7.3.25

The agony of the “political West”

Last week, I recounted the events concerning the Ukrainian conflict, emphasizing that the French president, Emmanuel Macron, as brilliant as he is, was incapable of adapting to changes in the world.
This week, I take the same elements, and many others that followed, to show that the divorce of Europeans from each other and of the EU from the United States has become a reality.
There is no longer time to procrastinate: the ancient world has just been destroyed. If we do not position ourselves immediately, we will be swept away with him.
However, for the moment, the United Kingdom and France are competing to take the place of the United States on the continent and not to reform.


Christoph Heusgen, former permanent representative of Germany to the United Nations and current president of the Munich Security Conference, cries upon discovering the divorce between the United States and the Europeans.

The last two weeks, we have experienced a turning point in History comparable to that of the Battle of Berlin, in April-May 1945, when the Red Army took Berlin and overthrew the Third Reich: this time, it was the Trump administration which definitively put the European Union back on the ropes.

For the moment, the EU, the G7 and the G20 have not yet been dissolved, but these three structures are already dead. The World Bank and the United Nations could follow.

Let’s look back at these events, which happened so quickly that almost none of us followed them and understood their consequences.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 12

The major European powers (i.e. Germany, Spain, France, Italy, Poland, the United Kingdom and the European Union), who feared what the Trump administration might decide, met in Paris on February 12 to develop a common position on the Ukrainian conflict. In this case, they agreed to continue what they have been doing for three years:
 deny having violated the commitments made during German reunification not to extend NATO to the East,
- deny that Ukraine is in the hands of “integral nationalists” (i.e. the party of Nazi collaborators)
-and continue the Second World War, no longer against the Nazis, but against the Russians.

Meanwhile, in Kiev, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent presented the US aid bill: $500 billion and proposed paying it by exploiting the rare earths of which the country is proud. I have already explained that this proposal was only a response from the shepherd to the shepherdess: Ukraine having falsely claimed to ultimately offer Westerners the opportunity to exploit these riches which do not exist. However, from a European point of view, what was going on was frightening: if the United States seized these so-called riches, they excluded the Europeans from benefiting from the sharing they had agreed upon. Without informing their fellow citizens, they shared Ukraine between them during its reconstruction: to the British, the ports, to the Germans, the mines, etc. They had already done this during the invasions of Iraq and Libya and during the war against Syria.

Above all, while Washington and Moscow were exchanging prisoners, the American presidents, Donald Trump, and Russian presidents, Vladimir Putin, spoke by telephone for an hour and a half. This summit was preceded by a conversation, in the Kremlin, between President Putin and Steve Wilkoff, President Trump’s special envoy who came to organize the prisoner exchange. Wilkoff had given his president a report on his mission that shattered everything NATO claimed to know about Ukraine.

Both bosses now had the same information.

The direct line between the White House and the Kremlin had just been reestablished.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 14

On February 14, the Vice President of the United States, JD Vance, addressed the diplomatic and military elite of the EU at the Security Conference in Munich. He drew up an indictment against the autism of European leaders: They refuse to respond to the concerns of their fellow citizens in terms of freedom of expression and immigration. However, if they are afraid of their people, the United States will be able to do nothing for them, he asserted, making the president of the conference, the German ambassador Christoph Heusgen, cry.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 17

A second meeting was held on February 17, still in Paris, with the same participants, plus Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, and Mark Rutte, Secretary General of NATO. They agreed to stand together against Donald Trump and not to accept any questioning of Western policy towards Russia.

Olaf Scholz, outgoing German chancellor, declared after the summit: “There must be no

division of security and responsibility between Europe and the United States. NATO is built on the fact that we always act together and share risks […]. This should not be questioned. »

Donald Tusk, Prime Minister of Poland, said: “No matter what everyone may say to each other, sometimes in harsh words […], there is no reason why the Allies cannot find a common language among themselves on the most important issues. [It is] in the interest of Europe and the United States to cooperate as closely as possible. »

Also on February 17, the Ukrainian army attacked US, Israeli and Italian interests in Russia. It bombed facilities partially owned by Chevron (15%), ExxonMobil (7.5%) and ENI (2%). Around twenty drones caused serious damage to the Caspian Pipeline Consortium (CPC), which supplies Israel with Russian oil.

