SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Clinton -- doomed & wagging, Japan collapses, Y2K bug, etc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 8:40:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
Wall Street Journal - 09/14/98

By BILL SPINDLE

TOKYO -- Japan has fallen into its longest economic contraction in five decades, leading some economists and government officials to suggest that the country is closer to entering a vicious cycle of
falling prices, falling employment and falling output that would ravage its economy even further.

Economic activity fell 0.8% during the April-to-June quarter from the previous quarter, the government said Friday, an annualized decline of 3.3%. And with spending by companies and consumers
plummeting, there was almost no sign the situation will improve soon.

"The Japanese economy is walking along the edge of a deflationary spiral," said Taichi Sakaiya, head of the government Economic Planning Agency.

Even before the gross domestic product numbers were released Friday, the benchmark Nikkei 225-Stock Average plunged more than 5% amid concern over the economy and the faltering U.S. stock market. The
Japanese bond market touched another record high as yields, which move in the opposite direction of prices, plunged to 0.79% on the benchmark long bond. Despite the drop in the Nikkei, the dollar
weakened almost five yen during the Asian trading day as investors, spooked by the volatility in global equity markets, bought the Japanese currency as a safe haven.

More Bad News

Japan's report on gross domestic product -- the total value of goods and services produced in the economy -- was a litany of problems that exceeded even the downbeat expectations of most private economists.

Consumer spending, the largest chunk of Japan's economy, fell an annualized 3.3%. Housing investment, which provided one of the few bright spots in the preceding quarter, plunged by an annualized rate of 4%. And perhaps worst of all, corporate capital investment posted a second straight dismal performance, falling 20% at an annualized rate. This is a particularly bad omen, since business investment has historically been a key engine that drives employment and thus consumer spending.

"That's brutal, and suggests the economy is going to be contracting" in the future, said Brian Rose, an economist with Warburg Dillon Read.

While Japan's trade surplus made the biggest contribution to economic growth, even that silver lining was more a sign of economic weakness than strength. The surplus expanded only because Japan's imports -- which fell 6.8% compared with the previous quarter -- are collapsing far faster in the weak economy than exports, which fell 0.4%. The only clear plus for the economy was an annualized 1% rise in government expenditures, indicating some of the spending from a fiscal stimulus package may be trickling into the economy.

Looking For Solutions

The most recent data -- showing Japan's economy deteriorated for a third straight quarter, the longest contraction since the government began compiling figures in 1955 -- come as the government gropes for
effective tools to turn the tide. On Wednesday, the central bank loosened monetary policy by slashing the interbank lending rate in half to 0.25% from 0.5%. But private economists and even some government officials said it would provide little help for an economy where the usual tools of monetary policy have broken down.

The government is also pouring some $100 billion in tax cuts and spending into the economy, part of an economic rescue package passed in April. Still, private economists say the stimulus package -- the
centerpiece of the dominant Liberal Democratic Party's economic strategy -- could easily be swamped by the deterioration in the rest of the economy.

"When the honchos were drawing up the April package, they never would have imagined in their worst nightmares the economy would be shrinking this rapidly," said Chris Calderwood, an economist with Jardine Fleming Securities in Tokyo. "When the public-works money reaches the economy, it's going to be outmatched by the downward momentum of the private sector."

Nonetheless, many economists still think the spending and tax-cut package will be enough to at least break the momentum of the contraction temporarily over the next two quarters.

The fallout from the continued economic deterioration could also eventually hit the banking system. Already, the swelling number of bankruptcies is creating concern that banks' huge portfolios of bad loans will grow further as more borrowers fail.

With the economy contracting and negotiations over how to deal with weak banks mired in politics, some investors are concerned that Japan could eventually face another banking crisis similar to the one
that occurred a year ago. The failure of a major bank and a major broker last November started an alarming funding squeeze among all Japanese financial institutions as the number of overseas institutions willing to lend to them plummeted.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 8:42:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
The Telegraph - London - 09/14/98

By Hugo Gurdon in Washington

Early polls show voters still back president

PRESIDENT Clinton regained a semblance of control over his crisis stricken White House operation yesterday, taking advantage of the hesitancy of his Republican opponents to declare that he would "never" resign.

His lawyers fanned out through televised Sunday morning talk shows to blunt attacks based on lurid details of his sexual encounters and cover-ups contained in Friday's report from Kenneth Starr, the
independent counsel.

With Republicans willing to wound but afraid to strike, Mr Clinton appears to have avoided the immediate danger of being howled out of office by an outraged nation. Instead he is preparing for a long slog and, according to those who know him well, will fight all the way through impeachment and a trial in the Senate if necessary, rather than leave office voluntarily.

Charles Ruff, the White House counsel, who with the President's personal lawyer, David Kendall, is commanding the fightback, said that Mr Clinton would "absolutely not resign, never".

Republicans and Democrats left Washington for the weekend to test opinion in their constituencies before committing themselves to attack. They will return today armed with polls superficially suggesting that Mr Clinton is doing well, with 58 per cent saying that he should not resign.

But beneath the surface, public opinion is running sharply against him and bodes ill for his chances of staying in office until the end of his second term in early 2001. Pollsters predict big Republican gains in congressional elections in November because of the Clinton scandals.

ABC News found that 57 per cent of people think that the President should be impeached if he encouraged Monica Lewinsky to lie to conceal their affair, a 14-point rise since last month; 59 per cent think he broke the law, a 17-point jump in only four weeks. The White House counter-attack has not struck home; 49 per cent believe that Mr Starr has made a strong case for impeachment, while only 26 per cent say that White House lawyers have a strong case against it.

Democrats, furious that the President's conduct is likely to lead them to defeat in November, have warned him that their wafer-thin residue of tolerance will crack completely if there are any more
unpleasant surprises from the Oval Office.

Their fears may be realised. Over the weekend there were hints of more of what Mr Clinton's own workers call "bimbo eruptions". A security camera video from the Oval Office was played on television, showing Mr Clinton escorting a young woman through a door into the hallway where his trysts with Miss Lewinsky took place. It has rekindled speculation that at least one more woman will be exposed as a lover.

