Wendi…back by popular demand…

“Cheers to Wendi! Gan bei! Drink the cup dry!”

It’s 8 pm on a freezing night in Xuzhou, and we’re having a jolly time in the Overflowing Fragrance dining room of the Sea Sky Holiday Hotel, an oddly named establishment given that this grim industrial city of 10 million people is 500 kilometres west of the Yellow Sea, and no place for a vacation. We’re toasting a thriving Chinese export, a girl born of modest means in nearby Shandong in December 1968 and given a politically correct name – Wen Ge, shorthand for ‘Cultural Revolution’ – as was the imperative for parents in that dark era. And what a remarkable journey to celebrate: catapulting herself from the anonymity and austerity of communist China to the family, and the family trust, of one of the world’s most powerful and wealthy men, and all by the age of 30……

….. http://www.themonthly.com.au/issue/2007/june/1311127304/eric-ellis/wendi-deng-murdoch

Oranges and Lemons: The Royal Houses of Europe

TODAY in Amsterdam, the Dutch royal family will perform something their ennobled Spanish cousins further south in Europe aren’t much inclined to publicly do these days – their job.

Admittedly, today’s majestic jollies at Amsterdam’s 15th century church, Nieuwe Kerk, are unavoidable if one’s privileged station is to bestride the Dutch kingdom, or the Koninkrijk der Nederlanden as it is formally known.

For it’s the day when leadership of the House of Oranje-Nassau, Europe’s most expensive to maintain, is invested with a new monarch. The throne will be passed from the matronly septuagenarian Queen Beatrix to her eldest son Willem-Alexander, a florid 46-year-old whom the Dutch like to call ‘Prince Pils’ because of his fondness for fun.

The throne will be passed from the matronly septuagenarian Queen Beatrix to her eldest son Willem-Alexander, a florid 46-year-old whom the Dutch like to call ‘Prince Pils’ because of his fondness for fun.

In keeping with this reputation, the event promises to be a massive party for most of the populace. Their new king’s investiture has been arranged to coincide with Koninginnedag, the annual Queen’s Day holiday when Nederlanders contract a 24-hour virus of oranjegekte. That is, they adorn most everything and particularly themselves with all things orange, the royal hue; it is the one time when the Dutch pocket their determined egalitarianism to hail their elite, and with much national gusto.

Indeed, if the investiture has a soundtrack, it’s not so much the ‘imbecilic’ official ditty, Koningslied (the ‘King’s Song’) – penned for the occasion but so unpopular it’s desperately in search of His Majesty’s first royal pardon – but rather the relentless doof-doof booming from party boats navigating Amsterdam’s canal zone.

Willem-Alexander’s is just the third accession to the throne in more than 120 years – Dutch royals having shown themselves to be impressively durable.

And despite the cost of maintaining this reigning family – almost €40 million annually – they are hugely popular, enjoying nearly 90 per cent approval by one measure. And among them, few are more popular than the comely Maxima, the new king’s blonde and big-haired wife, soon to be Queen.

Rather like Australian-born Crown Princess Mary of Denmark, Maxima has the advantage of being a novel foreigner, a professional woman – an investment banker before that calling became toxic – and one who mastered a relatively obscure language with chirpy acuity.

 

But unlike Our Mary of Hobart and her Scottish academic father, Maxima bears the inconvenience of being Argentinian, and of having a politician for a padre whose hands, if not dripping with blood, had certainly clasped a few that were when he was a minister in one of the world’s most brutal military dictatorships.

Maxima’s father, 85-year-old Jorge Zorreguieta, wasn’t welcome at the Nieuwe Kerk when his daughter married Prince Pils in 2002, and there’ll be no place for him today either when she becomes Queen.

It helps their popularity ratings that Dutch royals do appropriate things and that they aren’t politicians – for whom the Nederlanders reserve great derision. Rather, Willem-Alexander is said to be passionate, if that’s the right word, about water management, a big deal for a new king when around a fifth of his realm is below sea level.

It’s also expected that he will nod toward republican demands that the perks Dutch taxpayers provide their royals be slashed. In February, the Dutch economy slipped back into recession; a gentle one compared to the Club Med basket cases, but these are austere times in a country that has come to expect plenty.

Republicans want Willem to slash his pay by 80 per cent. He won’t go that far, but it’s expected he’ll do the royal thing and make concessions in that general direction.

The Dutch royals are not seen as so terribly out of touch as many modern monarchs. Maxima is a persuasive campaigner for immigrant, and lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) rights; while Beatrix has often deployed her lacquered hairdo and handbag to useful effect in crafting government coalitions – and all the better, she believes, if they don’t include the divisive Islamophobe Geert Wilders with whom she is engaged in near open warfare. And there is genuine affection among the Dutch for the plight of Beatrix’s middle son, Prince Friso, now in his 15th month of a coma after being buried in an avalanche while skiing in Austria last year. It was Friso’s accident that is said to have hastened Beatrix’s abdication after 33 years as monarch.

But Dutch royal powers have nonetheless been eroded. Parliament last year voted to deprive the monarch of any role in forming governments and a wedge of lefty MPs will not make the customary pledge of loyalty at today’s ceremony.

Though there’s been much belt tightening among the ordinary citizens of crisis-wracked Europe, the continent still maintains a dozen monarchies. Some monarchies, such as Liechtenstein, are rich, but many, such as Spain, are struggling. And that’s led some to question their worth. Can a Europe contemplating an ever tighter union afford, or even need, royals?

From Scotland to Spain, from Norway to The Netherlands, as Europe struggles through a state of near-permanent economic crisis, tradition-confronting events like the Utøya massacre and a continent-wide backlash against immigration, Eurotrash royals are learning, painfully, to pull in their collective head and do what taxpayers pay them to do – play national symbol and dollop out liberal portions of cultural comfort food.

In Brussels, the Belgian royals are feeling the strain of political impulses that threaten to divide the country between the Dutch-speaking Flemish and Francophone Walloons. Likewise in The Netherlands, where Wilders is waging a pitched battle with the royals over who best articulates ‘Dutchness’: is it Wilders’ dog-whistling anti-immigrant, anti-European populism or Beatrix’s entreaties for Dutch tolerance and multi-culturalism?

In Oslo, Norway’s King Harald V has won new admirers for the sincerity of his family’s compassion in the wake of the Breivik massacre, and for his reiteration of Norway’s liberal and transparent values. In Copenhagen, it has taken the arrival of the Australian princess to revitalise a dysfunctional royal family widely derided for its fatal tendency to produce trashy toyboys and bad marriages. Likewise, Sweden’s King Carl XVI Gustaf recently cited “precisely the strength of the monarchy that the king can be an impartial and uniting symbol… [for] new Swedish citizens”.

But deeper European political integration threatens to render the continent’s royals as quaint museum pieces with no power or status, titular or otherwise. Some institutions, such as Britain’s Windsors, have responded with uncharacteristic nimbleness and pragmatism in reminding their subjects they’re still around, by being actively dutiful, or by marrying commoners – baby bumps on bland princesses help here.

It also helps the British and Dutch royals that their kingdoms are not Spain.

Spain, Europe’s fifth biggest economy, is doing its best to fast become its sixth. More than one in four Spaniards are out of work, near one-in-two for under-25s. And with Catalonia poised to vote for independence, there’s a very real prospect that the Spanish kingdom could break up. Re-installed by a dictator in the mid-1970s, Spain’s royals are discovering the hard way that being la familia real is no longer all fashionable vacations and soft-focus features in ¡Hola! Magazine. Indeed, its rare to see a Spanish royal much anywhere these days except in the scandal sheets.

“If there was a league table of European royal popularity, the Spanish royal family would be wooden-spooners,” says Scottish academic Professor Neil Blain of Stirling University, who in 2003 co-authored a book on the European royals, Media, Monarchy and Power.

Last year, King Juan Carlos disgusted Spaniards by tootling off to Botswana on a €50,000 safari – a trip that became a public-relations blunder por excelencia.

While on holiday, the 74-year-old king suffered a fall and had to undergo hip-replacement surgery when he returned. That required explanation, and La Casa Real provided only limited detail, spinning it with the aim of generating sympathy for his plight.

But details leaked from Africa that he had been on a hunting trip, an elephant-hunting trip moreover, and with pictures to boot, of Juan Carlos in hunting vest and rifle, proudly smiling beside the dead elephants and buffaloes he’d bagged.

If an expensive foreign jaunt wasn’t a good look for a royal in these austere times, when Brussels – and Germany – are demanding that Europe’s ‘garlic belt’ ingest some harsh economic medicine, then having a King who is, incidentally, the honorary head of your country’s World Wildlife Fund hunting pachyderm could only add national insult and ridicule to his injuries.

Never mind the titillation surrounding the ‘mystery blonde’ – Juan Carlos’s companion in Botswana – who was identified as Corinna zu Sayn-Wittgenstein, a 47-year-old German-Danish multi-divorcee. Amidst claims she’s been socially trading off her Zarzuela Palace connections, she’s now being portrayed as part Wallis Warfield Simpson, part Sarah Ferguson, part Caroline of Monaco.

Juan Carlos has form in this area, so the usually royally biddable Spanish media has also gone big-game hunting. It’s an open secret in Spain that Juan Carlos’s 50-year marriage to the Greek royal princess, Sofia, is a convenient sham. Spain has been titillated by a trashy bestseller, La Soledad de la Reina, The Solitude of The Queen, published last year, which documented the King’s alleged habitual infidelity, saying that he even once made a play for the late Princess Diana.

The House of Bourbon is still reeling from the King’s links to a financial scandal involving Iñaki Urdangarin, his favourite son-in-law. Urdangarin is married to the youngest royal princess, Cristina, and is, significantly, a Basque who lives in Catalonia, an embodiment of the two regions of Spain that have most vigorously agitated for separation, sometimes to the point – in the Basque region at least – of near civil war.

But the spivvy Urdangarin has outlived his national usefulness. He’s suspected of embezzling public funds, and the King has been embroiled, via documents that indicate he has vouched for his son-in-law in a series of dodgy deals.

A recent opinion poll showed republican support in Spain at 37 per cent – triple what it was 16 years ago – which suggests there’ll be no more African holidays for the lothario king, nor sympathy for his offspring any time soon.

Far better during these dark European days to be a Dutch king, docile and deferential.

Lite-Wing: Mellowing The UK Right For The Masses

IT’S just after dusk, ahead of a harsh winter’s night in Westminster. I’m inside Europe House, the European Union’s “embassy” in London, and Nigel Farage, one of its more controversial tenants, is late.

People with gravitas rush into the building, en route to a discussion of doubtless importance, on something about Europe’s future. But Farage, Member of the European Parliament and British politics’ New Big Thing, is not among them. He’s in the pub.

The mission’s sleek surrounds belie the fact that Europe is damaged. Britain is re-thinking its engagement with Europe and the world, and all reports have it that Farage, leader of the rising United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), believes the only direction the European Union is heading is down, and fast. Forty years after Britain joined the European Economic Community, predecessor to the EU, Farage reckons Europe is bust and wants his beloved motherland to be shot of it — and Britain’s porous immigration policy with it.

“All that happened is that we got cheaper labour, which is very good, but it’s not very good for the unemployed British people.”

And yet, since 1999 he has served in Brussels’ parliament in Strasbourg, as MEP for South-East England. You might expect an ideologue so virulently anti-Europe to choose, on principle, to be a million miles from its well-lubricated apparatus, but Farage the Euro MP seems to confirm the adage that it’s best to keep friends close, and enemies closer. His press officer Gawain Towler says: “We use the devil’s money to do God’s work in a sense. We stand in all elections. In the case of the European Parliament we stand because it is there, to not do so would be a dereliction.”

When Farage emerges from the gloaming, dapper in fedora and coat and trailing a fruity tang of beer and fags, I ask him what the meeting is about, that everyone has been hurrying to.

He neither knows nor cares, and his loathing is palpable. “They are always meeting about something or other, that’s pretty much only what they seem to do,” he says, adding a spiky “appalling lot!” that contradicts his otherwise hail-fellow-well-met joviality.

As Farage settles down to talk to The Global Mail, alongside the feisty Towler, he doesn’t mind admitting that he’s had a few quiet ones in the local. Now in the company of an Australian, he’s happy to talk about The Ashes and John Howard, the former Australian Prime Minister, whom he recently met with and much admires for having been tough on immigrants.

It all rather recalls that real or imagined country that the UKIP was formed to preserve, some 20 years ago: all Times and Telegraph and comfort food — well, maybe the occasional curry house; and good chums, preferably waspy regimental types, sharing a pint in cosy pubs by foreigner-free village commons where cricket and golf are sportingly enjoyed, the cream teas tended by womenfolk in sensible shoes, and nary a pinko in sight.

<p>Matt Cardy/Getty Images</p>

The first UKIP meetings, back in 1993, could always be identified “by the number of Bomber-Command ties in the room,” says Farage, a founding member. “This was the WWII generation who saw the Maastricht Treaty as a complete betrayal.”

Farage wants to change UKIP, to move it beyond a vent for protest. Mid electoral-cycle, he’s working hard to cement the party into the electable mainstream alongside the Conservatives, Labour and Liberal Democrats and give it a winning chance in 2015, when the next British election is due.

The UKIP battleground is Europe and immigration, which he sees as directly connected. Two decades on, and two years since he became UKIP leader for the second time, the populist Farage has deftly manoeuvred his party into the heart of this divisive debate. Europe’s economic eclipse, two British recessions in five years, even Margaret Thatcher’s recent death have all intensified the Eurosceptic tone, and Farage is flogging his newfound relevance for all its worth.

It also helps that Britain will soon be compelled under EU rules to open its labour market to arrivals from Romania and Bulgaria, who are among the poorest EU members, and now a useful bogey to exploit. On this point, UKIP has resorted to what many regard as scare tactics. The party recently sent an MEP, with the popular press attached, to Sofia, to tour some of Bulgaria’s appalling orphanages that house many Roma children. The implication was that the next stop for the poverty-stricken Balkan citizens, if they can make it over, is Britain.

“We think quite a lot might come,” he says. “The other side thinks nobody will come, but none of us know whether we’re right so why take the risk?

“We’re not just saying to people you can come and work. We’re saying, under EU rules, you can come and claim our benefits.”

“We want an Australian-style immigration system where we ask, ‘Have you got a skill to give us? Are you self-sufficient to a certain degree? Do you have a long-term, life-threatening illness? Have you got a serious criminal record?’ ”

But Farage is anxious to elevate UKIP above being a fringe single-issue protest party of “fruitcakes and loonies and closet racists”, as British Prime Minister David Cameron once famously described them.

“This isn’t a single issue… this is the biggest, most important constitutional question Britain has faced in 300 years. This is about, do we govern our own country or not? Already 75 per cent of our laws are made somewhere else.”

Farage — he prefers the à la française ‘farahzh’ pronunciation of his surname to the more Anglo ‘farridge’ — is particularly chipper after UKIP’s showing in the recent Eastleigh by-election in the English heartland of Hampshire. It polled 27.8 per cent of the vote, running a close second to the incumbent Liberal Democrats, and relegating the Tories to third.

Now Farage’s every move is documented by the national media — and by his political opponents too — and he rather likes the attention. He’s also getting international oxygen. His interview with The Global Mail is wedged between appointments with The Washington Post and Fox News.

“Things have changed a lot,” says the Kent-born former City commodities trader (among others, Farage worked for the notorious Drexel Burnham Lambert, infamous for its junk bond felon Michael Milken). “Five years ago, nobody in the national media would’ve picked up our point. They’d have thought we were away with the fairies,” says Farage.

No longer. On March 25, post-Eastleigh, PM Cameron made a tough landmark speech on immigration. Farage was duly quoted on the BBC’s Six O’Clock News as observing that the PM’s proposal to restrict entry had less to do with curtailing immigrants and all to do with UKIP’s poll numbers. Farage’s party has polled as high as 17 per cent nationally over the past month, pushing Cameron’s Liberal Democrat coalition partners into fourth position, behind Labour and the Tories.

“It’s remarkable that Cameron gives a speech on this major subject,” says Farage, “which he thinks is bold and tough and taking a risk. And it just bombs.”

Labour, too, has noticed, as have the LibDems. A week after Eastleigh, Labour leader Ed Miliband virtually apologised for Labour’s relaxed immigration stance during its 13 years in power. LibDem leader and deputy Prime Minister, Nick Clegg, then floated that “some migrants” from “high risk countries” could pay a £1,000 security deposit upon entry to the UK, a sum reimbursable on departure.

“They are all on the run,” Farage smiles, reflecting on his years at the obscure reaches of the political wilderness. “They’re scared and they’ve now all decided to come and join me on the football pitch. Oh, I do laugh to see them flailing around.

“They are in a state of hysteria about us,” he says, adding that “a large element of our vote in Eastleigh came from people who hadn’t voted for 20 years. That is a re-engagement.”

Labour-force mobility around Europe is a basic EU tenet, part of Brussels’ effort to equalise its 27-nation union. But the commotion stoked over Bulgarians and Romanians is similar to that of 10 years ago, when Poles, Czechs and the EU’s other new Eastern European members were first allowed entry to work in Britain.

A decade on, Polish builders and plumbers, Czechs serving lattes at Starbucks, and couscous at the Tate Modern are as much a part of the fabric of middle-class Britain as the sub-continental Patels and Iqbals, who opened corner stores that supplied Sunday papers and milk, became in the 1980s.

Moreover, Britons have discovered that the sun still rises over their elysian fields regardless of whether ‘Johnny Foreigner’ is tilling them for discount wages. And it’s an oft-heard refrain in England, that “Brits won’t do the menial jobs.”

Farage’s predecessor as the Brits-first UKIP leader, Roger Knapman — who, like Farage, is another Tory refugee — knows this only too well. In 2006, it was revealed that Knapman had hired Polish workers to cheaply renovate his historic Devon pile. Knapman claimed no British builders were available. Job-seeking British builders begged to differ.

“If pre-2004, [you thought] that the cabbages rotted in the fields and no plumbing got done, I would say rubbish,” says Farage. “All that happened is that we got cheaper labour, which is very good, but it’s not very good for the unemployed British people.”

He claims British youth unemployment was 600,000 when Poland joined the EU, “and today it’s a million. The correlation is very, very clear. You would struggle now in Lincolnshire to get a job picking fruit as an Englishman.”

Farage and UKIP are often portrayed as if they’d like nothing more than to march immigrants to the airport while billing them for the passage home. But he insists he is not anti-immigration. “I want a balanced, sensible immigration policy which takes account of the fact that in the last decade, we have absorbed more people than we have for 100 years.

“We should take people with the necessary skills and qualifications to fit in well with our society. Speaking English could be useful here, you know.” At this point, press officer Towler chips in to describe how his Australian doctor girlfriend, who is of Indian-Fijian descent, applied to work in Britain’s National Health Service and was forced under EU rules to take an English-language test; the test was conducted by a Pole who had lesser linguistic skills than Towler’s Commonwealth-raised and trained girlfriend. Farage shakes his head in disbelief.

Channelling former Prime Minister of Australia John Howard, Farage says, “we want an Australian-style immigration system where we ask, ‘Have you got a skill to give us? Are you self-sufficient to a certain degree? Do you have a long-term, life-threatening illness? Have you got a serious criminal record?’… I mean they’re the questions we should be asking.

“Ours is, ‘if you come from anywhere in Eastern Europe, come on down. You’re a career criminal? That’s fantastic, we’ll give you social housing. You commit crimes repeatedly? That’s alright, we’ll give you a few weeks in prison here and there but please stay, please go on committing crime…’

“We can’t say anyone can come, we have to apply some sense of balance… [be] rational, logical,” he adds.

Migration Matters Trust recently calculated that halting net migration, as UKIP demands, would cost every British taxpayer £137,000 extra over their working life. “We would turn into Greece.”

Farage pleads UKIP’s “liberal-democrat principles” in saying “this is not about scapegoating groups of people. I don’t blame them. Because of our commitment through the European Union, we can decide who comes here from Pakistan still, but we can’t decide who comes from Romania from next year. And that is insane.”

What is as insane, says immigration advocate Atul Hatwal of British cross-party thinktank Migration Matters Trust, is if Britain closes its doors to immigrants. He says UKIP is “whipping up panic” over immigration. “It simply captured an angry mid-term protest vote, nothing more. We see it time and again in politics, people pissed off with the main parties and lashing out to send a message.

“The immigration debate is solely seen through a negative prism, tapping into that fear of the other,” he says. But Hatwal himself is not beyond a bit of scare-mongering to get attention. He says Britain needs its current rate of immigration to keep the basic economy turning over, and to pay for the “demographic time bomb” of an ageing nation.

Citing the government’s own data, Hatwal’s MMT recently calculated that halting net migration, as UKIP demands, would cost every British taxpayer £137,000 extra, over the period of their working life. “We would turn into Greece,” he warns.

With UKIP support surging across Britain, Farage claims the clichéd white, 60-year-old ex-military chap is no longer typical of the party’s membership. Today’s UKIP champions, Farage says, are self-employed tradespeople, families from the lower-middle classes worried about their jobs and future, and angry that the established political parties don’t speak for them.

Farage describes UKIP’s “changing” membership as “most eclectic”.

“If you go to the bar at a UKIP conference, you’re likely to have the Duke of Rutland buying you a beer as you are a dustman from Gloucestershire.”

He claims that during the last European elections, UKIP had more candidates who were gay and from ethnic minorities than other parties. “We don’t separate groups,” says UKIP press officer Towler, “It doesn’t matter…”.

But if UKIP has reformed its “Bomber Command” profile, as Farage insists, this is not reflected by its 11 members elected to the European Parliament; these are all men, all white, and with an average age of 61. Towler says, “Those selections were made six years ago, a lifetime in UKIP years. Even so, at the time we had two women and the only ‘out’ lesbian elected.”

Farage says he sees little evidence of Islamophobia in UKIP’s support. He agrees there’s an element of Italy’s Beppe Grillo-style protest about their vote — “but not much”.

Indeed, Farage can sound at times more like an Occupy-movement-Grillo hybrid. “Big Business, Big Banking and Big Politics very actively works to defend itself and to defend a model that is failing. We are seeing a wholesale rejection of the career political class. We’re not just taking on the Tories, we’re taking on the entire establishment.

<p>THIERRY MONASSE/AFP/Getty Images</p>

“No, our enemy is over the road here,” he says, referring to the Tory-led government, “These gutless, chinless wonders who all go to the same school, the same Oxford colleges, none of them have ever done a proper job in their life, they’re career politicians. They’ve got no hobbies, no interests, they married each others’ sisters and these are the people running the country.”

I quip that they speak well of Farage too. He smiles. “I couldn’t give a damn. I don’t care. It doesn’t matter. We’ve got the bland leading the bland. It’s almost as if our politics is dead, on really big issues. It is irrelevant who gets into Number 10 Downing St.”

David Cameron is a “catastrophe” as PM says Farage, who adds that it’s presently a ‘score draw’ between Cameron and Edward Heath as to who is the worst post-war Conservative leader. He also doesn’t think Boris Johnson, London mayor and increasingly Cameron’s presumptive heir as Tory leader, will become PM.

As senior Conservatives fret about support leaking to UKIP, with some calling for rapprochement with the ex-Tory Farage, he doesn’t rule out an alliance with his old political cohorts, saying, “I don’t know what’s going to happen.”

But UKIP can’t quite shake the tag that it is the “lite-wing” of the extremist right British National Party, or “BNP in suits” as it’s frequently derided. Farage says “there’s not much of a meeting of minds with the BNP. They’re protectionist, we’re free trade, they’re island, we’re libertarian, they’re authoritarian, they’re socialist, we’re free market.”

Although it’s drawn from the right of the political spectrum — UKIP’s membership is littered with disaffected Tories like Farage — he also blanches at comparisons to the US Tea Party and its campaign to transform the Republican Party. “We’re not religious, we’re not a pressure group within a party to change a party,” he objects.

He likes his own comparison, that UKIP might be the new Reaganite-Thatcherites, with its appeal reaching across to the aspirational blue-collar vote. But that seems wishful thinking. UKIP’s surge has thrilled Britain’s Labour opposition — for its purposes, what could be better than a party whose 24,000-odd members see themselves as the truer heirs to free-market Thatcherism than Cameron’s ‘caring’ Tories? The Labour Party is polling at around 38-42 per cent to the Conservatives’ 28-30 per cent and though Farage is keen to spin it otherwise (claiming that the party is also drawing support from the Labour heartland), UKIP’s support comes primarily at Tory and LibDem expense.

He blanches at comparisons to the US Tea Party and its campaign to transform the Republican Party. “We’re not religious, we’re not a pressure group within a party to change a party.”

Under Britain’s first-past-the-post voting system, UKIP doesn’t hold any parliamentary seats and is unlikely to win any nationally if support remains at current levels. Though doing well in mid-term opinion polls, Farage knows UKIP needs to move on from being a protest vent, lest voters decide come election day that a vote for UKIP would be a waste. Despite his contempt for most things European, Farage would like to have a more continental-style – he favours Germany’s – voting system, of the kind that elected him to the European Parliament in Strasbourg, even though changes to Britain’s voting system were recently rejected in a referendum.

Britain’s system, which continually delivers government with less than half of the national primary vote, has fallen into disrepair, he says. “There is a big disincentive for people to vote at all.” Farage chose not to run in the Eastleigh by-election; to do so would’ve meant giving up his European seat — and its perks. “The irony is I’ve got a much greater reach where I am” as an MEP. “But we’ve got to break through under the first-past-the-post system,” he says.

As he prepares to embark on a whistle-stop campaign for the May 2 English county elections, leading into the European elections next year, he reveals he also intends to run in the British poll in 2015. “I’d have to,” he says.

Farage has worked hard to clean up UKIP and push it into the mainstream. UKIP’s constitution now forbids membership to supporters who have been associated with the BNP, the National Front, the English Defence League or other extreme nationalist organisations.

But UKIP can’t quite shake Cameron’s loony-right tag, and perhaps for good reason. One of Farage’s more prominent UKIP colleagues in the European Parliament is Godfrey Bloom. Over his years as a public figure, Bloom has claimed that the early onset of the European ski season is evidence that climate change is a furphy; he has grumbled that women “don’t clean behind the fridge enough”, and has claimed that he was elected to Strasbourg “to represent Yorkshire women who always have the dinner on the table when you get home”. He has admitted that he often frequented brothels when he worked as a businessman in Hong Kong; claimed that most prostitutes “do it because they want to”; and stated that “no small businessman with a brain would employ a woman of child-bearing age”. Oh, and he once had to be carried out of the parliamentary chamber by an intern after delivering a speech fuelled by a few strong refreshments.

One of Britain’s leading Europeanists, Richard Corbett has published a forensic examination of UKIP on his website. A long-time Labour MEP until he lost his Yorkshire-based seat in 2009, Corbett is now an advisor to European Council President Herman Van Rompuy, or ‘Rumpy-Pumpy’ as Farage calls him. Corbett has crossed swords with UKIP more than once, notably via his “25 Things You Didn’t Know When You Voted For UKIP” — a pamphlet that UKIP has unsuccessfully tried to shut down.

It’s a damning indictment of the party’s historic links with Holocaust deniers, the extreme-right National Front and the British National Party.

Such old friends can be unwelcome when a party is on the make. When the far-right racist English Defence League endorsed UKIP last week and urged Britain’s nationalist parties to lie doggo to give UKIP clear electoral air for the collective cause, Farage quickly distanced UKIP from the “abhorrent and stupid” EDL.

“There is no global warming. And there hasn’t been since 1995, so we have to get some sense and perspective on this.”

His press officer, Towler, is another divisive figure among some of the UKIP membership, who think him a loose cannon. He told The Global Mail that he was a fan of Australian Liberal leader Tony Abbott. But Towler’s admiration for prominent conservatives didn’t extend last year to the then co-chairman of the Conservative Party, Baroness Warsi, the first Muslim and only the third woman to run the Tory party machinery. While making a guest appearance during the BBC’s local election coverage last May, Warsi mused that the rise of UKIP support might be linked with the decline in electoral appeal for the far-right British National Party. Towler was quick to tweet “Warsi **** off. How dare you. Bitch” to his 1,700 followers, which set off a storm around Westminster and the Twittersphere.

As many called for his head, Towler apologised for his quickly deleted “out of order” tweet that Farage casually dismissed as much-ado-about-little. “One of my press officers said something he perhaps shouldn’t have said, but hey — anyone who watches The Thick Of It knows in politics bad language does get used,” he said. Towler told The Global Mail,My head is still attached to my shoulders, and she [Baroness Warsi] has been demoted, as you are aware.”

Farage may also have to rethink some of UKIP’s international party alliances in his push for the centre. UKIP is part of a Eurosceptic Europe of Freedom and Democracy bloc in the European Parliament. Its Dutch partner is the Bible-based Reformed Political Party, a hardline theocratic party which until recently opposed female membership in its ranks, and which closes down its website on Sundays. UKIP’s Slovakian ally is the ultra-nationalist Slovak National Party, often described as fascist and notorious for its attacks on Slovakia’s ethnic Hungarian and Roma communities. The Italian partner is the Lega Nord, Silvio Berlusconi’s erstwhile coalition partner, while its Bulgarian associate is Euro MP Slavcho Binev, who featured in a WikiLeaked cable, “Who’s Who in Bulgarian Organised Crime”, that was written in 2005 by the US Embassy in Sofia. It said Binev, who was a keynote speaker at UKIP’s annual party conference in Exeter in March, controlled a group whose “criminal activities include prostitution, narcotics, and trafficking stolen automobiles”. For his part, Binev told a Bulgarian newspaper he regarded the people on the embassy list as “blossoms” who were helping Bulgaria’s transition to capitalism.

He describes it as “a delicious bloody irony” that his London office is housed in what, for him, are the very familiar surrounds of 32 Smith Square, in the stately shadows of the Palace of Westminster. Since 2010, Number 32 has been Europe House, but for 45 years, until 2003, it was headquarters of Britain’s Conservative Party — Farage’s political mecca until he defected in disgust from the “dreadful” Tories after Maastricht, and joined UKIP on its foundation a year later.

As a European MP, Farage avails himself of official Europe’s many conveniences. The post provides Farage with an office close to Westminster, where his real work is done. Indeed, the generous European taxpayer-funded perks, privileges and pensions provided by Brussels to its MEPs, on top of a €91,980 annual salary, add up to a benefits package which one watchdog group has calculated to be as much as £1m over a five-year MEP term.

But for a man of such self-stated conviction, 49-year-old Farage seems nothing if not pragmatic. A supporter of press freedom, Farage’s communications were hacked by Rupert Murdoch’s journalists — he was one of thousands of Britons to have been targeted. “I didn’t like it, I wasn’t up for it… it wasn’t right,” he says. But where many other victims of phone hacking have contempt for the Murdoch regime and have been actively campaigning to rein in its command over British public life, Farage chose to dine with Rupert Murdoch at his Mayfair flat last month. The invitation came after Murdoch tweeted approvingly of UKIP’s second-place showing in the Eastleigh by-election, and of “new leaders emerging”. Farage described Murdoch “as a remarkable bloke” who he “enjoyed meeting enormously”. Indeed, he met Murdoch and John Howard in the same week. “It wasn’t bad, was it?” he laughs.

He says if Britain withdrew from the EU, it “would become Greater Switzerland — we’d just boom”. He points out that London is the world’s biggest foreign-exchange clearing house for euros despite — he says it’s because — the fact that the UK is not a member of the Eurozone.

“We need appropriate regulation… not an almost neo-communist attitude to free markets. These idiots in Brussels think the reason the euro is in trouble is because of evil speculators in New York and London. It’s all baloney.”

A ‘Brixit’ (British Exit) from the EU, he says, would also mean Britain could be free of Europe’s “excesses of this global-warming lunacy. We are directly closing down British manufacturing and sending them to India… because we’ve signed up to the [EU’s] 20/20 package”, which has pledged to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20 per cent compared to 1990 levels by 2020, among other initiatives.

“There is no global warming,” Farage insists. “And there hasn’t been since 1995, so we have to get some sense and perspective on this.

“I’ve always said I’m agnostic on whether CO2 emissions lead to global warming, although the more the years go on, the more I’m not sure I see the link with this.”

But Farage is most exercised by Europe. “I can’t really explain what it is about this whole European question,” he says. “Back in the ’90s… my business colleagues — people at the pub, at the golf club — they all thought, ‘Has he gone bonkers? What’s he been smoking?’… but right from the start I just knew I was right [about not joining the EU].

“My views have changed in one way,” he says. “When I was elected in 1999, dark-haired, shy” — at which point he laughs and adds, “and if you believe that you’ll believe anything” — “I took the view that Britain was a square peg in a round [European] hole.

“But where I’ve changed personally is that I used to think, ‘If south of Calais that’s what they want, they’re welcome to it.’ But I now don’t just want Britain out of the EU, I want Europe out of it too.

“Their flag, their anthem, and [European President] Herman Van ‘Rumpy-Pumpy’ — they’ve hijacked Europe, they’re claiming ownership of a continent and they haven’t got the consent or the legitimacy to do it.

“The EU is bust, not just financially but morally as well. I now believe that this is a project that is run by extremely dangerous people.”

Europocalypse Now

What’s that shocking smell wafting around Europe?

Well, if you were sniffing in a Netherlandly direction on Wednesday, you’d have caught an unmistakable tang of fear among the thrifty Dutch, who for a brief moment during a banking technical malfunction thought they’d become the latest Eurozoners to have their hard-earned whipped from their accounts by incompetent bureaucrats.

Across the nation, many customers of ING Bank, one of Europe’s biggest banks, logged on – that is, when they could get online – only to discover that their credit balances had inexplicably turned into rather serious overdrafts.

“Are we Cyprus?” a concerned client implored of no-one in particular but of everyone gathering at ING Bank’s fast-filling Harlemmerdijk branch, in Amsterdam’s Canal Belt. Hassled staff handed out free water in bottles hued in Dutch-orange, and tried to mollify us with assurances that all was well in Dutch banking and, no, Amsterdam had not suddenly turned into Nicosia.

As bank runs go, this one was pretty pathetic; in this branch it consisted of about 25 confused punters sucking their ING-sourced H2O while lining up to punch their PINs into ATMs that weren’t working anyway. And the Dutch are a trusting lot, at least they became more so after news sites summoned on smartphones revealed there had been no announcement of The Netherlands having morphed into a Mediterranean basket case. Or, more to the point, when the headlines from those same sites reported that the Paniek! was prompted by a bank cock-up – technical and not state policy. It wasn’t quite panic on Harlemmerdijk on Wednesday, but it was heading toward that side of the straat for a little while there.

<p>Yiannis Kourtoglou/AFP/Getty Images</p>

As things got fixed and Dutch banking returned to his staid old self as Germany’s branch office, by the end of this befuddling day, it served to confirm that old adage that when suspecting a conspiracy, it’s best to plump for a cock-up every time.

But if there was a particularly bad time for a major European bank to have technical malfunctions, that time would be now, barely a week after Brussels and Berlin spooked Europeans by demanding that Cypriots – and their Russian banking clients – accept the trimming of as much as 60 per cent from their deposits held in the island’s banks, instead of the usual state-funded rescue now commonplace elsewhere. Interestingly, it was a Dutchman, the country’s finance minister Jeroen Dijsselbloem, who had expressed the view that the Cypriot ‘bail-in’ provided a useful template for future financial rescues in Europe, until he was roundly slagged for doing so, and duly backtracked.

Meanwhile, tiny Cyprus continued to rage that it had been bullied by Brussels, because that’s what bureaucratic Goliaths do to would-be Mediterranean Davids when given a chance; and the Russian oligarchs and the mates of Putin who had turned Cyprus into an offshore banking centre (maybe because they don’t trust that their own banks won’t be looted) reckoned they’d been ripped off.

Comprising less than 0.2 per cent of the collective Eurozone economy, Cyprus is in no position to punch back, and will be even less empowered as its economy contracts by a forecast 8 per cent this year. But Russia, with its Europe-bound oil and gas, can. And doubtless will exact revenge at a time of its choosing. Watch this space.

With such a precedent set in Cyprus, spooked Europeans elsewhere fret that it’s potentially open season on their own savings, too, if their economies were to get stuck deeper into the Euromire.

So it’s not a lot of fun to be European right now?

Hardly. With such a precedent set in Cyprus, spooked Europeans fret that it’s potentially open season on their savings, too, if their economies were to get stuck deeper into the Euromire. It’s been an austerely long five-plus years since they were first confronted by this crisis, and there seems to be no end in sight.

If personal deposits are now directly threatened, economists worry that for more and more Europeans, those who have the funds and the know-how, it might be “Hello Singapore” and “Bye-bye Siena and Sevilla” for what’s left of their euros, and maybe “Hello Hong Kong” and “Vaarwel!” to the likes of the Harlemmerdijk branch of ING, with its orange bottles of placatory water.

Still worse news came in the form of the latest unemployment data from Eurostat, Brussels’ official gatherer of info on all things European. Joblessness across the 17-member Eurozone is now a record 12 per cent, ranging from the virtual full employment of Teutonic Germany and Austria to the staggering 26.4 per cent and 26.3 per cent out of work in hard-hit Greece and Spain, respectively. The Eurostats confirmed this was the 22nd consecutive periodic rise in Europe’s jobless, which would be political cancer if the Brussels-based commissioners running the continent were elected — which they are not.

Unemployment among school leavers and under-25s is particularly high. In Spain – 55.7 per cent of them can’t get jobs. And it’s so bad in Greece, where youth unemployment was measured at a staggering 58 per cent in December last year, that they seemed to have stopped counting. There’s much concern, not least among politicians, for the social unrest that might erupt from this lost generation.

And on Thursday, even more Euro-grief. The mighty German economy, which anchors (read rescues) all this mess, was revealed to have slowed to “near stagnation” in March, according to a closely watched factory-door survey which monitors manufacturing across Europe. That same Markit purchasing managers’ index also revealed that manufacturing in France, the Eurozone’s second biggest economy, had declined to its worst point in four years.

Surely things are turning around somewhere?

Hmmm… if money and credit are the lubricants that make economies motor, here’s a scary screenshot that suggests the Eurozone is in desperate need of another fiscal grease-and-oil change:

<p>Source: @finansakrobat on Twitter</p>

This is collated data from Eurostat and the US Bank of America Merrill Lynch. It shows how credit growth – lent money – has evaporated over the past two years in select Eurozone economies. Spain, which has always been grim on this front, has only grown grimmer – but look how Italian credit provision has slumped. And to think that Brussels has been telling Europeans that the worst is over.

So it’s no wonder national voters are flocking to political protest movements?

That’s right, in Greece, Spain and elsewhere but in Italy where the spiky former comedian Beppe Grillo’s Five Star Movement got 25 per cent of the vote in last February’s polls, railing against the ancien regime hasn’t yet done them any good. Two months since the regime change, pivotal Italy is as ungovernable as ever, making the euro as wobbly as ever. Asked to form a government by the outgoing president, the centre-left’s Pierluigi Bersani said he wouldn’t deal with the right’s Silvio Berlusconi, the three-time PM desperate for a fourth term. And finger-pointing kingmaker Grillo won’t do deals with anyone, correctly claiming they are all corrupt. “Only a mentally ill person [would wish to govern Italy],” harrumphed a disgusted Bersani as he exhausted his coalition options. So that leaves the technocratic Mario Monti in office, who collected only 10 per cent of Italians’ votes in February.

Italy, Spain, Portugal, Ireland, Greece… and now Cyprus is the latest nightmare. Who’s next?

If you take the fashionable view among economists and post-Cyprus Euro-fretters – that it’s preferable for a country’s banking system be broadly proportionate to its economic output, that banking assets should more or less equal the national widgets and services produced – then Europe has a chronic monetary migraine.

According to London-based economic research house Capital Economics, Cyprus had a banking system that was seven times the size of its economy — it was the no-questions-asked Iceland of the Med, as Russians saw it. There were similar stashes of cash in Ireland too, before the one-time ‘Celtic Tiger’ crashed in 2008.

Now Eurostat data shows Malta’s bank-assets-to-GDP ratio to be even higher than those of troubled Cyprus had, at more than 7.6 times. Of course, the Maltese government puts it at closer to three times, which makes everyone feel so much better.

Tiny Malta won’t crash the EU or the euro of itself, but another depositor ‘bail-in’ along the lines of Cyprus, if it comes to that in Valetta, will confirm what more important Europeans in bigger but risky economies such as Spain and Italy already suspect is Brussels policy. And any resultant capital flight in the Eurozone proper – say, a supersized version of what was nervously contemplated by some on Wednesday this week in Amsterdam – would surely sink the euro.

Many analysts also look gloomily to Slovenia, which is reported to have bad banking loans equal to one-fifth of its GDP.

And as analysts calculated its bank-assets-to-GDP ratio at a whopping 20 times, secretive Luxembourg – the discreet European plutocrat’s preferred retreat, and one of the six original EU members – was moved in a rare government explanation to insist that it wasn’t a Cyprus-in-waiting, because German banks are its biggest clients.

So that’s all right then. Except it’s not. Because this is Europe today, and neither the people nor the markets much believe those who lead them

In Spain, Running With The Bullshit

THE A369 road south from Spain’s literary retreat of Ronda, the mountain town that so inspired Hemingway, Welles and amigos, meanders photogenically through Andalucia’s famous pueblos blancos, whitewashed villages punctuating one of Europe’s more spectacular mountainscapes.

With their architectural nod to Arabic neighbours, Andalucia’s charming white towns are daubed like splashed paint over verdant cork forests and russet olive groves. The region’s Rio Genal, which locals regard as the continent’s cleanest waterway, burbles through this stunning naturaleza to the Mediterranean’s gates near Gibraltar.

But for all its natural splendour, the A369 is also a corridor that tracks the epidemic of smalltown corruption that has crippled Spain — and Europe with it; a cancer infecting communities like these across this once-proud nation, Europe’s fourth-largest economy.

Negotiating the A369, it’s virtually impossible to find a municipality among the dozen or so through here that hasn’t been tainted by institutional graft; the petty thievery of ratepayers’ cash, the sleazy backhanders to get an illegal development approved, the tacky local follies sanctioned by dodgy mayors, and built by their relatives.

As scenic as it is, the A369 is a byway of bribery, a carretera of crookedness.

“There is so much corruption here,” says Jon Clarke, transplanted Englishman and editor of the Ronda-based newspaper The Olive Press, a local sheet that has done much to expose the region’s smalltown shenanigans.

“I would say [it’s] in 90 per cent of the town halls here. Sadly money talked and developers got their way by paying bribes, which were all too happily accepted in most towns.”

The A369’s corruption cancer starts in Ronda itself, where locals have been absorbed by the dramas that have engulfed former mayor Antonio Marin Lara, a charismatic local powerbroker known as Toti.

Toti is notorious in Ronda for his role helping the €200 million ($250 million) Los Merinos development, a massive luxury hotel and golf course of villas that had been approved inside a UNESCO-protected environmental zone near the historic town.

Developers had eyed the Los Merinos site hungrily for years but development finally took off during Toti’s four-year mayoralty from 2007, when credit was easy and Spain’s flashy property-led boom was at its most boisterous.

“It was an outrage and it was not being exposed locally as all the local press were in train to the developers.”

The Los Merinos project had been set up illegally, according to an exhaustive investigation by nearby Malaga University’s department of criminology. Still, this was the time where official papers and permits could easily be obtained if the right palms were greased.

Parading himself as the big man about town, Toti was a regional boss of the centre-left Partido Andalucista, which campaigns for nationalism in Spain’s most populous region. But when the PA ran out of usefulness for him and wasn’t able to deliver the mayoralty, he joined PSOE, Spain’s Socialist Party, which happily for Toti held power nationally.

Toti’s ayuntamiento, or town hall, was known by developers as an easy touch. But as Spain descended into economic mire, the party came to an end in late 2011 when the town hall was raided by federal police. Toti and six local officials were carted off as investigators levelled allegations of ‘‘economic crimes’’ — bribery, fraud, money-laundering being just a few of them.

Pointedly, the Toti raid was conducted by Spain’s crack drug and organised crime department of the national police force despatched from the capital. Madrid wasn’t taking any chances, essential in a febrile atmosphere when local cops are often part of the same problem.

Today, Toti cools his heels on bail, awaiting trial and protesting his innocence, one of 300-plus Spanish politicians facing corruption charges.

With such a staggering number of elected officials facing graft allegations in a country where more than one in four people are unemployed, it’s unsurprising then that a January 12 poll in Spain’s national El Pais newspaper showed 95 per cent of Spaniards believed official corruptors were protected and covered up within Spain’s two major political parties, PSOE and the ruling Popular Party.

If just 5 per cent of Spaniards remained of the view that their politicians were clean, they would have been in for a shock just three weeks later when it was revealed that leading officials of the PP, including Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy, had received undeclared payments averaging about €25,000 a year since the 1990s.

These funds, painstakingly doled out by the PP’s now disgraced treasurer Luis Barsenas, had been trousered by MPs and officials since the mid-1990s, their share of donations made by boom-time construction companies and parked in Swiss bank accounts. Rajoy, who denies the allegations, has only just survived the crisis, protected in part by the PSOE opposition, which has its own myriad skeletons.

But protected for how long? In Italy, popular disgust at the institutionalised corruption at municipal level was one of the factors that spurred the rise of Beppe “Pox-on-All-Their-Houses” Grillo’s activist Five Star Movement. After elections last month, 5SM’s ‘Grillinis’ are now the biggest single party in Italy’s Chamber of Deputies, spooking the political establishment in Rome. Spain has similar movements in embryo, mostly coalescing around the finger-pointing indignado protests, the periodic mass demonstrations that have been inspired by the Arab Spring uprisings. But no movement with Grillo’s electoral impact is evident yet in Spain, and grassroots corruption continues apace here.

At Los Merinos, building has stopped but its scars on the landscape, like so many of Spain’s crisis-interrupted developments, remain.

The long-running Los Merinos debacle was the catalyst for Britain’s former Daily Mail reporter Jon Clarke to set up The Olive Press in Ronda after he arrived in Andalucia a decade ago. “It was an outrage,” he says, “and it was not being exposed locally as all the local press were in train to the developers.

“We investigated it, published it and the story got followed up in the UK national press, then in the Spanish national press in return. To say we became persona non grata would be an understatement.”

Clarke says he and his staff received a succession of anonymous threats; a Spanish government minister described them as “mafia tactics”.

FROM RONDA, it’s a short drive south along the A369 through several more white villages. One village off the road, Juzcar, is no longer white but blue after painting itself for a Smurf movie publicity stunt and discovering that tourists liked it.

For Juzcar, a future steeped in sickly Smurf blue might have been a better option than another one it was facing; Libya’s late dictator Muammar Gaddafi owned thousands of hectares of land in these valleys, a repository for some of his corrupt oil-derived billions. And in December, Spain seized €28 million worth of luxury property owned by Egypt’s deposed ruler Hosni Mubarak, including seven villas on Andalucia’s Costa Del Sol, just south of here. Political successors are now pressing for these holdings to be turned over to the new governments in Tripoli and Cairo.

Most of the whitewashed towns along here have populations of little more than 500 people. But the administering of small communities is no impediment to mayors awarding themselves handsome salaries.

What would be ordinarily voluntary posts in most Western democracies are too often in Spain politicised honeypots to which you attach yourself to, and then your relatives, while there is an opportunity to do so. Spain’s small towns are a wellspring of political patronage that reach into national party ranks, on all sides of the Spanish spectrum.

Some of the mayors along here take home more than €50,000 a year, tasked with little more than attending council meetings and scrawling the occasional signature on a permit, legal or otherwise.

A recent study published in Spain’s El Economista business daily found that eight Spanish mayors earned bigger official salaries than the country’s Prime Minister, who earns €78,000 annually. Admittedly, some were the mayors of some of Spain’s bigger cities: Madrid, Barcelona, Valencia and Bilbao.

But some were not. After persistent national calls to limit the powers and perks of local officials, Rajoy’s government finally moved in December, upsetting all sides of Spain’s parliament. Many sitting MPs sprang from these mayoralties but meanwhile were keeping the home fires burning until they could possibly return, should affairs of state in Madrid take a nasty electoral turn.

Spain’s small towns are a wellspring of political patronage that reach into national party ranks, on all sides of the Spanish spectrum.

Rajoy’s decision to limit mayoral salaries to €68,000 a year meant that instead of eight Spanish mayors earning more than the country’s Prime Minister, it was now 20, some commanding cities with fewer than 100,000 people, some commanding rather unimportant suburbs of big cities.

A LITTLE FURTHER DOWN THE A369 is the town of Gaucin, with its floating population of about 2,000. It’s famous for its resident artistic community, and for the sturdy bridge gifted by Hitler’s Germany during the Spanish Civil War, (built by Berlin, it’s said, just in case it needed to move tanks and troops to lay siege to British-held Gibraltar).

Gaucin is infamous for the shenanigans in its ayuntamiento. The town has endured four mayors in six years as disgusted locals have turfed out one after another amid allegations of recidivist councillors’-hands-in-the-till and misuse of public funds that have virtually bankrupted the town.

There have been revelations of cash of unknown provenance deposited in Swiss accounts, of missing people and a mysterious death, of developments sprouting in areas regarded as rural zones, and apartment buildings on unstable land.

One notorious complex is known as “Landslide Villas”, built and precariously poised above the town’s primary school. Completed just as Spain’s economic crisis was worsening throughout 2008-09, it has remained mostly uninhabited since.

Gaucin is also famous for its glorious views, to Gibraltar and the Pillars of Hercules at the Mediterranean’s gate and, if the weather is clear, deep into Morocco. Africa and Europe are at their closest points near here, just 14 kilometres apart.

In the middle distance to the east, one can see the environs of Casares, another pueblo blanco of about 4,000 people. To get to Casares, one has to leave the A369 and take the A377. But it’s a road no less laced with corruption.

Last May, Casares’s colourful mayor, Juan Sánchez, was arrested by police and anti-corruption investigators in a sting now known as “Operation Majestic”, so named for the town’s Majestic development of 500 properties that was approved by Sánchez.

By small town standards, Majestic is one complex scandal. The now ex-mayor Sánchez is suspected of accepting payments and laundering money on behalf of the mafia in Russia and Eastern Europe.

Investigators have been probing the “unusual wealth” of Señor Sánchez. His wife has claimed she found five successful lottery tickets in his clothes while tidying up.

He started his political life as a member of Spain’s Communist Party, which had been virtually outlawed during the Franco era that ended upon the caudillo’s death in 1975. Sánchez first became Casares mayor in 1979 aged 25 and has been in and out of the town hall ever since, until his arrest.

Now he stands accused of playing financial footsies with the Russian mob, as investigators spread their probe across several countries, in what seems just another day in the life of a smalltown Andalucian mayor.

The Triumph Of The Pissed Off

From Brussels to Rome, his political opponents dismiss him — at their peril — as a clown, but Beppe Grillo, the Italian comedian-turned-activist movement, is nothing if not a man of his word.

When The Global Mail talked to him for a few hours last May, he told us his grassroots Five Star Movement (M5S), had just had its ‘Stalingrad’ moment, and that ‘Berlin’ was next.

At that stage M5S had just triumphed in Parma, where voters, disgusted by a huge scandal that had almost driven the region into bankruptcy, handed Grillo’s group 60 per cent of their ballots in the run-off for the mayoralty.

“We have a shared agenda in this project for the world.”

As the world is witnessing this week, Grillo’s war analogy was well-chosen; Stalingrad was World War II’s decisive battle, which saw tyranny pushed back all the way to Berlin.

By Berlin, Grillo meant Rome. But now that he’s all but taken the Italian capital — pulling 25 per cent of the vote in this week’s election –  could Berlin, which today runs pretty much all matters European via Brussels, be the next to blink?

In Berlin they see the euro rising and falling to the turmoil that Grillo and his political vigilantes have unleashed in the Eurozone’s third-largest economy. And titillated Europeans — anxious and marooned by austerity — would like to know what the nerve he’s touched in Italy means beyond.

The Grillo/5SM victory in last weekend’s Italian elections sends warnings about how politics is transacted everywhere. And it’s not just politicians he’s after, but the whole matey, conflicted, rotten construct that has accumulated around them; which includes the established media, the bureaucracy, the legal system, big business and, because this is Italy, the clerics, too.

Grillo believes the aims of M5S have application beyond Italy’s borders. As he told us, “We have a shared agenda in this project for the world,” he says. “We are like a laboratory for this type of movement.”

<p>Giorgio Cosulich/Getty Images</p>

Basta! Italians said, very loudly last weekend. Enough! His is a triumph of The Pissed Off, and Grillo, along with many in M5S don’t just want the bloated bad guys out of their comfy offices and state-provided cars, houses and pensions. They want them in prison.

5SM electoral bunting was conspicuous by its absence on Italian streets during the national campaign. This deliberate omission by the movement led its antedeluvian rivals to believe M5S was nothing more than background noise; a nonsense factor of little consequence to the election. That’s because all the noise that mattered was being made online — Silvio Berlusconi for one has admitted he doesn’t understand the internet — and the outrage was then transferred straight to the voting booth.

Grillo is on the verge of creating something very interesting. As he made very clear yesterday, he’s not interested in being a kingmaker; rather, he wants a total overhaul of democracy, to bring parliament and legislating directly back to the people, and to deal with matters issue-by-issue rather than by party machinery or bloc.

Grillo knows he risks alienating and losing his somewhat anarchic netizens if M5S does deals. But he also knows there’s another, more moderate push within M5S, which argues that with power in its grasp, now is the time to push the M5S legislative agenda. This division also opens ground for the established parties to exploit.

Grillo and many in M5S don’t just want the bloated bad guys out of their comfy offices and state-provided cars and houses. They want them in prison.

As a protest movement, M5S is part Occupy, part Pirate Party, and even part Tea Party, and then some. Labelled by the right and the commentariat as the leader of a leftist movement, Grillo has pointedly reserved the most stinging of his criticism for the old Italian left, describing the centre-led Democratic Party leaders as ‘political stalkers’ and ‘dead men talking’, and demanding they resign.

Grillo says M5S is not right, left or centre, or anywhere on the traditional spectrum, it’s primarily about being clean, and then it’s about direct, issue-by-issue consultation with Italians.

Grillo also believes M5S’s emergence on Italy’s political scene, at a time when the country was sliding into a crippling economic funk, has helped checked the rise of extremists such as Greece’s Golden Dawn, and Geert Wilders and imitators in The Netherlands and elsewhere. This is particularly poignant in Italy, the shores of which have proved to be a porous first-entry point for immigrants. Grillo told The Global Mail Europe’s political establishment “should thank us” for providing a valve for Italian frustrations, as unemployment has soared. A succession of political scandals has also helped focus grassroots outrage to him.

Ignored by the traditional media — which suited the net-savvy Grillo’s direct-democracy movement just fine — Grillo’s Parma victory was widely predicted by conventional commentators to have been a one-hit wonder. The consensus was that Parma would be the limit of the three-year-old M5S’s activism.

Then came last weekend’s poll, in which Parma voted for M5S in greater numbers than Italians did nationally. After M5S’s six months in the mayoralty — during which it has begun to restore the fortunes of one of Italy’s richest cities — it had won the trust of the locals, who clearly like what they’ve seen so far.

Labelled by the right and the commentariat as the leader of a leftist movement, Grillo has pointedly reserved the most stinging of his criticism for the old Italian left.

The movement’s effect has been similar in Sicily, where last October M5S became the island’s single biggest party after regional elections, having been just pipped to the post of actual power by a centre-left coalition. In the regional election, M5S polled 18.2 per cent, but last weekend, after four busy months helping to remake how politics is practiced in Palermo — cutting MPs’ perks for starters — M5S took 34 per cent of Sicilian votes in the national poll.

Because the Italian establishment is so rancid, it’s easy for Grillo to show the upside of change. One example, as he told The Global Mail, is that he wants to abolish Italy’s 110 provinces, to remove a superfluous layer of bloated government and patronage, and save Italians more than €10 billion a year. That would please budget-minded Brussels too.

The provincial posts he would nix have long been cosy little cabals for the established parties; a favour bank for vote-delivering cronies resistant to reform. Now, with M5S’s deputies in parliament pushing reform, woe betide the crippled institutional parties that resist — everyone is trying to chime in with the public mood that M5S has exposed.

Another big M5S idea is to reform Italy’s state pension system. It’s said that one million Italians live directly off the proceeds of politics; that thousands of former bureaucrats and retired politicians receive taxpayer-funded pensions of as much as €20,000 to €30,000 a month.

“Pensions above €3,000 a month should be abolished,” Grillo told The Global Mail. As this former auditor has in many Vaffanculo (‘fuck you’) rallies, told millions of Italians who accusingly raise their middle fingers toward Rome: “It’s time to take this wretched country back.”

The message from these fascinating Italian polls to Italy’s established elite is clear: the jig is up and we’re coming for you. What we’re seeing in Rome is only the beginning.

Fact-Checking The Geert Wilders Road Show

In the bewildering battle of ideas, ideology and spin, facts are important.

But the ugly confrontations that have marked the Australian tour of the extravagantly coiffed Dutch politician Geert Wilders — the Islamophobe whom Norwegian mass murderer Anders Breivik cited as an inspiration — have seen truth fall by the wayside.

Wilders’ trip to our shores was sponsored by The Q Society, an obscure group of “unhyphenated Australians” roused to halt the “further Islamisation of our Nation”. It spruiks its man with claims that the politician’s anti-Islam message has the support of “one million Dutch voters”. Muslims in The Netherlands number close to one million, around 5 to 6 per cent of the population, concentrated in cities such as Amsterdam and Rotterdam.

The Q Society also claims that since last September’s elections in The Netherlands, Wilders’ Freedom Party has “climbed to 25 seats in the polls and would likely be the second strongest party if elections were held now” — the ‘now’ being February 11, when the society published a press release promoting the Wilders tour.

That claim was amended from a more extravagant version of the same press release, in which the Q Society claimed that Wilders’ party “is currently [in early January 2013] the largest party in the polls”.

Even as the pompadoured Dutchman urges Australians to summon their ANZAC spirit to keep at bay marauding Muslims (who now number around 2 per cent of the Australian population), The Global Mail has learned in Amsterdam that none of the Q Society’s statements is quite correct.

Yet the Q Society’s claims about Wilders and his party’s standing in The Netherlands have been blithely repeated in Australian media reports, such as those written by Melbourne-based News Ltd polemicist Andrew Bolt.

While critics of the Wilders tour are being demonised as “un-Australian”, the devil, as is often the case, is in the details.

So how popular is Geert Wilders among the Dutch? Does he lead the most popular political party in The Netherlands, as the Q Society has claimed? Or even the second most popular, as it has also claimed? Is Wilders poised to sweep to power in The Netherlands on an Islamophobic ticket?

First, let’s take the Q Society’s ‘one million Dutch voters’ claim.

The PVV, as Wilders’ Freedom Party is known by its Dutch acronym, officially received just over 950,000 votes in last September’s elections, which is about 10 per cent of the national popular vote.

That’s 50,000 votes between claim and fact. The Q Society rounds the Wilders vote up to a more impressive sounding ‘one million’, which in The Netherlands could’ve meant more crucial representation in parliament. But on his party’s own website, Wilders thanked 950,263 Dutch voters for their votes. http://pvv.nl/index.php/component/content/article/36-geert-wilders/6155-derde-partij-van-nederland-950263-keer-bedankt.html which won him the 3rd biggest bloc in parliament. After having helped create the Rutte government in 2010, he then blew it up by refusing to back its government austerity budget, forcing last year’s election that his party lost heavily. And he also lost in post-election power politics; despite still having 15 seats, no party would do coalition business with him, forcing the PVV to the margins.  The PVV vote slumped by one-third, from 1.454 million, or 15.4 per cent in the 2010 election, causing it instead to lose 9 of its previous 24 seats in the 150-seat Dutch House of Representatives.

Revealing his political opportunism, Wilders would abandon his anti-Islam platform in the 2012 election, and instead campaigned against the euro and the Dutch membership of the European Union, while also setting up a website that invited the Dutch to complain about Poles and other non-Muslim immigrants and workers from the EU’s eastern European member countries.

As we mentioned earlier, the Q Society also said last week that Wilders’ Freedom Party “had climbed to 25 seats in the polls and would likely be the second strongest party if elections were held now”.

Four days after the Q Society published that claim, an opinion poll from one of The Netherlands’ leading polling agencies, TNS-Nipo, showed that far from being poised for power or even close to it, Wilders’ Freedom Party was tracking at a marginal fifth. And that support had surged for a new party speaking for Dutch pensioners, among whom Wilders is supposed to have appeal.

But that’s just a single opinion poll. What about a broader sample?

The Global Mail consulted Dutch psephologist Dr Tom Louwerse of Leiden University’s Political Science Department, who manages a data project for the university called the Peilingwijzer, or the Polling Indicator.

It’s a poll of polls, tracking myriad Dutch opinion surveys and aggregating the results to provide a better measure of the national political mood.

Among the methods used by Dr Louwerse are the polling techniques of noted Australian political scientist, Dr Simon Jackman of Stanford University.

Dr Louwerse might well be the Dutch Antony Green (of Australia’s ABC fame) or perhaps its Nate Silver — the American pollster at fivethirtyeight.com, who correctly predicted who would win all but one state in the past two US presidential elections.

Dr Louwerse’s data has been a feature of election coverage on The Netherlands’ state broadcaster NOS, which is required by law to be impartial.

The Q Society frequently cites ‘polls’ as evidence of Wilders’ popularity in The Netherlands — the plural usage, repeated by the columnist Bolt as recently as two days ago.

According to Dr Louwerse, Wilders’ PVV has this year led in just a single opinion poll — that conducted by the Maurice de Hond survey agency in early January.

Even in the Maurice de Hond survey, PVV shared the lead with the governing People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy, the party of Prime Minister Mark Rutte — another detail the Q Society didn’t include in its ‘polls’ claim.

Dr Louwerse also points out that Maurice de Hond’s surveys, which he includes in his collated data, are “much criticised” for favouring the Wilders camp. He says that’s because of the self-selected polling techniques it deploys, which can advantage populist activism — a Wilders hallmark. Most Dutch voters, Dr Louwerse says, aren’t sufficiently exercised politically to regularly register their mood with opinion pollsters. “It can tend to be those wanting to send the government a message,” who respond to Maurice de Hond’s surveys, says Dr Louwerse.

As for the Q Society/Bolt claims that Wilders’ party ranks second in Dutch ‘polls’ now, in February, that’s not right either.

Leaving aside that single abovementioned TNS-Nipo poll of February 15, which places the PVV fifth, Dr Louwerse’s most recent poll of polls, collating all surveys taken around February 16, shows support for Wilders’ PVV “at that time was 12.6 per cent, with a plus-minus error margin of one percentage point.”

Louwerse’s data places Wilders’ PVV at fourth nationally, just ahead of that surging 50PLUS pensioners’ party and the centre-right Christian Democrats that held power in The Netherlands through much of the 1980s. But that’s neither first nor even second nationally, per the Q Society/Bolt claims — it’s fourth position, with fifth and sixth in sight.

Indeed, in Leiden University’s poll of polls, at no time over the past five months, since the Dutch voted in an election that denied Wilders a grab at even influencing a victorious coalition, has the PVV been first or even second in collated national opinion.

Wilders’ PVV has consistently tracked fourth during that time, briefly peaking at third through December. The peak occurred after Wilders publicly revealed what many Dutch privately suspected; that the teenage footballers who bashed to death a Dutch dad volunteering as a referee, after a dispute in a suburban football match, were of Moroccan descent.

That killing was a shocking event, and for many fair-minded Dutch, it represented the violent exception that proves the rule of their famously tolerant liberalism. Never mind that pragmatism and commercial advantage might be at the heart of this tiny, tourist-friendly port nation’s tolerance.

In all, the Q Society doesn’t let facts hamper its efforts to tout Wilders’ Islamophobic campaign. Regarded by many as a hate speech, it paints the picture of a dystopic Netherlands overrun by Islamists and poised to become the West’s first member of the Organisation of the Islamic Conference, Extremist Chapter (if such a chapter existed) — with a burqa-ed Australia following close behind.

But as the likes of Liberal Party Senator Cory Bernardi, whom Wilders reportedly described as an old friend, might agree, there’s nothing like a bit of gratuitous scaremongering — and a few dodgy numbers — to crank up one’s flagging political career. It works particularly well on unsuspecting overseas audiences — just dust off an old stump speech that those at home have long since grown weary of.

From Machiavelli To Berlusconi In 500 Years (Is This Progress?)

ISN’T there a general election coming up in Italy?

Yes, it’s to be held from February 24-25, and we know there’s a poll because, in this the 500th anniversary of Machiavelli’s The Prince — a kind of Lonely Planet guide to power — Italy is engulfed by a massive corruption scandal that titillates graft-weary Italians as it disgusts them.

Maybe Machiavelli was onto something when he said: “Of mankind, we may say in general they are fickle, hypocritical, and greedy of gain.”

Oh bella l’Italia … (sigh)… who stole what from whom this time?

It’s apt that in a post-Lehman world, where public regard for bankers isn’t that far removed from that for vermin, this particular corruption drama centres on the world’s oldest bank, the 541-year-old Banca Monte dei Paschi di Siena, where normal banking practice could seem secondary to its service as a spigot for the Italian left.

A €2 billion hole has been discovered in the MontePaschi accounts.

MontePaschi is Italy’s third-biggest bank and is based in Siena — deliciously in Machiavelli’s home region of Tuscany — at the heart of a bucolic area oft-known as Chiantishire, where many European bankers own glorious holiday piles.

A €2 billion (AUD2.6 billion) hole has been discovered in the MontePaschi accounts, a gap in the books derived from secretive transactions made with German and Japanese banks years ago that everyone seems to have tried to cover up. Two weeks ago, MontePaschi was forced into an embarrassing €4 billion bailout from a friendly Italian government, which can’t afford a bank collapse in the middle of its election campaign, not to mention an economy it was appointed in 2011 to clean up.

But a daily drip of revelations around MontePaschi has exposed Italy’s usual treacherous politicians, conflicted bureaucrats, dodgy bankers, incompetent officials and, because this is Italy, conniving clerics. (MontePaschi is also being probed by corruption investigators about the circumstances of a €9 billion deal in 2007 to buy rival Italian bank Antonveneta from Spanish group Santander; the Spaniards had paid just €6.6 billion for it, just weeks earlier. At the risk of getting a little Dan Brown here, these banks have links to the church’s secretive prelature Opus Dei.)

<p>Hulton Archive/Getty Images</p>

Machiavelli

Indeed, about the only regular performer in the unending farce of Italian public life that hasn’t yet appeared in this circus is the Mob. That’s probably only because MontePaschi is Tuscan, and not Sicilian or from Naples. Still, it’s early days in the scandal and the Cosa Nostra will inevitably cameo at some point.

Siena? Where they run that famous horse race in the town square? Isn’t that where Machiavelli comes from?

The very same. The Prince was written in nearby Florence, where Machiavelli plotted to topple the Medicis. But, yes, it is famously home to il Palio, the medieval-era gallop around the town’s magnificent Piazza del Campo, an event long funded by, you guessed it, Banca MontePaschi.

Like too many Italian banks, MontePaschi is controlled by a fondazione, regional trusts jealously controlled by local worthies and, invariably, with shady church monsignori sticking their cassocks in too. Except, again because this is Italy, these foundations have become utterly politicised. The assets these fondazioni control, such as banks like MontePaschi, have been transformed into vehicles of matey patronage for political parties and vested interests.

Banca MontePaschi is an excellent example. Tuscany is the core of Italy’s quadrilatero rosso, the “red quadriliteral’’ that also includes Emilia-Romagna, Umbria and Marche. This part of central Italy has long been a stronghold of the leftist Democratic Party (PD), which has its roots in the Italian Communist Party. Siena is strongly PD, and that means the party effectively controls MontePaschi through the Siena foundation.

Now sacked after that mysterious €2 billion hole was discovered in his bank’s accounts, MontePaschi chief executive Guiseppe Mussari is an ex-communist lawyer and PD party hack. As Rome academic Guiseppe Ragusa told The Global Mail: “Actually being a banker is a skill too far for some of these foundations. A banking qualification isn’t really the point.”

And why is this important now?

Until this all blew up, the PD was virtually assured of outright election victory. It is the main anti-Berlusconi party — about the only one equipped with the political machinery to beat the disgraced 76-year-old billionaire and former prime minister — campaigning as the antidote to his corruption. But MontePaschi again reminds Italians that institutional cancer here isn’t exclusively the preserve of the right. But if Italian politics is true to form, a PD majority in next week’s election will likely mean that the MontePaschi scandal will be quietly despatched, unpunished, into the long grass.

Ah, the always entertaining Silvio! He was finito, no?

Certo, and that’s what weary Italians thought after the man Italians call Il Cavaliere, The Knight, was booted from office in November 2011 — he says by Germany Chancellor Angela Merkel — after treating Italy as his private fief for most of the past 20 years. As Machiavelli put it, “politics has no relation to morals’’, and Berlusconi brought Italy — and Europe — to the brink of collapse (though not his own business empire). Many thought he was finished, condemned (who could forget “Ruby” and “Bunga-Bunga”) and bound for prison. The sighs of relief from Brussels and Berlin were audible in Rome.

<p>ANDREAS SOLARO/AFP/Getty Images</p>

But in December the shameless Silvio decided he wanted power a fourth time. He withdrew his party’s support for Italy’s emergency government and started plotting. Italians treasure their democracy and this election will restore the vote briefly stolen from them when Mario Monti’s technocracy was installed a year earlier. Berlusconi has been quick to remind Italians that they actually elected him, as he touts a populist anti-austerity (read anti-EU, anti-Germany) ticket.

And he also delights in reminding that on the night last December after he forced the fall of the Berlin-backed technocracy (after pulling his party’s cross-parliament support for it), the toppled Prime Minister Monti attended the season opening at Milan’s storied La Scala opera house. The biggest event on the Italian cultural calendar usually opens, patriotically, with something from Verdi or Puccini, perhaps Rossini. But this season La Scala opened with (the German) Wagner’s Lohengrin. Among the glitterati in Milan was the EU Commission’s austerity-preaching president Jose Manuel Barroso. Silvio loved that too.

Because Italians seem to have short memories, the MontePaschi-PD scandal has rejuvenated Berlusconi’s poll numbers. As centre-left support erodes, Il Cavaliere is back with a real chance of winning at least a blocking vote next week. In Rome, one can almost feel the shudders from Berlin and Brussels at the very notion.

Beyond Berlusconi, MontePaschi has exposed deeper issues for Europe. The bank’s dodgy transactions occurred when Mario Draghi was governor of Italy’s central bank, the supervisor that’s supposed to check risky banking business. Draghi is the former Goldman Sachs executive anointed by Merkel to be governor of the mostly German-funded European Central Bank. That means he’s the custodian of the embattled euro; it’s not a good look as Europe’s crisis enters a sixth year.

Who is Berlusconi running against?

Well, there’s the 69-year-old acting incumbent Monti, the unelected economist installed 15 months ago to stave off an Italian flameout. He gets huge credit in Brussels and Berlin for stabilising the economy but precious little at home, where he’s seen as a taxer. After deciding to run, the colourless Monti has tried to patch together a centrist coalition for the election but as a career technocrat lacking a grassroots network, not to mention a personality, he’s tracking at 14-16 per cent, a poor fourth in opinion polls.

Berlusconi’s People of Freedom party is second in polls with 28-30 points, behind the PD led by the 62-year-old Pier Luigi Bersani with 34-35 points. Hailing from that “red quadrilateral”, the former communist Bersani was regional boss in Emilia-Romagna, based in Bologna. He’s unlikely to win outright, but could seek a post-poll coalition with Monti.

The wildcard is the pox-on-all-their-houses activist Five Star Movement of Beppe Grillo. He’s the internet-savvy former comedian famous for his vaffanculo, literally “fuck you’’, protest rallies when Italians sickened by their rancid political class come together in demonstration to tell their leaders, well, “fuck you”.

Grillo’s 5SM has polled as high as 22 per cent for a firm second behind PD and is now tracking third between 16-19 per cent. As yet another Italian political-financial scandal unfolds, the MontePaschi affair will have drawn support to Grillo, now on an end-of-poll “Tsunami tour’’ of Italy. 5SM’s internet-based activism has spooked the establishment parties into modernising their communications, and now they’re suddenly all over social media. Berlusconi’s Twitter feed is #fiducia, Italian for trust and, yes, he’s serious.

But perhaps minded of Machiavelli’s axiom that those who “act virtuously in every way necessarily come to grief among so many who are not virtuous”, Grillo’s raucous righteousness is also his Achilles heel. He wants nothing less than the wholesale cleanout of that establishment — with criminal prosecutions — and pledges he won’t make political deals with anyone. On polling day, Italians may decide a 5SM vote is a waste. Or they could prove so revolted that Grillo has power within his grasp.

The Pope’s just resigned. Will that have an impact on the election?

Apart from diverting the news cycle, likely not much. The church is broadly believed to support the (moral, church-going) Monti and then the PD. Bunga-Bunga kinda finished whatever allure the church had for Berlusconi.

What else are the parties talking about?

Grillo aside, an observer could be excused for answering “nothing”. In this not-so-divine comedy of Italian politics, there’s been lots of finger-pointing but little debate advancing policy of substance; little of immigration, Europe, education, foreign policy or the usual issues supposed to exercise voters.

<p>FABIO MUZZI/AFP/Getty Images</p>

But football matters in Italy and, desperate to secure his northern heartland, Berlusconi bought one of Europe’s most gifted players, Mario Balotelli, to bolster his AC Milan line-up. No matter that Silvio said last month that he didn’t want the striker at Milan because a “bad apple” infects the dressing room, Balotelli has proved an instant success for the Rossoneri. Political analysts believe the “Balotelli Effect” could bump Berlusconi’s numbers up as much as 5 per cent in northern Italy, proving crucial in this tight poll. What was it that Machiavelli said? Oh yes, “one who deceives will always find those who allow themselves to be deceived”.

Machiavelli said a lot. Didn’t he also write that “people also get the government they deserve”?

No, that line has been ascribed to either the 18th century thinker Joseph de Maistre or the 19th century French republican philosopher Alexis de Tocqueville. De Maistre was educated in Turin, in Italy, the country that elected Berlusconi to clean up the mess of the notorious tangentopoli crises of the early 1990s, the “Bribesville” scandal when Italians believed their corruption couldn’t get worse.

Who do you reckon first coined this?

“Whoever conquers a free town and does not demolish it commits a great error and may expect to be ruined himself.” Yep, that would be Machiavelli.

Germany: Inside Der Spiegel’s Tent

<p>Courtesy Der Spiegel</p>

BIG MEDIA is in crisis, this much we well know.

The internet is the Fourth Estate’s enemy, or possibly its saviour, if once-eminent titles such as Newsweek, which killed its 80-year-old print edition last month, and companies such as Australia’s ailing Fairfax Media, can deliver to a readership wielding smartphones, tablets and whatever the Next Big Thing is.

But a German publishing phenomenon, the country’s most respected news magazine Der Spiegel, may have the answer, and it’s achingly simple. That is, tell good, factually correct, society-serving stories; don’t treat readers like illiterate idiots and you’ll make money. Der Spiegel’s revenues in 2011 were €325 million ($410 million).

For 66 years Der Spiegel (The Mirror) has reflected Germany’s post-World War II renaissance as Europe’s biggest economy. Today, it has a thriving online presence, in German and English, and a well-watched TV channel. But it is the million-strong circulation of its print magazine, ubiquitous in a country of 81 million people, that continues to anchor its success. “The nation watches us to see how we think,” Der Spiegel’s managing editor, Klaus Brinkbäumer, says.

Der Spiegel’s achievements are captured in a simple exhortation: “Sagen, was ist” scrawled across the foyer wall of Spiegel-Haus, its edgy new headquarters in cosmopolitan Hamburg, traditionally the hub of German publishing.

<p>Patrick Lux/Getty</p>

“To say what is”, is the motto that exhorts Der Spiegel’s 1,200 staff to write and produce what is; to report, analyse and critique the world as it is, factually and faithfully, without fear, bias or influence.

“It is the program for Der Spiegel,” says the head of its legendary fact-checking department, Dr Eckart Teichert, a magazine institution after 29 years on staff. “We print the facts, whether friend or enemy will be pleased,” he continues. “And as a fact checker I add: the correct facts!” (True to form, Teichert points out that the aforementioned saying was first coined not by Der Spiegel’s sainted founder Rudolf Augstein, as many Germans believe, but by 19th century historian Leopold von Ranke.)

What Augstein did say was that he “never had difficulty being against something”, but rather “had more difficulty being for something’’.

It is an ethos that has been enthusiastically embraced by Germans.

Klaus Brinkbäumer is one of three editors stewarding the magazine, alongside 52-year-old Mathias Müller von Blumencron, and the German-Italian investigative journalist Georg Mascolo, 48, who has been editor-in-chief since 2008. Brinkbäumer describes the typical reader of this magazine that he says is run by 40-somethings and reported by 30-somethings:

“The nation watches us to see how we think.”

“I would love to say [it’s] a 22-year-old, very bright woman [but] it’s probably a male, in his 40s, a family man, a bit sceptical, professional, interested in politics, business and history, a bit sports-minded. A banker maybe, who has another language, most likely English and [is] fairly well-travelled.”

The polished Brinkbäumer may just have described himself. He’s 46, educated in Germany and the US and was a nationally ranked volleyballer and sailor. He’s worked at Der Spiegel for 19 years, originally hired as a sports writer. Over the past two decades, he’s also served on the features and foreign desks, and as a foreign correspondent, most recently in the US.

So is he his magazine’s typical reader? He smiles wryly: “I’m way too optimistic; our readers are sceptical.”

They are also internationally minded. A typical edition of Der Spiegel will have 30 to 50 pages of foreign coverage, as much as a quarter of the magazine, written by its own correspondents across dozens of bureaux. “Our readers want that,” says Brinkbäumer. “It’s expensive but we are not cutting our foreign correspondents.”

Ulf Armbrust, a Hamburg hotelier and former advertising executive, has read Der Spiegel “ever since I can remember.” Now 71, Ambrust says he misses the “sassy and irreverent tone” the magazine had in the ’60s and ’70s but adds that it has “at least prevented me from suffering from a one-sided view of the world’’. Armbrust still has seven binders of the editions he collected as a student in the radicalised West Berlin of the 1960s, when so many Germans of his generation railed against authorities. “I see Der Spiegel as part of what it means to be German,” he says.

IT’S JUST AS WELL Der Spiegel is a weekly because that’s about how long it takes to properly digest. Where one can inhale Time in minutes and absorb The Economist over a few studied hours, Der Spiegel’s detailed reporting takes days to fully appreciate. There’s so much to read, on Germany and on global topics. Der Spiegel supports more than 30 foreign correspondents on its staff, and it’s adding bureaux while other media organisations are closing theirs. The magazine’s writing is typically clear, concise and intelligent; the photography and art are compelling. Celebrity coverage is rare; trash and fluff, rarer still. The Economist once described it as “a thumping great glossy thing’’.

That same Economist graciously paid its competitor of sorts the following compliment when Augstein died aged 79, in November 2002, after he’d served for 55 years as editor-in-chief: “In a country where journalism, particularly in the past, tended towards the pompous and docile, it had the most lucid prose, the best investigative reporting, the widest foreign coverage, the sharpest political analysis, and the most insightful social commentary … the magazine often beat the rest of the German press combined.” As for Augstein, The Economist held that “he was usually right on the big things … he knew that relentless scrutiny of the rich and powerful was the way to make the country work better. It did.” Such is the national lustre surrounding Der Spiegel that when Augstein died, then-chancellor Gerhard Schröder didn’t just sign off on a perfunctory tribute noting his passing, he called an official press conference to pay due homage.

Originally called Diese Woche (This Week), Der Spiegel was set up in 1947 from the ashes of World War II, with professional input from Americans at Time and the official backing of the British occupation forces. It was viewed as an essential part of the nation-building of a new Germany. A 24-year-old soldier in the German Wehrmacht, Rudolf Augstein, was anointed as its first editor. (Another publishing licence was granted to Henri Nannen, founder of the racier Stern). Augstein had been an amateur journalist before being drafted, but it soon became apparent that if his British champions thought he’d cut them slack, they were mistaken. The magazine quickly turned its critical focus on the very institutions that set it up, reporting on Germany’s occupying forces — and the coverage was rarely flattering.

Der Spiegel has since claimed many scalps: a Bundesbank boss; myriad ministers and government officials, federal and state; errant tycoons and corporations, not least Deutsche Bank, the world’s biggest commercial bank and arguably Germany’s most powerful institution. Die Skandal-Bank, as Der Spiegel dubbed it, has been the subject of a cover story twice in the past year. Brinkbäumer says, “If the chairman of Deutsche Bank called and said, ‘Leave us alone, we are a national institution,’ we would say, ‘Well, you’d better take care of it.’

“Have politicians and companies tried to shut down stories?” asks Brinkbäumer rhetorically. “Yes, they have, but that has never stopped us from publishing. Even the threat of withdrawing advertising doesn’t, it has the opposite effect. Otherwise the whole reputation of the magazine would be gone and people know that in Germany. This reputation we have to protect. It has to be that way.”

Der Spiegel was one of five international titles — and the only magazine — to first air the WikiLeaks diplomatic cables in 2010, and the one most favoured by Julian Assange as he began to fall out with others such as The New York Times and The Guardian.

Willy Brandt, the late former Chancellor and hero of the German left, liked to call it a ‘‘Scheißblatt’’, literally ‘’shit paper’’.

But it was the bulldog of the German right, Konrad Adenauer’s Bavarian enforcer Franz Josef Strauss, who handed Der Spiegel its defining moment, and an international reputation for publish-and-be-damned independence.

That was in 1962 when Strauss, then Adenauer’s defence minister, tried to shut down the magazine after it exposed failings in the German armed forces. Strauss saw the coverage as treason and directed security forces to occupy the magazine’s Hamburg head office, while throwing editor Augstein and his senior colleagues in jail.

It was a serious test of Germany’s post-war democracy, 17 years after World War II had ended but with its democracy then far from secure. Germans rallied behind Der Spiegel. Augstein was released after 103 days. Strauss, on the other hand, then a towering figure in German politics, was forced from office, his reputation stained by a stand-off from which he never fully recovered. Many believe his attempt to silence the magazine eventually cost him the Chancellorship and the place in German history that his great rival on the right, Helmut Kohl, later assumed. Der Spiegel’s investigative reputation — and its circulation — soared. “It was all over the news, people started buying it,” Brinkbäumer says. “It’s where the culture of the magazine was cemented.”

‘‘Die SPIEGEL-Affäre’’ — Strauss’s raid on the magazine — was Der Spiegel’s watershed. On last year’s 50-year anniversary of the raid, Der Spiegel reproduced that same issue in commemoration (the proofs had been smuggled onto competitor-cum-accomplice Stern’s presses, with its headline “Sie Kamen In Der Nacht” (They Came In The Night). Could such a raid happen again? “I hope that is inconceivable,” Brinkbäumer says.

Few print products anywhere devote the same level of resources to journalists as does Der Spiegel. Brinkbäumer cites an assignment which took him across Africa and Europe, tracking where, how and why illegal immigrants then came to Europe — he travelled in their footsteps as if he were an immigrant himself. The editor of the day, Stefan Aust, told him the feature was “a great concept; whatever you need, whatever it costs, go and do it”. It took an arduous six months, and from it came a series which turned into a celebrated book. He’s one of many Der Spiegel journalists to have penned important tomes. “They sent me, they let me go, they trusted me and the pay-off was excellent. This is the sort of thing that builds trust in the magazine.”

Another Der Spiegel hallmark is its team reporting. Often packages can involve 25 journalists, exhausting every imaginable angle on a story over 10-15 pages. Such an approach might be used to dissect the fall of Lance Armstrong, compile the definitive guide to Angela Merkel or track Greece’s collapse, or investigating the euro; required reading in European capitals deciding its future. Brinkbäumer, sailor and volleyballer, enthuses: “I love team sports.”

Brinkbäumer says Der Spiegel’s is empowered by its corporate structure. No-one owns or controls the magazine, thus no-one can exert undue influence over editorial. Employees control 50.5 per cent of its stock through a 40-year-old mitarbeiter (employees’) trust. Another 24 per cent is held in an Augstein family foundation. “It creates a lot of loyalty,” Brinkbäumer says.

