Quedagh Merchant (;  Qedahyan Waćařakan), also known as the Cara Merchant and the Adventure Prize, was an Indian merchant vessel famously captured by Scottish privateer William Kidd on 30 January 1698.

The ship was originally owned by a man named Coirgi, a French corruption of "Kurji", a Khoja name common in Gujarat. After the ship's capture, Kidd attempted to return to New York to share in the treasure with the governor of that colony, then on to England to pay off his backers.

The capture of Quedagh Merchant, as well as Rouparelle, caused a scandal throughout the British Empire, hurting Britain's safe trading status along the African and Indian coasts. Although Kidd felt that both of these captures were legal in accordance with his commission by his Lords, word spread quickly that Captain Kidd was a pirate. Kidd was later imprisoned and ultimately executed for alleged acts of piracy, as well as murder.

The fate of Quedagh Merchant rested in the hands of merchants hired by Captain Kidd to guard the ship and await his return to the Caribbean in three months' time. During Kidd's long imprisonment in New York and later in England, New York Governor Lord Richard Bellomont attempted to extract a confession for the location of the ship, which was left anchored in a lagoon along Santa Catalina. When word reached New York that the merchants had sold off most of the goods, burned the ship, and sailed to Holland, Lord Bellomont sent a ship to verify that it had indeed been burned. The exact location of the remains of Quedagh Merchant were a mystery until December 2007, when they were discovered off the coast of Catalina Island, Dominican Republic.

Merchant voyage
In April 1696, a group of Armenian merchants hired the 350-ton Quedagh Merchant, owned by an Indian man named Coirgi.  Operating out of Surat in north-western India, the Armenians were assisted by Augun Peree Callendar, a local English East India Company representative who freelanced to help supplement his income. For the voyage, the ship was captained by John Wright, had two Dutch first mates, a French gunner, more than 90 Indian crewmen, and 30 Armenian merchants.

After several delays, the crew loaded the ship with cotton, and departed from Surat, travelled around the tip of India, and reached Bengal in late 1697. There, the Armenian merchants sold their cotton for 1,200 muslins and other cloths, 1,400 bags of brown sugar, 84 bales of raw silk, 80 chests of opium, and other items such as iron and saltpetre. For safe passage, the group applied to Francois Martin, the representative for the French East India Company.  The request was granted, and the ship began its return trip around the tip of India.

Capture by Captain Kidd

On 30 January 1698, Captain Kidd, aboard his ship Adventure Galley, spotted Quedagh Merchant about 25 leagues from Cochin, and raced to catch up with it. After approximately four hours, Adventure Galley caught up with Quedagh and hoisted a French flag for its colours, and Kidd commanded the other captain to board his ship. A Frenchman came over by boat, and when he stepped aboard Adventure Galley, Kidd gave the command to hoist an English flag. The Frenchman, upon seeing the flag change, reportedly replied, "Here is a good Prize."

Kidd, whose mission to capture any enemy and pirate ships, was commissioned by several English Lords to seize all loot and return to England to split the treasure among himself, his crew, and the Lord investors.  Although this ship was Indian owned, flying Armenian colours, captained by an Englishman, and had a mostly Indian crew, seemed to not fit Kidd's commission; that the voyage had been promised safe passage by the French, an English enemy, technically made this seizure a legal capture.

When Kidd and his crew began the inspection of Quedagh Merchant, while inventorying the loot, the Frenchman mentioned that he was not actually the captain of the vessel, but that Mr. Wright was indeed the man in that role. Kidd located Captain Wright below deck, and he denied being the captain, although the French pass identified him as the captain with the inscription "pilot Rette". Wright also informed him that an agent for the English East India Company had brokered the voyage. Kidd, acknowledging that looting this ship could raise concerns back in England, decided that the crew vote on whether to take the ship and its cargo, or sell it back to the Armenians. A man named Cogi Baba offered to buy the ship and its cargo back for what amounted to 1/20 of the actual value of the cargo, but the men of Kidd's crew rejected the offer.  Kidd did not fight the vote, knowing that this was a legal capture.

Kidd did not know that hundreds of the bales below deck belonged to a nobleman, Muklis Khan, who was close to the Grand Moghul. The crews of Adventure Galley, Quedagh Merchant, and Rouparelle, another ship captured by Kidd and renamed November, set sail for Cochin and Kalliguilon harbour to sell some of the goods to finance his trip back to England. After selling much of the cargo for gold, he left the harbour hurriedly to escape four ships of the Dutch East India Company that were attempting to capture him. Kidd gave orders that if his group of three ships broke up, to meet at St. Mary's Island, Madagascar.

St. Mary's Island
When Kidd arrived at St. Mary's Island aboard Adventure Galley, he spotted a ship that belonged to noted pirate, Robert Culliford, Mocha Frigate. Since Kidd's mission was to capture pirate treasure, he immediately began a battle plan, but he felt undermanned, so he decided to wait for his other two ships, November and Quedagh Merchant, to arrive before attacking. Six weeks passed before both November and Quedagh Merchant arrived at St. Mary's Island.

Mutiny
After a short time, Kidd called for all of his crew to gather on Quedagh Merchant.  He told his men to ready themselves for battle, but the crew, wanting to get paid after two years with Kidd, voted 100 to 15 to mutiny over to Culliford. The following morning, the mutinied crew began to off-load the treasure aboard Quedagh Merchant.  Kidd, after a show of force and personality, was able to convince his former crewmen to give back his, and his few remaining loyal crew, their share of the treasure. Culliford's men proceeded to strip all three ships of anything of value, including weapons, sails, rigging, and anchors. Before Culliford departed St. Mary's Island, his crew sank November, leaving Kidd with two stripped down ships, and a skeleton crew. Surprisingly, one of the men that chose to stay was an old rogue seaman named James Gilliam, who was a pirate at one time, but like Kidd, also believed that the mission was noble and had refused to turn pirate.

Adventure Prize
Kidd decided that there were enough sail parts, rigging, and metalwork available left on Adventure Galley, and moved everything to Quedagh Merchant, the ship he chose to be his vessel to travel back to New York. It was during this time that Kidd insisted on calling Quedagh Merchant the Adventure Prize. The first stop on his return journey was Port Dolphin,  down the coast of the Madagascar, then over to Tulear, also along the Madagascar coast, to buy provisions, and find more crew members.

Feeling that his ship appeared stolen, which could cause him problems, even though he had his documents to prove otherwise, he decided to avoid the main shipping ports.  He planned to head to the obscurity of Annobón off central Africa. From there he planned on going straight to the Caribbean, then up to New York. He arrived in the Caribbean a full ten months after his crew had mutinied, and anchored his vessel along the coast of Anguilla, the northernmost Leeward Island. It was here that he first learned that he was now a wanted pirate, with many governors having orders to arrest Kidd and his crew.

With nowhere to go, with Quedagh Merchant leaking and "too stolen looking", Kidd decided he needed a new ship. He moved his ship and what was left of his crew to Mona Island, a Spanish held Caribbean island. With help from a passing merchant, Henry Bolton, Kidd was able to sell some of his treasure for provisions and enough money to buy Bolton's sloop, St. Antonio.

Kidd decided his best plan was to sail to New York, in his new ship, and convince one of his backers, Governor Bellomont, that he served honourably, and that the stories of his piracy were not true. He authorized Mr. Bolton to stay and guard Adventure Prize, which was now in a lagoon on the small island of Santa Catalina, along with the authorization to sell more of the cargo if he was able to get a good deal. Kidd promised to return in three months, then whatever merchandise was sold, the shares would be divided then.

Attempted retrieval
When Kidd arrived in New York, he was arrested, but would not reveal the location of Adventure Prize, believing that the treasure aboard the ship could be used as barter to free him. Bellomont tried to get together two ships, one of which was St. Antonio, to sail back to the Caribbean to retrieve what was left of Kidd's loot. As the planning stage for this voyage was nearly completed, a sloop arrived in New York, claiming that the merchants aboard Adventure Prize had sold off most of the goods, set fire to the ship, and left the Caribbean to sail to Holland. After hearing this news, Bellomont approved Captain Nathaniel Cary, aboard St. Antonio, to return to the Caribbean to verify that the ship was indeed burned off the coast of Hispaniola, and attempt to reclaim the cargo from the local governments, including Curaçao. According to local records, the men Kidd entrusted with his ship reportedly looted it, and then set it ablaze and adrift down the Rio Dulce.

Discovery
In December 2007,  off the coast of Catalina Island in the Dominican Republic, the remains of a shipwreck were discovered by a local resident and then investigated by archaeologists from Indiana University. The team was surprised that this ship, that had been sought after by many a treasure hunter over the centuries, was located so close to shore in shallow, crystal clear water.  Confidence among the investigators was high that this was the remains of Quedagh Merchant due to consistencies of historical records, and the cannons found in the wreckage. The Indiana University team has been licensed to investigate the site, and convert the site into an underwater preserve, where it will be accessible to the public.

Since the ship is an important symbol of Armenian commercial history, attempts to find the ship had for some time been made by Armenian scientists as well. Ayas Nautical Research Club led by Karen Balayan, who in 2004-6 had sailed around Europe in a replica of the 13th-century Armenian vessel Kilikia, published a paper in March 2007, saying they would undertake an expedition to the Caribbean Sea aboard a 46-foot yacht, Anahit, sailing under the flag of Armenia.

References

Referenced materials

2007 archaeological discoveries
Pirate ships
Privateer ships
Ships attacked and captured by pirates
Shipwrecks in the Caribbean Sea
William Kidd
Merchant ships of India
Khoja Ismailism
Ships built in India
17th-century ships

Quedagh Merchant


In the United States Government, the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs (EAP, originally the Office of Chinese Affairs) is part of the United States Department of State and is charged with advising the Secretary of State and Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs on matters of the Asia-Pacific region, as well as dealing with U.S. foreign policy and U.S. relations with countries in the region.  It is headed by the Assistant Secretary of State for East Asian and Pacific Affairs, who reports to the Under Secretary of State for Political Affairs.

Organization
The offices of the Bureau of East Asian and Pacific Affairs direct, coordinate, and supervise U.S. government activities within the region, including political, economic, consular, public diplomacy, and administrative management issues.