All of Washington is also poring over a section of the Starr report describing a strange incident at the White House when Miss Lewinsky turned up unannounced late last year. When she heard that Eleanor
Mondale, an entertainer and daughter of Walter Mondale, a former presidential candidate, was inside, she stormed off in a rage. Mr Clinton later berated the gate guards for disclosing the identity of his guest, the Starr report says.

There is a prevailing suspicion in Washington that the extraordinarily detailed report may only have skimmed the surface of White House goings-on under Mr Clinton.

Bad polls may be working in the President's favour in the short term. Republicans are pulling ahead of Democrats among potential voters in congressional elections and the party may favour having a crippled
and besmirched Democrat in the White House during the next two months.

William Kristol, former chief of staff for Vice-President Dan Quayle, said: "The Republicans want this to drag out. They are gaining in the polls every day." Trent Lott, majority leader in the Senate, encapsulated congressional vacillation, saying: "The evidence is overwhelming that the President lied both in his deposition and to the grand jury. The last time a federal judge was removed it was for lying to a grand jury, so we have a precedent."

George Stephanopoulos, a senior aide in Mr Clinton's 1992 election victory, says in today's Newsweek magazine: "If necessary, Clinton will risk trial. He won't willingly go home."

There are signs that the White House's unacknowledged tactic is to seek a plea bargain with Congress, in which Mr Clinton would avoid resignation or impeachment, but would be officially censured. Some
analysts say that a much more serious plea bargain is likely.

If Democratic support crashes before the election, or if the Democrats suffer a terrible defeat in November, making the prospect of impeachment and trial by a Republican dominated Congress more likely, Mr Clinton could resign in exchange for a full pardon for his crimes and misdemeanours.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 8:48:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
By Richard Halloran
...September 9, 1998

The customs official stood before several hundred law enforcement officers in a conference here and said matter-of-factly: "Over 400 million people come into the U.S. every year, including returning American citizens, and there are 800,000 aircraft arrivals. If someone wants to bring in a vial of anthrax (a lethal bacteria), they're probably going to get in."

Moreover, 9 million large cargo containers arrive by ship from abroad every year. The customs official, who cannot be named under conference rules, continued: "We can inspect only two or three percent of
them for possible terrorist weapons. Altogether, we can't find the proverbial needle in the haystack." The main conclusion from the conference: The United States, despite its multiple law enforcement agencies and powerful military forces, is mighty vulnerable to terrorist attack. "The danger could come from anywhere," said Steven S. Alm, the U.S. Attorney here and a host of the conference. "The focus of an attack could be anyplace."

That danger may have increased as a consequence of the recent cruise missile assault on alleged terrorist centers in Afghanistan and Sudan ordered by President Clinton in retaliation for the bombing of
U.S. embassies in Kenya and Tanzania. The State Department has warned of "the potential for retaliatory acts against Americans and American interests." Noting that terrorists "have not distinguished between military and civilian targets," the State Department said, "we take these threats seriously."

On a wider range, the Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, Louis Freeh, told a Senate committee: "The trend toward more large-scale incidents designed for maximum destruction, terror, and media impact actually places an increasing proportion of our population at risk." Pointing to biological, chemical, and nuclear weapons, Freeh said: "These weapons of mass destruction represent perhaps the most serious potential threat facing the United States today."

Until last year, international terror had been on a decline because of better defenses, more international action, and improved law enforcement. The number of incidents fell to a 25 year low in 1996, then rose a bit to 304 episodes in 1997. Some observers even scoffed at the threat. David Kopel of the Cato Institute, a research organization in Washington, said two years ago that only 200 Americans a year had been killed by terror, less than the 317 who fell off ladders, and far less than the 42,000 killed in automobile accidents.

That, however, overlooked a fundamental difference: People fall off ladders by accident but innocents are deliberately slaughtered by terrorists for political ends. Not to be underestimated are the stunning effect of a terrorist explosion, as in Oklahoma City, the trauma caused by the capricious temper of terrorism, as at the Olympics in Atlanta, and the concentration of casualties, as in the airliner downed by a bomb over Scotland, all magnified by televised pictures on the six o,clock news. When soldiers go into battle,
some know they will die. When a young mother takes her child with her to the post office, her husband does not expect them to be killed by a bomb sitting in the mail.

Kopel's argument, however, does point up the dilemma of a free society in trying to cope with terror. On one hand, Americans cherish the freedom to enter public buildings or pass easily through airports for which they pay taxes. On the other hand, they expect to be protected by policemen and soldiers"also hired by tax money--who might seek to curtail those freedoms in the name of security. No one has yet
figured out how to balance those two legitimate demands.

A fresh assessment of the new terrorist threats from the National Defense University in Washington says the U.S. and other developed nations have become more vulnerable because "economies and
infrastructures are increasingly integrated and people move more or less freely across borders." Rogue states such as the seven designated by the State Department-Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea,
Sudan, and Syria-find terror tempting "because they are not able to confront the United States more directly," said the NDU study.

It adds, however: "Rogues need not be governments; they can be radical movements" that turn to terror "to blackmail governments and gain publicity." The FBI identified some as formal terrorist groups, such as Hizballah in Lebanon, Al-Gama Al-Islamiyya in Egypt, the Palestinian HAMAS, and the Irish Republican Army. Beyond them are what the FBI terms "loosely affiliated international radical extremists" that are "neither surrogates of, nor strongly influenced by, any one nation." According to an FBI report, "they have the ability to tap into a variety of official and private resource bases in order to
facilitate terrorists acts against U.S. interests." Evidently one private resource was Osama bin Ladin, the Saudi financier fingered by the U.S. as having paid for the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania.

Although the recent attacks were against embassies, terrorist targets have changed as governments and military forces have sought to protect themselves. "In the 1990's," says the NDU survey, "most international terrorist incidents have targeted businesses rather than governments." Of the 50 attacks against American interests in 1996, the report says, 50 were against civilian businesses compared with 4 against military and 2 against other government targets.

Weapons of terror promise to become more insidious, especially biological weapons that are easier and cheaper to produce than chemical or nuclear weapons. Says James Anderson of the Heritage
Foundation, another Washington think tank, a "bioterrorist attack will cause mass casualties because densely populated areas make lucrative targets." Enough anthrax, for instance, can be carried in a brief case to kill tens of thousands of unsuspecting people.

