Germán & Co 11/9/22 Germán & Co 11/9/22

J’accuse…!J’accuse…J’accuse…!J’accuse…

The only things we count on is that inmaterial called —-soul—- Let us never be afraid to speak the thrut…Justice will always be done…
Germán & Co…

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

“In 1894, the Dreyfus affair came to light, and the thirty-five-year-old Jewish Alsatian Captain Alfred Dreyfus was accused of high treason. Despite the accused’s pleas of innocence, which were not made public, he was sentenced to life imprisonment on Devil’s Island in French Guiana.”

— J’accuse…!!!!

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

Altice delivers innovative, customer-centric products and solutions that connect and unlock the limitless potential of its over 30 million customers over fiber networks and mobile…

Editor's Pick:

The only things we count on is that inmaterial called —-soul—- Let us never be afraid to speak the thrut…Justice will always be done…
Germán & Co…

Germán & Co 11/9/22 Germán & Co 11/9/22

LIVE… News… Today, November 9, 2022

The stock market wavers as midterm results remain unclear. (NYT)
POLITICO EU, very accurate in its forecast on the US midterm elections on Saturday 5 November.

“
The stock market wavers as midterm results remain unclear.”

— NYT

Editor's Pick:

Midterms Live Updates: No Signs of ‘Red Wave’ as Race for Congress Remains Tight

Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, a Democrat, beat Mehmet Oz in Pennsylvania, flipping a Senate seat. J.D. Vance won for Republicans in Ohio. But control of the House and Senate still hangs in the balance.

John FettermanWon, Pennsylvania Senate

Ruth Fremson/The New York Times
Kathy HochulWon, New York Governor
Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times
J.D. VanceWon, Ohio Senate
Stacey AbramsLost, Georgia Governor
Gabriela Bhaskar for The New York Times
Sarah Huckabee SandersWon, Arkansas Governor
Al Drago for The New York Times
Marco RubioWon, Florida Senate
Associated Press
Tudor DixonLost, Michigan Governor
Emily Elconin for The New York Times
Maggie HassanWon, New Hampshire Senate
Jodi Hilton for The New York Times
Becca BalintWon, Vermont Representative
Associated Press
Tim RyanLost, Ohio Senate
Brian Kaiser for The New York Times
Brian KempWon, Georgia Governor
Nicole Buchanan for The New York Times
Greg AbbottWon, Texas Governor

Jonathan Weisman

Here are the latest results from the pivotal midterm elections.

Control of Congress hung in the balance early Wednesday morning, with Democrats and Republicans closely monitoring yet-to-be-called Senate races in Nevada and Arizona, as well as a tight contest in Georgia that may be headed for a December runoff.

As the counting moved into Wednesday morning, it was fairly clear that Democrats had defied predictions of a midterm electoral drubbing, winning dozens of key House, Senate and governors’ races across the country and forestalling a “red wave” that Republicans said would define one of the most consequential midterm campaigns in recent memory.

But even with those disappointments, Republicans could emerge with majorities in both houses of Congress. To keep control of the Senate, Democrats need two of their endangered incumbents, Mark Kelly of Arizona and Catherine Cortez Masto of Nevada, to hold on to their leads (Mr. Kelly was leading his race early Wednesday, with 66 percent of the vote counted, while Ms. Cortez Mastro was trailing, with 75 percent of the ballots counted).

If only one of those two prevails, Democratic control will rest on either the last ballots in Georgia pushing Senator Raphael Warnock over the required 50 percent, or on a Dec. 6 runoff in that race that would captivate the country — much the way two Senate runoffs in Georgia in early 2021 determined the current Democratic majority.

On Tuesday, a hard-fought victory by Pennsylvania’s lieutenant governor, John Fetterman, over the celebrity doctor Mehmet Oz flipped a Senate seat to Democrat from Republican. Two incumbent Democratic senators, Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire and Michael Bennet of Colorado, won re-election decisively, according to The Associated Press, ending two races that were seen as potential harbingers for a Republican blowout.

But in Ohio and North Carolina, two Republicans endorsed by former President Donald J. Trump cruised to victory. The author and investor J.D. Vance defeated his Democratic challenger, Representative Tim Ryan, by six percentage points in Ohio, and Ted Budd won the North Carolina seat being vacated by the departing Richard Burr.

In the fight for the House, only one Democratic incumbent, Representative Elaine Luria of Virginia, had been defeated by early Wednesday. But her loss was matched by the defeat of a veteran Republican, Representative Steve Chabot, in Ohio. The G.O.P. also won two open House seats vacated by Democrats in Florida.

Representative Sean Patrick Maloney of New York, the chairman of the House Democratic campaign arm, was in danger of losing his seat. But in other critical House races, endangered Democrats like Representatives Abigail Spanberger of Virginia and Chris Pappas of New Hampshire retained their seats, according to The Associated Press.

With seats still in play in New York and several Western states, control of the House is anything but settled. It could take several days before the next House majority is clear. Here is a rundown of the most likely timeline.

Here is what else you need to know:

Beyond the House and Senate, voters were determining which party would control 36 governorships and an array of critical state positions. Governors’ contests in New York and Pennsylvania and Senate races in Colorado and Washington all went to the Democrats. And in swing states, Democrats fared far better than expected. Gov. Gretchen Whitmer, a Democrat, was re-elected in Michigan, as was Gov. Tony Evers in Wisconsin.
All indications were that Republicans would end up with perhaps one of the weakest performances in decades by the out-of-power party against a first-term president’s party. The polarization of the country may have functioned as a check, as the passions of one side offset the other. But America leaves these midterms much as it entered: a fiercely divided country that remains anchored in a narrow range of the political spectrum.
Inflation was a key issue in the race, leaving Democrats grasping for a response. But Mr. Trump’s influence saddled Republicans with weak candidates, and the Democratic base turned out in large numbers. Here are five takeaways from the elections.
Voters in California, Michigan and Vermont chose to enshrine abortion protections in their state constitutions, indicating that, when asked directly, a broad cross section of Americans want to protect abortion access.
Election Day appeared to have unfolded smoothly for millions of Americans, but in some communities, scattered problems were reported, including technical glitches that disrupted ballot counting in Arizona’s Maricopa County. In Nevada, election officials said that it could take days to count the votes because of a deluge of mail-in ballots.

Nov. 9, 2022, 7:09 a.m. ET1 hour ago

1 hour ago

Derrick Bryson-Taylor

The election in Colorado’s Third Congressional District was surprisingly tight, with Representative Lauren Boebert, a far-right provocateur who heckled President Biden during his State of the Union speech, locked in a close contest with Adam Frisch, a Democrat. The Associated Press has not called the race.

Nov. 9, 2022, 6:48 a.m. ET1 hour ago

1 hour ago

Joe Rennison and Chang Che

The stock market wavers as midterm results remain unclear.

Stocks slipped on Wednesday morning, as investors reacted to results from the U.S. midterm elections which featured high-profile victories for both parties, as overall control of the House and Senate remained uncertain.

Futures on the S&P 500 fell 0.2 percent in premarket trading on Wednesday, after posting small gains late on Tuesday which coincided with early Republican victories after the markets closed. The benchmark stock index eked out a 0.6 percent gain during regular trading hours on Tuesday.

Votes are still being counted and it may take days to get a clear picture of the result. According to the most recent projections, Republicans are favored to win control of the House while the Senate is leaning toward the Democrats.

Investors and analysts have said that divided government — where Democrats lose control of at least one chamber of Congress — could be positive for the stock market because it would probably limit any major legislation that could impact corporate profitability.

“You just have politicians stop doing stuff and generally the market likes that,” said James Masserio, the co-head of equities in the Americas for Société Générale.

However, past market moves after the midterms are less conclusive on what combination of control between Congress and the White House is best for markets. The S&P 500 has risen on the day after the last six midterm elections, and also posted gains in the year after the vote.

“Markets historically reward less uncertainty and split government,” Ben Laidler, the global markets strategist at eToro, wrote in a post-election report. “But it has potential for medium term pain, from uncertainty over the debt ceiling to recession spending.

The election is not the only thing on investors’ minds. Many have said that against a backdrop of high inflation, rising interest rates and tense geopolitics, the midterms have receded in importance. The next big event for investors comes on Thursday, when new data about inflation in the United States will steer expectations over how aggressively the Federal Reserve could be in raising interest rates, which raises costs for companies and dampens economic growth.

“There are these major forces that kind of drown out the election,” Mr. Masserio said.

Show more

Nov. 9, 2022, 5:55 a.m. ET2 hours ago

2 hours ago

Julie Brown

Counting all of the votes in Nevada could take days, election officials say.

Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, left, and Gov. Steve Sisolak at a Nevada Democratic election night party in Las Vegas on Tuesday.Credit...Mikayla Whitmore for The New York Times

Overwhelmed election officials in Nevada say that they have been flooded by thousands of mail-in ballots, and that it may take several days to count the votes and upload results.

Last year, the state began requiring that mail-in ballots be sent to every registered voter. While ballots must be postmarked by Election Day, they can be counted if they arrive as late as Saturday.

Elections officials have emphasized the need for patience and have not offered predictions on how quickly they will be able to offer tallies.

Jamie Rodriguez, the interim registrar of voters in Washoe County, said she was expecting roughly 16,000 mail-in ballots to arrive on Election Day. She said that those votes would not be counted until Thursday because poll workers were so behind.

“Understand that whatever results posted tonight, if there are close races, there are definitely still a large number of votes to be counted,” Ms. Rodriguez said on Tuesday night.

And even the results that have come in came slowly. Nevada does not post its results until the last voter in the state casts a ballot, and the polls did not officially close until after 9 p.m. local time. Tallies did not start coming in until late Tuesday, after many contests on the East Coast had already been called.

Long waits and continuous warnings from elections officials did not prevent the candidates in a competitive race for a Nevada Senate seat from projecting confidence about their standing. Early Wednesday morning, Senator Catherine Cortez Masto, a Democrat, was slightly behind her Republican opponent, Adam Laxalt.

“We have a lot of our votes coming in all across the state, yet to be tabulated,” Mr. Laxalt said on election night at a party in Las Vegas. “We are going to win this race.”

“We had people voting in the snow and then the rain because they want a better Nevada and a better America,” he added. “Unfortunately, we’re in for a long night and maybe a few days into this week as all the votes are tabulated.”

Ms. Cortez Masto was also upbeat, but made the situation clear: “We won’t have results for several days.”

The lag means Nevadans will also have to wait for results in other competitive state races, including the governor’s race between the incumbent, Steve Sisolak, a Democrat, and his Republican challenger, Joe Lombardo. Mr. Lombardo held a narrow lead early Wednesday morning.

Show more

Nov. 9, 2022, 5:20 a.m. ET3 hours ago

3 hours ago

Derrick Bryson-Taylor

The Associated Press has stopped calling races and will resume at 9 a.m. Eastern.

Nov. 9, 2022, 5:00 a.m. ET3 hours ago

3 hours ago

Luis Ferré-Sadurní

After her historic win, Hochul must govern over a fractured New York electorate.

Gov. Kathy Hochul on Tuesday became the first woman to be elected governor of New York.Credit...Hiroko Masuike/The New York Times

For Gov. Kathy Hochul, a second historical milestone was clearly in her grasp: Nearly 15 months after she unexpectedly became New York’s first female governor, she was about to be the first woman in the state to be elected to the position.

But her victory on Tuesday proved harder to secure than most had expected.

Ms. Hochul led Representative Lee Zeldin, her Republican challenger, by roughly five percentage points with roughly 93 percent of the vote counted — a wider gap than some had braced for in the final weeks of the race, but still what would be the narrowest margin in a New York governor’s race in nearly three decades.

Mr. Zeldin managed to gain unforeseen traction in one of the most liberal states in the nation by mounting a campaign that was almost singularly focused on crime, allowing him to close in on Ms. Hochul and make significant inroads among suburban and independent voters, as well as some disaffected Democrats.

Governor Hochul ultimately managed to repel Mr. Zeldin’s late momentum, recalibrating her campaign in the final two weeks of the race. She increased her time in New York City as she sought to animate her base of Democratic voters; changed the focus of her political messaging and talked more often about public safety; and drew a star-studded lineup of Democrats to New York to rally around her as labor unions also flocked to her aid.

Still, the uncertainty and last-minute scramble in the race, particularly unusual in a state that hasn’t elected a Republican governor in 20 years, led to scrutiny over how Ms. Hochul ran her campaign.

She ran an expensive operation, significantly outspending Mr. Zeldin and nearly depleting her record-breaking $50 million campaign war chest on a constellation of television ads that sought to portray him as too extreme. She spent many months focusing on Mr. Zeldin’s anti-abortion stance before shifting her message toward crime in the race’s final stages, raising questions about whether that should have been her focus from the beginning.

And she appeared to lack a sufficiently strong ground game to energize Democratic voters, especially in Black and Latino communities, as Democratic operatives noted a dearth of the typical election-season lawn signs and mailers.

Lee Zeldin, with his family on election night, chose not to concede as he addressed supporters in Midtown Manhattan.Credit...James Estrin/The New York Times

For Ms. Hochul, the question now is whether the election results — Democrats also lost seats in the state’s House delegation and the State Legislature — will influence her leadership and agenda in her first full four-year term as governor.

It remains unclear how Ms. Hochul will seek to appeal to a New York electorate that, judging from the results on Tuesday, appears increasingly fractured, potentially resembling the polarization seen elsewhere in the nation. In a midterm election that was seen as a national rebuke of Democrats, the governor’s race in New York underscored deep fissures and discontent among voters concerned about public safety and an affordability crisis, especially in the suburbs of Long Island and in pockets of New York City.

Some Democrats have already begun to theorize that the governor might lurch slightly to the right in her policies as she seeks to respond to the unrest among voters.

If she does, it could set the stage for increased tension between the more left-leaning Democrats who control the State Legislature and Ms. Hochul, whose views on issues around gun rights and immigration have turned increasingly liberal over the years.

“I think the end result will be a somewhat more moderate Kathy Hochul, which I think squares with where she actually is, which is a bit of a common sense, moderate Democrat,” said Chris Coffey, a Democratic political strategist. “I do think it sets up more of a showdown with the governor and the more progressive parts of the State Senate.”

In her victory speech on Tuesday, Ms. Hochul ticked off broad commitments she had made during her campaign, including promises to build more affordable housing, make subways safe, tackle illegal guns and protect abortion rights.

“I will lead with strength and compassion, not anger and fear,” Ms. Hochul said before confetti cannons erupted at her watch party in Lower Manhattan, adding that “the lesson of tonight’s victory is that given the choice, New Yorkers refused to go backward in our long march toward progress.”

Ms. Hochul, a Democrat from Buffalo, ascended to New York’s highest office in August 2021, replacing former Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo after he resigned in scandal. A virtual unknown to most New Yorkers, Ms. Hochul was a former Erie County clerk before serving in Congress and later becoming Mr. Cuomo’s lieutenant governor in 2015.

His sudden resignation put Ms. Hochul in charge of a state traversing a pandemic and spikes in crime, and she moved swiftly to overhaul the Cuomo administration and build more collaborative relationships in Albany, while rushing to assemble an election campaign.

She immediately established herself as a furious and formidable fund-raiser, building a monumental stockpile of campaign funds that helped her easily defeat two Democratic primary rivals in June.

But even then, some top Democrats raised concerns that Ms. Hochul was not doing enough to engage with New York City’s minority communities, a crucial bloc of voters she would have to turn out to win.

Indeed, given the nature of her ascendance, Ms. Hochul faced a shortened time period to introduce herself to voters after serving mostly in the shadow of Mr. Cuomo as lieutenant governor.

Image

Ms. Hochul appeared to step up her ground game as Election Day neared, making more appearances with voters, especially in New York City.Credit...Jeenah Moon for The New York Times

Yet in her campaign, the governor largely stuck to attack ads that played up fears of how Mr. Zeldin would weaken gun safety laws and erode women’s rights, as she hoped to increase turnout among women. She emphasized her record of achievement during her short tenure, but appeared to miss an opportunity to promote her back story or delineate a detailed policy vision for the state.

“She didn’t have four years before, she had an accidental first year,” said State Senator Liz Krueger, a Democrat from Upper Manhattan. “I’m not really sure we can say this is Kathy Hochul, this is her agenda for running the State of New York, these are her goals and dreams, and then is it influenced by Zeldin in one way or the other?”

Those worries were amplified by some anxious Democratic officials in the final weeks of the race who rushed to her aid as Mr. Zeldin continued to chip away at Ms. Hochul’s once-commanding lead in public polls, drawing thousands of supporters to some of his rallies and raising the specter of a potential upset.

Ms. Hochul also had to contend with about $16 million spent by super PACs, spearheaded by a billionaire Republican donor, that financed a barrage of ominous-looking ads that sought to blame the governor for nearly all aspects of crime in New York, and days of scathing front covers published by the right-leaning New York Post.

Few dispute that the national dissatisfaction with Democrats clearly permeated the governor’s race, playing an outsize role even in a state where Democrats outnumber Republicans two to one.

“There was a natural passion on the Republican side that has been percolating,” said Charlie King, a Democratic consultant and former candidate for lieutenant governor. “I didn’t think that abortion was going to drive people to the polls the way that Republican anger was going to drive people to the polls. The race was always going to tighten into the end.”

Image

In places like Chester, N.Y., Mr. Zeldin was able to attract hundreds of supporters who responded to his campaign message of how the state was spiraling out of control.Credit...Gregg Vigliotti for The New York Times

As the race drew closer and Election Day neared, Ms. Hochul was forced to change gears to avoid a potentially humiliating defeat.

She temporarily dispatched her government chief of staff, Stacy Lynch, to help coordinate the campaign, which was run mostly by high-paid, out-of-state consultants. In a sign that she may have miscalculated her initial messaging strategy, Ms. Hochul all but abandoned her previous focus on protecting a woman’s right to an abortion and pivoted to crime.

A high-profile lineup of Democratic politicians was called in at the 11th hour to campaign with the governor, including President Biden and former President Bill Clinton, as well as Hillary Clinton. And a scattershot of get-out-the-vote rallies were organized across the city, while Ms. Hochul made back-to-back visits to Black churches, where she usually spoke about her upbringing and campaign message in more personal terms.

“A victory is a victory, even if it’s one point, so you take it,” said Laura Curran, the former Democratic county executive of Nassau County. “Something that the governor said to me early on was that she was used to being underestimated.

“She was certainly underestimated in this campaign, and she made it.”

Show more

Nov. 9, 2022, 4:02 a.m. ET4 hours ago

4 hours ago

Mitch Smith and Ava Sasani

Michigan, California and Vermont affirm abortion rights in state ballot proposals.

Image

Abortion-rights supporters in California rallied in Long Beach before Election Day.Credit...Damian Dovarganes/Associated Press

Voters in California, Michigan and Vermont chose to enshrine abortion protections in their state constitutions on Tuesday, The Associated Press said.

A vote in Kentucky on whether to amend the State Constitution to say there was no right to abortion was too close to call as of early Wednesday.

The results in the three other states, which came just months after the U.S. Supreme Court removed the constitutional right to abortion, showed that when asked directly, a broad cross section of Americans want to protect abortion access.

Abortion also appeared to shape results in some candidate races. Across the country, Democratic politicians emphasized their support for legal abortion on the campaign trail, while many Republicans opposed to abortion tried to focus voters on other issues.

The amendments marked a victory for abortion rights supporters, who since losing in the Supreme Court this summer have sought to preserve or restore access to the procedure through a series of lawsuits, ballot initiatives and legislative fights.

Gov. Gavin Newsom of California, a Democrat who won re-election on Tuesday, said it was “a point of pride” that abortion was now protected in the State Constitution.

“It’s a point of principle and it’s a point of contrast,” he said, “at a time of such mixed results all across this country.”

Abortion-rights supporters have increasingly looked to ballot questions as a way to advance their interests, even in Republican-leaning places. In August, in the first major political test of abortion after Roe v. Wade fell, Kansas voters overwhelmingly rejected a constitutional amendment that would have ended abortion protections at the state level. That result in a conservative-leaning state was seen by national Democrats as a sign of the issue’s political potency and an opening for their candidates in November.

But as the Supreme Court decision began to fade from the headlines, Republicans who support abortion restrictions tried to shift the political conversation to more favorable ground like economic issues and crime.

In Michigan, the vote on whether to place abortion protections in the State Constitution played out at the same time as a high-stakes governor race. Gretchen Whitmer, the Democratic incumbent, made support for abortion rights central to her campaign. She won re-election, The Associated Press said.

A rally for Michigan Democrats and Gov. Gretchen Whitmer on Sunday.Credit...Brittany Greeson for The New York Times

The Michigan amendment is likely to have the most immediate impact. A state law that was dormant for decades while Roe was in effect bans abortion, but enforcement of that measure had been temporarily blocked by the courts.

Lisa Baldwin-Ryan, 58, voted in favor of the amendment despite her complex views on abortion.

“I am totally against people who use it as a form of birth control, but not everybody is strong enough to carry a child if they’re a victim of rape and incest — therefore, why should they be forced?” said Ms. Baldwin-Ryan, who supported the Libertarian candidate for governor.

Kristan Hawkins, president of Students for Life, which opposes abortion rights, said early Wednesday that Michigan voters would experience “buyer’s remorse” after passing the amendment.

In Kentucky, a reliably Republican state that is among many in the South with abortion bans, residents were still split as of early Wednesday. The vote on whether to amend the Constitution to say it contained no right to abortion came just a week before the State Supreme Court was scheduled to hear a challenge to Kentucky’s abortion ban.

JoAnn Lewis, 63, of Lexington, Ky., said she favored the amendment.

“Life, once it is seeded, it needs to grow just like a garden — you’ve got to protect it,” Ms. Lewis said at a polling place.

But Samia Temsah-Deniskin, 38, said she voted against the amendment “because women should choose what happens with their bodies.” Ms. Temsah-Deniskin, a photographer from Paris, Ky., said that she was pregnant and also has a daughter, and that “these rights are so important for women in particular.”

California and Vermont already had robust abortion protections in law. The votes on Tuesday provided the states with more durable bulwarks against any future anti-abortion legislation, but did little to change the immediate situation. With nearly all ballots counted, about 77 percent of Vermont voters favored the amendment.

In California, Sherman Jones, 54, said he considered the Supreme Court’s abortion ruling an affront to a woman’s right to privacy.

“I just think that’s something that individuals and their doctors need to decide and not politicians,” said Mr. Jones, who lives in Riverside County and voted to add abortion protections to the California Constitution.

In Montana, where abortion is legal, a ballot initiative requiring medical interventions to save those that the state defines as “born alive” infants had not been called as of early Wednesday.

Reporting was contributed by Sarah Baird, Corinne Boyer, Jill Cowan, Ryan Patrick Hooper and Shawn Hubler.

Nov. 9, 2022, 3:50 a.m. ET4 hours ago

4 hours ago

Rick Rojas

Votes on ballot measures reflect the nation’s divisions.

Image

Voters in College Park, Md., on Tuesday.Credit...T.J. Kirkpatrick for The New York Times

Voters in Maryland and Missouri approved ballot measures on Tuesday to legalize recreational marijuana, according to The Associated Press, adding those states to a list that has swelled in recent years. But similar efforts were also shot down in Arkansas and North Dakota — a mixed result that underscored the varying public attitudes over marijuana use.

Those measures were among the many initiatives that appeared on ballots across the country on Tuesday — an exercise in direct democracy that has offered an unfiltered glimpse into voters’ stances on some of the most pressing and polarizing issues, including voting rights, gun restrictions and abortion access.

The early results according to The Associated Press have, in many ways, reflected the deep fissures running through the country.

Measures related to voting were under consideration in several states, with some pursuing restrictions meant to bolster election security and others pushing to expand and protect access amid fears of a concerted campaign to weaken the country’s election systems. Many of these measures could be traced to former President Donald J. Trump’s efforts to overturn his loss and mobilize his supporters by spreading baseless claims of a stolen election.

Voters in Ohio approved an initiative aimed at thwarting any attempt to allow people who are not U.S. citizens from voting in local elections. The proposal was meant to counter efforts elsewhere, including in New York City, to allow permanent legal residents and people authorized to work in the United States to vote in city-level races. A similar proposal is up for a vote in Louisiana on a Dec. 10 ballot.

In Nebraska, roughly two-thirds of voters supported a measure to require photo identification to vote.

Voters in Michigan supported adding measures to the state constitution, including opening polls for early voting, meant to make it easier to cast ballots.

In Connecticut, a measure to allow in-person early voting was passed.

In Iowa, voters, by a wide margin, supported an initiative enshrining gun rights in an amendment to the State Constitution that declares that residents’ ability “to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Voters in Tennessee and Vermont resoundingly supported ballot measures that remove language allowing slavery as punishment from their state constitutions. In Alabama, more than three-quarters of voters endorsed changes to the State Constitution that removed outdated and racist language, including language related to slavery.

But in Louisiana, nearly two-thirds of voters rejected a proposal that would have removed language from the State Constitution allowing slavery as punishment.

These measures to forbid slavery or involuntary servitude as punishment have gained traction across the country in recent years, creating an opening for prisoners to challenge the practice of forced labor for which they are paid pennies per hour or nothing at all.

Show more

Nov. 9, 2022, 3:34 a.m. ET5 hours ago

5 hours ago

Ava Sasani

Voters in Michigan voted in favor of abortion rights, The Associated Press said, amending their State Constitution to create a right to reproductive freedom, including decisions “about all matters relating to pregnancy,” such as abortion and contraception.

Nov. 9, 2022, 3:30 a.m. ET5 hours ago

5 hours ago

Nate Cohn

While Republicans remain modest favorites in the House, it could be days or even longer until there’s enough information to be sure whether Republicans gained control of the chamber. Republicans are still 22 seats away, and many of the seats they need are in slow-counting western states.

Nov. 9, 2022, 3:20 a.m. ET5 hours ago

5 hours ago

Maggie Astor

Reporting from New York

Representative Elissa Slotkin, a moderate Democrat, was re-elected in the Seventh District of Michigan, according to The Associated Press, defying the district's tilt toward Republicans. The Republican candidate, Tom Barrett, had sought to cast her as a progressive in centrist’s clothes.

Nov. 9, 2022, 2:53 a.m. ET5 hours ago

5 hours ago

J. David Goodman

Across Texas, neither a red wave nor a blue one.

Gov. Greg Abbott of Texas won re-election on Tuesday.Credit...Christopher Lee for The New York Times

HOUSTON — The familiar contours of Texas politics held firm for another election despite a concerted effort and many millions in campaign spending aimed at proving otherwise.

As the votes came in on Tuesday, Democrats remained locked out of statewide offices — from the governor’s mansion to the agriculture commissioner’s office — and Republicans could point to some gains among Hispanic voters, winning an open congressional seat in South Texas, though fewer than they had hoped for.

Germán & Co 11/9/22 Germán & Co 11/9/22

China's exports and imports fall simultaneously for the first time since the start of covid-zero policy…

Exports lost -0.3% on an annual basis, down sharply from 5.7% in September, and imports fell -0.7% after rebounding 0.3% in the previous month. Weak supply and demand coincide in this downturn. On the one hand, global trends such as stifling inflation, rising interest rates and the generalised stagnation of the global economy.
abc.es

“Exports lost -0.3% on an annual basis, down sharply from 5.7% in September, and imports fell -0.7% after rebounding 0.3% in the previous month. Weak supply and demand coincide in this downturn. On the one hand, global trends such as stifling inflation, rising interest rates and the generalised stagnation of the global economy.”

— abc.es

Editor's Pick:

China's economic engine grinds to a halt

How China curbed global inflation and why it will stop doing so

Factory in China AFP

Jaime Santirso

JAIME SANTIRSO

Correspondent in Beijing

08/11/2022

Updated at 13:09h.

There is no end in sight for the covid-zero policy that for more than two and a half years has kept China isolated from the world and subjected to the virus. In the meantime, the social discontent and economic costs are piling up, forming a mixture of uncertain evolution. Unlike the first ingredient, silenced as befits an authoritarian regime, the second is ponderable.

The Asian giant's exports and imports entered negative territory during the month of October, according to figures released yesterday by the customs authorities. This is the first simultaneous fall since May 2020, when the pandemic that emerged in Wuhan began to spread the disaster across the planet.

Exports lost -0.3% on an annual basis, down sharply from 5.7% in September, and imports fell -0.7% after rebounding 0.3% in the previous month. Weak supply and demand coincide in this downturn. On the one hand, global trends such as stifling inflation, rising interest rates and the generalised stagnation of the global economy.

On the other, the incessant restrictions at home, exemplified these days by the flight of workers from the Zhengzhou factory of Foxconn, Apple's supplier, in the face of a resurgence. As a result, the US company has already announced delays in deliveries of its iPhone 14. Not even the devaluation of the yuan, which makes operations cheaper, has balanced the circumstances for Chinese exporters. Partial shutdowns in Guangzhou, a manufacturing hub and home to 19 million people, could aggravate the situation.

"We expect exports to continue to decline over the coming quarters as the global economy enters recession," Capital Economics said in a report following the release of the customs data. "Import volumes declined again last month after falling significantly over the course of the year, and are likely to continue to do so in the face of the complex domestic backdrop.

Overseas remittances are the engine that keeps the ailing economy going, so their slowdown will add to the pressure. China's GDP grew by 3.9% year-on-year in the third quarter, which puts the partial figure for the year so far at 3%: well below previous years and the official target of "around 5%", which is already unattainable. The reality hidden by the government figures could turn out to be even more unfortunate. "If they resort to 3% to lie, things must be very bad," said a well-known academic during a private conversation.

The true cost of cheap: the other side of Chinese giant Shein

The true cost of cheapness: the other face of the Chinese giant Shein

LUIS GARCÍA LÓPEZ

China's exports and imports fall simultaneously for the first time since the start of covid-zero policy prices.

In the short term, there is no prospect of the situation changing. Xi Jinping reiterated the validity of his covid-zero policy during the 20th Congress, before becoming the most powerful Chinese leader since Mao Zedong. Stock markets then reacted with huge losses to the personalist path of the world's second largest economy. A week later, last week, they jumped in the opposite direction on rumours that the authorities had begun to draw up a plan for the reopening. For the time being, the rumours were unfounded, as on Saturday the government maintained its strategy unchanged.

China is currently experiencing its highest number of cases in six months. The authorities today reported 7,475 infections in the last twenty-four hours, a modest figure in global terms but alarming in the context of China. And they are moving fast: the previous day it was 5,496. The country has not reached similar levels since 1 May, when Shanghai was under house-to-house confinement and Beijing was under almost complete restrictions. Several areas of the capital have already ordered the suspension of classes in schools.

China's voracious fishing ravages the seas, Russia wants to follow in its footsteps

Europe to become a net importer of cars by 2025

At the same time, public frustration is growing, spurred on by controversial cases such as the death of a three-year-old boy who did not make it to hospital in time because of the restrictions or a woman who jumped out of the window of her house in Hohhot after more than a month of quarantine. The end of the covid-zero policy, however, remains a mystery. As the trade balance shows, huge amounts of money depend on it. And a lot of other things as well.

Germán & Co 11/8/22 Germán & Co 11/8/22

News round-up, Tuesday, November 8, 2022.

The hardest-hit country was Greece, where 68% of respondents said their spending power had fallen “a lot” or “somewhat” since 2019, followed by 63% in France, 57% in Italy, 54% in Germany, 48% in Britain and 38% in Poland.
The Guardian…

“The hardest-hit country was Greece, where 68% of respondents said their spending power had fallen “a lot” or “somewhat” since 2019, followed by 63% in France, 57% in Italy, 54% in Germany, 48% in Britain and 38% in Poland.”

— The Guardian...

Editor's Pick:

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/environment/article/2022/11/07/germany-s-scholz-warns-against-fossil-fuel-renaissance_6003298_114.html

Germany's Scholz warns against fossil fuel 'renaissance'

The German Chancellor issued the warning during a speech at COP27, insisting Germany would not fall back on fossil fuels despite a lack of Russian energy imports.

Le Monde with AFP

Published on November 7, 2022 at 20h49, updated at 08h23 on November 8, 2022

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz speaks during COP27 NARIMAN EL-MOFTY / AP

German Chancellor Olaf Scholz on Monday, November 7, urged COP27 participants not to lose sight of renewable energy targets despite the impact of the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

"There must not be a worldwide renaissance of fossil fuels," Mr. Scholz said in a speech at the climate summit in Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. "And for Germany I can say: there will not be one," he said.

COP27: 'Choose climate solidarity or collective suicide,' UN chief warns world leaders

Europe's largest economy has been squeezed hard as Russian energy imports have dwindled and prices have risen following the outbreak of the war in Ukraine. Long reliant on imports from Moscow to meet its energy needs, Germany has scrambled to shore up its supplies in the face of potential winter shortages.

As a result, officials had made the decision to restart mothballed coal power plants "for a short time", Mr. Scholz said. Germany would "stick to our exit from coal", the chancellor assured, with Berlin targeting a complete end for the fossil fuel in 2030.

COP27: Climate ambition hit by war

As well as falling back on coal, Germany has invested billions into new infrastructure for the import of natural gas from new sources, such as the United States or Qatar. Such liquefied natural gas (LNG) terminals will in time be retrofitted for the import of hydrogen, officials say.

The pressure Russia has been able to exercise by cutting supplies showed that the transition away from fossil fuels was a "security policy imperative", the chancellor said. Less global warming meant "fewer droughts and floods, fewer conflicts over resources, less hunger and fewer bad harvests – and more security and well-being for all", he said.

Germany would up its investments in international environmental programs, Mr. Scholz said, bringing the total to €6 billion.

Funds for the protection of forests alone through 2025 would be doubled to 2 billion, the development ministry said. The money will mostly be invested via partnership programs with countries such as Brazil, Ecuador, Madagascar and Pakistan, according to the ministry.

Russia’s heavy casualties in Ukraine spark outcry and rare official response

By Mary Ilyushina

and

Annabelle Timsit

November 7, 2022 at 6:24 p.m. EST

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks to Oleg Kozhemyako, governor of the far eastern Primorsky region in September. Casualties among members of the 155th Brigade, which is normally based in Kozhemyako's region, have been high, prompting rare public outcry. (Gavriil Grigorov/Sputnik/Kremlin/AP)

RIGA, Latvia — Steep Russian casualties in key battles in eastern Ukraine have prompted an unusual public outcry — and sharp criticism of military commanders — by surviving soldiers, and family members of recently conscripted fighters, who say their units were led to slaughter in poorly planned operations.

The uproar over battlefield losses near Vuhledar in the Donetsk region prompted an official statement from the Russian Defense Ministry, which sought to play down the reportedly high death toll among soldiers in the 155th Separate Guards Marine Brigade, which led Moscow’s offensive in the area.

It was the first time since the start of Russia’s invasion that the ministry has officially responded to reports of mass casualties and criticism of commanders on Telegram, the main platform used by officials as well as by reporters and bloggers covering the Russian war.

Criticizing the war — or even calling it a war rather than a “special military operation” — is illegal in Russia. But the Kremlin in recent months has tolerated criticism of the military’s poor performance by pro-war hawks who back the invasion, including some demanding even more brutal tactics in Ukraine.

On Sunday, pro-Kremlin military correspondents posted the text of a letter sent by the members of the 155th Brigade, which is normally based in Russia’s Far East, decrying the order that sent them into what they called “an incomprehensible offensive” in the village of Pavlivka, in Ukraine’s Donetsk region.

“As a result of the ‘carefully’ planned offensive by the ‘great generals,’ we lost about 300 people killed, wounded and missing as well as half the equipment in four days,” the letter said. It was addressed to Gov. Oleg Kozhemyako of the Primorsky region, which lies on the coast of the Sea of Japan.

Nearly 6,000 miles away, in eastern Ukraine, the weather had turned for the worse in Pavlivka, with rain muddying the roads and making reinforcement of troops in the area even more difficult, the commander of the pro-Russian Vostok battalion, Alexander Khodakovsky, wrote on Telegram over the weekend.

“My fears about Pavlivka were justified,” Khodakovsky said, adding that he felt the advancement in the area initiated by Russian commanders had been “premature.”

The letter also specifically criticized Rustam Muradov, the commander of Russia’s Eastern Military District, who was appointed in October. Earlier in the war, Muradov led the Vostok grouping of forces, which was responsible for operations in eastern areas of Donetsk and Luhansk.

Officially, the military did not give the reason for the reassignment, but it came after the Russian military suffered a defeat in Lyman, a key logistics and supply hub in Donetsk area. The embarrassing defeat in occurred a day after Russian President Vladimir Putin declared Donetsk and three other Ukrainian regions to be annexed by Russia — a violation of international law.

The Russian chain of command has appeared to be in constant disarray throughout the war as Moscow repeatedly switched overall commanders and replaced top generals in all four of its military districts.

Most recently, Russian media reported that Col. Gen. Alexander Lapin no longer runs the Central Military District after he was repeatedly bashed by Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov and Yevgeniy Prigozhin, Putin’s ally and the financier of Wagner mercenary group, over strategic missteps and the poor performance of his troops.

The governor, Kozhemyako, at first dismissed the letter as a “potential fake planted” by Ukrainians but later issued a video message saying he had contacted the officers on the front line who confirmed there had been heavy fighting and losses, but, he said, “the number is as not as high as it’s written in this letter.”

“Due to the competent actions of the commanders, the losses among the marines over this period do not exceed 1 percent of the combat personnel and 7 percent of the wounded, a significant part of whom have already returned to duty,” the Russian Defense Ministry said in its statement, issued on Monday.

The ministry added that the 155th Brigade had been fighting near the regional hub of Vuhledar for more than 10 days and advanced “five kilometers deep into Ukrainian positions.”

Many pro-war commentators in Russia have been urging the ministry to be more transparent about its defeats. But rather than mollify these critics, the statement only inflamed their anger by minimizing the extent of the losses.

“So far it looks like that the military, having noticed another impending wave of discontent, decided to quickly subcontract the authorities of the region to their side and marginalize the whole situation, once again pretending that nothing is happening,” wrote a popular blogger who writes under the moniker Military Informer. “We hope this situation will change.”

Moscow’s top brass are also now trying to fend off another public scandal after residents of Voronezh, a city in a strategic Russian region near the Ukrainian border, complained that recently conscripted men from the region had been sent unprepared to Svatove, a town in the Luhansk region that has been the site of fierce battles. Hundreds may have died, according to Russian outlet Verstka.

“For three days they were under shelling, they tried to survive the best they could … they had no food and no sleep, they held up for three days and didn’t flee, unlike their commanding officers,” Inna Popova, the wife of a soldier, said in a video address recorded by the soldiers’ family members, and posted by Verstka.

“Please help us rescue our mobilized [men] and remove them from the first line of defense,” Popova said, adding that her husband had been mobilized on Oct. 12 and sent to Ukraine soon after.

Russian officials repeatedly asserted that the new conscripts, called up amid an unpopular mobilization effort initiated by Putin to replenish his army after several setbacks, would be tasked mainly with controlling already occupied areas and supporting the rear, and not to serve as the main advancing force.

Moscow took control of the Luhansk region early in the war, but its grip on the territory is under threat after Russian troops suffered a defeat near Kharkiv in September and lost Lyman, in the area Col. Gen. Lapin was responsible for, according to Russian media.

If Russia loses Svatove, Ukrainian forces probably will be able to advance further into Luhansk, regaining much of the territory that Putin claimed to be annexed and absorbed into Russia.

Verstka, citing family members, reported that men mobilized in Voronezh ended up on the front line after just a few days of training, probably a decision by their commanders aimed at closing the gaps in defensive lines and rotating out exhausted troops.

Two servicemen from the Voronezh region told Verstka that only a few dozen men from more than 500 solders in their unit have been accounted for since the intense shelling last week.

Pro-Kremlin Telegram channel “War on Fakes,” which is often quoted by the Defense Ministry, dismissed the reports as false.

The Voronezh region governor, Alexander Gusev, said Sunday that he had met with the family members who recorded the video address. Gusev’s press service did not refute reports of mass causalities, and a local news outlet deleted a report that had called the information fake.

“The situation is quite difficult in terms of finding objectivity, so we do not take responsibility for making such statements and discussing any figures and facts,” the press service told local pool journalists, according to a screenshot posted by a journalist in the pool.

Russia has officially sent a reinforcement of 50,000 mobilized men to Ukraine in recent weeks with at least another 250,000 soldiers still in training, Putin said Monday during a government meeting.

Russia and Ukrainian forces are each preparing for a bitter winter that will complicate virtually every aspect of the war, from logistics to morale to the physical health of the troops.

For Ukraine, the approaching cold weather will be increasingly difficult to brace after weeks of Russia attacks on the country’s energy infrastructure.

In Kyiv, the capital, Monday passed in relative quiet without air raid sirens or damage from Russian missiles — a welcome change for residents who have grown used to Monday morning strikes over the past month.

But the attacks have forced authorities to plan blackouts around the capital and in other parts of the country to relieve the strain on the energy grid, and millions in the capital and its vicinity were without power overnight.

