Pubblicato in: Cina, Economia e Produzione Industriale, Geopolitica Militare, Geopolitica Mondiale

Cina. C919 ed An-225. Si sviluppa l’industria aeronautica cinese.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-05-21.

c919-rollout-web

Dalla Cina sono arrivate due importanti novità circa la loro aeronautica: sono due notizie strategiche.

La prima novità consiste nel fatto che il 5 maggio ha fatto il suo volo inaugurale il C919, il primo aereo di linea di intera progettazione e costruzione cinese. Il C919 è un bireattore con autonomia di 5,500 kilometri, velocità di crociera 828 km/h, 168 passeggeri nella sua versione base. È stato progettato principalmente per soddisfare le necessità interne, ma nulla vieta il pensare anche al mercato globale.

Questo aereo segna l’ingresso della Cina nel ristretto novero dei produttori di aerei di linea. Se tutto dovesse andare come da programma, il C919 potrebbe conquistarsi dapprima il mercato cinese interno, quindi essere un temibile competitore sul mercato internazionale. Uno dei suoi punti di forza sarebbe il costo più che dimezzato rispetto agli aviogetti concorrenti, consumi nettamente inferiori alla norma attuale, riferita scarsa necessità di manutenzione.

È il primo grande aereo di linea, come detto, costruito in Cina: ma i programmi cinesi si articolano ampiamente nel tempo, fino a coprire l’intera gamma. È prevista anche una versione di tipo militare.

La seconda novità lascia sconcertati. La Cina ha rilevato i progetti relativi all’An-124 ed all’An-225. Sono aerei da trasporti di progettazione e costruzione russa. Il primo è un quadrimotore turboventola per il trasporto strategico che volando alla velocità di crociera di 850 km/h può trasportare 150 tonnellate per circa 5,000 kilometri. Il secondo è un esamotore turbofan che ad una velocità di crociera i 860 km/h può trasportare 250 tonnellate di materiali per 15,000 kilometri.

«In 2016, the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AICC), a Chinese state-owned aerospace and defense company, signed a cooperation agreement with Antonov for the An-225 program. If it goes through as planned, the skies could soon be flooded by a fleet of Chinese built An-225s.»

*

«This aircraft, when modernised, could give China a heavy lift capability that surpasses any other nation in the world – perhaps even greater than that of the US military.

According to Zhang, the An-225 would be the centrepiece of a hyper ambitious plan to add 1,000 heavy lift aircraft over the next 10 years.

Heavy lift is not the only capability they’re after though.»

* * * * * * *

I piani dei cinesi hanno sempre quel che di grandioso che solo la visione strategica di lungo termine conferisce all’operato umano.

Punto primo.

Forse è questo il cuore della notizia riportata, che propone un aspetto di fondo della concezione di governo dei popoli.

In Occidente, è stato lungamente dibattuto il bilanciamento tra la necessità di rinnovare la dirigenza governativa e la durata dell’incarico conferito dal suffragio elettorale. Se un incarico di breve durata consente un più rapido turnover al governo, un incarico più lungo corre il serio rischio di conferire troppo potere ai governanti. Il caso francese è da manuale: inizialmente la presidenza aveva durata settennale, rinnovabile. Quindi abbassarono la durata dell’incarico governativo a cinque anni.

Sta di fatto che anche un incarico settennale non consente di impostare piani strategici, l’arco temporale dei quali è ben oltre il decennio. Questo è un severo handicap dei sistemi elettorali occidentali.

Punto secondo.

Nessun governo di nuova nomina può esercitare agevolmente il proprio mandato senza un concomitante sistema di spoils system. Gli stati moderni sono altamente complessi e sarebbe ingenuo pensar che un nuovo eletto possa conoscerne l’intimo funzionamento se non dopo un certo quale lasso di tempo. Non solo: da molti punti di vista la vera struttura portante dello stato è il suo corpo burocratico. Ma sarebbe altrettanto ingenuo ritenere che il solo rinnovo a livello governativo senza un concomitante rinnovo dei burocrati possa consentire un corretto funzionamento.  Da queto punto di vista meramente funzionale, sarebbe utile che gli stati occidentali si dotassero di un efficiente sistema di spoils system,sulla falsariga di quello americano. Un apparato burocratico ostile e, sopratutto, nominato a vita, è il miglior antidoto possibile ad ogni iniziativa strategica: la burocrazia è per definizione un forza statica, non dinamica.

Punto terzo.

Il sistema politico e burocratico cinese ha sicuramente lati negativi e positivi: sicuramente è alieno all’attuale mentalità europea. Gode però della caratteristica di essere efficiente. Questo è un aspetto che un giorno o l’altro anche gli occidentali dovranno ben affrontare. Se sono importanti i principi fondamentali, altrettanto importante è costruire un sistema funzionante: un sistema inefficiente rinnega nei fatti i principi ai quali è improntato. In Cina virtualmente sono assenti le elezioni politiche: il vero agone politico è all’interno del partito comunista cinese, una sorta di scuola mandarnica adattata alla necessità dei tempi. Scuola durissima e severamente meritocratica, che nulla cede alla emotività mediatica.

Punto quarto.

L’aspetto militare non dovrebbe essere sottovalutato. La Cina non dispone al momento di aerei militari da trasporto progettati e costruiti in Cina. È evidente che i militari cinesi stiano cercando di risolvere questa grave mancanza, e la versione militare del C919 potrebbe già dare una ragionevole risposta per i problemi locoregionali. Tuttavia, sembrerebbe essere di maggiore interesse l’attenzione posta al progetto An-124 ed a quello An-225. Questi sono aerei da trasporto strategico, di progettazione e costruzione particolarmente complessa e costosa. Un solo esemplare arriva a costare oltre i cento milioni. Sembrerebbe essere irragionevole imbarcarsi in un simile progetto se non in vista di un allargamento dei propri interessi strategici militare a tutto il mondo. E questa sarebbe una mutazione di estremo interesse mondiale. Forse, all’interno di tutte le notizie sull’argomento, questa sembrerebbe essere la principale.

Punto Quinto.

L’intero Occidente è drammaticamente privo di progetti strategici: sembrerebbe essere diventato incapace di guardare il futuro per dominarlo. Nutre una filosofia di vita immanente, che sembrerebbe vivere solo l’attimo fuggente. Celebra i fasti di un welfare state insostenibile, attanagliato tra l’obbligo a mantenere gli impegni assunti e l’impossibilità di garantirne di equivalenti alle nuove generazioni. A ciò si aggiunga l’oneroso peso di debiti sovrani eccessivi e bilanci squilibrati vero il mantenimento del welfare state: gli stati occidentali hanno severe difficoltà a sostenere economicamente progetti strategici di largo respiro.

Ma senza progetti strategici proiettati nel futuro si inaridiscono anche quelli attuali arrivati a maturità. Questo citato è esempio da manuale. La Comac sottrarrà sicuramente mercato sia ad Airbus sia a Boeing, e molto verosimilmente potrebbe anche soppiantarle in un futuro nemmeno poi troppo lontano.

Significativo il titolo di Cinaforum:

Primo volo per il C919, decolla la sfida cinese a Boeing e Airbus.


Cnn. 2017-05-05. China’s 1st big passenger jet completes maiden flight

China’s first large jetliner has successfully completed its maiden flight, a key moment in the country’s push to challenge the U.S. and Europe as a global manufacturer.

*

The C919, China’s first domestically designed and built large airliner, took off Friday afternoon from Shanghai Pudong International Airport into hazy skies with a five-person crew aboard. The jet landed one hour and 19 minutes later after a seemingly uneventful first trial.

With the flight, China joins the ranks of the few nations that have developed homegrown large airliners: the U.S., Russia, Brazil, Canada, the U.K., France and Germany.

Made by the Commercial Aircraft Corporation of China (Comac), the 168-seat C919 is roughly the same size as Airbus’s A320 and Boeing’s 737-800, which are the most popular airliners in the world.

The C919’s maiden flight was watched by people around the globe, including at least 2 million on Chinese microblogging platform Weibo.

Comac also offered an unprecedented look inside the maiden flight of a new airliner. The company streamed live images from the jet’s cockpit looking over the shoulder of its test pilots as they performed gentle maneuvers off the coast. Neither Boeing nor Airbus has ever provided a live view of the cockpit on a first flight.

The Chinese jet’s first flight is the biggest and most visible milestone in its development. But it still has a long way to go before it’s carrying passengers and competing with its U.S. and European competitors.

The start of aerial testing kicks off months or years of grueling certification tests, and meeting safety standards might require design changes. Comac will also need to win the trust of airlines in China and elsewhere by proving the jet can operate efficiently and reliably on scheduled flights.

However, the milestone marks another key achievement for China on its ascent to challenging the west and cultivating its aerospace ambitions. The country is already an adept designer of military aircraft, but has sought to catch up to Boeing in the U.S. and Airbus in Europe in manufacturing civilian airliners.

