Friday, July 24, 2009

VOX POPULI





THE BIRTH OF AGRICULTURE


About 15,000 years ago, when the continental glaciers began to retreat, primitive peoples stumbled upon the fertile Levant region, which borders the Eastern Mediterranean Sea, and the area known as the Fertile Crescent, which stretches from the southeast coast of the Mediterranean Sea and the Persian Gulf. In these regions, abundant stands of wild wheat and barley grew in thickets on the uplands.


The stone-age peoples gathered the wild plants and used primitive stone grinders to process the cereals. The stability of this food supply encouraged people to build vented pottery in which to store and cook it. The began herding wildlife instead of hunting them. This led to a new system of animal husbandry. Wild dogs were also tamed and trained to manage several chores, including rounding up herds and warning of danger.


ERICKSON, J. Ices Ages: Past and Future. TAB books. USA. 1990. pp. 65.


'Ice Age: Dawn of the Dinosaurs' Welcome to my world!



No se me quita lo chismoso, deveras. No contento con leer las noticias diariamente, ahí me tienen interesado en las opiniones en la sección de comentarios del portal online de uno de los periódicos de circulación nacional. Una anécdota llama mi pronto mi atención, en ella el autor reseña un diálogo "casual" con un miembro de nuestra heroica PFP. El guardián del (¿constitucional?) orden habría "confesado" a su interlocutor que la guerra contra el narco no es más que una ad hoc puesta en escena, que todo está ya arreglado mero arriba, y que las capturas son escrupulosamente seleccionadas, tan en así que regularmente golpean a bandas rivales de los consentidos del sexenio. Hasta ahí no habría de pasar por una más de las expresiones populares que ven moros con tranchete a los sobrehumanos esfuerzos de nuestras eficientes autoridades policiales. Sin embargo, me atrae más la respuesta de otro compa, que en un dos por tres descalifica la anterior historia arguyendo que el anterior comentarista de seguro sabrá más del tema que la mismísima CIA y nuestros autóctonos cuerpos de inteligencia; quesque mejor hubiera de ser cobijado como asesor plenipotenciario pa´ resolver algunos de los más “enredados” problemas de seguridad pública de nuestro atribulado país.


aztec calendar Pictures, Images and Photos


Una interrogante, sin embargo, rueda en mi mente: ¿cómo es que algunas de estas leyendas urbanas son consistentes con ciertas elucubraciones periodísticas o académicas? Fieldwork, serendipity, or logical deduction? ¿O es que aún quedan terrenos inexplorados que esperan ser descubiertos? ¿Qué hay allá afuera en la calle que aún los más avezados teóricos ignoran?


marx Pictures, Images and Photos


Ciertamente, las (socialmente comprometidas) mentes más brillantes de México no parecen estar haciéndolo mal. Son ellos quienes creyeron en todos nosotros y demostraron fehacientemente el fraude en la elección presidencial de 2006, que tantas broncas ha causado a nuestra República Mexicana. Fueron los expertos que simpatizan con nuestro movimiento quienes balconearon el “gánsteril” manejo del presupuesto nacional durante la época de bonanza en los precios del barril de petróleo, una auditoria aún no resuelta, mi estimada Lolita. Los cerebros mejor entrenados del país nos avisaron de la difícil situación que padecen nuestros hermanos que emigraron pa´l norti, en esta difícil coyuntura of nearly (economic) depression in the states. Son nuestras luminarias quienes nos han advertido del esquizofrénico comportamiento del gabinete presidencial en cuanto al devastado sector turístico. Pero sobre todo, estos competentes académicos nos han estado develando que sólo un puñado de países han resistido esta mega crisis, y sin lugar a dudas ninguno de ellos (como el nuestro) sigue aplicando unas recetas económicas que hoy, con tal de ser benévolos, diremos que resultan obsoletas.



Desde el día de mi retorno a México he platicado con varios comp@s: desde la fabricante y vendedora de artesanías en El Tajín; a la prolífica señora de las aparentemente fuera de lugar tortillas de harina en el sótano de las golondrinas; rememorando también a los taxistas en Tampico y Morelia; volver mentalmente junto al guía turístico en las lagunas de Montebello, hasta llegar al adolescente matamorense de las historias narcas, han colaborado involuntariamente con nuestra causa.


Globalization Pictures, Images and Photos


Todos ellos, no obstante, comparten una característica: difícilmente tienen conciencia plena de lo que significa para los renegados, lo que estos comp@s reporteros han vivido, escuchado, visto, olido, palpado, percibido, e intuido. Pero todas sus experiencias han ayudado a que nuestras super stars hurguen para encontrar respuestas, o para exponer investigaciones y proyectos que parecían estarían eternamente enlatados. Si usted ha seguido con lupa la dinámica nacional, encontrará que una no despreciable franja de la sociedad mexicana está ya dispuesta a participar activamente en los sucesos cotidianos que directamente afectan su calidad de vida, lo cual tira por la borda el mito del apático (otros son los apátridas) mexicano.


three caballeros Pictures, Images and Photos


La mujer maravilla me comentaba recientemente que un compañero suyo le señalaba que el país está que arde, pero que no hay un verdadero líder que pudiera encabezar la rebelión que se avecina. Nosotros, los incansables huérfanos del 2006, sabemos que círculos de estudio, conferencias, mesas redondas, debates, son un método sistemático (y pacífico) para alcanzar nuestra madurez ciudadana, esta sabiduría popular está coja sin su contraparte, que es el análisis crítico. Los caminos de la ciencia son muy escrutables. Uno de los propósitos de este adiestramientos es prepararnos para, en un futuro cercano, exigir que a cada mexicano, sin distingo de ninguna especie, se le faciliten los medios necesarios y suficientes para que desarrolle su potencial humano, entienda objetivamente su entorno y, de ser posible armónicamente transforme, para el bien común, sus deficiencias naturales o artificiales. AL TIEMPO.



M@RCadencioso;


Av. San Diego, Cuernavaca; MOR(azán);


24/07/09.



..."Cuando el TECOLOTE canta..."



PREGUNTAS SIN RESPUESTA:


¿Qué países han realmente disminuido la desigualdad social durante el so called período neoliberal?


SPECIAL REQUESTS:


Que el roñoso se llame, Charlie, ¿no?



SITIO INTERNÉ DE LA SEMANA:


Asia Times online:


http://www.atimes.com/



ENCORE CON HARTA PACHOCHA:





Un Premio Nobel para Mrs. Clinton

(Tomado de Cubadebate)

El interminable documento leído ayer por el Nobel Oscar Arias es mucho peor que los 7 puntos del acta de rendición que había propuesto el 18 de julio.

No se comunicaba con la opinión internacional a través de una clave Morse. Hablaba delante de las cámaras de televisión que transmitían su imagen y todos los detalles del rostro humano, que suele tener tantas variables como las huellas digitales de una persona. Cualquier intención mentirosa se puede descubrir con facilidad. Yo lo observaba cuidadosamente.

Entre los televidentes, la inmensa mayoría conocía que en Honduras tuvo lugar un golpe de Estado. A través de ese medio se informaron de los discursos pronunciados en la OEA, la ONU, el SICA, la Cumbre de los No Alineados y otros foros; habían visto los atropellos, los abusos y la represión al pueblo en actividades que llegaron a reunir cientos de miles de personas protestando contra el golpe de Estado.

Lo más extraño es que, cuando Arias exponía su nueva propuesta de paz, no deliraba; creía lo que estaba diciendo.

Aunque muy pocos en Honduras podían ver las imágenes, en el resto del mundo muchas personas lo vieron y también lo habían visto cuando él propuso los famosos 7 puntos el 18 de julio. Sabían que el primero de ellos decía textualmente: "La legítima restitución de José Manuel Zelaya Rosales en la Presidencia de la República hasta el fin del período constitucional por el cual fue electo¼ "

Todos deseaban saber qué diría ayer por la tarde el mediador. El reconocimiento de los derechos del Presidente Constitucional de Honduras, con las facultades reducidas casi a cero en la primera propuesta, fue relegado a un sexto lugar en el segundo proyecto de Arias, donde ni siquiera se emplea la frase "legitimar la restitución."

Muchas personas honestas están asombradas y tal vez atribuyen a oscuras maniobras suyas lo que dijo ayer. Quizás yo sea uno de los pocos en el mundo que comprenda que había una autosugestión, más que una intención deliberada en las palabras del Nobel de la Paz. Me percaté de eso especialmente cuando Arias, con especial énfasis y palabras entrecortadas por la emoción, habló de la multitud de mensajes que Presidentes y líderes mundiales, conmovidos por su iniciativa, le habían enviado. Es lo que le pasa por la cabeza; ni siquiera se da cuenta de que otros Premios Nobel de la Paz, honestos y modestos, como Rigoberta Menchú y Adolfo Pérez Esquivel, están indignados por lo ocurrido en Honduras.

Sin duda alguna que gran parte de los gobiernos civiles de América Latina, los cuales conocían que Zelaya había aprobado el primer proyecto de Arias y confiaban en la cordura de los golpistas y sus aliados yanquis, respiraron con alivio, el cual duró solo 72 horas.

Visto desde otro ángulo, y volviendo a las cosas que prevalecen en el mundo real, donde el imperio dominante existe y casi 200 estados soberanos tienen que lidiar con todo tipo de conflictos e intereses políticos, económicos, medioambientales, religiosos y otros, solo falta algo para premiar la genial idea yanqui de pensar en Oscar Arias, para tratar de ganar tiempo, consolidar el golpe, y desmoralizar a los organismos internacionales que apoyaron a Zelaya.

En el 30 Aniversario del Triunfo de la Revolución Sandinista, Daniel Ortega recordando con amargura el papel de Arias en el primer Acuerdo de Esquipulas, declaró ante una enorme multitud de patriotas nicaragüenses: "Los yanquis lo conocen bien, por eso lo escogieron como mediador en Honduras". En ese mismo acto, Rigoberta Menchú, de ascendencia indígena, condenó el golpe.

Si se cumplían simplemente las medidas acordadas en la reunión de Cancilleres en Washington el golpe de Estado no habría podido sobrevivir a la resistencia pacífica del pueblo hondureño.

Ahora los golpistas se están moviendo ya en las esferas oligárquicas de América Latina, algunas de las cuales, desde altas posiciones estatales, ya no se ruborizan al hablar de sus simpatías por el golpe y el imperialismo pesca en el río revuelto de América Latina. Exactamente lo que Estados Unidos deseaba con la iniciativa de paz, mientras aceleraba las negociaciones para rodear de bases militares la patria de Bolívar.

Hay que ser justos, y mientras esperamos la última palabra del pueblo de Honduras, debemos demandar un Premio Nobel para Mrs. Clinton.

Fidel Castro Ruz
Julio 23 de 2009
2 y 30 p.m.


Desert sex amidst financial storm

23 July, 2009, 10:18

As hard times hit the world’s mainstream businesses, ladies in red are still making a living earning hard cash in brothels of the US state of Nevada.



Every man knows that women do not come cheap – something the sex industry has long capitalized on, even during recessions.

Read more

“I feel this business is recession proof, because it’s more of a luxury than a necessity. So if you cannot afford it, then you’re not gonna come,” explains Famous Alicia, a professional that has been working in legal brothels for over 15 years through all the economic ups and downs.

People have been coming to Chicken Ranch for ages. Found in Nevada, the only state where these businesses are legal, it is the longest running brothel in the US.

During the Great Depression of the 1930s, the girls of Chicken Ranch used to trade intimate services for live poultry, hence the brothel’s name. Now that the economy is in another recession, and trading chickens is no longer an option, but the remarkable thing about this business is that, despite the crisis, they keep raking in the dough.

Chicken Ranch choices can wet any appetite, but the $3,000 a night bungalow is empty on an early morning, and even for Famous Alicia, this is not full time work.

“I also have my realtor’s license. I have rental properties here along the strip, some of the hotel condos. And then I have a few homes – residential homes that I rent out in southern California as well,” boasts Alicia.

40 miles through the desert, in Las Vegas, you can find a former US marine, now known as Jessica Belle. In the process of transforming her gender, she also depends on the adult industry.

“It’s just a means to survive. You know, you have to do whatever’s gonna feed you at night and what keeps you afloat,” says a former marine.

Jessica is anything but a busty bimbo. Her personal blog shows an in depth understanding of the US financial system.

“You might ask yourself how can Americans have a negative interest rate, and it’s because they’re continuing to borrow and spend more than they can save, so that right there shows you that credit is expanding to a point where it’s inevitable for it to collapse,” predicts Jessica Belle.

Jessica does not just pose questions – she has answers. Former marine Belle says that “If we had sound currency based on gold and silver then you would not give up power to somebody to counterfeit money. Because that’s exactly what the Federal Reserve does, they counterfeit money. If you or I decided to print our own money, we would be thrown in prison, but they do it everyday in the trillions.”

So if even Las Vegas is feeling the economic pinch and the oldest profession in the world is taking a dive, it appears the future does not look so bright.



Thursday, July 23, 2009





En Italia no basta con ver lo que sucede en el escenario. Como dice Roberto Scarpinato, autor del libro Il ritorno del Principe y fiscal adjunto de Palermo, la historia de Italia ocurre ob-scena, fuera de escena. Quitando el foco del tupido follaje del reality pornopolítico de Estado, que mantiene ocupado al público soberano con grabaciones y declaraciones escandalosas, se da uno de bruces con otras declaraciones que ayudan a entender mejor el sentido de la farsa erótico-pornográfica que tanta audiencia suscita en el mundo entero. Vayamos por flashes.

1. Hace un año Massimo Ciancimino, hijo de Vito Ciancimino, alcalde mafioso que participó en el “saqueo” urbanístico de Palermo durante los años 60 y 70, después de una larga temporada en la cárcel condenado por lavar el tesoro del padre, comienza a colaborar con la justicia sacándose de la chistera tres cartas que la mafia envió a Berlusconi en un periodo comprendido entre 1991 y 1995 (1). Estas tres cartas ya han pasado a formar parte del proceso contra el senador Marcello Dell'Utri, "embajador de Cosa Nostra ante uno de los grupos económico financieros más importantes del País, la Fininvest", fundador de Forza Italia después, condenado en primera instancia a nueve años de cárcel por mafia. Se prevé que esas misivas acabarán teniendo consecuencias políticas también para Berlusconi. Por si fuera poco, Massimo Ciancimino asegura que tiene un documento que prueba que existió una negociación entre Cosa Nostra y el Estado. Ayer la Comisión parlamentaria antimafia decidió abrir una investigación al respecto.

2. Toto Riina, Capo dei capi, "padrino de padrinos", el pasado día 19 de julio, aniversario de la muerte del juez Borsellino, declara a Repubblica, a través de su abogado Luca Cianferoni, que a Borsellino, “lo mataron ellos”, que él “no tiene nada que ver con esa historia”.

Francesco La Licata, un periodista experto en mafia, en un artículo titulado El Padrino nunca habla por hablar, advierte que Palermo suele ser "un laboratorio donde se experimentan guiones que luego se exportan y representan en el panorama nacional". En las últimas elecciones europeas el Partido de la Libertad de Berlusconi sólo alcanzó el 36,44% en Sicilia, cuando lo normal era superar el 45%, mientras que el Movimiento por la Autonomía del Sur del gobernador de Sicilia, Raffaele Lombardo, superó el 13%. En una palabra: Sicilia traicionó a Berlusconi. Detrás de la "estrategia mediática de desmantelamiento institucional" a la que asistimos actualmente, detrás del folletín de Estado con Papi, Noemí, la D'Addario y las veline, habría algo más. Crece el consenso del “Partido del Sur”; nace un nuevo referente político para Cosa Nostra.

Ayer mismo, Antonio Bassolino, presidente de la Región Campania, representante político de referencia del Partido Democrático en Nápoles y alrededores, en una entrevista al Corriere afirmaba que "nunca había hablado de partido del Sur", para añadir después que “hace falta un movimiento político-cultural de inspiración moderna que dialogue con las fuerzas mejores del Norte y desmonte el mensaje monotemático de que el Sur es el mal”.

Algo está cambiando en Italia. Ya lo anunció de modo oscuro el cerebro de la siniestra sinistra, Massimo D'Alema. El 14 de junio declaró: “Habrá sacudidas de terremoto. La oposición ha de estar lista y ser responsable”. Se interpretaron sus palabras como anuncio del ataque mediático al sultán Berlusconi. El día 5 de julio volvió a repetir: “Habrá más sacudidas”. Resulta cada vez más difícil esconder mediáticamente la crisis; la prensa extranjera insiste en sus ataques al Cavaliere; lo ataca buena parte del mundo católico, mientras el Vaticano se lava las manos. Si le faltara el apoyo político de las mafias, tal vez estaríamos asistiendo, ahora sí, al otoño de Berlusconi.

Notas:

1. En una de esas cartas Cosa Nostra pide a Berlusconi una de sus tres cadenas televisivas y amenazan con matar a uno de sus hijos.








"Argentina: Turning Around" - an Interview With Mark Dworkin and Melissa Young

by: Benjamin Dangl, t r u t h o u t | Interview


"Argentina: Turning Around" is an exciting film which captures the spirit of Argentina's grassroots response to economic meltdown. Drawing from diverse interviews and incredible footage, the film offers an inside look at the victories and challenges of Argentina's neighborhood assemblies, protest movements and worker-run factories. "Argentina: Turning Around" skillfully transmits the country's courageous examples of social change.

photo


In this interview, film directors Mark Dworkin and Melissa Young talk about what led them to make the film, how the social and political environment in Argentina has changed since the 2001 economic crash, and how Argentina's methods of combating economic crisis on a grassroots level might offer lessons to activists in the US facing economic trouble.

Argentina: Turning Around is a documentary available from Bullfrog Films .

Benjamin Dangl: What led you to make this film, and how is it connected to the story of your previous film on Argentina, "Hope in Hard Times?"

Mark Dworkin and Melissa Young: Just as we prepared to leave for the World Social Forum in southern Brazil, and then to visit Argentina, the dominant US media reported Argentina's economic and political collapse of late 2001 with pictures of people pounding on the shuttered banks and the news that 30 people had been shot and killed by the police in just one day. We almost canceled our plans to visit Argentina for fear that it might be too dangerous or depressing. But friends in Buenos Aires encouraged us to come anyway.

And when we got there we saw what was not reported in the dominant media - a remarkable resurgence of grassroots democracy, mutual aid and cooperation, with street corner assemblies that sometimes led to takeovers of unused banks to form neighborhood centers, factories that had been shut down and were reopened by their workers in defiance of the law, large-scale community gardens, and daily mass blockades of streets and highways to demand government action to help those most hurt by the economic crisis. We pulled out our traveling camera and began to film. Although we were only able to stay for a couple of weeks, we continued to follow events in Argentina and returned six months later for more filming. The result was "Argentina: Hope in Hard Times" (2004) which has screened all over the world in its English and Spanish versions and has even been translated into Chinese for a screening in Hong Kong.

We were invited to screen "Hope in Hard Times" at the 2005 Festival de los Documentalistas in Buenos Aires. While in Argentina again, we tried to assess if things were back to business as usual, or if there were some fundamental changes from when we were last there. We revisited the grassroots projects in our film with camera in hand, and we even screened "Hope in Hard Times" in a couple of the worker-run factories. Many neighborhood assemblies were no longer active, but the factories that had been taken over by worker cooperatives were surviving and thriving, and we filmed at a few more.

We also visited a new community cooperative run by unemployed workers in the poor suburb of La Matanza, and a villa de miseria (slum) on the outskirts of Buenos Aires founded by cartoneros (recyclers). We met with economists, journalists and activists, including Esteban Magnani, author of "The Silent Change," who helped us to appreciate that the long-term significance of the events of 2001-2002 goes well beyond the accomplishment of a given factory or neighborhood. As Magnani puts it in "Argentina: Turning Around," "It was a miracle! People took over the scene again. We said that we are the protagonists of our own history, and we want to be the protagonists."

BD: Could you describe some of the main ways that Argentina's social and political environment has changed since the 2001-2002 economic crash and subsequent popular activism and organizing?

MD and MY: This is what "Argentina: Turning Around" addresses. For most people life has become more normal again. Once the emergency passed, the intense grassroots activity subsided, but many efforts in communities and workplaces continue. In 2003, Nestor Kirchner was elected president, and he was succeeded by his wife Cristina Fernández in 2007. They both talked a more populist line, and persuaded the courts and government agencies to give worker-run factories a chance to prove themselves [even as former owners tried to get them back]. Argentina paid off its entire debt to the IMF with help from Venezuela. They began to prosecute human rights offenders from the military dictatorship of 1976-83 (also touched on in "Turning Around"). As the economy recovered substantially in 2004-2007, official unemployment rates dropped from over 20 percent to eight percent. We were told that people would never again let the Argentine government favor the demands of global corporations and institutions at the expense of regular people, such as what happened in the 1990's.

Of course, now Argentina is feeling the effects of the global financial crisis, and right now too, the swine flu. The economy is down and unemployment is up. The expansion of lands planted with transgenic soy has raised food prices and contributed to inflation. And President Cristina Fernandez's party lost seats in the June midterm elections, with criticism from both right and left. (For more information, see Argentine journalist Marie Trigona's writings about swine flu and recent elections in Argentina.)

On a return visit earlier this year, we found that the 200 or so worker-run factories continue to "occupy, resist, and produce." A few have failed but others have started up. When eviction has been threatened by former owners, often the public has shown up to demonstrate their support for the worker-run enterprises. For the history of the Zanon ceramics plant, one of the first to be seized by its workers, see this article. Similar worker-run enterprises have taken root in Brazil, Venezuela and most recently, Uruguay.

BD: Could Argentina's experience with economic crisis and methods of combating that crisis on a grassroots level offer any lessons to activists in the US facing economic trouble?

MD and MY: Although there is seldom inspiring news from Latin America in the US press, we believe we can learn a lot from Argentina's activism, especially from the can-do spirit of horizontalidad (non-hierarchical organizations). As Esteban Magnani puts it in "Turning Around," "There is a vibe in the air that the important thing is to do it, to find your own way to do it, and to help other people find their own way!"

When "Hope in Hard Times" came out over four years ago, people at screenings in the US would say, "We have seen similar policies, such as off-shoring of jobs and privatization of public services here in the US. Will we have an economic collapse of our own? And if we do, would we pull together as people did in Argentina?" Fast forward a few years and we are in the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. The corporate agenda of globalization and privatization has been discredited.

Many in the US have quit expecting solutions from the top and are becoming active with others in their local communities, with a particular emphasis on local food and alternative energy. Workers at Republic Windows and Doors occupied their Chicago factory late last year, to demand severance pay and benefits after the factory closed, and they won. That factory is scheduled to reopen under new management to produce energy-conserving windows. Their example was followed by workers at Hartmarx clothing, who voted in May to sit in at their plants to protect their jobs.

But so far, we haven't seen workers begin to run these plants themselves. Even in Argentina, self-management didn't happen right away. At the beginning of "Argentina: Turning Around," Soledad Bordegaray of the Union of Unemployed Workers says, "It's not like people began with the idea of running things ourselves, we weren't taught to think that way. But no existing institutions were responding to our needs for jobs, education, and health care. People got together and said, why wait for someone else? Let's see what WE can do!"

We produced these films to encourage our own resurgence of grassroots democracy here in the US. It is hard to imagine resolving the current economic situation and the challenges of energy and climate change by relying on the same top-down, profit-maximizing institutions that got us into this mess in the first place.

BD: What are you working on now?

MD and MY: Earlier this year we visited Argentina again and personally delivered copies of "Argentina: Turning Around" to all who appear in the film. Our travels led us to film some of the current struggles of indigenous peoples in northwest Argentina. The expansion of mining contracts, burgeoning grape production for wines, and the lucrative soy plantations that produce animal feed for export are exerting pressure on the traditional lands of indigenous peoples. We also witnessed the successful vote in Bolivia for the new constitution that provides more rights for indigenous peoples. Some short pieces about these struggles will appear soon on You Tube. At the moment, we are preparing our most recent documentary for public TV broadcast in English and Spanish, "Good Food." Recently we signed a license with public TV in Argentina to broadcast "Buena Comida." Our web site is http://www.movingimages.org, and you can contact us through info@movingimages.org

"Argentina: Turning Around" is available from Bullfrog Films.

--------

Benjamin Dangl is the editor of TowardFreedom.com, a progressive perspective on world events, and UpsideDownWorld.org, a web site covering activism and politics in Latin America.


Greedy Banks

by: | Visit article original @ Le Monde | Editorial

Pretending that nothing had happened.... As though the global crisis they provoked weren't daily dragging along with it its cortège of social dramas, human tragedies and economic routs, banks are reviving yesterday's practices. The practices of a pre-crisis world. In the United States, investment bank Goldman Sachs is shamelessly preparing to fund an envelope of some $20 billion to devote to coming bonuses, or the sum the G-8 allocates to combating hunger in the world!

photo
French Economy, Industry and Employment Minister Christine Lagarde told London's Financial Times, "I think it is an absolute disgrace that guaranteed bonuses of several years could still be paid, or that some people are thinking of reinstating the old ways of compensating with insufficient relationship between compensation and lasting performance and risk management." (Photo: AP)


As though in the good old days, when, with complete impunity, they cooked up their little deals sheltered from the real world, the banks are reviving their guaranteed bonuses, intended to compensate bankers for their significant risk-taking, even as their original profits transform themselves into colossal losses. While the crisis is going to deepen the gap between rich and poor even further, these bonuses for greed are profoundly shocking. "Excess and one-upmanship," is the formula Ariane Obolensky, director general for the French Banking Federation, used in the July 22 La Tribune, excess and one-upmanship proscribed in France, thanks to the code on variable compensation adopted in the beginning of the year, but which exist elsewhere in Europe.

Christine Lagarde did not mince her words in the Financial Times of July 22: "I think it is an absolute disgrace that guaranteed bonuses of several years could still be paid, or that some people are thinking of reinstating the old ways of compensating with insufficient relationship between compensation and lasting performance and risk management." The [French] minister of the economy is in step with Barack Obama, who, on July 20, pronounced his own stern judgment: "You don't get the sense," he said, "that folks on Wall Street feel any remorse for taking all these risks; you don't get a sense that there's been a change of culture and behavior as a consequence of what has happened."

Less than four months ago, during the G-20 in London at the beginning of April, all the planet's great and powerful pledged to never allow the financial sphere to get the upper hand over the state ever again. They promised and swore: the crisis would be redemptive. It would supply new tools to regulate a world that had become insane. The post-crisis world would be completely different from the pre-crisis world. "Alas," says Mrs. Lagarde, "the 'old ways' are returning. They increase inequalities; they are dangerous for the economy as a whole; they arouse incomprehension and anger. They must cease."

--------

Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.


Opposition Goes to Court Over 'Voting Fraud'

By Na Jeong-ju
Staff Reporter

A coalition of three opposition parties filed an injunction with the Constitutional Court, Thursday, to nullify the passage of a bill reforming the broadcasting sector, claiming the governing party violated the law during voting Wednesday.

The legal action came after the National Assembly revised a set of disputed media reform bills aimed at allowing newspapers and conglomerates to own stakes in broadcasting stations, amid a opposition boycott.

Initially, the voting for the broadcasting bill fell short of the required number of voters, but Assembly vice speaker Lee Yoon-sung of the governing Grand National Party (GNP) called for a second vote to pass the bill.

Rep. Lee presided over the balloting on behalf of speaker Kim Hyong-o, who couldn't enter the Assembly main chamber as opposition lawmakers blocked his way.

"The re-vote is a clear violation of the National Assembly Law so the passage is invalid," said Rep. Kim Jong-ryul of the main opposition Democratic Party (DP).

According to the National Assembly Secretariat, however, it was legitimate for the Assembly to vote again because the vice speaker nullified the initial voting after finding a technical error in the voting system.

In the past, the Assembly has voted again on the same bill on four occasions, the secretariat said in a statement.

The argument came as opposition parties are threatening to boycott all remaining sessions and take to the street to hold rallies to protest the passage of the bills.

The DP claimed many of the votes were cast not by lawmakers, but by their aides or colleagues, as most GNP legislators were unable to get to their own seats while the balloting was taking place.

DP Chairman Rep. Chung Sye-kyun and floor leader Lee Kang-rae said they will give up their Assembly seats in protest of what they called "voting fraud."

Rep. Choi Moon-soon of the DP, who served as president and CEO of MBC-TV, tendered his resignation to protest the votes.

"From now on, we will move outside of the Assembly to bring attention to all the wrongdoings of this government," Chung told reporters Wednesday.

The GNP controls 169 seats in the 299-member legislature, compared with the DP's 84 seats.

Thousands of unionized workers at the country's newspaper and television networks have gone on strike, but the government vowed a crackdown, saying the strike was illegal. Opposition parties are set to join the striking workers.

The governing camp is expected to take steps to ease public anxiety over the passage of media reform bills, but the National Assembly may remain in limbo for a while, according to analysts.

President Lee Myung-bak may replace some Cabinet ministers and presidential secretaries this or next week to make a breakthrough in the political stalemate.

Cheong Wa Dae made no official comment on the passage of the media bills, but appeared to be satisfied.

jj@koreatimes.co.kr

How Constant War Became the American Way of Life


By David Bromwich, Tomdispatch.com
Posted on July 22, 2009, Printed on July 23, 2009
http://www.alternet.org/story/141503/

On July 16, in a speech to the Economic Club of Chicago, Secretary of Defense Robert Gates said that the "central question" for the defense of the United States was how the military should be "organized, equipped -- and funded -- in the years ahead, to win the wars we are in while being prepared for threats on or beyond the horizon." The phrase beyond the horizon ought to sound ominous. Was Gates telling his audience of civic-minded business leaders to spend more money on defense in order to counter threats whose very existence no one could answer for? Given the public acceptance of American militarism, he could speak in the knowledge that the awkward challenge would never be posed.

We have begun to talk casually about our wars; and this should be surprising for several reasons. To begin with, in the history of the United States war has never been considered the normal state of things. For two centuries, Americans were taught to think war itself an aberration, and "wars" in the plural could only have seemed doubly aberrant. Younger generations of Americans, however, are now being taught to expect no end of war -- and no end of wars.

