The violence of “relative calm”

Relatives mourn during the funeral of Muhammad Dar Adwan during his funeral in Qalandiya refugee camp, 2 April. Dar Adwan was shot and killed by Israeli occupation forces during a raid on the camp earlier in the day.

Ayat ArqawyAPA images

Maureen Clare Murphy -5 April 2019

The first anniversary of Gaza’s Great March of Return has now passed and Israel is counting down the days to an election that will determine its next government. Egypt and the United Nations have scrambled to head off a major armed confrontation between Israel and Hamas in Gaza, and so cross-boundary projectile and warplane fire have gone silent.

Thus “relative calm” reigns over the West Bank and Gaza Strip as Israel’s military occupation approaches its 52nd year.

“Relative calm” – the meaninglessness is baked into the phrase – being that Palestinians are still deprived of their basic rights, which are treated as subject to negotiation even by the UN.

View image on Twitter

Omar Shakir

✔@OmarSShakir

Israel fires on 10s of 1000s of unarmed demonstrators, killing 4 (3 kids). As reward for not agitating too much, it reopens crossings it sealed, illegal collective punishment. Unlawful closure remains. Good day? Only if we've become entirely desensitized to serious Israeli abuses

178

3:27 AM - Mar 31, 2019

Tania Hary@taniahary

This morning Israel "re-opened" Erez & Kerem Shalom crossings, the only pedestrian/commercial passageways connecting Gaza to the West Bank and Israel. And by re-open, I mean resumed enforcement of the closure, which in and of itself is ongoing punishment of two million people.

18

7:29 AM - Mar 31, 2019

Gisha גישה مسلك

✔@Gisha_Access

This morning: Erez & Kerem Shalom Crossings returned to normal operations; prohibition on access to "fishing zone" removed. Reminder: Closing crossings & blocking access to the sea constitute collective punishment and are in violation of intl law. More: https://gisha.org/updates/9888 

6

11:10 AM - Mar 31, 2019

Those deprived rights include Palestinians’ very right to life.

A protester was fighting for his life Friday night after being critically injured by an Israeli military sharpshooter during Great March of Return demonstrations earlier in the day, Gaza’s health ministry said.

Nearly 60 were injured by live fire during the day’s protests, according to Al Mezan, a human rights group in Gaza, and more than 40 others were directly hit by tear gas canisters.

More than 200 Palestinians, including 43 children, have been killed during Great March of Return protests since their launch 53 weeks ago.

The most recent fatality was 26-year-old Faris Abu Harjas, who died from his injuries on Tuesday after being shot in the stomach during protests the previous week.

“Killed in clashes”

In the West Bank this week, two Palestinians paid with their lives the cost of maintaining Israel’s settlement colony regime, which has claimed nearly 40 Palestinians in that territory and the Gaza Strip so far this year.

Muhammad Ali Dar Adwan, 23, was shot and killed by soldiers who had raided Qalandiya refugee camp early Tuesday. Israeli media stated that Adwan was “killed in clashes”; the man’s family said he was shot at close range while “getting into a vehicle near his home,” as reported by Ma’an News Agency.

The following day, Muhammad Abd al-Fattah, 23, was shot and killed by an Israeli settler at Huwwara checkpoint near the northern West Bank city of Nablus.

Yehoshua Sherman, an Israeli settler, said that Abd al-Fattah was holding a knife and tried to open his car door and attack his teenage daughter.

“I went outside and with the help of a driver who was behind me we neutralized the terrorist and thankfully we weren’t hurt,” Sherman told Israeli media.

In a place where street executions have become commonplace, there will be no investigation of Sherman and no state authority will question whether Abd al-Fattah posed an imminent threat to life that would justify the use of lethal force against him.

Instead, Israel’s defense ministry has authorized the construction of a new road serving settlers in the area that will allow Israelis to bypass Palestinian villages. Another Palestinian was killed by an Israeli motorist driving through Huwwara village in 2017.

Israel claims to build such roads for security purposes but they are an integral part of its settlement infrastructure in the West Bank, built in violation of international law, which forbids an occupying power from transferring its civilian population to the territory it occupies.

The human rights group B’Tselem has stated that Israel’s segregated road system in the West Bank “bears striking similarities to the racist apartheid regime that existed in South Africa until 1994.”

Gaza hospitals “on brink of collapse”

Death by direct fire is not the only way that Israel’s occupation deprived Palestinians of their right to life this week.

On Tuesday, Physicians for Human Rights-Israel stated that a Gaza toddler died the previous night after Israel denied a travel permit to his mother, and thus she was unable to take him to East Jerusalem for medical treatment.

