ASSESSORIA DE IMPRENSA DO GABINETE

Seleção Diária da Imprensa Internacional

Quarta-feira, 9 de maio de 2018

VIAGEM DO MINISTRO ALOYSIO NUNES FERREIRA À ÁSIA 3

The Business Times (Singapura) – Singapore, Brazil ink avoidance of double taxation pact 3
Devdiscourse (Singapura) – Singapore and Brazil consolidate business relationships 3
Vietnam+ (Vietnã) – Brasil y Singapur firman acuerdo de doble tributación 4
NNT (Tailândia) – Brazil's Minister to visit Thailand 4

ACORDO NUCLEAR DO IRÃ 5

The Washington Post (EUA) – Trump pulls United States out of Iran nuclear deal, calling the pact ‘an
embarrassment’ / Capa 5
Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump pulls US out of Iran nuclear deal 7
Reuters (Reino Unido) – Europeans scramble to salvage Iran deal after Trump reneges 9
Reuters (Reino Unido) – U.S. exit from Iran deal puts pressure on European planemakers 12
El País (Espanha) – La UE redobla los esfuerzos para salvar el pacto con Irán 14
The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Europe's clash with Trump over Iran nuclear deal is a durability test 15
El País (Espanha) – Un deshielo que no dio alas a la economía iraní 16
Reuters (Reino Unido) – Aliados de EEUU en el Golfo Pérsico celebran decisión de Trump sobre pacto
nuclear con Irán 18
The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Trump has manufactured a national security crisis for no reason / Artigo /
Michael H. Fuchs 18
The Guardian (Reino Unido) – By ending the nuclear deal, Trump has handed a gift to Iranian hardliners /
Artigo / Sanam Vakil 20
AFP (França) – Nucléaire: l'Iran organise sa riposte après la sortie des Etats–Unis 21
Libération (França) – Conflit Israël–Iran : pour Nétanyahou, «mieux vaut maintenant que plus tard» 23

TARIFAS DOS EUA 24

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump declares trade war on China / Coluna / Martin Wolf 24

MERCOSUL 26
La Nación (Argentina) – "La UE es el socio más confiable" / Entrevista / Aude Maio–Coliche 26
El Cronista (Argentina) – Paraguay, la nueva joya del Mercosur 27
El País (Uruguai) – La Unión Europea y "la meta" de firmar 28
Le Temps (Suíça) – Un voyage au Mercosur qui n’a pas rassuré les milieux paysans 29

AMÉRICA DO SUL 30
Reuters (Reino Unido) – ¿Quién necesita a Chávez? Líder venezolano impulsa su imagen camino a las
elecciones 30
Reuters/CNBC (EUA) – Conoco moves to take over Venezuelan PDVSA's Caribbean assets: Sources 33

AMÉRICA CENTRAL, CARIBE E MÉXICO 34

Excélsior (México) – Cartas Credenciales 34
Libération (França) – Nicaragua: la colère monte, le régime mate 35

ESTADOS UNIDOS E CANADÁ 37

The New York Times (EUA) – At a Key Moment, Trump’s Top Diplomat Is Again Thousands of Miles Away
37
Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump goes for global regime change / Coluna / Edward Luce38
EUROPA 39
Les Echos (França) – Poutine entame son quatrième mandat et garde Medvedev 40
Libération (França) – Nikol Pachinian, le grand saut dans l’inconnu pour le héros de la rue 40
Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Lords rebellion backs keeping UK in single market after Brexit 42
Le Figaro (França) – L’Italie s’achemine vers de nouvelles élections 43

ÁSIA 44
The Washington Post (EUA) – North Korea releases 3 American prisoners in apparent goodwill gesture
ahead of a planned summit between Trump and Kim 44
Reuters (Reino Unido) – China, Japan and South Korea highlight unity amid North Korea moves 46
The New York Times (EUA) – Kim’s Second Surprise Visit to China Heightens Diplomatic Drama 48
Reuters (Reino Unido) – Malaysia election: Early results show ruling coalition slightly ahead – Bernama50

ORIENTE MÉDIO 50
Reuters (Reino Unido) – Syrian state media says Israel attacked just after U.S. quit Iran deal 50
Le Monde (França) – Le régime syrien prend le contrôle de Rastane, sur l'axe Damas–Alep 51

ORGANISMOS INTERNACIONAIS E MECANISMOS REGIONAIS E INTER–

REGIONAIS 52
Clarín (Argentina) – Ideas y organismos que terminaron desvirtuados / Coluna / Rubén M. Perina 52

TEMAS MIGRATÓRIOS E CONSULARES 53

El Economista (Espanha) – Un total de 804 venezolanas tuvieron hijos en Brasil desde enero de 2017 53
The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Canada: Trudeau government cools on asylum seekers as numbers from US
rise 54

ASSUNTOS ECONÔMICOS, FINANCEIROS E INVESTIMENTOS 55

La Nación (Argentina) – Para Wall Street y Washington, Macri jugó su última carta 55
BAE (Argentina) – La agroindustria espera más ajuste tras la vuelta del FMI 56
Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Argentines shocked by IMF loan request 57
Le Figaro (França) – Le FMI alerte sur le retour de l'endettement de l'Afrique 59

TEMAS CULTURAIS 59
Deutsche Welle (Alemanha) – Mais diversa, nova safra de cineastas brasileiros é celebrada no exterior60
The Peninsula (Catar) – Garabia exhibition opens at Katara 63

2
VIAGEM DO MINISTRO ALOYSIO NUNES FERREIRA À ÁSIA

The Business Times (Singapura) – Singapore, Brazil ink avoidance

of double taxation pact
LEE U–WEN

SINGAPORE and Brazil have signed a comprehensive bilateral Avoidance of Double Taxation
Agreement (DTA), as part of the ongoing effort to further facilitate bilateral trade and
investment cooperation.

The document was inked in Singapore on Monday by Foreign Affairs Minister Vivian
Balakrishnan and his Brazilian counterpart Aloysio Nunes Ferreira. The latter is on a three–day
official visit that ends on Wednesday.

In a statement, Singapore's Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MFA) said that the two countries also
welcomed Singapore's removal from Brazil's list of low tax jurisdictions. They also look forward
to the early ratification of the DTA.

Brazil – Singapore's largest source of frozen chicken, beef and pork – is Singapore's third–
largest trading partner in Latin America. According to latest figures, the trade in goods
amounted to US$3.4 billion in 2017.

Since 2004, bilateral trade in services has grown at a compound annual growth rate of 33.9
per cent, reaching US$1.7 billion in 2016. Bilateral investment has also been "growing
steadily", said the MFA.

Singapore and Brazil have welcomed initial discussions on a free trade agreement (FTA)
between Singapore and the four–nation Mercosur bloc, with the aim of launching a first round
of negotiations in the third quarter of 2018.

The Mercosur member states – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay – have a combined
population of over 260 million people, with total gross domestic product of US$2.5 trillion.

The FTA will promote greater trade and investment between Mercosur member states and
Singapore by "creating more favourable business conditions among the parties", said the MFA
statement.

Devdiscourse (Singapura) – Singapore and Brazil consolidate

business relationships
Foreign Minister of both nation signed the document that will prevent the payment of several
taxes on the same tax object.

Devdiscourse News Desk

The Foreign Minister of Singapore, Vivian Balakrishnan, and his Brazilian counterpart, Aloysio
Nunes Ferreira, signed the document that will prevent the payment of several taxes on the
same tax object.

The first round of negotiations for the free trade agreement between Singapore and Mercosur
(Argentina, Paraguay, and Uruguay) will begin in the third quarter of 2018, the statement
said.

3
Both parties highlighted the growth of trade cooperation and investment, mainly the presence
of Singaporean companies in important sectors of the Brazilian economy such as oil, gas,
infrastructure, real estate, agriculture, and transport.

Brazil is currently the largest source of frozen chicken, beef and pork meats of Singapore.

Since 2004, bilateral trade in services has reported a compound annual growth rate of 33.9
percent, which represented 1.7 million dollars in 2016.

Vietnam+ (Vietnã) – Brasil y Singapur firman acuerdo de doble

tributación
Singapur (VNA)– Brasil y Singapur firmaron un tratado de doble tributación para prevenir la
evasión fiscal y promover las inversiones entre los dos países.

El acuerdo fue suscrito la víspera aquí por el ministro singapurense de Relaciones Exteriores,
Vivian Balakrishnan, y su homólogo brasileño, Aloysio Nunes Ferreira.

En el encuentro, ambas partes también consideraron la posibilidad de suscribir un Tratado de

Libre Comercio entre el país asiático y el Mercado Común del Sur (Mercosur) que integra a
Argentina, Paraguay, Brasil y Uruguay.

También abogaron por impulsar la cooperación entre Mercosur y la Asociación de Naciones del
Sudeste Asiático (ASEAN).

Singapur es el cuarto mayor inversor de Brasil con mil 400 millones de dólares en 2015,
centrados principalmente en la gestión de aeropuertos, construcción naval, petróleo,
combustible, infraestructura, agricultura y transporte.

Mientras, Brasilia suministró al mercado singapurense pollo, carne de res y cerdo congelada.
La nación suramericana alcanzó un superávit comercial de dos mil millones de dólares en
2017, gracias a la exportación de petróleo.

Según un comunicado del Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores del gigante suramericano, la

primera ronda de negociación del Tratado de Libre Comercio entre Singapur y Mercosur se
iniciará en el tercer trimestre de este año. – VN

NNT (Tailândia) – Brazil's Minister to visit Thailand

BANGKOK, 8th May 2018 (NNT) – The Foreign Affairs Minister of Brazil, Aloysio Nunes Ferreira
Filho, will pay a working visit to Thailand on May 9th and 10th, 2018, to promote bilateral
relations between both countries, especially in the areas of trade and investment.

The Brazilian Minister is scheduled to pay a courtesy call on the Prime Minister, Gen. Prayut
Chan-o-cha, at Government House on May 9th, and will meet the Foreign Affairs Minister, Don
Pramudwinai, on the same day.

Brazil is a strategic country for Thailand in Latin America. This visit will be the beginning of the
celebrations to mark the 60th anniversary in 2019 of the establishment of diplomatic relations
between Thailand and Brazil.

During the visit, both sides plan to discuss multidimensional topics, ranging from promotion of
trade and investment, agricultural cooperation, defense and security cooperation to
cooperation in multilateral frameworks, and global issues.

4
ACORDO NUCLEAR DO IRÃ

The Washington Post (EUA) – Trump pulls United States out of Iran
nuclear deal, calling the pact ‘an embarrassment’ / Capa
President Trump said May 8 that the United States would reinstate sanctions on Iran and
warned other states against helping Iran with its nuclear program. (The Washington Post)
By Anne Gearan and Karen DeYoung

President Trump on Tuesday said he is pulling the United States out of the international
nuclear deal with Iran, announcing that economic sanctions against Tehran will be reinstated
and declaring that the 2015 pact was rooted in “fiction.”

Trump’s decision, announced at the White House, makes good on a campaign pledge to undo
an accord he has criticized as weak, poorly negotiated and “insane.”

“The Iran deal is defective at its core. If we do nothing, we know exactly what will happen,”
Trump said in remarks at the White House. “In just a short period of time, the world’s leading
state sponsor of terror will be on the cusp of acquiring the world’s most dangerous weapons.”

The move amounts to Trump’s most significant foreign policy decision to date. While he cast
the U.S. action as essential for national security and a warning to Iran and any other nuclear
aspirant that “the United States no longer makes empty threats,” it could also increase
tensions with key U.S. allies that heavily lobbied the administration in recent weeks not to
abandon the pact and see it as key to keeping peace in the region. They tried to convince
Trump that his concerns about “flaws” in the accord could be addressed without violating its
terms or ending it altogether.

After Trump’s announcement, the leaders of Britain, France and Germany issued a joint
statement expressing “regret and concern” and pledging their “continuing commitment” to
terms of the agreement, formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

“This resolution remains the binding international legal framework for the resolution of the
dispute about the Iranian nuclear programme,” British Prime Minister Theresa May, French
President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel said in their statement.
“We urge all sides to remain committed to its full implementation and to act in a spirit of
responsibility.”

That was a plea to Iran not to take steps that would break the deal, something Iranian officials
have said at times they would do if Trump followed through on his frequent threats to yank
the United States out of the agreement.

While the U.S. exit does not render the rest of the deal moot, it is not clear whether there is
enough incentive on the part of Iran to sustain the agreement. Relief from U.S. banking
sanctions was a main reason for Tehran to come to the table.

“In response to US persistent violations & unlawful withdrawal from the nuclear deal, as
instructed by President Rouhani, I’ll spearhead a diplomatic effort to examine whether
remaining JCPOA participants can ensure its full benefits for Iran,” Iranian Foreign Minister
Mohammad Javad Zarif tweeted. “Outcome will determine our response.”

The United States will reimpose all sanctions and could add new ones, U.S. officials said.

Discussions with allies about new negotiations would begin Wednesday, White House national
security adviser John Bolton said.

5
Bolton, filling in some of the blanks in Trump’s remarks, said that all U.S. nuclear–related
sanctions lifted as part of the agreement are now back in effect. “We’re out of the deal. Right
now. We’re out of the deal,” he said.

A memorandum signed by Trump at the conclusion of his statement means that “no new
contracts” with Iran will be permitted, Bolton said. Although the United States cannot prevent
the Europeans or others from having financial relationships with Iran, nearly all global
transactions at some point pass through dollar exchanges and U.S. banks, arrangements that
are now prohibited.

Existing contracts, Bolton said, will be subject to “wind–down provisions” of 90 days to six
months, after which they will be required to “phase out.” Regulations giving specific time
frames, he said, will be announced by the Treasury Department.

Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin said the administration was revoking licenses for Boeing
and Airbus, which were among the biggest deals since the nuclear accord. Boeing had planned
to sell IranAir about 80 aircraft worth about $17 billion; Airbus had agreed to sell 100 aircraft
worth about $19 billion.

“The Boeing and Airbus licenses will be revoked,” Mnuchin said. “The existing licenses will be
revoked.”

He argued that sanctions are what previously brought Iran to the negotiating table.

“These are very, very strong sanctions — they worked last time,” Mnuchin told reporters. “Our
objective is to, again, eliminate transactions and eliminate access to their oil industry.”

Trump’s declaration puts a variety of companies in difficult positions. Though the French oil
giant Total had hoped the contract it signed would be excluded from the newly reimposed
sanctions, that seemed unlikely Tuesday.

The U.S. withdrawal from the Iran nuclear deal also boosts the outlook for crude–oil prices.
Before the deal, the Obama administration squeezed traders and refiners to not buy Iranian
oil, wringing a series of 20 percent cuts in purchases until more than 1 million barrels a day of
Iran’s exports had been taken off world markets. Fear of a similar mechanism has been one
factor bolstering oil prices in recent weeks, though prices sagged Tuesday. The price of West
Texas Intermediate crude fell about 1.4 percent, slipping to $69.74 a barrel.

Trump immediately faced questions about whether he has a plan for dealing with Iran beyond
scrapping the accord, and the administration will now be under pressure to show that it has a
strategy for the Middle East beyond undoing what was put in place under President Barack
Obama.

“I don’t see a path,” said Senate Minority Leader Charles E. Schumer (D–N.Y.), stressing that
even if Trump had promised during the campaign to rip up and replace the Iran deal, “they
don’t have a real plan here.”

Obama considered the agreement a signature foreign policy accomplishment, calling it the
best way to head off the near–term threat of a nuclear–armed Iran and a potential opening
toward better relations with Tehran after more than three decades of enmity.

Obama on Tuesday lamented Trump’s decision and sought to counter his criticism that the
accord had done little to check Iran’s nuclear ambitions.

“The reality is clear. The JCPOA is working — that is a view shared by our European allies,
independent experts, and the current U.S. Secretary of Defense,” Obama said in a statement.
“The JCPOA is in America’s interest — it has significantly rolled back Iran’s nuclear program.”

6
Trump said Iran had lied throughout negotiations for the international deal, and he cited
secret Iranian documents revealed last week by Israel that showed the Iranian regime had
concealed a nuclear weapons program in the 1990s.

“America will not be held hostage to nuclear blackmail. We will not allow American cities to be
threatened with destruction, and we will not allow a regime that chants ‘Death to America’ to
gain access to the most deadly weapons on Earth,” Trump said.

The chant was a fixture of pro–government rallies in Iran for decades, but despite its use
during a major anti–Trump rally last year, it has largely fallen out of favor as a propaganda
tool.

Trump invoked the current diplomatic efforts with North Korea and the possibility of a compact
to rid the Korean Peninsula of nuclear weapons as emblematic of how he is conducting major
international negotiations, saying any deal he cut would be airtight.

The reaction to the president’s decision did not split neatly along party lines. While some GOP
leaders applauded his decision, heralding it as an opportunity to strike a new and better
arrangement, several other senior Republicans — including those who voted against the Iran
deal — said the decision to withdraw was “foolhardy” and “a mistake.”

“The Iran Deal is a deeply flawed agreement. . . . However, without proof that Iran is in
violation of the agreement, it is a mistake to fully withdraw from this deal,” Rep. Michael R.
Turner (R–Ohio), a senior member of the House Armed Services and Intelligence committees,
said in a statement.

Even House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R–Wis.) said in a statement that it was “unfortunate” that
the United States could not come up with a way of fixing the Iran deal instead of withdrawing,
and he thanked the European parties to the pact for trying to work with Washington “toward
that goal.” He expressed hope that they might be able to find a new way of addressing Iranian
aggression before new sanctions are implemented.

Other GOP leaders cheered the move, saying it was needed to push U.S. allies and Iran to
strike a more restrictive bargain.

“President Trump is right to abandon the Obama administration’s bad deal,” Sen. John Cornyn
(R–Tex.) said in a statement, adding that Congress must have a role in any new agreement.

Democratic leaders excoriated the president for a “rash” and shortsighted decision that they
argued will compromise security in the Middle East and around the world.

“The President’s decision to abdicate American leadership during a critical moment in our
effort to advance a denuclearization agreement with North Korea is particularly senseless,
disturbing and dangerous,” House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D–Calif.) said in a statement.

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump pulls US out of Iran

nuclear deal
Move to re–impose sanctions is defeat for European allies
Sam Fleming in Washington and Katrina Manson in London

Donald Trump pulled the US out of the landmark nuclear deal with Tehran on Tuesday, moving
to re–impose sanctions on Iran and defying pleas from close allies who had called for the
agreement to be preserved.

7
The decision marks a bitter defeat for America’s European allies, who have spent months
beseeching Mr Trump to stay in a deal that he has denounced as “insane”. Critics warned it
would further endanger stability in the Middle East and have repercussions for big companies
doing business with Iran following the 2015 accord.

In an announcement at the White House, Mr Trump said the “decaying and rotten structure”
of the deal could not prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear bomb. “The US will withdraw from
the Iran nuclear deal,” he declared. “If I allowed this deal to stand, there soon would be a
nuclear arms race in the Middle East.”

He said the US would reimpose nuclear sanctions and “the highest level of economic
sanctions” on Iran. The US Treasury department said all nuclear–related sanctions would be
snapped back into place by the end of a six–month “wind–down” period.

The sanctions include prohibitions on Iranians accessing US dollars, and the Trump
administration will resume efforts to prevent Iranian oil from circulating on the international
market.

US decision on Iran nuclear deal 'humiliating' for Europe

In a pointed rebuke to Tehran, which Mr Trump accused of lying over its nuclear development,
the president said Mike Pompeo, the US secretary of state, was en route to Pyongyang to set
up a summit with Kim Jong Un, the North Korean leader, to seek the dismantling of its nuclear
programme.

Iran ’s president Hassan Rouhani said the country would decide whether to stay in the deal or
resume uranium enrichment at industrial level after talking with the other signatories over the
next few weeks.

But for now, he said, Iran considered that the deal remained intact. “Henceforth, the nuclear
deal will be between Iran and five other countries,” said Mr Rouhani in a speech broadcast live
on state television on Tuesday.

He added that he had ordered the country’s Atomic Energy Organisation to be ready for
“unrestricted enrichment at industrial level”.

The multi–party accord, also signed by China and Russia and endorsed by the UN Security
Council, was the key foreign policy achievement of Barack Obama’s presidency, curtailing
Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for limited sanctions relief. Official inspectors have
declared Tehran to be in compliance with the accord.

Senior officials from France, Germany, the UK and EU met Abbas Araghchi, Iran’s deputy
foreign minister, in Brussels on Tuesday for talks on how to save the deal.

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, said the bloc regretted the US decision but
was “determined to preserve” the deal as long as Iran remained compliant. She said she was
“particularly worried” by the announcement of new sanctions and would consult on their
potential impact.

“As we have always said, the nuclear deal is not a bilateral agreement,” she said. “And it’s not
in the hands of any single country to terminate it unilaterally.”

She added: “The nuclear deal with Iran is crucial for the security of the region, of Europe and
of the entire world.”

8
Emmanuel Macron, the French president, vowed to “work collectively on a broader
framework”, which would cover Iran’s nuclear activity, ballistic missile programme and
“stability in the Middle East, notably Syria, Yemen, and Iraq”.

Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister, who had lobbied hard against the deal,
thanked Mr Trump for taking a “brave and correct decision”.

The Iran deal was “a recipe for disaster, a disaster for our region, a disaster for the peace of
the world”, Mr Netanyahu said in a televised address after Mr Trump signed the executive
order ending the deal.

Oil prices rebounded following the announcement but remained down for the day. Brent, the
international oil benchmark, which had fallen as much as $3 a barrel to a low of $73.10 on
Tuesday, climbed back to $75.29 — down by 87 cents.

West Texas Intermediate, the US marker, dropped by a similar amount to $67.63 earlier in
the day but recovered more than half those losses to $69.48 a barrel.

Top Trump administration officials have declared Tehran to be in compliance with the accord,
including Mr Pompeo, who told the Senate in his confirmation hearing last month he had seen
no evidence that Iran was failing to comply.

However, Mr Trump promised to tear up the deal as part of his 2016 election campaign,
saying the agreement was a failure because it would not prevent Iran from gaining a nuclear
weapon nor put a stop to its so–called malign regional activities.

An existing waiver of sanctions requiring other countries to reduce imports of Iranian oil was
due to expire this weekend unless the US extended it.

In a joint statement, Theresa May, the UK prime minister, Angela Merkel, Germany’s
chancellor, and Mr Macron of France said: “We emphasise our continuing commitment to the
[deal]. This agreement remains important for our shared security . . . We urge all sides to
remain committed to its full implementation and to act in a spirit of responsibility.”

Europeans are alarmed by the potential consequences of Mr Trump’s withdrawal. One

European diplomat said “we have yet fully to understand and spell out” what happens next.
Visits to Washington by Mr Macron, Ms Merkel and Boris Johnson, UK foreign secretary, all
failed to persuade the US to recommit itself to the accord.

Mr Trump and some of his closest advisers argue the deal needs to be “fixed”, including by
extending time limits on restraints on Iran’s nuclear activities and cracking down on Tehran’s
ballistic missile activities and role in regional conflicts.

Reuters (Reino Unido) – Europeans scramble to salvage Iran deal

after Trump reneges
Yara Bayoumy, Michael Georgy

WASHINGTON/BEIRUT (Reuters) – Dismayed European allies sought to salvage the

international nuclear pact with Iran on Wednesday after President Donald Trump pulled the
United States out of the landmark accord, while officials in Tehran poured scorn on the U.S.
leader.

“The deal is not dead. There’s an American withdrawal from the deal but the deal is still
there,” French Foreign Minister Jean–Yves Le Drian said.

9
French President Emmanuel Macron would speak later in the day to his Iranian counterpart
Hassan Rouhani, Le Drian said. Iran also signaled its willingness to talk.

Trump announced on Tuesday he would reimpose U.S. economic sanctions on Iran to

undermine what he called “a horrible one–sided deal that should have never, ever been
made”.

The 2015 agreement, worked out by the United States, five other world powers and Iran,
lifted sanctions on Iran in exchange for Tehran limiting its nuclear program. The pact was
designed to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear bomb.