And security. This structure enables Der Spiegel to avoid the predicament which befell the late German media tycoon Leo Kirch, whose media empire, in 2002, fell foul of the very interests its journalists had criticised. Kirch’s heirs recently won a €2 billion lawsuit against the powerful Deutsche Bank which, it is claimed, led a conspiracy to bring down Kirch. “It’s almost impossible to buy Der Spiegel,” Brinkbäumer says, of the likelihood of a takeover. “Other publishing houses have tried but they couldn’t.” (Stern’s owner Gruner and Jahr controls a minority 25.5 per cent of Der Spiegel.)

TO PUT DER SPIEGEL’S CIRCULATION — and national impact — in context, it’s useful to view its reach alongside that of broadly comparable news magazines in other developed media markets.

Although it could never lay claim to the quality of Der Spiegel, Australia’s once-venerable The Bulletin was circulating, at a generous estimate, about 55,000 copies in its last months of life in 2008, when it was serving a national population of 21 million. This was about half its circulation when it was at its peak in the mid-’90s. In the US, which has a population of 314 million, Time circulates almost 3.3 million copies every week, and the magazine rarely runs to more than 60 pages. By comparison, Der Spiegel, all 200-plus pages of it, lands on about one million desks and tables every week, serving a heavily internet-wired German population of 81 million.

Der Spiegel may have a third the circulation of Time, but the US has almost four times as many people as Germany. And one should also consider that German newsstands boast three broadly similar news magazines, each of considerable heft and influence; Der Spiegel, Stern (circulation also about one million) and Focus (circulation 500,000-600,000).

FACT-CHECKING HAS BECOME an arcane — and increasingly rare — process in the world’s newsrooms. Der Spiegel, however, makes a virtue of its fact-checking department, which forms a crucial professional layer in the refining of text, separate from the usual editors and lawyers involved in the publication process. “It’s part of our selling point,” Brinkbäumer says. “It’s part of what makes us trusted.”

The department is headed by the formidable Dr Eckart Teichert,who was an academic before he joined Der Spiegel. He commands a 40-strong team of fact-checkers, about whom articles have been written, such is their regard in Germany and abroad.

“We are employed to be sceptical,” Teichert says of his department. “The first rule of our job is that nothing is correct until we can prove it to be.”

That means Der Spiegel has killed a lot of stories because they didn’t meet Teichert’s standards. Given the magazine’s elevated status in Europe, to publish something wrong could be corporate suicide. “We don’t want to have the catastrophe that happened to Stern.”

He’s referring, of course, to the Hitler Diaries scandal of 1983, when Stern was duped by German scammers Konrad Kujau and Gerd Heidemann into paying around $US6 million for what were purported to be Hitler’s journals, but which were in fact elaborate forgeries. (Rupert Murdoch also fell for the scam, ignoring warnings from his own staff against publishing the bogus diaries in his Sunday Times.) Stern’s reputation — and circulation — was smashed by the scandal and has never fully recovered. “It almost killed them,” Brinkbäumer says of his competitor’s disaster. “And it still hurts them. It was the biggest mistake in German journalism.”

Brinkbäumer says, “We haven’t had anything happen to us like [what happened at] Stern but can I say nothing [bad] is ever going to happen? No I can’t, nothing is infallible.” (He was proved right a few weeks later when his website briefly published an advance obituary of former US president George Bush Snr, who was then ailing in a Houston hospital. The mistake was hardly of Hitler Diaries proportions, but it severely embarrassed a magazine which takes the truth very seriously.)

Says fact-checking czar Dr Teichert: “The most satisfying thing about my job is knowing that every fact in an article is absolutely 100 per cent correct and the article has been published in a better condition than when the author wrote it.”

<p>Courtesy Ippolito Fleitz Group</p>SITTING IN HIS SLEEK HEADQUARTERS with its Scandinavian-inspired lines, as late-model Audis and BMWs emerge from the staff car park below, I ask Brinkbäumer if it’s fashionable, even cool, to work at Der Spiegel. Are they the grooviest guests at German dinner parties, leading discussion? He laughs. “You are not going to get that quote from me.” He seems aching to say ‘yes,’ but loyally opts for “I never want to leave” instead.

We speak the week before Christmas, as Newsweek’s print edition draws its last breath. Its editor, Tina Brown, has headlined a Twitter hashtag #LASTPRINTISSUE on the cover — a gesture that is part promotion, part finger-pointing and part obituary.

The death of Newsweek on paper symbolises the economic and electronic malaise affecting big media worldwide. Despite its solid economy, German media has plenty of Newsweeks of its own. A fortnight earlier, the Financial Times Deutschland, also published from Hamburg, was closed by its owner Gruner and Jahr, 12 years and €250 million after its launch. It had never made a profit, a point wryly noted in its last edition, which carried an all-black front page of just two words, Endlich schwarz (“finally (in the) black’’). Not even the FTD’s internet edition survived the shutdown.

<p>Patrick Lux/Getty</p>

And, a month earlier, the liberal daily Frankfurter Rundschau, one of Germany’s 10 largest national newspapers, became the first German newspaper in post-war history to go bankrupt.

Such turmoil has not gone unnoticed at Der Spiegel. “We are not so isolated, different to everybody else,’’ Brinkbäumer says. “We are losing advertising revenue to the internet. Everybody is.”

But Der Spiegel Online is making money, “one of the very few [online publications] of its kind in the world to do so”, Brinkbäumer says. And, he claims, it’s “not just barely profitable; they are making a lot of money”. Profits, he says, are derived primarily from advertising, supplemented by a paid app and, increasingly, paywalled content. Barely five per cent of the print magazine’s content is available online, a testimony to the quality of its journalism and a fiercely loyal following. “Advertising around the main part of our website is very expensive and lucrative for us,” he says. “The problem for us is print advertising, which has gone down, in volume and in value.”

Print circulation, he says, is less affected. “It’s slightly fallen, a little below a million. We are selling 40,000 iPad copies per week, and if you add those to the print circulation it almost evens out. I would say (circulation) is stable. There are others who have been worse affected than us.

“But we are not saying there’s not a problem,” he says. “There is a problem. We are lucky to be far from the position of Financial Times Deutschland and Frankfurter Rundschau, but our revenues are decreasing.”

I ask Brinkbäumer if Der Spiegel is clubby, or elitist, or blokey. There are a handful of aristocratic “vons” and plenty of Doktors on Der Spiegel’s masthead, and a distinct lack of women and cultural minorities. The 11 editors and co-editors of the magazine during its 66 years have all been male.

Brinkbäumer insists Der Spiegel is a meritocracy. Still, the magazine is a mostly white, male, Germanic place, unlike the liberated, increasingly kaleidoscopic Germany with its buoyant immigrant community that’s immediately evident in the bustle around Spiegel-Haus. “We are developing in that way,” Brinkbäumer says. “We always strive to reflect Germany in every way.”

Der Spiegel’s New Digs

The original Spiegel Cafeteria on the left, beside its successor in the new Spiegel-Haus.

Der Spiegel’s new headquarters in HafenCity, Hamburg’s redeveloped Elbe-side docklands, looks more like the home of a bank or insurance giant than that of a media company. Which is part of its point. Spiegel-Haus, completed in 2011, presents a huge silver wedge of solidity, symbolising a reassuring longevity for a wobbling industry.

The €250 million building is designed by Danish architects Henning Larsen of Copenhagen Opera House fame, and built in the heart of Hamburg’s emerging new financial centre. The building is solely occupied by the wider Spiegel group — the magazine and its offshoot publications, online operations and the popular Spiegel TV news channel.

There’s also a playfulness about Spiegel-Haus, evident in its café, which pays homage to the “Spiegel Cafeteria” in the magazine’s old headquarters. That café, the 1969 creation of the Danish colourist Verner Panton, became an international design icon — a Barbarella-esque riot of Pop Art psychedelic kitsch. It also was known as one of the best eateries in Hamburg. When the magazine moved, Hamburg’s government placed the legendary café under a preservation order, and parts of it are now being painstakingly recreated in the city’s arts and crafts museum. Hamburgers are reminded of Panton’s genius each time they pass the Spiegel-Haus and see the glowing orange orbs of the new building’s fifth floor café.

Writer Silke Burmester describes Der Spiegel’s culture of the 1960s and 70s as being “Mad Men of the Brandstwiete” (Brandstwiete is the historic street of Hamburg’s old town where the magazine was then based, with its famous café at the core). It was patronised, Burmester writes, by men “committed to shaping the republic with words, men fuelled by writing and alcohol in high percentage alliance”. Women, notes Burmester, “were primarily the secretary or the waitress”.

German Banking Gets a Spanking

<p>Hannelore Foerster/Getty</p>
Gott im Himmel! Corruption in Germany?

No matter that World War II ended 67 years ago, the jingoistic London publishers of the old British war comics Commando are going strong. And in Commando, lantern-jawed Germans still are always brutal, inhuman automatons, and most everyone else in Europe, particularly Brits, are valiant models of rectitude and probity.

Never mind trifling details such as Germany’s boisterous democracy, “the economic miracle”, Reunification (a Wall that inspired as it fell, arguably history’s most successful nation-building), and allied military boots on the ground in Afghanistan.

The hackneyed Commando-esque cliches are rampant still in English football too; Der Spiegel magazine’s former London correspondent Matthias Mattusek noted a few years back that the British continue to exhibit an “insatiable appetite for Nazi folklore and German-bashing”. However the Anglo-Deutsch ‘rivalry’ now exists almost entirely in English minds — Germany’s great sporting enemy is The Netherlands.

But the real world isn’t a comic. Germany is rich, chunky and successful; Europe’s largest — and the world’s fourth-largest — economy.

And a clean one, too. Germany ranks a laudable 13th on the latest Transparency International measure of global graft among 174 economies; the worthiest of the dominant G-8 economies that really matter to the world economy.

And where Brits sneer about Europe from the sidelines, Germany’s much-consulted taxpayers do the heavy lifting to keep the EU afloat. Indeed, if it weren’t for deep pockets of the Germans, the Union would’ve been kaputt long ago.

But wait, what’s this about corruption then?

This past week, the world’s biggest bank, Deutsche Bank (DB), has been embroiled in a huge corruption scandal. German investigators have fingered two of the country’s most influential businessmen — DB’s chief executive and chief financial officer, no less — in a drama that has Germany all Sturm und Drang.

<p>FRANK RUMPENHORST/AFP/Getty</p>

German cops, some 500 of them, dramatically raided DB’s Frankfurt headquarters, and regional offices and private homes in Berlin and Düsseldorf, too. They carted off reams of papers and arrested senior executives, such as the bank’s head of legal, as they went.

DB’s CEO Jürgen Fitschen and his CFO Stefan Krause remain at liberty, but none of it is a good look for the bank that anchors Deutschland Inc and, by extension, Europe.

Authorities are probing DB for money laundering, tax evasion and obstruction of justice. Among other misdemeanours, they suspect DB of wilfully creating ingenious schemes to evade taxes on carbon emissions.

Potentially worse, the bank is facing claims in New York from a whistleblowing ex-employee. The former executive, Dr Eric Ben-Artzi, says the bank cooked its books, whitewashing away billions in dodgy transactions as the 2008 financial crisis deepened. DB deny it, but Ben-Artzi claims it was a fraud and has a high-profile whistleblowing American group by his side.

Why is this important?

Bad banks are bad news, wherever they fester — witness the revulsion directed at the banking industry after these one-time masters of the universe imploded America in 2008 playing pass-the-toxic-parcel with their subprime junk loans.

Hollywood loves a bad guy, and dubious bankers spawned a popular Hollywood genre in films like Inside Job and Margin Call. Today, there are BBC documentaries about rough-sleeping bankers, but not much sympathy for them.

But in Europe, Deutsche Bank’s travails matter because they are about taxes, money laundering and possible fraud — the stuff of much German finger-pointing at their fellow Europeans.

Real or imagined, it’s the cavalier attitude toward such things in errant EU states like Spain, Italy and Greece that particularly galls northern Europeans, who bear some of the world’s highest taxes. In return, they get a high standard of living, creating a standard Brussels would like the rest of Europe to embrace as it struggles to equalise economies.

But the 2008 financial crises that collapsed economies across Europe’s Club Med belt saw a sharp loss of income to its suddenly stricken governments. Companies failed, people lost jobs, and these states couldn’t be financed as they once were. And all this while official obligations — things like providing the dole and economic stimuli — soared.

Europe’s biggest economy — and one of the euro’s biggest trading beneficiaries — Germany stepped up, largely because no-one else was able to and because it had a market to support. Berlin has been quick — and stern — in lecturing Mediterranean miscreants about mismanagement of their public finances. Germany has even placed teams of bean-counters in Greek government offices, to make sure their EU-saving euros are appropriately handled.

But Berlin’s intervention hasn’t gone down well down south. Yielding to their own Commando cliches, angry Greeks have taken to calling their new Teutonic technocrats ‘Nazis’.

<p>ARIS MESSINIS/AFP/Getty</p>
In Italy too, Il Giornale, a Milan newspaper owned by ousted ex-PM Silvio Berlusconi, who holds German Chancellor Angela Merkel responsible for his downfall, described Germany as ‘the Fourth Reich’, which is perhaps a bit rich coming from a darling of the Italian right seen by many, not least himself, as a modern Mussolini. Naturally, Il Giornale chose an unfortunate photo of Merkel waving to illustrate its anti-German invective.

Merkel has had to despatch jolly emissaries including politician Hans-Joachim Fuchtel to Greece, to calm things down. But that diplo-gambit also ended badly, after Herr Fuchtel told journalists that a German could do the job of three Greeks —  a remark that undoubtedly lifted the spirits of the drycleaner of Germany’s ambassador to Athens, Wolfgang Hoelscher-Obermaier, who copped abuse and any throwable item grumpy Greeks could lay their hands when caught exposed outside after Fuchtel’s indelicate remarks went live.

In Europe, Deutsche Bank’s travails matter because they are about taxes, money laundering and possible fraud — the stuff of much German finger-pointing at their fellow Europeans.

Tell us about Deutsche Bank…

Its very name says everything — German Bank, as if there is no other.

When German TV illustrates the usually dry economic and financial reports on the evening news, it does so with a stock image of DB’s iconic twin towers in Frankfurt, which Germans call Soll und Haben, literally debit and credit.

The lustre is evident in its famous ‘slash-in-a-square’ logo, Germany’s best-recognised brand; a dynamic forward slash, symbolising advancement, contained in a protective, stable box — a metaphor for Germany. (DB’s obsession with its logo has been subtly ridiculed this week in a damning cover story by Der Spiegel, which reverses DB’s famous slash so it slants backwards, highlighting its skandal.)

With more than 100,000 employees, DB commands a prominence in the country’s commercial life that few privately owned banks can equal. Boasting assets worth more than €2 trillion, DB is bigger than many national economies. It’s the premier institution that anchors and lubricates the efficient machine that is Deutschland Inc, owning influential tracts of major German industrial conglomerates, together a vast and powerful corporate octopus. Which makes it persuasive at opening doors — and having people like Germany’s well-connected former ambassador to the United Nations, Thomas Mattusek (brother of journalist Matthias above), as its main public affairs schmoozer also helps.

Despite the potential criminality implied by these current probes, DB likes to think itself in Germany as weißer than weiß. But whiter than white is not how Germans see it, as DB’s legal problems pile up on both sides of the Atlantic. DB is also being investigated in London for rigging interest rates. And last week, a Munich court found DB played a crucial role in bringing down one of Germany’s most powerful media empires, the Kirch Group, a DB critic which failed in 2002 in Germany’s biggest post-war bankruptcy.

So with all these DB problems back home, has Germany’s pot and kettle been blackened?

Absolutely. And Greeks are loving it. Which is all very well, but for all their schadenfreude, they’re still no better off.

http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/german-banking-gets-a-spanking/532/

 

Denmark: Inspiring Politics?

<p>Courtesy DR</p>

ADAM PRICE well remembers the moment one of modern television’s most celebrated series was conceived.

It was October 24, 2007 and the polymath Price — he’s a celebrity chef as well as an accomplished Danish scriptwriter — was working out in his Copenhagen gym. As he sweated, the gym TV flashed the news that Denmark’s 5.5 million people would soon be heading to the polls.

“I was standing next to a big muscular tattooed guy who I didn’t know, the two of us just watching the news,” Price recalls.

“And this big guy just looked at the prime minister making this important announcement about our nation, our future, and he uttered for me the now-famous words, ‘Fuck, count me out!’”

Five years and a global TV sensation later, Price still shakes his head, partly in disbelief and partly with disappointment. “We were almost the same age, we had grown up with these amazing events — the toppling of the Berlin Wall, Mandela’s release and the end of apartheid, Tiananmen Square — of people risking their lives for freedom, for democracy, and yet he was so disengaged from the process.

“We’d had democracy for 160 years in this very little, privileged country, and we don’t even bother to participate in it anymore. Why is it that way?” Price asks.

And within him, at that affecting instant, an entertainment phenomenon was born. It’s called Borgen — Danish for castle, the Danes’ vernacular term for their parliament that sits in Copenhagen’s Christiansborg Palace.

On the surface, Borgen sounds very much like an acquired taste, even for wonks; it’s an elongated series about the sausage-making of modern policy in a pleasant faraway land that has made an art form of consensus politics and national restraint. And with subtitles, too, for foreigners. Where could the drama possibly be in all that?

But Price, who’s descended from an English family that emigrated to Denmark in the 18th century, could hardly have foreseen that five years on from his gym date, his involved “little show” would be enthusiastically embraced around the world. Borgen’s absorbing twists and turns have become appointment viewing in living rooms across five continents — an intelligent antidote to this era of short attention spans, instant information gratification and junk TV.

<p>Mike Kollöffel/DR</p>

Price’s gym moment even found its way into an episode of Borgen’s first season, when a news-junkie journalist ditches her dishy but dopey gym instructor boyfriend in disgust because he fails to recognise a cabinet minister. Worse still for Price’s earnest character, Katrine Fønsmark, the boyfriend doesn’t even care. Mr Fitness might be sensational in the sack but, as the driven hack tells him, “Some things are more important than others.”

That scene is about as didactic as Borgen ever gets.

Reviewers often cite Borgen as “Denmark’s The West Wing”. But that would diminish the essential Danishness of Borgen, which is funded by Danmarks Radio (DR), Denmark’s equivalent of the British Broadcasting Corporation, with a similar chicken-or-egg charter to be Denmark’s cultural guardian, navigator, and prism too.

Unlike The West Wing creator Aaron Sorkin, whose characters can be earnest blowhards mega-phoning in the idealised America he’d like rather than the one that is, if Price has a political agenda beyond re-engaging Danes with policy, it is discreetly hidden.

If The West Wing portrayed the idealised, progressive White House America had lost, Borgen depicts a political culture Denmark didn’t yet have. Borgen’s charismatic Prime Minister, Birgitte Nyborg Christensen, becomes an accidental leader when her ‘Moderate Party’ unexpectedly emerges through the ruck to win an election because voters reject the rancid leaders at the polls.

As the series tracks Nyborg’s political career as PM, it takes a leaf from DR’s other international triumph, the police drama Forbrydelsen, or The Killing, in which Denmark’s dull winters are as much a feature as detective Sarah Lund’s brooding obsessions. Borgen’s characters are often darkly drawn, complex and as grey as a Copenhagen December. Where Sorkin’s goodies-and-baddies characters dramatically explode; Price’s intriguingly unravel their untidy dilemmas.

Price has often written the series from his kitchen table, and at all hours as inspiration arrives. It’s also where The Global Mail meets him, because today he is at home, nursing his four-year-old son who’s stricken with chicken pox — that’s what multi-tasking, 40-something Danish husbands do.

With its cats, kids and computers, the Price kitchen is quintessentially Danish; effortlessly modern, homey and warm. The Danes have a word for this much-craved domesticity — hygge — which they’ve refined into a cultural emblem.

Price emailed the final Borgen episode script from his MacBook to the producers at DR. “That’s it,” says the writer on the completion of his campaign to inspire the political interest of the populace. “There won’t be another series.” He is now exploring opportunities in British drama in the wake of the Borgen obsession ignited there.

Where The West Wing sprang from the entertainment-first rib of Sorkin’s 1995 feature The American President, Price was more civic-minded in developing Borgen.

Denmark’s spate of successful police series, such as his own Anna Pihl, and the well-watched The Killing, had the effect of attracting to the nation’s security service more candidates of a higher calibre. That got him thinking; if that could happen for policing, why not for politics? These shows had made policing cerebral. Could he, Price, make over the reputation of politics, given the decidedly arid personality of then PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen, who had won that fateful 2007 election. (Rasmussen is now NATO’s secretary-general in Brussels.)

<p>Mike Kollöffel/DR</p>

Deploying a laser smile, Borgen’s PM Birgitte, played by acclaimed Danish actress Sidse Babett Knudsen, would be the anti-Rasmussen. Price even gave his female PM a subtly aspirational name. The character’s family name is Nyborg, a common surname in Denmark but one also construed as telegraphing an end of era in Danish politics. Ny means new in Danish and borg is castle, that vernacular term for parliament. Did Birgitte Nyborg embody the new politics Price and his team at DR wanted for Denmark?

“My primary longing as a writer is to touch and move my audience,” insists Price, pausing before the inevitable but. “But I don’t want to move them party-politically, but in a way so they get more interested in politics.”

Price says he was a big fan of The West Wing and “almost everything Sorkin does because he’s a great writer and he loves dialogue. I am also very much in love with dialogue.

“I’m a Danish writer and we have a different way of communicating our message,” he says. “I like big speeches, but I also like to puncture them at the same time, to bash all the correct opinions also because that makes the world more edible and actual.

“I wanted to do something that wasn’t based on blue lights and dead bodies everywhere,” says Price. “Denmark had won three International Emmys in the police genre — Unit One, The Eagle and The Protector — and I wanted to do something different, something based on the power of an argument, on big ideas, about people who wanted to change the world.

“I wanted to move the audience in a way that will make them even a little more interested in politics — that was our big goal.”

It worked. Borgen’s second season peaked at 1.52 million viewers, an extraordinary number in a nation of just 5.5 million, around 20 per cent of whom are under 16. Only The Killing has out-rated Borgen, its final episode on November 25 attracting 65 per cent of Danish viewers, according to DR.

Critics sometimes gather Borgen and The Killing under a catch-all Nordic noir genre, also throwing in Henning Mankell’s Wallander, Stieg Larsson’s Millennium Trilogy, and the work of genre pioneers Maj Sjöwall and Per Wahlöö from Sweden, Norway’s Jo Nesbo, and Arnaldur Indriðason of Iceland.

But the DR programs’ arrival in Denmark is part of a wider flowering of cultural life, not as evident elsewhere in Scandinavia. It was led in the mid-1990s by a challenging cinematic revival called Dogme that coalesced in part around Denmark’s National Film School. Led by directors Lars Von Trier and Thomas Vinterberg, Dogme was a strict return to compelling no-frills storytelling, eschewing special effects and technology. Overnight, a film genre was born: dialogue-driven stories in the climate of an interior land that stays dark for large tracts of the year.

Denmark has long ranked as one of the world’s most equal societies, near the top of just about every human-development index that matters — health, longevity, gender, standard of living, services, infrastructure, the near absence of corruption — albeit with the impost of very high tax rates.

It’s a social contract Danes seem more than willing to accept, but now it comes with a bonus — that it’s hip to be Dansk. A nice, comfortable but outwardly rather dull nation seems to have blossomed overnight, inspiring Danes to make some of the world’s more stimulating films (Vinterberg’s Celebration, Von Trier’s pioneering The Idiots), must-see television (Anna Pihl, The Killing, Taxa), stunning architecture (Henning Larsen’s Opera House and Schmidt Hammer Lassen’s Black Diamond at the Royal Library), and superb food (NOMA, a portmanteau of Danish for Nordic and food, declared the world’s best restaurant the past three years by British magazine Restaurant, which is regarded as the industry measure).

WHEN DR announced to Danes in March 2009 that it would produce a political series called Borgen, Denmark’s extreme right-wing Danish People’s Party (DPP) was quick to jump into print to condemn it.

Writing in Politiken, Denmark’s leading broadsheet newspaper, DPP stalwart Søren Espersen decided he knew already what Borgen would be about, long before the first episode had been wrapped or even written.

Espersen had a robust spray at the “red hirelings” of DR’s “red master” Ingolf Gabold, DR’s long-time and widely celebrated head of drama who had green-lighted Borgen.

Gabold, Espersen wrote, was determined to manipulate Danish history by twisting the process of government itself. Borgen would surely be an expensive vanity project in which the right is portrayed as “power-mad, corrupt and without social responsibility, as insensitive climate deniers and racists”. The liberal left would be the “the opposite… fighting stubbornly and honestly… with sensitivity, love and often their lives”.

<p>Courtesy SBS</p>

These heroic left-wing politicians, Espersen wrote, will be protected by burly bodyguards against the evil right, whereas Denmark’s reality, he claimed, was that it was the leaders of the right who required protection for expressing the — disturbing, as the DPP see it — reality of multi-cultural, politically correct Denmark.

Espersen saw portrayed in Danish living rooms a pretty young Muslim female MP of the left who insisted on wearing the hijab in parliament while claiming bogus fealty to Denmark. Another white female politician would be a right-wing “calculating, cold witch… a nepotistic and corrupt populist… a cynic constantly finding ways to make the lives of immigrants so unbearable as possible”.

Espersen anticipated plot devices such as “an incorruptible party chairman struggling for a new government, a better environment, affectionate tolerance for strangers and a world without war”. He also foresaw a “tortured, former Guantanamo prisoner who now spends time creating dialogue between Christians, Jews and Muslims” and “a black preacher who thunders against Islam — and also beats his grandchildren”.

Borgen came to offer nothing of the kind, its plots richer and more complex and sometimes more mundane, too, than the obvious scenarios Espersen had prophesied. The evil party leader — depicted by much-loved ‘nice guy’ actor Peter Mygind — sprang from the left. About as malevolent as it got in the portrayal of the right — and this plot could just as easily have been ascribed to the left — was a gentle corruption scandal that ushered in the moderate Nyborg as PM.

Islam was largely absent; Borgen is mostly white and Christian, but then so is Denmark. The media is depicted as cynical and ruthless, conflicted and even buyable, rather than as idealistic. Civil servants are portrayed as dopey, noxious, loyal and calculating. And as for security breaches, the magnetic PM seductively deploys her winning smile on her driver as she rebounds from a separation with an unremarkable husband.

Espersen’s fears that Borgen would be expensive were also unfounded — the series paid for itself in unanticipated foreign sales.

The Global Mail contacted Espersen for his take, three years later, on a series whose international success had become a source of national pride. Declining to comment, Espersen said he was “busy” and found our inquiries “impertinent”.

But had Espersen been playing the canny pol in 2009, and getting in a pre-emptive shot across DR’s bows, so his controversial party would not be demonised? After all, his former party leader, Pia Kjærsgaard, is the most divisive politician Denmark has produced in recent times, a kind of nativist prototype given to remarks like “the Koran teaches Muslims it is acceptable for them to lie and deceive, cheat and swindle as much as they like” and that a “multi-ethnic Denmark… would be a ‘people’s disaster’”.

A Kjærsgaard-esque character would have been an easy target for a show aimed at re-engaging Danes with moderate and meaningful politics. If Espersen’s intent was to nip such a portrayal in the bud, it may have had some effect, but it didn’t do the Danish right, in power for 10 years, much good.

In elections in September last year, Helle Thorning-Schmidt’s centre-left coalition swept the polls, and Thorning-Schmidt became Denmark’s first female prime minister. She isn’t a moderate — Thorning-Schmidt leads Denmark’s Social Democrats — but when she told Danes after her victory that “we have the opportunity to change Denmark — that opportunity must be seized” she might’ve been channelling Borgen’s Birgitte Nyborg, in a case of life imitating art.

Price doubts Borgen would have been successful had the main protagonist been a man. “We have no shortage of accomplished women in this country, but here for the first time a woman was depicted as our prime minister, and people embraced that.” Most of the executives at DR responsible for Borgen and The Killing are female: they include head of drama and ex-Forbrydelsen producer Piv Bernth, head of fiction Nadia Kløvedal Reich, and Borgen’s chief producer Camilla Hammerich. DR’s director-general is prominent Danish lawyer Maria Rørbye Rønn.

<p>Agnete Schlichtkrull, DR</p>

Price diplomatically describes Espersen as a “very nice man” but snorts at his remarks. Still, he says, “DR felt it had to answer that criticism. We knew it was important to be very balanced and therefore we chose not to take any real party names. I made a rule in the writers’ room that we will not mention or depict actual political facts from recent Danish history within 25 to 30 years.” The closest Borgen comes to depicting the DPP extremists is via a corpulent minority party leader with a thick hillbilly-esque rural accent. Though the character is borderline cartoonish, Price says he wanted him to “always speak the truth even though it might be a truth we do not like”.

TRUTH IS, Price is not the only one to damn his generation for its lack of political engagement. He says they had been labelled as “the great consumers — good at investing in and consuming products and making big careers and not very much interested in revolutions.

“Yet great things have been part of my youth,” he argues. “In Denmark, this was part of our growing up and yet we didn’t want to revolutionise anything, we just wanted a bigger house than our parents.”

Denmark is a socially liberal country, a model of transparency in which it seems everything is open and up for debate. Everyone knows where Denmark’s first real female PM (who came into office after Borgen’s fictional Birgitte Nyborg) lives, but few much care.

Political leaders, and the royals, too, have discreet security but live at home and do their own shopping, washing and cooking. The Danish right wing might even be tagged as lefties in lesser democracies. This is the country in which the party that is literally called Left, Venstre, occupies the centre-right and whose most prominent recent leader, the ex-PM Anders Fogh Rasmussen, rose to power attacking Denmark’s famous welfare state, but while he was in power also approved gay marriage.

Is anything off limits in Borgen?

So far Islam has been only gently touched; Danish troops (in the series, and in reality) are in Afghanistan, and there’s the plot twist in which the Green Party, led by an integrated Muslim, joins Nyborg’s ruling coalition. But this seems almost denialist, in the land which spawned the Jyllands-Posten Mohammed cartoons controversy. And is Price ignoring that Islam is the biggest minority faith in Denmark, claiming almost four per cent of the population, a level that alarms many Danes? “Wait for the third series,” says the scriptwriter.

Another conspicuous absence from Borgen’s intrigues is the Danish royal family, Europe’s oldest continuous monarchy.

There’s a simple reason for that, says Price. “There isn’t really a discussion in Danish society about whether we should have the royals or not.”

He says they are “neutral subject matter” and therefore not (yet) the stuff of political thrillers.

“They are definitely not off limits, [but] they are not Fergie.”

One gets the impression that if the gamine Princess Mary were to transform herself into a duplicate of the indelicate Duchess of York, Price would be quick to notice. (In Borgen’s upcoming third season, Denmark’s near-absent republican movement gets a slight nudge when PM Nyborg’s Moderates decide to refuse to accept obligatory royal gongs for public service.)

Borgen ’s success abroad has astounded Price and his colleagues at DR. The series was written and produced for Danes. “We were told at the outset by management that this would not travel,” he says. “I mean, who would be interested in a show about, excuse me, Danish politics? The Swedes and the Norwegians might buy it out of politeness, as we do in Scandinavia, but that would be it.”

Now Borgen screens from South Korea to Estonia, with the American network NBC signed on to produce a re-make. “It is genuine astonishment on our part that the world has bought into this series.”

EU Crisis: All For One, And Everyone For Themselves

<p>Jasper Juinen/Getty Images</p>

Voters in Spain’s region of Catalonia gave secessionists a majority in November 25 regional elections. Why does Catalonia want to go it alone?

As Spain suffers its sixth year of economic crisis, ‘Why not?’ might actually be the grumpy Catalans’ more likely question.

Economic crises often create opportunities for long-simmering separatist movements to exploit. Think of what happened in the Baltic states as the Soviet Union unravelled, and in East Timor after the Indonesian economy collapsed in 1998. And consider the other Indonesian regions — Aceh, the West Papuans, the Christians of Maluku — that have tried to go it alone and could do so again next time Jakarta’s “Javanese empire” gets itself into money troubles.

As Spain’s richest region, Catalonia’s aspirations for independence have rarely been as passionately — and never as violently — expressed as those of the Basques on the other side of the Iberian peninsula.

After the dictator Franco died in 1975 (and poignantly, for many Spanish, not overthrown) to usher in a wobbly Spanish democracy, the 1980s saw Catalan extremists briefly flirt with the idea. They formed Terra Lliure, or Free Land, Catalonia’s equivalent of the Basque’s ETA (Basque Homeland and Freedom). Both groups wanted to install Marxist states in their respective regions, ETA more violently than the more business-minded Catalans, who prospered from Spain’s embrace from Europe.

Terra Lliure was never as confronting as ETA, and Madrid regarded it as a bit of a joke. ETA has killed more than 800 people in its five-decade war on the Spanish state, and remains an active, though much reduced, threat to Spain. Terra Lliure killed just once, a 62-year-old housewife who was accidentally slain in a botched raid on a judge.

So unremarkable has Catalonian separatism been that Madrid has probably never even considered waging a guerra sucia, or dirty war, against Barcelona’s splittists, as Spain’s first post-Franco democratic governments did when they marshalled death squads against the Basques.

In 1995, by which time Catalonia had become one of Europe’s richest regions, Terra Lliure had disbanded, but the rump of its members joined the Esquerra Republicana de Catalunya (ERC), Catalonia’s Republican Left party.

But Spain’s current economic demise has opened a door for Catalan secessionists.

Elections on November 25 gave the secessionist parties a majority in the Catalonian parliament, probably forcing the dominant centre-right Convergence and Union party into talks on how to advance independence.

And as they proudly wave their senyera, the striking Catalonian flag, as they enthusiastically dance the folkloric sardana piling high in ceremonial human castles, independence-minded Catalans will tell anyone who listens that it’s all about culture, language and identity. These conversations don’t take long to evoke the tyranny of Franco, as if he were still in power.

Except it’s actually about money. It may be Spain’s most industrious region, but Catalonia is going broke, it says, because the cash its economy generates is transferred to Madrid — which in its profligacy has wasted it. ‘Enough!’ cry as many as 70 per cent of Catalonians.

But the mechanics of how secession actually might take place mean independence will be a long time coming. The Catalan breakaways still want to be in the EU but, pressured by Madrid (and Paris too, which has its own Catalan region bordering Spain), Brussels has said that’s not a given. And its not clear how far an independent Catalonia would spread – south to Valencia and the Balaeric Islands too? Into France? All regions speak Catalan.

What’s Spain’s so-called ‘Red Effect’?

This was the feel-good nationalism that was expected to wash over Spain after its football team La Roja heroically prevailed on the South African veldt two years ago, for sport’s most-coveted trophy, the World Cup.

Until then, The Red — so named for the team’s fiery playing strip — had been international football’s chronic under-achievers. Commentators and pundits had mused that it was Spain’s political disunity — its grumpy Galicians, its cranky Catalans and, too often, its bombing Basques — that had turned the national team, drawn from one of the world’s strongest leagues in a football-obsessed land, into a dud.

And then La Roja won. The Guardian, CNN and others gushed about ‘How World Cup victory stirred Spain’s forgotten patriotism’ and that ‘Spain’s success puts nationalists in the shade’. We were assured that this Red Effect would elevate Spain from the deepening doldrums of its collapsed economy.

Except it did nothing of the sort.

Two years — and another football cup (Euro 2012) — later and Spain’s economy has plunged ever deeper. One in four Spanish is out of work, and more and more Catalans, Basques and even Galicians are itching to break away from a fretting Madrid, which relies on these regional economies to pay its mounting bills.

No-one can confidently predict when Spain’s once-tigerish economy will roar again. The best sensible estimate is 2014, which also happens to be when La Roja defends its title in Rio and also when Catalonia is likely to hold a referendum to decide if its seven million people will break clear of Spain.

If La Roja doubles up in Rio, doubtless Madrid will be pumping the Red Effect again for all it’s worth. But before it does, its politicians might wish to dig into the files to remind themselves of what Barcelona’s newspapers chose to put on their front pages the day Spain made its first World Cup final in history.

<p>Daniel Sastre/Getty</p>

True, with seven Barça players in the national team, 100,000 Catalans crowded Barcelona’s placas to celebrate La Roja’s magnificence; but as many as 1.5 million, about 20 per cent of Catalonia’s population, had come out a day earlier to protest Madrid’s winding back of its autonomy. It was the moment many Catalans today say crystallised their reborn independence movement — which carried last month’s regional elections.

But Spain’s crisis has evened out, no?

Not quite, but last week Spain finally made a start by accepting the reality that many analysts have long been banging on about — it must tackle the cancer in its toxic banking system. Though Spain’s property market first collapsed in 2008 in the wake of the US sub-prime drama, and has been tanking ever since, even banks that took billions in EU (read German) support were reluctant to swallow such harsh medicine onto their balance sheet. Write-offs of dodgy loans amounted to 25 to 30 per cent at best.

Now all that has changed. On November 28, the four stricken Spanish banks that had accepted state aid agreed to write their assets down by 60 per cent. With most of the problems in the property sector, that reflects the real level of real estate prices, which have been hammered by the massive glut of property across Spain.

But this is also a tricky topic for Madrid and Brussels — both desperate to keep their unions together. The write-down came with thousands more job losses at a time when neither administration can afford the resulting political impact of more unemployment. And it brought hundreds of branch closures too, denying enterprising Spaniards, who’d hoped to trade their way out of recession, the lifeblood of cash to help them do so. As if Spain didn’t have enough problems, last month revealed yet another as official unemployment reached a staggering 26 per cent.

You say 2014 might be when Catalans vote on independence? Isn’t that also when Scots vote in their independence referendum?

Yes, the Scottish will probably vote in October that year and, curiously, sport might also be a factor as nationalists, now well behind in the polls, crank up the rhetoric to get Scots fired up to leave Britain. But it won’t be football. Ranked at 70 on FIFA’s ladder, compared to Spain’s 1, Scotland isn’t likely to trouble the scorers in Rio, or even actually make it there. The vote will likely come a month or so after Glasgow hosts the Commonwealth Games, at which Scottish athletes are expected to do well. They won a disproportionately high seven of Britain’s 29 gold medals at this year’s London Olympics, almost 25 per cent of the tally from a land that comprises just 9 per cent of the UK’s population. And both sides, the unionists and the Scottish nationalists, claimed these efforts as their own, rather as Catalans celebrated La Roja’s 2010 win after cocking a snook at Madrid a day earlier.

But Madrid and London are dealing with their independence agitators in vastly different ways. UK Prime Minister David Cameron has agreed that Scots can have their referendum — not a bad gamble when support for independence runs about 40 per cent. In Madrid, Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy has denied Catalans the same privilege, claiming such a vote would be contrary to the Spanish constitution. That won’t much bother Catalans, some of whom are even contemplating a unilateral declaration of independence.

Scotland, Catalonia, the Basques… who else in Europe is angling to go it alone?

That would be, most embarrassingly for Brussels, the European Union’s capital, Belgium.

The unelected mandarins who run the EU can’t claim they don’t understand how their austerity demands are firing up opponents from Athens to Alicante, because it’s also happening in their own backyard. Belgians are embroiled in their own independence struggle. This momentum comes from Belgium’s Dutch speakers, the Flemish. They are represented by Bart De Wever’s centre-right New Flemish Alliance, the biggest party in the Belgian parliament, but not (yet) part of government.

De Wever is becoming well known in Belgium for his dramatic weight loss — the politician once pilloried as ‘The Waffleman’ this year lost 60kg of his 142kg, by going on a protein diet. But he is better known for his agitation for a separate Flanders. Though he may no longer personify Flanders’s famous frites, De Wever believes there’s no reason a Flanders independent from the Francophone Walloons should be excluded from the EU.

De Wever can appear to be the consummate European, and he is bringing more moderate Flemish voters into his party than the far-right Vlaams Belang, who occupies the more lunatic fringes of the Belgian debate.

Where else?

Who knows how far it could go in Europe’s race toward stable economies, jobs and incomes. Eurocrats fear that the momentum building in Barcelona, Brussels and elsewhere could spread quickly, rather like freedom caught on in Stalinist Eastern Europe after the Berlin Wall came down in 1989. And if Scotland goes it alone, what’s to stop semi-autonomous regions such as Wales and Northern Ireland from doing the same? Both already have powers devolved from London, and their own parliaments. Italy is a land of regions, so too is France. Bavarians in Germany can sometimes sound like Catalans when they start grumbling about Berlin getting all their hard-earned.

It all underlines how fragile the EU ideal is, in a Europe where the idea of gathering together distinct regions into a unitary state hasn’t really been around that long.

 

EU: Austerity, Brie, Merci

Okay, let’s first deal with the boring but important bit — money.

It’s Budget Time in Europe, and governments from London to Lisbon, from Rome to Riga are in a tizz over their commitment to the ailing European Union. On Thursday, a summit begins in Brussels at which Eurocrats — more than 50,000 of them —get to salivate over how much of the proposed €138 billion annual kitty they can get their mitts on. Importantly, these are not the funds used to bail out stricken members, as has become the Eurofashion, but the basic bucks for keeping the bureaucracy oiled, amounting to €1 trillion over seven years.

Some German diplomats have likened London to Statler and Waldorf, those two old duffers from The Muppets, snarking from the sidelines.

Of course, there are frictions, and serious ones, too. As winter looms, Europe is broadly split between the rich and chilly Calvinist north and the steamy, profligate, mostly Catholic south and east.

Britain, Germany, Sweden and The Netherlands want Brussels to keep its head for money, insisting on cuts in keeping with the recent EU mantra of austerity. Just about every other member country, including the Brussels bureaucracy, wants more cash to press its snout into.

Britain seems most vexed by its European membership. Conservative Prime Minister David Cameron wants cuts to the EU budget and better oversight on how it’s spent. That idea seems popular among Brits, most of whom don’t want to be in the EU anyway.

<p>Dan Kitwood-WPA Pool/Getty Images</p>

Dan Kitwood-WPA Pool/Getty Images

British PM David Cameron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel both want to force the EU to tighten its purse-strings, in keeping with the austerity mantra coming out of London and Berlin.

But Cameron’s Tories are also the party of Big Business which likes that Britain is in Europe.

And Cameron needs votes — he’s 7 to 10 points behind Labour in the polls. That’s about as many points as have leaked to the UK Independence Party, led by Eurosceptic Nigel Farage, a former Tory who left the party in 1992 when John Major endorsed the Maastricht Treaty that created the EU. After copping a bloody nose in Parliament last month when 53 Eurosceptic Tory rebels broke with him after a debate about the EU budget, Cameron can’t afford to soften.

Britain and Germany seem to be in broad budgetary agreement, but the Germans articulate Europe-wide exasperation at Whitehall’s constant sniping on Europe, saying it risks the entire European project, which is primarily financed by Berlin anyway. Some German diplomats have likened London to Statler and Waldorf, those two old duffers from The Muppets, snarking from the sidelines.

And let’s not forget propping up the lifestyles of grumpy French farmers — about a third of the EU budget goes on the Common Agricultural Policy.

What does the EU budget actually pay for?

The European Union’s main purpose is to equalise the bloc’s economies, a process which it calls cohesion. Funds are provided by member states, primarily the rich northern ones, and then dispersed by the EU to raise up the lesser regions, most often found in the continent’s east and south.

There are also countless civil society aid programs to support around the world, and myriad EU agencies to fund. And let’s not forget propping up the lifestyles of grumpy French farmers — about a third of the EU budget goes on the Common Agricultural Policy of huge subsidises that keeps European farmers tending their land — and woe betide the domestic political fortunes of any summit-going French president, particularly hero of la gauche François Hollande, who ventures to Brussels with plans to cut any more of the CAP.

Meanwhile, honest hard-working tax-paying Europeans in places like The Netherlands reckon the Brussels bureaucrats are just Moet-swilling papershufflers. Sacre bleu, claim these Eurocrats now agitating for a 5 to 6 per cent budget increase — and this,  remarkably, in the time of extreme austerity.

The fatcats insist there are some important projects to finance — such as the €50 million required to fund their own House of European History in Brussels, and the €300 million needed to build a new home for the European Council, the EU’s paramount secretariat.

Among the European national leaders — Merkels and Montis, Klauses and Kennys — in Brussels this weekend will be Thorbjørn Jagland from non-EU Norway. Jagland is a lifelong Norwegian Labour Party hack who heads the Council of Europe, which claims as its purpose the promotion of cultural co-operation, the rule of law and other noble undertakings — all of which are also done by the EU.

<p>Heiko Junge/AFP/GettyImages</p>

It’s not entirely clear what the Council of Europe is actually for, but it exists, a bureaucracy to be kept afloat for people like, well, like Thorbjørn Jagland, once briefly Norway’s PM, to slide into when the voters kick them out at home.

Though the Council of Europe, which costs €354.34 million annually to run, is strictly speaking not an EU institution, Jagland’s €261,570.48 annual salary and those of the CoE’s 2,139 employees are around 80 per cent funded by the EU and its member states.

(But it’s Jagland’s other job that has made him a very popular figure in the salons of Brussels. He’s also the chair of Norway’s five-strong Nobel Prize Committee, the crowd that hands out the annual Peace prize. Jagland is a career-long advocate of Norway joining the EU. He’s written books and campaigned in Oslo on the topic, but failed to make it happen. There is barely a more eloquent advocate of EU membership for Oslo than the 62-year-old Jagland. The high-minded Nobel committee that he chairs, as it never tires of reminding the world, is supposed to be above petty politics, or acting as a vehicle for Norwegian concerns. So where did the Jagland-chaired committee bestow its Nobel Peace prize this year? Why, it awarded it to the EU, the very same European Union that pays the bulk of Jagland’s salary. Perish the thought there may have been a conflict of interest — that would be very un-Scandinavian, very ig-Nobel.)

Spain’s troubled mortgages now equal a staggering 17.4 per cent of the national GDP. In 2007 it was less than two per cent.

 

How’s Spain doing? It was the dodgy one when we last looked.

It still is, although, Spain’s PM Mariano Rajoy this week declared the worst is over — becoming another voice in the chorus of Euroleaders to claim so. But his big credibility problem is that just as he made his claim, the central Banco de España revealed that the suspect property debts burdening Spain’s stricken banking system had hit new historically high levels.

Spain’s troubled mortgages now equal a staggering 17.4 per cent of the national GDP. In 2007, the last year in which the sun shone on the Spanish economy, it was less than two per cent. Rajoy is now in direct conflict with the Eurocrats keeping his country afloat. After years of recession, he says things ‘will be better’ next year, without offering specifics. But Brussels says Spain will be in recession at least until 2014, no laughing matter for the Tahrir Square-inspired indignados staging rolling protests across a land where one in four are unemployed.

To add to Rajoy’s woes, next Sunday, part of the country might vote to secede. Just as Europe’s bureaucrats are scheduled to conclude their budget summit, comes a regional election for Catalans that will effectively be a vote for Catalonian secession; a strong showing by the pro-independent parties will likely prompt a referendum to split this wealthy region from the rest of Spain, which it has been subsidising for some time. Brussels and other EU capitals fear that Catalonian secession could cause a ripple effect elsewhere in the EU — pushing Scotland, Wales, the Basque region, even ethnically divided Belgium itself to make the big leap.

Catalonian secession could cause a ripple effect — pushing Scotland, Wales, the Basque region, even ethnically divided Belgium itself to make the big leap.

Plus, Spain still has a huge property headache. As many as a million homes are surplus in Spain’s property market, so Rajoy has come up with a cunning plan — to rent out his country into China. Rajoy has directly propositioned Chinese mainlanders, asking them to invest just €160,000 for a house, with permanent residency of Spain thrown in as part of the deal.

At this price, selling a modest 150-square-metre apartment in China’s coastal Qingdao, Bilbao’s sister city, would do it. So would some average digs in the Sichuan capital Chengdu, which is officially chummy with Valencia. In Chinese terms, these are not expensive glamour cities like Beijing and Shanghai, where property prices are some of the world’s highest. Even flogging a tiny duplex in an unremarkable complex in industrial Shenzhen, near Hong Kong would yield permanent Spanish residency — aka a house — and €200,000 in change, for a tapa or two.

And what horrors to come?

Well, if you’d asked the venerable Economist magazine this week, the dramas engulfing Spain, Italy, Ireland, Portugal and Greece are nothing compared to what the ‘time bomb’ of France’s recent credit downgrade might have in store for the world.Mon Dieu!

And Greece? Where’s it at now?

Who could forget. Certainly not the Greeks, now turning in droves to the anti-immigrant, anti-EU, neo-Nazi party Golden Dawn. Germany has installed bureaucrats in various Greek regions to teach local mandarins how to run a budget, (Germany’s in the main, given that Berlin is largely funding the Greek bailout).For their trouble, Golden Dawn supporters have shown up calling the Germans Nazis and demanding they leave.

In the meantime, Eurozone finance ministers meetings in Brussels this week, failed to reach agreement with Athens over the terms of a second bailout. That failure prompted more hand-wringing and doomsaying, as is also the fashion among Euroleaders. As he grappled with a polity he doesn’t control, Greek Prime Minister Antonis Samaras noted that “it’s not only the future of our country, but the stability of the entire Eurozone that is at stake”.

Again.

Conrad: The New New Black

Convicted fraudster Conrad Black, who once lorded over Australia’s Fairfax newspapers in another less-disgraced life, has been peddling around London, hyping his new book with the velocity of a Lance Armstrong EPO-ed to the eyeballs. And, like Lance, flogging The Big Lie that he’s innocent.

Armstrong would have us believe that he’s as saintly as Mandela, as virtuous as Aung San Suu Kyi, and that it’s everyone else with the credibility problem.

Black goes even further in his delusion. He seems to think he is Mandela, another gift to humanity oppressed by a “venal and corrupt” legal system — in his case America’s — that he rates as lowly as North Korea’s. The US justice system is a “fraudulent fascistic conveyor belt” that persecuted him “half to death”.

His is a curious way of looking at his past decade. American justice and the fleeced shareholders of Black’s now-defunct Hollinger group view it differently; that he looted a public company to fund a billionaire’s lifestyle that he, as a mere multi-millionaire, couldn’t afford.

Mandela was incarcerated mostly because he was black. Black seems to believe he was villainised because he was Conrad Black. Mandela chipped limestone in hard labour on South Africa’s Robben Island for the best part of 27 years. Black did his porridge, some three years and change, in a low-security Florida facility American cons regard as a Club Med for Crims, denied little but permission to leave it of his own accord.

On his British book tour, Black has been near as ubiquitous as the paedophile Jimmy Savile, another criminal who’s been all over the box recently. But since Savile is dead, the most perilous place in Britain seems no longer a BBC dressing room but the space between the old Canadian-born crook and a TV interviewer.

His was more offensive than charm. Sparring on the BBC’s Newsnight with Jeremy Paxman, who deliciously introduced the Black segment as “Monsters Inc”. Black called Paxman “a priggish, gullible, British fool” while complimenting his own restraint in not belting Paxman on air. Black called Paxman an “asshole,” and was rude on Sky TV too, scrapping with “jackass” Adam Boulton, an interviewer “incapable of a civil syllable”. On BBC’s Hardtalk, he was civil, if impatient, but no less disabused of his criminality.

Black masochistically presented himself as well to the Beeb’s satirical flagship Have I Got News for You, where he proved stoic but ultimately roadkill for the show’s caustic regulars, the comic Paul Merton and Private Eye’s editor, Ian Hislop.

His schtick has been the same on each appearance. Everyone’s wrong except for Black and his fellow travellers; had his fraud case been heard anywhere but America he would never have been convicted, therefore he’s innocent globally. Like Armstrong, he’s guilty of nothing except choosing immoral business partners, unreliable directors and misjudging the zeal for corporate governance. He repeatedly claimed that he was never convicted for fraud, when the US Supreme Court — and his own book too — confirm he was. “I never cleaned the latrine,” he insists of his time in the lock-up. “It was a shower stall.” Which must be an important distinction for a convict.

Black affects an insouciance about his public image, that he doesn’t care what’s said about him. But writing in The Spectator (a magazine he once owned) after his media whirlwind, he assails London’s press as a “fetid and narcissistic infestation of self-obsessed, drearily-predictable, lazy, reckless self-exalted wits,” the “lowest mutation of human life” he’s ever encountered — except, of course, American prosecutors.

Not one adjective for the pleonastic Conrad when 10 are far better.

As for the politicians he once lavished in his books and on his boards, they now disappoint him. His request for a pardon from George W. Bush, which Black made via Bush’s father, was refused. Or as Black puts it “he didn’t reject it, he just didn’t act on it”. Now he’s trying to regain entry to the very same US that banned him for 30 years — when he’ll be 98 — the same US he ceaselessly slags, the same place he chose to headquarter his now-defunct empire, which was largely brought undone by an independent investigator (a former chairman of the US Securities and Exchange Commission, no less) his own board had appointed.

He’s also trying to restore his Canadian citizenship, the birthland which he once derided as a “Third World dump run by raving socialists”. He renounced his Canadian passport in 2001 to become Lord Black of Crossharbour, a peerage honour many Britons would now like withdrawn from Inmate 18330-424, as the US Federal Bureau of Prisons catalogues him.

Black says he’s doing the media rounds only to sell his new book, A Matter of Principle. Though his fortune has been pillaged by fleecing lawyers, he’s still a very wealthy man — worth USD80 million by one measure which he does not deny.

So if he doesn’t need the money, it’s presumably his ego and a craving for celebrity he’s trying to salve, or perhaps it’s to announce to his former social circle that he and wife Barbara Amiel are back, and that they still matter.

For a time, they were a hot ticket on the London circuit, but even at the peak of his powers — and excess — in the early 2000s, Black was never as publicly recognisable or notorious as British press czars such as Murdoch the “Dirty Digger,” porn baron Richard Desmond or that other fraudster, Robert “The Bouncing Czech” Maxwell. To the wider public, Black’s appearances in their living rooms this past week would likely be the first time they’ve ever heard of him.

A Matter of Principle is published by Encounter Books, which counts among its stable of authors the former US ambassador to the UN, John Bolton, British right-wing firebrand Melanie Phillips and Australian Keith Windschuttle, among other polemicists.

Black’s book is relentlessly self-absorbed, a riposte aimed at wresting the public record of his career back from Tom Bowers’ excoriating 2006 biography, Conrad and Lady Black: Dancing on the Edge, which Black describes as “the most artlessly libelous book since The Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Which is some claim when you consider that Protocols is the book many historians argue influenced Hitler to carry out the Holocaust.

A love letter to himself, Black’s book is at its most disquieting in describing prison life at Federal Correctional Institution Coleman Low in Florida, where — and parents, look away now — he even found child molesters, the lowest of the low of prison pond scum, agreeable company.

These ‘chomos’ were “quite pleasant and sometimes rather intelligent,” and quite possibly victims, like him, of America’s “corrupt prosecutocracy,” Black writes, questioning whether his chomo chums should’ve been behind bars at all.

“Some had huge collections of lewd photographs,” he writes. “I am not convinced that these are facts that justify imprisonment.” As for those who physically abused defenceless people, Black says they are “disgusting” but he also sympathises with them for the “maladjustment” that drove them to such “pitiful” acts.

A Matter of Principle is a register of floridly expressed fibs and score-settling, but no less entertaining for it. Its most diverting — and perhaps its most truthful — passages come at the end, when he discusses his one-time rival in British, Australian and North American print, Rupert Murdoch.

“The Real Rupert Murdoch” is Black’s dramatic coda. And he reserves his most intense vengeance for last.

The venom positively drips from the text. As widely reported this week, he describes Rupert as a “psychopath”, but this seems almost charitable compared with what follows. It’s almost as if Black blames the News Corp boss and his empire for his travails, because it’s clear in the preceding 500 pages — and perish the thought — the last person Conrad Black blames for those is himself.

First, there’s a generous preamble, praising Murdoch for corporate achievements that are “Napoleonic in boldness of concept and skill of execution”. Rupert, Black notes approvingly, cracked the British print unions, broke the American TV cartels, and pioneered satellite TV. With typical bombast, Black claims, “and no one has been more vocal or consistent than I in saluting [these achievements].”

But this is only the starter before Black’s main course, the punctuating breath presaging an inevitable ‘but.’

Then Conrad delivers the dish on his old friend, and then some. Rupert — whom Black says he supported when Murdoch flirted with bankruptcy in the early 1990s — has betrayed him in an “unspeakable assault … despite having assured me in writing that he would try to prevent excesses”.

In a passage penned the same week last year that Murdoch’s Wall Street Journal listed Black in a rogue’s gallery as one of five of history’s most monstrous of corporate criminals, Black says Murdoch “personally intervened” to “Madoffize” him, as “his vast media organisation swung into vitriolic defamatory mode”.

In what might be regarded as a pot-kettle moment for Black, he relishes the Murdoch empire’s recent descent into disgrace from its phone-hacking excesses, when “his companies’ skullduggery finally oozed out, sluggish and filthy”. Murdoch’s News has been “stripped naked as the lawless hypocritical organisation it has long been … engaging in wholesale industrial espionage.”

<p>Brian Kersey/Getty Images</p>

Black describes Murdoch’s “bumbling” appearance before British parliamentarians last year — “like a centenarian semi-cadaver, mumbling about humility. Behind his nondescript personality lurks a repressed destructive malice … [the proprietor of a criminal organisation”. Murdoch, writes Black, is “the great defamer ... a tottering, cowardly supplicant and a prime candidate for criminal prosecution on at least two continents.

“In the extreme winter of his days, Rupert Murdoch’s failing hands have dropped the mask; he is a malignant force and it would be a good thing for the world to be done with him.”

Responding by Twitter to Black’s harangue, Murdoch said last week that one should never be surprised by Conrad’s language, adding that “despite [his] faults, [Black was] very gutsy to fight”.

Their exchange reveals much of both men.

Black’s bile lays blame for his failures on everyone but himself. But what about Rupert? However harsh the insults Black heaps upon him here, Murdoch seems gracious about a fallen former adversary.

Instead, Murdoch reserves scorn for those who continue to meaningfully confront him — such as the “celebrity scumbags” of the Hacked Off campaign that formed in the wake of the phone-hacking revelations, and which continues to expose criminality at News and elsewhere.

Conrad Black no longer poses any threat to Murdoch so it’s easy and even cheap to be gracious about a man reduced to near a figure of pity and ridicule.

But for someone so clearly adoring of his own syntax, words don’t seem to be that important to Black. After mercilessly traducing Murdoch in his book, all it took was a “friendly tweet” from Rupert for Black to offer, via a column in London’s Mail on Sunday, to “bury the hatchet.” One suspects that if he cared, Murdoch would take up Black’s proposal — and embed said blade between Conrad’s shoulders.

THIS correspondent had a bit to do with the then London-based Black, before and briefly after he bought into Fairfax. I was then in Fairfax’s London bureau for The Sydney Morning Herald and spoke often with him as his effort to buy Fairfax twisted between Canberra and his Tourang syndicate’s big end of town.

In what might be regarded as a pot-kettle moment for Black, he relishes the Murdoch empire’s recent descent into disgrace from its phone-hacking excesses, “when his companies’ skullduggery finally oozed out, sluggish and filthy”.

Black then owned the right-leaning London Daily and Sunday Telegraphs. When he began looming over Fairfax, horrified SMH lifers exhorted me to write a hatchet job, insisting that he was a recidivist interferer of Murdochian proportion in his papers’ newsrooms.

Problem for that argument was there was little evidence that Black actually did interfere, at his London papers anyway. The toffy Telegraphs were — and remain — the handbook of England’s affluent conservative shires. They embodied his world view long before he bought them in 1986, that the planet was best stewarded by a patrician establishment club, the more white, male and Anglophone the better (though gender exception was enthusiastically made for Margaret Thatcher), populated by trans-Atlantic types like, well, Conrad Black, a scion of one of Canada’s wealthiest business dynasties, destined to be ennobled by his peers.

Black didn’t need to interfere too much in Telegraph editorial. More often than not he was in furious agreement with his clubbable editors Max Hastings, Charles Moore and Dominic Lawson — the latter two had also been editors of The Spectator. This is different to Murdoch, who directs his empire’s groupthink as might a mafia don, commanding a legion of capos directing ciphers delivering the boss’ directives.

The occasional times Black wasn’t in accord with the Telegraphs, he would indulge himself onto their pages with a signed letter or commentary, most notoriously on New Year’s Eve, 1992 when a vast tract of the Daily Telegraph’s fashion pages was set aside for Black’s “personal offensive against the efforts of the long-skirt brigade to kill off the short skirt”.

This bizarre piece came just a few months after Black had married, after a brief affair, the Canadian journalist Barbara Amiel, who Vanity Fair once described as a “sleek, self-absorbed sex kitten”, a woman notorious among her Toronto Sun colleagues for once, when editor, coming to work in a loose trenchcoat revealing a black bustier, garter belt and stockings.

My brief encounter with Amiel was comical. Researching the biography piece in late 1991 as Black circled Fairfax, I rang around a few colleagues representing Canadian media in London to exchange gossip about him. One hack suggested I call Amiel, then a Sunday Times columnist, because “she knows more about him than any of us”.

I did, but rather than swap titbits, she swiftly blew me off, telling me it would be “inappropriate” to discuss Black. I was puzzled and a little miffed too, particularly when everyone else had been faultlessly Canadian; polite, easygoing, co-operative. Weeks later, long after I’d filed my piece, the Evening Standard’s Londoner’s Diary had an item revealing Conrad Black’s new squeeze — Barbara Amiel, a femme fatale who would later admit to Vogue that her “extravagance knew no bounds,” a profligacy Conrad happily enabled for his “magnificent” spouse — his second, her fifth.

If Black knew of my blithe bumbling around his then mistress, he didn’t show it, engaging whenever necessary to transmit his take on whatever twist and turn his play for Fairfax was taking in Sydney and Canberra. He secured control in mid-1992 but maintained a contact of sorts afterwards, sporadically calling but never to direct, more to gossip and know more of Australia, a land about which he claimed he knew little.

Always faultlessly courteous, he was perhaps the most revealing the last time we spoke. In mid-January 1993, I got into the bureau early one day to meet a deadline. The phone rang around dawn and the caller asked for me. It was Conrad Black, a friendlier-than-normal Conrad Black.

For Black, as with other media moguls past and present, media proprietorship is an entry ticket to the Things That Matter. Flapping the Camillagate transcripts at his titillated dinner guests would remind them he was a global power player,

“Hello, mate,” he said, in that forced mimicry of the Australian vernacular foreigners deploy when seeking to ingratiate. “I was hoping you might have a copy of the Camilla story from Australia?” he asked. This was Camillagate, the transcript of an intimate telephone conversation illegally recorded three years earlier between Prince Charles and Camilla Parker-Bowles, which had been splashed in Australia overnight on the cover on Murdoch’s New Idea magazine.

It was news to me, but it was customary in those pre-internet days for the Fairfax bureaux to be faxed anything from Australia that needed follow up abroad. I went to the communications room, and there spilling from the fax was New Idea’s Camillagate.

I faxed it to Black, and he called back delighted that he’d got it probably before anyone in London. He explained that he was hosting a dinner that evening. The transcripts confirmed the open secret that Camilla and Charles, who was then still married to Diana, were an item. Then unpublishable in London during the ‘War of the Waleses,’ this would be the piece de resistance to produce at table, the hottest scandal of the time.

For all his verbosity and cerebral bluster, this man so profoundly enamoured of his own intellect — Paul Keating once described the choice between Kerry Packer and Black as that between a “900-pound gorilla and a fucking thesaurus” — was as down and dirty and gossipy as the next person.

For Black, as with other media moguls past and present, media proprietorship is an entry ticket to the Things That Matter. Flapping the Camillagate transcripts at his titillated dinner guests would remind them he was a global power player with a ringside seat on everything from trans-Atlantic machinations through Middle East intrigues (he also owned – and changed — the influential Jerusalem Post) to knowing before most in his elite social and business circle that the heir to the British throne imagined himself as a tampon.

My colleagues’ fears that Black would interfere would prove largely unfounded, and compared with the commercial turmoil Fairfax now endures, his was something of a golden era there. A vengeful Packer was mostly kept at arm’s length, technology was yet to dry up Fairfax’s classified advertising ‘rivers of gold’ and its newspapers did relatively well. Indeed, Black’s four years at Fairfax were among his more lucrative — and less larcenous — corporate adventures. He exited in 1996, frustrated by Canberra’s media regulations, which barred him from owning more, but with a $300 million profit on the investment.

Australia left him with mixed feelings. In his book, he writes that though he had a “happy commercial and personal experience” he found Australians “paranoid” about foreign investment and a place that encouraged “innovatively salacious foul-mouthed language”.

Paul Keating, the prime minister of the era, and with whom he tangled over media ownership law, was “an extremely entertaining and in some ways brilliant man, a likeable scoundrel” albeit one deficient of “Solomonic” judgement.

Dishonourable Australian political leaders on both sides had “flimflammed” him, and he blames them in part for his failure to become one of the world’s biggest media companies (when there are plenty who’ll testify — and did — that Black’s regard of his shareholders’ money as his own was a more compelling impediment to corporate expansion). He scowls at the Murdoch empire’s “constant Australian back-biting and chippiness”, which he says Rupert Murdoch “likes and promotes”.

About the only Australians to have Black’s unqualified approval are the “delightful” Barry Humphries and Bob Carr, whom he neo-colonially describes as the former “prime minister of New South Wales”. Carr, Black writes, is a “very accomplished man” and claims him as his best Australian friend since the 1999 death of the novelist Morris West.

It seems the love-in between Black and Carr is mutual. Carr wrote in August 2010 — prematurely as things turned out — of his pleasure to hear from his “favorite press proprietor”, noting that he’d won his appeal and had been released from prison in the US. A few months later, the US Supreme Court directed Black to prison to finish his sentence.

So where to next for the Black caravan? Australia? The Global Mail asked Encounter Books if he was planning to spruik his book in Sydney but received no reply.

His good friend Bob Carr is, of course, now Australia’s foreign minister. In various columns, Black has advanced Carr as just the man to restore the international lustre – if it were ever thus — of the Commonwealth, to replace Germany-dominated Europe and the “erratic” US.

Any Australian plans for Black would raise questions of whether Canberra would allow entry to this convicted criminal. And Bob Carr is the ultimate arbiter for a visa should his mate Conrad the crook beg Australia’s pardon to flog a few of his books down under and, if his British sortie is any guide, spread some lies and bile too.

Tricky.

If The Water’s At Your Neck, It Pays To Be Pragmatic

A FUNNY thing didn’t happen to Dutch voters on their way to recent elections.

They didn’t debate climate change.

Which, in one of the world’s more vigorous democracies, strikes one as astonishing. In the febrile atmosphere that marks the climate-change debate elsewhere, the discussion inevitably reduces to money — specifically, whether the imposition of a carbon tax or equivalent environment levy is necessary and affordable. That being so, if any nation’s taxpayers had a pressing fiscal imperative to put climate change at the top of their election agenda, it would be the 17 million people of the Netherlands, where great swathes of land lie below sea level.

The Dutch taxpayers’ basic annual water bill starts at a collective €6 billion. And that’s just managing the infrastructure that already exists.

Then take in the anticipated cost of upgrading that infrastructure, to ‘future-proof’ the country against the anticipated ravages of global warming — anthropogenically-induced or otherwise — and the bill explodes exponentially to a planned €100-150 billion. This projected bill is contained in a report that has long been accepted and recommended on all major sides of the Dutch polity.

<p>Co Zeylemaker/AFP/Getty Images</p>

That’s a big ask for taxpayers at any time, and then one remembers these are austere times of economic crisis in the Eurozone, where everything seems to be on the table for budget cuts.

Yet, in the saturated Netherlands, no-one seems to blanch. The need to secure their future doesn’t allow the Dutch an alternative.

“We don’t have the luxury of a climate-change debate in this country,” says Peter Glas, chairman of The Netherlands’s national water authority. “If we make the wrong decision, we are finished.”

How the Dutch deal with global warming stands in sharp contrast to the polarised forums in other nations. In the Anglosphere, for example, the ‘discussion’ is often reduced to little more than a shouty cartel: on one side the bumptious Moncktons and Morgans and their fellow travellers; on the other, the disciples of the evangelical Hayhoes and Gores — where both sides seem determined to submerge common sense under a deluge of shameless attention-seeking.

Were such colossal budgets as the Dutch endure in the hands of global-warming denialists, it would be political party time. In Australia we’ve seen it from those who make capital from the rights or wrongs of the recently instituted carbon tax. In the northern hemisphere, there’s the ongoing arm-wrestle over whether to drill Alaska’s Arctic Refuge, and the argy-bargy over how fast, if at all, Greenland’s ice is melting.

If this were the US, or even Australia, there’d doubtless be a bit more hoopla for here is something worth venerating: it is Europe’s lowest point — at 6.76 metres below sea level.

To put the pull future-proofing has on The Netherlands’s finances in perspective, the Dutch government that unexpectedly fell in April — the event that prompted September’s elections — did so because it couldn’t agree where and how to slash a general €12 billion from the national budget, to meet crisis-gripped Europe’s austerity edicts from Brussels.

Across Europe, the Dutch endure a reputation for parsimony, even stinginess. Thrift stores like the many clothes-repair shops on any Dutch main straat attest to the fact that these are a frugal people who can begrudge spending a cent more than they have to. Many Europeans would say Holland is the land of deep pockets and short arms.

That basic €6 billion in water management raised from Dutch taxpayers maintains existing sea defences such as the Delta Works around Rotterdam and the Zuiderzee system in the north. These are the massive network of dikes and drainage complexes that the American Society of Civil Engineers deems one of the ‘seven wonders’ of the modern world. This figure also covers maintenance of the vast network of canals, dams and sluices that criss-cross this flat land.

The vulnerable half of the Netherlands critically hosts Europe’s biggest seaport, Rotterdam, and most of its economy. When scientists report that 3,000 km away across the North Atlantic, Greenland’s glaciers are melting at an ever faster rate, it’s big news here. The Dutch care about the planet as much as the next nation, perhaps more so if Greenpeace bumper stickers in middle-class Amsterdam are any measure.

Vulnerable specks of land such as The Maldives and Kiribati, or even more substantial conurbations such as Java’s sodden northwest coast centred on flood-prone Jakarta, could sink under the waves and the global economy wouldn’t much notice anything missing.

But, as Netherlanders like to point out in their cosy ‘brown cafes’ where water laps metres away in canals, if Holland disappears it’s tot ziens to the world’s 17th largest economy, and then some. It would disrupt efficient access to Germany’s industrialised Ruhr region, the heart of the world’s fourth largest economy, to much of wealthy northern Europe and to a large proportion of the world’s largest economic bloc, the wider European Union itself.

With so much at stake, and so much spent, why wasn’t climate change an election showstopper in Holland? It’s not as if the Dutch don’t value democracy or loudly exercise their right to free speech.

Indeed, the Dutch polity is one of the world’s most democratic, and sceptical voters here demand to be intimately consulted by their representatives, as was evidenced during the recent election campaign.

Prime time TV viewers sat through eight debates — eight! — before the September 12 poll. Some 20 party leaders — from the ruling People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy and the Islamophobe Geert Wilders, to the Green-Left and the Animal (Rights) Party — got virtually equal air time. (My favourite moment of the election season was when the re-elected leader of the animal rights party wore a bandolier of carrots over her military-style outfit to the opening of Parliament.)

They debated Europe’s ongoing economic crisis and the Dutch role in dealing with it was the front, centre and near only issue of the poll. Well after that came the usual domestic concerns, such as education and health. And then they debated Europe’s crisis some more. But not climate change.

The issue hasn’t exactly been front and centre of the US presidential campaign either, but for very different reasons than the Dutch poll. According to Professor Pier Vellinga, scientific director of the state-supported think tank Knowledge for Climate in Utrecht, the Dutch examined, weighed up and digested climate-change science long ago — because they had to.

<p>Courtesy Wageningen University, Alterra</p>

Professor Pier Vellinga

“The Dutch have a very intimate relationship with water,” says Vellinga. “We can see the direct threat to our lifestyle and livelihood on a daily basis, possibly more than anywhere else.”

Famously imbued with mercantile common sense that has made the Netherlands one of the world’s richest countries, the Dutch accepted it and all parties agreed to pay billions to be defended from it. And then, says Vellinga, pragmatically moved to create an industry from it. Today, Dutch companies are the world’s leaders in dredging and reclamation, in land-starved places such as Singapore and Hong Kong.

“Internationally,” says Vellinga, “protecting against climate change — climate proofing — is very popular now but reducing emissions is a bit less popular, whereas in The Netherlands in the late 1980s we really started absolute priority for reducing emissions.

“We are very environmentally aware,” he adds. “We are quite a few people in a small area and we are vulnerable to the water, which makes us sensitive to the environment.”

The Netherlands is also located in the heart of one of the world’s most industrialised zones and, as an entrepôt, has built an infrastructure— Rotterdam port and Schiphol airport — that is far larger than its specific national requirements demand. “We are in the eye of the tornado,” Vellinga says. “We have more multinational production companies than the size of our nation might suggest.”

The Netherlands has long been an international champion of climate change, generally ahead of EU decrees. “About 80 per cent of our political establishment accepts corrective measures,” says Vellinga, “and 70 per cent accept the science”.

“Wilders,” he says, referring to Geert Wilders, the firebrand Dutch politician better known for his anti-Islam rhetoric, “is the denialist, but even he has safety-first arguments.” Wilders’ Freedom Party has the Dutch parliament’s third largest electoral bloc, despite big seat losses in the recent poll. It was Wilders who in April brought down the coalition government he’d helped create in 2010, when he broke over government plans to adhere to Brussels’ austerity edicts for EU members.

“We kept a little bit quiet when Wilders was more active because we did not want to become a lightning rod for his activities. We are here to do good scientific research and we did not want to provoke these guys and become a distracting political issue,” explains Vellinga.

One of the founders of the UN’s Nobel Peace Prize-winning Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Vellinga isn’t without his enemies and sceptics. The Dutch magazine Elsevier has described him as “Number One climate alarmist of the Netherlands”, and he says he often gets hate mail from denialists.

But, he says, something deeper motivates the average person to concern for the environment here, where every district is covered by one of the world’s earliest forms of democracy, the famous waterschappen, or water authorities — elected bodies entrusted with maintaining the regional defences.

<p>Koen van Weel/AFP/Getty Images</p>

Koen van Weel/AFP/Getty Images

ONE of Pier Vellinga’s earliest memories is of the refugees his family housed at their home in the early 1950s. They were evacuees from the 1953 North Sea flood disaster, still today regarded as the seminal event in modern Dutch history, when more than 1,800 people were killed in floods that submerged a tenth of the country.

It was this tragedy which prompted the vast Delta Works program and, later, the Delta Commission, which was tasked with future-proofing The Netherlands specifically against climate change. The commission was chaired by Dutch politician Cees Veerman, a farmer and stalwart of the Christian Democratic Appeal party, a member of the current caretaker government.

Veerman says he didn’t approach his job at the Delta commission with any pre-determined view on climate change, not with how or even whether it was happening. “We were entrusted with investigating whether it would impact on the Netherlands, and then recommend what to do to protect ourselves,” he says. “We let the science and our investigations speak for themselves. We looked at all scenarios.” As for the colossal bill anticipated to future-proof the country with some of the world’s most sophisticated engineering, he says, “we see this as little more than an insurance policy”.

“We do business with the sea, and more often than not, the money stays inside the Dutch economy.”

Veerman says he’s both amused and alarmed when he observes foreign debates about global warming and the existence, or otherwise, of it. As a farmer, he sees the effects of climate change for himself on his land; in seasons beginning and ending at unusual times or in the unexpected patterns emerging among local animals, insects and plants.

Growing up through the 1950s and 1960s, Vellinga says it became commonplace for Dutch teachers to encourage the nation’s best and brightest toward ‘Delta work’, to a career devoted to protecting the nation from nature.

Vellinga was one of them. He studied as a civil engineer, and was exempted from military service because he was involved in maintaining sea defences. “I wasn’t the boy with the dike,” he smiles, “but I guess I was almost patriotically driven to this type of work.” Today, 100 PhDs work in his research centre in Utrecht; among them are climatologists, economists, demographers and social scientists.

“It’s not just defending the country but it’s developing ways to sell our expertise in this area,” he says. For example, he consults to the city of Venice on how better to manage its water issues.

“Water management is seen as a Dutch speciality,” he says. “Like if you want to specialise in kangaroos, it’s perhaps better that you be an Australian.”

Australia, he says, “is so vulnerable for climate change.

“When I was at IPCC we were always sceptical about statements on emission reduction from countries which produce lots of coal and oil, like Norway, like Australia, to some extent Canada and The Netherlands because they depend on these resources for export.”

“Australia is close to Antarctica, and all climate models tell us it will have major changes in climate, more so than North America and Europe. Its geographic position makes it more sensitive to changes in the global temperature and air circulation than probably any other country.”

The no-nonsense-get-on-with-it way the Dutch approach their battle with the climate is starkly evident outside the tiny the Dutch village of Nieuwerkerk aan den Ijssel, in Holland’s southwest.

If this were the US, or even Australia, there’d doubtless be a bit more hoopla, for here is something worth venerating: it is Europe’s lowest point — at 6.76 metres below sea level — in a land world-famous for being waterlogged, and overcoming it. If it were anywhere else there’d likely be a boisterous theme park — instead it’s mostly verdant polder.

To the expectant foreign eye it’s all rather disappointing. There’s a car park for just 10 vehicles — The Global Mail was the only visitor when we called in — and a brief four-paragraph explanation of what we are looking at; an unremarkable steel column embedded in a small pond.

Instead of inevitable snowdomes and the naff kiddy toys of tourist kitsch, this emblematic place is just metres from one of The Netherlands’ busiest freeways. There’s no sign pointing here or even an acknowledgment. Motorists rush between Europe’s two biggest commercial ports, Rotterdam and Antwerp, oblivious to the national symbolism here at the heart of Europe Inc.

Which would appear to be its point. The monument is Dutch, matter-of-fact and not to be trumpeted. Plain is good in The Netherlands, whose 17 million people have little regard for razzamatazz when there’s important trading to be done at Europe’s commercial crossroads. They just accept it, and move on without fuss.

Indeed, it’s rather how the Dutch confront the challenge posed by global warming.

Pyongyang Pastorale – Updated

Pedalling Propaganda by the paddy

(see updated correspondence below text)

October 14, 1994

It seemed an image of rural harmony in developing Asia – a woman riding a pushbike beside a paddy field where peasants were harvesting rice. But in communist North Korea, nothing is as it seems.

This cyclist had fitted to her bicycle two oversized loudspeakers blaring a jaunty revolutionary song: “Kim Jong-il, you are our supreme commander; with you we will win a great victory”. With the tune etched on to a crude metal tape, her revolutionary task was to ride up and down this one-kilometre stretch of road outside Pyongyang for eight hours a day, every day. The “Dear Leader”, Kim Jong-il, the man expected to take over as North Korean President after 100 days of mourning the death in July of his father, directs that the song spur the peasants on to greater productivity.

The speed of her pedalling was directly related to the tune of the song, like a dynamo powering a headlight. If she slowed, the song slurred, and in North Korea nothing is permitted to stop the revolution.

It is impossible to escape the mark of the Great and Dear Leaders in North Korea.

For example, I was proudly shown what I was told was a “typical” high school, the Pyongyang June 9 Senior Middle School – June 9 being the day in 1969 when the Great Leader apparently directed his education authorities to build a new school.

The main entrance is dominated by two-metre by two-metre portraits of the two men, flanked by oil paintings of their respective birthplaces, flanked again by etched writings of their fabled “on-the-spot guidance”.

The headmistress explained that the co-educational school’s main curriculum comprised the Revolutionary History of Kim Il-sung, the Revolutionary History of Kim Jong-il and Communistic Virtue.

Electronics and Biology are also taught, but even then not without the family’s touch.

In the electronics class, students were being taught the miracle of television, fiddling with the insides of a contraption that Logie Baird might have trouble recognising until they got a picture. An image appeared through the fuzz – of the latest Worker’s Party congress.

It’s a similar story in Biology, where students examine organ isms beneath crude microscopes. The subject is the cellular structure of the kimjongilia, the national plant created for and named after the Dear Leader.

(Fences are of wrought iron in the style of the kimjongilia and the kimilsungia).

Later, the school put on a show for me and a group of Chinese tourists from Tianjin.

The show opened with a little girl in a pink and purple tutu bursting into tears, crying that “with a filial mind we must turn our grief into strength and support the Dear Leader Supreme Commander Comrade Kim Jong-il”.

A band strikes up and so does she, into full voice, her colleagues swaying in the background: “Who gives us happiness? Dear Leader Comrade Kim Jong-il.

“Who gives us hope? Dear Leader Comrade Kim Jong-il.

“We are living a happy life of gladness in the bosom of the party and Dear Leader Comrade Kim Jong-il.”

In the Kim family’s North Korea, the Cultural Revolution has never ended.

It seems clear Kim Jong-il, a pudgy-faced man with a bad hair cut, will take over from his father, the late “Great Leader” President Kim Il-sung, after October 15, when the official 100-day mourning period finishes.

Diplomats in Pyongyang say he has spent the past three months shoring up military, intellectual and propaganda support for his rule.

“Kim Il-sung is Kim Jong-il,” Pyongyang Radio said last week, confirming that the world’s first communist dynastic succession seems to be proceeding smoothly.

“Whatever trials and difficulties may confront us, we’ll carry on with the great task of Juche (self-reliance) revolution, and complete it by upholding high the will of Kim Il-sung, and faithfully follow the ideology and leadership of Kim Jong-il,” the radio said.

In the Korean National Art Museum, the first works have begun to appear since Kim senior’s death. In splendid social-realism, they show grief-stricken Koreans comforted by an athletic Kim junior at the foot of his father’s giant bronze statue in central Pyongyang.

Another shows Kim junior astride a prancing steed rodeo-style atop a mountain overlooking the military demarcation line that separates North and South Korea at the Korean War truce village of Panmunjon. The sky on the north side is clear and sunny, on the south stormy.

However, diplomats say it seems that it hasn’t all been smooth sailing for the mysterious Kim Jong-il, about whom very little is known.

The true test of his accession to power will come when North Koreans start wearing his image on the little badges they are required to wear on their left side above their heart.

The badge they wear now is still that of the Great Leader, and diplomats say that attempts to issue Dear Leader badges were stopped after only three days about six weeks ago.

Koreans wear these badges with fear and pride.

Two attempts by this correspondent to buy one in back lanes, both times pressing $US1,100 – two year’s average salary – into people’s hands, were repelled. The first said nothing could separate him from the Great Leader; the second pointed to an adjacent building and gestured like a policeman.

Dr Han S. Park, a Korean-American scholar and President Jimmy Carter’s liaison man with the Pyongyang regime, has had higher contact with North officials than most in recent months, as he tries to broker a peace deal between Washington and Pyongyang over the nuclear stand-off.

Interviewed by The Australian Financial Review in Beijing after a week in Pyongyang, Dr Park said: “Kim Jong-il’s power base is more extensive than we are led to believe.

“Since his father’s death, he has consolidated his grip over the military and the intellectual side.

“His fate is dependant on the performance of the economy. I don’t think the system will collapse Eastern European-style. People are not prosperous but they are not starving. They are thoroughly brain-washed. Almost all Koreans think the rest of the world lives under the Great Leader’s philosophy.

“That’s why there are all those museums devoted to his teachings, with gifts from foreign so-called dignitaries.”

I visited the biggest of these museums, the International Friendship Exhibition centre, about three hours north of Pyongyang. In a huge eight-storey building in traditional Korean architecture, there are displayed 73,035 gifts to Kim Il-sung and 29,831 to Kim Jong-il as at 18 months ago. A new museum is being built alongside to house the new gifts.

Visiting the centre is a near-religious experience, a monument to bad taste, a shrine to the Kims and to the despots of the world. There are even a few Australian gifts.

 

POST SCRIPT: In 2012, a Briton I don’t know, someone called Tom Law, published this: http://www.hoofindan.co.uk/online/jongs-mad/ – on his blog that purports to correct media wrongs. (I discovered it by chance when researching a piece I am writing, after receiving yet another inquiry about the Kim golf story)

“CRAZY FACT 1

Kim Jong-Il claims to be the world’s greatest golfer

In 1994 the North Korean propaganda machine reported that Kim Jong-Il had racked up 11 hole-in-ones during his first ever attempt at playing golf. His 38 under-par round at the Pyongyang Golf Course was verified by his 17 bodyguards.