So far it’s been slow-going. The country’s state-owned airlines first signed up to buy the jet in 2010, and it was originally supposed to enter service in 2016. The prototype wasn’t unveiled until November 2015, and the project has been beset by technical delays as China learns the ropes of airliner development.

Comac, a state-run enterprise, has partnered with western suppliers for nearly all the jet’s major systems to share technology and learn how to mass produce an airliner.

The C919’s main customers will be China’s domestic airlines. China Eastern Airlines will be the first carrier to operate the C919 when it completes testing and secures approval from China’s aviation regulator.

China is on track to surpass the U.S. by 2030 as the world’s largest commercial aviation market. Chinese airlines are buying hundreds of Boeing and Airbus jets to grow their fleets.

Boeing estimates that the country will need a trillion dollars worth of new airplanes over the next two decades, including more than 5,100 of the same size as the C919.


Bbc. 2017-05-05. The world’s biggest plane may have a new mission.

Tucked away in a small section of a Soviet era air base on the outskirts of Kiev is the flagship aircraft of the legendary Antonov design bureau. A one-off masterpiece of engineering designed and built during the 1980s in the waning days of the USSR.

The aircraft, designated the An-225, is the biggest to ever grace the Earth. It’s so large that the length of its cargo hold is longer than the Wright brothers’ first flight, from take-off to landing.

Now 30 years old, and recently upgraded to give it another 20 years’ service, the plane rarely takes to the skies anymore. Instead, it sits stagnant under an enormous steel arch. However, a crew of dedicated Antonov employees still periodically tend to the An-225. Its sporadic use has nothing to do with its age. It’s grounded because there is simply little demand for its highly specialised and relatively costly service. Although the plane, nicknamed ‘Mriya’ (‘Dream’) in Ukrainian, is in fine condition, there are very few jobs that call for something so large . And the jobs need to be urgent; if you want to use the An-225 it will cost around $30,000 (£23,220) an hour.

In 2016, it spent just three months traversing the globe on two lengthy deployments. The remainder of the time, it sat here at the Gostomel airport, once a top-secret flight testing airfield for Antonov.

Originally built as a transport for the Soviet Union’s Buran space shuttle, the An-225 was forced to find new purpose as a cargo carrier after the USSR collapsed, says Alexander Galunenko, the first man to fly the plane.

“When the USSR collapsed, the programme was shut down and the financing was closed as the need for this plane vanished,” says Galunenko. He first flew the An-225 on 21 December 1988, after over a decade’s service as a Soviet test pilot.

Galunenko fondly remembers the bewilderment of first taking the behemoth across the world to visit the United States.

“We were invited to an aviation show in Oklahoma and the media reported that the largest aircraft in the world was coming so that attracted a mass of people,” he says.All of these people just assumed that the largest aircraft in the world was made by the Boeing company. We had to tell them it was made by Antonov, and they asked, ‘Where is Antonov from?’ We said, ‘It’s a company in Kiev’, so they asked us, ‘And what is Kiev?’ Well we told them ‘Kiev is in Ukraine’, and of course they asked, ‘But what is Ukraine?’”

The navigator of the flight eventually pulled out his maps and began to point out Ukraine to the many curious visitors. “He took a marker and circled Kiev to show them where it is,” laughs Galunenko. “We got to show our plane and give the Americans a geography lesson too.”

The plane is effectively an extension of its little brother, the An-124 ‘Ruslan’ – an aircraft rarely regarded as “little”, seeing as it’s the largest military transport in the world.

From a room adorned with scale models of every aircraft the company has built in its 71-year history, the lead engineer of the An-225 project, Nikolay Kalashnikov, tells BBC Future that he spent his entire professional life working for Antonov. But it was building the Mriya that was the pinnacle of his career.

“Today it’s hard to tell, but back then it was so impressive. It was just so difficult to imagine that such a big machine can fly,” says Kalashnikov.

Although the An-124 Ruslan was already an impressively sized cargo carrier at that time, Kalashnikov and his team set about modifying the structure to increase its maximum takeoff weight. They added two engines, rows of landing gear, extended the fuselage and redesigned the tail in order to meet the most important requirement, which was to ensure that the Buran space-shuttle and the Energia booster rocket could slide off the plane midflight and take off into space.

“It was possible to carry everything, the shuttle and all the elements of the rocket on the back of the aircraft,” says energetic CEO of Antonov Airlines, Mikhail Kharchenko, from his office at the Gostomel airport. “The idea hasn’t gone away. The United States is now working on an air-start programme.

At that time, the USSR’s space missions were run from what is now southern Kazakhstan, at the Baikonur Cosmodrome. So the AN-225’s mission was to bring the booster rockets from Moscow and ferry the Buran itself to Baikonaur. They calculated that the AN-225 programme would be cheaper than building a freeway across two rivers and through the Urals just to move these parts, says Kalashnikov.

Kharchenko believes that the Mriya still has huge potential, despite its age, and it’s not just for its enormous cargo capacity. He thinks there’s still the chance to develop the An-225 into a proper in-air launch platform.

“Approximately 90% of the energy of the launch vehicle is spent getting up to an altitude of 10km (6.5 miles) ,” says the CEO. “If we take some spacecraft and put it on the Mriya’s back and fly it up to a height of 10km, then we can launch it into space from there. From the point of view of cost, the economic benefit is huge if you launch from a height of 10km.”

He admits it’s still going to take a little bit of refinement, but Kharchenko believes this is the best direction for his company’s flagship aircraft. And he’s not the only one.

In 2016, the Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AICC), a Chinese state-owned aerospace and defense company, signed a cooperation agreement with Antonov for the An-225 program. If it goes through as planned, the skies could soon be flooded by a fleet of Chinese built An-225s.

“The initial idea and early stage research of the An-225 started in 2009,” the president of AICC, Zhang Youshengtells BBC Future. “The official contact with Antonov began in 2011, and then from 2013 to 2016 was the acceleration phase of this project.”

The Chinese company isn’t interested in purchasing the existing airworthy An-225. They have spent the past several years studying the feasibility of modernising the only other An-225, an unfinished airframe that has sat inside a hangar at Antonov’s giant corporate campus in downtown Kyiv for the past 30 years. This aircraft, when modernised, could give China a heavy lift capability that surpasses any other nation in the world – perhaps even greater than that of the US military.

According to Zhang, the An-225 would be the centrepiece of a hyper ambitious plan to add 1,000 heavy lift aircraft over the next 10 years.

Heavy lift is not the only capability they’re after though.

“The An-225 can be equipped with spacecraft to high altitude, and can launch commercial satellites at any height below 12,000m,” Zhang tells the BBC. “Its launch time is flexible, accurate, and can quickly send the satellite into intended orbit, which greatly reduces launch costs.”

The Chinese are aiming to make their way into the lucrative satellite launch industry, which doubled revenue from 2006 to 2015, according to figures provided by AICC.

The purchase agreement for the existing An-225 airframe is similar to China’s acquisition of an aircraft carrier hull from Ukraine nearly 20 years ago. That hull, originally commissioned by the Soviet Union, was rebuilt and modernised over two decades until it was declared ‘combat ready’ by China’s military in November 2016.

If the plan goes forward, the Mriya will have found new life flying the skies for China’s AICC, but Ukraine will have lost of a small but symbolic part of its aerospace industry. The men who built the plane have mixed feelings about the prospect of losing the programme to the Chinese.

“The Chinese want to buy from us this plane and there’s no harm in it, but of course no one wants to sell the aircraft,” says Kalashnikov. “The Mriya is not separable from Ukraine, it’s like our child, and it’s something our children, and our grandchildren can always be proud of.”

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Mondiale, Medio Oriente, Unione Europea

Macron. L’opinione di Al Arabiya.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-05-19.

Presidential Candidate Emmanuel Macron Hosts A Meeting At Parc Des Expositions In Paris

Se è importante sapere cosa voglia una persona pubblica, sembrerebbe essere altrettanto importante conoscere come essa sia percepita in punti strategici del mondo.

Questo articolo del dr. Ismaeel Naar dovrebbe essere letto con molta attenzione, ed anche sovra le righe. Soprattutto sovra le righe.

Tutto è possibile, ma sembrerebbe difficile che Mr Macron possa soddisfare in questa maniera le ambizioni politiche arabe.


Al Arabiya. 2017-05-17. Five things Arabs need to know about French President-Elect Emmanuel Macron

With more than 40 million of France’s 47 million registered voters accounted for, official Interior Ministry figures on Sunday confirmed independent centrist Emmanuel Macron had been elected president with 64.16 percent of valid votes cast so far.

At 39 years old, Macron is being considered the youngest president of France and the only one with no experience in running a political campaign or holding elected office.

He served under President François Hollande as Minister of Economy, Industry, and Digital Affairs.

