Posts Tagged ‘Vietnam’

BRD: Projekt Münchhausen gegen Kriegslügen

Montag, März 31st, 2014

“Projekt Münchhausen

Jeder Stifter einer Weltreligion verhieß Frieden, und zwar im Diesseits, zu erreichen durch Toleranz, Barmherzigkeit, Menschlichkeit. Staatsgründer taten es ihnen gleich und schrieben in ihre Grundgesetze: All men are created equal (Unabhängigkeitserklärung der USA). Großartige, kluge Worte. Und doch ist die menschliche Geschichte geprägt von Gewalt und Krieg, deren Beute von wenigen eingesackt wurde und dessen Leid von den Vielen getragen werden musste.

Wie gelang es und gelingt es in fast allen Gesellschaftsformationen, die Menschen gegeneinander in Stellung und zu Mord und Totschlag zu bringen und dies noch als gute und ehrenvolle Taten zu verkaufen? Die Massenmörder schrieben und schreiben die Geschichte, sie ließen sich den Titel ‚Der Große’ zumessen, und der Tod auf dem Schlachtfeld wurde zum Heldentod verklärt, während die ‚Kollateralschäden’ ignoriert wurden. Interessen obsiegen über Ethik und Moral.

Das Projekt Münchhausen fordert alle auf, die Geschichten der großen und kleinen Kriegslügen zu erzählen, mit denen die Menschen zur Gewalt gegen einander verführt wurden – von den Kreuzzügen, über den angeblich Gerechten Krieg, den Tonking-Zwischenfall an den Küsten Vietnams, bis zur dreisten Lüge des US-Außenministers über die Atombomben des Saddam Hussein und dem Militär als letztem Mittel der angeblich Humanitären Intervention?

Wir müssen uns befreien von dem Spinnengewebe der Lügen und Legitimationsideologien, die unsere Mitmenschen zu Feinden und Feindbildern und uns zu Gewalt gegen sie in der globalisierten Gesellschaft machen wollen. Das Projekt Münchhausen soll dazu einen Beitrag leisten. (…)

• Die Lügengeschichte des Monats März

Es begann mit einer Lüge – Kosovo-/Jugoslawienkrieg 1999

• Die Lügengeschichte des Monats Februar

Münchhausen und die Bundeswehr in Mali

• Weitere Lügengeschichten

Krieg gerecht gelogen

1990 – Lügen am Golf 1990

1964 – Der Zwischenfall von Tonking oder wie man einen erwünschten Krieg inszeniert

1867/68 – Der Krieg des britischen Empire gegen den Kaiser von Äthiopien


(Quelle: Aachener Friedensmagazin

Global: Die wunderbare Welt des CO2 (Teil 2)

Dienstag, Dezember 4th, 2012

Share of global emissions (% world total 2010)



(Tabelle aus: United Nations Environment Programme: The Emissions Gap Report 2012, S. 17, 18
Download des o. g. Reports hier.)


(Quelle: United Nations Environment Programme: The Emissions Gap Report 2012)

Vietnam/USA: Agent Orange – Die Opfer warten immer noch

Montag, August 6th, 2012


By Jeanne Mirer and Marjorie Cohn

To take action go to

There are images from the U.S. War against Vietnam that have been indelibly imprinted on the minds of Americans who lived through it. One is the naked napalm-burned girl running from her village with flesh hanging off her body. Another is a photo of the piles of bodies from the My Lai massacre, where U.S. troops executed 504 civilians in a small village. Then there is the photograph of the silent scream of a woman student leaning over the body of her dead friend at Kent State University whose only crime was protesting the bombing of Cambodia in 1970. Finally, there is the memory of decorated members of Vietnam Veterans Against the War testifying at the Winter Soldier Hearings, often in tears, to atrocities in which they had participated during the war.