In an otherwise scary conference, there was one bright spot: An official of the Central Intelligence Agency said "no known instance of a successful transaction in trafficking of nuclear materials was
detected last year." In the next breath, however, the official said "the CIA's reliable reporting on this is
limited and fragmentary."

Richard Halloran, formerly with The New York Times in Asia and Washington, writes about Asia from Honolulu. He is a consultant to the Center for War, Peace, and the News Media, and a regular contributor to the Global Beat. For reprint rights, please contact him at tel: 808-395-0511, fax 808-396-4095, or e-mail: oranhall@compuserve.com



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 8:53:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
By Paul Waugh, Political Correspondent

TROOPS may be on the streets in the year 2000 under emergency Home Office plans to maintain vital services which could be crippled by the millennium computer bug.

Armed forces will be on standby to help councils and police provide disaster relief if key infrastructures such as hospitals, water supplies and roads are hit by the electronic change.

The Home Office confirmed yesterday that local authorities are beingencouraged to draw up contingency plans to deal with the "nightmare scenario" of failed traffic lights, disabled water pumping stations, fuel shortages and other disrupted services.

The bug, which represents the inability of most computers and electronic systems to deal with the change of date from 1999 to 2000, could also hit vital equipment in hospitals, lifts, benefits payments
and phone lines.

Most computer experts believe that major failures are unlikely, but councils, which have a statutory duty to provide emergency relief, have been told to prepare for the worst. They will be allowed to use the Armed Forces Military Aid to Civil Authorities Act to call in emergency help.

The plans emerged as the Government's Action 2000 group held the first meeting of all private and public sector bodies involved in maintaining the nation's infrastructure.

Rail, telecommunications, gas and electricity regulators were joined by BT, Shell, Transco and Trailtrack to agree ways to reassure the public that their computers were being adapted to avoid the bug.

Action 2000's chairman, Don Cruickshank, warned that any private firms that failed to prepare adequately for the change could be penalised with the withdrawal of their licences.

In one key sanction, BT and Cable and Wireless have been told they will be given the power to disconnect firms that corrupt phone connections.

Nineteen key sectors of the economy on which the country depends have been identified by Action 2000, with power, water, transport, oil, telecommunications and finance judged the most critical for
preventative action.

The group is insisting that all private and public bodies involved in maintaining the infrastructure should have their plans to tackle the bug independently assessed.

The different bodies will share information so they can declare by next summer that the public has little to fear from the millennium.

Mr Cruickshank said: "The aim is disclosure amongst the members of this group so that confidence is high that it will be 'business as usual' when the day comes.

"We are all commmitted to functioning as closely as possible to normal on the day. This is crucial for the British economy. Elements of the national infrastructure underpin everything else and everyone is reliant on them."

Mr Cruickshank met Home Office officials earlier this week to discuss its plans to encourage emergency planning at local level. Emergency powers could be invoked in the worst-case scenario, he said.

Home Secretary Jack Straw is ultimately responsible for emergency planning as chairman of a body called the Civil Contingencies Committee. The Home Office Emergency Planning Division will meet this
month to firm its own proposals.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:00:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE - August-September 1998

Only a little over a year ago, the unannounced but unavoidable devaluation of Thailand and Indonesia's currencies opened the floodgates of a full-blown economic and financial crisis. By January 1998, one of the three poles of the global economy had been severely battered, after serving for ten years as a showcase for the new "liberalised" and "deregulated" model of capitalist economy and also, more importantly, as an escape route for the excess capital of the OECD member countries. However hard the free-marketeers have tried to deny it, from the collapse of Korea onwards, it was no longer an "Asian crisis" but rather the first episode of a process leading towards world financial crisis and global depression (1).

In Asia, the crisis has already led to the closure of hundreds of factories. But more significantly, it has also led to the collapse of the social bases and institutional mechanisms of economic activity. In
Indonesia and Thailand, tens of millions of people are once more suffering from extreme poverty. A strong social backlash is making itself felt in Korea, and even Japan (2), now that Asia is in the process of passing from recession to depression.

The term recession can legitimately be used when the economic and social fabric affecting basic demand in a given country remain intact. In such cases, cyclical recovery can, in the medium term, be
achieved by a revival in private consumption and investment or state-run economic recovery programmes. Recession turns to depression when falls in the level of production and trade becomes cumulative, to the point where the social foundations of economic activity are themselves affected. At this stage, it becomes impossible to foresee a reversal of the downward movement: classic recovery measures
becomes difficult or even useless. Depression is associated with a collapse of the principal institutional foundations, not only of the accumulation of capital, but also of elementary economic activity per se.
This is the situation currently prevailing in many countries in Asia, which means the region as a whole is now under threat.

The sharp contraction in banking and the drop in public spending which immediately followed the collapse of markets and financial systems resulting from the devaluation of the Thai baht and the
Indonesian rupiah, and the subsequent devaluation of other currencies in the region, at first sight suggest similarities with what happened after the devaluation of the Mexican peso at the start of Mexico's crisis in the winter of 1994-95 (3).

But the crisis in Asia has had its own specificities: the principally private character of foreign debt held by international banks; the inability of Japan because of its own difficulties to play the role of lender of last resort in regard to Thailand and Indonesia, the countries most affected, as the United States did in the case of Mexico; the onset of crisis in both South Korea and Japan, which are major exporting industrial countries, but are also the main customers for goods produced in their neighbouring countries.

A key factor in the transition to depression is the tight interdependence of countries whose economies have all been built on the model of "export-led growth" (4) and thus need other countries as outlets. In 1997 more than 50% of the trade of Thailand, Indonesia, Malaysia and the Philippines, but also of China, was intra-regional and about half of that was with Japan. The percentage is a bit lower in the case of South Korea, but Korea's exports are of a qualitatively higher level. The productive capacities of the Korean conglomerates (chaebol) were created in the expectation of regional growth continuing at the same rate as at the start of the decade.

The simultaneous onset of the falling currencies and the stunting of markets in these countries effectively killed off any classic recovery that might have derived from the devaluations, thus opening the way for deflation. During the first six months of 1998, Thailand increased its exports by 25% in volume terms but actually earned less, due to the collapsing prices of the goods sold. At the same time, its imports
shrank by an equivalent amount. The whole region has been affected by a deflationary logic, with "mechanical" repercussions that have come on top of deliberate strategies of price competition.

