Hong Kong political integration v Puerto Rico 'protectorate' status

SOUTH CHINA MORNING POST

US should look to its own conduct before crying interference

A look at how Washington treats Puerto Rico shows the hypocrisy of its claims about Beijing’s role in Hong Kong

Alex Lo

The US State Department thinks Beijing is interfering in Hong Kong affairs. It’s a bit like a serial killer accusing a pickpocket of being a criminal. Some examples?

State-run newspapers ran an op-ed campaign against appointing a pro-democracy scholar to a senior position at a local university. A bookseller and a tycoon in Hong Kong might have been coerced into going back to the mainland. Beijing has championed the former chief secretary to be the next chief executive. A Basic Law interpretation by the standing committee of the nation’s parliament aims to disqualify local secessionist lawmakers.

To compare like with like, let’s consider Puerto Rico, a US protectorate. Exactly a century ago, Washington granted US citizenship to a million people on the island. It promptly drafted 2 per cent of the population into fighting in world war one. That set off a century of ruthless American exploitation that is unabated today. Beijing formally controls the foreign and military affairs of Hong Kong while we still run our own trade, currency, border control, government, tax, law, water, energy and much else.

The Puerto Rican government has no control of much of anything. According to Nelson Denis, author of War Against All Puerto Ricans, US federal agencies now run the island’s banking and legal systems, foreign trade and relations, shipping and maritime laws, broadcasting regulations, postal service, immigration, social security, customs, transportation, defence, the environment, territorial waters and air space. It uses the US dollar as its official currency. It is poorer than the poorest US state, Mississippi.

Yet, its government has recently raised the retirement age and public pension contributions while cutting benefits. It has raised rates for water, gas, electricity and sales taxes from 10 to 60 per cent. More schools and clinics are shut. Why? Because it has become a municipal bond debtor being targeted for privatisation by Wall Street and US hedge funds. Puerto Rico has a public debt of US$72 billion, equivalent to three-quarters of GDP.

Poll after poll has shown most Puerto Ricans want to join the American union. Yet, last year, all three branches of the US government declared the island to be no better than a colony.

The Obama White House said it was a US territorial possession without sovereignty, and the Supreme Court agreed. The US Congress created a financial control board to run its economy and government, to make sure American financiers got their pound of flesh.

Interference? It’s all relative.

ELISE DONOVAN APPOINTED DIRECTOR OF BRITISH VIRGIN ISLANDS HOUSE ASIA

Government of the Virgin Islands

The Government of the Virgin Islands today announced the appointment of Ms. Elise Donovan as Director of the BVI House Asia, the BVI’s Asia Pacific regional office, effective January 2014.

bvi.gov.vg

“As we continue to deepen our commercial footprint in Asia, Ms. Donovan will play a crucial role in promoting the BVI business in Asia-Pacific and in supporting the financial services industry and its growth in the region,” said Dr. D. Orlando Smith, Premier of the British Virgin Islands.

Ms. Donovan will take over the post from the current interim director Mrs. Lorna Smith. As the new Director, Ms. Donovan will promote BVI’s financial services, represent the BVI in a diplomatic setting, uphold BVI’s voice with the region’s government authorities, strengthen economic and political cooperation regionally and internationally, and build cultural and educational links in the Asia-Pacific.

Ms. Donovan has a wealth of experience in international affairs, international political economies, diplomacy and public relations. She has worked in the BVI Government and the BVI Financial Services Commission. Ms. Donovan is currently the Executive Director of the BVI International Finance Centre, where she is responsible for promoting and marketing the BVI financial services industry globally.

Ms. Donovan holds bachelor’s and master’s degrees from Carleton University, Ottawa and Columbia University, New York.

About BVI House Asia

BVI House Asia was established in Hong Kong in September 2013 to meet the growing demand for closer ties with the jurisdiction, particularly in the Greater China region. Currently, more than 40 percent of BVI financial services business is from Asia. BVI House Asia is committed to expanding and deepening the British Virgin Islands’ footprint in Asia Pacific with a focus on financial services.

In Asia Pacific, The British Virgin Islands provides a wide range of services including: asset protection, property holding, financial management, trading, copyrighting, bespoke trust services, and investment business. The BVI is also known for providing an efficient, 24-hour turnaround for formation of the widely used Company.