These pictures are heartbreaking. They expose the horrors of war. The U.S. War against Vietnam was televised, while images of the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq have intentionally been hidden from us. But what was not televised was the relentless ten years (1961-1971) of spraying millions of gallons of toxic herbicides over vast areas of South Vietnam. These chemicals exposed almost 5 million people, mostly civilians, to deadly consequences. The toxic herbicides, most notably Agent Orange, contained dioxin, one of the most dangerous chemicals known to man. It has been recognized by the World Health Organization as a carcinogen (causes cancer) and by the American Academy of Medicine as a teratogen (causes birth defects).

From the beginning of the spraying 51 years ago, until today, millions of Vietnamese have died from, or been completely incapacitated by, diseases which the U. S. government recognizes are related to Agent Orange for purposes of granting compensation to Vietnam Veterans in the United States. The Vietnamese, who were the intended victims of this spraying, experienced the most intense, horrible impact on human health and environmental devastation. Second and third generations of children, born to parents exposed during the war and in areas of heavy spraying — un-remediated “hot spots” of dioxin contamination, — suffer unspeakable deformities that medical authorities attribute to the dioxin in Agent Orange.

The Vietnamese exposed to the chemical suffer from cancer, liver damage, pulmonary and heart diseases, defects to reproductive capacity, and skin and nervous disorders. Their children and grandchildren have severe physical deformities, mental and physical disabilities, diseases, and shortened life spans. The forests and jungles in large parts of southern Vietnam were devastated and denuded. Centuries-old habitat was destroyed, and will not regenerate with the same diversity for hundreds of years. Animals that inhabited the forests and jungles are threatened with extinction, disrupting the communities that depended on them. The rivers and underground water in some areas have also been contaminated. Erosion and desertification will change the environment, causing dislocation of crop and animal life.

For the past 51 years, the Vietnamese people have been attempting to address this legacy of war by trying to get the United States and the chemical companies to accept responsibility for this ongoing nightmare. An unsuccessful legal action by Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange against the chemical companies in U.S. federal court, begun in 2004, has nonetheless spawned a movement to hold the United States accountable for using such dangerous chemicals on civilian populations. The movement has resulted in pending legislation HR 2634 – The Victims of Agent Orange Relief Act of 2011, which attempts to provide medical, rehabilitative and social service compensation to the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange, remediation of dioxin-contaminated “hot spots,” and medical services for the children and grandchildren of U. S. Vietnam veterans and Vietnamese-Americans who have been born with the same diseases and deformities.

Using weapons of war on civilian populations violates the laws of war, which recognize the principle of distinction between military and civilian objects, requiring armies to avoid civilian targets. These laws of war are enshrined in the Hague Convention and the Nuremberg principles, and are codified in the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and the Optional Protocol of 1977, as well as the International Criminal Court statute. The aerial bombardments of civilian population centers in World Wars I and II violated the principle of distinction, as did the detonation of nuclear weapons at Hiroshima and Nagasaki on August 6 and August 9 of 1945. Hundreds of thousands of Japanese people were killed in an instant, even though Japan was already negotiating the terms of surrender.

The use of Agent Orange on civilian populations violated the laws of war and yet no one has been held to account. Taxpayers pick up the tab of the Agent Orange Compensation Fund for the U. S. Veterans at a cost of 1.52 billion dollars a year. The chemical companies, most specifically Dow and Monsanto, which profited from the manufacture of Agent Orange, paid a pittance to settle the veterans’ lawsuit to compensate them, as the unintended victims, for their Agent Orange related illnesses. But the Vietnamese continue to suffer from these violations with almost no recognition, as do the offspring of Agent Orange-exposed U.S. veterans and Vietnamese-Americans.

What is the difference between super powers like the United States violating the laws of war with impunity and the reports of killing of Syrian civilians by both sides in the current civil war? Does the United States have any credibility to demand governments and non-state actors end the killings of civilians, when through wars and drones and its refusal to acknowledge responsibility for the use of Agent Orange, the United States has and is engaging in the very conduct it publicly deplores?

In 1945, at the founding conference of the United Nations, the countries of the world determined:

to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war, which twice in our lifetime has brought untold sorrow to mankind, and

to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small, and

to establish conditions under which justice and respect for the obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law can be maintained, and

to promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom.