In economies where there are large inequalities in income, the collapse of external markets cannot be compensated for by increasing domestic consumption. In fact, the reverse is true. The shrinking of
overseas trade outlets will contribute to an accelerated contraction of domestic demand, with industrial profits and the meagre incomes deriving from waged work disappearing as the level of exports shrinks.

Ideological myopia

In elevating the economy to the level of an independent sphere with the supposed function of governing the whole of society, neoliberalism has attempted to abstract it from its political and social
underpinnings. It has chosen to see market relations as "natural" and, once they were apparently in place in a given country or region, it has reckoned them to be self-perpetuating.

This form of blindness, characteristic of totalitarian ways of thinking, consciously or unconsciously, explains how it was possible for the "experts" of the World Bank at the start of 1997 to place Indonesia - then under the declining rule of President Suharto - in pride of place as a country where development had been particularly successful.

The IMF had displayed the same blindness in its determination to impose on countries that called for help the adoption of the kind of harsh macro-economic policies which accentuate recessionary effects
and lead into depression. Observers have accused it of exacerbating the movement towards recession: this is true but it is a superficial view - which is perhaps why it was taken up by leading neoliberals such as Jeffrey Sachs (5). The behaviour of the IMF in Asia has been indicative of a vision of the world which is shared by all those who have sought to set up a benign dictatorship of capital away from the public gaze... A typical devotee has been Renato Ruggiero, director-general of the World Trade Organisation, who describes the Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) as "writing the constitution for a single global economy (6)".

Student revolts and popular rioting of a variety strong enough to bring down the Suharto dictatorship were obviously not part of the IMF's parameters, any more than the daily spread of social chaos in Indonesia.

Full-blown depression is not going to be limited to Asia. Now the Russians are experiencing the misery that comes with the collapse of the basic foundations of economic activity; and they will soon be
followed by the peoples of the Ukraine and the other ex-Soviet republics. Nor will the process stop: the Latin American countries will be the next victims of rentier and mafia-dominated global capitalism.

Three parallel tracks

As in the 1930s, financial crisis and global recession are now progressing simultaneously along three parallel, interdependent tracks. The first is the contraction in production, demand and trade, and the fall in prices. This is what deflation is about - and it is not the opposite of inflation. Unlike inflation, there are
no known and easy remedies, because the fall in prices is a result of increased competition in a context of over-production, excess stocks and productive capacity, as well as a reversal in business
expectations. Deflation affects raw materials first and hardest. But it spreads through manufacturing like a disease.

This process has now been at work for over a year. The sum of Asian intra and extra regional trade amounts to a third of world trade. This in itself was enough to discredit the idea of a purely "Asian" crisis.
In the 1980s steps were taken by the major capitalist powers to bring OPEC to its knees and reverse the price of oil. Liberalisation and deregulation of the oil market are at the origin of the current collapse of prices and the resulting shock - which will prove to have far more destructive effects than in 1973 and 1978. In the case of Venezuela, Mexico and also Russia, this is one dimension of their financial crisis.

The second track is through the astronomical increase in bad debt, both private and public, held by the banking system. When combined with political graft, the brutal spread of insolvency can bring the credit system to a halt, as in Indonesia and now in Russia. But the share of foreign banks in insolvent debt means that the process rapidly becomes global. It begins by losses by major internationally-exposed banks and the announcement of profit falls that impact on increasingly vulnerable stock markets. But
bad debt can also lead to the weakening of the capacity of banks to provide credit to their own firms. "Credit crunch", as economists call it, is now a central feature of the Japanese recession, but other
countries are not immune.

The third track is the one where the timing of events is hardest to predict, but where the effects are the most radical. It pertains to the very close interconnection between major stock markets and the real time transmission from one stock exchange to the others of gregarious market behaviour by increasingly nervous financial investors. As a result of the hierarchical nature of the world of finance, the decisive key to the world stock market contagion is to be found in New York and Chicago. The state of Wall Street is
obviously largely a function of the state of the US economy, which plays a central role in determining both the profitability of the firms whose shares are being exchanged and the mood of investors.

But profitability also depends on the state of the world economy and, as it deteriorates, investors become increasingly sensitive to political events far removed from Wall Street. This was clearly shown in
the free fall which shook the markets on 4 August, with a fall of 299 points - 3.4% - in a single day following disappointment with the new Japanese government's economic programme; and again in the fall
that shook the markets on successive days in late August after the devaluation of the rouble and the political turmoil in Russia.

An end to euphoria

Over most of the year, while Asia was moving into depression, financial markets in the Western world were booming. One of the reasons for the buoyancy has been a "subjective" element on which all
observers agreed, even though they disagreed over its depth - namely the euphoria associated with the worldwide "bull" market in shares, of which Wall Street is both the front-runner and the pivot. In the
months that followed the Thai devaluation, the World Bank estimates that around $110 billion drained out of the four countries most affected by the crisis. The combination of falls in interest rates and surging rises on the stock markets was directly linked to this massive influx of liquid assets seeking refuge in the major financial institutions of the West and adding to the euphoria among the "new investors" of the upper middle classes.

This phase is now over for two major reasons, first, the end of the economic boom and the reversal of the business cycle in the United States (7) and second, the fact that politics and economics are closely interwoven. The dykes of the neoliberal capitalist order are beginning to collapse one after another and, each time one goes down, the remainder are under even greater pressure. This is clear for Brazil, Argentina, Mexico, not to speak of Hong Kong and China...

_____________________________________________________________

Professor at the University of Paris-XIII-Villetaneuse; author of La Mondialisation du capital, new edition, revised and enlarged, Syros, Paris, 1997.

Translated by Ed Emery

(1) See FranAois Chesnais, "La face financiEre d'une crise de surproduction", Le Monde diplomatique, February 1998, and Diana Hochraich, "Crise financiEre et compEtivitE dans les pays d'Asie: au dely de la crise boursiEre", Les Etudes de CERI, no. 42, Fondation Nationale des Sciences Politiques, Paris, June 1998.