One in four Europeans say their financial position is ‘precarious’

Study by anti-poverty NGO shows more than half feel at financial risk and 80% have already made hard spending choices

Parents in particular are feeling the strain, the survey shows. Photograph: Anna Gowthorpe/PA

Jon Henley Europe correspondent

@jonhenley

Mon 7 Nov 2022 05.00 GMT

One in four Europeans describe their financial position as “precarious”, more than half see a serious risk it will become so over the coming months, and 80% have already been forced into hard spending choices, according to a survey.

Colder early winter in Europe could worsen cost of living crisis, say forecasters

As the cost of living crisis, driven by high energy prices, rampant inflation and Russia’s war on Ukraine, tightens its grip, the six-country survey for the French anti-poverty NGO Secours Populaire painted an alarming picture of “a continent on the brink”.

More than half (54%) of more than 6,000 people across France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Poland and the UK told the pollster Ipsos their purchasing power had fallen over the past three years – mostly due to higher food, fuel, heating and rent bills.

The hardest-hit country was Greece, where 68% of respondents said their spending power had fallen “a lot” or “somewhat” since 2019, followed by 63% in France, 57% in Italy, 54% in Germany, 48% in Britain and 38% in Poland.

About 80% of respondents said they had already been forced to make significant compromises, including cutting down on travel (62%) or heating (47%), borrowing from friends or family (42%), finding a second job (40%) and skipping a meal (29%).

Across the six countries, 64% said they were now “often” or “sometimes” unable to decide what to cut next as they had already cut what they could, 28% said they were overdrawn by mid-month, and 27% often or sometimes feared losing their home.

On average, about 27% of respondents across the six countries said their financial and material situation was “precarious”, defined as “one unexpected expenditure could change everything”, while 55% said they had to pay attention.

Archie Bland and Nimo Omer take you through the top stories and what they mean, free every weekday morning

Privacy Notice: Newsletters may contain info about charities, online ads, and content funded by outside parties. For more information see our Privacy Policy. We use Google reCaptcha to protect our website and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Rising cost of living a worry for 77% of adults in Great Britain, says ONS

The future looked worse for many, however: a majority of Europeans (55%) said they felt they faced a very or somewhat significant risk of falling into precariousness over the coming months – with one in five (17%) assessing the possibility as very high.

Italians and Greeks were the most worried, with 70% and 68% respectively very or somewhat concerned. About 47% of respondents in Britain said they felt the risk of precariousness was significant, and 42% of those in France.

Parents in particular were feeling the strain, the survey showed. A large majority (72%) across the six countries said they had cut back on their own leisure activities (76%), hair and beauty treatments (72%) and clothes budget (72%) in order to preserve their children’s quality of life.

Almost half of parents (48%) across the six countries also said they regularly cut back on their own food to feed their children, while 66% said they had been forced to rein in their children’s activities, including outings and holidays.

On average, 49% – including 50% in the UK – of parents said they were worried about not being able to meet their children’s needs in future, while 33% said they were already unable to ensure their children’s diet was as varied as they would like.

The study showed striking differences between the countries in terms of which groups were deemed most at risk of falling into poverty: retirees in Germany (61%), younger people in Italy (57%), and in the UK, single-parent families (55%).

Germán & Co 11/7/22 Germán & Co 11/7/22

News round-up, Monday, November 7, 2022.

A joint venture of the German company Wintershall Dea delivers gas condensate to Gazprom. The Russian state-owned corporation in turn provides aviation fuel to two military bases believed to be behind air strikes that have been internationally criticized as possible war crimes.
(Spiegel)

“A joint venture of the German company Wintershall Dea delivers gas condensate to Gazprom. The Russian state-owned corporation in turn provides aviation fuel to two military bases believed to be behind air strikes that have been internationally criticized as possible war crimes.”

— Spiegel

Editor's Pick:

World is on ‘highway to climate hell’, UN chief warns at Cop27 summit

António Guterres tells leaders ‘global climate fight will be won or lost in this crucial decade – on our watch’

António Guterres speaking at the Cop27 summit in Egypt on Monday. Photograph: Mohammed Salem/Reuters

Fiona Harvey and Damian Carrington in Sharm El-Sheikh

Mon 7 Nov 2022 12.15 GMT

The Guardian

Humanity is on a “highway to climate hell”, the UN secretary general has warned, saying the fight for a liveable planet will be won or lost in this decade.

António Guterres told world leaders at the opening of the Cop27 UN climate summit in Egypt on Monday: “We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot on the accelerator.”

He said the world faced a stark choice over the next fortnight of talks: either developed and developing countries working together to make a “historic pact” that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions and set the world on a low-carbon path – or failure, which would bring climate breakdown and catastrophe.

“We can sign a climate solidarity pact, or a collective suicide pact,” he added.

He said the world had the tools it needed to reduce greenhouse gas emissions, in clean energy and low-carbon technology.

“A window of opportunity remains open, but only a narrow shaft of light remains,” he said. “The global climate fight will be won or lost in this crucial decade – on our watch. One thing is certain: those that give up are sure to lose.”

Revealed: US and UK fall billions short of ‘fair share’ of climate funding

Abdel Fatah al-Sisi, the president of Egypt, said in his opening address to the summit that poor and vulnerable people around the world were already experiencing the effects of extreme weather: “The intensity and frequency of climate disasters have never been higher, in all four corners of the world, bringing wave after wave of suffering for billions of people. Is it not high time today to put an end to this suffering?”

More than 100 heads of state and government from around the world gathered in the Egyptian resort of Sharm El-Sheikh on Monday for two days of closed-door meetings and public events to discuss the climate crisis.

Rishi Sunak, the British prime minister, will attend for one day, along with Olaf Scholz of Germany, Emanuel Macron of France, and Ursula von der Leyen, the president of the European Commission. Joe Biden, the US president, will come later in the week, after the US midterm elections.

Mia Mottley, the prime minister of Barbados, will set out a new initiative on climate finance for the developing world, and African leaders including William Ruto of Kenya, Macky Sall of Senegal, and George Weah, the president of Liberia, are at the talks. The crown prince of Saudi Arabia, Mohammed bin Salman, is also at the meeting.

From Wednesday, the world leaders will hand over to officials and ministers for the rest of the fortnight of talks. However, the summit promises to be a fraught and difficult one, with little chance of a breakthrough.

The planet's most important stories. Get all the week's environment news - the good, the bad and the essential

Countries are meeting in the shadow of the war in Ukraine, a worldwide energy and cost of living crisis, and rising global tensions. Rich and poor countries are at loggerheads as big economies have failed to cut greenhouse gas emissions quickly enough, and the poorer countries bearing the brunt of the climate crisis are receiving little of the financial assistance they need and that has been promised.

The Cop27 conference got off to a slow start, with negotiators spending more than 40 hours over the weekend wrangling over what would be on the agenda. In the end, it was agreed that the vexed issue of loss and damage – which refers to the worst impacts of the climate crisis, which are too severe for countries to adapt to – would be discussed.

Poor countries suffering loss and damage want a financial mechanism that will give them access to funding when disasters such as hurricanes, floods and droughts strike, destroying their infrastructure and tearing apart their social fabric.

It is not likely that these talks will provide a final settlement on loss and damage, but countries are hoping for progress on ways of raising and disbursing finance.

At most UN climate summits, activists and protesters play a key role. However, Egypt clamps down on dissent and its jails are full of political prisoners. Sisi’s government has promised that climate activist voices will be heard, but their activities have been curtailed, with protesters kept at a separate site and required to register in advance to be granted permission for even minor demonstrations.

Republicans sue to disqualify thousands of mail ballots in swing states

Bytheustime24@gmail.com

November 7, 2022

Washington Post

Republican officers and candidates in a minimum of three battleground states are pushing to disqualify hundreds of mail ballots after urging their very own supporters to vote on Election Day, in what critics are calling a concerted try at partisan voter suppression.

In Pennsylvania, the state Supreme Courtroom has agreed with the Republican Nationwide Committee that election officers shouldn’t rely ballots on which the voter uncared for to place a date on the outer envelope — even in instances when the ballots arrive earlier than Election Day. Hundreds of ballots have been put aside in consequence, sufficient to swing an in depth race.

In Michigan, Kristina Karamo, the Republican nominee for secretary of state, sued the highest election official in Detroit final month, looking for to toss absentee ballots not forged in individual with an ID, despite the fact that that runs opposite to state necessities. When requested in a current courtroom listening to, Karamo’s lawyer declined to say why the swimsuit targets Detroit, a closely Democratic, majority-Black metropolis, and never your entire state.

And in Wisconsin, Republicans won a court ruling that may stop some mail ballots from being counted when the required witness deal with will not be full.

Over the previous two years, Republicans have waged a sustained marketing campaign towards alleged voter fraud. Consultants say the litigation — which may considerably have an effect on Tuesday’s vote — represents a parallel technique of suing to disqualify mail ballots based mostly on technicalities. Whereas the rejections might have some foundation in state legislation, consultants say they seem to go towards a precept, enshrined in federal legislation, of not disenfranchising voters for minor errors.

The fits coincide with a scientific try by Republicans — led by former president Donald Trump — to influence GOP voters to forged their ballots solely on Election Day. Critics argue that the general objective is to separate Republicans and Democrats by technique of voting after which to make use of lawsuits to void mail ballots which might be disproportionately Democratic.

“They’re on the lookout for each benefit they will get, and so they’ve calculated that this can be a means that they will win extra seats,” mentioned Sylvia Albert, director of voting and elections for Widespread Trigger, a nonpartisan democracy advocacy group. “Analysis has proven that absentee ballots usually tend to be discarded if they’re voted by younger folks and other people of shade, which aren’t usually seen because the Republican base.”

Albert mentioned authorized battles over mail poll eligibility have the potential to delay outcomes and even change outcomes. In some instances, the disputes may wind up earlier than the U.S. Supreme Courtroom.

The potential for chaos is very excessive in Pennsylvania, the place the authorized combat is ongoing and will affect or postpone the result in a few of the state’s tightest races, together with a contest that would decide management of the U.S. Senate.

Republican Nationwide Committee spokeswoman Emma Vaughn mentioned in a press release that the committee sued in Pennsylvania “as a result of we’re merely asking for counties to comply with the state legislation, which by the way in which, dozens of Democrats supported.”

“We look ahead to persevering with our authorized actions to make sure that elections are administered in accordance with this bipartisan rule of legislation,” Vaughn added.

Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Wolf (D) issued a press release Sunday evening during which he asserted that “no voter ought to be disenfranchised just because they made a minor error in filling out their poll.”

“This was not a controversial idea in our nation or our commonwealth till not too long ago, with the rise of the Huge Lie and the efforts to unfold mis- and disinformation within the days main as much as the final election,” Wolf continued. “I urge counties to proceed to make sure that each vote counts.”

Election officers are braced for a repeat of a protracted standoff following Pennsylvania’s Could major between state officers and three counties — Berks, Fayette and Lancaster — that refused to incorporate undated ballots of their licensed outcomes.

Wolf’s administration sued these counties in July to pressure them to incorporate the ballots, nearly all of which have been forged by Democrats, courtroom information present. In August, a state judge ordered the counties to incorporate “all lawfully forged ballots,” together with these with lacking dates, of their licensed outcomes.

Republicans then efficiently persuaded the state Supreme Courtroom to reverse that coverage for the final election in a choice launched final week. The state courtroom deadlocked on whether or not rejecting the ballots was a violation of voters’ federal civil rights.

Widespread Trigger and others shortly filed a federal swimsuit looking for to overturn the state courtroom ruling on the grounds that rejecting ballots over a technical error violates the Civil Rights Act. The case stays pending.

The date printed on the envelope of a mail poll is a “meaningless technicality” that has no bearing on officers’ capability to guage whether or not the poll has been forged on time by a certified voter, the criticism says.

The federal courts have already weighed in on the difficulty: Earlier this 12 months, the U.S. Courtroom of Appeals for the third Circuit discovered that failing to rely undated mail ballots is a violation of federal civil rights legislation. Nonetheless, the U.S. Supreme Courtroom injected uncertainty into the difficulty by vacating that call and instructing that the case be dismissed as moot as a result of the election in query had already handed.

Within the meantime, voting rights teams and others have launched a full-court press to inform voters throughout Pennsylvania whose ballots had been rejected and wanted to be mounted or changed. At the least 7,000 such ballots have been rejected statewide for quite a lot of causes, together with the lacking date, in response to information compiled by the Pennsylvania Division of State. Activists mentioned the determine might be a lot greater as a result of many counties have refused to publish the data.

In Philadelphia, the state’s largest metropolis and a Democratic bastion, greater than 2,000 such ballots have been rejected. Election officers posted lists of voters on-line with directions to return to Metropolis Corridor up by way of Election Day to forged a substitute poll. Nick Custodio, a deputy metropolis commissioner, mentioned in a phone interview {that a} regular trickle of residents confirmed up over the weekend to vote anew.

Shoshanna Israel, a coordinator with the liberal Working Households Social gathering in Philadelphia, mentioned her group assigned 49 volunteers to contact voters with ballots needing a repair. The group has contacted 1,800 voters since final Tuesday.

However not everybody could make it to Metropolis Corridor.

“I’m completely disabled,” mentioned Jean Terrizzi, 95, who was listed as having returned a poll with a lacking date. She added that she had an vital medical appointment on Monday and would simply need to “let it go” and never have her vote counted.

“This voting state of affairs is horrible,” she mentioned, declining to state her political affiliation. “It’s very disgraceful.”

Republicans additionally sued to dam counties from notifying voters who uncared for up to now their ballots to present them the prospect to repair them. The trouble failed, however counties might select whether or not to take action, that means not all voters will probably be given a chance to right poll errors.

Small numbers of votes may make a distinction within the form of shut races to which Pennsylvania has turn out to be accustomed.

“For those who can get rid of 1 p.c of the votes and so they are inclined to lean Democratic, then that offers you that statistical benefit,” mentioned Clifford Levine, a Pittsburgh-based election lawyer for Democrats.

“This isn’t about stopping fraud,” Levine mentioned. “It’s about discounting mail ballots. There’s simply no query.”

Republican candidates in Pennsylvania, together with gubernatorial nominee Doug Mastriano, have been vocal in urging supporters to forged ballots on Election Day, not by mail.

Jeff Mandell, a Democratic election lawyer in Wisconsin, mentioned there was much less of a coordinated effort in that state to steer Republicans towards Election Day, though Trump made that pitch at an look this 12 months.

Underneath Wisconsin legislation, an absentee voter should discover a witness — often a partner, relative or buddy — to attest that the voter legally accomplished the poll. The witness should signal the poll envelope and supply an deal with.

Republicans efficiently sued this 12 months to toss steering from the Wisconsin Elections Fee permitting native election officers to fill in incomplete witness addresses on ballots. When voting rights teams sought new pointers on what lacking components within the deal with would enable for tossing a poll, judges dominated that it was too near the election to vary state coverage.

“There’s a concerted effort by the Republican infrastructure, the occasion, and others working with it, in addition to Republican leaders within the legislature, to undermine absentee voting and make it more durable for folks to vote that means,” Mandell mentioned.

How votes are cast and counted is increasingly decided in courtrooms

Wisconsin Republicans who spoke out in favor of the swimsuit mentioned state legislation is obvious that solely a voter might right an incomplete deal with.

“Lawless poll curing can’t and won’t be allowed to proceed,” Republican Senate Majority Chief Devin LeMahieu mentioned in a press release issued on the time. “We’re placing the complete weight of the legislature behind this lawsuit to close down [the Wisconsin Elections Commission’s] defiant and flagrant abuse of the legislation.”

Republicans and Democrats in Michigan say they assume the lawsuit introduced by Karamo, the GOP secretary of state nominee, has little likelihood of success. Democratic election lawyer Mark Brewer known as the Karamo lawsuit “racist, frivolous, and sanctionable.”

In a textual content change, Karamo lawyer Daniel Hartman mentioned the candidate, who’s Black, filed the swimsuit in Detroit partly due to what he described as the town’s historical past of election safety breaches. Karamo has been an outspoken proponent of the baseless declare that the 2020 election was stolen from Trump.

Even when the swimsuit fails, different challenges are taking part in out: In current days, county clerks throughout Michigan have acquired emails from organized teams making an attempt to dispute the eligibility of voters who requested or forged absentee ballots, suggesting there could possibly be extra litigation to return.

Tom Hamburger in Washington and Patrick Marley in Madison, Wis., contributed to this report.

A German Company's Questionable Involvement in Russia

A joint venture of the German company Wintershall Dea delivers gas condensate to Gazprom. The Russian state-owned corporation in turn provides aviation fuel to two military bases believed to be behind air strikes that have been internationally criticized as possible war crimes.

By Frederik Obermaier, Claus Hecking, Hans Koberstein, Ferdinand Kuchlmayr und Ruben Schaar

04.11.2022, 19.04 Uhr

Fueling the War: A German Company's Questionable Involvement in Russia - DER SPIEGEL

Clean Energy Park a New Visions of Energy World from Sweden…

Clean Energy Park a New Visions of Energy World from Sweden… | Energy Central

Germán & Co 11/7/22 Germán & Co 11/7/22

Frankrike bevisar dagligen att återvinning av SNF inte bara är genomförbart utan också en säker och prisvärd teknik som bör ingå i USA:s program för ren energi.

Fördelar och utmaningar med återvinning av kärnkraft
De viktigaste skälen till att återvinna SNF är följande: (1) återvinning och återanvändning av oanvänt bränsle, (2) stor minskning av avfallsvolymen och (3) eliminering av behovet av ett geologiskt slutförvar som allmänheten inte vill ha.
(Center For Security Policy)

Det har aldrig funnits ett bättre tillfälle än nu för USA att fortsätta med återvinning som en väg till att lösa SNF-frågan. Den nya regeringen har förklarat att den inte har för avsikt att återuppta arbetet med Yucca Mountain, så återvinning av kärnbränsle skulle inte skada de befintliga ansträngningarna där. Den andra stora kritiken - att få reaktorer kan använda reaktorplutonium - behandlas redan i DOE:s reaktordemonstrationsprogram.

Editor's Pick:

GERMAN TORO GHIO reputations score 5,387

29 items added last 28 days with 7,881 views
EnergyCentral
131K views months
Twitter
28K views months
Linkedin
Nov 6, 2022
Source: April 6, 2021 Yechezkel Moskowitz, Center for Security Police
Translations: Germán & Co

Frankrike bevisar dagligen att återvinning av SNF inte bara är genomförbart utan också en säker och prisvärd teknik som bör ingå i USA:s program för ren energi. Om USA menar allvar med att minska sina koldioxidutsläpp måste landet ta kärnkraften på allvar. Detta allvar börjar med en heltäckande lösning för SNF. Återvinning av kärnkraft skulle inte bara ge en värdefull energikälla, utan också signalera till världen att USA återtar sitt ledarskap inom ren energiproduktion.
(Nuclear power has a nuclear waste problem. Here's how to fix it. - Center for Security Policy)

Det har aldrig funnits ett bättre tillfälle än nu för USA att fortsätta med återvinning som en väg till att lösa SNF-frågan. Den nya regeringen har förklarat att den inte har för avsikt att återuppta arbetet med Yucca Mountain, så återvinning av kärnbränsle skulle inte skada de befintliga ansträngningarna där. Den andra stora kritiken - att få reaktorer kan använda reaktorplutonium - behandlas redan i DOE:s reaktordemonstrationsprogram.

Kongressen bör utforska återvinning av kärnkraft som ett genomförbart alternativ. Eftersom SNF-problemet skapades av regeringen kan det inte lösas enbart av privata företag. Kongressen kan börja med att inleda ett FoU-program, i likhet med de senaste årens program för avancerade reaktorer, för att stimulera innovation och få fram ny teknik för återvinning av kärnbränsle från nationella laboratorier till kommersiell utveckling.

Kongressen bör uppmuntra den privata sektorn att delta i ett eventuellt framtida offentlig-privat partnerskap i frågan. På så sätt skulle flera grupper med medarbetare från industrin, universitet och nationella laboratorier kunna presentera sina metoder och den bästa skulle väljas ut.

I all lagstiftning om kärnavfall bör man ge tillgång till NWF för att betala för utveckling, konstruktion och eventuell drift av en anläggning för återvinning av kärnavfall.

En omläggning av den befintliga fonden, som betalas av privata kunder, skulle ge en omedelbar finansieringskälla utan att kongressen behöver anslå medel. Det enda som behöver göras är att tillåta att en del av den ränta som för närvarande tillfaller fonden används för att stödja forskning och utveckling tills rätt teknik och utvecklare har identifierats.

Kongressen bör sträva efter att välja en plats efter förhandlingar med lokala myndigheter för att undvika att situationen i Nevada upprepas. En sådan "samtyckesbaserad lokalisering" bör fungera i USA på samma sätt som den har fungerat på andra håll. I gengäld för att stå som värd för anläggningen kan partnerstaten belönas med en årlig avgift - på samma sätt som den federala regeringen för närvarande betalar till företag i ansvarsfrågan. Detta kommer att ge delstaten en betydande inkomstkälla och samtidigt kompensera en del av de långsiktiga riskerna. Under tiden kan energidepartementet återuppta insamlingen av SNF-avfallet till NWF när det är konsoliderat.

På grund av de politiska förändringarna som har förstört den amerikanska kärnkraftsindustrin utgör byggandet av en anläggning för återvinning av kärnbränsle en oöverkomligt hög risk för privata investeringar. Eftersom nästan alla dessa risker skapas och förvärras av statlig politik, är statligt stöd avgörande för lösningen.

Att göra kärnkraftsåtervinning till ett statligt projekt riskerar dock att gå samma öde till mötes som den en gång så lovande, men förstörda MOX-anläggningen vid Savannah River. Utan statligt stöd är riskerna dock för extrema för privat kapital.

För att finansiera denna verksamhet utan att anslå ytterligare skattepengar bör kongressen utnyttja de befintliga och oanvända finansiella tillgångarna i kärnavfallsfonden. Den skulle kunna skapa en separat fond till vilken en del av den ränta som NWF tjänar in skulle kunna fördelas successivt under programmets gång. På så sätt kan man se till att tillräcklig finansiering upprätthålls utan partipolitiska ingripanden för att tillhandahålla en hållbar, koldioxidfri energiframtid.

Germán & Co 11/6/22 Germán & Co 11/6/22

HELP!!! Vulnerable countries demand compensation for a climate crisis that buries them in poverty…

On 28 February, just four days after the invasion of Ukraine, it was impossible to focus on anything other than the columns of Russian tanks advancing through the heart of Europe. But on 28 February, the IPCC, the international panel of experts that has provided the scientific basis for global warming for three decades, released a major report in which it concluded that "human-induced" climate change has already caused "widespread adverse impacts" on humans and nature

Editor's Pick:

GERMAN TORO GHIO reputations score 5,239

29 items added last 28 days with 7,772 views
EnergyCentral
131K views months
Twitter
28K views months
Linkedin
Nov 6, 2022
Source: El País…
Translations: Germán & Co

Manuel Planelles

MANUEL PLANELLES

Madrid - 06 NOV 2022 - 05:30Updated:06 NOV 2022 - 10:10 CET

On 28 February, just four days after the invasion of Ukraine, it was impossible to focus on anything other than the columns of Russian tanks advancing through the heart of Europe. But on 28 February, the IPCC, the international panel of experts that has provided the scientific basis for global warming for three decades, released a major report in which it concluded that "human-induced" climate change has already caused "widespread adverse impacts" on humans and nature. The document - which UN Secretary-General António Guterres called "an atlas of human suffering" - reviewed the negative effects "in all sectors and regions" of the planet. But he warned: not everyone is being hit equally by this crisis, with the worst being borne by highly vulnerable regions such as Africa, South Asia, Central and South America and the poorest small island states. Just one fact helps to understand this: "Between 2010 and 2020, human mortality from floods, droughts and storms was 15 times higher in highly vulnerable regions compared to regions with very low vulnerability".

Eight months after that report and the beginning of an invasion that has no end in sight, the Egyptian city of Sharm el-Sheikh is hosting the annual UN climate summit, COP27, starting this Sunday. It brings together the most vulnerable countries that have been battered by increasingly frequent and severe extreme weather events due to climate change for which they are the least responsible and which threatens to curb their development possibilities. Over the next two weeks of negotiations, delegates from these nations of the so-called global south will try to get the richest countries - those historically responsible for warming - to commit in the most robust way to compensation formulas. They are asking for a specific fund or mechanism to be set up for what is known in climate diplomacy as "loss and damage". In other words, the irreversible impacts that are already occurring with the current level of warming, which averages 1.1 degrees Celsius compared to pre-industrial times.

This debate is of particular importance in a planet that will continue to warm and where extreme events will increase considerably, as science warns. But this debate has never been fully addressed in the three decades of climate negotiations since the first COP was held in Berlin in 1995. "Loss and damage has been the subject always postponed. There is no more time to postpone it," Guterres demanded this week. "Getting concrete results on loss and damage is the litmus test of governments' commitment," he added.

"It will be a central theme of the summit," admitted Wael Aboulmagd, the special ambassador appointed by the Egyptian presidency of COP27, on Friday. The negotiations of delegates from the nearly 200 countries participating in the summit begin on Sunday, but the informal opening will take place on Monday and Tuesday, when around 125 heads of state and government will take the floor, according to the COP presidency's estimates. Europe's top leaders will be there, and although US President Joe Biden will not be attending the opening, he will be attending the summit later next week on his way to the G20 meeting in Indonesia.

Not expected in Egypt are the leaders of China, India and Russia. The tension generated by the war in Ukraine and increasing friction between the United States and China, which now account for around 40 per cent of global emissions, are hampering progress on the big issues on the multilateral agenda. And the fight against climate change is no exception. At last year's summit in Glasgow, the US and China sealed a pact to make progress on some concrete measures, such as reducing methane emissions. But following tensions over the conflict in Taiwan, talks between the two countries were put on hold in August. Wael Aboulmagd denies, however, that this tension will spill over to the Egyptian summit. And John Kerry, the US special envoy for climate change, last week left the door open for a meeting with his Chinese counterpart Xie Zhenhua in Sharm el-Sheikh.

At this summit, considered a transitional summit after last year's in Glasgow, the poorest countries arrive with a small initial goal: there is a broad consensus that the issue of loss and damage should be formally discussed among delegates, including, for example, the certain risk of some island states disappearing, the impacts caused by droughts and floods, and even climate migration. Among developed countries, reluctance has focused in recent years on opening the floodgates to claims whose outcome is uncertain.

Failures

Having to discuss loss and damage is, to a certain extent, the confirmation of humanity's failure to face the challenge of climate change, which has been on the table for more than three decades without a halt to the constant increase in greenhouse gas emissions, whose origin lies mainly in the fossil fuels that feed the global economy. These negotiations have two legs: mitigation (reducing gases to bring warming within safe limits) and adaptation (preparing societies for the already unavoidable effects of climate change). The rich nations' commitment was to help those with fewer resources in both areas by "mobilising" $100 billion a year from 2020. But 2020 came and that target was not met. According to calculations by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), only 83.3 billion dollars were reached by 2020.

The term mobilise includes public and private resources that reach developing countries through loans and non-repayable aid. But the result is that most of the money comes in the form of loans (only 21% in 2020 were grants). Moreover, only 34% of the funds (29 billion) were allocated to adaptation actions for the poorest nations to protect themselves against the ravages of global warming. To these OECD figures, the International Red Cross adds another: none of the world's 30 most vulnerable countries are among the top 30 recipients of adaptation funds per capita.

This failure of developed countries to deliver has sown mistrust in the climate negotiations in recent years. This is why Guterres calls for rebuilding "trust" between "North and South". He proposes something like "a historic pact between developed and emerging economies" for rich nations to help emerging countries to adapt and also to reduce emissions.

An elusive goal

Because the other point on which humanity is also off track is the reduction of greenhouse gases. The Paris Agreement, which came out of the COP held in 2015 in the French capital, established a safety limit: the average global temperature at the end of the century must not exceed 2 degrees Celsius and, as far as possible, 1.5 degrees Celsius above pre-industrial levels. But with warming of 1.1 degrees Celsius and countries' climate plans inadequate, the possibility of meeting the 1.5 target is already becoming remote.

If we are to have any chance of achieving that goal, the science says global emissions must be reduced by 45 per cent from 2010 levels by 2030. But the climate plans of the nearly 200 countries in the Paris Agreement will lead to a 10.6% increase in emissions by the end of this decade.

Last year's Glasgow summit ended with a call for countries to tighten their climate plans for this decade. And in the last 12 months 24 nations have done so, including China and India. The US and the European Union, for example, had updated their targets before Glasgow. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) has analysed the set of plans to cut emissions and concludes that, if these pledges are met, the temperature rise would be between 2.4 and 2.6 degrees Celsius.

"It is still theoretically possible, but we are running out of time. If global emissions continue at current levels, the possibility of limiting global warming to 1.5 degrees will disappear by the end of this decade," explains Anne Olhoff, one of the coordinators of the UNEP report. "That's why there can be no further delay in action and ambition. We already know that every fraction of a degree matters, which means that every tonne of emissions avoided matters," she adds.

THE COUNTRY

It matters, once again, when returning to the debate on loss and damage, because with every tenth of an increase, the negative impacts grow and do not hit everyone equally. The so-called V20 - a group of 58 developing nations considered highly vulnerable to climate change - this week released a report on the effects warming is already having on their territories. "The asymmetric impact deepens global inequalities and injustices. The poorest and most vulnerable nations are by far the hardest hit," the report concludes. And they are the least responsible. For example, these 58 V20 nations (which include Central African, Central American and at-risk Pacific nations) are home to some 1.5 billion people, about 20 per cent of the world's population, but emit only 5 per cent of global emissions. The same is true of the 54 African countries, which account for only 3-4% of global emissions. All of them "have contributed marginally" to global warming, the V20 concludes.

Germán & Co 11/6/22 Germán & Co 11/6/22

Clean Energy Park a New Visions of Energy World from Sweden…

The world is in the midst of its first global energy crisis - needs a new vision and solutions…

Editor's Pick:

GERMAN TORO GHIO reputations score 5,239

29 items added last 28 days with 7,772 views
EnergyCentral
131K views months
Twitter
28K views months
Linkedin
Nov 6, 2022
Source: www.mynewsdesk.com

"In its 2022 report on the role of nuclear power in combating climate change, "Nuclear Power and Secure Energy Transitions", the International Energy Agency (IEA) writes that "Nuclear power can help make the energy sector's journey away from unabated fossil fuels faster and more secure"."

— HTTPS://ENERGYCENTRAL.COM/C/GN/ACHIEVING-NET-ZERO-REQUIRES-BUILDING-ALL-LOW-CARBON-TECHNOLOGIES-INCLUDING-LOTS

With Clean Energy Park, Uniper introduce a new concept for the energy system of the future. The vision is to bring together small-scale and large-scale energy production in one place, where fossil-free power sources interact with each other to produce both electricity and hydrogen in an optimal way. So far, this is just a vision. But if all the conditions are in place, the Barsebäck plant could be a place where the concept is realised in the future.

At the moment, radiological demolition of the two reactors at the Barsebäck power plant is underway. The project is being carried out in parallel with the dismantling of the two oldest reactors at OKG outside Oskarshamn. The joint project is estimated to cost around SEK 10 billion, financed by the nuclear power companies themselves through annual allocations to the Nuclear Waste Fund.

- The project is on schedule for both budget and time. Radiological demolition is now underway and should be completed by 2028. By carrying out decommissioning and demolition in a safe and responsible way, we are closing the life cycle of nuclear power. And leave room for a new generation of electricity production, says Åsa Carlson, CEO of Barsebäck Kraft AB.

New fossil-free and predictable power generation is needed in southern Sweden - which has hardly any power generation of its own, and where electricity prices are likely to be unusually high this winter. Svenska Kraftnät has warned of an increased risk of rotating disconnection this winter - that is, planned and scheduled power cuts if electricity production and imports are not sufficient at any one time.

New power generation needed in southern Sweden

Relying on imports from our neighbours does not guarantee security of supply over time. The lack of predictable electricity production is a consequence of permanent closure of power plants in southern Sweden, Germany and Denmark over a 20-year period - coal-fired power plants, thermal power plants and some 20 reactors in Germany and Sweden. This means that in cold and windless weather, a number of European countries could be dependent on imports at the same time.

- We have often been asked what to do with the land where the Barsebäck plant is located. Our message is that we are focusing on decommissioning. When the Swedish Energy Agency classified the land as a national interest for new electricity production, we also began work on how we can contribute to the electricity supply in southern Sweden, albeit in the long term," says Åsa Carlson.

The Barsebäcks site still has electricity distribution infrastructure with both switchyards and access to the main grid. But even though much has already been prepared, it may still be some time before new energy production comes on stream.

- Well, so far it's a vision where we are now exploring the conditions to realise our ideas. One part of this is to see a long-term and broad common view in energy policy on the strategy and objectives for the future electricity system," says Åsa Carlson and continues.

- We have initiated discussions with Kävlinge municipality, where my hope is that we can develop and work together on a common vision. We don't just see the energy park as housing energy production, but we also want the site to become a research hub in the Öresund region with a focus on new energy technologies. We have already started to make contacts with academia and industry.

Several projects around Sweden

Uniper has initiated a number of business development projects around Sweden, where the aim of the projects is to contribute to the transition to fossil-free energy and continued security of energy supply and competitiveness. Many of the projects involve testing and developing technologies such as SMR and energy carriers such as hydrogen, mainly for industry and transport, together with other partners.

The idea is also to develop new concepts for the electricity system of the future. The Clean Energy Park is just such a concept, with integrated energy production in which the different power sources interact rather than compete with each other.

- We see a future with clusters of local energy production close to electricity consumers, in cities and industrial towns, where small-scale nuclear power of the SMR type complements other fossil-free electricity production to provide the local community with both electricity and hydrogen," explains Åsa Carlson.

The construction of SMRs (Small Modular Reactors) requires changes in legislation to allow new construction outside existing nuclear facilities (not including BKAB) and the establishment of regulatory and licensing processes by SSM. In addition, that the law allows for an increased number of reactors.

If conditions are right, a new SMR Gen3 could be operational in the early 2030s, while a new SMR Gen4 is unlikely to be commercially mature until the 2040s. However, Uniper does not exclude large-scale nuclear power as a possible part of the solution, this will have to be analysed in further work.

- It is positive that the government's agreement seems to be in line with our concept. For example, a review of the legislation that currently limits the location and number of reactors is needed. Our concept must be able to extend beyond one political term," says Åsa Carlson.

Positive opinion in Sweden and Denmark

Another important parameter for new nuclear power is public opinion. There is currently a preponderance in favour of nuclear power in both Sweden and Denmark. According to a Novus survey earlier this year, 48% of respondents want to build new reactors in Sweden, while 12% want to phase them out through political decisions.

In Denmark, too, opinion has swung dramatically. In an August poll this year by analyst firm Megafon, 46% of respondents would vote yes on the question of building nuclear power in Denmark while 39% would vote no.
In a similar poll in Denmark in 2016, 17 percent voted for nuclear power in Denmark while a whopping 66 percent voted no.

Germán & Co 11/6/22 Germán & Co 11/6/22

Kyiv Planning for Total Evacuation if It Loses Electricity…

What is the reason for this misfortune, which for months has been taking its toll on the economies of millions of European families?

“What on earth was going through former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder’s mind when he ventured to sign the memorandum of understanding for the construction of the Nord Stream pipeline? ”

— Germán & Co

“The eternal marriage - Putin / Schroeder - bore fruit for both. Putin became the executor of the former Chancellor and in turn Schroeder took on the role of private secretary and spokesman for President Vladimir Putin. This open and knowledgeable relationship is not common practice in politics, especially when dealing with two nations with a geopolitical weight of absolute responsibility. Obviously, this friendship crossed the line and by far... The question here is why German intelligence did not act against a -financial society- that was so dangerous for its own country as well as for the world? ”

— Germán & Co

Editor's Pick:

WalkerBuldog says:

November 6, 2022 at 6:20 am

The city is also establishing 1,000 heating centers for its 3 million residents, as Russia pounds away at civilian targets.

KYIV, Ukraine — As they struggle to maintain an electricity grid heavily damaged by Russian missiles, officials in the Ukrainian capital, Kyiv, say they have begun planning for a once unthinkable possibility: a complete blackout that would require the evacuation of the city’s approximately three million remaining residents.

The situation is already so dire, with 40 percent of Ukraine’s energy infrastructure damaged or destroyed, that municipal workers are setting up 1,000 heating shelters that can double as bunkers while engineers try to fix bombed-out power stations without the needed equipment.

To try to keep the grid from failing altogether, Ukraine’s national energy utility said on Saturday that it would continue to impose rolling blackouts in seven regions.

The tremendous strain on Ukraine’s ability to provide power is the result of the widespread bombardment by Russian forces of critical energy infrastructure across the country, a tactic that analysts say President Vladimir V. Putin of Russia has resorted to as his troops have suffered repeated setbacks on the battlefield.

The damage caused by the Russian strikes has heaped new suffering on Ukraine’s civilians and forced officials to reckon with the possibility that further damage could render them unable to provide basic services.

“We understand that if Russia continues such attacks, we may lose our entire electricity system,” Roman Tkachuk, the director of security for the Kyiv municipal government, said in an interview, speaking of the city.

Officials in the capital have been told that they would be likely to have at least 12 hours’ notice that the grid was on the verge of failure. If it reaches that point, Mr. Tkachuk said, “we will start informing people and requesting them to leave.”

For now at least, the situation is manageable, and there were no indications that large numbers of civilians were fleeing Kyiv, he said. But that would change quickly if the services that relied on city power stopped.

“If there’s no power, there will be no water and no sewage,” he said. “That’s why currently the government and city administration are taking all possible measures to protect our power supply system.”

Germán & Co 11/5/22 Germán & Co 11/5/22

Nyheter vecka 44, världens kärnkraftsproduktion…

För att uppnå —net zero— krävs att man bygger all teknik med låga koldioxidutsläpp, inklusive mycket kärnkraft.

“I sin rapport från 2022 om kärnkraftens roll i kampen mot klimatförändringarna, “Nuclear Power and Secure Energy Transitions”, skriver Internationella energiorganet (IEA) att “Kärnkraft kan bidra till att göra energisektorns resa bort från oförminskade fossila bränslen snabbare och säkrare”.””

— (IEA)

Editor's Pick:

New life possible for British nuclear energy

Nov 4, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/UPI International Top News

Despite looking for cost-cutting measures, the British governments said Friday it has no plans to scrap the development of a new nuclear power plant that carries a $33 billion price tag.

Nuclear power fell out of favor in the wake of the Fukushima disaster in Japan in 2011. But the so-called energy transition -- the pivot away from fossil fuels -- has put it back in play.

During his tenure, former British Prime Minister Boris Johnson said he wanted to see eight new nuclear facilities built within the next eight years, putting nuclear power at the center of his energy transition strategy. Most of the operational nuclear power stations in the U.K. were expected to reach the end of their planned life span by the end of this decade.

Faced with a $56 billion gap in financing, Prime Minister Rishi Sunak is working to trim spending. A spokesperson for his office told the BBC that every major project was now under review as part of the cost-cutting efforts, but nuclear power would be spared.

Talks with private developers for the planned Sizewell C facility -- slated for the Suffolk coast -- have been "constructive" and the government "hoped to get a deal over the line as soon as possible," the government spokesperson said.

The British taxpayer will provide about 20% of the bill for Sizewell C, The Guardian newspaper added in a separate report.

New life possible for British nuclear energy | Energy Central

Oklo Selected for DOE Project to Enable Recycling of Used Nuclear Fuel

Nov 4, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Gulf Oil & Gas

- Oklo, Argonne National Laboratory, Deep Isolation, and Case Western Reserve University were awarded $6.1 million in funding to enable the recycling of used nuclear fuel from the current light water reactor fleet into advanced reactor fuel. - Today’s reactors only consume about 5% of the energy content contained in their fuel. Nearly 95% of the energy content remains unused, and Oklo’s technology can unlock much of this remaining energy content. - The cost-share project will support the commercialization of Oklo’s clean powerhouses by utilizing the energy content in today’s waste and converting it into clean energy. - This work in strengthening the domestic fuel supply chain will facilitate a cleaner and more secure energy future for the country.

Oklo Selected for DOE Project to Enable Recycling of Used Nuclear Fuel | Energy Central

Entergy names new leader for nuclear division; see who will take over

Nov 4, 2022

By: Staff report

Source:

EnergyCentral/The Times-Picayune

Kimberly Cook-Nelson is taking over as Entergy's chief nuclear officer, the first woman to hold the position with the New Orleans-based utility corporation.

She will be based in Jackson, Mississippi, where the company's nuclear operations are headquartered.

Cook-Nelson joined Entergy in 1996 as general manager of plant operations at Entergy's Waterford 3 Steam Electric Station in Killona in St. Charles Parish. She has held various leadership positions in engineering, maintenance, operations and nuclear safety.

Most recently, she served as senior vice president for nuclear corporate services and chief operating officer, overseeing a trio of nuclear stations: River Bend Station in St. Francisville; Arkansas Nuclear One in Russellville, Arkansas; and Palisades Power Plant in Michigan, which Entergy shut down and sold earlier this year. Entergy also operates the troubled Grand Gulf nuclear station in Port Gibson, Mississippi.

