Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Diplomazia, Geopolitica Asiatica

Giappone. L’occidente liberal si frantuma sul Myanmar.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-28.

2021-05-20__ G7 GDP (Statista) 001

«Japan should play a bridging role to Myanmar’s junta rather than following the Western policy of regime change»

«Japan must position itself as a bridge between the Tatmadaw and the United States and other democratic countries rather than blindly aligning itself with the Western policy of regime change»

«Japan must position itself as a bridge between the Tatmadaw and the United States and other democratic countries rather than blindly aligning itself with the Western policy of regime change»

«Myanmar’s huge development project of Thilawa Special Economic Zone development»

«Japan, a major aid donor with long ties to Myanmar, has not placed explicit sanctions against the Myanmar military, unlike other nations such as the United States and Britain.»

«The Japanese government did halt negotiations on new aid to Myanmar, but not existing aid projects»

«Leveraging its decades-long economic cooperation, Japan can now directly work with the Tatmadaw to reverse China’s geoeconomic influence»

«Any drastic move to cut ties with Myanmar’s military could result in China winning more influence»

«Chinese investment in Myanmar has surged in recent years, driven by Beijing’s “Belt and Road” infrastructure plan»

«Japan must realise its historic mission of guiding Myanmar’s military government in service of a free and open Indo-Pacific and remain unafraid even if its actions diverge from those of the U.S. and other democratic allies»

* * * * * * *

Il problema è dannatamente semplice.

I liberal degli stati occidentali ed occidentalizzati si credono investiti della missione di imporre la loro ideologia ad un mondo che proprio non ne vuole sapere. Reputano di essere i depositari della verità assoluta.

Solo che in altri tempi riassumevano gran parte del pil mondiale e dettavano legge, mentre ad oggi ne costituiscono poco più di un terzo: troppo poco per potersi imporre con lo strumento economico.

Non solo.

I liberal socialisti sono in declino ed il loro sistema economico sta devolvendosi, mentre quello dei paesi eurasiatici è in forte crescita, attirando investitori ed investimenti occidentali.

Cina. 2020. Investimenti esteri +81% YoY. Superano quelli negli Usa.

Foreign investment in China up 81 pct in 2020.

Cina. Abolite le restrizioni agli investimenti esteri nel settore energetico.

BlackRock anticipa l’apertura cinese alla finanza occidentale. 3.4 trilioni in tre anni.

*

Giappone. Aprile21. Export +38.0%, Import +12.8%, aprile21 su aprile20.

Il Giappone esporta negli Usa per 1,276.134 milioni di Yen, mentre l’Asia raccoglie 4,156.211 milioni di Yen di esportazioni. L’Asia conta quindi poco meno di quattro volte gli Usa.

La scelta di campo sta diventando obbligatoria.

Però questa presa di posizione del Giappone rompe drammaticamente quello che una volta era il bastione dei G7, spezzando la unità di intenti del fronte liberal. E la riunione del G7 è imminente.

*


Japan should not follow the Western policy on Myanmar – Diplomat op-ed

Japan should play a bridging role to Myanmar’s junta rather than following the Western policy of regime change, said a senior official at the Japan-Myanmar Association, which has strong ties with Myanmar’s military.

“I argue that Japan must position itself as a bridge between the Tatmadaw and the United States and other democratic countries rather than blindly aligning itself with the Western policy of regime change,” Yusuke Watanabe, the association’s secretary general, said in an opinion piece for the Diplomat magazine.

The Japan-Myanmar Association is a private group Yusuke Watanabe’s father and politician Hideo Watanabe launched to rally support for the wave of Japan’s investment in the Southeast Asian country. The association includes retired government bureaucrats and business executives and members of big Japanese companies.

A former cabinet minister Hideo Watanabe has long been Tokyo’s point man for economic relations, backing Myanmar’s huge development project of Thilawa Special Economic Zone development, and has a long track record of working closely with the junta, including junta leader Min Aung Hlaing.

Myanmar’s military overthrew the elected government on Feb. 1, citing alleged fraud in an election three months earlier, and has since waged a deadly crackdown which has killed hundreds and displaced tens of thousands of people.

Japan, a major aid donor with long ties to Myanmar, has not placed explicit sanctions against the Myanmar military, unlike other nations such as the United States and Britain.

The Japanese government did halt negotiations on new aid to Myanmar, but not existing aid projects.

“Leveraging its decades-long economic cooperation, Japan can now directly work with the Tatmadaw to reverse China’s geoeconomic influence,” Watanabe added, also warning of Russia’s growing influence in Myanmar.

Any drastic move to cut ties with Myanmar’s military could result in China winning more influence, a senior Japanese official told Reuters in February after the coup. read more

Chinese investment in Myanmar has surged in recent years, driven by Beijing’s “Belt and Road” infrastructure plan.

“Japan must realise its historic mission of guiding Myanmar’s military government in service of a free and open Indo-Pacific and remain unafraid even if its actions diverge from those of the U.S. and other democratic allies,” Watanabe said.

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti

Usa. 27Maggio. 15,802,126 persone assistite a vario titolo. -175,255 sulla settimana prima.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-28.

2021-05-28__ Usa Unemployment 001

Lo U.S. Department of Labor ha rilasciato il Report: May 27, 2021.

Unemployment Insurance Weekly Claims Report

* * * * * * *

UNEMPLOYMENT INSURANCE WEEKLY CLAIMS

                         SEASONALLY ADJUSTED DATA

In the week ending May 22, the advance figure for seasonally adjusted initial claims was 406,000, a decrease of 38,000 from the previous week’s unrevised level of 444,000. This is the lowest level for initial claims since March 14, 2020 when it was 256,000. The 4-week moving average was 458,750, a decrease of 46,000 from the previous week’s unrevised average of 504,750. This is the lowest level for this average since March 14, 2020 when it was 225,500.

The advance seasonally adjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.6 percent for the week ending May 15, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the previous week’s unrevised rate. The advance number for seasonally adjusted insured unemployment during the week ending May 15 was 3,642,000, a decrease of 96,000 from the previous week’s revised level. The previous week’s level was revised down by 13,000 from 3,751,000 to 3,738,000. The 4-week moving average was 3,675,000, a decrease of 2,750 from the previous week’s revised average. The previous week’s average was revised down by 3,250 from 3,681,000 to 3,677,750.

                         UNADJUSTED DATA

The advance number of actual initial claims under state programs, unadjusted, totaled 420,472 in the week ending May 22, a decrease of 34,131 (or -7.5 percent) from the previous week. The seasonal factors had expected an increase of 3,932 (or 0.9 percent) from the previous week. There were 1,902,793 initial claims in the comparable week in 2020. In addition, for the week ending May 22, 53 states reported 93,546 initial claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance.

The advance unadjusted insured unemployment rate was 2.5 percent during the week ending May 15, a decrease of 0.1 percentage point from the prior week. The advance unadjusted level of insured unemployment in state programs totaled 3,521,314, a decrease of 149,996 (or -4.1 percent) from the preceding week. The seasonal factors had expected a decrease of 53,483 (or -1.5 percent) from the previous week. A year earlier the rate was 13.1 percent and the volume was 19,037,741.

The total number of continued weeks claimed for benefits in all programs for the week ending May 8 was 15,802,126, a decrease of 175,255 from the previous week. There were 31,578,845 weekly claims filed for benefits in all programs in the comparable week in 2020.

During the week ending May 8, Extended Benefits were available in the following 14 states: Alaska, California, Colorado, Connecticut, District of Columbia, Illinois, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, and Texas.

Initial claims for UI benefits filed by former Federal civilian employees totaled 834 in the week ending May 15, a decrease of 97 from the prior week. There were 606 initial claims filed by newly discharged veterans, a decrease of 3 from the preceding week.

There were 13,453 continued weeks claimed filed by former Federal civilian employees the week ending May 8, a decrease of 332 from the previous week. Newly discharged veterans claiming benefits totaled 7,300, a decrease of 21 from the prior week.

During the week ending May 8, 51 states reported 6,515,657 continued weekly claims for Pandemic Unemployment Assistance benefits and 51 states reported 5,191,642 continued claims for Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation benefits.

The highest insured unemployment rates in the week ending May 8 were in Nevada (5.7), Connecticut (4.5), Rhode Island (4.5), Alaska (4.3), Puerto Rico (4.3), California (3.9), New York (3.9), Pennsylvania (3.9), Illinois (3.7), and Vermont (3.6).

The largest increases in initial claims for the week ending May 15 were in New Jersey (+4,812), Washington (+3,023), Minnesota (+1,806), West Virginia (+907), and Rhode Island (+792), while the largest decreases were in Georgia

(-7,392), Kentucky (-7,123), Texas (-3,881), Michigan (-3,560), and Florida (-2,994).

Pubblicato in: Armamenti

Turkia. Vende alla Polonia 24 droni anticarro Bayraktar TB2.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-27.

2021-05-25__ Turkia TB2 001

«The Bayraktar TB2 is a Turkish medium altitude long endurance (MALE) unmanned combat aerial vehicle (UCAV) capable of remotely controlled or autonomous flight operations. It is manufactured by Turkey′s Baykar company primarily for the Turkish Armed Forces. The aircraft is monitored and controlled by an aircrew in the Ground Control Station, including weapons employment, via Türksat satellite. Bayraktar means “ensign” or “standard-bearer” in Turkish. The development of the UAV has been largely credited to Selçuk Bayraktar, a former MIT graduate student.

The aircraft previously relied on imported and regulated components and technologies such as the engines (manufactured by Rotax in Austria) and optoelectronics (FLIR sensors imported from Wescam in Canada or Hensoldt from Germany). Engines exports were halted when Bombardier, owner of Rotax, became aware of the military use of their recreational aircraft engines. ….

General Characteristics

    Crew: 0 onboard, 3 per one ground control station

    Length: 6.5 m (21 ft)

    Wing Span: 12 m (39 ft)

    Max Take Off Weight: 650 kg (1,430 lb)

    Payload: 150 kg (330 lb)

    Powerplant: 1 x 100 Hp Internal Combustion Engine with Injection

    Fuel Capacity: 300 litres (79 US gal)

    Fuel Type: Gasoline

Performance

    Maximum Speed: 120 knots (220 km/h)

    Cruise Speed: 70 knots (130 km/h)

    Range: 150 km (81 nmi)[27]

    Communication Range: Line-of-sight propagation

    Service Ceiling: 27,000 feet (8,200 m)

    Operational altitude: 18,000 feet (5,500 m)

    Endurance: 27 hours

Armaments

The Smart Micro Munition (MAM-L) and behind it MAM-C high explosive variant

Hardpoints: 4 hardpoints for laser guided smart munition, with provisions to carry combinations of :

    L-UMTAS (Long Range Anti tank Missile System) 

    MAM: MAM-C and MAM-L precision-guided munitions

    Roketsan Cirit (70 mm Missile System)

    TUBITAK-SAGE Bozok Laser Guided Rockets

    TUBITAK-SAGE TOGAN[132] Air-to-surface launched 81 mm mortar munition.» [Fonte]

* * * * * * *

«Poland will buy 24 armed drones from Turkey, the Polish defence minister said on Saturday, becoming the first NATO member to buy Turkish-made unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs)»

«The Bayraktar TB2 drones, the first of which are due to be delivered next year, will be armed with anti-tank projectiles. Poland will also buy a logistics and training package»

«Blaszczak told state radio the Bayraktar TB2 drones “have proven themselves in wars”»

«The contract, which will be concluded without a procurement process, will be signed next week during a visit by Polish President Andrzej Duda to Turkey»

«Authorities in fellow NATO member Turkey say the country has become the world’s fourth-largest drone producer since President Tayyip Erdogan increased domestic production to reduce reliance on Western arms»

* * * * * * *

L’idea di una Turkia misera e sottosviluppata persiste ad alimentare l’immaginario collettivo europeo.

