‘It’s not a done deal’: inside the battle to stop Brexit
With less than a year remaining, the opponents of Brexit are mobilising. Could a second referendum be forced by people who won’t take go for an answer?
by Dorian Lynskey
Sat 28 Apr 2018 18.00 AEST
Mark Malloch-Brown is drawing me a picture. He first saw a version of it 28 years ago, while working on Mario Vargas Llosa’s presidential campaign in Peru. In a Lima bar one night, Malloch-Brown’s fellow consultant Rob Shepardson flipped over a beer mat and drew two intersecting axes that, he said, summed up all political campaigns. In Malloch-Brown’s version, the vertical axis runs from “change” to “status quo” and the horizontal from “distrusted elites” to “people like me”.
“Where was the Brexit campaign? Up here.” He marks a cross in the top right corner. “And where was the remain campaign? Down here.” Another cross, bottom left. “How do we reverse that position? How do we make remain – the very word is a status quo word – the change cause, and find spokespeople to deliver that message? Our whole campaign is about how to get to here.”
We’re meeting in London on 8 February, hours after the Daily Telegraph published an inflammatory front-page story about a £400,000 donation made by the investor and activist George Soros to Best for Britain, the anti-Brexit organisation Malloch-Brown chairs. After a hectic day of interviews, he appears serenely unflustered. “One shouldn’t overreact to the drama of things like this,” he says, leaning back and opening a can of Coke.
He’s seen worse. The Labour peer’s CV includes the UN, the Foreign Office and election campaigns in “lots of very strange places where massive disruptive forces were at work”. He joined Best for Britain last September, charged with uniting the anti-Brexit movement, and went public on 17 December, promising “a much more coordinated campaign and a more coherent, consistent message”. On 1 February, the Labour MP Chuka Umunna formally announced the existence of the grassroots coordinating group (GCG), a regular Wednesday morning gathering of organisations, activists and sympathetic MPs. Two weeks ago, GCG members launched the People’s Vote, calling for a referendum on the final Brexit deal.
One GCG member describes Malloch-Brown’s intervention as an accelerant rather than a catalyst – discussions about a united front had been ongoing for months – but to most remainers, 18 months after the referendum the movement still appeared frustratingly diffuse. The plethora of groups with overlapping names – Best for Britain, Open Britain, Britain for Europe, the European Movement – inspired frequent references to Monty Python’s People’s Front of Judea. Nick Clegg complained: “It is frankly a gift to the Brexiters the way so much anti-Brexit energy is being dissipated in so many disorganised ways.”
Mark Malloch Brown of Best for Britain, photographed at his office in London
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Mark Malloch-Brown of Best for Britain: ‘There’s a volatility about British politics.’ Photograph: Suki Dhanda for the Guardian
That is no longer the case. The new arrangement, which Malloch-Brown describes as a “ragged army” or “wild garden”, pools resources around a shared message, while allowing space for different opinions and achieving the broadest possible reach. This alliance has been achieved not a moment too soon. On 29 March 2019, under the terms of article 50, the UK is set to leave the EU, beginning a 21-month transition period. Having all but abandoned the sunlit uplands, the government’s most powerful argument now is grim inevitability: like it or not, it has to happen. The anti-Brexit movement insists this is not true, and it has only months to prove it. “If this was Britain in a more traditional, settled moment in its political rhythm, it wouldn’t be enough time,” Malloch-Brown says. “But there’s a volatility about British politics at the moment which is quite novel.”
Thwarting the most divisive and disruptive development in modern British history would be an extraordinary achievement. This is how the anti-Brexit movement plans to do it.
Thursday 23 June 2016 was one of the roughest nights of James McGrory’s life. As a seasoned Liberal Democrat operative, he had grown accustomed to disappointing nights, but this was the first time it had fallen to him, as chief spokesman for Britain Stronger in Europe, to address the defeated troops. There were tears. Alcohol was required. The nearest pub that was open at dawn was the Hope, opposite Smithfield meat market in central London. “If the irony of drinking somewhere called the Hope wasn’t enough, all these lads were coming in from their shift covered in blood,” he remembers. “There was a lot of gallows humour.”
Post-ballot analysis is a game of winner takes all. The losers’ shrewd decisions are swept aside along with the winners’ mistakes. The truth is more nuanced, but it is generally agreed the remain campaign was too conservative and establishment-dominated, while the leave campaign was more passionate and agile. “They were very good at characterising us: the elites and Project Fear,” McGrory says over coffee and cigarettes in the plaza outside Millbank Tower in Westminster, the anti-Brexit movement’s new riverside nerve centre.
With the country exhausted and divided by the referendum, McGrory had to decide what to do next. Under election law, dissolving Stronger In would have meant discarding its database of half a million email addresses. “It would have been silly to throw the greatest pro-European asset that has ever been established in this country in the bin,” he says. “The question was: how do we keep the flame alive?”
One demo, ironically named Unite for Europe, almost fell apart, split by personality clashes and fights over strategy
McGrory and his colleague Joe Carberry (who has since moved on) morphed Stronger In into Open Britain. Launching in August 2016 with six staff (since expanded to 11), the campaign group aimed to “seek common ground between voters on both sides” by advocating a Brexit so soft, one journalist dubbed it “the Mr Whippy of Brexits”. McGrory calls it the best argument available at the time. “We couldn’t just come out and say we didn’t agree with Brexit, because we’d just been beaten and it would have lacked credibility. Second, it wasn’t where the country was. And third, there was zero appetite in parliament.”
Advertisement
Still, Open Britain’s position struck many remainers as defeatist. Early attempts at unity were derailed by heated exchanges between people who immediately sought to reverse Brexit and those who favoured a more cautious, long-term strategy. There was friction at the grassroots, too. Although several regional groups coalesced into Britain for Europe, others butted heads. “There was a lot of chaos and a lot of new entries,” says Dr Mike Galsworthy, co-founder of Scientists for EU and Healthier IN the EU. “Because it was such a confusing landscape, different people’s strategies were hard to line up and would change over time.” One major demonstration in March 2017, the ironically named Unite for Europe, almost fell apart when the organisers fractured into two groups due to personality clashes and fights over strategy. “That got very toxic,” Galsworthy says. “When the march finally happened, everyone breathed a massive sigh of relief and said, we don’t want to go back to that again.”
“That year was a bit of a desert for us,” says Hugo Dixon, the activist who runs anti-Brexit factchecking website infacts.org. “We went into a vicious cycle. We lost almost all our parliamentary and media support. ‘Stop fighting, get real,’ was the message I would get. It became almost impossible to raise money; people thought, ‘What’s the point of backing a lost horse?’ As a result, the pro-European activists lost heart.” He brightens. “Then Theresa May did this wonderful thing of calling an election.”
When May sought a mandate for hard Brexit on 18 April 2017, Best for Britain was eight days away from its official launch. “We thought, ‘Crikey, either we pop our plans in the freezer and see if they’re still relevant on 9 June, or we engage,’” the campaign director Eloise Todd says. We’re sitting in Best for Britain’s central London meeting room, surrounded by unnervingly large satirical portraits of Boris Johnson, Michael Gove and Tony Blair. “We felt we had little choice but to engage.”
During the referendum campaign, Todd had been global policy director for the One campaign, the anti-poverty coalition co-founded by Bono. Before that, she worked in and around the EU, becoming friends with the late Jo Cox, another Yorkshirewoman who worked in Brussels and anti-poverty NGOs. “I was known for getting governments to agree to ambitious things they didn’t really want to do,” she says. “Being a gamekeeper turned poacher, you learn what changes politicians’ minds.”
Eloise Todd of Best for Britain, photographed at their office in London
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Eloise Todd of Best for Britain: ‘I don’t mind looking a bit foolish.’ Photograph: Suki Dhanda for the Guardian
Shortly after the referendum, the Labour MP David Lammy called Todd to ask for advice because he believed “Brexit would be a massive mistake” and “the remain campaign was on its knees”. He introduced her to people who were looking to set up a more robust alternative to the continuity remain campaign, including the former health minister Alan Milburn and the economist Anatole Kaletsky. She started work in January 2017. “There seemed to be a clear gap in the market, a democratic way through this,” Todd says. “We said, the government’s got a mandate to negotiate, but not to sign it off.”
Todd’s first attempts to ally with other groups fizzled out. “There was not a huge appetite; people wanted their own patch.” (“I don’t recognise that assessment,” McGrory says.) But Best for Britain and Open Britain launched tactical voting initiatives to topple pro-Brexit MPs and boost remainers. It looked like a tall order. Best for Britain’s private polling predicted a walloping Tory majority. “A senior pollster told me, ‘You shouldn’t be doing this. It’s not going to work,’” Todd remembers. “I said, ‘I agree it looks very grim, but I don’t mind looking a bit foolish, because the alternative is not to try at all.’”
If the expected Tory landslide had materialised, Todd says, “We would have shut up shop and gone home.” Instead, May lost her majority altogether. “OK,” Todd thought. “Game on.”
On election night, Chuka Umunna was “elated” by the implications for Brexit. May’s mandate for a hard Brexit had been emphatically rebuffed and it was now arithmetically possible to defeat the government in the Commons. A few days later, he met with Anna Soubry, the Tories’ remainer-in-chief and a close ally since the referendum campaign, and said, “Look, we’ve got to get organised.”
The result liberated Umunna, who had been mooted as a challenger to Jeremy Corbyn in the event of a Tory landslide. “A few people saw my involvement in the pro-EU movement partly through the prism of internal Labour party politics,” he says, drinking tea in his office at Portcullis House. “This is nothing to do with the Labour leadership. Brexit is bigger than that.”
MPs Layla Moran (Lib Dem), Chuka Umunna (Labour) and Anna Soubry (Conservative) at the launch of the People’s Vote in London, UK, on 15th April 2018.
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
MPs Layla Moran (Lib Dem), Chuka Umunna (Labour) and Anna Soubry (Conservative) at the launch of the People’s Vote earlier this month. Photograph: Vickie Flores/Alamy Live News
Umunna is passionately pro-European. “I am a quarter Irish, I have a Danish niece, nephew and brother-in-law, a French aunt and Spanish nationals in my family,” he says. “I feel intensely not just British and Nigerian, but European. When I tell people this, they say, ‘I understand now why you bang on about it so much.’” Following the referendum, however, he was a voice of caution. “What we were picking up in our constituencies was fatigue with the whole Brexit issue. If you were going to try to steer the country on to a different trajectory, it was not going to be possible in the immediate aftermath. Shouting about something isn’t necessarily going to get you where you need to get to.” He made his case on 5 September 2016, during a House of Commons debate: “I believe that if the deal that is reached at the end of this process is substantially and materially different from that that many of the leave voters believed they were promised, we could legitimately ask for a second referendum, but the fact is that we have not got to that point yet.”
The election shook the kaleidoscope. Umunna immediately proposed an ambitious amendment to the Queen’s speech, demanding the government guarantee Britain’s place in the single market. Though doomed to defeat, it was designed to “flush out the fiction that you can get all the economic benefits of EU membership while outside its economic structures” and jolt the Labour frontbench into breaking with the government. “I got a lot of flak for that amendment, but it brought out into the open the fact that basically we were pegged to the Tory position.” A month later, he and Soubry formed the all-party parliamentary group on EU relations, which includes the Green party co-leader Caroline Lucas and the Liberal Democrat deputy leader Jo Swinson.
That summer, Umunna was approached to take a leading role in coordinating the anti-Brexit forces. “I have to be honest, I was quite hesitant,” he says. But he believed the movement needed unity if it were to succeed. “I said, ‘Look, I want to stop Brexit as much as anyone else, but the question is how?’ My very strong view was that seeking to divide the movement between whether you were pure no-Brexit or soft Brexit was totally unhelpful.”
It’s a bit like a football team. You get a win and the crowd’s on your side again. When we work together, we're stronger
Last autumn, the GCG began to coalesce, formalising months of smaller meetings, conference calls, email chains and collaborations. Simultaneously, the former Tory MEP Edward McMillan-Scott began chairing Where Next for Brexit?, a separate but overlapping talking shop whose heavyweight attendees included Gina Miller, Alastair Campbell, Lord Adonis and AC Grayling. “It got to the point where everyone was saying, ‘Why don’t all these campaigns work together?’” Galsworthy says. “And actually we were – now we just had to communicate that.”
The fantasy of one dynamic saviour to become the face of anti-Brexit had been widely rejected. “It’s just a bit 90s, as if we’ve still got four channels on the telly,” Todd says. “We need different people to speak to different audiences, and the trick is making sure the right ears connect with the right voice.” Malloch-Brown calls it “a two-front fight: the Westminster front is all about day-to-day battles; the country-facing front uses a different set of spokespeople.”
On 13 December, anti-Brexit MPs finally bagged their first victory. Passing by a whisker, amendment 7 to the withdrawal bill required a separate act of parliament to approve the final deal: the crucial “meaningful vote”. Several MPs told McGrory that activists’ letters, surgery visits and social media pressure had influenced their decision. “It’s a bit like a football team,” McGrory says. “You get a win and suddenly the crowd’s on your side again. It was a shot in the arm for two reasons. First, when we work together, we are stronger. Second, this isn’t a done deal.”
***
The ideal scenario for the anti-Brexit movement goes like this. In October or November this year, the government will conclude negotiations and present the final Brexit deal to parliament. Under pressure from their constituents and opinion polls, MPs will vote to reject it and pass legislation for another referendum with a “No Brexit” option on the ballot. Remain will swing enough voters to win the referendum. The government will ask the EU to revoke article 50 before 29 March. RIP Brexit.
Members of InFacts, Healthier IN the EU, the European Movement, Our Future, Our Choice and Open Britain at their shared offices in Millbank Tower. From left: Rob Davidson, Aurora Lyngstad, Hugo Mann, Hugo Dixon, James MacCleary, Lara Spirit, Alex Clifford and Rachel Franklin
Members of InFacts, Healthier IN the EU, the European Movement, Our Future, Our Choice and Open Britain at their shared offices in Millbank Tower. From left: Rob Davidson, Aurora Lyngstad, Hugo Mann, Hugo Dixon, James MacCleary, Lara Spirit, Alex Clifford and Rachel Franklin. Photograph: Richard Saker for the Guardian
Advertisement
That’s a simple way of describing a fiendishly tricky and unpredictable chain of events. First, success in the Commons depends on Labour both rejecting the deal and supporting another referendum. (“Frankly, if Labour puts its head in the sand and tries to ignore the anti-Brexit effect on our vote in 2017, we will be punished when the next general election comes,” Umunna says.) The next hurdle is passing legislation for a referendum, which would normally take a year. Then the anti-Brexit cause would need to win that referendum. The latest polling by YouGov and ICM gives remain a slim lead, but ComRes and ORB favour leave. Finally, it’s unclear whether the EU27 would be sympathetic to an 11th-hour change of heart. “We could be in a level of constitutional uncertainty I’ve never seen in politics,” McGrory says. “To try to game-theory this is really hard.” He’s a realistic optimist. “Well, you’d like longer, wouldn’t you? It’s by no means unachievable, but it’s unquestionably a stiff task.”
Preparations have escalated dramatically. In the first week of March, eight key groups moved into shared offices at Millbank Tower – on the same floor, coincidentally, as the website brexitcentral.com. When I visit a week later, the main office still has an ad hoc feel, with nothing on the three banks of desks apart from laptops, papers and a communal bowl of sweets. Each organisation’s sector of the office is marked by a colourful banner or cardboard display.
Open Britain has the largest following – 550,000 email subscribers and 553,000 Facebook followers – and the strongest connections with the media and MPs; Lord Mandelson is a founding board member. Britain for Europe and the European Movement maintain branches around the country, keeping the conversation alive and preparing to spring into action the moment a referendum is announced. Scientists For EU and Healthier IN the EU are maestros of social media. InFacts is an unrivalled data resource. The wittily acronymed Our Future, Our Choice (Ofoc) and For our Future’s Sake (FFS) speak to younger voters. Meanwhile, Best for Britain, which maintains separate offices, uses its war chest to fund polling, advertising and regional “barnstorms”, inspired by Barack Obama’s campaigns, that teach activists how to get out of their echo chambers and talk to wavering leavers. Between them, they cover the waterfront.
Campaign group Our Future, Our Choice’s Femi Oluwole, photographed in Darlington, 19 April, 2018
Facebook Twitter Pinterest Femi Oluwole of Our Future, Our Choice: ‘The will of the people has an expiration date.’ Photograph: Mike Pinches for the Guardian
“We need ruthless pragmatism,” says Dr Rob Davidson, who co-founded Scientists for EU and Healthier IN the EU with Galsworthy. “No group is big enough on its own. We’ve all tried working with different combinations of people. There have been fallings out, there have been splits. What we’ve found here is people who are willing to be pragmatic.”
