YCLOAK

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said Wednesday that Janet Yellen has not said yet whether she plans to remain on the Federal Reserve board when her term as chair ends in February, but the administration is moving ahead with filling other vacancies.

There are three vacancies on the seven-member Fed board and there could be a fourth if Yellen decides to leave. Her term as a board member does not end until 2024.

In an interview on Bloomberg TV, Mnuchin said he had breakfast with Yellen on Wednesday from which he came away with the impression that she had not made a decision about her future at the Fed.

Last week, President Donald Trump announced he would nominate Fed board member Jerome Powell as the next Fed chairman, bypassing Yellen.

If Yellen did stay on the board, she would be only the second former chair to do so. Marriner Eccles, whose name is on the Fed’s headquarters in Washington, remained on the board for three years after he was not nominated for another term as chair by Harry Truman in 1948.

Mnuchin said the goal was to fill the vacancies quickly, but the administration did not necessarily see a need to pick someone with a PhD in economics for the vice chair position even though Powell will be the first person to lead the Fed without a degree in economics in nearly four decades.

“I think our priority is that we are going to fill these positions quickly. Our focus was on the chair,” Mnuchin said. “Now that we have resolved that issue, we are already looking at people for these positions. So I am comfortable we will have the jobs filled.”

Before Trump’s announcement last week, Yellen had declined to say what she might do if she was not tapped for a second term.

“I have said that I intend to serve out my term as chair, and that I’m really not going to comment on my intentions beyond that,” she told reporters in September.
…

Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross plans to completely divest from a shipping company that counts a Russian gas producer with ties to the Kremlin among its major customers.

 

A commerce department spokesman says Ross plans to sell all his shares of Navigator Holdings. That company ships products from Sibur, a Russian gas producer whose owners include two Russian oligarchs close to President Vladimir Putin and a businessman believed to be Putin’s son-in-law.

 

Details of the Ross stake in Navigator were revealed among the Paradise Papers leak of documents about offshore entities.

 

Critics have said Ross should not hold the stock given his public office. He has said that he disclosed his stake in reports filed with the government earlier this year and has done nothing wrong.
…

The European Commission said Wednesday it wants to cut emissions of carbon dioxide from cars by 30 percent by 2030 and boost the use of electric vehicles by making them cheaper and easier to charge.

 

The proposal stops short of imposing fixed quotas for emission-free vehicles and is more modest than goals already set out by some EU members. Still, European automakers said the commission’s targets were too drastic, and Germany’s foreign minister warned against the proposal.

 

Commission Vice President Maros Sefcovic insisted that the plan is the most “realistic” compromise between Europe’s ambitions to blaze trails on clean energy and the costs that the continent’s powerful car manufacturers will have to bear to overhaul workforces and production.

 

Current targets require automakers to achieve the average permitted emission for new models in the European Union of 95 grams of CO2 per kilometer for cars, or 147 grams for light commercial vehicles by 2021.

 

The new proposal foresees a further reduction of 15 percent by 2025 and 30 percent by 2030, compared to 2021 levels.

 

Car companies that fail to meet those targets face substantial fines of 95 euros ($110) per excess gram of carbon dioxide – per car. Automakers that manage to equip at least 30 percent of their new cars with electric or other low-emission engines by 2030 will be given credits toward their carbon tally.

 

The European Automobile Manufacturers’ Association, an industry body, criticized the 2025 target, saying “it does not leave enough time to make the necessary technical and design changes to vehicles, in particular to light commercial vehicles given their longer development and production cycles.”

 

The lobby group also said the targeted cut of 30 percent by 2030 was “overly challenging” and called for a 20 percent reduction instead, saying that was “achievable at a high, but acceptable, cost.”

 

“The current proposal is very aggressive when we consider the low and fragmented market penetration of alternatively-powered vehicles across Europe to date,” the group’s secretary general, Erik Jonnaert, said.

 

Germany’s foreign minister wrote to the commission last week to say the new rules shouldn’t “suffocate” the ability of automakers to innovate.

 

In a letter obtained by The Associated Press, Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel said all European countries benefit from the jobs the auto industry creates and warned that the time frame for emissions cuts “mustn’t be too restrictive.”

 

The letter caused friction within the German government, which is currently hosting a two-week United Nations meeting on implementing the 2015 Paris climate accord.

 

“The contents of this letter weren’t coordinated within the Cabinet,” a spokeswoman for Germany’s environment ministry, Friederike Langenbruch, told reporters in Berlin.

 

Germany is predicted to fall short of its own climate goals, in large part due to continued high emissions from coal-fired electricity plants and vehicle traffic.

 

The European executive’s plan also includes 800 million euros in funding for the expansion and standardization of electric charging stations Europe-wide.

 
…

Emerging nations pressed developed countries Wednesday to step up cuts in greenhouse gas emissions by 2020 to kick-start the Paris climate agreement, saying the rich were wrongly focused on 2030 goals.

“We came here needing to hit the accelerator, not the brakes,” Brazil’s chief negotiator Antonio Marcondes told Reuters on the sidelines of the November 6-17 negotiations in Germany on limiting global warming.

In 2015, almost 200 governments agreed on the Paris accord to end the fossil fuel era by 2100 and remained united last year in declaring action “irreversible” after Donald Trump, who has called man-made climate change a hoax, won the U.S. presidential election.

But that unity is fraying.

Under the Paris Agreement, most governments set targets for cutting emissions by 2030, with little focus on shorter-term milestones.

Brazil and nations including India, China and Iran now want to fill the gap with more action by 2020 to cut greenhouse gas emissions, especially by the rich, which have burned the most fossil fuels since the Industrial Revolution.

“While action on [the] post-2020 period under the Paris Agreement has gained momentum, the discussions on pre-2020 actions have lagged behind,” India’s chief negotiator Ravi S. Prasad said this week.

Actions defended

Developed nations say they are acting. European Union officials pointed to proposals on Wednesday for tougher car emissions targets, including a credit system for carmakers to encourage the rollout of electric vehicles.

Nazhat Shameem Khan, chief negotiator for Fiji, which is presiding at the meeting, said: “Clearly, there is strong appetite for a constructive and focused discussion on pre-2020.

“I think it’s a generalized view … that there hasn’t been enough discussion” about what to do before 2020, she said.

Overall, she said, the talks, also working on a detailed rule book for the Paris Agreement, were advancing well and that the United States delegation was being “constructive and helpful.”

Trump said in June that he would pull the United States out of the Paris Agreement, a process that will take effect in 2020, and instead promote coal and oil.

A pullout will isolate the United States since Syria, the only other nation outside the pact, said Tuesday that it would join.

Under the Paris Agreement, the period to 2020 is a gap partly because backers of the 2015 pact assumed it might take years for parliaments to ratify it. The deal entered into force in record time last November.

Camilla Born, of the E3G think tank, said the Paris Agreement was now a victim of its own success. “It’s right now to shine the spotlight on more action by 2020,” she said.
…

Wine producers in Argentina, renowned for its plush Malbecs, are furious over a tax proposal they say would crush exports and domestic sales as vineyards struggle after two of their lowest vintages in recent history.

The bill, unveiled last week by President Maurico Macri’s government, proposes a 10 percent tax on wine for consumers.

Argentine wine is not taxed, unlike beer, mineral water and sugary drinks.

Vineyards in Argentina, the world’s No. 6 wine producer and No. 10 exporter, have struggled to stay competitive internationally due to high labor, shipping and production costs.

While 70 percent of Argentine wine is consumed locally, much of it in the country’s famed cafes and steakhouses, years of double-digit inflation has cut domestic sales. Volatile weather ravaged crops for the past two seasons.

