El día, hace 20 años, que un extremista religioso derrotó a la civilización

Miles de israelíes homenajean a Rabin a los 20 años de su asesinato

El expresidente Clinton participa en el homenaje en el lugar donde un judío ultra lo mató

Beatriz Lecumberri Jerusalén 31 OCT 2015 

Bill Clinton participa en el homenaje a Rabin en Tel Aviv. / T. COEX (AFP)

Miles de personas se han dado cita este sábado en Tel Aviv para recordar al ex primer ministro Isaac Rabin, asesinado el 4 de noviembre de 1995 por un extremista judío. El acto, que conmemora el 20º aniversario según el calendario judío, se produce en un momento en que la violencia y el extremismo vuelven a castigar a israelíes y palestinos.

Grupos pacifistas, movimientos de jóvenes, políticos, artistas y ONGs participaron en este acto, en el que también estuvieron presentes el presidente de Israel, Reuven Rivlin, y el exmandatario estadounidense Bill Clinton, quien apadrinó los acuerdos de paz de Oslo de 1993 entre Israel, representado por Rabin, y los palestinos, encabezados por el fallecido Yasir Arafat.

"El siguiente paso en la historia de Israel será decidir si Rabin tenía razón, si ustedes deben compartir su futuro con sus vecinos y si el riesgo que se corre persiguiendo la paz no es tan grande como el riesgo que supone alejarse de ella. Rezamos para que tomen la buena decisión”, dijo Clinton en su discurso ante una multitud emocionada que según los organizadores rozaba las 100.000 personas aunque medios locales apuntaban que en la plaza Rabin había entre 40.000 y 50.000 personas.

En un discurso grabado y difundido durante la concentración, el presidente estadounidense Barack Obama también instó a israelíes y palestinos a “comprometerse y correr riesgos para lograr la única solución real: dos Estados para dos pueblos”.

“Veinte años han pasado y aun estamos demasiado ocupados con las heridas del pasado en lugar de construir el futuro. No tenemos que tener miedo, la democracia israelí es suficientemente fuerte. A aquellos que nos amenazan quiero decirles hoy: no les tenemos miedo”, dijo Rivlin durante el acto, en el que no estuvo presente ningún miembro del gobierno del primer ministro Benjamin Netanyahu.

Yigal Amir, el asesino de Rabin explicó claramente que su intención era sabotear cualquier acuerdo de paz entre israelíes y palestinos. Veinte años después, las negociaciones no han dado apenas frutos y están congeladas desde hace año y medio. La creación del Estado palestino, que tras Oslo parecía tocarse con los dedos, no logra concretarse.

Más violencia en Cisjordania

 

La ola de violencia que castiga desde principios de octubre a israelíes y palestinos no da tregua. Este sábado el ejército israelí mató a un palestino de 17 años en un retén de Cisjordania cuando, según fuentes militares, intentó apuñalar a un soldado.

Al menos 66 palestinos, la mitad de ellos agresores o presuntos agresores, y nueve israelíes han muerto violentamente en las últimas semanas. Este sábado cerca de Belén era enterrado un bebé palestino de ocho meses fallecido el viernes asfixiado, según las autoridades palestinas, por los gases lacrimógenos lanzados por el Ejército israelí cerca de su domicilio.

La tensión y los controles siguen siendo palpables en ciudades como Jerusalén, escenario de numerosos ataques y de enfrentamientos.

Las imágenes y los videos de presuntos abusos de las fuerzas de seguridad israelíes recorren las redes sociales y avivan la cólera palestina. Este sábado, la policía israelí informó de que suspendía a un agente que amenazó por megafonía a los vecinos del campo de refugiados palestino de Aida, cerca de Belén, con "matar a todos" si los vecinos seguían lanzando piedras. "Somos el Ejército de ocupación (…) Si tiran una piedra les vamos a lanzar gas hasta que mueran. Los niños, los jóvenes, los ancianos. Moriréis todos”, dijo el oficial en árabe.

La violencia se extiende también a la franja de Gaza, escenario de manifestaciones antiisraelíes diarias, y a puntos de Cisjordania como la ciudad palestina de Hebrón, donde la tensión y las restricciones se han agravado.

Esta localidad del sur de Cisjordania es desde hace años un microcosmos que resume perfectamente el desgarrado conflicto israelo-palestino. En su centro histórico, que alberga la Tumba de los Patriarcas, venerada por judíos, musulmanes y cristianos, conviven unos 35.000 palestinos y alrededor de 800 colonos israelíes, protegidos por otros tantos militares y policías, según datos de la ONG israelí B’tselem.

En los últimos días el Ejército israelí ha matado a varios palestinos en la región de Hebrón. Según fuentes militares, la mayoría de ellos intentaron atacar a israelíes, una versión que ha sido puesta en entredicho por responsables locales palestinos. Cinco de los palestinos muertos fueron enterrados este sábado en medio de una gran tensión y de nuevos enfrentamientos. Al menos doce palestinos han resultado heridos en los disturbios, según fuentes médicas locales.

