FLASH Decembrie 2014 | publicatii - Politica La Est

FLASH Decembrie 2014

Conform definitiei de dictionar ‚flash’ este un verb tranzitiv si intranzitiv care defineste actiunea „to cause light to appear suddenly or in brief bursts from something, or appear in this way”, „to reflect light suddenly or briefly, or make a source of light reflect from a surface „ , „to signal to somebody or communicate something by quickly turning lights on and off”, etc. Pe scurt, iar acest lucru explica titlul ofertelor noastre de lectura pentru fanii www.politicalaest.ro. Vrem sa „luminam” pentru bei cateva dintre caile posibile de informare in hatisul relatiilor internationale de azi, cand sistemul parcurge o stare de incertitudine, cand Pax Americana da semne de slabiciune,iar dinamismul Chinei o „impinge” pe primul loc sistemic ca volum al economiei, cand Rusia nu vrea sa piarda competitia tot mai dura  pentru un loc sistemic fruntas, astfel incat sa aiba o ‚voce’in afacerile globale, dincolo de propria regiune,  sau cand ‚jihadul’islamic ia o forma statala ca acomodare la regulile sistemului pe care vrea sa-l modifice (sau domine ? ).
         El va avea o periodicitate bilunara ( speram sa ne tina puterile, pentru ca de materie prima nu se duce lipsa ), in limbile romana si engleza , iar tinta noastra este sa trecem si dincolo de opiniile consacrate si –potrivit spiritului erei internetului- sa dam cuvantul si celorlalti preocupati de domeniul in relatiilor internationale ( de la cititori  care comenteaza , cateodata uluitor diverse evolutii sistemice , la bloguri de experti sau institutionale, la scapari’revelatoare ale oficialilor prin  ‚microfoane deschise’sau altfel ). Si inca o mentiune: cateodata ne vom ‚amuza’ profesional oferind si incursiuni  in alte orizonturi, nu doar cele luminand relatiile inter- sau intrastatale .
         Cine va vroi sa intervina sau sa propuna „cai” necunoscute  redactorilor „FLASH” sunt oricand bineveniti.
 
1. CUM SE VA INCHEIA NEGOCIEREA INTRE „GRUPUL 5 plus 1”  si IRAN Cand la 24 noiembrie a.c. State Secretary John Kerry a anuntat extinderea cu inca 7 luni a negocierilor  ‚Grupului 5 plus 1”( cei cinci membri permanenti ai Consiliului de Securitate al ONU ) cu Iranul el a adaugat un lucru extrem de semnificativ. Anume - pe langa la fel de importanta  declaratie : “we would be fools to walk away”- , State Secretary a spus:  “If you are looking for a zero sum game in nuclear negotiations, you are doomed to failure.” Negocierile cu Iranul desfasurate la Viena au privit dosarul nuclear tintind demantelarea infrastructurii iraniene dedicata programului nuclear , despre care Occidentul crede ca are o finalitate militara. Asadar, inca sapte luni in care partile –Iranul si SUA si aliatii- au a continua negocierile cu Tehranul , dar fulgeratoarele evolutii pe arena internationala, mai ales in Mideast, isi vor spune neindoielnic cuvantul asupra deznodamantului  ( vezi : http://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/25/world/middleeast/iran-nuclear-talks.html?_r=0 ). In lumea de azi totul este conexat pe arena internationala astfel incat ceea ce se va intamnpla in Ucraina cu evolutia rublei sau negocierile cu Iranul ori soarta califatului islamic sunt interdependente.
O excelenta mini-istorie a negocierii intre aliati si Iran in anul care s-a scurs o intreprinde  articolul intitulat US and Allies Extend Iran Nuclear Talks by 7 Months: A Deal May Be Reached with Trust, But Not with Certainty”” postat la 8 decembrie 2014 pe  site-ul  ‘greatcharlie’( Commentary and advice for foreign and defense policymakers, political and business leaders and policy aficionados worldwide.). Pentru ca ne aflam in fata acestui dosar extrem de important pentru situatia internationala actuala , sa ne delectam cu incheierea acestei analize , care recurge la utile rememorari istorice:“faith will be required to formulate a final decision on a deal under current circumstances. Clearly, some reasonable doubt exists, at least among Western partners in the P5+1, over whether the terms of a deal would be observed. With circumstances in the world seeming off-balance, George William Rutler, pastor of Saint Michael’s Church in New York City and author of Cloud of Witnesses, recently reminded greatcharlie.com of a live radio message by King George VI on New Year’s 1939, offering reassurance to his people. It would have an important effect on the listening public as they moved closer to war. King George VI acknowledged that there was uncertainty over what the new year would bring. He explained, “If it brings peace, how thankful we shall all be. If it brings us continued struggle we shall remain undaunted.” He went on to quote a poem from Minnie Haskins of the London School of Economics entitled “The Gate of the Year” (The Dessert 1908). It seems apropos to present that quote here at the end of 2014, given the situation the leaders of the P5+1 nations will face in 2015 over the nuclear negotiations.
“I said to the man who stood at the Gate of the Year:
‘Give me a light, that I may tread safely into the unknown!’
And he replied: ‘Go out into the darkness and put your hand into the Hand of God.
That shall be to you better than light and safer than a known way’.
http://greatcharlie.com/2014/12/08/us-and-allies-extend-iran-nuclear-talks-by-7-months-a-deal-may-be-reached-with-trust-but-not-with-certainty/
 