For anyone born during World War II, or in the early years of the Cold War, the hope of international progress toward the reduction of armed conflict remains a palpable memory. After all, the menace of the Axis powers, whose state apparatus was fed by wars, had been stopped definitively by the concerted action of Soviet Russia, Great Britain, and the United States. The founding of the United Nations extended a larger hope for a general peace. Organizations like the Committee for a Sane Nuclear Policy (SANE) and the Union of Concerned Scientists reminded people in the West, as well as in the Communist bloc, of a truth that everyone knew already: the world had to advance beyond war. The French philosopher Alain Finkielkraut called this brief interval "the Second Enlightenment" partly because of the unity of desire for a world at peace. And the name Second Enlightenment is far from absurd. The years after the worst of wars were marked by a sentiment of universal disgust with the very idea of war.

In the 1950s, the only possible war between the great powers, the U.S. and the Soviet Union, would have been a nuclear war; and the horror of assured destruction was so monstrous, the prospect of the aftermath so unforgivable, that the only alternative appeared to be a design for peace. John F. Kennedy saw this plainly when he pressed for ratification of the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty -- the greatest achievement of his administration.

He signed it on October 7, 1963, six weeks before he was killed, and it marked the first great step away from war in a generation. Who could have predicted that the next step would take 23 years, until the imagination of Ronald Reagan took fire from the imagination of Mikhail Gorbachev in Reykjavik? The delay after Reykjavik has now lasted almost another quarter-century; and though Barack Obama speaks the language of progress, it is not yet clear whether he has the courage of Kennedy or the imagination of Gorbachev and Reagan.

Forgetting Vietnam

In the twentieth century, as in the nineteenth, smaller wars have "locked in" a mentality for wars that last a decade or longer. The Korean War put Americans in the necessary state of fear to permit the conduct of the Cold War -- one of whose shibboleths, the identification of the island of Formosa as the real China, was developed by the pro-war lobby around the Nationalist Chinese leader Chiang Kai-shek. Yet the Korean War took place in some measure under U.N. auspices, and neither it nor the Vietnam War, fierce and destructive as they were, altered the view that war as such was a relic of the barbarous past.

Vietnam was the by-product of a "containment" policy against the Soviet Union that spun out of control: a small counterinsurgency that grew to the scale of almost unlimited war. Even so, persistent talk of peace -- of a kind we do not hear these days -- formed a counterpoint to the last six years of Vietnam, and there was never a suggestion that another such war would naturally follow because we had enemies everywhere on the planet and the way you dealt with enemies was to invade and bomb.

America's failure of moral awareness when it came to Vietnam had little to do with an enchantment with war as such. In a sense the opposite was true. The failure lay, in large part, in a tendency to treat the war as a singular "nightmare," beyond the reach of history; something that happened to us, not something we did. A belief was shared by opponents and supporters of the war that nothing like this must ever be allowed to happen to us again.

So the lesson of Vietnam came to be: never start a war without knowing what you want to accomplish and when you intend to leave. Colin Powell gave his name to the new doctrine; and by converting the violence of any war into a cost-benefit equation, he helped to erase the consciousness of the evil we had done in Vietnam. Powell's symptomatic and oddly heartless warning to George W. Bush about invading Iraq -- "You break it, you own it" -- expresses the military pragmatism of this state of mind.

For more than a generation now, two illusions have dominated American thinking about Vietnam. On the right, there has been the idea that we "fought with one hand tied behind our back." (In fact the only weapons the U.S. did not use in Indochina were nuclear.) Within the liberal establishment, on the other hand, a lone-assassin theory is preferred: as with the Iraq War, where the blame is placed on Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, so with Vietnam the culprit of choice has become Secretary of Defense Robert McNamara.

This convenient narrowing of the responsibility for Vietnam became, if anything, more pronounced after the death of McNamara on July 6th. Even an honest and unsparing obituary like Tim Weiner's in the New York Times peeled away from the central story relevant actors like Secretary of State Dean Rusk and General William Westmoreland. Meanwhile, President Richard Nixon and his National Security Adviser Henry Kissinger seem to have dematerialized entirely -- as if they did nothing more than "inherit" the war. The truth is that Kissinger and Nixon extended the Vietnam War and compounded its crimes. One need only recall the transmission of a startling presidential command in a phone call by Kissinger to his deputy Alexander Haig. The U.S. would commence, said Kissinger, "a massive bombing campaign in Cambodia [using] anything that flies on anything that moves."

No more than Iraq was Vietnam a war with a single architect or in the interest of a single party. The whole American political establishment -- and for as long as possible, the public culture as well -- rallied to the war and questioned the loyalty of its opponents and resisters. Public opinion was asked to admire, and did not fail to support, the Vietnam War through five years under President Lyndon Johnson; and Nixon, elected in 1968 on a promise to end it with honor, was not held to account when he carried it beyond his first term and added an atrocious auxiliary war in Cambodia.

Yet ever since Senator Joe McCarthy accused the Democrats of "twenty years of treason" -- the charge that, under presidents Franklin Delano Roosevelt and Harry Truman, the U.S. had lost a war against Communist agents at home we did not even realize we were fighting -- it has become a folk truth of American politics that the Republican Party is the party that knows about wars: how to bring them on and how to end them.

Practically, this means that Democrats must be at pains to show themselves more willing to fight than they may feel is either prudent or just. As the legacy of Lyndon Johnson and Bill Clinton attests, and as the first half year of Obama has confirmed, Democratic presidents feel obliged either to start or to widen wars in order to prove themselves worthy of every kind of trust. Obama indicated his grasp of the logic of the Democratic candidate in time of war as early as the primary campaign of 2007, when he assured the military and political establishments that withdrawal from Iraq would be compensated for by a larger war in Pakistan and Afghanistan.

We are now close to codifying a pattern by which a new president is expected never to give up one war without taking on another.

From Humanitarian Intervention to Wars of Choice

Our confidence that our selection of wars will be warranted and our killings pardoned by the relevant beneficiaries comes chiefly from the popular idea of what happened in Kosovo. Yet the eleven weeks of NATO bombings from March through June 1999 -- an apparent exertion of humanity (in which not a single plane was shot down) in the cause of a beleaguered people -- was also a test of strategy and weapons.

Kosovo, in this sense, was a larger specimen of the sort of test war launched in 1983 by Ronald Reagan in Grenada (where an invasion ostensibly to protect resident Americans also served as aggressive cover for the president's retreat from Lebanon), and in 1989 by George H.W. Bush in Panama (where an attack on an unpopular dictator served as a trial run for the weapons and propaganda of the First Gulf War a year later). The NATO attack on the former Yugoslavia in defense of Kosovo was also a public war -- legal, happy, and just, as far as the mainstream media could see -- a war, indeed, organized in the open and waged with a glow of conscience. The goodness of the bombing was radiant on the face of Tony Blair. It was Kosovo more than any other engagement of the past 50 years that prepared an American military-political consensus in favor of serial wars against transnational enemies of whatever sort.

An antidote to the humanitarian legend of the Kosovo war has been offered in a recent article by David Gibbs, drawn from his book First Do No Harm. Gibbs shows that it was not the Serbs but the Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) that, in 1998, broke the terms of the peace agreement negotiated by Richard Holbrooke and thus made a war inevitable. Nor was it unreasonable for Serbia later to object to the American and European demand that NATO peacekeepers enjoy "unrestricted passage and unimpeded access" throughout Yugoslavia -- in effect, that it consent to be an occupied country.

Americans were told that the Serbs in that war were oppressors while Albanians were victims: a mythology that bears a strong resemblance to later American reports of the guilty Sunnis and innocent Shiites of Iraq. But the KLA, Gibbs recounts, "had a record of viciousness and racism that differed little from that of [Serbian leader Slobodan] Milosevic's forces." And far from preventing mass killings, the "surgical strikes" by NATO only increased them. The total number killed on both sides before the war was about 2,000. After the bombing and in revenge for it, about 10,000 people were killed by Serb security forces. Thus, the more closely one inquires the less tenable Kosovo seems as a precedent for future humanitarian interventions.

Clinton and Kosovo rather than Bush and Iraq opened the period we are now living in. Behind the legitimation of both wars, however, lies a broad ideological investment in the idea of "just wars" -- chiefly, in practice, wars fought by the commercial democracies in the name of democracy, to advance their own interests without an unseemly overbalance of conspicuous selfishness. Michael Ignatieff, a just-war theorist who supported both the Kosovo and Iraq wars, published an influential article on the invasion of Iraq, "The American Empire: The Burden," in New York Times Magazine on January 5, 2003, only weeks before the onset of "shock and awe." Ignatieff asked whether the American people were generous enough to fight the war our president intended to start against Iraq. For this was, he wrote,

"a defining moment in America's long debate with itself about whether its overseas role as an empire threatens or strengthens its existence as a republic. The American electorate, while still supporting the president, wonders whether his proclamation of a war without end against terrorists and tyrants may only increase its vulnerability while endangering its liberties and its economic health at home. A nation that rarely counts the cost of what it really values now must ask what the 'liberation' of Iraq is worth."

A Canadian living in the U.S., Ignatieff went on to endorse the war as a matter of American civic duty, with an indulgent irony for its opponents:

"Regime change is an imperial task par excellence, since it assumes that the empire's interest has a right to trump the sovereignty of a state... Regime change also raises the difficult question for Americans of whether their own freedom entails a duty to defend the freedom of others beyond their borders... Yet it remains a fact -- as disagreeable to those left wingers who regard American imperialism as the root of all evil as it is to the right-wing isolationists, who believe that the world beyond our shores is none of our business -- that there are many peoples who owe their freedom to an exercise of American military power... There are the Bosnians, whose nation survived because American air power and diplomacy forced an end to a war the Europeans couldn't stop. There are the Kosovars, who would still be imprisoned in Serbia if not for Gen. Wesley Clark and the Air Force. The list of people whose freedom depends on American air and ground power also includes the Afghans and, most inconveniently of all, the Iraqis."

And why stop there? To Ignatieff, the example of Kosovo was central and persuasive. The people who could not see the point were "those left wingers" and "isolationists." By contrast, the strategists and soldiers willing to bear the "burden" of empire were not only the party of the far-seeing and the humane, they were also the realists, those who knew that nothing good can come without a cost -- and that nothing so marks a people for greatness as a succession of triumphs in a series of just wars.

The Wars Beyond the Horizon

Couple the casualty-free air war that NATO conducted over Yugoslavia with the Powell doctrine of multiple wars and safe exits, and you arrive somewhere close to the terrain of the Af-Pak war of the present moment. A war in one country may now cross the border into a second with hardly a pause for public discussion or a missed step in appropriations. When wars were regarded as, at best, a necessary evil, one asked about a given war whether it was strictly necessary. Now that wars are a way of life, one asks rather how strong a foothold a war plants in its region as we prepare for the war to follow.

A new-modeled usage has been brought into English to ease the change of view. In the language of think-tank papers and journalistic profiles over the past two years, one finds a strange conceit beginning to be presented as matter-of-fact: namely the plausibility of the U.S. mapping with forethought a string of wars. Robert Gates put the latest thinking into conventional form, once again, on 60 Minutes in May. Speaking of the Pentagon's need to focus on the war in Afghanistan, Gates said: "I wanted a department that frankly could walk and chew gum at the same time, that could wage war as we are doing now, at the same time we plan and prepare for tomorrow's wars."

The weird prospect that this usage -- "tomorrow's wars" -- renders routine is that we anticipate a good many wars in the near future. We are the ascendant democracy, the exceptional nation in the world of nations. To fight wars is our destiny and our duty. Thus the word "wars" -- increasingly in the plural -- is becoming the common way we identify not just the wars we are fighting now but all the wars we expect to fight.

A striking instance of journalistic adaptation to the new language appeared in Elisabeth Bumiller's recent New York Times profile of a key policymaker in the Obama administration, Undersecretary of Defense for Policy Michele Flournoy. Unlike her best-known predecessor in that position, Douglas Feith -- a neoconservative evangelist for war who defined out of existence the rights of prisoners-of-war -- Flournoy is not an ideologue. The article celebrates that fact. But how much comfort should we take from the knowledge that a calm careerist today naturally inclines to a plural acceptance of "our wars"? Flournoy's job, writes Bumiller,

"boils down to this: assess the threats against the United States, propose the strategy to counter them, then put it into effect by allocating resources within the four branches of the armed services. A major question for the Q.D.R. [Quadrennial Defense Review], as it is called within the Pentagon, is how to balance preparations for future counterinsurgency wars, like those in Iraq and Afghanistan, with plans for conventional conflicts against well-equipped potential adversaries, like North Korea, China or Iran.

"Another quandary, given that the wars in both Iraq and Afghanistan have lasted far longer than the American involvement in World War II, is how to prepare for conflicts that could tie up American forces for decades."

Notice the progression of the nouns in this passage: threats, wars, conflicts, decades. Our choice of wars for a century may be varied with as much cunning as our choice of cars once was. The article goes on to admire the coolness of Flournoy's manner in an idiom of aesthetic appreciation:

"Already Ms. Flournoy is a driving force behind a new military strategy that will be a central premise of the Q.D.R., the concept of 'hybrid' war, which envisions the conflicts of tomorrow as a complex mix of conventional battles, insurgencies and cyber threats. 'We're trying to recognize that warfare may come in a lot of different flavors in the future,' Ms. Flournoy said."

Between the reporter's description of a "complex mix" and the planner's talk of "a lot of different flavors," it is hard to know whether we are sitting in a bunker or at the kitchen table. But that is the point. We are coming to look on our wars as a trial of ingenuity and an exercise of taste.

Why the Constitution Says Little About Wars

A very different view of war was taken by America's founders. One of their steadiest hopes -- manifest in the scores of pamphlets they wrote against the British Empire and the checks against war powers built into the Constitution itself -- was that a democracy like the United States would lead irresistibly away from the conduct of wars. They supposed that wars were an affair of kings, waged in the interest of aggrandizement, and also an affair of the hereditary landed aristocracy in the interest of augmented privilege and unaccountable wealth. In no respect could wars ever serve the interest of the people. Machiavelli, an analyst of power whom the founders read with care, had noticed that "the people desire to be neither commanded nor oppressed," whereas "the powerful desire to command and oppress." Only an appetite for command and oppression could lead someone to adopt an ethic of continuous wars.

In the third of the Federalist Papers, written to persuade the former colonists to ratify the Constitution, John Jay argued that, in the absence of a constitutional union, the multiplication of states would have the same unhappy effect as a proliferation of hostile countries. One cause of the wars of Europe in the eighteenth century, as the founders saw it, had been the sheer number of states, each with its own separate selfish appetites; so, too, in America, the states, as they increased in number, would draw external jealousies and heighten the divisions among themselves. "The Union," wrote Jay, "tends most to preserve the people in a state of peace with other nations."

A democratic and constitutional union, he went on to say in Federalist 4, would act more wisely than absolute monarchs in the knowledge that "there are pretended as well as just causes of war." Among the pretended causes favored by the monarchs of Europe, Jay numbered:

"a thirst for military glory, revenge for personal affronts; ambition or private compacts to aggrandize or support their particular families, or partisans. These and a variety of motives, which affect only the mind of the Sovereign, often lead him to engage in wars not sanctified by justice, or the voice and interests of his people."

When, thought Jay, the people are shorn of their slavish dependence, so that they no longer look to a sovereign outside themselves and count themselves as "his people," the motives for war will be proportionately weakened.

This was not a passing theme for the Federalist writers. Alexander Hamilton took it up again in Federalist 6, when he spoke of "the causes of hostility among nations," and ranked above all other causes "the love of power or the desire of preeminence and dominion": the desire, in short, to sustain a reputation as the first of powers and to control an empire. Pursuing, in Federalist 7, the same subject of insurance against "the wars that have desolated the earth," Hamilton proposed that the federal government could serve as an impartial umpire in the Western territory, which might otherwise become "an ample theatre for hostile pretensions."

Consider the prominence of these views. Four of the first seven Federalist Papers offer, as a prime reason for the founding of the United States, the belief that, by doing so, America will more easily avert the infection of the multiple wars that have desolated Europe. This was the implicit consensus of the founders. Not only Jay and Hamilton, but also George Washington in his Farewell Address, and James Madison and Benjamin Franklin, and John Adams as well as John Quincy Adams. It was so much part of the idealism that swept the country in the 1780s that Thomas Paine could allude to the sentiment in a passing sentence of The Rights of Man. Paine there asserted what Jay and Hamilton in the Federalist Papers took for granted: "Europe is too thickly planted with kingdoms to be long at peace."

Have we now grown too used to the employment of our army, navy, and air force to be long at peace, or even to contemplate peace? To speak of a perpetual war against "threats" beyond the horizon, as the Bush Pentagon did, and now the Obama Pentagon does, is to evade the question whether any of the wars is, properly speaking, a war of self-defense.

At the bottom of that evasion lies the idea of the United States as a nation destined for serial wars. The very idea suggests that we now have a need for an enemy at all times that exceeds the citable evidence of danger at any given time. In The Sorrows of Empire, Chalmers Johnson gave a convincing account of the economic rationale of the American national security state, its industrial and military base, and its manufacturing outworks.

It is not only the vast extent and power of our standing army that stares down every motion toward reform. Nor is the cause entirely traceable to our pursuit of refined weapons and lethal technology, or the military bases with which the U.S. has encircled the globe, or the financial interests, the Halliburtons and Raytheons, the DynCorps and Blackwaters that combine against peace with demands in excess of the British East India Company at the height of its influence. There is a deeper puzzle in the relationship of the military itself to the rest of American society. For the American military now encompasses an officer class with the character and privileges of a native aristocracy, and a rank-and-file for whom the best possibilities of socialism have been realized.

Barack Obama has compared the change he aims to accomplish in foreign policy to the turning of a very large ship at sea. The truth is that, in Obama's hands, "force projection" by the U.S. has turned already, but in more than one direction. He has set internal rhetorical limits on our provocations to war by declining to speak, as his predecessor did, of the spread of democracy by force or the feasibility of regime change as a remedy for grievances against hostile countries. And yet we may be certain that none of the wars the new undersecretary of defense for policy is preparing will be a war of pure self-defense -- the only kind of war the American founders would have countenanced. None of the current plans, to judge by Bumiller's article, is aimed at guarding the U.S. against a power that could overwhelm us at home. To find such a power, we would have to search far beyond the horizon.

The future wars of choice for the Defense Department appear to be wars of heavy bombing and light-to-medium occupation. The weapons will be drones in the sky and the soldiers will be, as far as possible, special forces operatives charged with executing "black ops" from village to village and tribe to tribe. It seems improbable that such wars -- which will require free passage over sovereign states for the Army, Marines, and Air Force, and the suppression of native resistance to occupation -- can long be pursued without de facto reliance on regime change. Only a puppet government can be thoroughly trusted to act against its own people in support of a foreign power.

Such are the wars designed and fought today in the name of American safety and security. They embody a policy altogether opposed to an idealism of liberty that persisted from the founding of the U.S. far into the twentieth century. It is easy to dismiss the contrast that Washington, Paine, and others drew between the morals of a republic and the appetites of an empire. Yet the point of that contrast was simple, literal, and in no way elusive. It captured a permanent truth about citizenship in a democracy. You cannot, it said, continue a free people while accepting the fruits of conquest and domination. The passive beneficiaries of masters are also slaves.

David Bromwich, the editor of a selection of Edmund Burke's speeches, On Empire, Liberty, and Reform, has written on the Constitution and America's wars for The New York Review of Books and The Huffington Post.

© 2009 Tomdispatch.com All rights reserved.
View this story online at: http://www.alternet.org/story/141503/

Latest GDP figure is right on the money
China's economic recovery,are we there yet?

China's economy grew by 7.1 percent over the first half of the year and rebounded robustly by 7.9 percent in the second quarter thanks to the country's effective stimulus package so far.

However, should China continue that model of state investment driven growth to sustain the growth in the second half of the year to achieve its eight percent growth target?

Priorities

NPC: Prioritize consumption and employment in second half of 2009
The 11th meeting of the Financial and Economic Committee of the National People's Congress (NPC) held on July 16 explicitly pointed out that China needs to further solve development problems by means of reform.
more

Policies in H2 2009 should focus on real economy and consumption
In the second half of this year and next year, the general guiding concept for economic regulation should be watching out for accumulative unhealthy and uncertain factors and highlighting the consumption-led structural adjustment while maintaining the recovery trend, said Xia Bin, chief of the Financial Research Institute at the Development Research Center of the State Council, to People's Daily recently.
more

Restructuring

China stresses industry restructuring in economic growth
China's government will support the development of the new energy, energy-efficiency and environment-friendly industries to improve the quality of economic growth in the second half.
more

Ministry of Finance to support five new energy sectors
Local governments should quicken their pace along with the central government.
more

Second half 2009 a good time to reform China's resource tax
The tax increases should be combined with a transformation of the economic growth model, as well as resource saving.
more

Monetary policy

Premier Wen urges adhering to proactive fiscal policy and relatively easy monetary policy
Wen said maintaining steady and relatively fast economic growth remains the foremost task at present, noting the good development momentum of the economy does not mean the difficult period has been over.
more

Chinese banks to improve financial support for fighting economic downturn
China's central bank official has called on the country's financial institutions to closely monitor new trends in the economy and improve financial support for fighting the economic downturn.
more

China should strengthen supervision to control credit flocking into stock market
Enterprise credit capital flocking into stock markets will make it difficult for banks to track and supervise this capital, increasing its risks, and take away credit capital needed by enterprises with development potential in the real economy sector.
more

Banking regulator should regulate credit cards
Improved regulation of the credit card market requires China's banking regulator to press commercial lenders to carefully assess creditworthiness before issuing cards while encouraging innovations to improve consumers' advantages.
more

Foreign trade and investment

China welcomes foreign enterprises to invest in China
China welcomes foreign enterprises to invest in China, and adheres to its mutually beneficial opening up strategy, Foreign Ministry spokesman Qin Gang said at a routine press conference
more

China simplifies rules on forex use to boost outbound investment
From August 1, 2009, Domestic companies would be allowed to register the source of their foreign exchange financing after their investment overseas instead of obtaining approval beforehand.
more

Industries

China to regulate real estate markets
Monitoring and analysis of real estate markets should be strengthened to promote the construction of welfare housing projects. Furthermore, any behavior that violates market order will be punished.
more

CPC issues new party regulation to promote SOE leaders' honesty
Company leaders are not allowed to violate company principles and procedures to make major policies on production management, appointment and removal for key positions or management of huge money. They should not adjust the salaries, bonuses and other benefits of company leaders without the approval of personnel departments.
more



Los tres errores de Barack Obama en África

por Aminata Barry Touré*, Emilie Tamadaho Atchaca*, Solange Koné*, Jean Victor Lemvo*, Damien Millet*, Luc Mukendi*, Victor Nzuzi*, Sophie Perchellet*, Eric Toussaint*, Ibrahim Yacouba*

Barack Obama sigue tratando de mejorar la imagen de Estados Unidos. En su discurso pronunciado ante el parlamente de Ghana, en Accra, el presidente estadounidense tendió la mano a los africanos y se comprometió a ayudarlos a salir de subdesarrollo. Al igual que en el caso de sus discursos del Cairo y de Moscú, la retórica de Barack Obama sedujo a los medios de prensa atlantistas, aliviados por tener al fin la posibilidad de promocionar a un emperador simpático, pero molestó muchísimo a los interesados. Varios responsables del Comité para la Anulación de la Deuda del Tercer Mundo (CADTM) analizan su discurso paternalista.






VISIONS OF EUROPE IN 2030

A Postmodern Middle Ages

By Parag Khanna

07/23/2009 04:04 PM

In the future, globalization will further weaken the nation-state. A long transition process toward global government will be, like the Middle Ages, a time of great insecurity. But Europe's governance structure will prevail, even in the United States. It will buy its way to peace and its model will be copied across the globe.

Europe invented, named, and shaped all eras of history -- and will continue to do so in the future. The classical world is defined by the flourishing of Greece; the Middle Ages followed the sacking of Rome; the European Renaissance led to the formation of nation states that organized the world in their image; and in the 21st century, Europe is pioneering the post-nation state regionalism and corresponding postmodern governance that is also being adopted around the world. Already we can see hints of the world going Europe's way. Just consider the ongoing global financial crisis: ever more observers foresee the need for a balance between American capitalism and inflexible, overly managed statism. The right mix is European-style, social democratic capitalism.

First let us take a step back and see how the global landscape has already come to resemble a crucial period of European history, namely the Middle Ages. It was a long and uncertain period, and thus an ideal metaphor for our times. It was an age of plagues and progress, commercial revolutions, expanding empires, crusades, city-states, merchants, and universities. The new middle ages -- synonymous with our postmodern globalization age -- have already begun.

Particularly the city-state, the most prominent medieval political unit, will continue its resurrection. Today's list of "global cities" -- New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Sao Paulo, London, Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo -- will also include Alexandria, Karachi, Istanbul, and others. Then as now, city-states are commercial hubs all but divorced from their national anchor, reminding that corporate actors will be paramount well into the future. Today's sovereign wealth funds, fused with city-state savvy, will be tomorrow's Hanseatic League, forming capital networks that radiate the newest technologies to those in their proximity. Hamburg and Dubai have just signed an agreement to boost bilateral trade and technical cooperation. City-states will pay for their protection as global security privatizes further into corporate hands, the knights, mercenaries, and condottieri of the 21st century.

The Middle Ages witnessed innovations from the cannon to the compass, all geared toward enhanced global exploration. So too will the speed of communication and transport bring us ever closer toward simultaneity. As the ranks of billionaires soars beyond Gates, Branson, and Ambani, mega-philanthropists will become the postmodern Medicis, financing explorations in outer space and the deep sea, governing territory and production like medieval princes.

The new Middle Ages will be as much multipolar with expanding empires on the Eurasian landmass as apolar with no single global leader. Charlemagne's efforts to resurrect the Holy Roman Empire have been succeeded over a millennium later by the multi-pronged armadas of Brussels Eurocrats steadily colonizing the Baltics, Balkans, and eventually Anatolia and the Caucasus. Their book is not the Bible but the "acquis communautaire," the 35 chapters of Lex Europea rebuilding European Union member states from the inside out.

Not only Ukraine and Turkey, but with any luck even depopulated, cantankerous Russia will be an EU member by 2030. Having already become one of Europe's main energy arteries, Turkey will also take on the role as a major trade and investment corridor to Central Asia and the Near East. The road networks linking Anatolia to the Caspian Sea will have been extended southward toward Syria, Iran, and Iraq as well, providing direct access to Mideast energy and export routes for high-end European products.

The Middle East will be integral to Europe's expanded sphere of influence in 2030. Though the Arab world will be more populous than Europe, its energy supply will be dwindling and its trade relationships ever more tied to European investment for large-scale production of manufactured goods from automobiles to solar-cells. Islam will remain a fractured faith, widely practiced, but also subdued by the impetus of economic development. Just as Europe bought off communism, it will purchase the reform of Islamism toward constructive, prosperous social democracy. North African Arab states will be ever more bound to Europe through natural gas pipelines, outsourced small-scale production, and agriculture. Sarkozy's present vision of a Mediterranean Union will indeed have blossomed into a resurrection of the Roman Empire -- with Brussels as its capital.

But this Europe of 2030 will not only be externally integrating its neighbors, but internally blending with them as well. The robust Ukrainian and Turkish populations will be ever more part of the European economic and social fabric, maintaining the empire's status as a manufacturing juggernaut. Arab migrants will remain a feature of Western European societies, but like the Turks of the late 20th century, become constructive diasporas advancing progressive social and micro-economic models through a free flow of capital and ideas with the West.

Russia's Path

The path for Russia will in fact be similar to that of Turkey. Initial restraint and reluctance combined with a strong desire to maintain a free hand in foreign policy, followed by gradual acceptance of the merits of coordination and shared leverage, and an insatiable appetite for high-quality European investment and generous subsidies. Russia will trade its insecure control over oil and gas supply and prices for the stability and reliability of trustworthy European consumers. It will settle for fair compensation, and learn how to spend it more wisely with the assistance of Brussels, Frankfurt, and London.

Other regions will similarly exhibit European-style hierarchies. China will have completed restoration of its ancient status as the "Middle Kingdom," presiding over half the world's population through its massive export volume, energy infrastructure feeding back to the core, and networks of Chinese diaspora. The world's third center of gravity will still be the United States, demographically stable but also more thoroughly blended with Latin America. A century after Kennedy's "Alliance for Progress," the United States will have rediscovered its southern counterparts, especially Brazil, as industrial partners to boost the hemisphere's competitiveness with Asia-and for energy independence from the Middle East.

The model of regional governance that the European Union represents in its most sophisticated form will be copied not only in North America and East Asia, but gradually in South America and Africa as well. Already Brazil speaks of a South American Union of economic integration and diplomatic stature under its benign leadership. The African Union, while lagging behind other regional blocs, will have developed its much needed peacekeeping force to stabilize its many festering conflicts, while trade barriers will have come down, allowing Africa's many land locked nations to bring their goods to regional and world markets.

Europe as Middleman

The European model for the United States thus applies on the levels of social democratic capitalism and federal governance mechanisms for regional institutions and markets -- but also in terms of foreign policy. Europe will have liberalized and modernized its periphery using the steady hand of governance reform and foreign investment, strategies America should see are the key to stabilizing Mexico and Central America. America's relations with China will hopefully be influenced by this psychology, transformed toward a focus on accountability with Chinese characteristics rather than American-style democracy.

Europe is well-positioned to be this ideological and cultural intermediary between East and West. Already Indian and Chinese artists are thriving in the European scene, while wealthy Asians (and Arabs) have become the prime purchasers of European impressionists and modernists. Similarly, in the field of education, more Chinese are already studying in European universities than American ones, learning the new social democratic ethos for the 21st century much as they learned Marxism and communism from Europe in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Even as European militaries consolidate into a formidable conventional force, this ground power will remain more useful for policing and ad hoc interventions than long-term war-fighting or occupations. But such a pan-European constabulary force will be necessary for the uncertainties of the new Middle Ages. Indeed, not much was certain in the Middle Ages, and an equal number of risk factors exist in the decades ahead. What of AIDS, malaria, SARS, and other diseases which could become plagues like the 14th century Black Death? And what impact will migratory hordes have, potentially unsettled by wars and environmental disasters? Who will be the next Mongols, small, concentrated hordes who violently establish peace, law, and order? Establishing a new global governance will take centuries, hence the uncertain leadership and complex landscape of the mid-21st century. The next Renaissance is still a long way off.

