不合法的裁决不过废纸一张, Illegal ruling but a waste paper

Dialogue 07/10/2016 Differing views on South China Sea

 China enhances maritime law enforcement

China established Sansha City four years ago to strengthen its maritime law enforcement.

 Chinese navy conducted annual combat drill near Hainan Island & Xisha Islands in #SouthChinaSea

Over 100 vessels and dozens of fighter jets participated in the annual combat drill held on July 8 in South China Sea.

浩渺南海，水天相接。本是商舟渔船自在穿行的地方，近来却波诡云谲颇不寻常。

7月12日，所谓南海仲裁案结果即将出炉。围绕这毫无合法性可言的一纸裁决，一些人筹谋算计、排兵布阵，企图用它来强化对中国的舆论攻势，将莫须有的罪名强加给中国；一些人颠倒黑白、借题发挥，期望以此抹黑中国的形象，把“不守法”的帽子扣向真正的受害者。

种种急不可耐的喧哗与躁动，无一例外都打出了国际法的旗号，南海问题的真相却被有意忽略了——中菲南海争议究竟源于何处？菲律宾南海仲裁案实质为何？仲裁案所激起的种种波澜，又将给南海的和平稳定带来何种影响？

对于这些问题，7月5日在华盛顿举办的“中美智库对话会”，提供了一个视角——即使是一些来自美国的专家也认为，“中国在南海的权益是历史上形成的”“欧洲和其他国家的知名法律专家都表示，南海仲裁案整个过程都是非法的，菲律宾单方提起仲裁，违反了国际法”。

看来，有关南海仲裁案并非难以搞清。拨开一些人以国际法为名蓄意在南海上空制造的迷雾，还原真相，对于中国而言，是维护国家领土主权的神圣使命；对于世界来说，是主持国际公理正义的必然要求。

（一）

一段时间以来，西方舆论连篇累牍渲染南海问题，然而对于南海问题特别是中菲南海争议的历史经纬、事实真相，自诩“主持公道”的西方舆论却“选择性回避”了。

南海诸岛究竟属谁？历史早就给出了明确答案。南海诸岛自古以来属于中国，历代中国政府通过行政设治、海军巡航、生产经营、海难救助等方式持续对南海诸岛及相关海域进行管辖。二战期间，日本在发动全面侵华战争后，侵占了中国南海诸岛。二战结束后，中国根据《开罗宣言》和《波茨坦公告》所作出的明确规定，收复南海诸岛，在岛上派兵驻守并建立各类军事、民事设施，从法律和事实上恢复对南海诸岛行使主权。

在二战结束后相当长一段时间内，美国通过外交询问、申请测量、通报航行飞越计划等方式，承认中国对南沙群岛的主权。中国还曾在南沙群岛有关岛礁上接待过美国军事人员。同期美国出版的地图和书籍等，如1961年版《哥伦比亚利平科特世界地名辞典》、1963年版《威尔德麦克各国百科全书》、1971年版《世界各国区划百科全书》，均确认中国对南海诸岛的主权。

可以说，中国在南海的主权和相关权益，二战结束后数十年没有任何国家提出异议。因为南沙群岛回归中国，是战后国际秩序和相关领土安排的一部分，受到《联合国宪章》等国际法保护；否认中国对南沙群岛的主权，就是对战后国际秩序的否定，就是对国际法的公然违背。

对于南海诸岛属于中国这一点，菲律宾同样心知肚明。菲律宾固有领土范围是由1898年《美西巴黎和平协议》、1900年《美西关于菲律宾外围岛屿割让的条约》、1930年《关于划定英属北婆罗洲与美属菲律宾之间的边界条约》明确规定的。南沙群岛和黄岩岛根本不在上述条约规定的菲律宾版图内。

但自上世纪60年代末南海地区发现丰富的油气资源后，这片原本安宁的水域频起波澜。在巨大资源利益的诱惑下，菲律宾等国开始非法侵占和蚕食属于中国的南沙岛礁，成为南海问题产生的根源。更有甚者，菲律宾等国还以南沙群岛位于自其本国海岸起200海里范围内为由，企图以海洋管辖权主张来否定中国对南沙群岛的主权。

显而易见，在南海问题上，中国绝不是加害者，而是受害者。如果真的遵从法律，应该谴责的是菲律宾等国公然违背国际法和《联合国宪章》的行径，应该禁止的是一切非法侵犯他国领土主权的行为。

作为南海最大沿岸国，中国从维护南海地区和平与稳定的大局出发，在南海问题产生后的几十年里始终保持了极大克制，从未主动挑起争议，也没有采取任何使争议复杂化、扩大化的行动。中国最先提出并始终坚持“搁置争议，共同开发”，坚持通过谈判协商和平解决争议；按照2002年《南海各方行为宣言》所确定的原则，在平等和相互尊重的基础上，探讨与南海声索国之间建立信任的途径；根据1982年《联合国海洋法公约》在内的国际法原则，切实保障在南海的航行及飞越自由。

在过去的几十年里，南海局势总体保持稳定，有关争议得到妥善管控，东南亚地区实现高速发展，这一地区成为世界上和平、稳定和繁荣之地。这自然得益于中国与东盟相关国家的共同努力，但不可否认的是，作为综合国力较强的一方，中国的克制是南海得以保持和平稳定、繁荣发展的最重要原因。中国政府有权利也有能力收复失地，但是中国并没有这样做，目的就是为了南海的和平稳定，以及沿岸各国人民的共同福祉。

遗憾的是，树欲静而风不止。2012年4月10日，菲律宾蓄意挑起“黄岩岛事件”。2013年1月，菲律宾阿基诺三世政府置昔日谈判协商解决南海争议的承诺于不顾，单方面提起有关南海争议的仲裁案。

纵观南海问题演进脉络，2009年以前，虽然相关国家间存在摩擦，但矛盾却总体保持可控。可是从2009年起，南海问题开始步步升级。

为何2009年成为中菲南海争议重要分界线？为何菲律宾阿基诺三世政府会在南海问题上选择一系列政治赌博？

（二）

审视菲律宾在南海问题上逐步走向“活跃”的整个过程，不得不说美国的“战略转变”提供了最有解释力的视角。

2009年1月，奥巴马政府就职，美国外交政策出现方向性调整，在“重返亚太”的战略布局下，南海问题迅速成为美国维护地区霸权地位、对中国进行战略牵制的重要抓手。

2010年7月，时任美国国务卿希拉里·克林顿在东盟地区论坛上宣布美国在南海地区“拥有国家利益”。观察人士指出，此举标志着美国对南海问题开始走向事实上的“选边站”和“引导式”路径，克林顿本人更是在事后回忆称，“这是精心选择的措辞”。此次会议被美方视为“检视美国在亚洲领导地位以及反击中国扩张的临界点”。

正如美国卡托研究所国防外交政策研究室副主任卡本特所言，美国想要通过干预中国与邻国的南海争议来达到制衡中国的目的，“最具挑衅的做法是奥巴马政府支持菲律宾及其对南海争议岛礁的声索”。

大量新闻报道显示，菲律宾正式提起南海仲裁案之后，美国的“深度参与”几乎无处不在。美国律师出任菲方法律顾问，全面帮助菲方向仲裁庭提交总计12册、长达3000页的答复书以回答有关菲方诉求和依据之问题，并一手代理了第一轮口头辩论的文件起草和庭辩。此外，美国多次公开发声，力挺菲律宾非法主张。2014年3月，美菲在华盛顿发表包括所谓以仲裁解决南海国际争端等内容的联合声明；同年4月，奥巴马在与菲律宾总统阿基诺三世会谈时再次对菲律宾诉诸国际仲裁表达了公开支持。

人们看到，美国借南海问题无端抹黑中国国际形象，无所不用其极。近年来，国务卿、国防部长、国会议员等各色美国高官在东盟地区论坛、东亚峰会、香格里拉对话会、亚太经合组织会议、七国集团峰会等各种场合，热炒南海问题，试图把“规则破坏者”“现状打破者”“军事扩张者”的帽子强加于中国头上。