The Europeans reacted no more to this operation than when the CIA sabotaged the Nord Stream gas pipeline (September 26, 2022), although it is owned not only by the Russian Gazprom (50%), but also by the Germans BASF/Wintershall and Uniper, the French Engie, the Austrian OMV and the British Royal Dutch Shell. This sabotage has thrown Germany into an economic recession, which continues to spread to the rest of the EU, not to mention increasing energy prices for all EU households.

In both cases (the Nord Stream sabotage and the CPC attack), the Europeans were unable to defend their interests. They successively let their main ally hurt them, then their allies fight each other.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 18

The European powers learned with astonishment that, at their first meeting in Riyadh (Saudi Arabia), on February 18, the US and Russian delegations agreed:
 to denazify and neutralize Ukraine,
 to respect the commitments made during German reunification and to withdraw NATO troops from all countries that joined the Atlantic Alliance after 1990.

President Trump had suddenly abandoned the plan of General Keith Kellogg, his special envoy for Ukraine, as it had been published in April 2024 by the America First Foundation. On the contrary, he had used the plan of his friend Steve Witkoff, special envoy for the Middle East, who had met Vladimir Putin in Moscow through the Saudi Crown Prince Mohamed bin Salman (known as “MBS”), hence the choice of Riyadh for these negotiations. Kellogg reasoned with NATO’s ideas, while Witkoff listened, heard and verified the validity of the Russian position.

The European powers were quickly able to verify that the order to withdraw had been transmitted to certain US troops, in the Baltic countries and in Poland. The security architecture in Europe, that is to say the system ensuring peace, was destroyed. Of course, there is no immediate threat of invasion, Russian or Chinese, but in the long term and given the time required for rearmament, everyone must immediately prepare for the best or the worst.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 19

On February19, EU ambassadors approved the 16th package of unilateral coercive measures (misleadingly called “sanctions” by Atlantic propaganda) against Russia. It was to be officially approved on 24 February by the Foreign Affairs Council on the occasion of the third anniversary of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine. In addition, the EU decided to disconnect 13 banks from the Swift system and to ban three financial institutions from trading. In addition, 73 ships of the Russian “ghost fleet” were sanctioned, and 11 Russian ports and airports that circumvent the oil price cap were banned from trading. Finally, 8 Russian media outlets also had their broadcasting licenses in the EU suspended.

Meanwhile, on the same day, February 19, President Donald Trump vented his anger at his unelected Ukrainian counterpart, calling him a “modestly successful comedian” and an “unelected dictator,” and then accusing him of provoking the war. Meanwhile, General Kellogg, the White House’s special envoy to Kiev, canceled his press conference with Volodymyr Zelensky. The Trump administration had broken with the Kiev government that the Biden administration had praised to the skies.

THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 20

Libertarian Senator Mike Lee (Utah) introduced a bill in the Senate on February 20 to completely withdraw the United States from the United Nations. Representative Chip Roy (Texas) introduced the same bill in the House of Representatives the following day.

While President Donald Trump is a “Jacksonian” (i.e., a disciple of Andrew Jackson, who wanted to replace war with business), Washington has now embraced “American exceptionalism.” This is a political theology according to which the United States is a chosen people who must bring the light they have received to the rest of the world. As such, they do not have to negotiate anything with others and especially not be accountable to them.

“American exceptionalism” should not be confused with the “isolationism” that led the Senate to refuse to join the League of Nations in 1920. This organization, unlike the UN that succeeded it, had provided for military solidarity between states that recognized international law. Consequently, the United States would have had to maintain troops to maintain peace in Europe and the Europeans could have intervened in Latin America (Washington’s “backyard” according to the “Monroe Doctrine”) to maintain peace there.

SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 22

Without waiting, Polish President Andrzej Duda went to Washington uninvited on February 22. He managed to meet President Donald Trump for ten minutes, not at the White House, but on the sidelines of the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC). He asked him not to withdraw US troops from his country, giving Poland time to complete its military restructuring. Since Warsaw has already initiated a profound internal revolution by reestablishing universal military service and building a very large army, he managed to get him to postpone, not cancel, his order.

Andrzej Duda is Polish President, at least until the May elections. Constitutionally, he does not exercise executive power, but he is nonetheless the head of the armed forces. His Prime Minister, Donald Tusk, had promised in Paris not to negotiate separately with the United States.

So, whatever one might say, the united front of the Europeans was broken. It had only lasted ten days.