Evidence?

It’s a great story, but there is no record of either the North Korean media or Kim Jong-Il ever making this claim. The origins of this ‘fact’ are from an International Herald Tribune article. It was an off-the-cuff comment made by a groundsman at the golf course during a chat to an American journalist called Eric Ellis.”

I ASKED Law to correct two of his assumptions he wrote above 1) that I am not an “American journalist” and 2)that the origins were in the IHT and not the AFR. He refused,  later saying he would do so only after the AFR  corrected my own ‘inaccurate’ reports – 18 years later, about a place he admitted he has never been.

This is the bizarre correspondence that followed, perhaps also titled as How to Ill-Advisedly Waste An Afternoon:

From: Eric Ellis <eric@ericellis.com>
Subject: Re:
Date: 26 October 2012 12:24:18 CEST
To: hoofindan@gmail.com

And the original article, as appeared on P1 of the Australian Financial Review, the Australian FT/WSJ, of which I was Asia Corres at the time.

http://ericellis.com/archive/northkorea1.htm

You amusingly asked if I ‘fact-checked’ my interlocutor’s anecdote. The answer is no, because his remarks were so clearly ludicrous, why would one bother? A round of 34 is about 24 under the established world record. It was more interesting – and revealing – as a vehicle for the lengths some very scared people felt/feel they have to go to deify the First Family. How do I know they are scared? Because I was there – its called journalism.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 12:04, Eric Ellis wrote:
The most honest and correct re-telling of the story, largely because he consulted me, which you didn’t. I’m not hard to find. You tap my name into Google and its usually the first result. Sometimes things aren’t as conspiratorial as they might appear to be, sometimes things are just banal.
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/kim-jong-ils-record-setting-round-may-not-have-been-all-it-was-cracked-be

On 26 Oct 2012, at 12:32, Tom Law wrote:

Point noted,

I’m genuinely interested in your look at how the Internet is liable to blur lines between opinion and fact.
But I would also ask you to look at your original artilcle in the same light.

One area that I was intrigued by, was this section:

“It seemed an image of rural harmony in developing Asia – a woman riding a push-bike beside a paddy field where peasants were harvesting rice. But the bicycle carried two oversized loudspeakers blaring a jaunty revolutionary song: “Kim Jong Il, you are our supreme commander; with you we will win a great victory.”
Her task was to ride up and down a single short stretch of road outside Pyongyang for eight hours a day, every day. The speed of the woman’s pedaling directly determined the tune of the song, like a dynamo powering a bicycle headlight. If she slowed, the song slurred, and in North Korea nothing is permitted to stop the revolution.”

What efforts did you make to check this or did you use your assumption?
Did you speak to this woman?
How do you know her task was to ride up and down – who told you?
Where did you get the eight hour figure from?
How do you know the lyrics to the song?
You’ve presented this as if the bike was specially rigged up to ensure the woman keeps pedalling as some kind of bizarre propoganda device.
Do you genuinely believe this is what was happening.

How much of this is factual and how much is your attempt to find a story where non-exists?

Tom

Eric Ellis wrote:
To address your questions;

I do not work on the basis of assumption.
I witnessed that particular anecdote – it  was – quite a common scene in rural DPRK. The details of that anecdote was happily and openly provided me by the two minders/government officials/guides who accompanied me on my tour. They did so not on the basis that this was unusual. To them it was commonplace, and quite normal. For memory, on this occasion, they pointed it out to me, as a point of pride. (This was also at a time of rumoured famine). I then asked questions, based on many years working as a foreign correspondent in China (which had provided something of a state information revolutionary template for the NKeans to expand) and they provided the answers. Despite what the headline (for which I was not responsible) says, this was not necessarily conventional propaganda. It was precisely as I reported it, the peasantry exhorting each other to work harder, in the interests of the collective/state, and that was that particular woman’s job.

Yes, I genuinely believed this happened, otherwise I would not have reported it.

As for your last remark, it doesn’t bear the dignity of a response. But I hope it made you feel better.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:09, Tom Law wrote:

Thanks for that.

So to go back to my questions:

What efforts did you make to check this or did you use your assumption?
(he answers himself) You assumed it from what the minder had told you.

Did you speak to this woman?
(again) No

How do you know her task was to ride up and down – who told you?
(again) You assumed it from minder

Where did you get the eight hour figure from?
(again) Presumably minder

How do you know the lyrics to the song?
(again) Minder?

You’ve presented this as if the bike was specially rigged up to ensure the woman keeps pedalling as some kind of bizarre propoganda device.
So you genuinely believe that throughout North Korea at the time of your visist the government was employing people to ride up and down roads on bikes which were specially rigged up so that they had to constantly pedal to play propoganda music?

You base this on something your minder said. You made no actual effort to check if any of this was true.
You didn’t bother to ask the woman herself – which you’d imagine would be a good place to start when checking if this was accurate or not.

You do not mention in the story that this is just something the minder said. You present it as fact.

You then allowed this to be published throughout the world and to portray North Korea as a deranged world of robot slaves forced by the state into carrying out this kind of insnae life sapping act. Which may or may not be  true.

What makes you think this is any more accurate that the golf anedote your were told?

Tom

On 26/10/2012 12:20, Eric Ellis wrote:
OK, mate, you’ve got me…I confess. I’m actually Jerrold M Post. I’ve succumbed to your penetrating interrogation. Well done you, surely a genuine konghwaguk yeongung medal is winging your way. But strangely, rather as I imagine the various doped-up Tour de France cyclists also feel, I’ve now been liberated from the burden of 18 years carrying these carefully-cultivated lies. (I wondered what all those CIA cheques were about) I’m calling Lance Armstrong immediately…

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:37, Tom Law wrote:

Heh, heh, fair enough. I’ll get back in my box.

As you’ve pointed out – I’m no paragon of journalistic purity. Theres no big conspiracy and the reality is usually banal  – that’s why people aren’t particularly interested in it.

But I do think there’s something genuinely interesting in how a pretty throwaway comment written a long time ago has been appropriated over the years.

One last question.

Did you ever write a story about the fact that North Korea wasn’t suffering from a famine, surely that could have been considered as something of a scoop.

To have the journalistic guile to take a look inside a secretive country and find that some of the reports of famine etc were overexaggerated?

And did you feel your newspaper was looking for a certain angle in the coverage you provided?

Tom

On 26/10/2012 13:13, Eric Ellis wrote:
I didn’t write a story that it was not suffering a famine because I saw no evidence it wasn’t, and many suggestions that it might have been (people eating earth, drinking grass juice), but not enough to warrant writing a story that it was. Had I written there was no evidence of famine, I would’ve made a serious error as it later emerged there was a serious famine at the time, known as The Arduous March, a local term. It was admitted by the government, and the DPRK accepted international aid to help remedy it. Again, I suggest you do a little more reading before making assumptions.
And, no, my newspaper made no instructions to me.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:20, Tom Law wrote:

Thanks for the info.

In light of your comments, you might like to get that article you cite as being the most honest and accurate account revised:

“Ellis was really in North Korea to investigate famines that were rumored to be causing disturbances. This was just after the death of Kim’s father, Kim Ilsung, and before Kim ascended to power. Along the way he saw no evidence at all of famine. “I went to get one world scoop,” he says now. “And I ended up getting a completely different world scoop.”

Tom
From: Eric Ellis <eric@ericellis.com>
Subject: Re:
Date: 26 October 2012 14:35:46 CEST
To: Tom Law <hoofindan@gmail.com>

No, I shall not be doing that because – to go by your standards of what constitutes a fact – I saw occasional things consistent with famine, which is very different from ‘evidence of famine.’ To extend that literally, does the drinking of grass in a juice bar in, say, Islington suggest there’s a famine there? And I don’t know enough about Korean cuisine to conclude that earth wasn’t some sort of cooking ingredient. To write there is a famine based on those observations would be insufficient and irresponsible.

The only factual corrections I deem necessary here are those that provided my initial contact – your assumptions that I was American and that origin of the golf anecdote was in the IHT. As I have explained, that is not so. And, I note, several hours after I pointed that out, that you are still to correct your record.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:57, Tom Law <hoofindan@gmail.com> wrote:

Why didn’t you ask your minder about the famine?

He was the reliable source you relied on to report that North Koreans are paid by the govenrment to drive up and down roads on specially rigged propoganda bikes.

Why didn’t you write an honest report of your experience – that you found nothing to suggest there’s a famine. Yes, there were signs of poverty but you didn’t see a country crippled by           famine in the way the West was portraying at the time.

In light of the evidence you’ve provided me I’m requesting that you take whatever steps are needed to correct your original article. It is wholly inaccurate to portray something as fact when it’s, at best, hearsay from a minder.

The article needs to make it clear that you’re purely repeating something a minder told you and that you made no attempts to establish if any of it is true.

tom

On 26/10/2012 14:05, Eric Ellis wrote:
Mate…truly, get a life….if you want to revisit an 18 year article to complain to a editor who no longer works there that I didnt write that there wasnt a famine in North Korea when the state later admitted there was one, and there was much to suggest there was, well,knock yourself out…correct your “facts” that I originally asked and stay away from those funny cigarettes..

On 26 Oct 2012, at 15:39, Tom Law wrote:

When it was written is irrelevant. It’s published on the Internet and continues to be viewed.

Yes, I do want it changed because I think these things are important and so should you. You were obviously fairly indignant that I had details wrong, something which I’ll hold my hands up to and gladly correct.

You don’t seem to have the same enthusiam, however, when it comes to something which I consider a great deal more important.

As it’s relatively unusual for reports to come out of North Korea from Western journalists, your article obviously has had some influence, and continues to do so.

You went to report on a famine – which you didn’t find. Instead of giving an honest and balanced account saying that – you chose to write a misleading and innacurate report in which you present hearsay from a minder as fact.

My assumptopnm is that this was a journalist looking for scraps to justify the time and expense of an otherwise fruitless trip.

You used this article to create a general perception of a deranged country full of robotic slaves – again, this may or may not be true. But to use the propogandist cyclist to present this viewpoint is inaccurate and misleading when you completely failed to check it was true.

I would be obliged if you could provide me with any of the editorial contacts necessary for me to get this actioned.

tom
On 26 Oct 2012, at 16:54, Eric Ellis wrote:

I shall humour you, for the last time…

You say “your article obviously has had some influence.” I suppose, inasmuch as you – a self-appointed media crimes campaigner – have been among the handful since who have seen fit to incorrectly cite it without bothering to consult me (that’s Journalism 1:01), an oversight which would seem to strongly at odds with your zeal in correcting the general media record. But it was about golf. It was not about famine. You are incorrectly – again – connecting the two. But, as you correctly point out, you are ‘no paragon of journalistic purity.’

As for famine or otherwise, consider this a free lesson in Journalism 1:02. No self-respecting professional journalist not going to write there is no famine when there are clear, albeit limited, suggestions of one, just as no self-respecting professional journalist is going to write there is a famine based on those same limited suggestions, when either perspective is virtually impossible to verify within the confines of a highly-controlled state-escorted tour that is only evident upon actually taking it (which you didn’t.) I suggest you re-read that passage above a few times, to take in its subtlety.

As things transpired, after I had left, there was a famine in the DPRK – a very serious one, which I later wrote about – a famine which had begun long before I got there, suggesting the incidents that I witnessed turned out to be proof of sorts, though still limited. So, on balance, at best I erred on the side of caution, at worst I missed the story. And yet – and have a long, long think about your logic here – you are demanding the record should be changed to reflect that there wasn’t a famine, 18 years on, when there, er, was one. That, my erstwhile interlocutor, I find seriously strange and I’m saddened for my industry if when you do undertake work for the media, you do so informed by such logic.

Given that you seem to struggle with logic, and basic journalistic procedure, I’ll put it another way to make it easier for you to understand. Armed with your logic, a journalist visits Nazi Germany in 1940 on a state-directed tour. He/she doesn’t get to see Auschwitz, ipso facto there must not be a Holocaust, despite the dwindling Jewish community insisting there is. But it turns out the Jewish community and others are tragically correct. But, 18 years on, that doesn’t satisfy you. In 1958, long after the Nuremburg trials, even as the Wiesenthal Centre goes after Nazi monsters, you demand the media of the day apologise/correct the record for not writing in 1940 that there wasn’t a Holocaust. That would make you a Holocaust denier, as well as ludicrous.

“Hearsay from a minder”….hmm, did I say that? That looks like another of your assumptions. Again, I don’t recall you being with me at the time, but minders are precisely that, they are there to officially provide information on behalf of the state, as they proudly did on this occasion. Some might call it propaganda (and not propoganda, as you routinely and incorrectly render it).

Fruitless trip? Again, I don’t recall you being with me. Among other activities, I had a very revealing round of golf, which brings me again to the reason why we have had contact today. I look forward to your correction. And, take this as another free Journalism 1:03 lesson, be careful not to make assumptions.

All of which leads to sadly conclude that you are at best illogical and bored, at worst a troll, and I don’t have any further time for either. Were I to put bored, illogical trolls in touch with my editor of the day, he would have strong grounds for suggesting I seek medical help, and I wouldn’t blame him. But feel free to undertake your own research, and make your complaint as you see fit.

Now, I’ve stupidly wasted too much of my day on you, so I ask you to be a nice little chap, please correct the two errors I have pointed out and darken my inbox no more.

In the interim, you might find common purpose with this crowd…  http://www.korea-dpr.com/kfa.html And then look up the origins of the term ‘useful idiots’

Cheerio..
On 26 Oct 2012, at 17:12, Tom Law wrote:

“But feel free to undertake your own research, and make your complaint as you see fit.”

Thanks, I will.

I’m not interested in the famine – purely in what you reported in that original article which is inaccurate and misleading. As you’ve confirmed.

One lesson you appear to have skipped in journalism school was the one which taught the importance of humility.

tom

It must’ve been Revisit the Kims Day for I also received this, from Seoul..

On 26 Oct 2012, at 10:18, “Kim Young-jin, The Korea Times”  wrote:

From: Kim Young-jin, The Korea Times
Subject: Query from The Korea Times

Message Body:
Dear Mr. Ellis,

My name is Kim Young-jin; I am a politics reporter for The Korea Times in Seoul. I hope this finds you well.

I frequently cover North Korea issues, and I am looking into the oft-cited myth that Kim Jong-il scored 11 hole-in-ones during his first round of golf. I was told by a colleague that you might have the best perspective on this.

I would like to know how this story got started, and hear your thoughts on the situation.

Please let me know if you are willing to chat over the phone and if so, what the best times are to call. If email correspondence is preferable, please let me know.

Kim Young-jin
Politics Desk
The Korea Times

Dear Leader and The Golf War-Updated

Pyongyang, October 13, 1994

(see updated correspondence below text)

THE first hole at the Pyongyang Golf Club is a 340-metre dogleg par four, a severe test of skill even for Normans and Nicklauses.

But it was a mere cakewalk for North Korea’s “Dear Leader”, Kim Jong-il, when he gave “on-the-spot guidance” at the country’s only golf club recently.

“Dear Leader Comrade General Kim Jong-il, who I respect from the bottom of my heart, scored two on this hole,” said course “professional” Mr Park Young-man.

Clearly, the mysterious 52-year-old son of the late “Great Leader” Kim Il-sung, and the man the world expects to be anointed soon as President of the Stalinist “Hermit Kingdom”, is a hero of the golf course as well as of the North Korean people.

Hole by hole, Mr Park, who has never heard of Arnold Palmer, explains that the Dear Leader shot a 34, including five holes-in-one, and no hole worse than a birdie – one under par.

“He is an excellent golfer,” Mr Park said.

If North Korea is in the dire economic straits the world suspects it to be- and anecdotal evidence suggests it clearly is – the solution is obvious: launch the Dear Leader on the pro tour.

Just this golf outing illustrates the lengths North Koreans will go to deify the family that has ruled this country in the service of socialism for five decades.

Indeed, in the week this correspondent spent travelling with tour guides-cum-secret police, this was one of the milder feats they were responsible for.

Official propaganda has it that the two Kims are responsible for everything from the morning sun and harvest rain to world peace and the Mona Lisa. He is not responsible for the Moon landing. But nobody in North Korea yet believes there has been a landing on the Moon.

This is a land of roads without cars, restaurants without diners, chimneys without smoke, where every aspect of individual choice has been taken away by the state, or more correctly the Worker’s Party of Korea. Even the purchase of a toothbrush requires approval from a party cadre.

It is a regime where the Bo-Wee-Bu, the “security department”, is probably not necessary, because the notion of dissent seems superfluous in a land where even the dawn is the creation of the omniscient Great and Dear Leaders.

“THIS is the world’s last great arbitrage opportunity,” says Mr Paul Pheby, Seoul-based director of investment bank Peregrine, scouting Pyongyang for joint ventures.

We are speaking in the billiard room of Pyongyang’s Koryo Hotel, the main if not the only social focus for the few foreigners who venture to North Korea.

“This is a country of undervalued assets, 20 million cheap workers who will do what they are told, and everything separated from the world by an artificial line,” Mr Pheby says.

Peregrine, which likes its regimes rigid, is the latest of a lengthening line of hated capitalists scouting North Korea for joint ventures midst murky signs that it may at last be opening for foreign business.

Korean-speaking Briton Mr Steve Cox, one of the few Westerners resident in Pyongyang, claims that his Euro-Asian Business Consultancy represents 10 Fortune 500 companies sniffing around for opportunities.

Multinationals such as Royal Dutch Shell, DHL, Unilever, Ciba-Geigy and Asea Brown Boveri have recently sent delegations, mostly to study the prospects for the United Nations-backed special economic development zone to be fenced off in in the far north-east of North Korea, near the Chinese and Russian borders.

Australian diplomat Mr Ian Davies, who administers North Korea for the UN’s Industrial Development Organisation, believes “reformers” are pushing to the fore of the Worker’s Party and that an opening-up is necessary for the maintenance of the regime.

“They are watching very carefully what is happening in China,” he says. “It is early days, but they are looking to virtually copy the Chinese experience.

But China looks positively liberal compared to North Korea, where the economy has contracted by 4-5 per cent a year since 1990 and the country has an appalling history of welshing on its debts – including a $US1 billion syndicate headed by the ANZ Bank for a wheat deal. Australia’s TNT stationed an agent in Pyongyang for a year in 1992-93 for a $US200,000 state contract. The agency relocated to Beijing, the contract officially “dormant”.

Not least of the problems is North Korea’s monetary system. The economy has three currencies – green won for hard-currency use; a little-used red won for trade with communist brethren; and the brown won used by average Koreans the few times they venture to poorly stocked, rarely open state shops.

There is little obvious foreign influence in North Korea. Because of Kim’s doctrine of Juche, or self-reliance, Koreans have been encouraged to do it themselves.

The result is the shoddy output that communism specialised in, and not much of it.

The few North Koreans who know of the export successes of the booming southern economy – Daewoo, Hyundai, Samsung – describe Seoul as prostituting the Korean people, the “puppet regime” reliant on foreign trade to feed its people.

There are no foreign goods in average stores and even the privileged hard-currency stores, where foreigners and party potentates shop, Chinese goods are considered luxury items.

There is little obvious economic activity in North Korea, even in Pyongyang, the geometrically planned exhibition capital.

There is clearly a severe energy shortage. At 6.30pm, the lights of city apartments come on automatically, illuminating the portraits of the two Kims every household and public building is obliged to display. At 10pm, they go off.

Even in the dim Koryo Hotel, chambermaids switch off hallway lights after guests have moved through them. Pyongyang is a city without noise, without activity.

 

POST SCRIPT: In 2012, a Briton I don’t know, someone called Tom Law, published this: http://www.hoofindan.co.uk/online/jongs-mad/ – on his blog that purports to correct media wrongs. (I discovered it by chance when researching a piece I am writing, after receiving yet another inquiry about the Kim golf story)

“CRAZY FACT 1

Kim Jong-Il claims to be the world’s greatest golfer

In 1994 the North Korean propaganda machine reported that Kim Jong-Il had racked up 11 hole-in-ones during his first ever attempt at playing golf. His 38 under-par round at the Pyongyang Golf Course was verified by his 17 bodyguards.

Evidence?

It’s a great story, but there is no record of either the North Korean media or Kim Jong-Il ever making this claim. The origins of this ‘fact’ are from an International Herald Tribune article. It was an off-the-cuff comment made by a groundsman at the golf course during a chat to an American journalist called Eric Ellis.”

 

I ASKED Law to correct two of his assumptions he wrote 1) that I am not an “American journalist” and 2)that the origins were in the AFR and not the IHT. He refused,  later saying he would do so only after the AFR  corrected my own ‘inaccurate’ report – 18 years later, about a place he admitted he has never been. I think the poor chap was missing his medication

This is the bizarre correspondence that followed, perhaps also titled as How to Ill-Advisedly Waste An Afternoon:

From: Eric Ellis <eric@ericellis.com>
Subject: Re:
Date: 26 October 2012 12:24:18 CEST
To: hoofindan@gmail.com

And the original article, as appeared on P1 of the Australian Financial Review, the Australian FT/WSJ, of which I was Asia Corres at the time.

http://ericellis.com/archive/northkorea1.htm

You amusingly asked if I ‘fact-checked’ my interlocutor’s anecdote. The answer is no, because his remarks were so clearly ludicrous, why would one bother? A round of 34 is about 24 under the established world record. It was more interesting – and revealing – as a vehicle for the lengths some very scared people felt/feel they have to go to deify the First Family. How do I know they are scared? Because I was there – its called journalism.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 12:04, Eric Ellis wrote:
The most honest and correct re-telling of the story, largely because he consulted me, which you didn’t. I’m not hard to find. You tap my name into Google and its usually the first result. Sometimes things aren’t as conspiratorial as they might appear to be, sometimes things are just banal.
http://www.golf.com/tour-and-news/kim-jong-ils-record-setting-round-may-not-have-been-all-it-was-cracked-be

On 26 Oct 2012, at 12:32, Tom Law wrote:

Point noted,

I’m genuinely interested in your look at how the Internet is liable to blur lines between opinion and fact.
But I would also ask you to look at your original artilcle in the same light.

One area that I was intrigued by, was this section:

“It seemed an image of rural harmony in developing Asia – a woman riding a push-bike beside a paddy field where peasants were harvesting rice. But the bicycle carried two oversized loudspeakers blaring a jaunty revolutionary song: “Kim Jong Il, you are our supreme commander; with you we will win a great victory.”
Her task was to ride up and down a single short stretch of road outside Pyongyang for eight hours a day, every day. The speed of the woman’s pedaling directly determined the tune of the song, like a dynamo powering a bicycle headlight. If she slowed, the song slurred, and in North Korea nothing is permitted to stop the revolution.”

What efforts did you make to check this or did you use your assumption?
Did you speak to this woman?
How do you know her task was to ride up and down – who told you?
Where did you get the eight hour figure from?
How do you know the lyrics to the song?
You’ve presented this as if the bike was specially rigged up to ensure the woman keeps pedalling as some kind of bizarre propoganda device.
Do you genuinely believe this is what was happening.

How much of this is factual and how much is your attempt to find a story where non-exists?

Tom

On 26/10/2012 11:52, Eric Ellis wrote:
To address your questions;

I do not work on the basis of assumption.
I witnessed that particular anecdote – it  was – quite a common scene in rural DPRK. The details of that anecdote was happily and openly provided me by the two minders/government officials/guides who accompanied me on my tour. They did so not on the basis that this was unusual. To them it was commonplace, and quite normal. For memory, on this occasion, they pointed it out to me, as a point of pride. (This was also at a time of rumoured famine). I then asked questions, based on many years working as a foreign correspondent in China (which had provided something of a state information revolutionary template for the NKeans to expand) and they provided the answers. Despite what the headline (for which I was not responsible) says, this was not necessarily conventional propaganda. It was precisely as I reported it, the peasantry exhorting each other to work harder, in the interests of the collective/state, and that was that particular woman’s job.

Yes, I genuinely believed this happened, otherwise I would not have reported it.

As for your last remark, it doesn’t bear the dignity of a response. But I hope it made you feel better.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:09, Tom Law wrote:

Thanks for that.

So to go back to my questions:

What efforts did you make to check this or did you use your assumption?
(Law answers himself) You assumed it from what the minder had told you.

Did you speak to this woman?
(again) No

How do you know her task was to ride up and down – who told you?
(again) You assumed it from minder

Where did you get the eight hour figure from?
(again) Presumably minder

How do you know the lyrics to the song?
(again) Minder?

You’ve presented this as if the bike was specially rigged up to ensure the woman keeps pedalling as some kind of bizarre propoganda device.
So you genuinely believe that throughout North Korea at the time of your visist the government was employing people to ride up and down roads on bikes which were specially rigged up so that they had to constantly pedal to play propoganda music?

You base this on something your minder said. You made no actual effort to check if any of this was true.
You didn’t bother to ask the woman herself – which you’d imagine would be a good place to start when checking if this was accurate or not.

You do not mention in the story that this is just something the minder said. You present it as fact.

You then allowed this to be published throughout the world and to portray North Korea as a deranged world of robot slaves forced by the state into carrying out this kind of insnae life sapping act. Which may or may not be  true.

What makes you think this is any more accurate that the golf anedote your were told?

Tom

On 26/10/2012 12:20, Eric Ellis wrote:
OK, mate, you’ve got me…I confess. I’m actually Jerrold M Post. I’ve succumbed to your penetrating interrogation. Well done you, surely a genuine konghwaguk yeongung medal is winging your way. But strangely, rather as I imagine the various doped-up Tour de France cyclists also feel, I’ve now been liberated from the burden of 18 years carrying these carefully-cultivated lies. (I wondered what all those CIA cheques were about) I’m calling Lance Armstrong immediately…

On 26 Oct 2012, at 13:37, Tom Law wrote:

Heh, heh, fair enough. I’ll get back in my box.

As you’ve pointed out – I’m no paragon of journalistic purity. Theres no big conspiracy and the reality is usually banal  – that’s why people aren’t particularly interested in it.

But I do think there’s something genuinely interesting in how a pretty throwaway comment written a long time ago has been appropriated over the years.

One last question.

Did you ever write a story about the fact that North Korea wasn’t suffering from a famine, surely that could have been considered as something of a scoop.

To have the journalistic guile to take a look inside a secretive country and find that some of the reports of famine etc were overexaggerated?

And did you feel your newspaper was looking for a certain angle in the coverage you provided?

Tom

On 26/10/2012 13:13, Eric Ellis wrote:
I didn’t write a story that it was not suffering a famine because I saw no evidence it wasn’t, and many suggestions that it might have been (people eating earth, drinking grass juice), but not enough to warrant writing a story that it was. Had I written there was no evidence of famine, I would’ve made a serious error as it later emerged there was a serious famine at the time, known as The Arduous March, a local term. It was admitted by the government, and the DPRK accepted international aid to help remedy it. Again, I suggest you do a little more reading before making assumptions.
And, no, my newspaper made no instructions to me.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:20, Tom Law wrote:

Thanks for the info.

In light of your comments, you might like to get that article you cite as being the most honest and accurate account revised:

“Ellis was really in North Korea to investigate famines that were rumored to be causing disturbances. This was just after the death of Kim’s father, Kim Ilsung, and before Kim ascended to power. Along the way he saw no evidence at all of famine. “I went to get one world scoop,” he says now. “And I ended up getting a completely different world scoop.”

Tom
From: Eric Ellis <eric@ericellis.com>
Subject: Re:
Date: 26 October 2012 14:35:46 CEST
To: Tom Law <hoofindan@gmail.com>

No, I shall not be doing that because – to go by your standards of what constitutes a fact – I saw occasional things consistent with famine, which is very different from ‘evidence of famine.’ To extend that literally, does the drinking of grass in a juice bar in, say, Islington suggest there’s a famine there? And I don’t know enough about Korean cuisine to conclude that earth wasn’t some sort of cooking ingredient. To write there is a famine based on those observations would be insufficient and irresponsible.

The only factual corrections I deem necessary here are those that provided my initial contact – your assumptions that I was American and that origin of the golf anecdote was in the IHT. As I have explained, that is not so. And, I note, several hours after I pointed that out, that you are still to correct your record.

On 26 Oct 2012, at 14:57, Tom Law <hoofindan@gmail.com> wrote:

Why didn’t you ask your minder about the famine?

He was the reliable source you relied on to report that North Koreans are paid by the govenrment to drive up and down roads on specially rigged propoganda bikes.

Why didn’t you write an honest report of your experience – that you found nothing to suggest there’s a famine. Yes, there were signs of poverty but you didn’t see a country crippled by           famine in the way the West was portraying at the time.

In light of the evidence you’ve provided me I’m requesting that you take whatever steps are needed to correct your original article. It is wholly inaccurate to portray something as fact when it’s, at best, hearsay from a minder.

The article needs to make it clear that you’re purely repeating something a minder told you and that you made no attempts to establish if any of it is true.

tom

On 26/10/2012 14:05, Eric Ellis wrote:
Mate…truly, get a life….if you want to revisit an 18 year article to complain to a editor who no longer works there that I didnt write that there wasnt a famine in North Korea when the state later admitted there was one, and there was much to suggest there was, well,knock yourself out…correct your “facts” that I originally asked and stay away from those funny cigarettes..

On 26 Oct 2012, at 15:39, Tom Law wrote:

When it was written is irrelevant. It’s published on the Internet and continues to be viewed.

Yes, I do want it changed because I think these things are important and so should you. You were obviously fairly indignant that I had details wrong, something which I’ll hold my hands up to and gladly correct.

You don’t seem to have the same enthusiam, however, when it comes to something which I consider a great deal more important.

As it’s relatively unusual for reports to come out of North Korea from Western journalists, your article obviously has had some influence, and continues to do so.

You went to report on a famine – which you didn’t find. Instead of giving an honest and balanced account saying that – you chose to write a misleading and innacurate report in which you present hearsay from a minder as fact.

My assumptopnm is that this was a journalist looking for scraps to justify the time and expense of an otherwise fruitless trip.

You used this article to create a general perception of a deranged country full of robotic slaves – again, this may or may not be true. But to use the propogandist cyclist to present this viewpoint is inaccurate and misleading when you completely failed to check it was true.

I would be obliged if you could provide me with any of the editorial contacts necessary for me to get this actioned.

tom
On 26 Oct 2012, at 16:54, Eric Ellis wrote:

I shall humour you, for the last time…

You say “your article obviously has had some influence.” I suppose, inasmuch as you – a self-appointed media crimes campaigner – have been among the handful since who have seen fit to incorrectly cite it without bothering to consult me (that’s Journalism 1:01), an oversight which would seem to strongly at odds with your zeal in correcting the general media record. But it was about golf. It was not about famine. You are incorrectly – again – connecting the two. But, as you correctly point out, you are ‘no paragon of journalistic purity.’

As for famine or otherwise, consider this a free lesson in Journalism 1:02. No self-respecting professional journalist not going to write there is no famine when there are clear, albeit limited, suggestions of one, just as no self-respecting professional journalist is going to write there is a famine based on those same limited suggestions, when either perspective is virtually impossible to verify within the confines of a highly-controlled state-escorted tour that is only evident upon actually taking it (which you didn’t.) I suggest you re-read that passage above a few times, to take in its subtlety.

As things transpired, after I had left, there was a famine in the DPRK – a very serious one, which I later wrote about – a famine which had begun long before I got there, suggesting the incidents that I witnessed turned out to be proof of sorts, though still limited. So, on balance, at best I erred on the side of caution, at worst I missed the story. And yet – and have a long, long think about your logic here – you are demanding the record should be changed to reflect that there wasn’t a famine, 18 years on, when there, er, was one. That, my erstwhile interlocutor, I find seriously strange and I’m saddened for my industry if when you do undertake work for the media, you do so informed by such logic.

Given that you seem to struggle with logic, and basic journalistic procedure, I’ll put it another way to make it easier for you to understand. Armed with your logic, a journalist visits Nazi Germany in 1940 on a state-directed tour. He/she doesn’t get to see Auschwitz, ipso facto there must not be a Holocaust, despite the dwindling Jewish community insisting there is. But it turns out the Jewish community and others are tragically correct. But, 18 years on, that doesn’t satisfy you. In 1958, long after the Nuremburg trials, even as the Wiesenthal Centre goes after Nazi monsters, you demand the media of the day apologise/correct the record for not writing in 1940 that there wasn’t a Holocaust. That would make you a Holocaust denier, as well as ludicrous.

“Hearsay from a minder”….hmm, did I say that? That looks like another of your assumptions. Again, I don’t recall you being with me at the time, but minders are precisely that, they are there to officially provide information on behalf of the state, as they proudly did on this occasion. Some might call it propaganda (and not propoganda, as you routinely and incorrectly render it).

Fruitless trip? Again, I don’t recall you being with me. Among other activities, I had a very revealing round of golf, which brings me again to the reason why we have had contact today. I look forward to your correction. And, take this as another free Journalism 1:03 lesson, be careful not to make assumptions.

All of which leads to sadly conclude that you are at best illogical and bored, at worst a troll, and I don’t have any further time for either. Were I to put bored, illogical trolls in touch with my editor of the day, he would have strong grounds for suggesting I seek medical help, and I wouldn’t blame him. But feel free to undertake your own research, and make your complaint as you see fit.

Now, I’ve stupidly wasted too much of my day on you, so I ask you to be a nice little chap, please correct the two errors I have pointed out and darken my inbox no more.

In the interim, you might find common purpose with this crowd…  http://www.korea-dpr.com/kfa.html And then look up the origins of the term ‘useful idiots’

Cheerio..
On 26 Oct 2012, at 17:12, Tom Law wrote:

“But feel free to undertake your own research, and make your complaint as you see fit.”

Thanks, I will.

I’m not interested in the famine – purely in what you reported in that original article which is inaccurate and misleading. As you’ve confirmed.

One lesson you appear to have skipped in journalism school was the one which taught the importance of humility.

tom

It must’ve been Revisit the Kims Day for I also received this, from Seoul..

 

On 26 Oct 2012, at 10:18, “Kim Young-jin, The Korea Times”  wrote:

From: Kim Young-jin, The Korea Times >
Subject: Query from The Korea Times

Message Body:
Dear Mr. Ellis,

My name is Kim Young-jin; I am a politics reporter for The Korea Times in Seoul. I hope this finds you well.

I frequently cover North Korea issues, and I am looking into the oft-cited myth that Kim Jong-il scored 11 hole-in-ones during his first round of golf. I was told by a colleague that you might have the best perspective on this.

I would like to know how this story got started, and hear your thoughts on the situation.

Please let me know if you are willing to chat over the phone and if so, what the best times are to call. If email correspondence is preferable, please let me know.

Kim Young-jin
Politics Desk
The Korea Times

Calling a Scumbag a Scumbag: Rupert Murdoch’s Revealing Twitter Habit

Isn’t it just grand that older folk have embraced the Internet with such gusto? Why, Gramps and Granny can now Skype with the far-flung grandkids, and bitter octogenarian megalomanic billionaires can tweet about all the “toffs”, the “scumbags”, and the “lying” who’ve tried to bring their media empires down.

Bitter octogenarian megalomanic billionaires like, well, Rupert Murdoch.

<p>Justin Sullivan/Getty Images</p>

He’s had a Twitter account since December 2011. And, what fun, he’s amassed 342,000 followers since then, tweeting on all manner of topics. But he reserves particular venom for those he perceives as enemies, traitors and anyone who stand in his way: the BBC, The New York Times, Australia’s Fairfax, Hugh Grant and other phone-hacking victims, the British Prime Minister David Cameron, the Obama administration, China.

He’s even deployed Twitter to have a crack at those News Corporation shareholders demanding better standards of morality and governance within the Murdoch fief, tweeting last Thursday that, “any shareholders with complaints should take profits and sell!”

Many of his 583 tweets seem to reveal more about the world’s most powerful media mogul than any number of biographies penned about his controversial career.

On one October weekend, he took aim at the “lying” White House, Vice-President Joe Biden and Washington’s UN ambassador Susan Rice, a China apparently “in crisis”, “scumbag celebrities” and David Cameron, and the BBC, while taking a glancing swipe at “millennials” — younger Generation-Y types “who don’t read or watch established media”.

In a flood of tweets over the weekend, did the cranky Murdoch have a good word to say about anyone? Yes, about the Afghan-Australian media tyro Saad Mohseni, for organising Afghanistan’s first post-Taliban soccer competition in Kabul. Mohseni is a Murdoch business partner.

Great day in Afghanistan. First football grand final founded by friend Saad Mohseni. Very popular. Taliban promised stay away. Go Saad!

It’s instructive to deconstruct some more of Murdoch’s recent tweets, like this one, sent in the midst of Uncle Rupert’s Excellent Trolling Weekend.

Told UK’s Cameron receiving scumbag celebrities pushing for even more privacy laws. Trust the toffs! Transparency under attack. Bad.

The “scumbag celebrities” that a graceless Murdoch refers to are all victims of News’s phone hacking — the actor Hugh Grant; the Welsh singer Charlotte Church (who sang, unpaid, at Murdoch’s 1999 wedding to Wendi Deng) and the British ex-policewoman, now crime TV presenter, Jacqui Hames.

The reference to toffs seems another barb aimed at David Cameron, Prime Minister and Old Etonian, and the clubby Oxbridge types that populate the British establishment.

Murdoch has long riffed on “toffs” in the class-encrusted UK — playing that he and his papers are at one with the downtrodden underdog, champions of the working class. Which is curious when you’re a billionaire named Rupert who was schooled at Australia’s Eton — Geelong Grammar — before reading PPE at Worcester College, Oxford, and then inheriting a newspaper.

Murdoch blames Cameron for needlessly advancing the Leveson inquiry into press standards — primarily an inquiry into News International — and the various criminal investigations targeting News.

Murdoch loves that London Mayor Boris Johnson seems to be angling for Cameron’s job as Tory leader and PM. No matter that Johnson is another Old Etonian/Oxonian who exudes even more entitled privilege than Cameron, the mayor and his office have dismissed the News phone-hacking “hysteria” as “codswallop” and weren’t afraid to host the pariah Murdoch at the Olympic pool in August.

As you do, Rupert paid Boris’s hospitality back with a tweet:

London in best shape ever. All overboard about the Olympics, brilliantly organized by Zeb Coe and Boris Johnson.

Murdoch has taken any opportunity to tweet revenge on Cameron, be it highlighting corruption in his party last March or his repeated support for Scottish independence and Edinburgh’s First Minister Alex Salmond — another of the rare politicians who’s happy to meet with Murdoch — and get his endorsement.

Murdoch can only be taking the proverbial when he cautions that “transparency [is] under attack”.

It’s true that the British media and its role as the fourth estate is threatened by proposals that could wind back freedoms once regarded as sacrosanct. But the reason why that’s happening stems largely from the unethical practices at the Murdoch newspapers in Britain, practices that have resulted in criminal charges.

Had there been no phone hacking, effectively sanctioned at News, there’d be no national revulsion over Milly Dowler, there’d be no Leveson and there’d be little need for Murdoch’s “scumbag celebrities” to meet the Prime Minister urging him to legislate for press reform.

Murdoch’s weekend hypocrisy so enraged Neil Morrison, a British expatriate language teacher in Japan, who follows Murdoch’s Twitter account, that he tweeted the following back at Murdoch:

Told UK’s Cameron receiving scumbag celebrities pushing for even more privacy laws. Trust the toffs! Transparency under attack. Bad.

@rupertmurdoch “scumbags”? And your journalists and executives are what? You are abso;utely fucking pathetic.

Morrison told The Global Mail, “it just pissed me off. I mean Murdoch is the real scumbag here.”

To Morrison’s surprise, Murdoch responded to his tweet:

@enem408 They don’t get arrested for indecency on major LA highways! Or abandon love child’s.

At this point, it’s perhaps useful to be reminded of the remark Murdoch made in some dudgeon to the Leveson inquiry, about the culture of lying. It was during an exchange with the inquiry’s lead counsel, Robert Jay QC, who quizzed Murdoch about the “perception” that he misuses his influence as a media baron in his dealings with politicians.

That was a myth, Murdoch snorted, telling Jay, “You know, after a while, if these lies are repeated again and again, they sort of catch on, and particularly if we’re successful, it sort of — you know, there are people who are a little resentful and grab on to them. But they just aren’t true.”

Knowing chortles ricocheted around the chattering classes. As prominent media commentator Roy Greenslade pointed out, “Isn’t this just what Murdoch’s newspapers have done to people down the years — perpetuating untruths through drip-drip-drip repetition and thus creating myths?”

Return to last weekend’s Twitter-fest, and Murdoch’s tweet to Morrison seems to reference both Hugh Grant’s 1995 dalliance with the Hollywood prostitute Estella Thompson, aka Divine Brown, and that Grant became a father last year.

The problem with Murdoch’s tweet is that it is wrong. Rupert’s mindset, revealed at Leveson — “after a while if these lies are repeated again and again, they sort of catch on” — seems to betray his Twitter tactics.

The fact is that Grant — another posh Oxonian, usefully for Murdoch’s anti-toff riff — wasn’t, as Rupert exclaimed, “arrested for indecency” by LA police on “major LA highways”. He was arrested in his car, in flagrante delicto certainly, while parked at the corner of Hawthorne and Curson Avenues, one of the quietest and least trafficked residential neighbourhoods of West Hollywood.

Notwithstanding what transpired in Grant’s car between consenting, single adults, the police version — also known as the truth — is a very different account than the titillating version the well-followed Rupert put about on Twitter last Sunday.

As an LA police statement of the day described it, Grant had picked Brown up on Sunset Boulevard and “they drove a short distance to a residential street and engaged in an act of lewd conduct. Vice officers walked up to the car and observed the act.”

Maybe Rupert is still grumpy about the fuss Grant’s actions caused at the time. When Grant had his proverbial collar felt, he was in LA promoting the only movie he’s ever made for Murdoch’s Fox Studios — the eminently forgettable Nine Months.

As for Murdoch’s suggestion that Grant is a deadbeat dad abandoning his “love child’s”, (sic), well, that’s not true either.

Grant has admitted he had a fleeting affair with Chinese actress Tinglan Hong, which resulted in the unplanned birth last year of baby Tabitha. But, until Rupert’s weekend tweet, no-one had suggested that Grant has been anything other than a supportive and happy father.

His publicist said the day after Tabitha’s birth, “I can confirm that Hugh Grant is the delighted father of a baby girl. He and the mother had a fleeting affair and while this was not planned, Hugh could not be happier or more supportive.”

As Grant himself told The Guardian last March, “I’m absolutely thrilled to have had her, I really am. And I feel a better person.” And to the US talk show host Ellen DeGeneres a month later, “Now that I have a child, it is life changing. I recommend it!”

Doubtless Rupert would be the first to insist that words and facts are important, so let’s look at some of Murdoch’s other tweets to see what sort of example this powerful media mogul sets for his 50,000-plus staff.

There’s his weekend take on the BBC, long Murdoch’s Enemy Number One in Britain:

Saville- BBC story long way to run. BBC far the biggest, most powerful organization in UK.

Murdoch is referencing the scandal now engulfing the BBC: the appalling evidence of paedophilia and molestation by one of its most popular presenters, the late Jimmy Savile. British police are pursuing 340 lines of inquiry as new victims reveal daily how they were abused by the predatory Savile.

The revelations about the once-loved Savile have shocked the nation, prompting prominent media lawyer Mark Stephens to tweet:

Moral dilemma of the day: would it have been ok to phone hack Jimmy Savile to get evidence and expose his child abuse and grooming?

For Murdoch, Savile presents a rich seam to mine via Twitter. Mark Thompson recently became chief executive of another of Murdoch’s great nemeses, The New York Times, after eight years as BBC director-general in London. Like the string of BBC bosses before him, Thompson claims to have known nothing of Savile’s evils, committed at the enterprise Britons like to call ‘Auntie’.

Murdoch’s already had a little crack at Thompson-NYT over Twitter:

Look to new CEO to shake up NYT unless recalled to BBC to explain latest scandal.

But as for Murdoch’s description of the BBC as the “biggest, most powerful organization” in Britain, that’s not true either.

There’s the government, the Trades Union Congress, the Anglican Church — all way bigger and, arguably, more powerful than the BBC. In fact, the BBC is a relative minnow when compared to, well, News Corporation. The BBC has 22,000 employees and operates on revenues of just over £4 billion. News Corporation has more than 50,000 staff and last year generated revenues of £20.99 billion — which makes it around five times the size of the BBC. Yes, the BBC is watched by more Britons than Murdoch’s BSkyB’s 11 million subscribers, but the BBC doesn’t also own near 40 per cent of Britain’s newspaper market.

There’s another area in which News outstrips the BBC; in former staff arrested for phone hacking and bribing police — more than 40 at last count, including its former chief executive in Britain and two former editors. That compares with none at the BBC.

From the thumbs of another person, Murdoch’s tweets might be ignorable hyperbole, lost among the 400 million tweets made each day.

But it’s not another person, it’s Rupert Murdoch, whose clan and camp followers have waged a relentless, bitter war against the mostly license-funded BBC, its imitators (such as Australia’s ABC) and supporters. They’d like nothing more than for the BBC and its culture to be broken up, providing clear air for further BSkyB expansion and influence.

When Murdoch slags the BBC, he seems to be implying that the “big and powerful” BBC will get through the Savile saga legally and politically unscathed. But the Savile saga is barely a week old and, as the BBC hierarchy painfully examines itself to discover how and why a Jimmy Savile was able to operate there, undetected, for 40 years, it’s far too early to make any judgment as to its outcome. Yet, almost dog-whistling, Murdoch’s tweets echo the victim culture cultivated by News in relation to the phone-hacking drama — that he’s hardly done by, whereas the well-connected toffs will get off scot-free.

When Murdoch and son James appeared before British parliamentarians investigating phone hacking in July last year, he started proceedings by claiming it was the “most humble day of my life”. Notwithstanding the persuasion of lawyers seated behind him, he seemed sincere. And many of us even felt sympathy for Murdoch Sr when that idiot cream-pied him.

That was then. It seems that Rupert’s humility, if it were ever thus, only lasted as long as it took him to start a Twitter account.

http://www.theglobalmail.org/blog/calling-a-scumbag-a-scumbag-rupert-murdochs-revealing-twitter-habit/430/

Ground Zero Kuta – The Bali Bombings Revisited, 10 years on – Part 1

October 17, 2002

As dawn broke on the chaos that was Kuta Beach, Eric Ellis searched for survivors of Australia’s worst terrorist outrage….

HE WAS tanned, a bit paunchy, late 40s; a handsome man with short hair. He was a solid bloke and very clearly an Australian. The bare feet and boardshorts – all that he was wearing – marked him out.

As we approached each other on the fourth floor of the Hard Rock Hotel on Kuta Beach last Sunday night, barely a block away from the Sari Club where our countrymen had perished in terror not even 24 hours earlier, I scoped him in that split second one spends assessing fleeting strangers. An old footballer on an end-of-season tear in Bali with the younger charges he’s now coaching back home? Or, just as possible, an ageing surfer on a nostalgic trip revisiting breaks he carved on the ’70s hippy trail through Asia?

And then he stopped, almost collapsing, grabbing the wall of the corridor for support and smothering his face with his right hand in a gesture of anguish.

“You all right, mate?” I called out. “No, mate, I’m not all right thanks,” he replied, almost impatiently. And then he broke down and wailed: “I’ve just lost … I’ve just lost … me daughter! I’VE JUST LOST ME BLOODY DAUGHTER.”

He said it twice but it didn’t need emphasising. I instinctively embraced this bloke I’d never met before, grabbing his neck and pulling his head into my shoulder as he sobbed uncontrollably.

“You poor, poor bastard.” It seemed such a pathetic thing to say. “I am so, so sorry.” He cried for about 10 seconds, contained himself and pushed free. Muttering his embarrassed thanks, he shook my hand and continued down the corridor, steadier this time. “Thanks, mate, I’ve got to find my wife.”

And that was it, a very human moment during a day when not much humanity was on offer. And perhaps even a very Australian moment when too many Australians, like this stranger, had lost loved ones. I didn’t get his name – it didn’t occur to ask.

IT WAS the hundreds of bags of crushed ice that first suggested something was very wrong at Denpasar’s Sanglah Hospital on Sunday. You saw the ice trucks lined up as you approached the clinic, the refrigerated ones borrowed from Bali’s five-star resort hotels, while the local Kijang trucks turned the dusty approach street into a muddy creek as the equatorial air quickly melted their cargo. Once inside the hospital compound, you could see – and smell – the urgent need for the ice.

A 20-man human chain had formed to ship the bags hand-to-hand from the parked trucks to the foyer. When the chain reached the foyer, a team of hospital orderlies, their white jackets spattered with blood and black ash, were casting the cubes on rows of charred bodies that had been piled up one on top of another.

It was a gruesome sight. People, mostly foreigners, gingerly picked through the remains. One victim, his mouth agape, was clad in what looked like a burnt sleeveless jumper in the black and red of Melbourne’s Essendon Football Club. Someone had the BBC World Service going on a short-wave radio. Alexander Downer was quoted saying only three or four people had been confirmed as being Australian. But it was obvious standing here, from the victims’ clothing and their loved ones’ accents, that the situation was going to be much worse. And then you remembered they were ferrying bodies to four other clinics around Denpasar.

At Sanglah, the ice was doing its job, for the moment. “We don’t have a big enough morgue to cope with this,” said one frantic orderly, Gede, as he doled out the ice. “There’s nowhere else to put them so we have to put them here.”

Gede was right. The tiny morgue was already full.

At one end of the corridor, covered by a roof but both its sides open to the air, a team of carpenters was hammering in a flimsy plywood wall. It seemed designed to stop onlookers from wandering in off the street, a job the stunned local police and soldiers weren’t doing. But this is Indonesia and already the shoddy wall was coming apart even as it was being hastily assembled, straining under the weight of hundreds of people – hysterical relatives, media, medicos and rubberneckers – craning for a peek.

Sanglah Hospital, Bali’s main public medical facility, is in Denpasar’s suburbs. The other end of the 25m-long main corridor backs onto a suburban street, blocked off from houses and the street by a 3m concrete wall. Balinese – as many as 200 – had pushed through the outside police perimeter and had now taken up vantage points on the wall separating someone’s house from the clinic.

They could see directly over the makeshift corridor morgue where grief-stricken relatives and friends pulled back charred fragments of Mambo shirts and Quiksilver jackets – more telltale signs of Australian­ness – to reveal identities that the firestorm might have allowed.

Over by the hospital wall, a foreign girl in her 20s, wearing T-shirt, skirt and thongs, was vomiting into an open drain, comforted by a woman who looked old enough to be her mother, herself sobbing into a tissue. Gede the orderly told me they’d just identified her brother – and perhaps her son – among the dead not 5m away in the corridor. He didn’t exactly know where they were from. “I think Australia,” he said.

There were plenty of Australians inside the un-airconditioned main ward of the hospital; middle Australians, not the $600-a-night Bali spa set but ordinary working people from the big-city outer suburbs and country towns.

The numbers of dead and injured bounced and bandied from bed to bed: 100, 120, 150, as high as 210 dead by some reports. And 300 injured. The word around the hospital was that about half the dead and injured were Australians but, if the patients provided a guide, that percentage seemed more like 80%. There’s an Italian who says six of his friends are missing and a distressed French teenager looking for his girlfriend. Of the 50-odd beds, only four or five are occupied by Balinese. But this was overwhelmingly an Australian ward, an Australian tragedy.

One uninjured man, an Australian in his 50s, had appointed himself ward leader, probably because no one from the overwhelmed hospital seemed to be in charge. Moving from bed to bed, crisis to crisis, he was trying to clear the room of everyone but the few hospital staff, their patients and relatives. A fight broke out between journalists and the man, who was calling the media “vultures”.

As they argued, a photographer was pushed into a bed where a Balinese boy no more than 12 was swathed in bandages, only his face white-red with burns visible through the swabbing. His family suffered the foreigners’ unseemly arguments silently while a young Balinese girl worked the room soliciting foreigners with a donation plate.

Another Australian woman, a volunteer who lives in Bali, opined rather too loudly to a journalist that: “It was OK for the Australians – they’re insured. The Balinese have got nothing.” She, too, copped an earful.

Amid the pandemonium, Val from Perth was bearing up well enough, she said, “considering”. “I’ve got three here in Bali,” Val explained. “I’ve got my son-in-law over there,” she said, pointing to a man burnt, motionless but alive, on a filthy bed. “And my daughter Leanne’s over there. She’s 44. They don’t know what’s wrong with her; they think she’s got a broken arm so we’re making arrangements to airlift her out.

“I think she’ll be all right. I think she’ll make it.” Val herself was shaken, but uninjured. She wasn’t the nightclubbing type and had spent the night in the hotel with her grandson while her kids went out and partied … and almost died.

Across the ward, 21-year-old Steven Betland sat on a bed, his blistered back too painful for him to lie down. His mate Lauren Munroe hovered over him, doing what he could. Steven’s exposed injuries looked shocking, but compared with many of his fellow patients, he seemed all right, well enough to talk about the horror.

A rugby player from Forbes, NSW, Steven said he’d been at the Sari Club for about an hour drinking with mates who were in Bali for a rugby tournament. “People were dancing, having a few beers and then it was just boom,” Steven said.

“The blasts hit, one after another, within seconds of each other,” he said. “First a flash, then another one, two blasts one after another, just a coupla seconds between them,” he said. “We had to climb the wall to get out. The top part, where the roof is, collapsed, then it all started going up in flames, then the wall started caving in.

“And people started scrambling out anywhere and anyway they could.

“There was 25 of us,” Steven explained. “We’re missing three of our mates.”

THEY’RE already calling the smouldering remains of the Sari Club on Jalan Legian “Ground Zero”. It’s easy to see why. It’s not anywhere near as big as the New York version but the images are the same: the same vacant space where a building once stood, the same twisted metal, the same contorted pylons, the same pall of tragedy hanging in the air.

And all this in a place that generations of Australians – perhaps two million of us – have escaped to for a good time, our first taste of exotic Asia, a destination so familiar that, for many Australians, Bali seems almost like a seventh state.

It’s a place so thick with Australian youth culture, so pervasive, that revellers in nightclubs such as the Sari Club could stagger home with a skinful of VB after a big Saturday night out singing Cold Chisel’s Khe Sanh and local street urchins would sell the Australian Sunday newspapers, fresh off the Qantas jumbo with Saturday’s footy scores.

Not any more. No one’s going to come back to this dark place for a very long time.

(nominated for Best Story in Magazine Publishers of Australia 2003 awards)

Bali’s Demons – The Bali Bombing Revisited, 10 years on – Part 2

October 23, 2002

As well as the lives of many, the nightclub bombs destroyed any lingering illusions that Bali was a tranquil haven somehow isolated from Indonesia’s current malaise. Eric Ellis reports from Kuta Beach……

IT didn’t take long for the bile in South-East Asia to rise. And it came from Malaysia, hardly Australia’s best friend in the region. Writing in the government-controlled New Straits Times four days after the Kuta bombings, Kuala Lumpur-based writer and self-styled intellectual Rehman Rashid informed his mostly Muslim countrymen of what he knew of the Sari Club and its mostly Australian clientele.

“Yes, I knew the Sari Club,” Rashid admitted. “It had been there about 15 years, sopping up the dregs of the Kuta night, where the carousing begins in the early evenings at the chi-chi Legian end of the strip, then cascades down the drag in seven waterfalls of deepening drunkenness to debouch onto Kuta Beach and sprawl snoring at the dawn, or sink into the strip’s last sump, the Sari Club.”

Rashid (who didn’t respond to The Bulletin’s inquiries) was presumably only familiar with the Sari Club in the broader sense of research. As he got up his literary head of steam in the NST, he didn’t exactly say the victims of Australia’s biggest terror attack, our September 11, were Asia’s white trash. But he may as well have.

“Reeking of beer and sweat; the air thick with smoke and jagged with Strine; packed out and heaving into the night at the scummy end of the Legian-Kuta strip … the slimiest, sleaziest dive of them all.

“If you couldn’t score anywhere else, you could score at the Sari Club. To that rickety firetrap would lurch the last of the night’s purblind drunken foreigners.”

True, a river of VB flowed down Jalan Legian and true too that the Sari Club and its mostly Australian crowd of young party animals wasn’t the Amandari, the $1100 a night resort an hour away in bohemian Ubud favoured by the beau monde.

And perhaps harsh words such as Rashid’s have to be aired if Australia and Asia are ever to reconcile the accident of their geography. Others have certainly expressed these views privately. But his rant is hard to read if you are a parent whose son or daughter was struck down.

Or, if you were the four young teens who wandered aimlessly around Kuta for days, wondering when their still-missing parents would come home from their big Saturday night out. Or the Coogee Dolphins. Or the people of Forbes.

What Rashid didn’t mention was that the foreigners-free/Indonesians-$10 entry policy at Sari Club operated with offical connivance. Nor did he mention that the Indonesian government allows such bigotry in a country that touts itself as secular and non-discriminatory.

Rashid didn’t report that the ecstasy and dope available at the Sari Club and in myriad clubs like it around Kuta probably enriches corrupt Indonesian army officers and police, and their compradores in the Balinese-Chinese underworld. That very corruption – and for Bali read any region of Indonesia and Rashid’s own Malaysia – is a big reason why firetraps such as the Sari Club, with their not-so-Balinese thatched roofs and exposed gas cylinders, are allowed to exist.

It’s also why it took almost two hours to ferry injured from chaotic Kuta the 10km to the charnel house that was Denpasar’s Sanglah Hospital. And why poorly constructed and poorly resourced medical facilities caused more foreigners and Indonesians to perish than is acceptable.

It’s also why kilos of explosives can fall into terrorist hands and why militant groups of any persuasion can fester. And why three million Balinese are very angry that all this has been allowed to happen on their Island of the Gods.

BALI’S Hindus take their spiritualism very seriously, even at places such as the massive Grand Bali Beach Hotel in Sanur. It’s not far from where Australians such as the artist Donald Friend lived, loved and painted lithe young men and began a great tradition of Australian hedonism on Bali, which by generational osmosis somehow now expresses itself via foot­ballers in fleshpots such as Kuta.

Before October 12, Bali’s last great fire was at the Bali Beach Hotel, or the “Bali Bitch” as it’s known here, in 1993. There were no fatalities and the hotel, completed in 1966 in the blocky International style of the era, opened by Sukarno and financed by Japanese war reparations, re-opened post-fire as a national treasure. But as every Balinese of an era – and Sukarno’s daughter Megawati Sukarnoputri – knows, room 327 is special. It’s the room the Balinese believe that Loro Kidul, their mythical Goddess of the South Seas, allocated to Sukarno, independent Indonesia’s father. The hotel was gutted in the 1993 blaze but room 327 was the only one of 600-odd that survived wholly intact.

Even today, the room is maintained in the vernacular of the era even though Sukarno never stayed in the hotel. His trademark black peci and white trousers lay on the bed. No one stays in the room but it’s cleaned daily. On August 17, Indonesia’s Independence Day, Balinese deliver cakes coloured the red and white of the national flag. It’s part of the complex relationship that connects Megawati to Bali and Bali to Indonesia which October 12, and her inability to prevent it, threatens to unravel.

IT didn’t take long for the patrols to start up in Penestenan village, near the cultural retreat of Ubud, one hour north of ground zero Kuta.

But it wasn’t the police or the military on the job. And that was the point. Many Balinese have lost confidence in the ability of the central authorities in Jakarta to protect them, and in their once beloved part-Balinese president, for whom they voted 96% in 1999′s elections, a landslide that propelled her to the presidency last year. Bali is Muslim Megawati’s political heartland and such has been the reciprocal attachment that her political opponents led a whispering campaign that she is a secret Hindu. But there is widespread disgust that Ibu Mega – Mother Megawati – seems to be taking them for granted, appeasing Muslim factions elsewhere in the archipelago and not reining in the Islamists who now seem to have rained terror on Bali. “It’s criminal neglect,” says Made Wijaya, an Australian designer and culture critic once called Michael White who came to Bali 30 years ago and is one of the few foreigners to learn Balinese. “The Balinese are horrified at this,” he says. “It has effected them very deeply.”

And so they’ve retreated to the surety of pecalang, the traditional security of the village banjar, or committee of Hindu elders, where real power resides on Bali. So in villages across the island, a day or so after the bombings, young men in sarongs, black waistcoats, headbands and bearing kris daggers were moving traffic, closely checking village comings and goings. The ethos of the pecalang is persuasion not aggression and, so far, the banjars have dissuaded young hotheads from seeking revenge. But dangerously for Bali’s delicate relationship with a Jakarta desperately trying to avoid becoming Asia’s Yugoslavia, they form the basis of what is essentially a Balinese militia.

That worries people such as Luh Ketut Suryani, one of Indonesia’s leading academics who has seen her island steadily eroded by generations of foreign hedonists. Although gladdened her fellow Balinese didn’t loot shops, trash mosques and kill Muslims as her fellow Indonesians have done elsewhere in recent years, she neverthless believes the bombings were a “good thing”, divine retribution for the louche paradise lost that Bali has become.

“This is the punishment of God,” Suryani told The Bulletin. “We now have prostitution, gambling, paedophilia, drugs, [plans for a] casino. These things are not Balinese …

“It is good for us that Australians will not come to Bali. Our people can go back to their land, to their [rice] padi.”

Ibu Suryani reckons such “pollution” is imported by foreigners, by which she also includes the non-Balinese Indonesians who have flocked to the island since Soeharto’s 1998 ouster and the subsequent collapse of the Indonesian economy. In the past five years, Bali has been Indonesia’s Switzerland. As much of Indonesia burned, Bali has enjoyed a relative boom, becoming the second-richest place in Indonesia after Jakarta, its economic prop and a magnet for jobless non-Balinese.

This has tilted the delicate cultural blend. The guidebooks say Balinese is 95% Hindu, a religious redoubt in the sprawling country’s Islamic sea in which Javanese such as Jemaah Islamiyah’s spiritual leader Abu Bakar Bashir want to place the core of a Muslim superstate stretching from Burma to Timor. But local activist Putu Suasta, who hosts a weekly radio talkback show, reckons the split today is more like 75%-20%-5% Hindu-Muslim-Christian. He notes that Muslim families who’ve arrived on the island since 1998 are more fundamentalist than during the iron-fisted Soeharto’s moderate transmigrasi era. They also have more children – five or six to the two or three of the average Hindu family. “Bali will have a Muslim majority within two generations,” Suasta predicts.

Like the academic Suryani, the radio presenter Suasta would like Bali to turn introspective for a while. He doesn’t want a proposed bridge between Hindu Bali and Muslim Java. He’s angry about the “rape of Bali” at places such as the Bali Golf and Country Club where Hindu temples are hazards (free drop, nearest point of relief) and north-east of Denpasar at the stunning Tanah Lot, probably Bali’s holiest Hindu temple.

Here, Greg Norman turned rice padi into a golf course owned by the Jakarta-based Bakrie family, who then employed the rice-farmers as caddies. The complex is called Nirvana.

Before October 12, the saddest place of many on Bali was Pecatu Graha, a planned extension of the Nusa Dua tourist enclave where Tommy Soeharto (recently jailed for the murder of a Jakarta judge) was given a 650ha Indian Ocean beachfront by his father’s cronies and planned to build a massive condominium, golf and marina complex. An Australian design firm was its master planner, conceiving a Balinese Sanctuary Cove for wealthy foreigners and Indonesians like, well, like Tommy Soeharto.

That was 1996-97, when Soeharto power and corruption was so rampant the first family summoned the Indonesia military to clear 200 families from the site by bulldozing their temples, their fruit farms and their rice padi. Some were given jobs as gardeners, busboys and cultural performers at Tommy’s nearby Bali Cliff Hotel. He still owns the massive complex with its glass lift chute carved into the cliff connecting the hotel to the beach below.

In 1998, the Soeharto regime collapsed, and today, Pecatu Graha is a white elephant. Wind whistles through a dismal cluster of half-built condos and a golf clubhouse with no course. Nearby a temple lies in ruins. The wretched families have returned to their now barren home, earning a living by extracting a pathetic $1 toll from foreign fun-seekers careering down the estate’s potholed road in rented Vitaras to one of the best surfspots in Asia. The beach is called Dream Land.

VIGNETTES from Australia’s – and Indonesia’s – worst terror attack will stay with me forever; the unidentified girl with the purple belly-button ring; the stray cats and dogs lapping at the icy red-black rivulet that streamed from the Sanglah morgue; Qantas’ heartstring-tugging I Still Call Australia Home playing repeatedly on satellite TV in every hotel in Kuta; the bizarre Ray White (We’re All Right) Bali real-estate signs in familiar yellow and black.

Then there was the unclaimed luggage piled high at the Bounty flophouse, where scores of partying guests didn’t make it home; the wreaths of fake frangipani strewn island-wide; the traffic jams caused by myriad mecaru, the Balinese cleansing ceremony; in bohemian Ubud, a poleng – the ubiquitous black-and-white check skirt Balinese enrobe their temples in – symbolically spattered with chicken blood; the grieving family wailing as they repeatedly touched the photos of victims blue-tacked to the impromptu cross at the Australian consulate. This family – Australian wife, Muslim Balinese husband, three mixed-race kids in Islamic headscarves – hadn’t lost anyone. They grieved for hundreds of innocent families, for Bali, for Indonesia and for Australia. They grieved for all of us.

Allah’s Assassins – The Bali Bombings Revisited, 10 years on – Part 3

Winner of the 2003 Walkley Award, Asia-Pacific reporting….

THE Bali bombers were rootless young men recruited from the dusty poverty of a village in West Java – their overseer a worldly West Javanese, burning with Islamic zeal and with the contacts to organise and bankroll their jihad. Eric Ellis retraces their steps as they moved from village to town meeting the fixers, financiers and bombmakers, and finally assembling and detonating the devices that would kill and maim so many in a Kuta Beach tourist precinct.

March 5, 2003

GROUND ZERO

“Slay the idolaters wherever you find them. Arrest them, besiege them, and lie in ambush everywhere for them” – The Koran, chapter 9, verse 5

 

IT’S 11.06PM ON SATURDAY, October 12, 2002 and the Sari Club is a United Nations of Idolatry. There’s much devotion being afforded to the free-flowing VB and Bintang. A strong smell of dope hangs in the air. And some serious body-worship is in the offing when the club winds down at about 3am. Just another normal night in Kuta, Partytown Central.

Corey “Goose” Paltridge, 20, nicknamed for his Top Gun hero, is one of 500-odd revellers from 25 countries at the Sari Club and Paddy’s, the infamous meat market of a bar just across Jalan Legian. Goose is partying hard. The glazier is on his first trip abroad with the Kingsley Football Club in Perth. Eminem’s Without Me is pumping through the speakers. Goose plays air guitar in front of his mates.

Marc Gajardo is more discriminating than Goose. “I’m sorry, but I really can’t dance to this,” the 30-year-old English surfer tells his girlfriend Hannabeth Luke and friend Melanie Cohen when the Sari DJ plays Cher’s Believe. With mock disgust, Marc heads for Jalan Legian.

He steps outside for some fresh air. Standing there, he may notice that a white Mitsubishi L300 van is parked outside the club. He may even notice the 12 filing cabinets packed inside – late Saturday night is a strange time to deliver office furniture. More likely to catch his attention, in Bali’s equatorial heat, is the young Indonesian man who steps from the van into Paddy’s wearing a very heavy vest.

The man is dressed for jihad, his vest bulked up by 5kg of TNT. Inside the van’s filing cabinets are 48 draws packed with a lethal 700kg recipe of potassium chlorate, sulfuric acid and aluminium powder – a powerful bomb primed for maximum destruction. At 11.07pm, the man in the vest blows himself up. Thirty seconds later, the Mitsubishi goes up too, possibly with another man in it. The times are known because the blast was so big it registered on Indonesian seismographs. Marc takes the full force of the bigger second blast and dies instantly. Goose perishes in the fireball that engulfs the thatched-roof Sari Club. Beth and Mel crawl from the inferno and survive. In all, 202 people will be killed and 350 horribly burned or injured.

In the next few weeks, in a Denpasar hall that will double as a courtroom, 25 Indonesians believed responsible for those bombs will answer for the attacks. If found guilty – and many have already confessed – death by firing squad awaits most.

And for the attack’s alleged masterminds – Mukhlas, Imam Samudra and their principal accomplices, who had cased the two clubs in the week earlier – their part in the jihad will have been splendid. For Islamic militants like them, a death killing unbelievers guarantees glory before Allah. Paradise will have been entered.

THE TREE

“Do not make mischief on the Earth” – The Koran 29:36

THE TINY TOWN OF MALIMPING, in the remote corner of south-west Java, revolves around its alun-alun, the village square as big as a football pitch common to many Javanese towns. The Indonesian state gathers around it; a police station, a school, a health clinic, municipal offices and the Telkom exchange. There’s also a mosque and the local wing of Vice-President Hamzah Haz’ Islamist United Development Party. The merah-putih, Indonesia’s red-and-white national flag, flutters proudly above.

And in the middle of the alun-alun is a massive asem tree. Malimpingers have shaded under their illustrious tree for generations; to pray, plot against Dutch colonisers and Japanese occupiers, celebrate the Merdeka (independence) of 1945, Suharto’s ousting in 1998, or simply to play guitar, gossip and while away the scorching equatorial days.

It was beneath this tree’s weeping boughs that 35-year-old Imam Samudra recruited jihadis to his holy war, just 50 metres from Malimping’s unsuspecting police station. “We had no clues they were there, no hint that anything suspicious was going on,” says a slightly embarrassed police chief Jamalludin Chaniago. “It was an entirely normal place to be.”

Samudra made the bus journey to Malimping from his home in Serang, five hours’ drive north, in mid-2000, not long after he returned to Indonesia from 10 years abroad in Pakistan, Afghanistan and, mostly, Malaysia. Outwardly, he wanted to look up a wealthy friend he knew from Malaysia, a man called Ook Oktavia – or Pak O.O. as he’s known in Malimping. Pak O.O. is the go-between unskilled Malimpingers see when they want to work in Malaysia, in jobs Indonesia doesn’t have, and for wages three times those they can earn at home.

The Oktavia-Samudra association was natural. Both come from West Java and speak the region’s Sundanese as their mother tongue. But there was another link: Oktavia’s 20 year-old son, Andri. He also knew Samudra in Malaysia, where he worked after studies at Abu Bakr Bashir’s Al-Mukmin religious school in Solo, central Java, the notorious pesantren that authorities now believe is the base for Bashir’s Jemaah Islamiyah, suspected of being al Qaeda’s South-East Asian branch.

It’s clear that Samudra went to Malimping with more in mind than seeing old friends. His eldest sister, Aliyah, told me that when he returned to Indonesia at Eid, the end of the Islamic haj pilgrimage, “he felt hurt and angry”. “He’d seen his Muslim brothers slaughtered [in Afghanistan and Palestine] and he wanted revenge for that,” she says. Inspired by the Taliban’s success in creating a pure Islamist state in Afghanistan, spurred on by the brimstone of his compatriot cleric Bashir, and seeking revenge for attacks on Muslims in Ambon, Samudra had terror on his agenda.

Older, fluent in English and Arabic and full of worldly adventures in Afghanistan and Pakistan, Samudra cut a thrilling figure for impressionable kids like Andri, his friend Andi – one of Malimping’s young football stars who lived just 50m from Andri Oktavia’s house – and an acquaintance, Arnasan, who lived in his parents’ shack outside town. Over two years, he introduced his new friends to computers and the internet, teaching them how to communicate online. He acquainted them with mobile phones, with SMS. He explained the “victory” of September 11.

They would meet under the tree and then stroll over to the mosque to bond in prayer. Gradually, Samudra got to know these small-town boys with barely an education between them, winning their trust and playing on their circumstances, their vulnerabilities. They didn’t realise it but Andi, Andri and, particularly, Arnasan were Samudra’s low-hanging fruit, forming the core of what would eventually be the 13-strong Banten halaqah, named for their home region in West Java. Halaqah is Arabic for an Islamic study circle but, in truth, Samudra had formed a terror cell that police now know as the “Serang Group”. Members of the group have been implicated in bombings across Indonesia, notably the Christmas 2000 attacks on Christian targets in eight cities. Bali wasn’t yet marked for attack but the boys sensed their guru was planning something big, something that would guarantee them eternal paradise. It was exhilarating stuff for three naive kids from a scruffy town like Malimping.

By early 2002, after a crucial meeting in Thailand between JI’s leadership – which included Mukhlas and, by some reports, Bashir – and known al Qaeda operatives, it was decided to bomb “soft targets” in South-East Asia, because the hard target strategy was now too difficult after the rumbling of the Singapore attack plan in late 2001. Samudra’s Bali plans took off. A meeting of the Serang Group at a safe house in nearby Bandung decided the matter. Bali and its corrupting foreigners would be the target of a big hit.

Ambitious terror is expensive. At the Bandung meeting, the plotters decided to finance their jihad by robbing non-believers. Stealing from infidels was not a crime, Samudra explained to his charges, but a noble part of the holy struggle. On August 22 last year, Andri and Andi donned balaclavas and pistols to raid the Toko Elita Indah jewellery store in downtown Serang of $A80,000 in cash and gold. It helped that Elita’s owners were Chinese, regarded by many Javanese as polluters.

Samudra didn’t participate in the Elita hit but Vini Khian, the store owner’s 18-year-old daughter who was shot in the abdomen during the hold-up, told me she’d later recognised him as the suspicious man who cased the shop in the weeks before the raid. He would repeat the tactic six weeks later in Kuta, scouting Bali’s foreign tourist precinct in the week before the October 12 attack, looking for the target with maximum impact.

A few days after the Elita grab, most of the loot was handed to Samudra in the back of a Suzuki van parked in a Jakarta bus terminal. Andri, Andi, Arnasan and another cell member, Abdul Rauf, kept some to rent two safe houses near Serang, finessing their plans and staying close – but not too close for suspicion to be aroused – to their guru Samudra.

One of the tenancies, unit 316 on the Ciruas road 6km from Serang, cost 60,000 rupiah ($A11.15) a month. The apprentice terrorists got what they paid for. The unit is not even a studio, but a filthy 2m x 3m room in a motel-style block of six. Bizarrely, someone has fashioned a Star of David from masking tape on a pillar at the unit’s entrance. Indonesians know such accommodations as kos, a Dutch holdover term for shared lodgings. Indonesian kos are a focus of social life, which parents grumble is why it takes so long – up to 10 years – for their kids to finish university. But not this one. “I barely saw them,” says 42-year-old landlord Sunarto. “They would come and go in the night, creep around.” Sunarto is still not happy with the “college students” who rented the room. “They used my room to plan this terrible thing. I really want to beat them up.” Sunarto says they paid two months’ rent from August. The last time he saw them was early October. He’s still waiting for the rest of the rent.

Andri, the Malimping slave trader’s boy, was captured a month after Bali. He’s now imprisoned in an even smaller room than the hovel he rented in Serang and, unless his influential father can swing it, facing another 15 years there. Andri’s friend, Andi the football hero, could get the death penalty, despite shopping his hero Samudra to the police in November.

And what of Arnasan, the poorest of the three? At 11.07pm last October 12, as Marc Gajardo was avoiding Cher in the street outside the Sari Club, Arnasan transformed himself into “Iqbal” and became South-East Asia’s first suicide bomber. Samudra had delivered on his promise of paradise.

THE PREY

“They are to cohabit with demure virgins … as beauteous as corals and rubies … full-breasted maidens for playmates … in the gardens of delight” – Koran 55:56,58

ARNASAN’S PARENTS HAVE NOW accepted their youngest son’s role in the Bali bombings. They have little choice; they haven’t seen him since August last year, when he told them he was off to see “a friend in Serang”, most likely Samudra. That’s also about the last time they saw Arnasan’s insistent friends from town, Andi and Andri. The next outsiders to come to their padi house were police from Indonesia and Australia, who took DNA samples from them in November to help identify the body parts that had bomb debris attached to them and which were found in the Legian rubble – the remains of their youngest boy.

Three nightmares have convinced Arnasan’s 57-year-old mother, Arti Satra, that her son is dead. In the first dream, before the bomb, she saw Arnasan fall down. In the second, around the time of the Bali bombs, Arti dreamt she saw her son’s only pair of trousers, with legs but no upper torso. The third dream was after the bomb but before the police arrived at her door. In it, Arnasan was dead. Says her husband, Haji Satra, also 57: “I am convinced now. It’s obvious to me that my son has died. This is Allah’s will.”

Arti says Arnasan was educated only to primary school, after which he was forced to drop out because his family could not pay school fees. “He was a little bit naughty when he was young; he liked to play more than study,” she says. “But he was a good boy. He was quite devoted, prayed five times a day and always observed Ramadan, but never expressed any extreme views. If I had known Arnasan wanted to do such things, I would try as a mother to ask him not to do it.” She repeats it over again, perhaps three to four times, breaking down more deeply each time. “In my heart I am always crying. I keep crying and crying and looking at nothing.”

The family’s poverty is striking. Their wooden hut is little bigger than the average Australian bathroom. There’s no electricity and few possessions. Food is provided by a single rice padi, shared with a neighbour. A few chooks scratch around in the dust. Arti and Satra can’t even speak Bahasa Indonesia. In Java’s remote backblocks like Sundanese-speaking Malimping, to speak disparate Indonesia’s unifying national language suggests a basic education neither ever had.

Sobbing, Arti still holds some small hope that might be expected of a mother. “Whenever I see the police coming, when I see the uniforms walking through the padi, I think they might be bringing my son back to me,” she says, as scrawny cockerels scratch around her and the flyblown infant grandson she’s nursing.

But today, all the Malimping police are bringing to the parents is a routine surat, a statutory declaration that requires their identifying fingerprints. Pressing their thumb into the police inkpad, and then to the surat, theirs is an absolute submission to police authority. The document is blank but even if there were writing on it, the illiterate couple would have no idea what it said. Likewise the letter, reportedly from Arnasan and found at his friend Andri’s house, in which he apologises for his “martyr’s death”. “I want to say sorry to you, but all I want to do is commit myself to jihad,” he wrote.

THE ZEALOT

“God’s curse be upon the infidels! They have incurred God’s most inexorable wrath. An ignominious punishment awaits the unbelievers” – Koran 2:92-6

WHEN IMAN SAMUDRA was a boy in the 1970s – before he became a mujahid with al Qaeda and the Afghan Taliban, before he joined G272, a fundamentalist group of 272 Indonesian veterans of the Afghanistan conflicts, and before he settled in Malaysia as a computer technician – he was called Abdul Aziz. The eighth of 11 kids, he came from Serang, a market town in the West Javanese region of Banten. And Abdul Aziz was a cengeng. In Bahasa Indonesia, a cengeng is a crybaby. As in English, it’s not a particularly flattering term. Samudra’s 42-year-old eldest sister Aliyah Rudi doesn’t remember their childhood with much attachment. “I always had to carry him when he was a baby. He would cry very easily at the smallest thing.

“There were no happy times,” she says. “We were always poor. Misery came after misery. We always live in misery. We always had hard times but I consider this a test of Allah.”

She’s still miserable but her brother’s actions, of which she’s “very proud”, provide some definition. “My brother took the right path,” she insists. “I believe in his goal to bomb Bali.” She describes her brother as an intellectual, a studious man with eclectic interests who excelled at school, topping his class each year during his time at high school.

We’re sitting on the patio of this severe woman’s small house in a Serang slum. The Serang-Banten region resonates in Java’s history, in its politics, its religion and its mysticism. Banten’s mosque, Indonesia’s oldest, is almost 500 years old, a place of pilgrimage for the country’s Muslims, who believe it has mystical healing qualities. The area was also the first landfall in Java of the Veerenigde Oostindische Compagnie, the Dutch East India Company that led the 350-year Dutch colonisation of the islands.

The area’s mysticism echoes beyond the province. Suharto’s bodyguards tended to be Bantenese, bestowing that extra magic to keep evil from their president. Desperate for some of his lustre, Suharto’s incompetent successor, B.J. Habibie, raised his special militia from among the Bantenese.

Samudra’s sister is the most covered woman I’ve seen in years of travel through South-East Asia, clad in traditional Islamic dress, a blue tent that’s just a face-mask short of a burqa. Banten is Indonesia’s most devout region, a stronghold of Darul Islam. DI extremists violently campaigned for a Taliban-style Islamic regime in post-colonial Indonesia. The intellectual Samudra’s high school teacher was a DI hothead. Today, DI leaders obsess the terrorist-watchers of agencies like the FBI, CIA and the Australian Federal Police.

A goods train rumbles past barely 50m away from Aliyah’s house, en route to the nearby state steelworks that showers pollution on the district. A mosque is 50m the other way. While Aliyah’s home is concrete, her neighbours’ are mostly shanties and lean-tos. Before Bali, Aliyah was known for her sate bandeng stall, grilling the milkfish named for its succulent white flesh. But since Bali, her fame has been transformed into something more profound. Delighted neighbours give her the thumbs-up sign as they walk past the house. “No one has been against my brothers.” She smiles. It’s her only animated gesture in 30 minutes of difficult conversation. The smile doesn’t last. “The little boy dares to fight against the old man,” she rails. She means her brother, fighting for the masses against the US and its allies. “He is a defender of Muslims in Indonesia, a defender of peace. Everybody knows that his purpose is only for jihad. We are not terrorists but it is a war on kafir.” She almost spits out the Arabic word for “unbelievers”. “What he did was just to scare people.”

THE DEVOUT

“You shall sing the praises of your Lord, and be with the prostrators. And worship your Lord, in order to attain certainty” – Koran 15:98-99

WHILE SAMUDRA, in West Java, was plotting deadly ways to scare kafirs, in a tiny hamlet on the eastern side of Indonesia’s main island, a family of devotees were spreading their own brand of hatred. Foreigners don’t get a friendly reception at the Al-Islam boarding school in Tenggulun run by the eldest son of former village elder Nur Hasyim – the father also of the radical fanatics the world now knows as Amrozi, Mukhlas and Ali Imron. Not surprisingly, visitors are welcomed by signs in English that say “Only for Muslim People”. The elementary English taught to students here is not the standard “Hello” or “How are you?” but words like “avenger”, “mole”, “accuse” and “spy”. At least, that’s the lesson for today on the blackboard – as much as I could see before I retreated under a torrent of spittle.

Tenggulun itself is almost medieval. A few of its hundred-odd houses have been tarted up by remittances sent from relatives working in Malaysia but, like Iqbal’s district in West Java, the poverty is palpable. There’s hardly a car or a motorbike on its streets. Wizened old men, their backs bent under cut bamboo, stagger through town herding buffalo. From a dilapidated mosque, a muezzin wails out a strident midday call to prayer.

The windows at the school’s other “campus” – which Amrozi was in the process of setting up and which was the place where he met Samudra – are filthy. In the dust, anonymous fingers have written messages of support for the brothers in English and Bahasa: “Bali for the jahanam (evil)” and “Bali for the neraka (hell)”, “Amrozi group for Paradise”. There are Koranic blessings, and promises of sugar and heavenly liaisons with Balqis, a mythical Muslim beauty of great power.

Two doors from the mosque is the house where Amrozi, Mukhlas and Ali Imron were raised. It’s small and modest, more a wooden shack, with its three “rooms” partitioned by flimsy plywood. There’s a small refrigerator (containing an egg, two half-eaten chicken legs and a bottle of water), a fan and four broken rattan chairs.

Groaning in pain in the middle of the stone floor is the family’s 85-year-old patriarch, Nur Hasyim. The word “patriarch” suggests a towering authority figure. But not this sad man. Not any more. He lies on the floor in a puddle of his urine, incontinent and whimpering. His wife swats away flies crawling over him, occasionally adjusting his green sarong to cover his shrivelled genitals. The stench in the house is overpowering. In the street outside, one of his grandchildren – a girl no more than five – rides a tricycle. When the wheels turn, the trike’s tinny speaker plays London Bridge is Falling Down.

Tariyem, the 65-year-old mother, is herself a frail little thing. She’s very welcoming and gives me the honorific bapak, even though I’m a generation her junior. The house has been raided a dozen times since October 12, she explains, including by Australian police. “They were very kind,” she says. “They gave me 50,000 rupiah for our information. They took lots of cassettes and magazines and discs.”

She seems genuinely bewildered by the whirlwind that’s swept in since October 12, a tragedy that will likely see a quarter of her family executed. “Why would my kids do such a thing? I cannot understand. They were all good kids. They never expressed any hatred for anyone.

