dinsdag 16 december 2014

Vrije val roebel zet door


De waarde van de roebel ging vandaag opnieuw in een duizelingwekkende vaart omlaag. De drastische renteverhoging die de Russische centrale bank afgelopen nacht doorvoerde, heeft voorlopig geen einde gemaakt aan de vrije val van de munt en de daarmee samenhangende vlucht van kapitaal uit Rusland.

De waarde van de roebel kelderde aan het begin van de middag zo'n 15 procent ten opzichte van het slot op maandag, tot een nieuw dieptepunt van ruim 75 roebel per dollar. Gisteren werd met een daling van 10 procent, tot 64 roebel per dollar, al de sterkste achteruitgang sinds de roebelcrisis van 1998 genoteerd.

De roebel is dit jaar ruimschoots in waarde gehalveerd en is daarmee de grootste verliezer van alle toonaangevende valuta in de wereld. De Russische munt staat zwaar onder druk door de grote onzekerheid over de Russische economie, die wordt geremd door de westerse sancties tegen het land en de sterke daling van de olieprijs. De afgelopen dagen gaat de achteruitgang van de munt steeds sneller. De daling van 40 roebel per dollar naar 55 nam tussen begin oktober en begin december nog bijna twee maanden in beslag. De stap naar meer dan 75 roebel per dollar werd vervolgens binnen een week genomen.

Staatsleningen
Door alle onrust loopt ook de rente op Russische staatsleningen hard op. Vandaag steeg het rendement op tienjaarsleningen in roebels naar ruim 15 procent, waarmee het hoogste peil in jaren werd bereikt. Het rendement op vergelijkbare leningen in dollars steeg naar 7,6 procent.



donderdag 18 september 2014

Eastern Promises. Portrait of Eastern Europe in 50 films

Eastern Promises. Portrait of Eastern Europe in 50 films is the title of one of the retrospectives at this year’s 62nd San Sebastian Festival. A look at movies produced since 2000 in the countries that lived under Soviet influence post-World War II. A cycle to discover the creative wealth of these film industries and the new talents that have emerged in the last decade, putting an end to all kinds of prejudices and stereotyped images and bringing us closer to the reality of these countries as they themselves portray it.
This year will see the 25th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. An occurrence which brought an end to the division of Europe that had marked the Cold War and to Soviet domination in these countries, totally separated ideologically and culturally from the rest of Europe. From then on, a series of momentous historical events completely changed the political geography of the countries forming that bloc traditionally known as "Eastern Europe": the Balkan War and the tragic division of the former Yugoslavia, the Romanian revolution, the disappearance of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics following the independence of some of its member states, the dissolution of Czechoslovakia, etc. The shift from the former communist regimes to market economies and the opening up to cultural products that had been repressed was also decisive in provoking important social changes in these countries, both in the generations that had lived under communism and in other new ones that emerged after the fall of the Wall.
As was to be expected, these changes, which radically transformed the former communist societies in barely 25 years, are reflected in the cinema produced in these countries, a cinema that now brings us a record and testimony of that social and political process. The new generations of filmmakers from countries such as Romania, Hungary, Poland or Czech Republic currently attract the attention of critics and audiences worldwide, along with the proposals from countries experiencing new stimulus in their film production: Bulgaria, the Baltic Republics, Ukraine, Slovakia, Slovenia, Moldavia and Macedonia. All propose new mind-sets for today’s audiences: films on social issues portraying contemporary human landscapes, historical recreations of events in recent decades only now coming to light, models of genre movies focussed on a new kind of audience, young upcoming filmmakers who turn their particular points of view on the world inherited from their elders... Liberalisation, critique, historical reflection and uncertainty as regards the future of these societies come together in this extremely wealthy cinematic fresco helping us to better understand that Europe hidden from our eyes for decades and to discover how it deals with that new reality today.
The retrospective will bring together a total of 50 titles from Albania, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Croatia, Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Moldavia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia and Serbia, many of which have never been seen in our country. The cycle will include, among others, titles such as No Man's Land(2001) by Danis Tanovic, The Blacks (2009) by Goran Dević & Zvonimir Jurić, Children of Sarajevo (2012) by Aida Begic, The Parade (2011) by Srđan Dragojević, How I Killed a Saint (2004) by Teona Strugar Mitevska, The Temptation of St. Tony (2009) by Veiko Õunpuu, Cooking History (2009) by Peter Kerekes, The Wild Bees (2001) by Bohdan Sláma, Hukkle (2002) by György Pálfi, The Death of Mr. Lazarescu (2005) by Cristi Puiu, 12:08 East of Bucharest (2006) by Corneliu Porumboiu and Panihida (2012)by Ana-Felicia Scutelnicu & Tito Molina (provisional titles selection). A publication coordinated by Mathieu Darras will accompany the cycle.

The retrospective is jointly organised with San Telmo Museum, San Sebastian European Capital of Culture 2016, Euskadiko Filmategia/Filmoteca Vasca and CulturArts IVAC.

maandag 3 maart 2014

Political crisis in Ukraine



Crimea has been a part of Russia for over two centuries and to many Russians it is a strange switch in the Soviet history that Crimea is not part of Russia today. It was a present of Nikita Chrushev to celebrate the 300th anniversary of Ukraine’s merger with tsarist Russia.  In recent decades it has been a source of tension between Ukraine and Russia. 

One of the most recent disputes has been in May 1992, shortly after the collapse of the Soviet Union, when the Crimean Parliament declared independence from Ukraine. The dispute was resolved with an agreement known as the Act on Division of Power Between Authorities of Ukraine and Republic of Crimea, which granted Crimea autonomous status within Ukraine.