MONDAY, FEBRUARY 24

On the third anniversary of the Russian special military operation in Ukraine, on 24 February, Roberta Metsola, President of the European Parliament, António Costa, President of the European Council and Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, issued a completely out-of-place joint statement. In it, they called for “a comprehensive, just and lasting peace based on the Ukrainian peace formula”, meaning they stuck to the old narrative: there are no Nazis in Ukraine and Russia is the aggressor. In doing so, they contradicted not only the facts, but also the recent statements of their economic and military overlord, the United States.

On the same day, French President Emmanuel Macron travelled to Washington, on behalf of all Atlanticist Europeans. Before receiving him, President Donald Trump had his chief of staff take him to a wing of the White House to participate in a G7 video conference that he was chairing… from another room.

For two hours, the heads of state and government of the G7, plus the Spanish Prime Minister and the unelected Ukrainian president, tried in vain to make their overlord relent. He would not budge: the Ukrainian conflict was not started by Russia, but by the Ukrainian fundamentalist nationalists hiding behind Zelensky alone. In any case, as a matter of principle, it is not possible to defend people who have just attacked US interests, even if they are located in Russia. To make himself clearly understood, Donald Trump refused to sign the final communiqué prepared by the Europeans and announced to them that, if this text were published (it had already been distributed under embargo to journalists), he would deny it and his country would leave the G7.

Only after this scandal did he receive President Emmanuel Macron. The latter chose not to confront him, but to celebrate transatlantic friendship. At the joint press conference, he interrupted his host when the latter repeated that Ukraine, not Russia, had provoked the war, but ultimately did not dare contradict him.

Meanwhile, in New York, the UN General Assembly was debating a resolution proposed by Ukraine. It denounced “the total invasion of Ukraine by the Russian Federation” and demanded that it withdraw “immediately, completely and unconditionally all its military forces from the territory of Ukraine within the internationally recognized borders of the country and that the hostilities conducted by the Russian Federation against Ukraine, in particular all attacks against civilians and civilian objects, cease immediately.”

For the first time in history since World War II, the US delegation voted against a text, along with that of Russia, against those of Canada, the Europeans and Japan who approved it.

Then, the United States presented a second resolution itself so that “the conflict be ended as soon as possible.” This text aimed to align the General Assembly with the position of the US negotiators in Riyadh. But Russia voted against it because the text “advocates for a lasting peace between Ukraine and the Russian Federation” and not for a “lasting peace within Ukraine.” As a result, the United States, considering that it had poorly drafted its proposal, abstained on its own text, while Canada, the Europeans and Japan condemned it.

TUESDAY, FEBRUARY 25

Kaja Kallas, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, travelled to Washington to meet with Secretary of State Marco Rubio. The meeting, which had been announced for a long time, was cancelled at the last minute by Mr Rubio’s secretariat, officially due to his overbooked schedule.

Ms Kallas said that instead, she would meet “with senators and (…) members of Congress to discuss Russia’s war against Ukraine and transatlantic relations”.

After EU members voted against the US at the UN, the Secretary of State refused to meet his European counterpart.

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 26

At a press conference in kyiv, Volodymyr Zelensky assured on February 26 that without security guarantees from the United States and NATO, any peace agreement would be unfair and there would be no real ceasefire.

THURSDAY 27 FEBRUARY

Before leaving Washington, Kaja Kallas, High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, gave a lecture at the Hudson Institute on February 27. She said: “We need to put pressure on Russia to also want peace. It is in a position where it does not want peace.”

Keir Starmer, British Prime Minister, went to the White House, carrying an invitation from King Charles III for a second state visit to the United Kingdom. Her Majesty’s diplomats believe that President Trump greatly enjoyed the premiere and that, given his pride, he would be sensitive to the pomp of the Crown.

During the two leaders’ press conference, President Trump claimed not to remember calling Volodymyr Zelensky a “dictator” (“Did I say that? I can’t believe I said it!”). In addition, he expressed openness to the idea of the 25% tariff hike not affecting the United Kingdom and to London returning the Chagos Islands (including the Diego Garcia base) to Mauritius.

On the substance, Keir Starmer managed to renew his country’s "special relationship" with the United States. This includes the "Five Eyes" global interception and espionage system and the delegation of the strike force (remember that the British atomic bomb could not work without the support of US military scientists).

