Building LONG TERM WEALTH with Stocks & Avoid FAKE GURUS | FIRL Podcast 36
Ng Zhu Hann of Tradeview.my shares his journey from London School of Economics, to becoming a long term stock investor and the author of Once Upon a Time Bursa. He passionately writes on his blog, Tradeview.my to educate retail investors on investing and to avoid fake gurus. He also mentions that retail investor participation is at all all time high in 2020. However, he makes the most wealth during the bear market and says dividend yields, earnings and cash flow are time tested theorem that generate wealth and not short term goals.
More effort needed to educate the young investing
With thousands of new and young retail investors participating in the local bourse in the last two years, more effort is needed from capital market regulators and the private sector to improve financial literacy, particularly among the youth, say market observers. `
Ng Zhu Hann, who is the CEO of Tradeview Capital and author of “Once Upon A Time In Bursa”, told StarBiz that brokerages and investment banks could not afford to neglect providing first-time retail investors with “the tools to understand the stock market”. `
“Once you lose money, or whatever savings that you have, you would never return to participate in the stock market because you may think the market is rigged against you. That is human nature,” he said. ` According to the Securities Commission’s (SC) annual report 2021, an investor survey focused on the youth found that only 3% of youths have a high-risk appetite regarding the level of risk they were willing to take for investments.
“This may suggest that risk aversion has set in due to the pandemic,” said the SC survey. `
The Nielsen Company (M) Sdn Bhd was commissioned by the SC to conduct the survey on its behalf. `
However, on capital market products and their associated risks, the survey showed that respondents viewed investments in Amanah Saham Bumiputera (ASB) as low-risk. `
“In comparison, 70% of the respondents perceived stocks and shares to be high-risk. Overall observations suggested that respondents perceived the capital market products as high-risk and this perception was consistent across the demographic profiles,” said the SC survey. `
Ng also noted that according to Bursa Malaysia, following a similar trend in 2020, 63% or about two-thirds of the new 223,249 individual central depository system accounts opened in 2021 were by millennial investors (aged 26 to 45 years of age). `
He pointed out that many of the new millennial investors had lost money when they got caught up in the penny stock or glove stock mania in the last two years. `
“They had no prior investing experience, and lost money, and that becomes a problem. That is why more should be done in terms of investor education,” said Ng. `
Meanwhile, Rakuten Trade head of equity sales Vincent Lau noted that the regulators of the Malaysian capital markets have made many efforts to educate retail investors, in an era where investing via new and innovative digital platforms is the norm. `
“Online resources like Bursa Marketplace have been very crucial in educating new retail investors, which increased tremendously in numbers during the pandemic-related lockdowns in the last two years,” he said. `
Lau also pointed out that with the younger generation pivoting towards buying, selling and storing crypto currencies, Malaysian regulators have been staying in tune with the demands of the digital era with the approval of crypto currency platforms like MX Global, Tokenize and Luno. `
“Digital banks are also coming, and new fintech will enable and attract the younger generation to explore various investment options,” he said. `
Lau pointed out that Rakuten Trade, as an online stock trading platform, has been actively holding corporate and investment webinars. `
Ng said it was not surprising that the youth would view investments in ASB and fixed deposits as low-risk, compared with equities.
“If you invest in equities by yourself, without the proper understanding and knowledge, it is just like gambling, right? But I think that equities in fact, is not the most high risk asset class.
I am seeing a very unhealthy trend of youngsters, who have never even invested in equities in their life, actually jumping into crypto currencies,” he said. ` The SC’s annual report also said RM21bil in investment in digital assets are across all registered digital asset exchanges (DAX) in 2021. ` Digital asset accounts jumped 300% to 760,000 in 2021 (from 190,000 in 2020). ` About 62% of investors in crypto currencies on the DAXs are below the age of 35, according to the SC as at end-2021. ` The regulator also observed that last year, non-fungible tokens (NFTs) became a hot trend among artists and collectors. `
Ng pointed out that unlike crypto currencies which are not regulated, there is a lot of regulation, oversight and transparency when it comes to investing in equities. `
“Compared with less developed markets, I believe Bursa ranked among the best, along with Singapore Exchange and the Hong Kong Stock Exchange, in terms of the regulators,” said Ng. `
In the SC’s annual report, the survey also showed that investment decisions of the youth were not based on fundamentals, but mainly driven by socio-economic status, family, friends, influencers as well their perceptions of the products and brands. `
It also revealed that there was also familiarity bias among the respondents, choosing to invest in products that they were already familiar with. `
Ng said while there was plenty of information available on company websites and annual reports, first-time investors may not know how to decipher or dissect the data. ` “They would go for financial investment talks and hope that the guru would teach them, which is very dangerous. The problem is there are many fake gurus today in the market, who just want to make money, and they are not even licenced,” he said. `
Ng suggested regulators could allocate more resources in disseminating financial information via social media, and also working with professional or non-profit organisations to improve financial literacy among the youth. `
“Under the Continuing Professional Development (CPD) framework, perhaps a revision can be done where CPD points can be earned by contributing pro bono, or helping society in terms of improving financial literacy,” he said.