1) Worked for four years with an investment bank

Macron was an investment banker at Rothschild from 2008 to 2012. Before that banking job, he worked in France’s economy ministry. After Rothschild, he returned to civil service, including serving in his predecessor’s cabinet before resigning to start his independent political party and movement “En Marche”.

2) He is the youngest president of France

Born in December 1977 in Amiens, a city in northern France, Macron is 39-years-old and is now youngest-ever president since the French Republic was established in 1848.

He is the eldest child of Jean-Michel Macron and Francoise Macron-Nogues and the only one in his family not to have pursued a medical career.

3) Has never held elected office

Macron’s first roles came under his predecessor, Francois Hollande, as a member of his personal staff and later as a minister of economy, industry, and digital affairs under the government of Manuel Valls.

He identifies as centrist although his he was a member of the Socialist Party for three years before becoming an independent politician in 2009.

4) He called France’s colonial past in Algeria a ‘crime against humanity’

Unlike his political rivals from the left and right, Macron was one of the first political figures to call out France’s colonial past.

He labelled it a “crime against humanity” and said “it’s really barbaric and is part of that past that we must face up to also by apologizing to those who were hurt”.

Algerians lived under French rule for 132 years until it won a bloody war of independence in 1962. The conflict killed an estimated 1.5 million Algerians.

5) Macron rules out unilateral recognition of Palestine

Just days before election day, Macron said he would not unilaterally recognize the state of Palestine if he becomes elected. He told French media that he backs a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and that “unilaterally recognizing Palestine would cause instability and would harm France’s relations with Israel”.

“I defended the principle of a two-state solution, and France’s commitment to that,” he said in 2015 when he was minister of economy.

Macron is also likely to be consistent with France’s stance against the Palestinian-led Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement. “We are against any practice such as that of the BDS,” he was quoted as saying when he was a minister in 2015.

 

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Militare, Geopolitica Mondiale

Nato. La Germania nicchia ad incrementare la quota.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-04-01.

Europa 002

«The United States provides nearly 70 percent of NATO’s budget and is demanding that NATO allies make clear progress toward the agreed target this year»

*

«Germany said on Friday that NATO’s agreed target spend of two percent of members’ yearly economic output was neither “reachable nor desirable”»

*

«Two percent would mean military expenses of some 70 billion euros»

*

«I don’t know any German politician who would claim that is reachable nor desirable»

*

«Trump has criticized NATO as “obsolete” and suggested Washington’s security guarantees for European allies could be conditional on them spending more on their own defense»

*

«Though Washington offered reassurances, Tillerson’s initial decision to skip his first meeting with NATO foreign ministers had reopened questions about the Trump administration’s commitment to the alliance»

* * * * * * *

Il problema sembrerebbe essere semplice.

Gli Stati Uniti stanno ripensando a fondo se il territorio europeo debba essere ancora considerato o meno strategicamente rilevante per l’America.

In altri termini: il controllo dell’Europa occidentale vale o meno una eventuale guerra atomica globale?

La risposta sembrerebbe essere scontata: no.

Settanta anni or sono il dominio dell’Europa consentiva di farvi stazionare i bombardieri atomici, unico vettore all’epoca disponibile. L’Europa era a quei tempi strategica come base aerea ravvicinata all’allora Unione Sovietica.

Adesso, con l’introduzione dei missili balistici intercontinentali, i sommergibili atomici anche essi dotati di missili balistici, e soprattutto dei missili da crociera, l’Europa ha perso il suo vecchio ruolo strategico in una eventuale guerra globale.

E questo è un altro buon argomento per non ritenerla vitale agli interessi americani.

Infine, l’Europa ha eserciti nazionali fatiscenti, minuscoli numericamente e pessimamente armati. In poche parole: inutilizzabili dal punto di vista operativo.

Perché dunque gli Stati Uniti dovrebbero caricare i loro Contribuenti dell’onere di proteggere l’Europa?

*

Da ultimo ma non certo per ultimo vi è un argomento che pesa come un macigno.

Germania. Incidenza economica del calo demografico. – Bloomberg.

Germania. Summit in Cancelleria per l’allarme demografico.

Nel volgere di quindici anni la popolazione autoctona tedesca si sarà dimezzata per calo delle nascite.

Washington è ben conscia di questo fenomeno e si domanda: passi dover difendere i tedeschi, ma quale senso avrebbe difendere uno stato islamico dislocato nell’attuale realtà geografica tedesca?

* * * * * * *

Da alcuni punti di vista si potrebbe anche apprezzare l’orgoglio tedesco, ma nel secolo passato abbiamo dovuto constatare per ben due volte consecutive dove esso porti. Chi si credono d’essere?


Reuters. 2017-04-01. Germany balks at Tillerson call for more European NATO spending

Germany said on Friday that NATO’s agreed target spend of two percent of members’ yearly economic output was neither “reachable nor desirable” countering a call by U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson for all allies to comply and quickly.

The United States provides nearly 70 percent of NATO’s budget and is demanding that NATO allies make clear progress toward the agreed target this year. Only four European NATO members – Estonia, Greece, Poland and Britain – have done so.

“Two percent would mean military expenses of some 70 billion euros. I don’t know any German politician who would claim that is reachable nor desirable,” Germany’s Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said at the first NATO meeting attended by Tillerson.

Tillerson, however, reiterated Washington’s demands and said allies will need to pay up or outline plans for how they plan to meet the threshold when NATO leaders meet on May 25 for the first top-level summit of the alliance. U.S. President Donald Trump will attend that meeting.

“Our goal should be to agree at the May leaders meeting that by the end of the year all allies will have either met the pledge guidelines or will have developed plans that clearly articulate how…the pledge will be fulfilled,” Tillerson said.

“Allies must demonstrate by their actions that they share U.S. governments commitment.”

In Berlin, German government spokesman, Steffen Seibert, said the government was committed to increasing defense spending and would continue to do so “because we know it is necessary and makes sense to further strengthen our armed forces”.

Members have until 2024 to comply with the spending target.

Tillerson did however offer assurances of Washington’s commitment to NATO during his brief stop in Brussels, although U.S. officials said he did not have time for one-on-one meetings, which are customary during such meetings.

Trump has criticized NATO as “obsolete” and suggested Washington’s security guarantees for European allies could be conditional on them spending more on their own defense. He has also said he wants NATO to do more to fight terrorism.

“The United States is committed to ensuring NATO has the capabilities to support our collective defense,” Tillerson said at the meeting in Brussels. “We will uphold the agreements we have made to defend our allies.”

Tillerson said the NATO alliance was fundamental to countering Russian aggression, in particular in Ukraine. A meeting on Thursday between ambassadors from NATO and Russia called on Moscow to do more to rein in armed separatists battling Kiev’s forces.

Meanwhile, NATO Secretary General Jens Stoltenberg said ties between European NATO members and the United States were “rock solid”.

He said the ministers would discuss “fair burden sharing to keep the trans-atlantic bond strong” and “stepping up NATO efforts to project stability and fight terrorism”.

Stoltenberg confirmed ministers would discuss national defense spending plans on Friday as the bloc seeks to respond to the new, harsher tone from across the Atlantic, which has galvanized European NATO allies.

Though Washington offered reassurances, Tillerson’s initial decision to skip his first meeting with NATO foreign ministers had reopened questions about the Trump administration’s commitment to the alliance. The meeting was later rescheduled.

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Mondiale, Rapporti Commerciali

EU non importa carne americana? Usa metteranno dazi fino al 100%.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-03-30.

Pecore macellate 005

La dirigenza dell’Unione Europea è invero sui generis.

Si è data una sua “scala valoriale“, che solo lei condivide, e vorrebbe quindi imporla a tutto l’orbe terracqueo. Lanciando anatemi ed insulti di ogni tipo a quanti non la avessero accettata. Quindi, fanno una legge che mette al bando i prodotti di quanti non si pieghino ai loro desiderata.

Nel settore commerciale denominano questo comportamento come “libero mercato“. La gente sarebbe libera di fare solo ciò che vogliono gli eurocrati, dal loro punto di vista.

*

Nello specifico, il problema nasce dagli esportatori americani di carne.

Con provvida legge l’Unione Europea aveva messo al bando la carne bovina trattata con ormoni, quasi totalmente di produzione statunitense, asserendone una estrema pericolosità. A parole per poter meglio tutelare la salute di propri sudditi. In realtà, il bando era stato emesso per avere il pretesto di proteggere gli allevamenti zootecnici danesi, francesi e tedeschi. Mica che potevano dirlo ad alta voce.

Nulla come il male ama ammantarsi di eticamente corretto. Poi, per portarsi avanti con il lavoro:

«l’Ue non ha aperto abbastanza i propri mercati alla loro [degli Usa] carne di manzo non trattata con gli ormoni, come prevedeva un accordo del 2009»

*

Rispettare gli accordi è roba da bischeri: la dirigenza europea si reputa ben al di sopra di simili quisquilie e pinzillacchere.