Producers say the tax would cripple them and hurt efforts to boost exports just as Macri seeks to open Argentina’s economy to the world after more than a decade of protectionism.

“When you don’t have a cost advantage in the domestic market, you cannot compete outside because you have a big chunk of your business here,” said Rafael Calderon, chief executive of Bodegas Bianchi, a winery based in Argentina’s top wine-producing province, Mendoza.

Businesses are generally happy with Macri’s tax reform proposal, which aims to slash corporate income taxes. It also aims to be revenue neutral in five years to avoid straining a wide fiscal deficit, so it added taxes on consumption. These included a 17 percent duty on champagne and a doubling in the tax on beer to 17 percent.

Open to Discussion

Macri told Reuters in an interview on Tuesday his government was willing to listen to wine producers’ concerns and said he wants Argentina to be a top wine exporter.

“We bet on the future of that industry,” he said. “We think we can substantially increase our wine exports in future years if we succeed to open markets because we compete with many other producers.”

Government officials, who will meet on Wednesday with the governor of Mendoza, have noted that alcoholic beverages in Argentina are taxed much lower than in other wine-producing countries like Chile, where domestic consumption is taxed at 20.5 percent.

Argentine producers are also angry about being lumped into the same category as beer, spirits and sugary drinks. They say wine has proven health benefits.

They note internal consumption fell 9.2 percent in 2016 from 2015 according to the National Institute of Viticulture.

Potentially adding to the sour grapes, Brazil’s Agriculture Minister has said the European Union is trying to negotiate access for European wines to the Mercosur trade bloc, which includes Brazil and Argentina.

Argentine wine producers had hoped for a lifeline from Macri to boost exports in the form of financing or subsidies.

“This is an industry the government should help to grow abroad. Nobody can do Malbec better than us,” said wine producer Esteban Baigun, director general of Codorniu Group in Latin America.

Baigun said his cost of goods shot up by 47 percent in the last year and it was cheaper to ship wine to China than truck it from Mendoza to Buenos Aires.

Together with other wine producers, he planned to ask the government to consider a gradual tax increase, delaying its start so the industry has more time to recover.

“We understand that we all need to contribute something, but they need to take the consideration that we are struggling,” Baigun said.
…

Players line up beside a small kiosk in a poor neighborhood to choose animals in a lottery game that has become a craze in Venezuela even as the oil-rich country suffers a fourth year of brutal recession.

It seems more and more Venezuelans are turning to gambling in their desperation to make ends meet amid the country’s unprecedented economic crisis.

Though more people lose than win overall, the illusion of a payday has become more alluring as Venezuelans endure the world’s highest inflation, shortages of basics from flour to car batteries, and diminished real-term wages. 

Among multiple options from race courses to back-street betting parlors, the roulette-style “Los Animalitos” (or the Little Animals) is currently by far the most popular game on the street.

“Most people I see playing the lottery are unemployed, trying to make a bit extra this way because the payouts are good,” said Veruska Torres, 26, a nurse who recently lost her job in a pharmacy and now plays Animalitos every day.

Torres often plays more than a dozen times daily at the kiosk in Catia, spending between 5,000-10,000 bolivars, but sometimes making up to 50,000 or 60,000 bolivars in winnings – more than a quarter of the monthly minimum wage.

When that happens, she splits the money between buying food and diapers for her baby boy, and re-investing in the lottery.

The Animalitos game, whose results appear on YouTube at scheduled times, is hugely popular because it goes through various rounds, holding people’s interest, and provides more chances to win than most traditional betting options.

The cheapest ticket costs just 100 bolivars – a quarter of a U.S. cent at the black market currency rate, and more than 10 times less than that at the official exchange level.

“It helped me a lot,” said Eduardo Liendo, 63, of a timely win. He recently lost his house and lives in a car in Caracas’ Propatria neighborhood, but had a successful punt on the Animalitos, choosing the dog figure after his own had died.

There is no hard data on betting figures, and the government’s betting regulator did not answer requests from Reuters for information. But those behind Venezuela’s gambling businesses, run by a mixture of private companies and local regional authorities, said trade was booming, with lines longer and busier than ever – because of, not despite, the hard times.

“In a crisis like the one we’re going through, people drink and gamble more to escape from reality,” said psychologist Rosa Garcia from the rural state of Barinas.

The latest scarcity in Venezuela is cash – as authorities cannot produce enough notes to keep up with dizzying inflation – so many bars, shops and betting parlors have quickly switched from cash to electronic transactions to keep money flowing.

That has hit the Caracas hippodrome, where cash is still king. But thousands still go there at weekends, pushing against fences in front of the sand track to cheer their horse on as salsa music booms in the background.
…

The U.S. Senate Banking Committee unanimously backed new sanctions targeting Chinese banks that do business with North Korea on Tuesday, just before President Donald Trump visits Beijing for the first time since taking office.

As well as strengthening existing sanctions and congressional oversight, the measure will target foreign financial institutions — in China and elsewhere — that provide services to those subject to North Korea-related sanctions by the U.S. Congress, a presidential order or U.N. Security Council resolution.

All 12 Republicans and 11 Democrats on the panel voted for the “Otto Warmbier Banking Restrictions Involving North Korea (BRINK) Act,” clearing the way for its consideration by the full Senate.

The bill was named after a U.S. student who died earlier this year after he was imprisoned in North Korea, further chilling already poor relations between Washington and Pyongyang.

“For too long, we’ve been complacent about the growing and gathering threat from the North Korean regime,” Republican Pat Toomey, one of the bill’s authors, said after the committee voted.

Democratic Senator Chris Van Hollen, another author, said that in addition to Chinese banks, Malaysian financial institutions might end up in its sights.

Trump is due to wrap up a visit to Seoul on Wednesday with a major speech on North Korea, and then shift focus to China, where he is expected to press a reluctant President Xi Jinping to tighten the screws further on Pyongyang.

Some of Trump’s fellow Republicans, as well as many Democrats, have been critical of Trump’s bellicose rhetoric about North Korea, and have called for the use of economic tools like sanctions or more negotiations before talking of war.

Washington so far has largely held off on imposing new sanctions against Chinese banks and companies doing business with North Korea, given fears of retaliation by Beijing and possibly far-reaching effects on the world economy.

Van Hollen told reporters on Monday ahead of the committee vote that he wished Trump would follow the model of President Theodore Roosevelt and “speak softly and carry a big stick,” adding: “We’re trying to give him a little bigger stick with the sanctions.”

Republican and Democratic lawmakers said last week they had reached a bipartisan agreement on the sanctions bill. A companion bill has been introduced in the House of Representatives.

The leaders of the Republican-led Senate have not said when the chamber might vote on the legislation.

 

 
…

Inflation in Venezuela’s crisis-hit economy was 826 percent in the 10 months to October and may end 2017 above 1,400 percent, the opposition-controlled National Assembly said Friday.

The government stopped releasing price data more than a year ago but congress has published its own figures since January and they have been close to private economists’ estimates.

As well as the alarming Jan-Oct cumulative rise, the legislative body, which has been sidelined by President Nicolas Maduro’s government, put monthly inflation at 45.5 percent for October, compared with 36.3 percent in September.

Opponents say Maduro and his predecessor, Hugo Chavez, have wrecked a once-prosperous economy with 18 years of state-led socialist policies from nationalizations to currency controls.

The government says it is victim of an “economic war” including speculation and hoarding by pro-opposition businessmen, combined with U.S. sanctions and the fall in global oil prices from mid-2014. OPEC member Venezuela relies on crude oil for more than 95 percent of its export revenues.