Office of Australia, New Zealand, and Pacific Island Affairs (EAP/ANP) – Coordinates policy on Australia, Fiji, Kiribati, the Marshall Islands, Micronesia, Nauru, New Zealand, Palau, Papua New Guinea, Samoa, the Solomon Islands, Tonga, Tuvalu, Vanuatu and Antarctica
Office of China Coordination (China House) (EAP/CHINA) – Coordinates policy regarding China
Office of Regional and Security Policy (EAP/RSP)
Office of Public Affairs (EAP/P) – Coordinates the bureau's media engagement and domestic public outreach, and prepares press guidance for the Department Spokesperson in the Bureau of Public Affairs
Office of Japanese Affairs (EAP/J) – Oversees Japan–United States relations
Office of Mainland Southeast Asian Affairs (EAP/MLS) – Coordinates policy on Burma, Cambodia, Laos, Thailand, and Vietnam
Office of Maritime Southeast Asian Affairs (EAP/MTS) – Coordinates policy on Brunei,  East Timor, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines and Singapore.
Office of Korean and Mongolian Affairs (EAP/KM) – Coordinates policy towards North Korea and South Korea. Since 2022 this office as also coordinated bilateral relations with Mongolia.
Office of Public Diplomacy (EAP/PD)
Office of Multilateral Affairs (EAP/MLA) – Coordinates policy regarding the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), the East Asia Summit, the ASEAN Regional Forum, the Lower Mekong initiative and the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia Pacific
Office of Taiwan Coordination (EAP/TC) – Oversees Taiwan–United States relations
Office of Economic Policy (EAP/EP)
Office of the Executive Director (EAP/EX) – Oversees the bureau's human resources and resource management

Budget
Its budget for FY 2020 was $336 million for diplomatic engagement and $760 million for foreign assistance.

References

External links

EAP
United States diplomacy
United States–Asian relations
United States–Oceanian relations
United States and the Antarctic
Australia–United States relations
Brunei–United States relations
Cambodia–United States relations
China–United States relations
East Timor–United States relations
Fiji–United States relations
Indonesia–United States relations
Japan–United States relations
Kiribati–United States relations
Laos–United States relations
Malaysia–United States relations
Marshall Islands–United States relations
Federated States of Micronesia–United States relations
Mongolia–United States relations
Myanmar–United States relations
Nauru–United States relations
New Zealand–United States relations
North Korea–United States relations
Palau–United States relations
Papua New Guinea–United States relations
Philippines–United States relations
Samoa–United States relations
Singapore–United States relations
Solomon Islands–United States relations
South Korea–United States relations
Taiwan–United States relations
Thailand–United States relations
Tonga–United States relations
Tuvalu–United States relations
United States–Vanuatu relations
United States–Vietnam relations


Ms. Splosion Man is a platform video game developed by Twisted Pixel Games, and was released on Xbox 360 on July 13, 2011 as well as Windows Phone. It is the sequel to 2009's 'Splosion Man. The game takes place directly after Splosion Man. In the celebration of 'Splosion Man's capture, the scientists behind his creation accidentally create Ms. Splosion Man. The gameplay draws most of its core elements from its predecessor, but adds new gameplay mechanics such as jump pads and riding on rails.

The game was generally very well received by critics. Aggregate websites GameRankings and Metacritic report scores in the 85% range. Individual scores ranged from a 60% approval to multiple perfect scores. Critics generally felt that the game was a great expansion and improvement over the original. The game's humor was also lauded. Criticisms included long load times between levels and increased difficulty over the original Splosion Man. The game sold over 70,000 units as of year-end 2011.

Ms. Splosion Man was released on November 22, 2018 for Nintendo Switch.

Gameplay

Ms. Splosion Man shares much of the same gameplay with its predecessor, 'Splosion Man. The character is made entirely of explosive material. The aim of the game is to "splode" through a series of levels consisting of puzzles, traps, and enemies. A splode is effectively a jump, and can also be used to kill enemies, such as scientists and robots, demolish walls, detonate explosive barrels or trigger other effects.

Various new gameplay elements have been added to Ms. Splosion Man, including energy rails on which the protagonist can ride, and cannons that toss her in specific directions, some of which can be controlled by the player. The game features both single-player and multiplayer cooperative campaigns, each including levels set in the outside world. Also new to the game is a mode known as 2 Girls 1 Controller, which enables a single player to play through the cooperative campaign controlling both Ms. Splosion Man and 'Splosion Man simultaneously.

In response to player feedback about the first game's difficulty, Ms. Splosion Man contains an overworld that clearly marks each level's difficulty and allows players to skip more difficult levels if they so choose. Twisted Pixel CEO Micheal Wilford stated that the overworld map was inspired by Super Mario World, and that it contains similar secrets such as secret exits.

Synopsis
Following from where 'Splosion Man left off, 'Splosion Man is finally captured by Big Science. As the scientists celebrate in their lab, one scientist inadvertently spills a bottle of liquid onto some electrical wiring. This causes a surge of energy to flow to a nearby experimentation platform where a yellow bow is falling. As the bow touches the platform the surge of energy is released, and Ms. Splosion Man is created. For the first time in the series the character will escape the fictional Big Science facilities and venture out into the world.

Development
Ms. Splosion Man was announced on December 3, 2010 via a press release and teaser trailer. Josh Bear of Twisted Pixel Games said: "I think with Splosion Man a follow up was something we really wanted to do, and that is why you never saw DLC for that game. We could have churned out new levels, but we wouldn't have had the time to add in new gameplay puzzles or cool new character stuff. But we didn't just want to do Splosion Man 2, it had to be something a little more interesting. That is why we decided to do MSM". The team chose a female variation on 'Splosion Man as an homage to Ms. Pac-Man, which, according to Bear, the game pays homage to. Bear continued by explaining that as Ms. Pac-Man was an improvement on Pac-Man so Ms. Splosion Man is meant to be an advancement on Splosion Man. He stated the goal was to ensure that the game "stands out on its own as a much bigger and better game overall, not to be confused as an over-priced DLC pack which I think a lot of retail "sequels" can be a lot of the time". The game runs on Twisted Pixel's BEARD engine, which has been used to power all of their titles.

Twisted Pixel stated that their desire was to keep the game character driven. CEO Micheal Wilford said: "Everything is character based. The thing that matters to us is that hopefully there's a memorable character that makes you laugh, cause no one makes games like that anymore". One of the ways in which they do this is with pop culture references. For example, if the controller is kept idle long enough Ms. Splosion Man will do the Macarena, a popular dance from the 1990s. Additionally the character will quote movies and other references as the player navigates through levels.

Ms. Splosion Man ran a beta testing session in June 2011. Ten thousand signup slots opened to players on May 24. The beta slots filled in three days. Additional codes were distributed during E3 2011 on the show floor and via the official Twisted Pixel Games Twitter account as well as programmer Mike Henry's Twitter account. The game was shown at PAX East 2011 as well as E3. The game was released on July 13, 2011, nearly two years after Splosion Man. Ms. Splosion Man was later released for Steam, Games for Windows – Live, iOS and Windows Phone.

Reception

Ms. Splosion Man received generally strong reviews, some with critical acclaim. Aggregate scores were strong, with Metacritic reporting 82/100. GameRankings reports a similar aggregate score of 83.92%. Individual scores ranged from a 60% approval to a perfect score. The lowest score came from Giant Bomb's Brad Shoemaker who gave the game 3/5 stars. It sold over 70,000 units in its first calendar year. Multiple critics gave the game a perfect score, including Richard Mitchell of Joystiq, Ray Barnholt of 1UP.com, and Terry Terrones of GamePro.

Richard Mitchell of Joystiq stated that Twisted Pixel Games put in a lot of love into this sequel that is packed with new mechanics, level designs and he stated it was his favorite ending of a video game. He stated that "Ms. Splosion Man excels over its predecessor in every way". Daemon Hatfield of IGN also gave the game high marks. He stated in the review that the game was "another excellent, thrilling platformer from the insane team at Twisted Pixel". He added that the game was much more challenging than the first installment, but that it was also more creative, adding new gameplay elements and spots of humor. Hatfield said "there is more creativity packed into one Ms. Splosion Man level than many other games can muster in their entirety".

1UP.com's Ray Barnholt awarded the title an A rating and praised the single and multiplayer modes. Nick Chester of Destructoid called it a step up from Splosion Man. He noted that fans of the first will enjoy the game: "If you enjoyed the developer's first incendiary platformer, you've got no excuse not to go pink for Ms. Splosion Man". Official Xbox Magazines Tyler Cocke praised the wonderful levels, excellent humor and charm but criticized the long load times between levels and menus. Terry Terrones of GamePro praised the vast amount of content for the asking price. He stated it had "a ton of great content to choose from, from concept art to videos and more".

GameSpot's Carolyn Petit lauded the game's level design and cooperative mode. She felt it had many funny moments and extras, as well as great replay value. She criticized some of the visuals and puzzles that hinder some moments. Brad Shoemaker from Giant Bomb expressed some disappointment in the game: "Given all the improvements and additions and craziness, though, it's a little disappointing that I didn't enjoy playing this sequel as much as the first one". His criticisms included the amount of time it takes for Ms. Splosion Man to reach her full speed, and the lack of air control. In addition, he felt the game required a certain amount of "guesswork" to get through some levels, and that players have been put off by the trial-and-error segments present within the game.

References

External links

2011 video games
Games for Windows
IOS games
Microsoft games
Nintendo Switch games
Platformers
Indie games
Side-scrolling video games
Twisted Pixel games
Video game sequels
Video games developed in the United States
Video games featuring female protagonists
Video games with 2.5D graphics
Video games with commentaries
Xbox 360 games
Xbox 360 Live Arcade games
Windows games
Windows Phone games
Multiplayer and single-player video games

Ms. Splosion Man


The original Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) was negotiated and concluded during the last years of the Cold War and established comprehensive limits on key categories of conventional military equipment in Europe (from the Atlantic to the Urals) and mandated the destruction of excess weaponry. The treaty proposed equal limits for the two "groups of states-parties", the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the Warsaw Pact. In 2007, Russia "suspended" its participation in the treaty, and on 10 March 2015, citing NATO's alleged de facto breach of the Treaty, Russia formally announced it was "completely" halting its participation in it as of the next day.