Palestinians in Gaza requiring treatment in the West Bank or Israel have their cases referred to the West Bank-based Palestinian Authority, which pays for the treatment, and then on to Israel, which has the final say in whether an individual may travel.

Patients who require multiple procedures and follow-up care are repeatedly subjected to bureaucratic delays and sometimes even interrogation and arrest.

Gaza’s already overburdened healthcare system has been brought to the “brink of collapse” due to the staggering number of casualties during Great March of Return protests, UNRWA, the United Nations agency for Palestine refugees, recently stated.

Chronic electricity shortages in Gaza, which has been under Israeli-enforced land, sea and air blockade for 12 years, has come close to seeing hospitals shut down altogether.

Most of the 11,000 healthcare employees working in government facilities in the territory have not received regular payment since July 2014, and receive less than half of their salaries every 40-50 days, according to the World Health Organization.

The Palestinian Authority in the West Bank, reeling from a financial crisis after Israel withheld $138 million in Palestinian tax revenue, recently announced that it would no longer refer patients in Gaza to Israeli hospitals, instead routing them to facilities in the West Bank and other Arab countries.

A spokesperson for the PA’s health ministry told Al Mezan, a human rights group in Gaza, that the move was intended to cut inflated health costs.

Al Mezan welcomed the effort to nationalize healthcare but warned that the measure could affect patients’ health, particularly those needing life-saving treatment.

“This concern is underscored by the state of Gaza’s impoverished health sector, which is characterized by a lack of medical equipment, medicines and medical supplies, and lack of adequately-trained personnel, which results in long waitlists and inability to provide care,” the group stated.

“Patients’ rights to healthcare, physical integrity and life are paramount and must be kept out of any political dispute. These rights should be a priority on the national agenda,” Al Mezan added.

Israeli elections: Why Jews should vote for a Palestinian national party

A vote for Balad would allow us to be partners for change in the deepest possible sense

An Israeli flag flutters, with Jerusalem’s Old City in the background, on 27 March (AFP)

Orly Noy-3 April 2019

Electioneering in Israel has entered the home stretch, with party propaganda – and public discourse in general – degenerating into a mixture of slogans, mudslinging and distortions, even more glaring than usual.

Amid this turmoil, Jews of conscience are trying to decide how to cast their vote. For those who do not identify as Zionist, the main possibilities are the two Arab parties into which the Joint Arab List has split: Hadash-Taal and Raam-Balad. 

Superficial political discourse

The first combines the communists and Ahmad Tibi’s party, and the second combines Balad and the Islamic Movement’s southern branch. Apart from the question of voting for Islamic candidates, the second alternative raises one of the more challenging questions in Israeli political thought: the place of Jews in the Palestinian national movement. 

Balad is a Palestinian national party, which, in the frightfully superficial political discourse conducted in Israel, is enough to brand it as nationalist in the extreme. That’s a lie, and it must be refuted.

The aspiration to create a 'Jewish and democratic' state in Israel makes a demographic war against its non-Jewish citizens inevitable

In general, extreme nationalism is a concept that prioritises the national over the individual, and one specific nationality over others. The national approach of Balad is the obverse of both of these.

Firstly, Balad does not talk about Palestinian nationalism as exclusive, but rather as something alongside Jewish-Israeli nationalism; it demands recognition of both national entities. From a national Palestinian perspective, this is a far-reaching position, because it proposes recognition by this country’s indigenous people of the Jewish nationalism imposed upon it as a legitimate nationalism, and not a colonial one. 

Unchaining nationalism from Zionism

The only precondition is unchaining this Jewish nationalism from Zionism. The Zionist position, even in its most progressive version – as represented by Meretz, for instance – offers Palestinian citizens civil rights, but not national collective rights. The right of national recognition is accorded to Jewish citizens only. 

Israel’s nation-state law is just a more blatant expression of this basic Zionist stance, highlighting the fact that it is impossible to talk about equal civil rights in a reality of national oppression. It’s not coincidental that since the founding of the state, not a single new Arab city has been built. The aspiration to create a “Jewish and democratic” state in Israel makes a demographic war against its non-Jewish citizens inevitable.

Secondly, the nationalism of Balad does not position itself above the individual, but rather is a means for people to actualise their individual rights, including their collective rights. 

A Palestinian waves the national flag during a protest in Gaza on 30 March (AFP)

In a reality where national identity is most influential in shaping the space and place of the individual in the hierarchy of power, national liberation is a necessary step on the path to civic equality; in other words, to the establishment of a true democracy, which is the second foundation upon which Balad’s ideology rests.