Opening Keynote Address by Datuk Syed Zaid Albar, Chairman SC Malaysia at ESG Corporate Summit.
Scams have been increasing in the Malaysian capital market over the past few years, amid the Securities Commission’s (SC) efforts to clamp down on unscrupulous activities. `
Chairman Datuk Syed Zaid Albar said that complaints on unlicensed schemes in 2021 had increased to 52% of total complaints received by the SC, up from 37% in 2020. `
“In line with this, we have also stepped up our anti-scam efforts using a multi-pronged approach,” he said. `
Syed Zaid was speaking during a virtual media briefing yesterday, following the launch of the SC’s annual report for 2021. `
Actions taken by the SC in 2021 against unlicensed activities and unauthorised operators included issuing 24 cease and desist orders to persons carrying on unlicensed investment advice, 13 administrative sanctions via reprimands and directives, and blocking access to 143 websites via the Malaysian Communications and Multimedia Commission (MCMC). `
To date, the SC has undertaken five enforcement actions, 473 regulatory interventions and put up 275 unlicensed companies and individuals on the SC’s Investor Alert List. `
An internal taskforce was also established to investigate investment scams and clone firms which reviewed 159 bank accounts that identified 32 persons of interest. `
In 2021, the SC concluded 22 investigations, and more than 55% of completed investigations last year relate to unlicensed activity and securities fraud. `
Corporate misconduct, which constituted 14% of the total completed investigations, included disclosure breaches relating to securities laws. `
As of Dec 31, 2021, the total number of active investigations were 46. `
“While the SC continued to dedicate substantial resources to conduct investigations relating to securities fraud and market manipulation offences, investigations on corporate misconduct has emerged as the second highest percentage of active investigations carried out in 2021,” the commission said in the annual report. `
Through its civil enforcement actions, the SC had in 2021 restituted RM2.7mil to a total of 721 investors who had suffered losses as a result of such breaches. ` On a separate matter, Syed Zaid said that the SC was monitoring the issuance of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) on a case-by-case basis, amid the global craze to convert real-world items into digital assets. `
This was, however, subject to the nature of the NFTs, the NFT projects as well as the activities carried out at the NFT marketplace, he added. `
An NFT is a unique digital asset that represents ownership of real-world items like photos, videos and audios. It is a non-interchangeable unit of data stored on a blockchain, a form of digital ledger, that can be sold and traded. `
Syed Zaid pointed out that the underlying assets of most NFTs in Malaysia were non-securities products, hence such NFTs did not fall under the SC’s regulations. `
However, SC managing director Foo Lee Mei said that some NFTs may come under the SC’s purview, if the NFTs met the SC’s digital asset prescription order. `
In addition, in the event any of the NFT players engaged in capital market-regulated activities, the issued NFTs would have to adhere to the SC’s rules. `
Based on the SC’s latest annual report, Malaysia’s digital asset market continued to expand in 2021 despite the market uncertainties, with approximately RM21bil in digital assets traded across all registered digital asset exchanges (DAXs). `
The total number of investment accounts surged by nearly 300% to about 760,000 from more than 190,000 in 2020.
Since introducing the DAX framework in 2019, the SC had registered four DAXs, namely Luno Malaysia Sdn Bhd, SINEGY Technologies (M) Sdn Bhd, Tokenize Technology (M) Sdn Bhd and MX Global Sdn Bhd. `
Commenting on the Malaysian capital market outlook for 2022, Syed Zaid said volatility will remain, especially in the near term. `
The outlook, he added, will be premised on the baseline expectation of a sustained economic recovery this year. `
However, he warned that further escalation of the Russia-Ukraine conflict could disrupt the much-need economic recovery. `
“As we have witnessed, the impacts are already felt in various market segments worldwide, especially in commodities.
“The possibility of a more severe impact still remains, given the potential for further escalation and the lack of a clear resolution. `
“For the moment, the direct impact to Malaysia is still manageable, given our minimal exposure to Ukraine and Russia,” he said. `
Challenges aside, Syed Zaid said the SC’s priorities in 2022 aim to shift the capital market to a relevant, efficient, diversified and inclusive ecosystem. `
This would allow Malaysia’s national growth pillars to achieve its ambitions in areas such as digital, carbon-neutrality and managing the transition of the country into an aged nation. `
“From an organisation perspective, the SC will strengthen its internal digital capabilities and skills set to enable the SC’s workforce to harness state-of-the art digital technology for deeper insights and engender efficiency in our risk management, surveillance and supervision functions. `
“The SC has also embarked on its own journey towards reducing its carbon and environmental footprint, in line with Malaysia’s goal of becoming a carbon-neutral country by 2050,” he said. `
On expected fundraising activities, Syed Zaid painted a positive outlook, underpinned by normalising economic conditions. `
For 2022, he expects about 35 initial public offerings (IPOs) to take place. `
In comparison, there were 29 new listings in 2021, of which six were on the Main Market, 11 were the ACE Market, and the remaining 12 were the LEAP Market. The total amount of funds raised from these new listings was approximately RM2.3bil. `
The SC noted in its annual report that it had also considered an IPO application on the Main Market last year, which would have raised about RM4.7bil. However, the application was subsequently withdrawn. `
“We have also received enquiries and statements of interest in SPACs (special purpose acquisition companies), but it is still too early to tell whether any SPACs will be listed in 2022,” he added.