Adesso gli americani, grazie al Presidente Trump, stanno puntando i piedi. Esigono rapporti paritetici.

«L’amministrazione Usa sta valutando di imporre dazi punitivi del 100% sugli scooter Vespa (Piaggio), l’acqua Perrier (Nestle’, che produce anche la San Pellegrino) e il formaggio Roquefort»

*

Gli eurocrati sono estremamente abili a fare dei piagnistei da checche isteriche. Pestano i piedi e fanno i capricci quando qualcuno li contraddica.

Ma non possono proseguire all’infinito a voler per forza di cose imporre il proprio modo di vedere.

L’Europa conta economicamente grosso modo un quindici per cento dell’economica mondiale: troppo poco per potersi permettere di fare i capricci. Il resto del mondo potrebbe schiacciarla in un batter d’occhio.


Ansa. 2017-03-30. Gli Usa di Trump studiano dazi sui prodotti Ue, anche italiani

 L’amministrazione Usa sta valutando di imporre dazi punitivi del 100% sugli scooter Vespa (Piaggio), l’acqua Perrier (Nestle’, che produce anche la San Pellegrino) e il formaggio Roquefort in risposta al bando Ue sulla carne di manzo Usa di bovini trattati con gli ormoni: lo scrive il Wall Street Journal. Dietro la misura ci sarebbero le proteste dei produttori di carne di manzo americani, secondo i quali l’Ue non ha aperto abbastanza i propri mercati alla loro carne di manzo non trattata con gli ormoni, come prevedeva un accordo del 2009.

Piaggio in perdita dell’1,5% a 1,842 euro, in Piazza Affari (mentre l’All share guadagna lo 0,1%), dopo le indiscrezioni del Wall Street Journal sulle intenzioni dell’amministrazione americana. Ieri il titolo della Piaggio ha chiuso a 1,87 euro.

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Mondiale, Problemi militari

Giappone verso l’armamento nucleare.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-03-28.

bomba_atomica_

Il problema è veramente semplice, pur nella sua complessità.

Nelle grandi potenze nucleari mondiali, Stati Uniti, Russia, Regno Unito, Cina, India, solo per far alcuni nomi, l’ascesa al vertice del potere è lunga e difficile: chiunque alla fine si imponga è persona vagliata dalla difficoltà del cursus honorum, stabile da un punto di vista caratteriale, e, soprattutto, ben bilanciata dai poteri che lo sottendono.

L’idea che un folle possa impadronirsi del potere in queste nazioni è al momento destituita di sano buon senso.

Nel complesso, un accordo raggiunto è mantenuto, specie almeno nei suoi punti essenziali.

*

La sicurezza del Giappone è al momento garantita da un accordo con gli Stati Uniti, per cui un eventuale attacco al Giappone scatenerebbe un’immediata risposta nucleare statunitense.

L’idea che la Cina oppure l’India si buttino in una guerra atomica sembrerebbe non avere fondamento alcuno.

*

Tuttavia lo sviluppo di scienza e tecnica hanno reso più facile l’accesso alla tecnologia nucleare.

Con evidenti limitazioni.

Se è vero che la costruzione di un qualche ordigno atomico è relativamente facile, la messa a punto di vettori per trasportarla sugli obiettivi è di difficoltà ben maggiore.

*

Il problema emerge nella sua crudezza quando all’armamento atomico arrivano potenze quali l’Iran ed il Nord Korea, stati che sembrerebbero non brillare per pacatezza della loro dirigenza. Qui non si entra nel merito se a torto od a ragione: si constata soltanto che sembrerebbero essere ben poco affidabili.

*

Il Giappone è in una situazione geopolitica instabile.

Se da una parte potrebbe sentirsi rassicurato dall’impegno americano, dall’altra constata che non è autosufficiente nella difesa del proprio territorio e della propria popolazione.

Difficile quindi disapprovare la nuove posizioni che sta assumendo.

«Negotiations on a treaty outlawing nuclear weapons began Monday at U.N. headquarters with Japan, the world’s only atom-bombed country, announcing it would abstain from the talks alongside the five major nuclear powers»

*

«Regrettably, given the present circumstances, we must say that it would be difficult for Japan to participate in this conference in a constructive manner and in good faith »

*

«The treaty you will be negotiating today must reflect this call of hibakusha in express terms so that the world makes remarkable progress towards nuclear weapons abolition»

*

«Of the five major states possessing nuclear weapons, the United States, Britain, France and Russia are vehemently opposed to the treaty. China recently decided not to participate in the talks after weighing up the possibility of joining them»

* * * * * * * *

«I trattati sono pezzi di carta.»

Meglio sembrare malfidati prima, che distrutti dopo.


The Japan Times. 217-03-28. Japan abstains as talks start at U.N. on nuclear arms ban treaty

NEW YORK – Negotiations on a treaty outlawing nuclear weapons began Monday at U.N. headquarters with Japan, the world’s only atom-bombed country, announcing it would abstain from the talks alongside the five major nuclear powers.

“Regrettably, given the present circumstances, we must say that it would be difficult for Japan to participate in this conference in a constructive manner and in good faith,” Japan’s disarmament ambassador, Nobushige Takamizawa, said during the opening segment of the conference.

“What is essential is to pursue practical and effective measures with the engagement of both nuclear and nonnuclear weapon states,” he explained in the General Assembly hall. “We will continue to pursue realistic and effective disarmament measures and will work to create a security environment conducive to the elimination of nuclear weapons.”

Japan has said it aspires to a nuclear-weapon-free world but has been vague about whether it will join the U.N. talks, reflecting its reliance on the U.S. nuclear deterrent for protection.

The first round of negotiations will run through Friday, with the second taking place from June 15 through July 7. Both sessions will be held at U.N. headquarters.

Toshiki Fujimori, assistant secretary general of Nihon Hidankyo, an organization for atomic bomb victims, also addressed the delegates as a Hiroshima hibakusha. He was little more than a year old when the bomb exploded over his city on Aug. 6, 1945.

“The treaty you will be negotiating today must reflect this call of hibakusha in express terms so that the world makes remarkable progress towards nuclear weapons abolition,” he said.

While he and other atomic bomb survivors back the U.N. efforts to negotiate a landmark treaty, he expressed disappointment with Tokyo for not endorsing the move.

“As a hibakusha, and as a Japanese person, I am here today heartbroken, yet I am not discouraged,” he said. He pointed to the positive work being undertaken by a majority of countries, international organizations and civil society who are pressing for the treaty despite opposition.

A total of 113 counties supported the start of negotiating a nuclear weapons ban treaty at the U.N. General Assembly in December. Nongovernmental organizations estimated on Monday that 115 nations were present for the conference.

Austria and other nonnuclear countries that have strongly pursued the start of negotiations are aiming to draft such a treaty by July.

Of the five major states possessing nuclear weapons, the United States, Britain, France and Russia are vehemently opposed to the treaty. China recently decided not to participate in the talks after weighing up the possibility of joining them.

It remains to be seen whether the negotiations will lead to any tangible nuclear disarmament as the new U.S. administration of President Donald Trump has signaled a review of the goal of a world without nuclear weapons, which was advocated by the Barack Obama administration.

U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations Nikki Haley along with representatives of about 20 other nations spoke against the treaty outside the General Assembly hall in an unusual move timed to coincide with the start of the conference.

“As a mom, as a daughter, there is nothing I want more for my family than a world with no nuclear weapons. But we have to be realistic,” she said.

“Is there anyone that believes that North Korea would agree to a ban on nuclear weapons? So what you would see is the General Assembly would go through, in good faith trying to do something, but North Korea would be the one cheering and all of us and the people we represent would be the ones at risk,” she said.

Britain and France also delivered brief remarks echoing Haley’s sentiment and endorsing the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty as the way forward.

“My country, the United Kingdom, is completely committed to the long-term goal of a world without nuclear weapons and we recognize that we have obligations, as every country does, under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty,” British Ambassador Matthew Rycroft told reporters.

International Campaign to Abolish Nuclear Weapons Executive Director Beatrice Fihn criticized the move by the United States and others in a press statement issued before the talks began.

“Today’s last-minute protest by Ambassador Haley and others standing with the American president demonstrates how worried they are about the real impact of the nuclear ban treaty,” she said. “It is an unhelpful distraction from the important work of banning nuclear weapons.”

During a press conference, Fihn also took aim at North Korea for taking the “same position” as the United States.

“We regret that any state boycotts these negotiations and think they should be a part of it,” she explained. “I think that’s why it’s very important to take urgent action to prohibit nuclear weapons.”