人们看到，美国以所谓“航行自由”为借口，以种种手段炫耀武力，实质上推动了南海军事化。美国航空母舰、战略轰炸机多次闯入南海，美国导弹驱逐舰不断抵近中国南海岛礁，美国与盟国在南海的军事演习更是接二连三。美国还敦促东盟国家在南海地区进行联合海上巡逻，支持日本在南海地区进行海上巡逻。

人们看到，美国拉帮结派，迫切希望把南海问题引向多边化、国际化，妄图给中国施加所谓外交压力。美国极力推动在各种地区及全球性多边组织框架下讨论南海问题，企图使东盟在南海问题上统一口径，鼓动日本、澳大利亚、印度、欧盟等与南海问题无关的域外国家和地区关注南海问题。

美国有识之士对于华盛顿在南海问题上制造对抗之举深表忧虑。知名战略学家布热津斯基就曾发出警告，美国在南海必须非常小心，南海问题不应成为美中关系的中心问题。然而，在霸权本性驱使下，美国在南海问题上制造紧张局势、破坏和平稳定的冒险之举依然愈演愈烈。

（三）

事实清楚地表明，菲律宾南海仲裁案完全是一个由美国鼓动操纵、菲律宾挑头、仲裁庭客观上予以配合的针对中国的一个“局”。

这个“局”其实不难看穿，自仲裁闹剧开始后，国际社会“不平则鸣”的正义之声从未停歇。迄今，已有近70个国家和地区组织明确表示支持中方在仲裁案上的立场，其中既有东盟国家，也有域外国家，还有阿拉伯国家联盟、上海合作组织等区域组织。即使在西方国家，也有很多国际法专家从专业角度发表严肃、公正的评论，表达对中方法理主张的认同，表明对该案的批评和质疑立场。

为什么中国立场的支持者那么多，越来越多？归根结底，是因为中方不参与、不接受立场有着充分的法理依据，而菲律宾单方面提起南海仲裁案，仲裁庭违法扩权、滥权，才是在真正破坏国际法。

首先，禁止反言是国际法治的一条基本原则，但菲律宾阿基诺三世政府却置自身昔日承诺于不顾，单方面强行提起仲裁，侵犯了中国按照《联合国海洋法公约》规定享有的自主选择争端解决方式的权利。正如联合国国际法委员会前主席、联合国国际法院特别法官布朗利所言：“一般国际法上不存在解决争端的义务，以正式法律程序寻求解决的程序取决于当事各方的同意。”争端提交国际仲裁，通常都需经当事国达成合意，尊重当事方意愿才是体现“各国主权平等的一种必然结果”。如今，仲裁庭擅自扩大管辖权限、漠视一国之主权，哪里还有“法的精神”？

其次，菲方不顾基本历史常识，妄称中国人历史上在南海没什么活动和存在，从未拥有对南海诸岛的主权。然而，中国渔民在南沙水域捕鱼作业，已成为南沙群岛主人的历史事实，有多个版本的《更路簿》可以证明；19世纪以来的外国文献，也明确记载了只有中国渔民在岛上生产生活的历史事实。法律的基点本就是“以事实为依据”，如今，昭昭青史仍在，凿凿证据如山，菲方却敢如此颠倒黑白篡改事实，对南海岛礁的有关论述缺失最起码的可信度。这样一个“并不构成争端”的无理诉求，竟然被仲裁庭接受，哪里还有“法的权威”？

再有，仲裁庭不顾中方一贯坚持将南沙群岛视为整体的立场，玩弄“切割”伎俩，歧视性地把中国驻守的南沙有关岛礁从南海诸岛的宏观地理背景中剥离出来。对菲律宾等其他国家非法侵占的岛礁，仲裁庭却只字不提，还将有关领土主权问题包装为所谓的岛礁法律地位问题。如此偷梁换柱、翻云覆雨，哪里还有“法的公信”？

南海仲裁案是否具有合法性和正当性？联合国国际法委员会前主席拉奥·佩马拉朱的判断一针见血：中菲南海争端的实质是关于主权和海域划界，而领土主权问题不属于《联合国海洋法公约》调整的范围，划界问题也可据中国政府声明而排除强制仲裁程序，此案仲裁庭对主权和海域划界问题都没有管辖权。菲律宾诉求的实质是领土问题，因此不属于《联合国海洋法公约》调整的范围。

然而，仲裁庭擅自扩大解释其自身管辖权限。对于领土和海洋划界问题，仲裁庭罔顾中菲早已选择谈判协商作为解决相关争议唯一方式这一前提，罔顾中国早已于2006年根据《联合国海洋法公约》将海洋划界争议排除适用强制争端解决程序这一事实，恶意解读此前中菲对争端解决方式的共同选择，轻易否定国与国之间达成的一致意见，严重侵犯中国作为主权国家和《联合国海洋法公约》缔约国享有的自主权利。其实质，不过是为个别国家滥用仲裁程序制造国际舆论实现政治目的提供配合。

培根在《论司法》中写道，“一次不公的判决比多次不平的举动为祸犹烈。因为这些不平的举动不过弄脏了水流，而不公的判决则把水源败坏了”。菲律宾及仲裁庭滥用强制仲裁程序，让《联合国海洋法公约》失去严肃性，其对《联合国海洋法公约》的破坏性、对国际法治秩序的冲击，不容低估。

事实上，很多西方专业法律人士都对强制仲裁程序被滥用表示担忧和关切。如果今后别国都效仿菲律宾的恶劣先例，只要将领土和海洋划界问题包装成《联合国海洋法公约》解释和适用问题即可提交仲裁，不仅会让30多个缔约国所作排除性声明成为一纸空文，也将伤害《联合国海洋法公约》争端解决机制的信誉，破坏《联合国海洋法公约》建立的国际海洋秩序，对现行国际秩序构成重大威胁。

正如英国牛津大学国际公法副教授安东尼奥斯·察纳科普洛斯、英国外交部前法律顾问克里斯·沃默斯利指出，如果仲裁庭允许菲律宾背弃其在《南海各方行为宣言》中的承诺继续推进强制仲裁，这种处理方式或造成“恶法”，会对国际关系的整体稳定造成潜在破坏。

从这个意义上来看，中国为捍卫国际法做针锋相对的斗争，不仅是在捍卫自己的领土主权，更是在切实捍卫国际海洋秩序、维护世界长治久安。

（四）

菲律宾南海仲裁案如此公然违背国际法，为何向来以“国际法官”自居的美国却在装糊涂？美国著名律师布鲁斯·费恩直言，美国的南海政策体现了其“危险的帝国思维”。

这种为所欲为的“帝国思维”，就是霸权主义。美国比任何人都喜欢把国际法挂在嘴边，但历史和现实一再表明，美国对待国际法，总是对人不对己，且每每玩弄法律于股掌之上——如果国际法对美国有利，美国就高高祭起这面大旗；如果国际法可能约束美国的行为，美国就会把它踩在脚下置之不理，甚至将“非法”尊为“合法”，将“合法”抹黑为“非法”。

美国如果真的关心国际法治，为何《联合国海洋法公约》推行几十年了还不愿加入？众所周知，作为规范当代国际海洋关系最重要的法律文件，《联合国海洋法公约》被誉为当今世界的“海洋宪章”，目前大部分国家都已加入《联合国海洋法公约》。美国作为世界上最大的海洋国家之一，却一直没有加入该公约，是安理会“五常”中唯一没有加入该公约的国家。根子就在美国霸权主义的国际法观和傲慢自私的海洋特权思想。

美国口口声声以海洋法治的维护者自居，却为一己之私拒不批准加入公约；口口声声要求别国接受第三方争端解决方式，自己却又拒不接受国际法院这一联合国最主要司法机构就尼加拉瓜诉美国案所作出的判决和命令；口口声声要求其他国家遵守国际法，却对自己和所谓盟友大开违法之门，长期以来对菲律宾非法侵占中国岛礁的行为视而不见。

