Sublime News #6

1. My e-friend Eugene Ivanov participated on Peter Lavelle’s Crosstalk program at Russia Today, Lobbying: Who really rules America? Check it out!

2. Is Obama transforming America into Amerika? Let me explain. Take a look at the details of the healthcare bill, which was passed despite my pessimism (to be fair I think I had a good excuse). Essentially, it will eventually require everyone to buy a health insurance, but there will be subsidies for the poor / employers and continuing competition amongst insurance providers. Overall, could it even be said that the current administration is essentially transforming the American welfare state from one based on liberalism (in which markets are the primary guarantors of welfare with government only stepping in to restrict un-competitive practices, streamline market distortions, and assume only minimal relief obligations from private charitable and religious groups) to corporatism (in which the provision of welfare is tied to the imperative of maintaining social stability)?

Second, the US is developing a proper industrial policy in a bit to reverse deindustrialization. For instance, there are the plans to double exports by 2015, expand into foreign markets, and react strongly against currency manipulation by China. In other words, the US may be beginning to abandon its status as the world’s consumer of last resort – an important foundation of the current international system. These is also a higher focus on equality of opportunity, energy efficiency and greentech, closer ties between the state and the “commanding heights” (see Goldman Sachs, General Motors, Google, etc).

This is a suggestion, not a conclusion, and certainly not a moral judgment. Quite possibly, a “convergence to Europe” is inevitable as the US population ages and comes under increasing limits-to-growth pressures (e.g. peak oil). Incidentally, Matt Taibbi has a different take - his best line, ”The whole picture is strange: Democrats running as Republicans, Republicans running as Turner-Diaries conspiracy theorists.”

3. Climate change & energy blast.

4. Geoengineering watch

  • 6 Ways We’re Already Geoengineering Earth (Brandon Keim) – draining the rivers; painting the Earth black; the infinite farm; wiping out reefs; the plastic revolution (note: will probably be mankind’s longest-lasting legacy); altering the atmosphere. (h/t Lou Grinzo)
  • A Survival Guide to Geoengineering (James Cascio) – “despite its potential to trigger conflict, geoengineering will likely be part of the global response to climate change. Be prepared.”
  • On terraforming the solar system, with pictures & What do you think of geoengineering (Randy McDonald) – in my huge post on the topic, I’ve described it as a “final gambit”. We will soon be so far beyond climatic tipping points that sacrificing prodigal resources into geoengineering, in the hope that it will provide a big payoff (e.g. avert the collapse of industrial civilization), will become both rational and inevitable.

5Global Wellbeing Surveys Find Nations Worlds Apart – Gallup measured life satisfaction for 155 nations by “asking respondents to place the status of their lives on a “ladder” scale with steps numbered from 0 to 10, where 0 indicates the worst possible life and 10 the best possible life”.

The results? Dernmark 82%, Canada, Australia & Israel 62%, Brazil 58%, USA 57%, Britain 54%, Germany 43%, France 35%, Poland 28%, Russia & Ukraine 21%, Japan 19%, India & Egypt 10%, China 9%, Togo 1%. For some reason, only the the Americas, northern Europeans, and Anglo-Saxons consider themselves to be thriving, while most of Eurasia and Africa are heavily depressed.

6In other news from Gallup, 49% of Americans believe that the healthcare bill is a “good thing”, whereas just 40% believe it is a “bad thing”. Some have critisized this as an outlier, however. Time will tell as passions die down and Americans get access to more affordable healthcare (and assuming the fiscal situation remains more or less under control – no certainty given the range of possible discontinuities).

7. Russia watch. Mark Adomanis does a good summary of the week’s main issues: START, pipelines, and economic growth. Now for my thoughts.

I agree with Mark that the agreement over START will not overspill into better overall Russia-America relations. What they have is a fundamental geopolitical clash of interests that simply cannot be resolved while both nation-states retain imperial mentalities. The deal to cut nukes is 1) a rational cost-cutting measure – though not an imperative one, ignore the talk that Russia can’t afford maintaining a massive nuclear arsenal, it can but would rather not, and 2) in any case the age of the ICBM is slowly drawing to a close with the proliferation of effective ABM systems covered on this blog.

PS. Nikolas Gvosdev on START.