From here comes the answer to the question of why Jews should support a Palestinian national party. In the present reality, this is the only path towards real democratisation of the country, and its release from the bonds of exclusive Jewish nationalism and the narrowing of the civic-democratic space to which that nationalism inherently leads. 

Coming to grips with privilege

True, it’s much easier and more tempting to join a movement that defines itself as Jewish-Arab, such as Hadash, even if the party’s percentage of Jewish members is negligible. 

This self-definition is morally very appropriate, but it blurs the extreme asymmetry that exists between the positions of these two national entities, so the fact that it tends to focus more on the discourse of equality is not surprising. That, too, is an appropriate discourse, but its horizons are limited while there is still this essential inequality in the most influential component shaping the political reality: national identity.

Unseating Netanyahu: New faces, same policies on Palestinians

Read More »

This is something that should be significant for us, as Jews who are interested in a radical change in the status quo. It requires us to come to grips with the privilege that we cannot be released from if all we do is chant slogans along the lines of: “Jews and Arabs refuse to be enemies.”

Balad invites us, as Jews, to take a step back from the euphoria of partnership and get behind the national Palestinian project – the only thing that can bring authentic meaning to that partnership.

It’s not a simple challenge. We, as Jews, are not accustomed to taking a backseat. But so long as we have not set out on this journey from the most deeply rooted point of departure, the result won’t rise beyond slogans that enthuse us at demonstrations but ultimately lead nowhere. 

In this sense, Balad is inviting us to be partners for change in the deepest possible sense. We must simply take a deep breath and embrace a conceptual shift in the hierarchy. This appears to be the most significant thing we can do in the upcoming elections.

The views expressed in this article belong to the author and do not necessarily reflect the editorial policy of Middle East Eye.

Israel’s Netanyahu, a political Houdini, is facing his toughest escape act yet

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is running for his fifth term and is a whisper away from becoming the country's longest-serving prime minister. (Loveday Morris, Joyce Lee/The Washington Post)

By Loveday Morris andRuth Eglash-April 5 at 1:36 PM

JERUSALEM — When Israel’s top satire show launched its recent election special, it depicted an impersonator of Prime Minister Benjamin “Bibi” Netanyahu breaking out of chains in a Houdini-like feat. With a smirk he turned to exit, before realizing his foot was still shackled.

Netanyahu has escaped many a peril in the quarter-century that he has been a dominant ­figure in Israeli politics, including 13 years as prime minister.

There was the first “Bibigate,” when he dramatically confessed an extramarital affair to the Israeli public, and the second, when he was investigated during his first year in office amid allegations of influence peddling. More investigations would follow over the years as stories of extravagant spending by him and his wife, allegedly at taxpayers’ expense, filled Israeli newspapers.

There was the $1,600 bill for his hairstyling and $1,750 for makeup on a 2015 New York trip. There was the $127,000 spent on installing a double bed on an El Al plane for a five-hour flight to London and a $2,700 ice-cream budget. 

And still he has survived, denying all accusations of wrongdoing, staying put when others might have resigned and winning a pair of elections in which he was widely written off.

But the latest corruption cases, which involve allegations of fraud, breach of trust and bribery, have overshadowed this year’s election campaign and left Israelis wondering whether he could be caught in that last shackle. Just days before Israelis vote on Tuesday, polls suggest the prime minister is in a very tight race with his main rival.

If he prevails and stays in office through mid-July, Netanyahu will become Israel’s longest-serving prime minister, surpassing the country’s founding father, David Ben-Gurion. But the question remains: Will his legal troubles catch up with him, or can he escape them once more?

“The guy has the best staying power in politics,” said Eyal Arad, an Israeli political strategist who was an adviser to Netanyahu in the 1980s and 1990s. “He falls, he recuperates, but then he goes on to the next battle.”

That, in part, Arad said, comes from his unshakable belief in himself. 

“He believes that he is the only one who is capable to lead Israel,” he said. “He absolutely believes that.” 

That self-belief has only grown over the years, former advisers say, as Netanyahu has defied the odds to stay in power.

Netanyahu in the Oval Office during his visit to the United States last month. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

'Bibi being Bibi' 

Last time around, in the 2015 election, Netanyahu had been widely expected to lose. Aron Shaviv, his campaign adviser, recalls how five days before the vote, defeat seemed imminent. 

“We were staring down the barrel of a 5 or 6 percent loss,” Shaviv said. But Netanyahu remained “cool and calculated,” he said. “Straight away we got down to business to work through all the options of this serious problem.”

Netanyahu would call him throughout the night. If Shaviv screened the calls on his cellphone, Netanyahu would call on the house phone and keep ringing until Shaviv picked up.