Ma la realtà dei fatti indica come essa sia in grado di produrre armamenti altamente sofisticati e che hanno provato la loro efficacia sul campo di battaglia.

«the country has become the world’s fourth-largest drone producer»

Quindi, si colloca subito dietro Russia, Cina e Stati Uniti, le tre grandi superpotenze mondiali.

*


Poland to become first NATO country to buy Turkish drones.

Poland will buy 24 armed drones from Turkey, the Polish defence minister said on Saturday, becoming the first NATO member to buy Turkish-made unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs).

The Bayraktar TB2 drones, the first of which are due to be delivered next year, will be armed with anti-tank projectiles. Poland will also buy a logistics and training package, said Defence Minister Mariusz Blaszczak.

Blaszczak told state radio the Bayraktar TB2 drones “have proven themselves in wars” and added that the UAVs would be serviced by a military company, without giving further details.

The contract, which will be concluded without a procurement process, will be signed next week during a visit by Polish President Andrzej Duda to Turkey.

Authorities in fellow NATO member Turkey say the country has become the world’s fourth-largest drone producer since President Tayyip Erdogan increased domestic production to reduce reliance on Western arms.

Turkish defence technology company Baykar has sold its Bayraktar TB2 armed drone to Azerbaijan, Ukraine, Qatar and Libya. Erdogan said in March that Saudi Arabia was also interested in buying Turkish drones. read more

Canada scrapped export permits for drone technology to Turkey in April, after concluding that the equipment was used by Azeri forces fighting Armenia in the enclave of Nagorno-Karabakh. The parts under embargo included camera systems for Baykar armed drones.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Ong - Ngo, Unione Europea

Danimarca. Profughi siriani non più benvenuti. Rimpatriati.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-27.

Danimarka 010

«Denmark asylum: The Syrian refugees no longer welcome to stay»

«When Denmark became the first European country last month to revoke residence status for more than 200 Syrian refugees, it faced condemnation from EU lawmakers, the UN refugee agency and human rights groups»

«Authorities in Copenhagen argue that parts of Syria are now safe enough for refugees to return»

«For a country with a liberal reputation, Denmark has become known for repeatedly tightening its immigration policies in recent years»

«They are among more than 200 Syrian nationals who have had their residency withdrawn on the grounds that Damascus and the surrounding region are now considered safe»

«Two weeks ago their appeal was rejected and they’ve been given 60 days to leave»

«More than a decade after conflict broke out in Syria about 35,000 Syrian nationals live in Denmark»

«Over the past year the immigration service has been reassessing the cases of more than 1,200 refugees from the wider Damascus region»

«The government says it has always been clear the protections it offered were temporary»

«The government based its decision of reports by the Danish Immigration Service»

«Thirty-three Euro MPs recently sent a letter to Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen calling for a “180-degree turnaround” in Denmark’s asylum policy»

«As Denmark doesn’t have diplomatic ties with President Assad’s regime, it cannot carry out forced deportations»

*

«Denmark was the first country to join the UN Refugee Convention in 1951 and, according to the UN has traditionally been one of Europe’s strongest supporters of refugees. But it’s a changed picture today»

«Successive Danish governments have pursued aggressive anti-immigration campaigns, including the seizure of assets such as jewellery from asylum seekers»

«Migrants yield little cash for Denmark»

«The ruling Social Democrats have also adopted a tough stance to win supporters back from right-wing parties»

«Last year the number of asylum seekers fell to 1,500. Only 600 people were granted asylum, the lowest in three decades»

«Many of those who come here do not need protection at all»

«Never did she imagine Denmark would be the only country other than Viktor Orban’s Hungary that saw Syria as safe»

* * * * * * *

In tutto il blocco europeo si sta assistendo al calo delle propensioni al voto verso i partiti della sinistra. Questo fenomeno sta assumendo una portata significativa sia per quanto riguarda le elezioni nazionali, sia per quanto concerne le prossime elezioni europee.

Ecco spiegata l’inversione di rotta di molti governi nazionali liberal, più attenti alla propria rielezione che ai così detti ‘human rights’. Un caso da manuale sarebbe la Spagna.

Spagna. Regionali Madrid. Partito Popolare dato al 41%.

Ceuta, 8.000 migranti entrano in Spagna. Crisi tra Madrid e il Marocco.

Migranti in Spagna, la «vendetta» del Marocco: in 8mila a Ceuta

Spagna, Marocco, Unione Europea e migranti, i quali sono usati come arma impropria.

Il problema non sono i migranti, bensì i governi.

*


Denmark asylum: The Syrian refugees no longer welcome to stay.

When Denmark became the first European country last month to revoke residence status for more than 200 Syrian refugees, it faced condemnation from EU lawmakers, the UN refugee agency and human rights groups.

Authorities in Copenhagen argue that parts of Syria are now safe enough for refugees to return.

But the issue has proved divisive and activists and community groups have planned protests in several cities on Wednesday in support of the refugees.

For a country with a liberal reputation, Denmark has become known for repeatedly tightening its immigration policies in recent years.

In a separate move, it recently signed a migration agreement with Rwanda, leading to speculation that it intends to open an asylum-processing facility there.

Danish authorities notified Sara’s family in February that she, her parents and younger siblings could no longer stay.

“All my life is here. How can I go back to Syria now?” says the 19-year-old, who speaks fluent Danish and is due to sit her final high-school exams next month. She dreams of becoming an architect, but after six years in Denmark her future in Denmark is now in doubt.

They are among more than 200 Syrian nationals who have had their residency withdrawn on the grounds that Damascus and the surrounding region are now considered safe

Her father Mohammed was a lawyer in Syria but came to Denmark in 2014 when his life was endangered. The rest of the family fled the war a year later, travelling via Turkey and Greece.

Two weeks ago their appeal was rejected and they’ve been given 60 days to leave.

They fear arrest and torture under President Bashar al-Assad’s rule. “It’s risky for every single person who left Syria to go back,” she says.

Her father has been running a restaurant and said: “We stopped taking money from the [Danish] government four years ago.”

More than a decade after conflict broke out in Syria about 35,000 Syrian nationals live in Denmark.

Over the past year the immigration service has been reassessing the cases of more than 1,200 refugees from the wider Damascus region. “The conditions in Damascus in Syria are no longer so serious that there are grounds for granting or extending temporary residence permits,” it said.

Many of those with temporary refugee permits are women or elderly, as younger men who were at risk of military conscription were usually given different protection. The government says it has always been clear the protections it offered were temporary.

Hundreds are still waiting to hear what will happen and many who have are facing long appeals:

– According to preliminary figures, the Danish Immigration Service has decided on 300 cases since January

– About half resulted in new or extended permits

– 154 refugees had their status revoked or not renewed, on top of 100 who had it withdrawn in 2020

– Thirty-nine people from the Damascus area have received a final rejection from the Refugee Board

Mohammed Almalees, 30, will be able to stay, along with his brothers. But his parents and sister have been told recently they will have to leave, giving the family sleepless nights.

“We have lived three to four years under war,” he says. The family home is now destroyed. “Soldiers came to our city. They wanted to arrest us, because we had protested,” he said.

He and a brother reached Denmark in 2014 after a three-day boat voyage from Libya to Italy. A year later, his mother Awatif and sister Maya travelled via Turkey and Greece.

He is adamant if they return they will be imprisoned. “The regime have the names of people who demonstrated against Assad both in Syria and in Denmark. They monitor social media.”

The government based its decision of reports by the Danish Immigration Service. However, 11 of the 12 experts cited in a 2019 report have distanced themselves from its findings – and the 12th is a Syrian general who heads the country’s immigration department.

Sara Kayyali, a Syria researcher for Human Rights Watch quoted in the document, says Denmark’s assessment is flawed.

Thirty-three Euro MPs recently sent a letter to Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen calling for a “180-degree turnaround” in Denmark’s asylum policy.

As Denmark doesn’t have diplomatic ties with President Assad’s regime, it cannot carry out forced deportations. So the options are either to return voluntarily or face limbo at a “departure” centre, says Michala Bendixen, head of Refugees Welcome, a Danish charity.

“The whole idea of establishing those camps was to pressure people to go back. To give up their hopes of staying in Denmark. You have no income. You can’t work. You can’t study,” she says. “Even Danish prisons are much better in many ways.”

As members of Denmark’s Syrian community held a protest outside parliament on Tuesday, the immigration minister defended the government’s decision to revoke the residence status of hundreds of them.

Denmark was the first country to join the UN Refugee Convention in 1951 and, according to the UN has traditionally been one of Europe’s strongest supporters of refugees. But it’s a changed picture today.

In 2015, a peak of more than 21,000 asylum-seekers arrived in Denmark. Asylum policies were tightened significantly that year and again in 2019, moving away from integration to focus on temporary protection and repatriation.

Successive Danish governments have pursued aggressive anti-immigration campaigns, including the seizure of assets such as jewellery from asylum seekers.

Migrants yield little cash for Denmark

In 2017, then-Integration Minister Inger Stojberg marked her 50th curb on immigration by posting a picture of her with a celebratory cake on social media.

The ruling Social Democrats have also adopted a tough stance to win supporters back from right-wing parties.

“The Danish system is sort of an outlier. It’s one that’s pushing quite severely in this direction. More so than other countries.” says Martin Lemberg-Pedersen, associate professor at the Centre for Advanced Migration Studies. “It doesn’t believe integration can work.”

For him the policies boil down to a “deterrence logic”, sending a message to others not to come.

Last year the number of asylum seekers fell to 1,500. Only 600 people were granted asylum, the lowest in three decades.

“That’s really good news,” Mr Tesfaye said in February. “Corona, of course, plays a role, but I think first and foremost, it’s because of our strict foreign policy. Many of those who come here do not need protection at all.”

The government has set a target of zero, arguing that the money saved can go towards welfare.

Within weeks, Denmark’s immigration and development ministers had made an under-the-radar trip to Rwanda, fuelling speculation that this could be a first step towards setting up an overseas refugee processing centre.

Denmark and Rwanda did sign a non-binding deal to co-operate on asylum and migration issues, but Danish officials have played down the significance of the trip. Nils Muiznieks of Amnesty International has warned that any attempt to transfer asylum seekers to Rwanda would be “unconscionable” and “potentially unlawful”.

Rifts over Denmark’s asylum policy have begun to appear, among the government’s allies as well as some grassroots supporters.

“I regret that we were so naive,” Sofie Carsten Nielsen, leader of the Social Liberals, told MPs.

Never did she imagine Denmark would be the only country other than Viktor Orban’s Hungary that saw Syria as safe, she said.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Stati Uniti

Usa. Nancy Pelosi starebbe per dire addio alla politica. Midterm si avvicina.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-27.

Pelosi Nancy 014

Mrs Nancy Pelosi nacque il 26 marzo 1940. Speaker della Camera dei rappresentanti dal 2007 al 2011 e nuovamente dal 2019, è tuttora in carica.

È un concentrato di odio livoroso, che espresse al meglio stracciando platealmente il discorso fatto dall’allora Presidente Trump.

Ma questo fu solo l’inizio.

Trump. Discorso sullo Stato dell’Unione. Pelosi lo straccia platealmente.

Nancy Pelosi ha depositato il primo atto da mettere in discussione e voto nel Congresso.

Pelosi Nancy 013

* * * * * * *

Mrs Nancy Pelosi è vetusta e midterm si avvicina a grandi passi: sarà uno scontro all’ultimo sangue, il cui esito è al momento impredicibile, ma che potrebbe anche capovolgere la attuale situazione degli schieramenti.