Trump complained that the deal, the signature foreign policy achievement of his Democratic
predecessor, Barack Obama, did not address Iran’s ballistic missile program, its nuclear
activities beyond 2025 or its role in conflicts in Yemen and Syria.

His decision raises the risk of deepening conflicts in the Middle East, puts the United States at
odds with European diplomatic and business interests, and casts uncertainty over global oil
supplies. Oil prices rose more than 2 percent on Wednesday, with Brent hitting a 3–1/2–year
high.

It could also strengthen the hand of hardliners at the expense of reformers in Iran’s political
scene.

France’s Le Drian said Iran was honoring its commitments under the accord.

“The region deserves better than further destabilization provoked by American withdrawal. So
we want to adhere to it and see to it that Iran does too, that Iran behaves with restraint,” he
told French radio station RTL.

The European Union said it would remain committed to the deal and would ensure sanctions
on Iran remain lifted, as long as Tehran meets its commitments.

France and others were well aware that there were concerns about issues other than nuclear
capability but they too could be addressed without ditching the nuclear deal, Le Drian said.

Macron’s contact with Rouhani will be followed by meetings next week, probably on Monday,
involving the Iranians and European counterparts from France, Britain and Germany.

The prospects of saving the deal depend in large measure on whether international companies
are willing and able to still do business with Iran due to the U.S. sanctions.

Le Drian said meetings would also be held with firms including oil giant Total (TOTF.PA) and
others with major business and economic stakes in the region.

In a harbinger of what could be in store, Trump’s new ambassador to Germany said German
businesses should halt their activities in Iran immediately.

French Finance Minister Bruno Le Maire said Trump’s decision was a mistake and that the
United States should not consider itself the world’s “economic policeman”.

European companies including carmaker PSA (PEUP.PA), plane manufacturer Airbus (AIR.PA)
and Siemens (SIEGn.DE) said they were keeping a close watch on the situation.

MENTAL CAPACITY
In Tehran, the speaker of the Iranian parliament mocked Trump, saying he was not fit for his
job.

10
“Trump does not have the mental capacity to deal with issues,” speaker Ali Larijani told the
assembly. Larijani comes from one of the most prominent political families in Iran and often
acts as a diplomatic envoy.

Members of parliament burned a U.S. flag and a symbolic copy of the Iran deal, known
officially as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), as a session of parliament began.
They also chanted “Death to America”.

General Mohammad Baqeri, the chief of staff of Iran’s military, said Iran had not had to sign
the deal.

“But that arrogant country (America) did not even stand by its signature,” the Islamic Republic
News Agency (IRNA) quoted him as saying.

President Hassan Rouhani, a reformist, struck a more pragmatic tone, saying immediately
after Trump’s announcement that Iran would remain committed to the deal without
Washington.

“If we achieve the deal’s goals in cooperation with other members of the deal, it will remain in
place,” he said in a televised speech.

“I have ordered the foreign ministry to negotiate with the European countries, China and
Russia in coming weeks. If at the end of this short period we conclude that we can fully benefit
from the JCPOA with the cooperation of all countries, the deal would remain,” he said.

Trump’s decision intensifies the strain on the trans–Atlantic alliance since he took office 16
months ago. One by one, European leaders came to Washington and tried to meet his
demands, while pleading with him to preserve the deal.

The Trump administration kept the door open to negotiating another deal with allies, but it is
far from clear whether the Europeans would pursue that option or be able to convince Iran to
accept it.

The leaders of Britain, Germany and France, signatories to the deal along with China and
Russia, said in a joint statement that Trump’s decision was a cause for “regret and concern.”

China said it regretted the move. Its foreign ministry said Beijing would safeguard the deal
and called on all relevant parties “to assume a responsible attitude”.

A Western diplomat was more pointed.

“It announces sanctions for which the first victims will be Trump’s European allies,” the
diplomat said, adding that it was clear Trump did not care about the alliance.

AMERICA FIRST
Abandoning the Iran pact was one of the most consequential decisions of Trump’s high–stakes
“America First” policy, which has led him to withdraw the United States from the Paris climate
accord, come close to a trade war with China and pull out of an Asian–Pacific trade deal.

It also appeared to reflect the growing influence within the administration of Iran hawks like
new Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and national security adviser John Bolton.

Iran denies it has tried to build atomic weapons and says its nuclear program is for peaceful
purposes. U.N. inspectors say Iran has not broken the nuclear deal and senior U.S. officials
themselves have said several times that Iran is in technical compliance with the pact.

11
Renewing sanctions would make it much harder for Iran to sell its oil abroad or use the
international banking system.

Iran is the third–largest member of the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries and
pumps about 3.8 million barrels per day of crude, or just under 4 percent of global supply.
China, India, Japan and South Korea buy most of its 2.5 million bpd of exports.

According to the U.S. Treasury, sanctions related to Iran’s energy, auto and financial sectors
will be reimposed in three and six months.

Licenses for Boeing Co (BA.N) and Airbus (AIR.PA) to sell passenger jets to Iran will be
revoked, U.S. Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin said, scuttling a $38 billion deal.

Trump said the nuclear agreement did not prevent Iran from cheating and continuing to
pursue nuclear weapons.

“It is clear to me that we cannot prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb under the decaying and
rotten structure of the current agreement,” he said. “The Iran deal is defective at its core.”

Trump said he was willing to negotiate a new deal with Iran, but Tehran already has ruled that
out and threatened unspecified retaliation if Washington pulled out.

Iran’s growing military and political power in Yemen, Syria, Lebanon and Iraq worries the
United States, Israel and U.S. Arab allies such as Saudi Arabia.

Among the few nations to welcome Trump’s decision to renege on the deal were Israel and
Saudi Arabia, Iran’s arch–foes in the Middle East.

Reuters (Reino Unido) – U.S. exit from Iran deal puts pressure on
European planemakers
Tim Hepher

PARIS (Reuters) – America’s withdrawal from the Iran nuclear accord signals the collapse of
$38 billion in plane deals between Tehran and Western companies and leaves Airbus facing
greater risks than arch–rival Boeing, according to people involved in the deals.

President Donald Trump announced on Tuesday he was pulling his country out of the 2015
accord, and his administration said it would revoke export licenses needed by planemakers to
sell commercial planes – which require U.S. components – to Iran.

Tehran has ordered 200 passenger aircraft for state carrier IranAir worth $38.3 billion at list
prices, including 100 from Europe’s Airbus (AIR.PA), 80 from U.S. rival Boeing (BA.N) and 20
from smaller Franco–Italian turboprop maker ATR (LDOF.MI).

Airbus is more exposed on wide–body jets, for which sluggish global demand forced it last
month to revise down part of its production plans. Iran has ordered 53 wide–body jets from
Airbus and 30 from Boeing, which are yet to be built.

Losing the order deals a further blow to Airbus’s newest wide–body jet, the A330neo, which
faces weak demand months before it enters service, three industry sources said. IranAir is its
second–largest airline buyer after AirAsia (AIRA.KL).

By contrast, Boeing Chief Executive Dennis Muilenburg signaled last month that his company
was no longer as dependent on the Iran orders as it had been, following an aggressive effort

12
to improve sales of its current–generation 777–300ER wide–body jets which were part of the
Iran deal.

Airbus and Boeing said they would study the U.S. decision, but declined to comment on the
risks they faced.

“We will do the right thing,” Jeff Knittel, chairman of Airbus Americas, told Reuters.

Neither planemaker will be as concerned about the potential loss of a total of around 100
narrow–body plane orders from the Iranian deals, as demand for those jets is strong and they
will have no problem in allocating production slots to other buyers.

Two European sources said Airbus was resigned to losing the historic Iran deals which had
taken months of preparation, culminating in a Paris signing by President Hassan Rouhani in
2016. Rouhani said on Tuesday Iran was committed to the deal.

AIRBUS ‘COMES OUT WORSE’

A collapse of aircraft deals struck under the nuclear pact would also hit Airbus’s 2018 order
book harder than Boeing’s.

A cancellation of Airbus’s Iranian orders – which it booked early to pip Boeing in the 2016
order race – could wipe out its entire tally of 86 net orders for this year. Investors keep an
eye on new orders as a gauge of jet market confidence.

Boeing is ahead with 221 net orders for 2018, and had delayed booking the orders from its
$16.5 billion Iran contract – Iran’s biggest with America since the 1979 revolution.

“Airbus was very aggressive about booking orders and delivering planes and Boeing were very
conservative; Airbus gets hit a bit worse,” said Teal Group analyst Richard Aboulafia.

Still, Boeing’s wide–body portfolio is not without risk.

“In terms of optimistic expectations, Airbus comes out worse. In terms of hoping for (wide–
body) revenue that won’t be there, neither feels good right now,” Aboulafia added.

The situation looks mixed for small but profitable ATR.

Analysts say the turboprop maker has had a good Iran deal so far, managing to deliver more
aircraft than its larger rivals with 8 already in service.

It looked on course to deliver the remaining aircraft later this year and may just be able to
squeeze one or two more into Iran before the end of a 90–day wind–down period in August.

However, it faces potentially costly industrial decisions over the rest of the 20–plane deal.
Analysts say the deadline for deliveries suggests ATR had started building some of the
remaining planes, potentially leaving it with unsold aircraft.

ATR was not available for comment.

Trump’s speech pulled the shutters down on the wider aircraft deals unexpectedly quickly and
marked a sharp contrast with scenes over two years ago when plane sellers and leasing
companies flocked to Tehran eager to drum up new business.

Although Airbus and Boeing are arch–foes in the $120 billion annual jet market, their deals
with Iran had brought them into alignment because each depended on the same U.S. licenses.

13
But as opposition to the Iran accord mounted in the U.S. Congress, which holds the key to
defense and other contracts, and as markets for its jets improved elsewhere, Boeing seemed
to change its tone with the comments by Muilenburg last month.

“It’s not just Trump but the anti–Iran mood in Congress,” explained a person familiar with the
U.S. transactions.

El País (Espanha) – La UE redobla los esfuerzos para salvar el pacto

con Irán
LUCÍA ABELLÁN,Bruselas.

La Unión Europea "está decidida a trabajar con la comunidad internacional para preservar" el
acuerdo nuclear con Irán. La alta representante para la Política Exterior europea, Federica
Mogherini, ha asegurado en un comunicado difundido en nombre de los 28 Estados miembros
que Bruselas mantiene su compromiso con "la plena y efectiva implantación" del pacto, lo que
implica que no reactivará las sanciones que fueron derogadas en 2015.

Un día después del anuncio del presidente de EE UU, Donald Trump, de abandonar el acuerdo
nuclear firmado en julio de 2015 con Irán en el marco del grupo 5+1 (Estados Unidos, Rusia,
China, Reino Unido, Francia y Alemania), se suceden las reacciones en contra. El secretario de
Estado de Exteriores británico, Alistair Burt, ha asegurado a la BBC que el Reino Unido, junto
con Francia y Alemania, está comprometido a rebajar la tensión en Oriente Medio, informa
Efe.

"No buscaremos que [Trump] dé marcha atrás en algo porque no lo hará. Pero hay otras
formas de avanzar y es nuestra labor asegurar que funcionan esas otras maneras y trabajar
desde una posición que no sea de confrontación", ha dicho Burt.

El presidente de Francia, Emmanuel Macron, por su parte, hablará este miércoles por teléfono
con su homólogo de Irán, Hasan Rohani, para intentar salvar el acuerdo. Según ha avanzado
el ministro francés de Exteriores, Jean–Yves Le Drian, Macron va a transmitirle la "voluntad de
Francia de seguir en el acuerdo y de que Irán respete totalmente sus términos".

Con ese mismo objetivo, el ministro francés ha asegurado que el próximo lunes se han dado
cita los ministros de Exteriores de Francia, Reino Unido y Alemania con representantes iraníes.
Este mismo miércoles, representantes del ministerio del Exteriores alemán se reunirán con sus
homólogos rusos en Moscú, informa Reuters citando a agencias rusas.

Europa busca convencer al mundo de que la paz nuclear con Irán puede sobrevivir sin uno de
sus garantes clave. Pero el abandono estadounidense coloca este acuerdo en una situación
crítica. Bruselas teme que los sectores más conservadores de Irán utilicen el gesto de Donald
Trump como excusa para apartarse definitivamente de los compromisos nucleares.

Para convencer al régimen de los ayatolás de que nada cambia, la diplomacia comunitaria
trabaja en dos proyectos. El primero, un programa de crédito del Banco Europeo de
Inversiones que respalde a las empresas que quieran hacer negocio en Irán pero no puedan
financiarse por la incertidumbre que crea la decisión estadounidense. Además, Bruselas está
desempolvando una herramienta que ya ideó en 1996, cuando Estados Unidos promulgó la
controvertida ley Helms–Burton, que penalizaba a los empresarios de cualquier territorio,
incluido el europeo, con proyectos en Cuba. Bruselas intenta dar garantías de que ninguna
firma deberá acatar medidas estadounidenses con efectos extraterritoriales.

En la práctica, la potencia de estos escudos puede ser muy limitada si los inversores
consideran que el veto estadounidense a operar en Irán les cierra el grifo de financiación y
amenaza el eventual beneficio.

14
Por su parte, China también ha manifestado su rechazo a la decisión de Trump y ha pedido a
todas las partes a asumir una "actitud responsable" para garantizar la continuidad del
acuerdo. El portavoz chino del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores Geng Shuang ha recordado
que el acuerdo debe ser aplicado para garantizar la integridad y proteger el principio de no
proliferación nuclear y, en consecuencia, la paz internacional.

Shuang ha asegurado que Pekín continuará con los intercambios y la cooperación que
mantiene con Irán sin violar ningún acuerdo internacional y se ha mostrado abierto a
mantener conversaciones con las partes para garantizar la protección y la implementación del
pacto nuclear.

The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Europe's clash with Trump over Iran
nuclear deal is a durability test
Tone struck by Britain, France and Germany will be critical to future transatlantic relations
Patrick Wintour Diplomatic editor

European leaders are determined to try to salvage the Iran nuclear deal even though this
potentially puts them on a collision course with an uncompromising US president determined
to confront Iran as the “leading state sponsor of terror”.

The clash represents a huge test of the durability of the surprisingly concerted alliance that
Germany, France and the UK have managed to maintain in their humiliatingly fruitless bid to
prevent Donald Tump from explicitly withdrawing from the deal signed by his predecessor
Barack Obama.

The risk is that the unity forged by the European trio over the need to preserve the deal now
falters as disagreements surface on how far they are prepared to antagonise a determined US
president, not to mention Israel and Saudi Arabia, to keep the deal alive.

The tone in which figures such as the French president Emmanuel Macron challenge Trump’s
judgment call, and bellicose rhetoric, will also be critical to future transatlantic relations. In
making his announcement Trump did not hold back, or make any concessions to European
sentiment, effectively accusing his European allies of being duped by “a giant fiction
perpetrated by a murderous regime”. Still worse, from the EU perspective, he said he was
imposing “the highest level of sanctions”, adding explicitly that other nations could be
sanctioned if they assisted Iran.

In the face of this rhetoric, Europe’s room for manoeuvre and apparent traction with
Washington is limited.

Tony Blinken, a former Obama deputy secretary of state involved in the negotiation of the
original deal known as the joint comprehensive plan of action (JCPOA), said Europe’s ability to
keep the deal alive would largely depend on whether Iran continues to reap economic
benefits, even without the US. “That will be a judgment over time,” he said. “It depends on
how companies react to the new environment and it depends on whether the US tries to
sanction companies that trade with Iran.”

But the viability of Europe’s plans to keep Iran committed to the deal will depend on how
aggressively the US Treasury ensures that any economic sanctions it now imposes on US firms
that continue to trade with the central bank of Iran also impact on European firms. The first
sanction that is being reimposed by Trump, as a result of ending the waiver, is a requirement
for firms to show they are significantly reducing the number of oil deals they are striking with
Iran via the country’s central bank. That will take as long as 180 days to measure. But in an

15
uncompromising mood, Trump implied other much wider sanctions will also be reimposed,
even though he gave no timeframe for doing so.

One difficulty is that many existing US sanctions on Iran, some linked to Tehran’s human
rights abuses and its ballistic missile programme, have already had a chilling effect on risk–
averse European banks with commercial links to the US.

Previous efforts in 2016 and 2017 to find a way to disentangle European firms trading with
Iran from the threat of US sanctions largely failed, leading Tehran to complain for the past
three years that the supposed chief upside– increased western investment in the Iranian
economy – had not materialised in contravention of the nuclear deal.

The question for Europe is whether it can find a more effective means of protecting European
business trading with Iran from US sanctions. Blinken pointed out that in the past the EU has
staged confrontations with the US when Washington has imposed secondary sanctions. The
Libya and Iran sanctions act passed by Congress in 1996 provoked the EU to pass a blocking
statute asserting US secondary sanctions on European firms trading with Iran or Libya had no
legal effect. The EU also threatened to take the US to the World Trade Organisation. “Broadly
the US backed down”, Blinken said.

But Trump seems prepared to hit European firms trading with Iran. The tone of his White
House address suggested he will not tolerate any threat to his political authority to settle the
west’s relations with Iran.

Nevertheless, over the past few weeks, the EU has been privately reviewing such past
confrontations with the US over sanctions, but it has not spoken of its contingency plans in
public preferring to focus on how to persuade the US to pull back.

Maja Kocijančič, the EU spokeswoman for foreign affairs, simply said on Tuesday: “We are
working on plans to protect the interests of European companies.”

But in a bid to reassure the Iranians, and prevent an uncontrolled escalation, officials from the
UK, France, Germany and the EU’s foreign policy service stressed their support for the Iran
deal when they met Iran’s deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araghchi for talks in Brussels on
Tuesday, hours before Trump’s statement. Europe would implement the JCPOA as long as Iran
complies with its obligations, said a German foreign ministry source.

At the same time, Europe instinctually will not want to find itself at odds with its natural allies
Saudi Arabia, Israel and Washington on such a critical judgment call as the role of Iran in the
Middle East. A public confrontation between the US and Europe at the United Nations security
council over the future of the agreement is only likely to benefit Russia.

Instead, the EU will have to decide whether to pursue its proposals, originally concocted to
persuade Trump to stay in the deal, to negotiate a supplementary agreement with Iran
covering its ballistic missile program, its foreign policy interventionism in the Middle East and
the controversial sunset clauses in the deal.

At the moment European leaders face only an invidious choice: succumb to Trump’s leadership
even though they say it risks turmoil in the Middle East, or challenge their closest ally on
probably the biggest foreign policy decision of his presidency.

El País (Espanha) – Un deshielo que no dio alas a la economía iraní

ALICIA GONZÁLEZ, Madrid.

Cuando Hasan Rohani apareció en enero de 2014 en el Foro de Davos, los directivos de las
grandes multinacionales hacían cola literalmente en el centro de congresos para reunirse con

16
el presidente iraní y su ministro del Petróleo. La posibilidad de un levantamiento de las
sanciones ya parecía real y nadie quería quedar al margen de sus jugosos contratos ni de un
mercado de casi 80 millones de habitantes. La realidad poco se parece a las expectativas.

Tras el levantamiento efectivo de las sanciones, en enero de 2016, el Fondo Monetario

Internacional (FMI) calculó que la economía iraní crecería un 4% adicional como consecuencia
directa del aumento de las exportaciones de petróleo, que la producción de crudo rondaría por
estas fechas los cuatro millones de barriles diarios y que los flujos de inversión internacionales
se dispararían en el país de los ayatolás. Dos años y medio después del levantamiento de las
sanciones, los beneficios económicos para Irán presentan un balance mixto.

Cierto es que en 2016 el PIB creció un 12,5% pero el año pasado apenas un 3,7%. La
inflación superaba con creces el 30% y, por primera vez en décadas, la tasa se situó por
debajo del 10%. Pero el desempleo no ha dejado de crecer en estos años, hasta el 12,5% el
año pasado, y la confianza de la población en las perspectivas económicas del acuerdo se ha
desinflado. Hay algunas causas que explican el estancamiento de la economía.

Por un lado, aunque la Unión Europea ha levantado la mayoría de las sanciones, Estados
Unidos ha mantenido todas aquellas que no tenían que ver directamente con el acuerdo
nuclear. Esas trabas frenan las transacciones entre los bancos iraníes y los estadounidenses y
las operaciones con miembros de los Guardianes de la Revolución, con una fuerte presencia en
la economía. Tampoco el Gobierno de Teherán ha llevado a cabo las reformas y los ajustes
previstos, tanto en las cuentas públicas como en la banca, lastrada por una tasa de morosidad
del 12%, ni para combatir su rampante corrupción.

Finalmente, desde la llegada de Donald Trump “la posibilidad de nuevas sanciones ha

desincentivado a muchas industrias extranjeras y a muchos bancos de establecer vínculos con
Irán que pueden volver a romperse”, asegura un informe del proyecto de Dinámicas
Económicas Globales (GED, en sus siglas en inglés).

En un encuentro del sector petrolero celebrado en marzo en Londres, la industria dejó clara su
actitud de esperar y ver. El viceministro del Petróleo, Amir Husein Zamaninia, aseguró a los
inversores que, en este tiempo, Teherán ha firmado memorandos de entendimiento
(intenciones de inversión) para 28 proyectos con diferentes compañías, incluidas la francesa
Total, la italiana Eni, la anglo–holandesa Shell, las rusas Rosneft y Lukoil, y las chinas Sinopec
y CNPC, entre otras.

Total, pionera
De todos, el más avanzado es el acuerdo con la francesa Total por 4.800 millones de dólares
para explotar, junto con CNPC, parte del proyecto de South Pars, el mayor campo de gas del
mundo. Pero, la empresa no las tiene todas consigo. “Si el marco cambia, si podemos hacerlo
legalmente y ejecutar el contrato, lo haremos. Hay enormes oportunidades en Irán. Pero
vamos a ver primero si podemos cumplir ese proyecto inicial”, admitió Patrick Pouyanne,
presidente de Total.

Buena parte de las reticencias a la hora de invertir proceden del sector financiero, escaldado
con las multimillonarias sanciones impuestas por EE UU a los bancos HSBC y BNP, de 1.900 y
8.900 millones de dólares, respectivamente. De hecho, uno de los sectores prioritarios para el
régimen era la renovación de la flota aérea, con más de 100 aeronaves encargadas a Airbus
por IranAir y otros 80 aparatos a Boeing. Y aunque ambas compañías han recibido
autorizaciones de exportación por parte de EE UU, la banca es reacia a financiar estas
compras por temor a nuevas sanciones.

Lo mismo ha sucedido con la industria automovilística. Peugeot anunció inversiones por 700
millones de euros, Renault se ha comprometido a construir una nueva planta para producir
350.000 vehículos al año y Volkswagen ha anunciado que volverá a exportar al país tras 17

17
años. En cambio, BMW, con una elevada exposición al mercado estadounidense, ha aplazado
sus proyectos.

Siemens, Alstom, Ferrovie dello Stato y la empresa ferroviaria china han comprometido
inversiones millonarias para renovar los trenes, construir líneas de alta velocidad y desarrollar
la red de metro. Pero ahora todos pueden verse obligados a esperar y ver.

Reuters (Reino Unido) – Aliados de EEUU en el Golfo Pérsico

celebran decisión de Trump sobre pacto nuclear con Irán
Por Stephen Kalin y Sarah Dadouch

RIAD, 9 mayo (Reuters) – Arabia Saudita y otros aliados de Estados Unidos en el Golfo Pérsico
se regocijaban el miércoles por lo que veían como una victoria política sobre Irán, su rival
regional, después de que Washington decidió retirarse de un pacto internacional con la
república islámica.

Arabia Saudita, Emiratos Árabes Unidos y Bahréin se apresuraron a respaldar la decisión del
presidente estadounidense, Donald Trump, de reimponer sanciones contra Teherán, reflejando
su preocupación por el programa de misiles balísticos y el respaldo de Irán a grupos
militantes.

“A París y Londres podría no gustarles la decisión de Trump, pero ¿qué sentirían los franceses
y los británicos si sus ciudades estuvieran bajo la amenaza directa de los iraníes?”, escribió
Faisal Abbas en una editorial del diario saudí Arab News, que llevaba de título “El acuerdo ha
muerto”.