Los 200.000 habitantes de Hebrón, que desde hace años deben atravesar retenes militares y controles para ir a trabajar o estudiar, son objeto desde hace varios días de una vigilancia más exhaustiva. El ejército israelí ha instalado barreras en numerosos puntos de la ciudad, sobre todo en los barrios colindantes con algunos asentamientos israelíes, y prohíbe la entrada de palestinos que no residan en la zona.

Por otro lado, la prensa local israelí, citando a medios digitales de la oposición siria, afirmó este sábado que la aviación israelí bombardeó el viernes por la noche dos posiciones de la milicia chií libanesa Hezbulá y del régimen de Bachar el Asad, cerca de la frontera con Líbano.

Si estas informaciones se confirman sería el primer bombardeo israelí en suelo sirio desde que Rusia inició su campaña aérea de bombardeos contra posiciones rebeldes a finales de septiembre.

Link http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2015/10/31/actualidad/1446316234_035917.html

LA PATOTA KIRCHNERISTA Y SUS MEDIOS - VIDEO BORRADO POR C5N: Gana Scioli por amplia diferencia

Desopilante noche de desaciertos en los informativos de la TV

Insultos, anuncios que no se cumplieron y falta de profesionalismo en la cobertura

José Crettaz

LA NACION

Martes 27 de octubre de 2015

Las seis horas que van del zócalo en la pantalla "Gana Scioli por amplia ventaja" a la ansiosa pregunta filtrada por un micrófono que quedó abierto "¿Ya están negociando con Macri?". Así podría resumirse la larga noche electoral del animador Roberto Navarro, en el canal del empresario kirchnerista Cristóbal López, C5N. Aunque grotesca, esa peripecia también condensa lo que pasó en las pantallas de los canales abiertos y las señales de noticias, a donde los electores acudieron para saciar su sed de certezas.

Hasta que los datos oficiales empezaron a filtrarse con cuentagotas desde el Luna Park -sí, antes de que la Dirección Nacional Electoral los subiera a su web- todos los medios se manejaron con las mismas cuatro encuestas en boca de urna, pero la manera de presentarlas mostró profundas diferencias. Algunos dieron certezas sobre la indefinición: "Hay balotaje" (América); otros se limitaron a plantear la duda; "Podría haber balotaje" (Telefé); y otros prefirieron una prudencia inicial que no resistiría el paso de las horas: "Hoy se define si hay nuevo presidente o hay balotaje" (Canal 13 y TN).

En los medios oficialistas, todo se daba por hecho: "Gana Daniel Scioli" (Canal 26), "Ganó Scioli" (Crónica), pero fue C5N el que a las 17.58 (violando groseramente la veda electoral) dictaminó: "Ganó Scioli por amplia diferencia", "En provincia, gana Aníbal Fernández" (algo que repetiría el menos relevante CN23, propiedad del candidato derrotado Sergio Szpolski; y el aún menos significativo 360 TV, de Electroingeniería).

Pero lo más interesante vendría en el mismo C5N: "Daniel Scioli ganó por más de 3 millones de votos, es el único que mejoró su performance de las PASO. Macri no pudo atraer votos de otros candidatos", se agitó Roberto Navarro, animador estrella. Tanto entusiasmo le dio vértigo a Gustavo Sylvestre, que sintió la necesidad de aclarar que Mauricio Macri iba segundo. Fueron 17 minutos que, vistos ahora, resultan desopilantes y que podrían servir como herramienta a profesores de periodismo de todo el mundo que quieran ejemplificar lo que no se debe hacer apenas cerrada una elección. Es que la patria zocalera cobra especial fuerza durante los llamados "acontecimientos mediáticos", hechos previamente organizados que son transmitidos en vivo y donde la TV todavía reina y marca el pulso incluso por encima de las redes sociales. Y las elecciones de anteayer -con tantas horas muertas en espera- dejó mucho graph para cortar.

El zócalo de C5N con "la amplia diferencia" del oficialismo siguió casi toda la noche, incluso después de que el propio Scioli aceptó tácitamente el ballottage en el discurso en que convocó a los indecisos a votarlo. En esos primeros momentos de nulos datos, en C5N no pegaron una. Claro, es cierto, eso visto con el diario del lunes (porque, en efecto, ya estaba bien entrado el lunes). A la 1.25, cuando ya se confirmaba el triunfo de María Eugenia Vidal en la provincia, el vozarrón de Navarro "interfería" en la lectura de los números. "¿Ya se fueron, cobardes? Ah, sí? ¿Ya están negociando con Macri, hijos de puta?", preguntaba el animador a sus interlocutores antes de largar una carcajada. Todo eso salió al aire y habríamos sabido más si la presentadora de C5N no hubiera alertado al despistado sonidista. ¿En serio se despistó? El video se subió a YouTube y en menos de 24 horas fue visto 115.559 veces: 54 segundos imperdibles.