“My wife always used to joke that she felt like she was in bed with him,” he said. “He has such a deep voice, she could still hear him through the phone.” 

To win, Netanyahu had to do something that did not come naturally — acknowledge he was likely to lose. Campaign research showed that right-wing Israelis were leaning toward smaller parties instead of Netanyahu’s Likud, confident that Netanyahu would still be the prime minister. He was not quick to heed the warnings.

“Bibi being Bibi said: ‘I don’t trust you. But I do trust the data, so prove it to me,’ ” Shaviv said. He watched five hours of focus-group videos before he was convinced. 

Shaviv said Netanyahu immediately went out to do what he does best: He conducted more than 40 media interviews to warn supporters that he was about to lose — and that the left would win. 

Then, on election day, his campaign released a last-minute video declaring that Israeli Arabs were flocking to the polls, potentially threatening to thwart his reelection. The video, which was condemned by many Israelis as racist but may have succeeded in spurring his supporters to vote, was entirely the prime minister’s call, Shaviv recalled.

It worked, and Netanyahu ultimately won. 

“He felt that almost with his bare hands, he managed to win,” said Aviv Bushinsky, a former adviser and chief of staff to the prime minister.

Netanyahu, left, in the Knesset in 1993. At right is former foreign minister David Levy, Netanyahu’s top rival in Likud leadership elections that year. (Menahem Kahana/AFP/Getty Images)

Atmosphere of hate and fear

Netanyahu’s decision to release that video fits a long pattern of divisive politics, critics say, and early on those politics almost tripped him up.

When Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was assassinated by an ultranationalist Israeli in 1995, Netanyahu, as leader of the opposition, was blamed by some Israelis, including members of Rabin’s family, for stirring up an atmosphere of hate and fear. Many political observers thought he was too tarnished to defeat Rabin’s successor, Labor Party leader Shimon Peres, in the election a year later.

“After Rabin’s assassination, everyone thought it would be a walk in the park for Peres,” recalled Nahum Barnea, a veteran Israeli journalist. “Nobody believed Netanyahu had a chance.” 

But when Palestinian suicide bombers began blowing up buses and restaurants in Israel, the shine came off the peace process championed by Rabin and Peres. Public opinion swung toward Netanyahu.

Barnea said Netanyahu’s skills as a public speaker also helped him turn the campaign around. 

Shortly before the election, Netanyahu participated in a televised debate, prerecorded at the Labor Party headquarters in Tel Aviv. Barnea watched the session live with about a dozen other journalists. They thought Netanyahu performed well. Then, when Barnea reviewed the recording on television, Peres came off even worse, he said. 

“I ran from the studio to our office,” Barnea said. “I went to the editor in chief and said Bibi won the debate.” 

Netanyahu would go on to win the election with a razor-thin majority. 

Tapping resentment

Netanyahu was not originally tapped to be the star of his family, growing up in the shadow of his older brother Yonatan, or Yoni, whom he idolized. But Yoni was killed in 1976, the lone Israeli military casualty in an operation to rescue more than 100 Israeli passengers and a flight crew held hostage at Uganda’s Entebbe Airport after their plane was hijacked. 

If Yoni had lived, Netanyahu might have stayed in the United States — where he was partly raised and attended Harvard and MIT — and never entered politics. But he did, and despite that privileged upbringing, he went on to find a fierce following among Israel’s blue-collar voters.

Painting himself as a repeated underdog who has been unfairly targeted by the elitist establishment, Netanyahu has tapped into the resentment of Israel’s Mizrahi Jews, whose roots mostly lie in other Middle Eastern and North African countries and who felt shut out of power in Israel’s early years by Ashkenazi Jews of European ancestry.

Netanyahu at the White House last month. (Jabin Botsford/The Washington Post)

While Netanyahu is also of Ashkenazi stock, his family had felt alienated from Israel’s Zionist establishment. Netanyahu’s father, Benzion, had been a follower of the revisionist leader Binyamin Zeev Jabotinsky, a rival of left-leaning socialists who dominated the early Zionist movement. 

Netanyahu has survived in part by telling his political base that it is us against them, the right vs. the weak, dangerous and Arab-loving left. 

“Netanyahu’s greatest achievement is keeping his base disgruntled and dissatisfied and angry despite Likud having been in power for three-quarters of the last four decades,” said Anshel Pfeffer, author of “Bibi: The Turbulent Life and Times of Benjamin Netanyahu.” “Netanyahu’s biggest political asset is that he knows how to latch onto his voters’ phobias and keep them alive.”

Yet despite presenting himself as a candidate of the people, he has a love for the high life, which biographers say is his Achilles’ heel.