If we are to avoid sinking once again into the scourge of war, we must reaffirm the principles of the Charter and establish conditions under which countries take actions that promote rather than undermine justice and respect for our international legal obligations. The alternative is the law of the jungle, where only might makes right. It is time that right makes might.

August 10th marks 51 years since the beginning of the spraying of Agent Orange in Vietnam. In commemoration, the Vietnam Agent Orange Relief and Responsibility Campaign urges you to observe 51 seconds of silence at 12 noon, to think about the horrors of wars which have occurred. We ask you to take action so as not to see future images of naked children running from napalm, or young soldiers wiping out the population of an entire village, or other atrocities associated with war, poverty, and violence around the world. We urge you to take at least 51 seconds for your action. In the United States, you can sign an orange post card to the U.S. Congress asking it to pass HR 2634. This would be a good start to assist the Vietnamese victims of Agent Orange as well as the next generations of those exposed to these dangerous chemicals in both Vietnam and the United States.

Jeanne Mirer, a New York attorney, is president of the International Association of Democratic Lawyers. Marjorie Cohn is a professor at Thomas Jefferson School of Law and former president of the National Lawyers Guild. They are both on the board of the Vietnam Agent Orange Relief and Responsibility Campaign.

To sign the petition, go to


(Quelle: Marjorie Cohn.)

Südkorea: Agent Orange-Skandal

Sonntag, Juli 10th, 2011

“Agent Orange in Korea

By Christine Ahn and Gwyn Kirk

Christine Ahn

In May, three former U.S. soldiers admitted to dumping hundreds of barrels of chemical substances, including Agent Orange, at Camp Carroll in South Korea in 1978. This explosive news was a harsh reminder to South Koreans of the high costs and lethal trail left behind by the ongoing U.S. military presence.

“We basically buried our garbage in their backyards,” U.S. veteran Steve House told a local news station in Phoenix, Arizona. A heavy equipment operator in the Army, House said he was ordered to dig a ditch the length of a city block to bury 55-gallon drums marked with bright yellow and orange labels: “Province of Vietnam, Compound Orange.” House said that the military buried 250 drums of defoliants stored on the base, which served then as the U.S. Army Material Support Center in Korea. Later they buried chemicals transported from other places on as many as 20 occasions, totaling up to 600 barrels.

“This stuff was just seeping through the barrels,” said Robert Travis, another veteran now living in West Virginia. “There was a smell, I couldn’t describe it, just sickly sweet.” Immediately after wheeling the barrels from a warehouse at Camp Carroll, Travis developed a severe rash; other health problems emerged later. He said there were “approximately 250 drums, all OD (olive drab) green… with a stripe around the barrel dated 1967 for the Republic of Vietnam.”

A third soldier, Richard Cramer of Illinois, said that his feet went numb as he buried barrels of Agent Orange at Camp Carroll. He spent two months in a military hospital and now has swollen ankles and toes, chronic arthritis, eye infections, and impaired hearing. “If we prove what they did was wrong,’ says Cramer, “they should ‘fess up and clean it up and take care of the people involved.”

The three veterans are now seriously ill. Steve House suffers from diabetes and neuropathy, two out of 15 diseases officially linked to Agent Orange. “This is a burden I’ve carried around for 35 years,” House, aged 54, told Associated Press reporters. “I just recently found out that I have to have some major surgery… If I’m going to check out, I want to do it with a clean slate.”

The Missing Barrels

A deadly herbicide, Agent Orange is widely known for its use during the Vietnam War when the U.S. military sprayed an estimated 10 million gallons on forests and rice fields. In Korea, the U.S. military used Agent Orange along the de-militarized zone to defoliate the forests and prevent North Koreans from crossing the border.

“The United States Army has acknowledged that pesticides, herbicides and other toxic compounds were buried at Camp Carroll,” writes New York Times reporter Mark MacDonald. Although the chemicals and about 60 tons of contaminated soil were purportedly dug up and removed, “the Army is still searching its records to discover what became of the excavated chemicals and soil.”