The Millbank move was a precursor to the launch of the People’s Vote on 15 April – the campaign seeks to establish the democratic legitimacy of a vote on the deal. “It’s the most significant thing that’s happened on our side of the argument since the referendum,” McGrory says. “It’s what everyone’s wanted for ages. Why don’t you have a single campaign with a very clear ask? Well, there is one now.”
A recent YouGov poll found that only 38% of voters backed a vote (the unpopular term “second referendum” is verboten), with 45% opposed, although the gap is narrowing. “It feels like a Jedi mind trick has gripped the country, like ‘the will of the people’ was only 23 June,” Todd sighs. “It’s important for us to normalise debate and make people feel like it’s OK to say, ‘You know what, I don’t think this Brexit thing is going that well. Maybe we should look at it again.’”
One argument is that there was no form of Brexit on the ballot paper and that campaign promises have been broken. “When will we know what we voted for?” asked Best for Britain’s recent billboards. Another argument is demographic: there are already half a million new voters since June 2016, and multiple studies predict the British electorate will be firmly pro-remain by 2021. “The will of the people has an expiration date,” Ofoc’s co-founder Femi Oluwole says.
James MacCleary, the campaign director for the 69-year-old pressure group European Movement UK, thinks the campaign would be fought over “quite a small section of persuadables: probably 10%. We’re trying to identify the motivations, values and identity politics of people in that available group, and find ways to address issues they’re concerned about.”
Advertisement
The pro-EU cause seems to be shifting into the right corner of Malloch-Brown’s diagram. Umunna calls it a role reversal, with the leavers now in government and the remainers the fleet-footed rebels. “We think Brexit is being driven by elites,” says Tom Brufatto, chair of Britain for Europe. “Nigel Farage is a career politician – a failed one, but still a career politician. Arron Banks is a multimillionaire. They’re just a different type of establishment. We see an opportunity to brand ourselves as the change campaign that provides real solutions to the factors that led to Brexit.”
The challenge is formidable, but morale, support and fundraising are at their highest since the referendum, with even Farage admitting “the remain side are making all the running”.
***
It’s a bright, chilly March morning in Leeds. Thousands of people have gathered outside the Art Gallery for the Great Northern March, one of several simultaneous Stop Brexit protests designed to show that opposition is growing around the country. Drums are pounded, flags are waved, placards are held high, among them one that reads “Stop pretending this is a good idea!”
Anti-Brexit campaigners inside the Best for Britain offices
Facebook Twitter Pinterest
Inside the Best for Britain offices. Photograph: Suki Dhanda for the Guardian
Eloise Todd scrutinises the expressions on bystanders’ faces to see if the issue is resonating with the public. At Best for Britain’s barnstorms, activists are sternly told that things that galvanise remainers, such as flags and Bollocks to Brexit stickers, are counterproductive when it comes to swaying the unconverted. A middle-aged man comes over to lend his support. “An enthusiastic northerner!” Todd says. They exchange a few words. “Oh,” she says. “He’s Dutch.”
The march concludes with a rally. Brufatto is here, as is Oluwole, whose bright red T-shirt reads: “I’m Femi, talk to me about Brexit.” “The mood is hopeful,” he says. “We’re out on the streets saying that you’re not alone if you think this is a disaster and you want things to change.”
Alongside marquee names such as Adonis and Grayling, the speakers include a Labour MEP, a Lib Dem peer, a former Tory councillor, a union official, a Spanish-born nurse and an Ofoc member who regrets voting leave. The voices are diverse, but they all hit the same notes: new facts have emerged; the negotiations aren’t delivering what was promised; a people’s vote is a democratic necessity; Brexit is not inevitable. Three weeks later, they will announce the People’s Vote.
“The people of this country are not daft,” Todd says from the stage. “Especially not in Yorkshire.” She raises her voice for a final rallying cry, triggering a cascade of cheers and applause. “Let’s do it!” But Todd knows that rallying the base is the easy part. The real fight is just beginning.
Saturday, April 28, 2018
Visa Jumps on Debit Spending by Credit-Averse Millennials - Bloomberg
Visa Jumps on Debit Spending by Credit-Averse Millennials
By Jennifer Surane
April 26, 2018, 6:22 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 26, 2018, 8:17 AM GMT+10
Debit spending continued to grow at faster clip than credit
Visa CFO: Consumers look ‘pretty strong’ as they spend more
Visa Jumps on Debit Spending by Millennials
You can thank the millennials.
Spending on Visa Inc. debit cards -- the favored plastic of the younger set -- continues to grow at a faster clip than on credit. Spending on the firm’s debit cards jumped 16.3 percent in this year’s first three months, helping the firm raise its financial outlook for 2018. Credit-card spending rose 13.7 percent.
“Every aspect of the debit business looked very good this quarter,” Chief Financial Officer Vasant Prabhu said On a conference call with analysts. It “attests to a pretty strong consumer profile in terms of propensity to spend.”
Younger consumers prefer to pay with debit cards or cash after cultivating an aversion to credit while coming of age during the financial crisis. They also don’t typically qualify for top credit cards until becoming older. Visa, the world’s largest payment network, generates more-lucrative fees from credit-card use yet has a larger debit business than rival Mastercard Inc.
Total spending on Visa’s network climbed 14.9 percent to $2 trillion in the first three months of the year, topping the $1.98 trillion average of analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg. That helped boost revenue to $5.1 billion, a 13 percent increase compared with a year ago, exceeding estimates of $4.82 billion.
Higher Forecast
Prabhu also said the firm’s results benefited from a weaker U.S. dollar in the first three months of the year. Cross-border payment volumes rose 11 percent.
“Revenue growth was better than anticipated and many of our key business drivers accelerated compared to the first quarter, including strong growth in cross-border and payments volume,” Chief Executive Officer Al Kelly said in the statement announcing results for the fiscal second quarter.
Visa raised its forecast for full-year, earnings-per-share growth rate to the “low 60s” from the mid-50s and it now expects adjusted EPS growth in the “high 20s.”
The stock rose 3.1 percent to $125 at 5:50 p.m. in late trading in New York. It had climbed 6.3 percent this year through the close of trading on Wednesday, compared with the 1.8 percent advance of the S&P 500 Information Technology Index.
Here are other metrics to watch:
Net income jumped to $2.6 billion, or $1.11 a share, from $430 million, or 18 cents, a year earlier, when the company incurred extra costs from reorganizing its legal entity in Europe. That topped analysts’ $1.02 average estimate.
Operating expenses climbed 4 percent to $1.74 billion, the company said, primarily driven by an increase in personnel and marketing costs. That topped the $1.61 billion average of 12 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.
Visa spent $1.29 billion on incentives for banks to issue cards on its network in the quarter. That came in lower than the $1.39 billion analysts expected.
By Jennifer Surane
April 26, 2018, 6:22 AM GMT+10 Updated on April 26, 2018, 8:17 AM GMT+10
Debit spending continued to grow at faster clip than credit
Visa CFO: Consumers look ‘pretty strong’ as they spend more
Visa Jumps on Debit Spending by Millennials
You can thank the millennials.
Spending on Visa Inc. debit cards -- the favored plastic of the younger set -- continues to grow at a faster clip than on credit. Spending on the firm’s debit cards jumped 16.3 percent in this year’s first three months, helping the firm raise its financial outlook for 2018. Credit-card spending rose 13.7 percent.
“Every aspect of the debit business looked very good this quarter,” Chief Financial Officer Vasant Prabhu said On a conference call with analysts. It “attests to a pretty strong consumer profile in terms of propensity to spend.”
Younger consumers prefer to pay with debit cards or cash after cultivating an aversion to credit while coming of age during the financial crisis. They also don’t typically qualify for top credit cards until becoming older. Visa, the world’s largest payment network, generates more-lucrative fees from credit-card use yet has a larger debit business than rival Mastercard Inc.
Total spending on Visa’s network climbed 14.9 percent to $2 trillion in the first three months of the year, topping the $1.98 trillion average of analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg. That helped boost revenue to $5.1 billion, a 13 percent increase compared with a year ago, exceeding estimates of $4.82 billion.
Higher Forecast
Prabhu also said the firm’s results benefited from a weaker U.S. dollar in the first three months of the year. Cross-border payment volumes rose 11 percent.
“Revenue growth was better than anticipated and many of our key business drivers accelerated compared to the first quarter, including strong growth in cross-border and payments volume,” Chief Executive Officer Al Kelly said in the statement announcing results for the fiscal second quarter.
Visa raised its forecast for full-year, earnings-per-share growth rate to the “low 60s” from the mid-50s and it now expects adjusted EPS growth in the “high 20s.”
The stock rose 3.1 percent to $125 at 5:50 p.m. in late trading in New York. It had climbed 6.3 percent this year through the close of trading on Wednesday, compared with the 1.8 percent advance of the S&P 500 Information Technology Index.
Here are other metrics to watch:
Net income jumped to $2.6 billion, or $1.11 a share, from $430 million, or 18 cents, a year earlier, when the company incurred extra costs from reorganizing its legal entity in Europe. That topped analysts’ $1.02 average estimate.
Operating expenses climbed 4 percent to $1.74 billion, the company said, primarily driven by an increase in personnel and marketing costs. That topped the $1.61 billion average of 12 analyst estimates compiled by Bloomberg.
Visa spent $1.29 billion on incentives for banks to issue cards on its network in the quarter. That came in lower than the $1.39 billion analysts expected.
Russian lawyer from Trump Tower meeting claims to be an 'informant' - Independent
April 28, 2018
Russian lawyer from Trump Tower meeting claims to be an 'informant'
'I am a lawyer, and I am an informant,' Natalia Veselnitskaya says
Emily Shugerman New York @eshugerman
The Russian lawyer who attended at a controversial meeting with Trump campaign members has reportedly called herself “an informant” who is in communication with Russia's chief prosecutor.
Attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya was one of eight people present at the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, which was organised after an intermediary promised to give Donald Trump Jr incriminating information about his father’s election rival, Hillary Clinton.
Ms Veselnitskaya has previously claimed that she was acting independently during the meeting with Trump campaign officials. But her recent comments suggest she may have been more involved with the Russian government than she let on.
Trump's Jr took Russian lawyer to meet his father, claims Steve Bannon
“I am a lawyer, and I am an informant,” she told NBC News in an interview set to air Friday night, according to the New York Times.
She added: “Since 2013, I have been actively communicating with the office of the Russian prosecutor general.”
The comments square with earlier New York Times reporting, which suggested Ms Veselnitskaya had spoken with Russia’s prosecutor general about the memos she intended to deliver to the Trump team.
The biggest names involved in the Trump-Russia investigation
17
show all
The Times also reviewed emails which appear to show Ms Veselnitskaya working closely with the prosecutor general, Yuri Chaika, on a 2014 case involving the US Department of Justice.
According to emails obtained by former Russian tycoon Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, and seen by the Times, Ms Veselnitskaya helped Mr Chaika respond to the US’s request for help in a civil fraud case. The Russian government provided little help in the case, according to an American judge, and the Justice Department eventually agreed to settle.
The emails, and Ms Veselnitskaya’s recent comments, contrast with her statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee last year, in which she claimed to operate "independently of any governmental bodies”.
“I have no relationship with Mr Chaika, his representatives and his institutions other than those related to my professional functions as a lawyer,” she told the committee in November.
Russian lawyer says Trump Jr 'badly' wanted dirt on Clintons
The Trump Tower meeting drew scrutiny last year, after the Times reported that Ms Veselnitskaya had attended the meeting with Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, as well as Mr Trump Jr and the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
Mr Trump Jr claimed the meeting – which friend and former business partner Rob Goldstone helped arrange – was “nothing” and "a wasted 20 minutes”.
He later released emails revealing that Mr Goldstone had offered him “official documents and information" that would incriminate Ms Clinton, from someone he referred to as the “Crown prosecutor of Russia”.
Russia does not have a crown prosecutor. The closest role is Mr Chaika’s – the prosecutor general.
Mr Trump Jr and his father have both repeatedly denied colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election.
Russian lawyer from Trump Tower meeting claims to be an 'informant'
'I am a lawyer, and I am an informant,' Natalia Veselnitskaya says
Emily Shugerman New York @eshugerman
The Russian lawyer who attended at a controversial meeting with Trump campaign members has reportedly called herself “an informant” who is in communication with Russia's chief prosecutor.
Attorney Natalia Veselnitskaya was one of eight people present at the June 2016 Trump Tower meeting, which was organised after an intermediary promised to give Donald Trump Jr incriminating information about his father’s election rival, Hillary Clinton.
Ms Veselnitskaya has previously claimed that she was acting independently during the meeting with Trump campaign officials. But her recent comments suggest she may have been more involved with the Russian government than she let on.
Trump's Jr took Russian lawyer to meet his father, claims Steve Bannon
“I am a lawyer, and I am an informant,” she told NBC News in an interview set to air Friday night, according to the New York Times.
She added: “Since 2013, I have been actively communicating with the office of the Russian prosecutor general.”
The comments square with earlier New York Times reporting, which suggested Ms Veselnitskaya had spoken with Russia’s prosecutor general about the memos she intended to deliver to the Trump team.
The biggest names involved in the Trump-Russia investigation
17
show all
The Times also reviewed emails which appear to show Ms Veselnitskaya working closely with the prosecutor general, Yuri Chaika, on a 2014 case involving the US Department of Justice.
According to emails obtained by former Russian tycoon Mikhail B. Khodorkovsky, and seen by the Times, Ms Veselnitskaya helped Mr Chaika respond to the US’s request for help in a civil fraud case. The Russian government provided little help in the case, according to an American judge, and the Justice Department eventually agreed to settle.
The emails, and Ms Veselnitskaya’s recent comments, contrast with her statement to the Senate Judiciary Committee last year, in which she claimed to operate "independently of any governmental bodies”.
“I have no relationship with Mr Chaika, his representatives and his institutions other than those related to my professional functions as a lawyer,” she told the committee in November.
Russian lawyer says Trump Jr 'badly' wanted dirt on Clintons
The Trump Tower meeting drew scrutiny last year, after the Times reported that Ms Veselnitskaya had attended the meeting with Trump campaign manager Paul Manafort, as well as Mr Trump Jr and the president’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner.
Mr Trump Jr claimed the meeting – which friend and former business partner Rob Goldstone helped arrange – was “nothing” and "a wasted 20 minutes”.
He later released emails revealing that Mr Goldstone had offered him “official documents and information" that would incriminate Ms Clinton, from someone he referred to as the “Crown prosecutor of Russia”.
Russia does not have a crown prosecutor. The closest role is Mr Chaika’s – the prosecutor general.
Mr Trump Jr and his father have both repeatedly denied colluding with Russia to win the 2016 election.
Five things you might be surprised affect weight - BBC News
April 28, 2018
Five things you might be surprised affect weight
By Kirstie Brewer
BBC News
People might think battling obesity is down to sheer willpower, but medical research says otherwise. Here are five potentially surprising factors that can affect your weight, as unearthed by The Truth About Obesity .
1. Gut microbes
Gillian and Jackie are twins - but one weighs over six stone (41kg) more than the other.
Prof Tim Spector has been tracking their progress over 25 years, as part of the Twins Research UK study.
He believes a lot of their weight differences are down to the tiny organisms - microbes - that live deep in the gut.
"Every time you eat anything, you're feeding a hundred trillion microbes. You're never dining alone," he says.
A stool sample from each twin revealed Gillian, the thinner of the two, had a very diverse range of microbes, whereas Jackie had very few species living in her gut.
"The greater the diversity, the skinnier the person. If you're carrying too much weight, your microbes aren't as diverse as they should be," says Prof Spector, who found the same pattern in a study of 5,000 people.
Having a healthy and varied diet, rich in different sources of fibre, has been shown to create a more diverse range of gut microbes.
Prof Spector warns most Britons eat only half the fibre they should.
Good sources of dietary fibre include:
wholegrain breakfast cereals
fruits, including berries and pears
vegetables, such as broccoli and carrots
beans
pulses
nuts
2. The gene lottery
Why do some people diligently follow diets and exercise regularly but still struggle to see results, while others do very little and don't pile on the pounds?
Scientists at Cambridge University believe 40-70% of the effect on our weight is down to variation in the genes we inherit.
"It is a lottery," says Prof Sadaf Farooqi.
"It is now very clear that genes are involved in regulating our weight, and if you have a particular fault in some genes that can be enough to drive obesity."
Particular genes can affect a person's appetite, how much food they want to eat and what type of food they might prefer. Genes can also affect how we burn calories and whether our bodies can efficiently handle fat.
There are at least 100 that can affect weight, including one called MC4R.
It is thought about one in every 1,000 people carries a defective version of the MC4R gene, which works in the brain to control hunger and appetite. People with a fault in this gene tend to be more hungry and crave higher fat foods.
Prof Farooqi says: "There's not really anything you can do about your genes, but for some people, knowing that genes may increase their chances of gaining weight can help them to deal with changes in diet and exercise."
If you can't see the calculator tap or click here.
Can we trust BMI to measure obesity?