Over the years, Israeli newspapers have highlighted his penchant for leaving restaurants without picking up the bill and reported scintillating details of the extravagant habits of the Netanyahus. 

Two months ago, the Israeli attorney general decided to charge him in three criminal cases, pending a hearing in which he can present his defense. One of those cases centers on allegations that he and his wife, Sara, received gifts of cigars and jewelry worth around $280,000 in exchange for ­political favors.

But Netanyahu, who denies all charges, has built a loyal base that supports him no matter what and can deliver enough votes to keep him atop Israel’s fragmented politics.

“He just needs to keep his right-wing base voting for him, which he’s done very effectively,” Arad said. 

Netanyahu attends the funeral of Zachary Baumel on Thursday in Jerusalem. The U.S. citizen and Israeli soldier went missing during fighting in Lebanon in 1982. His remains were recovered this week. (Ariel Schalit/AP)

A different cloth

The personal stakes for Netanyahu are higher in this election than ever before. 

“He understands that the only good way, from his perspective, to fight his legal battles is from power,” Bushinsky said.

Others might have resigned already. Rabin stepped aside in his first term when it emerged that he still had a U.S. bank account several years after working at the Israeli Embassy in Washington, in contravention of Israeli currency regulations. 

Netanyahu’s most recent predecessor, Ehud Olmert, who stepped down when he was indicted, served 16 months in jail for corruption.

But Netanyahu is cut from different cloth and has vowed to stay in office even if he is indicted.

Bushinsky said that if Netanyahu is in power, he is in a stronger position to influence the time frame of the corruption investigations and could even push for legislation to prevent charges being pursued against a sitting prime minister.

He has beaten the legal rap each time since the first criminal investigation back in 1997. At the time, police recommended he be indicted after he was accused of appointing an attorney general who, in return for political support, agreed to be lenient in pursuing an extortion case against one of the prime minister’s political allies.

In an April 1997 editorial, The Washington Post asked, “Can Mr. Netanyahu hang on?” The editorial noted that less than a year into office he was already “hip-deep” in controversy. But already, he had a reputation as a survivor, if not an escape artist.

“The prudent expectation must be that Mr. Netanyahu will somehow come through,” the Post editorial said. 

Liberty leads the people: fighting for a decent life in Gaza

The photograph by Mustafa Hassouna that made Aed Abu Amro an instant icon.Anadolu Agency


Amjad Ayman Yaghi -5 April 2019

When Aed Abu Amro held a Palestinian flag aloft during one of the Great March of Return protests last year on the boundary between Gaza and Israel, the last thought on his mind was that he would become an internet sensation.

Liberty leads the people fi... by on Scribd

Take Five: Panic over? World markets themes for the week ahead

FILE PHOTO: Traders work on the floor at the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) in New York, U.S., April 4, 2019. REUTERS/Brendan McDermid/File Photo

APRIL 5, 2019 

LONDON (Reuters) - Following are the five big themes likely to dominate thinking of investors and traders in the coming week and the Reuters stories related to them.

1/ THE I WORD

As the U.S. yield curve makes up its mind whether to invert or not, investors seeking reassurance that we are in a Goldilocks era of non-inflationary growth will get to scour two monthly price gauges this week.

On Wednesday, the Labor Department is expected to report that its March Consumer Price Index rose 0.3 percent on the month and 1.8 percent over the year - a reading that would reinforce subdued underlying inflation and validate the Fed’s almost about-face after four hikes last year.

CPI - a proxy for overall inflation that factors into cost of living adjustments for Social Security - rose 1.5 percent year to February, the smallest increase since September 2016. The latest reading of the Fed’s favorite inflation measure rose 1.8 percent in the year to January, below its 2 percent target.
Fed officials have started alluding to a new economic reality of slowish growth and little upward price pressure. Even as wages creep higher, improved productivity curbs firms’ costs.

Minutes of the March Fed policy meeting, to be released on Wednesday, will be cross checked for references to the new “patient” approach and “muted” inflation. The March producer price index, a glimpse of pipeline price pressures, is scheduled for Thursday.
For a graphic on U.S. Core CPI and PCE, see - tmsnrt.rs/2CYPJ1h

2/ MARIO TO THE RESCUE

Just a month since the European Central Bank put plans to normalize policy on hold and delayed a rate hike into 2020, further signs of weakness in the economy and a whiff of panic among investors puts the spotlight back on the central bank.

A woeful set of German industrial orders data this week pushed German Bund yields back into negative territory and though a U.S.-China trade deal could be in sight, it looks like difficult times ahead for Europe.

No policy changes are expected at Wednesday’s ECB meeting, especially since some board members are traveling to Washington for the International Monetary Fund’s spring meetings.