According to a February 25, 2011 report by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Far East Command, the U.S. military has discovered evidence of a burial site within Camp Carroll measuring 83 feet long, 46 feet wide, and 20 feet deep. It confirmed contamination on the base with high concentrations of highly carcinogenic perchloroethylene (PCE), pesticides, heavy metals, and components of dioxin. According to Hankyoreh, the report also cites testimony from a Korean employee, Gu Ja-yeong, who worked at Camp Carroll and participated in burying drums, cans, and bottles containing chemicals in 1974 and 1975. The report recommends monitoring once or twice a year and removing the soil from the burial site because ground-water chloroform levels were 24 times the South Korean standard for drinkable water. Chloroform is a carcinogen that can cause liver, kidney, and nervous system problems.

Two earlier environmental studies of Camp Carroll, commissioned by U.S. Forces in Korea (USFK), were not shared with the South Korean government until the recent whistle-blowing by the U.S. vets. In 1992, a Woodward-Clyde report confirmed the burial of toxic chemicals. “Many potential sources of soil and groundwater contamination still exist at the base and the presence of contaminated groundwater has been documented,” the report stated. “From 1979 to 1980, approximately 6,100 cubic feet (40 to 60 tons) of soil were reportedly excavated from this area and disposed offsite.”

Samsung C&T reported on a second survey in 2004. This also found soil samples from the base contained pesticides and dioxins: “Hazardous materials and waste, including solvents, petroleum oils and lubricants, pesticides, herbicides and other industrial chemicals have been used and stored onsite for over 40 years.” The Korea Herald reported, “more than 100 kinds of harmful chemicals including pesticides and herbicides were buried.” Hankyoreh reported that the Samsung survey found “quantities of highly carcinogenic trichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCE) at 31 and 33 times the standard levels of potable water, respectively.” The 2004 report estimated that it would cost $98.3 million to remove all the contaminated soil from Camp Carroll. Both the 1992 and 2004 reports state that a significant amount of soil had been excavated, but they differ as to when this actually happened. According to the Korea Times, the 2004 report concluded, “The fate of the excavated drums is unknown”.

So what happened to the buried chemicals?

Camp Carroll is located in Waegwan, about 20 miles north of Daegu. “If Agent Orange was dumped in 1978, the drums may have already eroded. And the toxic substance could have contaminated the soil and underground water near the area,” said Chung In-cheol of Green Korea United. “The U.S. camp is situated just 630 meters away from the Nakdong River,” says Chung, “which is the water source for major cities like Daegu and Busan.”

Cancer rates in the Chilgok area near Camp Carroll were up to 18.3 percent higher than the national average between 2005 and 2009, according to Statistics Korea’s website, and mortality rates for nervous system diseases were above the national average.

Soil and Water Contamination

Environmental contamination on U.S. bases in South Korea has been a source of contention between Washington and Seoul. Since 2001, South Korea has spent $3.4 million to clean up 2,000 tons of oil-contaminated ground water near Yongsan Army Garrison and Camp Kim. The South Korean military is now conducting environmental tests at 85 former U.S. bases that were returned to South Korean control between 1990 and 2003.

With the latest revelations, the South Korean public is calling for a full-scale assessment of the environmental damage of all U.S. military facilities in Korea. Under the Status of Forces Agreement (SOFA) between the two nations, the United States has no responsibility to clean up the land it uses for bases. Some advocates are seeking a revision of the SOFA to hold Washington responsible for the contamination it causes.

After House spoke out, the USFK and the South Korean government assured the public that they would research his claims, though they disagreed about the method of investigation. The USFK preferred to use ground-penetrating radar (GPR) while the South Korean government insisted on sampling the soil and underground water. According to Hankyoreh, GPR can test for foreign matter such as canisters containing harmful materials, but it cannot verify soil or water contamination. “The South Korean government has repeatedly stated that this kind of investigation is incapable of resolving the questions harbored by the population,” said a Ministry of the Environment official.

