ASEAN Affairs Forum

[Malaya]

Asean links with the Middle East
Gregor Stuart Hunter
Jun 17, 2013

What is the asset class and geography you are focused on?

Equities in the countries of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean). Asean shares some similarities with the Middle East. The population is pretty young. What's going on in Asean is that we're seeing signs of a huge infrastructure boom across many of their markets, which many Middle Eastern investors can identify with. A lot of Middle Eastern people have been to Asean - Malaysia receives a lot of Middle Eastern tourists, and Thai hospitals get a lot of Middle Eastern patients.

What is the outlook for the month ahead in your opinion?

There might be some volatility. If you look at the performance year-to-date of these markets, they've all done phenomenally well. We've already seen one round of profit-taking in markets like the Philippines, but the recovery has been extremely fast. A lot of investors just want to buy the dips because the fundamentals are so strong. There's a lot of money waiting on the sidelines. Year-to-date, foreigners have been net sellers.

What are the main risks (either upside or downside) to the outlook?

We think that the stronger US dollar is a reflection of the US economy. This should ultimately be positive for Asean economies. The strong US dollar sometimes has a negative correlation with Asian markets, but we don't necessarily think that this should be negative for South East Asian markets. We worry about a flood of hot money into this region. The regulators in the region have the memories of the Asian financial crisis still in their heads so they're always very worried about asset bubbles and hot capital inflows. But they don't want harsh capital controls to scare aware foreign investors.

What is the best investment at the moment in your opinion?

There aren't too many high profile names in South East Asia. A number of these companies are still emerging, so you don't have big sophisticated companies - yet.What's happening in South East Asia is a strong domestic demand story which has gained a lot of momentum over the past few years. There's a growing middle-class population. A lot of industries which once would not have been viable now become viable, like convenience stores and supermarkets. This region is becoming a lot more vibrant and a lot stronger. As this region becomes more integrated, it is more and more resilient against external shocks. As trade barriers and tarriffs fall it becomes more efficient … the investment opportunities become greater and I would think that growth becomes more sustainable and entrenched.

What was the best investment you were ever involved in?

What we did really well was to identify very good long-term thematics in the healthcare industry, and healthcare stocks in Thailand. We could see that one company we invested in was a consolidator, which was consolidating in a growth market.

What was the worst?

We did miss out on the very strong yield compression trade in 2011. We missed out a lot of the very high yielding stocks, the Thai telcoms in particular. We were resistant, in that there was a lot of flip-flop in the regulatory environment. We have since corrected some of that.

Asean links with the Middle East - The National

 

[Malaya]

Asean and navigating the reefs
By FINTAN NG

NO, this is not about the consensus-building process that Asean is famous or infamous for. It's about finding common ground where the region's interests are concerned but not through a process which may not be as effective.

One glaring example of how ineffective the Asean way is can be found in the disputes between China and Asean over the South China Sea. However, supporters of this slow process of consensus-building still believe in it.

“It's frustrating but it works,” is how Brunei's second minister of foreign affairs and trade Pehin Lim Jock Seng described the Asean way during a luncheon talk held at the 27th Asia Pacific Roundtable two weeks ago.

But consensus was sorely lacking last July when Asean failed for the first time in its history to issue a joint statement following a foreign ministers' meeting in Phnom Penh, Cambodia over how to deal with China's claims in the South China Sea.

Analysts pointed the finger at host country Cambodia, which insisted that the dispute not be mentioned in the statement. China has considerable commercial interests in the country and is Asean's largest trade partner.

This disunity has also meant that China can insist on bilateral talks with member states which it has a dispute with instead of multilateral talks.

Meanwhile, the resurgent US interest in the region will complicate matters. Inevitably there will be a clash between China and US interests. There are some who are wary of the renewed US interest in the region and feel that Beijing can balance out Washington.

Ambassador Christopher Hill, a former assistant secretary of state said at the same roundtable that no one should be made to choose between China and the United States.

Therefore, how should Asean go about forging a new way? Perhaps the answer lies in history. In 1948, Mohammad Hatta, Indonesia's first vice-president, said in a speech to that country's national committee that Indonesian diplomacy should be based on two pillars anti-colonialism and an independent as well as active foreign policy.

The days of colonialism or even neo-colonialism is over but the second pillar of an independent and active foreign policy is still relevant.

Hatta's speech was titled “Mendajung Antara Dua Karang” or “Rowing Between Two Reefs”. Asean's two reefs are China and the United States.

Nobody is saying that Asean member states should surrender their sovereignty over foreign policy but Hatta's speech is still relevant today and perhaps lessons can be learned and common ground found for the good of the region.

 

[Malaya]

Asean economic ministers enhance trade ties with US
Wednesday 19th of June 2013

MANILA, June 19 (PIA) -- A high-level Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) delegation visited the United States on June 10-14 to further enhance trade and investment relations between the two sides.

The delegation, led by Second Minister Pehin Dato Lim Jock Seng of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Brunei, composed of economic ministers from Laos, Malaysia, Myanmar and the Philippines; vice-ministers from Cambodia, Indonesia, Thailand and Vietnam; and senior officials from Asean countries.

The delegation visited Los Angeles specifically the Port of Los Angeles which is the main gateway for trade between Asean and the US, San Francisco (Silicon Valley), and Washington D.C., as well as multinational corporations Fox Studios, Covidien, Mattel, and Google. They also held consultations with the private sector including venture capitalists.

The delegation met with top US government officials, including Ambassador Miriam Sapiro, Acting US Trade Representative; Cameron Kerry, Acting Secretary of Commerce; and Francisco Sanchez, Undersecretary of Commerce for International Affairs. The delegation also made a courtesy call to Mayor Chuck Reed of San Jose and Congressman Devin Nunes at Capitol Hill.