3. What time it is
There's some truth to the old saying: "Breakfast like a king, lunch like a lord and dinner like a pauper," but not for the reasons you might think.
Obesity expert Dr James Brown says the later we eat, the more likely we are to gain weight. Not because we're less active at night, as is commonly believed, but because of our internal body clocks.
"The body is set-up to handle calories much more efficiently during the daytime period when it's light than it is at night when it's dark" he says.
For that reason, people who do shift-work and erratic hours might face a particular battle to stave off weight gain.
During the night our bodies struggle to digest fats and sugars so eating the bulk of calories before about 19:00 can help you lose weight or prevent you from gaining it in the first place.
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image caption
"Go to work on an egg" isn't a bad idea
Over the past decade, the average dinnertime in Britain has moved from 17:00 to around 20:00, and this has contributed to rising obesity levels, according to Dr Brown.
But today's working patterns and hectic lifestyles aside, there are things we can do that will make a difference to our waistlines.
Skipping breakfast or just having a piece of toast is a no-no in Dr Brown's book.
Instead, eating something with lots of protein and some fat, as well as carbohydrates - such as eggs on wholegrain toast - will make you feel fuller for longer.
Follow that up with a substantial nutritious lunch, and have something lighter at dinnertime.
4. Tricking your brain
The Behavioural Insights Team suggests Britons are bad at keeping track of how much they eat, and that calorie consumption is being underestimated by 30-50% as a result.
Behavioural scientist Hugo Harper suggests a number of ways to subconsciously change your eating behaviour, rather than rely on calorie counting.
For example, removing visual temptations might be more effective than relying on conscious willpower.
So don't have unhealthy snacks out on the kitchen counter - put a fruit bowl or healthy snacks in reach instead.
Don't sit down with a whole packet of biscuits in front of the television, put the number you plan to eat on a plate and take that through instead.
Dr Harper also encourages substitution behaviours - swapping to lower calorie alternatives of favourite foods rather than trying to banish them all together.
Opt for diet versions of soft drinks, for example. And reducing portion sizes can also be more effective than trying to cut out that ritual afternoon tea with a chocolate biscuit (or is that just us?).
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image caption
Not now Fido!
"People don't tend to notice a difference when their portion sizes are reduced by 5-10%," Dr Harper says.
There is a tendency to eat without thinking about it, so following the serving suggestions on food packets and using a smaller plate when dishing up dinner can prevent someone absent-mindedly chomping through excess calories.
5. Hormones
The success of bariatric surgery isn't just down to creating a smaller stomach, but the change in hormones it creates.
Our appetites are controlled by our hormones and it has been discovered that bariatric surgery - the most effective treatment of obesity - makes the hormones that make us feel full increase and the ones that make us feel hungry drop in number.
But its a major operation that involves reducing the size of the stomach by up to 90% and is only carried out on people with a BMI of at least 35.
Researchers at Imperial College London have recreated the gut hormones that cause appetite changes after bariatric surgery and are using this for a new clinical trial.
A mixture of three hormones are given to patients as an injection every day for four weeks.
"Patients are feeling less hungry, they're eating less and they're losing between 2-8kg (4-17lb) in just 28 days," says Dr Tricia Tan.
If the drug is proven safe, the plan is to use it until the patients reach a healthy weight.
Five things you might be surprised affect weight
By Kirstie Brewer
BBC News
People might think battling obesity is down to sheer willpower, but medical research says otherwise. Here are five potentially surprising factors that can affect your weight, as unearthed by The Truth About Obesity .
1. Gut microbes
Gillian and Jackie are twins - but one weighs over six stone (41kg) more than the other.
Prof Tim Spector has been tracking their progress over 25 years, as part of the Twins Research UK study.
He believes a lot of their weight differences are down to the tiny organisms - microbes - that live deep in the gut.
"Every time you eat anything, you're feeding a hundred trillion microbes. You're never dining alone," he says.
A stool sample from each twin revealed Gillian, the thinner of the two, had a very diverse range of microbes, whereas Jackie had very few species living in her gut.
"The greater the diversity, the skinnier the person. If you're carrying too much weight, your microbes aren't as diverse as they should be," says Prof Spector, who found the same pattern in a study of 5,000 people.
Having a healthy and varied diet, rich in different sources of fibre, has been shown to create a more diverse range of gut microbes.
Prof Spector warns most Britons eat only half the fibre they should.
Good sources of dietary fibre include:
wholegrain breakfast cereals
fruits, including berries and pears
vegetables, such as broccoli and carrots
beans
pulses
nuts
2. The gene lottery
Why do some people diligently follow diets and exercise regularly but still struggle to see results, while others do very little and don't pile on the pounds?
Scientists at Cambridge University believe 40-70% of the effect on our weight is down to variation in the genes we inherit.
"It is a lottery," says Prof Sadaf Farooqi.
"It is now very clear that genes are involved in regulating our weight, and if you have a particular fault in some genes that can be enough to drive obesity."
Particular genes can affect a person's appetite, how much food they want to eat and what type of food they might prefer. Genes can also affect how we burn calories and whether our bodies can efficiently handle fat.
There are at least 100 that can affect weight, including one called MC4R.
It is thought about one in every 1,000 people carries a defective version of the MC4R gene, which works in the brain to control hunger and appetite. People with a fault in this gene tend to be more hungry and crave higher fat foods.
Prof Farooqi says: "There's not really anything you can do about your genes, but for some people, knowing that genes may increase their chances of gaining weight can help them to deal with changes in diet and exercise."
If you can't see the calculator tap or click here.
Can we trust BMI to measure obesity?
3. What time it is
There's some truth to the old saying: "Breakfast like a king, lunch like a lord and dinner like a pauper," but not for the reasons you might think.
Obesity expert Dr James Brown says the later we eat, the more likely we are to gain weight. Not because we're less active at night, as is commonly believed, but because of our internal body clocks.
"The body is set-up to handle calories much more efficiently during the daytime period when it's light than it is at night when it's dark" he says.
For that reason, people who do shift-work and erratic hours might face a particular battle to stave off weight gain.
During the night our bodies struggle to digest fats and sugars so eating the bulk of calories before about 19:00 can help you lose weight or prevent you from gaining it in the first place.
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image caption
"Go to work on an egg" isn't a bad idea
Over the past decade, the average dinnertime in Britain has moved from 17:00 to around 20:00, and this has contributed to rising obesity levels, according to Dr Brown.
But today's working patterns and hectic lifestyles aside, there are things we can do that will make a difference to our waistlines.
Skipping breakfast or just having a piece of toast is a no-no in Dr Brown's book.
Instead, eating something with lots of protein and some fat, as well as carbohydrates - such as eggs on wholegrain toast - will make you feel fuller for longer.
Follow that up with a substantial nutritious lunch, and have something lighter at dinnertime.
4. Tricking your brain
The Behavioural Insights Team suggests Britons are bad at keeping track of how much they eat, and that calorie consumption is being underestimated by 30-50% as a result.
Behavioural scientist Hugo Harper suggests a number of ways to subconsciously change your eating behaviour, rather than rely on calorie counting.
For example, removing visual temptations might be more effective than relying on conscious willpower.
So don't have unhealthy snacks out on the kitchen counter - put a fruit bowl or healthy snacks in reach instead.
Don't sit down with a whole packet of biscuits in front of the television, put the number you plan to eat on a plate and take that through instead.
Dr Harper also encourages substitution behaviours - swapping to lower calorie alternatives of favourite foods rather than trying to banish them all together.
Opt for diet versions of soft drinks, for example. And reducing portion sizes can also be more effective than trying to cut out that ritual afternoon tea with a chocolate biscuit (or is that just us?).
Image copyrightGETTY IMAGES
Image caption
Not now Fido!
"People don't tend to notice a difference when their portion sizes are reduced by 5-10%," Dr Harper says.
There is a tendency to eat without thinking about it, so following the serving suggestions on food packets and using a smaller plate when dishing up dinner can prevent someone absent-mindedly chomping through excess calories.
5. Hormones
The success of bariatric surgery isn't just down to creating a smaller stomach, but the change in hormones it creates.
Our appetites are controlled by our hormones and it has been discovered that bariatric surgery - the most effective treatment of obesity - makes the hormones that make us feel full increase and the ones that make us feel hungry drop in number.
But its a major operation that involves reducing the size of the stomach by up to 90% and is only carried out on people with a BMI of at least 35.
Researchers at Imperial College London have recreated the gut hormones that cause appetite changes after bariatric surgery and are using this for a new clinical trial.
A mixture of three hormones are given to patients as an injection every day for four weeks.
"Patients are feeling less hungry, they're eating less and they're losing between 2-8kg (4-17lb) in just 28 days," says Dr Tricia Tan.
If the drug is proven safe, the plan is to use it until the patients reach a healthy weight.
Abba announce first new music since 1982 - BBC News
Abba announce first new music since 1982
By Mark Savage
BBC Music reporter
27 April 2018
470 comments Share this with Facebook Share this with Twitter Share this with Messenger Share this with Email Share
Pop group Abba have returned to the studio to record their first new music since the 1980s.
The Swedish quartet said the new material was an "unexpected consequence" of their recent decision to put together a "virtual reality" tour.
"We all four felt that, after some 35 years, it could be fun to join forces again and go into the studio," the band said on Instagram.
"And it was like time stood still."
No release date has been set for the new songs - but one of them, titled I Still Have Faith In You, will be performed in December on a TV special broadcast by the BBC and NBC.
Skip Instagram post by abbaofficial
Report
End of Instagram post by abbaofficial
Abba's spokesperson Gorel Hanser told the BBC the atmosphere in the studio was "magic".
"It was like no time had passed at all," she said. "It was like the olden days. They were happy, it was easy and warm-hearted, and it was actually quite moving. I wasn't the only one with tears in my eyes."
But she said said the group would not perform live, other than as holograms in the forthcoming Abba Avatar tour.
"It's a studio moment, I can promise you," she said. "Don't expect too much."
Skip Twitter post by @BBCPM
BBCPM
✔
@BBCPM
“They were happy... it was actually quite moving... and I wasn't the only one with tears in my eyes.” #ABBA manager Görel Hanser tells @bbcpaddy about being in the studio whilst the group recorded their first new music for 35 yrs. #bbcpm
4:24 AM - Apr 28, 2018
99
48 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Report
End of Twitter post by @BBCPM
The band have resisted pressure to reform since they stopped recording together in 1982, despite a reported $1bn (£689m) offer to tour in 2000.
In an interview with the BBC in 2013, Agnetha Faltskog said she preferred to leave the band in the past.
"It was such a long time ago, and we are getting older, and we have our different lives," she explained.
News of the new material comes in a bumper year for Abba fans. An immersive exhibition based on the band's career is running on London's South Bank, while Chess, the musical Bjorn Ulvaeus and Benny Andersson wrote with Sir Tim Rice, is being revived in the West End.
Will Abba's new music ruin their legacy?
Abba give first performance in 30 years
6 shocks from the Mamma Mia 2 trailer
Abba's Agnetha comes out of retirement
A sequel to the film version of Mamma Mia!, starring Amanda Seyfried, Lily James and Cher, will be released on 20 July.
Speaking to BBC News, Rod Stephen, founder of Abba tribute act Bjorn Again, described the new material as "a whole new beginning".
Bjorn, Anni-Frid, Agnetha and Benny pictured at the Swedish production of Mamma Mia in 2016
"I heard about Abba releasing new songs and I was instantly, like everyone else in the Abba community, really excited to know what the songs were and how they're going to sound. Will it have that 1970s sound or will it be up to date?
"It's brilliant really, because we love Abba's music to death. I just hope they're great songs, I hope they're equivalent to Dancing Queen or Mamma Mia."
He added: "I know Benny and Bjorn wouldn't release something in this way unless they were good songs."
Speaking to the BBC's Adam Fleming last week, Ulvaeus had hinted that there could be new material. Here's what he said:
Media captionBjorn Ulvaeus hints there could be new ABBA material
How did the Abba avatar idea come about?
We were introduced to an idea by Simon Fuller who is, as you know, an entertainment entrepreneur - [creator of] the format of American Idol and manager of the Spice Girls and so forth.
He came to Stockholm and he presented this idea to us that we could make identical digital copies of ourselves of a certain age and that those copies could then go on tour and they could sing our songs, you know, and lip sync. I've seen this project halfway through and it's already mind-boggling.
What does it actually look like? Does it look like a younger you?
Yes. Real. And they say once it's finished you'll never see that it's not a human being. And what attracted me personally to this is of course I'm always curious, scientifically-curious and this is new technology and we are pioneers. So I thought, 'Yeah let's go for it,' and you know the other three went for it as well.
What is the actual format of the tribute show going to be? Is it going to be these Abba-tars all the way though?
No, other people as well. And as for the format I'm not entirely sure what it's going to look like but some sort of tribute show with these Abba-tars for want of a better word as the kind of centrepiece.
Will you write new material for it?
We don't know what the Abba-tars will sing yet but there's lots to choose from of the old stuff and yeah, I'm not ready to say that yet.
So there could be new songs…
I'm… it's up in the air.
Stay tuned…
Yeah.
Why not reform and have a reunion? The real you, rather than the virtual ones.
Yeah, why not? Well… it never seemed like a good idea. It's not that we haven't had offers over the years. But somehow we always thought that the Abba that people have in their minds are the once-young and energetic group from the '70s. And we just never felt the urge to go on tour, I guess.
On the whole we toured very little. We had like 10 years together and of those 10 years maybe we toured, like, seven months. Not more than that. So to go on tour as a geriatric, I don't know!
Formed in 1972, Abba were essentially a Swedish supergroup, consisting of songwriters Ulvaeus and Andersson from The Hep Stars and singers Faltskog and Anni-Frid Lyngstad, who had scored success as solo artists.
But their joint project completely eclipsed their previous successes. After winning the Eurovision Song Contest with Waterloo in 1974, the band sold almost 400 million singles and albums around the world.
Mamma Mia!, the musical based on their hits and produced by Ulvaeus and Andersson, has been seen by more than 50 million people.
During their most successful period, the band survived marriage break-ups between Ulvaeus and Faltskog, and Lyngstad and Andersson, but they finally called it a day in 1983.
Their final recording sessions, in 1982, produced the hits Under Attack and The Day Before You Came, which featured on the compilation album The Singles.
Their last public performance came three years later, on the Swedish version of TV show This Is Your Life, which honoured their manager Stig Anderson.
By Mark Savage
BBC Music reporter
27 April 2018
470 comments Share this with Facebook Share this with Twitter Share this with Messenger Share this with Email Share
Pop group Abba have returned to the studio to record their first new music since the 1980s.
The Swedish quartet said the new material was an "unexpected consequence" of their recent decision to put together a "virtual reality" tour.
"We all four felt that, after some 35 years, it could be fun to join forces again and go into the studio," the band said on Instagram.
"And it was like time stood still."
No release date has been set for the new songs - but one of them, titled I Still Have Faith In You, will be performed in December on a TV special broadcast by the BBC and NBC.
Skip Instagram post by abbaofficial
Report
End of Instagram post by abbaofficial
Abba's spokesperson Gorel Hanser told the BBC the atmosphere in the studio was "magic".
"It was like no time had passed at all," she said. "It was like the olden days. They were happy, it was easy and warm-hearted, and it was actually quite moving. I wasn't the only one with tears in my eyes."
But she said said the group would not perform live, other than as holograms in the forthcoming Abba Avatar tour.
"It's a studio moment, I can promise you," she said. "Don't expect too much."
Skip Twitter post by @BBCPM
BBCPM
✔
@BBCPM
“They were happy... it was actually quite moving... and I wasn't the only one with tears in my eyes.” #ABBA manager Görel Hanser tells @bbcpaddy about being in the studio whilst the group recorded their first new music for 35 yrs. #bbcpm
4:24 AM - Apr 28, 2018
99
48 people are talking about this
Twitter Ads info and privacy
Report
End of Twitter post by @BBCPM
The band have resisted pressure to reform since they stopped recording together in 1982, despite a reported $1bn (£689m) offer to tour in 2000.
In an interview with the BBC in 2013, Agnetha Faltskog said she preferred to leave the band in the past.
"It was such a long time ago, and we are getting older, and we have our different lives," she explained.
News of the new material comes in a bumper year for Abba fans. An immersive exhibition based on the band's career is running on London's South Bank, while Chess, the musical Bjorn Ulvaeus and Benny Andersson wrote with Sir Tim Rice, is being revived in the West End.
Will Abba's new music ruin their legacy?
Abba give first performance in 30 years
6 shocks from the Mamma Mia 2 trailer
Abba's Agnetha comes out of retirement
A sequel to the film version of Mamma Mia!, starring Amanda Seyfried, Lily James and Cher, will be released on 20 July.
Speaking to BBC News, Rod Stephen, founder of Abba tribute act Bjorn Again, described the new material as "a whole new beginning".
