2012年乌克兰议会选举

Background.

Political crises and canceled 2008 snap elections.

On October 8, 2008 Ukrainian President Viktor Yushchenko tried to dissolve the Verkhovna Rada (parliament) and called early parliamentary elections in Ukraine for the second time in as many years for December 7, 2008. The right of the President to dismiss the parliament was challenged in Ukraine's Constitutional Court. The President's decree has since lapsed as it was never put into action (the coalition supporting the second Tymoshenko Government was extended) and appeals to Ukraine's Constitutional Court were withdrawn. Nevertheless, a snap election was predicted by Ukrainian politicians during the 2010 presidential election and after the dismissal of the second Tymoshenko Government. One of the arguments against holding early elections were the costs. Early elections were (in October 2008) estimated to cost approximately UAH₴417 million (about EUR€60 million or US$80 million).

2012 election date set.

On February 1, 2011 the Verkhovna Rada set the election date for October 28, 2012. Several deputies whose votes were registered that day have stated they could not have taken part in voting because they were not in Kiev (where the Verkhovna Rada building is located) on February 1, 2011. Voting by MPs in the place of absent MPs of the Verkhovna Rada is prohibited by law. On July 27, 2012 the Central Election Commission of Ukraine announced that campaigning for the elections would commence on July 30.

Changes in the voting system.

In June, 2011 the Venice Commission reviewed a proposed Draft Law on the election of Ukrainian parliamentary members. The proposal sought to re-instate a parallel voting system – used in the 1998 and 2002 elections – with the establishment of 225 local single-member districts elected (in one round) by a first-past-the-post electoral system (candidate with the highest vote total wins); and the remaining 225 parliamentary seats being elected nationwide on a proportional party-list system with a 5% support threshold; and excluding political blocs from all elections. The option "Vote against all" was also made defunct in the proposal (according to a November 2012 opinion poll by Research & Branding Group (otherwise) 17% of the voters would have voted "against everybody" during the elections). The opposition and Ukrainian analysts accused the Party of Regions of "rewriting the law so that the president could secure a majority in the next Verkhovna Rada." In October 2011 the Venice Commission recommended Ukraine should not return to a mixed election system. Nevertheless, on 17 November 2011 the Ukrainian Parliament approved an election law almost identical to the June 2011 proposed Draft Law. This new law satisfied the major opposition parties Batkivschyna and Front for Change; but was condemned by the core party of Our Ukraine–People's Self-Defense Bloc, Our Ukraine. Candidates could be elected on party lists or through self-nomination. On 8 December 2011 President Viktor Yanukovych signed the new election law. Since then several parties merged with other parties.  The possibility to be simultaneously be nominated on a nationwide party list and in a single mandate constituency also was declared unconstitutional by the Constitutional Court of Ukraine on 10 April 2012.  Voters could temporarily change their place of voting without changing their permanent voting address.

Issues.

Fraud suspicions and accusations.

From 2011 to 2013 with liaison to Serhiy Lyovochkin, Alan Friedman, Eckart Sager, who was a one time CNN producer, Rick Gates, Paul Manafort, and Manafort's senior aide Konstantin Kilimnik devised a strategy to discredit Yulia Tymoshenko along with Hillary Clinton who had been an outspoken critic of pro-Russia, pro-Kremlin, and pro-Putin supporters in Ukraine. Manafort's Global Endeavour Inc., a St. Vincent and Grenadines based consulting and lobbying company, his Lucicle Consultants Ltd., a Cyprus based consulting company, and three other of his companies were hired to provide support to Yanukovich and his Party of Regions. This strategy included: creating a fake think tank in Vienna, the "Center for the Study of Former Soviet Socialist Republics" (CXSSR), to support Yanukovich and his Party of Regions; using a social media blitz with Twitter, YouTube, and Facebook, and altering the Google's search stack to disseminate articles and videos that undermine opponents of the Party of Regions and Yanukovich in Europe and the United States; rewriting wikipedia articles to smear Yanukovich opponents especially Tymoshenko; and using Breitbart News, RedState, and an article in "The Wall Street Journal" to discredit the Obama State Department and the United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Alan Friedman, who had not registered as a foreign agent in the United States, told Kostyantyn Gryshchenko that Friedman, who often wrote using the pen name "Matthew Lina", published dozens of positive stories about the Party of Regions and Yanukovich and ensured that these were disseminated to over 2,000 publications and placed at the top of Google search stacks. Known as the Tymoshenko Files, Friedman sent Manafort a highly confidential two page letter detailing Friedman's efforts and that Friedman would claim to be Inna Bohoslovska to ghost pen articles on her behalf. In October 2012 after Hillary Clinton had supported Tymoshenko, Brietbart News released an article calling Hillary Clinton a “neo-Nazi Frankenstein”.  Candidates and analysts predicted that bribery to secure votes would be rampant. A March 2012 poll by Research & Branding Group showed that 66% of the respondents believed that the election would not be fair, 18% disagreed with that. Following the elections the parties Fatherland, UDAR and Svoboda filled in an appeal at the Central Election Commission of Ukraine (CVK) with allegations of fraud in 13 simple-majority constituencies. Irregularities in the elections like cases of ballot stuffing, carousel voting, suspiciously high voter turnout and bribed voters have been reported. On 30 October 2012 the Committee of Voters of Ukraine stated that the elections saw a record number of cases of bribery of voters. They also insisted the elections had not brought the country closer to democratic standards. And that although there were no grounds to believe that the violations that were reported on polling day could affect the election results, the election results could seriously be affected by violations during the counting of votes.  According to Opora the most common violations of the electoral law during the election campaign in August were using government resources for partisan purposes and vote buying. According to Opora the Party of Regions committed the most violations of the electoral law. On 28 October 2012 Party of Regions itself claimed to have documented 607 violations of the election legislation by its opponents. In June 2012 the Committee of Voters of Ukraine declared that the use of government resources for partisan ends would not be decisive in the (then upcoming) elections. According to Taras Kuzio Berkut riot police was used in attempts to destroy ballots.  On 1 November 2012 the Deputy Chairwoman of the Central Election Commission of Ukraine (CVK), Zhanna Usenko-Chorna, stated that the elections are heavily falsified. She indicated that several electoral districts clearly demonstrate a depravity of the single-constituency district elections in Ukraine and that as of 1 November CVK still had not received results from 14 electoral districts. According to her that was the main reason why CVK could not announce the complete results of the elections on the scheduled time, 31 October 2012.  In mid-February 2012 Bloc Yulia Tymoshenko deputy Roman Zabzalyuk stated that "if the results on Election Day can’t be sufficiently fixed" the Party of Regions had already made plans to bribe deputies to join the Party of Regions after their election into the Parliament; representatives of the Party of Regions denied allegations of bribery or plans to fix the election.

Issues at districts.

Kiev and its region.

A notably reported scandal took place at the electoral district 215 where initially a win was awarded to the acting chairman of the Kiev city council Halyna Hereha. After the results were challenged it was decided to recount the votes with about 30 law enforcement personnel to keep public order. Later everything was resolved and cleared that indeed the votes between the two candidates Hereha (independent) and Andriy Illyenko ("Svoboda") were switched around. On November 1, 2012 Halyna Hereha officially complained about the elections, but does not intend to take it to court.  To another electoral district 211 in Kiev was sent an ambulance as a deputy chairman of the district electoral commission had a nervous breakdown. The commission of the district for three days had a difficult time to count all the votes.  Another big scandal with involvement of the riot law enforcement unit of Berkut took place at the 95th electoral district (a Kievan suburban city of Irpin). The electoral commission at the district was the slowest and the public involvement surely did not help to speed up the process, however a possible miscounting was prevented. Previously, a possible riot from a big "youth group of athletic posture" was suspected by witnesses.  Another scandal took place at the 223rd district where some fist fighting took place, which was eventually extinguished with the help of law enforcement. Oleh Tyahnybok told Ukrayinska Pravda that "Svoboda" will be picketing "EpiCenter" supermarkets and apartments of the 223rd electoral district commission members. Because of the incident, the Radio Liberty (Radio Svoboda) conducts a live broadcasting from the headquarters of the district. In protest the district electoral commission refuses to continue its work.

Southern Ukraine.

At the 132nd district (Pervomaisk, Mykolaiv Oblast) peasants laid a siege around the building of the district electoral commission in the protest of post-electoral results.

Repeat elections in 5 constituencies.

The Central Election Commission of Ukraine adopted a resolution on November 5 recognizing the impossibility of announcing election results in five single-seat constituencies (electoral districts 94, 132, 194, 197 and 223); it also recognized the need to hold repeat elections in these constituencies and asked parliament to take a decision on holding repeat elections in these constituencies. On November 6 the Verkhovna Rada adopted a resolution that proposed repeat elections. On 8 November the Central Election Commission stated that the Verkhovna Rada should thus make a respective law for this and the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine should determine the amount of funding for these elections.  On 29 December 2012, the Constitutional Court of Ukraine received a query from 54 Verkhovna Rada members concerning procedures for the five repeat elections. As of 21 March 2013 the Constitutional Court has not opened a case on this issue. The current Verkhovna Rada parliamentary majority refused to consider the scheduling of repeated elections in the five constituencies before the court issues its ruling on this issue.  On 5 September 2013 the Verkhovna Rada set the date of (all, see below) 7 re-elections to 15 December 2013.

Repeat elections in 2 more constituencies.

In early February 2013 the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine ordered the Central Election Commission of Ukraine to hold new elections in 2 more districts after the court removed the deputy mandates of United Centre member Pavlo Baloha (at the time a member of the Party of Regions parliamentary faction) and independent Oleksandr Dombrovsky. The Administrative Court established that the results in single-member districts number 11 (Vinnytsia Oblast; Dombrovsky) and number 71 (Zakarpattia Oblast; Baloha) after the 2012 elections had been "unreliable". On 3 July 2013 Baloha's and Dombrovsky's mandates were officially cancelled.  On 5 September 2013 the Verkhovna Rada set the date of (all, see above) 7 re-elections to 15 December 2013.