Parag Khanna directs the Global Governance Program at the New America Foundation in Washington.



07/23/2009 12:51 PM

SETTLING FOR SECOND BEST

In Global Institutions, Mediocrity Is the Way to the Top

By SPIEGEL Staff

Many international organizations suffer from the fact that they are run by uninspiring bureaucrats. In most cases, this is the fault of the heads of state and government who prefer to elevate weak figures, who won't meddle too much, to these positions. Is that the best approach in these times of crisis?

José Manuel Barroso's smile has become thin and helpless. From time to time, he loses his habitual fixed smile, and a gray veil seems to descend over his tanned face.

These are tough times for the Portuguese president of the European Commission. And walking into the newly elected European Parliament in Strasbourg last Wednesday was a particularly difficult experience.

It was the day Barroso was expected to be re-elected to another five-year term as head of the Brussels headquarters of the European Union. That, at least, was what was called for in the script that had been written at the last meeting of the EU heads of state and government. But parliament played hard-to-get, as Green Party members and Social Democrats decided to delay the vote.

The next opportunity to re-elect Barroso will be on Sept. 15, but perhaps nothing will come of it then, either, now that even fellow Christian Democrats are distancing themselves from their candidate.

The Tragicomic Figure in Brussels

Barroso has turned into a tragicomic figure. Hardly anyone thinks highly of him anymore. In fact, many are now criticizing Barroso and spreading malicious gossip about his desperate attempts to solicit the support of his old backers. One of them, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who once helped him secure the appointment, now derides him for calling her so often. Staff members in the office of Swedish Minister for European Affairs Cecilia Malmström have said similarly deprecating things about Barroso.

Barroso no longer has any significant authority -- if, indeed, he ever had any. Why then did EU leaders want this man in the first place, and why do they mock him today, allowing him to flounder, as if his position were merely an afterthought and not a prominent office within the EU, a major economic power with aspirations to be a major political power? The reason is obvious, says a regent from southeastern Europe: The EU is holding on to the man, who is known to be weak, for reasons of convenience, and because the search for an alternative could possibly lead to greater conflicts.

In truth, politicians like Merkel and French President Nicolas Sarkozy appreciate the downhill gradient between them and the European Commission president. If he were a peer, a man like Frenchman Jacques Delors, who led the Commission from 1985 to 1995 with a mixture of ambition and panache and was justifiably dubbed "Mr. Europe," the EU wouldn't be the kind of organization that large countries can control for their own benefit.

Barroso doesn't present the French and German leaders with such problems. Sprawling proposals on the limits of expansion or a core Europe that could lead an organization that has grown considerably in recent years are not to be expected of him.

Of course, this glaring lack of initiative at the top is not good for an institution like the EU, as it faces a severe economic crisis and is increasingly being sidelined by a US president who dominates the world stage.

The Principle of Mediocrity

It is no comfort that other large organizations that seek to play a role in global politics are taking the same approach. The imbalance between standards and leadership is currently the most glaring at the United Nations, where Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, a South Korean, is more of an administrator than a leader. NATO and, similarly, the World Bank, also applied the criterion of inconspicuousness in choosing its current secretary general.

These executives are the products of a proportionate way of thinking. Their selection is based on the principal of mediocrity, and they fail to live up to the possibilities their positions would offer. But realizing the potential of their positions seems to be exactly what the countries and national leaders that selected them don't want them to do.

Five years ago, the European Commission might have had an alternative to Barroso, the Belgian politician Guy Verhofstadt, a man with his own mind, experience and the determination not to play a subordinate role. Then Chancellor Gerhard Schröder campaigned for him, but Schröder's political fortunes were already in decline in 2004, allowing Merkel to seize her opportunity. She mobilized the conservative European leaders and defeated Schröder. Barroso, the former Portuguese prime minister, was not the best candidate, but his ambitions were modest, and that was what counted.

The Germans, for their part, have been restrained in putting forth candidates for important positions in international organizations. Despite Germany's role as the dominant economic power in Europe, it has been 40 years since a German was president of the European Economic Community (Walter Hallstein) and 25 years since the NATO secretary general was from Germany (Manfred Wörner). Only once in the recent past has Berlin enthusiastically tried to push its own candidate. In the spring of 2000, Schröder nominated Caio Koch-Weser for the position of head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), but the United States rejected the nomination. At the last minute, he conjured up Horst Köhler, who Merkel in turn elevated to the office of German president.

A German Tradition of Abstinence

Since the establishment of the postwar republic, Germany's reason of state has included integration into the European Community, loyalty to the NATO and the support of major international organizations like the United Nations. It would thus seem logical for Germany to repeatedly put forward its most talented candidates for international positions. But domestic politics continue to prevail in Berlin.

Former Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer is greatly respected abroad and is touted as a possible foreign minister for the EU when Javier Solana leaves the post in the autumn, but Fischer is a member of the Green Party. Former Defense Minister Volker Rühe, with chancellor's conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU), had a falling out with Merkel early on, ruining his prospects. Former CDU Chairman Friedrich Merz is also seen as a possible candidate, but he fell from favor when he became a competitor and critic of Merkel.

This German tradition of abstinence is presumably baffling to many abroad. The British government promptly named former Prime Minister Tony Blair as a possible candidate for the post of EU Council president this autumn, assuming the Lisbon Treaty is ratified -- and this despite the fractured relationship between Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his predecessor. But personal rivalries are apparently less important in London than in Berlin when it comes to such international posts.

Other governments set different priorities. For instance, Dominique Strauss-Kahn and Javier Solana, both socialists, were strongly supported by their conservative governments in Paris and Madrid, so that they could be named head of the IMF (Strauss-Kahn) and European foreign minister (Solana). In those cases, national pride trumped political differences.

The leap from domestic politics to the international level is often enormous, and in many cases the newly elected or appointed chief executives are suddenly confronted with the task of leading giant bureaucracies with an independent streak. Usually, it quickly becomes apparent whether they will live up to the challenge, and will either develop the ambition to take control or submit to the wishes of the larger countries.

A UN Leader Who Is More Secretary than General

Ban Ki-moon, the former South Korean foreign minister, has been UN secretary general for the past two-and-a-half years. At the organization's New York headquarters, and elsewhere, he is seen as a disappointment, and as the wrong man to assume a prominent role and lead the global community at a time when the world's political axis is shifting from America to Asia. It has always been said that Ban is more interested in being secretary than general, which is precisely what he is today.

The discussion over waste and inertia at the UN is as old as the organization, which was founded in 1945, and it has long been part of this utopian experiment to unite the 192 current member states. But it is worth the effort, and Kofi Annan -- Ban's predecessor and a true global politician -- became involved and made his voice heard. Annan, too, was a candidate of proportional representation at first, but he expanded his scope, plainly refused to toe the US line and was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

Under Ban, it seems like the UN first fell silent and then disappeared. It is as bureaucratic, slow and formalistic as ever. And it is silent, far too silent. Of course, a few things have changed since Ban Ki-moon succeeded Kofi Annan. US President Barack Obama is now the one giving the speeches on reconciliation, solidarity and a new beginning in world politics, and the fate of the planet.

A UN secretary general plays three key roles: to be a conciliatory diplomat, a speaker and a manager. Ban's English is difficult to understand, and he speaks softly and carefully in a constant singsong of consternation. This was known about him before, but the fact that he is a poor leader also diminishes the UN's worth and aura.

"We never know what he wants," says a European ambassador. "All he does is nod, and he never explains his position," says a confidante. It is said that his UN is weak and unimaginative, and that it is far too close to the Americans, as it has been in the past.

Ban travels a lot, spending more than a third of his time on the road. One-on-one conversations are his specialty, and at some point at every summit meeting, there is a moment when he asks all staff to leave the room, allowing him to spend half an hour with the world's presidents and dictators. "Personal relationships are always helpful," says Ban.

Granted, he has achieved a few things. As a result of his efforts, African Union peacekeepers were allowed into the Sudanese war zone, former US President Bill Clinton was named special envoy for Haiti, and the generals who control Burma allowed foreign aid workers into the country after Typhoon Nargis.

Leadership Deficiencies

But is this enough?

Times of crisis require leaders of a different caliber. Times of crisis are unforgiving for bureaucrats at the helm of large institutions. They reveal deficiencies all too clearly, such as lack of charisma and the will to shape policy. This dearth of leadership is all the more evident today at the World Trade Organization (WTO), where treaty negotiations have reached a stalemate. And even the proud World Bank is satisfied to play a secondary role -- during nothing less than a global economic crisis.

For two years, the World Bank suffered under then President Paul Wolfowitz, a friend of former President George W. Bush who had holes in his socks. The bank's new president, Robert Zoellick, 55, is a skilled negotiator who learned his trade in the administration of former President George H.W. Bush and as an advisor to Goldman Sachs. But Zoellick is a technocrat with a fondness for documents, not a motivator, strategist or gifted speaker. According to other World Bank executives, when criticism of bank practices is voiced in internal reports, the president, instead of trying to improve things, prefers to neutralize the critics.

The United States always appoints one of its own to the top job at the World Bank. Washington has a tendency to install someone like Wolfowitz in what is seen as a comfortable position, in this case as the White House's way of thanking him for his neoconservative justification for the Iraq war. Zoellick is also expected to submit to the wishes of the Obama administration -- the institutional prerequisite for the job.

NATO's Lowest Common Denominator Pick

In other organizations, the hierarchy is not as clearly arranged, and the appointment of personnel is more cumbersome. For instance, anyone who hopes to rise to the top of NATO must be prepared for a complicated arithmetic of power. One does not apply for the position of secretary general or, at any rate, one should not assert claims in public. Instead, one is appointed -- at least that's what the multi-talented Solomon Passy, 52, experienced.

The former Bulgarian foreign minister "drinks freshly squeezed hot peppers, speaks English to the penguins in Antarctica and can calculate in his mind the squared area of a circle." This, at any rate, is what he claims on his homepage, and as far as he was concerned, this seemed to be the ideal profile for the office of NATO secretary general. Passy was long the only official applicant, a fact that already guaranteed his failure.

Washington traditionally appoints the alliance's supreme military commander, while the diplomatic leadership is left up to the Europeans. This led to a certain amount of jostling when the term of Dutchman Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, who leaves the post on July 31, began drawing to a close.

Joschka Fischer was touted as a possible new secretary general. Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Störe expressed an interest in the job, as did Canadian Defense Minister Peter Gordon MacKay. Polish Foreign Minister Radoslav Sikorsky and former President Aleksander Kwasniewski, as well as former Slovenian President Janez Jansa, also felt that they stood a chance of securing the top NATO post. Each of these three men would have been the first secretary general from a former Soviet bloc country.

The man who will be applauded next Friday as the new secretary general of the alliance, former Danish Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen, 56, is a conservative politician who promoted an anti-immigration policy in an otherwise liberal country. He was the lowest common denominator that everyone could agree on. No one seems to be troubled by the fact that Rasmussen, an economist, is not a military expert.

And Bulgarian candidate Passy? A marginal curiosity.

The Tried and True Approach

Mohamed ElBaradei, 67, on the other hand, is an example of how a compromise candidate can become a highly respected figure. The Egyptian president of the International Atomic Energy Agency, headquartered in Vienna, criticized the US invasion of Iraq, prompting the Bush administration to attempt to obstruct his reappointment, but to no avail. ElBaradei also hasn't readily joined the ranks of Iran's detractors. Nevertheless, he and his institution were awarded the Nobel Peace Prize.

ElBaradei, who has turned a nuclear watchdog agency into a politically oriented forum, is retiring in November. His successor, 63-year-old Japanese diplomat Yukiya Amano, received the necessary two-thirds majority in the sixth round of voting.

Then Amano, an expert on international law and nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament, gave a speech. For six long minutes, he read his prepared remarks, speaking in a monotone. He is considered the candidate of the West and the United States, but he is said to lack the gift of communication -- which is quickly apparent to anyone who listens to him speak.

Perhaps the IAEA, too, has taken the tried-and-true approach: choosing a man of mediocrity.

RALF BESTE, KLAUS BRINKBÄUMER, MANFRED ERTEL, RÜDIGER FALKSOHN, HANS-JÜRGEN SCHLAMP

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan



Violencia juvenil, problema de salud pública

Autor: Érika Ramírez
Sección: Sociedad

Tamaño de texto:
a- A+ Default
19 Julio 2009

La violencia juvenil ya es un problema de salud pública en México. Informes de organismos nacionales e internacionales demuestran que este sector de la población vive expuesto al maltrato físico y sicológico, perpetrado por familiares, autoridades y docentes, principalmente, sin que exista un programa público que los atienda

La violencia juvenil ya es un problema de salud pública en México. Informes de organismos nacionales e internacionales demuestran que este sector de la población vive expuesto al maltrato físico y sicológico, perpetrado por familiares, autoridades y docentes, principalmente, sin que exista un programa público que los atienda

“Viví una experiencia horrible. Fui violada por un familiar; la verdad, a mí no me gustó por el simple miedo que tenía hacia esa persona. Le conté a mi mamá lo que me había pasado, y me dijo que a ella le había pasado lo mismo” (sic), revela una estudiante de 16 años ante el anonimato que le da una encuesta que busca conocer los niveles de violencia a los que se enfrentan los jóvenes.

Éste es uno de los 186 relatos (relacionados con la violencia familiar) escritos por mujeres y hombres en edad adolescente, para el Diagnóstico sobre la violencia en la educación media superior, y las relaciones entre estudiantes y docentes, para la promoción de los derechos humanos y las relaciones igualitarias, elaborado en 2008 por la Academia Mexicana de Derechos Humanos (AMDH).

El informe de la AMDH, vinculado con la Cátedra Organización de las Naciones Unidas para la Educación, la Ciencia y la Cultura (UNESCO, por sus siglas en inglés) de Derechos Humanos de la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM), dice que “los jóvenes no están exentos de sufrir o perpetuar la violencia. A su vez, la escuela tampoco está exenta, por el contrario, regularmente los establecimientos escolares son escenarios de violencia, a veces sutil, a veces manifiesta y, en ocasiones, incontrolable”.

“Ahorita en la escuela tengo muchos problemas con las materias, porque he faltado mucho y no me quieren justificar las faltas. Ya les expliqué y les traje los papeles de la demanda que le metí a mi padrastro, que desde los ocho años me ha estado violando. Ahorita mi mamá ya lo sabe… ahora se asusta, pero antes no me creía (sic)”, dice el testimonio de otra joven de 15 años de edad.

La AMDH, presidida por Gloria Ramírez Hernández, doctora en ciencias sociales por la Universidad Sorbona de París, Francia, aplicó 1 mil 700 cuestionarios en 18 planteles CETIS (Centro de Estudios Tecnológicos, Industriales y de Servicios); la hipótesis fue: “La violencia, la discriminación, la injusticia social y de género provocan una radical desigualdad de oportunidades; la escuela puede contribuir a acrecentar esta situación cuando no es debidamente atendida”.

Los resultados obtenidos sobre 800 encuestas validadas por la academia indican que los alumnos expresaron que habían sido víctimas de violencia: 412, en el trato que reciben de las y los docentes al dar clase; 362 más, en la convivencia entre estudiantes; 267, al exterior del plantel (calles cercanas); 186, familiar; 99, en las relaciones de pareja; 85, en la relación con personal del plantel (directivos, administrativos y prefectos), y 228 más hablaron de experiencias ajenas.

La también coordinadora de la Cátedra UNESCO de Derechos Humanos de la UNAM, Gloria Ramírez, dice en entrevista: “Vemos una situación preocupante, que parece estar instalada en la absoluta resignación de la comunidad escolar. Los jóvenes siempre han sido un sector vulnerable, poco atendido. Cuando hicimos la encuesta, nos dimos cuenta de que no hay una oficina que se ocupe de esta situación”.

Datos del Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (Unicef), contenidos en el estudio Hechos sobre adolescentes y jóvenes en América Latina y el Caribe, indican que la trasgresión inicia desde la edad infantil y deja un saldo de 220 niños y adolescentes, menores de 18 años, que mueren todos los días víctimas de la violencia doméstica –el equivalente a 80 mil personas por año.

La Unicef también alerta que América Latina y el Caribe tienen la tasa más alta de homicidios entre adolescentes de 15 a 17 años en el mundo, con un promedio de 22 asesinatos (37.7 hombres y 6.5 mujeres) por cada 100 mil habitantes.

Acoso en las escuelas

El diagnóstico de la AMDH indica que de los 412 casos que dejaron sus testimonios del trato que reciben de las y los docentes al dar clase, el 58 por ciento corresponde a 239 mujeres. Mientras que 173 varones denunciaron algún tipo de violencia contra su persona y/o de sus compañeros.

Ejemplo de ello es el breve relato de una joven: “El profesor nos decía putas teiboleras, que estábamos feas y gordas, y que somos humanos”. Casos como éste fueron denunciados por 103 mujeres que dijeron haber pasado por alguna situación de violencia verbal. En tanto, este tipo de violencia se presentó en 239 varones.

De acuerdo con la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS), la violencia juvenil está caracterizada como un problema de salud pública. El organismo internacional define a la violencia como el uso intencional de la fuerza o el poder físico, de hecho o como amenaza, contra uno mismo, otra persona, un grupo o comunidad, que cause o tenga muchas probabilidades de causar lesiones, muerte, daños sicológicos, trastornos del desarrollo o privaciones.

El diagnóstico de la AMDH también revela que el acoso sexual y el hostigamiento son otra de las situaciones a las que se enfrentan los estudiantes. De las acusaciones recavadas, sólo 43 mujeres dejaron muestra de ello: “Personalmente, este profesor me llegó a insinuar que yo le interesaba y que podía ayudarme para aprobar el curso. Después me enteré que no era la única alumna a la que acosaba; nunca se le denunció”, dice una joven de 18 años de edad.

Mientras, un varón de 16 años hace referencia al acoso que observa por parte de los maestros: “En la escuela es bien notorio que los profesores, sobre todo el de… es bien lanzado con las chavas… se hace el gracioso y se quiere pasar de listo. Ya platicamos con las que se les ha insinuado; les pide cuerpomático y además una lana para pasar” (sic).

De las relaciones entre el personal docente y los alumnos se desprende que 47 hombres denunciaron violencia sicológica, mientras que 55 mujeres se vieron agredidas de esta manera. “Hay maestros que nos dicen: son unos mediocres y nunca van a poder ser nada en la vida”, dice una joven.

La coordinadora de la Cátedra UNESCO de Derechos Humanos enfatiza que en el país prevalece la violencia de género en todos los ámbitos. “Aquí, a la mujer se le viola, se le maltrata y se le mata. Es la sociedad que estamos heredando, y las autoridades no han representado una figura de protección”.

Novios violentos

“Un día, él y yo estábamos bien, nos la estábamos pasando muy bien, pero a la hora de la salida (de la escuela) platiqué con un compañero y (mi novio) se puso muy mal. Me empezó a azotar en un carro, me fracturó la muñeca derecha, me gritó que yo lo provocaba (a enojarse), que era una golfa. Me aventó hacia la avenida, tiró todas mis cosas al suelo… intentaba pegarme hasta que una amiga me defendió y me llevó con ella”, dice una estudiante de 17 años de edad.

Según el Diagnóstico sobre la violencia en la educación media superior, y las relaciones entre estudiantes y docentes, 99 mujeres (entre 15 y 22 años de edad) manifestaron ser víctimas de violencia en las relaciones de noviazgo. De esta cifra, 42 dijeron padecer violencia verbal; 34, física; 15, sexual, y ocho, discriminación.

Una joven de 17 años, estudiante y que vive con su pareja, relata: “Llegaba a golpearme, y sus padres no decían nada. Las pocas cosas que tenía, me las robó para comprar su porquería (droga). Ahora estoy embarazada y tengo miedo de que mi bebé nazca con problemas. No sé qué hacer, él me sigue golpeando y abusa sexualmente de mí”.

El informe La violencia juvenil, elaborado por la OMS, dice que en casi todos los países, los adolescentes y los adultos jóvenes son las principales víctimas y los principales perpetradores de esa violencia. “Los homicidios y las agresiones no mortales que involucran a jóvenes aumentan enormemente la carga mundial de muertes prematuras, lesiones y discapacidad”.

Ello, indica el organismo mundial, daña profundamente a las víctimas y también a sus familias, amigos y comunidades. Sus efectos se ven en los casos de muerte, enfermedad, discapacidad y en la calidad de vida. “La violencia que afecta a los jóvenes incrementa enormemente los costos de los servicios de salud y asistencia social; reduce la productividad, disminuye el valor de la propiedad, desorganiza una serie de servicios esenciales y en general socava la estructura de la sociedad”.

En el caso de los jóvenes que violentan, explica que a menudo presentan problemas como el ausentismo escolar, el abandono de los estudios y el abuso de sustancias sicotrópicas. También suelen ser mentirosos compulsivos, conductores imprudentes, y estar afectados por tasas altas de enfermedades de transmisión sexual.

La sicóloga social Miriam Camacho Valladares, académica de la Facultad de Psicología de la UNAM, indica que los jóvenes “son un sector vulnerable, porque no hay atención a los múltiples conflictos que los afectan”.

La especialista en atención del sector juvenil indica que el “sujeto” es el reflejo de todas las dinámicas que se dan en la familia: de cómo se piden las cosas en casa o de cómo los padres resuelven los problemas. “La violencia es la forma en que los jóvenes han aprendido a solucionar los conflictos y nadie más que la familia es el ejemplo”.

Para la elaboración de este trabajo se solicitó entrevista con el Instituto Mexicano de la Juventud institución federal encargada de las políticas públicas de atención a los y las jóvenes– a través de Patricia Ferreira, directora de Prensa y Relaciones Públicas, sin que al cierre de la edición se haya obtenido respuesta.


Juventud y pobreza en América Latina y el Caribe

El estudio Hechos sobre adolescentes y jóvenes en América Latina y el Caribe, del Fondo de las Naciones Unidas para la Infancia (Unicef), indica que en la actualidad hay más de 158 millones de jóvenes, entre 10 y 24 años de edad, que representan el 30 por ciento de la población total de la zona, “el mayor número en la historia de la región”.

El organismo internacional indica que 15 millones de adolescentes entre 10 y 18 años viven con menos de 1 dólar al día. Además, estima que entre un 25 y un 32 por ciento de la población joven sufre las consecuencias de comportamientos riesgosos como: la deserción escolar, la maternidad adolescente, el desempleo, la adicción a las drogas o los conflictos con la ley.

En materia de empleo, el informe de la Unicef señala que 22 millones de jóvenes no tienen empleo y no asisten a la escuela.

Otro de los aspectos que muestra el organismo internacional es que el embarazo en adolescentes, entre 15 y 19 años, registra “la segunda tasa más alta del mundo”. Indica que el 20 por ciento de los nacimientos en la región es de madres menores de 20 años y el 40 por ciento es de embarazos no deseados.

También resalta que hay aproximadamente 420 mil adolescentes y jóvenes, de 15 a 24 años, que viven con el Virus de Inmunodeficiencia Humana /Sida. (ER)

    Más sobre este tema:
  1. Mediante subrogaciones se privatiza la salud pública
  2. Miles de jóvenes, presa de drogas y violencia
  3. Al alza, la violencia en América Latina: Pierre Salama
  4. Urge transitar de la violencia al trabajo: Astudillo
  5. Avala Función Pública, nepotismo y desvío de recursos en Pemex


Discriminación a jóvenes por “apariencia”

Autor: Paulina Monroy
Sección: Sociedad
Tamaño de texto:
a- A+ Default
19 Julio 2009

De los barrios de Nezahualcóyotl y Ecatepec, los Sureños 13 viven todos los días hostigamiento, abuso de autoridad y exclusión por lucir como lucen. Ellos se reúnen porque en la pandilla está su familia, su identidad, su forma de expresarse, su arte. El Estado mexicano no les asegura ni garantiza el respeto a sus derechos humanos. Ellos, como otras identidades juveniles, son discriminados por miedo, ignorancia y olvido. De no acabar con la segregación a los jóvenes, no habrá un futuro posible, aseguran especialistas

Los Sureños 13 de Nezahualcóyotl y Ecatepec saltaron (o, como explican: “recibieron una putiza”) cuando tenían 10 años para pertenecer a la pandilla. Desde niños ya caminaban en las calles. Son de una segunda generación. Los anteceden los migrantes de Estados Unidos que trajeron la ideología del barrio. También herederos de los roncanroleros, ya no usan pantalones entubados ni el cabello relamido. Se visten con ropa guanga, se rapan, se tatúan, se dan a respetar. En la sala de el Boli, ocho barrios están representados.

La regla es que quien pertenece al barrio, pertenece a una familia. La firmeza, el respeto, el apoyo y la amistad están en un código no escrito. Todos tenían algo en común: problemas en casa y por eso fueron al encuentro de los camaradas. Se buscaban una identidad, una compañía, una escuela, como dice el Mex: “Ellos me enseñaron a vestir, a no dejarme, a tener respeto, a caminar las calles”.

Para el Chiquis, brincarse al barrio significó encontrar una familia: “En ese momento decidí mi vida. Siempre ha sido mi rutina; mi forma de vestir es siempre floja, yo no cambio ni disfrazo nada. La gente que nos mira de arriba abajo por nuestra apariencia no entiende que hay una realidad en la pandilla: que somos una familia”.

En el barrio, quienes no son “guangos” o “tumbados”, como ellos, los respaldan: “Respetan nuestra placa –describe el Mex, quien también colabora con la organización civil Cauce Ciudadano en el área de Derechos Humanos y Reinserción Social–, porque saben que nosotros damos respeto y por eso lo recibimos. Muchas veces estamos cotorreando y llegan las patrullas y se arma el desmadre, quieren llegar al barrio a apañarnos, y salen las jefas de los cantones y se ponen al pedo con la tira. Saben que la neta es el barrio”.

Les costó tiempo ganarse esa honra en la calle y en el hogar. Recuerdan lo difícil que fue que los aceptaran los suyos, ahí comenzó la segregación: que si debían subirse los pantalones porque parecían “cagados”, o si la lavada era por metro o lucían locos con la cabeza rapada. Se congratulan porque han conseguido terminar con esos estereotipos: “Se dieron cuenta que en los momentos difíciles, la pandilla está contigo y ahora es bienvenida en nuestras casas”.

El municipio de Nezahualcóyotl, en el Estado de México, se convirtió en la “capital del cholo” en 1995. En un principio fue una expresión en apariencia y conducta, ahora es para ellos una protesta, una revolución, una consigna por lo nacional. Al respecto el Smiley, quien produce jerseys, describe que si usan ropa holgada es porque así vestían a los braceros en Estados Unidos: “No les hacían los uniformes a la medida y la banda dijo ‘presta, los voy a alinear y vas a ver cómo uso mi ropa de obrero’”.

Los pachucos se mofaban de los gabachos, los provocaban, ataviándose con sus prendas: el traje, los mocasines, el sombrero y la pluma. De esa manera expresaban su inconformidad hacia los opresores. Hoy, ellos intentan defender lo “mexicano” a través de la vestimenta, de la música y las artes. Así los que quedaron, los que no murieron o están torcidos (en la cárcel), siguen aquí, rapeando, maquilando ropa, publicando revistas, pintando, manteniendo vivo el espíritu de que el cholo es cultura, no sólo locura.

El Smiley asegura que no todo es violencia. Tienen proyectos: fomentar la cultura y el arte en el barrio, porque es esa raíz la que no quieren dejar morir. El Maru confiesa que después de vivir una vida en pandilla (discriminación, abandono, drogas, cárceles) lo que queda es amar al barrio de otra forma, ya no juntándose en una esquina, pero sí representándolo. Ya no “tiran la placa”, la respetan. Ahora todos son Neza 13.

Aunque consideran que se debería favorecer públicamente a los movimientos juveniles, todo lo logrado ha sido por ellos mismos, sin ayuda de nadie, ni del Estado ni de ninguna institución privada. Buscan mejorar la vida de la gente del barrio, pero gobierno, sociedad y medios de comunicación no ven más allá: los discriminan.

El Mex relata que en una entrevista realizada por el diario El Excélsior la reportera le preguntó si alguna vez había matado a alguien. En la nota periodística, comenta, lo retratan como un asesino. El Mex, el Smiley y el Maru pertenecen al colectivo Rap Pandillero Estilo Mexicano (Rapem). El grupo ha sido invitado a MTV, Radio Acir y al Tecnológico de Monterrey. Aun así, en cada lugar no los dejaron entrar, pues creen que causarán problemas: “Estamos tan aterrizados que sabemos que si tocamos puertas no nos abren y por el otro lado va a salir una patrulla”, lamenta el Smiley.

Son rechazados también en los lugares de trabajo por los tatuajes: sea que durante el proceso de selección no los acepten, o que una vez realizado el examen médico no los contraten. Una vez ocupada la vacante, son vigilados a cada momento. El Maru dejó de intentarlo, prefirió el autoempleo. Su mayor humillación, califica, ocurrió cuando desde la puerta de una oficina le aseguraron que no había vacantes.

La misma reacción se repite en la calle, en el transporte público, en establecimientos comerciales, en bares y centros nocturnos, donde incluso se leen letreros que dicen: “No se aceptan mascotas ni cholos”.

“Cuando decides entrar en esto –advierten– te das cuenta de que nunca embonarás en diferentes ámbitos. La gente cuando te mira pone una línea y no te deja demostrar lo que eres. Aquí hay mucho talento y no hay quien lo apoye. Podríamos destacar y no se nos permite por nuestra apariencia.”

Por las calles de Nezahualcóyotl y Ecatepec las perreras hacen sus rondines. El Chiquis dice que la policía se siente con autoridad porque está uniformada. Los suben y vigilan porque los ven reunidos o simplemente porque les caen mal. Han sufrido robos de judiciales hasta por seis veces y hasta los han encañonado para quitarles sus celulares. Alguna vez fueron capturados y llevados a un barrio enemigo; en otra, les aplicaron torturas como la máscara del diablo (envolverles la cara con una bolsa de plástico) para que confesaran dónde se vendía la marihuana.