Bjorn, Anni-Frid, Agnetha and Benny pictured at the Swedish production of Mamma Mia in 2016
"I heard about Abba releasing new songs and I was instantly, like everyone else in the Abba community, really excited to know what the songs were and how they're going to sound. Will it have that 1970s sound or will it be up to date?
"It's brilliant really, because we love Abba's music to death. I just hope they're great songs, I hope they're equivalent to Dancing Queen or Mamma Mia."
He added: "I know Benny and Bjorn wouldn't release something in this way unless they were good songs."
Speaking to the BBC's Adam Fleming last week, Ulvaeus had hinted that there could be new material. Here's what he said:
Media captionBjorn Ulvaeus hints there could be new ABBA material
How did the Abba avatar idea come about?
We were introduced to an idea by Simon Fuller who is, as you know, an entertainment entrepreneur - [creator of] the format of American Idol and manager of the Spice Girls and so forth.
He came to Stockholm and he presented this idea to us that we could make identical digital copies of ourselves of a certain age and that those copies could then go on tour and they could sing our songs, you know, and lip sync. I've seen this project halfway through and it's already mind-boggling.
What does it actually look like? Does it look like a younger you?
Yes. Real. And they say once it's finished you'll never see that it's not a human being. And what attracted me personally to this is of course I'm always curious, scientifically-curious and this is new technology and we are pioneers. So I thought, 'Yeah let's go for it,' and you know the other three went for it as well.
What is the actual format of the tribute show going to be? Is it going to be these Abba-tars all the way though?
No, other people as well. And as for the format I'm not entirely sure what it's going to look like but some sort of tribute show with these Abba-tars for want of a better word as the kind of centrepiece.
Will you write new material for it?
We don't know what the Abba-tars will sing yet but there's lots to choose from of the old stuff and yeah, I'm not ready to say that yet.
So there could be new songs…
I'm… it's up in the air.
Stay tuned…
Yeah.
Why not reform and have a reunion? The real you, rather than the virtual ones.
Yeah, why not? Well… it never seemed like a good idea. It's not that we haven't had offers over the years. But somehow we always thought that the Abba that people have in their minds are the once-young and energetic group from the '70s. And we just never felt the urge to go on tour, I guess.
On the whole we toured very little. We had like 10 years together and of those 10 years maybe we toured, like, seven months. Not more than that. So to go on tour as a geriatric, I don't know!
Formed in 1972, Abba were essentially a Swedish supergroup, consisting of songwriters Ulvaeus and Andersson from The Hep Stars and singers Faltskog and Anni-Frid Lyngstad, who had scored success as solo artists.
But their joint project completely eclipsed their previous successes. After winning the Eurovision Song Contest with Waterloo in 1974, the band sold almost 400 million singles and albums around the world.
Mamma Mia!, the musical based on their hits and produced by Ulvaeus and Andersson, has been seen by more than 50 million people.
During their most successful period, the band survived marriage break-ups between Ulvaeus and Faltskog, and Lyngstad and Andersson, but they finally called it a day in 1983.
Their final recording sessions, in 1982, produced the hits Under Attack and The Day Before You Came, which featured on the compilation album The Singles.
Their last public performance came three years later, on the Swedish version of TV show This Is Your Life, which honoured their manager Stig Anderson.
Koreas summit: North Korean media hail 'historic' meeting - BBC News
April 28, 2018
Koreas summit: North Korean media hail 'historic' meeting
Welcoming Kim Jong-un with pomp and ritual
Friday's summit between the leaders of North and South Korea was a "historic meeting" paving the way for the start of a new era, North Korea's media say.
The North's Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in of South Korea agreed to work to rid the peninsula of nuclear weapons.
In a rare move, state-run TV and the official KCNA news agency hailed the talks and the leaders' commitment to seek "complete denuclearisation".
The summit came just months after warlike rhetoric from the North.
It saw Mr Kim become the first North Korean leader to set foot in South Korea since the end of the Korean War in 1953.
The two men warmly shook hands and then stepped symbolically over the military demarcation line to the North Korean side.
For years, Pyongyang has insisted that it would never give up its nuclear arsenal, which it claims it needs to defend itself against aggression from the US.
Seeing even a small mention of denuclearisation in a public newspaper will be perceived as a breakthrough by South Korean officials, says the BBC's Laura Bicker in Seoul.
What is in the agreement?
The two leaders said they would pursue talks with the US and China to formally end the Korean War, which ended in 1953 with a truce, not total peace.
The commitment to denuclearisation does not explicitly refer to North Korea halting its nuclear activities but rather to the aim of "a nuclear-free Korean peninsula".
The statement talks about this taking place in a phased manner, but does not include further details.
Many analysts remain sceptical about the North's apparent enthusiasm for engagement.
Profile: Kim Jong-un
North Korea crisis in 300 words
Media captionKim Jong-un issues his pledge for peace with South Korea
Previous inter-Korean agreements have been abandoned after the North resorted to nuclear and missile tests and the South elected more conservative presidents.
Mr Kim said the two leaders had agreed to work to prevent a repeat of the region's "unfortunate history" in which progress had "fizzled out".
Other points the leaders agreed on in a joint statement were:
An end to "hostile activities" between the two nations
Changing the demilitarised zone (DMZ) that divides the country into a "peace zone" by ceasing propaganda broadcasts
An arms reduction in the region pending the easing of military tension
To push for four-way talks involving the US and China
Organising a reunion of families left divided by the war
Connecting and modernising railways and roads across the border
Further joint participation in sporting events, including this year's Asian Games
Will the summit lead to peace?
By Dr John Nilsson-Wright, Chatham House and University of Cambridge
Mr Kim's bold decision to stride confidently into nominally hostile territory reflects the young dictator's confidence and acute sense of political theatre and expertly executed timing.
Media captionThe moment Kim Jong-un crossed into South Korea
His clever, seemingly spontaneous gesture to President Moon to reciprocate his step into the South by having him join him for an instance in stepping back into the North was an inspired way of asserting the equality of the two countries and their leaders.
It also, by blurring the boundary between the two countries, hinted at the goal of unification that both Seoul and Pyongyang have long sought to realise.
The rest of the day was full of visual firsts and a set of cleverly choreographed images of the two leaders chatting informally and intimately in the open air - deliberately advancing a powerful new narrative of the two Koreas as agents of their own destiny.
Read full analysis from Dr John Nilsson-Wright
What did China and the US say?
China, North Korea's ally, and the United States both welcomed the outcome of the talks.
President Donald Trump said "good things are happening" but pledged continue to exert maximum pressure on North Korea, as he prepares to meet Mr Kim in the coming weeks.
"We're not going to be played, OK?" he said.
US officials are still deciding where to hold the summit but Mongolia and Singapore are understood to be two countries on the shortlist.
Korea summit sparks cold noodle craze
Diplomacy on the menu: How food can shape politics
Mr Kim travelled in a car surrounded by jogging bodyguards
How did we get here?
Few had predicted a development like this, as North Korea continued its nuclear and missile tests and stepped up its rhetoric through 2016 and 2017.
The rapprochement began in January when Mr Kim suggested he was "open to dialogue" with South Korea.
Did the Winter Olympics repair relations?
North and South set up hotline ahead of summit
The following month the two countries marched under one flag at the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics, held in the South.
Many South Koreans were overcome with emotion as they saw the historic moment on TV
Mr Kim announced last week that he was suspending nuclear tests.
Chinese researchers have indicated that North Korea's nuclear test site may be unusable after a rock collapse.
Koreas summit: North Korean media hail 'historic' meeting
Welcoming Kim Jong-un with pomp and ritual
Friday's summit between the leaders of North and South Korea was a "historic meeting" paving the way for the start of a new era, North Korea's media say.
The North's Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in of South Korea agreed to work to rid the peninsula of nuclear weapons.
In a rare move, state-run TV and the official KCNA news agency hailed the talks and the leaders' commitment to seek "complete denuclearisation".
The summit came just months after warlike rhetoric from the North.
It saw Mr Kim become the first North Korean leader to set foot in South Korea since the end of the Korean War in 1953.
The two men warmly shook hands and then stepped symbolically over the military demarcation line to the North Korean side.
For years, Pyongyang has insisted that it would never give up its nuclear arsenal, which it claims it needs to defend itself against aggression from the US.
Seeing even a small mention of denuclearisation in a public newspaper will be perceived as a breakthrough by South Korean officials, says the BBC's Laura Bicker in Seoul.
What is in the agreement?
The two leaders said they would pursue talks with the US and China to formally end the Korean War, which ended in 1953 with a truce, not total peace.
The commitment to denuclearisation does not explicitly refer to North Korea halting its nuclear activities but rather to the aim of "a nuclear-free Korean peninsula".
The statement talks about this taking place in a phased manner, but does not include further details.
Many analysts remain sceptical about the North's apparent enthusiasm for engagement.
Profile: Kim Jong-un
North Korea crisis in 300 words
Media captionKim Jong-un issues his pledge for peace with South Korea
Previous inter-Korean agreements have been abandoned after the North resorted to nuclear and missile tests and the South elected more conservative presidents.
Mr Kim said the two leaders had agreed to work to prevent a repeat of the region's "unfortunate history" in which progress had "fizzled out".
Other points the leaders agreed on in a joint statement were:
An end to "hostile activities" between the two nations
Changing the demilitarised zone (DMZ) that divides the country into a "peace zone" by ceasing propaganda broadcasts
An arms reduction in the region pending the easing of military tension
To push for four-way talks involving the US and China
Organising a reunion of families left divided by the war
Connecting and modernising railways and roads across the border
Further joint participation in sporting events, including this year's Asian Games
Will the summit lead to peace?
By Dr John Nilsson-Wright, Chatham House and University of Cambridge
Mr Kim's bold decision to stride confidently into nominally hostile territory reflects the young dictator's confidence and acute sense of political theatre and expertly executed timing.
Media captionThe moment Kim Jong-un crossed into South Korea
His clever, seemingly spontaneous gesture to President Moon to reciprocate his step into the South by having him join him for an instance in stepping back into the North was an inspired way of asserting the equality of the two countries and their leaders.
It also, by blurring the boundary between the two countries, hinted at the goal of unification that both Seoul and Pyongyang have long sought to realise.
The rest of the day was full of visual firsts and a set of cleverly choreographed images of the two leaders chatting informally and intimately in the open air - deliberately advancing a powerful new narrative of the two Koreas as agents of their own destiny.
Read full analysis from Dr John Nilsson-Wright
What did China and the US say?
China, North Korea's ally, and the United States both welcomed the outcome of the talks.
President Donald Trump said "good things are happening" but pledged continue to exert maximum pressure on North Korea, as he prepares to meet Mr Kim in the coming weeks.
"We're not going to be played, OK?" he said.
US officials are still deciding where to hold the summit but Mongolia and Singapore are understood to be two countries on the shortlist.
Korea summit sparks cold noodle craze
Diplomacy on the menu: How food can shape politics
Mr Kim travelled in a car surrounded by jogging bodyguards
How did we get here?
Few had predicted a development like this, as North Korea continued its nuclear and missile tests and stepped up its rhetoric through 2016 and 2017.
The rapprochement began in January when Mr Kim suggested he was "open to dialogue" with South Korea.
Did the Winter Olympics repair relations?
North and South set up hotline ahead of summit
The following month the two countries marched under one flag at the opening ceremony of the Winter Olympics, held in the South.
Many South Koreans were overcome with emotion as they saw the historic moment on TV
Mr Kim announced last week that he was suspending nuclear tests.
Chinese researchers have indicated that North Korea's nuclear test site may be unusable after a rock collapse.
Friday, April 27, 2018
China's upstart chip companies aim to topple Samsung, Intel and TSMC - Nikkei Asian review
China's upstart chip companies aim to topple Samsung, Intel and TSMC
Push into semiconductor market raises fears of a supply glut
CHENG TING-FANG, Nikkei staff writer
April 25, 2018 15:00 JST
SHANGHAI/TAIPEI -- Business is booming at the Shanghai Integrated Circuit Museum.
For most of its nine-year history, the museum has been mostly a place for school children to learn about the uses of computer chips. But it has become a hot ticket for officials from all over China ever since Beijing declared that creating a world-leading semiconductor industry was a top national priority.
On a recent weekday this spring, Lance Long, the museum's director, was hosting a tour for officials from Urumqi, the Xinjiang capital known for being the world's most landlocked city. Before that, Long hosted groups from distant provinces such as Gansu and Yunnan and even Mongolia. All told, some 200 groups came last year for an education in China's next big thing.
"Many of these representatives knew very little about chips, but they all want to capture this once-in-a-lifetime investment opportunity being led by high-ranked policymakers," Long told the Nikkei Asian Review.
This national enthusiasm reflects China's towering ambitions for its semiconductor industry. China, and its young chipmakers, are clear about their goal: to break the dominance of American, South Korean, Taiwanese and Japanese semiconductor companies. The government wants to create Chinese versions of most of the industry's leaders, then leapfrog them in the race for advanced chips used in artificial intelligence.
In March, Premier Li Keqiang named semiconductors as the top priority of the 10 industries China wants to foster in its "Made in China 2025" initiative. But China's ambitions were already clear in 2014 when it launched the National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund -- better known as the Big Fund -- in 2014 with 138 billion yuan ($21.9 billion) in seed capital, which it hoped would turbocharge investment from local governments and the private sector. The Big Fund is in its second phase of fundraising for at least 150 billion yuan. Credit Suisse estimates China's total investment to be around $140 billion.
China wants to end its reliance on foreign technology -- its annual imports of $260 billion worth of semiconductor-related products have recently risen above its spending on oil. It also wants to move its manufacturing sector to higher-value products.
But there are also national security concerns. Chips serve as the brains for every electronic device -- from smartphones and PCs to connected cars and data centers -- and therefore have strong implications for intelligence. China wants to defend against the types of national security breaches exposed by Edward Snowden's 2013 leaks, which revealed connections between American technology providers and the U.S. National Security Agency's vast surveillance program.
This position is a mirror-image of the increasingly hard-line U.S. stance toward China. American regulators have cited national security concerns when it has curbed chip and other deals with Chinese groups, and has recently fired the opening shots in a trade war to penalize China for stealing high-tech intellectual property. To Beijing, such moves point to an all-out U.S. effort to slow China's aggressive attempt to become a new semiconductor superpower.
"The U.S. is really feeling the threat," said Jerry Peng, an analyst at research unit IEK of Industrial Technology Research Institute in Taiwan.
There is no guarantee of success for China's chip push, however. The country's previous efforts to build a chip industry, including a major drive in the 1990s, were mostly unsuccessful. Its technology is far behind that of global giants such as Samsung Electronics and Intel, making China's goal of producing 75% of the chips it uses domestically by 2025 seem highly ambitious, analysts at Natixis say.
Unlike its previous efforts, when its investments were scattered and ill-placed, China is seeking to bring in expertise from the outside by luring foreign companies to set up advanced production facilities within its territories. This will help create a full supply chain and attract talent. The latest move by the U.S. to bar American companies from selling any components to ZTE, a Chinese telecom equipment provider and smartphone maker, has only strengthened China's determination to replace as many foreign suppliers as possible, according to multiple industry executives.
The recent U.S. move to bar American companies from selling components to ZTE has made China more determined to create its own chip ecosystem. © Getty Images
Analysts also say China has learned from its past mistakes.
"It's totally different from decades ago when China suffered through a frustrating experience to build semiconductors out of nowhere," Mark Li, an analyst at Bernstein Research said. "This time, it's a totally different story as the country has all the right ingredients, including a massive market and strong local makers of smartphones, TVs, PCs, and automobiles ... . It could be just a matter of time for them to bear fruit."
Memory chip push
The first fruits of Beijing's big investment in chips could come as soon as the end of next year, when it will begin shipping its first batch of memory chips. Right now, China has yet to produce such chips in substantial volumes. But industry executives say Chinese memory chips could cause a major disruption in the market once its manufacturers are able to produce them in sufficient quantities, which they expect to happen in three to five years.
When that happens, it could have an impact on two markets: NAND flash memory and DRAM memory chips.
Production of global NAND flash memory-- a $58 billion market annually -- is controlled by only six companies: Samsung Electronics, Toshiba, Western Digital, SK Hynix, Micron Technology and Intel.
DRAMs are dominated by an even smaller group of companies: Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron, which together held 95% of the $71 billion global market in 2017, according to Taipei-based research company TrendForce.
Helped by strong demand and tight supplies, Samsung and SK Hynix alone generated some $85 billion in memory chip sales in 2017, higher than the gross domestic product of Luxembourg. The combined semiconductor operating profit from both companies -- about $46 billion -- would be 1.6 times higher than what the two biggest Japanese companies, Toyota Motor and SoftBank Group, earned together in fiscal 2017.
"It's so unhealthy about the recent memory price hike, and it's so unfair that such important components are controlled by very few companies," a Chinese chip industry executive told the Nikkei Asian Review. "The road could be bumpy, but we need to have our domestic memory chips for sure, and we wouldn't care at first whether we could make a profit or whether we cause a price crash in the market."