The joint ROK-U.S. team is using ground-penetrating radar and electrical resistivity devices at 41 sites since the news broke in late May. According to a team official, the USFK is not just worried about dioxin, but other toxic and carcinogenic materials, which soil and water tests can detect. Indeed, investigation of an underground stream and groundwater near Camp Carroll has shown traces of PCE, a known carcinogen that attacks the nervous system and can cause reproduction problems. The Chilgok regional government sealed the well upon learning from the joint Korea-U.S. team that the amount of PCE exceeded the level for acceptable drinking water.

Lessons from Vietnam

Agent Orange contains the deadly chemical dioxin, a byproduct of industrial processes involving chlorine or bromine. Decades after its use in Vietnam, there is still great controversy about its effects on human and environmental health, despite the fact grandchildren of Vietnamese soldiers and civilians have been born with abnormalities attributable to their ancestors’ exposure.

In 1995, Arnold Schecter and Le Cao Dai of the Vietnam Red Cross published research findings showing “that high levels of dioxin contamination persist in the blood, tissue, and breast milk of Vietnamese living in sprayed areas.” Schecter tested soil and human tissue samples from people living near the former Bien Hoa U.S. military base where 7,500 gallons of Agent Orange were spilled in 1970.

In 1998, Hatfield Consultants published the results of a four-year study of soil and water samples in the A Luoi valley near the Ho Chi Minh trail and the site of three former U.S. Special Forces bases where Agent Orange was stored and sprayed. Working with Vietnamese scientists, Hatfield found “a consistent pattern of food chain contamination by Agent Orange dioxin… which included soil, fishpond sediment, cultured fish, ducks and humans.” They found dioxin levels in some breast milk samples to be dozens of times higher than maximum levels recommended by the World Health Organization.

Although Vietnamese officials and scientists believe that many thousands of people are victims of Agent Orange, “remarkably little has been proved with scientific certainty,” Robert Dreyfuss wrote in 2000. The Institute of Medicine reports “strong evidence that exposures to herbicides is associated with five serious diseases, including Hodgkin’s disease and a form of leukemia… and ‘suggestive’ evidence that herbicides might cause birth defects and cancer.” A major factor limiting serious research into dioxin contamination is the high costs. According to Dreyfuss, it cost $600 to $1000 to test one single soil or tissue sample for tiny traces of Agent Orange dioxin.

Since 1981, U.S. veterans of the Vietnam War who were exposed to dioxin have been entitled to register with the Veteran Administration’s Agent Orange Registry. Of the nearly 3 million U.S. soldiers who served in Vietnam, approximately 300,000 veterans are on the list and entitled to free annual health exams. In a 2003 article in the San Francisco Chronicle, David Perlman wrote that more than 22,000 vets have successfully claimed disability and are entitled to “free long-term treatment for a variety of disorders that are ‘presumptively’ caused by exposure to dioxin.” Compensation has ranged from $104 to $2,193 a month.

U.S. veterans have attempted to sue the manufacturers of Agent Orange for compensation. In 1984, seven U.S. chemical companies agreed to settle a suit brought by U.S. veterans in 1979. In making this settlement, the companies refused to accept liability, claiming that the scientific evidence did not prove Agent Orange was responsible for the medical conditions alleged. By 1997, 291,000 U.S. veterans had received a total of $180 million dollars over a period of 12 years. “My brother was given $362, and me, I was given $60,” recalls U.S. veteran George Johnson. “My brother has never been able to have kids.”

South Korean veterans who served in the Vietnam War also attempted to sue Agent Orange manufacturers. In 2006, the Korea Times reported that the “Seoul High Court ruled that Dow Chemical and Monsanto should pay $63 billion won ($62 million) to a group of 6,700 Korean veterans… who first filed lawsuits against the company in 1999.” However, this ruling is largely symbolic since the Korean authorities cannot force the companies to comply.

Why Act Now?

When asked why he came forward now, Steve House said, “I’ve wanted the government to take care of this nightmare I’ve had to live with for the last 30 years. I don’t want to poison kids or anything, and I don’t want to hurt GIs.”