(2) See "Asia: Social Backlash", Business Week, 17 August 1998 and, particularly, the report on the real levels, and social effects, of unemployment in Japan.

(3) See Francis Pisani, "La fin des illusions pour le modEle mexicain"; FranAois Chesnais, "DEfense et illustration de la dictature des marchEs"; and Ignacy Sachs, "Quelques leAons de la crise mexicaine", Le Monde diplomatique, respectively February 1995, March 1995 and April 1995.

(4) See Gabriel Kolko, "Mais exportez, donc! dit le FMI", Le Monde diplomatique, May 1998.

(5) Jeffrey Sachs, "High Time to Rein in the IMF", International Herald Tribune, Paris, 3 May 1998.

(6) On the Multilateral Agreement on Investment see Le Monde diplomatique, February and March 1998.

(7) Business Week, 17 August 1998, uses the term "paper wealth" to describe a significant portion of the wealth enjoyed by rich and middle-class American families and to analyse the foreseeable effect of stock market losses on private consumption and subsequently on investment.

ALL RIGHTS RESERVED c 1998 Le Monde diplomatique



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:02:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
The London INDEPENDENT, 12 Sept. '98

Market crisis demands urgent action Jeremy Warner

FOR THE FIRST TIME SINCE THE ASIAN CRISIS BROKE, THERE SEEMS A REAL RISK OF A WORLD-WIDE CREDIT CRUNCH

In Brazil things got so bad that they were forced to suspend share trading. In Tokyo the Nikkei collapsed more than 5 per cent yesterday to close below 14,000, its worst level since the start of the great bear market in Japan nine years ago. On Wall Street, the record one-day rally achieved on Monday had all gone up in smoke by the end of the week, and with political concerns piling in on existing economic ones, US share prices are again heading south.

By last night there was a massive credit squeeze under way throughout the Western banking system. Wild rumours swept the City and Wall Street of loans being called in, of huge losses across a raft of
top-drawer names, and Lehman Brothers was forced publicly to deny it was filing for Chapter 11.

Meanwhile, here in the UK, the equity market looks cheap set against the US, the Continent and bonds, but with sentiment as bombed out as it is, that counts for nothing. Just as in a bull market all sensible
valuation analysis goes out the door in the scramble for stock, in a bear market the same is true but in reverse. It doesn't matter that a stock is inexpensive; nobody wants it anyway.

What's happening to world equity markets can no longer be described as an overdue and healthy correction. Over the last month, the mood has moved decisively away from the "buy on the dips" approach which has served investors so well over the years, into a "sell into the rallies" one. If you want to see what a real bear market looks like, as opposed to the little blips we have seen in the West over the past 30 years, just look at the graphic charting the Nikkei's nine years of misery. Few are yet suggesting that this is the outlook for Wall Street and Europe as we move into the new millennium, but certainly we seem to be living through one of the great defining moments in financial markets, and the end game is far from clear.

To see the extent of the damage, look no further than Barclays and Siebe - two top-drawer but very different FTSE 100 companies. Both share prices have nearly halved from their peaks this year, a quite
sickening plunge for anyone who bought at the top and one that will send dismay into the hearts of long-term holders. Both are highly exposed to the traumas now afflicting the British and world economies
- the one as a bank joined at the hip to the business cycle and with some exposure, albeit limited, to emerging markets, the other as a diversified international engineer.

Were it not for the utilities, which behave more like bonds in a downturn than ordinary shares, and telecoms, a sector investors have yet to lose faith in, the FTSE 100 index would be heavily down on the
year. As it is, it is already into negative territory. The vast bulk of the rest of the market reached that ground some time ago. In the US and on the Continent, the picture looks very similar.

In the absence of a significant, coordinated cut in western interest rates, it's hard to see anything on the horizon that might rescue stock markets. Many brokers are now forecasting nil growth in UK corporate earnings this year and not much better for next. The picture is a little brighter in the rest of Europe, where there's still huge scope for corporate cost cutting, but with the dollar now weakening fast against core euro currencies, not significantly so. Meanwhile, forecasts for earnings growth in the US are being slashed daily.

For the first time since the Asian crisis broke, there seems to be a real risk of a world-wide credit crunch. Already no one will lend to emerging markets; that's taken as read. Now there is growing concern about the reliability of counter-parties, spreads

are widening dramatically, credit lines are being recalled, and banks throughout the West are announcing big provisions.

Seemingly, there's another big loss announced in the banking system every day with much worse to come widely rumoured. This cannot help but have a real effect on the supply and availability of credit, not
just to hedge fund operators and other high-risk speculators, but to all parts of the economy. Money lost in one market means less to lend in another. There could be a quite severe liquidity drought building.

Events seem to be conforming to an alarming stereotype. This is what happens when a speculative bubble goes pop. Everyone loses a lot of money, liquidity dries up, and the situation becomes even worse.

There is an obvious policy response to such circumstances - to cut interest rates. Unfortunately, central bankers have so far proved very reluctant to do so. There was a cut in Tokyo this week, but rates are
already so low in Japan that its effect on demand cannot be any more than marginal.

In the US, Alan Greenspan, chairman of the Federal Reserve, continues to worry about inflationary pressures in the economy, though there appeared to be a slight easing of his position in a recent speech
where he acknowledged that the US economy could not remain immune to the turmoil in world markets.

In Continental Europe, interest rates are already as low as they safely can be without stoking up an inflationary boom, while here in the UK, the Bank of England this week again resisted pressure for a cut
in rates in an effort to force inflation back to the target level.

In summary, there appears no great appetite among policy-makers for the one thing that might put a floor under falling stock markets - a convincing and concerted easing of rates. Whether Monday's meeting of
G7 deputy finance ministers in London can convince them otherwise remains to be seen. The politicians can yell and scream all they want about the need for such action, but they don't call the shots.