History

Background
In 1972, US president Richard Nixon and Soviet General Secretary Leonid Brezhnev reached a compromise agreement to hold separate political and military negotiations. The Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) would deal with political issues, and Mutual and Balanced Force Reductions (MBFR) with military issues. The CSCE resulted in 1975 in 35 nations signing the concluding document: the Helsinki Final Act. Negotiations for MBFR were stalled by the USSR in 1979 because of NATO's decision to deploy new intermediate-range nuclear weapons in Europe. In 1986, Soviet General Secretary Mikhail Gorbachev proposed in the context of MBFR negotiations to reduce ground and air forces, and to include conventional and nuclear weapons from the Atlantic to the Urals. This proposal was later that year formalized during a Warsaw Treaty meeting. NATO's North Atlantic Council of foreign ministers issued the Brussels Declaration on Conventional Arms Control, which called for two distinct sets of negotiations: one to build on the Confidence and Security-Building Measures (CSBM) results of the Stockholm Conference and the other to establish conventional stability in Europe through negotiations on conventional arms control from the Atlantic to the Urals (ATTU). In 1987, the Stockholm Document entered into force and provided for the first time for a negotiated right to conduct on-site inspections of military forces in the field.

Informal talks between the 16 NATO and the 7 Warsaw Treaty nations began in Vienna on February 17, 1987 on a mandate for conventional negotiations in Europe, which would set out treaty negotiating guidelines. Several months later, on June 27, NATO presented a draft mandate during the 23-nation conference in Vienna. The mandate called for elimination of force disparities, capability for surprise attack, and large-scale offensive operations, and the establishment of an effective verification system. Meanwhile, in December the INF Treaty between the United States and the Soviet Union was signed, effectively allowing mutual inspections. During the May–June 1988 Moscow Summit, US President Ronald Reagan and General Secretary Gorbachev emphasized the importance of stability and security in Europe, specifically calling for data exchange, verification of these data, and then reductions. In December Gorbachev announced at the United Nations a unilateral withdrawal of 50,000 troops from Eastern Europe, and demobilization of 500,000 Soviet troops.

CFE negotiations
In January 1989, NATO and the Warsaw Treaty members produced the Mandate for the Negotiation on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe. The mandate set out objectives for the CFE Treaty and established negotiating principles, and formal negotiations began on March 9, 1989 in Vienna. When US President George H. W. Bush and France's President François Mitterrand met in May, Bush announced the acceptance of reductions of combat aircraft and helicopters. He also proposed a ceiling of 275,000 personnel stationed in Europe by the US and Soviet Union. Bush's proposal was formally adopted during the 1989 Brussels NATO summit and subsequently presented in Vienna.

In July, the 1989 Polish legislative election held in accord with the Polish Round Table Agreement resulted in the appointment on 24 August 1989 of a first non-communist Prime Minister considered an effective end of communist rule in Poland, followed in November by the fall of Berlin Wall in Germany. In the following months revolutions broke out in Hungary, Czechoslovakia, Romania, Bulgaria and Albania. Bush and Gorbachev agreed to speed up arms control and economic negotiations. Bush proposed even steeper reductions, and the Soviet Union negotiated and concluded troop withdrawal agreements with Warsaw Treaty states. The ensuing German reunification would lead to the Treaty on the Final Settlement with Respect to Germany linked to the CFE treaty by specifying that certain military limits imposed on Germany would come into force upon the conclusion of the CFE Treaty.

The text of the treaty was approved by the 22 negotiating states on 15 November 1990 in Vienna.

The Vienna Document on confidence- and security-building measures, also first adopted in 1990, and the CFE Treaty, were seen as parallel peace process components by the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE).

1990 signature ceremony in Paris

The Treaty was signed in Paris on November 19, 1990 by 22 countries. These were divided into two groups:
the then-16 NATO members: The United States, Canada, Denmark, France, Germany, Greece, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain, Turkey, United Kingdom, and Belgium.
the then-six Warsaw Treaty states: Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania, and the Soviet Union

Ratification

The treaty entered into force on November 9, 1992. In 1991 the USSR and the Warsaw Treaty dissolved and Czechoslovakia was in the middle of splitting into the Czech Republic and Slovakia, which explains why the treaty was ratified by 30 rather than 22 states:
The then-16 NATO members
The eight former USSR republics that have territory west of the Urals. These former USSR republics include Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Georgia, Kazakhstan, Moldova, Russia, and Ukraine.
the six former Warsaw Treaty members: Bulgaria, Czech Republic and Slovakia, Hungary, Poland, Romania.

Military blocs reshuffle in Europe and former Soviet Union
In 1994, the Collective Security Treaty Organization (CSTO) was formed and currently includes Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Russia, as well as Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan, though the latter two states did not join the treaty, while Russia suspended its participation in 2015. In September 2022, the lack of Russian support during the Armenia–Azerbaijan border clashes prompted a national debate in Armenia, as an increasing percentage of the population put into doubt whether it is beneficial to continue CSTO membership, calling for realignment of the state with NATO instead.

In contrast, the former non-USSR Warsaw Treaty members subsequently joined NATO, being later followed by the Baltic states and the states of the former Yugoslavia (except Serbia, Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina) which however did not join the treaty. Furthermore, the former Soviet Union republics of Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine, also aspire to join.

Azerbaijan in turn balances between the blocs without joining any.

1996 amendment
On May 31, 1996, the treaty was amended by the so-called flank agreement, which relaxed the restrictions for Russia and Ukraine in the flank region defined in Article V, subparagraph 1(A) of the treaty.

2007–2015 partial suspension of Russian participation
On 14 July 2007, Vladimir Putin announced that Russia would suspend implementation of its Treaty obligations, effective after 150 days. Moscow continued to participate in the JCG, because it hoped that dialogue could lead to the creation of an effective, new conventional arms control regime in Europe.

In 2007 Russia did specify steps that NATO can take to end the suspension. "These include [NATO] members cutting their arms allotments and further restricting temporary weapons deployments on each NATO member's territory. Russia also want[ed] constraints eliminated on how many forces it can deploy in its southern and northern flanks. Moreover, it is pressing NATO members to ratify a 1999 updated version of the accord, known as the Adapted CFE Treaty, and demanding that the four alliance members outside the original treaty, Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, and Slovenia, join it."

2015 indefinite total withdrawal of Russian participation
In March 2015, the Russian Federation announced that it had taken the decision to completely withdraw its participation in the Treaty. Russian diplomat Mikhail Ulyanov said Russia would be unlikely to return to compliance because the accord, "created when the Warsaw Pact was still in existence, is "anachronistic" and "absolutely out of sync with the present realities.""

Content

Arms ceilings
The CFE Treaty set equal ceilings for each bloc (NATO and the Warsaw Treaty Organization), from the Atlantic to the Urals, on key armaments essential for conducting surprise attacks and initiating large-scale offensive operations. Collectively, the treaty participants agreed that neither side could have more than:
 20,000 tanks;
 20,000 artillery pieces;
 30,000 armored combat vehicles (ACVs);
 6,800 combat aircraft; and
 2,000 attack helicopters.

To further limit the readiness of armed forces, the treaty set equal ceilings on equipment that could be deployed with active units. Other ground equipment had to be place in designated permanent storage sites. The limits for equipment each side could have in active units were:
 16,500 tanks;
 17,000 artillery pieces; and
 27,300 armored combat vehicles (ACVs);

The treaty further limited the proportion of armaments that could be held by any one country in Europe to about one-third of the total for all countries in Europe – the "sufficiency" rule.

All sea-based Naval forces were excluded from CFE Treaty accountability.

Regional arrangements
In addition to limits on the number of armaments in each category on each side, the treaty included regional limits intended to prevent destabilizing force concentrations of ground equipment.

Destruction
To meet required troop ceilings, equipment had to be destroyed or, if possible, converted to non-military purposes.

Verification
The treaty included unprecedented provisions for detailed information exchanges, on-site inspections, challenge inspections, and on-site monitoring of destruction. Treaty parties received an unlimited right to monitor the process of destruction. Satellite surveillance was used to verify placement and progress on destruction of large military equipment like vehicles and tanks.

Joint Consultative Group
Finally, the Treaty established in Vienna a body composed of all Treaty members, which was called the Joint Consultative Group (JCG), and which dealt with questions relating to compliance with the provisions of the Treaty. The group aimed to:
 Resolve ambiguities and differences in interpretation
 Consider measures that enhance the Treaty's viability and effectiveness
 Resolve technical questions
 Look into disputes that may arise from the Treaty's implementation

Implementation
After the treaty entered into force, a 4-month baseline inspection period began. Twenty-five percent of the destruction had to be completed by the end of 1 year, 60% by the end of 2 years, and all destruction required by the treaty completed by the end of 3 years.

The principal accomplishment was the large-scale reduction or destruction of conventional military equipment in the Atlantic Ocean to the Ural Mountains (ATTU) region during the first 5 years the Treaty was in effect. By the end of the Treaty's reduction period in 1995, when equipment limits took effect, the 30 States Parties completed and verified by inspection the destruction or conversion of over 52,000 battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, artillery pieces, combat aircraft and attack helicopters. In addition, they have conducted/accepted over 4,000 intrusive on-site inspections of military units/installations, and of specified areas.

NATO mostly fulfilled its obligations by destroying its oldest equipment. Also, NATO members with newer equipment, such as the United States, agreed to transfer some of this equipment to allies with older equipment.

Compliance

NATO
In 2007, the United States' plans to create bases in Romania and Bulgaria constituted, according to Russia, a breach of the treaty. NATO officials disputed this and stated that the US bases were not intended as permanent and thus could not be seen as a breach. However, it was then reported that the agreements signed with both Romania and Bulgaria in 2006 specifically allowed for permanent bases under direct US control and The Washington Times also had obtained the confirmation of a senior United States official that the facilities were intended to be permanent.

Former Soviet republics
A June 1998 Clinton administration report stated that Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Armenia and Azerbaijan were not in compliance with the CFE treaty. Violations ranged from holdings of treaty-limited equipment (TLE) in excess of CFE ceilings to denial of full access during treaty inspections. The report concluded that the compliance issues were not "militarily significant" and Russia and Ukraine, the former USSR republics with the largest holdings among the Eastern bloc, remained within their treaty limits.

In the run-up to the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe's (OSCE) November 1999 Istanbul summit, NATO members perceived three treaty compliance problems. First of all, the continuing existence of Russian equipment holdings in the "flank" region (i.e. Russia's North Caucasus Military District) were in excess of agreed treaty limits. Secondly, the Russian military presence in Georgia was beyond the level authorised by the Georgian authorities. Thirdly, the Russian military presence in Moldova lacked the explicit consent of the Moldovan authorities. During the summit, 30 OSCE members signed the adapted CFE treaty and Russia assumed an obligation to withdraw from the Republic of Moldova, reduce her equipment levels in Georgia and agree with the Georgian authorities on the modalities and duration of the Russian forces stationed on the territory of Georgia, and reduce their forces in the flanks to the agreed levels of the Adapted CFE Treaty. These agreements became known as the "Istanbul Commitments" and were contained in 14 Annexes to the CFE Final Act and within the 1999 Istanbul Summit Declaration. NATO members however refused to ratify the treaty as long as Russia refused, as they saw it, to completely withdraw its troops from Moldovan and Georgian soil. While Russia partially withdrew troops and equipment from Georgia and Moldova, it did not do so completely as requested by NATO.