En un café, el empresario saudí Ziad dijo que los gobernantes del reino estuvieron en lo
correcto al cuestionar el acuerdo nuclear firmado el 2015, que redujo las sanciones contra Irán
a cambio de que restringiera su programa nuclear y sus intentos por desarrollar una bomba
atómica.

Arabia Saudita, un país musulmán suní que ha mantenido por décadas una rivalidad con la chií
Irán, están enfrentados por sus roles en conflictos de Oriente Medio como Irak, Siria, el Líbano
y Yemen.

En los Emiratos Árabes Unidos (EAU), Anwar Gargash, ministro de Relaciones Exteriores, dijo
en Twitter: “Irán interpretó el acuerdo como una recurrencia de su hegemonía. Una Irán
agresiva fue alentada como resultado y su programa de misiles balísticos se transformó en
ofensivo y exportable a la vez”.

Trump ha empleado argumentos similares, al criticar el acuerdo por no limitar el programa de

misiles balísticos de Irán, abordar las actividades nucleares de Teherán después del 2025 ni su
rol en las guerras de Oriente Medio.

Otros estados del Golfo Pérsico como Omán, que estuvo a cargo de los contactos secretos
entre Irán y Estados Unidos que allanaron el camino para el acuerdo nuclear, no han
comentado oficialmente sobre la decisión de Trump.

The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Trump has manufactured a national

security crisis for no reason / Artigo / Michael H. Fuchs
Michael H Fuchs is a contributing opinion writer for the Guardian US. He is also a senior fellow
at the Center for American Progress, and a former deputy assistant secretary of state for east
Asian and Pacific affairs.

18
His decision to pull the United States out of the Iran deal could place the lives of Americans –
and people around the world – in danger. And all for nothing

Imagine the president of the United States of America sitting in the White House Situation
Room with his top national security advisers and deciding that there are not enough threats to
US national security. There are not enough wars and humanitarian crises around the world.
The United States is bored. Imagine the president deciding to manufacture a new national
security crisis that will directly threaten America, its allies and the world.

Sounds like the work of fiction, right? Unfortunately, not. President Trump announced his
decision for the United States to violate the diplomatic agreement that is currently preventing
Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon – and with that decision Trump produced a new,
unnecessary crisis.

Let’s quickly go over how we got here. Just a few years ago, Iran was working to get a nuclear
weapon, and making progress. After years of a sustained, highly coordinated campaign of
sanctions backed by most of the world, the economic pressure forced Iran to come to the
negotiating table. The United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom, Germany,
France, China and Russia got Iran to agree to stop its nuclear weapons program and to never
attempt to get a nuclear weapon.

In the almost three years since the deal was signed, not only has the IAEA confirmed that Iran
is complying with the deal, but the Trump administration – the very administration now
violating the deal – has repeatedly verified Iran’s compliance. The US secretary of defense,
James Mattis, said the verification mechanisms in the deal are “robust”, and the head of the
IAEA called them the “world’s most robust”.

But forget the facts and the details. Trump wants out. So now what?

The most consequential result could be an eventual war with Iran that engulfs the Middle East.
Iran could kick out inspectors and develop a nuclear weapon. Iran could ramp up its support
for terrorism and proxy wars. Arab states like Saudi Arabia could try to get their own nuclear
weapons and respond to Iranian escalation with more escalation in Syria and Yemen. And all
of that could lead to more conflict in the Middle East, including potential wars with Israel and
the United States.

At a time when Trump has already created a rift with allies in Europe over climate change,
trade and more, Trump’s violation of the Iran deal doesn’t just put the screws to Iran – it puts
the screws to Europe as it faces new potential US sanctions. These are the very allies that the
United States needs not only for all manner of global challenges, but also for the new deal
with Iran that Trump supposedly wants to pursue. Treating one’s allies as adversaries is not a
recipe for success. And sure enough, very quickly after Trump’s announcement, the leaders of
the United Kingdom, Germany, and France jointly announced their “continuing commitment”
to the deal.

Likewise, the numerous other countries that were essential in pressuring Iran into talks for the
nuclear deal – China, Russia, India, Japan, among others – seem even less likely to help.
Many of them need oil from the region to fuel their economies, and it took years of
painstaking diplomacy to get these countries to reduce their economic ties with Iran in the
years leading up to the 2015 nuclear agreement. It seems highly unlikely that they would do
so again when there is no evidence of Iran violating the agreement.

And if the US goal is now to force Iran to make a “new and lasting deal” – as Trump put it –
why would Iran agree to negotiate when it believes the word of the United States is good for
nothing?

19
So where does that leave the United States? Alone, with a self–inflicted wound that will injure
others as collateral damage.

The best–case scenario is that Iran remains in the agreement for now (which Rouhani
immediately indicated Iran would) as the other parties continue to comply in the face of
potential US sanctions, which tanks US relations with allies and partners around the world.

The worst–case scenario is war.

There was – and still remains – a much better path. The United States could continue to ramp
up its activities to push back against Iran around the region. It could start working with allies
and partners now to develop plans for continuing to prevent Iran from developing nuclear
weapons when parts of the deal expire years from now.

The nuclear deal is not perfect, but it reduces the chances for conflict, and achieves a key goal
that the United States, Israel and allies had long sought: stopping Iran from getting a nuclear
weapon. And yet, in dumping the deal, Trump has offered no alternative to achieve this goal.

It’s not clear that Trump is looking for more violent conflict. But his decision to pull the United
States out of the Iran deal very well could place the lives of more Americans – and people
around the Middle East and beyond – in danger. And all for nothing.

The Guardian (Reino Unido) – By ending the nuclear deal, Trump

has handed a gift to Iranian hardliners / Artigo / Sanam Vakil
Sanam Vakil is the James Anderson adjunct professor at Johns Hopkins University–SAIS
Europe and an associate fellow covering Iran at Chatham House

One of the many knock–on effects of Trump’s decision to end the nuclear deal could be the
victory of hardliners in upcoming elections writes Sanam Vakil

For Iranians, Donald Trump’s announcement that he is withdrawing the US from the nuclear
deal and reimposing sanctions, despite Iran’s compliance with the deal, is deeply
disappointing.

This is a manufactured crisis, and in making it, Washington and its allies in Tel Aviv and
Riyadh have set their sights on a zero sum option of containing and even forcing political
change in the Islamic Republic.

This naïve thinking reflects Washington’s limited understanding of Iran and its internal politics
as well as the deep regional divide between Iran and its Arab neighbours. So rather than
address the principal challenge of Iran’s regional meddling and the wider tensions in the
Middle East in an initiative separate from the already functioning nuclear deal, Trump has
unleashed a genie that will not so easily go back in its bottle. The consequences and
challenges ahead are multiple.

First, the US withdrawal creates a transatlantic divide at a time when cooperation between
Washington and its European allies is critical. Since January, France, Germany and the UK
have scrambled to find solutions, albeit unsuccessfully, to placate Trump’s concerns about the
nuclear agreement. Trump’s zero sum decision, however, leaves the EU with little room for
manoeuvre, either to save the deal or to create openings for new negotiations.

In the absence of either, a full–scale collapse of the deal will ultimately empower China and
Russia. Both will capitalise on Western paralysis in the Middle East by building strong
economic and political ties not only with Iran, who will have no where else to turn, but also its
neighbours that are already looking east.

20
Inside Iran, President Rouhani’s initial reaction was to translate Iranian anger and
disappointment into nationalism. He immediately responded by summoning the “Iranian
nation…to be more united and resolved.”

But Trump has handed a unique opportunity to hardline political elites to build on Iranian
frustration. Not only can the hardliners use the breakdown of the deal to establish unity
among the divided elites, but they can also build bridges with the Iranian population after
protests in January. The knock–on effects of conservative unity could even lead to a victory
for a hardline candidate in the 2020 parliamentary elections and the 2021 presidential poll.

Moving beyond symbolic speeches though, Iran has a hard task ahead that includes trying to
maintain European, Russian and Chinese solidarity. \Without that Tehran faces renewed
economic isolation.

In the weeks ahead, Tehran will seek to pressure the EU in particular to defend the deal. If
that defence does not materialise though, Iran will gradually restart its nuclear programme.
The wider consequence here is that other regional actors such as Saudi Arabia will also make
similar moves accelerating the issue of regional nuclear proliferation.

The Middle East is a tinderbox of tensions as conflicts rage in Syria, Yemen, Iraq and Lebanon
and Iran is the driver of much of this toxicity. Here too, the potential for a wider regional
escalation is high. Israel remains rightly intent on preventing Tehran from gaining a significant
foothold on the Syrian border. Yet, Iran has developed asymmetrical ties with militias and
proxies affording it great opportunity to stir up trouble and demonstrate its leverage.

With these consequences in mind, it is clear that the Trump administration has miscalculated.
While Trump is proud to have maintained his campaign promise to roll back the “worst deal
ever,” he does not yet realise that by doing so he will be breaking another—and the United
States could yet again become embroiled in another Middle East war.

AFP (França) – Nucléaire: l'Iran organise sa riposte après la sortie

des Etats–Unis
Téhéran organise mercredi sa riposte après le retrait des États–Unis de l'accord sur le
nucléaire, les dirigeants iraniens se montrant unis pour condamner cette décision mais
partagés sur la marche à suivre.

Dès mardi soir, le président Hassan Rohani a affirmé que son ministre des Affaires étrangères,
Mohammad Javad Zarif, allait mener des négociations avec les cinq autres pays parties à cet
accord (Allemagne, Chine, France, Royaume–Uni et Russie) pour voir si celui–ci peut être
sauvé.

Le président américain Donald Trump a annoncé mardi qu'il retirait son pays de l'accord signé
à Vienne en juillet 2015, par lequel l'Iran a accepté de brider son programme nucléaire en
s'engageant à ne jamais chercher à obtenir la bombe atomique en échange de la levée d'une
partie des sanctions internationales visant la République islamique.

Washington a choisi pratiquement l'option la plus radicale en rétablissant l'intégralité des

sanctions levées, mais aussi en annonçant des sanctions encore plus sévères et en forçant les
entreprises étrangères à choisir rapidement entre faire des affaires en Iran ou aux États–Unis.

"Nous devons attendre de voir ce que les cinq grands pays vont faire (...). Si les intérêts du
peuple iranien sont assurés (...), l'accord nucléaire restera et nous pourrons agir pour l'intérêt
de la paix et de la sécurité de la région et du monde", a dit M. Rohani.

21
La presse iranienne reflétait mercredi les opinions divergentes entre réformateurs et
conservateurs modérés d'un côté (comme M. Rohani, un des pères de l'accord) et
ultraconservateurs de l'autre, opposés depuis le départ à ce compromis.

"Trump a déchiré l'accord nucléaire, il est temps pour nous de le brûler", a ainsi avancé le
quotidien ultraconservateur Kayhan. Les journaux réformateurs ont eux dit leur espoir de
trouver une solution avec les Européens.

Mais la marge de manœuvre semble mince.

– "Poids" de l'Europe –

Pour Ali Larijani, président du Parlement, la situation va permettre de voir ce que les
Européens ont dans le ventre.

"Vue l'attitude passée de l'Europe, nous ne pouvons pas tellement faire confiance à leurs
déclarations sur le maintien de l'accord", a–t–il dit lors d'une séance animée ayant vu
plusieurs députés ultraconservateurs brûler un drapeau américain en papier à la tribune aux
cris de "Mort à l'Amérique".

"C'est une ouverture pour que l'Europe montre qu'elle a le poids nécessaire pour régler les
problèmes internationaux", a–t–il ajouté.

Si les négociations échouent, "la République islamique d'Iran, avec ses actions sur le plan
nucléaire (...), ramènera (tout le monde) à la raison", a encore dit M. Larijani, pour qui M.
Trump ne comprend que "le langage de la force".

M. Rohani a prévenu mardi soir que l'Iran pourrait cesser d'appliquer les restrictions qu'il a
consenties à ses activités nucléaires et reprendre un enrichissement d'uranium plus élevé si
les négociations avec les Européens, Russes et Chinois ne devaient pas donner les résultats
escomptés.

Dans les rues de Téhéran, de nombreux Iraniens ont dit leur choc face au retour des sanctions
économiques.

"Les sanctions touchent le peuple, pas le régime", a affirmé une jeune femme.

– "Partir" –

"Le premier sentiment que j’ai (...), c’est qu’on ne peut plus rester vivre ici (...), on est déjà
tellement malheureux", a déclaré à l'AFP Katayoon Soltani, jeune Iranienne de 21 ans,
déplorant que nombre de ses amis soient déjà "en train de partir" à l'étranger.

Farid Roshan Ghyassi, jeune réalisateur d’œuvres télévisées, a dit être "très affecté" et
craindre "les conséquences sur l’ensemble de l'économie du pays".

"Nous espérons que nos partenaires européens et nos dirigeants feront en sorte que les États–
Unis soient isolés et qu'on limite les conséquences", a ajouté Touraj Tabatabaï, homme
d'affaires d'une cinquantaine d'années.

Sans ambages, le général Mohammad Ali Jafari, chef des Gardiens de la révolution, l'armée
d'élite de la République islamique, a lui salué "la sortie des États–Unis de l'accord.

"Il était clair dès le début que les États–Unis ne sont pas dignes de confiance", a–t–il argué,
selon plusieurs agences.

22
Dans une critique à peine voilée de la volontés de négocier annoncée par M. Rohani, M. Jafari
a dit espérer que ces tractations prendraient "fin le plus rapidement possible".

"Il est évident qu'entre les États–Unis et l'Iran, les Européens vont choisir les États–Unis (...).
L'enrichissement d'uranium est un prétexte pour les États–Unis (...). La question principale est
la capacité défensive et balistique ainsi que la puissance et l'influence de la Révolution
islamique dans la région", a–t–il ajouté, prônant un "renforcement des capacités des forces
armées".

Libération (França) – Conflit Israël–Iran : pour Nétanyahou,

«mieux vaut maintenant que plus tard»
Alors que la décision de Washington sur le nucléaire iranien est imminente, la rhétorique
guerrière monte d’un cran en Israël, où l’on se prépare de plus en plus ouvertement à la
confrontation directe avec Téhéran sur le terrain syrien.
Par Guillaume Gendron

Le matin, il grêle; l’après–midi, le soleil assomme; le soir, le ciel se larde d’éclairs: climat
électrique en Israël, épousant parfaitement l’humeur nationale. La source de cette tension?
«Trois problèmes», comme aime à le répéter le ministre la Défense, Avigdor Lieberman:
«L’Iran, l’Iran et l’Iran.» Aux médias étrangers, les sources militaires chuchotent que les
préparations à la «guerre ouverte» sont lancées, pendant que, côté politique, on rivalise de
déclarations belligérantes. Dimanche, le Premier ministre, Benyamin Nétanyahou, s’est dit
«déterminé à arrêter l’agression de l’Iran tant qu’elle en est à ses premiers stades, même si
cela implique un conflit». Et d’ajouter: «Mieux vaut maintenant que plus tard.»

«Arrêt de mort». Le terrain de bataille: la Syrie, où Israël entend combattre l’apparente

volonté de la République islamique d’établir des bases militaires permanentes. Pour les
Gardiens de la révolution, il s’agit d’un retour sur investissement après l’aide fournie au
président syrien, Bachar al–Assad, pour se maintenir au pouvoir. Celui–ci est désormais
prévenu: «Si Al–Assad continue à laisser les Iraniens opérer sur le sol syrien, il doit savoir
qu’il a signé son arrêt de mort: nous renverserons son régime», a menacé lundi Yuval Steinitz,
le ministre de l’Energie, membre du cabinet de sécurité.

Surenchère rhétorique ou véritable bruit de bottes? Difficile à dire, le brouhaha du petit jeu
politico–militaro–médiatique recouvrant tout. A chaque jour, son annonce catastrophiste, puis
son désamorçage dans l’heure. Dimanche soir, les journaux télévisés annonçaient que l’Etat
hébreu se préparait à une salve imminente de missiles sur le nord du pays, tirés depuis la
Syrie pour le compte de l’Iran. A la manœuvre, toujours selon le renseignement israélien, des
milices chiites et très probablement le Hezbollah, qui n’est plus tenu de jouer profil bas
maintenant que les législatives libanaises sont passées (lire ci–contre). Face à l’effroi
provoqué par l’annonce, les officiels israéliens ont distillé le message que ces frappes
viseraient certainement des cibles militaires et non civiles, et que le système antimissile Dôme
de fer serait à même de les intercepter.

Il n’empêche: l’Iran a promis de se venger «en temps et en lieu» aux récentes frappes
aériennes de Tsahal en Syrie, toujours plus hardies et profondes dans le territoire. Non
revendiquées formellement, celle du 9 avril, sur la base T–4 près de Palmyre, et la dernière, le
29 avril, sur un stock de missiles à Hama, auraient tué à elles deux presque une vingtaine de
gradés iraniens. Les analystes estiment que Téhéran attend de connaître le sort qu’a réservé
Donald Trump à l’accord sur le nucléaire iranien pour bouger ses pions. La date butoir du
président américain est elle aussi imminente, fixée à ce mardi soir.

Dans les médias, les généraux à la retraite comme les grandes plumes des conflits passés
parlent d’une ambiance ressemblant à celle de l’avant–guerre du Kippour : entre sentiment
d’impunité tendant à l’hubris et sous–estimation dangereuse de l’adversaire, le tout avec une

23
sensation de multiplication des fronts, de Gaza à la Syrie, semblable à l’avant–guerre des Six
Jours en 1967.

Cédéroms. L’attitude de Nétanyahou interroge. En une semaine, «Bibi» a montré ses muscles.
Il y a d’abord eu les chasseurs F–15 lancés sur Hama, suivis de la présentation grand
spectacle sur le programme nucléaire iranien. Si les «révélations» toutes relatives de
Nétanyahou n’ont pas fait bouger d’un iota les positions de chaque camp sur l’accord (les
Européens continuant à s’évertuer à sauver le deal), l’exhibition des archives iraniennes
récupérées par le Mossad, copies conformes des classeurs et cédéroms à l’appui, se voulait
aussi humiliante que possible pour Téhéran. Dernier coup de menton: Benyamin Nétanyahou a
fait passer aux députés une proposition de loi visant à assouplir la déclaration de guerre. Avec
ce nouveau texte, en cas de «situation extrême», plus besoin de l’aval du gouvernement mais
seulement du soutien du ministre de la Défense. «[Hassan] Nasrallah [le leader du Hezbollah,
ndlr] et les Gardiens de la révolution n’ont pas besoin d’un conseiller juridique ou d’une Cour
suprême… Nous devons nous aussi avoir l’option de réagir en temps réel», s’est justifié
Avigdor Lieberman face aux critiques.

«Liban bis». Dans le quotidien Yediot Aharonot, l’éditorialiste vedette Nahum Barnea posait
clairement la question ce week–end: «Nétanyahou cherche–t–il la guerre avec l’Iran ?»
Longtemps décrit comme un pragmatique accro au statu quo et rétif à la confrontation directe,
le Premier ministre fait montre d’une résolution nouvelle. Au–delà d’une situation politique
personnelle fragilisée par les affaires qui pourrait le pousser à se draper dans le manteau du
«protecteur de la nation», le contexte a changé. Tolérée par la Russie devenue maîtresse du
jeu régional, une implantation durable de l’Iran en Syrie se transforme chaque jour un peu
plus en «fait du terrain». L’appareil sécuritaire israélien y voit le risque d’un «Liban bis» qui
concrétiserait le continuum chiite rêvé par Téhéran jusqu’à la Méditerranée, avec un double
front unifié au nord d’Israël. Benyamin Nétanyahou sera à Moscou mercredi pour aborder la
situation avec Vladimir Poutine. Placé en position d’arbitre, ce dernier s’est montré jusqu’ici
très réticent à trancher.

TARIFAS DOS EUA

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump declares trade war

on China / Coluna / Martin Wolf
No sovereign power could accept the humiliating demands being made by the US

The Trump administration has presented China with an ultimatum on trade. That is what the
US’s “draft framework” for the trade talks with Chinese officials in Beijing last week actually is.
China could not accede to its demands. The US administration is either so foolish that it does
not understand this or so arrogant that it does not care. This may be a decisive moment for
relations between the world’s two greatest powers.

The US side demands the following “concrete and verifiable actions”.

China is to reduce the US–China trade imbalance by $100bn in the 12 months beginning June
1 2018, and by another $100bn in the 12 months beginning June 1 2019.

China should also immediately eliminate all “market–distorting subsidies” conducive to excess
capacity. It will strengthen intellectual property and eliminate technology–related
requirements for joint ventures.

“Furthermore, China agrees to . . . cease the targeting of [US] technology and intellectual
property through cyber operations, economic espionage, counterfeiting and piracy. China also
agrees to abide by US export control laws.”

24
Moreover, China will withdraw requests for World Trade Organization consultations relating to
tariff actions on intellectual property. “In addition, China will not take any retaliatory action . . .
in response to actions taken or to be taken by the US, including any new US
restrictions . . . China immediately will cease all retaliatory actions currently being pursued.”

China “will not oppose, challenge, or . . . retaliate against US imposition of restrictions on

investments from China in sensitive US technology sectors or sectors critical to US national
security”. But “US investors in China must be afforded fair, effective and non–discriminatory
market access and treatment, including removal of . . . foreign investment restrictions and
foreign ownership/shareholding requirements”.

By July 1 2020, China will reduce tariffs in “non–critical sectors to levels that are no higher
than” equivalent US tariffs. It will also open access to services and farm products as the US
specifies.

The agreement is to be monitored quarterly. Should the US conclude that China is not in
compliance, it may impose tariffs or import restrictions. China “will not oppose, challenge or
take any form of action against” any such US impositions. China will also withdraw its WTO
complaint that it is not being treated as a market economy.

What is to be made of these demands? The call for a reduction of the bilateral deficits by
$200bn (up from $100bn) is ridiculous. It would require the Chinese state to take control over
the economy — precisely what, in other respects, the US demands it not do.

It is a violation of the principles of non–discrimination, multilateralism and market–conformity

that underpin the trading system the US created. It should be ashamed of itself. It ignores the
overwhelming probability that this will not reduce overall US deficits, particularly given US
fiscal irresponsibility. It ignores the inevitable adverse effects on third countries.

The demand that China have exactly the same tariffs as the US is almost as ridiculous. There
is no economic case for such a policy. It would be far more reasonable to demand that it move
towards the same average tariff as the US or EU.

A serious discussion should indeed be had on the terms of foreign investment in China and
Chinese investment in the US. So, too, must there be a discussion of intellectual property
protection and cyber–espionage. But China could never accept the idea that the US may
prevent it from upgrading its technology.

The notion that the US may insist on unrestricted access for investment in China while
reserving the right to restrict Chinese investment, as it wishes, must also be unacceptable.

Finally, the idea that the US will be judge, jury and executioner, while China will be deprived
of the rights to retaliate or seek recourse to the WTO is crazy. No great sovereign power could
accept such a humiliation. For China, it would be a modern version of the “unequal treaties” of
the 19th century.

The Americans seem sure they can force the Chinese to sue for terms, how ever foolish and
humiliating these are. China would indeed be hurt more by a tit–for–tat tariff war than the US.
This is because its exports to the US dwarf those from the US to China.

A recent analysis from the Hoover Institution suggests that China’s economic growth might be
reduced by 0.3 percentage points in a tariff war. That is far more costly than to the US, but it
would be survivable for an economy as dynamic as China’s. To China’s leaders, such costs
would be dwarfed by those of abject surrender. (See charts.)

Both economically and politically, the US is going about this in the wrong way, not only
because it is seeking to humiliate China, but because it is simultaneously waging commercial

25
war on its potential allies. The right path for everybody would be to make the discussion
multilateral, not narrowly bilateral.

China should recognise that, though still a developing country in some respects, it is also a
superpower. It should embrace the principles of rules–governed openness and liberal trade. A
renewal of the lapsed multilateral trade negotiation, built around opening up the Chinese
economy, could, as the Chinese say, be a “win–win” for everybody. China should take the
lead. The Europeans and Japanese should support the idea.