Meanwhile, US and Russian negotiators met for six and a half hours at the US Consulate General in Istanbul for a second round of negotiations, at a "technical level". It was not a question of progress on the substance, but of resolving problems that had been addressed by the ministers in Riyadh. Namely, the operating conditions of the respective embassies in Washington and Moscow, which President Joe Biden had considerably supervised and to which Moscow had responded identically.

FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 28

The unelected Ukrainian President, Volodymyr Zelensky, visited the White House on February 28. President Trump and Vice President Vance received him, not to listen to his version of events, but to sign an agreement on rare earths that Ukraine claims to possess. Of course, he could not have done so, since they do not exist, but it was a way for the Trump administration to show the man who is no longer known whether it considers him a “democrat” or a “dictator” that he no longer had any cards in his hand.

The welcome press briefing will be remembered. The Western press was shocked by the altercation between President Trump and his guest. We must be wary of images here: they do not say the same thing at all if we stick to a selected excerpt or if we listen to the entire exchange. In an excerpt, we remember the arguments that are stated, while overall, we understand why they are stated.

During the fifty minutes of this press briefing, President Donald Trump constantly recalled that he was not aligned with either party, Russian or Ukrainian, but that he was negotiating with Russia to defend the interests of his country and, ultimately, for all of Humanity. As President of the United States, he speaks with everyone, is careful not to insult anyone and recognizes the positive points of each. On the contrary, Volodymyr Zelensky has constantly accused Russia of aggression since 2014, of murders, kidnappings and torture. He even claimed that President Vladimir Putin had violated his own signature 15 times.

Contrary to what the Western press saw, this press briefing did not focus on military aid, rare earths and even less on a division of territories. It escalated when Vice President Vance noted that his host’s narrative was “propaganda,” then returned to the charge, declaring of both versions of the facts: “We know you’re wrong!” Ultimately, President Trump noted that Ukraine was in bad shape and that his guest not only was not grateful for U.S. support, but did not want a ceasefire. Exasperated, he observed that Vladimir Putin had never violated his signature, neither with Barack Obama nor with him, but only with Joe Biden because of what the latter did to him. He then recalled the repeated false accusations made against Russia by President Biden.

SUNDAY, MARCH 2

British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said Europe is “at a crossroads of history” as he welcomed to Downing Street the leaders of Ukraine, France, Germany, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Spain, Canada, Finland, Sweden, the Czech Republic and Romania, as well as the Turkish foreign minister, the NATO secretary general and the presidents of the European Commission and European Council.

The UK and France are competing to replace the US and guarantee peace on the European continent. Both countries are said to be prepared to guarantee the security of others with their nuclear weapons. However, no one seriously considers that these would be sufficient to ensure peace in the absence of serious conventional forces, which neither London nor Paris has. At most, Warsaw began reorganising its armies and generalising conscription for its young people more than two years ago, but it still does not have enough weapons.

After the meeting, which aimed to create a “coalition of the willing”, Keir Starmer said on behalf of all participants:

“Today I welcomed to London counterparts from across Europe, including from Türkiye, as well as the Secretary General of NATO and the Presidents of the European Commission, the Council of the EU and Canada, to discuss our support for Ukraine.

Together, we reaffirmed our determination to work towards a permanent peace in Ukraine, in partnership with the United States. Europe’s security is our primary responsibility. We will tackle this historic task and increase our investment in our own defence.

We must not repeat the mistakes of the past when weak agreements allowed President Putin to invade again. We will work with President Trump to secure a strong, just, and lasting peace that ensures Ukraine’s future sovereignty and security. Ukraine must be able to defend itself against future Russian attacks. There must be no talks on Ukraine without Ukraine. We agreed that the United Kingdom, France, and others will work with Ukraine on a plan to end the fighting that we will discuss further with the United States and move forward together (…) In addition, many of us have expressed our readiness to contribute to Ukraine’s security, including through a force of European and other partners, and will intensify our planning. We will continue to work closely together to advance next steps and make decisions in the weeks ahead.”

The participants in this summit have not changed their analysis of the Ukrainian conflict at all. They remain deaf to the United States and, as a result, no longer understand it. They managed to unite not to deploy a peace stabilisation force in Ukraine, but to protect critical infrastructure in western Ukraine or in similar strategic areas. They agreed not to make fragmented national efforts, but to take advantage of the economic power of the European Union (EU) by redirecting its recovery funds. They therefore convened a special European Council on March 6. However, to transform the EU from a common market to a military alliance, they will need not a majority, but the unanimity of the 27 Member States, including Hungary and Slovakia.

