Showing posts with label mariano rajoy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label mariano rajoy. Show all posts

Saturday, February 04, 2017

Spanish Prime Minister Rajoy supports Mexico against Trump

Spain's conservative Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy telephoned Mexican President Enrique Peña Nieto this past week to express his support for Peña Nieto and Mexico in the current diplomatic crisis with the United States under Trump. (Respalda Rajoy a Peña ante embestida de Trump La Jornada 01.02.2017)

Surprisingly, the Mexican peso has risen in value in the two weeks since Trump's Inauguration, after having fallen sharply after the US Presidential election. (El peso mexicano es la moneda que más se aprecia desde la llegada de Trump a la Casa Blanca El País 03.02.2017) Ironically, as of the El País report, that makes the peso the currency that has risen the most of any in the world in the first two weeks of the Trump Family Business Administration. This eases for the moment fears of the inflationary effects of the peso's pre-Inauguration drop and of the negative effect it could have on Mexico's debt ratio.

With the United States following an anti-EU policy right now, it makes good realist sense for the EU countries to make common cause with Mexico in its confrontation with Trump. (Javier Casqueiro, Rajoy ofrece a Peña Nieto ayuda para un arreglo justo y sensato ante la coyuntura actual El País 01.02.2017)

Pere Ortega sees the Trumpist Muslim ban of last week targeted to seven nations as a warning of a war-oriented foreign policy, saying Trump's policies "amenazan la convivencia y la paz mundial" ("threaten coexistence and the peace of the world"): (El militarismo de Donald Trump Público 31.01.2017. Oretega reminds us that Trump promised a big military buildup during the campaign. He is concerned about the dubious results that may be expected of cooperation between the US and Russia on fighting jihadists in the Middle East. He warns that the result could be:

... mucho más peligroso, las guerras se pueden incrementar, el yihadismo terrorista ser más virulento. Aparte de otras cuestiones no menores: negar el cambio climático y aumentar las emisiones de CO2; no [a]poyar a Naciones Unidas; aumentar las violaciones de derechos humanos como autorizar la tortura y la xenofobia. Malos tiempos para la paz.

[... much more dangerous, wars could grow, terrorist jihadism could be more violent. Apart from other questions on less important: denying climate change and increasing the emissions of CO2; not supporting the United Nations; increasing violations of human rights such as authorizing torture and by xenophobia.]
Der Spiegel ran a striking cover in its most recent issue:


The English translation of the cover story will be published soon apparently, The Pain of a Donald Trump Presidency Spiegel International 02/04/2017.

The article gives a lot of attention to some of the deplorables around the new President: Steve Bannon, Stephen Miller, Jared Kushner, Kellyanne "alternative facts" Conway, Michael Flynn. The authors (Markus Becker et al) write, "Sie sind keine Republikaner, sie sind Trumpisten. Sie sind keine Konservativen, sie sind Nationalisten. Bannon ist ihr Ideologe. Der vielleicht klügste – sicher der gefährlichste." (They aren't Republicans, they are Trumpists. They are not conservatives, they are nationalists. Bannon is their ideologue. Perhaps they most clever - certainly the most dangerous.")

Another deplorable may soon join the team as Ambassador to the European Union, Ted Malloch. EU leaders are not thrilled at the prospect, as Daniel Boffey reports (European parliament leaders call on EU to reject Trump's likely ambassador pick Guardian 02/02/2017):

In a startling move that threatens a major diplomatic row, the leaders of the conservative, socialist and liberal groups in Brussels have written to the European commission and the European council, whose members represent the 28 EU states, to reject the appointment of Ted Malloch. ...

When recently asked by the BBC why he was interested in moving to Brussels, Malloch replied: “I had in a previous career a diplomatic post where I helped bring down the Soviet Union. So maybe there’s another union that needs a little taming.”

He also said that Trump was not a fan of the EU, described it as “supranational and unelected” and attacked the European commission’s president, Jean-Claude Juncker. “Mr Juncker was a very adequate mayor I think of some city in Luxembourg, and maybe he should go back and do that again,” he said.
Aljazeera's Big Picture has a documentary called "The Making And Breaking Of Europe," which recounts the history of the EU with particularly emphasis on the trends that eventually developed into the xenophobia we still in European politics today, Part 1:



Part 2:



The second part is very good on describing how Angela Merkel's Herbert Hoover/Heinrich Brüning austerity policies toward Greece in particular contributed a great deal to the rise of nationalism and nationalist hatreds within the EU.