2. PRABUSIREA RUBLEI SI SOARTA REGIMULUI PUTIN.  In zilele d 15 , 16 si 17 decembrie, rubla ruseasca s-a prabusit. Banca Centrala a Rusiei a incercat sa opreasca hemoragia care vlaguia fulgerator moneda nationala si a reusit cu greu sa stavileasca momentan caderea in neant a acesteia. Cu costuri financiare uriase. Dar , se pare, ca acest colaps al rublei continua. Comentariile presei internationale s-au inmultit rapid si s-a incercat a se da un raspuns la intrebarea: poate stavili Kremlinul prabusirea monedei nationale sau V. Putin, presedintele rus va trebui sa plece. Intr-o insemnare pe blogul consacrat situatiei globale al „Financial Times”( 16 decembrie 2014 ), Tony Barber  scrie ca , practic, contractul social incheiat de putin la preluarea puterii in anul 2000 se apropie de sfarsit:” Like many a tsar and communist party leader before him, Putin was saying that, when the going gets tough in Russia (and, from the Kremlin’s perspective, it has been tough most of the time since the 13th-century Mongol invasion of Kievan Rus’), order must trump liberty – that’s the way the narod likes it.He wasn’t necessarily wrong. But the flip side of Putin’s political philosophy is that, when a Russian leader fails to provide order, he loses his legitimacy with the masses – and with at least some of his closest supporters. The social contract is torn up. So is that other contract, the undisclosed one among the ruling elite. The people instinctively sense that it’s time for a new leader. So do the holders of political, economic, military and police power. This is the reason why Putin’s inability to halt the rouble’s collapse is so important.”
         La fel de interesante  sunt comentariile care insotesc aceasta analiza. Iata unul dintre ele , care reface o istorie – doar in cateva paragrafe- a relatiei lui Putin cu ‚semia’( familia ) oligarhilor:
” Tsubais and Gref appeared in Davos this year and tried to negotiate a way for Russia to get out of the Ukranian mess. Some weeks later Srelkov , Borodai and some other 'leaders' of the Novorasiya-Danietsk experiment resigned cursing publicly the 'traitors in Kremlin' who chucked them out with the threat of cutting off all aide, while they sung Putin's praises . Then Yeftuseyev was arrested.
It was quite obvious that some faction inside the Kremlin walls had told ( at least attempted to tell) Putin that enough was enough with the confrontation with the West. It was really good he brought Crimea back into the fold of 'Rodina'. It was not so nice ( but what the hell!) showing some real teeth to the arrogant Sikorsky and making him choke on his attempt to reassert Polish authority over Ukraine, by snatching away two Oblasts ( Lugansk and Donetsk) . But ! But enough was enough !
Vladimir Vladimitovits was a hero of the people with 80% or more approval ratings, but American sanctions were starting to bite where it hurt. So it would be better for Mr. Putin to come to some terms with the West, or else !
The KGB-FSB Palkovnik, member of the famous Peterski, seems to have stood his ground.
In some notable speeches since September he denounced the West and its ambitions on Russia's vast resources. His words had the ring of sincerity. He reiterated Russia's claim to what it considers its own since time immemorial. And challenged the West to do its worst !
In between, the Serious Fraud Office in England has uncovered a massive money laundering operation through Moldova and Latvia. Funds to the tune of 20bn dollars were siphoned out of the country just by one group of clever boys. A couple of other similar stories were hushed before they hit the press. God knows the real scale of this funds exodus. It was obvious that those who warned Putin really meant their 'else' and had started moving their money out in haste. Some-times so hastily that they made elementary mistakes.
Then, the tsunami of the oil price collapse hit. And the exodus became a stampede. It took less than a month for even the simple man in the street to get the drift and start hoarding Foreign Currency. And today the stampede became a classic panic run !
This article should be considered as a harbinger of things that could be coming. The fall of the rouble has taken such a momentum not because Russia does not have reserves. Nor because Russia is heavily indebted abroad. Most of the debt to the abroad is owed by companies which could go belly up without a lot o repercussions on the Russian budget.
Neither is the drop of the Ruble justifiable by the state of the Russian Economy, nor by inflation, not even by the drop in oil prices which Russia could weather for at least 3 years without major earth movements.
It has come because everybody is convinced that the power struggle behind the Kremlin walls is going on strong and the outcome is uncertain. Putin is not the mortally ill Yeltsin for a 'Semia' ( family) of oligarchs to take over power. And the oligarchs who challenged him back in the early 2000 are mostly destroyed and destitute. But Putin is not invulnerable and his policies have hurt a lot of people in the country. So the Tzar is being disputed, his power is not so absolute, and suspicion has crept in about what is about to happen.
This suspicion-cum-fear for tomorrow's news is what is fueling the massive dollar buying. Russians know better than anybody that in times of turbulence the only really stable value is the greenback. So they turn their own backs to the Ruble en mass.
If Putin will survive this is anybody's guess. One thing is certain. The unfolding route of the Ruble has already made a big dent in his shiny armor. Vladimir Vladimirovits seems to be as mortal as the next man. „
Nu este singurul comentariu demn de citit al acestei interesante analize intr-o chestiune de importanta desoebita in evolutia relatiilor internationale azi. La urma urmei, criza rublei deschide o alta perspectiva de ‚citire’a solutiei in criza din  Ucraina. Va ceda Putin si va recurge la des-escaladare in Ucraina in  contrapartida cu sprijinirea internationala a rublei ?
 (http://blogs.ft.com/the-world/2014/12/what-putins-inability-to-halt-the-roubles-collapse-says-about-him/)
 