By-election in constituency 224 (Sevastopol).

On 24 December 2012 President Viktor Yanukovych appointed Pavlo Lebedyev as Defense Minister. Lebedyev had been elected as a lawmaker in the single-seat constituency No. 224 (in Sevastopol) in the 2012 election (28 October 2012). On 22 March 2013 the Verkhovna Rada cancelled his parliamentary mandate. The by-election for the single-seat constituency No. 224 was held on 7 July 2013 and won by independent Vadim Novinsky with 53.41% with a turnout of 23.91%. Before the election Novinsky had stated he would join the Party of Regions if he won.

Repeat elections in constituency 133 (Odessa).

On 12 September 2013 the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine (under a lawsuit lodged by Yuriy Karmazin) ruled it impossible to reliably establish the results of the 28 October 2012 elections in single-mandate constituency No. 133 (in Odessa), at the time Ihor Markov had been declared winner of that constituency. The court overturned the Central Election Commission (CEC) decision of 23 November 2012 regarding Markov’s registration as a People's Deputy of Ukraine and ordered the CEC to take measures to organize, prepare for and hold repeat elections in constituency No. 133.  Police officers had documented the use of pens with disappearing ink in at least 40 polling stations in constituency No. 133 on 28 October 2012.

Repeat elections in five constituencies of 15 December 2013.

The Central Election Commission of Ukraine finalized the vote count on 12 November 2012 but simultaneously ordered – on recommendation of the Verkhovna Rada (Ukraine's parliament) – repeat elections in five troubled single-mandate constituencies where it could not establish results. Because of occurrences in these five constituencies. In February 2013 the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine ordered to hold (additional) new elections in 2 more districts after the court removed the mandates of two seats. On 5 September 2013 the Verkhovna Rada itself set the date of these 7 re-elections to 15 December 2013. Hence, before 15 December 2013 of the 450 seats in parliament 443 deputies have been elected. But eventually only repeat elections were held in 5 constituencies on 15 December 2013.

By-election in constituency 83 (West Ivano-Frankivsk).

In February 2014 Oleksandr Sych became Vice Prime Minister in the Yatsenyuk Government. Sych had been elected as a lawmaker in the single-seat constituency No. 83 (West Ivano-Frankivsk) in the 2012 election of 28 October 2012.  The by-election for the single-seat constituency No. 83 was held on 25 May 2014 and won by independent Oleksandr Shevchenko with 37.6% with a turnout of 37.66%. The candidate of the party of Sych, Svoboda, came third with 14.9%.

Campaign.

Andriy Klyuyev was the chief campaign manager for the Party of Regions. The Party of Regions' campaign focused heavily on promoting its record as the ruling party, contrasting the "stability" of the (then current) Azarov Government with "chaos" during the Second Tymoshenko Government in 2007–10 (which it referred to as: "the chaos and ruins of 5 years of orange leadership". It advocated a "balanced" approach to developing relations with Russia and the West, saying neither should be given priority over the other.  Fatherland tried to paint the election as a battle of good against evil and pledged to impeach President Viktor Yanukovych. The party stated it advocated "European values" and promised to reverse the Azarov Government policy of raising the status of the Russian language.  UDAR avoided sensitive and polarising subjects and focused instead on popular topics, such as more empowerment to ordinary Ukrainians and a ruthless campaign against corruption, the indifference of the authorities, the lack of local governance, inequality and poverty.  Svoboda softened their rhetoric in the campaign but nevertheless promised to shake up the country's political status quo.  One of the biggest spenders of the campaign was the party Ukraine – Forward!. One of their election billboards claimed that “an average wage of EUR€1,000 and a pension of €500” was realistic for Ukraine (the monthly average wage was €300 at the time).  Many candidates in single-seat constituencies tended to focus on local issues, often distancing themselves from party agendas.  Overall the election programs of the major parties bore many similarities; all pledged reforms to spur economic growth, higher wages, pensions and other benefits, better education and medical care.  Two weeks before the (28 October) election UDAR withdrew 26 of its candidates running in single-member constituencies in favour of Fatherland candidates and they withdrew 26 parliamentary candidates in favor of UDAR in an attempt to maximise votes for the opposition.

Costs.

Political parties spent more than US$75 million on the election campaign in multi-member constituencies (according to the parties' official reports). The Party of Regions spent about US$27 million, Fatherland more than $13 million, UDAR more than $4 million, the Communist Party of Ukraine $9 million, Our Ukraine $8 million and Ukraine – Forward! $7.6 million. Svoboda claimed it had spent US$3 million on the campaign. The Ukraine of the Future did not spend anything on campaigning yet still managed to take the 15th spot amongst the 21 parties who participated in the nationwide list with 0.18% of the votes.  Denys Kovrizhenko of the International Foundation for Electoral Systems – Ukraine stated the sum of money spend could be up to 10 times more than what parties report afterwards. According to OPORA “In general, candidates spend about three times more than they officially report to spend”. Political scientist Artem Bidenko estimated other figures; he believed that the Party of Regions had spent around $850 million, Ukraine – Forward some $150 million, and the election campaigns of the rest of the political parties $350 million, while candidates in majority constituencies had spent some $900 million on the election campaign. About half of the single-constituency candidates submitted reports about their campaign spending.  In October 2008 Ukrainian experts estimated that a small political party who wants to win seats in parliament would spend up to US$30 million on the campaign and large political parties would spend up to $100 million. Political analyst Pavlo Bulhak stated then that a party's election budget will be spent on advertising on television, bribing voters, organizing rallies and party propaganda.

Results.

On 8 November the Central Election Commission of Ukraine completed and released all results of the nationwide party list the constituencies (the elections took place on 28 October). Meanwhile, the Central Election Commission refused to establish the election results for the first-past-post results in 5 constituencies. The Central Election Commission of Ukraine finalized the vote count on 12 November 2012 but simultaneously ordered - on recommendation of the Verkhovna Rada - repeat elections (on a yet unknown date) in five troubled single-mandate constituencies where it could not establish results. Because of occurrences in these five constituencies. Hence, on 12 November 2012 445 deputies had been elected of the 450 seats in parliament. On 8 February 2013 the Supreme Administrative Court of Ukraine deprived 2 more deputies of power. They were banned from parliament on 3 July 2013. On 5 September 2013 the Verkhovna Rada itself set the date of all 7 re-elections to 15 December 2013.

Electoral districts.

Next to the 87 political parties 1150 independent candidates took part in the 225 electoral districts. Several lawmakers elected into the new parliament have family ties with other lawmakers or other family members in the executive branch of Ukrainian politics.

Turnout.

The total voter turnout in the election was 57.99%; about average for parliamentary elections in Ukraine. On election day turnout had reached 22.43% by noon local time. The number of reported participating voters varied somewhere between 20.76 million and 20.78 million, while the number of invalid ballots accumulated to about 1.2 million (5.74%) for party list voting and voting at districts.  The lowest turnout was in Crimea (with 49.46%), the highest in Lviv Oblast (67.13%). Local disparities in turnout did occur: for example, the voting turnout figures in two adjacent districts in Donetsk were 39.8% and 84.5%.

Forming of new government.

On 9 December President Viktor Yanukovych nominated Mykola Azarov for a new term as Prime Minister. This nomination was approved by parliament on 13 December 2012. 252 deputies of the 450 deputies supported the nomination; the whole factions of Party of Regions (210 deputies) and Communist Party (32 deputies) and ten independent deputies.  The second Azarov Government was appointed by Yanukovych on 24 December 2012.

Reactions.

Fatherland, UDAR and Svoboda stated 12 November they did not recognize the results and will challenge them in local and international courts. In a joint statement the three parties vowed to work towards the impeachment of President Viktor Yanukovych, the resignation of the Azarov Government and chief prosecutor Viktor Pshonka, and the release from jail of Yulia Tymoshenko "and other political prisoners".  Prime Minister Mykola Azarov and President Yanukovych praised the elections; Azarov claimed “neither democratic norms nor legal democratic procedures were in fact violated” and according to Yanukovych the elections "took place well from the technical viewpoint".  Party leader Petro Symonenko of the Communist Party of Ukraine believed on 8 November that the new parliament could not work better than the present one, as "there will be a confrontation between the financial, political and clan groups who got seats in the new parliament." He also stated then that his party will not form any coalition with other groups in the new parliament.  Civil movement "Chesno" stated on 5 December 2012 that 331 out of the 450 deputies elected on 28 October fell short of its criteria for honesty; according to "Chesno"'s parameters, 114 of them violated the rights and freedoms of citizens, 30 earlier changed their political position while working in parliament or on local councils, 233 had been involved in corrupt practices, 185 had nontransparent incomes and expenses, 156 did not personally take part in voting in previous parliaments, and 101 had shirked work in parliament.  Party of Regions politician Sergei Tigipko stated in December 2012 "the parliamentary elections showed that politics in Ukraine is becoming more ideological".

International reactions.

European Union – On 12 November 2012 the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy Catherine Ashton and European Commissioner for Enlargement and European Neighbourhood Policy Stefan Fule stated "We express our concern about the conduct of the post electoral process, which was marred by irregularities, delays in the vote count and lack of transparency in the electoral commissions". The also expected to see "swift and determined action" to bring Ukraine's electoral legislation "into line with European norms and standards on the basis of an Election Code".

International observers.

