O que é este blog?

Este blog trata basicamente de ideias, se possível inteligentes, para pessoas inteligentes. Ele também se ocupa de ideias aplicadas à política, em especial à política econômica. Ele constitui uma tentativa de manter um pensamento crítico e independente sobre livros, sobre questões culturais em geral, focando numa discussão bem informada sobre temas de relações internacionais e de política externa do Brasil. Para meus livros e ensaios ver o website: www.pralmeida.org. Para a maior parte de meus textos, ver minha página na plataforma Academia.edu, link: https://itamaraty.academia.edu/PauloRobertodeAlmeida;

Meu Twitter: https://twitter.com/PauloAlmeida53

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/paulobooks

Mostrando postagens com marcador Donald Trump. Mostrar todas as postagens
Mostrando postagens com marcador Donald Trump. Mostrar todas as postagens

sábado, 1 de junho de 2019

O que fazer contra um presidente maluco? O Congresso dos EUA precisa conter o alucinado (WP)

O presidente adota medidas ilegais, não apenas contra o direito internacional e tratados multilaterais, regionais e bilaterais de comércio, mas também contra a própria Constituição americana, que atribui ao Congresso a última palavra em matéria de política comercial.
Por que o Congresso, os republicanos sobretudo, mas os democratas também, renunciaram a atuar segundo seus próprios mandatos constitucionais constitui um segredo até aqui não tratado pelos especialistas?
Como um presidente atuando fora de seus limites legais consegue impor sobretaxas comerciais aos parceiros dos EUA sem que o Congresso atue?
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Trump defies close advisers in deciding to threaten Mexico with disruptive tariffs

