Russia’s economy may be tanking, but Putin’s pipeline politics have led to victory – The Globe and Mail
Nina Khrushcheva is a professor of International Affairs at The New School in New York. She is the co-author of In Putin’s Footsteps: Searching for the Soul of an Empire Across Russia’s Eleven Time Zones.
Over the past year, predictions of serious struggles for Russian President Vladimir Putin – or even his political demise – have been increasingly frequent. A recent article in The Economist, “An Awful Week For Vladimir Putin,” is just one example. But it is Putin biographer and New York Times correspondent Steven Lee Myers whose assessment rings most true: “Putin,” Mr. Myers has repeatedly said to me, “always wins.”
Maybe “always” isn’t quite true. Russia’s economy is expected to grow by only 1 per cent this year, owing to lagging export diversification, large-scale capital flight and low levels of foreign direct investment linked to Western sanctions imposed after the country’s 2014 annexation of Crimea.
But 61 per cent of Russians still rate Mr. Putin’s performance positively. Most democratic leaders can only dream of such favour with the public. Fewer than 43 per cent of Americans approve of U.S. President Donald Trump, for example. In fact, the same incoherent and combative U.S. policies toward Europe, China, Turkey and others that have contributed to Mr. Trump’s unpopularity have fuelled Mr. Putin’s popularity by handing him a series of tactical victories.
For example, a lack of effective U.S. engagement in Syria has pushed Turkey into Russia’s arms. In particular, in October 2015, the United States withdrew its Patriot missiles from southeastern Turkey, which had been deployed after the country appealed to its NATO allies to guard against missile threats from neighbouring Syria. In 2017, the U.S. offered to sell Patriot missiles to Turkey but without the underlying technology.
So Turkey reached a multibillion-dollar arms deal with Russia instead, despite the outrage of its NATO partners. But Turkey knows that it is Russia, not the U.S., that is shaping the Syria conflict and will play a leading role in the country’s potentially lucrative reconstruction effort, making it a much more desirable partner there. Strengthening the bilateral relationship further, Mr. Putin and Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan are about to inaugurate the TurkStream gas pipeline connecting their two countries.
Russia has also launched a massive new gas-pipeline project with China, worth US$400-billion over 30 years, and is negotiating another. Here, too, the Trump administration’s actions – in particular, its bitter trade war against China, which may well continue, despite the two countries’ recent “phase one” agreement – created a lucrative opening that Mr. Putin was quick to seize.
The pipeline project, according to Mr. Putin, takes bilateral “strategic co-operation in energy to a qualitative new level” and supports progress toward the goal, set with Chinese President Xi Jinping, “of taking bilateral trade to US$200-billion by 2024” – the year Mr. Putin’s “final” presidential term ends. Perhaps he hopes that the fruits of such engagement will strengthen his position enough to enable him to remain in power, whether as president or in another position.
Although fears of being under Mr. Putin’s thumb fuelled the protests that ousted Ukraine’s pro-Russian president, Viktor Yanukovych, in 2014 – leading directly to Russia’s annexation of Crimea and Russia-backed separatists’ takeover of eastern Ukraine – the fear of confronting Russia alone is even greater.
This doesn’t mean Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is going to roll over for Russia. He agreed with the Kremlin on an exchange of 200 prisoners in the continuing war in eastern Ukraine – the second prisoner exchange this year. The recent pipeline deal can also be considered a win for Ukraine; Gazprom had previously insisted on a one-year deal, because it already has the Nord Stream-1 pipeline, which crosses the Baltic Sea to Germany, and will soon complete Nord Stream-2.
But Russian negotiators eased their position, perhaps partly in the hope of easing resistance to the Nord Stream project. That resistance includes sanctions, included in the 2020 U.S. defence budget, on companies working on Nord Stream-2, which the U.S. argues would give Russia too much leverage over America’s European allies, as well as those working on TurkStream.
Russian officials have said that Gazprom has already lined up other companies prepared to take over. There is “nothing to worry about,” claims Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev, especially given the gas-transit arrangement with Ukraine. As in the Middle East and China, Mr. Putin knows that a moment when Europe’s relationship with the U.S. is severely strained is the ideal time to strengthen its position vis-à-vis its neighbour.
Mr. Putin may not have a winning long-term strategy to save Russia’s economy, but his pipeline politics have led to a series of impressive foreign-policy victories. This approach may give him enough prestige to continue his long winning streak.
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2019. www.project-syndicate.org
Keep your Opinions sharp and informed. Get the Opinion newsletter. Sign up today.