Yangtze Memory Technologies is spending $24 billion to build one of China's first advanced memory chip factories in the city of Wuhan. (Courtesy of Tsinghua Unigroup)
A little-known state-backed conglomerate called Tsinghua Unigroup will play a key role in determining whether Chinese chipmakers can successfully challenge the dominance of Samsung, SK Hynix and Toshiba in the memory market.
Tsinghua initially tried to buy its way into the market, but its $23 billion bid to acquire Micron and a separate attempt to become the largest shareholder of Western Digital were blocked by the U.S. government. At the same time, the industry's dominant players were reluctant to license their technology to the aggressive latecomer. But those setbacks did not dampen Tsinghua's enthusiasm.
The group's affiliate, Yangtze Memory Technologies, is spending $24 billion to build the country's first advanced memory chip factories in the city of Wuhan. It has poached thousands of engineers from Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron and Nanya Technology, and on April 11, it began moving equipment into the factory.
Tsinghua Unigroup Chairman Zhao Weiguo announced that the company should begin producing its first batch of 32-layer NAND flash memory chips this year. But Avril Wu, a longtime market watcher at TrendForce, said it is likely that Yangtze Memory will not be ready to ship the more advanced 64-layer chips, currently the industry standard, until the end of 2019 at the earliest.
Tsinghua Unigroup Chairman Zhao Weiguo © Reuters
Apple, the world's biggest consumer of NAND flash memory, recently visited Yangtze Memory to learn about its development status, according to people familiar with the matter. It is not clear whether the iPhone maker received pressure from China to evaluate a potential supply deal, but Apple will undoubtedly want to continue diversifying its memory chip suppliers in order to reduce its reliance on Samsung, multiple industry sources and analysts have said.
Roger Sheng, an analyst at Gartner, said Chinese memory chipmakers still have a long way to go before they make a dent in the market. Still, his company expects that in the NAND flash memory segment, Yangtze Memory could come to replace some low-end providers in three years and compete with first-tier players in five years.
Samsung Electronics CEO Kim Ki-nam and Micron CEO Sanjay Mehrotra are aware of China's offensive, but both say Chinese chipmakers face high technological barriers to entering the market. "We recognize that the Chinese government is supporting [these emerging players] actively ... but it's difficult to narrow technological gaps in the short term solely through big investments," Samsung's Kim said at the company's annual general meeting in March.
The memory chip market is notoriously volatile, swinging between periods of supply shortages and serious gluts. Despite China's technological hurdles, executives from top memory chipmakers worry that Chinese companies could flood the market with cheap semiconductors, leading to a repeat of the massive oversupply that hit the industry a decade ago.
There may be good reason for such concern -- the planned capacity from China is huge. Yangtze Memory has set out to make 300,000 NAND flash wafers a month in years to come, equivalent to some 20% of current global output. "Even if only some one-third or even less of [planned production] is realized in three to five years, it could cause a major price drop for memory chips and hurt the profitability of current suppliers," said Sean Yang, an analyst at Shanghai-based CINNO.
Chinese chipmakers will have the advantage of a vast end market of local gadget makers eager to use more domestic chips. Chinese brands controlled roughly 50% of the global smartphone market and 36% of the PC and tablet computer market in 2017, according to Gartner. Government agencies would also be first-wave adopters.
Another potential hurdle -- intellectual property, including chip design and production techniques -- is not a worry for Chinese chipmakers, analysts say. "Intellectual property issues would never be a roadblock for these newcomers," said IEK's Peng. "The most important task is to deliver the results, and even if there is any concerns with IPs, they can always later come back to negotiate with these big guys to settle the case with a certain license fee."
A dilemma for foreign chipmakers
While IP may not be a worry for the Chinese companies, it is a very real concern for foreign chip giants such as Intel, Samsung, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) and SK Hynix. Like companies in other sectors, high-tech groups are eager to have access to the Chinese market, but wary of handing over valuable technology secrets to state-sponsored competitors.
For China, bringing in as many world-class foreign chip producers as possible is the easiest way to achieve its goal of cultivating a supply chain ecosystem to support its new industry.
"For the longer term, expanding advanced production sites in China could be a trade-off for the existing players because they are potentially helping their competitors," said a Taiwanese chip industry executive who asked not to be named. "It's like these newcomers can go to Harvard or MIT near their home rather than going abroad."
TSMC, for instance, has spent $3 billion on an advanced 12-inch chip facility in the Chinese city of Nanjing, which began production ahead of schedule in April. The world's No. 1 contract chipmaker relies on Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia and other U.S. clients for 60% of its revenue, but Chinese customers are its fastest growing, making up some 11% of sales in 2017, up from 9% the previous year.
Tsinghua Unigroup plans to build a memory chip production site the size of 2,380 basketball courts in Nanjing. (Photo by Cheng Ting-Fang)
Not far away from TSMC's Nanjing facility, Tsinghua Unigroup is planning to build a $30 billion megasite the size of 2,380 basketball courts to produce memory chips. The Tsinghua project would benefit from any suppliers that TSMC brings to the community.
"It's very difficult for emerging players to secure good support from best-in-class chip equipment and material suppliers, but foreign chipmakers would bring a whole cluster of them even to some distant cities should they have a facility there," said Gartner's Sheng. "And these foreign chipmakers could help us train a huge group of engineers that could later work for local Chinese companies."
This complicated dynamic will only be exacerbated once homegrown Chinese chipmakers make it to the global stage.
"We will see more and more conflicts of interests later -- between countries and also between local and foreign suppliers later," said CINNO's Yang. "This ongoing trade friction between the U.S. and China is just one example."
Nikkei staff writers Hiromi Sato in Silicon Valley, Kim Jaewon in Seoul and Lauly Li in Taipei contributed to this report.
Push into semiconductor market raises fears of a supply glut
CHENG TING-FANG, Nikkei staff writer
April 25, 2018 15:00 JST
SHANGHAI/TAIPEI -- Business is booming at the Shanghai Integrated Circuit Museum.
For most of its nine-year history, the museum has been mostly a place for school children to learn about the uses of computer chips. But it has become a hot ticket for officials from all over China ever since Beijing declared that creating a world-leading semiconductor industry was a top national priority.
On a recent weekday this spring, Lance Long, the museum's director, was hosting a tour for officials from Urumqi, the Xinjiang capital known for being the world's most landlocked city. Before that, Long hosted groups from distant provinces such as Gansu and Yunnan and even Mongolia. All told, some 200 groups came last year for an education in China's next big thing.
"Many of these representatives knew very little about chips, but they all want to capture this once-in-a-lifetime investment opportunity being led by high-ranked policymakers," Long told the Nikkei Asian Review.
This national enthusiasm reflects China's towering ambitions for its semiconductor industry. China, and its young chipmakers, are clear about their goal: to break the dominance of American, South Korean, Taiwanese and Japanese semiconductor companies. The government wants to create Chinese versions of most of the industry's leaders, then leapfrog them in the race for advanced chips used in artificial intelligence.
In March, Premier Li Keqiang named semiconductors as the top priority of the 10 industries China wants to foster in its "Made in China 2025" initiative. But China's ambitions were already clear in 2014 when it launched the National Integrated Circuit Industry Investment Fund -- better known as the Big Fund -- in 2014 with 138 billion yuan ($21.9 billion) in seed capital, which it hoped would turbocharge investment from local governments and the private sector. The Big Fund is in its second phase of fundraising for at least 150 billion yuan. Credit Suisse estimates China's total investment to be around $140 billion.
China wants to end its reliance on foreign technology -- its annual imports of $260 billion worth of semiconductor-related products have recently risen above its spending on oil. It also wants to move its manufacturing sector to higher-value products.
But there are also national security concerns. Chips serve as the brains for every electronic device -- from smartphones and PCs to connected cars and data centers -- and therefore have strong implications for intelligence. China wants to defend against the types of national security breaches exposed by Edward Snowden's 2013 leaks, which revealed connections between American technology providers and the U.S. National Security Agency's vast surveillance program.
This position is a mirror-image of the increasingly hard-line U.S. stance toward China. American regulators have cited national security concerns when it has curbed chip and other deals with Chinese groups, and has recently fired the opening shots in a trade war to penalize China for stealing high-tech intellectual property. To Beijing, such moves point to an all-out U.S. effort to slow China's aggressive attempt to become a new semiconductor superpower.
"The U.S. is really feeling the threat," said Jerry Peng, an analyst at research unit IEK of Industrial Technology Research Institute in Taiwan.
There is no guarantee of success for China's chip push, however. The country's previous efforts to build a chip industry, including a major drive in the 1990s, were mostly unsuccessful. Its technology is far behind that of global giants such as Samsung Electronics and Intel, making China's goal of producing 75% of the chips it uses domestically by 2025 seem highly ambitious, analysts at Natixis say.
Unlike its previous efforts, when its investments were scattered and ill-placed, China is seeking to bring in expertise from the outside by luring foreign companies to set up advanced production facilities within its territories. This will help create a full supply chain and attract talent. The latest move by the U.S. to bar American companies from selling any components to ZTE, a Chinese telecom equipment provider and smartphone maker, has only strengthened China's determination to replace as many foreign suppliers as possible, according to multiple industry executives.
The recent U.S. move to bar American companies from selling components to ZTE has made China more determined to create its own chip ecosystem. © Getty Images
Analysts also say China has learned from its past mistakes.
"It's totally different from decades ago when China suffered through a frustrating experience to build semiconductors out of nowhere," Mark Li, an analyst at Bernstein Research said. "This time, it's a totally different story as the country has all the right ingredients, including a massive market and strong local makers of smartphones, TVs, PCs, and automobiles ... . It could be just a matter of time for them to bear fruit."
Memory chip push
The first fruits of Beijing's big investment in chips could come as soon as the end of next year, when it will begin shipping its first batch of memory chips. Right now, China has yet to produce such chips in substantial volumes. But industry executives say Chinese memory chips could cause a major disruption in the market once its manufacturers are able to produce them in sufficient quantities, which they expect to happen in three to five years.
When that happens, it could have an impact on two markets: NAND flash memory and DRAM memory chips.
Production of global NAND flash memory-- a $58 billion market annually -- is controlled by only six companies: Samsung Electronics, Toshiba, Western Digital, SK Hynix, Micron Technology and Intel.
DRAMs are dominated by an even smaller group of companies: Samsung, SK Hynix and Micron, which together held 95% of the $71 billion global market in 2017, according to Taipei-based research company TrendForce.
Helped by strong demand and tight supplies, Samsung and SK Hynix alone generated some $85 billion in memory chip sales in 2017, higher than the gross domestic product of Luxembourg. The combined semiconductor operating profit from both companies -- about $46 billion -- would be 1.6 times higher than what the two biggest Japanese companies, Toyota Motor and SoftBank Group, earned together in fiscal 2017.
"It's so unhealthy about the recent memory price hike, and it's so unfair that such important components are controlled by very few companies," a Chinese chip industry executive told the Nikkei Asian Review. "The road could be bumpy, but we need to have our domestic memory chips for sure, and we wouldn't care at first whether we could make a profit or whether we cause a price crash in the market."
Yangtze Memory Technologies is spending $24 billion to build one of China's first advanced memory chip factories in the city of Wuhan. (Courtesy of Tsinghua Unigroup)
A little-known state-backed conglomerate called Tsinghua Unigroup will play a key role in determining whether Chinese chipmakers can successfully challenge the dominance of Samsung, SK Hynix and Toshiba in the memory market.
Tsinghua initially tried to buy its way into the market, but its $23 billion bid to acquire Micron and a separate attempt to become the largest shareholder of Western Digital were blocked by the U.S. government. At the same time, the industry's dominant players were reluctant to license their technology to the aggressive latecomer. But those setbacks did not dampen Tsinghua's enthusiasm.
The group's affiliate, Yangtze Memory Technologies, is spending $24 billion to build the country's first advanced memory chip factories in the city of Wuhan. It has poached thousands of engineers from Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron and Nanya Technology, and on April 11, it began moving equipment into the factory.
Tsinghua Unigroup Chairman Zhao Weiguo announced that the company should begin producing its first batch of 32-layer NAND flash memory chips this year. But Avril Wu, a longtime market watcher at TrendForce, said it is likely that Yangtze Memory will not be ready to ship the more advanced 64-layer chips, currently the industry standard, until the end of 2019 at the earliest.
Tsinghua Unigroup Chairman Zhao Weiguo © Reuters
Apple, the world's biggest consumer of NAND flash memory, recently visited Yangtze Memory to learn about its development status, according to people familiar with the matter. It is not clear whether the iPhone maker received pressure from China to evaluate a potential supply deal, but Apple will undoubtedly want to continue diversifying its memory chip suppliers in order to reduce its reliance on Samsung, multiple industry sources and analysts have said.
Roger Sheng, an analyst at Gartner, said Chinese memory chipmakers still have a long way to go before they make a dent in the market. Still, his company expects that in the NAND flash memory segment, Yangtze Memory could come to replace some low-end providers in three years and compete with first-tier players in five years.
Samsung Electronics CEO Kim Ki-nam and Micron CEO Sanjay Mehrotra are aware of China's offensive, but both say Chinese chipmakers face high technological barriers to entering the market. "We recognize that the Chinese government is supporting [these emerging players] actively ... but it's difficult to narrow technological gaps in the short term solely through big investments," Samsung's Kim said at the company's annual general meeting in March.
The memory chip market is notoriously volatile, swinging between periods of supply shortages and serious gluts. Despite China's technological hurdles, executives from top memory chipmakers worry that Chinese companies could flood the market with cheap semiconductors, leading to a repeat of the massive oversupply that hit the industry a decade ago.
There may be good reason for such concern -- the planned capacity from China is huge. Yangtze Memory has set out to make 300,000 NAND flash wafers a month in years to come, equivalent to some 20% of current global output. "Even if only some one-third or even less of [planned production] is realized in three to five years, it could cause a major price drop for memory chips and hurt the profitability of current suppliers," said Sean Yang, an analyst at Shanghai-based CINNO.
Chinese chipmakers will have the advantage of a vast end market of local gadget makers eager to use more domestic chips. Chinese brands controlled roughly 50% of the global smartphone market and 36% of the PC and tablet computer market in 2017, according to Gartner. Government agencies would also be first-wave adopters.
Another potential hurdle -- intellectual property, including chip design and production techniques -- is not a worry for Chinese chipmakers, analysts say. "Intellectual property issues would never be a roadblock for these newcomers," said IEK's Peng. "The most important task is to deliver the results, and even if there is any concerns with IPs, they can always later come back to negotiate with these big guys to settle the case with a certain license fee."
A dilemma for foreign chipmakers
While IP may not be a worry for the Chinese companies, it is a very real concern for foreign chip giants such as Intel, Samsung, Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Co. (TSMC) and SK Hynix. Like companies in other sectors, high-tech groups are eager to have access to the Chinese market, but wary of handing over valuable technology secrets to state-sponsored competitors.
For China, bringing in as many world-class foreign chip producers as possible is the easiest way to achieve its goal of cultivating a supply chain ecosystem to support its new industry.
"For the longer term, expanding advanced production sites in China could be a trade-off for the existing players because they are potentially helping their competitors," said a Taiwanese chip industry executive who asked not to be named. "It's like these newcomers can go to Harvard or MIT near their home rather than going abroad."
TSMC, for instance, has spent $3 billion on an advanced 12-inch chip facility in the Chinese city of Nanjing, which began production ahead of schedule in April. The world's No. 1 contract chipmaker relies on Apple, Qualcomm, Nvidia and other U.S. clients for 60% of its revenue, but Chinese customers are its fastest growing, making up some 11% of sales in 2017, up from 9% the previous year.
Tsinghua Unigroup plans to build a memory chip production site the size of 2,380 basketball courts in Nanjing. (Photo by Cheng Ting-Fang)
Not far away from TSMC's Nanjing facility, Tsinghua Unigroup is planning to build a $30 billion megasite the size of 2,380 basketball courts to produce memory chips. The Tsinghua project would benefit from any suppliers that TSMC brings to the community.
"It's very difficult for emerging players to secure good support from best-in-class chip equipment and material suppliers, but foreign chipmakers would bring a whole cluster of them even to some distant cities should they have a facility there," said Gartner's Sheng. "And these foreign chipmakers could help us train a huge group of engineers that could later work for local Chinese companies."
This complicated dynamic will only be exacerbated once homegrown Chinese chipmakers make it to the global stage.
"We will see more and more conflicts of interests later -- between countries and also between local and foreign suppliers later," said CINNO's Yang. "This ongoing trade friction between the U.S. and China is just one example."
Nikkei staff writers Hiromi Sato in Silicon Valley, Kim Jaewon in Seoul and Lauly Li in Taipei contributed to this report.