Friday, April 20, 2012

Business press struggles with the YPF story

I'm fascinated to see how the business press is reacting to Argentine President Cristina Fernández' proposal to take control of 51% of the YPF oil company, which is currently controlled by the Spanish-based multinational Repsol. Argentina is one of the countries that has serious - and so far successfully - challenged the neoliberal/Washington Consensus economic policy prescriptions over the last decade. How the business press responds to actions like the YPF nationalization says a lot about the ideological outlook they take.

Roben Farzad in Argentina Tries the Chávez Way Bloomberg Businessweek 04/17/2012 takes a more frivolous approach:

It's hard to believe now, but in the early 1980s, Argentina was perhaps the most promising and talked-about emerging market. Coming off the trauma of its Dirty War and military dictatorship, and its disastrous invasion of the Falkland Islands, democracy finally took root in 1983. Endowed with abundant natural resources, endless tracts of fertile land, and half-decent infrastructure, the then-167-year-old country projected upside to the investor community.

But Argentina regressed. In late 2001, as its economy collapsed, the country defaulted on $100 billion in debt and nationalized several enterprises. Argentina has since been a pariah state among international creditors. At the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Argentina has more disputes pending against it than any other nation. Since 2003, rulers Néstor Kirchner and wife Cristina Fernández de Kirchner have nationalized $24 billion in private pensions and raided $6.6 billion in reserves from the central bank to make debt payments.

Now, Cristina Fernández (a widow since October 2010 and reelected by a landslide a year later) is seizing control of YPF, the former national oil monopoly that since 1999 has been majority-owned by Spain’s Repsol (REP). On Monday, she delivered a fire-and-brimstone speech on TV that blamed foreigners for the energy shortages plaguing the country—a rationalization for what would be the largest natural resource re-nationalization since Russia moved to seize Yukos in 2003. Fernández decreed that Argentina’s minister of planning and public investment would immediately assume the reins at YPF.
I have the irresistible urge to unpack this particular pile of hoo-hoo piece of reporting. So I will:

It's hard to believe now, but in the early 1980s, Argentina was perhaps the most promising and talked-about emerging market.
That would have been under the leadership of President Carlos Menem, also still a member of Cristina's Partido Justicialista (PJ), the Peronist party. Menem was committed to neoliberal fundamentalism. His government privatized state functions like crazy and deregulated according the dictates of what became known as the Washington Consensus endorsed by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. A man whose economic policies Angela Merkel would surely love. Those measures, along with Argentina's euro-like tying of their currency to the US dollar, crashed their economy spectacularly in 2001. Deregulation of the capital markets made Argentina particularly vulnerable to attacks by international financial speculators.

Coming off the trauma of its Dirty War and military dictatorship, and its disastrous invasion of the Falkland Islands, democracy finally took root in 1983. Endowed with abundant natural resources, endless tracts of fertile land, and half-decent infrastructure, the then-167-year-old country projected upside to the investor community.
Democracy first "took root" in Argentina in the early 1800s, but it would be fair to say that the roots were relatively weak ones. The country was plagued by a long series of military takeovers. But all of them were mild in comparison to the brutal military dictatorship of 1976-83, the worst Argentina and South America has ever experienced. It was that dictatorship that began the push for Argentina to adopt the aggressive neoliberal economic policies demanded by the IMF and the World Bank. Or, to use Farzad's phrase, the military dictatorship "projected upside to the investor community".

But Argentina regressed. In late 2001, as its economy collapsed, the country defaulted on $100 billion in debt and nationalized several enterprises.
They "regressed" because the neoliberal/Free Market/Washington Consensus policies insisted on by the US, the IMF and the World Bank failed miserably - for the people and national economy of Argentina. It worked well for financial speculators and for companies like Repsol that got to buy a majority in YPF and milk it as a cash cow for the benefit of their investments outside of Argentina.

In late 2001, as its economy collapsed, the country defaulted on $100 billion in debt and nationalized several enterprises. Argentina has since been a pariah state among international creditors. At the World Bank’s International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes, Argentina has more disputes pending against it than any other nation. Since 2003, rulers Néstor Kirchner and wife Cristina Fernández de Kirchner have nationalized $24 billion in private pensions and raided $6.6 billion in reserves from the central bank to make debt payments.
Or, to put it more briefly, Argentina stopped playing the neoliberal game after it had wrecked their economy. And they've been recovering nicely ever since. Countries like Greece, Spain, Portugal, Ireland and Italy are suffering from a similar disaster today that Argentina suffered in 2001. But they are following Angela Merkel's neoliberal prescriptions and it's wrecking their economies even more badly. The sooner they learn from Argentina's lessons, the better. They will no doubt be criticized by Bloomberg Businessweek when they do. But their people and their national economies will have a chance to improve that they won't get under Angienomics.