This document contains an outcome-based core competencies framework on financial literacy for youth. It is a policy tool, providing guidance on the typical ...
With many competing demands for scarce funds, countries often do not fully recognize how critical young people are to their national economies, societies, and.
Besides Fort Detrick at home, US military has 336 biolabs in 30 countries including Ukraine
;
`
The US has 336 labs in 30 countries under its control, including 26 in Ukraine alone. It should give a full account of its biological military activities at home and abroad and subject itself to multilateral verification.
Personnel at work in the biosafety level-4 laboratory at the US Army Medical Research Institute of Infectious Diseases at Fort Detrick in 2002. [Photo/Agencies]
An envoy called on the international community to assess documents on US military biological activities, which were published by the Russian government, to alleviate the “great concern” of the international community.
“The Covid-19 pandemic has reminded us that as a crucial matter of international peace and security, biological security has no borders and involves the shared interests of humanity,” Dai Bing, China’s deputy permanent representative to the United Nations, said during the UN Security Council Arria Formula Meeting on biological security, hosted by Russia.
“Thus, any information on the biological military activity should trigger heightened concern and attention of the international community to avoid irreparable harm,” Dai said.
He stressed that “China welcomes the international community to assess the discovered documents within appropriate frameworks including the BWC (Biological Weapons Convention) and the UN, and hear the clarifications from the relevant country in a fair and impartial manner”.
He said the relevant country should “take a responsible approach and offer timely and comprehensive clarifications on its biological activities to remove the doubts of the international community”.
“Further enhancement of the transparency on its global biological activities is also needed,” he added.
China has suffered from biological weapons during World War II, Dai said, and hence “consistently stands for the complete prohibition and thorough destruction of all weapons of mass destruction, including biological and chemical weapons”.
Dai said China “firmly opposes the development, stockpiling or use of biological and chemical weapons by any country under any circumstances and urges countries that have not done so to destroy their chemical weapons stockpiles as soon as possible”.
“All States parties should comply with the objectives and principles of the BWC in good faith,” he said.
Sunday will mark the 50th anniversary of the opening for signature of the BWC, he noted.
“The current dynamics on biological security highlight the urgent need to relaunch negotiations on a verification protocol under the BWC and establish a professional, impartial and independent multilateral verification mechanism based on that,” Dai said.
Dai said such a mechanism is a necessary but "long-absent instrument to eliminate potential biological weapons threats and enhance the authority and effectiveness of the BWC, and its establishment must not be thwarted by any certain member state".— China Daily/ANN
US shuns UN meeting on biological security to 'cover up guilt conscience'
Russia has called for a UN Security Council meeting to discuss purported
US-backed biological weapons programs in Ukraine.Photo:VCG
When Russia, China and other countries expressed their concerns over US biological activities in countries including Ukraine at a UN Security Council meeting on Wednesday, the US did not show up, which in some Chinese experts' eyes, was out of the US' "guilty conscience" over the issue.
At the UN Security Council Arria Formula Meeting on Biological Security on Wednesday, Igor Kirillov, chief of the Radiation, Chemical and Biological Defense Forces of the Russian Armed Forces, said Washington is creating biological laboratories in different countries and connecting them to a unified system. In territories bordering Russia and China alone, about 60 facilities have been modernized since 2005 with funding from the US military, he said. Kirillov noted that the US has spent more than $5 billion on military biological programs since 2005.
The Ukrainian network of laboratories is designed to conduct research and monitor the biological situation consisting of 30 facilities in 14 populated locations, Kirillov said, noting especially valuable materials from Ukrainian biological laboratories were exported to the US in early February, and the rest should be destroyed, TASS reported.
Dai Bing, China's deputy permanent representative to the UN, said at the meeting that China firmly opposes the development, stockpiling or use of biological and chemical weapons by any country under any circumstances, and the Russian Federation has published a number of documents related to the biological military activities of the US, which has caused great concern from the international community.
China welcomes the international community to assess the discovered documents within appropriate frameworks including the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and the UN, and hear the clarifications from the relevant country in a fair and impartial manner. The relevant country should take a responsible approach and offer timely and comprehensive clarifications on its biological activities to remove the doubts of the international community, Dai said.
