3 giugno 2012

I consigli di lettura di questa settimana si concentrano sulla condanna inflitta a Hosni Mubarak, la balance of power mediorientale, la perdurante crisi dell’euro (e dell’Unione Europea), la politica estera americana – Obama e Bush si assomigliano sempre di più? – e l’economia del web.

La pena dell’ergastolo comminata all’ex presidente egiziano Hosni Mubarak è stata uno degli argomenti di maggior discussione della settimana. Sul Time, Lauren E. Bohn si chiede se si tratti di un gioco manipolatorio “a game of smoke e mirrors”. “Mubarak and al-Adly’s convictions are based on their failure to stop the killing once it started. That leaves a logical hole in the verdict: was no one is responsible for the ordering of killing?”. Per l’israeliano Haaretz l’Egitto ha compiuto un ulteriore passo verso la democrazia: “The public’s response to the verdict will determine whether Egypt is ready to place its confidence in the current justice system and adopt it as the revolution’s pillar of fire and an indisputable foundation for the future. In about two weeks Egypt will complete the revolution by electing a new president. We should wish this great country success and hope it does not have to yearn for the era in which its prisoner-president ruled.”

Ammon Aran, sul blog della London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), sostiene che l’assetto di potere mediorientale si stia allontanando dal centro nevralgico israeliano ormai da due decenni a causa dell’ascesa dell’Islam politico nella regione, degli sviluppi nucleari iraniani e dei cambiamenti demografici interni allo stesso Stato di Israele. “Although changes may still be possible, Israel’s position is weaker than when it embarked on the Oslo Process. Consequently, other things being equal, perhaps the best Israel can hope for is management of its ongoing conflicts in the region rather than the setting of an agenda from the enhanced strategic position Rabin and Peres hoped to maintain.”

In un editoriale sul Washington Post, Charles Kupchan scrive che l’euro può essere salvato. “After more than a year in crisis mode, the euro-zone countries are still scrambling to salvage their common currency. Their plan is to stick to the fiscal discipline needed to calm financial markets while introducing measures that could seed growth. And it’s likely they will succeed.” Il problema però rimane e si sposta dalla moneta unica all’Unione Europea in quanto tale: “Though it is not too late to save the euro, it is growing too late to save the E.U.”. Come sostiene infatti Daniel Gros su Project Syndicate, “all of those grandiose plans to create a political union to support the euro with a common fiscal policy cannot work as long as EU member countries remain both democratic and sovereign. Governments may sign treaties and make solemn commitments to subordinate their fiscal policy to EU rules (or to be more precise, to the wishes of Germany and the European Central Bank). But, in the end, the “people” remain the real sovereign, and they can choose to ignore their governments’ promises and reject any adjustment program from “Brussels.”

La politica estera americana prescinde dalle convinzioni politiche dell’inquilino della Casa Bianca? C’è stato un vero cambiamento tra le amministrazioni Bush e Obama? Per Foreign Affairs, le posizioni di democratici e repubblicani si fanno sempre più vicine, soprattutto in tema di multilateralismo. “As history and our survey demonstrate, even on areas with significant partisan difference, ideological orientation need not result in acrimony and policy paralysis. Vigorous partisan debate can improve the quality of policy by restraining overreach by each side, injecting new ideas into the debate, and helping the United States drive a better bargain on the international stage. So although partisan differences over foreign policy will inevitably surface, and may even become quite severe, the American foreign policy community need not be destined for an ideological struggle over multilateral engagement. Perhaps international partnership begins at home.”

Barack Obama, come scrive The Guardian, si è trasformato dal liberale professore di diritto che si opponeva alla guerra in Iraq a un George W Bush sotto steroidi? Il Presidente supervisiona personalmente la “kill list” per gli attacchi dei droni in Yemen e Pakistan. “Indeed, newspaper revelations last week about the “kill list” showed the Obama administration defines a militant as any military-age male in the strike zone when its drone attacks. That has raised the hackles of many who saw Obama as somehow more sophisticated on terrorism issues than his predecessor, George W Bush. But Guiora does not view it that way. He sees Obama as the same as Bush, just much more enthusiastic when it comes to waging drone war.”

L’Economist, prendendo spunto dal finora deludente ingresso in borsa di Facebook, offre un’interessante riflessione sull’impatto economico di internet. “Maybe some people imagined that the arrival of the web would launch an internet economy in which we all worked for internet companies producing internet. That’s akin to a belief that the development of electricity should have given rise to an electricity era in which we all worked for electrical companies making electricity.” Intanto il social network di Mark Zuckerberg si lancia alla conquista dell’Asia, il mercato demograficamente più attraente al mondo, come mostra l’infografica firmata AFP e riproposta da Yahoo.