Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

    During this year a number of governments applied sanctions against Russia for its involvement in the alleged pro-Russian unrest in the Ukraine. Sanctions against Russia were applied by many countries, with the United States and the European Union taking a lead. In retaliation, Russia has responded with sanctions against a number of countries, including a total ban on food imports from the European Union, United States, Norway, Canada, and Australia.

    What does all of this mean to Europe, the United States, and the geopolitical reconfigurations on trade pacts?

    Here to discuss all of this is Michael Hudson. Michael is coming to us from New York City. He is the distinguished research professor of economics at the University of Missouri-Kansas City.

    So, Michael, what’s going on this week in Beijing?

    MICHAEL HUDSON, PROF. ECONOMICS, UMKC: The APEC meetings. In most such meetings for the last few years, including the G20 meetings (coming up in Brisbane this weekend) nothing really has been done. The United States is attending as the odd man out.

    At issue are two different views of how economies should evolve. China is moving for its own trading bloc instead of being in a privatized pro-corporate bloc, it’s a mixed economy. So what you have is the Chinese economy growing very rapidly, and the American economy that’s been going flat.

    In a situation like this there’s not really much to say. China and the United States have announced pretty much what they were going to do anyway and make it appear as if they’re all doing it in harmony.

    President Obama was talking mainly to his American base, and to the Republican Party in particular to work on the Trans-Pacific Partnership. His vision is an agreement that will abolish government regulation of the environment, abolish regulation of banking, and implicitly nullify the Dodd-Frank Act. If a bank misbehaves or a government requires higher reserve requirements, then under the new international law that Mr. Obama is pushing, the government have to pay the private bank as if it weren’t regulated. And if a government imposes environmental fines on a company for polluting the environment, the government will have to pay the company whatever it would have made if it didn’t have any such fines.

    The big news in the American press is that China has agreed to lower its air pollution. Well, of course China has to do this. If you’ve been in Beijing, you know it’s a polluted city. So this is just an announcement of where it’s going. Russia announced at the meetings a $400 billion 30-year gas deal with China to increase gas exports, with some oil also going to China. So China will scale back its coal plants, and there’ll be less coal smoke in the air.

    Mr. Obama said that the United States is also going to cut back carbon emissions. But he’s still pushing for the XL Pipeline with Alberta to bring tar sands oil into the United States. That is the most high polluting activity on the planet.

    What has been less talked about are the banking changes that have been announced.

    PERIES: Before you move on, Michael, isn’t it a bit ironic that on one hand China signs an accord with the United States making a commitment to cut emissions, but on the other hand they’re making a deal with Russia that includes oil, a fossil fuel that will obviously increase emissions, not reduce them?

    HUDSON: Every economy needs oil to some extent. China has to use oil for many things that gas simply won’t work for. Every country’s GDP goes up in keeping with its energy consumption. You could say the rise in productivity for the last hundred years, throughout the Industrial Revolution, has been an increase in energy use per worker or per unit of output. So it’s energy that’s pushing growth. And of course China needs oil. In fact, one of its problems is that when people are getting richer, they want to have cars, and they use gasoline. So of course China’s going to be dependent on oil from Russia.

    Mr. Putin said that as a result of these deals, Russian trade with China and the rest of Asia is going to increase from 25 percent to 40 percent of Russia’s GDP. This leaves Europe out in the cold. What’s been clear at the meeting is that there’s a coming together between China and Russia. This has been the opposite of what American foreign policy has been trying to push for since the 1980s. What is ironic is that where the United States thought that it was putting pressure on Russia and sanctions following the NATO adventure in Ukraine, what it’s actually done is bring Russia and China closer together.

    The most important way in which they’re coming together is reflected in Mr. Putin’s announcement that Russia is setting up its own bank clearing house system independent of the so-called SWIFT system. When you transfer funds from one bank to another, or when any bank uses U.S. dollars, it has to go through the SWIFT clearing house system in the United States.

    Right now the only country that’s not part of this is Iran. To Russia, this has tipped America’s hand. It showed that what U.S. Cold Warriors really want is to break up Russia and China, and to interrupt their financial and banking services to disorient their economies. So Russia, China and Iran – and presumably other Asian countries – are now moving to establish their own currency clearing systems. To be independent of the SWIFT system and the U.S. dollar, Russia and China are denominating their trade and investments in rubles and yuan instead of the dollar. So what you’ve seen in the last few days in Beijing is a rejection of the dollar standard, and a rejection of American foreign policy behind it.