And yet, already, Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian Prime Minister, has responded to the draft final declaration of the European Council by stressing that there are “strategic differences” between the EU states. He therefore advocates that there should be no written conclusions, because "any attempt to do so would project the image of a divided European Union."

Translation
Roger Lagassé

3.3.25

El plan maestro de Donald Trump para la economía

Yanis Varoufakis


Frente a las medidas económicas del presidente Trump, sus críticos centristas oscilan entre la desesperación y una conmovedora fe en que se desvanezca su frenesí arancelario. Suponen que Trump resoplará y resoplará hasta que la realidad deje al descubierto la vacuidad de su razonamiento económico. No han estado prestando atención: la fijación arancelaria de Trump forma parte de un plan económico global que es sólido, aunque sea algo intrínsecamente arriesgado.

Su forma de pensar [de ellos] conecta directamente con un concepto erróneo de cómo se mueven el capital, el comercio y el dinero en todo el mundo. Como el cervecero que se emborracha con su propia cerveza, los centristas acabaron creyéndose su propia propaganda: que vivimos en un mundo de mercados competitivos en el que el dinero es neutral y los precios se ajustan para equilibrar la oferta y la demanda de todo. Ese Trump tan poco sofisticado es, de hecho, mucho más sofisticado que ellos en el sentido de que entiende cómo el poder económico en bruto, y no la productividad marginal, decide quién hace qué a quién, tanto a escala nacional como internacional.

Aunque nos arriesgamos a que el abismo nos devuelva la mirada cuando intentamos darle una ojeada a la mente de Trump, necesitamos comprender su pensamiento en relación con tres cuestiones fundamentales: ¿por qué piensa él que los Estados Unidos están explotados por el resto del mundo? ¿Cuál es su visión de un nuevo orden internacional en el que los Estados Unidos puedan volver a ser “grandes”? ¿Cómo piensa conseguirlo? Sólo entonces podremos elaborar una crítica sensata del plan director económico de Trump.

¿Por qué cree el presidente que los Estados Unidos ha recibido un trato malo? Su principal queja consiste en que la supremacía del dólar puede conferir enormes poderes al gobierno y a la clase dirigente de los Estados Unidos, pero, en última instancia, los extranjeros la están utilizando de forma que garantiza el declive de los Estados Unidos. Así es que lo que la mayoría considera un privilegio desorbitado de los Estados Unidos, lo ve él como una carga desorbitada.

Trump lleva décadas lamentando el declive de la industria manufacturera estadounidense: “Si no tienes acero, no tienes país”. Pero ¿por qué culpar de esto al papel global del dólar? Pus porque, responde Trump, los bancos centrales extranjeros no dejan que el dólar se ajuste a la baja hasta el nivel “correcto”, en el que las exportaciones estadounidenses se recuperan y las importaciones se frenan. No es que los bancos centrales extranjeros estén conspirando contra los Estados Unidos. Es tan solo que el dólar es la única reserva internacional segura de la que pueden echar mano. Es natural que los bancos centrales europeos y asiáticos atesoren los dólares que fluyen hacia Europa y Asia cuando los norteamericanos importan cosas. Al no cambiar sus reservas de dólares por sus propias monedas, el Banco Central Europeo, el Banco de Japón, el Banco Popular de China y el Banco de Inglaterra suprimen la demanda de sus monedas (y, por tanto, su valor). Esto ayuda a sus propios exportadores a aumentar sus ventas a los Estados Unidos y ganar aún más dólares. En un círculo sin fin, estos dólares frescos se acumulan en las arcas de los banqueros centrales extranjeros que, para ganar intereses con seguridad, los utilizan para comprar deuda pública estadounidense.

Y ahí está el problema. Según Trump, los Estados Unidos importan demasiado porque son un buen ciudadano global que se siente obligado a proporcionar a los extranjeros los activos en dólares de reserva que necesitan. En resumen, la industria manufacturera estadounidense entró en declive porque los Estados Unidos son un buen samaritano: sus trabajadores y su clase media sufren para que el resto del mundo pueda crecer a su costa.