Sole 24 Ore. 217-03-28. Il Giappone snobba i negoziati Onu per il bando alle armi nucleari

TOKYO – Sembra incredibile ma è vero: il Giappone, unico Paese vittima delle bombe atomiche, snobba i negoziati iniziati all’Onu – con il supporto di 113 Paesi – per arrivare a un trattato che metta al bando le armi nucleari. Il governo del premier Shinzo Abe ha deciso di non parteciparvi, con una iniziativa che dà un colpo alle prospettive già infime di un esito soddisfacente delle trattative internazionali. La mossa sembra minare la credibilità del desiderio più volte conclamato da Tokyo di un mondo senza armamenti atomici e ha suscitato forti critiche da parte di molti hibakusha (i sopravvissuti alle atomiche di Hiroshima e di Nagasaki).

Il primo round dei negoziati, presso il Palazzo di Vetro, durerà fino a venerdì, mentre il prossimo si terrà dal 15 giugno al 7 luglio.

Il ministro degli esteri Fumio Kishida ha spiegato la posizione negativa del Giappone sulle trattative, sostenendo soprattutto che un bando è irrealistico e potrebbe generare conseguenze non intenzionali negative. Le trattative avviate a New York, a suo parere “non solo non aiutano, realisticamente, a creare un mondo senza armi nuclari ma potrebbero approfondire ulteriormente le divisioni tra Stati nucleari e non, risultando quindi controproducenti”. Kishida ha sottolineato che nessuno dei cinque principali Stati nucleari – Usa, Russia, Cina, Francia e Regno Unito – partecipano alle trattative, il che rende difficile pensare che possano essere condotte in una maniera “pratica ed efficace”. E ha citato il peggioramento della situazione della sicurezza del Sol levante, a fronte dei progressi nel programma missilistico e nucleare della Corea del Nord.

Nel disimpegno giapponese dai negoziati, secondo vari analisti, gioca anche la priorità che il Paese assegna all’alleanza con gli Stati Uniti e all’ombrello nucleare che gli States forniscono, tra minacce nordcoreane e crescente assertivita’ cinese. Tokyo temeva, altrimenti, di irritare Donald Trump, che a febbraio ha riaffermato l’impegno di Washington a difendere gli alleati con tutti i mezzi a disposizione, quindi eventualmente anche con le atomiche. Una dichiarazione lodata dal premier Shinzo Abe.

“Il Giappone continuerà a fare sforzi per realizzare un mondo senza armi nucleari dando il suo fermo contributo alle discussioni che procedano dalla cooperazione tra Stati nucleari e non nucleari”, ha concluso Kishida. Certo, da oggi, il Giappone apparirà meno convincente in questa lotta. Anche i suoi sforzi per convincere il maggior numero possibile di leader stranieri a visitare Hiroshima e Nagasaki sembreranno non del tutto sinceri.

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Militare, Geopolitica Mondiale

L’Ukraina chiede formalmente lo status di alleato esterno Nato.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-03-23.

NATO_affiliations_in_Europe.svg

La Verkhovna Rada, il parlamento ukraino, ha approvato con un ridotto margine di maggioranza, 232 / 450, un appello indirizzato al Congresso degli Stati Uniti volto a farsi riconoscere lo status di principale alleato al di fuori della Nato. Il testo fa notare come questa concessione non dipenda dal Consiglio Nato, bensì dai soli Stati Uniti.

*

Il problema è delicato e complesso.

Domandiamoci intanto chi, cosa e dove sia l’Ukraina.

Regno più che millenario, con una tradizione invidiabile, l’Ukraina ha conosciuto tempi di splendore, quando i suoi confini arrivavano a Mosca e Novgorod, così come conobbe la dominazione polacca, prima, e quindi quella russa.

Nell’attuale Ukraina, nelle regioni ad ovest si parla polacco, ungherese e rumeno, mentre in quelle orientali si parla il tataro di Krimea ed il russo. Alle differenze linguistiche corrispondono differenze di mentalità.

Da oltre quattro secoli la Russia considera l’Ukraina zona strategica per la sua difesa, ed infatti ha combattuto numerose guerra per assumerne il controllo.

Annessa forzatamente all’Urss, negli anni trenta subì l’Holodomor: lo sterminio sistematico per fame di oltre sette milioni di ukraini, i kulak. È impossibile che un ukraino posa dimenticare l’Holodomor.

Nel 1954, l’allora Segretario Generale Nikita Chruščëv annetteva all’Ukraina i territori russofoni e la Krimea, facendole assumere i confini attuali. Fu un’annessione amministrativa, ma contro natura dal punto di vista etnico, culturale e linguistico.

Nel 1990, con la caduta dell’Urss, l’Ukraina si dichiarò indipendente. Per sua disgrazia non si dette una struttura federale, comprendente uno stato a cultura polacca, uno stato orientale a cultura russa, la Krimea ed, infine, l’Ukraina vera e propria. Aveva posto le basi per severi contrasti e conflitti sociali.

Se la pacifica convivenza avrebbe potuto essere possibile, non resse alle pesanti interferenze di stati esteri.

*

Adesso cerchiamo di ragionare, aiutandoci con la cartina.

I russi non permetteranno mai che l’Ukraina entri nell’orbita occidentale e, massimamente, che aderisca alla Nato. Il problema è geopolitico, ma anche militare. Se così fosse, sarebbe possibile schierare missili a testata nucleare in Ukraina, ossia in una zona che si incunea in profondità nel territorio russo. Ma i missile a gittata intermedia sono più difficilmente intercettabili dalla contraerea per i tempi ristrettissimi che intercorrono tra il loro rilevamento radar ed il loro impatto al suolo.

Per essere chiari, la Russia si sentirebbe così minacciata nella sua esistenza da ricorrere anche ad una guerra atomica globale. Ed anche al momento attuale, la possibilità che la Russia invada la Ukraina è tutt’altro che remota.

*

Di ieri la richiesta dell’Ukraina al Congresso degli Stati Uniti.

Non sappiamo come potrebbe reagire l’Amministrazione Trump.

Sinceramente, ci si stupirebbe se concedesse lo status di alleato maggiore esterno alla Nato.


Agenzia Nova. 2017-03-22. Difesa: l’Ucraina ha chiesto agli Stati Uniti lo status di alleato esterno della Nato.

Kiev, 22 mar 14:59 – (Agenzia Nova) – Il parlamento ucraino (Verkhovna Rada) ha chiesto al Congresso degli Stati Uniti un approfondimento sostanziale del partenariato per la sicurezza bilaterale tra i paesi e la concessione dello status di alleato maggiore esterno alla Nato. L’appello è stato sostenuto da 232 deputati necessari su 450, con una soglia minima di 226. Nella risoluzione si osserva che in contrasto con la domanda a lungo termine per ottenere l’adesione alla Nato la concessione dello status di principale alleato al di fuori della Nato è un diritto sovrano degli Stati Uniti e non richiede il consenso di tutti i paesi membri dell’Alleanza atlantica. Nel documento si afferma inoltre che lo status è riconosciuto agli stati che si trovano in aree diverse del mondo, come Australia, Nuova Zelanda e Giappone, così come paesi che sono sotto la minaccia di un’azione militare, come Corea del Sud, Afghanistan e Israele.

Pubblicato in: Devoluzione socialismo, Geopolitica Mondiale

G20. La Merkel tenta e perde la congiura contro Mr Trump.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-03-23.

MERKEL 001

Gli allegati sono parte integrante dell’articolo.


La Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel e l’entourage che la supporta avevano da lungo tempo preso la decisione di contrapporsi muro e muro al Presidente Trump. Basterebbe solo pensare alle dure parole che Frau Merkel usò all’allora candidato Mr Trump ed a quelle ancora più dure usate dopo la sua elezione.

Né ci si dovrebbe dimenticare lo sgarbo di aver fatto mandare le congratulazioni per l’elezione con notevole ritardo e non a firma della Bundeskanzlerin, come da usuale prassi diplomatica, ed anche di sano buon senso.

La disintegrazione dei liberals democratici sembrerebbe aver totalmente colto di sorpresa le cancellerie europee, massimamente quella tedesca.

Vi sono evidenti motivi politici, ma anche, e forse soprattutto, altrettanto evidenti motivi economici e psicologici.

Almeno apparentemente, la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel si sta comportando come se fosse in preda ad una severa sindrome isterico-depressiva post climaterica, che colpisce oltre il 50% delle donne in quel delicato momento transazionale. Il comportamento infatti della Bundeskanzlerin sembrerebbe avere ben poco di substrato razionale.

*

Se è vero che Frau Merkel ha un suo bagaglio “valoriale“, come ella stessa lo definisce, è altrettanto vero che abbia cercato in ogni maniera non di proporlo e discuterlo, bensì di imporlo, sia nell’Unione Europea sia in tutta la sua politica estera. È un vissuto che Frau Merkel presenta come apodittico, come verità assoluta ed incontestabile, di portata tale anche da far passare in secondo piano buon senso e ragion di stato.

Questa rigidità mentale e ragionativa le ha portato più nemici che amici, ed adesso la sta isolando, sia nell’Unione Europea sia a livello internazionale.

