André Rebentisch's Open Salon Blog

Shortening messages

Thu, 3 Dec 2009 05:12:39 -0500

There the Salon quoted statement of D. Rumsfeld, here is my shortened version:

In his speech to the nation last night, President Obama claimed that "Commanders in Afghanistan repeatedly asked for support to deal with the reemergence of the Taliban". I am not aware of a single request of that nature between 2001 and 2006.

Apparently more troops are going to be sent to Afghanistan now.

Oracle-SUN or Birth of the Fool

Wed, 25 Nov 2009 13:11:18 -0500

A sip of Austrian economics, please.

Usually you would believe lobbying was a professional task but when it comes to European competition law American larger companies usually apply a mad rhino strategy with slanderous communication against the EU Competition authorities, Commissioner N. Kroes and her administration, and they call into question the alphabet rules of order policy. In the US it seems acceptable to bully competition authorities and depict them as consumer agencies you are safe to ignore. Apparently in the US business people do not appreciate competition enforcement.

Dark SUN...

Now the Oracle takeover of SUN Microsystems is under investigation in the European Union, and there is a concern with the MySQL part of the SUN portfolio. The computer company SUN Microsystems earlier overtook the database company MySQL, and it is now in a difficult commercial situation, hit hard by the financial crisis. Fortune 500 corporation Oracle decided to take SUN Microsystems over. MySQL is the most popular database in the web sphere (you probably know that many websites use LAMP servers, the M in LAMP stands for MySQL.) Oracle leads in the Enterprise database management sector and still makes a whole lot of money with database management. MySQL as part of the SUN product portfolio strategically challenges their cash cow.

Given the market penetration of MySQL European competition regulators were asked by competitors to investigate the acquisition. Of course some competitors are playing their games, and Oracle and SUN Microsystems are said to lose a fair amount of money because of the delay in the course of the competition review. Understood.

Lobby letter this mornin'

SUN-Oracle's unreasonable approach towards the EU regulators, first ignorant, then aggressive is again reflected in a letter signed by 59 US-Senators from both sides of the aisle who kick the ass of the EU-commission to speed up the investigation:

Chargé d’Affaires Angelos Pangratis
Acting Head of Delegation
Delegation of the European Commission to the United States
2300 M Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037

Dear Chargé d’Affaires Pangratis:

As fellow government officials committed to the principle that competition is the cornerstone of healthy economic growth, we would like to take this opportunity to share our thoughts with you as to the proposed acquisition of Sun Microsystems, Inc. by Oracle Corporation. In addition, due to Sun Microsystems’ deteriorating financial condition and the possible negative effect on employment of the company’s workforce, we respectfully request the European Commission expedite the completion of its investigation into this transaction.

The United States Department of Justice, after an intensive investigation, closed its inquiry into this transaction without taking any action. In fact, the Justice Department did not find documentary evidence that this acquisition would harm competition. We recognize that the European Commission has a sovereign right to thoroughly investigate transactions where corporations utilize the European Union’s marketplace. Further, it is our understanding the Commission is concerned about competition in the database software market. However, we have been informed by Sun Microsystems that their subsidiary, which competes in this specific market, generates only €17 million in revenue and that the same market has competitors with capitalizations of tens of billions of Euros.

Unfortunately, Sun Microsystems’ financial position has become more precarious and the Commission’s inquiry has continued. Some have raised concerns over the company’s ability to continue to employ its thousands of workers. Accordingly, we respectfully request the European Commission complete its investigation of this transaction as quickly as possible.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

You may be surprised that the commercial situation of SUN Microsystems is depicted as desperate. The argument is SUN's desperation, not Oracle's interests in the takeover.

Senate hates E-U

The media quotes the US-Senators:

Orrin Hatch ...has become "increasingly concerned about the growing body of evidence that foreign regulatory agencies are unfairly using their review processes to impede the business of American corporations."

John Kerry: "...with our Department of Justice having made a compelling case that the merger does not pose a threat to competition, it is fair to ask the EC for the basis on which a delay on decision making is warranted and to make a decision one way or the other.”

Crazy. Who do they think they are?

... and what really happened

Now here is the other side of the story:

"Oracle requested the extension in order to have the opportunity to further develop its arguments in response to the Commission's concerns," said the European Commission.