Now, Cristina Fernández (a widow since October 2010 and reelected by a landslide a year later) is seizing control of YPF, the former national oil monopoly that since 1999 has been majority-owned by Spain’s Repsol (REP). On Monday, she delivered a fire-and-brimstone speech on TV that blamed foreigners for the energy shortages plaguing the country—a rationalization for what would be the largest natural resource re-nationalization since Russia moved to seize Yukos in 2003. Fernández decreed that Argentina’s minister of planning and public investment would immediately assume the reins at YPF.
Nationalization is always a sin for the American business press. A "fire-and-brimstone" type sin, we might say.

They could have also used other examples of partially or fully state-owned oil companies, from Saudi Arabia, China, Venezuela, Mexico, Brazil and others. As The Economist reported in some detail earlier this year, the 13 largest oil companies in the world fall into that category. But since neoliberalism says that nationalized oil firms are inefficient, that must mean the world oil business is in a shambles, right?

Or, not. What it means is that Argentina has rejoined the list of countries that consider oil and gas production such a critical national resources that they choose not to leave it to the whims of the Great God Free Market. One leader who expressed such a sentiment in 2008 was Mariano Rajoy, currently the conservative Prime Minister of Spain, who said, "Nuestro petróleo, nuestro gas y nuestra energía no se pueden poner en manos de una empresa rusa, porque eso nos convertiría en un país de quinta división." ("Our oil, our gas and ourenergy can't pass into the hands of a Russian firm, because that would convert us into a fifth-rate country.") His concern then was that the Russian oil company Lukoil might buy shares in Repsol. Now, Rajoy is loyally defending Repsol against Cristina's nationalization proposal while wrecking his own country's economy with the austerity economics demanded by Princess Angela von Merkel. (Hace cuatro años, Rajoy se oponía a la extranjerización de los hidrocarburos en España Télan 19.04.2012; Medios argentinos airean vídeos de Rajoy rechazando la entrada de Lukoil en Repsol El País 20.04.2012) Here's Rajoy back then holding forth on the need for sovereignty in energy matters (in Spanish), Rajoy exige que se impida la entrada de Lukoil en Repsol Libertad Digital Televisión 22.11.2008:



Farzad does get around to some relevant information about the case of Argentina and YPF: "In 2011, for the first time since YPF was privatized in the early 1990s, Argentina became a net importer of natural gas and oil. The government there blames Repsol for starving YPF of investment in order to pay out shareholder dividends."

Then he takes another shot at Cristina: "This month, on the 30th anniversary of the war over the islands Argentina persists in calling Las Malvinas, she has been thumbing her nose at London." Actually, Argentina generally has persisted in calling the island the Malvinas since, you know, Britain occupied them illegally in 1833. But Farzad treats it as an arrogant quirk of the current President.

Xavier Vidal-Folch offers refutations of the Argentine government's charges about the business inadequacies of YSP under Repsol's ownership in Repsol ¿fiera predadora? El País 19.04.2012. But at best it's a sloppy analysis, in which he doesn't make at all clear the sources of his counter-claims. And the arguments are fairly slippery. He makes the point that only 50 of YPF's employees are Spaniards, but so what? I haven't noticed Cristina's government arguing that too many of YPF's employees were Spanish. He also claims that Repsol is the largest investor in Argentina, but based on what? The market value of the shares they bought in YPF? The point of the Argentine government's criticism of Repsol-YPF is that they haven't invested sufficiently in exploration and development. Vidal-Folch addresses that arguments, but also in a very unclear way. He also seems to basically think the issue of dividend payouts is an irrelevant issue to anything else, that it stands alone separate from any question of what the company is delivering to Argentina in terms of development and exploration.

Ben Sills and David Voreacos report for Bloomberg on the agreement between Repsol and YPF's second-largest owners, the Petersen Group, which is controlled by Argentina's Eskenazi family: Repsol Required to Buy Eskenazi YPF Stake 04/20/2012. There is likely to be a legal fight over Repsol's commitments to the Petersen Group.

Like several reports I've seen, Sills and Voreacos make a particular point that the Eskenazi family's investment in YPF was backed by former President Néstor Kirchner, Cristina's late husband:

The Eskenazis made their fortune in banking and construction, buying 15 percent of YPF from Repsol in 2008 in a deal backed by then-president Nestor Kirchner, the late husband of Fernandez. The acquisition was financed with a syndicated bank loan and a seller’s note from Repsol. The Eskenazis bought an additional 10 percent of YPF in 2011 with two similar loans.
Tags: , , , , ,