Americans who are better aware of the national interest than the administration need to
understand that the US will find itself on its own if it seeks conflict. That is what must happen
when a leader turns into a self–regarding bully.

MERCOSUL

La Nación (Argentina) – "La UE es el socio más confiable" /

Entrevista / Aude Maio–Coliche
Estados Unidos desbarata acuerdos globales, Rusia interfiere en los procesos electorales de
otros países, China impone reglas con su diplomacia económica. Mientras tanto, el cuarto
actor más importante de la escena internacional, la Unión Europea (UE), es un ejemplo de
"cómo puede y tiene que funcionar el multilateralismo, un sistema basado en reglas".
"Somos el socio más confiable hoy" en el mundo, dice la embajadora del bloque en la
Argentina, Aude Maio–Coliche, en el día que Europa celebra su día. La diplomática, orgullosa
de las sólidas cifras de cooperación entre la UE y el país, advierte que, por esa razón, el
acuerdo entre el Mercosur y el bloque debe tener el tiempo de negociación que sea necesario,
de forma tal que represente una situación "win–win" para ambas partes.

–¿Por qué el acuerdo UE–Mercosur a veces parece tan cercano y a veces tan lejano?
–Primero es un acuerdo entre dos bloques muy importantes. Por un lado hay 260 millones de
habitantes del Mercosur y por el otro hay 500 millones de habitantes; 28 países de un lado y
cuatro del otro. Y tienen una historia y valores completamente compartidos. Y grandes ganas
de estar juntos. Empezó la negociación como un acuerdo de asociación con un mandato de
1998 y en estos 20 años hubo cambios políticos. Entonces la primera cosa es que tenemos la
impresión de que estamos negociando desde hace 20 años, pero no estamos negociando
desde hace 20 años. Hubo cambios de ambos lados. Lo que pasó es que se reactivó
justamente la negociación hace dos años con el impulso de la Argentina, que tenía la
presidencia del Mercosur, y una alineación de los planetas. Es un acuerdo muy amplio y hay
varios capítulos. Hoy en día nos gusta hablar de un acuerdo de comercio basado en reglas, es
decir que existe efectivamente este componente de liberar las tarifas, que es el objetivo de un
acuerdo de libre comercio, es hacer más fácil el intercambio, disminuyendo las barreras de
acceso en ambos lados. Pero también eso se tiene que acompañar de lo que llaman un mismo
level playing field. Tenemos que poder hablar el mismo idioma en materia de normas.

–¿Este trabajo de alineamiento supone un tiempo considerable por delante, entonces?

–Tampoco es tan así porque todos los temas ya han sido abordados, no hay nuevos temas.
Los negociadores saben muy bien lo que les queda por hacer, lo que necesita coordinación
dentro de la UE. Por suerte una sola persona tiene el mandato de negociar y del lado del
Mercosur no hay una institución así, pero son solo cuatro países, no 28.

–Usted recién dijo, cuando yo mencioné la palabra divisiones en Europa, que no lo llamaría
divisiones. Macron incluso habló de "guerra civil". ¿Qué son si no son divisiones?
–Cuando uno mira la historia hay diferencia, hay procesos, hay pueblos, pero al final la UE
está, la UE ha permitido que no haya guerras desde 1945, que es un gran logro para nosotros.
Y el nivel de prosperidad ha aumentado y de manera significativa en muchos países. Ahora
bien, si hay países que, en sus procesos internos, están con populismo, y eso es lo que más

26
golpea a los países europeos, son procesos que están en todos lados. Bueno, es el papel de la
Unión recordar que con estos métodos populistas no nos ha ido bien en el pasado.

–Dijo que la "UE está", es cierto eso. Pero cuando en junio de 2016 los británicos votaron por
el Brexit, muchos pensaron que era el comienzo del fin de la UE. ¿Cuánto va a cambiar la UE?
¿Cuánto va a escuchar el descontento de todos aquellos que dijeron que la UE no supo
responder a sus necesidades?
–El referéndum británico fue una sorpresa para todos, y es lamentable, obviamente. La salida
de Gran Bretaña se está negociando de manera ordenada, lo que permite poner el interés de
los ciudadanos en primera plana. Si hay áreas en las cuales continuaremos trabajando juntos
son la política exterior, compartimos los mismos valores, y la seguridad. Ahora cómo
responder a los ciudadanos, que es un tema muy importante. La UE se construyó con la
convicción de grandes pensadores, con gente con visión. Esa visión era: si creamos
solidaridades de hecho entre los europeos ya no se podrá hacer la guerra, y por eso
empezamos con el carbón y el acero, que eran el fundamento de la industria de la guerra.
Después esas solidaridades se hicieron en lo económico porque, ¿qué más que el dinero obliga
a la gente a trabajar juntos? Poco a poco los tratados añadieron otras competencias a la UE.
Pero tal vez no fue tan claro para los ciudadanos ese valor añadido. Hoy, el 80% de la
legislación de un país viene de un acuerdo que hizo ese país con la UE, no de una mente en
Bruselas que impone. Falta explicar lo que estamos haciendo, obviamente que siempre se
puede mejorar lo que hace la UE para hacerlo más cercano a la gente.

–Asciende China, EE.UU. sigue con su poder, Rusia quiere recuperar la influencia diplomática y
política. ¿Qué rol le cabe hoy en el mundo a la UE entonces?
–La UE es hoy un socio previsible y estable. Y ofrece eso al resto del mundo.

–¿Es el socio más previsible?

–Bueno, hoy en día sí lo es. Justamente porque gestionamos nuestras diferencias, lo que sale
de nosotros es muy estable. Y tenemos la experiencia de 60 años de multilateralismo interno y
lo que ofrecemos al mundo es cómo puede y tiene que funcionar el multilateralismo, un
sistema basado en reglas. Cuando hay reglas y derechos claros, uno puede avanzar y trabajar
para la prosperidad de todos. Eso es lo que ofrecemos y defendemos para el mundo. Somos
además el bloque que más aporta en ayuda al desarrollo (0,45% de PBI). Somos líderes en la
lucha contra el cambio climático desde el principio, hemos hecho nuestro trabajo en casa,
hemos crecido mientras bajábamos nuestras emisiones.

El Cronista (Argentina) – Paraguay, la nueva joya del Mercosur

Ya no es una novedad ni un tesoro por descubrir, Paraguay crece con paso firme y continuo, el
promedio del crecimiento de su PBI durante los últimos años fue un ritmo del 4.5% anual.

El pasado domingo 22 de abril este modelo de crecimiento y reconversión económica fue

apoyado por el 46.5% de los votantes, eligiendo como presidente a Mario Abdo Benítez
candidato del Partido Colorado.

Pero el actual presente de la República hermana del Paraguay fue forjado por la gestión del
Presidente Horacio Cartes quien asumió el cargo en el año 2013. Durante su mandato,
podemos afirmar que se han tomado las decisiones correctas para materializar lo que para
muchos era un imposible.

En 2014 Cartes lanzó un ambicioso `Plan de Desarrollo 2014–2030` El mismo posee cuatro
pilares fundamentales: Reducción de la Pobreza – Desarrollo Social – Crecimiento Económico
Inclusivo – Inserción de Paraguay en la Economía Global.

Como motor de ese cambio, se propuso diversificar la matriz económica, ya que su principal
ingreso por exportaciones es la agricultura (soja y maíz), la exportación de carne a 73 países
y la energía eléctrica. Paraguay produce alimentos para 80 millones de habitantes y el

27
programa del gobierno apunta a triplicar esa producción. Pero la diversificación de la matriz
económica apunta también al fomento de la instalación de industrias a través de la ley de
Maquilas.

La ley de Maquilas Nro. 1064/97 reglamentada por Decreto Nro. 9585/00, ha sido muy
importante en el crecimiento del Paraguay en los últimos años donde se han instalado 150
industrias, mayormente de origen brasilero (60%). Éste régimen está acompañado de amplias
facilidades para la tramitación de sociedades, agilización en el otorgamiento de permisos y
habilitaciones para que los empresarios puedan instalarse en un breve tiempo y comiencen a
producir y generar empleo sin mayores demoras. Beneficio Otro de los beneficios es que las
empresas que operan bajo este régimen pagan solamente el Impuesto Único que es del 1%
sobre el valor agregado al producto en suelo paraguayo o sobre factura de exportación. Este
régimen también contempla el recupero de la alícuota del IVA 10%. Además de la suspensión
de impuestos y aranceles aduaneros. Las remesas al exterior se encuentran exentas. También
las empresas pueden beneficiarse con la Ley 60/90 donde las importaciones de bienes de
capital no pagan arancel (0%) y también están exentas del pago del IVA. Los servicios de
deuda también están exentos y tampoco pagan impuestos los dividendos y utilidades de
inversiones mayores a u$s 5 millones.

Siguiendo con los beneficios impositivos, y ya fuera de la ley de Maquilas, nos encontramos
que en este país rige El Régimen del Triple Diez (10/10/10) de baja presión tributaria que
grava sólo el 10% a la Renta de Empresas, 10% a la Renta Personal, 10% de IVA.

Con una máxima apertura y facilidades para recibir a capitales extranjeros, Paraguay posee
una alta tasa de retorno de la inversión, el registro de 2014 fue del 22% comparado con el
10% para Argentina, 8% para Uruguay y 6% para Brasil.

Una de las ventajas comparativas de Paraguay es su joven población. Con 7 millones de

habitantes el 40% se encuentra por debajo de los 40 años de edad.

La baja sindicalización también ha sido uno de los principales motivos por lo que varias
empresas decidieron migrar a este país.

En lo que respecta a la logística la importancia del tráfico fluvial gravita a favor de Paraguay
que posee la tercera flota en importancia a nivel mundial con 2.200 barcazas y 200
remolcadores.

La vía Paraguay – Paraná – Uruguay: con 2.770 kilómetros de extensión por el Río Paraná y
por la que se puede acceder a los puertos de Buenos Aires y Montevideo (PY–AR–UY).

La ruta Tietè – Paraguay: con 1494km de extensión por el Río Paraguay conectando con Brasil
y Bolivia (PY–BR–BO).

Para mejorar el transporte carretero y multimodal el gobierno del Presidente Cartes concretó
inversiones en las rutas 2 y 7 que unen su capital, Asunción, con Ciudad del Este en la
frontera con Brasil De esta manera conecta dos regiones responsables del 70% del PBI de
Paraguay. También se hicieron mejoras en el aeropuerto Silvio Pettirrossi (ASU) y en sus rutas
y caminos de acceso.

En un país donde hay mucho por hacer las cosas se están haciendo, en silencio, con
constancia y esfuerzo y ya, pasado un tiempo, los resultados se notan y comienzan a
sorprender gratamente. Paraguay posee una alta tasa de retorno de la inversión, el registro de
2014 fue del 22% comparado con el 10% para Argentina, 8% para Uruguay y 6% para Brasil.

El País (Uruguai) – La Unión Europea y "la meta" de firmar

28
El diálogo entre los bloques se inició en 1999 y tras fracasar e interrumpirse, se retomó en
2016, siendo la última reunión a fines de abril en Bruselas.

En la celebración del Día de Europa, el embajador de la Unión Europea (UE) en Uruguay, Karl–
Otto König, contó que hace un año retornó al país para encabezar la delegación diplomática
"con la meta personal de firmar el acuerdo" con el Mercosur. "¡Ufff!", dijo en referencia a ese
desafío, generando risas en el auditorio.

"He comido muchos asados con el canciller (de Uruguay) y ya cumplí con mi cuota de carne,
pero espero varios kilos más antes de la firma. ¿Por qué no el acuerdo, si ya lo conseguimos
con una larga lista de países y estamos negociando con otros 18?", se preguntó el diplomático
alemán.

Reconoció como cierta "la crítica que somos asimétricos", pero indicó que se busca "que
ambos (bloques) ganen en pie de igualdad", y destacó "la solidaridad" de la UE que aporta
más de la mitad de los fondos globales para el desarrollo de países emergentes.

El diálogo entre los bloques se inició en 1999 y tras fracasar e interrumpirse, se retomó en
2016, siendo la última reunión a fines de abril en Bruselas.

"Soy optimista de que las negociaciones sigan, todavía es posible llegar a un acuerdo.
Debemos ver cuál es la filosofía, no es un tratado de libre comercio sino que el comercio es un
elemento más, pero también tenemos coordinación política y en temas sociales", dijo König.

Por otra parte, acerca del nuevo permiso de viaje que exigirán los países de la UE para el
ingreso de uruguayos (la reglamentación alcanza 62 países) desde 2020, el embajador aclaró
que "la idea es facilitar el acceso" al viejo continente "pero de una manera más coordinada".
Descartó que sea una medida de control de la inmigración y dijo que tramitar el permiso
"toma solo 15 segundos si no hay ningún problema".

Le Temps (Suíça) – Un voyage au Mercosur qui n’a pas rassuré les

milieux paysans
Johann Schneider–Ammann est rentré d'Amérique latine sans parvenir à tranquilliser le monde
agricole suisse. Les paysans demandent des chiffres concrets

Johann Schneider–Ammann a passé une semaine dans les Etats du Mercosur (Argentine,
Brésil, Paraguay, Uruguay) accompagné d'une délégation de 50 personnes constituée des
représentants des milieux économiques, scientifiques, politiques et agricoles. Le but de ce
voyage qui s'est déroulé du 29 avril au 5 mai: «se confronter à des faits» et «dynamiser les
négociations» sur un accord de libre–échange entre la zone économique sud–américaine et
l'Association européenne de libre–échange (AELE). «Expédition réussie», s'est félicité le
ministre de l'Economie ce mardi lors d'une conférence de presse. Mais les paysans suisses
restent sur leurs gardes.

Un accord «nécessaire»
Si le Mercosur – 260 millions de consommateurs – aiguise l'appétit de l'industrie et du marché
des services helvétiques, le monde agricole suisse craint que l'accord n'ouvre les vannes à
l'importation massive de viande et produits agricoles sud–américains. La Suisse est sous
pression: l'Union européenne (UE) négocie le même type d'accord. Ce qui pourrait péjorer la
situation de l'économie helvétique par rapport à ses voisins.

Membre de la délégation, Jacques Gerber, ministre jurassien chargé de la politique agricole,

s'est voulu rassurant: «L'accord fixera un contingent qui évitera une déferlante de viande en
Suisse. Le Mercosur pourrait fournir le marché helvétique en viande du jour au lendemain, a–
t–il concédé, mais il ne le fera pas.»

29
Les inquiétudes des paysans découlent du tournant libéral annoncé par le Conseil fédéral
l'année dernière. Dans le rapport prospectif publié à fin 2017, le gouvernement suisse
demande en effet «l’ouverture du marché» et le «démantèlement de la protection douanière».

Johann Schneider–Ammann est catégorique: «Ce voyage a prouvé que l'accord était
nécessaire.» Le Mercosur détient «un énorme potentiel avec de multiples opportunités,
notamment pour les PME suisses», a souligné le ministre. Conquis par son séjour, il a même
vanté la convivialité de la communauté helvète rencontrée sur place: «Un moment
fantastique: nous avons chanté l'hymne national».

Quant aux normes sanitaires, le conseiller fédéral a mis les points sur les i, une fois pour
toutes: «On entend souvent dire que le Mercosur produit de la viande aux hormones, mais ce
n'est pas vrai. La législation est là–bas aussi stricte que la nôtre. Cela doit maintenant être
reconnu et accepté.» Les exploitations visitées sur place ont d'ailleurs «impressionné» le
ministre, qui les a qualifiées de «parfaitement propres».

Toujours plus de questions

Mais de multiples doutes persistent. Directeur de Proviande, la faîtière de la filière carnée
suisse, Heinrich Bucher faisait partie du voyage. Il n'en a pas ramené que des certitudes:
«L'accord pourrait être problématique selon les conditions négociées, dit–il. Un système de
contingent est envisageable pour nous, toutefois cela dépend des quantités. Il faudra aussi
prendre en compte l'accord obtenu par l'UE, mais nous ne le connaissons pas encore.»

Peut–il en fait se prononcer pour ou contre cet accord à ce stade? «Pas vraiment, concède–t–
il. Nous n'avons pas encore assez de détails». Ces derniers devraient être en partie apportés
lors du quatrième round de négociations, prévu cet été. Heinrich Bucher souligne que des
doutes viennent également de l'autre côté de l'Atlantique. «Les paysans suisses ne sont pas
les seuls à se préoccuper des négociations, l'industrie pharmaceutique du Mercosur n'est pas
non plus sûre de vouloir se confronter aux poids lourds suisses.»

Le débat intérieur avant tout

Conseiller national et président de l'Union suisse des paysans, Jacques Bourgeois demande lui
aussi plus de garanties qu'un sol de boucherie immaculé. Le voyage ne change pas
fondamentalement la donne, déclare–t–il: «D'ailleurs est–ce que tout est produit comme ce
qu’ils ont pu observer sur place? On peut peut–être en douter.»

S'il salue la prise de contact avec les Etats sud–américains, il attend désormais un «rapport
sérieux» qui fasse une «analyse technique approfondie» pour détailler de manière précise
«quels sont, au cas par cas, les droits de douane sur nos produits sensibles». Il rappelle enfin:
«C'est le débat intérieur entre le conseiller fédéral et les paysans qui primera avant tout.»

AMÉRICA DO SUL

Reuters (Reino Unido) – ¿Quién necesita a Chávez? Líder

venezolano impulsa su imagen camino a las elecciones
Por Andrew Cawthorne y Francisco Aguilar

CARACAS, 9 mayo (Reuters) – En su campaña presidencial de 2013, Nicolás Maduro abría sus
mítines con una emotiva grabación del himno nacional venezolano cantado por el entonces
recién fallecido presidente Hugo Chávez.

En una táctica que le consiguió una estrecha victoria, Maduro se rodeó entonces de imágenes
del popular expresidente, reproduciendo el video de su mentor uniéndole como su sucesor, y
proclamándose “el hijo de Chávez”.

30
Sin embargo, esta vez, en la inusualmente descolorida carrera presidencial 2018 de Venezuela
–que la oposición está boicoteando– Maduro ha relegado la imagen de Chávez.

Ignorando su impopularidad personal y el hecho de que muchos lo culpan por una crisis
económica sin precedentes, el exconductor de autobuses y excanciller se ha colocado a sí
mismo como el centro de la campaña para la votación del 20 de mayo.

En los mítines, Maduro, de 55 años, baila al ritmo de un pegadizo reggaetón llamado “Todos
con Maduro”, mientras enormes pancartas con una “M” flanquean el escenario. Las multitudes
agitan imágenes de su radiante rostro bigotudo, aunque a veces aparezca también la cara de
Chávez.

“Nuestro comandante (Chávez) se nos fue, pero hay que seguir la lucha. No me dejen solo”,
imploró Maduro a los participantes en una reciente manifestación. “Si hace 5 años era un
candidato novato, ya no lo soy. Ahora soy un presidente maduro, preparado, capacitado, con
las que te conté bien puestas para enfrentar la oligarquía, el imperialismo”.

La táctica de Maduro parece audaz: las encuestas muestran que el difunto presidente Chávez
sigue siendo de lejos la figura política más popular de Venezuela, mientras que los porcentajes
de aceptación del actual mandatario se han hundido, así como la economía del país.

La estrategia refleja la absoluta confianza de Maduro de ganar otro mandato de seis años. ¿Y
por qué no? Las dos figuras opositoras más populares no pueden postularse, los recursos del
Estado están a su servicio para hacer campaña, sus partidarios dominan instituciones
judiciales y electorales, y la oposición sufre una amarga división sobre el tema de abstenerse
de votar.

Además, lejos de los jingles de campaña y dentro de las propias filas del “Chavismo”, Maduro
superó con éxito para consumar su candidatura a aspirantes internos como el poderoso
número 2 del partido oficialista, Diosdado Cabello.

Su consolidación en el poder comenzó con la derrota en 2017 de las protestas callejeras de la

oposición que amenazaron con derrocarlo, y luego este año impulsó una purga de poderosos
funcionarios que eran leales a Chávez pero se habían vuelto críticos de Maduro, como el exzar
del petróleo, Rafael Ramírez.

OPCIONES LIMITADAS
“Bueno o malo, es Maduro la única imagen política que figura en este momento”, dijo Hebert
García, un exgeneral y exministro que se distanció de Maduro hace varios años y que ahora
trabaja como consultor en Estados Unidos, donde se encuentra eludiendo las acusaciones de
corrupción del gobierno venezolano.

Pero de hecho hay otras opciones en la boleta de votación: los más destacados son el
exgobernador regional Henri Falcón y el pastor evangélico Javier Bertucci.

No obstante, muchos partidarios de la oposición los ven como títeres y “colaboradores” que
participan en un simulacro de voto puramente para dar legitimidad a la “dictadura” de Maduro.

Algunas encuestas incluso le dan una ventaja a Falcón, quien rompió con la decisión opositora
de no postular un candidato a los comicios y de llamar a no votar.

Pero la abstención generalizada prevista para el 20 de mayo, la formidable maquinaria política

de Maduro, el poder de los subsidios estatales, la presión a empleados del gobierno y la
composición pro Maduro de la junta electoral, convierten en hercúlea la tarea de Falcón de
alzarse con la victoria.

31
Y hay poca evidencia en las calles de que la campaña de Falcón se esté convirtiendo en su
esperado fenómeno de “bola de nieve”.

A pesar de lo confiado que Maduro puede lucir en el escenario político, su talón de Aquiles
sigue siendo la economía que parece caer en picada.

Venezuela sufre su quinto año de recesión y se anticipa una contracción de dos dígitos en
2018. La inflación es la más alta del mundo y el salario mínimo mensual vale apenas 2 dólares
al tipo de cambio del mercado paralelo.

La escasez de alimentos y medicinas es vasta y cientos de miles de venezolanos han

abandonado el país en los últimos años, cada vez más caminando, en autobús o incluso en
bicicleta.

LA CRISIS PUEDE PROFUNDIZARSE

Aún si gana el 20 de mayo, Maduro tendrá una gran crisis en sus manos. Estados Unidos está
amenazando con sumar al sector petrolero a las sanciones ya existentes para evitar que
Venezuela emita nueva deuda, no hay señales de reformas al fallido modelo de control estatal
y los acreedores, nerviosos, están estudiando tácticas más agresivas.

Su mantra de campaña ha sido culpar a todos, desde el presidente de los Estados Unidos,
Donald Trump, a los empresarios locales, molestos por el caos económico de Venezuela, sin
mencionar el daño causado por las nacionalizaciones y los ineficientes controles monetarios.

Más allá de prometer un “renacimiento” económico, Maduro ha dado pocos detalles sobre los
planes postelectorales. Muchos temen nuevos movimientos contra el sector privado, como la
intervención por 90 días anunciada la semana pasada de Banesco, el banco privado más
grande en términos de depósitos del país.

En una gira nacional antes de la votación, los mítines de Maduro son visiblemente más
pequeños, controlados y cortos que en 2013. Lejos de las primeras filas embelesadas, hay
muchos gruñidos en la parte posterior de venezolanos infelices.

“Es la campaña más sin sabor o incolora de por lo menos los últimos 20 años”, se burló el
exministro de Petróleo, Ramírez, que quería postularse como el candidato del “chavismo”,
pero que en su lugar está en el exilio en un lugar no revelado.

En una reciente manifestación en el estado Barinas, donde nació Chávez, los nerviosos
organizadores llamaban por teléfono en busca de engrosar el número de asistentes. Un
Maduro molesto culpó a la lluvia por la baja asistencia, aunque solo comenzó a lloviznar tras el
evento, dijeron testigos.

“Vine a ver qué decía sobre la reactivación de la economía”, aseguró el campesino Aparicio
Terán de 49 años, quien, como muchos en este estado, lucha por la falta de préstamos
bancarios, los pesticidas y el alimento para el ganado.

“Me voy sin encontrar una sola cosa que haya dicho de crédito, de fertilizantes, de herbicidas,
de fungicidas, de alimentos para ganado. Así no se puede, hermano, aquí lo que viene es
hambre”, agregó.

