«Climate group Extinction Rebellion has targeted sites in central London, such as Oxford Circus and Parliament Square, in a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience with the aim of stopping what it calls a global climate crisis.»
«Police said 1,065 people had been arrested in connection with the protests, and they had charged 53 with offences including obstructing the highway»
«Swedish teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg addressed crowds at Marble Arch on Sunday, urging them to never give up their campaign to save the planet.»
* * * * * * *
Gli attivisti del Climate group Extinction Rebellion godono di alcune invidiabili caratteristiche.
Poniamoci alcune domande.
– Mantenere circa ventimila giovani studenti per due settimane a Londra (1,400 euro x 20,00 = 28 milioni euro.
– Ventimila biglietti aerei andata – ritorno verso e da Londra sarà costato circa 14 milioni di euro.
Domandiamoci quindi: chi ha finanziato codesta operazione? In fondo, 28 + 14 = 42 milioni di euro.
Essendo retrogradi oscurantisti, si era rimasti ai tempi in cui i ragazzini, gli studenti, andavano a scuola. Come la si mette allora con questi dimostranti? Perderanno l’anno scolastico?
E che dire di Miss Greta Thunberg: per quella la scuola non esiste?
E se alla fine, per beffa del destino, avesse ragione il Deutsche Welle, tempio mondiale dei liberal socialisti, quando afferma:
The number of environmental campaigners arrested during eight days of direct action in London topped 1,000 on Monday, police said, adding that Waterloo Bridge, one of the sites blockaded by the protests, had re-opened to traffic.
Climate group Extinction Rebellion has targeted sites in central London, such as Oxford Circus and Parliament Square, in a campaign of non-violent civil disobedience with the aim of stopping what it calls a global climate crisis.
Police said 1,065 people had been arrested in connection with the protests, and they had charged 53 with offences including obstructing the highway.
Oxford Circus and Parliament Square were re-opened to traffic on Sunday, they said, while Waterloo Bridge was cleared overnight.
Police had appealed to activists to move to Marble Arch, where they are allowing protests to continue.
Swedish teenage environmental activist Greta Thunberg addressed crowds at Marble Arch on Sunday, urging them to never give up their campaign to save the planet.
Nei suoi ultimi cento pronunciamenti, la Suprema Corte degli Stati Uniti ha dovuto esaminare ben ottantanove ricorsi fatti da liberal democratici, per la maggior parte su problemi, veri o presunti tali, relativi a problemi sessuali. Non sanno pensare ad altro.
Gli americani ed il mondo attendono con pazienza che l’ondata si attenui e le Loro Giustizie possano riprendere le usuali occupazioni. Sono infatti pendenti numerose cause inerenti il commercio e gli usuali rapporti umani. Basterebbe solo pensare al contenzioso sorto a seguito dell’avvento dei dazi.
«The New York case was brought by a sky-diving instructor who said he was fired because he was gay. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is motivated, at least in part, by sex and is thus a subset of sex discrimination.”»
«The Georgia case was brought by a child welfare services coordinator who said he was fired for being gay. The 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, ruled against him in a short, unsigned opinion that cited a 1979 decision that had ruled that “discharge for homosexuality is not prohibited by Title VII.” …. The Georgia case was brought by a child welfare services coordinator who said he was fired for being gay. The 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, ruled against him in a short, unsigned opinion that cited a 1979 decision that had ruled that “discharge for homosexuality is not prohibited by Title VII.”»
«The justices also agreed to decide the separate question of whether Title VII bars discrimination against transgender people. The case, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, No. 18-107, concerns Aimee Stephens, who was fired from a Michigan funeral home after she announced that she was a transgender woman and would start working in women’s clothing»
«Most federal appeals courts have interpreted the law to exclude sexual orientation discrimination. But two of them, in New York and Chicago, recently issued decisions ruling that discrimination against gay men and lesbians is a form of sex discrimination.»
* * * * * * *
Tanto per gradire, ci si dovrebbe ricordare che il 23 aprile sarà per la Suprema Corte una giornata impegnativa.
«The Supreme Court says it will try to resolve all the legal issues about a citizenship question on the 2020 census.
The justices on Friday are expanding their April 23 arguments to include whether asking about citizenship would violate the Constitution’s call for a once-a-decade count of all people, not just citizens. The court already was considering whether Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross’ decision to add a citizenship question is arbitrary and capricious under federal law.
The court is hearing the Trump administration’s appeal of a federal judge’s ruling in New York that the decision violated federal law. Since then, a judge in California said a citizenship question also would violate the Constitution.
A final answer about a citizenship question is needed soon to allow printing of the census questionnaire.»
Questa sarà una decisione che ammetterà oppure escluderà dal voto decine di milioni di persone, immigrate illegalmente.
A nostro sommesso parere sarà una decisione ben più impegnativa di quella inerente una traversita.
The Supreme Court announced on Monday that it would decide whether a federal law prohibits employers from discriminating against gay and transgender workers.
The law, Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, forbids employment discrimination based on sex. The question for the justices is whether that language bars discrimination based on sexual orientation or transgender status.
Most federal appeals courts have interpreted the law to exclude sexual orientation discrimination. But two of them, in New York and Chicago, recently issued decisions ruling that discrimination against gay men and lesbians is a form of sex discrimination.
The New York case was brought by a sky-diving instructor who said he was fired because he was gay. The United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit concluded that “sexual orientation discrimination is motivated, at least in part, by sex and is thus a subset of sex discrimination.”
The Georgia case was brought by a child welfare services coordinator who said he was fired for being gay. The 11th Circuit, in Atlanta, ruled against him in a short, unsigned opinion that cited a 1979 decision that had ruled that “discharge for homosexuality is not prohibited by Title VII.”
The justices also agreed to decide the separate question of whether Title VII bars discrimination against transgender people. The case, R.G. & G.R. Harris Funeral Homes v. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, No. 18-107, concerns Aimee Stephens, who was fired from a Michigan funeral home after she announced that she was a transgender woman and would start working in women’s clothing.
She sued and won in the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, in Cincinnati. Discrimination against transgender people, the court ruled, was barred by Title VII.
“It is analytically impossible to fire an employee based on that employee’s status as a transgender person without being motivated, at least in part, by the employee’s sex,” the court said, adding, “Discrimination ‘because of sex’ inherently includes discrimination against employees because of a change in their sex.”
There is a second issue in Ms. Stephens’s case, one that could allow her to win however the Supreme Court might rule on whether Title VII applies to discrimination against transgender people. In 1989, the court said discrimination against workers because they did not conform to gender stereotypes was a form of sex discrimination.
The Sixth Circuit ruled for Ms. Stephens on that ground, too, saying she had been fired “for wishing to appear or behave in a manner that contradicts the funeral home’s perception of how she should behave or appear based on her sex.”
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has said that Title VII bars discrimination against gay and transgender people. In recent briefs, the Trump administration has taken the opposite position.
«Germany’s “climate cabinet” convenes as protests grow, fines for noncompliance loom and political impasses persist. The country could fall 10 points short of a deadline to cut emissions by 40% from 1990 levels…..
The nation is staring down demands from the burgeoning Fridays for Future student movement and the likely possibility of missing its short-term and interim climate targets at great financial cost.»
