The New Prize: Asia’s “Fire Ice” Gas Revolution

Every few decades a new energy source comes online and promises to revolutionize the way world fuels its economies. This was true of shift from coal and whale oil to conventional oil in 19th and early 20th century. Then, in the 1960s and 70s came nuclear power revolution soon followed by renewable energies, hydro, solar, wind power. Most recent, much talked about promise, comes from shale gas, which threatens to drastically change global geopolitics. But that’s old news. Tomorrow’s energy revolution, many believe, will be “fire ice,” otherwise known as methane hydrates. In March of this year, Japan Oil, Gas, Metals National Corporation (JOGMEC) successfully extracted methane hydrates from offshore reservoirs. This new potential source of energy, a natural gas, could free up traditionally energy-poor countries such as Japan and South Korea, has potential to further sink established petro-powers, which are already threatened by cheaper LNG prices through the entry of shale gas on the market. Under the JOGMEC’s program, Japan has set an ambitious target of commercial production of methane hydrates by 2018. Methane hydrates are gas molecules trapped in ice. They occur in permafrost, on the slopes of continental plates and in the seabed usually at a depth greater than 1,600 feet (500 meters). As a result, the Arctic and the coastlines of every continent are dotted with gas reservoirs. The U.S. Geological Survey (USGS) estimates that there could be up to 100.000 trillion cubic feet of gas hydrates globally. While only a portion of that impressive figure is currently considered to be concentrated enough to allow for commercially viable quantities, it is a figure dwarfs estimates of conventional gas. A few problems have stemmed the hype. Similar to the development of other unconventional energies, the technology has not yet allowed for commercial viability of extraction, production is currently too expensive and uncompetitive. Further, converting the methane hydrate from its naturally-occurring solid form, trapped in ice, into an easily extracted gas is technically difficult. Yet technology is slowly catching up and deep seabed mining programs are quickly becoming a new frontier for extraction of minerals+unconventional hydrocarbons. As technology progresses, deep seabed mining could provide many Asian states with the much prized energy and resource security they have long sought. Such technological advances are crucial as an estimated 99% of the world’s gas hydrates occur in marine sediment in seabed. In a world first, JOGMEC cracked one part of the problem wide open in March. The corporation successfully extracted methane hydrates from the seabed off Japanese coast. The extraction, which took place 50 miles (80 km) from Atsumi Peninsula and at a depth of 1,000 feet (300 meters), decreased the pressure of methane hydrate allowing for the separation of the ice and methane, leaving a gas could then be extracted. But, while Japan is the first to successfully extract methane hydrates, it isn’t only country studying them. China, Norway, Russia, New Zealand, Germany, Brazil, Chile, South Korea, Canada, India and U.S. have all started their own research programs. Collaboration has been the order of the day and has been spearheaded by agreements between the U.S., Canada, Japan, and South Korea (…..)

Link: http://thediplomat.com/2013/05/11/the-new-prize-asias-fire-ice-gas-revolution/

A Troubling Survey on Global Corruption

CORRUPTION is a growth business. Bribery scandals have dominated headlines in several countries in recent months, among them India and Nigeria. International enforcement of antibribery laws has been increasing in the United States and major European countries. A new survey of corporate officials and employees in 36 countries, in Europe, Africa, Middle East, as well as India, indicates there is plenty of corruption that needs investigating. Over all, 20% of respondents said they knew of incidents at their own companies within the previous year that could be construed as cooking the books, moves to either understate expenses/ overstate revenue. Among senior managers and directors, the figure was 42%. The survey was conducted late last year by Ipsos, a market research firm, on behalf of Ernst & Young, a major accounting firm. Ernst did not break down responses to the cooking-the-books question by country, but indicated that managers from emerging markets were more likely to say that had happened than were managers from more developed economies. The firm did provide country-by-country results for some questions, as can be seen in accompanying charts. Asked if companies in their countries “often report their financial performance as better than it is,” more than half the respondents in nine countries, Nigeria, Slovenia, Russia, Spain, Croatia, India, Serbia, Kenya and Austria, said that they did. At the other end of scale, fewer than a quarter of respondents in 8 countries, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, France, Romania, Sweden, Hungary and Netherlands, said that happened. The survey was commissioned by Ernst’s fraud investigation and dispute services group, which does not perform standard corporate audits but instead is hired by companies to look for signs of corruption or fraud in their own operations. It did not include either China or United States. David Stulb, the global leader of that group, said it was growing in part because many companies were worried about enforcement of the American Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, which bars the bribing of foreign officials, of similar laws in other developed countries. Those surveyed included employees and officials of overseas subsidiaries of multinational companies. The respondents were promised anonymity, Ernst said. The survey revealed what Ernst called a “corruption perception gap” in many countries, where the respondents said bribery and the corrupt practices were far more common in other parts of their country than they were in their own industry. At extreme, 94% of respondents in Kenya thought corruption was widespread in the country, but only 34% thought it was a problem in their own industry. Responses indicated corruption and bribery are rare in Scandinavian countries, common in some Southern and Eastern European countries, as well as in India, the Middle East and Africa.