ALSO SEE: 

British Virgin Islands picks Hong Kong to be its Asia 

Hong Kong Chief Executive addresses Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC)

"The relationship between China and Latin America and the Caribbean is mature enough to think about enhancing quality," stated today Antonio Prado, Deputy Executive Secretary of ECLAC, when welcoming the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China (HKSAR) Donald Tsang, who delivered a keynote speech at the organization's headquarters.

 

Antonio Prado, Deputy Executive Secretary of ECLAC, welcomes the Chief  Executive of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region of the People's  Republic of China, Donald Tsang, during his visit to ECLAC headquarters  in Santiago, Chile. Photo: Carlos Vera/ECLAC

Tsang gave a speech entitled "Hong Kong's role in China's development", which was attended by authorities, representatives of the diplomatic corps accredited in the country, the academia, international organizations officials and civil society representatives. 

"The countries of the region urgently need to develop new linkages to strengthen innovation, productivity, competitiveness, diversification of the productive and export base, a more qualified workforce, and a less unequal income distribution," said Prado when welcoming the Chinese high-level official. 

"I am convinced that HKSAR can, and should, be an active partner of the region in this endeavor," added Prado. 

Donald Tsang mentioned that, like ECLAC and its Member States, Hong Kong is a firm believer in multi-lateral dialogue, networking and sharing knowledge. "As one of the most free, open and globally connected economies in the world, we in Hong Kong readily support initiatives that expand opportunities for economic as well as cultural co-operation," he said. 

According to ECLAC, China will take over the European Union as Latin America and the Caribbean's second most important trade partner in a few years. The robust Chinese demand for commodities has benefited the countries of the region exporting such goods, allowing them to improve their terms of exchange and stimulating their growth. 

Likewise, Hong Kong's exports and imports to and from Latin America and the Caribbean amount to nearly 6 and 5 US dollars billions, respectively, which has made this territory a key actor for re-exports on to continental China, which represent half of the total commercial exchange. 

The Deputy Executive Secretary of ECLAC specified that the great progress shown by Hong Kong in the last years makes it an excellent candidate for mutual cooperation between this territory and the countries of the region. Some of the areas for cooperation are trade and services - including tourism; science and technology - including nanotechnology and advanced materials; education; small and medium-sized enterprises; information and communication technologies; and supply chain logistics and management. 

"This is the time to identify, in a cohesive manner, the region's priorities with respect to its relationship with China and come up with ideas on how HKSAR can contribute to achieving this goal," concluded Prado.

Read Spanish text here.

British Empire continues amidst sovereignty, militarisation disputes

Britain, same insatiable colonialist

Britain's colonialist ambitions seem to remain insatiable as the British government continues to refrain from negotiating over the sovereignty of the lands it has colonized. When the sovereignty of Hong Kong was granted (returned? - OTR) to the People's Republic of China in 1997, the British Empire hoped that it would legitimately hold sovereignty over its remaining colonized territories under the rubric of 'the British Overseas Territories.' 

However, of the 16 Non-Self-Governing Territories listed on the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization waiting to be decolonized, 10 including the Malvinas Islands and Gibraltar remain under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom. 

As Argentina and Spain have called for negotiations, the British government continues to take a hostile stance ruling out the possibilities for any negotiation and taking provocative acts. 

Earlier this week, the British government sent the Duke of Cambridge Prince Williams clad in the uniform of the 'conqueror' to Malvinas Islands on a six-week-long tour to act as a search and rescue pilot. 

Furthermore, Britain's Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced plans for sending its most advanced warship to the islands in order to give Buenos Aires a 'pause' to think about calling for negotiations over the sovereignty of the islands. 

This comes as the UN Special Committee on Decolonization's draft  on the Malvinas Islands (see text of adopted resolution below - OTR) calls for a 'peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom.' 

Moreover, as the Spanish government calls for bilateral negotiations over Gibraltar's sovereignty under the Brussels Agreement, the British Secretary of State for Europe, David Lidington categorically announced that Britain would not sit at the table of negotiations. 

In 1713, under the Treaty of Utrecht, Spain gave sovereignty over the town and castle of Gibraltar to Britain. However, the isthmus and the airspace were not part of the treaty. 