The total trade between Asean and the US reached US$ 198.8 billion in 2011 which made the United States the fourth largest trading partner of Asean. For investment, the United States is the third largest investor in Asean investing more than US$5.8 billion in 2011.

“The Ministers gained better insights of the issues faced by investors through their interaction with business community and reiterated their commitment for timely realisation of an Asean Economic Community by 2015 which will create a single market and production base for them to establish new or expand existing operations in the region,” said Lim Hong Hin, Asean Deputy Secretary-General for Asean Economic Community. (Home)

PIA | Philippine Information Agency | Asean economic ministers enhance trade ties with US

 

[Malaya]

Political, Economic Stability Key Factors For Asean's Economic Transformation

KUALA LUMPUR, June 19 (Bernama) -- Political as well as economic stability will be key factors for the Asean economic transformation which began after the 1997-1998 Asian financial crisis.

The Singapore Institute of International Affairs chairman Simon SC Tay said following the crisis, Asean countries had done a lot to build the economy as well as political stability, despite being shadowed by two emerging economic giants, China and India.

"But with these two countries facing problems, more attention is now been placed on South East Asia," he said at the fifth CIMB Annual Asia Pacific Conference here Wednesday.

He was a panelist at the conference.

Simon said due to the crisis, integration amongst Asean countries had been emphasised, with more business friendly policies being developed.

However, he disagreed with nationalistic and protectionism policies, saying, it will in the end hurt the economy.

"Asean integration is imperative, particularly in the economic sector," he said.

Meanwhile, the co-founder and chief executive officer of the Asian Strategy and Leadership Institute (Asli) Tan Sri Michael Yeoh said the Asean leadership needs to address the growing democracy challenge along with demographic and development challenges.

Also a panelist at the conference, he said while development challenges focused on the need for inclusive and sustainable development, and the demographic challenge was about an aging society, that of democracy emphasised human rights and protection.

"How Asean governments deal with this challenge is more important and crucial, when more people expect more freedom and greater human rights," he added.

The two-day conference, from today, focuses on leadership vision and strategies as Asian countries and regional businesses seek to enhance growth, adaptability and stability in a globalising and rapidly changing landscape.

-- BERNAMA

BERNAMA - Political, Economic Stability Key Factors For Asean's Economic Transformation

 

[cirr]

Published: Thursday June 20, 2013 MYT 11:03:00 AM

China’s Comtec to build one of world’s largest solar wafer making plants in Kuching for RM1.2bil

By YU JI

KUCHING: China-based Comtec Solar will build a RM1.2bil solar wafer manufacturing plant at Samajaya Free Industrial Zone near here, which will be one of the world's largest such facilities.

The factory, to be built by SinoHydro and scheduled for completion by the end of this year, will create 1,300 new jobs.

The company listed on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange said 80% of its workforce here would be Malaysians, "with most holding diplomas as field engineers and technicians," according to a press release on Thursday.

Sarawak Chief Minister Tan Sri Abdul Taib Mahmud said at the formal launch that Comtec's entry signified international confidence in Sarawak's economy and the Samajaya Free Industrial Zone.

The industrial park, in 2009, welcomed its first solar ingot and wafer manufacturer, MEMC Electronic Materials Inc, from the US.

"Among the factors that prompted Comtec Solar to choose Sarawak was the state's competitive costs of production and attractive investment incentives," said Second Resource Planning and Environment Minister Datuk Amar Awang Tengah Ali Hasan, who also spoke at the launch.

"At the end of 2012, Comtec Solar began to engage my ministry on its proposed investment. Within a couple of months of negotiations with the state Government, the investment was confirmed."

Comtec's entry into Samajaya is the first since another major plant, Sanmina-SCI, closed to relocate to China last year, resulting in the loss of about 1,000 jobs.

China’s Comtec to build one of world’s largest solar wafer making plants in Kuching for RM1.2bil - Nation | The Star Online

 

[ViXuyen]

Four Vietnamese students win Joint the Spirits Award from EADS

EADS Names ‘Join the Spirit’ Award Winners

Paris/Le Bourget, 18 June 2013

EADS Innovation Works has announced the winners of its "Join the Spirit" high performance computing competition at a prize giving ceremony held during the 50th Paris Air Show.

The contest challenged graduate students from around the world to submit the fastest code to solve a problem related to aeronautics using multiple graphics processing units (GPUs) on a single computing node. The first prize went to the Kota team comprising students Thuy Diem Nguyen and Chau Khoa Pham from Nanyang Technological University in Singapore. The runners-up were Thai Son Nguyen and Thi Phuong Nhung Ngo, a team of two Vietnamese students studying at the University of Bolzano in Italy.

The competitors, working alone or in teams of up to three persons, were challenged to create problem-solving codes, which were tested live. They could submit their codes and compare their performance against others via an on-line leaderboard.

Join the Spirit is a contest initiative organised by EADS Innovation Works, which operates EADS' network of research laboratories. Three contests have already been launched on different topics. The aim is to stimulate innovation and promote EADS' relations with universities and their students.

Sébastien Remy, Head of EADS Innovation Works, said: “We are very happy to see that there was strong participation in this contest. It shows that a new generation of computer engineers is ready to work with us and they are more than welcome.”

The award ceremony took place at Le Bourget during dedicated student workshops organized by EADS. Around 25 students watched Sébastien Remy, Head of EADS Innovation Works and Yann Barbaux, Airbus Chief Innovation Officer, present the prizes to the two teams. The winners received an EADS prize of $10,000 and a quadrocopter from Parrot, a global leader in wireless devices for mobile phones. Parrot is also sponsor of the current Join the Spirit contest “Find me if you can”.