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/18/business/economy/a-troubling-survey-on-global-corruption.html

Sueños de nuestros hijos

Nuevo sueño viene a competir con los que conocíamos. Es el sueño chino, que asoma la cabeza por el Oriente, cuando declina el sueño europeo y se mantiene, mal que bien, el sueño americano. El nuevo sueño chino ha sido formulado por Xi Jinping, timonel de la quinta y última generación, encargado de emprender largo bordo para colocar a su país en primera posición de la regata. Los sueños son dobles: ordenan los deseos, pero proyectan nuestra imagen hacia fuera, con frecuencia en la forma de lenguaje mitológico y propagandístico. Pueden ser mentira, pero cumplen con su propósito de hacernos soñar y de hacer soñar a los otros. Son la mejor síntesis del “soft power”, poder blando y persuasivo que consigue mejores y más estrechas adhesiones al convertir el modelo de sociedad que se propone en objeto de deseo para millones de terrícolas. El sueño americano ha sido un potente motor acción internacional durante la guerra fría, en la que venció al sueño del igualitarismo totalitario soviético, y que mantiene todavía hoy su fuerte magnetismo. El sueño europeo tomó forma con la unificación del continente, cuando fue máquina de paz, estabilidad y prosperidad, un modelo de integración supranacional admirado más allá de sus fronteras, hasta saltar hecho pedazos con la actual crisis. Y ahora aparece este nuevo sueño, balbuceante en boca del nuevo líder chino, que anuncia el “gran resurgimiento de la nación china”. De puertas adentro, el sueño chino significará seguir creciendo y sacando a la gente de la pobreza, generando las clases medias y construyendo ciudades punteras en urbanismo e infraestructuras, un Estado de bienestar sostenible, menos desigualdades y sin la corrupción, en el que sus ciudadanos puedan sentirse orgullosos de su país y quienes los gobiernan. Si suscita mucho escepticismo, dentro y fuera, sobre todo por estructura autoritaria del poder y el camino tan accidentado de su crecimiento, cifras que colocan a China en cabeza, en comercio y en reservas extranjeras, y en el segundo lugar en PIB, no dejan margen a la duda. De puertas afuera, el sueño chino es salto estratégico. Hasta ahora era una superpotencia agazapada y discreta, concentrada en el comercio e inversiones al proyectarse internacionalmente, mientras contemplaba silenciosa el desgaste de su rival estratégico en guerras optativas que le cargaron de endeudamiento y de enemistades, además de crear inestabilidad. No será así con Xi Jinping. En el sueño chino hay un momento, en la época inminente de nuestros hijos y nietos, en que sustituye al americano. Esta semana hemos tenido un gesto de anticipo, cuando Pekín ha tenido pretensiones de Washington respecto a israelíes y palestinos, al recibir a dirigentes de uno y otro bando y darse la oportunidad de exhibir vocación de árbitros equidistantes. Habrá más gestos así, muchos más, y pronto. (Fuente: Lluís Bassets – El País.com – 12/05/2013)

