Charles Taylor

Charles Taylor, former president of Liberia, has been sentenced to 50 years imprisonment at the International Court for aiding and abetting rebels in Sierra Leone during the  10 year civil war which ended in 2002.

I wasn't going to comment on this but by popular demand (Dave Phillips in Reno Nevada) I shall do so.

I say 'at' the International Court because Mr Taylor cannot be tried by them, his misdeeds having taken place before the Court was created. Instead he is being tried by the Special Court for Sierra Leone, set up by Sierra Leone under the aegis of the United Nations. The rules of this court state that the trial must take place in Sierra Leone, but in this case it was thought proper to ignore that.

I can't say I feel comfortable about all this.

Britain and America often supply arms and assistance to rebel groups - the recent overthrow of Gaddafi in Libya is a good example. The trick is to be on the winning side, which Charles Taylor was not. America, by the way, has withdrawn from the ICC, as has India.

Taylor was not present in Sierra Leone, indeed for all I know he has never been there, but has attracted the stigma of war criminal.

Doubtless there was some nasty stuff in the Sierra Leone civil war - there usually is - and doubtless Taylor is a nasty piece of work, but is what he was up to worse than our involvement in Libya or Russia's involvement in Syria? One day Assad will be ousted; will Putin and Medvedev be dragged before the court in the Hague? I don't think so.

Then there is the problem of imposing western values on other people (I have written about this before). Suppose some African tribal leader is hauled before these unelected judges, from such places, by the way, as Nigeria and Uganda, and indicted for eating missionaries. His people have always eaten missionaries, he says, indeed it is an essential tribal ritual. But no, he is guilty because British and Americans don't eat missionaries.

Mr Taylor is being tried essentially by Sierra Leone where, let's face it, they want a guilty verdict. None of this is such as to leave one feeling comfortable.

Taylor is not the sort of person you would want your daughter to marry and not the sort to invite to a dinner party. But should we have the arrogance to allow his former opponents to condemn him? My vote is no.

Assad: still there

'Diplomatic pressure on Assad mounts' says the FT. I'm not sure that a man who can order the systematic slaughter of children is going to be too upset by having his chargé d'affaires sent home from Portugal. He is still there, and his opponents must be wondering what it would take to dislodge him.

The West cannot intervene militarily. It's not just that we are tired of war, it's that it would be opposed by Russia and in all probability China. Equally we can't arm the opposition because it would start an East-West proxy war.

The only people who can do something, whether it is intervention, assistance to the rebels or diplomatic pressure, are the Saudis and the Qataris: nations that are sufficiently strong in energy-wealth not to fear the Russians, and for whom Syria is their back yard. The people of Syria are largely Sunni, like them, although the Assad government is Alawite, a branch of the Shia sect.

The Saudis and Qataris will be nervous of a Sunni-Shia conflict, and nervous of arming the rebels but I fear if they don't the butchery will continue.

The one thing the British can do is cancel the citizenship of his wife. We certainly don't want the expense of her taking up residence.

Tax Freedom Day

Today is Tax Freedom Day in Britain. Calculated every year by the Adam Smith Institute, it takes the proportion of our incomes we pay in taxes as a percentage of the year, showing the date on which we stop working for the State and start earning for ourselves.

Today, 29th May, is two days later than last year. Australia's Tax Freedom Day was on 4th April, America's on 17th April. France's will be some time in July.

This seems a good time to consider the benefits of small government, with this useful presentation by the Centre for Policy Studies:

Greek Cyprus

I call it thus because this blog, unlike the British Government, also recognises Turkish Cyprus.

In the middle of the euro-fiasco we seem to have forgotten them.

For a long time the political class in Brussels refused to contemplate the possibility of Greece leaving the euro, saying the process was irreversible. The Greeks, taking them at their word, have said they won't administer the austerity package, so that the Eurocrats have been forced into a U-turn, saying Greece would have to leave the euro if it didn't take the medicine (or das Medikament, as it's known in Berlin).

Of course we don't know what will happen and won't until a day after the 17th June elections in Greece. But we have all been advised to do a bit of contingency planning and I expect quite a lot of that will be going on in Nicosia.

