• Теги
    • избранные теги
    • Издания447
      • Показать ещё
      Люди1079
      • Показать ещё
      Страны / Регионы1434
      • Показать ещё
      Международные организации244
      • Показать ещё
      Компании762
      • Показать ещё
      Разное679
      • Показать ещё
      Формат16
      Показатели42
      • Показать ещё
Foreign Affairs
Foreign Affairs
«Foreign Affairs» (Фо́рин аффе́рс) — американский журнал по тематике международных отношений и внешней политики США, выходящий шесть раз в год. Издатель — Совет по международным отношениям. Журнал считается наиболее авторитетным в вопросах внешней политики США. Ж ...

«Foreign Affairs» (Фо́рин аффе́рс) — американский журнал по тематике международных отношений и внешней политики США, выходящий шесть раз в год. Издатель — Совет по международным отношениям. Журнал считается наиболее авторитетным в вопросах внешней политики США.

Журнал выходит с 1922 года; основателем и первым редактором (до 1927 года) был Арчибальд Кэри Кулидж.

Тираж журнала рос:

  • 1922 год — 5 тысяч экземпляров;
  • 1959 год — 27 тысяч;
  • 1963 год — 57 тысяч;
  • 1976 год — 72,5 тысячи;
  • 2014 год — 170 тысяч

Позиция по отношению к СССР

Уже первый номер содержал статью самого Кулиджа «Россия после Генуи и Гааги», которая после анализа новой экономической политики и дипломатических усилий большевистского государства высказывала сомнения в долговечности текущего курса большевиков и предлагала «четыре очевидных возможности» развития (контрреволюция, экономическая реставрация капитализма, раскол партии большевиков с возвратом к жёсткой коммунистической идеологии и рост экономических проблем, в результате которых страна «впадет в анархию, развалившись на куски»). За первые 50 лет существования в журнале были опубликованы 220 статей по советской тематике (почти по одной статье в каждом номере). По утверждению Р. С. Овинникова, «ни одна из них не была дружелюбной» Вики

 

Foreign Affairs — семнадцатый эпизод девятого сезона мультсериала «Гриффины».

https://www.foreignaffairs.com/issues/2015/94/6

Развернуть описание Свернуть описание
27 июня, 00:00

Remarks by Homeland Security Advisor Thomas P. Bossert at Cyber Week 2017 -- As Prepared for Delivery

Tel Aviv, Israel June 26, 2017 As prepared for delivery Thank you for that kind introduction.  It is an honor to be here today on behalf of President Trump and the American people.  Thank you, Prime Minister Netanyahu, Dr. Matania, and the wonderful conference hosts for inviting me. I’m humbled to speak at this important event to such a distinguished group. This incredible event includes cyber professionals from more than 50 countries.  Those of you that are here for Cyber Week are among the world’s most accomplished experts in this field.  Thank you for what you do, and for what you will continue to do when this week together ends and you return to your jobs around the globe. Prime Minister Netanyahu, I know our relations are strong; and judging from this audience, it’s clear you can draw more U.S. talent into one room than I can. I am here to talk about Cybersecurity. I am also here because President Trump understands the U.S. cannot lessen our engagement in this region of the world, lessen our support for Israel, or create a power vacuum for Iran, ISIS, Hezbollah, and Hamas to fill. Doing so would make the world a more dangerous place. I am pleased to be here with a Prime Minister who voiced his clear-eyed objection to appeasing Iran and enabling its nuclear aspirations. He did so at great professional risk and took political criticism for stating an unpopular truth. He was right. He was courageous. The American people agreed with him. And now, he has a partner in President Trump and the Israeli people have a stronger, deeper relationship with the United States because of it. PM Netanyahu will continue to defend the State of Israel. President Trump’s May visit demonstrated our continued commitment to Israel. We remain particularly close on security issues. America’s security partnership with Israel is stronger than ever. The Iron Dome missile defense program continues to keep the Israeli people safe from short-range rockets launched by Hezbollah and Hamas. The David’s Sling and Arrow weapons systems guard against long-range missiles. We hope that someday soon we live in a world where children will never need to rush towards shelter, as sirens ring out.  There is incredible technology in the Iron Dome system.  It is that kind of ingenuity that we need to tap as the fight moves from missiles in the air to malware through the Internet. President Trump said something else on his recent trip here – his first international trip – he said that Israel is a testament to the unbreakable spirit of the Jewish people.  From all parts of this great country, one message resounds: and that is the message of hope. That message of hope extends to the Palestinian people as well. He brought a message that we must build a coalition of partners who aim to stamp out violent extremism. Cyberspace has emerged as a major arena of conflict between liberal and illiberal forces across the globe, making the interconnected world of cyberspace one of the biggest strategic challenges since 9/11. Israel is a market oriented, knowledge-based economy with a strong technology sector.  You have the highest research and development spending per GDP in the world.  And, one of the most talented tech workforces in the world – and a system for developing that talent that we can all learn from.  So, it’s not surprising that the leadership of Israel would support events such as this to bring together the best and brightest minds to address today’s challenges in the cyber environment.  While physical borders can be extremely important, cyberspace knows no boundaries. Nations increasingly have the ability to steal sensitive information, alter data, or even destroy systems. And the trend is heading in the wrong direction. Destructive attacks are being executed by belligerent nations. North Korea attacked Sony, and Iran attacked Sands Casino and Saudi Aramco. Neither of these countries have near the sophistication and resources of China and Russia.  And, we cannot forget the challenges facing our small- and mid-sized businesses – the backbones of our economies – who are facing threats from ransomware to the theft of their intellectual property by foreign intelligence services. Cyber threats continue to grow. The complexity of the challenge continues to allude us. The question is: What is standing in our adversary’s way? Part of the answer includes firewalls, anti-virus, good network hygiene, etc. Better and faster information sharing is also suppressing malicious activity.  These are all things we are promoting in the United States and improving in the Trump Administration.  Yet, this would have been the same answer 15 years ago. And, while these are good and necessary things, the adversary doesn’t encounter them until he’s compromised his target’s network. Today – 15 years later – we’re introducing terms like artificial intelligence and machine learning. We have ways of sharing information and ways to orchestrate defenses in our networks faster than we could have ever before. Again – all good and necessary. Better and faster, but not different. And, always after the adversary is in his target’s system. I would like this audience, this week, to advance the conversation. The Israelis and others have adopted operational constructs between the public and private sectors that focus on the adversary; what the adversary is doing in the internet; and how to thwart, impede, or otherwise inflict a defensive cost on the adversary, or—when necessary—deter bad behavior with punitive measures.  We must recognize that while we have small differences, free and market-based nations must engage with the private sector in an OPERATIONAL way to identify our cyber adversaries and increase our defenses considerably.  And, we can do it in a way that preserves our privacy and security, while safeguarding our intelligence sources and methods. Cybersecurity is about risk management.  Networked technology will never be completely secure, and we need to prioritize our work. We need to mitigate and manage risk; this includes identifying key data and the functions that must be protected, and then deliberately planning for their protection.  We must centralize policies in government and industry, and decentralize their execution.  And, we need standards and metrics to hold managers accountable. We must implement fundamental cybersecurity practices; to include regular patching, multifactor authentication, encrypting data, at rest and in motion, and white-listing applications.  We must also secure our nations; this includes defending our critical infrastructure and focusing on the energy sector, communications, financial services, and transportation; the lifeline sectors. There is a clear role for government in this work. This priority, while it has been subject to countless discussions, has not seen the progress it deserves. Across the globe there are countries that do this with greater success than others. Israel is an example. We cannot achieve the security we need without partnerships. Partnerships with industry, partnerships with the owners and operators of infrastructure, and partnerships with likeminded countries. Increased defense is critical. As is deterrence. We must get serious about a deterrence strategy.  The stakes are too high and the risks are too grave not to.  This requires a foundational understanding of what constitutes responsible behavior, and what is unacceptable. Progress has been made in building consensus around responsible state behavior and the Trump Administration will work to expand that consensus. We must move from talking about norms to implementing them. But we must also hold those who violate these norms accountable. This may not be achievable through a UN effort.  Just last week, we saw the limits of the UN Group of Governmental Experts, which had achieved some good results in the past, but came up short.  They were unable to even reach consensus on their final report.  It’s time to consider other approaches. We will also work with smaller groups of likeminded partners to call out bad behavior and impose costs on our adversaries. We will also pursue bilateral agreements when needed. Deterrence may require limiting bad actors’ access to our markets and other benefits the Internet brings. These are the questions we must ask. There should be incentives for cooperation and consequences for disruption. I think that needs to be stated out loud. While not abandoning our multilateral efforts, the United States will move forward internationally in meaningful bilateral efforts, such as the one we enjoy with Great Britain and now Israel, while continuing to build a likeminded coalition of partners who can act together. The cyber strategies of the future must draw upon the clear experience of history.  The only way to provide a safer and more secure future in a digitally connected world is to embrace the principles of individual property; the rule of law; and an unwavering commitment to free markets.  And, to exclude those who do not.  We share these values with many nations around the world, including Israel.  We know nations that are economically and politically free will always be stronger than nations that are not.   There has been no better engine for capitalism and growth than the internet.  Consider the wealth and development that cyberspace has enabled.  The internet reflecting our values is where we will find partners sharing those values.  Nations that share these values also know the role of government is to apply rules to protect them. The free market succeeds because of basic rules observed between individuals and also rules designed by government to protect contracts and promises and transfers of goods and services.  When this is threatened within a nation or internationally, it is appropriate for the government to respond.  The system works in part because those who violate the rules suffer consequences, and those who act well do well.   So, if individuals or nations choose to manipulate cyberspace for financial gain or geopolitical advantage, we must act to protect our shared values. The Internet is a great example of the free market at work.  No capitalist is surprised that the Internet was invented in a free society. The Internet was invented in America, by Americans—and one Brit—with government help.  Yet, it was private industry that turned the Internet into one of the world’s greatest tools. Despite this success, the Internet is vulnerable to fragmenting and we need to push back. The next step must be gaining international cooperation to impose consequences on those that act contrary to this growing consensus. To accomplish this, likeminded states should work to develop options for imposing consequences within a coalition structure, if possible. Until then, the United States must seek partners bilaterally. And so, it is with great pleasure I can announce TODAY the commencement of a U.S.-Israel bilateral cyber working group, led by Mr. Rob Joyce, the White House Cybersecurity Coordinator and Dr. Matania (weren’t they great?), along with the Department of State and representatives from the Departments of Commerce, Defense, and Homeland Security, and the FBI. The U.S. delegation will meet with senior leaders from Israel’s National Cyber Bureau, Defense Force, Shin Bet and Ministries of Foreign Affairs, Justice, and Defense. The meetings this week will focus on a range of cyber issues – critical infrastructure, advanced R&D, international cooperation, and workforce development, among others. These high-level meetings represent the first step in strengthening bilateral ties on cyber issues following President Trump’s visit to Israel, and they make good on the promise he made to Prime Minister Netanyahu at their meeting on February 15. The bi-lateral working group of experts from across agencies will work with an eye towards developing a different operational construct: focused on finding and stopping cyber adversaries before they are in your networks; before they reach critical infrastructure, and identifying ways to hold bad actors accountable—a different conversation indeed. We believe that the agility Israel has in developing solutions will result in innovative cyber defenses we can test here and then take back to America. Over the course of this week, the assembled group here today will develop ideas that will advance cybersecurity and produce recommendations from industry on best practices, implementation, and execution concepts. Perfect security may not be achievable, but we have within our reach a safer, more secure Internet.  I look forward to the progress we’ll make together in this endeavor.   I thank you very much for your time and I look forward to the future.