这种自相矛盾与双重标准，集中体现了美国对待国际法“合则取，不合则弃”的虚伪本质，暴露了其根深蒂固的“帝国思维”。美国现实主义国际关系学者米尔斯海默谈及南海问题时曾说，“中国的邻国有动机在现阶段就把问题解决掉，而不是等到中国强大了，到时候就来不及了”，一句话道出了对中国防范遏制的阴暗心理。

中国正在成长，但一个多世纪里屡遭外敌入侵、强权欺凌的屈辱经历，是中国人民不可磨灭的记忆。在这样的历史记忆中强起来的中国，最懂得遭受欺凌和屈辱的滋味，“己所不欲，勿施于人”；在这样的历史记忆中走过来的中国人民，也决不会答应“屈辱的过去”哪怕在局部重演。

习近平总书记在庆祝中国共产党成立95周年大会上指出：“中国人民不信邪也不怕邪，不惹事也不怕事，任何外国不要指望我们会拿自己的核心利益做交易，不要指望我们会吞下损害我国主权、安全、发展利益的苦果。”这道出了全体中国人民的心声。

放眼南海，闪闪发光的航标灯，照亮的应该是和平的方向，驱散的应该是霸权主义的心魔，警醒的应该是被眼前蝇头小利冲昏的头脑。不合法的裁决不过是废纸一张，它否定不了中国在南海的合法权益，改变不了中国人民维护国际法治尊严，与相关国家一道维护南海和平稳定的坚定意志和决心。

编辑：刘雅萱, 来源：人民日报

Related:

U.S. should stop treating South China Sea as next Caribbea

The United States should stay away from the South China Sea issue and avoid repeating its history of military intervention and political manipulation in the Caribbean in the past century.

Commentary: U.S. cold-war mentality not solution to South China Sea issue

Denouncing UNCLOS remains option for China after tribunal ruling

For many years, the People's Republic of China has been a strong supporte[Read it]

Western countries should stop playing international law as political card: People's Daily 

Although Western countries always label themselves as defenders of international law, historic facts[Read it]

Think twice before taking law-abusing arbitration as South China Sea solution

BEIJING, July 8 -- Launching a legal action is not always the best way to solve a dispute, and it is[Read it]

Related posts:

 Notorious Philippines's Abu Sayyaf & Law abusing ...

Notorious Philippines's Abu Sayyaf & Law abusing tribunal on South China Sea ... ZAMBOANGA CITY: The Abu Sayyaf has announced that it will be ..... 2 million listings worldwide, with revenue of about $2.4 billion in t.

US containing a rising Chinese power

Jul 2, 2016 ... America's objective is to contain a rising power, which presents itself as a major challenge to US global hegemony. Geo-strategically, the most .

Analysts pooh-pooh US Defence Secretary's 'self ...

Jun 6, 2016 ... Dialogue 06/05/2016 South China Sea & Sino-US ties - CCTV ... Arbitral tribunal abusing its power .... US containing a rising Chinese power.

The global mahjong winner's curse

Like mahjong: The current world situation is like the Chinese game of mahjong which has four players with a limited number of chips. If one player is the persistent winner, he or she ends up with all the chips and the game ends.

Winners and losers in the global economy of 2025

 Winners and losers in the global eco

There is grave concern that the world economy is slipping into what Harvard professor and former US Treasury Secretary Larry Summers calls the global secular deflation. In simple terms, growth has slowed without inflation, despite exceptionally stimulative monetary policy. Larry’s view is that the advanced countries can use fiscal policy to stimulate growth, using massive investments in infrastructure. If needs be, this can be financed by central banks.

Central bank financing fiscal deficits is technically called “helicopter money”, named by the late monetarist economist Milton Friedman as the central bank pushing money out of the helicopter. Strict monetarism thinks that this would cause inflation.

The simple reason why the world is moving into secular deflation is that the largest economies are all slowing for a variety of reasons. Unconventional monetary policy applied since the 2007 crisis has brought central bank interest rates to zero or negative terms in economies accounting for 60% of world GDP.

Most economists blame current slow growth to “lack of aggregate demand” or “excess of aggregate production”. The rich countries are mostly aging and already heavily burdened with debt, so they cannot consume more. After the 2007 global financial crisis, the emerging market economies have slowed down, as demand for their exports have slowed. We are in a vicious circle where global trade growth is now slower than GDP growth, because the US economy is no longer the consumption engine of last resort. China, which has been a huge consumer of commodities, has slowed. Japanese growth has been flat due to an aging population. European growth has not recovered, partly because the leading economy, Germany, calls for austerity by its southern partners.

The Brexit shock threatens to weaken global confidence and send growth down another notch.

Former Bank of England Governor Lord Mervyn King famously called the global monetary order a game of sodoku, in which national current accounts in the balance of payments add up to a zero sum game. This is because in the global trade game, one country’s current account deficit is another country’s surplus. In the past, if the US runs larger and larger current account deficits, world growth is stimulated because everyone wants to hold dollars and has been willing to supply the US with all manners of consumer goods. This has been called an “exorbitant privilege” for the dollar.

The present global monetary order or non-order is a result of the 1971 US dollar de-link from gold, which gave rise to a phase of floating exchange rates and rising capital flows, which some people call Bretton Woods II. The old order, set at the Bretton Wood Conference of 1944, centered around a system of global fixed exchange rates, based on the US dollar link with gold price at US$35 to one ounce of gold.

But flexible exchange rates has resulted in a system where everyone seems to be devaluing their way out of trouble. Has the global secular deflation something to do with Bretton Woods II?

My answer must be yes. The reason lies in what I call, instead of sodoku, the mahjong winner’s curse. The Chinese game of mahjong has four players with a limited number of chips. If one player is the persistent winner, he or she ends up with all the chips and the game stops. Since the global game of trade cannot stop, the winner has both an exorbitant privilege (of being funded by the others) and an exorbitant curse (of bearing the loss if the others won’t or refuse to pay). To keep the game going, the winner has to give or lend the chips back to the other players, who play with the hope of winning the next round.

Indeed, if the winner is generous, the game can be made bigger, because the winner can issue more chips (defined as a reserve currency), which the others are more than willing to borrow and play.

The current world situation is that the Winners are the four reserve currency countries, the dollar, euro, yen and sterling, all of which have interest rates near zero or even negative. Until recently, the Winners blame China and the oil producing countries as having too high current account surpluses. But recently, after the huge European cutback in expenditure, Europe as a whole is the world’s largest current account surplus group of nearly 5% of GDP.

Herein lies the winner’s curse. The emerging markets should be able to stimulate global growth, but are unwilling to run larger current account deficits because they cannot get financing. The richer economies can stimulate global growth, but they are unwilling to do so, because they either feel that they already have too much debt or because they worry that stimulus would lead to inflation.

However, reserve currency countries have an advantage. As long as they are willing to run current account deficits, there will be little inflation because the world economy has huge excess capacity and surplus savings. If emerging markets run higher current account deficits, they will have to depreciate, which is exactly what Brazil, South Africa and others have done.

The winner’s curse is that if Europe is now unwilling to reflate and spend, the world will continue to slow. Indeed, in a world of greater geo-political risks, money is fleeing to the US dollar and the yen, causing both to appreciate.

What these capital flows into the reserve currencies when their interest rate is zero and they are unable to reflate imply is that the dollar and yen play the deflationary role of gold in the 1930s. As more and more mahjong players hold gold and don’t spend, the world global trade and growth game slows further. The mahjong winner’s curse requires the winners to stimulate and spend, bearing higher credit risks. That’s the privilege and responsibility of winners in the global game. If not, look out for more global secular deflation.

By Tan Sri Andrew Sheng who writes on global issues from an Asian perspective.

Related posts

Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi scheme!

Mar 5, 2016 ... Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi scheme! Economic Collapse soon? Ponzi schemes and modern finance. Andrew ...

 Dealing with the new abnormal negative interest rate ...

Jun 15, 2016 ... Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi scheme! Economic Collapse soon? Ponzi schemes and modern finance. Andrew.

 Beware when elephants Trump-et! Trump victory a major ...