Prices in Venezuela, which has long had one of the highest inflation rates in the world, rose 180.9 percent in 2015 and 274 percent in 2016, according to official figures, although many economists believe the real data was worse.

Announcing the October calculations, opposition lawmaker Angel Alvarado told the National Assembly that inflation next year could reach 12,000 percent.

“This is dramatic, this is Venezuelans’ big problem, it’s what keeps workers awake at night, it’s what’s killing the people with hunger,” Alvarado said.

In a research note this week, New York-based Torino Capital estimated Venezuela’s 2017 inflation would be 1,032 percent.

A central bank spokeswoman could not provide official data.
…

Unless emissions can be drastically and quickly curbed, efforts by small island nations to adapt to climate change may be in vain, a leader of a group of small island nations said Tuesday.

Hurricanes that hit the Caribbean this year were like nothing seen before, with Hurricane Irma so strong it was picked up by seismic machines that detect earthquake tremors, officials said.

National plans to curb planet-warming emissions, drawn up ahead of the Paris Agreement, currently add up to a projected temperature rise of 3 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels by 2100 — well above the 1 degree Celsius rise already seen.

That may bring climate impacts that are impossible for small island nations to deal with, their leaders warned Tuesday at the U.N. climate talks in Bonn.

If ambition to curb climate remains modest, “have we created a situation for small island developing states where resilience may not necessarily be … achievable?” asked Janine Felson, Belize ambassador to the United Nations and vice chair of the Alliance of Small Island States.

This year, Hurricane Maria destroyed broad swaths of homes and infrastructure on the Caribbean island of Dominica and stripped its trees bare. Barbuda island was left temporarily uninhabitable when Irma whipped through the region.

“In the Caribbean we’re used to hurricanes, but … for the first time we’ve seen storms turbocharge and supersize in a matter of hours,” she said, speaking on the sidelines of the climate talks.

The storms’ impact was “quite apocalyptic,” and magnified the acute vulnerability of small island states, Felson said.

Even so, countries — who are now clear on the risks — can take steps to protect themselves by building structures better able to weather storms, and ensuring policies take into account the rapidly changing climate, she said.

“If we do not know the extent of our vulnerability, then we will not change,” Felson said.

Bouncing back

In Fiji, resilience to the rapidly changing climate is about communities being able to bounce back, rebuild together and become stronger, said Inia Seruiratu, Fiji minister for agriculture, rural and maritime development, and national disaster management.

When Cyclone Winston struck Fiji last year, it caused $100 million in damage to infrastructure alone. Businesses and people’s livelihoods suffered, women and girls became more vulnerable, and school records were lost, Seruiratu said.

“We need to put in place response measures that will allow vulnerable countries to cope with such severities,” he said.

Small island states also need to look at climate risk insurance schemes, and diversify their economies, he said.

“Our dependence on agriculture and tourism makes our economies particularly vulnerable,” he said.

Felson said that international climate funds — including the Green Climate Fund, the Least Developed Countries Fund and the South-South Cooperation Fund on Climate Change — need to better serve the needs of the most vulnerable countries facing climate impacts now.

Countries should also try to tap into the private sector, where much more financing is potentially available, she added.

No fossil fuel

Small island nation campaigners are pushing for countries to immediately phase out existing fossil fuel projects and ban new ones, alongside the overall Paris Agreement commitment to switch to renewable energy by the second half of the century as a way to keep planet-warming to no more than 1.5 degrees Celsius.

“We are fighting for our future. We want our children to be able to live where we live, to learn about our traditions, our culture,” said Billy Cava, Pacific coordinator for 350.org, an activist group, as he described changes in his home territory of New Caledonia.

With new coal mines and coal-fired power plants opening in many parts of the world — including a huge new mine planned in Australia — rapidly phasing out all fossil fuels remains a challenge, experts say.

But the stakes are too high to not push for this change, one campaigner from Fiji said.

“We have to move our plantations inland; we have to build back better after storms,” said Alisi Rabukawaqa-Nacewa, the Fiji program coordinator for the Coral Reef Alliance and a member of Pacific Island Represent campaign group.

“But that is not enough. We cannot keep adapting, moving farther and farther inland. What can we do? Build on the top of the mountain, buildings in the sky? No, we need a phase-out of fossil fuels,” she said.
…

The United States and other countries hoping to host the 2026 World Cup should provide government guarantees on visa-free travel plus work permit and tax exemptions for their bids to be accepted, according to documents published by FIFA on Tuesday.

The U.S wants to host the 2026 tournament in a joint bid with Canada and Mexico, who would also have to commit to the government guarantees for their proposal to be accepted by soccer’s world governing body.

Morocco is currently the only other country to have indicated they will bid for the finals, which will be the first to feature an expanded 48-team field.

FIFA wants a visa-free environment, or at least non-discriminatory visa procedures, while the work permit exemptions apply to anyone involved with the World Cup and tax exemptions relate to the soccer governing body and its subsidiaries.

While FIFA has asked for — and received — similar exemptions in the past, their inclusion in a revamped World Cup bid process will mean the current U.S. administration of President Donald Trump will need to sign off on the exemptions.

Sunil Gulati, chairman of the joint U.S, Mexican and Canadian “United Bid Committee” has previously stated that Trump supports the attempt to bring the World Cup to the United States, which hosted the 1994 finals.

FIFA produced new bidding criteria after the organization was heavily criticized over the selection process for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup finals, won by Russia and Qatar respectively.

Formal submission of the completed bids has to be made by March 16, 2018 and FIFA will decide whether to select one of the candidate bids at their congress in June next year, or re-open the process if none of the bids are accepted.

Overview document

Regarding immigration and travel guarantees, the FIFA overview document on government guarantees states: “In order to cover the needs of the respective groups of individuals, the Government is requested to generally establish a visa-free environment or facilitate existing visa procedures for them. Regardless, any visa procedures must be applied in a non-discriminatory manner.”

As a presidential candidate, Trump called for a total ban on Muslims entering the U.S. as a counter-terrorism measure.

The courts have blocked his latest executive action barring entry into the United States for people from several Muslim-majority countries.

The FIFA document adds however that: “It is understood that such ease of access to the Host Country/Host Countries must by no means adversely affect the national immigration and security standards in the Host Country/Host Countries.”

The document also says a bidding nation’s government “is requested to guarantee the issuance of valid work permits unconditionally and without any restriction or discrimination of any kind” to people involved in the preparation, organization and hosting of the tournament.

It adds that the government “must grant a general tax exemption for FIFA, the 2026 FWC (FIFA World Cup) Entity, the 2026 FWC Subsidiaries (if applicable) and any other FIFA subsidiary limited to the period of preparation, delivery and wrap-up of the Competition, commencing on the date of appointment of the Host Country/Host Countries and ending on 31 December 2028.”

FIFA’s “enhanced” bidding guidelines are part of a series of reforms enacted after a corruption crisis in 2015 engulfed the organization. They include ethics, human rights and transparency commitments plus demands on stadium size and infrastructure.

 
…

Indian cuisine is often identified with spicy curries and a range of kebabs, but the government wants to propel a staple dish made with rice and lentils across the global stage. The dish recently came under the spotlight as a team of leading Indian chefs prepared a record 918 kilograms of the meal, called “khichdi,” at the World Food India Conference in New Delhi.

This dish, which top Indian chefs steam cooked in a giant wok in the heart of New Delhi, was no gourmet preparation. But the traditional dish has been prepared for centuries in homes across the diverse country with rice, lentils and sometimes a sprinkling of vegetables and other grains.