EADS Global Website - EADS Names

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

In Search of an Asian or Asean Identity
By KHANH VU DUC / ASIA SENTINEL| Wednesday, July 3, 2013 |

Women stand under the Asean flag at a human rights and democracy demonstration ahead of the Asean Summit in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, on Nov. 16, 2012. (Photo: Reuters)

Much is made about the 21st century belonging to Asia, but what exactly does this mean? This is not a question of the region’s rising economic and political importance, but the broad strokes in which observers seem to brush over the continent is rather misleading. Talks of Asian growth are largely specific to China and Southeast Asian countries as opposed to the continent of Asia.

The confusion largely stems from the absence of any agreed definition of an Asian identity, due in part because Asians themselves are not necessarily united beyond the continent on which they inhabit. In common parlance, “Asia” is sometimes used to refer only to the peoples of East and Southeast Asia; however, Asia encompasses far more than those countries bordering or in the Pacific.

With respect to that fast economic development in Southeast Asia, the region is no less united in pursuit of prosperity and resolving territorial disputes. Asean has served as the primary vessel through which Southeast Asian nations address and manage regional concerns; however, the forum has proved rather ineffective in dealing with the South China Sea disputes. Hopes of an Asean unity may appear far off, but it is a far easier task than an Asian unity.

The Asian Identity

From a large portion of the Middle East and the Mediterranean to the Pacific Ocean, “Asian values” nonsense to the contrary, Asia cannot be defined as one language, one people, or one religion. It is not surprising that Asia is often broken down to sub-regions such as the Middle East, Central Asia, East Asia, South Asia, and Southeast Asia so as to better describe who and what one is discussing.

Talk of one unifying Asian identity is, at present, a hypothetical exercise given its size. If there is an Asian identity, it will be so vague as to be nonexistent. Regardless, a discussion on Asian identity does provide an opportunity to compare against Europe, no less diverse, and its successful establishment of a European identity.

Simply put, Europe, even with the broadest of generalizations, is a far more cohesive entity than Asia. There exists a quality to “being” European-born from possessing certain shared values and beliefs, a shared continental history despite language, religious, and cultural differences. Western Europe and Eastern Europe, Northern Europe and Southern Europe—though each is different, they are also similar. The relative locality of nations and their shared borders, to say nothing of their history, have undoubtedly factored into the creation of a European identity and, as a result, the establishment of the European Union.

Asia, however, is a creation of Ancient Greece and has been perpetuated since, rather than a term originating from the continent. The term has only ever been used for broad strokes as opposed to referring to a specific group of people; and as such, it is not hard to imagine why no meaningful Asian identity has been established.

Distance as a consequence of Asia’s geographic size, in addition to its colonized past, has instead limited the exchange of historical cultural interactions between Asian nations. Although modern technological advances in communication and transportation such as the Internet and air travel have essentially eliminated, if not significantly reduced, barriers between Asian countries, creating an Asian identity similar to that in Europe would be no small feat, to say nothing of a potential integrated economic zone akin to the European Union.

Despite these difficulties, the Asia Cooperative Dialogue appears to have taken the first step toward fostering pan-Asian unity. Created in 2002, the organization aims to incorporate “every Asian country and building an Asian Community without duplicating other organizations or creating a bloc against others.” Only time will tell just how effective the ACD will prove.

An Asean Unity

If not Asia, then what about Asean?

At the heart of Asia-Pacific are China and the member states of Asean; however, the future bodes ill for Asean unity. The 2012 Asean Summit in Cambodia saw for the first time in the organization’s history a failure by member states to issue a joint closing statement, due in part to disagreements over China and the South China Sea.

The apparent failures of Asean may be attributed to a combination of its diverse membership and soft touch toward confronting issues. Although there is much to respect about the Asean way, it must be said that the Asean way has thus far proved ineffective in dealing with the South China Sea disputes. If Asean is to remain relevant in the coming years, it must change to reflect the times.

First, China is no longer a peasant country as it once was during the establishment of Asean. In today’s Asia-Pacific, China is a giant. It has economic, diplomatic and military weight. Though many Asean member states (especially Vietnam and the Philippines) are apprehensive with respect to China’s increasing assertiveness in the region, they are unable to muster an appropriate response, as evidenced during the 2012 Asean Summit.

Second, Asean must recognize its limitations. The organization is without a natural leader. That every member state is equal may appear ideal, but it leaves Asean rudderless when tackling challenges such as the South China Sea disputes. Asean needs a leader, a state possessing the influence and resources necessary to muster its fellow members into action.

Third, and perhaps most importantly, for Asean to endure, it must be rooted in something deeper than economic pursuits; and as such, the organization must put forth core values on which it will build for the future. These values should include individual freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law. Talks of Asean unity cannot have any real hope of success without encompassing those intangible qualities that are beyond monetary value.

For the similar reasons regarding an Asian identity, Asean unity is difficult to establish due to the fact that Asean member states are quite diverse, linguistically and culturally. Southeast Asia includes a number of ethnic groups and their respective languages, and dozens of religions as diverse as Christianity and Islam to Buddhism and Confucianism. Southeast Asia is no more united in identity than Asia.

Nevertheless, Asean unity is important largely because foreign interests do not always align with those of Asean states. China cannot be expected to hold the best interest of Asean at heart, and why should it? Chinese foreign policy is explicitly Chinese. Without a common foreign policy, Asean, and Southeast Asia as a whole, will be subject to the dictations of foreign powers.

Asean must grow to be more than an organization, more than a forum for discussion. It must seek to establish and grow an identity. Southeast Asia is far too vague, too broad, to define and unite; however, Asean if given a proper mandate, can aspire to champion the causes of Southeast Asia.

Khanh Vu Duc is a lawyer and part-time law professor at the University of Ottawa who researches on Vietnamese politics, international relations and international law.