So what do we have? Based on preliminary reports, the Russians will get language that recognizes that there are important linkages between offensive and defensive systems–acknowledging their concerns over how U.S. missile defense systems could impact the strategic balance–but that language is nonbinding, and does not prevent Washington from moving ahead, if it so chooses, with plans to deploy limited BMD systems in the Black Sea region. Both sides will have an upper limit of 1,675 warheads and may shoot for an even lower number of delivery vehicles than originally outlined in last year’s MOU–from 1100 to an upper limit of 800. Some of the Russian reductions are likely to occur from attrition and the retirement of aged systems. This will test the willingness of the Senate to accept a compromise, because it has been argued that Russia would have “no choice” but to bring down the size of its nuclear arsenal, to a size it can more effectively maintained–but now Russia will get binding limits on the size of the U.S. arsenal as well.

Russia’s potential buyout of the Ukrainian gas pipeline network in return for selling Ukraine gas at lower prices is potentially a huge deal that will further tighten its control over European energy supplies – agreed with Mark. (It would also in large part remove the need for South Stream). Note that Ukraine is now very strapped for cash and its implicit social obligations to provide subsidized gas to the populace are placing it between a rock and a hard place (popular unrest, fiscal collapse, and increased Russian influence).

World Bank predicts Russia will grow at 5.0-5.5% in 2010 (not news: most investment banks predict 4-6%, Citibank predicts 6.2%), but will slow to 3.5% in 2011 “as tight credit and unemployment constrain consumption”. Nonetheless, this means that by 2012, Russia will have regained its peak GDP level of 2008 (which in turn was roughly equal to its peak Soviet-era GDP in 1989 – excellent, a whopping 23 wasted years!). But anyhow, still better than common expectations during the crisis…

8. Military & hi-tech blast (no, I’m not a Sinophobe, I admire good spies). ;)

  • Cyber-attack on U.S. firms, Google traced to Chinese (Bill Gertz) – describes how 2000+ Chinese hackers infiltrate US companies to steal industrial R&D. Makes perfect sense for a country looking to leapfrog development, of course.
  • Jihadism and the Importance of Place – free Stratfor article on the geopolitics of jihad. The jahidi movement is transitioning from being based on large organizations to clandestine cells and individuals, as country after country is “drained” of its ability to sustain Islamist militants.
  • The people have been liberated. China no longer has a People’s Liberation Army, now it’s just the Chinese Army. I think they should go all-out and rename it to Ever Victorious Army!
  • Has you Gmail been hacked by the Chicoms? Find out!
  • Stratfor has a long, detailed history of Chinese espionage efforts (“mosaic intelligence”). Behind subscriber wall.
  • Is Russia Google’s next weak spot? – the Kremlin to launch “national search engine” and give government e-mail accounts to every Russian to rationalize social services. (PS. Paranoiacs hold your breath, totalitarian Turkey already has a system. PSS. Apprecite deadpan humor).

9. This whole nonsense about the “Day of Wrath” and how the foundations of the Putin regime are crumbling in the recent wave of “protests” that are hardly large enough to even deserve the name! According to Barret Brown anyway, who believes that “it is worth noting that a poll conducted this month indicated that almost 30 percent of Russians are inclined to engage in protests of this sort, and that this percentage is higher than it was just a month ago”, hence spelling the apocalypse for the Kremlin. Erm, this is basically the same figure as in early 2005 (coinciding with protests over welfare reform), and LESS than two occasions in the 1990’s. Give me a call when it breaks 50%, then we might have something to talk about.

[Blue line = "yes I think protests are possible"; light blue line = "yes I will probably participate in protests. Opinion polls from Levada].

The fact of the matter is that most Russians if not happy, at least satisfied, with the political system, and 70% believe they are “free” today (this figure was much lower under Yeltsin and the early Putin years).

10. The Israel-US spat over settlements. Nothing will come of it as usual. The two countries are bound together by mutual geopolitical interests – the US needs its Middle East bridgehead, Israel needs its insurance policy.

11What’s really wrong with Russia? by Ben Aris – (h/t poemless). An excellent article that I recommend very much. It points out Russia’s real economic weaknesses, without succumbing to Russophobia or hyperbole – a rare achievement in the mainstream Russia-watching community, regretfully. A few quick comments:

The big omission here on the Kremlin’s part is that while they are spending on power and trains, they have ignored badly needed investment into social infrastructure.