In global currency war, a new front opens in the South Pacific

From (way) down under comes a new front in the push and pull over world currency values: Stung by the rise in the New Zealand dollar, affectionately known as the kiwi, the country’s central bank last week acknowledged that it had intervened in foreign exchange markets to try to fight any further appreciation. It was cautionary move, New Zealand Reserve Bank Governor Graeme Wheeler said, to “take … the tops off rallies” and curb what New Zealanders worry is a runaway property market driven by the global money rushing into the country, according to reports in the New Zealand Herald. If the currency fight has been joined in Wellington, can it be anything less than a global war? That is the renewed concern as more countries react to the ocean of money released into the world financial system by major central banks, and nations with large trade deficits, such as the United States, struggle to boost their own exports. Exchange rates play an important role in world trade, shaping where companies buy their parts or commodities, determining the prices consumers pay for imported goods, influencing financial and investment decisions. While savvy international firms have ways to buffer what they do against daily exchange rate movements, the actions of a determined central bank can alter the prospects of nations around the world, acting in effect like a tax or other trade barrier. China’s peg of its currency to the value of the dollar at what many consider an artificially low level, for example, has helped expand its exports by making them cheaper than products from other countries. Recent steps by Japan, the world’s third-largest economy, have now become a central concern. The impact of the country’s aggressive new monetary policy has been quick and broadly felt, kindling debate over whether the Bank of Japan is using its last resort tools to boost growth, or actively trying to influence exchange rates to give its exporters an advantage. As with any such effort, the concern is that other countries might react in kind, touching off a corrosive competition that leaves everyone worse off. In a global economic review, the PIMCO chief executive Mohamed El-Arian said central banks were pushing world economy toward a dangerous fork in the road, one path leading to renewed and stable growth, one leading toward crisis and intense competition among countries for shrinking economic returns. To date, he said, evidence points to loose monetary policy pushing up asset prices and currency values to potentially dangerous levels. “By venturing deep into experimental policy territory … they have inserted a remarkable wedge (a disconnect) between market prices and underlying economic and financial fundamentals,” he wrote. The yen has fallen sharply against the dollar this year, crossing the threshhold 100 level, and import prices from Japan consequently have fallen for three months running, according to U.S. Labor Department. Australia and Korea cut interest rates in recent days to try to boost lagging growth, in part out of concern over the rise in value of their currencies against the yen and the dollar (…..)

Link: http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/in-global-currency-war-a-new-front-opens-in-the-south-pacific/2013/05/14/ff07b582-bccf-11e2-97d4-a479289a31f9_story.html

Confirmam cúpula de ministros da Rússia e da CELAC em Moscou

O vice-ministro de Assuntos Exteriores Ryabkov confirmou ontem para o dia 29 de maio, nesta capital, um encontro de chanceleres da Rússia e da troica ampliada da Comunidade Estados Latino-americanos e Caribenhos (CELAC). A reunião de ministros contará com a participação de Cuba – presidente temporária, Chile, Costa Rica, Haiti, informou o vice-chanceler durante sua intervenção nas reuniões parlamentares desta segunda-feira dedicadas prioridades da Rússia nas relações com a América Latina e o Caribe. Serguei Ryabkov disse que, como resultado do encontro, serão emitidos os documentos conjuntos que refletirão “os enfoques de nossos países para os problemas contemporâneo de ordem mundial e da agenda internacional”. Trabalhamos de maneira exitosa com nossos sócios América Latina considerando as prioridades política exterior Rússia, inclusive medidas de transparência no desenvolvimento espacial, na segurança internacional e no aperfeiçoamento do sistema de órgãos dos direitos humanos. O diplomata remitiu à declaração assinada pelos presidentes da Rússia, Vladimir Putin; e pela presidenta do Brasil, Dilma Russeff, no dia 14 de dezembro 2012, refirmando a política de nossos países de não permitir que se desenvolva processo de armamento do espaço sideral, sublinhou. Ontem, expressou, é um dos resultados mais importantes nossos esforços comuns, e Ryabkov demonstrou ter confiança em que resto dos países latino-americanos não permitirão corrida armamentista e militarização do espaço. Destacou, assim mesmo, o apoio consolidado de uma série de estados da região a uma resolução russa na ONU contra glorificação do nazismo. De acordo com embaixador cubano na Rússia, Emilio Lozada, o encontro de ministros da troica da CELAC em Moscou dará continuidade à primeira reunião, realizada em setembro de 2012, em Nova York, um sinal claro que nossas relações avançam de acordo ao interesse mútuo de desenvolvê-las e ampliar a todos os âmbitos, sublinhou o diplomata. (Agencia Prensa Latina – 14/05/2013)

