US ECONOMICS
DEMOCRACY
U.S. Department of State. 06/19/2020. Secretary Michael R. Pompeo At the Virtual Copenhagen Democracy Summit. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State. Orange County, California
MR RASMUSSEN: It’s a great pleasure for me to welcome our next speaker, the American Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo. Good morning, Mr. Secretary. I think it’s morning in your time zone.
I know you’ve been traveling from Hawaii where you met a high-ranking Chinese official. Earlier this year I listened to your speech at the security conference in Munich, and I enjoyed your upbeat message that the free world is winning. So we look very much forward to listening to you today. Please, join me in welcoming the 70th United States Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Anders, thank you very much. Thanks for that warm greeting. It’s great to be with you all today, and hello to the Copenhagen Democracy Summit. It’s an honor to be with you and with Secretary General Rasmussen, a friend of freedom-loving people all across the world.
I don’t know if you all know this, but when it comes to strengthening transatlantic relations, Anders really walks the walk. His son and three beautiful grandchildren live here in the United States. They’re United States citizens. Glad to have Rasmussen on both sides of the Atlantic bringing us together. Thanks for having me today.
When Anders sent the invitation to me, I said yes immediately. So many of these conferences that you all participate in talk about what’s wrong with the world. I want to focus on what’s going right in the world today, what we’ve got right, and that’s democracy, and we know it. It’s how to preserve it that is the challenge. There is no nobler goal for all of us.
I spent a few years of my life – it’s been decades, when I was a young soldier serving in Germany – patrolling along the Iron Curtain. I’ve seen tyranny firsthand, and I have dealt with all manner of unfree regimes in my previous role as director of the CIA and now in my current role as Secretary of State of the United States of America.
First principle: There’s nothing brave or visionary about oppressing your fellow men or women. Democracy is the only system of government that honors human dignity and personal freedom and progress for mankind. The corollary is that capitalism is the greatest anti-poverty program in all of history.
I want to make a few brief remarks and then I’m looking forward to taking questions.
First: the idea that Europe is being forced to choose between the United States and China. I want to talk about that at some length.
Second: the belief that it’s costless to compromise your values.
Everywhere I go – everywhere I go, I talk to my counterparts and audiences like this about the reality of what we see in the world – especially in China. I’ve done it in Europe, done it in the Arctic, done it in Central Asia, done it in Africa – I’ve done it in the Pacific islands.
For many years, the West, in an era of hope, believed we could change the Chinese Communist Party and improve the lives of the Chinese people along the way. That was the bargain. That was the bet.
The rising tide of democracy in Eastern Europe and in the former Soviet Union 30 years ago made us believe – perhaps reasonably – that the spread of freedom in every nation was inevitable. So we engaged. We opened ourselves to an authoritarian regime that we knew was hostile to democratic values.
Along the way, the Chinese Communist Party made a bet. It bet that it could take advantage of our goodwill while assuring us they wanted a cooperative relationship. As Deng Xiaoping said, “Hide your strength,” and “bide your time.”
I’ve talked about why this has happened. It’s a complicated story. Fault is not material here. It’s not important.
Over decades, Americans and European companies invested in China with enormous optimism. I ran a small business; we had an operation in China ourselves. We outsourced our supply chains to places like Shenzhen. We opened our education institutions to PLA-affiliated students. We welcomed Chinese state-backed investment in our own countries. Now we’re deeply intertwined.
But even so – even so, we must acknowledge a set of facts about who and what we’re dealing with, and I think we’re seeing this. I think all across the world this is becoming more apparent each and every day.
The Chinese Communist Party decreed an end to freedom in Hong Kong, violating a UN-registered treaty and the rights of its citizens – one of just many international treaties that the Chinese Communist Party has violated.
General Secretary Xi has greenlighted a brutal campaign of repression against Chinese Muslims, a human rights violation on a scale we have not seen since World War II.
The PLA has escalated border tensions – we see it today in India, the world’s most popular – populous democracy. And we watch as it militarizes the South China Sea and illegally claims more territory there, threatening vital sea lanes, a promise they broke again.