Tienen el estigma de los Maras Salvatrucha. Dicen que les robaron la cultura del cholo y ahora los confunden. El Boli y el Smiley señalan que se les achacan sus business y ellos son diferentes: no faltan al respeto, no aparentan lo que no son ni intimidan: “Que se nos tache de imitadores de Maras es utilizado por las autoridades para desviar la atención y criminalizarnos. Ellos tomaron de nosotros, no nosotros de ellos”. Medios impresos y electrónicos los quieren usar con ese propósito: aparecer en la imagen como integrantes de esa banda.

Los Sureños 13 han sido perseguidos por elementos de la Agencia Federal de Investigación (AFI) en el aeropuerto, donde les piden identificarse. Al Chiquis lo detuvieron en Polanco cuando salía de trabajar. Por dos noches estuvo aprehendido. Fue llevado a la AFI, a la Unidad Mixta de Atención al Narcomenudeo y a Santa Martha Acatitla. Le preguntaron si era salvadoreño, fotografiaron sus tatuajes y le tomaron las huellas. En esa misma colonia, cuando grababa un material discográfico el Mex fue revisado por la policía. Tuvo que entonar una estrofa del Himno Nacional para comprobar que es mexicano.

El Smiley y otros fueron atrapados en un operativo de 15 patrullas, motos y “perreras” por estar cantando. En otra ocasión, los acusaron de golpear a una mujer embarazada, hecho que no sucedió, y los llevaron al palacio municipal. Refieren el caso de otro compañero que fue acusado de robo de automóvil, cuando ni siquiera sabe manejar, y otros que por robos que no cometieron pasan tiempo en la cárcel. Por igual son acusados por vecinos y elementos de seguridad pública.

Antes de lanzar el primer disco de Rapem, uno de sus integrantes fue asesinado por un disparo de arma en el pulmón. Para entregar el cuerpo, la familia tuvo que firmar el acta donde dice que la muerte fue por asfixia: “Después de decir que vamos por la paz, ves que las autoridades te hacen jugadas. Es imposible creer en ellas. Hablarles es hablarle a la nada”.

A los también padres de familia les enorgullece que el movimiento los mantiene unidos: “Somos pandilleros, pero pandilleros con valores”.

Discriminación a lo diferente

El artículo cuarto de la Ley Federal para Prevenir y Eliminar la Discriminación define ésta como toda distinción, exclusión o restricción que tenga por efecto impedir o anular el reconocimiento o el ejercicio de los derechos y la igualdad real de oportunidades de las personas. Entiende como conducta discriminatoria el que se realice o promueva el maltrato físico o sicológico por la apariencia física, forma de vestir, hablar, gesticular o por asumir públicamente su preferencia sexual.

Jean Philibert Mobwa Mobwa N’Djoli, subdirector de medidas administrativas del Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación (Conapred), asegura que la sociedad que discrimine a los jóvenes tendrá un futuro incierto.

Parte de las expresiones juveniles que son segregadas, son las mal llamadas “tribus urbanas”. Desde la definición misma se les discrimina. El funcionario aclara que el término es reductivo y discriminatorio. En su lugar, habla de identidades juveniles.

El concepto –define la CNDH en su Informe especial de la Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos sobre el grupo juvenil conocido como emo– conlleva una posición clasista para definir de forma peyorativa la adscripción cultural de los jóvenes de condición económica baja, y posee rasgos excluyentes a partir de la asignación de rasgos violentos, salvajes o atrasados como supuestas características.

Mobwa Mobwa N’Djoli explica que debido a que los jóvenes no encuentran satisfecha su necesidad de pertenencia en el hogar o en la escuela, recurren a la calle y ahí encuentran esas identidades: jóvenes punketos, góticos, darketos, hardcores, emos, skatos, rastas, chavos banda, cholos, hippies, taggers. Estos grupos se caracterizan por utilizar diferentes aditamentos que marcan su identidad, pero por los que son excluidos.

En Las percepciones de las diferencias físicas en la Ciudad de México: la discriminación que vive la población obesa, con discapacidad, con cicatrices, tatuada, con perforaciones en la piel, darketos, punketos y personas cuya apariencia indica pertenencia indígena o a grupo religiosos, Jorge Horbath Corredor atiende los motivos por los que un joven es discriminado: la falta de tolerancia, el acceso limitado a diferentes formas de saber, la enseñanza y la inseguridad.

Según un sondeo realizado para propósitos de la investigación, los entrevistados reconocieron que existe una tendencia a estigmatizarlos como fuentes de contaminación social por llevar cierta indumentaria y pensar diferente. La apariencia física para los jóvenes, explica el autor, funciona como argumento de diferenciación social, con la que se construye la pertenencia, aceptación o exclusión.

Mobwa Mobwa N’Djoli apunta que sólo por el hecho de ser diferentes, esas identidades son discriminadas. Para él, el motivo está en el miedo a lo desconocido: “El otro no sabe qué pueda haber detrás de esa diferencia”. Él observa que se concibe que el estilo de vida y la forma de manifestarse causan choques, debido a la inseguridad social que vive el país y a la cantidad de jóvenes que están en esa encrucijada.

De acuerdo con cifras del Conapred, de enero de 2004 a junio de 2009 el órgano recibió 91 quejas y reclamaciones por discriminación por apariencia física. Mientras en 2004 sólo captó siete, para 2008 esa cantidad se elevó cuatro veces. En tanto que en el primer semestre de este año se presentaron 12, en todo 2007 se contaron 18.

Horbath Corredor observa a la discriminación como un proceso que origina prejuicios, que “se cristaliza en actitudes y prácticas que van en detrimento de un individuo o colectividad”. El documento de trabajo, publicado por el Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación en diciembre de 2007, señala que esas prácticas pueden estar tan arraigadas que no se cuestionan.

Una de las manifestaciones de discriminación que más afecta a los jóvenes, precisa, es “la tendencia de la policía al hostigamiento, a la sospecha infundada y a sus ataques, no sólo verbales, sino también físicos”. Refiere que los entrevistados indicaron que además de tratarlos despectivamente, los obligan a despojarse de su ropa y frecuentemente los acusan de portar armas o drogas.

El artículo “Joven, crimen y estigma”, de Carlos Mario Perea Restrepo, apunta que ser joven y violento, de un tiempo para acá, vienen a ser una única cosa: “Se les asocia no sólo con el acto sangriento, se les funde también con el hecho criminal. Al joven se le contempla como encarnación de la inseguridad urbana”.

Tras un análisis a las estadísticas en delitos contra la vida, el patrimonio y la salud, el autor detectó que en homicidio y lesiones los jóvenes no tienen ese pretendido protagonismo, como tampoco en narcotráfico. Sólo en robo alcanzan una distancia notable respecto de otras edades.

Aunque no niega que los jóvenes por debajo de los 20 años de edad estén involucrados en prácticas criminales, aclara que su participación se ubica en el nivel medio, con igual intensidad que los adultos de 30 años. Publicado en la Revista de Estudios sobre Juventud en 2004, el estudio concluye que la responsabilidad en incidencia delictiva en México “se comparte simétricamente entre jóvenes y adultos”.

Para Perea Restrepo, la criminalidad proviene no de los desquiciados jóvenes que perdieron toda referencia en una sociedad con hondas crisis, sino de la invasión del crimen al tejido social.

El subdirector de medidas administrativas del Conapred sugiere no olvidar que los elementos de seguridad pública se manejan, en el tema de las identidades juveniles, por medio de estigmas y estereotipos. Compara que así como en el pasado la policía sabía de antemano si alguien era criminal o no, sólo por la forma de conducirse, a los jóvenes con esas identidades, únicamente por la apariencia o el lenguaje, se les detiene.

Nuestra policía, indica, tiende a categorizar cuando la delincuencia se disimula de diversas formas, incluso, el vestir bien: “¿Si yo soy darketo, punketo o emo no tengo derecho a la vida, a divertirme, a manifestarme tal como soy?, cuestiona. Si hablamos de derechos humanos, el punto central es la dignidad y ésa no se presta, no se intercambia, no se transfiere, es algo que debe quedar intacto en cualquier momento”.

La segregación también ocurre en el hogar. El maestro en derechos humanos por la Universidad Iberoamericana habla sobre la oposición entre la familia y los jóvenes: una se forma con un ideal imposible de alcanzar, mientras el otro sueña con la realidad, con los pies en la tierra.

Sin una base en el hoy, previene, y con el rechazo de por medio, los jóvenes tendrán como refugio la depresión, las drogas, el alcoholismo y la sexualidad. Asegura que alcanzar un país de valores que permita aceptar y admirar lo que hacen los otros es responsabilidad del gobierno, la familia y los particulares. Mobwa Mobwa N’Djoli recalca que sin un matrimonio entre el Estado y la juventud que resuelva la crisis de valores, habrá un futuro diferente.

“¿Qué futuro nos espera con la discriminación? Si la respuesta es negativa, entonces no comprendemos qué es un ser humano. La persona no es sólo una apariencia física; más allá de lo que se ve, es alguien. Un joven con cierta imagen puede darle otro giro a la sociedad el día de mañana”, reflexiona el especialista.


Grupo emo, grupo vulnerable: CNDH

El Informe especial de la Comisión Nacional de los Derechos Humanos sobre el grupo juvenil conocido como emo, publicado en marzo, describe que éste sufre violencia y discriminación tanto por autoridades como por la sociedad. Se pretende limitar su libertad de expresión, asociación y reunión, señala. La difusión, a veces distorsionada de su ideología y costumbres, como por sentimientos de rivalidad, es motivo para que las autoridades incurran en este tipo de conductas.

El 8 de marzo de 2008 en Querétaro ocurrió una agresión tumultuaria contra tres jóvenes emos. El incidente se intentó reproducir en otros estados, lo que, en algunos casos, se realizó “ante la inicial complacencia de las autoridades”.

La Comisión Nacional de Derechos Humanos (CNDH) enumera agravios de elementos de seguridad pública en el Distrito Federal: dispersar a jóvenes en la glorieta del Metro Insurgentes, su punto de reunión; del presidente municipal de Celaya, Guanajuato, quien les pidió que se retirarán del centro histórico de esa ciudad, y de diputados locales de Oaxaca que sugirieron la creación de comités municipales de la juventud para evitar la formación de las “tribus urbanas como los emos o punketos”.

Analiza que las afrentas evidencian un problema de intolerancia social cargada de clasismo. Para la CNDH, son producto de la falta de acción y participación de las autoridades quienes, “en un efectivo ejercicio de sus funciones, deben mantener los espacios de libertad para cada grupo social y procurar el respeto a sus ideas”. No sólo eso, advierte el órgano, tienen que otorgar a los diferentes sectores las mismas oportunidades de desarrollo, con el propósito de evitar que se sientan agredidos por manifestar aspectos distintos.

Frente a violaciones a la Constitución, instrumentos y convenciones internacionales, el organismo propone la elaboración de campañas que enfaticen el respeto a la diversidad; el diseño de políticas públicas dirigidas a jóvenes; la inclusión en planes de estudio de temas relativos a la discriminación; la capacitación a los cuerpos de seguridad pública y al personal del Ministerio Público. (PM)

Desinterés por discriminación a personas tatuadas y con perforaciones

Presentada en 2008 en la Asamblea Legislativa del Distrito Federal, la iniciativa para incluir en la Ley para Prevenir y Erradicar la Discriminación en el Distrito Federal como personas vulnerables a quienes tienen con tatuajes y perforaciones sigue en la congeladora.

Dante Salomo, precursor de la campaña contra la discriminación y por los derechos de las personas tatuadas y perforadas y promotor de la iniciativa, denuncia que no fue impulsada: “Hay desinterés y no les parece un tema importante, aun cuando ocurre en todo el país”.

En 2006 acudió al Consejo Nacional para Prevenir la Discriminación y a las comisiones Nacional de Derechos Humanos y de Derechos Humanos del Distrito Federal, pero sus inconformidades no fueron atendidas.

La principal causa por la que una persona con tatuajes o perforaciones es discriminada, puntualiza en entrevista, es la criminalización. Comenta sobre ella que en 1899, hace un siglo y 10 años, se realizó la primera investigación sobre el tema en una muestra de reclusos tatuados, buscando una relación directa entre el tatuaje y el delito cometido: “Se le intentó vincular a lo peligroso. Ya no iban tras el crimen en sí, sino tras quien lo pareciera”.

Esa visión se reprodujo en las teorías de sicología criminal y, como advierte Cupatitzio Piña Mendoza en el capítulo “La construcción del sujeto tatuado como individuo peligroso”, del libro Tinta y carne, en el imaginario colectivo permanece la valoración de la persona tatuada como alguien que no es mental ni fisiológicamente normal, lo que permite que se le perciba como un sujeto amenazante y peligroso.

Debido a ello, especifica el autor, las relaciones son de dos tipos: una disciplinaria que intenta “normalizarlos” y otra fincada en la exclusión (discriminación, persecución y uso de la fuerza).

Mediante la Encuesta nacional contra la discriminación y por los derechos de las personas tatuadas y perforadas, realizada en 2007, Dante Salomo recogió los testimonios de jóvenes que sufrieron exclusión y anulación en todos los ámbitos. En su mayoría se trata de actos realizados por adultos y autoridades.

Entre los resultados que obtuvo, destaca el que 598 entrevistados (90 por ciento) sufrieron por lo menos algún tipo de discriminación. Casi el 50 por ciento, 298 personas, fue revisado por la policía o sufrió detención ilegal. En tanto, en el ámbito laboral, 226 fueron discriminadas; 205 en la calle; 208 en el hogar, y 123 en las oficinas de gobierno.

Sobre los casos, relata que en una fiesta, un joven, identificado con el grupo punketo, fue golpeado hasta quedar inconsciente por otros invitados que le gritaban: “Si quieres lastimar tu cuerpo, nosotros te ayudamos; sólo los putos se ponen aretes y tatuajes”.

Otros sufren ese rechazo en su hogar, desde que sus padres les arranquen los piercings hasta ser corridos. Y entre más tatuajes o perforaciones tengan, la gente en la vía y el transporte público prefiere alejarse o voltear la mirada.

En las contrataciones de personal, la exclusión es para todo candidato que posea un tatuaje o perforación. Durante el proceso de selección, son rechazados, sea desde la propia oferta laboral hasta los exámenes médicos, donde se les desnuda para detectar tinta, perforaciones o cicatrices.

Salomo alerta que eso motiva la automutilación: adultos jóvenes que usan ácido de coche, navajas de afeitar, planchas, cigarros o químicos para borrarse “al rojo vivo” los tatuajes. Veintidós de los encuestados tuvieron que recurrir a esos métodos, sólo seis lo hicieron de forma segura.

Desempleados (por lo que llevan grabado en la piel), sin dinero y con la urgencia de conseguir un empleo, no tienen más opción, pues las cirugías son muy costosas. Por si no fuera poco, la cicatriz no les garantiza que sean contratados. Advierte que con esas políticas de no empleo, el país se pierde de personas valiosas y capaces.

Para el activista esto parece el pago de un castigo muy caro por un error cometido: “Es una sociedad donde tienes que arrepentirte de eso que se califica como malo. Me parece terrible porque es el único grupo que tiene que mutilarse para ejercer sus derechos”.

La discriminación llega a excluir a toda persona tatuada o perforada como donante de sangre. No obstante, la Norma Oficial Mexicana NOM-003-SSA2-1993 “para la disposición de sangre humana y sus componentes con fines terapéuticos” dice que sólo se rechazarán a quienes en el último año se hayan sometido a procedimientos efectuados con instrumentos potencialmente contaminados con líquidos de riesgo, tales como un tatuaje o perforación.

En relación con la persecución policiaca, dice que si algo ha cambiado es que ya no se hace de forma general, sino a aquél con un tatuaje rudimentario, como los elaborados en la cárcel. Por el contrario, quien posee un diseño estilizado no es perseguido, pues se entiende que pagó mucho por él.

Quien iniciara la campaña contra la discriminación y por los derechos de las personas tatuadas y perforadas concluye que se discrimina por ignorancia, por creencias antiguas y por rechazo al cambio. Por ello “no debemos parar hasta lograr que en el nivel nacional se nos reconozca plenamente con leyes, información y acciones”. (PM)

    Más sobre este tema:
  1. Chile: la lucha contra la discriminación publicitaria
  2. Miles de jóvenes, presa de drogas y violencia

“Russia cannot allow collapse of power in the Caucasus” – Medvedev

23 July, 2009, 20:49

That is what Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said Thursday, commenting on the security situation in southern Russia, which has deteriorated in recent months.



“We can’t afford to relax or show terrorists that their actions can paralyze the authorities and prevent them from making decisions,” Medvedev said. “This can’t be allowed to happen anywhere, and especially in the Caucasus.”

“You know how the powers that display any weakness are treated in the Caucasus: they are trampled on,” the Russian president added. “This is unacceptable, because it can only lead to a collapse.”

Read more

Russia’s Northern Caucasus has recently seen a wave of violence, with state authorities, members of the security forces and other officials having been murdered or attacked.

Sergey Bastrykin, the head of the Investigation Committee of Russia’s Prosecutor’s Office, stated that criminals’ attempts to destabilize the situation in the region are behind all this.

Chronicles of recent assaults

– Adilgerey Magomedtagirov, Minister of Internal Affairs of Dagestan since 1998, shot dead by a sniper at a wedding in the Republic’s capital Makhachkala on May 5;

– Aza Gazgireeva, a deputy head of the Supreme Court of Ingushetia, shot dead on May 10.

– Seyfutdin Kaziakhmedov, a deputy chief of the Investigation Department of Dagestan, was killed in May. He was coordinating investigation work on the most serious acts of terrorism, and his murder is believed to be connected with his professional activities.

– Former deputy prime minister of Ingushetia, Bashir Aushev, killed on the 13 of June.

– On June 22, Ingush President Yunus-Bek Yevkurov was seriously injured during an assassination attempt. The attack occurred when a suicide bomber drove his car, laden with 70 kilograms of explosives, into the Ingush president’s armored Mercedes 221. The blast flung the president’s vehicle off the road and set it on fire. At the present time, the wounded head of the Republic is receiving medical treatment in Moscow.

– Most recently, the body of a human rights activist Natalya Estemirova, who was kidnapped in mid-July in Chechnya, was found in the neighboring Republic of Ingushetia with two bullet wounds.

According to Bastrykin, today the Northern Caucasus is the most complicated region for law-enforcement authorities in Russia. Although crime has decreased by 8% across Russia, the situation in the Northern Caucasus is quite the opposite. In the past five months, according to Bastrykin, “It has risen by 9% in North Ossetia-Alania, by 10% in the Chechen Republic and by 22% in Ingushetia.”

Possible reasons

Apart from the vast illegal arsenals and scattered groups of bandits still remaining in post-conflict Chechnya and the neighboring republics, low living standards appear to be among the main reasons underlying constant outbreaks of violence.

“Living standards remain especially low, while unemployment-related issues are being solved ineffectively,” Bastrykin said.

“All this stimulates crime,” added the head of the Investigation Committee of Russia’s Prosecutor’s Office. “And I would also draw your attention to the fact that such a kind of situation is used by various foreign criminal organizations with terrorist and religious-extremist ideologies, as well as those involved in illegal trade.”


NEW GREAT GAME REVISITED, Part 1

Iran and Russia, scorpions in a bottle

By Pepe Escobar

HONG KONG - Things get curiouser and curiouser in the Iranian wonderland. Imagine what happened last week during Friday prayers in Tehran, personally conducted by former president Ayatollah Hashemi Rafsanjani, aka "The Shark", Iran's wealthiest man, who made his fortune partly because of Irangate - the 1980s' secret weapons contracts with Israel and the US.

As is well known, Rafsanjani is behind the Mir-Hossein Mousavi-Mohammad Khatami pragmatic conservative faction that lost the most recent battle at the top - rather than a presidential election - to the ultra-hardline faction of Ayatollah Ali Khamenei-Mahmud Ahmadinejad-Iran Revolutionary Guard Corps. During prayers, partisans of the hegemonic faction yelled the usual "Death to America!" - while the pragmatic conservatives came up, for the first time, with "Death to Russia!" and "Death to China!"

Oops. Unlike the United States and Western Europe, both Russia and China almost instantly accepted the contested presidential re-election of Ahmadinejad. Could they then be portrayed as enemies of Iran? Or have pragmatic conservatives not been informed that obsessed-by-Eurasia Zbig Brzezinksi - who has US President Barack Obama's undivided attention - has been preaching since the 1990s that it is essential to break up the Tehran-Moscow-Beijing axis and torpedo the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO)?

On top of it, don't they know that both Russia and China - as well as Iran - are firm proponents of the end of the dollar as global reserve currency to the benefit of a (multipolar) basket of currencies, a common currency of which Russian President Dmitry Medvedev had the gall this month to present a prototype at the Group of Eight (G-8) meeting in Aquila, Italy? By the way, it's a rather neat coin. Minted in Belgium, it sports the faces of the G-8 leaders and also a motto - "Unity in diversity".

"Unity in diversity" is not exactly what the Obama administration has in mind as far as Iran and Russia are concerned - no matter the zillion bytes of lofty rhetoric. Let's start with the energy picture.

Iran is world number two both in terms of proven oil reserves (11.2%) and gas reserves (15.7%), according to the BP Statistical Review of World Energy 2008.

If Iran ever opted towards a more unclenched-fist relationship with Washington, US Big Oil would feast on Iran's Caspian energy wealth. This means that whatever the rhetoric, no US administration will ever want to deal with a hyper-nationalist Iranian regime, such as the current military dictatorship of the mullahtariat.

What really scares Washington - from George W Bush to Obama - is the perspective of a Russia-Iran-Venezuela axis. Together, Iran and Russia hold 17.6% of the world's proven oil reserves. The Persian Gulf petro-monarchies - de facto controlled by Washington - hold 45%. The Moscow-Tehran-Caracas axis controls 25%. If we add Kazakhstan's 3% and Africa's 9.5%, this new axis is more than an effective counter-power to American hegemony over the Arab Middle East. The same thing applies to gas. Adding the "axis" to the Central Asian "stans", we reach 30% of world gas production. As a comparison, the whole Middle East - including Iran - currently produces only 12.1% of the world's needs.

All about Pipelineistan
A nuclear Iran would inevitably turbo-charge the new, emerging multipolar world. Iran and Russia are de facto showing to both China and India that it is not wise to rely on US might subjugating the bulk of oil in the Arab Middle East. All these players are very much aware that Iraq remains occupied, and that Washington's obsession remains the privatization of Iraq's enormous oil wealth.

As Chinese intellectuals are fond of emphasizing, four emerging or re-emerging powers - Russia, China, Iran and India - are strategic and civilizational poles, three of them sanctuaries because they are nuclear powers. A more confident and assertive Iran - mastering the full cycle of nuclear technology - may translate into Iran and Russia increasing their relative weight in Europe and Asia to the distress of Washington, not only in the energy sphere but also as proponents of a multipolar monetary system.

The entente is already on. Since 2008, Iranian officials have stressed that sooner or later Iran and Russia will start trading in rubles. Gazprom is willing to be paid for oil and gas in roubles - and not dollars. And the secretariat of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) has already seen the writing on the wall - admitting for over a year now that OPEC will be trading in euros before 2020.

Not only the "axis" Moscow-Tehran-Caracas, but also Qatar and Norway, for instance, and sooner or later the Gulf Emirates, are ready to break up with the petrodollar. It goes without saying that the end of the petrodollar - which won't happen tomorrow, of course - means the end of the dollar as the world's reserve currency; the end of the world paying for America's massive budget deficits; and the end of an Anglo-American finance stranglehold over the world that has lasted since the second part of the 19th century.

The energy equation between Iran and Russia is much more complex: it configures them as two scorpions in a bottle. Tehran, isolated from the West, lacks foreign investment to upgrade its 1970s-era energy installations. That's why Iran cannot fully profit from exploiting its Caspian energy wealth.

Here it's a matter of Pipelineistan at its peak - since the US, still during the 1990s, decided to hit the Caspian in full force by supporting the Baku-Tblisi-Ceyhan (BTC) oil pipeline and the Baku-Tblisi-Supsa (BTS) gas pipeline.

For Gazprom, Iran is literally a goldmine. In September 2008, the Russian energy giant announced it would explore the huge Azadegan-North oilfield, as well as three others. Russia's Lukoil has increased its prospecting and Tatneft said it would be involved in the north. The George W Bush administration thought it was weakening Russia and isolating Iran in Central Asia. Wrong: it only accelerated their strategic energy cooperation.

Putin power play
In February 1995, Moscow committed to finishing construction of a nuclear reactor at Bushehr. This was a project started by that erstwhile, self-proclaimed "gendarme of the Gulf" for the US - the shah of Iran. The shah engaged KWU from Germany in 1974, but the project was halted by the Islamic Revolution in 1979 and hit hard between 1984 and 1988 by Saddam Hussein's bombs. The Russians finally entered the picture proposing to finish the project for $800 million. By December 2001, Moscow also started to sell missiles to Tehran - a surefire way of making extra money offering protection for strategic assets such as Bushehr.

Bushehr is a source of immense controversy in Iran. It should have been finished by 2000. As Iranian officials see it, the Russians seem never to be interested in wrapping it up. There are technical reasons - such as the Russian reactor being too big to fit inside what KWU had already built - as well as a technology deficit on the part of Iranian nuclear engineers.

But most of all there are geopolitical reasons. Former president Vladimir Putin used Bushehr as a key diplomatic peon in his double chessboard match with the West and the Iranians. It was Putin who launched the idea of enriching uranium for Iran in Russia; talk about a strategic asset in terms of managing a global nuclear crisis. Ahmadinejad - and most of all the Supreme Leader - gave him a flat refusal. The Russian response was even more foot-dragging, and even mild support for more US-sponsored sanctions against Tehran.

Tehran got the message - that Putin was not an unconditional ally. Thus, in August 2006, the Russians landed a new deal for the construction and supervision of two new nuclear plants. This all means that the Iranian nuclear dossier simply cannot be solved without Russia. Simultaneously, by Putin's own framework, it's very clear in Moscow that a possible Israeli strike would make it lose a profitable nuclear client on top of a diplomatic debacle. Medvedev for his part is pursuing the same two-pronged strategy; stressing to Americans and Europeans that Russia does not want nuclear proliferation in the Middle East while stressing to Tehran that it needs Russia more than ever.

Another feature of Moscow's chessboard strategy - never spelled out in public - is to keep the cooperation with Tehran to prevent China from taking over the whole project, but without driving the Americans ballistic at the same time. As long as the Iranian nuclear program is not finished, Russia can always play the wise moderating role between Iran and the West.

Building up a civilian nuclear program in Iran is good business for both Iran and Russia for a number of reasons.

First of all, both are military encircled. Iran is strategically encircled by the US in Turkey, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Pakistan and Afghanistan, and by US naval power in the Persian Gulf and the Indian Ocean. Russia has seen the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) gobbling up the Baltic countries and threatening to "annex" Georgia and Ukraine; NATO is at war in Afghanistan; and the US is still present, one way or another, across Central Asia.

Iran and Russia share the same strategy as far as the Caspian Sea is concerned. They are in fact opposed to the new Caspian states - Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Azerbaijan.

Iran and Russia also face the threat of hardcore Sunni Islam. They have a tacit agreement; for instance, Tehran has never done anything to help the Chechens. Then there's the Armenian issue. A de facto Moscow-Tehran-Erevan axis profoundly irks the Americans.

Finally, in this decade, Iran has become the third-largest importer of Russian weapons, after China and India. This includes the anti-missile system Tor M-1, which defends Iran's nuclear installations.

What's your axis?
So thanks to Putin, the Iran-Russia alliance is carefully deployed in three fronts - nuclear, energy and weapons.

Are there cracks in this armor? Certainly.

First, Moscow by all means does not want a weaponized Iranian nuclear program. This spells out "regional destabilization". Then, Central Asia is considered by Moscow as its backyard, so for Iran to be ascendant in the region is quite problematic. As far as the Caspian goes, Iran needs Russia for a satisfactory juridical solution (Is it a sea or a lake? How much of it belongs to each border country?)

On other hand, Iran's new military dictatorship of the mullahtariat will react savagely if it ever had Russia fully against it in the UN Security Council. That would spell a rupture in economic relations - very bad for both sides - but also the possibility of Tehran supporting radical Islam everywhere from the southern Caucasus to Central Asia.

Under these complex circumstances, it's not so far-fetched to imagine a sort of polite Cold War going on between Tehran and Moscow.

From Russia's point of view, it all comes back to the "axis" - which would be in fact Moscow-Tehran-Erevan-New Delhi, a counter-power to the US-supported Ankara-Tblisi-Telaviv-Baku axis. But there's ample debate about it even inside the Russian elite. The old guard, like former prime minister Yevgeny Primakov, thinks that Russia is back as a great power by cultivating its former Arab clients as well as Iran; but then the so-called "Westernizers" are convinced that Iran is more of a liability.

They may have a point. The key of this Moscow-Tehran axis is opportunism - opposition to US hegemonic designs. Is Obama - via his "unclenched fist" policy - wily enough to try to turn this all upside down; or will he be forced by the Israel lobby and the industrial-military complex to finally strike a regime now universally despised all over the West?

Russia - and Iran - are fully committed to a multipolar world. The new military dictatorship of the mullahtariat in Tehran knows it cannot afford to be isolated; its road to the limelight may have to go through Moscow. That explains why Iran is making all sorts of diplomatic efforts to join the SCO.

As much as progressives in the West may support Iranian pragmatic conservatives - who are far from reformists - the crucial fact remains that Iran is a key peon for Russia to manage its relationship with the US and Europe. No matter how nasty the overtones, all evidence points to "stability" at this vital artery in the heart of the New Great Game.

Next: Iran, China and the New Silk Road

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)



NEW GREAT GAME REVISITED, Part 2

Iran, China and the New Silk Road


By Pepe Escobar

Part 1: Iran and Russia, scorpions in a bottle

HONG KONG - Does it make sense to talk about a Beijing-Tehran axis? Apparently no, when one learns that Iran's application to become a full member of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO) was flatly denied at the 2008 summit in Tajikistan.