You see, the Greek Cypriot economy is inextricably linked to the Greek one, and if Greece leaves the euro, Greek Cyprus will have to as well.

So what will it be? The New Drachma? Actually Cypriots have a rather interesting alternative. Their currency has never been the drachma (in my opinion Cyprus isn't Greek) but following its long period of Ottoman Turkish rule was run by the British from 1879 (annexed in 1914) and the currency was the Cypriot pound.

The Cypriot pound was divided into 20 shillings and each shilling into 9 piastres, making 180 piastres to the pound.

In 1955, sixteen years before Britain, the Cypriots decimalised, with 1000 mils to the pound. This excellent system subsisted until 1st January 2008 when they joined the ill-fated euro.

The solution is simple: they just revert to the Cypriot pound.

Incidentally the British bases on Cyprus, Akrotiri and Dekhelia, which are sovereign territory, are the only instances of  British territory using the euro. Poor things. I hope we are doing something to protect them.

Not this time, Silvio

Silvio Berlusconi is trying to start a movement to make the President of Italy electable by the people. Nothing wrong with that - a popular mandate would be far better than him or her being elected by the corrupt, time-serving envelope receivers that constitute the Italian parliament.

It's just that you don't have to read too deeply between the lines to realise what Silv is up to: he wants to be President himself and reckons he could get the popular vote.

No, caro. This blog never thought the man's private life made him unfit for the job of Prime Minister - the problem with Silvio is that he never actually did that job, his tenure being characterised by ineffectual posturing.

But the job of President is a different one to that of Prime Minister: it involves the non-political representation of 60 million people. The President is a figurehead and an example and Silvio's past life excludes him from the position.

Also he is a voice from the past, and the people want something new.

Berlusconi should retire to his girls and his villas and his yacht. If he wants to campaign for an elected President, he should undertake not to be a candidate himself. It was fun while it lasted, ma basta!

A Scoop!

This blog has succeeded in obtaining the menu for the next European summit:

Crudités (raw vegetables)
Pasta Povera (poor man's pasta with garlic and oil)
Kleftiko (Greek robber's mutton)
Crème Anglaise (to remind them that some countries are not in the euro)

Mrs. Merkel to bring her own cheese.

Er.... in your dreams.

Menu before the crash

The menu for the last dinner on the Titanic recently sold for £76,000. What would the menu for the last Euro-summit fetch?

Last week's was not the last, time for a few more tuck-ins before it goes down, but the excellent Marco Zatterin of La Stampa has discovered the menu

Lobster with asparagus
Fillets of San Pietro with vegetables
Chocolate mousse
Coffee

He says nothing about the wines, but describes the meal as 'moderately sober'.

Double your money?

Thanks to the excellent people at Zero Hedge who have followed the announcements of the rescue of the Spanish Bank Bankia

Bank Of Spain Formally Nationalizes Bankia, Says Insolvent Bank Is "Solvent", Adds There Is No Cause For Concern, Zero Hedge, May 9

Spain is taking over Bankia by converting its 4.5 billion euros of preferred shares in the group’s parent company into ordinary shares, BusinessWeek, May 21

Spain said on Wednesday its rescue of problem lender Bankia would cost at least 9 billion euros ($11 billion), as the government tries to clean up a banking system that threatens to drag the country deeper into the euro zone crisis, Reuters, May 23

Bankia SA will have to ask the Spanish government for more than 15 billion euros as part of its effort to restore its financial health, state-owned news agency EFE reported Thursday, citing financial sources, Dow Jones, May 24

Note that the cost more than trebled in three days. Almost as bad as the Olympic Games.

Bankia is a conglomerate of seven banks which include the wonderfully named Caja Rioja.

I can add to all that today's FT:

Spain to inject up to €19bn into Bankia.

Any more for any more?

Eurovision

The Eurovision Song Contest final is tomorrow, and looks to be about as much fun as everything else with the prefix 'Euro'.

Spain has reportedly told its entrant Pastora Soler not to win, because the winner has to hold the next contest and Spain can't afford it.

The UK also can't afford it, but our solution is to field jowly septuagenarian crooner Engelbert Humperdink (formerly Arnold Dorsey).

Let's hope it works.