*


Le voci di un possibile addio di Nancy Pelosi scuotono i Dem.

Le prossime elezioni di Midterm potrebbero essere decisive per la tenuta della presidenza Biden: i repubblicani hanno la possibilità di riconquistare la maggioranza dei seggi.

Dopo aver assunto di nuovo nel 2018 l’incarico di Speaker della Camera, prima donna della storia americana a occupare quella poltrona, Nancy Pelosi si definì “ponte verso la futura generazione di leader” e accettò a una condizione: lo avrebbe fatto per l’ultima volta. Adesso, forse, il conto alla rovescia è cominciato. Nel 2022, quando ci sarà una nuova tornata elettorale, la leader democratica avrà 82 anni.

In questi giorni si stanno rincorrendo le voci su un suo possibile passo indietro, altri indicano nella figlia Christine, 56 anni, come candidata per lo storico seggio californiano alla Camera al suo posto. Le prossime elezioni di midterm potrebbero essere decisive per la tenuta della presidenza Biden: i repubblicani hanno la possibilità di riconquistare la maggioranza dei seggi.

                         Decisione entro marzo.

Nancy dovrà decidere entro l’11 marzo 2022 se correre per il seggio, ma intanto il dibattito si è aperto e i media americani hanno cominciato a chiedersi: cosa farà la Speaker? In gioco c’è uno dei giganti del partito, una donna ostinata che, anche di recente, ha dato una grossa mano alla raccolta di fondi per il partito, con 32 milioni di dollari arrivati nel primi tre mesi del 2021, parte di quel miliardo di dollari che il ‘ciclone Nancy’ ha portato ai democratici nei suoi vent’anni di attività politica.

Il duello rovente con Donald Trump, nei passati quattro anni, le ha portato nuova popolarità tra i liberal, seppure con qualche distinguo tra i radicali, ma anche l’odio degli elettori repubblicani, che non le hanno mai perdonato il gesto irrituale di strappare platealmente le pagine del discorso del tycoon, alla fine dell’intervento sullo Stato dell’Unione del 2020.

La domanda sul futuro della Speaker, al Congresso dall’87, nata in Maryland ma sbocciata politicamente in California, arriva nel momento in cui Pelosi si trova ad affrontare il momento più difficile della sua carriera, alla guida di una delle maggioranze democratiche più risicate della storia, da tenere compatta davanti all’agenda da migliaia di miliardi di dollari portata avanti dal presidente Joe Biden.

                         La ricerca di spazio.

L’insolito messaggio lanciato nei giorni scorsi da una moderata come lei, quando ha invocato il boicottaggio delle Olimpiadi invernali di Pechino nel 2022, come critica per il mancato rispetto dei diritti umani, è sembrato un modo per riconquistare spazio, forse luce, messa nell’ombra da Biden e dalla sua vice, Kamala Harris, ma anche per parlare all’ala radicale del partito, sempre piu’ insofferente alla sua presenza. O forse un modo per chiudere il cerchio di una vita politica, nata nel segno delle battaglie per i diritti civili.

Il democratico di New York Hakeem Jeffries viene considerato come l’erede piu’ probabile alla successione, ma finora il rappresentante alla Camera ha dribblato qualsiasi domanda. Quando, di recente, gli hanno chiesto se avrebbe sostenuto una ricandidatura di Pelosi, Jeffries ha risposto, dicendo che i democratici sono concentrati sull’agenda Biden.

Nessuno slancio, neanche formale. Un messaggio che Nancy avrà registrato, ufficialmente come in linea con il partito, ma intimamente come segno che il tempo delle grandi decisioni, forse, è davvero arrivato.

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Devoluzione socialismo, Economia e Produzione Industriale

Germania. 2021Q1. Pil -5.0% rispetto al 2019Q4. Consumi -9.1%.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-26.

2021-05-26__ Germania Pil 001

In sintesi.

-1.8% on the previous quarter (price-, seasonally and calendar-adjusted)

-3.4% on the same quarter a year earlier (price-adjusted)

-3.1% on the same quarter a year earlier (price- and calendar-adjusted)

– Compared with the fourth quarter of 2019, the quarter before the corona crisis began, GDP was 5.0% lower

– The largest decreases (-13.9%) were recorded for other services

– Household final consumption expenditure, which was down a price-adjusted 9.1% on the first quarter of 2020

– Household final consumption expenditure fell by 5.4% on the fourth quarter of 2020

* * * * * * *

I macrodati tedeschi indicano uno stato di recessione e di una profonda crisi.

New orders in main construction industry in March 2021: -12.1% seasonally adjusted on the previous month.

Germania. Feb21. Import elettronica. Da Cina un terzo, da Asia oltre la metà. – Zvei.

Germania. Gen21 e Feb21. Export totale -4.5%, anno su anno. – Destatis.

Exports in February 2021: +0.9% on January 2021. Exports are 2.1% below the pre-crisis level of February 2020.

Germania. Febbraio 21. Produzione Industriale -6.4% anno su anno. – Destatis.

Germania. Febbraio. Vendite al Dettaglio -9.0% Feb21 su Feb20. – Destatis.

La crisi di leadership che mina il futuro della Germania.

Germania. Merkel. Après nous, le déluge. – Spiegel International.

* * *

Più ancora del pil in calo del 5%, rende preoccupati la contrazione del -9.1% dei consumi.

L’attuale crisi politica, con parcellizzazione delle forze politiche, lascia fitte nubi sui risultati delle elezioni federali di settembre. Ma senza un governo stabile sarà ben difficile risalire la china.

*

Destatis. Gross domestic product: detailed results on the economic performance in the 1st quarter of 2021. Economic performance 5.0% below pre-crisis level.

                         Pressrelease #244 from 25 May 2021

                         Gross domestic product, 1st quarter of 2021

-1.8% on the previous quarter (price-, seasonally and calendar-adjusted)

-3.4% on the same quarter a year earlier (price-adjusted)

-3.1% on the same quarter a year earlier (price- and calendar-adjusted)

Wiesbaden – The gross domestic product (GDP) fell by 1.8% in the first quarter of 2021 on the fourth quarter of 2020 after adjustment for price, seasonal and calendar variations. After the German economy had somewhat recovered in the second half of 2020 (+8.7% in the third quarter and +0.5% in the fourth quarter), the coronavirus crisis caused another decline in economic performance at the beginning of 2021. The Federal Statistical Office (Destatis) reports that the decrease was slightly larger than reported in the first release of 30 April 2021. Compared with the fourth quarter of 2019, the quarter before the corona crisis began, GDP was 5.0% lower.

                         Household final consumption expenditure markedly down, increase in imports larger than in exports

The continuing, and in part intensified, restrictions imposed to contain the coronavirus pandemic had a particularly marked impact on household final consumption expenditure at the beginning of the year. In the first quarter of 2021, household final consumption expenditure fell by 5.4% on the fourth quarter of 2020 after adjustment for price, seasonal and calendar variations. Government final consumption expenditure was slightly higher than in the previous quarter (+0.2%). Positive contributions came especially from gross fixed capital formation in construction in the first quarter of 2021 as it rose 1.1% on the fourth quarter of 2020 after price, seasonal and calendar adjustment. Seasonally adjusted gross fixed capital formation in machinery and equipment was slightly down on the previous quarter (-0.2%).
Foreign trade increased at the beginning of the year. However, the increase in imports of goods and services in the first quarter of 2021 (+3.8%, price-, seasonally and calendar-adjusted) was markedly larger than the increase in exports (+1.8%).

                         Gross value added fell considerably in trade and construction

In the first quarter of 2021, the price-, seasonally and calendar-adjusted gross value added decreased by 0.8% on the fourth quarter of 2020. Diverging trends were shown for the individual economic sectors. Gross value added in manufacturing was slightly up on the fourth quarter of 2020 (+0.4%), whereas gross value added in trade, transport, accommodation and food services was down (-3.2%). The decrease in construction was even larger (-4.9%), one of the reasons being the unusually cold weather at the beginning of the year.

                         Gross domestic product still markedly down on a year earlier

GDP in the first quarter of 2021 was down a price-adjusted 3.4% compared with the first quarter of 2020. After price and calendar adjustment, the decrease was slightly smaller (-3.1%) as there was one working day less than a year earlier.

                         Household final consumption expenditure fell sharply also on a year earlier, trade in goods increased

Domestic demand continued to be far lower than a year earlier. This applies especially to household final consumption expenditure, which was down a price-adjusted 9.1% on the first quarter of 2020. Gross fixed capital formation did not contribute to year-on-year growth either. Fixed capital formation in machinery and equipment decreased by 0.7% and in construction by 1.6% on a year earlier. Only government final consumption expenditure (+2.5%) and foreign demand had an upward effect when compared with a year earlier.

Foreign trade rose considerably on the first quarter of 2020, with exports of goods increasing slightly more than imports of goods. At the same time, foreign trade in services saw two-digit decreases, as was the case in the previous three quarters. On the whole, exports of goods and services fell by 0.6% (price-adjusted) in the first quarter of 2021 on the first quarter of 2020. Total imports declined by 3.0% in the same period.

                         In nearly all economic sectors, economic performance was down on a year earlier

On the production side of the GDP, price-adjusted gross value added was lower in almost all economic sectors in the first quarter of 2021 compared with a year earlier. The largest decreases (-13.9%) were recorded for other services, which include entertainment and recreation. In trade, transport, accommodation and food services, gross value added fell sharply, too (-8.2%). Especially accommodation and food services recorded an even larger decrease. Following the two-digit slump last summer, the economic situation in manufacturing continued to improve; nevertheless, gross value added in the first quarter of 2021 was still by 1.2% below the level of the first quarter of 2020. Information and communication is the only sector that saw noticeable economic growth on a year earlier (+0.7%).

Total gross value added was down 3.5%.

                         Number of persons in employment still markedly below pre-crisis level

The economic performance in the first quarter of 2021 was achieved by roughly 44.4 million persons in employment whose place of employment was in Germany. This was a decrease of 707,000, or 1.6%, on a year earlier (see press release 230/21 of 18 May 2021). It must be noted, however, that short-time work does not affect the employment figures because short-time workers still count as persons in employment.

However, short-time work had a substantial effect on the average number of hours worked per person in employment. The latter decreased by 4.0% in the first quarter of 2021 compared with the first quarter of 2020, according to first provisional calculations of the Institute for Employment Research of the Federal Employment Agency. The labour volume of the overall economy, which is the total number of hours worked by all persons in employment, went down even more (-5.5%) over the same period.

Overall labour productivity (price-adjusted GDP per hour worked by persons in employment) rose by 2.3% on the same quarter of the previous year, according to provisional calculations. However, labour productivity per person in employment was down 1.9% compared with the first quarter of 2020.

                         Stable incomes and consumer reticence lead to increase of savings ratio

At current prices, both the GDP and the gross national income were down 1.1% in the first quarter of 2021 compared with a year earlier. Net national income at factor costs was up 0.9% on the first quarter of 2020. While the compensation of employees was slightly down (-0.4%), property and entrepreneurial income was up 4.0% according to first provisional calculations. Gross wages and salaries per employee recorded a slight increase on average (+0.2%), while average net salaries rose 1.0% because of decreasing social contributions paid by employees. The disposable income of households was by 1.1% higher in the first quarter of 2021 than a year earlier. Household final consumption expenditure at current prices, however, showed a decrease of 7.3%. As in the previous three quarters, the relatively stable incomes, on the one hand, and consumer reticence, on the other, resulted in a substantial rise in household saving during the corona crisis. According to provisional calculations, the savings ratio was 23.2% in the first quarter of 2021.