Meanwhile, Lidington made no reference to this issue and maintained that Britain “will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their wishes.” 

Furthermore, British Foreign Secretary William Hague's comments in the Somali capital of Mogadishu tells of Britain's plots for its oil-rich ex-colony as he described his visit as a 'major diplomatic push to bring stability, and a sign of Britain's commitment to the people and country of Somalia.' 

Britain's refusal to get engaged in negotiations over the sovereignty of lands it has colonized takes the lid off its colonialist nature no matter if the lands are called 'the British Overseas Territories.' 

ISH/HN/HE

*****

 Report of the United Nations Decolonisation Committee

2011 

Chapter XI 

Falkland Islands (Malvinas) 

...135. The Special Committee considered the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) at its 6th and 7th meetings, on 21 June 2011. 

136. In its consideration of the item, the Special Committee took into account paragraph 4 (b) of the annex to General Assembly resolution 58/316, as well as other relevant resolutions and decisions. 

137. During its consideration of the item, the Special Committee had before it a working paper prepared by the Secretariat containing information on developments concerning the Territory (A/AC.109/2011/14). 

138. At the 6th meeting, the Chair informed the Special Committee that the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay had requested to participate in the Committee’s consideration of the item. The Committee decided to accede to the requests. 

139. At the same meeting, in accordance with a decision taken at the 3rd meeting, statements were made by Roger Edwards and Dick Sawle of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands, Maria Angélica del Carmen Vernet and Alejandro Betts (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6). 

140. Also at the same meeting, the representative of Chile, also on behalf of Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), introduced a draft resolution on the item (A/AC.109/2011/L.7). 

141. At the same meeting, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Worship of Argentina made a statement (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6). 

142. Also at the same meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Cuba, China, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Russian Federation, Indonesia, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, Sierra Leone, Paraguay (on behalf of the Common Market of the South and associated countries), Guyana (on behalf of the Union of South American Nations), Guatemala (on behalf of the Ibero-American countries), Brazil, Uruguay, Peru and El Salvador (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6). 

143. At the same meeting, the Special Committee adopted draft resolution A/AC.109/2011/L.7, without a vote. 

144. At the 7th meeting, on 21 June, the representative of Grenada made a statement (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.7). 

Resolution Adopted without a vote

21st June 2011

Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) 

The Special Committee (on Decolonization), 

       Having considered the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), 

    Aware that the maintenance of colonial situations is incompatible with the United Nations ideal of universal peace,

    Recalling General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, 2065 (XX) of 16 December 1965, 3160 (XXVIII) of 14 December 1973, 31/49 of 1 December 1976, 37/9 of 4 November 1982, 38/12 of 16 November 1983, 39/6 of 1 November 1984, 40/21 of 27 November 1985, 41/40 of 25 

November 1986, 42/19 of 17 November 1987 and 43/25 of 17 November 1988, Special Committee resolutions A/AC.109/756 of 1 September 1983, A/AC.109/793 of 21 August 1984, A/AC.109/842 of 9 August 1985, A/AC.109/885 of 14 August 1986, A/AC.109/930 of 14 August 1987, A/AC.109/972 of 11 August 1988, A/AC.109/1008 of 15 August 1989, A/AC.109/1050 of 14 August 1990,  A/AC.109/1087 of 14 August 1991, A/AC.109/1132 of 29 July 1992, A/AC.109/1169 of 14 July 1993, A/AC.109/2003 of 12 July 1994, A/AC.109/2033 of 13 July 1995, A/AC.109/2062 of 22 July 1996, A/AC.109/2096 of 16 June 1997, A/AC.109/2122 of 6 July 1998, A/AC.109/1999/23 of 1 July 1999, A/AC.109/2000/23 of 11 July 2000, A/AC.109/2001/25 of 29 June 2001, A/AC.109/2002/25 of 19 June 2002, A/AC.109/2003/24 of 16 June 2003, the resolution adopted on 18 June 2004, the resolution adopted on 15 June 2005, the resolution adopted on 15 June 2006, the resolution adopted on 21 June 2007, the resolution adopted on 12 

June 2008, the resolution adopted on 18 June 2009 and the resolution adopted on 24 June 2010, and Security Council resolutions 502 (1982) of 3 April 1982 and 505 (1982) of 26 May 1982, 