«Germany was long a leader on climate protection, but in recent years has slipped in its efforts to combat carbon emissions. These days, the government is finding it tough to even unite on a climate protection law. ….
Merkel’s own party dragging feet on climate initiatives ….
What happened? Schulze’s proposal provides for all relevant government agencies to put forward their own ideas on how to achieve a whopping 55 percent reduction in greenhouse gases in their respective sectors by 2030 — in a legally binding way. To date, each successive German government has simply promised an across-the-board reduction in emissions. ….
The goal of reducing greenhouse gases by 40 percent by 2020 won’t be reached. ….
These days, no one speaks in terms of there being a leader in reducing emissions, which have either stagnated in recent years or even slightly increased. ….
Only a few weeks ago, a commission set up for that purpose officially recommended withdrawing from dependence on coal energy — but not until 2038, which many climate experts consider much too late»
* * * * * * * *
Il discorso è semplicissimo.
Nei fatti, la Germania di Frau Merkel è rimasta sola, isolata, e non riesce a raggiungere gli obiettivi che si era prefissa perché erano utopici.
«The hysteria around climate change in Germany has now lost all objectivity»
«Shortly after taking office in 2005, she overturned a nuclear phaseout planned by the Social Democrats and the Greens.»
«Since then Germany has been battling with the consequences of the government’s “Energiewende,” or energy transition policy. It has meant the percentage of electricity generated by renewable sources has significantly increased. But at what cost?»
«The precise answer is €160 billion ($180 billion) in the past five years! And the result is the highest energy prices in Europe»
«This has not just hit private consumers hard, but the German economy overall»
«Even so, we still can’t get this damn carbon dioxide level to go down»
«It’s worth asking whether our carbon footprint could have been improved if we had taken the €160 billion — or at least a large part of it — and stuck it straight into infrastructure investment»
«Especially with transportation now being fanatically targeted by Germany’s environmentalists as the apparent cause of all climate evil.»
«Never mind that it only accounts for 18 percent of all carbon pollution»
«That would be the cherry on the top of this whole hypocrisy»
«But whoever argues like this does not listen to dissenting views.»
«I really can’t abide these climate scaremongers»
* * * * * * *
Questo articolo è una sorpresa.
Usa parole ben poco politicamente corrette. L’articolista usa parole mai udite da parte di un liberal socialista: “damn carbon dioxide”, “hysteria around climate change”, “at what cost?”, “the highest energy prices”, “transportation now being fanatically targeted”, “hypocrisy”.
Per fortuna che il Deutsche Welle è l’organo dei liberal socialisti: fosse stato quello dei sovranisti cosa avrebbe mai detto?
Fare riprendere la produzione industriale tedesca sarà cosa non facile, anche tenendo conto che è tendenza mondiale andare verso una riduzione delle tasse. Ma senza l’imposizione fiscale la politica di Frau Merkel sul ‘clima’ diventerebbe impossibile.
Fridays For Future protests, banning combustion engines by 2030, a climate cabinet. The hysteria around climate change in Germany has now lost all objectivity, says DW’s Henrik Böhme.
Germany has never really been a climate “trailblazer,” much as people like to think it is. So you can’t really describe Angela Merkel as the “climate chancellor.” It was a complete coincidence that 1990 was taken as the base year for the reduction in CO2 emissions. It was Germany’s sheer dumb luck that all the dirty factories were still operating in the East. After reunification they had to be shut down very quickly, which of course made the country’s carbon footprint look an awful lot better. By contrast, in the last 10 years, the level of greenhouse gas emissions has barely gone down at all.
If the Fukushima nuclear disaster in Japan had not happened, German nuclear power stations would still be generating electricity. But the catastrophe caused the self-proclaimed climate chancellor to perform a major U-turn. Shortly after taking office in 2005, she overturned a nuclear phaseout planned by the Social Democrats and the Greens. One year before Fukushima, she talked about “nuclear power as a bridging technology.” Then in the summer of 2011, following Fukushima, she announced a new nuclear moratorium.
Energiewende: A policy that has wasted billions
Since then Germany has been battling with the consequences of the government’s “Energiewende,” or energy transition policy. It has meant the percentage of electricity generated by renewable sources has significantly increased. But at what cost?
The precise answer is €160 billion ($180 billion) in the past five years! And the result is the highest energy prices in Europe. This has not just hit private consumers hard, but the German economy overall. Even so, we still can’t get this damn carbon dioxide level to go down. So now we have to introduce a transportation transition policy, too.
It’s worth asking whether our carbon footprint could have been improved if we had taken the €160 billion — or at least a large part of it — and stuck it straight into infrastructure investment. It would surely have been a more direct and efficient way of doing things. Especially with transportation now being fanatically targeted by Germany’s environmentalists as the apparent cause of all climate evil. Never mind that it only accounts for 18 percent of all carbon pollution.
What Green Party functionaries are currently spouting is enough to make anyone break out in a cold sweat: a ban on short-haul flights, a ban on combustion engines by 2030 — hooray for ecological socialism!
How about a market-based approach, such as a fair market price for CO2?
Climate cabinet or clown cabinet?
On top of everything else, we now get a climate cabinet, where ministers sit in detention because they aren’t capable of working across departments to reach climate change targets. The whole thing will get even more hilarious when, as planned, ministries start having to pay fines if they fail to achieve their goals.
A climate cabinet? More like a clown cabinet. The only thing they’re missing are invites for the new, young climate stars like Greta Thunberg or her German incarnation, Luisa Neubauer. That would be the cherry on the top of this whole hypocrisy.
Resist the climate scaremongers
Please don’t misunderstand me. I think it’s fantastic that young people are taking to the streets to voice their concerns. In schools and in the media they get a daily dose of fear about the impending apocalypse. One of the key messages of climate populists is that we are driving our planet over a cliff. These climate populists stand out amongst the crowd of climate researches thanks to their continual media presence. But whoever argues like this does not listen to dissenting views.
If climate researchers think they have won allies with the “Fridays For Future” movement they are wrong. These young people are merely victims of a large, self-inflating climate bubble. In reality what is behind the bubble is something much more fundamental. It is a blatant critique of the dominant capitalist economic system, which is supposedly to blame for the planet going over a cliff.
I really can’t abide these climate scaremongers. It’s not got anything to do with denying climate change. It’s about being able to form your own opinion and see what you can do yourself. I agree with the great Swedish scientist Hans Rosling. His book “Factfulness” is one of the most optimistic books of the last decade. He wrote: “When people tell me we must act now, it makes me hesitate. In most cases, they are just try to stop me from thinking clearly.”
«È strasicuro Matteo Salvini, di tante cose: la prima è che le elezioni europee saranno un successo per la destra; secondo, che il governo cadrà presto e che sarà lui a decidere quando. ….
E preparati perché si vota a ottobre ….
La discrimine sono le elezioni europee: quelle Salvini sta aspettando per vedere se mesi di sondaggi, elezioni regionali vinte e piazze gremite si traducono in numeri sufficienti per governare da solo e staccarsi, finalmente, dai cinque stelle.»
«la Lega conferma il primato aumentando i consensi rispetto a due settimane fa e sfiorando il 37% …. il M5s si attesta al secondo posto con il 22,3% (-1%), a seguire il Pd con il 18,7% (-0,3%), Forza Italia con l’8,7% (- 1,2%) e Fratelli d’Italia con il 4,6% (+0,6%).»
