Kot sem pisal konec tedna: ZDA iščejo zase “face saving” izhod iz izgubljene vojne v Ukrajini in iščejo pravi način redefiniranja ukrajinske zmage v izgubljeni vojni. In ta trenutek je uradno napočil. Misija ZDA pri Natu je ukrajinsko “zmago” uradno definirala kot: “Ukrajina je ponovno zavzela več kot polovico svojega ozemlja, ki so ga zasegle ruske sile od februarja 2022. V tej težki in dinamični bitki se ukrajinski vojaki vsak dan pogumno borijo in še naprej navdihujejo svet s svojim pogumom in pogumom. Še naprej jih bomo podpirali, da bodo v čim močnejšem položaju za pogajalsko mizo, ko bo čas za to.“

Kaj če Rusija na pogajanjih zahteva nevtralnost preostalega dela Ukrajine? Bodo ZDA tudi to interpretirale kot ukrajinsko zmago?

Začelo se je s Trumpovimi trgovinskimi vojnami proti Kitajski (2018), s prepovedjo sodelovanja s Huaweijem (2019) in z Bidenovo totalno tehnološko vojno s Kitajsko (po 2021) s “črnolistanjem” kitajskih tehnoloških podjetij pri nastopanju na ameriškem trgu, prepovedjo izvoza čipov in opreme za proizvodnjo čipov na Kitajsko. Vse z namenom, da bi se ZDA “odklopile” (decoupling) od Kitajske glede uvoza končnih izdelkov in da bi zaustavile kitajski tehnoški vzpon. To ameriško odklapljanje od Kitajske naj bi rezultiralo v manjšem uvozu ZDA iz Kitajske. Vendar podatki tega ne potrjujejo. Lani (2022) je bil ameriški uvoz iz Kitajske na rekordni ravni.

Slika 1: Uvoz ZDA iz Kitajske 2013-2022 (mlr. $)

Vir: Trading economics

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Less than a month ago, President Biden was asked on camera if the United States could simultaneously bring conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East to a palatable conclusion. “We’re the United States of America, for God’s sake,” he responded, “the most powerful nation in the history of the world.” A few weeks later, facing domestic pressure to order Israel to cease its bloody bombing campaign against Gaza, Biden administration officials instead proclaimed their total powerlessness to influence its ally. Similarly, Biden’s early proclamations that America would support Ukraine “for as long as it takes” have run into the brick wall of American political dysfunction: as long as it takes, it transpires, in practice means just under two years.

Different wars with different causes, both Gaza and Ukraine reveal, in their own unique ways, the limitations of American imperial power. Neither would have been launched by either Russia or by Hamas — perhaps with Iran behind it — without the confidence that America’s ability to defend the world it created in its own image was radically weakened. The Pax Americana is already dead: the world is now suffering more wars than at any time since 1945. Worse, a vast gap has opened up between America’s stated commitments to its allies, and its ability to enforce its will: entire nations could be swallowed in the gulf between rhetoric and reality.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Prepis podcasta, ki sem ga imel za Zeleno omrežje študentov o energetiki, in ki je bil objavljen v reviji ESG:

Na svojem blogu ste zapisali, da je posodobljeni NEPN pravljičen. Zakaj tako mislite? Kaj je največji problem že obstoječega NEPN in kaj problem NEPN, ki ga sedaj Slovenija posodablja?