Emotions, Decision Making and Brinksmanship

Surprise !!! States (not to mention pundits) spend an inordinate amount of time trying to figure out what the other states thinks. Discerning the intentions of a foreign government is no easy task; even understanding basic structure of government can be a challenge, states have a strong incentive to deceive others as to their intentions, beliefs, capabilities. Even if the United States privately decided not to defend Taiwan from PRC attack, it would behoove American leaders to make Beijing believe the U.S. would rush to Taipei’s defense, in the hopes that the threat of intervention would deter an attack. At same time, state leaders regularly speak to different audiences; the President of the United States surely wishes to convey a different message of credibility and deterrence to Taiwan than to the PRC, as a “blank check” might encourage former to become overly adventurous. Then, accordingly, it’s hard to know what another state is thinking, even when that state sends costly signals of intent. But what if even the leaders of states don’t know how they’ll react to certain events? A recent International Organization article by Jonathan Mercer investigated the role of emotion in decision-making. Although the theory is somewhat complicated, the argument boils down to the idea we use our own emotional reactions to events as evidence of our interests and preferences. A classic experiment along these lines involves a coin flip, with heads deciding one course of action, tails the other. By flipping a coin, you determine whether you’re happy or sad about the outcome; accordingly, you know which path you really prefer. Mercer argues that the leadership of United States sent costly signals of disinterest in the fate of South Korea, withdrawing all forces and de-emphasizing possibility of intervention in case of a North Korean attack in 1950. When the attack came, however, the U.S. leaders had an unexpected emotional reaction of alarm, which led to concern about how rest of the world would interpret inaction. As Mercer points out, U.S. policymakers used their own sense of shock and alarm as evidence that the world would see United States as weak. Consequently, the United States intervened in contravention of its own expectations. Later in the war, an emotional attachment to the idea of “reputation” prevented American policymakers from understanding the consequences of advancing beyond the 38th parallel. The bottom line is that an approach to decision-making that concentrates on interests and raw calculation will come up short. As Mercer suggests, “Strategy depends on imagining not only how another feels, but how another will feel as a result of one’s policy.” This adds another layer of the calculation to how, for example, China and Japan try to predict each others’ responses to moves in Senkaku/Diayou islands. It is deeply difficult for policymakers to empathize with (or put themselves in the position of) the leaders of another state, and perhaps even more difficult to try to understand the emotional complexity associated with intrigue and infighting associated with internal deliberations of the other government. Similarly, there are stark limits on practice of “Kreminology”, or effort to discern intent from the governmental infighting, when emotional reactions may yield unpredictable behavior. A Brinksmanship, whether over islands or high altitude deserts, may be even more dangerous than the players appreciate. (source: Robert Farley – The Diplomat – 08/05/2013) 

U.S. Weighs Wide Overhaul of Wiretap Laws

Obama administration, resolving years of internal debate, is on verge of backing a Federal Bureau of Investigation plan for a sweeping overhaul of surveillance laws that would make it easier to wiretap people who communicate using the Internet rather than by traditional phone services, according officials familiar with deliberations. F.B.I. director, Robert Mueller III, has argued bureau’s ability to carry out court-approved eaves-dropping on suspects is “going dark” as communications technology evolves, since 2010 has pushed for legal mandate requiring companies like Facebook and Google to build into their instant-messaging and other such systems a capacity to comply with wiretap orders. That proposal, however, bogged down amid concerns by other agencies, like the Commerce Department, about quashing Silicon Valley innovation. While the F.B.I.’s original proposal would have required Internet communications services to each build in a wiretapping capacity, the revised one, which must now be reviewed by White House, focuses on fining companies that do not comply with wiretap orders. The difference, officials say, means start-ups with a small number of users would have fewer worries about wiretapping issues unless the companies became popular enough to come to the Justice Department’s attention. Still, the plan is likely to set off a debate over the future of the Internet if the White House submits it to Congress, according to lawyers for technology companies and advocates of Internet privacy and freedom. “I think F.B.I.’s proposal would render Internet communications less secure, more vulnerable to hackers and identity thieves,” said Gregory T. Nojeim of Center for Democracy and Technology. “It would also mean that innovators who want to avoid new and expensive mandates will take their innovations abroad and develop them there, where there aren’t the same mandates.” Andrew Weissmann, the general counsel of the F.B.I., said in a statement the proposal was aimed only at preserving law enforcement officials’ longstanding ability to investigate suspected criminals, spies and terrorists subject to a court’s permission. “This doesn’t create any new legal surveillance authority”. “This always requires a court order. None of the ‘going dark’ solutions would do anything except update the law given means of modern communications.” A central element of the F.B.I.’s 2010 proposal was to expand Communications Assistance for Law Enforcement Act, a 1994 law that already requires phone and network carriers to build interception capabilities into their systems, so that it would also cover Internet-based services that allow people to converse. But bureau has now largely moved away from that one-size-fits-all mandate. Instead, the new proposal focuses on strengthening wiretap orders issued by judges. Such orders instruct the recipients to provide technical assistance to law enforcement agencies, leaving wiggle room for companies to say they tried but could not make the technology work. Under new proposal, providers could be ordered to comply, and judges could impose fines if they did not. The shift in thinking toward the judicial fines was first reported by The Washington Post, and additional details were described to The New York Times by several officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity (…..)