                         International and European comparison

Trends were diverging within Europe. In the first quarter of 2021, the price-, seasonally and calendar-adjusted GDP declined for example in Spain (-0.5%) and Italy (-0.4%) on the fourth quarter of 2020, while a slight increase was seen in France (+0.4%). According to provisional calculations, the Statistical Office of the European Union (Eurostat) reported a GDP decline of 0.4% on the previous quarter for the European Union (EU) as a whole, which was markedly smaller than for Germany (-1.8%). The United States recorded a substantial increase in their gross domestic product (+1.6%, converted figure) at the beginning of the year, compared with the fourth quarter of 2020.
When compared with a year earlier, too, an increase in GDP (+0.4%, converted figure) was reported for the United States. The French economy recorded a considerable increase on the first quarter of 2020 (+1.5%), whereas most EU Member States reported marked decreases. Spain recorded the largest year-on-year decline (-4.3%) of all the Member States which have data available as yet for the first quarter of 2021. In Italy, the decline (-1.4%) was smaller than in Germany (-3.1%). For the whole EU, Eurostat released a preliminary result of -1.7% on the same quarter of the previous year.

Pubblicato in: Banche Centrali, Cina, Russia, Stati Uniti, Unione Europea

G7 e Russia. Un G7 in via di devoluzione conta molto poco.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-26.

2021-05-20__ G7 GDP (Statista) 001

L’istogramma pubblicato da Statista dovrebbe essere eloquente.

«In 2019, the G7 countries of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United Kingdom and United States held 31.68 percent of the global gross domestic product (GDP). In 2025, that figure is projected to drop to 28.8 percent»

Nel 2019 il pil dei paesi G7 rappresentava il 31.68% del pil mondiale, mentre quello del G20, esclusi i paesi del G7), valeva il 41.51%.

Nel 2025 il pil dei paesi G7 è proiettato al 28.8% del pil mondiale, mentre quello del G20, esclusi i paesi del G7), è stimato arrivare al 44.77%.

Solo per dare un esempio, nel 2000 il pil indiano valeva 476.64 miliardi Usd, ma è stimato a 3,049.7 miliardi nel 2021 ed a 4,534.34 miliardi nel 2026.

Si noti come invece il pil dei paesi G7 sia in consistente diminuzione.

Non solo.

Il pil di alcuni paesi è drogato dal conteggio dei fondi pubblici erogati in via  assistenziale.

Se è vero che il pil sia un macrodato di primario interesse, sarebbe altrettanto vero ricordare come la sua lettura dovrebbe essere corroborata da altri macrodati similmente importanti, quali la produzione industriale, i volumi dell’Import – Export, la percentuale degli occupati, il valore della inflazione, solo per citarne alcuni.

Si faccia attenzione. Le parole son come le farfalle, mentre i numeri sono massi, ed anche pesanti.

* * * * * * *

Se questi dati siano fermamente chiari, l’intervista rilasciata da Mr Andrei Kelin, Ambasciatore russo a Londra, risulterebbe essere chiara.

– «G7 playing a ‘dangerous game’ by pushing Moscow towards China»

– «Russia, he said, was more interested in other forums such as the G20, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the BRICs organisation»

* * * * * * *

«G7 leaders gather for a summit in St Ives, in the southern English region of Cornwall, on June 11-13. How to deal with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia is expected to be on the agenda»

«The Group of Seven is playing a “dangerous game” by making aggressive and baseless criticism of the Kremlin because it pushes Russia closer to China»

«G7 foreign ministers this month scolded both China and Russia, casting the Kremlin as malicious and Beijing as a bully, but beyond words there were few concrete steps aside from expressing support for Taiwan and Ukraine»

«Kelin said the G7’s critique was biased, confrontational, lacked substance and was stoking anti-Western feelings among Russians, while its aggressive attitude towards Russia and China was pushing the two powers together»

«Russia, the world’s largest country by territory, denies it meddles beyond its borders and says the West is gripped by anti-Russian hysteria»

«China, the world’s second largest economy, says the West is a bully and that its leaders have a post-imperial mindset that makes them feel they can act like global policemen»

«Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain»

«it has no grounds to judge other countries about the state of democracy»

«Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain»

«No one gives them the right to judge others – especially on the state of democracy»

«It is strange for us as we are not eager to become once again a part of this club, …. In our view it has lost its authority»

* * * * * * *

L’enclave liberal socialista occidentale sta devolvendosi ogni giorno che passa, incapace di sottoporsi a revisione critica.

Certamente ad oggi ha ancora una potenza economica non indifferente, ma è sulla via del declino.

*


G7 playing a ‘dangerous game’ by pushing Moscow towards China – Russian envoy.

The Group of Seven is playing a “dangerous game” by making aggressive and baseless criticism of the Kremlin because it pushes Russia closer to China, Russia’s ambassador to London Andrei Kelin told Reuters on Thursday.

G7 foreign ministers this month scolded both China and Russia, casting the Kremlin as malicious and Beijing as a bully, but beyond words there were few concrete steps aside from expressing support for Taiwan and Ukraine.

The G7, in a 12,400-word communique, said Russia was a destabilising influence on the world because of its 2014 annexation of Crimea, its build up on Ukraine’s border and its meddling in the internal affairs of other countries.

Kelin said the G7’s critique was biased, confrontational, lacked substance and was stoking anti-Western feelings among Russians, while its aggressive attitude towards Russia and China was pushing the two powers together.

“This is a dangerous game,” Kelin, 64, told Reuters. “Russia and China have enormous potential in different fields – in the economy, in technology, in military capacities, in politics – this potential is spread around the world.”

“We are not allies with China, however pushing Russia and China, it closes our ranks with China – in that sense we are more and more united against challenges that are being presented from the West.”

Russia, the world’s largest country by territory, denies it meddles beyond its borders and says the West is gripped by anti-Russian hysteria.

China, the world’s second largest economy, says the West is a bully and that its leaders have a post-imperial mindset that makes them feel they can act like global policemen.

G7 leaders gather for a summit in St Ives, in the southern English region of Cornwall, on June 11-13. How to deal with President Vladimir Putin’s Russia is expected to be on the agenda.

Kelin, a career diplomat who speaks fluent English, French and Dutch, said Russia would proceed according to its own geopolitical interests and that if there were issues that needed to be discussed then dialogue was the best way.

“But the G7 prefers megaphone diplomacy,” Kelin said. “This is a club that expresses certain opinions on different subjects but it has no grounds to judge other countries about the state of democracy.”

Asked about G7 criticism of the state of human rights in Russia, Kelin said the United States and Britain should pay more attention to the state of their own democracy after the attacks on the U.S. Capitol and race issues in Britain.

“Look at yourself in this situation – but they don’t want to look at themselves,” Kelin said. “No one gives them the right to judge others – especially on the state of democracy.”

Russia was brought into what became the Group of Eight in 1997 under former President Boris Yeltsin but its membership was suspended in 2014 after the annexation of Crimea.

“We see discussions on this subject: let’s invite Russia, let’s not invite Russia. It is strange for us as we are not eager to become once again a part of this club,” Kelin said. “In our view it has lost its authority.”

“It is divisive – it has a tendency to split the world into friends and aliens: they want to talk about coalitions of friends targetted against the others. This doesn’t bring solutions – it brings more problems to the world,” Kelin said.

Russia, he said, was more interested in other forums such as the G20, Shanghai Cooperation Organisation and the BRICs organisation.

Pubblicato in: Cina, Devoluzione socialismo, Finanza e Sistema Bancario, Stati Uniti

BlackRock (7.81tn Usd) continua ad espandersi in Cina, e vi porta i denari occidentali.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-26.

Cervelli in Fuga 001

BlackRock. Q3. Assets a 7.81 trilioni Usd dai 7.32 del trimestre precedente.

Blackrock. Mr Fink, il vero padrone del mondo.

«Blackrock è la più grande società di investimenti a livello mondiale e gestisce direttamente oltre 7,810 miliardi di dollari. Ma questo è solo la punta di iceberg.

 «Attraverso BlackRock Solutions – risultato di continui investimenti in sistemi tecnologici integrati altamente sofisticati – BlackRock offre soluzioni di gestione del rischio e piattaforme d’investimento ad un’ampia rosa di clienti istituzionali, detentori di un patrimonio complessivo di oltre 7,810 miliardi di dollari.»

Più tutto il resto.

Fondata da Robert S. Kapito e da Laurence Fink nel 1988, ha basato il suo successo su alcune semplicissime considerazioni.

– Una società di investimenti può ammaliare un potenziale cliente, ma se non lo fa guadagnare perde sia il cliente sia il suo entourage. I clienti soddisfatti sono fedeli e portano immediatamente altri clienti. Il guadagno assicurato è la migliore forma pubblicitaria possibile.

– Gli investimenti devono essere copiosi, fruttiferi e stabili nel tempo. Quindi, pochissimo mordi e fuggi. Solo investimenti strategici. La platea deve essere semplicemente il mondo.

– Tipicamente, si rileva un pacchetto di compartecipazione in una società produttiva sana. Non un pacchetto di maggioranza, sarebbe troppo oneroso, ma di dimensioni tali da poter nominare membri nel cda e da poter influenzare la condotta della società stessa.

– Le società delle quali BlackRock detiene una partecipazione azionaria formano un network virtuale di aziende sane e redditizie, che si spalleggiano le une con le altre. Per esempio, una società produttrice utilizzerà delle banche ove sia presente Blackrock, si servirà da fornitori Blackrock, venderà ad utilizzatori Blackrock.

– Ma la idea portante è utilizzare il denaro degli altri, ossia degli investitori, per ottenere il condizionamento del cda di una società, obbligandolo alla generazione di reddito da ripartire tra gli azionisti ed alle norme comportamentali su riportate. La conditio sine qua non è una gestione impeccabile di quanto conferito. A nessuno mai interesserà come il denaro sia investito purché esso frutti utili copiosi.

– La onestà di comportamento nei confronti degli investitori che hanno conferito il loro denaro da gestire è il cuore del comportamento di BlackRock, e ne condiziona eticamente ogni azione. Infatti nessun investimento dura nel tempo se è utilizzato in modo improprio.

– Nella realtà dei fatti, BlackRock ha introdotto una filosofia di investimenti volta sicuramente al profitto, ma molto di più al controllo: in altri termini, al potere.  Non solo. Se è difficile entrare nel suo organico, è facilissimo uscirne: le progressioni di carriera sono fortemente meritocratiche, basate solo sui risultati ottenuti. Si viene così a formare una scuola dirigenziale di elevato valore, che potrebbe in ogni momento transitare alla politica surclassando i classici candidati mediatici. In altri termini: è un nuovo modo di fare politica.»

* * * * * * *

«BlackRock Inc has received a licence in China for a majority-owned wealth management venture, expanding its footprint in the country’s fast-growing asset management market»

«The U.S. fund giant said on Wednesday its wealth management venture with a unit of China Construction Bank Corp (CCB) and Singapore state investor Temasek Holdings (Pte) Ltd can now start business»

«BlackRock will “support China in building a sustainable ecosystem for investing,”»

«The venture, 50.1% owned by BlackRock and 40% by CCB’s wealth management unit, will draw on BlackRock’s investment expertise and CCB’s vast distribution network»

«The Chinese market represents a significant opportunity to help meet the long-term goals of investors in China and internationally»

«Amundi  has set up a wealth management joint venture with Bank of China, and Schroders has applied to partner with Bank of Communications (BOCOM) in wealth management»

* * * * * * *

A prima vista, il concetto è semplice. Il denaro migra dagli stati a bassa o nulla remunerazione verso quelli con buoni rendimenti. Da quelli pericolosi e traballanti a quelli sicuri.

Se questa è un norma vera, nei fatti è più subdolamente complessa.