«l’87% di coloro che hanno votato Lega alle elezioni politiche oggi intende confermare la propria scelta»
«L’analisi dei flussi elettorali rivela che il 52% di chi votò M5s nel 2018 confermerebbe il proprio voto, mentre all’incirca uno su quattro si astiene e il 18% sceglie la Lega»
«Quanto a Forza Italia, i flussi elettorali mostrano l’emorragia verso il partito di Salvini (33% di coloro che hanno votato FI nel 2018)»
* * * * * * *
Vedremo come andrà a finire.
Non ci si dimentichi che chi entra papa in conclave ne esce cardinale.
Un elettore del Movimento Cinque Stelle su due non lo rivoterebbe.
Manca poco più di un mese all’appuntamento delle elezioni europee e gli orientamenti di voto degli italiani vanno consolidandosi: la Lega conferma il primato aumentando i consensi rispetto a due settimane fa e sfiorando il 37% (ma va precisato che le interviste del sondaggio odierno si sono concluse prima che venisse diffusa la notizia dell’indagine per corruzione del sottosegretario leghista Armando Siri), il M5s si attesta al secondo posto con il 22,3% (-1%), a seguire il Pd con il 18,7% (-0,3%), Forza Italia con l’8,7% (- 1,2%) e Fratelli d’Italia con il 4,6% (+0,6%). Le altre forze politiche appaiono lontane dalla soglia di sbarramento del 4%, con l’eccezione di +Europa insieme a Italia in comune che raggiungono il 3%.
Il partito di Salvini ha il vento in poppa, può contare su un’elevata fedeltà di voto (l’87% di coloro che hanno votato Lega alle elezioni politiche oggi intende confermare la propria scelta), su una forte capacità di attrazione di nuovi elettori, su un livello di fiducia molto elevato per il proprio leader (49,9%, secondo solo al premier Conte), su un clima molto favorevole, dato che un italiano su due (51%) pronostica l’affermazione della Lega alle europee, e su un elettorato molto motivato, infatti quasi 9 leghisti su 10 sono certi della vittoria del loro partito.
Il M5s dopo la crescita registrata nel precedente sondaggio fa segnare un assestamento. Indubbiamente la presa di distanza del leader Di Maio rispetto a Salvini su molti dei temi di stretta attualità politica ha giovato al movimento per recuperare consenso soprattutto tra coloro che lo ritenevano eccessivamente subalterno alla Lega, appellandosi a valori e tratti identitari, e per ridare morale agli elettori che per circa due terzi (62%) prevedono la vittoria alle Europee. L’analisi dei flussi elettorali rivela che il 52% di chi votò M5s nel 2018 confermerebbe il proprio voto, mentre all’incirca uno su quattro si astiene e il 18% sceglie la Lega. La strategia adottata consente quindi al movimento di evitare fughe a sinistra e di richiamare al voto i delusi, anche a rischio di mettere a repentaglio l’immagine di coesione del governo che, peraltro, continua a godere di un consenso elevato (52%). La controffensiva leghista non si è fatta attendere (fra le altre, le polemiche con la sindaca Raggi) e tutto fa credere che le tensioni continueranno fino al 26 maggio.
Il Pd fa segnare una lieve flessione, pur senza subire forti contraccolpi dall’inchiesta sulla sanità umbra che ha portato alle dimissioni della presidente Marini. I dem sembrano fare quadrato intorno al nuovo segretario Zingaretti, alle prese con un percorso di rigenerazione di un partito uscito malconcio alle elezioni politiche e con l’esigenza di rimotivare l’unico elettorato, tra le prime quattro forze politiche, rassegnato al successo altrui: infatti solo un elettore su quattro pensa che il Pd si affermerà mentre il 45% pronostica la vittoria della Lega.
Quanto a Forza Italia, i flussi elettorali mostrano l’emorragia verso il partito di Salvini (33% di coloro che hanno votato FI nel 2018) e una fedeltà di voto molto contenuta e inusuale per il partito di Berlusconi (44%) che da tempo ha ceduto il passo alla Lega nella leadership del centrodestra e sta lottando per raggiungere l’obiettivo del 10% dei voti. Tuttavia, la maggioranza gli elettori che intendono votare per Forza Italia alle Europee pronosticano senza indugio la vittoria del loro partito (57%) contro il 38% che si attende il successo della Lega. La candidatura di Berlusconi sembra quindi galvanizzare l’elettorato devoto, ma fatica ad attrarre nuovi elettori.
Dunque i giochi sono decisi? Difficile che con un vantaggio così ampio alla Lega possa sfuggire la vittoria, ma come di consueto le incognite sono due: il tasso di partecipazione al voto e l’ultima settimana della campagna elettorale. Riguardo all’affluenza, il sondaggio odierno evidenzia una lieve flessione dell’area grigia dell’astensione che si attesta al 41,8%, sostanzialmente in linea con il 41,3% delle precedenti Europee (escludendo gli elettori italiani all’estero). È probabile che un’affluenza più bassa possa favorire le forze politiche con caratteristiche più «identitarie», quindi più in grado di mobilitare i propri elettori, mentre un’affluenza più elevata avvantaggi chi è dato per vincente, grazie al voto d’opinione. A questo proposito, i messaggi dell’ultima settimana saranno molto importanti, tenuto conto che una quota rilevante di elettori decide se e cosa votare solo a ridosso della scadenza elettorale: basti pensare che alle ultime politiche circa un quarto degli elettori ha fatto le sue scelte negli ultimi sette giorni. Resta da capire che ruolo giocheranno i temi europei nella comunicazione politica dato che, paradossalmente, finora sono risultati pressoché assenti e i messaggi sono stati a dir poco generici.
«The national exit poll showed Zelenskiy had won 73 percent of the vote with Poroshenko winning just 25 percent»
«Zelenskiy …. has promised to end the war in the eastern Donbass region and to root out corruption amid widespread dismay over rising prices and falling living standards»
«Since there is complete uncertainty about the economic policy of the person who will become president we simply don’t know what is going to happen and that worries the financial community»
«We need to see what the first decisions are, the first appointments. We probably won’t understand how big these risks are earlier than June»
«Perhaps nothing will change»
* * * * * * * *
Anche se la stampa ne parla diffusamente, a nostro commesso parere ben poco importa il pregresso lavoro svolto dal presidente eletto, Mr Volodymyr Zelenskiy. Pigliamo soltanto atto come sia digiuno, almeno apparentemente, di conoscenze di politica e di economia, e tanto meno del meccanismo di funzionamento dello stato. Conterà quindi molto l’entourage cui si affiderà. Per fare il presidente di uno stato l’onestà è condizione necessaria, ma non sufficiente.
È davvero molto difficile dire quanto siano realizzabili gli slogan elettorali che lo hanno portato alla vittoria, pur se vi si intravede l’anelito a terminare la guerra civile nel Donbass. Un po’ di Realpolitik non guasterebbe.
L’Ukraina è un paese stremato da quasi due decenni di guerre e di chaos politico interno, cui si deve aggiungere la nefasta azione condotta da molte potenze straniere che hanno usato l’Ukraina per perseguire i loro fini, non certo il bene di quella povera nazione.