Link: http://www.nytimes.com/2013/05/08/us/politics/obama-may-back-fbi-plan-to-wiretap-web-users.html

El desarrollo nuclear y la responsabilidad

La diplomacia y la comunidad científica argentinas tienen un bien ganado prestigio en materia desarrollo nuclear pacífico. Desde primeros debates que tuvieron lugar en las Naciones Unidas con motivo del Tratado de No Proliferación Nuclear, ese prestigio ha seguido consolidándose. La cooperación brindada generosamente a muchos países, ventas reactores, acuerdos con Brasil para la contabilidad y control recíproco de respectivas instalaciones nucleares, así como cooperación con la OIEA y la participación en otros regímenes de no proliferación, han servido para dar a Argentina presencia, voz, autoridad en estos sensibles y estratégicos temas. (Fuente: Fernando Petrella – Infobae, Argentina – 07/05/2013)

Dentro de esos históricos lineamientos, resulta ejemplar que, desmintiendo el convulso y receloso panorama político mundial, Argentina y Brasil hayan suscripto el 6 de mayo pasado un contrato para desarrollar reactor multipropósito a ser construido por empresa argentina Invap, de impecable trayectoria. Iniciativa continúa acercamientos iniciados por Alfonsín+Sarney, profundizados por Menem+Cardozo y siguientes presidentes argentinos y brasileños. Precisamente fue a mérito de esa trayectoria, el contrato con Brasil constituye un eslabón adicional, en mayo 2010, el presidente Barack Obama le dirigió una sustantiva carta a la presidenta Cristina Fernández de Kirchner destacando el liderazgo regional argentino y su rol en la Cumbre de Seguridad Nuclear celebrada poco antes en Washington. Uno de los aspectos más importantes allí discutidos se relacionan con iniciativas globales para combatir el terrorismo nuclear.

Sorprende entonces que, en ocasión de un reciente viaje a la hermana Bolivia, autoridades argentinas hayan hecho pública la voluntad argentina de colaborar con La Paz para que pueda “arrancar su plan nuclear”. El anuncio sugiere algunas reflexiones. En primer lugar Argentina es campeona en sostener desarrollo nuclear pacífico para todos los países. Las posiciones expuestas oportunamente en los ámbitos multilaterales por los embajadores Ruda, Ortiz de Rozas, Berazategui en ese sentido, todavía hoy son regla, tanto en la OIEA como en Naciones Unidas y organizaciones regionales. Pero ello no sustrae a las cuestiones nucleares de su profunda naturaleza estratégica, por ende, de la necesidad de proceder siempre con prudencia y conocimiento del entorno político. En segundo lugar, Bolivia tiene indiscutible derecho a su desarrollo nuclear pacífico. Argentina se debe a sus vecinos, posee experiencia y es natural que preste toda colaboración que Bolivia pueda requerir. Pero, en tercer lugar, cabe también analizar el entorno político subregional y el impacto que el anuncio argentino podría tener. Vemos que la relación entre Bolivia y Chile está sometida a lógicas tensiones por el renovado reclamo de Bolivia por la salida al Pacífico. Hace días la Corte Internacional de Justicia acepto el caso planteado por Bolivia. Es probable que tensiones no disminuyan. Perú también tendría lo suyo para decir en el tema. Por otro lado, la profundidad de los vínculos del gobierno de Evo Morales con Irán no es clara para la Argentina. Almadineyad ha visitado Bolivia y habría una conexión iraní en la frontera con Argentina nutrida, tal vez, por el chavismo que es el puente de Irán en América Latina. Además, Irán está cuestionado por su desarrollo nuclear no transparente, ha sido sancionado por el Consejo de Seguridad de Naciones Unidas y su gobierno es sospechado de haber originado los 2 atentados terroristas en la Argentina y en otros lugares.