Pero el estatus hegemónico del dólar también apuntala el excepcionalismo estadounidense, como bien sabe y aprecia Trump. La compra de bonos del Tesoro norteamericano por parte de los bancos centrales extranjeros permite al gobierno norteamericano incurrir en déficit y pagar un ejército sobredimensionado que llevaría a la bancarrota a cualquier otro país. Y al constituir el eje de los pagos internacionales, el dólar hegemónico permite al presidente ejercer el equivalente moderno de la diplomacia de las cañoneras: sancionar a voluntad a cualquier persona o gobierno.

Esto no es suficiente, a los ojos de Trump, para compensar el sufrimiento de los productores norteamericanos que se ven debilitados por extranjeros cuyos banqueros centrales explotan un servicio (las reservas de dólares) que los Estados Unidos les prestan gratuitamente para mantener sobrevalorado el dólar. Para Trump, Estados Unidos se está socavando a sí mismo por la gloria del poder geopolítico y la oportunidad de acumular beneficios ajenos. Estas riquezas importadas benefician a Wall Street y a los agentes inmobiliarios, pero sólo a expensas de las personas que le han elegido dos veces: los norteamericanos de las zonas centrales que producen aquellos bienes «varoniles» como el acero y los automóviles que una nación necesita para seguir siendo viable.

Y esa no es la peor de las preocupaciones de Trump. Su pesadilla es que esta hegemonía sea efímera. Ya en 1988, mientras promocionaba su Art of the Deal con Larry King y Oprah Winfrey, se lamentaba: “Somos una nación deudora. Va a pasar algo en los próximos años en este país, porque no se puede seguir perdiendo 200.000 millones de dólares al año”. Desde entonces, está cada vez más convencido de que se acerca un terrible punto de inflexión: a medida que la producción de los Estados Unidos disminuye en términos relativos, la demanda mundial del dólar aumenta más rápidamente que los ingresos norteamericanos. El dólar tiene entonces que apreciarse aún más rápido para satisfacer las necesidades de reservas del resto del mundo. Esto no puede durar eternamente.

Cuando los déficits norteamericanos superen un cierto umbral, los extranjeros entrarán en pánico. Venderán sus activos denominados en dólares y buscarán otra moneda con la que atesorar. Los norteamericanos quedarán en medio del caos internacional, con un sector manufacturero destrozado, unos mercados financieros en ruinas y un Gobierno insolvente. Este escenario de pesadilla ha convencido a Trump de que tiene la misión de salvar a los Estados Unidos: que tiene el deber de marcar el comienzo de un nuevo orden internacional. Y esa es la esencia de su plan: llevar a cabo en 2025 un decisivo shock anti-Nixon, una conmoción global que anule la obra de su predecesor al poner fin al sistema de Bretton Woods de 1971, que fue la punta de lanza de la era de la financiarización.

Un elemento central de este nuevo orden mundial sería un dólar más barato que siguiera siendo moneda de reserva mundial, lo cual reduciría aún más los tipos de interés de los préstamos a largo plazo de los Estados Unidos. ¿Puede Trump nadar (con un dólar hegemónico y unos bonos del Tesoro norteamericano de bajo rendimiento) y guardar la ropa (con un dólar depreciado)? Sabe que los mercados nunca lo conseguirán por sí solos. Sólo los bancos centrales extranjeros pueden hacerlo por él. Pero para que acepten hacerlo, primero hay que provocarles una sacudida. Y ahí es donde entran en juego sus aranceles.

Y esto es lo que sus críticos no entienden. Creen erróneamente que él piensa que sus aranceles reducirán por sí solos el déficit comercial de Estados Unidos. Él sabe que no lo reducirán. Su utilidad estriba en su capacidad para conmocionar a los bancos centrales extranjeros y hacer que reduzcan los tipos de interés nacionales. En consecuencia, el euro, el yen y el renminbi se debilitarán frente al dólar. Esto anulará las subidas de precios de los bienes importados a Estados Unidos y no afectará a los precios que pagan los consumidores norteamericanos. Los países con aranceles pagarán de hecho los aranceles de Trump.

Pero los aranceles son únicamente la primera fase de su plan maestro. Con unos aranceles elevados como nuevo valor por defecto, y con el dinero extranjero que se acumula en el Tesoro, Trump puede esperar su momento mientras claman por hablar amigos y enemigos en Europa y Asia. Es entonces cuando entra en acción la segunda fase del plan de Trump: la gran negociación.