“I just have to accept that they were involved. We don’t have anything. The only thing we have is religion. I hope that their struggle can be accepted by Allah. I just have to surrender to Allah.” Like Arti, Iqbal’s similarly devastated mother in Malimping, Tariyem breaks down. The two women – one has already lost a son, the other will probably lose three – don’t know each other. But they are united in grief and confusion. Tariyem is still sobbing as I leave, pleading: “Help us bring back our boys.”

THE FIXER

“We do not send down the angels except for specific functions” – Koran 15:8

EVERYONE IN INDONESIA needs a fixer. They’re the access merchants who open doors, arrange stuff, get things done – for a modest fee, of course. Foreign journalists and diplomats couldn’t function without them. Working the angles, and knowing everyone’s mobile number, fixers provide function in the chaotic shambles that is often Indonesia. The best fixers are influential and so low-key as to be almost invisible.

In the central Javanese city of Solo, the Bali bombers had Herniyanto. Except the 25-year-old teacher at Abu Bakr Bashir’s Al-Mukmin pesantren didn’t get paid for his fixing. His fee for organising the safe houses, the transport, target maps (of military origin) and many of the jihadis’ meetings was October 12. And he fixed it all while his young wife was pregnant. (She gave birth to a son three weeks after the boy’s father was captured last December 4.)

If the conspirators needed motivation, Herniyanto was eager to please, producing Bashir’s cranky sermons to fire up the expanding group. He organised video nights for the plotters, with Osama bin Laden’s A Martyr’s Testament: Five Mute Witnesses to the Brutality of America the Terrorist the gripping main feature. It’s an al Qaeda documentary about the treatment of its detainees at the US military base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. If that was too depressing for the Bali-bound jihadis, there were videos of the September 11 attacks for inspiration.

Fixers also have a keen sense of who’s boss. And in terrorism as in normal life, real estate is a telling indicator. Of the six houses raided by Solo police, the biggest and most expensive was Samudra’s. His place is in Solo’s middle-class Sukoharjo neighbourhood, a pleasant concrete cottage gaily painted in a pinkish hue. The roof, recently repaired and painted the green of Islam, pleased him. Herniyanto paid a year’s rent, 1.7 million rupiah in cash, in advance, to move Samudra in.

It’s standard procedure in Indonesia for tenants to show landlords identification papers. Samudra was careful to keep his secret, apologising to his 43-year-old neighbour, Ani Ratno – whose family owned the house – that “my friend Herniyanto has them”. She says Samudra moved his wife and four children to Solo in August. Ani Ratno thought them “good neighbours, very religious. The house was very crowded sometimes.” She rarely saw Samudra, who would come and go at night. His wife said he was “very busy working with computers”. Most days, Ani Ratno’s children played with Samudra’s.

Herniyanto had planned with convenience in mind. Samudra’s Solo digs were just a short stroll from the homes of fellow conspirators Dulmatin, one of the suspected Bali bombmakers, and Ali Imron, Amrozi’s and Mukhlas’ brother. After the Bali bomb, when Samudra’s identikit was displayed on national TV, Istiqorma, the five-year-old daughter of Dulmatin’s neighbour, noticed that the face looked a lot like “Sabillah’s daddy”. It was. When strolling around the block to plan terror, Imam Samudra liked to take his four-year-old daughter along, too.

The three houses, just 100m from each other, were also a short three-wheeled becak journey from the vacant house of Herniyanto’s in-laws, where neighbours say as many as 15 men would come for Koran readings from June to October, mostly at night. Susi, 31, runs a warung across the road which sells, among other things, box-cutters. She noticed activity around the house just two days before it was raided by police in November, well after the Bali bomb. She’s suggesting the inhabitants may have been tipped off. Police also raided two nearby terrace houses, including the home of Herniyanto’s brother, which police now believe was the group’s operations centre. Lots of JI documents and al Qaeda videos were seized here.

HEAD OFFICE

“Carry out the orders given to you” – Koran 15:94

SOLO IS WHERE INDONESIANS go to connect with their inner Java. The city’s famous kraton, the ancient sultan’s palace, is stunning. So is the Masjid Agung, the grand mosque built, not in the common Arabic style, but in a low-slung Javanese manner. And chaotic Klewer Market, the centre of the world’s batik industry, is an absorbing jumble of colour and fabric.

But it wasn’t a cultural odyssey that Samudra and his Serang Group from West Java, and the brothers Amrozi, Mukhlas and Ali Imron from Tenggulun village in East Java, took to Solo last August. It was to finetune the attack on Bali, in the city that is home to the fundamentalist Jemaah Islamiyah of hardline cleric Abu Bakr Bashir, who had taught many of them while exiled in Malaysia during the 1980s and 1990s.

Samudra first contacted Amrozi in late 2000, not long after his return to Indonesia from Malaysia. He needed bomb ingredients for church attacks in Ambon. The younger brother of Ali Ghufron (better known by his nom-de-guerre, Mukhlas), another powerful G272 jihadi also influential in JI whom Samudra knew from Afghanistan and Malaysia, was eager to help. This time, however, he was summoned to Solo.

When Amrozi arrived, he had no inkling Bali would be the target. For Indonesia’s radical jihadis, the peaceful Hindu island and its infidel tourists were doubtless a provocation to their ideal of an Islamic super-state from Thailand to Timor. But they were pragmatic enough to know their war would not be easily won. Bali, with air links nearly as good as Jakarta’s, was a convenient – and unsuspecting – hub to source and store materiel for campaigns further afield.

Samudra welcomed Amrozi over soto at an Islamic community centre outside Solo known as a JI haunt. They arranged another meeting at the Klewer batik market, when Samudra brought along Idris (also known as Jhoni Hendrawan) and Dulmatin, two bomb-making and electronics experts. They told Amrozi what they needed. As in Ambon, Amrozi would be the quartermaster, and the mule, knowing only as much as he needed. But this time the quantities would be much bigger. A van was also needed and it should all be delivered to Bali by late-September.

Samudra handed Amrozi the funds; the equivalent of $A10,000 made up of rupiah, US greenbacks, Malaysian ringgit and Singapore dollars, the mix of currencies suggesting their funding wasn’t entirely from the jewellery store heist in Serang. However another credible source maintains the funds were not actually handed over until a later meeting in Tenggulun. Surrounded by Klewer’s dazzling batik, Amrozi was told Bali was the target, and assured that victory would be glorious. It was a successful meeting. The jihadis strolled across the road to give thanks at the Grand Mosque.

The operation was developing quickly. Samudra told his wife they would soon be moving. Their neighbour Ani Ratno says the wife told her they were moving to Lampung, the same Sumatran town where Herniyanto’s Solo-born in-laws live. On October 8, the Samudras moved out. His wife headed west with their four children, and Samudra east. He had important business in Bali.

THE EXECUTION

“Your Lord never annihilates any community unjustly, while its people are unaware” – Koran 6:131

URCHINS GATHER ON the upper decks of the decrepit boat that ferries traffic from Java on the hour’s passage to Bali. For 3000 rupiah, the scamps swallow-dive into the murky water 30m below, then duck for the coins delighted passengers fling as the ferry retreats from the port. Their antics introduce a holiday air to the journey. We are, after all, heading for Bali.

Amrozi made the journey in late September, with a white Mitsubishi van in the hold, bearing a deadly chemical cargo. Today, several months after the bombings, a car like this would be impounded by soldiers toting sub-machineguns, its occupants arrested. The patrols began on October 25; before that, security was non-existent and, besides, vehicles carrying explosives were commonplace. Balinese fishermen use them instead of trawling.

After the meetings with Samudra and friends, Amrozi set about his important assignment. He was also eager to please his intense elder brother, Mukhlas, who had long regarded Amrozi and his faith as a bit flaky. Amrozi had bought a white Mitsubishi L300 van from a man called Annas in Tuban village in East Java, not far from Tenggulun. Annas told the police Amrozi had offered him Singapore dollars and Malaysian ringgit for the vehicle. Amrozi converted the cash to rupiah and paid Annas around Rp30 million (about $A5000).

Amrozi drove it into Surabaya – Indonesia’s second-largest city, about three hours from Tenggulun – to the Tidar Kimia store of Chinese chemical merchant Silvester Tendean, where he’d filled Samudra’s Ambon order in 2000. Tendean was keen to deal and happily doctored invoices that showed Amrozi had bought cooking salts. Arrested soon after Amrozi, Tendean is now on trial in Surabaya for his role in various terror campaigns. His store is shut down, but on Jalan Tidar, there are perhaps 20 just like it.

Amrozi set out for Bali, seven hours by road and ferry. As he drove, he may have even passed the truck which has one side decorated by a portrait of a smug Osama bin Laden surveying his jihadis flying a plane into the World Trade Center, the other that classic Easy Rider biker image – mixed symbolism if ever there was. At Banyuwangi, he paid Rp40,000 car-and-driver passage. An hour later, he arrived in Bali.

While Amrozi was gathering the bomb materials inJava and making his way to Bali, the fixers were at work in Denpasar. Safe houses were rented in at least four locations. The main one was a flat at 18 Jalan Menjengan, where Samudra stayed. Landlord Mas Edi rented the flat in September to an “Alfian”, a man with a strong Batak accent, meaning he was from the Medan region of Sumatra. Alfian’s ID said he was born in 1976. He told Edi he needed the flat for a year to store cargo. He paid a year’s rent in advance, some Rp10 million, wired through Bank Mandiri. “He found it through the newspaper,” said Edi. “I gave him the key … and he still has it.”

Edi’s ground-floor flat had a mango tree out front. A young student neighbour remembers one afternoon during the week before the bomb, Samudra yelled out to her: “Do you like mangoes?” He picked one and, now flirting, gave it to her, suggesting she make a rojak. “He was nice, very polite and had a caring manner. His face is not scary, I don’t suspect him capable of doing such an act.” It seems the charmer Samudra was good at picking low-hanging fruit.

Amrozi arrived in Bali during the last week of September, checking into Room 101 at the seedy Hotel Harum, a flophouse in central Denpasar. His brother Ali Imron told police he arrived about the same time, accompanied by Dulmatin and another man, a Malaysian called Dr Azhari who’d also been in Afghanistan. The bomb-making team were in place.

Ali Imron says he packed the explosives into 12 plastic filing cabinets, each with four draws. He roped the cabinets together with a plastic tube containing explosive, priming the package with dozens of detonators. The bomb was packed into the van delivered by Amrozi, who then returned home to Tenggulun. A bomb vest was also built: six pockets of a vest filled with plastic PVC tubes containing TNT, and wired to a switch to be flicked by the wearer.

Ali Imron told police he prepared four detonation options: a remote-control device activated by a mobile phone; a standard countdown timed for 45 minutes from activation; switches; and a detonator that automatically engaged when its lid was removed. If Ali Imron’s version is correct, it’s clear there was mistrust in some of the operatives. Ali Imron devised the first two methods as failsafes if the deliverer suddenly opted out.

The Mitsubishi was driven to Jalan Legian, which had been scouted and selected by Samudra as the target zone. Samudra was reportedly praying at a nearby mosque. Ali Imron says he was accompanied by two men, both known by their nom-de-guerre of Iqbal. One of them was Arnasan, the poor boy from Malimping.

Just before reaching Legian, Ali Imron left the van and jumped on a motorbike left there by his colleague Idris. Arnasan drove the van to the Sari Club, and stayed with it. Iqbal put on his vest and, at 11.06pm, stepped from the van toward Paddy’s. While Samudra maintains there was only one suicide bomber – Arnasan, who was wearing the vest – Ali Imron’s version contradicts this and says there were two and that Arnasan stayed in the van. Whatever the real identity of the vest-wearing “Iqbal”, he could hear Eminem’s Without Me booming from the Sari Club behind him as he climbed out of the van.

“Jump back jiggle a hip and wiggle a bit

And get ready cuz this is about to get heavy …”

– Eminem, Without Me

THE DEALMAKER

“The noblest of you before God is the most righteous of you” – Koran 49:13

IT’S LUNCHTIME IN A Jakarta hotel. One of Indonesia’s most influential lawyers sweeps into the cafe. He is neither garbed in the flowing robes nor clutching the Koran one might expect of the “Muslim Lawyer” his business card describes. Natty in good suit and expensive haircut, this senior counsel with the Indonesian Muslim Lawyers Group seems more Salomon Brothers than Sharia. We’re lunching because he’s defending some of the alleged Bali conspirators. There’s much to discuss. The lawyer remarks he’s taking the case pro bono, which I take to mean that I’m paying for lunch. But conversation is a struggle. His mobile phone or, rather, phones – he has three and his assistant two – won’t stop chirruping. The one with a French Can-Can ringtone is particularly distracting.

Between juggling Nokias and forkfuls of nasi goreng, he explains why he’s taking the case. “I must ensure it is fair, that it doesn’t become the target of infiltration and external influence,” he says, a noble ambition in a country where the law is derided as the best money can buy.

His clients, of course, are innocent; he reels off the usual Mossad-and-CIA-did-it theories. He claims the Legian bombs were “micro-nuclear”. whatever that is. He’s not sure himself but “Americans know about it. They are the crusader nation”.

He’s going to have to do better than this. “My clients’ so-called confession is their religious duty, because they do not think it is wrong, it’s best for their religion. There is a reward of going to paradise. A confession under Allah and under the law are two different things. The case should be built on the facts. I want to leave religion out of it.”

Lunch dishes cleared, he pushes a school exercise book across the table. It is, he explains, Imam Samudra’s hand-written diary, written in his Denpasar cell since his arrest.

Samudra has filled about 24 pages, mostly in Bahasa. He writes in Arabic after prayers and in English, he spouts invective. Exclamation marks scream from the generally neat text – BUSH! HOWARD! AMERICA! AUSTRALIA! TERRORISTS! The diary reveals a sarcastic man, angry and unrepentant. He complains bitterly of the police and their choking kretek cigarettes, and disparages their interrogation. Their questions are “childish” and “stupid”, the investigation “ridiculous” and “boring”. There’s no confession in the pages I read, nor accounts of torture made in the Indonesian press. Just plenty of bile from a cengeng.

“So, Bush the ‘Pharoah’ [the same ironic term Osama bin Laden uses to describe the US president] and the ‘so-called’ John Howard congratulate Indonesia for success in capturing terrorists. But the terrorists are those who treat the Muslim brothers like animals, those who bombarded Afghanistan during Ramadan after September 11, 2001.

“To the infidel, when you stir up trouble, you will be led to hell. Sooner or later, there will be torture for you in the world, and even the afterlife will be messed up.”

Cynicism drips from Samudra’s acid pen: “The animal Bush declares this is a crusade, for infinite justice, and joining him is the ‘nation’ called Indonesia in which the majority are Muslim. Yes, of course America and Australia are correct, that’s why Muslims are rounded up in Malaysia, Singapore, Indonesia for the sake of the master America and their lackey Australia.

“Allah will vanquish and destroy America and other infidels. Those who make war on Allah’s enemies, on those infidels who slaughter Muslims, that is called jihad. Yes, of course, America and Australia are correct.”

He also shows an inventive grasp of current affairs: “the terrorist America is definitely successful at cloning because they have spread out ‘Islamophobia’ and ‘Jihadophobia’ in the veins and the blood of the Indonesian people. That’s why all the ridiculous procedures that America imposes are cloned and followed by the Indonesian government”.

In one entry, written after a day with police reconstructing meetings with alleged co-conspirators, he puns thathe is an actor in a “REKONSTRUKSINETRON!!!” (Rekonstruksi is Bahasa for reconstruction and a Sinetron is an Indonesian soap opera.)

“The police are the directors and scriptwriters and I am just the instant actor that must follow all the rules; no complaints, just follow the director, my mouth sealed.”

His English seems solid. “I.M.A.M S.A.M.U.D.R.A” is defined with initial capitals as “Islamic Movement against American Monster. Save And help our Masjidil Haram [mosque worshippers] UnDeR Attack from American aggressors and its allies.”

It’s gripping stuff, a solid scoop, but before I can read more, the lawyer grabs back the book. “Perhaps we could come to a mutually beneficial relationship.” He suggests we should keep our “negotiations” confidential.

“It’s very expensive for my team to always be travelling to Bali to talk to clients,” he grumbles. He proposes an “arrangement”, exclusive stories and access to Samudra for $US2000. Like any practised dealmaker, he throws in a sweetener, a video of Samudra being interrogated by Indonesian police and “guarantee” of an exclusive interview in his Bali cell. “It can be arranged.”

“Many wartawan [journalists] from your country want to deal with me,” he claims. “… if you don’t want, I sell to them.”

The Bulletin declines his offer. We’ve seen enough. It’s time for justice to do its work.

Additional research by Rin Hindriyati, Jakarta

What On Earth Is Going On In Spain?

THESE are very difficult days for Spain.

Summer’s tourists have returned home from sojourning in the world’s second biggest tourist economy. And as the northern autumn descends into winter, that means that even more Spanish will now be out of work than the near one-in-three that entered the short holiday season jobless. The cold reality of its economic plight confronts Spain again.

Signs of Spain’s pain are evident across the country. Spanish nights, for example, are darker now, but it isn’t the imminent end of daylight saving and onset of winter that are causing the pall. Spain’s charming villages are less so because municipalities can no longer afford to light their streets or illuminate signature landmarks, such as a once-glowing 12th century castle. Those same streets are also less tidy, because urban services are being slashed, regarded as a luxury by penniless councils that have paid neither their teachers nor the local cops for months.

It’s a vicious circle: no jobs mean less local tax collected, and fewer administrative fees paid too, because fewer and fewer people have a job, let alone a budget to pay mortgages, improve houses, register cars or use basic services. Municipal rubbish dumps have suddenly become very popular; the usual scavenging cats are joined by foraging jobless breadwinners who gather food scraps for their families — their own leftovers remain uncollected because councils can’t pay refuse-collectors’ contracts. This is a nation reduced to its knees, fretting about what might happen next.

Spain’s regional governments, themselves hubristic victims of property’s nasty boom and bust, can’t help because they too are broke, having lavished the public purse on expensive white elephants. Regions such as Valencia, Andalucia, Murcia and Catalonia are being forced to ask Madrid for cash it doesn’t have. Foreigners are both loved and resented: in Andalucia, for example, where many foreigners own houses, these modest villas have become impromptu economic islands in otherwise becalmed neighbourhoods where the foreigner is master and diminished locals work as servants. It’s all wounding a proud nation.

Didn’t Spain recently get a lifeline from Brussels and Frankfurt?

Yes, a pledge of €100 billion in June this year, but that doesn’t seem to be enough. This week the ratings agency Moody’s said Spain’s bank bailout, which had been measured at around €60 billion, might need to be almost double what Madrid admitted to last week in its ‘stress test’. In any event, the Spanish are outraged that bankers and their political patrons will be rescued by each other, some with multi-million-euro payoffs, while their victims have to endure a generation of austerity, unemployment and poverty.

There’s little trust in the banking system. To compensate for funds that have been withdrawn from its banks, Spain has had to borrow more than €400 billion, about 40 per cent of its pre-crisis economic output, from the European Central Bank.

Hang on, weren’t we told “the worst is over” in Europe?

Yes, that’s what was said, by lots of prominent people who are paid to know better.

People like the IMF chief Christine Lagarde, who said last March that “the world economy has stepped back from the brink…we have cause to be a little bit more optimistic”. And Mario Draghi, the boss of Europe’s central bank, also this year: “The worst is over…the situation is stabilising”. And the European Commission President José Manuel Barroso: “We have not lost, we are not losing, we have resisted well.” And the German finance minister, and the new Greek prime minister and the Spanish prime minister, and, well, you get the idea…

If the worst is over for the Eurozone, desperate Madrileños and Athenians clearly didn’t get the note, as the blood spilled on their streets this past week suggests.

Blood?

In Spain, Madrid’s besieged Rajoy government has begun hardening official resistance to the indignados, the ‘indignant’ protestors. Last week Spanish police bludgeoned and shot them with rubber bullets during demonstrations outside Parliament. These brutal tactics shocked many Spanish, who are usually among the first to put up their hand to serve  international peacekeeping efforts. Now there’s even murmurings of civil war — dangerous talk in a country that was defined by just such a conflict. Politically rare for him, King Juan Carlos even chimed in last week to warn against Spain’s splitting.

Polarising extremes are forming, testing a democracy that’s barely 30 years old and prompting some to portray Spain as an ‘unexploded bomb.’ To the right, veterans groups demand the army step in to enforce the unitary Spanush state, remarks which evoke modern Europe’s last attempted coup in February 1981. And on the left, Robin Hood-figures like Juan Manuel Sánchez Gordillo, an Andalucian communist mayor, have emerged as indignado heroes as they raid supermarkets for the poor and occupy banks and properties.

The Anglo-Spanish intellectual Felipe Fernández-Armesto warns that “fears of a social meltdown are excessive but not baseless”. The tension in Spain is palpable and as austerity measures are rejected across these struggling ‘Club Med’ nations from Portugal to Greece, the future of the euro may not be decided by summits populated by nameless bureaucrats spouting ‘globaloney’, but by the raw people power of the disaffected.

Wait, wasn’t Spain supposed to be the model for European unity?

Time was when Europe aficionados, many of them with their snouts in Brussels’ troughs, touted Spain as a model for the European Union. They enthused that here was a land riven by war which had made a unifying peace, a long-time dictatorship that had found prosperity in boisterous democracy — and so could their idealised wider Europe.

Though Spain encompasses distinct language groups and autonomous ethnicities — dour Basques, dogged Galicians, sophisticated Catalans and fiery Andalucians — who have historically never much liked each other, they were able to celebrate their own identities while embracing a national Castilian tongue and identifying as Spanish for a common cause. Why, Spain even resurrected a royal family of pomp and ornamental ritual — how very European.

That was pre-meltdown. How fragile the construct is proving to be.

Today, Spain has again become a symbol for Europe, but not the one imagined by the continent’s federalists. Now it’s a model for the EU’s own possible unravelling; under economic pressure, its celebrated diversity may become its undoing — revealing the weaknesses of artificial federalism.

Take wealthy Catalonia: as Germany is to Europe, so Catalonia is to Spain. It’s the country’s biggest economic contributor andhas long subsidised poorer parts of Spain through internal fiscal transfers managed via demanding Madrid bureaucrats. The industrious Catalans have always been grumpy that their taxes were badly spent by their fellow Spaniards, but while the going was good they kept their grumbles largely to themselves.

Now, they have had to ask Madrid for a bailout themselves, effectively asking for their own money back — and the feeling is they’ve had just about enough of this caper. Last month under banners proclaiming ‘Catalonia: A New European State’, 1.5 million Catalans jammed Barcelona’s avenues to demand secession from Madrid. Opinion polls show support for Catalan independence running at around 50 per cent — double the level of 2008 when the euro crisis was yet to bite.

Local economists have calculated that if Barcelona went it alone, Catalonia’s debt-to-economic-output ratio would fall by 40 per cent.

In other words, Catalonia would appear to be better off independent. On November 25, Catalans will effectively vote on secession in a regional election, on what is looming as a defining day for the Spanish state, and for Europe.

But aren’t the proud Spanish rallying, banding together to see out this national crisis? For goodness’ sake, the nation is the reigning football World Cup holder and has just taken the Euro championship.

Ask the people of Almeria in Spain’s southeast. This is where are more than 100,000 Africans slave off the official books for €25 a day, if they are lucky, picking vegetables for export in hothouses owned by billionaire Spanish food barons. They are illegal immigrants working without rights in a region where the official unemployment level is as high as 50 per cent among Spaniards under 25 years of age.

So why not diplomatically manage the flow of illegal workers from across the Med and provide jobs to the Spanish? No chance. That would mean lower profits for the billionaires if they had to pay their compatriots the minimum wage required by law, which is double what they occassionally pay their African illegals. More to the point, it would require the local mafia of cops, official and politicians – and the tycoons that back them – to apply the law, not just Spain’s but that of Europe. And that would mean the end of cheap labour – and of bigger profits. This is not a spirit-of-the-Blitz situation.

An eloquent depiction of Spanish regionalism is that when institutionalised corruption is unearthed in Spain’s districts, like it has been in the Almeria area, it tends to get shut down by Spanish federal agents from Madrid doing a job that conflicted local colleagues won’t.

As for football, well, it matters in Spain. Half the mighty La Roja, the Spanish national team, hails from or plays in Barcelona. If Catalonia went it alone, the famous Barca would be reduced to being a dominant team in an unremarkable league in a minor nation that would win internationally perhaps as often as, say, Scotland.

And as the Almerians like to say, it’s not as if the rest of Spain much likes the Catalans; they see them as arrogant and soft, entitled complainers. In a similar way, the barely concealed enmities all over Europe are resurfacing to divide it; north-south, Catholic-Calvinist, taxpaying-tax avoiding, rich-poor.

And what’s happening in that little Andalucian village that you wrote about once before?

Oh, you mean Gaucin, the tiny southern town with the shonky property development? Yes, this place crystallises much of what ails the Spanish economy, a lethal cocktail of speculation and malgovernance. That development is known locally as ‘Landslide Villas,’ because its 20-odd flats were precariously built by a mate of the then dodgy mayor on a shifting cliff that wasn’t zoned urban. The unremarkable two-to-three bedroom units that rose there were first offered at €350,000 to 400,000 through 2008, just after they were built, when times were better.

But near every time we’ve returned to Gaucin since, the advertised price has been lower. When I looked in June, they were ‘rent-to-buy’ for €399 a month, making a notional price of around €100,000, assuming the average five per cent annual return landlords aim for.

Now, a new advertisement draped over the building touts them at €299 a month to rent, 25 per cent down from June. At one level, that’s an extraordinarily cheap €9.83 a day for  a never-occupied apartment. But it also suggests that their prices are 80 per cent down on what they were first offered.

That’s a big headache for the developer, but a bigger one for his bank that collateralised the development loan against the now-stricken property, and possibly many more like it. No bank in Spain has written back 80 per cent of its property load as bad debt burdening its balance sheet. The biggest write-down is about 25 to 30 per cent.

So if this Gaucin property is taken as representative of Spain, that means there’s twice to triple the financial headache still to be endured, in a banking sector that last week admitted it needed €60 billion in emergency funding after that state-sponsored stress test,  a state that few much believe its public admissions of how profound is Spain’s crisis.

What If You (Mostly) Built A Ridiculously Ambitious City And Nobody Came?

The abandoned and incomplete apartment buildings of Seseña

UNTIL the recent years of Spain’s economic catastrophe, Spaniards mostly knew Seseña as the scene of a decisive battle in the country’s brutal civil war of 1936-39, during which the Molotov cocktail first found deployment in modern combat.

The Battle of Seseña came early in that conflict, but it defined its eventual outcome. With aid from Hitler and Mussolini, Franco’s forces had quickly taken key towns on the central Spanish plain, including Seseña, and were poised to take Madrid just 40km north. Franco’s men encountered Republican forces here, repelled them and pushed on to lay brutal seige to the capital for three years.

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Today, Seseña again finds itself determining Spain’s survival, this time laying seige to its economy in a battle no less grave in its potential to cripple this proud nation.

For a symbol of all that ails Spain — and Europe too — look no further than the Residencial Francisco Hernando Seseña. This folly has it all: excess, waste, hubris, misery and scandal.

In 2002, the first sods were turned at Seseña, on what was the biggest residential complex ever undertaken by a private developer in Europe. It was essentially a EUR9 billion bank-financed plan to construct a new city, a working-class utopia of 14,000 large, affordable apartments piled into 280 blocks.

The developer was Francisco Hernando, better known to Spaniards as El Pocero, or The Drain Man. That’s the polite nickname many have for Hernando. Barely literate and from a dirt-poor family, he got his start — and a less flattering moniker — unblocking sewers. He likes to tell journalists that he didn’t have a proper shower until he was 22, which perhaps explains the smell that surrounds Seseña.

Hernando’s company Onde 2000 would complete barely a third of the promised apartments — though his builders have managed to finish the pompous statues of his clan still sprinkled around the complex, some now daubed with unflattering graffiti.

There is no feature of Residencial Francisco Hernando that demolition wouldn’t fix.

Today, four years of a crisis on, the apartment blocks are nothing but squat brown chunks of brick punctuating a massive abandoned construction site. Tumbleweeds somersault down broad avenues named, as if like a cruel joke, after famous artists, which run into dead ends. The promised swimming pools are dry, the sporting fields browned over in the baking 40-degree summer heat.

The towers where a few apartments were completed are forlornly plastered with ‘for sale’ signs or, even more pathetically, with ‘for rent’ signs. Planned shops and supermarkets are shuttered. Even the real estate agents are boarded up.

As for Hernando, the last Seseña residents heard of the 70-year-old Señor Sewers, he had re-launched in the West African dictatorship of Equatorial Guinea, the former Spanish colony regarded as the one of the world’s most corrupt nations.

It’s not just at Seseña where vanity and hubris ended in tears and white elephants. A few hours’ drive further south, the city of Ciudad Real boasts a EUR1 billion airport that doesn’t have planes. Built before the crisis, it opened midst much fanfare in 2008 as the economy began to collapse, only to close this year when the handful of flights stopped flying there.

Its fate was that it was financed and owned by Caja Castilla La Mancha — one of the first of the Spanish savings banks to collapse in 2009 — and built in a town populated by overreaching city fathers with close developer friends, and all anxious for their share.

Today, the management company of the Aeropuerto Don Quijote — no windmill-tilting irony intended is in receivership.

Across Spain there are a million vacant dwellings like those at Seseña and myriad white elephants like the airport at Ciudad Real, and that’s the core of the crisis facing the country. Financially, there’s a double whammy effect evident in Seseña. The project was bank-financed and begun in the very years, over 2003-04, that the market began to peak. The project was in trouble even before Spain’s property market began collapsing, and then it got worse. A few apartments were sold, mostly with 100 per cent mortgages, but today they are notionally worth 50 to 75 per cent less than what punters paid for them — notionally, because there is no market to sell into. With unemployment here at around 50 per cent, residents who can’t meet pre-crisis mortgage terms, or any terms at all, are being evicted.

Today, some 100 to 150 billion euros are being earmarked to bail out Spain’s banks, but even this may not be enough. The central Banco de España measures Spaniards’ private debt at more than one trillion euros, with mortgages accounting for about 60 per cent of that. And few banks have written down their bad debt portfolios to fully account for what has been, on average, a halving of property values since 2008.

Last month, as the Olympic Games were staged in London, I wandered down one of the main streets of Residencial Francisco Hernando, and through the wasteland that is the Ciudad Real airport.

In Seseña, the occasional Spanish flag hung patriotically from one of the buildings, and at one second-floor apartment a man who  identified himself as “Jose” appeared on his balcony and called down, surprised to see another human being in the neighbourhood. He was bare-chested and trying to catch a breeze amidst the heat, he said, explaining that his air conditioning wasn’t working because the electricity grid was down. When he learned he was talking to media, his wife appeared alongside him and pleaded with us to “expose all the corruption in our country”.

At Ciudad Real, the sprawling airport complex has rusting passenger air bridges that connect to nowhere, an empty and locked terminal and a runway that was built to handle the world’s biggest planes now closed to traffic, except that of scurrying rabbits. The only jobs evident are that of an occasional cleaner pushing a bucket, and a hyper-sensitive security guard shooing onlookers from public access roads.

The World Bank recently declared Europe to be a “lifestyle superpower, with arguably the highest quality of life in human history”. Perhaps it was referring to Paris’s chic sixth arrondissement. Had these wise sages expended some shoe leather on visiting Seseña and Ciudad Real, their conclusions might have been decidedly different.

And rather closer to the reality of today’s Europe, as it begins the difficult rise from its mire.

Read more Eric Ellis stories on the Australian lawyer leading Julian Assange’s charge to avoid extradition; the quaint hamlets and towns turning to right-wing politics in recession-struck France; and a step-by-step primer on the ongoing Greek sovereign-debt crisis.

 

Letters to the Editor (2)

The pain in Spain came mainly from the drain.

From andrew

20 September 2012

Not to mention the airport at Castellón that has never received a single commercial flight, which cost 150 million euros.

From John

19 September 2012

Indonesia: Helman’s play on Asia

MENTION the name Aburizal Bakrie in the smart bars, clubs and restaurants of Singapore and Jakarta where bankers gather and the name Helman Sitohang is often uttered in the next breath.

Sitohang is Credit Suisse’s chief rainmaker in Jakarta and Singapore, a man regarded by many as perhaps the best-connected banker in Indonesia.

Some of his envious colleagues even say he almost enjoys a father-son relationship with Bakrie, one of Indonesia’s richest – and most powerfully connected – businessmen.

Throughout the last 14 years, when most foreign banks, still bearing wounds from the late 1990s, would touch an Indonesia deal, Credit Suisse kept its door open in Jakarta and its Rolodex up to date. That was mostly down to Sitohang, rewarded for his efforts as co-head of Credit Suisse’s Asia-Pacific investment banking operation.

Sitohang’s Bakrie relationship has served him and Credit Suisse well, but it’s not been without its sleepless nights. As Indonesia’s highest-profile Muslim pribumi, or indigenous, business family, the Bakries have been something of a protected species in mostly Islamic Indonesia, where the business elite tends to be ethnic Chinese.

Politically-wired Bakrie has been close to the wall several times, only to be bailed out or have his obligations waived in controversial deals stitched up behind official Jakarta’s secretive walls. Shares in Bakrie’s main operating company Bumi Resources have fallen to a three-year low as the market frets about its ability to service around $4 billion in debt, most notably a pressing $1.3 billion obligation to Beijing’s state-owned China Investment Corp. Bumi Resources’ coal reserves, gathered mostly in Kalimantan on the island of Borneo, are the mainstay of London-listed Bumi plc, which Bakrie co-owns with financier Nat Rothschild, a deal Sitohang helped set up through 2010/11.

But it’s a relationship that has often had tensions, sometimes breaking out into open warfare between the two sides as they publicly traded barbs over Bumi Resources management and debt levels. Adding to the drama is the sharp fall in coal prices in the last year, and the slowing of the Chinese economy – Bumi’s main customer.

Now operating from Singapore, Sitohang is a trusted keeper of many of the cosy Jakarta elite’s commercial secrets. It seems to help that many of them bank – mostly in secure Singapore, out of reach of grasping hands in Jakarta – with Credit Suisse’s private wealth management division. “We have this concept of ‘one bank’ and we have three big businesses – investment banking, private banking and asset management,” says Sitohang. “So obviously if the clients can be serviced with more than one product, it’s a good situation. If somebody is already covering them with one product, why don’t we offer them the others.”

Sitohang has been Indonesia’s top dealmaker for years, positioning Credit Suisse close to all of its big transactions, corporate and sovereign. Credit Suisse has topped the Indonesian investment banking league tables for most of the past 15 years. Sitohang attended one of Indonesia’s most prestigious schools, the Bandung Institute of Technology, alma mater of many prominent Indonesians, including Bakrie and modern Indonesia’s founding president, Sukarno.

But Sitohang is far from being a typical Asian banker. And it also turns out he’s rather less Indonesian than many believe. He’s actually half-Slovakian, his family history a throwback to a very different kind of Indonesia. Through the 1950s and early 1960s, at the height of the Cold War, the former Soviet bloc was locked in a fierce ideological struggle with a west led by the US.

The newly independent and populous Indonesia under the leftist firebrand Sukarno was a particular Soviet favourite and Moscow wooed Jakarta with many favours. Some of the largesse is still evident across the islands. One of southeast Asia’s biggest sporting stadiums is Gelora Bung Karno in central Jakarta, built six years after the massive Lenin Stadium was opened in Moscow by the same engineers and architects, a gift for Sukarno’s hosting of the 1962 Asian Games.

The then USSR also gave rise to the modern steel industry in Indonesia, providing most of the plant that would become Indonesia’s biggest steelmaker, PT Krakatau. The Soviets sponsored cultural and educational ties too, and it was under this programme that Sitohang’s father, an ethnic Batak from Indonesia’s northern Sumatra region, won a scholarship to study economics at Prague’s Charles University, where he met – and married – a fellow student, a Slovak from the small Tatra mountains town of Ružomberok, who is Sitohang’s mother.

Sitohang was born in Prague, in communist times. “My first language is actually Czech,” he reveals. “I only started studying Bahasa Indonesian when I was nine years old.” Sitohang’s father recently passed away, but his Slovak mother still lives in Medan, the northern Sumatran capital. “She went back to Slovakia recently after my father died,” Sitohang says. “I thought she would stay there, but she came back because she told me her heart is in Indonesia.”

As is her son’s, though he has been long a resident of Singapore, which many bankers regard as Indonesia’s preferred financial centre. Sitohang is Credit Suisse’s chief rainmaker in Jakarta and Singapore Helman Sitohang is Credit Suisse’s chief rainmaker in Jakarta and Singapore Fourteen years after Indonesia’s reformasi, the period that ushered in a wobbly democracy, Sitohang has become Credit Suisse’s Indonesia booster.

He tells Euromoney that in the next decade “Indonesia will experience the highest growth of the G20 countries”. He says: “You could even see a year where Indonesia matches China’s growth.” He expects Indonesia’s GDP per capita to rise to around $7,000 by 2019, double current levels – in other words moving from Moroccan-level standard of living to something approximating a present-day Bulgaria, an EU member.

Sitohang says he’s “not big into politics” and politely declines to discuss the antics of the Suharto clan, many of whom remain active today in Indonesian business. Indeed, as one of the few foreign banks to stay the course in Jakarta, Credit Suisse has long had tight and extensive links with Indonesia’s ancien régime and its cronies, notably banking and advising projects associated with Suharto’s second son, Bambang Trihatmodjo.

Those links famously came into sharp focus just weeks before the corrupt Suharto edifice fell when in March 1998 the late US diplomat Richard Holbrooke, hired by Credit Suisse as a door-opening vice-chairman, was made to apologize to Suharto for his remarks that the Indonesian strongman was “captured by cronies” and should step away from power. The remark caused outrage in Jakarta, where Credit Suisse had a big presence.

Holbrooke blamed jet lag for his “unfortunate impression” and insisted he had “high respect for the historic role of president Suharto”. Some months later, Suharto would be toppled amid claims that he and his family had looted impoverished Indonesia of up to $70 billion. Sitohang says the old regime’s passing has “given an opportunity for a new breed of businessman”, such as the media and property mogul Chairal Tanjung, a Credit Suisse client.

Sitohang claims that in today’s Indonesia one no longer needs to be politically connected to operate in business. Sitohang praises Indonesia’s reform drive since 1998 but would like to see greater efforts made by government on infrastructure development, which he forecasts could add 1% to 2% to GDP growth.

Sitohang’s Credit Suisse has been active in Indonesia’s sovereign debt market, alongside UBS and JPMorgan. He says he has no special relationship with any department or with any of the eight finance ministers Indonesia has had since 1998 because of rotation by the ministry. “That’s the right and fair way,” he says. Two areas where Credit Suisse is indisputably number one in Indonesia are the M&A and IPO markets. “I was lucky that I had a boss who was a big supporter of us staying here,” he says. (The boss being American Eric Varvel, now chief executive of Credit Suisse’s investment bank. Varvel was based in Jakarta as country CEO before and during the Asian financial crisis, helping to build Credit Suisse’s close ties to Indonesia’s big business families.)

Sitohang joined Credit Suisse a few months before the crisis. He remembers the riots in Jakarta and the sclerosis of the collapsed economy. “Frankly, there was no job for the first six months,” he says. Credit Suisse pitched for the government’s banking reconstruction, privatization and economy support body it managed alongside the IMF’s rescue package, but lost that advisory business to JPMorgan and the old Lehman Brothers. “By 1999/2000 there were not that many competitors,” he says. “Then slowly business started coming in.”

And how. According to Thomson Reuters data, Credit Suisse has earned some $250 million in Indonesia fee income since 2002, doing around 120 deals. That’s almost double the income of its two main competitors: UBS and JPMorgan. Alongside the many Bakrie deals, the biggest transaction Sitohang has handled is the $5.5 billion purchase in 2005 by the Altria Group of the US, the former Philip Morris, of the clove cigarette maker Sampoerna, corporate Indonesia’s biggest-ever takeover.

Today, there are six investment bankers in the Credit Suisse Indonesia team. Sitohang says “that decision to stay while everyone was pulling out” was critical to the bank’s success today. “The fact that we stayed when eventually the country starts recovering and people want to do deals, of course you call someone you know. “We are friends with as many people as we can be, that’s the trademark. It’s a team effort.”

As for the Bakrie relationship, Sitohang says: “I don’t think its different from any other client relationship we have. We believe in longer-term relationships. Our clients choose us; we are committed to the country, we have the knowledge, we have the global capacity, we are with our clients through good and bad. And that’s important.” Sitting in Singapore and now the co-head of Credit Suisse’s investment banking division for the entire region, enjoying a career built in large part on riding the Indonesia story, Sitohang insists Bakrie’s political clout in Jakarta has no bearing on his business relationship with the bank.

But in another part of Singapore, there’s a claque of his knowing and ever-so-envious colleagues who beg to differ.

Wikileaks: Jennifer Robinson

Jennifer Robinson leaves the Ecuador Embassy in London, June 2012

JENNIFER ROBINSON is baffled.

And that’s not the natural state of this peppy jurist, defender of whistleblowers, daughter of tiny Berry on New South Wales’s south coast now ascending the rarified legal heights of Cavendish Square, London W1 and jurisdictions beyond.

I’ve asked her to clarify what seems an elliptical answer to a legal journal that had asked what the word ‘law’ meant to her.

She’d responded with just one word — ‘Jude’ — and words matter to lawyers. Particularly a self-described ‘legal nerd’ like this Bahasa-speaking graduate of Australian National University’s (ANU) Asian Studies and Law faculties, via Indonesia’s storied Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) and a Rhodes scholarship to Oxford’s Balliol College, too.

Robinson’s ‘Jude’ appears an academic, even wry, riposte, perhaps evoking the Epistle of Jude, a Biblical canon about faithfulness and virtue, of discipline and resisting intemperance; de rigeur values for an advocate exciting the international human rights stage.

Robinson, you see, is fast becoming an eloquent activist for the world’s downtrodden and disenfranchised, and is defending WikiLeaks and the divisive Julian Assange too, pro bono, at what many of her more-monied ‘learned friends’ scorn as the touchy-feely end of the legal spectrum.

And she is doing so while helping shape three of the most significant cases defining modern media, free speech, privacy and transparency: the Murdoch phone-hacking scandal, WikiLeaks and Assange (she’s the telegenic blonde in severe legal garb at his side exiting the courts), and the plight of alleged ‘Cablegate’ WikiLeaker, the US soldier Bradley Manning.

But reminded of her ‘Jude’ remark, the Robinson brow knots, perplexed at what I’m rabbiting on about. The Bible? Religion?

“Oh no!” she laughs. “It’s far more superficial than that. It’s just Jude Law, the actor!

“I could’ve got all serious and said, ‘Oh, you know, the scales of justice and all that stuff but I just thought, ‘You know what? Jude!’ I can be very serious but I was being facetious, taking the piss. I take my work very seriously but me less so. I am Australian, after all, and proudly so.”

Jennifer Robinson is just 31. But she’s already achieved a CV that would be impressive for someone double her vintage: trusted advisor to Assange’s legal team and Assange himself, engaged with the British media reform agitator Hacked Off, the Manning monitoring brief in the US, adjunct lecturer in law at Sydney University, member of the International Lawyers for (the disputed Indonesian region of) West Papua, former legal advisor to the New York Times in its investigation that kick-started the Murdoch phone-hacking drama, legal director for the South African-backed philanthropic Bertha Foundation, et al. “I wear a lot of hats,” she says.

Oh, and she also bangs out hundreds of emails and tweets a day, crisply cogitating on bogus Pakistani blasphemy and the Tamil ordeal in Sri Lanka, to Leveson, Prince Harry and Nicola Roxon’s flip-flops on data retention policy, while briefing journalists and colleagues and lobbying politicians and officials, and often doing it all from check-in at Heathrow, en route to a conference somewhere where she’s keynoting. “My smartphone gets a serious hammering,” she says.

Any one of these roles would be a fulltime undertaking for most, but Robinson has also found capacity to write a book on the plight of West Papuans — perhaps the issue closest to her heart — while setting up a award to encourage students at Bomaderry High School, her alma mater outside Nowra, to go onto tertiary studies. And she advises and funds independent documentary-makers, a vocation she’d secretly like to pursue if she wasn’t a lawyer (she has a dedicated screening room in her London suite).

“If there was a tablet that replicated the benefits of sleep,” she says, “I would take it because there are so any interesting things to do in the world, and so many important causes, and I’m so engaged by what I do. I would work all day long and all night long if I could. Unfortunately you have to sleep. We only have about 680,000 hours in our lifetime.”

Time to take a breath. She must’ve been insufferable at school, definitely the teacher’s pet, the bookworm sitting clasped hands at the front of the bus as she swotted for exams?

She laughs. “Yes, I did well at school, was captain of this and that, did all the school leadership things. But I partied a lot. I certainly wasn’t the worst kid in class but I wasn’t a goodie-goodie either.

“I certainly got called to the principal’s office on more than one occasion,” she says. “I think I would’ve sat definitely towards the back of the bus.”

When The Global Mail caught up with Robinson last Monday for an hour’s coffee among the lavender shrubs of the sunny rooftop above her London office, she had just moved house. She claimed she was exhausted and apologised for her appearance. It wasn’t apparent that either was an issue.

And so the Jennifer — Jen to her mates — Robinson dynamo powers on.

Next on her bucket list? Learning Spanish. She thinks it will be useful, given where her close friend and client Assange finds himself, confined to the Ecuadorian embassy in nearby Knightsbridge, and considering she’s working on Assange’s case alongside one of her lifelong legal heroes, the campaigning Spanish jurist Baltasar Garzon. Before Garzon, Robinson has been under the tutelage of two other heroes of hers: the Australian silk Geoffrey Robertson, and the former justice of the Australian High Court, Michael Kirby, before him.

Remembers Robertson: “Jen was interested in human rights and media law and so I engaged her as my researcher. She was exceptional in being able to understand the practicality of the case as well as being quite brilliant academically. That is why she is such a good lawyer.

“She is passionate about her clients but sensible enough to keep a certain distance in order to argue their case with power and objectivity,” he says.

Robertson introduced Robinson to Assange in mid-2010, just before WikiLeaks published the ‘Iraq War Logs’ revealing US military abuses in Iraq, and further fuelling Washington’s disquiet about him.

Anticipating Washington’s rage, and with ‘Cablegate’ about to publicly break, Assange was in London discussing legal representation with Robertson, Robinson’s mentor since the mid-2000s while she was still at Oxford. He recommended the London lawyer Mark Stephens, with whom Robinson now worked.

Assange had seen Robinson interviewed by Australia’s ABC about claims of Jakarta-backed torture and abuse in restive West Papua, a region where she had worked and studied eight years earlier and knew well. Meeting Assange in London, she was “impressed by his knowledge of the issue, its history and the politics”, of a subject “most people do not know much about”.

Two years on, she clearly has great empathy for the enigmatic 41-year-old WikiLeaks founder. “Julian is very engaging and fun to argue with,” Robinson says, “and far more self-deprecating than anyone realises, which — as an Australian — I appreciate.

“The constant feedback I get from journalists who meet him is that they are surprised by how warm and engaging he is, which is contrary to the impression created by the mainstream press.

“He is very committed to WikiLeaks work, and that can lead him to be uncompromising — particularly if he sees his principles at stake.

“There have been countless articles about his character and how he is as a person. Interestingly, a lot of the time they are written by people who have never met him. That is not good journalism.”

Of the Swedish rape allegations dogging Assange at the centre of the London-Stockholm-Quito diplomatic impasse, Robinson is reluctant, deliberate and on-message. “Everyone would like to see a satisfactory outcome where these allegations are dealt with and where Julian is protected from onward extradition to the United States for prosecution for his work related to WikiLeaks,” she says.

She is puzzled that Swedish state investigators won’t come to London to take evidence from Assange in the rape investigation. “We have offered his testimony since October 2010. It’s provided for under mutual legal assistance treaties, they’ve done it before in other cases, it’s permissible and they’ve refused to do so. It is unclear to me. One can only speculate as to their reasons.

“I do not think anyone should be confined in this way to an embassy, and the stress of the situation should not be underestimated, but if anyone can do it, Julian can.

“His commitment to his work and continuing that work will get him through.”

Pace her Indonesia passion, Jen Robinson has described herself as a rambutan, the fruit found across South-East Asia. A rambutan’s skin — hairy, bristly and coarse — offers no hint as to the surprisingly sweet and succulent fruit it conceals.

The description is about confounding cliches.

She’s absorbed by human rights and justice, and believes they shouldn’t divide right and left, that they are always about higher values and humanity. She is no less serious for liking fashion, cocktail bars and champagne in her fridge, or for eating in smart restaurants when she can, or liking the Cannes film festival. She loves Hugh Grant’s work, less so his films than his campaigning for Rupert Murdoch’s phone hacking victims. She says she’s just at ease working Sundance or a G-20 if need be, as she is yarning with wharfies or villagers in an Indonesian lean-to. She’s a big fan of Malcolm Turnbull, but has little regard for Julia Gillard or Tony Abbott. Kylie was on her wall as a netball and touch rugby-playing teen back home in Berry, and she’s now on her iPod as a 30-something lawyer in London.

She’s the first and only lawyer in her middle-class family. Dad is a racehorse trainer, Mum a teacher, Robinson the eldest of six siblings. “I didn’t go to a posh high school,” she says. “I went to government schools, I’ve gotten places because of my own efforts, I’m not part of any boys’ club, none of my parents and friends are ‘connected’. I’m from a good, solid, country family.”

Family is important to her. “The values that my family instilled gave me a sense of wanting to help others, a sense of empathy and that’s what drives my career. The trajectory of my life has been so unexpected.”

While she says her career experiences so far are firmly in the ‘not-in-my-wildest-imagination’ basket, “what I did hope was that I’d find a way of making human rights and defence of the media, of free speech, my career and I’ve been very fortunate to be able to do that.”

She remembers an Oxford friend had taken a screenshot of the front page of The New York Times on December 16, 2010. It’s a photograph of Assange — “the most famous dissident on the planet”, as she describes him — holding his release order from a British prison, flanked by Robinson and her mentor Robertson on the steps of London’s Royal Courts of Justice. The friend, who’d stayed on at university, said how thrilled he was she didn’t take his advice and continue studying; if she had, instead of being on the page one of the world’s most famous newspaper, she’d likely still be in the college library swotting with him.

WIKILEAKS may have provided Robinson her ‘pinch-myself’ moments, but it’s Indonesia and its restive far-eastern region of West Papua that really press her buttons. Robinson learnt Bahasa at high school, visiting Indonesia as a 16-year-old on a school trip that would change her world. It fired a zeal to defend the disadvantaged, and a perspective that Australians don’t often appreciate how advantaged they are.

As a genuine student of Asia — she also studied international relations, in Bahasa, a very rare bule (foreigner) at Jogjakarta’s storied UGM — she laments the loss of Keating and Rudd, less so for their politics but more for Canberra’s Australia-in-Asia initiatives, since rolled back by subsequent governments.

“I imagine how different my life would be if I didn’t that opportunity to be exposed to Bahasa, to Indonesia, to Asia.”

Fifteen years and several degrees on, she’s bemused and disappointed in equal measure that her Bahasa skill is somehow seen as a point of separation for her among Australians. “I’m one of the few lawyers who can speak Indonesian very well, but it shouldn’t be shocking that an Australian speaks Indonesian, it should be par for the course. I was fascinated by Indonesia, and I’m still fascinated by it, the most diverse and wonderful country.

“I really love Indonesia,” she insists, “and I am constantly frustrated by how it’s portrayed in the media post the Bali bombing. But at the same time, I can’t countenance what happens in West Papua,” the closest part of Indonesia to Australia, and largely off-limits to foreigners who aren’t miners.

It’s a place she knows well, having studied and worked in Jayapura with the renowned local human rights champion John Rumbiak in 2002, on an exchange from UGM in Jogja. “I think my UGM supervisor rues the day he ever proposed it,” she says. (Rumbiak was forced to flee West Papua in 2003 for Australia after a succession of attacks and death threats.)

For Robinson, her time in West Papua filled the missing link about Indonesia that was curiously not addressed by the ANU curriculum. “I thought, How on earth can I have spent three years at ANU, studying every single possible subject about Indonesia and East Timor and human rights and not once come across West Papua and what happened there.”

And it’s been noticed in Jakarta, too. In London, she recently had a spooky visit — dressed up as a courtesy call — from an Indonesian diplomat inquiring about her advocacy for human rights in West Papua. She saw the warning as a reflection of Indonesian sensitivity about the mineral-rich and militarised region, which has long been pushing to break away from Jakarta. It seems Jakarta was checking out, and she agrees.  “He told me that I wouldn’t be welcome back”.

But she returned to Indonesia last November for the first time in almost 10 years, doing so without a hitch. “I’d like to think that is a sign of the new Indonesia, that people can speak out about human rights issue and come and go.

“If you want to test Indonesia’s democratic development, then you need to have a look at what happens in West Papua. No democratic state would allow what happens there. The great strides and reforms made elsewhere in the archipelago have not happened in West Papua. It doesn’t engender support for the Indonesian state, it’s against their self-interest.

“Australia ought to be pushing the human rights agenda much further, which does not equate with supporting independence for West Papua. We need to harden up.

“We compromise our own values for the sake of political pragmatism, which is what we do on West Papua all the time. It’s unacceptable.

“If we are lobbying for a place on the UN Security Council on the basis of our supposed human rights-based foreign policy, if we can’t sort out what’s going on at our doorstep, how on earth can we be trusted to be on the international committee that deals with crisis all over the world when we can’t deal with the genocide on our doorstep?

“Human rights hypocrisy in the West, it gets my gall,” she says.

“When you have countries like Australia and America doing things that, if other states did, they’d really raise concerns about, but it’s fine if we do it — that to me is unacceptable.

“You have the US bombing a friendly state, using targeted killings as part of their foreign policy. If Iran was doing that, the world would be up in arms.

“Australia locks up refugees. If another state did that how would we respond? It’s double standards. Historically the West has led the human rights debate, quite correctly, but I feel their capacity to do so has been diminished by their hypocrisy. And that is a great concern because it’s important the West leads by example.”

“One of my great concerns is the state of Australian politics. It does our nation a disservice. Australia is a better country than our politics portrays. There’s a loss of values… I’m very proud of being Australian but I’m not proud of our politics.”

Robinson probably first came to wider attention in her own right in April this year, for what could well a spooky brush with Washington’s invisible tentacles. Checking in at Heathrow for a Virgin flight to Sydney to speak at a conference about, irony of ironies, “Lawyers on the Frontline”, she discovered she was on an ‘inhibited’ travel list. It meant she, an Australian passport-holder, couldn’t board a flight for her own country, forbidden from entering Australia without specific clearance from Canberra’s Department of Foreign Affairs and Trade.

The incident came “well and truly” after she was known to be working with Assange and WikiLeaks. She remembers the Virgin security officer telling her “You must have done something controversial to end up on this list”, as they leafed through her passport and banged impenetrable buttons to print her boarding pass.

The impression was given it was an Australian issue, and it floored her. “My thought bubble was ‘WTF, exclamation mark, exclamation mark’.” She contacted Assange.

Despite his WikiLeaks notoriety, Assange had never been stopped at immigration or check-in while he was at liberty to travel. She laughs recalling his remark. “He told me ‘Hmm, ‘inhibited’? That doesn’t sound like you, Jen.’”

Since she’s been advising WikiLeaks and Assange, she’s travelled to the US, to the Bradley Manning proceedings, and had no issues getting in or out. Holidaying at the Sundance Film Festival in Utah this year, she even collared US Attorney General Eric Holder, the man who launched Washington’s criminal investigation into WikiLeaks and Assange.

She has not been visited by mysterious wellwishers from Grosvenor Square, where Washington’s embassy is in London, as she was with the Indonesians.

“If it were related to my work, it’s unacceptable, and the world thinks it’s unacceptable because of the response to it,” she says, citing the storm that briefly raged across the media. It forced a response from Roxon, who assured Robinson she was on no Australian government ‘watch list’, even claiming Canberra has no such list.

“I’m completely open to the fact that it was a mistake,” she says, “but it’s something I still haven’t had a proper answer to.”

BEYOND WikiLeaks and matters Papuan, Jennifer Robinson is concerned about the wider media’s self-absorption with Britain’s Leveson inquiry into press standards, another pet subject.

She remembers a conversation she had with Assange about the phone-hacking drama, that Leveson could result in greater press regulation and government control over information.

“A self-regulated press is what we want to maintain and I’m concerned that Leveson may result in changes that move is away from that,” she says.

“Yes, phone-hacking was a terrible thing to have happened, yes it was illegal, yes there were lots of people involved in it, thousands had their phones hacked and not just celebrities and yes we should be doing something about that,” she says, pausing before the ‘but’ qualifier.

“But phone-hacking has been the number-one tweeted story by journalists in the last year. But when the UK government is proposing wholesale surveillance of the entire population — of every single person — where is the media coverage?

“The average person on the street… their emails are being captured. That’s what we should be writing about.

“Surveillance affects everyone. Not just the elite, celebs or those few phone-hacking victims who were not famous but in the news for other unfortunate reasons. And it’s not just ordinary citizens, but it’s also journalists. How can you possibly protect your sources with the data retention plans and the government’s ability to data mine it?

“Open your eyes to the longer-term game,” she pleads. “In 10 years’ time when you’ve got statutory regulation around your content, let’s have another talk about what you think you should’ve been reporting on right now.”

So what does the future hold for Jen Robinson? She says, “I just hope I’m doing good human rights work, and I hope in some way making a difference.”

Mentor Robertson believes “she is probably torn between a tempting career as head of a big NGO and carving out a career as a barrister.

“She is still very young. She could certainly become a great advocate or an excellent judge or could end up running an organisation like Amnesty.

“It will be fascinating to watch.”

* Ms Robinson would like to note that, to date, she has not argued a case at the Old Bailey. We say, watch this space.

From The Global Mail… http://www.theglobalmail.org/feature/from-bomaderry-to-the-old-bailey/370/

 

Read more Eric Ellis stories on the European debt crisis arranged alphabetically, fear and loathing in la France profonde, and an Italian satirist peddling pranks, parody and political power.

Letters to the Editor (2)

A great article about someone we all should be inspired by. What a wonderful Australian. Lets hope she can enter politics as we need more of her straight shooting intelligence and formidable actions based on deep values.

From Robert

6 September 2012

The West Papua situation is an appalling indictment of Australia and it is great to learn that Jen is a passionate advocate for the people.

From Peter Franklin

6 September 2012

My Life As A Mighta-Been Millionaire

REGRETS, I’ve had a few but, like Sinatra perhaps, too few to mention.

But this week as Apple, the much-loved technology company, became history’s most valuable public corporation, I allowed myself a look back at what might have been.

Some 15 years ago, almost to the day, I ruefully recall, I was the owner of around 400 to 500 shares in Apple.

Today, with its market capitalisation of around $630 billion, if Apple were a sovereign nation it would be a G-20 member, the value of its gross domestic product slotting in around the world’s 19th to 20th biggest  — alongside Switzerland, Sweden and Saudi Arabia, almost three times the size of Singapore, 11 times bigger than Syria and Sri Lanka, near 50 times Senegal.

And I owned a modest chunk of it when the entire company was valued at just USD2 billion, when Seychelles and Sao Tome and Principe could’ve given it a run for its money.

If I’d hung onto my Apple shares — and I tend to philosophically subscribe to that old ‘if’ aphorism about aunts and uncles’ testicles — then with subsequent dividends, splits and re-investments, not to mention its virtual reincarnation from a near-death experience in 1997, I calculate the holding would be worth around USD2 million to USD3 million today.

I recall that Rupert Murdoch’s mate, the Saudi financier Prince Alwaleed bin Talal, also bought Apple shares about the same time as me, acquiring some five per cent of the company for about USD115 million in April 2012.

He was educated in Silicon Valley and he’s still got them, two more reasons why he’s a billionaire and I’m not. But he also owns a lot of Citibank shares, and they’ve been mercilessly hammered since the 2008 financial crisis. And I’ve never been so naive as to much believe bankers.

With the bounty from my Apple portfolio that I once had, I could today buy about 2,000 Mac Book Pros, 10,000 iPads, 150,000 iPod Shuffles and who knows how many tunes of iTunes. And I’d be writing from a luxurious condo at an Aman resort somewhere expensively exotic, surrounded by all things divine and perfect. That I owned.

Instead, as pissed Poms on a stag party puke their Grolschs and haring onto the pavement outside my window, I write it from an apartment in Amsterdam. Which I don’t own.

I REMEMBER making the Apple trade, less for the head-spinning wealth that would (not) follow but for the amount of money I risked at the time — USD10,000 from memory, then as now a ridiculous amount for someone who’s tended to think trading the stockmarket a mug’s game.

I made it sometime in mid-1997. I was then an Australian Financial Review staff correspondent in the US, based in San Francisco, with a brief to cover California, supposedly modern society’s laboratory. I was planning to write a story about online share trading.

Initially sent to Los Angeles, I quickly became aware that Corporate Hollywood wasn’t where the world was being re-invented. That seemed to be mostly happening a few hours up Route 101, just south of San Francisco in a place insider hipsters liked to call Nerdistan — a place the world knows as Silicon Valley.

Sick of the long drives from LA, I moved to San Fran to be closer to this rise and rise of the post-industrial ‘New Economy,’ where this amorphous thing called ‘The Internet’ was being defined. I was reporting on how it might affect the traditional pillars of the economy, particularly for — pace the bulk of the AFR’s readership — banking and finance.

The whole area was — and is even moreso today — as much a feeling, an ideal, as it was a sprawling conurbation either side of the Bayshore Freeway from San Francisco to San Jose.

I lost count of the times I drove up and down the 101 during these years seeking stories and interviews with people few beyond the Bay Area had ever heard of. Many of those interviewed are now billionaires: people like Eric Schmidt, today Google’s boss, then an executive at Sun Microsystems. And John Doerr of venture capitalist Kleiner Perkins Caulfield and Byers, which seeded Google, Amazon and Netscape among many others. And Intel’s Gordon Moore, he of the legendary Moore’s Law.

They lived and worked in places like Redwood City (home of Oracle), Menlo Park (Sand Hill Rd, Nerdistan’s Wall St, and today Facebook), Palo ‘Shallow’ Alto (Stanford University), Mountain View (where Steve Jobs lived), Sunnyvale (Google and Yahoo), Santa Clara (Intel), San Jose (Cisco, eBay et al) and Cupertino (Apple).

Mostly low-rise suburbs, Nerdistan was all so remarkably unremarkable. But no less aspirational. Once, tapping out an email while my room service breakfast was being unpacked at the Fairmont in San Jose, the Vietnamese-American waiter asked me if my Compaq (remember them?) laptop “was powered by Pentium?” It occurred that only a few hours south down the 101 in LA, hospitality staff ‘wait’ to be discovered by Hollywood moguls. In Nerdistan’s dream factory, they’re waiting to be Steve Jobs.

I’d noticed emerging phenomena such as ‘online trading’ and ‘online banking’ taking off and figured it would be good to road-test them for a story about how technology was transforming the financial sector.

Soon after arriving in the US in late 1996, I signed on for an account with America Online, then the world’s biggest internet provider. On near perma-clogged 14kbps telephone lines, I later managed to open accounts with Bank of America and start-up broking companies called eTrade and Ameritrade.

That I should buy Apple for the online trading story was unsurprising. It was the gripping story of the day, the company famously founded in Jobs’s garage, the company which had made modern gadgetry cool, even sexy, with its design ethos.

But it had fallen on tough times. It was losing billions, and Microsoft, the interloper from Seattle portrayed as the evil empire in the Jobs-obsessed Silicon Valley, had easily eclipsed it in the software market, and the booming internet economy was passing it by. Though posters of Jobs adorned the bedroom walls of many Nerdistan geeks, he had been long ousted as Apple boss.

Nerdistan facsimiles were springing up around the Microsoft campus at Redmond in the US Pacific Northwest, along Boston’s Route 128, in Colorado, Utah, Texas and Virginia, indeed around any American educational and military heartland. Many experts and techno-hacks portended the demise of this landmark company of American innovation. Momentum seemed to be slipping away from Silicon Valley.

But rumours began to build through June 1997 that Jobs was coming back, in search of The Next Big Thing for Apple. In July he was welcomed as an Apple ‘advisor’ and on August 6, 1997, he appeared, to jeers from Apple cultists, on stage at the Macworld Expo in Boston with Bill Gates, who announced a USD150 million investment by Microsoft to ‘save’ Apple. In my report of the deal, I quoted an analyst who likened the Gates-Jobs show as “like putting Darth Vader up at a Star Wars convention”. The rest — the funky iMacs, Jobs’s myriad other must-haves, and his death last year — is history, USD630 billion worth.

I remember my Apple transaction not for the missing millions, mostly, but for the principled outrage it generated for me.

I recall intending only to buy a modest 100 shares, about the smallest parcel one could buy. But with a slip of the finger on a keyboard on a ropey 14kbps dial-up connection, I managed to buy 400 to 500 instead. The deal cost about USD10,000 from memory, executed moreover at a price way higher than I believed I was buying.

I complained to the customer service automaton that it was all his company’s crappy software’s fault. The response was ‘caveat emptor‘, saying there was a long delay between my trade and their executing the order, and they can’t be held responsible and, and, and…

Some 15 years on and without any supporting paperwork to hand, my abiding memory is being worried for a few months about having USD10,000 at risk as Apple wobbled.

But the fact is, had I hung onto those shares, I wouldn’t be writing about it at all today. I’d be luxuriating in my good fortune, which I wouldn’t be calling good fortune but perspicacious investing during 10 of the worst years to be an investor in stocks. Except I wouldn’t be doing that either, because shares only become cash when they’re sold. And, in an ideal world, I wouldn’t have sold them.

Truth be told, if I was still an Apple shareholder, I’d likely be a nervous obsessive and even more boring than my wife says I am when I’m reminded, as I was again this week, about my Apple-fortune-that-got-away. My Apple shares would probably be the only thing I’d talk about. I’d be equipped with every known device to monitor the share price and sell as the price — and my nerve — faltered.

As it did. Some 15 years after being, for a few months, an Apple shareholder, the reason I no longer have any — to the best of my knowledge — is because I was always nervous owning them, about owning any shares for that matter. Journalism is professional scepticism and I’ve reported too many company collapses, scandals and corruption to believe trading stocks makes one rich. And, of course, one should only invest what one can afford to lose.

Conflict of interest has also been a concern. I also remember the general relief after selling them later the same year, to help pay for a week’s skiing at Lake Tahoe with my then soon-to-be wife, even though I took a 20 per cent loss doing so.

And I never wrote the story about online trading, because AFR readers aren’t supposed to be nervous shareowners. Isn’t that who read the AFR? Nerveless Masters of the Universe?

Still, as a bill-paying wage slave, I hold out some hope that I might yet be one of Apple ‘millionaires-next-door,’ everyday people like Rich and Mary Bleyle of Buffalo, New York, who also bought their Apple stock in 1997 and, USD2 million later, still have them. Or the soldier who began accumulating Apple at USD33 in 2005 for his retirement fund and now has USD6 million worth.

My fortune-that-never-was recollections above are from memory. I’ve moved five countries and six houses since 1997, and my records are patchy at best. When I saw Apple become the world’s most valuable public company this week, I went on a slightly manic search for my account statements of the day, to see how many I did once have.

And maybe, just maybe, if I still had some, hoping that my memory isn’t as good as I think it is. At the very least, I finally got around to writing my story about online trading, which is better than being boring about Steve Jobs.

Do I regret selling? Not really — I had a memorable Thanksgiving ski with the woman who became my wife.

And as Cranky Franky also once put it, “flying high in April, shot down in May”. That’s life, 15 years on.

Read more Eric Ellis reports on France’s rightward turn, another great wave of Irish immigration to Australia, and an ailing Spanish town that caught — and kept — the post-Gaddafi blues.

Spain: Rhapsody in (Smurf) Blue

Juzcar's rhapsody in blue

GLOBALISATION isn’t a topic that ever much exercised the good pueblo of Juzcar, population 221.

Tucked anonymously into the southern Spanish sierra dividing Ronda — the stunning mountain town made famous by Hemingway and Welles — from the tacky towers of the Costa del Sol, discussions in

this sleepy, whitewashed hamlet were always pretty local. Talk was of family, football and the fluctuating state of the campo, the countryside this agricultural village traditionally drew its living from; wild seta mushrooms, pungent garlic and suckling pigs reared on acorns.

Indeed, about as external as Juzcar ever tilted was the career of Jesulin, a nationally prominent bullfighter hailing from nearby Ubrique, whose frolics with models and television blondes titillatingly play out in the gossip magazines the Spanish voraciously devour.

But along came globalisation to jolt Juzcar from its torpor, first in the form of Libya’s Colonel Gaddafi, the flamenco-fancying strongman who acquired thousands of hectares of that campo in the mid-1990s, because he could. He had big ideas to develop golf courses, resorts and theme parks in these parts; endless prosperity for all, or so it was thought around here.

And when that didn’t work out — Arab Springs can put a nasty dent in a billionaire dictator’s business plan — then Smurfs chance-landed in Juzcar, resplendent in all their pastelly, sickly, euro-minting blueness.

As events would have it, Juzcar’s Smurf-led recovery has enjoyed a greater longevity than ever would the ill-fated Mad Muammar, bringing cash, international fame and chronic traffic jams to the town.

Though Spain teeters on the edge of economic oblivion, a victim of hubris and corruption in faraway Madrid to possibly take the European Union with it, Smurfonomics have saved Juzcar, for the moment at least.

Today, among Juzcar’s maze-like streets once blindingly white now dizzyingly blue, there’s a blue market in the grounds of the blue-hued Catholic church with a blue cemetery attached, where the mourning bouquets and posies adorning the Virgin Mother are arranged from blue wildflowers.

Juzcar’s swimming pool is blue, and not just its water, and so too its bank, police station and stores. The local hostelries promise beds of ‘el descanso azul,’ or ‘blue rest,’ whatever that is. There’s even an ‘adventure in blue’ a rural treasure hunt looking for, well, Smurfs in the surrounding forest.

And there’s something for the grown-ups here too. In Juzcar’s delightful Hotel El Bandolero, its American co-owner David Nuyen adds Nordic Mist mixers of blue tonic water to his pungent Ronda gin, as his Spanish chef partner Ivan Sastre despatches blue-tinted tapas from the kitchen to hungry gourmands, the two hoteliers clad in electric blue lycra bodysuits topped by curly conical hats. “I guess I’m getting just a little bit over it now,” sighs Nuyen theatrically, “but I can’t deny it has been good for business.”

About the only thing not blue in Juzcar is its mood. Its triumphant — and recently re-elected — mayor is riding a blue wave of popularity, and has ambition to take his energy to greater things, perhaps the regional seats in Malaga and Sevilla and who knows where beyond? Such is the stuff that makes a modern politician successful in crisis-hit Europe.

Thriving Juzcar is a quirky model of globalisation, squeezing everything it can from a Belgian cartoon phenomenon described as ‘kiddie cocaine’ and launched into commercial overdrive by a Japanese entertainment giant out of Hollywood.

But first there was the evil Gargamel to overcome. No, not the only Juzcareño who refused to paint his house on Calle del Sol blue (he slams the door on pesky inquiring journalists) but a murderous dictator from North Africa drunk on power and petrodollars.

Gaddafi’s flunkies arrived in 1995 in nearby Marbella, in the glitzy heart of the Costa del Sol, with a huge entourage and a bigger chequebook. Local hoteliers remember Libyans in shiny suits claiming to front for Tripoli’s central bank taking 100 rooms of a five-star property on the coast and demanding Arabsat satellite TV and hookers be installed for their stay.

They stayed a month and spent liberally, engaging local lawyers and trusted frontmen and set about diversifying ‘Gaddafi Inc’, which included stakes in London’s Pearson plc (publisher of the Financial Times) and the Italian auto giant FIAT, Unicredit Bank and the football club Juventus.

Gaddafi already owned retail petroleum interests in Spain through the Dutch-based Tamoil, but a massive property called La Resinera caught the Libyans’ attention. It was a series of rural holdings that stretched unbroken from coastal Benahavis near the exclusive La Zagaleta estate — much favoured by the suntanned gold-medallion jetset — some 30km northwest up the Genal river valley to Juzcar.

A Juzcar townsfolk not that long distant from feudalist serfdom heard lavish talk after Gaddafi bought La Resinera; of a benevolent landlord promising freeways and high-speed rail lines depositing sun-starved northern Europeans and the Arab middle class onto golf courses, beaches and vast resorts. There was even plans for a second EuroDisney for the area.

Gaddafi’s men would occassionally visit — Juzcar’s mayor David Fernandez Tirado remembers seeing a few show up in town — and the talk got warmer after September 11, when the colonel was being transformed from pariah to fellow traveller in the West’s War on Terror. Once reviled, he was now pitching his tent in the world’s capitals as the Sarkozys, Blairs and Aznars rushed to clasp his hand and his money.

In 2007, locals believe Gaddafi himself visited his holdings here during a visit to Andalucia, where he is known to have travelled to Sevilla, Malaga and nearby Marbella. This supposed great admirer of Arab culture claimed he was visiting the glorious mudejar antiquities of Moorish Al-Andalus. But in a US embassy cable of the day later aired by WikiLeaks, “unexpectedly, he left Seville on Sunday to visit Marbella on the coast, where he reportedly enjoyed a flamenco performance (and paid an extravagant amount to have the performers give a repeat performance later in Madrid)”.

Noted the cable: Gaddafi was “sporting scraggly, dyed black hair and sparse moustache and goatee”. He dined with then Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodríguez Zapatero, his predecessor (and now News Corp director) José Maria Aznar and Spain’s King Juan Carlos who, the embassy observed, “was gracious and polite, but seemed to have little patience for Gaddafi’s quirkiness”.

This Gaddafi roadshow was bigger than that which bought the La Resinera property years earlier, some 350-strong, including his own butchers (and by some accounts that famous Ukrainian nurse), all moving in a motorcade of more than 50 vehicles.

Spain, then at pains to do deals with Gaddafi, would four years later freeze the dictator’s assets, including La Resinera, as Libya erupted in civil war and Gaddafi started killing his people — who would then kill him, last October by a drainpipe near his ancestral home outside Sirte.

Today, La Resinera’s formal status is unclear, its ownership murky, and all the moreso in a legal environment where long-term squatting on land can sometimes be judged by Spanish courts as de facto ownership and in a region where local dealmakers can also be the same people as corrupt politicians and papershufflers. Gaddafi’s legal representative in Marbella, Spanish lawyer Ignacio Pérez de Vargas, did not respond to The Global Mail’s enquiries.

And now the colonel is dead, and Andalucia must seem a million miles from the minds of Libya’s apprentice democrats, as they introspectively chart Tripoli’s transition from tyranny. There has been recent talk among diplomats in Madrid that the seized property will transfer to Libya’s new government, to be developed or sold. But in a Spanish property market where more than a million dwellings are empty and values have slumped by as much as 75 per cent in some regions, such ambition seems very far away.

Dodging the bullet that Gaddafi could not, Juzcareños noted his violent demise with passing interest. He made no significant impact here, and the town reverted back to being what it always has been, just another of Andalucia’s fabled whitewashed pueblos blancos, the white villages, and now an even more forgotten one.

Pleasant but unremarkable, Juzcar had only one road into town, a glorified goat-track where cars waited for oncomers to make passing room. Rather as Gertrude Stein wrote of her native Oakland, when one eventually made it to Juzcar, there was no there there. Tourists were tallied at a pitiful 300 annually, and Juzcar’s future was bleak.

But then came the Smurfs, Los Pitufos as they known in Spanish.

Inspired by the fungi fiesta Juzcar hosts every November, Sony Pictures, the producers of last year’s Smurf movie, chose Juzcar from more than 300 other villages as the centre of an elaborate — and cheap — publicity stunt to promote the film. The film’s producers claimed they imagined Juzcar as the town Los Pitufos would likely live, and that proved a major stroke of luck for the locals struggling with the Spanish recession. Insists Juzcar’s Mayor Fernandez Tirado, “there was no real reason to it, we didn’t know anyone at Sony, no money changed hands, there was no contest, it just happened and we got selected.”

This would be the municipal equivalent of Warhol’s 15 minutes of fame. Sony convinced Tirado’s town hall to legislate that the village’s whitewashed walls be painted blue, and be left that way while they marketed the film. When promotional interest inevitably dropped off after a few months, Juzcar would return to its whitewashed old self. Sony would foot the bill for the blue painting of the town’s 175 buildings — hiring 12 unemployed locals for a few days’ labour — and the subsequent return to traditional white too.

At least that was the idea. But Juzcar has been overwhelmed by the intoxicating power of the Smurfs upon children — and the desperate need by their parents to sate it.

Last year, according to Juzcar’s jubilant mayor David Fernandez Tirado, about 150,000 tourists visited Juzcar, more than 700 times its population. More than a year on, the town is still visited by 500 to 1,000 visitors a week. They traverse the town’s streets taking photographs of each other in front of blue walls and over-sized Smurf puppets, and spend an average of 100 euros per family in the bars and restaurants. Now there are blue fun runs, weddings in blue, Smurf art festivals and trade fairs promoting all things blue.

Juzcar’s mayor since 2007 and the son of a local wheeler and dealer, Fernandez couldn’t be happier. He’s a member of the Spanish Socialist Workers’ Party and his recent re-election as mayor bucked a national and local trend in Spain to oust the left from office.

Like all canny pols, Fernandez seems to be able to sniff out populism. Last December, when it came time for Sony to re-paint Juzcar white under the original agreement, Fernandez decided to put it — and his popularity — to a vote.

The village would stage a town-only referendum. The question on the ballot was a simple one — to be blue or white?

But like all plebsicites, there was more in it than simply the question on the ballot paper. There were rumblings in some quarters that the town was growing tired of being blue.

It would be a critical poll, one really about the town’s economy. Around Juzcareños, their beloved Spain was collapsing in a miasma of corruption, excess and malgovernance. The economic cancer was deepening in the cajas, once community co-operative banks that sponsored culture and sports but which were now imploding in the hands of greedy moneymen in Madrid, and crippling places like Juzcar. In surrounding Andalucia, one in three people were out of work, one in two if they were under 25. Local businesses were going bust, and locals feared going abroad to find work in Germany and France, just as generations before them did during Franco’s darker days. Even the usually abundant local soil was dying from drought. Drowsy from the blazing sun, Juzcar was in danger of slipping into a coma from which it might not emerge.

So what did the locals do? They stormed the ballot boxes dressed as Smurfs, carrying the poll 141 to 33. With a Smurf movie sequel in production, Tirado thinks Juzcar will remain enthusiastically blue for some years yet.

Still, Spain is a democracy and sometimes there are conscientious objectors. One house, owned by a supporter of the opposition, refused to be painted blue, determinedly staying the traditional white. Notes Mayor Tirado, “I think this is also the house of Gargamel”.

Read more Eric Ellis stories on Spain’s economic malaise, the shady side of its sunny southern hothouses, and a two-part series on Scotland’s bid for independence.

Boris Bags Gold In London — But Beware The Curse Of Cameron

Jessica Ennis celebrates her gold medal
These Olympics have been stunning — stunning, that is, for the Brits and their much-lauded Team GB.

So much so that last Saturday night, after Mo Farah streeted his 10,000-metre rivals and Jessica Ennis triumphed in the heptathlon — achievements which crowned four victories earlier that day, and capped off Britain’s most successful sporting day in a century — BBC pundits ruminated whether Britain’s “national character” had now fundamentally changed. All because it had taken 16 lottery-funded, glorious gold medals, halfway through the 30th Olympiad.

(Which happened to be 15 more than the sun-dappled taxpayer-funded athletes of the Great Southern Land had achieved by then, and let’s not mention the cricket.)

But national character? It’s an elusive notion, and rarely more so than in class-ridden Britain, whose disaffected youth were, only a year ago, knifing each other with machetes and hatred in boroughs neighbouring the now sainted Olympic Park.

Things change. A year on, as British authorities assemble tacky memorial golden postboxes along the high streets of the hometowns of their medallists, national expectations soar that sport will unify Britain’s many tribes. Entitled posh girls and their chinless-wonder chums from England’s aristocratic shires will link arms with East End bovver boys, and displaced Pakistani bomb-makers too. Essex chavs will unite with dour Scousers who just might also be Sikhs. And independence-minded Scots will sing at the pub with the Welsh who want nothing of London, except to help them finance lots of gold medals.

So, can fleeting Olympic success at “The People’s Games” transform a divided nation of deep-fried-Mars-Bar-munching couch potatoes, and recent rioters too, into vital arugula-fanciers ruthlessly burning up county tracks, pools and velodromes in pursuit of physical excellence? Can another rebranded Britain — remember Cool Britannia? — be a multi culti masala of shiny, happy winners in sport and business, all patriotically inclusive as they go? It’s a big ask.

Some progress has been made. In Beijing, half of Britain’s gold medallists were educated in private schools, “one of the worst statistics in British sport” said Lord Moynihan, the (privately educated) chairman of the British Olympic Association (whose late brother Tony was a notorious Manila-based drug trafficker and brothel keeper). Thus far in these Games, private-school athletes have won just a third of British medals.

But there are other obstacles proving tougher to overcome. Farah, a Muslim, was born in Somalia, and Ennis, Britain’s Cathy Freeman and these Games’ marketing symbol, is half-Jamaican. Both are superb athletes, proudly British and publicly educated, who disprove the Oz adage that Brits are only good at sit-down sports.

Because of their heritage, both have been labelled, in the pages and threads of the Venal Little Englander handbook, the Daily Mail, and elsewhere as ‘Plastic Brits’ — those born abroad or of foreign parentage. The category presumably includes cycling god Bradley Wiggins, whose father was Australian (a white Christian, so to the Daily Mail editors that makes him acceptably unplastic).

For opinion-formers like the Mail that rather like another, dated, Britain, the polite, nicely squared-away English Tim Henman, forever pluckily trying to win Wimbledon, was way more palatable than the socially awkward Scot Andy Murray doing the same — even though the superior (gold-medallist) Murray likely soon will take out the tournament.

One national character positioning to influence any new national character emerging from these Games has been London’s ambitious Mayor Boris Johnson, clearly the big winner of the Olympics’ political gold medal.

Though comfortingly white for Middle England taste, by strict Daily Mail definition Johnson is another Plastic Brit, having been born in New York 48 years ago into one of Britain’s more pukka and capable families. The Johnsons have long populated Oxford, politics, journalism and the smart professions, but it’s Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson and his well-considered eccentricity that has set new standards in ubiquity.

Johnson’s profile in recent weeks has been such that The Guardian‘s Jonathan Freedland — no ideological fellow traveller he — went so far as to claim Boris would be the face of the London Games, rather as Mark Spitz was for Munich, Carl Lewis for Los Angeles, and Bolt for Beijing.

Writes Freedland: “Boris remains the one person in British politics who passes both the Madonna test — no surname necessary — and the Simpsons test, a character recognisable by his silhouette alone. He may be unserious, but it’s time to take him very seriously indeed.”

A rumpled riot of contrived buffoonery, the wild-haired Johnson could give Usain Bolt a run for his money, with his ability to sprint toward a photo opportunity and claim credit for an Olympics that had been underway three years before he got anywhere near City Hall … even as he over-extravagantly praises the worthier others.

As Boris would doubtless note, if anyone should take glory for Britain’s Olympics’ outcome, both infrastructurally and sportingly, it would be the modest quietly achieving Tory, Lord Sebastian Coe, the former Olympic champion athlete, along with — inconveniently — Labour’s Blair and Brown. This bumbling, bombastic blowhard’s great skill is to point that out, while also drawing lavish attention upon himself, on the Late Show with David Letterman.

Johnson’s media spinners say his brazen, and dare we say un-English self-promotion in claiming success for these charming Olympics is simply him ‘shamelessly promoting London’ because that’s what mayors are paid — almost £150,000 a year — to do.

But the strong sense among Brits is that the shamelessness is all about Boris’s future political career, long after Saturday’s closing ceremony. Not that the emerging Cult of Boris sees it that way, as he hurtles comically down a zipwire only to be dangled photogenically halfway before the easily delighted world’s press. Or fumbles his way into another offensive gaffe that curiously doesn’t seem to harm.