Indeed, Oracle was just granted more time by the EU-Commission. Maybe Senator John Kerry (Mass.) should better call Oracle's Larry Ellison, the domestic "basis on which a delay on decision making is warranted".

Clinton in Germany or Get Real-Politik

Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:11:55 -0500

Hillary Clinton was in Berlin and claims the "liberation" of Berlin as part of a larger struggle and presents her unique view on 9.11.89

"But there wasn't anything inevitable about it. And there is nothing hat we can take for granted about that history. The circumstances that surround us today are a culmination of an effort by Europeans and Americans that spanned generations. And, yes, the end to the Berlin Wall was an iconic moment. It was an hour when the hopes and prayers and sacrifice of millions came together in an unwavering exclamation of freedom. But it did not begin with the mistake of a flustered Communist spokesman in East Berlin, or even the peaceful masses that took to the street that evening. It had been building over years." .. "Now, as in the past, we know that the work ahead will not be quick, and it will certainly not be easy. But once again, we are called to take ownership of our future, and to affirm the principles and the sacrifice of the generations who helped us reach the milestone we commemorate. The ideals that drove Berliners to tear down that wall are no less relevant today. The freedoms championed that night are no less precious. And the rights and principles that brought us to this hour are no less deserving of our defense."

I was wondering what was between the lines, why her speech irritates me so. Of course it just a matter of style. German speeches are often more reflective, we don't speak about us and the hopes and prayers and sacrifice of millions rhetorical kitsch.

"As one who came of age amid the barriers of oppression, Chancellor knows of what she speaks. But tomorrow, when she walks through the Brandenburg Gate, she will do so as a free daughter of Brandenburg, and the leader of an emancipated people."

Ironically I never realised before our Chancellor leads me. I thought her task was to define the basic policies for the ministries. You'd probably speak of service and duty, not leadership. I never asked her to lead me. She was born in Hamburg, and I would expect a "Free Daughter of Brandenburg" to be either a houseboat or a mule.

Why is it so difficult to accept chance as a part of history? What is all this visionary leadership for but a myth for those who do not understand the functioning of an administration? Nov 9 I listened full length to the Schabowski (the flustered Communist spokesman) press conference, it makes you realise the banality of history.

I wonder how to predict these incidents. Unlike the collapse of the Soviet Union some events are predictable, ten years ago it was common knowledge that internal financial markets were about to collapse, and it was widely known that radical islamists target the United States. Today we know that a larger earthquake is about to happen in Istambul, the patent system is broken, we know that flu would strike again, climate change, peak oil, not to mention the ever accelerating universial decline of German forests and the dangers of sound film.

"And we need to form an even stronger partnership to bring down the walls of the 21st century, and to confront those who hide behind them: the suicide bombers; those who murder and maim girls whose only wish is to go to school; leaders who choose their own fortunes over the fortunes of their people."

It requires training but now I am mostly immune against such emotional speech and furthermore I think persons in her office have to be sober-minded. I am not amidst enemies, why does she tell me so. A person in her office has to accept that her own troops kill boys and girls whose only wish is to go to school, she has to accept that her office makes her target of attacks, she has to accept that larger catastrophes happen. If there was anything as leadership she needs to calm people down to withstand psychological warfare as terrorism.

A few weeks ago I met an Afghan student in Berlin. As a sidenote, while I was eating Pizza he remarked, the Americans just didn't care about civilian human loss in their military operations. So as I had to cheer to him up (win his "heart and mind") I just told him once Berlin was bombed to the ground and still it is very nice place to live and stay.

Oh, and of course Berlin was liberated by the ~~Russians~~, Soviets. They also liberated Afghanistan, later taken back by Afghan freedom fighters who... You get the picture, get real, realpolitik.

What laws and bananas have in common

Wed, 4 Nov 2009 14:11:36 -0500

Yes, they convinced me. I endorsed a letter to US-President Obama about ACTA transparency on behalf of an German digital market organisation where I serve in the board. My objection was, you know, we should not interfere into the internal matters of third nations. Obama is not our President. Internal matters, what a weird vintage principle?! Our former German Chancellor Helmut Schmidt still sticks to "non-interference" but he is the old guard. We are dealing with an entirely different situation, that is a world where our legislation is made through confidential trade talks. Welcome to the world of global policy laundry!