But the CCP isn’t just a rogue actor in its own neighborhood. If it was, we might think differently about it. It impacts us all. It lied about the coronavirus, and then let it spread to the rest of the world while pressuring the World Health Organization to assist in a coverup campaign – by the way, a failure of transparency that continues even today. Now hundreds of thousands of people have died and the global economy is decimated. Even now, months into the pandemic, we don’t have access to a live virus, we don’t have access to facilities, and information about patients in December in Wuhan remains unavailable.
It’s pushing disinformation and malicious cyber campaigns to undermine our governments to drive a wedge between the United States and Europe, and is saddling developing nations with debt and dependency.
You’ve seen this all. Everyone in this room knows that the Chinese Communist Party strongarms nations to do business with Huawei, an arm of the CCP’s surveillance state. And it’s flagrantly attacking European sovereignty by buying up ports and critical infrastructure, Piraeus to Valencia.
We must take off the golden blinders of economic ties and see that the China challenge isn’t just at the gates; it’s in every capital, it’s in every borough, it’s in every province.
Every investment from a Chinese state-owned enterprise should be viewed with suspicion.
Europe faces a China challenge, just as the United States does, and as – just as our South American, African, Middle Eastern, and Asian friends do too.
And I had a chance earlier this week on Monday to speak with my EU counterparts. I know that there’s fear in Europe that the United States wants you to choose between us and China.
But that’s simply not the case. It’s the Chinese Communist Party’s that’s forcing this choice. The choice isn’t between the United States; it’s between freedom and tyranny.
The party wants you to throw away the progress we in the free world have made, through NATO and other institutions – both formal and informal institutions – and adopt a new set of rules and norms to accommodate them within Beijing.
I don’t believe that there’s a uniquely “European” or “American” way to face this choice. There’s also no way to straddle these alternatives without abandoning who we are. Democracies that are dependent on authoritarians are not worthy of their name.
Look, the good news is my European friends – even this week I could see it. It’s not uniform. There are different thoughts of different countries. But they’re waking up to this challenge. And I heard some of them, they questioned whether the democratic way of life can win.
And Beijing relishes this uncertainty. They shouldn’t be confident. We’re winning. This is what you talked about in my remarks in Munich.
One CCP diplomat in France recently said, quote, “Some Westerners are beginning to lose confidence in liberal democracy,” end of quote, and “some have become psychologically weak.”
But democracy isn’t fragile in the way the Chinese Communist Party believes it is. Democracy is strong. We defeated fascism. We won the Cold War.
It is authoritarianism that is fragile. CCP propagandists work hard to control information flows and speech to maintain their grip on power. They won’t be satisfied until the digital firewall extends to our nations too. In some ways, it already does. We could talk about this at some length, Anders.
While I do not believe for a moment democracy is fragile, it does require careful stewardship and constant vigilance. I’ve been encouraged recently in private conversations with European allies who are taking their responsibilities seriously. We had a vigorous discussion earlier this week, as I mentioned earlier. We debated what democracies ought to be engaged in, and that’s what we do. That’s precisely the kind of debate we should have. It was a good meeting, and we’ll continue our dialogue with the Europeans on China.
Meanwhile, positive steps abound. The new Inter-Parliamentary Alliance on China – substantially comprised of European leaders – is adding new members weekly. Denmark has bravely stood up to the CCP’s attempts to censor Danish newspapers. The United Kingdom is moving towards securing its networks from Huawei. The Czechs are standing up to the PRC’s coercive diplomacy. The Swedes have closed all of their Confucius Institutes that reside on their soil. And our NATO allies have committed to increase defense spending by a cumulative $400 billion between now and 2024.
And Anders’s successor in Brussels, General Secretary Stoltenberg, recently gave visionary remarks about the alliance’s mandate to “stand up for a world built on freedom and democracy” and to counter China’s malign influence in the Asia-Pacific region.
I’ll end here so Anders can speak. We all know – we’ve lived it – democracy’s not easy. It’s messy. The whole world can see how we have tough debates, like my country’s having right now. But that struggle reflects commitment to fundamental values and our constant striving towards a more perfect union. It’s who we are, and we share those values with our European friends.