In Search of an Asian or Asean Identity | The Irrawaddy Magazine

 

[Reashot Xigwin]

S&P says PHL, Indonesia continue to lead ASEAN economies
By SIEGFRID O. ALEGADO, GMA NewsJuly 30, 2013 5:00pm


Standard & Poor’s on Tuesday raised its Philippine economic forecast for the year but cut its growth projection for Asia-Pacific as a whole and citing the impact of a slowing growth in China, the world's second largest economy.

In its report “Credit Conditions: Increased China Downside Risk Dampens Asia's Growth,” the debt-watcher revised its 2013 gross domestic product (GDP) growth outlook for the Philippines to 6.9 percent from 6.5 percent in May.

“The more domestically-led ASEAN economies, headed by the Philippines and Indonesia, continue to outperform the more trade-dependent newly industrialized economies,” the report read.

The revised projection now falls within the Philippine government’s 6 to 7 percent goal this year and is slightly higher than last year’s 6.8 percent.

The debt-watcher, however, trimmed its 2014 economic forecast for the Philippines to 6.1 percent from 6.3 percent.

S&P sees ASEAN economies growing 5.5 percent this year before accelerating to 5.6 percent next year.

“The ASEAN sub-region will continue to be the bright spot in Asia-Pacific, owing to the larger contribution of domestic demand to growth in these economies,” the report read.

The debt-watcher noted the downward revision for its Asia-Pacific forecast was largely prompted by cuts made in China’s economic forecast.

“We now see real GDP growth in Asia-Pacific at 5.3 percent this year, down slightly from our 5.5 percent forecast in May,” the report read.

S&P sees Asia-Pacific growth accelerating to 5.6 percent next year.

“Growth in Asia-Pacific came in weaker than expected in the first half of 2013 undercut by sluggish external demand and internal growth drivers,” the report read, adding that the “main risk factor for the region is a continued slowdown in China.”

China’s growth is forecast at 7.3 percent this year and the next, slower than the 7.5 percent target of the world’s second largest economy.

In an interview with reporters Monday, Socioeconomic Planning Secretary Arsenio Balisacan noted the economy will remain robust this year on domestic demand and a continued uptick in manufacturing and investments.

Philippine output expanded by 7.8 percent in the first quarter, the fastest in Asia, on the back of strong domestic demand and rising investments. — VS, GMA News

S&P says PHL, Indonesia continue to lead ASEAN economies | Economy | GMA News Online

 

[Nike]

Can Asean last another
50 years?

BA Hamzah, The Nation/ANN, Bangkok | World | Wed, July 31 2013, 5:51 PM

Malaysia's Minister of International Trade and Industry Mustapa Mohamed caught me off-guard with his recent remarks on the lack of awareness of Asean integration plans among those surveyed by the Asean Secretariat. However, on closer examination of the Report, "Surveys on the Asean Community Building Effort, 2012", the situation doesn't appear to be that gloomy.

The regional grouping will celebrate its golden jubilee in 2017, but we can only guess whether there will be a centennial celebration for Asean in 2067. After all, predicting Asean's future or destiny is a very delicate proposition. William Shakespeare reminds us, "it is not in the stars to hold our destiny but in ourselves".

In "Vanished Kingdoms", Professor Norman Davies of Oxford reminds us that power is transient. He writes: "Sooner or later all things come to an end. … All states and nations, however great, bloom for a season and are replaced."

It is no small feat for Asean to have bloomed for almost 50 years; the League of Nations lasted only for 39 years. Will Asean face the same destiny as the European kingdoms in Norman Davies' book, or the League of Nations? Your guess is as good as mine.

Some leaders are overtly obsessed with keeping the Asean experiment alive forever. As a part of the 1967 generation, like many, having enjoyed the peace dividends, I am appreciative of Asean. I witnessed many crises in the region before the group's founding fathers summoned the moral courage to design Asean as the architecture for Southeast Asian political security and peace.

Countries in the region have been through crisis after crisis, some spilling over into neighbouring states. For Indonesia, the Sukarno-inspired confrontation against Malaysia, for example, forced some of us to join the military. The American war in Indochina has also scarred our history.

I have the impression that the successful Asean experiment to establish political security has lulled us, made us complacent and ignorant of the region's dark past. Asean was formed primarily for political and security reasons. Today, while acknowledging the value of political cooperation, Asean leaders put more emphasis on economic and cultural links.

Despite the so-far mostly successful experiment in regionalism, should our present leaders continue to indoctrinate and compel the immediate generation to demand that the generation of 2067 keeps Asean intact? Are we not being over-presumptuous to suggest that what is good for the goose is also good for the gander?

Is it ethical to impose our values on future generations? Should the current generation decide on the shape and destiny of Asean in 2067? Winston Churchill put it elegantly when he said, "The empires of the future are the empires of the mind." Of course, the minds of future generations will have to determine what they wish to do with Asean.

The Chinese have a saying: If you are planning for one year, plant rice. If you are planning for a decade, plant trees. If you are planning for a century, invest in education. In the Churchillian sense, education is about moulding critical minds. Education that broadens the minds of citizens is critical to the destiny of Asean. All Asean countries should educate, not indoctrinate, their citizens on the importance of Asean for regional security, trade and cultural exchange.

Quo vadis Asean in a new geo-political environment? The US, China, India and Japan have "returned" to the region. The footprints of their rivalry are everywhere, in the South China Sea and in the Straits of Malacca.

In a transformed regional geo-political outlook, the strategic value of Asean has declined. With the big powers back in the region, competing for influence and primacy, and the proliferation of new regional security and economic institutions, Asean has lost its centrality and near-monopoly over regional security.

Regional maritime security, for example, is now subject to very intricate power plays between the external powers and client states. If leaders do not read the tea leaves properly, we will become pawns in the big power games once again.

The future of Asean is for the generations to decide. They may wish to be part of a larger community, like the East Asia Community. We can only hope they will decide wisely. They may wish to ponder George Santayana's dictum that "Those who do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it."