Calling it a super food associated with health and nutrition, the government promoted “khichdi” as “Brand India food” at the recent World Food India Conference.

Oozing confidence about popularizing it across the world, Chef Harpal Singh Sokhi points out that “khichdi” was as popular on tables in erstwhile palaces as in ordinary kitchens.

 

“If paella from Spain can be global then why not ‘khichdi’? This has health benefits, it has wellness, it is a detox food, it is a royal food. It deserves a global platform and recognition,” he said.

 

The selection of the humblest dish among Indian cuisines has raised many eyebrows among those who question if global palates will relish the culinary experience of what most Indians associate not with indulgence but comfort food.

 

Chef Imtiaz Qureshi is optimistic there is room for innovation to suit all tastes.

 

“Khichdi can be made with mutton, fish, chicken. You can also add whatever vegetables you like, Indian or Western, from broccoli to zucchini to capsicum,” he said.

The 918 kilograms of “khichdi” prepared on Saturday has made it to the Guinness Book of World Records. However it remains to be seen whether it makes its mark in the world. But for the time being the humble dish is getting the attention and appreciation it has seldom enjoyed in ordinary homes.

 
…

Indian cuisine is often identified with spicy curries and a range of kebabs, but the government wants to propel a staple dish made with rice and lentils across the global stage. The dish recently came under the spotlight as a team of leading Indian chefs prepared a record 918 kilograms of the meal, called “khichdi”, at the World Food India Conference in New Delhi. Anjana Pasricha has this report.
…

A U.S. decision to cut funding for a demining program in Cambodia threatens to further worsen a feud between Phnom Penh and Washington.

On Tuesday, it emerged through local media reports the U.S. had decided to discontinue annual funding in 2018, worth about $2 million, to clear explosive remnants of war in Cambodia.

Prime Minister Hun Sen reportedly responded to the surprise decision by declaring he will stump to raise the money, according to a senior Cambodian demining official.

No public explanation has been given for the cut, and both the Cambodian Mine Action Center (CMAC), the final recipient of the funding, and Norwegian People’s Aid, which administer the money, say they do not know why the funding has been discontinued.

CMAC Director General Heng Ratana said he had no warning of any cut to the funding before he received notification Monday about the decision. The money covered the salaries of about 300 staffers, many of whom were deminers.

“I don’t know what the real dispute [is]. We just present the facts and we work together; they never indicated any dispute that we have had, but suddenly they cut the aid,” he said.

“But we are very lucky that the government, the head, the prime minister, granted approval that he will maintain our operation as usual so that means it has no impact on our operation,” he said, adding that funds for the rest of this year had not been affected.

The United States had a moral obligation to deal with the legacy of its bombing of Cambodia during the Vietnam war, he added.

Ruling Cambodian People’s Party spokesman Sok Eysan told VOA he was unaware of the cut, which seemed peculiar to him.

“I think that it’s an issue which we see that it’s not normal. So, no matter what we answer, it will still be not normal,” he said.

Norwegian People’s Aid country director Aksel Steen-Nilsen said he, too, had been unaware about the reasons for the cut.

“I mean, of course, there is a lot of rhetoric between Cambodia and the U.S. right now,” he said. “But … I don’t see any specific objective related to this because it’s the end of the grant cycle, and then of course, it’s up to the donor if they have funds and interest to continue or not.”

Steen-Nilsen said cooperation had been good thus far over the three years the grant had been running and there was no indication of any special reason it would stop.

In an email, the deputy spokesman of the U.S. embassy in Phnom Penh, David Josar, said demining remained at the top of the State Department’s assistance priorities, but he did not address the specific reason for the cut.

“We will use 2018 resources to put in place a world-class removal program targeting U.S.-origin UXO [unexploded ordnance] in eastern Cambodia,” he wrote. “UXO experts have proposed that the United States devote more attention to clearing such UXO, in addition to our support for clearing the more lethal Chinese, Vietnamese, and Soviet land mines in western Cambodia.”

Next year’s funding would be opened up to competitive bidding with requests for proposals — prepared in consultation with the Cambodian government — to be released this year, he wrote without providing any further details.

For months, Cambodia has accused the U.S. of fomenting a color revolution — a conspiracy plot it has used as the grounds to jail the country’s opposition leader, Kem Sokha, and justify moves to dissolve his party.

They have seized on the continuing impacts of unexploded ordinance left over from the U.S.’s massive illegal bombing campaign during the Vietnam war — a line of attack only bolstered by news of the cut to CMAC funding.

Carl Thayer, an emeritus professor at the Australian Defense Force Academy, said the embassy reports he had read also did not seem to be specific about the reasoning for the cut.

“So we don’t really know the reason why the funding was cut so far, and it’s sheer speculation on Hun Sen’s part and political opportunism on his part to make that linkage,” he said.

Any retaliatory action by the U.S. in response to the decimation of Cambodia’s opposition party would have been made up front, he said.

“There’s an expression, ‘between conspiracy and cock-up, you always go for conspiracy, and that seems to be what the Cambodians are doing, and until I see a better explanation, I’m saying its just a bureaucratic decision probably made in Washington and passed through without much thinking,” he said.  

Josar said the U.S. had spent more than $131 million on the remediation of explosive remnants of war in Cambodia.

In recent years, the main focus of that funding has been on U.S.-dropped unexploded ordnance left in Cambodia’s east. Some experts have complained this diverts resources away from more harmful explosive remnants in the west.

 
…

The restive Spanish region of Catalonia faces a potential $500 million financial hit in the fourth quarter as business-related travel dips following the attack in Barcelona and the uncertainty generated by the disputed independence referendum.

 

In an interview Monday with The Associated Press at the World Travel Market in London, Catalonia’s top tourism official Patrick Torrent said the region will likely see a 10-12 percent fall in tourist numbers during the fourth quarter, which would equate to around 450 million euros. The large bulk of that fall is related to a drop-off in business travel to events such as conventions.

 

Despite the anticipated fourth-quarter decline, the executive director at the Catalan Tourist Board, said Catalonia is set to see revenues this year outstrip those last year and that the expectation is that revenues will rise again next.

 

However, more insight will emerge at the turn of the year when the bulk of pre-reservations are made. His staff, he said, are “on alert” about the impact on the main booking season.

 

The worry among many economists is that deteriorating business environment in Catalonia, which has seen around 1,500 firms move their headquarters out of the region, could worsen further amid all the uncertainty. Credit ratings agency Moody’s has warned that the region’s financial recovery is being jeopardized

 

“Moody’s believes that the political instability will negatively affect the region’s economy, in particular foreign investor sentiment and the tourism sector, and add pressure to the region’s already weak finances,” it said last week.

The Catalan tourism industry, a key income generator in what is Spain’s richest region, has had a difficult few months. After the August attacks in Barcelona and a nearby town that saw 16 people killed, the region has been embroiled in a battle of wills with Spain over the disputed independence referendum in early October which prompted Madrid to impose direct rule and seek the arrest of members of the Catalan government, including its leader, Carles Puigdemont, who has fled to Brussels.

 

The impact of the attack in Barcelona on holiday travelers was short-lived, according to Torrent, and “less important” than other cities in Europe, such as Brussels or Paris.

 

“The perception of Barcelona and Catalonia as a safe destination has not suffered any impact,” he said, noting figures showing tourism numbers higher in September.

 

Torrent said he met up with Alvaro Nadal, the Spanish minister of energy, tourism and digital matters, on Monday for the first time since the triggering of Article 155 of the Spanish Constitution which imposed direct rule on Catalonia.