On election day (28 October) there were 3,500 accredited foreign observers. The observers from the European Academy for Elections Observation (most of whom where European Parliament members), stated it was "a good election, not perfect but clearly acceptable", and that it was "in compliance with democratic norms". On 29 October the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE) (who had monitored the election with 600 observers) stated in a preliminary report that "certain aspects of the pre-election period constituted a step backwards compared with recent national elections" and that the election was marred by "the abuse of power and the excessive role of money". It complained of "a lack of a level playing field, caused primarily by the abuse of administrative resources, lack of transparency of campaign and party financing, and lack of balanced media coverage". This contrasted sharply with the international observers' conclusions on Ukraine's February 2010 presidential election, judged then to have been transparent, unbiased and an "impressive display" of democracy.  Ten thousand foreign observers where expected to observe the elections. Some 100 long term observers from OSCE member states arrived in Ukraine starting from the middle of September 2012, followed by 600 short-term observers who will arrive a week before the elections to monitor the election process at voting stations.  Poland is to send observers to Ukraine to monitor the elections, Polish Foreign Minister Radosław Sikorski stated on 8 February 2012. German Ambassador to Ukraine stated "Germany is planning to send a numerous group of official supervisors" on 13 March 2012.  The total number of registered observers on October 9, was 1053 persons. The largest mission of international observers from CIS-EMO was 197 people.  On 2 October 2012 CIS-EMO observers presented the Interim report of the CIS-EMO Election Monitoring Mission. The report, in particular, noted that "The majority of detected violations are connected not with a political struggle of party lists but with the struggle of single-seat candidates". An impression that “antidemocratic power” clash with “democratic opposition” imposed by European and world society has a very relative nature that, as a rule, doesn’t distinct the real situation. In nowadays Ukrainian “peripheral capitalism” model such classes as “power” and “opposition” are conventionality. When the “Power Elite” is unconsolidated and disconnected and there is an open internal war between leading financial-industrial groups and corporations of Ukraine to get leverage of real state authority, all existing political parties only play the role of institutionalized political framework of realization of oligarchs’ economic interests.  On 5 October 2012 the CIS-EMO report was presented at the annual meeting of the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights. Shortly before the presentation of CIS-EMO interim report web-site of CIS-EMO had been subjected to a massive DDoS-attack. The report was published on the official website of the OSCE in English and Ukrainian and also in Russian.  The ENEMO (European Network of Election Monitoring Organizations) mission for the 2012 parliamentary elections in Ukraine began its work on 23 July 2012 with the arrival of four Core Team members. ENEMO is the first international election observation mission registered for the Parliamentary Elections 2012 by the Central Election Commission (CEC). 35 LTOs (long-term observers) arrived to Kyiv on 5 August 2012 and were deployed throughout Ukraine. Long-term observer teams cover one or two oblasts of Ukraine. On E-day, October 28, ENEMO deployed 43 STO (Short-term observer) teams throughout all oblasts of Ukraine.

Factions in parliament after elections.

According to the amendment to parliamentary regulations adopted in November 2012, the smallest faction of parliament can be formed out a party with the smallest number of deputies elected by a party list and a single constituency vote. That amendment to regulations can also be interpreted as "either or" meaning that the smallest faction can be formed either based on party list or a single constituency election. In that case the smaller parties' deputies that were elected to the parliament will be able to form factions of their own, making it more challenging to form a coalition in the Ukrainian parliament.  On 27 November 2012 Party of Regions parliamentary leader Oleksandr Yefremov claimed that 223 members of the Verkhovna Rada had already expressed their desire to work in his party's fraction; according to earlier press reports 38 of the 43 unaffiliated politicians elected into parliament would join the Party of Regions faction.

Removing deputies from parliament after 2012 election.

Since 8 February 2013 four parliamentarians have been deprived of their mandate by the Higher Administrative Court of Ukraine.

Registered parties.

In contrast with the 2007 parliamentary elections, candidates in this election could be elected on party lists or through self-nomination. There were 87 parties registered for the elections to compete in electoral districts. For the nationwide list the voters could choose between 22 parties. Several parties united together under "umbrella" parties. For example, the election list of All-Ukrainian Union "Fatherland" included members of Reforms and Order Party, People's Movement of Ukraine, Front of Changes, For Ukraine, People's Self-Defense, Civil Position and Social Christian Party. This electoral list was the result of negotiations within the opposition Dictatorship Resistance Committee.

Nationwide list.

The Central Election Commission of Ukraine had registered 22 parties who would participate on the nationwide list. On 15 October 2012 Ukrainian Platform "Assembly" withdrew itself from the national list (it had received ballot number 1) but the other ballot numbers did not change. So the ballot numbers were:

Public opinion polls.

Note that on 17 November 2011 the Ukrainian Parliament approved an election law under which 225 members of Parliament would be elected under party lists and 225 would be winners of constituencies. Simultaneously the option to vote "Against all" had been made defunct; furthermore candidates could be elected on party lists or through self-nomination.

The Ukrainian parliamentary election of 2012 took place on 28 October 2012. Because of various reasons, including the "impossibility of announcing election results" various by-elections have taken place since. Hence, several constituencies have been left unrepresented at various times.

2012年乌克兰议会选举(Ukrainian parliamentary election of 2012)在2012年10月28日举行。 地区党在选举中获胜,保持议会第一大党地位。反对派的力量有所削弱,“乌达尔”(UDAR,突击党)和全乌克兰“自由”联盟为乌克兰政治生活中的后起力量,值得关注。


History.

Early years.

Balfour Beatty was formed in 1909, with a capital of £50,000. The two principals were George Balfour, a qualified mechanical and electrical engineer, and Andrew Beatty, an accountant. The two had met while working for the London branch of the New York engineers JG White & Company. Initially, the company concentrated on tramways, the first contract being to construct the Dunfermline and District Tramways that opened in November 1909 for Balfour Beatty's own subsidiary, the Fife Tramway Light and Power Company.  It subsequently acquired a portfolio of electric power and tramway companies including in Carlisle, Cheltenham, Leamington & Warwick, Llanelly, Luton, Mansfield, Nottinghamshire & Derby, Falkirk and Wemyss. Some later operated trolley and motor buses. Several bus companies were purchased or formed including Midland General, Percivals (Carlisle), Stratford Blue and Scottish General Omnibus.  The Scottish bus subsidiaries were sold in June 1930 to W Alexander & Sons, and the Scottish tramways in 1935 to Scottish Motor Traction, Cheltenham was sold in July 1939 to Red & White Services with the remaining operations transferred to the Tilling Group.  Balfour Beatty's general construction expertise was extended during First World War with, for example, the building of army camps.  George Balfour was elected to the House of Commons in 1918 and played a large part in the debates which established the National Grid. To service this new market, George Balfour, Andrew Beatty and others formed Power Securities to finance projects, and the two companies, with their common directors, worked closely together. Balfour Beatty was heavily involved in the development of Scotland’s hydro electric power, building dams, transmission lines and power stations.  Other work between the wars included the standardisation of the electricity supply in Derbyshire and Nottinghamshire, and the construction of tunnels and escalators for the London Underground. Extensive overseas work started in 1924 when Balfour Beatty took over the management of the East African Power & Lighting company; construction work included hydro electric schemes in the Dolomites, Malaya and India, power stations in Argentina and Uruguay, and the Kut Barrage on the Tigris in Iraq.  By the onset of the Second World War, control of the firm had changed: Andrew Beatty had died in 1934 and George Balfour died in 1941. Construction work was now dominated by the war effort, and notable projects included blocking the approaches to Scapa Flow and the building of six Mulberry harbour units.

Post World War II.

Peacetime saw a resumption of Balfour Beatty’s traditional work, with power stations and railway work dominating at home. Overseas, a construction company was bought in Canada in 1953, and other work included the Mto Mtwara harbour in Tanganyika (now Tanzania) and the Wadi Tharthar irrigation scheme in Iraq.  In 1969, Power Securities, which by then owned Balfour Beatty, was taken over by cable manufacturer BICC. Balfour Beatty moved away from its traditional area of expertise in 1986, when it formed Balfour Beatty Homes, building on a modest scale from its office in Nottingham. It also opened offices in Paisley and Leatherhead, and in 1987, it bought the Derbyshire firm of David M Adams to give it an annualised production rate of up to 700 houses.  Little more than a year before the housing market collapsed, through its parent BICC, Clarke Homes was bought. By the middle of the 1990s, sales were down to only five hundred a year, and although no financial figures were ever published, the housing operation was believed to have suffered heavy losses. Balfour Beatty Homes was renamed Clarke Homes and then sold to Westbury in 1995.

21st century.

In May 2000, BICC, having sold its cable operations, renamed itself Balfour Beatty. It then commenced a series of acquisitions, primarily in the United Kingdom and North America; in 2004, it also acquired Skanska's 50% stake in Hong Kong's Gammon Construction.

Acquisitions in the United Kingdom.

Balfour Beatty's acquisitions in the United Kingdom included: construction services business Mansell plc, for £42m in November 2003, construction and civils contractor Birse plc, for £32m in August 2006, Bristol construction company Cowlin Construction, also in October 2007, and regional contractor Dean & Dyball for £45 million in February 2008.  In November 2010, the company bought the remnant of collapsed construction company Rok plc for £7 million.

North American acquisitions.

In February 2007, Balfour Beatty acquired Texas based Centex Construction for £180m. In February 2008, the company bought GMH Military Housing, a United States based military accommodation business, for £180m.  In September 2009, the company agreed to buy Parsons Brinckerhoff, a project management firm based in the United States, for $626 million. Balfour Beatty sold Parsons Brinckerhoff to WSP Global for $1.24bn in October 2014. In October 2010, the company bought Halsall Group, a Canadian professional services firm, for £33 million.  In June 2011, it bought Howard S. Wright, one of the oldest contractors on the West Coast of the United States, for £58 million as well as Fru-Con Construction, a water and wastewater contractor based in the United States, for £12 million and in January 2013, it bought Subsurface Group, a consulting and engineering firm based in the United States.

Rebuffed merger.

In August 2014, the company rebuffed three offers by its rival in the United Kingdom, Carillion, for the two companies to merge. The last bid, which valued Balfour Beatty at £2.1 billion, was unanimously rejected by the Balfour Beatty board on 20 August 2014, one day before a deadline for negotiations to conclude. Balfour refused to allow an extension of time for negotiations which could have prompted a fourth bid. Carillion subsequently announced it would no longer pursue a merger with its rival.

Controversies.