Apparently yes, when one sees how the military dictatorship of the mullahtariat in Tehran and the collective leadership in Beijing have dealt with their recent turmoil - the "green revolution" in Tehran and the Uighur riots in Urumqi - reawakening in the West the ghostly mythology of "Asian despotism".

The Iran-China relationship is like a game of Chinese boxes. Amid the turbulence, glorious or terrifying, of their equally millenarian histories, when one sees an Islamic Republic that now reveals itself as a militarized theocracy and a Popular Republic that is in fact a capitalist oligarchy, things are not what they seem to be.

No matter what recently happened in Iran, consolidating the power the Khamenei-Ahmadinejad-IRGC axis, the relationship will continue to develop within the framework of a clash between US hyperpower - declining as it may be - and the aspiring Chinese big power, allied with the re-emergent Russian big power.

On the road
Iran and China are all about the New Silk Road - or routes - in Eurasia. Both are among the most venerable and ancient of (on the road) partners. The first encounter between the Parthian empire and the Han dynasty was in 140 BC, when Zhang Qian was sent to Bactria (in today's Afghanistan) to strike deals with nomad populations. This eventually led to Chinese expansion in Central Asia and interchange with India.

Trading exploded via the fabled Silk Road - silk, porcelain, horses, amber, ivory, incense. As a serial traveler across the Silk Road over the years, I ended up learning on the spot how the Persians controlled the Silk Road by mastering the art of making oases, thus becoming in the process the middlemen between China, India and the West.

Parallel to the land route there was also a naval route - from the Persian Gulf to Canton (today's Guangzhou). And there was of course a religious route - with Persians translating Buddhist texts and with Persian villages in the desert serving as springboards to Chinese pilgrims visiting India. Zoroastrianism - the official religion of the Sassanid empire - was imported to China by Persians at the end of the 6th century, and Manichaeism during the 7th. Diplomacy followed: the son of the last Sassanid emperor - fleeing the Arabs in 670 AD - found refuge in the Tang court. During the Mongol period, Islam spread into China.

Iran has never been colonized. But it was a privileged theater of the original Great Game between the British Empire and Russia in the 19th century and then during the Cold War between the US and the Soviet Union in the 20th. The Islamic Revolution may at first imply Khomeini's official policy of "neither East nor West". In fact, Iran dreams of bridging both.

That brings us to Iran's key, inescapable geopolitical role at the epicenter of Eurasia. The New Silk Road translates into an energy corridor - the Asian Energy Security Grid - in which the Caspian Sea is an essential node, linked to the Persian Gulf, from where oil is to be transported to Asia. And as far as gas is concerned, the name of the game is Pipelineistan - as in the recently agreed Iran-Pakistan (IP) pipeline and the interconnection between Iran and Turkmenistan, whose end result is a direct link between Iran and China.

Then there's the hyper-ambitious, so-called "North-South corridor" - a projected road and rail link between Europe and India, through Russia, Central Asia, Iran and the Persian Gulf. And the ultimate New Silk Road dream - an actual land route between China and the Persian Gulf via Central Asia (Afghanistan, Tajikistan, Uzbekistan).

The width of the circle
As the bastion of Shi'ite faith, encircled by Sunnis, Iran under what is now a de facto theocratic dictatorship still desperately needs to break out from its isolation. Talk about a turbulent environment: Iraq still under US occupation to the west, the ultra-unstable Caucasus in the northwest, fragile Central Asian "stans" in the northeast, basket cases Afghanistan and Pakistan to the east, not to mention the nuclear neighborhood -Israel, Russia, China, Pakistan and India.

Technological advancement for Iran means fully mastering a civilian nuclear program - which contains the added benefit of turning it into a sanctuary via the possibility of building a nuclear device. Officially, Tehran has declared ad infinitum it has no intention of possessing an "un-Islamic" bomb. Beijing understands Tehran's delicate position and supports its right to the peaceful use of nuclear energy. Beijing would have loved to see Tehran adopt the plan proposed by Russia, the US, Western Europe and, of course, China. Carefully evaluating its vital energy and national security interests, the last thing Beijing wants is for Washington to clench its fist again.

What happened to the George W Bush-declared, post-9/11 "global war on terror" (GWOT), now remixed by Obama as "overseas contingency operations" (OCO)? GWOT's key, shadowy aim was for Washington to firmly plant the flag in Central Asia. For those sorry neo-cons, China was the ultimate geopolitical enemy, so nothing was more enticing than to try to sway a batch of Asian countries against China. Easier dreamed of than done.

China's counter-power was to turn the whole game around in Central Asia, with Iran as its key peon. Beijing was quick to grasp that Iran is a matter of national security, in terms of assuring its vast energy needs.

Of course China also needs Russia - for energy and technology. This is arguably more of an alliance of circumstance - for all the ambitious targets embodied by the SCO - than a long-term strategic partnership. Russia, invoking a series of geopolitical reasons, considers its relationship with Iran as exclusive. China says slow down, we're also in the picture. And as Iran remains under pressure at different levels from both the US and Russia, what better "savior" than China?

Enter Pipelineistan. At first sight, Iranian energy and Chinese technology is a match made in heaven. But it's more complicated than that.

Still the victim of US sanctions, Iran has turned to China to modernize itself. Once again, the Bush/Dick Cheney years and the invasion of Iraq sent an unmistakable message to the collective leadership in Beijing. A push to control Iraq oil plus troops in Afghanistan, a stone's throw from the Caspian, added to the Pentagon's self-defined "arc of instability" from the Middle East to Central Asia - this was more than enough to imprint the message: the less dependent China is on US-subjugated Arab Middle East energy, the better.

The Arab Middle East used to account for 50% of China's oil imports. Soon China became the second-largest oil importer from Iran, after Japan. And since fateful 2003, China also has mastered the full cycle of prospection/exploitation/refining - thus Chinese companies are investing heavily in Iran's oil sector, whose refining capacity, for instance, is risible. Without urgent investment, some projections point to Iran possibly cutting off oil exports by 2020. Iran also needs everything else China can provide in areas like transportation systems, telecom, electricity and naval construction.

Iran needs China to develop its gas production in the gigantic north Pars and south Pars fields - which it shares with Qatar - in the Persian Gulf. So no wonder a "stable" Iran had to become a matter of Chinese national security.

Multipolar we go
So why the stalemate at the SCO? As China is always meticulously seeking to improve its global credibility, it had to be considering the pros and cons of admitting Iran, for which the SCO and its slogan of mutual cooperation for the stability of Central Asia, as well as economic and security benefits, are priceless. The SCO fights against Islamic terrorism and "separatism" in general - but now has also developed as an economic body, with a development fund and a multilateral economic council. The whole idea of it is to curb American influence in Central Asia.

Iran has been an observer since 2005. Next year may be crucial. The race is on to beat the clock, before a desperate Israeli strike, and have Iran accepted by the SCO while negotiating some sort of stability pact with the Barack Obama administration. For all this to happen relatively smoothly, Iran needs China - that is, to sell as much oil and gas as China needs below market prices, while accepting Chinese - and Russian - investment in the exploration and production of Caspian oil.

All this while Iran also courts India. Both Iran and India are focused on Central Asia. In Afghanistan, India is financing the construction of a US$250 million road between Zaranj, at the Iranian border, and Delaram - which is in the Afghan ring road linking Kabul, Kandahar, Herat and Mazar-i-Sharif. New Delhi sees in Iran a very important market. India is actively involved in the construction of a deep water port in Chabahar - that would be a twin for the Gwadar port built in southern Balochistan by China, and would be very helpful to landlocked Afghanistan (freeing it from Pakistani interference).

Iran also needs its doors to the north - the Caucasus and Turkey - to channel its energy production towards Europe. It's an uphill struggle. Iran has to fight fierce regional competition in the Caucasus; the US-Turkey alliance framed by the North Atlantic Treaty Organization; the perpetual US-Russian Cold War in the region; and last but not least Russia's own energy policy, which simply does not contemplate sharing the European energy market with Iran.

But energy agreements with Turkey are now part of the picture - after the moderate Islamists of the AKP took power in Ankara in 2002. Now it's not that far-fetched to imagine the possibility of Iran in the near future supplying much-needed gas for the ultra-expensive, US-supported Turkey-to-Austria Nabucco pipeline.

But the fact remains that for both Tehran and Beijing, the American thrust in the "arc of instability" from the Middle East to Central Asia is anathema. They're both anti-US hegemony and US unilateralism, Bush/Cheney style. As emerging powers, they're both pro multipolar. And as they're not Western-style liberal democracies, the empathy is even stronger. Few failed to notice the stark similarities in the degree of repression of the "green revolution" in Tehran and the Uighurs in Xinjiang. For China, a strategic alliance with Iran is above all about Pipelineistan, the Asian Energy Security Grid and the New Silk Road. For China, a peaceful solution to the Iranian nuclear dossier is imperative. This would lead to Iran being fully opened to (eager) European investment. Washington may be reluctant to admit it, but in the New Great Game in Eurasia, the Tehran-Beijing axis spells out the future: multipolarity.

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007) and Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge. His new book, just out, is Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).

He may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

(Copyright 2009 Asia Times Online (Holdings) Ltd. All rights reserved. Please contact us about sales, syndication and republishing.)

Israel: Irán en la mira del Dolphin. Juegos de guerra en el Mar Rojo

Global Research/ il manifesto

Traducido del inglés para Rebelión por Germán Leyens


El Dolphin emergió del agua frente a los bañistas en Eilat, el puerto israelí en el Golfo de Aqaba en el Mar Rojo. No se trataba de un mamífero marino sin de un Dolphin, uno de los submarinos israelíes armados con misiles nucleares. Aunque la noticia hizo sensación, en realidad no es un misterio que los Dolphin cruzan de un lado al otro por el Mar Rojo para mantener a Irán en sus puntos de mira. Escribí al respecto hace siete años en ‘il manifesto’ (5 de abril de 2002). Los primeros submarinos de esta clase, equipados con sofisticados sistemas de navegación y combate, fueron suministrados a Israel por Alemania en los años noventa, dos de ellos como regalo. A pedido de Israel, aparte de los seis lanzatorpedos de 533 mm adecuados para misiles crucero de corto alcance, todos los submarinos tienen cuatro tubos adicionales de 659 mm para lanzar misiles crucero nucleares de largo alcance: los Popeye Turbos, que pueden alcanzar objetivos a hasta 1.500 km de distancia. Esos misiles son derivados de versiones estadounidenses y fueron fabricados en conjunto por la firma israelí Rafael y Lockheed-Martin en una versión aerotransportada.

En 2010 dos nuevos submarinos para ataques nucleares se sumarán a los tres actuales, también desde Alemania. Fueron construidos en los astilleros Howaldtswerke-Deutsche Werft AG a un coste de 1.270 millones de dólares, de los cuales el gobierno alemán financió un tercio. El Jerusalem Post confirma que también los dos nuevos, del tipo U-212, fueron construidos según “especificaciones israelíes”: son más rápidos (20 nudos), tienen un campo de acción más amplio (4.500 km), y son más silenciosos, lo que les permite acercarse a los objetivos sin ser identificados.

Según expertos militares uno de los tres Dolphin entregados por Alemania patrulla el Mar Rojo y el Golfo Pérsico, el segundo está desplegado en el Mediterráneo, mientras el tercero es mantenido en reserva. Con la integración de otros dos, la cantidad de los que navegan, listos para lanzar un ataque nuclear, se ha prácticamente duplicado. Y esto es sólo una parte del poder nuclear de Israel, calculado en entre 200 y 400 ojivas, el equivalente a casi cuatro mil bombas del tipo Hiroshima, y cuyos vectores incluyen sobre trescientos F-16 y F-15 cazas bombarderos estadounidenses y unos cincuenta misiles balísticos Jericho II sobre ramplas móviles de lanzamiento. Estas y otras armas nucleares están listas para ser lanzadas a toda hora.

El gobierno israelí, que rechaza el Tratado de No-Proliferación, no admite la posesión de armas nucleares (cuya existencia es reconocida por la Agencia Internacional de Energía Atómica), pero deja que se piense que las tiene y que puede utilizarlas. Esto explica el motivo por el cual el Dolphin apareció ante los ojos de los bañistas en Eilat y el Jerusalem Post publicó la noticia de que había pasado por el Canal de Suez de vuelta de maniobras en el Mar Rojo. Como explica el propio Jerusalem Post: “Es una señal a Irán.” En otras palabras, una manera de dejar en claro a Irán y a otros países en la región, que no poseen armas nucleares, que Israel sí las tiene y está listo a utilizarlas.

Otra “señal de advertencia a Irán” es la noticia, publicada por Haaretz, de que ayer dos barcos de guerra israelíes, el Hanit y el Eilat, pasaron por el Canal de Suez hacia el Mar Rojo. El Hanit ya había transitado en junio junto con el Dolphin. Eso parece indicar un acuerdo israelí-egipcio contra Irán. Las propias fuentes israelíes hablan de un “cambio de política” que permitiría que unidades navales transiten libremente por el Canal. Fue confirmado por el ministro de exteriores egipcio Ahmed Aboul Gheit, quien definió el uso del Canal de Suez por Israel como “legítimo,” porque fue aprobado formalmente por “un acuerdo entre el Cairo y Jerusalén.” Consecuentemente, ahora hay un vínculo estratégico más estrecho entre el Mediterráneo, el Mar Rojo y el Golfo Pérsico.

Y mientras Israel practica para un ataque nuclear contra Irán, los dirigentes del G-8 (casi todos sustentadores activos del programa nuclear militar israelí) denuncian “los riesgos de proliferación debidos al programa nuclear de Irán” en documentos aprobados en Aquila en la cumbre del 8 de julio “durante la cena.”

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=14448


Glaxo unmasked: drug firm to make £1bn from swine flu

By Alistair Dawber and Jeremy Laurance

Thursday, 23 July 2009

Liverpool fans take precautions against swine flu at a friendly football match between Liverpool and Thailand at Rajamangala stadium in Bangkok yesterday

EPA

Liverpool fans take precautions against swine flu at a friendly football match between Liverpool and Thailand at Rajamangala stadium in Bangkok yesterday


Entrevista a Juan Alberto Barahona, Coordinador del Bloque Popular y dirigente del Frente Nacional contra el golpe de Estado



Aunque el régimen de Roberto Micheletti no lo reconozca, Juan Alberto Barahona (Nueva Armenia, Francisco de Morazán, 12 de julio de 1954) se ha de mover permanentemente escoltado, sobre todo después de la última noche de hostigamiento sufrida por él y su familia.

Para evitar posibles arrestos o nuevas agresiones, un grupo de miembros de la Federación Unitaria de Trabajadores, que hasta ahora presidía, le acompaña con discreción a sus mítines y entrevistas. Conocedores de la tensión que se vive en el país en estas horas de incertidumbre, los miembros del Bloque Popular, que coordina este histórico sindicalista hondureño no quieren dar pie a que su líder corra la misma suerte que el depuesto presidente Zelaya. Si bien "el Bloque", alma máter del "Frente Nacional contra el golpe de Estado", sigue manifestándose con relativa libertad, todo puede cambiar en cuestión de minutos, sobre todo desde que Zelaya haya llamado a la desobediencia civil, el ejército continúe pisando las calles y la propia organización de Barahona apela a la rebeldía.

¿Qué ha cambiado en Honduras desde el pasado 28 de junio?

Se ha retrocedido 50 años. Hemos regresado a los tiempos de las repúblicas bananeras, días en las que la oligarquía junto con el ejército hacia lo que quería con el beneplácito de Estados Unidos.

Además este golpe significa un atraso en el desarrollo social, político y económico, porque lo dan los sectores más atrasados de la sociedad, esos que se oponen al desarrollo común. Aunque sean ricos y vistan trajes, su opción no es en realidad la del progreso.

¿Por qué creen ustedes que se da el golpe?


Bueno, lo evidente es que el régimen golpista representa los intereses económicos de una minoría que vio amenazada su hegemonía cuando Zelaya empezó a actuar sin contar con la receta que éstos le imponían.

Explíqueme eso.


Cuando él llega a la presidencia apoyado por estos sectores del poder tradicional, Zelaya se sale del esquema heredado por estas elites y se va acercando al pueblo, con cambios que poco a poco lo acercan a los más desfavorecidos.

Primero decide una licitación para comprar los combustibles energéticos de este país. Esa licitación fue boicoteada. Luego se une a PetroCaribe. Después se adhiere al Alba, proyecto que ha beneficiado, probadamente, a los sectores más pobres del hemisferio, erradicando el analfabetismo, dando apoyos al campo, bonos a estudiantes, etc. Después, aprueba una subida del salario mínimo. Este salario mínimo nunca fue subido tanto como hasta que llegó Zelaya. El diciembre pasado se da la negociación entre empresarios y trabajadores pero finalmente fracasa, pues los empresarios querían bajarlo, ¡ni tan siquiera mantenerlo! Por último, el presidente aprobó la subida unilateralmente. Los empresarios recurrieron, pero la corte finalmente da la razón a Zelaya y los trabajadores, confirmando el derecho a la subida. Esto, evidentemente, creó un importante malestar en las clases dirigentes del mundo empresarial. No se lo perdonaron.

El 1, 2 y 3 de junio se da la asamblea de la OEA en San Pedro Sula. Acá se querían suspender las sanciones a Cuba y se logró. Desde ese momento la guerra contra el presidente Zelaya se hizo abierta.

Y, por último, se planteó la consulta al pueblo hondureño para ver si estábamos de acuerdo o no en poner una cuarta urna en las elecciones con el fin de votar a favor, o no, de una asamblea constituyente. Eso, a ojos de la oligarquía, fue la gota que colmó el vaso, pues veía con claridad que definitivamente su histórico control político se desvanecía.

¿Realmente tenían miedo?


Sin duda, pero a lo que verdaderamente tienen miedo los oligarcas es a la reforma de la Constitución, eso los aterra, pues afectaría a sus negocios, al comenzar a perder parte de sus injustos privilegios, como es el no pagar impuestos en cantidad de sectores.

Nosotros queremos aclarar que el golpe no es contra Zelaya, sino contra todo el pueblo hondureño. Nos niega cualquier posibilidad de cambio por muy legitimo y democrático que sea. Los golpistas quieren mantener todo como antaño, el pueblo abajo y ellos arriba.

Tras estos días de infructuosa negociación, ¿hay algo que para ustedes sea negociable?


Muchas cosas lo son. Lo que es innegociable es el regreso del presidente Zelaya y la convocatoria de una asamblea nacional constituyente, pues el pueblo tiene derecho.

¿Puede definir su movimiento?


En Honduras todo lo que son los sectores populares, el llamado "bloque popular", estamos aglutinados en el "Frente Nacional contra el golpe de Estado". Somos campesinos, maestros, indígenas, mujeres, médicos, sindicalistas, etc. y tenemos una dirección en la que nos coordinamos para resistir y responder a los desafíos impuestos por los golpistas.

¿Cuáles son sus instrumentos de lucha?


La razón, la capacidad de movilización y, sobre todo, muy importante, el apoyo de la mayoría de la comunidad internacional. Para nosotros, ese apoyo internacional es determinante, nos anima a seguir.

¿Y cómo viven esa lucha?


Se han dado asesinatos, arrestos, palizas y registros injustificados. En la zona norte, donde apenas hay medios de comunicación, la represión es aún peor. Pero el día en que realmente quisieron dejar claro hasta dónde podían llegar fue cuando nos balacearon en el aeropuerto, matando a un joven manifestante e hiriendo a varios otros.

Pero resistimos. Por ejemplo, hace poco nos ametrallaron un autobús de ciudadanos que iban a una concentración, como no paramos ni nos asustamos, nos hicieron bajar del autobús y retroceder. Más aún así conseguimos llegar al punto de protesta. Y ahora vamos a golpear su economía, que es donde de verdad les duele.

¿Critican mucho el papel de los medios de comunicación frente a la actual crisis?


Si, porque es un escándalo. Desde el primer día del golpe, los medios se han posicionado ferozmente a favor del golpe. No es casualidad, dado que todos los medios de gran difusión están vinculados a las elites. Los pocos que eran objetivos, no digamos ya críticos, los cerraron. Todavía hoy el ejército monta guardia en la entrada de varios de los clausurados. Es lamentable que cierta prensa internacional trate a Micheletti de demócrata.

Se ha dado y se da un salvaje cerco mediático para que el pueblo no sepa nada. Si hoy se sabe algo de lo que pasa es gracias a los medios internacionales que han llegado y han tenido la suerte de no ser expulsados, como les sucedió a varios venezolanos.

¿Se declaran en rebeldía?


El pueblo está rebelado en contra del régimen golpista, no en contra de la gente. El artículo 3 de nuestra Constitución dice que no debemos apoyar a un gobierno usurpador como éste, un gobierno no votado, que ha sido impuesto en contra de la voluntad del pueblo y de los intereses de éste.

¿Hasta dónde puede llegar su resistencia?


No tenemos limites en nuestra resistencia. Los limites los pondrán la cohesión del pueblo y su accionar en la defensa de su soberanía. Pero repito, aunque somos un movimiento pacífico no tenemos limites. Estos -los límites- vendrán más bien dictados por la dirección en la que los golpistas quieran llevar su agresión contra el pueblo.

Unai Aranzadi / Tegucigalpa (Honduras)

www.independentdocs.com

Crisis financiera

Mundo Obrero


Sabemos ya perfectamente que la crisis que vivimos no es solamente una crisis financiera, aunque se haya llevado por delante a una buena parte del sistema bancario mundial, que ahora se encuentra prácticamente en quiebra.

También, y aunque lo quieran negar quienes se aferran ciegamente al liberalismo doctrinario, ha fallado un sistema de regulación permisivo con los poderosos, concebido para que éstos puedan hacer y deshacer libremente con sus capitales y basado, o simplemente justificado retóricamente, en la quimera de los mercados autorregulables capaces de asumir y resolver sin mayores disturbios cualquier dosis de riesgo por grande que sea en aras de aumentar el beneficio. Aunque no será fácil que los reguladores pongan límites a la ingeniería financiera desorbitada y cuasi fraudulenta, al apalancamiento artificialmente desbocado y a la libertad absoluta de la que disfrutan los capitales y sus propietarios, también se tendrá que establecer antes o después una regulación más represiva en el mundo financiero.

Ha fallado también la articulación sistémica del propio capitalismo que se ha mostrado incapaz de proporcionarse a sí mismo los resortes de seguridad que puedan impedir que los disturbios en un segmento de la vida económica, como ahora en lo financiero, afecten fatalmente al conjunto provocando, como está sucediendo, su parálisis casi completa. Eso obligará a disponer en el futuro de una supervisión más rigurosa y de mecanismos de intervención anticipada que traten de evitar el peligro de inestabilidad que, en todo caso, nunca van a desaparecer en un sistema intrínsecamente desigual y que necesita generar constantemente asimetrías para alimentar al capital que le sirve de base y fundamento.

Han fallado instituciones, como los propios gobiernos y los bancos centrales que, a pesar del poder acumulado, han sido incapaces, bien por complicidad, bien como efecto de las anteojeras ideológicas con que analizan la realidad, de anticipar lo que evidentemente iba a ocurrir y, por supuesto, de hacer frente a la crisis con eficacia cuando ésta se ha desatado. No será extraño, pues, que incluso tarde o temprano se ponga también sobre la mesa la necesidad de disponer de nuevas instancias de gobierno y toma de decisiones (por supuesto, no necesariamente más democráticas y transparentes) en el plano internacional e incluso también nacional para evitar que los disturbios localizados, como viene ocurriendo, terminen por generar problemas globales.

Y por supuesto han fallado, como incluso algunos dirigentes de la derecha y del poder económico establecido lo reconocen, los sistema de incentivos y muchos de los valores que se han fomentado para lograr emprendimiento y conseguir la necesaria legitimación del sistema.

Lo que quiero señalar mencionando todo estos extremos es que la crisis está siendo muy, muy profunda y que, por tanto, los arreglos necesarios para que los fundamentos del capitalismo permanezcan igual, que en definitiva es lo que se va a buscar por los poderes que dominan el mundo, las respuestas a la crisis de éstos últimos tendrán que ser también muy profundas, aunque se adopten taimadamente, con disimulo y procurando, en definitiva, que parezca que todo lo ocurrido no ha sido más que un accidente.

Yo intuyo que van a conseguir darle la vuelta a la situación y regenerar el sistema financiero, aunque no tengo certezas sobre el modo en que van a lograrlo, ni estoy seguro de que las medidas que finalmente se apliquen sean capaces de evitar en el futuro nuevos sobresaltos, ni de que todo ello vaya a resultar netamente positivo para el bienestar social e incluso para la estabilidad macroeconómica.

Y tengo esas duda precisamente porque hay otro fracaso que es el que hace que los poderes que determinan las decisiones sociales disfruten de la gran capacidad de maniobra que tienen: el de las izquierdas de todo el planeta que se han mostrado incapaces de hacer ver a los ciudadanos lo que en realidad hay detrás de la crisis y de empoderarlos para hacer posible que se pusieran en marcha decisiones alternativas a las que se van a aplicar solo para salvaguardar los intereses de los más ricos y privilegiados.

Se trata de un fracaso histórico que a su vez tiene que ver con diversas dimensiones pero que creo que se podrían resumir en una principal: las izquierdas no han sabido civilizar a la sociedad, como sí ha hecho el liberalismo, en torno a valores, incentivos materiales e inmateriales y principios éticos.

Mientras que el neoliberalismo ha creado sociedad, aunque haya sido la no-sociedad del individualismo, las izquierdas siguen actuando arrastradas por el racionalismo decimonónico que les lleva a pensar que su tarea no es la de socializar sino la de crear ellas mismas el marco social (como hace la socialdemocracia cuando gobierna, si lo consigue) o la de descubrir y presentar a las gentes el horizonte objetivo al que tarde o temprano y de modo inexorable se encaminarán los hechos sociales.

Un planteamiento tan errado es el que lleva a que las izquierdas más pragmáticas como la socialdemocracia se limiten a tratar de conseguir mejores condiciones de vida desde los gobiernos pero sin poner en marcha un proyecto civilizatorio alternativo. Lo que generalmente tiene como consecuencia que la propia práctica de gobierno socialdemócrata, aunque más favorable a los trabajadores que la liberal, termine por generar ciudadanos que finalmente abrazan el liberalismo. Y, por otro lado, a que las izquierdas más radicales se dediquen simplemente a dibujar con renovada precisión el alcance de su radical proyecto político y a presentar ante los ciudadanos el camino que se suponen que deberán asumir como un imperativo categórico para mejorar su condición.

Una y otra práctica, y ambas superpuestas frente a un neoliberalismo mucho más coherente y con más inteligencia política, han desarmado a los trabajadores y han propiciado el desafecto creciente que, nos guste o no reconocerlo, se da entre las clases más desfavorecidas y los partidos de la izquierda.

Hay que hacer frente a este fracaso y hay que acometer esa tarea con decisión, con un esfuerzo de convergencia muy sincero y fraternal, con gran lucidez y, sobre todo, sin un ápice de sectarismo sino anteponiendo a cualquier otra cosa los elementos transversales que permitan hacer mallas y construir redes.

Es verdad que se necesitan medidas radicales para lograr que la crisis (y no solo en este episodio concreto que vivimos sino la que constantemente supone un capitalismo que deja morir cada día a casi 30.000 personas de hambre) se resuelva favorablemente para los empobrecidos. Pero eso no puede llevar simplemente a radicalizar el discurso sino a mezclarse más íntimamente con la gente. Es verdad que para poner en marcha un proyecto político alternativo será necesario disponer de más poder pero eso no puede llevar a fortalecer las organizaciones y las burocracias sino a crear contrapoderes basados en la movilización social destinada al sabotaje pacífico de las injusticias. Y es verdad que la lucha contra el capitalismo es en realidad un enfrentamiento puramente político pero eso tampoco puede significar que las izquierdas centren su diálogo con la sociedad en esa única dimensión sino que deben humanizarlo, hacerlo más cordial y vinculado también, o quizá sobre todo, al mundo de las emociones y los afectos que mueve a las personas normales y corrientes. No hay que olvidar que si algo pone de relieve una crisis como la que vivimos y en general un sistema social como el capitalismo que condena a la muerte por hambre o falta de agua, a la ignorancia, a la enfermedad y al desamparo a millones de personas cuando se dispone de recursos suficientes para evitarlo, es su incapacidad para practicar la fraternidad. Es decir, su radical fracaso para humanizar a los seres humanos. Por eso, quizá si la izquierda comenzara a trabajar para poner en marcha prácticas políticas de este otro signo, fraternales, de emociones y afectos, de reunión, de deliberación y debate, en lugar de dedicarse simplemente a gestionar o simplemente a radicalizar sobre el papel sus programas, las salida a la crisis que vivimos y a las que vendrán, serían diferentes.

Juan Torres López es catedrático de Economía Aplicada (Universidad de Sevilla).

Su página web: http://www.juantorreslopez.com


El 30 Aniversario sandinista y la propuesta de San José

(Tomado de Cubadebate)

El golpe de Estado de Honduras, promovido por la extrema derecha de Estados Unidos —que mantenía en Centroamérica la estructura creada por Bush— y apoyado por el Departamento de Estado, evolucionaba mal por la enérgica resistencia del pueblo.

La criminal aventura, condenada de forma unánime por la opinión mundial y los organismos internacionales, no podía sostenerse.

El recuerdo de las atrocidades cometidas en décadas recientes por las tiranías que Estados Unidos promovió, instruyó y armó en nuestro hemisferio, estaba todavía fresco.

Los esfuerzos del imperio se encaminaron durante la administración de Clinton y en los años subsiguientes al plan de imponer el TLC a todos los países de América Latina a través de las llamadas Cumbres de las Américas.

El intento de comprometer al hemisferio con un acuerdo de libre comercio fracasó. Las economías de otras regiones del mundo crecieron a buen ritmo y el dólar perdía su hegemonía exclusiva como divisa privilegiada. La brutal crisis financiera mundial complicó la situación. En esas circunstancias se produjo el golpe militar en Honduras, uno de los países más pobres del hemisferio.