Le banche centrali dell’enclave liberal socialista europea mantengono tassi negativi ed acquistano titoli di stato (QE) con l’unico reale scopo di mantenere il debito, evitando il default.

Ma tutta la liquidità che iniettano nel sistema raggiunge in minima parte i consumatori e le aziende in difficoltà: confluisce nelle casse della banche. Queste ne concedono ben poco in prestiti: ne investono un po’ nel mercato borsistico che sale a dismisura, ma la maggior quota la fanno migrare in Cina, ove sono accolte a braccia aperte.

In poche parole, il denaro dell’occidente aiuta ed alimenta la crescita cinese, a discapito dell’occidente.

Non è solo questione di enantiosemia.

Un gran bel risultato.

*


BlackRock expands China footprint with wealth management licence

BlackRock Inc (BLK.N) has received a licence in China for a majority-owned wealth management venture, expanding its footprint in the country’s fast-growing asset management market.

The U.S. fund giant said on Wednesday its wealth management venture with a unit of China Construction Bank Corp (CCB) (601939.SS), and Singapore state investor Temasek Holdings (Pte) Ltd (TEM.UL) can now start business.

The venture, 50.1% owned by BlackRock and 40% by CCB’s wealth management unit, will draw on BlackRock’s investment expertise and CCB’s vast distribution network, the U.S. firm said in a statement.

BlackRock will “support China in building a sustainable ecosystem for investing,” Chairman and CEO Laurence Fink said in the statement.

“The Chinese market represents a significant opportunity to help meet the long-term goals of investors in China and internationally.”

China opened its massive financial sector last April as part of an interim Sino-U.S. trade deal.

Guo Shuqing, chairman of the China Banking and Insurance Regulatory Commission (CBIRC), said in March that Chinese regulators welcome more foreign entry into China’s financial sector, including the wealth management space.

Amundi (AMUN.PA) has set up a wealth management joint venture with Bank of China (601988.SS), and Schroders has applied to partner with Bank of Communications (BOCOM) in wealth management.

BlackRock CCB Wealth Management Ltd, which received the licence from CBIRC, will expand BlackRock’s presence in China.

BlackRock already owns a mutual fund venture with Bank of China, and is setting up a wholly-owned mutual fund house in the country.

Pubblicato in: Diplomazia

Egitto, vero mediatore tra Israele ed Hamas, prosegue l’opera di pace.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-25.

Egitto e Sinai 001

Le vittorie hanno cento padri e le sconfitte sono orfane.

La tregua tra Israele ed Hamas è stata il frutto di un’abile diplomazia egiziana, che ha operato con grande discrezione e senza clamore alcuno. Una diplomazia che adesso si sforza di stabilizzare la tregua: se parlare di ‘pace’ sarebbe al momento impossibile, prospettare invece una tregua di lunga durata sembrerebbe essere del tutto ragionevole.

Questa puntualizzazione è necessaria tenendo conto che un buon numero di governanti hanno pubblicamente affermato come la tregua sia stata opera loro. Senza nemmeno menzionare l’Egitto.

Il tragico è che la gente crede più ai governanti che ai fatti.

* * * * * * *

«Israel-Hamas ceasefire holds, Egyptian mediators shuttle between the two sides»

«A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip held on Saturday as Egyptian mediators pressed on with talks with the two sides on securing longer-term calm»

«Palestinian officials put the reconstruction costs at tens of millions of dollars and medical officials said 248 people had been killed in Gaza»

«Palestinian attacks killed 13 people in Israel, where the rocket attacks caused panic in some communities»

«A source familiar with planning said U.S. Secretary of State would visit Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday and Thursday, hoping to build on the ceasefire mediated by Egypt with U.S. support»

«The delegates have since been shuttling between Israel and Gaza, with talks continuing on Saturday»

«U.S. President Joe Biden said on Thursday that Washington would work with the United Nations on bringing humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Gaza»

«How can the world call itself civilised?»

«It’s only a matter of time until the next operation in Gaza»

* * * * * * *

Nella vita si fa dapprima ciò che si possa, quindi ciò che si debba fare, e solo per ultimo quello che si vorrebbe.

Ottima l’iniziativa diplomatica su Israele e su Hamas, ma senza un’azione altrettanto energica sugli stati che patrocinano Hamas rifornendola di mezzi finanziari e di armamenti nessuna tregua potrebbe perdurare almeno un po’ di tempo.

Ocasio-Cortez drafts resolution to block $735m sale of missiles to Israel

«We have a responsibility to protect human rights»

La Harris – Biden Administration ha dimostrato tutta la sua inconsistenza ed inettitudine, pressata la riottosa sinistra liberal capitanata da Mrs Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez e l’ala più moderata, non fortemente avversa ad Israele.

*


Israel-Hamas ceasefire holds, Egyptian mediators shuttle between the two sides.

A ceasefire between Israel and Hamas-led Palestinian militants in the Gaza Strip held on Saturday as Egyptian mediators pressed on with talks with the two sides on securing longer-term calm, officials said.

The ceasefire began before dawn on Friday, and Palestinians and Israelis are now assessing the damage from 11 days of hostilities in which Israel pounded Gaza with air strikes and militants fired barrages of rockets at Israel.

Palestinian officials put the reconstruction costs at tens of millions of dollars and medical officials said 248 people had been killed in Gaza. The devastation has raised concerns about the humanitarian situation in the densely populated enclave.

Economists said the fighting could curb Israel’s economic recovery from the COVID-19 pandemic and medics said Palestinian attacks killed 13 people in Israel, where the rocket attacks caused panic in some communities.

A source familiar with planning said U.S. Secretary of State would visit Israel and the Palestinian Authority in the occupied West Bank on Wednesday and Thursday, hoping to build on the ceasefire mediated by Egypt with U.S. support.

Egypt sent a delegation to Israel on Friday to discuss ways of firming up the ceasefire, including with aid for Palestinians in Gaza, Hamas officials told Reuters.

The delegates have since been shuttling between Israel and Gaza, with talks continuing on Saturday, the officials said.

Despite confrontations between Israeli police and Palestinian protesters at a Jerusalem holy site on Friday, there were no reports of Hamas rocket launches from Gaza or Israeli military strikes on the enclave as of Saturday morning.

U.S. President Joe Biden said on Thursday that Washington would work with the United Nations on bringing humanitarian and reconstruction assistance to Gaza, with safeguards against funds being used to arm Hamas, which the West deems a terrorist group.

The State Department announced Blinken’s visit on Thursday, without announcing dates, and said he would “discuss recovery efforts and working together to build better futures for Israelis and Palestinians”.

The source familiar with planning for Blinken’s visit said the top U.S. diplomat would visit Egypt and Jordan as well as the Palestinian Authority, which is run by Hamas’ rival, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.

                         HUMANITARIAN CONCERNS.

World Health Organization spokeswoman Margaret Harris said on Friday Gaza’s health facilities were in danger of being overwhelmed by the thousands of injuries, and called for immediate access into Gaza for health supplies and personnel.

“How can the world call itself civilised?” Gaza resident Abu Ali asked, standing next to the rubble of a 14-storey tower block.

Gaza has for years been subjected to an Israeli blockade that restricts the passage of people and goods, as well as restrictions by Egypt.

Both countries cite concerns about weapons reaching Hamas, the Islamist group that controls Gaza and led the rocket barrage. Palestinians say the restrictions amount to collective punishment of Gaza’s 2 million population.

Gaza medical officials say the Palestinian death toll from Israeli air and artillery strikes includes 66 children.

Israel said its forces killed more than 200 fighters from Hamas and allied faction Islamic Jihad, and that at least 17 civilian fatalities in Gaza were caused by militants’ rockets falling short.

The death toll in Israel included two children, a soldier and three foreign workers, medics said.

In a cafe in the Israeli port city of Ashdod, north of Gaza, student Dan Kiri, 25, said Israel should continue attacking Hamas until it collapsed.

“It’s only a matter of time until the next operation in Gaza,” he said.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Propalatori di Odio, Regno Unito

Bbc. La cloaca delle menzogne. Soffre di essere stata smascherata. – Governo Inglese.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2021-05-25.

Biancaneve e la Strega

Questi sarebbero i fatti, per quanto si possa appurare in questo mare di menzogne sistematiche.

«Twenty-five years ago, the BBC’s Panorama programme landed a scoop rivals the world over wanted – an interview with Diana, Princess of Wales.»

«Her son and heir to the throne, Prince William, has now launched an unprecedented attack on the corporation over that interview»

«The programme, which attracted a UK audience of 23m, was a career-defining moment for reporter Martin Bashir»

«But after accusations resurfaced last autumn that Bashir misled the princess to gain her trust, the BBC established an inquiry led by the former Supreme Court judge Lord Dyson. That inquiry has judged Bashir to be “unreliable”, “devious” and “dishonest.”»

«Bashir was investigated by the BBC at the time by Tony Hall, who went on to become the BBC’s director general. Hall found that Bashir was “honest” and an “honourable man”. Dyson has condemned Hall’s inquiry as “flawed” and “woefully ineffective”.»

«Until now, the full story behind the scoop has remained hidden for a quarter of a century»

* * * * * * *

UK journalist at centre of Diana storm denies link to her death

«A former BBC journalist found to have deceived Princess Diana in order to secure an explosive interview with her in 1995 has denied he was responsible for a chain of events that led to her death, a newspaper reported.

Martin Bashir told The Sunday Times he believed his actions did not harm Diana.

An independent investigation published on Thursday found that Bashir lied and deceived Diana that she was being spied upon to persuade her to agree to the interview in which she disclosed details of her failed marriage to Prince Charles.

“I never wanted to harm Diana in any way and I don’t believe we did,” Bashir told The Sunday Times.

Diana’s eldest son William has said the way the interview was secured was “deceitful” and the BBC’s failures contributed significantly to Diana’s “fear, paranoia and isolation.”

His younger brother Prince Harry and Diana’s brother Charles Spencer have said the interview was part of a series of unethical practices that ultimately cost Diana her life in a car crash in Paris in 1997.»

Martin Bashir ha detto al Sunday Times di credere che le sue azioni non abbiano danneggiato Diana.

Un’indagine indipendente pubblicata giovedì ha scoperto che Bashir ha mentito e ingannato Diana sul fatto che fosse spiata per convincerla ad accettare l’intervista in cui ha rivelato i dettagli del suo matrimonio fallito con il principe Carlo.

Il figlio maggiore di Diana, William, ha detto che il modo in cui l’intervista è stata assicurata è stato “ingannevole” e che i fallimenti della BBC hanno contribuito significativamente alla “paura, paranoia e isolamento” di Diana.

* * *

BBC’s reputation highly damaged by Diana interview report, says Patel. – Bbc

«The BBC’s reputation has been “highly damaged” following an inquiry into the Panorama interview with Diana, Princess of Wales, Priti Patel has said.

The home secretary said Lord Dyson’s probe into how Martin Bashir obtained the interview was a “really significant moment” for the BBC.

The independent inquiry found Bashir used deception to get the interview.

Asked whether the corporation would survive, Ms Patel said it would have to “reflect and learn lessons”.

She told The Andrew Marr show on BBC One it had been “utterly heart-breaking” to hear Diana’s sons Prince William and Prince Harry speaking “in very personal terms” about their mother, following the publication of the report last week.

“There is no doubt this world-class institution, its reputation has been highly damaged,” she said. “Lessons will have to be learned – there is no question about that.”

The report by former senior judge Lord Dyson found Bashir was unreliable and dishonest, and that the BBC fell short of its high standards when answering questions about the interview.

The home secretary said next year’s mid-term review of the BBC’s royal charter – focussing on the governance and regulation of the organisation – would be “a very significant and serious moment, at a time when the reputation of the BBC has been compromised”.