Things could, none the less, be on the move at last. The Bank of England's Monetary Policy Committee took the unusual step on Thursday of commenting on its decision to leave rates unchanged, and in so
doing it recognised that a further deterioration in the international economy might require a rate cut. This is progress indeed. The Bank has at least left the door open for movement should anything concrete
come out of the G7. The danger for markets is that whatever action central bankers do eventually take will be too little too late.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:20:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
No. 475-98 (703)697-5131(media) IMMEDIATE RELEASE September 14, 1998
(703)697-5737(public/industry) Remarks Prepared for Delivery by U.S. Secretary of Defense William S. Cohen Council on Foreign Relations New York, New York September 14, 1998

"Security in a Grave New World" When I leave my office to walk to the National Military Command Center, I pass through a corridor that is decorated with quotations on the walls. My favorite is one by Robert E. Lee: "I was too weak to defend, so I attacked." But the most sobering is one from Proverbs: "When there is no vision, the people perish." Tonight, I want to talk about my vision for maintaining a
strong, flexible national defense in a grave new world characterized by complex threats. These challenges include:
Transnational terrorism
Rogue nations rushing to build weapons of mass destruction.
Ethnic, religious and economic strains that undermine security and stability in key areas of the world. We no longer face a single, powerful enemy, as we did during the Cold War. We don't live with a balance of terror. But we do face terrorists, and we do face the terrorizing possibility some nation or group will try to use a deadly chemical or biological weapon against our forces or our homeland. Because we don't confront a single enemy, we are facing a wider variety of challenges. We are deploying to more places than 10 years ago, and we are doing that with a military that is 36% smaller than at the end of the Cold War. To deal effectively with these challenges, we must have a national security policy based on four pillars:
Bi-partisan support for Defense Policy
Budgets adequate to maintain the world's best military today and in the future
International cooperation
Interagency cooperation within our government When I became secretary of defense, I announced that my goal was to maintain a bi-partisan consensus for strong national security policies. The security issues we face today transcend partisanship. They aren't Democratic or Republican challenges; they are national challenges. What happens in Moscow, Baghdad or Pyongyang matters in Minneapolis,
Birmingham or Portland. Any vision for a strong national defense must rest on a foundation of bi-partisan support. We can't lead the world unless we agree on the road to take. The decision to expand NATO
showed the power of a bi-partisan consensus. Another example is the Nunn-Lugar Cooperative Threat Reduction Program, under which we are helping the former Soviet Union diminish its nuclear arsenal. As
a result of Nunn-Lugar, Belarus, Kasakhstan, and Ukraine have abolished their nuclear arsenals. After the Soviet Union split up, these countries maintained the third, fourth and fifth largest strategic nuclear forces in the world. The second key to a strong defense is maintaining budgets that are adequate to meet our challenges, both current and future. Today our spending on readiness is high. Our forces in Bosnia, Korea and the Gulf -those at the tip of the spear-prove every day that they are well trained, well led and ready to defend U.S. interests. But we are facing some strains, particularly in the follow-on forces. The Navy and the Air Force are experiencing problems with recruiting and retention, in part because of attractive job offers from the booming private sector. The Army has had to take money out of base operations and infrastructure accounts to pay for readiness. In any given year, it is tempting to slow
development and procurement of future weapons in order to fund today's operations. This is a costly mistake. Technology now gives the United States an opportunity that no other military has ever had: the
ability to see through the fog of war more clearly and to strike precisely over long distances. This is what we call the revolution in military affairs. It means fighting with more stealth and surprise. It means achieving greater effectiveness with less risk. The Revolution in Military Affairs is NOT just a vision of the future; it is a set of capabilities that we are beginning to use today. Realizing the program's full promise will require new weapons and digital links between intelligence gatherers and warriors. It will also demand that we continue to recruit, train and retain a well-educated force. Last year I proposed management reforms and base closings designed to produce billions of dollars of savings that can be channeled into readiness and procurement. We need to achieve these savings if we hope to maintain the best fighting force in the world to face future challenges. The challenges include overcoming the technological difficulties of developing and deploying effective theater and national missile defense systems. I am committed to working with the President and with Congress to assure that our armed forces have the resources they need to protect U.S. interests in the 21st century as well as they have in this century. The third element in my vision for a strong national security policy is international cooperation. While the United States is the world's undisputed leader, we cannot solve problems alone. One example is preventing aggression by Iraq. Our policy of containing Iraq is the policy of the U.N. Security Council. Enforcement of Security Council Resolutions prevents him from attacking his neighbors and from rebuilding his weapons of mass destruction program. Saddam Hussein wants to remove U.N. economic sanctions, recover control of his oil revenues and rebuild his military, including large stock piles of chemical and biological weapons. For years Iraq has been trying to divide the Security Council by pretending that the dispute is between Washington and Baghdad. It is not. This is a dispute between Iraq and the U.N. over whether Iraq is going to comply with U.N. mandates requiring it to disclose and dismantle its program to build nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles to deliver them. Last week's Security Council decision to suspend the bi-monthly review of sanctions until Iraq lives up to its commitments is a set back for Saddam. Despite his efforts, the Security Council remains unified behind full compliance. The complex security challenges the United States faces today
can't be resolved by the military alone. Soldiers and diplomats have always worked side by side. Now we are learning in Asia that economists and soldiers share the same interests in stability. Months ago, I appeared on Capitol Hill with Treasury Secretary Rubin and Federal Reserve Board Chairman Greenspan to argue for economic support for South Korea. I pointed out that economic and military security were linked there and in other parts of Asia. Earlier today, the President noted that security rests on economic growth and development. One area that illustrates the need for a bi-partisan approach, adequate funding, international cooperation and close inter-agency coordination is the battle against terrorism. We can no longer think of terrorists as malefactors who attack American interests abroad. The World Trade Center Bombing and Oklahoma City have destroyed that myth. The challenge of terrorism demands that we think the unthinkable--attacks with weapons of mass destruction on American soil. The Defense Department is actively engaged with other federal agencies and with State and local authorities to prepare for such attacks. Two years ago, at the direction of Congress, the Department of Defense started a program to train city and state authorities responsible for emergency medical, fire fighting,
hazardous material, police, and other services. State and local officials are the first respondents--the people who will be first on the scene if an attack occurs. So far, we have already trained nearly 10,000 first responders in 30 cities, and another 25 cities will receive training in the coming year. Our program is specifically designed so that the people we train become trainers themselves. This approach will greatly magnify our efforts to produce a core of qualified first responders across the nation. The Department of
Defense is providing other support services, such as establishing 10 Rapid Assessment, Identification and Detection Teams in the National Guard. These new RAID teams will quickly reach the scene of an
incident in order to help local first responders figure out what kind of attack occurred, its extent, and the steps needed to minimize and manage the consequences. Getting prepared for such a potential attack
is extremely complicated, given the wide range of possible threats and the many players at the local, state and federal levels. Earlier this summer the President acted to expand and improve coordination of
federal efforts. We have made significant progress already and expect more in the coming months. We hope, for example, to consolidate all support to state and local officials into one lead federal agency.
Other agencies, such as the Department of Defense, will play an active support role. So far we have had several false alarms, such as the anthrax hoaxes in Wichita, Washington and Las Vegas. We had one
close call here in New York. The World Trade Center bombers attempted, fortunately without success, to develop a chemical weapon capability to supplement their truck bomb. And we know that Usama bin
Laden wants chemical weapons and has worked to acquire them. These facts, combined with the multiple chemical weapons attacks in Japan by the Aum Shinrikyo cult, should make clear that the threat is real. We must be prepared. Terrorism demands a coordinated, resolute response, but there is one response we should never indulge. We must never allow messengers of hate to alter the course of America's role in the world. We must be mindful that those who engage in terror will exploit any display of fear or weakness. We have a choice: fight or fold in pathetic cowardice. America cannot retreat behind concrete bunkers and barriers and expect to be a force for good in the world--or even to remain secure in our own homes. And no government can permit others to attack its citizens with impunity, if it hopes to retain the loyalty and confidence of those it is charged to protect. We can remain free only as long we remain strong and brave. We intend to do precisely that. All should know that we will not simply play passive defense. Those who sponsor or support acts of terrorism are not beyond the reach of America's military might. We demonstrated this after the attacks against our embassies in Nairobi and Dar es Salaam. Those who attack American citizens will find no safe harbor, no haven in which to hide. A successful fight against terrorism will require discipline, patience and strength. There is no doubt that terrorists will test our resolve. There is no doubt that we will meet the test. -END-