3.  CARE VA FI NOUA „MUTARE DE SAH” PE ARENA GLOBALA ? Neindoielnic, criza ucraineana tine capul de afis al politicii internationale in prezen. Ea ‘bate’ de departe atat desfasurarile din Mideast , unde aparitia ISIL-califatul islamic a determinat o rescriere a aliantelor, unele parand sau chiar fiind ‘contra firii’  sau evolutiile din Estul Asiei, unde situatia se apropie amenintator de o solutie in peninsula Korea sau declansarea unor alegeri anticipate in Japonia de catre premierul Sabe prelimina miscari si mai indraznete ale acestuia in eventualitatea castigarii lor . Atat pe planul intern- contracararea inflatiei- cat si extern – masurarea cu o China intr-un  mars triumfal catre numarul 1 in topul global.
         De ce Ucraina ? Mai intai , pentru ca pare-se Kremlinul nu da semna ca ar ceda , desi rubla a pierdut aproape jumatate din valoare in utlimele sase luni, iar pretul petrolului continua sa scada. In al doilea rand, pentru ca Germania da semne ca vrea sa abandoneze vechiul Ostpolitik, bazat pe Helsinki-1, asdar pactul euroatlantic care constituie baza legala a ordinei globale in fiinta. In al treilea rand, pentru ca Washingtonul, cu deosebire Congresul a devenit tot mai activ in a cere ca Rusia sa se conformeze ordinei legale ori sa fie contracarata in Ucraina prin forta sprijinind Kievul in acest sens. I n sfarsit, dar nu in cele din urma pentru ca este evident nca incelstarea in care s-a angajat Rusia are ca ti nta schimbarea ordinei globale- Pax Americana actuala- si identificarea locului considerat la Mosocova Legitim pentru Rusia in noua alcatuire sistemica. Cu alte cuvinte,  Moscova urmareste o ordine post-Pax Americana.Este nevoie de o ‘miscare’ indrazneata care sa dezlege vointa fiecaruia dintre marii actori globali pentru a purcede mai departe, dincolo de criza ucraineana si primejdia de razboi hegemonic.
         La o asemenea miscare refera Gideon Rachman in articolul publicat in Financial Times la 8 decembrie sub titlul ‘Chess moves to transform world politics’. Iata premisa pe care este construita analiza comentatorului britanic: “At the moment, international politics looks badly in need of some brilliant new thinking. Many of the big powers are in a diplomatic mess. America is back at war in the Middle East. Russia is isolated. China has antagonised almost all its neighbours. Britain is drifting to the margins of Europe. The geopolitical chessboard seems to cry out for bold new moves. What might they be?”.
         Analistul imagineaza patru asemenea miscari de sah si le explica oferind si propria estimatie relative la implementare.