Tras dos semanas de creciente lucha popular, Estados Unidos maniobró para ganar tiempo. El Departamento de Estado asignó a Oscar Arias, Presidente de Costa Rica, la tarea de auxiliar al golpe militar en Honduras, asediado por la vigorosa, pero pacífica presión popular. Nunca un hecho similar en América Latina había recibido tal respuesta.

En los cálculos del Gobierno de Estados Unidos pesaba el hecho de que Arias ostentaba el título de Premio Nobel de la Paz.

La historia real de Oscar Arias indica que se trata de un político neoliberal, talentoso y con facilidad de palabras, sumamente calculador y aliado fiel de Estados Unidos.

Desde los primeros años del triunfo de la Revolución Cubana, el gobierno de Estados Unidos utilizó a Costa Rica y le asignó recursos para presentarla como una vitrina de los avances sociales que se podían lograr bajo el capitalismo.

Ese país centroamericano fue utilizado como base por el imperialismo para los ataques piratas contra Cuba. Miles de técnicos y graduados universitarios cubanos fueron sustraídos a nuestro pueblo, que estaba ya sometido a cruel bloqueo, para prestar servicios en Costa Rica. Las relaciones entre Costa Rica y Cuba se han restablecido en fecha reciente; fue uno de los dos últimos países del hemisferio en hacerlo, lo cual nos satisface, pero no por ello debo dejar de expresar lo que pienso en este momento histórico de nuestra América.

Arias, procedente del sector rico y dominante de Costa Rica, estudió Derecho y Economía en un centro universitario de su país, cursó estudios y se graduó después como Máster en Ciencias Políticas en la Universidad Inglesa de Essex, donde finalmente recibió el título de Doctor en Ciencias Políticas. Con tales laureles académicos el presidente José Figueres Ferrer, del Partido Liberación Nacional, lo nombró asesor en 1970, a los 30 años de edad, y poco después lo designó Ministro de Planificación, cargo en el que fue ratificado por el Presidente que le siguió, Daniel Oduber. En 1978 ingresa al Congreso como Diputado de ese Partido. Asciende luego a Secretario General en 1979, y es Presidente por primera vez en 1986.

Años antes del triunfo de la Revolución Cubana, un movimiento armado de la burguesía nacional de Costa Rica, bajo la dirección de José Figueres Ferrer, padre del presidente Figueres Olsen, había eliminado el pequeño ejército golpista de ese país y su lucha contó con las simpatías de los cubanos. Cuando combatíamos en la Sierra Maestra contra la tiranía batistiana, recibimos del Partido de Liberación creado por Figueres Ferrer algunas armas y municiones, pero era demasiado amigo de los yanquis y pronto rompió con nosotros. No debe olvidarse la reunión de la OEA en San José de Costa Rica, que dio lugar a la Primera Declaración de la Habana en 1960.

Toda Centroamérica sufrió durante más de 150 años y todavía sufre desde los tiempos del filibustero William Walker, que se hizo presidente de Nicaragua en 1856, el problema del intervencionismo de Estados Unidos, que ha sido constante, aunque el pueblo heroico de Nicaragua logró ya una independencia que está dispuesto a defender hasta el último aliento. No se conoce de apoyo alguno de Costa Rica después que la alcanzó, aunque hubo un gobierno de ese país al que vísperas de la victoria de 1979, le cupo la gloria de ser solidario con el Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional.

Cuando Nicaragua era desangrada por la guerra sucia de Reagan, Guatemala y El Salvador habían pagado también un alto precio de vidas debido a la política intervencionista de Estados Unidos, que suministraba dinero, armas, escuelas y adoctrinamiento a las tropas represivas. Daniel nos contó que los yanquis finalmente promovieron fórmulas que pusieran fin a la resistencia revolucionaria de Guatemala y El Salvador.

Más de una vez Daniel me había comentado con amargura que Arias, cumpliendo instrucciones de Estados Unidos, había excluido a Nicaragua de las negociaciones de paz. Se reunió solo con los gobiernos de El Salvador, Honduras y Guatemala para imponerle acuerdos a Nicaragua. Expresaba por ello enorme gratitud hacia Vinicio Cerezo. Me contó igualmente que el primer acuerdo se firmó en un convento de Esquipulas, Guatemala, el 7 de agosto de 1987, después de dos días de intensas conversaciones entre los cinco presidentes centroamericanos. Nunca hablé públicamente sobre eso.

Pero esta vez, al conmemorarse el 30 Aniversario de la victoria Sandinista el 19 de julio de 1979, Daniel lo explicó todo con impresionante claridad, como lo hizo con todos los temas a lo largo de su discurso, que fue escuchado por cientos de miles de personas y transmitido por la radio y la televisión. Utilizo sus palabras textuales: "Los yanquis lo nombraron mediador. Tenemos una profunda simpatía al pueblo de Costa Rica, pero yo no puedo olvidar, en aquellos años duros el Presidente de Costa Rica convocó a los Presidentes centroamericanos y no nos invitó a nosotros¼ "

"Pero los otros Presidentes centroamericanos fueron más sensatos y le dijeron: Aquí no puede haber plan de paz si no está presente Nicaragua. Por la verdad histórica, el Presidente que tuvo el valor de romper el aislamiento que habían impuesto los yanquis en Centroamérica —donde les habían prohibido a los presidentes conversar con el Presidente de Nicaragua y querían una solución militar, querían acabar a través de la guerra con Nicaragua, con su revolución—, quien dio ese paso valiente fue el presidente de Guatemala, Vinicio Cerezo. Esa es la historia verdadera."

De inmediato añadió: "Los yanquis corrieron a buscar al presidente Oscar Arias, ¡porque ya lo conocen!, para buscar cómo ganar tiempo, para que los golpistas comiencen a hacer demandas que son inaceptables. ¿Desde cuándo un golpista va a negociar con la persona a la que le está arrebatando sus derechos constitucionales? Esos derechos no pueden ser negociados, simplemente hay que restituir al presidente Manuel Zelaya, tal como lo dijeron los acuerdos del ALBA, del Grupo de Río, del SICA, de la OEA y de las Naciones Unidas.

"En nuestros países queremos soluciones pacíficas. La batalla que está librando el pueblo de Honduras en este momento es una batalla pacífica, para evitar más dolor del que ya se ha producido en Honduras", concluyó textualmente Daniel.

En virtud de la guerra sucia ordenada por Reagan y que en parte —me dijo él— fue costeada con drogas enviadas a Estados Unidos, perdieron la vida más de 60 mil personas y sufrieron invalidez otras 5 800. La guerra sucia de Reagan dio lugar a la destrucción y el abandono de 300 escuelas y 25 centros de salud; 150 maestros fueron asesinados. El costo ascendió a decenas de miles de millones de dólares. Nicaragua disponía solo de 3,5 millones de habitantes, dejó de recibir el combustible que le enviaba la URSS y la economía se hizo insostenible. Convocó a las elecciones e incluso las adelantó, y respetó lo decidido por el pueblo, que había perdido toda esperanza de preservar las conquistas de la Revolución. Casi 17 años después, los sandinistas regresaron victoriosos al gobierno; hace solo dos días conmemoraban el 30 aniversario de la primera victoria.

El sábado 18 de julio el Premio Nobel propuso los conocidos 7 puntos de la iniciativa personal de paz que restaba autoridad a las decisiones de la ONU y la OEA, y equivalían a un acta de rendición de Manuel Zelaya, que le restaban simpatía y debilitarían el apoyo popular. El Presidente Constitucional envió lo que calificó de ultimátum a los golpistas, que los representantes suyos debían presentar, anunciando a la vez su regreso a Honduras para el domingo 19 de julio por cualquier departamento de ese país.

En horas del mediodía de ese domingo, se produce en Managua el gigantesco acto sandinista con históricas denuncias a la política de Estados Unidos. Eran verdades que no podían dejar de ser trascendentes.

Lo peor es que Estados Unidos estaba encontrando resistencia del gobierno golpista a su maniobra edulcorante. Estaría por precisar el momento en que el Departamento de Estado envía por su parte un fuerte mensaje a Micheletti, y si los jefes militares fueron advertidos de las posiciones del Gobierno de Estados Unidos.

Lo real es que para quien siguiera de cerca los hechos, Micheletti estaba insubordinado contra la paz el lunes. Su representante en San José, Carlos López Contreras, había declarado que la propuesta de Arias no podía ser discutida, pues el primer punto, es decir, el restablecimiento de Zelaya, no era negociable. El gobierno civil golpista había tomado en serio su papel y no se percataba siquiera de que Zelaya, privado de toda autoridad, no constituía riesgo alguno para la oligarquía y políticamente sufriría un duro golpe si aceptaba la propuesta del Presidente de Costa Rica.

El propio domingo 19, cuando Arias pide otras 72 horas para explicar su posición, la señora Clinton habla telefónicamente con Micheletti y sostiene lo que el portavoz Philip Crowley califica de una "llamada dura". Algún día se conocerá qué le dijo, pero bastaría ver la cara de Micheletti cuando habló en una reunión de su gobierno, el lunes 20 de julio: parecía realmente la de un niño de kindergarten regañado por la maestra. A través de Telesur pude ver las imágenes y los discursos de la reunión. Otras imágenes transmitidas fueron las de los representantes de la OEA pronunciando sus discursos en el seno de esa institución, comprometiéndose a esperar la última palabra del Nobel de la Paz el miércoles. ¿Sabían o no lo que la Clinton le había dicho a Micheletti? Tal vez sí, o tal vez, no. Quizás algunos, aunque no todos, lo conocían. Hombres, instituciones y conceptos se habían convertido en instrumentos de la alta y arrogante política de Washington. Nunca un discurso en el seno de la OEA brilló con tanta dignidad como las breves, pero valientes y brillantes palabras de Roy Chaderton, embajador de Venezuela, en esa reunión.

Mañana aparecerá la pétrea imagen de Oscar Arias explicando que han elaborado tal y más cual propuesta de solución para evitar violencia. Pienso que hasta el propio Arias ha caído en la gran trampa montada por el Departamento de Estado. Veremos qué hace mañana.

Sin embargo, el pueblo de Honduras es quien dirá la última palabra. Representantes de las organizaciones sociales y de las nuevas fuerzas no son instrumentos de nadie dentro o fuera del país, conocen las necesidades y sufrimientos del pueblo; sus conciencias y su temple se han multiplicado; muchos ciudadanos que eran indolentes se han sumado; los propios afiliados honestos de los partidos tradicionales que creen en la libertad, la justicia y la dignidad humana juzgarán a los líderes a partir de la posición que adoptaron en este minuto histórico.

No se conoce todavía cuál sería la actitud de los militares frente a los ultimátums yanquis, y qué mensajes les llegan a los oficiales; solo hay un punto de referencia patriótica y honorable: la lealtad al pueblo, que ha soportado con heroísmo las bombas lacrimógenas, los golpes y los disparos.

Sin que nadie pueda asegurar cuál será el último capricho del imperio, si a partir de las últimas decisiones adoptadas Zelaya regresa legal o ilegalmente, sin duda que los hondureños le harán un gran recibimiento porque será una medida de la victoria que ya han alcanzado con sus luchas. ¡Nadie dude de que solo el pueblo hondureño será capaz de construir su propia historia!

Fidel Castro Ruz
Julio 21 de 2009
8 y 55 p.m.


Fed Chairman Bernanke signals more bank bailouts, calls for cuts in social programs

By Barry Grey
23 July 2009

In two days of testimony before Congress, Federal Reserve Board Chairman Ben Bernanke defended the multi-trillion-dollar bailout of the banks while seeking to allay fears on financial markets of a potential eruption of inflation.

Bernanke’s testimony before the House Financial Services Committee on Tuesday and the Senate Banking Committee on Wednesday underscored the commitment of both the central bank and the Obama administration to defending the profits and wealth of the financial elite. His reception by the Democratic-controlled committees made clear that, whatever minor criticisms Congress may offer, it shares this overriding goal.

Bernanke published a lengthy commentary in the Wall Street Journal on Tuesday, timed to coincide with his appearance before the House committee, arguing that the Fed had an “exit strategy” to unwind the massive injections of capital into the banking system and avoid an inflationary spiral once business activity begins to rebound from the deepest recession since the 1930s.

In his prepared statement, Bernanke cited the rally on Wall Street and the renewed profitability of major banks as signs that the financial crisis had abated. At the same time, he made clear that unemployment and home foreclosures would continue to rise and remain at near-record rates for at least the next two years, and warned that consumer spending would remain depressed.

The Fed chairman forecast a slight growth in the US economy by the end of 2009 and a gradual acceleration in 2010 and 2011. But he said the central bank, which cut its key interest rate to near zero last December, would continue to hold interest rates at record lows “for an extended period.”

Bernanke acknowledged that “financial conditions remain stressed, and many households and businesses are finding credit difficult to obtain.” In response to a question about the prospects for a jobs recovery, he said, “We have a very long haul here. Unemployment is going to stay high for quite a while, and so it’s not going to feel really like a strong economy.”

However, he called a second economic stimulus package “premature” and proposed no measures either to provide immediate relief for the millions hit by plant closures, layoffs, and the collapse of home values and savings, or to allocate government funds to create new jobs. Nor did he propose any measures to compel the banks, which have received more than $200 billion in taxpayer cash and trillions more in low-interest loans, subsidies and government backing for their debt, to increase their lending and make credit available to working families.

On the contrary, he reiterated earlier demands that Congress and the Obama administration agree on plans to slash the budget deficit by cutting basic social programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. In his prepared statement, he said “...maintaining the confidence of the public and financial markets requires that policymakers begin planning now for the restoration of fiscal balance. Prompt attention to questions of fiscal sustainability is particularly critical because of the coming budgetary and economic challenges associated with the retirement of the baby-boom generation and continued increases in the costs of Medicare and Medicaid. Addressing the country’s fiscal problems will require difficult choices, but postponing those choices will only make them more difficult.”

In the course of his testimony, he endorsed the drive by the Obama administration, in the name of health care “reform,” to reduce the costs to business and the government of health insurance for workers. “I do believe,” he said, “for the broad economy’s health or fiscal health, we do need to address the problem of increasing cost. And so any program that is undertaken should look to how we’re going to get control of costs...”

An exchange on Wednesday with Jim Bunning, the right-wing Republican senator from Kentucky, highlighted the priorities of the Federal Reserve. Citing the role of former Fed Chairman Paul Volcker, who, under presidents Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan, raised interest rates above 20 percent and precipitated a wave of plant closures and layoffs, Bunning asked, “But do you have the will as former Chairman Volcker did to tighten even if the economy is still weak?”

Bernanke replied, “We will absolutely do it, so long as we are not forced to do something different by Congress.”

At the same time, Bernanke made clear that the Fed would continue to allocate whatever funds were needed to prop up the banks. In response to the plea from Senate Banking Committee Chairman Christopher Dodd, Democrat from Connecticut, Bernanke said he was prepared to extend one bailout program, the Term Asset-Backed Securities Loan Facility (TALF), beyond its December 31 expiration date.

Much of the discussion at both hearings focused on fears of an impending avalanche of commercial real estate defaults. Trends Research Institute Director Gerald Celente, who forecast the subprime mortgage crisis, has predicted that defaults will turn into a commercial real estate collapse that will “dwarf the subprime problem.”

Moody’s Investor Services reported that the number of commercial properties in default, foreclosure or bankruptcy in June was more than twice the number six months earlier and almost twice the value.

Bernanke at one point acknowledged that “Many banks will be facing mountains of CRE (commercial real estate) challenges going forward.” He told the Senate Banking Committee that it “may be appropriate” for the government to guarantee commercial mortgages, an allocation of government funds that could run into the hundreds of billions of dollars.

In a further indication of the character of the “recovery” touted by Bernanke, the Fed chairman said, “The American consumer is not going to be the source of a global boom by any means. On that very topic, we are continuing to encourage our trading partners in Asia and elsewhere to understand—and I believe that they do—that they need to substitute their own domestic spending, their own domestic demand, for American consumers as the engine of growth in their economies.” He cited China’s stimulus program as a positive example.

Bernanke used the hearings to oppose an Obama administration proposal to establish, as part of a revised bank regulatory system, a largely token consumer protection agency, a measure that is fiercely opposed by Wall Street. He also denounced a pending bill in Congress that would expand the powers of the Government Accountability Office, an arm of Congress, to audit the Federal Reserve.

The hearings, known as the semi-annual Monetary Policy Report to Congress, came in the wake of bumper profit reports by bailed out banks, most notably Goldman Sachs and JPMorgan Chase, and record set-asides by Wall Street firms for executive salaries and bonuses. Public anger is rising over the windfalls for bankers and big investors, some of it coming from predatory hikes in credit card rates and fees and huge penalties being charged for bank overdrafts.

This sentiment found no genuine reflection in the hearings. Massachusetts Democrat Barney Frank, the chairman of the House Financial Services Committee, devoted his opening remarks to absolving Bernanke of any wrongdoing in last year’s Bank of America takeover of Merrill Lynch.

A number of congressional hearings have been held into charges that Bernanke and then-Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson pressured Bank of America CEO Kenneth Lewis to go through with the takeover even though it had become clear that Merrill’s debts and toxic assets were far higher than the failing bank had acknowledged. Shareholders have filed suits alleging that Lewis, under pressure from Bernanke and Paulson, concealed the real state of Merrill from shareholders and the public.

Within weeks of the January 2009 completion of the merger, the government awarded Bank of America $20 billion in bailout cash under the Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP) over and above the $25 billion that had been given the bank in October of 2008. The government also agreed to guarantee over $300 billion on Bank of America assets.

Frank declared that he saw “no villains” in the takeover deal.

On the Senate side, Chairman Dodd used his opening statement to posture as an advocate for laid off workers and families facing foreclosure, praising the progress in stabilizing the banks but complaining that the recovery was one-sided. There should be more balance, he said, so that the “other half”—namely, the broad mass of the American people—also benefitted.

He took pains, however, to combine this criticism with a testimonial to Bernanke’s service to the country. “Mr. Chairman,” he said, “all of us understand the importance of the work you are doing—and that’s not just a platitude or a generous comment. And we all look forward to continuing to partner with you in this effort.”

No one at either hearing raised the charges leveled Monday by the special inspector general for TARP, Neil Barofsky, that TARP funds were being misused by the banks. Nor did any congressman or senator cite his denunciation of the Obama administration for refusing to compel the banks to reveal how the bailout funds are being used. In his report, Barofsky estimated the total in government funds allocated for the various bailout programs at $23.7 trillion.


US pledges continuing support for Georgia

23 July, 2009, 18:32

US Vice President Joe Biden’s politically-delicate mission continues in Georgia. Georgian President Mikhail Saakashvili has repeated his request for weapons, but the White House has refused to comment on his remarks.



In his speech, Biden said that US partnership with Georgia involves meeting security challenges together. He’s urged more press freedom and justice in the country, while promising US help to upgrade Georgia’s army to meet NATO standards. Biden has reiterated that his country supports Georgia’s bid to join the alliance.

Read more

Will Georgia get the weapons it’s asking for?

President Mikhail Saakashvili is asking the US for more weapons, which he claims are needed to defend against a possible Russian invasion. The White House has refused to comment on the request. However, an anonymous US official said that Vice President Joe Biden didn’t promise any military supplies.

Meanwhile, Adrian Pabst, Leverhulme research fellow in European affairs from Nottingham University, says militarization is the last thing Georgia needs.

“If the US is determined not to help the Georgian army to rearm in order to intervene in South Ossetia or Abkhazia, it’s good news,” he noted.

The Georgian leader is placing his hopes for more aid with the American second in command:

“It is important for the world to understand that, as we will never surrender, we will continue, with the help of our friends, to resist peacefully, to the invaders who aim at destroying our territorial integrity.”

US will never recognize Abkhazia’s and South Ossetia’s sovereignty – Biden

The US Vice President has assured the Georgian leader that his country “supports Georgia’s territorial integrity in the framework of internationally recognized borders”, thus not recognizing the two republics now and never planning to do so.

He has also called on the whole international community not to recognize Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent republics either.

Following Georgia’s aggression against South Ossetia in August 2008, Russia recognized Abkhazia and South Ossetia as independent states the same month.

Later, the independence of both republics was also recognized by Nicaragua.

“We’ll stand by you”

Speaking to the political elite of the country, Joe Biden said: “One year ago when I came to Georgia it was under very different and difficult circumstances. I was proud to stand with you then and the reason I am back – and the reason President Obama asked me to come back – was to send an unequivocal, clear, simple message to all who will listen, and those who don’t even want to listen, that America stands with you at this moment and will continue to stand with you.”

Biden also described Georgia as a vital strategic partner for the US. He promised to help ensure Georgia’s energy security. Biden said Washington welcomed the country’s vital role in this process, and added that the state is a bridge for the transportation of natural resources from the Caspian region to the West.

Saakashvili’s “democracy”

US Vice President Joe Biden has also been meeting with members of Georgia’s opposition to discuss the burning issues of Georgia’s internal politics.

During the fist day of Biden’s visit, several thousand opposition supporters staged a rally in the city centre. They were trying to draw attention to what they call the anti-democratic and authoritarian policies of the Georgian leader.

US Vice President said Saakashvili must further encourage democracy in the country.

Police remove the "cell block" props of the opposition in Tbilisi in anticipation of Joe Biden (AFP Photo / Vano Shlamov)

Prior to the meeting columnist from The Guardian Jonathan Steele told RT: “It is very important that Joe Biden is going to talk to the opposition politicians in Georgia. I think the message will be: if you want to be recognized by the West as a respectable country – you have got to do something about your internal democracy and particularly the freedom of the press.”

He reminded that the Georgian state enjoys a complete monopoly over television and that opposition newspapers have been closed down, while journalists have been pressured to conform to the Saakashvili line.

Georgian political analyst and former member of parliament Tsotne Bakuria was even more critical.

“The truth is that Georgia does not have a future, if this current situation is going to be the same for another four years. The country has been devastated. There is no economy working in the country. The unemployment rate is almost 64%. Imagine the number, it’s terrible!” shared Bakuria.

He expressed hope that Joe Biden will talk current president Mikhail Saakashvili to resign peacefully.

“This would be the best solution for everybody: for Georgians, for Americans, for Russians and for the region as a whole,” concluded Tsotne Bakuria.




Expertos califican con 5.18 los resultados obtenidos en dos años y medio de gobierno

Reprueban el desempeño del Ejecutivo federal en materia de seguridad pública, estado de derecho, economía, desarrollo social, política internacional, medio ambiente y democracia

Emir Olivares Alonso

El gobierno de Felipe Calderón fue reprobado por casi 50 académicos e investigadores de diversas instituciones educativas, quienes le otorgaron una calificación de 5.18, debido a los ineficientes resultados en políticas prioritarias para el país.

Al realizar un análisis acerca de la efectividad de los programas gubernamentales y la eficacia de los resultados obtenidos en materia de seguridad pública, estado de derecho, economía, desarrollo social, política internacional, medio ambiente y desarrollo de la democracia, especialistas de instituciones como la Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) y el Centro de Investigación y Docencia Económicas (CIDE) consideraron que el Ejecutivo federal no aprobó en su desempeño durante los dos años y medio que lleva de gestión.

La Evaluación del desempeño del Poder Ejecutivo –en la que se calificaron los resultados obtenidos en relación con las promesas de campaña y el contenido del Plan Nacional de Desarrollo (PND) 2007-2012– refiere que en el tema de seguridad pública el gobierno federal ha mostrado un matiz policializado, pues considera que la solución está en la policía y hacia ese rubro se canalizan las mayores inversiones, razón por la que se ha descuidado al Ministerio Público.

En conferencia de prensa, Lorenzo Córdova, del Instituto de Investigaciones Jurídicas de la UNAM –quien participó en la evaluación–, resaltó que en el tema de seguridad se ha dado prioridad a la atención policiaca y, en paralelo, existe descuido en materia de derechos humanos.

El gobierno de Felipe Calderón “tiene una visión unidimensional sobre la seguridad pública. Entiende el problema desde una perspectiva netamente policiaca y, en consecuencia, las políticas públicas al respecto responden a esa lógica.

Pero en realidad el tema tiene una dimensión múltiple: existen factores sociales y económicos que inevitablemente inciden e influyen en el fenómeno de la delincuencia organizada, pero han sido descuidados y olvidados desde el punto de vista de la política pública, afirmó.

Débil combate a la pobreza

En lo concerniente a desarrollo social, los expertos consideraron que en dos años y medio la gestión calderonista obtuvo resultados débiles en el combate a la pobreza, debido a la ausencia de criterios de evaluación, operación ineficiente de los programas sociales y falta de una estrategia que los armonice y haga converger.

Particularmente en educación, señalaron, alcanza apenas 4.9 de calificación. El Ejecutivo federal centró su estrategia e interés en la evaluación con el propósito de elevar la calidad; sin embargo, esos procesos no han tenido buenos resultados, han sido incompletos y no coinciden con los de organismos internacionales.

Asimismo, destacaron que existe un vacío en la política educativa, ya que no se logra retener a muchos jóvenes de entre 15 y 16 años de edad que desertan de las aulas para incorporarse a las áreas laborales.

Acerca de la economía, los especialistas consideraron que la productividad y la competitividad fueron las áreas con más rezagos, sobre todo porque en la promoción del empleo y la paz laboral las propuestas han sido demasiado simplistas y vagas. Las medidas impulsadas por el Ejecutivo para promover el empleo han sido insuficientes y hacen falta políticas públicas focalizadas.

Manifestaron que, lejos de fortalecer la prevención en salud, que es eje medular, la administración federal ha desmantelado el sector. Y si bien existe un incremento en la cobertura de salud, la planeación no es suficiente, lo que ha generado deficiencia en la calidad de la atención.

Por otra parte, debido al escaso fortalecimiento de la democracia y a la falta de transparencia y rendición de cuentas, el Ejecutivo federal obtuvo calificación reprobatoria en política y desarrollo de la democracia.

Los expertos advirtieron que el equipo gubernamental responsable de dialogar con las diferentes fuerzas políticas no es el más adecuado, existe una enorme discrecionalidad en la rendición de cuentas, y la aprobación de las leyes antiaborto en estados gobernados por el PAN pone de manifiesto el predominio de los lineamientos conservadores de un partido político.

La mayoría de los expertos que participaron en el panel son integrantes del Sistema Nacional de Investigadores; entre otros, colaboraron en la evaluación John M. Ackerman, Lorenzo Córdova, Miguel Sarre, Soledad Loaeza, Elena Azaola, José Antonio Caballero Juárez, Miguel Ontiveros Alonso, José Luis Valdés, Gerardo Esquivel Hernández, Fausto Hernández Trillo, María López Barajas, Alejandro Guevara Sanguinés, Cristina Puga Espinosa y María Eugenia Ibarrán.


Wednesday, July 22, 2009


La antiproliferación nuclear: las ideas audaces de El-Baradei

Alfredo Jalife-Rahme

El discurso de Barack Obama en Europa sobre un mundo libre de armas nucleares fue escamoteado por los multimedia anglosajones, controlados por el complejo financiero-militar-industrial, amén de haber sido calificado de fantasioso por los belicosos de costumbre.


Foto
Barack Obama, presidente de Estados Unidos, ayer en la Casa BlancaFoto Ap


La temeraria visión de Obama (ver Bajo la Lupa, 5/7/09) puede abrir las puertas a la desnuclearización de Medio Oriente –sin excepciones paleobíblicas (v.gr. la dotación de Israel de un máximo de 400 bombas atómicas, según el Boletín de Científicos Estadunidenses)–, en medio de la cual se sitúa la crisis iraní, según De Defensa (13/7/09).

Debka (20/7/09), presunto portal del Mossad (servicios de espionaje israelíes), revela parte del contenido del paquete de propuestas ofrecido a Occidente por Irán, en medio de su crisis electoral, que coloca en el foco del desarme medioriental a las más de 200 (sic) ojivas nucleares de Israel.

El portavoz del Ministerio de Exterior de Irán, Hassan Qashqavi, comentó que no podemos hablar de un Medio Oriente desnuclearizado sin discutir las más de 200 (sic) ojivas del régimen sionista de Israel.

¿Son más de 200 ojivas, según los iraníes, o el máximo de las 400, expuesto por los científicos de Estados Unidos, que posee en forma clandestina Israel?

La única manera de averiguarlo es mediante una inspección de la Agencia Internacional de Energía Atómica (AIEA), rechazada obviamente por Israel, que aún no firma el Tratado de No Proliferación (NPT, por sus siglas en inglés) y goza de selectivas canonjías celestiales que discriminan al resto de los países del planeta.

Por cierto, los sionistas locales, autoadscritos a la defensa de los derechos humanos en cualquier lugar del mundo que no sea Israel, han guardado silencio obsceno sobre el trato infrahumano propinado al pacifista Mordechai Vanunu, técnico nuclear israelí, quien reveló la dotación atómica de su país en Dimona hace dos décadas.

En ese contexto de fragilidad conceptual, que flagela la antiproliferación, el egipcio y de esposa iraní Muhamed El-Baradei, saliente director de la AIEA, aduce que se requieren ideas audaces (sic) para avanzar en la no proliferación (The Daily Star, 19/8/09).

Exalta la visión de Obama sobre un mundo libre de armas nucleares y el vínculo entre la no proliferación atómica y el desarme de los estados nucleares, y admite que el NPT, que data de 1970, se encuentra en desorden, pero que Obama, por fortuna, ha prometido revitalizar.

Identifica cinco problemas del NPT:

1. Las cinco principales potencias nucleares (nota: los cinco miembros permanentes del Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU) no han tomado en serio (sic) sus obligaciones en el NPT para el desarme atómico. Al contrario, han modernizado sus arsenales y carecen de la autoridad moral (sic) para persuadir a otros de no adquirir armas nucleares, que son fuente de poder e influencia y garantía contra un ataque.

2. No existe nada (sic) que pueda detener a los países firmantes del NPT a que lo abandonen (el caso de Norcorea).

3. La AIEA se encuentra vergonzosamente subfinanciada para investigar el programa encubierto de un país: sus laboratorios analíticos son vetustos, carece de acceso adecuado a la imagenología satelital, y sus inspectores tienen las manos atadas al no tener permiso de acceso a todas las localizaciones.