For House and other vets, also at issue is the question of medical compensation. According to the U.S. Veterans Affairs website, “Veterans who served … in or near the Korean Demilitarized Zone (DMZ) anytime between April 1, 1968 and August 31, 1971 and who have a disease VA recognizes as associated with Agent Orange exposure are presumed to have been exposed to herbicides. These Veterans do not have to show they were exposed to Agent Orange to get disability compensation for these diseases.” Veterans like House, however, who were exposed to Agent Orange after this time period, or in other parts of Korea outside of the DMZ, are not considered eligible for disability compensation.

Although more information is likely to emerge from the joint U.S.-R.O.K. investigation in the coming weeks, both the U.S. and Korean public must ask and demand answers to many urgent questions. What happened to the barrels of Agent Orange and contaminated soil at Camp Carroll? How much dioxin and other contaminants have leached into the soils surrounding Camp Carroll and other U.S. military bases? Will the U.S. government provide medical assistance and financial compensation to the veterans who handled a substance that was known to be toxic in 1978? Who will compensate the Korean people who may have been exposed to these contaminants – that the U.S. military knew of as far back as 1992, but never told the So.uth Korean government

Based on the experience of thousands of U.S. vets and civilians who live around U.S. bases — in this country and overseas — even routine military operations can have serious long-term costs to human health and the environment. Without adequately addressing its toxic legacy in South Korea, the U.S. military continues to take fertile land to expand and create new bases, as it did in seizing rice paddies from farmers in Pyongtaek. The ROK-U.S. naval base now under construction on Jeju Island will have a devastating impact on the island’s marine ecology, affecting fishermen and women sea divers who depend on the clean sea for their livelihood, and the Korean people who rely on the ocean for seafood. The blind rhetoric of national security must no longer trump human security, certainly not when the U.S. military isn’t even willing to provide adequate medical care to its own veterans and protection to the Korean people they are purportedly in Korea to defend. “

Christine Ahn is the executive director of the Korea Policy Institute and a columnist for Foreign Policy In Focus, and Gwyn Kirk is a member of Women for Genuine Security and a contributor to FPIF.


(Quelle: Foreign Policy in Focus.)

Südostasien: Xayaburi-Staudamm-Projekt sorgt für Zwist

Sonntag, Juli 10th, 2011

“Laos Steamrolls Neighbors in Xayaburi Dam Process

Government Unilaterally Claims Regional Consultation Process Complete

Bangkok, Thailand: Laos appears to have defied its neighbors in a move to press ahead with the proposed Xayaburi Dam on the Mekong Mainstream, despite concerns raised by neighboring governments and regional civil society groups. A letter leaked to International Rivers, dated June 8, 2011, reveals that the Lao Government has informed the Xayaburi project developer Ch. Karnchang that the Mekong River Commission's (MRC) regional decision-making process is now complete, presumably giving Ch. Karnchang the green light to proceed with the project.

The MRC itself, however, is yet to officially announce the regional process as complete. Previously, at a Special Joint Committee Meeting on April 19, the four member governments agreed to defer the decision on the project to a Ministerial level meeting, likely to take place in October or November 2011. At this Special Joint Committee meeting, whilst Laos proposed to proceed with the dam, Thailand, Cambodia and Vietnam called for an extension to the decision-making process citing concerns about transboundary impacts and knowledge gaps requiring further study and consultation. Vietnam also recommended that the decision on the Xayaburi Dam and other proposed mainstream dams be deferred for a period of ten years.

The procedures of the MRC's regional process clearly state in Article 5.4.3 that ‘The MRC [Joint Committee] shall aim to arriving at an agreement on the proposed use and issue a decision that contains the agreed upon conditions.' "By deciding unilaterally that the regional decision-making process is complete, the Government of Laos has committed an egregious breach of trust and has joined the ranks of rogue nations," said Ms. Ame Trandem, Mekong Campaigner with International Rivers.