Aunque el problema de la falta de comida ha superado los terribles niveles de violencia

criminal como la mayor preocupación de los venezolanos, muchos aún no ven otra opción que
votar por Maduro, especialmente para garantizar que sigan recibiendo bolsas de alimentos
subsidiadas por el Estado, de las que dependen millones para comer. [nL8N1QG7GZ]

Y Maduro aún tiene un núcleo duro de simpatizantes que se calcula en aproximadamente una
quinta parte de los venezolanos, que juran lealtad al legado de Chávez, pase lo que pase.

32
“Todo un pueblo lucha por su futuro, contra las políticas de destrucción del imperio
norteamericano y sus aliados europeos, contra el bloqueo, la guerra económica”, dijo Carlos
Márquez, de 24 años, en el mitin de Barinas, vistiendo la gorra roja de rigor y la camiseta de
los “chavistas” acérrimos.

Reuters/CNBC (EUA) – Conoco moves to take over Venezuelan

PDVSA's Caribbean assets: Sources
The move enforces a $2 billion arbitration award over a decade–oil nationalization of its
projects in the South American country.

The U.S. firm targeted facilities on the islands of Curacao, Bonaire and St. Eustatius that
accounted for about a quarter of Venezuela's oil exports last year.

U.S. oil firm ConocoPhillips has moved to take Caribbean assets of Venezuela's state–run
PDVSA to enforce a $2 billion arbitration award over a decade–oil nationalization of its projects
in the South American country, according to three sources familiar with its actions.

The U.S. firm targeted facilities on the islands of Curacao, Bonaire and St. Eustatius that
accounted for about a quarter of Venezuela's oil exports last year. The three play key roles in
processing, storing and blending PDVSA's oil for export.

The company received court attachments freezing assets at least two of the facilities, and
could move to sell them, one of the sources said.

Conoco's legal maneuvers could further impair PDVSA's declining oil revenue and the country's
convulsing economy. Venezuela is almost completely dependent on oil exports, which have
fallen by a third since its peak and its refineries ran at just 31 percent of capacity in the first
quarter.

The Latin American country is in the grip of a deep recession with severe shortages of
medicine and food as well as a growing exodus of its people.

PDVSA and the Venezuelan foreign ministry did not respond on Sunday to requests for
comment. Dutch authorities said they are assessing the situation on Bonaire.

Conoco's claims against Venezuela and state–run PDVSA in international courts have totaled
$33 billion, the largest by any company.

"Any potential impacts on communities are the result of PDVSA's illegal expropriation of our
assets and its decision to ignore the judgment of the ICC tribunal," Conoco said in an email to
Reuters.

The U.S firm added it will work with the community and local authorities to address issues that
may arise as a result of enforcement actions.

PDVSA has significant assets in the Caribbean. On Bonaire, it owns the 10–million–barrel
BOPEC terminal which handles logistics and fuel shipments to customers, particularly in Asia.
In Aruba, PDVSA and its unit Citgo lease a refinery and a storage terminal.

On the island of St. Eustatius, it rents storage tanks at the Statia terminal, owned by U.S.
NuStar Energy, where over 4 million barrels of Venezuelan crude were retained by court order,
according to one of the sources.

33
NuStar is aware of the order and "assessing our legal and commercial options," said
spokesman Chris Cho. The company does not expect the matter to change its earnings
outlook, he said.

Conoco also sought to attach PDVSA inventories on Curacao, home of the 335,000–barrel–
per–day Isla refinery and Bullenbay oil terminal. But the order could not immediately be
enforced, according to two of the sources.

Last year, PDVSA's shipments from Bonaire and St Eustatius terminals accounted for about 10
percent of its total exports, according to internal figures from the state–run company. The
exports were mostly crude and fuel oil for Asian customers including ChinaOil, China's
Zhenhua Oil, and India's Reliance Industries.

From its largest Caribbean operations in Curacao, PDVSA shipped 14 percent of its exports last
year, including products exported by its Isla refinery to Caribbean islands and crude from its
Bullenbay terminal to buyers of Venezuelan crude all over the world.

PDVSA on Friday ordered its oil tankers sailing across the Caribbean to return to Venezuelan
waters and await further instructions, according to a document viewed by Reuters. In the last
year, several cargoes of Venezuelan crude have been retained or seized in recent years over
unpaid freight fees and related debts.

"This is terrible (for PDVSA)," said a source familiar with the court order of attachment. The
state–run company "cannot comply with all the committed volume for exports" and the
Conoco action imperils its ability to ship fuel oil to China or access inventories to be exported
from Bonaire.

At the International Chamber of Commerce (ICC), Conoco had sought up to $22 billion from
PDVSA for broken contracts and loss of future profits from two oil–producing joint ventures,
which were nationalized in 2007 under late Venezuela President Hugo Chavez. The U.S. firm
left the country after it could not reach a deal to convert its projects into joint ventures
controlled by PDVSA.

A separate arbitration case involving the loss of its Venezuelan assets is before a World Bank
tribunal, the International Centre for the Settlement of Investment Disputes.

Exxon Mobil also has brought two separate arbitration claims over the 2007 nationalization of
its projects in Venezuela.

AMÉRICA CENTRAL, CARIBE E MÉXICO

Excélsior (México) – Cartas Credenciales

Por otra parte, el presidente Enrique Peña Nieto recibió ayer en Palacio Nacional las cartas
credenciales de 18 nuevos embajadores, con lo que inician formalmente su misión diplomática
en nuestro país.

Durante el acto en Palacio Nacional, Peña resaltó el objetivo e interés de México de impulsar la
diversificación de sus vínculos económicos y políticos, como una de las prioridades de política
exterior.

A su vez, los embajadores que cumplieron con la entrega de cartas credenciales al mandatario
mexicano fueron los de Japón, Chipre, Austria, Irlanda, Nueva Zelanda, Corea, Costa de
Marfil, Grecia, Líbano, Argentina, Brasil, Unión Europea, Vietnam, Egipto, El Salvador, Santa
Lucía, Filipinas y Guatemala.

34
En el caso de Estados Unidos, cuya embajadora, Roberta Jacobson, concluyó su misión este
pasado fin de semana, aún continúa el proceso interno en el país vecino para el nombramiento
del nuevo representante.

UNIÓN EUROPEA, ADELANTE

El nuevo embajador de la Unión Europea en México, Klaus Rudischhauser, respaldó el Acuerdo

Global que recientemente renovó este bloque económico con nuestro país y que, precisó, va
más allá del tema comercial.

En tanto, el nuevo embajador de Brasil, Mauricio Carvalho, informó que platicó con el
presidente Peña Nieto sobre el avance en la negociación del Acuerdo de Complementación
Económica (ACE–53) entre ambas naciones y la posible visita que harán ambos mandatarios a
sus naciones.

Por su parte, el embajador de Argentina, Ezequiel Sabor, comentó que América Latina sigue
de cerca el proceso electoral que vive nuestro país y que resultará positivo para las
democracias en la región por la cantidad de proyectos políticos que se exponen.

Mientras tanto, el embajador de Corea del Sur en México, Kim Sang–II, agradeció a Peña
Nieto su respaldo para la pacificación de la península coreana.

El nuevo embajador de Egipto en México, Yasser Morad Osman, afirmó que ya fue cerrado el
caso de los ocho turistas mexicanos asesinados en esa nación árabe, en un error de las
fuerzas de seguridad que bombardearon en septiembre de 2015 un convoy en el que se
transportaban, luego de que se alcanzara un acuerdo con las familias afectadas.

Libération (França) – Nicaragua: la colère monte, le régime mate

De plus en plus contesté dans la rue, le pouvoir de Daniel Ortega réprime dans le sang le
mouvement social initié le 19 avril. Les morts et les arrestations se comptent par dizaines.

A Monimbó, quartier indien de la ville de Masaya située à une trentaine de kilomètres de la

capitale nicaraguayenne, là où a eu lieu la première insurrection populaire de soutien à la
révolution sandiniste, en février 1978, on se croirait presque revenu quarante ans en arrière.
Il y a des pavés arrachés, des barricades. Une des maisons où se réunissaient les partisans
locaux du parti sandiniste il y a peu encore est en ruine. Ses portes ont été arrachées, le local
a été dévasté les 19 et 20 avril, lorsque les manifestations contre la réforme de la sécurité
sociale et des retraites ont été violemment réprimées par le gouvernement dans tout le pays.
«On est parvenu jusqu’ici et la population nous a protégés», racontent Manuel Martinez et
Fernando Brenes, respectivement avocat et ex–militaire à la retraite, qui participaient à la
manifestation.

Martinez, qui est aussi un ancien cadre fondateur du Front sandiniste de libération nationale
(FSLN) et Brenes, qui fut commissaire politique dans l’Armée populaire sandiniste, se
souviennent avec nostalgie avoir pris part, ici même, à l’insurrection de 1978. A l’époque, la
maison aujourd’hui en ruine avait aussi été «prise», mais… à la garde nationale du dictateur
Anastasio Somoza (le dernier de la dynastie Somoza qui régna pendant près de quarante–trois
ans sur le pays).

«L’avenir appartient aux jeunes, ce sont eux, la relève», dit gravement Fernando Brenes.
Manuel Martinez surenchérit: «On peut leur apporter notre expérience, mais la lutte a changé
et elle est pacifique.» Surtout, pour beaucoup de sandinistes, le compagnon d’hier Daniel
Ortega, président depuis onze ans – et au pouvoir pratiquement depuis 1979 – a trahi.

Nouveau printemps

35
Sur la place, devant le portail de l’église, des bougies, des photos, une banderole: «Honneur
et gloire aux jeunes tombés au combat. Monimbó se souviendra d’eux pour toujours.» Parmi
eux, Alvaro Alberto Gomez, 24 ans, étudiant à l’Université nationale autonome du Nicaragua
(Unan, publique), mort par balles le 20 avril, fils d’un professeur de mathématique de 48 ans
qui fut combattant de l’Armée populaire sandiniste. Sur la place de Monimbó, depuis le 19
avril, les habitants se rassemblent tous les soirs pour veiller. Comme cette sociologue de 48
ans, droite comme une statue, qui brandit fermement le drapeau bleu et blanc nicaraguayen,
symbole des manifestants de ce nouveau printemps, en disant: «Je suis là pour protester
contre la répression, je resterai là jusqu’à ce que ce gouvernement tombe. Je n’ai plus peur.»
D’autres maintiennent leur poing levé au passage de la caravane de dizaines de motos, de
bicyclettes, de voitures, qui passent régulièrement en klaxonnant en signe de protestation
contre le pouvoir.

Selon le Centre nicaraguayen des droits de l’homme, au moins 45 personnes sont mortes
depuis le début des manifestations le 19 avril, dont 4 mineurs, 24 étudiants, 18 citoyens
soutenant les étudiants, 2 policiers et 1 journaliste. La plus jeune des victimes, Alvaro
Conrado, avait 15 ans. Ce lycéen apportait de l’eau aux étudiants de l’Université nationale
d’ingénierie (UNI) de Managua, retranchés dans l’enceinte universitaire après avoir été
attaqués par la police et les brigades motorisées des jeunes sandinistes qui terrorisent la
population à chaque manifestation.

Au moins 400 personnes ont aussi été blessées et plusieurs autres sont portées disparues.
«Nous assistons à une forte aggravation des violations des droits de l’homme», soutient Vilma
Nuñez, 80 ans, la flamboyante présidente de cette association. Torturée dans les prisons du
dictateur Somoza, celle qui fut vice–présidente de la Cour suprême de justice dans le premier
gouvernement Ortega se sent désormais «trahie, trompée, mais aussi responsable d’avoir
créé cette idole d’argile». Tombée en disgrâce depuis qu’elle a fondé cette association et
défendu Zoilamerica Ortega Murillo, fille de l’actuelle vice–présidente Rosario Murillo lorsque
celle–ci accusa son beau–père, Daniel Ortega, de viols systématiques, elle n’a plus de mots
assez durs contre le régime ortéguiste. «La situation est très difficile. La répression continue
et s’aggrave car nous assistons aussi au développement d’un mécanisme de répression
sélective, dénonce–t–elle. La torture est aussi en train de se systématiser.»

Autoritarisme croissant

A quelques kilomètres de Monimbó, à Niquihomo, le village natal du général Augusto Calderón

Sandino, partisans et opposants du gouvernement s’affrontent depuis plusieurs jours pour
imposer aux pieds de la statue du héros révolutionnaire nicaraguayen les couleurs du Front
sandiniste (rouge et noir) et celles du drapeau nicaraguayen (blanc et bleu).

Partout, dans le pays, le mécontentement est latent. La révolte a commencé début avril
lorsqu’un immense incendie a dévasté, en moins d’une semaine, près de 5 000 hectares de
l’une des principales forêts tropicales d’Amérique centrale, la réserve Indio Maíz, dans le sud
du Nicaragua. Des étudiants de l’Université centraméricaine de Managua (UCA, jésuite et
semi–privée) ont alors commencé à protester contre les négligences du gouvernement.
L’annonce, quelques jours après, de l’approbation d’une réforme de la sécurité sociale et des
retraites, a renforcé leur indignation. Ils ont été rejoints par les étudiants des universités
publiques après des heurts avec des groupes défendant la politique du gouvernement.

Le mouvement spontané s’est alors étendu à la plupart des universités et dans le pays. Et ne
s’est pas éteint en dépit du retrait de la réforme des retraites et de la sécurité sociale. La
corruption, l’omniprésence du couple présidentiel et son autoritarisme croissant, ainsi que les
détériorations des conditions de vie, ont fini par excéder la population. Le gouvernement a
lancé, sans avancer aucune date, l’idée d’un dialogue national avec les étudiants, l’Eglise et le
patronat. En attendant, la pression de la rue ne semble pas vouloir s’arrêter. Et pendant que
les quatre mouvements étudiants qui ont surgi de ces mobilisations tentent de s’organiser et
de se coordonner, à chaque rassemblement on entend ces jeunes gens chanter, le poing levé,

36
comme autrefois leurs parents ou grands–parents El Pueblo Unido, Jamás Será Vencido («le
peuple uni ne sera jamais vaincu»). Tandis que la célèbre chanson Me Gustan Los Estudiantes
(«j’aime les étudiants») de la Chilienne Violeta Parra se répand partout dans les rues. Une
nouvelle grande manifestation a été convoquée pour le 9 mai.
Par Anne Proenza, envoyée spéciale à Masaya

ESTADOS UNIDOS E CANADÁ

The New York Times (EUA) – At a Key Moment, Trump’s Top

Diplomat Is Again Thousands of Miles Away
By Gardiner Harris

WASHINGTON — When President Trump made the surprise announcement in March that he
would soon meet with the North Korean leader, Kim Jong–un, Secretary of State Rex W.
Tillerson was thousands of miles away, an absence interpreted as a sign of Mr. Tillerson’s
irrelevance.

Mr. Trump soon replaced Mr. Tillerson with Mike Pompeo, who has promised to bring back the
State Department’s “swagger” and import. But on Tuesday, when Mr. Trump made what could
be the most significant diplomatic announcement of his presidency — that he would exit the
Iran nuclear agreement — his chief diplomat was again thousands of miles away, this time on
an unannounced visit to Pyongyang, the North’s capital, to lay further groundwork for a
summit meeting between Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump.

The absence of Mr. Pompeo and other top State Department officials left perplexed European
diplomats privately complaining that they were having trouble getting answers from
Washington, and created an uncertainty about what was next that spanned the Atlantic
Ocean.

Senior State Department officials were momentarily speechless on Tuesday when asked why
Mr. Pompeo did not delay his trip by a day to be in Washington during Mr. Trump’s Iran deal
announcement. Mr. Pompeo left for Pyongyang on Monday night.

One official cited the separate nature of the two sets of negotiations. Another said Mr. Pompeo
had remained reachable, citing the plane’s communications system. But the secretary’s aging
plane has such poor equipment that calls are often dropped midsentence.

Brian H. Hook, who led negotiations with the Europeans for a supplemental agreement to the
Iran deal, was also on the plane to Pyongyang on Tuesday, worsening the communications
problems.

The senior State Department officials who briefed reporters in the moments after Mr. Trump’s
announcement confirmed that they did not know whether European countries would fight the
administration’s plan to reimpose sanctions on Iran, a crucial test of whether the
administration’s strategy would work. Nor does the administration know whether European
countries will agree to try to negotiate a new agreement with Iran or whether a tentative deal
the two sides created to address Iran’s ballistic missile program would go into effect, the
officials said.

One of the officials said American and European officials had not discussed a Plan B. Those
discussions were beginning Tuesday, the official said, although neither Mr. Pompeo nor Mr.
Hook was in Washington or any European capital to begin them.

37
Meanwhile, Mr. Pompeo told reporters on his plane that his agenda in North Korea was to
reach an agreement on the date, time and specific location for the summit meeting between
Mr. Kim and Mr. Trump.

“And the location is important. But there are many conditions that play into that. How long is
it going to go on? When you say where, like really where? Not just a city or a country, but like
really where?” Mr. Pompeo said. “So we’re trying to put some more meat on that.”

Also, according to a senior aide to South Korea’s president, Moon Jae–in, Mr. Pompeo was
expected to leave Pyongyang with three Americans now imprisoned in North Korea and return
to the United States with them. All of them are Korean–Americans and all have the surname
Kim, although they are not related.

But on Tuesday night, the White House took a more cautious tone, declining to confirm the
reports out of South Korea that the Americans were to be released.

Sarah Huckabee Sanders, the White House press secretary, said in a brief interview that
arranging the summit meeting remained Mr. Pompeo’s top priority for the visit, and she
stressed that the release of the prisoners was “not a done deal.”

Asked whether he expected the North Koreans to release the three detainees to him, Mr.
Pompeo said, “I think it’d be a great gesture if they would choose to do so.” And asked
whether a summit meeting were possible if the North Koreans continued to detain the
Americans, he said, “We’re hopeful we don’t have to cross that road.”

Mr. Pompeo also stressed, as he has done on almost every occasion when publicly speaking
about the summit meeting between Mr. Trump and Mr. Kim, that the United States would not
support a proposal by President Moon Jae–in of South Korea for step–by–step measures, in
which the North Koreans would get sanctions lifted over a period of years as they gradually
unwound their nuclear program.

Many analysts in South Korea and around the world believe that such an all–or–nothing
strategy will fail with the North Koreans, but a senior administration official traveling with Mr.
Pompeo pointed out that previous administrations had tried incremental measures, all of which
failed to halt the country’s progress toward building a nuclear arsenal and the missiles to
deliver them.

The senior official said that Mr. Kim promised as recently as New Year’s Eve that the country
would mass produce nuclear warheads and the means to deliver them, and that a year ago he
had ordered the assassination of his half brother with the use of a chemical weapon. One goal
of the trip, the official said, was to see whether the North was ready to take the steps needed
to prove it had moved beyond such talk and actions.

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Donald Trump goes for global

regime change / Coluna / Edward Luce
Move over Iran deal may be remembered as the day the US abandoned its belief in allies

Remember the Eighth of May. History may recall it as the day the United States abandoned its
belief in allies. Donald Trump’s exit from the Iran agreement puts Washington — rather than
Tehran — in violation of an international deal. For the first time in decades, the US is acting
without a European partner. The 2003 Iraq war was backed by Britain, Spain and others —
along with halfhearted efforts to coax France and Germany. Mr Trump, by contrast, has
isolated America from the rest of the west without serious effort at all. Who else could unify
the post–Brexit UK with Europe?

38
The first casualty of Mr Trump’s move is any semblance of a global order. The US now finds
itself in a lonely group with Israel and Saudi Arabia on one side of a toxic international breach.
On the other are China, Russia, Europe and Iran. To that list we should almost certainly add
Japan, India, Australia and Canada. It is hard to see how the gap will not widen. Mr Trump
was deaf to the unanimous pleading of America’s closest allies. Two of their leaders, France’s
Emmanuel Macron, and Germany’s Angela Merkel, even trekked to Washington in the last
fortnight to press their case. They came away with nothing.

A third senior ally, Boris Johnson, Britain’s foreign secretary, pointed out that the world had
“no Plan B” to the Iran nuclear deal. That was another way of saying that the alternative to
“jaw jaw” is “war war”. Mr Trump has landed Europe with a dilemma it did its best to avoid.
He is giving America’s leading Nato allies a choice between upholding a deal they brokered —
and that Iran has honoured — or signing up to an “America first” war party over which they
have no influence. The first will trigger US sanctions on European banks and energy
companies that continue to do business with Iran. The second would mean forfeiting their best
judgment and risking a Middle Eastern conflict that would hurt Europe far more than America.
Falling in line with the US would also come at a steep political cost. Mr Macron’s domestic poll
ratings fell after his “flattery offensive” on Mr Trump.

It would also mean embracing Mr Trump’s alternative take on reality. The US president said
on Tuesday that the 2015 nuclear deal had brought Iran “to the brink” of developing nuclear
weapons. Europe’s leaders point out that Iran was within three months of achieving nuclear
breakout before the deal was struck. The agreement put that clock back to at least a year.
Iran agreed to unscheduled inspections and strict limits on its nuclear research and
enrichment activities for 10 to 15 years. Mr Trump has handed Iran the pretext to restart its
nuclear programme at any time. The same applies to Mr Trump’s claim that the deal had
spurred a Middle Eastern nuclear arms race. No such race was taking place. It might start
now.

Europe’s response will largely hinge on how Iran reacts. Hassan Rouhani, Iran’s president,
said on Tuesday that the ball was in Europe’s court. If the three Ms — Merkel, May and Macron
— find a way to sustain the deal, Iran is likely to stick to it. That fork leads to a deepening
western split. Washington would levy sanctions on European entities. Europe would be forced
to retaliate. For years, America’s allies have chafed at Washington’s imposition of secondary
sanctions. The fallout over Iran may be the unilateral straw that breaks the camel’s back. It
goes without saying that Russia, China and others will continue to do business with Iran. They
will also reciprocate in the event of US financial penalties.

Such tit–for–tat will not occur in isolation. The knock–on impact on Mr Trump’s trade talks
with China, and hopes of sustaining China’s pressure on North Korea’s Kim Jong Un to
denuclearise, would be radically uncertain. Asia — like Europe and the Middle East — is
watching Mr Trump’s evolution with mounting anxiety. It is unclear how he thinks his Iran
brinkmanship could boost prospects of a serious nuclear deal with Mr Kim.

There was once a debate about whether to take Mr Trump seriously or literally. The answer is
both. Now he has a team that shares his America First instincts. John Bolton, his national
security adviser, has long argued the US should launch strikes on Iran’s nuclear facilities. Mr
Bolton has never met a nuclear inspector whom he believes is worth trusting. The parallels
with the build–up to the Iraq war are troubling. Few countries wish to see a repeat of that
blunder. On Tuesday, Mr Trump all but declared war on Iran. That will be consequential
enough. The collateral damage to America’s global standing may be even worse.

EUROPA

39
Les Echos (França) – Poutine entame son quatrième mandat et
garde Medvedev
Dmitri Medvedev est reconduit au poste de Premier Ministre. C'est le signe qu'il ne faut pas
attendre de grandes réformes du pouvoir russe dans les prochains mois.
Benjamin Quénelle Correspondant à Moscou

Vladimir Poutine a entamé lundi son quatrième mandat présidentiel, comme le précédent,
sous les ors et applaudissements au Kremlin, deux jours après l'arrestation de centaines de
manifestants à Moscou. Le chef de l'Etat, âgé de soixante–cinq ans, et qui est de fait à la tête
du pays depuis dix–huit ans – une durée très nettement supérieure à celle de tout autre
dirigeant de pays important, hormis Angela Merkel – a prêté serment, la main droite sur la
Constitution. Il a été réélu le 18 mars président jusqu'en 2024 avec plus de 76 % des voix.
Quelques minutes plus tard, Vladimir Poutine a annoncé qu'il garderait à la tête du
gouvernement Dmitri Medvedev. Ce dernier a été depuis 2003 un collaborateur parfaitement
loyal – une qualité prioritaire pour Vladimir Poutine – en tant que chef de l'administration
présidentielle, puis vice–Premier ministre, puis chef de l'Etat et Premier ministre. Il incarne le
statu quo.