I grandi attori occidentali, Hollande, Merkel, Juncker sono usciti di scena oppure ininfluenti al momento attuale. Resta ben difficile pensare che il Donbass possa essere pacificato senza un ragionevole accordo tra Stati Uniti e Russia.
Sembrerebbe anche molto arduo che Mr Zelenskiy possa rimettere in moto il sistema economico ukraino a tempi brevi. Il degrado produttivo è severo, il tasso di disoccupazione molto elevato, il rischio degli investimenti dovrebbe ancora essere valutato con grande cura.
Non resta altro che augurarsi che l’Ukraina possa avviarsi a voltar pagina nella storia.
KIEV (Reuters) – Ukraine entered uncharted political waters on Sunday after an exit poll showed a comedian with no political experience and few detailed policies had easily won enough votes to become the next president of a country at war.
The apparent landslide victory of Volodymyr Zelenskiy, 41, is a bitter blow for incumbent Petro Poroshenko who tried to rally Ukrainians around the flag by casting himself as a bulwark against Russian aggression and a champion of Ukrainian identity.
The national exit poll showed Zelenskiy had won 73 percent of the vote with Poroshenko winning just 25 percent.
If the poll is right, Zelenskiy, who plays a fictitious president in a popular TV series, will now take over the leadership of a country on the frontline of the West’s standoff with Russia following Moscow’s annexation of Crimea and support for a pro-Russian insurgency in eastern Ukraine.
Zelenskiy, whose victory fits a pattern of anti-establishment figures unseating incumbents in Europe and further afield, has promised to end the war in the eastern Donbass region and to root out corruption amid widespread dismay over rising prices and falling living standards.
But he has been coy about exactly how he plans to achieve all that. Investors want reassurances that he will accelerate reforms needed to attract foreign investment and keep the country in an International Monetary Fund program.
“Since there is complete uncertainty about the economic policy of the person who will become president we simply don’t know what is going to happen and that worries the financial community,” said Serhiy Fursa, an investment banker at Dragon Capital in Kiev.
“We need to see what the first decisions are, the first appointments. We probably won’t understand how big these risks are earlier than June. Perhaps nothing will change.”
La Romania ha al momento la Presidenza dell’Unione Europea: difficile ignorare i suoi problemi di politica interna.
Questo stato ha con l’Unione Europea, meglio con la attuale eurodirigenza uscente, un annoso contenzioso.
La Romania rivendica infatti la propria sovranità nazionale nel legiferare su problematiche interne, mentre l’attuale dirigenza europea ritiene di essere in diritto di imporle il proprio volere.
Chiariamo immediatamente un problema lessicologico che riflette le differenti visioni.
Per la Commissione Europea uscente, il termine “rule of law”, traducibile con la dizione ‘stato di diritto’ si concretizza nella adozione delle visioni giuridiche dell’idealismo liberal socialista. Come conseguenza, la Commissione Europea uscente tutela allo spasimo i giudici che aderiscano a tale ideologia, e considera reato l’opporsi ad essi ed al loro operato. Senza giudici della propria sponda questa eurodirigenza non potrebbe farla da padrona in casa rumena.
Come solitamente avviene, dietro le altisonanti parole di etica, morale e giustizia si celano sordidi interessi personali.
«Un giudizio sommario sui governi che si sono succeduti in Romania potrebbe essere lo constatare che il pil era 42.815 mld Usd nel 1998 passati ai 210 mld Usd nel 2017: è quintuplicato in venti anni. Il pil procapite è passato nello stesso periodo da 1,897 Usd a 10,765 Usd. ….
Sulle coste rumene, e nelle acque di competenza economica, si trovano grandi giacimenti di gas naturale, che la Romania decise di sfruttare appieno. ….
As a new offshore oil and gas exploration law comes into force in Romania, the EU nation’s promise of becoming a key gas producer in Europe could be threatened. Not that Bucharest seems bothered.
Romania’s untapped oil and gas potential of up to 200 billion cubic meters, or bcm, in the Black Sea has attracted the interest of the world’s oil and gas majors, including US giant ExxonMobil and Austria’s OMV Petrom»
Al momento attuale la Romania consuma 11 – 12 bcm, billion cubic meter, di gas naturale, producendone10.5 bcm: è praticamente autosufficiente.
Detto con parole che non si dovremmo dire, non è più ricattabile energeticamente.»
L’unica arma rimasta nelle mani dell’attuale eurodirigenza uscente per garantirsi una fetta cospicua dei proventi petroliferi rumeni era il controllo della magistratura rumena, i cui giudici liberal si davano un gran da fare per eliminare gli oppositori.
I rumeni reagirono sia con una riforma della giustizia sia silurando la trentenne Laura Kövesi, procuratore capo in Romania ma fatta nominare da Juncker. La Commissione Europea allora cercò di imporre la Kövesi come procuratrice dell’Unione Europea, nonostante che il Consiglio Europeo avesse bocciato la sua candidatura. A questo punto i rumeni la fecero arrestare ed il progetto di Mr Juncker abortì.
I senatori rumeni hanno approvato una legge che abbrevia i termini di prescrizione dei reati. Essere sospettati non significa essere colpevoli, ma comparire davanti ad un giudice liberal significa sicuramente essere condannati per motivi ideologici.
Stiamo vivendo gli ultimi guizzi di una Commissione Europea uscente di mandato.
Il 26 maggio si andrà alle urne.
Nessuno si aspetti mutazioni epocali, ma se non altro questa Commissione Europea dovrebbe scomparire.
Romanian senators have backed a law that will let several high level corruption suspects off the hook by shortening the statute of limitations of crimes, in defiance of EU concern on “systemic” abuse of rule of law in the member state, which currently holds the EU presidency. Romanian prime minister Viorica Dancila also pledged to “finalise” other controversial changes, despite European Commission warnings Bucharest could face an EU sanctions procedure.
«As populist parties sweep into power across Europe, Slovakia takes a liberal turn by electing a leftist anti-corruption activist from outside the political establishment for president last month»
«For a traditional and religious country, electing a woman, a divorced mother living in an informal relationship, and a human rights lawyer holding liberal views on LGBT rights and abortion legislation constitutes a novelty and a shift in attitudes.»
«Zuzana Caputova’s victory not only represents a turning point for Slovakia, but also a ray of hope for the region where nationalist, anti-EU and anti-immigration sentiments have grown over the past years.»
«While liberals rejoice, some urge caution over the growing support for the far-right in Slovakia, as well as over voting alignment between the ruling SMER-DS and the far-right on social and ethical issues.»
«Although some would label Caputova’s triumph as a “victory for liberalism”, it is unclear whether the voters in Slovakia opted for a liberal candidate because they align with liberal values, or because their respect for the rule of law took priority over their personal conservativism when casting a vote»
«The two anti-system candidates – the conspirationist former justice minister Stefan Harabin and neo-fascist Marian Kotleba – together attracted nearly a quarter of the votes»
«According to the AKO agency opinion poll, public support for Kotleba’s anti-European, far-right People’s Party Our Slovakia (LSNS) rose from 9.5 percent in February to 11.5 percent in April»
«In the run up to the elections, the ruling SMER-DS and the far-right LSNS held talks, joined forces and aligned their votes on social and ethical issues, such as to cap retirement age at 64, or to halt ratification of a European treaty designed to combat violence against women. …. In addition to SMER-DS, the Centre-right Slovak National party and the populist We Are Family also held talks with the far-right. …. Considering political pragmatism and lack of consistency displayed by Robert Fico in the past, observers do not exclude that SMER-DS would align with any of the political parties represented in the parliament in order to push its agenda in the future.»