South Caucasus
According to 2019 report, Azerbaijan continues to significantly violate the treaty. In its data as of January 1, 2018, Azerbaijan declared equipment totals that exceeded its overall limits by over 900 pieces of Treaty-Limited Equipment:

 over 300 battle tanks in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 220 battle tanks, surpassing 136% of the limit,
 over 160 armored combat vehicles (ACV) in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 220 ACVs, surpassing 72% of the limit,
 over 670 artillery pieces in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 285 artillery pieces surpassing 235% of the limit
over 5 attack helicopters in excess of Azerbaijan's limit of 50 attack helicopters surpassing 10% of the limit.

In May 2019, Armenia dismantled and decommissioned 21 armored combat vehicles in accordance with the requirements of treaty.

Follow-up agreements

Concluding Act of the Negotiation on Personnel Strength of Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE-1A)
CFE-1A negotiations began shortly after the original CFE Treaty was signed in 1990. CFE-1A was unlike the original CFE treaty not a legally binding treaty, but a political commitment that simultaneously came into force with the CFE treaty and served as a follow-up agreement. The commitment was that all signatories of the CFE Treaty would undertake steps to improve further confidence and security in the ATTU region. CFE-1A committed the 30 members of the treaty to establish manpower limits and, if deemed necessary, to reduce the existing manpower levels within the CFE area of application to reach these limits. The United States was limited under this commitment to have no more than 250,000 troops in the area of application. As an additional source of security assurance, the CFE −1A agreement required the parties to provide advanced notification of any increases made to the force levels. The compliance with the CFE-1A agreement by a member was evaluated during on-site inspections conducted under the CFE Treaty.

Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE-II)

The Agreement on Adaptation of the Treaty on Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (also known as the adapted CFE treaty) was a revision of the original treaty and was signed during the November 1999 Istanbul summit and took into account the different geopolitical situation of the post-Cold War era by setting national instead of bloc-based limits on conventional armed forces. NATO members refused however to ratify the treaty so long as Russia refused to completely withdraw its troops from Moldovan and Georgian soil. While Russia partially withdrew troops and equipment from Georgia and Moldova, it did not do so completely as demanded by NATO. The linkage between the ratification of the adapted treaty and the complete withdrawal was a political decision made by NATO members based on fundamental principles of international law pertaining to the territorial integrity of sovereign states.

Suspension and withdrawal by the Russian Federation
After the Russian Federation was not willing to support the US missile defense plans in Europe, Russian President Vladimir Putin called for "moratorium" on the treaty in his April 26, 2007 address. Then he raised most of his points for rewriting the treaty during the Extraordinary Conference of States Parties to the Treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, held in Vienna on June 11–15 at Russia's initiative. As his requests were not met during this conference, Putin issued a decree intended to suspend the observance of its treaty obligations on July 14, 2007, effective 150 days later, stating that it was the result of "extraordinary circumstances (...) which affect the security of the Russian Federation and require immediate measures," and notified NATO and its members. The suspension applies to the original CFE treaty, as well as to the follow-up agreements.

Motives
An explanatory document from Russia's presidential administration outlined several reasons for its original suspension of compliance in 2007. First of all, Russia considered the linkage between the adapted treaty ratification and the withdrawal of troops from Georgia and Moldova as "illegitimate" and "invented". Russia also considered the troop-withdrawal issue a bilateral Russia–Georgia and Russia–Moldova issue, not a NATO–Russia issue. Secondly, the three Baltic states, which border Russia unlike the rest of NATO (excluding Poland and Norway), were not covered under the original CFE treaty as they were still occupied by the Soviet Union when the treaty was signed. Also, the Baltic states like all NATO members did not ratify the adapted CFE treaty. Russia's request for a ratification and accession of the Baltic states to a ratified treaty was not fulfilled.

Thirdly, Russia emphasized that NATO's 1999 and 2004 enlargements increased the alliance's equipment above the treaty limits. Consequently, Russia demanded a "compensatory lowering" of overall NATO numerical ceilings on such equipment. Fourthly, Russia mentioned that the then planned basing of U.S. military units in Romania and Bulgaria "negatively affects" those countries' compliance with the CFE Treaty's force ceilings. Fifthly, the document demanded a "removal" of the flank (i.e., North Caucasian) ceilings on Russian forces by a "political decision" between NATO and Russia, ostensibly to "compensate" Russia for the alliance's enlargement. Sixthly, Russia wanted to re-negotiate and "modernize" the 1999–adapted CFE treaty as soon as it was brought into force. Russia's position was that it would proceed unilaterally to suspend the treaty's validity unless NATO countries brought the updated version into force by July 1, 2008, or at least complied with its terms on a temporary basis, pending a re-negotiation of the treaty.

Most likely, but not mentioned in Russia's explanatory document, the above-mentioned "extraordinary circumstances" referred to the US plans for a missile defense complex in Poland, with a radar component in the Czech Republic. Another likely reason is that NATO members refused to ratify the Adapted CFE Treaty due to the continuing presence of several hundred Russian troops in Moldova—something they considered as a violation of the obligations Russia assumed during the 1999 Istanbul summit. However, there was no legal connection between the Adapted CFE treaty and the Russian withdrawal from Georgia and Moldova. The linkage between these two security issues was a decision made by NATO member states to protest against the Second Chechen War and was used as a reason not to ratify the treaty. Russia never accepted this decision—a decision also made six months after the Istanbul summit. Russia also considered the original CFE treaty to be outdated and strategically flawed as it did not take into account the dissolutions of the Warsaw Treaty or the Soviet Union.

In Russia, even Vladimir Ryzhkov, an opposition leader and an independent member of the Duma, agreed that Russia had been forced to respond. However, he also speculated that Putin's suspension by decree was "primarily an election-year message to the country: "Your leader won't budge, no matter who formally becomes next President"."

Reactions
NATO immediately expressed regret over Russia's decision to suspend the treaty, describing it as "a step in the wrong direction", but hoped to engage Moscow in what was described as constructive talks on this issue. The United States along with European states such as Germany, Poland and Romania also expressed their disappointment. Collective Security Treaty Organisation (CSTO) General Secretary Nikolai Bordyuzha and former Soviet president Mikhail Gorbachev expressed support for Putin's decree. On 25 November 2011, the UK stopped sharing military data with Russia.

The Russian Foreign Ministry also said that the consequences of the suspension would be the halting of inspections and verifications of its military sites by NATO countries and that it would no longer have the obligation to limit the number of its conventional weapons. In practice, Russia had already halted such verification visits in June 2007 after an extraordinary CFE treaty conference held in Vienna turned a deaf ear to Russia's complaints. Consequently, military delegations from Bulgaria and Hungary had been denied entry to Russian military units.

Yuri Zarakhovich speculated in Time that the above-mentioned "immediate measures" would be a build-up of its forces in areas bordering NATO eastern members, in particular Poland and the Baltic states. Time further speculated at the time that other measures could include troop buildups along southern borders in the Caucasus, new pressures on Ukraine to maintain the Russian Black Sea Fleet in the Crimea beyond the (then planned) 2017 withdrawal deadline, and a refusal to leave Moldova.

In March 2015, the Russian Federation announced that it had taken the decision to completely halt its participation in the Treaty.

See also
Budapest Memorandum on Security Assurances
Helsinki Accords

References

External links
The Conventional Armed Forces in Europe (CFE) Treaty at a Glance — Arms Control Association
Text of the treaty — United States Department of State
Official signatures and ratifications.
History of NATO – the Atlantic Alliance – UK Government site
Russia intends to leave CFE 26 April 2007
Statement by Russia's Ministry of Foreign Affairs Regarding Suspension by RF of CFE Treaty
'Kremlin tears up arms pact with NATO', the Observer
The Cornerstone Crumbles , the eXile
Key Facts About the CFE Treaty and Agreement on Adaptation – U.S. Mission to the OSCE

NATO treaties
Conventional Armed Forces in Europe
Treaties of the Soviet Union
Soviet Union–United States relations
Multilateral relations of Russia
Cold War treaties
Treaties concluded in 1990
Treaties entered into force in 1992
Treaties of Belgium
Treaties of Canada
Treaties of Denmark
Treaties of France
Treaties of Germany
Treaties of Greece
Treaties of Iceland
Treaties of Italy
Treaties of Luxembourg
Treaties of the Netherlands
Treaties of Norway
Treaties of Portugal
Treaties of Spain
Treaties of Turkey
Treaties of the United Kingdom
Treaties of the United States
Treaties of Armenia
Treaties of Azerbaijan
Treaties of Belarus
Treaties of Georgia (country)
Treaties of Kazakhstan
Treaties of Moldova
Treaties of Ukraine
Treaties of Bulgaria
Treaties of the Czech Republic
Treaties of Slovakia
Treaties of Hungary
Treaties of Poland
Treaties of Romania
Treaties of Czechoslovakia
Treaties extended to the Faroe Islands
Treaties extended to Greenland
Treaties extended to Akrotiri and Dhekelia
Treaties extended to Gibraltar
Treaties extended to Guernsey
Treaties extended to the Isle of Man
Treaties extended to Jersey
November 1990 events in Europe
Law of the Commonwealth of Independent States


Blackenstein, also known as Black Frankenstein on its theatrical release poster and whose actual on-screen title is Blackenstein the Black Frankenstein, is a 1973 American blaxploitation horror film directed by William A. Levey, and starring John Hart, Ivory Stone, Andrea King, Roosevelt Jackson, Joe De Sue, Nick Bolin and Liz Renay. It is loosely based on Mary Shelley's 1818 novel Frankenstein; or, The Modern Prometheus. Released on August 3, 1973, it was made in an attempt to cash in on the success of Blacula; released the previous year by American International Pictures. However, Blackenstein fared poorly in comparison to its predecessor, with most reviews agreeing that the film was "a totally inept mixture of the worst horror and blaxploitation films".