The Crimea is the only region in Ukraine where Russians are in the majority, constituting about 60 percent of Crimea’s population.  Apart from the Russians and Ukrainians, there live 12 percent Crimean Tatar (a Muslim population which has been deported en masse in 1942 by Stalin to Central Asia and have since returned to their homeland), who have little affection for Russia. There is also an important naval base at Sevastopol that the Russians lease from Ukraine (until 1942 in exchange for discounts on Russian gas). Sevastopol is the home of Russia's Black Sea Fleet, and it gives the Russian Navy direct access to the Mediterranean Sea.

Last November started unrest in Kiev when President Yanukovich backed away from political and free trade agreements with the European Union. On 22 February he was impeached by the Ukrainian parliament and temporally – until the elections of May 2014 – replaced by Oleksandr Turchynov, an ally of Tymoshenko. This caused tensions between supporters of the new Kiev administration with pro-Russian protesters at the Crimean area. On 1 March the Russian parliament approved to send troops to Crimea in order to protect their military bases.

A full invasion of Ukraine could risk interrupting deliveries of Russian gas to European countries and further destabilizing a country that’s already on the brink of default. Opinion makers think that Putin’s goal rather may be to ensure Russia’s military dominance of the region survives through its hold on the Black Sea port Sevastopol.  The threat of military force may set the stage for a referendum scheduled for 30 March in Crimea over whether the region should have more independence from Kiev (and become de facto Russia’s unofficial protectorate).

Reporters of the Bloombergs Bussiness Week ask themselves why Ukraine matters to so many nations. “Ukraine doesn’t seem like the kind of place that world powers would want to tussle over. It’s as poor as Paraguay and as corrupt as Iran. During the 20th century it was home to a deadly famine under Stalin (the Holomodor, 1933), a historic massacre of Jews (Babi Yar, 1941), and one of the world’s worst nuclear disasters (Chernobyl, 1986).”

According to them China looks to Ukraine as a secure source to supply food and energy. It’s lending the country billions of dollars to upgrade farm irrigation and develop coal gasification; and Russian President Vladimir Putin wants Ukraine to join his Eurasian Union trade bloc, not the European Union. Half of the gas sold by Russian state controlled Gazprom to Europe, traveled through a maze of Ukrainian pipelines.  [Read more at: The New Great Game: Why Ukraine Matters to So Many Other Nations.]


Pride: Putin said in 2005 that the fall of the Soviet Union was “the greatest geopolitical catastrophe” of the 20th century. From that perspective, to allow Ukraine to slip out of Russia’s orbit would make Putin no better than Mikhail Gorbachev, who presided over the Soviet empire’s dissolution in 1991.

Trade: Putin wants Ukraine to join Russia’s fledgling customs union with Belarus, Kazakhstan, and soon, Armenia. The customs union is his answer to the European Union’s much larger trading bloc. Indeed, the current protests broke out after Ukrainian President Viktor Yanukovych, a Putin ally, pivoted away from a European Union integration accord last November and chose Russia instead.

History: Russia and Ukraine have deep historical links dating back to the Kievan Rus, whose glory days were the 11th and 12th centuries. Kievan Rus “is traditionally seen as the beginning of Russia and the ancestor of Belarus and Ukraine.”

Statehood: In 2008, the Russian business daily Kommersant cited a source in a NATO country’s delegation who quoted Putin as telling President George W. Bush: “You understand, George, that Ukraine isn’t even a state.” For most of the 900 years preceding independence in 1991, it wasn’t. Parts of what’s now Ukraine were controlled by Poland, Lithuania, the Khanate of Crimea, Austria Hungary, Germany, and of course Russia. In 2009 Putin approvingly quoted a description of Ukraine as “little Russia.” If Putin doesn’t perceive Ukraine as a real state, he’s less likely to respect its independence.

Crimea: Crimea, the southern part of Ukraine on the Black Sea, was part of Russia until 1954, when it was given to the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic by the Presidium of the Supreme Soviet, supposedly to strengthen brotherly ties, even though it had a majority-Russian population. Historians still aren’t sure why Russia gave away Crimea, but Putin isn’t likely to let that gift get too far away.

The Navy: Russia’s Black Sea Fleet is headquartered in the Crimean city of Sevastopol (which is less than 200 miles northwest of Sochi). If an unfriendly Ukrainian government ended the lease, Russia would be forced to move its headquarters east to Novorossiysk. In December, Russia dangled an offer of cheaper natural gas to Ukraine in exchange for better terms on its lease in Sevastopol.

Energy: Natural gas sales to Europe are a key source of foreign exchange for Russia, and a big share of that gas passes through Ukraine. It wants to keep those pipelines in friendly hands. But Russia’s Gazprom is also hedging its bets by building a new South Stream pipeline that crosses the Black Sea on the seabed from Russia to Bulgaria, bypassing Ukraine.

Source: New York Times, Bloomberg Businessweek


zaterdag 22 februari 2014

De crisis in Oekraïne: een kijk op de zaak door Idesbald Goddeeris


'Wat Verhofstadt in Oekraïne doet is ofwel dom ofwel pervers'
Slavist en historicus Idesbald Goddeeris (KULeuven) heeft bedenkingen bij de politiek van de Europese Unie in Oekraïne. Bovendien zijn er ultra-fascisten onder de demonstranten. Een gesprek over olie op het vuur in een complex conflict.