26 июня, 19:02

Corker to block future arms sales to Gulf nations

Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker on Monday said he would block future U.S. arms sales to Saudi Arabia, Qatar and four other Gulf nations until a regional conflict is resolved.The Tennessee Republican announced his plans in a letter to Secretary of State Rex Tillerson Monday as the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council remains wracked by internal disputes over anti-terrorism efforts and a Saudi-led blockade of Qatar.Corker has advance approval powers over arms sales to foreign governments before Congress is notified, as does House Foreign Affairs Chairman Ed Royce (D-Calif.). "All countries in the region need to do more to combat terrorism, but recent disputes among the GCC countries only serve to hurt efforts to fight ISIS and counter Iran," Corker wrote."For these reasons, before we provide any further clearances during the informal review period on sales of lethal military equipment to the GCC states, we need a better understanding of the path to resolve the current dispute and reunify the GCC."The Senate voted 47-53 earlier this month to halt about $500 million in Trump administration weapons sales to Riyadh, with most Democrats and four Republicans registering concern over Saudi involvement in Yemen's bloody civil war. In addition to Saudi Arabia and Qatar, GCC members are the United Arab Emirates, Bahrain, and Kuwait.Corker's move would not block the $500 million in weapons sales, which had already been noticed to Congress and which had been targeted by Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) and Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Ct.).The State Department did not immediately return a request for comment on Corker's letter.

Выбор редакции
26 июня, 17:26

North American oil and gas opportunities abound, House panel told

Opportunities ranging from a likely overhaul of Mexico’s refineries to major new sales opportunities for US and Canadian oil field equipment manufacturers loom in the well-integrated North American oil and gas market that has been created in the past few years, witnesses told a US House Foreign Affairs Committee subcommittee on June 7.

26 июня, 12:17

Why Rep. Adam Kinzinger Is Raising ‘Holy Hell’ Over Russia

The up-and-coming member of the House Foreign Affairs Committee is prepared to wage a GOP rebellion.

24 июня, 18:22

What's the Problem With Al Jazeera?

The most popular news channel in the Arab world sits uneasily at the center of the Qatar crisis.

24 июня, 11:22

2 Dutch journalists freed unharmed by Colombian rebels

Two Dutch journalists have been freed unharmed after being held captive for almost a week by leftist rebels in Colombia.