Mar 19, 2016 ... In other words, growth accelerates exponentially until the economy reaches maturity and slows down, and if there is no longer ... Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi scheme! Economic Collapse soon?

 The alchemy of money

May 14, 2016 ... Finance is a derivative of the real economy, which can be leveraged or multiplied as ... value of the underlying asset – which were triggers of the global crash of 2007, ... all lending) can only be implemented after the next and coming crisis. ... Modern finance and money being managed like a Ponzi scheme !

Homestays, a booming business: Homes vs hotels, a study of the industry

Homestays, a booming business

HOMESTAYS, once popular in rural areas, have now become big businesses in towns and cities nationwide.

Thousands of homeowners have discovered how to make money with their properties and avoid paying taxes.

They have joined global home-sharing marketplaces, and just like how Uber has made life for government-regulated taxi drivers difficult, the home-sharing phenomenon is shaving off hotel revenues.

By paying a mere 3% service fee per booking, homeowners – also called hosts – can connect with over 60 million travellers worldwide through online giants like American company Airbnb and Singapore-based HomeAway.

Airbnb’s website has a tool to help homeowners gauge their expected weekly income and according to this, the country’s chart-toppers are those in Langkawi who can make RM2,801 a week, followed by those around Malacca’s Jonker Walk (RM2,495 a week).

Close behind are Penang home-shares in Tanjung Tokong (RM2,494) and Pulau Tikus (RM2,449). In Bukit Bintang in Kuala Lumpur, they can expect to earn RM1,676 weekly, while those near Taman Pelangi in Johor Baru can expect RM2,287 a week.

The above estimated earnings are for apartments or houses catering to groups of five travellers.

There are homeshares even in the hinterlands. They can make an average of RM923 a week in Kota Baru, Kelantan. In Kangar, Perlis, homeshares can expect to collect RM1,619 a week.

Unlike hotel occupancies, the government has no knowledge nor way of tracking these check-ins.

All the payments are transacted via the home-sharing portals’ overseas payment gateways and the earnings are transferred to homeowners through international money wires, PayPal or direct deposits.

Their guests are also “exempted” from the RM2 per room per night heritage tax fee in Malacca and Penang’s local government fee of RM3 per room per night for four-star and five-star hotels, and RM2 per room per night for three stars and below.

“They don’t have to pay corporate or income taxes. They don’t need to collect GST or report their occupancy rates.

“They don’t need to install fire doors or water sprinkler systems. If this goes on, budget hotels can just take down their signboards and become home-share operators,” said Malaysia Budget Hotels Association president P.K. Leong.

He said his association had raised the issue of home-sharing with the government several times and urged them to regulate this business but no action had been taken.

“We estimate about 15% of our business is being siphoned into the home-sharing market. And it’s not really sharing,” he said.

“People are buying residential properties specifically to start short-term rental businesses. We believe this is growing at an alarming rate but we don’t have any way to track them.”

In 2014, Airbnb was reported to have over 800,000 listings worldwide. Now, the company declares on its website that it has over two million.

Five-star resorts contacted, however, do not feel threatened by the home-sharing operators.

Managers in two five-star hotels, who declined to be named, said these setups target budget travellers who come to Penang on business or already know what to do when they come to Penang.

“Our hotel offers a level of service not found in home-shares. It’s a different market,” said one manager. - By Arnold Loh The Star

Homes versus hotels

 

Home-sharing services like Airbnb are becoming a hit among Malaysians. But hotels are urging the Government to regulate such services, claiming that rental of private apartments and studio units is illegal. Noting such calls, the Government is currently discussing how to address the matter.

LIVING rooms instead of hotel lobbies. Apartment units instead of hotel suites. This is the trend today.

More Malaysian holiday-makers are choosing to rent private properties as accommodation on their trips, instead of booking hotel rooms.

They do this using home-sharing services like Airbnb and Singapore-based HomeAway, which offer travellers the option to stay in a local host’s property.


Ranging from single rooms to entire apartment units, guests can book their accommodation from hosts, who list their property on such websites to be leased out for a fee.

Sometimes, the fees are even lower than the room rates offered by hotels.

This is one of the factors that drive the popularity of such services, with the San Francisco-based Airbnb having over two million property listings for rent from local hosts in about 191 countries around the world.

In Malaysia, home-sharing services are also gaining traction among travellers and homeowners, who want to earn some income from offering short-term rentals.

However, the hotel industry in the country is claiming that such services are eating into their business, with some estimating about 5% to 15% of their business being diverted.

Hoteliers are also saying that consumers are not fully protected under such arrangements.

Likening home-sharing services like Airbnb to Uber in the taxi business, hoteliers claim that the hosts are not subjected to the same regulations imposed on hotels and do not need to pay taxes or collect the Goods and Services Tax (GST).

As the industry calls on the Government to regulate such services, the Tourism and Culture Ministry says discussions are ongoing to address the matter while the Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry is open to feedback on the issue.

Malaysian Association of Hotels president Sam Cheah sees the growing popularity of such home-sharing platforms like Airbnb as a threat to the hotel industry.

“It isn’t a level playing ground because the hosts who are offering their properties for rent are not subjected to the same requirements, including safety standards,” he says.

Cheah points out that the hosts can afford to offer lower rates because their operating costs to run their businesses are smaller.

“They pay domestic usage for quit rent and utility bills. They are not required to adhere to safety requirements such as installing proper fire protection,” he adds.

Cheah explains that hotels also have public liability insurance and protect consumers in the event of negligence or fire.

“We are obligated to protect our customers. But there is no such policy for home-sharing hosts,” he says, urging consumers to be aware of such risks.

Cheah also points out that it is illegal for homeowners to operate a business for tourists and travellers when the property is meant for domestic dwelling.

“It is unfair for residents who are neighbours of such hosts as they will have strangers walking in and out of the premises,” he says.

These tourists will also be using the swimming pool, gym and other facilities meant for residents.

However, Cheah says the association, which consists of 881 member hotels, cannot discount or prevent such a business model from being practised.

“But the Government should regulate such businesses to protect tourists and make it an even playing field for hotel operators,” he says.

If left unchecked and unregulated, Cheah foresees the Government will have a problem dealing with the projected 36 million tourist arrivals by 2020.

“If we do not regulate Airbnb and other home-sharing services, we wouldn’t be able to monitor the industry. We wouldn’t know if we have an oversupply or over-development and businesses may lose out.

“It is just like Uber and GrabCar in the taxi industry. You cannot stop them but you have to regulate them. Then it makes sense,” he says.

Echoing Cheah’s call to the Government to impose regulations, Malaysian Association of Hotel Owners secretary Anthony Wong calls such home-sharing services illegal as hosts are not licensed to provide lodging and insurance for guests.

“It is amounting to making private arrangements and guests who are hurt during their stay are unable to claim insurance for any mishaps.

“As legal entities, hotels have permits to comply with. Our operating costs are expensive and we pay taxes,” says Wong, adding that hotel rates are also competitively priced.

He claims that the emergence of such services and illegal homestays have caused hoteliers to lose about 5% in revenue.

Acknowledging the concerns by hotels, Tourism and Culture Ministry secretary-general Tan Sri Dr Ong Hong Peng says the ministry has received complaints from the industry on the emergence of home-sharing platforms.

“This issue has been acknowledged and discussed extensively by the Special Task Force on Service Delivery and its working group.

“This working group is represented by government agencies such as the ministry, Malaysia Productivity Corporation, the Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Ministry and the police,” he tells Sunday Star.

Dr Ong adds that the question of regulating home-sharing platforms and conducting enforcement on homeowners under such services comes under the purview of local councils.

In the meantime, the ministry has its Malaysian Homestay Programme, which offers a unique experience to tourists.

“The programme enables tourists to stay and interact with local families who act as hosts.

“Under this programme, families and their houses register with the ministry after completing the homestay training module and following the guidelines,” he explains.

But Dr Ong points out that this is different from merely offering accommodation as it is a community-based tourism programme which offers tourists a lifestyle experience of rural villages.

