Cameron afferra un salvagente Trans-Atlantico/G-8 preme nonostante le divergenze sulla Siria/Putin lancia segnali: non intendo ess

Wsj     130618
Cameron afferra un salvagente Trans-Atlantico
SIMON NIXON

– Il lancio dei negoziati commerciali tra UE e USA, la TTIP (Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership – Alleanza transatlantica per il commercio e l’investimento) è un’occasione per UE e USA per riaffermare la supremazia del vecchio Occidente, in un mondo multipolare.

– La TTIP creerebbe un mercato unico di quasi 1 miliardo di persone, del 50% del PIL mondiale e di oltre il 30% del commercio mondiale.

o   Per Obama la TTIP è stata una piattaforma centrale nel suo discorso dell’Unione di quest’anno, e nella sua seconda campagna presidenziale.

o   Per i leader UE un tentativo di mostrare gli aspetti positivi della UE, in una fase di recessione e austerità.

– Ne trae particolari benefici il primo ministro britannico, Cameron, che se ne è fatto promotore al G8 in Nord Irlanda:

o   Cameron spera che la TTIP serva a diminuire la pressione che sta subendo per rinegoziare la partecipazione della GB alla UE, e per convincere la propria opinione pubblica a rimanervi prima del referendum promesso per il 2017.

– La TTIP è anche un modo per porre il UK al centro dell’Europa.

– Gli altri paesi UE del G8, che non hanno avuto un posto di primo piano sulla questione, devono riconoscere che una TTIP che leghi maggiormente il UK alla UE raddoppierebbe i vantaggi per l’Europa.

o   Da sola la GB non potrebbe concludere un simile accordo, e rimanerne fuori sarebbe svantaggioso.

o   Temono le ripercussioni negative se ne rimanessero fuori Svizzera, Norvegia e Islanda – che fanno parte dell’European Free Trade Association (Associazione europea per il libero commercio), presentato dagli euroscettici come modello delle future relazioni britanniche on la UE.

———————-
Wsj     130618
G-8 preme nonostante le divergenze sulla Siria/Putin lancia segnali: non intendo essere ignorato
NICHOLAS WINNING e STACY MEICHTRY/ Gerald F. Seib

– Tentativo di una dichiarazione congiunta sulla Guerra civile in Siria, nonostante le divergenze, il cui punto centrale è la sorte di Assad:

o   Usa e altri paesi occidentali sono per un governo di transizione senza Assad;

o   la Russia non è d’accordo.

o   La Russia sostiene Assad con armi pesanti, ribadisce il NO ad una no-fly zone, ricordando la propria contrarietà a quella creata per la Libia nel 2011.

o   Gli Usa hanno dato ordine alla CIA di armare gli oppositori; hanno mantenuto gli F-16 e i missili Patriot in Giordania; le forze armate americane chiedono una no-fly zone su una striscia di confine con la Giordania.

o   Assad minaccia ritorsioni terroristiche sull’Europa …

– I paesi occidentali potrebbero emettere una loro dichiarazione isolando Putin. La domanda dal punto di vista americano è:  

o   è ancora importante tenere buona la Russia?

– A vent’anni dal crollo dell’Urss la sua influenza è diminuita, sta diminuendo la sua popolazione e anche la sua importanza come fornitrice di petrolio e gas all’Europa (boom del gas e petrolio da scisti, diversificazione del rifornimento energetico).

– Putin si tiene stretta la Siria perché è quasi l’unico alleato nel MO.

– Nel frattempo la Cina è divenuta un attore di peso molto superiore sia economico che politico;

 

– Di fronte al declino russo, nel 2011 Niall Ferguson (Harvard) ha dichiarato che la Russia era divenuta “l’ombra di se stessa nella Guerra Fredda”, sempre più irrilevante sulla scena mondiale

– Ma le cose non sono così semplici: la Russia ha ancora un peso:

o   per la quantità di armi nucleari di cui dispone;

o   perché è membro permanente del CdS ONU,

o   e quindi pesa sulla questione iraniana e nord-coreana.

– Sette le aree in cui la Russia rimane importante, secondo il documento del the National Defense University della scorsa primavera:

o   controllo globale sulle armi; competizione per le risorse dell’Artico; Siria; Iran; Nord Corea, Afghanistan.

    EUROPE NEWS
    June 17, 2013, 7:01 p.m. ET

Cameron Grabs a Trans-Atlantic Lifeline

By SIMON NIXON

–          Vast amounts of political capital have been invested in the trade talks between the European Union[e] and the U.S., which were formally launched at the G-8 summit in Northern Ireland on Monday.

–          For President Barack Obama, the decision to push for a Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership [TTIP] was a central plank of his State of the Union[e] address this year and crucial to his quest for a second-term legacy in the form of a boost to jobs and exports.