Problem slovenskega NEPN-a je podoben problemu v drugih državah, na primer v Nemčiji, kjer stavijo cilje razogljičenja proizvodnje električne energije le na sonce in veter. Pri tem je veliko manipulacije. Če zamenjamo proizvodnjo električne energije v Šoštanju le s soncem in vetrom, s tem nismo razogljičili proizvodnje električne energije. Zakaj? Ker sonce sije le osmino časa na leto, pri nas le 1100 ur na leto, torej bi preostali čas, več kot 7600 ur, morali električno energijo proizvajati iz nadomestnih virov, večinoma plina. Ta pa je, če gledamo izpuste TGP, le malo manj umazan vir kot TEŠ6 s premogom. Torej nismo naredili veliko, da bi učinkovito razogljičili proizvodnjo elektrike. Če bi TEŠ6 menjali z JEK2, bi proizvodnjo električne energije razogljičili za 98,5 %. NEPN je pravljičen tudi zato, ker še nikomur ni uspelo dokazati, da lahko energetsko stabilno upravljamo državo le s spremenljivimi viri sonca in vetra. Oba sta močno odvisna od vremena, zato je treba zagotoviti vir nadomestne energije, ki jo lahko reguliramo, to je plin. Le plinske elektrarne so sposobne hitre in fleksibilne proizvodnje, nadomestiti izpad in ohraniti stabilen sistem, če pride do kolapsa in nismo povezani v mednarodno prenosno omrežje. Zelo je tvegano staviti le na sonce ali veter, saj to predstavlja ogrožanje oskrbe z elektriko celotnega slovenskega prebivalstva in gospodarstva.

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Tako nekako bi se glasil povzetek komentarjev tega tedna v ameriških medijih glede vojne v Ukrajini. Spodaj je dober povzetek na Moon of Alabama:

Larry Johnson has spotted one of the many signs that “the West” is giving up on its war in Ukraine:

This week’s “No Shit Analysis” award goes to Eugene B. Rumer for his Wall Street Journal op-ed, It’s Time to End Magical Thinking About Russia’s Defeat. Only took him 22 months to figure this out. He may be a slow learner but give him some credit, he finally awakened from his dream world and is beginning to grasp that the Ukraine project is swirling down the toilet.

Eugene B. Rumer is a Senior Fellow at the Institute for National Strategic Studies, National Defense University, Washington DC. Previously, he served at the State Department, on the staff of the National Security Council and at RAND.

Despite his pedigree, he is struggling to acknowledge reality and still feels the need to spin nonsense. Here is an example:

Putin has reason to believe that time is on his side. At the front line, there are no indications that Russia is losing what has become a war of attrition. The Russian economy has been buffeted, but it is not in tatters. Putin’s hold on power was, paradoxically, strengthened following Yevgeny Prigozhin’s failed rebellion in June. Popular support for the war remains solid, and elite backing for Putin has not fractured.

Yep. Russia’s economy is so battered that it is headed toward 4% growth, its defense industry is out producing Europe and the United States combined, it is manufacturing new, more deadly drones and the stores across Russia are filled to the brim. If that is “battered” give me some.

More signs that the official foreign policy establishment is throwing the towel can be found in the current edition of Foreign Affairs. There the former head of the Council of Foreign Relations, Richard Haass, is urging the Biden administration to push the Ukraine towards negotiations:

Redefining Success in Ukraine – A New Strategy Must Balance Means and Ends – Foreign Affairs – Nov 17 2023

Nadaljujte z branjem→

V velikih medijih boste našli različna “branja” oziroma različne intepretacije izrečenega na srečanju med kitajskim in ameriškim predsednikom. Spodaj sta dve interpretaciji izrečenega iz proazijskega stališča, ker tega v naših in zahodnih medijih ne boste zasledili. Sta pa pomembni, ker je Kitajska pač eden izmed dveh velikih globalnih igralcev. Nato pa sledi še interpretacija srečanja s strani ameriškega predsednika Bidena, ki je najbrž edina relevantna za razumevanje sedanje in prihodnje ameriške politike do Kitajske. Če povzamem v treh stavkih:

• Kitajska pravi (ob Tajvanu kot absolutni rdeči črti), da je svet dovolj velik za oba in je ponudila “solidarnost in partnerstvo” namesto “rivalstva in konfrontacije” ter 5 načel za sodelovanje.
• ZDA pravijo, da se te igre glede “solidarnosti in partnerstva” ne gredo in da organizirajo blok držav, da bi bolj učinkovito tekmovale s Kitajsko ter da pri tem zagovarjajo načela nekonfrontacije.
• Biden pa je na koncu tiskovne konference rekel, da še vedno meni, da je Xi diktator, ki vodi komunistično državo, ki temelji na popolnoma drugačni obliki vladanja od ameriške.