Canal 13 y Todo Noticias (Grupo Clarín) fueron inicialmente cautos con sus títulos ("Terminó la votación"). Pero de madrugada, los autores de los zócalos se volvieron más audaces: "A todo esto, nadie sabe dónde está Aníbal" o "Aníbal no asomó el bigote". "Duro golpe para Cristina", fue lo último que se leyó a eso de las tres de la mañana.

Más allá de su vínculo con la vieja guardia del PJ y el sindicalismo y la bajada de línea respectiva, había sido Crónica TV quien lo tomó con humor desde temprano usando en Twitter el hashtag #VotoPorCrónica. "La mesa donde vota Macri es el 64, el llanto", titulaba el canal del Grupo Olmos. Seguiría en esa tónica todo el día hasta que la realidad de la derrota obligó a ponerse serios.

En tanto, Víctor Hugo Morales hacía su análisis en el canal multiestatal con sede en Caracas Telesur junto a Leopoldo Moreau, ex candidato a presidente de la UCR (logró 2,34% en 2003) convertido tardíamente al kirchnerismo. El ballottage también será una segunda oportunidad para el periodismo televisivo.

 

http://www.lanacion.com.ar/1840158-desopilante-noche-de-desaciertos-en-los-informativos-de-la-tv

Argentina: In any case, a Presidential defeat...

In Argentina Elections, Tight Vote Yields Presidential Runoff. The New York Times.

26 octubre, 2015

October 25, 2015. By Simon Romero and Jonathan Gilbert for The New York Times.

BUENOS AIRES — Argentine voters sent the country’s presidential race into a runoff on Sunday, boosting hopes in the opposition after Mauricio Macri, the mayor of Buenos Aires, made a surprisingly strong showing against the candidate endorsed by President Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, according to partial results released by the electoral authorities.

Pointing to a remarkably tight race, Daniel Scioli, a former vice president supported by Mrs. Kirchner, took 35.7 percent of the vote with 84 percent of balloting stations tallied, against 35.3 percent for Mr. Macri. The votes obtained by Mr. Macri, a former president of one of Argentina’s most popular soccer clubs who ran to the right of his rivals, upend a race in which Mr. Scioli was viewed as a strong front-runner.

The candidates signaled an intense new phase of campaigning ahead of the runoff election on Nov. 22. Sergio Massa, a former ally of Mrs. Kirchner’s who moved into the opposition, could find himself in the role of kingmaker after securing 21 percent of the vote in the partial count, with analysts questioning whether he will forge an alliance with Mr. Macri.

“I invite you to conquer our future,” Mr. Macri, 56, said Sunday night, in a conciliatory speech before the first official results were released after midnight, as he positioned his campaign to lure more voters.

With Mrs. Kirchner, 62, constitutionally barred from seeking a third consecutive term, the leading candidates ran carefully orchestrated campaigns that seemed to reflect a longing in the electorate for a break with her divisive governing style. Mrs. Kirchner intensified attacks on opponents in the news media and business establishment after succeeding her late husband, Néstor Kirchner, as president in 2007.

“More moderation is expected as the Kirchner era comes to a close,” said Mariel Fornoni, director of Management and Fit, a leading polling company. “There’s an enormous desire in society for less polarization.”

Mr. Scioli, 58, a former speedboat racer, sought to appeal to Mrs. Kirchner’s supporters by contending that he did not plan any abrupt policy shifts. Lacking her combative rhetorical spirit, he came across as a safe option for many voters who want continuity for programs that have increased social welfare spending over the past 12 years.

“I never won a race smashing into a competitor’s boat,” Mr. Scioli told reporters during the campaign. “To the contrary, I always look to improve on what’s been achieved.”

Even though Mr. Scioli seemed to fall short of obtaining the support on Sunday of some die-hard supporters of Mrs. Kirchner, the possibility of continuity under Mr. Scioli appealed to many voters.

“Scioli is with the poor people,” said María Rosa González, 66, a maid who voted for him on Sunday. She explained that her late father, a corn harvester, had been able to claim a state pension under a 2005 law supported by the Kirchners in which workers who had not paid contributions could collect retirement benefits. “This government helped the people. It’s on display.”

Economists here argue over the costs of such policies, with some saying that Mrs. Kirchner’s successor will have to grapple with galloping inflation and a yawning budget deficit. But her supporters say that antipoverty spending was badly needed in the country after a chaotic economic collapse and political turmoil in 2001 and 2002.

Mr. Macri, a civil engineer by training, said he would introduce market-oriented changes aiming to loosen currency controls and lure great investment into Argentina’s economy, standing in contrast to his rivals.

Mrs. Kirchner still holds considerable sway, emerging as one of Argentina’s strongest leaders in recent decades. She has recently moved to enhance her power through a calculated series of moves, potentially casting her shadow over the management of the economy and foreign policy well after she is scheduled to leave office in December.