BA Hamzah is a Malaysian scholar on regional affairs.

Can Asean last another 50 years? | The Jakarta Post
This will became a nice discussions wether or not ASEAN will be lasting for a long time

 

[EastSea]

Hoang Thanh Trang is European Women’s Chess Champion

Aug 3, 2013
Hungarian Grandmaster Hoang Thanh Trang drew her last round game against the former continental champion Viktorija Cmilyte (Lithuania) to secure the first place in the tournament and claim the title of 2013 European Women’s Chess Champion.
Trang played very well throughout the event, scoring seven victories and conceding only four draws for a total of 9 points from 11 games.
She cemented the lead after beating the defending champion Valentina Gunina in round 8 and proceeded to defeat former World Champion Alexandra Kosteniuk in round 10.
Trang rating performance was 2663 and she earned 26 elo-points.

GM Hoang Thanh Trang has double Citizenships, Vietnamese and Hungarian.

Six players shared the second place with 8,0 points each: IM Salome Melia GEO 2428, IM Lilit Mkrtchian ARM 2454, GM Viktorija Cmilyte LTU 2497, GM Alexandra Kosteniuk RUS 2489, IM Bela Khotenashvili GEO 2512 and GM Monika Socko POL 2435.
Acording to tie-breaks, Melia won the silver medal, while Mkrtchian earned the bronze.
The 14th European Individual Women’s Chess Championship was held from 23rd July to 3rd August in Belgrade, Serbia.
A total of 168 players from 35 countries competed in the Championship (Ksenija Tomin, who is listed to make 169, did not play a single game). The number of participants is equal to the 10th European Women’s Championship which was held in Saint Petersburg, Russia, in 2009.