That’s just Boris, they say, in all his unwitting, disarming, cuddly lovableness, as was clearly evident in Hyde Park the last Friday before the Games opened, when he gave a rousing speech that had the massed crowd chanting his name.

Fortunately for Boris, his friend, fellow Old Etonian, and rival for Tory hearts and minds, the Prime Minister David Cameron, seems to be suffering an Olympic jinx in inverse proportion to Johnson’s effortless political athleticism.

Known as the ‘Curse of Cam’, and naturally trending on Twitter, this hex has it that when Cameron shows up at an Olympic event, the British contestant loses — unless Cameron’s presence is offset by Boris, Seb Coe or the royals.

It started on Day One of the Games. Cameron headed to London’s southwest to cosy up to the highly fancied cyclist Mark Cavendish as he rode to Britain’s first gold medal in the men’s road race. Except Cavendish finished 29th.

Then Cameron showed up at the pool to see every British mum’s teenage sweetheart Tom Daley take the presumptive gold in synchronised diving. Except Daley finished fourth.

No matter, Dapper Dave’s new best friend and judo black belt Vladimir Putin came to town to watch Olympic judo, and to try to explain why Moscow arms the murderous Assads in Syria. As Vlad explained the difference between an ippon and a waza-ari, Cameron’s curse naturally led to a Russian judoka taking gold, and a Brit judoka getting silver.

The word then gets around the Twitterverse that the PM is heading to the velodrome, where Team GB are enjoying almost obscene success. Horrified Brit tweeps, led by Labour’s former deputy PM, the decidedly unathletic John Prescott, call for Cameron to be denied entry to the cycling venue. Then ‘Queen’ Victoria Pendleton’s team is disqualified from the women’s team sprint.

As his coalition with Nick Clegg’s Liberal Democrats slowly unravels, Cameron’s curse continues into the Olympics’ second week when the photogenic chicklit author and prominent ‘Cameroon’ Louise Mensch suddenly resigned as an MP to go and live in New York. Never knowingly invisible, the self-promoting Mensch was on the parliamentary committee that probed the Murdochs’ misdemeanours, and seemed to be their biggest defender.

While Cameron faces a nightmare by-election in her marginal seat, one presumes Mensch will in time accept a new job spruiking the Murdochs in the Big Apple, where her husband manages the thrash band Metallica.

But given Cameron’s recent luck, tweeps and myriad others watching the more profound ‘Curse of Murdoch’ that’s long manipulated British public life are urging Cameron to give his old friend Rebekah Brooks moral support by showing up in court at her upcoming criminal trial for phone hacking. Justice will then surely be done.

It’s all in good fun, and it all advantages Boris Johnson, so confident in his impenetrable political skin that he invited the toxic Rupert Murdoch — no friend of Cameron, he, blaming him for the Leveson media inquiry — and wife, Wendi, as his personal guests to watch the weekend of swimming medals.

The gesture did not go without Rupert reciprocating. “London in best shape ever,” he tweeted. “All overboard about the Olympics, brilliantly organised by Zeb (sic) Coe and Boris Johnson.”

The same day The Sun, the newspaper that Murdoch told Leveson most closely mirrors his own world view, published an opinion poll from YouGov that 36 per cent of Britons believed Johnson was well suited to be Prime Minister, up from 24 per cent in May.

No matter that Johnson isn’t an MP, the Sun poll also found that if the Conservative Party installed Johnson as national leader, Labour’s lead in the polls would be cut by five points, placing the Tories at 37 per cent, a point behind Labour’s 38, with the Lib-Dems on 10 per cent.

Every time Boris gaffes and blusters through something outrageous — his questionable private life, his chumminess with toxic media moguls — he gets away with it. Brits seem to warm to him, perhaps as a refreshing antidote to their bland, hyper-controlled politics.

As Johnson’s biographer Sonia Purnell notes, it all leaves an envious Cameron to rue events that would be catastrophic for anyone-but-Boris, but which in Johnson’s hands turn into an “absolute triumph”.

As Cameron struggles through a Leveson inquiry of his own creation, and a double-dip recession he promised but failed to correct, while taking the Tories to a touchy-feely liberalism the party’s core remains deeply uncomfortable with … the mayor’s antics, says biographer Purnell, widen “the gap between Johnson’s invigorating brightness and Cameron’s pessimistic realism; the blond’s opportunistic genius and the brunette’s apparent lack of ideas”.

Of course being Mayor of London is not the same as being British Prime Minister with the nuclear suitcase and an economy to right. Making sure the rubbish bins are collected and London’s buses run more-or-less on time are tasks Downing Street would love only to have. And the recently re-elected Johnson, a lifelong Eurosceptic, must convince voters beyond the M25, and beyond these Olympics too, that he has the right stuff to lead the nation, even as they increasingly think Cameron doesn’t.

But like Britain’s gold medallists, Johnson has sudden star power, and that has Ennis-like momentum, perhaps to shape that emergent new national character. Running the kaleidoscopic London has got to help.

The deeply Tory social commentator Charles Moore seems to think so. Writing in The Daily Telegraph, he says Brits “are ironical, eclectic, genre-subverting, fusion-cooking, mixing up Chelsea pensioners and lesbian kisses. We are high-brow and low-brow at the same time. The only politician who ‘gets’ any of this is Boris. He can mix Virgil and James Bond, a posh accent and street cred, conservative politics and a liberal spirit. Cameron is the moderniser, but Boris is the post-moderniser.

Letters to the Editor (1)

Like many Aussies of that generation, I lived in London for two years during the mid-90s. A confessed Anglophile, I love many things about British culture, including most of all, the Brits’ ability to be self-deprecating and have a good laugh at their own expense. They don’t take themselves too seriously because they don’t have to. They are and ancient and modern nation who have seen, done and survived it all. I love the place. But……..

I lived through Euro ’96, the European Football Championships, hosted by England and saw a side to their national character that frightened me. The hype and nationalism, whipped up by the tabloids of course, were suffocating, while the xenophobia and nastiness shown towards opponents such as Spain – defeated by England in the quarter finals – and Germany – who England lost to in the semis and eventual champion – were ugly. Chants of ‘Two World Wars and a World Cup later!’ were everywhere during the build up to the semi, while one tabloid declared war on Germany.

I watched the semi in a north London pub and as I waited for a bus after the game, I watched car windows and phone boxes get smashed in.

We think we love our sport in Australia but we have nothing on the craziness that occurs in other parts of the world. Thank God!

From Andrew Starkie

9 August 2012

French Timewarp: A Tres Grand Step To The Right

Front National Leader Marine Le Pen

WHEN the French and their many admirers speak of La France Profonde, or Deepest France, it is rural hamlets such as Le Hamel they have in mind.

Tucked into the wheat fields of Picardie, under big azure skies a few hours’ drive north of Paris, Le Hamel gathers sleepily around a 16th century church consecrated Notre Dame. The graveyard is dotted with wartime-red poppies and roses, which are carefully tended by a gardener named Christian.

It is just a few parishes away from the Somme region where Australian troops died in their thousands to liberate villages such as this during World War I. (The memorial to Australian soldiers is in nearby Villers-Bretonneux.)

Christian’s deployment of a leaf blower seems an obnoxious modern intrusion into a village, population 126, which seems otherwise preserved in cultural aspic, and is doubtless as neatly arrayed today as in 1803 when Le Hamel became a commune.

With deference, Christian points out the biggest house in town — a pile in local brick that was once the manoir of the village’s feudal leaders. Those seigneurs once lorded it over the peasantry, and the mores of history linger. In a town that dates its history and folklore back to the 11th-century Crusades, it’s almost as if the Bastille had never been stormed.

Life in Le Hamel is gentle. The tidy mairie, its town hall, deigns only to open a few hours every second Thursday to transact affairs of state. Indeed, the most pressing decision around here seems to be choosing between a ficelle picardie — a crêpe filled with local ham, cheese and mushrooms — or agneau de pré-salé, the delicious lamb reared on nearby coastal saltmarshes. Drawn from the Brussels-subsidised farmland that surrounds and sustains the town, the local gastronomie is solid, honest and comfortable, rather as les Picards themselves appear to be.

There are plenty of other communes in France that might be deemed the custodians of a traditional rural lifestyle that is fast vanishing in the wake of Brussels’s bland, one-size-fits-all Euro-isation, but few of them are as bare of immigrants as Le Hamel and its neighbours.

Local councillor Denis Dormoy can count the number of foreigners in the area: three — a Moroccan, a Romanian and an Italian. “And they are very well integrated,” Dormoy is pleased to note. The pain de campagne — as well as the residents — of this tranquil corner of La France Profonde is decidedly white bread.

Which makes Le Hamel’s latest claim to national fame somewhat confounding. When France voted last April in the first round of its presidential election, Le Hamel voted 49.58 per cent for the anti-immigrant tearaway Marine Le Pen and her Front National (FN). Aside from the eight voters of nearby Epecamps, five of whom voted FN to deliver a 62.5 per cent win for Le Pen, Le Hamel’s enthusiasm at the ballot box made it the FN’s most fervent municipality in France.

Dormoy says Le Hamel has always voted right but never to this extreme or with such gusto as at this recent poll.

This result was almost triple what the FN polled nationally and almost triple, too, what then President Nicolas Sarkozy, and what his ultimately victorious Socialist opponent François Hollande, polled here. In the 2007 elections, Marine’s more openly racist father, Jean-Marie, gathered 32.76 per cent of Le Hamel’s votes for the FN in the first round. In greater Picardie, its two million people this year voted 25.03 per cent for Le Pen, which makes it her premiere territory nationally.

These achievements were loudly trumpeted by the FN, which claimed Picardie as its own and lauded itself as an “unavoidable political force”, poised to replace Sarkozy’s Union pour un Mouvement Populaire as France’s main party of the right.

The Le Pens are infamous as the standard-bearers of the racist extremes of the French right. The ignorant old man’s long dirty-laundry list of outrages includes convictions for inciting racial hatred, and recidivist anti-Semitism and Holocaust denial. That the Le Pens are Islamophobes goes without saying, despite the fact that Muslims are calculated at around 10 per cent of the French population — the EU’s biggest Islamic community. So strong has been the rhetorical poison spouted by the elder Le Pen, the octogenarian patron of the FN, that even hotheads like Dutch firebrand Geert Wilders have been appalled by him.

Since taking over leadership of the FN from her father last year, the blonde Marine has positioned herself as a struggling, single mum Everywoman, who’s more moderate than her cranky dad.

She says she wants to reduce immigration to France, as distinct to his preferred abolition of it — but she still wants France to exit Europe’s borderless Schengen treaty, a policy seen as shorthand for restricting immigration from Eastern Europe, the EU’s newest members.

So why is the FN so popular in Picardie, a region where, save for the occasional Turkish kebab house or sad little Chinese greasy spoon, about the only foreigners one sees are boozy tour groups sampling wine in the local vineyards and visitors to the war graves and trenches of the Somme battlefields?

What’s going on here?

Appropriately, the answer seems more profonde than racism. “People are very frightened,” says Dormoy. With their fears fanned by the FN, they have come to view Brussels as the cause of all things bad.

The cost of sewage treatment has risen, notes Dormoy, and Le Hamel thinks that’s Brussels’s fault, even though most locals have septic tanks. The village baker doesn’t sell his delicious baguettes door-to-door around the hamlet anymore because it no longer pays to do so — blame the EU. The postman’s job is threatened because the French state can barely afford to pay for his salary, because of its obligation to the EU — or so it is believed.

“We councillors do everything we can, but people still think it’s Europe that’s at fault,” says Dormoy.

“No-one feels responsible for anything. They feel as if they are not in charge of their own future. People work but they are at the limit of poverty. They feel very fragile.”

Unemployment in Picardie is among the highest in France; about 12 per cent compared with 10 per cent nationally.

Because few jobs are generated in the area, locals are compelled to find them elsewhere, commuting as far as Paris, 120 kilometres away. “Then it’s the cost of transport, and the work isn’t very well paid,” adds Dormoy.

Dormoy, a Socialist, worries that in places like Picardie the FN is becoming seen as the one party willing to defend la vie traditionnelle — not just French traditions, but those of a wider Western Europe perceived as fatally assailed by Brussels. “It’s not about immigration,” Dormoy insists, “there are not enough jobs here to attract immigrants.”

Apparently confirming Dormoy’s take is the profile in rural France of the CPNT Party, whose French acronym translates as Hunting, Fishing, Nature and Tradition. It too claims to be the protector of ‘the real France’ and Picardie is also its heartland. Though its leaders claim the CPNT tilts neither left nor right, in these parts its members have been known to play footsies with the FN. “They are cut from the same cloth,” sniffs Dormoy.

Le Hamel’s mayor, Jean-Jacques Adoux, denies he is a Front National member. But when asked why Le Hamel voted so strongly for the FN, he says “it’s possible that when the mayor or other locally elected officials support a candidate it has some sway.” Adoux insists he’s an independent but some of his constituents are not convinced. Says a fellow councillor, “He just wants change…in another milieu he would’ve been a communist.”

By voting for FN, a party that would like Paris to exit the euro and the EU, Le Hamel seems to take for granted the direct infusions of cash that the farmers of Picardie receive from Brussels to keep their sugarbeet, maize, barley, potato and linseed farms operating. No matter that these subsidies, enshrined in the controversial Common Agricultural Policy — and chewing up about 40 per cent of the EU budget at a time of crisis — keep places like Le Hamel alive; Adoux says the strong vote for the FN was a vote against Paris’s embrace of EU diktats.

The FN vote here, Adoux says, was to protest against the “high social charges, unemployment and unfair competition from the new EU states”.

That may be overstating matters. Councillor Dormoy points out that though he’s been a councillor for 12 years, he’s been told by locals that he shouldn’t have been elected, or even run in polls because he wasn’t born in Le Hamel. “There’s a lot of intellectual misery here,” he says. “It’s an enigma.”

All politics is local, and so it seems it is for Mayor Adoux. He told The Global Mail that he’s “just a truck driver” who’s worried about the free rein foreign drivers have on French roads. The implication being that this was why he may have encouraged the people of Le Hamel to vote for FN.

“Eastern European trucks can and do operate totally in France, paying their drivers a fraction of the wages, and flouting safety laws,” he says.

Few places in this country openly describe themselves as La France Profonde, as Picardie does. It’s a term rather like ‘The Lucky Country’, originally coined to criticise Australian entitlement but which has changed in usage and meaning. It was first — and similarly unflatteringly — aired by Parisian intellectuals to describe a not particularly attractive side of France, and referred to a God-fearing insular people resistant, even hostile, to external influences.

Now marketers deploy it to refer to that elusive ‘real’ France that tourists go in search of.

And in this forever corner of Picardie, it seems to be a little of both.

Read more of Eric Ellis on a comedian reshaping Italian politics, an economist who says it’s time for Germany to stop mentioning the war, and what all the upheaval might mean for the European Union.

Tower Of Sun

I NOW know what consumed Richard Dreyfuss as he entered The Mothership at the end of Close Encounters of The Third Kind.

Like the ethereal glows that are Spielberg’s cinematic signature, the light emitting across southern Spain’s arid plains from Abengoa Solar’s soaring towers bewitch and entice much as it was in ‘CE3K’ for Dreyfuss; hypnotic, seductive and utterly irresistible.

Doo-dee-der-doo-dooooo! One can almost hear those five iconic notes from Close Encounters over the Andalucian cicadas, here in Europe’s sunniest region. I’m drawn, like Dreyfuss, from kilometres away, compellingly closer to the facility’s otherworldly towers as if engulfed by a subliminal magnetic field. A flat-topped butte suddenly rising from the sunflower fields here would not surprise. The scale of it, with those colossal rays, is spellbinding and even a bit spooky. It’s impossible not to be beguiled by it all.

Abengoa claims this as the world’s biggest commercial solar power station, situated 30 km to the west of Sevilla — and visible from almost as far away. Spain might be in dire economic crisis but this is a project its Spanish promoters believe is a model to power a warming world, as Abengoa rolls out identikits in joint ventures in similarly sunlit climes; the Middle East and North Africa, an Obama initiative in the American West and, they hope, Earth’s poles and Australia too.

The two main towers rise 110 metres and 160 metres from the plain. The tallest — PS20 — is Spain’s seventh tallest building, around 20m higher than the highest point of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, about the same height as a conventional 40-storey skyscraper. What looks from afar like cables suspending from a huge bridge are actually powerful sunbeams illuminating the everyday dust and haze of the parched Spanish campo. That’s the beginning and the end of the pollution around here, little of it generated by the plant.

At the summits of the towers are what seem like intense “second suns”, huge bowls of concentrated light that are impossible to view longer than a few seconds with the naked eye. These pits capture and process the concentrated reflections of around 2000 solar panels, known as heliostats, arrayed on the ground below in neat radial lines across an area roughly equal to the playing surface area of the Melbourne Cricket Ground.

These mirrored panels — cool to touch but generating heat approaching 250 degrees Celsius — reflect into the towers barely 100 metres above. Each panel covers about 120 square metres, or the side of a conventional suburban house. Though the heat they channel to the towers is extreme — one victim of the plants’ presence are birds straying near the sun bowls — one can stand on the tower roof just a few metres above the bowls in comfort.

Operated electronically from a control room, the heliostat fields are constantly (though imperceptibly to the human eye) moving, each tracking the daily arc of a sun that shines for about 16 hours during the Andalucian high summer.

It seems odd to hear the eight-year-old complex described as a plant, for there is relatively little about the facility that could be deemed conventionally industrial. The few employees work mostly in maintenance and the high-tech control room, and there’s little actual infrastructure apart from the concrete towers, the solar panels and the compact power distribution stations they feed, sending power on to Spain’s national grid. And it is spartanly clean; no mines, no smokestacks save for steam and no significant pollution. Moreover, the sun’s rays are free and, around here, pretty much infinite all year round.

As for plant, the word is perhaps best reserved for what inspires the Abengoa technology, those ubiquitous sunflowers that punctuate large parts of Andalucia, and surround this facility.

They are known in Spanish as girasoles, which translates as “turn to the sun”, and which is precisely what the Abengoa Solar group would like the world’s electricity consumers to do.

http://www.theglobalmail.org/rnr/photo-essay/?goto=tower-of-sun

The Man Who Divides Germany. Again.

The Writer and Economist Thilo Sarrazin

THILO SARRAZIN, Germany’s most provocative author and self-styled public intellectual, wants to make a few things clear.

Firstly, this economist who helped draft the template for the modern German welfare state is neither anti-euro nor anti-Europe.

Yes, he has just written a book — which has soared rapidly on Germany’s bestseller lists — called Europe Doesn’t Need The Euro. And he’s no fan of how Europe’s stricken ‘Club Med’ economies have let themselves go, bringing the continent to its knees.

But that doesn’t make him hostile to the grand European Union experiment, or even currency union. He simply demands economic shock therapy for those already inside it, and thinks Brussels should be more discriminating about who it lets in.

Just as Berlin should be, he says, about who it lets into Germany. Which raises the other things to clear up; Sarrazin insists he’s no racist, not a neo-Nazi, nor Holocaust denier, nor wishes ill-will or disrespect. Yes, his 2010 anti-immigration tome Germany Is Abolishing Itself — his first bestseller — was adopted with gusto at the hateful fringes of the far right, in arguing that Germany’s Muslim immigrants are socially, culturally and educationally sub-standard. And, yes, he likes to talk about Jews a lot.

Yet, though he’s hailed all the way to the fringes of the far-right, Sarrazin is actually a card-carrying member of Germany’s centre-left Social Democratic Party (SDP), albeit a party that tried — and failed — to expel him for his extreme views. If Sarrazin could be accused of anything, it wouldn’t be anti-Semitism, but more likely philo-Semitism. In the main, he seems a great admirer of what the Jewish people have achieved despite the appalling obstacles history has erected against them. And he likes to further defy pigeonholing, by claiming that Sarrazin, his family name, derives from a mediaeval European term for Muslims.

But as Germany pledges to bankroll Europe back to health, Sarrazin’s willingness to pose questions as to why has stirred a national conversation around taboo subjects many Germans burdened by their country’s dark past find particularly uncomfortable. Sarrazin simply says these conversations must be aired, if Germany and Europe are to advance through this funk.

All of which explains why some are quick to opine on Thilo Sarrazin, as he controversially fleshes out skeletons long believed well dead and buried.

Der Spiegel, Germany’s prominent weekly news magazine, for example, describes Sarrazin as a “firebrand”, a “maverick”, and a “combative politician”. SDP party colleagues reckon he talks “bullshit”. The SDP’s Peer Steinbrück, the first finance minister in the right-left “grand coalition” government of 2005 that handed Christian Democrat Angela Merkel the German chancellorship, says Sarrazin “sees only money and capital, not society”. The German intellectual Arno Widmann says his work is that of a “madman”. German Turks and Arabs say he’s a racist, and even Merkel herself regards him as “socially divisive”.

But the mild-mannered 67 year-old — he’s the same age as post-war Germany — conversing opposite with The Global Mail appears anything but a tub-thumping demagogue. Indeed, Sarrazin’s manner is measured and thoughtful, punctuated by reflective pauses as he chews over questions. His answers, when they come, are neither lecturing nor hectoring; if anything, he comes across as slightly awkward and introverted, even shy. But his remarks are not gaffes; he knows exactly what he is saying.

It’s only later, when listening to his recorded remarks, that one has a sharper intake of breath at what Sarrazin has actually said; at his blunt challenging of prevailing orthodoxies, remarks perhaps more racialist than racist, but no less confronting.

“Europe, as a rule, has to put a lid on immigration from the wrong area and regions. We should stop immigration from the Middle East and from Africa altogether. This is a very serious long-term demographic and cultural risk for Europe, not only for Germany … we have to do this.”

And: “Let them [Europe's suffering economies] go bust. Let them improve their ways. There should be no further bailouts for any of the other member countries. All those who don’t better their ways will have to leave the currency union.”

And: Germany’s rescue of the Eurozone “is driven by that very German reflex that we can only finally atone for the Holocaust and World War II when we have put all our interests and money into European hands. I tell the German people you shall pay for Europe because your ancestors murdered the Jews”.

WE MEET the day after the June 17 Greek elections, at Berlin’s famous Café Einstein on Unter den Linden, in what was East Berlin. A great deal of politics has occurred around here — eastern and western. The Brandenburg Gate, built by a king, is just 300 metres to the west, next to it is the Reichstag that’s again home to the German parliament after Berliners tore down Communism’s wall, the remnants of which are still standing here too. And Hitler’s government, home and suicide bunker was 300 metres south of here, under the old Reich’s Chancellery on Wilhelmstrasse.

A succession of US presidents have also made landmark speeches here, within a short stroll of each other: JFK found his inner Berliner a kilometre away at the Schoneberg town hall in 1963; by the Brandenburg Gate in 1987, Reagan implored Gorbachev to “tear down this wall”; and four years ago, in a packed Tiergarten, once a hunting precinct for the aristocracy, now the city’s largest park, Obama campaigned for the presidency he would stroll to a few months later. It all serves to remind that what happens along these strasses can change the world.

This is Sarrazin’s home turf. He was Berlin state’s finance minister and also worked at the upper reaches of the Treuhandanstalt, the West German state trust that managed East Germany’s transformation to capitalism after the 1990 reunification.

Such a CV makes him a political insider — “I know all their tricks,” he says of Germany’s political classes, adding that this explains their vitriol against him, that the milieu in which he once moved feels betrayed. “This is what makes politicians so angry at me,” he says. “They feel caught out, I am one of the political class, I used to be a successful civil servant, I was a fairly successful manager of a public enterprise, I was a highly successful minister of finance in Berlin. They regard me as one of them, I know most of them personally so they seem to regard [what I say] as a kind of treason. My way of addressing the reality poses the question of why they don’t address it themselves.”

If that’s so, he’s no pariah in this most political of Berlin cafés. Wellwishers — all men, all ageing — approach our table to engage him for a moment and shake his hand. Even before our meeting I’d felt some of his celebrity: having arrived early at the café I told the 50-something maître d’ I was meeting Thilo Sarrazin. He smiled with recognition, and led me to a generous table.

Germany’s educated middle class, Sarrazin says, buy his books. But then this man who’s often condemned as racist tells an anecdote about an encounter he’s just had, en route to the café. A cab driver, “obviously from India but of course speaking German” cheerily recognised him, bidding him well and advising him “not to be afraid” of his critics, and to keep on speaking the unspeakable. Sarrazin clearly likes that an immigrant — not an obvious member of that advantaged middle class — says this.

THILO SARRAZIN’S two recent bestsellers have certainly stirred Germans, while also making this former central banker wealthier than he ever was as a career civil servant.

His 2010 anti-immigration book has sold 1.4 million copies, and this second tome about the euro spent much of May and June atop Germany’s non-fiction lists. Both have been translated into other languages, and Sarrazin says his publisher is “very pleased” at the debate he’s generated. And doubtless at the euros generated too.

If Sarrazin has a mantra, it is, “first one has to sort out the facts, and then one has to sort out the reasons”. In a two-hour discussion with The Global Mail he prefaces several answers in this way, speaking with the patience of a scientist explaining complex chemistry to a layperson.

Sarrazin expresses slight surprise at the reaction to his writing. He says he merely states the obvious, drawing conclusions from basic research. His work, he says, is a study combining conventional economics with sociology and social science and perhaps some journalism too. “Nothing of what I said in both my books is really new,” he says. “It’s just no-one has articulated the facts in such a way, of what is in the public mind, combining German demographic questions with immigration and education and intelligence.”

When he claims, during a discussion about immigration, that students from the Muslim world rank lowly on OECD aptitude measures, he knows exactly what impact such remarks may have. Yet he insists that when he includes such material in his books, he’s not writing to shock, to gain an easy headline or emerge as some cultish messiah of the wacky right. Nazism, he says, was abhorrent and he’s appalled that he’s become something of a pin-up boy for the National Democratic Party (NDP), at the neo-Nazi extremes of Germany’s political spectrum.

In the hands of a Dutch Geert Wilders, Greece’s Golden Dawn, France’s Marine Le Pen or Britain’s National Party, such remarks might appear to be populist nationalism designed to scare an ignorant electorate into voting for them. Sarrazin claims to hold no ambition for political office and says, at 67, he’s too old anyway. (Recent polls show about 20 per cent of Germans say they’d vote for him if he launched a political party.)

It’s little wonder that the NDP latches on to Sarrazin. In May, after his euro book connected Berlin’s euro bailouts to the Holocaust, the NDP gleefully said Sarrazin articulated Germany’s “psychopathological guilt complex that makes it fulfil almost every wish of self-interested foreign countries even 67 years after the end of the war”.

While insisting he has no truck with the NDP, Sarrazin says this German World War II atonement debate is what the German Everyman discusses with friends and family around the dinner table. And never more so than now, when they are being asked to pay for Europe’s economic failures.

That’s garbage, choruses Germany’s political establishment. Germany’s feisty incumbent finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble recently told German TV that “either Sarrazin says and writes his appalling nonsense out of actual conviction, or he does it out of obnoxious calculation”. Germany, Schäuble says, “can be happy that we have been given a second chance despite the Holocaust … and that there is a growing Jewish life in Germany”.

Schäuble condemns Sarrazin as simplistic and populist. “That was the case with the way he handled the not-so simple problem of integration in our country,” Schäuble says of Sarrazin’s 2010 book. “Sarrazin obviously wants to repeat that commercial success with the euro issue,” Schäuble says, referring to Sarrazin’s latest publication. “As long as he pays his taxes properly, that’s fine by me.”

But with Greek protestors happy to parade posters of Angela Merkel as a Nazi, Germany’s multi-billion-euro shouldering of the Eurozone mess has awakened a debate about blaming modern-day Germans for the actions of their ancestors. The American essayist Adam Gopnik wrote recently in the online BBC News Magazine that it just be might be time to stop mentioning the war.

In Germany, more and more moderate average citizens are asking whether, 67 years after Hitler’s death, it is acceptable for Germany to stop self-flagellating over the horrors of World War II. Appropriately or not, this question has been phrased in the context of more recent barbarism — Rwanda, Yugoslavia, Mao’s China, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, mid-60s Indonesia, Apartheid, Sri Lanka — having since been perpetrated.

“I have never beaten myself up,” Sarrazin says, in reference to a war he had no part in, or ever felt guilty for. Then, pointing at me, an Australian, he says, “you haven’t been very nice to the Aboriginals 150 years ago. It was kind of a Holocaust, eh? Life, and people, can be very cruel”.

To this he pragmatically adds, “as long as there is German cultural and historical identity, the German name will be connected to the Holocaust and National Socialism [the Nazis]. This is complicated for Germany.

“Guilt and responsibility never ceases, wrong deeds are wrong deeds, even after a thousand years.

“[Atoning] stops when we stop it. We have to stop it ourselves. The others always get their way when they use this argument.”

IN 2010, when he was still on the board of the Bundesbank, Sarrazin told an interviewer that Jews “share a certain gene” that distinguishes them. Germany’s Jewish community recoiled in horror. “Whoever tries to define Jews by their genetic make up succumbs to racism,” said Stephan Kramer of Germany’s Central Council of Jews. Germany’s deputy Chancellor Guido Westerwelle said Sarrazin had stoked hatred and that “remarks that feed racism or even anti-Semitism have no place” in German politics. Chancellor Merkel condemned him as making Sarrazin “stupid and pointless” statements. He apologised and soon after resigned from the central bank.

I ask him if he is a racist. His responding laughter emits more as a contemptuous snort. “It’s a label,” he says. “It’s political defamation.”

He says, “I’m combining the facts, and drawing conclusions from the information that is available. I would never say I have discovered the final truth and can predict the future … but I am only concerned with the facts as I see them. If those trends go on, they will have the following consequences, that Germany as we know it will abolish itself.”

“One thing that 80 per cent of our less successful immigrants — and this goes for Australia as well as the US and the whole of Western Europe — have in common is their Islamic faith,” he says, without citing any sources.

Germany’s immigration policy, which welcomes immigration from Muslim countries, particularly Turkey, “will make us, as a people, in the long run, less bright. The type of immigration that we have in Germany does not help matters but makes them worse”. (Sarrazin has perhaps forgotten how many Turks first arrived in post-war Germany, as gastarbeiter, or guest workers, doing menial jobs Germans wouldn’t.)

I say that generalised views like this are often put around the US right, in relation to Hispanic immigration, and also arises in Australia over Asian arrivals.

He’s unmoved. “Germany, as with most European countries, does not get its immigration from the Far East, we get immigration from the Middle East, Turkey and from sub-Saharan Africa. This is quite a different matter.”

I suggest he may be on strong ground as a trained economist, but that he leaves himself exposed to attack and condemnation when he ventures into the realms of race, demographics and immigration policy.

He pauses for thought, before describing himself as one of the architects of the modern German welfare state, which required him to regard the economy with a sociologist’s demographic eye.

“I came to recognise that in the long run we will not solve public financial problems without reforming the welfare state … and this means in Germany and Europe always to deal with the sources of the productivity and with immigration.”

“And [if] you have a kind of immigration which lowers our future productivity, then we won’t be able to finance the welfare state.”

He cites research from the OECD-backed Programme for International Student Assessment which ranks educational aptitude.

“You can see that the kind of immigration to Australia or Canada [as compared with immigration to Germany] makes your country [Australia] brighter.” He stresses the last word, brighter, to cement the point. “Or at least more educated, because people from the Far East are simply much better in the educational system and have better educational and scientific achievements.”

“What is the reason?” he asks. “Maybe they have inborn brightness, maybe it’s their culture. It doesn’t matter what the reason is, they are better.”

On a trip he made to Australia in 2011, he says he was struck by the “young faces of immigrants from Asia, it’s quite different from our immigrants. Their appearance, their attitude, their way of dealing with each other, the way of the sexes, the kind of integration … and the lack of ghettoes. Many things all different [from Germany].”

Sarrazin similarly lauds the effects of Chinese emigration to North America a century ago, saying that “even the children of uneducated Chinese and Japanese workers which built railways did better in school than the white race did. It was to the astonishment of the authorities in Canada at the time, who were still rather racist but they had to accept that the children of Chinese coolies did better in school than did their own white middle class”.

Also in the US, he claims the sub-continental Indian community today comprises just one per cent of the population, but 13 per cent of all tertiary engineering professors. “With our Arabs and Turks and the people from sub-Saharan Africa it’s the other way around,” he says, meaning that these immigrants rank poorly in the German education system, and are less likely than Europeans to undertake higher education. “When [such trends] are long term and statistically significant, then I have to look for the difference,” he says.

SARRAZIN has written two books about the euro. The first was in 1996, as Europe was enthusiastically preparing for monetary union. It sold an unremarkable 50,000-odd copies, and became relegated mostly to the drier shelves of academic libraries. The second, published earlier this year as the euro was melting down, has been a bestseller.

He explains that Paris’s desire for the common currency was born of envy and rivalry of Germany, of French anxiety about the strength of the German deutschmark. “It was always a problem for the British and the French that though we had lost the war, we then had the strongest economy and strongest currency. They thought ‘if we get a common currency, we get the strength of the deutschmark in our hands’.”

Many economists, and more than many Greeks, believe Germany has been the biggest beneficiary of the common currency, that Germany has in fact made billions from it. They say that by linking with lesser (Mediterranean) economies, Germany sufficiently softened the rampant mark while efficient, industrial Germany churned on.

This, according to Sarrazin, is “not the whole truth”. He says that the strength of Germany in a common currency area would naturally have made it “much more superior”. Germany, he notes, has managed to sustain its industrial and manufacturing competitiveness even when confronted by the rise of cheaper China as an economic power.

“I am not anti-euro … not at all anti-European, not at all,” he insists, adding that he’s no German nationalist. He argues that the economic union that Europe created for itself — free internal movement of labour, goods, services and capital, and a common competition policy — “may have a common currency, but it is not necessary”.

“All those who don’t better their ways will have to leave the currency union but [the EU] has to have the courage and cold blood to go through with this messy process.”

He then paints a vivid picture of currency-union dysfunction, crediting the vision to a taxi driver who was praising his new book about why Europe doesn’t need the euro. (Yes, this is his second cabbie anecdote. “I have a lot of conversations with taxi drivers … he was a guy around 70 and was a German,” notes Sarrazin.)

The scene is of a prosperous German town where all the houses’ windows and doors are open, with all villagers’ belongings on show, enabling the “poor to steal from the rich.” He roars with laughter in re-telling the cabbie’s metaphor for what has happened with the euro. “This is exactly what one is doing with the currency union!” he exclaims. “Isn’t that a wonderful picture for the currency union?”

As for fixing the Eurozone crisis, Sarrazin advocates shock therapy. “Let them go bust. Let them improve their ways.” He says, “there should no further bailouts for any of the other member countries.”

“I would tell France and the other governments that from now on the German purse will be closed, there is no need for further discussion about the opening of that purse.”

Yes, he agrees there is the possibility of economic contagion as cancerous symptoms spread to healthy neighbours but “be it a few days or many years it will always be smaller than the long-term cost if we stick to the wrong policy.”

He would also put an ultimatum to the European Central Bank: that it must put continental books in order or Germany will pull out. He claims his fellow Bundesbankers were “all against the euro — they were forced to do it”.

One senses Sarrazin is having a bit of fun in suggesting any of this, as Europe burns through a conflagration he doesn’t have to extinguish. He chortles when he says, if Germany were ever to adopt such policies, “we will be bombarded by insinuations and accusations, and be permanently reminded of our very bad past. They will all tell us this is really bad form”. He pauses for dramatic effect.

“And then maybe Angela Merkel should go buy herself a handbag similar to that wielded by Maggie Thatcher and say ‘Dear Mr President, may I remind you’…”

He laughs at the mental image. “Or something like that.”

Scrabble for Europhiles

A is for Absent. Leadership is made during crises: think Churchill, Giuliani and 9/11, Mandela’s inclusive grace, even Anna Bligh during the Brisbane floods. Overwhelmed by Europe’s most calamitous crisis since World War II, the rudderless European Union threatens to dissolve; it is in dire need of leadership. So where’s the EU President, Herman Van Rompuy, the cookie-cutter Belgian bureaucrat from central casting better known as “Who?!”?

When the largely invisible ‘Rompie’ did briefly surface in May, he was scorned for the post-prandial afterthought made to officials invited to dinner, as the euro was melting down: “At the very end of our dinner I propose we discuss recent developments in the Eurozone,” he helpfully suggested.

But, one presumes, that vulgar matter would only have been raised after mints were elegantly proffered.

As Eurocrats like Van Rompuy readily remind, A is also for acquis communautaire, the EU’s ‘community agreements’. These are the 35 dictums that form the basis of all things functionally European, the equalising laws that member states are obliged to implement, such as keeping the national books in order. Except they didn’t. Which is why the EU’s half-pregnant ‘economic and monetary union’ has a currency that’s anything but functional.

Which brings us to B for bonds, the IOUs governments issue to finance themselves, which conservative investors buy, deeming them safe. But in wobbly Spain, Madrid now has to pledge such generous interest rates to attract buyers the country is in danger of becoming unsustainable. Can bad countries, like bad companies, go broke? Yes, just ask Argentina (2001) and Indonesia (1998) and Mexico (1994). As so too the contagious Eurozone, where Spanish bond rates are its canary in the coalmine …

… because of Europe’s disease and as yet unproven cure — bad banks and bailouts. Last week, Madrid was promised a lazy €100 billion rescate from fretful European neighbours. Banks across the continent, but particularly in Spain, are in various states of distress under the weight of billions of euro in dud property loans, mismanagement and over-exposure to risks like, well, Spain. And Ireland. And Greece. And Cyprus. And so it goes, infectiously on. Except in Madrid, the banks will probably be rescued by mates in the state; many of these bad banks were controlled by cronies of Spain’s two main political parties …

… which briskly leads to C for the corruption, collusion and cronyism rife across the continent, afflicting Spain, and Silvio’s Italy and, as Greeks see it, your average unelected bureaucrats with their nose in the Eurotrough. Or, as grumpy northern European taxpayers see it, the average indolent Mediterranean.

C is also for circuses. Most of the continent’s 500 million-odd people are presently diverted from their currency catastrophe by the Euro 2012 football carnival expensively mounted by EU member Poland and aspirant Ukraine. For them, a European crisis is when Italy’s Azzurri don’t make it beyond the first round. On June 17, as Greeks voted for a future on the Germans’ tab, not one of 40 TV channels beaming into this compiler’s Berlin hotel had a live feed to the drama unfolding in Athens. But there were many tuned to the drama at Euro 2012. Might C be also for “Crisis? What crisis?”

D is for drachma, the old Greek currency that pre-dated the euro, and could now post-date it if Greece can’t be rescued fast. Drachma derives from ancient Greek suggesting a fist grasping a bundle of sticks, from a time when Greece’s economy existed hand-to-mouth. That’s a time that might be coming again in a back-to-the-future moment for a proud but humiliated people.

D is also for democracy. Europe is supposed to specialise in it, and doesn’t mind telling errant dictators elsewhere to find some. But someone forgot to tell the commissioners who run the European Union out of Brussels. They get their well-paid, well-perked jobs by appointment, a quirk of continental bureaucracy that the people subject to their diktats like rather less and less in these unsettled times.

E is for tiny Estonia, Brussels’s wunderkind for its austerity mantra. In 2008-09, the first years of this crisis, this euro-denominated Baltic economy sank by a staggering 18 per cent — a depression. Estonians then tightened belts and restored order. As Nobel Prize-winning economist Paul Krugman recently pointed out, things haven’t yet returned to the salad days of recent yore, but Tallinn’s righted economy last year surged by almost eight per cent, near five times better than the becalmed Eurozone. Estonia has 1.3 million people.

F is for Francois, as in Hollande, the growth-is-good lobby’s new poster boy. Elected only last month, France’s almost accidental Président de la République is an affable “M. Normal ” who, the French hope, will arm-wrestle Germany’s butchy Chancellor Angela Merkel into accepting that austerity is an anathema to European joie de vivre. Bon chance there, Francois.

G is for guilt, the German post-war variety, and the increasingly prevalent opinion in German households that Berlin funds the mammoth Eurozone bailouts as part of its ever-enduring atonement for World War II and the Holocaust.

Regarded by many as a truth-that-dare-not-speak-its-name, this view is most controversially aired in a best-selling book by Thilo Sarrazin who, inconveniently for those who contend he’s just another right-wing nutter, is a member of Germany’s mainstream Social Democrats and a respected economist who served on the executive of the German central bank, the Bundesbank, the anchor of the European Central Bank (ECB), the euro’s custodian.

G is also for gag. No, not the parlous state of the Med economies, but this joke doing the rounds of European inboxes:

Angela Merkel arrives at passport control in Athens.

“Nationality?” asks the immigration officer.

“German,” she replies.

“Occupation?” the officer inquires.

“No,” she says, “Not yet.”

H is for Herman Van Rompuy, the EU’s so-called President. Oh, we’ve mentioned him already? So we have (see A for Absent). So where is he again, as the Eurozone burns? Hastening to the excellent Bordeaux?

I is for Iceland, where this economic mess surfaced back in 2008. No-one had much noticed or cared that its banks had become bigger than this frozen country’s economy, or that it was unusual. Remote Icelandics like to boast they have the world’s purest gene pool, but such magnificent isolation clearly didn’t nurture the sceptical chromosome in the European DNA.

J is for jargon. If there’s one thing unelected Eurocrats are good at it’s creating humbug. The EU is so beset by its own Esperanto — OMG-words like additionality and comitology, derogation and flexicurity — it even publishes a website which attempts to correct it. If only it took its own advice: “Best to use the terms people really use rather than the ones we think they should use.”

K is for χάος, or khaos, the Greek word for chaos, which is what many believe inevitable in the event of a Grexit, if Athens foresakes the euro. Banks will be overrun and collapsed by anxious depositors clamouring for their savings. Businesses will fail and people will be reduced to bartering to survive. Things will get worse before they get better — when Germany steps in.

K is also for Kroes, Karel, Kallas and Kristilina, the names of some of the EU’s Brussels-based ‘cabinet ministers’, the commissioners who execute policies for more than 500 million people. Never heard of them? You are not alone — neither have most Europeans, who are also denied the opportunity to elect them.

L is for London, the City of, the world’s leading financial centre, to which British politicians are in thrall and, on its behalf, win pragmatic concessions from Brussels on key EU policies so as not to upset the money pot generated by the ‘Square Mile’ (see O for opt-out). Upsettingly for the ECB, it’s also the world’s biggest trader of euros, even though the UK is not part of the Eurozone. When commentators remark, and Europe’s politicians grimace, at how ‘the markets’ are flaying the Eurozone again, they usually mean London screen jockeys who don’t much care what happens across the Channel so long as there’s a fat bonus in trading it.

L is for Luxembourg and Lichtenstein, two tiny and fabulously wealthy monarchies at the heart of Europe, into which great swathes of the continent’s wealth disappears, inside impenetrable trusts and foundations out of reach of grasping taxmen elsewhere. Which may be just as well, given the way Europe has been throwing euros around of late.

M is for Merkel and the Marios. No, not another cheesy ensemble of Euro lip-syncers a la Milli Vanilli but the EU’s pin-up troupe for austerity. Germany’s Merkel signed up the two Italian Marios as fellow travellers on her take-no-prisoners austerity path, and so far she’s prevailing. Draghi is now Europe’s main central banker and technocrat Monti is the unelected, post-Berlusconi PM rescuing the Eurozone’s third-biggest economy.

N is for non, no, nee and nein, which is how frazzled French, stressed Spaniards, insecure Italians, indigent Irish, perturbed Portuguese, doubting Dutch and divided Deutschlanders increasingly respond to Brussels’s demand for austerity. They’re also becoming inclined to vote no! to their politicians who advocate it. Unfortunately for our glib A-Z guide, no in Athens is όχι, which can sound a little like ‘okay’ off the tongue of Greeks, many of whom find Merkelesque austerity most certainly not okay (see S for Syriza).

O is for opt-out, an official departure from EU laws that recalcitrant members like Britain have finessed into a diplomatic art form. London most famously opted out of monetary union back in the 1990s, and today’s euro plight suggests the Poms were prescient to do so. London also opted out of the borderless Schengen Agreement, which is why travellers at Heathrow can wait hours for the dubious privilege of entering the UK, all while being abused by its surly immigration officials.

P is for populism. As Europe smoulders, extremists like Geert Wilders of the Netherlands, France’s Marine Le Pen, and the Golden Dawn — those Greeks who sound like they might be a breakfast cereal except they are neo-Nazis — have been quick to point fingers at foreigners and Brussels as being responsible for all that ails.

Nothing if not an opportunist, the pompadoured Wilders would like the Dutch — for many, the quintessential European traders — to return to the guilder and leave the EU. He recently schemed the collapse of Dutch PM Mark Rutte’s centre-right government for signing up to Brussels’s austerity. In Paris, Le Pen believes she’s just one political cycle away from consuming France’s right. Meanwhile in Athens, Golden Dawn thugs simply like to beat up immigrants, and their fellow Greeks, too.

P is also for petal, the poor little Portuguese one that seems to be the EC’s president José Manuel Barroso. When non-European G-20 summiteers at a Mexican resort last week politely suggested Europe might hasten to fix itself because the euro crisis has now become the world’s problem, Barroso undiplomatically told them to butt out. We’re doing our best, he claimed. No way, José, say they.

Q is for the quadriga. If there’s a stirring European symbol, it’s the classical four-horsed chariot that proclaims Europe’s triumphs, its civilisation and culture, even its Christian faith. Quadrigas are omnipresent: controversially bestriding Berlin’s Brandenburg Gate, Napoleonically surveying Paris from the Arc de Triomphe and, naturally, there’s one in Brussels’s ‘European Quarter’. The British provocateur Will Self recently mused that the Berlin quadriga epitomises Europe’s current bewilderment. Is it “peaceful or warlike, facing east or west?” he writes. “Roman or Prussian? Coming or going? Inasmuch as Germany today sits in the very cockpit of the European Project, so the quadriga is a perfect symbol of how confused and contested that project has become.”

R is for ratings agencies. These are the influential, mostly US-owned, ‘experts’ — Standard and Poor’s, Moody’s and Fitch — that rank the creditworthiness of institutions that sell investment products, such as nations and banks. Take Spanish bonds, which Moody’s ranks as Baa3, meaning just one downgrade away from being derided as ‘junk’. Cranky finance ministers grumble these agencies have too much sway and plead — usually in vain — for markets to ignore them. Some French claim it was the downgrade of their economy that helped seal Nicolas Sarkozy’s election loss in May. It certainly didn’t help. In Europe, only Germany, Britain (though on notice), The Netherlands, Luxembourg and the Scandinavians (minus Iceland) boast coveted Triple-A ratings.

S is for Syriza. After the June 17 election, Greece is the word, and so is the rapid rise and rise of Syriza, Alexis Tsipras’s Coalition of the Radical Left. With his anti-austerity, anti-bailout insistence, Tsipras fell just a few seats short of power, which is probably his preferred position so he can snipe at new conservative PM Antonis Samaras doing Europe’s hardest job — dancing to Merkel’s austerity tune. Samaras’s regard for Syriza? Beware of Greeks bearing rifts.

T is for Turkey, long a frustrated EU wannabe. When booming Turkey projects sophisticated Istanbul as its international face, Brussels sees the teeming hordes of Anatolia governed by Islamist Ankara. So it’s constantly denied entry, because it is Muslim and — sacre bleu — would instantly replace France as the EU’s biggest member after Germany. But no matter, with the Eurozone ablaze, Turks now look anew at brighter prospects to its Asian east — Europe’s loss.

T is also for the Tobin tax, a levy Francois Hollande promised French voters he would impose on currency traders to discourage speculation in the euro, a proposal which has found favour among his fellow besieged Eurozone leaders (see R for ratings) but not, unsurprisingly, in the currency market where it most matters (see L for London) or, ipso facto, with the British government (see O for Opt-out).

U is for Union, and the debate that more of it — a politically tighter Europe — would help solve its problems. U is also for the United States of America, particularly its President, Barack Obama, who frets that his re-election bid this November will be upended by continued euro contagion Stateside, which thwarts America’s own recovery from the 2008 sub-prime crisis that started all this. Americans ruefully remember Europe’s last big domestic crisis, the Balkans war 20 years back, the one Washington had to fix because Europe couldn’t.

V is for Van Rompuy, as in Herman, that evanescent Eurocrat. But wait, what’s this? He’s actually put out a statement this week assuring that “We will continue to stand by Greece.” Is that before the petit fours, Herman?

W is for wasted, which is what many dubious, hard-working Europeans, usually from the north, increasingly believe happens to their contributions to the EU. For the years from 2007-2013, Brussels and its many bureaucratic derivatives, such as the European Parliament, decided themselves a budget of €864.3 billion. And that was before the combined near-trillionaire bailouts that are yet to be proved successful.

X is for xenophobia (see P for populism). There’s a lot of it about this long European summer. The EU’s glossary doesn’t have anything listed under X — but give the Eurocrats time.

Y is for Europe’s alienated youth, who’ll be paying for the debts of their parents’ generation for a lifetime, if they ever get a job to do so. In Spain, youth unemployment is 50 per cent. But it’s not just first-time jobseekers who struggle to find work. In Greece, nearly one in four people are jobless. In Italy and France, it’s one in 10 and fast getting worse. But no such problems in Germany, where unemployment is around six per cent, close to the level where unemployment is a lifestyle choice. That’s a 20-year low in Germany as its robust domestic economy compensates for the loss of orders from strapped Euro neighbours.

Z is for ZZZZ, the sound emanating from a leaderless Europe, as it sleepwalks into oblivion.

The Pain in Spain

Broke, jobless and homeless.

Oh no, not another European economy going down the gurgler. What’s wrong with these people?

Let’s start with The Binge, before we get to The Hangover.

For the past 20 years, it’s been lots of fun to be Spanish. You got to party on someone else’s coin — Brussels’ and your bank’s.

The dictator Franco’s death in 1975 uncorked a latent flowering of Spanish society that had been bottled up through his austere four-decade rule.

With Franco gone – but crucially for the Spanish political angst, not overthrown — this was Spain’s national catch-up to the world, a party-like-there’s-no-tomorrow feeling that even had a name, La Movida (think Pedro Almodovar and you get the cultural and economic exuberance of the Movida vibe).

With democracy came economic liberation, dramatic social change and a succession of self-confident booms – a high point was in 1992, Spain’s contemporary Year of Marvels with the Seville Expo, the Barcelona Olympics and the 500th anniversary of Columbus’s voyage of discovery to the Americas.

Many of these fiestas were supported by Brussels, as part of its wider drive to equalise the European economy. Today, Spain has first-class — and very expensive — infrastructure; superb autopistas, one of the world’s most extensive high-speed rail systems, and some of Europe’s snazziest airports — all financed mostly by other Europeans.

For 12 years until 2007, Spain’s economy grew uninterruptedly, at a rate that was often near-double the EU average. Spain became Europe’s fifth largest economy.

For a glorious decade and then some, one of Europe’s poorest countries was transformed into notionally one of its richest. The Catalonia region around Barcelona enjoyed a standard of living 30 per cent higher than the European average, this before the ex-communist eastern states entered.

Economically liberated Spaniards hankered after the Five Cs — cash (they would fashionably use the English term), coche (car), casa (house), club (denoting social mobility) and cosas (literally ‘things’, implying consumerism). And if you were a young Spanish bloke on the up, you’d add another C for chicas, or girlfriends, suggesting a concurrent loosening of mores in this conservative, heavily Catholic society. Spain became groovy like Italy and France, a very old culture that suddenly felt very new.

The casa was the big prize for Spaniards. In rural Andalucia, barely literate campesinos, the rural peasantry who lived in caves or feudalistic hovels, were moving into spanking new urbanizaciones financed by 100 per cent mortgages.

And lured by the Ryanairs and easyJets, sun-starved northern Europeans did likewise, preferably with a golf course nearby. As the “United States of Europe” took shape politically within a confident EU, Spain positioned itself as its California.

OK, that’s The Binge. What about The Hangover?

From the mid-1980s until the 2008 crash, Spanish property enjoyed three significant booms, with nary a whimper between to dampen them.

In some locales, house values jumped as much as five-fold. That meant a huge construction — and, with it, a labour — boom. In 2006, at the height of all this economic activity, Spain was consuming half the cement produced within the EU.

And property prices kept rising, even as new stock was added to the housing pool. As houses and apartment buildings went up all over the country, so did mortgage lending. Money was very easy to get hold of, and the central Banco de España was inclined to let the party rage on. In 2006, the central bank measured the average Spanish family’s indebtedness at 115 per cent of disposable income.

Then, 2008 suddenly happened — instant recession. The trans-Atlantic financial crisis, which remember was prompted by the explosion of the American sub-prime mortgage market, shone a spotlight on the Spanish property bubble.

And it’s been in free-fall ever since. The debt is all with Spaniards — the Madrid government has tended to run its finances well, which is just as well because Spanish unemployment is running at around 25 per cent nationally, and as high as 50 per cent among some regions and social groups, which has placed big welfare burdens on the state.

The lack of jobs meant a lack of loan repayment, so banks were exposed with billions of bad debts in a fast-falling property market. Unemployment also meant less tax revenue. It’s all put massive strains on Madrid’s ability to finance the nation. The government is now borrowing — very expensively, because the economy and ratings are so weak — on international markets at record high interest rates in order to finance the state’s obligations. And it’s not like Spain has a booming resources sector to help it through la crisis. About the best Spain can hope for in the immediate term is that this fourth-most visited nation in the world has a nice hot summer to get tourist numbers on the up.

Politically?

Last December, Spaniards tossed out the left and installed Mariano Rajoy’s right-wing People’s Party, a kind of heir to the Franco legacy. He promised to manage Spain’s economy in line with EU austerity diktats, but — like the suffering Greeks and Italians, and the anxious French — Spaniards aren’t buying it. Since May last year, thousands of indignados, or the indignant, have massed in near-permanent demonstration in plazas across Spain, part-Tahrir, part-Occupy and all protest.

Have the banks taken all the pain from the property bubble bursting?

Good question, and one much debated by European economists as they try to save the euro from disintegration.

But let’s try to answer it anecdotally.

This correspondent has been vacationing in the bucolic Andalucian “white village” of Gaucin each of the last three years. On a stunning cliff at Gaucin’s outskirts sits a newly built block of flats, and has done so for several years. The flats have never been occupied. A local bar owner told me the construction was bank-financed. Prices in the area have come off by 50 to 60 per cent since 2008 but still these places aren’t moving, and each time we’ve come there’s a new, much-reduced price advertised. Now you can rent one “with an option to buy” for €399 per month.

Landlords anywhere like to get around five per cent annual returns, with appreciation the cream. But in Spain, forget appreciation for at least five years. At €399 a month, were one of these Gaucin apartments let, annual rent would total near €5,000, suggesting a value of around €100,000 for the flat. When I first saw them, they were being touted at €350,000. Today they are, generously, a third of that price, and still not moving.

It might also mean that they were badly built — locals hint grimly at landslips — and, if so, that hints at corruption. Local mayors, even in towns as tiny as Gaucin, pay themselves well. They are very powerful locally, and have a habit of handing building permits to their relatives and amigos. I’ve lost count of the mayors Gaucin has suffered in recent times, hounded from office by grumpy voters — I think it’s three in three years. And for Gaucin, read any small town in Spain; in nearby Ronda, the former mayor — a man wonderfully known as Toti — was recently arrested in a national sting on suspicion of fraud, bribery, money-laundering and falsifying documentation.

Across Spain, banks are being forced out of denial and taking massive hits for their bad property debts. Last month, Spain’s fourth bank, Bankia — itself a 2010 state-enforced merger of seven weak regional banks — received a €23 billion state bailout, mostly because of its bad property portfolio. (Somewhat alarmingly, Bankia was at the time chaired by a former chief of the International Monetary Fund, the global body that’s supposed to rescue stricken economies.)

Back at the unlettable and unsellable Gaucin apartments, that notionally means the landlord’s banker is sitting on a potential bad debt risk of at least 60 per cent. No Spanish bank has taken a 60 per cent haircut on its distressed property portfolio; those that have written off loans tend to have made 20 to 30 per cent provisions. Banks, of course, assess customer solvency on a client-by-client basis, but on the surface, the Gaucin example suggests this particular lender might need to double its provision if the Gaucin properties are any guide to how it handles the rest of its portfolio.

And there are more than a million vacant homes glutting the collapsed Spanish property market. It’s ugly out there, Señor, and getting uglier.

Read Eric Ellis’s Greek explainer, ‘Greekonomics’ here.

 

Laughing All The Way To Power

Italian political activist Beppe Grillo.

Italy’s most popular political figure has just told me to fuck off.

At least that’s what Beppe Grillo’s hand gesture seems to say, emphatically “Vaffanculo!” as Italians like to curse. Or could his two-finger salute be more a Churchillian V-for-Victory gesture? Recent Italian events suggest as much — that his profanity might be a lost-in-translation expression of triumph.

Neither right or left, Grillo’s anti-politics, internet-led Five Star Movement, the Movimento 5 Stelle or just M5S as Italians know it, has just swept into the mayoralty of one of Italy’s most important cities, Parma — source of the world’s best-loved hams, cheeses and pasta sauces and, also, home of the indigestible $10 billion Parmalat corruption scandal that continues to disgust Italians.

With his candidate elected on a campaign budget of just €6,000, historically minded Grillo says the post-Berlusconi landslide in Parma is M5S’s decisive ‘Stalingrad’ moment.

His implication is that Rome (or perhaps Berlin again) will be the next to fall to him and his grassroots army, who are conquering all before them. Italy’s political establishment — the “partytocracy” as he condemns it — and the media are suddenly spooked, simultaneously attacking him and praising him after decades of mostly ignoring him.

I ask him to clarify his hand gesture. “No, it definitely means fuck off,” the 63-year-old activist insists, smiling. “Vaffanculo!” he says, verbalising in Italian, “to the media, to the corrupt officials, to the corrupt politicians, right and left — all of them can fuck off.”

Not only does he confirm the meaning of his hand signal, he gleefully describes how he organises, via the internet, throughout Italy, national ‘V-Days’. These rollicking events draw thousands of roaring Italians into their village piazze to tell the well-upholstered, state-sponsored, Portofino-vacationing plutocracy who rule them to, well, vaffanculo. Collectively. And increasingly loudly.

Relentless in his anti-corruption message, Grillo talks for an hour about what ails Italy. He punctuates the discussion, held at his modest beachside villa on the Tuscan coast, with a generous offer of sustenance — as Italian grace compels him.

“Would you like some food?” he asks, and then with a mischievous wink, “…are you sure you don’t want any money from me?”

The question betrays Grillo’s take on the back-scratching relationship between Italy’s media and its state officials, a deeply rancid one. Italy is the country where Rupert “Leveson Inquiry” Murdoch’s satellite TV operation Sky Italia is marketed as highbrow. I decline.

Grillo also declines to call the M5S a party, preferring the more populist “movement”. Whatever M5S is, it’s young and rampant. Apart from Parma, it has recently taken three other Italian mayoralties, with candidates aged 26 to 32 years. In 2010 local elections, its vote was an average 3 to 5 per cent. In recent municipal ballots, it tracked at 10 to 15 per cent. Nationally, an Ipsos opinion poll on May 21 had Grillo’s M5S at 18.5 per cent popularity, second only to the big-tent Democratic Party on the left, and outstripping former Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi’s centre-right People of Freedom.

As M5S’s notional leader, Grillo refuses to parade the movement’s candidates in the conventional media, and rare is the Italian journalist who has interviewed him. Grillo sees local journalists as irrelevant and if he wishes to talk to the press, he does so with foreign reporters. The candidates also bypass the media, consulting direct with voters via technology. This sidelining has engendered a deep animosity from the Italian media, who demonise him and often cast him as “un-Italian”.

Mass movements like Grillo’s — organised via the internet, text and social media, and bypassing the traditional outlets of communication to take anti-austerity, anti-corruption mantras direct to the citizenry — are sweeping a deeply wounded Europe. As the continent descends further into its economic mire, these movements are tearing up the long-established rules of politics. And they expose a profound disgust for a centuries-old political class that seems clueless and incapable of correcting Europe’s many ills.

In Germany, the centre-left Pirate Party is polling about 10 per cent nationally with its net-derived “liquid democracy”. Having taken seats in a handful of key state legislatures it’s now taking aim federally.

Last month in Prague, Pirate Parties from around the world met to network and brainstorm ideas. Their goal was nothing less than the wholesale re-casting of how politics is transacted globally, issue-by-issue directly by the citizen. In struggling Greece, too, protest parties have emerged, including the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn at the extreme right, and Alexis Tsipras’ Syriza on the left, which is now tracking second in polls for the decisive June 17 election.

But only Italy has produced political buccaneers with the fun and sheer take-no-prisoners bumptiousness of Beppe Grillo and his Five Star Movement. Grillo says the movement is now in the throes of nothing less than ”zeroing, eliminating all other political parties”.

“We have a shared agenda in this project for the world,” he says. The same sentiment is echoed in his blog, which is published simultaneously in Italian, English and Japanese. “We [M5S] are like a laboratory for this type of movement.”

In Germany and France, he says, protest movements are arising at the extreme left and right, “but in Italy our movement is filling the vacuum, genuinely rising through the centre”. Which is paradoxical, he mischievously notes, “because we invented fascism in Italy!”

Grillo says Italy’s traditional power brokers, now whingeing about him, “have to thank us” for emerging through Italy’s moderate, rational centre. He compares this with the movements in France and Greece, which have tilted to harsh political extremes in their protest.

“People don’t believe in traditional politics anymore. They want democracy from below. People want to know where their taxes are spent.

“It’s the end of the power of parties, of the political class, of the partytocracy.

“We must imagine an entirely different life, to produce other things that aren’t cement, roads, supermarkets and big infrastructure as a way of growing … to get out of using oil in 20 years. It’s finished.

“We [M5S] are against infinite growth as the only propulsion of the economy.

“It’s not just Italy, but the entire Western world cannot stand on its feet anymore.” He likens the globe’s plight to Wile E. Coyote of Road Runner cartoon fame, who often overshot his path to teeter at a precipice. “If we in the West look down, like he did, we fall. We are on the brink.”

Beppe Grillo is hard to pigeonhole, and that’s just the way he likes it. Although he trained as an accountant, most Italians know him as a TV comic and entertainer who morphed into a satirist targeting the often-ridiculous vaudeville that is Italian political life, along with its endemic, fecund corruption.

After stints on TV through the 1980s — he was effectively banned by broadcasters in the late 1980s after criticising the then Prime Minister Bettino Craxi’s Socialist Party as corrupt — he embarked on annual national tours, which helped build his grassroots visibility. In packed halls and clubs around the country, he would reveal how Italians were being ripped off by state utility companies, often producing immaculately researched charts that detailed the connections between politicians and business. He’d also tell his audiences how their environment was being degraded by rapacious developers aided by friends in official posts. And it was all done, all explained, with an edgy wit.

This satirist is a triple threat: part humourist, part consumer champion (he is famous for his assaults on Telecom Italia) and part investigative journalist. He was the first to expose the Parmalat scandal, the long-running fraud at one of Europe’s biggest food companies that was revealed to have €8 billion missing from its accounts, a scam that claimed thousands of investors. His background as an auditor has been useful in disgesting dodgy corporate accounts — and then traducing them in his shows.

His tours and notoriety also made him wealthy, enabling him to finance the technology backbone that keeps the Five Star Movement on the up. That formidable network and internet reach is provided by a specialist Milan consultancy, Casaleggio Associates, who Grillo says are “geniuses” but who his sceptical enemies like to describe as “shadowy”.

It’s easy to see why the pampered political class is scared of him, and why his finger-pointing touches a chord with weary Italians.

Take his big idea to reform Italy’s cosy state pension system, which dispenses taxpayer-funded entitlements of as much as €20,000 to €30,000 a month to myriad ex-officials: “Pensions above €3,000 a month should be abolished,” he tells The Global Mail.

And the way he brings perspective to the perks of Italy’s diplomatic service: “Our ambassador to Berlin makes more than Angela Merkel does! Angela Merkel should change jobs and be our ambassador.”

And his take on the expensive office of president: The most revered political office in Italy costs €240 million annually to maintain — “four times Buckingham Palace!” he claims.

But not anymore, not if Grillo gets his way. His is an attack on the Italian state as a careerist lifestyle choice, as an unchallenged perks-for-life way of living.

“Everyone says we have no program, well, here’s the program!” he says, plonking a printed manifesto on the desk, while offering a link to his hugely trafficked blog. “We’ve got more of a program than these other guys.”

As for the ailing euro, Grillo argues for a two-tier common currency, reflecting Europe’s relative economies. “Since we [Italy] went into the euro, we have lost 30 per cent of our economy.”

He wants to abolish Italy’s 110 provinces, thereby taking out an expensive layer of government and patronage. This would save Italians €10 billion annually, he says.

Smaller municipal councils would be aggregated, another huge saving. And he would ban Italy’s long-standing practice of politicians being permitted to hold a range of political offices, which multiplies their perks.

He takes pride in declaring that none of his movement’s candidates are extremists, nor do they have criminal records, nor are they being investigated — no small achievement in this land of the mafia and assassinated judges. He’d like errant politicians and officials to be tried before juries of citizens, a dig at a justice system often criticised as soft and conflicted.

But even finger-pointers have to deliver and Parma will be a huge test for M5S, to see if it has the right stuff to clean up federal politics, a concept that opinion polls suggest Italians are warming to. Parma’s new mayor is 38-year-old Federico Pizzarotti and, unsurprisingly for an internet-inspired political movement, a computer technician. Pizzarotti is probably Italy’s most closely watched politician now and on May 29, his job became harder still when the Emilia-Romagna region was struck by a powerful earthquake, the second in a week.

Grillo says he doesn’t want to be Prime Minister (which is just as well because he is unable to, because of a 1981 conviction for manslaughter after a car he was driving was involved in an accident that killed three people).

“I am not the puppet-master. I give my popularity as the inspirer of this movement over to young people.

“It’s time to take this wretched country back.”

NEXT WEEK: Inside Germany’s Pirate Party

Greekonomics

Athenians against austerity. Greeks protest against the EU outside their parliament in February this year.
So what’s Greece’s problem, economically? And why is Greece’s problem also Europe’s?

Hmm, how much time do you have?

Here goes…Greece embarked on a decade-long borrowing and spending spree after it joined the eurozone in 2001. Membership of what was then a shiny, new, strength-in-numbers currency club — notionally anchored by mighty Germany — made it so much easier to borrow from oh-so-willing banks.

No-one much noticed or cared about this kind of excess while Europe’s economy was chugging along. Freshly minted euros were splashed around (see: Athens’s shambolic 2004 Olympics), and generated little comment. But then the 2008 financial crisis took hold and suddenly ruthless markets began shaking angry fingers. Athens was revealed to have repeatedly lied to Brussels and Frankfurt — home of the European Central Bank — about its flaky national numbers which glossed over overspending, tax evasion and corruption. They’d cooked the books, and today, Greece owes almost double what its flagging economy can generate.

Connected by the euro, quite a lot of Europe — Ireland, Spain, Portugal, even core France and Italy to a degree — also ran their economies carelessly, unsustainably. Furious markets at home in Europe and abroad flayed the banks for funding this bacchanalia, which exposed systemic weaknesses that rippled across the panicky eurozone and beyond.

And Greece’s problem, politically?

You do have time to spare.

Since 2008, several governments across Europe have been ousted from office as crisis-contagious economies crumbled. Enter the EU mandarins in Brussels who, unfettered by election pressures, and persuaded by Angela Merkel’s Germany (also, until recently, by France’s Nicolas Sarkozy), begin insisting on Europe-wide austerity, prescribing economic cold turkey after years of euro-bingeing.

Back to the voters, where tough love proves unpalatable — Bonjour M. Le Président Francois Hollande! Merkel, a political survivor of the financial crisis, had been re-elected in 2009, but now she too has a bloody nose as voters across her crucial Ruhr industrial heartland only this month rejected her austerity mantra.

In Athens, a succession of recent Greek governments was felled for meekly acceding to Brussels and International Monetary Fund (IMF) demands to enact austerity. Proud though emasculated Greeks demanded consultation from their politicians, took their argument to the point of violence, even to the point of dystopia. Greece has seen riots and even protest by self-immolation; society is fracturing. When the tear gas temporarily dissipated for the recent May 6 election, more than 30 parties representing all manner of political persuasions — but mostly anti-Brussels in tone — contested the poll.

That didn’t resolve anything; it only reinforced Greek contempt for all things EU. Greece made three attempts at building a governing coalition this past week. All failed. Greeks are now so utterly riven they can’t decide who they want to govern them, or what’s best for them. Should they leap leftish or rightish? Go pro- or anti- EU austerity (or any combination thereof)? Or should they back the feisty pox-on-all-their-houses populists emerging at either extreme of the political spectrum?

As the world looks on, fretting, another Greek election has been called, for June 17, with the country under technocrat caretakers in the meantime. But, of course there is no guarantee this next poll will yield anything conclusive either. Deadlocked, the Greeks might in theory be condemned to repeat this fruitless invocation of democracy ad nauseum, which would send them even more broke, and all this as creditors hover impatiently.

The next election will be for Greece’s survival, fought around the call to leave the euro (if, by then, it hasn’t left already) and perhaps leave the EU, too. Markets crave political stability and tend to punish those that don’t have it, which means countries linked to Greece via the vulnerable eurozone are being hammered. Again. It’s the stuff of international divorce.

But didn’t Belgium, the European Union’s host nation, go without a government for 18 months?

True, but Belgians mostly have jobs, pay taxes, have a functioning civil service and aren’t in chronic recession. Nor does their country owe more than 150 per cent of its annual economic output to banks. Were Greece Belgium.

So, come on, what’s really at risk here?

In Greece, social chaos and its very democracy — a heavy irony in the country that invented the idea. Unemployment and bankruptcies are at record levels; so is suicide. It’s grim, and getting grimmer by the day.

Athens is periodically swept by rumours of military coups, which would be catastrophic for a Europe that is supposed to have politically matured beyond such extremes. This Europe aspired to be a beacon for enlightenment elsewhere, for places that increasingly matter, like autocratic Russia and China, emerging Africa and mid-spring Middle East.

The Greek meltdown is potentially a back-to-the-future moment for the world’s largest economic bloc, a stark preview of what could happen elsewhere in the continent as it implodes due to its own connectedness. Nothing less than the grand post-WW2 political-economic project, the 27-member European Union (EU) itself, is at risk, as Europeans rail against rules being made for them by bureaucrats they didn’t elect.

Will it get that far?

Improbable, but not impossible. Greece comprises just 2 per cent of the wider European population and less of its economy, so it’s expendable. And anyway, it’s becoming increasingly clear that a dominant Germany, doing relatively well, Danke schön, won’t allow the Greek cancer to spread to such a calamitous extent. Greece will be cut loose before that happens.

Greece owes foreigners $400-500 billion, almost double the size of its economy, but smaller than a decent-sized German state like, say, Bavaria, which is where the EU economy really matters. Athens’ creditors — banks and state agencies — would likely weather a Greek default and one from similar-sized Portugal, which is wobbling, too. But they’re unlikely to cop another on the chin, should six-times-bigger Italy fail to meet its commitments. After all, Italy is an original EU member and is seen as a core eurozone economy. Nor could they probably wear the default of Spain, where more than a million houses are empty and big banks are vulnerable from their 30 per cent bad-debt overhang of dodgy property portfolios. At this end of the domino game lies potential Euro-Armageddon, with the EU and IMF probably powerless to stop it.

So far in 2012, the Greek economy has contracted by an alarming 6.2 per cent. It’s the 13th backward quarter of the past 14 and Greeks simply can’t pay their bills or manage their economy according to the strict rules euro membership demands. So they risk default on their truckload of loans.

The most likely outcome of a default is that Greece will be forced to leave the eurozone, thereby quarantining its economy and protecting other member countries from further infection. Greece might then collapse Argentina-style, a mess that could take generations to correct. But delinked from Greece, the rest of the eurozone would be relatively immune. Unless another Greece emerges elsewhere.

But isn’t a chain only as good as its weakest link? Isn’t it a rock-solid Brussels tenet that member nations can’t leave the euro without also leaving the EU?

Yes, and no. Last November, Brussels reminded the world that the EU “treaty doesn’t foresee an exit from the eurozone without exiting the EU.” Six months on in this crisis, most scenario planning has Greece leaving the euro but not the EU, mostly because, as you point out, it would be catastrophic for the EU as an institution to wobble because of a minor member. Politicians are pragmatic; they know when to change their own rules.

Once a forbidden, nightmare topic, Greece’s departure from the euro is now being openly discussed by Europe’s central bankers and governments, and even by Brussels’s mandarins. In a weekend speech by the EU’s economic and monetary commissioner, Olli Rehn, Europe was described as “certainly more resilient” in the event of a ‘Grexit’ than it was in 2010 when Greece’s plight began to emerge, and the EU bloc would have been “massively underprepared”.

So really, what would happen in Greece if it exited the euro?

Greeks face an appalling choice. Clinging onto the euro means they’ll be dependent on external life support for generations, beggars to Brussels and Berlin. But leaving it could be even worse, albeit in the medium term, where it could mean economic and possibly social collapse as they wrest back control of their destiny with a new currency and their own policies.

A ‘Grexit’ from the euro would be timed to occur before a weekend, when business tends to be limited, in order to minimise the immediate shock as much as possible.

But it would be, to steal from the Greek, χάος, chaos. As Greece adjusted to its new reality, the cure could seem to be worse than the disease. There could be bank runs, and even collapses as banks were stripped by customers of lifeblood cash. Account withdrawals could be limited or even frozen, stopping meaningful economic activity and provoking anger. As businesses failed, people would be reduced to bartering. The police and the army could be deployed to maintain order, and all this in a politically divided nation that may only have a caretaker government to convince citizens to behave. As the EU’s Rehn said at the weekend “Europe also suffers, but Greece would suffer more…it would be much worse for Greece and Greek citizens, especially less well-off Greek citizens, if Greece left the euro, than for Europe.”

Creating and distributing a new currency would take about six months, then people and markets would have to adapt — if in fact they adapt. As the chaos settles, this ‘new drachma,’ so the thinking goes, would have a much-reduced value to reflect Greece’s toxic economy and Athens’ weakened ability to tap sceptical sovereign debt markets without the implicit EU guarantees that euro membership brings.

Imported goods would suddenly be massively expensive, fuelling inflation, which could further collapse dependent businesses, particularly in retail. One wouldn’t see too many Greeks wielding their flaccid currency in the world’s tourist hotspots.

But Greek goods and services, such as those associated with tourism, the country’s biggest industry, would become relatively cheap to outsiders — that is if penurious Greeks could resist abusing the European guests they blame for their plight. External demand would help kick-start the economy. Greeks would also stop buying expensive imports, and a recovery of sorts could begin. Perhaps.

What about Greek’s rich? What are they doing?

Much the same as what they’ve always done: keeping their money and assets offshore, in Switzerland, Paris, London, while declaring very little at home.

And the poor?

Jobless, they’re being fed — literally and ideologically — by reborn political populists like the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn on the extreme right and the radical left Syriza.

The middle class?

Increasingly unemployed.

How come the neo-Nazi ‘Golden Dawn’ got 7 to 8 per cent of the vote last week? Are Greeks racist?

Other than an historical antipathy toward neighbouring (and, gallingly for Greeks, bigger, booming Turkey) they’re no more racist than any other nationality. The big Golden Dawn vote was essentially a protest. Established parties are seen as corrupt, too chummy with Brussels, too quick to agree to austerity and too willing to open Greece’s doors to immigrants. (Greece is now home to as many as a million people from the poorer reaches of Africa, Asia and the Middle East — innocents now demonised as job-stealers by Golden Dawn.)

So why is Greece in the EU in the first place? Isn’t it a bit, er, ‘easterly,’ a bit foreign for (western) European taste?

Good questions, and all the more so as Islamic Turkey, once-warring Balkan states and even African Morocco line up to join the EU, while wary Nordics stay away. In something of an elongated political Kumbaya moment, Brussels’ view has been that signing up historically erratic “Club Med nations” to a united Europe means securing democracy at the continent’s vulnerable fringes, while extending internal markets.

More to the point, hard-working, tax-paying volk in functioning, conscientious places like The Netherlands and Germany, are increasingly posing these questions of their own governments which are now asking them to sign up to Brussels’ demands of austerity.

As the British historian Niall Ferguson noted this week “for two generations, the Germans really did want to take over Europe — by force. But today, when they could do so peacefully, they can’t be bothered.”

Fuelled by their own Eurosceptic populists, the “North Sea” view is that the European Mediterranean’s ‘garlic belt’ — Greece, Spain, Portugal — is a nice, sunny area to visit and even in which to own a cheap holiday home, but no place to do business or to rely on. These dour northern heartlands, including Scandinavia, have never been totally convinced that being ‘European’ is a good thing, and less so when dusky foreigners arrived and changed their quaint villages, seeking jobs and welfare that their hefty taxes now fund.

Discomfited core EU constituencies in France, Germany and Benelux find it all a bit offensive that the social contract they’ve long enjoyed, earned and paid for at home — the free health, the excellent services and infrastructure — are threatened by austerity when, as they see it, the real problem lies in less disciplined climes.

Places like Greece, teetering at the abyss.

 

For more on Greece, read Inside the Greek Tragedy here.

Letters to the Editor (1)

Greekonomics . . . Wow, a great summary and a thoroughly good read to boot. Of all the hot spots around the world (read Middle East, the Koreas, sub-continent) it is Europe that is still the scariest I think.

From Patrick

17 May 2012

It’s Time, Rupert

Puppets of Prime Minister David Cameron and Culture Secretary Jeremy Hunt, held by Rupert Murdoch, July 6, 2011.

IN THE blue corner, there’s ‘Dave Snooty’ as Private Eye depicts the British Prime Minister; a privileged old Etonian, an embodiment of the elite. He’s a royalist, the glorified PR schmoozer with little actual qualification except a profound sense of entitlement.

In the other, more Thatcherite, corner, there’s Rupert Murdoch; the Antipodean megalomaniac, a self-styled champion of the underdog, a billionaire airing grudges about all that is repugnant about class-ridden Britain. For Private Eye’s pox on both their houses, Murdoch is the ‘Dirty Digger’.

Murdoch, so Westminster wisdom goes, hates Cameron — and never really rated him much anyway, having been talked into backing his run at Downing Street by his News International confidantes, Cameron’s fair-weather Oxfordshire friends, long before the world ever heard much about the blight of phone hacking.

But as the hacking disgrace and its unfolding scandals have consumed nearly all in their wake this past year, Murdoch detests the Cameronian establishment elite who once courted him for allowing this very public, elongated humiliation of his life’s work to happen at all, just as he — or was it they? — was poised to deliver his biggest ever deal, the $12 billion acquisition of all of BSkyB he thought was sewn up.

“It’s starting to seem a little like an embrace to the death,” Charlie Beckett, director of the London School of Economics’s POLIS journalism think tank told The Global Mail.

The latest episode of this compelling danse de la mort came yesterday, May 1, in what was the most humiliating public denunciation of Murdoch in his 60-year business career.

“Rupert Murdoch is not a fit person to exercise the stewardship of a major international company,” concluded the House of Commons’ Culture, Media and Sport Committee of British parliamentarians.

“On the basis of the facts and evidence before the committee, we conclude that if at all relevant times Rupert Murdoch did not take steps to become fully informed about phone hacking, he turned a blind eye and exhibited wilful blindness to what was going on in his companies and publications.

“This culture, we consider, permeated from the top throughout the organisation and speaks volumes about the lack of effective corporate governance at News Corporation and News International.”

The Commons report was brutal. But in the partisan party division of the committee over its most damning language condemning Murdoch and News Corp, did David Cameron blink and wave a white flag at the Murdochs? Do the four Tories publicly breaking with their Labour and Liberal Democrat committee colleagues suggest Cameron was telegraphing a truce message to Rupert?

There’s much to indicate that Murdoch is out for payback on Cameron and his kind: Rupert’s mischievous support for independence-minded Scots seeking to break Britain up in what would be the ultimate payback; his casual and damning evidence to the Leveson Inquiry last week about how Cameron swanned about the Greek Islands on Murdoch family yachts, flown there on the family’s coin too.

And Murdoch still owns lots of British media that’s potentially tricky for troublesome Tories. In March, a key fundraiser of the ruling Conservative Party resigned after a Murdoch-owned Sunday Times sting exposed him trading access to Downing Street dinners for donations.

Murdoch has made his wrath transparently, if somewhat elliptically, known, tweeting in March after more revelations about him that it “seems every competitor and enemy piling on with lies and libels. So bad, easy to hit back hard, which preparing”.

And in another recent tweet: “Enemies many different agendas, but worst old toffs and right-wingers who still want last century’s status quo with their monopolies.”

Only this past weekend, there were still more tantalising titbits, again in his Sunday Times: revelations that Murdoch’s quasi-daughter Rebekah Brooks — the trusted Murdoch aide he promoted from News of the World editor to run his British division — may make public her emails and text messages with her once great Oxfordshire horse-riding chum, one David Cameron. Though spring is upon London, one could feel the shiver from Downing Street after that morsel was digested.

Brooks is, many believe, the keeper of the Murdoch secrets, therefore to be protected. Murdoch’s compelling testimony to Leveson last week was notable for his ‘whacking’ of many characters in this shabby drama, from Labour ex-PM Gordon Brown, many of Murdoch’s own ex-staff, and Cameron, too. But one person Rupert Murdoch hasn’t burnt this past year is Brooks, “This One”, as he described her after rushing to her side last July as the hacking scandal — and her career — exploded.

No matter that some of Murdoch’s newspapers and former staff stand accused of crimes such as bribery, perversion of justice, perjury and interception of communications; power is about who has it and when to deploy it.

The Murdoch scandal is cancerous for Cameron. Less than two years in office and forced into coalition with the centrist Liberal Democrats in order to rule, Cameron’s Tories would lose an election were it to be held tomorrow.

A weekend opinion poll in The Guardian showed Tory support to have slumped by six points in the past month, to 33 per cent. Labour, led by the neophyte Ed Miliband, was tracking five points higher, at 41 per cent, probably enough for Labour to be elected in its own right in Britain’s simple majority, or first past-the-post electoral system. A YouGov poll in Murdoch’s Sunday Times last week gave Labour an 11-point break over the Tories, as 82 per cent of voters said Cameron’s government was out of touch with ordinary people.

Worse, there will be more revelations, and more humiliations, for Cameron as well as the Murdochs to tough out. Public evidence is continuing to be heard in the three investigations created by Cameron, including two into the police conduct and ties to News.

Cameron has Parliament, a coalition partner and a rampant opposition to answer to. Rupert only has shareholders well accustomed to him imposing his will.

“Cameron is weak,” Professor Brian Cathcart, professor of journalism at London’s Kingston University, told The Global Mail. “This is a collective investigation bigger than any previous probe into a British corporate scandal. The authorities are probably not even half-way done with it.”

And it will continue for much of this year and possibly next, extended by its own momentum, such as the fallout from last week’s disclosures of how chummy Britain’s “media minister”, one-time Tory leadership contender Jeremy Hunt, was with the Murdochs in deciding the future of BSkyB. There will be more ad hoc investigations, in Parliament and beyond, as revelations unfold.

Separately, there is the inquiry by Britain’s newly-muscular media and telecoms regulator Ofcom into whether the Murdochs and News are “fit and proper” to hold a British broadcasting licence. Then there are also the investigations and trials of the near-50 people so far arrested by police, many of them ex-News employees.

Little of this will be good for Cameron.

“They are kind of a mirror image of each other as a model of desperately maintaining power,” says Kingston’s Brian Cathcart, “in the way they have erected firewalls to protect them, firewalls that are fast being torn down.”

Cathcart cites these “firewalls” News built to prevent the phone-hacking blaze reaching the Murdochs — the rogue reporter defence, the dodgy lawyers, the executive cover-ups – now mostly in tatters.

So, too, similar construction mishaps for Cameron. First his Andy Coulson defence gave way last year, prompting the inquiries. And now Brooks seems to have decided Rupert is a better bet than her old Chipping Norton chum.

Last week Cameron saw his Jeremy Hunt defence all but collapse, and now, after the partisan pro-Murdoch posture of the four Tory MPs on the Culture Committee MPs, he could find himself in the uncomfortable position of defending their stance in Parliament, in effect a defence of the toxic Murdochs.