I hope I’ll hear more public statements from Europe about the China challenge, because all of our people deserve to know about it, and America is ready to stand with you. Let’s speak clearly, and more importantly, let’s act decisively. Let’s not leave any confusion about the choice between tyranny and freedom.
Anders, I look forward to our conversation. God bless you all.
MR RASMUSSEN: Thank you very much, Mike. Thank you, Mr. Secretary, and I also appreciate your willingness to answer some questions. My first question is regarding China. A few days ago, you met with the Chinese State Councilor Yang, who is considered one of the architects of China’s foreign policy. China’s news agency, Xinhua, put a positive spin on the meeting. They wrote both sides “fully elaborated on their stances, agreeing that this was a constructive dialogue,” and you agreed to maintain contact and communication.
When I read texts like this, I might be thinking something is going on. So my question to you is: Could it be that the United States and China secretly are preparing new initiatives to reduce tensions while publicly you are maintaining a tough stance? And one in the audience has asked the question whether we could expect the U.S. to take new initiatives vis-a-vis China.
SECRETARY POMPEO: So Anders, it was a long overdue meeting. It was a long meeting. We met for some six hours or so. Each side staked out what I think for each was pretty familiar positions. As for me, I articulated that day just exactly what I articulated here this morning. America is engaging in a response to Chinese Communist Party and aggression in a way that America has not done for the past 20 years. It’s not political. We’ve had Republican presidents, Democrat presidents who simply allowed China to have deeply nonreciprocal relationships, not just on trade – which of course is true, but we responded to their military – use of military force by moving back. We responded to their use of diplomatic coercion via retreating. Donald Trump is not going to permit that, and we made that clear.
You referenced statements. Those are statements. What I spent a good deal of my time speaking with Yang Jiechi about was the fundamental idea that we’re just watching actions. It’s no longer enough to listen to what the Chinese Communist Party is saying. We can see their actions. I ticked through a few of them: Hong Kong, Tibet, Xinjiang, what they’re doing in India, what they’ve done in the economic zones along the Philippines and Malaysia and Indonesia and Vietnam, the coercion on Australia – when they had the audacity to demand that there would be an investigation of how this virus got from Wuhan to Milan, how this virus got from Wuhan to Tehran, how this virus got from Wuhan to Oklahoma City, and to Belgium and to Spain, and decimating the global economy.
Look, we had to – we were – it was a very frank conversation. We still don’t have the answers the medical professionals, epidemiologists need to take on this challenge. If the Chinese Communist Party can’t rise to that – forget what they say – if they can’t rise to that level, what every democratic nation would have done in response to a virus that began in our nation, we would have participated in a global response where we shared information openly, we learned together, and we resolve the problem set together. Instead, they did what authoritarian regimes do: they disappeared doctors, they squirreled information away, and they denied the world the access it needed to respond to this virus in a way that could have reduced a lot of risk and a lot of costs.
That’s the nature of the conversation that we had. I think, as America’s most senior diplomat, that it is always useful to be in a room together, to have a conversation, and to share the (inaudible).
MR RASMUSSEN: (In progress.) – you indicated that the United States might consider to withdrawal the special status for Hong Kong. Which measures could you imagine regarding trade, travel, currency exchange, et cetera? Will Hong Kong be treated like all other Chinese cities?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Well, it appears that that’s China’s intention. And I always – when I hear my European counterparts say, well, we don’t want to choose, I always remind them the other side gets to choose, too. So when you ask, will Hong Kong be treated as any other Chinese city, it will be to the extent that the Chinese choose to treat it that way. Look, I haven’t seen what happened overnight, but the Chinese Communist Party appeared intent on passing a national security law that will deny significant amount of freedoms that the Chinese Communist Party had promised to the people of Hong Kong would last 50 years.
There are a set of elections scheduled for September. We should all watch closely. That’s not that far off now. We should all watch very closely whether those elections are permitted to take place in a free and fair fashion. To the extent those elections are delayed, postponed, canceled, or somehow not treated in a way that is fair and open, I think that will tell us everything we need to know about the Chinese Communist Party’s intentions with respect to freedom in Hong Kong. President Trump – as for our policy, President Trump has made very, very clear to the extent that the Chinese Communist Party treats Hong Kong as it does Shenzhen and Shanghai, we will treat them the same. We have many agreements that are unique between the United States and Hong Kong, separate and different from those we have with Beijing. We will move away from every one of those.