In 2015, Malaysia attracted 25.7 million tourist arrivals, a decline of 6.3% compared to 27.4 million tourist arrivals in 2014.

For the first quarter of 2016, Malaysia registered an increase of 2.8% in tourist arrivals, which Dr Ong perceives as a positive outlook.

“A strong growth in arrivals is expected for the remainder of this year,” he says.

Former Urban Wellbeing, Housing and Local Government Minister Datuk Abdul Rahman Dahlan, who was just replaced in a Cabinet reshuffle on Monday, says it is still too early to decide whether to regulate homeowners involved in home-sharing services.

“This will require extensive discussion. The ministry welcomes feedback from stakeholders on this matter, including hoteliers, and will be more than happy to listen to their concerns,” he says.

The issue of regulating or even banning Airbnb and other home-sharing marketplaces is of growing concern.

Recently, it was reported that New York State in the United States may make it illegal to advertise apartments on Airbnb if a Bill is made into law by Governor Andrew Cuomo.

Meanwhile, the German capital of Berlin has stopped tourists from renting entire apartment units using Airbnb and other similar websites. The move bans homeowners from leasing their property to tourists without a city permit.

Japan released national guidelines for home-sharing services, making properties only available for rent if guests stay for a week or longer.

Other places are more receptive towards home-sharing platforms, including London, which amended housing legislation that makes it legal for locals to rent out their homes through websites like Airbnb. -  By Yuen Meikeng The Star

Airbnb: Malaysia is a really ‘exciting growth market’ 

AS more Malaysians open their homes to tourists, Airbnb describes Malaysia as an “exciting growth market”.

Nevertheless, the world’s leading community-driven hospitality company also encourages hosts to familiarise themselves with regulations in their area.

“These can differ from council to council and even street to street, all over the world,” Airbnb tells Sunday Star in an email.

Despite the growth of Airbnb across Malaysia, the company says the traditional hotel sector continues to do well too, with growth in occupancy and room rates.

“We’re proud of the economic benefits Airbnb provides to families, communities and local businesses that otherwise wouldn’t benefit from the tourist dollar,” it says.

Overwhelmingly, Airbnb says its hosts are renting out their homes occasionally, earning a little extra to help supplement their income.

“The vast majority of our hosts across Malaysia are everyday people renting their spare room or home occasionally, not commercial operators,” it adds.

Airbnb also says it has a good working relationship with the Malaysian Government and have partnered with it in the past.

In December last year, it was reported that a pilot project was being conducted in Malacca involving 130 homestays in 11 villages to help them market their business using online listings.

The programme was a collaboration between the Multimedia Development Corporation, the International Trade and Industry Ministry, the Tourism and Culture Ministry and Airbnb.

Airbnb says over 80 million guests have had a safe, positive experience using the platform.

“We help promote positive experiences through a global trust and safety team available 24/7, authentic reviews, verified profile information, and the $1 Million Host Guarantee,” it says.

A check on its website showed that the Host Guarantee will reimburse eligible hosts for damages up to A$1mil (RM3.06mil).

“The Host Guarantee should not be considered a replacement or stand-in for homeowners or renters insurance,” read the website.

Airbnb also has a refund policy for guests if the host fails to provide reasonable access to the booked listing, the listing booked is misrepresented or isn’t generally clean or unsafe, among others.

“Airbnb’s community operates on the principles of trust and respect. Our host and guest review systems demonstrate our commitment to responsible behaviour,” it says.

Meanwhile, some local Airbnb hosts in Malaysia have mixed views about the idea of having the Government regulate their business.

A full-time Airbnb host in Malacca, known only as Chen, says she welcomes such a move as long as it is done fairly and does not overly restrict the business.

“It can be beneficial for both the hosts and guests.

“If we are given licences by the Government, we can even put up signages to advertise our business. And for guests, they would have more protection,” says the 30-year-old lass who rents out one apartment and two townhouses.

Chen, a former marketing manager, quit her job two years ago to become a full-time Airbnb host, calling it her “interest and passion”.

She denies having any opposition from her neighbours in renting out her properties to tourists.

“I informed my neighbours before doing this. While they were initially doubtful, they are now happy I have guests,” Chen adds.

And in the event the Government decides to ban such services, Chen says hosts like herself will transform and adapt to the situation.

“This is the global trend and many are using this business model now. It is important to stay competitive and adapt to the times,” she says.

Another full-time host, Ridzuan Effendy, 29, hopes the Government does not impose regulations on Airbnb.

“Home-sharing services aren’t the same as hotels. Many tourists use Airbnb because the prices are cheaper compared to hotels.

“It is a case of having a willing buyer and seller. It shouldn’t be illegal,” says the former engineer, who lists his properties in Kuala Lumpur.

Related: Travellers drawn to cheap prices 

 

Home-shares annoy neighbours   

 

BE nice. Buy fruits for your guests or colouring books for their kids and potentially make RM8,000 or more each month renting your apartment or house to short-stay tourists.

Unofficial hotel: At one time, nine of the 28 units of one of the blocks in Halaman Pulau Tikus were available for short-term rentals by medical tourists.>>>

The key performance indicators for home-share operators are the guest reviews on their listings in global marketplaces like Airbnb and HomeAway.

“My guests and I review each other. It’s like Uber (global ride hailing app). You will know your guests’ reputation and your guests will also know yours.

“If anything bad happens, the guests or I can report it to Airbnb and we can be banned,” said an operator in Penang who only wants to be known as Sue, a housewife.

She rents out a house in Batu Ferringhi (RM320 a night) and a condominium unit in Pulau Tikus (RM400 a night) as a host on Airbnb and said her properties were now rated four-and-a-half stars.

The location may seem to be a secondary consideration, with one three-bedroom low-medium cost apartment in Air Itam having a five-star rating on Airbnb.

“It may look like a low-cost apartment from the outside and parking is limited. But it is lovely inside. Love the design and everything,” wrote a reviewer.

From the photos on this listing, the owner had decorated the place with a profusion of wallpaper and the furnishings and paintings within can rival a plush hotel room. There is bed space for up to eight guests and it is only RM150 a night.

But the surge of home-share operators may have inconvenienced neighbours.

Halaman Pulau Tikus management corporation chairman Khoo Boo Eng said his block in Lengkok Berjaya had become the haunt of medical tourists looking for a place to stay while seeking treatment here since several years ago.

He said he had seen medical tourists arrive who were truly sick.

“They shouldn’t be allowed to stay in our residential area. Some of my neighbours are worried that if they had contagious diseases, we would all be at risk,” he said.

He said at one time, nine out of 28 apartments in his block were rented out this way and many unit owners complained about the constant flow of strangers.

“Ours is a small, exclusive residence. We had to install extra security cameras and have a security guard 24 hours a day for our residents’ safety.

“They are making commercial use of their residential properties. We are planning to take them to court and seek injunctions to stop them from renting to short-stay guests,” he said.

Earlier in the week, officials from four departments of the Penang Island City Council (MBPP) carried out a spot check and four unit owners in Birch Regency Condominium in Datuk Keramat were fined RM250 each for operating a business without licence.

They knocked on the doors of 15 units believed to be available for rent on a short-term basis and found four being occupied – two units by Singaporeans, one by Australians and another by Canadians.

Tanjung MP Ng Wei Aik, who was present, said the officers spoke to the foreigners who confirmed they were here on holiday.

However, owners argued that there were no laws prohibiting them from renting out their units for any length of time.

One hurdle they had to go through is the complaints from other condo owners.

“We get many complaints from our fellow residents about these short-stay guests. We’re just doing our duty to maintain the peace in our condominium,” said a condominium committee member.

When contacted, Penang Island City Council Building Department director Yew Tung Seang said there could be a legal loophole that would make it hard for authorities to stop residential property owners from offering short-term rentals.

“Property owners have the right to earn rent and there is a grey area over short-term and long-term rentals.

“But when apartments or houses become like hotels, their operations can become a nuisance for neighbours.

“The council is planning a machinery to control this sort of activity,” he added.

