Category: Aggregated

Where’s the new bailout money going? Not to the Greek people. This is clear. Friday, the European Economic and Financial Affairs Council (Ecofin) of the 28 EU economic and finance ministers, officially approved the “bridge loan” of EU7.16 billion to cover debt payments while the new bailout is negotiated. Of that, EU4.5 billion is going directly to the European Central Bank on July 20 to pay interest on Greek bonds held by the ECB; the rest is going to the IMF to cover the payments Greece failed to make at the end of June, which only covers payments up to Aug. 20. Later in August another payment is due to the ECB, which Greece, without a bailout, will not be able to make. If Greece does not make these payments, and Greece does not have the money to pay them, then Greece’s entire unsustainable debt pile would be declared in default, a move whose consequences would go way beyond Greece.

The bridge-loan funds came from the European Stability Mechanism (ESM), according to European Commission Vice President Valdis Dombrovskis, who said that Great Britain expressed its strong opposition regarding funding via the ESM, of which it is a financial backer although it is not in the Eurozone. Reportedly, Britain has made an arrangement that it would not suffer losses if the ESM loan to Greece were defaulted on.

The negotiations for a new bailout are currently being approved by parliaments throughout Europe (in nations requiring votes). Germany, Austria, and Latvia voted up approval for the talks. The negotiations could result in a new bailout of between EU82 billion to more than EU90 billion. Where will the money go?

The popular Greek website DefenceNet published a preliminary rundown of where it claims the debt will be going. It includes:

—EU29.7 billion for loan repayments within the Eurozone

—EU9.9 billion to the IMF

—EU5.5 billion to private debt holders.

—EU25 billion for the recapitalization of the banking system (which was destroyed when ECB cut off liquidity)

—EU17.2 billion in interest payments on debt.

—EU7 billion for domestic debt.

—EU7.7 billion for the liquidity of the banking system.

As for France’s backing for debt relief, French Finance Minister Michel Sapin told Europe 1 radio, that debt relief could involve measures such as an extension of maturities, lengthening of the grace period on repayment, or easing of interest rates. However, Sapin ruled out any write-off of Greek loans, saying that as a creditor, France wanted to ensure it gets its money back, according to Reuters.

On Thursday, Bernie Sanders (Ind.-VT) became the fifth Senator to sponsor the Glass-Steagall bill, S. 1709, introduced last week by Sens. Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), John McCain (R-AZ), Maria Cantwell (D-WA), and Angus King (Ind.-ME). Sanders’ office put out an official announcement on Friday, the day that he was appearing in Iowa with all four other Democratic presidential pre-candidates, including Martin O’Malley, who made Glass-Steagall the main issue of his campaign back in March, and one day before Sanders is scheduled to speak on the podium with O’Malley at the Netroots progressives’ conference in Arizona.

In covering Sanders’ announcement, Politico reported, “Sanders backs big bank breakups, in contrast with Hillary Clinton,” and referenced the Monday intervention by a LaRouche PAC activist, saying that “a heckler … challenged her [clinton] to revive the depression-era policy [glass-steagall].”

Sanders’ statement says:

The White House is feeling the heat of the growing support for the Glass-Steagall bill in the Senate—and so is Wall Street, as shown in a series of articles and statements.

Late Friday, The Hill published an article titled, “White House distances itself from Glass-Steagall push,” quoting White House spokesman Josh Earnest praising Wall Street and the fraudulent piece of garbage called Dodd-Frank. When asked whether Obama supports the Glass-Steagall bill, Earnest replied that the administration is “still focused on implementing the 2010 Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform law,” reported The Hill.

“’Wall Street reform has been incredibly effective at reforming our financial system in a way that looks out for the interests of the middle-class families and taxpayers,’ he said.”

The media is piling on stories about Glass-Steagall, showing both support and the Wall Street freakout.

The infamous PIMCO investment company ran a mini-manifesto on July 16 called, “Reinstating Glass-Steagall Is a Really, Really Bad Idea,” saying that Glass-Steagall “would not have prevented the last financial crisis. But reinstating it might make the next one even worse.” The first legislator the PIMCO attacks in the article is Rep. Walter Jones (R-NC) for his statements and interviews explaining how Glass-Steagall would protect bank depositors and the U.S. economy. Next, PIMCO goes after Sen. Elizabeth Warren and other Glass-Steagall co-sponsors.

The liberal Huffington Post—taking off on former President Bill Clinton’s apology about mandatory sentencing, has an article today called, “Bill Clinton Is Sorry for a Lot of Things,” announcing, “As president, Bill Clinton was wrong about Wall Street deregulation…” and plays up that he “turned a blind eye to big banks when he repealed FDR’s Glass-Steagall Act” and the Commodity Futures Modernization Act; it also highlights his 2010 apology for that “mistake.”

“In 2010, Clinton said his decision to exempt derivatives from regulation was shortsighted and … he should not have listened to his economic advisers who urged him to do it.”

