in disgust at the Crusades. Religion after all is nothing to fight over.”

Antonio quickly chipped-in: “As far as I understand it, there was nothing to justify the Crusades as being “holy-wars” in the context of what Jesus Christ’s teachings which was against “an eye for an eye; a tooth for a tooth”. When challenged by the Pharisees, Jesus Christ said the two foremost   commandments were to: (i) Love the Lord God [Yehovah] with all one’s heart, soul and mind; and (ii) Love one’s neighbours as oneself. (Ref:Matt.22:37-40).

Earnesto said: “For the invading forces, territorial expansion was justified theologically in view of the religious concept in dividing the physical world into two spheres or territories namely Darul al-Islam (Territory of Peace) and Darul al-Harb (Territory of War). By the theological concept and interpretation, Darul al-Harb became the prime sphere of territorial conquests and expansions..... That explained the conquests of Palestine, Syria, and Egypt—once the most heavily Christians dominated worlds in the eighth century including North Africa and Spain. In the eleventh century, the Seljuk Turks conquered Asia Minor (modern Turkey), which had been Christian in term of religion since the time of St. Paul. The old Roman Empire, known to modern historians as the Byzantine Empire, was reduced to little more than Greece. In desperation, the Roman emperor in Constantinople sent word to the Christians of western Europe asking them to aid their brothers and sisters in the East....”

Alberto said: “With the historical happenings, it appeared the “holiness of religion” was infused and exploited strategically as divine authority or ruling to do something in the name of a religion. The Crusades are most misunderstood event in European history. Most of what passes for public knowledge about it is either misleading or just plain wrong. Nonetheless, Christianity as a religion naturally became a powerful “uniting force” tantamount to “coalition-of-rights-of-defence”- in defending fellow-believers (practically neighbours) from destructive invading forces. My personal view is that the Crusades were not and could not be termed as ‘holy wars” by the true standards and teachings of Jesus Christ.”

“Brother!” exclaimed Earnesto, “May be one way of looking at the Crusades (as act of love toward one’s neighbours) is look into the mind of Pope Innocent III who wrote to the Knights Templar: ‘You carry out in deeds the words of the Gospel by saying that: Greater love than this hath no man, that he lay down his life for his friends.'... May I also invite us to imagine that we were also in the midst of our fellow-believers at the material time of the Crusades and asked ourselves - what would be our reactions to the call made by the Popes? Like all warfare, the violence was brutal (although not as brutal as modern wars). There were mishaps, blunders, and crimes.

Alberto concluded: “We’ve discussed enough. To weave the memories of Crusades into intractable modern political problems is to exacerbate present-day hatreds...... In the propagation of its teachings, any religion including Christianity cannot be religion of peace as long as it remains intolerance and justifies violence in the propagation of its teachings. If men are so wicked and careless with religion, what would they be without one?”

******************************************************************************

NOTE (18.08.11): Story of GENESIS 1 - Readable in http://www.histruths.blogspot.com 

WHAT IS IMPOSSIBLE - BY GOD IT IS POSSIBLE.

A dramatic TESTIMONY of an Indonesian Bible college student who came back miracoulously from death to life. Readable in  http://www.histruths.blogspot.com   



"What you leave behind is not what is engraved in stone monuments, but what is woven into the lives of others." – Pericles

TRANSPARENCY IN ARMS DEALS ...

In its press statement dated 30^th July 2011, Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M) said (as quoted below):

Transparency in Arms Deals Vital 

“The arms trade is one of the most corrupt prone sectors. The impact of corruption in the arms trade has severe consequences for citizens, governments and nations.

The payment of kickbacks and bribes in defence purchases inflate the cost of weapons and this impedes the ability of governments to defend their countries. When there is high level of secrecy in arms deals, weapons may end up in the hands of criminals and violent dictators ending in the cost of many lives.

Transparency in the purchase of arms will assist governments in checking that arms do not

fall into the hands of those involved in criminal activities.

Taxpayers money intended for development needs such as education and healthcare have

often been diverted to the purchase of arms with dire consequences for social development

at national levels.

Member states of the United Nations are currently negotiating a UN treaty by 2012 to regulate the arms trade. Anti-corruption provisions will be an important part of the treaty.

Transparency International Malaysia (TI-M) certainly hopes that Malaysia will not object to the inclusion of anti-corruption provisions in the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). The 27 member states of the European Union and others such as Australia, Costa Rica and South Africa are supporting the inclusion of anti-corruption provisions in the ATT.

Exporting governments, importing governments and defence companies are already beginning to introduce tools and mechanisms such as Integrity Pacts for greater transparency and accountability in defence procurement. Some of these tools include civilian oversight of defence procurement. Strong anti-corruption tools and measures are vital in defence procurement as payments of bribes in defence purchases are widespread.”

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞∞.

Apparently the above press statement is self-explanatory which seems to have some connections with what Dr. Kua Kia Soong wrote which are readable in SUARAM website:  www.suaram.net, Malaysia Today in www.malaysia-today.net as well as in

Free Malaysia Today in www.freemalaysiatoday.com