 

Torrent said the Spanish government has made no requirements upon him or his staff and that it is “business as usual” until an early Catalan regional election on Dec. 21.

 

“It’s not intervention. It’s more a kind of coordination,” he said. “It’s easy, it’s not complicated, with good relations without problems, at this moment.”

 

Before direct rule, Torrent would speak with Spanish tourism officials two or three times a month. Now, it’s that amount of times a week.

Torrent urged all participants in upcoming demonstrations in Catalonia before the election, including one this Saturday, to remain peaceful and law-abiding.

 

“It’s important to say that our streets are normal, our restaurants are working as usual, our destination is exactly the same situation,” Torrent said.
…

Two weeks ago the glitzy Ritz Carlton hotel in Riyadh was the site of an international conference promoting Saudi Arabia as an investment destination, with over 3,000 officials and business leaders attending.

Now the hotel is temporarily serving as a luxury prison where some of the kingdom’s political and business elite are being held in a widening crackdown on corruption that may change the way the economy works.

By detaining dozens of officials and tycoons, a new anti-corruption body headed by Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman is seeking to dismantle systems of patronage and kick-backs that have distorted the economy for decades.

But it is a risky process, because the crackdown is hurting some of the kingdom’s top private businessmen — leaders of family conglomerates who have built much of the non-oil economy over the past few decades.

Many industries could suffer if investment by these families dries up in coming months, at a time when the economy has already fallen into recession because of low oil prices and austerity policies.

New breed of companies

Meanwhile, a new breed of state-backed companies is rising to compete with the old guard; many of the new enterprises are linked to the Public Investment Fund (PIF), the kingdom’s top sovereign wealth fund. But it is not clear how smoothly the transition to these firms will happen.

“The rules of the game are changing. But they’re changing indiscriminately,” said one financial analyst in the region, declining to be named because of political sensitivities. “Even people who thought they were within the rules don’t know if they will still be within those rules tomorrow. There’s just uncertainty.”

Some private businessmen in Saudi Arabia are now trying to move their money out of the country “while they still can,” the analyst said.

For many foreigners, the most shocking aspect of the purge has been the detention of billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, the flamboyant, internationally known chairman of investment firm Kingdom Holding.

But for Saudis, the names of other detainees have been equally stunning: Nasser bin Aqeel al-Tayyar, founder of the Al Tayyar Travel group; billionaire Saleh Kamel; and Bakr bin Laden, chairman of the huge Saudi Binladin construction conglomerate.

State contracts

The saga of the Binladin group underlines how the business environment is changing. Binladin and another big construction group, Saudi Oger, long enjoyed preferential access to the kingdom’s biggest projects and control over pricing as a result of their close relationships with royal patrons.

But the bottom fell out from under both companies last year, when a cash squeeze resulting from low oil prices caused the government to cancel or suspend projects and delay payments.

The firms faced multi-billion dollar debt restructurings; Binladin has laid off tens of thousands of people while Oger’s bankers say it has essentially stopped operating.

New construction company

At the same time, state oil giant Saudi Aramco is moving to set up a construction company with local and international partners to build non-oil infrastructure in Saudi Arabia — potentially taking billions of dollars of business that would previously have gone to the family conglomerates.

Aramco and PIF, the sovereign fund, have also linked up with U.S. construction firm Jacobs Engineering to form a management company for strategic projects in the kingdom.

Many in the Saudi business world are celebrating the downfall of the old patronage system and the shift toward a “cleaner” business environment.

“It’s great news for the clean ones among us — 99.99 percent are ecstatic,” said one senior executive.

But others express disquiet about the possible economic fallout of the purge. Some are concerned that banks could start calling in loans to families implicated in the probe, using loan clauses that permit this in cases of legal jeopardy; this could collapse companies’ share prices.

Business deals put in limbo?

Many new business deals may be put on hold. A businessman at a foreign technology services firm told Reuters he had been considering a venture with a Saudi partner, but decided against it this week because of the partner’s ties to the detained Bakr bin Laden.

The new anti-corruption commission has broad authority to seize assets at home and abroad. Some businessmen wonder if these powers could be used to pressure firms into participating in Prince Mohammed’s economic development projects.

“It’s the old royal fiefdoms that are not in the Al Salman branch of the royal family that are now being purged,” said a Western analyst. “It’s a further centralising of political and economic power, and a seizing of the private assets that those fiefdoms have accumulated.”

 
…

A revamping of the Federal Reserve’s leadership is widening with the announcement Monday that William Dudley, president of the New York Fed and the No. 2 official on the Fed’s key interest rate panel, will retire next year.

 

Just last week, President Donald Trump chose Fed board member Jerome Powell to replace Janet Yellen as Fed chair in February. The post of Fed vice chair remains vacant. So do two additional seats on the Fed’s seven-member board. And a fourth seat may open as well next year.

The unusual pace of the turnover has given Trump the rare opportunity for a president to put his personal stamp on the makeup of the Fed, which operates as an independent agency. Investors are awaiting signals of how Trump’s upcoming selections might alter the Fed’s approach to interest rates and regulations.

 

Trump has made it known that he favors low interest rates. He has also called for a loosening of financial regulations. The Fed has played a key role in overseeing the tighter regulations that were enacted after the 2008 financial crisis, which nearly toppled the banking system.

 

The uncertainty surrounding the Fed’s top policymakers has been heightened by the slow pace with which the Trump administration has moved to fill openings.

To date, the administration has placed one new person on the Fed board: Randal Quarles, a veteran of the private equity industry who is thought to favor looser regulations, was confirmed as the first vice chairman for supervision. That still left three vacancies on the Fed’s board: Just as Quarles was joining the board last month, Stanley Fischer was stepping down as Fed vice chairman.

 

And Yellen herself could decide to leave the board when her term as chair ends on Feb. 3, even though her separate term on the board runs until 2024.

 

Dudley’s announcement that he plans to retire by mid-2018 also creates an opening on the committee of board members and bank presidents who set interest rate policies. Dudley’s position is particularly crucial: As head of the New York Fed, he is a permanent voting member of the Fed committee that sets interest rates.

 

The committee is composed of the board members and five of the 12 regional bank presidents. Unlike the New York Fed president, the other regional bank presidents vote on a rotating basis. The New York Fed president also serves as vice chairman of the rate-setting panel.

 

Some economists said that while financial markets have so far registered little concern about the number of key open Fed positions, that could change quickly, especially if investors begin to worry that the central bank will accelerate interest rate hikes.

 

“We need to get rid of this uncertainty, and until these seats are filled, there is going to be uncertainty,” said Diane Swonk, chief economist at DS Economics.

 

Analysts are trying to read the two decisions Trump has made — picking Powell for the top job and Quarles for the key post for banking supervision — as signs for where he might be headed. With Powell, the president opted for continuity on rates by selecting someone who for years was the lone Republican on the board but who remained a reliable vote for the gradual approach to rate hikes Yellen favored.

And in the bank supervision post, analysts say Trump might have been signaling that he wants to reverse, or at least weaken, Yellen’s backing of the reforms instituted by the 2010 Dodd-Frank financial overhaul law. During the campaign, Trump argued that Dodd-Frank was harming the economy by constraining back lending.

 

Quarles has been critical of aspects of that law. To a lesser extent, so, too, has Powell, who will be the first Fed chairman in nearly 40 years to lack a degree in economics. Powell, a lawyer by training, amassed a fortune as an investment banker at the Carlyle Group.

 

“With his background, Powell can be expected to work well with Wall Street and the business community in general,” said Sung Won Sohn, an economics professor at California State University, Channel Islands.