A Liberal Haiku

This blog has received a transcript of a speech to be made by Nick Clegg, described as Deputy Prime Minister, to the lucky people of Berlin.

The full transcript is here, and I should give a health warning: it's ghastly stuff.

But amidst such tosh as

Management of financial risk, fiscal discipline, labour market reform; these are not just different chapters in an economics textbook. They are closely connected problems with consequences for us all. (getaway, Nick)

This is a European crisis. It must be solved at the European level.

We cannot let this crisis shake our commitment to Europe’s big idea – that union is worth pursuing as a means to peace and prosperity alike.

I found this gem:

The tree is falling, and we are pruning one leaf at a time.

This is so poetic, so beautiful, that I leave it to you in the form of a Japanese Haiku

The euro tree falls

But Nick Clegg is pruning it

One leaf at a time

Just think about that, the next time you wonder why this fool hasn't yet apologised for suggesting we join the euro in the first place.

Growth

To celebrate the new millennium European leaders agreed to make Europe 'the most competitive and dynamic knowledge-based economy in the world capable of sustainable economic growth with more and better jobs and greater social cohesion' by 2010. Having agreed that, they all breathed a sigh of relief, shook hands and sat down to lunch to celebrate the great things they were doing for their people. It was called the Lisbon Agenda because that is where they had the lunch were meeting.

Of course by 2010 Europe had actually slid down the list of competitive nations or areas of the world.

Why? The reason is that for most politicians in Europe, growth means government spending (you remember Gordon Brown used to call it 'investment'). Growth means more government not less.

Of course in the places we are competing with, the Far East, America and increasingly the Third World, growth means a refreshing absence of regulation and political interference. Perhaps the key words in the declaration are 'better jobs and greater social cohesion': someone slipped those in so it wouldn't matter if governments simply borrowed more money and handed it to the special interest groups in their countries in return for votes - that's how European politics works.

Now growth is back on the agenda. Leaders met in Brussels, some of them having just met at the G8 in America, and decided....er....to make a decision in June. Yes! A success!

I don't think we'll get a decision on anything in June, either. What they'll do is agree more infrastructure, more grands projets. Europe will become a dystopia of superb motorways and no trucks to drive on them.

And the money for the grands projets? Yes, borrowed of course. Greece will be invited to borrow money for high speed trains while being made to cut back on the health service.

This is Europe today: a dithering, self-important, corporatist political class which just hustles to stay in power at the expense of the poor.

Mouthy

David Cameron has made a couple of speeches lecturing the Eurozone on its plans, and offering warnings to Greece. His predecessor, Gordon Brown, was much the same and earned a reputation for hypocrisy.

I must say if I were a Greek or other Eurozone voter and found some mouthy youngster, who had made a complete cock of his own country's economy, telling me what to do, I should do the exact opposite.

This is a good time to shut up, Dave.

Robin Gibb

We mourn the death of Robin Gibb, far too young at 62

Earthquake

Sympathy to the people of Emilia - in the Bologna region - for the earthquake which has killed seven people. The aftershocks are still being felt.

I was there the day before. Strangely, when there was an earthquake at my home in Umbria, I was in Rome; and when there was a 'quake in Rome, I was in Umbria, so I have never experienced the phenomenon.

Not that I'm sorry.

Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau

Being away for a few days, I missed news of the death of Dietrich Fischer-Dieskau, the greatest exponent of German Lieder, aged 86

Donna Summer

And the sad death of Donna Summer, pioneer of disco music, aged 63

Referendum trick

There has been a bit of talk about the possibility of a referendum on the UK’s membership of the EU. What is being said is that the Labour Party will support the idea so as to try to expose the Conservatives’ differences on Europe, and that the Liberals will approve it thinking that the answer wil be yes and it will put the matter to bed. Thus Cameron will be bounced into offering it in his manifesto. Most people assume I am a supporter of the idea, but I’m not so sure I am.

I start from the basis of the conclusion I came to in 1991, that Britain would be better off, both financially and democratically, if it left the EU. Nothing that has happened since then has made me reconsider: if anything I feel it more strongly.