Plot
Big and burly African American soldier Eddie Turner (Joe De Sue) stepped on a land mine while serving in Vietnam and lost both arms and both legs. His physicist fiancé Doctor Winifred Walker (Ivory Stone) thinks she has found help for him in her white former teacher and colleague Doctor Stein (John Hart) who has recently won a Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for "solving the DNA genetic code".

In a tour of Doctor Stein's castle-like Los Angeles home, Winifred is introduced to his other patients: the 90-year-old Eleanor who looks to be only 50 (Andrea King) thanks to Stein's treatments, and the bald Bruno (Nick Bolan) whose lower legs have been successfully re-attached via "laser beam fusion" and Stein's "DNA solution". Winifred is startled when she sees one of Bruno's legs is tiger-striped, which Doctor Stein attributes to "an unknown RNA problem" which he hopes to correct during the course of treatment. His sinister black assistant Malcomb (Roosevelt Jackson) seems overly interested in her reaction to this sight and in her in general. Meanwhile, the stoically suffering Eddie is being verbally abused by an obnoxious white orderly (Bob Brophy) at the local Veteran's Hospital. When Doctors Stein and Walker arrive to ask if he would be interested in submitting to experimental limb transplant surgery that could correct his condition, he immediately consents.

Doctor Stein gives Eddie new replacement arms using his DNA solution, and Eddie seems to be recovering well until Malcomb confesses his attraction to Winifred. Winifed tries to let him down gently, explaining that she intends to marry Eddie as soon as the surgeries are complete, and Malcomb seems to accept her statement, but he later vindictively sabotages the DNA solution used during Eddie's leg surgeries with the contaminated RNA, causing the former soldier to start to devolve into a primitive brutish state with hairy hands and a Neanderthal-like brow ridge. As his condition worsens and he loses the mental capacity for speech and rational thought, the stony-faced Eddie becomes a slow, shambling monster resembling an African American version of the iconic Boris Karloff Frankenstein Monster with a squarish Afro instead of the usual scars and neck bolts. Although he lies in a near-catatonic state by day, compelled by horrible cannibalistic urges the black suit and turtleneck-clad Eddie secretly leaves the house late each night in search of victims who he dismembers, disembowels and devours zombie-style, always returning in time each morning for his ongoing schedule of DNA injections with his doctors none the wiser.

Two police detectives visit Doctor Stein as the body count starts to rise (their suspicions aroused due to the fact that all the killings took place in the surrounding vicinity and that the abusive hospital orderly was the vengeful Eddie's first victim), but Stein is ignorant of the fact that there is now a murderous monster living in his basement laboratory. Winifred, however, has become suspicious of Malcomb and spends her time in the lab, examining the various solutions used during Eddie's surgery. One night, returning from his usual senseless rampage, Eddie hears screaming coming from Winifred's room. He enters to find Malcomb at her bedside and interrupts the attempted rape. Malcomb grabs a gun and empties it into the unaffected Eddie as Winifred flees. Eddie strangles Malcomb and then goes on to kill Bruno and Eleanor, the latter aging rapidly as she dies. Doctor Stein meets Winifred on the stairs, where she tells him Eddie is the monster. Together they down run to the lab.

Winifred busies herself preparing an injection of the DNA solution that she hopes will cure Eddie. When Eddie draws near, he seems moved by her terror and backs away, perhaps dimly remembering that she is his fiancé. Doctor Stein, however, attacks him from behind, provoking a violent response. After a brief tussle with his creator that ends with Stein being fatally knocked into the high voltage electrical equipment, Eddie leaves the house. The police arrive too late to stop Eddie, but discover Doctor Stein's dead body and console Winifred.

Eddie finds a brunette attempting to start a Jeep and spends several long minutes chasing her around an empty industrial warehouse. The police call in the Los Angeles County Canine Corps, and the Doberman Pinschers surround Eddie, knock him to the ground and, with a fittingly macabre irony, viciously tear the monster to pieces in the same way he killed his victims.

Cast
 John Hart as Dr. Stein
 Ivory Stone as Dr. Winifred Walker
 Joe De Sue as Eddie Turner
 Roosevelt Jackson as Malcomb
 Andrea King as Eleanor
 Nick Bolin as Bruno Stragor
 Karin Lind as Hospital Supervisor
 Yvonne Robinson as Hospital Receptionist
 Liz Renay as Blonde Murder Victim
 Don Brodie as Police Lieutenant

Development
According to director William A. Levey, non-actor Joe De Sue was cast in the title role because he was a client of criminal lawyer turned writer/producer Frank R. Saletri, as was celebrity cult icon Liz Renay. Saletri also wrote, produced and directed the never-released blaxploitation horror film Black the Ripper and wrote the screenplays for two unmade Sherlock Holmes films, Sherlock Holmes in the Adventures of the Werewolf of the Baskervilles and Sherlock Holmes in the Adventures of the Golden Vampire, the latter of which was to star Alice Cooper as Dracula. In 1982 Saletri was found murdered "gangland style" in his home, a mansion formerly owned by Bela Lugosi.

Other appearances
 Blackenstein has appeared in skits on Saturday Night Live.
 In a 2011 episode hosted by Jesse Eisenberg, "The Essentials" segment showed the movie Bride of Blackenstein where Dr. Blackenstein (portrayed by Jay Pharaoh) creates a bride (portrayed by Nicki Minaj) for Blackenstein's Monster (portrayed by Kenan Thompson). Unfortunately, it becomes sassy because Igor (portrayed by Jesse Eisenberg) got the parts that caused this personality like the brain of a female DMV employee who just died, the fingernails of a cashier at Walgreens, and the lips of a "ho who didn't know her place" as she described herself when Dr. Blackenstein felt offended at that answer at first. The Bride of Blackenstein wants Blackenstein's Monster to take her out to dinner if she wants to become an official bride. When the angry mob attacks the castle, the Bride of Blackenstein talks off the mob leaders (portrayed by Bill Hader and Kristen Wiig). After the angry mob leaves, the Bride of Blackenstein claims the castle and states that her aunt is coming and needs a room close to the bathroom due to her broken foot. Then she, Blackenstein's Monster, and Dr. Blackenstein sing her theme song as Igor claps along.
 Blackenstein has appeared on MADtv where he was re-dubbed "Funkenstein".
 The movie was referenced in the 2003 South Korean film Save the Green Planet!.
 Blackenstein is given a surprisingly serious scholarly examination as an aspect of a larger cultural perspective in Elizabeth Young's Black Frankenstein: The Making of an American Metaphor published in 2009 as part of the America and the Long 19th Century series from New York University Press.
 On the Simpsons Season 9 episode "Simpson Tide" (1998), Homer Simpson is watching TV at home after getting fired (yet again), when an announcer says, "Next, on Exploitation Theater: Blacula, followed by Blackenstein, and The Blunchblack of Blotre Blame."

Home video release
Blackenstein was first released on video in the late '70s by Media Home Entertainment and again on VHS and DVD by Xenon Pictures in 2003. Severin Films released it on Blu-ray on May 30, 2017; fully restored, it features two versions of the film: the theatrical release, which runs for 78 minutes, and the home video release that lasts 87 minutes. Extras include the original theatrical trailer, as well as numerous interviews.

See also
 List of films featuring Frankenstein's monster

References

External links

1973 horror films
1973 films
Blaxploitation films
1970s English-language films
Frankenstein films
Films about amputees
Films set in country houses
African-American horror films
1970s American films
English-language horror films

Blackenstein


〈I Want You Back〉是一首積遜五人組的第一首全國單曲,在1969年10月6日由摩城唱片發行,並於1970年1月31日成為該團體的第一首熱門歌曲,這首歌於1969年10月18日在黛安娜·罗斯的中首次演出,並於1969年12月14日在艾德·蘇利文秀上進行了里程碑式的演出。

這首歌與的B面重製的"一樣,是積遜五人組的第一張專輯《》中唯一發行的單曲,這首歌連續四周登上靈魂單曲榜第一名,並於1970年1月31日的周末登上告示牌百強單曲榜第一名

"I Want You Back"登上滚石杂志五百大歌曲第104名。

製作

Originally considered for Gladys Knight & the Pips and later for Diana Ross, as "I Wanna Be Free", "I Want You Back" explores the theme of a lover who decides that he was too hasty in dropping his partner. An unusual aspect about "I Want You Back" was that its main lead vocal was performed by a tween, Michael Jackson.

"I Want You Back" was released on October 6, 1969 and was the first Jackson 5 single to be released by Motown and the first song written and produced by The Corporation, a team comprising Motown chief Berry Gordy, Freddie Perren, Alphonso Mizell, and Deke Richards. It also is the first of four Jackson 5 number-ones released in a row (the others being "ABC" – 1970, "The Love You Save" – 1970, and "I'll Be There" – 1970) and the first Jackson 5 song recorded in Los Angeles, California; the quintet had previously been recording Bobby Taylor-produced remakes of other artists' hits, including "Who's Lovin' You", the B-side to "I Want You Back", at Hitsville U.S.A. in Detroit, Michigan. From late 1969 and on, nearly all of the Jackson 5's recordings were done in Los Angeles when the majority of recordings for other artists on the label were done in Detroit.

Although Gladys Knight had been the first to mention the Jacksons to Berry Gordy, and Bobby Taylor brought the Jackson brothers to Motown, Motown credited Diana Ross with discovering them. This was done not only to help promote the Jackson 5, but also to help ease Ross' transition into a solo career, which she began in 1970 soon after the Jackson 5 became a success.

The song was remixed for the 2009 release The Remix Suite.

現場演出

The Jackson 5 performed "I Want You Back" during all of their world tours, either as a full song or as a part of the Jackson 5 Medley in concerts (which also included "ABC" and "Mama's Pearl", later on switched with "The Love You Save" in 1973). During their second-ever television appearance (in an episode of The Hollywood Palace hosted by Diana Ross & the Supremes), the Jackson 5 performed "I Want You Back" along with Sly & the Family Stone's "Sing a Simple Song", The Delfonics' "Can You Remember", and James Brown's "There Was a Time". They also performed the song on American Bandstand and The Andy Williams Show.

Michael Jackson performed the song as part of the "Jackson 5 Medley" (which also included the songs "The Love You Save" and "I'll Be There") during all of his world tours - the Bad World Tour, the Dangerous World Tour and the HIStory World Tour.  The song was performed live at the Michael Jackson: 30th Anniversary Special in 2001, in which Jackson reunited with his brothers on stage for the first time since 1984. The song was to be performed at Jackson's This Is It comeback concerts in London, which were cancelled due to his death.

迴響

The song has sold six million copies worldwide. In 1999, "I Want You Back" was also inducted into the Grammy Hall of Fame.