While voting unfolded peacefully around the country, the leading candidate needed more than 45 percent of the vote, or 40 percent and a margin larger than 10 points over the nearest rival, to avoid the runoff. The delay by the authorities in releasing the results, which were made public about six hours after polls had closed, left much of the country on tenterhooks.

Throughout the race, many voters and analysts here were struck as much by the similarities among the leading candidates as their differences, reflecting strategies of offering a nonthreatening alternative to Mrs. Kirchner’s commanding presence. Even Mr. Macri, who began campaigning from another part of the ideological spectrum, sought to appeal to supporters of Peronism, the ideologically diverse political grouping that dominates Argentine politics.

Kirchnerismo, the leftist movement named for the Kirchners, came to overshadow other factions aligned with Peronism, which originated decades ago during the rule of Juan Domingo Perón. Mindful of the hazards of opposing Peronist power brokers, the three men adopted reserved campaign styles, leading some to suggest that a composite candidate could easily be made of Mr. Scioli, Mr. Macri and Mr. Massa.

“He is an amiable, middle-of-the-road, middle-class, middle-aged and fairly athletic bloke of Italian extraction who, with a winning smile, tells us that the country can easily overcome all its many economic and social problems,” James Neilson wrote in a column in The Buenos Aires Herald.

A selection of toned-down candidates suited some voters just fine. “He’s less bellicose, less divisive,” said Nicolás Quadri, 28, an architect who voted for Mr. Macri, contending the candidate would have “more logical international policies.”

Eying the possibility of an alliance between Mr. Macri and Mr. Massa, political analysts were examining how many of Mr. Massa’s supporters could help swing the vote. Some estimate that about a third of Mr. Massa’s support came from dissident Peronists who could actually swing back to Mr. Scioli, potentially handing him a victory.

“That greatly limits Massa’s margin for maneuver,” said Sergio Berensztein, an Argentine political analyst. Still, he said Mr. Macri would have already contemplated how to court this 30 percent, pointing to a statue of Juan Domingo Perón, the founder of Peronism, that Mr. Macri recently unveiled. “That’s why he inaugurated the statue,” Mr. Berensztein said.

Source: http://mobile.nytimes.com/2015/10/26/world/americas/argentina-presidential-election.html?smid=pl-share&_r=1&referer=

Image: Voter lists in Buenos Aires on Sunday. Many voters want a break from President Kirchner’s style.
NATACHA PISARENKO / ASSOCIATED PRESS

Is really Germany so strong ?

The End of German Hegemony

Daniel Gros

16 October 2015

Without anyone quite noticing, Europe’s internal balance of power has been shifting.

Germany’s dominant position, which has seemed absolute since the 2008 financial crisis,

is gradually weakening – with far-reaching implications for the European Union.

Of course, from a soft-power perspective, the mere fact that people believe Germany is strong

bolsters the country’s status and strategic position. But it will not be long before people begin to

notice that the main driver of that perception – that Germany’s economy continued to grow, while

most other eurozone economies experienced a prolonged recession – represents an exceptional

circumstance, one that will soon disappear.

In 12 of the last 20 years, Germany’s growth rate been lower than the average of the other three

large eurozone countries (France, Italy, and Spain). Although German growth surged ahead

during the post-crisis period, as the graph shows, the International Monetary Fund predicts that it

will fall back below that three-country average – and far below the eurozone average, which

includes the smaller high-growth countries of Central and Eastern Europe – within five years.

To be sure, Germany still has some apparent advantages. But a closer examination shows that they

are not quite as positive as they seem.

For starters, Germany is close to full employment – in sharp contrast to the double-digit

unemployment rates that prevail in much of the eurozone. But the combination of full

employment and low growth rates actually points to an underlying problem: very slow

productivity growth. Add to that a shrinking pool of workers capable of meeting the needs of

Germany’s labour market – the country’s population is aging, and the arriving refugees lack the

needed skills – and the German economy seems set for a protracted period of sluggish

performance.

Another apparent advantage is Germany’s large financial reserves, which not only cushioned it

from the crisis, but also conferred upon it considerable political sway. Indeed, because German

funds were indispensable in bailing out the eurozone’s deeply stressed periphery, the country

became central to all efforts to address the crisis.

Germany’s consent was needed to create Europe’s “banking union,” which entailed the transfer of

supervisory powers to the European Central Bank and the creation of a common fund to resolve

failing banks. And German resistance contributed to a delay in the ECB’s intervention in bond

markets; when the ECB finally did launch its bond-buying program, it did so with Germany’s tacit

approval.

But now that interest rates are at zero, Germany’s large savings are no longer doing it much good.

And with the financial storm having largely abated, Germany lacks new opportunities to

demonstrate its political clout, both within and outside the eurozone.

Indeed, whereas Germany, owing to its deep involvement in Central and Eastern European

economies, was a key player in the Minsk agreements that were meant to end the conflict in

Ukraine, it has little influence in the Middle Eastern countries that are occupying the world’s

attention today. While many have highlighted Germany’s political leadership in the refugee crisis,

the reality is that being thrust into the front line of that crisis, without having much influence over

the factors that are driving it, is placing considerable strain on the country. Germany is now, for

the first time, in the position of having to ask its EU partners for solidarity, as it cannot absorb all

the newcomers alone.