Final standings:
1. GM Hoang Thanh Trang HUN 2467 – 9
2. IM Melia Salome GEO 2428 – 8
3. IM Mkrtchian Lilit ARM 2454 – 8
4. GM Cmilyte Viktorija LTU 2497 – 8
5. GM Kosteniuk Alexandra RUS 2489 – 8
6. IM Khotenashvili Bela GEO 2512 – 8
7. GM Socko Monika POL 2435 – 8
8. WGM Kashlinskaya Alina RUS 2334 – 7.5
9. WGM Arabidze Meri GEO 2320 – 7.5
10. WGM Pogonina Natalija RUS 2478 – 7.5
11. WGM Kovanova Baira RUS 2371 – 7.5
12. GM Muzychuk Anna SLO 2594 – 7.5
13. WGM Girya Olga RUS 2437 – 7.5
14. GM Stefanova Antoaneta BUL 2497 – 7.5
15. WGM Ozturk Kubra TUR 2293 – 7.5
16. GM Cramling Pia SWE 2523 – 7.5
17. IM Javakhishvili Lela GEO 2465 – 7.5
18. IM Atalik Ekaterina EUR 2430 – 7.5
19. IM Milliet Sophie FRA 2396 – 7.5
20. GM Arakhamia-Grant Ketevan SCO 2385 – 7.5
21. IM Kovalevskaya Ekaterina RUS 2407 – 7
22. WGM Daulyte Deimante LTU 2363 – 7
23. IM Guramishvili Sopiko GEO 2421 – 7
24. GM Lagno Kateryna UKR 2542 – 7
25. GM Gunina Valentina RUS 2507 – 7
26. GM Dzagnidze Nana GEO 2558 – 7
27. IM Gaponenko Inna UKR 2393 – 7
28. GM Kosintseva Tatiana RUS 2528 – 7
29. IM Matnadze Ana ESP 2412 – 7
30. GM Zhukova Natalia UKR 2471 – 7
31. IM Bodnaruk Anastasia RUS 2440 – 7
32. IM Paehtz Elisabeth GER 2454 – 7
33. WGM Goryachkina Aleksandra RUS 2401 – 6.5
34. WGM Ziaziulkina Nastassia BLR 2321 – 6.5
35. IM Khurtsidze Nino GEO 2443 – 6.5
36. WGM Schleining Zoya GER 2368 – 6.5
37. IM Savina Anastasia RUS 2368 – 6.5
38. IM Romanko Marina RUS 2368 – 6.5
39. IM Peptan Corina-Isabela ROU 2439 – 6.5
40. WIM Schut Lisa NED 2277 – 6.5
41. WGM Mammadova Gulnar AZE 2322 – 6.5
42. WGM Voicu-Jagodzinsky Carmen ROU 2296 – 6.5
43. WGM Zawadzka Jolanta POL 2393 – 6.5
44. WGM Yildiz Betul Cemre TUR 2287 – 6.5
45. IM Vega Gutierrez Sabrina ESP 2402 – 6.5
46. WGM Kochetkova Julia SVK 2328 – 6.5
47. WGM Majdan-Gajewska Joanna POL 2375 – 6.5
48. IM Muzychuk Mariya UKR 2484 – 6.5
49. IM Sedina Elena ITA 2313 – 6.5
50. WGM Batsiashvili Nino GEO 2405 – 6.5
51. Ibrahimova Sabina AZE 2168 – 6.5
52. IM Ovod Evgenija RUS 2386 – 6.5
53. WGM Shadrina Tatiana RUS 2377 – 6.5
54. IM Purtseladze Maka GEO 2349 – 6
55. IM Lomineishvili Maia GEO 2351 – 6
56. WGM Charochkina Daria RUS 2326 – 6
57. WIM Olsarova Tereza CZE 2203 – 6
58. WGM Ivakhinova Inna RUS 2291 – 6
59. WGM Makropoulou Marina GRE 2220 – 6
60. WGM Chelushkina Irina SRB 2265 – 6
61. WGM Sandu Mihaela ROU 2237 – 6
62. WGM Cosma Elena-Luminita ROU 2329 – 6
63. IM Galojan Lilit ARM 2320 – 6
64. WGM Kursova Maria ARM 2351 – 6
65. WIM Hairapetian Anna ARM 2214 – 6
66. WIM Abdulla Khayala AZE 2241 – 6
67. WGM Melamed Tatjana GER 2384 – 6
68. WIM Mikadze Miranda GEO 2314 – 6
69. WIM Franciskovic Borka CRO 2277 – 6
70. WIM Nikoladze Sopio GEO 2163 – 6
71. WGM Dolzhikova Olga NOR 2244 – 6
72. WIM Berke Ana CRO 2145 – 6
73. WIM Balaian Alina RUS 2237 – 6
74. IM Klinova Masha ISR 2322 – 6
75. WGM Srebrnic Ana SLO 2203 – 6
76. WGM Molchanova Tatjana RUS 2296 – 5.5
77. WIM Rakic Marija SRB 2294 – 5.5
78. WIM Bronnikova Elizaveta RUS 2245 – 5.5
79. IM Gvetadze Sofio GEO 2341 – 5.5
80. WIM Tarasova Viktoriya RUS 2300 – 5.5
81. WIM Styazhkina Anna RUS 2242 – 5.5
82. WGM Papp Petra HUN 2276 – 5.5
83. WFM Cherednichenko Elena UKR 2167 – 5.5
84. WIM Umudova Nargiz AZE 2253 – 5.5
85. WIM Vega Gutierrez Belinda ESP 2148 – 5.5
86. WIM Isgandarova Khayala TUR 2219 – 5.5
87. Martynkova Olena UKR 1851 – 5.5
88. Azimova Karina RUS 2037 – 5.5
89. WGM Mamedjarova Zeinab AZE 2256 – 5.5
90. WIM Eric Jovana SRB 2223 – 5.5
91. WGM Zakurdjaeva Irina RUS 2291 – 5.5
92. WIM Baraeva Marina RUS 2185 – 5.5
93. WGM Kaps Darja SLO 2235 – 5.5
94. WIM Drljevic Ljilja SRB 2187 – 5.5
95. WGM Manakova Maria SRB 2351 – 5.5
96. WGM Benderac Ana SRB 2225 – 5.5
97. IM Foisor Cristina-Adela ROU 2387 – 5.5
98. WFM Zarkovic Mila SRB 2070 – 5.5
99. WFM Folkova Martina CZE 2189 – 5.5
100. WFM Petrukhina Irina RUS 2190 – 5.5
101. WIM Olsarova Karolina CZE 2246 – 5
102. WIM Pavlidou Ekaterini GRE 2210 – 5
103. WGM Videnova Iva BUL 2301 – 5
104. FM Stetsko Lanita BLR 2209 – 5
105. WGM Bulmaga Irina ROU 2403 – 5
106. WGM Vojinovic Jovana SRB 2376 – 5
107. WFM Belenkaya Dina RUS 2191 – 5
108. WGM Rogule Laura LAT 2329 – 5
109. WFM Korchagina Viktoria RUS 2068 – 5
110. WFM Shulakova Svetlana RUS 2194 – 5
111. WFM Batyte Daiva LTU 2161 – 5
112. WIM Petrovic Marija SRB 2104 – 5
113. Nonkovic Bogdana SRB 2081 – 5
114. WGM Stjazhkina Olga RUS 2243 – 5
115. Kruljac Petra CRO 2092 – 5
116. WIM Kazimova Narmin AZE 2208 – 4.5
117. WFM Novkovic Julia AUT 2102 – 4.5
118. WFM Golubeva Oksana RUS 2149 – 4.5
119. Gueci Tea ITA 2018 – 4.5
120. Utiatskaja Irina RUS 2047 – 4.5
121. WFM Khalafova Narmin AZE 2107 – 4.5
122. WIM Gavasheli Ana GEO 2170 – 4.5
123. WIM Makka Ioulia GRE 2171 – 4.5
124. WIM Baraeva Irina RUS 2171 – 4.5
125. Jacimovic Sara BIH 1971 – 4.5
126. WFM Visanescu Daria-Ioana ROU 2061 – 4.5
127. Velikic Adela SRB 1992 – 4.5
128. Imeeva Aisa RUS 2079 – 4.5
129. WFM Bokuchava Madona GEO 2109 – 4.5
130. WGM Mamedjarova Turkan AZE 2267 – 4.5
131. WCM Gjergji Rozana ALB 1917 – 4.5
132. Panic Anastasija SRB 1948 – 4.5
133. Kezele Tamara SRB 1994 – 4.5
134. Nikolovska Dragana MKD 1848 – 4.5
135. Todorovic Violeta SRB 2117 – 4.5
136. WFM Miladinovic Lena SRB 2083 – 4.5
137. WIM Djukic Sandra SRB 2197 – 4.5
138. WCM Egorova Ayyyna RUS 1991 – 4
139. WFM Coimbra Margarida POR 2093 – 4
140. WFM Zivic Radmila SRB 2029 – 4
141. Serefidou Despina GRE 1971 – 4
142. Kaplan Ebru TUR 1885 – 4
143. Olea Liliana ROU 1905 – 4
144. Injac Teodora SRB 1713 – 4
145. WCM Oliveira Maria Ines POR 1978 – 4
146. Dizdarevic Barbara SRB 1981 – 4
147. Gurcan Aytolun TUR 1705 – 4
148. WFM Bogumil Tatiana RUS 2084 – 4
149. Milutinovic Stefana SRB 2035 – 3.5
150. Blagojevic Tijana MNE 2058 – 3.5
151. Bejatovic Bojana MKD 2002 – 3.5
152. WIM Vrabic Anita SLO 2112 – 3.5
153. WFM Khropova Larisa RUS 1987 – 3.5
154. WCM Cemhan Kardelen TUR 2052 – 3.5
155. Ivekovic Ivana CRO 1858 – 3.5
156. Rakic Teodora SRB 1862 – 3.5
157. Mahmutbegovic Nadina BIH 1800 – 3.5
158. Nestorovic Katarina SRB 1484 – 3.5
159. Korbovljanovic Natasa SRB 1877 – 3.5
160. Brankov Kristina SRB 1903 – 3.5
161. WIM Pihajlic Amalija SRB 1882 – 3.5
162. Rudovic Anja SRB 1549 – 3
163. WFM Paramentic Mila SRB 1936 – 3
164. Sekulovic Dusica SRB 1805 – 3
165. Milanovic Maja SRB 1969 – 2.5
166. Sarjanovic Andjela SRB 1655 – 2.5
167. WIM Velickovski-Nejkovic Maja SRB 2083 – 2
168. Jankovic Milanka SRB 1619 – 1