"I Want You Back" ranks number 104 on Rolling Stones list of the '500 Greatest Songs of All Time'. It also ranks ninth on Rolling Stone's list of the '100 Greatest Pop Songs since 1963'. In 2020, it was ranked number 2 on Rolling Stone's list of 'The 100 Greatest Debut Singles of All Time'.

In 2006, Pitchfork named it the second best song of the 1960s, adding that the chorus contains "possibly the best chord progression in pop music history". A June 2009 article by The Daily Telegraph called it "arguably the greatest pop record of all time". Digital Spy called the song "one of the most enduring pop singles of the sixties".

According to Acclaimed Music, it is the 45th most celebrated song in popular music history, and the 2nd best song of 1969.

The single has been awarded Silver certification on August 22, 2014 by the British Phonographic Industry Association.

"I Want You Back" has long been considered one of the most sampled songs in all of hip hop music. The song has been sampled over 60 times since its release by artists including Jay-Z and The Notorious B.I.G.

The song was included in the soundtrack for the 2014 film Guardians of the Galaxy.

製作名單
以下資訊摘錄自《Michael Jackson All The Songs》以及AllMusic。

 迈克尔·杰克逊 – 主唱
 狄托·傑克森 – 演唱、伴唱
 傑奇·傑克森 – 演唱、伴唱
 傑曼·傑克森 – 演唱、伴唱
 馬龍·傑克森 – 演唱、伴唱
  – 、伴唱
 盧迪·華盛頓 – 、伴唱
  – 鋼琴
  – 鋼琴
  – 吉他
  – 節奏吉他
  – 貝斯
  – 吉他
  – 鼓手
  – 鍵盤
  – 鋼琴
  – 打擊樂器

排行榜

周榜

年終榜

認證

 TWICE翻唱版

《I WANT YOU BACK'》是韓國女子組合TWICE的日本發行英語單曲,由JYP娛樂製作,日本華納音樂發行,於2018年6月15日推出,,主打歌為〈I WANT YOU BACK〉。該歌曲翻唱的是杰克逊五兄弟的经典歌曲《I want you back》。

發行
此單曲共發行五個版本。

初回限定盤A:內含1張CD、1張DVD、24頁寫真歌詞本、隨機小卡1張(共10款)
初回限定盤B:內含1張CD、1張DVD、隨機小卡1張(共10款)
通常盤:內含1張CD、歌詞本、隨機小卡1張(共10款)
ONCE JAPAN 限定盤:內含1張CD、可更換式個人封面(共9款)、收入募集序號

排行榜

認證

註釋與參考資料
註釋

參考資料

外部連結
 Overview of "I Want You Back", featuring picture sleeves from all over the world
 List of cover versions of "I Want You Back"  at SecondHandSongs.com

傑克遜五人組歌曲
1969年單曲
告示牌百大歌曲榜冠軍單曲
Cashbox冠軍單曲
Grammy Hall of Fame Award recipients
Graham Parker歌曲
Tito Nieves歌曲
Victoria Justice歌曲
Victorious
Berry Gordy創作歌曲
Freddie Perren創作歌曲
Deke Richards創作歌曲
Motown歌曲
日本華納音樂單曲
1969年歌曲

I Want You Back


The history of banking in China includes the business of dealing with money and credit transactions in China.

Imperial China

Early Chinese banks

Foreign counting houses called guifang sprang up during the height of the Tang dynasty in China in the 600s, where merchants could deposit funds for protection and could draft checks third parties could cash for those deposits.
By the time the Song dynasty began in 960, Chinese financial institutions were conducting all major banking functions, including the acceptance of deposits, the making of loans, issuing notes, money exchange, and long-distance remittance of money. In 1024, the first paper currency was issued by the state in Sichuan.

Under the Ming dynasty in the 1440s, the confidence in fiat money was so undermined that China abandoned the Great Ming Treasure Note paper money around 1445. The latter Ming and Qing dynasties both regressed to commodity money in response. The single whip tax reform by Grand Secretary Zhang Juzheng's in 1581 had mandated the payment of taxes to be made in bulk silver only, this reform had re-energised the exchange shop business.

Two major types of early Chinese banking institutions are piaohao and qianzhuang. The first nationwide private financial system, so-called "draft banks" or piaohao () was created by the Shanxi merchants during the Qing dynasty. Smaller scale local banking institutions called qianzhuang (), more often cooperated than competed with Piaohao in China's financial market.

Due to structural weaknesses of traditional Chinese law, Chinese financial institutions focused primarily on commercial banking based on close familial and personal relationships, and their  working capital was primarily based on the float from short-term money transfers rather than long-term demand deposits.  The modern concepts of consumer banking and fractional reserve banking never developed among traditional Chinese banks and were introduced to China by European bankers in the 19th century.

A major difference between the piaohao and the qianzhuang was the fact that the qianzhuang banking companies grew out of the money-changing businesses known as the qianpu and would engage in business typical of banks such as providing loans, savings accounts with interest, and so forth, while the piaohao would primarily facilitate the sending of remittances, that is, the sending of money, across the Chinese realm.

Furthermore qianzhuang tended to be very locally run operations and were typically run only by a single family, or a close set of associates, in contrast the piaohao maintained branch offices across China, this allowed money to be paid into one branch office and withdrawn from another branch office - essentially "sent" - without there to be any actual physical silver sycees or strings of copper-alloy cash coins having to be arduously transported, under heavy guard, across great distances bringing many risks with them.

Piaohao

An early Chinese banking institution was called the draft bank or piaohao (票号) in Chinese, also known as Shanxi banks because they were owned primarily by Shanxi merchants. The first "piaohao" Rishengchang originated from Xiyuecheng Dye Company Pingyao in central Shanxi. To deal with the transfer of large amounts of cash from one branch to another, the company introduced drafts, cashable in the company's many branches around China. Although this new method was originally designed for business transactions within the Xiyuecheng Company, it became so popular that in 1823 the owner gave up the dye business altogether and reorganised the company as a special remittance firm, Rishengchang Piaohao. In the next thirty years, eleven piaohao were established in Shanxi province, including Pingyao and neighboring counties of Qi County, Taigu, and Yuci. By the end of the nineteenth century, thirty-two piaohao with 475 branches were in business covering most of China, and the central Shanxi region became the de facto financial centres of Qing China.

All piaohao were organised as single proprietaries or partnerships, where the owners carried unlimited liability. They concentrated on interprovincial remittances, and later on conducting government services. From the time of the Taiping Rebellion, when transportation routes between the capital and the provinces were cut off, piaohao began involvement with the delivery of government tax revenue. Piaohao grew by taking on a role in advancing funds and arranging foreign loans for provincial governments, issuing notes, and running regional treasuries.

Qianzhuang

Independent of the nationwide network of piaohao there were a large number of small native banks, generally called qianzhuang. These institutions first appeared in the Yangzi Delta region, in Shanghai, Ningbo, and Shaoxing. The first qianzhuang can be traced to at least the mid-eighteenth century. In 1776, several of these banks in Shanghai organised themselves into a guild under the name of qianye gongsuo. In contrast to piaohao, most qianzhuang were local and functioned as commercial banks by conducting local money exchange, issuing cash notes, exchanging bills and notes, and discounting for the local business community.

Qianzhuang maintained close relationships with Chinese merchants, and grew with the expansion of China's foreign trade. When Western banks first entered China, they issued "chop loans" (caipiao) to the qianzhuang, who would then lend this money to Chinese merchants who used it to purchase goods from foreign firms. It is estimated that there were around 10,000 qianzhuang in China in the early 1890s.

There were several financial crashes which occurred in China during which a large number of qianzhuang closed, the largest of these occurred in the years 1883, 1910, and 1911. By and by the traditional qianzhuang banks were being replaced by modern credit banks in China, particularly those residing in Shanghai. This would continue to happen well into the Republican period. The last qianzhuang banks were nationalised in 1952 by the government of the People's Republic of China.

During the 1990s qianzhuang made a come back in Mainland China, these new qianzhuang are informal financial companies which are often operating just within the edges of what is legal. The government attitude towards these new qianzhuang isn't that much different from their attitude in the 1950s.

Entry of foreign banks

British and other European banks entered China around the middle of the nineteenth century to service the growing number of Western trade firms. The Chinese coined the term yinhang (銀行), meaning "silver institution", for the English word "bank". The first foreign bank in China was the Bombay-based British Oriental Bank Corporation (東藩匯理銀行), which opened branches in Hong Kong, Guangzhou and Shanghai in the 1840s. Other British banks followed suit and set up their branches in China one after another. The British enjoyed a virtual monopoly on modern banking for forty years. The Hong Kong and Shanghai Banking Corporation (香港上海匯豐銀行), now HSBC, established in 1865 in Hong Kong, later became the largest foreign bank in China.

In the early 1890s, Germany's Deutsch-Asiatische Bank (德華銀行), Japan's Yokohama Specie Bank (橫濱正金銀行), France's Banque de l'Indochine (東方匯理銀行), and Russia's Russo-Asiatic Bank (華俄道勝銀行) opened branches in China and challenged British ascendancy in China's financial market. By the end of the nineteenth century there were nine foreign banks with forty-five branches in China's treaty ports.

At the time due to unfair treaties, foreign banks enjoyed extraterritorial rights. They also enjoyed complete control over China's international remittance and foreign trade financing. Being unregulated by the Chinese government, they were free to issue banknotes for circulation. They also accepted deposits from Chinese government institutions and Chinese private customers and provided and received loans from qianzhuang.

Government banks

After the launch of the Self-strengthening movement, the Qing government began initiating large industrial projects which required large amounts of capital. Though the existing domestic financial institutions provided sufficient credit and transfer facilities to support domestic trade and worked well with small-scale enterprises, they could not meet China's new financial demands. China turned to foreign banks for large scale and long term finance. Following a series of military defeats, the Qing government was forced to borrow from foreign banks and syndicates to finance its indemnity payments to foreign powers.

A number of proposals were made by a modern Chinese banking institution from the 1860s onwards. Li Hongzhang, one of the leaders of the self-strengthening movement, made serious efforts to create a foreign-Chinese joint bank in 1885 and again in 1887.

The Imperial Bank of China (中國通商銀行), China's first modern bank, opened for business in 1897. The bank was organised as a joint-stock firm. It adopted the internal regulations of HSBC, and its senior managers were foreign professionals. After the proclamation of the Republic of China, the bank changed its English name to the Commercial Bank of China in 1912. The name more accurately translated its Chinese name and removed any link to the Qing dynasty.