The Washington Post, June 1, 2019

President Trump, confronted with the latest surge of migration that threatens his tough-on-the-border image, was ready to launch his newest plan — across-the-board tariffs on Mexican goods, likely to wound the healthy economy and trigger protests from parts of his own party. 
But during a Wednesday night huddle inside the Oval Office, Trump was running into a roadblock: his own advisers.
Calling in from his travels in the Middle East, presidential son-in-law Jared Kushner argued against imposing unilateral tariffs, warning that the move could imperil the prospects of ratifying a new trade deal with Mexico and Canada, according to officials familiar with the meeting. Kushner, a senior White House adviser, insisted that he could still work directly with Mexico to resolve the burgeoning migration crisis. 
In the Oval Office with Trump, U.S. Trade Representative Robert E. Lighthizer also lobbied against the tariffs, similarly concerned that the drastic threat against the United States’ third-largest trading partner would upend the fragile trade agreement, which still requires Congress’s blessing. 
But Trump was unmoved by the arguments and repeatedly said Mexico had to do more, one person with knowledge of the meeting said. The tariffs, he declared, were going to be announced no matter what. 
Roughly 24 hours later, Trump would go public with his latest attempt to stop the migration of Central Americans arriving in record numbers at the southern border, seeking to punish Mexico by gradually increasing tariffs on the entire universe of its goods.
This account of Trump’s decision to open a new front in his battles over immigration and trade — and the ensuing fallout — is based on interviews with 14 White House officials, lawmakers, congressional aides and others familiar with the issue, most of whom spoke on the condition of anonymity to discuss internal deliberations.
The tactic sowed disruption on multiple fronts Friday as top Mexican officials rushed to Washington to defuse the threat, the stock market tumbled on the news and administration officials offered little explanation of how increasing the prices of goods from Mexico would stop illegal immigration at the border, a goal that has eluded multiple administrations.
“He’s trying to solve a humanitarian situation by creating economic chaos,” said Congressional Hispanic Caucus Chairman Joaquin Castro (D-Tex.), whose state would be devastated in any trade standoff with Mexico. “He doesn’t have a coherent strategy for how to deal with any of this stuff.”
Still, the chorus of objections that enveloped the White House did little to discourage Trump, who was infuriated after more than 1,000 migrants from Central America surrendered early Wednesday to U.S. officials near El Paso. That development — on the same day that former special counsel Robert S. Mueller III delivered an in-person statement on the conclusions of his Russia investigation — marked the largest group of migrants taken into custody by U.S. border authorities in a single event. 
On Friday, Trump defended his threat, insisting that Mexico “has taken advantage of the United States for decades.” 
“Mexico makes a FORTUNE from the U.S., have for decades, they can easily fix this problem,” Trump tweeted as the pushback from Republican lawmakers and the business lobby continued to pour in. “Time for them to finally do what must be done!” 
Under the White House threat, the United States would implement a 5 percent tariff on all Mexican imports starting June 10 if illegal migration hadn’t stopped by then. That figure would rise to a 10 percent tariff on July 1 and then an additional 5 percent on the first day of each month for three months, maxing out at 25 percent on Mexican products until the country “substantially stops the illegal inflow of aliens coming through its territory.”
In public, Trump administration officials sought to defend the plan by pointing to the rising number of asylum seekers arriving at the southern border — a trend that shows no signs of reversing. The Department of Homeland Security projects that the month of May is on track to record the highest number of border apprehensions in more than a dozen years. 
“Let me [be] clear, the current situation is risking the lives of children every day,” acting homeland security secretary Kevin McAleenan said, calling for Mexico to take “significant action” to secure its own southern border. 
But privately, top officials were caught in an administration-wide scramble as aides continued to have meetings with Trump on Friday to try to persuade him to reverse course, two officials said.
The idea of enacting unilateral tariffs against Mexico had surfaced repeatedly in internal discussions — and seriously enough that the White House Counsel’s Office had already written a draft of the plan when Trump brought up the proposal again Wednesday, officials said. White House lawyers had been studying their legal options since Trump threatened to shut down the entire U.S.-Mexico border before backing down. 
The arguments against the tariffs — voiced internally by Kushner, Lighthizer and Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin — did little to dissuade Trump, and Kushner was asked to call Mexican officials to inform them of the impending threat.
After the Wednesday night meeting in the Oval Office, the tariff order was finalized by the White House counsel and the office of Stephen Miller, a senior White House adviser and immigration hard-liner who oversees domestic policy. 
But Thursday morning, it was unclear whether Trump would actually follow through, even as he hinted at a “big league” announcement on immigration before leaving Washington for an Air Force Academy address in Colorado. Other White House offices not included in the initial tariff discussions — such as the legislative affairs division and the office of the public liaison — learned as aides came into work Thursday that Trump was considering such an announcement. 
By the time a cadre of senior White House aides assembled for a 4:30 p.m. meeting Thursday, the decision to announce the tariffs was essentially finalized, even though it had appeared to be in flux for much of the day. Trump called in from Air Force One as he returned from Colorado and told the staff that he wanted the announcement put out immediately. 
Vice President Pence — traveling in Ottawa to meet with Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau and promote the pending trade agreement — separately phoned congressional Republican leaders to inform them of the imminent announcement. The top Republican on the House Ways and Means Committee, Rep. Kevin Brady (Tex.), was told in advance, but Senate Finance Committee Chairman Charles E. Grassley (Iowa), who leads a powerful panel overseeing trade policy, was not, according to their aides. 
“The president didn’t blindside his own party,” White House press secretary Sarah Sanders said Friday. “If Republicans weren’t aware, then they haven’t been paying attention.”
From the driveway of the White House, Sanders continued, “Anybody in this country — or frankly, in the world — that says they’re surprised by this has been living under a rock and not paying attention.” 
Nonetheless, Trump told people around him that he was well aware that many Republican senators would not like the tariff threat. Indeed, White House legislative staffers were flooded with calls Thursday night, although they referred all the inquiries to the counsel’s office, according to two senior White House aides.
The objections were particularly pointed Friday from proponents of free trade such as Sen. Patrick J. Toomey (R-Pa.), but they also flooded in from border-state Republicans who have been reliable Trump allies but also are on the ballot in 2020. 
“While I support the president’s intention of stopping unchecked illegal immigration, I do not support these types of tariffs, which will harm our economy and be passed onto Arizona small businesses and families,” Sen. Martha McSally (R-Ariz.) said in a statement.
A spokesman for Sen. John Cornyn (R-Tex.) conveyed similar sentiments: “Senator Cornyn supports the President’s commitment to securing our border, but he opposes this across-the-board tariff which will disproportionately hurt Texas.”
House Democrats began considering legislative remedies aimed at halting imposition of the tariffs, although one leadership aide said they needed more information from the administration to determine their options. 
Mick Mulvaney, the acting White House chief of staff, and economic staffers fielded a range of calls Friday from business leaders. In response, the White House told corporate officials to put pressure on Mexico, according to a senior administration official.
Meanwhile, the Mexican government scrambled to stave off the looming taxes, announcing that its delegation and U.S. officials will meet in Washington on Wednesday, with the sides led by Mexican Foreign Minister Marcelo Ebrard and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo.
“Trump loves tariffs. That’s fine, but this needs to end in policy wins,” said Republican donor Dan Eberhart. “The short-term pain needs to produce a long-term gain for America.” 

Que tal um criminoso como presidente? - o caso Trump; novo livro (The Guardian)

Karen Dawisha, uma professora da Universidade de Ohio, escreveu um livro de excepcional qualidade chamado “Putin’s kleptocracy”, uma análise meticulosa de todas as jogadas financeiras feitas pelo ex-agente do KGB que o levaram ao controle da Rússia.
Este livro pode representar o início de uma investigação oficial sobre um outro cleptocrata e mentiroso compulsivo, que resultou ser o presidente da nação mais poderosa do planeta.
Outros presidentes criminosos podem aparecer, mas esta dupla — que estaria muito unida, não fossem as atitudes russofóbicas da maior parte do establishment americano, militares sobretudo — supera todas as demais gangues políticas na história contemporânea.
Este livro ainda vai causar muito ruído, pelo mesmo autor de Fire and Fury.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida


Bannon described Trump Organization as ‘criminal enterprise’, Michael Wolff book claims

Former White House adviser says financial investigations will take down president in sequel to Fire and Fury
The Guardian, Wed 29 May 2019 07.00 BST


The former White House adviser Steve Bannon has described the Trump Organization as a criminal entity and predicted that investigations into the president’s finances will lead to his political downfall, when he is revealed to be “not the billionaire he said he was, just another scumbag”.