And it is hard to dispute the legality or constitutionality of a referendum. The matter is important enough to be put to the people, and there is the precedent of the referendum held in 1975 – so far the only nation-wide referendum ever held in Britain – when we decided to stay in.

So: important and constitutionally defensible. It is only then that the problems start.

First is the question, which will be asked by the government. Now, David Cameron has tried to spin himself as a eurosceptic, but in my view all his actions since coming to power and even before, point to a man who is quite comfortable in the EU. He wants us to trust him to be fair on this, and I, frankly, don’t.

It’s not just the nature of the question. I don’t suppose Cameron will try ‘Do you want us to leave the EU, with all that that will entail in terms of lost jobs and being politically isolated, or do you want to pursue the broad sunlit uplands of prosperity and peace with our partners, our European brothers?’ – although with most of the administrations since 1975 that is roughly what you would have got.

No, it’s the practicality of the matter. Cameron won’t call it ‘leaving the EU’ – he calls it ‘renegotiating the terms of our membership’. But every time we have asked for changes, the answer has been ‘Non’. The only difference this time is that it will be ‘Nein’. They don’t want Britain to become more efficient and prosperous by opting out of the ugly bits.

So the only occasion we can renegotiate is when they have something to lose. If Cameron had held his nerve on the Fiscal Pact, rather than giving in immediately and allowing them to use civil servants, partly paid for by Britain, to draft its terms and put it into practice, if only he hadn’t rolled over, we could have had that as a bargaining point: if you want your Fiscal Pact Britain opts out of the Common Agricultural and Fisheries policies, the working time directive, the health and safety nonsense which they pretend is part of the single market, the common policing, the European Arrest Warrant, European Army and all the rest.

Now, we can only have a negotiating point, a point d’appui, if they decide to have another grand treaty. And they aren’t likely to in the foreseeable future.

So Cameron reckons he can negotiate something simple and easy – cheaper biscuits in meetings and an undertaking the European Army won’t invade Norway -  and then put it to the people as the best that could be negotiated, thus silencing debate on the subject for a generation.

He has to be exposed and resisted. The only suitable question is ‘Do you want to stay in the EU or leave it?’.

Anything else is a con-trick on the British people.

Default

An interesting little tale reaches me.

When Greece did its 'restructuring' (which ordinary people call a default) it told private investors that they had to take a 75% hit on their holdings. These amounted to some €177 billion. However a small amount, we think around €6bn, was written not under Greek law but under English Law (the one used internationally for these instruments).

€450 million, a small amount in the context of things, of these 'foreign law bonds' became due today.

It is thought, but not known, that these bonds were held by the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund,
Norges Bank Investment Management (NBIM). This outfit is worth $600 billion, and owns something like 2% of all the shares in Europe - ie pretty chunky. Now NBIM was annoyed at the Greek default, thinking the eurozone should look after its own affairs, and that it was disgraceful that the European Central Bank should remain immune from the default: the ECB, despite holding a lot of the paper, took no loss at all - everyone else paid for it.

So, it is rumoured, the NBIM said if it wasn't paid today, it would sue Greece in the London courts, which would have defaulted everything.

The Greeks have paid up. A Greek spokesman said it 'would not have any bearing on future decisions regarding other similar bonds'.

This is of course nonsense. The other €5.5 billion who have held out against the limited default - for most people it is a cardinal rule that you treat all similar creditors equally - now know they are in with a chance.

And every other investor knows that if the Eurozone pull this kind of stunt again they shouldn't go along with it.

And Mrs. Merkel knows that now if the ECB makes a socking great loss on a defaulting country's bonds, it is the Germans who are going to have to pay.

It's going to have a big impact, in my view.

The new team

Much was reported about the governing duarchy of Germany and France, named Merkozy. What are we to call the new pair? Merlande? - it sounds too much like the French for the fish, whiting.

Holkel?

No. I prefer the simple, but eloquent......

Merde.

Each silver lining has a cloud

Hate bankers' bonuses? Here's some good news for you. According to the Centre for Economics and Business Research bonuses have fallen from their 2007/8 peak of £11.5 billion down to £2.3 billion this year.

Like spending on health and education? Here's bad news for you. Because of the drop in the bonuses the government's income is down by £4 billion.