Hoang Thanh Trang is European Women’s Chess Champion | Chessdom

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

China Foreign Minister to Visit Vietnam

By Vu Trong Khanh and Nguyen Pham Muoi

HANOI—Chinese Foreign Minister Wang Yi will start a Vietnam visit Saturday to boost bilateral ties, amid disputes over territories in the South China Sea between China and other countries in the region.

Mr. Wang Yi will meet his Vietnamese counterpart Pham Binh Minh on Sunday, before meeting with Prime Minister Nguyen Tan Dung and the General Secretary of the Communist Party Nguyen Phu Trong on Monday, Vietnam’s Foreign Ministry said.

China, Vietnam and other countries in the region have been embroiled in long-standing territorial disputes over parts of the South China Sea, including the mineral-rich Spratly and Paracel Islands.

“The visit is aimed at promoting the implementation of the agreements reached during the recent China visit by Vietnam’s President Truong Tan Sang and the 6th meeting of the Vietnam – China Bilateral Cooperation Committee,” spokesman for the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Luong Thanh Nghi, told The Wall Street Journal.

Mr. Nghi said the two ministers will discuss international and regional issues, as well as ways to deepen cooperation between the two countries, especially in economic relation.

This will be the second time the two foreign ministers meet in less than two months. They met in Beijing June 20 when Mr. Pham Binh Minh escorted Vietnamese President Truong Tan Sang in his first visit to China.

“Both sides believed that while working together to safeguard the stability of the South China Sea, they should try every way to properly handle the South China Sea issue and strengthen maritime cooperation,” the Chinese Foreign Ministry said in a statement after the two ministers met in June.

Vietnam has several times this year accused Chinese vessels of harassing its fishermen in what it calls the East Sea, also known as the South China Sea.

In the latest incident in July, Vietnam accused crew members of a Chinese vessel of searching two Vietnamese fishing boats in waters near the Paracel Islands, beating the fishermen and taking away their personal items.
“This has violated Vietnamese sovereignty over the Hoang Sa archipelago (also known as the Paracel Islands)…and violates the spirit of treating fishermen in a humane manner and international laws,” Mr. Nghi said in a statement on the ministry’s website July 18.

Mr. Nghi said Vietnam lodged a formal complaint with the Chinese Embassy in Hanoi over the incident, adding that Vietnam has requested an investigation by the Chinese and compensation for the fishermen’s losses.

Former Vietnamese general consular to China Duong Danh Dy said Mr. Wang’s visit is aimed at easing tensions between the two countries after Vietnam and other countries have recently urged China to agree on early negotiations for a code of conduct in the South China Sea dispute.

“Though Vietnam and China are close neighbors, Mr. Wang only visits Vietnam after he has visited four other Asean countries since he took office in March,” Mr. Dy said. Mr. Wang has visited Thailand, Indonesia, Singapore and Brunei during this period.

In May, Vietnam accused a Chinese vessel of ramming a fishing boat in its waters. In March, it also accused a Chinese vessel of firing at a Vietnamese fishing boat and burning its cabin.

The Chinese Foreign Ministry had disputed the allegations in March, saying that “relevant Chinese parties” had taken “proper and reasonable actions” against illegal fishing activity.

China has had de facto control of the Paracels since it seized them from South Vietnam in a brief conflict in 1974. In July last year, Beijing established a new city, Shansha, with its own garrison on the island of Yongxing to administer the islands.

In the trade front, Vietnam has been struggling to reduce its trade deficit with China, which has been eating into its already-thin foreign exchange reserves. Vietnam recorded a trade deficit of $16.4 billion with China in 2012, or more than 10% of Vietnam’s gross domestic product. This widened from a $13.5 billion trade deficit in 2011.

 

[Viet]

China Foreign Minister to Visit Vietnam

By Vu Trong Khanh and Nguyen Pham Muoi
...

In the trade front, Vietnam has been struggling to reduce its trade deficit with China, which has been eating into its already-thin foreign exchange reserves. Vietnam recorded a trade deficit of $16.4 billion with China in 2012, or more than 10% of Vietnam’s gross domestic product. This widened from a $13.5 billion trade deficit in 2011.

Vietnam must put more pressure on China on the economic front, aiming to reduce this deficit. This trade gap is not sustainable in the long run.

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

Vietnam must put more pressure on China on the economic front, aiming to reduce this deficit. This trade gap is not sustainable in the long run.

I thought China has the deficit before. From your side, if you want to give more pressure, you should first make your product more competitive and then balance your trade structure. Vietnam import machine&equipment, steel product, and some raw materials from China, while export cloth, marine products, electronic and rice. Generally speaking, you import the raw materials and then use the raw materials to make products to be exported to China and other countries in the future. That is where Vietnam's deficit comes from. In the long run, it is dangerous. You should make products that cannot be surpassed, like Japan's SLR and vehicles. But, it's my impression that Vietnam performs a good job than other ASEAN countries recently.

