Trapper's Swamp

DBS and OCBC garnered international attention after human rights group EarthRights International (ERI) released a report accusing the two banks of holding billions of dollars in their coffers for the Burmese junta, siphoned from a major national gas pipeline project with Total and Chevron. From the report:

In simplistic terms, the military regime receives revenue for its natural gas exports in US Dollars. It then exchanges that revenue into its national budget at an exchange rate of Kt 6 to the dollar, rather than the more accurate market rate of Kt 1,000 to the dollar. Based on that moel, of the US$4.83 billion in earnings from the Yadana gas [project] since 2000, the Burmese regime would have included Kt 28.98 billion (or US$28.98 million) in its national budget instead of Kt 4.83 trillion (or US$4.83 billion). That leaves approximately Kt 4.80 trillion (or US$4.80 billion) mysteriously unaccounted for in the national budget. That is, approximately US$4.80 billion of the US$4.83 billion of the SPDC's Yadana revenue is not included in the national budget.

EarthRights International's sources indicate that the Burmese military regime's portion of the Yadana Project revenue, generated from the peoples' natural resources, is located in two leading offshore banks in Singapore, well known as the repositories of funds of regional governments and diaspora communities: the Overseas Chinese Banking Corporation (OCBC), which holds the majority of the revenue, and DBS Group. The OCBC is Singapore's longest established local bank and one of the largest financial institutions in the Singapore-Malaysian market with total assets of $183 billion, according to the bank. DBS Group is one of the largest financial services groups in Asia and the largest bank in Singapore as measured by assets. These transactions are facilitated by Burma's state-owned Foreign Trade Bank.

(Emphasis from the report itself)

AFP and Reuters also covered this story. As expected, DBS and OCBC both deny this, but the problem is one of credibility, and this can work both ways. If this story turns out to be true, then they can be "counted upon" to hold your money for you, even if, or maybe, especially if, you're a crook. I suppose that is a plus when we are aiming for the Swiss banking model, but where accountability is concerned, it raises more than a few questions.

Judging from their reluctance in proving their innocence, there appears to be more than what they are telling us. We'll see if this blows over quickly or not. I'd much prefer the latter.