“It is just not popular amongst the British public to be seen to be protecting the Murdochs,” Professor Cathcart says.

But Cathcart says Rupert has something Cameron does not. An exit strategy. And Cathcart says it’s one that News Corp shareholders should insist Murdoch exercise, fast. “News Corp needs to start thinking about how to get rid of Rupert.”

Though humbled and humiliated, Murdoch could sell out of the UK as many News Corp investors demand — News Corp shares rose yesterday on that prospect — and retreat to his bunker on New York’s Sixth Avenue.

From there he’d at least be rid of — as he might see it — perfidious Poms and, though reduced, rally to wage what would be a more serious battle if the scandal meaningfully migrates across the Atlantic to Washington.

Kingston’s Cathcart says Murdoch needs to become an irrelevance to the modern functioning of the company, to become “a thing of the past.”

Yesterday’s events, Cathcart says, should dispel any notion that the Murdoch family will extend their dynasty beyond Rupert. “It’s clear that Elisabeth and Lachlan don’t want it, and it’s been proven that James can’t do it,” he says. “It’s time for Rupert to step away and for a no-name executive from the US to come in and take over. That could put a line under it.”

And be further humiliation for an 81-year-old man whose legacy may be less about his business acumen and skills as it was persuading people to provide the right results.

Murdoch: All The Truth That Fits

AFTER swearing on the Bible to begin a two-day interrogation in Court 73 of London’s Royal Courts of Justice last Wednesday, an octogenarian once feared as the world’s most powerful media mogul began taking questions, the first few being perhaps the only ones he answered with clear and indisputable truth.

“Your full name, please?” Robert Jay, the QC assisting Britain’s Leveson media inquiry, asked.

“Keith Rupert Murdoch,” came the reply.

“You are the chairman and chief executive officer of News Corporation, a company incorporated in the United States?”

“Yes.”

As for much of the rest of his seven-hour testimony – gripping for media junkies; like watching paint dry for the most that aren’t – Murdoch’s former editor at London’s The Sunday Times, Sir Harold Evans, saw Murdoch’s performance more akin to the fanciful plots scriptwriters at News Corp’s Fox Studios might concoct.

“Everything he says should be taken as the diametric opposite,” Sir Harold told an interviewer on his wife Tina Brown’s Daily Beast website afterwards. Murdoch’s testimony showed, he said, that the mogul had “discovered a huge imagination. Frankly it’s pathetic. I haven’t stopped laughing all morning.” Perhaps Evans, sacked by Murdoch, was miffed that Rupert said he hadn’t read his famous account of their brief liaison, Good Times, Bad Times.

Others, including Murdoch’s raucous cheerleader in Australia, Andrew Bolt, thought it “a brilliant rebuttal of the sniggering reports of his intellectual decline.” Writing on the website of the Murdoch-owned Melbourne Herald-Sun, Bolt wrote: “Murdoch at 81 showed his memory of events of decades ago was as sharp as a razor, and his wit was just as keen. No stumbles, no doddering, no embarrassment, no lack of command.”

At this point, it’s useful to remember why Murdoch was there in the first place and why the world was treated to a rare, public and proper grilling by a skilled and well-researched interrogator of The Man Who Owns the News, the title of a celebrated Murdoch biography by the New York journalist Michael Wolff.

Murdoch was there ostensibly to explain how things were allowed to fester inside News Corporation’s British division, News International — the now notorious phone-hacking scandal and its derivatives, which have seen more than 40 of his former staff arrested, some jailed.

His company has been scorned as a “shadow state” for its cosy links to — and support, manipulation and even intimidation of — politicians and public figures around the world over decades, in the cause of advancing News Corp.

Murdoch wasn’t appearing before Leveson to explain how he and News Corp think and function; he was there primarily to defend and rebut, as continuing scandals threaten to consume and even vanquish his legacy and life’s work.

So it’s perhaps unsurprising that swathes of his testimony were incorrect.

Take Murdoch’s recollection of many of the key events surrounding his controversial 1981 acquisition of Times Newspapers, notably The Times of London and The Sunday Times, the deal that provided him real political clout in Britain.

As Robert Jay walked him through the transaction, Murdoch drove a proverbial coach and horses right back at him, at one point seemingly re-writing the ideological legacy of one of his political heroes and allies, Margaret Thatcher.

Murdoch was asked by Jay about a meeting he’d requested with then British PM Thatcher on January 5, 1981.

This was a meeting over lunch at Downing St’s Buckinghamshire retreat, Chequers, that happened as Thatcher’s government was under pressure, including from MPs within her own Conservative Party, to refer Murdoch’s bid for Times Newspapers to Britain’s quasi-independent Monopolies and Mergers Commission.

Until March this year, when Thatcher’s private diaries revealed it, this was a meeting that officially never happened.

Jay quoted evidence of the meeting, a note from Thatcher’s then press secretary Bernard Ingham, from those diaries: “In line with your wishes, the attached has not gone outside Number 10 and is, of course, to be treated commercial in confidence.” In The Times‘s official history, published in 2005 by the Murdoch-owned Harper Collins, Murdoch reportedly suggests he had never met with Thatcher ahead of her cabinet approving the Times purchase.

But meet her he did, and the timing of their Chequers lunch seems telling, as Jay attempted to explore with Murdoch this week.

Murdoch again claimed to Jay that he had no recollection of the meeting and, when prompted by Jay, sought to portray it as a public service, a businessman advising his Prime Minister that militant unions were rampant at the papers:

“I don’t think she did know that there would be great problems with the unions or there could be – the sort of extent of the costs and the risks. I’m not sure she was interested.”

Not interested in the costs and risks to Murdoch? Or not interested in breaking the unions?

Mrs Thatcher was most certainly interested and informed about the extent of union power in Britain at the time. In October 1979, at the first Conservative Party annual conference since she’d come to power in May that year, she made a landmark speech that many Tories hailed as her setting down a marker for her rule — that the militant British unions’ grip over the country must be broken.

“What madness it is that winter after winter we have got set-piece battles in which powerful unions inflict appalling damage on the industries on which their membership’s welfare depends,” she railed.

“Millions of British workers go in fear of union power, and the demand for this Government to make changes is coming from the very people who experience this fear. It is coming from the trade unionists themselves. They want to escape the rule of the militants.”

On January 27, 1981, just three weeks after Murdoch’s secret meeting with Thatcher — a meeting Murdoch has repeatedly said he couldn’t remember — her Trade Secretary John Biffen said the Murdoch bid would not be referred to Britain’s anti-monopoly regulator. Murdoch now had control over four of London’s highest circulating newspapers, and an ally in Downing Street.

Jay asked if Murdoch worried the Times bid would be referred to the anti-monopolies regulator. Murdoch replied that “didn’t worry me in the least”.

According to a search on the Murdoch-owned Factiva archive data base, on January 28, 1981 Murdoch is reported to have “threatened that if his bid was referred to the monopolies commission ‘all bets would be off’”.

Murdoch described to the inquiry an “embittered” Times newsroom in turmoil at the time, claiming that its journalists had been on strike for “three months” in the lead-up to his bid.

Not so.

Times journalists began a strike on August 22, 1980. They returned to work on August 30, after accepting a 27 per cent pay increase.

An American since the mid-80s, Murdoch’s accent is now decidedly mid-Atlantic; the Australia where he learned how to dominate the media and schmooze politicians must be a long way away for him now.

How else to explain his insistence to Leveson that “I would say that my, all my interests, whether intuitive or otherwise, have been confined to the media, not just any business”?

Murdoch hasn’t just been a media mogul. He was an aviation mogul too, for almost 21 years. That’s how long News Corporation held a half-stake in the now defunct Ansett Airlines, in joint venture with his old friend, the late Sir Peter Abeles. Through much of the 1980s and 1990s, it was one of Murdoch’s biggest assets in Australia. In 1986, News and Abeles’ TNT Corporation also acquired a half-stake in the Hong Kong-based Regent Hotels International. More recently, Murdoch has and had owned a series of sports franchises and stadiums and half of Australia’s National Rugby League, though these could reasonably be seen as connected to his broadcasting interests.

Jay also asked if the Australian Press Council had ever upheld a complaint of bias against one of his papers. Murdoch emphatically replied, “Certainly not”.

Perhaps the years have dimmed his recollection of what happened in 1979 at the paper which launched him, the Adelaide’s The News, passed to him by his late father, Keith, at his death.

In December that year, the Australian Press Council ruled that “readers of the (Adelaide) News could have been left in no doubt that the newspaper strongly desired the return of the Liberal Party and the defeat of the Labor government”. It upheld the complaint, ruling that the News was “biased, one-sided and deliberately so.”

There are other serious inconsistencies in his testimony. The Guardian newspaper, which has doggedly pursued the News phone-hacking scandal and its impact on British democracy, describes some of them here and here.

The Guardian also commissioned the storied Scottish journalist and writer Magnus Linklater to recall his version of The Sunday Times‘s Hitler Diaries scandal of 1983, a rather different one to the Murdoch testimony. And Harold Evans too, rebutting Murdoch’s testimony about their stormy — or was it? – relationship.

But Murdoch’s fudging isn’t just about his pursuit of Western influence.

Jay asked him about the circumstances in February 1998 that led to a biography commissioned by Harpers Collins of Hong Kong’s last imperial governor, Chris Patten being withdrawn. Murdoch admitted he’d pulled it, describing it as “one more mistake of mine.”

Jay asked him if he was “hoping to acquire commercial interest in China at that point”. An emphatic Murdoch replied “no”.

This is also untrue.

Leaving aside the fact that from July 1, 1997, the Murdoch-owned regional satellite TV broadcaster Star TV was — and remains — based in the now Beijing-controlled Hong Kong, Murdoch was determinedly pursuing business interests in China throughout the 1990s. It was also where he romanced his current and third wife, Wendi Deng, in Shanghai and Beijing in October 1997 as the then 28-year-old mainlander interpreted for him.

In his 2008 kiss-and-tell book, Rupert Murdoch’s Adventures in China, Murdoch’s former CEO in Beijing from 1992-98, Bruce Dover, writes “breaching the Great Wall of China would become a very personal obsession” for Rupert Murdoch.

Murdoch’s first visit to China was in the mid-80s, where he met the then Chinese Vice-Premier Yao Yilin. And the reason why we know that is because it was noted, almost People’s Daily style, in a 38-word item in Murdoch’s The Times on March 20, 1985. The paper reported that Murdoch told Yao “he will try his best to make co-operation between Chinese and Australian television ‘fruitful’.”

In May that year, Murdoch agreed with Chinese authorities that he would develop “an international hotel and news media centre” in Beijing in a joint venture with the Chinese government, a commitment that does not appear to have been fulfilled. The deal was reportedly discussed with Hu Yaobang, the then General Secretary of China’s Communist Party.

In 1986, two years after the Sino-British Joint Declaration that sealed Hong Kong’s post-1997 sovereignty, Murdoch bought control of its main English-language newspaper, the South China Morning Post, an asset he held until 1993. Murdoch even briefly moved there in 1993, renting a house on The Peak.

In 1992, Murdoch made a speech in London that infuriated Beijing, positing that the spread of satellite TV could bring down “totalitarian regimes”. A few months later, he would buy control of Hong Kong’s Star TV, which had a footprint extending across China. Star carried the BBC World Service TV, and Dover writes in his book that Murdoch had heard the Beijing hierarchy were anti-BBC, offended by a documentary that described Mao Zedong’s sex life. Dover writes: “Murdoch would later tell his biographer, William Shawcross, that the Chinese leaders hated the BBC.

“He (Murdoch) said, “They say it’s a cowardly way, but we said in order to get in there and get accepted, we’ll cut the BBC out.” Star TV, which had teams of executives devoted to extending the franchise across China, dropped the BBC in July 1994.

In 1995, Harper Collins published the English translation of a hagiography of China’s then paramount leader Deng Xiaoping, written by his daughter, Deng Rong. Star also aired a Chinese official documentary series about Deng Xiaoping.

In November 1996, The Times hosted the head of People’s Daily, Shao Huaze, then also a senior figure in the Chinese Communist Party, on a visit to Britain. Shao’s delegation was billeted at London’s Ritz Hotel, where the then British Prime Minister, John Major, visited them.

Murdoch would go on to build a broadcasting studio in Tianjin, and an estimated audience of between 20 and 25 million viewers across China. There were technology joint ventures with the Communist Party’s propaganda mouthpiece, the People’s Daily, and a joint venture TV channel with an influential ex-People’s Liberation Army officer.

But it didn’t end there.

Murdoch was an official guest at the June 30/July 1 ceremony handing Hong Kong’s sovereignty to China in 1997. Murdoch’s TV joint venture broadcast 60 hours of the ceremony in a joint venture with China’s state broadcaster, CCTV.

Murdoch also joined a high-powered “Council of International Advisors” to Beijing’s main political representative in Hong Kong. In February 1998, about when Murdoch decided to kill the Patten book, Bruce Dover hosted a private viewing in Beijing of the Fox blockbuster Titanic for senior ministers and cadres of the Chinese government.

In his testimony this week, Murdoch repeatedly insisted, “I’ve never asked a Prime Minister for anything” and variations of that theme.

One presumes he meant British ones.

Does My Neo-Nazism Look Big In This?

Anders Behring Breivik in an Oslo court this week.

IT’S NOT HARD to imagine this is how it went.

Last July, in a boardroom in Germany, a group of executives are brainstorming ideas to lift sales of their youth-oriented clothing line, Thor Steinar. As they thrash concepts around, a TV airs its usual schlocky fare in the background, broadcasting to no-one in particular.

But the ideas are lame, and nothing’s gelling with the execs. The stuff being batted around the table just isn’t hitting home. Marketers know there’s always something else, something superior out there to keep your brand relevant to fickle fashionistas. And Thor Steinar has an edgy reputation to maintain.

And then, a news flash from Oslo on that box. A car bomb has exploded in the government quarter of the Norwegian capital, killing eight. The news is shocking, all the more because the fashions these executives peddle references Nordic themes, Norway seen as the acme of desirous purity in many German minds, including Adolf Hitler’s.

But it’s the next series of bulletins that truly arrests the German executives, and the rest of Europe, too.

A 32-year-old has laid waste to another 69 of his countrymen, mostly teens at summer camp on an island called Utøya. His image is flashed across the screen, and his name too: Anders Behring Breivik. He’s a white Norwegian, not Al-Qaeda as the world so often assumes at such moments. The media unearths his ‘manifesto’ — some 1,516 pages Breivik wrote titled 2083: A European Declaration of Independence. Breivik declares he’s a culture warrior, a crusading knight who must kill Norwegians to save them and Europe from themselves, lest they be polluted by multiculturalism and Europe’s inevitable Islamisation.

And in the mind of these German executives at Thor Steinar, an idea is conceived.

THE IMAGINING OVER, fast-forward to reality, to March this year, when a Thor Steinar outlet opens in an eastern German region, Saxony, notorious for its neo-Nazi extremism. It debuts in a grim city, Chemnitz, once known as Karl-Marx-Stadt, when this part of Germany was ruled by Stalinists.

Now voters in a democracy, the people of Saxony deliver eight deputies of the far-right National Democratic Party (NPD) to their parliament, one of only two of Germany’s 16 Länder to vote the extremist NPD into its parliament.

Germany is now moving to ban the NPD. A few months before Thor Steinar opened in Chemnitz, German police in neighbouring Zwickau busted an NPD-linked neo-Nazi cell responsible for the murders of nine immigrants, eight of them Turkish Muslims.

Thor Steinar names its stores after Norwegian towns, subliminally referencing that ethnic spotlessness notion Germans have for all things Scandinavian. But it’s a practice that has riled the Norwegian embassy in Berlin, whose diplomats have — unsuccessfully — asked Thor Steinar to stop using Norwegian themes in its marketing.

So, nine months after Anders Behring Breivik’s Utøya massacre, what did Thor Steinar’s executives decide to call the store they opened in the heart of the German neo-Nazi belt?

They called it Brevik.

We can only imagine the corporate discussions and events that preceded Thor Steinar’s naming its new shop Brevik because when The Global Mail contacted the company to ask why it named the shop after a mass murderer, its chief executive, Uwe Meusel, emailed to say, “Sorry, but we don’t give statements.”

But how else to explain it? When outraged Germans descended on the Chemnitz store last month demanding it change its name, the company claimed, in one of its rare utterances to the German press, that it was just a coincidence, a misunderstanding.

It said it names all its 13 stores in Germany after places in Norway; places like Larvik, Trondheim, Narvik and Oseberg. Brevik is just another Norwegian name, the company claimed. And besides, it’s spelt differently to the spree killer Breivik’s surname.

It’s true that Brevik, a town of 2,700 people 173 kilometres south of Utøya, is a place in Norway. And it’s also true that Brevik the village is an ‘i’ shy of the mass murderer’s family name, Breivik.

But Thor Steinar executives need only consult an atlas for the literally thousands of potential Norwegian locales that might have supplied a name to their new store. For a brand that evokes physical vitality and the body perfect in its advertising, Thor Steinar could’ve chosen the sporty Lillehammer, site of the 1994 Winter Olympics. Some of its bunting has an outdoorsy flavour, so why not the famous Sognefjord?

Instead, they decided to use Brevik; this as Norwegian investigators transparently built their case about what Anders Behring Breivik himself proudly boasted this week in an Oslo courtroom was “the most sophisticated and spectacular political attack in Europe since World War II,” one which he lamented didn’t kill more, including his planned beheading of former Norwegian Prime Minister Gro Harlem Brundtland.

What’s also revealing about Thor Steinar’s inclination to name its outlets after Norwegian towns are the other names it chooses — places that in history tend to have been locations of Nazi Germany triumphs during its World War II occupation of Norway.

Thor Steinar has said it no longer calls its Chemnitz store Brevik, in what the company says is an acknowledgment that the term might offend. But if that is so, nobody has told the designers of the company’s website, where Thor Steinar sources international sales from its online catalogues.

With its fashion photo spreads featuring sculpted, white, often blonde models and product lines that subliminally reference Aryan themes, Thor Steinar has long been provocative in a Germany always alert to neo-Nazism.

With logos on hoodies, T-shirts, polos and bling in fonts that mimic the SchutzStaffel, Hitler’s notorious paramilitary, the SS, it’s prohibited to wear the Thor Steinar brand in Germany’s Parliament, the Bundestag. Various Bundesliga football clubs have banned patrons wearing it to their stadiums. Some Thor Steinar stores have been trashed and picketed by protestors.

The company’s internal mailing list has been hacked and leaked by protesters agitating to shut down the chain. The mailing list revealed thousands of customers, mostly German but a good many in the new Eastern European democracies, where far-right groups and neo-Nazis are gathering political ground.

The company’s website also reveals other clues, with its links to French, Dutch, Russian and English translations, all countries that are home to increasingly virulent anti-immigration movements led by politicians such as The Netherlands’s Geert Wilders, whom Anders Behring Breivik hailed as a fellow traveller and inspiration in his manifesto.

But maybe Thor Steinar’s got nothing to do with neo-Nazism, Anders Behring Breivik and white European supremacy after all. Maybe it’s simply a business catering to a captive and well-heeled market, giving them what they want.

In 2009, seven years after it was founded and about when Anders Behring Breivik began planning his attack, the German company that owns Thor Steinar, Mediatex GmbH, was sold to a company in Dubai called International Brands General Trading. It seems to be part of a wider United Arab Emirates-based conglomerate called the Faysal Al-Zarooni Group, whose principals could reasonably be assumed to be Muslims, given their name and domicile in the heart of the Gulf. According to German commercial papers, Mediatex’s new director is a man called Mohammed Aweidah.

The Global Mail called the Faysal Al-Zarooni Group in Dubai. An executive there called Ahmad Madbouly said Mr Aweidah had left the company “about a year ago”. He said Thor Steinar “sounded familiar” and asked us to forward questions “for my boss” by email. The company did not respond.

But this apparent Arab ownership seems to have gotten Thor Steinar’s devotees in a tizz. According to the German magazine Der Spiegel, in May 2009 an Essen-based neo-Nazi group called Action Group Essen put out a statement condemning the sale of Thor Steinar to the Dubaian company, and calling for a boycott of its clothes.

“We, as national socialists, clearly reject Mediatex GmbH and their label Thor Steinar,” Action Group Essen said. “We are of the opinion that our complex worldview cannot be printed on a T-shirt which costs €32.95 and which is produced by an Arab.”

The Arab sale also had the American white supremacist group Stormfront all aflutter too. Stormfront dedicates pages of admiring commentary to Thor Steinar, its posters hoping the clothes will be available to Americans as well as Europeans.

But there are others who’ve not been so sure. On a Stormfront thread entitled “Thor Steinar: Aryan or Not?”, ‘Germani’ asks whether the 2009 sale to the Dubaians “would mean that, since many patriots support the company, it is a huge fraud.” No matter, chimes in another, there’s always other “OK brands” like Fred Perry and Lonsdale.

So what sort of European does actually buy Thor Steinar? Apparently a lot of them.

At 119.90 euro for a camouflage jacket, Thor Steinar is priced directly at a European middle-class, with an 18 to 35-year-old demographic. Police reports describe Breivik as having donned camo when skulking around the Norwegian countryside building his bomb, writing his manifesto and planning his attack.

Clothes maketh the man, as the aphorism famously goes, and a click through some of the Facebook pages of the 48,000-plus ‘likes’ linking from Thor Steinar’s Facebook presence reveals several recurring themes, while quickly accessing some of the murkier, more nihilistic corners of the internet.

Take the interests of one Slovenian whom we’ll call JR. His open Facebook profile, linking from Thor Steinar, reveals a taste for the 1990s Australian cult skinhead film Romper Stomper, for the Nazi architect Albert Speer, and for south London’s Millwall Football Club, notorious in English football for its deeply-rooted terrace violence and alleged links to Britain’s whites-only fascist party, the National Front. JR’s pages are littered with Nazi iconography, with pictures of Hitler and Mussolini.

JR cites his activities as football hooliganism and the WW2-era German-led anti-Communist militia, the Slovene Home Guard. He likes the Norwegian death metal exponent Varg Vikernes, a convicted murderer and self-described neo-Nazi who has cited Norway’s notorious wartime puppet Vidkun Quisling as an inspiration. JR also likes two organisations called Europe Ultra and Ultras World, both of which advance nationalistic football violence. JR also likes pitbull terriers.

But does any of this make a JR, clad in Thor Steinar, a threat to society?

JR also likes South Park and Beavis and Butthead, and The Da Vinci Code.

You may not want to sit next to JR at a dinner party but none of this is illegal.

But as an unrepentant Anders Behring Breivik plays Norway’s famous transparency and openness against itself on his Oslo bully pulpit, his every utterance and clenched-fist defiance distributed by the second by a repelled yet fascinated foreign media, JR and his ilk across Europe haven’t, it seems, decided that they “like” Norway’s biggest mass murderer (at least not on Facebook) as much as they do Thor Steinar.

Yet.

The Stain on Spain

An illegal worker tends vegetables.
LAST July 1, in a sweltering greenhouse in southern Spain, a black man from Africa was shot by a white man from Europe.

Allegedly.

The black man was Dinantou Barbosa, a 29-year-old from the impoverished West African state of Guinea-Bissau, one of as many as 100,000 Africans living and labouring illegally in the fruit and vegetable industry here, one of Europe’s largest.

The white man who — allegedly — shot Barbosa was a Spaniard simply known as “Paco”. He’s the owner of a greenhouse where Barbosa had been working nine days straight, tending the vegetables Paco grows to sell to Europe’s insatiable tables.

Barbosa was shot — allegedly — by Paco during a pay dispute. Barbosa had arrived at his workplace to get the 32-euro-a-day’s wages Paco had agreed to pay Barbosa for his toil.

No matter that Spain’s legal minimum daily wage is 45 euros, Paco told Barbosa he would pay him only 29 euros a day for nine days’ grind under his plastic hothouse, in temperatures approaching 50 degrees.

Understandably Barbosa objected, and the two men argued. The ugly row ended when Paco — allegedly — pulled a shotgun on Barbosa and shot him in the legs. Barbosa then fled for his life.

The reason we know all this is because the incident is documented in what’s known in Spain as a denuncia, the formal condemnation of an individual, dating from the Franco dictatorship, that the police are compelled by law to investigate.

Barbosa survived his — alleged — shooting by Paco to tell his story to the Guardia Civil, Spain’s national police. Or, more correctly, to relate it to someone who was officially allowed to tell the police about his — alleged — shooting. Barbosa couldn’t do it himself because, as an illegal immigrant, he has no civil rights.

A copy of his two-page denuncia — numbered 2011-001360-00002730 — has been obtained by The Global Mail. It reads like an event that was commonplace in apartheid’s diamond and gold mines, on the 17th century sugar plantations of Barbados, or in America’s Deep South during the notorious slavery era.

Except it didn’t take place in Vorster’s South Africa, or on a Virginia tobacco plantation circa 1820 but — allegedly — less than a year ago in a key member state of the European Union, an EU which by its own charter is “committed to defending the universal and indivisible nature of human rights”, a body that doesn’t baulk at imposing sanctions on other nations — Burma, Syria, Zimbabwe — that it believes abuse its own high-minded ideals.

As a legal document, Barbosa’s denuncia has many flaws, one presumes more than enough for a court to throw the case out in an instant.

But it opens a telling window onto one of Europe’s dirty little secrets, its reliance on illegal foreign labour. And it also throws a harsh spotlight into the darker recesses of an industry that has thrived in a remote corner of the continent, where corruption and unlawfulness prosper largely unchecked in a cosy, conflicted and circular establishment embracing corrupt local government, the law, big business and a media that quickly condemns and closes ranks on prying outside eyes.

And it says something of Spain’s evolution as a maturing democracy, not yet 40 years after the end of the Franco dictatorship, about its wobbly transition to the rule of law and how it copes as the buffer state between affluent Europe and impoverished Africa.

Barbosa’s denuncia reveals much about the grossly unequal relationship between the tens of thousands of Africans who toil and live as virtual slaves of the Spanish vegetable plutocracy, of men like Paco who control a multi-billion-euro industry, a massively profitable business crucial to Europe’s food security and one, if local labour activists can be believed, that’s primed to boil over in racial angst.

The Barbosa shooting — allegedly — took place last July in a greenhouse in a district of El Ejido, the unofficial capital what Spanish proudly call Europe’s Mar de Plastico.

This ‘sea of plastic’ despoils an arid, 200-kilometre strip of Spain’s Mediterranean coast, like Christo on steroids. The extent of the environmental impact is striking up close — a panorama of polyethylene as far as the eye can see that creates its own climate — but is breathtaking when viewed from space.

What appears at first to be a desert is, in tighter definition, a glaring patchwork of many thousands of greenhouses — planted with zucchini, eggplant, tomatoes, capsicum and cucumbers ; the “Salad Bowl of Europe” as the industry also likes to style itself. Alongside them are the ancillary industries: factories making even more plastic, vast rubbish dumps of used synthetics, warehouses packing produce and the depots of trucks that ship it to supermarkets in all corners of Europe and beyond.

Thirty years ago, this was one of Europe’s poorest regions. Today, the Almeria district’s horticulture industry is regarded as an economic miracle, one of Spain’s most important industries in what has become one of its wealthier regions. El Ejido has more banks and Mercedes per capita than anywhere in Spain. It’s an industry controlled by a handful of hugely wealthy local families, who have bankrolled chosen local politicians into influential mayoraltys and local councils that pass favourable laws, or have looked the other way when it matters.

But it’s one that would not have become so but for the labour of the millions of Africans, most of them illegal, who’ve passed through these hothouses with official connivance over the years.

What one can’t see with Google Earth are the thousands of immigrants labouring on any given day under the plastic, often in temperatures reaching 55 degrees at the height of summer. Many do so without any provision of water or food by the owners. Workers are often sprayed with the chemicals and pesticides that owners deploy to protect their crops, used and abused for a pittance, which is still more than they might earn back home, if there were a job to go to there.

And when they are done with their day’s toil, they go home, exhausted, often to a slum they rent and share with scores of other men, only to front up the next day and do it all again. And they do it for an average 30 euros a day, if the hothouse owner agrees to pay them.

According to Spitou Mendy, a Senegalese labour activist in nearby Roquetas de Mar, the labour equation that a typical Spanish farmer makes here is “an African one”. The farmer knows, Mendy says, that countries such as Mali and Guinea-Bissau are among the world’s poorest nations. He also knows that many of the Africans drawn here do so invisibly, without official papers or status. The owner also knows that despite Spain’s dire economic crisis, which has seen unemployment of 35 to 40 per cent in the suddenly struggling Almeria region, few jobless Spaniards will work in the hothouse for “African wages”.

The owner’s cost structures would oblige him to pay a fellow Spaniard the legal minimum wage of 45 euros for an eight-hour day, along with other entitlements. But provide those conditions to an illegal African and the industry’s costs suddenly shoot up. And, in the supermarkets of places like Rotterdam, Stuttgart, Leeds and Lille, that could mean more expensive food at a time when Europe can afford it the least.

Spain also has some of Europe’s most cumbersome labour laws, and employers here have long grumbled about the productivity issues of hiring workers with effective jobs-for-life who can be legally difficult to shift. Illegal Africans are sought and employed in places like El Ejido and Almeria because they provide the horticulture industry with the labour mobility it craves, without too many strings when authorities look the other way, particularly in tight communities — when the authorities can be your cousins.

The majority of Spanish hothouse moguls are not barbarians, insists Mendy, but Spain’s economic crisis has heightened the pressure on the industry to bring production costs down even further, as cheaper new suppliers develop crops elsewhere. That means that even rudimentary employment agreements with African workers are being dishonoured or torn up by unscrupulous owners.

Mendy fears further outbreaks of Spanish-on-African racial violence, which has flared here periodically. Potential flashpoints include rumours circulating the region now that Spanish banks are refusing African cash withdrawals. Mendy says this sort of thing, whether it’s true or not, is “dynamite that the authorities need to be more aware of”.

Mendy says that scenes like the one witnessed by The Global Mail in early April are commonplace: It plays out nearly every morning in hamlets like La Mojonera and Las Norias de Daza. Burly Spaniards in pickup trucks, the hothouse owners, park near village squares where Africans gather hopefully in the morning gloom. After a coffee, a cigarette and a gossip with fellow farmers, the hothouse owners move like judges in a beauty contest, picking out the Africans they deem to be sufficiently sturdy. Once chosen, they are corralled onto a truck’s tray and driven off for a day’s labour in their hothouses. Those who aren’t selected set off on bicycles to solicit work at greenhouses elsewhere. Most times the workers get paid a day’s rate but sometimes they do not, like when a ruthless owner declares at day’s end that his customers didn’t meet a bill, or when he scoots off home early and ‘forgets’.

SOME workers have the verbal promise of regular work with an owner whom they tend to know by first name only, and rarely do the workers know his company’s name. Dinantou Barbosa is one such worker.

As the translated denuncia describes, Barbosa “was working nine days in a greenhouse located in Las Norias de Daza, the property of a person named Paco, who the deponent said would pay him wages of 32 euros a day.

“At 1830 on July 1, 2011, the deponent went to Paco’s greenhouse to collect the wages for the days worked. Paco told the deponent he would not pay him 32 euros as established but only 29 euros. The deponent and the afore-mentioned Paco began to argue over the facts,” the denuncia describes.

“Then Paco grabbed a shotgun and started shooting at the deponent, impacting on his trousers. Another greenhouse worker with them rushed against the aforementioned Paco to stop him firing. The deponent left the place in fear.”

When contacted by The Global Mail, Barbosa related the details of the denuncia made on his behalf, adding that he regarded Paco as “a very bad man who must confront justice”.

The Barbosa document is revealing at many levels about the sordid practices at the extremes of the horticulture industry here. Much of the labour toiling under El Ejido’s plastic sea comes from North and West Africa; Morocco, Mali and Mauritania, Guinea, Gambia, Senegal and Guinea-Bissau.

These are some of the world’s most economically depressed and most politically volatile states, prime ground for mass emigration. Guinea-Bissau, for example, has a GDP per capita of just USD537, or 1.47 a day. Since mutinous soldiers assassinated its president in 2009, Guinea-Bissau has endured three attempted or successful coups d’etat. Similarly in Mali, where a military junta briefly seized power last month, the GDP per capita is just USD777, according to the International Monetary Fund.

The immigrants to southern Spain from these broken nations are almost always male, from teenagers to men in their 60s. Many of the workers who labour in the Almeria and El Ejido region have arrived in Spain illegally, according to local labour activist Mendy, himself from Senegal. They are often transported to Spain on flimsy boats, known as pateras, across the Mediterranean in scenes that the erstwhile visitors to places like Australia’s Christmas Island and Ashmore Reef might recognise. Organised human trafficking syndicates in Africa nations, sometimes working with associates in Europe, charge as much as 5,000 euros per labourer for the perilous trans-Med voyage, in effect their entire first year’s wages — if they land a job when they get here.

The anecdotes these men exchange about their trans-continental voyages are horrendous. They tend to cross the Straits of Gibraltar, or to Spain’s Canary Islands, under the cover of darkness, the dirtier the weather the better because it’s deemed that then the Spanish Coast Guard is less likely to be out patrolling. Depending on how much the would-be immigrant has paid for his passage, these pateras can stop a few kilometres off the Spanish coasts to force their human cargo overboard, sometimes at gunpoint, directing them to swim toward Europe’s bright lights.

Sometimes the illegals, known in idiomatic Spanish as espaldas mojadas, or wetbacks — the term mimics the vernacular for the Mexican illegal entries into the US across the Rio Grande border — don’t make it. Their drowned bodies wash up on the shores of Spain’s tourist-packed beaches. This patera invasion has reached alarming proportions in recent years, and Spanish authorities have since moved to shut it down, with mixed results.

But Spitou Mendy says that simply means that human traffickers find more inventive — and lucrative — ways to deposit their human cargo into Europe. Once ashore, the immigrants tend to make their way to the Almeria region on foot, sleeping rough in the day, so as to trek at night along routes through the mountain ranges that ring southern Spain. It can take weeks to walk to Almeria 400km away, and there are many Andalucian villagers and holidaying foreign villa owners who’ve answered night-time doorknocks from desperate, famished Africans.

MOROCCAN Mohammed El Hosni paid a human trafficker 3,000 euros to get across the Straits of Gibraltar to Almeria three years ago. Today, the 33-year-old tends zucchinis for 30 euros a day, going home to his family of five who live in a chabola outside La Mojonera.

These crude chabolas are the hovels that punctuate the hothouse region here, and embarrass Spain. Fashioned from scavenged cardboard boxes and discarded plastic, they are erected by homeless Africans on abandoned plots or on land not yet turned into greenhouses. Water is brought in by bucket from nearby wells and stored in discarded pesticide containers. Cooking and heating is by bottled gas, the electricity lifted off the main grid by running illegal, fizzing wires.

But inside, Mohammed’s three-roomed chabola is spotless. His cheery wife offers The Global Mail sweet mint tea as we sit on a rudimentary lounge suite fashioned from cardboard boxes and covered, like the earthen floor, in blankets. Mohammed is reluctant to talk in detail about his passage here, lest there be some sort of retribution by the criminal syndicates he paid to get to Spain. The only things he will say is that he doesn’t have official papers, and that he came secreted in the hold of a boat which berthed at Barbate, Spain’s tuna port, about 450km to the west, notorious in this part of Spain for its drug traffickers.

Mohammed says that no people should live like this, in these appalling chabolas, adding that if he’d known life in Spain would be this way, he would’ve had second thoughts about coming. But he’d seen returnees from Europe in his village back home flashing money and bling around, and the satellite TV shows beamed across the water show an El Dorado he’s yet to experience. But there is one advantage to the chabolas, he smiles. They’re rent-free.

IN A plot Kafka would recognise, as far as the Spanish state is concerned Dinantou Barbosa doesn’t exist. So his complaint to the police about how his employer Paco — allegedly — shot him was made by someone who does, his friend and housemate Luis Bai Mendes. He’s a 53-year-old man, also from Guinea-Bissau, who is legally allowed to be in Spain because he has an all-important Número de Identificación de Extranjeros, a foreign identity number. That means he can do things such as get a bank account, rent a house or buy a mobile phone SIM card.

There is much sharing of valuable access to Spain’s formal infrastructure among the Africans. Sometimes near whole villages of able-bodied clansmen from Africa have assembled here, so a legal cousin with an NIE will act as proxy for his illegal relatives, sharing bank accounts or buying mobile phones in a familial honesty system.

Spitou Mendy claims the Africans are victims of racism, perhaps unsurprising in a part of the country that has traditionally been provincial and insular. He says it’s also ignorance, adding that there are many places where Africans are not welcome — “not with a sign like in the old South Africa, but with that same attitude”.

In the case of the Paco shooting, Mendes was legally able to avail of Spanish officialdom, so he made the denuncia against Paco for his housemate Barbosa. The denuncia pleased the activist Mendy, who is pressing his fellow Africans to speak out against abuses and pressure Spaniards into officially accepting what’s going on here, and not to be afraid of losing jobs or being harassed. But such actions also expose issues that again underline what Mendy describes as the Africans’ “legal invisibleness”.

The Barbosa document identifies his hothouse owner-assailant simply as Paco. That’s the Spain-wide nickname for a man with the Christian name of Francisco, one of the country’s more common. There are literally thousands of Francisco/Pacos in Spain and Andalucia has more than most other regions. Judges require details that some conflicted police in these parts can be reluctant to find, when minded that horticulture has become a lifeblood industry that comprises about 80 per cent of the regional economy here, much of it in the hands of well-connected families who engage sharp-eyed lawyers to demolish flawed legal documents.

Because Barbosa was illegally employed, Spitou Mendy says, he was happy to have any sort of job. Knowing his employer’s full name is a detail too far, for Barbosa and for many of the papers-less illegals.

But Paco seems to have made a crucial blunder. According to Mendy, he fled the area when he heard there’d been a denuncia made against him. As the Africans pressed the point, Mendy says Paco’s lawyer called Barbosa with an offer to pay him 1,000 euros if he dropped the case.

The Global Mail inquired of the Guardia Civil about the Barbosa-Paco case. It took a week for it to respond, as we were bounced from office to office. Finally, its division in Almeria emailed to say the matter was before El Ejido’s Court of Instruction, the first court of Spain’s legal system usually tasked with investigating and mediating minor misdemeanours, often without lawyers present.

In his denuncia, Barbosa listed his address as Urbanizacion Fabrica de la Mujer 19 in El Ejido. That’s part of a collection of slums lining a long track south of the town, a plastic canyon that runs through a thicket of hothouses growing nearly every imaginable salad vegetable.

Barbosa wasn’t home when The Global Mail visited so we went to his neighbour at 22. It looks like an abandoned stable for animals. Power lines hang exposed and fizzing like electric spaghetti. There’s a rudimentary outdoor well, where two semi-naked black men are washing clothes over rocks, and themselves.

Inside the house, I meet Sang Mendi from Gambia, in a bedroom he shares with four to eight men, depending who’s on shift. Sang is a 32-year-old father from a town called Yuna, outside the Gambian capital, Banjul. He’s worked in El Ejido for four years, also tending zucchinis. In good months here, Sang can earn 800 to 900 euros but he averages around 400 to 500 euros. He sends about half of his earnings back every month to his girlfriend, via a Moroccan agent who takes a 20-euro fee for the transfer. The Moroccan also runs an internet café, where Sang weekly Skypes his girlfriend and a son he hasn’t seen in the flesh since he left Gambia in 2008. He says his earnings support about 40 family members back home.

Sang’s story is typical of the Africans living in the slums around here. As many as 45 men share this house, for which they pay 420 euros a month rent to a Spanish owner who lives in faraway Andorra. The landlady provides nothing except the premises.

Impressive, educated and articulate, Sang has emerged as something of an advocate and counsel for his fellow workers, a natural leader of men. When his neighbour Barbosa told him that Paco’s lawyer had called him to offer 1,000 euros to drop the shooting case, Sang advised him to refuse it. “I told him, no; I asked him if he thought our lives as black men in Europe was only worth 1,000 euros,” Sang told The Global Mail. “I told him the case should go through to the court. This is Europe, this is supposed to be a democracy, a fair place, where justice is honest.

“We are no different to the Spanish,” he says. “We get hot, we get tired, we get hungry and thirsty and sick just like they do when they work too much in these places.” He himself has fallen ill after his workplace crops were sprayed with chemicals and growth enhancers. He had to visit a health centre, for which he, not his employer, paid the expensive consultation fees. “Yes, we earn more money here than in Gambia but things cost more, too,” he says. “Europe is very expensive.”

Sang insists he is no troublemaker and takes pride in his work, which is valued by his employer, a “good man” as he describes him. “This is very hard work, and very dangerous sometimes too,” he says. Sang claims that men have died of heat exhaustion working under the hothouses and that conditions can be “inhuman”.

BUT for how long can this continue?

The Global Mail asked the European Union’s Commissioner for Home Affairs, Sweden’s Cecilia Malmström, who has jurisdiction over immigrant labour issues in the EU, what she knew of the situation in the Almeria region.

Malmström’s officer responded: “The Commission deplores and is particularly committed to fighting against all illegal practices entailing or leading to the exploitation of immigrants, regardless of their migratory status.

“It is critical to avoid exploitation of human beings in which irregular migrant workers face bad working conditions with low salaries, limited social protection, occasional dangerous work, bad accommodation, and social segregation.

“The EU wants to end the abuse and reduce the market for those who take advantage of vulnerable migrants, such as employers of irregularly-staying migrants. Abuses are inadmissible in terms of human dignity, but it is also important for the avoidance of unfair competition as well as for public acceptance of immigration and the successful integration of third-country nationals.

“A first step was the adoption on 25 May 2009 of the Employer Sanctions Directive which prohibits the employment of illegally staying third-country workers and provides for sanctions for those who employ them. More specifically, it establishes a set of minimum common rules on sanctions and measures applicable in the Member States to the employers who do not respect this prohibition. Member States were obliged to transpose this instrument into their national legislation by July 2011.

“This legislation reduces the pull factor by targeting the employment of migrants who are staying irregularly in the EU, facilitates a better fight against the exploitation of irregularly staying, non-EU nationals and strengthens the legal security of all interested actors. It also brings positive effects in the form of reduced losses to Member State public finances, less pressure on working conditions and less distortion of competition between EU businesses.”

At the big UK supermarket chain Asda, an offshoot of the US retailing giant Walmart, spokesperson Jo Newbould admits Asda “sources from Spain when we have gaps in the British growing season between October and May — taking supply of tomatoes, cucumbers and aubergines and other salads and vegetables when it’s difficult to grow them in the UK in the winter months, and melons and watermelons in the spring.”

She says Asda has an office in Spain that “works closely with growers in the Almeria region.”

“Having closer relationships with producers means that buyers have a stronger and more detailed understanding of the quality of the produce, as well as the ethical conditions of the sites we take supply from. Two of our Almeria team are local to the region themselves and have built up good working relationships with the growers over the years we’ve been working together. This is a big point of difference for us, and means we’re in constant contact with the produce, the greenhouses and the growers themselves. As well as having a presence on site almost every day, our team conduct unannounced audits a number of times a year to ensure the growers we work with not only meeting the regulations, but exceeding them.”

TO EXPLAIN something of how this region emerged exploiting its illegal labour under the nose of official Spain, it’s instructive to examine the colourful career of one Juan Enciso.

He is El Ejido’s Godfather figure, the popular alcalde, or mayor, of El Ejido for 20 years, representing the heirs to the Franco legacy, the Popular Party (PP) and their patrons. In Spain’s municipal system, mayors wield much power and are highly-paid public officials controlling police forces and budgets running to hundreds of millions.

In 2009, Enciso was arrested as part of a major corruption investigation. The investigation, Operación Poniente, was pointedly handled by federal police out of Madrid, not locally, where Enciso had lifelong connections. The Poniente sting on Enciso was part of a Spain-wise series of corruption raids run from Madrid in the wake of the collapsing economy in 2008.

It centred on the affairs of a network of companies linked to Enciso, his business associates and family members. The focus was an Enciso-linked company called El Sur — The South — whose offices neighboured Enciso’s town hall and which outsourced municipal services, receiving as much as 40 per cent of his council’s budget.

Bankrolled by local farmers, Enciso ran El Ejido as his personal fiefdom. Local journalists tell stories of how Enciso and his cronies would take over a favourite restaurant for a big lunch, request its doors be shut to other diners and spend the afternoon partying as they divided out the spoils. Enciso spent almost a year on remand after his arrest, reportedly running El Ejido council from inside his jail cell. He’s now awaiting trial, accused of embezzling as much as 200 million euros, of money laundering and falsifying official documents.

Stories of his prolifigacy are legion around here. When he finally did step down as mayor in 2010, after being bounced from the PP, his replacement revealed there was a missing five million euros from Enciso’s ill-fated bid to bring The Rolling Stones to El Ejido.  Another audit, according to a local journalist, revealed Enciso’s council had acquired an expensive snow plough, this for a council in one of Europe’s hottest regions, where the last snowfall in 30 years stayed on the ground for less than an hour.

SO IT’S LITTLE wonder then that the Almerian establishment doesn’t much like it when outsiders ask embarrassing questions about their affairs. Such as February last year, when London’s The Guardian newspaper published an investigation into the hothouse industry.

It was written by the newspaper’s industry specialist, Felicity Lawrence, who has authored several well-regarded books about the global food industry and is an internationally-acknowledged industry expert. But not in the eyes of Almeria’s local newspaper, La Voz de Almeria.

After The Guardian published its expose, La Voz de Almeria hit back with a feisty defence of the industry that help keeps it afloat, in a defensive response more akin to how Singapore’s Straits Times or China’s People’s Daily defend their respective autocracies than might be expected of a newspaper in a notional European democracy. Local journalist David Jackson likened La Voz — a paper he describes as Pravda — as having an “editorial style lifted directly from the Iranian official press”.

It was, by any measure, an extraordinary riposte. Industry leaders, tycoons, politicians and local journalists lined up to extravagantly condemn The Guardian, and Britain as well, for good measure. A front-page La Voz editorial said The Guardian feature should become an academic study “as a revelation of the manipulation of information, professionalism, secularism and stupidity.

“Claims that the conditions of work in the fields of Almeria are similar to those suffered by the slaves of the 16th century are an insult, not to the Almerian people, but to the intelligence of those who make these claims. These claims are so delirious that, as from now, all of its news reports are discredited by association,” the editorial said.

María José Pardo Losilla, managing director of the industry lobby Hortyfruta, weighed in with a separate 1,056-word letter to the paper condemning the article and defending her patrons as lawful, ethical and high-minded. The Global Mail asked Hortyfruta via its website and Ms Losilla’s Facebook page to respond to our own inquiries. We received no reply.

La Voz de Almeria ‘s coverage in particular reads as rather unhinged, particularly given that Lawrence had filmed and photographed her work, is not the first journalist to investigate the region’s labour abuses and that even casual visitors asking around the El Ejido hothouses and the slums themselves could easily assess the situation themselves.

But perhaps the oddest rejoinder came from the La Voz de Almeria’s editor-in-chief, Manuel León, who is also a self-styled local historian in Almeria.

In what could only have been seen as a good editorial idea at the time, León thought it appropriate to write and publish an open letter in his paper, to “Felicity,” as he described The Guardian’s Felicity Lawrence, a woman he has never met.

No matter that León is himself an author, in his letter he opines that “Felicity” can’t be a very good mother if she abandons her children to write her best-sellers about the world’s food industry. Imbued with sneer and scorn, León’s letter describes Lawrence as a “filibusterer”, a “redhead with an unreliable gaze”, a prime example of “Perfidious Albion”, all the while claiming, without evidence, that her journalism is subject to political influence. And then, in a bizarre flourish, León wonders if Lawrence is from London “or perhaps Birmingham?”, seeming to suggest that in Spanish minds a Brummy is somehow a lesser mortal than a Londoner.

Lawrence told The Global Mail that she just laughed when she read León’s column. She says not only has she never met him but “I’ve never been a redhead either.” As for the rest of his claims, she snorts, “They are not real journalists; the paper’s very existence is dependent on the support of the greenhouse industry.”

The Global Mail asked La Voz de Almeria for Manuel León’s contact details. He responded personally by providing his email address, to which we forwarded him a series of questions about his column and coverage. He refused to answer.

His paper hasn’t yet reported the — alleged — shooting incident regarding Dinantou Barbosa and Paco either.

The Schlock of Gibraltar

St Tropez? Not quite!

THERE are eyesores, there’s urban blight, and then there is Gibraltar, Britain’s last colony in Europe, a carbuncle of ocean-going ghastliness that’s in a class all of its own.

Next April, its 30,000 people will have been officially and determinedly British for 300 years. That’s the anniversary of the Treaty of Utrecht, when Gib’s 6.8 square kilometres were ceded “in perpetuity” from Spain to the UK, a pact-at-gunpoint that still stings Spanish machismo; the Spanish conveniently forget Madrid has two Gibraltars of its own in nearby Morocco — the exclaves of Ceuta and Melilla — and has held them longer than the Brits have occupied Gibraltar.

Gibraltar likes to think of itself as a historic Monaco when Merseyside-sur-Med is closer to the truth. British TV location scouts use Gibraltar’s main street to capture that quintessential 1950s dreariness, because actual English towns no longer look like that. This is the place where Marks and Spencer despatches the fashion lines they can’t move back home because modes have moved on.

It’s all so ordinary. And all the more so given where Gibraltar is, embedded like a stubborn haemorrhoid at the gate of the enchanting Mediterranean, twixt two of the world’s most culturally absorbing, aesthetically bewitching nations, vibrant Spain at its frontier and compelling Morocco just 14 kilometres across the water.

It’s as if Gib is determined to be dismal. Its neighbours are endlessly fascinating, with their superb cuisines, profound cultures and global consequence, so Gib seems to go out of its way to be dull as a point of separation.

Take, for example, the first weekend in April at Gibraltar’s Eliott Hotel, allegedly its best. A couple of kilometres from here across the border, Spanish breakfasters are feasting simply but gloriously on café con leche, freshly squeezed juices and pan con tomate — hearty farmers’ bread rubbed with oil, garlic and spritely garden tomatoes. No matter Spain is in deep economic crisis; these are standard but always lively repasts con familia that inevitably extend into livelier lunches of paella, fresh seafood and robust rioja. And they’re probably doing it con pasion, and al fresco too, because they’re Spaniards.

But in the death-warmed-over silence of the Eliott, blue-rinsed English guests are taking tea, The Times and, for the racier, some daring baked-beans-on-white-toast or kippers flown in from London, as famous-for-15-minutes contestants doubtless named Sharon and Darren grope each other on the latest reality TV show. Why travel? Gib is a stop of the cruise ship circuit; it’s just as well that Greece, Turkey and Italy et al, deeper along the Med, market themselves so alluringly to travellers -because if you arrived here in the belief that first impressions are important in European tourism, once you’d marvelled at the admittedly impressive rock that spikes colonially above the azure seas, you’d want your money back quick smart to head to the Caribbean.

Imagination doesn’t seem to be a Gibraltarian speciality (except when it’s devising byzantine corporate structures for wealthy clients in Russia, Scandinavia and the UK, which regard Gib as the City of London’s southern suburb). Gibraltar’s Moroccan restaurant is called Marrakech, the Indians Maharajah and Mumbai, the Chinese Kowloon. The smart eatery by the waterfront is called, well, The Waterfront. Gibraltar doesn’t have nightclubs. It has discos, 1980s ones, and none of them in irony. If Gib had a soundtrack, it would be Rick Astley’s Never Gonna Give You Up.

It’s relentlessly ordinary, but whoever named Gib’s old folks’ home Both Worlds was inspired. Overlooking the sea, what does the name nod to? Africa and Europe? Spain and Britain? Islam and Christianity? Or, mindful that Both Worlds is God’s waiting room for the decrepit, is it a spooky portent of what’s coming?

Gibraltar’s flaws are more profound than simply cosmetic. Let’s start with its economic raison d’etre, which Gibraltarians euphemistically like to market as “financial services”.

Tell it like is, Gib! Everyone knows you’re a tax haven, so just say it. It’s how you make your living. Some people create companies and build things — useful things, actual things. You create companies to disappear things, often other companies. You are where Big Business goes when it wants to vanish — from creditors, bankers, shareholders. You’re the taxwash deployed by Russian oligarchs, banks, insurers and slick-haired lawyers to set up circular and impenetrable corporate structures, in cahoots with your mates in Jersey and the British Virgin Islands (curious how all these places tend to be British). Not for nothing did Gib hire its corporate regulator after he’d done stints in the Cayman Islands and the Isle of Man.

With its millions of shelf companies in legal garrets that own billions in assets elsewhere, far from the prying eyes of the world’s regulators, Gibraltar is the wealthy’s discreet refuge for funny money. With homegrown values like these, I’m betting Gibraltarians don’t grow up wanting to be Mandela or Gandhi, Steve Jobs or even Lionel Messi — more like Madoff and Gekko.

If Gibraltar Inc were an actual company that included the assets it domiciles, it would be one of the world’s biggest. But if Gibraltar Inc were an actual company, it may have been shut down years ago by the world’s proper corporate policemen — conflicts of interest and a lack of transparency being just two of their reservations.

But no-one here with any money is saying Gib doesn’t have its advantages — including Spain, which also bases companies here, while complaining about others who do.

Select any one of the thousands of villas cascading down the cliffs of the adjacent Costa del Sol and chances are they’ll be owned by a Gibraltarian company, the deeds secreted in a lawyer’s office, whose partners will be directors and secretaries of thousands of purpose-created entities.

Every one in three buildings here seems to be a real estate agency, a bank or a trust agency of some sort. Hotel rooms don’t have just the room service menu — specialty frozen cod and chips — but brochures touting those trademark “financial services”.

With its surfeit of lawyers, beaks and moneymen, Gib is known as a “barristocracy”. As it positions itself as a new Monaco, with an expanding super-yacht marina and new airport — catering to just four flights a day, all to and from the UK — the impression it desires is of a smoothly running money machine. And rich too: Gibraltar ranks alongside Singapore, around 20th place, among the world’s richest per capita economies.

Gibraltarians are at pains to convince they are perfectly capable of looking after their own affairs, fiercely independent and answering neither to Whitehall nor to a Spain that’s perennially rejected as an unreliable neighbour, known euphemistically here as “that other place”. Anyone Spanish looking for Hong Kong-style resolutions to its sovereignty question should look elsewhere. To llanitos, as Gibraltarians are known, there is no question. Not for nothing is Gib’s motto nulli expugnabilis hosti — conquerable by no enemy.

Gibraltar is also the place where you’re likely to be separated from your hard-earned if you dabble in online casinos, and pornography too, say many. Gib may be the world’s only legal jurisdiction where its state corporate regulatory agency shares an office block with companies called Party Gaming and Lucky Nugget Online Casino, virtual enterprises which deeply annoy US authorities trying to protect its homegrown casino industry.

Maybe the Both Worlds retirement home is owned by the people who set up the Reincarnation Bank in Gibraltar. It had a business model that was novel, to say the least: Clients could deposit assets while they were alive, then die and avail of their accounts in the hereafter.

When I spoke a year or so back to Marcus Killick, the Gibraltarian corporate regulator — a designation that almost seems a contradiction in terms in this haven of smugglers and tax avoiders — about Reincarnation Bank, he was adamant he’d shut the scam down, at the behest of US authorities. The Financial Services Commission finally succeeded in shutting the down the dodgy “bank”.

Killick told me that he “philosophically” takes a light touch to corporate regulation in Gibraltar: “I along with the vast majority of my regulatory colleagues are opposed to greater scrutiny in Gibraltar because of the potential over-regulation and strangulation — otherwise you end up not having an industry to regulate.”

Officials here are pumped up with self-importance. They talk about “national” this and “global” that, citing UN human development index measures and pompously comparing Gib’s statistics to other sovereign nations as if they are equals. They solemnly intone about Gibraltar’s “heft”, as if this is the US and as if it talks in Europe at the same table as the Merkozys.

Gentlemen — and they are always men — enough please! You live in a town of 30,000 people, as few as Dubbo. Yes, you jealously keep a few financial secrets, but Dubbo’s not a UN member and neither are you.

But Gib does have national symbols. Apart from the actual rock, there are the Barbary Apes who fling and forage around its upper reaches, often fossicking inside houses and hotel rooms. There are about 250 of them and for many years they had their own military supervisor, the most famous being Sergeant Alfred Holmes, a mainstay of the Royal Gibraltar Regiment whose career high point was to be appointed “Officer-in-Charge of the Apes”.

But Gib also has a national smell, an unmistakable tang of fried food and servicemen who’ve relieved themselves while lurching back to barracks after another big night on the sauce.

Indeed, it was this overt British military presence in the anchorage here that reveals one of the many stories Gibraltarians like to tell to underline how important and strategic they are.

It was in this bay, 30 years ago this April, where the ill-fated Operation Algeciras almost happened. This was an Argentinian plan to sink British warships, lest they sail south to join the taskforce taking back the Malvinas/Falklands. Crack commandos were despatched by the junta in Buenos Aires and, by all reports, they had quite a nice springtime holiday waiting for the Admiralty’s ships-of-the-line to sail in.

In the end, the plot was rumbled not by the Brits but by Spain, thanks to a vigilant car rental operator suspicious at the Argentines’ constant re-renting of vehicles, which they’d settle from fat wads of US dollars. The Spanish gathered up the Argies, told them they were very naughty boys and discreetly returned them home.

The Argies also had a plan to torch the fuel dump in Gib, and there are a good many Spanish who wish the frogmen had completed their mission, an opportunity lost to rebuild the miserable, anachronistic Gibraltar.

Letters to the Editor (1)

Great article – Gib is an interesting but ultimately claustrophobic & rather dispiriting place. Couple of points: the Brits broke several conditions of the Treaty of Utrecht within a short time of gaining the Rock (including allowing Jews to live there, for example) so it could be argued that the Treaty is no longer valid. Franco used Gib to drive his nationalist agenda, and to attempt to unify the peoples of Spain after the civil war. His closure of the border in the 60′s (and turning off of the water supply) gave the Gibraltarians enormous political leverage in London which the masterful Sir Joshua Hassan used astutely to gain a cast-iron constitutional guarantee that they would not be handed back to Spain against their wishes. So although the Rock is now an embarrassment to both Spanish & British governments any change in status must come about through seduction rather than force, a concept politicians of both countries have struggled to come to terms with. But the real scandal, in Gib and so many other remaining or ex-British colonies, is how the international tax evasion industry is publicly criticised by British politicians but privately allowed to flourish providing it continues to provide vast amounts of cheap capital for the City of London despite the enormous cost to Britain’s allies and EU partners. If the public finances of western countries are to be rebuilt that whole tax avoidance/evasion industry should be closed down. If that happens (a big if) my hunch would be on the people of Gibraltar adapting and continuing to prosper…

From Paul

12 April 2012

Braveheart’s Bomb

Faslane nuclear base, Garelochhead.

IT’S 7.30am in the tiny hamlet of Garelochhead, all 1,200 residents and no traffic lights of it. We’re well north of Glasgow, into the breathtaking foothills of Scotland’s remote loch-lined Highlands.

The locals are friendly, the air is clean and sharp like the waters of Gare Loch; Scotland at its more bucolic. But there’s a traffic jam.

It’s not just a few hardcore punters angling in the pre-dawn gloom for a wee early-opening dram at The Anchor Inn, Garelochhead’s only pub, but genuine gridlock, about a kilometre-long tailback down the A814 south toward Dumbarton.

It happens every morning; commuters queuing to enter Her Majesty’s Naval Base Clyde, just another day’s work at a bastion better known in the British military establishment as Faslane, the massive base that clings to the north-eastern shore of Gare Loch. A few kilometres to the west at Coulport, there’s a similar morning scene at the Royal Naval Armaments Depot on Loch Long.

The 160-odd warheads that comprise Britain’s nuclear arsenal are housed here, and only here, away from prying eyes and in convenient isolation from London.

Britain transferred its nuclear delivery system from flight-borne to submarine-delivered decades ago, opting for a missile system known as Trident. Today, the four Vanguard-class submarines of the line — HMS Vanguard, HMS Victorious, HMS Vigilant and HMS Vengeance — that carry the nukes and their complement call these lochs home; otherwise they’re prowling the depths of the nearby North Atlantic.

Apart from the rather sad “peace camp” of techno-coloured caravans that’s been rooted in protest opposite the Faslane base since 1982, the locals are proud of what goes on around these waters. They know they are at the same time, a long way away but also at the centre of Important Things. At Garelochhead’s Anchor Inn, the walls are lined with stirring oil paintings of submarines steaming down Gare Loch to defend the realm.

There is a proud military tradition in these waters of Western Scotland; the Clydeside docks further south in Glasgow have built British warships since the 1840s. Officers from the bases like to escape to The Anchor Inn for a taste of normal life, away from geopolitics and defence planning. They take their pints and a feed and retreat to discreetly watch the rugby on the pub’s TV. At the bar, opinions are as robust as the drink. The clientele is, in the main, of the belief that Scotland’s independence movement “will get a bloody nose” in an independence referendum in 2014, which happens to be the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn, a legendary victory over the English. But, no fans of the English, the drinkers here insist they are no less Scots for their views.

Equipped during the West’s long Cold War with the Soviet Union, the naval bases are sited here for a reason, and not just because they are a long way from London and in relative proximity to the once and perhaps future enemies to Europe’s east. The lochs are narrow and secluded, making land and sea access easily policed (the isolation is also useful in the event of nuclear accidents.) They are also very deep — submarine deep — and, in the upper reaches of the Firth of Clyde, are a relatively short sail to the cavernous channels of the North Atlantic, NATO’s tactical waters. According to local lore, the low and near-permanent cloud cover here also has advantages, lest passing spy satellites wish to zoom in using something more powerful than Google Earth.

Locals estimate as many as 5,000 people commute from nearby towns like Dumbarton, Helensburgh and even the outer suburbs of Glasgow, to work at the bases, from scientists and technicians to those mucking out submariners’ barracks and pulling pints at the facilities’ pubs.

And then there are the thousands more Scots reliant on the bases; local businesses including the Anchor Inn, and the lochside guest houses where proud parents stay to visit their uniformed offspring — Scotland’s so-called “nuclear families”.

But for how long? Making Scotland non-nuclear is a core campaign pledge of Edinburgh’s ruling Scottish National Party. Its leader, Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond, recently told the Scottish Parliament: “It is inconceivable that an independent nation of 5.25 million people would tolerate the continued presence of weapons of mass destruction on its soil.”

If Scots vote for independence from London in that 2014 referendum, and Salmond’s SNP is true to its word, the bases will have to go.

“We’d be wiped out overnight,” says the Anchor Inn’s young barman, Alan Scott, as he tests his Addams Family questions on The Global Mail for a pub trivia night. “This whole area would be reduced to a ghost town.”

Unsurprisingly, this part of Western Scotland tends to vote with its wallet: In the 2010 British elections, the SNP came a poor fourth. In last year’s Scottish elections, the SNP held the local seat, but aided in significant part by its three main opponents splitting the unionist vote.

The dismantling of Faslane and Coulport has been described as “the nightmare scenario” for Britain’s defence establishment. Scottish political commentator and author Gerry Hassan says London has been “blindsided” by Scotland’s emerging independence movement. “There wasn’t any serious scenario planning done until 2009,” he says. “Now they are awash with them, all frantically playing catch-up.”

And its getting attention also in Washington, which maintains military bases in the UK and frequently avails of these Scottish havens. In a February essay in the influential Foreign Policy magazine, US defence analyst Robert L Goldich wrote: “Scottish independence may or may not be a good idea for Great Britain as it is currently constituted. But there are good reasons for us to think that it might not be too good for us.”

So, if Scotland and Britain divorce, who gets the “kids”, as Scottish wits like to describe this nuclear dilemma?

According to Professor Malcolm Chalmers of the Royal United Services Institute, a defence think tank, the critical issue is less the relocation of Faslane’s submarines but rather Coulport’s bristling nuclear arsenal. “The subs can mostly be sailed and re-berthed,” he says. “But the weaponry is extremely difficult, highly sensitive and most likely very controversial.”

If they had to go, where would they go?

Various sites have been canvassed to station Britain’s nuclear arsenal in England; Barrow-in-Furness on the Irish Sea, where the bulk of Britain’s submarines are constructed, and Devonport, Portland and Falmouth along England’s southern coast. Milford Haven in Wales by the Bristol Channel has also been mentioned.

But according to Britain’s Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament (CND), London’s Ministry of Defence had rejected these alternative sites previously, long before Scots started meaningfully pushing for independence. All come with some sort of oceanographic or topographic issue that the Western Scotland lochs don’t have, such as shallow waters and tricky tides. Barrow and Devonport are in the middle of major population centres, which discounts nuclear storage, while Falmouth and Portland are tourism playgrounds, the latter an Olympic yachting venue. Milford Haven is already one of Europe’s busiest oil and gas storage depots, potentially another nightmare scenario.

If Scots go their own way, an alternative plan is a deal between London and a pragmatic SNP, Scotland-as-Kazakhstan. That seems to have been discounted by SNP rhetoric, but analysts including Hassan believe it could provide the canny Salmond valuable “political wiggle room” when trading other crucial aspects of the divorce should the vote come to that.

Short of re-basing Britain’s submarine nuclear deterrent in Europe or even the US, the CND believes there is another way – the no nukes option.

It believes that if Scotland breaks away, it would bring a natural end to Britain’s nuclear power status in a post 9/11 world where warfare has changed. In a January paper entitled Trident: Nowhere to Go, CND analyst John Ainslie wrote “a government which had deep pockets and which placed nuclear weapons at the top of their agenda could, with enough political will and financial commitment, find some way to relocate Trident. However the economic and political realities of today mean that none of the alternatives are practical.”

AT THE other end of the Highlands, in the bucolic seaside village of Ullapool, Scotland’s independence dilemma is also being debated with vigour — in Gaelic. The view around the breakfast table at the local arts and debating house, The Ceilidh Place, is not one of gloom and what-if, but of the possible — an independent Scotland.

The Ceilidh Place — the word means “meeting” in Gaelic — is run by Jean Urquhart, SNP member of the Scottish Parliament for the Highlands and Islands, the entire northern reaches outside Scotland’s populated “central belt” conurbation.

If Scotland were Switzerland, Urquhart’s The Ceilidh Place — equally bar, bookshop, restaurant, gallery and debating chamber — in Ullapool might be its Davos, where Scotland’s big thinkers come several times a year to thrash around ideas. A few weeks later, Urquhart would host her biannual Changin’ Scotland gabfest, with three days of sessions and seminars debating the pro and anti cases for independence.

Thoughtful and mild-mannered, Urquhart is a committed independence supporter, she says, “for the simple reason that it just makes sense.

“We are sick of being patronised by the south,” she says. “The time has come.” Scots have batted independence notions around for centuries but what has thrilled her now, Urquhart says, has been a natural flowering of homegrown arts and culture that has risen alongside the independence push. That, she says, is “one of the many reasons why this time it’s different”.

It’s been helped in significant part by Urquhart herself. The weekend The Global Mail visited The Ceilidh Place, there was a celebration of Gaelic music and verse. The clientele was comprised not of grandmothers and great-uncles keeping the ancient rituals alive over Scotch and haggis as cliché might imagine it, but energetic 20 and 30-somethings with their future and Facebook pages staked in Scotland.

Urquhart cites the many schools that are offering tuition in Gaelic, and performing arts movements such as the Glasgow-based National Theatre of Scotland, an antidote to the state-sponsored Creative Scotland. There’s a renewed interest in writers including Alasdair Gray, widely hailed for his gritty portrait of Glasgow, Lanark, and upcoming heirs to Gray’s mantle, like Alan Bissett. “We have been colonised for centuries,” Bissett told The Global Mail. “That’s precisely what it is, it has to be said for what it is.”

Bissett brims with enthusiasm as he contemplates the buildup to the October 2014 referendum. “It’s great to be Scottish right now,” he says.

He says he’s looking forward to the next two years, as Scots thrash around the issues: How they’ll spend their North Sea oil royalties; who’ll be permitted to vote and what type of questions and future they’ll be voting for; the status of immigrants; what role will the Scots diaspora have in the referendum not just outside the UK but within it; what will happen to the BBC; will there be visas, border controls?

Bissett says it’s very exciting and very creative. “There’s no excuses any more, no more whinging that it’s all London’s fault,” he says.

“This is our moment, and London doesn’t get it.”

What’s Rupert’s Game in Scotland?

 

Alex Salmond, Scotland’s First Minister.
IT WAS a humble tweet, just 52 characters, one of around 300 million made on February 20 — initially little noticed in London but resonating across the bonny Caledonian highlands.

“Let Scotland go and compete. Everyone would win,” tweeted one Rupert Murdoch last month.

While that’s not how London sees the potential break-up of its United Kingdom, Murdoch’s intervention into Scotland’s independence debate raises a delicious prospect.

While the criminality of News International’s phone-hacking disgrace still unravels, could Scotland’s First Minister Alex Salmond, the populist leader of the Scottish National Party, who’s driving Edinburgh’s divorce from London after three centuries of unionism, be the world’s only leader who thinks it’s a good idea to engage the Murdoch empire?

The answer would appear to be a resounding “Yes!”

A day or so after Murdoch’s mischievous entry into the Scottish twittersphere, Salmond felt the need to telephone him. Salmond claimed he called Murdoch solely to discuss business. Murdoch would be soon launching The Sunday Sun in Scotland and, besides, he’s also one of Scotland’s leading employers, with 6,000 people on the payroll at call centre facilities for News’s satellite TV operation, BSkyB. It was entirely appropriate, Salmond said, for the Scottish First Minister to discuss the company’s “substantial economic footprint in Scotland” and Murdoch’s keenness to invest, as Scotland considers an independent future.

Salmond is nothing if not a pragmatist, for he was calling a man whose main newspaper in Scotland, The Scottish Sun, had once deployed its front page to portray Salmond’s centre-left SNP as Scotland’s executioner, on the very day in 2007 Salmond would be elected as Scotland’s most powerful politician.

That was yesteryear. Murdoch loves a winner, and today he and Alex are old mates on first-name terms, having enjoyed 26 encounters in some shape or form in recent years. Described by commentators as a Faustian pact, it’s a relationship that also discomforts many of Salmond’s purer colleagues in the SNP.

Salmond admitted they had discussed his independence tweets. ‘Sir Rupert,’ as he has called the media mogul with a proud Presbyterian Scottish ancestry, had offered “a very interesting eight words”.

Murdoch’s remark, Salmond said, was “a textbook example of how to deploy a tweet and cause a great stir. We are in a debate in Scotland and internationally about Scotland’s future and I welcome all contributions to that debate, including Mr Murdoch’s.”

A tweet hasn’t – yet – changed British governments, but as former Labour leaders Neil Kinnock and Tony Blair know, the powerful nod of Murdoch’s The Sun can. Murdoch’s The Scottish Sun is Scotland’s biggest-circulating newspaper. It hasn’t quite become a blind supporter of Scottish independence but isn’t an opponent of it, as per the tabloid’s notorious Election Day hangman’s noose in 2007, an image which revolted many Scots.

No sooner had Salmond put down the phone, Rupert’s new Sunday paper — replacing the pestilent News of the World — had a major launch-day scoop in Scotland, revealing the date of Scotland’s ‘Day of Destiny’ — October 18, 2014.

That’s Salmond’s preferred date for the crucial referendum asking Scots if they want independence from London.

Current opinion polls here suggest a majority of Scots are for maintaining the union, around 60/40 for the broader status quo. So London is urging Salmond to hold his referendum much sooner, to keep the UK intact.

But as nationalism gathers north of the border, particularly among younger voters, and as it flowers — often in Gaelic — across Scottish arts and culture too, Salmond believes the longer Scotland has to mull a breakaway the more it’s inevitable.

And after its landslide win in last May’s Scottish elections, the SNP has the advantage of incumbency, with a resounding mandate to frame the independence conversation. The 2014 referendum increasingly seems Salmond’s to lose, becoming less a question for Scots of whether to devolve from London rule, but how.

When British Prime Minister David Cameron came to Edinburgh in February to plead the unionist case, the body language was all with Salmond. His friend Murdoch had a view on that too, tweeting, albeit inarticulately, “Alex Salmond clearly most brilliant politician in U.K. Gave Cameron back of his hand this week. Loved by Scots.”

AS loathing toward News International’s corruption has gathered in Britain, Salmond has been pressured to reveal the extent of his own contacts with the Murdochs and their empire. Salmond strenuously resisted at first, but finally succumbed to release 17 pages of Murdoch correspondence

The dossier revealed that they are quite firm friends, exposing a relationship that had warmed in five years from frostiness all the way to News’s enthusiastic support for Salmond in those Scottish elections last year that were swept by the SNP; invitations to Ryder Cup golf, to various conferences, junkets and ribbon-cuttings; present-giving and some sycophantic backscratching. “Dear Rupert,” Salmond writes, after a 2007 meeting in New York, “…as ever, (I) found your views both insightful and stimulating.”

The Scotsman newspaper sniffily described the Murdoch-Salmond “bromance” as being of “gifts, trans-Atlantic trysts, billets-doux and an unprecedented display of loyalty under fire…. a vote of confidence from the media tycoon only slightly less damaging than a vote of confidence from President Assad.”

When the extent of his Murdoch engagement was revealed, Salmond spun that it was all entirely above board. It had nothing to do with politics, he claimed, but was selflessly all about putting Scotland first. Unsurprisingly, his opponents saw it another way. “Just how low did he have to stoop to secure News International’s support?” asked Willie Rennie, the Liberal Democrat leader in Scotland. Labour’s Iain Gray portrayed Salmond as “seducing” Murdoch, saying it was “highly questionable behaviour” from a politician who “has spent more of his media time in the last year with News International than any other party leader in Britain.”

In all their published communication, including with Murdoch’s son James when he was boss of News International, there is a revealing lack of discussion of the phone-hacking scandal.

Murdoch may be the most toxic brand in British media but to Alex Salmond, that’s no grounds not to maintain the relationship. On February 29, just days after police arrested more journalists and editors at Murdoch’s The Sun, the smiling media mogul stopped by Salmond’s official residence in Edinburgh for tea and biscuits. Only a day earlier, while entering News’s offices in Glasgow, he was confronted by the mother of a phone-hacking victim, who described him as “scum.”

The Murdoch-Salmond meetings have revolted Iain Macwhirter, the prominent commentator. A former rector of the storied Edinburgh University, Macwhirter is a significant intellectual authority in Scotland. Murdoch, he recently wrote in the Glasgow Herald, “was, is, a cancer in British public life. Truly, we live in the Murdoch State.”

“An entire generation of politicians has been corrupted… by association with this sinister oligarch,” Macwhirter wrote.

For an intensely political businessman, Murdoch has never been known to be much exercised by independence movements. In the China-Tibet debate, he delighted Beijing by dismissing the Dalai Lama as “a very political old monk shuffling around in Gucci shoes” and, infamously, removing the BBC from Star TV’s programming roster in Asia, in 1994. He’s not known for his views about East Timor, South Sudan, the Tamil issue in Sri Lanka or much anywhere outside his theatres of operation. As News International faced something of its own Arab Spring in the phone-hacking uprising last year, Murdoch was more seen as the Hosni Mubarak figure, a teetering autocrat no longer to be feared, an ageing emperor suddenly naked of power.

So what’s Rupert playing at in Scotland?

It might simply be his deep roots in Scotland. His paternal grandfather was a Presbyterian minister from Aberdeen, following on from his father, who was also a churchman. Murdoch’s second wife, Anna — mother of the presumptive News Corporation heirs Elisabeth, Lachlan and James — was born in Glasgow of Catholic stock. The Scottish connections are evident in the Murdoch estate on Victoria’s Mornington Peninsula. Cruden Farm is named after the Aberdeenshire parish where his grandfather Patrick was a minister. The Murdoch yacht, and the Long Island estate he sold last year, were both called Rosehearty after the small Aberdeenshire town from where his great-grandfather hailed. Rupert’s father Keith’s wartime experiences at Gallipoli in 1915, and the family’s Scottish connections, have often been cited by biographers as helping fire the Oxford-schooled Rupert’s antipathy to the English, and his undaunted Calvinist work ethic too. And there’s also been talk of News moving BSkyB to Scotland, in return for massive tax cuts.

But there’s another theory doing the rounds of Scottish salons, one aired by prominent Scottish political commentator Gerry Hassan – revenge.

“The motivations are not hard to fathom,” Hassan told The Global Mail. “Murdoch, the arch anti-establishment figure in his own mind, wants to have revenge on the British political classes who courted and then spurned News International. What better way than to threaten the breakup of that very state, the United Kingdom?”

Murdoch, Hassan posits, sees himself as a victim of English perfidy and hypocrisy over the phone-hacking scandal. This tallies with the anti-establishment stance where he’s positioned his British businesses — Murdoch as ‘Dirty Digger’ as Private Eye famously describes him, a champion of the underdog — which happily also provides him a huge market. It also implies what many believe of News International, that its corporate culture has fostered an arrogance that it’s above the law, that its chairman is all-powerful.

In backing independence, Hassan says, Murdoch’s intent isn’t so much supporting Scotland as to weaken Britain, exacting “the ultimate revenge” on the “London elites” across the establishment now going after News in England. And in a Scotland where the media tends to be unionist, News can argue it provides diversity while also developing a market niche of independence-minded readers. “It’s payback time for the British political classes,” says Hassan, “and it’s smart business too.”

Scottish independence is a hugely significant issue that’s steadily creeping up on London. Domestically, it could cripple the UK, encouraging already devolved parliaments in Wales and Northern Ireland to go further, perhaps reducing Margaret Thatcher’s once “Great” Britain to merely England, while depriving its economy of an estimated $1 trillion in North Sea oil revenues Scots regard as theirs.

Internationally too, Scotland’s independence manoeuvres are significant. London’s influence in diplomatic architecture is largely a holdover of its post-World War II authority as a victor nation, and as a former imperial power. As the British intellectual and broadcaster Jeremy Paxman recently noted in his magisterial series Empire, Britain’s “heritage helped her believe she’s still entitled to a place at the top table in world affairs. How did such a small country get such a big head?”

Britain is a nuclear power, a founding member of the five-nation United Nations Security Council and of the G-8 group that frames world economic and fiscal policy. But as so-called BRIC economies like Brazil and India surge, Britain’s relevance in shaping the international debate is already under question. A Britain sans Scotland would be significantly reduced, and its shrinkage likely exploited diplomatically.

Without the Scots, Britain’s economy would be about 10 per cent smaller, its population five per cent reduced and its landmass by under a third. A Scotland-less Britain would rank just above South Africa as the world’s 23rd most populous state, between Italy and Mexico as its 10th biggest economy and alongside Uruguay and Suriname as its 92nd biggest nation by size.

But it is within the European Union, where London often appears to be a reluctant member, that Scotland’s separation might be most keenly felt internationally. A London without Edinburgh would slip a place to be the EU’s fourth biggest member after Germany, France and Italy. More importantly, a Salmond-led independent Scotland is seen as an enthusiastic European, an extra voice in Brussels to dilute the English one, and a voice that Paris and Berlin have warmed to, if only to isolate the recalcitrant London. Hassan says the interest in Scottish independence from the continental powers is almost palpable, and that Murdoch will likely have calculated all this.

Salmond has firmly stated that an independent Scotland would be non-nuclear. That means London’s massive Royal Navy bases north of Glasgow at Faslane and Coulport on Gare Loch and Loch Long, where Britain houses its nuclear-armed submarine fleet, would leave.

Nukes are the elephant in the Scottish independence debate so it’s perhaps unsurprising that Rupert Murdoch also had a view on this. On February 20, he tweeted “what’s this nonsense about British nuclear subs? Who are they going to nuke? Argentina, come off it. Dreams of empire should die.”

Alex Salmond couldn’t have tweeted it more eloquently himself.

In Part Two of his series on Scotland, Eric Ellis visits Garelochhead, where the UK stores its nuclear deterrent, and the arts centre of Ullapool, in the highland north, finding two very different perspectives on its push for independence.

Which Way Paradise?

Banners in the crowd at Celtic Park.

TO MANY Glaswegians, particularly those of an independent, Catholic and Republican persuasion, Paradise is a football stadium in this tough city’s East End, where urban blight in Britain seems at its bleakest.

Their idea of heaven is a drizzly winter’s Saturday, a gutful of lager and fish and chips, with the family clad in the green and white hoops of their storied Celtic Football Club as they cheer from the terraces of Celtic Park, the cauldron that is their hallowed home pitch. Planted with shamrocks from Ireland, they call this place Paradise, though it’s anything but around here.

In the hardscrabble surrounds is a massive necropolis; the nickname Paradise, then, is a nod not only to the heroic deeds their club’s loyal servants have performed for 120 years, but a sardonic nod to the stadium’s next door neighbour, too.

Both are venues Glasgow’s long-suffering Eastenders know only too well. The club’s exploits here have earned them the Scottish championship 42 times in 122 years, and, now well clear at the top of the table, Celtic seems assured of a 43rd title this season. Only one team has a better record – the hated Rangers from across town.

And on the grim streets around the necropolis, male life expectancy hasn’t much changed from the Victorian era when the cemetery opened for business, a few years before Celtic began playing here. Glaswegian men here, live an average of just 54 years, lower than in war-torn Iraq and Gaza and famine-racked North Korea. People living just a few kilometres away do so for 28 years longer.

It’s a little sobering to consider that many of the burly, middle-aged men who’ve come here today, some of the 53,000 Glaswegians I’ve shouldered alongside to be seated at Paradise, may not be around much longer.

Still, caught in the Celtic moment, mortality doesn’t seem much to matter today. We’re all here to savour one of world sport’s most enthralling occasions – a Celtic home game in a seething stadium British sports fans regard as one of the country’s most atmospheric arenas.

The place is abuzz. The stadium’s loud speaker announces the teams as they run onto the pitch, and as they finesse their skills pre-game, the crowd builds up a voice. We roar through continuous choruses of Britpop anthems before launching into Depeche Mode’s totemic Just Can’t Get Enough. It’s deafening and I’m convinced the chants must be raising the necropolis’ tenants, and audible to the Highlands beyond, too.

But now, a hush. The announcer solemnly intones that the noble Celtic is not so much about sport as it is about society, a community gathered together to overcome. He reads the club’s mission statement from Hoops, the club’s matchday programme.

These are fine words that could’ve been penned by Nelson Mandela himself, with the drafters of the United Nations’ Universal Declaration of Human Rights nodding approvingly.

Celtic, we learn, “is run on a professional basis with no political agenda…the Club has a wider role and the responsibility of being a major Scottish social institution promoting health, well-being and social integration”.

Moreover, Celtic stands “to maximise all opportunities to disassociate the Club from sectarianism and bigotry of any kind … to promote Celtic as a club for all people, regardless of gender, age, religion, race or ability”.

Indeed, underlining the mantra is Celtic’s current playing squad, a masala of Korean, Nigerian and Israeli midfielders, a Honduran defender and a Muslim striker from Sierra Leone. Of the 34 players in Celtic’s top squad, only seven are Scottish, and then just three from Glasgow.

It’s stirring stuff. The stadium’s big screen is showing soft-focus clips of an outreach program the club has mounted in Thailand, sleek footballers, resplendent in club colours, showing their skills to Thai kids with Down Syndrome.

Problem is, the crowd’s attention span has been exhausted, and we’re not exactly linking hands to sing Kumbaya at the earnest inclusiveness of the message.

No, we’re far more arrested by what’s going on at the other end of the stadium, where the notorious toughs of Celtic’s Green Brigade are in full voice, conveying an entirely different message – one at the edges of hate.

Though we’re packed in to see Celtic tackle third-placed Motherwell, they’re really an afterthought. The Green Brigade’s real enemy isn’t Motherwell but a team that’s not even playing, Celtic’s sectarian rival, a mortal foe in more ways than just football, that hails from the other – Protestant and Unionist – end of the Glasgow divide.

That would be Rangers.

It’s been a bad week for the famous club from Ibrox, in Glasgow’s near-as-deprived West. Forged in the shipbuilding foundries of the Clydeside docks, which built the warships that built and defended Empire and Realm, Rangers has just gone into administration, 140 years after the club was founded. (It is 16 years older than Celtic.)

It’s an ugly story that’s dominated Scottish media and the chatter of pubs and kitchen tables here. Every day, there seems to be a newer, more shocking revelation about the depth of the crisis Rangers faces. There are claims of corruption and fraud and fingers pointed at hands in the till as the club totters at the edge of extinction.