4. Los controles de exportación han fracasado en prevenir la difusión de la sensible tecnología atómica, como es el caso de las sofisticadas redes clandestinas del científico nuclear paquistaní A.Q. Khan. Nueve países disponen de armas atómicas (nota: además de los cinco grandes, los cuatro clandestinos: Israel, India, Pakistán y Norcorea) y “cierto número de países con programas nucleares de energía tienen la capacidad de manufacturar ese tipo de armas (…), ya que han dominado la tecnología crítica del enriquecimiento de uranio y el reprocesamiento del plutonio”. Tal dualidad civil-militar es el talón de Aquiles del NPT.

5. El Consejo de Seguridad (sic) de la ONU ha estado paralizado frente a los desafíos a la seguridad internacional y ha sido inefectivo (sic) en responder a los casos sospechosos de proliferación.

El saliente director de la AIEA alaba el paso decisivo de recortar los arsenales de Estados Unidos y Rusia, que juntos disponen de 95 por ciento de las 27 mil ojivas que pululan en el mundo.

Existen otros pasos principales: aplicar el Tratado Integral de Abolición de Pruebas Nucleares (CTBT, por sus siglas en inglés), negociar un tratado verificable para prohibir la producción de material fisionable para su uso en armas nucleares; mejorar la seguridad física de material atómico y radiactivo, que puede caer en manos de terroristas, y fortalecer a la AIEA.

Propone una medida principal: la creación de un banco de uranio de bajo enriquecimiento (LEU, por sus siglas en inglés), a cargo de la AIEA, para garantizar el abastecimiento a países que necesitan combustible atómico para sus reactores. Su financiamiento es viable gracias a las aportaciones de Nuclear Threat Initiative (la ONG fundada por Ted Turner y Sam Nunn) y del empresario Warren Buffett.

Una característica del LEU (uranio de bajo enriquecimiento) es que no puede ser usado para fabricar armas y dicho mecanismo será esencial conforme más países introduzcan la energía nuclear: “sin criterios políticos ni discriminatorios (…) la AIEA tendría a su disposición un almacenamiento físico de LEU como reserva de última instancia para los países con programas atómicos que enfrentan una interrupción del abastecimiento por razones no comerciales” y requieran desarrollar su propia capacidad de enriquecimiento de uranio o reprocesamiento de plutonio.

Cita el caso anómalo de Irán después de la revolución islámica de 1979, cuando no fueron cumplidos los contratos para combustible y la tecnología para sus plantas nucleares planificadas (léase por Estados Unidos).

Comenta que las consecuencias de dicha decisión son todavía resentidas 30 años más tarde, en crítica alusiva al unilateralismo nuclear de Estados Unidos frente a Irán: ningún país será obligado a cesar su derecho a desarrollar su propio ciclo de combustible, siempre y cuando cumpla sus obligaciones atómicas de salvaguarda (nota: que pisotea Israel).

Concluye que todas las actividades nuevas de enriquecimiento y reprocesamiento serán colocadas exclusivamente bajo control multinacional y todas las instalaciones existentes pasarán de control nacional a multinacional.

Sí que es audaz la idea de El-Baradei, ya que en la presente involución de la civilización occidental es inimaginable que Estados Unidos, ya no se diga Israel, admita controles nucleares que no domine en su suelo y en el de los demás.



Hildebrando vive

Antesalas electorales

El cubilete de Televisa

Julio Hernández López

El visor oficial de las operaciones de compraventa electoral en el país, Leonardo Valdés Zurita, considera que ha llegado el momento de prepararnos para un idílico futuro hildebrándico. Nada mejor que entregar el humano proceso del depósito de votos y su conteo a confiabilísimos sistemas computacionales, apostando por la tecnología y evitando doble desgaste de los funcionarios de las mesas de casilla y, posteriormente, de los consejos distritales. El danzón dedicado a la banda de los algoritmos, y sistemas que le acompañan, se escuchó en el foro de análisis de la reforma electoral 2007-2008 que organizó la oficina del jefe en vías de pasar atrás del trono senatorial, Manlio Fabio Beltrones. Emocionado, propositivo, moderno, Leonardo Hildebrando Valdés Zavala se permitió la desmemoria de establecer que la tecnología ha sido aliado natural de la construcción de confianza en los procesos electorales, así es que, ya encarrerados, ¿por qué no estudiamos la posibilidad de aprovechar los avances tecnológicos y la creatividad de nuestros científicos para concebir instrumentos de votación electrónica que sean confiables y que den certeza a los ciudadanos y a los partidos políticos en la emisión del sufragio y, por supuesto, en el cómputo de la votación?




Foto

COORDINADOS CONTRA EL HAMPA. El secretario de Gobernación, Fernando Gómez Mont, y el gobernador de Michoacán, Leonel Godoy, en conferencia de prensa realizada tras la reunión del gabinete de seguridad, en la cual se acordó que habrá coordinación entre los gobiernos federal y estatal en la lucha contra la delincuencia organizadaFoto Carlos Ramos Mamahua


Pensar en la etapa superior del fraude, perdón, del proceso electoral, proviene de un peculiar raciocinio mueblero hecho por el presidente gourmet del IFE (antes fue un mago, ahora un catador): Lo que vivimos tanto en 2006 como en 2009 podríamos interpretarlo como la antesala de nuestra democracia futura; es decir, nos enfrentamos a las primeras contiendas en las que las propias reglas propician resultados más cerrados. ¡Sopitas de pollo (que no sea de las Guarderías Bachoco)! ¿Así es que apenas hemos estado modosamente sentados en la antesala de nuestra democracia futura, para ver si somos recibidos o no, y si nuestras expectativas y votos merecen atención, desdén o trampa? ¿Y ahora resulta que el fraude 0.56% se debió a las propias reglas, tan irrespetadas como incluso lo reconocieron los dictámenes vergonzosamente cínicos de los integrantes del tribunal electoral federal que aceptaron la presencia de múltiples infracciones pero se abstuvieron de castigar o anular esos resultados amañados? V. Zurita todavía tuvo cuerda para advertir que, de seguir las cosas como se dieron en las citadas antesalas 2006 y 2009, acabaremos recontando más resultados de casillas, pues tres años atrás se volvieron a computar 11 mil casillas y, ahora, el arqueo se repitió en un 30 por ciento de una elección, por lo que de seguir así podría darse el caso que en 2012 tengamos que recontar más casillas e incluso en más de una elección. Ante ese panorama tan complicado, ¿qué hacer? Pues recuperar las bondades de Diego Hildebrando Zavala Gómez del Campo, evitando cansancio e irregularidades humanas, dejando todo al reino impoluto y totalmente confiable de las máquinas, pues la votación electrónica es sin duda un nuevo componente natural del futuro de nuestra democracia, según san Leonardo.

En la antesala del baño de sangre, el decorativo Leonel es llamado al Distrito Federal para que dialogue hasta que se canse con el gabinete calderónico de seguridad, mientras en el campo michoacano de batalla los miles de militares desarrollan su estrategia de castigo familiar. En otro tipo de espera, el teórico de las intervenciones, Carlos Pascual, cumple con la parte senatorial que le permitirá ser aprobado como embajador gringo en el México fallido. Y en Honduras (lo que es un signo para toda Latinoamérica y las expectativas de gobiernos liberales o, por llamarlos de algún modo genérico, de izquierda), el resplandor progresista de Obama es ahogado por las fuerzas reales del poder imperial, de tal manera que gana tiempo el golpe de Estado, que nunca se habría podido dar sin la aprobación o cuando menos la tolerancia del Pentágono, y en el fondo de todo subyace una maniobra regional para castigar los acercamientos a Hugo Chávez y la postulación de reformas que dañen a los grandes capitales de determinado país.

Astillas

Un periodista español de larga historia, José María Siles, director de la agencia ANews, domiciliada en Bélgica, está demostrando lo que todo mundo sabía pero Televisa pretende negar (o atenuar): que la exagerada presencia de Enrique Peña Nieto en las pantallas, disfrazada de información, se paga con dinero del gobierno del estado de México. Una prueba de ello ha sucedido luego que a mediados de marzo se desató una campaña de imagen que pretendía colocar a Quique Gaviotón a niveles de estadista internacional sólo porque decidió asistir a un foro mundial sobre agua, en Estambul, y pronunciar algunas palabras de húmeda demagogia. Televisa, que transmitió ampliamente esa importantísima intrascendencia proselitista, contrató a ANews para que diera cobertura a la gira del despilfarrador funcionario mexicano. Un funcionario de la televisora gobernante le dijo a Siles que no se preocupara por sus honorarios: Televisa cobra del estado de México (sic) y Enrique Peña Nieto es una prioridad informativa. Además, tenemos un acuerdo con ellos para cobrar por esas coberturas, le dijeron funcionarios de la televisora, según escribió el periodista español en su blog. Pero, más delante, le dijeron que el gobierno de Peña Nieto pagaría todo. Y Siles considera que quien debe pagar es Televisa y no el erario del estado de México. Por ello escribió: Aunque no estén ustedes puestos de lo que se cuece en la escena política mexicana, detrás del cubilete y de la morosidad de Televisa está la suculenta historia de cómo se fabrica un presidente. Saber lo que hay detrás del cubilete de Televisa nos va a tener entretenidos... Y, mientras Felipe ahora sale con que la crisis ha hecho caer 9 por ciento a la economía, pero en materia de empleos no tanto, o menos de lo que se temía, o en un descuido hasta mejor nos está yendo, ¡hasta mañana, con El valiente Gómez Mont apareciendo (en espera) en la Lotería michoacana!


Bretton Woods anniversary brings focus back to waning dollar outlook

22 July, 2009, 13:42

65 years ago the dollar became the world’s de facto reserve currency at the Bretton Woods conference in New Hampshire. On the anniversary, uncertainty about the Dollar’s capacity to continue in the role is increasing.



At the latest G-8 summit in Italy, Russian President, Dmitry Medvedev, demonstrated an example a new supranational coin called the United Future World Currency which is one possible dollar killer.

Read more

President Sarkozy of France in turn suggested “a politically multi-polar world should be an economically multi-currency world” with other countries from China to India talking of diversifing away from the dollar. And Sergey Khestanov, Managing Director at Finam Management, blames the dominance of one nation’s money for the current financial crisis

“America kept printing dollars, the economy grew, but nothing was happening to inflation, as a large part of this money was diffused around the globe. This has led to excessive debt and we’ve got what we’ve got.”

While the currencies of other nations are backed by their foreign exchange reserves, the Dollar is the only one not secured against anything except the promise to print more money. Some experts say the world should come back to the gold standard or some other tangible reserve such as oil, gas or even a kilowatt of power. However, Elina Rybakova, Chief Economist at Citigroup, Russia & CIS, says there is no need for measures from another age.

“I may trust Bernanke or our government just based on their track record in the recent past and their education, which is their background and their credibility, their knowledge. And I will not necessarily need them to show me that piece of gold that they keep in their reserves, are fully backed. Don’t believe in this idea that we need to come back to the sort of tangible backing, I believe in idea of establishing credibility of Central Banks – that they would deliver a positive interest rates and they will be successful inflation targeters.”

It took the Dollar about 40 years to defeat the British Pound as the leading reserve currency. Nowadays, analysts say a possible new player may dump the Dollar much sooner.


Pretende eliminar prácticas que inhiban la sana competencia en el mercado, argumenta

Aportaron 95.93% de las ganancias del sistema de pagos entre enero de 2007 y abril de 2009

Las medidas se aplicarán a Sofoles y Sofomes reguladas; pide claridad en mecanismos de cobro

Juan Antonio Zúñiga

El Banco de México dio a conocer nuevas disposiciones que intentan frenar el indiscriminado cobro de comisiones por parte de la banca comercial, las sociedades financieras de objeto limitado (Sofoles) y las sociedades financieras de objeto múltiple reguladas (Sofomes-r), las cuales a partir del próximo 21 de agosto deberán someterse a nuevas reglas para eliminar prácticas inadecuadas en relación con el cobro de comisiones.

De acuerdo con informes de la Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores (CNBV) el cobro de comisiones constituye la segunda mayor fuente de ingresos de los bancos que operan en el país, la cual aportó casi 96 centavos de cada peso de utilidad obtenida por la banca entre enero de 2007 y abril de 2009.

Con base en su facultad reguladora, prevista en cuatro ordenamientos legales, desde la Constitución Política hasta la Ley para la Transparencia y Ordenamiento de los Servicios Financieros, el Banco de México prohibió a bancos, sofoles y sofomes-r cobrar comisiones por la cancelación de cuentas de depósito, de tarjetas de crédito, de débito o del servicio de banca por Internet.

Disminuyen cargos

Además, las instituciones de crédito tampoco podrán cobrar comisiones en cuentas de depósito a la vista, tales como de cheques y de nómina, ni tampoco por manejo de cuenta o no mantener un saldo mínimo.

El registro de comisiones que lleva el Banco de México, señala la circular 17/2009, ha sido de utilidad para obtener información con base en la cual resulta conveniente eliminar prácticas inadecuadas en relación con el cobro de comisiones, que a la fecha han sido objeto de observación conforme a dicho registro, y asegurar que tanto las comisiones aplicadas como los mecanismos de cobro sean claros y transparentes.

Las reglas, que por primera vez imponen limitaciones al cobro de comisiones de los bancos, y ahora también de sofoles y sofomes reguladas, fueron elaboradas luego de que éstas fueron objeto de observación por parte de la dirección general de Análisis del Sistema Financiero del Banco de México, y tocan a la segunda mayor fuente de ingresos de los bancos que operan en el país.

Según los informes de la Comisión Nacional Bancaria y de Valores, de enero de 2007 a abril de 2009 los bancos obtuvieron 151 mil 60 millones de pesos por el cobro de comisiones a sus clientes y usuarios, mientras el monto de sus ganancias netas fue de 157 mil 468 millones de pesos en el mismo periodo.

Foto
Fachada del Banco de MéxicoFoto Guillermo Sologuren

Así, los ingresos por comisiones aportaron 95.93 por ciento de las utilidades bancarias, mientras el llamado margen financiero, la principal fuente de ingresos de la banca, sirvió propiamente para cubrir los gastos y costos de operación de la misma.

El comportamiento del cobro de comisiones bancarias respecto de las ganancias alcanzadas, en el transcurso de la actual administración gubernamental, ha sido el siguiente: en 2007 los ingresos por comisiones representaron 81.91 por ciento de las utilidades alcanzadas en 2008 las comisiones rebasaron en 11 mil 882 millones de pesos a las ganancias obtenidas por los bancos ese año, y sirvieron para la conformación de fondos de contingencia ante el impacto de la crisis en México a partir del cuarto trimestre de ese año.

Entre enero y abril de 2009, el ingreso por comisiones aportó 83.82 por ciento de los beneficios reportados por los bancos en ese periodo, informó la CNBV.

El propósito de las reglas que limitan el cobro de comisiones por parte de la banca, puntualizó el Banco de México, es que las comisiones sean claras y transparentes; que se apliquen únicamente a servicios efectivamente prestados y a operaciones realizadas por los clientes, y que se eliminen prácticas que inhiban la sana competencia.

En forma explícita, prohibió a los bancos cobrar comisiones por los siguientes casos: por la apertura, manejo y por no mantener un saldo promedio mínimo cuando requieran que se abra una cuenta de depósito para realizar cargos relativos al pago de algún crédito que hayan otorgado; por la devolución de cheques que hayan recibido para abono en alguna cuenta de depósito bancario de dinero; por la devolución de cheques que hayan recibido como medio de pago de algún crédito del cual sean acreedores.

Tampoco podrán cobrar comisiones cuando se exceda el saldo de la cuenta de depósito bancario de dinero asociada a una tarjeta de débito, derivado de transacciones realizadas con ella, o bien, por intentar exceder el saldo de la cuenta de depósito bancario asociada a una tarjeta de débito de transacciones derivadas de ella; por la cancelación de cuentas de depósito, o medios de disposición o del servicio de banca electrónica.


China, Russia launch large-scale war games

22 July, 2009, 17:39

Russian and Chinese military forces are taking part in a five-day joint exercise, one of the biggest of its kind.



The “Peace Mission 2009” drill was officially started on Wednesday in the Far Eastern city of Khabarovsk by Russian Chief of General Staff Nikolay Makarov and his Chinese counterpart Chen Bingde.

About 3,000 army and air forces personnel, 300 armored vehicles and 45 aircraft will take part in the maneuvers at the Taonan military range in China. The scenario of the exercise says a large group of terrorists have captured a city and provoked massive riots there. The joint force is to defeat the militants and quell the uprising.

Read more

Chinese media say the scenario resembles the bloody riots in Xinjiang province earlier this month, even though the plans for the dill had been announced long before that. “To some extent, the July 5 Xinjiang riot pushed forward anti-terrorism cooperation between China and Russia,” the China Daily newspaper quoted Major Wang Haiyun, a former Chinese military attaché to Russia, as saying.

This is the third “Peace Mission” exercise. For Russia’s Far Eastern military command it will be the largest movement of troops across the national borders since the campaign against Japan in 1945.

“This is not an act to stick with fashion but a concrete advancement in preparing our military forces for joint countering of security threats in the region,” General Makarov told the media.

He added the drill was even more important in the context of Japan and South Korea taking a militarization course following North Korea’s nuclear test in May and subsequent missile test launches.

According to Makarov, the Russian military will have things to learn from their Chinese partners, who provided security during the Olympic Games in Beijing in August. Their advice will come in handy in 2014, when Russia itself is to host the Winter Olympics in Sochi.

General Bingde praised the traditional war games and stressed that they “are not directed against a third party and are not a threat to other nations.”


Perils of doing business in a secret state

Rio Tinto 'spies' fell victim to a Chinese regime where the rules are changing - and unknowable

When Chinese police detained four Rio Tinto employees – including an Australian national – for allegedly stealing state secrets, a chill ran down the spines of many foreign investors.

Given its timing shortly after Rio aborted plans to take a £12bn investment from Chinalco, the state-owned metals producer, many initially suspected it was retribution for that debacle. Australia was quick to suggest it could affect the international business community's perceptions of the world's third largest economy.

Today the latest round of a war of words between the two governments over the spying allegations deepened as it emerged that China has told the Australian government that it has "sufficient evidence" to support the accusations.

He Yafei, China's vice-minister of foreign affairs, said: "I stressed that we have sufficient evidence showing that the individuals involved obtained China's state secrets using illegal means. The case has entered the judicial process and I requested the Australian side to respect China's judicial sovereignty."

Rio has denied the claims that its employees have been involved in any kind of spying or bribery in China.

Integrity

Canberra said that it would "take some time" to resolve the crisis, which has seen Rio's top iron ore executive in China, Australian Stern Hu, held for 18 days along with three colleagues. Stephen Smith, the Australian foreign minister, said he still hoped to meet his Chinese counterpart to discuss the matter.

China is Australia's biggest trade partner, with trade worth $53bn (£32.3bn) last year. Last week Simon Crean, its trade minister, warned that the case was "important as a signal to all people seeking to do business in China" and called for the matter to be handled quickly.

With the case still under investigation, no one can be sure of the precise details of the allegations; still less of whether they have foundation. Rio Tinto has stressed that it believes its staff "acted at all times with integrity and in accordance with Rio Tinto's strict and publicly stated code of ethical behaviour" and denied claims that they bribed steel companies.

But most now believe the issue is in effect an inquiry into the operations of a complicated and often shady steel industry rather than any espionage or national security matters. The problem is that in China, the distinction is not so clear. The case centres on negotiations between Chinese steelmakers and iron ore producers, led by Rio Tinto, and the information used in those talks. Because so many Chinese companies are partly government-backed, and because steel is a strategic industry, it has become far more than a purely commercial matter.

"This case illustrates some of the uncertainty of getting involved in business in China," said John Frankenstein, assistant professor of economics at the City University of New York. "A Chinese lawyer once told me 'basically, the state can legitimately intervene in any deal at any time under any pretext'."

"There are a lot of multinationals who came to China and have a fact-finding, commercial information arm. For those people it's certainly worrying," added Tom Miller, of the Beijing-based economic consultancy Dragonomics.

"If you are in the kind of business where you think there might be an overlap between commercial information and state secrets, you would be concerned. The problem is that Chinese law on this is very, very oblique and frankly no one knows what a state secret is."

The worst fears of foreign investors appear to have been mitigated by the emerging details of the Rio case.

"I don't think it's as alarming as it looked on day one," said one business adviser who asked not to be identified; several people were reluctant to speak on the record, or had been instructed not to do so by their companies, in a sign of the case's sensitivity.

"There is obviously a degree of political motivation; it's impossible to say it's pure coincidence."

But he pointed out that the inquiry had expanded with the investigation of executives from steel firms, suggesting that the authorities were not simply targeting Rio Tinto and that they were concerned about the "notoriously corrupt" industry and its possible skewing of development. "Using legal means to intimidate or pressurise companies in business negotiations at lower levels is not at all surprising; it happens quite a lot. But to happen on that sort of stage would be unusual," he added.

The case is so sensitive that it was reported that president Hu Jintao personally approved the decision to press ahead. But Steve Dickinson, a partner at the law firm Harris & Moure in Qingdao, believes the issues it raises are not new.

Executed

"The old notion used to be that foreigners got a free pass – the worst that would happen was that you would be told to go home. That is not the rule now," he said. "People who conduct industrial espionage and bribe people and obtain information illegally should not set foot in China.

"One guy said to me 'everyone does that in China'. But people also go to jail and get executed for doing this in China. People do it and think 'see, nothing happened'. The only time things happen in China is when things go sideways."

Many complain that the market for illicit information has been created by China's failure to establish legally compliant information agencies. "Government and enterprises should realise that by [providing] publicly available information, they can to a large extent satisfy the demand for commercial intelligence ... and reduce the space available for corruption and espionage," the Beijing-based economic consultancy Anbound said.

Dickinson acknowledges many clients chafe at obeying laws that they can see competitors flouting. "Foreigners have pressure to get information through improper means … [But] If you can't do things any other way – go home. It's not worth being arrested for," he added.

Whether companies take his advice remains to be seen. "I doubt this will put them off coming. Most of the world economy is still in the doldrums; China is one of the bright spots," said Miller, speaking days after new figures showed that GDP growth rose to an unexpectedly high 7.9% in the second quarter.

Experts also play down suggestions that an increasingly mighty China is brushing aside the firms it used to woo. "There's anxiety that China is not interested in foreign investment any more," pointed out Professor Li Wei, of the Cheung Kong Graduate School of Business in Beijing and the University of Virginia.

"I would discount that. It doesn't care much about financial resources foreign companies can bring, but access to foreign markets remains important. I don't expect major changes."




Germany accuses China of industrial espionage

• Cyber sabotage and phone hacking rife, agent says
• Several Chinese workers caught stealing secrets

Germany is under attack from an increasing number of state-backed Chinese spying operations that are costing the German economy tens of billions of euros a year, a leading intelligence agent said.

Walter Opfermann, an espionage protection expert in the office for counter-intelligence for the state of Baden-Württemberg, said that China was using an array of "polished methods" from old-fashioned spies to phone-tapping, and increasingly the internet, to steal industrial secrets.

He said methods had become "extremely sophisticated" to the extent that China, which employs a million intelligence agents, was now capable of "sabotaging whole chunks of infrastructure" such as Germany's power grid. "This poses a danger not just for Germany but for critical infrastructure worldwide," he said.

Russia, he said, was also "top of the list" of states using internet spying techniques to garner vital German know-how which "helps save billions on their own economic research and development". He said while Russia only had "hundreds of thousands of agents", compared to China's million, it had "years more experience".

Opfermann estimated that German companies were losing around €50bn (£43bn) and 30,000 jobs to industrial espionage every year.

"China wants to be the world's leading economic power by 2020," Opfermann said. "For that they need a speedy and intensive transfer of high-level technological information which is available in developed industrial lands, if you can get your hands on it".

The areas most under attack include car manufacturing, renewable energies, chemistry, communication, optics, x-ray technology, machinery, materials research and armaments. Information being gathered was not just related to research and development but also management techniques and marketing strategies.

Opfermann said internet espionage was the biggest growth field, citing the "thick fog of Trojan email attacks" taking place against thousands of firms on a regular basis and the methods employed to cover up where the emails had come from.

But he said "old-fashioned" methods were also rife, such as phone-tapping, stealing laptops during business trips or Chinese companies who regularly sent spies to infiltrate companies.

"I cannot name names but we've dealt with several cases of Chinese citizens on work experience in German companies, who stole highly sensitive information from them," he said.

In one case, the police raided the house of a Chinese woman suspected of stealing company secrets from a German business where she was working, and discovered 170 CDs containing highly sensitive product details.

In a separate case a highly qualified Chinese mechanical engineer employed by a company in the Lake Constance region was discovered to have passed on information for a machine it was developing to the company's Chinese competitor, who constructed an exact copy.

"As is often the case the man disappeared and went back to China – so often the attacker is way ahead of the game and it's also hard to find out who they've been working for."

Opfermann said although the problem was "huge and growing", it was not being discussed, "because companies don't want to admit their weaknesses and lose customers and they don't want to ruin business opportunities with China. As a result we're only seeing the tip of the iceberg."

Two years ago the consultancy firm Corporate Trust estimated that around 20% of German companies – mainly small and middle-sized businesses – had been the victims of industrial espionage.The findings chime with fears across the industrial world about the threat of cyber crime and the corresponding increase in efforts being put in place to fight it.

In Britain last month the GCHQ, the government's electronic spy centre, which estimates that the UK loses GBP 1bn a year to e-fraud, set up operations to deal with the growing threats. The Pentagon also announced it is to create a new "cyber command" and in May President Obama said he would establish a White House role to oversee cyber defence, saying the nation's digital networks had to be recognised as a "strategic national asset".



US ready to upgrade defences of Gulf allies if Iran builds nuclear arms

Clinton outlines policy of containment if Tehran cannot be stopped from constructing warheads

Hillary Clinton arrives for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) summit in Thailand

Hillary Clinton arrives for the Association of Southeast Asian Nations summit in Thailand Photograph: Bazuki Muhammad/EPA

Hillary Clinton today outlined how the US may go about containing a nuclear-armed Iran by extending a "defence umbrella" to US allies in the region.

The US secretary of state, speaking on the way to a security summit in Thailand, later said she was not suggesting a new policy. But her comments marked the first time a senior US official has publicly contemplated the option of containment in the event of Iran's succeeding in building a nuclear weapon.

Until today such an option was a taboo subject among US government officials and their British counterparts, who have insisted Iran would be ultimately stopped from constructing a warhead.

Iran says its nuclear programme is not for military purposes, and refuses to comply with UN security council resolutions calling on Tehran to suspend the enrichment of uranium. The impasse has grown into a crisis as the enrichment programme has expanded over the past few years.

"We will still hold the door open [for negotiations], but we also have made it clear that we will take actions, as I have said time and time again, crippling action working to upgrade the defences of our partners in the region," Clinton told Thai television.

"We want Iran to calculate what I think is a fair assessment: that if the United States extends a defence umbrella over the region, if we do even more to develop the military capacity of those [allies] in the Gulf, it is unlikely that Iran will be any stronger or safer because they won't be able to intimidate and dominate as they apparently believe they can once they have a nuclear weapon."

Sir Richard Dalton, a former British ambassador to Tehran, said: "She's implying that, if Iran became a nuclear weapon state, then the US would develop their existing defence commitments and that the US would contemplate nuclear deterrence to protect Persian Gulf states."

Clinton's remarks appeared to be aimed at influencing the decisions being made in Tehran. She was also seeking to fend off an arms race in the Middle East, where America's Arab allies are nervous about the rise of a nuclear Iran, and considering their own nuclear options.

But her comments angered America's closest ally in the region, Israel, and drew an immediate riposte from minister of intelligence and atomic energy, Dan Meridor.

"I was not thrilled to hear the American statement … that they will protect their allies with a nuclear umbrella, as if they have already come to terms with a nuclear Iran. I think that's a mistake," Meridor said on Army Radio.

Asked for clarification at press conference, Clinton said: "I was simply pointing out that Iran needs to understand that its pursuit of nuclear weapons will not advance its security or achieve its goals of enhancing its power both regionally and globally.

"The focus that Iran must have is that it faces the prospect if it pursues nuclear weapons of sparking an arms race in the region. That should affect the calculation of what Iran intends to do and what it believes is in its national security interest because it may render Iran less secure, not more secure."

The remarks appear to reflect deepening US pessimism on Iran following the June presidential elections, which brought an entrenchment by hardliners in Tehran.

Hopes had been raised in Washington that Barack Obama's warm overtures to the Iranian people and the offer of talks without preconditions would break the long-running impasse over uranium enrichment.

Iran has so far not replied to the latest offer from six major powers – the US, Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China – to provide economic help and technical assistance in building a nuclear power industry, if Iran suspends enrichment. Little hope is left in Washington or other western capitals that any response now will be positive.

The outgoing director of the International Atomic Energy Agency, Mohamed ElBaradei, said recently he thought Iran was developing a breakout capacity to build nuclear weapons, as an "insurance policy" against perceived foreign threats.

The containment option is boosted by the belief that Iran is running out of uranium ore to convert and enrich. The US thinks the supply will run out by next year and is urging all uranium-producing countries to tighten control over their exports, to ensure Iran does not get hold of any more.

If that effort is successful, it would limit the size of arsenals Iran is able to build. That is the theory at least. It is very much plan B as far as the west is concerned, but it is a bow to new realities.


This is a stick-up: Spaniards take revenge on banks for credit crunch

By Elizabeth Nash in Madrid

Wednesday, 22 July 2009


With Spain's economy in freefall and loans squeezed, desperadoes are resorting to robbing banks to solve their personal credit crunch.

Bank robberies have risen by 20 per cent in two years, Spain's banking association says; and those who adopt the tactic of the stick-up to pay their debts are novices rather than hardened criminals.

"In recent months, it has become apparent that Spain is suffering from an increase in bank robberies," Francisco Perez Abellan, the head of criminology at Camilo Jose Cela University in Madrid, told The New York Times.

"We are seeing people committing offences through necessity, first-time offenders who can no longer continue to maintain their lifestyle and so turn to crime," he said.

Instances where counter clerks are tied up at gunpoint while masked raiders empty the safe have become so common that Spain's government, prodded by the bank employees' trade union, has classified bank robbery as an occupational hazard.