Hatfield rail crash.

In October 2005, Balfour Beatty was found guilty of breaching health and safety laws, and were fined £10 million for its involvement in the October 2000 Hatfield rail crash. The crash resulted in the death of four people, and injured more than 70.

Blacklisting.

In March 2009, the company was found to be a subscriber to the Consulting Association, a firm which was then prosecuted by the UK Information Commissioner's Office for breaching the Data Protection Act by holding a secret database of construction workers details, including union membership and political affiliations, and six enforcement notices were issued against Balfour Beatty companies.  In January 2010, individual workers had started suing the company for being on the blacklist; the first of these cases, however, was ruled in favour of the company.  On 10 October 2013, Balfour Beatty was one of eight construction firms involved in blacklisting that apologised for their actions, and agreed to pay compensation to affected workers. The eight businesses established the Construction Workers Compensation Scheme in July 2014, though the scheme was condemned as a "PR stunt" by the GMB union, and as "an act of bad faith" by Parliament's Scottish Affairs Select Committee.  A High Court case regarding the blacklisting was scheduled for May 2016. In October 2015, during preliminary stages of the case, the eight firms did not accept the loss of earnings that the blacklisting victims had suffered, but, in January 2016, they increased their compensation offers.  On 22 January 2016, the High Court ordered 30 construction firms to disclose all emails and correspondence relating to blacklisting by 12 February 2016, after it emerged that Balfour Beatty managers had referred to blacklisted workers as ‘sheep’. However, some settlements were eventually agreed, and on 11 May 2016, a 'formal apology' from the 40 firms involved was read out in court and the case ("Various Claimants v McAlpine & Ors") was closed.  In December 2017, Unite, announced it had issued high court proceedings relating to blacklisting against twelve major contractors, including Balfour Beatty.

Late payment.

In April 2019, Balfour Beatty was suspended from the UK Government's Prompt Payment Code, for failing to pay suppliers on time. It was reinstated around 10 months later.

Operations.

London, carried out by Balfour Beatty]] Balfour Beatty designs, builds and maintains infrastructure across a number of sectors. Its capabilities include:  Balfour Beatty is a member of Constructing Excellence, the Business Services Association and of Build UK, comprising some members of the Confederation of British Industry.

Notable projects.

Projects involving Balfour Beatty include:

Balfour Beatty plc () is a multinational infrastructure group based in the United Kingdom with capabilities in construction services, support services and infrastructure investments. A constituent of the FTSE 250 Index, Balfour Beatty works across the United Kingdom, Ireland, the United States, Canada and South East Asia.

保富集团(又译「鲍佛贝蒂公司」,英语:Balfour Beatty plc),1909年成立,是国际性的基础设施建造公司,为富时250指数成份股之一,亦是全英国最大的承建商,近年以BOT模式兴建了多间医院和监狱。鲍佛贝蒂公司在全球超过80个国家皆有业务,除英美等主要市场外,其工程遍布澳大利亚、加拿大、中东、南非和东南亚,并手持金门建筑一半股权(另一半由怡和集团持有)。


Plot.

News reporter Ichiro Sakai and photographer Junko Nakanishi take pictures of wreckage caused by a typhoon. They uncover a strange, bluish-gray object in the debris, not knowing its significance. Later that day, a giant egg is discovered on the shore. The local villagers salvage it and Kumayama, entrepreneur of Happy Enterprises buys the egg from the local villagers. Instead of letting scientists study the egg, Kumayama intends to exploit it. While Sakai, Junko, and Professor Miura are discussing the egg at a hotel, they spot Kumayama checking in. Kumayama meets with Jiro Torahata, the head of Happy Enterprises. They are unexpectedly confronted by tiny twin girls known as the Shobijin and try to capture them. The Shobijin escape and meet with Sakai, Nakanishi and Miura. They explain that the egg belongs to Mothra. If the egg hatches, the larva will cause great damage looking for food.  The trio agree to help and attempt to reason with Kumayama and Torahata but fail to do so and the Shobijin leave. Miura informs Sakai and Junko that the strange object they discovered is radioactive and return to the beach to find the source. Godzilla surfaces from buried mud and attacks Nagoya. Sakai, Junko, and Miura travel to Infant Island to request the Shobijin to send Mothra to defeat Godzilla. The natives and the Shobijin initially refuse due to the atrocities inflicted on the island and its habitants by nuclear testing, but are eventually convinced. However, the Shobijin warn them that Mothra is too old and nearing death.  Kumayama confronts Torahata and demands to get back the money that Torahata had recently swindled from him. Kumayama is shot by Torahata, then he too is killed when Godzilla destroys his hotel. Godzilla advances on the giant egg but is interrupted by Mothra. Mothra initially gains the upper-hand but is defeated by Godzilla's atomic breath, and dies of exhaustion. The JSDF launch multiple attacks on Godzilla until two giant larvae hatch from Mothra's egg. They follow Godzilla to Iwa Island, trap it with their silk spray and force Godzilla into the sea. Sakai, Junko, and Miura thank the Mothra larvae and Shobijin as they return to Infant Island.

Themes.

Historian Steve Ryfle called the film's themes as a "classic good-versus-evil stand-off". He noted the film raises philosophical questions about unity and humanity's will to put aside their differences for the greater good. Ryfle refers to Godzilla as a "specter of nuclear annihilation", metaphorically casting its shadow over Japan. Ryle also compares Godzilla as a "symbol of moral judgement" after indirectly killing the film's villains. Actor Hiroshi Koizumi felt that Honda was able to emphasize his themes through Mothra better than Godzilla, stating, "Mothra's role was a messenger of peace." Kenji Sahara emphasized that his character "was a symbol of greed." Honda purposely chose to portray the film's version of Infant Island as a partial wasteland, stating, "I wanted to visualize the terror and the power of the atomic bomb."

Production.

Production credits  Before production began, Honda discussed with his cast that with the competition television has been posing for the movies, "[Toho] is targeting kids, not just adults, so we have to make something that all ages will find interesting." Producer Tanaka had told Kenji Sahara that he "wanted a villain with impact". To prepare for his role, Sahara spent time around "pushy" real-estate agents by posing as a buyer. Tanaka hired The Peanuts for publicity, due to their popularity at the time.

Writing.

The film was originally intended to pick up after "Mothra" (1961), with the Rolisicans re-cast as the villains. There were several key differences from Sekizawa's earlier drafts: the villain Torahata did not exist; Sakai was accompanied by two scientists, a colleague and a friend's mentor; Godzilla's body washes ashore rather than Mothra's egg; the leads offer themselves as hostages to the Infant Island natives in exchange for Mothra's help; Rolisica was to be attacked by Godzilla; the Frontier Missiles were to be used by the Rolisican military; Himeji Castle was to be destroyed; Godzilla was to move East until reaching close to Tokyo; The artificial lightning tactic is conceived when Godzilla is repelled by electrical towers in Tokyo; Mothra attacks Godzilla when he becomes immune to electricity; Mothra engages Godzilla in a final battle when it stalks the lead characters on a beach. Honda changed much of Sekizawa's original script to accommodate his vision.

Music.

The score was composed by Akira Ifukube. Ifukube adapted elements from Yuji Koseki's "Song of Mothra" theme into his score. At the point in their careers, Honda and Ifukube held planning sessions to discuss which scenes would feature music. Honda and Ifukube had a disagreement over a scene which featured Godzilla rising behind a ridge-line. Honda asked for attack music for the scene but Ifukube refused, feeling that it was unnecessary due to Godzilla being "impressive enough". However, Godzilla's theme was added instead, a decision which upset Ifukube. The track "The Sacred Springs" was the only track Ifukube wrote for The Peanuts and was intended to be lament for Infant Island's destruction.

Special effects.

The film's special effects were directed by Eiji Tsuburaya, while Teruyoshi Nakano served as the assistant special effects director. For Godzilla, the new suit was built by Teizo Toshimitsu, with Haruo Nakajima giving input whenever visiting the workshop. This led to a lighter suit that awarded Nakajima more fluid movement. Reinforced heels were added to the suit's feet which gave Nakajima freedom to roll and flip without losing his footing. The suit was constructed two months prior to filming. The 1962 Godzilla suit was recycled for water scenes and the shot with Godzilla tumbling off the cliff. For Mothra, a new prop was built, similar to the 1961 prop, with Y-shaped braced attached to the back that allowed the wings to flap. High-powered fans were used to create wind for Mothra's wings. The wing-span for the new Mothra prop was 15 feet. Mechanism were added that allowed the prop to move the head and legs via remote control.  Mechanical props and puppets were built for both monsters. The two larvas were a combination of hand puppetry and motor-driven mechanical props. The larva web was a petroleum based product which was liquified polystyrene. When the web was shot off-screen, it was poured onto a cup stationed at the center of a heavy industrial fan. The cup was sealed with small gaps around the edges. To shoot the webs out of the larva's mouth, a canister of compressed air was run into a sealed tube of liquid polystyrene. At a high pressure level, the liquid polystyrene was forced through a tube that ran through the back of the larva and into the nozzle installed on the mouth. As long as the nozzle was small, the solution vaporized when first emitted and solidified into the trademark web. Gasoline had to be used to remove the webbing and to prevent the suit from combusting, it had to be thoroughly dried.  The larva movements were designed by Soujiro Iijima by using a conveyor belt with rotating gears that allowed the bodies to move up and down. For the scenes with the Fairies, oversized furniture were built eight times their size to make the Fairies appear to look 30 centimeters. Honda had originally intended to depict the wasteland part of Infant Island with more realism and graphic imagery but this idea was dropped due to budgetary issues with the art department. Honda would later regret this decision, feeling he should have been more "stubborn."  Tsuburaya had Toho purchase an Oxberry 1900 optical printer which helped remove damages for composite photography shots. The optical printer was also used to create Godzilla's atomic breath. For the Nagoya Castle scene, Nakajima was unable to completely destroy the model. Nakajima attempted to salvage the shot by having Godzilla appear enraged by the Castle's strong fortification, however, the model was rebuilt to crumble more easily, with the scene having to be re-shot. For the scene with Mothra dragging Godzilla by the tail, the Godzilla suit was used for medium shots and a prop used for long shots. An additional sequence was filmed for the overseas version, which featured the United States military attacking Godzilla with frontier missiles. This sequences was omitted from the Japanese version.  The Mothra prop used for the New Kirk City scenes in "Mothra" (1961) was recycled for the Infant Island scenes. This prop was smaller compared to the new prop built for the film's adult Mothra. The 1961 model had a motor built into it that flapped the wings at a rapid pace. For the scenes with Godzilla near the cliff face, part of the set's support structure was hidden by using matte painting. The miniature tanks used in the film were purchased from Ihara models rather than typically custom built. The tank models were built to a 1/15th scale and were constructed from aluminum. The antennas were used for remote control.  For the scene where Godzilla destroys the incubator, the scene proved difficult for Nakajima and the wire staff, which required coordination. Close ups of the tail were done with a prop that was operated by two people due to the heavy weight of the tail. The scenes with Godzilla thrashing wildly at Mothra were shot at high speed, then projected at a quicker speed. The end results have been compared to the movement of stop-motion animation. The scene with Godzilla thrashing from the nets was shot with different cameras at once and as a result, the same scene plays over from different angles.  A second egg was produced for the hatching scene. A styrofoam egg was molded and a calcium carbonate substance was mixed with glue and added on top. The styrofoam egg was removed from its interior with a heated wire, which felt a hollow form. For the opening typhoon scene, Iijima built a shallow water tank to create the illusion of violent waves. Wider water scenes were filmed at Toho's massive stage pool.