 

A senior administration official indicated that one important attribute for the open positions will be a diversity of backgrounds.

 

“We believe the Fed will function best with a wide range of skill sets,” said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss personnel decisions. This official would not give a timetable for when the administration’s next nominations for the Fed might occur.

Though Trump will choose officials to fill the openings on the board, the choice of Dudley’s replacement will fall to the board of the New York Fed. The New York Fed said a search committee had been formed to choose a successor to Dudley, who joined the New York Fed in 2007 after more than two decades at Goldman Sachs.

 

The announcement from the New York Fed said Dudley, 64, intended to step down in mid-2018 to ensure that his successor would be in place well before the mandatory end of Dudley’s term in January 2019.

 

After overseeing the New York Fed’s securities operations for two years, Dudley succeeded Timothy Geithner as its president after Geithner was tapped by President Barack Obama to become Treasury secretary in 2009.

 

Dudley won praise for the work he did with Geithner and Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to contain the fallout from the 2008 financial crisis. Dudley supported Yellen’s cautious approach to raising the Fed’s benchmark rate and the plan the central bank has begun to gradually shrink its $4.5 trillion balance sheet, which is five times its size before the financial crisis.

 

The balance sheet contains $4.2 trillion in Treasurys and mortgage bonds that the Fed bought since 2008 to try to hold down long-term borrowing rates and help the economy recovery from the worst recession since the 1930s.

 

In a statement, Yellen praised Dudley for his “wise counsel and warm friendship throughout the years of the financial crisis and its aftermath.”
…

While President Donald Trump continues an Asia trip with high geo-strategic stakes, Republicans in Washington are promoting an ambitious tax reform bill that could bring enormous fiscal, and political, consequences. VOA’s Michael Bowman reports, a tax cut is Trump’s last hope for a major legislative victory in his first year in office, something Republicans desperately need and something Democrats are determined to deny them.
…

The Republican tax bill unveiled last week in the U.S. Congress could disrupt the global supply chains of large, multinational companies by slapping a 20-percent tax on cross-border transactions they routinely make between related business units.

European multinationals, some of which currently pay little U.S. tax on U.S. profits thanks to tax treaties and diversion of U.S. earnings to their home countries or other low-tax jurisdictions, could be especially hard hit if the proposed tax becomes law, according to some tax experts.

Others said the proposal could run afoul of international tax treaties, the World Trade Organization and other global standards that forbid the double taxation of profits if the new tax did not account for income taxes paid in other countries.

The proposed tax, tucked deep in the 429-page bill backed by President Donald Trump, caught corporate tax strategists by surprise and sent them scrambling to understand its dynamics and goals, as well as whether Congress is likely ever to vote on it.

Reuters contacted seven multinational companies and four industry groups. None would comment directly on the proposal, with most saying they were still studying the entire tax package.

The proposal is part of a broad tax reform bill unveiled by House of Representatives Republicans on Thursday, which promises to lower overall tax burdens and simplify the tax code.

Whether the proposed reforms ever become law is uncertain, with weeks and possibly months of debate and intense lobbying still ahead. The House package overall has drawn criticism for adding too much to the federal budget deficit and too heavily favoring the rich and big business.

However, the corporate tax part, experts said, included some ambitious proposals worthy of further discussion. They said the 20 percent excise tax is one such proposal targeting the abuses of so-called transfer-pricing where multinationals themselves set prices of goods, services and intellectual property rights that constantly move between their national business units.

Under global standards, those prices should resemble those available on the open market. However, if a foreign parent charges U.S. affiliates inflated price, it can reduce its U.S. tax bill and effectively shift profits to a lower-tax country, reducing the entire corporation’s overall tax costs.

Blunt instrument

“Clearly there’s a transfer-pricing issue and something should be done,” said Steven Rosenthal, senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, a nonpartisan Washington think tank.

“I would view this 20-percent excise tax as a blunt instrument to address the problem. And the problem with blunt instruments is sometimes they hit what you want to hit, and sometimes they hit what you don’t want to hit,” said Rosenthal, former legislation counsel at Congress’s Joint Tax Committee.

Under the proposal, U.S. business units that import products, pay royalties or other tax-deductible, non-interest fees to foreign parents or affiliates in the course of doing business would either pay a 20-percent tax on these or agree to treat the amounts as income connected to their U.S. business and subject to U.S. taxes.

As proposed, the new tax rule would apply only to businesses with payments from U.S. units to foreign affiliates exceeding $100 million. The rule would not take effect until after 2018.

European companies that sell foreign-made products into the U.S. market through local distribution units could be among those most affected, said Michael Mundaca, co-director of the national tax department at the accounting firm Ernst & Young.

Such companies could end up paying tax on the transfers twice — first if they paid the excise tax in the United States and then at home where they are taxed now and where the new U.S. tax would not be accounted for without changes to bilateral tax treaties.

“That would be a structure that would at least initially be hit by the full force” of the excise tax, said Mundaca, a former U.S. Treasury Department assistant secretary for tax policy.

He said European officials would be registering concern. “I am sure they are making calls right now to their counterparts in the U.S. Treasury looking for some explanation… and making the point that this might be contrary to treaty obligations.”

Gavin Ekins, an economist at the Tax Foundation, a conservative think tank, predicted that most multinationals would opt to avoid the excise tax by electing to pay U.S. corporate tax on all the profits related to products sold in the United States. Those include profits on activities conducted overseas, like manufacturing or research, which are also subject to foreign income taxes.

The U.S. corporate tax rate on those profits would drop to 20 percent from 35 percent if the House bill becomes law.

The promise of additional revenue and hopes that the new tax may entice multinationals to locate more production and jobs in the United States, may well outweigh international concerns.

The entire Republican tax package is projected to add $1.5 trillion over 10 years to the $20 trillion federal debt and the planned excise tax is among sources of new revenue needed to avoid an even bigger shortfall. It is expected to bring about $155 billion over 10 years, according to a summary of the Republican proposal distributed last week.

Still, as the tax debate heats up, foreign multinationals are likely to lobby hard against it, with domestic corporations linked to foreign affiliates possibly concerned as well.

There is also uncertainty how the new rules would work in practice.

It was unclear, for example, from the bill’s language how companies should calculate income “effectively connected” to their U.S. business, Tax Foundation’s Ekins said.

“You don’t know what profit is included when you choose ‘effectively connected income’ and don’t know the formula,” he said. “Is it just for that product line? All the income that comes in from every other company or from every other source?”

The House tax committee was scheduled to begin considering amendments to the Republican tax bill on Monday.
…

Wireless carriers Sprint and T-Mobile called off a potential merger, saying the companies couldn’t come to an agreement that would benefit customers and shareholders.

The two companies have been dancing around a possible merger for years, and were again in the news in recent weeks with talks of the two companies coming together after all. But in a joint statement Saturday, Sprint and T-Mobile said they are calling off merger negotiations for the foreseeable future.

“The prospect of combining with Sprint has been compelling for a variety of reasons, including the potential to create significant benefits for consumers and value for shareholders. However, we have been clear all along that a deal with anyone will have to result in superior long-term value for T-Mobile’s shareholders compared to our outstanding stand-alone performance and track record,” said John Legere, president and CEO of T-Mobile US, in a prepared statement.

T-Mobile and Sprint are the U.S.’ third- and fourth-largest wireless carriers, respectively, but they are significantly smaller than AT&T and Verizon, who effectively have a duopoly over U.S. wireless service. The two companies have said they hoped to find a way of merging to make the wireless market more competitive.