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:25:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
Journal of the Federation of American Scientists (F.A.S.)

Volume 51, Number 4 July/August 1998

CONTINUED FROM (I)

Nuclear War Implications

The Y2K Problem has attracted growing attention in the computer and commercial sectors, but it is only in recent weeks that the potential implications of this problem for the danger of nuclear war have become
public. Because of the secrecy and sensitivity of strategic warfighting systems, there are currently few definitive answers, but many important questions that must be addressed in coming months by the nuclear weapon states.

may also in turn manifest Y2K anomalies. System integrity may also face coincidental compromises from a variety of factors, ranging from solar-storm induced communications outages to heightened security due to warnings of terrorist attacks.

Difficult Choices

At this point, operators and commanders may face difficult choices between reducing the overall readiness of nuclear warfighting forces, and making changes in the operational practices of those forces
to compensate for degradations in command and control capabilities. Such difficult choices would not be made in isolation, but might simultaneously confront system operators in more than one country,
creating complex interactions among partially degraded command and control networks and nuclear warfighting forces. Random events, such as solar storms or sounding rocket launches, could further perturb the situation. In practice, such tightly-coupled interactions are all rather unlikely, given the poor track record of the American intelligence community in monitoring the alert status of Soviet forces during the Cold War. But technological "accidents" seem inexorably to result from seemingly trivial technical problems compounding in unlikely ways to produce surprising and occasionally catastrophic results.

There is obviously considerable potential for public alarm here, whatever the actual underlying risks of Y2K leading to accidental nuclear war. One obvious step would simply be to take all nuclear forces off alert, pending robust resolution of any lingering doubts concerning Y2K compliance. While there are certainly many compelling reasons for de-alerting nuclear forces, it would probably be counterproductive to suggest that the Y2K problem mandates immediate de-alerting as the only prudent step for ensuring that the new millennium dawn with a nuclear apocalypse.

Steps Needed to Address Y2K Issues

Several relatively straightforward steps are clearly called for, both to address the actual potential for the increased risk of accidental nuclear war due to Y2K, and to address potential public concerns.

The first step would be a continuation of Awareness Phase activities to include familiarizing information system operators with likely symptoms of Y2K non-compliance, to reduce the degree of confusion or
alarm that may accompany unexpected system performance. Because of the high level of vigilance that currently attends strategic command and control operations, care must be taken to ensure that
Y2K-induced glitches are not mistaken for malevolent assaults by adversaries.

The second step would be implementation of robust contingency planning detailing alternate means of fulfilling affected information system missions in the event of a critical failure induced by Y2K problems. These should include defaulting functions to appropriate manual operation if needed. It is exceedingly unlikely that Y2K problems would induce the generation of apparently valid launch authorizations, given the complexity and redundancy of existing launch authorization mechanisms and procedures. Nonetheless, given equally remote likelihood of a "bolt-from-the-blue" sneak attack, a requirement to verbally authenticate apparently valid launch orders would provide an additional risk reduction measure.

The third, and most critical, step would be direction from the National Command Authority that, as a matter of national policy, system operators and commanders should accept reductions in alert status and warfighting readiness pending resolution of Y2K induced problems, rather than attempting to sustain high alert rates through implementing or improvising contingency plans that could contribute to
increasing the risk of accidental or inadvertent nuclear war. These are not priorities that can be chosen by commanders on the scene, particularly when faced with puzzling or alarming system failures possibly induced by Y2K problems.

The next step would be the completion of an independent Y2K compliance audit of STRATCOM, USSPACECOM, and supporting intelligence activities. While the full report would surely be highly classified, some portion of the audit and Y2K compliance certification could surely be released to the public, confirming that the American strategic command and control system is Y2K compliant, and that
robust measures are in place to counter Y2K interface problems caused by potentially non-compliant American systems.

Y2K Certification from Nuclear States

An American working group, consisting of participants from nuclear weapons agencies and agencies concerned with information assurance issues, should be established to make formal Y2K compliance
presentations to all the other nuclear states (declared and otherwise). The focus of these activities would include a rehearsal of the nature of the problem, representations concerning American Y2K compliance initiatives, offers of technical assistance, and a request for reciprocal compliance certification.