a.    The New Yalta defence, cu alte cuvinte impartirea lumii in sfere de influenta asa cum s-a procedat in februarie 1945, la Yalta in  conferinat “celor trei mari”. Desi oarecum mitica si necorespunzatoare intergal adevarului istoric, conferinta de la Yalta din 1945 a asigurat mai bine de jumatate de secol de pace.  Rachman scire, si evalueaza: “Mr Putin’s dream is to be granted a renewed Russian sphere of influence over most of the former Soviet Union. Some in the west are tempted by a new Yalta. Others find the idea sinister and distasteful. Mr Putin did himself no favours when, discussing the idea of great-power bargains, he suggested the Hitler-Stalin pact of 1939 had got an unfairly negative press. Bad move. Chances: 3/10”.
b.   The Perfidious Albion counter, cu alte cuvinte ceea ce a facut secole de-a randul Anglia pentru a pastra echilibrul European amenintat de Habsburgi, Napoleon, Wilhelm sau Hitler.Scrie Rachman:” The European chessboard currently looks perfectly set up for a classical deployment of the Perfidious Albion counter-attack. There is a growing rift between France and Germany and raging antagonism between northern and southern Europeans. However, the British seem to have lost their chess-playing abilities and are proving remarkably inept at building alliances. Unable to achieve their ends through diplomacy and cunning, the British are now considering leaving the EU altogether. This is the equivalent of responding to a weak position by turning over the board and stalking out of the room – not so much a tactic as a temper tantrum. Chances: 0/10 (under current conditions)
c.    The Mad Mullah gambit sau apropierea SUA de Iran si reformularea Orientului Mijlociu, un ‘hotspot’ durabil. Miscarea aceasta pare a fi in present in plina desfasurare pentru ca se observa o alianta neformalizata intre cele doua puteri impotriva Califatului Islamic si Siria si Irak. Rachman scrie ca :”  Some Americans also argue Saudi support for jihadism is a bigger threat to the Middle East than Iran’s regional ambitions and that the sophisticated, worldly Iranians are ultimately more attractive partners than the backward fundamentalists of Riyadh. Strike a deal on the nuclear issue with Iran, lift economic sanctions on the country and you have a new Middle East in the making.” Sansele implementarii sunt 2/10, intre altele, apreciaza Rachman , datorita faptului ca Israelul si Arabia Saudita se vor opune din rasputeri.
d.   The Korean opening sau noua politica a Beijingului de apropiere de Korea de Sud. Beneficiile unei apropieri Beijing-Seoul ar fi ca astfel SUA ar fi confruntata cu o schisma intre doi din aliatii sai regionali-Japonia si Korea de Sud, iar Korea de Nord , care se bizuie pe garantia de securitate a Chinei , ar deveni un jucator impredictibil . ai mult,South Korea relies on the US security guarantee to protect it against the North. Would it be prepared to trade that in return for the uncertain benefits of an alliance with China? Probably not – at least yet. Chances: 3/10”
 