Entergy names new leader for nuclear division; see who will take over | Energy Central

Belarus, Russia to develop cooperation in training nuclear energy specialists

Nov 4, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Belarusian Telegraph Agency (BelTA)

MINSK, 3 November (BelTA) - Approaches to developing workforce capacity in the nuclear power industry were discussed in Minsk during a visit of representatives of Rosatom to Belarus, BelTA learned from the communications department of the state corporation.

The Russian delegation comprised specialists of Rosatom Technical and Corporate Academies and Rosenergoatom. They got familiar with the material base of the training center of Belarusian NPP: a full-scale simulator of a central control panel and training rooms for operating personnel with local simulators of different systems. The parties considered possibilities for further cooperation in personnel training and exchange of experience of the instructor personnel.

Belarus, Russia to develop cooperation in training nuclear energy specialists | Energy Central

Soon-to-be-nationalized German energy firm set to build nuclear plant in Sweden

Nov 4, 2022

By: 03.11.2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Anadolu Agency

BERLIN

The soon-to-be nationalized German energy company Uniper is looking to build a power plant in Sweden, local media reported on Thursday.

The decision comes amid a dispute in the German government over the future of nuclear power as an alternative in the energy crisis.

It was only thanks to an intervention by Chancellor Olaf Scholz that the operating licenses for three German nuclear power plants were extended in October against the opposition of coalition partner the Greens. However, the supply of new fuel rods is still unclear.

Soon-to-be-nationalized German energy firm set to build nuclear plant in Sweden | Energy Central

SMALL MODULAR REACTOR TECHNOLOGY COVERS ALL THE BASES: RELIABILITY, RESILIENCY, SAFETY AND AFFORDABILITY

Nov 3, 2022

EnergyCentral/Source:

States News Service

The following information was released by the American Public Power Association:

November 2, 2022

EnergyCentral/Peter Maloney

New nuclear technologies, such as small modular reactors (SMR), have reached a point where they are able to help utilities address growing concerns about fulfilling their core mission: delivering safe, affordable, and reliable electric power.

Several industry trends are challenging utility executives' abilities to balance those three key objectives.

A July report from the North American Electric Reliability Corp. (NERC) highlighted the growing threats to reliability, including extreme weather events, the growing proliferation of "inverter based resources" such as photovoltaic solar power and energy storage, and increasing reliance on natural gas-fired generation.

The growth of renewable resources aimed at meeting state and federal goals aimed at addressing greenhouse gas emissions has been impressive. In the first half of the year, 24 percent of utility-scale generation in the United States came from renewable sources, according to the Energy Information Administration. However, as NERC pointed out this summer, as renewable resources have proliferated, gas-fired generators are becoming "necessary balancing resources" for reliability, leading to an interdependence that poses "a major new reliability risk."

SMALL MODULAR REACTOR TECHNOLOGY COVERS ALL THE BASES: RELIABILITY, RESILIENCY, SAFETY AND AFFORDABILITY | Energy Central

Moscow wants to connect Ukrainian nuclear plant to Russian grid - Energoatom

Nov 3, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Financial Post

From the Ukrainian power grid by Russian shelling, the Ukrainian nuclear energy company said. Energoatom said the last remaining high voltage lines connecting the plant to the Ukrainian grid had been damaged in Wednesday's shelling, and that Moscow wanted to connect the plant to the Russian grid. The facility in southern Ukraine, Europe's largest, has 15 days' worth of fuel to run the ...

Moscow wants to connect Ukrainian nuclear plant to Russian grid - Energoatom | Energy Central

Poland says first nuclear power station to cost $20 bn

Nov 3, 2022

By: AFP

Source:

EnergyCentral/Macau Business

Poland said Wednesday its first nuclear power station will cost around $20 billion (euros) to build, days after the government announced it had picked US firm Westinghouse for the job.

The decision to choose Westinghouse over France’s EDF and South Korea’s KHNP was formally adopted at a cabinet meeting in Warsaw on Wednesday.

“We have opted for American technology… namely US firm Westinghouse,” Morawiecki told reporters.

“The approximate cost… will be up to around $20 billion,” he said.

The EU member wants the power station in the northern village of Lubiatowo-Kopalino on the Baltic Sea coast to go online in 2033.

Poland plans to eventually host three nuclear sites with three reactors each, which would produce around 30 percent of the country’s electricity needs.

Warsaw also signed on Monday a letter of intent for South Korea’s KHNP to build a nuclear plant in Patnow, central Poland, based on its APR1400 technology.

Warsaw has been planning the nuclear programme for years but the question of energy security has taken on added urgency because of tensions with Russia over its invasion of Ukraine.

Nuclear power would also help Poland replace coal, which has accounted for up to 80 percent of electricity generation, and reach its climate obligations.

Poland says first nuclear power station to cost $20 bn | Energy Central

French government aims to cut red tape for new nuclear reactors

Nov 2, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Reuters

PARIS, Nov 2 (Reuters) - France has drafted legislation to streamline bureaucracy for administrative permits needed to build new nuclear power plants, as it aims to double down on its nuclear and renewable energy facilities amid a global energy crunch. "The challenge is huge. We must move much more quickly and more strongly," Energy Minister Agnes Pannier-Runacher wrote on Twitter ahead of a ...

French government aims to cut red tape for new nuclear reactors | Energy Central

Northeast's first nuclear heating site begins ops

Nov 2, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/China Daily: Hong Kong Edition

Hongyanhe Nuclear Power Plant in Liaoning province was put into operation on Tuesday to provide heating for locals, said its operator China General Nuclear Power Corp.

This is Northeast China's first commercial nuclear heating project. With a planned heating area of 242,400 square meters, it is expected to replace the 12 coal-fired small boilers in Hongyanhe town, said the company.

The project will reduce coal consumption by 5,726 metric tons annually, and cut emissions of carbon dioxide by 14,000 tons, dust by 209 tons, sulfur dioxide by 60 tons and nitrogen oxide by 85 tons, it said.

Located in Wafangdian, Dalian, Hongyanhe Nuclear Power Plant is also the first nuclear power facility and the largest electric energy investment project in Northeast China.

Northeast's first nuclear heating site begins ops | Energy Central

NEWS

Poland plans to build 3 nuclear plants with 6 reactorNov 1, 2022

By: Murat Temizer |

Source:

EnergyCentral/Anadolu Agency

ANKARA

Poland plans to build three nuclear power plants with six reactors as part of its nuclear power program, Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced late Sunday.

According to the Polish news agency PAP, Morawiecki said the country's nuclear program has been instigated to ensure energy security.

Morawiecki confirmed on Twitter on Friday that Warsaw would team up with the US and American company Westinghouse to build its first nuclear power plant.

"Nuclear power plants will help make us independent from the whims of the market, energy traders and the weather," he said.

Morawiecki also confirmed that the nuclear power investment energy "does not mean Poland will not be developing renewable sources of energy."

"However, we need stable energy, which today is ensured by coal," he added.

UPDATE 1-Bulgaria to reconnect nuclear reactor by end of week, says minister

Nov 1, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Reuters

The state-owned plant had to shut down one of its two Russian-designed units late on Saturday after detecting a problem with the cooling system of the reactor's power generator. Energy Minister Rossen Hristov said the repairs would take a bit longer than initially planned, but outlined that the problem was not in the nuclear part of the reactor and that there is no change in the radiation ...

UPDATE 1-Bulgaria to reconnect nuclear reactor by end of week, says minister | Energy Central

TerraPower, PacifiCorp evaluate potential to deploy up to five more Natrium reactors by 2035

Published on November 01, 2022 by Chris Galford

EnergyCentral

After announcing last year that a nuclear Natrium demonstration plant would be brought to Wyoming to replace a PacifiCorp coal-fueled power plant, PacifiCorp and TerraPower added last week that they are studying, in advance of potentially deploying, the possibility of up to five more reactors by 2035.

All affiliated reactors would be located in PacifiCorp service territory and include integrated energy storage systems. Part of the study on the topic will be to determine if deployment of said reactors could reduce costs for PacifiCorp customers while finding ways to more broadly deploy the technology. Assessors will examine the possibilities of locating these reactors near current fossil-fueled generation sites to repurpose existing generation and transmission assets.

TerraPower, PacifiCorp evaluate potential to deploy up to five more Natrium reactors by 2035 | Energy Central

WESTINGHOUSE TO BUILD POLAND'S FIRST NUCLEAR REACTORS; KHNP MAY GET SEPARATE DEAL

Nov 1, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/States News Service

The following information was released by the American Nuclear Society (ANS):

Poland has chosen Westinghouse Electric Company to supply the reactors for its initial nuclear power plant, as the Central European nation seeks to lessen its dependence on domestic coal and Russian imports for its energy supply. On Friday, Polish prime minister Mateusz Morawiecki announced the decision on Twitter, confirming last week's reports that Westinghouse's AP1000 technology was the government's likely choice.

"A strong [Polish-American] alliance guarantees the success of our joint initiatives," Morawiecki tweeted. "After talks with [vice president Kamala Harris and energy secretary Jennifer Granholm], we confirm our nuclear energy project will use the reliable, safe technology of [Westinghouse]."

WESTINGHOUSE TO BUILD POLAND'S FIRST NUCLEAR REACTORS; KHNP MAY GET SEPARATE DEAL | Energy Central

Ziakova: Ukraine war may spark more nuclear power R;D

Nov 1, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/Slovak Spectator

1. Nov 2022 at 7:15 Premium content Slovaks positive on nuclear power.

With the launch of the third unit of the nuclear power plant in Mochovce, Slovakia should become self-sufficient in electricity production within months. Once phased in - a process expected to be completed in early 2023 - it will cover 13 percent of electricity demand in the country, raising the share of nuclear energy as a part of total electricity generated in Slovakia from 52 to 65 percent.

The process of constructing and launching the unit is supervised by the Slovak Nuclear Regulatory Authority (aSJD SR).The Slovak Spectator spoke with MARTA ZIAKOVa, chairperson of aSJD SR, about the process, new trends in harnessing nuclear energy, and the ongoing decommissioning of two nuclear power plants in Slovakia.

Ziakova: Ukraine war may spark more nuclear power R;D | Energy Central

Rosatom to establish 2nd nuclear unit in Dabaa

Nov 1, 2022

By: Egypt Independent

Source:

EnergyCentral/Egypt Independent

Egyptian authorities have granted the Russian Rosatom State Atomiс Energy Corporation permission to establish a second unit for generating electricity at the Dabaa nuclear plant, according to a statement from the Egyptian Nuclear and Radiological Regulatory Authority on Monday.

The authority received a request to obtain a construction permit for the first and second units in January 13, 2019.

Over the course of two years, the Nuclear Power Plants Authority completed its procedures by submitting the initial safety analysis report for the first and second units from January to June 2021.

Rosatom to establish 2nd nuclear unit in Dabaa | Energy Central

ENEC, Atlantic Council to collaborate on nuclear energy

Nov 1, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/TradeArabia

Kempe and

Al Hammadi The Emirates Nuclear Energy Corporation (ENEC) has signed a three-year agreement with the Atlantic Council to collaborate on the Council's Nuclear Energy Policy Initiative. It will also support the Council's efforts in promoting nuclear energy as a central component to clean energy transition.

The Atlantic Council is a US-based think tank, and home to the Global Energy Centre, one of the leading US energy centres for promoting energy security, working across government, industry and society to identify the way forward for the global energy sector.

The collaboration will see ENEC, and the Atlantic Council join forces to support the Atlantic Council's new Nuclear Energy Policy Initiative, which is dedicated to identifying the pathways for global decarbonisation using civil nuclear energy.

ENEC, Atlantic Council to collaborate on nuclear energy | Energy Central

NEWS

Poland, South Korea sign letter of intent on nuclear plant

Nov 1, 2022

By: The Peninsula Newspaper

Source:

EnergyCentral/The Peninsula

Warsaw and Seoul on Monday signed a letter of intent for South Korea's KHNP to build Poland's second nuclear power station, the partners involved said in a statement.

The announcement comes three days after Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki said US firm Westinghouse had been selected to build the nation's first nuclear power station at Choczewo, on the Baltic Sea.

Monday's agreement is between KHNP and Polish partners PGE and ZE PAK as well as Polish government representatives.

Poland, South Korea sign letter of intent on nuclear plant | Energy Central

IAEA Chief Visits US - Nuclear Energy, Ukraine and UN Security Council

Oct 31, 2022

Source:

EnergyCentral/ENP Newswire

IAEA Director General Rafael Mariano Grossi was in the United States this week as the IAEA held its International Ministerial Conference on Nuclear Power in the 21st Century in Washington DC. During his visit, on Thursday Mr Grossi addressed the United Nations Security Council, briefing the 15-nation group on what he described as the 'extremely fragile and dangerous' nuclear safety and security situation at the Zaporizhzhya Nuclear Power Plant (ZNPP). The ZNPP site has been controlled by Russian forces since March. Until recently, operational decisions were taken by its Ukraine staff, but Russia has announced it has taken control of the facility and is now taking those decisions. In recent months the site has been beset with power outages caused by shelling, putting nuclear safety and security at the plant at risk.

The briefing to the Security Council was Mr Grossi's fourth since the conflict began more than eight months ago, and the first delivered in person rather than virtually. The meeting was also attended by Ukraine, currently not a Security Council member.

Mr Grossi told the Council that progress had been made in high-level consultations with Ukraine and Russia in recent weeks on establishing an 'indispensable' nuclear safety and security protection zone around the ZNPP. He said 'we're not far from' an agreement and 'it is in no one's interest to have a major nuclear accident.'

IAEA Chief Visits US - Nuclear Energy, Ukraine and UN Security Council | Energy Central

Germán & Co 11/4/22 Germán & Co 11/4/22

News round-up, Friday, November 4, 2022.

The sands of the hourglass are beginning to run out for Putin`s project and the world too…

““Disunion and chaos are not inevitable,” said Biden, standing at a podium in Union Station. “There’s been anger before in America. There’s been division before in America. But we’ve never given up on the American experiment. And we can’t do that now.””

— NYT

'Against humanity'
The North's latest launches come as South Korea is in a period of national mourning after more than 150 people – mostly young women in their 20s – were killed in a crowd crush in Seoul on Saturday. (Le Monde)

Jean-Marie Questiaux
Consultant on Linkedin today…

Editor's Pick:

What if Every Moment Since Jan. 6 Was Just the Calm Before the Storm?

November 3, 2022

Richard Ringer, a 69-year-old Democratic state House candidate in Pennsylvania, is an early riser, and on Monday he was up before 5 a.m. when he heard someone at his garage door. He looked out the window, saw a man with a flashlight, and assumed it was the same person who had twice vandalized his house in the past month.

Just a couple of weeks earlier, Ringer says, he found a message spray-painted on his garage door; though the rain partly rinsed it off, the words “Your Race” and “Dead” were visible. Then, last Thursday night, he says he came home to a brick thrown through his window.

So when Ringer saw the intruder on Monday, he says, he ran outside and tackled him. But the man was quickly able to pin Ringer down, and beat him unconscious. Ringer doesn’t know for certain that the violence was political — the police are investigating — but given the graffiti, and the fact that his neighborhood in Fayette County, in southwestern Pennsylvania, is usually quiet and safe, he suspects it was. “I’m not really surprised that this is happening locally, and is happening to me, just because of what has been going on and the enthusiasm for Trump around here,” he told me.

Ringer’s assault made the local news, but hasn’t been much of a story nationally. Perhaps that’s because it’s just a small detail in a growing tapestry of menace. All over this febrile country, intimations of mayhem are gathering. Vigilantes in Arizona, some armed and wearing tactical gear, have harassed and intimidated voters at the sites of ballot drop boxes, cheered on by Mark Finchem, the Republican candidate for secretary of state. In Nevada, where a millionaire far-right Republican official named Robert Beadles has systemically targeted election workers, Reuters reported that the top election officials in 10 of the state’s 17 counties have resigned, retired or declined to run again.

And, most notably, a MAGA fanatic named David DePape broke into Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s home and assaulted her 82-year-old husband with a hammer, leaving him unconscious in a pool of his own blood. More shocking than the attack itself has been the response to it from the Trumpist wing of the Republican Party. Some officials spread lurid lies that Pelosi was attacked by a gay lover. Others jeered about it. “Nancy Pelosi, well, she’s got protection when she’s in D.C. — apparently her house doesn’t have a lot of protection,” Kari Lake, Arizona’s Republican candidate for governor, said to laughter at a campaign event. Donald Trump Jr.

It’s hard to feel sanguine about a society whose political class cannot muster the solidarity to universally condemn the terroristic bludgeoning of an old man. It’s why Joe Biden’s speech on Wednesday night, in which he spoke about the attack on Pelosi and the role that Trump’s big lie is playing in the midterms, was at once so necessary and so unpromising. He was trying to appeal to a patriotic consensus about democracy that simply no longer exists.

“Disunion and chaos are not inevitable,” said Biden, standing at a podium in Union Station. “There’s been anger before in America. There’s been division before in America. But we’ve never given up on the American experiment. And we can’t do that now.”

Biden wasn’t warning that America might spiral into either autocracy or low-level civil war. He was trying to offer hope that it might not. The very fact that he had to insist there’s an alternative to disunion and chaos is a sign of how bad things have gotten.

Political violence is not exclusively perpetrated by conservatives. The recent beating in Florida of a Marco Rubio canvasser — a man who turned out to have ties to white supremacists — appears to have been motivated by anti-Republican animus. But, as my colleagues on the editorial board wrote on Thursday, the right is far more violent than the left, and Republicans wink at assaults committed by extremists in a way that Democrats do not.

The message of all the chuckling about Paul Pelosi is clear: The right believes its enemies have no rights, and no longer sees the need to pretend otherwise. Donald Trump taught the Republican Party that it needn’t bother with hypocritical displays of decency, that it can revel in cruelty, transgression and the thrill of violence. Now it’s taking that lesson into the first post-Jan. 6 election. The tense calm of the last 20 months has often felt like being in the eye of a hurricane. Now the terrible weather is coming back.

In a widely cited essay, the centrist pundit Josh Barro criticized Biden’s speech because it implied that voters concerned about democracy must vote for Democrats whatever their policy preferences. “The message is that there is only one party contesting this election that is committed to democracy — the Democrats — and therefore only one real choice available,” he wrote, adding, “This amounts to telling voters that they have already lost their democracy.” I find this argument bizarre. It is simply a fact that only one party tried to overturn the 2020 election, and only one party is trying to insulate itself from the will of voters in future elections. As the Wisconsin Republican candidate Tim Michels put it recently, “Republicans will never lose another election in Wisconsin after I’m elected governor.”

It may be that Biden’s efforts to alert the country about what’s coming are doomed. In a recent CBS poll, 56 percent of likely voters said they believe that if Republicans win in the midterms, they will try to overturn Democratic election victories. The same poll showed that, if the election were held today, 47 percent plan to vote for Republicans, and only 45 percent for Democrats. Those who prioritize the preservation of democracy in America are probably already Democratic voters. Still, Biden had an obligation to try to focus our attention on a mounting threat.

Though Republicans are likely to do well on Tuesday, many elections will probably remain unsettled. Leigh Chapman, Pennsylvania’s acting secretary of state, wrote that because of a state law prohibiting the counting of mail-in ballots before Election Day, results there will probably take several days. Nevada will also take several days after the election to count mail-in ballots. Some Republicans, including Lake and Finchem, won’t commit to accepting the result if they lose. We can expect others to sow doubt about the process if they start falling behind as mail-in votes come in.

As the Democratic strategist Michael Podhorzer put it, “When it comes to the postelection crisis, 2020 was like the beginning of ‘The Sorcerer’s Apprentice,’ and 2022 will be more like the part where the walking mops multiply out of control.” We should be ready for what could soon be unleashed.

The post What if Every Moment Since Jan. 6 Was Just the Calm Before the Storm? appeared first on New York Times.

You can share an article by clicking on the share icons at the top right of it.
The total or partial reproduction of an article, without the prior written authorization of Le Monde, is strictly forbidden.
For more information, see our Terms and Conditions.
For all authorization requests, contact droitsdauteur@lemonde.fr.

https://www.lemonde.fr/en/international/article/2022/11/04/south-korea-scrambles-jets-after-detecting-180-north-korean-warplanes_6002933_4.html

South Korea scrambles jets after detecting 180 North Korean warplanes

The North Korean aircraft flew north of the military border, South Korea's military said in a statement.

Le Monde with AFP

Published on November 4, 2022 at 08h39

A South Korean Air Force F-35A fighter jet during a US-South Korea joint aerial drill called "Vigilant Storm" at Gunsan Air Base in Gunsan, October 31, 2022/ HANDOUT / AFP

South Korea's military scrambled stealth jets on Friday, November 4, after detecting the mobilization of 180 North Korean warplanes, Seoul said as it conducted large-scale joint air drills with the United States which have infuriated Pyongyang.

North Korea has launched a record-breaking blitz of missile launches this week, including a failed intercontinental ballistic missile test on Thursday. Seoul and Washington extended their largest-ever joint air drills through Saturday in response to the North's flurry of projectiles.

"Our military detected around 180 North Korean warplanes" mobilized in Pyongyang's airspace, Seoul's Joint Chiefs of Staff said, adding that Seoul "scrambled 80 fighter jets including F-35As" while jets involved in the joint drills were also "maintaining readiness".

Shortly after South Korea announced the decision to extend the joint drills on Thursday, Pyongyang launched three more short-range ballistic missiles, calling the move "a very dangerous and wrong choice". Hours later, the North fired 80 artillery rounds that landed in a maritime "buffer zone", Seoul's military said.

The barrage was a "clear violation" of the 2018 agreement that established the buffer zone in a bid to reduce tensions between the two sides, Seoul's Joints Chiefs of Staff said.

The artillery fire came after Pyongyang fired about 30 missiles Wednesday and Thursday, including an intercontinental ballistic missile and one that landed near South Korea's territorial waters for the first time since the end of the Korean War in 1953.

US Defence Secretary Lloyd Austin described Pyongyang's ICBM launch as "illegal and destabilizing," and Seoul and Washington vowed to pursue new measures to demonstrate their "determination and capabilities" against the North's growing threats.

Experts and officials have said Pyongyang is ramping up its tests in protest over the US-South Korean drills. Washington and Seoul have repeatedly warned that Pyongyang's recent launches could be a precursor to a nuclear test, which would be its seventh.

Pyongyang has called the joint air drills, dubbed Vigilant Storm, "an aggressive and provocative military drill targeting" North Korea, and threatened that Washington and Seoul would "pay the most horrible price in history" if it continued.

'Against humanity'

The North's latest launches come as South Korea is in a period of national mourning after more than 150 people – mostly young women in their 20s – were killed in a crowd crush in Seoul on Saturday.

Pyongyang's provocations, "especially during our national mourning period, are against humanity and humanitarianism", Lee Hyo-jung, a vice spokesperson at Seoul's unification ministry, said Friday.

"The government strongly condemns North Korea for continuing threats and provocations, citing our annual and defensive drills, raising tensions on the Korean peninsula," she said, blaming the current tension on Pyongyang's "reckless nuclear and missile development".

Read more North Korea fires at least 23 missiles, one crosses maritime border with South for first time We are interested in your experience using the site. Send feedback

In addition to extending Vigilant Storm through Saturday, Seoul's military announced that the annual Taegeuk exercise – which focuses on "improving wartime transition performance" and crisis management – would be held next week.

The computer-simulated exercise will be carried out to strengthen "the ability to carry out practical mission capability in preparation for various threats such as North Korea's nuclear weapons, missiles, and recent provocations", it said.

Le Monde with AFP

The 1973 Oil Shock - What if anything did we learn?

Jean-Marie Questiaux

Consultant

The growing demand for oil in the past 100 years is a reflection of the world’s growing economy coupled to an exponential growth in its population. Of course, the demand for a commodity like oil is one thing, its supply and price is another. Yet its supply and price have a direct repercussion on the world’s economies, inflation, food prices and ultimately on social stability, which can range from peaceful street demonstrations to all out regional wars.

Amazingly, oil prices were incredibly stable in the period 1880 to 1973 (Figure 1), even showing a general decrease with time (in real terms). This probably because oil was so plentiful with discoveries far outweighing production until 1981 (Figure 2) that is when the trend reversed.

The world enjoyed low and stable prices that major world events such as the crash of 1929 and two world wars barely made a ripple on the oil price (Figure 1).

Figure 1 – Historical oil prices 1881 to 2017. Price normalised to constant 2017 US$

Figure 2 – Oil Discoveries versus Oil Production

All this changed in October 1973 when the Yum Kippur war broke out between Egypt and Israel. A short but fierce and bitter conflict which ended with a truce 3 weeks after the start of hostilities. Frustrated and angered by the support shown to Israel by the US and most western countries, the Middle Eastern countries holding the largest oil reserves and making up the bulk of OPEC member countries, slapped an oil embargo on the countries allied to Israel.

OPEC production was reduced by 25% from 5th November and further to 30% by 9th December 1973. Not surprisingly the oil price rocketed, quadrupling from $3 to $12/bbl ($17 to $61/bbl in 2017 US$). The period of low, stable and predictable oil prices had come to an abrupt end. Nothing but “oil” hardship and pain seemed to lay ahead from that date.

OPEC’s action was immediately and vociferously condemned by western governments describing it as blackmail and was depicted as nothing short of extorsion by a very hostile western press.

As brutal as the embargo was, OPEC’s behaviour and immediate actions thereafter deserve far more praise than the criticism it continues to attract to this day. Firstly, to the credit of OPEC, the embargo was extremely short lived, ending after 5 months in March 1974. The harm was limited and short-term, which for those who remember was queues at gas stations, reduced speed limits, no driving on Sundays and other fuel saving rules enforced in those 5 months. However, with the benefit of hindsight, the embargo's repercussions were significant and turned out in the longer term to be far more beneficial than harmful. It acted as a wakeup call to the world (consumer countries mainly) reminding them of the strategic importance of a reliable low cost energy supply to maintain healthy economic growth, while making all aware for the first time that the era of limitless oil was coming to an end.

The balance between access to cheap and plentiful energy (oil mainly) and its price is of enormous importance to the world and should not be left solely to the market forces of supply and demand to control it as many believe. Oil prices must be set such that producing countries can generate their fair share of revenue, that oil companies can likewise make a fair profit on finding and producing the stuff, while oil should be sufficiently affordable to the world's factories to keep industry and the economy rolling and healthy. This is a noble objective, but a diabolically difficult act to balance, especially in a global economy where the needs of the producing and consuming countries vary widely between them as does the production costs of oil.

What good came out of the 1973 Oil shock?

1. An understanding that a fair price for oil, would sustain world industrial activity and its economic wellbeing. In other words, a win-win situation of a continued well-oiled industrial machine, in return for a fair, steady and continued income from oil.

2. The higher oil price triggered by the 1973 oil shock spurred countries to seek greater energy independence which in turn launched successful exploration and production in non-OPEC countries

3. World production was 55 MMstb/d in 1973 and reached 100 MMstb/d in 2018, with demand growing at ~1.7%/year. Covid-19 has reduced this to 95MMstb/d for 2020 which frankly is not much. Without the spur for additional production brought on by the 1973 oil shock, the present demand could probably never have been met today, and the world would likely be in much greater turmoil now as a result.

4. The realisation that discoveries would soon be overtaken by production and that peak oil was on the horizon

5. This growth in production has maintained low oil prices since to the benefit and delight of industry and consumers alike

What did OPEC learn and gain from the 1973 Oil shock?

Although the growth in non-OPEC production did cause OPEC to lose some of its clout and power on the energy market, there were major gains and benefits too:

1. First realisation that voluntary production cuts can have a very dramatic impact on oil prices. Demonstration that a 25% cut in production could quadruple oil prices overnight. Even if, it must be said, the quadrupling a small number remains a small number.

2. Realisation that volatility in supply and price leads to economic chaos, damaging to all parties (consumers & producers). A lose-lose scenario. Probably explains why the embargo was short-lived

3. Realisation that oil prices in 1973 were ridiculously low. The (sharp) adjustment was necessary, long overdue, and hugely beneficial to the oil producing countries, with minimal damage to consuming countries

4. Gained greater control over its oil and its production.

For example, and as incredible as it sounds, 1973 marked the first year in which an agreement between a producing country and a producer (foreign oil company) was more beneficial to the oil producing country than to the oil company.

It was Colonel Muammar Gaddafi who demanded in a renewal of a production agreement with Occidental Oil, that the production ratio of 40:60 to the benefit of Oxy be reversed to the benefit of the state of Libya, something Armand Hammer (CEO at Oxy at the time) readily signed to.

No one today would argue that producing countries (OPEC or non-OPEC) should be the greatest beneficiary of their oil.

5. The imbalance in favour of new discoveries versus produced oil was rapidly coming to an end.

Production overtook discoveries in 1981 and the gap has widened ever since (Figure 2)

6. Maintaining world economies in good health comes from affordable energy prices and requires establishing a fair price to make it a win-win situation

What did the world learn and gain from the 1973 Oil shock?

1. That a fair price for oil is necessary for the benefit of producing and consuming countries

2. There is for now plenty of oil and the 1973 oil shock is largely responsible for that. No so confident on the future but that is another debate

What now?

There is still much to do, especially in rectifying some of the imbalances which persist to this day

1. Oil prices continue to show excessive volatility, unlike the era before 1973

2. OPEC producers are constantly solicited and Saudi Arabia in particular, to cut back production when oil prices are low and open the taps when prices and/or demand is high. Not sure what flexibility or capacity Saudi Arabia enjoys to do that

This is a very heavy burden to carry for OPEC and Saudi Arabia in particular, especially as there is very little reciprocity from non-OPEC producers, including the US or North Sea to do likewise

3. Consuming countries impose variable but generally high duty/tax on refined petroleum products and could use these tariffs as levers to encourage or stifle demand which could have an equally important impact on oil prices, rather than expecting OPEC countries to carry the burden and responsibility to stabilise oil prices

Conclusions

1. The 1973 oil shock was almost certainly far more beneficial than harmful in the long term

2. OPEC should not be considered as a rival or competitor, but rather as a partner to ensure stability on the energy market

3. There should be far greater research done to establish the range of what constitutes the fair value of oil as economic conditions and metrics change. This to ensure that both producing and consuming countries best benefit from oil production and in the most equitable manner

Verizon profit declines as pricier plans result in subscriber loss

PUBLISHED FRI, OCT 21 20221:02 PM EDT

SHAREShare Article via FacebookShare Article via TwitterShare Article via LinkedInShare Article via Email

KEY POINTS

Verizon Communications Inc’s profit fell 23% and it added fewer-than-expected wireless subscribers in the third quarter.
The largest U.S. wireless carrier said on Friday it lost 189,000 monthly bill-paying phone subscribers in its consumer business after it included additional charges in June.
Shares fell 6% to their lowest in over a decade.

By Paul Sakuma

Verizon Communications Inc’s profit fell 23% and it added fewer-than-expected wireless subscribers in the third quarter as its raised prices drove some customers to cheaper plans from fast-growing rivals AT&T Inc and T-Mobile US Inc.

The largest U.S. wireless carrier said on Friday it lost 189,000 monthly bill-paying phone subscribers in its consumer business after it included additional charges in June, over and above its pricey plans.

Shares fell 6% to their lowest in over a decade as finance chief Matt Ellis said higher prices for plans led to disconnections and warned the pressure would continue into the next quarter.

Competition in the U.S. telecoms markets is heating up after Verizon and AT&T offloaded their media businesses and T-Mobile completed its merger with Sprint Corp to become wireless-focused companies.

While higher spending on 5G infrastructure has jacked up costs, the companies are forced to keep their plans affordable as rising inflation hammers consumer spending.

Verizon, whose plans are the most expensive, added 8,000 net new monthly bill paying wireless phone subscribers in the quarter, well below Factset estimates of 35,400 additions.

Some analysts feared competition is catching up, while many said its high price must been seen as its strength.

“The thing people forget is the biggest company in the industry, they have the most customers to lose each quarter,” Michael Hodel, director of telecom and media research at Morningstar said.

Its net subscriber addition was powered by an increase in its business segment, which added 197,000 customers.

“Verizon’s ability to maintain pricing power is a key strength as it navigates a fairly saturated wireless market,” Jamie Lumley, Third Bridge analyst said.

While its third-quarter revenue and profit beat Refinitiv estimates, subcriber loss remains an overhang as analysts said iPhone upgrades in the holiday season are expected to be weaker.

Net income fell to $5 billion, prompting Verizon to announce a plan to reduce annual costs of between $2 billion and $3 billion by 2025.

Germán & Co 11/4/22 Germán & Co 11/4/22

Think the Energy Crisis Is Bad? Wait Until Next Winter… (Time)

An out-of-control 23-tonne Chinese rocket is heading for Earth and Spain is on its trajectory. It has forced the closure of part of Spain's air traffic. (abc.es)

“BY SURIYA JAYANTI
OCTOBER 31, 2022 6:00 AM EDT
Jayanti is an Eastern Europe energy policy expert. She served for ten years as a U.S. diplomat, including as the Energy Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine (2018-2020), and as international energy counsel at the U.S. Department of Commerce (2020-2021). She is currently the Managing Director of Eney, a U.S.-Ukrainian decarbonization company.”

— Time.com

“NOW:... An out-of-control 23-tonne Chinese rocket is heading for Earth and Spain is on its trajectory.
It has forced the closure of part of Spain’s air traffic.”

— www.abc.es

Editor's Pick:

For policymakers grappling with global energy shortages and households scrambling to pay record high utility bills, some unwelcome news: This year’s energy crisis is going to look mild once next year’s kicks in. It is winter 2023-2024 that is going to be the real crisis. Any current energy planning that fails to account for next year and beyond is jumping out of the frying pan and into the fire—where this winter is a problem, 2023’s may be a catastrophe.

The immediate problem is simple: There is not enough fuel, and therefore not enough electricity, so prices have skyrocketed for both. To a large extent, this is a result of decreased Russian exports of oil, natural gas, and coal, which have been hit by western sanctions and other policy efforts to curb Russian revenues funding atrocities in Ukraine. Most Russian fuel supplies are still reaching international markets, however, because countries like China and India are happy to buy discounted product from a not-quite-fully marginalized Kremlin. But Russian exports are down, too, approximately 18% in August compared to February. Notwithstanding a current drop in natural gas prices now that European storages are mostly full, prices have been so high as a consequence of tighter supplies that Russian President Vladimir Putin is enjoying record energy revenues—over €200 billion since the start of the war on February 24. In turn, markets are tight globally and countries are competing for limited supplies in what has become a zero-sum energy game.

This year’s energy shortage is not just a Russia problem, however. Other factors keeping energy supply below demand are the unexpected surge in economic and industrial activity as countries awoke from COVID-19, refining capacity shortfalls caused by myriad fires, labor strikes, and other maintenance activities, and overall inflation that puts upward pressure on prices independent of supply constraints. The knock-on effect—high prices and lower than normal generation—on electricity are because most power plants burn oil, coal, and natural gas. Utilities can neither raise prices on consumers without regulatory approval nor buy fuel imports with unchecked debt under existing laws that prevent risky behavior by critical service providers. Many power plants around the world are struggling to continue generating electricity.

Meanwhile there are not nearly enough nuclear, wind, solar, and other non-fossil fuel alternatives, and hydroelectric plants worldwide are suffering due to climate change droughts. The end result is current or forecast brown and blackouts across the developing world, in parts of Europe, and maybe in the U.S., too, according to the U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. Developing countries are the worst off because they have less ability to absorb higher energy costs.

This is the situation we are in now, which winter will exacerbate, but it is going to be a walk in the park compared to next year. To start with, this year is not as bad as it could be. Although this year’s winter will prove uncomfortable and expensive, Europe is nonetheless in a surprisingly good position. Bloc-wide, natural gas storages are now well over 90% of the annual target, which is actually at least 15% higher than their levels a year ago. This is not enough to heat and power the continent through a cold winter, or even a normal winter at current consumption levels. But barring any unforeseen calamities, current natural gas reserves are probably enough for one winter if the E.U. succeeds in implementing both its voluntary and mandatory cumulative 15% electricity usage reduction policies.

Of course, a warm winter and a 15% consumption reduction is a best case scenario, and it is far from certain it will play out. During a cold snap in September and October, Poles were burning trash to stay warm. Europeans are hoarding firewood, and blackouts are already occurring in some countries. And, unfortunately, warm weather now coupled with energy subsidies are likely to disincentivize conservation of existing energy resources. Alexey Miller, CEO of Russia’s Gazprom, thus estimated in mid-October that European countries could be short about one-third, 800 million cubic meters (mcm) of natural gas per day during a cold spell this winter even with gas storages full now.

He’s not wrong. An unusually cold week in Europe in September functioned something of a stress test for whether energy use was being successfully reduced. It was a failure. Amid a massive effort to lower consumption, German consumers instead used 14.5% more gas than in previous years. So much for belt tightening.

What is certain is that if Europeans, and the rest of us, could see ahead to 2023 and beyond they would be doing everything in their power to save energy reserves now in preparation. The fundamental problem faced this year—a fuel and thus power shortage causing insanely high prices—will not go away by next year. It will instead expand into an energy crisis that makes this year’s look manageable.

First, there is a high probability that China will finally come out of COVID-19 slumber. It will rock and roil energy markets when it does. China’s ongoing lockdowns resulted in a sharp decline in fossil fuel and power consumption, a 9.14% drop for oil and 5.8% for natural gas in April 2022 over 2021. In fact, Chinese consumption has dropped so much that it was recently arbitraging energy, buying U.S. liquified natural gas (LNG) on preexisting fixed long-term contracts and selling it for a huge profit at current spot market prices to Europe. This August, China, the world’s biggest consumer of energy, imported a full two million barrels of crude oil a day fewer than expected. For comparison, Russia exports an average of 10 million barrels per day, meaning that when China wakes up from COVID-19 it will rise with a voracious energy appetite equal to 20% of Russia’s exports. This will put tremendous additional pressure on energy markets already straining under current demand.

Second, Putin is not about to turn the energy taps back on for Europe. If he is still in power next year, the Russian President will demonstrate his famous ability to hold a grudge by doing whatever he can to continue punishing Europe for backing Ukraine. He would not have sabotaged Nord Stream 1 and 2, his own gas pipelines to Germany, if he were considering starting to again send fuel to Europe. Putin is instead playing a long game, waiting for the energy crisis to cause enough inflation to bring about enough popular unrest to topple western governments opposed to Russian imperialism. He would also not be damaging Russia’s oil and gas industry if energy relief for the West were in his plans. The physics of natural gas and oil wells are such, to differing degrees, that they are not like a light switch that can be flicked on and off. The sanctions coupled with the loss of western expertise and reduced export volumes mean Russia will have trouble quickly getting its petroleum industry back up and running at scale after the war, if ever.

If Putin is not in power next year, then possibly new Russian leadership so deftly takes the helm of the Russian economy and its petroleum industry that sanctions are lifted and oil and natural gas again flow westward freely, but probably not. Far more likely to flourish in the power vacuum Putin would leave in a situation of political and economic instability. So, either way, Russia is probably not going to be the world’s energy bank in 2023, and likely not for years after.

This means that when Europe emerges from this winter in April 2023 it will have exhausted its fuel reserves and will have a much harder time finding ways to replenish them. Over 40% of Europe’s stored gas for this winter came from Russia, despite sanctions and conflict. In 2023 and beyond, Europe will try to—will have to—source its energy imports from elsewhere, which will put it in direct competition with other countries and result in a bidding war for resources. This will, in turn, drive prices up even higher. Although natural gas prices have dropped precipitously for now, down 70% as Europe has stopped buying now that its storages are relatively full and Autumn has been mostly warm, they will spike again in 2023 as soon as demand rises.

The simple reality is that there aren’t adequate supplies anywhere in the short to medium term—6 months to 2 years. U.S. LNG cannot save the world. This year’s 12% increase in U.S. LNG exports is a rate of growth that cannot be sustained. Existing U.S. production is already mostly maxed out for now and there is inadequate infrastructure—not enough pipeline capacity to move gas to LNG terminals, and no new LNG terminals planned for another two years. The next one expected to come online is Exxon’s Golden Pass LNG facility, a joint project with QatarEnergy, hoped for in 2024.

Even were there more production and export capacity in the U.S., global import capacity is limited to the fewer than 50 LNG terminals in existence. In Europe, for one, LNG terminals have had spare capacity to import less than 70 billion tons, whereas the continent imported about 170 bcm of pipeline gas, the equivalent of 118 billion tons of LNG, per year from Russia before the invasion of Ukraine. Europe is looking to rent floating LNG terminals to alleviate this bottleneck, but the cost is massive and other issues persist. And, a dirty secret is that much of the LNG that has rescued Europe this winter is in fact Russian, a sanctions loophole that is almost certainly going to be closed. Russian LNG imports into Europe are up 42%, but won’t be next year. Moreover, LNG is now shockingly expensive, too. LNG tanker charter prices were recently $400,000 per day and were expected to hit $1 million.