Release.

Theatrical.

"Mothra vs. Godzilla" was released in Japan by Toho on April 29, 1964, prior to the Golden Week and sold 3.5 million tickets. According to Henry G. Saperstein, the film grossed $217,000 for three weeks from eight theaters in Tokyo. The film was re-released theatrically in Japan in 1980 and sold 3 million tickets.

American version.

In May 1964, Henry G. Saperstein acquired the American theatrical and television rights to the film, under the proposed working title "Godzilla vs. the Giant Moth", and sold the rights to American International Pictures. AIP released the film as "Godzilla vs. the Thing" on August 26, 1964, where it premiered in Los Angeles. AIP chose the title "Godzilla vs. the Thing" purposely to generate curiosity and anticipation for Godzilla's foe. AIP hired Reynold Brown to create a poster that featured Godzilla, but censored the other monster. Brown was paid $350 for his services.  The American version of the film contains footage shot by Toho specifically for the American release. The American version of the film received only a few minor adjustments: shortening the twin fairies' song on Infant Island and a scene where Sakai, Junko Miura and Makamura wave goodbye to the Mothras swimming home. Removed scenes include Kumayama handing out leaflets to attract visitors to the giant egg incubator and where Torahata shoots Kumayama in a hotel room. New scenes were also added including a sequence where U.S. military officials help Japan against Godzilla. The American release of the film was double-billed with "Voyage to the End of the Universe". AIP hired Titra Studios to dub the film into English.

Critical response.

A 1964 review for Kinema Junpo praised the effects but criticized the military attacking Godzilla, stating, "It's strange that the people don't learn from the past. From the Self-Defense Forces on down, every single person just plain looks stupid." In a contemporary review from the "Monthly Film Bulletin", the review noted that "In spite of some clumsy model shots, Godzilla's fight with the giant moth and its caterpillar progeny is one of Toho's better efforts". The review praised the monsters design in the film and opined that the "ineffectual attempts to bring him to a halt are cleverly and spectacularly staged. Unfortunately, nothing else quite matches the special effects", noting a plot that was "ridiculous" and acting that was "lamentable, and the two miniature twins' habit of repeating every line of dialogue simultaneously is intensely irksome."  "Variety" commented that the film was a "Japanese sci-fi long on special effects but lacks appeal for general trade", and that "inspite of the slick production, the story and acting don't offer enough to attract large general audiences." The review commented that "virtually all-Japanese cast, with unfamiliar faces and broad emoting typical of such Japanese pics, also detracts from general appeal." The review commented on the film crew, stating that Honda's direction and the script "keep story moving at lively pace, building up to tense climatic scenes" and that "Eiji Tsuburaya, labored mightily to cook up monsters and their battles, the tiny twins and the military assaults against Godzilla."  From a retrospective review in 1998, Steve Ryfle, author of "Japan's Favorite Mon-star: The Unauthorized Biography of "The Big G"" praised the film as it stood "indisputably as the greatest of all the Godzilla sequels, with a fast-paced story and likable characters, the most impressive Godzilla design ever, two of the Big G's most spectacular battles, and an abundance of special-effects "money shots" that evoke the thrills of the 1954 original." In his 2017 book cowritten with Ed Godziszewski and covering Ishiro Honda's filmography, the two gave their impression that "[t]he final twenty-plus minutes hint at the genre's impending tilt toward young boys. It's a near nonstop barrage of military hardware and monster action", and adding that "Honda seemed to know that kids were now rooting for Godzilla, and so the film never gets too scary."  Ryfle praised the English dubbing for the American version, feeling that it's one of the reasons why the film is considered amongst the best Godzilla films. Ryfle felt that the English script was "snappy" and "well written" and that the voice performances sounded sincere and pulled with effort, stating, "You'd be hard pressed to find another movie where the dubbing is done as well as it is here."

Home media.

Japan.

In 1983, the Japanese version was released on VHS in Japan by Toho. In 1986, Toho released the film on LaserDisc. In 1989, Toho reissued the film on VHS. In 1991, Toho released a new mastered version on VHS. In 1992, Toho released the Champion Festival cut on LaserDisc. In 1993, Toho released the Japanese and American versions on a LaserDisc combo pack. In 1996, Toho reissued the film on LaserDisc. In 2003, Toho released the film on DVD. In 2005, Toho included the film on the Godzilla Final Box DVD Set. In 2010, Toho released the film on Blu-ray.

United States.

In 1989, the American version was released on VHS in North America by Paramount Pictures Corp under the title "Godzilla vs. Mothra". In 1998, Simitar Video reissued the American version on DVD and VHS, which included a widescreen edition. This release retained the previous title "Godzilla vs. Mothra", however, the widescreen side of the DVD featured the original American print with the original title, "Godzilla vs. The Thing". In 2002, Sony Music Entertainment released a pan-and-scan version of the American version on DVD. This release also retained the previous title, "Godzilla vs. Mothra".  In 2007, Classic Media and Sony BMG Home Entertainment released both the Japanese and American versions on DVD in North America. The special features included an audio commentary by Steve Ryfle (author of "Japan’s Favorite Mon-Star: The Unauthorized Biography of the Big G") and Ed Godziszewski (author of "The Illustrated Encyclopedia of Godzilla"), a featurette on Akira Ifukube's life and career by Godziszewski and Bill Gudmundson, a slideshow, and the film's theatrical trailer. In 2019, the Japanese version was included in a Blu-ray box set released by the Criterion Collection, which included all 15 films from the franchise's Shōwa era.

Due to the success of "King Kong vs. Godzilla" (1962), Toho chose to pair Godzilla against Mothra for the following film, with Mothra chosen due to the success of "Mothra" (1961). Honda directly intended for the film to be meant for children in addition to adults, as a way to compete with television's growing popularity in Japan. Notably, it is the final film in the franchise's Shōwa period to depict Godzilla solely as an antagonist.

《摩斯拉对哥斯拉》(日文原名:)是1964年4月29日上映的日本电影,哥斯拉系列电影的第4部作品,日本观众人数达到720万人。


Description.

"Callinectes sapidus" is a decapod crab of the swimming crab family Portunidae. The genus "Callinectes" is distinguished from other portunid crabs by the lack of an internal spine on the carpus (the middle segment of the claw), as well as by the T-shape of the male abdomen. Blue crabs may grow to a carapace width of. "C. sapidus" individuals exhibit sexual dimorphism. Males and females are easily distinguished by the shape of the abdomen (known as the "apron") and by color differences in the chelipeds, or claws. The abdomen is long and slender in males, but wide and rounded in mature females. A popular mnemonic is that the male's apron is shaped like the Washington Monument, while the mature female's resembles the dome of the United States Capitol. Claw color differences are more subtle than apron shape. The immovable, fixed finger of the claws in males is blue with red tips, while females have orange coloration with purple tips. A female's abdomen changes as it matures: an immature female has a triangular-shaped abdomen, whereas a mature female's is rounded.  Other species of "Callinectes" may be easily confused with "C. sapidus" because of overlapping ranges and similar morphology. One species is the lesser blue crab ("C. similis"). It is found further offshore than the common blue crab, and has a smoother granulated carapace. Males of the lesser blue crab also have mottled white coloration on the swimming legs, and females have areas of violet coloration on the internal surfaces of the claws. "C. sapidus" can be distinguished from another related species found within its range, "C. ornatus", by number of frontal teeth on the carapace. "C. sapidus" has four, while "C. ornatus" has six.  The crab's blue hue stems from a number of pigments in the shell, including alpha-crustacyanin, which interacts with a red pigment, astaxanthin, to form a greenish-blue coloration. When the crab is cooked, the alpha-crustacyanin breaks down, leaving only the astaxanthin, which turns the crab to a bright orange-red color.

Distribution.

"Callinectes sapidus" is native to the western edge of the Atlantic Ocean from Cape Cod to Argentina and around the entire coast of the Gulf of Mexico. It has recently been reported north of Cape Cod in the Gulf of Maine, potentially representing a range expansion due to climate change. It has been introduced (via ballast water) to Japanese and European waters, and has been observed in the Baltic, North, Mediterranean and Black Seas. The first record from European waters was made in 1901 at Rochefort, France. In some parts of its introduced range, "C. sapidus" has become the subject of crab fishery, including in Greece, where the local population may be decreasing as a result of overfishing.