Peu apprécié dans la population, moqué par l'opposition en raison de sa personnalité jugée
effacée, Dimitri Medvedev verra ce mardi sa candidature soumise à la Douma, la chambre
basse du Parlement, qui approuvera très certainement le choix présidentiel. Les analystes à
Moscou s'attendaient pour la plupart à sa nomination en raison de la priorité de Poutine pour
la stabilité, ainsi que du manque d'alternatives crédibles. L'ex–ministre des Finances, Alexeï
Koudrine, était trop libéral et inacceptable pour les « siloviki » (armée et FSB).

Le duo apparemment inaltérable de l'exécutif aura un agenda chargé. La Russie, certes sortie
de deux ans de récession, est menacée de stagnation. Des mesures impopulaires sont à
prévoir, dont la hausse de l'âge de la retraite. D'autres réformes mettront à mal la rente
pétrolière et les intérêts de proches peu enclins à la diversification industrielle pourtant
indispensable pour s'assurer de nouveaux moteurs de croissance.

Les plus libéraux espèrent des changements institutionnels, notamment pour rendre le
système judiciaire plus indépendant et donc plus efficace dans la lutte contre la corruption.
Mais le maintien de Dmitri Medvedev ne laisse pas préjuger de grandes réformes. Un mot que
Vladimir Poutine n'a d'ailleurs même pas prononcé dans son récent discours à la nation.

Sortir la Russie de son isolement

« Ce quatrième mandat sera le plus difficile pour Poutine. Jusque–là, son agenda avait été
dominé par la politique étrangère, thème gagnant. Mais il va devoir se concentrer sur
l'économie, thème où il a beaucoup à perdre… », prévient Dmitrï Oreshkine, politologue
indépendant . Sortir la Russie de son isolement international sera un défi tout aussi difficile.
Un temps incertain à cause de l'affaire Skripall, le voyage d'Emmanuel Macron le 25 mai au
forum économique de Saint–Pétersbourg a finalement été confirmé par l'Elysée. Une semaine
avant, Vladimir Poutine recevra la chancelière allemande Angela Merkel. Deux rencontres tests
pour donner le ton du quatrième, et en principe dernier, mandat du chef du Kremlin.

Libération (França) – Nikol Pachinian, le grand saut dans l’inconnu

pour le héros de la rue
Porté par une foule en liesse, le nouveau Premier ministre a promis de s’attaquer à la
corruption. On ne sait en revanche pas grand–chose de ses orientations économiques.

Les Arméniens ont réussi leur révolution de velours. Après plus d’un mois de contestation
pacifique et de désobéissance civile – pas une vitre n’a volé, pas un pavé n’a été déplacé,

40
mais on a beaucoup dansé, rit et flâné – la rue a obtenu l’élection de son candidat, Nikol
Pachinian. Mardi, l’infatigable marcheur qui s’est lancé presque seul dans une fronde contre le
pouvoir en place, le 31 mars, a été élu Premier ministre par le Parlement arménien.

Depuis l’hémicycle, il s’est adressé aux dizaines de milliers d’Arméniens rassemblés sur la
place de la République, rivés aux écrans et aux radios, dans la capitale, à travers le pays,
dans le Haut–Karabakh, et dans le reste du monde, comme si un jour nouveau s’était levé sur
le pays: «Il n’y a plus désormais de privilégiés en Arménie, plus d’élections truquées, de pots–
de–vin. Les droits de l’homme doivent être protégés. La corruption déracinée. Ce sera le règne
de la loi et de l’ordre.» Comme il l’a martelé depuis qu’il a pris la tête de la contestation, la
priorité du nouveau chef du gouvernement est d’assainir la loi électorale et organiser des
élections anticipées, sans quoi la démocratisation du système politique arménien ne pourra
être engagée. Cette semaine, il devra présenter un gouvernement, qu’il n’a pas eu le temps
d’ébaucher, même sous forme de cabinet fantôme, tant les choses se sont passées
rapidement.

Renouveau. L’ancien journaliste de 42 ans a fait une ascension politique fulgurante, en

quelques semaines seulement, de député coriace d’un petit parti d’opposition avec neuf sièges
au Parlement à héros national, rassembleur de foules et incarnation des espoirs de renouveau
national. «Sauf que le pouvoir n’a pas changé en Arménie, prévient le politologue Mikael
Zolyan. Ce sont toujours les Républicains qui détiennent la majorité, ils vont certainement
tenter de saboter ses initiatives. Il faudra soit s’entendre avec eux pour passer les réformes,
soit faire pression, en continuant de mobiliser la rue.» Mardi, Pachinian a été soutenu par 59
députés contre 42. Le Parti républicain au pouvoir, qui l’avait désavoué lors d’un premier vote,
le 1er mai, lui a accordé cette fois 11 voix, en précisant bien que sa «position n’avait pas
changé». «Nous sommes toujours contre la candidature de Nikol Pachinian, mais le plus
important pour nous est d’assurer la stabilité dans le pays», a déclaré le chef de la fraction,
Vagram Bagdassarian.

Si la victoire du «candidat du peuple» couronne plusieurs semaines de lutte non violente mais
intense, elle inaugure aussi une période compliquée de transformation politique et
économique, dont il s’agit d’élaborer les modalités en cours de route, sur le tas. «Pachinian n’a
pas de programme économique très clair, on ne sait pas exactement quel modèle il va
adopter. Certainement un modèle libéral avec des garanties sociales. Il parle beaucoup
d’inégalités», relève Zolyan. En Arménie, la vie politique ne s’organise pas entre gauche et
droite, libéraux d’un côté et conservateurs de l’autre. «La principale césure passe entre
l’opposition et le pouvoir, poursuit l’expert. L’opposition a une rhétorique plus libérale et
démocratique, le pouvoir est plus conservateur et protectionniste. Les revendications de
l’opposition ont toujours été la lutte contre la corruption, la séparation du business et de l’Etat,
la fin des monopoles dans l’économie. Ce sont aussi les thèmes de prédilection de Pachinian.
C’est là–dessus qu’il sera attendu.»

Culte. Les attentes à son égard sont immenses. En sillonnant le pays et la capitale ces
dernières semaines, galvanisant les foules à chacune de ses apparitions, en ayant réussi
surtout l’impossible – la démission du présumé indéboulonnable Serge Sarkissian – Pachinian
a fini par susciter une sorte de culte. A l’heure qu’il est, il semble jouir d’une confiance
populaire absolue. «Il va de soi qu’une partie des partisans sera déçue. Les deux autres partis
qui l’ont soutenu au Parlement l’ont fait pour des raisons tactiques. En même temps, Pachinian
a un noyau dur de partisans loyaux. Il sait parler à la rue et aux électeurs et pourra encore
exploiter pendant longtemps le crédit de confiance acquis en un mois», assure Zolyan.

Enfin, si l’Arménie espère être au seuil de transformations profondes et de bouleversements

heureux, rien ne devrait changer dans les relations avec Moscou. Sa révolution n’a jamais été
une révolution de couleur antirusse. Durant sa «campagne» éclair, le nouveau Premier
ministre n’a pas manqué de rappeler que l’Arménie ne reviendrait pas sur ses engagements
économiques et sécuritaires, ne remettrait en cause ni l’Union douanière eurasiatique, ni
l’Organisation du traité de sécurité collective (OTSC). «Le style en revanche peut changer.

41
Pachinian est un homme politique public, il n’aura pas froid aux yeux. Par exemple sur la
question de la vente d’armes à l’Azerbaïdjan par la Russie ou encore la Biélorussie. Le discours
sera plus franc, mais toujours dans le cadre des accords existants. Pachinian n’est pas le
Saakachvili arménien, comme on le craint à Moscou», conclut Zolyan.
Par Veronika Dorman

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Lords rebellion backs keeping UK

in single market after Brexit
Vote for European Economic Area membership defies both Tory ministers and Labour leaders
Henry Mance, Political Correspondent

The House of Lords has voted in favour of keeping Britain in the European single market,
issuing a rebuke to the government and the Labour leadership, which had both opposed the
option.

The UK’s upper chamber voted by a majority of 29 for Britain to negotiate continued
membership of the European Economic Area, in effect adopting the Norwegian model.

Former ministers Michael Heseltine, Ros Altmann and Stephen Green were among 17 Tories to
rebel against the government, while 83 Labour peers defied their front bench’s instruction to
abstain.

The vote potentially puts pressure on Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, to consider EEA
membership when the EU withdrawal bill returns to the House of Commons.

In February, Mr Corbyn switched to supporting indefinite membership of a customs union with

the EU, which applies to goods but not services.

Theresa May, the prime minister, is struggling to gain agreement from her cabinet over future
customs arrangements, and faces a tough fight to convince parliament that her Brexit strategy
will not cause economic disruption.

The EEA vote was one of a series of changes made by peers to the EU withdrawal bill, most of
which would have the effect of softening Brexit or even allowing it to be stopped altogether.

On Tuesday, the Lords also defeated the government on three other amendments. One would
allow Britain to remain part of EU agencies; another would remove the fixed date for Brexit
from law, thereby making it easier for the government to extend negotiations.

MPs could overturn all the Lords’ amendments in due course. However, pro–EU politicians
have been emboldened by the government’s failure to present a detailed Brexit blueprint.

Chuka Umunna, a Labour MP, urged the Labour front bench to support EEA membership,
“which is what the overwhelming majority of our members and voters want”. Labour has so
far rejected the option, citing the need to control immigration and to give state support to
industry.

Waheed Alli, the Labour peer who tabled the EEA amendment, said he wanted “the voice of
business” to be heard in Brexit negotiations.

Sandip Verma, a Conservative peer who backed it, said that EEA membership would still mean
Britain could leave the common agricultural policy and common fisheries policy and not be
subject to the direct jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice.

42
However, Martin Callanan, the Brexit minister, said that the amendment would leave Britain
subject to legislation over which it had “little influence and . . . no vote”, thereby failing to
deliver on the sentiment behind the Brexit vote.

Le Figaro (França) – L’Italie s’achemine vers de nouvelles élections

Faute d’accord de gouvernement, le président Mattarella plaide pour un gouvernement «
neutre », en attendant un nouveau scrutin.

RICHARD HEUZÉ

POLITIQUE Un retour aux urnes en juillet, le 22 probablement. Ou encore en octobre, en plein

débat budgétaire. À peine deux mois se sont écoulés depuis les élections du 4 mars, et les
vainqueurs – Mouvement 5 étoiles (M5S) d’une part, coalition de droite de l’autre – envisagent
déjà de nouvelles élections. La rupture s’est consommée lundi soir au Quirinal, devant un
président de la République consterné de ne pouvoir amener à la raison les factions adverses. «
Ce serait la première fois depuis l’avènement de la République (1947, NDLR) qu’une
législature se conclut avant même d’avoir commencé », a–t–il relevé, très amer.

Trois tours de consultations de Sergio Mattarella et deux missions exploratoires confiées aux
présidents du Sénat et de la Chambre des députés n’ont pas suffi à réduire les distances. « La
tentative de donner vie à une majorité de centre droit avec les 5 Étoiles n’a pas abouti. Ni
celle du M5S de constituer une majorité avec la seule Ligue. Quant à une majorité entre 5
Étoiles et Parti démocratique, elle s’est révélée impraticable », a souligné le président. Quant
à former un gouvernement minoritaire, comme l’a demandé avec insistance la Ligue – la
coalition de droite aurait eu 42 % des voix au Parlement –, le président dit l’avoir « exclu dès
le début ».

Faute de donner jour à un gouvernement politique, le président de la République a avancé

l’idée d’un gouvernement « neutre par rapport aux forces politiques », un « gouvernement de
garantie » qui ne durerait pas plus de six mois et se démettrait aussitôt approuvé le budget
2019, avec l’engagement de tous ses membres de ne pas chercher à se faire élire aux
prochaines élections. Cela permettrait à l’Italie d’être représentée par un cabinet dans la
plénitude de ses fonctions à l’important Conseil européen des 28 et 29 juin, qui débattra du
budget communautaire pour les sept prochaines années et des flux migratoires. Pour le chef
de l’État, proroger le gouvernement de Paolo Gentiloni qui s’est démis à peine élu les
présidents du nouveau Parlement, le 31 mars, est impensable: «Il représente une majorité
parlementaire qui n’existe plus. »

La craine d’un marasme économique

À peine sortis du Quirinal, Matteo Salvini et Luigi Di Maio ont torpillé l’idée d’un gouvernement
de techniciens: «Nous refusons catégoriquement d’accorder notre confiance à un nouveau
Monti (Mario Monti, l’économiste nommé en pleine tempête monétaire en septembre 2011
pour remplacer Silvio Berlusconi comme président du Conseil). Il faut immédiatement
redonner la parole aux électeurs », se sont–ils écriés l’un et l’autre.

Qu’importe à leurs yeux que les élections se déroulent en plein milieu des vacances d’été – ce
qui n’est jamais advenu – ou au début de l’automne. Qu’importe de retourner aux urnes avec
la même loi électorale responsable du désastre du vote du 4 mars. Qu’importe encore les
appels angoissés du président du patronat Vincenzo Boccia face au marasme économique dans
lequel l’Italie risque de replonger. Salvini et Di Maio y voient un avantage personnel immédiat.

D’ici à la fin de la semaine, Sergio Mattarella devrait pressentir un (ou plutôt une) personnalité
de la société civile pour former un exécutif « léger » de douze membres. S’il n’obtient pas la
confiance du Parlement – ce qui paraît probable – ce gouvernement restera en place pour

43
expédier les affaires courantes. Le temps de retourner aux urnes avec l’espoir d’un
changement.

ÁSIA

The Washington Post (EUA) – North Korea releases 3 American

prisoners in apparent goodwill gesture ahead of a planned summit
between Trump and Kim
By Carol Morello and Anna Fifield

BREAKING: President Trump said in tweet this morning, “I am pleased to inform you that
Secretary of State Mike Pompeo is in the air and on his way back from North Korea with the 3
wonderful gentlemen that everyone is looking so forward to meeting. They seem to be in good
health.”

PYONGYANG, North Korea — If North Korea gives up its nuclear weapons, the country can
“have all the opportunities your people so richly deserve,” Secretary of State Mike Pompeo
told senior North Korean officials upon his arrival in Pyongyang Wednesday.

Pompeo is in the North Korean capital to discuss the details for the proposed summit between
leader Kim Jong Un and President Trump and to try to secure the release of three American
men detained here for more than a year.

“For decades, we have been adversaries,” Pompeo told Kim Yong Chol, a man sanctioned by
the United States for his involvement with the North’s nuclear program but who has emerged
as one of the regime’s key interlocutors to the outside world.

“Now we are hopeful that we can work together to resolve this conflict, take away threats to
the world and make your country have all the opportunities your people so richly deserve,”
Pompeo said before lunch at the Koryo Hotel, a large, double–towered building in central
Pyongyang.

“There are many challenges along the way. But you have been a great partner in working to
make sure our two leaders will have a summit that is successful,” the new secretary of state
said.

After a historic summit between the two leaders of the Koreas, South Koreans told The Post
April 27 they felt hopeful that change might be coming. (Joyce Lee, Daniel Smukalla/The
Washington Post)

When Pompeo touched down in Pyongyang shortly before 8 a.m. local time, he was greeted by
Kim Yong Chol, a former North Korean intelligence chief, and Ri Su Yong, the influential
former foreign minister. Ri is close to Kim Jong Un, having served as ambassador to
Switzerland while the young leader attended school there.

Kim Yong Chol, who is in charge of relations with South Korea, and Ri, responsible for
international relations, had just returned from the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian, where
Kim Jong Un held talks with Chinese president Xi Jinping, their second meeting in to China in
only 40 days.

Both also attended the inter–Korean summit with South Korean president Moon Jae–in late
last month.

44
On the way to North Korea, Pompeo said he did not know if he would see Kim Jong Un, whom
he met several times during a secret trip to Pyongyang over Easter weekend to start preparing
for the proposed summit. If it takes place, it will be the first time a sitting American president
and a leader of North Korea have met.

Pompeo and Kim Jong Chol met behind closed doors at the Koryo Hotel for about an hour
Wednesday morning, before lunch in a 39th floor function complete with poached fish and
duck, and red wine.

Kim Yong Chol was in an effusive mood, telling Pompeo and the dozen or so staffers traveling
with him that this was a good time to be in Pyongyang because it was spring time and a good
atmosphere had been established between North and South. This echoed remarks that both
Korean leaders had been making about a new spring arriving on the peninsula.

“So everything is going well in Pyongyang now,” he said, adding that from now on, North
Korea would be concentrating all its efforts “into the economic progress of our country.”

“This is not a result of sanctions that have been imposed from outside,” Kim Yong Chol told
Pompeo, contradicting the administration’s line that Trump’s “maximum pressure” approach
had brought North Korea to the negotiating table.

“I hope the United States also will be happy with our success. I have high expectations the
U.S. will play a very big role in establishing peace on the Korean Peninsula,” he said. Then he
toasted Pompeo.
Pompeo stood and said the American delegation was “equally committed to working with you
to achieve exactly” that.

The delegation’s arrival in Pyongyang was part of a sudden flurry of diplomacy in northeast
Asia related to efforts to engage North Korea.

Kim had met with Xi earlier in the week, following a visit to Pyongyang from Chinese Foreign
Minister Wang Yi last week.

In Tokyo on Wednesday, leaders from China, Japan and South Korea met and stressed their
resolve to use talks to convince North Korea to give up its nuclear weapons program.

“We must lead the ongoing momentum toward complete denuclearization of the Korean
Peninsula and achieve peace and stability in northeast Asia,” Japanese prime minister Shinzo
Abe said at a joint news conference in Tokyo after their trilateral summit.

Li Keqiang, the Chinese premier and second–in–command to Xi, said that China was “in favor
of dialogue to address both the symptoms and root causes, promote a political settlement of
the peninsula issue and establish a peace mechanism, so as to achieve lasting peace in the
region.”

South Korea’s Moon, who has been leading the diplomatic charge, said regional cooperation
was crucial if the effort was to succeed. “The countries’ support and cooperation is absolutely
needed in our journey toward peace on the Korean Peninsula and in northeast Asia,” he said.

Before the summit, a South Korean official said that the presidential Blue House expected
Pompeo to finalize the date and location for the summit between Kim Jong Un and Trump,
expected to be held within the next month or so. Trump said Friday that a location had been
decided but there has been no official announcement.

Pompeo was also expected to secure the release of the three Americans detained in North
Korea.

45
“We expect him to bring the date, time and the captives,” a South Korean official said,
speaking on condition of anonymity, told reporters in Tokyo on Wednesday.

All three have been treated as “prisoners of war” and have not been seen since June, when a
State Department official was allowed a brief visit with them while collecting Otto Warmbier,
the detained college student who fell into a coma in North Korea and died shortly after his
return to the United States.

The longest–held prisoner was Kim Dong–chul, a 64–year–old who once lived in Fairfax, Va.,
and was arrested in October 2015, three months before Warmbier. He had been based in the
Chinese city of Yanji, near the border with North Korea, and traveled back and forth to the
special economic zone of Rajin–Sonbong, where he managed a hotel business.

In a highly scripted appearance in Pyongyang six months after he was detained, Kim Dong–
chul appealed for mercy for his “unpardonable” acts, wiping away his tears. He was accused of
spying for South Korea’s intelligence agencies, seeking to obtain details of the North’s military
programs and trying to spread “religious” ideas — a serious crime in the North.

He was sentenced in April 2016 to 10 years in prison on charges of espionage and subversion.

Then, a year ago, two men associated with the Pyongyang University of Science and
Technology, or PUST, a private institution run by Korean American Christians, were detained.

Tony Kim, a 59–year–old accountant, had been teaching at PUST’s sister institution in Yanji for
more than 15 years.

Since PUST began operating in 2010, he had made at least seven trips, usually for a month at
a time, to teach international finance and management to students in Pyongyang, his son Sol
Kim said in an interview.

He was detained at Pyongyang’s airport as he prepared to depart in April 2017, and North
Korean state media reported that he was arrested for “committing criminal acts of hostility
aimed to overturn” North Korea.

Two weeks later, Kim Hak–song, an agricultural consultant who was also living in Yanji and
working at PUST, was detained. He is about the same age as the other two, but relatively little
is known about him.

He was also arrested on suspicion of “hostile acts” against North Korea, the official Korean
Central News Agency said.

Reuters (Reino Unido) – China, Japan and South Korea highlight

unity amid North Korea moves
Kiyoshi Takenaka, Nobuhiro Kubo

TOKYO (Reuters) – The leaders of China, Japan and South Korea agreed on Wednesday to
cooperate in seeking peace on the Korean peninsula against the backdrop of historic
diplomatic moves by North Korea and a push for the isolated country to give up its nuclear
weapons.

North Korea figured prominently in talks between the three leaders in Tokyo after South
Korean President Moon Jae–in’s historic meeting last month with the North’s Kim Jong Un.

Kim is expected to have a summit soon with U.S. President Donald Trump.

46
Leaders of the three Asian powers, whose ties have at times been strained by territorial and
historical disputes, also touched on economics, in the face of U.S. trade pressure on China and
Japan.

Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe praised efforts by Moon and China to engage North Korea
and said further efforts on denuclearization were essential.

“We must take the recent momentum toward denuclearization on the Korean peninsula and
toward peace and security in Northeast Asia, and, cooperating even further with international
society, make sure this is linked to concrete action by North Korea,” Abe told a news
conference after the meeting.

Moon said the three countries agreed to highlight unity as the two Koreas moved toward a
permanent peace settlement.

“Above all we reached the consensus that complete denuclearization of the Korean peninsula,
a permanent peace settlement and improvement of South–North relations is very important
for peace and prosperity of Northeast Asia,” Moon said.

In bilateral talks with Moon later on Wednesday, Abe expressed Japan’s concern that pressure
on North Korea might be lifted too early as a “reward” for its shutting down its nuclear test
site or halting missile launches.

Abe called for additional, specific action, a spokesman for South Korea’s presidential office
said in a Tokyo briefing.

Moon assured Abe that no such steps would be taken without conferring with the United
Nations, the United States and others.

TRADE PRESSURE AND DEALS

Trump’s trade pressure on China and Japan, the world’s second and third–largest economies,
appeared to have had an impact as Li urged swifter discussions on regional free trade deals,
such as a Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership backed by Beijing.

“We are all beneficiaries of free trade and even though various issues have emerged, these
should not stand in the way,” Li said. “Through actual behavior, let’s show that we three
nations support engaging in free trade.”

Later, before a bilateral meeting as part of Li’s state visit to Japan – the first such visit by a
Chinese premier since 2010 – Abe said he wanted to raise bilateral ties to a new level and visit
China later this year.

China and Japan are set to strengthen economic ties by signing a currency swap deal during
Li’s visit.

As the meeting’s host, Abe has won an opportunity to project himself in a leadership role, and
move beyond domestic woes such as suspected cronyism scandals, falling support rates and
calls for his finance minister to quit.

Japan fears it may be left out of North Korean negotiations, with Abe and Kim yet to set up a
summit.

In comments aimed at a domestic audience, Abe told the news conference Japan would
normalize ties with North Korea if the issue of Japanese abducted by Pyongyang to train spies,
a key plank of his political platform, was comprehensively resolved.

47
Additional reporting by Christine Kim in Seoul, Writing by Elaine Lies; Editing by Clarence
Fernandez and Paul Tait

The New York Times (EUA) – Kim’s Second Surprise Visit to China
Heightens Diplomatic Drama
By Jane Perlez

DALIAN, China — The leaders of China and North Korea met for the second time in two
months on Tuesday, staying overnight in this Chinese port city as China worked to regain
control in the fast–moving diplomacy over the North’s nuclear program.

The North Korean leader, Kim Jong–un, flew to Dalian on Monday, where he held long rounds
of discussions with Chinese officials, attended a formal banquet, and took a stroll on a
beachfront sidewalk with China’s president, Xi Jinping. The pageantry was shown at length on
China’s state–run evening television news, with the two men looking like friends, if rather stiff
ones.

The Chinese leader appeared intent on showing that the frayed relationship with North Korea
was now repaired, and that China was as important to resolving the problems of North Korea’s
nuclear weapons as the United States.

