«ПАПКА НОВОСТЕЙ»

fallenleafblackbeansΠετρελαϊκά και Εξόρυξη

8 Νοε 2013 (πριν από 4 χρόνια και 1 μήνα)

259 εμφανίσεις














ДИАЛОГ С ЭДВАРДОМ ЛЮТТВАКОМ:


«ГЕО
-
ЭКОНОМИКА ИОРГАНИЧЕСКИЙ ПОЛИТИКА»






2

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


ДИАЛОГ С ЭДВАРДОМ ЛЮТТВАКОМ:

«ГЕО
-
ЭКОНОМИКА ИОРГАНИЧЕСКИЙ ПОЛИТИКА»


ЭДВАРД ЛЮТТВАК

Старший научный сотрудник Центра международных и стратегических исследований, Вашингтон
(
США), выдающийся американский историк и политолог, один из крупнейших в мире специалистов по
международным отношениям, политической и военной стратегии


Ministry of international trade and industry which was there very powerful and they set there in Tokyo,

and they decided, that they are going to take over the world computer industry. So, they had their company,
the designated company in these activities there is always designated companies/ The one company that will
be your instrument. They called in Engli
sh “Chosen is one”.

Fujitsu, they launched the national program called fourth generation computing, where they are going to find
the universities, reaching centers and all the stuff for go to Fujitsu, and Fujitsu would attack the IBM on the
world market, a
nd take over computing. So, I said this is different closing the border not allowed silk to be
traded to turks. This is positive thing. And then, of course, in a recent time we phenomenal like Chinese in
taking about energy security, and going to… So, all
three things we put together to make geo
-
economic:
something very old, something very new. Then

there

are

the

complications
.


СУЛТАН АКИМБЕКОВ

Политолог, историк, главный редактор журнала "Континент", бывший Директор института мировой
экономики и политики при Фонде Первого Президента Республики Казахстан



It means, for example some struggle for the influence, for some priorities
, some advantages. It means
the geo
-
economics is the instrument for the great powers. What we will do for the small countries who is the
object for such countries?


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

Well, first of all, when you look at eh people really doing, a lot of what t
hey are doing, almost everything
they do fails. So, what the little countries should do is sit there and drink some vodka, and wait until the fail
arrives. Why is the fail happening? Always for the same reason: mainly we have businessman, industrialist,
ma
nagers who are planning get politics, and your politicians who are playing with technology and economics.
What happened in Japanese case. Was the Japanese built up Fujitsu to take over the computers. In a mean
time United States government wanted to break
IBM, because it’s a monopoly. They didn’t care if the mentality
wanted to strong IBM. No, they wanted to break IBM. So, what happened was that Japanese wanted to fight
IBM. The US didn’t defend the IBM, they broke it. And after IBM been broken, came the ne
w computer
industry. Not one company big computers, but many companies little computers. So Japanese found
themselves completely without anything, but Fujitsu had some laptops. It was very expensive way to develop
laptop. They spent to develop laptops same

they spent to develop aircraft. So, that’s what happens, this things
fail. So, what the little countries should do is to enjoy itself, and not do it. The Chinese and Sudan fail, Brazil
and so. It always like this.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

It means, for example
we have leaders of the countries possible to have influence in other countries.
You said the example between Japan and USA about Fujitsu. If you are looking for the geo
-
economical theory,
we have a countries the new capitals like Kazakhstan, like other one
. For us it’s very difficult to build such kind
of companies, leaders like IBM and so on, to have struggle with American, Japanese companies. We

are

oil

producer
,
gas

producer


КАЙРАТ КЕЛИМБЕТОВ

Заместитель Премьер
-
Министра Республики Казахстан:

How about cotton? Small country, but very employing.