Ecology.

The natural predators of "C. sapidus" include eels, drum, striped bass, spot, trout, some sharks, humans, cownose rays, and whiptail stingrays. "C. sapidus" is an omnivore, eating both plants and animals. "C. sapidus" typically consumes thin-shelled bivalves, annelids, small fish, plants and nearly any other item it can find, including carrion, other "C. sapidus" individuals, and animal waste. "C. sapidus" may be able to control populations of the invasive green crab, "Carcinus maenas"; numbers of the two species are negatively correlated, and "C. maenas" is not found in the Chesapeake Bay, where "C. sapidus" is most frequent.  "Callinectes sapidus" is subject to a number of diseases and parasites. They include a number of viruses, bacteria, microsporidians, ciliates, and others. The nemertean worm "Carcinonemertes carcinophila" commonly parasitizes "C. sapidus", especially females and older crabs, although it has little adverse effect on the crab. A trematode that parasitizes "C. sapidus" is itself targeted by the hyperparasite "Urosporidium crescens". The most harmful parasites may be the microsporidian "Ameson michaelis", the amoeba "Paramoeba perniciosa" and the dinoflagellate "Hematodinium perezi", which causes "bitter crab disease".

Life cycle.

Growth.

Eggs of "C. sapidus" hatch in high salinity waters of inlets, coastal waters, and mouths of rivers and are carried to the ocean by ebb tides. During seven planktonic (zoeal) stages blue crab larvae float near the surface and feed on microorganisms they encounter. After the eighth zoeal stage, larvae molt into megalopae. This larval form has small claws called chelipeds for grasping prey items. Megalopae selectively migrate upward in the water column as tides travel landward toward estuaries. Eventually blue crabs arrive in brackish water, where they spend the majority of their life. Chemical cues in estuarine water prompt metamorphosis to the juvenile phase, after which blue crabs appear similar to the adult form.  Blue crabs grow by shedding their exoskeleton, or molting, to expose a new, larger exoskeleton. After it hardens, the new shell fills with body tissue. Shell hardening occurs most quickly in low salinity water where high osmotic pressure allows the shell to become rigid soon after molting. Molting reflects only incremental growth, making age estimation difficult. For blue crabs, the number of molts in a lifetime is fixed at approximately 25. Females typically exhibit 18 molts after the larval stages, while postlarval males molt about 20 times. Male blue crabs tend to grow broader and have more accentuated lateral spines than females. Growth and molting are profoundly influenced by temperature and food availability. Higher temperatures and greater food resources decrease the period of time between molts as well as the change in size during molts (molt increment). Salinity and disease also have subtle impacts on molting and growth rate. Molting occurs more rapidly in low salinity environments. The high osmotic pressure gradient causes water to quickly diffuse into a soft, recently molted blue crab's shell, allowing it to harden more quickly. The effects of diseases and parasites on growth and molting are less well understood, but in many cases have been observed to reduce growth between molts. For example, mature female blue crabs infected with the parasitic rhizocephalan barnacle "Loxothylacus texanus" appear extremely stunted in growth when compared to uninfected mature females. Blue crab may reach maturity within one year of hatching in the Gulf of Mexico, while Chesapeake Bay crabs may take up to 18 months to mature. As a result of different growth rates, commercial and recreational crabbing occur year-round in the Gulf of Mexico, while crabbing seasons are closed for colder parts of the year in northern states.

Reproduction.

Mating and spawning are distinct events in blue crab reproduction. Males may mate several times and undergo no major changes in morphology during the process. Female blue crabs mate only once in their lifetimes during their pubertal, or terminal, molt. During this transition, the abdomen changes from a triangular to a semicircular shape. Mating in blue crab is a complex process that requires precise timing of mating at the time of the female's terminal molt. It generally occurs during the warmest months of the year. Prepubertal females migrate to the upper reaches of estuaries where males typically reside as adults. To ensure that a male can mate, he will actively seek a receptive female and guard her for up to 7 days until she molts, at which time insemination occurs. Crabs compete with other individuals before, during, and after insemination, so mate guarding is very important for reproductive success. After mating, a male must continue to guard the female until her shell has hardened. Inseminated females retain spermatophores for up to one year, which they use for multiple spawnings in high salinity water. During spawning, a female extrudes fertilized eggs onto her swimmerets and carries them in a large egg mass, or sponge, while they develop. Females migrate to the mouth of the estuary to release the larvae, the timing of which is believed to be influenced by light, tide, and lunar cycles. Blue crabs have high fecundity: females may produce up to 2 million eggs per brood.  Migration and reproduction patterns differ between crab populations along the East Coast and the Gulf of Mexico. A distinct and large scale migration occurs in Chesapeake Bay, where "C. sapidus" undergoes a seasonal migration of up to several hundred miles. In the middle and upper parts of the bay, mating peaks in mid to late summer, while in the lower bay there are peaks in mating activity during spring and late summer through early fall. Changes in salinity and temperature may impact time of mating because both factors are important during the molting process. After mating, the female crab travels to the southern portion of the Chesapeake, using ebb tides to migrate from areas of low salinity to areas of high salinity, fertilizing her eggs with sperm stored during her single mating months or almost a year before.  Spawning events in the Gulf of Mexico are less pronounced than in estuaries along the East Coast, like the Chesapeake. In northern waters of the Gulf of Mexico, spawning occurs in the spring, summer, and fall, and females generally spawn twice. During spawning, females migrate to high salinity waters to develop a sponge, and return inland after hatching their larvae. They develop their second sponge inland, and again migrate to the higher-salinity waters to hatch the second sponge. After this, they typically do not reenter the estuary. Blue crabs along the southernmost coast of Texas may spawn year-round.

Commercial importance.

Range of fisheries.

Commercial fisheries for "C. sapidus" exist along much of the Atlantic coast of the United States, and in the Gulf of Mexico. Although the fishery has been historically centered on the Chesapeake Bay, contributions from other localities are increasing in importance. In the past two decades, the majority of commercial crabs have been landed in four states: Maryland, Virginia, North Carolina, and Louisiana. Weight and value of harvests since 2000 are listed below.

History of the crab fishery.

As early as the 1600s, the blue crab was an important food item for Native Americans and European settlers in the Chesapeake Bay area. Soft and hard blue crabs were not as valuable as fish but gained regional popularity by the 1700s. Throughout their range crabs were also an effective bait type for hook and line fisheries. Rapid perishing limited the distribution and hindered the growth of the fishery. Advances in refrigeration techniques in the late 1800s and early 1900s increased demand for blue crab nationwide.

Atlantic Coast.

The early blue crab fishery along the Atlantic coast was casual and productive because blue crabs were extremely abundant. In the lower Chesapeake Bay, crabs were even considered a nuisance species because they frequently clogged the nets of seine fishermen. Early on, the blue crab fishery of the Atlantic states was well documented. Atlantic states were the first to regulate the fishery, particularly the Chesapeake states. For example, after observing a slight decline in harvest, the fishing commissions of Virginia and Maryland put size limits into place by 1912 and 1917 respectively. Catch-per-unit-effort at the time was determined by packing houses, or crab processing plants.

Gulf of Mexico.

The early history of the recreational blue crab fishery in the Gulf of Mexico is not well known. Commercial crabbing was first reported in the Gulf of Mexico in the 1880s. Early crab fishermen used long-handled dip nets and drop nets among other simple fishing gear types to trap crabs at night. Blue crab spoiled quickly, which limited distribution and hindered the growth of the fishery for several decades. The first commercial processing plant in Louisiana opened in Morgan City in 1924. Other plants opened soon after, although commercial processing of hard blue crabs was not widespread until World War II.

Louisiana fishery.

Louisiana now has the world's largest blue crab fishery. Commercial harvests in the state account for over half of all landings in the Gulf of Mexico. The industry was not commercialized for interstate commerce until the 1990s, when supply markedly decreased in Maryland due to problems (see above) in Chesapeake Bay. Since then, Louisiana has steadily increased its harvest. In 2002, Louisiana harvested 22% of the nation's blue crab. That number rose to 26% by 2009 and 28% by 2012. The vast majority of Louisiana crabs are shipped to Maryland, where they are sold as "Chesapeake" or "Maryland" crab. Louisiana's harvest remained high in 2013, with 17,597 metric tons of blue crab valued at $51 million. In addition to commercial harvesting, recreational crabbing is very popular along Louisiana's coast.

Chesapeake Bay fishery.

The Chesapeake Bay has had the largest blue crab harvest for more than a century. Maryland and Virginia are usually the top two Atlantic coast states in annual landings, followed by North Carolina. In 2013, crab landings were valued at $18.7 million from Maryland waters and $16.1 million from Virginia waters. Although crab populations are currently declining, blue crab fishing in Maryland and Virginia remains a livelihood for thousands of coastal residents. As of 2001, Maryland and Virginia collectively had 4,816 commercial crab license holders. Three separate licenses are required for each of the three major jurisdictional areas: Maryland, the Potomac River, and Virginia waters. While the Bay’s commercial sector lands the majority of hard crab landings and nearly all peeler or soft crab landings, the recreational fishery is also significant. In 2013, an estimated 3.9 million pounds of blue crab were harvested recreationally.

Recent decline.

Blue crab populations naturally fluctuate with annual changes in environmental conditions. They have been described as having a long-term dynamic equilibrium, which was first noted after irregular landings data in the Chesapeake in 1950. This tendency may have made it difficult for managers to predict the severe decline of the Chesapeake’s blue crab populations. Once considered an overwhelmingly abundant annoyance, the declining blue crab population is now the subject of anxiety among fishermen and managers. Over the decade between the mid-1990s to 2004, the population fell from 900 million to around 300 million, and harvest weight fell from 52,000 tons (115,000,000 lbs) to 28,000 tons (62,000,000 lbs). Revenue fell further, from $72 million to $61 million. Long term estimates say that the overall Chesapeake population decreased approximately 70% in the last few decades. Even more alarming, the number of females capable of reproducing, known as spawning age females, has plummeted 84% in just a few decades. Survival and addition of juveniles to the harvestable crab population is also low. Many factors are to blame for low blue crab numbers, including high fishing pressure, environmental degradation, and disease prevalence. The 2018 reduction in H-2B visas available for seasonal workers is affecting Maryland's 20 crab processors, which typically employ about 500 foreign workers; however, the effect this will have on the crab fishery is not yet clear.