As usual, however, perceptions are lagging behind reality, which means that Germany is still

widely viewed as the eurozone’s most powerful force. But, as the global business cycle accelerates

Germany’s return to the “old normal,” the power shift within Europe will become increasingly

difficult to ignore.

Germany, which exports a large volume of investment goods, benefited more than other eurozone

member countries from the investment boom in China and other emerging economies. But

emerging-economy growth is now slowing considerably, including in China, where demand is

shifting from investment toward consumption. This tends to undermine German growth and

benefit southern European countries, which export more consumer goods.

The ongoing shift in Europe’s economic and political power dynamics is likely to have a major

impact on the EU’s functioning – and especially that of the eurozone. For example, without a

strong Germany to enforce the eurozone’s fiscal strictures and urge the implementation of difficult

but necessary structural reforms, countries may lose their motivation to do what is needed to

ensure fairness and stability in the long term. If inflation remains low, the ECB might feel freer to

pursue further rounds of monetary stimulus, undermining fiscal objectives further.

In short, we may be headed toward a less “Germanic” economic policy in the eurozone. While that

might enhance the EU’s popularity in the periphery, it could increase resistance to EU membership

in Germany – a country that, despite its waning economic strength, remains an important piece of

the integration puzzle.

Elections in Poland

   

In Poland, Elections Mark the End of an Era

STRATDOR, October 24, 2015 

Summary

Poland will hold general elections on Oct. 25 in a vote that could bring eight years of center-right Civic Platform rule to an end. At issue are Poland's pro-market domestic policies, which have allowed it to grow even during the eurozone crisis but have led to more inequality. Opinion polls suggest that the conservative Law and Justice party will win, although the post-election coalition talks could be fraught with difficulty. Whether or not the ruling party loses power, Poland's foreign policy priorities will not change. Warsaw will continue to maintain close ties with the United States and NATO while supporting Ukraine, diversifying energy suppliers and pushing for a continued tough EU stance on Russia.

Analysis

Poland is still very much a nation in transition. This is most evident in its capital and largest city, Warsaw. The city center, bombed into ruin during World War II, has been rebuilt as a sort of living museum – a reminder of the country's past. But surrounding the historic center, tall glass buildings showcase Poland's new ambition: to become a key Central and Eastern European business hub. Large infrastructure projects — most notably the massive stadium where part of the 2012 European football championship was played — offer a glimpse of Polish modernization fueled by foreign investment and EU development funds.

Poland's economic growth has been consistent and impressive. It is the only European country that has not stopped growing in spite of the global economic crisis. In fact, Poland's gross domestic product skyrocketed over the past decade, and unemployment is at a relatively low 8 percent – better than it was in the early 2000s. The ruling Civic Platform party has led most of the business-friendly reforms of the past decade. During its eight years in power, it introduced free market policies, including low taxes on corporations and a relatively weak social safety net compared with its competitors in Western Europe. The government's objective was to attract foreign investment while keeping debt at a manageable level.

However, there is a growing sense among some Polish voters that this economic growth has been unequally distributed. While absolute poverty has declined steadily over the past two decades in Poland, equality measures such as the Gini index indicate that earnings inequality has grown. According to the European Union this disparity is also regional, with large urban regions growing faster than small towns and rural areas. Many Poles, especially the young, are under temporary employment contracts and receive low salaries, meaning they are becoming increasingly disenchanted with the benefits of EU membership. Others have chosen to emigrate, as illustrated by the massive population outflow that followed Poland's accession to the European Union in 2004.

These factors have magnified the natural erosion in popularity experienced by any party that has been in power for eight years, and Civic Platform's rival, the Law and Justice party, promises to reverse many of the past decade's policies. The opposition party has campaigned on a platform that includes canceling a recent rise in the retirement age, introducing tax breaks for low-income families and implementing higher taxes on banks and supermarkets, most of which are foreign-owned. Recent opinion polls put popular support for the Law and Justice party at around 36 percent, more than ten points higher than Civic Platform.

A government led by the Law and Justice party could, therefore, lead to greater state intervention in the economy. Banks could be in a particularly uncomfortable situation under Law and Justice party rule. Since Switzerland ended its peg to the euro in January, Polish officials have struggled to come up with a solution for the situation of Polish bank customers who took loans denominated in Swiss francs. The Law and Justice party has targeted banks to bear most of the burden of converting deposits denominated in Swiss francs to Polish zloty, while Civic Platform has been looking for ways to mitigate the negative impact of the conversion on the financial sector.

Game of Alliances

While opinion polls predict an electoral victory for Law and Justice, the party may not be able to form a government alone. This puts it in an awkward position — the Law and Justice party does not have many options for a government alliance. A potential ally is Kukiz'15, an anti-establishment party led by former rock star and social activist Pawel Kukiz. But though Kukiz'15 performed well in May presidential elections, its popularity has waned over the last few months.