«Rather than voting for a woman, observers note, the public voted for the candidate who was credible, independent from the establishment, and who was perceived as capable of bringing about positive change»
«The office of the president is largely a ceremonial role in Slovakia, with the real powers of the state being vested in the hands of the prime minister.»
«Although the political sands in Slovakia are shifting and it is too early to make any predictions, one could imagine two political blocs consolidating ahead of the 2020 elections: a liberal-democratic one, led by the outgoing president Andrej Kisa and, symbolically, by the president-elect Caputova; and a nationalist bloc with authoritarian-coloured tendencies formed by parties such as SMER-DS, the Slovak National party and the We Are Family, which is connected to Marine Le Pen’s and Matteo Salvini’s ENF group»
* * * * * * *
Stando ai sondaggi eseguiti da Poll of Polls, lo Smer avrebbe il 19.7% e Progresívne Slovensko + Spolu otterrebero il 14.4% dei voti: messi assieme avrebbero il 34.4%, percentuale che non permetterebbe l’ingresso al governo.
Nel converso, Sloboda a Solidarita (Ecr) avrebbe il 12.9%, Ľudová strana – Naše Slovensko, ĽSNS (NI) l’11.5% e Obyčajní Ľudia l’8.6%: in totale raggiungerebbero il 33% dei suffragi. Sme Rodina, 10.7% non è stata conteggiata pur essendo chiaramente populista. Ma se fosse possibile una sinergia, il blocco di destra arriverebbe al 43.7% dei voti.
Le prossime elezioni dovrebbero chiarire alla fine la situazione numerica.
In linea generale, però, sembrerebbe prospettarsi un risultato elettorale non favorevole ai liberal.
For a traditional and religious country, electing a woman, a divorced mother living in an informal relationship, and a human rights lawyer holding liberal views on LGBT rights and abortion legislation constitutes a novelty and a shift in attitudes.
For a traditional and religious country, electing a woman, a divorced mother living in an informal relationship, and a human rights lawyer holding liberal views on LGBT rights and abortion legislation constitutes a novelty and a shift in attitudes.
Zuzana Caputova’s victory not only represents a turning point for Slovakia, but also a ray of hope for the region where nationalist, anti-EU and anti-immigration sentiments have grown over the past years.
While liberals rejoice, some urge caution over the growing support for the far-right in Slovakia, as well as over voting alignment between the ruling SMER-DS and the far-right on social and ethical issues.
Victory for liberalism?
Although some would label Caputova’s triumph as a “victory for liberalism”, it is unclear whether the voters in Slovakia opted for a liberal candidate because they align with liberal values, or because their respect for the rule of law took priority over their personal conservativism when casting a vote.
We should not forget about the first round of presidential elections, which revealed the uglier side of Slovak politics.
The two anti-system candidates – the conspirationist former justice minister Stefan Harabin and neo-fascist Marian Kotleba – together attracted nearly a quarter of the votes.
According to the AKO agency opinion poll, public support for Kotleba’s anti-European, far-right People’s Party Our Slovakia (LSNS) rose from 9.5 percent in February to 11.5 percent in April.
In the run up to the elections, the ruling SMER-DS and the far-right LSNS held talks, joined forces and aligned their votes on social and ethical issues, such as to cap retirement age at 64, or to halt ratification of a European treaty designed to combat violence against women.
In addition to SMER-DS, the Centre-right Slovak National party and the populist We Are Family also held talks with the far-right.
Considering political pragmatism and lack of consistency displayed by Robert Fico in the past, observers do not exclude that SMER-DS would align with any of the political parties represented in the parliament in order to push its agenda in the future.
Prime minister Peter Pellegrini, however, rejected any suggestion of a future coalition government with the far-right LSNS.
Gender equality in Slovakia
Observers also caution against jumping to conclusions over how progressive Slovak society is in terms of gender equality and women’s representation in national governments.
Rather than voting for a woman, observers note, the public voted for the candidate who was credible, independent from the establishment, and who was perceived as capable of bringing about positive change.
As such, Caputova’s success should be viewed partly as a result of public disillusionment with the governing coalition a year after the killings of an investigative journalist and his fiancee, and partly as an outcome of her campaign, which displayed her authenticity, honesty, empathy, reluctance to undermine other candidates or to use aggressive vocabulary, and a strong record as an activist against injustice.
It was her image of authenticity and political decency that united the divided electorate in Slovakia.
In this regard, Caputova rise and appeal is comparable to that of Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez in the US Congress.
Beginning of the road to change
The office of the president is largely a ceremonial role in Slovakia, with the real powers of the state being vested in the hands of the prime minister.
Caputova nevertheless committed to ensuring justice for all Slovaks by reinforcing the independence of the public prosecutor’s office and in the naming of judges, which will fall under her responsibility.
Despite the limitations she will face, the symbolic value of her election should not be underestimated.
Caputova victory already boosted her Progressive Slovakia (PS) party’s prospects in EU elections and contributed to the consolidation the liberal camp at home.
Because her victory came at a low turnout of 40 percent, to push her agenda the president-elect will need to work together with, and secure the backing of, the parliament dominated by SMER-DS, led by Fico.
All eyes now turn to the national parliamentary elections, which are due in a year, and which will constitute the real test for the progressive left in Slovakia.
Although the political sands in Slovakia are shifting and it is too early to make any predictions, one could imagine two political blocs consolidating ahead of the 2020 elections: a liberal-democratic one, led by the outgoing president Andrej Kisa and, symbolically, by the president-elect Caputova; and a nationalist bloc with authoritarian-coloured tendencies formed by parties such as SMER-DS, the Slovak National party and the We Are Family, which is connected to Marine Le Pen’s and Matteo Salvini’s ENF group.
Rather than paving the way for a more liberal region, the situation in Slovakia can also take the Austrian turn, where a liberal president finds himself in a difficult position having to balance a right-wing coalition government.
Se nel linguaggio corrente il termine ‘agonia‘ indica solitamente il periodo che precede la morte, nell’italiano classico così non è. Agonia deriva dal greco ἀγωνία che significa lotta durissima. Forma le parole agonismo, agone, etc.: è il momento che precede la fine di qualcosa, il suo venir meno.
Vi sono cose che debbono essere dette e vi sono cose sulle quali è prudenza tacere. Ambedue i comportamenti saranno sempre criticati.
Il dramma del sistema finanziario tedesco potrebbe essere sintetizzato nella classica frase di Richelieu:
«Per essere grande la Francia deve rinunciare ad essere immensa».
Nelle proiezioni al 2023 fatte dall’IMF, la Germania renderà ragione di un pil ppa di 5,171 miliardi Usd contro i 178,018 miliardi Usd del mondo: la Germania varrà quindi il 2.9% del pil ppa mondiale. Cifra di gran rispetto per una potenza locoregionale, ma troppo scarna per una potenza mondiale. Sempre in tali previsioni, i paesi afferenti il G7 varranno il 27.06% ed i Brics il 35.9% del pil ppa mondiale.