         Rachman atrage atentia asupra unui amanunt defel nesemnificativ:the odds are against any of these great diplomatic gambits actually happening. That is partly because, in a democratic age, it is much harder to behave like a Richelieu or a Bismarck. Social media, financial markets, popular movements and terrorist outrages are all capable of upsetting the calculations of even the most brilliant geopolitical strategist. These days a would-be grandmaster, staring at the global chessboard, is liable to find that the pawns have started moving around on their own.” (Gideon Rachman, Chess moves to transform world politics ,December 8, 2014 12:52 pm, gideon.rachman@ft.com )
 
           
 
4.CHINA A DEVENIT LIDER AL SISTYEMULUI INTERNATIONAL DE STATE .”When the history of 2014 is written, it will take note of a large fact that has received little attention: 2014 was the last year in which the United States could claim to be the world’s largest economic power. China enters 2015 in the top position, where it will likely remain for a very long time, if not forever. In doing so, it returns to the position it held through most of human history.Comparing the gross domestic product of different economies is very difficult. Technical committees come up with estimates, based on the best judgments possible, of what are called “purchasing-power parities,” which enable the comparison of incomes in various countries. These shouldn’t be taken as precise numbers, but they do provide a good basis for assessing the relative size of different economies. „ Astfel isi incepe articolul cu titlul China Has Overtaken the U.S. as the World’s Largest Economy, renumitul economist american Joseph. J Stiglitz. Cateva idei demne de retinut sunt chiar in acest inceput. Pentru Stiglitz, Chia „se reintoarce”in aceasta pozitie de lider, detinuta in cea mai mare parte a istoriei inregistrate a umanitatii. Apoi, el evalueaza ca probabil aceasta reinstalare a Chinei in fruntea sistemului ar putea sa fie de lunga durata, „if not for ever”. In sfarsit o alta idee este aceea ca exista lipsa de precizie  nin diversele statistici intocmite in aceasta privinta, dar ofera  totusi o baza pentru evaluari pertinente.
         Un amanunt deloc nesemnificativ priveste modul in care a fost primita aceasta veste de cei doi competitori. Iata ce relateaza Stiglitz: „Early in 2014, the body that conducts these international assessments—the World Bank’s International Comparison Program—came out with new numbers. (The complexity of the task is such that there have been only three reports in 20 years.) The latest assessment, released last spring, was more contentious and, in some ways, more momentous than those in previous years. It was more contentious precisely because it was more momentous: the new numbers
showed that China would become the world’s largest economy far sooner than
anyone had expected—it was on track to do so before the end of 2014.The source of contention would surprise many Americans, and it says a lot about
the differences between China and the U.S.—and about the dangers of projecting onto the Chinese some of our own attitudes. Americans want very much to be No. 1—we enjoy having that status. In contrast, China is not so eager. According to some reports, the Chinese participants even threatened to walk out of the technical discussions. For one thing, China did not want to stick its head above the parapet—being No. 1 comes with a cost.”
         Stiglitz ofera  abundente exemple istorice a ceea ce inseamna aceste schimbari in top-ul sistemic, fie ca ele privesc doar volumul economiilor in cauza. Pentru ca este evident ca, pentru a clama „the end of Pax Americana”cu alte cuvinte ca hegemonia americana in sistem , instalata ferm dupa al Doilea Razboi Mondial, a incetat nu este suficient doar a prelua conducerea economica a lumii. Capabilitatile militare, superioritatea tehnologica, dinamismul, economic, flexibilitatea politica, etc. Sunt factori care insumati si racordati intr-un network de evaluare pot indreptati conducerea sistemica in postura de hegemon. Iata exemplul dat: „Tectonic shifts in global economic power have obviously occurred before, and as a result we know something about what happens when they do. Two hundred years ago, in the aftermath of the Napoleonic Wars, Great Britain emerged as the world’s dominant power. Its empire spanned a quarter of the globe. Its currency, the pound sterling, became the global reserve currency—as sound as gold itself. Britain, sometimes working in concert with its allies, imposed its own trade rules./.../Britain’s dominance was to last a hundred years and continued even after the U.S. surpassed Britain economically, in the 1870s. There’s always a lag (as there will be with the U.S. and China). The transitional event was World War I, when Britain achieved victory over Germany only with the assistance of the United States. After the war, America was as reluctant to accept its potential new responsibilities as Britain was to voluntarily give up its role. Woodrow Wilson did what he could to construct a postwar world that would make another global conflict less likely, but isolationism at home meant that the U.S. never joined the League of Nations. In the economic sphere, America insisted on going its own way—passing the Smoot-Hawley tariffs and bringing to an end an era that had seen a worldwide boom in trade. Britain maintained its empire, but gradually the pound sterling gave way to the dollar: in the end, economic realities dominate. Many American firms became global enterprises, and American culture was clearly ascendant.World War II was the next defining event. Devastated by the conflict, Britain would soon lose virtually all of its colonies. This time the U.S. did assume the mantle of leadership. It was central in creating the UnitedNations and in fashioning the Bretton Woods agreements, which would underlie the new political and economic order.”
         Analiza lui Stiglitz cuprinde si alte lucruri de mare interes pentru a intelege semnificatia unui asemenea eveniment, precum depasirea SUA de China in plan economic- asteptata doar acum cativa ani sa aiba loc undeva in anii 30-40 ai acestui secol si care iata a avut loc atat de curand-, in planul evolutiei de viitor a sistemului de state .
http://www.vanityfair.com/business/2015/01/china-worlds-largest-economy

Comentarii

Nu exista niciun comentariu

Postarea comentariilor dupa trei luni a fost dezactivata.