Not least of Rangers’ problem is a potential £75 million tax bill, which the club says it can’t pay. Its senior players have taken 75 per cent pay cuts to keep it afloat, as desperate fans dig deep to save their club. An emblem of Queen and country, Rangers’ woes couldn’t come at a worse time for the Unionist cause in Glasgow, as momentum for Scottish independence builds on the republican base that is Celtic’s heartland.

It’s all pretty grim at Ibrox, and don’t the Gaels at Paradise know it? No matter that Celtic is playing the perfectly solvent Motherwell, the Paradise crowd seems keen to pretend that it’s Rangers lining up out there for slaughter.

The Green Brigade leads the stadium into well-practised verses of Bye Bye Rangers, sung to the tune of Bye Bye Blackbird. Then, if anyone was in any doubt where loyalties lie here, they switch to Bye Bye England for a spirited few more.

There’s no sympathy at all for Rangers, nor much for Her Majesty’s United Kingdom either, just gloating schadenfreude that’s gathering ahead of 2014, when Scots vote in an independence referendum.

And then, the day’s pièce de résistance. To an ecstatic roar, the Green Brigade unfurls the banner that the faithful have been waiting for.

Stretching over several sections of Celtic Park, the banner shows the HMS Dignity, painted in Rangers’ unionist colours of red, white and blue, disappearing beneath choppy seas. Rats in team ties – the club’s board – scurry to abandon ship carrying treasure chests of loot and booty, the corruption metaphor. As the Dignity sinks, a seaworthy craft in Celtic’s Gaelic tricolor looses off a missile for good measure, assuredly consigning Rangers to the deep. The catastrophe is captioned “Rats Drown.” And all this just seconds after those worthy words from the announcer urging the stadium to follow “The Celtic Way”.

Maybe they took him at his word. Such is the bitter sectarian rivalry between Dublin-leaning Catholic Celtic and London-inclined Protestant Rangers that neutral Scots have even coined a name for it – the Old Firm.

Their domination of the competition is beyond dispute; since 1904, the Scottish championship has been won just 12 times by teams that weren’t Rangers or Celtic. It’s been 27 years since a club other than the Old Firm won the title. That’s impressive – but it’s what happens off the field that can shame Scotland and expose the country’s deep-seated rifts.

One might say, all this is just the one-eyed passion of football fans the world over.

Yes, and no. Bad things happen when Rangers play Celtic. In 2009, the Glasgow region’s Strathclyde Police found that reports of domestic violence spiked by 41 per cent on days the two met in big matches. Last year, the BBC reported that on the Saturdays during the 2007-2011 football seasons when the Old Firm were drawn apart, instances of violent crime averaged 140 across Strathclyde. But on the Saturdays when the Old Firm was playing each other, that number leapt to 382.

Those figures have since come down, thanks to a police crackdown, but at a price. It costs Scottish authorities nearly 30 times more to police a Celtic-Rangers clash than a match in which these clubs aren’t playing.

Ask the family of Celtic manager Neil Lennon if it’s all just about football. In mid-2011, he and two other high-profile Celtic supporters, as well as the offices of Cairde na hÉireann – the main republican organisation in Scotland – received nail bombs in the post. Two men are currently on trial in Glasgow’s High Court for these crimes; 42-year-old Neil Mackenzie and 43-year-old Trevor Muirhead.

They both deny the charges but the proceedings have the city chattering as eagerly as the Rangers’ ongoing travails. Last week the trial jury was shown an oath of allegiance to the “Scottish Unionist Association”. It said: “I, Trevor Muirhead, am a Protestant by birth and being convinced of a fiendish plot by Republicans to destroy my heritage, swear to defend my comrades and my country by any and all means against Republicans and Republican offshoots that may be of similar intent.”

Talk like this alarms moderate Scots, who congratulate themselves that the independence debate has so far been conducted peacefully. It raises the ominous spectre that Scotland has so far avoided, as the independence issues get thrown around – that it could become Northern Ireland.

That’s a nightmare scenario few Scots dare contemplate, and so far the debate has been spirited and well-fought on all sides.

Which is more than one can say for the epic and ongoing battle that is Glasgow’s Old Firm, that threatens to break out of the seething confines of Paradise.

Irish Eyes Are on Australia

The Strand Line, Kilkee

IN Kilkee, a sleepy retreat from the stormy Atlantic on Ireland’s remote far west coast, they still talk about the day the West Clare Gaels Ladies Football Club won the 2010 All-Ireland Ladies Intermediate Final.

It was, by all accounts, an incredible victory, a bright moment of glory that briefly illuminated Ireland’s morbid economic gloom. Resplendent in blue and white, the West Clare Gaels triumphed by 10 points over the girls from Laois St Conleth in an imperious display of pluck and skill, the grandest ever success in the village’s sporting history.

Unsurprisingly, tiny Kilkee – population 1,100 – went off after the match. “It was brilliant,” beams club secretary Dierdre Kenny Downes. “There were bonfires all over the place. I’ve never seen anything like it.” The champion team was paraded down Kilkee’s bunting-draped main drag, O’Curry Street, on a float, hailed as the heroes they were by all. “Everyone in the team got up, the cup was shown, and everybody just appeared on the street. We had some celebration, I can tell you!”

Ireland has a proud sporting tradition, but fleeting successes on the playing field doesn’t put food on the table. And Ireland isn’t generating many jobs after the economy collapsed in 2007 and Brussels put the clamps on Dublin’s decade of excess.

Today Ireland is broke and depressed, and the Irish make jokes about doing everything that their “leader”, Angela Merkel, wants. Ireland was the first EU member into recession, and is now painfully emerging from it.

So fast-forward a football season and if there’s any main street the West Clare Gaels might parade down, it’s Parramatta Road in Sydney. That’s because as many as half the members of the victorious 2010 squad are no longer in Kilkee or the team’s feeder towns around it. Even secretary Downes’ sister had left for Australia.

And there are more to follow her. For every West Clare Gaels, there’s the footballing lads from neighbouring Kilmihil, where in the pubs they reminisce about their 1980 footballing glories and the hurlers of Kilrush down the road. Indeed sporting teams (which became the necessary focus of communities across the country as the Catholic Church descended into disgrace) have been decimated, at a time when the nation needs them most.

Irish who’ve grown up entitled, in a booming land of plenty – there were 12 years of the Celtic Tiger economy, roughly half a generation’s time and just enough to feel permanent – are now getting out as quick as they can, hot-footing it to Australia for work. A new Irish arrival is quite likely to be plastering your new bathroom, or answering phones at the local solicitor’s chambers (perhaps not laying your bricks, though; one Perth firm recently advertised on the classifieds site Gumtree, “Bricklayer needed ASAP. $250 a day, no part-time workers and NO IRISH.”)

But it’s not just the youth bailing, and it’s not just Australia they’re bailing to. Tom Byrne, a self-employed architect and a 58-year-old stalwart of Kilkee’s Chamber of Commerce, is heading to Saudi Arabia for work he can’t get at home. Another Kilkee architect, 37-year-old Annette Stanford, is planning to relocate her practice to Sydney. Neither knows when they’ll be back, if at all. Says Stanford: “I’m sick of the whinging and moaning. There’s only one way to fix this problem, and that’s to fix it.” Worse for Kilkee; Stanford volunteers at its ocean rescue service, which will have to train up her replacement. Another one.

Such is the relentless draw abroad, and the impact this loss of people is having on national affairs, the Irish Times last year launched a special section, “Generation Emigration“, with a graphic evoking an airport’s departure board.

About two per cent of Ireland’s population has emigrated since 2008, when the depth of the recession began to impact on the ground. Though booming Australia is the preferred destination, the immigration services even of recession-hit Britain and the US are reporting arrivals from Ireland at near historic highs. Irish families are being divided again in this land famous for its emigrants, as the Emerald Isle loses yet another generation of its best talent.

Indeed as St. Patrick’s Day looms this weekend, this famous celebration will likely be marked by as many as 20 times more people claiming Irish roots than there are Irish living in Ireland, an eloquent statement if ever there was one that Ireland has struggled to adequately support itself.

They are people like 21-year-old Aaron Lineen of Kilmihil, who left for Australia 18 months ago and reckons he’s earned around $150,000 since, working 18-hour days as a plasterer. He lives in central Sydney having paid his visa dues working in dairy country around Victoria’s Timboon, a landscape not unlike Kilmihil. It wasn’t Australia per se that attracted him, Aaron says. It was, brutally, the prospect of fast money. “I checked them all out – Spain, the US, Canada, Holland,” he tells me, back home in Kilmihil for two weeks and “bored shitless”.

“If I could earn this sort of money in Africa, I’d be there,” he says. “But I make no apologies when I say I’m only there for the money. If Australia goes down the tube, I’m off.”

FOR 12 extraordinary years from 1995, Ireland was able to support itself, and then some, even if it was illusory. The Irish got used to the good times. Ireland was transformed virtually overnight from a land of want to a land of want-even-more. It felt a little like Taiwan or Hong Kong here, so much so that an economist named the economic phenomenon after them – the Celtic Tiger – because it was thought this sort of modern boom was of the type in which Asia seems to specialise.

There was a construction roar, and huge foreign investment as the Irish finance sector took off. People like Sean Quinn became billionaires. Quinn, a “simple farmer’s boy”, as he once described himself, was Ireland’s richest man in 2008, his £4 billion fortune built around the venerable Anglo Irish Bank.

Flash cars were bought, and multilane highways built on hock to accommodate them (today, anecdotally, most of the cars on Irish roads seem to be about five or six years old). Irish accents were heard loudly securing spots beside expensive foreign hotel pools and beaches where well-heeled Germans were usually found. And, unlike their parents’ and grandparents’ generations, then they’d go home, back to Dublin, and mint even more money, buy another car, mortgage another new building. Ireland’s economy grew by an average nine per cent annually during the late 1990s and early 2000s and, remarkable this for a country where planes and ships have tended to leave full and arrive empty, there was immigration into the country.

Suddenly Irish streets were full of foreign opportunity-seekers. It became de rigeur to have a plumber from Poland fitting a mortgaged second holiday home, built by a Bulgarian. For instance, Ennis, Clare’s county seat, has a Nigerian community that arrived in 2000, though many of those, too, are thinking of pulling up and moving back home, where Africa at last is showing signs of emerging from neglect.

Today those banks are in ruins or government hands, nursing numbers that make Iceland’s dodgy financiers look like paragons of fiscal rectitude. Flashy entrepreneurs such as Quinn are bankrupt and facing ruin in court. Some 85 per cent of Irish believe that corruption is a major problem in the Republic.

Villages such as Kilkee and Kilmihil soldier on, putting a brave face on the gloom and re-inventing themselves as best they can. But it seems about the only thing booming in West Clare and far-flung outposts like it, are subscriptions to Skype, so separated families can keep in touch with loved ones putting down roots across the other side of the world.

Once a conservative stalwart of Irish society, the Catholic Church is not helping ease Ireland’s burden. This emigration crisis comes at a time when the Church in Ireland has irrevocably retreated from the moral high ground here, where fiddling priests isn’t the name of a jaunty folk band but a national shame.

With national unemployment at 14.5 per cent, youth unemployment as high as 25 per cent, and few jobs being generated, the more desperate are choosing other, tragic options.

Suicide prevention charities predict about 1,000 people will take their own lives in Ireland this year, about 40 per cent more than 2010. In County Clare, 10 times more people suicided than died from fatal road accidents last year, many choosing the county’s spectacular sea cliffs, along which local authorities have erected “community care” signs reminding locals to keep a weather eye out.

It’s all a bit grim, which is why Kevin Dwyer has decided to bail out for Australia.

He’s an Irish politician and proud Soldier of Destiny, as members of the Fianna Fail political party like to style themselves.

Dwyer is the elected Fianna Fail councillor for New Ross, a constituency in the southeastern Irish town of Wexford, population 20,000, a selfless undertaking to public service for which he is paid 4,000 euros a year. “I love Ireland, I love my town,” Councillor Dwyer told The Global Mail.

Elected in 2004 at the tender age of 30, today he’s something of an elder statesman of the council. “In a sense, absolutely,” Councillor Dwyer tells The Global Mail. “I’ve seen 14 councillors come and go around me.”

Councillor Dwyer isn’t one of them. Just before last Christmas, however, he decided Wexford wasn’t for him. A self-employed plasterer and carpenter by trade, things were so bleak that he decided to emigrate to Australia, specifically to his aunt’s house in Sydney’s Lane Cove, where he commutes to work as a carpenter out Blacktown way.

Now one might think Councillor Dwyer would resign his post, to allow someone else to serve the good burghers of Wexford in the flesh, as he begins afresh in Oz. Think again.

Today his constituents in Wexford won’t find Councillor Dwyer manning the phones, deliberating on their rates or making sure their garbage is collected in Wexford. He does all that by Facebook and email. From Lane Cove.

Councillor Dwyer says he works 60 to 80 hours a week as a carpenter in Australia, as well as picking up the monthly allowance Wexford’s New Ross ratepayers pay him for being a councillor there. In Wexford. Even though he’s no longer in Wexford. Because he’s in Lane Cove. Working as a carpenter.

But no matter, says Dwyer, who apparently has no intention of resigning from the council. He believes that though he’s almost 16,000 kilometres and a dozen time zones away, he’s still “very accessible” to his Wexford constituents.

“They can contact me on Facebook or by email,” he said. “I’ve been elected and re-elected with a very strong vote. I have a responsibility to my constituents.”

He says he’s been as busy being a politician as he has been being a carpenter. In Australia. “I have been making representations since I’ve come here. It’s very easy to deal through Facebook and email.”

His Facebook page doesn’t immediately let his constituents know he serves them. It says he likes The Hangover, Michael Buble and Take That, and that he recently told his mate “Hi Mark how u doin r shud I say gday mate lol!!! Im living in Lane Cove with my Aunt at da mo!!!!! Where you at?????.” This is not the soaring oratory of Fianna Fail’s much-revered grandee Eamon de Valera, whose grandson Ruairi ran for Ireland’s national parliament, the Dáil, in Wexford last year.

A politician’s lot can’t be easy when ministering constituents from the Antipodes, particularly when there’s important carpentry to attend to in Sydney. “I’m not able to get to the monthly meetings,” Councillor Dwyer lamented. “It’s not ideal. It’s very expensive here. The streets are not paved with gold in Australia.”

What is perhaps even more revealing about Councillor Dwyer’s councilloring-by-Facebook is what it might say about Irish politics, at a time when politicians aren’t exactly popular in Ireland. When Wexford voters thought it a little rich that their elected official didn’t resign when he left town, it was put to a council vote. Dwyer won, keeping his seat, at least until his wife and family also find their place in the Australian sun.

He’s hurt that he’s been singled out for criticism in Wexford when “billions have been ripped out of my country by corrupt politicians and their business and banking friends”.

He said he was “disappointed” there was an attempt to bounce him from the Wexford council after he’d left town for Australia, and he is pleased he’s now secured an extension to serve New Ross until September 2012, when he’s entitled to seek another one. Which he says he won’t, if he gets settled in Australia.

Indeed, he sees himself a victim.

“Emigration has gripped many people,” he says. “I recently lost my parents to cancer and I find this is a cancer in many ways, emigrating abroad for work.”

Free The Billionaire! Would That Help President Putin?

Mikhail Khodorkovsky, the former head of Yukos, facing trial in 2004.
IT’S unlikely that Forbes Magazine has too many subscribers in Segezha, a grim town of 35,000 in Russia’s wintry northwest at the edges of the Arctic Circle.

But if by chance it did, the magazine would take some time to get there. Segezha is a train station that became a settlement that’s a long way from everywhere. The Finnish capital, Helsinki, is closer than Moscow, more than 1,200 kilometres to the south, and it’s pretty much snow and ice to the Arctic north.

Saint-Tropez, Segezha isn’t. It’s a place known in Russia as the home of a big pulp and paper operation and as a stop on the Belomorkanal, the 230-kilometre shipping channel connecting Russia’s frigid northern seas to the westerly Baltic, a waterway hewn from the tundra by prisoners of Stalin’s gulags.

But there’s a peculiar poignancy this week about Segezha and its most famous resident, the fallen oligarch Mikhail Khodorkovsky; it’s the week when Forbes announced its famous global Rich List.

This is a publishing moment in which Vladimir Putin might allow himself some fleeting self-congratulations, because the Forbes list helps explain how he’s remained ensconced in the Kremlin for eight years as President and almost four as Prime Minister, carving a harsh and not particularly appealing modern Russia in his image. And perhaps for Khodorkovsky too, as he mucks out Segezha’s prison toilets in his eighth year in detention at Putin’s hand.

Eight years ago this week, Khodorkovsky, then just 40, was ranked 16th on the Forbes list of 2004, boasting a fortune then calculated by the magazine at US $15 billion.

That then made him Russia’s richest person by some margin, and the world’s richest person aged 40 and under. Who was next on that 2004 list, at 17th? That was Mexico’s telco mogul Carlos Slim, with $13.9 billion.

Throw forward to 2012. Last weekend, Khodorkovsky languished in prison in Segezha as Putin, in tears in Moscow, secured a third term as president of a country where, more nakedly than most, money begets power, and vice versa.

And all this as Forbes declared the 72-year-old Slim – the Mexican who was poorer than Khodorkovsky in 2004 – to be the world’s richest person. Slim is worth $69 billion this year by Forbes’ calculation.

That’s impressive, but consider this: Had the youthful Khodorkovsky not been jailed and instead had continued along the corporate trajectory as he was before Putin’s Russia arrested him in 2003, today he would likely boast a fortune far in excess of the Mexican, even considering Slim’s six-fold increase.

That’s because Khodorkovsky’s wealth was mostly built upon oil, a sector which has enjoyed the мать of all booms in the past five to six years, spiking as the world frets about the reliability of supply from the Iraq mess, from a wobbly Middle East confronted by the Arab Spring and from the threat of conflict in Iran — and all this after the Kremlin shut down Yukos, the company Khodorkovsky controlled.

In 2003-04, Khodorkovsky’s Yukos empire boasted Russia’s most extensive reserves, coveted by Putin’s Kremlin cronies. It was a conglomerate of six Soviet-era oil companies which had been rolled into one giant and then sold off. Khodorkovsky ended up in control. And on the cheap, thanks to former President Boris Yelstin’s privatisation program in the early 1990s, when Russia’s post-Soviet economy was struggling and few had the money, smarts or appetite for risk to kickstart it.

At its peak, Yukos was Russia’s biggest taxpayer, generating almost $2 billion a month in revenues and accounting for about 20 per cent of its oil production — or two to three per cent of global production.

In 2001, Forbes weighed Khodorkovsky’s wallet at $2.4 billion, then the world’s 194th richest person. And remember, this was still a time of capitalism-on-training-wheels for Russian businessmen, barely a decade after communism’s sputtering collapse.

At the time, like much of Russia Inc, Yukos was notorious for its scant regard for corporate governance. And it showed, as Khodorkovsky struggled to attract meaningful external investment to his empire.

But advised by Western consultants, Khodorkovsky then underwent something of a corporate Damascene conversion. He flung open the Yukos books to scrutiny, a move that saw it transformed overnight from villain to the virtuous for foreign investors keen to snare their share of the Russian resurgence. At the same time, he positioned his Siberian-centred oil holdings to trade into the boom in neighbouring China.

It worked. Three years later, Khodorkovsky’s wallet had fattened almost seven times, to $15 billion, as Yukos embraced a transparency of sorts and became a market darling.

But this sharp rise in Khodorkovsky’s wealth and, ipso facto in Russia, in influence, wasn’t because of a rising world oil price. The price per barrel of crude tracked at around $35-$40 per barrel through the entire period when Khodorkovsky’s wealth shot up seven-fold.

His rise and rise was more the stuff they teach in Harvard Business School, Corporate Governance 101. Create a more trusted business model and they — the investors — tend to come. And Russia’s 150 million-strong was an emerging market too big to ignore. (It was around this time that an economist at Goldman Sachs coined the acronym BRIC, for the emergence for investors of Brazil, Russia, India and China that would power the next phase of global growth.)

But in many ways, it was the logical evolutionary step for a businessman — and a budding economy — which by their own admission had much to learn about how modern corporations present themselves in investor-led capital markets. (China had much the same experience after Deng Xiaoping’s open-door policy of 1979, when Beijing’s huge enterprises corporatised and cleaned up their act through the 1980s and 1990s for listings on stock exchanges in Hong Kong, London and New York.)

If Mikhail Khodorkovsky has been tracking the markets while in jail, he’s doubtless reflected on what happened after Yukos was seized; the world oil price took off exponentially. Crude peaked at $145 in July 2008, and has mostly traded in the $100 to $125 range since.

Had Khodorkovsky remained a free man in control of Yukos, and continued an even modest replication of the arc he’d tracked in the period prior to his arrest, his wealth could well be measured today in the hundreds of billions. By comparison, Rosneft, the state-controlled oil giant that took over the Yukos oil assets in 2006 after Khodorkovsky was jailed, today has a market capitalisation approaching $100 billion. And Khodorkovsky’s Yukos was much more than Rosneft.

This oligarch, who back then was improbably financing civil society groups in Russia like a turbo-charged George Soros, today would make Carlos Slim look like a relative pauper.

And all that cash and influence on the ground — via the nongovernmental organisations Khodorkovsky was funding — would likely have presented an insurmountable threat to the Putinistas who control Russia today, described by US diplomats in the WikiLeaks cables as a hugely corrupt “mafia state”.

But this week hasn’t just been about Khodorkovsky’s mislaid place on an American business magazine’s rich list.

Last Monday, as Putin was dabbing the tears that flowed after it was clear he would be reinstalled as Russian President, word came from the Kremlin that the man he’ll replace, Dmitry Medvedev, had ordered a “review” of Khodorkovsky’s 2005 conviction for tax evasion and fraud.

It raised hopes in the Khodorkovsky camp that their hero could soon be freed. Russians speculated that a deal was in the offing, that Putin might free Khodorkovsky and give him a second chance at building a fortune, so long as he doesn’t spend it on opposition politics. Or perhaps the Kremlin might offer Khodokovsky the chance of exile in the West.

Moscow’s usually-silenced political salons are suddenly a-titter. It’s been posited that this is Putin’s sop to placate critics at home and abroad, particularly in Washington, who believe he’s stolen recent polls with massive voter fraud. It also comes as Putin continues to support the Assad regime, which Russia supplies with arms, in the Syrian civil war. Putin’s backing repulses many, as Syrians are being massacred in  Homs and elsewhere in the country.

One theory circulating in the salons holds that Putin is sufficiently spooked by the recent winter demonstrations at home against his rule, to worry they could build through the better weather into a Russian spring. Releasing Khodorkovsky could diffuse some of that and improve Moscow’s human rights record, so damaged by the oligarch’s arrest.

But Khodorkovsky’s lawyers seem sanguine about the review of the case ordered by Dimitry Medvedev. The jailed man’s attorney, Yuri Shmidt, told Novosti: “This may just be a formality that means nothing, or it may be a signal that the people at the top decided to close the case of Khodorkovsky … to prevent it from causing problems for the authorities.”

Also last week, in the midst of this, a film about Mikhail Khodorkovsky by the German director Cyril Tuschi opened in cinemas across Europe.

Simply titled Khodorkovsky, it’s a mostly sympathetic cinéma vérité treatment of his career and plight, oligarch-as-Mandela. It portrays Khodorkovsky as an urbane and thoughtful humanist of modest habits, the antithesis of the tacky and flashy oligarch Russia has thrown up.

Tuschi’s Khodorkovsky is the most compassionate portrait yet of a man who has been comprehensively demonised and reviled in Russia as an industrial-level thief from the Russian people, and a murderer of business rivals too.

The film describes how he rose to become deputy head of Komsomol, the youth wing of the old Soviet Communist Party, developing a network that launched his business career from the country’s post-1991 ashes — most notably on Bank Menatep, the vehicle he and his Komsomol pals rode to become hugely wealthy.

There are poignant interviews with his teary mother, his first love and wife, an old chemistry lecturer and his former business colleagues, most of them interviewed from exile in Israel or London.

We also learn that this latent arch-capitalist had a poster of Lenin on his bedroom wall as a teen. And in letters he wrote to the persistent Tuschi from prisons in Siberia and Segezha, Khodorkovsky reveals his great inspiration is the hero of one of the seminal propaganda texts of Stalin’s USSR: Pavel Korchagin, the protagonist in Nikolai Ostrovsky’s 1936 epic novel, How the Steel Was Tempered, pace its most widely-quoted passage:

“Man’s dearest possession is life. It is given to him but once, and he must live it so as to feel no torturing regrets for wasted years, never know the burning shame of a mean and petty past; so live that, dying, he might say: all my life, all my strength were given to the finest cause in all the world ─ the fight for the liberation of Mankind.”

Writes Khodorkovsky, “Pavel Korchagin wholeheartedly believed in a fairy tale. In his courageous struggles against the adversities of life he has helped many people to fight and be victorious against all odds.

“I now realise what I only glimpsed at then; Korchagin is still my hero today.”

It’s a compelling film, albeit one that’s unlikely to make it to wider Russian release any time soon, though Tuschi says it was screened by a film club at a cinema near the Kremlin last December, two days before the parliamentary elections that would erupt into mass demonstrations.

Perhaps its most spellbinding passage is the fateful televised meeting of Russia’s richest oligarchs with Putin at the Kremlin on February 19, 2003. It is conducted as if it was a seminar where issues of State and Mammon are co-operatively batted around, for the collective Russian good. But it is clear it’s a trap for Khodorkovsky, who had been dabbling in opposition politics and breaking Putin’s unwritten rules on how oligarchs ought to behave. Mindful that it was being televised, Putin also sent a strongman message to average Russians who were doing it hard and becoming increasingly angry at the growing and obvious wealth of those who tipped in to capitalism at the right time.

In the meeting, the President singled out Khodorkovsky, asking if Yukos was paying enough tax. “We did discuss this with you previously, yes?” Putin asks, almost rhetorically. “Not long ago, no?” Khodorkovsky and Putin then spar about state corruption, as the other assembled billionaires keep their discomfitted counsels, not knowing quite where to look. Khodorkovsky’s security advisor, anxiously watching at home, tells the filmmaker, “When I saw this dialogue, I knew this would be the end of us.”

Tuschi asks Khodorkovsky in a letter why he was arrested. “There are many possible reasons,” Khodorkovsky replies, citing the Kremlin’s fear he would sell Yukos to a US oil major (he had been reportedly negotiating with Exxon and Chevron).

He denies wanting to become president, and he retells a popular café theory that Putin was insulted that Khodorkovsky had repeatedly disrepected him and the presidency by not wearing a tie to their Kremlin meetings. (Putin reportedly once told Lord Browne, the former chief executive of British Petroleum, of Khodorkovsky: “I have eaten more dirt than I need to from that man.”)

“But that’s all invented,” Khodorkovsky writes to Tuschi. “One real motive to arrest me was that Igor Sechin, the boss of Rosneft, wanted to take over Yukos.” (With annual revenues of about $100 billion, state-controlled Rosneft is Russia’s biggest, and one of the world’s biggest, oil companies, acquiring the bulk of Yukos via a series of contrived auctions after Khodorkovsky was arrested.) Sechin is a tight Putin aide — likewise an intelligence operative who became a politician, a so-called silovik — and Russia’s deputy Prime Minister, who’s also been Rosneft chairman since 2004.

“I think the main reason is because I supported the political opposition.”

Viva O’Chevolución!

The front door of The Strand Hotel, overlooking Kilkee main beach, where Che spent a fateful night in 1961.

IN history’s pantheon of legendary revolutionaries, there’s Cromwell and Washington, there’s Lenin, Mao and Ho, there’s Gaddafi if you’re so inclined, and Mandela, too.

And then there’s Ernie Lynch.

Ernie Lynch? Now, there’s a name one doesn’t hear so much in such radical company.

If the name doesn’t ring a bell, perhaps Che Guevara might. He was Fidel Castro’s comrade-in-arms in overthrowing the brutal US puppet in Cuba, Fulgencio Batista, in 1959. He was also an Argentine doctor apparently born Ernesto Guevara de la Serna Lynch (yes, Lynch) whose allure and iconic image – most famously in Alberto Korda’s intense Guerrillero Heroico photograph – has adorned college fratroom walls, countless T-shirts and inspired uprisings from Caracas to Cairo, Dili to Durban.

And now, it seems, in Kilkee too. Kilkee is a tiny slip-of-a-seaside hamlet in Ireland’s remote far west that’s desperate for a way out of Ireland’s crippling recession, a village of 1,500 people where about the only things thicker than the creamy Guinness poured in the town’s 16 pubs are its abundant hospitality and the near-impenetrable regional accent.

Some 50 years after Che made an unscheduled overnight stay here, and re-affirmed his alleged roots to Eire, Kilkee’s elders are keen to lead a tourism revolution with him, or his image at least.

It all started last September, when tiny Kilkee was suddenly awash with all things Cubano. Havana’s ambassador to Dublin, Teresita Trujillo, had trekked over to open the Che do Bheatha festival, organised by Kilkee’s great and good to mark the village’s fleeting connection to Che.

For three days, Kilkee’s pubs made mojitos, Hemingway and Fidel lookalikes were salsa dancing, 1950s-era Plymouths and Buicks cruised the streets, cigars were rolled and smoked, and festival organiser Tom Byrne squired Madam Ambassador around town on a 1939 Norton, a replica of La Poderosa (the Mighty One), the motorcycle Che rode around South America in the 1950s, pace his history-changing diaries.

By all accounts, it was a right craic. So much so, Kilkee plans to make it an annual event. This year Kilkee has invited Guevara’s daughter, Aleida from Havana, and Courtney Kennedy too, daughter of the late Bobby, JFK’s brother and his attorney-general through the Bay of Pigs debacle and the Cuban Missile Crisis. “It will be fascinating to see those two together,” enthuses organiser Byrne.

Six months out, Ernie-as-Che is institutionalised on the walls of Kilkee, five hours west of Dublin, next stop Newfoundland, or Havana if one is inclined to head left, a sharpish south-left more to the point.

I fling open the windows of Room 6 of the Stella Maris Hotel to take in the morning sea air and there he is, 20 metres away, decorating the side of Nolan’s Deli. I peer down Kilkee’s long beachside Strand Line, along which generations of Gaelic buckos and cailins have strolled and courted, and there he is again, nine square metres of him, affixed to the sea wall.

He’s on a plaque next door at Johnny Redmond’s Strand Hotel, where Che stayed in September 1961. And by the chemist, and the bank, and the grocery store too and…and…and…ad nauseum, as some of the town’s occasional visitors – particularly American ones – regard this relentless Che-a-thon.

There’s no escaping Ernie Lynch at breakfast either. Over a sturdy refection of strong tea, soda bread and black pudding, I browse through the Connacht Tribune from nearby Galway, and there he is again, causing controversy at the city council, which wants to erect an arty monument to him on the town’s promenade, complete with funky wi-fi access so admirers can post tributes if so persuaded.

So what’s this all about?

Well, back in 1961 en route to Krushchev’s Moscow and in the comradeship of 34 Czech and Polish fellow travellers, bad weather forced Guevara’s plane to land at nearby Shannon, the airport closest to Kilkee. Local cabbies made their living ferrying passengers to the only town that could accommodate a large group, so it was to Kilkee’s salty climes an hour away for this earnest claque of compañeros.

Che and amigos had unexpectedly alighted in the birthland of a woman, Anna Isabel, who was either his grandmother, his great-grandmother or his great-great-grandmother, depending on which Irish bard is embroidering the yarn.

Whatever distant relation Anna was of Che, it is universally agreed here that her family name was Lynch, a clan common to Counties Clare and Galway of Eire’s faraway west.

The Che party signed into the Strand Hotel register on September 11, 1961. (Then on the CIA’s most-wanted list, Che ironically used the nom de plume of Rafael Trujillo, another US-backed dictator, in the neighbouring Dominican Republic, whom Che had lined up to knock off, too. The address was “La Habana, Cuba”.)

By all accounts, Che et al had a grand old time of it in Kilkee, crawling the pubs and enjoying some of that legendary craic. The Strand’s current proprietor, Johnny Redmond, remembers his mother telling him how she’d seen Che hold court over the breakfast buffet, full of revolutionary bonhomie, or perhaps the hair-of-the-dog more likely, given the night he’d just had. “Apparently, he was very charismatic,” winks Johnny, a scion of Kilkee’s chamber of commerce and the fourth Redmond generation to run the six-room guesthouse.

Che’s Kilkee visit gave rise to the famous poster of him, published just before his death in Bolivia, which went on to become a phenomenal revolutionary icon. It was painted (and freed of copyright) by the left-wing Irish artist Jim Fitzpatrick, who claims to have met Che in the nearby Marine Hotel where the then 16-year-old Fitzpatrick was pulling Guinnesses behind the bar. Fitzpatrick reckons Che’s revolutionary fervour in Cuba and elsewhere was inspired by Ireland’s Easter Rising of 1916, when a Republic independent of colonial London was first proclaimed. Che’s father supposedly referenced the Irish connection at his son’s 1967 funeral.

And then Che’s visit to Kilkee was forgotten. For years. Johnny Redmond, who’s 45, remembers hearing about it only six or so years back, when he moved to take over the family hostelry. Ireland’s Celtic Tiger economy was roaring at the time, so who much cared for history, particularly a ephemeral footnote such as Che in Kilkee?

But recessions have a way of re-opening memories if a buck can be made of them. Suddenly, in the hands of master yarnspinners as the Irish famously are, Che is not only Irish, this land nurtured his revolutionary zeal, gave rise to that painting and, don’t forget, he was surnamed Lynch. Thus far, no 50 year old with a swarthy countenance and flowing mane and speaking Gaelic with an Argentinian patois have to yet to charismatically emerge from Kilkee’s misty bogs, but no-one here will be surprised if they do.

On the surface, Kilkee’s Che festival seems mostly good, clean fun. And for a long weekend, the town buzzed with visitors, forgot its miseries and made some cash.

Four years after the boom crashed, it seems almost half the town’s businesses are boarded up, houses are being repossessed, and many of the town’s youth have packed their bags for Australia for jobs Ireland can’t generate. Tragically, a despairing few that didn’t leave have been fished from the Atlantic, after leaping to their deaths from the soaring cliffs outside town.

But back at the Stella Maris, a couple of American tourists are struggling mightily with Kilkee’s Che obsession. They’ve been tootling around the Emerald Isle connecting with their Irish roots, as 40 million Americans claim.

They’re charmed by the Kilkee but deeply puzzled by the Che thing. So they ask the Stella’s amiable proprietress, Ann Haugh, about it all.

Ann patiently explains the Guevara connection, but it doesn’t wash. “So, I guess if that means that if Adolf Hitler once stayed here, you’d have a celebration around him, too?” they inquire. Ann baulks and parries with a diplomatic shrug that says, ‘there’s not a lot one can say to that.’ Tom Byrne snorts that the Che festival isn’t offensive, or to be taken very seriously or politically. “We are more commemorating the image, not necessarily the man,” he says.

But in Galway, firebrand local businessman and politician Declan Ganley is firmly behind the Americans, and having a lot of fun with it. An old mate of John Howard’s strategist Lynton Crosby, multi-millionaire Ganley is outraged that his taxes are being wasted on a work that commemorates a “monster”, at a time when Ireland is deep in the peat.

“There’s two more people who won’t be visiting our shores again,” Ganley tells The Global Mail. “Having worked across the former Soviet Union trying to help correct the ideological handiwork that Che and friends inflicted on the world, I’m appalled. Che Guevara was one sick puppy.

“These idiots (at the Galway council) can’t help themselves,” he says. “They come into public money and suddenly it’s party time.”

Ganley has made his views clear to the local media, and the local media have made theirs back. Thundered Dublin’s Evening Herald: “If anything is going to shame the country, it’s not this plan to commemorate a famous figure. It’s reactionary, right-wing windbags like Declan Ganley.” The artist Jim Fitzpatrick chimed in to the Irish Times, quoting Che’s biographer Jon Lee Anderson: “I have yet to find a single credible source pointing to a case where Che executed ‘an innocent’.”

Across the pond in Washington, D.C., Ileana Ros-Lehtinen agrees with Ganley. Born in pre-Castro Cuba, she’s a Florida Republican who was the first Cuban-American to be elected to the US Congress. She’s the chairwoman of the powerful House Committee on Foreign Affairs.

On February 29, she issued a statement urging the Galway council not to build the Che monument. “Despite the image makeover which some try to give him,” the congresswoman railed, “the real Che Guevara was a mass murderer and human rights abuser.

“To honour him with a monument would be an outrage, and would be a futile attempt to hide the brutal acts which he committed. Che Guevara was a ruthless killer who should not be idealised.” It seems Ros-Lehtinen’s entreaty has had an impact. Three days after it was issued, Galway’s mayor said she didn’t support the council’s Che proposal.

Phew. It’s all getting a bit heavy around here so I repair to the radio for light relief, to the broadcaster and wit Sean Moncrieff. After ripping into a Sinn Fein MP for wasting 50,000 euros of taxpayers’ money on printer ink (the normal annual cost is about 1,000 euro), he’s now sparring with a pushy American author who’s promoting his book about fighting, something the American posits is not unknown to the Irish – after a few pints, he ventures.

“What’s the time over there?” the American asks Moncrieff, apropos of nothing. “About 2pm,” Moncrieff responds. “Why do you ask?”

“What, two in the afternoon and you’re not drunk yet?” the American taunts.

But Moncrieff was quick as a flash. “Not yet, my friend, but in an hour we’re all heading down to the Cliché Bar near the studios and we’ll be getting utterly plastered.”

Ernie Lynch would be proud. Of his countryman.

The Anti Rupert Murdoch

ENGLAND can be confusing, and John Bird isn’t helping.

Bird is the Anti-Rupert, a social entrepreneur who in 1991 founded – with Gordon Roddick, who also founded The Body Shop with his late wife, Anita – The Big Issue, that ubiquitous “street newspaper” distributed by homeless people from Brisbane to Birmingham, Adelaide to Addis Ababa, a “global self-help revolution” as it describes itself.

In these desperate days of the Leveson Inquiry into criminality on Fleet Street, Bird is about the only media mogul with any public regard. But with a profile like that, the last place one expects to meet the man many Britons regard as a selfless saint is in a comfortable office 50 metres from King’s College Cambridge, home of the renowned Christmas choir, illustrious alma mater of barons and earls, princes and PMs. For six distinguished centuries, King’s has been one of the world’s most entitled temples of privilege. Not many rough-sleeping down-and-outs in evidence in its cloistered surrounds. None actually.

“What did you fuckin’ expect?” asks the man many Britons regard as a virtual Nelson Mandela, a vagrant’s champion whose novel idea at self-help has given the homeless of the world hope, dignity and a living, spawning a global phenomenon. “Me sittin’ with a bottle of plonk under a bridge somewhere holdin’ me hand out? I have no problem with privilege.”

Bird uses the f-word a lot.

Like when he confronts those who claim he’s a fraud who’s grown rich exploiting those with nothing. He tells the story of being at a charity event when a man came up to him.

“He said, ‘You’re John Bird aren’t you? You must be absolutely fuckin’ loaded!’ And I said to him, ‘Yeah, I fuckin’ am! I’ve got so much fuckin’ money it’s fuckin’ unbelievable!’

“And he says, ‘You must be broke then.’ And I ask, ‘Why?’ And he says, ‘Because everybody who’s got money says they haven’t got it, and the only people who say they’ve got it, don’t.’”

He accentuates the f-word to describe the contribution the British state has made to The Big Issue. “We’ve never got a fuckin’ penny out of Her Majesty’s Government, and that’s nice,” he says. “I’ve never asked and even if they did offer I’d tell them to get stuffed. I’d rather close down. As soon as you take their own, you have to take their influence.”

He uses it to describe Australians, too: “They come over here and they become more fuckin’ English than the English.”

And he uses it to describe Australian journalists – well, one of them. John Pilger. Bird’s not a big fan.

He once shared a car with Pilger en route to the University of Lincoln, where they both were to receive honorary journalism doctorates. Pilger was “difficult,” says Bird, sitting in the front in silence much of the way. “He was fuckin’ imperious,” Bird says.

But on the podium with the celebrated finger-pointer, as the two gave speeches accepting their gongs, Bird had his moment. Pilger was urging his audience to embrace investigative journalism and expose the world’s ills.

Bird took a different tack. “They didn’t give me the same time as they gave him, so I just said, ‘John, look, you’re a guy who goes around the world coming up with its problems… You go, Look! Look! [He makes finger-pointing gestures.] But you don’t ever look for the answers.’

“Journalism is about asking questions but not so much about finding out who’s trying to solve it.”

The Pilger story illustrates a deeper point, of Bird’s lifelong search for answers, a mission from which he says he’ll never rest. But he’s no bleeding heart. He struggles with “white middle-class liberalism” and the “wankers” who populate it.

He cites the near-cultish hand-wringing in the well-heeled West for the Burmese politician Aung San Suu Kyi. “She’s suffered house arrest, which means compound arrest; she can’t move out of her compound.

“You never hear of somebody [homeless] suffering cardboard-box arrest. But there are thousands of people who have suffered that.”

Bird says, “There is a real tokenism about how people handle social crises. People buy The Big Issue but they don’t buy into the idea of helping the homeless help themselves.

“There is a real myopia, and I think it’s about time we started re-educating people into understanding that poverty is a human rights abuse, wherever it is.”

When he started The Big Issue back in 1991, there were 501 institutions and charities in Britain devoted to helping the homeless, he says, “and not one of them gave them the opportunity of making money”.

It exposed Bird to what he calls “the homeless industry”.

“The one thing these homeless organisations had was jobs for themselves, so everybody there was getting paid. Get a job working for the poor and you’ll never be out of work because there’ll always be the poor. I find it very, very interesting that so many of us have a vested interest in the continuation of poverty.”

He says he “hates the sight” of the homeless, and says it with the venom one expects of the bulk of us who step over them, and perhaps abuse them as we do.

“Where are the homeless going to get experience? Do they just rely on your pocket money? There’s only one cure for poverty – get the fuck out of it.”

Ian Burrell, media writer at The Independent, says Bird “deserves credit for building an institution that has lasted 20 years. But now in his mid-60s and living in leafy Cambridge, he is more distant from the magazine, which itself appears increasingly less relevant.”

Bird was famously a roughsleeper himself, from his early teens when he “was getting away from a shit family – violent, nasty.” When he was 15, on the run from the police and his family, he says he arrived in Trafalgar Square and there were 100,000 people there protesting. “It was a rally for the Campaign for Nuclear Disarmament, a group I’d never heard of,” he says.

But what really impressed him were the chicken sandwiches someone had prepared for the protestors, because he hadn’t had a feed in a few days. Then the police moved in to start cracking heads, and the young Bird made his own protest – that he only came for the sandwiches.

“I’m telling this to the police and they’re saying, ‘Well you’re fuckin’ nicked now.’”

And he was, later finding himself in a cell of 32 people, “including a paedophile who was following me around so much that I eventually gave him a kick in the head,” Bird says.

In state reformatories, he learned to read and write, to become a printer, a bricklayer and gardener. He also learned to fight, to look after himself. How did he get out of the cycle? “I was fortunate because I was nicked by the police and put into various institutions – and every time I got nicked, I learned something new.”

He says the experience helped him learn the art of seeking and exploiting opportunity.

“Unfortunately, there was no cure for my insatiable curiosity, to go around and meet women and get into trouble, and drinking, so I was always in and out of grief.” Bird has been married three times. “I’m a devout ex-Catholic so I’ve always married my pregnant girlfriends.”

I ask the devout ex-Catholic if religion is bunk. “No, religion is not bunk, it plays a very important part in a lot of people’s lives,” he says. “Except mine. There are some people who like science fiction.”

The Big Issue is not a charity but a “very weird business,” Bird explains. The magazine’s charter obliges that whatever surplus it generates is ploughed back into an associated foundation aimed at addressing homeless issues.

“I’m a businessman,” he says. “I’m just very unsuccessful at making big money for myself, but I’ve been very successful at making money for homeless people – millions and millions.”

Some 70 per cent of the magazine’s costs are its distribution network – the homeless street vendors – and that makes it an inherently and perennially unstable operation.

“We run a very uncommercial business,” he says. “We’ve always been slightly above profitability or slightly below it, and that’s because we have the most unreliable workforce on the face of the earth, who often just don’t show up.”

He cites an example a few years back, in Nottingham, when he saw five “tip-top” salesmen get jobs, which he arranged for them. “Our sales went from 7,000 copies a week to 1,200, so we had to close the office down.

“We are always doing things which are materially against our interest of running a business, always against our own interest. But if we didn’t do that, we’d lose our raison d’être.”

Bird describes The Big Issue’s readership demographic as “very, very weird”.

“We do get suits in the City, we get members of the royal family reading it, of government, but we tend to get 60 per cent of our readership from women between the ages of 23 and 53,” he says.

“It’s not The Guardian, it’s not The Independent, it’s a little bit of everything. Only about 13 per cent of our readers read The Guardian. We seem to straddle them all – we have Sun readers reading The Big Issue. We’re kind of left, right and centre – no-one’s ever put that concoction together.”

Bird is the media proprietor who’s not regarded as a media proprietor. “I get a lot of press as an individual, people are always asking for my opinion of this or that, but we’re not really players in the media industry largely because the industry’s pretty closed. The alternative media in Britain almost doesn’t exist, so we are kind of on our own. You’re taken seriously, but in a kind of mock-serious sort of way.”

The Big Issue has a history of guest editors: the chef Jamie Oliver, DJ Fatboy Slim, the artist Damien Hirst and Sting’s wife, Trudie Styler. Of Styler’s turn, the Daily Mail and The Observer sniffed that here was a socialite with multiple homes around the world editing a magazine dedicated to those with none. Both papers, ideological opposites, asked why Bird offered his magazine to a “one-per-center”. Bird responded in a letter that the magazine was launched with the help of a man, The Body Shop’s Gordon Roddick, who had at least three homes – those Bird had visited – and who quite likely owned more.

British Prime Minister David Cameron’s guest editorship also raised a stir. He did it – or rather, as Bird tells, his aides did it – last July during the week he fielded flak and revelations from the Murdoch phone-hacking scandal. But that didn’t rile readers. They were outraged because they saw this as Bird angling for a knighthood or a peerage.

Bird chortles. “David Cameron would never give me, of all people, a gong because you can never trust John Bird -because I don’t know what sectional interest I’ll be after tomorrow.” Besides, he already has an MBE.

Says The Independent‘s Ian Burrell: “As a journalistic publication it carries increasingly little weight and is no longer known for breaking stories, having once had a reputation of obtaining exclusive interviews with stars who supported its mission.”

So in its 21st year, and Bird’s 66th, what’s been unexpectedly good for him with this most unusual of magazines?

He tells an anecdote about a “very big black guy”, a distributor who had a reputation for violence, shoplifting and general intimidation. Bird had to confront the guy, to tell him his conduct was out of order and bar him from selling the magazine.

But the man he met had been “transformed into an angel” who discovered he sold more magazines by being nice to people. Soon he was off the streets, had a job ushering in a theatre and had straightened out. And was no longer homeless.

It was the first manifestation of his mission and it happened just three months after he launched the magazine.

The Global Mail : “So you’re officially a saint then?

John Bird: “Yeah, I am. There’s a lot of people who really do feel I am the bee’s knees, but there’s a lot more who think I’m a shark, a charlatan and I’m in it for myself. I hear a lot from vendors who say

they know my (nonexistent) house in the Caribbean, or in the south of France. My Alzheimer’s must be bad because I can’t find these places, I must’ve lost the key.”

The Global Mail : “Who’s your hero?”

Bird: “I don’t have ‘em. I think maybe myself. I am absolutely fascinated why, how the fuck, I survived. There’s not a moment of the day I don’t think, How the hell did I get through all this shit?

“So I’m in love with myself.”

UK: The Bomb-Chucking Blogger

Guy Fawkes’s plot revisited.

Eric Ellis

A DISCUSSION with Paul Staines develops not so much as conventional-journalist-interviews-gadfly-blogger-of-British-politics, as form dictates it should.

Rather it mutates into an hour of grilling each other, as perhaps was destined to occur upon meeting the bomb-thrower better known as Guido Fawkes, named after the anarchist who plotted to blow up Parliament in 1605.

The Guy Fawkes of the day was captured under the House of Lords with a cache of explosives, then executed for high treason. But his 21st century incarnation is at liberty on the internet, his missiles hurled in plain view on Staines’s scabrous site, Order-Order.com.

Part PopBitch part The Sun, the site gets about 60,000 visitors a day with its tart and toxic mix of gossip, sharp analysis and take-the-piss. It’s become a must-read for anyone operating inside Britain’s political bubble, “The Village” as Staines calls it.

GQ Magazine ranks Staines as the 28th most influential man in Britain, while The Guardian regularly places him among its Top 100 national media powerbrokers, describing him “as one of the most feared and influential forces in British public life.” Ian Burrell, media writer at The Independent, told The Global Mail Staines is a “maverick mischief maker” and “like his namesake, a shadowy figure who carries the danger of an unexploded bomb.” And he was summoned to appear before the Leveson media inquiry, rare for a blogger.

With such reviews, I mail Staines to see if he’d be up for a yarn. He responds within seconds with an invitation to meet at a London café called Free Words.

We both arrive at the conversation via enemy territory; me a “colonial” in England, who only hours earlier at Gatwick was accused by a choleric immigration officer of coming to bludge off the UK’s National Health Service, a sickness of which my private insurance card couldn’t cure him.

And Staines has ventured to The People’s Republic of Islington (or at least its EC1 fringes), the oh-so-right-on haunt of Amnesty International, The Guardian et al. The Occupy London crusties – who, Staines testily observes, have filched his Guy Fawkes visage – are plonked 500 metres from here at St Paul’s.

Neither of us got here via fallen trees. Barely a week old, The Global Mail is what it is. But 44-year-old Staines has been digitally blowing up the Palace of Westminster since 2004, with all the intent of the Gunpowder Plot.

“My Guido was taken from a 1950s fireworks box,” he reveals. “He’s a cheeky chappie, with a glint in his eye and a rogueish character. It was 2004 and I asked myself, ‘Who is the strongest recognisable anti-politics figure?’ and it had to be the guy who wanted to blow up parliament!”

He’s as curious about The Global Mail as we are about him. “What’s the rationale for it?” he probes. “Where’s it coming from?” A fair question, so I spiel on worthily about objectivity and philanthropy. It’s a door for Staines to waltz though and flog a pet target. “But we’ve got the BBC!” he snorts. “That’s objective! What are you worried about?”

“So, no ads?” That’s right, no ads. “Good luck there,” Staines smirks, “because unless you go tabloid you know that won’t happen.”

It’s well-practised scepticism. Unsurprisingly, a Staines hero is Kelvin MacKenzie, the incorrigible former editor of Rupert Murdoch’s The Sun . Still, Staines is chuffed that a foreigner has sought him – though it’s not the distant Antipodes he cares for, it’s that his subversions reach beyond Britain. “I even get read in Cambodia!”

While it’s fitting that we meet a skyrocket’s trajectory from Parliament, Free Words café is not his natural habitat. The clientele seems nice; comrade brunchers this drizzly weekday aren’t quite readers of Staines’s caustic site. The liberated literature here is of the freedom-from-oppression persuasion. The menu is earnest, all free-range latte, herbed teas and biological carrot cake. Almost by taunt, the doughy blogger insists the barista prepare him a “Full English.” And when it arrives, I push aside my fashionable banana bread and join him in a robust dollop of baked beans, toast and tea.

BRUNCH sorted, we get down to business. A child of Thatcherism, Staines, before he was an iconoclast, worked as a City screen jockey. And before that he was the PR man for the acid and rave crowd, which in the 1980s and early 90s colonised great tracts of the English countryside and so may have needed a spokesperson to smooth things over. Perhaps that explains the keep-’em-guessing dyed white clump punctuating his jet-black locks.

He’s been all over the show ideologically; Thatcher’s student wing, a 1980s dabble with the wishy-washy Social Democrats, even playing footsies with the ill-fated Irish Progressive Democrats. He stopped joining political parties after that. “I was clearly a jinx,” he says, though he admits donating to the anti-Europe UK Independence Party. One side he hasn’t been to is Labour’s.

He started in the blogosphere a decade ago dissecting Gulf War commentary. “But I wasn’t really into 3,000-word articles taking apart another 3,000-word article so I started doing 200-word articles that were snarky.

“Everyone wanted to be the media writer for The Telegraph or The Guardian. I was the first person in the UK to do it in tabloid style.”

At first, lazy journalists would nick items uncredited from his blog. Then, when he protested that their diary columns were actually his work, they started paying for them. Now that he’s unignorable, they flick him stuff that won’t get past their libel lawyer.

His demographic is similar to The Spectator and its ideological foil, The New Statesman. “I get along well with The Spectator guys but The New Statesman don’t like me a lot, obviously, because I have a lot of fun with their circulation. They’re struggling and the only time I see anybody reading it is someone slightly smelling of pissed-tramp-in-a-library.” For its part, The New Statesman didn’t bite.

One of Staines’s regular columns is dubbed – feminists please look away now – Totty Watch. It highlights, among scantily-clad and Photoshopped offerings, a clip of a televised “catfight” between the Tory first-term MP Louise Mensch and The New Statesman columnist Laurie Penny, the two debating whether feminism and the right are mutually exclusive.

Or, as Staines described it: “Taking Newsnight by storm was GQ‘s cover-girl Louise Mensch. The successful chick-lit author sported a vintage cocktail dress, with a simple yet elegant jacket, Mensch perfectly mixed old-school Tory for a sexy new-age feel. Joining her was the recent New Statesman cover-girl Laurie Penny, the former burlesque dancer turned political pundit went for the classic little black dress, accessorised with a small pink badge. A bold colour palette was on display with her hair. With Laurie wearing her political allegiances on her head, we now know why they call her Penny Red.” All of which probably makes him Private Eye. (For the record, both Mensch and Penny furiously agreed that a woman can be right-wing and a feminist too. Phew!)

Staines started Guido anonymously in 2004, but The Guardian outed him a year later after he started getting noticed. But he kept the shadowy schtick up for a few years, most absurdly in a 2007 debate with Michael White, The Guardian‘s legend at Westminster refereed by Jeremy Paxman on the BBC’s Newsnight.

Paxman opened proceedings by asking the magisterial White, seated in the studio, if political journalists were too close to those they report on to dispassionately cover them in the public interest. White calmly admitted that was sometimes true, but sometimes not.

Turning to Staines, Paxman pointed out that conventional media must operate within the constraints of the law – “not a problem that applies as far as you’re concerned” – while White sniped that Staines wasn’t worth suing because he didn’t have any money. (Staines tries to libel-protect himself by domiciling his site in a Caribbean tax haven.)

Now, this all shaped as promising, and in trans-generational hands might be seen as a defining moment transitioning the ink-stained old media to the digitally-enabled new; the established dinosaur insiders who type, pitted against nimble gadflies who Tweet and blog because they can.

But the most effective arrow in White’s quiver was all Staines’s work, because he preposterously appeared via link in silhouette illustrated only with a Guy Fawkes mask, as White and Paxman witheringly noted.

The item has become YouTube lore. An opportunity was lost to Staines, and the YouTube thread trolls were savage. Anonymously, of course.

Looking back, Staines says it was a stitch-up and agrees he was the ‘prat’ that White said he was. Staines says the segment’s producer, a mate since student days, “wanted a bit of mystique.” Instead “I looked like a c..t. Paxo and White spit-roasted me.”

Staines ditched the anonymous jape soon after. And hasn’t looked back.

GUIDO FAWKES has been more destructive than his 17th century inspiration. Chucking his mortars from outside the village walls, he’s claimed many victims; dodgy pols and their advisors, shifty fundees, conflicted hacks and boorish blowhards.

His most prominent victim has been Gordon Brown’s Welsh Secretary, Peter Hain, whom Staines stalked for years, finally nailing him in 2008 over campaign finance indiscretions. It’s regarded as the British blogosphere’s first scalp. “I pummel them until they beg for mercy,” he has said.

Now in opposition, tangling with Staines still seems to sting Hain. When The Global Mail asked Hain to comment about the man who brought him down, he said, “I have fought for justice and equality all my political life and have never been intimidated by attacks on me.” Fine words but it may have been better for the press secretary who forwarded them to have deleted Hain’s earlier take that “(I) don’t want to comment directly on him.”

But Staines’s most telling success was probably what became known as Smeargate, in 2009, when he revealed a dirty tricks campaign inside Gordon Brown’s Number 10. Advisors resigned and Labour lost five points in the polls with an election looming, ground it never recovered in losing office to the Cameron-Clegg coalition a year later. “I’ve been told it was a game-changer,” he boasts.

Observes The Independent‘s media writer Ian Burrell: “His thing is to stand outside of the system of lobby journalists, whom he likes to say are spoon-fed stories by politicians in return for positive coverage.

“Though largely unknown to the public, Guido Fawkes is unquestionably a player within the political village of Westminster, and runs one of the best-known political websites in the UK,” Burrell told The Global Mail.

The political correspondents, Burrell says, “like to downplay his record in breaking stories, but he will often run things, especially the more spiteful revelations that the newspapers are reluctant to publish.”

Critics say Staines’s work has most impact not on his website but when he shares his titbits with the evil empire – the old-fashioned mainstream media. He admits a genuine scoop published in The Daily Telegraph can have more force than the same story aired on his gadfly blog.

“It depends on the story,” he says. “If it’s an intellectual type story, we know its not going to get picked up in The (Daily) Mail or The Telegraph. It might get The Guardian, to give it a bit of oomph.”

“The other sharing is your tabloid ‘pants-down’ story and we’ll sell it to the tabloids,” he says. “I miss The News of the World quite a lot.”

Ah, so he’s also a Max Clifford, the notorious public relations flack to whom ministers’ mistresses flee to maximise their kiss-and-tell earnings?

“Yeah, we had a racket in being a mini Max Clifford for political stories. About half our income is story-broking. And that’s purely for commercial reasons. If I sell a story to a tabloid for 10-grand, that’s a lot of impressions I have to have on a blog to get that.

“The problem I have is that this is a country of 60 million people and there’s only about half-a-million who are really interested in politics. With the best will in the world, it’s never going to turn over millions.” Matt Drudge, the American online dirt-disher, by comparison makes about US$500,000 a month.

I tell Staines I’ve noticed some soft-porn ads randomly served up on his pages. He looks shocked. “You sure it’s not dating sites?” he says. “That would be very annoying.” He parries, a little too defensively, that’s it’s probably my computer’s cookies helping generate them.

Now I’m shocked, and protest that I don’t do online porn. As Maggie T famously declared, we are not for turning, so we negotiate a gentlemen’s agreement that it’s probably because I was viewing Staines’ blog from uber-liberal Amsterdam, where porn is not unknown. But when I log on later from abroad, I see his site carrying UK-specific ads for Jackpot Slots, a job site, and Valentine’s Day promos for the Ann Summers sex shops, and as I assure my wife, I definitely haven’t been anywhere near them.

Still, Staines wont retire on his site’s AUD400,000 annual revenues. His blog’s advertising take covers the salary of a staffer and his technology but “it’s not enough to keep me in the manner I’m accustomed to.

“And I’m probably one of the biggest blogs in the UK.”

Top banker breaches FSA rules in £2 million share trade

A Standard Chartered plc director has breached Financial Services Authority regulations over millions of pounds of his personal share dealings in the bank’s stock.

A joint investigation by Euromoney and The Global Mail into the share dealings of Stanchart’s Hong Kong-based group executive director and CEO for Asia, Jaspal Singh Bindra, has learnt that Bindra failed to promptly disclose his dealings in 153,000 Stanchart shares, worth £2.14 million, to the bank.

Once it had been informed of Bindra’s dealings, Stanchart itself then failed to promptly disclose the dealings to the market, as it is obliged to under FSA rules on disclosure of public company directors’ dealings.

The breaches, confirmed by Standard Chartered yesterday, relate to a transaction by Bindra which took place on December 28, 2011, in Hong Kong, where he is based. Tim Baxter, Stanchart’s London-based head of corporate communications told Euromoney: “Yes, there has been a breach.”

“There was a delay between the relevant transaction and Mr Bindra notifying the company,” Baxter said.

“There was then a short delay between the company being notified and filing the announcement as it sought further details on the transaction.

“The company has disclosed both the timing and nature of the transaction in the filings you have seen. We confirm the relevant shares are ordinary shares of Standard Chartered PLC.”

On December 28, 2011, Bindra had pledged 153,000 Stanchart shares to BMI Offshore Bank Ltd, a bank in the Seychelles. The filing said that the shares were pledged as security to a credit facility from that bank. That information was contained in a filing Stanchart made 27 days later, on January 24, 2012 to the three stock exchanges where its stock is traded; the primary listing in London, plus Mumbai and Hong Kong.

The filing disclosed that Bindra had informed his employer of the transaction on January 20, 2012.

Under the strict rules of the UK market regulator, the Financial Services Authority, and the London Stock Exchange, directors of public companies are required to notify their companies of any personal dealings in their company’s stock within four days of the transaction.

The company is then required to report the transactions to the London Stock Exchange’s company announcements office “no later than the end of the business day” following receipt of information from the director for release to the wider market.

These rules over public company director personal dealings have been tightened in recent years by the FSA and banking and business regulators globally, in response to the banking crisis. (The specific regulation is as required by DTR 3.1.4R(1)).

The disclosure of Bindra’s dealings is made in accordance with DTR 3.1.2R. These regulations are detailed on the FSA’s website.

However, Bindra took 23 days to advise his employer he had dealt in its stock. Once advised by Bindra, Stanchart took another four days to inform the market.

The former head of Stanchart’s Indian operation, which he turned into the bank’s biggest national profit centre, Bindra became a group executive director in January 2010.

 

The Last Grande Dame of Australian Art

 

 

Mitty Lee Brown, art student, circa 1959 – 1963 Sydney.Mitty Lee Brown in Dec. 2011.

DAZZLING in a sarong of a shade best classified as unspeakably orange, Mitty Lee Brown emerges regally from a nap through Sri Lanka’s tropical torpor to receive an unexpected well-wisher.

She’s a little startled at the intrusion because these days, at 89, Mitty doesn’t get too many guests at her estate at the island’s wilder reaches. “I’m rather sick, so stay away from me,” she croaks, squinting through air dappled with seaspray suspended from the Indian Ocean surging metres away. “I’ve got a fever and I’m not with it. I’m very annoyed with myself because I very rarely get ill.”

Mitty’s shrivelled body is shocking, much reduced from the hale woman I first met here seven years ago after the tsunami that nearly drowned her, her partner, Les, and their local Tamil staff.

But she’s quite magnificent in her decrepitude, anything but the prickly battle-axe described in recent reviews. Indeed, she evinces the courtly charm and clipped speech of the privileged, of an era when Sydney’s beau monde was a waspy clique that moved elegantly and entitledly between Bellevue Hill and Bowral, Belgravia and the Balearics, and, if you were arty like Mitty and her rich, often louche collaborators, to places such as Bali and Sri Lanka too.

This beachside hideaway has been Mitty’s home, atelier and muse since the 1970s. Nearly 40 years on, she’s one of the last surviving members of the fêted Merioola Group, named for the bohemian Woollahra boarding house of the 1940s that was patronised by Donald Friend, Russell Drysdale, Margaret Olley, William Dobell et al.

They all were Mitty’s friends and collaborators; indeed they all remain her friends. Mitty speaks lovingly of them in the present tense even though most are long departed. “Bill Dobell… a very shy, gentle creature. I sat with him all the way through his court case, a lovely man.” Sadly, also soon departed might be their various works that Mitty displays, deteriorating on her villa walls. Her once-glorious paintings are faded and untended, alive only with colonies of equatorial bugs and geckos nibbling away what may well be one of the more significant private collections of Australian art abroad.

Decades ago, abandoning an ill-advised marriage in Australia, Mitty “bolted” to this place with a then-new lover, a Cooma tradesman called Les Barwick, scandalising polite society as they fled. Sprawling 15 hectares along the island’s desolate eastern coast, here was paradise then, with its peacocks, monkeys, elephants and epic flora, a utopia she’d found with Les, who would become her rest-of-life partner.

But Les was never to become her husband. She’d already had three of those; an intellectual, a filmmaker/poet, and a pastoralist. They and the punctuating lovers and fiancés whose hearts she broke were quite enough for a woman who has lived well and large, sometimes a little too much so for some.

Today, both Les and paradise have long gone. Les died by Mitty’s side in 2005, his body blighted by years of asbestosis and cigarettes. And her Shangri-La has been blighted, too, by Sri Lanka’s long and brutal civil war. Mitty’s part of this shattered island has been a no-man’s land hellhole, fought over by Tamil Tiger separatists and the Sinhalese-led government army commanded from faraway Colombo for 26 of her 35 years here. “Les went out for a swim once and a shell exploded next to him,” Mitty recalls, with a giggle. “It blew his bloody sarong off.”

Civil wars have a habit of discouraging guests, and Lankans have died in crossfire on Mitty’s estate. In any event, most of Mitty’s friends, patrons and artist contemporaries are long gone. And for those still going, including James Fairfax, Jeffrey Smart and John Olsen, the long flight to Colombo, then seven-hour drive – with 30 military checkpoints – deterred. Sri Lanka’s government brutally vanquished the Tigers just near here in 2009 – “both sides were always very polite to us,” notes Mitty – and only recently allowed public access to this devastated corner of a land which nature presciently fashioned in the shape of a teardrop.

Mitty’s beach is an exotic, abundant place, where bamboo and frangipani, Palmyra and tropical ferns grow as if on steroids, where bread is baked from coconut, where giant turtles track across the sands. It’s where passionfruits, papaya and pineapples grow wild, where breakfast is a lunu miris over manioke and dahl, a fiery onion sambal on tapioca with a lentil curry. Since the war’s end, it’s also become a sleazy Paedophilia-sur-Mer for obese German rockspiders touching up slim-hipped paramours plucked from impoverished local villages.

This paradise has other limitations, such as appalling health care. And Mitty’s world is troubled. She fears she is being steadily killed, even poisoned, though she’s not entirely sure by whom. “I’m frightened, I’m bloody frightened,” she says. “I don’t feel secure here. I’m worried about me. I’m expecting to be attacked, to be killed.”

Who is trying to kill you, I ask. “God only knows, I wish I knew,” she says, “I’d try to get them first. There’s some very questionable people who have no morals at all wanting the house; Lankans, foreigners, a bit of both.”

Friends dismiss this as fabulist paranoia, saying she’s always been given to fantasy and dramatics. I tell her there are people who are concerned about her welfare. “Including me,” she declares. “I’m top of the bloody list!”

I’ve brought her some wine, plantains and roasted cashews from Colombo. “That’s very sweet but you’ll have to drink the wine, I’m over 100 and I don’t drink anymore.” [The National Gallery of Australia has her born in 1922.] She offers cold water and beer, summoning Thervan, her loyal butler for 25 years, with a well-practised tap of her cane to a fridge that rarely works for lack of power.

“I’m scared silly. What I want to do is get the hell out of here before they get me,” she says. “I’ll throw [the art] out to sea. They are trying to kill me.… I’m sounding like a sixpenny thriller now but I’m ill, I don’t usually get ill and I fear it could be poison.

“What I want is for somebody to take me over, lock, stock and barrel, to sell this, get what they can out of it, and get me out fast.”

She claims much of her art has “vanished,” though some friends dispute this. “I’ve lost all my collection,” she laments. “It went astray. I did have a very nice collection, oh, of this and that, of … hmm, let’s not make lists.” It may have disappeared in the tsunami, or some other more sinister manner. “I don’t know, it hurts too much [to think about it],” she says.

I remind her of a John Olsen she proudly showed me in 2005, which she said the artist had given her after a “you-beaut” evening with him somewhere in Europe. It seems a revelation to her, at the edges of dementia. “Oh, yes … what’s happened to that?” she asks herself. “What has happened to the Olsen?” She despatches me to the guest wing to see if it’s hanging there. She has many paintings decaying there, including some by her own brush. But none is by John Olsen.

ADVANCING mortality is the certainty we endeavour to bear with as much resignation and dignity as declining mind and body allow. For most of us, family steps up to comfort our last days. That is probably not going to happen for Mitty Lee Brown. And she’d probably be the first to admit, she’s got only herself to blame. Or perhaps not.

Born in San Francisco, where her doctor father, Robert, was studying medicine, and raised in an establishment family on ‘Pill Hill’ at Sydney’s Palm Beach – a locale so named for the moneyed Sydney physicians who owned houses there – Juanita Lee Brown’s has been a theatrical, eventful life.

Known as Mitty since childhood, she lost both her parents before she was 21; her father crashed his self-piloted biplane on a Botany Bay beach when he was 39 and she 13, and her 45-year-old artist mother, Ailsa, who had remarried a pilot, perished in a traffic accident in 1943 as she returned home from volunteer coast-watching for Japanese warships at Palm Beach. An only child, Mitty is thrice-married and has been 60 years abroad; in Paris, an island in Rome’s Tiber, the Greek island of Kos, Bali, Sri Lanka, Ischia and, she claims, Kashmir, Japan and Hong Kong.

Mitty’s been a people collector, and her admirers over the years have been Fairfaxes, Packers, Lloyd Joneses and myriad establishment dynasties, even if the admiration wasn’t always reciprocated. A daughter of the establishment, she lived amongst it through the 1960s as the wife of a squattocratic grazier.

Gwen Friend, Donald’s 87-year-old sister, remembers Mitty as “a real stunner, a knockout” in her younger years. “She had eyes like a Siamese cat, she was tall and always slim, with jet black hair and a wonderful, low voice, and a string of young men behind her. She constantly fell in love with everybody, and everybody adored Mitty. She was absolutely a magnet. And when Mitty talked to you, she absolutely talked to you – you were the only person in the world.”

Mitty was quite the social fixture around Sydney’s eastern suburbs in the 1960s, after she married into the squattocratic clan of the grazier and racing indentity William Gordon. In particular, she drew admirers for her elegant gardens and tasteful restoration of their landmark Runnymede mansion in Woollahra, where the NSW Governor from 1891-93 Victor Child Villiers, the Seventh Earl of Jersey and a godson of Queen Victoria, once kept a mistress.

But Mitty ultimately found it all rather dull and stifling, and she escaped to a peripatetic bohemia, eventually alighting on Sri Lanka with Les. She’s painted along the journey, and by universal agreement she is immensely talented, if not prolific. Gwen, herself resident at Merioola for a time, says Mitty was “a bloody good painter but wasn’t prolific because she didn’t have to be.”

National Gallery of Australia board member and art dealer Philip Bacon says that though Mitty wasn’t productive enough to be better known, he admires her limited portfolio. He has one of hers – a 1944 work called Escaped Convict - on sale at his Brisbane gallery. Friends say she didn’t paint so much in Sri Lanka because she didn’t want to abuse her visa status with the Colombo government. But others say that’s nonsense. Says Gwen Friend: “Other painters had to sell a picture in order to get some bread and cheese on the table, but Mitty had plenty of money and she could afford to take her time.”

What isn’t in much dispute is how Mitty has entertained, amused, appalled and alienated many with her loves and feuds, her tantrums and myriad fallings-out. But widowed, childless and an only child, Mitty today is alone, virtually abandoned on this remote foreign beach save for her loyal Tamil retainers.

A friend says that Mitty’s closest direct relatives are a distant Sydney family who haven’t seen her since the early 1980s and “couldn’t care less about her anyway.” Then there is the clan of NSW pastoralists related via her third marriage to William Gordon.

Mitty recalls: “I was married to Bill Gordon, the main gentleman of the Gordon family and that was a great mistake, disastrous.

“The one that messed me up was Bill Gordon. I refused and refused [his proposals] and he convinced me he was going to kill himself if I didn’t accept. Bill was waving a pistol at me … he threatened to blow his brains out, and mine, too.” Gwen Friend says this “sounds about right. Bill Gordon was always waving guns around, full as a tick, I would think.”

Gwen remembers Mitty leaving Runnymede for the move down south to Bobingah, the Gordon family seat outside Cooma where the art critic Robert Hughes penned much of his magisterial study of her brother, Donald. Packing up a removalist van, Mitty almost forget a Dobell she’d hung over the fireplace. Bobingah famously had Mitty’s Dobells displayed in the toilet. “She worked like a Trojan on the house and garden at Bobingah,” recalls a friend, “and she was doing some wonderful paintings at the same time.”

But Bobingah couldn’t hold her either. In 1967, she “bolted” from Bill Gordon, running off with Les Barwick, the builder she’d met while he was fixing Bobingah.

Her affair with Les – “the great love of my life” – caused huge ructions with two families, the Gordon clan and Les’s family in Cooma, that resonate even today.

Mitty claims it was “love at first sight” with Les and insists that she “managed not to do anything until I’d left Bill.”

But memories are still raw at the Gordons. One septuagenarian relative-by-marriage we contacted, a rural grande dame of the extended clan, was generous about Mitty when we called, describing her as “great fun” and “a hugely entertaining and brilliant woman.” But when The Global Mail described Mitty’s current situation, and recounted her pleas for help to return to

Australia, this matriarch didn’t quite say “she reaps what she has sown” but she may as well have. “I think it’s probably better for all of us, and Mitty in particular, that she die there in Sri Lanka,” she said.

Sydney society clearly has a long memory.

Gwen Friend says the Gordons were a bit stuffy and didn’t approve of Mitty because she was bohemian. But another of the artist’s friends says, “Mitty treated Bill Gordon appallingly,” adding that she exhibits “extraordinary generosity but has also been appallingly selfish and a bully. And she makes things up, and then forgets what she has said.”

Not that Mitty articulates any regrets. Sydney, she dismisses with a cavalier wave, “is about as snobbish as any place can be,” while Melbourne is “constipated.”

So why didn’t Mitty and Les marry? “Why bother?” Mitty says, “I married Bill and then I said I’d had enough of marriage. And I was with my beloved, remember – Les, a darling, an absolute darling.”

MITTY’S second husband, the Italian film director Nelo Risi, was also a darling. “He’s ringing me up even now, he’s a poet, Italy’s best poet, an absolute pet.” She lived with Nelo in an apartment on the Isola Tiberina, the storied island in the middle of Rome’s Tiber River, and in Paris, too.

“I had a darling little house in Montparnasse,” she recalls. It was described in November 1953 in the Sydney Sun-Herald‘s gossip column, Mere Chatter, as a “sweet, if startling tiny home … decorated in a scheme of pink, purple and yellow.” The item cited Mitty’s “one-man show” in Rome and her marriage to Risi, too, while hinting at “a rumour she may come home for a visit at the end of the year.”

Indeed, the archives of The Sydney Morning Herald, The Sun-Herald and The Australian Women’s Weekly social pages are littered with Mitty titbits: her 1937 graduation from Sydney’s Alliance Française; a 1939 account of her entertaining “in a frock of white chantilly lace … a party in town from Melbourne and the country for the spring race meeting;” a 1941 despatch describing her “adding colour to Palm Beach gaieties … in a heavy seashell necklace, mauve jumper and grey slacks;” her 1942 engagement to a Free French naval officer, François Paul Fourlinnie; the 1944 notice of her marriage to Dr Peter Vasquez Russo – “a Melbourne University scholarship winner, Dr Russo went to Japan, where he became Professor of European Languages in the University of Tokyo. His bride this year was runner-up in the New South Wales Art Travelling Scholarship;” a follow-up picture of her radiant self, honeymooning in Melbourne with Russo; a 1958 item from Vogue about her Rome apartment, “one of a row of old church properties, a 14th Century house that has been turned into a 20th Century flat where the sound of the water comes in through the windows.”

I remark how she’s often appeared in the social pages. “I’ve got an awful habit of, wherever I am, however much I hide under the table, I seem to get written up,” she ventures.

With Mitty’s links to an important art movement at Merioola, and her deteriorated, faded Drysdales and Friends and Dobells, hers is an estate that is part of Australian history. Her old friend and noted collector James Fairfax said her collection is “meritorious.” The Australian High Commission in Colombo claims it is in regular contact with her. Mitty says that’s nonsense.

Her property should be a museum but instead it will most likely pass to Thervan’s family of servants, who don’t know much about her colourful past. They know how she likes her tea and that she likes breakfast papaya with a squeeze of lime. “I’ve been through a lot with these people,” Mitty says. “We were bashed around by the tsunami together, but we all managed to survive. They are marvellous.” But Mitty worries about the integrity of the professional advisors in Colombo handling her affairs.

For Philip Bacon, this is all-too-familiar terrain. He’s well acquainted with the plight of the artist who escaped Australia’s suffocating philistinism only to decay and die unacknowledged and unknown in foreign climes. “It’s a tragically familiar story, I’m afraid,” Bacon says. And Sri Lanka has more than its fair share of the unscrupulous, foreigners and locals alike, exploiting the country’s rampant corruption and lawlessness.

MERIOOLA was a grand mansion in Rosemont Avenue, Woollahra, the family seat for generations of the prominent legal dynasty, the Allen family, who founded Australia’s oldest law firm, Allens – today’s Allens Arthur Robinson. In 1941, when the then-patriarch Arthur Wigram Allen died, his heirs decided to lease Merioola as a boarding house, to be run by a Melbourne chatelaine called Chica Lowe. The art historian Christine France describes Lowe as “an exceptional character … she had already run several boarding houses, she was interested in the arts and liked to have interesting people as tenants.”

Writes France: “[Lowe's] warmth, generosity and ability to amuse, as well as her maxim that the house should be run for the convenience of the tenants not the landlady, attracted artists.” One of them was Mitty, studying art under William

Dobell and others at the nearby East Sydney Technical College, the old Darlinghurst Gaol and today’s National Art School. “I lived at Palm Beach and it was too far go home every night,” Mitty recalls, “so I moved in there with Chica.

“Chica is one of my greatest friends,” she recalls. “She got her hands on [Merioola] and turned it into the best boarding house there ever was.”

According to France, “Part of the success of Merioola also came about from [Lowe's] belief that it was bad for artists to live in isolation. In post-war Sydney, Merioola was probably the most exciting place to live.”

“It was marvellous,” remembers Mitty. “We had such fun there, everyone was falling in love with everyone else, but it was also very creative.”

As an artist colony, Merioola was a more hedonistic, free-spirited antidote to John and Sunday Reed’s rather more earnest Heide Circle in Melbourne. In Woollahra, matronly eyebrows were raised in neighbouring drawing rooms about the real or imagined goings-on at Merioola, shockingly perpetrated by wayward scions of the elite, their kind. “I think Victoria was more stuffy than New South Wales,” says Mitty. “But we weren’t out to shock, we were artists and it was great fun.”

Mitty’s lover at Merioola was the debonair Alec Murray, who would enjoy a celebrated career as a celebrity and fashion photographer in London (and who famously shot a cherubic six-year-old Kerry Packer by a Sydney fish pond).

But her best and lifelong friend was the artist Donald Friend, who also would live and love extravagantly in Ceylon through the late 1950s and early 1960s. Indeed, several of Friend’s works adorn the walls and garden of Brief, the magnificent but little-visited estate of Sri Lankan lawyer and aesthete Bevis Bawa, elder brother of the architect Geoffrey. Friend died in 1989, and though his life on the island pre-dated Mitty’s time here, I ask if he ever visited her here.

“Oh, heavens yes, wherever I go, he goes. I’ve known Donald virtually all my life, being a painter and all.” She talks of Friend in the present tense. “We are brother and sister … not lovers or anything like that.”

She recalls grand times with Friend in Bali, where Mitty initially fled in 1968 with Les Barwick after she left Bill Gordon in Nimmitabel. Before Les died in 2005, he and Mitty told me he built Friend’s house in Bali. Friend’s Sanur residence, Villa Batujimbar, is much celebrated. Inspired by the architecture of the ancient aristocratic Balinese seat of Klungkung, it was designed by Geoffrey Bawa and later acquired by the Czech-Indonesian hotelier Adrian Zecha of Aman Resorts fame. Not only does Friend’s art adorn the walls still, his ashes are sprinkled around the grounds. But the connection with Friend has long past; Batujimbar is now a boutique hotel owned by the controversial mining magnate Graeme Robertson, brother of the celebrity barrister Geoffrey.

There is plenty of discussion about Mitty and Les in Friend’s meticulous published diaries, though no mention of Les building the Friend residence. Friend described a long and great friendship with Mitty, but also a steadily declining one as the years wore down. Indeed, Mitty’s friendship with Friend – he often described her as his sister – seems to have been severely strained when she ran off with Les. Says a mutual friend of both: “They [Donald and Mitty] really did adore each other but the relationship became strained when he advised her in about 1967 never to marry Les. Donald told her, ‘You fucked up the three previous relationships by marrying them, Mitt. Don’t commit the same error by marrying Les.’”

Friend was characteristically snobbish about Les. His diary entry of June 9, 1968 observes that Les makes Mitty very happy but then describes him as “one of those competent, somewhat gnome-like ‘realistic’ Australians with feet so firmly planted on the hard ground that his acknowledgment of the existence of clouds is a matter of pure politeness.”

Les, Friend sneers, “speaks with an Australian accent so thick you could hardly cut it with an axe…. I don’t think he has any esteem for the trappings of wealth and culture in his own society, probably reading them as messages of hostility to what he stands for.”

As for Mitty’s romantic dramas, Friend is withering. In 1968, a fortnight after he had entertained the visiting Australian Prime

Minister John Gorton and wife, Betty, at Villa Batujimbar, and Mitty, too, Friend opines that “with glazing eyes and heaving breast, haughtily she cast her emerald tiara in the dust, smiling scornfully to see the sordidly grasping knave grovelling after it greedily in the gravel. Really, women are bloody absurd, especially when tired of an old mate and being sexually excited by a new one, they must put up a fine show for themselves and the world to admire. One feels a sort of shamed compassion.

“[Mitty] may go on to Hong Kong – in fact she has told me two dozen destinations, which probably signifies she has decided on a smokescreen and trails of red herrings to conceal her actions from herself. I expect her back here in a couple of weeks.”

Mitty says it was Friend who encouraged her to live in Sri Lanka with Les. “He had come back from here and he kept going on and on and on about it,” she remembers. Curmudgeonly, she says she didn’t want to be on Sri Lanka’s south coast, where many foreigners have sumptuous seaside villas with echoes of the Raj. “That’s precisely why I’m not there. I’ve done all that in my teens. I don’t want a whirling social life.”

MITTY has lived in the midst of a war most of the time she has been in Sri Lanka, just a few kilometres from the formal 2002 ceasefire line, demarcated because neither the Tigers or Colombo could reliably hold the ground around it. Government forces were based three kilometres away, holding a position known locally as the Three Mile Post. Some 500 metres away were the Tigers. For years, the territory beyond, including Mitty’s estate, was in Eelam, as the Tigers called their Tamil homeland.

Mortars would whizz overhead and sometimes miss their target. “Frequently,” notes Mitty. “We wouldn’t go out on the bad days.”

She remembers the ill-fated Indian intervention, which ended in Rajiv Gandhi’s assassination by a Tiger suicide bomber. Sometimes the army made territorial gains, sometimes the Tigers did. And then the other side would fight back.

“The army had a big gun next door for a long time,” she says.

Getting food was often difficult. Electricity, capricious at the best of times, would go down for months on end, as each side did what it could to smoke the other out of foxholes and bunkers. The longest time without power was nine months, she says. Likewise the phone. Pillboxes punctuate the coast along here, scars on paradise. Sometimes Mitty and Les provided sanctuary for petrified villagers, who believed that neither side would shell foreigners.

Did you ever think to leave, I ask. “No,” Mitty says firmly.

Then came the tsunami. “It wasn’t a wave, it was a wall, a surge and a most peculiar noise, very, very loud,” she recalls. Mitty remembers yelling at everyone to drop everything and run with her. She tells the story with gusto. She gathered her pets and tried to link arms with panicking staff as the water inundated the house. In the end, they all went with the flow in the debris – exhausted, because they couldn’t run anymore. Mitty says her childhood years swimming at Sydney’s northern beaches probably saved her. She tried to save a cow, holy in these Hindu parts. Cars, dead bodies and a Hindu priest, alive, floated by, finishing up in a coconut tree.