Ci si rende perfettamente conto come il pil ppa non sia l’unico parametro di cui tener conto, ma dovrebbe rendere conto delle differenze di grandezza.
«Since it was founded in 1870, Deutsche Bank was supposed to be a steward for German industry, helping the nation’s manufacturers finance overseas trade»
«Even as its European rivals were scaling back their businesses and ambitions to adjust to the postcrash world, Deutsche Bank AG pushed further into new markets and new businesses, with a vision to project German financial might onto a global stage»
«Now that ambition is in tatters»
«A deal with Commerzbank could be a solution, but it could also make things a lot messier»
«Deutsche Bank’s travails are the last thing Germany needs as it copes with a weakening economy and a surge in political populism»
«If the banks haven’t managed to develop a viable business model 11 years after the financial crisis, there is no way that taxpayers should be put in a position where they could be asked to step in again.»
« It’s been trapped in a spiral of falling revenue and rising costs
«The idea is that fusing two weak banks will forge a stronger one that can better withstand the next recession or financial crisis»
«The German government still holds a 15 percent stake in Commerzbank, a legacy of bailing out the lender a decade ago»
* * * * * * * *
Sembrerebbe essere una considerazione vera:
fondere due banche traballanti
non determina la nascita di una banca sana.
Ma senza almeno una banca di interesse mondiale sana e redditizia, la ripresa tedesca è una pura utopia.
Senza banche sane, la Germania è destinata a morire, con una lunga agonia.
A deal with Commerzbank could be a solution, but it could also make things a lot messier.
Since it was founded in 1870, Deutsche Bank was supposed to be a steward for German industry, helping the nation’s manufacturers finance overseas trade. Broken up into 10 banks after World War II, it regrouped and prospered along with West Germany and, much later, a post-Berlin Wall, reunified nation. It’s long strived to be more than just another lender. And since the 1990s, it’s tried to go toe-to-toe with U.S.-based powerhouses such as Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in global investment banking, the business of trading and underwriting securities and providing financial advice to corporations. Germany—and Europe—had nothing to match the Americans on that scope.
Even as its European rivals were scaling back their businesses and ambitions to adjust to the postcrash world, Deutsche Bank AG pushed further into new markets and new businesses, with a vision to project German financial might onto a global stage. Now that ambition is in tatters. The lender has burned through chief executive officers and launched four turnaround plans in recent years. It’s been trapped in a spiral of falling revenue and rising costs. Because of intense competition from Wall Street, it’s struggled to boost sales at the investment bank. But it’s also been reluctant to make deep cuts there, in part because the division also provides more than half of revenue. Europe’s sluggish economy and low interest rates haven’t given the bank much of a margin for error.
Today it’s considering a takeover of its main national rival, Commerzbank AG, which has also been in a slump. German Finance Minister Olaf Scholz has egged the deal on. The idea is that fusing two weak banks will forge a stronger one that can better withstand the next recession or financial crisis. The German government still holds a 15 percent stake in Commerzbank, a legacy of bailing out the lender a decade ago. European bankers and investors are riveted by what might happen next. If this deal fails, some speculate that a lender from outside Germany, such as Italy’s UniCredit SpA, will take a run at Commerzbank. Even Deutsche Bank could be vulnerable to a takeover from outside Germany. That foreign incursion would be a blow to the country’s pride.
Deutsche Bank’s future is a question of national importance. More than almost any other large country, Germany’s economic growth is dependent on its export industry—much of which relies on Deutsche Bank and Commerzbank to provide trade finance and other crucial banking services such as payments and risk management products. As concerns over the next recession are beginning to swirl in Europe, so are worries mounting that Germany may not have much of a domestic financial industry should it strike.
Scholz took an activist approach to the problem. In April 2018, a week after Christian Sewing became Deutsche Bank CEO, the finance minister drew him aside at a Prussian palace in Berlin during the German banking association’s annual reception. While it’s not known what was said, the 15-minute exchange marked the beginning of a thaw in relations between the government and the financial giant.
Even so, Sewing continued to resist a merger. He asked for investors’ patience as he focused on cutting expenses and stabilizing market share and said it would take several months before he would consider a deal as a solution to the bank’s woes. But he struggled to create a positive narrative. Over the past 12 months, Deutsche Bank’s shares have declined more than 37 percent.
A slew of awful headlines hasn’t helped. Earlier this year, it emerged that the U.S. Federal Reserve is reviewing Deutsche Bank’s handling of billions of dollars in suspicious transactions from Danske Bank AS, a Danish lender swept up in a €200 billion ($225 billion) money laundering case. Deutsche Bank said at the time it was providing information to law enforcement and regulators. In a separate matter, prosecutors in Frankfurt were looking into whether an obscure entity called Deutsche Bank Global Trust Solutions turned a blind eye when clients laundered dirty money and dodged taxes from 2013 to 2018. In November, 170 German law enforcement officers descended on Deutsche Bank’s headquarters and carted away boxes of files and computers. The bank denied wrongdoing and said it was fully cooperating with the inquiry. But the raid eroded confidence in the institution as it seemed to lurch from one fiasco to the next. By March 17, Sewing announced that the lender was starting formal tieup talks with Commerzbank.
There’s been a strong backlash to the potential deal. It would make a bank that’s already too big to fail about a third bigger. And it could eliminate as many as 30,000 jobs, say people familiar with the potential transaction. German newspapers have lambasted the proposal as a “disgrace,” and unions representing bank employees have vowed to boycott negotiations with bosses at both institutions if the idea isn’t abandoned. Moreover, Deutsche Bank may need to sell billions of euros of new shares to cover the cost of a merger, a move that would dilute the stakes of existing shareholders.
Even so, Sewing and Chairman Paul Achleitner see little choice but to consider a linkup, say people familiar with their thinking. Deutsche Bank has lost money in three of the last four years. Last year revenue from trading was 40 percent less than in 2014. “Something has to give,” says Oswald Grübel, the former CEO of Swiss banking giant UBS Group AG. But he adds, “They have huge problems to solve, and I think a merger would make the whole situation worse.”
One reason to come to the table is Deutsche Bank’s rising cost of funding. Banking profits are largely a matter of basic math—does your lending and other business earn more than it costs you to borrow? The weak profitability has made investors and credit rating companies more concerned about the bank’s ability to service its debt. It’s been forced to pay considerably more to borrow capital than its rivals have. Moody’s Investors Service pegs some of the bank’s bonds one notch above junk status and has a negative outlook on the lender. The bank says it’s doing everything it can to keep and even improve its rating. If a downgrade happened, “every financial risk committee on Wall Street would call a meeting and say, ‘Can we, or should we, continue to do business with Deutsche Bank?’ ” says Barrington Pitt Miller, a money manager with Janus Henderson Group Plc, which holds shares of the lender.
By merging with Commerzbank, Deutsche Bank would increase its deposit base by more than 40 percent, which should help lower funding costs. It would also expand the proportion of income from more stable business lines. The deal could provide another benefit: It may help preserve the bulk of the company’s investment banking franchise in London, New York, and Asia.