The startling remarks are contained in Siege: Trump Under Fire, the author Michael Wolff’s forthcoming account of the second year of the Trump administration. The book, published on 4 June, is a sequel to Fire and Fury: Trump in the White House, which was a bestseller in 2018. The Guardian obtained a copy.

In a key passage, Bannon is reported as saying he believes investigations of Donald Trump’s financial history will provide proof of the underlying criminality of his eponymous company.
Assessing the president’s exposure to various investigations, many seeded by the special counsel Robert Mueller during his investigation of Russian election interference, Wolff writes: “Trump was vulnerable because for 40 years he had run what increasingly seemed to resemble a semi-criminal enterprise.”
He then quotes Bannon as saying: “I think we can drop the ‘semi’ part.”
Bannon, a leading promoter of far-right populism, was a White House adviser until August 2017, when he was removed. He was a major source for Fire and Fury, also first reported by the Guardian. Among other claims in that book, he labelled as “treasonous” an infamous Trump Tower meeting between Donald Trump Jr, Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner, campaign manager Paul Manafort and a Russian lawyer.
Amid publicity surrounding Fire and Fury, Bannon was ejected from circles close to Trump and his position at Breitbart News.
In Siege, Wolff pays close attention to Trump’s financial affairs. Investigations into Trump’s business dealings, spearheaded by the southern district of New York, have shuttered the president’s charity and seen the Trump Organization chief financial officer, Allen Weisselberg, receive immunity for testimony in investigations of Michael Cohen, the former Trump attorney and fixer who is now in jail in New York.
This month, the New York Times obtained tax information that showed Trump’s businesses lost more than $1bn from 1985 to 1994.
The newspaper subsequently reported that in 2016 and 2017, Deutsche Bank employees flagged concerns over possible money laundering through transactions involving legal entities controlled by the president and Kushner. Some of the transactions involved individuals in Russia.
The bank did not act but Congress and New York state are now investigating its relationship with Trump and his family. Deutsche Bank has lent billions to Trump and Kushner companies. Trump has attempted to block House subpoenasfor his financial records sent to Deutsche Bank.

In Siege, Wolff quotes Bannon saying investigations into Trump’s finances will cut adrift even his most ardent supporters: “This is where it isn’t a witch hunt – even for the hard core, this is where he turns into just a crooked business guy, and one worth $50m instead of $10bn.

“Not the billionaire he said he was, just another scumbag.”

Wolff also details a 2004 Palm Beach property deal involving the now disgraced financier Jeffrey Epsteinand the Putin-friendly oligarch Dmitry Rybolovlev that, the author writes, earned Trump “$55m without putting up a dime”.
Epstein, he writes, invited Trump to see a $36m Palm Beach mansion he planned to buy. According to Wolff, Trump went behind Epstein’s back to buy the foreclosed property for around $40m, a sum Epstein had reason to believe Trump couldn’t raise in his own right, through an entity called Trump Properties LLC, which was entirely financed by Deutsche Bank.
Epstein, Wolff writes, knew Trump had been loaning out his name in real estate deals for a fee and suspected that in his case Trump was fronting for the property’s real owners. Epstein threatened to expose the deal. As the dispute increased, he found himself under investigation by the Palm Beach police.
According to Wolff, Trump made only minor improvements and put the house on the market for $125m. It was purchased for $96m by Rybolovlev, part of a circle of government-aligned industrialists in Russia, thereby earning Trump $55m without risking any of his own money.
Wolff presents two theories as to how the deal worked: first, perhaps “Trump merely earned a fee for hiding the real owner – a shadow owner quite possibly being funneled cash by Rybolovlev for other reasons beyond the value of the house”
Second, he suggests the real owner of the house and the real buyer were one and the same. “Rybolovlev might have, in effect, paid himself for the house, thereby cleansing the additional $55m for the second purchase of the house.”
This,” Wolff writes, “was Donald Trump’s world of real estate.”

sexta-feira, 31 de maio de 2019

Trump: um louco desmantelando a ordem econômica mundial criada pelos EUA desde Bretton Woods - Paulo Roberto de Almeida

Donald Trump está desmantelando todo o sistema multilateral de comércio criado pelos EUA desde 1944, baseado em regras consensualmente acordadas com base em cláusulas consagradas desde séculos no comércio internacional, como as de nação-mais-favorecida, tratamento nacional, não discriminação, reciprocidade, transparência, e antes de tudo, a velha e boa teoria (ainda válida) herdada de David Ricardo, sobre vantagens comparativas relativas.
O esquizofrênico presidente está simplesmente destruindo tudo isso, com a complacência irresponsável, irracional e incompreensível do establishment republicano e a inoperância do Congresso, que tem a atribuição constitucional de legislar sobre comércio. Trump "resolve" impor tarifas unilateralmente e ilegalmente, sob as regras do GATT, assim como uma criança resolve descartar um brinquedo e passar a brincar com outro, independentemente do que possam pensar ou desejar os demais parceiros no jogo, e no desprezo total pelas regras do jogo em questão.
Um verdadeiro touro louco numa loja de cristais, quebrando tudo à sua volta, na leniência geral.
Sua ação se estende inclusive além do comércio, ao afetar relações econômicas e de segurança com outros países, como a Grã-Bretanha, com base em suas preferências políticas anti-União Europeia – nisso ele está unido com Putin, em ação conjunta para desmantelar o bloco econômico –, pró-Brexit, e contrário ao projeto 5G da empresa chinesa Huawei.
Se houvesse uma autoridade central de controle da sanidade mental do presidente, ela o declararia louco, necessitando internação urgente num sanatório para doentes mentais.

Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Pirassununga, 31 de maio de 2019

Alguns exemplos:

A Tariff Issue on Which Free and Fair Traders Can Agree
By Peter Navarro (WSJ)
Flawed WTO rules allow other countries to charge significantly higher duties than America does.

U.S. will slap 5% tariff on Mexican imports over migrant problem, Trump says (WP)

U.S. Hits Mexico With Tariffs. Trump announced that he will slap a 5 percent tariff on all Mexican goods entering the United States until the Mexican government halts illegal immigration. The U.S. government is slated to start implementing the policy on June 10 and increase tariffs if the flow of migrants doesn’t stop. “White House officials did not immediately explain how driving up the cost of Mexican goods might stem the flow of migrants,” the Washington Post noted.

Trump weighs in on Brexit and Huawei before U.K. visit. U.S. President Donald Trump is preparing for a state visit to Britain next week amid the country’s ongoing political crisis. He reportedly plans to threaten to halt U.S. intelligence sharing with Britain if the U.K. government allows the Chinese company Huawei to build part of its 5G network.

While he did not endorse a successor to British Prime Minister Theresa May, he referred to pro-Brexit contenders Nigel Farage and Boris Johnson as “friends” on Thursday. Fears of a no-deal Brexit—currently the default if no agreement is approved by Parliament before Oct. 31—are growing due to ongoing deadlock in the House of Commons.

quarta-feira, 29 de maio de 2019

Trump vs China: a guerra Fria Econômica se transforma em guerra quente tecnológica

Minha opinião sobre o atual conflito econômico provocado pelo estúpido presidente americano contra a China, uma “trade war” que se converte em feroz guerra tecnológica, estimulada pelos paranoicos do Pentágono. 
O aprendiz de feiticeiro, “defensor da Civilização Ocidental” segundo um patético seguidor brasileiro, acelera assim a decadência da “civilização ocidental” liderada pelo Império americano, tudo em função da “lei das consequências involuntárias” e da ainda mais poderosa Lei de Murphy (aliás, ironicamente, inventada por um americano, assim como o Peter Principle, aquele que eleva um incompetente como Trump ao nível mais alto de sua própria incompetência).

Eu imaginava que a Guerra Fria Econômica se desenvolveria em etapas prolongadas numa série de frentes secundárias, com intermediários diversos, ou seja, uma espécie de protracted war combinada a proxy wars, como ocorreu ao longo de toda a Guerra Fria Geopolítica entre EUA e URSS.
Agora a Guerra Fria Econômica se converte repentinamente numa guerra aberta, suscitada não apenas pela estupidez econômica de Trump — o mais estúpido de todos os presidentes americanos —, mas também pela paranoia estratégica (outra estupidez) dos militares do Pentágono.
Isso vai representar um enorme atraso para o mundo, crescimento lento, perda de oportunidades para todos, mas também, contraditoriamente, um avanço inevitável em certas frentes, ainda que de forma fragmentada.
O mundo será menos global, menos “globalista” (contra o temor, portanto, dos antiglobalistas estúpidos, aliados idiotas de Trump), com menor dinâmica na integração global das economias.
Uma perda temporária, que será aproveitada pela China para deslocar ainda mais o Império americano.
Estaremos pior, em face da “autocracia chinesa”?
Não creio: a China não pretende exportar o seu modelo político autocrático, apenas os seus produtos e serviços, e lucrar muito com isso.
Algum dia, a China será uma democracia.
Idiotas como Trump apenas retardam essa evolução inevitável.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida
Curitiba, 29 de maio de 2019

El País, Madri – 28.5.2019
El problema no está en tu móvil Huawei, el problema se llama 5G
La quinta generación de telefonía móvil se ha convertido en el nuevo arma de destrucción masiva en la guerra declarada por Trump a China
Ramón Muñoz

El veto del Gobierno estadounidense, primero a las redes, y ahora a los móviles del fabricante asiático es una declaración de guerra que va mucho más allá de las hostilidades arancelarias. El anuncio de Google de que dejará de dar soporte a los smartphones de Huawei ha sido un golpe de efecto mundial. Millones de usuarios se levantaban el pasado lunes azorados al enterarse de que su móvil podía convertirse en un cascarón vacío porque Android, el sistema operativo con el que funcionan, ya no dispondría de actualizaciones del sistema de Google.
Siendo gravísimo el hecho de que una decisión gubernamental condene a la obsolescencia a millones de dispositivos, en realidad, es solo el primer aviso del volcán. La mayor erupción, la definitiva, está por venir bajo las siglas 5G. Esta tecnología no es solo un avance más. Gracias a la quinta generación del móvil funcionarán los coches autónomos, los robots industriales podrán procesar en tiempo real cualquier orden, lo que les convertirá en máquinas eficientes y casi humanas capaces no solo de sustituir a operarios de una fábrica sino a un cirujano en un quirófano para realizar una operación a distancia.