La Argentina es miembro del Consejo de Seguridad y una potencia nuclear reconocida. Sólo por esta razón debería poner prudente distancia de todo aquello que vincule a Irán con la región. Adicionalmente, Bolivia y EEUU mantienen un serio conflicto diplomático sobre el que no cabe opinar. Pero sí, hay que recordar con énfasis, que EEUU es principal inversor directo en la Argentina y socio estratégico para la cooperación tecnológica necesaria para el progreso nacional. Lo expuesto muestra algunos de los importantes elementos que invitan a ejercer la mayor responsabilidad y prudencia al abocarse a temas nucleares. Bolivia tiene derecho a su programa nuclear pacífico y Argentina no debe retacear su participación. Se trata de 2 países entrañablemente amigos y por ello capacitados para comprender la delicada naturaleza que el tema plantea y conversar al respecto a los niveles adecuados. De allí la necesidad de proceder paso a paso, teniendo en consideración todos los elementos que hacen al interés nacional, así como circunstancias globales + subregionales. No hay que correr riesgos desestabilizadores contrarios a la tradición diplomática argentina.

Start-Up Diplomacy

2011, a group of American high-tech executives and angel investors traveled to North Africa as part of an innovative State Department economic development program. Local entrepreneurs flocked to workshops in Tunisia, Morocco, Algeria, where Americans judged their business proposals, encouraged them to open start-ups. Initiative embodied the “economic statecraft” at heart of Secretary Hillary Rodham Clinton’s vision for American foreign policy. But program turned out to be so poorly financed that it had no prize for winners. Embarrassed delegates cobbled one together: an internship at a start-up incubator in Detroit. (source: David Rohde – NYTimes – 08/05/2013)

Today, Middle East is an economic powder keg. About 60% of the Arab world’s population is under the age of 30; millions of jobs are needed or already high unemployment levels will explode. Obama administration’s efforts in the region should be more economic than military. “The United States government has done a terrible job of focusing on economic issues in Middle East,” Thomas R. Nides, a former deputy secretary of state, told recently. “You have huge youth unemployment, no hope.” This argument is hardly new. “To succeed, the Arab political awakening must also be an economic awakening,” Mrs. Clinton said, more than a year ago. “Economic policy is foreign policy,” her successor, John Kerry, said this week. Last month he asked Congress to approve creation of a $580 million “incentive fund” that would reward countries in the Middle East and North Africa for enacting reforms that foster market-based economies, democratic norms, independent courts and civil societies.

But Mrs. Clinton’s proposal for a similar fund received a scant support last year from a Congress that was understandably focused on domestic issues. With the sequester now in effect, Kerry’s request could suffer the same fate. After Iraq and Afghanistan, it’s no longer politically feasible to sponsor vast development initiatives with little regard for whether they create self-sustaining growth for the region. We must find innovative ways to conduct economic statecraft in an age of austerity. The incentive fund, a small fraction of the $1.2 trillion Washington has spent in Iraq and Afghanistan, is a good start. Some countries in the region have had success implementing, on their own, the kinds of reforms the fund would encourage. Over the past decade, Turkey has carried out a harsh International Monetary Fund economic reform program, opened its economy, attracted foreign investment as part of its effort to join European Union. Today, few Turkish business owners care if the country is part of the union. In 2011, Turkey boasted a faster growing economy than any other European nation. And in the West Bank, the economic and security reforms of Salam Fayyad, who recently resigned as prime minister of Palestinian Authority, deserve much praise. Mr. Kerry should also focus aid in areas where viable markets and partners exist. Tareq Maayah, a Palestinian engineer who runs a West Bank high-tech firm, said $100,000 from the United States Agency for International Development helped his firm gain a tryout with Hewlett-Packard. Today, his company writes software for Cisco, Hewlett-Packard and Alcatel-Lucent, with no government assistance.