The Law and Justice party's lack of strong political allies opens the door for the centrist Civic Platform to form an alliance against its more conservative rival. The alliance could include small parties such as the Polish Peasant Party, also known as the Polish People's Party, which has been the Civic Platform's junior coalition partner since 2007. It may also include the liberal Modern Party, founded less than six months ago. In addition, a variety of other small parties could align with the Civic Platform, provided they surpass the electoral threshold to enter the parliament: 5 percent for parties and 8 percent for electoral alliances.

But while an agreement between the Civic Platform and smaller parties could prevent Law and Justice from forming a government, the shaky alliance would involve parties with very different political agendas, which could make for a fragile government. Such an anti-Law and Justice bloc would also clash with Poland's president, Andrzej Duda. Polish presidents traditionally relinquish their party affiliations upon entering office, but before his election in May, Duda was a longtime member of the Law and Justice party. In late September, the president proposed that the government restore the retirement age to 60 years of age for women and 65 for men versus the current 67, elements of a populist agenda in line with Law and Justice's electoral platform. 

Steady Foreign Policy

But neither the Law and Justice Party nor the Civic Platform would change Poland's foreign policy track, which is rooted in the country's enduring geopolitical imperatives and precarious position between Europe and Russia. Warsaw will continue to seek close cooperation with the United States and NATO. The current government has been particularly hawkish when it comes to Russia, and the next administration will continue pressuring the European Union to maintain the existing sanctions regime against Moscow. Warsaw will also continue pushing for energy diversification to reduce its dependence on Russia.

The Civic Platform has been quite ambiguous about Poland's prospects of joining the eurozone, and a government led by the Law and Justice party would not put the country any closer to joining the common currency. More important, Poland will clash with the European Union on issues such as immigration or integration with the rest of the Continent. Poland has resisted EU plans to establish a mechanism for the automatic distribution of asylum seekers across the bloc, and the next administration in Warsaw will continue this line. Poland is interested in preserving its EU membership but will remain wary of measures that involve transferring any more sovereignty to Brussels.

This opens the door for tactical political alliances in the coming years. Poland will probably support proposals by the United Kingdom to protect non-eurozone countries from measures designed by the members of the currency union. Poland will also continue to cooperate with the other members of the Visegrad Group (Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia) as well as with Romania and Bulgaria to defend EU agricultural and development funds and oppose quotas of migrants, among other issues.

After the Oct. 25 polls, Warsaw will enter a new political phase dominated by either a nationalist government or a multiparty alliance that would struggle to remain in power. This will not produce any meaningful changes in the country's orientation, but could freeze or even reverse some aspects of the country's process of economic liberalization and EU integration. The extent of this change will depend on the final composition of the government.

Stratfor provides global awareness and guidance to individuals, governments and businesses around the world. We use a unique, intel-based approach to analyze world affairs.

DIGITAL MEDIA LATAM 2015 - México D.F.

La industria de los medios digitales busca su modelo de desarrollo

Digital Media Latam 2015 reúne en México DF a responsables de medios para debatir los retos de un sector en transformación acelerada

• ‘Materia’ gana el premio más prestigioso de información científica

Pablo de Llano México 24 OCT 2015

Antonio Caño, director de El País, durante la conferencia / SAÚL RUIZ

La industria de los medios digitales sigue buscando su modelo de desarrollo ideal. Los últimos años de transformación tecnológica y crisis de la publicidad han sacudido los cimientos del mundo de la información y el sector se reinventa sobre la marcha. En su edición de este año en México DF, el congreso Digital Media 2015 de la Asociación Mundial de Periódicos y Editores de Noticias (WAN-IFRA) reúne a responsables de medios para debatir los temas calientes de un periodismo que vive a caballo entre lo impreso y lo digital: su modelo de negocio (o cómo hacer dinero); su esquema de distribución (o cómo llegar a la gente, que nos vea); su apuesta de contenidos (o cómo atraer la atención de la gente, que nos lea).

La receta con la que abrió el evento Tomas Brunegard, presidente de WAN-IFRA, propone una mezcla de audacia de mercado y buen oficio: “Es tiempo de emprender en la industria de los medios y de mantener nuestra regla principal: contar buenas historias”.

Brunegard puso en cifras brutas el quid del panorama mediático. En comparación con 2013, la circulación de medios en papel ha aumentado sólo un 0,4% mientras la de digitales ha escalado un 45%, pero lo complejo del esquema, en cuanto a negocio, es que a la parte que crece le sigue costando traducir su presencia expansiva en ingresos, que siguen siendo incomparablemente mayores en papel: un 93% del total.