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

Well, using information, that’ a different thing. The reason that we are having this session is because
there is a lo
t of misinformation. If you look at the western press, American press, European press, there were




3

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


one thousand articles saying: oh my god! Terrible! The Chinese are invading Africa. Actually, what was
happening was, for example in Sudan. The oil is always
known in Sudan. Nobody wanted for going to Sudan,
because they hate the government, because there is unstable, because there is a war, there is a horrible place
to do it. When the Chinese went to Sudan, there were Politian newspapers saying: oh, terrible!
Actually, all that
happened was that the Chinese spent a lot of money to get very high cost oil. This oil, of course, is extra oil,
before this oil did not exist. So, the other countries benefit it, because the price of the oil at this, not
Kazakhstan, but

importing countries. The countries were frightened of Chinese, they were benefiting, because
there were extra oil from the Chinese. The only people did not benefit are the Chinese, because this oil is
Sudan’s, doesn’t go back to China. And its been sold,
but originally whole thing the state oil company
persuaded the Chinese leadership to give them all the money to send it through Sudan in a name of energy
security. Now, if you are serious about the energy security. And the Chinese afraid that the Americans

want to
sell them oil or something. Well, you know, you can’t take the oil from Sudan to China unless you have a big
naive, and there is no energy securities. So, what really happened here? Is there oil company managers state
go to the politburo and persu
ade them to give the money. And energy security people give you a money, but
never works out this way. The people we have real energy security in world are the Swiss. They have no oil
fields, no naivies no nothing. They have their money. They go and buy th
e oil. And whoever has the money
buys the oil and you don’t need to do that. So, there is a lot of misinformation, misunderstanding and this has
reas consequences like in Brazil, real consequences.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

If for example return to beginning for your answering, You said that there is a thousand articles about
the China, but in Kazakhstan maybe not thousand, but hundreds such kind of articles we have. Because of
Chinese some maybe mythology, b
ecause we have 40% of our oil and gas resources under the control of
Chinese government, other part are under the control of American, another from Russian, another from
European. And

maybe

result

of

multivectoral

policy

of

Kazakhstan
.


ЭДВАРД ЛЮТТВАК

So,
first of all, you are not Sudan and you not Brazil. You have a board with China. And now, there is an
afford by the Chinese which is started, maybe, three hundred years ago to fill the Sing Zhang with Chinese
people. Therefore, if you are on this border, y
ou allowed to be nervous. If you have small population in a big
territory next to the country with a lot of people, you allowed to be nervous, but not under the geo
-
economic
growth. If you lose your independence, then the Chinese ownership of oil here is i
mportant. If you are
independent, it’s not important. Because, if you really have independence, it means that you can decide that
you want to nationalize the oil. Of course, with compensation without stealing it, not like Argentina stealing the
stuff. But

if you feel, that you can’t nationalize, for political reasons, then you have a political problem, but not
your economics.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

So what is the best strategy for our country oil and gas producer? You said about the Argentina
nationalized their oil. We have people from one side said that, maybe the Bolivian, Venezuelian and
Argentinian variant is one of the best vari
ant. Another people say that for an investment technologies is the
best for countries, which have not such kind of production. What

is

the

strategy
?


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

I think: this cases are different. In a Bolivian case they had an old contract and the term

of contract was
not good. The new president Morales is very radical at that time, very left wing, but his plan actually was to
nationalize the gas to get the gas revenue for the Bolivian government, because he wanted to do 2 ….: 1) He
wanted to imitate t
he Brazilian welfer system of giving all poor family actual money and the other he wanted to
hide his dirty secret. His dirty secret is that Evo Morales is a conservative monetary guy. His central bank is
poor Chicago. They don’t print money. In a words Ev
o Morales with a red shirt shouting, actually money very
conservative. More conservative than in a US federal reserve. Maybe like in a German Bundesbank. So, he
did not want to print money at all, and he wanted extr… that’s why he did very different case.

In Argentina it is
a dirty business. There is a private family in Argentina that got the part of the ownership of r… without any
money with a loan and then they got into trouble, and then their best friend of this president, the family of the
president, s
o the family of president nationalized rapsol to help one family. That is very different case than in




4

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


Bolivian case. In a Bolivian case the aim was not to steal the money from the Spanish to give it to friends of a
president. It was a different aim. And as

you know there was a lot of shouting, because they saw what
happened, and how it was done. They

reached

an

agreement

with

the

Brazilians
.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

What is the best strategy, for example, our model?