In 1905, China's first central bank was established as the Bank of the Board of Revenue (大清户部銀行).  Three years later, its name was changed to the Great Qing Government Bank (大清銀行).  Intended as a replacement for all existing banknotes, the Da Qing Bank's note was granted exclusive privilege to be used in all public and private fund transfers, including tax payments and debt settlements.  Da Qing Bank was also given exclusive privilege to run the state treasury. The Board of Revenue that controlled most of the central government's revenue transferred most of its tax remittance through the bank and its branches.  The government entrusted the bank with the transfer of the Salt Surplus Tax, diplomatic expenditures, the management of foreign loans, the payment of foreign indemnities, and the deposit and transfer of the customs tax in many treaty ports.

Following the Xinhai Revolution of 1911, Daqing Bank was renamed the Bank of China. This bank continues to exist today.

Another government bank, the Bank of Communications (交通銀行), was organised in 1908 by the Ministry of Posts and Communications to raise money for the redemption of the Beijing-Hankou Railway from Belgian contractors. The bank's aim was to unify funding for steamship lines, railways, as well as telegraph and postal facilities.

Private banks

The first private bank dates to 1897,  courtesy of the  entrepreneurship of Shen Xuanhui. Three private banks appeared in the late Qing period, all created by private entrepreneurs without state funding. The Xincheng Bank was established in Shanghai in 1906, followed by the National Commercial Bank in Hangzhou the following year, and the Ningbo Commercial and Savings Bank (四明銀行) in 1908. In that year, the Regulations of Banking Registration was issued by the Ministry of Revenue, which continued to have effect well after the fall of the Qing dynasty.

A lion's share of the profitable official remittance business was taken by the Daqing Bank from the piaohao. The piaohao all but disappeared following the Xinhai Revolution in 1911.

The same period saw the increasing power of private interests in modern Chinese banking and the concentration of banking capital. In Shanghai, the so-called "southern three banks" (南三行) were established. They were the Shanghai Commercial and Savings Bank (上海商業儲蓄銀行), the National Commercial Bank (浙江興業銀行), and the Zhejiang Industrial Bank (浙江實業銀行). Four other banks, known as the "northern four banks" (北四行) emerged later. They were the Yien Yieh Commercial Bank (鹽業銀行), the Kincheng Banking Corporation (金城銀行), the Continental Bank (大陸銀行), and the China & South Sea Bank (中南銀行). The first three were initiated by current and retired officials of the Beijing government, whilst the last was created by an overseas Chinese.

Republic of China

Note suspension incident

In 1916 the Republican government in Beijing ordered the suspension of paper note conversion to silver. With the backing of the Mixed Court, the Shanghai Branch of the Bank of China successfully resisted the order.

The Bank of China's bylaws were revised in 1917 to restrict government intervention.

Golden Age of Chinese banking
The decade from the Northern Expedition to the Second Sino-Japanese War in 1937 has been described as a "golden decade" for China's modernisation as well as for its banking industry. Modern Chinese banks extended their business in scope, making syndicated industrial loans and offering loans to rural areas.

The Nationalist government created the Central Bank of China in 1928, with T. V. Soong as its first president. The Bank of China was reorganised as a bank specialising in the management of foreign exchange while the Bank of Communications focused on developing industry.

The Bureau of Financial Supervision was set up under the Ministry of Finance, to supervise financial affairs.

Confronted with imminent war with Japan, the Chinese government took control of over 70 percent of the assets of modern Chinese banks through the notorious banking coup.

Modern banks had a significant role in China from 1900 to 1930.

Introduction of the Chinese national yuan

The role of non-government banks greatly decreased as the era of China's Nationalist government continued. As inflation grew, only government banks could attract deposits. By 1945, only 2% of deposits were held by private banks.

Following the  the government of the Republic of China introduced the  (法幣, "legal tender"), from November of the year 1935 to December 1936, the three officially sanctioned note-issuing banks issued the new paper currency, the fabi was completely detached from the silver standard. The Central Government of the Republic of China had enacted these currency reforms to limit currency issuance to three major government controlled banks: the Bank of China (中國銀行), Central Bank of China (中央銀行), Bank of Communications (交通銀行), and later the Farmers Bank of China (中國農民銀行). Chinese people were required by government mandate to hand in all of their current silver reserves in return for the newly introduced fabi, this was primarily done by the government in order to supply the silver that the Chinese government owed to the United States. The Chinese government and the central bank were careful to do a controlled release of about 2,000,000,000 yuan worth of new fabi banknotes, this was done in order to prevent inflation, and the government had taken many precautions to distribute these banknotes both gradually and fairly. In the first few months following the release of the fabi banknotes, the Chinese government did this to wait to see whether the Chinese public would place their trust in the new, unified Chinese currency.

Taiwan

Following the Chinese civil war between the Kuomintang and the Communist Party, the General Management Office and the Bank of Communications accompanied the government of the Republic of China during their move to Taiwan. The branches of Chinese banks that had remained in mainland China were nationalised by the government of the People's Republic of China and branches of the Bank of China and Bank of Communications continued to be called "Bank of China" and "Bank of Communications". The branches of Chinese banks abroad would continue to serve overseas Chinese. These branches would also accept remittances and assisted the government of the Republic of China in handling foreign procurement matters.

In the year 1960, the General Management Office of the Bank of China was reopened in Taiwan, during this era the Taiwanese version of the Bank of China was a professional bank for international trade and exchange, and operated as a general commercial banking corporation.

On 25 October 1971, the Communist Party-run People's Republic of China replaced the Republic of China at the United Nations following the passing of Resolution 2758. In order to prevent all of its assets from being forcibly transferred to the government of the People's Republic of China as it was seen as a "successor state" that was "inheriting China" from the still existing Republic of China. For this reason the Bank of China in Taiwan was renamed to the "International Commercial Bank of China" (中國國際商業銀行), also referred to as the ICBC, it was later privatised by the government of the Republic of China.

People's Republic of China
Mao Zedong's 1940 essay On New Democracy stated in a new democratic China, the state would "own the big banks and the big industrial enterprises."

The People's Bank of China was formed in 1948 as the merger of Huabei Bank, Beihai Bank, and Northwestern Farmer's Bank. The merger provided that People's Bank of China would function as the country's central bank and only commercial bank. The People's Bank of China held 93% of the country's financial assets. It was the only provider of credit, settlement clearance, and teller services.

After 1949

Nationalization and consolidation of the country's banks received the highest priority in the earliest years of the People's Republic, and banking was the first sector to be completely socialized. In the period of recovery after the Chinese civil war (1949–52), the People's Bank of China moved very effectively to halt raging inflation and bring the nation's finances under central control. Over the course of time, the banking organization was modified repeatedly to suit changing conditions and new policies.

The early PRC banking system was highly centralized and based on a handful of state institutions. Banking regulations were adopted wholesale from the Soviet Union's banking regulations.

In 1950, the Bank of China became was made a bureau of the People's Bank of China. Pursuant to the 1953 "Regulations on Bank of China," it was made the only institution authorized to handle foreign currency and international payments. It was responsible for allocating the country's foreign exchange reserves, arranging foreign loans, setting exchange rates for China's currency and issuing letters of credit. The Bank of China had offices in Beijing and other cities engaged in foreign trade and maintained overseas offices in major international financial centers, including Hong Kong, London, New York City, Singapore, and Luxembourg.

The Agricultural Bank was created in the 1950s to facilitate financial operations in the rural areas. The Agricultural Bank provided financial support to agricultural units. It issued loans, handled state appropriations for agriculture, directed the operations of the rural credit cooperatives, and carried out overall supervision of rural financial affairs. The Agricultural Bank was headquartered in Beijing and had a network of branches throughout the country. It flourished in the late 1950s and mid-1960s but languished thereafter until the late 1970s, when the functions and autonomy of the Agricultural Bank were increased substantially to help promote higher agricultural production. In the 1980s it was restructured again and given greater authority in order to support the growth and diversification of agriculture under the responsibility system.

The People's Construction Bank managed state appropriations and loans for capital construction. It checked the activities of loan recipients to ensure that the funds were used for their designated construction purpose. Money was disbursed in stages as a project progressed. The reform policy shifted the main source of investment funding from the government budget to bank loans and increased the responsibility and activities of the People's Construction Bank.

Rural credit cooperatives were small, collectively owned savings and lending organizations that were the main source of small-scale financial services at the local level in the countryside. They handled deposits and short-term loans for individual farm families, villages, and cooperative organizations. Subject to the direction of the Agricultural Bank, they followed uniform state banking policies but acted as independent units for accounting purposes. In 1985 rural credit cooperatives held total deposits of ¥72.5 billion.

During the Cultural Revolution, the People's Bank of China suspended its commercial banking service. In 1969, the State Council approved the consolidation of People's Bank of China's headquarters as a bureau within the Ministry of Finance. Local People's Bank of China branches were merged into local government finance departments. This effective demotion of the People's Bank of China lasted for a decade.

Urban credit cooperatives were a relatively new addition to the banking system in the mid-1980s, when they first began widespread operations. As commercial opportunities grew in the reform period, the thousands of individual and collective enterprises that sprang up in urban areas created a need for small-scale financial services that the formal banks were not prepared to meet. Bank officials therefore encouraged the expansion of urban credit cooperatives as a valuable addition to the banking system. In 1986 there were more than 1,100 urban credit cooperatives, which held a total of ¥3.7 billion in deposits and made loans worth ¥1.9 billion.

Beginning in 1978 and continuing through 1984, the People's Bank of China began spinning off its commercial banking functions. In 1979, the State Council approved the People's Bank of China's Proposal on the Reform of China's Banking System. This resulted in the establishment of the State Central Administration of Foreign Exchange (SCAFE), which managed China's then-small amount of foreign reserves. SCAFE became a subsidiary of the People's Bank of China in 1983 and became known by its current name, the State Administration of Foreign Exchange (SAFE).

During the 1980s the banking system was expanded and diversified to meet the needs of the reform program, and the scale of banking activity rose sharply. New budgetary procedures required state enterprises to remit to the state only a tax on income and to seek investment funds in the form of bank loans. Between 1979 and 1985, the volume of deposits nearly tripled and the value of bank loans rose by 260 percent. By 1987 the banking system included the People's Bank of China, Agricultural Bank of China, Bank of China (which handled foreign exchange matters), China Investment Bank, China Industrial and Commercial Bank, People's Construction Bank, Communications Bank, People's Insurance Company of China, rural credit cooperatives, and urban credit cooperatives.