–          For the EU’s leadership, it is an attempt to demonstrate that the European project still has something positive to offer its citizens beyond recession and grinding austerity.

–          For both sides, it is an opportunity to reassert the global leadership of the "Old West" in a multipolar world.

–          But no one has quite as much riding on the TTIP as U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron. The pictures of him standing alongside President Obama, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and European U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron at a news conference with President Barack Obama in Enniskillen on Monday.

–          They didn’t come about by accident: they were the result of months of diplomatic effort by British officials, first to build political support for a trade deal on both sides of the Atlantic to ensure the talks got to the starting line; and second to ensure the starting gun was fired this week in Northern Ireland during Mr. Cameron’s presidency of the G-8.

–          For Mr. Cameron, the TTIP is far more than just a trade deal. It is central to his campaign to reconcile the U.K. to its membership of the EU before his promised referendum in 2017. Much of his party may be neuralgic about the EU, but all claim to be ardent free-traders and most say they support the European single market. Well, the TTIP would potentially create a vast single market comprising almost one billion people, 50% of global GDP and more than 30% of global trade.

–          Not only could the U.K. never secure such a deal on its own, it would be a major competitive disadvantage if it were to put itself on the outside.

–          Already, Switzerland, Norway and Iceland, whose membership of the European Free Trade Association is often held up by euroskeptics as a model for future British relations with the EU, have expressed concern at the potential economic consequences of being left outside a potential trans-Atlantic free trade zone.

–          Mr. Cameron is betting that a successful TTIP will substantially reduce the pressure on him to deliver a comprehensive renegotiation of the terms of British membership before 2017.

–          At the same time, the TTIP offers a politically palatable way for Mr. Cameron to put the U.K. squarely at the heart of Europe, his enthusiastic backing for such an ambitious project helping to undo some of the mistrust caused by his past mishandling of key European relationships. Any goodwill could help wring future political concessions from his partners.

–          Of course, there is some resentment in Brussels at the way Mr. Cameron was able to use his G-8 presidency to hijack what was a hugely important bilateral event between the EU and U.S. None of the other EU heads of government attending the G-8, among them Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany and President François Hollande of France, was on the podium.

–          But EU officials should put these frustrations aside: instead they should savor the subliminal impact of countless British news bulletins in which the words "European Union" will now appear in an unambiguously positive light for the first time for years. More importantly, they should recognize a far-reaching TTIP that binds the U.K. more closely to the EU would be a double boost for Europe.

Write to Simon Nixon at simon.nixon@wsj.com

Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

————-
Wsj      130618
    June 18, 2013, 8:12 a.m. ET

G-8 Presses On Despite Syria Differences

Officials Focus on Common Ground to Craft Statement on Syria Conflict

By NICHOLAS WINNING And STACY MEICHTRY

Vladimir Putin, left, David Cameron, center, and Barack Obama attend a working session during the G-8 summit at the Lough Erne golf resort in Enniskillen, Northern Ireland, on Tuesday.

–          ENNISKILLEN, Northern Ireland—-Leaders from the Group of Eight are trying to avoid a diplomatic rift over Syria as their two-day summit draws to a close later Tuesday, with officials attempting to craft a joint statement on the conflict despite differences between Russia and other members over the civil war.

Matthew Dalton discusses tense relations between President Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-8 Summit over Syria. Photo: Getty Images

–          Russia is backing the regime of President Bashar al-Assad with heavy weaponry, while U.S. President Barack Obama’s administration has ordered the Central Intelligence Agency to begin arming Mr. Assad’s opponents.

–          The leaders also Tuesday agreed to clamp down on ransom payments to terror groups following a U.K. initiative to tackle one of their main sources of financing for extremism, British sources said.

–          The dispute over Syria carried over into a joint press appearance Monday. The two leaders spent most of the session staring grimly ahead and appeared at pains to avoid open disagreement.

–          Other Western leaders also pressed Russian President Vladimir Putin to soften his backing for Mr. Assad.

–          If Mr. Putin doesn’t relent, one option for Western leaders would be to issue their own statement on the conflict, isolating Mr. Putin and raising the diplomatic stakes.

–          But officials drafting the statement are trying to avoid such an open breach, and focus on what common ground exists, such as a shared desire to see parties to the conflict meet for talks in Geneva next month and a hope that the conflict can be resolved by political, rather than violent means.

"There are still discussions going on, these are difficult and challenging issues here," said a spokesman for U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, who is hosting the summit. "We believe that the G-8 can reach agreement on an approach that takes us forward" toward upcoming peace talks in Geneva.

G-8 leaders talked about the conflict during a working dinner Monday night, which Mr. Cameron’s spokesman said was "a very real discussion."