The letter written by the Director-General of Laos' Ministry of Energy and Mines to the Xayaburi Power Company Limited refers to a one-month study by the international consultancy group Pöyry. The letter states that in Pöyry's view the "Prior Consultation of the Xayaburi Project has now been completed," and that the Lao government "hereby confirm[s] that any necessary step in relation to the 1995 Mekong Agreement has been duly taken."

Conclusion of the PNPCA process is a prerequisite to the Xayaburi Dam developers signing a Power Purchase Agreement with the Electricity Generating Authority of Thailand, which the company is now seeking.

"Laos has no entitlement to unilaterally declare the end of the PNPCA process at this stage," said Ms. Sor Rattanamanee Polkla, a Thai Lawyer from the Community Resource Center and member of the Mekong Legal Network. "Chapter 2 of the 1995 Mekong Agreement makes it clear that the regional decision-making process is 'neither a right to veto the use nor unilateral right to use water by any riparian without taking into account other riparians' rights'. The three other lower Mekong countries asked for the project to be delayed for further study, including a trans-boundary Environmental Impact Assessment. Laos has an obligation under international law to both conduct such an EIA and negotiate in good faith under the Mekong Agreement before moving forward."

On April 23, at a meeting in Phnom Penh, the Prime Ministers of Vietnam and Cambodia jointly expressed concern about the Xayaburi Dam's transboundary impacts to fisheries and agriculture. Subsequently, at the 18th ASEAN summit in Jakarta on 7 May 2011, the Lao Prime Minister agreed to a request by Vietnam's Prime Minister to temporarily suspend the Xayaburi Dam and commission a review of the project's documents by an international consultancy firm under the framework of the MRC.

Laos' Ministry of Energy and Mines had publicly confirmed that the study had been commissioned, yet no further details of the study nor the role of the MRC in this process was announced to the public. It now appears that the study was a cursory, one-month review of the PNPCA process and not a review of the environmental and social impacts of the project.

"It's no surprise that the Pöyry Group was selected to review the Xayaburi Dam given their long history of dodgy deals that have allowed disastrous dams to proceed in the Mekong region," said Pianporn Deetes, Thailand Campaign Coordinator for International Rivers. "But it's outrageous that Laos would stoop so low as to place its consultants' opinions above its neighbors concerns. The extensive scientific evidence that demonstrates the dam's severe social and environmental impacts should no longer be ignored, and the Xayaburi Dam should be cancelled."

Media Contacts: 
  • Ame Trandem, Mekong Campaigner, International Rivers: +66 868822426, ame [at] internationalrivers [dot] org
  • Pianporn Deetes, Mekong Campaigner, International Rivers: +66 814220111, pai [at] internationalrivers [dot] org
Contact us: 

Ame Trandem
ame [at] internationalrivers [dot] org
+1 510-848-1155

Pianporn Deetes
pai [at] internationalrivers [dot] org
+66 814 220 111 “


(Quelle: International Rivers.)

Siehe auch:

Laos pushes ahead with Xayaburi Dam

Vietnam: Kooperation mit Südafrika

Freitag, Mai 6th, 2011

“South Africa, Vietnam Strengthen Links

Prensa Latina

South Africa and Vietnam have agreed to beef up their relations and comprehensive cooperation, especially on politics, economy, science, technology, culture, and education, BUA News reported.

Vice President Kgalema Motlanthe and visiting counterpart Nguyen Thi Doan agreed on Wednesday to seek measures to boost bilateral cooperation in all fields, and emphasised there was vast potential to expand trade and investment between the two countries, the South African information service added.

They also committed to increasing the volumes of trade to reach a target of $1 billion over the next few years.

Although no details were given, Motlanthe said that details of achieving this goal will be mapped out by the South Africa Vietnam Partnership Forum, which is scheduled to meet later this year.

The two officials, however, did indicate that it will be done by creating awareness among South African and Vietnamese business communities regarding the business opportunities that exist in both countries.

This is a second such meeting between Motlanthe and Nguyen, with the first being held in Vietnam last year.

Motlanthe described the relationship between the two countries as one that has ‘grown, deepened and matured over the years.'”


(Quelle: World Forum for Alternatives.)