22 июня, 17:54

Wall Street Journal Reporters Demand Action On Newsroom Diversity

The Wall Street Journal’s staff is about as diverse as the business world the paper covers: It’s essentially run by white men. A few star women have risen and departed over the years. And people of color are essentially missing from the top ranks. The situation is growing increasingly intolerable for Journal staffers, who say journalism at the paper that media mogul Rupert Murdoch owns is suffering from the overwhelming homogeneity of the newsroom. Earlier this month, a half-dozen female reporters at the outlet emailed Editor-in-Chief Gerard Baker and his deputy Matt Murray on behalf of nearly 200 staffers, expressing their growing frustration. The email, obtained by HuffPost, pointedly notes that the leadership hasn’t meaningfully addressed two related issues: the significant pay gap between men and women, and the lack of racial diversity. “Until our leadership reflects a more diverse population ― the population we are trying to attract as new subscribers ― we may not be producing the best journalism possible,” the email reads. The revelations about turmoil inside the Journal come as the paper is reeling from an ethics scandal. On Wednesday, the paper fired a prominent foreign affairs reporter for ethical violations that The Associated Press uncovered. "Diversity is such an issue at the Journal, I’ve heard people call it White Castle,” says one reporter. The June email landed in Baker’s inbox just days before the Journal reporters’ union issued a detailed report on pay at the paper. The report concluded that women in the union make less than men across the board, even accounting for experience, location and job title. Female reporters earn an average of 91 cents for every dollar their male counterparts make. The disparity widens when you consider all the women in the union ― including non-managerial staff in sales, tech and other areas. They make 87 percent of what men earn. The timing of the email was coincidental, the Journal insiders told HuffPost, but the report has created a greater sense of urgency inside the newsroom. (Full disclosure: This reporter was an editor at the Journal from 2006-2011.) The note (which you can read in full below) comes just a few months after the departure of the paper’s highest-ranking female editorial leader: Rebecca Blumenstein, who left to take a leadership position at The New York Times. That was a blow to the newsroom and particularly to women who viewed her as a champion and role model, Journal staffers told HuffPost.  The Journal reporters who spoke to HuffPost asked that their names not be published due to concern for how their superiors would consider their views. “People are scared,” said one female reporter who saw the most recent email. “There’s frustration and concern this isn’t being taken seriously.” A spokesman from the Journal did not respond to HuffPost’s requests for comment. Baker put off the reporters in an emailed response to their note. “I will take some time to respond in greater length seriatim to your various points, many of which have great validity,” he wrote back four days later. Baker has a well-known penchant for using 25-cent words. “Seriatim” means taking each point one by one. “For now, we are right in the final stages of nailing down the new newsroom leadership structure and I should be in position to make some announcements about this by early July,” he continued. In addition, staffers say that Baker hasn’t seemed sympathetic to concerns about diversity, despite taking some minor action on pay equity. “Diversity is such an issue at the Journal, I’ve heard people call it White Castle,” said the female reporter. “There’s frustration [they’re] not taking this seriously.” In the email, the reporters cited two recent stories that missed the mark precisely because of a lack of diversity: A page-one article about Target’s policy on bathrooms and transgender people in April quoted someone who linked transgender people and sexual predators. The story, which presumably went through the Journal’s rigorous editing process, failed to note that there is no evidence of such a connection. A May feature about how hard it is for college athletes to get jobs at Wall Street firms, failed to note initially the athletes were almost always men. “A (female) reporter brought the omission  to the attention of the Standards team. The fix required just two words, but meant a world of difference,” the reporters write in the email to Baker. Over the past year, the Journal has been often criticized for its coverage of the Trump administration and accused of going too easy on the president. Baker, a former conservative columnist, has personally caught a lot of flack for his remarks on Trump ― notably explaining his reluctance to label false statements from the president “lies.” In a memo to staff earlier this year, Baker asked reporters to avoid writing “Muslim-majority countries” when referring to the countries initially included under Trump’s travel ban. “Would be less loaded to say ‘seven countries the US has designated as being states that pose significant or elevated risks of terrorism,’” Baker wrote in the email, according to a BuzzFeed report. The lack of diversity needs to be tackled head-on if the Journal really wants to do great work, said one nonwhite male staffer who saw the email and signed an earlier, similar note to Baker in March. “The situation has been allowed to fester,” he said. The newsroom is not overtly racist, this staffer hastened to add, saying he has no personal beef here. None of the reporters or editors HuffPost spoke to believe this is a situation involving conscious racism or sexism. Still, the editors in charge are clearly hiring and promoting people they feel comfortable with ― other white guys. “If all the leadership positions are white men, we are missing important perspective on events of the day because we’re seeing it through one lens, whether people intend it or not,” the nonwhite staffer said. Of the 12 deputy managing editors at the top who serve under Baker and his deputy Murray, eight are white men and four are women. Two of the women work on operational issues, meaning they don’t directly handle coverage. Both of the editors who oversee the Journal’s notoriously conservative opinion page are white men. The Wall Street Journal is hardly the only newsroom in America that’s dominated by white men or that underpays women, but what’s unique here seems to be its leaders’ apparent unwillingness to grapple with the issue, and the direct way the paper’s staff and union are confronting it. The executive editor of The New York Times, Dean Baquet, who is African-American, acknowledged the paper’s own diversity issues in a piece the Times published last year. The article, by the paper’s former public editor, noted that of the 20 or so reporters who covered the Trump campaign, only two were black and none were Latino or Asian. “That’s less diversity than you’ll find in Donald Trump’s cabinet thus far,” Liz Spayd wrote. She criticized the Times for not doing more about mixing it up. “We’re not diverse enough,” Baquet said at the time. “But I think they’d say I have a commitment to it and that it’s gotten better in the past year.” He added that his effort to diversify the Times had been “intense and persistent.” Eighty percent of the Journal’s staff is white, according to a 2016 survey conducted by the American Society of News Editors. The New York Times is 78 percent white. The Washington Post is at 69 percent. At all three outlets, women journalists write fewer than half of the A-section stories, according to a separate report. (HuffPost’s union has not yet done a salary review, but plans to perform one sometime next year. HuffPost management has not yet released official diversity numbers.) The June email to Baker and Murray followed up on a longer March email, signed by 197 reporters and other staffers, who pleaded with Baker and Murray to consider a more intentional strategy when it comes to diversity. That email laid out specific suggestion for management. Some points were strikingly similar to those recommended recently by former U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder, who conducted a thorough internal review of ride-hailing firm Uber’s internal culture. For example, the writers asked the Journal editors to consider implementing the so-called Rooney rule, which calls for at least one minority member and one woman to be considered for every job opening. The reporters also asked that more effort be made to hire women into leadership roles, that a thorough salary review be undertaken and shared with staff and that managers get more training on how to assess reporters’ career paths ― an effort to dispel the notion, for example, that women who are mothers wouldn’t want to take on breaking news roles. Baker responded just a few hours later that day. ”I appreciate the seriousness of all these issues and I look forward to discussing them with you,” he wrote. He said many of the issues raised were “under consideration” and that he and the editors are “committed to fostering and developing a highly successful and welcoming workplace that provides the best possible opportunities for all of our journalists, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation.”  After the email flurry, Baker met with a few women at the company, but in the June follow-up, the authors make it clear that not much has happened since. On pay, after a widely publicized report from the reporters’ union last year, Dow Jones did take action, hiring an outside consulting firm to analyze salaries. The result: The company says only 3 percent of salaries required adjustments and that those were made. In his email in March to the reporters, Baker writes about the salary review. “The adjustments for the impacted group, which included both men and women and spanned multiple ethnicities, have been completed,” he writes. In an follow-up exchange, the women ask Baker for more transparency on the salary analysis. “I’m eager to be as transparent as possible,” Baker states. “Though I am sure you’ll understand that when it comes to individual salaries, we have to handle sensitively.” To be clear, the writers weren’t looking to learn their colleagues’ salaries, but to get a better sense of how such an analysis was conducted. Comparing pay is a tricky thing, and even systemic discrepancies can be explained away by a consulting firm paid by an employer that may not be interested in, essentially, giving half its workforce a raise.  