In January, Johor Tourism, Trade and Consumerism committee chairman Datuk Tee Siew Kiong was reported as saying that homestay operators at housing estates in the urban areas in the state would no longer be allowed to use the word “homestay” to promote their accommodation.

He said there were plans to regulate and standardise the homestay segment in Johor.

He said many home owners in the urban areas had converted their properties into homestay facilities to cater to customers looking for a short stay.

In the United States’ New York State, legislators tabled a bill last month to ban the advertising of short-term home rentals of less than 30 days, with fines of up to US$7,500 (RM30,000).

“Every day I hear from New Yorkers who are sick and tired of living in buildings that have been turned into illegal hotels through Airbnb because so many units are rented out to tourists, not permanent residents,” Manhattan assembly-woman Linda Rosenthal was reported as saying last month.

It was reported that New York City has over 40,000 home-share listings and each earns an average of US$5,700 (RM23,300) a month.

Study the homestay industry

 

I REFER to the reports “Home versus hotels” and “Travellers drawn to cheap prices” ( Sunday Star, July 3) and “Govern home-share under new laws” (see above).

It is well known that homestay is popular not only in Malaysia but also all over the world now. I have used both types of lodgings and find pros and cons in both.

Homestays are likened to the Airbnb concept which was launched in 2008 and has experienced rapid growth since then. Statistics show that at the end of 2015, Airbnb hosted eight million guests, chalked up three million nights of cumulative booking, were used by 50,000 renters per night and has a market capitalisation of US$2.5bil. This demonstrates the effectiveness and popularity of the concept used by Airbnb. However, in the US where this concept began, there is concern among the traditional hospitality industry that it is a threat to their business. There is pressure on the government to either put a stop to Airbnb activities or regulate them. According to a report commissioned by hotel associations in the US, some of the financial effects of Airbnb (focused in New York city but gives a strong indication of what may be happening in other parts of the world too) are:

i) Airbnb is growing because it is less labour intensive and requires lower level of service;

ii) There is no marginal cost for such services as new rooms can be added incrementally (or removed) and overheads are negligible compared to hotels;

iii) Hotels were losing revenue due to loss of room nights. This also had an ancillary effect on other services offered by the hotels such as F&B outlets and business centres; and

iv) Hotels in areas where Airbnb is established have responded to increased competition by reducing their prices.

I also looked up issues of competition in this market which may be a cause for concern. If we look at the homestay concept, what it offers is the opportunity for consumers on the supply side to supplement their income by providing a service via a peer-to-peer platform. It also offers travellers a chance to live like the locals and take part in cultural exchanges.

It is also basically a connection where supply meets demand and other needs such as budget constraints, personalised service, easy accessibility and homely atmosphere and all are rolled into one. Airbnb portrays itself as “a platform that allows the little guy to build up a complimentary industry, one that increases the size of the hospitality pie rather than take a slice from existing business.”

Applying this concept in Malaysia, it is a wonderful way to not only expand our hospitality industry especially in areas where hotel rooms are limited or extremely expensive but also allow locals to interact (people from the peninsula going to Sabah and Sarawak and vice versa, for example) or foreigners a chance to live like the locals.

This would in turn generate a multiplier effect on the local economy as other services such as restaurants, laundry, cleaning or transport would be required to support the homestay service. Besides all these, it would put money in the pockets of local residents and also support small businesses outside the hotel districts.

Will the homestay industry be a threat to the hotels? From a competition point of view, there may be some concerns (especially to budget hotels) but these could easily be overcome with careful formulation of policies and guidelines.

As consumer demand has shifted, the markets are or may be different, and it is ultimately up to the consumer to choose where he wants to stay.

Hotels are mainly located in the city or town centres and offer better services, amenities and standards. On the other hand, homestays and Airbnb serve up lodging options that cater to a more local and less touristy experience. Hotels and Airbnb/ homestays operate differently so there is room for both to coexist as long as they are after different customers.

Having said that, regulators and policy makers in Malaysia need to carefully study the implications of introducing regulations to homestay or Airbnb users from the supply side. Many countries have taken steps to address the issues emerging from the rapid rise of Airbnb and homestays. It would be useful for the Malaysia Competition Commission (MyCC) to commission a study on the effects of such concepts on the hospitality industry in Malaysia. This will then give the policy makers some empirical studies to formulate the required guidelines or regulations.

Competition is always threatened when there is a threat to the sharing economy (as in Uber versus the traditional taxi service). The sharing economy is where industry can collaboratively make use of under-utilised inventory via fee-based sharing. The market is always uncertain and nervous when a new marketplace is created, which in turn increases the difficulty of defining the market in competition law. The way businesses are being done and change in consumers’ tastes all merit a thorough study before any action is taken to manage a growing industry.

Two factors have arguable given rise to the rapid growth of peer-to-peer platforms – technology innovations and supply side flexibility. A win-win situation is always possible. If competition is distorted, as in when people buy into residential property to turn it into a business venture, that is when the authorities could step in.

By SHILA DORAI RAJ Founding and former CEO Malaysia Competition Commission

Related post:

Young adults in developed countries rent, we buy for good

While young adults all over the world are renting homes, Malaysias prefer to own homes as soon as they get their first pay cheque. Instea...

Notorious Philippines's Abu Sayyaf & Law abusing tribunal on South China Sea

Foreign captives: A file picture showing hostages Hall (right) and Sekkingstad in the southern Philippines. — Reuters

Abu Sayyaf Militants to behead another hostage

ZAMBOANGA CITY: The Abu Sayyaf has announced that it will be beheading its hostage, Norwegian Kjartan Sekkingstad, if Presidential Peace Adviser Jesus Dureza insists on the non-payment of ransom.

“There is no more ultimatum, we are going to behead this Norwegian anytime today,” said Abu Sayyaf spokesman Abu Rami, who called a couple of journalists here on Sunday night.

Rami said the beheading will be done following reports of Dureza’s pronouncement of the government’s no-ransom policy.

The Abu Sayyaf has been demanding 300 million pesos (RM25.5mil) in exchange for Sekkingstad’s freedom.

Rami said they were aware that ransom was already set for delivery, and they were just waiting for someone to deliver the money.

Sekkingstad is one of four victims who were taken from a marina in the Island Garden City of Samal in Davao del Norte in November last year.

Rami’s announcement came two days after the body of beheaded Abu Sayyaf kidnap victim, Canadian Robert Hall, was found in Sulu on Saturday morning.

Hall was beheaded by the Abu Sayyaf on June 13 after the bandit group failed to receive the ransom money they had demanded.

His head was found on the same day in front of the Jolo Cathedral.

Hall was the second kidnap victim the bandits had decapitated after fellow Canadian John Ridsdel, who was killed in April.

Filipino Marites Flor was freed on June 24. — Philippines Daily Inquirer / Asia News Network

Law-abusing tribunal to issue award on South China Sea arbitration

AN arbitral tribunal with widely contested jurisdiction will issue an award on July 12 on the South China Sea case unilaterally initiated by the Philippines, the Permanent Court of Arbitration (PCA) in The Hague said.

"The Tribunal will issue its Award on Tuesday, 12 July 2016 at approximately 11 A.M.," the PCA, acting as the registry of the tribunal, said in a press release.

"The Award will first be issued via e-mail to the Parties, along with an accompanying Press Release containing a summary of the Award," it added.

China has refused to participate in the proceedings and declared that it will never recognize the verdict, stressing that the tribunal has no jurisdiction because the case is in essence related to territorial sovereignty and maritime delimitation.

Beijing has pointed out that territorial issues are not subject to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), and that as early as in 2006 it declared -- in line with UNCLOS -- to exclude disputes concerning maritime delimitation from mandatory dispute-settlement procedures. Some 30 countries have also filed declarations of this kind. - Xinhua

Related:   

South China Sea dispute suggests U.S. efforts to contain China

Power game decides post-arbitration order

Tribunal arbitration escalates sea tensions

Related posts:

Job for new Philippine head: Stop the kidnapping of foreign citizens

Apr 29, 2016 ... Job for new Philippine head: Stop the kidnapping of foreign citizens ... Even as the foreign governments were working to get their citizens ...

https://rightways.wordpress.com/tag/abu-sayyaf/?iframe=true&preview=true/feed/

Philippine president-elect Duterte may shift Manila's foreign policy ...