    Distressed that, notwithstanding the time that has elapsed since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 2065 (XX), this prolonged dispute has not yet been settled, 

    Aware of the interest of the international community in the resumption by the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of their negotiations in order to find as soon as 

possible a peaceful, just and lasting solution to the sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), 

    Expressing its preoccupation over the fact that the good level of relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom has not yet led to negotiations on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), 

    Considering that this situation should facilitate the resumption of the negotiations in order to find a peaceful solution to the dispute over sovereignty, 

    Reaffirming the principles of the Charter of the United Nations on the non-use of force or the threat of force in international relations and the peaceful settlement of international disputes, 

    Calling attention to the importance of the Secretary-General continuing his efforts to give full effect to the mission entrusted to him by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), 

    Reaffirming the need for the parties to take due account of the interests of the population of the islands in accordance with the provisions of the General Assembly resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), 

    1.  Reiterates that the way to put an end to the special and particular colonial situation in the question of  the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) is the peaceful and negotiated settlement of the dispute over sovereignty between the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great 

Britain and Northern Ireland; 

    2.  Takes note of the views expressed by the President of the Argentine Republic on the occasion of the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly; 

    3.  Regrets that, in spite of the widespread international support for a negotiation between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom that includes all aspects of the future of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), the implementation of the General Assembly resolutions on this question has not yet started; 

    4.  Requests the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to consolidate the current process of dialogue and cooperation through the resumption of negotiations in order to find as soon as possible a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Falkland 

Islands (Malvinas), in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25; 

    5.  Reiterates its firm support for the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General in order to assist the parties in complying with the request made by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas); 

    6.  Decides to keep under review the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) subject to the directives that the General Assembly has issued and may issue in that regard. 

Formulating an Economic Policy for the British Virgin Islands

By Benito Wheatley
(Orginially published in the BVI Beacon on May 13 under the title "Moving Government beyond BiWater politics").
 
The recent controversy over the awarding of a water production contract to BiWater highlights the need for the Government to formulate a coherent economic policy to help guide government’s economic decision-making and coordination, and provide a clear economic direction for the Territory as a whole.
 
Currently, the Government’s economic policy amounts to a number of uncoordinated economic initiatives driven by factors other than a carefully crafted economic policy. As a consequence, it is unclear exactly what economic goals it is trying to achieve for the British Virgin Islands (BVI). Establishing a coherent economic policy should help to improve government’s economic decision-making and coordination and provide the society with a better understanding of its economic goals.
 
Formulating a coherent economic policy must begin with an economic vision, followed by a basic set of economic objectives and the development of a package of policy measures for achieving them. This process requires addressing four questions.
 
First, what is the Government’s economic vision for the Territory? To state it plainly, what is the economic future that the Government wants for the BVI. Twenty years from now does the Government envision a Territory still highly dependent on tourism and financial services? If so, does the Government envision more BVIslanders owning hotels and resorts, providing charter boat and plane services, and a substantially smaller number of BVIslanders providing taxi services? Does the Government envision significantly more BVIslanders owning trust companies and law firms, as opposed to simply occupying entry level and middle management positions? What about other sectors and industries? Is there a vision for agriculture and fisheries? What about health tourism or back-office services?
 
Whatever the economic vision may be, it is critical that an economic vision exist upon which a coherent economic policy can be formulated.

The second question to be addressed is, what general economic approach should the government pursue? More specifically, upon what economic and social principles should an economic policy be based? Should the Government pursue an economic policy that broadly seeks to economically empower BVIslanders through preferential treatment in the economy? Or should the Government pursue an economic policy that places local companies and BVIslanders on an equal footing with foreign companies and foreign workers in the economy? This was the essence of the BiWater contract controversy where the UK company was selected over Ocean Conversion (OC), a partially locally owned company, to provide water production services.

Governments around the world have varied in their approach to economic management. In Hong Kong, the government favors a free market economy that is open to foreign competition. The Hong Kong Government is primarily concerned about the efficient delivery of services to the public, as opposed to the origin of the companies or individuals who provide them. By contrast, in India, the Indian Government privileges local companies for contracts and shields domestic industries from foreign competition. The Indian approach emphasizes the economic empowerment of local companies and citizens and the development of domestic industries. In France, the French Government has adopted a mixed approach to economic management. Various sectors of the French economy are open to foreign competition, while others are strategically protected and government contracts are reserved for domestic companies. None of these approaches are perfect and each has its advantages and disadvantages.