En este contexto de cambio, los medios se enfrentan a una pregunta de raíz: ¿Qué es hoy un medio? Antonio Caño, director de EL PAÍS, subrayó que se ha tenido que asumir que lo que ocurre no es un simple cambio sino una metamorfosis: “Nosotros hemos entendido que EL PAÍS ya no es un periódico. Hasta ahora habíamos intentado adaptar un periódico a las nuevas tecnologías, pero finalmente hemos entendido que ya no somos un periódico sino una marca, una marca que debe ser capaz de elaborar diferentes productos para diferentes plataformas y diferentes audiencias. Hoy somos un centro de producción de contenidos”. Caño precisó que el norte de esos contenidos pivota sobre “la diferenciación, la globalidad y lo multimedia” y en base a los fundamentos sólidos de la identidad tradicional del diario desde su fundación en 1976. "Es imprescindible saber por qué aparecimos hace 40 años para acometer todo lo que nos toca a partir de ahora".

Frédérique Lancien, directora de estrategia y nuevos negocios del periódico deportivo francés L’EQUIPE, explicó cómo su medio está apostando por la diversificación de plataformas de contenido, un esquema que tiene que ver con la opción de aprovechar la fidelidad a la cabecera creando nichos de lectores específicos que se ofrecen a los anunciantes como “un catering” ajustado a su diana de mercado; por ejemplo, una página para gente que no sólo consume deporte sino que lo practica, u otra centrada en la rumorología del mercado de fichajes en el fútbol, sección que, por dar información que por esencia no se puede contrastar, no se difunde bajo la cabecera del medio, si bien quienes llegan a ella lo hacen por su lazo con la cabecera. “La gente sigue esos productos porque son de la familia L’EQUIPE”.

La actual incertidumbre de negocio influye a su vez en el rumbo de los contenidos y su relación con el crecimiento de la audiencia

La actual incertidumbre de negocio influye a su vez en el rumbo de los contenidos y su relación con el crecimiento de la audiencia. En espera de que el mundo digital haga un click económico y empiece a multiplicar los ingresos de los medios, una de las preocupaciones es ir tomando posiciones logrando números de usuarios cada vez mayores, lo que lleva al intrincado problema de cómo enganchar a los lectores en un panorama ilimitado de oferta digital.

“A mí ahora lo más importante me parece la necesidad de conectarse emocionalmente con las audiencias, dejar de pensar en usuarios y pensar en fans”, dijo Diego Carvajal, vicepresidente de producto de Univision, que mencionó como ejemplo particular la orientación de The New York Times de concentrarse en un 10% de lectores que considera fieles y dispuestos a pagar por una información de calidad. Otra potencialidad que señaló es la “personalización del producto”, al punto de poder llevar a la bandeja de entrada del correo de los lectores una selección de contenidos a su gusto, adaptada a sus intereses.

El tiempo también ha cambiado. La información ya no se mide en jornadas. La información sucede en directo. “Ahora cada siete minutos estamos publicando algo”, dijo Manuel Rivera, presidente del Grupo Expansión. Y la capacidad de evaluar el éxito de los contenidos es casi instantánea gracias a las nuevas herramientas. “Tenemos una medición en cada momento de cuánta gente lee una nota, de dónde llegó esa gente y adónde se va esa gente después. Sin abandonar nuestro enfoque editorial, tenemos que ser sensibles a lo que el lector quiere o no quiere en cada momento”, sopesó Rivera, que también indicó la hipervelocidad con la que han variado los tempos de remozamiento de los medios: “Antes innovábamos cada cinco años. Hoy la innovación sucede en sprints de dos semanas”. 

Un giro a la información de servicio

El analista Jeff Jarvis defendió el giro digital como una oportunidad para poner el “servicio al lector” por delante de cualquier otra consideración. “No puede ser que Google o Facebook sepan más de las necesidades de un usuario que un periódico local”.

Jarvis, director del Centro Tow-Knight para el Emprendimiento Periodístico, sostiene que los medios deben transitar del modelo de “gran factoría de noticias” a otro con una estructura de “pequeños equipos entrecruzados” que sean capaces de proporcionar contenidos de ámbito específicos y localizados en tiempo real.

“Seguimos haciendo miles de versiones de la misma noticia. No podemos vivir de repetirnos entre nosotros. Tenemos que cambiar de un modelo de negocio basado en el volumen a uno basado en el valor y en el servicio al momento”, reflexionó. “Tenemos que construir este negocio en función de si mejoramos o no la vida de nuestro usuarios. Eso es valor, y es valor de negocio”.

Link Original: http://internacional.elpais.com/internacional/2015/10/23/mexico/1445625932_228140.html

Fighting for the TPP

What comes after the Atlanta deal on the Trans-Pacific Partnership?

 

The 12-member Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) agreement was all but concluded last week after five years of negotiations. The deal now faces the challenge of ratification in each of the 12 countries, with all their domestic political obstacles — including a possible election year vote in the US Congress and the Australian Senate.

In this week's lead Richard Katz reviews the trip wires facing passage of the legislation through the US Congress. The time has passed for correcting any flaws in the TPP settlement, he points out, and Congress will either have to pass this TPP package or none at all. Although its terms have yet to be publicly announced, the question for legislators in all countries is whether the pact's benefits outweigh its flaws.