El inicio de la era de la invención

“El 5G marcará el comienzo de lo que llamamos la era de la invención. Es mucho más profundo que lo que vimos antes con el paso al 4G o cualquier avance anterior. Y no es una exageración. El 5G y la inteligencia artificial significarán miles de millones de elementos conectados, enormes cantidades de datos y todos ellos en la nube. Cambiará la forma de compartir archivos, las compras online o la reproducción de contenidos”, según dijo Cristiano Amon, presidente de Qualcomm en el Congreso Mundial del Móvil (MWC19) de Barcelona.
El 5G dará paso a la cuarta revolución industrial gracias a saltos de innovación, que supone una disrupción tecnológica total. Las conexiones 5G son 10 veces más rápidas (aunque en laboratorios se han alcanzado velocidades 250 veces más rápidas) que las 4G actuales. Gracias a esa inmediatez, se podrán ver contenidos en realidad virtual o en calidades inimaginables como la televisión en 8K.
En segundo lugar, multiplica por 100 el número de dispositivos conectados con el mismo número de antenas. Se resuelve así el problema de la cobertura en grandes aglomeraciones como estadios de fútbol y conciertos. Además, reduce también a una décima parte el consumo de batería de los dispositivos (alarmas, células o chips) lo que les da más autonomía para funcionar durante años.

Permitirá la conducción autónoma

No obstante, el mayor avance del 5G será la reducción de la latencia, el tiempo de respuesta que tarda un dispositivo en ejecutar una orden desde que se le manda la señal. Cuanto más baja, más rápida será la reacción del aparato que accionemos a distancia. El 5G reduce ese retardo a un milisegundo. Esa repuesta instantánea es la que permite que la conducción autónoma sea segura pero también que se dirija a distancia los sistemas de comunicación, seguridad o defensa. De ahí que Trump haya centrado toda su artillería en Huawei, porque domina la construcción de redes 5G.
Lo que subyace en el pulso tecnológico entre EE UU y China tiene que ver con la más honda preocupación estadounidense por una primacía china en la carrera militar y el 5G figura en el centro de esa inquietud. El Pentágono advierte de ello en un informe al Congreso, en el que destaca el desarrollo de firmas como Huawei y ZTE y señala que el esfuerzo de Pekín por “construir grandes grupos empresariales que logren un rápido dominio del mercado con un amplio abanico de tecnologías complementa directamente los esfuerzos de modernización del Ejército y trae consigo implicaciones militares serias”.

El control de los sistemas de comunicaciones y defensa

En un lenguaje mucho más crudo se expresaba el general retirado James L. Jones: “La tecnología 5G de Huawei es la versión siglo XXI del mitológico Caballo de Troya”, advertía en un documento de recomendaciones publicado el pasado febrero por el Atlantic Council, uno de los grandes laboratorios de ideas de Washington.
“Si China controla la infraestructura digital del siglo XXI —razonaba— explotará su posición para sus propósitos de seguridad nacional y tendrá una influencia coercitiva en EE UU y sus aliados, ya que estas redes procesarán todo tipo de datos, y China desde luego las usará para llevar a cabo espionaje”. Y agregó: “la expansión del 5G chino amenazará la interoperabilidad de la OTAN, ya que EE UU no podrá integrar su red 5G segura con ningún elemento de los sistemas chinos”.
El presidente estadounidense cree que Huawei puede instalar en las redes una capa oculta (lo que se conoce como puerta trasera) con la que el Gobierno chino controlará las comunicaciones de todo el mundo, incluyendo los EE UU. Huawei insistió una y otra vez esta semana en que esa acusación es falsa, y ofrece a cualquier autoridad el acceso a sus redes para que puedan comprobarlo por sí mismas.
Liderazgo en tecnología
En Europa, Huawei tiene una cuota de mercado del 35% que en España se dispara hasta el 60% en las redes de nueva generación. Más de 2.500 patentes relativas al 5G llevan su nombre, y tiene contratos con unos 40 operadores. Si estos, incluyendo los españoles (Telefónica, Vodafone y Orange), secundan el bloqueo a Huawei les sería imposible desplegar a tiempo una red 5G. De hecho, Europa ya va con retraso respecto a países como EE UU, Japón, China o Corea. Solo Nokia y Ericsson le hacen sombra, pero la tecnología y despliegue de la firma china es más avanzada y menos costosa.
“Nuestras tecnologías 5G van al menos dos años por delante y serán líderes mundiales durante mucho tiempo. Nuestras estaciones base de 5G se pueden instalar a mano. No hace falta torres ni grúas ni cortar carreteras para construirlas ya que tienen el tamaño de un maletín. Por eso, es precisamente el departamento de 5G el que ha sido objeto de los ataques de los EE UU”, dijo esta semana Zhengfei en declaraciones recogidas por medios chinos.
El fundador de Huawei, cuya biografía arranca como militar del Ejército Rojo, calmó a una audiencia enfervorecida, y les pidió que no recurrieran al nacionalismo ni al populismo en respuesta al bloqueo estadounidense.