–          But the central disagreement remains the fate of Mr. Assad. The U.S. and other Western nations believe that any transition in Syria must involve Mr. Assad leaving power, while the Russians don’t agree.

–          "Our view…, and of a number of other countries, is that Assad does not have a role to play in the future of Syria," said Mr. Cameron’s spokesman. "Our objective remains progress towards a political solution which results in a transitional government and we don’t believe Assad has a role to play."

–          Tensions had risen in the run-up to the G-8. Last week, the Obama administration said it had determined that Mr. Assad’s forces had used chemical weapons during the conflict, then said it would arm rebels. Over the weekend, U.S. defense officials decided to keep F-16 fighters and Patriot missiles in Jordan.

–          As part of the process of arming rebels, U.S. military officials also have proposed establishing a limited no-fly zone over a strip of Syrian land along the Jordanian border. The White House hasn’t decided whether to pursue the option.

–          On Monday, Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Lukashevich suggested in a news conference that such a no-fly zone would be disrespectful of international laws. He said that Russia disapproved of how Western powers implemented a no-fly zone during the 2011 conflict in Libya.

–          "We don’t want a repeat of that in relation to the Syrian conflict," he said, according to Russian news agencies. "And I think that we in principle won’t allow such a scenario."

President Assad, in what amounted to his first comment on Western plans to arm rebels, warned that doing so would have dire consequences.

"If Europeans deliver weapons, terror will arrive in Europe’s backyard and Europe will pay the price," Mr. Assad said in an interview with the German daily Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung.

–          The danger, he said, would originate not from his own forces, but rather from radical jihadist elements who would set their sights on Europe after fighting in Syria.

"Battle-tested terrorists will return to Europe with extremist ideas," Mr. Assad told the newspaper. "For Europe, there’s no alternative to working with the Syrian state, even if that’s not what Europe wants."

–          The British ransom initiative took on added impetus after January’s hostage-taking at the In Amenas gas plant in Algeria, operated by Sonatrach, in which 40 oil workers from several G-8 countries died. Ransom payments are illegal in Britain, but there are no such rules in other G-8 nations.

Write to Nicholas Winning at nick.winning@dowjones.com and Stacy Meichtry at stacy.meichtry@wsj.com

Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. All Rights Reserved

———————-
Wsj      130618

Putin Signals: I’m Not Gonna Be Ignored

By Gerald F. Seib

President Barack Obama and Russian President Vladimir Putin got together for a talk on Monday, but things appeared to be, well, a little tense.

–          Mr. Obama’s decision to send arms to the rebels fighting Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, a Russian ally, didn’t sit well with Mr. Putin when they met during the current G-8 summit in Ireland. They emerged looking less than jolly and gave somewhat strained statements, in which both acknowledged their dispute over Syria and Mr. Putin used that telltale diplomatic phrase for a difficult conversation, saying they had a “frank exchange of opinions.”

–          So, the Russian leader isn’t happy with the Americans. From the American side, the question these days is simple: Does it really matter anymore?

–          The temptation is to say no. Two decades after the Soviet Union[e] dissolved, Moscow’s influence has receded.

o   Mr. Putin is clinging to his Syrian friends so tightly in part because they are about the only allies he has left in the Middle East.

o   China has become a far more important economic as well as political player on the world stage over those two decades.

o   Russia’s population is declining, and even its importance as an oil and gas supplier to Europe is declining with the onset of the fracking boom and the diversification of energy supplies.

–          Indeed, Russia’s decline prompted Harvard history professor Niall Ferguson to declare in 2011 that Russia had become “a shadow of its Cold War self” that is increasingly irrelevant on the world stage.

–          Ah, but things aren’t that simple. Russia still matters, and not just because of that stockpile of Cold War-era nuclear weapons it has at its disposal. If you listened closely to Messrs. Obama and Putin, they reminded that Russia remains–if only because of its position on the United Nations Security Council–a player on two of the most important security issues facing Washington, the nuclear ambitions of Iran and the nuclear ambitions of North Korea. It has the ability to play the spoiler, which is one of the most important roles in world affairs.

Just this spring, the National Defense University issued a paper entitled, pointedly, “Russia Still Matters,” listing seven areas where Russian policies remain important, including global arms control and the race for Arctic resources, in addition to Syria, Iran, North Korea and America’s desire to exit Russia’s neighbor, Afghanistan.

So, yes, Mr. Putin may be a little grouchy in part because he knows his influence is diminished. But like Glenn Close in the movie “Fatal Attraction,” he’s able to say with meaning, “I’m not gonna be ignored.”

For critical perspectives on politics and the economy from Jerry Seib & David Wessel, visit Seib & Wessel.

Leave a Reply

Questo sito usa Akismet per ridurre lo spam. Scopri come i tuoi dati vengono elaborati.