In the case of the BVI, the operation of foreign companies in the Territory is necessary for the provision of certain services. However, this is not the case for every sector. In fact, in some sectors, it may not be desirable to allow foreign competitors into the market, particularly where they undermine the growth of a domestic industry.

What is most important to note here is that a government should adopt an economic policy of some type to guide its economic decision-making and coordination and the economic activities of the country it governs. Such a policy must be made clear to the business community and public to clarify their expectations of government and the position of local companies and individuals relative to foreign companies and foreign workers. Importantly, awarding petty contracts to party supporters and family members does not constitute an economic policy.

The third question that must be addressed is, what should the Government’s economic objectives entail? In simple terms, economic objectives are targets the government sets for attaining a desired outcome. Setting economic objectives involves deciding: How many more tourist arrivals are needed per year to sustain tourism growth? How many more international business company registrations are needed per year to sustain financial services growth? How many new local businesses should open per year to significantly increase entrepreneurship? How many new jobs should be created per year to absorb new entrants to the labor market? By what percentage should wages and salaries increase annually to keep pace with the rising cost of living? These are just a few of the areas where economic targets must be set. An in-depth study and analysis of the macro- and microeconomic conditions of the BVI should allow government to sufficiently perform this task.

The fourth and final question to be addressed is: what policy measures are needed to achieve the society’s economic objectives? A policy measure is simply a course of action a government adopts for achieving a stated goal. Policy measures include things like start-up grants for small businesses to encourage entrepreneurship; soft mortgages or land grants for residential construction to encourage home ownership; first right of refusal to local companies for government contracts to help grow domestic industries; tax incentives for foreign companies to attract foreign direct investment; and a number of other measures for economically moving the Territory forward.

In retrospect of the Government’s controversial decision to award BiWater a water production contract, a well-defined and coherent economic policy would have helped to clarify its position, or at the very least, provided a minimum policy standard against which the public could judge the contract’s procurement and the merits of the agreement.

On a final note, recent clashes between the Government and OC over water production contracts are indicative of a long standing problem in the BVI: the politicization of government contracts. By virtue of government’s ability to directly award a contract (i.e., bid, no-bid) and indirectly provide employment through it, or to deny the award of a contract, a ruling party is placed in an unduly politically advantageous position to influence the public. Likewise, certain businesses and individuals can potentially influence elected officials by pledging future support in return for a contract. These power dynamics present the danger of a government contract being used as a political tool for garnering public support or securing business. De-politicizing the awarding of government contracts would help to mitigate theses dangers and encourage impartiality.

In real terms, what this means is that government procurement must become a more objective and balanced process. One means by which to achieve this is the creation of a BVI Procurement Board whose responsibility would be to review bids on government contracts and vet companies. Once completed, the Board would submit its non-binding recommendations and rationale for a vendor to government for consideration. The Board’s recommendations would also be made public at the time of submission.

A body of this kind would be composed of elected representatives from industry organizations and appointed business professors from the Department of Business at the H. Lavity Stoutt Community College. A societally balanced membership would provide the level of objectivity and balance needed for determining the best proposals and the most appropriate vendors for contracts. Not only would this improve transparency and deepen the society’s participation in government’s economic decision-making process, but it would help to avoid the kind of controversies witnessed over the past months between Government and OC.

In conclusion, the Government cannot afford to be ambivalent or obscure about the economic direction of the Territory during these uncertain times. Formulating a coherent economic policy would strengthen Government’s economic decision-making and coordination, and give the people of the BVI a better understanding of the economic goals it has for the Territory. If done thoughtfully, the BVI will become a stronger society economically and be well positioned for a strong economic recovery in the future.

Benito Wheatley is an Analyst in the International Affairs and Services Department at the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority in Washington, DC. He is also a Researcher for International Affairs Forum Journal, published by the Center for International Relations in Arlington, Virginia. Please direct comments or questions to: Benito_Wheatley@yahoo.com.

Data on Some Dependencies Omitted in UN Documents

An important function of the United Nations (UN) is the compilation and publication of statistical information and indicators on economic and social development in countries around the planet. This data is valuable to governments, civil society, experts, researchers and individuals in the continual examination of economic and social trends in jurisdictions worldwide.