In the mid-1980s the banking system still lacked some of the services and characteristics that were considered basic in most countries. Interbank relations were very limited, and interbank borrowing and lending was virtually unknown. Checking accounts were used by very few individuals, and bank credit cards did not exist. In 1986 initial steps were taken in some of these areas. Interbank borrowing and lending networks were created among twenty-seven cities along the Yangtze River and among fourteen cities in north China. Interregional financial networks were created to link banks in eleven leading cities all over China, including Shenyang, Guangzhou, Wuhan, Chongqing, and Xi'an and also to link the branches of the Agricultural Bank. The first Chinese credit card, the Great Wall Card, was introduced in June 1986 to be used for foreign exchange transactions. Another financial innovation in 1986 was the opening of China's first stock exchanges since 1949. Small stock exchanges began operations somewhat tentatively in Shenyang, Liaoning Province, in August 1986 and in Shanghai in September 1986.

Throughout the history of the People's Republic, the banking system has exerted close control over financial transactions and the money supply. All government departments, publicly and collectively owned economic units, and social, political, military, and educational organizations were required to hold their financial balances as bank deposits. They were also instructed to keep on hand only enough cash to meet daily expenses; all major financial transactions were to be conducted through banks. Payment for goods and services exchanged by economic units was accomplished by debiting the account of the purchasing unit and crediting that of the selling unit by the appropriate amount. This practice effectively helped to minimize the need for currency.

In 1993, Zhu Rongji gave a speech in his capacity as governor of the People's Bank of China which helped serve as the basis for the subsequent development of China's policy banks. Zhu explained his view of how China's financial system should be structured, stating that the state "must establish a system of financial institutions, under the supervision of the central bank, principally consisting of national policy banks and state-owned commercial banks, but that encompasses a variety of financial institutions[.]" His proposed institutions included an export-import bank, a national interbank lending system, a short-term paper market, and an renminbi exchange rate mechanism based on the market rate. As researcher Zongyuan Zoe Liu writes, "The Party's contemporary economic power and financial influence are based substantially upon the institutions that Zhu envisioned in 1993, Fifteen years later, in 2008, China's policy banks and sovereign funds emerged on the global financial scene as some of the world's largest institutional investors, wielding significant influence over financial markets and projecting the Party's power abroad."

In 2003, Central Huijin was established as China's first sovereign fund and given the mission of recapitalizing China's banks.

Since 1949 China's leaders have urged the Chinese people to build up personal savings accounts to reduce the demand for consumer goods and increase the amount of capital available for investment. Small branch offices of savings banks were conveniently located throughout the urban areas. In the countryside savings were deposited with the rural credit cooperatives, which could be found in most towns and villages. In 1986 savings deposits for the entire country totaled over ¥223.7 billion.

See also
 History of banking
 History of economics
 Economy of the Song dynasty
 Economy of China
 Economic history of China (Pre-1911)
 Economic history of China (1912–1949)

References

Further reading
 Linsun Cheng, Banking in Modern China: Entrepreneurs, Professional Managers, and the Development of Chinese Banks, 1897-1937 (Cambridge University Press, 2007).
 Zhaojin Ji, A History of Modern Shanghai Banking: The Rise and Decline of China's Finance Capitalism (M. E. Sharpe, 2003).

Economic history of China
Banking in China
China
Cooperatives in China

History of banking in China


Emanuel ("Manus") Boekman (15 August 1889 – 15 May 1940) was a Dutch social democratic politician, statistician, demographer and typographer. He is remembered for his activities as a municipal executive board member for education and culture (wethouder) in Amsterdam (1931-1933, 1935-1940) and his advocacy for an active state cultural policy.

Life

Boekman was born into a Jewish bookseller dynasty and was the eldest son of Maurits Boekman (1869-1942), initially a diamond cutter, and Heintje Peereboom. At the age of twelve, he started working as a typographer. He was interested in politics and became a chairman of his trade union, the Typografen Jongelingen Vereeniging (Young Typographer's Society). Originally he was a follower of the early Dutch socialist Ferdinand Domela Nieuwenhuis. Boekman's spare time was devoted to studying, and he qualified for various teacher's degrees, including the economy.

In 1911 Boekman obtained a position as head of the administration of the Amsterdam Harbour Authority and, in 1916, became head of the department for statistics of the Rijksverzekeringsbank (nl), a state insurance bank. In this period, he became a prolific author on various subjects, ranging from statistics and economy to unemployment and alcoholism. From 1921 up to his death in 1940, Boekman was a member of the Amsterdam city council for the Dutch Social Democratic Workers' Party (SDAP). In 1931 he became a municipal executive board member (wethouder) for Amsterdam's education and culture.

On 6 June 1939, Boekman obtained his Ph.D. degree from the University of Amsterdam with professor H.N. ter Veen. His thesis "Overheid en kunst in Nederland" (Government and art in the Netherlands) investigated the 19th and 20th-century history of Dutch cultural policy and projected seminal plans for cultural dissemination by the state and municipalities, e.g., by incorporating art in new building projects and giving the working class access to art. This thesis was influential and reprinted into the 1970s. When the German army invaded the Netherlands in May 1940, Boekman initially stood by his principle that executives should not flee. Later on, when he had changed his mind, the escape route via IJmuiden to the United Kingdom became intractable. On capitulation day 15 May 1940, Boekman and his wife committed suicide together with their friends, the family of the social democrat professor Bob van Gelderen.

In 1963 the Boekmanstichting (nl) was founded, named after him by the Federatie van Kunstenaarsverenigingen (federation of artist's societies). The Boekmanstichting is an independent center for the study of art, culture and policy.

See also
List of Dutch politicians

References
E. Boekman, 1889 - 1940 at the University of Amsterdam Album Academicum website

Sources
 Boekman, Emanuel: Overheid en kunst in Nederland, Thesis University of Amsterdam, 1939
 G.W.B. Borrie, 'Boekman, Emanuel (1889-1940)', in Biografisch Woordenboek van Nederland.
 Van Dulken, Hans en Jansen, Tony (red.): Het leven als leerschool. Portret van Emanuel Boekman, Amsterdam, 1989
 Jansen, Tony, Boekman, Emanuel, Biografisch woordenboek van het socialisme en de arbeidersbeweging in Nederland, op socialhistory.org maintained by the International Institute of Social History
 Jansen, Tony en Rogier, Jan: Kunstbeleid in Amsterdam, 1920-1940: Dr. E. Boekman en de socialistische gemeentepolitiek, Nijmegen, SUN, 1983.
 Maas, Harro: A pragmatic intellectual. Dutch Fabians, Boekman and cultural policy in the Netherlands, 1890-1940, International Journal of Cultural Policy 12(2006)2, 151-170
 , C. e.a.: Van Boekman tot Schimmelpennink. De kleine geschiedenis van een boekhandel op de Weteringschans, 2003

1889 births
1940 deaths
1940 suicides
Dutch typographers and type designers
Dutch Jews
Municipal councillors of Amsterdam
Social Democratic Workers' Party (Netherlands) politicians
University of Amsterdam alumni
Dutch politicians who committed suicide
Suicides in the Netherlands
Joint suicides
Dutch Jews who died in the Holocaust
Suicides by Jews during the Holocaust

Emanuel Boekman


Nieder-Isenburg (often called Lower Isenburg) was a small mediaeval county in northern Rhineland-Palatinate, Germany. It was located to the east of the town of Neuwied, due north of Vallendar.

Roughly speaking, territories of the Archbishops of Trier were located to the south, and territories of the Counts of Wied to the north.

Nieder-Isenburg emerged in 1218 as a partition of the County of Isenburg-Isenburg. Nieder-Isenburg was partitioned twice: between Isenburg-Grenzau, Isenburg-Neumagen and itself in 1502, and between Isenburg-Grenzau and Isenburg-Neumagen in 1503.

Following the death of Count Ernst of Isenburg in Brussels in 1664 without direct heir, the territories of Nieder-Isenburg were claimed back as a feudal tenure by the Archbishopric of Cologne, the Archbishopric of Trier and the core tenure of Isenburg and Grenzau by the Archbishopric of Fulda. The Fulda part was eventually passed on to the Counts of Walderdorff who had to share them with the Counts of Wied, at that stage a cadet branch of the Isenburgs, following a later agreement. Eventually the Walderdorff estates were distributed to the Nassovian state in the Napoleonic era.

Counts of Nieder-Isenburg (1218–1664)
 Theodoric I (1218–53)
 Theodoric II (1253–73)
 Salentin I (1273–1300)
 Salentin II (1300–34) with...
 Salentin III  (1319–70)
 Salentin IV (1370–1420)
 Salentin V (1420–58)
 Gerlach I (1458–90)
 Gerlach II (1488–1502) with...
 James (1486–1503)
 Heinrich,  5.1.1521/22-1553
 Johann Heinrich, +aft 15.11.1565;
 Arnold, died 1577
 Anton, +Walhain 5.11.1548–1577
 Salentin VIII (1532–1610)
Salentin IX (1580–1619) ( 5.12.1619, Prague)
 Ernst (1584–1664)
reversion to Fulda, Cologne, and Trier.

States and territories established in 1218
Counties of the Holy Roman Empire
1210s establishments in the Holy Roman Empire
1218 establishments in Europe
1664 disestablishments in the Holy Roman Empire
House of Isenburg
Electoral Rhenish Circle

Nieder-Isenburg


Protocadherin alpha-9 is a protein that in humans is encoded by the PCDHA9 gene.

This gene is a member of the protocadherin alpha gene cluster, one of three related gene clusters tandemly linked on chromosome 5 that demonstrate an unusual genomic organization similar to that of B-cell and T-cell receptor gene clusters. The alpha gene cluster is composed of 15 cadherin superfamily genes related to the mouse CNR genes and consists of 13 highly similar and 2 more distantly related coding sequences.
The tandem array of 15 N-terminal exons, or variable exons, are followed by downstream C-terminal exons, or constant exons, which are shared by all genes in the cluster. The large, uninterrupted N-terminal exons each encode six cadherin ectodomains while the C-terminal exons encode the cytoplasmic domain. These neural cadherin-like cell adhesion proteins are integral plasma membrane proteins that most likely play a critical role in the establishment and function of specific cell-cell connections in the brain. Alternative splicing has been observed and additional variants have been suggested but their full-length nature has yet to be determined.

References

Further reading

PCDHA9