Prince Louis Arthur Charles - William and Kate name their baby - Reuters
APRIL 27, 2018 / 8:07 PM / UPDATED 12 MINUTES AGO
Prince Louis Arthur Charles - William and Kate name their baby
Reuters Staff
LONDON (Reuters) - Prince William and his wife Kate have named their newborn son Louis Arthur Charles, who will be known as His Royal Highness Prince Louis of Cambridge, Kensington Palace said on Friday.
Britain's Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William leave the Lindo Wing of St Mary's Hospital with their new baby boy in London, April 23, 2018. REUTERS/Hannah Mckay
The prince, who is fifth in line to the British throne, was born at 1001 GMT on April 23 weighing 8 lbs 7oz.
Louis is William’s fourth name as well as being that of Earl Mountbatten, to whom William’s father Prince Charles was particularly close. Mountbatten was the uncle of Prince Philip, 96, great-grandfather of the new prince.
Charles, heir to the throne, has said it was a great joy to have another grandchild.
William and Kate now have three children: Louis joins Charlotte, 2, and George, 4.
For a boy, the leading bets were for Albert, Arthur, Alexander, James and Philip. The betting odds indicated just a 5 percent chance of Louis.
Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge and Alistair Smout; editing by Stephen Addison
Prince Louis Arthur Charles - William and Kate name their baby
Reuters Staff
LONDON (Reuters) - Prince William and his wife Kate have named their newborn son Louis Arthur Charles, who will be known as His Royal Highness Prince Louis of Cambridge, Kensington Palace said on Friday.
Britain's Catherine, the Duchess of Cambridge and Prince William leave the Lindo Wing of St Mary's Hospital with their new baby boy in London, April 23, 2018. REUTERS/Hannah Mckay
The prince, who is fifth in line to the British throne, was born at 1001 GMT on April 23 weighing 8 lbs 7oz.
Louis is William’s fourth name as well as being that of Earl Mountbatten, to whom William’s father Prince Charles was particularly close. Mountbatten was the uncle of Prince Philip, 96, great-grandfather of the new prince.
Charles, heir to the throne, has said it was a great joy to have another grandchild.
William and Kate now have three children: Louis joins Charlotte, 2, and George, 4.
For a boy, the leading bets were for Albert, Arthur, Alexander, James and Philip. The betting odds indicated just a 5 percent chance of Louis.
Reporting by Guy Faulconbridge and Alistair Smout; editing by Stephen Addison
Joint police action 'punches big hole' in Isis propaganda ability - Guardian
Joint police action 'punches big hole' in Isis propaganda ability
Computer servers seized in two-day operation in Europe, US and Canada to prevent radicalisation
Jamie Grierson
@JamieGrierson
Fri 27 Apr 2018 20.21 AEST Last modified on Fri 27 Apr 2018 20.58 AEST
Rob Wainwright, director of Europol
Law enforcement authorities have “punched a big hole” in Islamic State’s propaganda machine, targeting news agencies and radio stations used by the jihadi group to radicalise people across the world.
Isis computer servers in the Netherlands, Canada and the US, as well as digital evidence in Bulgaria, France and Romania, have been seized in a two-day takedown operation co-ordinated by Europol.
UK authorities took part in the operation, dealing with top-level domain registrars – companies that register websites – abused by Isis.
The action targeted Isis-branded media outlets such as Amaq and Nashir news agencies and al-Bayan radio, hitting the extremist organisation’s ability to broadcast and publicise terrorist material.
Rob Wainwright, executive director of Europol, said: “With this groundbreaking operation we have punched a big hole in the capability of IS [Isis] to spread propaganda online and radicalise young people in Europe.”
The data captured as part of the operation will help to identify the administrators behind Isis media outlets, Europol said.
Home Office unveils AI program to tackle Isis online propaganda
Amaq is the main mouthpiece for Isis and has been used to claim responsibility for terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels, Barcelona, Berlin and Trebes. Europol and law enforcement across Europe have been targeting the news agency and other Isis outlets since 2015.
In June 2017, an operation targeted at Amaq’s web assets and infrastructure led to the identification of radicalised individuals in more than 100 countries.
The EU security commissioner, Julian King, said: “This shows that by working together we can stamp out the poisonous propaganda Daesh [Isis] has used to fuel many of the recent terror attacks in Europe. For too long the internet has been open to terrorists and those who seek to do us harm. Those days are coming to an end thanks to this type of co-ordinated global work.”
Computer servers seized in two-day operation in Europe, US and Canada to prevent radicalisation
Jamie Grierson
@JamieGrierson
Fri 27 Apr 2018 20.21 AEST Last modified on Fri 27 Apr 2018 20.58 AEST
Rob Wainwright, director of Europol
Law enforcement authorities have “punched a big hole” in Islamic State’s propaganda machine, targeting news agencies and radio stations used by the jihadi group to radicalise people across the world.
Isis computer servers in the Netherlands, Canada and the US, as well as digital evidence in Bulgaria, France and Romania, have been seized in a two-day takedown operation co-ordinated by Europol.
UK authorities took part in the operation, dealing with top-level domain registrars – companies that register websites – abused by Isis.
The action targeted Isis-branded media outlets such as Amaq and Nashir news agencies and al-Bayan radio, hitting the extremist organisation’s ability to broadcast and publicise terrorist material.
Rob Wainwright, executive director of Europol, said: “With this groundbreaking operation we have punched a big hole in the capability of IS [Isis] to spread propaganda online and radicalise young people in Europe.”
The data captured as part of the operation will help to identify the administrators behind Isis media outlets, Europol said.
Home Office unveils AI program to tackle Isis online propaganda
Amaq is the main mouthpiece for Isis and has been used to claim responsibility for terrorist attacks in Paris, Brussels, Barcelona, Berlin and Trebes. Europol and law enforcement across Europe have been targeting the news agency and other Isis outlets since 2015.
In June 2017, an operation targeted at Amaq’s web assets and infrastructure led to the identification of radicalised individuals in more than 100 countries.
The EU security commissioner, Julian King, said: “This shows that by working together we can stamp out the poisonous propaganda Daesh [Isis] has used to fuel many of the recent terror attacks in Europe. For too long the internet has been open to terrorists and those who seek to do us harm. Those days are coming to an end thanks to this type of co-ordinated global work.”
Mueller won't find a 'stitch of evidence' that Trump colluded with Russians: Giuliani - ABC News
Mueller won't find a 'stitch of evidence' that Trump colluded with Russians: Giuliani
By JOHN SANTUCCI Apr 25, 2018, 9:33 PM ET
WATCHGiuliani: Mueller won't find a 'stitch of evidence' Trump colluded with Russians
Email
President Donald Trump's old campaign pit bull is already reclaiming his role of defending his friend.
Interested in Russia Investigation?
Add Russia Investigation as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Russia Investigation news, video, and analysis from ABC News.
Russia Investigation Add Interest
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who last week formally joined the president's legal team handling the Russia probe, is already firing off at special counsel Robert Mueller's team.
"I can guarantee you this: When Mueller is finished, no matter whatever he does, he’s not going to have a stitch of evidence that [Trump] colluded with the Russians. Now, that's a disgrace. The case should be over,” Giuliani, who is also a former federal prosecutor, told ABC affiliate WMUR in an interview Wednesday.
The Trump legal team, including Giuliani, met with Mueller’s team on Tuesday, sources with direct knowledge confirmed to ABC News. One source said the meeting is “part of ongoing negotiations.” The source added the president remains apprehensive about agreeing to an interview of any kind with the special counsel at this time but negotiations are continuing.
News of the meeting was first reported by The Washington Post.
What Giuliani's past tells us about how he may represent Trump
Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani joining Trump legal team along with others
"First of all, [Trump is] innocent. There isn't a person in the world who thinks he's guilty of collusion with the Russians,” Giuliani went on to tell WMUR.
For months prior to Giuliani's arrival, the president's lawyers have had multiple meetings with the special counsel's office regarding a potential interview by the president. The options, according to sources familiar with the negotiations, have included a formal sit down with parameters or a questionnaire.
Yet ever since an early morning raid was carried out against Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen, sources close to the president say the commander-in-chief is "less inclined" to sit down for an interview with Mueller.
Mueller's office has declined to comment on the alleged meetings with Trump's lawyers.
By JOHN SANTUCCI Apr 25, 2018, 9:33 PM ET
WATCHGiuliani: Mueller won't find a 'stitch of evidence' Trump colluded with Russians
President Donald Trump's old campaign pit bull is already reclaiming his role of defending his friend.
Interested in Russia Investigation?
Add Russia Investigation as an interest to stay up to date on the latest Russia Investigation news, video, and analysis from ABC News.
Russia Investigation Add Interest
Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who last week formally joined the president's legal team handling the Russia probe, is already firing off at special counsel Robert Mueller's team.
"I can guarantee you this: When Mueller is finished, no matter whatever he does, he’s not going to have a stitch of evidence that [Trump] colluded with the Russians. Now, that's a disgrace. The case should be over,” Giuliani, who is also a former federal prosecutor, told ABC affiliate WMUR in an interview Wednesday.
The Trump legal team, including Giuliani, met with Mueller’s team on Tuesday, sources with direct knowledge confirmed to ABC News. One source said the meeting is “part of ongoing negotiations.” The source added the president remains apprehensive about agreeing to an interview of any kind with the special counsel at this time but negotiations are continuing.
News of the meeting was first reported by The Washington Post.
What Giuliani's past tells us about how he may represent Trump
Former NYC Mayor Rudy Giuliani joining Trump legal team along with others
"First of all, [Trump is] innocent. There isn't a person in the world who thinks he's guilty of collusion with the Russians,” Giuliani went on to tell WMUR.
For months prior to Giuliani's arrival, the president's lawyers have had multiple meetings with the special counsel's office regarding a potential interview by the president. The options, according to sources familiar with the negotiations, have included a formal sit down with parameters or a questionnaire.
Yet ever since an early morning raid was carried out against Trump's personal attorney Michael Cohen, sources close to the president say the commander-in-chief is "less inclined" to sit down for an interview with Mueller.
Mueller's office has declined to comment on the alleged meetings with Trump's lawyers.
Romania's president calls on PM to quit over Israel embassy move - Reuters
APRIL 27, 2018 / 7:12 PM / UPDATED 15 MINUTES AGO
Romania's president calls on PM to quit over Israel embassy move
Radu-Sorin Marinas
BUCHAREST (Reuters) - Romania’s president called on the prime minister to resign on Friday after she endorsed a secret deal to move the country’s embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, overstepping her powers on foreign policy.
Romanian Prime Minister Viorica Dancila speaks during a visit at Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum in Jerusalem, April 25, 2018. REUTERS/Ammar Awad
The head of state cannot dismiss the premier but President Klaus Iohannis’ call could trigger a no-confidence vote, something Prime Minister Viorica Dancila should easily survive given her party’s robust majority in parliament.
“Mrs. Dancila is not coping with her position of prime minister of Romania and thus is turning the government into a liability for Romania. That is why I am calling publicly for her resignation,” Iohannis said in a statement.
Any decision on embassy relocation rests with the president, who said he was not consulted about that or the state visit Dancila paid to Israel this week along with the leader of her Social Democrat party, Liviu Dragnea.
Dancila has said the memorandum she approved was confidential and could not be made public yet.
Iohannis - who has the final say in foreign policy matters - said moving the embassy to Jerusalem, which is not widely recognized as Israel’s capital due to competing sovereignty claims by the Palestinians, has said the move could break international law.
“A secret document, a secret foreign policy memorandum, was discussed last week in the government. That was a big mistake,” Iohannis said.
“Because in foreign policy matters, if we are talking about secret documents, which obviously are sensitive otherwise they should not be secrets, the president should have been consulted, which did not happen,” Iohannis added.
Dancila has yet to comment on his call for her to resign.
Romania would be the first EU country and one of very few countries in the world to relocate its embassy following U.S. President Donald Trump recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in December.
The Romanian foreign ministry had said the memorandum was only the start of a wide consultation process and that it sought to identify the best way for Romania to position itself.
It added Romania’s position regarding the Israeli-Palestinian situation “has traditionally been a balanced one, including ... bilaterally recognizing the Palestinian state.”
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “at least half a dozen” countries were considering moving their embassies to Jerusalem. The U.S. Embassy is due to relocate on May 14.
Editing by Robin Pomeroy
Romania's president calls on PM to quit over Israel embassy move
Radu-Sorin Marinas
BUCHAREST (Reuters) - Romania’s president called on the prime minister to resign on Friday after she endorsed a secret deal to move the country’s embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, overstepping her powers on foreign policy.
Romanian Prime Minister Viorica Dancila speaks during a visit at Yad Vashem Holocaust History Museum in Jerusalem, April 25, 2018. REUTERS/Ammar Awad
The head of state cannot dismiss the premier but President Klaus Iohannis’ call could trigger a no-confidence vote, something Prime Minister Viorica Dancila should easily survive given her party’s robust majority in parliament.
“Mrs. Dancila is not coping with her position of prime minister of Romania and thus is turning the government into a liability for Romania. That is why I am calling publicly for her resignation,” Iohannis said in a statement.
Any decision on embassy relocation rests with the president, who said he was not consulted about that or the state visit Dancila paid to Israel this week along with the leader of her Social Democrat party, Liviu Dragnea.
Dancila has said the memorandum she approved was confidential and could not be made public yet.
Iohannis - who has the final say in foreign policy matters - said moving the embassy to Jerusalem, which is not widely recognized as Israel’s capital due to competing sovereignty claims by the Palestinians, has said the move could break international law.
“A secret document, a secret foreign policy memorandum, was discussed last week in the government. That was a big mistake,” Iohannis said.
“Because in foreign policy matters, if we are talking about secret documents, which obviously are sensitive otherwise they should not be secrets, the president should have been consulted, which did not happen,” Iohannis added.
Dancila has yet to comment on his call for her to resign.
Romania would be the first EU country and one of very few countries in the world to relocate its embassy following U.S. President Donald Trump recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital in December.
The Romanian foreign ministry had said the memorandum was only the start of a wide consultation process and that it sought to identify the best way for Romania to position itself.
It added Romania’s position regarding the Israeli-Palestinian situation “has traditionally been a balanced one, including ... bilaterally recognizing the Palestinian state.”
Last week, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said that “at least half a dozen” countries were considering moving their embassies to Jerusalem. The U.S. Embassy is due to relocate on May 14.
Editing by Robin Pomeroy
Germany's Merkel next to visit Trump on a mission of 'damage limitation' - CNBC News
Germany's Merkel next to visit Trump on a mission of 'damage limitation'
Touching down in the afterglow of her French counterpart's three-day visit, Merkel arrives in Washington to try to find a compromise with the president on a raft of divisive issues.
The Iran nuclear deal, the prospect of U.S. tariffs on European metals products and Berlin's military spending are all politically sensitive topics seen as likely to come up during Merkel's working lunch with Trump.
Eurasia Group's Charles Lichfield said Macron's trip to the U.S. had no implications on the balance of power in Europe because the so-called "Trump-whisperer didn't actually get him to agree to very much."
Sam Meredith | @smeredith19
Published April 27, 2018
CNBC.com
President Donald Trump (R), French President Emmanuel Macron (L) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (C) chat at the start of the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, northern Germany, on July 7, 2017.
John MacDougall | AFP | Getty Images
President Donald Trump (R), French President Emmanuel Macron (L) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (C) chat at the start of the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, northern Germany, on July 7, 2017.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel is embarking on a one-day working visit to meet President Donald Trump on Friday, harboring no illusions of matching the "special relationship" formed by France's Emmanuel Macron.
Touching down in the afterglow of her French counterpart's three-day visit, Merkel arrives in Washington to try to find a compromise with the president on a raft of divisive issues.
The Iran nuclear deal, the prospect of U.S. tariffs on European metals products and Berlin's military spending are all politically sensitive topics seen as likely to come up during Merkel's working lunch with Trump.
"Macron has a good personal relationship with Trump and Merkel has a bad relationship with him, but it's not necessarily a problem. In fact, I don't actually think she cares that much about it," Charles Lichfield, Europe associate at Eurasia Group, told CNBC in a phone interview on Friday.
"This trip is about damage limitation. We are almost in crisis mode with tariffs being threatened, so her focus has to be on that," he added.
'Horrible deal'
Merkel is visiting the U.S. in the hope of averting a trade war between the world's largest economy and the European Union (EU). It is thought German officials will try to convince Trump that Washington's trade deficit with Berlin is not just shrinking, but some of the factors behind their trade partnership are out of the chancellor's control.
Nonetheless, Trump is seen as unlikely to shift from his current position that the trading relationship between the two is clearly biased in Europe's favor.
U.S. President Donald Trump talks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel before the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, July 7, 2017.
Kay Nietfeld | Pool | Getty Images
U.S. President Donald Trump talks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel before the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, July 7, 2017.
France's Macron had initially sought to persuade the Trump administration to abandon its combative stance on both trade and the Iran nuclear accord. However, some analysts questioned whether his tactile relationship with Trump had yielded any tangible results for the EU.