This latest episode in Deutsche Bank’s long-running drama has been building since the term of Sewing’s predecessor as CEO. John Cryan, a Briton and former chief financial officer at UBS, had tried to shake up the German lender for three years. He derided investment bankers for expecting lavish pay simply “for turning up to work” and slashed their bonuses. He pushed hard to overhaul the company’s convoluted IT infrastructure, which ran more than 40 operating systems, and to install controls against misconduct. He also vowed to trim expenses and boost revenue.
Cryan’s changes were designed to deliver what he called “sustainable profits.” Yet year after year, shareholders were peeved by the company’s inability to produce just that. They weren’t happy about slow progress in cutting expenses, either. When Deutsche Bank recorded only €26.4 billion in revenue in 2017, its worst performance since the crash, the board decided not to keep Cryan around. It replaced him in April 2018 with Sewing, then head of the private and commercial bank. Sewing is the first executive to lead Deutsche Bank in almost two decades who wasn’t from investment banking.
The board was, in effect, conceding that despite three turnaround plans since 2015, management was still failing to reverse the bank’s slide. Several analysts and shareholders blamed the investment side—especially its U.S. operations. But when Sewing unveiled his own turnaround plan a few weeks after taking charge, investors saw it wasn’t much different from Cryan’s. Once again, management decided to apply only limited cuts to the divisions. Investors punished Deutsche Bank’s stock.
Chairman Achleitner has also come in for criticism. Glass Lewis & Co., an influential corporate governance advisory firm based in San Francisco, said it had “substantial concerns” about the progress under Achleitner. The appointment of Sewing, it said, was likely the chairman’s “final chance” to get things right.
As the bank’s struggles deepened, anxiety mounted in Berlin. Scholz, the new finance minister, and his deputy, Jörg Kukies, were becoming concerned that Deutsche Bank couldn’t rebound on its own. A merger with Commerzbank looked like a solution. It could put the bigger bank on a sounder footing without investing new taxpayer funds.
Scholz, a former leader of the left-leaning Social Democratic Party, and Kukies arranged a series of discussions involving Achleitner, Sewing, and Commerzbank CEO Martin Zielke, according to people familiar with the talks. The ministers were careful not to speak publicly about a potential deal, but they also didn’t shoot down news reports about the talks and the government’s tacit support for the idea of creating a national banking champion.
Deutsche Bank’s travails are the last thing Germany needs as it copes with a weakening economy and a surge in political populism. A decade after the global financial crisis and long since most of Deutsche Bank’s counterparts in the U.S. and Europe have rebounded, a nation that shuns credit cards and budget deficits somehow has a bank problem on its hands. While Chancellor Angela Merkel has distanced herself from the negotiations, Deutsche Bank’s inability to recover under its own power puts her in an awkward position. For years, Germany has demanded that the countries in the euro zone clean up their banking industries and make sure they don’t need taxpayer-funded bailouts. But now, if there’s a combination, Berlin may wind up owning about 5 percent of the country’s largest bank, mainly as a result of Deutsche Bank’s strategic missteps.
The takeover “would reinforce the too-big-to-fail problem that could eventually fall back on the German taxpayer,” says Danyal Bayaz, a Green Party member of the Bundestag and member of the legislature’s finance committee. “If the banks haven’t managed to develop a viable business model 11 years after the financial crisis, there is no way that taxpayers should be put in a position where they could be asked to step in again.”
Deutsche Bank’s troubled trading arm will likely be considered by European banking regulators looking at the proposal, according to people familiar with the matter. They’ll want to know how much the bigger bank would still rely on the securities unit.
It’s unclear how the combined institution would be reorganized or who would make up its executive suite and supervisory board. The benefits of a deeper deposit base might be eclipsed by the overwhelming challenges of merging two complex organizations. In an era when digitalization is a top priority in banking, fusing the IT systems of Deutsche Bank and Commerzbank could be the last thing either one needs. Not unlike public railway projects, such undertakings are fraught with blown deadlines and cost overruns.
No company knows that better than Deutsche Bank: Nine years after it bought German consumer lender Postbank for about €6 billion, it’s now spending an additional €1 billion trying to consolidate the companies’ systems, and the job still isn’t done. A merger with Commerzbank “would tie the bank down for years to come and cause huge upfront costs, while any savings would come much later, if at all,” says Isabel Schnabel, a finance professor at Bonn University and an adviser to the German government.
The problem is that Deutsche Bank may not have much of a choice. If the deal falls through, Sewing would be left with a fraying turnaround plan, and investors would likely demand that he rapidly come up with a new one. It’s just not clear what that could be other than even more cuts to a bank that’s unsuccessfully tried to shrink itself to profitability for the better part of a decade.
That’s why some, including Harry Harutunian, an analyst with Olivetree Financial Ltd. in London, see a tieup as the least bad option. Slashing costs too deeply in the investment bank will limit its ability to increase revenue, likely hurting profits and putting the bank at risk of a credit rating downgrade. It’s a vicious circle, to use the phrase of Deutsche Bank CFO James von Moltke. And there’s little hope the lender can pick up a “revenue tailwind” from Germany’s commercial banking market, which has long been a tough place to make money because of low interest rates and numerous state-backed competitors. That may be why, even now, the bank continues to add staff in markets such as the Middle East and South Africa in a hunt for business.
The path of cuts and more cuts might put Deutsche Bank in a position similar to that in 2009 of the Royal Bank of Scotland, a sprawling, intercontinental player then in need of wholesale restructuring. It took RBS a decade and £15 billion in reorganization costs to get back to the right size. “Deutsche Bank will have to take less risk in investment banking, and it will continue to lose relevance as an international player,” says Klaus Fleischer, a finance professor at Munich University of Applied Sciences who’s studied the bank for years.
Whether Deutsche Bank merges or goes it alone, it will also need to end its habit of slipping into political or legal scandals. It wasn’t until 2017 that its management board started getting a detailed picture of how its many businesses signed up clients and monitored and controlled risk. That year, Deutsche Bank agreed with regulators in the U.S. and the U.K. to pay $630 million to settle allegations that it helped wealthy clients transfer $10 billion out of Russia from 2011 to 2015 in violation of money laundering laws.
More recently, Adam Schiff and Maxine Waters, the Democratic heads of two powerful committees in the U.S. House of Representatives, started hiring lawyers and readying subpoenas as they opened investigations to examine Deutsche Bank’s dealings with President Donald Trump. Before 2016, the bank made hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to the Trump Organization at a time when the group’s numerous bankruptcies had cut off funding from most other lenders. Deutsche Bank declined to comment on the inquires, and the Trump Organization didn’t respond to requests for comment.
Maybe Europe does need its own investment bank as an alternative to U.S. powerhouses. The question now is whether the Frankfurt lender can ever be that institution—and what path the bank should ultimately take to help Germany prosper.
Les Gilets jaunes sont de retour samedi dans les rues de Paris et de plusieurs villes françaises pour lancer un nouvel “ultimatum” à Emmanuel Macron. Le ministre de l’Intérieur dit craindre le retour des “casseurs”.
Pour le 23e samedi consécutif, les manifestants se sont principalement donné rendez-vous à Paris à l’occasion de mobilisations qui font craindre au ministère de l’Intérieur un regain de violence par rapport aux dernières semaines. 60 000 policiers et gendarmes seront mobilisés.