According to the TASS report, diplomats from Brazil, Venezuela, Belarus and other countries also spoke at the meeting, but US and UK representatives did not show up.
"This is evidence of their real attitude to this problem--the fact that they have something to hide and do not want to answer the uncomfortable questions posed today," Russian First Deputy Permanent Representative to the United Nations Dmitry Polyansky said, TASS reported.
Song Zhongping, a Chinese military expert and TV commentator, told the Global Times that the US did not attend the meeting out of "guilty conscience," and the US did not want to make public its biological activities but covered its hidden agenda with "commercial secrets."
The US kept setting up biological laboratories around rival countries with the goal of developing targeted viral weapons against those countries, Song said.
The US insists on developing weapons of mass destruction to seek hegemony, which is a gross violation of the BWC and an assault on human civilization, he said.
Wang Yiwei, director of the institute of international affairs at the Renmin University of China, told the Global Times that the US attacks voices from Russia as disinformation and attempts to use its resources to shut off Russia's voices, and amid the Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US believes that Russia was trying to use the biological lab issue to rewrite the story of its military operation in Ukraine.
No matter it's for stirring up a color revolution or conducting biological activities in Ukraine, the US' purpose is to create confrontations and division to slow down its decline, Wang said.
Facing growing concerns, the responses from Washington have made the international community more concerned. Undersecretary of State for Political Affairs Victoria Nuland said the US has "biological research facilities" in Ukraine. But the US Department of State said Russia's claims of US bio-weapons activities in Ukraine were "outright lies."
Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov said on Wednesday that the US should share comprehensive information on bio-labs in Ukraine.
During this week's Preparatory Committee for the Ninth Review Conference of the BWC, the US cited "revisionist history" to describe the international community's criticism over its opposition to the establishment of a verification mechanism of the BWC, Zhao Lijian, Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson, said at Thursday's media briefing, noting that the US' remarks are "shocking."
He said what the US wants is to arbitrarily accuse others of violating the convention and demand verification with "the presumption of guilt", while refusing to accept any supervision and verification of its own compliance.
This lies at the heart of the US' sole opposition to a verification mechanism, Zhao said.
If the US wants to prove its innocence, why doesn’t it open up the bio-labs for independent investigations ...
US’ exclusive opposition to the biological weapons verification regime an egregious act of seeking global hegemony
Military personnel stand guard outside the USAMRIID at Fort Detrick on September 26, 2002. Photo: AFP
Editor's Note:
The US has ignited a war between Russia and Ukraine for its own selfish interests, the flames of war have also unveiled a darker side of the US' secret biological experimentation activities around the world.. Although the US government has repeatedly claimed that it is not developing biological weapons, numerous facts show that this claim is hardly convincing.
Biological weapons have always been an extremely sensitive topic in the international military and political arena. However, the US first pushed for the conclusion of the Biological Weapons Convention (BWC) and then exclusively opposed the establishment of a multilateral verification mechanism for the convention for more than 20 years. Observers and experts reached by the Global Times noted that hidden behind this flip-flopping stance is the US' elaborate calculations of international and domestic realities, which is another nefarious attempt to seek global hegemony under its narrow view of security.
US says 'No' to BWC verification
As the world frowns at the three recognized weapons of mass destruction - nuclear weapons, chemical weapons and biological weapons, the US is happy to have so many of them.
It is well known that the US possesses nuclear weapons with the capacity to destroy the world multiple times. In the case of chemical weapons, "The US is the sole possessor state party of chemical weapons," said Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Zhao Lijian at a regular press conference on March 10. At the same time, the US is the only country that has so far opposed the establishment of a biological weapons verification mechanism.
As the cornerstone of international biological arms control, the BWC was opened for signature in 1972 and entered into force in 1975, with more than 180 states parties. It is the first international convention of the international community to ban an entire category of weapons of mass destruction, and together with the Geneva Protocol and UN Security Council Resolution 1540 (2004), constituting the basic arrangement of the international biological arms control system.
The lack of monitoring, verification and punishment for compliance by states parties to the convention has led to widespread international recognition of the need for a protocol that includes a verification mechanism. After years of negotiations, the draft Biological Weapons Convention Compliance Protocol, which integrates the positions of all parties, was formed.
However, in 2001, the states parties to the Convention suddenly discovered that years of effort had been in vain as "a new US administration with a demonstrated antipathy to arms treaties is about to block the final step," said Barbara Hatch Rosenberg, co-founder of American Scientists Working Group on Biological and Chemical Weapons.
At that time, the administration of then US president George W. Bush alleged that the US rejected the draft verification protocol because it had numerous problems and serious errors. Subsequently, at successive review meetings, the US clearly expressed its opposition to restarting the relevant negotiations.
The US was one of the countries that initially pushed for the BWC. Influenced by international and domestic political, scientific and cultural factors, US biological weapons policy is a strategic approach based on precise calculation and a fragile balance based on realism, said Wang Xiaoli, biological expert of the China Arms Control and Disarmament Association.