The royal charter is an agreement with the government over what the BBC intends to do, including how it is funded and run.

The report will “go down as one of those key moments in the history of the BBC”, she added.»

La reputazione della BBC è stata “altamente danneggiata” a seguito di un’inchiesta sull’intervista di Panorama a Diana, principessa del Galles, ha detto Priti Patel. Il ministro dell’Interno ha detto che l’indagine di Lord Dyson su come Martin Bashir ha ottenuto l’intervista è stato un “momento davvero significativo” per la BBC.

L’inchiesta indipendente ha scoperto che Bashir ha usato l’inganno per ottenere l’intervista.

Alla domanda se la corporazione sarebbe sopravvissuta, la signora Patel ha detto che avrebbe dovuto “riflettere e imparare le lezioni”.

Ha detto allo show di Andrew Marr su BBC One che è stato “assolutamente straziante” sentire i figli di Diana, il principe William e il principe Harry parlare “in termini molto personali” della loro madre, dopo la pubblicazione del rapporto la scorsa settimana.

“Non c’è dubbio che questa istituzione di classe mondiale, la sua reputazione è stata altamente danneggiata”, ha detto. “Le lezioni dovranno essere imparate – non c’è dubbio su questo”.

Il rapporto dell’ex giudice anziano Lord Dyson ha scoperto che Bashir era inaffidabile e disonesto, e che la BBC è venuta meno ai suoi alti standard nel rispondere alle domande sull’intervista.

Il ministro dell’Interno ha detto che la revisione di medio termine del prossimo anno della carta reale della BBC – che si concentra sulla governance e la regolamentazione dell’organizzazione – sarebbe “un momento molto significativo e serio, in un momento in cui la reputazione della BBC è stata compromessa”.

La carta reale è un accordo con il governo su ciò che la BBC intende fare, incluso come è finanziata e gestita.

Il rapporto “passerà come uno di quei momenti chiave nella storia della BBC”, ha aggiunto.”

* * * * * * *

Come tutte le testate liberal occidentali, la Bbc ha da sempre utilizzato artatamente le menzogne per allestire una fabbrica del fango su quanti fossero stati ritenuti essere avversari potenziali o reali, che sono sempre stati trattati da pervicaci nemici, degni solo della morte civile e financo fisica.

Adesso, anche nell’enclave liberal occidentale si sta facendo strada il concetto che questo modo di agire abbia avuto serie conseguenze.

«The BBC’s reputation has been “highly damaged”».

Ma chiunque si fosse peritato di leggersi con cura BBC controversies non ne sarebbe mai rimasto sorpreso. È un lunghissimo elenco che riporta una miriade di notizie false e tendenziose.

*

Orbene.

Come poi dare torto che almeno fuori dall’occidente la gente abbia perso la pazienza?

Bbc. Bandita dalla Cina perché propala fake news. – Xinhua e Bbc.

China pulls BBC World News off the air for serious content violation.

La Bbc è stata cacciata via a pedate.

*

Al momento non si può fare altro che condividere quanto ha detto la Home Secretary, Segretario di Stato per gli affari interni del Regno Unito Mrs Priti Patel.

Dirigenza e giornalisti della Bbc dovrebbero essere tutti sottoposti ad inchiesta e quindi essere licenziati con disonore.

Quella attuale si contrista di essere stata smascherata, mica di quello che ha fatto.

*


Martin Bashir inquiry: Diana, the reporter and the BBC

Twenty-five years ago, the BBC’s Panorama programme landed a scoop rivals the world over wanted – an interview with Diana, Princess of Wales. Her son and heir to the throne, Prince William, has now launched an unprecedented attack on the corporation over that interview.

The programme, which attracted a UK audience of 23m, was a career-defining moment for reporter Martin Bashir.

But after accusations resurfaced last autumn that Bashir misled the princess to gain her trust, the BBC established an inquiry led by the former Supreme Court judge Lord Dyson. That inquiry has judged Bashir to be “unreliable”, “devious” and “dishonest.”

Bashir was investigated by the BBC at the time by Tony Hall, who went on to become the BBC’s director general. Hall found that Bashir was “honest” and an “honourable man”. Dyson has condemned Hall’s inquiry as “flawed” and “woefully ineffective”.

Until now, the full story behind the scoop has remained hidden for a quarter of a century.

The interview became one of the 20th Century’s seminal TV events. As the separated wife of the future king, Princess Diana spoke of adultery, palace plotting, mental and physical illness, and how Prince Charles was unfit for the job.

“Do you really think a campaign was being waged against you?” Martin Bashir asked Princess Diana, having spent the preceding weeks amplifying the alarm bells in her head about just such a campaign. He claimed uniquely placed sources were telling him about dirty tricks by journalists, royal courtiers, the intelligence services, and even her friends.

“Yes, I did,” replied Diana.

I worked on Panorama in 1995, and I had heard the rumours that Bashir had used deception to land his scoop, but nothing more. The details only began to resurface last autumn, on the 25th anniversary of the interview. The BBC released to ITV and Channel 4 some of the information journalists had been seeking for years.

At the same time, Princess Diana’s brother Charles Spencer disclosed that he’d kept contemporaneous notes of his meetings with Bashir, and the claims he made.

Lord Dyson’s report represents the BBC’s formal response to the allegations against Martin Bashir and the failure of Tony Hall’s 1996 inquiry to get to the bottom of this affair.

However, so serious were last autumn’s renewed allegations of misconduct that the current Panorama team decided this needed to be investigated by the programme itself to restore public trust in Panorama’s journalism and independence.

We’ve talked to almost all the witnesses who have given evidence to Lord Dyson and many more besides, including detailed testimony from Earl Spencer.

Like Lord Dyson, we have also seen internal BBC documents that not only show Bashir repeatedly lied, but also acknowledge that there was a serious breach of journalistic ethics and BBC rules. And yet the BBC management board was told by Hall that he was certain Bashir had not set out to deceive, while Hall’s note intended for the corporation’s governing body said he was an “honest and honourable man”.

Lord Dyson says: “What Mr Bashir did was not an impulsive act done in the spur of the moment. It was carefully planned… What he did was devious and dishonest.”

Bashir contacts Earl Spencer

The story begins with Bashir’s plan to persuade Princess Diana’s brother Earl Spencer that among journalists covering the “War of the Waleses”, he had access to high-level sources with the inside story of a broad conspiracy against him and his sister.

On 24 August 1995, Bashir left a telephone message with one of Spencer’s assistants: “Not seeking interview or info”, just “15 minutes of time to talk”. He then sent a BBC headed letter claiming to have spent the “past three months investigating press behaviour”. In fact, Bashir had spent much of that time working on other Panorama programmes. However, his letter intimated that a dogged investigation had unearthed something big about press intrusion into the Spencer family.

“I simply [want] to share some information which I believe, may be of interest,” he wrote, calculating Spencer would bite knowing that he had had his own battles with the media. With no response, Bashir called again on 29 August. Spencer said he could meet him in London at 18:00 for a quick drink.

On the face of it, the suddenness of Spencer’s invitation to a meeting may well have taken Bashir by surprise. In order to ingratiate himself with Earl Spencer to gain access to his sister, the reporter intended to show Spencer – falsely – that his former head of security, ex-soldier, Alan Waller, was being paid regularly by Rupert Murdoch’s News international and the intelligence services to spy on the Spencer family. However, Bashir didn’t show this to Spencer at their first brief meeting – presumably because he hadn’t yet created the “information”.

Lord Dyson said he could not be certain about the precise date when this “information” was created. However, our own investigation suggests this happened immediately after Bashir’s introductory drink with Spencer.

Spencer had agreed to continue their conversation at his country estate, Althorp, two days later at 11:30 on 31 August.

The fake bank statements

To help prepare the “information”, Bashir made an urgent call to a former colleague, Matt Wiessler, begging him to drop everything for a job that couldn’t wait. The graphic designer doesn’t recall the exact date except that it was at the junction of August and September. Wiessler’s business partner at the time told me that Bashir called him first and remembers it being around the time of the Notting Hill Carnival, which in 1995 ended on 28 August. He says that because Bashir wanted a rushed overnight job, he couldn’t do it and suggested he call Wiessler instead.

Both Wiessler and his business partner are also clear that the call came after hours. Since Spencer’s diary shows he had his first meeting with Bashir on the evening of the 29th, the evidence points to Bashir having called Wiessler soon after his drink with Spencer.

Wiessler says Bashir came to his flat and dictated from his notebook details of what he said were two of Alan Waller’s bank statements, which he claimed to have seen – £4,000 from News International on 8 March 1994, and £6,500 from a Jersey-based company called “Penfolds Consultants” on 4 June. Bashir didn’t mention the story he was working on was about Princess Diana, only that it “could lead to something big” in relation to “surveillance by MI5 or MI6”.

The designer assumed that Bashir had actually seen Waller’s original bank statements. He told Bashir the job of recreating them would take all night. Wiessler says that since Bashir was due to fly somewhere the following morning, he instructed him to courier the graphics to him at Heathrow at 07:00. Presumably Bashir wanted them ready for his trip to Althorp first thing on the 31st.

Spencer’s note of that meeting shows that Bashir mentioned “payments” to Waller, which he said were regular: “8/3/94 £4K News International £4K quarterly” and “4/6/94 £6.5K Penfolds, 4 payments”. “Penfolds Consultants”, said Bashir, was a Jersey-based front company for the intelligence services.

What had really hooked Spencer, however, was another false claim by Bashir – that the private secretary of Prince Charles, Commander Richard Aylard, was conspiring against Diana. Spencer’s notes show Bashir having claimed that Aylard had been handed secretly recorded conversations and, in an apparent reference to the possibility of divorce, told journalist Jonathan Dimbleby: “We are in the end game. Shit or bust.”

Spencer says this knocked him sideways so he called Panorama editor Steve Hewlett. Although Spencer didn’t list Bashir’s claims to Hewlett, he did ask him if he could be trusted. Hewlett, according to Spencer, assured him that Bashir was “one of my best”.

Bashir is introduced to Diana

On 14 September, Bashir and Spencer met again at Althorp. Bashir now ramped up his allegations: Diana’s own private secretary Commander Patrick Jephson was said to be in cahoots with Aylard. Bashir produced what Spencer describes as a folded A4-sized sheet of paper purporting to show sizeable payments to both Aylard and Jephson from the intelligence services to monitor Princess Diana’s movements.

In evidence to Lord Dyson, Bashir categorically denies he showed any such document to Spencer. However, Spencer noted the following comment from Bashir: “Patrick Jephson was a gd friend of Aylard + had business connections until 1992. Non exec director of company that Aylard was on board of Financial investment co. Jephson cashed in shared +resigned in 1992.”

This echoed Diana’s well-publicised fears of a conspiracy by her estranged husband’s camp at St James’s Palace to discredit her.

Because Spencer could make no sense of such alleged treachery, he thought his sister should hear all this directly from Bashir, so he telephoned her to suggest that she should meet Bashir. “Darling Carlos,” she replied in an affectionate note shown for the first time to Panorama. Using their childhood names for each other, the note said: “I so appreciated the contents of our telephone call this morning – it all makes complete sense to what is going on around me at this present time. ‘They’ underestimate the Spencer strength! Lots of luv from Duch x”

By 1995 Diana, had come to fear she had enemies in high places and was already vulnerable and unsettled. “I think that she was looking for reasons as to why things were as they were,” Spencer told me.

On 19 September, Spencer introduced Bashir to Diana. During this meeting, Spencer noted some 30 claims which he attributes to Bashir, including Jephson’s alleged plots against her: “Jephson – dangerous: money. Left offshore a/c in March 1994”.