Extending Secretary Cohen's initial June meetings, the United States should formally request that all nuclear weapons states implement formal Y2K compliance certification for their nuclear command and
control systems. This compliance certification should be validated by some independent entity within each country, consistent with domestic Y2K compliance procedures. The final outcome of this process would be formal public statements by the nuclear weapon states of their Y2K compliance.

None of these initiatives can guarantee the eradication of the millennium bug from nuclear command and control systems, just as there is no guarantee against nuclear war other than the elimination of nuclear weapons. But systematic initiatives taken today could significantly contribute to reducing the risk of accidental nuclear war, and certainly contribute to reducing public anxieties concerning this risk.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:27:00 PM
From: SOROS  Respond to of 1151
 
15sep98

BANGLADESH'S worst floods this century have crippled the country's largest port, further threatening an economy already struggling to cope with the impact of the disaster.

Port authorities in Chittagong said the nationwide floods and resultant disruption to communications had halved loading and unloading at the port, which usually reaches 26,000 tonnes daily.

Officials say the calamity has hit exports badly and blocked imported, emergency food aid needed to stave off famine in 55 of the flood-hit nation's 64 districts. The floods, the third major such disaster since 1954, have cut off the country from India, which accounts for 90 per cent of trading activity, and affected 30 million people since July.

Some 12,000 containers had been dumped in yards meant to hold 8000, Chittagong port chairman Zahiruddin Mahmud said. "We are facing problems with the transportation of goods to and from Chittagong," he said, adding that 40 ships carrying 250,000 tonnes of cargo, including 100,000 tonnes of food, were stuck in the harbour.

Floods have cut key roads between Chittagong and the capital, Dhaka, stranding 5000 trucks due to carry cargo from the port on the Bay of Bengal.



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/14/1998 9:30:00 PM
From: SOROS  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 1151
 
Armyworms invade the Southeast Monday, September 14, 1998

The mild winter brought on by El Ni¤o has allowed armyworms to invade the Southeast this summer and chew their way through thousands of acres of crops, pasture and turf.

The pests, usually prolific in the summer and fall, got off to a strong start this spring, said Richard Sprenkel, a pest management specialist with the University of Florida's Institute of Food and Agricultural Sciences.

"They showed up very early but weren't much of a problem in April, May and June because the drought stunted vegetation," he said. "The rain that began in July activated fertilizer that had been lying dormant. Greenery exploded, and the worms went to town.

"Early in the summer, we were getting only four to five armyworms in our traps each night," Sprenkel said. "Recently, we've gotten as many as 50 per night."

The outbreak is the worst in 20 years, say experts at universities across the Southeast. They fear that the next wave of the pests will wipe out their fall crops.

Armyworms balloon from a width of two hairs to as fat as a pencil and up to two inches long during their three- to four-week life span.

"When they're full size, they move awfully quick, sometimes destroying a farm field in 48 hours," said David Holmes, Marion County extension service director in Ocala, Fla. "One farmer came in who said it was like his whole pasture was just moving."

Armyworms are eating corn, cotton, peanuts and grasses used for pasture and hay.

"We've had some pastures so decimated that we've had to move cattle just to get them something to eat," said Harrell Phillips, a veterinarian and farmer from Morriston, Fla.

The pests also are a serious threat to lawns, golf courses and athletic fields, stripping almost all the grass leaves, said University of Florida turfgrass specialist Grady Miller. "They wiped out new plantings of grass at two Gainesville playing fields, and I'm getting calls from as far away as Louisiana.

Armyworms have multiple generations so one spraying of a pesticide will not wipe them out.

The pests replace their skins, or molt, six times in their life span. "They do 90 percent of their damage in their last two moltings and go into overdrive the last 48 hours," Sprenkel said.

The pesticide spinosad has proven an effective control of armyworms but it is only licensed for use on cotton, said Sprenkel.

"It doesn't kill most beneficial insects," Sprenkel said. "When you use it, you don't destroy the tiny wasps, spiders and various beetles that are armyworms' natural enemies."

Sprenkel hopes that tests conducted on experimental crops will convince the pesticide manufacturer to go through the necessary paperwork to make licensing it for other crops a reality.

The problem is that doing the paperwork does not make much economic sense, said Sprenkel. "Armyworms tend to be sporadic."

In terms of biocontrols, such as mass releases of the armyworms natural predators, none are effective, said Sprenkel.

"The best method is to stay away from hard chemicals and prevent a complete wipeout of beneficials," he said.

The armyworm infestation is expected to continue through September and October and threatens hay fields and pastures. They should taper off as the weather changes and there is less food for them.
Environmental News Network



To: grampa who wrote (284)9/17/1998 9:20:00 PM
From: SOROS  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 1151
 
SINGAPORE is grappling with its most serious economic crisis since the British withdrew armed forces from the former colony in 1968, according to elder statesman Lee Kuan Yew.

"The damage to the Indonesian economy and the problems in Malaysia have made for more concerns" for neighbouring Singapore, Senior Minister Lee was quoted as saying in The Business Times.

"Their difficulties will affect us through our many trade and investment links."

Mr Lee, the father of modern Singapore, said the country would have to cut business costs to restore its competitiveness and control rising unemployment.

Since the start of the financial crisis in Asia, Singapore's currency has fallen less against the US dollar than the currencies of most of its neighbours.

Also, the cost of doing business in the city-State has risen steadily to levels higher than those of its competitors.

Speaking at an event to launch his controversial memoirs and celebrate his 75th birthday, Mr Lee explained that simply letting the Singapore dollar fall to regain competitiveness would not work.

He said all-round cuts in rents, fees, taxes, power and telecommunications rates and wages were required.

"These adjustments will not solve our problems and cause us to recover quickly, as happened in 1985" during the last recession, Mr Lee said. "But they are indispensable if Singapore is to weather the severe difficulties that will last at least a few years."

He added that the present crisis was more difficult to overcome because Japan was in recession, leaving only the US and the European Union to aid Singapore.

The huge depreciation in Asian currencies, including the Indonesian rupiah and the Malaysian ringgit, had made Singapore less competitive than other Asian countries. "For example, the Japanese are making disk drives in The Philippines to compete against those made in Singapore, paying wages and rents in pesos at a fraction of ours," he said.