Da manuale il modo come ella sta conducendo la preparazione del G20 a presidenza tedesca.

Una presidenza sonda dapprima le differenti opinioni ed esigenze, quindi elabora un programma che abbia come principale caratteristica la fattibilità. Esattamente l’opposto di ciò che ha fatto Frau Merkel e, quindi, la Germania.

Non ci si stupisce quindi se in molti non intendono stringerle la mano.

*

L’elemento di cui ben poco si ama parlare è che la Germania, come l’Italia, ha un bilancio fortemente sbilanciato verso il finanziamento del welfare e delle classi anziane.

Welfare. 65.4% per i vecchi e 6.5% per le famiglie.

Questa è la palla al piede che condiziona fortemente l’operato della Bundeskanzlerin, specie poi durante un anno elettorale, essendosi essa riproposta per un quarto mandato.

*

Dal G20 è scomparso il “clima“, elemento che stava estremamente a cuore sia alla Bundeskanzlerin, sia alla dirigenza dell’Unione Europea, sia ai liberals americani. È letteralmente scomparso dai discorsi dei politici e dai media, come se mai fosse esistito. Ma dietro al clima c’era un business stimabile attorno ai 13,500 miliardi. Perdita non da poco.

Ma ciò che maggiormente dovrebbe essere stressato è il mutamento si direbbe epocale nella governace del G20.

Se in passato l’Occidente si presentava compatto e governava la riunione, adesso gli Stati Uniti si sono alleati con la Cine, l’India e l’Arabia Saudita. Questa nuova ed inedita alleanza ha obbligato la Germania a togliere ogni riferimento al ‘clima’ alla velocità della luce, ed a ridimensionare severamente la portata dei colloqui sul commercio.

Una débâcle per la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel, da leggersi tra l’altro con l’assenza di Mr Tillerson dalla riunione Nato prossima ventura.

«The G20 has failed to agree a joint position on free trade at the Baden-Baden summit. This is a harbinger of how difficult it may be to strike international agreements with the US going forward, says Henrik Böhme.»

*

La rivolta di Frau Merkel sembrerebbe essere abortita prima ancora di nascere. E da queste posizioni di debolezza dovrà rinegoziare i finanziamenti tedeschi per la difesa.

Non si nega che si sarà curiosi di vedere il sorrisetto del Presidente Putin al G20: sembrerà il gatto che fa la posta al sorcio.


Bloomberg. 2017-03-20. Germany, Japan Push Trade Deal as Merkel Seeks Anti-Trump Allies

– Abe in Germany says he wants to help champion open markets

– Two G-7 leaders stand together after both met U.S. president

*

German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe called for a concerted effort to defend free trade, expanding the list of economic powers joining together to counter the U.S. shift toward protectionism.

Barely 48 hours after Merkel and President Donald Trump clashed on economic policy at their first White House meeting, the German leader called for swift conclusion of a trade accord between Japan and the European Union. That followed a renewed German-Chinese commitment to open markets on the eve of her trip to Washington and Merkel’s backing for a free-trade accord between the EU and Mercosur, the South American economic bloc.

“Of course we want fair markets, but we don’t want to put up barriers,” Merkel said Sunday evening in a speech in Hanover, Germany, pushing back against Trump’s pledge to enact “America First” policies. “At a time when we have to quarrel with many about free trade, open borders and democratic values, it’s a good sign that Germany and Japan aren’t quarreling about that.”

Abe said Japan, the EU’s second-biggest Asian trading partner after China, “wants to be the champion of upholding open systems alongside Germany.” The prime minister, who met Trump in February, said “it will be necessary to have rules that are fair and can stand up to democratic appraisal.” Abe and Merkel are due to give a press briefing later on Monday at the Hanover trade fair, where Japan is this year’s partner country.

Battle Lines

The display of German-Japanese unity underscores a rift elsewhere among the world’s biggest economic powers after U.S. insistence on “fair” trade triggered conflict at a weekend meeting of Group of 20 finance chiefs in Germany. Another potential clash looms when Trump, Abe, Merkel and the leaders of Canada, France, Italy and the U.K. meet at a Group of Seven summit in Sicily in May.

A commitment to free trade and defense spending are emerging as the first key dividing lines with the Trump administration, with Germany in the firing line on both counts. The U.S. and Germany traded barbs over the weekend over Trump’s assertion on Twitter that “Germany owes vast sums of money” to NATO and the U.S. for defense.

The clashing views of trade were exposed when Trump told Merkel at a White House news conference on Friday that the U.S. had been treated “very, very unfairly” and said “negotiators for Germany” had bested their American counterparts.

Merkel Explains

Merkel replied with an explanation of how the EU conducts trade talks, saying it’s the Brussels-based European Commission that negotiates on behalf of all 28 EU countries.

The U.S. stance is pushing China and Germany, the world’s No. 1 and No. 3 exporters, closer, with Merkel and President Xi Jinping renewing their support for open markets in a phone call on Thursday, hours before she traveled to Washington.

Trump’s complaint on trade reflects comments by the head of his National Trade Council, Peter Navarro, who has denounced Germany’s trade surplus, accusing Europe’s biggest economy of exploiting its position within the euro area to gain advantage. He was among those in the audience for the news conference. Merkel and her government have rejected those accusations as absurd.

“I don’t believe in an isolationist policy, but I also believe that a policy of trade should be a fair policy,” Trump said Friday.

While standing her ground with the U.S. president, Merkel is touting a trade accord between the EU and Canada that European lawmakers backed in February as an example of the power of open markets. Europe “must never retreat, wall itself off or withdraw,” she said in a speech to parliament in Berlin on March 9.

Talks on an EU-Japan accord began in 2013 with the goal of lowering barriers to trade and investment on both sides. Japan and the EU jointly account for more than a third of global economic output, according to European Commission data.

Germany is ready to “be the motor” for completing the deal as a signal that “we want free, open markets,” Merkel said Sunday.

 


Bloomberg. 2017-03-20. Germany Trades Barbs With Trump on Defense After Merkel Meeting

– Trump says Germany owes vast amounts for U.S. defense spending

– Germany rebuffs Trump over meeting NATO funding commitments

*

Germany and U.S. traded barbs over the weekend about defense spending following an awkward first meeting between President Donald Trump and Chancellor Angela Merkel.

German Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen on Sunday rebuffed Trump over her country’s commitment to meeting NATO funding commitments after the U.S. president posted on Twitter Saturday that “Germany owes vast sums of money to NATO & the United States must be paid more for the powerful, and very expensive, defense it provides to Germany!”

“There is no debit account in NATO,” von der Leyen countered in her statement, arguing that the spending goal for NATO members includes other activities beyond the defense alliance. “We all want fair burden-sharing and that requires a modern concept of security.”

The president wrote that he’d had a “GREAT meeting with” Merkel, brushing off what he termed “fake” reports suggesting otherwise. The exchanges come after Merkel, at a joint White House press conference on Friday, appeared to tweak the president about his criticisms of her and others on social media and elsewhere, including an interview in January calling Germany’s open-border refugee policy a “catastrophic mistake.”

“In the period leading up to this visit, I’ve always said it’s much, much better to talk to one another and not about one another, and I think our conversation proved this,” the German leader said through a translator.

Trump on Friday said he had “reiterated to Chancellor Merkel my strong support for NATO, as well as the need for our NATO allies to pay their fair share for the cost of defense.” He said “many nations owe vast sums of money from past years and it is very unfair to the United States.”

‘Free Riders’

Trump isn’t the first U.S. leader to complain that most NATO nations, including Germany, weren’t meeting the alliance’s goal that members spend 2 percent of their GDP on defense. Germany spends about 1.2 percent on defense now.

President Barack Obama in 2016 said in an interview with The Atlantic about his foreign policy doctrine that “free riders aggravate me.” Sigmar Gabriel, Germany’s foreign minister, said a few weeks ago said that meeting the 2 percent goal is “unrealistic,” although that’s a much lower percentage than the U.S. spends on defense.

Friday’s visit by Merkel, postponed from earlier in the week by a snowstorm, was a day of tense cordiality and sometimes awkward body language. Trump was unresponsive when Merkel leaned in for a handshake in the Oval Office at the request of photographers.

There were few public attempts at the jocularity leaders often use to leaven such encounters, except for a barbed reference Trump made that they had “in common, perhaps” the experience of surveillance by U.S. intelligence.

Policy Vision

The visit was a test of Trump’s foreign policy vision as he welcomed a leader who not only represents Europe’s biggest economy, but has emerged as the most visible advocate of the post-World War II international order. The new U.S. president, a political novice before the 2016 campaign, had his first face-to-face talks with a veteran German leader whom he frequently maligned on the campaign trail, and whose free-trade, open-border politics stand in marked contrast to Trump’s nationalistic rhetoric.