Yes, Germany and other countries are now building new infrastructure, but none of it will be ready next year. Building new pipelines takes 1.5-4 years and LNG terminals need 2-5 years. It will take another 3-5 years, at a minimum, for the LNG markets to balance supply and demand. Meanwhile, few reasonable investors will pour billions into infrastructure projects with a 10-30 year breakeven timeline for fuels the world is trying to phase out in 8 years because of climate change. New fossil fuel projects may be redundant before they are even completed. In the meantime, in 2023 there will not be enough U.S. or Qatari liquified natural gas (LNG), nor Azerbaijani gas, nor Kenyan, nor Australian, nor any other to compensate for the total loss of Russian imports.

Protester hold a sign that reads "People over profits" as people march to demand a continued shift to renewable energy sources and reduction in fossil fuel dependence despite the current energy crisis on October 22, 2022 in Berlin, Germany.

Nor can renewables yet save the day. Wind and solar farms can be built relatively quickly and cheaply, but they cannot be used to power heating at a large scale because most households are not equipped with electric heaters or heat pumps. Replacing an entire country’s heating systems will take longer than a year. In any case, there are supply chain bottlenecks for solar panels and wind turbines, mostly because of China’s lockdwon policies, so this is not a viable option in the short term anyway. Nuclear power is also not a solution for the 2-5 year range because nuclear plants take 5-10 years to license and build. Biofuels and geothermal heating are promising technologies, but suffer from the same shortcomings—either they take too long to build or are not sufficiently scalable and thus unable to solve the immediate problem. While the energy crisis is proving an excellent stimulus for innovation, none of the new technologies it brings forth will be ready by 2023, or 2024, or probably even 2025.

Taken together, Europe is likely to be short by as much as 20% of its needed fuel in 2023. The bulk of what it can secure will come at a price so high that recession-hit governments will have trouble buying it while simultaneously paying their populations’ energy bills. Without the ability to bring new energy sources online in a hurry, the single tool governments have at their immediate disposal is cutting consumption. This is the equivalent of zipping up the tent in a hurricane, but it is what’s available. As the German experience in September shows, however, getting people to use less gas and electricity is very, very difficult. A mild winter in Europe this year will also make people less likely to conserve for 2023.

Of course, it’s not the rich countries of North America and northern Europe that will suffer the most through the energy crisis, whether this year or next. This energy crisis is global. Already poorer countries are facing blackouts, protests, and worse because European and Asian demand has driven fuel prices higher than developing countries can afford. Sri Lanka, Pakistan, Ecuador, and Haiti are just a few of the cash strapped countries rocked by energy inflation, fuels shortages, and the violent protests they triggered. Continued food insecurity due to lack of fertilizer and fuels will worsen, too, and unrest with them. And as scarce energy resources pit countries against each other, it is the those that were already behind that will lose on the market. These trends will accelerate when the real energy crisis hits in 2023 and 2024.

For fuel-rich countries, like the U.S., the consequences of the energy crisis escalating through 2023 will be mixed. On one hand, there is a lot of money to be made. The 2022 energy crisis has brought record profits to petroleum companies, which will continue as long as fuel shortages do. The large increase in U.S. LNG exports has meant massive profits for private U.S. petroleum companies, such as Exxon. The same is true for Norway. Norwegian gas imports into the E.U. are up 8% compared to last year, making it the E.U.’s top supplier since Russia mostly cut off gas exports. Equinor, the state-owned petroleum company, is expecting $82 billion more in 2022 and 2023 in energy revenues, up from $27 billion in 2021. Even embattled Venezuela could cash in—the White House was considering relaxing sanctions on Caracas to allow Chevron to bring more Venezuelan crude oil into play. China’s LNG arbitrage made for good money, too.

On the other hand, the macroeconomic and political fallout from the energy crisis will be felt everywhere, even in net energy exporting countries. Record energy prices have almost certainly pushed European and other countries into recession, which will necessarily reverberate in the U.S., Canada, OPEC countries, and elsewhere. Even in Norway, inflation has tripled, up from a 20-year average of 1.84% to almost 7% in September 2022. Economies are simply too interlinked for problems on one continent not to affect everywhere else.

Germán & Co 11/4/22 Germán & Co 11/4/22

Think the Energy Crisis Is Bad? Wait Until Next Winter… (Time)

An out-of-control 23-tonne Chinese rocket is heading for Earth and Spain is on its trajectory. It has forced the closure of part of Spain's air traffic. (abc.es)

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

“BY SURIYA JAYANTI

OCTOBER 31, 2022 6:00 AM EDT

Jayanti is an Eastern Europe energy policy expert. She served for ten years as a U.S. diplomat, including as the Energy Chief at the U.S. Embassy in Kyiv, Ukraine (2018-2020), and as international energy counsel at the U.S. Department of Commerce (2020-2021). She is currently the Managing Director of Eney, a U.S.-Ukrainian decarbonization company.”

— Time.com

“NOW:... An out-of-control 23-tonne Chinese rocket is heading for Earth and Spain is on its trajectory.
It has forced the closure of part of Spain’s air traffic.”

— www.abc.es

Editor's Pick:

Germán & Co 11/3/22 Germán & Co 11/3/22

Ägarna till "Ingenmansland"

För 35 euro och en flygbiljett till Haiti kan man köpa en slav. Detta var bara en av de svåra lärdomar som författaren Benjamin Skinner fick när han gjorde research för sin bok “A Crime So Monstrous”: Face-to-Face with Modern-Day Slavery.

För 35 euro och en flygbiljett till Haiti kan man köpa en slav. Detta var bara en av de svåra lärdomar som författaren Benjamin Skinner fick när han gjorde research för sin bok A “Crime So Monstrous” : Face-to-Face with Modern-Day Slavery.

När de internationella medierna började sända nyheterna om den telluriska händelsen som rasade med all sin vrede mot det haitiska folket hade det gått många timmar sedan händelsen. Detta kraftfulla slag, som valde Haitis hjärta som epicentrum, verkar ha känts olika av varje invånare på Hispaniola i något av de två länder som delar den. Jag kan inte ha varit något undantag.

Jag tillbringar större delen av min tid på 23:e våningen i den högsta byggnaden i Santo Domingo, på öns östra halva. Jag hade ett läkarbesök klockan 16.30 den ödesdigra dagen; det tar inte mer än tio minuter att ta sig från byggnaden som inrymmer kontoret där jag arbetar till kliniken där jag hade mitt möte. Det vill säga, naturligtvis, om det inte uppstår en av de trafikstockningar som bara förekommer i denna huvudstad, och det kan ta upp till en timme att köra några kvarter.

Jag var redan vid fyratiden på eftermiddagen på min läkarklinik. Ännu en gång var jag tvungen att upprepa några tester vars resultat hade varit konsekvent felaktiga. Min familjeläkare var bortrest. Så en kollega till honom fick i uppdrag att ta hand om mig. Klockan 43 minuter över fyra visade sjuksköterskan mig in i ett av mottagningsrummen.

-Var snäll och ta av dig tröjan", bad han mig artigt, även om artigheten inte helt överskuggade den känsla av främlingsskap som uppmaningen gav upphov till.

Medan jag tog av mig skjortan kom sjuksköterskan ut. Ensam i det där konsultrummet märkte jag att tiden gick längre än vanligt, och läkaren kom inte in i det lilla rummet. Väntan började göra mig otålig.

Och varför kommer inte läkaren, tänkte jag, sittande på båren? Vad är det som händer? Plötsligt började jag känna hur den lilla ram som jag vilade på rörde sig. Jag brydde mig inte om det. Båren rörde sig igen, men jag ägnade inte heller den någon större uppmärksamhet. Sedan kom en ännu kraftigare ryckning. Från utsidan, in i konsultationsrummet där jag var ensam, kom rösterna från läkarna och sjuksköterskorna.

-Han skakar! -Jag hörde en kvinnlig röst säga i alarm.

Den västindiska delen av planeten känner inte till hur våldsam denna vulkaniska ilska är. Jag tänkte för mig själv: hur är den här byggnaden konstruerad? Svaret jag fick var en känsla av misstro. Genom skriken och korridoren kände jag hur oron växte i korridoren när jordens svajande blev allt högre och högre.

-Det låter som en jordbävning", hörde jag någon säga med en skrämd röst.

-Ja, det verkar så", sa en annan.

Småningom började jorden ge vika i sitt obehag.

-Oh, vi glömde Don Victor Manuel i konsultrummet, utbrast sjuksköterskan som bad mig ta av mig skjortan. I det ögonblicket öppnade hon dörren och kom in.

-Ja, verkligen", sade jag, "de har glömt mig.

Klockan var knappt över fem på eftermiddagen. Det var tisdagen den 12 januari 2010. Sex minuter tidigare hade en jordbävning på 7,2 på Richterskalan slagit till. Epicentrum låg i den västra halvan av ön Hispaniola, närmare bestämt i Port-au-Prince, huvudstaden i Haiti, världens fattigaste land.

Det var på morgonen den 11:e som världen började få reda på konsekvenserna av jordbävningen. Den 13 januari, den tredje dagen efter händelserna, var den stora katastrofens ansikte omisskännligt i Haiti. Dominikanska republiken, där jag bor, som delar ö med Haiti, drabbades inte lika hårt. Detta grannland aktiverade omedelbart alla möjliga mekanismer för att hjälpa det haitiska folket.

Klockan fyra på morgonen den 14 januari var vi på väg till den haitisk-dominikanska gränsen, som ligger mer än 200 kilometer väster om Santo Domingo. Resan på väg tar ungefär tre och en halv timme.

Vi var en av de första organisationerna som anlände med bistånd till jordbävningsoffren för tre dagar sedan. Under de senaste åren har den stiftelse som jag arbetar för samarbetat med en amerikansk icke-statlig organisation (NGO) som ägnar sig åt hälsofrågor i Dominikanska republiken.

Dagen innan kontaktade vi deras representant i landet. Han informerade oss om att frivilliga från organisationen, främst läkare, morgonen efter jordbävningen åkte till Port-au-Prince, Haitis huvudstad. De arbetade på ett haitiskt gemenskapssjukhus i Pétion-Ville.

Sjukhuset var överväldigat av det betydande antalet skadade som behövde akutvård. Sjukhuset var osäkert. Läkarna kunde inte klara av det. Det fanns inte heller tillräckligt med mediciner eller ersättningsmaterial. Till och med amputationer och andra operationer utfördes utan morfin. Detta var en av de första beställningarna vi fick, tillsammans med antibiotika, vatten och en elgenerator.

Vid 8-tiden på morgonen anlände vi till Jimaní, en dominikansk stad som ligger på den södra gränsen mellan de två länderna. Den platsen, gränsen som skiljer Dominikanska republiken från Haiti, är en värld som motsvarar ett annat liv och andra ökända tider som finns där eländigt närvarande. Allt som händer längs den gränsen är förnedrande.

De två länderna är förvånansvärt nog åtskilda av taggtråd. Det finns två befästningar, en på den dominikanska och en på den haitiska sidan. Båda är uppsatta med samma slarv som fängslar, mellan de två, en sträcka som har fått det mycket speciella namnet "Ingenmansland".

Från "No Man's Land" på den haitiska sidan av gränsen tittar mystiska ansikten ut mot den andra halvan av ön. De höll sig fast vid taggtråd och förlorade sina ögon i vem vet vilken omloppsbana de befann sig i. Man vet inte vilket lidande som trycker på dem eller var de finner styrkan att fortsätta på den karga och ändlösa vägen för att klara sig själva. De är fångar i extrem fattigdom i hopp om att kunna korsa linjen för att undkomma den utarmade situation som dagligen överväldigar dem.

På andra sidan palissaden kan man se deras ansikten, som är väderbitna av den hårda solen, när de tänker gå över gränsen. Ansiktena är solbrända av hunger. Ansikten som är garvade av smärta. Ansikten som är garvade av sjukdom. Ansiktena garvade av elände. Ansikten som är vittrade av förtvivlan. Ansikten som är vittrade av det perversa arbete som är deras lott. Ansikten som är vittrade av neoslaveri. Ja, det är vad man kan kalla det slaveri på 35 euro som Benjamin Skinners beskriver så levande i en artikel i tidningen Foreign Policy. I texten, som publicerades i den spanska upplagan från april/maj 2008, står följande:

"New York är fem timmar från att kunna förhandla om att sälja en frisk pojke eller flicka i fullt dagsljus. Prostitution och hushållsarbete är deras vanliga destinationer. (...) "En slav är en människa som tvingas arbeta genom bedrägeri eller under hot om våld endast i utbyte mot en summa som räcker för att klara sig själv". Sådana förhandlingar kan enligt Skinners göras i Port-au-Prince framför frisörsalongen Le Réseau, som ligger på Rue de Delmas, en av huvudstadens mest trafikerade gator.

Linjen av taggtråd påminner om nazisternas koncentrationsläger. På den ena och den andra sidan känner man att korruption, människohandel, olaglig adoptionsverksamhet, informell handel, narkotikahandel och extrem fattigdom bor där. Alla dessa plågor utgör detta laglösa område utan möjligheter till någon som helst rest av ett värdigt liv. De är ägarna till "No Man's Land".

Till all denna olycka den dagen kom de skadade haitier som försökte korsa linjen för att få medicinsk hjälp. De kom för att deras land, ett av världens fattigaste, nu hade reducerats till ingenting av naturens destruktiva kraft.

Vår kontaktperson väntade på oss vid gränsen på den dominikanska sidan. Därifrån skulle vi ta med oss hjälpen vi bar till Haitis huvudstad. Vi hade en lång väntan medan vi fick tillstånd så att lastbilen och de säkerhetsstyrkor som eskorterade lasten kunde fortsätta sin väg till sjukhuset i Pétion-Ville.

Berättelserna från den vänliga företrädaren för den icke-statliga organisationen var hjärtskärande. Läkarna rom den minut de anlände till centret, hade inte slutat behandla och operera de som drabbats av skalvet. De gjorde det under rudimentära förhållanden. De hade varken elektricitet eller vatten. De antibiotika, lugnande medel och smärtstillande medel som de hade med sig räckte knappt till för de första timmarna av vård. Läkarna hade satt upp tält på byggnadens tak. De sov där under de få stunder som de tog för att vila.

När vi anlände till vårdcentralen i Pétion-Ville såg vi att verkligheten var ännu värre. Tusentals skadade människor tog skydd utanför vårdcentralen och väntade på att bli behandlade. Det var nästan omöjligt att gå på grund av antalet skadade som låg på marken. Det var en skrämmande bild som slog hårt mot våra känslor.

Enligt läkarna kunde ett kolerautbrott bryta ut när som helst med tanke på förhållandena i landet. Utan att slösa tid förberedde vi en lång lista över behov på sjukhuset. På uppdrag av den stiftelse som jag delar arbetsuppgifter med åtog jag mig att samla in så många förnödenheter som möjligt och återvända till Haiti om cirka fyra dagar.

Jag återvände till Dominikanska republiken med en bruten själ. På två dagar samlade vi in de mediciner och det material som behövdes för att fylla på. Vi packade allt i tre lastbilar och lämnade dem redo att föras till Pétion-Ville, en bergsstad på östra sidan av Haitis huvudstad. Vi skulle ta en helikopter till Port-au-Prince för att ta emot lasten på själva sjukhuset.

Vi åkte återigen till Haiti den 28 januari. Ungefär fyrtio minuter in i flygningen, när vi passerade gränsen, kunde vi länder se en drastisk förändring från helikoptern. Det är något som man märker direkt. Atmosfären går plötsligt från grönt till torrt. I århundraden har Haiti varit utsatt för skövling av sina skogar. När öns västra sida avträddes till Frankrike 1697 genom fördraget i Ryswik i Europa, hade franska bosättare påbörjat plantagesystemet mer än femtio år tidigare. Denna form av intensiv odling av jordbruksprodukter inledde en period av rikedom för Frankrike och var också början på omvandlingen av Haitis jord till en öken. Sedan dess har denna process inte avstannat än i dag.

När vi närmade oss Port-au-Prince med flyg började vi se den förstörelse som orsakats av jordbävningen och som vi inte hade sett tidigare när vi reste på land. Antalet byggnader och hus på marken, i spillror, var helt enkelt oräkneligt. De nya konstruktionerna, av tvivelaktig kvalitet, var ett lätt byte för jordrörelsens raseri.

På morgonen landade vi vid den dominikanska ambassadens helikopterflygplats i Haitis huvudstad. Trots att vi minutiöst hade samordnat oss med våra kontakter väntade de inte på oss i det diplomatiska högkvarteret. Vi ville åka omedelbart till sjukhuset i Pétion-Ville. Men det var omöjligt att ge sig av på stadens gator utan skydd av myndigheterna från Minustha (FN:s uppdrag för stabilisering av Haiti), den enda militära styrkan i Haiti sedan den lokala armén upplöstes 2004 i samband med USA:s intervention.

Det var först vid middagstid som vi lyckades lämna ambassaden och ta oss till sjukhuset. Efter att ha lämnat den dominikanska ambassaden går man uppför en kulle på en smal väg och kommer till en livlig gata. Man ser genast en skylt med namnet Pétion-Ville som anger vägens riktning. Du kan se skadorna överallt. Det förekommer ofta att bilar krossas av husplattor som faller över dem. Carabinieri som bär den chilenska flaggan på sina axlar står vakt vid vissa hörn.

En spontan marknad hade bildats där skylten som visade vilken väg man skulle följa stod. Fattigdomen och de hygieniska förhållandena på denna mikromarknad är häpnadsväckande. En gammal kvinna, med ryggen lutad mot väggen, halvt sittande i luften och med sin långa kjol hängande nedåt, tvättar ett knippe persilja med det smutsiga vatten som rinner nerför gatan i avsaknad av avlopp. På den tiden kännetecknades Port-au-Prince av en outhärdlig stank som tvingade till ständig användning av näsdukar över näsor och munnar.

Vi rörde oss långsamt på väg till sjukhuset. Vägen är brant, smal, slingrande och oftast överbelastad av fordonstrafik; dessutom fanns det på grund av jordbävningsskadorna elstolpar som vreds in i vägen med några meters mellanrum, nedfallna träd och bråte. Vid en viss punkt på sträckan försökte förbipasserande att stoppa skåpbilarna i en brottslig handling. Men den orubbliga militären avlossade skott i luften och skrämde bort dem. Förarna kör defensivt. Trots svårigheterna försökte de öka farten som om någon följde efter oss.

Vi närmade oss äntligen vårdcentralen. Plötsligt såg jag hundratals flerfärgade tält som ställts upp runt kliniken. De skadade bodde där tillsammans med sina familjer och fördrivna personer, trängda i bräckliga, små utrymmen som inte var mer än två eller tre meter breda gånger två meter långa och mindre än höjden på en genomsnittlig person som står upprätt. Bland tälten, som nästan alla var gjorda av plast och där golvet bestod av jord, rådde en infernalisk värme, särskilt under dagen. Under dessa förhållanden åt, sov och avlöste de sig själva.

Chauffören parkerade vid vad som verkade vara sjukhuset från dörrarna. Dussintals människor rusade mot oss. Det var en handling som skapade ögonblick av fara. Vi frågade ihärdigt efter vår kontaktperson, men ingen kände honom. Vi gick in i sjukhusbyggnaden, som hade blivit ett rum av kaos. Människor sprang från den ena sidan till den andra. Vi kunde höra skrik och rop av smärta. De skadade fanns överallt. Man kunde till och med se dem på sjukhusgården, ute i det fria.

Smärtan ligger i luften. Man fick inte ta till sig betydelsen av bedövningsmedel. Morfin var av en slump det första vi överlämnade till en läkare som rusade ut ur en operationssal och stötte på oss. Efter att ha pratat med honom en stund och sett hans ansiktsuttryck av lättnad över den information vi gav honom, förde läkaren oss in i operationssalen för att visa oss under vilka förhållanden operationerna utfördes. Jag såg en skadad kvinna på golvet, plågad av lidande. Det var alltför chockerande att se detta ansikte fångat av modlöshet. Ett svårt misshandlat barn låg ensamt på golvet, hjälplöst på en bår. En hel legion av sjuka människor låg i korridorerna och väntade på att bli behandlade.

Läkarna var inte i ett tillstånd av full klarhet. De hade vida överskridit de kontinuerliga arbetstimmarna inför verklighetens motgångar. Instinkt och självuppoffring fick dem att fortsätta sitt humanitära arbete mitt i denna danteska scen av död och smärta. De bilder som iscensattes där var imponerande på grund av verklighetens dysterhet. Men bland sjukvårdspersonalen och människorna fanns det, även under den uppenbara oredan, en intuitiv ordning som övervann den dramatiska situationen.

I olika hörn av sjukhuset försökte andra frivilliga att återställa administrativ ordning på platsen. De sorterade mediciner, sorterade mat och kontrollerade vattenförsörjningen. Andra talade med patienter för att registrera deras identitet.

En volontär tog oss med upp på byggnadens tak. När vi gick upp såg jag en detalj som jag inte såg vid min första resa. Många av sjukhusets väggar var spruckna. På övervåningen visade han oss det lilla lägret där de frivilliga läkarna vilade för mycket korta stunder.

Vi hade gjort vårt jobb. Men i stället för tillfredsställelse lämnade vi sjukhuset med en rad känslor på gränsen till kramp. Vi tröstades av det åtagande vi hade gjort att fortsätta att göra en samarbetsinsats under den desperata nödsituation som Haiti genomgick. Och vi levererade.

På flyget tillbaka till Santo Domingo var mina tankar mer förvirrade än någonsin. Den försämrade situation som detta lilla karibiska land befann sig i på 2000-talet var ständigt närvarande i mitt huvud. Sanningen och det ärliga är, och det måste sägas, att det var mycket svårt att finna något hopp som skulle kunna bidra till att förändra det ofattbara tillståndet för denna före detta franska kolonis olycka. De mest aktiva medlemmarna av det internationella samfundet såg ut att försöka betala utestående skulder till denna olyckliga stat. Vid tiden för tragedin lovade de högljutt en Marshallplan för återuppbyggnaden av landet. Paradoxalt nog, och inte förvånande, fick detta försök till samarbete inget gensvar från Frankrike.

Tidningar över hela världen kommenterade den unika möjligheten i Haitis historia att få landet att ta sig ur sitt misslyckade tillstånd. En internationell kommission med den förre presidenten Bill Clinton som ordförande inrättades för att förverkliga dessa ideal. Internationella toppmöten hölls för att hitta sätt att effektivisera samarbetet. I motsats till sunt förnuft hölls det första toppmötet i ett av de fattigaste länderna på ett av de dyraste och lyxigaste hotellen i Karibien. Sanningen är att samarbetet inte har nått Haiti. Det lilla stöd som har mottagits har varit helt obetydligt jämfört med vad som utlovades. Femtiotusen ursäkter har sökts för att rättfärdiga varför det inte har varit möjligt att göra återuppbyggnaden av denna lilla nation livskraftig. Vissa förklaras, andra är mindre förklarliga. Under tiden är Haiti tyvärr fortfarande den plats på planeten där man efter fem timmars bilresa från Manhattan till Port-au-Prince kan köpa en slav för 35 euro.

Germán & Co 11/3/22 Germán & Co 11/3/22

-Once upon a time, a long time ago... an old monk lived in an orthodox monastery. His name was Pamve.

Whatever they say, a method, a system, has its virtues. You know, sometimes I say to myself, if every day, at the same time, one was to perform the same act, like a ritual, unchanging, systematic, every day at the same time, we would do the same thing, the world would change...

Undoubtedly, Tarkovsky's thoughts on life from a deep philosophical and poetic conviction; surviving within an alienating, oppressive and totalitarian society, made him see the facts greyer than the common denominator of his fellow countrymen in their coexistence with the absurd system. (Tarkovsky 1986)

-Once upon a time, a long time ago... an old monk lived in an orthodox monastery. His name was Pamve. Once he planted a dry tree on a hillside... Then he told his young disciple, a monk named Loann Kolov, that he should water the tree every day until it came back to life. So, early every morning Loann filled a bucket with water and went out. He would go up the mountain and water the dry tree and, in the evening, when darkness had fallen, he would return to the monastery. He did this for three years. And one day he went up and saw that the whole tree was full of shoots. Whatever they say, a method, a system, has its virtues. You know, sometimes I say to myself, if every day, at the same time, one was to perform the same act, like a ritual, unchanging, systematic, every day at the same time, we would do the same thing, the world would change...

Germán & Co 11/3/22 Germán & Co 11/3/22

La historia no contada del "Rusiagate" y el camino a la guerra en Ucrania (NYT)

Al final, Putin no sacaría de una presidencia de Trump lo que creía haber pagado, y la democracia se doblaría pero no se rompería tanto en Estados Unidos como en Ucrania. Pero eso, como todo, pondría al líder ruso en marcha hacia la guerra.

El plan iba en contra de décadas de política estadounidense de promoción de una Ucrania libre y unida, y una presidenta Clinton sin duda mantendría, o quizás incluso endurecería, esa postura. Pero Trump ya estaba sugiriendo que pondría patas arriba el statu quo diplomático; si es elegido, creía Kilimnik, Trump podría ayudar a hacer realidad el plan de Mariupol. Primero, sin embargo, tendría que ganar, una propuesta improbable en el mejor de los casos. Lo que llevó a los hombres a la segunda parte de su agenda esa noche: los datos de las encuestas internas de la campaña que trazaban un camino a través de los estados en disputa hacia la victoria. El hecho de que Manafort compartiera esa información -el código "sólo para los ojos" que guiaba la estrategia de Trump- no habría sido nada destacable si no fuera por una pieza importante de la biografía de Kilimnik: No era simplemente un colega; era, según afirmarían más tarde los funcionarios estadounidenses, un agente ruso.
(NYT)

Ney York Time

Por Jim Rutenberg

2 noviembre 2022

Traducción al español por Germán & Co

La noche del 28 de julio de 2016, mientras Hillary Clinton aceptaba la nominación presidencial demócrata en Filadelfia, el presidente de la campaña de Donald J. Trump, Paul Manafort, recibió un correo electrónico urgente desde Moscú. El remitente era un amigo y socio comercial llamado Konstantin Kilimnik. Ciudadano ruso nacido en la Ucrania soviética, Kilimnik dirigía la oficina en Kiev de la empresa de consultoría internacional de Manafort, conocida por llevar técnicas de campaña estadounidenses de vanguardia a clientes que buscan salirse con la suya en las frágiles democracias de todo el mundo.

Kilimnik no dijo mucho, sólo que necesitaba hablar, en persona, lo antes posible. Exactamente lo que quería hablar era aparentemente demasiado delicado incluso para la técnica que los hombres desplegaron tan fastidiosamente: aplicaciones encriptadas, la carpeta de borradores de una cuenta de correo electrónico compartida y, cuando era necesario, "teléfonos murciélago" dedicados. Pero había hecho una referencia codificada - "caviar"- a un importante ex cliente, el depuesto presidente ucraniano Víktor Yanukóvich, que había huido a Rusia en 2014 tras presidir la masacre de decenas de manifestantes prodemocráticos. Manafort respondió en cuestión de minutos y el plan quedó fijado para cinco días después.

Kilimnik pasó por la aduana del aeropuerto Kennedy a las 7:43 p.m., sólo 77 minutos antes de la cita programada en el Grand Havana Room, un lugar de reunión del mundo de Trump en el 666 de la Quinta Avenida, la torre de oficinas de Manhattan propiedad de la familia del yerno de Trump, Jared Kushner. Poco después de la hora señalada, Kilimnik entró en un escenario perfectamente montado para un drama caricaturesco de figuras furtivas que traman planes encubiertos con dudosas intenciones: un bar de puros con luz oscura, paredes con paneles de caoba y ventanas del suelo al techo coloreadas con gruesas cortinas de terciopelo, sus sillas de club de cuero típicamente ocupadas por hombres grandes con cuellos abiertos que beben escocés y dibujan parejos y figurados. Hombres, es decir, como Paul Manafort, con su pompadour teñido de negro y su afición a las rayas. Allí, con la línea del horizonte brillando a través de la bruma del humo de los puros, Kilimnik compartió un plan secreto cuyo significado sólo quedaría claro seis años después, cuando el ejército invasor ruso de Vladimir V. Putin se adentró en Ucrania.

Conocido vagamente como el plan Mariupol, en honor a la ciudad portuaria estratégicamente vital, exigía la creación de una república autónoma en el este de Ucrania, dando a Putin el control efectivo del corazón industrial del país, donde los "separatistas" armados, financiados y dirigidos por el Kremlin estaban librando una guerra en la sombra de dos años que había dejado casi 10.000 muertos. El líder de la nueva república no sería otro que Yanukovich. La contrapartida: "paz" por una Ucrania rota y servil.

El plan iba en contra de décadas de política estadounidense de promoción de una Ucrania libre y unida, y una presidenta Clinton sin duda mantendría, o quizás incluso endurecería, esa postura. Pero Trump ya estaba sugiriendo que pondría patas arriba el statu quo diplomático; si es elegido, creía Kilimnik, Trump podría ayudar a hacer realidad el plan de Mariupol. Primero, sin embargo, tendría que ganar, una propuesta improbable en el mejor de los casos. Lo que llevó a los hombres a la segunda parte de su agenda esa noche: los datos de las encuestas internas de la campaña que trazaban un camino a través de los estados en disputa hacia la victoria. El hecho de que Manafort compartiera esa información -el código "sólo para los ojos" que guiaba la estrategia de Trump- no habría sido nada destacable si no fuera por una pieza importante de la biografía de Kilimnik: No era simplemente un colega; era, según afirmarían más tarde los funcionarios estadounidenses, un agente ruso.

Concluidos sus negocios, los hombres se marcharon por rutas separadas para evitar ser detectados, aunque continuaron enviando mensajes de texto hasta bien entrada la noche, según los investigadores federales. En las semanas siguientes, los agentes de Moscú y San Petersburgo intensificarían su campaña de hackeo y desinformación para perjudicar a Clinton y ayudar a decantar las elecciones hacia Trump, lo que constituiría el núcleo del escándalo conocido como Rusiagate. El plan de Mariupol se convertiría en una nota a pie de página, casi olvidada. Pero lo que el plan ofrecía sobre el papel es esencialmente lo que Putin -a la peligrosa defensiva tras una serie de errores de cálculo estratégicos y crecientes pérdidas en el campo de batalla- intenta ahora apoderarse mediante falsos referendos y la anexión ilegal. Y Mariupol es la abreviatura de los horrores de su guerra, una ciudad ocupada en ruinas después de meses de asedio, sus imponentes acerías espectrales y silenciadas, innumerables ciudadanos enterrados en fosas comunes.

El asalto de Putin a Ucrania y su ataque a la democracia estadounidense han sido tratados hasta ahora en gran medida como dos líneas argumentales distintas. A lo largo de los años transcurridos, la intromisión de Rusia en las elecciones se ha visto esencialmente como un capítulo cerrado de la historia política de Estados Unidos, un momento peligroso en el que un líder extranjero trató de poner a Estados Unidos en su contra explotando y exacerbando sus divisiones políticas.

Sin embargo, esas dos narrativas se unieron aquella noche de verano en el Gran Salón Habana. Y la lección de esa reunión es que la aventura estadounidense de Putin podría entenderse mejor como el pago por adelantado de un grial geopolítico más cercano: un Estado ucraniano vasallo. Debajo de toda la saga electoral latía otra historia: la de los esfuerzos de Ucrania por establecer una democracia moderna y, como resultado, su posición como zona caliente de la nueva Guerra Fría entre Rusia y Occidente, la autocracia y la democracia. En un grado notable, la larga lucha por Ucrania fue una nota baja para los trastornos y escándalos de los años de Trump, desde los primeros días de la campaña de 2016 y luego la transición presidencial, a través de la primera destitución de Trump y hasta los últimos días de las elecciones de 2020. Incluso ahora, algunas voces influyentes en la política estadounidense, en su mayoría pero no totalmente de la derecha, sugieren que Ucrania haga concesiones de soberanía similares a las contenidas en el plan de Kilimnik, que los líderes de la nación rechazan categóricamente.

Este segundo borrador de la historia surge de una revisión de los cientos de páginas de documentos producidos por los investigadores para el abogado especial, Robert S. Mueller III, y para el Comité Selecto de Inteligencia del Senado, dirigido por los republicanos; de las transcripciones de las audiencias de destitución y de la reciente cosecha de memorias del Rusiagate; y de las entrevistas con casi 50 personas en Estados Unidos y Ucrania, incluyendo cuatro conversaciones de una hora con el propio Manafort.

Para Trump -que hoy se enfrenta a desafíos legales relacionados con el alijo de documentos clasificados en su complejo turístico de Mar-a-Lago, sus finanzas y su papel en los esfuerzos por anular su derrota electoral en 2020- la investigación sobre Rusia fue el pecado original, la primera de muchas "cazas de brujas" con motivaciones políticas, desde entonces reutilizadas como armas en su amplio arsenal de agravios. La investigación sobre Rusia y sus ramificaciones nunca probaron la coordinación entre la campaña de Trump y Moscú, aunque sí documentaron numerosas conexiones. Pero ver el registro dejado atrás a través de la lente filtrada por la sangre de la guerra de Putin, ahora en su noveno mes, es descubrir un rastro de señales infravaloradas que telegrafían la profundidad de su obsesión ucraniana - y lo que está en juego a vida o muerte que las tribulaciones domésticas de Estados Unidos tendrían para unos 45 millones de personas a casi 5.000 millas de distancia.

Entre los episodios que emergen está la reunión de la Gran Sala de La Habana, junto con el persistente y subrepticio esfuerzo por dar vida al plan de Mariupol. El plan no fue el único esfuerzo por cambiar la paz en Ucrania por concesiones a Putin; muchos obstáculos se interpusieron en su camino. Y su procedencia sigue sin estar clara: ¿Fue parte de un juego largo de Putin o un intento de su aliado, Yanukóvich, de recuperar el poder? En cualquier caso, los fiscales que descubrieron el plan llegarían a considerarlo un posible pago por la intromisión electoral del presidente ruso.

El examen también pone de manifiesto los trucos del oficio de Putin, mientras presionaba su misión revanchista de cimentar su poder restaurando el imperio ruso y debilitando la democracia en todo el mundo. Persiguió ese objetivo mediante la astuta cooptación de oligarcas y agentes de poder en los países que tenía en el punto de mira, al tiempo que aplicaba técnicas de desinformación en constante evolución para jugar con los miedos y odios de sus pueblos.

Ninguna figura de la era Trump se movió con más habilidad por ese mundo que Manafort, un operador político conocido por tratar la democracia como una herramienta tanto como una idea. Aunque insiste en que intentaba frenar la influencia rusa en Ucrania, no permitirla, había logrado grandes riquezas poniendo su perspicacia política al servicio de los oligarcas del país alineados con el Kremlin, ayudando a instalar un gobierno que se mostrara dócil ante las exigencias de Putin. Luego ayudó a elegir a un presidente estadounidense cuya abierta admiración por el hombre fuerte ruso enturbió más de medio siglo de política de promoción de la democracia.

Al final, Putin no sacaría de una presidencia de Trump lo que creía haber pagado, y la democracia se doblaría pero no se rompería tanto en Estados Unidos como en Ucrania. Pero eso, como todo, pondría al líder ruso en marcha hacia la guerra.

Mucho antes de las investigaciones de la era Trump, Manafort se había establecido en Washington y en el extranjero como un gran maestro de las artes oscuras de la política. Junto con Roger Stone, Manafort ayudó a desarrollar el estilo de la política conservadora, presionando los "botones calientes" para irritar a los votantes de base y alquitranar a los oponentes. Sirvieron en las campañas presidenciales de Ronald Reagan y crearon su propia firma, encargándose de clientes internacionales que buscaban el favor del Washington de Reagan. El bufete se especializó en cubrir los sangrientos historiales de dictadores como Mobutu Sese Seko de Zaire y Ferdinand Marcos de Filipinas con copiosas capas de espinillas de alto brillo, presentándolos como demócratas amantes de la libertad.

En 2005, Manafort se había convertido en una figura central en el experimento democrático ucraniano, que a menudo es una serpiente. Fue introducido en la política del país por uno de los oligarcas más poderosos de Rusia, el magnate del aluminio Oleg Deripaska. Los oligarcas no sobreviven en la Rusia de Putin sin demostrar continuamente que son útiles a la patria. Y cuando Putin tuvo un problema urgente en Ucrania, Deripaska, que tenía varias participaciones allí, intervino para ayudar: Trajo a la firma de Manafort, a la que había contratado antes para que le ayudara a superar un bloqueo de su visado estadounidense, basado en las acusaciones de que había obtenido su posición a través de vínculos con el crimen organizado (algo que él niega).

Lo que tenía a Putin en vilo era un movimiento democrático prooccidental y dirigido por jóvenes que había prendido justo cuando el segundo líder postsoviético de Ucrania, el dictatorial y alineado con el Kremlin Leonid Kuchma, se preparaba para dimitir. Para sucederle, los reformistas se habían alineado detrás de un político llamado Viktor Yushchenko. Pro-estadounidense y casado con una antigua funcionaria del Departamento de Estado, Yushchenko prometió unirse a la OTAN y a la Unión Europea. Para el Kremlin, como dijo entonces un influyente analista de defensa ruso, una victoria de Yúschenko representaría "una pérdida catastrófica de la influencia rusa en toda la antigua Unión Soviética, lo que conduciría en última instancia al aislamiento geopolítico de Rusia".

Putin había apostado por el sucesor elegido por Kuchma, Yanukovich, que había subido al poder en la región oriental ucraniana de Donetsk y contaba con el respaldo de los principales oligarcas del país. Pero al trabajar con algunos de los principales operativos políticos de Putin, la campaña de Yanukovich había salido terriblemente mal. En primer lugar, un intento de asesinato había dejado a Yúschenko con cicatrices permanentes pero muy vivo. (Nunca se identificó a un culpable; Yúschenko sospechó del Kremlin.) Luego, el equipo de Yanukóvich recurrió a un atraco electoral digno de la fantasía de fraude electoral de Trump en 2020, con informes de rellenado de papeletas, desaparición de tinta y votantes metidos en autobuses. Con miles de personas protestando en la céntrica plaza Maidan de Kiev, el Tribunal Superior de Ucrania declaró que la "victoria" de Yanukóvich estaba empañada por violaciones electorales "sistémicas y masivas". Yushchenko ganó entonces en una nueva votación, un triunfo de la democracia conocido como la Revolución Naranja.

Ahora Deripaska le preguntó a Manafort si podía restaurar la organización política de Yanukovich, el Partido de las Regiones, en el poder. La prescripción de Manafort está contenida en un memorando de junio de 2005 dirigido a Deripaska que fue citado en el informe del Comité de Inteligencia del Senado. Yanukóvich y su partido, argumentaba, debían trabajar para ganar las elecciones de forma legítima disfrazándose de demócratas en un molde occidental, utilizando las herramientas de Occidente "de forma que Occidente crea que está de acuerdo con ellos", aunque no lo estuvieran. Al abrazar a Occidente, Yanukóvich y su partido "restringirían sus opciones para fermentar una atmósfera que dé esperanzas a los potenciales defensores de un camino diferente". En los temas de conversación que le tocaron a Putin, Manafort añadió: "Ahora estamos convencidos de que este modelo puede beneficiar mucho al Gobierno de Putin si se emplea en los niveles correctos con el compromiso adecuado para el éxito".

Manafort insistió a lo largo de nuestras entrevistas en que Putin llegaría a no gustarle ni él ni su estrategia, y que el memorándum pretendía ser una especie de tutorial para Deripaska. "Básicamente le estaba enseñando la democracia", dijo. La oficina de Deripaska no respondió a una solicitud de entrevista. Pero en una fallida demanda por difamación contra The Associated Press por un artículo de 2017 que revelaba sus discusiones sobre Ucrania, Deripaska dijo que contrató a Manafort únicamente para sus propios intereses comerciales y que "nunca tuvo ningún acuerdo, ya sea contractual o de otro tipo, con el señor Manafort para promover los intereses del gobierno ruso."

El estado de la guerra

Dando la vuelta a la tortilla: Con poderosas armas occidentales y mortíferos drones caseros, Ucrania tiene ahora una ventaja artillera en la región de Kherson. El trabajo de los equipos de reconocimiento que penetran en las líneas enemigas también ha resultado clave para romper el dominio ruso en el territorio.Ataque con drones en el mar: El aparente uso de barcos teledirigidos para atacar a la flota naval rusa frente a la ciudad portuaria de Sebastopol, en Crimea, sugiere una ampliación de las capacidades ucranianas en el campo de batalla tras meses de ayuda militar de las naciones occidentales.Una coalición bajo presión: El presidente Biden se enfrenta a nuevos retos para mantener unida la coalición bipartidista y multinacional que apoya a Ucrania. La alianza ha mostrado signos de deshilacharse con la proximidad de las elecciones de mitad de mandato en Estados Unidos y un frío invierno europeo.