Interpretacija kitajskih stališč (vir: Arnaud Bertrand):

In what’s likely an extremely consequential meeting, this is what Xi told Biden according to the Chinese readout of their meeting. I think anyone who wishes to understand China’s standpoint wrt to the US should read this:

• There are 2 options for China and the U.S. going forward:
• either 1) “enhance solidarity and cooperation and join hands to meet global challenges and promote global security and prosperity”
• or 2) “cling to the zero-sum mentality, provoke rivalry and confrontation, and drive the world toward turmoil and division”
• To highlight the extreme importance of this Xi stressed that “the two choices point to two different directions that will decide the future of humanity and Planet Earth.”
• He said that “China’s development is driven by its inherent logic and dynamics. China will not take the old path of colonization and plundering, or the wrong path of seeking hegemony with growing strength. It does not export its ideology, or engage in ideological confrontation with any country.”
• He sought to reassure the US that “China does not have a plan to surpass or unseat the U.S. Likewise, the U.S. should not scheme to suppress and contain China.” The reason why is because “mutual respect, peaceful coexistence and win-win cooperation are the lessons we learned from 50 years of China-U.S. relations as well as the conflicts between major countries in history. China and the U.S. should put in a lot of efforts to follow them.”
• For the purpose of achieving “solidarity and cooperation” instead of “rivalry and confrontation” he proposed the following 5 steps/principles:

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Zadnja objava Eurostata glede industrijske proizvodnje v EU kaže zelo mračno sliko: indeks industrijske proizvodnje je v prostem padu od sredine prejšnjega leta. Denimo obseg proizvodnje septembra letos glede na lanski september je bil v celotni EU nižji za 6.1%, v evrskem območju pa za 6.9%.

Situacija v evrskem območju je tako slaba, da slike ne more popraviti niti izključitev Irske iz podatkov (glejte obe spodnji sliki; Irska zaradi davčnega režima običajno kvari sliko, ker je odvisno, ali in kdaj tuje multinacionalke zaradi davčnih razlogov prijavijo svojo aktivnost v Irski).

Nadaljujte z branjem→

Napačna diagnoza inflacije s strani vodilnih ekonomistov in centralnih bank v letih 2021–2022 je bila zadnja epizoda v dolgotrajni seriji neuspehov mainstream neomonetaristične ekonomije, od tega, da niso predvideli finančne krize leta 2008, do podpiranja samouničujočega varčevanja v letih 2010. Problem je bil, da so zaradi napačne presoje minule inflacije kot posledice povpraševalnega šoka (in pregrevanja gospodarstva) namesto kot posledice prehodnega ponudbenega šoka centralne banke inflacijo “zdravile” na napačen način – z dvigom obrestnih mer. S čimer so po nepotrebnem ubile investicije in gospodarsko aktivnost ter nepremičninski trg, spravile gospodinjstva v finančne težave ter dale ogromno darilo bankam v obliki presežnih dobičkov zaradi povečanja obrestne marže.

James Galbraith pravi, da ali morajo mainstream ekonomisti ponovno preučiti svoja temeljna prepričanja in modele ali pa stroka potrebuje nov mainstream.

In his November 7, 2023 New York Times newsletter, the economist Paul Krugman asks a good, albeit belated, question: Why did so many economists get the inflation outlook wrong? After all, the near-consensus among mainstream economists in recent years was that inflation would persist – and even accelerate – and that this justified substantial interest-rate hikes by the US Federal Reserve. Yet the quasi-inflation of 2021-22 proved transitory.

Nadaljujte z branjem→