Equities may rally since the U.S. economy remains strong: Dennis Mitchell – BNN Bloomberg
Strong job gains in US add to economic puzzle – BBC
Job creation in the US remained robust last month, despite rising prices and a sharp spike in borrowing costs weighing on the economy.
Employers added 339,000 jobs, but the unemployment rate rose to 3.7%, from April’s unusually low 3.4%.
Analysts have expected hiring to slow as the US central bank raises interest rates to try to rein in rising prices.
But payrolls have remained resilient, raising hopes the economy will avoid a painful recession, while also stirring debate about whether the Federal Reserve will have to take more aggressive action to bring inflation under control.
Inflation, the rate at which prices rise, was 4.9% in the US in April.
While that was the lowest in roughly two years, it remained more than double the 2% rate that the bank considers healthy.
Expectations of what Friday’s report might mean for interest rates in the months ahead were divided.
“This is the strangest employment report for some time,” said Ian Shepherdson of Pantheon Macroeconomics, pointing to the disconnect between the job gains and the rise in unemployment.
Some analysts said the widespread job gains in May, as hospitals, restaurants, bars and construction firms added workers, was a sign that the Fed will have to raise interest rates more.
The Labor Department also said job gains in April had been greater than previously estimated.
Others said the report included signs that should convince the bank to hold off, pointing to moderating wage gains. At 3.7%, the jobless rate was also the highest in seven months.
US President Joe Biden, who has been dogged by public pessimism over the economy, celebrated the figures, saying it was a “good day for the American economy and American workers”.
But others said the gains may not be sustainable.
Seema Shah, chief global strategist at Principal Asset Management, said the “blow out” job gains in May indicated that the “Fed’s job is not yet done”.
“The key question now is: can they wait until July or does this monster payrolls number trigger another burst of urgency?” she said.
“Perhaps the report details, with the unemployment rate rising and average hourly earnings growth slowing, tilts the decision to July. But overall, this is not a labour market that is slowing – and if it’s not slowing, then inflation isn’t coming down to 2%.”
If the US central bank continues to raise interest rates, that would lead to higher borrowing costs for households and businesses seeking mortgages or other loans.
The expectation is that the economy will cool, easing pressures pushing up prices, as higher borrowing costs lead people to cut back on spending and businesses to delay expansions and other activities.
“By year-end, as the impact of Fed tightening feeds into the economy and corporates retrench, we expect a material weakening in job market conditions and an early-90s type economic recession,” said Hussain Mehdi, macro and investment strategist at HSBC Asset Management.
He added: “A delay to this process implies the risk of higher-for-longer rates, and a deeper downturn.”
Global fertility has collapsed, with profound economic consequences
In the roughly 250 years since the Industrial Revolution the world’s population, like its wealth, has exploded. Before the end of this century, however, the number of people on the planet could shrink for the first time since the Black Death. The root cause is not a surge in deaths, but a slump in births. Across much of the world the fertility rate, the average number of births per woman, is collapsing. Although the trend may be familiar, its extent and its consequences are not. Even as artificial intelligence (ai) leads to surging optimism in some quarters, the baby bust hangs over the future of the world economy.
In 2000 the world’s fertility rate was 2.7 births per woman, comfortably above the “replacement rate” of 2.1, at which a population is stable. Today it is 2.3 and falling. The largest 15 countries by GDP all have a fertility rate below the replacement rate. That includes America and much of the rich world, but also China and India, neither of which is rich but which together account for more than a third of the global population.
The result is that in much of the world the patter of tiny feet is being drowned out by the clatter of walking sticks. The prime examples of ageing countries are no longer just Japan and Italy but also include Brazil, Mexico and Thailand. By 2030 more than half the inhabitants of East and South-East Asia will be over 40. As the old die and are not fully replaced, populations are likely to shrink. Outside Africa, the world’s population is forecast to peak in the 2050s and end the century smaller than it is today. Even in Africa, the fertility rate is falling fast.
Whatever some environmentalists say, a shrinking population creates problems. The world is not close to full and the economic difficulties resulting from fewer young people are many. The obvious one is that it is getting harder to support the world’s pensioners. Retired folk draw on the output of the working-aged, either through the state, which levies taxes on workers to pay public pensions, or by cashing in savings to buy goods and services or because relatives provide care unpaid. But whereas the rich world currently has around three people between 20 and 64 years old for everyone over 65, by 2050 it will have less than two. The implications are higher taxes, later retirements, lower real returns for savers and, possibly, government budget crises.