Eurasia Group's Lichfield said Macron's trip to the U.S. had no implications on the balance of power in Europe because the so-called "Trump-whisperer didn't actually get him to agree to very much."
In fact, Trump said Thursday that Macron "really came to recognize" his viewpoint on the Iran nuclear deal.
"He is viewing, I believe, Iran a lot differently than he did before he walked into the Oval Office and I think that's important," Trump said on Fox News. He went onto reaffirm his belief the Obama administration had agreed to a "horrible deal" to freeze Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Macron and Merkel's trips to the U.S. come shortly before a May 12 deadline, set by Trump, to improve on an international deal to curb Iran's nuclear program.
The president has threatened to pull out from the accord between Tehran and six world powers, signed in 2015 before he took office — unless Germany, France and Britain helped to agree on a follow-up pact by that date.
Germany's 'shrinking' global role
Merkel, who was once seen as the torchbearer for liberal democracy, has not enjoyed a warm alliance with Trump. And since losing ground in September's general election, Germany's premier has been accused of being in a strategic retreat on the international stage. In a recent Der Spiegel editorial, the newspaper lamented Berlin's "incredibly shrinking role" as a global player.
That is in sharp contrast to just two years earlier when, shortly after Trump's election victory in November 2016, former President Barack Obama flew to Germany and hailed Merkel as the "closest international partner" of his eight years in office. Thereafter, domestic newspapers had declared Merkel as the somewhat reluctant "leader of the free world."
— Reuters contributed to this article.
Touching down in the afterglow of her French counterpart's three-day visit, Merkel arrives in Washington to try to find a compromise with the president on a raft of divisive issues.
The Iran nuclear deal, the prospect of U.S. tariffs on European metals products and Berlin's military spending are all politically sensitive topics seen as likely to come up during Merkel's working lunch with Trump.
Eurasia Group's Charles Lichfield said Macron's trip to the U.S. had no implications on the balance of power in Europe because the so-called "Trump-whisperer didn't actually get him to agree to very much."
Sam Meredith | @smeredith19
Published April 27, 2018
CNBC.com
President Donald Trump (R), French President Emmanuel Macron (L) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (C) chat at the start of the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, northern Germany, on July 7, 2017.
John MacDougall | AFP | Getty Images
President Donald Trump (R), French President Emmanuel Macron (L) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (C) chat at the start of the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, northern Germany, on July 7, 2017.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel is embarking on a one-day working visit to meet President Donald Trump on Friday, harboring no illusions of matching the "special relationship" formed by France's Emmanuel Macron.
Touching down in the afterglow of her French counterpart's three-day visit, Merkel arrives in Washington to try to find a compromise with the president on a raft of divisive issues.
The Iran nuclear deal, the prospect of U.S. tariffs on European metals products and Berlin's military spending are all politically sensitive topics seen as likely to come up during Merkel's working lunch with Trump.
"Macron has a good personal relationship with Trump and Merkel has a bad relationship with him, but it's not necessarily a problem. In fact, I don't actually think she cares that much about it," Charles Lichfield, Europe associate at Eurasia Group, told CNBC in a phone interview on Friday.
"This trip is about damage limitation. We are almost in crisis mode with tariffs being threatened, so her focus has to be on that," he added.
'Horrible deal'
Merkel is visiting the U.S. in the hope of averting a trade war between the world's largest economy and the European Union (EU). It is thought German officials will try to convince Trump that Washington's trade deficit with Berlin is not just shrinking, but some of the factors behind their trade partnership are out of the chancellor's control.
Nonetheless, Trump is seen as unlikely to shift from his current position that the trading relationship between the two is clearly biased in Europe's favor.
U.S. President Donald Trump talks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel before the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, July 7, 2017.
Kay Nietfeld | Pool | Getty Images
U.S. President Donald Trump talks to German Chancellor Angela Merkel before the first working session of the G20 meeting in Hamburg, Germany, July 7, 2017.
France's Macron had initially sought to persuade the Trump administration to abandon its combative stance on both trade and the Iran nuclear accord. However, some analysts questioned whether his tactile relationship with Trump had yielded any tangible results for the EU.
Eurasia Group's Lichfield said Macron's trip to the U.S. had no implications on the balance of power in Europe because the so-called "Trump-whisperer didn't actually get him to agree to very much."
In fact, Trump said Thursday that Macron "really came to recognize" his viewpoint on the Iran nuclear deal.
"He is viewing, I believe, Iran a lot differently than he did before he walked into the Oval Office and I think that's important," Trump said on Fox News. He went onto reaffirm his belief the Obama administration had agreed to a "horrible deal" to freeze Iran's nuclear weapons program.
Macron and Merkel's trips to the U.S. come shortly before a May 12 deadline, set by Trump, to improve on an international deal to curb Iran's nuclear program.
The president has threatened to pull out from the accord between Tehran and six world powers, signed in 2015 before he took office — unless Germany, France and Britain helped to agree on a follow-up pact by that date.
Germany's 'shrinking' global role
Merkel, who was once seen as the torchbearer for liberal democracy, has not enjoyed a warm alliance with Trump. And since losing ground in September's general election, Germany's premier has been accused of being in a strategic retreat on the international stage. In a recent Der Spiegel editorial, the newspaper lamented Berlin's "incredibly shrinking role" as a global player.
That is in sharp contrast to just two years earlier when, shortly after Trump's election victory in November 2016, former President Barack Obama flew to Germany and hailed Merkel as the "closest international partner" of his eight years in office. Thereafter, domestic newspapers had declared Merkel as the somewhat reluctant "leader of the free world."
— Reuters contributed to this article.
Kushner Brothers Can’t Seem to Avoid Each Other’s Shadow - Bloomberg
Kushner Brothers Can’t Seem to Avoid Each Other’s Shadow
By David Kocieniewski and Caleb Melby
April 27, 2018, 6:00 PM GMT+10
Archrivals tangled in an effort to remake Jersey City skyline
Charles Kushner says city Democrats treating him unfairly
Buildings stand ahead of the Manhattan skyline in this aerial photograph taken above Weehawken, New Jersey, U.S. Photographer: Craig Warga/Bloomberg
The epic rivalry between Charles and Murray Kushner, wealthy New Jersey brothers with competing real estate empires, has intermittently flared up into lawsuits, fraud allegations and sordid revenge plots.
Now their competition has become entwined in a policy dispute in Jersey City, where both men are trying to remake the skyline.
Charles Kushner, whose son Jared is a senior adviser and son-in-law to President Donald Trump, this week accused the leaders of the staunchly Democratic city of trying to curry favor with anti-Trump voters by unfairly blocking tax incentives he needs to build two 56-story towers in Journal Square.
Comparing the city’s actions to religious or racial bigotry, Charles Kushner said Jersey City had discriminated against his company, Kushner Cos., by denying it the kind of tax subsidies Jersey City has offered other developers.
Left unsaid -- but widely known in Jersey City real-estate circles -- is that one of the most prominent companies to receive tens of millions of dollars in subsidies from the government is Kushner Real Estate Group, or KRE, which is owned by Charles Kushner’s brother and archrival, Murray.
Building Momentum
Neither Kushner Cos. or KRE responded to questions on the rivalry.
In the early 2000s, when the brothers were still in business together, Murray Kushner began to believe his brother was mismanaging the firm’s funds and sued him. That sparked a legal battle that would eventually send Charles Kushner, at that time a prominent Democratic fundraiser, to prison after it was revealed that he made illegal campaign contributions and he hired a prostitute to entrap his brother-in-law.
KRE was the first major developer to commit to a major project in Jersey City’s blighted Journal Square area, receiving a package in 2013 of more than $40 million in tax breaks and subsidized loans. KRE’s development, called Journal Squared, opened a 54-story high rise last year and broke ground on a second tower that is slated to rise to 72 stories. It has plans for a third building too.
KRE’s project generated such momentum to redevelop the area that by 2015, Charles Kushner’s project, One Journal Square, was on track to receive $10 million in subsidized bonds, another $34 million in tax breaks, plus $59 million from the state of New Jersey. The sites of the two projects are less than a block away.
The rival Kushner real estate companies had long competed for tenants in Jersey City, and, according to two people who spoke with Charles Kushner about the negotiations, he was pleased to receive more public financing than his brother’s project had been allotted.
But that plan began to collapse last year, after the anchor tenant, WeWork Cos., left the project, taking with it $59 million in state subsidies tied to it being a tenant. Kushner Cos. maintains it made the decision not to pursue a partnership with WeWork.
Kushner Cos. also dealt the proposal a self-inflicted wound last spring. Top company officials flew to China to raise money using the controversial EB-5 investment-for-visa program and their pitch featured a photo of Donald Trump, which many viewed as a conflict of interest.
LANDSCAPE SHIFTED
Kushner Cos. said it had been unaware the event promoter made references to Jared Kushner and Trump in the promotional material and said it would no longer seek EB-5 money for the project. (Jared Kushner has sold his interest in the company to family members.)
By the time Kushner Cos. and their partner in the deal, the KABR Group, came back with a revised plan last fall, the political landscape had shifted. Jersey City activists organized protests outside the site and blasted city officials for offering subsides that might enrich the family of the president’s son-in-law.
Mayor Steven Fulop, a Democrat who faced an election challenge last year, eventually dropped his support for the project. Charles Kushner said this week Fulop once acknowledged that the city was discriminating against Kushner Cos., but Fulop’s spokeswoman said she could not confirm that conversation ever took place.
The spokeswoman, Hannah Peterson, said the mayor’s decision was based on the merits of the redesigned project, which has struggled to obtain financing. She didn’t respond to questions on the rivalry between the brothers.
Earlier this month, Fulop said he hopes another developer comes in to replace Kushner Cos. The mayor also a tweeted that Charles Kushner, his longtime supporter, was out of line.
"There is a sense of entitlement that the developer has towards a subsidy,” he wrote. “We as a city just don’t see it the same way.”
‘Trump Connection’
Others in city government are more sympathetic to Charles Kushner’s complaints.
Michael Yun, a Jersey City councilman who has overseen studies of the city’s subsidies to developers, said, "It’s a good project, and if it weren’t for the Trump connection, I don’t think you’d be seeing people oppose it this way."
Still, he said, it would be inappropriate for Charles Kushner’s company to expect the same level of support that Murray’s got.
"When someone goes to redevelop an area first, they’re taking the most risk and deserve incentives to help make sure it works," Yun said. "But once there’s already an established development there and things are starting to happen, it’s a safer investment. So there’s no reason for such big tax breaks."
By David Kocieniewski and Caleb Melby
April 27, 2018, 6:00 PM GMT+10
Archrivals tangled in an effort to remake Jersey City skyline
Charles Kushner says city Democrats treating him unfairly
Buildings stand ahead of the Manhattan skyline in this aerial photograph taken above Weehawken, New Jersey, U.S. Photographer: Craig Warga/Bloomberg
The epic rivalry between Charles and Murray Kushner, wealthy New Jersey brothers with competing real estate empires, has intermittently flared up into lawsuits, fraud allegations and sordid revenge plots.
Now their competition has become entwined in a policy dispute in Jersey City, where both men are trying to remake the skyline.
Charles Kushner, whose son Jared is a senior adviser and son-in-law to President Donald Trump, this week accused the leaders of the staunchly Democratic city of trying to curry favor with anti-Trump voters by unfairly blocking tax incentives he needs to build two 56-story towers in Journal Square.
Comparing the city’s actions to religious or racial bigotry, Charles Kushner said Jersey City had discriminated against his company, Kushner Cos., by denying it the kind of tax subsidies Jersey City has offered other developers.
Left unsaid -- but widely known in Jersey City real-estate circles -- is that one of the most prominent companies to receive tens of millions of dollars in subsidies from the government is Kushner Real Estate Group, or KRE, which is owned by Charles Kushner’s brother and archrival, Murray.
Building Momentum
Neither Kushner Cos. or KRE responded to questions on the rivalry.
In the early 2000s, when the brothers were still in business together, Murray Kushner began to believe his brother was mismanaging the firm’s funds and sued him. That sparked a legal battle that would eventually send Charles Kushner, at that time a prominent Democratic fundraiser, to prison after it was revealed that he made illegal campaign contributions and he hired a prostitute to entrap his brother-in-law.
KRE was the first major developer to commit to a major project in Jersey City’s blighted Journal Square area, receiving a package in 2013 of more than $40 million in tax breaks and subsidized loans. KRE’s development, called Journal Squared, opened a 54-story high rise last year and broke ground on a second tower that is slated to rise to 72 stories. It has plans for a third building too.
KRE’s project generated such momentum to redevelop the area that by 2015, Charles Kushner’s project, One Journal Square, was on track to receive $10 million in subsidized bonds, another $34 million in tax breaks, plus $59 million from the state of New Jersey. The sites of the two projects are less than a block away.
The rival Kushner real estate companies had long competed for tenants in Jersey City, and, according to two people who spoke with Charles Kushner about the negotiations, he was pleased to receive more public financing than his brother’s project had been allotted.
But that plan began to collapse last year, after the anchor tenant, WeWork Cos., left the project, taking with it $59 million in state subsidies tied to it being a tenant. Kushner Cos. maintains it made the decision not to pursue a partnership with WeWork.
Kushner Cos. also dealt the proposal a self-inflicted wound last spring. Top company officials flew to China to raise money using the controversial EB-5 investment-for-visa program and their pitch featured a photo of Donald Trump, which many viewed as a conflict of interest.
LANDSCAPE SHIFTED
Kushner Cos. said it had been unaware the event promoter made references to Jared Kushner and Trump in the promotional material and said it would no longer seek EB-5 money for the project. (Jared Kushner has sold his interest in the company to family members.)
By the time Kushner Cos. and their partner in the deal, the KABR Group, came back with a revised plan last fall, the political landscape had shifted. Jersey City activists organized protests outside the site and blasted city officials for offering subsides that might enrich the family of the president’s son-in-law.
Mayor Steven Fulop, a Democrat who faced an election challenge last year, eventually dropped his support for the project. Charles Kushner said this week Fulop once acknowledged that the city was discriminating against Kushner Cos., but Fulop’s spokeswoman said she could not confirm that conversation ever took place.
The spokeswoman, Hannah Peterson, said the mayor’s decision was based on the merits of the redesigned project, which has struggled to obtain financing. She didn’t respond to questions on the rivalry between the brothers.
Earlier this month, Fulop said he hopes another developer comes in to replace Kushner Cos. The mayor also a tweeted that Charles Kushner, his longtime supporter, was out of line.
"There is a sense of entitlement that the developer has towards a subsidy,” he wrote. “We as a city just don’t see it the same way.”
‘Trump Connection’
Others in city government are more sympathetic to Charles Kushner’s complaints.
Michael Yun, a Jersey City councilman who has overseen studies of the city’s subsidies to developers, said, "It’s a good project, and if it weren’t for the Trump connection, I don’t think you’d be seeing people oppose it this way."
Still, he said, it would be inappropriate for Charles Kushner’s company to expect the same level of support that Murray’s got.
"When someone goes to redevelop an area first, they’re taking the most risk and deserve incentives to help make sure it works," Yun said. "But once there’s already an established development there and things are starting to happen, it’s a safer investment. So there’s no reason for such big tax breaks."
Does Trump deserve the credit for peace talks with North Korea? - BBC News
Does Trump deserve the credit for peace talks with North Korea?
27 April 2018
Claim: Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in agree the US President deserves credit for peace talks with North Korea.
Verdict: Only the historical record will reveal what influenced these talks, but evidence suggests it was the South Koreans who encouraged dialogue with the North, along with pressure from Chinese enforced sanctions.
Leaders of North and South Korea are expected to meet 27 April, for their third leaders' summit since the Korean War armistice was signed in 1953. Then in May or June, Donald Trump is expected to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, for the first ever meeting between a leader of the North and a sitting US president.
After mounting tension and military threats traded between the US and North Korea, the historic talks may bring about a de-escalation of hostilities, as well as a peace treaty to end the 68-year Korean War.
On 4 January 2018, US President Donald Trump tweeted: "With all of the failed 'experts' weighing in, does anybody really believe that talks and dialogue would be going on between North and South Korea right now if I wasn't firm, strong and willing to commit our total 'might' against the North. Fools, but talks are a good thing!"
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said publicly too that President Trump deserved big credit for bringing about talks to discuss peace with the North. "It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure."
US-led sanctions enforced by UN
Since North Korea detonated its first nuclear test in 2006, the US and a number of allies imposed sanctions on North Korea. As well, the United Nations Security Council passed nine rounds of sanctions on North Korea - many of these proposed by the US.
Over the years, these sanctions became more strict. The initial UN sanctions in 2006 banned the supply of heavy weaponry, missile technology and luxury goods. By December 2017, the UN sanctions restricted oil imports, metal, agriculture and demanded the deportation of North Koreans working abroad.