A pesar de ello, con la financiación de los aliados oligarcas de Deripaska en Ucrania, Manafort comenzó a poner en marcha el plan. Trajo a consultores electorales internacionales y a estrategas estadounidenses de ambos lados del pasillo partidista. Para el conocimiento local, Manafort trajo a Kilimnik, que incluso entonces estaba rodeado de sospechas de que era un topo ruso. De un metro y medio de altura y con un aspecto desarmantemente juvenil, Kilimnik había trabajado por última vez en el Instituto Republicano Internacional, una entidad de promoción de la democracia afiliada al senador John McCain de Arizona, que era cliente del socio de Manafort desde hacía tiempo, Rick Davis. Kilimnik había estudiado en una academia de idiomas militar soviética conocida por acuñar futuros oficiales de inteligencia y había servido como traductor del ejército ruso. Sus colegas del I.R.I. llegaron a sospechar que pasaba secretos a la inteligencia rusa, y fue despedido cuando el instituto se enteró de que trabajaba para los partidarios de Yanukovich.

Bajo la tutela de Manafort, Yanukovych adoptó un nuevo aspecto, cambiando su ropa gris de bloques por trajes a medida, al estilo de Manafort, y domando su bouffant de estilo soviético con un corte más ajustado. Luego, desde una nueva oficina justo al lado de la plaza Maidan, Manafort elaboró una plataforma del Partido de las Regiones en la que prometía hacer de Ucrania un "puente" entre Rusia y Occidente, estableciendo una asociación económica con la Unión Europea (popular en el oeste) pero rechazando la pertenencia a la OTAN (popular entre los rusoparlantes del este de Ucrania). Los diplomáticos estadounidenses escépticos titularon el proyecto de Manafort "Extreme Makeover".

A pesar de toda la palabrería sobre la extensión de un puente hacia Occidente, Manafort pronto comenzó a aplicar su política de división, probada en las encuestas, explotando las fisuras sobre la cultura, la democracia y la propia noción de nación para excitar a la base del Partido de las Regiones, los votantes de habla rusa del este y el sur. Los borradores de los discursos y los temas de conversación, desenterrados en las causas penales de Manafort, describían la Revolución Naranja como un "golpe" y la "ilusión naranja". Atacaron la línea más dura del gobierno de Yushchenko hacia Moscú y se centraron en un tema candente en la política ucraniana: una división regional sobre si hacer del ruso la segunda lengua oficial.

"En la política estadounidense", dice Tetiana Shevchuk, abogada del Centro de Acción contra la Corrupción, un grupo reformista con sede en Kiev, "se llama 'guerras culturales', cuando se elige algún tema que no es la gran prioridad para la sociedad en este momento pero que puede convertirse fácilmente en algo. Impulsa algo como la idea de que hay dos tipos de ucranianos: hay ucranianos que hablan ucraniano y ucranianos que hablan ruso".

A lo largo de nuestras entrevistas, Manafort mantuvo que los reformistas habían forzado la cuestión al impulsar la preeminencia del ucraniano en un país en el que muchos hablaban principalmente ruso. En todo caso, argumentó, su estrategia dio a Yanukóvich la credibilidad con los votantes "étnicos rusos" que necesitaba para unir el país mientras lo giraba hacia el oeste. (Dice que está "firmemente" del lado de Ucrania en la guerra). Aun así, la línea de ataque de Manafort coincidió con una operación de inteligencia rusa en ciernes que se dedicaba a "manipular cuestiones como el estatus de la lengua rusa" para avivar una rebelión separatista en la península de Crimea e "impedir el movimiento de Ucrania hacia el oeste, hacia instituciones como la OTAN y la UE", según un cable filtrado de la embajada estadounidense de la época. Casi dos décadas después, Putin emplearía mensajes similares sobre el idioma y la identidad nacional como justificaciones para su guerra y sus anexiones ilegales en el este.

La estrategia de Manafort fue un éxito rotundo. El Partido de las Regiones ganó las elecciones parlamentarias en 2006 y, cuatro años después, Yanukóvich recuperó la presidencia en unas elecciones que pasaron el examen internacional. Los revolucionarios naranjas, o al menos su dirección elegida, habían hecho gran parte del trabajo por sí mismos, alienando a los votantes mediante luchas internas paralizantes y un fracaso en la realización de reformas. Pero Manafort se ganó el crédito, llegando a ser tan conocido en los círculos políticos ucranianos como Karl Rove o James Carville en Estados Unidos. Estaba viviendo la vida del oligarca, coleccionando chaquetas de piel de pitón y avestruz, trajes de Alan Couture y propiedades en el SoHo, los Hamptons, la Torre Trump y los brownstone de Brooklyn. También se estaba acercando a Yanukovich, jugando al tenis en pista de hierba -dejando siempre que ganara el cliente- y remojándose en la bañera de hidromasaje de la Residencia Mezhyhirya, de 350 acres, del nuevo presidente, con su zoológico de mascotas, su campo de golf y el esperpento de una mansión, cuya mezcla desordenada de influencias arquitectónicas se conocía localmente como "Rococó de Donetsk".

Yanukóvich no tardó en empezar a retroceder en sus promesas de democracia. Encarceló a su oponente, la antigua líder naranja Yulia Timoshenko; recortó las libertades de prensa criminalizando la difamación e iniciando investigaciones inventadas sobre los medios de comunicación de la oposición; presidió el saqueo de fondos públicos; amañó las elecciones parlamentarias de 2012; y dio marcha atrás a un plan para poner fin al contrato de arrendamiento de Rusia sobre el puerto de Sebastopol, en Crimea, donde su flota naval era vista como un caballo de batalla para una toma de posesión de Putin.

Pronto, varios de los asesores de Manafort en materia de democracia se retiraron decepcionados. Por su parte, Manafort amplió su papel con Yanukóvich, convirtiéndose en una especie de asesor de política exterior en la sombra y emisario de Occidente. También, según acusaron más tarde los fiscales, trabajaba como agente extranjero no registrado, dirigiendo campañas secretas de presión en Washington y Bruselas para evitar las sanciones por el encarcelamiento de Timoshenko, mientras insistía en que Yanukóvich seguía adelante con su acuerdo económico con Europa.

Pero ese tenue puente con Occidente no pudo mantenerse. Bajo la presión de Putin, Yanukóvich dio un brusco giro a finales de 2013, rompiendo las conversaciones con Europa y profundizando en su compromiso económico con Rusia. Por decenas de miles, los manifestantes volvieron a acudir a la plaza Maidan. Semanas de enfrentamiento, salpicadas de violencia, llegaron a un desenlace mortal durante tres días en febrero de 2014, cuando una represión del gobierno dejó decenas de muertos, a escasos metros de la oficina de Manafort.

En la reacción, con su coalición política hecha pedazos, Yanukovich huyó a Rusia. Al cabo de unas semanas, alegando que Yanukóvich no había sido derrocado en una oleada democrática interna, sino en un golpe de Estado respaldado por Occidente, Putin avanzó sobre Crimea y el este. Hasta el día de hoy, Manafort también sostiene que Maidan fue esencialmente un golpe de estado contra un presidente debidamente elegido. También fue un desastre financiero personal: había perdido su vaca lechera. Aun así, se las arregló para encontrar trabajo, ayudando a antiguos miembros del Partido de las Regiones a fundar un nuevo partido llamado Bloque de la Oposición y asesorando en las carreras por las alcaldías.

La última llegó a finales de 2015, en Mariupol. La ciudad portuaria, en el sureste de Ucrania, formaba parte de un posible puente terrestre para las armas entre la Crimea ocupada y el Donbás devastado por la guerra y sería un centro comercial para una república Potemkin en deuda con Moscú. También era un feudo del ciudadano más rico de Ucrania, el magnate de los metales y la minería Rinat Akhmetov, para quien tanto Rusia como Europa eran mercados importantes. Padrino político temprano de Yanukovich, Akhmetov fue también un financiador original del trabajo de Manafort para el Partido de las Regiones.

Con una concentración de participaciones industriales en el Donbás, Akhmetov mantuvo un fuerte control sobre la política, la gobernanza y los medios de comunicación de la región. Incluso cuando los apoderados de Putin avanzaron sobre Mariupol y celebraron un falso referéndum de independencia en 2014, Akhmetov adoptó una postura aparentemente neutral que dio a los "separatistas" una oportunidad para afirmar que tenían su apoyo. "Rinat", rezaba un grafiti en la Plaza de la Independencia de Kiev, "¿estás con Ucrania o con el Kremlin?". Finalmente, Akhmetov se pronunció con dureza contra la violencia "separatista", enviando a trabajadores a patrullar las calles y a ayudar a repeler a los apoderados de Rusia. Pero incluso entonces, sus mensajes contradictorios siguieron alimentando la sospecha de que estaba cubriendo sus apuestas. Después de que los "separatistas" bombardearan una zona civil a principios de 2015, matando a 30 personas -el ataque, según se supo después, fue dirigido por oficiales militares rusos-, su mayor medio de comunicación, Segodnya, destacó por artículos que evitaban atribuir la culpa. "La impresión era que no se trataba de un bombardeo provocado por el hombre, sino de una especie de terremoto; simplemente ocurrió", me dijo Eugenia Kuznetsova, una analista de los medios de comunicación ucranianos que estudió la cobertura del ataque.

Jock Mendoza-Wilson, un portavoz de Akhmetov, dijo que el oligarca nunca había sido neutral y que siempre había apoyado una Ucrania unida. (Akhmetov está ahora demandando a Rusia por la destrucción de su mayor fábrica de acero en Mariupol, el lugar donde los soldados ucranianos realizaron una desesperada resistencia de 80 días este año). Pero para mantener el país unido, dijo, Akhmetov creía en ese momento que "no sería constructivo salir disparado" contra Rusia.

Ante la proximidad de las elecciones a la alcaldía y al consejo municipal de 2015, varios candidatos insurgentes dieron un paso al frente, prometiendo volver a Mariupol más decididamente contra Rusia y sus apoderados. El candidato a la alcaldía elegido por Akhmetov, un antiguo ejecutivo de su empresa siderúrgica, Vadym Boychenko, era un claro defensor del statu quo neutral.

La mano de Manafort en la campaña, revelada en un correo electrónico desenterrado por los investigadores del Senado, se ocultó en gran medida; en las entrevistas, describió su papel como menor. Un candidato reformista, Oleksandr Yaroshenko, se sorprendió al saber que Manafort había participado, aunque, en retrospectiva, vio indicios de su presencia. "Los estadounidenses vinieron con pocos recuentos", me dijo durante una entrevista en vídeo en mayo que fue interrumpida ocasionalmente por sus esfuerzos para coordinar las evacuaciones de la ciudad asediada. "Tenían tecnología: cuánta gente tenemos que traer de cada calle, qué porcentaje". Para él, todo esto era una fachada, ya que el control de la ciudad por parte de Akhmetov se extendía al contrato de impresión de las papeletas.

Tras la victoria de Boychenko, Yaroshenko organizó una campaña en el Ayuntamiento para obligarle a renovar una proclama que declaraba a Rusia como "país agresor". El alcalde archivó la medida.

El paso de Manafort a la campaña de Trump, en marzo de 2016, fue una bendición para el candidato, ya que le proporcionó uno de los estrategas intramuros más hábiles de los republicanos justo cuando el senador Ted Cruz empezaba a recortar su ventaja de delegados, lo que hizo que se hablara de una convención disputada.

También fue una bendición para Manafort, que era pobre en efectivo aunque rico en bienes de lujo. Había transferido una gran parte de sus ganancias en Ucrania -una toma total de unos 60 millones de dólares, según descubrieron los investigadores- a sus compras de bienes inmuebles, automóviles y trajes desde empresas fantasma en Chipre, parte de lo que, según los fiscales, era un plan de blanqueo de dinero. Una factura de 2,4 millones de dólares a Akhmetov y a otro cliente seguía sin pagarse. Las amenazas financieras se cernían sobre él. Estaba siendo demandado por Deripaska, que afirmaba que Manafort y su adjunto, Rick Gates, habían perdido casi 20 millones de dólares en una empresa conjunta que salió mal.

Manafort hizo todo lo posible para conseguir el trabajo en la campaña de Trump, según el informe de inteligencia del Senado. Presionó a Roger Stone y al recaudador de fondos Tom Barrack y cerró el trato, según dijo Barrack a los fiscales, diciendo "las palabras mágicas": trabajaría sin cobrar. Después de todo, razonó Manafort, el trabajo podría ser una forma de obtener su paga atrasada de Akhmetov y arreglar las cosas con Deripaska, quien sin duda vería valor en la asociación de Manafort con un potencial presidente. "¿Cómo utilizamos para conseguirlo todo?", escribió Manafort a Kilimnik. Manafort me dijo que creía que tendría mayor influencia con Trump como voluntario de apoyo que como miembro de su personal.

El nuevo trabajo de Manafort también era prometedor para Putin. El círculo íntimo del principal candidato republicano a la presidencia de Estados Unidos incluía ahora a un asesor que fue el cerebro del partido más exitoso de Ucrania en favor de Rusia y que estaba cerca de un hombre, Kilimnik, al que los funcionarios estadounidenses han identificado como agente ruso.

Actualizaciones: La guerra entre Rusia y Ucrania

Actualizado el 2 de noviembre de 2022, 8:34 a.m. ELos generales rusos han mantenido conversaciones sobre el uso de armas nucleares en Ucrania, según funcionarios estadounidenses.Rusia se reincorpora al acuerdo sobre los cereales después de decir que recibió garantías de seguridad.Kiev dice que está preparando 425 refugios en caso de un ataque nuclear ruso.

El día después de que la campaña de Trump anunciara su nombramiento como estratega jefe de la convención, Manafort trabajó con Gates y Kilimnik para enviar copias del anuncio a sus principales patrocinadores en Ucrania, junto con cartas personales en las que les prometía mantenerlos informados durante toda la campaña. Entre los destinatarios se encontraban Deripaska, Akhmetov y otro ucraniano adinerado, un antiguo jefe de gabinete de Yanukóvich llamado Sergiy Lyovochkin. Conductor del dinero de los oligarcas hacia Manafort durante los años del Partido de las Regiones, Lyovochkin también tenía una estrecha relación de trabajo con Kilimnik, según los investigadores del Senado.

Mientras Manafort ascendía hasta convertirse en el presidente de la campaña de Trump -y mientras los operativos rusos hackeaban los servidores del Partido Demócrata- el candidato adoptó posturas sobre la región que eran ventajosas para las ambiciones de Putin en Ucrania. Antes de la Convención Nacional Republicana en Cleveland en julio, Trump sorprendió al establishment de la política exterior estadounidense al expresar sólo un tibio apoyo a la OTAN. También dijo a sus ayudantes que no creía que mereciera la pena arriesgarse a una "Tercera Guerra Mundial" para defender a Ucrania contra Rusia, según el informe de inteligencia del Senado publicado en el verano de 2020.

A esto le seguiría la única pelea de plataforma de la convención. Después de que un delegado de Texas añadiera una plancha que prometía "armas defensivas letales" para Ucrania, un asesor de seguridad nacional de Trump, J.D. Gordon, intervino para bloquearla; se rebajaría a una promesa más suave de "asistencia adecuada". La delegada de Texas diría al Comité de Inteligencia del Senado que Gordon le había dicho que estaba actuando en consulta con "Nueva York", específicamente con Trump. Gordon lo negó, diciendo que actuó por iniciativa propia porque la promesa de "ayuda letal" parecía contradecir la posición de Trump sobre Ucrania. En la convención había otros dos actores muy implicados: los embajadores ucraniano y ruso en Estados Unidos; el ruso habló con Gordon días después de que se suavizara la plancha. Al final, los investigadores no concluyeron que Rusia estuviera implicada en la disputa de la plataforma. Tampoco encontraron pruebas que contradijeran la insistencia de Manafort en que se había apartado totalmente del proceso, aunque un funcionario de la campaña dijo después a los investigadores que Manafort tuvo que "apaciguar" al "molesto" embajador ucraniano.

Los ucranianos tendrían motivos para estar molestos, y los rusos complacidos, de nuevo unos días después, el 27 de julio, cuando Trump, en una conferencia de prensa, dijo que consideraría el reconocimiento de Crimea como territorio ruso, poniendo fin de forma efectiva a las sanciones de la administración Obama y normalizando las relaciones que habían sido tensas desde la anexión ilegal. También, como es sabido, invitó a Rusia a hackear los correos electrónicos de Hillary Clinton.

Al día siguiente, Kilimnik voló a Moscú, según muestran los registros de viaje obtenidos por la oficina de Mueller. En su correo electrónico a Manafort esa noche, escribió que se había reunido con "el tipo que te dio tu mayor tarro de caviar negro hace varios años" -el tipo era Yanukovich, que una vez le dio a Manafort 30.000 dólares en caviar fino. Kilimnik necesitaba conocerse en persona. Tenía "una larga historia de caviar que contar".

En el Gran Salón Habana, Kilimnik transmitió el mensaje urgente de Yanukóvich: Se estaba elaborando un plan de "paz" para Ucrania que esperaba que Manafort ayudara a llevar a cabo.

Tal como lo describió Kilimnik en mensajes y memorandos durante los meses siguientes, la república autónoma prevista en el este seguiría siendo nominalmente parte de Ucrania; con Yanukovich como líder, negociaría entonces un acuerdo. Pero lo que se conoció como el plan Mariupol era, como Manafort reconoció más tarde a los fiscales, una ruta de "puerta trasera" hacia el control ruso del este de Ucrania, notablemente similar a lo que Putin ha declarado ahora que ha logrado con sus anexiones a golpe de pistola.

El plan se basaba en la interpretación maximalista de Putin de los acuerdos, firmados en la capital bielorrusa, Minsk, a finales de 2014 y principios de 2015, que vinculaban un alto el fuego en el este a una nueva disposición constitucional ucraniana que otorgaba un "estatus especial" a los dos principales territorios allí. Rusia interpretó ese término difuso como la concesión de autonomía a los territorios -bajo sus apoderados- con poder de veto sobre la política exterior de Ucrania. Ucrania lo vio como una expansión más limitada de la gobernanza local. Incluso entonces, la mayoría de los ucranianos vio la disposición como una capitulación, según las encuestas, y tuvo dificultades para conseguir la aceptación en el Parlamento.

Para Estados Unidos, que no formó parte de las conversaciones de Minsk, cualquier plan que diera al este una autonomía e influencia desmesuradas iba en contra de lo que William Taylor, antiguo embajador estadounidense en Ucrania, describió como "una Ucrania independiente y soberana dentro de sus fronteras reconocidas internacionalmente". "Hemos dicho eso una y otra vez", me dijo. Ahora, sin embargo, la retórica de Trump sobre Rusia sugería una ruptura con esa política.

En la investigación sobre Rusia, la reunión en el salón Grand Havana sería más conocida por el otro asunto que se llevó a cabo esa noche: la discusión de los datos de las encuestas que trazaban cómo Trump podría alcanzar la posición de poder para hacer esa trascendental ruptura diplomática. Manafort y Gates habían estado pasando esos datos a Kilimnik desde la primavera; producidos por el encuestador al que recurría Manafort, Tony Fabrizio, se encontraban entre los activos más estrechos de la campaña, según el informe de inteligencia del Senado. Manafort y Gates han insistido en que los datos eran sólo del tipo más básico, algunos de ellos disponibles públicamente. Pero también mostraba exactamente lo que la campaña estaba mirando mientras formaba su estrategia y difundía su mensaje en nuevas formas a través de las redes sociales. Y como Manafort le dijo a Kilimnik en el club, según el testimonio de Gates y de otro testigo informado de la reunión, las encuestas estaban recogiendo algo que los encuestadores de Clinton y los pronosticadores de la corriente principal no estaban: un camino hacia la Casa Blanca a través de estados tradicionalmente azules como Michigan, Minnesota, Pensilvania y Wisconsin. Por supuesto, explicó Manafort, eso requeriría un asalto implacable a la imagen pública de Clinton.

A finales del verano, se intensificaron las despiadadas operaciones anti-Clinton en los medios sociales, no sólo por parte de la campaña de Trump y sus aliados estadounidenses, sino también por parte de trolls rusos que se hacían pasar por estadounidenses, que difundían una serie de teorías conspirativas sobre la salud de Clinton y su supuesta criminalidad. Las operaciones incluyeron los estados que Manafort había identificado como clave, según descubrieron los investigadores.

Los datos de las encuestas se convertirían en uno de los principales objetivos del equipo de Mueller y de los investigadores del Senado. Ninguno de ellos pudo vincular directamente las operaciones rusas con los datos; sólo informaron de que Gates creía que Kilimnik los compartía con Deripaska y sus homólogos ucranianos, un aparente cumplimiento de la promesa de Manafort de mantener a sus mecenas al tanto. Pero el año pasado un comunicado del Departamento del Tesoro concluyó que Kilimnik había pasado los datos directamente a la inteligencia militar rusa, calificándolo de "conocido agente ruso".

El documento no proporcionaba ninguna prueba subyacente, y Manafort y Gates han aprovechado eso para cuestionar la evaluación y todo lo que se deriva de ella. Como me dijo Gates: "Si Kilimnik es un agente del G.R.U., muéstrenos la prueba, y seré el primero en decir que es correcto". Kilimnik se negó a hablar conmigo, pero en un mensaje de texto, desestimó su trabajo en el plan de Mariupol como "discusiones informales" respecto a "una de las 10.000 diversas opciones de solución de paz". (No era "el momento adecuado para discutir estos asuntos", me dijo, dada la "lucha de los ucranianos por su vida y su libertad"). El año pasado, Kilimnik dijo a un entrevistador de RealClearInvestigations que la evaluación era "insensata y falsa", señalando que era una fuente habitual de información para los funcionarios de la embajada de Estados Unidos en Kiev, lo que confirmaron documentos y antiguos funcionarios.

Por supuesto, crear confianza dentro de la embajada de una nación rival es lo que se supone que hacen los espías. Un occidental muy enchufado, un arreglador que interactuaba con Kilimnik regularmente en Kiev, me dijo que aunque albergaba dudas sobre la evaluación de los servicios de inteligencia, consideraba la cuestión académica: Como ciudadano ruso con familia en Rusia y un historial con los militares, Kilimnik habría estado bajo presión para cumplir las órdenes de Putin, y a menudo parecía hacerlo. En este sentido, los correos electrónicos obtenidos por Mueller mostraban a Kilimnik refiriéndose a sus interacciones con actores de alto nivel en Moscú, incluyendo algunos con claros vínculos de inteligencia. Entre ellos estaba un alto ayudante de Deripaska, Viktor Boyarkin, a quien el Departamento del Tesoro de EE.UU. ha descrito como un antiguo funcionario de alto rango del G.R.U., que tomó la delantera en la operación de intromisión de Putin.

La mejor conexión de Kilimnik con la campaña de Trump no estaría presente cuando esa operación llegó a su máximo esplendor. Menos de tres semanas después de la reunión del Gran Salón de La Habana, Manafort se quedó sin trabajo. A mediados de agosto, The New York Times había informado de que una nueva agencia anticorrupción ucraniana había obtenido un "libro negro" del Partido de las Regiones, en el que se enumeraban los pagos asignados, fuera de los libros, a funcionarios ucranianos... y a Manafort. Unos días más tarde, en una conferencia de prensa en Kiev, un ex periodista convertido en parlamentario reformista, Serhiy Leshchenko, destacó 22 entradas del libro de contabilidad escritas a mano que enumeraban 12,7 millones de dólares en pagos designados para Manafort. La campaña de Clinton calificó el libro de contabilidad como una prueba de los vínculos entre la campaña de Trump y Rusia, y Manafort dimitió.

El descubrimiento del libro de contabilidad parecía sacado directamente de la trama de una comedia de éxito, "Servant of the People". Un riff ucraniano de "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington", estaba protagonizado por el actor cómico Volodymyr Zelensky en el papel de un humilde e idealista profesor de historia que se ve empujado inesperadamente a la presidencia, luchando constantemente contra un agente de los oligarcas parecido a Manafort que intenta empaquetarlo y manejarlo. En el final de la temporada de 2015, encuentra un libro negro de pagos secretos guardado por su predecesor y jura limpiar la "empresa extraoficial llamada 'Ucrania'" de su corrupción endémica.

Hablando con los periodistas, Leshchenko utilizó una retórica similar al hablar de por qué ayudó a hacer público el libro de contabilidad real. También tenía otra razón. "Cuanto más se exponga a Trump y al círculo de Trump", dijo a la revista Tablet varios meses después, "más difícil será para Trump concluir un acuerdo separado con Putin, vendiendo así tanto a Ucrania como a toda Europa".

Desde el inicio de su transición presidencial, Trump pareció dar a Rusia todos los indicios de que su apuesta política había dado resultado. Nombró como asesor de seguridad nacional a un teniente general retirado, Michael J. Flynn, que había aceptado 33.750 dólares para hablar en una celebración en Moscú en 2015 del medio de propaganda ruso financiado por el Estado, RT. Incluso antes de asumir el cargo, Flynn estaba hablando con el embajador de Putin en Washington, en aparente violación de la ley federal, sobre el levantamiento de las sanciones por la intromisión electoral. (Flynn se declaró dos veces culpable de los cargos de mentir al FBI sobre esas conversaciones, pero fue indultado por Trump). El nuevo secretario de Estado sería Rex W. Tillerson, que como director general de Exxon Mobil había criticado la decisión de la administración Obama de sancionar a Rusia por Crimea y el derribo de un vuelo de Malaysia Airlines.

Y en los días cercanos a la toma de posesión, llegaron señales prometedoras desde el otro lado del Potomac, en Virginia, donde Manafort se reunió con Kilimnik y Lyovochkin en el hotel Westin Alexandria Old Town. (Los dos hombres obtuvieron entradas para la inauguración a través de un asociado de Manafort que más tarde se declararía culpable de no haberse registrado como agente extranjero y de haber comprado ilegalmente las entradas, una violación de las normas contra las donaciones políticas extranjeras). Como la mayor parte de sus comunicaciones tuvieron lugar a través de aplicaciones de mensajería encriptadas, los investigadores tuvieron poca visibilidad de la agenda, pero Manafort reconoció un punto a los fiscales: el plan de "paz" de Ucrania.

Sin tener una posición oficial, Manafort siguió asesorando al bando de Trump, según el informe del Senado. Al mismo tiempo, Kilimnik se movía entre Moscú y Kiev, elaborando los detalles del plan de "paz". Comunicándose a través de un borrador de correo electrónico en una cuenta compartida antes de la reunión de Virginia, Kilimnik le dijo a Manafort que él y Yanukóvich -nombre en clave BG por Big Guy- se habían reunido en Rusia y discutido el plan. "Los rusos del más alto nivel no están en principio en contra de este plan", escribió Kilimnik, "y trabajarán con el BG para iniciar el proceso". Un respaldo público de Trump, añadió, vencería la resistencia en Kiev. "Todo lo que se necesita para iniciar el proceso es un "guiño" (o un ligero empujón) de DT diciendo "quiere la paz en Ucrania y que el Donbass vuelva a Ucrania" y una decisión de ser un "representante especial" y gestionar este proceso", escribió Kilimnik. El representante de Trump sería aparentemente Manafort, quien, según pudo garantizar Yanukovych, tendría acceso al "más alto nivel" en el Kremlin.

Manafort no era la única figura en la órbita de Trump que se relacionaba con personas que conocían a gente en Moscú. Los primeros meses de la administración trajeron una procesión de revelaciones que le dieron vueltas a la cabeza. Flynn, el asesor de seguridad nacional, fue despedido por sus conversaciones por detrás del embajador ruso. Hubo la revelación de que un asesor de política exterior de la campaña llamado George Papadopoulos, en un bar de Londres, había dicho a un diplomático australiano que Rusia tenía trapos sucios sobre Clinton, semanas antes de que se conociera públicamente el hackeo ruso de los correos electrónicos de Clinton. Su charla suelta desencadenó la primera investigación por intromisión, que evolucionó hasta la investigación de Mueller. Se supo que Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner y Manafort se reunieron en la Torre Trump en junio de 2016 con un abogado ruso bien conectado que, según les dijeron, quería pasar información incriminatoria sobre Clinton como "parte del apoyo de Rusia y su gobierno al señor Trump". Según cuentan, el abogado, más interesado en el levantamiento de las sanciones, no cumplió. Y hubo la revelación del equipo de Mueller en documentos judiciales en el otoño de 2017 de que Kilimnik fue "evaluado por tener vínculos con un servicio de inteligencia ruso".

Para entonces, sin embargo, Manafort había surgido como un objetivo principal de la investigación, sus interacciones con Kilimnik, Deripaska y los ucranianos prorrusos vistos como un vínculo potencial entre el Kremlin y la campaña de Trump. Sin embargo, incluso después de su acusación a finales de octubre de 2017, según informaron los fiscales, él y Kilimnik siguieron buscando el "guiño" de la administración Trump para el plan de "paz" de Ucrania. Para ello, todavía en marzo de 2018, él y Kilimnik estaban trabajando en una encuesta a los ucranianos. Un borrador de la encuesta preguntaba si Donbas debería permanecer bajo el gobierno de Kiev en uno de los dos acuerdos alternativos; separarse como una región autónoma; o unirse directamente a Rusia. Elaborado con la aportación del encuestador Fabrizio, también preguntaba si Yanukovich podía ser aceptado como líder en el este.

Pero mientras Manafort y Kilimnik trabajaban para perfeccionar la encuesta, los fiscales presentaron nuevos cargos penales contra Manafort. Ahora se enfrentaba a dos juicios, uno en Virginia y otro en Washington. Entonces llegó la noticia de un nuevo testigo estrella: el ayudante de Manafort, Gates, que expuso con detalle cómo Manafort utilizó empresas ficticias para ocultar millones de dólares en ganancias a los recaudadores de impuestos.

En agosto de 2018, un jurado de Virginia declaró a Manafort culpable de ocho de los 18 cargos que se le imputaban, incluyendo fraude fiscal y bancario. Con su segundo juicio, por lavado de dinero, avecinándose en Washington, Manafort llegó a un acuerdo para declararse culpable y cooperar con el gobierno, con la esperanza de recibir indulgencia en la sentencia. (Manafort dice ahora que no creía en su admisión de culpabilidad jurada, y que la presentó sólo porque no pensaba que se enfrentaría a un jurado justo y quería proteger los activos financieros de la familia). Pero en el último momento, el fiscal principal, Andrew Weissmann, echó por tierra el acuerdo. Se enteró de que Manafort había mentido sistemáticamente "sobre un asunto en particular: sus interacciones con Kilimnik, el oficial de inteligencia ruso", como dice el informe del Senado. Entre esas interacciones: las maniobras para el plan de Mariupol.

Weissmann descubrió el plan sólo después del juicio de Virginia, cuando el FBI obtuvo un lote de correos electrónicos de Kilimnik. Confrontado con esa nueva información, Manafort dijo a los fiscales que había descartado el plan de plano cuando surgió por primera vez, en el salón Grand Havana en agosto de 2016. Se aferró a esa insistencia incluso después de que Weissmann revelara que estaba en posesión de la correspondencia de diciembre de 2016 en la que se discutía "el BG" y el deseado "guiño" de apoyo de Trump, y de nuevo cuando se le presentaron los correos electrónicos sobre la encuesta en marzo de 2018.

En nuestras entrevistas y en su libro, "Political Prisoner", publicado este agosto, Manafort califica de "locura" la idea de que apoyó el plan y sostiene que la encuesta fue diseñada para ayudar a un candidato presidencial ucraniano que no quiso nombrar. Aunque no niega que Kilimnik impulsara el plan -a instancias de Yanukóvich, no de Putin, dice-, acusa a Weissmann de elaborar una "narrativa inventada" a partir de hechos inconexos.

Para Weissmann, las revelaciones supusieron un momento "aha". El plan de partición, se dio cuenta, era el "quo" que quería Putin por el "quid" de ayudar a la campaña de Trump. "El 2 de agosto, si no antes", escribió en sus memorias de 2020, "Rusia había revelado claramente a Manafort -y, por extensión, a la campaña de Trump- lo que quería de Estados Unidos: 'un guiño', un asentimiento de aprobación de un presidente Donald Trump, mientras se apoderaba de la región más rica de Ucrania".

Putin ha tratado de justificar su guerra en Ucrania con un aluvión de propaganda: que Ucrania, con un presidente judío, está gobernada por nazis; que las atrocidades rusas, ampliamente recogidas en fotografías, vídeos y relatos de testigos, son ataques ucranianos de falsa bandera, montados para desprestigiar a Rusia; que Ucrania se está preparando para detonar una "bomba sucia", mientras Moscú aviva el temor mundial a un ataque nuclear ruso. Las fuerzas de propaganda de Putin, de hecho, han estado empleando tales ficciones durante años para sembrar la división y la confusión en Crimea y Donbas, mientras probaba una nueva doctrina de guerra híbrida, una mezcla de armas y palabras.

Ese mensaje a través del espejo tiene su eco en la elaboración y la evolución de una contranarrativa a la investigación sobre Rusia que echó raíces en la campaña de Trump y que, en última instancia, desembocó en su primera destitución: Ucrania, no Rusia, se había entrometido en 2016.

Según el informe de Mueller, Kilimnik y Manafort empezaron a dar vueltas a la teoría después de que en junio de 2016 se conociera la noticia de que una empresa privada de ciberseguridad llamada CrowdStrike había determinado que piratas informáticos rusos habían sido los responsables de vulnerar los sistemas informáticos del Comité Nacional Demócrata. Gates dijo más tarde a los investigadores que Manafort había dicho a personas dentro de la campaña que Ucrania estaba realmente detrás del hackeo. Al hacerlo, informó Gates, Manafort había "repetido como un loro una narrativa que Kilimnik apoyaba a menudo", según las notas del FBI citadas en el informe del Senado. Manafort niega el relato de Gates.

Tras la revelación del nombre de Manafort en el libro negro, Kilimnik montó una defensa de la reputación de su jefe sacando a la luz una nueva iteración de la contranarrativa: que los aliados ucranianos de Clinton habían fabricado el libro negro para manchar a Manafort y socavar a Trump. Como toda desinformación eficaz, tenía algunos lazos muy finos con la realidad: la opinión dentro del gobierno ucraniano de que una presidencia de Trump sería potencialmente ruinosa, y la admisión de que el libro de contabilidad no había sido totalmente autentificado y no probaba los pagos reales realizados a Manafort. Un agente del FBI que vio el libro de contabilidad me dijo que sus cientos de páginas de anotaciones manuscritas habrían sido prohibitivamente difíciles de falsificar y eran una herramienta de investigación valiosa, si no una prueba lista para el tribunal. (Manafort ha negado haber recibido pagos fuera de los libros y nunca fue objeto de una investigación penal por parte de los fiscales ucranianos, que se centraron en investigar si los pagos a Manafort y otros habían sido extraídos indebidamente de fondos públicos).

La incursión inicial de Kilimnik fue sutil, y consistió en un artículo del Financial Times de agosto de 2016 sobre la toma de partido de destacados ucranianos en las elecciones estadounidenses, rompiendo con la neutralidad tradicional para oponerse al "pro-Putin Trump". Kilimnik había intercambiado varios correos electrónicos con el periodista antes de la publicación, según supieron los fiscales, y el artículo incluía una cita de un "antiguo leal a Yanukóvich" que sugería no sólo que el libro de cuentas se había filtrado para perjudicar a Trump, sino también que los periodistas que cubrían la filtración habían estado "trabajando en favor de los intereses de Hillary Clinton." Kilimnik envió el artículo a Gates con la esperanza de que "DT lo vea". Luego, después de tres llamadas telefónicas con Manafort, Roger Stone publicó un enlace al artículo en Twitter. "La única interferencia en las elecciones de Estados Unidos es la de los amigos de Hillary en Ucrania", añadió como puntuación.

Varios meses más tarde, Kilimnik ayudó a exponer el caso de forma más clara en un artículo de opinión en U.S. News & World Report que ayudó a escribir de forma fantasma para su antiguo socio, el mecenas de Manafort, Lyovochkin, que ahora sirve en el Parlamento de Ucrania como miembro del sucesor del Partido de las Regiones, el Bloque de la Oposición. Acusando a los funcionarios de la lucha contra la corrupción de "fabricar un caso" contra Manafort, el artículo de opinión defendía a quienes proponían "dolorosas concesiones" a cambio de la paz con Rusia.

La contranarrativa encontró un amplificador prominente en el Kremlin, que no perdió tiempo en utilizarla para avivar la ira de Trump contra su enemigo. Señalando lo vital que era el patrocinio estadounidense para el futuro de Ucrania, la portavoz del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores ruso, Maria Zakharova, dijo a los periodistas en Moscú durante la transición: "Parece que mantener este patrocinio es un gran desafío para las autoridades de Kiev", que habían sido "incivilizadas y groseras con el presidente electo Donald Trump" y habían plantado información sobre Manafort. Putin se unió al coro en febrero, asegurando que el gobierno ucraniano había "adoptado una posición unilateral a favor de un candidato": Clinton. "Más que eso", añadió, sin pruebas, "ciertos oligarcas, ciertamente con la aprobación de la dirección política, financiaron a este candidato, o candidata, para ser más precisos".

Los activos rusos en línea en Ucrania y Estados Unidos se sumaron. Ese mes de julio, CyberBerkut, un grupo de hackers asociado a la inteligencia militar rusa -y activo en los anteriores esfuerzos propagandísticos de Rusia en Ucrania- elaboró la teoría de Putin de que los oligarcas ucranianos habían financiado en secreto a Clinton. Al día siguiente, una cuenta de Twitter pro-Trump con sede en San Petersburgo que más tarde fue identificada como un activo en la intromisión de 2016, @USA_Gunslinger, publicó: "¿Dónde está la indignación por la colusión de Clinton y su equipo de campaña con Ucrania para interferir en las elecciones estadounidenses?"

En los meses que siguieron, la opinión de Trump sobre los ucranianos sólo pareció oscurecerse, ya que una versión más extravagante de la teoría floreció en los rincones pro-Trump de Internet. Sus defensores afirmaban que la empresa de ciberseguridad CrowdStrike era propiedad de un ucraniano (no lo era), y que los servidores físicos estaban escondidos en algún lugar del país (no lo estaban). En otras palabras, al igual que el "engaño" de la investigación sobre Rusia, todo era una campaña ucraniana para inculpar a Trump y a Rusia. Trump asintió a la idea en su conferencia de prensa con Putin en Helsinki en julio de 2018, cuando dijo que aceptaba la palabra de Putin de que Rusia no había estado involucrada en el hackeo. "¿Dónde están esos servidores?", preguntó. "Han desaparecido".

La desconfianza de Trump amenazaba con tener consecuencias mortales para los ucranianos. Según las memorias de su ex asesor de seguridad nacional, John R. Bolton, cuando los marineros rusos se apoderaron de tres buques navales ucranianos ese noviembre en un movimiento potencialmente escalador, el primer instinto de Trump fue sospechar que Ucrania había provocado a Rusia.

Ese mismo mes, los fiscales informaron a un juez federal de que Manafort había incumplido su acuerdo de culpabilidad al mentir. El juez lo condenó más tarde a una pena de prisión de siete años y medio, que deberá cumplir en la Institución Correccional Federal Loretto, en Pensilvania, como recluso número 35207-016. Lo que podría haber sido la mejor esperanza de Putin para un plan aprobado por Trump para una Ucrania debilitada y dividida parecía haberse ido con él. Pero de una manera que jugó a favor de los designios del líder ruso, el enconado agravio de Trump hacia Ucrania daría forma al siguiente gran escándalo de su presidencia.

Puede que Manafort estuviera en la cárcel, pero, en busca de un indulto, todavía tenía algo de valor para el presidente transaccional: su incomparable conocimiento de la política y el gobierno ucranianos. Pasaría efectivamente el testigo al abogado personal de Trump, el ex alcalde de Nueva York Rudolph W. Giuliani, que en el otoño de 2018 preparaba una ofensiva para echar definitivamente la investigación del abogado especial como un golpe político después de que su informe final no probara la "colusión".

Un aspecto central de la misión de Giuliani era el esfuerzo por construir la contranarrativa "Ucrania lo hizo". Giuliani y Manafort no hablaron directamente sino a través de los abogados de Manafort. Cuando le pregunté a Manafort qué había transmitido exactamente, fue vago, pero señaló que Giuliani estaba "hablando con algunas de las personas en Ucrania que eran mis amigos" y dijo que sus abogados habrían informado a Giuliani sobre los detalles de lo que él llama un complot para inculparle. Giuliani se negó a hablar conmigo sobre sus discusiones, pero dijo a The Washington Post en 2019 que su pregunta para Manafort fue: "¿Había realmente un libro negro?" y la respuesta fue: "No había un libro negro".

Lo que ocurrió a partir de ahí ya es historia de Trump exhaustivamente litigada, ya que Giuliani se aventuró por Europa hilando esa contranarrativa original en una ornamentada teoría de la conspiración que involucró a la embajada de Estados Unidos en Kiev, a su embajadora, Marie Yovanovitch, y a Joe y Hunter Biden. En su versión más simple, el caso de destitución que siguió fue sobre el abuso de poder presidencial: un plan para condicionar la ayuda militar esencial a una investigación ucraniana sobre CrowdStrike, los "servidores ocultos" y los negocios supuestamente corruptos de los Biden con la empresa energética ucraniana Burisma. Sin embargo, lo que se le escapó a la audiencia estadounidense fue la forma en que la campaña de presión de Trump y la diplomacia independiente de Giuliani estaban zarandeando a un país que, lo supiera o no, se dirigía hacia la guerra. Sus maquinaciones estaban jugando directamente en una contienda de poder blando sobre si Ucrania sentaría las verdaderas bases de una democracia independiente al estilo occidental o seguiría esclavizada por Moscú y sus apoderados.