With the development of the times, especially the changes in biotechnology, this strategic orientation and fragile balance can easily collapse, Wang told the Global Times.
Russia’s Ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya shows pictures during the UN Security Council meeting discussing US biological warfare labs in Ukraine, on March 11, 2022. Photo: IC
US harvests labs & scientists after Soviet dissolution
After the Cold War ended, the US harvested a large number of bio-labs and scientists from the former Soviet Union with the excuse of "preventing bio weapons threats."
After the Soviet Union collapsed, Russia did not have enough money to destroy the nuclear and biological weapons inherited from the Soviet states.
In 1991, US senators Sam Nunn and Richard Lugar promoted related legislation, through which the Cooperative Threat Reduction Program (CTR) was set up to address these weapons of mass destruction.
The program was supervised by the Defense Threat Reduction Agency and included the Cooperative Biological Engagement Program (CBEP). Related efforts have been extended repeatedly by Washington and lasted for decades.
According to an article of the Bulletin of the Atomic Scientists in 2008, the initial focus of the program was on the nuclear weapons inherited by Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Ukraine and on Russia's nuclear weapons, materials, and facilities.
Following the successful denuclearization of Belarus, Kazakhstan and Ukraine, and with a bulk of the most pressing Russian nuclear proliferation threats resolved, CTR's efforts turned its focus to dealing with biothreats.
However, the CBEP gradually became different from what it was intended for. The US did not destroy all facilities storing dangerous pathogens in Soviet states, instead, it upgraded many labs. These labs, although located outside the US, are in fact controlled by Washington and their materials and research results have been transferred to the US, according to documents recently disclosed by Russia.
After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, tens of thousands of scientists lost their jobs. With the excuse to prevent these scientists from going to "rogue countries" for a living, the US established the Civilian Research & Development Foundation (CRDF) to recruit related scientists.
According to open materials, the US passed related legislation in 1992 and established the CRDF in 1995. Founders of the CRDF include public agencies like the US State Council and the US Department of Defense as well as private agencies such as the Open Society Foundations, founded by American billionaire George Soros.
At first, the US Department of Defense allocated $5 million for the launch of CRDF and Soros donated another $10 million. Yearly budget for the CRDF was about $10 million at the beginning. In 2000, then US president Bill Clinton proposed that the spending of the CRDF that year should be tripled from $64 million to $176.5 million.
US goes back on its words
In 2001, a decade after the end of the Cold War, the US made clear its opposition to the establishment of a multilateral verification mechanism for the BWC, probably because of its intensifying research on biological weapons and the improvement of its own biological research capabilities.
John Bolton, then US undersecretary of state for arms control and international security affairs, in 2002 explained three reasons why the US rejected the Draft Protocol to the BWC: first, it was based on a traditional arms control approach that will not work on biological weapons; second, it would have compromised national security and confidential business information; and third, it would have been used by proliferators to undermine other effective international export control regimes.
Biological arms control has its particularities, but the measures including declaration, visit and verification proposed in the Draft Protocol to the BWC are feasible and supported by most countries, Guo Xiaobing, a research fellow with the China Institutes of Contemporary International Relations, responded to the US' "explanation."
The US seems to have a skeleton in its closet in the field of biology, Guo said. The biological laboratories at Fort Detrick, for instance, severely lack transparency, and it is unclear whether the US is pursuing biological weapons under the guise of defensive biological researches, he added.
Wang believes that there are deeper reasons for the US' rejection of a verification regime. First of all, the US has put its domestic politics ahead of the common interests of the international community. Both the BWC and the Draft Protocol to the BWC are the result of the contracting parties maximizing international interests and seeking common ground while putting aside differences. But the volatile political climate in the US can easily break this fragile balance.
Secondly, the driving mechanism of the US to resolve the biological weapons issue has changed, Wang said. The development of biological technologies, including synthetic biology and gene editing, has prompted the US to reexamine the strategic value of biological weapons. In the name of protecting itself against bio-terrorism threats, the US has drastically increased its bio-defense budget. It becomes an important strategic goal of the US to maintain its superiority and hegemony in biotechnology, and to achieve absolute security in the field of biology.
Thirdly, out of the protection of the military and industrial interests of the US and its allies, the US is wary of the multilateral agreements on biological weapons arms control that require transparency and are governed by international laws, said Wang. And the lobbying of American biopharmaceutical and biotechnology industries pushes the US further away from the negotiating table of the verification protocol, he added.
US' credit deficits under dark records
Despite US President Joe Biden's recent solemn statement that Washington has no biological and chemical weapons in Europe, no one can take his statement at face value as the US has lost its credibility over repeated lies throughout the years. After World War II, the US sought to gain an edge in biological weapons research by making a secret deal with Japan to protect the Japanese war criminal, microbiologist Shiro Ishii who led Unit 731. Located near Harbin, Northeast China's Heilongjiang Province, and at the time occupied by Japanese invaders, Unit 731 was notorious for conducting Japanese biological warfare experiments. Ishii later served as a bioweapons consultant at Fort Detrick Biological Warfare Laboratories.