    China has doubled its military spending since Mr. Obama was there in 2009. The president of China politely said, let’s make sure there’s not an accidental bang up in the air or on sea. What he means is, “We’ve defined our airspace over the islands that we’re claiming as ours, so if one of your planes comes too close to ours and we bump into it and knock it down, please don’t take this as an attack on America. We don’t really mean it personally.” So China’s really throwing its weight around.

    That’s why Mr. Obama has looked so uncomfortable at these meetings. He knows that he hasn’t gotten anything he wants. Asian countries are not about to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, and they’re moving on now to Brisbane, Australia.

    In the next few days you’re going to see Europe being left out. The sanctions that the United States and NATO have insisted that it impose on Russia have led to Russian counter-sanctions against French and Baltic and European exports. French farmers are already demonstrating, and Marine Le Pen’s nationalists are likely to win the next election. The Baltic States are also screaming from losing their farm exports. France, Latvia, and even Germany had been looking to Russia as a growing market the last few years. Yet their leaders obeyed U.S. demands not to deal with the Russian market. This leaves Europe in a position of economic stagnation.

    As for the sanctions isolating Russia economically, this is just what it needs to protect its industrial revival and economic independence. In conjunction with China, it’s integrating the Russian economy with that of China, Kazakhstan and Iran. Russia is now going to be building at least two atomic reactors in Iran. The center of global investment is shifting to Asia, leaving the United States out as well as Europe.

    So you can expect at the G20 Brisbane meetings next week to see increased pressure from Europe to break away from the U.S. sanctions. All the United States has diplomatically at the present time is military pressure, while Russia and China have economic growth – markets and investment opportunities opening up. Despite the fact that there was an agreement on high-technology trade between the United States and China, the U.S. is basically being left out. This seems to be why Mr. Obama was looking so out of sorts at the meetings. He knows that the strategy that he was given by his neocons is backfiring.

    PERIES: Finally, Michael, how do you think this is going to be dealt with by Congress and a Republican-controlled Senate now?

    HUDSON: Obama said that he looked forward to dealing with the Republicans now that he doesn’t have to deal with the Democrats anymore. He has shown himself to be a Republican in the same spirit as Cheney and George W. Bush. The noises coming out of Washington from Harry Reid and the Democratic leadership are blaming Obama for mishandling the economy so badly and losing them the election – as if it were not their own doing and Steve Israel’s support for Republican-striped Democratic Blue Dog candidates. So if I can paraphrase what Obama essentially said, it’s “I’m a Republican and I’m supporting Wall Street.” He’s letting the Republicans know he’s pushing for the kind of giveaways that the lobbyists have written into the Trans-Pacific Partnership. I think you’ve had Lori Wallach on your show explaining exactly what this is. So you can expect Obama to move even more sharply to the right, getting Republican support while the Democrats pretend to scream in agony and say, “My God, what have we ever done with bringing this guy in?” – while supporting Hillary.

    PERIES: Michael Hudson, as always, thank you so much for joining us.

    HUDSON: It’s good to be here. Thank you very much.

    PERIES: And thank you for joining us on The Real News Network.

  • #2
    Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

    All the United States has diplomatically at the present time is military pressure, while Russia and China have economic growth – markets and investment opportunities opening up.
    A long life teaches that a bully that only uses their fists to impose their wishes upon others around them; sooner or later, ends up in the ditch with the rest quietly walking by; looking the other way.

    What comes around; goes around.

    Success stems from friendly, realistic, and above all else; honest dealing with anyone less fortunate. Imposing dishonest, unrealistic, overdemanding treaties; in the process, removing historic rights to sovereignty, particularly enjoyed by the hard working citizen; is a recipe for disaster.

    It gives me no pleasure to have to say these things.

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

      From Forbes . . .

      Chinese leader Xi Jinping knows something Barack Obama doesn’t: America is finished. The U.S. economy is an ocean liner holed below the waterline. In the stateroom, the band plays on – but, on the bridge, the outcome is clear.

      With the arguable exception of the late-era Soviet Union, America is sinking faster than any Great Power in history.

      As a proportion of national output, America’s foreign debts are already larger than those of any Great Power since the rotten-to-the-core Ottoman empire a century ago. For those who need reminding, the Ottoman empire, which had flourished for more than six centuries, was then within a decade of final collapse.

      Because every dollar of current-account deficit (the current account is the largest and most meaningful measure of trade) represents an extra dollar that has to be funded from abroad, America’s foreign indebtedness is now accumulating at a rate of more than $1 billion a day.

      There is no way America can export itself back to national solvency.