“It washed the cemetery out, too,” she says. Up on the main road, they recognised the bloated body of a local Tamil friend who had recently died of cancer and whose funeral they’d attended just days earlier. Her body had been exhumed by the force of the tsunami. “They were horrific scenes,” Mitty recalls. She says she broke her back in three places. Mitty and Les had only the sopping clothes they were washed about in, now in shreds. They stayed as refugees for six weeks in a local community centre, returning to rebuild their devastated house.

“I was unbelievably lucky,” Mitty says. “We all survived but we lost a hell of a lot of the art.” A tranche of the severely damaged pieces was sent to Colombo and abroad for repair. “The good ones I left in Australia, the really good ones.”

As 2012, Mitty’s 90th year, arrived, well-meaning friends arrived too, as the reporting of this story alerted them to the situation in paradise. They are logging her deteriorated art for posterity, for the enjoyment of later generations. And the missing Olsen was located and is now secure. But the future is uncertain for Mitty Lee Brown.

“At the moment the only thing I want to do is go home,” she declares, unprompted.

To Australia? I ask. “Yep,” she offers firmly. “I should go back, to put my little flat feet on Double Bay or something like that. Eventually I’d want to stay there but at the moment I’m not well enough to pack the house.”

I gently press her. “Do you really want to go home?” I ask. “You’ve been here a long time, you’ll miss here, no?”

Mitty sighs. “I don’t want to go home forever. I don’t think I’d make it.”

Room for Everyone at The Hague

 

MEET Kuniko Ozaki – 55, Japanese and, since 2009, international resident of The Hague.

Ozaki-san is one of the current 19 judges of the International Criminal Court, which sits in The Hague with claims as the world’s most distinguished forum to transact criminal justice.

With her untaxed, near €300,000-a-year package with generous pension entitlements that you, the taxpayers, help foot, few would argue hers is an important task, perhaps among the most vital at such rarefied heights of international law.

And never more than during these dark days of violence – the oppression of popular revolutions by despots who kill democrats and trigger genocide. We’ve all seen the footage – victims from around the world breathlessly finding voice in sound bites of broken English to will their persecutors to “The Hague.” They may not seem quite sure what that actually means, but they’re utterly convinced it’s the right place to despatch bad guys.

Likewise for the megalomanic monsters and we civilised others; the words “The Hague” don’t so much conjure an agreeable if somewhat dull Dutch city, the seat of government for The Netherlands. Rather this city of 500,000 – about 15 per cent of them well-funded “internationals” – has become shorthand for the rule of law, the end of tyranny, for the most high-minded justice for all.

Dutch money, as a local truism goes, might be earned in Rotterdam, spent in Amsterdam and divided in The Hague, but to the rest of us The Hague is the town where the fair-minded bring tyrants and dictators to book, in the hope that their successors won’t similarly kill, rape and pillage their citizenry.

We all seem to feel a little lighter when a much-reviled villain is brought here in chains via the nightly news. Astrid Bronswijk, head of The Hague city council’s department of international affairs, says a “definite frisson” ripples across town when that happens. “It’s kind of why we are here,” she says. It’s Bronswijk’s job to market her city as The Legal Capital of the World.

Indeed, Judge Ozaki herself is presiding over the crimes-against-humanity case of one Jean-Pierre Bemba, a wealthy Congolese warlord who seems particularly evil. Cannibalism of pygmies is but one of the claims made against the odious M. Bemba, though the matter before Judge Ozaki concerns his role in a murderous freelance rampage through neighbouring Central African Republic in 2002.

So given what’s at stake, the taxpayers of the world who fund the collective €110 million a year (and rising) for the ICC alone – the generous salaries, the comfortable travel and lodgings, the perks and per diems, the staff and offices of its learned judges – would reasonably expect that the ICC will only hire the world’s finest, most supremely qualified legal brains to transact such grave and momentous undertakings. And we’d expect some results, some bang for our buck.

Think again.

Since 1998, when the ICC was founded under United Nations auspices in Rome, it has yet to complete a case.

It garners many worthy headlines in announcing them – witness last month’s indictments of the two Kenyan presidential candidates, last year’s pursuit of the Gaddafis and the 2008 indictment of Sudanese President Omar al-Bashir over Darfur. But it doesn’t seem particularly adept at trying them.

Indeed, 14 years and almost USD1 billion later, the ICC boasts more judges in its ranks than it has had defendants in its dock: 27 indictees as against some 34 judges called to preside.

Let’s crunch those numbers down further. Of these 27 formally pursued by the ICC – all of them Africans – three have died; two are in custody in Libya, their cases dextrously handpassed onto local authorities; two had their cases swiftly dismissed before substantial evidence was heard, and seven are fugitives. That leaves just 13 people who’ve actually appeared before the court in its 14-year history, and eight of them did so voluntarily.

But time seems elastic at the ICC. The court created by the goodwill and intent of 120 states is still to hand down its first judgment. Its inaugural prosecutor, the high-profile Argentinian lawyer Luis Moreno Ocampo, will soon depart office without any legal precedent to claim.

One of those in custody in Libya, Saif Gaddafi, seemed to do the proverbial ICC math. After his father was killed in Sirte last October, Saif offered himself before the ICC, as his Libya collapsed around him. At one point, he even reportedly offered to pay his own way, even fly his private jet, according to one version. Far better, he figured, to chance one’s legal hand in The Hague, which doesn’t have the death penalty, than to be throttled in a fetid Zintan dungeon. A few weeks later, Ocampo flew to a Tripoli still in flames and told Gaddafi’s successors that he was happy for Libya to mount Saif’s trial, despite that he had no reliable guarantee that it would be fair. Libya didn’t then have a formal government, and still doesn’t.

Though it lacks a police force, the ICC says it can compel member states to arrest indictees. That doesn’t much concern Sudan’s Beijing-backed President Omar al-Bashir, whose contempt for the court is palpable. He says the ICC charges against him aren’t worth the ink they’re printed with, as he travels unencumbered to ICC signatory states including Egypt, Kenya, Djibouti and Nigeria.

And as for the ICC’s Judge Ozaki, well, she lacks a law degree, which would be reasonably assumed a necessary pre-requisite for a legal process with claims to be a criminal court of courts. Fumiko Saiga, Ozaki-san’s compatriot judge at the ICC, whom she replaced in 2009, didn’t have one either. Indeed, it’s not entirely clear how many of the ICC’s judges have formal legal qualifications. Doubtless, there are some eminent jurists on the panel, but the court’s information section wasn’t exactly fizzing with efficiency in identifying which of the 34 were actually formally qualified to be there, and who were not.

And, more to the point, why not? The ICC’s own founding “constitution,” the 1998 Rome Statute that ushered the ICC into being, decrees that its “judges shall be chosen from among persons of high moral character, impartiality and integrity who possess the qualifications required in their respective states for appointment to the highest judicial offices.”

Now, it may well be that the “highest judicial offices” of Tokyo, Osaka and beyond don’t require formally qualified jurists, such be the quirks of Japanese justice. As Judge Ozaki herself explained when quizzed by a non-governmental organisation in 2009 about what she thought qualified her to rule at the ICC, “Japan’s Supreme Court, the highest judicial office in Japan, traditionally has recruited at least one justice of the court from among administrators of the government, who are not necessarily lawyers qualified at the bar. Since the end of World War II, seven diplomats have become Justices of the Supreme Court in this way based on cabinet decisions, and have occupied the seat of justice for government administrators for a total of more than 40 years.”

Which, again, is all very well, except Judge Ozaki hasn’t been a justice of the Japanese Supreme Court either. She’s been a career civil servant, mostly at the Japanese foreign ministry and most notably as an “ambassador” – albeit not to a nation but to a little-known UN treaty, the Convention on Biological Diversity. Her ICC predecessor, Judge Fumiko Sagai, also was a diplomat.

Judges Ozaki and Saiga were appointed to the court under the ICC’s so-called List B provisions, allowing those with expertise in international law. Judge Ozaki has lectured on international law in Japan, and she’s even described on the ICC’s website as “an academic lawyer.” Except Ozaki’s was an arts degree, which she later upgraded to international relations, as might befit a diplomat. None of her qualifications are for jurisprudence.

But there could be another factor as to why ICC rules allow non-lawyer Japanese diplomats such as Ozaki and Sagai tickets on this multilateral gravy train: Japan will provide about 20 per cent of the ICC budget this year. Perhaps if a Democratic Republic of the Congo, or a Qatar, or an Israel provided a fifth of the court’s budget, they too could have their non-lawyers appointed to transact justice on our behalf.

This is clearly sensitive stuff for the Japanese, and the ICC too. Though claiming it upholds the highest standards of transparency, the court retreated into bureaucracy to field a series of questions posed by The Global Mail about the Ozaki-Sagai appointments.

When the Financial Times last year raised similar questions about their credentials, Mr Masahiro Mikami, the Japanese Foreign Ministry’s director of legal affairs, wrote to the paper defending the two judges’ work and international standing, while noting that Judge Sagai had recently died “during her arduous assignment at the International Criminal Court.”

Mikami condemned the paper’s “unfair targeting” of the two judges, and cited Judge Ozaki as “an excellent example of a List B judge.”

“I cannot accept the implied accusation that Japan is taking advantage of its position as the largest contributor to the ICC budget to get a seat on the ICC bench,” Mikami wrote. “What would be its purpose? Japan remains the largest contributor, in the absence of three permanent members of the UN Security Council – the US, Russia and China – and is a strong proponent of the enhancement of the ICC’s judicial quality and governance. Indeed, only better judges can create a better court. I am proud that Japan has made a good contribution in this respect and will continue to do so in the future.”

The ICC’s Rome Statute entered into force for Japan on October 1, 2007. Since then it has been a significant contributor to the court, providing €104 million to the ICC budget. Since 2008, it has been footing about 20 to 25 per cent annually.

Mikami told The Global Mail, “Japan has been consistently the top donor to the ICC since joining the Statute in 2007,” shouldering the American share, which Washington doesn’t pay because it hasn’t signed onto the ICC process.

“Japan had borne 22 per cent of the ICC budget, which was the maximum ceiling, until 2009, and has borne approximately 18.6 per cent of the ICC budget since 2010,” Mikami says, adding that both judges Saiga and Ozaki “became ICC judges based upon their experience and expertise in the field of international law,” qualifying under the List B provisions.

“Because of the differences in legal systems and traditions in various countries, the Rome Statute, as a universal treaty, never refers to those formal domestic qualifications. The Statute qualifies judges by their ‘competences,’ ‘experiences,’ or ‘expertise,’ and refers to ‘qualification required in their respective States for appointment to the highest judicial offices.’ Indeed, you can find judges with no or very limited experiences in national criminal proceedings even among List A Judges.

“I do not believe there is anything wrong about [judges] being former diplomats,” Mikami continues. “Neither has the international community at large had any problem so far, since you find several former professional diplomats among List B (and even among List A) judges from other regions.

“Judge Ozaki, since her appointment, has been a very active trial chamber judge and her legal opinions expressed in various court decisions are highly regarded by legal experts inside and outside the Court. I am personally very happy that Japan has produced those well-qualified judges.”

WHAT THE world understands as “The Hague” primarily revolves around the main UN-derived international bodies, the ICC, the International Court of Justice and the Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons, the OPCW. After these come the UN’s “special tribunals,” each with their own extensive personnel and infrastructure operating apart from the ICJ and ICC and convening under their own UN Security Council mandate.

Unlike the ICC, there have been judgments in these other UN tribunals, and solid ones. Indeed, the court trying crimes from the 1990s Balkan War, the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, is widely seen as a major UN legal success. Dr Joseph Powderly of the Leiden University’s Grotius Centre for International Legal Studies says that though he has “serious credibility concerns” about the world leaders with prima facie war crimes cases to answer but will never be indicted because of “realpolitik,” for those that do make it to The Hague “justice has pretty much played out as it should.”

Some 161 people have been brought before the Yugoslav tribunal, most prominently the former Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic (who died in custody in 2006) and Bosnian Serb leaders Radovan Karadicz and Ratko Mladic, whose trials are ongoing. Now winding down, the Yugoslav tribunal is 19 years old. The tribunal for Sierra Leone is now a decade long, the Rwanda hearing 18 years and the Lebanon court, six years and counting.

With its near-1,000 staff from 76 nations housed in its own building, the Yugoslav court has cost almost USD$2 billion to stage. It’s been “an investment in the peace and future of southeastern Europe,” claims the court.

But is it?

Some 17 years after the Dayton peace accords that ended the Balkan conflict, Yugoslavia is no more and each of its six former republics – seven when counting semi-recognised Kosovo – has become a democracy, with varying degrees of stability. Yugoslavia’s smallest former republic, Slovenia, has arguably been its most successful offspring, attaining EU membership in 2004 and meeting the economic rigours of the Eurozone in 2007. Its GDP per capita of USD$25,000 is about 75 per cent of the EU average, and about double the most prosperous of its former compatriot republics, Croatia, which voted two weeks ago to join the EU in 2013.

So far, so good. But the last Yugoslav tribunal prosecutor, the amiable Belgian lawyer Serge Brammertz, isn’t convinced attitudes have much changed in the Balkans in the 20 years of the tribunal.

Speaking before Christmas, 2011 at a lecture in The Hague attended by The Global Mail, Brammertz said he was disappointed to see people convicted and jailed in The Hague for monstrous crimes still hailed as national heroes back home. “The message has not got through,” he lamented. One of the last Balkan war criminals to be sentenced, the Croatian general Ante Gotovina, was last year regarded by readers of a popular Zagreb newspaper to be the second most influential Croatian of its independence era.

Brammertz says resources could be focussed on public education beyond The Hague, and across the former Yugoslavia “where it matters most.” He notes that fugitives have arrived in The Hague after years on the run only to see their health dramatically improve after capture. Here they receive, for free, some of the world’s best standards of health care, a balanced diet, cosy and comfortable if limiting accommodations at the so-called Hague Hilton, as the UN’s detention facility at seaside Scheveningen is known, and a chance to hone their tennis. The Croat general Gotovina, now serving a 24-year sentence, reputedly became the “monster’s champion” as his trial proceeded, known on the Scheveningen courts as “Goran,” pace the famous Croatian player Ivanišević.

One diplomat says he’s knows of a detainee “accused of the most appalling crimes” who says The Hague saved his life; UN doctors have been able to wean him off a 40-year, 60-a-day chain-smoking habit since he was brought here. It’s all a mixed blessing for the brutalised families of their victims back in the Srebrenicas, Vukovars and Sarajevos; yes, many of their now-aged tormentors are behind bars but those families back home are still poor, still broken, still devastated. And their relatives are still dead. It’s a sore point for the UN tribunals, now focussing on putting more resources into victim support and reparations. One diplomat says, “The bad blood in some parts of the Balkans reminds me of 1991.”

PHILIPPE SANDS, QC, is a professor of law at University College London and has written extensively of the international legal processes that coalesce around The Hague. He’s a critic but ultimately a proponent.

“International justice is a long game,” he says.

“It took more than half a century for governments to agree on the need for an international criminal court, so it’s far too early to provide any sort of serious judgment.

The cost to mount the international courts, he says “is peanuts when you compare how much is spent each year by governments on weaponry. And anyway, justice isn’t a can of beans, it’s not something you buy at the supermarket.”

As for the quality of the judges, “all international courts – criminal, general, economic – will want to be seen to be applying the highest standards across the board. On the judges. On the registries and secretariats. On ethical standards, including independence and impartiality. On the treatment of evidence. On the equality of parties. On the quality of the decisions.

“If they don’t meet high standards they will find it difficult to persuade public opinion and national courts – where, after all, most of the work will be done – that their decisions are worth giving effect to.

“Show me any court,” Sands says, “national or international, in which politics in the largest sense of the word doesn’t intrude in some way. Law and politics are intimately connected, and that’s why you need international courts that apply the very highest standards and function according to principles that are transparent.

“It’s early days for international justice, including criminal justice. The dangers are there for all to see, including lop-sided arrangements where, as Balzac put it, the law is like a spider’s web: the small flies get caught and the bigger ones get away. If the ICC is to have a broad legitimacy around the world, it will need to treat the big and powerful players like the smaller ones. That applies to all the international courts.”

HAGUE enthusiasts like to describe the city as a “legal Silicon Valley.” Leiden University’s Dr Powderly says it’s the place to be for anyone exercised by international law. And it’s true, this compact town is awash with voluble academics, prolix lawyers and humourless do-gooders from whom it sometimes seems impossible to derive single-word answers when 100 will do.

Everyone presents as important and worthy. The Hague and neighbouring Leiden are known in The Netherlands for the quality of their bookshops.

Their readers staff the many other bodies, foundations, embassies, treaty offices and “post-conflict managers;” Europol, Eurojust, the European Library, the Carnegie Foundation and so on, et al, seemingly ad infinitum. From the Orange People to the Red Cross, from peace choirs to NATO’s C3 Agency, The Hague council devotes 19 pages of its city guide indexing them. What, precisely, is Euroclio? The Spanda Foundation? Pax Ludens?

These near-countless NGOs, many of them funded by the European Union – for how long, many wonder – feed and gather around the main institutions like plankton on whales. Some are little more than one- or two-man outfits staffed by ex-UN officials and amounting to little more than glorified webmasters. Astrid Bronswijk of The Hague council says NGOs don’t need to be registered to set up shop here. “Anyone can be here, so long as they are not on a proscribed EU or Dutch list of banned organisations,” she says. “We welcome them.” The council estimates that every new international arrival generates one new Dutch job. Some banks and public offices in The Hague have even set up special service lines for internationals, prompting much tutting from queue-marooned locals.

Take the city council’s downtown Metropole building at 70 Laan van Meerdervoort, around the corner from the neo-renaissance Peace Palace, seat of the International Court of Justice, the so-called World Court where states seek non-binding judgments on matters such as maritime boundaries.

Rents are levied lightly at The Metropole, which seems to be Intern Central, a functional six-floor edifice that wouldn’t be out of place in Mountain View or Palo Alto. Tidy 20-somethings with backpacks and bikes bustle in and out, presumably en route to meet fellow 20-somethings. Over several days, I notice they like to gather over the excellent coffee and nibbles at The Blossom, a famous Hague hangout.

Were this California, this crowd might be programming the next Google, or devising a successor to Facebook. Here at the Metropole, soon to be re-named after the Austrian pacifist Bertha Von Suttner, the first woman to win the Nobel Peace Prize, the United Network for Young Peacebuilders shares the fourth floor with the International Network of Museums for Peace, the International

Mediation Institute and the Institute for Historical Justice and Reconciliation. One floor below is the Unrepresented Nations and Peoples Organisation and the International Society of City and Regional Planners. Along the corridor below, the Parliamentarians for Global Action and the Gender Concerns International groups share space with the European Association for History Educators and the International Confederation of Midwives.

Across the road is a Syrian consulate – “it’s been very difficult for us here recently,” says a hijab-clad visa officer – which is next-door to the Control Office for Halal Slaughtering and the Indian tourist office, which is next-door to the Algerian embassy. The Australian embassy is 50 metres west, past New Zealand and Macedonia, while the Estonians, Cubans and Saudis are but a legal brief’s hefty hurl east.

The mind’s eye might regard the Laan van Meerdervoort neighbourhood as all very important, even self-important, but it’s actually rather mundane. This is no high security no-go zone buzzing with spooks and cops; it’s an average Dutch city street. A comely young couple emerge from Slaapvoorlichters, a popular Dutch bedding chain, grappling with a new mattress as a gaggle of matrons check themselves into the day spa opposite. Canadian Deborah Valentine, who runs the city-funded Access NL office aimed at blending “internationals” into The Hague, says that after 18 years here, she’s not convinced locals even much notice the internationals moving around them. “It’s all a bit cerebral,” she says.

But for how long?

The Hague is welcoming but as the Dutch economy sputters in the Euro crisis there’s a rising xenophobia in the Netherlands, stirred by the populist Geert Wilders, against untaxed foreigners riding the gravy train. Wilder’s PVV party has six seats on the city council, the second biggest lobby. Council officers fret the stonewalling PVV playing the “Little Nederlander” card could start making life harder for them, withholding resources from foreign initiatives. Then again, international funds and civil wars help keep pragmatic Nederlanders here well-shod. Astrid Bronswijk of the town council smirks when it’s suggested that today’s faraway wars mean big bucks tomorrow in The Hague.

For all its evident comforts – the designer boutiques that have sprung up here in the past decade, the excellent restaurants, groovy cafes and some sumptuous hotels, much favoured by people who don’t foot their own bills – what’s also striking is who is not here.

This company town whose business is bureaucracy aspires to be a city of solutions, global ones. The well-mannered Hague has not become a locus of international protest, nor a sanctuary for political refugees, throne-pretenders, presidents-in-exile, WikiLeaks-loving iconoclasts or self-styled international finger-pointers.

There’s a distinct absence of graffiti, Tibetans and bumper stickers in The Hague. The closest presence that Amnesty International has is in London and Brussels. An October Occupy rally seemed over almost as it started; just as well, as temperatures plummeted.

There’s been little of the demonstration activity of anti-globalisation movements that have gathered around the IMF, World Bank or Davos meetings in recent years. Perhaps protesters believe that the decisions that matter aren’t made here, they’re made between Washington, Beijing, Paris and Moscow, and that The Hague is where the theatre is performed.

The council’s Astrid Bronswijk says the only protest she can much recall was when the Turkish embassy complained to her about the presence of a Kurdish ginger group. She told the Turks that The Netherlands was a democracy and as long as everyone obeyed the law, everyone could be here.

Another thing The Hague lacks are the notorious “coffee shops,” the dope-peddlers that mark the canal-side streets of louche Amsterdam, an hour’s train ride away. Seems everyone in this serious-minded city, not much of a pull for tourists in any event, has their nose in statutes instead of scoobs.

AS I CYCLE amid the myriad manifestations of The Hague’s complex legal construct, I discover the city also hosts a museum dedicated to the celebrated Dutch graphic artist Maurits Cornelis Escher.

A favourite of jigsaw-makers, M.C. Escher’s trademark style was to portray form as illusion, “impossible realities” that depicted everyday things as tricks of infinite and inconclusive perspective.

In a museum gallery, I reflect on one of Escher’s more recognisable works, The Tower of Babel. It’s a woodcut he made in 1928, depicting workers of many creeds and races building an ambitious tower ever higher, a polyglot cradle of civilisation surging closer to God, as the biblical fable has it. But at Escher’s tower, work has stopped, the workers in varying states of despair because, as he once interpreted it, they can no longer understand each other sufficiently to complete construction.

About a kilometre away from here, work is supposed to soon begin on a new €200 million permanent headquarters of the International Criminal Court, a medley of towers to be finished by 2015, and populated by even more people from ever more nations.

Escher would understand.

Europe’s Leaders-In-Waiting Face The Mess Ahead

HINDSIGHT. It’s a wise and beautiful thing. And there’s a lot of it about Europe at the minute.

In Britain, the Murdoch kids believe, with hindsight, that Rupert shouldn’t have handed Rebekah Brooks the reins at News International. Much of the rest of the country reckons, in hindsight, that Rupert shouldn’t have actually been given the keys to their media to trash.

At Downing Street, David Cameron also has 20-20 clarity after the event. He now says he shouldn’t have accepted the secondment of Murdoch’s placeman, Andy Coulson, at Number 10. And perhaps, Mr Cameron, it probably wasn’t a good look to frolic around Oxfordshire house parties double-air-kissing Rebekah and her luvvy friends. In hindsight.

Meanwhile, at the august London School of Economics, hindsight has made its pursuit of the oleaginous Saif Gaddafi a very bad idea. And, still with Libya, hindsight holds that it wasn’t clever of MI6 bigwig Sir Mark Green to lavish the Gaddafi regime which had allegedly tortured the militia leader who now runs much of Tripoli and who is now suing him.

Banking’s Big Bang of the 1980s was a Big BooBoo in hindsight because it permitted staid but solvent old banks to become racy hedge funds, with consequences taxpayers will fund for generations. And then there’s Sir Fred ‘The Shred’ Goodwin, the former boss of the Royal Bank of Scotland that he trashed. It wasn’t smart – in hindsight – to hand him a knighthood. With RBS now in the British state’s intensive care, Her Majesty has rescinded the Goodwin gong. With the benefit of hindsight.

Across the channel, the Continent veritably fizzes with Monday’s experts; it was a mistake, mea culpa, for Italians to elect – and re-elect – the vulgar Silvio. In hindsight, Greece perhaps shouldn’t have been invited into the Eurozone. Actually, make that the EU. To many Europeans, the single currency was a disaster, in hindsight, while to others it was a blunder, in hindsight, not to press for deeper political union while Brussels was advancing monetary and economic federation. Oh, and as the long-suffering Anne Sinclair and French voters know only too well, DSK clearly isn’t a typo for YKK.

In hindsight, experts say it was plain dumb to allow Eurozone states to maintain competing sovereign bond markets when a combined, stronger Euromarket would’ve better ballasted the euro. In Paris, Jacques Delors, the French economist most closely associated with the single currency project, says it was a mistake for politicians to manage it. Far better, he says with hindsight, to leave epochal matters to technocrats.

But of the many mea culpa being bandied about, a personal favourite comes from one Andrew Gowers. Who is he? Well, at the time the euro entered circulation in 2002, Gowers edited that venerable business bible, the Financial Times. Gowers was a passionate advocate of the euro and, indeed, argued to readers that a euro-sceptical Britain should also join the party.

A decade on, Gowers recently devoted 3,661 words of a recent Sunday Times article to confess “I now believe I was wrong.” After he got hounded out of the FT, he turned up at Lehman Brothers at its main PR flack in London. When Lehman failed – Gowers wrote a hindsight piece about that experience too – he bailed to BP, only for it to be immersed in the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, a PR disaster nonpareil.

For his next gig, Gowers could present himself as a Leading Market Indicator, his career moves telegraphed as a clairvoyance of calamity to be cited on the evening’s news bulletin alongside the latest market-moving trade figures or employment data. Whatever company he surfaces at would become an immediate short-sell. It would be transparent and would help clear up Europe’s wider outbreak of hindsight, too.

(The Global Mail emailed Gowers for his input. To his credit, he responded. “If you think such a tired and hackneyed observation will amuse your few readers, please go ahead!” Given Gowers’s recent efforts at crystal ball-gazing, we at an ambitious start-up take his remark as heralding a brilliant future.)

WITH SO MUCH hindsight about, foresight in Europe is in short supply, as rare as a job in Spain, uncommon as a taxpayer in Athens. So TGM journeyed to Belgium in search of sagacity, not to the EU capital Brussels but to Bruges, to consult some of the people likely to be tasked with fixing Europe’s mess: the Bright Young Things studying at the exclusive College d’Europe.

Bruges is the perfect setting for an academy whose very raison d’etre is to advance European unity. With its chocolate-box canals and quaint 12th century cobblestoned streets named for the guilds and artisans trading here, it’s hard to imagine a place that’s more quintessentially European than this UNESCO-listed city. Beautiful art and music was inspired, made and displayed here. The bistros are excellent, and so was a 2008 film set here, the well-known In Bruges. The commercial capital of the world in mediaeval times, Bruges is the town once ruled by a man dubbed Philip the Good.

Conceived in 1948, as war’s ashes still smouldered across the continent, the College of Europe has been described as “an elite finishing school for aspiring Eurocrats” and for the European political elite – “what the Harvard Business School is to American corporate life.… a hothouse where the ambitious and talented go to make contacts”, the Financial Times, which has traditionally preferred its complement to be Oxbridge-derived, and preferably Oxford’s Balliol, portrays the college as “an institution geared to producing crop after crop of graduates with a lifelong enthusiasm for EU integration.” Its first – and, at 22 years, longest-serving – director, the Dutch Euro-federalist Henrik Brugmans, imagined the college’s purpose as “to train an elite of young executives for Europe.”

And that it has. From EC presidents, myriad ministers, technocrats and MEPs to a UN deputy secretary-general, its roll call is luminous. Of the current leadership generation, Britain’s Dutch/French/Spanish/German/English-speaking Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg met his Spanish lawyer wife, Miriam González Durántez, here. Denmark’s PM, Helle Thorning-Schmidt, hooked up with her husband, Stephen Kinnock, son of former British Labour leader and long-time European commissioner Neil, at the college. It isn’t just Europeans who study here; the outed CIA operative Valerie Plame is a graduate, and today there are Palestinians, Chinese, Azeris, Armenians, and 15 aspirational Turks, the college’s sixth biggest national group.

But 238 of the 315 students are from the 27 EU member nations. And, if the college’s alumni are a guide, a good number of them will be running Brussels in 15 to 20 years time.

So what do they think about Europe? Where might they take it?

TGM sat down in Bruges with eight 20-something College of Europe students: Elena Faloutsou from Greece, Christophe Christaenes of Belgium, Spaniards Juan Gargallo and Rodolfo Navarro, Briton Louise Larnach Day, Ilenia Ventroni of Italy, Percin Imrek from Turkey and Annabelle Marxen from Luxembourg.

They envisage a Europe that will meld ever deeper politically, where member states must deliver up more of their sovereignty to survive and prosper, a single market that must become a genuine political union to ensure that the economic union, and the euro, prevail. They realise that theirs is a Europe where, for the first time in generations, a job will be hard to get. It’s a Europe that will embrace new members across the Balkans and east beyond Poland – to Ukraine and possibly Belarus, but not Russia. Their EU will include Islamic Turkey and won’t exclude Greece. But it won’t tolerate Germany telling it what to do, an EU that must have Britain at its core if only for bureaucratic discipline and a union that will bail each other out of crises, albeit at the cost of the European welfare state.

As we convene, the Europe crisis descends ever deeper. EU leaders meet in Brussels for yet another arm-wrestle over who bails out who and by how much, while in Madrid, the new Mariano Rajoy government announces unemployment has reached 22.8 per cent, the highest in 17 years.

It’s all very grim, but Europe is much more than the economy. What strikes me as I’m talking with this group is that though the EU is in a dire crisis, they are adamant that Europe is more about ideals, enlightenment and liberalism – the essential values, forged from conflict, that Europe exports. It’s very deep, and it’s culturally ingrained.

We interviewed them in two sittings, asked them the same questions and edited their answers into a single Q & A. This is what they said….

TGM: Is Greece the problem here in Europe?

Illenia/Italy: How can we say that?! They [Greece] might have a problem, but have you seen Italy? If they fall, it’s manageable but if we fall everyone falls, so I do feel a bigger responsibility than the Greeks might have. We all have issues in our finances, the problem comes when you ignore them for ages and you also have a big responsibility in Europe, and that’s not fair at all.

Rodolfo/Spain: It would be worse if we leave them out. The EU couldn’t afford that. And they are nice people.

Illenia/Italy: For we Italians, it would be a total shock not having Greece in Europe. We grow up knowing that our culture comes from their culture so for us, it’s a trauma. Their exit is not an option. We are ready to hold onto them.

TGM: But everyone’s pointing fingers at Greece for not paying taxes. Are they secreted away with Annabelle in low-tax Luxembourg?

Annabelle/Luxembourg: There’s a big difference between having different tax rates in member states and illegal tax. I don’t think the solution in Europe would be complete tax harmonisation, and that’s not the aim.

Juan/Spain: I want to make a very clear statement. Southern Europe is not the cause of the problem of Europe. We had an arrangement among all EU governments – the Stability and Growth Pact – and the first ones to breach it were Germany and France! It was impossible, in political terms, to punish them for breaking these rules. From that point, there was no incentive for any government in Europe to comply with their budgetary obligations. That is one of the biggest reasons why our finances are so bad now.

Illenia/Italy: Juan is right, after these breaches [by Germany and France], everyone started to play for themselves. Tax-collecting is a cultural problem, it’s not about law, it’s about the sense of the state that a country has; that’s historical and you can’t change that in a day.

TGM: Elena, do you Greeks still want to be in the EU?

Elena/Greece: What is at stake here is where we really belong. We lived under Turkish occupation for 400 years and that has left us with many problems. This “Ottoman tradition” is the cause of many of our problems now. It’s important that we be in the EU for Greeks to adjust themselves to European culture. I think they can. We cannot live without Europe any more. It’s not about the market any more, it’s about the citizenship, labour mobility. This is a world of opportunity now in Europe.

TGM: Is the solution genuine political union, the abolition of the nation-state?

Elena/Greece: In order to have an efficient, effective economic and monetary union, you need political integration first. But things in Europe happen vice versa.

Illenia/Italy: I totally agree. It started backwards … It’s a difficult step but even a crisis like this could boost more integration, but I don’t think it’s the right thing to jump too much. It’s about sovereignty, and many countries had to struggle a lot for that. The citizens need to be involved … so many citizens feel like they haven’t been asked anything for ages … they need to own.

Rodolfo/Spain: Yes … in the near future we will be more likely to operate like one country, all Europe together. Spain is a model. Yes, we are considered European but we are also Spanish and each of us belong to a region. We don’t want to lose our nationality or our identity just because we belong to the EU.

Annabelle/Luxembourg: You can have both at the same time. The more I feel European, the more I feel Luxembourgish.

Juan/Spain: Until 1975 we [Spain] were under a dictatorship and in 1986 we joined Europe, so our modern history cannot be explained without this relationship to Europe. Now we have European standards in a very short period. We can’t face the modern challenges of the international economy without being together, we just can’t.

Illenia/Italy: The values of the EU are written on paper and sometimes in some states we do forget about them, what it means to have a real liberal democracy, to have everyone able to speak their mind. I like that we can remind each other what happened to us in World War 2 all the time.

TGM: Will Europe be a Christian-only club?

Elena/Greece: The idea of Christendom is inherent from the Middle Ages, but now, in a multicultural environment, I don’t think it’s the basis of European values.

TGM: Turkey’s economy is booming, your economy is not, but it’s a different culture, a different religion. Are they welcome?

Juan/Spain: No! I don’t want them because it means a lot of their workers competing with ours and that means lower wages. Our domestic economy is damaged enough.

Annabelle/Luxembourg: I don’t agree. We of the original six could’ve said the same of Spain. The religious argument is how Europeans would perceive it. I don’t know if it’s an economic or political problem.

TGM: Here’s a referendum. The simple question is: Turkey in or out? What do you tick?

Annabelle/Luxembourg: Blank!

Rodolfo/Spain: They see society in a different way so maybe we should try and avoid this situation. I will allow them but under certain conditions.

Illenia/Italy: Juan was worried about them coming to work in Europe. I want to go there because their economy has the jobs for young people and in my country there is no more!

Percin/Turkey: Its like going to a party at 2am, half are drunk and the other half have gone home. The main reason Turkey is not in Europe is that it is too big to swallow. It’s a power struggle, nobody wants 60-70 Turkish parliamentarians (which would change the balance in the European parliament), the second biggest. I believe, historically, we are very much attached to Europe.

Louise/UK: Why not? Definitely, yes … there’s not many arguments against it … economic benefits, cultural similarities, expansion of the EU… there’s plenty of Muslims in all the different European countries. This is an identity question … why is the EU inherently Christian? I’m of the opinion there shouldn’t be any religious connotation to the EU because its united in diversity, and that means diverse religions as well.

Christophe/Belgium: Not at the moment, for practical and institutional reasons, but let’s say in 10-15 years, why not?

Juan/Spain: They have many structural problems.

TGM: Juan, you are saying that but you really mean the religion is the real problem, no?

Juan/Spain: Cultural things are very important too.

Illenia/Italy: In Europe, I don’t think religion is that important any more. Culture is not about religion, it’s more about liberal values and democracy. They are working very hard to reform, however they are not there yet. Our Turkish friends here say they’d like this process to go on as much as it can.

Elena/Greece: We should make the distinction that there is Istanbul, and there is the Turkey of the east. The official position of Greece, and also mine, is that for security reasons Turkey should be in the EU because we spend thousands of euros per day deterring the Turkish (military).

Illenia/Italy: Turkey is a great missed opportunity. Right now there is the Arab Spring. If we had Turkey in Europe before the Arab Spring, probably the opportunities that are about to be lost in some of those countries wouldn’t have been lost.

Elena/Greece: I’m not convinced that Turkey really wants to join the EU.

TGM: Which leads us to Britain. Will they stay in the EU and do you want them there? And in the euro, too?

Illenia/Italy: Definitely.

Rodolfo/Spain: Yes, sure.

Juan/Spain: Yeah, if they want to.

Illenia/Italy: Britain brought an administrative revolution to Europe, more transparency, a more efficient and specialised bureaucracy. They could’ve had a positive influence [in the euro] but never used the leverage they could’ve had. We waste so much money in the way in which we organise in our own countries.

Elena/Greece: Britain and Turkey are more emotional questions. Even if everything were perfect [all entry criteria were met], still we ask, ‘Do I belong with them, and do they belong with me?’

Illenia/Italy: Yes, our education system in Italy really gives us the incontrovertible conviction that we are part of a bigger thing.

TGM: You all will be paying for the mess of this generation … how can it be fixed?

Illenia/Italy: My generation will not have a pension because my parents’ generation have behaved in a completely crazy way. They haven’t been thinking about their children in Italy. We are still ruled by the same class who ruined everything and there is a total block about the new generation. Our president is 86 years old. There is a huge cultural gap between us and our parents. So people are just going away and never coming back. Our mind is more open than them, we don’t understand each other at all, so the danger is that we will all go away. Our generation feels more European because we feel more welcome elsewhere in Europe than at home.

Annabelle/Luxembourg: At some point we have to accept and say, ‘OK, we cannot change it we have to find a remedy for it.’ People should have a bit more faith in Europe, a bit more patience. Economies have always been cyclical, and sometimes we make it worse than it is and we aggravate it. So we should first calm down … and then work through it patiently.

Juan/Spain: We won’t create jobs for at least five years … people will move away … we won’t be able to sustain the welfare levels … the financial reforms that have been undertaken is not sufficient at all. And this is why if we don’t strengthen it now, we will have the same problem in 10 or 20 years, another financial crisis. This must be done with America, China, Russia … that’s globalisation.

Elena/Greece: We cannot do it alone. The very essence to fix it is co-operation, at three levels: global, the eurozone and national. Fix the global financial system, regulate the markets, decide what kind of investment product will be allowed, the bonuses, all these things…

Illenia/Italy: The last thing we should do is treat the citizens like we don’t understand. We should really bring them on board… But we really do need a political change everywhere, a change of guard … when you don’t care about politics, politics is going to care about you. Conspiracy theories are very damaging … when you don’t trust your fellow citizens, you don’t trust your government, what can you build on? You have no hope.

TGM: The Germans are the bosses now. This is what they always wanted, no?

Rodolfo/Spain: Actually, we have to consider that. They are the biggest in the EU.

Annabelle/Luxembourg: They have more responsibility so with this comes more power, but I don’t think they should enforce it too much.

Juan/Spain: We don’t feel that Germans want to rule Europe.

Illenia/Italy: Actually, I think they are reluctant leaders. I agree with the Polish leader who said recently he was more fearful of a reluctant Germany than a proactive one. You can’t play day-by-day in the middle of a crisis, you have to plan for 10, 20 years. That takes a lot of courage as well because you have to face your electors as well, and they won’t really like what you decide.

Elena/Greece: Germans have been brainwashed that they are paying the bills. That’s not true, they get huge interest rates from Greece.

Amsterdam: I’ve Been To Bali, Too

AMSTERDAM. Been here a year. Was concerned I’d find it boring after years absorbed by manic Asia, the last years in Indonesia, which used to be Dutch. But, neo-colonially, we’re now ensconced in the Netherlands, in an agreeably restored 18th century canal-house that once traded silks, pelts and spices shipped from, well, the East Indies. Plus ça change et cetera, or however that saying is in Dutch.

With its curio shops, cosy brown cafes and UNESCO-listed waterways spanned by antique bridges, de Grachtengordel, Amsterdam’s canal zone, is enchanting. As temperatures plummet and canals snow over, my wife and I feel like we’re characters in a yuletide pastiche inspired by Bruegel.

And so convenient. In fetid Jakarta, shopping would take literally all day, hours wasted in smoggy gridlock. Now some of Europe’s most divine stores are just minutes away. I like how a store on nearby Haarlemmerdijk is a calendar for the seasons. In summer, it sells gelati of a sublimity that would delight the Medicis. But I know its time to change the clocks when it starts ladelling stamppot, a stodgy potato-based comfort food, around mid-October.

In Jakarta, we paid $150 a month for the world’s slowest ‘broadband’ service which rarely worked anyway. Here — and nota bene, NBN — it is 100mbps 24/7, the network is privately funded, and it costs a competitive €50 a month, with phone and TV, too. No wonder Dutch geeks are world leaders at internet piracy.

What’s not to like?

THAT would be racism, which underpins the national debate here. This is the country in Europe closest to electing as leader a man many regard as a racist, Geert Wilders, the divisive “Golden Pompadour” as the US embassy here described him in a candid missive published by WikiLeaks.

I’m tipping he’ll make it to the Prime Ministerial residence, Catshuis, in The Hague, if he isn’t assassinated first. Wilders is the canniest pol in a land where politicians are dull and dulled. He calls his vehicle the Party of Freedom, as if he’s some messiah liberating one of the world’s most democratic polities from chains. He commands 24 seats, the 150-seat parliament’s third largest bloc, carved from 16 per cent of the 2010 vote. In that election, the 48-year-old part-Indonesian Wilders stoked populist embers among those Dutch fearing real or imagined Islamist blowback from years allowing Turks, Pakistanis and Moroccans into the Netherlands for jobs deemed beneath the average Nederlander.

The articulate Wilders is Pauline Hanson with brains, a savvy kingmaker who anointed the decidedly beige PM Mark Rutte’s centre-right coalition. It would be too neat to say Wilders only appeals to a whitebread Netherlands of be-clogged cheesemakers and jolly milkmaids. There are plenty of Amsterdam sophisticates who like him too, and increasingly they admit it.

Wilders plays his rivals off a break. He’s not formally part of Rutte’s government and so can snipe at the coalition he installed while manipulating policy. And when something’s done well, he takes credit.

His timing is canny — Wilders condemned the Islamophobic mass murderer Anders Breivik when the Norwegian nutter cited him as an inspiration but has been quick to ask the Dutch, an essential Euroland economy, if returning to the nostalgic, insular cosiness of the guilder would soothe their Euro-pain.

WILDERSISM surfaces unexpectedly. Starved of deli items in Indonesia, I’ve found abundant Amsters a revelation and became partial to the Mediterranean mezzes at the Albert Kuyp market. One providore seemed pleasant; a 40-something blonde, groovily groomed, two perfect kids. I bet hubby is a banker/lawyer/doctor and they press their own olive oil summering splendidly at their just-so Provencal stone mas.

I was there recently, second in line behind a well-dressed man whom a tabloid would describe as being “of Middle-Eastern appearance.” He apologised to her for not speaking Dutch and ordered, in English, some olives. She looked straight past him and solicited my order instead. I gestured that he was first but she insisted she serve me. Puzzled, I did precisely what the Arab man did, apologised and ordered olives in English. The Arab guy tsk-ed, gently protested and walked off in helpless disgust.

The proprietress barely seemed to notice. I asked her why she served me ahead of the Arab chap. Neither of us was Dutch nor spoke it, but we were both polite in not doing so. “Yes,” she said, “but you are normal.” With that, she lost a second customer.

MY BUTCHER, Sami, feels threatened by Wilders. And I’ll bet the feeling would be mutual. A fluent Dutch speaker, Sami is from Cairo, and in 2005 he bought a small slagerij in the pleased-with-itself Amsterdam neighbourhood of Jordaan. The butchery has been known for centuries as Int Vette Varken.

It was a good business deal, however Sami had a problem. It doesn’t do a practising Muslim to own a shop called The Fat Pig. But common to many Jordaan shops, the name was embedded above the door in a heritage plaque that depicted said fat pig. And such legacy is state-protected.

What to do? In what seemed an artful marriage of religious pragmatism and Mammon, Sami re-named his new butchery Vette Kalfje, the Fat Calf, secularly suggesting — if Amsterdammers could be bothered — the Bible’s festive parable of the prodigal son. He kept the porcine plaque as the law compelled, and festooned the window of his re-named with a graphic of a cheerful, Dutch-looking cow.

Bad idea. This name-changing was interpreted as precisely what Wilders was on about, the game-changing of Dutch culture. Customers voted with their feet. I discovered Sami only because one day there was a long queue spilling out to the straat from Loumans, a three-generations-Dutch butcher just 20 metres away, while Sami was customer-less.

They are both excellent butchers, and Sami is about as much of a threat to Dutch wellbeing as I am — and less, I venture, than a rampant Wilders. In a culture that’s notoriously penny-pinching, Loumans’s meats are a third more expensive. But it bustles with blousy matrons, and this in an economic crisis. At Sami’s Vette Kalfje you can buy much the same cuts (except, er, fatted pigs and their derivatives), get served immediately and debate Middle East politics, too. And Loumans doesn’t sell kofta.

AMSTERDAMMERS insist they are tolerant, welcoming to all comers. And it’s true, the city is a multicultural kaleidoscope; I’ve become firm friends with a Pakistani phone guy, a Kandahari launderer and his Tibetan wife, a feisty Iranian deli owner and Palestinian brothers who sell sensational baklava. Every third person seems to be gay — a big support base for Wilders; Islam does not look kindly on homosexuality, so homosexuals tend to feel more favourably toward the anti-Islamic Wilders. And there’s a coffee shop on nearly every corner. I can see, and smell, two from our apartment.

But the longer I’m here, the more I think all this famous liberalism is more accidental and, if the truth be told, pragmatically commercial than considered. Amsterdam has ghettoes, and very grim ones. Take Bijlmeer, with its disenfranchised blacks and Surinamese, whom the good burghers of Jordaan choose not to think about much, and when they do, it can be with contempt. Wilders’s disciples say that places such as Bijlmeer are evidence that many immigrants won’t assimilate and furthermore that they are sick of subsidising them from some of Europe’s highest taxes. The truth, as always, is somewhere in the middle.

SKIPPING — sometimes literally, near Centraal Station — over the Dutch clichés of dope, porn and prostitution, I’m often asked by Nederlanders if I like it here. I say it reminds me of Bali. This tends to be a conversation-stopper.

The comparison is not immediately evident. It’s four degrees outside here now while equatorial Bali maintains a steamy 32. The Netherlands is a hyper-developed conurbation; save its tourism scars, Bali is rural. Bali is often corrupt and convoluted, the Dutch are clean, candid, even curt.

But here’s my banter-arresting take. The average Balinese spends an hour a day on ethnocentric activities: dressing a temple with poleng, the ubiquitous black-and-white checkered cloth that symbolises Bali’s yin-yang dualism balancing life; thatching penjor, ceremonial bamboo poles; lighting incense and speaking Balinese instead of the official Bahasa Indonesia. Within a few minutes of meaningful engagement with a Balinese, they tend to let you know they are Balinese.

So, too, the Dutch. I’ve now taken to tallying such encounters to advance my theory. Of the 10 Nederlanders I’ve initiated chat with this week, seven quickly reminded me they are Dutch. Some other places I’ve noticed this are in Sri Lanka among the Sinhalese, and in Singapore. A friend told me Israelis also do it — some defensive kind of cultural re-affirmation, as he put it.

Which seems to prove the non-scientific theory I call Small Culture Syndrome. It tends to afflict places that are cultural and linguistic islands surrounded by intimidating — or as many see it, threatening — majorities. With Balinese, it’s the Javanese Muslims who run the Indonesian empire. In Bali, orang dari Jawa, man from Java, is the catch-all explanation why bad things happen. The Buddhist-Sinhalese, though a majority on their island, feel like a minority in their mostly Hindu-Dravidian corner of South Asia. In Chinese-Malay-Tamil Singapore, all three ethnicities have something to feel spooked about. With Israelis, it would be the Arabs and Islam.

Here Small Culture Syndrome has 16 million Dutch surrounded by 75 million Francophones, the mighty Anglosphere, and 85 million Germans about to realise a destiny of dictating Europe. And there are fast-breeding home-grown Muslims. Not to mention China, too, wanting to buy everything.

That’s a lot to fret about if you’re Dutch — small, rich, smug but just a little bit anxious at the centre of the European drama.

LONDON: Starbucks, Star Pupils and Protest

THE Starbucks on St Paul’s Church Yard is one of the chain’s biggest and busiest outlets in London. And no wonder, servicing disciples of two deities, The City and The Church, and myriad tourists too, at £3.50 per winter-warming, triple-shot venti latte.

Worshippers of Mammon swing by here in their commute between the Tube and the trading screens of banks a minute away, while other pilgrims make for The Maker, symbolised in the soaring dome of Wren’s magnificent cathedral, where salvation doesn’t come cheap either – a blasphemous £14.50 entry to enter this House of God, if you don’t mind.

And for a few weeks in October and November, this thriving Starbucks got busier still, as the Occupy London movement descended on St Paul’s for the anti-capitalism protest, which outlasted the fraternal protest in New York’s Zuccotti Park, cleared in mid-November.

No matter that Starbucks symbolises what the Occupiers rail against – third-world exploitation and the “corporatocracy” – it also had things going for it: clean toilets, free WiFi and sockets to recharge laptops and mobiles.

But no longer. A showerless four months on, there’s nary a protester seen here. As electricity bills soared and the WiFi – and the bathroom – overloaded, management took an executive decision that crusties, as London’s Mayor Boris Johnson describes them, are not welcome. So a gross of portaloos was donated for the 350-strong camp. They are self-regulated, rather as the Occupiers say the corrupt City is. But in the battle to tame capitalism, there are casualties.

So, as they wait to be inevitably evicted by a patient state, no more espresso and clean loos for the land-rights-for-gay-whales crowd, and friends. Today, Starbucks is back to doing what it does best, purveying overpriced lattés to the bland clad in Dockers chinos and Zara knock-offs.

For a posse of Chinese tourists, Occupy London is an experience of something they don’t have back home – democracy and freedom of expression. Not that they seem exercised by such matters; they’re grumpy that their view of a storied church they’ve crossed the world to see is blocked by the camp’s 100-odd tents. I ask the Filipina barista serving them what she makes of the shivering anarchists and activists, many saying they do for the likes of her, the cheap third world labour Big Business likes. She shrugs and smiles mutely. I think it’s the first time she’s had cause to much notice them.

The British media, too, have mostly stopped noticing Occupy, and that’s proving fatal. St Paul’s’ protestors are now just another London fixture, and that’s no longer as interesting to the pooterish Daily Mail, which preferred to demonise them as dope-smoking hippy radicals, when they weren’t demonising them as homeless fringe-dwellers. Save perhaps the left-leaning Guardian, the media – as Occupy London sees it – is part of the establishment cancer. Like the Church (“The Synagogue of Satan”), any government, the shadowy Bilderberg Group, the monarchy, the City and Big Business, the media is not to be trusted. So the Occupiers have tried to bypass it, going direct online to fellow travellers with perhaps the most impressive, logistically speaking, aspect of the camp: its technology tent.

This is a three-metre-by-two-metre bivouac at the camp’s edges, a cigarette-stained riot of blankets, car battery-powered generators and encrypted WiFi, its satellite-derived provenance a state secret. Thanks to the body heat of the dozen or so people crammed in here live-streaming the “global revolution,” it’s also the warmest place in a camp where open fires are banned for safety’s sake as temperatures plunge to zero.

The movement’s donated laptops (the camp gets about £1,000 a week in hand-outs from sympathisers) are manned by people including Matt Horne, an ex-soldier who served in Iraq, who now helps convene Veterans for Peace. Problem is, his passionate advocacy on YouTube has attracted few hits.

Horne says he is prepared to spend the rest of his life fighting this cause, and perhaps even from this tent. “We are not going anywhere,” he insists. “We will fight any eviction attempt to the European courts and beyond.” Though the movement has lost a court-instructed eviction notice, which it’s now appealing, London’s July Olympics loom as a medium-term publicity target. I ask him what would constitute a job well done, enabling him to go home. He says “a fairer, more just world, one that’s not based on profits before people.” Matt will be livestreaming here a long time.

Outside, in the impromptu Occupy kitchen, the chai may not not be trendy, soyed or cardamommed, it may even be called tea, but it’s got one thing over the Starbucks version: It is free, just like the soup, stew and bread also being ladled

out. Which is also why Occupy London has become occupied by London’s homeless. I ask one of the rough-sleepers why he’s here. “I’m against them,” he says. Who precisely, I ask. “You know, all those fuckers workin’ in the banks,” he says without much conviction. Was he one of them, I venture, who lost his job in 2008? “No, mate, I’m from Bournemouth, I’ve come here to get some free grub with my friends.”

The presence of the homeless has caused issues for the movement. At one level, they’ve been embraced as victims of capitalism, cast out by a pitiless system, society’s embarrassing detritus for whom no-one takes responsibility. Says “Arthur” – named for he of Excalibur fame -volunteering at the movement’s information tent: “They are welcome here. They are homeless for a reason, you know.” But there is concern and frustration that the homeless burden Occupy’s core message, so they’ve been gently coaxed away from where the core philosophies are batted around, in “general assemblies” and at the “Tent City University,” where lecturers of genuine calibre have inspired protesters.

Still, Arthur warns that the City bucks who swagger through the square on Fridays after a skinful and like to give the crusties some lip and biff “should remember that they are only a lost job away the same plight when the system spits them out.” That doesn’t seem to exercise the corpulent Jack-the-Lad owner of an Audi A5, which had the misfortune to break down on his way to dinner. As he waits for the AA, he chortles, “Really, someone should just clear them away. They are a fuckin’ embarrassment.”

Barnaby Raine doesn’t agree. At 16, he’s dressed in the uniform of Westminster School. Set in the grounds of Westminster Abbey, the school is one of Britain’s most prestigious secondary colleges, a passage for the country’s established elite to Oxbridge and beyond to power and prominence. With its emphasis on academic rigour, its high-achieving alumni is lustrous: seven Prime Ministers and myriad statesmen, writers, intellectuals and philosophers. The founder of the Bank of England was an Old Westminster, as is Nick Clegg, Britain’s deputy prime minister, as was, fittingly, Sir Christopher Wren, designer of the temple soaring above us. It’s a serious school for those presumed if not entitled to be going places.

As Barnaby and Arthur nod in furious agreement about what’s ailing the planet, “Sir,” Barnaby’s well-dressed economics teacher, is waiting a metre away and drinking it all in. “I feel as a teacher, that it’s important for me to open them to different perspectives on capitalism and social responsibility,” he says. “I don’t find a lot of resistance to these kinds of ideas in the classroom at all.”

Not that Barnaby needs much encouragement. Marked by some as a future prime minister and already profiled by The Independent, he is a cause célèbre in left circles after his impassioned address to the Coalition of Resistance national conference 18 months ago.

Barnaby tells me that “in the wider country, there is a lot of sympathy for the idea that in 2008 we had a huge systemic financial crisis and nothing much has really changed. Still today, bankers are picking up multi-million pound bonuses in banks that are owned by the taxpayer.” Indeed, a week later, Stephen Hester, chief executive officer of the Royal Bank of Scotland that was bailed out by the British taxpayer in 2008, was awarded a £1.4 million bonus, only to waive it as the nation’s bile boiled into disgust. This should’ve been a win for Occupy London, but the protest got little credit for percolating the national revulsion over the million-pound-plus City payments. Those flames were fanned by politicians occupying the debate.

A few tents away, ”Aaron” of the hacktivist group Anonymous, cheerfully hands around chipolatas fried on a gas cooker by a man in a Guy Fawkes mask. Aaron’s named himself after the Old Testament priest famed for his eloquence. As he dissects mankind’s ills, arguing for root-and-branch corporate reform and deeper regulation of banks, a dozen passersby have gathered. But it all seems a little undergraduate. I feel like I have to rush off in a Kombi to a student union concert. There’s no talk of China’s emergence, of Putin. About as global as the debate gets is someone from Chicago remarking that Obama is a puppet.

Aaron says Occupy London is the public expression of Britain’s “silent majority.” At the very least, their occupation of St Paul’s “has made Britons think, made them aware,” he says, pointing out that before Occupy, it would be unthinkable to read the Archbishop of Canterbury’s defence of the movement in a Financial Times op-ed, as Rowan Williams penned in November. As we speak, I see a billboard promoting a week-long series in the FT, “Capitalism in Crisis.”

Someone’s noticing.

Egypt: Banking on a revolution

CAIRO -

In January and February this year, as revolution coursed through Cairo and beyond, Egypt’s central bank governor, Farouk Abd El Baky El Okdah, called the heads of the country’s main banks to a series of urgent meetings at the Cairo Marriott on Zamalek Island in the middle of the Nile.

“We were called for meetings every two days with the central bank governor,” recalls Barclays’ country head, Khalid El Gibaly. “It was off-site at the Marriott, we were not even to go to the central bank head office.” That’s because to do so would have left bankers, particularly those coming from Cairo’s downtown or from the western Giza side of the Nile, with the then dangerous, near impossible trek through the clogged Tahrir area. And, with the country on fire, and the blaze threatening to spread to the financial system, Okdah demanded that everyone show up at the Marriott.

It’s only 800 metres from the Marriott across the Nile’s Sixth October Bridge to Tahrir Square. From the hotel, anxious bankers, many of whom had reluctantly left neighbourhood posts keeping potential looters at bay to come to the meetings, could hear and smell the uprising – the million-strong roar of protest rising from the square, the headquarters of Hosni Mubarak’s disgraced National Development Party smouldering by the riverside.

These were extreme times and if ever there was a moment to display one’s independence from government (as many central bankers claim to do but rarely actually achieve in practice), this was it. The country was in chaos, the system was crumbling, the economy had largely ceased to function – Crédit Agricole estimated that the month-long revolution cost the economy at least $300 million a day; other estimates were higher – and vigilantes roamed the streets as police abandoned their posts. And Mubarak, who had appointed Okdah in 2003, was grimly holding on.

In the midst of this anarchy, bankers fretted that their branch networks would be overwhelmed by angry, desperate depositors. There were already rumours of runs on banks. Barclays’ Khalid recalls “a tough few days in the battlefield going around my branches seeing hundreds of customers queueing. There was the start of a run, on everybody.” In wealthy Nasr City’s Abbas El-Akkad Street, where many banks have branches, Khalid says: “It was a sight to see. It was crazy because there were mile-long queues out of every bank branch, without exception.”

And then there were the private calls to field from regime members, from cronies who had got richer the closer they were to the Mubaraks. They wanted their cash too, and fast before they fled, a particular issue for the state-owned market leader, National Bank of Egypt. (Egypt’s newly formed Illicit Gains Authority has claimed that Mubarak’s wife, Suzanne, kept an account with a $145 million balance at the NBE’s Heliopolis branch. She has admitted to – and handed back to the state – an NBE account with $4 million in it.)

“We discussed two things very clearly,” recalls Khalid. “One was convertibility and we had to ensure that was seen as free and possible any time in any quantity for any individual. The other was transferability, to ensure there is confidence in the FX markets, unlimited.” The dominant NBE, sometimes seen as a de facto central bank in Cairo, even volunteered to fly in dollars in cash from abroad to service customers and other banks.

The Central Bank of Egypt also injected dollars from its reserves. Indeed, Egypt’s reserves have fallen from about $36 billion pre-revolution to about $25 billion today, partly explaining why the Egyptian pound has traded in a narrow, some say artificial, 5.67 to 5.97 range to the dollar since January 1, one of the world’s most stable currencies this year. For foreign investors willing to plunge into Egyptian treasuries or stocks there was free transferability, not that many took advantage of this.

Another of the Marriott meetings’ participants remembers: “We made plans. We didn’t know if they’d be workable plans, but little was left unsaid.” On the table were myriad micro issues: bank and staff security, how to maintain liquidity and confidence, the logistics of physically moving money around the country. And then there was the macro picture: stabilizing the currency, and dealing with expected capital outflow. The bankers weren’t entirely convinced Okdah would remain in his post. His was – and remains – one of the many Mubarak-era positions at which revolutionary fingers pointed accusingly.

The CBE made some broader edicts but left the implementation and detail up to banks themselves. The meetings were well received and participants spoke well of Okdah’s calm. “We left the meeting more confident than we entered it,” says one.

Khalid says Barclays was “literally the first bank to realize that this was something bigger than the usual protest”. That was on January 27, two days after Tahrir Square began to fill. Barclays’ office is barely a rock’s throw from the square. It’s also next door to a key military barracks. Some 50 metres away is the US embassy. It’s a high-security area that, at that uncertain time, was no place to do any banking.

“We were the first bank to invoke a business continuity plan,” says Khalid. In other words, closing the doors of its downtown headquarters and moving a skeleton staff to the less-frantic Nasr City, in Cairo’s well-heeled east. Closed by order of the central bank, Barclays reopened on February 6. Five days later, Mubarak fell. (Khalid’s team would later win an internal accolade from their London headquarters for their handling of the crisis.)

Across the river at the headquarters of the Bank of Alexandria (AlexBank), the country’s biggest privately owned bank, its 39-year-old head of retail banking, Bassel Rahmy, had no time to join his countrymen in revolt even if he had wanted to, and he did.

A formidable former member of Egypt’s Davis Cup tennis squad (he was part of the team that whitewashed Tunisia 5-0 in 1993) Rahmy was frantically interpreting and tailoring the plans as transmitted from the Marriott meetings. “It was a very interesting time,” he recalls. “We were trying to figure out what decisions were best. This was new stuff for us.”

The central bank had ruled that 10% of a bank’s branches should remain open – it was up to the bank to choose which ones. But there was an imperative to maintain a geographic spread, not just in the more economically literate parts of Cairo and Alexandria but in the poorer Nile Delta and Upper Egypt too. That created security headaches.

“Security was a very big issue, especially in February,” says Rahmy, “to move money to supply branches. For example, it is 1,000 kilometres to Aswan. We used the army.”

He continues: “I was always consulting my branch managers, because they knew their customers, and we wanted to see which customers were knocking on our doors for their money and where.” In the event, bank branches were closed for almost three weeks and ATM networks – a target of looters (AlexBank had 18 ATMs destroyed) – were down for about a week.

“We didn’t want another revolution from the ordinary people because they don’t have money. They need to eat,” says Rahmy. “We didn’t want rumours and speculation about liquidity, so on purpose we told our customers: Whatever amount you want to withdraw, please withdraw.’ We didn’t apply a ceiling.”

It was a high-risk strategy, one that counters a conservative instinct to limit withdrawals and hold cash. “Yes, it was high-risk,” he says, “but if you do the opposite and you tell them you can only withdraw E£10,000 (about $1,700), they will panic.”

It worked “beautifully,” says a proud Rahmy. “It went smoothly and people understood there was no problem.”

Hisham Ezz Al-Arab, executive chairman of Commercial International Bank, Egypt’s biggest locally owned private bank, didn’t have to go far to the CBE meetings – he lives in the same Zamalek neighbourhood. But from his office in Giza, he implemented a contingency plan he had previously commissioned to deal with riots, natural disasters or terrorist attacks. When the revolution arrived, he closed CIB’s 155 branches for about 10 days but the bank continued to function internally, as employees stuck at home telecommuted on landlines, which Mubarak hadn’t cut, unlike the mobile systems.

“We were still operating – our asset liability division, international dealing treasury, all operating,” says Al-Arab. “Everything went by the book. The army helped us.” He says the projection of cash withdrawals was exaggerated. “In reality, after a week, the cash held in our vaults went up.”

He says: “We were determined to go back to normal but it wasn’t out of love for the ex-president. It was out of love for the country.” (Al-Arab’s remarks reflect a flowering of nationalism since the revolution – in advertising and popular culture, even down to poignant memorials in banking halls and offices to the fallen shaheed, or martyrs, who died during the Tahrir protests.)

At Barclays, Khalid worried about the re-emergence of the FX black market, which had been largely killed off in the previous decade. “We said free convertibility, unlimited,” he recalls. “If somebody walks in and wants to convert E£100 million into dollars, let them do that so that they have confidence that their money is safe. We had a significant amount of customers do that in the early days until they realized there was no issue.”

He recalls: “We were discussing and agreeing strategies. Strategies revolving around how to service customers, how to re-instil confidence in the market because things were getting out of control. We had to be one of the few sane entities around. We had to placate, we prepared and we gave people confidence. And we gave them their money.” (Another problem for Barclays was documents that surfaced in the newly liberated Egyptian media and online that purported to show a $7.45 million treasury bond issued by Barclays in Hosni Mubarak’s favour. The bank was forced to make a statement insisting that the documents were bogus.)

A veteran of the Cairo operations of Citibank and Jordan’s Arab Bank, AlexBank’s Rahmy says: “We were expecting much worse.” AlexBank had revisited reasonably rosy pre-revolution forecasts in March, and downgraded its expected business – returns, commissions, net revenue – by about 50%. AlexBank’s Rahmy claims that deposits have actually increased since February by about E£700 million, a sign of confidence in a banking sector that has often struggled in the past for public trust in Egypt. “It’s been one of the success stories in Egypt since the revolution,” he says.

Restart time for the banks

A massive new billboard framed by the Nile’s Sixth October Bridge speaks to a telling transition in these revolutionary times. The iconic bridge marks an Egypt whose time has passed, the 1973 war when Cairo’s military regime – with Hosni Mubarak as air force chief of staff – led an Arab coalition across the Suez Canal and started a campaign against Israel on its Yom Kippur holy day.

But this billboard parades the more modern accomplishment of the January revolution. A counterpoint to much of the capital’s poverty, it depicts a young man with a computer screen that declares “Egypt 2011″ and a taskbar with the icons “STOP. PAUSE. RESTART”, his finger poised over RESTART.

But one area that’s still waiting for someone to press the restart button is Egypt’s torpid banking sector. It is plodding along much as it has for years. This is the country where just 8 million people – out of an 80 million population – have bank accounts.

Further evidence that Egypt has some catching up to do is seen in the downtown district that passes for a Cairene Wall Street. All around here in quiet streets coated sepia brown by years of pollution and desert dust, grand villas built for local pashas a century ago, when London held sway in Egypt, have become the gracious headquarters of banks. HSBC, Barclays, Citibank, Paribas, Bank of Alexandria and Arab African International Bank among many others operate from here, making their way in tumultuous times.

In other comparable commercial centres – Mumbai, Jakarta, Istanbul, São Paolo – economic boom times have led to gleaming new financial centres soaring from urban badlands. In Cairo, few financial institutions have invested in modern towers to house their banks and make a statement too. In Mubarak’s Egypt, the money and incentives hadn’t much been there. It perhaps speaks volumes that the deal that has local bankers a-twitter is the yet to be closed purchase by London’s Standard Chartered of Greece’s Piraeus Bank’s 40-branch strong Egyptian operation. If consummated, it will be the most important deal in Egyptian banking since the $1.6 billion purchase by Italy’s Intesa SanPaolo of government-owned AlexBank in 2006.

That landmark deal also further reduced the government’s hold over banking here via NBE and Banque Misr, now measured at around 40%, about half the level of 20 years ago. Still, at around $150 million, the Piraeus deal is hardly transformational for the market; it’s a play that’s as much about shoring up loss-making Piraeus at home as it is on Egypt’s future.

And things can move extremely slowly in Egypt. For example, it was only six years ago that AlexBank centralized its network. Until then – and AlexBank wasn’t alone – each of its branches operated as if it was a separate standalone bank – with its own balance sheet, loan officers and discretion, and its own profit-and-loss. It was like banking in the 1930s.

But eight months after Tahrir, Cairene bankers are hoping that revolution is imminent. While the prevailing tone among Egyptian bankers is wait-and-see as they ponder what type of government and policy will emerge from the chaos, they tread water with a cautious optimism that Egypt will quickly be transformed into a Middle East tiger economy. Or, as one cricket-savvy banker put it to Euromoney: “We’re ready to graduate from the Goldman Sachs ‘second 11’ (a play on Goldman’s N-11, or the ‘next 11’) to adding an e to Bric.”

That will take some time. AlexBank’s Rahmy says: “As a banker, I feel ashamed to have only 8 million accounts across 80 million people. There are only 1.2 million credit cards. But we see this as a big chance to expand.”

Of Egypt’s privately owned non-government banks, AlexBank is first in retail banking assets and third in liabilities. In the wider banking sector, government-owned NBE is the elephant in the room. Banque Misr and NBE each has about 400 branches and AlexBank has around half that, the widest-networked of the private-sector banks, with a presence in all of Egypt’s 27 district governorates, rare for private-sector banks, which have tended to focus on the urban centres of Cairo and Alexandria. Then comes the well-regarded National Société Générale Bank.

Rahmy says AlexBank’s typical customer is from the C-D demographic but the bank is also creating new profiles for the upper-middle class – quasi-private banking similar to HSBC’s Premier offering. In Egypt that market has tended to bank abroad.

“It’s a matter of education – people have to know what it means to save, to get a return, to have a debit card, a credit card, and that banks can help you start a business.”

But he has concerns about how the revolution has trended since February. He says the Tahrir demonstrations of recent months have been different to the January rallies. Now, he says, Egyptians go there when they have any sort of grievance. “What’s happening now in Tahrir is not positive,” he says. “The bad people are in jail, people are in court and we have to trust the system to work it all out, and we go back to work.” He worries that with the Mubarak family on trial, “people are not going to calm down unless they see something tangible come out of them. We don’t have a magic wand to change everything in one day. People have to be patient, we need to go back to work and do our job, rebuild the economy. We have lost a lot.”

He says Egyptians were distracted by the revolution. “We didn’t know where the ship was sailing. How many people will be fired from all this, from the private sector and the government? What will the bad loans be? The credit card bills? The non-payment of mortgages? The lack of tourists? We had no guide for this, of which way to go.

“And then we recovered, strongly and especially in retail banking. We started seeing it in May, after the new government came in.

“The success of the banking in the coming five years is retailing to small businesses and micro-financing. This is where the big potential is, at the grassroots, from people who were economically disadvantaged before, people who were unbankable; you give them the money, they do a project. We are trying to unlock that entrepreneurism, we have all the tools to make this country successful. We have 6 million people working in the government sector – that’s too many.”

He says there are two remaining bottlenecks – getting a good president and a capable cabinet. “The people will work. You put them in place, Egypt will boom in no time.”

Rahmy at AlexBank thinks agriculture and resources, notably petroleum, will be the drivers of a new Egyptian economy. Infrastructure was neglected by Mubarak. “It’s like we will have to destroy everything and built it better again,” says Rahmy.

Khalid El Gibaly at Barclays says Egypt needs a cabinet that is seen to be for the long term, to enable clarity on policy, which has been lacking since the resignation of Samir Radwan as finance minister after just six months.

When asked how business is going, Khalid says: “It goes without saying that it is not doing nearly as well as it was last year, partly because of politics, security and the general mindset of consumers and corporates, all interlinked.”

He adds: “Any decision to get into a long-term borrowing arrangrment has been put on hold. It’s not that plans have changed, they’ve just been rescheduled, [the thinking is] let’s see what happens in 2012 and that’s leading to a big impact in 2011. And this is not helped by the global economic environment, in a lot of the traditional trading partners of Egypt.

“The security situation is leading to a lot of uncertainty, unrest and unease. The new-found liberty and freedom is having a negative mpact on productivity. People are saying: ‘I’m going to continue on strike until I get what I need’ and they are not very clear [what they want].”

Khalid says there are questions over tourism and construction, not because they are bad industries but because “for the next six to 12 months customer demand will not be as strong and income flows into these sectors might not be sufficient to service their debt”.

Khalid says the “critical agenda item” is the upcoming election. “The army can only do so much, they can’t be the police, so a fundamental requirement is the feeling that security is in place.”

“They [Egyptian citizens] say they want everything and it doesn’t seem they are willing to get into a dialogue. The balanced maturity required to reach a middle ground is still to come.” Khalid says, though, that he is “cautiously optimistic” about Egypt. “There’s a danger of things going in the other direction, of going to extremes, even the days of socialism, even beyond.

“The jury’s out. There are obviously balancing forces to all this directionlessness.”

Khalid says he is starting to see good signs at his branches. Although a wholly-owned subsidiary of Barclays UK since 2004, when it ended a joint venture with state-owned Banque du Caire, 60-branch-strong Barclays Egypt now operates as a local bank, with the same rights and functions as any locally owned operation. Khalid says: “We’ve taken measures, so we do more business with the segments we know really well.” He pinpoints these as the food and beverage sector, farming and oil and gas.

He says the banking system is very sound, thanks to reforms “fortunately” set down over the past decade, often in response to earlier crises from abroad. “The banks are very well capitalized,” he says. “We are operating with a capital adequacy ratio of over 20%.” The CBE’s minimum requirement is 10%.

“Banks,” he says, “are swimming in liquidity. The loan-to-deposit ratio is around 53% to 54% so banks are overly liquid.”

He says non-performing loans had become a problem because borrowers had not been able to service loans as banks were closed, and then customers were fearful of venturing onto the streets. “These guys were good credit in December,” notes Khalid. “And all of a sudden not-so-good credit in January and February on the books, so we are not concerned about the fundamentals of the market, it’s a logistical thing. Starting from May, things had gone back to just about normal, and we’ve been heartened by that.”

He adds: “This is a period of maintaining our business rather than hyper-investment. But we have great ambitions in this country. Fingers crossed, by the third quarter of next year, things should’ve returned to some semblance of normality and we’ll get back to the same growth as before.”

Bearded ambiguity

In the Giza headquarters of Commercial International Bank, executive chairman Hisham Ezz Al-Arab has a portrait of Karl Marx on the sideboard by his desk.

That’s not because Al-Arab believes there is much inspiration in Das Kapital for a modern-day Egyptian banker. With rhetoric flying around the confused nation, he tells the story that after the revolution, his clients and colleagues were speculating what type of democracy and economy would emerge from the chaos. Will it be the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood and its Shariah doctrine? Or could it even be communism?

Al-Arab jokes that it doesn’t matter who comes. “I can say to the brothers that he was a salafi,” he says, referring to the pious, heavily bearded 12th-century followers of Islam. And the communists would recognize him too. “I could tell any of them, ‘Look, I’m a believer!’”

As CIB employees break for midday prayers in the lift lobby outside, he agrees that Egypt’s banks are sound. “We are proven to be well structured and well capitalized. We got through the 2008 financial crisis, and then we went through the revolution, and banks are solid.

“What brought the banks down in Europe and the US was a lack of financial oversight; it is different here in Egypt. In terms of asset quality, liquidity and capitalization, we are by far better than the majority of the countries in this region.”

Rare in being Egyptian-owned and privately held – its share free-float is 91% of issued stock – CIB boasts a market share of 8.1% in loans and 7.1% in deposits made at its 155 branches nationwide, not far shy of the Italian-owned AlexBank. But CIB’s shares were hit hard in the aftermath of the crisis, down to almost half its year high, against the Cairo stock exchange’s benchmark EGX30 index, which is off 35%. The bank’s stock began to marginally edge back in August after it reported a better-than-expected 11% fall in second-quarter profits of E£443 million on the earlier quarter.

“We got hammered,” laments Al-Arab. “Obviously I’m poorer now, but people are starting to calm. Policy is starting to open again, and we’ve started to lend more. There is starting to be a catch-up, even in tourism at [the Red Sea resort of] Sharm El-Sheikh, which had been cursed [because Mubarak was exiled there after resigning].

“But from now until the parliamentary election it’s going to be very much like a rollercoaster. Some good days, some bad days. Fasten your seatbelt. After the elections, the fundamentals will not have changed, there are still 80 million people who have to eat, grow, find houses, raise their families. But I know smart people closing deals now, while prices are depressed.”

He adds: “The entire business model is changing. The previous business model was built around who-do-you-know – who do you know to bribe to get a licence, or a permit to expand. When the model changes from who-do-you-know to what-do-you-know, this country will flourish.”

Thailand: Korn puts Shinawatra government on watch

BANGKOK:

What a difference a year makes in Thailand.

This time last year, Bangkok’s downtown Ratchaprasong crossroads at the Thai capital’s commercial core was a mess. The iconic Central Department Store was in ruins, trashed after the scorched-earth tactics of the crippling protests earlier in the year. Much of Bangkok’s commercial core – its chic five-star hotels and the luxury brand names of this iconic Asian downtown – was off limits and under reconstruction. And the divide between the red and yellow political factions was as wide as ever.

Today, it is impossible to imagine that anything more violent than a manic dash to a summer sale ever took place here.

Despite deep ructions in society, and some good reasons to be concerned for their future, not least the failing health of their much-loved octogenarian monarch, Thais have not retreated into economic introspection. Despite five years of red-yellow bitterness, airport blockades and that nasty two-month stand-off in central Bangkok last year that ended in a military crackdown, Thailand’s economy steamed on regardless.

Thailand enjoyed its most buoyant year in decades, with GDP expanding 8% since the May 2010 disturbances, a China-style performance despite tourism – which makes a bigger contribution to Thailand’s economy than to any other in Asia, up to 10% – taking a big hit after travellers were spooked by the bloody Bangkok siege. (And this prompted the industry’s time-honoured ‘Amazing Thailand’ slogan to be pragmatically amended to ‘Amazing Value’ as $300-a-night Bangkok hotels were marked down by 75% to boost occupancies that fell as low as 10% in the months after the downtown violence.)

The Bangkok stock exchange’s benchmark SET Index has been southeast Asia’s second-best performer in 2010, up 40% and bested only by frothy Jakarta. The baht too was strong, up by around 10% against the US dollar over the year. And the Bank of Thailand has raised interest rates nine times in recent years, to dampen the exuberance that policymakers in most sputtering western economies would like to have. Indeed, the baht performed such that the now former government warned the notionally independent central bank that the buoyant currency was risking growth and export demand.

And that probably would have been the case this year had the devastating tsunami not slammed into Japan’s northeastern Pacific coast. That led to critical disruptions in the supply of parts for Thailand’s thriving auto sector, an industry known as southeast Asia’s Detroit for the sprawling plants on the hot plains that surround the Thai capital.

None of which saved Korn Chatikavanij and his Democrats, savaged by Thaksin Shinawatra’s re-made Pheu Thai Party, headed by his neophyte sister, Yingluck. In mid-August she – or was it he? – announced Korn’s successor in the finance ministry, veteran regulator Thirachai Phuvanatnaranubala.

This is not what was supposed to happen after one of the bloodiest episodes in Thailand’s coup-plagued history. Chronic instability doesn’t usually result in an economic boom.

That Thais endured all this mess is a testimony to the economy’s resilience: the disturbances were geographically confined to a downtown core and did not spill over to labour agitation nor to the sprawling Bangkok surrounds where crucial exports are manufactured.
Pump-primed

And in time-honoured Thai tradition, some serious government pump-priming also helped. The then Abhisit Vejjajiva-led Democrat government threw billions into stimulating micro-payments in impoverished rural areas, where support for former prime minister Thaksin, ousted in a military coup in 2006, and his red-hued followers is at its fiercest.

Elections are supposed to be won on the economy, but clearly not in Thailand. Abhisit and his deputy, finance minister and former investment banker Korn, had presided over what had reasonable claims to be a ‘miracle economy’. And yet on July 3 they were tossed out in a landslide. Under new prime minister Yingluck Shinawatra, Thailand feels as calm as it has been for years. Thais are clearly tired of turmoil and are prepared to give Yingluck a chance to heal the nation.

Korn is back in opposition, a back-to-the-future moment for the ex-Bangkok head of JPMorgan, who still hopes he might become Thai finance minister again. We first spoke to the urbane Thai politician in 2008, in the parliament in Bangkok as he was doing what most shadow finance ministers do in democracies – present alternative policies to run the economy, which at the time was new ground for Thailand, where governments have tended to rule in isolation.

But now, three years on, he is again in opposition, and in parliament too, where again he was presenting an alternative vision to 66 million Thais and Euromoney. Except that, in between, he’d been in office implementing many of the policies he was arguing for in 2008.
His new adversary on the government side is a London School of Economics-educated technocrat economist best known in Thailand for leading Thailand’s market regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission. He was appointed to the SEC in 2003 during the last Thaksin government and kept his slot during the five prime ministerships that followed, surviving the 2006 military coup that ousted Thaksin. Before joining the SEC, Thirachai was with the Bank of Thailand for 26 years.

Thirachai’s appointment has generally been well received by Thai-watchers; they note that many of his years at the central bank – where he reached the deputy governorship before moving to the SEC – were spent in the financial institution regulation department. Thailand’s economy virtually collapsed in 1997/98 when the management and fiscal prudence of many of its bank and finance companies was found wanting. New to office, Thirachai was unavailable to be interviewed by Euromoney.

Prominent regional economist Jim Walker, managing director of Hong Kong-based economics consultancy Asianomics, says that although the jury is still out on Yingluck’s new team at finance “a number of policies are worrying from a market perspective and I think a lot of them wouldn’t happen anyway”.

Walker says the new Thai government of Yingluck Shinawatra “is a much more specifically populist government than the Thaksin government was in 2001. The policies are open to question, they’re obviously pressuring the central bank, which knows they’ve still got a problem with inflation and that this is not the time to be lowering interest rates as the populist Yingluck camp would prefer.”

On August 24, speaking at the first main debate since the Yingluck government was formed, ex-finance minister Korn made his first big contribution from the opposition benches to what he said “was the most interesting policy debate of my parliamentary career”.

Korn had argued during the bitterly fought campaign that much of the economic platform put forth by the Shinawatra camp was “lavish”, “unsustainable” and “undoable”.

He said: “All during the campaign they insisted it was not only doable but good for the country and that they were ready to execute them.

“Now that they have the votes, we are arguing: ‘OK, you’ve won, the people are waiting, go ahead and do it’. Yet in their post-election policy statement in parliament they are suddenly not as clear about how they will be executed as they were during the campaign.”

Korn cites the controversial policy of raising the minimum wage. The Shinawatra government had promised to raise it to Bt300 a day (about $10), about double the present level in rural areas, and to roll it out across every Thai province. It is the massive income differences, particularly between the rural poor and the urban middle class, that have been a flashpoint of the disturbances of recent years.

The Democrats had moved in government to raise wages substantially but their policy was more directed at Thailand’s poor regions, which also happened to be where Korn’s Bangkok-oriented party had less support. This was unpopular with the Democrats’ core support, the small and medium-sized business owners and economically able Thai middle class. But Korn argued that it was necessary to even out incomes and the cost of living, and to help placate the simmering tensions among the rural poor toward the urban elite in places such as Bangkok and foreigner-drenched tourist areas such as Phuket.

Sensible things

“We agreed that the minimum wage should rise by an initial 25% over the next two years, but we were more circumspect,” Korn says. “It had to be balanced so as to incentivize business investment, but our proposal was far short of the Bt300 promised by our opponents.” Korn said that was unsustainable and prime minister Yingluck, as she addressed parliament in late August, pledged to press ahead with the policy as sold in the campaign, albeit with some unspecified “adjustments to the details”.

Korn claims: “Now they are saying it’s not going to be Bt300 for everybody. Now they are saying the sensible things that they should’ve said all along.”

He adds: “It’s huge. This is the one single issue that the working population had been waiting for, so it will have significant reverberations.

“Now they are being told: ‘Oh, by the way [to qualify] you have to have certain qualifications, increased productivity and so on’. That’s not how you define minimum wage.”

Had Thais known earlier what they know now, would this have swayed the July 3 poll?

“It would’ve made an impact,” Korn says. “I wouldn’t go so far as to say it would’ve changed the result of the election. But put together with other promises that are all now looking shaky… well, it’s very different to what was being said. There are significant backtracks to state policy, including with their famous debts amnesty.

“Its just slightly short of criminal. The total cost of their programme exceeds the government’s legal borrowing limit.

“They need to provide explanation as to how they are going to fund their programmes.” Korn says this will lead to a larger budget deficit and increased inflation.

Walker says former finance minister Korn was a “genuinely clued-up guy” who had managed the economy with prudence. He says the Democrats’ economic policy was “virtually a blueprint of the first two Thaksin governments of the early 2000s, with a Democrat picture in them.

“I don’t think that was a bad strategy, and they executed it relatively well, and that was largely to do with Korn, who’s much less a political figure than Abhisit was. He delivered a good case.”

Walker says Thailand is well prepared to weather any effects of a “Take Two spillover from the 2008 global financial crisis, the continuing euro crisis and sclerosis in the US. Generally Thailand is in quite good shape because it hasn’t gone to any extremes in terms of investment expenditure and capacity expansion over the last few years. It’s one of the defensive plays in Asia, even with the new government.”

Whether or not that soothes simmering tensions is anyone’s guess. With the semi-divine King Bhumibol ailing and 83, his 64-year reign encompassing 15 military coups, 16 new constitutions and 27 prime ministers, of greater concern to many Thais and foreign investors is how the pivotal southeast Asian country will manage the consequences of his demise.