But talk of tiered rates to ease pressure on banks, global recession fears, Brexit, and a sense of panic that has pushed 10-year German bond yields back below zero percent, all suggest ECB chief Mario Draghi’s news conference may prove lively.

Investors will also keep an eye out for further details on cheap loans known as the targeted long-term refinancing operations (TLTROs) — one of the few policy tools left in the kit after the end of QE — and what the ECB will do to incentivize banks to take it up.

For a graphic on German Bund yields hover around zero, see - tmsnrt.rs/2HYkJ5L

3/ WATCH YOUR CHINA

An unexpected recovery in China factory activity surveys offered investors a glimmer of hope the stimulus injected in one of the world’s major growth engines may be yielding results.

Trade data due out on Friday could provide the next clue that could help investors regain confidence as they gauge whether the slowdown is bottoming out.

That said, the recovery remains feeble and analysts believe it is still highly-dependent on how the trade negotiations with Washington go.

Markets took some hope from an announcement by U.S. President Donald Trump on Thursday that Washington and Beijing could announce a trade deal within four weeks while Chinese President Xi Jinping was reported as saying progress was being made. But Trump also warned Beijing it would be difficult to allow trade to continue without a pact.

Many believe the Chinese economy may still need more stimulus either way. Looking at the pattern of past decisions by the People’s Bank of China, a decision to cut bank reserve requirements may be announced by mid-April, economists say.

For a graphic on China reserve requirement ratios and the yuan, see - tmsnrt.rs/2CXO8c7

Slideshow (2 Images)

4/ THE LONG GOODBYE

After British Prime Minister Theresa May’s request to the European Council to delay Brexit until up to June 30, focus now shifts to a meeting next week where EU leaders will discuss a proposal to offer Britain a flexible extension of up to a year.

After the British parliament failed to approve a withdrawal agreement, May started talks this week with Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn in the hope of breaking the Brexit deadlock, but markets are not getting too excited about it.

While one-month risk reversals for the pound, a gauge of demand for the British currency in the derivatives market, have rebounded from a 2-1/2 year low hit last month, they still remained far below levels seen earlier this year, indicating overall sentiment remained bearish.

Implied volatility measures also indicated caution with one-month gauges for the pound remaining elevated despite a dip this week compared to the euro and the Japanese yen.

For a graphic on GBP implied vol curve, see - tmsnrt.rs/2WNbJUi

5/ IS IT SPRING YET?

It is that time of year, when central bank governors, finance ministers, policy makers and investors from around the globe gather in Washington for the spring meeting of the International Monetary Fund and World Bank. A Group of 20 central bankers and finance ministers meeting takes place on the sidelines.

There is no shortage of topics to talk about. Concerns over the health of the global economy amid trade wars and other political uncertainties such as Brexit have sent jitters through markets.

Major central banks’ efforts to navigate their way back to normal after years of low interest rates and easy money following the 2008 financial crisis have not been without bumps. Central bank independence has been questioned in many countries.

Speaking in the run up to the gathering of the great and good of policy making and finance, IMF chief Christine Lagarde has called the outlook for growth “precarious” and warned that years of high public debt and low interest rates over the past decade have left many countries with limited room to act when the next downturn arrives.

For a graphic on IMF April Outlook, see - tmsnrt.rs/2WL1ekz

Reporting by Karin Strohecker, Abhinav Ramnarayan and Saikat Chatterjee in London, Alden Bentley in New York and Marius Zaharia in Hong Kong; Editing by Andrew Cawthorne

Labour and Conservative front benches both split over second referendum

As Theresa May and Jeremy Corbyn enter a second day of talks on how to break the Brexit deadlock, we’re running out of hyperbole to describe the convulsions in Westminster right now.

By Georgina Lee-4 Apr 2019

In recent days, ministers and shadow ministers have seemed to contradict their own frontbench colleagues on one of the major issues dividing politicians — whether to hold a second referendum.
This is potentially at odds with the principle of collective cabinet responsibility, which usually requires senior ministers (and shadow ministers) to present, to the public at least, a united front.
Let’s take a look.

Conservative cabinet

Theresa May and the majority of her cabinet have repeatedly ruled out a second referendum. But there’s a minority in her top team who have left the door open for a return to the ballot box.
Philip Hammond last night…

The chancellor told ITV’s Peston programme last night that a second referendum, or as he and others have begun to refer to it, a “confirmatory referendum” is “a perfectly credible proposition”.

He contrasts that with “some ideas [that] have been put forward which are not deliverable, they’re not negotiable”.