Jose Manuel Murcia, the head of workplace health and safety in the financial sector for the Workers' Commissions union federation, said: "There's unemployment, there's hunger and there's money in the banks, and the three factors combine.

"Banks are denying credit, so companies are having problems... People can't pay their mortgages. So it's... logical to rob a bank."

Typical among novice robbers is the building contractor identified as Ausencio CG, who allegedly stole €80,000 (£69,000) from four banks before he was caught attempting his fifth hold-up near Barcelona in February. He told police he had used the money to pay his workers and fund his daughter's studies in London.

Other new bandits were low-skilled workers from eastern Europe or Latin America, drawn to Spain during the building boom, who were now unemployed, Mr Perez Abellan said.

"They bring new skills that increase the level of violence and the speed of the bank robbery."

Four South American painters kidnapped a bank manager in Barcelona in March, held him overnight and forced him to hand over €150,000 from the vault.

They were caught last month in their painters' overalls, guns and bullets in their car, as they tried a final heist before returning home.




The Big Question: Why has Britain become more unequal, and can it be changed?

By Nigel Morris, Deputy Political Editor

Wednesday, 22 July 2009


null

independent graphics


Media Bills Railroaded Amid Scuffle


Female lawmakers from the governing and opposition parties scuffle Wednesday during a National Assembly session convened to vote on three controversial media bills. The bills were passed by a quorum of lawmakers from the ruling Grand National Party. / Korea Times

Broadcasting Bill Passage Controversial As Voting Was Made Twice

By Kang Hyun-kyung
Staff Reporter

Three controversial media bills were railroaded Wednesday, paving the way for conservative dailies and chaebol to take a controlling interest in broadcasting and cable news networks.

The vote was made amid violent physical clashes between lawmakers of the ruling Grand National Party (GNP) and opposition parties.

Immediately after the passage of the bills, Democratic Party (DP) Chairman Chung Sye-kyun, floor leader Lee Kang-rae and Rep. Choi Moon-soon said they will tender their resignations.

They said the passage of the bills was invalid as the procedures went against the National Assembly Law. Vice speaker Lee Yoon-sung, who chaired the proceedings, held two votes on the broadcasting bill. Under the law, a vote on a single bill can be held only once.

Claiming that many of the ballots were cast not by the lawmakers but their aides, the DP said it will file for a court injunction to nullify the vote.

The Assembly main chamber was turned into a battleground, as brawls and yelling turned into scuffles and violence as Lee, instead of Speaker Kim Hyong-o, took the podium to present the bills.

One hundred and fifty GNP lawmakers voted for the measures. The quorum needed for passage of the bills was 148, given that there are 294 sitting lawmakers. The DP tried in vain to block the voting.

The conservative GNP claim the bills will promote competition in the media industry, whereas the liberal DP has labeled the measures a plot to control the media. The opposition party insists that they will only benefit major conservative newspapers.

Under the approved bills, newspapers and chaebol are now allowed to own 10- and 30-percent stakes in national television and cable news networks, respectively.

But newspapers that have a circulation taking up 20 percent of the total market will be banned from investing in the businesses.

Several people, including Reps. Kim Young-jin of the DP and Kwak Jung-sook of the Democratic Labor Party (DLP), were rushed to hospital due to injuries suffered during the scuffles.

The clash began a couple of hours after Speaker Kim announced he would invoke his right to table the disputed bills at a plenary session.

Speaker Kim couldn't preside over the votes because he was unable to enter the chamber due to a barricade set up by DP lawmakers and their aides.

In a statement read by his chief of staff, Kim said he had waited long enough to see a bipartisan agreement on the measures and that now was the time to make a decision, as the GNP and the DP showed little sign of compromise.

The announcement came about an hour after GNP floor leader Ahn Sang-soo declared an end to inter-party talks.

"Given the results of previous meetings, I don't think we need to have more talks on the bills," Ahn said.

Before the vote took place, about 120 aides and dozens of DP lawmakers barricaded the entrance to the main chamber to block access to GNP lawmakers.

About 120 ruling lawmakers were already inside before the scuffles occurred, but the number didn't meet the quorum needed for the passage of the bills.

Clashes came as GNP legislators and aides tried to enter and their DP counterparts blocked their attempts.

Vice speaker Lee and about 30 GNP lawmakers entered later, and voting took place as soon as the quorum was reached.

DP lawmakers who were inside the chamber greeted the vote with loud criticism, yelling and swearing.

hkang@koreatimes.co.kr




Mercosur sacará al dólar como moneda de referencia


La reunión de sudamérica que se llevará a cabo en Montevideo revisa qué moneda será la referencia en las transacciones comerciales; también revisarán la disparidad entre los países con economías débiles




sacará al dólar como moneda de referencia" alt="Mercosur sacará al dólar como moneda de referencia " width="302">
Más de 2 mil policías aguardan la llegada de los titulares del Mercosur que se reunirán en Paraguay esta semana (Foto: Reuters )





Imprimir | Envíar |








Comenta la nota

AP
El Universal
ASUNCIÓN Miércoles 22 de julio de 2009
13:30

La eliminación del dólar estadounidense como moneda de referencia en las transacciones comerciales intrazona y el recurrente tema de las asimetrías de Paraguay y Uruguay frente a las economías más fuertes de Argentina y Brasil, serán los puntos dominantes de la nueva cumbre de mandatarios del Mercosur que tendrá lugar en Asunción el jueves y viernes próximos.

Al encuentro asistirán, además, los presidentes de estados asociados como Bolivia y Chile, Evo Morales y Michelle Bachelet; también fue confirmada la presencia de Hugo Chávez, de Venezuela, mientras que Rafael Correa, de Ecuador, comunicó su inasistencia.

Bachelet arribará el miércoles de noche porque tiene previsto un encuentro bilateral con su anfitrión el mandatario Fernando Lugo para analizar la venta de electricidad paraguaya a Chile.

El canciller paraguayo Héctor Laconagta dijo el miércoles que existe un acuerdo anticipado entre Brasil, Argentina, Paraguay y Uruguay ''para utilizar las monedas locales en el comercio dentro de la región, descartando al dólar como referente''.

''Para ajustar el mecanismo de cotización sesionarán el jueves los presidentes de bancos centrales y ministros de Economía y Hacienda de nuestros países''.

Oscar Rodríguez, viceministro de Relaciones Exteriores para asuntos de integración, adelantó que ''se seguirá debatiendo el tema de las asimetrías de los socios pequeños Paraguay y Uruguay ante los más grandes como Argentina y Brasil para afianzar el objetivo de alcanzar la libre circulación de bienes y personas''.

''Se debe ajustar el funcionamiento del Fondo para la Convergencia Estructural del Mercado Común del Sur (Focem) que administra dinero a ser prestado a Paraguay y Uruguay para la inversión en infraestructura y achicar las asimetrías'', recordó.

Carlos Alvarez, ex vicepresidente argentino y representante de Mercosur frente a otros organismos regionales de integración, dijo durante una conferencia en Asunción que ''las supuestas afinidades ideológicas de los gobiernos del sur del continente no han servido para una reorientación estratégica de nuestro bloque aduanero''.

Hizo alusión a las aparentes propuestas progresistas de Brasil, Argentina, Bolivia y Paraguay, cuyos presidentes han criticado en reiteradas ocasiones el modelo neoliberal vigente anteriormente en la zona.

Alvarez vaticinó días difíciles para Mercosur ''si los países miembros no ofrecen propuestas comunitarias a los problemas de la gente''.

Alfonso González, del opositor Partido Colorado y miembro del Parlasur con sede en Montevideo, se quejó ''porque en Mercosur hay mucha retórica pero Argentina y Brasil siguen violando el artículo 1 que establece la libre circulación de bienes, servicios y factores productivos''.
''Para penar esa inconducta es necesario el funcionamiento de un Tribunal Superior del Mercosur que no permitirá la supremacía de nadie'', especificó.

Sin embargo, desde Montevideo se alzaron voces oficiales en contra de la creación del referido tribunal porque obligaría a una modificación de la constitución nacional.

isv

Tuesday, July 21, 2009




Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao urged long-term preparedness for dealing with the global downturn, saying China will tackle the development issue through reform at a meeting for Chinese diplomats Monday.


Chinese President Hu Jintao also made a speech at the four-day meeting.


Wen said that the global financial crisis has plunged the world into deep recession, and it's difficult to say the global downturn has reached the bottom.


"The recovery of the global economy will be a slow process with twists and turns, there must be a long-term preparedness to effectively deal with (the global downturn)," said Wen.


Wen said that China will stick to mutual-beneficial strategy of opening-up and the use of outbound investments. China will combine expansion of domestic demand with stabilizing foreign demand, continue to use foreign investment, and accelerate the pace of "going out" strategy, Wen said.


Wen said China will continue to reform the RMB, or yuan, exchange rate forming mechanisms, and maintain the yuan's exchange rate at a stable level.


China will participate extensively in international cooperation in non-traditional fields and further work with other countries to address the climate change issue, Wen said.


In addition to President Hu Jintao and Premier Wen Jiabao, seven members of the Standing Committee of the Political Bureau of the Communist Party of China (CPC) Central Committee attended the meeting: Wu Bangguo, Jia Qinglin, Li Changchun, Xi Jinping, Li Keqiang, He Guoqiang and Zhou Yongkang.


Source: Xinhua

GERMAN INDUSTRY LEADER ON THE CREDIT CRUNCH

'Bottlenecks That Give Cause for Concern'

07/20/2009 12:06 PM

Hans-Peter Keitel, 61, president of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), discusses the threat of a credit crunch in Germany and the tough work awaiting the next government, which will have to create a plan for dealing with the massive debt accrued through efforts to combat the economic crisis.

SPIEGEL: Mr. Keitel, the government in Berlin says we are experiencing a credit crunch. The banks are saying there isn't one. Who's correct?

Keitel: Both are correct. A person running a healthy business has no problem getting a short-term loan for his day-to-day business. In that sense I must even defend the banks against the occasional populist criticism. But there is trouble with loans needed by companies to finance large, long-term projects or investments. Here we are observing bottlenecks that give cause for concern. The crunch hasn't happened yet, but we are close to it.

SPIEGEL: What are you concerned about, in concrete terms?

Keitel: The financial crisis has caused banks to lose large parts of their own capital. Now, because of the growing real economic risks, they are being forced to put increasing amounts of equity capital aside to cover old and new loans. That is the mechanics of Basel II. It has reduced their scope to issue loans. But if the financial institutions only finance failsafe businesses, then that will hit the core area of German industry -- the export-oriented, highly innovative, mid-sized business sector. If lending doesn't gain momentum, I fear that by the autumn even completely healthy companies could get into difficulties that could threaten their survival -- with all the negative consequences for the economy and employees.

SPIEGEL: German Economy Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg is threatening to force banks to step up their lending if he has to.

Keitel: I think nothing of that idea. The financial crisis happened because banks entered into risks that were too great. That is why it is correct for them to now pay greater attention to their risks. But the pendulum can't be allowed to swing too far in the other direction, either. Neither state coercion nor additional state funding will help. We have made enough of that available by now. Instead I favor improving conditions for lending.

SPIEGEL: How can that be done?

Keitel: It needs to be made easier for companies to get a loan from the state-owned German development bank KfW. It would also be helpful if KfW were able to directly buy securitized loans issued by banks. Additionally, the German government should energetically push for banks to be relieved of pressure caused by the equity requirements of the so-called Basel II guideline.

SPIEGEL: If your forecast is correct, then the credit crunch in Germany will first intensify after national elections on Sept. 27. What will that mean for the next government?

Keitel: Above all, the new government will have to develop a strategy for tackling the dramatic deficits the state has run up in its fight against the financial crisis. Of course the budget needs to be consolidated. But the government must also be careful not to choke off economic growth. Only the economy can get us out of the current misery. That's why it would be a mistake to unilaterally focus on increasing taxes and contributions. If you want to speed up the upswing, you need to do the opposite -- you need to reduce the burden on those who generate growth in this society: the broad middle class and the companies.


URL:



GROWING FEAR OF CREDIT CRUNCH

Germany Considers Forced Capitalization of Banks

07/20/2009 11:31 AM

The German government is considering forcing banks to accept state aid and partially nationalizing them in return because it's increasingly worried that Germany faces a credit crunch, the Süddeutsche Zeitung newspaper reported on Monday.

The German government is worried that the current shortage of bank credit plaguing industry will worsen later this year and is considering tackling the problem by forcibly taking stakes in banks, similar to the policy adopted by authorities in the United States and Britain, a German newspaper reported on Monday.

Not lending enough -- German banks in Frankfurt, the country's financial capital.
Getty Images

Not lending enough -- German banks in Frankfurt, the country's financial capital.

The plan envisages the government forcing banks to take state aid and to part-nationalize them in return, Süddeutsche Zeitung reported, citing unnamed sources.

So far, both Chancellor Angela Merkel and Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück have rejected such mandatory aid and have allowed banks to choose whether to tap the government's bank stabilization fund set up last year.

But analysts at the Chancellery, Finance Ministry and Economy Ministry now concur that Germany is at risk of a credit crunch that could worsen the recession, already the deepest since the 1930s, Süddeutsche reported.

Businesses Report Trouble Getting Credit

At present small businesses as well as large corporations say they are having problems securing bank loans. The banks have tightened their lending because they have had to make risk provisions to cover remaining toxic assets in their balance sheets, because an increasing number of companies cannot repay their loans in the current economic downturn, and because new international balance sheet rules are forcing banks to put back more equity capital to cover their loans.

The government has argued that it's time banks boosted their lending because several of them have taken billions of euros in government aid.

The government has not decided yet whether to go ahead with forced part-nationalization, the report said. One source at an unnamed ministry said it had been a mistake to make the aid system voluntary, but others in the government remain skeptical about forced measures, arguing that major banks in the US and Britain hadn't boosted their spending either, even though their governments have taken stakes in them.

So far, the German government has taken stakes in Hypo Real Estate and Commerzbank. But more banks are expected to avail themselves of government aid in the months to come because banks are having to undergo so-called stress tests to ascertain whether they qualify for the planned " scheme, under which they can free up their balance sheets by depositing their toxic assets in separate institutions. Those stress tests could reveal new problems at banks and force them to seek government aid.

Any law entitling the government to forcibly nationalize banks could probably only be passed after the Sept. 27 federal election, the Süddeutsche report said. The government is also considering an alternative -- expanding the lending activities of state development bank Kreditanstalt für Wiederaufbau (KfW).

Merkel reiterated on Sunday that she was concerned about the lack of lending and signalled she would put additional pressure on banks to prevent a credit crunch. If loans don't increase, "the government will invite them back and have a serious word with the banks," she told ARD television.

cro -- with wire reports



THE BANKS THAT WOULDN'T LEND

Experts Warn of New Credit Crunch in Germany

By Christian Reiermann, Christian Salewski and Michael Sauga

07/20/2009 12:00 AM

Many economists are already talking about a light at the end of the recession tunnel. But a new crisis is looming in Germany as companies find it increasingly difficult to borrow money. The government is coming up with increasingly desperate ideas to get liquidity flowing again.

There was little evidence of a crisis as German Chancellor Angela Merkel hurried through a production building at Opitz Holzbau GmbH, a manufacturer of prefabricated building elements based in the eastern German town of Neuruppin, on Wednesday of last week. Production was in high gear, and the chancellor chatted with assembly workers, handed out praise and shook hands.

Idle cranes in Hamburg harbor: The economic crisis is hitting German exporters hard.
DPA

Idle cranes in Hamburg harbor: The economic crisis is hitting German exporters hard.

Merkel was making the second stop on her summer tour of German small- and mid-sized businesses. She was trying out the central message of her election campaign, which will begin in the coming weeks: "Everything will be just fine."

After the factory tour, Merkel and local business owners retired to a drab conference room -- and suddenly the crisis was back. The discussion revolved around banks, the slowdown in the flow of credit and the resulting cash crunch many companies are experiencing. This is the subject that is currently capturing the attention of economists, politicians, business owners and ordinary people alike.

Merkel complained that even though the government has spent billions to support the banks, there are now "massive problems with investments over €10 million ($14 million)." She said that she is gradually losing her inclination to take responsibility for the financial industry. "It's time for the banks to do their part," Merkel said.

The government is preparing for the next stage of the economic crisis. While some experts are already declaring the imminent end of the recession, Berlin's grand coalition government of conservative Christian Democrats (CDU) and the center-left Social Democratic Party (SPD) fears that the financial crisis could come to a head in the fall.

Because the banks have been reluctant to lend money, even healthy small-and medium-sized companies lack the funds for much-needed investments and future-oriented projects.

Senior officials at the Economics Ministry warn of a "serious danger," while Hans-Peter Keitel, president of the Federation of German Industries (BDI), warned in an interview with SPIEGEL that "even completely healthy companies could get into difficulties that could threaten their survival." Merkel is worried: If the prognoses prove to be correct, the weeks leading up to Germany's national elections on Sept. 27 could be filled with bankruptcy filings by firms in Germany's traditional export industries, like mechanical engineering, electronics and the automotive sector.

Even as companies threaten to go under, which would set off waves of layoffs, financial firms like US investment bank Goldman Sachs and Germany's Deutsche Bank are raking in substantial profits once again. Merkel's advisers fear that the prospect of widespread company failures could poison the mood among voters.

This concern has prompted government leaders to assign the blame for the malaise to the reluctant bankers. Lenders would rather invest the money "in the trading of foreign currency, bonds and stocks," Finance Minister Peer Steinbrück says. Economics Minister Karl-Theodor zu Guttenberg calls the banks' behavior "unreasonable," and SPD chancellor candidate Frank-Walter Steinmeier says that "healthy companies are going under, merely because banks are hording their money."

Graphic: German measures to tackle the financial crisis to date
DER SPIEGEL

Graphic: German measures to tackle the financial crisis to date

Assigning the blame to the financial managers, who were indeed partly responsible for the financial crash, may be popular, but it is not particularly accurate. In truth, the government is mainly to blame for the fact that liquidity has yet to return to important segments of the German credit market.

For reasons partly of parsimoniousness and partly of misunderstood market ideology, the Merkel cabinet has designed its billions in bailout programs (see graphic) in such a way that they have often narrowly missed their mark.

For instance, the German government had expected that its €480 billion ($672 billion) financial market stabilization fund would ensure that banks with heavy losses would boost their equity reserves. But instead of requiring banks to accept the government bailout funds, as was the case in the United States and Britain, the German government made participation in its program voluntary.

The outcome was inevitable. Fearing that the public would perceive them as ailing, even banks that urgently needed the money shied away from accepting the government's capital injection.

Only Commerzbank and a few smaller institutions took the government up on its rescue offer. Meanwhile, the majority of players in the financial industry are trying to survive the crisis without any outside help, which severely restricts their ability to lend money.

The upshot of the so-called "bad bank" law, which the grand coalition hoped would enable lenders to get rid of their now worthless toxic securities, has been similarly sketchy. The Christian Democrats and the SPD spent half a year discussing one detoxification model after the next. In the end, they decided on a version whose main feature is that it minimizes the burden on the federal budget.

For financial institutions, on the other hand, the aid was tied to so many conditions that hardly any banks have wanted to participate. To date, not a single institution has submitted the relevant applications, and only three banks have even expressed their "interest" in the program. As a result, toxic securities continue to burden bank balance sheets and tie up capital which is urgently needed for loans.

The most disastrous outcome of the failed policies, however, has been the federal and state governments' inability to recapitalize Germany's troubled state-owned regional Landesbanken. After playing a larger role in the global investment casino than any other sector of the financial industry, institutions like WestLB and HSH Nordbank faced enormous losses when the crisis hit.

In Poor Shape

Experts have long recommended that if these institutions are to become viable again, unprofitable business segments will have to be abandoned and several institutions merged -- a step many governors of Germany's states are unwilling to take. Fearing a loss of control and of jobs, states like Bavaria and Baden-Württemberg are even turning down offers of federal assistance and are trying to bail out their troubled state-owned banks on their own.

The consequences have been disastrous. Because the government's cleanup efforts have been so unsuccessful, Germany's banking industry is in worse shape than that of almost any other industrialized nation. Foreign banks like the Royal Bank of Scotland have withdrawn from the German market, private banks lack the necessary capital and the ailing state-owned banks are largely incapable of lending money for investment.

Thus, it comes as no surprise that the flow of capital has stagnated. The banks increased their lending volume by 5 percent in the first quarter of this year, compared with the same period last year. But this growth stems primarily from short-term liquidity loans, an area in which banks are still eager to lend money. For long-term loans, however, which companies need for their capital investments, banks have "tightened their standards across all types of businesses and for all repayment terms," a survey conducted by Germany's central bank, the Bundesbank, concluded.

Graphic: German measures to tackle the financial crisis to date
DER SPIEGEL

Graphic: German measures to tackle the financial crisis to date

But the worst is yet to come. Experts predict that the credit crunch will worsen in the second half of the year. When that happens, the recession will affect larger numbers of companies, causing their credit ratings to decline. The banks, in turn, will be even more reluctant to lend money.

The government is familiar with the experts' predictions. But instead of addressing the root causes of the problem, Finance Minister Steinbrück would rather resort to belligerent rhetoric. Unless the banks finally toed the line, he blustered, he would take "unprecedented measures."

Steinbrück's aggressive tone makes it all the more embarrassing that his announcements have proven to be nothing but empty threats until now. They have included the suggestion that the Bundesbank issue loans directly, and that the equity capital requirements under the Basel II rules -- international banking regulations that stipulate how much capital banks need to have -- be relaxed. But no matter what Steinbrück has proposed, he has consistently failed in the face of legal constraints and the objections of European partner countries. Are German banks in such poor shape, EU negotiators in Brussels jeered, that Berlin is already torpedoing its own regulatory ideas?

Steinbrück is now pursuing yet another plan. Officials at the Finance Ministry have prepared another version of an emergency financing plan, which calls for the government-owned KfW development bank to take action, instead of the Bundesbank. Before the crisis began, KfW and the banks through which it channels its loans onto the market each bore half the credit risk. In exceptional cases, KfW may assume 80 percent of the risk, while the other bank assumes the remaining 20 percent. In the future, however, KfW's share could be even higher, perhaps even 100 percent, according to the Finance Ministry's latest plans. The Economics Ministry is fashioning similar schemes.

Some plans are even more radical, including the possibility of KfW lending directly to businesses in the future. The funds for the new loans would come from the existing stimulus programs.

The plan could indeed benefit some cash-strapped companies, but it can hardly replace a functioning money and capital market. As Merkel has learned from her visits to small and mid-sized businesses, companies are the first to suffer when banks are not functioning properly.

Admittedly Martin Opitz, the CEO of Opitz Holzbau, was able to report to the chancellor that business is good. With its prefabricated roof trusses, some of which come with attached solar panels, Opitz is profiting from the alternative energy boom.

But Martin Opitz has also had his unfortunate experiences with the credit crunch. In May, a large bank approved a loan of €2.2 million ($3.1 million) for his company. But after spending two months calling the bank in an attempt to actually get the promised funds, he ended up going to the local Sparkasse savings bank, which lent him the money within two weeks.

Since then, Opitz has followed a simple rule of thumb. "I no longer work with large banks," he says.

Translated from the German by Christopher Sultan



Dos criterios de justicia

PDF Imprimir E-mail

Escrito por Amy Goodman Martes, 14 de Julio de 2009 21:21 Última actualización el Sábado, 18 de Julio de 2009 10:30

SCOTT ROEDER, EL FANÁTICO antiaborto acusado de matar al DOCTOR George Tiller, ha estado ocupado. Llamó a Associated Press desde la prisión del Condado de Sedgwick en Kansas, y dijo: “Mientras el aborto continúe siendo legal, sé que hay muchos otros incidentes parecidos planificados en todo el país”.

Scott Roeder Roeder está acusado de homicidio en primer grado y de agresión agravada, y está previsto que comparezca ante el juez el 28 de julio. AP recientemente informó que Roeder ha defendido desde su celda en la prisión la idea de que matar a personas que practican abortos está justificado. Según el informe, el Reverendo Donald Spitz del Ejército de Dios, con sede en Virginia, envió a Roeder siete panfletos que apoyan la “acción defensiva”, o el homicidio de trabajadores de clínicas de abortos.
La página de inicio de la web del militante Ejército de Dios que conduce Spitz considera a Roeder como un “héroe estadounidense”, y proclama: “George Tiller normalmente asesinaba de 10 a 30 niños al día…hasta que fue detenido por Scott Roeder”.
El sitio web, que contiene citas bíblicas que sugieren que matar está justificado, publica artículos escritos por Paul Hill, que mató al doctor John Britton y a su escolta de seguridad en Pensacola, Florida, y también artículos de Eric Rudolph, que hizo estallar una bomba en una clínica de salud de mujeres en Birmingham, Alabama, matando al guardia de seguridad part-time de la clínica.
En el sitio web de Spitz, Rudolph continúa escribiendo sobre el aborto: “Creo que la fuerza mortal está de hecho justificada en el intento de detener los abortos.”
Comparemos la defensa que Roeder hace desde la cárcel con las condiciones de detención de Fahad Hashmi.
Hashmi es un ciudadano estadounidense que se crió en Queens, Nueva York, y fue a la Universidad de Brooklyn. Luego se graduó en Gran Bretaña y fue arrestado allí en 2006 por supuestamente haber permitido a un conocido que se quedara con él durante dos semanas. Este conocido, Junaid Babar, presuntamente guardó en el apartamento de Hashmi un bolso que contenía ponchos y medias, que Babar luego envió a un agente de al-Qaeda. Babar fue arrestado y accedió a cooperar con las autoridades a cambio de indulgencia.
Si bien las pruebas contra Hashmi son secretas, probablemente hayan surgido de las afirmaciones del informante Babar.
Fahad Hashmi fue extraditado a Estados Unidos, donde permanece detenido desde hace más de dos años a la espera del juicio. Su hermano Faisal describió las condiciones de detención: “Ha estado detenido en confinamiento solitario durante dos años de corrido, permanece encerrado de 23 a 24 horas al día…En su propia celda, tiene restringidos los movimientos que puede hacer. No se le permite hablar en voz alta en su propia celda….Es filmado y vigilado en todo momento. Puede ser castigado, negándosele las visitas familiares, si ellos consideran que determinados movimientos que hace son de artes marciales o algo que ellos consideren incorrecto. El propio gobierno impuso Medidas Administrativas Especiales (SAM, por sus siglas en inglés) en su contra."
Fahad Hashmi Hashmi no puede contactar a los medios, e incluso sus abogados deben ser extremadamente cuidadosos cuando discuten su caso, por temor a ser encarcelados ellos mismos. Su abogado Sean Maher me dijo: “Este tema de las Medidas Administrativas Especiales y sus condiciones de detención antes del juicio, de mantener a los detenidos en confinamiento solitario cuando se presume que son inocentes, está siendo estudiado por el Tribunal Europeo de Derechos Humanos. Están debatiendo la posibilidad de impedir que los paises europeos extraditen a una persona a Estados Unidos si existe la posibilidad de que sea detenida en virtud de las SAMs. Y cabe la posibilidad de que Europa, todos los miembros de la Unión Europea no extraditarán a nadie a este país en vista de las SAMs, porque lo consideran una violación a la Carta Europea de Derechos Humanos, es decir que es una violación a los derechos humanos tener a alguien en aislamiento con privación de los sentidos, meses antes del juicio, reitero, cuando uno se presume inocente».
De modo similar, ambientalistas y activistas por los derechos animales, procesados como “eco-terroristas”, fueron enviados a las nuevas “Unidades de Manejo de Comunicación” (CMU, por sus siglas en inglés) de la Dirección Federal de Cárceles. Andrew Stepanian fue recientemente liberado y describió la CMU donde estuvo detenido: «La Unidad de Manejo de Comunicaciones es una prisión dentro de otra prisión. Está instalada en donde antes era la Penitenciaría de Estados Unidos, que fue la primera cárcel de máxima seguridad en el sistema penal federal de Estados Unidos. La unidad no tiene comunicación telefónica normal con familiares, ni visitas normales, como poder comunicarse con los familiares o abrazarlos. Estas visitas normales son negadas. Es preciso concertar una cita para hacer una llamada telefónica a la semana, y eso debe hacerse con la supervisión de un traductor, un monitor en vivo y alguien de Washington, DC».
Stepanian observó que hasta el 70 por ciento de los prisioneros de las CMUs son musulmanes; de ese hecho proviene el apodo de las CMU: “Pequeño Guantánamo”. Al igual que con Hashmi, parece que el gobierno de Estados Unidos pretende quitarle a los sospechosos de terrorismo el derecho al debido proceso y el acceso a los medios ya sea en Guantánamo o en las nuevas unidades carcelarias de acceso restringido, las CMUs. La Unión Estadounidense por las Libertades Civiles (ACLU, por sus siglas en inglés) está demandando al Fiscal General de Estados Unidos, Eric Holder y a la Dirección de Cárceles por las CMUs.
Activistas no-violentos, como Stepanian, y musulmanes como Hashmi, que fueron acusados en forma secreta y dudosa, están detenidos en condiciones draconianas, mientras que Scott Roeder pregona desde la cárcel la campaña de intimidación, vandalismo, incendio premeditado y homicidio que lleva adelante desde hace años el movimiento extremista antiaborto.
———————————
* Denis Moynihan colaboró en la producción periodística de esta columna.
** Texto en inglés traducido por Mercedes Camps y Democracy Now! en español, spanish@democracynow.org

Fideicomisos públicos por 505 mil MDP

Autor: Nancy Flores
Sección: Capitales
Tamaño de texto:
a- A+ Default
19 Julio 2009

La administración de Felipe Calderón mantiene 356 fideicomisos, mandatos y contratos análogos vigentes, cuyos recursos superan los 500 mil millones de pesos. El monto es 43 por ciento mayor que lo resguardado en 2006 –220 mil MDP–, cuando el gobierno de Vicente Fox se comprometió a transparentar la llamadas cajas chicas. Al cierre del primer trimestre de 2009, dos fondos de Pemex transferían 18 mil millones de pesos, indica un amplio reporte de Hacienda


Los fideicomisos, mandatos y contratos análogos forman parte de la lista de las 13 áreas de opacidad y riesgo de la administración pública, integrada por la Auditoría Superior de la Federación (ASF). A estas figuras se l