Crabbing gear.

Many types of gear have been used to catch blue crabs along the Atlantic and Gulf Coasts. Initially people used very simple techniques and gear, which included hand lines, dip nets, and push nets among a variety of other gear types. The trotline, a long baited twine set in waters 5–15 feet deep, was the first major gear type used commercially to target hard crabs. Use of commercial trotlines is now mostly limited to the tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay. In the Gulf of Mexico, trotline use drastically declined after invention of the crab pot in 1938. Crab pots are rigid boxlike traps made of hexagonal or square wire mesh. They possess between two and four funnels that extend into the trap, with the smaller end of the funnel inside of the trap. A central compartment made of smaller wire mesh holds bait. Crabs attracted by odorant plumes from the bait, often an oily fish, enter the trap through the funnels and cannot escape.

Bycatch.

Species other than blue crab are often caught incidentally in crab pots, including fish, turtles, conch, and other crab species. In Georgia, hermit crabs ("Pagurus" spp.), channeled whelk ("Busycon canaliculatum"), spider crabs ("Libinia" spp.), and stone crabs ("Menippe mercenaria") were the most common species observed as bycatch in commercial crab pots. Of important concern is the diamondback terrapin, "Malaclemys terrapin". The blue crab and diamondback terrapin have overlapping ranges along the East and Gulf coasts of the United States. Because the funnels in a crab pot are flexible, small terrapins may easily enter and become entrapped. Traps are checked every 24 hours or less, frequently resulting in drowning and death of terrapins. Crab pot bycatch may reduce local terrapin populations to less than half. To reduce terrapin entrapment, bycatch reduction devices (BRDs) may be installed on each of the funnels in a crab pot. BRDs effectively reduce bycatch (and subsequently mortality) of small terrapins without affecting blue crab catch.

Efforts to manage fisheries.

Because of its commercial and environmental value, "C. sapidus" is the subject of management plans over much of its range. In 2012, the "C. sapidus" population in Louisiana was recognized as a certified sustainable fishery by the Marine Stewardship Council. It was the first and remains the only certified sustainable blue crab fishery worldwide. For the state to maintain its certification, it must undergo annual monitoring and conduct a full re-evaluation five years after the certification date.

Callinectes sapidus (from the Greek'= "beautiful",'= "swimmer", and Latin'= "savory"), the Blue Crab, Atlantic Blue Crab, or regionally as the Chesapeake blue crab, is a species of crab native to the waters of the western Atlantic Ocean and the Gulf of Mexico, and introduced internationally.

蓝蟹(学名"Callinectes sapidus"),又名青蟹、可口美青蟹或美味优游蟹,是一种分布在大西洋(乞沙比克湾)、中美洲的海岸及墨西哥湾的美青蟹属生物。它们是马里兰州的代表甲壳类,是当地重要的渔获。


Mechanics.

QTEs generally involve the player following onscreen prompts to press buttons or manipulate joysticks within a limited amount of time. More recent games on consoles with motion-sensitive controls feature QTEs requiring specific movements from the player. The prompts are often displayed as a graphical image of the physical controller button; for example, games on the PlayStation consoles may show any of the four colored face buttons (X, square, circle, or triangle) as input for the event. Such actions are either atypical of the normal controls during the game, or in a different context from their assigned functions. Whilst most prompts simply require the player to push the appropriate button in time, some may require different types of actions, such as repeatedly pressing a button a certain number of times within the time limit or hitting the button with precise timing.

History.

In the 1980s, "Dragon's Lair" (Cinematronics, June 1983), "Cliff Hanger" (Stern, December 1983) and "Road Blaster" (Data East, 1985) were interactive movie laserdisc video games that showed video clips stored on a laserdisc. This gave them graphics on par with an animated cartoon at a time when video games were composed of simple, pixelated characters, but left little room for more advanced gameplay elements. Gameplay consisted of watching an animated video and pressing the correct button every few seconds to avoid seeing a (circumstance-specific) loss scene and losing a life. Compared to modern titles, games like "Dragon's Lair" would require the player to memorize the proper sequence and timing of their input, effectively making the entire game one continuous QTE. Such uses were also seen as giving the player only the illusion of control, as outside of responding to QTE, there were no other commands the player could enter; effectively, these games were considered the equivalent of watching a movie and responding every few minutes to allow it to continue. An improvement to the QTE mechanic was flashing the buttons that need to be pressed on the screen, which appeared in the laserdisc games "Super Don Quix-ote" (Universal, 1984), "Ninja Hayate" (Taito, 1984), "Time Gal" (Taito, 1985) and "Road Blaster".  "Die Hard Arcade" (Sega, 1996), "" and most notably "Shenmue" (Sega, 1999) for the Dreamcast introduced QTEs in the modern form of cutscene interludes in an otherwise more interactive game. "Shenmue"s director Yu Suzuki is credited with coining the phrase "Quick Time Event", which were included in the game as to provide "a fusion of gameplay and movie" and create cinematic experience to the player. The game's manual called them "quick timer events", but the phrase became popularized as "quick time events" since its release. Since this period, several other games on modern console and game systems have included QTEs or similar mechanics.  Quick-time events have also appeared in some sports games, such as the Wii version of "2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa", where they are used to save penalty shots and free kicks aimed towards the goal, or win possession of the ball after it is punted or corner-kicked. Failure to execute the quick-time event in time would result in the opposing team scoring a goal or claiming possession of the ball.  To improve game accessibility, action games increasingly contain options to individually disable quick-time events and other design elements that contribute to a game's difficulty.

Use and critical reaction.

QTEs have received mixed reactions from players and journalists. They can be used effectively to enhance cutscenes and other actions. The use of QTEs within "Shenmue" is often praised, as "they seamlessly flow from cinema to the QTE sequence without any loading pauses at all", and sections which utilized the QTE were considered "some of the most thrilling in the whole game". At the same time, they also are considered to be a weak addition to gameplay, and often force the player to repeat such sections until they complete the QTE perfectly to move on. They are often considered a "bane of action games", as their presence breaks the standard flow of the game and reduce the control of the game for the player to a few buttons, distracting, and turning interactivity into a job. Also, QTEs may frustrate the player due to the fact that they might not have any sign that they are about to happen.  QTEs are often used during dramatic cutscenes. "Resident Evil 4" uses QTEs (described by cinematics lead Yoshiaki Hirabayashi as an "action button system") to "facilitate a seamless transition between gameplay and the in-game movies" and prevent players from losing interest during cutscenes. One example in "Resident Evil 4" is a knife fight. The fight occurs during a late-game cutscene where the protagonist meets a major villain, who explains missing links in the game's story while periodically slashing at the protagonist and requiring the player to quickly press a button to parry him. As the action takes place during the major revelation of the game, the QTE serves to prevent the player from skipping over the cutscene. While this example is considered to use QTEs effectively, punctuating the heating discussion between the characters with rapid player reactions, it also demonstrates a common failing with the mechanism, in that if the player should miss a QTE, the protagonist will be killed, and the player must restart the cutscene and the fight from the start. Because of the likelihood of player death, the phrase "Press X to not die" has become synonymous with the use of QTEs in game. Furthermore, when a QTE is used during such a scene, the player's attention is drawn away from the animation and instead to the area of the screen where the button control indicator would appear, rendering the effort put into animating the scene meaningless.  Another problem with the use of QTE during cutscenes is that it can dilute the emotion and importance of the scene to a single button press, trivializing the nature of the scene. This issue was raised from "", in which during an early scene where the player character attends the funeral of a fallen fellow soldier, the player is given the option to press a button to mourn for the soldier. Forcing this type of interaction has been considered a poor form of storytelling, as some have argued the scene could have been played out without requiring player action to make the same form of emotional connection to the protagonist, or with the player give more control of the character.  QTEs may be used to provide a limited control scheme for a scene within the game that would be otherwise difficult or impossible to perform with the game's standard controls. A second example from "Shenmue II" requires the player to navigate several narrow planks across a void in a disused building, every so often responding to a QTE to regain the character's balance, with each successive plank requiring more and quicker responses to QTEs. Failing to respond to the QTE leads to the character's death and requiring the player to restart the sequence. This sequence has been strongly criticized, as when the plank sequence is finished, the player is rejoined by another character who had used the elevator to bypass the floors, an option not given to the player.  More recent games have used QTEs that occur more directly in gameplay and, when failed, do not end the game for the player. The "God of War" series uses QTEs as finishing moves: by completing the maneuver successfully, the player can defeat larger beasts or bosses, but failure to complete only leads to being tossed away, upon which the player can move back into battle to continue to fight. Often these are progressive QTE systems where the player is only partially penalized for missing the necessary commands; these often take place in boss battles. An example of this usage is from the game "Ninja Blade"; during a special attack by the boss, the player can attempt a series of QTEs to minimize the distance that the protagonist is pushed back down a long hallway from the boss, reducing the amount of time and damage that the character would then take in rushing the boss at the conclusion of the attack. Other positive means of incorporating the QTE is for manipulating the environment to gain a tactical edge; "Gears of War 2", for example, includes one area where the player character and his non-player character squad are on a circular elevator, fending off hordes of monsters engaging them on all sides. By temporarily abandoning the battle, the player can engage the elevator through a QTE at its control panel to gain the high ground, though this gain can be nullified if the monsters engage a second control panel.  A more recent use of QTEs have been within cutscenes themselves where failing to perform the QTE may alter or provide more details about the game's story and affect the character later in the game. In "Mass Effect 2" and "Mass Effect 3", certain cutscenes contain dramatic moments where a QTE will appear for a short moment, indicating an action that will drive the character towards either extreme of a morality scale. In one case, the player is given the opportunity to stop ruffians from firing upon a weaker character, with the QTE provided helping to boost the player towards higher moral standing. Telltale Games' "The Walking Dead" includes QTEs intermittently, creating tension throughout the game. Furthermore, during conversation trees with non-player characters, failure to select the next choice of topic in a limited time may affect later events in the game. This "quick time conversation" mechanic is used in other Telltale games as well.  More recently, the games "Fahrenheit" ("Indigo Prophecy" in North America) and "Heavy Rain" from Quantic Dream are primarily presented as sequences of QTEs, integrating the mechanic as part of the core gameplay, and present controller actions that correlate directly with the character actions on the screen; this was emphasized further in "Heavy Rain" by a game patch to support the use of the PlayStation Move motion controls where the player could actually physically perform the moves that corresponded with character actions. In both games, players may miss certain QTEs, or may be given a choice of multiple QTEs they could perform; opting of which QTEs to perform would alter the story, with the possibility of character death at some later point. In "Heavy Rain", for example, the player controls the fates of the game's four playable characters, leading to numerous different endings if the characters remained alive and if they had discovered critical information. Even prior to "Heavy Rain"s release, the game's director David Cage had to defend his vision of the game from critics that were skeptical of the reliance on QTEs within "Heavy Rain" and created an early stigma on the game's reception. Despite the integration, "Heavy Rain" was often criticized for use of QTEs in otherwise non-dramatic situations. In an early sequence in the game, the player has to control the lead character to find his son Jason in the mall, with the only available action of pressing the "X" button to shout "Jason" with no apparent effect.  With the onset of newer technology to improve graphics, controls, in-game physics, and artificial intelligence, gameplay elements previously simulated through QTEs can potentially be re-implemented as core game mechanics. "Road Blaster" used QTEs to steer the car and ram other vehicles off the road in pre-rendered animated scenes, while a modern game like "Burnout Paradise" gives the player full control of the vehicle and uses its game engine to create real-time crashes with other vehicles. Similarly, "" recreates the experience of the pre-animated scenes from "Dragon's Lair" as a platform game, allowing the player to react freely to the environmental traps and monsters.