By the end of the meeting, Spencer told me he had become highly sceptical. “I warned Diana that his stories didn’t add up and apologised to her… and she said, ‘Oh, don’t worry, Carlos. It’s nice to see you. It doesn’t matter at all.’ And I thought that was the last time I’d hear from or about Martin Bashir.”

Bashir has claimed that most of the comments noted down by Spencer came from Diana, but Lord Dyson finds: “I am satisfied that Mr Bashir said most, if not all, of the things that are recorded in Earl Spencer’s notes.”

The reporter gave a very different account of his dealings with Earl Spencer – and in particular the claims attributed to him – in his evidence to Lord Dyson. He denied he had said many of the things attributed to him by Earl Spencer. Despite the findings of Lord Dyson, he still stands by his account.

For Diana that encounter was just the start of numerous meetings with Bashir. As Lord Dyson says, by late summer 1995, she was “keen on the idea of a television interview”.

However, friends who met her in the run-up to the Panorama interview on 5 November observed a marked change. They were regarded as no longer trustworthy, including Jephson. “From Martin Bashir’s perspective, I was the obstacle that had to be removed,” he told me. “Because there was a fair chance that if I advised against her giving the interview to him that she wouldn’t do it.”

Diana’s friend Rosa Monckton has written that everyone knew something was wrong “but none of us could put a finger on it”.

On 30 October, the day after Diana had secretly confirmed the interview with Bashir, she met her lawyer Lord Mishcon and described to him a series of lurid plots which she said had been hatched against her.

Asked to identify her sources Diana replied only that they were “reliable” and included GCHQ.

Is it a coincidence that among the top-level sources, Bashir would later claim to BBC management that he had met while “investigating” the dirty tricks campaign against Diana, was a member of GCHQ? It was, however, unheard of for a serving intelligence officer to disclose intercepts (even assuming that Diana’s communications were being intercepted, which itself seems highly dubious) to a journalist.

The key question about the BBC for both our inquiry and Lord Dyson’s was: How did Bashir’s machinations elude the corporation’s most senior executives, all of whom had been editors and journalists for whom the first rule is to cast a sceptical eye over anything that doesn’t seem to add up?

Alarm bells at the BBC

The first alarm bell that should have warned BBC management something was wrong rang in December 1995, a month after the sensational interview had been broadcast. Designer Wiessler approached current affairs bosses Tim Gardam and Tim Suter and told them that he had been unwittingly drawn into forging bank statements by Bashir.

Wiessler – who says he only realised a connection between the fake documents and the interview after it was broadcast – told them he had previously approached the then Panorama editor Steve Hewlett, who had assured him there was nothing to worry about. Hewlett died of cancer in 2017, and having worked closely with him, the idea that he might have colluded with Bashir in using fake bank statements is – to me – unthinkable. And nothing I have seen suggests that Hewlett did. Nonetheless, were he alive, Lord Dyson would have sought his answer to some searching questions.

Why, for example, having been first alerted to the fake bank statements shortly after transmission, had Hewlett not reported this to management?

The evidence suggests that Hewlett first learned about the fake bank statements after Wiessler faxed them to Panorama producer Mark Killick with whom he had previously worked. Killick instantly recognised the name “Penfolds Consultants” because the company had featured in two previous Panoramas he and Bashir had made about the business affairs of former England football manager Terry Venables. Why, puzzled Killick, should Penfolds be involved with paying an ex-employee of Earl Spencer?

Killick confronted Bashir with the bank statements in the BBC canteen. The meeting was brief and acrimonious, with Bashir telling Killick it was none of his concern.

Killick, along with two colleagues – former Panorama deputy editor Harry Dean and Panorama reporter Tom Mangold – went to see Hewlett on 4 December. All three also recall the editor saying it was none of their business. Dean asked him if he knew about the bank statements, and Hewlett said he couldn’t remember. But as Killick left, he suggested Hewlett talk to Spencer. Despite Spencer later calling Hewlett, we have seen no evidence that either Hewlett or anyone from BBC management did ever check Bashir’s version of events against Spencer’s. Lord Dyson is especially critical of this failure. He says the investigation carried out by Tony Hall and Anne Sloman, a former radio current affairs producer who later became the BBC’s chief political adviser, was “flawed and woefully ineffective”.

Lord Dyson said it “would have been substantially changed if they had bothered to speak to Earl Spencer”.

Dean recalls that Hewlett later assured him that the information on the bank statements was true. He told Dean that Venables had given up his interest in Penfolds and the name appearing in the fake bank statements was merely coincidental. That assurance seems likely to have come from Bashir himself.

Bashir’s ever-changing story

At the Panorama Christmas party, former producer Peter Molloy recalls Wiessler looking very shaken as he arrived. Wiessler told Molloy his flat had been broken into, and the only thing missing appeared to be two disks containing the bank statements. When Wiessler reported his concerns to BBC management, it became clear that Hewlett had not told his line manager Tim Gardam anything about Bashir having faked bank statements. “Tim was angry but sensible about it,” recalled colleague Tim Suter in 2001. Hewlett told them there’d been “nothing underhand in getting the Diana interview”.

Bashir was then questioned by Gardam, Hewlett and Suter. He assured them the bank statements hadn’t been shown to Diana or anyone else. They couldn’t have been used to persuade the princess to give an interview, he said, because the source of the information in them had been Diana herself.

However, a note by Tim Gardam of this meeting, shows Gardam was still puzzled – why had Bashir gone to the trouble and expense of creating such authentic looking documents? He asked Bashir to seek an assurance from the Princess in writing that she’d not been shown them. The following day, a handwritten letter arrived from Kensington Palace: “I can confirm that I was not (not is underlined twice) put under any undue pressure to give my interview. I was not shown any documents nor given any information by Martin Bashir that I was not already aware of. I was perfectly happy with the interview and I stand by it.”

Diana’s letter put to rest any doubts management had that she’d been tricked or coerced. The BBC’s greatest ever scoop, was safe. For now.

What had been missed, however, was a big clue that Bashir was lying.

Bashir had already told Gardam in November that his first contact with Princess Diana had been in late September. This was mentioned in a “record of events” note by Gardam for Tony Hall. However, Gardam had also been told by Matt Wiessler that he had created the bank statements in late August/early September, some three weeks earlier.

Although both Hewlett and BBC management had been made aware of both dates, neither appear to have spotted the obvious conflict that Diana couldn’t have been Bashir’s source because she and Bashir were yet to be in contact. When we highlighted this discrepancy over dates to Gardam, he acknowledged he hadn’t spotted it: “Had I done so, I would have questioned Martin Bashir about it.” His focus, he explained, had been on Wiessler’s allegation that “the documents had been shown to the Princess of Wales in order to persuade her to give an interview”.

Bashir may have calculated that by naming Diana as his confidential source, BBC management would feel inhibited about checking this with her. And they never did.

He also deflected suspicion by admitting that he falsely inserted the name “Penfolds Consultants” as one of the two companies supposedly paying Spencer’s ex-employee Alan Waller. His excuse? Although Diana had supposedly told him Waller was being paid by an intelligence services front company to spy on the Spencers, she hadn’t known the name. All she had known, said Bashir, was that the company was based in Jersey. So he’d just inserted a dummy name because he knew Penfolds was based in Jersey.

In truth, Bashir must have realised he would never get away with passing off Penfolds as real because it had featured in his previous Panoramas. What Hewlett made of Bashir’s volte-face over Penfolds given the former editor’s earlier assurances to a sceptical Harry Dean is unclear. In Gardam’s note of his interview with Bashir, he makes no reference to having been told about this contradiction which suggests Hewlett never told him.

Asked by Gardam why he had compiled the graphics in the first place, Bashir said it was simply to record and file the information – an implausible reason for getting a graphic designer to work all night, paying him £250 of licence fee payers’ money and getting the documents couriered to Heathrow, when jotting down the details in his notebook would have sufficed.

Nonetheless, however improbable this may seem today, Diana’s letter appears to have reassured management. “All could now relax for Christmas,” said Suter at the time. “We had had a scare, but we had got through it.” But for Earl Spencer, the letter doesn’t exonerate the BBC. “Diana is dealing from a position of having been lied to. She didn’t know that the whole obtaining of the interview was based on a series of falsehoods that led to her being vulnerable to this,” he told me.

However, if management thought that was the end of it, they were mistaken. On 21 March, the Mail on Sunday told Spencer they were investigating how Martin Bashir had been introduced to his sister and secured his scoop interview. In order to convince Spencer of his credentials, the newspaper alleged that Bashir had shown him bogus security service documents about bugging phones at Kensington Palace. Clearly the Mail were on to something, but were wrong about the content of the documents.

Distrustful of the tabloid press, Spencer called the BBC to find out more. Spencer was put on to Hewlett and told him he had introduced Bashir to Diana “on 19 September on the back of extremely serious allegations he had made, against various newspapers, named journalists, named senior figures at St James’s Palace, and unnamed figures in the secret service”.

Hewlett now had a golden opportunity to question the Earl about Bashir’s allegations and crucially whether he’d been shown bank statements since, unlike Spencer, Hewlett knew they were fake. It’s not clear that Hewlett did ask Spencer about either point. Nonetheless, since the Mail on Sunday had mentioned forgeries, Gardam instructed Hewlett to question Bashir about this again.

Again, Bashir insisted he had not shown his forgeries to anyone, including Spencer.

On 23 March, Gardam was telephoned and doorstepped by the Mail on Sunday, so he telephoned Bashir: Had he shown the documents to Spencer? Again, Bashir denied this to both Gardam and Hewlett. Unconvinced, that afternoon, Gardam sought another assurance. Fearing imminent publication, Bashir caved in, finally admitting that he had. It had taken four attempts since December to get the truth out of Bashir.

A furious Gardam warned Bashir the BBC would have to consider its position.

The BBC investigates

Gardam was days away from leaving the BBC. He wrote a handover note setting out all of Bashir’s lies. It also records Tony Hall as having agreed with Gardam that since Bashir had “misled us and… appeared to have acted unethically and in breach of the guidelines” the corporation should conduct a “full inquiry”.

But what transpired could hardly be described as a “full inquiry” and was compounded by misleading statements.

The Mail on Sunday had withheld publication, but by April 1996 had firmed up their story and published Bashir’s fake documents. Approved by both Hall and Hewlett, the BBC issued a statement saying the documents were “never connected in any way to the Panorama on Princess Diana”. Yet by now both knew that Bashir had admitted showing the statements to Spencer. They also knew that in a written statement, Bashir had admitted showing the documents to Spencer in order to “foster” his relationship with him. Therefore the documents manifestly were “connected to the Panorama on Princess Diana”.

In fact, Lord Dyson finds that the way the BBC handled its public statements as a whole in this matter “fell short of its high standards of integrity and transparency which are its hallmark”.

As Anne Sloman, who had taken over as Gardam’s temporary replacement, and Hall carried out their “full inquiry”, they never appear to have worked out that Bashir’s central claim – Diana was Bashir’s source for the information in the fake graphics – was a lie.

Like Gardam in December, neither Hall nor Sloman appear to have spotted that Diana couldn’t have been Bashir’s source because they hadn’t met when Bashir commissioned Wiessler to do the graphics. But no such comparison appears to have been made. Lord Dyson does not hold BBC management culpable for not spotting the discrepancy in dates. He does, however, find that ahead of Bashir’s first meeting with Diana on 19 September, it is “inconceivable” that he was “locked in a relationship” such that she would have been his source for the information in the graphics.

The Hall-Sloman investigation did draw up a chronology of events, which we’ve seen, but its focus was more about leaks from Panorama to newspapers than Bashir. Its chosen starting point was late October shortly before transmission, not late August/early September which is when management had already been told that Bashir had commissioned the graphics. Nor at any point did it say Bashir had lied.