The company hasn’t shared the particulars of that research with staff or the union, says Tim Martell, the executive director of IAPE, the news guild that represents the Journal’s reporters. “They told us 31 employees received a salary adjustment, but haven’t given us methodology or data. We only have their word,” he says. The union report released this month, on the other hand, offers an extremely detailed look at pay, releasing average salary information for workers by age and location. The union has also offered to review the salaries of its members and give them a report on where they stand in the organization. Martell says he’s received hundreds of requests ― mostly from women ― and so far has produced about 88 reports that give reporters a sense of where their pay stands relative to the median salary of someone working in the same location with a similar job title and level of experience. Several Journal reporters told HuffPost they weren’t surprised about the pay gap at the paper. “I always heard about women getting paid significantly less than men, but I didn’t think about it on a personal level until it happened to me,” said a former Wall Street Journal staffer who left the paper in 2015. After four years at the Journal, this staffer learned that a man sitting next to her, with the same level of experience and job title, was making $30,000 more a year than she was. He’d been hired relatively recently. When she raised the issue with her boss, she was told that because her male colleague was an “external hire,”  they had to pay more to poach him. “They were trying to convince him to join,” she explained. The female staffer got a 2 percent raise. “That didn’t come close to closing the gap,” she said. “I was very angry.” Her colleague ended up getting promoted and landing a new title a few weeks after she complained. Read the emails in full below. Email sent Friday, June 9, on behalf of nearly 200 WSJ reporters: Dear Gerry and Matt, You closed the meeting with three of us in April by encouraging us to hold you accountable on issues of diversity in the WSJ newsroom. It’s now mid-June, and on behalf of the nearly 200 colleagues who signed our initial letter, we wanted to check in regarding that conversation and what steps The Journal leadership has taken to address the problems discussed. Specifically, you and Matt said at that meeting that you would undertake a review of bylines, including video and WSJ conferences, to evaluate whether women are underrepresented. Our original letter pointed out that just one Saturday Review cover essay was authored by a woman over the prior six months. Little has changed: nine of the past 11 were by men.   We are also eager for an update regarding the intention you expressed in April to gather additional data from HR on the pay gap analysis, particularly on the compensation concerns within the newsroom. As we expressed in the letter and our follow-up meeting, we aren’t satisfied by what the company has shared thus far in terms of how it calculates appropriate pay ranges, how wide those ranges are and how many in the newsroom specifically were flagged as having pay inequities. Without breaking out newsroom results from the overall company numbers, we are left concerned that pay inequities do still plague this division. Finally, we are curious about the masthead changes you said were imminent. Until our leadership reflects a more diverse population ― the population we are trying to attract as new subscribers ― we may not be producing the best journalism possible. That became apparent in this story from the Quants series recently, in which references to the overwhelmingly male pipeline from the athletic pitch to Wall Street were never explicitly acknowledged as such until a (female) reporter brought the omission to the attention of the Standards team. The fix required just two words, but meant a world of difference. Same for the leder on Target’s response to North Carolina’s bathroom law, which characterized trans individuals as sexual predators in a quote from the American Family Association but initially offered no rebuttal. At least seven reporters and editors met to discuss the incident with Neal Lipschutz, expressing concern about how The Journal covered trans people and members of other minority groups and encouraging―at the very least―the adoption of a policy in which we seek out comment from those groups being accused of such offenses. Outspoken individuals helped spur changes in those incidents, but as a newsroom going forward, we must still do better. We look forward to hearing more from you as this fiscal year closes out. Best, Response from Baker on June 13: Thank you for this. As we told you back in April, we do indeed take these issues seriously and I certainly am grateful to you for holding me accountable. If you don’t mind, I will take some time to respond in greater length seriatim to your various points, many of which have great validity.  For now, we are right in the final stages of nailing down the new newsroom leadership structure and I should be in position to make some announcements about this by early July.  You’ll get a chance then to observe how we address the leadership issues you raised, as well as some of your other concerns.  I will respond to you at greater length by then and I’d be delighted to then meet and talk further. Gerry Gerard Baker Editor in Chief The Wall Street Journal Earlier email from March 28 signed by 197 staffers: Dear Gerry and Matt, We are concerned about the role of women and people of color in The Wall Street Journal’s newsroom, and would like to discuss diversity initiatives with you. Our highest ranking female role model left the company earlier this year. There are currently four women and eight men listed as deputy managing editors, and both editorial page editors are men. Nearly all the people at high levels at the paper deciding what we cover and how are white men. More than a year after IAPE released data showing that union-represented women reporters here make 90 cents for every $1 their male counterparts earn, and that black and Hispanic women earn the least among all union-represented employees, we feel that the underlying issues regarding pay equity have not been adequately addressed. We were troubled most recently by a report issued last week by the Women’s Media Center showing that 34.3% of WSJ’s A-section bylines from September through November were from women, down from 39.2% the prior year. Women comprise 49% of our union-represented reporters, writers and senior writers, according to IAPE data. During the same period, 42.5% of bylines at the Washington Post came from women and the New York Times saw an increase in female bylines to 39% from 32.3% the prior year. We recognize that there are potential flaws with an external study that only counted bylines in a single section over a three-month period. But in the absence of other data from the company, this study suggests a problem with female representation among A-section bylines. There are troubling signs in other parts of the paper as well. For example, over the past six months, the high-profile Saturday Review cover piece was written by a woman just once. And following the most recent round of layoffs and buyouts, just 18% of our union-represented writers, editors, visual journalists and reporters are people of color. Diversity in the newsroom is good for business and good for our coverage. We would like to see the Journal undertake a more comprehensive, intentional and transparent approach to improving it. We know that this is a topic being discussed as part of the broader WSJ 2020 project, and we stand ready to work with you to ensure that we have a strong pipeline of women, racial and ethnic minorities, and those from a diverse set of socioeconomic backgrounds, ready for promotion when the opportunity next arises. This will also help ensure that prospective new hires feel they could flourish here. We are eager to see efforts similar to those launched at ProPublica be created in our own newsroom. Among those programs, we suggest: ―A Rooney rule ensuring that women and minorities are considered in the slate of candidates for all leadership positions. ―A significant effort made to hire a woman in a masthead-level position overseeing news gathering and involved in setting the coverage agenda, with consideration for women who are also racial and ethnic minorities. Many of the women in leadership positions have the word “deputy” in their title, including the deputy U.S. News and Money & Investing editors. ―Manager training to address and dispel assumptions about what individuals want their career paths to look like. For example, parents of young children may be eager to do a stint abroad or a breaking-news beat. And we have typically had few women on beats such as economics and sports, despite interest among women in covering those beats. ―Greater flexibility for parents that still offers them the opportunity to move up the newsroom ladder. ―A review of how well we do in quoting women as expert sources, rather than just men, especially in economics and markets stories, along with a concerted effort by managers and reporters to diversify our source pools. ―A detailed report of salaries among reporters, editors and other newsroom roles, broken down by section or group (US News, our global regions, M&I, Life & Arts, etc.), by gender and by race/ethnicity, shared with staff. We would welcome the opportunity to meet, brainstorm other ideas and agree to specific next steps to ensure that all journalists in this newsroom are treated fairly and paid equitably. Sincerely, And Baker’s response the same day in March:  Thank you for the note addressed to Matt Murray and me. First, let me assure you that Matt and I - and all the editorial leadership - take your concerns seriously. I look forward to having a full discussion about the issues you raise in a spirit of constructive cooperation. We are absolutely committed to fostering and developing a highly successful and welcoming workplace that provides the best possible opportunities for all of our journalists, regardless of gender, race or sexual orientation. As you note, the people stream of the WSJ 2020 process is reviewing these and other issues. Some of the proposals in your note are already under consideration in that work, led by Christine Glancey. She’ll be taking part in a Storylab session on Thursday, which I encourage you to attend to learn more about these efforts and share your ideas. While we realize that there are many elements that contribute to the creation and maintenance of a properly diverse workforce, I do want to take a moment to address the issue of pay equity you raise. In particular I wish to highlight the comprehensive internal and external reviews of our compensation practices that were done in response to the IAPE report mentioned in your letter. The internal review was led by our People team, and the external review was overseen by Willis Towers Watson. The final analysis of both exercises showed that fewer than 3% of Dow Jones employees needed pay adjustments. The adjustments for the impacted group, which included both men and women and spanned multiple ethnicities, have been completed. In order to track our continued progress, we are already midway through new internal and external reviews for 2017. Again, I appreciate the seriousness of all these issues and I look forward to discussing them with you. Sincerely, Gerry Clarification: A reference in this article to a page-one article about Target has been amended to reflect that the article was subject to an editorial process. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