Esa contienda era difícil de ver a través de la niebla de la política ucraniana. Todas las personas con las que hablé que tenían alguna experiencia en Kiev -sin importar su tendencia política- me advirtieron que no debía ver nada en blanco y negro, buenos y malos. No se podía saber cuántas agendas aparentemente contradictorias podría estar haciendo malabarismos un actor importante en Ucrania, siendo las únicas líneas fiables la búsqueda de dinero y poder. Con ese espíritu, los oligarcas más a menudo caracterizados en la prensa occidental como "prorrusos" rechazan la etiqueta. "Nunca he sido pro-ruso", dijo el multimillonario corredor de energía Dmitry Firtash a NBC News este año, "pero tienen que entender que soy un hombre de negocios". En la Kiev de preguerra, perseguir el dinero y el poder y servir a los intereses de Putin podían significar a menudo lo mismo.

"Los estadounidenses jugaban a un juego básico: 'Trump quiere ensuciar a Biden'", dice Suriya Jayanti, jefa de política energética de la embajada estadounidense en Kiev en aquella época. "Lo que en realidad estaba ocurriendo en Ucrania era esta loca red de alianzas cambiantes y bolsillos de oligarcas y comercio de caballos y puñaladas por la espalda, y en nuestra miopía estadounidense teníamos una comprensión limitada de que si un árbol cae en el bosque y Estados Unidos no está allí para oírlo, sigue cayendo".

Si algún lugar proporcionó una visión relativamente clara de este hirviente panorama, fue la embajada, a través de los acontecimientos que condujeron al despido del embajador, Yovanovitch. Algo así como un personaje secundario en la primera destitución de Trump, Yovanovitch era fundamental en la competición geopolítica que se desarrollaba en Kiev. En términos de fondo, ella representaba la resistencia diplomática estadounidense a todo lo que Putin y sus apoderados ucranianos querían de Trump.

Yovanovitch, una diplomática de carrera, recta y con ganas, enviada a Kiev por Obama apenas unos meses antes del día de las elecciones, era hija de emigrantes cuyas familias habían huido de los soviéticos y de los nazis. Llegó a Ucrania en un momento precario. Tras la revuelta del Maidan de 2014, la voluntad popular de democracia volvía a mostrarse incontenible. Miles de millones de dólares llegaban de Occidente. Pero los esfuerzos por alimentar la democracia ucraniana estaban fracasando, ya que la nueva administración, al igual que el gobierno posterior a la Revolución Naranja, no estaba cumpliendo sus promesas de reforma. El nuevo presidente, Petro O. Poroshenko, dejó pocas dudas sobre la seriedad de su retórica antirrusa al presionar a la administración Obama, sin éxito, para obtener armas defensivas. Pero como político oligarca en el clásico molde ucraniano -había hecho su fortuna en el comercio del chocolate- también formaba parte del sistema que se le pedía que hiciera estallar.

Yovanovitch se propuso inmediatamente apuntalar los dos pilares de la agenda democrática estadounidense: liberar la economía de Ucrania de las garras de los oligarcas y su sistema judicial de los imperativos corruptores de la política. Eso la puso inexorablemente en conflicto con dos hombres poderosos.

Uno era el agente energético Firtash, la encarnación del sistema oligárquico que había resultado tan beneficioso para Putin. Había construido una riqueza extraordinaria mediante una asociación con Gazprom, el principal consorcio energético de Rusia: Gazprom vendía gas con grandes descuentos a una empresa intermediaria que poseía con Firtash, que luego lo revendía, con un beneficio considerable, a Ucrania y a toda Europa. Firtash, a su vez, utilizó parte de esos beneficios para apoyar a políticos alineados con Rusia. Había sido un importante patrocinador del Partido de las Regiones y, según los fiscales, un importante pagador de Manafort. Los hombres eran también posibles socios comerciales; una década antes, discutieron un acuerdo para comprar un hotel en Manhattan. (Firtash no respondió a las preguntas enviadas a un representante).

Para cuando Trump asumió el cargo, Ucrania había eliminado al intermediario de Firtash del acuerdo del gas. El propio Firtash estaba en Austria, luchando contra la extradición a Estados Unidos por cargos de soborno no relacionados que él niega. Pero mantenía lucrativos lazos con la industria energética de Ucrania a través de la propiedad de empresas regionales de distribución asociadas al consorcio nacional del gas, Naftogaz. Ahora, a pesar de lo que sospechaba que eran presiones de Firtash, Yovanovitch persuadió a Poroshenko para que mantuviera su promesa de promulgar nuevas normas que desbarataran "el modelo de negocio de Firtash", como dijo la embajadora en sus memorias.

Al principio, Yovanovitch tenía esperanzas en el jefe de las fuerzas del orden de Ucrania, el fiscal general, Yuriy Lutsenko. Pero casi inmediatamente se enemistó también con él. Lutsenko había sido nombrado en la primavera de 2016, después de que los aliados occidentales presionaran para que se destituyera a su predecesor, Viktor Shokin, por no perseguir los casos de corrupción. Uno de los ejemplos más atroces, citado con frecuencia por los estadounidenses, implicaba a la empresa energética Burisma. Ésta había escapado al enjuiciamiento a pesar de las acusaciones, que negaba, de que había malversado fondos públicos. Mientras los funcionarios del Departamento de Estado pedían una investigación sobre la gestión del caso por parte de la fiscalía general, Joe Biden, en calidad de vicepresidente, lanzó un contundente ultimátum: los 1.000 millones de dólares en garantías de préstamo estarían supeditados al despido del fiscal general. Biden fue un mensajero imperfecto. El año anterior había dado un lucrativo puesto en el consejo de administración a su hijo Hunter, que tenía un apellido famoso pero ninguna experiencia en la industria energética. Incluso los funcionarios del Departamento de Estado se preocuparon, previsoramente, de que su puesto en el consejo de administración diera la apariencia de un conflicto.

Sobre el papel, Lutsenko parecía el hombre adecuado para profesionalizar el sistema judicial. Aunque no tenía una formación jurídica formal, había sido uno de los líderes de la Revolución Naranja, luego fue encarcelado por Yanukóvich y emergió para unirse a las protestas del Maidán de 2014. El libro negro sería una prueba de si tendría éxito donde Shokin había fracasado, y prometió apoyar las investigaciones sobre su contenido, que se extendía más allá de Manafort a aparentes sobornos a jueces y funcionarios electorales. Sin embargo, al cabo de unos meses, los reformistas se quejaron de que la oficina de Lutsenko parecía estar dando largas a las investigaciones relacionadas con el libro mayor. Un abogado principal de la oficina se quejó públicamente de que el fiscal general le prohibía entrevistar a los testigos o emitir citaciones en cuatro casos relacionados con el trabajo de Manafort.

En la embajada, Yovanovitch chocaba con Lutsenko por su aparente falta de celo en una serie de casos de corrupción. También estaba furiosa porque él estaba trabajando para socavar, si no desautorizar, un cuerpo de fiscales e investigadores anticorrupción independientes que Occidente había empujado a Ucrania a crear. Mientras ella le sermoneaba sobre la necesidad de un sistema de justicia despolitizado, pronto dejaron de comunicarse regularmente. "Pensamos que él sería diferente", me dijo. "No lo fue".

Cuando Trump ganó la presidencia en 2016, los ucranianos y los rusos creyeron que el impulso de cambio liderado por Estados Unidos en Kiev disminuiría. Pero Trump, convencido de que Ucrania estaba detrás del "engaño" de Rusia, mostró poco interés en el país, dejando a Yovanovitch libre para mantener el rumbo.

Eso cambió drásticamente cuando Giuliani entró en escena a finales de 2018. Firtash proporcionaría un bloque de construcción vital del caso de Giuliani contra los Biden: una declaración jurada de Shokin en septiembre de 2019 en la que afirmaba que Biden había forzado su despido como parte de un esquema corrupto para proteger a Burisma, con su hijo en la junta directiva, del escrutinio. A pesar de las abundantes pruebas de que el caso contra Burisma estaba latente bajo su vigilancia, Shokin mantuvo que, de hecho, había estado llevando a cabo una investigación "de gran alcance". Firtash había conseguido la declaración jurada como parte de su propia lucha legal -en ella, Shokin sugería que el caso de soborno de Firtash estaba motivado políticamente- y aparentemente llegó a Giuliani a través de asociados mutuos. Firtash ha dicho que nunca se reunió con Giuliani y que no autorizó el uso de la declaración jurada en su operación.

Pero esa operación no habría sido posible sin Lutsenko, que la llevó adelante con un giro añadido que implicaba a Yovanovitch en el supuesto complot para ayudar a Clinton y perjudicar a Trump.

Aunque Lutsenko tenía sus propias ambiciones políticas, debía su posición actual a Poroshenko, que quería una cosa por encima de todo de Trump: más misiles antitanque. La gente dentro y fuera de Kiev ya sospechaba que eso estaba en juego cuando las investigaciones sobre el libro mayor seguían estancadas y Estados Unidos entregaba un primer lote de misiles. Como dijo un funcionario ucraniano a The Times en 2018, el gobierno de Poroshenko había puesto las investigaciones del libro mayor en un "cajón de sastre a largo plazo", porque "no debemos estropear las relaciones con la administración." Y en marzo de 2019, tras reunirse con Giuliani en su despacho de Park Avenue, Lutsenko pareció dar a Trump al menos algo de lo que quería. Le dijo a la publicación política The Hill que estaba abriendo una nueva investigación sobre el libro mayor, sobre las acusaciones de que activistas e investigadores anticorrupción lo habían divulgado para ayudar a Clinton. A continuación, indicaba que tenía pruebas de posibles irregularidades por parte de los Biden.

Sin embargo, a pesar de toda esa intriga, había una fuerza de la que ni siquiera los más cínicos de Kiev dudan: la sinceridad de los llamamientos de los manifestantes ucranianos a la democracia, independiente y sin corrupción. Y el 21 de abril, Poroshenko fue destituido en favor de Zelensky, un neófito político que se amoldó al molde reformista del personaje que había interpretado en la televisión.

De repente, Lutsenko dio marcha atrás, anunciando que no veía pruebas de que los Biden hubieran actuado mal. (No respondió a los intentos de ponerse en contacto con él para que hiciera comentarios). La trama estaba en un callejón sin salida. Mientras Trump y Giuliani se esforzaban por volver a ponerlo en marcha bajo la nueva administración de Kiev, Trump finalmente forzó la salida de Yovanovitch, haciéndola pasar por un actor central en la trama de fantasía para derrotarle en 2016. Ahora el presidente y su abogado trataban de forzar un resultado que encarnaba todo lo que el embajador caído había tratado de vencer en Ucrania: la rancia politización del sistema de justicia, articulada abiertamente en la "llamada telefónica perfecta" de Trump pidiendo a Zelensky que cambiara una investigación falsa por armas, lo que condujo a la destitución, sólo la tercera en la historia de Estados Unidos.

En marzo de 2021, los servicios de inteligencia de Estados Unidos desclasificaron un informe en el que detallaban su opinión consensuada de que Kilimnik y otros asociados a la inteligencia rusa habían utilizado a varios estadounidenses -entre ellos, sugería fuertemente, a Giuliani- para promover la idea de la corrupción de los Biden en Ucrania para influir en la campaña de 2020. El informe consideraba que los dirigentes rusos veían la posible elección de Biden como "desventajosa para los intereses rusos", especialmente en lo que se refiere a Ucrania.

Al principio de su presidencia, Zelensky se mostró dispuesto a llegar a un compromiso con Rusia sobre la autonomía en el este, la cuestión que está en el centro del plan de Mariupol. Pero después de que miles de manifestantes volvieran a entrar en Maidan a finales de 2019, rechazó las exigencias de Putin de hacer concesiones sobre la soberanía ucraniana. Zelensky ya estaba dando prioridad a los esfuerzos para ingresar en la OTAN y firmaría una legislación que limitara a los oligarcas.

Trump indultó a Manafort antes de dejar la Casa Blanca. Si hubiera seguido en el cargo, dijo el ex presidente en una declaración a principios de este año, "la profanación de Ucrania no estaría ocurriendo". Pero con la toma de posesión de Biden en enero de 2021, Putin se enfrentaba ahora a un nuevo presidente estadounidense que prometía una línea dura contra sus designios imperiales en Ucrania, y sin canales traseros evidentes a través de los cuales manipularlo a él o a su política.

Trece meses después, los tanques rusos cruzaron la frontera ucraniana.

Germán & Co 11/3/22 Germán & Co 11/3/22

Den osagda historien om "Russiagate" och vägen till krig i Ukraina (NYT)

Avsändaren var en vän och affärspartner vid namn Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik, som är rysk medborgare och född i Sovjet-Ukraina, ledde Kiev-kontoret för Manaforts internationella konsultföretag, som är känt för att föra ut banbrytande amerikansk kampanjteknik till klienter som försöker få sin vilja igenom i bräckliga demokratier runt om i världen.

Planen, som löst kallas Mariupol-planen efter den strategiskt viktiga hamnstaden, innebar att en autonom republik skulle skapas i Ukrainas östra del. Putin skulle på så sätt få effektiv kontroll över landets industriella hjärta, där Kremlbeväpnade, -finansierade och -ledda "separatister" förde ett två år gammalt skuggkrig som hade krävt nästan 10 000 dödsoffer. Den nya republikens ledare skulle bli ingen annan än Janukovytj. Kompromissen: "fred" för ett sönderslaget och undergivet Ukraina.
(NYT)

Ney York Time

By Jim Rutenberg

2 november 2022

Svensk översättning av Germán & Co

Natten till den 28 juli 2016, när Hillary Clinton tog emot demokraternas presidentnominering i Philadelphia, fick Donald J. Trumps kampanjordförande Paul Manafort ett brådskande mejl från Moskva. Avsändaren var en vän och affärspartner vid namn Konstantin Kilimnik. Kilimnik, som är rysk medborgare och född i Sovjet-Ukraina, ledde Kiev-kontoret för Manaforts internationella konsultföretag, som är känt för att föra ut banbrytande amerikansk kampanjteknik till klienter som försöker få sin vilja igenom i bräckliga demokratier runt om i världen.

Kilimnik sa inte mycket, bara att han behövde prata, personligen, så snart som möjligt. Exakt vad han ville prata om var tydligen för känsligt även för den teknik som männen så noggrant använde sig av - krypterade appar, mappen med utkast i ett gemensamt e-postkonto och, när det var nödvändigt, dedikerade "fladdermus-telefoner". Men han hade gjort en kodad hänvisning - "kaviar" - till en viktig tidigare klient, den avsatta ukrainska presidenten Viktor Janukovytj, som hade flytt till Ryssland 2014 efter att ha lett massakern på mängder av prodemokratiska demonstranter. Manafort svarade inom några minuter och planen fastställdes till fem dagar senare.

Kilimnik klarade tullen på Kennedy-flygplatsen klockan 19.43, endast 77 minuter före den planerade träffen på Grand Havana Room, en samlingsplats i Trumps värld på toppen av 666 Fifth Avenue, det kontorstorn på Manhattan som ägs av familjen till Trumps svärson Jared Kushner. Strax efter den utsatta timmen gick Kilimnik in på en perfekt uppställd scen som var avsedd för ett karikatyrdrama med smygande personer som kläcker hemliga planer med tvivelaktiga avsikter - en mörkerbelyst cigarrbar med mahognypanelade väggar och fönster från golv till tak, täckta av tjocka sammetsdraperier, vars klubbstolar i läder vanligtvis fylls av stora män med öppna kragar som dricker whisky och drar på parejos och figurados. Det vill säga män som Paul Manafort, med sin svartfärgade pompadour och förkärlek för kritstrecksrandiga kläder. Där, med skyline som skimrade i cigarettrökens dimma, delade Kilimnik med sig av en hemlig plan vars betydelse inte skulle bli klar förrän sex år senare, när Vladimir V. Putins invaderande ryska armé trängde in i Ukraina.

Planen, som löst kallas Mariupol-planen efter den strategiskt viktiga hamnstaden, innebar att en autonom republik skulle skapas i Ukrainas östra del. Putin skulle på så sätt få effektiv kontroll över landets industriella hjärta, där Kremlbeväpnade, -finansierade och -ledda "separatister" förde ett två år gammalt skuggkrig som hade krävt nästan 10 000 dödsoffer. Den nya republikens ledare skulle bli ingen annan än Janukovytj. Kompromissen: "fred" för ett sönderslaget och undergivet Ukraina.

Planen strider mot decennier av amerikansk politik för ett fritt och enat Ukraina, och en president Clinton skulle utan tvekan upprätthålla, eller kanske till och med skärpa, den inställningen. Men Trump antydde redan att han skulle bryta upp det diplomatiska status quo; om han valdes, trodde Kilimnik, skulle Trump kunna hjälpa till att förverkliga Mariupol-planen. Först måste han dock vinna, vilket i bästa fall är osannolikt. Detta förde männen till den andra delen av deras agenda den kvällen - interna kampanjmätningar som visar hur man kan ta sig igenom de olika delstaterna för att vinna. Att Manafort delade med sig av denna information - den "ögonkodex" som styrde Trumps strategi - skulle ha varit oansenlig om det inte hade varit för en viktig del av Kilimniks biografi: Han var inte bara en kollega, utan han var, som amerikanska tjänstemän senare skulle hävda, en rysk agent.

När affärerna var avslutade lämnade männen varandra för att undvika att bli upptäckta, även om de fortsatte att sms:a långt in på natten, enligt federala utredare. Under de följande veckorna intensifierade agenter i Moskva och S:t Petersburg sin hacknings- och desinformationskampanj för att skada Clinton och hjälpa till att vända valet till Trump, vilket skulle utgöra kärnan i den skandal som kallas Russiagate. Mariupol-planen skulle bli en fotnot, nästan helt bortglömd. Men det som planen erbjöd på pappret är i huvudsak det som Putin - som befinner sig på den farliga defensiven efter en rad strategiska missbedömningar och ökande förluster på slagfältet - nu försöker lägga beslag på genom falska folkomröstningar och olaglig annektering. Och Mariupol är en förkortning av hans krigs fasor, en ockuperad stad i ruiner efter månader av belägring, dess väldiga stålverk spöklika och tystade, otaliga medborgare begravda i massgravar.

Putins angrepp på Ukraina och hans angrepp på den amerikanska demokratin har hittills i stort sett behandlats som två skilda berättelser. Under de mellanliggande åren har Rysslands valinblandning i huvudsak betraktats som ett avslutat kapitel i USA:s politiska historia - ett farligt ögonblick då en utländsk ledare försökte ställa USA mot sig självt genom att utnyttja och förvärra landets politiska klyftor.

Ändå möttes dessa två berättelser den där sommarnatten på Grand Havana Room. Och lärdomen av det mötet är att Putins amerikanska äventyr kanske bäst kan förstås som en förskottsbetalning för en geopolitisk graal närmare hemmet: en ukrainsk vasallstat. Under hela valsagan döljer sig en annan historia - om Ukrainas ansträngningar att etablera en modern demokrati och, som ett resultat av detta, dess position som en het zon i det nya kalla kriget mellan Ryssland och väst, autokrati och demokrati. I en anmärkningsvärd utsträckning var den långa kampen för Ukraina en basnot till omvälvningarna och skandalerna under Trump-åren, från de första dagarna av kampanjen 2016 och sedan presidentövergången, genom Trumps första åtal och in i de sista dagarna av valet 2020. Redan nu föreslår vissa inflytelserika röster i amerikansk politik, mestadels men inte helt och hållet på högerkanten, att Ukraina ska göra eftergifter i fråga om suveränitet som liknar dem som ingår i Kilimniks plan, som landets ledare kategoriskt förkastar.

Detta andra utkast till historia är resultatet av en genomgång av de hundratals sidor dokument som tagits fram av utredare för den särskilde åklagaren Robert S. Mueller III och för den republikanskt ledda senatens särskilda underrättelsekommitté, av utskrifter från åtalsförhör och den senaste skörden av memoarer om Russiagate samt av intervjuer med nästan 50 personer i USA och Ukraina, inklusive fyra timslånga samtal med Manafort själv.

För Trump - som i dag står inför rättsliga utmaningar som rör gömman av hemliga dokument på hans semesterort Mar-a-Lago, hans ekonomi och hans roll i ansträngningarna att upphäva hans valnederlag 2020 - var Rysslandsutredningen den ursprungliga synden, den första av många politiskt motiverade "häxjakter", som sedan dess har omformats till vapen i hans expansiva arsenal av klagomål. Rysslandsutredningen och dess förgreningar bevisade aldrig någon samordning mellan Trumps kampanj och Moskva, även om de dokumenterade många kopplingar. Men om man tittar på de uppgifter som lämnats efter sig genom den blodfiltrerade linsen från Putins krig, som nu är inne på sin nionde månad, upptäcker man ett spår av underskattade signaler som visar hur djupt hans besatthet av Ukraina är - och de insatser på liv och död som USA:s inhemska problem skulle innebära för cirka 45 miljoner människor nästan 5 000 mil bort.

Bland de episoder som kommer fram är det stora mötet i Havanna-rummet och de ihärdiga, smygande ansträngningarna för att förverkliga Mariupol-planen. Planen var knappast det enda försöket att byta ut fred i Ukraina mot eftergifter till Putin; många hinder stod i vägen. Och dess ursprung är fortfarande oklart: Var den en del av Putins långsiktiga spel eller ett försök av hans allierade Janukovytj att ta tillbaka makten? Hur som helst skulle de åklagare som avslöjade planen komma att betrakta den som en potentiell betalning för den ryske presidentens valinblandning.

Granskningen ger också en tydligare bild av Putins knep när han drev sitt revanchistiska uppdrag att befästa sin makt genom att återupprätta det ryska imperiet och försvaga demokratin globalt. Han strävade efter detta mål genom att på ett listigt sätt samarbeta med oligarker och makthavare i de länder som han hade i sikte, samtidigt som han använde sig av ständigt utvecklade desinformationstekniker för att spela på rädslan och hatet hos deras folk.

Ingen person under Trump-eran rörde sig mer skickligt i den världen än Manafort, en politisk operatör som var känd för att behandla demokratin som ett verktyg lika mycket som en idé. Även om han insisterar på att han försökte stävja det ryska inflytandet i Ukraina, inte möjliggöra det, hade han uppnått stora rikedomar genom att använda sitt politiska skarpsinne för att arbeta för landets Kreml-allierade oligarker och hjälpa till att installera en regering som skulle visa sig vara foglig inför Putins krav. Sedan hjälpte han till att välja en amerikansk president vars öppna beundran av den ryske starke mannen gjorde att mer än ett halvt sekel av demokratifrämjande politik blev lidande.

I slutändan skulle Putin inte få ut det han trodde att han hade betalat för av ett Trump-ordförandeskap, och demokratin skulle böjas men ännu inte brytas i både Förenta staterna och Ukraina. Men det skulle i lika hög grad som något annat sätta den ryske ledaren i gång på sin marsch mot krig.

Långt före Trump-erans utredningar hade Manafort etablerat sig i Washington och utomlands som en stormästare i de politiska mörka konsterna. Tillsammans med Roger Stone bidrog Manafort till att utveckla den konservativa politikens slashing-stil genom att trycka på "heta knappar" för att reta upp basväljarna och tjära motståndare. De deltog i Ronald Reagans presidentkampanjer och startade sin egen firma som tog sig an internationella klienter som sökte gunst i Reagans Washington. Firman specialiserade sig på att täcka över de blodiga meriterna hos diktatorer som Mobutu Sese Seko i Zaire och Ferdinand Marcos i Filippinerna med rikliga lager av högglansig spinn och presentera dem som frihetsälskande demokrater.

År 2005 hade Manafort framträtt som en central person i Ukrainas ofta slentrianmässiga demokratiexperiment. Han introducerades i landets politik av en av Rysslands mäktigaste oligarker, aluminiummagnaten Oleg Deripaska. Oligarker överlever inte i Putins Ryssland utan att ständigt visa sig nyttiga för moderlandet. Och när Putin hade ett brådskande problem i Ukraina gick Deripaska, som hade olika innehav där, in för att hjälpa till: Han tog in Manaforts firma, som han tidigare hade anlitat för att hjälpa honom att övervinna en blockering av hans visum till USA, på grund av anklagelser om att han hade fått sin ställning genom kopplingar till organiserad brottslighet (vilket han förnekar).

Det som fick Putin att bli upprörd var en provästlig och ungdomsledd demokratirörelse som hade tagit eld precis när Ukrainas andra post-sovjetiska ledare, den diktatoriske och Kreml-allierade Leonid Kutjma, förberedde sig på att avgå. För att efterträda honom hade reformisterna ställt upp bakom en politiker vid namn Viktor Jusjtjenko. Viktor Jusjtjenko, som var proamerikansk och gift med en före detta tjänsteman från utrikesdepartementet, lovade att ansluta sig till Nato och Europeiska unionen. För Kreml, som en inflytelserik rysk försvarsanalytiker uttryckte det vid den tiden, skulle en seger för Jusjtjenko innebära "en katastrofal förlust av ryskt inflytande i hela f.d. Sovjetunionen, vilket i slutändan skulle leda till Rysslands geopolitiska isolering".

Putin hade satsat allt på Kutjmas handplockade efterträdare, Janukovytj, som hade tagit makten i Ukrainas östra Donetsk-region och hade stöd av landets ledande oligarker. Men i samarbete med några av Putins främsta politiska agenter hade Janukovytj-kampanjen gått fruktansvärt snett. För det första hade ett mordförsök lämnat Jusjtjenko med permanenta ärr men i högsta grad vid liv. (En gärningsman identifierades aldrig; Jusjtjenko misstänkte Kreml.) Sedan tog Janukovytj-teamet till en valhärva värdig Trumps fantasi om valfusk 2020, med rapporter om fyllning av valsedlar, försvinnande bläck och inbäddade väljare. Medan tusentals protesterade på Maidan-torget i Kiev förklarade Ukrainas högsta domstol att Janukovytjs "seger" var behäftad med "systematiska och massiva" valöverträdelser. Jusjtjenko vann sedan i en ny omröstning, en triumf för demokratin som kallas den orangefärgade revolutionen.

Nu frågade Deripaska Manafort om han kunde återupprätta Janukovytjs politiska organisation, Regionernas parti, till makten. Manaforts recept finns i ett memo från juni 2005 till Deripaska som citerades i senatens underrättelseutskotts rapport. Janukovytj och hans parti, hävdade han, borde arbeta för att vinna val på ett legitimt sätt genom att klä sig som demokrater i västerländsk tappning - genom att använda västvärldens verktyg "på ett sätt som västvärlden tror är i samförstånd med dem", även om de inte var det. Genom att omfamna västvärlden skulle Janukovytj och hans parti "begränsa sina möjligheter att göda en atmosfär som ger hopp åt potentiella förespråkare av ett annat sätt". I talepunkter som spelade Putin tillfogade Manafort: "Vi är nu övertygade om att den här modellen kan vara till stor nytta för Putin-regeringen om den används på rätt nivåer med lämpligt engagemang för att lyckas".

Manafort insisterade under våra intervjuer på att Putin skulle komma att ogilla honom och hans strategi, och att memot var tänkt som en slags handledning för Deripaska. "Jag lärde honom i princip demokrati", sade han. Deripaskasas kontor svarade inte på en intervjuförfrågan. Men i en misslyckad förtalstalan mot Associated Press om en artikel från 2017 som avslöjade deras diskussioner om Ukraina, sade Deripaska att han anlitade Manafort enbart för sina egna affärsintressen och att han "aldrig hade något arrangemang, vare sig avtalsmässigt eller på annat sätt, med herr Manafort för att främja den ryska regeringens intressen".

Krigets status

Att vända på steken: Med kraftfulla västerländska vapen och dödliga hemmagjorda drönare har Ukraina nu ett artillerifördel i Kherson-regionen. Arbetet av spaningsgrupper som tränger in i fiendens linjer har också visat sig vara avgörande för att bryta Rysslands grepp om territoriet. sea Drone Attack: Den uppenbara användningen av fjärrstyrda båtar för att attackera den ryska flottan utanför hamnstaden Sevastopol på Krim tyder på en utvidgning av Ukrainas förmåga på slagfältet efter månader av militärt stöd från västländer.En koalition under ansträngning: President Biden står inför nya utmaningar när det gäller att hålla ihop den multinationella koalition som stöder Ukraina och som består av två partier. Alliansen har visat tecken på att vara splittrad när det amerikanska mellanårsvalet närmar sig och en kall europeisk vinter.

Med finansiering från Deripaskas oligarker som är allierade med Deripaska i Ukraina började Manafort ändå sätta planen i verket. Han tog in internationella valkonsulter och amerikanska strateger från båda sidor av partiets sida. För lokal kunskap tog Manafort in Kilimnik, som redan då var förföljd av misstankar om att han var en rysk mullvad. Kilimnik, som är 1,75 meter lång och har en avväpnande pojkaktig framtoning, hade senast arbetat på International Republican Institute, en organisation som arbetar med demokratifrämjande åtgärder och som är knuten till senator John McCain i Arizona, som var kund till Manaforts långvariga partner Rick Davis. Kilimnik hade studerat vid en sovjetisk militär språkakademi som var känd för att forma framtida underrättelseofficerare och hade tjänstgjort som översättare för den ryska armén. Hans kollegor vid I.R.I. började misstänka att han förmedlade hemligheter till den ryska underrättelsetjänsten, och han fick sparken när institutet fick veta att han arbetade för Janukovytjs stödjare.

Under Manaforts ledning fick Janukovytj ett nytt utseende och bytte ut sina gråa, blockiga kläder för skräddarsydda kostymer i Manafort-stil och tämjde sin sovjetiska bouffant med en snävare klippning. Från ett nytt kontor strax utanför Maidan-torget utarbetade Manafort sedan en plattform för Regionernas parti där han lovade att göra Ukraina till en "bro" mellan Ryssland och väst - genom att ingå ett ekonomiskt partnerskap med Europeiska unionen (populärt i väst) men förkasta ett Nato-medlemskap (populärt bland de rysktalande i Ukrainas östra del). Skeptiska amerikanska diplomater gav Manaforts projekt titeln "Extreme Makeover".

Trots allt tal om att bygga en bro till väst började Manafort snart att bedriva sin kampbeprövade och opinionsbildande splittringspolitik - han utnyttjade klyftor i fråga om kultur, demokrati och själva begreppet nation för att uppvakta regionpartiets bas, de rysktalande väljarna i öster och söder. I talutkast och talepunkter, som grävdes fram i Manaforts brottmål, framställdes den orange revolutionen som en "kupp" och den "orange illusionen". De angrep Jusjtjenko-regeringens hårdare linje gentemot Moskva och inriktade sig på en sjudande fråga i ukrainsk politik - en regional splittring om huruvida ryska ska bli det andra officiella språket.

"I amerikansk politik", säger Tetiana Shevchuk, jurist vid Anti-Corruption Action Center, en reformgrupp baserad i Kiev, "kallas det för 'kulturkrig', när de väljer en fråga som inte är högprioriterad för samhället just nu men som lätt kan göras till något. Han drev något som t.ex. idén att det finns två typer av ukrainare - det finns ukrainskspråkiga ukrainare och ryskspråkiga ukrainare".

Under våra intervjuer vidhöll Manafort att reformatorerna hade tvingat fram frågan genom att driva fram ukrainskans företräde i ett land där många främst talade ryska. Om något, hävdade han, gav hans strategi Janukovytj den trovärdighet hos de "etniska ryska" väljarna som behövdes för att ena landet samtidigt som det vände sig västerut. (Han säger att han "starkt" står på Ukrainas sida i kriget.) Ändå sammanföll Manaforts angreppslinje med en begynnande rysk underrättelseverksamhet som ägnade sig åt "manipulation av frågor som det ryska språkets status" för att underblåsa ett separatistiskt uppror på Krimhalvön och "förhindra Ukrainas förflyttning västerut till institutioner som Nato och EU", enligt ett läckt telegram från USA:s ambassad från den tiden. Nästan två decennier senare skulle Putin använda liknande budskap om språk och nationell identitet som rättfärdigande för sitt krig och sina olagliga annekteringar i öster.

Manaforts strategi var en lysande framgång. Regionernas parti vann parlamentsvalet 2006, och fyra år senare återtog Janukovytj presidentposten i ett val som klarade internationella krav. De orangefärgade revolutionärerna, eller åtminstone deras valda ledning, hade gjort mycket av arbetet själva - de hade alienerat väljarna genom förlamande stridigheter och misslyckande med att genomföra reformer. Men Manafort vann äran och blev lika känd i ukrainska politiska kretsar som Karl Rove eller James Carville i USA. Han levde oligarkens liv och samlade på jackor av pyton- och strutsskinn, Alan Couture-kostymer och fastigheter i SoHo, Hamptons, Trump Tower och Brooklyn. Han närmade sig också Janukovytj, spelade tennis på gräsbanor - och lät alltid kunden vinna - och badade i bubbelpoolen på den nya presidentens 350 hektar stora residens Mezhyhirya, med dess djurpark, golfbana och groteska herrgård, vars skrämmande blandning av arkitektoniska influenser lokalt kallades "Donetsk rokoko".

Det dröjde inte länge innan Janukovytj började backa från sina löften om demokrati. Han fängslade sin motståndare, den tidigare orangefärgade ledaren Julia Tymosjenko, minskade pressfriheten genom att kriminalisera ärekränkning och inleda falska utredningar av oppositionella medier, ledde plundringen av offentliga medel, manipulerade parlamentsvalet 2012 och ändrade en plan för att avsluta Rysslands hyresavtal med Krimhamnen Sevastopol, där flottan sågs som en förföljelsehäst för Putins maktövertagande.

Snart hoppade flera av Manaforts demokratikonsulter av i besvikelse. För sin del utökade Manafort sin roll med Janukovytj och blev något av en skuggad utrikespolitisk rådgivare och sändebud till väst. Han arbetade också, vilket åklagare senare anklagade honom för, som en oregistrerad utländsk agent och drev hemliga lobbykampanjer i Washington och Bryssel för att avvärja sanktioner på grund av Tymosjenkos fängslande, samtidigt som han insisterade på att Janukovytj fortfarande höll på att genomföra sitt ekonomiska avtal med Europa.

Men denna bräckliga bro till väst kunde inte hålla. Under påtryckningar från Putin ändrade Janukovytj plötsligt kurs i slutet av 2013, avbröt samtalen med Europa och fördjupade sitt ekonomiska engagemang för Ryssland. Tiotusentals demonstranter strömmade återigen in på Maidantorget. Veckor av dödläge, som avbröts av våld, ledde till en dödlig upplösning under tre dagar i februari 2014, då regeringens tillslag ledde till att dussintals människor dog, bara några meter från Manaforts kontor.

I efterdyningarna flydde Janukovytj till Ryssland med sin politiska koalition i spillror. Inom några veckor, då Putin hävdade att Janukovytj inte hade avsatts genom en inhemsk demokratisk våg utan genom en väststödd kupp, tog Putin sig an Krim och öst. Än i dag hävdar Manafort att Maidan i huvudsak var en kupp mot en vederbörligen vald president. Det var också en personlig ekonomisk katastrof - han hade förlorat sin kassako. Ändå lyckades han hitta arbete och hjälpte tidigare medlemmar av Regionernas parti att starta ett nytt parti som heter Opposition Bloc och var rådgivare i borgmästarvalen.

Det sista valet kom i slutet av 2015, i Mariupol. Hamnstaden i Ukrainas sydöstra del var en del av en potentiell landbro för vapen mellan det ockuperade Krim och det krigshärjade Donbas och skulle bli ett kommersiellt nav för en Potemkinrepublik som var lydig mot Moskva. Det var också en fideikommiss för Ukrainas rikaste medborgare, metall och gruvmagnaten Rinat Akhmetov, för vilken både Ryssland och Europa var viktiga marknader. Akhmetov, som tidigt var en politisk gudfader till Janukovytj, var också en av de ursprungliga finansiärerna av Manaforts arbete för Regionernas parti.

Med en koncentration av industriella innehav i Donbas höll Akhmetov ett fast grepp om regionens politik, styrning och medier. Till och med när Putins ombud avancerade mot Mariupol och höll en skenbar folkomröstning om självständighet 2014 intog Akhmetov en neutral hållning som gav "separatisterna" en öppning för att hävda att de hade hans stöd. "Rinat", stod det på graffiti på självständighetstorget i Kiev, "är du med Ukraina eller Kreml?". Akhmetov gick till slut hårt ut mot det "separatistiska" våldet och skickade ut arbetare för att patrullera gatorna och hjälpa till att slå tillbaka Rysslands ombudsmän. Men även då fortsatte hans blandade budskap att ge näring åt misstankarna om att han säkrade sina insatser. Efter att "separatister" besköt ett civilt område i början av 2015 och dödade 30 personer - attacken, som senare visade sig vara styrd av ryska militärer - utmärkte sig hans största nyhetsbyrå, Segodnya, med artiklar som undvek att lägga skulden på någon. "Intrycket var: 'Det är inte en bombning som orsakats av människor utan någon slags jordbävning, det bara hände'", berättade Eugenia Kuznetsova, en ukrainsk medieanalytiker som studerat bevakningen av attacken.

Jock Mendoza-Wilson, en talesman för Akhmetov, sade att oligarken aldrig varit neutral och alltid har stött ett enat Ukraina. (Akhmetov stämmer nu Ryssland för att ha förstört hans största stålverk i Mariupol, platsen för de ukrainska soldaternas desperata 80-dagars hållning i år). Men för att hålla ihop landet, sade han, trodde Akhmetov vid den tiden att "det inte skulle vara konstruktivt att gå ut med vapen i handgemäng" mot Ryssland.

När valet till borgmästare och stadsfullmäktige 2015 närmade sig trädde flera upproriska kandidater fram och lovade att vända Mariupol mer beslutsamt mot Ryssland och dess ombud. Akhmetovs utvalda borgmästarkandidat, en tidigare chef i hans stålföretag, Vadym Boychenko, var en tydlig förespråkare för det neutrala status quo.

Manaforts hand i kampanjen, som avslöjades i ett e-postmeddelande som senatens utredare grävde fram, var till stor del dold; i intervjuer beskrev han sin roll som liten. En av de reformistiska kandidaterna, Oleksandr Jarosjenko, var förvånad över att få veta att Manafort hade varit inblandad, även om han i efterhand såg antydningar av hans närvaro. "Amerikanerna kom med små räkningar", berättade han för mig under en videointervju i maj som ibland avbröts av hans ansträngningar att samordna evakueringar från den belägrade staden. "De hade teknik: hur många människor vi måste ta med oss från varje gata, vilken procent." Han såg det som så mycket fönsterputs, med tanke på att Akhmetovs kontroll över staden sträckte sig till kontraktet om att trycka valsedlarna.

Efter att Boychenko hade vunnit organiserade Jarosjenko en kampanj i stadsfullmäktige för att tvinga honom att förnya en proklamation där Ryssland förklarades vara ett "angriparland". Borgmästaren lade åtgärden på is.

Manaforts övergång till Trumps kampanj, i mars 2016, var en välsignelse för kandidaten, eftersom han fick en av republikanernas smartaste interna strateger just när senator Ted Cruz började skära ner på hans delegatförsprång, vilket gav upphov till diskussioner om ett omtvistat konvent.

Det var också en välsignelse för Manafort, som var fattig i kontanter om än rik på lyxvaror. Han hade överfört en stor del av sina inkomster från Ukraina - en sammanlagd summa på cirka 60 miljoner dollar, enligt utredarna - till sina köp av fastigheter, bilar och kostymer från skalbolag på Cypern, vilket var en del av vad åklagarna sa var ett system för penningtvätt. En räkning på 2,4 miljoner dollar till Akhmetov och en annan klient förblev obetald. Finansiella hot hotade. Han stämdes av Deripaska, som hävdade att Manafort och hans ställföreträdare, Rick Gates, hade förlorat nästan 20 miljoner dollar i ett gemensamt affärsprojekt som gått snett.

Manafort gjorde stora ansträngningar för att få jobbet i Trumps kampanj, enligt senatens underrättelserapport. Han lobbade Roger Stone och insamlaren Tom Barrack och fick till stånd affären, berättade Barrack för åklagarna, genom att säga "de magiska orden" - att han skulle arbeta utan lön. När allt kommer omkring, resonerade Manafort, kunde jobbet vara ett sätt att få tillbaka sin lön från Akhmetov och att lappa ihop saker och ting med Deripaska, som utan tvekan skulle se ett värde i Manaforts samröre med en potentiell president. "Hur ska vi använda för att bli hel", skrev Manafort till Kilimnik. Manafort berättade att han trodde att han skulle ha större inflytande hos Trump som en stödjande frivillig än som medlem av hans stab.