I agree, but it’s not quite accurate to say that social infrastructure has been ignored – at least, not after 2007-2008. E.g., there is a lot of investment in newly-equipped hospitals and clinics since 2007, and positive results are already showing.

Oil is heavily taxed, with the state taking 90 cents on every dollar when prices for oil are over $27. The extra revenue has been used to subsidise income and profit taxes (13% and 24% respectively) in an effort to boost economic diversification. Even this largesse can’t soak up all the petrodollars, so the excess cash is siphoned off into the “lockbox” of the Stabilisation Fund and kept out of the reach of free-spending MPs by Finance Minister Alexei Kudrin.

Good points, but note that some extreme free marketeers would decry the heavy taxation on oil (they’re incorrect of course, having never heard or serious studied lock-in or dependency theory).

The Kremlin’s solution is to lift struggling sectors up by the bootstraps by pouring enough money into them so that even if they can’t compete on price, they can compete on quality. The trouble is that state-led rescues of industry look intrinsically wrong-headed to almost everyone.

Katinka Barysch… spoke for many recently in a recent paper when she wrote: “A genuine modernisation alliance would have to be bottom-up and driven by the private sector. The Russian leadership is pursuing a model of modernisation that is state-centric and top-down. It throws money at new institutes to foster research, it nationalises big industries, it tells state-owned banks which sectors to lend to. It does not do the things that would be required for genuine economic diversification. … Barysch assumes there is a foundation of business that will flourish if the shackles of government are removed, but the Kremlin is facing an economy where rafts of products and services are simply missing and can’t get started.

State spending is inherently wasteful, but as Russia has the money thanks to oil, the issue at hand is not the efficiency of state spending, but rather its effectiveness: can the spending create sectors that don’t exist now or upgrade those that can’t compete now? “As there is no vibrant [small and medium-sized enterprise] sector, the only option left is heavy state spending. The Kremlin is doing this not because they want bigger versions of the existing state-owned behemoths, but because how else are they going to change the nature of the Russia economy?” says Plamen Monovski…

Head. Nail. Railing about how a large degree of state involvement is necessary for Russia to develop has been one of S/O’s common themes.

More worryingly, these nascent attempts to remake the system have already led to an increase in political risk. Up until now Russia has grown by first putting bums in empty seats, and then building new factories when the Soviet-era capacity was fully used. To go to the next stage, the system itself has to be liberalised, as it is efficiency not volume that counts now. This means cutting into the vested interests and they are already fighting back. In March, Medvedev told ministers that they had to obey orders “or take a hike” – a rare visible sign of the growing tension.

Conventional wisdom has it that Putin is a virtual dictator, but bne’s sources in diplomatic, business and government circles say that Putin is visibly under an increasing amount of strain, frustrated by the government machinery’s failure to implement his plans. On top of this, bringing in Medvedev has considerably weakened his position. “Two camps have formed around Medvedev and Putin. The first wants to see Medvedev go further with the liberalisation of the economy and politics, whereas the people close to Putin want to keep things as they were prior to the crisis – where they were making money,” says an economist who has been advising the government at a top level. “Putin is visibly stressed, as some people are starting to ignore him and others are openly calling for him to leave.”

1) Demonstrates how the anti-Putinistas have no appreciation for nuance or the institutional intricacies of the system Russia’s leaders have to operate in.

2) The more portentous conclusion one could possibly draw from this is that at times when plans for reform ran into heavy vested opposition, what followed was either a) a period of conservative retreat and stagnation or b) the opposite – an upping of the tempo and increase in coercion, centralization, mobilization. It will be interesting to see what will happen this time round.

PS. One major thing Aris leaves out is Russia’s awfully low level of energy efficiency. Not that it matters for now, given that it is so well-endowed with resources, but nonetheless all good things come to an end. Furthermore, improvements in energy efficiency can translate into higher foreign export earnings or domestic saving (in the form of resources-left-in-the-ground).

13Germany: Mitteleuropa Redux (Peter Zeihan) from Stratfor (free article) – an interesting take on the rise of German power in Europe in the wake of the financial crisis – and the possible responses of its neighbors.