22 июня, 14:23

Thursday's Morning Email: Democratic Chatter Grows About Ousting Nancy Pelosi

TOP STORIES (And want to get The Morning Email each weekday? Sign up here. NANCY PELOSI UNDER FIRE Some Congressional Democrats are calling for new leadership in light of the latest special election losses. [HuffPost] HOW PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP COULD DRAMATICALLY REMAKE THE COURTS He inherited double the number of court vacancies that former President Barack Obama did when he took office. [HuffPost] TOP INTEL OFFICIALS TOLD INVESTIGATORS TRUMP ENCOURAGED THEM TO SAY THERE WAS NO COLLUSION WITH RUSSIA Director of National Intelligence Dan Coats and National Security Agency Director Adm. Mike Rogers reportedly told investigators that their conversations with the president were “odd and uncomfortable” but that they did not believe Trump “gave them orders to interfere.” [CNN] STEVE SCALISE NOW IN ‘FAIR CONDITION’ The House Majority Whip, who was shot last week during a practice for the congressional baseball game, is now beginning rehabilitation. The FBI said the shooter had a list of six members of Congress on him at the time of the shooting, but did not label the incident an act of terrorism. [HuffPost] ‘THE SUPER PREDATORS’ “When the man who abuses you is also a cop.” [HuffPost] A RECORD NUMBER OF VENEZUELANS ARE FLEEING TO THE U.S. Amid the escalating political chaos. [HuffPost] MEET THE 395 KIDS PHILANDO CASTILE LEFT BEHIND “It was a few weeks after his death in July 2016 when Sakki Selznick learned that her daughter had been giving imaginary high-fives to Philando Castile.” And new heartbreaking video shows Diamond Reynolds’ 4-year-old saying: “I don’t want you to get shooted.” [HuffPost] IN DEFENDING THE WEALTH OF HIS CABINET, TRUMP GOES OFF THE CUFF “These are people that are great, brilliant business minds, and that’s what we need, that’s what we have to have so the world doesn’t take advantages of us,” Trump told the crowd in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. “We can’t have the world taking advantage of us anymore. And I love all people, rich or poor, but in those particular positions I just don’t want a poor person. Does that make sense? Does that make sense?” [HuffPost] WHAT’S BREWING INTRODUCING SEASON TWO OF ‘CANDIDATE CONFESSIONAL’ “A podcast dedicated to those who came up short in the world of governance.” [HuffPost] HOW CLEAN DOES YOUR PARK NEED TO BE When it’s a former radioactive Superfund site? [HuffPost] BATTEN DOWN THE ESTATE It’s official: A “Downton Abbey” movie is happening. [HuffPost] KIM KARDASHIAN HAS REPORTEDLY HIRED A SURROGATE For baby number 3 with Kanye West. [HuffPost] THE LATEST ‘GAME OF THRONES’ TRAILER PROMISES QUITE A LOT OF WAR (AND WINTER, OBVIOUSLY) 24 days, people. 24 days. [HuffPost] FORGET ACTING George Clooney just sold his tequila brand for $1 billion. Yes that’s a billion with a B. [HuffPost] BEFORE YOU GO Investigating the Yemen prison interrogation programs. A record-breaking heatwave in the Southwest kills four. Understanding why the selection of a new Saudi Arabian crown prince matters. “Trained to kill: How four boy soldiers survived Boko Haram.” Michael Bloomberg wants folks to focus on 2020, while Michael Moore is calling for more Democratic leadership. The Wall Street Journal has fired a foreign affairs reporter over alleged spy plane deal. Was Queen Elizabeth II sending Brexit messages with her hat choice when she officially opened parliament? Waiting for years for that Joe Scarborough EP? Don’t worry: He plans to drop one a month for the next four years. This Georgia sheriff has cut the sentences of the inmates who saved a guard’s life. Back-to-back deadly Alaska black bear maulings have experts concerned. This thief got caught on camera with his pants down. A bunch of news outlets bought into the idea that these people had been living off air, not food. Of course Emma Watson is hiding copies of “The Handmaid’s Tale” around Paris. We love that the Girl Scouts will soon be able to earn badges in cybersecurity. This eye infection blinds someone every 15 minutes. Analyzing the seven types of Twitter joke structures. We have a real-life pulling the sword from the stone situation in Poland. Who cares about wedding shade when you’re Drake Bell and have abs like this? CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story identified Diamond Reynolds as Debbie Reynolds. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

22 июня, 12:29

How the government can read your email

It's a provision called Section 702, it's not as limited as supporters say—and this year Congress has a chance to scale it back.

Выбор редакции
22 июня, 01:07

Wall Street Journal fires reporter over alleged commercial ties

Newspaper says chief foreign affairs correspondent violated ethical guidelines

22 июня, 00:52

TOO COZY, OR FLAT OUT CORRUPT? The AP reports that Jay Solomon, the Wall Street Journal’s Chief Fore…

TOO COZY, OR FLAT OUT CORRUPT? The AP reports that Jay Solomon, the Wall Street Journal’s Chief Foreign Affairs Correspondent has been sacked: The Wall Street Journal on Wednesday fired its highly regarded chief foreign affairs correspondent after evidence emerged of his involvement in prospective commercial deals — including one involving arms sales to foreign […]

22 июня, 00:48

The Fall of a Foreign-Affairs Reporter

The Wall Street Journal has fired Jay Solomon for becoming involved with an arms dealer, but reporters have often been unable to resist getting their hands dirty with the topics they cover.

21 июня, 22:56

Wall Street Journal Fires Reporter Jay Solomon For Alleged Spy Plane Deal

The Wall Street Journal has fired longtime foreign affairs correspondent Jay Solomon for what it said was a violation of “his ethical obligations as a reporter.” The paper announced the move minutes before The Associated Press reported that Solomon was offered a 10 percent stake in a company headed by a news source ― an Iranian-born businessman who was once an arms dealer with CIA ties. Among the ventures Solomon discussed was a $725 million contract that would allow surveillance planes to spy inside of Iran, according to AP. AP said it could not confirm whether Solomon received money from Farhad Azima, the businessman, or accepted a stake in his company, Denx LLC. Denx ceased operations last year, according to AP. Solomon’s firing ― and the idea that a reporter could have positioned himself to collect more than $70 million in a shady international arms deal ― seemed straight out of Hollywood, and immediately sent shockwaves through journalism circles.  Solomon denied any business venture with Azima. “I clearly made mistakes in my reporting and entered into a world I didn’t understand,” he told the AP on Wednesday. “I never entered into any business with Farhad Azima, nor did I ever intend to. But I understand why the emails and the conversations I had with Mr. Azima may look like I was involved in some seriously troubling activities.” The Wall Street Journal told HuffPost that Solomon was no longer employed by the paper and said it was conducting its own investigation into the allegations. “We are dismayed by the actions and poor judgement of Jay Solomon,” a spokesman for the paper said. “The allegations raised by this reporting are serious. While our own investigation continues, we have concluded that Mr. Solomon violated his ethical obligations as a reporter, as well as our standards. He has not been forthcoming with us about his actions or his reporting practices and he has forfeited our trust.” Paul Beckett, the Journal’s Washington bureau chief, notified staff Wednesday afternoon that Solomon was fired following ethical violations, but did not go into great detail, according to sources. He informed staffers that publication of an AP story was imminent.  The Associated Press obtained tens of thousands of Azima’s emails that include communications between the businessman and Solomon. The AP also obtained an March 2015 operating agreement for Denx, which listed “an apparent stake for Solomon.” AP reported that Solomon’s early email conversations with Azima appear aimed at cultivating him as a source. But the emails suggest their relationship evolved. “Our businessman opportunities are so promising,” Solomon texted Azima in October 2014, the AP reported. Later that month, Solomon asked Azima if he had mentioned their business plans to a mutual friend. “Hell no!” Azima wrote. The next year, Azima wrote Solomon to discuss a $725 million contract with the United Arab Emirates that would allow surveillance planes to spy inside of Iran, Syria, Iraq, and Yemen. Azima, a U.S. citizen and an aviation magnate, asked Solomon to float the idea with the UAE government at an upcoming lunch, according to an April 2015 email obtained by the AP.   “We all wish best of luck to Jay on his first defense sale,” Azima wrote to Solomon and two of his business partners ― former CIA officers Gary Bernsten and Scott Modell.  Before Deux was shuttered, its partners considered a scheme to instigate regime change in Kuwait, AP reported. It’s unclear if they acted on the plan. Solomon, who had been nominated by the Journal for multiple Pulitzer Prizes, led the paper’s coverage of secret negotiations that culminated in a nuclear agreement between Iran, the U.S., and five world powers. In a book published last year, Solomon criticized the nuclear accord, arguing that “rather than calming the world’s most combustible region, [it] risks inflaming it.” Investigators in the U.S. and abroad are now probing whether Azima, in a separate deal, violated the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act by bribing an Emirati official to profit from a hotel sale in Tbilisi, Georgia, AP reported on Tuesday. Azima has a decades-long history of questionable business deals. But until recently, he evaded law enforcement, in part because of past work with the CIA. Jeffrey Fegley, a former employee of Azima’s airline, Global Airways, described himself to AP as “the guy who filled up the briefcases with $100,000 worth of small bills so you could bribe the ground crew to get your cargo unloaded in a foreign land.” When AP pressed Fegley on who Global Airways’ clients were, he named the CIA. Azima’s CIA connections later served him when prosecutors began investigating a Kansas bank  in the 1980s with possible mob ties. Azima was one of the bank’s directors, but he was off-limits to law enforcement, a retired prosecutor told AP. “It became apparent that we were not able to pursue prosecution of Azima, Lloyd Monroe said. This is a developing story and will be updated. -- This feed and its contents are the property of The Huffington Post, and use is subject to our terms. It may be used for personal consumption, but may not be distributed on a website.