Manaforts nya jobb var också lovande för Putin. Den inre kretsen av den ledande republikanska kandidaten till det amerikanska presidentämbetet omfattade nu en rådgivare som var hjärnan bakom Ukrainas mest framgångsrika ryssvänliga parti och som stod nära en man, Kilimnik, som amerikanska tjänstemän har identifierat som en rysk agent.

Uppdateringar: Ryssland-Ukraina-kriget

Uppdaterad 2 november 2022, 08:34 ET, Ryska generaler har haft diskussioner om att använda kärnvapen i Ukraina, säger amerikanska tjänstemän.Ryssland återinträder i spannmålsavtalet efter att ha sagt att man fått säkerhetsgarantier.Kiev säger att man förbereder 425 skyddsrum i händelse av en rysk kärnvapenattack.

Dagen efter att Trump-kampanjen tillkännagav att han utsetts till chefstrateg för konventet arbetade Manafort tillsammans med Gates och Kilimnik för att skicka kopior av tillkännagivandet till sina viktigaste beskyddare i Ukraina, tillsammans med personliga brev där han lovade att hålla dem informerade under hela kampanjen. Bland mottagarna fanns Deripaska, Akhmetov och en annan förmögen ukrainare, en före detta stabschef för Janukovytj vid namn Sergiy Lyovochkin. Lyovochkin, som var en kanal för oligarkernas pengar till Manafort under regionpartiets år, hade också en nära arbetsrelation med Kilimnik, enligt senatens utredare.

När Manafort steg till att bli Trumps kampanjordförande - och när ryska agenter hackade servrar för det demokratiska partiet - intog kandidaten ståndpunkter om regionen som var fördelaktiga för Putins ambitioner för Ukraina. Inför det republikanska nationalkonventet i Cleveland i juli chockade Trump det amerikanska utrikespolitiska etablissemanget genom att uttrycka endast ett ljummet stöd för Nato. Han sa också till sina medarbetare att han inte ansåg att det var värt att riskera "tredje världskriget" för att försvara Ukraina mot Ryssland, enligt senatens underrättelserapport som offentliggjordes sommaren 2020.

Detta skulle följas av konventets enda plattformsstrid. Efter att en delegat från Texas lagt till ett löfte om "dödliga försvarsvapen" för Ukraina, gick Trumps nationella säkerhetsrådgivare J.D. Gordon in och blockerade det. Delegaten från Texas skulle berätta för senatens underrättelseutskott att Gordon hade sagt till henne att han agerade i samråd med "New York", närmare bestämt med Trump. Gordon förnekade detta och sade att han agerade på eget initiativ eftersom löftet om "dödligt bistånd" verkade motsäga Trumps ståndpunkt om Ukraina. Två andra mycket engagerade aktörer fanns på plats vid konventet - Ukrainas och Rysslands ambassadörer i USA; den ryske talade med Gordon dagar efter det att löftet mjukades upp. I slutändan drog utredarna inte slutsatsen att Ryssland var inblandat i plattformsstriderna. De fann inte heller några bevis som motsade Manaforts insisterande på att han helt och hållet hade avlägsnat sig från processen, även om en kampanjtjänsteman senare berättade för utredarna att Manafort var tvungen att "blidka" den "upprörda" ukrainska ambassadören.

Ukrainarna skulle få anledning att vara upprörda och ryssarna nöjda igen några dagar senare, den 27 juli, när Trump vid en presskonferens sade att han skulle överväga att erkänna Krim som ryskt territorium, vilket i praktiken skulle innebära att Obama-administrationens sanktioner upphörde och att förbindelserna, som varit ansträngda sedan den olagliga annekteringen, normaliserades. Han uppmanade också, som bekant, Ryssland att hacka Hillary Clintons e-post.

Följande dag flög Kilimnik till Moskva, visar resehandlingar som Muellers kontor fått tillgång till. I sitt mejl till Manafort samma kväll skrev han att han hade träffat "den kille som gav dig din största svarta kaviarburk för flera år sedan" - killen var Janukovytj, som en gång gav Manafort fin kaviar till ett värde av 30 000 dollar. Kilimnik behövde träffas personligen. Han hade "en lång kaviarhistoria att berätta".

På Grand Havana Room överlämnade Kilimnik Janukovytjs brådskande meddelande: En "fredsplan" för Ukraina höll på att utarbetas och han hoppades att Manafort skulle hjälpa till att genomföra den.

Enligt Kilimniks beskrivning i meddelanden och memos under de kommande månaderna skulle den tänkta autonoma republiken i öster nominellt sett förbli en del av Ukraina, och med Janukovytj som ledare skulle den sedan förhandla fram en överenskommelse. Men det som blev känt som Mariupolplanen var, som Manafort senare erkände för åklagare, en "bakdörr" till rysk kontroll över östra Ukraina - anmärkningsvärt likt det som Putin nu har förklarat vara genomfört genom sina annekteringar med vapenmakt.

Planen byggde på Putins maximalistiska tolkning av avtal som undertecknades i Vitrysslands huvudstad Minsk i slutet av 2014 och början av 2015 och som knöt ett eldupphör i öster till en ny ukrainsk författningsbestämmelse som gav "särskild status" åt de två största territorierna där. Ryssland tolkade denna luddiga term som att territorierna fick autonomi - under dess ombud - med vetorätt över Ukrainas utrikespolitik. Ukraina såg det som en mer begränsad utvidgning av det lokala styret. Även då såg en majoritet av ukrainarna bestämmelsen som en kapitulation, enligt opinionsundersökningar, och den hade svårt att få acceptans i parlamentet.

För USA, som inte var part i Minsksamtalen, gick varje plan som gav öst ett överdrivet stort självstyre och inflytande stick i stäv med ett långvarigt stöd för vad William Taylor, en tidigare amerikansk ambassadör i Ukraina, beskrev som "ett oberoende, suveränt Ukraina inom sina internationellt erkända gränser". "Vi har sagt det om och om och om igen", berättade han för mig. Nu föreslog dock Trumps retorik om Ryssland en brytning med den politiken.

I Rysslandsutredningen skulle mötet på Grand Havana Room bli mer känt för den andra sak som genomfördes den kvällen: diskussionen om opinionsundersökningar som spårade hur Trump skulle kunna uppnå den maktposition som krävs för att göra detta betydelsefulla diplomatiska brott. Manafort och Gates hade lämnat över dessa uppgifter till Kilimnik sedan i våras. De hade tagits fram av Manaforts favoritundersökningsledare Tony Fabrizio och hörde till kampanjens mer välbevarade tillgångar, enligt senatens underrättelserapport. Manafort och Gates har insisterat på att uppgifterna endast var av det mest grundläggande slaget, och att en del av dem var allmänt tillgängliga. Men de visade också exakt vad kampanjen tittade på när den utformade sin strategi och spred sitt budskap på nya sätt i sociala medier. Och som Manafort berättade för Kilimnik på klubben, enligt vittnesmål från Gates och ett annat vittne som fått information om mötet, visade opinionsundersökningarna något som Clintonundersökningarna och de vanliga prognosmakarna inte hade - en väg till Vita huset genom traditionellt blå stater som Michigan, Minnesota, Pennsylvania och Wisconsin. Naturligtvis, förklarade Manafort, skulle detta kräva ett obevekligt angrepp på Clintons offentliga image.

I slutet av sommaren intensifierades de elaka anti-Clinton-operationerna på sociala medier, inte bara av Trump-kampanjen och dess amerikanska allierade utan också av ryska troll som utgav sig för att vara amerikaner och som spred en rad konspirationsteorier om Clintons hälsa och påstådda brottslighet. Verksamheten omfattade de stater som Manafort hade identifierat som viktiga, konstaterade utredarna.

Opinionsundersökningarna skulle komma att bli ett viktigt fokus för Mueller-teamet och senatens utredare. Ingen av dem kunde direkt koppla den ryska verksamheten till uppgifterna; de rapporterade endast att Gates trodde att Kilimnik delade dem med Deripaska och hans ukrainska motsvarigheter - ett uppenbart uppfyllande av Manaforts löfte att hålla sina beskyddare informerade. Men förra året drogs slutsatsen i en kommuniké från finansdepartementet att Kilimnik hade lämnat uppgifterna direkt till den ryska militära underrättelsetjänsten och kallade honom för en "känd rysk agent".

Dokumentet innehöll inga underliggande bevis, och Manafort och Gates har använt detta för att ifrågasätta bedömningen och allt som följer av den. Som Gates sa till mig: "Om Kilimnik är en Ryska federationen-agent, visa oss bevisen, så är jag den förste att säga att det stämmer". Kilimnik avböjde att tala med mig, men i ett sms avfärdade han sitt arbete med Mariupolplanen som "informella diskussioner" om "ett av 10 000 olika alternativ till fredslösning". (Det var "inte rätt tid att diskutera dessa frågor", sade han till mig, med tanke på "ukrainarnas kamp för sitt liv och sin frihet".) Förra året berättade Kilimnik för en intervjuare från RealClearInvestigations att bedömningen var "meningslös och falsk", och noterade att han var en regelbunden informationskälla för tjänstemän vid den amerikanska ambassaden i Kiev, vilket dokument och tidigare tjänstemän bekräftade.

Att bygga upp förtroende inom en rivaliserande nations ambassad är naturligtvis vad spioner ska göra. En mycket insatt västerlänning, en fixare som regelbundet umgicks med Kilimnik i Kiev, berättade för mig att även om han hyste tvivel om underrättelsebedömningen ansåg han att frågan var akademisk: Som rysk medborgare med familj i Ryssland och ett förflutet inom militären skulle Kilimnik ha varit pressad att följa Putins önskemål, vilket han ofta verkade göra. I de e-postmeddelanden som Mueller har fått tillgång till framgår det att Kilimnik hänvisar till sina kontakter med aktörer på hög nivå i Moskva, däribland några med tydliga underrättelseanknytningar. Bland dem fanns en av Deripaskas toppassistenter, Viktor Boyarkin, som USA:s finansdepartement har beskrivit som en tidigare högt uppsatt tjänsteman vid G.R.U., som tog ledningen i Putins inblandning i operationen.

Kilimniks bästa koppling till Trumps kampanj skulle inte finnas med när den operationen kom till full blomstring. Mindre än tre veckor efter mötet i det stora Havannarummet var Manafort utan jobb. I mitten av augusti hade New York Times rapporterat att en ny ukrainsk antikorruptionsbyrå hade fått tag på en "svart huvudbok" från Regionernas parti, där öronmärkta, okontrollerade utbetalningar till ukrainska tjänstemän - och till Manafort - förtecknades. Några dagar senare, vid en presskonferens i Kiev, framhöll en före detta journalist som blivit reformistisk parlamentsledamot, Serhiy Leshchenko, 22 handskrivna bokföringsposter med en förteckning över 12,7 miljoner dollar i betalningar avsedda för Manafort. Clintons kampanj kallade bokföringen för bevis på kopplingar mellan Trump-kampanjen och Ryssland och Manafort avgick.

Upptäckten av huvudboken tycktes ha lyfts direkt från handlingen i en succéserie, "Servant of the People". Den ukrainska versionen av "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" hade den komiska skådespelaren Volodymyr Zelensky i huvudrollen som en ödmjuk och idealistisk historielärare som oväntat kastas in i presidentämbetet och ständigt kämpar mot en Manafort-liknande agent för oligarkerna som försöker paketera och förvalta honom. I finalen av säsongen 2015 hittar han en svart huvudbok med hemliga betalningar som hans föregångare förde och lovar att rensa det "off-the-book-företag som kallas 'Ukraina'" från dess endemiska korruption.

När Leshchenko talade med journalister använde han liknande retorik när han diskuterade varför han hjälpte till att offentliggöra den verkliga huvudboken. Han hade också en annan anledning. "Ju mer Trump och Trumps kretsar avslöjas", sade han till tidningen Tablet några månader senare, "desto svårare blir det för Trump att ingå ett separat avtal med Putin och därmed sälja ut både Ukraina och hela Europa".

Från början av sin övergång till presidentposten verkade Trump faktiskt ge Ryssland alla tecken på att dess politiska satsning hade lönat sig. Han nominerade en pensionerad generallöjtnant, Michael J. Flynn, till nationell säkerhetsrådgivare, som hade accepterat 33 750 dollar för att tala vid en fest i Moskva 2015 för Rysslands statligt finansierade propagandasändare RT. Redan innan han tillträdde talade Flynn med Putins ambassadör i Washington, i uppenbar överträdelse av federal lag, om att häva sanktionerna för valinblandning. (Flynn erkände sig två gånger skyldig till anklagelser om att ha ljugit för FBI om dessa diskussioner, men benådades av Trump). Den nya utrikesministern skulle bli Rex W. Tillerson, som som i egenskap av Exxon Mobils verkställande direktör hade kritiserat Obama-administrationens beslut att sanktionera Ryssland för Krim och nedskjutningen av ett Malaysia Airlines-flyg.

Och under dagarna kring invigningen kom lovande signaler från andra sidan Potomac i Virginia, där Manafort träffade Kilimnik och Lyovochkin på hotellet Westin Alexandria Old Town. (De två männen fick invigningsbiljetter genom en medarbetare till Manafort som senare skulle erkänna sig skyldig till att ha underlåtit att registrera sig som utländsk agent och olagligt köpt biljetterna - ett brott mot reglerna mot utländska politiska donationer). Eftersom de flesta av deras kommunikationer skedde via krypterade meddelandeappar hade utredarna liten insyn i dagordningen, men Manafort erkände en punkt för åklagarna: "fredsplanen" för Ukraina.

Utan någon officiell ställning fortsatte Manafort att ge råd till Trump-lägret, enligt senatens rapport. Samtidigt pendlade Kilimnik mellan Moskva och Kiev och utarbetade detaljerna i fredsplanen. Kilimnik kommunicerade via ett utkast till e-postmeddelande på ett gemensamt konto före mötet i Virginia och berättade för Manafort att han och Janukovytj - med kodnamnet BG för Big Guy - hade träffats i Ryssland och diskuterat planen. "Ryssarna på högsta nivå är i princip inte emot den här planen", skrev Kilimnik, "och kommer att arbeta med BG för att starta processen". Ett offentligt stöd från Trump, tillade han, skulle övervinna motståndet i Kiev. "Allt som krävs för att starta processen är en mycket liten 'blinkning' (eller liten knuff) från DT som säger 'han vill ha fred i Ukraina och Donbass tillbaka i Ukraina' och ett beslut att vara en 'särskild representant' och hantera denna process", skrev Kilimnik. Trumps representant skulle tydligen vara Manafort, som Janukovytj kunde garantera skulle ha tillträde till "den allra högsta nivån" i Kreml.

Manafort var knappast den enda personen i Trumps omgivning som hade kontakt med personer som kände personer i Moskva. Under administrationens första månader skedde en rad avslöjanden som var helt galopperande. Flynn, den nationella säkerhetsrådgivaren, fick sparken på grund av sina samtal med den ryske ambassadören i bakre ledet. Det avslöjades att en utrikespolitisk rådgivare till kampanjen vid namn George Papadopoulos på en bar i London hade berättat för en australisk diplomat att Ryssland hade smuts på Clinton, veckor innan Rysslands hackning av Clintons e-postmeddelanden blev offentligt känd. Hans lösa prat utlöste den första undersökningen om inblandning, som utvecklades till Mueller-utredningen. Det var nyheten om att Donald Trump Jr, Jared Kushner och Manafort träffade en välkänd rysk advokat i Trump Tower i juni 2016, som, fick de veta, ville föra vidare komprometterande information om Clinton som "en del av Rysslands och dess regerings stöd till Mr Trump". Av allt att döma misslyckades advokaten, som var mer intresserad av att häva sanktionerna, med att leverera. Och så var det Mueller-teamets avslöjande i domstolshandlingar hösten 2017 att Kilimnik "bedömdes ha kopplingar till en rysk underrättelsetjänst".

Vid det laget hade dock Manafort dykt upp som ett primärt mål för utredningen, hans samverkan med Kilimnik, Deripaska och proryska ukrainare betraktades som en potentiell länk mellan Kreml och Trump-kampanjen. Men även efter hans åtal i slutet av oktober 2017, rapporterade åklagarna, fortsatte han och Kilimnik att söka Trumpadministrationens "blinkning" för Ukrainas "fredsplan". I detta syfte arbetade han och Kilimnik så sent som i mars 2018 med en undersökning av ukrainare. I ett utkast till undersökningen ställdes frågan om Donbas skulle stanna under Kiev i ett av två alternativa arrangemang, bryta sig loss som en autonom region eller ansluta sig helt och hållet till Ryssland. I undersökningen, som utformades med hjälp av Fabrizio, ställdes också frågan om Janukovytj kunde accepteras som ledare i öst.

Men samtidigt som Manafort och Kilimnik arbetade med att förfina opinionsundersökningen väckte åklagare nya brottsanklagelser mot Manafort. Han stod nu inför två rättegångar, en i Virginia och en i Washington. Sedan kom nyheten om ett nytt stjärnvittne - Manaforts ställföreträdare, Gates, som i detalj redogjorde för hur Manafort använde skalbolag för att dölja miljontals dollar i inkomster från skatteindrivarna.

I augusti 2018 fann en jury i Virginia Manafort skyldig till åtta av 18 åtalspunkter, bland annat skatte- och bankbedrägeri. Med tanke på att hans andra rättegång, för penningtvätt, hotade i Washington, slöt Manafort en överenskommelse om att erkänna sig skyldig och samarbeta med regeringen i hopp om att få mildare straffbestämmelser vid straffmätningen. (Manafort säger nu att han inte trodde på sitt svurna erkännande av skuld och att han gjorde det endast för att han inte trodde att han skulle ställas inför en rättvis jury och för att han ville skydda familjens ekonomiska tillgångar). Men i sista minuten avbröt den ledande åklagaren, Andrew Weissmann, uppgörelsen. Manafort, fick han veta, hade konsekvent ljugit "om en fråga i synnerhet: hans samverkan med Kilimnik, den ryske underrättelseofficeren", som senatens rapport uttryckte det. Bland dessa interaktioner: manövreringen av Mariupol-planen.

Weissmann upptäckte planen först efter rättegången i Virginia, när FBI fick tillgång till ett parti av Kilimniks e-postmeddelanden. Konfronterad med den nya informationen berättade Manafort för åklagarna att han hade avfärdat planen med en gång när den först kom upp, på Grand Havana Room i augusti 2016. Han höll fast vid detta även efter att Weissmann avslöjade att han hade tillgång till korrespondensen från december 2016 där man diskuterade "BG" och den önskade "blinkningen" av stöd från Trump - och återigen när han fick ta del av e-postmeddelandena om omröstningen i mars 2018.

I våra intervjuer och i sin bok "Political Prisoner", som publicerades i augusti i år, kallar Manafort idén om att han stödde planen för "galen" och vidhåller att omröstningen var utformad för att hjälpa en ukrainsk presidentkandidat som han inte vill nämna. Även om han inte förnekar att Kilimnik drev igenom planen - på order av Janukovytj, inte Putin, säger han - anklagar han Weissmann för att ha skapat en "påhittad berättelse" av osammanhängande fakta.

För Weissmann innebar avslöjandena en aha-upplevelse. Partitionsplanen, insåg han, var det "quo" som Putin ville ha för "kvittot" att hjälpa Trumps kampanj. "Den 2 augusti, om inte tidigare", skrev han i sina memoarer för 2020, "hade Ryssland tydligt avslöjat för Manafort - och i förlängningen för Trumps kampanj - vad de ville ha ut av USA: 'en blinkning', en godkännande nick från en president Donald Trump, när landet tog över Ukrainas rikaste region."

Putin har försökt rättfärdiga sitt krig i Ukraina med en mängd propaganda - att Ukraina, med en judisk president, styrs av nazister; att ryska grymheter, som i stor utsträckning fångats i fotografier, videor och vittnesmål, är ukrainska attacker under falsk flagg som iscensatts för att smutskasta Ryssland; att Ukraina förbereder sig för att detonera en "smutsig bomb", samtidigt som Moskva underblåser den globala rädslan för en rysk kärnvapenattack. Putins propagandastyrkor hade i själva verket använt sig av sådana fantasier i flera år för att så splittring och förvirring på Krim och i Donbas, samtidigt som han testade en ny doktrin om hybridkrigföring, en blandning av vapen och ord.

Detta "genom-glasögon"-budskap ekar i utformningen och utvecklingen av en motberättelse till Rysslandsutredningen som slog rot i Trumps kampanj och som till slut blödde ut i hans första åtal: Det var Ukraina, inte Ryssland, som hade blandat sig i 2016.

Enligt Mueller-rapporten började Kilimnik och Manafort spinna på teorin efter att det i juni 2016 kom nyheter om att ett privat cybersäkerhetsföretag vid namn CrowdStrike hade kommit fram till att ryska hackare hade varit ansvariga för intrånget i Democratic National Committés datasystem. Gates berättade senare för utredare att Manafort hade berättat för personer inom kampanjen att Ukraina faktiskt låg bakom hackningen. Gates rapporterade att Manafort därmed hade "efterliknat en berättelse som Kilimnik ofta stödde", enligt FBI:s anteckningar som citeras i senatens rapport. Manafort förnekar Gates redogörelse.

Efter avslöjandet av Manaforts namn i den svarta boken försvarade Kilimnik sin chef genom att ta fram en ny version av motberättelsen - att Clintons ukrainska allierade hade fabricerat boken för att svartmåla Manafort och undergräva Trump. Liksom all effektiv desinformation hade den några tunna band till verkligheten - åsikten inom den ukrainska regeringen att ett ordförandeskap för Trump skulle vara potentiellt ruinerande, och medgivandet att huvudboken inte hade autentiserats fullt ut och inte bevisade de faktiska betalningar som gjorts till Manafort. En FBI-agent som såg huvudboken berättade för mig att de hundratals sidorna med handskrivna noteringar skulle ha varit oöverkomligt svåra att förfalska och att de var ett värdefullt utredningsverktyg, om än inte ett domstolsdugligt bevis. (Manafort har förnekat att han fått betalningar utanför bokföringen och var aldrig föremål för brottsutredningar av ukrainska åklagare, som fokuserade på att undersöka om betalningar till Manafort och andra felaktigt hade tagits från offentliga medel).

Kilimniks första försök var subtilt och omfattade en artikel i Financial Times från augusti 2016 om att framstående ukrainare valde sida i det amerikanska valet och bröt med den traditionella neutraliteten för att motsätta sig den "pro-Putin-vänliga Trump". Kilimnik hade utbytt flera e-postmeddelanden med reportern före publiceringen, fick åklagarna veta, och artikeln innehöll ett citat från en "före detta lojalist till Janukovytj" som inte bara antydde att huvudboken hade läckt ut för att skada Trump utan också att journalister som bevakade läckan hade "arbetat i Hillary Clintons intresse". Kilimnik skickade artikeln till Gates med förhoppningen att "DT ser den". Efter tre telefonsamtal med Manafort lade Roger Stone sedan ut en länk till artikeln på Twitter. "Den enda inblandningen i det amerikanska valet kommer från Hillarys vänner i Ukraina", tillade han som interpunktion.

Flera månader senare hjälpte Kilimnik till att göra saken tydligare i en debattartikel i U.S. News & World Report som han hjälpte till att spökskriva för sin gamla medarbetare, Manaforts beskyddare Ljovotjkin, som nu sitter i Ukrainas parlament som medlem av partiet Regionernas partis efterträdare, Oppositionsblocket. I artikeln anklagas korruptionsbekämpande tjänstemän för att ha "fabricerat ett fall" mot Manafort, och de som föreslår "smärtsamma eftergifter" i utbyte mot fred med Ryssland försvaras.

Motberättelsen fann en framträdande förstärkare i Kreml, som inte slösade någon tid på att använda den för att underblåsa Trumps ilska mot sin fiende. Det ryska utrikesministeriets talesperson Maria Zakharova, som noterade hur viktigt det amerikanska sponsringen var för Ukrainas framtid, sade till reportrar i Moskva under övergången: "Det verkar som om det är en stor utmaning för myndigheterna i Kiev att behålla denna sponsring", som hade varit "ociviliserade och ohövliga mot den tillträdande presidenten Donald Trump" och som hade planterat information om Manafort. Putin anslöt sig till kören i februari och hävdade att den ukrainska regeringen hade "antagit en ensidig ståndpunkt till förmån för en kandidat" - Clinton. "Mer än så", tillade han utan bevis, "vissa oligarker, säkert med godkännande av den politiska ledningen, finansierade den här kandidaten, eller kvinnliga kandidaten, för att vara mer exakt".

Rysslands online-tillgångar i Ukraina och Amerika anslöt sig till detta. I juli samma år utvecklade CyberBerkut, en hackergrupp med koppling till den ryska militära underrättelsetjänsten - och aktiv i Rysslands tidigare propagandasatsningar i Ukraina - Putins teori om att ukrainska oligarker i hemlighet hade finansierat Clinton. Dagen därpå skrev ett pro-Trump-twitterkonto baserat i S:t Petersburg som senare identifierades som en tillgång i inblandningen 2016, @USA_Gunslinger, följande: "Var är upprördheten över Clintons och hennes kampanjgrupps samröre med Ukraina för att störa det amerikanska valet?".

Under de följande månaderna tycktes Trumps syn på ukrainarna bara bli mörkare, eftersom en mer outlandish version av teorin florerade i de pro-Trump-orienterade hörnen av internet. Dess förespråkare hävdade att cybersäkerhetsföretaget CrowdStrike ägdes av en ukrainare (det gjorde det inte) och att de fysiska servrarna var gömda någonstans i landet (det gjorde de inte). Med andra ord, ungefär som Rysslandsutredningens "bluff", var allt en ukrainsk kampanj för att sätta dit Trump och Ryssland. Trump nickade till idén under sin presskonferens med Putin i Helsingfors i juli 2018, när han sa att han accepterade Putins ord om att Ryssland inte hade varit inblandat i hackningen. "Var är servrarna?" frågade han. "De saknas."

Trumps misstro hotade att få dödliga konsekvenser för ukrainarna. Enligt de memoarer som hans tidigare nationella säkerhetsrådgivare John R. Bolton skrev var Trumps första instinkt att misstänka att Ukraina hade provocerat Ryssland när ryska sjömän beslagtog tre ukrainska örlogsfartyg i november samma år i ett potentiellt eskalerande drag.

Samma månad rapporterade åklagare till en federal domare att Manafort hade brutit mot sitt avtal om erkännande genom att ljuga. Domaren dömde honom senare till ett fängelsestraff på sju och ett halvt år som ska avtjänas på Federal Correctional Institution Loretto i Pennsylvania som fånge nr 35207-016. Det som kunde ha varit Putins bästa hopp om en av Trump godkänd plan för ett försvagat och splittrat Ukraina verkade ha försvunnit med honom. Men på ett sätt som spelade på den ryske ledarens planer skulle Trumps pyrande missnöje mot Ukraina forma nästa stora skandal under hans presidentskap.

Manafort må ha suttit i fängelse, men på jakt efter en benådning hade han fortfarande något av värde för den transaktionsinriktade presidenten - sin oöverträffade kunskap om ukrainsk politik och regering. Han skulle i praktiken lämna över stafettpinnen till Trumps personliga advokat, den förre New York-borgmästaren Rudolph W. Giuliani, som hösten 2018 förberedde en offensiv för att slutgiltigt kasta ut specialåklagarens utredning som ett politiskt mordförsök efter att dess slutrapport inte lyckats bevisa "samverkan".

Centralt i Giulianis uppdrag var ett försök att bygga ut motberättelsen "Ukraina gjorde det". Giuliani och Manafort talade inte direkt utan genom Manaforts advokater. När jag frågade Manafort exakt vad han hade lämnat vidare var han vag, men han noterade att Giuliani "talade med några av de personer i Ukraina som var mina vänner" och sade att hans advokater skulle ha informerat Giuliani om detaljerna i vad han kallar en komplott för att sätta dit honom. Giuliani avböjde att tala med mig om deras diskussioner, men han berättade för Washington Post 2019 att hans fråga till Manafort var: "Fanns det verkligen en svart bok?" och svaret kom tillbaka: "Det fanns ingen svart bok".

Vad som hände därifrån är redan uttömmande processad Trump-historia, eftersom Giuliani äventyrade över Europa och spände den ursprungliga motberättelsen till en utsmyckad konspirationsteori som drog in USA:s ambassad i Kiev, dess ambassadör, Marie Yovanovitch, och Joe och Hunter Biden. I sin enklaste version handlade det fall av åtal som följde om presidentens maktmissbruk - en plan för att ställa villkor för viktigt militärt bistånd på en ukrainsk utredning om CrowdStrike, de "dolda servrarna" och Biden-parets påstått korrupta affärer med det ukrainska energibolaget Burisma. Vad som dock gick förlorat för den amerikanska publiken var det sätt på vilket Trumps påtryckningskampanj och Giulianis frilansdiplomati bufflade ett land som, vare sig det visste det eller inte, var på väg mot ett krig. Deras intriger spelade direkt in i en mjukmaktstävling om huruvida Ukraina skulle lägga de verkliga grunderna för en oberoende demokrati i västerländsk stil eller förbli i träldom till Moskva och dess ombud.

Denna tävling var svår att se genom den ukrainska politikens dimma. Alla jag talade med som hade någon erfarenhet av Kiev - oavsett politisk övertygelse - varnade för att se allt i svart och vitt, goda och onda. Det gick inte att säga hur många till synes motsägelsefulla agendor en viktig aktör i Ukraina kunde jonglera med - de enda pålitliga genomgående linjerna var jakten på pengar och makt. Det är i den andan som de oligarker som i västerländsk press oftast betecknas som "proryska" avvisar etiketten. "Jag har aldrig varit proryska", sade miljardären och energimäklaren Dmitrij Firtash till NBC News i år, "men du måste förstå att jag är en affärsman". I förkrigstidens Kiev kunde strävan efter pengar och makt och att tjäna Putins intressen ofta betyda samma sak.

"Amerikanerna spelade ett grundläggande spel - 'Trump vill ha smuts på Biden'", säger Suriya Jayanti, chef för energipolitiken vid den amerikanska ambassaden i Kiev vid den tiden. "Det som faktiskt pågick i Ukraina var denna galna väv av skiftande allianser och oligarkernas fickor och kohandel och bakslag, och i vår amerikanska närsynthet hade vi begränsad förståelse för att om ett träd faller i skogen och Amerika inte är där för att höra det, så faller det ändå."

Om någon plats gav en relativt tydlig bild av detta sjudande panorama var det ambassaden, genom de händelser som ledde till att ambassadören, Yovanovitch, fick sparken. Yovanovitch, som var något av en bifigur i Trumps första anklagelse, var central i den geopolitiska konkurrens som utspelade sig i Kiev. I grund och botten representerade hon det amerikanska diplomatiska motståndet mot allt som Putin och hans ukrainska ombud ville ha av Trump.

Yovanovitch var en stram och driven karriärdiplomat som skickades till Kiev av Obama bara några månader före valdagen, och hon var dotter till emigranter vars familjer hade flytt från Sovjet och nazisterna. Hon anlände till Ukraina vid en prekär tidpunkt. I kölvattnet av Maidan-upproret 2014 visade sig den folkliga viljan till demokrati än en gång vara okuvlig. Miljarder dollar strömmade in från västvärlden. Men ansträngningarna för att vårda Ukrainas demokrati höll på att gå i stöpet eftersom den nya administrationen, liksom regeringen efter den orangefärgade revolutionen, misslyckades med att hålla sina löften om reformer. Den nya presidenten, Petro O. Porosjenko, lämnade knappast något tvivel om allvaret i sin antiryska retorik när han utan framgång pressade Obama-administrationen för att få defensiva vapen. Men som oligarkpolitiker i klassisk ukrainsk tappning - han hade gjort sin förmögenhet inom chokladhandeln - var han också en del av det system som han ombads att spränga i luften.

Jovanovitj började genast att stötta de två pelarna i den amerikanska demokratiagendan: att befria Ukrainas ekonomi från oligarkernas grepp och dess rättssystem från politikens korrumperande imperativ. Detta förde henne obönhörligen i konflikt med två mäktiga män.

Den ena var energimäklaren Firtash, förkroppsligandet av det oligarkiska system som hade visat sig vara så fördelaktigt för Putin. Han hade byggt upp en extraordinär rikedom genom ett partnerskap med Gazprom, Rysslands ledande energibolag: Gazprom sålde gas till kraftigt rabatterade priser till ett mellanhandbolag som företaget ägde tillsammans med Firtash, som sedan sålde gasen vidare till Ukraina och hela Europa med en betydande vinst. Firtash använde i sin tur en del av dessa vinster för att stödja politiker med rysk inriktning. Han hade varit en viktig sponsor av Regionernas parti och, enligt åklagarna, en viktig betalningsförmedlare för Manafort. Männen var också tänkbara affärspartners; ett decennium tidigare diskuterade de en affär om att köpa ett hotell på Manhattan. (Firtash svarade inte på frågor som skickades till en representant).

När Trump tillträdde hade Ukraina skurit bort Firtashs mellanhand från gasaffären. Firtash själv befann sig i Österrike och kämpade mot utlämning till USA på grund av orelaterade mutanklagelser som han förnekar. Men han upprätthöll lukrativa band till Ukrainas energiindustri genom att äga regionala distributionsföretag som är knutna till den nationella gaskoncernen Naftogaz. Trots vad hon misstänkte var påtryckningar från Firtash övertalade Jovanovitj Porosjenko att hålla fast vid sitt löfte att införa nya regler som skulle störa "Firtashs affärsmodell", som ambassadören uttryckte det i sina memoarer.

Jovanovitj hade till en början hopp om Ukrainas främsta brottsbekämpare, generalåklagaren Jurij Lutsenko. Men hon blev nästan omedelbart tvärsäker på honom också. Lutsenko hade utnämnts våren 2016, efter att västliga allierade hade tryckt på för att hans föregångare, Viktor Shokin, skulle avsättas för att han inte hade lyckats åtala korruptionsfall. Ett av de mer flagranta exemplen, som ofta citerades av amerikanerna, gällde energibolaget Burisma. Det hade undgått åtal trots anklagelser, som det förnekade, om att det förskingrat offentliga medel. När tjänstemän från utrikesdepartementet krävde en utredning av hur åklagarmyndigheten hade hanterat fallet ställde Joe Biden, som vicepresident, ett kraftfullt ultimatum: 1 miljard dollar i lånegarantier skulle villkoras av att åklagarmyndigheten fick sparken. Biden var en ofullkomlig budbärare. Året innan hade Burisma gett en lukrativ styrelseplats till sin son Hunter, som hade ett berömt efternamn men ingen erfarenhet av energiindustrin. Till och med tjänstemän vid utrikesdepartementet oroade sig i förväg för att hans styrelseplats skulle ge sken av en konflikt.

På pappret verkade Lutsenko vara den man som skulle kunna professionalisera rättssystemet. Även om han inte hade någon formell juridisk utbildning hade han varit en av ledarna för den orangea revolutionen, fängslades sedan av Janukovytj och kom ut för att ansluta sig till protesterna på Maidan 2014. Den svarta liggaren skulle bli ett test på om han skulle lyckas där Shokin hade misslyckats, och han lovade att stödja utredningarna av dess innehåll, som sträckte sig bortom Manafort till uppenbara mutor till domare och valfunktionärer. Inom några månader klagade dock reformvännerna över att Lutsenkos kontor verkade vara långsam i sina utredningar om huvudboken. En ledande jurist vid kontoret klagade offentligt över att generalåklagaren förbjöd honom att intervjua vittnen eller utfärda stämningsansökningar i fyra fall som rörde Manaforts arbete.

På ambassaden stötte Jovanovitj ihop med Lutsenko på grund av hans uppenbara brist på iver i en rad olika korruptionsfall. Hon var också rasande över att han arbetade för att undergräva, om inte rentav avskaffa, en kår av oberoende åklagare och utredare som arbetar med korruptionsbekämpning, en kår som västvärlden hade pressat Ukraina att skapa. När hon läxade upp honom om behovet av ett avpolitiserat rättssystem upphörde de snart med sin regelbundna kommunikation. "Vi trodde att han skulle vara annorlunda", berättade hon för mig. "Det var han inte."

När Trump vann presidentposten 2016 trodde ukrainarna och ryssarna att den amerikanskledda push för förändring i Kiev skulle avta. Men Trump, som var övertygad om att Ukraina låg bakom Rysslands "bluff", visade föga intresse för landet, vilket gjorde att Jovanovitj var fri att hålla kursen.

Detta förändrades drastiskt när Giuliani kom in i bilden i slutet av 2018. Firtash skulle komma att tillhandahålla en viktig byggsten i Giulianis fall mot familjen Biden - en svuren försäkran från Shokin i september 2019 där han hävdade att Biden hade tvingat fram hans avskedande som en del av en korrupt plan för att skydda Burisma, med hans son i styrelsen, från granskning. Trots rikliga bevis för att fallet mot Burisma låg vilande under hans tid, hävdade Shokin att han i själva verket hade bedrivit en "omfattande" utredning. Firtash hade skaffat sig den försäkran som en del av sin egen juridiska kamp - i den antydde Shokin att Firtashs mutmål var politiskt motiverat - och den hade tydligen hamnat hos Giuliani genom gemensamma medarbetare. Firtash har sagt att han aldrig har träffat Giuliani och att han inte har godkänt att den försäkran används i hans verksamhet.

Men den operationen skulle inte ha varit möjlig utan Lutsenko, som förde den vidare med en extra vändning som involverade Yovanovitch i den förmodade komplotten för att hjälpa Clinton och skada Trump.

Även om Lutsenko hade sina egna politiska ambitioner hade han sin nuvarande position att tacka Porosjenko för, som framför allt ville ha en sak av Trump: fler pansarvärnsrobotar. Människor inom och utanför Kiev misstänkte redan att detta spelade in när utredningarna av ledboken förblev avstannade och USA levererade en första omgång missiler. Som en ukrainsk tjänsteman berättade för The Times 2018 hade Porosjenkos regering lagt huvudboksutredningarna i en "långsiktig låda", eftersom "vi inte ska förstöra relationerna med administrationen". Och i mars 2019, efter att ha träffat Giuliani på hans kontor på Park Avenue, verkade Lutsenko ge Trump åtminstone en del av det han ville ha. Han berättade för den politiska publikationen The Hill att han inledde en ny huvudboksutredning - om anklagelserna om att antikorruptionsaktivister och utredare hade släppt ut den för att hjälpa Clinton. Han skulle sedan uppge att han hade bevis för eventuella oegentligheter från Bidens sida.

Men trots alla dessa intriger fanns det en kraft som inte ens de mest cyniska Kievhandarna någonsin tvivlar på - de ukrainska demonstranternas uppriktiga krav på demokrati, oberoende och okorrumperad. Och den 21 april röstades Porosjenko bort till förmån för Zelenskij, en politisk nybörjare som formade sig i den reformistiska formen av den karaktär han hade spelat i tv.

Plötsligt ändrade Lutsenko kurs och meddelade att han inte såg några bevis för att Bidens hade gjort sig skyldig till oegentligheter. (Han svarade inte på försök att nå honom för en kommentar.) Planen var i en återvändsgränd. Medan Trump och Giuliani arbetade för att få det på rätt spår igen under den nya administrationen i Kiev, tvingade Trump slutligen ut Jovanovitj och kastade ut henne som en central aktör i den fantasifulla komplott som skulle besegra honom 2016. Nu försökte presidenten och hans advokat tvinga fram ett resultat som förkroppsligade allt som den fallne ambassadören hade försökt besegra i Ukraina: den rangliga politiseringen av rättsväsendet, öppet artikulerad i Trumps "perfekta telefonsamtal" där han bad Zelensky att byta ut en skenutredning mot vapen, vilket ledde till en åtalsprövning, bara den tredje i amerikansk historia.

I mars 2021 avklassificerade amerikanska underrättelsetjänster en rapport som redogjorde för deras samstämmiga uppfattning att Kilimnik och andra med anknytning till den ryska underrättelsetjänsten hade använt olika amerikaner - bland dem, vilket den starkt antydde, Giuliani - för att främja idén om Bidens korruption i Ukraina i syfte att påverka kampanjen 2020. Rapporten bedömde att ryska ledare såg Bidens potentiella val som "ofördelaktigt för ryska intressen" - särskilt när det gällde Ukraina.

I början av sitt presidentskap visade Zelensky en vilja att kompromissa med Ryssland om autonomi i öster - den fråga som står i centrum för Mariupolplanen. Men efter att tusentals demonstranter strömmade tillbaka till Maidan i slutet av 2019 vägrade han Putins krav på eftergifter i fråga om Ukrainas suveränitet. Zelensky prioriterade redan ansträngningarna för att ansluta sig till Nato och skulle underteckna lagstiftning som begränsar oligarkerna.

Trump benådade Manafort innan han lämnade Vita huset. Hade han suttit kvar i ämbetet, sade den tidigare presidenten i ett uttalande tidigare i år, "skulle Ukraina-skändningen inte äga rum". Men i och med Bidens tillträde i januari 2021 stod Putin nu inför en ny amerikansk president som lovade en hård linje mot hans imperiala planer på Ukraina - och utan uppenbara bakvägar genom vilka han kunde manipulera honom eller hans politik.