All this and more has happened. We saw the 2008-2009 financial crisis in Central Europe as particularly instructive. Despite their shared EU membership, the Western European members were quite reluctant to bail out their eastern partners. We became even more convinced that such inconsistencies would eventually doom the currency union, and that the euro’s eventual dissolution would take the European Union with it. Now, we’re not so sure. …

Back-of-the-envelope math indicates that in the past decade, Germany has gained roughly a 25 percent cost advantage over Club Med. … The implications of this are difficult to overstate. If the euro is essentially gutting the European — and again to a greater extent the Club Med — economic base, then Germany is achieving by stealth what it failed to achieve in the past thousand years of intra-European struggles. In essence, European states are borrowing money (mostly from Germany) in order to purchase imported goods (mostly from Germany) because their own workers cannot compete on price (mostly because of Germany). This is not limited to states actually within the eurozone, but also includes any state affiliated with the zone; the relative labor costs for most of the Central European states that have not even joined the euro yet have risen by even more during this same period.

It is not so much that STRATFOR now sees the euro as workable in the long run — we still don’t — it’s more that our assessment of the euro is shifting from the belief that it was a straightjacket for Germany to the belief that it is Germany’s springboard. In the first assessment, the euro would have broken as Germany was denied the right to chart its own destiny. Now, it might well break because Germany is becoming a bit too successful at charting its own destiny. And as it dawns on one European country after another that there was more to the euro than cheap credit, the ties that bind are almost certainly going to weaken.

14. Liberast & Russophobe watch.

15. Odds and Ends.

16. Happy Earth Hour Day! (Personally, I think it’s a ridiculous and meaningless gesture that does absolutely nothing except assuage the guilt feelings of green-washy liberals for fucking up the planet). ;)

Related posts:

  1. Sublime News #5
  2. Sublime News #8 – #9
  3. Sublime News #1
  4. Sublime News #3
  5. Sublime News #4

About AK

Anatoly Karlin (see profile) is the owner and main editor of this site. He also runs the Arctic Progress blog on trade, energy & security in a thawing world.
This entry was posted in Sublime News and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Sublime News #6

  1. Ombrageux says:

    Lol at the Figaro nostalgia-puff piece. Not untrue, of course, but I love how they took Sarkozy’s expression. Our good president will go off to Algeria or Senegal and explain to the natives – hand on heart – that even though their parents were taken in chains to America, tortured and killed, or subject to the worst despotisms (Mobutu in Zaire, Hutu Power in Rwanda), that France should not be embarrassed! Well, if you say so, Nicolas. And Brandt should never have knelt in Warsaw!

  2. georgesdelatour says:

    I’m still thinking about how we can bring about an Anglo-Russian alliance. This may be relevant:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/mar/28/us-uk-special-relationship-over

  3. T. Greer says:

    The Chinese response to the Department of State’s Human Rights reports was amusing. Part of it was dead on, but then you come across statements like this:

    Child farmworkers are prevalent. An organization devoted to protecting children’s rights disclosed that as many as 400,000 children are estimated to work on U.S. farms. Davis Strauss, executive director of the Association of Farmworker Opportunity Programs, noted that for decades, children, some as young as eight years old, have labored in the fields using sharp tools and toiling amongst dangerous pesticides. The association’s president Ernie Flores said children account for about 20 percent of all farm fatalities in the United States (Spain’s Uprising newspaper, October 14, 2009). A labor standards act permits a child beyond 13 to work in heat for long time in a farm, but does not permit that child to work in an air-conditioned office and even forbids them working in a fast food restaurant.

    It made me chuckle.

    I am curious, however, who this document is meant for. If the audience is domestic Chinese, then this is written in the wrong language. If it is written for Americans or other members of the transnational elite – well then statements like that should make them chuckle too.

    • AK says:

      I suspect it’s little more than a piss-take and the Chinese themselves don’t care about it except in situations where the Americans are haranguing them about their HR record, in which case they could just throw out a link to their own Report about US human rights violations to end the conversation.

  4. Fred says:

    I think Mark is a dumb ass, he doesn’t provide facts on his articles and assumes he knows it all which he doesn’t. Talk about a crooked editor, he speaks as if he’s the president with a 5th grade education.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>