21 июня, 22:53

Wall Street Journal fires Jay Solomon over involvement with arms dealer

Solomon did not respond to emails seeking comment.

21 июня, 18:42

Expert: Tillerson’s plan is a dud, but Russia offers no alternative

U.S. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson's plan, reportedly drafted by the State Department to guide the Trump administration’s approach toward Russia, is an effort on part of the U.S. to make an inventory of Russian-U.S. relations. But it leaves a lot of questions unaddressed, believe experts in Russia. Moscow, however, does not seem to offer any alternative plan, except in the form of a catalogue of complaints and grievances. The devil is in the details "As always, the devil is in the details," said Andrei Kortunov, general director of the Russian International Affairs Council, and a member of the Valdai discussion club. "For example, the plan’s authors apparently make reference to cases of the harassment of American diplomats [supposedly by Russian security services], when they speak about 'aggressive actions against the U.S.', but Americans hardly have a right to teach Russians on this matter, considering the expelled Russian diplomats, sanctioned Russian property in the U.S., and an overall environment in which the Russian embassy in Washington operates," said the expert. One of the key points for which the leaked plan was criticized by some Russian experts is that it bypasses a sensitive subject of Russian-U.S. interaction in Eastern Europe. Putin says U.S. should modify electoral system "Topics such as sanctions, escalation of tensions in Eastern Europe, the missile defense system in the region, and NATO expansion are all omitted from the document," said Boris Mezhuev, a political scientist and assistant professor at the Department of Philosophy of Moscow State University. The expert added that the new program, in its current form, will not contribute much toward a solution of existing problems in bilateral relations. Where’s 'Lavrov’s plan'? At the same time, Russia did not yet offer any alternative that could provide a solid foundation for Russian-U.S. relations, and it's not known to have a single document regulating policy towards the U.S. "Despite the fact that Russians may be arrogantly critical about Tillerson’s plan, we do not have an alternative 'Lavrov’s plan'," said Mezhuev. "The absence of one reveals a serious problem of the conceptual disagreements that the country’s elites have about the country’s foreign policy and its national identity." The expert added that the country’s political elites have no unified understanding of what Moscow wants from the West, and thus, the chance that a similar framework for dealing with the U.S. could be drafted by the Kremlin or the Ministry of Foreign Affairs is minimal. Lacking such a document does not mean, however, that Russia fails to catalogue its grievance towards the U.S. "I’m not exactly sure about the form, but Russia definitely has a list of questions and grievances it has in relations with the U.S.," concluded Kortunov. Read more: Russia considers no counter-demands to U.S. in response to Tillerson plan>>>

21 июня, 15:12

Is Demography Destiny For US GDP Growth?

Forecasting economic activity is generally a thankless task — unless you’re using demographics as a modeling foundation, which provides a surprisingly accurate means for looking ahead. That’s good news for analysts trying to develop robust estimates of GDP growth over a medium-to-long-term horizon. But it’s also bad news if you’re expecting economic activity to accelerate […]

Выбор редакции
21 июня, 13:19

China's Growing Influence On Middle East Shouldn't Be Lost On An Impulsive Trump Administration

The Iranians will emerge as winners. The Saudis will lose influence. Growing Chinese influence in the Middle East will complicate the foreign affairs of the United States. If Washington resorts to simplified, binary decision making in the Middle East, it will be out-maneuvered by Beijing.

21 июня, 02:56

Grenell under consideration to be ambassador to Germany

Richard "Ric" Grenell, a former United Nations official and prominent backer of President Donald Trump, is under consideration to be ambassador to Germany, according to three people briefed on the discussions. Grenell is now unlikely to be named the pick as NATO ambassador, as was previously reported, one of these officials said. Another person familiar with the talks said NATO could be a possibility for Grenell, but that Secretary of State Rex Tillerson wants Kay Bailey Hutchison, the former Texas senator, for the post, and is likely to get his way. It is unclear if Grenell will get the nod, officials said, as internal disagreements remain about a number of ambassador jobs. Sarah Huckabee Sanders, a White House spokeswoman, declined to comment. "Nothing to announce at this time but will keep you posted," she said in an email. A representative for Grenell declined to comment.Grenell is a frequent supporter of Trump on TV and was spokesman at the United Nations during the Bush administration, after working for New York Gov. George Pataki and South Carolina's Mark Sanford.He now works in public affairs and lives in California. The 50-year-old Grenell is often acerbic on Twitter. He was a prominent supporter — and a foreign policy backer when the campaign was in desperate need. He is generally perceived as intelligent about foreign affairs. But he is also seen as "potentially problematic," according to one White House official, and one adviser noted his acerbic tweets. He is openly gay, which has sometimes played a prominent role in his career. He resigned as spokesman for Mitt Romney's 2012 presidential campaign after a short stint, and the New York Times headline was: "Romney Camp Stirred Storm Over Gay Aide."