President Trump has said he will meet with Mr. Kim in the coming weeks, and tweeted hours
after the meeting in Dalian that he expected to talk shortly on the phone with Mr. Xi about
North Korea, as well as trade.

A Chinese statement, which was issued on behalf of both leaders after Mr. Kim left, showed
the differences between the Trump administration on the one hand, and China and North
Korea on the other, over the question of how to rid the North of its nuclear weapons.

It envisioned a far more drawn–out process for the denuclearization of North Korea than the
demands of the Trump administration, which has talked about dismantling the North’s arsenal
in six months to a year.

Mr. Kim wanted “phased and synchronous measures in a responsible manner” and hoped to
“eventually achieve denuclearization and lasting peace on the peninsula,” the Chinese
statement said.

The statement said Mr. Kim expressed his “gratitude to China for its longstanding and
significant contribution in realizing denuclearization on the Korean Peninsula,” phrasing that
seemed to extol China’s role in hosting talks among six countries on North Korea’s nuclear
weapons in the mid–2000s. Those talks fell apart, and the Trump administration has been
scathing about them.

North Korea’s bare–bones economy — which has been long kept afloat by China, but is now
being pummeled by United Nations sanctions — featured in the Dalian talks, the statement
said. Mr. Kim told the Chinese that he wanted to develop his economy, a move that China said
it supported.

Chinese analysts speculated that Mr. Kim asked Mr. Xi for relief from the rounds of tough
sanctions for which China grudgingly voted last year, at the urging of the United States. Those
sanctions have drained the North’s foreign–exchange reserves.

Mr. Kim recently met the South Korean president, Moon Jae–in, who is eager to help the North
with economic aid, although within the bounds of the United Nations sanctions. That meeting
gave the North Korean leader new leverage with Mr. Xi.

48
In essence, Mr. Kim can say that if China does not help ease the North’s economic pain, South
Korea will.

Mr. Xi was joined in the talks by Wang Huning, one of his close aides, as well as others from
the Communist Party hierarchy, and Mr. Kim brought a large retinue of officials, including his
foreign minister, Ri Yong–ho.

Chinese television footage showed the two delegations seated at a long table during formal
discussions, with Mr. Xi doing most of the talking.

The flight from the North Korean capital, Pyongyang, to Dalian is under one hour. Even so, the
surprise arrival of Mr. Kim was a departure from protocol, which the Chinese usually take pride
in following to the letter, said a Chinese analyst, Cheng Xiaohe.

After Mr. Kim’s visit to Beijing at the end of March — his first foreign visit after being in power
since 2011 — it was Mr. Xi’s turn to travel to Pyongyang.

Mr. Xi was expected to wait to go to the North Korean capital until after Mr. Trump’s summit
with Mr. Kim. But under that schedule, Mr. Xi would have not seen Mr. Kim again until the end
of June or July.

It is without modern precedent for a leader to come to China on back–to–back visits as Mr.
Kim has done, Mr. Cheng said.

“This second meeting demonstrated that North Korea wanted China to play a larger role in the
denuclearization process,” said Mr. Cheng, a professor at Renmin University. “When Kim
enters the meeting with Trump, he will feel more confident, simply his positions on a variety of
issues were consulted and sanctioned by the Chinese leader.”

But some Chinese analysts said the warmth between the two leaders on display in Dalian —
they sat for a while in wicker arm chairs on a bucolic outdoor terrace — should not be
overstated. Mr. Kim retains a streak of independence, they said.

“North Korea was never a vassal state,” said Shi Yinhong, also a professor at Renmin
University. It is even less of one now that the United States has agreed to deal with Mr. Kim,
he said.

Like Mr. Kim’s visit to Beijing in March, his visit to Dalian was kept under wraps. But early
Tuesday afternoon, the Japanese news service Kyodo reported that a plane from the North
Korean carrier Air Koryo was at Dalian’s airport. Security at the airport was tight Tuesday
afternoon, with flights canceled between 1:30 p.m. and 4 p.m.

Chinese officials will be heading to Tokyo for meetings on Wednesday with South Korean and
Japanese counterparts as part of the recent burst of diplomacy over North Korea. Japan, the
host of the talks, has been pushing the United States to continue a tough line against
Pyongyang.

North Korean state news media on Tuesday criticized Japan for continuing to support tough
sanctions against the North, with Rodong Sinmun, the country’s official newspaper, calling it
“tantamount to throwing cold water over easing tensions on the Korean Peninsula.”

But Mr. Moon, who as South Korea’s leader has pushed for engagement with Pyongyang,
urged Japan to consider normalizing ties with North Korea.

“I think dialogue between Japan and North Korea should be resumed,” Mr. Moon said in an
interview Tuesday with the Japanese newspaper Yomiuri Shimbun.

49
“If Japan–North Korea relations are normalized, that would greatly contribute to peace and
security in Northeast Asia beyond the Korean Peninsula,” he said in written answers to
questions submitted by the newspaper.

Dalian was also the site of a 2010 meeting between Mr. Kim’s father, Kim Jong–il, and Li
Keqiang, China’s premier.

Mr. Kim, apparently not as fearful of flying as his father, traveled by plane this time. On his
visit to Beijing, he came to China by a slow–moving train, as his father had done.

Reuters (Reino Unido) – Malaysia election: Early results show ruling

coalition slightly ahead – Bernama
KUALA LUMPUR (Reuters) – Early results of Malaysia’s general election shows Prime Minister
Najib Razak’s ruling coalition has won 15 parliamentary seats, while the main opposition led
by Mahathir Mohamad secured 12 seats, state news agency Bernama reported.

Parti Warisan Sabah and an independent candidate got one seat each. There are 222
parliamentary seats in total.

Polling stations closed at 0900 GMT on Wednesday.

Reporting by Praveen Menon

ORIENTE MÉDIO

Reuters (Reino Unido) – Syrian state media says Israel attacked

just after U.S. quit Iran deal
JERUSALEM/BEIRUT (Reuters) – Syrian state media accused Israel of launching missiles at a
target near Damascus on Tuesday, shortly after U.S. President Donald Trump announced he
was quitting the Iranian nuclear deal, a move that had prompted Israel to go on high alert.

The Israeli military said that, upon identifying “irregular activity” by Iranian forces in Syria, it
instructed civic authorities on the Golan Heights to ready bomb shelters, deployed new
defenses and mobilized some reservist forces.

Israel’s top general, Gadi Eizenkott, canceled a scheduled appearance at an annual security
conference and was conferring with Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman and other national
security chiefs, officials said.

Trump’s hard tack against the nuclear deal, while welcomed by Israel, has stirred fears of a
possible regional flare–up.

Within two hours of the White House announcement, Syrian state news agency SANA reported
explosions in Kisweh, south of Damascus. Syrian air defenses fired at two Israeli missiles,
destroying both, SANA said.

A commander in the regional alliance supporting Syrian President Bashar al–Assad told
Reuters that Israel’s air force had struck an army base at Kisweh without causing casualties.

Asked about those statements, an Israeli military spokeswoman said: “We do not respond to
such foreign reports.”

50
Iran and Lebanon’s Hezbollah have been helping Assad beat back a seven–year–old rebellion.
Israel has carried out repeated air strikes against them, hoping to stop the formation of a
Lebanese–Syrian front to its north.

An April 9 strike killed seven Iranian military personnel at a Syrian airbase. Iran blamed Israel
and vowed to retaliate.

Israeli media said Tuesday’s order to prepare bomb shelters on the Golan was unprecedented
during Syria’s civil war. Israel captured the Golan from Syria in the 1967 Middle East war and
annexed it in a moved no recognized internationally.

Israel has posted Iron Dome short–range air defenses on the Golan, local media said,
suggesting that the anticipated attack could be by ground–to–ground rockets or mortars.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a televised address lauding Trump’s Iran
policy and alluding to the tensions over Syria.

“For months now, Iran has been transferring lethal weaponry to its forces in Syria, with the
purpose of striking at Israel,” Netanyahu said. “We will respond mightily to any attack on our
territory.”

On Twitter, Lieberman said he had spoken to his U.S. counterpart James Mattis and “updated
him on regional developments”.

Le Monde (França) – Le régime syrien prend le contrôle de

Rastane, sur l'axe Damas–Alep
C'est dans la boue et sous des averses que des dizaines de bus transportant des combattants
et des civils ont quitté la ville de Rastan, dans le gouvernorat d'Homs, en Syrie, lundi 7 mai.
Paraphé le 2 mai par les forces de l'opposition d'un côté, et par celles du régime et l'armée
russe de l'autre, l'accord de " réconciliation " et le départ d'un premier contingent de près de 3
000 rebelles et civils en direction de Djarabulus, une région du Nord contrôlée par des rebelles
proturcs, marque la reddition du dernier bastion de l'opposition en Syrie centrale face au
pouvoir de Damas.

Le régime parachève ainsi la reconquête de la Syrie dite " utile ", un corridor qui court de
Damas à Alep en passant par Homs et Hama. La poche de Rastan–Talbiseh, qui compte 300
000 habitants, avait été conquise en 2012 par les factions armées formées à partir de noyaux
d'officiers et de soldats déserteurs de l'armée

Le pouvoir n'avait pas caché que l'écrasement, début avril, de la Ghouta orientale, près de la
capitale, devait valoir avertissement et inciter les autres poches de résistance à capituler. "
Les options sont ouvertes, réconciliation complète ou action militaire ", assurait, à la fin du
mois, Ali Haidar, le ministre de la réconciliation, à l'agence Reuters.

Peur des représailles

Ali Haidar désignait la poche rebelle de Rastan–Talbiseh comme la prochaine cible : " Les
groupes armés attendent de ressentir le sérieux et la détermination du gouvernement avant
d'envisager un accord de réconciliation ", menaçait–il. Sur le terrain, la crainte d'une nouvelle
guerre d'annihilation, comme dans la Ghouta, et la pression de la population semblent avoir
convaincu les chefs des factions rebelles d'accepter la " réconciliation ".

Au terme d'une période probatoire de six mois, l'accord permettra aux suspects de "
subversion ", militants armés ou activistes, d'être amnistiés en échange d'un renoncement à
toute activité antigouvernementale. Dans les faits, par peur des représailles, nombre

51
d'opposants, leurs familles ou des jeunes en âge d'effectuer leur service militaire pourraient
préférer embarquer dans des cars en direction des territoires rebelles sous domination turque
du Nord.

" Le régime Assad, avec l'aide de la Russie et de l'Iran, déplace de force les gens qui refusent
d'être gouvernés par un régime criminel oppresseur, à Homs, Hama et Damas, alors que tout
le monde ferme les yeux sur les crimes commis contre l'humanité en Syrie ", a dénoncé, lundi,
Dima Moussa, membre de la Coalition nationale syrienne et originaire d'Homs.

Au 10 avril, 75 339 personnes avaient fui la Ghouta orientale et la région du Qalamoun, non
loin de Damas, selon un décompte établi par l'ONG syrienne The Assistance Coordination Unit
(65 000, selon l'ONU). Parmi elles, près de 2 000 réfugiés avaient rallié la poche de Rastan–
Talbiseh et pourraient prendre de nouveau la route de l'exil. Joint par Le Monde àRastan, un
membre du conseil civil administrant la ville s'attend à 30 000 personnes, " peut–être 50 000
départs " de la région.
Madjid Zerrouky

ORGANISMOS INTERNACIONAIS E MECANISMOS

REGIONAIS E INTER–REGIONAIS

Clarín (Argentina) – Ideas y organismos que terminaron

desvirtuados / Coluna / Rubén M. Perina
La decisión de Argentina, Brasil, Chile, Colombia, Paraguay y Perú, el pasado 20 de abril, de
suspender por tiempo indefinido su participación en UNASUR (Unión de Naciones
Suramericanas) obedeció ostensiblemente a razones concretas y prácticas que han
obstaculizado el funcionamiento del organismo. Aunque el trasfondo ideológico es innegable y
relevante.

En primer lugar, el plan de trabajo propuesto por Argentina durante su presidencia pro–
tempore (abril 2017–abril 2018) para articular con otros organismos regionales proyectos de
integración física y energética, uno de los principales objetivos de UNASUR, nunca fue
aprobado. Segundo, desde que terminó su mandato Ernesto Samper (2017), los estados
miembros no han logrado consenso para nombrar un nuevo Secretario General. El candidato
propuesto por Argentina, el embajador Octavio Bordón, fue vetado por Bolivia y Venezuela,
pero tampoco se presentaron alternativas. La Secretaría General permanece acéfala, sin
dirección política. En tercer lugar, la Secretaría se encuentra inoperante por enfrentamientos
político/burocráticos internos entre facciones de funcionarios, involucrando al jefe de gabinete
y directores de las diferentes áreas. Finalmente, no ha habido liderazgo ni consenso para la
realización de las reuniones de los órganos colectivos de decisión: las bimestrales del Consejo
de Delegados, las semestrales del Consejo de Cancilleres, ni las anuales de los Jefes de
Estado.

En vista de esta parálisis político/diplomática y operativa, los Cancilleres del grupo de seis
analizaron en Lima la situación y decidieron suspender su participación en el organismo y
dejar de pagar sus cuotas hasta que su funcionamiento se normalice.

Pero sería ingenuo ignorar que detrás de esto hay un trasfondo político/ideológico que
sustenta la decisión. Es indudable que en la gran mayoría de los estados–naciones de las
Américas existe un sesgo ideológico a favor de la democracia representativa y liberal. La lucha
por su vigencia y el respeto por los derechos humanos ha marcado la historia de nuestra
naciones desde su independencia. La “clausula democrática” de UNASUR (2014), como la
Carta Democrática Inter–Americana (2001) cristalizan el compromiso colectivo para la defensa
y ejercicio de ese sistema de gobierno.

52
No es un secreto que en UNASUR Venezuela y Bolivia no adhieren con el mismo apego o
entusiasmo a ese compromiso; Ecuador y Uruguay parecen estar en la “cerca” divisoria. Y
recordemos que UNASUR fue una creación del ex presidente Chávez, así como del ALBA y la
CELAC (ambos moribundos) para marginar a la OEA y a EE.UU. de los asuntos
latinoamericanos, y arrogarse el liderazgo de la integración política y económica de la región,
con miras a instalar el “socialismo del siglo XXI”, como Castro intentó con el comunismo en la
década de los ‘60. La ilusión de Chávez, apoyado sino instigado por Lula y los Kirchners, era
conformar un bloque independiente de creciente influencia en el concierto internacional.

La parálisis de UNSASUR resulta también de una clara división política/ideológica entre dos
modelos políticos y económicos de desarrollo, comercio e integración regional: Uno autoritario,
populista, demagógico y estatista; y el otro democrático y respetuoso del estado de derecho,
y pro mercado y libre comercio. Esta tenaz grieta impide llegar a decisiones colectivas, que
requieren de consenso y unanimidad, y ha paralizado al organismo para considerar, por
ejemplo, la aplicación de la cláusula democrática, a raíz del colapso de la democracia y del
estado derecho, la violación de los derechos humanos y la calamidad humanitaria en
Venezuela.

O sea, UNASUR no sólo no funciona para facilitar la integración regional, tampoco sirve para
defender la democracia y evitar su colapso en Venezuela, con todas sus posibles
consecuencias la paz y la seguridad regional. Chávez dijo una vez que UNASUR era necesaria
porque la OEA era obsoleta y no servía para nada. Hoy, parece que es al revés.

TEMAS MIGRATÓRIOS E CONSULARES

El Economista (Espanha) – Un total de 804 venezolanas tuvieron

hijos en Brasil desde enero de 2017
Un total de 804 venezolanas han tenido hijos en el estado Brasileño de Roraima entre enero
de 2017 y marzo de este año, según datos oficiales divulgados hoy sobre la situación de los
inmigrantes en esa región del norte del país.

La estadística, elaborada por el Ministerio de la Presidencia, se refiere al número de partos

pero no precisa si alguno de ellos fue múltiple, por lo que la cifra de Brasileños nacidos de
venezolanas una vez que se agudizó la ola inmigratoria hacia ese estado del norte de Brasil
puede ser aún mayor.

De acuerdo con el informe, 566 de esos partos se registraron el año pasado, lo cual reflejó de
alguna manera el constante aumento del flujo de venezolanos que han optado por emigrar
hacia Roraima ante la crisis política, social y económica en que se ha sumergido su país.

En enero de 2017, las venezolanas que tuvieron hijos en la red de salud pública de Roraima
fueron 39, pero esa cifra saltó a 68 en el mes de diciembre, tras haber aumentado
progresivamente durante todo el año.

En el primer trimestre de 2018, al mismo tiempo que se mantenía el aumento de la llegada de

inmigrantes de esa nación, los partos de venezolanas en ese estado llegaron a 238 (80 en
enero, 81 en febrero y otros 77 en marzo).

Esa cifra representa poco más del 10 % del total de 2.291 partos que se registraron en
Roraima entre enero y marzo pasados, un dato que revela la presencia que la comunidad de
venezolanos ha adquirido en ese estado fronterizo, uno de los más pobres de Brasil.

Las autoridades Brasileñas, en conjunto con diversos organismos internacionales, como el Alto
Comisionado de las Naciones Unidas para los Refugiados (Acnur), han instalado en el estado
de Roraima ocho albergues, uno de los cuales fue inaugurado el pasado fin de semana.

53
En el nuevo refugio fueron acogidas unas 800 personas, entre las que había decenas de niños
y que estaban acampadas en una céntrica plaza de Boa Vista, capital de Roraima, que
paradójicamente lleva el nombre de Simón Bolívar, héroe de la independencia venezolana.

Según datos oficiales, en los albergues permanecen unas 4.000 personas, pero otro millar de
venezolanos aún deambula en las calles a la espera de que sean abiertos nuevos centros de
acogida.

El Gobierno también ha dado facilidades a los inmigrantes para rehacer sus vidas en otras
ciudades de Brasil.

Hasta ahora, 268 han aceptado ser trasladados a Sao Paulo, otros 164 se han asentado en la
amazónica ciudad de Manaos, más cercana a Venezuela, y 66 se han radicado en Cuiabá,
capital del estado de Mato Grosso, una región fundamentalmente volcada a la agricultura y la
ganadería.

The Guardian (Reino Unido) – Canada: Trudeau government cools

on asylum seekers as numbers from US rise
Canada warns making it across border is ‘no free ticket’ as officials try to tone down
welcoming image they have cultivated
Ashifa Kassam in Toronto

The Canadian government has sharpened its tone towards asylum seekers, warning that
simply making it across the border is not a “free ticket” to Canada as the number of migrants
crossing from the US continues to rise.

Since the election of Donald Trump, growing numbers of asylum seekers have been entering
Canada by foot, driven by fears over the US president’s approach to immigration.

Last year more than 20,000 people entered Canada at remote, unguarded locations along the
border, sometimes braving freezing temperatures, fields of waist–deep snow and icy ditches.
Doing so allows migrants to skirt a longstanding pact that bars most refugee claimants in the
US from applying for asylum in Canada.

The flow of people shows little sign of abating, with 7,300 people entering Canada irregularly
this year – more than double the number of those who made the journey in the first four
months of 2017.

This week, Canadian officials sought to tone down the welcoming image they have cultivated
since coming to power, offering instead a blunt warning to those considering making the
crossing into Canada.

“Coming across the border in a way that seeks to circumvent the law or defy proper procedure
is no free ticket to Canada,” Ralph Goodale, the country’s public safety minister, said on
Monday.

Officials said they believe that more than 90% of those entering Canada do not meet the
criteria to be considered refugees. “They must prove they need Canada’s protection to keep
them safe,” said Goodale. “Seeking asylum is not a shortcut to get around normal immigration
rules and procedures.”

After rising to a high of about 250 people a day earlier this year, the flow of migrants – many
of them Nigerian nationals – has stabilised to around 70 or 80 per day, said Goodale.

54
Canada’s immigration minister, Ahmed Hussen, said he would travel to Nigeria in the coming
days to address the issue. Canada has been working with the United States to crack down on
Nigerians who obtain tourist visas to the US solely for the purposes of walking into Canada to
claim asylum, said Hussen.

The federal government has been under pressure to stem the flow of migrants across the
border. Last month the opposition Conservatives – who have linked the rise in asylum seekers
to Trudeau’s viral tweet welcoming refugees – tabled a motion in the House of Commons
urging the government to take “immediate action” on the issue.

Canadians across the political spectrum are generally supportive of immigration, but the
Conservative MP behind the motion argued that the issue, if not properly addressed, could
cause Canadians to lose confidence in the system.

“My concern is that if the government does not take steps to rectify [its] failure to manage our
borders, we are going to rapidly see Canadians lose that social licence for immigration,
because there will be a lack of faith in the ability of the government to ensure planned and
orderly migration,” said Michelle Rempel.

The New Democratic party and organisations such as Amnesty International have long urged
the federal government to suspend the pact with the US that forces Canada to turn away most
asylum seekers who attempt to enter the country at official border crossings.

Halting the Safe Third Country Agreement would allow asylum seekers to make claims at
official ports of entry, reducing the dangers faced by migrants and allowing Canada better
control over the process, they argue.

The province of Quebec – where the bulk of asylum seekers have arrived after crossing into
Canada from the US – has called for more resources to help with the increase in refugee
claimants.

David Heurtel, Quebec’s immigration minister, said last month: “This is not about money. This
is about saying that Quebec can do its part, but our resources are completely saturated and
we can’t do more.”

ASSUNTOS ECONÔMICOS, FINANCEIROS E INVESTIMENTOS

La Nación (Argentina) – Para Wall Street y Washington, Macri jugó

su última carta
Rafael Mathus Ruiz

WASHINGTON.– El regreso de la Argentina al FMI fue recibido en Washington y en Wall Street

con cierta sorpresa, interrogantes (uno clave: cuánto dinero se obtendrá), respaldo al
Gobierno y a la decisión y una advertencia: Mauricio Macri jugó "su última carta".

"Si esto no le sale bien, ya no tiene plan B para ir por la reelección", lanzó un directivo de un
fondo de inversión, quien avaló la movida para revertir el azote del mercado, que quizá no
alcance del todo: "Te falta que pare la fortaleza del dólar. Sin esa ancla de afuera, es muy
difícil". Otro manager dijo que recurrir al Fondo era "la parte necesaria" para completar la
ofensiva para recuperar terreno perdido y tratar de ponerse "delante de la crisis". Lamentó el
timing: "Ir a pedir una línea contingente no es malo. La tienen muchos países. Lo malo fue no
haberlo tenido antes como un plan de contingencia", indicó.

En Washington, en el Departamento de Estado, el anuncio de Macri convirtió a la Argentina en

protagonista excluyente de la conferencia anual del Consejo de las Américas por motivos

55
olvidados en el pasado. En uno de los paneles, Shawn Donnan, editor del Financial Times –que
llevó a su tapa el regreso de la Argentina al Fondo–, le preguntó a David Malplass, del
Departamento del Tesoro, si veía el inicio de una crisis en las economías emergentes. Malplass
dijo que no, reiteró el respaldo a las reformas de Macri y apuntó, respecto de la negociación
con el FMI: "Vamos a mirar esas discusiones de cerca". Otro de los funcionarios presentes en
ese panel fue Marcello Estevão, secretario de Asuntos Internacionales del Ministerio de
Finanzas de Brasil. Al finalizar, dijo a LA NACION que Brasil estaba "muy bien preparado" para
capear estos cimbronazos y minimizó el vendaval que se vivía en la Argentina.

"La Argentina es un gran socio comercial de Brasil y aliado histórico en muchas áreas. El
gobierno de Macri está haciendo un trabajo óptimo, no estamos preocupados", dijo. "El FMI
existe para ayudar a países que enfrentan problemas temporales de balance de pagos o
problemas macroeconómicos temporales. Está para ayudar a la Argentina. No es una mala
señal. La Argentina es un país miembro y está pidiendo una ayuda temporal para suavizar el
impacto en la economía", agregó.

Ayer, el monto del acuerdo que buscará la Argentina era la gran incógnita que todos
intentaban dilucidar. Una fuente de un banco de inversión dijo que los mercados podían llegar
a recibir "muy bien" un acuerdo con el Fondo si el monto era alto. "Vos tenés que dar la señal
de que la plata es suficiente para que el mercado ni siquiera se anime a testearte. Treinta mil
palos es un piso. Tiene que ser más cerca de 40 o 50.000", dijo un analista.