Inclusion of data on the Non-Independent Countries (NICs) is equally useful for those who follow developments in this unique set of non-sovereign countries. Generally, these NICs are so-defined because of their associate membership (or eligibility) in the respective UN regional economic commissions, but there are many others which exist under varying political and constitutional arrangements with larger countries.

The Non-Independent Countries (NICs)

Caribbean

There are ten Non-Independent Caribbean Countries (NICCs) which are associate members of the UN Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC), including seven classified by the UN as Non Self-Governing Territories (NSGTs) and three designated as Self-Governing Territories (SGTs). Thus, the United Kingdom - administered territories of Bermuda, Turks and Caicos Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, British Virgin Islands and Anguilla join with the United States – administered US Virgin Islands as the seven NSGTs in the Caribbean. Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles in association with the Kingdom of the Netherlands, and U.S. – administered Puerto Rico constitute the SGT category (even as the level of self-government in Puerto Rico is subject to question). All but Bermuda are associate members of the Economic Commission for Latin America and the Caribbean (ECLAC).

Island jurisdictions such as Martinique, Guadeloupe and French Guiana which are overseas departments of France are not eligible for separate status in ECLAC because of their status as politically integrated with the French Republic - and by extension, the European Union. It is often the case that because of the size of their economy, and despite their integrated status, their data is included in international statistical documents.

Pacific

In the case of the Pacific, a similar situation applies. A number of the Non-Independent Pacific Countries (NIPCs) are associate members of the Economic and Social Commission for Asia and the Pacific (ESCAP). The Non Self-Governing Territories (NSGTs) listed by the UN in the Pacific are the US-administered territories of American Samoa and Guam, the French –administered territory of New Caledonia and the New Zealand-administered territory of Tokelau. The Northern Mariana Islands with its autonomous arrangement (albeit in reversal) with the US, the autonomous French Polynesia, and the two freely associated states of the Cook Islands and Niue in their association arrangement with New Zealand, constitute the Self-Governing Territories (SGT) category on the Pacific side. Hong Kong and Macau are also included, as they remain associate members of ESCAP pursuant to the terms of the agreements between China and the United Kingdom governing the re-integration of those former territories.

Statistics for NICs

It is always useful to have the statistical indicators of these Non-Independent Countries (NICs) included in the UN statistical documentation as it facilitates economic and social analysis, and is helpful to international business in investment decision-making. It is encouraging that many of the UN statistical documents contain significant information on this group of countries. The lack of availability of data for many of the NICs is often a constraint since the level of statistical capacity in the NICs varies significantly. This has been identified as an area where international technical assistance could prove especially useful.

Another factor influencing the presentation of data may be the level of political awareness of the UN statistical researchers who may have to determine the ‘political correctness’ of separate inclusion of data on individual NICs. As the political and constitutional dynamics of these countries can be fairly complex, it should not be assumed that these expert technicians would also have access to expert political analysis on these issues.

UN Statistical Publications

Within this context, three UN statistical publications among many offer some insights into the presentation and availability of economic and social development data. The first publication is the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics which is published by the Statistics Division of the UN Department of Economic and Social Affairs. This is a highly useful reference with coverage of the ten Non-Independent Caribbean Countries (NICCs), while only omitting the small economies of Niue and Tokelau where data may not be as readily available. (It is to be noted, however, that some of this data may be accessed from the UN Development Programme which has historically provided services to both jurisdictions, or from ESCAP in which Niue enjoys associate membership).

The Monthly Bulletin of Statistics admirably exceeds the coverage of the recognised NICs by including non-independent countries and other jurisdictions with varying autonomous relationships with UN member states, and even several integrated parts of larger countries. Thus, data is available on the Aland Islands with its unique relationship with Norway, and the Faroe Islands and Greenland with their respective autonomous relationships within the Kingdom of Denmark. This is commendable since the economies of these territories warrant separate inclusion in their own right. It is also interesting that data is included on the French overseas departments of Guadeloupe, Martinique and Reunion, even as they are integrated parts of France. These outer-most areas of the French Republic (as it is termed) clearly fit the bill as individual economies, even as they are politically integrated, and not autonomous. Perhaps data on the US “outer-most areas” of Hawaii and Alaska should be included in future.