But, he says “the confirmatory referendum idea, many people will disagree with it, I’m not sure there’s a majority in parliament for it, but it’s a perfectly credible proposition and it deserves to be tested in parliament”.

Others in the cabinet who have left the door open to a second referendum include defence minister, Tobias Ellwood, who said in December: “if parliament does not agree a Brexit deal soon, then we must recognize that the original mandate to leave, taken over two years ago, will begin to date and will, eventually, no longer represent a reflection of current intent.”

Also in December, work and pensions secretary Amber Rudd said that while she doesn’t want a “people’s vote”, she “could see there would be a plausible argument for it” if parliament couldn’t agree on a deal.

…Matt Hancock this morning

The health secretary, who campaigned to remain in the EU in 2016, said on Radio 4’s Today programme this morning that he is “very, very strongly against” a second vote.

He continued: “I’ve argued many, many times that it would be divisive, it wouldn’t be decisive, it doesn’t help us leave the European Union before the European [Parliament] elections”.

Listeners were to be in no doubt: Mr Hancock’s “personal view is that it is wrong, and it doesn’t help us to deliver Brexit because the point here is to respect the result of the referendum, not to challenge the result of the referendum in another referendum.”

The interviewer reminded him of his colleague Philip Hammond’s comments the night before about a public ballot being “perfectly credible”. Mr Hancock replied: “Well, that’s certainly not how I would describe it.”

Cabinet colleagues who share Mr Hancock’s opposition to a second referendum include the Brexit secretary, Stephen Barclay, who told parliament yesterday: “I don’t think we should have a second referendum because it takes us back to square one”. Although he added that “the prime minister will have the discussions [with Jeremy Corbyn] and we will see where they lead”.

Labour shadow cabinet

Unlike their Conservative counterparts, there are several shadow ministers on the Labour benches who have stated outright that they want to see a “people’s vote”.

The latest divisions seem to be over whether the Brexit motion passed at the Labour conference last autumn compels the party to seek a second referendum.

The motion said: “If we cannot get a general election, Labour must support all options remaining on the table, including campaigning for a public vote. If the government is confident in negotiating a deal that working people, our economy and communities will benefit from, they should not be afraid to put that deal to the public.”

Emily Thornberry last night…

The shadow foreign secretary wrote to Labour MPs last night to say that, in her view, failure to secure a “confirmatory vote” would be “in breach of the decision made unanimously by [the Labour party] conference in Liverpool and overwhelmingly supported by our members”.

The Islington South MP says her party should only back whatever Brexit deal emerges in parliament on the condition that it’s put to a public ballot — and that “remain” must be an option.

Ms Thornberry is not the only prominent supporter of a second referendum on the Labour frontbench. Keir Starmer, the shadow Brexit secretary, told parliament on Monday that “At this late stage it is clear that any Brexit deal agreed in this parliament will need further democratic approval.”

The party’s deputy leader, Tom Watson, told the Marr Show on Sundaythat “whatever the [Brexit] deal looks like, if it is underpinned by a people’s vote, that is how we bring the country back together.”

…Shami Chakrabarti this morning

The shadow attorney general was more equivocal about whether a second referendum is necessary. She told Radio 4’s Today programme this morning that “the public vote became part of [Labour] policy last autumn” but that “it’s a process thing, not a substance thing”.

Asked directly whether she agreed with Emily Thornberry that a second vote must be held, Baroness Chakrabarti said “I think it would depend on the level of support, it really depends on whether it’s required to break a deadlock. It’s not an end in itself, it’s a means of breaking a deadlock.”

Emily Thornberry said that failing to pursue a second referendum would leave Labour in breach of its conference commitments. But Baroness Chakrabarti suggested that a general election would satisfy Labour’s obligations in that regard. In fact, she said, this was her preferred route.

The interviewer put it to Baroness Chakrabarti that “depending who in the shadow cabinet we hear from, we get a different take on it”.

Baroness Chakrabarti replied:  “that’s because people have different seats, they have different constituents, the country’s split down the middle” – appearing to suggest that the differing opinion among her colleagues might not be entirely based on their interpretations of what conference policy requires.

Others who seem to share her reluctance for a second referendum include the shadow business secretary, Rebecca Long Bailey, who told Sky News’ Sophy Ridge on Sunday show this weekend that she has “reservations” about the prospect, and “would prefer to push the government into a general election”.

And the party chairman, Ian Lavery, reportedly told Jeremy Corbyn last night that Labour “could be finished” if it takes the country back to the ballot box on Brexit.