'Looming large over the debate in the US Congress is the immense veto power of assorted well-connected, well-financed special interests. Too many of those who claim to support “free trade” no longer mean a two-way street in which the United States helps promote its own prosperity by promoting that of its partners. Rather, they seek a system in which others open their markets to favoured American business sectors, but the United States is not expected to reciprocate'.

Clearly President Obama wants to steer the TPP through Congress as early as possible, with the target date being April next year. But there is talk of delay because of next year's presidential elections, in which Hillary Clinton, who's done a U-turn against the TPP, is still the likely Democrat contender. One option is to try to engineer passage through the 'lame duck' session of US Congress next December after the election. United States Trade Representative (USTR) Michael Froman is said to have given credence to that tactic in the past few days.

Australia's Trade and Investment Minister, Andrew Robb, stared down the USTR and the US pharmaceutical lobby on restricting data protections on biologics — medicines made from living cells and organisms — to five years instead of the 12 that the United States wanted and that will make it easier to pass the Australian Senate. It is difficult to justify extending monopoly protections for intellectual property that would cost Australian consumers and inhibit further innovation, as most of the evidence suggests. If Australia was to change its patent laws, copyright and intellectual property protections more generally, that should be done through domestic debate and agreement.

In situations where there is political consensus in most countries on opening up to trade, but where narrow interests block broader benefits to an economy, the TPP made some real gains. Australian, New Zealand and other producers will have better access to Japanese agricultural markets, beyond that achieved in the bilateral economic partnership agreement last year. The US sugar market was never in play but a small import quota has doubled and access increased in other important areas in manufacturing and services.

While market access issues were among the most contentious in the negotiations, the biggest gains will come from the new rules and standards that promote commerce in the 21st century. Making sure data flows freely, markets are more contestable and improved transparency are all worthy goals: we will know more about that achievement when details of the agreement are made public. If it turns out that the outcome has been defined largely by business interests at the cost of consumers, ratification and further opening up to international competition will be tougher.

The TPP is not the end goal but should be seen as a step forward to economic integration, lifting incomes and creating jobs. There are still many other markets that would benefit from exposure to international competition, both inside the TPP and beyond it. And the TPP creates some problems that will need to be addressed.

The main economic benefit for Vietnam, for example, derives from more access to the US clothing and textiles market — an important export market for Vietnam and one where the benefits appear so large as to swamp any costs associated with signing up to new rules that seem more suited to advanced economies. But that market access requires materials and inputs to be sourced from within TPP countries. Not China, Indonesia, India or any other non-TPP country. This problem affects not just textiles but all trade that discriminates between trading partners. Diverting trade away from non-members towards members means that trade is simply being shifted around instead of new opportunities created.

The calculation for countries like China and Europe left out of the TPP is not the same as it is for Vietnam. While China and other developing countries aspire to high environmental standards and better institutions, with reformers pushing hard for more transparency and diluting the influence of state-owned enterprises, none of these issues can be resolved simply by an international agreement mandating it. They require the hard yards of reform, just as China's 15-year long march to WTO accession in 2001 shows. The reformers in China can align some of their domestic reform priorities to the TPP to act as a catalyst but this will take time.

Both Asia and TPP countries cannot ignore the established trade and economic weight of China. There's no major business anywhere in the region, including Japan, that does not have to factor China in. With China out of the TPP for the foreseeable future, the incentive to ramp up Asian economic ties will be more powerful.

The ASEAN plus six countries are parties to the negotiation of the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), which has yet to receive the attention that the TPP has but could still be more important economically. It builds off ASEAN's agreements with China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia and New Zealand, and it accounts for a much greater share of Asia's economic interests than the TPP, incorporating the most dynamic elements in the global economy.

Getting RCEP right so that it dilutes trade diverted by the TPP and other agreements and helps India, China, Indonesia and others in Asia advance their domestic reforms and openness, is now the top priority. And hopefully East Asian arrangements will be open to US participation sooner than the TPP is likely to be open to China's.

All preferential trade and economic arrangements have the potential to enhance (through making markets more contestable) or damage (through redistributing business to higher-cost preferred sources of supply) the world economy. The TPP is no different and includes positive and negative economic features. It's the balance of benefits and costs that count and that depends on the detail. The redistribution of business is what buys political favours, not only within the participating countries, but also in international political dealings. They are agreements that affect who's left out as well as who is in the ring.

But what we already know about the TPP is that this is more than anything else a very big deal for the United States and Japan — as Robert Manning says, it serves as a surrogate bilateral free trade deal that shifts the partnership to a new level. We also know that if the deal were to fail Congressional passage or fall over for other reasons, that it would be a major disaster for US alliance relations with Japan and in Asia and the Pacific more broadly.

Shiro Armstrong and Peter Drysdale
Editors, East Asia Forum

Crawford School of Public Policy | College of Asia and the Pacific | Australian National University
Canberra ACT Australia 0200
19 October 2015