Sprint and its owner, the Japanese conglomerate SoftBank, have long been looking for a deal as the company has struggled to compete on its own. But Washington regulators have frowned on a possible merger. D.C. spiked AT&T’s offer to buy T-Mobile in 2011 and signaled in 2014 they would have been against Sprint doing the same thing. But with the new Trump administration, it was thought regulators might be more relaxed about a merger.

Sprint has a lot of debt and has posted a string of annual losses. The company has cut costs and made itself more attractive to customers, BTIG Research analyst Walter Piecyk says, but it hasn’t invested enough in its network and doesn’t have enough airwave rights for quality service in rural areas.

T-Mobile, meanwhile, has been on a yearslong streak adding customers. After the government nixed AT&T’s attempt to buy it in 2011, T-Mobile led the way in many consumer-friendly changes, such as ditching two-year contracts and bringing back unlimited data plans. Consumers are paying less for cellphone service, thanks to T-Mobile’s influence on the industry and the resultant price wars.

“T-Mobile does not need a merger with Sprint to succeed, but Sprint might need one to survive,” Piecyk wrote in an October research note.
…

U.S. President Donald Trump urged Saudi Arabia Saturday to list its state-owned oil company on the New York Stock Exchange when the company goes public in what is expected to be the largest-ever initial public offering in which shares of a company are sold to investors.

“Would very much appreciate Saudi Arabia doing their IPO of Aramco with the New York Stock Exchange. Important to the United States!,” Trump tweeted from Hawaii, his first stop ahead of a 13-day trip to Asia.

Saudi officials have reportedly said the government intends to list 5 percent of  the company’s shares on local and global stock exchanges in 2018 but have yet to select an overseas venue. Saudi officials have estimated the IPO will be worth about $100 billion.

The NYSE has had discussions with the Saudis about the upcoming IPO as has the London Stock Exchange. Exchanges in Hong Kong, Singapore, Tokyo, Toronto and the U.S. are also soliciting portions of the public offering.

New York-based NASDAQ, which provides technology to Saudi Arabia’s exchange, has been leveraging that relationship in an attempt to win the listing.

Trump has developed a close relationship with Saudi Arabia. During his visit there last summer, he signed a $110 billion defense agreement with Saudi King Salman.

At a $2 trillion valuation Saudi officials have projected for Aramco, selling five-percent of the company’s shares would reap $100 billion.

The public offering of shares of Aramco, the world’s largest oil producer, is part of Saudi government plans to sell state assets as a recession slows Riyadh’s effort to eliminate a budget deficit caused by low oil prices.

 

 
…

The recent flurry of social and economic reform coming out of Saudi Arabia has left some Saudis ecstatic, others more circumspect, and a few conservatives bewildered or even angry.

Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman told a crowd of investors at a conference in late October that he was merely attempting to “return Saudi Arabia to the moderate Islam that once prevailed” before the Iranian Revolution in 1979. He stressed that 70 percent of Saudis are younger than 30 and vowed “not to spend another 30 years of our lives living under extremist ideas.”

The young crown prince also proposed an ambitious plan for a new economic zone on the Red Sea near Jordan and Egypt. In April, he put forward an economic road map for the kingdom, called Vision 2030. Part of the plan calls for privatizing 5 percent of the country’s flagship petroleum company Aramco, in addition to attracting foreign investment capital.

​Too much change too fast

Clarence Rodriguez, who spent 12 years as a French foreign correspondent in Riyadh and recently wrote a book called Saudi Arabia 3.0 on the aspirations of Saudi women and young people, tells VOA that she believes Saudi Arabia “is in crisis, due to the drop in the price of petroleum,” and that it has found itself under pressure to “diversify its economy, which necessitates societal reform involving women and young people, as well.”

Rodriguez points out that the late King Abdallah, who died in 2015, started the reform movement by allowing Saudi women to run for the country’s consultative “Shoura” council and to enter the work force, becoming lawyers, bankers and salespeople.

She worries, however, that some recent moves to change the status of women have angered parts of the kingdom’s mostly conservative population. Traditionalists, she says, are “not used to such quick change” and many “are afraid, because things are moving too fast for them.”

On a recent talk show on an Arabic-language news channel, a conservative Saudi caller told the show’s host that he thinks Saudi King Salman and Crown Prince Mohammed Bin Salman are “violating (Islamic) sharia law” with some of their recent reforms “and should go to jail.”

Saudi commentator Jamal Kashoggi tells VOA that he’s “not optimistic about the reforms,” but that he would “still like to be optimistic … since everyone will suffer if they fail.” Kashoggi worries that the reforms are “not engaging Saudi society, enough.” 

“We wish Mohammed Bin Salman well, and we need economic (and social) reform,” he said, “but, we also need to discuss (these issues). The change,” he said, “is being done in very narrow circles. (Ordinary) people are not feeling engaged.” 

Was Saudi society more moderate?

Hilal Khashan, who teaches political science at the American University of Beirut, is not convinced that Saudi society was more moderate before the Iranian Revolution in 1979. He thinks that parts of Saudi society have always had a conservative streak to them, pointing out that Wahabi conservatives killed many moderate Muslims, including the Shafa’i mufti of Mecca when they overran the city and the nearby resort city of Ta’ef in 1924.

A handful of prominent Saudi conservative clerics have been arrested since Mohammed Bin Salman replaced his cousin, Mohammed Bin Nayef, as crown prince, in June. 

“By weakening the clerical establishment and making clerics simple government workers,” Khashan said, “(Mohammed Bin Salman) will be able to give women more rights, as he is proposing.” Saudi women were allowed to drive, starting in September, and this week were given permission to attend sports matches with their families.

Khashan believes that economic considerations are a key factor in the decision to allow Saudi women to drive. 

“If 10 million women are given the right to drive in Saudi Arabia,” he said, “and if just a fraction of those women buy cars, take driving lessons or buy insurance, that would contribute to stimulating Saudi Arabia’s stagnant economy.” Allowing women to drive will also curtail the expensive practice of hiring foreign chauffeurs to drive women around.

Both Kashoggi and Khashan believe that the Saudi government will eventually prevail in its efforts to reform society. 

“Conservatives,” Kashoggi said, “have already lashed out. They’ve been lashing out since 2003. Al-Qaida, or ISIS, or the radical Wahabis … these are the extremists in Saudi Arabia … and they don’t want change. They have resisted, and will continue to resist. … The only thing stopping them is (government) security.”

Clashes with clerics

Khashan points out that in clashes with conservative clerics back in the 1960s, after King Faisal opened a school for girls in Riyadh, and when the king opened the first TV station in Riyadh in 1965, the government prevailed. 

“Whenever the state clashes with the (conservative) clerical establishment, the state emerges victorious,” he said, “and there’s no reason to believe that things will not be the same, this time.”

Jordanian analyst Shehab Makahleh is less certain about who will come out on top, however. 

“There is a kind of opposition among royal family members who are not happy (about the reforms),” he said, “and they have had a number of meetings to clarify where the country is heading in the coming five to 10 years.”

Makahleh believes that King Salman may soon abdicate in favor of Mohammed Bin Salman “in order to gain more support from the international community” for his ambitious reform program and to promote a more secular model of society.
…

For Yu Kaiguang, harsh new United Nations sanctions on North Korea are a disaster.

The trader in the Chinese border city of Dandong has seen business all but dry up, and he spends his days scrambling to obtain payment from the suddenly broke North Korean state companies to whom he sold on credit.

“They have no money to pay us in cash, and the worst is that because of sanctions they can’t settle the bill with goods such as coal, as they did in the past,” said Yu, reached by telephone at the offices of his Dandong Gaoli Trading Company.