“’I was wrong to take [their advice],’” Huff Post quotes Clinton saying.

In the Boston Herald, July 17, financial specialist Rick Shaffer says that even though he totally agrees that “a large part of the reason for the Great Depression was the fact that commercial banks were in essence allowed to gamble with their depositor’s money,” the chances are “slim” that Glass-Steagall will be revived because of the massive power of the mega-banks’ lobbying. Reinstating Glass-Steagall has only “a snowball’s chance,” but that could change when “consumers realize they are the most powerful” force in the country, Shaffer says.

The President of the Greek Parliament, Zoe Konstantopoulou, gave a very strong speech during the July 11 plenary debate over whether to approve prior actions for negotiations for a third bailout. It hits all the right points and is worth quoting. It was translated by Nicholas Evangelos Levis for AnalyzeGreece! from the Greek text on Left.gr; the full translation is available here.

Although in conscience, Konstantopoulou could not vote yes to back the government, she could also not vote against the government, and instead voted “present,” a form of abstention, because, as she put it, “the government is being blackmailed to consent to conditions that do not represent it, that do not come from it, that it is struggling to reverse and prevent. The prime minister spoke with honesty, bravery, boldness, and selflessness. He is the youngest of all Greek prime ministers, and he has fought as much as any of his predecessors for the democratic and social rights of the people and of the younger generations. He represented and represents our generation, and he gives us hope. I honor him and will always honor him for this stand and this choice.

“And at the same time, I consider it my binding responsibility, as president of the parliament, not to close my eyes or to pretend that I do not understand blackmail. I cannot make it easy. I could never vote for and legalize the content of this agreement.

“I think the same is true and would apply to the prime minister, who is today blackmailed with a weapon threatening the survival of his people. I believe the same applies to the government and to the parliamentary groups who support it.”

Konstantopoulou says, “Everyone has the right and obligation to resist. No resistance in history was easy.”

Here are major excerpts from her speech:

“The Greek people entrusted this Government with the great cause of releasing them from the shackles of the Memorandum, from the vise of surveillance and supervision imposed on society under the pretext of debt.

“This debt furthermore is illegal, unfair, odious, and unsustainable, as demonstrated in the preliminary findings of the Truth Commission on Public Debt, and as the creditors already knew in 2010. This debt was not incurred as a cyclical phenomenon. It was created by the previous governments through corruption in procurement, bribes, misleading terms, corporate stipulations, and astronomical interest rates, all to the benefit of foreign banks and companies. …

“After the Second World War, Germany enjoyed the greatest remission of debt so as to allow it to get back on track. This was done with the generous partnership of Greece.” But, she continues, “Germany is behaving as if history and the Greek people owe a debt to her—as if she expects to receive a historic payback for her own atrocities. Germany is promoting and enforcing a policy that constitutes a crime, not only against the Greek people, but a crime against humanity. This is a criminal concept, a widespread and systematic attack on a population with the aim and calculation to bring about its total or partial extermination. And, unfortunately, governments and institutions that are required to live up to their history and their responsibility have aligned themselves behind this attack.

“Ladies and gentlemen,

“The artificial and deliberate creation of conditions of humanitarian disaster so as to keep the people and the government in conditions of suffocation and under the threat of a chaotic bankruptcy constitutes a direct violation of all international human rights protection treaties, including the Charter of the United Nations, the European treaties, and even the statutes of the International Criminal Court. Blackmail is not legal. And those who create conditions that eliminate freedom of the will may not speak of ‘options.’ The lenders are blackmailing the government. They are acting fraudulently, since they have known since 2010 that this debt is unsustainable. They are acting consciously, since their statements anticipate the need for humanitarian aid in Greece. Humanitarian assistance for what? For an unexpected and inadvertent natural disaster? Is it an unpredictable earthquake, flooding, a fire?

“No.

“Humanitarian aid [would be required] because of their conscious and calculated choice to deprive the people of the means of survival, closing the tap of liquidity in retaliation for the democratic choice of the government and the parliament to call a referendum and to turn to the people to decide their own future. The Greek people honored the Government that entrusted them, and the parliament that allowed them the right to take their lives and fates in their own hands. With bravery and pride they announced

“NO to blackmail

“NO to ultimatums

“NO to the Memoranda of servitude

“NO to the repayment of a debt they did not create and that is not attributable to them

“NO to new measures of impoverishment and exhaustion. …

“The Greek people are the second to suffer this form of warfare in the Eurozone, preceded by Cyprus in March 2013. This attempt to impose measures rejected by the people in a referendum, using the blackmail of closed banks and the threat of bankruptcy, constitutes a violent overthrow of the Greek constitution and deprives the parliament of the authority granted to it by the constitution.

“Everyone has the right and obligation to resist. No resistance in history was easy. But we undertook the popular vote, and we trust the people on the difficult matters. It is to the difficult matters that we must respond. And we must not fear.”