“He’s been president less than two months; she has been chancellor more than 10 years,” said Richard Haass, president of the Council on Foreign Relations. “She has all this experience. She’s the most important leader in Europe. Some would say she’s the most important leader in the world right now.”

‘We Want Fairness’

The two clashed on trade on Friday. “The negotiators for Germany have done a far better job than the negotiators for the United States,” Trump said. “But hopefully we can even it out. We don’t want victory; we want fairness.”

Merkel subtly corrected the U.S. president. “When we talk about trade talks, the European Union negotiates for all of the member states in the European Union,” she said. “In this spirit, I would be very happy if the European Union and the U.S. can take up talks again.”

Trump bristled at a German reporter’s question about his unsubstantiated accusations that Obama had placed him under surveillance before making the reference to a disclosure, made during the Obama administration, that the U.S. was intercepting Merkel’s mobile phone communications. Turning to Merkel, he joked, “At least we both have something in common, perhaps.” Merkel didn’t smile.

Merkel was looking to Trump — who has said he wants to reset his relationship with Russian President Vladimir Putin — to ease concerns within Europe that the U.S. could abandon efforts to pressure Moscow into changing course. Merkel has struck a hard line over incursions into Ukraine and the Kremlin’s support for Syrian dictator Bashar al Assad.

Trump suggested before he took office that the U.S. might not come to the defense of allies who didn’t meet the 2 percent spending goal, and said the coalition doesn’t always best serve American interests. But U.S. officials have publicly praised the alliance since Trump took office, and Merkel is among European leaders who have outlined steps to boost defense spending to the target level.

 


Deutsche Welle. 2017-03-20. Opinion: The G20’s dilemma

The G20 has failed to agree a joint position on free trade at the Baden-Baden summit. This is a harbinger of how difficult it may be to strike international agreements with the US going forward, says Henrik Böhme.

*

This was not the outcome German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schäuble had envisaged. At the start of the G20 finance ministers’ meeting in his homeland of Baden, the host of the summit was still convinced that a common policy could be agreed with the United States. A profession of the G20 countries’ support for free trade and opposition to protectionist measures was supposed to appear in the final declaration, as it always does after meetings like this. However, the minister failed to wring a compromise out of his American counterpart Steven Mnuchin. All they were able to agree on was a weak statement that they were “working to strengthen the contribution of trade to our economies.” A mere platitude.

Is a trade war on the horizon?

At least Baden-Baden has made one thing clear: The new team in the White House apparently means business. US President Donald Trump said it outright at his meeting with Chancellor Angela Merkel: “The negotiators for Germany have done a far better job than the negotiators for the United States.” Americans must become more successful at this, he chided. Baden-Baden gave us a taste of what this meant. Not even Wolfgang Schäuble, a highly experienced political strategist, could break through the American blockade.

Describing the finance ministers’ summit as a failure would not, however, be a fair assessment. Meetings like this are often informal in character; the concluding documents are not legally binding, but rather a kind of template for the ongoing work of the G20 states. And even if in the preceding years they had always promised each other that they would promote free trade and reduce trade barriers, the trend towards protectionism has actually been apparent for some time. Since 2008 the World Trade Organization (WTO) has counted well over 2,000 measures restricting trade. Given that the G20 countries represent 80 percent of trade worldwide, it’s obvious that they aren’t keeping their promises.

What about Africa?

The argument about trade policy also overshadowed some very positive developments the G20 was able to present. Good progress has been made, for example, by those working on fiscal transparency, or the taxation of big international corporations, and the Americans were also involved in that. Then there’s Schäuble’s new Africa plan: more security for private investors to encourage them to set aside their reservations about committing to projects on the African continent. General agreement here, too, although this initiative is by no means a major coup.

At the end of the two days, though, no one was interested in any of this. The only question asked, again and again, was: Are we heading for a trade war?

t’s not a concern to be dismissed. When Trump’s trade adviser describes Germany’s trade deficit (too many exports, too few imports) as a “threat to national security;” when the American negotiators are already getting out the “big guns” on trade issues in the preliminary talks for Baden-Baden, then yes, there are reasons to be worried. The criticism of Germany is not new; it was made by Trump’s predecessors George W. Bush and Barack Obama, too, and is also regularly heard in Brussels. The German answer is always the same: Are we supposed to make worse products that no one wants to buy?

No grounds for optimism?

A reminder that it is the EU that is responsible for trade policy will not wash with the White House. When the United States imposes the first punitive duties on German exports, it will not have to wait long for a reaction from Berlin. In the past few days, the German minister of the economy, Brigitte Zypries, has been speculating about the possibility of lodging a complaint with the WTO. That would really put the wind up the administration in Washington. Donald Trump’s only interest in the WTO is in what it can do for him. For some time now the US government has already been looking into how it can bypass the WTO and impose sanctions.

The 20 countries’ pronouncements on exchange rate policy do offer hope that a trade war is not inevitable: No manipulation of the exchange rate to favor national economies.

That does provide a little reason for optimism, after some criticism from across the Atlantic with regard to the “weak euro.”

Baden-Baden, then, was a foretaste of meetings to come. It’s hard to imagine that things are likely to go smoothly at the big G20 summit in Hamburg in early July: There will be considerably more controversial issues on the agenda there than on the finance ministers’ much more manageable list.

Pubblicato in: Geopolitica Mondiale

Ambasciatore russo Vitaly Churkin verosimilmente avvelenato.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-03-02.

raffaello-la-scuola-di-atene-pitagora

L’ambasciatore russo presso le Nazioni Unite, Mr Vitaly Churkin, è morto improvvisamente pochi giorni or sono.

Quattro ambasciatori russi stecchiti in meno di tre mesi.

I risultati preliminari dell’autopsia sembrerebbero suggerire che sia morto per aver ingerito una qualche sostanza velenosa.

*

«US media stir up rumors about the poisoning of Russian diplomat Vitaly Churkin. Reportedly, there was poison found in the kidneys of Russia’s late Ambassador to the UN.

According to ABS-CBN, a post-mortem examination of Churkin’s body showed the presence of poison in his kidneys. Allegedly, the diplomat had had late supper, at around midnight, hours before his death. Perpetrators could have added an unknown substance in his food.

For the time being, heart attack remains the official cause of his death.

Chief editor of Echo of Moscow radio station Alexei Venediktov said that Vitaly Churkin had diplomatic immunity, which means that his autopsy contradicted the norms of diplomacy.

Venediktov, with reference to American press, also said that there was a medical report that said that Churkin had been poisoned by the food that he took at midnight.» [Amn]

*

Si noti come l’autopsia eseguita sulla salma di un diplomatico violi lo status di immunità.


Cbn. 2017-03-01. Autopsy Report Reveals Russia’s UN Envoy Churkin Was Poisoned

A preliminary autopsy report done by medical experts revealed that Russia’s ambassador to the United Nations, Vitaly Churkin had poison in his kidneys.

The leaked report, which a LiveMonitor reporter saw, reads “Legal examination determined the time of death, presumably on Monday morning, approximately 10 h after ingestion of the suspected meal.

Microscopic findings were as follows: moderate centrolobular liver necrosis without inflammatory signs and discrete biliary stasis, significant vascular congestion of the lungs, probably due to acute cardiac insufficiency, significant necrosis from all layers of colon mucosa and submucosa alternating with better-preserved zones, and mixed intestinal flora but no evidence of invasive bacterial lesions.

Significant lysis of the adrenal glands was also reported.  

As friends, fans and colleagues struggled to accept the news, his family had released a statement detailing his last moments.

“Our beloved Churkin who would have turned 65 Tuesday unfortunately took his last breath at 10.30 am on Monday morning during his working hours,” read part of the statement.

The statement went on to add that proper arrangements are made and will soon send the body to his homeland for befitting burial and funeral rites.

More details to be released as and when they become available.

Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Geopolitica Mondiale, Medio Oriente

Global Foundries costruisce uno stabilimento di wafer da 10$bn in Chengdu

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-02-16.

2017-02-14__aerial_photograph_of_globalfoundries_dresden

«GlobalFoundries (stylized as GLOBALFOUNDRIES) is a semiconductor foundry headquartered in Santa Clara, California, United States. GlobalFoundries was created by the divestiture of the manufacturing arm of Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) on March 2, 2009, expanded through the acquisition of Chartered Semiconductor on January 23, 2010, and further expanded through the acquisition of IBM Microelectronics on July 1, 2015. The Emirate of Abu Dhabi is the owner of the company through its subsidiary Advanced Technology Investment Company (ATIC). On March 4, 2012, AMD announced they divested their final 14% stake in the company, which concluded AMD’s multi-year plan to divest its manufacturing arm.» [Fonte]

*

«Globalfoundries, produttore di chip per conto terzi e partner di AMD nella produzione delle ultime GPU Radeon, ha annunciato il nuovo processo produttivo a 7 nanometri FinFET.