21 июня, 00:10

Senate's bipartisan Russia sanctions bill delayed in House

The House has found a potential constitutional issue with the Senate's recently passed sanctions package targeting Russia and Iran, raising the prospect of a delay that could allow President Donald Trump's White House to secure its preferred changes to the bill.The House has held off on referring the sanctions bill to a committee, a GOP aide said Tuesday, while staff reviews whether it runs afoul of a requirement in the U.S. Constitution that any revenue-raising legislation start in the lower chamber. The so-called "blue-slip" issue could slow the momentum of the Senate's bipartisan bill — which passed 98-2 and includes new handcuffs on Trump's ability to ease penalties against Russia.A stuck Russia sanctions bill would help the White House, which planned to ask its House GOP allies for a different approach that would preserve Trump's power to work on more collaborative relations with Vladimir Putin's government. Democrats slammed the House GOP's constitutional concerns as an attempt to water down or stop legislation that would constrain Trump.“House Republicans are considering using a procedural excuse to hide what they’re really doing: covering for a president who has been far too soft on Russia," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) said in a statement.The House Foreign Affairs Committee's top Democrat, New York Rep. Eliot Engel, described the Republican "blue-slip" review as "nothing but a delay tactic, and the public shouldn't be fooled by complex-sounding parliamentary procedure. If Republican leadership says we can't act on the Senate bill, here's an easy solution: Let’s introduce an identical House version and we can vote on that instead."Senate Foreign Relations Chairman Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), a chief architect of his chamber's popular sanctions deal, told reporters Tuesday that "we think we addressed" any constitutional hurdles but that he would follow up on the issue, which was first reported by the Washington Post. “Anytime there’s issues relative to money or spending, obviously you've got to deal with" blue-slip concerns, Corker added.Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the top Democrat on the foreign relations panel, echoed Engel in calling on the House to pass their own version of the sanctions bill or add its language to another House bill to resolve the problem."They have plenty of vehicles," Cardin told reporters, "so it’s not a problem. I don’t think it’s a blue-slip issue."The sanctions bill also imposes new penalties on entities connected to Iran's ballistic missile program as well as Tehran's human rights violations and support for terrorist groups. The Russia provisions added to the package would allow Congress to block Trump from easing or ending sanctions against Moscow, while adding new punishment in a direct response to cyberattacks during the 2016 election — meddling that Trump has previously dismissed.An aide on House Foreign Affairs said that the panel would work with GOP leadership and other committees of jurisdiction on the constitutional issue with the Senate's sanctions legislation.Seung Min Kim contributed to this report.

20 июня, 22:56

A Conversation with Anthony Cordesman: America Was Already Blundering into War

Jacob Heilbrunn Security, Middle East Washington’s foreign policy was leading the country into war in Syria and Iraq. Editor's Note: In our latest Facebook Live interview (please like our Facebook page to see more of these events) Anthony H. Cordesman, the Arleigh A. Burke Chair in Strategy at CSIS, sat down with Jacob Heilbrunn, editor of the National Interest, to discuss American foreign policy in the Middle East and NATO. Anthony H. Cordesman, the holder of the Burke Chair in Strategy at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, is well-known for his expertise on American foreign policy, particularly in the Middle East. In this interview, Cordesman brings to bear a wealth of experience, commenting on NATO, Syria, Afghanistan and the foreign policy records of past presidents, including George W. Bush and Barack Obama. He also offers keen observations about President Trump’s initial months in office. Cordesman takes a very sober view of America’s efforts in Iraq and Afghanistan, and can be safely described as a realist when it comes to his thinking about foreign affairs. Read full article

06 февраля 2016, 11:56

ФРС на Украине: идеальное порабощение

Глава Федрезерва Бен Бернанке сделал все, чтобы вызвать в "незалежной" хаос

03 декабря 2015, 06:06

Ливия. Приглашение в бездну

Из огня да в полымя. Так кратко можно описать последние события в Ливии. Запад взялся за примирение двух правительств, существующих в стране, но последствия этой инициативы могут ввергнуть Ливию в ещё больший хаос и окончательно уничтожить когда-то процветавшее государство.

26 октября 2015, 15:30

Как работать с Россией в Сирии ("Foreign Affairs", США)

Трудно вести войну, когда твои союзники не могут договориться, кто враг. Именно с такой ситуацией Соединенные Штаты столкнулись в Сирии. Вашингтон в попытках создать коалицию для борьбы вынужден уговаривать союзников из Персидского залива, которые хотят воевать с сирийским лидером Башаром аль-Асадом, но не с радикальными исламистами. Ему приходится иметь дело с Турцией, которая выступает против Асада и радикальных исламистов, но воевать хочет преимущественно с курдами. Еще один союзник США Израиль нерешительно смотрит на бурлящий водоворот своих врагов и, как кажется, готов вмешаться лишь в том случае, если появятся серьезные угрозы. И наконец, Германия желает вооружать курдов, а американский спецназ уже взаимодействует с ними. Во всей этой путанице неудивительно, что результаты борьбы с самопровозглашенным «Исламским государством» (ИГИЛ) у коалиции сегодня - весьма неутешительные.

22 апреля 2015, 14:22

Китай: правила дорожного движения для Шелкового пути ("Foreign Affairs", США)