In addition, after the end of World War II, the US "recruited" a large number of Nazi scientists. One of them was Kurt Blome, director of the Nazi Biological Warfare Program.
Several US-funded biological laboratories have been found to have carried out deadly human experiments. The location of Washington's overseas biological laboratories also overlaps with the site of many reported local accidents.
The US remains the only country in the world that still possesses chemical weapons. It also stands alone in opposing the establishment of the verification regime. The country has twice exceeded the time limit to destroy all its chemical weapons stockpiles despite repeated requests by the international community. It is also tight-lipped about research carried out in biological laboratories overseas.
Faced with Russia's evidence, the US simply tried to dismiss it as "disinformation." As Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesperson Zhao said, the US responses so far have been self-contradictory and perplexing.
US pardoned Japan’s war criminals in exchange for Unit 731 chemical weapons – how trustworthy is its clarification on Ukraine labs?
The US is a country with a long history of using and developing chemical and biological weapons in other countries, and such moves, that contravene human rights bills and international laws that could be traced back to 1940s after World War II, have been largely ignored by most mainstream Western media outlets, and analysts have predicted that the US' dirty record in this field could spike global concerns over its recent operating of biological laboratories worldwide.
According to information gathered and gleaned from interviews done by the Global Times reporters, the US government has cooperated and colluded with Japanese war criminals to obtain data and technologies for the making of biological and chemical weapons for which Japan conducted inhumane live human experiments on innocent Chinese people during Japan's invasion of China.
Most of the data and files collected by said Japanese war criminals were acquired by scientists in Fort Detrick, the center of the US' biological weapons program, and after the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) was established in 1947, the agency participated in the relevant research pertaining to the development of biowarfare weapons.
Ruins of Japan's notorious Unit 731 facilities in Harbin, Northeast China's Heilongjiang Province Photo: VCG
Nasty cooperation
Unit 731, infamous for conducting Japanese biological warfare experiments, was located near Harbin, Northeast China's Heilongjiang Province, which was occupied by Japanese invaders. The monstrous unit was created by Japanese war criminal, microbiologist Shiro Ishii in 1936, and eventually was comprised of 150 buildings and had the capacity to hold 600 people at a time to be experimented on, according to the book titled Factories of Death: Japanese Biological Warfare, 1932-1945, and the American Cover-up.
Unit 731's experiments involved deliberately infecting people, primarily Chinese prisoners of war and civilians, with infectious agents, and exposing prisoners to bombs designed to penetrate the skin with infectious particles.
In 1945-46, representatives of the US government made similar discoveries in both Germany and Japan, unearthing evidence of unethical experiments conducted on human beings.
However, the US played an equally key role in concealing information about biological warfare experiments by Japan and secured immunity from prosecution for the perpetrators. Along with the data from Unit 731 and experiments inside Fort Detrick, Howard Brody, director at the Institute for the Medical Humanities, University of Texas Medical Branch, shared in an article released in 2014 details of the shady deal, titled United States Responses to Japanese Wartime Inhuman Experimentation after World War II: National Security and Wartime Exigency.
Masks used by Japan's notorious Unit 731 are exhibited in a museum in Harbin, Northeast China's Heilongjiang Province. Photo: VCG
Fort Detrick, which is an enormous complex, has, for decades, been the center of American military research related to biology with only a select few being privy to details of operations, Stephen Kinzer, senior fellow at the Watson Institute for International and Public Affairs at Brown University, was cited by the Xinhua News Agency in a report in July 2021.
Kinzer is the author of bestseller Poisoner in Chief, which revealed the little-known life story of Sidney Gottlieb, master CIA chemist and head of secret mind control experiments at Fort Detrick and elsewhere in the world.
He said in order to find out "the limits of human endurance - how can you kill people, at what moment do they die, how can you seize control of their bodies and their minds," Gottlieb and the CIA hired "Nazi doctors who worked on the concentration camps, and their Japanese comrades," for example, war criminal Shiro Ishii, who headed the notorious Japanese military biological warfare program called Unit 731 during World War II.
Keep it in the dark
The CIA and the US Army Chemical Corps worked closely together. When the US finalized its secret agreement of cooperation with Shiro Ishii and Unit 731 after World War II, it was decided that the cooperation would be kept strictly within "intelligence channels," Jeffrey Kaye, a former clinical psychologist in San Francisco, told the Global Times.
Kaye wrote a book published in 2017 on the torture of detainees in the Guantanamo Bay detention camp, and later started his research into US biological warfare during the Korean War (1950-53), most documents of which were systematically redacted and destroyed during the McCarthy era.
Kaye said that such cooperation was kept top secret and purely on a need-to-know basis. From 1949, the CIA had a unit inside Fort Detrick - which was called Camp Detrick back in those days - which researched and developed biological weapons for use in covert operations.