Respuesta de China al desafío de Trump

China tiene muchas armas tecnológicas y comerciales en su arsenal para responder al desafío. La primera es que es el primer inversor mundial en innovación y su retirada de los países occidentales causaría daños considerables. También puede cortar el grifo de las exportaciones de los metales raros, imprescindibles para los teléfonos móviles. Pero sin duda, la más temible es que aplique los planes de contingencia que dice tener para esquivar el aislamiento estadounidense (el plan b del que habla Huawei) y desarrolle un sistema operativo que reemplace a Android, y acabe con el cuasimonopolio de Google, con una cuota de mercado del 85%.
El plan pasa por avanzar también en el desarrollo de sus propios chips de procesamiento y de memoria, rompiendo el cerco que le han impuesto los fabricantes como Intel, Qualcomm, Xilinx, Broadcom, Micron Technology y Western Digital, o la británica ARM. Los conglomerados industriales chinos como Huawei pasarían una larga travesía del desierto pero al final estarían en disposición de destronar a los gigantes norteamericanos como Google, Cisco, Microsoft o Qualcomm, cuyo dominio nadie discute ahora.
Está en juego algo más que la desilusión de millones de usuarios de Huawei. El 5G representará el 15% de las conexiones móviles globales en 2025, y cerca del 30% en mercados como China y Europa, y del 50% en EE UU, según la GSMA. En ese año, la cantidad de conexiones globales del Internet de las Cosas se triplicará hasta los 25.000 millones. Ahora toca decidir si quién controla esas redes inteligentes y maneja a distancia los dispositivos tendrá su despacho en Pekín o en Washington.

TRUMP, ENTRE LA GUERRA FRÍA Y EL ACUERDO COMERCIAL

El temor a que China controle las comunicaciones y los datos en el futuro es lo que convierte lo que parecía una guerra comercial en una liza trascendental en la industrial tecnológica y, en el fondo, en la génesis de una posible carrera armamentística. Es decir, que el problema no es el móvil, ni el 5G a secas, sino todo lo que Pekín pueda llegar a desarrollar con esa red más allá de los usos civiles. Por eso, Washington también se plantea vetar a la compañía china de video vigilancia Hikvision.
La tensión no nace con la Administración de Trump. Sin embargo ha sido esta, nutrida de halcones en materia comercial la que ha apretado las tuercas a Pekín de un modo que Barack Obama, pese a compartir el diagnóstico, no se atrevió.
Eso sí, se trata de una presión contradictoria, marca de la casa en el estilo negociador de Trump, que pese a la escalada de las últimos días pugna por sellar un gran acuerdo comercial con China.
Las proporciones de una guerra económica entre Estados Unidos y China son mayúsculas. El flujo comercial entre ambas potencias mueve unos 2.000 millones de dólares y el actual grado de interconexión entre producción, suministro y finanzas provoca que el pulso, en realidad, afecte a medio planeta. Para Washington, la complicidad de la Unión Europea y el resto aliados en la presión contra Pekín resulta básica, pero la respuesta es mucho más fría de lo que la Casa Blanca querría.

(Grato ao embaixador Pedro Luís Rodrigues, pelo provimento da informação)

sábado, 11 de maio de 2019

Depois das grandes guerras globais e da Guerra Fria, no seculo XX, agora as grandes guerras economicas - Global Times (China)

Depois do assassinato do Arquiduque austríaco em Sarajevo, a irresponsabilidade e a arrogância de imperadores "medievais" – sim, imbuídos do militarismo aristocrático do Antigo Regime, como argumentou Arno Mayer – precipitaram o mundo no primeiro grande conflito global, a Grande Guerra, que foi seminal para desmantelar tudo o que havia sido construído no longo século XIX em matéria de paz e de cooperação internacional, no contexto da segunda onda de globalização, e para precipitar não só a Europa, mas todo o mundo num ciclo infernal de destruições materiais e de loucuras políticas, desembocando no segundo grande conflito global, ainda mais destruidor.
Digo isto para demonstrar como a IRRESPONSABILIDADE de certos dirigentes políticos pode trazer enormes turbulências, que destroem riquezas, desestruturam países, permitem a ascensão de demagogos, de populistas, eventualmente até de psicopatas perigosos.
Acredito que possamos estar em face de uma dessas novas rupturas, provocadas por um dirigente político altamente IRRESPONSÁVEL, capaz de precipitar uma guerra econômica que só vai destruir riquezas, em seu próprio país, e nos demais.
Reafirmo minha condenação absoluta dos gestos irresponsáveis do atual presidente americano, capaz de causar prejuízos aos seu próprio país, e fazer retroceder a ordem econômica mundial.
O Brasil não está imune, direta ou indiretamente, a esse tipo de populismo insensato e irresponsável.
Paulo Roberto de Almeida