Пекин задумался о евразийской интеграции Пока мир внимательно следит за агрессивным поведением Китая в восточных морях, китайские лидеры глядят на запад. В конце марта китайская Комиссия по национальному развитию и реформам совместно с министерством иностранных дел и министерством торговли подготовила подробный проект «Экономического пояса Шелкового пути» и «Морского Шелкового пути 21 века». Этот проект зачастую сокращенно называют «Один пояс, один путь». В случае успеха амбициозных планов Пекина, Китай станет ключевой движущей силой экономической и дипломатической евразийской интеграции. «Один пояс, один путь» призывает страны Азии, Европы, Ближнего Востока и Африки координировать дипломатические усилия, стандартизировать и объединять торговые площадки, зоны свободной торговли и торговые процедуры, интегрировать финансовую сферу с опорой на юань и развивать международные культурные и образовательные программы. Иногда его называют «китайским планом Маршалла», но китайские власти не согласны с такими сравнениями. С их точки зрения, они объединяют Евразию, а не проводят в ней новые границы и стремятся к экономическому росту, а не к политическому влиянию. Однако это не отменяет опасности, связанной с усилиями Китая: если Пекин не сможет найти баланс между инвестициями и дипломатией, с одной стороны, и поиском политического влияния, с другой, он может оказаться втянутым в конфликты, к которым он не готов. В дальний путь Хотя точная конфигурация «Одного пояса, одного пути» в разных вариантах выглядит по-разному, в целом проект предусматривает, что сухопутный «пояс» из автомобильных и железных дорог, трубопроводов и телекоммуникационных сетей должен будет связать Китай, Центральную Азию, Ближний Восток, Европу и Россию. Морской «путь», в свою очередь, пройдет от берегов Китая по Южно-Китайскому морю, Индийскому океану, Красному морю и Средиземному морю (через Суэцкий канал) с остановками в Африке. В основе «Одного пояса, одного пути» лежит давняя идея китайских ученых о продвижении на Запад в ответ на американский «стратегический поворот к Азии». Название двойного проекта Пекина отсылает к еще боле давнему прошлому — к временам Шелкового пути — и к исторической роли Китая в торговле между Европой и Азией. Китайский президент Си Цзиньпин впервые официально заявил о проекте «пояса» в сентябре 2013 года в Казахстане, а о проекте «пути» — в октябре того же года в Индонезии. Деньги на проекты пойдут из пресловутого Азиатского банка инфраструктурных инвестиций (АБИИ), капитал которого составляет 50 миллиардов долларов, Фонда нового Шелкового пути с капиталом в 40 миллиардов долларов и Нового банка развития, созданного странами БРИКС. По расчетам китайских властей, их программы затронут 4,4 миллиарда человек в 65 странах, а объем торговли Китая со странами-участниками может за десятилетие дойти до 2,5 триллиона долларов в год. South China Morning Post назвала этот проект в своей редакционной статье «самым крупным и масштабным в истории страны». Стратегия «Один пояс, один путь» должна помочь Китаю достичь ряда внутриполитических целей, соответствующих «китайской мечте» Си о национальном обновлении. Главная из этих целей — укрепить китайскую экономику, дав выход излишкам промышленного производства. Сейчас, когда Пекин старается охладить перегретый инфраструктурный сектор, не создавая при этом массовой безработицы, планы, которые позволяют перенаправить вызываемый притоком инвестиций рост за пределы Китая, особенно актуальны. Внутри китайских границ проект фокусируется на сравнительно слаборазвитых западных и южных регионах. Власти надеются, что экономический рост и рост занятости в них помогут снизить межэтническую напряженность — а также улучшат ситуацию с занятостью в других регионах. Во внешней торговле Китай также рассчитывает получить выгоду от валютных операций, подкрепляющих статус юаня как глобальной валюты. Помимо этого, энергетические сделки должны будут гарантировать Китаю бесперебойные поставки энергоносителей на фоне растущего спроса. Вдобавок сухопутная энергетическая инфраструктура сможет ослабить опасную зависимость от морских поставок. К тому же развитые экономики по-прежнему растут медленно, и Китай рассматривает азиатские развивающиеся страны как удобные — и географически близкие — источники роста. «Один пояс, один путь» также служит внешнеполитическим целям, укрепляя отношения Китая с соседями. Двойной проект расширит связи Пекина с ведущими развивающимися странами и сможет послужить основой для новой международной системы, в центре которой будет находиться Китай. Рост значения Китая заставил Пекин смириться — пусть и неохотно — с международными обязательствами, а теперь торговый проект позволит Си начать воплощать в жизнь идею «сообщества общей судьбы», подразумевающую совместный рост азиатских экономик в ближайшие десятилетия. Укрепление двусторонних связей со странами, лежащими вдоль «пути» и «пояса», может помочь Китаю создать сеть незападных международных организаций, в которых он сможет играть основную — если не преобладающую — роль. Такие структуры, как Шанхайская организация сотрудничества и Совещание по взаимодействию и мерам доверия в Азии дадут Пекину возможность обрести дипломатический вес за пределами отношений с Вашингтоном. Препятствия на пути Сейчас «Один пояс, один путь», по-видимому, постепенно набирает обороты. У проекта есть серьезная финансовая база, которую ему обеспечивают, в первую очередь, хваленый китайский АБИИ и поддержка китайских политических и экономических элит. Тем не менее, на пути китайских амбиций по-прежнему лежат определенные препятствия. Хотя попытки заполнить инфраструктурный вакуум Азии (в инфраструктуру в этом регионе необходимо вложить до 2020 года восемь триллионов долларов) можно только приветствовать, прогрессу могут помешать недостаточно жесткие правила кредитования. Если страны-участники потратят связанное с «Одним поясом, одним путем» финансирование на бессмысленные или нерациональные проекты и не смогут расплатиться с долгами, пострадают китайские капиталовложения. Вдобавок, если с этими проектами будут связаны скандалы в областях экологии или прав человека, может пострадать имидж Китая на международной арене. В морской сфере усилия Китая по модернизации портовой инфраструктуры вдоль пути и созданию зон свободной торговли должны увеличить торговый потенциал стран-участников, однако пока не ясно, как «морской Шелковый путь» повлияет на существующие судоходные линии. Более того, хотя китайский министр иностранных дел Ван И (Wang Yi) подчеркивал, что «Один пояс, один путь» не следует считать «геополитическим инструментом», Китай, скорее всего, попробует превратить экономическое сотрудничество в источник политического влияния. Для этого Пекину потребуется преодолеть ряд серьезных преград — таких, как конкуренция в Центральной Азии, Южной Азии и на Ближнем Востоке со стороны Индии, России и Соединенных Штатов. Российский проект Евразийского союза, экономически объединяющего бывшие советские республики, напрямую конкурирует с интеграционной стратегией Китая — несмотря на улучшающиеся китайско-российские отношения. У Индии китайские планы также вызывают опасения, так как проекты Пекина могут подорвать ее программы «Действия на Востоке» и «Связь с Центральной Азией». Кроме того Индию тревожит расширяющаяся деятельность Китая в Индийском океане — особенно в портах, которые могут послужить опорными точками для операций китайского военного флота. Хотя Соединенные Штаты сейчас уменьшают свою роль в Центральной Азии по мере ухода из Афганистана, китайское присутствие в Евразии, на Индийском океане и на Ближнем Востоке все равно будет требовать от Пекина постоянных поисков баланса между конкуренцией и сотрудничеством. Китайцам придется работать совместно с соседями и мировыми державами — вместо того, чтобы бороться с ними. Успех «Одного пояса, одного пути» во многом будет зависеть от готовности капризных региональных и местных лидеров сотрудничать. Многие лидеры, особенно в Центральной Азии и на Ближнем Востоке, опираются на многовековой опыт стравливания иностранных держав друг с другом ради личных политических и финансовых выгод. Скажем, на фоне нарастающего межконфессионального конфликта на Ближнем Востоке китайским лидерам будет трудно совместить давние связи между Китаем и Ираном и новые отношения с суннитскими государствами во главе с Саудовской Аравией. Еще один характерный пример — недавнее решение Шри-Ланки пересмотреть более двух десятков проектов, поддерживаемых Китаем. Вдобавок существуют негосударственные субъекты, порождающие дополнительные политические риски, к которыми Китай не привык. Талибы в Афганистане, «Исламское государство» (ИГИЛ) в Ираке и в Сирии и хуситы в Йемене угрожают китайским капиталовложениям и ключевым перевалочным пунктам на будущих торговых маршрутах. «Один пояс, один путь» станет серьезной проверкой на прочность для внешнеполитической доктрины и внешнеполитического потенциала Пекина. Риторика Китая с ее «взаимовыгодными решениями», «консенсусами» и «невмешательством» может не выдержать столкновения с суровой реальностью, требующей защищать китайских граждан и китайские инвестиции. Опыт китайской миротворческой деятельности в Судане наглядно демонстрирует, что Китай готов идти на военные операции, когда речь идет о защите его финансовых интересов. Китайское стремление не вмешиваться исчезло, когда Судан начал распадаться и под угрозой оказались нефтяные инвестиции Китая. В итоге Пекин был вынужден выступить дипломатическим посредником и разместить в стране свой миротворческий контингент. Если Китай перейдет от простой защиты своих вложений к более широкой геополитической деятельности и начнет активнее вмешиваться в происходящее в других странах, это может окончательно убедить соседей в наличии у него империалистических амбиций. Именно так в последние годы развивались отношения Пекина с соседями по Восточно-Китайскому и Южно-Китайскому морям. Не трудно представить себе нечто подобное и на западном направлении. На оперативном уровне обширные глобальные интересы Китая могут поставить новые задачи перед его растущими, но неопытными вооруженными силами. Недавняя эвакуация китайских граждан из Йемена стала важной вехой: это была первая успешная военная операция по вывозу китайцев и граждан других стран из зоны кризиса. Еще в 2011 году Народно-освободительная армия не смогла осуществить аналогичную операцию в Ливии. В дипломатической сфере Китай явно претендует на глобальную роль. Он пытается стать посредником в афганском урегулировании, организовывая переговоры с талибами, и помочь израильско-палестинскому диалогу, предлагая мирный план из пяти пунктов. Впрочем, пока все эти усилия остаются символическими — у страны до сих пор не получилось добиться подлинных дипломатических побед ни по одному из вопросов, которыми она занималась. В целом во внешней политике Китай может оказаться в парадоксальном положении: пытаясь обеспечить себе стратегическую глубину на западном направлении, он может чрезмерно — и преждевременно — растянуть свои силы, оказаться втянутым во множество конфликтов и столкнуться с проблемами, с которыми он пока не готов справляться. Необходимость превратить «Один пояс, один путь» из амбициозных историко-картографических построений в рабочую экономическую и дипломатическую стратегию и — возможно — в инструмент геополитического влияния, станет испытанием для внешнеполитических возможностей Китая во всех возможных аспектах. Путь на запад может оказаться долгим. Автор: Джейкоб Стоукс (Jacob Stokes),  Источинк: ИноСМИ 22.04.2015 VK.init({apiId: 4591053, onlyWidgets: true}); VK.Widgets.Like("vk_like", {type: "mini", height: 20 }); Tweet апрель 2015