As far as I know, my uncle's brick factory located in north China has a good relationship with Vietnam customers. They are honest business men I can see. They have been importing bricks and other raw materials from my uncle. And the chemical fertilizer factory in my hometown city also export product to Vietnam. They are all in north China, I think south China provinces have more economic ties with Vietnam.

I suggest Vietnam develops shipbuilding industry with great great great effort. Because this is a big and comprehensive industry that requires integration with other advanced industries, such as steel, chemical engineering, electronic mechanical and sea exploration. Ocean economy should be your advantage. I said too much...I forget our island dispute. Whatever, the whole shipbuilding industry will have an incentive and positive influence on your whole industry department and pull your overall heavy industry up to a high level. Now, China, S.Korea and Japan have advantage in this industry, as a coastal country, Vietnam also has the potential to share the market.

 

[Viet]

@szft517

China started the economic reform since 1978, while Vietnam came later by 1986. It is not only this time gap from 8 years that makes huge difference between the two countries. China´s economy today is probably 15 years ahead of Vietnam. The matter is even worse as the gap increases year by year as the growth rate of China is much higher than Vietnam.

One of the main reasons for this as when Vietnam started rebuilding the country, she came from zero...devastated by three Indochina wars and economic failures. Vietnam economy constantly lacks of money and expertise ever since. Unlike China, Vietnam is small, does not have a huge basis of Overseas Chinese, compared to the number of 3ml Overseas Viets.

It is very hard for Vietnam to compete with China in manufactured products as China is more advanced. Vietnam may find some niches, but it does not change the whole picture. As for the trade deficit, Vietnam must export more farm products to China as our products such as rice, fish, shrimps, etc... are much cheaper and some of better quality.

For example, China imports from Vietnam more than 1ml ton of rice at present. Why not double or triple the amount to 3ml per year? You can enjoy cheap rice (side affect: move helps keep inflation under controll) and help Vietnam a bit to reduce the deficit.

In Vietnam, there is a strong sentiment against China´s trade practice. Many people feel you don´t play fair. A lot of story tell on how you only seek your benefits and leave scorched earth back. That is not good for a close neighborship considering how complicated our common history is.

You are right at the point suggesting Vietnam develops shipbuilding industry and other advanced industries, such as steel, chemical engineering, electronic mechanical and sea exploration. But all takes time. Luckiky Japan is committed to helping Vietnam in achieving the goal to become an industrialized nation in 2020. We will see how far we can go. It is quite ambitious.

 

[StarCraft_ZT]

@szft517

China started the economic reform since 1978, while Vietnam came later by 1986. It is not only this time gap from 8 years that makes huge difference between the two countries. China´s economy today is probably 15 years ahead of Vietnam. The matter is even worse as the gap increases year by year as the growth rate of China is much higher than Vietnam.

Yes, from 1978 to 1986 maybe, China established 4 special economic zone, Shenzhen, Ningbo... Before 1993, China only opened and conducted reform policy in several coastal provinces. After 1993, China opened the entire market. Although Vietnam is a little late in open and reform, your political reform is obviously ahead of China.

One of the main reasons for this as when Vietnam started rebuilding the country, she came from zero...devastated by three Indochina wars and economic failures. Vietnam economy constantly lacks of money and expertise ever since. Unlike China, Vietnam is small, does not have a huge basis of Overseas Chinese, compared to the number of 3ml Overseas Viets.

Rest in peace. Yes, your are right, Vietnam does not have so many abundant natural resources and human resources to develop. Unlike, South Korea and Japan, which got most advanced technology transfer from US. After cultural revolution and great leap, China died 30 million people, GDP grows at negative numbers at that time......nobody could imagine that situation.

It is very hard for Vietnam to compete with China in manufactured products as China is more advanced. Vietnam may find some niches, but it does not change the whole picture. As for the trade deficit, Vietnam must export more farm products to China as our products such as rice, fish, shrimps, etc... are much cheaper and some of better quality.

The Asian tigers seized the opportunity of western industry upgrade and transfer, you can do it too, because labor cost in China is rising dramatically, they would like to move factories to Vietnam.

For example, China imports from Vietnam more than 1ml ton of rice at present. Why not double or triple the amount to 3ml per year? You can enjoy cheap rice (side affect: move helps keep inflation under controll) and help Vietnam a bit to reduce the deficit.

Well, in Northeast China and most South China, we both grow rice. I am not a agricultural expert, so I don't no if China's rice supply is enough. Vietnam rice noodles is famous and good. Maybe you heard agriculture industrialization, it means produce advanced food product using modern equiment. You can make instant rice noodles product with different packing style and different flavor, such as Chicken, Beef... Then, Chinese people would like to buy more instant rice noodles, because such product is convenient to cook, just with some boiled water. You can get profits several times bigger than just the rice. This is just an example, you can exploit your own resources to make the best product.

In Vietnam, there is a strong sentiment against China´s trade practice. Many people feel you don´t play fair. A lot of story tell on how you only seek your benefits and leave scorched earth back. That is not good for a close neighborship considering how complicated our common history is.

Even inside China, different regions and industries are not on a fair ground.

You are right at the point suggesting Vietnam develops shipbuilding industry and other advanced industries, such as steel, chemical engineering, electronic mechanical and sea exploration. But all takes time. Luckiky Japan is committed to helping Vietnam in achieving the goal to become an industrialized nation in 2020. We will see how far we can go. It is quite ambitious.

Hope you can make it, since China is in the middle age of industrialization, many industrial departments in China are the same as Vietnam's. That means we are directly on the trade competition, while Japan is more advanced, Japan don't need to compete with Vietnam in primary product sector, so Japan could help you in most cases. Good luck.