Ahmed El Alfi, an Egyptian-American Silicon Valley venture capital investor, said American officials could “do a lot more” at little cost. Mr. Alfi, who began a high-tech incubator in Cairo, said Egyptian start-ups clamor for access to American investors. “Have a weekly call for companies from the region doing 10-minute presentations to American companies,” he suggested. Mr. Kerry should emphasize to American companies that investment opportunities exist in the region, particularly in infrastructure, energy and aviation. Chinese firms exported an estimated $150 billion to the Middle East and North Africa in 2011, twice as much as American firms. Of course, some countries in the region are too unstable for American private investment. But in others, public-private initiatives that foster trade, a investment and the job creation with little taxpayer funding could be expanded. The high-tech entrepreneurship delegations started by Mrs. Clinton should be increased and properly funded. Wealthy Persian Gulf countries should be asked to finance a regional bank for small and medium-size enterprises. Perhaps most important, we should stop thinking we can transform societies overnight. Even if United States perfectly executes its policies and programs, they alone will not stabilize countries. We need viable local partners. Nations must transform themselves. Should scale back ambitions and concentrate on long-term economics. By trying to do fewer things over longer periods, we will achieve more. 

Putin Strives to Become Russia’s Über-Patriot

(…..) And yet the man who appeared in Rostov-on-Don was no longer the Putin who entered the Kremlin for the third time on May 7, 2012. Rather, Putin this year has radically changed course and changed his leadership style. To find out who this new Putin is, and what he wants, it helps to meet 3 men: Gennady Gudkov, the sidelined former KGB man who joined the opposition, Dmitry Badovski, Kremlin ideologue and Alexander Prokhanov, a Stalinist whom Putin brought back to the political stage. “Putin has finally seen the signs of the times,” says Prokhanov, 75. “For years, he talked about need for giving the country a jolt, but nothing happened. Now, that is apparently changing and I will use my modest powers to help him achieve this.” Prokhanov is a prolific author of considerable renown and he has been compared to Dostoyevsky. Over period of 40 years, he has written some 50 books: novels, short stories, works of non-fiction and volumes of poems. He worked as a correspondent in Afghanistan and Nicaragua, resisted Gorbachev and his perestroika, later on, antagonized former Russian President Boris Yeltsin’s oligarchs and the nouveau riche elite. Prokhanov describes himself as a left-wing patriot, an “orthodox socialist,” someone who is fighting for the reestablishment of old Russian state. He says that the Russian people are by nature Stalinist: “They will always place greater importance on the state than on the small happiness of the individual,” he argues. For a long time, Prokhanov and his ideas were banished to the political wilderness, but more recently he has been invited every few days to take part in talk shows on the quasi-state-owned television networks. But why does someone like Putin need the support of a Stalinist who talks about a new Russian empire he says is currently emerging? Someone who never tires of warning of “geopolitical disaster” is encroaching upon Russia’s borders, and whose newspaper Zavtra is notoriously anti-Semitic? Prokhanov receives his visitors in the shabby offices of his small newspaper in Moscow. But one shouldn’t gauge his political influence by these surroundings. The rooms are located on the premises of the general staff of the armed forces and he maintains close friends among the generals. He recently received two North Korean embassy staff members and the photo showing Prokhanov next to Syria’s dictator Bashar al-Assad is only a few weeks old. Putin is a “very dynamic” politician, says Prokhanov: “He began his career in the entourage of the oligarch Boris Berezovsky, who tried to use him as a puppet after Yeltsin left office,” he contends. “But Putin was not the man people thought he was.” He says Putin got rid of Berezovsky, seized control of his media empire, stopped former Soviet republics from seceding from the Russian Federation and enticed Europe to become dependent on Gazprom. It was “powerful geopolitical operation,” says Prokhanov, who adds that in 2008 Putin regrettably strictly adhered to constitution, which forbids presidents from serving more than two consecutive terms. Instead of continuing in the office, he chose Dmitry Medvedev to serve as a nominal head of state. “That was a huge mistake,” Prokhanov notes, “because he wasted four valuable years and weakened himself in the process” (…..)

Link: http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/putin-uses-patriotism-to-strengthen-hold-on-russia-a-898170.html