À moins d’une semaine de la prise de parole d’Emmanuel Macron, dorénavant prévue jeudi 25 avril, concernant ses réformes tirées du grand débat national, quatre défilés sont prévus dans la capitale. Deux seulement ont été autorisés. L’un doit partir de la basilique de Saint-Denis (Seine-Saint-Denis) pour rejoindre le campus de Jussieu (Ve arrondissement). Les deux autres, au départ du secteur de Bercy (est de Paris) pour rejoindre les Halles ou la place de l’Étoile, ont été interdits.
“À nouveau, la menace est sérieuse et appelle à un dispositif renforcé”, a déclaré, vendredi 19 avril, Christophe Castaner, à la veille de l’acte XXIII. “Casseurs” et “ultras” sont décidés à “reproduire” les violences du samedi 16 mars, a-t-il ajouté, craignant que ceux-ci ne se mêlent de nouveau aux manifestants.
Le ministre de l’Intérieur, qui s’exprimait lors d’une conférence de presse, a évoqué des incidents à craindre à Bordeaux, Toulouse, Montpellier et “tout particulièrement à Paris”, théâtre des débordements les plus spectaculaires depuis le début du mouvement, en novembre dernier. Les mesures prévues par la récente loi dite “anticasseurs”, adoptée en mars, seront appliquées par les forces de l’ordre. Parmi elles, l’interpellation de manifestants dont le visage est dissimulé, et les fouilles renforcées.
Il y a plusieurs semaines, la frange la plus radicale des Gilets jaunes a appelé à un regain de mobilisation après les samedis de calme relatif qui ont suivi la dernière poussée de fièvre, à la mi-mars.
Le 16 mars, plusieurs boutiques et établissements emblématiques des Champs-Élysées, comme le restaurant Le Fouquet’s, avaient été vandalisés, voire partiellement incendiés.
“D’après les informations dont nous disposons, les casseurs seront à nouveau au rendez-vous demain”, a dit Christophe Castaner.
Cassonetti dati alle fiamme, auto danneggiate e oggetti lanciati contro gli agenti, che hanno risposto con i lacrimogeni. Al centro della mobilitazione anche l’irritazione per le donazioni dopo l’incendio di Notre Dame
Tornano le proteste dei Gilet gialli a Parigi dove sabato sono state indette quattro manifestazioni, solo due delle quali autorizzate. Il 23esimo atto di protesta ha visto numerosi scontri tra casseur e polizia: le persone fermate sono oltre 180 (17.500 i controlli preventivi) e nella zona della Bastiglia diversi cassonetti e materiali di cantiere sono stati dati alle fiamme. Alcune automobili sono state danneggiate e degli oggetti sono stati lanciati contro gli agenti che hanno risposto con lacrimogeni. In place de la Republique sono stati montati camion con idranti a getto di liquido colorante (blu) per identificare successivamente i manifestanti coinvolti nei disordini.
La capitale francese è stata blindata: vietati gli Champs-Élysées, così come tutta la zona attorno alla cattedrale di Notre-Dame, devastata dall’incendio di lunedì scorso. Dopo settimane di stallo, i leader del movimento avevano parlato di un «rilancio primaverile» delle proteste, anche sulla scia delle polemiche per le donazioni per la ricostruzione della cattedrale. «Non spegne la nostra lotta e non va strumentalizzato», ha però sottolineato il legale del movimento, Juan Branco.
Imponente lo schieramento di forze dell’ordine: 60mila gli agenti in campo in tutta la Francia di cui oltre 5mila nella sola capitale. Un appello via Twitter è arrivato dalla prefettura parigina ai manifestanti «più tranquilli»: «Troncate subito con i violenti», si legge nel messaggio che chiede di dissociarsi dai gruppi violenti per permettere alla polizia di intervenire.
Des groupes violents se sont constitués dans le cortège à proximité de la place de la République, désolidarisez vous de ces groupes, laissez les forces de l’ordre et de secours intervenir. pic.twitter.com/zl9mcgukHi
Il presidente Emmanuel Macron ha ricevuto il ministro dell’Interno Christophe Castaner all’Eliseo a mezzogiorno per un «punto di vista» su questo nuovo giorno di mobilitazione. Il presidente farà giovedì alle 18 il suo discorso sul «Grande dibattito nazionale» lanciato proprio dopo la crisi dei Gilet gialli. Macron spiegherà quali saranno le misure prese a conclusione del «Gran Debat», in nome del quale ha girato il Paese in lungo e largo per ascoltare le opinioni dei cittadini.
Marine Le Pen has thrown her weight behind Salvini’s new pan-European right-wing bloc. So far the group has garnered support from nationalist parties in Austria, Germany, Denmark, Estonia and Finland.
France’s right-wing National Rally party formally joined a new alliance of far-right forces in Europe on Friday. The populist coalition, spearheaded by Italy’s anti-immigrant interior minister and deputy prime minister Matteo Salvini, was formed to unite and strengthen disparate right-wing parties ahead of critical EU elections next month.
“Heartfelt thanks to National Rally leader Marine Le Pen and our historic friends and allies of the National Rally for joining the Milan manifesto ‘Towards a Europe of Common Sense,’” Salvini tweeted.
Salvini, the leader of Italy’s League party, announced the launch of the pan-European far-right faction earlier this month at a press conference where he called the EU “a nightmare, not a dream” and vowed to reform the bloc.
The group, dubbed the European Alliance of Peoples and Nations (EAPN), has already attracted support from:
– Alternative for Germany (AfD)
– Austria’s Freedom Party (FPÖ)
– The Danish People’s Party,
– Finland’s Finns Party
– The Conservative People’s Party of Estonia (EKRE).
The move comes days after Le Pen renounced her support of France leaving the European Union in a ‘Frexit’ in favor of reforming the European project from the inside. Her announcement came just ahead of a meeting of European far-right leaders in Prague on Thursday.
European far-right parties are currently split between three different groups in the European Parliament. If the parties were to merge, they would hold 173 out of 751 seats in the EU parliamentary assembly, or 23%, which would make them the second-largest bloc in the European Parliament, according to the latest poll of polls released by the EU assembly.
The AfD and other euroskeptic parties have formed a bloc ahead of the European Parliament elections. Various anti-immigrant youth organizations recently gathered in Rome, giving a sense of what might be to come.
Euroskeptic parties are joining forces ahead of the elections for the European Parliament in May. ….
Italy’s hard-line interior minister and France’s far-right leader are cementing their longtime alliance ahead of Europe-wide elections next month and said they will press for like-minded candidates in Europe to join their “family.”.
Italy’s hard-line interior minister and France’s far-right leader are cementing their longtime alliance ahead of Europe-wide elections next month and said they will press for like-minded candidates in Europe to join their “family.”
Matteo Salvini and Marine Le Pen discussed work, family and environmental protection as major themes in the upcoming vote, which will determine the makeup of the European Parliament in Brussels, Salvini’s office said.
They met on Friday in Paris ahead of the G-7 meeting of interior ministers. Both Le Pen’s National Rally party and Salvini’s League have railed against the power wielded by the European Union’s governing body, especially when it comes to immigration.
Both parties — as well as others on Europe’s right — could make gains in the late May elections, according to recent polling.