May 11, 2016 ... Philippine president-elect Duterte may shift Manila's foreign policy, have limited room for change on maritime disputes. Illustration: Liu Rui/GT.

Add caption

US containing a rising Chinese power

Might the rush to arbitration be nothing more than a US provocation to provide an excuse for military engagement? asks Shannon Ezra Th...

 China calls arbitral court 'mouthpiece' for certain groups

China on Monday slammed remarks by the Philippines' chief lawyer on the international arbitration of the South China Sea disputes, saying his comments prove the court is 'only a mouthpiece for certain groups.'

China, next global hub for higher education

With its varsities gaining better rankings, the most populous nation is set to become the world’s leading learning destination.

HIGHER education in China can perhaps be traced to the establishment of a Taixue (the Imperial Academy) in the capital city of China during the Western Han Dynasty (206BC to 9AD).

Before this there were no formal organised institutions of higher learning. Only private education was available. Thus taixue became the highest educational institution in imperial China.

The earliest taixue education was based on legalist and Confucian ideals and philosophies, but later it evolved into one that was mainly Confucian-based when Emperor Wu (141BC to 87BC) decided to adopt Confucianism as the state doctrine. Imperial University was the first Confucian-based institution established in 124BC.

The taixue system later evolved into what was known as Gouzijian (Directorate of Education or National Central Institute of Learning). This occurred during the Western Jin Period (265 to 316).

Under the gouzijian system, higher education was stratified and segmented.

The system of admission and enrolment of students to these different levels and segments was based on social standing.

This traditional system of higher education was in place for the next 2,000 years before it underwent structural reforms into “modern universities” that we know of today.

In the late 19th century, several traditional institutions of higher learning sought permission from the Emperor to “modernise”.

However, Peking University is generally regarded as the first “modern university” in the country.

This was in 1898 and the term daxue for such institutions was adopted.

The university was first known as the Imperial Univer-sity of Peking before it became the present Peking University.

The reformation came about when events that took place in China in the mid-1800s opened up the country to the rest of the world.

Varsities closed

Even so, these new centres of learning experienced a period of great turmoil during China’s Cultural Revolution of 1966 to 1969.

In the early months of the revolution, schools and universities were closed.

Though the revolution was officially over by 1969, its activities however continued until 1971 and most universities did not reopen until 1972.

From the 1980s onwards, higher education in China underwent further reforms.

In 1995, Project 211 was initiated to raise research standards of about 100 universities by the 21st Century, hence the term Project 211.

Project 985 launched in May 1998 by President Jiang Zemin, initially targeted 10 universities. They were given the necessary support to make them all world-class institutions. The number of such universities has now gone up to 39.

The project has also resulted in the creation of what is known as the C9 League of universities. The aim is to create a league that is equivalent to the Ivy League of the United States.

The C9 universities are Fudan University, Harbin Institute of Technology, Nanjing University, Beijing University, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, Tsinghua University, University of Science and Technology of China, Xi’an Jiaotong University and Zhejiang University.

China spends about 4% of her GDP on education and currently spends about US$250bil (RM1.03tril) a year on human capital development.

There are about 2,900 universities and colleges in China with a total enrolment of some 37 million students. Close to 380,000 international students from 203 countries studied in China in 2014.

The bulk of them were from South Korea, the US, Thailand, Russia, Vietnam, India, Indonesia, France and Pakistan.

Currently only about 10% of foreign students receive Chinese government scholarships and the rest are mainly self-funded.

However this is expected to change as China aims to attract 500,000 international students by 2020 and providing more scholarships is a way to support the target.

The 2016 Higher Education System Strength Rankings (by Quacquarelli Symonds - QS), placed China at eighth worldwide with China’s strongest score being in the economy metric.

The eighth place ranking is the highest for Asia with South Korea and Japan placed at the ninth and 10th position respectively.

The first seven places were taken by the US, UK, Germany, Australia, Canada, France and the Netherlands respectively. Malaysia is placed 27th, behind Taiwan, Hong Kong and Singapore.

This ranking is an assessment of the overall education system strength and flagship university performance, alongside factors relating to access and funding.

Also, according to the QS World University Rankings of 2015/16, of the world’s top 800 universities, four of the top 100 are in China.

They are Tsinghua University (ranked 25), Peking University (ranked 41), Fudan University (ranked 51) and Shanghai Jiao Tong University (ranked 70) with Tsinghua being third in Asia after the National University of Singapore and the Nanyang Technological University of Singapore (ranked 12th and 13th respectively).

Tsinghua is even ahead of universities in South Korea, Japan, Hong Kong and Taiwan. Xiamen University, placed 17th in China, fell in the 401-410 band.

For Malaysian public universities, Universiti Malaya (UM) is placed 146 while Universiti Sains Malaysia (USM) is ranked 289. Universiti Teknologi Malaysia (UTM) is at 303 while Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 312 and Universiti Putra Malaysia, 331. None of Malaysia’s private universities appeared in the list.

According to the Times Higher Education World University Rankings of 2015-2016, two universities in China made it to the world’s top 100 out of the 800 listed.

The two were Peking University (ranked 42) and Tsinghua University (ranked 47), with Peking being ahead of universities in Japan, Hong Kong and South Korea.

Tsinghua was ahead of even the best in South Korea.

The best Malaysian university listed was UTM, placed in the number 401-500 band, similar to that of Xiamen University which has a branch campus in Sepang, Selangor.

Most of the British universities with branch campuses in Malaysia are within the world’s top 200.

Research performance

The Academic Ranking of World Universities (ARWU), also known as the Shanghai Jiao Tong World University Ranking, ranked 500 universities worldwide based mainly on their research performance.

For 2015, four universities in Japan did better than those in China.

The top university in Japan was the University of Tokyo (ranked 21) while the top four in China, according to alphabetical order, were Peking University, Shanghai Jiao Tong, Tsinghua and Zhejiang University. They were placed in the number 101-150 band.

Malaysia’s top university, according to ARWU, was UM, placed in the number 301-400 band, while USM, the next best, was placed in the number 401-500 band. Xiamen University was placed in the same band as UM.

In a span of about 120 years, from having only one “modern” university, there are now about 2,900 universities and colleges in China. Several are world-class and are ready to compete with the best in the US and the UK.

Within the next decade, two universities in China may be ranked among the world’s top 10.

To achieve this, the government is going to great lengths to attract leading scholars, especially overseas Chinese scholars, to take up academic appointments at its leading universities.

Many universities in China are not only focusing on developing technologies that are competitive, but are doing so in areas like business education. Improvements have been by leaps and bounds.

Under such a scenario, what effects would the above have on world higher education in general and the trend of higher education pursuits by the global Chinese diaspora in particular?

It is an open secret that China encourages successful overseas Chinese to return to China to help in its development.

Even though the country is now the world’s second largest economy, there are still many spheres that need to be developed before China can claim to be at par with developed nations of the West.

One strategy would be to attract the best foreign students to study in China.

Upon graduation, these students can then be enticed to stay on to help develop the country.

Even if the graduates decide to return to their home country, their positive experiences while in China and the local Chinese network of friendship (guanxi) that the students have established are assets that will to some extent, influence their home countriesfavourably in their dealings with China.

Having foreign students on campus also has the added benefit of excha-nge and enrichment of experiences and ideas between local students and those from different parts of the world.

Such a strategy is not new as it has been practised by countries of the West even though these countries have their own bright students.

That is one reason why the West is now so strong and advanced, especially in the area of science and technology.

This approach of attracting the best foreign students can only be successful if an excellent system of higher education is in place, and China is doing just that.

As a start, China is also increasing the number of scholarships for foreign students.

For example during the 18th ASEAN-China Summit held in Kuala Lumpur last November, China’s Premier Li Keqiang made a commitment that China will increase the number of government scholarships for Asean countries by a thousand over the next three years.