      As Chinese leaders know better than anyone, the ultimate issue is American corruption. Washington is actually far more corrupt than Beijing. If you want to get something done in Washington, you do what you do in Jakarta: just slip some money to the right people. The point was made as far back as a generation ago by the prominent Japanese commentator and author Shintaro Ishihara. From an East Asian point of view, the United States is already, in its political dynamics, a Third World country.

      There is a one-way valve here. Key production technologies leak out of the United States: they don’t leak in. Other nations have industrial policies to make sure that their most productive technologies stay at home. By contrast in a latter-day America, corporations have no national loyalty and they have every reason to transfer their technologies abroad as their executives max out their stock options.

      meanwhile back in the real world . .

      Right at the start, President Xi urged APEC to "add firewood to the fire of the Asia-Pacific and world economy". Two days later, China got what it wanted on all fronts.

      1) Beijing had all 21 APEC member-nations endorsing the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) - the Chinese vision of an "all inclusive, all-win" trade deal capable of advancing Asia-Pacific cooperation - see South China Morning Post (paywall). The loser was the US-driven, corporate-redacted, fiercely opposed (especially by Japan and Malaysia) 12-nation Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP).

      2) Beijing advanced its blueprint for "all-round connectivity" (in Xi's words) across Asia-Pacific - which implies a multi-pronged strategy. One of its key features is the implementation of the Beijing-based US$50 billion Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. That's China's response to Washington refusing to give it a more representative voice at the International Monetary Fund than the current, paltry 3.8% of votes (a smaller percentage than the 4.5% held by stagnated France).

      3) Beijing and Moscow committed to a second gas mega-deal - this one through the Altai pipeline in Western Siberia - after the initial "Power of Siberia" mega-deal clinched last May.

      4) Beijing announced the funneling of no less than US$40 billion to start building the Silk Road Economic Belt and the 21st Century Maritime Silk Road.

      Predictably, once again, this vertiginous flurry of deals and investment had to converge towards the most spectacular, ambitious, wide-ranging plurinational infrastructure offensive ever attempted: the multiple New Silk Roads - that complex network of high-speed rail, pipelines, ports, fiber optic cables and state of the art telecom that China is already building across the Central Asian stans, linked to Russia, Iran, Turkey and the Indian Ocean, and branching out to Europe all the way to Venice, Rotterdam, Duisburg and Berlin.

      Asia Times

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

        Russia's SWIFT response . . .

        Given the challenges, Bank of Russia is creating its own system for transmitting financial messaging... It’s time to hurry up, so in the next few months we will have certain work done. The entire project for transmitting financial messages will be completed in May 2015,"
        Ramilya Kanafina, deputy head of the national payment system department at the Central Bank of Russia (CBR).

        Comment


        • #5
          Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

          Originally posted by don View Post
          Russia's SWIFT response . . .

          Given the challenges, Bank of Russia is creating its own system for transmitting financial messaging... It’s time to hurry up, so in the next few months we will have certain work done. The entire project for transmitting financial messages will be completed in May 2015,"
          Ramilya Kanafina, deputy head of the national payment system department at the Central Bank of Russia (CBR).
          And you can bet your right arm; it will not carry transactions dominated by the use of the US$. Then ask the question; I wish to do business with these new partners; what currency should I use when I advertise my goods for sale?

          Then ask the question; I need to purchase goods for sale; what currency will I need in hand to make such a purchase?

          This is going to become the end game to end all end games.

          Comment


          • #6
            Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

            This is going to become the end game to end all end games.
            It took two world wars to break the pound sterling.

            The king was dead, long live the king . . .

            Comment


            • #7
              Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

              Originally posted by don View Post
              It took two world wars to break the pound sterling.

              The king was dead, long live the king . . .
              Two world wars before there were nukes, which the USA has a lot of now.

              Also, why do the China elite like to send their kids to the USA for college and by property in the USA, and not the other way around?

              Comment


              • #8
                Re: Hudson on the Trans-Pacific Partnership

                Originally posted by don View Post
                It took two world wars to break the pound sterling.

                The king was dead, long live the king . . .
                My thinking is based upon how I have seen a free market work; instantly! This is not about war; it is all about trade. Any business can lose its client base overnight; when all they have to do is ask themselves the question; is continuing to do business here to my best advantage? If the answer is no; then the very next minute, they can change direction.

                It is always foolish to believe that your customer is always going to walk through your doorway; when they can walk away at the proverbial drop of the hat. There is every sign that the customer is walking away. Fed up to the back teeth with being taken for granted.

                Comment

                Working...
                X