While these most recent sanctions were US-led under the administration of President Trump, it may be China's recent enforcement of UN sanctions that hit North Korea hardest. China accounts for more than 90% of North Korea's trade, and while the Security Council member voted in favour of the UN sanctions against their long-time ally, they rarely upheld those, reports the Council on Foreign Relations. However, in this past year, China appears to have enforced the sanctions.
Having already proved his military capabilities, Mr Kim is now turning his attention to economic growth, says Dr John Nilsson-Wright, a senior research fellow at Chatham House. So while the sanctions didn't stop Mr Kim from developing weapons, this latest development could hinder his economic plan for the long term.
Image copyrightHUW EVANS PICTURE AGENCY
Image caption
In a campaign to abolish nuclear weapons, activists wear masks of President Trump and Mr Kim, in front of the American embassy in Berlin
Tough talks and threats of military action
On 2 January 2018, President Trump tweeted: "North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un just stated that the 'nuclear button is on his desk at all times'. Will someone from his depleted and food-starved regime please inform him that I too have a nuclear button, but it is a much bigger and more powerful one than his, and my button works."
On 23 September 2017, President Trump tweeted: "Just heard [the] foreign minister of North Korea speak at [the] UN. If he echoes [the] thoughts of Little Rocket Man, they won't be around much longer."
To compare, President Obama, in 2014, warned North Korea that "we don't use our military might to impose these things on others, but we will not hesitate to use our military might to defend our allies and our way of life".
In 2016, President Obama told CBS News North Korea was "erratic enough" and "irresponsible enough that we don't want them getting close".
"We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals. But aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, the Republic of Korea," he added.
President Bush, for his part, labelled North Korea part of the "axis of evil."
America has for years used words and threats of military might.
Kim Yo Jong (top right), sister of the North Korean leader, attends the Olympics in South Korea, along with President Moon Jae-in (bottom left)
The influence of South Korean engagement
Two presidents prior to Moon Jae-in, Lee Myung-bak (2008-2013) took a hard-line approach to North Korea. The next president, Park Geun-hye (2013-2017), promised engagement with the North, a strategy that ended in early 2016 following missile and nuclear tests.
In his inauguration speech, Mr Moon said he would "do everything I can to build peace on the Korean peninsula".
This is a return to the Sunshine Policy of Presidents Kim Dae-Jung (1999-2003) and Roh Moo-Hyun (2003-2008), who were the only other two South Korean presidents to meet North Korean leadership - during the Inter-Korean Summits of 2000 and 2007. Kim Dae-jung won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
"More credit should go to the South Koreans, because they actually made sure to have the North Koreans come to the Olympics and that was organised very very quickly," said senior lecturer Dr Virginie Grzelczyk, of Aston University. "The invitation to have the North Korean delegation and Kim Jong-un's sister…has been really critical to organise the summit that we are going to see at the end of the week."
So why is the South giving credit to Trump?
South Korea is acting strategically, says Dr Grzelczyk, to bring the Americans around to a place of dialogue "because both Koreas have at some point, been perplexed and concerned by American policy".
27 April 2018
Claim: Donald Trump and South Korean President Moon Jae-in agree the US President deserves credit for peace talks with North Korea.
Verdict: Only the historical record will reveal what influenced these talks, but evidence suggests it was the South Koreans who encouraged dialogue with the North, along with pressure from Chinese enforced sanctions.
Leaders of North and South Korea are expected to meet 27 April, for their third leaders' summit since the Korean War armistice was signed in 1953. Then in May or June, Donald Trump is expected to meet North Korean leader Kim Jong-un, for the first ever meeting between a leader of the North and a sitting US president.
After mounting tension and military threats traded between the US and North Korea, the historic talks may bring about a de-escalation of hostilities, as well as a peace treaty to end the 68-year Korean War.
On 4 January 2018, US President Donald Trump tweeted: "With all of the failed 'experts' weighing in, does anybody really believe that talks and dialogue would be going on between North and South Korea right now if I wasn't firm, strong and willing to commit our total 'might' against the North. Fools, but talks are a good thing!"
South Korean President Moon Jae-in said publicly too that President Trump deserved big credit for bringing about talks to discuss peace with the North. "It could be a resulting work of the US-led sanctions and pressure."
US-led sanctions enforced by UN
Since North Korea detonated its first nuclear test in 2006, the US and a number of allies imposed sanctions on North Korea. As well, the United Nations Security Council passed nine rounds of sanctions on North Korea - many of these proposed by the US.
Over the years, these sanctions became more strict. The initial UN sanctions in 2006 banned the supply of heavy weaponry, missile technology and luxury goods. By December 2017, the UN sanctions restricted oil imports, metal, agriculture and demanded the deportation of North Koreans working abroad.
While these most recent sanctions were US-led under the administration of President Trump, it may be China's recent enforcement of UN sanctions that hit North Korea hardest. China accounts for more than 90% of North Korea's trade, and while the Security Council member voted in favour of the UN sanctions against their long-time ally, they rarely upheld those, reports the Council on Foreign Relations. However, in this past year, China appears to have enforced the sanctions.
Having already proved his military capabilities, Mr Kim is now turning his attention to economic growth, says Dr John Nilsson-Wright, a senior research fellow at Chatham House. So while the sanctions didn't stop Mr Kim from developing weapons, this latest development could hinder his economic plan for the long term.
Image copyrightHUW EVANS PICTURE AGENCY
Image caption
In a campaign to abolish nuclear weapons, activists wear masks of President Trump and Mr Kim, in front of the American embassy in Berlin
Tough talks and threats of military action
On 2 January 2018, President Trump tweeted: "North Korean Leader Kim Jong-un just stated that the 'nuclear button is on his desk at all times'. Will someone from his depleted and food-starved regime please inform him that I too have a nuclear button, but it is a much bigger and more powerful one than his, and my button works."
On 23 September 2017, President Trump tweeted: "Just heard [the] foreign minister of North Korea speak at [the] UN. If he echoes [the] thoughts of Little Rocket Man, they won't be around much longer."
To compare, President Obama, in 2014, warned North Korea that "we don't use our military might to impose these things on others, but we will not hesitate to use our military might to defend our allies and our way of life".
In 2016, President Obama told CBS News North Korea was "erratic enough" and "irresponsible enough that we don't want them getting close".
"We could, obviously, destroy North Korea with our arsenals. But aside from the humanitarian costs of that, they are right next door to our vital ally, the Republic of Korea," he added.
President Bush, for his part, labelled North Korea part of the "axis of evil."
America has for years used words and threats of military might.
Kim Yo Jong (top right), sister of the North Korean leader, attends the Olympics in South Korea, along with President Moon Jae-in (bottom left)
The influence of South Korean engagement
Two presidents prior to Moon Jae-in, Lee Myung-bak (2008-2013) took a hard-line approach to North Korea. The next president, Park Geun-hye (2013-2017), promised engagement with the North, a strategy that ended in early 2016 following missile and nuclear tests.
In his inauguration speech, Mr Moon said he would "do everything I can to build peace on the Korean peninsula".
This is a return to the Sunshine Policy of Presidents Kim Dae-Jung (1999-2003) and Roh Moo-Hyun (2003-2008), who were the only other two South Korean presidents to meet North Korean leadership - during the Inter-Korean Summits of 2000 and 2007. Kim Dae-jung won a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts.
"More credit should go to the South Koreans, because they actually made sure to have the North Koreans come to the Olympics and that was organised very very quickly," said senior lecturer Dr Virginie Grzelczyk, of Aston University. "The invitation to have the North Korean delegation and Kim Jong-un's sister…has been really critical to organise the summit that we are going to see at the end of the week."
So why is the South giving credit to Trump?
South Korea is acting strategically, says Dr Grzelczyk, to bring the Americans around to a place of dialogue "because both Koreas have at some point, been perplexed and concerned by American policy".
North Korea crisis in 300 words - BBC News
April 27, 2018
North Korea crisis in 300 words
The North Korean stand-off is a crisis that, at worst, threatens nuclear war. The sudden prospect of direct talks with the US might mean there's a chance at peace, but it's complicated. Let's take a step back.
Why does North Korea want nuclear weapons?
The Korean peninsula was divided after World War Two and the communist North developed into a Stalinesque authoritarian system.
Isolated on the global stage, it says nuclear weapons are its only deterrent against an outside world seeking to destroy it.
Could they carry out a nuclear attack?
Probably, but likely won't.
North Korea has carried out six nuclear tests. One, it says, was a hydrogen bomb.
It claims, though this remains unverified, to have developed a nuclear bomb small enough to be carried by a long-range missile.
It has also has a ballistic missile that experts believe could reach the US, Pyongyang's main adversary.
In response the UN, the US, the EU and have implemented increasingly tough sanctions.
Why can't Kim just be removed?
The North has missiles aimed at the South and Japan. A pre-emptive strike against Pyongyang could trigger devastating retaliation. It would also kill countless North Koreans.
As the biggest Asian power, China is concerned about regime collapse, and that a unified Korea would bring US forces currently stationed in the South directly to its border.
An unprecedented turnaround?
Previous attempts to negotiate aid-for-disarmament deals have failed.
But in January, the North embarked on direct talks with Seoul, attended the Winter Olympics in South Korea and in April the two leaders met for a historic inter-Korean summit.
Pyongyang also offered direct talks with the US - an offer Mr Trump accepted - and ordered a halt to nuclear and missile tests.
Talks between the two would be unprecedented, but the details, agenda and timing of the summit are yet to be confirmed.
Want to know more?
Why has Kim Jong-un halted North Korean tests now?
Did sanctions push N Korea into US talks?
The political gamble of the 21st Century
North Korea-Trump talks in 400 words
Have the Olympics repaired North-South Korea relations?
What are North Korea's other WMDs?
What missiles does North Korea have?
How advanced is North Korea's nuclear programme?
What North Korea missile tests achieved
North Korea crisis in 300 words
The North Korean stand-off is a crisis that, at worst, threatens nuclear war. The sudden prospect of direct talks with the US might mean there's a chance at peace, but it's complicated. Let's take a step back.
Why does North Korea want nuclear weapons?
The Korean peninsula was divided after World War Two and the communist North developed into a Stalinesque authoritarian system.
Isolated on the global stage, it says nuclear weapons are its only deterrent against an outside world seeking to destroy it.
Could they carry out a nuclear attack?
Probably, but likely won't.
North Korea has carried out six nuclear tests. One, it says, was a hydrogen bomb.
It claims, though this remains unverified, to have developed a nuclear bomb small enough to be carried by a long-range missile.
It has also has a ballistic missile that experts believe could reach the US, Pyongyang's main adversary.
In response the UN, the US, the EU and have implemented increasingly tough sanctions.
Why can't Kim just be removed?
The North has missiles aimed at the South and Japan. A pre-emptive strike against Pyongyang could trigger devastating retaliation. It would also kill countless North Koreans.
As the biggest Asian power, China is concerned about regime collapse, and that a unified Korea would bring US forces currently stationed in the South directly to its border.
An unprecedented turnaround?
Previous attempts to negotiate aid-for-disarmament deals have failed.
But in January, the North embarked on direct talks with Seoul, attended the Winter Olympics in South Korea and in April the two leaders met for a historic inter-Korean summit.
Pyongyang also offered direct talks with the US - an offer Mr Trump accepted - and ordered a halt to nuclear and missile tests.
Talks between the two would be unprecedented, but the details, agenda and timing of the summit are yet to be confirmed.
Want to know more?
Why has Kim Jong-un halted North Korean tests now?
Did sanctions push N Korea into US talks?
The political gamble of the 21st Century
North Korea-Trump talks in 400 words
Have the Olympics repaired North-South Korea relations?
What are North Korea's other WMDs?
What missiles does North Korea have?
How advanced is North Korea's nuclear programme?
What North Korea missile tests achieved
Koreas make nuclear pledge after summit - BBC News
April 27, 2018
Koreas make nuclear pledge after summit
Kim Jong-un makes pledge for peace with South Korea
The leaders of North and South Korea have agreed to work to rid the peninsula of nuclear weapons after holding a historic summit.
The announcement was made by the North's Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in of South Korea after talks at the border.
The two also agreed to push towards turning the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953 into a peace treaty this year.
It comes just months after warlike rhetoric from North Korea.
LIVE: Latest updates from the historic summit
The confidantes Kim brought along to the summit
Details of how denuclearisation would be achieved were not made clear and many analysts remain sceptical about the North's apparent enthusiasm for engagement.
Following discussions at the summit on Friday, Mr Kim said that both leaders had agreed to co-ordinate closely to ensure that there was not a repeat of the region's "unfortunate history" in which previous progress had "fizzled out".
"There may be backlash, hardship and frustration," he said, adding: "A victory cannot be achieved without pain."
Other points the leaders agreed on in a joint statement were:
An end to "hostile activities" between the two nations
Changing the demilitarised zone (DMZ) that divides the country into a "peace zone" by ceasing propaganda broadcasts
An arms reduction in the region pending the easing of military tension
To push for three-way talks involving the US and China
Organising a reunion of families left divided by the war
Connecting and modernising railways and roads across the border
Further joint participation in sporting events, including this year's Asian Games
How the summit unfolded
The leaders were met on Friday by an honour guard in traditional costume on the South Korean side. The pair walked to the Peace House in Panmunjom, a military compound in the DMZ between the two countries.
Mr Kim then invited the South Korean president to step briefly across the demarcation line into North Korea, before the pair stepped back into South Korea - all the while holding hands.
It was an apparently unscripted moment during a highly choreographed sequence of events.
The meeting is aimed at ending the decades-long conflict on the peninsula
When the first session ended, the pair separated for lunch and Mr Kim returned to the North in a heavily guarded black limousine.
Diplomacy on the menu: How food can shape politics
When he returned in the afternoon, the two leaders took part in a ceremony consisting of the planting of a pine tree using soil and water from both countries.
The pair shovelled soil on the roots of the tree and unveiled a stone marker featuring their names, official titles and a message that read: "Planting peace and prosperity."
Mr Kim returns to the North in a car surrounded by jogging bodyguards
A banquet will later be held on the South's side where Mr Kim will be served the Swiss potato dish rösti - a nod to his time studying in Switzerland - along with the North's signature dish of cold noodles, and a North Korean liquor.
Kim's sister and North Korea's secret weapon
Mr Kim arrived for the symbolic discussions on Friday accompanied by nine officials, including his powerful and influential sister Kim Yo-jong.
Koreas make nuclear pledge after summit
Kim Jong-un makes pledge for peace with South Korea
The leaders of North and South Korea have agreed to work to rid the peninsula of nuclear weapons after holding a historic summit.
The announcement was made by the North's Kim Jong-un and Moon Jae-in of South Korea after talks at the border.
The two also agreed to push towards turning the armistice that ended the Korean War in 1953 into a peace treaty this year.
It comes just months after warlike rhetoric from North Korea.
LIVE: Latest updates from the historic summit
The confidantes Kim brought along to the summit
Details of how denuclearisation would be achieved were not made clear and many analysts remain sceptical about the North's apparent enthusiasm for engagement.
Following discussions at the summit on Friday, Mr Kim said that both leaders had agreed to co-ordinate closely to ensure that there was not a repeat of the region's "unfortunate history" in which previous progress had "fizzled out".
"There may be backlash, hardship and frustration," he said, adding: "A victory cannot be achieved without pain."
Other points the leaders agreed on in a joint statement were:
An end to "hostile activities" between the two nations
Changing the demilitarised zone (DMZ) that divides the country into a "peace zone" by ceasing propaganda broadcasts
An arms reduction in the region pending the easing of military tension
To push for three-way talks involving the US and China
Organising a reunion of families left divided by the war
Connecting and modernising railways and roads across the border
Further joint participation in sporting events, including this year's Asian Games
How the summit unfolded
The leaders were met on Friday by an honour guard in traditional costume on the South Korean side. The pair walked to the Peace House in Panmunjom, a military compound in the DMZ between the two countries.
Mr Kim then invited the South Korean president to step briefly across the demarcation line into North Korea, before the pair stepped back into South Korea - all the while holding hands.
It was an apparently unscripted moment during a highly choreographed sequence of events.
The meeting is aimed at ending the decades-long conflict on the peninsula
When the first session ended, the pair separated for lunch and Mr Kim returned to the North in a heavily guarded black limousine.
Diplomacy on the menu: How food can shape politics
When he returned in the afternoon, the two leaders took part in a ceremony consisting of the planting of a pine tree using soil and water from both countries.
The pair shovelled soil on the roots of the tree and unveiled a stone marker featuring their names, official titles and a message that read: "Planting peace and prosperity."
Mr Kim returns to the North in a car surrounded by jogging bodyguards
A banquet will later be held on the South's side where Mr Kim will be served the Swiss potato dish rösti - a nod to his time studying in Switzerland - along with the North's signature dish of cold noodles, and a North Korean liquor.
Kim's sister and North Korea's secret weapon
Mr Kim arrived for the symbolic discussions on Friday accompanied by nine officials, including his powerful and influential sister Kim Yo-jong.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