China vows to counter US tariffs

Global Times,  21:43 UTC+8, 2019-05-10   
Shanghai Daily, 10/05/2019

After months of truce, the trade war between China and the US escalated on Friday, after the US shrugged off widespread warnings and moved to hike tariffs on Chinese goods, drawing a firm response from China, which vowed to retaliate.
Though Chinese and US officials are continuing talks, the renewed tensions between the world's two largest economies significantly complicated ongoing negotiations, dimmed the prospects of any potential trade agreement and stoked fear that a full-fledged trade war could still break out. And the US is to blame for the risky turn of events, Chinese officials and analysts stressed.
After days of repeated threats, US officials on Friday noon (Beijing Time) increased an existing 10 percent tariff on $200 billion in Chinese goods to 25 percent, breaking a truce reached by the leaders of the two countries in December 2018 and highlighting the unreliable and unpredictable nature of the US administration.
Minutes after the US tariff hike took effect, China struck back. In a statement, the Chinese Ministry of Commerce said that China "will have to take necessary countermeasures," while still urging the US to meet China halfway in ongoing negotiations in Washington.
Even as tensions escalated, officials pushed through with the 11th round of negotiations as they try to make a last-ditch effort to bring the months-long talks back on track for a trade agreement.
The Chinese delegation was seen arriving at the Office of the US Trade Representative at around 5 pm on Thursday US time and left about an hour and half later. The talks will continue on Friday morning, according to US media reports.
 "We are now at a very delicate place, where further negotiations have become significantly more difficult… the risk of a further escalation also increased," Song Guoyou, director of Fudan University's Center for Economic Diplomacy, told the Global Times on Friday. "We cannot allow this to become normal. That would be dangerous."

Forced retaliation

Chinese officials have repeatedly stressed that China does not want to fight a trade war, but Washington's aggressiveness and belligerence left them no other option but to fight back, analysts said.
"China will also have to make good on its own words, otherwise, it will be at a huge disadvantage to the US team at the negotiations," said He Weiwen, a former senior Chinese trade official, told the Global Times on Friday, referring to China's earlier vow to retaliate if the US went ahead with the tariff threat.
Though the MOFCOM on Friday did not say what countermeasures China will take and when it will implement them, there are many ways China can inflict pain on the US economy, according to analysts.
"The most direct countermeasure would be raising existing tariffs on US goods or imposing tariffs on more US products," Song said. "However, we cannot rule out other policy tools."
Song pointed out that with the overall trade relationship souring, US companies' operations and investments in China could also be impacted, given the rising anger among the Chinese public toward the US.
In the wake of renewed tensions, calls on Chinese social media to boycott US products rose, including US films, iPhones and computers. "Why retaliate? All we need to do is boycotting US products," one internet user said on Sina Weibo.
Chinese analysts also suggested that China could target the US financial system, the backbone of the US economy, including unloading China's holdings of US Treasury bonds. Big US corporations and products, such as agricultural goods, will also likely encounter more scrutiny in China.
"Such an impact on US companies and industries will not be less severe than from the tariffs," Song said.
Many US business groups have expressed strong opposition to the tariffs. On Wall Street, US stocks have also suffered losses in the past few days, as have stocks in major bourses across the world.

Complicated outlook

While it remains to be seen whether trade officials could still make a breakthrough at the talks, it is clear that the escalation complicates the talks and dims prospects for a deal, analysts said.
"I don't expect too much from this round of talks," a source in Washington familiar with the talks told the Global Times on Friday, noting that US President Donald Trump had miscalculated.
"He initially wanted to show how he forced China into making concessions," the source, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said. "But that is like forcing China not to sign the deal quickly".
However, citing US eagerness, other observers have also argued that there is still a chance for the two sides to reach a deal.
"I think there is still a chance for the two countries to reach an agreement," Sang Baichuan, director of the Institute of International Business at the University of International Business and Economics in Beijing, told the Global Times on Friday, noting that the two sides still appear eager to reach a deal, despite their tough rhetoric.
In what appears to be an attempt to leave room for talks, US officials offered a grace period for the tariff hike. Trump also said on Thursday that a deal is still "possible" this week and that he might speak to Chinese President Xi Jinping by phone, CNBC reported.
Asked about the phone call, Geng Shuang, a spokesperson for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, said on Friday that he was not aware of such a plan but the two leaders have maintained close contact.

segunda-feira, 18 de março de 2019

Mac Margolis sobre a visita presidencial aos EUA (ops, ao Trump) - Bloomberg

Trump and Bolsonaro Put Their Bromance to Its First Test

The Western Hemisphere’s disruptors-in-chief meet in Washington this week. Is a new U.S.-Brazil entente in the offing?


Washington rolls out the welcome wagon.
Washington rolls out the welcome wagon.
Photographer: Eric Baradat/AFP/Getty Images

Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro doesn’t like his look. That’s a big part of why he’s substituting the ambassadors to Washington and 14 other A-list foreign posts, Brazil’s biggest foreign-service makeover in recent memory. The mission: “Not to present the government and president as if they were racist and homophobic,” Bolsonaro told journalists in Brasilia last week, on the eve of his first bilateral visit to the United States and a meeting with his campaign idol, President Donald Trump.
If there’s one place Bolsonaro doesn’t have to explain himself, it’s in Washington, where civility, institutional backstops and the rules of democratic decorum are being cut down faster than the Amazon. What’s less clear is how the Western Hemisphere’s ranking disruptors-in-chief will manage their announced “new beginning,” and whether Latin America’s economy of record can put the feeling to good use at home and beyond.
The renewed friendship itself is important. Brazil and the U.S. have not always seen the world the same way. “For most of the last two decades, good relations with the U.S. were not a priority,” said Jose Pio Borges, president of the Brazilian Center for International Relations, in reference to 2003 to 2016, when Brazil was ruled by the soft left and still gringo-allergic Workers’ Party. “We had no conflicts, but saw no major advances.”
In that context, the agenda for Bolsonaro’s trip looks a bit like diplomacy as usual. The two governments are scheduled to sign agreements and protocols on technology safeguards for a Brazilian satellite launching station, bilateral security, two-way trade, and a new energy forum including investment in nuclear power.
Brazil wants Washington’s blessings to become a major non-Nato ally—with enhanced access to  U.S. defense technology—and more ambitiously to join the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the pact of the most advanced economies. As a good will gesture, Brazil is expected to drop visa requirement for U.S. visitors, though the U.S. is unlikely to return the favor.
But Brazil’s broader expectations couldn’t be grander. Bolsonaro emulated Trump’s sawed-off populism, promising to make “Brazil great again” and retrieve politics from the swamp of socialism. Foreign Minister Ernesto Araujo, a career diplomat who lately has veered sharply to the right, went further, declaring Trump the Western world’s “Hail Mary.” Arriving in Washington on Sunday, Bolsonaro tweeted: "For the first time in a while a pro-American Brazilian President arrives in D.C."
Far more than bilateral bonhomie is in play, however. Analysts caution that as the junior partner in the alliance, Brazil is vulnerable to capture by an imported agenda.  “Automatic alliance with any world power can be problematic. Close relations shouldn’t be capitulation,” warned Roberto Abdenur, a former Brazilian ambassador to the U.S., Germany and China.

Theoretically, Brazil’s seasoned diplomats and technocrats have the policy acumen and global mileage to negotiate with testy powers and overweight allies. Brazil boasts its own heft in the World Trade Organization (presided over by a Brazilian) and is a respected voice in the Inter-American Development Bank, the United Nations and the G20. And the soft power pull of its music, food, rainforest and futebol’s ballet on grass have endeared the country to foreigners. 
Unfortunately, the hard-right political makeover in Brasilia has inspired Araujo to clear the house of graybeards while promoting their subordinates: “colonels giving orders to generals,” as disconcerted diplomats put it. That’s a prerogative of new management—Araujo has never headed an embassy—but the upheaval has left Itamaraty, as the foreign ministry is known, short of its most seasoned envoys and bereft of institutional memory.

“The minister has grown authoritarian and isolated,” senior diplomat Paulo Roberto de Almeida told me. “He shuts himself in his office and hardly consults  the ministry’s divisions anymore,” he said.  Almeida should know: He was recently removed from his post as president of the ministry’s International Relations Research Institute after inviting independent debate on foreign policy through his personal blog.
Among those reportedly snubbed under the new command was the ministry’s most knowledgeable Venezuela hand, “a person who’s read all the cables and follows all the developments in Caracas,” one serving diplomat told me. That’s an inexplicable oversight at a time when Brazil is trying to lead the regional conversation about rescuing Venezuela from authoritarian collapse.
Squandering experience is bad enough. Itamaraty’s ideological turmoil threatens to make it worse. In an hour-and-twenty minute master class to aspiring diplomats in Brasilia last week, Araujo said he’d had enough of the encomiums to “third worldism, anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism” and bets on errant “partners unable to help our development.” Alongside his leader, Araujo has bet on rapprochement with Washington as a kind of existential redemption.
And forget China: As far as Araujo is concerned, Brazil’s finest moment was when the U.S. led the way, not just in international trade but setting the world’s moral and political compass. Brazil’s way forward? Combine “freedom and greatness” to reclaim the nation’s rightful place in the march of “Christian” civilization.
That’s stirring stuff for the pulpit or the lectern, but makes for dicey foreign policy. The caveat goes double for Brazil, a nation that ought to spread its alliances, not funnel them, much less fix its fortunes on the humors of a mercurial populist in Washington. “It’s not a strategy. It’s a messianic message,” said O Estado de Sao Paulo in a lead editorial last week.
Some analysts note that Bolsonaro’s politics are a work in progress and that the campaign passions and articles of faith will fade as the grind of governing sets in. Cooler heads in Brasilia, especially the retired generals in Bolsonaro’s kitchen cabinet, are credited with muting the Washington-inspired rhetoric about invading Venezuela, moving Brazil’s embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, quitting the Paris Agreement on climate change, and falling in behind Trump in his trade quarrel with China. “I see hopeful signs in the moderating influence of the military ministers and especially in Vice President Hamilton Mourao,” said Abdenur.
But Bolsonaro still surrounds himself with incendiaries like Araujo, self-styled adviser and freelance philosopher Olavo de Carvalho, and Bolsonaro’s youngest son Eduardo, who fancies himself a parallel foreign minister. Consider the inclusion of disgraced former Trump strategist Stephen Bannon on the guest list for Bolsonaro’s welcome dinner at the Brazilian embassy. “It’s a mistake to think that military cabinet members have won the upper hand and created a cordon sanitaire for policy initiatives,” said a well-placed diplomatic source.
The tough talk “is part of a shared worldview that got Bolsonaro elected and is also driving foreign policy,” said the diplomat. “I don’t see him just letting this go.” This week’s visit is likely to bear out that proposition.
This column does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the editorial board or Bloomberg LP and its owners.

To contact the author of this story:
Mac Margolis at mmargolis14@bloomberg.net
To contact the editor responsible for this story:
James Gibney at jgibney5@bloomberg.net