The second publication is the highly useful World Population Prospects document which is published by the Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs. The coverage of this document is not as complete as the Monthly Bulletin of Statistics published by the Statistics Division, and is interesting in its omissions as well as in its inclusions. Thus, the population document omits all of the United Kingdom-administered territories of Bermuda, Turks and Caicos Islands, Cayman Islands, Montserrat, British Virgin Islands and Anguilla. Data on US-administered American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands, New Zealand-administered-Tokelau, and the New Zealand associated countries of the Cook Islands and Niue are also missing. Nevertheless, these omitted economies are listed in the beginning of the publication which classify countries by major area and region of the world. Demographic information on these Non-Independent Countries (NICs) is readily available, however, from other agencies of the UN system, so their exclusion from the demographic document is puzzling, especially as the Population Division's two highly useful statistical charts on rural and urban population, respectively, complete extensive data on the NICs.

The third publication, and one of the most specialised UN statistical publications, is the Energy Statistics Yearbook. The aim of this publication is “to provide a global framework of comparable data on long-term trends in the supply of mainly commercial primary and secondary forms of energy.” The document is perhaps the most intriguing of the three in terms of how it treats island countries, especially the NICs.

In the Country Nomenclature explanation at the beginning of the text, it is explained that statistics for the United States includes the 50 states and the District of Columbia, and oil statistics as well as for coal trade statistics, also include Puerto Rico, Guam, the US Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern Mariana Islands. The explanation also inexplicably indicates that the Pacific Islands used for military purposes - Johnston Atoll, Midway Islands and Wake Island –– were also subsumed under the US statistics. More on this later.

In the statistical tables of the energy document, data for the Caribbean and Central America is in the North American region (an interesting interpretation of the political cartography). In tables 1-3 of the document on production, trade and consumption of commercial energy, data for all of the UK-administered territories except the Turks and Caicos Islands is listed, along with statistics for Aruba, the Netherlands Antilles, Puerto Rico, Greenland, Martinique and Guadeloupe. Data for the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) and French Guiana are appropriately listed in the South America category, with Hong Kong and Macau statistics also properly listed under Asia. The Faroe Islands is under Europe. The Pacific category includes data for the Cook Islands, French Polynesia, New Caledonia and Niue. Data is also included for Gibraltar (in the European section), and St. Helena (in the African section).

It is in table 14 on the production, trade and consumption of crude petroleum that has raised eyebrows, and returns attention to the beginning of the document where it was indicated that data for the US-administered territories is subsumed under the US statistical totals. In this regard, only data on Aruba and the Netherlands Antilles, of all of the non-independent countries (NICs), is made available. Data on Martinique also appears, even as this is not a country, non-independent or otherwise, but is a part of the EU. Table 15 on international trade of crude petroleum does not even include the few NICs listed in table 14. A subsequent table on refinery distillation capacity only includes Aruba and Martinique.

Invariably, of the 38 tables included in the document, data on the NICs is included primarily when energy consumption is addressed. In the areas of energy production, however, data on the NICs is absent. Thus, in the case of oil statistics, the data for the US-administered territories is included with the US statistics, providing no opportunity for an assessment of performance in this sector in the US-administered territories. This is clearly evident in the specific tables dealing with refinery distillation capacity, production, trade and consumption of gasoline where data on most of the NICs appears, except for the US -administered territories.

The exclusion of oil production and trade statistics is puzzling given that the US Virgin Islands maintains the largest oil refinery in the Western Hemisphere, with significant refining capacity, imports of crude, and exports of refined petroleum products to the US and other markets. The five US – administered territories, with the exception of Puerto Rico, are also not within the customs zone of the United States, so are therefore separate economies. All warrant separate attention, notwithstanding the arbitrary decision to exclude their data – unless, of course, the decision was not so arbitrary.

The decision to include separate data for NICs, or to include that data in the statistics of the larger country with which the territory has a political relationship, should be made carefully, based on established principles. All efforts should be made to provide separate data for NICs if the document is to have validity and meaning to those who look to UN studies for information. Such decisions should not be left to chance or misinterpretation, nor subject to any unilateral political direction. Such omissions detract from otherwise excellent UN documents.