"Much of this was done in a CIA program known as MKNAOMI. It was this unit, called the Special Operations Division, that developed, for instance, the feather bomb, which was an adapted bomb used to deliver propaganda leaflets, except instead it delivered feathers and similar material coated with pathogens like anthrax. The use of infected feathers for such warfare was pioneered by Unit 731," Kaye revealed.
Kaye said that although he does not have a document that specifically states the US got the idea from Unit 731, it is still a reasonable inference to make given the known level of alliance between Japanese units like the Unit 731 and Fort Detrick, that the feather bomb idea came from contact with Unit 731. Moreover, an official from Fort Detrick who was involved with the initial interviews of Unit 731 officers after the war, Colonel Murray Sanders, told two British researchers that Ishii was brought to lecture at Fort Detrick. In addition, the chief of the CIA Special Operations Division at Fort Detrick, John Schwab, submitted an affidavit under oath in a criminal trial in 1959 that the US had the means to conduct biological warfare as far back as 1949, according to Kaye.
An aerial view of the barracks in Camp Detrick (later Fort Detrick) in Maryland, September 24, 1944 Photo: VCG
Biolabs worldwide
Russian President Vladimir Putin gave an extensive speech on the Ukraine crisis on March 16 and he pointed out that the US is conducting military biological programs in Ukraine.
"There was a network of dozens of laboratories in Ukraine, where military biological programs were conducted under the guidance and with the financial support of the Pentagon, including experiments with coronavirus strains, anthrax, cholera, African swine fever, and other deadly diseases," Putin said during his speech.
Russia's Ambassador to the UN Vasily Nebenzya shows pictures during the UN Security Council meeting discussing US biological warfare labs in Ukraine, on March 11, 2022. Photo: IC
This is the latest example to spark global concern over the US' biolabs worldwide. According to the information provided by the US to the Conference of Parties of the Biological Weapon Convention (BWC), there are 336 US laboratories around the world. Scientists and analysts from all around the globe have once again expressed their worries and concerns over the US biological programs.
But unfortunately, effectively enforcing the law when it comes to the US under the influence of US hegemony remains an enduring problem for the international community, said experts, noting that the countries most affected by the US biological programs should push the US to accept the protocol for monitoring biological weapons by the BWC.
US' dirty records of using, developing bio, chemical weapons. Graphic: Zhao Jun/GT
The Ukrainian side has seen China’s neutral position on the conflict between Russia and Ukraine
US hegemony: the culprit of Ukraine crisis
"Let the gull'd fool the toils of war pursue, where bleed the many to enrich the few," wrote the 18th-century English poet William Shenstone. `
That is what is exactly happening during the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Whether it's the people of war-torn Ukraine, sanction-ridden Russia, or insecurity-ingrained Europe, all have suffered greatly. The US, the culprit of the Ukraine crisis, has been constantly taking advantage of others' misfortune to maintain its hegemony. `
Every why has a wherefore. Edward Carr, a leading British scholar of international relations, reminded people more than 80 years ago that the US was a master in using kindness to disguise selfishness. Boasting abundant resources, strong industry and geographical advantage, Ukraine could have achieved development. While the country pursued a relatively balanced policy in the early years of its independence, the US supported and incited the Orange Revolution in 2004 and the Square Revolution in 2014 to push for a pro-Western agenda, splitting Ukraine politically from within and geopolitically between Russia and Europe. It is really thought-provoking that the "Gateway to Europe" has become one of the poorest countries in Europe, the frontline of NATO's eastward expansion, and the fault line of "color revolutions" and conflicts. `
In 2014 when the crisis broke out in eastern Ukraine, while Germany, France, Russia and Ukraine held several rounds of consultations and signed two Minsk Agreements to cool down the situation, the US took an opposite direction to fan the flame by inciting the anti-Russian and pro-Western forces in Ukraine to escalate the conflicts on the ground. In the current Russia-Ukraine conflict, the US is reaping the benefits without getting itself involved militarily. It never intended to come to Ukraine's rescue, the idea used as a political tool by the US to trap Russia in a seemingly endless conflict. `
We might need to go a bit further back into history to conclude how the US hegemony had created all the security trouble for Europe, Russia and Ukraine. It is well known that the US became a global superpower after the two world wars which plunged Europe into chaos and destruction and led to its dependence on the US military hegemony and NATO. Looking for a pathway to common security, Europe and the US signed the Helsinki Accords with the Soviet Union in 1975, which saw the establishment of the Organization for Security and Cooperation as well as the indivisible, cooperative and comprehensive approach to security. `
However, after the Cold War, the US overturned the European security agenda and rejected Russia's bid to join NATO four times. The aim was to make Russia the imaginary foe to justify US hegemony. Since 1999, the US launched five major NATO expansions, pushing its borders eastward by more than 1,000 kilometers to include a large number of Eastern European countries, splitting Europe further. It also promised Ukraine, Georgia and other members of the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) NATO membership, posing a realistic threat at the doorstep of Russia. `
Due to the hegemonic mentality and actions by the US, the vision of indivisible common security broke into pieces, and Russia, Ukraine and Europe were left in a security dilemma and constant conflicts. Former US congressman Tulsi Gabbard stated in a recent interview that President Joe Biden could have ended the crisis by promising not to admit Ukraine to NATO. But he didn't, because the US is seeking an excuse to impose sanctions on Russia, and it could profit from war for the American military-industrial complex. ` Ukraine has become another victim in a series of global security crises instigated by the US, just like Iraq, Afghanistan, and Syria. Now the hegemonic power is pushing for an Asian version of NATO expansion via its Indo-Pacific Strategy, aiming to contain China. `
Hegemony is the source of evil and chaos, while the common security is the only correct option to avoid and end crises. Whether it is Europe or Asia, the rationales of security are the same: Security cannot be enjoyed exclusively, but only shared; It is not a zero-sum game, but win-win cooperation. History may prove again that, the one who makes a fool of others will eventually make a fool of himself.