A diferencia de sus predecesores, de Carter a Biden, Trump desdeña las reuniones multilaterales y las negociaciones multitudinarias. Es un hombre del tú a tú. Su mundo ideal es un modelo de centro y radios, como la rueda de una bicicleta, en el que ninguno de los radios individuales influye demasiado en el funcionamiento de la rueda. En esta visión del mundo, Trump confía en que puede tratar cada radio secuencialmente. Con los aranceles por un lado y la amenaza de retirar el escudo de seguridad de Estados Unidos (o desplegarlo contra ellos) por el otro, cree que puede conseguir que la mayoría de los países den su aquiescencia.

¿Aquiescencia a qué? A una apreciación substancial de su moneda sin liquidar su tenencia de dólares a largo plazo. No sólo esperará que cada interlocutor recorte los tipos de interés nacionales, sino que exigirá cosas distintas de los distintos interlocutores. A los países asiáticos, que son los que más dólares atesoran en la actualidad, les exigirá que vendan una parte de sus activos en dólares a corto plazo a cambio de su propia moneda (que se apreciará). A una eurozona relativamente pobre en dólares y plagada de divisiones internas, lo cual incrementa su poder de negociación, Trump puede exigirles tres cosas: que acepten cambiar sus bonos a largo plazo por bonos a muy largo plazo o incluso perpetuos, que permitan que la fabricación alemana emigre a Estados Unidos, y, naturalmente, que compren muchas más armas fabricadas en los Estados Unidos.

¿Se imaginan la sonrisa de Trump al pensar en esta segunda fase de su plan maestro? Cuando un gobierno extranjero acceda a sus demandas, se habrá apuntado otra victoria. Y cuando algún gobierno recalcitrante se resista, los aranceles no se moverán, proporcionando a su Tesoro un flujo constante de dólares de los que podrá disponer como mejor le parezca (ya que el Congreso sólo controla los ingresos fiscales). Una vez completada esta segunda fase de su plan, el mundo se habrá dividido en dos bandos: un bando protegido por la seguridad norteamericana a costa de una moneda apreciada, la pérdida de plantas de fabricación y la compra forzosa de exportaciones norteamericanas, incluidas las armas. El otro campo estará estratégicamente más cerca tal vez de China y Rusia, pero todavía conectado a los EE.UU. a través de un comercio reducido que todavía proporcionará a los EE.UU. ingresos arancelarios regulares.

La visión de Trump de un orden económico internacional deseable puede ser violentamente diferente de la mía, pero eso no nos da a ninguno de nosotros licencia para subestimar su solidez y propósito, como hace la mayoría de los centristas. Como todos los planes bien trazados, esto puede torcerse, por supuesto. La depreciación del dólar puede que no sea suficiente para anular el efecto de los aranceles sobre los precios que pagan los consumidores norteamericanos. O puede que la venta de dólares sea demasiado grande como para mantener lo suficientemente bajos los rendimientos de la deuda norteamericana a largo plazo. Pero además de estos riesgos manejables, el plan maestro se pondrá a prueba en dos frentes políticos.

La primera amenaza política a su plan maestro es interna. Si el déficit comercial empieza a reducirse según lo previsto, el dinero privado extranjero dejará de inundar Wall Street. De golpe, Trump tendrá que traicionar a su propia tribu de financieros y agentes inmobiliarios indignados o a la clase trabajadora que le eligió. Mientras tanto, se abrirá un segundo frente. Considerando a todos los países como radios de su eje, Trump puede pronto descubrir que ha fomentado la disidencia en el exterior. Pekín puede abandonar sus precauciones y convertir los BRICS en un nuevo sistema de Bretton Woods en el que el yuan desempeñe el papel de anclaje que desempeñó el dólar en el Bretton Woods original. Este sería acaso el legado más asombroso, y el merecido que recibiría el plan maestro, impresionante por demás, de Trump.
 
Yanis Varoufakis  exministro de Finanzas de Grecia, dirigente del partido MeRA25 y profesor de Economía en la Universidad de Atenas. Su último libro es “Tecnofeudalismo: El sigiloso sucesor del capitalismo” (Ed. Argentina, 2024).
Fuente:
Unherd, 12 de febrero de 2025, https://unherd.com/2025/02/why-trumps-tariffs-are-a-masterplan/

2.3.25

Trump y Vance acusan a Zelensky de provocar la tercera guerra mundial: ¿suicidio europeo o "síndrome de Masada"?