In video games, a quick time event (QTE) is a method of context-sensitive gameplay in which the player performs actions on the control device shortly after the appearance of an on-screen instruction/prompt. It allows for limited control of the game character during cut scenes or cinematic sequences in the game. Performing the wrong prompt or not at all results in the character's failure at their task and often in an immediate game over, or a life being lost and being shown a death/failure animation.

快速反应事件(英语:Quick Time Events,简称QTE),是一种交互式的电子游戏方式,玩家必须根据画面指示输入指令,后续结果会根据玩家输入指令的正确与否有所不同。QTE的名称来源为1999年的《莎木》对此种游玩方式的官方命名,往后经推广成为游戏界的通称。


Climate.

Guantánamo Bay has a hot semi-arid climate according to the Köppen climate classification, with high temperatures throughout the year. Rainfall is rather low, and it is one of the driest regions in Cuba.

U.S. control of Guantánamo Bay.

The United States first seized Guantánamo Bay and established a naval base there in 1898 during the Spanish–American War in the Battle of Guantánamo Bay. In 1903, the United States and Cuba signed a lease granting the United States permission to use the land as a coaling and naval station. The lease satisfied the Platt Amendment; this amendment stated a naval base at "certain specific points agreed upon by the President of the United States" was needed to "enable the United States to maintain independence of Cuba."

History.

The original inhabitants of the bay, the Taínos, called it "Guantánamo". Christopher Columbus landed in 1494, naming it "Puerto Grande". On landing, Columbus' crew found Taíno fishermen preparing a feast for the local chieftain. When Spanish settlers took control of Cuba, the bay became a vital harbor on the south side of the island.  The bay was briefly known as Cumberland Bay when the British seized it in 1741 during the War of Jenkins' Ear. British Admiral Edward Vernon arrived with a force of eight warships and 4,000 soldiers with plans to march on Santiago de Cuba. However, local guerrilla forces (Creoles and Spaniards) defeated him and forced him to withdraw or face becoming a prisoner. In late 1760, boats from and HMS "Boreas" cut out the French privateers "Vainquer" and "Mackau", which were hiding in the bay. The French were also forced to burn the "Guespe", another privateer, to prevent her capture.  During the Spanish–American War of 1898, the U.S. Navy fleet attacking Santiago needed shelter from the summer hurricane season. They chose Guantánamo because of its excellent harbor. U.S. Marines landed with naval support in the invasion of Guantánamo Bay in June 1898. As they moved inland, however, Spanish resistance increased and the marines required support from Cuban scouts.  The Guantanamo Bay Naval Base surrounds the southern portion of the bay. The naval base, nicknamed "GTMO" or "Gitmo", covers on the western and eastern banks of the bay. It was established in 1898, when the United States took control of Cuba from Spain following the Spanish–American War. The newly-formed American protectorate incorporated the Platt Amendment in the 1901 Cuban Constitution. Tomás Estrada Palma, the first President of Cuba, offered a perpetual lease for the area around Guantánamo Bay on February 23, 1903. The 1903 Cuban–American Treaty of Relations held, among other things, that the United States, for the purposes of operating coaling and naval stations, has "complete jurisdiction and control" of the Guantánamo Bay, while recognizing that the Republic of Cuba retains ultimate sovereignty.  In 1934 a new Cuban-American Treaty of Relations, reaffirming the lease, granted Cuba and its trading partners free access through the bay, modified the lease payment from $2,000 in U.S. gold coins per year to the 1934 equivalent value of $4,085 in U.S. dollars, and made the lease permanent unless both governments agreed to break it or until the U.S. abandoned the base property.  After the Cuban Revolution of 1953–1959, United States President Dwight D. Eisenhower insisted that the status of the base remain unchanged, despite Fidel Castro's objections. Since then, the Cuban government has cashed only one of the rent checks from the U.S. government, and even then only because of "confusion" in the early days of the leftist revolution, according to Castro. The remaining un-cashed checks, made out to "Treasurer General of the Republic" (a title that ceased to exist after the revolution), were kept in Castro's office stuffed into a desk drawer.  The United States used Guantanamo Bay as a processing center for asylum-seekers and as a camp for HIV-positive refugees in the 1990s. Over a period of six months, the USA interned over 30,000 Haitian refugees in Guantanamo, while another 30,000 fled to the Dominican Republic. Eventually, the USA admitted 10,747 of the Haitians to refugee status in the United States. Most of the refugees were housed in a tent city on the re-purposed airstrip that would later be used to house the complex used for the Guantanamo military commissions. The refugees who represented discipline or security problems were held on the site that later became Camp XRay, the initial site of the Guantanamo Bay detention camp. In August 1994, rioting broke out in the detention camps and 20 U.S. military police and 45 Haitians were injured.  Since 2002, the base has included the detainment camp for individuals deemed of risk to United States national security. In 2009 U.S. President Barack Obama gave orders for the detention camp to close by January 22, 2010., the detention camp remains open due to a congressional refusal of funds for its closure.  Alfred-Maurice de Zayas has argued that the 1903 lease agreement was imposed on Cuba under duress and was a treaty between unequals, no longer compatible with modern international law, and voidable "ex nunc". He makes six suggestions for a peaceful settlement, including following the procedure outlined in the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties.

Guantánamo Bay () is a bay located in Guantánamo Province at the southeastern end of Cuba. It is the largest harbor on the south side of the island and it is surrounded by steep hills which create an enclave that is cut off from its immediate hinterland.

关塔那摩湾(西班牙文:Bahía de Guantánamo;英文:Guantanamo Bay)位于古巴东南端关塔那摩省。北纬19.54度,西经75.9度。湾中设有一属于美国海军的关塔那摩湾海军基地,占地116平方公里。近年来该基地被美军用于拘留和审讯在阿富汗与伊拉克等地区的战事中捕获的恐怖活动嫌疑人、战俘。此地因为算是租借的古巴领土,法理上受刑人的权利不受联邦法律保护与监管,美国政府便可以为所欲为向受刑人迫供,因而再度受到媒体与民间人权团体的关注。


General definition.

In chromatography, the retardation factor, "R", is the fraction of the sample in the mobile phase at equilibrium, defined as:

Planar chromatography.

The retardation factor, "R", is commonly used in paper chromatography and thin layer chromatography for analyzing and comparing different substances. It can be mathematically described by the following ratio:  An "R" value will always be in the range 0 to 1; if the substance moves, it can only move in the direction of the solvent flow, and cannot move faster than the solvent. For example, if particular substance in an unknown mixture travels 2.5 cm and the solvent front travels 5.0 cm, the retardation factor would be 0.5. One can choose a mobile phase with different characteristics (particularly polarity) in order to control how far the substance being investigated migrates.  An "R" value is characteristic for any given compound (provided that the same stationary and mobile phases are used). It can provide corroborative evidence as to the identity of a compound. If the identity of a compound is suspected but not yet proven, an authentic sample of the compound, or standard, is spotted and run on a TLC plate side by side (or on top of each other) with the compound in question. Note that this identity check must be performed on a single plate, because it is difficult to duplicate all the factors which influence R exactly from experiment to experiment.

Relationship with retention factor.

In terms of retention factor ("k"), retardation factor ("R") is defined as follows:  and conversely:

In chromatography, the retardation factor (R) is the fraction of an analyte in the mobile phase of a chromatographic system. In planar chromatography in particular, the retardation factor R is defined as the ratio of the distance traveled by the center of a spot to the distance traveled by the solvent front. Ideally, the values for "R" are equivalent to the R values used in column chromatography.

在色谱法中,保留因子(R)定义为被分析物在色谱体系流动相中的分数。特别的,在平面色谱法中,保留因子(R)定义为一点中心运动距离与溶剂前沿运动距离的比值。理想条件下,"R"的值等于柱色谱中的R值。