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

I believe that you have to seriously consider that you can industrialize country with oil and gas or you
can just sell the oil and gas take the cash and it not to work. We
have these two roads. The Norwegian you see
people think of Norway as a kind of Scandinavian country in a so European this or that. Actually the population
they were goat farmers and fishermen. Not big fishermen with big ships. Little boats and goats. The
Norwegian
government decided that oil and gas are going to be used to transform these goat farmers and fishermen to oil
workers or engineers, geologists, divers, mechanics and so. That in my view is how oil and gas should be
developed. Not to maximize pro
duction, not to maximize revenue, but to maximize human capital formation,
and you don’t have to invent anything, just copy what they did. Don’t think that the Norwegian people were so
different from Kazakh people today. They were no Phys
-
Math schools in N
orway. Very nice country. There
were maybe 100

000 educated people, but the rest of the country were very nice people didn’t have a lot of
education. And that is the way to do it. Because life for the fishermen and goat farmers is very difficult. If you
al
low them to get the government job doing nothing, like a ministry of religion in Saudi Arabia. You go there,
you put your jacket on the table, drink coffee and at five o’clock you go home. If you allow people with a very
hard life to go in easy parasitic l
ife, they will never work again. You know the bad way where very difficult life,
the bad way in Arabia will producing meat and milk. From land where other people would just die on it. So, the
bad way had skills. They had intelligence, they have all kinds o
f very clever things to produce milk and meat
from sand. Once you allowed them to go to the air conditioned office, they will never work again. You can’t get
them from the air conditioned office to the oil finding field. So, the Norwegians know this. So, t
hey never
allowed the fishermen and goat farmers to go air conditioned place. Well, in Norway warmed offices. They
moved them from the goats and the fish boats right to the oil producing places, because they had rules. They
had diversification policy and t
hey did not allowed the oil companies to bring in people. The oil companies had
to train them. They were very strict. And today, as you know, the Norwegians become very technical
population and diving and etc. So, I believe that there is a clear strategy t
hat take your government is been
talking about diversification, but this is not diversification, because the oil and gas, what is different is how you
are developing. Not maximizing revenue all production, but maximize human capital formation. I

think

it

c
an

be

done
.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

We are in expect of geo
-
economic more objects and subjects. Because are exports of oil and gas. All
these messes is from geo
-
economic theory. Is elements of influence of different countries for some advantages
for these all.


EDWARD LUTTWAK:

Countries or companies? Because we had here Exxon Mobil. Let me tell you, if
you think that he is an instrument of United States, you are completely wrong. He is an instrument of Exxon
Mobil. He is interested in Exxon Mobil. He is not inte
rested in American national interests. There are countries
that operate like countries. China is one of them. Except they co
-
divided. Russia has one monopoly GazProm
and other big monopoly companies, so they are acting like that. But in US in Houston alone

there are
thousands of oil companies, which means that there are businessmen trying to make money. They are not
carrying the flag. They are not soldiers of America. They are oil
-
gas. So, I think that people outside may see
them as being in a way governmen
tal. But they themselves typically want to do nothing with the government. It’
a kind of tax altitude. They know that taxes will separate.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

I think that according to your theory is no countries is trying to defend the interests by protectionism, but
maybe in a rank of free trade they use some other instruments.


ЭДВАРД ЛЮТТВАК





5

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


Right. There is protectionism, a lot of protection
ism under the table. Health regulations, type
regulations, and there is a dumping. For example two months ago President Obama issued an order that solar
panels from China… Because they see that Chinese are subsidizing the solar panels. The solar panel stor
y is
that every intelligent person in the world knows that we should go to solar energy. The only thing is it doesn’t
work. That’s the only problem. Therefore, the solar panel companies that sell solar panels, when there is a lot
of noise and sound. I’m th
e only person in the world who actually use a solar energy that I need it, because I
have a ranch in the Amazon 400 km from electricity. So, I have solar panels it’s an only way to get the
electricity. So, what do the Chinese do? They invest it in a nation
al way, in a huge solar panel industry. Then,
of course, people don’t buy so much. So they decide to dump it to all over the world. This is geo
-
economic
action. This s the state and trick, but the fact is a failure. Not the big failure as Brazil
-
China, but

still fail.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

If we are looking through geo
-
economical principal from our custom union with Russia, what…