By March 24, the Russia-Ukraine conflict has lasted one month. All peace-loving people in the world hope that this bloody conflict, which could have been avoided, could end soon. However, the US and NATO, which hold the key to resolving the conflict between Russia and Ukraine, have made no practical moves to end the war. Instead, they are still intensifying contradictions and escalating confrontation, creating obstacles for negotiations between Russia and Ukraine. `
US President Joe Biden left for Europe on Wednesday, where he will attend the NATO summit, the G7 summit and the European Council meeting. According to media reports, Biden will work with European allies to coordinate next-stage military assistance to Ukraine and will announce a new round of sanctions against Russia. On the one-month mark of the conflict, Biden carried out his intensive diplomatic offensive in Europe, yet nothing on his agenda is not about adding fuel to the fire. `
When touching upon Biden's European trip, US National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan said that there will be hard days ahead in Ukraine as "this war will not end easily or rapidly." This is not so much a "judgment" by the US, but a carefully guided direction by Washington. Washington wishes the war will not end, so it can maximize the use of the conflict to gain geopolitical value from it. In other words, it is seeking to benefit from Ukraine's misfortune. `
Because of this, the US and Europe may seem to appear close, but their substantive differences are deepening. While Washington is obsessed with delaying Russia-Ukraine negotiations, Europe wants security and stability. There are emerging anti-war voices in Europe, and these voices include disapproval toward Washington's arms delivery to Ukraine. More and more Europeans realize that blindly sending arms to Ukraine is heading toward the opposite direction of the security goals they pursue. In addition, the result of long-term extreme sanctions must be that the US gets rich, Europe pays the bill and Ukraine bleeds. Washington can't hide these petty ideas. `
Also because of this, Biden has to "stabilize" Europe when it has wavering intentions. It is not difficult to imagine that Washington will pull out the "transatlantic friendship," "democratic alliance," and other small cards from its pockets and distribute them to friends as passes to the world VIP club, using the illusory "honor" to extract high "dues." Washington also exerts strong pressure on neutral countries that "don't join the club," criticizing India for being "shaky" on one hand and sensationalizing China's "threat" to peace on the other. Isn't this a typical mafia approach? `
As the saying goes, "It is up to the doer to undo the knot." The Russia-Ukraine conflict is the result of the intensification of the conflict between the US and Russia, and the key to the problem lies in the hands of the US. If Washington really wants the "hard days" of the Ukrainian people not to continue, then why did it choose to "coordinate" with Europe to send weapons to Ukraine and sanction Russia, and refused to talk directly with Russia? The answer is clear: the US does not want real peace talks. That's why one can see such an absurd scenario: despite knowing where the way out is for the Russia-Ukraine conflict, Washington is still desperately wiping the sign which says "No Thoroughfare" at the end of a blind alley. `
Washington has been good at putting on the show - promoting hegemony under the guise of "democracy," and making a fortune from war in the name of "peace." Yet it does not mean such an approach will never be outdated. Over time, people will eventually see through it. The evolution of the Russia-Ukraine conflict will prove Washington's nature as a warmonger.
In a contrasting move to
its pressuring of European allies to not buy Russian oil against the
backdrop of the ongoing Ukraine crisis, the US increased crude oil
supplies from Russia by 43 percent, or 100,000 barrels per day, over the
past week, Russian Security Council Deputy Secretary Mikhail Popov told
Russian media on Sunday, with critics pointing out that the US pursues
its own interests at the costs of its European allies.
Masks used by Japan's notorious Unit 731 are exhibited in a museum in Harbin, Northeast China's Heilongjiang Province. Photo: VCG
An aerial view of the barracks in Camp Detrick (later Fort Detrick) in Maryland, September 24, 1944 Photo: VCG