Yu said he’s owed about $1 million in all for deliveries of toothpaste, instant noodles and other household items. He’s trying to avoid laying off staff by continuing to export foodstuffs such as pine nuts and red beans. “If they become unemployed, it would be bad for both the state and society.”

​Common problem for traders

Yu’s plight appears increasingly commonplace across Dandong, where the bulk of the cross-border trade is handled. Interviews with four trading companies and recent media reports indicate Chinese companies are hurting in a city where North Korean trucks used to rumble across the Yalu River bridge several times a week delivering metal scrap and returning with everything from televisions to toilet bowls.

The owner of another firm, Dandong Baoquan Commerce and Trade Co., which used to import iron ore and coal and export basic consumer goods, said he was owed around $200,000 by his North Korea clients.

“I had to lay off about 10 staffers, but I had no other choice because it was the government policy,” Han Lixin said, referring to the sanctions. “I’m still in business hoping to trade with other countries, but it takes a lot of time and efforts to develop customers.”

Large-scale trade involving North Korean resources such as iron ore and coal has been banned entirely under the sanctions, dealing a big blow to Dandong’s port, whose operator defaulted on a $150 million corporate bond this week in part because of cratering revenues.

Both economies hurting

“The sanctions have a broad effect, and both the economies of North Korea and China are suffering a lot,” said Jin Qiangyi, professor at the Institute of Northeast Asia Studies at Yanbian University in Northeast China. “Chinese companies doing business with North Korea may see quite a lot of losses, and the companies that have already invested in North Korea will suffer more.”

Dealing with North Korean companies was never easy. Wang Chengpeng, former manager of Dandong Hongwei Trading Company, quit doing business with the North entirely because of hassles, restrictions and low-profit margins, even before the latest sanctions began to bite.

Despite that, China has long been the North’s biggest economic partner. Beijing accounted for more than 90 percent of its neighbor’s foreign trade of about $6.5 billion in 2016, according to the South Korean-owned Korea Trade Investment Promotion Agency. China continues to be a key source of food and fuel aid to help keep North Korea’s weak economy from collapsing, and Chinese officials say they won’t agree to measures that could cut off basic life necessities and possibly cause Kim Jong Un’s dictatorship to topple.

Sanctions holding

China’s patience with Kim has grown increasingly thin, however, and Beijing has lent its support to increasingly tough resolutions unanimously approved by the Security Council this year that target North Korea’s economy in response to its ballistic missile launches and latest nuclear test.

China has said it sees sanctions purely as a means of inducing North Korea to return to nuclear disarmament talks and has rejected unilateral measures not approved by the Security Council, of which it is one of the five veto-wielding permanent members.

Still, despite some allegations of cheating, China appears to be seeking to enforce the sanctions that also ban exports of lead, textiles and seafood, prohibit joint ventures, and bar any country from authorizing new permits for North Korean workers, all sources of hard currency for Pyongyang.

The sanctions have also blacklisted a number of firms in the extraction and financial industries, imposed travel bans and frozen the assets of some government officials, banned the import of natural gas liquids and condensates, and capped the country’s crude oil imports.

It’s hard to gauge the exact impact of sanctions on the North Korean economy because the crucial food and energy sectors are less likely to be hurt by external conditions, said Lee Seok-ki, a senior researcher at the South Korean government-run Korea Institute for Industrial Economics and Trade.

However, while the North’s economy has been expanding, by 3.9 percent in 2016, according to an estimate by the Bank of Korea in South Korea, that rate almost certainly can’t be sustained if sanctions continue, Lee said.

China for its part is watching North Korea to see how its ally will respond to the new measures, eager for signs of a shift in tactics by Kim and an improvement in relations between Beijing and Pyongyang that have “sunk into a standstill,” as Jin puts it.
…

A solid rebound for the job market in October as the U.S. economy added 261,000 jobs. Job gains were strong across the board, and the unemployment rate fell to 4.1 percent, its lowest level in 17 years. But, as Mil Arcega reports, American workers are not seeing any real growth in their wages.
…

Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro has announced that the country and state oil company PDVSA will restructure its burgeoning foreign debt, even as he vowed to make a payment of more than $1 billion that came due on Thursday.

The announcement did not put Venezuela or PDVSA into default, but suggests that Maduro’s cash-strapped government may be preparing to do so as heavy debt payments aggravate the country’s crippling economic crisis.

Why is Venezuela so heavily indebted?

Even though the OPEC nation was flush with cash during a decade-long oil boom, Venezuela’s ruling Socialist Party borrowed heavily during the era of late president Hugo Chavez to finance generous social programs that made him popular. The country also dismantled mechanisms meant to ensure Venezuela saved money when oil prices were high, leaving it without sufficient hard currency reserves to import basic goods such as food and medicine after prices crashed in 2014. Hunger and preventable diseases are as a result taking a growing toll on the population of 30 million.

Why can’t Venezuela refinance its debt?

The most common refinancing mechanisms are effectively blocked by U.S. sanctions levied this year, in response to accusations that Maduro was undermining democracy, which prevent U.S. banks from acquiring newly issued Venezuelan debt.

Venezuela and PDVSA cannot carry out “swap” transactions in which they exchange maturing bonds for ones that come due further down the road because financial institutions with U.S. headquarters would not be able to acquire the new debt. Investors also say bondholders would have no interest in renegotiating payment timelines without a cohesive plan to reform the country’s dysfunctional socialist economic model. Maduro has repeatedly balked at carrying out such reforms.

Who are the major holders of Venezuela and PDVSA bonds?

These securities are popular among funds that invest in emerging market bonds. Their high yields – which are close to 10 times higher than those of neighboring Colombia – help increase the overall profitability of the portfolios.

Institutional investors with big holdings include T. Rowe Price Associates Inc., Ashmore Investment Management Ltd., and BlackRock Investment Management Ltd. Goldman Sachs Group Inc came under heavy fire this year for purchasing $2.8 billion in PDVSA bonds at a steep discount, which opposition critics dubbed “hunger bonds.”

What would be the consequences for Venezuela of default?

Creditors could seek to seize assets Venezuela owns in other countries, including refineries such as those operated by PDVSA’s U.S. refining and marketing subsidiary Citgo. A default could also make it more complicated for Venezuela to import products from foreign companies.  Providers of goods such as food and medicine may reduce sales to Venezuela on concern that they will not get paid, or that they could find themselves ensnared in creditor lawsuits.

What is the role of Russia and China in financing

Venezuela?

Venezuela has borrowed heavily from both nations via oil-for-loan agreements in which it pays back in deliveries of crude and fuel. Investors believe support from Moscow and Beijing has been instrumental in allowing Venezuela to keep up with bond payments so far. Russia recently said it was willing to restructure a $3 billion loan.  But both China and Russia have shown impatience with Venezuela’s continued refusal to reform its Byzantine socialist economic regulations that are widely cited as the principal obstacle to growth.

Could multi-lateral institutions such as the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank get involved in the country’s debt restructuring?

Maybe, but substantial obstacles loom. There has been no formal contact between Venezuela and the IMF and World Bank although it does have a representative on each of their boards. Before the fund could get involved again, Maduro’s government would have to agree to an economic and financial assessment – something it has for years refused to do on the grounds that it violates sovereignty. Its current willingness to submit to such a review is unclear.

How would a default affect daily life in Venezuela?

Default would likely further pummel the country’s already bruised bolivar currency, which has depreciated 99 percent on the black market since Maduro took office. Reluctance to do business with Venezuela could make it harder to import goods.
…