Incentives

On a global scale such efforts may not seem much, but China might introduce innovative incentives to attract the best foreign students to its shores.

The country might just be waiting for the right moment to do so.

Like all other projects launched, once a decision is made and the time is right, China would go all out to implement the idea in a big way.

The soft power strategy outlined above, if introduced, would have a greater impact in countries with a large overseas Chinese population - especially in countries where these students are marginalised with limited access to higher education.

Together there are close to 27 million overseas Chinese living in the Asean region. This is about half the total number of overseas Chinese worldwide.

China may have the edge over the West in attracting these overseas Chinese students as many of these students would be familiar with China’s culture and language.

However it must also be highlighted that presently in China, some university courses are already being taught in English.

From the economic perspective, the cost of higher education in China is relatively cheap compared to those in the West.

Depending on the programme of study, the location of the institution, the type of accommodation sought, and the food consumed, the cost can be as low as US$4,000 (RM16,000) per year.

However it can also be at US$10,000 (RM40,000) per year, making it less affordable to those from poorer nations.

Nonetheless, even now, , studying in China is already a good option.

Doing so not only allows one to receive a world-class education at an affordable cost, it also provides the opportunity for one to establish vast professional and business networks.

These networks are certainly beneficial in a world that has predicted that China would be the largest global economy and a superpower in the not too distant future.

By Dr Lim Koon Ong

The writer is a former Universiti Sains Malaysia deputy vice-chancellor, and is presently an emeritus professor there.

Related posts

Asian students dominate global exam; Are the Chinese ...

Dec 17, 2013 ... Hong Kong ranked third in Maths, scoring 561, while Japan was ranked ... Are the Chinese cheating in PISA or are we cheating ourselves?

 

 The Malaysian Education: bleak and bright side, a wake ...

May 20, 2015 ... ... Assessment (PISA) and the Trends in International Mathematics and ... schools are scoring top grades for science and maths in the UPSR.

 English not only language of science and mathematics

Feb 27, 2016 ... May 20, 2015 ... As a result of participating in ASTI's Science Fair for Young Children, Tamil schools are scoring top grades for ... What is PISA?

US containing a rising Chinese power

Might the rush to arbitration be nothing more than a US provocation to provide an excuse for military engagement? asks Shannon Ezra

The most effective way to halt China's global rise is to exert control over its gateway to the sea, through which it conducts 80 percent of its trade, says the writer. File picture: Eugene Hoshiko. Credit: AP

Dialogue 06/05/2016 South China Sea & Sino-US ties - CCTV News - CCTV.com English

english.cntv.cn

Video: South China Sea Is Indisputable Part of China

Video: 8th China-U.S. S&ED & 7th CPE

Johannesburg - If the containment of China is one of the key strategic pillars of US foreign policy, the impending outcome of The Hague’s arbitration on the South China Sea dispute is of critical importance to the US.

Even though China disregards the arbitration process as illegitimate, the decision of the tribunal, which is due in the next 10 days, will ratchet up tensions in one of the world's most hotly contested bodies of water. It will set the stage for what could degenerate into a serious conflagration, as the US pulls out all the stops to encircle China, and China takes measures to assert its sovereignty.

America’s objective is to contain a rising power, which presents itself as a major challenge to US global hegemony. Geo-strategically, the most effective way to impede China’s rise is to exert control, through proxies, over China’s gateway to the sea, through which it conducts 80 percent of its trade and transports its energy supplies.

This strategic waterway has turned into a game of chess between China, which claims sovereignty over four main archipelagos, and some of its neighbours along the South China Sea, which have made a series of territorial claims and are backed by the US.

The US claims its interest in the South China Sea is to protect the freedom of navigation as US trade through this waterway is worth $1.2 trillion (R17.6 trillion) annually. To date, China has posed no threat to international navigation in the waters of the South China Sea and also seeks to protect its annual $5 trillion worth of trade.

Despite the tug of war, the situation was under control prior to 2009. When President Barack Obama took office in that year, he announced his keystone foreign policy undertaking as a “strategic pivot to Asia” or rebalancing strategy to the Asia-Pacific. The entire region intuitively recognised that the rebalance was, and is, about China.

A new determination emerged within the US administration to support the territorial claims in the South China Sea of China’s neighbours. It was in this way that the US was arguably the invisible hand behind the rising tension in the region since 2009.

From the Chinese perspective, it was the US that plotted behind the scenes the arbitration of its South China Sea dispute with the Philippines. There have been allegations that the US staffed a team of lawyers to lead the Philippines through the arbitration process, and encouraged them to launch their arbitration case when a Japanese national was president of the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. The Japanese national in question had been previously opposed to China’s positions in previous cases and became one of the five arbitrators in the case.

From the time that the Philippines took the unilateral initiative of taking the South China Sea arbitration to the tribunal in January 2013, China has refused to accept or participate in the arbitration. It maintains that territorial sovereignty issues are beyond the purview of the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS).

As for maritime delimitation, China made an exclusion declaration in 2006, thereby lawfully excluding itself from any compulsory dispute settlement procedure by a third party. Apart from China, more than 30 other countries, including the UK, France, and Russia have made the same exclusion declaration.

China also maintains that, together with the Philippines, they have reaffirmed settling the South China Sea dispute through bilateral negotiations. This is in keeping with the Declaration on the Conduct of Parties in the South China Sea, signed between China and the Association of South-east Asian Nations, which explicitly states that the parties concerned should undertake to resolve their disputes through consultations and negotiations.

From the perspective of the Philippines, there have been a number of exchanges of views with China since 1995, which led to no resolution. But China argues that the two states have never engaged in any serious negotiations on the dispute. According to UNCLOS, China has the right to choose the means of dispute settlement, which means it cannot be forced to accept dispute settlement which is imposed on it, including a third-party settlement. But this has not stopped the arbitration from continuing without China’s participation.

What kind of consequences could the rush to arbitration, encouraged by the US, result in? Would China withdraw from UNCLOS and expand its Air Defence Identification Zone over all its territories in the South China Sea?

This was always a likely scenario, which begs the question of whether the US is keen to provoke a military confrontation as part of its containment strategy. Why else would it be deploying 60 percent of its naval fleet and 60 percent of its overseas air force to the South China Sea by 2030?

By Shannon Ebrahim who is the foreign editor for Independent Media http://www.iol.co.za/

Related:

Expert: Negotiation is only way for South China Sea issues

  http://t.cn/R5R1nar 

• Overview of the South China Sea Disputes ep.2：The Current Situation

http://english.cntv.cn/2016/07/01/VIDEFqZVHU17UA77AL1fVaQZ160701.shtml

The nine-dashed line was first discovered and owned by China. It is a maritime boundary line formed after China’s long-term jurisdiction and development of the South China Sea islands.

China holds sovereignty and jurisdiction rights within the nine-dashed line. Other countries’ ships have the right to freedom of navigation and their aircraft enjoy rights to fly over the territory.
There had been no problem with the nine-dashed line before the 1970s, but with Vietnam, the Philippines and other countries pushing further territorial claims, more governments are beginning to deny legitimacy of the nine-dashed line.

The United States and other countries have intervened in the South China Sea issue; using the so-called freedom of navigation in the South China Sea to deny the nine-dashed line to disregard China’s territorial rights.

Xi eyes joint bid to boost Manila ties

Beijing would like to improve relations with Manila through joint efforts, President Xi Jinping told the Philippines' new president, who was sworn in on Thursday.

 

South China Sea arbitration nothing more than a political farce: People’s DailyGiven the lack of legal validity of the arbitral tribunal of the South China Sea case, China does not accept any propositions or actions based on the...

Duterte's inauguration can put ties on new track

Immediately prior to Rodrigo Duterte's inauguration as the new Philippine leader, The Hague-based Permanent Court of Arbitration announced it would deliver a ruling on July 12 in the Philippines' case against China over their South China Sea dispute.

• Fmr. ICJ judge: Negotiation best way to resolve dispute

 More support for China against arbitration

Tribunal arbitration escalates sea tensions

The tribunal’s involvement goes against the principles of the convention.