No more tariffs and quota for imports and exports of bananas and steam engines but legislation itself is now traded across the Atlantic, across the world. Trade administration, not parliament, makes our laws. Billions of citizens are affected but don't get consulted in any way. Business and civil society stakeholders and our representative legislators are unable to inspect what is negotiated. Democratic control and transparency are missing, sounds all like exaggerated drama but it unfortunately isn't. So I made up my mind, got real, and we decided to sign the American letter to Obama, a call for procedural improvements for ACTA because it does not really matter anymore whose leader is capable to influence a process.

ACTA?

So, on both sides of the Atlantic we find a great mystery about a planned secret treaty between the Western nations. The proposal is called ACTA, anti-counterfeiting trade agreement, and it is basically a followup to the famous TRIPS agreement (which was smuggled as an annex into the GATT Uruguay round by the United States). TRIPS non-tariff provisions do not fit well the spirit of GATT. TRIPS made emerging countries like India, Brazil, South Africa pay high attention to TRIPS and these nations nowadays mount confrontations and drama on all levels. The Indian generic pharma industry for instance is very concerned about the patent provisions, so is e.g. Medicines Sans Frontiere. Even free trade guru Jagdish Bhagwati was very sceptical about patent policy laundry with TRIPS. As a side effect TRIPS also removed the flexibility of all WTO nations to adjust their patent protection terms, a regulatory deadlock. TRIPS can be seen as an ugly duck of the GATT.

In the lights of the huge controversy, a TRIPS plus cannot be concluded within the World Trade Organization, steps beyond TRIPS are blocked by some dedicated nations. They are rather busy to undermine TRIPS applications and seek flexibilities. That is why our trade administrations decided to get even more "forum shopping" with a coalition of the willing and create a new dedicated trade process, named ACTA outside the WTO. Needless to say ACTA has little to do with removal of trade barriers and a classic free trade paradigm, though with the right spin all kinds of legislative differences between nations may be perceived as "trade barriers".

More is better?

The negotitiation mechanism of trade talks is designed under the premise that removal of actual trade barriers is always beneficial which is true (Sorry, I am no lefty anti-globalisation critic or protectionist, I am for free trade, studied trade economics). The GATT was a great success to achieve a removal of trade barriers worldwide. Now, the one-sided mechanisms of trade policy designed for a removal of classical trade barriers are abused for legislative maximalist export across the world.

First a coalition of the willing (trade officials from different nations) agrees on entirely new legislation, concludes the agreement and then their national legislators have to ratify and implement the trade agreement. In parallel trade negotiators trade banana import quotas and tariffs for adoption of these new legislative instruments by the developing Republic of Bananas. They parallelise the process with bi- and multilateral coalitions and agreements which include the same provisions. The regulatory provisions in trade agreements are like liquid concrete. Legislators on all sides can hardly get rid off them.

In other words, democracy and sovereignty (great word, hope I learn to spell it correctly one time) of all our nations, not just the powerless nations, is seriously undermined by a technocratic group of trade officials with a simple more is better ideology and maximalist objectives.

A global trade regime needs a global governance perspective

We can't even see what they negotiate. On the EU side I got this reply today about an ACTA document access request under Article 255 of the EU treaties or regulation EC/1049/2001 which grants all citizens the right to access to public documents. Unfortunately not to a document written by a "Friends of the Presidency" group for the EU Council:

09-2185en.reb.nh-ank

So as we endorsed the call to Obama I would appreciate you to question our government as well on ACTA transparency. My government is actually not even involved. The German government (and the 26 other EU governments) granted a (confidential) mandate to the European Commission to negotiate with the US and other nations on their behalf...

The old principles of governance are dead. Maybe I add a quote from the responsible EU-Trade Commissioner Ashton (a New York colleague asked if that was a Yes Men prankster stunt, no it isn't)

Just as we have a transatlantic market for goods we should have a transatlantic "market for regulation". A solid and critical exchange about our respective approaches, and indeed some degree of competition for best practice in this area can actually help us spot the most efficient regulatory tools, which we can then share with each other.

Admitted, "regulation" does not mean "legislation" but as ACTA (which is negotiated by the EU DG Trade) shows there is hardly any difference to be expected. These new principles of governance will not be easy to put into compliance with the old spirit of Lockean separation of powers, democratic governance, parliamentarism etc.

Actually, it does not look like the change we need.

Let's give it a try

Sun, 1 Nov 2009 21:11:28 -0500

Nice system for writing text. Very convenient.