 Alfredo Jalife-Rahme

En el encontronazo del presbiteriano Trump y su vicepresidente, el católico J. D. Vance, con el clepto-porno-comediante jázaro (https://bit.ly/3QqemJr) Zelensky resaltó lo que verdaderamente está en juego: una tercera guerra mundial (TGM) contra Rusia instigada por los cuatro jinetes BlackRock/Banca Rothschild/George Soros/Bloomberg, amos del ilegítimo presidente ucranio quien finiquitó su mandato en mayo del año pasado.

Además, está en juego el vellocino de oro del siglo 21: US$13 billones (trillones en anglosajón) de tierras raras en Ucrania y su inigualable “tierra negra ( chernozem)”, donde los cuatro jinetes apostaron pletóricos capitales y quienes, al parecer, prefieren una TGM antes de que estalle la burbuja financiera de los “derivados financieros (https://bit.ly/3D5i6gw)” que se manejan fuera de los balances contables tradicionales (off-balance-sheet) y que pueden alcanzar la aterradora cifra de US$2 mil billones (¡ megasic!), inherentes al modelo especulativo de la globalización financierista, cuya explosión sería peor a una conflagración termonuclear. Poco se presta atención a la grave situación financiera en Occidente cuando nada menos que Elon Musk reconoce la inviabilidad de la deuda de EU con el pago de sus intereses que exceden su gasto militar anual (https://bit.ly/41zEzvE). That’s the name of the game!

Más allá de la folclórica expulsión de Zelensky de la Casa Blanca (https://bit.ly/3QEQ3Yz), The Telegraph expone su grave error por haber interpelado al vicepresidente Vance (https://bit.ly/3XmtRWW), como parte de su desastre diplomático, cuando Trump conminó al ilegítimo presidente ucranio a “regresar cuando esté listo para hacer la paz (https://bit.ly/4hXNNHR)”. Se suicidó Europa –en particular la triada bélica Londres/París/Berlín– transmutada en el clepto-porno-comediante jázaro Zelensky, quien practica el clásico “síndrome de Masada (https://bit.ly/4iepUfz)” de sus correligionarios. The Economist, de los banqueros Rothschild, reconoce el doble desastre de Zelensky y Ucrania en la Casa Blanca (https://bit.ly/3XpLSUh).

Más allá de que los neonazis (literal) de la facción Bandera hoy festejen en los bares de Kiev que Zelensky confrontó a Trump y a J. D. Vance en la Casa Blanca, lo real es que Ucrania se quedó huérfana del relevante apoyo de su otrora principal aliado EU. Ahora los omnipotentes multimedia que controlan los cuatro jinetes jázaros se han lanzado en nado sincrónico a la yugular de Trump al tildarlo, en la revista gala Le Point, de “agente de la KGB (https://bit.ly/4bpNR0Q)” con el mote de Krasnov, y tanto The Economist (https://bit.ly/43hgKdu) como el jázaro Thomas Freedman, del NYT, lo injurian de “gánster (https://bit.ly/4h2j23l)”. ¡No, bueno!

El problema es que los dos bandos que hoy chocan por el alma de Occidente –Trump/Vance/Musk vs los cuatro jinetes BlackRock/Banca Rothschild/George Soros/Bloomberg– se tildan mutuamente de gánsteres, como es el caso notorio de Kash Patel, hoy flamante director de la FBI con Trump, quien publicó hace año y medio su estrujante libro Los gánsteres del gobierno: el DeepState, la verdad y la batalla por nuestra democracia (https://bit.ly/4gYrVuR)”.

El muy influyente senador republicano Lindsey Graham descuartizó al ya despellejado Zelensky al reclamar su renuncia o defenestración expeditas (https://bit.ly/41CZxtR). Seguirá resonando la frase de Trump cuando interrumpió a Zelensky para decirle que carecía de cartas para jugar frente a Rusia sin la ayuda de EU. En efecto, el destino de Ucrania y Zelensky se definieron hace mucho en el campo de batalla.

Hoy Putin detenta y ostenta las cartas, quien, por cierto, se entrevistó largamente por teléfono con el mandarín Xi Jinping, otro gran triunfador del nuevo orden mundial que cada vez más se asienta que será tripolar o no será. En la fase post-Zelensky (https://bit.ly/4hYgjt4), Trump/Vance ya pueden cooperar con Putin sobre las pletóricas tierras raras que detenta Rusia en su propio territorio y que conquistó en la misma Ucrania (https://bit.ly/3EZPu97).