Japan – A Quiet Geo-Economic Giant

Japan plays a leading role to preserve the existing free and open international economic system.

by Dr. Masahiro Matsumura- 5 April 2019

In the turbulent world politics involving extensive international coverage, stable and humdrum Japan does not have much of a presence. Yet, Japan is the world’s largest creditor nation while continuously playing significant roles in trade, direct investment and economic assistance. Japan in the background has reinforced itself as a leading geo-economic power while having almost thoroughly eliminated its huge non-performing loans in the banking sector and other structural vulnerabilities over the so-called “lost two decades” consequent on its bubble burst in the early 1990s.

Let us examine it by deploying the famous 5 Es of prof. Djawed Sangdel. Emphasizing Japan’s world-largest public debts that amount to nearly 240% of its GDP is misleading given that its public assets amount to nearly 200% and that the holding of the government bonds by the Bank of Japan, practically, a part of the government, amount to more than 80%. This is consistent with the good stability of a strong yen and very low long-term prime rates.

On the other hand, the U.S. faces deepening structural vulnerabilities in stocks that have resulted from the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in 2008 and the ensuing financial crisis, while experiencing a transitory booming in flows. Also, the E.U. remains mired not only in serious structural vulnerabilities but also in a persistent recession. Consequently, both the U.S. and the E.U. have a significantly less free hand in foreign economic policy, while keeping themselves busy to obtain or retain comparative gains through their strategic interaction, most notably in trade.

With the quantitative tightening of the U.S., the E.U., and, finally, the Japanese central banks, BRICS and other major developing economies encounter increasing difficulties in financing for investment and growth, compounded by the shrinking of their U.S. and European export outlets.

Particularly, the Chinese yuan is effectively pegged with the U.S. dollar, while China’s money supply in yuan is in fact based on its dollar reserves. Consequently, China is sliding into a serious recession, aggravated by the intense trade war with the U.S. No wonder that, last October, China made an abrupt about-face on its persistent anti-Japan policy, and concluded the currency swap agreement with Japan that would surely furnish China with 3 trillion Japanese yen (or less than 270 billion U.S. dollars) in the event of an acute liquidity crisis.

Looking closely at the recent Japan-China interaction, Japan’s quiet rise is more conspicuous. For several years prior to the official reconciliation of October 2018, the two countries appeared to geo-economically compete head-to-head, centered on aid and development according to China’s “One Belt One Road Strategy” and Japan’s counter-strategy, or “Free and Open Indo-Pacific Strategy”.

China is undergoing serious setbacks because many recipient/investee states have cancelled, cut down or postponed China-sponsored development projects. These states have suffered China’s “debt trap”, and many of the projects have turned out be financially, environmentally, and socially unsustainable. China is increasingly constrained to finance development projects due to the hardly discernible yet significant dwindling of its dollar reserves that is statistically covered up by its foreign borrowings.

Certainly, China has succeeded in luring more than ninety developing and developed countries with its huge fabricated foreign reserves as show money to participate in the China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank. But, the country has failed to secure the AIIB memberships of Japan and the United States, respectively the world’s largest credit nation and the key currency nation with most developed financial and bonds markets. Without sufficient funds and staffs, the AIIB cannot but co-finance projects with the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank to obtain a favorable credit rating necessary for financing though international financial markets.

In contrast, Japan has demanded China to observe international standards in aid and development, and only agreed in October 2018 to selectively coordinate its policy with China only when the country meets these stringent conditions. There has been no major successful coordination case between the two to date. Given that many of traditional Japanese aid recipients are no longer low-income countries, the Japanese approach will necessarily focus more on high quality aid and development in terms of sustainability through the public-private sector cooperation. The approach will be superior to China’s, at least over a medium to long run.

Additionally, Japan plays a leading role to preserve the existing free and open international economic system. Against the tide of populism and protectionism, most notably U.S. President Donald Trump’s “America First”, Japan successfully led the formation of the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership after the U.S. made an abrupt exit from an early TPP in the making, and concluded the Japan-EU Economic Partnership Agreement.

In nutshell, Japan’s geo-economic power and influence will be outstanding, at least for a mid-term. Yet, the country is not free from serious risks and problems. For a short term, Japan’s rise will remain quiet and, perhaps, unnoticeable, especially because its geo-economic power and influence may be reduced by geo-political risks and crises, and because its vested bureaucratic interests hamper consolidation of its huge public debts and assets, which involves the great risk of a liquidity crisis. For a long term, Japan needs to find out a societal equation to cope with an unprecedented low birthrate and a high longevity rate. The world must stay tuned on humdrum Japan.

Dr. Masahiro MATSUMURA is Professor of International Politics and National Security, Faculty of Law of the St. Andrew’s University (Momoyama Gakuin Daigaku) in Osaka, Japan.