The chronology reflected what Sloman appears to have thought about Panorama – “a viper’s nest” seething with jealous rivalries was how she later described the atmosphere to the late Richard Lindley, himself a former Panorama reporter, for his book “Panorama: Fifty Years of Pride and Paranoia” published in 2002. “All felt they had a God given right to leak to the press” said Sloman.

Had Earl Spencer spoken out, his notes would have blown apart Bashir’s story – and the BBC would have been confronted with one of its biggest crises. However, Spencer told me the reason he didn’t was because he didn’t know the BBC had launched an inquiry and Princess Diana’s Panorama interview was “seen as very controversial. And if I had gone against it while she was alive, then I didn’t want to be seen to be undermining her in any way.”

Moreover, at the time, Spencer didn’t know the information in the bank accounts was entirely fake, or that Bashir had told the BBC his sister was the source.

Also, the Mail on Sunday revelation quite quickly ceased to have traction. BBC press briefings that “jealous colleagues” were behind the paper’s story had distracted from its allegation about Bashir’s subterfuge, Spencer wasn’t talking, and management hoped he never would. “The Diana story is now dead, unless Spencer talks. There’s no indication that he will,” wrote Anne Sloman in an internal BBC management document a fortnight after the Mail on Sunday story.

Bashir had already put Diana off limits for questioning by claiming her as his source for the “exact” payment sums to her brother’s former head of security Alan Waller. Now in conversations with management, Bashir did the same to her brother claiming it was Earl Spencer himself who was his source for Waller’s bank account details – something he’d not previously mentioned.

Bashir had changed his story again but it seems not to have rung any alarm bells. Spencer only learned last autumn that Bashir had accused him of misusing private information and categorically denies there is any truth to it. In anger he contacted the BBC urging they hold an independent inquiry – hence Lord Dyson.

“In a credibility contest between Earl Spencer and Mr Bashir, Earl Spencer wins convincingly,” says the former Supreme Court judge.

In Lindley’s history of Panorama, Anne Sloman is quoted as saying Bashir was interviewed by Hall “at length”, with Hall at one end of her “grand desk” in Broadcasting House, Bashir at the other. “Certainly, Bashir had forged these documents. It was a stupid thing to do – it didn’t get him the interview. Why he did it, God only knows.”

To those of a more curious disposition, the circumstantial evidence pointed in only one direction: that these documents were Bashir’s way of getting his foot in the door of the Spencer family. That is also the finding of Lord Dyson, who says: “I conclude that Mr Bashir showed the fake statements to Earl Spencer before there was any contact between Princess Diana and himself.”

On 25 April 1996, Hall reported the results of his “personal investigation” into Bashir to the BBC’s governors, at the time the body appointed to regulate the corporation. A statement written by Hall for the governors’ meeting quotes him as saying that Bashir’s explanation for having commissioned the graphics was simply because “he wasn’t thinking”. Then came Hall’s exoneration: “I believe he is, even with this lapse, an honest and honourable man. He is contrite.”

Hall’s statement made no mention of what he already knew by that point, that Bashir had shown the fake documents to Spencer and had repeatedly lied to his editor and to senior management. At the same time, Hall refers to “TRUST” (which Hall spelled out in capital letters) and “straight dealing” as “paramount” BBC values.

While Hall’s statement to the governors criticised Bashir for having been “incautious and unwise”, he assured his fellow managers he was “certain there had been no question of Bashir trying to mislead or do anything improper with the document” – implying nothing improper had taken place.

Lord Dyson comments: “To dismiss his actions as no more than a mistake, unwise and foolish did not do justice to the seriousness of what he had done.”

An internal document faxed three days before the board of governors meeting shows that management seem to have privately acknowledged Bashir had been in breach of journalistic ethics and BBC rules: “Management will have to decide what action if any to take privately or publicly about Bashir, what to do about his contract and how long he should stay on Panorama.”

Lord Hall told Panorama Bashir was given a “severe reprimand” and was placed under “close supervision”. It is true on 4 April 1996, Tim Suter wrote a letter addressed to Bashir saying the creation of the graphics “was in breach of BBC’s guidelines on straight dealing… compounded by your failure to inform the head of department of the use made of this material when directly questioned by him. You should be in no doubt of the seriousness with which we view this nor of the reprimand that this letter represents.”

However, Lord Dyson finds that the letter was probably not sent to Bashir and further, that there is no record of a reprimand on his employment records. Panorama’s then deputy editor Clive Edwards told me he was “unaware of any supervisory order on Martin”.

“It is difficult to imagine how any such order could have been in force but not known to me as deputy editor, since I would have been the person to supervise such an order.”

Bashir remained with the BBC until 1998, when he left to join ITV.

The ‘entire truth’

The most senior managers responsible for BBC journalism appear to have swallowed a whale of a story, and in a 2005 interview for the BBC’s Arena documentary series to celebrate the scoop’s 10-year anniversary, Tony Hall unwittingly explained why: “Martin is the sort of interviewer who works very hard at getting into your confidence.”

It seems to have worked on everyone – despite Tim Gardam’s parting note to his management colleagues emphasising the need for the BBC to get to “the entire” truth of what Bashir had been up to.

For the anonymous BBC leakers without whom we would never have known about Bashir’s dishonesty there was only excoriation – briefed against by the BBC to the newspapers as “jealous colleagues” and referred to in an internal management document as “troublemakers.” Because of “this sordid saga”, says the document “we can either go the formal disciplinary route, which needs proof and may be messy or pick off the troublemakers one by one with a stiff warning and ensure they are found work elsewhere as speedily as is practicable”.

The only named whistleblower Matt Wiessler would never again get any BBC work, Hall assured the governors. Wiessler paid a heavy price – his freelance graphics business eventually collapsed so he left London and in his own words became “a bit of a drifter… I tried lots of other things, but at heart I was always a television current affairs guy. Hall called Martin, a ‘good and honourable man’. I want him to reverse that because I’m the good and honourable man in this.”

In response to Dyson, the BBC offered a “full and unconditional apology” and said it would be writing to “a number of individuals involved”.

Wiessler says the least the BBC could do is include him in that list.

In overall charge of the BBC at the time was director general John Birt. He says the revelation that the BBC “harboured a rogue reporter on Panorama who fabricated an elaborate, detailed but wholly false account of his dealings with Earl Spencer and Princess Diana” is a “shocking blot on the BBC’s enduring commitment to honest journalism; and it is a matter of the greatest regret that it has taken 25 years for the full truth to emerge. As the director general at the time, I offer my deep apologies to Earl Spencer and to all others affected.”

Lord Dyson has little to say about how BBC governance was undermined by Hall’s “woefully ineffective” investigation.

Our own investigation sheds some light on this, however.

Lindley’s book on 50 years of Panorama quotes Sloman as saying that she, Hall and Birt had a 90-minute meeting about Bashir but it doesn’t go into detail as to what transpired. Lindley’s widow let me search her attic for his original notes. I found that Sloman told Lindley: “We concluded that faking documents had been going on as a general practice” and that “our business creates monsters… never did Birt express interest in covering his own back… Birt wanted to get to the bottom of the matter.”

I understand Birt has no recollection of any such meeting, but that he thinks his reference to wanting to “get to the bottom of the matter” refers to a meeting immediately after the Mail on Sunday revelations. What briefing Birt may have been given on the results of Hall’s investigation before the boards of governors and boards of management is unclear, except that Birt is said not to have been told that Bashir had repeatedly lied. In fact, no evidence of Bashir having lied is mentioned in any of the documents written by Hall or Sloman that have surfaced.

However, Lord Hall told Panorama that he was “open and transparent with the director general and with colleagues on the board of management and I believe I gave them all the key facts… throughout I discharged my responsibilities in good faith”. For his part, Lord Dyson finds that Hall “presented these facts to both the board of management and the board of governors as if they were uncontroversial”.

Lord Dyson continues: “And yet he knew (but did not tell the board) that they derived from Mr Bashir’s uncorroborated version of the facts and that Mr Bashir had lied on three occasions on a matter of considerable importance.”

In a statement, Lord Hall said: “I accept that our investigation 25 years ago into how Panorama secured the interview with Princess Diana fell well short of what was required. In hindsight, there were further steps we could and should have taken following complaints about Martin Bashir’s conduct.”

He said he was “wrong” to give Martin Bashir the “benefit of doubt, basing that judgement as I did on what appeared to be deep remorse on his part”.

Martin Bashir said in a statement that he had apologised then, and did so again now for asking for bank statements to be “mocked up”.

But he reiterated that “the bank statements had no bearing whatsoever on the personal choice by Princess Diana to take part in the interview”.

He said Lord Dyson had accepted that the princess would “probably have agreed to be interviewed without what he describes as my ‘intervention'”.

And he said he was “immensely proud” of the interview, in which Princess Diana “courageously” talked through the difficulties she faced. He said in it, she “helped address the silence and stigma that surrounded mental health issues all those years ago. She led the way in addressing so many of these issues.”

The least that can be said is that Bashir tried to con everyone. Others may say Bashir told management what they too readily wanted to hear – to spare the corporation the ignominy of undermining a truly global scoop. In 2016, Bashir was rehired by the BBC as religious affairs correspondent. The announcement referred to his “track record in enterprising journalism” and previous experience on “BBC religion and ethics programmes.”

He resigned as the BBC’s editor of religion before the publication of the Dyson report.

Managing relationships ‘cleverly’

The last word must go to Panorama’s editor at the time, Steve Hewlett. He too was interviewed for the BBC Arena documentary marking the 10th anniversary of Bashir’s scoop. I understand Hewlett agreed to be interviewed provided he wasn’t asked specifically about the forged bank statements. Instead, he was asked how Bashir met Diana.

Arena didn’t broadcast his answer and the BBC refused to release it to us. However, we obtained a transcript which shows the normally sure-footed Hewlett seeming to stumble: “I’m sure he told me he was going to see her… look, he’s a journalist, he does his business, I don’t follow him around all day, so you know, I’ve got a show to run… what, precisely… how he did it, to be honest I don’t know.”

If this was Hewlett’s way of saying he hadn’t known all the strokes Bashir had pulled before transmission, that is very likely to be true. I and others knew Hewlett to be an ethical journalist.

He continued: “You know… he’s an operator, so he manages relationships very cleverly. I don’t mean…dishonestly, but he manages them cleverly.”

Was Hewlett really still convinced by 2005 that Bashir had “managed” his relationship with Diana “very cleverly” but not “dishonestly”?

The idea that Hewlett hadn’t yet suspected that Bashir got to Diana by deceiving Spencer sits uneasily with his careful editorial eye.

Yet, however Bashir got his scoop, it was undeniably real and Princess Diana was, by several accounts, intent on telling her side in the War of the Waleses. At the same time, the reporter to whom Hewlett had entrusted this assignment turned out to be “rogue” confronting him with an acute dilemma. Did Hewlett reconcile this by deciding the authenticity of the scoop trumped an otherwise tainted process? I pose this as a question, not an allegation, because Hewlett is no longer here to answer for himself. Yet it seems he was troubled by something.

It is 2004, a late-night bar in Sydney. By chance Hewlett has bumped into a colleague Phil Craig, who had just produced a documentary about Princess Diana. They talk and they drink. Having previously worked on Panorama, Craig knew a little of the rumours. “We were coming at this from different sides,” he recalls “so with Steve there was a sense of ‘let’s talk it all through’. I came away that night with the very strong impression that he thought there was a chance that one day the Bashir story would cause everybody a lot more trouble, that there was more to come out about the background to the interview, that there was something that hadn’t gone away and was still lurking in the shadows.”

That “something” turns out to be a timebomb about public trust that the BBC tried to defuse 25 years ago, but left it ticking. That bomb has now detonated.