L’azienda ha deciso saltare il processo a 10 nanometri, investendo risorse umane ed economiche nella produzione a 7 nanometri.

La scelta è stata dettata dai miglioramenti prestazionali e di consumi solo marginali – rispetto ai 14/16 nanometri FinFET – osservati nelle fasi di ricerca e sviluppo con i 10 nanometri FinFET. I clienti di Globalfoundries potranno iniziare a progettare chip a 7 nanometri dalla seconda metà del 2017, con un primo approccio alla produzione (risk production) all’inizio del 2018.» [Fonte]

*

Diamo adesso una rapida occhiata alle scatole cinesi.

Advanced Technology Investment Company (ATIC).

«Established in 2008, the Advanced Technology Investment Company (ATIC) is a specialist investment company mandated to focus primarily on the global advanced technology sector. ATIC is a wholly-owned subsidiary of Mubadala Development Company, a catalyst for the Emirate’s economic diversification, managing long-term, capital-intensive investments that deliver strong financial returns and tangible social benefits to the region.

ATIC has a clear and single purpose:

To deliver superior financial returns to its shareholder by responsibly and sustainably investing in, and building, leading technology companies around the world.»

*

Mubadala Development Company.

«Mubadala Development Company PJSC (Mubadala) is a state-owned holding company that can be characterized as a National Wealth Fund. It was established in October 2002 as a Public Joint Stock Company and is a wholly owned investment vehicle of the government of Abu Dhabi, in the United Arab Emirates.

Mubadala’s mandate is to facilitate the diversification of Abu Dhabi’s economy. Its focus is on managing long-term, capital-intensive investments intended to deliver strong financial returns and tangible social benefits for the emirate.» [Fonte]

La Mubadala Development Company ha total assets per 55.21 miliardi di Usd, e total equity per 37 miliardi di Usd. Pur essendo una compagni pubblica, ha solo 700 dipendenti.

Chairman è HH Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan e Ceo è Khaldoon Khalifa Al Mubarak.

Ricordando come HH Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed Al Nahyan altro non sia che il Principe ereditario di Abu Dhabi, è sequenziale dedurne come la Mubadala Development Company più che compagnia di stato sia proprietà personale dell’Emiro, inter alias.

Per quanti avessero il senso dell’umorismo, potremmo citare queso particolare:

«Al-Nahyan has been underlining his commitment to the fight against human trafficking by funding the ‘Global Report on Trafficking Persons’ through a Dh55 million donation to the United Nations Global Initiative to Fight Human Trafficking (UN.GIFT)»

*

Il resto è usuale cronaca.


MIT Technology Review. 2017-02-13. The U.S. Chip Industry Is Growing–in China

American chip maker Global Foundries is defying President Trump to build a $10 billion fabrication facility in Chengdu.

*

In a move that may upset the Trump administration, California-based chip maker Global Foundries has announced that it plans to build a new fabrication plant in China at a cost of $10 billion.

The move is part of an expansion strategy that will include increasing production of its semiconductors in facilities in the U.S., Germany, and Singapore. But the U.S. facilities are likely to see the most modest growth.

The new Chinese plant, which will be built in the city of Chengdu, is quite another story. It’s expected to produce up to 85,000 silicon wafers per month by the end of 2019, according to AnandTech, making it one of the company’s highest-capacity plants.

The New York Times suggests that Chinese government initiatives are to thank for the new plant. Heavy investment in the semiconductor industry and new initiatives that encourage domestic companies to use chips built inside Chinese borders mean that it’s a good time to set up shop in China.

Several Asian tech firms have recently stated that they plan to set up manufacturing operations in the U.S. in the coming years. In another article, though, the Times suggests that CEOs of Chinese companies may have taken a cue from Trump’s style of business: make big promises, even if they’re unlikely to come to full fruition. 

The GlobalFoundries news serves as a reminder that whatever Trump may say, the East still exerts a powerful appeal. It’s understandable: there’s a talented workforce, reasonably priced labor, and a healthy market to boot.

The White House knows that this is a problem. Late last year, the Obama administration put together a new task force of industry experts in a bid to help home-grown semiconductor companies battle overseas challengers and expand their fabrication operations in the U.S. But there’s still, clearly, a way to go.

(Read more: AnandTech, New York Times, “China’s Bid to Dominate the Chip Industry Is in Danger of Falling Short,” “Made in America: Asian Tech Giants Say They Will Expand U.S. Operations Under Trump,” “Can the White House Make America’s Chip Industry Great Again?”)

Pubblicato in: Economia e Produzione Industriale, Geopolitica Mondiale, Unione Europea

Trump. BMW conferma platealmente l’investimento di $1bn in Messico.

Giuseppe Sandro Mela.

2017-01-09.

2017-01-09__bmw__001

Mr Trump non si è ancora insediato alla Casa Bianca e già si stanno intravedendo quelle che potrebbero essere le sue direttive in campo economico, specialmente verso la produzione di beni.

Ma iniziano nel contempo i dubbi che queste manovre economiche sottendano in realtà precise motivazioni politiche.

Nei giorni scorsi Mr Trump aveva avvisato con due brevi scritti Twitter Ford e Toyota che avrebbe imposto un dazio severo sulle automobili fabbricate in paesi limitrofi e quindi importate sul mercato domestico.

Lo scontro si evolve con il coinvolgimento di molti attori.

Sicuramente vi sono:

– Mr Trump come presidente-eletto;

– altrettanto sicuramente la componente politica liberals democratica che aveva patrocinato una zona di libero scambio attribuendole determinate caratteristiche;

– poi i così detti “economisti”, oggi indecisi se persistere nelle teorie finora sostenute oppure virare a quelle del presidente – eletto e partecipare quindi al suo potere;

– le case automobilistiche coinvolte nella produzione in Messico con conseguente mercato di vendita nord – americano;

– ed infine i Governi dei paesi ove le case costruttrici hanno sede legale e storica. In questo specifico caso, il Governo tedesco.

*

Appare davvero difficile pensare che la Bmw non abbia consultato preventivamente la Bundeskanzlerin Frau Merkel prima di rendere pubblico il suo comunicato.

Non avendo Mr Trump mai accennato alla Bmw, che ha quindi preso l’iniziativa del comunicato, resta difficile non pensare che abbia eseguito un ordine di Frau Merkel.

Si preannuncia di conseguenza una situazione in cui sicuramente vi sono grandi risvolti economici, ma altrettanto sicuramente chiare prese di posizione politiche.

Giappone e Germania hanno preso molto male l’elezione di Mr Trump alla presidenza degli Stati Uniti. Davvero molto male.

Frau Merkel ha già preso posizioni di netto contrasto, suscettibili di notevoli conseguenze politiche.

Quindi, situazione molto fluida, tutta in evoluzione.

Sembrerebbe però preannunciarsi un severo braccio di ferro.


Bbc. 2017-01-09. BMW ‘absolutely committed’ to a new Mexican plant

BMW has told the BBC that it is “absolutely” committed to a new plant in Mexico despite Donald Trump’s hostility to imported cars.

The president-elect has threatened to impose a “border” tax on firms that make cars in Mexico for the US market.

BMW is spending $1bn on a plant in Mexico, while other firms are investing in the US or moving production back.

On Sunday Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) announced a $1bn (£816m) plan to produce three Jeep models in the US.

FCA will also move the production of a Ram pickup truck from Mexico to the US.

Last week Mr Trump criticised General Motors for building cars in Mexico for the US market.

“General Motors is sending Mexican-made model of Chevy Cruze to US car dealers tax-free across border. Make in USA or pay big border tax!” he tweeted.

He also threatened Toyota with a border tax if it went a head with a plant in Mexico.

BMW sales and marketing director Ian Robertson told the BBC that the firm was “absolutely” committed its new plant in San Luis Potosi, which will make its 3 Series cars for sale across North America.

He added that the company was investing $1bn in its plant in South Carolina and pointed out that BMW was the biggest exporter of cars, in terms of value, from the US.

“I don’t think there’s any discussion that BMW is not at home in the United States. Yes we are building a plant in Mexico. Yes we built a plant in Brazil last year. Yes we are building plants in other parts of the world as our capacity increases. But that’s part of a normal strategic manufacturing direction,” Mr Robertson said.

Job creation

Last week Ford cancelled a $1.6bn plan to build a plant in Mexico and instead decided to expand operations in Michigan.

Ford boss Mark Fields said the decision was partly due to falling sales of small cars and partly a “vote of confidence” in Mr Trump’s policies.

On Sunday, FCA said it would invest in a plant in Michigan, so that it can produce two new Jeep sports utility vehicles (SUVs) and take on the production of a Ram truck, currently made in Mexico.

Also, an Ohio plant will be retooled to make a new Jeep pickup truck.

As a result, FCA says that 2,000 jobs will be created.

Its announcement was the second phase of a plan, first outlined in January, to expand in the market for pickup trucks and SUVs.