Otra fuente indicó que si el Banco Central puede salir a mostrar que dispone de 80.000
millones de dólares en las reservas habrá menos incentivos para comprar. "Tienen que tener
una bazuca, si no, no sirve", dijo otra fuente, en referencia al monto que puede llegar a cerrar
el ministro de Hacienda, Nicolás Dujovne, con el organismo internacional.

Hubo voces más críticas con el oficialismo. "Está bien que hayan ido al Fondo Monetario
Internacional. Tienen que restaurar la confianza y lograr un sello de administrador prudente
que hoy no pueden mostrar", dijo otro ejecutivo de otro fondo de inversión. "El problema es
que no tienen un plan", cerró.

BAE (Argentina) – La agroindustria espera más ajuste tras la vuelta

del FMI
El pedido de auxilio "preventivo" por parte del Gobierno al Fondo Monetario Internacional
(FMI), tomo por sorpresa tanto a productores como a las distintas cámaras que agrupa a la
industria. Entienden que no es más que un nuevo ajuste lo que consideran una mala señal
para un sector que en parte busca levantar cabeza tras las inclemencias climáticas y los
elevados costos para producir.

La posibilidad de que el préstamo internacional llegue a tener un impacto sobre el agro "es
bastante posible dado que venimos de un parate y si no hay políticas diferenciadas para
potenciar el nivel de producción y comercialización, el panorama será más complicado",
sostuvo el presidente de Coninagro, Carlos Iannizzotto a BAE Negocios.

Desde la Federación Argentina de la Industria Molinera (FAIM), se mostraron "sorprendidos"

por la medida "dado que no lo esperábamos", dijo su titular Diego Cifarelli, que si bien
entiende "que puede tranquilizar la economía; no es lo que nos hace sentir más cómodos".

El empresario apunto a que hace falta tranquilidad para tener mercados quietos que permitan
el desarrollo de la agroindustria.

Para el presidente de Confederaciones Rurales Argentinas (CRA); Dardo Chiesa "el gobierno
muestra un camino donde las cosas no le están saliendo bien, lo que genera una gran
incertidumbre".

56
Distintos productores consultados manifestaron que su preocupación hoy pasa más por los
cambios en los porcentajes de los préstamos anunciados días atrás con lo cual si el pedido al
FMI tiene que ver con que las tasas de referencia bajen, el camino es el correcto de lo
contrario el sector verá un panorama aun más difícil de levantar.

Es sabido que hoy el productor no vende sus granos más que para pagar sus deudas y
posterga la entrega para más adelante.

El responsable de la Asociación de la Cadena Sojera Argentina (Acsoja), Luis Zubizarreta

señaló que "es una medida que el gobierno entiende que tenía que hacer para mejorar el
financiamiento del Estado y achicar el déficit".

La continuidad de cambios en la política económica no es un tema que al campo le agrade, en

especial a las economías regionales y a los pequeños productores que hoy siguen reclamando
algún tipo de reforma impositiva más benévola para un sector que no puede despegar.

La muestra de esto es la suba en el precio de la soja que paso de los $6.800 la tonelada del
lunes a $7.200 de ayer. Los 400 pesos de alza marcó una ganancia del casi 6 por ciento. La
devaluación del peso motivo que al cierre de esta edición se negocien 113.000 toneladas
superando las 97.000 de hace dos días. Del otro lado, los productores frutícolas entregan su
mercadería sin saber cuánto ni cuándo recibirán el pago de la producción.

Financial Times (Reino Unido) – Argentines shocked by IMF loan

request
Many still traumatised by 2001 crisis and consider ‘Fund’ a dirty word
Benedict Mander in Buenos Aires, and John Paul Rathbone in Mexico City

Seventeen years ago, economic policies backed by the IMF brought Argentina to its knees.
Five years later, then–president Néstor Kirchner severed IMF ties, swearing never again. This
week, a run on the currency forced President Mauricio Macri to return to the international
lender.

On Tuesday, in a televised address to the nation, a sober–faced Mr Macri said assistance from
the International Monetary Fund would help “avoid a crisis like the ones we have faced
before . . . [it] will allow us to strengthen our programme of growth and development”.

It was a stunning reversal for the 59–year old former businessman who came to power in
December 2015 vowing to make Argentina a “normal country”, after 12 years of leftist rule by
Mr Kircher and his wife Cristina Fernández. In a country where many still feel traumatised by
the phrase “IMF”, it was also a major psychological shock.

“When you talk about the IMF in Argentina, you are talking about a crisis,” says Carlos
Germano, a political analyst, who says that “Fund” has become a dirty word in Argentina. “The
Kirchner government worked hard to [demonise] the IMF. The vast majority now believe it is
synonymous with crisis and usury.”

There are few countries with as checkered a history of IMF relations as Argentina. Many
Argentines associate it inextricably with the social and economic chaos that followed the
country’s 2001 devaluation and $100bn debt default.

The crisis was so bad that one of five Argentines lost their jobs. The peso, which had been tied
to the dollar, lost two–thirds of its value. Banks froze deposits. More than 20 people died in
protests and looting. In just two weeks, the country had five successive presidents.

57
So, while Mr Macri’s decision to return to the IMF for a reported $30bn credit line may calm
investors worried about his ability to stabilise the economy after a string of interest rate
increases failed to stop a two–week run on the peso, locals are less convinced.

“It’s Macri’s first serious crisis, the first big bump along the road,” says Juan Cruz Díaz,
managing director at Cefeidas Group, a Buenos Aires risk consultancy. “On Wall Street they
may think this a good thing, but it will be much harder to sell this politically.”

Mr Macri’s popularity has already taken a battering and seeking IMF help will not help it
recover. As investor confidence in Argentina has, in some part, been predicated on the
possibility of Mr Macri winning a second term in 2019, that is also a potentially serious blow.

Walter Stoeppelwerth, head of research at Balanz Capital, a local investment bank, says that
Mr Macri has set in chain a process whose end is uncertain.

“Argentina is not going to access $30bn from the IMF unless the currency is at much weaker
levels and it is willing to accept the political liability of adjusting the fiscal deficit more
aggressively,” he says. “There will be a quid pro quo that may not be acceptable for Macri.”

Still, Argentina is very different from what it was in 2001. Over the past two and a half years,
the government has made great strides in re–building market confidence. Last year, it even
sold a heavily oversubscribed 100–year bond to international investors. This year, it is heading
the G20.

Attempts by critics to compare recent events to the run–up to the 2001 crisis are
exaggerated, analysts said.

“No one seriously thinks that,” says Mr Díaz. “We are a long way from 2001. It is still a solid
government — with problems, yes, and there have been a lot of criticisms of the way
economic policy has been handled — but no one is questioning the strength or the capability
of the government to run the country, which is what was happening in 2001.”

The country’s finances have also changed radically. The exchange rate is floating, not fixed.
Most bank deposits are in pesos instead of dollars, points out Martin Castellano, head of Latin
America research at the Institute of International Finance. Almost half of public debt is also
held by public institutions such as the central bank. In 2001, it was mostly in private hands.

The broad political situation has also changed. In 2001, the Peronist opposition was powerful
and eager to oust the flailing government of Fernando de la Rúa. Today it is in disarray,
unable to unite around a single leader. Nobody seriously believes that Mr Macri will fail to
make it to the end of his term in December 2019, becoming the first non–Peronist president to
do so.

Last, the IMF has changed. “Today it is very different from the one we knew 20 years ago,”
Nicolás Dujovne, Argentina’s treasury minister, said on Tuesday. “It has learnt lessons from
the past, and I repeat, it has helped our gradual programme.”

Exactly what kind of IMF programme Argentina will seek remains unclear. With high inflation
and wide current account and fiscal deficits, the country does not obviously meet the criteria
needed for a so–called IMF flexible credit line.

Still, Christine Lagarde, the IMF’s managing director, said on Tuesday: “Discussions have been
initiated on how we can work together to strengthen the Argentine economy and these will be
pursued in short order.”

She also described Argentina as a “valued member of the International Monetary Fund”. Such
language would have been hard to imagine only a handful of years ago.

58
Le Figaro (França) – Le FMI alerte sur le retour de l'endettement de
l'Afrique
Il redoute les effets d'une hausse des taux d'intérêt et plaide pour une réforme de la collecte
de l'impôt.
Anne Cheyvialle

Jouer les Cassandre, c'est un peu la spécialité du FMI, qui met en avant les risques et les
fragilités des économies. Dans un rapport dédié à l'Afrique, rendu public mardi, les experts de
Washington tablent sur une croissance globale plus forte cette année à 3,4 %, contre 2,8 %
en 2017, en hausse pour environ deux tiers des pays du continent.

Une embellie, souligne Abebe Aemro Sélassié, directeur du département Afrique du Fonds,
«largement due à l'amélioration des politiques, ainsi qu'à une conjoncture extérieure favorable
avec une croissance mondiale plus vigoureuse et une hausse des produits de base». Ce qui a
permis «d'importantes entrées de capitaux, et ainsi de rééquilibrer les comptes extérieurs et
d'accumuler des réserves», complète–t–il.

Après deux années difficiles, les producteurs de pétrole – Angola, Gabon, Nigeria – profitent
des prix du baril (en hausse de 36 % depuis début 2017). La croissance restera soutenue, au–
delà de 6 %, en Côte d'Ivoire (7,4 %), locomotive de l'Afrique de l'Ouest, au Sénégal (7 %)
ou en Éthiopie (8,5 %), un marché de 100 millions d'habitants qui séduit les investissements
étrangers, notamment de la Chine, attirée par les coûts bas de la main–d'œuvre. Le FMI
insiste sur la grande disparité des 54 pays – citant les deux poids lourds économiques,
l'Afrique du Sud et le Nigeria, encore «en dessous de la normale» et la persistance des conflits
dans plusieurs États. Et alerte sur les risques à moyen terme.

Dette publique

Toujours très dépendante des chocs extérieurs, l'Afrique pâtira de l'essoufflement attendu de
la conjoncture mondiale et des conditions d'emprunt moins favorables sous l'effet du
resserrement de la politique monétaire américaine. Une situation d'autant plus inquiétante que
les «vulnérabilités macroéconomiques» se sont aggravées dans plusieurs pays. La dette
publique s'est nettement creusée, passant de 30 % du PIB en moyenne sur le continent en
2013 à 40 % prévus cette année, jusqu'à une situation de surendettement dans 15 pays sur
35 à faible revenu. «La forte hausse du service de la dette accapare les ressources qui
pourraient être consacrées à des domaines essentiels tels que la santé, l'éducation et les
infrastructures», s'inquiète le directeur Afrique.

Il faut poursuivre l'assainissement des finances publiques et – priorité des priorités –

augmenter les recettes fiscales. Même s'il y a eu des progrès depuis vingt ans, l'Afrique
demeure la région où le ratio recettes sur PIB est le plus faible. Elle pourrait «accroître ses
recettes de 3 à 5 % du PIB, 50 à 80 milliards de dollars, soit nettement plus que les 36
milliards de dollars d'aide au développement international» (en 2016), note le rapport. Le FMI
recommande de renforcer les régimes de TVA, d'élargir l'assiette de l'impôt sur le revenu et de
créer de nouvelles sources d'imposition comme l'impôt foncier. En recourant davantage aux
nouvelles technologies, qui permettront de lutter contre la fraude et de collecter des
informations plus fiables.

L'autre priorité pour une croissance durable doit être de créer des cadres plus favorables à
l'investissement privé, là encore parent pauvre comparé au reste du monde, en facilitant
l'accès au crédit et en stimulant les échanges interafricains.

TEMAS CULTURAIS

59
Deutsche Welle (Alemanha) – Mais diversa, nova safra de cineastas
brasileiros é celebrada no exterior
Beneficiados por políticas de incentivo, jovens diretores driblam problemas estruturais, saem
do eixo Rio–São Paulo e chegam a festivais internacionais, revelando multiplicidade de olhares
no cinema nacional.

Com uma produção volumosa e mais diversa, uma nova safra de cineastas brasileiros vem
sendo selecionada e aplaudida em grandes festivais internacionais. É o caso de duas jovens
diretoras, Beatriz Seigner e Carolina Markowicz, cujos filmes serão exibidos na Quinzena de
Realizadores do Festival de Cannes, evento que objetiva dar visibilidade aos novos
realizadores e cujas sessões ocorrem paralelamente à célebre competição francesa, que se
inicia nesta terça–feira (08/05).

A multiplicidade de olhares por trás das câmeras acompanha o crescimento da produção

nacional como um todo, que explodiu na última década. Um termômetro são as inscrições de
novos filmes no Festival de Brasília, por exemplo, que saltou de 30 para 170 entre 2007 e
2017. Segundo a Agência Nacional do Cinema (Ancine), o Brasil teve um recorde de 158
filmes lançados no ano passado.

Além do maior volume produzido, a descentralização e a criação de novos polos de produção

fora do eixo Rio–São Paulo, bem como uma maior preocupação em incluir mais mulheres,
negros e indígenas em políticas de incentivo tem mudado, aos poucos, o rosto e o sotaque do
cinema brasileiro.

"Estamos vivendo o período mais diverso na produção cinematográfica brasileira", analisa o

crítico de cinema Adriano Garrett, responsável pelo site especializado CineFestivais. "É uma
produção vigorosa, com diversidade geográfica, de linguagem e temática, que ainda nem
atingiu a maturidade, visto que muitos realizadores desta geração estão produzindo curtas e
ainda não lançaram os primeiros longas–metragens", afirma.

"Faço parte de uma geração que está chegando e fazendo seu primeiro ou segundo longa.
Ainda está longe do ideal, mas é bem legal participar deste momento, em que finalmente há
algumas medidas para incluir no cinema mais pessoas que antes não tinham acesso", opina
Markowicz, de 35 anos.

Superando obstáculos

Embora ainda esbarre em problemas como a dificuldade de financiamento, de distribuição e da

pouca formação de público, o diverso grupo – cujos expoentes incluem também o
pernambucano Kleber Mendonça Filho, diretor de O Som ao Redor e Aquarius, o ex–jogador
de futebol Adirley Queirós, que filmou na cidade–satélite de Ceilândia Branco Sai, Preto Fica,
além dos mineiros Affonso Uchôa e João Dumans (diretores de Arábia) e Juliana Antunes
(Baronesa) – tem conseguido romper barreiras e atingir boa inserção em festivais nacionais e
internacionais.

Inspirado em casos reais, o curta O Órfão, de Markowicz, foi escolhido entre 1.667 inscritos e
relata o drama de Jonathas, menino negro e pobre que acaba preterido nos processo de
adoção por ser diferente.

"Acabei me deparando com casos de crianças devolvidas no processo de adoção por terem
características mais afeminadas ou por parecerem gays. Fiquei chocada, achei um absurdo e
resolvi fazer o filme para contar que essas histórias existem”, explica a paulistana.

Cineasta Beatriz Seigner

60
Em 2009, Seigner foi premiada pelo longa "Bollywood Dream – O Sonho Bollywoodiano",
coprodução entre Brasil e Índia

Já o longa Los Silencios, dirigido por Beatriz Seigner, disputou com outros 1.609 filmes uma
vaga na exibição. Nascido de mais de 80 entrevistas com famílias colombianas e filmado na
tríplice fronteira entre Brasil, Colômbia e Peru, o longa narra a jornada de Amparo, que foge
do conflito armado em seu país e se abriga com os dois filhos pequenos em uma pequena ilha
com casas de palafita no Rio Amazonas.

Da ideia inicial dada por uma amiga colombiana à estreia em Cannes, passou–se quase uma
década, lembra Seigner. "Comecei a escrever em 2009 e mandar para editais em 2012.
Mandei para 37 editais, nós ganhamos dez e perdemos 27. Com bastante persistência,
acabamos conseguindo ganhar um pouco em cada edital e fechar o orçamento", explica a
cineasta de 33 anos

Ela se aproximou do cinema ainda na adolescência, quando produziu um curta em uma oficina
na comunidade Monte Azul, na zona sul de São Paulo. Em 2009, foi premiada pelo longa
Bollywood Dream – O Sonho Bollywoodiano, primeira coprodução cinematográfica entre o
Brasil e a Índia da história.

Formação de cineastas

"A produção brasileira saiu do eixo Rio–São Paulo e se diversificou bastante em novos polos,
como o de Pernambuco, o do Ceará e o de Contagem, em Minas Gerais", explica Garrett,
ressaltando a importância da disseminação, nos últimos 15 anos, de cursos técnicos e
universitários voltados para o audiovisual, que ajudaram a formar parte dos cineastas atuando
hoje.

"Até os anos 2000, havia poucas opções para quem quisesse estudar cinema fora das capitais.
E mesmo nelas as opções eram restritas, havia basicamente os cursos da Universidade de
Brasília, criado em 1965, ou a USP e a FAAP, em São Paulo. Os cursos existiam, mas eram
oferecidos em um número muito menor do que o atual", afirma.

Na política pública, um indutor importante da produção cinematográfica nacional foi a criação

da Ancine, em 2001. "Essa leva de editais e leis de incentivo, tanto no plano federal quanto
nos estaduais e municipais, ajudaram a impulsionar essa produção. Hoje, a maior parte das
produções, exceto as ultraindependentes, tem algum tipo de financiamento via edital. Isso
ainda é uma parte muito grande do contexto de produção brasileira", diz Garrett.

Oriunda de Porto Alegre, capital do Rio Grande do Sul, a dupla de diretores e roteiristas Filipe
Matzembacher e Marcio Reolon é fruto da descentralização dos polos de criação
cinematográfica. Ambos se formaram na PUC–RS, Matzembacher com o auxílio do ProUni,
programa do governo federal que oferece bolsas em universidades privadas para alunos de
baixa renda.

"Somos de uma das primeiras turmas de cinema do nosso estado. Eu tive bolsa, vários outros
tiveram também esse tipo de incentivo para estudar. Isso traz novos olhares e possibilidades
de acesso para outras pessoas", opina Matzembacher.

Multiplicidade de olhares e temas

A estreia da dupla Matzembacher e Reolon se deu no Festival de Berlim, a Berlinale, de 2015,

com o filme Beira–Mar. Três anos depois, os gaúchos comemoraram a inclusão do segundo
longa, Tinta Bruta, na mostra Panorama do festival deste ano. O filme venceu a categoria de
melhor longa–metragem no Teddy Awards, segmento da Berlinale dedicado a obras com
temática LGBTI. O longa também ganhou o CICAE Art Cinema Award.

61
"Hoje há um pessoal produzindo cinema que mostra de fato a cara do Brasil, que vai além da
cara da novela da Globo, com sotaque carioca", opina Daniel Ribeiro, de 35 anos, diretor do
longa Hoje eu quero voltar sozinho. O filme levou para as telas a história da descoberta da
sexualidade de um adolescente com deficiência visual e estreou no Festival de Berlim de 2014.

O diretor André Novais, expoente da chamada "cena de Contagem", cidade da região

metropolitana da capital mineira Belo Horizonte, também destaca a multiplicidade de olhares
como um dos principais diferenciais dessa nova geração.

"Há dez anos, eram poucas as pessoas negras no audiovisual. Hoje dá para ver um
crescimento, vários diretores e diretoras negras conseguindo fazer curtas e mesmo longas. É
ver o Brasil por meio de olhares diferentes”, opina ele, que ingressou no universo do
audiovisual na adolescência, assistindo a festivais de cinema em Belo Horizonte.

Nesse contexto, ele conheceu a Escola Livre de Cinema, espécie de curso técnico de um ano
de duração, onde se formou. Foi também fora desse eixo já consagrado que nasceu a
produtora Filmes de Plástico, formada por Novais, Gabriel Martins, Maurílio Martins e Thiago
Macêdo Correia.

"Eu acho que a geração atual teve a felicidade de ver o acesso mais simplificado a tecnologias
que em alguma instância ‘democratizaram' a produção. Muitos profissionais, incluindo eu,
começaram a trabalhar com cinema a partir de iniciativas próprias, com grupos de amigos,
por ter a possibilidade de filmar com câmeras e equipamentos mais acessíveis", opina Macêdo.

O mineiro produziu o documentário Chuva é Cantoria na Aldeia dos Mortos, coprodução

portuguesa rodado na terra indígena Krahô, no Tocantins, cuja estreia acontecerá na mostra
Un Certain Regard, como parte das festividades de Cannes em 2018.

"Somente depois que alguns de nós tivemos a possibilidade de concorrer e ter contemplações
em editais públicos. Esses fomentos também ampliaram a possibilidade de surgimento de
novas filmografias, o que num passado não tão distante talvez fosse mais limitado a poucos
nomes já reconhecidos", diz o produtor e diretor.

Quem está assistindo a esses filmes?

O crítico de cinema Sérgio Rizzo aponta, no entanto, a existência de gargalos que impedem
que essa nova produção nacional atinja um público maior.

"Vejo com simpatia o cinema de longa–metragem experimental, mas fico um pouco

incomodado porque esses filmes circulam pouco. É um cinema de festival, que chega a poucas
salas e não têm a existência que merece", afirma. "Tendemos a olhar para os filmes e
reconhecer ali um talento emergente e jovem, mas quem está assistindo a esses filmes? Em
geral, o mercado é dominado por superproduções", acrescenta o crítico, ressaltando que seria
necessário também uma política mais robusta na formação do público.

Além dos problemas estruturais, a geração atual de cineastas convive com os temores de
corte de verbas e as incertezas diante do volátil cenário político brasileiro. A esperança,
porém, é de que as mudanças sejam irreversíveis.

"Não sabemos exatamente o que acontecerá, mas essa área tem muita força e conseguiu
manter as conquistas até agora. A minha geração conseguiu ter acesso a esses recursos muito
jovem, é fruto desse olhar do governo para o setor", afirma Ribeiro.

Para Garrett, como as políticas públicas costumam dar resultado no médio prazo, possíveis
impactos só serão sentidos nos próximos anos. "No momento, a safra ainda é muito rica."

62
The Peninsula (Catar) – Garabia exhibition opens at Katara
DOHA: Al Garabia, an exhibition of works by a group of Latin American artists based in Qatar,
opened at Katara Cultural Village Building 18 on Wednesday.

Ahmed Abdul Rahman Al Sayed, deputy general manager of Katara and Rossana Cecilia
Surballe, the Ambassador of Argentina to Qatar opened the exhibition in the presence of
ambassadors of several Latin American countries and other visitors and dignitaries. The
exhibition will run until May 14 from 10am to 10pm. The exhibition is titled Al Garabia, after a
linguistic expression, rich with cultural and historic meanings.

The term algaravia or al-arabîya is complex in significance giving its many layers, ranging
from its colonial origins to the modern Spanish expression Algarabía, meaning a sudden loud
situation or troupe of people creating confusion and bewilderment. This definition is also often
used to describe the Middle Eastern and Latino American peoples which aside of the cliché
highlights the similarities derived from long standing cultural ties between the two worlds.

“We call ourselves Group of Seven, meaning seven Latin American artists based in Qatar.
Three more have joined this exhibition and we may change the name to G10,” said Maria Al
Badr, one of the participating artists, originally from Uruguay, married and settled in Qatar.

Al Badr said that the basic idea behind the exhibition was to show “what the Arab cultures
have given to our countries,” through Arab immigrants who came to Latin America several
centuries ago. About 40 artworks illustrating the cultural link between Arabs and Latin
American countries are on display at the exhibition.

The exhibits include a painting by Al Badr, titled Bustle of Lights which evoke joyful memories
of the Muslim Holy month of Ramadan.

Juan Miguel Ramirez from Mexico has showcased a blend of photography, installations and
paintings, depicting three Qatari “boats” and colourful paintings set in the backdrop of Qatari
life and environment.

Other participating artists include Alma De La Barrera from Mexico, Melina Da Moura from
Brazil, Angeles Ollarburo from Argentina, Johnathen Machado Tepper from Venezuela, Leonora
Benavides from Chile, Maria de las Nieves Ahuad Goya from Mexico, Oscar Mantilla and
Sebastian Betancur, both from Colombia.

63