Low ratios of workers to pensioners are only one problem stemming from collapsing fertility. As we explain this week, younger people have more of what psychologists call “fluid intelligence”, the ability to think creatively so as to solve problems in entirely new ways .
This youthful dynamism complements the accumulated knowledge of older workers. It also brings change. Patents filed by the youngest inventors are much more likely to cover breakthrough innovations. Older countries—and, it turns out, their young people—are less enterprising and less comfortable taking risks. Elderly electorates ossify politics, too. Because the old benefit less than the young when economies grow, they have proved less keen on pro-growth policies, especially housebuilding. Creative destruction is likely to be rarer in ageing societies, suppressing productivity growth in ways that compound into an enormous missed opportunity.
All things considered, it is tempting to cast low fertility rates as a crisis to be solved. Many of its underlying causes, though, are in themselves welcome. As people have become richer they have tended to have fewer children. Today they face different trade-offs between work and family, and these are mostly better ones. The populist conservatives who claim low fertility is a sign of society’s failure and call for a return to traditional family values are wrong. More choice is a good thing, and no one owes it to others to bring up children.
Liberals’ impulse to encourage more immigration is more noble. But it, too, is a misdiagnosis. Immigration in the rich world today is at a record high, helping individual countries tackle worker shortages. But the global nature of the fertility slump means that, by the middle of the century, the world is likely to face a dearth of young educated workers unless something changes.
What might that be? People often tell pollsters they want more children than they have. This gap between aspiration and reality could be in part because would-be parents—who, in effect, subsidise future childless pensioners—cannot afford to have more children, or because of other policy failures, such as housing shortages or inadequate fertility treatment. Yet even if these are fixed, economic development is still likely to lead to a fall in fertility below the replacement rate. Pro-family policies have a disappointing record. Singapore offers lavish grants, tax rebates and child-care subsidies—but has a fertility rate of 1.0.
Unleashing the potential of the world’s poor would ease the shortage of educated young workers without more births. Two-thirds of Chinese children live in the countryside and attend mostly dreadful schools; the same fraction of 25- to 34-year-olds in India have not completed upper secondary education. Africa’s pool of young people will continue to grow for decades. Boosting their skills is desirable in itself, and might also cast more young migrants as innovators in otherwise-stagnant economies. Yet encouraging development is hard—and the sooner places get rich, the sooner they get old.
Eventually, therefore, the world will have to make do with fewer youngsters—and perhaps with a shrinking population. With that in mind, recent advances in ai could not have come at a better time. An über-productive AI-infused economy might find it easy to support a greater number of retired people. Eventually ai may be able to generate ideas by itself, reducing the need for human intelligence. Combined with robotics, ai may also make caring for the elderly less labour-intensive. Such innovations will certainly be in high demand.
If technology does allow humanity to overcome the baby bust, it will fit the historical pattern. Unexpected productivity advances meant that demographic time-bombs, such as the mass starvation predicted by Thomas Malthus in the 18th century, failed to detonate. Fewer babies means less human genius. But that might be a problem human genius can fix. ■
For subscribers only: to see how we design each week’s cover, sign up to our weekly Cover Story newsletter.
Meta to test blocking news on Facebook, Instagram in Canada over Bill C-18 – Global News
Apple WWDC 2023: Date, Time, Live Streaming Details And What To Expect From Apples Event – BQ Prime
Housing affordability in Canada just saw the biggest improvement in almost 4 years – Global News
Silver investment demand jumped 12% in 2019
Iran anticipates renewed protests amid social media shutdown
Search for life on Mars accelerates as new bodies of water found below planet’s surface
Science19 hours ago
Private Astronaut Crew, Including First Arab Woman in Orbit, Returns from Space Station – Voice of America – VOA News
Science15 hours ago
Private astronaut crew, including first Arab woman in orbit, returns from space station – Indiatimes.com
News18 hours ago
Air Canada flight communicator system breaks down, causing widespread delays – CBC.ca
Real eState16 hours ago
Victoria real estate sales up and prices down year-over-year – Times Colonist
Media18 hours ago
Will Google's AI Plans Destroy the Media? – New York Magazine
News19 hours ago
Digital banking complications resolved at RBC – CTV News
Sports18 hours ago
Brad Treliving on the criticism the Maple Leafs’ core players face in the market. "Whether it’s raining or sunny, it seems to be the core four’s fault every day… Quite frankly, I don’t want to hear the [core four] term"
News15 hours ago
Air Canada flight delays at Toronto Pearson | CTV News – CTV News Toronto