Tretton månader senare korsade ryska stridsvagnar den ukrainska gränsen.

Germán & Co 11/2/22 Germán & Co 11/2/22

-Det var en gång, för länge sedan... en gammal munk bodde i ett ortodoxt kloster. Han hette Pamve…

-Det var en gång, för länge sedan... en gammal munk bodde i ett ortodoxt kloster. Han hette Pamve. En gång planterade han ett torrt träd på en sluttning... Sedan sa han till sin unge lärjunge, en munk som hette Loann Kolov, att han skulle vattna trädet varje dag

Tarkovskijs tankar om livet utifrån en djup filosofisk och poetisk övertygelse, och hans överlevnad i ett alienerande, förtryckande och totalitärt samhälle, fick honom att se fakta gråare än den gemensamma nämnaren för hans landsmän i deras samexistens med det absurda systemet.
(Tarkovskijs 1986)

-Det var en gång, för länge sedan... en gammal munk bodde i ett ortodoxt kloster. Han hette Pamve. En gång planterade han ett torrt träd på en sluttning... Sedan sa han till sin unge lärjunge, en munk som hette Loann Kolov, att han skulle vattna trädet varje dag tills det återfick liv. Så tidigt varje morgon fyllde Loann en hink med vatten och gick ut. Han gick upp på berget och vattnade det torra trädet och på kvällen, när mörkret hade fallit, återvände han till klostret. Han gjorde detta i tre år. En dag gick han upp och såg att hela trädet var fullt av skott. Vad de än säger så har en metod, ett system, sina förtjänster. Vet ni, ibland säger jag till mig själv att om man varje dag, vid samma tidpunkt, skulle utföra samma handling, som en ritual, oföränderlig, systematisk, varje dag vid samma tidpunkt, skulle vi göra samma sak, skulle världen förändras ...

Germán & Co 11/2/22 Germán & Co 11/2/22

News round-up, Wednesday, November 2, 2022.

Business As UsualGerman Companies Ignore Major Risks in China (Spiegel)

The central bank is expected to raise rates three-quarters of a point today, but what it says about its next steps will be even more important. (NYT)

Conclusion of the day's news:
Fed Faces Tough Decisions as Inflation Lingers and Economic Risks Loom
The central bank is expected to raise rates three-quarters of a point today, but what it says about its next steps will be even more important.
Jerome H. Powell, the Federal Reserve chair, and his colleagues have been rapidly increasing interest rates this year to try to wrestle inflation lower.Credit...Drew Angerer/Getty Images
By Jeanna Smialek
Nov. 2, 2022, 5:00 a.m. ET
The Federal Reserve is expected to continue its fight against the fastest inflation in 40 years on Wednesday by raising rates three-quarters of a percentage point for the fourth time in a row. What officials signal about the central bank’s future plans is likely to be even more important.
Jerome H. Powell, the Fed chair, and his colleagues have been rapidly increasing interest rates this year to try to wrestle inflation lower. Rates, which were near zero as recently as March, are expected to stand around 3.9 percent after this meeting.
Wednesday’s move would be the sixth consecutive rate increase by the Fed. The last time it moved this quickly was during the 1980s, when inflation peaked at 14 percent and interest rates rose to nearly 20 percent. Fed officials have suggested that at some point it will be appropriate to dial back their increases to allow the full economic effect of these rapid moves to play out. The question now is when that slowdown might happen.
The Fed’s most recent economic projections, released in September, suggested that it could begin next month. But prices have remained uncomfortably high since those estimates were published. That could make it difficult for Mr. Powell and his colleagues to explain why backing down in December makes sense — even if they think it still does.
Officials do not want investors to conclude that the Fed is easing up on its inflation fight, because market conditions could become more friendly to lending and economic growth as a result. That would be the opposite of what central bankers are aiming for: They are trying to slow conditions down so companies will lose their ability to charge more.
“There are good reasons to believe that the Fed should pause relatively soon,” Tiffany Wilding, a U.S. economist at PIMCO. “There are going to be communication challenges to manage with this.”
It’s a challenge that could be on full display when the Fed releases its rate decision at 2 p.m. and Mr. Powell holds his news conference at 2:30 p.m.
Inflation F.A.Q.
Card 1 of 5
What is inflation? Inflation is a loss of purchasing power over time, meaning your dollar will not go as far tomorrow as it did today. It is typically expressed as the annual change in prices for everyday goods and services such as food, furniture, apparel, transportation and toys.
What causes inflation? It can be the result of rising consumer demand. But inflation can also rise and fall based on developments that have little to do with economic conditions, such as limited oil production and supply chain problems.
Is inflation bad? It depends on the circumstances. Fast price increases spell trouble, but moderate price gains can lead to higher wages and job growth.
How does inflation affect the poor? Inflation can be especially hard to shoulder for poor households because they spend a bigger chunk of their budgets on necessities like food, housing and gas.
Can inflation affect the stock market? Rapid inflation typically spells trouble for stocks. Financial assets in general have historically fared badly during inflation booms, while tangible assets like houses have held their value better.
The Fed doesn’t want to overdo tightening.
The Fed wants to slow its brisk rate increases at some point for a simple reason: It has already adjusted policy by a lot.
Before this year, central bankers had not raised interest rates by three-quarters of a point since 1994. The jumbo rate moves in 2022 have rapidly made it more expensive for consumers and businesses to borrow money.
Editors’ Picks
Accommodation Is Not a Shield From Criticism
Is It Better to Brush Your Teeth Before Breakfast or After?
What Does the End of Yeezy Mean for the Sneakerverse?
While those moves are already ricocheting through financial markets, they take time to trickle into the real economy. The housing market has slowed as mortgage rates have jumped, but for now, companies are hiring rapidly and the labor market remains hot. That could begin to change in the months ahead as firms find that business loans are pricier and demand is starting to wane.
Plus, there are already good reasons to expect inflation to begin to slow next year. Supply chains, tangled for years, are now swiftly healing. Housing costs have been a major driver of inflation in recent months, and many economists think they will begin to cool by mid-2023, based on moderation that is already taking hold in the rental market.
The Fed does not want to lift rates more than it needs to in order to bring inflation down. Doing so could result in slower economic growth and a weaker job market than is necessary — a mistake that would leave people out of work and families with less money, diminishing lives and livelihoods.But backing off too early carries risks.
Just as the risks of overdoing it are immense, underdoing the policy response to inflation could also come with grave consequences.
If central bankers fail to bring price increases back under control quickly, businesses and consumers may come to expect permanently higher inflation. Workers could factor that into their wage negotiations, businesses into their pricing decisions. Inflation could begin to fuel itself.
If that happened, the Fed might need to stage an even more aggressive response to stamp inflation out — and that would come at a greater economic cost to society.
“The best thing they can do is try to balance the risks,” Bill English, a former director of the Fed’s monetary affairs division who is now a professor at Yale University.
Policymakers at this meeting will probably want to set themselves up to slow down in the future, he said, while leaving their options open in case data between now and the Fed’s December meeting suggest that the economy and inflation will remain hot.Understand Inflation and How It Affects You
- Inflation Calculator: How you experience inflation can vary greatly depending on your spending habits. Answer these seven questions to estimate your personal inflation rate.
- Tax Rates: The I.R.S. has made inflation adjustments for 2023, which could push many people into a lower tax bracket and reduce tax bills.
- Your Paycheck: Inflation is taking a bigger and bigger bite out of your wallet. Now, it’s going to affect the size of your paycheck next year.
- Cost of Living: As food prices rise, eating is becoming increasingly expensive. We took a close look at five New Yorkers’ food and drink habits to see where the effects are most felt.
While inflation is expected to slow eventually, that process is likely to take time. Consumer demand is chugging along, job openings remain plentiful, and wages are still rising quickly. Energy shocks stemming from the war in Ukraine could easily push prices higher. Central bankers will want to keep an eye on those developments.
The Fed is likely to leave its options open.
Given the risks that Mr. Powell’s central bank is staring down, many careful Fed watchers expect it to leave the door open to a slowdown in rate increases in December without committing to one.
“I’m not even sure they’ve decided: I think they really just want optionality to step down in December,” said Michael Feroli, chief U.S. economist at J.P. Morgan. Of Mr. Powell, he said: “I do think he wants to make sure that December is considered a meeting where they actually go in and have a debate.”
Most Fed officials have predicated slowing and eventually stopping rate increases more on the level of interest rates than on what is happening with inflation. The logic: If officials have moved rates high enough that they are clearly weighing on growth and hold them there, that will pull inflation lower over time.
“Holding the economy in a restrictive stance of policy also continues to bridle it,” Mary C. Daly, president of the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, said during a Yahoo Finance interview last month. “So we’ll end at a rate that we think is appropriate and in terms of where to stop and look around.”
Given that, a slowdown might be possible before inflation moderates, especially if growth pulls back and the labor market begins to soften.
The Fed will release a fresh set of economic predictions next month. If it does pare back the pace of rate increases then, it could simultaneously project a slightly higher path for interest rates in 2023, Mr. Feroli from J.P. Morgan noted
Such a setup would allow the central bank to communicate that it is both committing to crushing inflation and cognizant that its policy changes to date are still taking hold.
And it would underline that the Fed will need to be nimble next year if price increases are slow to fade. So far, inflation has shown no obvious response to the Fed’s campaign to cool the economy.
“Inflation is likely to remain uncomfortably high for a while, and this could make continuing to hike in small increments for a bit longer the path of least resistance,” David Mericle at Goldman Sachs wrote in a recent research note. Plus, with wages picking up and consumers hanging in there, “more rate hikes might eventually be needed to keep the economy on a below-potential growth path.”
The bizarre invention of voter fraud in the United States
'The US midterm elections as seen from my French window': Former US correspondent Gilles Paris discusses how Republicans have taken up the boogeyman of election fraud.
Published on November 2, 2022 at 12h30 Time to 2 min.
(Le Monde)
Suportar of then president Donald Trump gather for a rally on January 6, 2021, at the Ellipse near the White House in Washington. JOSE LUIS MAGANA / AP
Just one week before the midterms, former president Donald Trump was adamant. "Here we go again! Rigged election!" he wrote on Tuesday to his 4.43 million followers on Truth Social, his own platform, above a link to an article from the conservative site Just The News. That article suggested the Department of State of the key state of Pennsylvania sent out mail-in ballots without verifying voters’ identities. Such accusations based on a misleading interpretation of Pennsylvania’s voter registration rules are easily debunked, but surprisingly enough, they are not falling on deaf ears, a victory of rumor over facts.
A Fox News poll conducted in early October showed that 55% of those surveyed were "extremely" or "very concerned" about voter fraud. Among Republicans, nearly three-quarters (73%) said they were concerned about this (a staggering 85% was reached for those who define themselves as very conservative). But a significant portion of Democratic voters (36%) also expressed the same feeling and Independent voters were evenly split on this issue (50%).
These results are all the more astounding because voter fraud is extremely rare in the United States, at least at the level required to falsify a state result, let alone a national election. The main cause of this material impossibility of massive fraud lies in the federal nature of American democracy, which never ceases to amaze in a country as centralized and small as France.
As mentioned by the US Election Assistance Commission, an independent agency of the US government, "elections are managed by over 8,000 local governments, with unique rules and laws adopted by individual states." What would be seen here as possible biases and as an infringement of the principle of equality between citizens is de facto protection against a widespread attack on the integrity of an election.
The "Great Quest" for fraudsters is not new in the United States. In the contemporary period, it goes back to John Kennedy's narrow victory in Illinois in 1960. But it has hardly delivered convincing results. In a seminal report issued in 2007 by the Brenner Center for Justice, a non-profit institution perceived as progressive, the focus was on three hotly contested elections in 2000 and 2004 in Missouri, New Jersey and Wisconsin. The scrutiny of the votes showed irregularities that could be counted on the fingers of two hands, with a fraud rate of 0.0003% for Missouri, 0.0004% for New Jersey and 0.0002% for Wisconsin. The Heritage Foundation (a conservative think-tank) database on election integrity has collected 1,384 proven cases during the four last decades, out of nearly 3 billion of votes.
When Donald Trump lost the popular vote in 2016 despite his unquestionable victory in the Electoral College, he created a controversial body, the Presidential Advisory Commission on Election Integrity, led by one of his most determined supporters, former Kansas secretary of state Kris Kobach. It was disbanded one year later without presenting any findings or evidence of widespread voter fraud. The astonishing efforts of some Republicans and dozens of high-profile lawsuits lost to prove that Joe Biden was fraudulently elected in 2020 did not produce more substantial results.
This does not mean, however, that these accusations are without consequences. Quite the contrary. An AP poll released in October showed a strong link between belief in voter fraud and confidence in the health of democracy. Not surprisingly, Republicans who mostly think that the midterm votes won't be counted accurately were overwhelmingly convinced (68%) that democracy does not work "well" or "at all." This sentiment was shared by 52% of all respondents. The belief in voter fraud, regardless of evidence to the contrary, has become a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Business As UsualGerman Companies Ignore Major Risks in China
Critics like Economy Minister Robert Habeck are warning Germany's industrial giants from becoming too dependent on Beijing. But it seems many haven't the learned the lesson from Russia of the perils of doing business with autocratic countries.
By Simon Hage, Martin Hesse, Michael Sauga, Benedikt Müller-Arnold und Christoph Giesen
(Spiegel)
01.11.2022, 16.42 Uhr
The presentation of a new Volkswagen car at the Shanghai International Automobile Industry Exhibition in China in 2021
A few weeks ago, German industry executives clashed with Robert Habeck. At an internal, high-level roundtable, the German economy minister warned them against "naivety" in their dealings with China. Protests followed promptly, especially from Siegfried Russwurm. The president of the Federation of German Industries (BDI) considers the market to be indispensable simply because of its sheer size. The federation's stance is that the industry doesn't need any advice from the minister.
Sources who attended the meeting say Habeck quickly backpedaled, saying he said he didn't want his words to be interpreted as an accusation. Nor was he calling for German corporations to withdraw from China. However, it would be desirable for companies to increasingly tap into other markets – as counterweights to the People's Republic.
DER SPIEGEL 44/2022
The article you are reading originally appeared in German in issue 44/2022 (October 29th, 2022) of DER SPIEGEL.
SPIEGEL International
Business leaders responded to the minister's wish with a shrug of the shoulders. "With very few exceptions," said one industry representative, "no one wants to shut down their business in China." And, he says, they have already long since been looking around for opportunities elsewhere in Asia.
The episode shows that industry leaders and politicians lack a common understanding on how to best deal with Germany's most important trading partner in the future. The recent makeshift settlement of a dispute in Germany's coalition government over whether the Chinese state-owned shipping company Cosco should be allowed to acquire a stake in a Hamburg port terminal and the upcoming trip by German Chancellor Olaf Scholz to visit state and party leader Xi Jinping have cast new light on the issue. To what degree do German companies need to uncouple themselves from autocratically governed countries? And to what extent can they still engage in business with them?
The doctrine of "transformation through trade," to which Germany adhered for decades, was exposed as an illusion by Russia's invasion of Ukraine, a truth that even Germany's president accepts. "We must become less vulnerable and reduce one-sided dependencies," Frank-Walter Steinmeier told public broadcaster ARD, "and that applies to China in particular."
German Economy Minister Robert Habeck speaking to business representatives
Germany has seen trade with the People's Republic quadruple since 2005, but during that same period, China has developed into a full-blown dictatorship. The West's hopes for further market-economy reforms have been dashed. President Xi Jinping, who had his power cemented last week at the 20th Party Congress, is fully committed to a state-controlled economy. "Henceforth: Marx gets precedence over the markets," says Jörg Wuttke, president of the European Union Chamber of Commerce in China. In his opening speech, he notes, Xi mentioned "Marx" 15 times, but the market only three times.
The world's second-largest economy after the United States is increasingly resembling a fortress in which domestic players are favored. The situation is becoming increasingly unpredictable due to the concentration of power in Xi's hands, warns Ismail Ertug, deputy head of the Social Democrats' party group in the European Parliament and a member of the Delegation for Relations with the People's Republic of China. The targeted persecution of the Muslim Uighur minority, aggression toward Taiwan and the increasing escalation in relations with the U.S. – all these will provoke reactions from the West sooner or later, Ertug says. Business leaders would thus be well advised to seek alternatives, he says, "the sooner the better."
But do Germany's corporate leaders even have an alternative? And what might such an alternative look like? Or are they simply hoping everything will turn out just fine in the end?
There is, in other words, a great deal of uncertainty, as the Chancellery's planning for the Beijing trip has shown in recent weeks. On November 3, Scholz is scheduled to land in Beijing to meet Xi for a day in the Chinese capital. A delegation of business leaders is to accompany him. It's actually a must-attend event for all company leaders who maintain relations with the People's Republic. When Angela Merkel would fly to China as chancellor, they pulled out all the stops to get on board the government plane.
The situation is different this time: As of last Wednesday, it was still unclear which business executives would accompany Scholz at all. Powerful representatives such as Mercedes-Benz CEO Ola Källenius or Martina Merz, the head of Thyssenkrupp, aren't joining him, nor is Deutsche Post CEO Frank Appel. Officially, some have said they have scheduling issues, others have given no reason at all. For many, the trip is simply coming at an inopportune time, even if no one wants to admit it openly. Images with Chinese leadership so soon after Xi's martial display of power at the October 22 party congress might not go over so well.
"What is important is that there is straight talk during Scholz's trip."
Thilo Brodtmann, executive director of the German Engineering Federation (VDMA)
Leaders of some major blue chip German firms who are accompanying Scholz to Beijing, including Siemens CEO Roland Busch, BASF CEO Martin Brudermüller and Merck CEO Belén Garijo, don't share those fears. Personal exchange is vital at the moment, says Siemens, despite significant differences of opinion on specifics. "Sticking your head in the sand isn't an option," says one participant who asked not to be named. Especially given that some corporations have grown desperately dependent on the Chinese market.
Others wanted to join on the trip but didn't get invites, including representatives of the German Engineering Federation (VDMA). The expectations are even greater for the chancellor there. "What is important is that there is straight talk during Scholz's trip," says VDMA Executive Director Thilo Brodtmann. He says Scholz should "also address issues such as respect for human rights." He adds that VDMA is "fed up with the unequal treatment of companies in China." If that doesn't change, he says, "we will have to review our economic interests and put up more resistance to the Chinese."
The rift between politics and industry is revealed whenever Chinese corporations want to invest in German companies or infrastructure – be it the highly controversial takeover of Augsburg-based robot manufacturer Kuka in 2016 or, most recently, Cosco's planned investment in a port terminal in Hamburg. Whereas critics such as Habeck are warning about new dependencies, Scholz was persuaded by the argument of port logistics company HHLA that prohibiting the investment would jeopardize "long-standing and trusting customer relationships" with the Chinese partner. The German government ultimately approved the deal under pressure from the chancellor – on the condition that Cosco will only obtain a minority stake of less than 25 percent.
The federal government's kid-glove approach to China has irritated some within the business community. As recently as June, Habeck's ministry was admonishing companies that they had "a responsibility to respect human rights when they invest in countries like China." But such criteria no longer seem to play a role in the selection of Chinese investors for Germany infrastructure. Following the Cosco decision, calls from politicians for corporations to keep a critical distance from China's regime are likely to ring rather hollow.
At the same time, it has long been clear, at least to Germany's leading industry association, that the business community must find a new approach. The goal of free, open markets can no longer be maintained if systemic competitors like China enter the competition with state backing and a geostrategic claim to power. In an as yet unpublished policy paper, the BDI proclaims a "watershed moment." It might come as a slight surprise, but the association is calling for the greater politicization of industry. The BDI not only wants to bring corporate interests into the political arena – it also urges its members to take security considerations into account in addition to profit margins. With "weighty economies like China," especially, "cooperation needs to be redefined," says BDI head Russwurm.
BDI President Siegfried Russwurm
The association recommends that companies should "diversify their import and export partners in critical segments in order to fundamentally enable a rapid shift to other markets." In the supply of raw materials, for example, "dependence on China is already greater than for oil or natural gas from Russia," the paper states. It calls for a "three-pillar raw materials policy" to identify additional supplier countries, promote more materials in Germany and drive the recovery of raw materials through recycling. The goal of all these measures must be to "strengthen Europe's sovereignty," the report states.
The paper is also surprising because the BDI is going against some of its own members, for whom pivoting away from China isn't even an option. The discord within the association can hardly be concealed: The member companies are oscillating between pulling back from China and even deeper integration in the Chinese market.
Volkswagen: Hooked
VW is part of the latter group. Ralf Brandstätter has the most important job outside of Germany's in Volkswagen's global empire. Since August, he has been responsible for more than 30 plants with more than 90,000 employees in China. Europe's largest automaker sells more than one in three cars in the People's Republic, and no other foreign market generates comparably high profits. Accordingly, Brandstätter doesn't think much of calls for the company to break away from the country. "We will not deliberately downgrade our strong market position in China," the VW board member says, conducting the interview by video chat from "V-Space," VW's glass edifice in Beijing.
Recently, the company came under criticism, including internally, for its heavy dependence on business in Asia. The supervisory board spoke of a "cluster risk" in China. Jörg Hoffmann, the head of the IG Metall trade union as well as the vice chairman of the VW supervisory board, also openly questioned the VW plant in the Xinjiang region, where the Chinese apparatus systematically discriminates against the Muslim Uighur ethnic minority, locking them up in re-education camps. Hoffmann said it would be necessary to examine "whether it would be right to end activity there."
But VW is currently far from suspending its operations in Xinjiang. Although Brandstätter is planning a visit to the plant in the region later this year "to get a picture of the situation on the ground myself," he says he isn't sure what to expect. But there are no plans to withdraw from the controversial plant. Too much is at stake for Volkswagen.
While the other two major sales markets – Europe and the U.S. – continue to slump, car sales in China have increased by 15 percent industry-wide this year. In other words, the People's Republic is once again the only glimmer of hope in an otherwise dangerously weak global economy. Companies that don't do business there are doomed to shrink.
Even China-critical employee representatives concede that the billions in profits from the People's Republic also secure jobs in Germany. That's because cars sold in China are partly developed in Germany. The high unit numbers increase profit per vehicle. Doing business with China, Brandstätter says, "makes us more competitive on the world market."
But what if one day this engine of growth fails because of a geopolitical escalation? Xi makes no secret of his plans for "reunification" with the independent, U.S.-protected island country of Taiwan. The head of state said at the party congress that a peaceful solution would be preferred, but he would "never promise to renounce the use of force."
Forcible annexation would be a disaster for the entire global economy. Taiwan is considered the center of the global microchip industry. If China cuts the global supply of semiconductors, car production in Germany would grind to a halt - a horror scenario. All parties involved in the Taiwan issue are "striving for de-escalation," VW executive Brandstätter believes. "No one wants to risk a military confrontation."
VW, like other automakers, is pursuing a dual strategy. The company wants to see cars in China as long as it can. But in order to prevent exposing itself entirely to China, the company is currently investing 7 billion euros in the world's second largest car market, the U.S. But some other industrial sectors actually want to further expand their China share. Chemicals giant BASF, for example.
BASF: The China Offensive
Martin Brudermüller has little understanding for the discussion about the correct China policy. "At the moment, society and the media are looking for every opportunity to report negatively about China," the man the Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung newspaper once described as BASF's "John Wayne" rumbled at a press conference last Wednesday. His presentation served to justify the China strategy of the global market leader he heads.
The gas crisis, permanently higher energy prices in Europe, weaker demand in Germany – all this shows "how important it is to have a balanced regional setup," Brudermüller said.
He says he doesn't consider the setup of his own company to be balanced at the moment. Its footprint in China is too small. The company generates 40 percent of its revenues in Europe, but only 15 percent in China. From Brudermüller's point of view, that's a glaring disproportion given that the People's Republic will soon account for half of global chemical production.
In response, the BASF CEO wants to invest a whopping 10 billion euros in a new compounds site, a state-of-the-art factory in the southern Chinese city of Zhanjiang. It plans to dramatically increase its business operations in the autocratically led country in the long term. Brudermüller admits that BASF does see risks in China. On the other hand, he says, you have to ask "what kind of risk is a company taking by giving up on half of the world market?"
It's a view that isn't shared by all in German industry. Specialty chemicals manufacturer Laxness, for example, is pulling back on its China operations, at least as far as its own production facilities are concerned. The former Bayer subsidiary operates a large factory near Shanghai for engineering plastics, which are used primarily in the automotive industry.
Related Articles
- "Chairman of Everything": The Omnipotence of China's Xi Jinping By Georg Fahrion und Christoph Giesen in Beijing
Laxness now wants to spin off the entire division into a joint venture in which the company would hold only a minority stake, with the remainder going to a financial investor. The rationale is that this will make the company less dependent on cyclical fluctuations.
As a result of the trade war with the U.S., parts of chemical production would move out of China and relocate – to Vietnam, for example, Laxness believes. Recently, the company has shown a preference for larger acquisitions in the U.S. And competitor Evonik is focusing its Asian expansion on Singapore rather than China.
Brudermüller, who headed BASF's Asian business from Hong Kong for 10 years, is no stranger to such caution. As recently as September, he spent three days in the country – and was enthusiastic about its "unbroken dynamism." The BASF boss says he doesn't want to give politicians advice but that what Berlin needs more than a change of course in its China policy is for Germany and Europe to work out a "resilience strategy." He says a global analysis could reveal where dependencies, untapped potential and deficiencies exist. There would be "a China chapter, but also a Germany chapter" in which to read what needs to change.
"We have to ask ourselves whether it would be wise in the current situation to have only a China growth strategy."
Michael Vassiliadis, union boss and the longest-serving member of the supervisory board at BASF
In Europe, Brudermüller is already taking action. He has just announced plans to save 500 million euros a year, with more than half of that coming from Ludwigshafen in Germany, also at the expense of jobs. However, he doesn't want to change his company's plans in China.
That combination is causing growing resentment within the company. "If Mr. Brudermüller were to push the expansion plans for China even further and at the same time not show any strategic perspective for the sites in Europe, that would not be acceptable," says Michael Vassiliadis, a union boss and the longest-serving member of the supervisory board at BASF. He says he expects the management board to develop solutions that go beyond mere staff reductions and shape the future. "If BASF loses Europe, it could kill the company."
Vassiliadis criticizes BASF for publicly making itself the "frontrunner" in German industry for a continuation of the past China strategy. "I caution against putting all our eggs in one basket and underestimating the geopolitical risks." He says the 10-billion investment was a "bet that growth in China will continue linearly for a long time like a law of nature," which is by no means certain. Several stable pillars are important for a company like BASF, he says, and innovations and investments in the green transition need to be made globally. "We have to ask ourselves whether it would be wise in the current situation to have only a China growth strategy."
Vassiliadis' push is a plea to seek opportunities in Europe rather than increasing exposure in China. Especially given that competition with China certainly creates new opportunities for Europe's companies.
Siemens Energy: The Challenged
At Siemens Energy, many aren't happy about the growing skepticism toward China. Fears of espionage and the misuse of data by the regime in Beijing could even pay off for the German company.
In the global energy industry, Siemens Energy is regarded as a model German company. It wants to change radically in the next few years, hoping to move away from fossil technologies such as gas-fired power plants, to converters, transformers, lines for wind power or hydrogen – high technologies that Germany needs for its own energy transition and that can help defend its status as a leading export nation.
It's necessary, too: In recent years, wind power specialists from China have been pushing into Europe, and six of the world's 10 largest wind turbine manufacturers now come from the country. Conversely, the Chinese have largely kept Europe suppliers out of their own energy business. China is sealing off its own market – and at the same time exporting its state-supported energy technology all over the world, Siemens Energy CEO Tim Holt says, critically.
The wind turbine manufacturer is therefore pinning a lot of hope on stricter political regulation. For months, the German government has been working to exclude Chinese suppliers from tenders for critical infrastructure, an exclusion it wants to expand to include energy networks in the future. If that were to happen, then so-called converter platforms, transformer stations on the high seas, would no longer be allowed to rely on Chinese technology. Network equipment supplier Huawei has already been the focus of a similar lockout. It has been banned from supplying parts of Western mobile phone network coverage.
Germany, so the lesson goes, will have to seal itself off and become a little bit more like China in order to protect itself from the People's Republic.

Kärnkraften avvecklas i den takt som är möjlig med hänsyn till behovet av elektrisk</a> kraft…

Germán & Co 11/2/22 Germán & Co 11/2/22

Kärnkraften avvecklas i den takt som är möjlig med hänsyn till behovet av elektrisk kraft…

Ungefär 75 procent av inflationsökningen i euroområdet har faktiskt berott på direkta och indirekta effekter av energi- och livsmedelspriserna
(elpais.com)

“Ungefär 75 procent av inflationsökningen i euroområdet har faktiskt berott på direkta och indirekta effekter av energi- och livsmedelspriserna”

— elpais.com

Chefen för Bundesbank: "Vi måste agera beslutsamt"; chefen för Spaniens centralbank: "Vi måste minska balansräkningen med försiktighet".
H. de C. Jag upprepar: de chocker som har drabbat euroområdet har varit annorlunda än de som den amerikanska ekonomin har upplevt. Ungefär 75 procent av inflationsökningen i euroområdet har faktiskt berott på direkta och indirekta effekter av energi- och livsmedelspriserna. Därför har ECB:s reaktion varit annorlunda. Och trots den betydande ökningen av inflationen har inflationsförväntningarna på längre sikt förblivit väl förankrade, vilket enligt min mening visar att vår reaktion är lämplig.

“Världen befinner sig mitt i sin första globala energikris - en chock av aldrig tidigare skådad omfattning och komplexitet. Trycket på marknaderna fanns redan före Rysslands invasion av Ukraina, men Rysslands agerande har förvandlat en snabb ekonomisk återhämtning från pandemin - som ansträngde alla typer av globala försörjningskedjor, inklusive energi - till en regelrätt energiturbulens. ”

— (Executive summary – World Energy Outlook 2022 – Analysis - IEA)

“Regeringarna emitterar mer skulder för att skydda hushåll och företag från smärta. Allt fler räknar med att energikrisen kommer att leda till en recession i Europa nästa år.”

— NYT

Tyvärr lagras elektricitet inte, och det finns säkert många som säger att den går lagras, i praktiken i batterier i små mängder. Det är därför det finns en kapacitetsfaktor i elsystemen.
Ett robust elsystem måste ha en säker basproduktion till konkurrenskraftiga priser ... det måste ha en mängd olika typer av teknik för att inte drabbas av det som vi upplever i dag på grund av en enda människas demenssjukdom ...
Turkiet kommer säkert, även om det tar så lång tid att börja bygga en naturgashubb med ett långsiktigt gasavtal och till extraordinära priser för dem. Därför kommer president Erdogan att göra det mycket svårt för Sverige att gå med i Nato...
(Germán & Co)

Fact is fact…

I folkomröstningen 1980 röstade 58 procent av medborgarna på denna utgångspunkt:
Kärnkraften avvecklas i den takt som är möjlig med hänsyn till behovet av elektrisk kraft för upprätthållande av sysselsättning och välfärd. För att bl.a. minska oljeberoendet och i avvaktan på att förnybara energikällor blir tillgängliga används högst de 12 kärnkraftsreaktorer som i dag är i drift, färdiga eller under arbete. Ingen ytterligare kärnkraftsutbyggnad skall förekomma.

Linje 1

Denna linje företräddes av Moderata samlingspartiet. Kampanjgeneral var Per Unckel. I folkomröstningen röstade 18,9 procent av väljarna på linje 1.

På valsedelns framsida fanns följande text:

"I Sverige är nu sex kärnkraftsreaktorer i drift. Ytterligare fyra reaktorer är färdiga och två är under arbete.

Valsedel för Linje 1. Texten är densamma som på linje 2 som dessutom hade en baksida.

Riksdagen har beslutat att en folkomröstning om kärnkraftens roll i den framtida energiförsörjningen skall hållas den 23 mars 1980. Omröstningen gäller tre olika förslag.

Jag röstar på förslag nummer 1.

Detta förslag innebär:

. För att bl.a. minska oljeberoendet och i avvaktan på att förnybara energikällor blir tillgängliga används högst de 12 kärnkraftsreaktorer som i dag är i drift, färdiga eller under arbete. Ingen ytterligare kärnkraftsutbyggnad skall förekomma. Säkerhetssynpunkter blir avgörande för den ordning i vilken reaktorerna tas ur drift."

Observera att denna text är identisk med texten på framsidan av valsedeln för linje 2.

Valsedeln hade ingen text på baksidan.

Linje 2

Denna linje företräddes av Socialdemokraterna och Folkpartiet. Linje 2 leddes av Hans Blix. I folkomröstningen röstade 39,1 procent av väljarna på linje 2.

På valsedelns framsida fanns följande text:

"I Sverige är nu sex kärnkraftsreaktorer i drift. Ytterligare fyra reaktorer är färdiga och två är under arbete.

Riksdagen har beslutat att en folkomröstning om kärnkraftens roll i den framtida energiförsörjningen skall hållas den 23 mars 1980. Omröstningen gäller tre olika förslag.

Jag röstar på förslag nummer 2.

Detta förslag innebär:

Kärnkraften avvecklas i den takt som är möjlig med hänsyn till behovet av elektrisk kraft för upprätthållande av sysselsättning och välfärd. För att bl.a. minska oljeberoendet och i avvaktan på att förnybara energikällor blir tillgängliga används högst de 12 kärnkraftsreaktorer som i dag är i drift, färdiga eller under arbete. Ingen ytterligare kärnkraftsutbyggnad skall förekomma. Säkerhetssynpunkter blir avgörande för den ordning i vilken reaktorerna tas ur drift."

Observera att denna text är identisk med texten på valsedeln för linje 1.

På valsedelns baksida fanns följande text:

"Energihushållningen bedrivs kraftfullt och stimuleras ytterligare. De svagaste grupperna i samhället skyddas. Åtgärder vidtas för att styra elkonsumtionen bl.a. för att förhindra direktverkande elvärme i ny permanentbebyggelse.

Forskning och utveckling av förnybara energikällor forceras under samhällets ledning.

Miljö- och säkerhetsförbättrande åtgärder vid kärnkraftverken genomförs. En särskild säkerhetsstudie görs vid varje reaktor. För medborgarnas insyn tillsätts vid varje kärnkraftverk en säkerhetskommitté med lokal förankring.

Elproduktion genom olje- och kolkondensverk undviks.

Baksida på valsedel för linje 2.

Valsedel linje 3 som också hade en baksida.

Samhället skall ha ett huvudansvar för produktionen och distributionen av elektrisk kraft. Kärnkraftverk och andra framtida anläggningar för produktion av elektrisk kraft av betydelse skall ägas av stat och kommun. Övervinster i vattenkraftproduktionen indrages genom beskattning."

Den sista punkten var kontroversiell och den viktigaste orsaken till att Moderaterna inte ansåg sig kunna ställa sig bakom linje 2.

Linje 3

Denna linje företräddes av Centerpartiet, KDS [4] och Vänsterpartiet kommunisterna. Linje 3:s ledare var Lennart Daléus.[5] I folkomröstningen röstade 38,7 procent av väljarna på linje 3.

På valsedelns framsida fanns följande text:

"I Sverige är nu sex kärnkraftsreaktorer i drift. Ytterligare fyra reaktorer är färdiga och två är under arbete.

Riksdagen har beslutat att en folkomröstning om kärnkraftens roll i den framtida energiförsörjningen skall hållas den 23 mars 1980. Omröstningen gäller tre olika förslag.

Jag röstar på förslag nummer 3.

Detta förslag innebär:

NEJ till fortsatt utbyggnad av kärnkraften.

Avveckling av nuvarande sex reaktorer i drift inom högst tio år. En hushållningsplan för minskat oljeberoende genomförs på grundval av

- fortsatt och intensifierad energibesparing

- kraftigt ökad satsning på förnybara energikällor.

Reaktorerna i drift underkastas skärpta säkerhetskrav. Icke laddade reaktorer tas aldrig i drift.

Uranbrytning tillåts inte i vårt land."

På valsedelns baksida fanns följande text:

"Om pågående eller kommande säkerhetsanalyser så kräver, innebär detta förslag självfallet att omedelbar avstängning skall ske.

Arbetet mot kärnvapenspridning och atomvapen skall intensifieras. Ingen upparbetning tillåts och export av reaktorer och reaktorteknologi upphör.

Sysselsättningen ökas genom alternativ energiproduktion, effektivare energihushållning samt förädling av råvaror."

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

The stock market wavers as midterm results remain unclear. (NYT)

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

Midterms Live Updates: No Signs of ‘Red Wave’ as Race for Congress Remains Tight

John FettermanWon, Pennsylvania Senate

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

How China curbed global inflation and why it will stop doing so

China's exports and imports fall simultaneously for the first time since the start of covid-zero policy prices.

The hardest-hit country was Greece, where 68% of respondents said their spending power had fallen “a lot” or “somewhat” since 2019, followed by 63% in France, 57% in Italy, 54% in Germany, 48% in Britain and 38% in Poland.

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

Germany's Scholz warns against fossil fuel 'renaissance'

The German Chancellor issued the warning during a speech at COP27, insisting Germany would not fall back on fossil fuels despite a lack of Russian energy imports.

Le Monde with AFP

Published on November 7, 2022 at 20h49, updated at 08h23 on November 8, 2022

Germany would up its investments in international environmental programs, Mr. Scholz said, bringing the total to €6 billion.

Funds for the protection of forests alone through 2025 would be doubled to 2 billion, the development ministry said. The money will mostly be invested via partnership programs with countries such as Brazil, Ecuador, Madagascar and Pakistan, according to the ministry.

Russia’s heavy casualties in Ukraine spark outcry and rare official response

Russian President Vladimir Putin speaks to Oleg Kozhemyako, governor of the far eastern Primorsky region in September. Casualties among members of the 155th Brigade, which is normally based in Kozhemyako's region, have been high, prompting rare public outcry. (Gavriil Grigorov/Sputnik/Kremlin/AP)

One in four Europeans say their financial position is ‘precarious’

A joint venture of the German company Wintershall Dea delivers gas condensate to Gazprom. The Russian state-owned corporation in turn provides aviation fuel to two military bases believed to be behind air strikes that have been internationally criticized as possible war crimes.

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

World is on ‘highway to climate hell’, UN chief warns at Cop27 summit

António Guterres tells leaders ‘global climate fight will be won or lost in this crucial decade – on our watch’

António Guterres told world leaders at the opening of the Cop27 UN climate summit in Egypt on Monday: “We are on a highway to climate hell with our foot on the accelerator.”

Republicans sue to disqualify thousands of mail ballots in swing states

A German Company's Questionable Involvement in Russia

Clean Energy Park a New Visions of Energy World from Sweden…

Fördelar och utmaningar med återvinning av kärnkraft

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

Failures

An elusive goal

THE COUNTRY

The world is in the midst of its first global energy crisis - needs a new vision and solutions…

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

New power generation needed in southern Sweden

Several projects around Sweden

Positive opinion in Sweden and Denmark

What is the reason for this misfortune, which for months has been taking its toll on the economies of millions of European families?

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

För att uppnå —net zero— krävs att man bygger all teknik med låga koldioxidutsläpp, inklusive mycket kärnkraft.

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

New life possible for British nuclear energy

Oklo Selected for DOE Project to Enable Recycling of Used Nuclear Fuel

Entergy names new leader for nuclear division; see who will take over

Belarus, Russia to develop cooperation in training nuclear energy specialists

Soon-to-be-nationalized German energy firm set to build nuclear plant in Sweden

SMALL MODULAR REACTOR TECHNOLOGY COVERS ALL THE BASES: RELIABILITY, RESILIENCY, SAFETY AND AFFORDABILITY

Moscow wants to connect Ukrainian nuclear plant to Russian grid - Energoatom

Poland says first nuclear power station to cost $20 bn

French government aims to cut red tape for new nuclear reactors

Northeast's first nuclear heating site begins ops

Poland plans to build 3 nuclear plants with 6 reactorNov 1, 2022

UPDATE 1-Bulgaria to reconnect nuclear reactor by end of week, says minister

TerraPower, PacifiCorp evaluate potential to deploy up to five more Natrium reactors by 2035

WESTINGHOUSE TO BUILD POLAND'S FIRST NUCLEAR REACTORS; KHNP MAY GET SEPARATE DEAL

Ziakova: Ukraine war may spark more nuclear power R;D

Rosatom to establish 2nd nuclear unit in Dabaa

ENEC, Atlantic Council to collaborate on nuclear energy

Poland, South Korea sign letter of intent on nuclear plant

IAEA Chief Visits US - Nuclear Energy, Ukraine and UN Security Council

The sands of the hourglass are beginning to run out for Putin`s project and the world too…

AES Dominicana Foundation… Lend a Hand…. It´s Time to Reforest

Seaboard’s CEO in the Dominican Republic, Armando Rodriguez, explains how the Estrella del Mar III, a floating hybrid power plant, will reduce CO2 emissions and bring stability to the national grid…

'Against humanity'

Jean-Marie Questiaux

What if Every Moment Since Jan. 6 Was Just the Calm Before the Storm?

South Korea scrambles jets after detecting 180 North Korean warplanes

'Against humanity'

The 1973 Oil Shock - What if anything did we learn?