Эдвард Люттвак

Старший научный сотрудник Центра международных и стратегических исследований, Вашингтон
(США), выдающийся американски
й историк и политолог, один из крупнейших в мире специалистов по
международным отношениям, политической и военной стратегии:

Listen. I’m an American living in Washington. I hate the customs union. Why do I hate it? Because this
is like seeing a very nice p
erson. He is going to bar with Belarus. Let me tell you that Belarus is not very
fashionable. Many people want to go to Monte
-
Carlo to Bali, but nobody wants to go to Belarus. Why the
Kazakhstan is going with Belarus? And, of course, in our point of view w
e would like to see you more
independent of Russia. We are not stupid, so we realize that Russia is very important to balance China. There
are so many cultural connections, the institutional con2`1nections. We understand it, but to enter in the
customs uni
on specifically is maybe more than it need to do. The worst thing will be the currency union. If you
make a currency union, the Kazakhstan will have the Ruble. This

is

not

something

we

would

like
.


КАЙРАТ

КЕЛИМБЕТОВ

What about the trade integration you ar
e doing with Canada?


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

The Americans always think on themselves very practical people, but actually they are very ideological.
Number one of American ideology is free trade. Whenever an industrialist, somebody making shirts was
destroyed by t
he Chinese imports he goes to his congressmen and says: please help me. I can’t sell shirts in
America because of Chinese imports. Congressman says: sorry, I will fight for you, defend you, but free trade.
Americans are free trade fanatics. So, why there i
s connections between Mexico and Canada? Because they
can do it. They now do it with Columbia. They do it with ancient Republic of San Marino, they would do it with
Butane. They would certainly do it with Kazakhstan. This is an American ideological crusade
, sometimes to our
advantage, sometimes not. But if you go to the secretary of treasury Mr. Guitner, he say: look, there always
Chinese imports. America is destroyed by the Chinese imports. Guitner says: we can’t go against free trade.
It’s a kind of ideol
ogical fixation, but NAFTA worked out very well. It doing a debate on NAFTA. Everybody
explained that the day after NAFTA, that America was completely destroyed by the Mexico, all the industry will
go to Mexico. Caterpillar is a heart of America. They are
in Priory in Illinois, in the heart of America, and doing
a debate they said that they are moving the factory to Mexico. And this became a whole debate. Actually it
didn’t happen. So, free trade in this case, work between Canada, Mexico and US. In other ca
se it doesn’t
always work.

When I was a little boy, I was brought up to Southern Italy. And Southern Italy suffered so badly from being
free trade with Northern Italy that today’s backward. Because they never had a chance to develop their own
industry. The
y should have not free trade. But for Americans it’s an ideology.


КАЙРАТ

КЕЛИМБЕТОВ

Mr. Luttwak, I know that you are preparing a new book about developing the role of China. What do you
think: is it a true idea that the Chinese in the future will dominat
e the world economy?


ЭДВАРД ЛЮТТВАК





6

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


Старший научный сотрудник Центра международных и стратегических исследований, Вашингтон
(США), выдающийся американский историк и политолог, один из крупнейших в мире специалистов по
международным отношениям, политическо
й и военной стратегии:

At this time, I believe not. The reason is that to be powerful in the world, you need to have inside power
and outside power. Inside power is your people, your work, your money, your technology. A Chinese have
inside nervous power an
d they can even have more. Unfortunately, they don’t understand form policy. They
don’t understand strategy, they never understood strategy. We have people who have always been wonderful
at building civilization from just water and earth, but they don’t kn
ow strategy. What happened in last 4 years?
In last 4 years quarreled with Japan, with India and Vietnam. Now Japan, Vietnam and India have more people
than China. They have more money than China, more technology than China. So this is called outside
balan
ce. If you make enemies, if we, America will quarrel with Mexico and Canada, and quarrel with all little
Caribbean countries, we could never go far away to be powerful. Of course, this is true that we would also not
go to Afghanistan, and waste a lot of mo
ney on a ridiculous war. That’s true! When you are so safe at home,
you can go abroad to be powerful, or to do stupid things, and we do both.


КАЙРАТ

КЕЛИМБЕТОВ

Let’s switch on issues which more interesting for Kazakhstan, what is going on the terms of the energy
balance.


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

There is somebody here from Cambridge Energy Consulting. I’m not a specialist. I used to work in oil
staff lif
e time ago. People like me see a gas price revolution. Wherever, the fraking technology has been
applied. The fraking technology theoretically is related to geology, but it’s related to politics. The fraking is not
limited by geology. God has been very gen
erous is strange. Why? Because the biggest gas potentially is in
France. The French have champagne. They don’t need it. It should go to some poor country like Bangladesh,
but no. He gives it to France. In US, I’m putting it in a very vulgar way, the price
goes from fourteen dollars to
two. Every export believes that two is so low. It will go up maybe to four. But four plus four, means eight, which
means, that this gas can arrive in Rotterdam for eight dollars. And today Rotterdam paying thirteen or twelve.
So, this is called a gas revolution. There will be much more gas. The Qatar will be slightly pooring, they won’t
even know, but they will be. It will go up and down, because the first price goes down. And then people stop
drilling, but then, because it’s l
ow, people apply gas to more things and convert more things called gas, and
then price will grow up again, but this have a revolution, complete revolution. I believe that it’s a big potential to
do staff with it.


СУЛТАН

АКИМБЕКОВ

Thank you very much, Mr.
Luttwak. I think we should listen for the questions from the auditory.


ARMAN

SHARIPOV
:

Каково влияние на гео
-
экономику предсказываемый выход Греции из Еврозоны?


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

Listen, you look like an intelligent guy. I believe that if you were Greek, y
ou would leave the Europe
tonight, not wait tomorrow. The problem is not that. Everybody talks about that. It’s competitiveness. Price
structure is that in Athens a cup of coffee costs twice much than in Paris, because of extra taxes. So they can’t
work. I

believe when the Greece leaves, nothing will happen. Greece is not Italy, not Spain. It’s a very small
economy And because of the economic policy it becomes smaller. We have here the vice minister of
development, they did negative development. On the othe
r hand, Italy has a wonderful prime minister. He is
very tall and good looking and honest and nice and everybody loves him, because they hated Berlusconi.
However, I have to inform you, since he became a prime minister the public dept has gone up, the econ
omy
has gone down. To reduce that, they increased the taxes. When you increase the taxes the economic activities
go down, and therefore there is less money in the government and the public dept is higher than it was. So,
Berlusconi is a horrible guy, but t
he public dept was less, the taxes was less. So, we are dealing here still with
a confusion. Policy deficit, policy confusion. They don’t know what to do.

Michael Smith: For Kazakhstan how strategically, which sort of human capital development should they
pursue, and how to develop that strategy of human capital development?






7

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»


ЭДВАРД

ЛЮТТВАК

I believe that it has to be done by forcing oil and gas operators to hire and train Kazakhs. Because of that,
there will be slower production, less revenue. The Norwegian has accept it. Slower production rise. You can
bring two person, the o
thers have to be here. People are not so stupid, they will learn. It means you are going
to generate less production, less taxes, and we accept that. Because the best way to form human capital is to
have a real existing industry which needs the people, and

therefore will train them. Training people is
expensive, it complicates production they don’t like to do it and there is a penalty. It means you develop slower,
the production goes up slower. But as it goes up, you form your capital. But then, somebody wh
o learns some
oil technology, tomorrow he can do something else with it. As you know Norway is now become a country with
many small technical companies doing researching developments in different areas. Many of them started,
because they were oil technicia
ns. So I think this is the way to do it, sacrifice revenue for capital forma


















8

©
АО «Институт экономических исследований»