And then second, the President’s made clear, too, we have a responsibility to hold accountable those inside of China who fail to live up to those agreements as well. So we are working our way through a decision-making process to determine who those decision-makers were and what the appropriate mechanism is to hold them accountable. We don’t want to harm the people of Hong Kong. They’re freedom-loving people that we aim to get the benefit of the bargain they made with the United Kingdom. To the extent the Chinese Communist Party denies that, we’re responsible to hold the relevant parties accountable.
MR RASMUSSEN: Right. What will happen if the security law leads to imprisonment of democracy activists, et cetera, in the autumn? What could you imagine to do?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Anders, I just don’t want to get into particular decisions – I don’t want to foreclose anything that the President may choose to do or not do. We’re still working our way through that process. Two things to think about, though. One is: What will the people of Hong Kong do? We’ve watched them. They’ve simply asked for the mainland Chinese to live up to the commitments that were made. We’re on year 27 of a 50-year deal. You wouldn’t take that. You signed up for a deal for 50 years, somebody walks away at the halfway point, you’d not be happy – or year 23, I guess it is.
So it will be interesting to see how the people of Hong Kong respond, and frankly the people – the freedom-loving people in the mainland as well. They’re watching, too. Never forget that while we see a unitarian face from the Chinese Communist Party, that that billion and a half people also have ideas that are different and they will be watching how this transpires as well. I know the people of Taiwan are certainly watching how this transpires.
And second, as for how the United States will respond, I want to leave open the range of possibilities, but the President has made clear: To the extent Hong Kong is treated by the Chinese Communist Party as just another piece of mainland China, there’s no reason for the United States to treat them any differently as well. And we have a law that requires that as well.
MR RASMUSSEN: You also mentioned Taiwan. I think we agree that Taiwan is a beacon of democracy, a real contrast with mainland communist China. What more do you think we could do to defend the Taiwanese democracy? And shouldn’t Taiwan be allowed, for instance, to join WHO and maybe other international organizations?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So it’s widely known how hard many countries, the United States amongst them, worked diligently to allow the Taiwanese Government to participate at least as an observer as part of this most recent World Health Assembly. There’s another scheduled for November. We think it both appropriate for them to do so, and perhaps even more importantly, very useful. They have a great deal of knowledge. They handled this coronavirus very, very well; they have high-end technology and high-end pharmaceutical capabilities, high-end scientists. We think it would be very useful for them to be part of the conversation that surrounds how the world is going to respond to the continuing pandemic.
As for how we deal with Taiwan, the United States has had a clear set of policies that extend back to – depending where you want to start to clock – back to the early 1990s is a reasonable place to start. President Trump has adhered to those commitments and will continue to do so. We – they’re set out very clearly and we will continue to abide by them.
MR RASMUSSEN: If I may, let’s turn to Europe. The White House has announced an intention to reduce the U.S. troop presence in Germany. May I ask you: Will a possible reduction in Germany be compensated by an increase in the U.S. presence in Eastern Europe, for instance in Poland?
SECRETARY POMPEO: So as for troop deployments and numbers, I will leave that to my colleague Secretary Esper to talk about. I try to maintain these boundaries. But as for U.S. policy, I can speak to that very clearly. I’ve been here as the Secretary of State now for just over two years. I’ve been part of the administration since the beginning. We set out back in early 2018 – excuse me, back in early 2017, in the spring of 2017 – to evaluate our entire – the entire structure about how engaged in the world. And that certainly has a component about troop stationing, where we will put people, how we will deploy them.
It has two dimensions. One, their location, and second, a dimension of should these be permanent bases or are we better off in a more modern world to have rotational deployments where we can get the right equipment at the right time. We always think about soldiers on the ground; much, much of modern conflict today involves things disconnected from – I was a tanker; I was a Army guy. I loved that dearly. I wish the whole world just revolved around M1 tanks. It would make me happy. But it doesn’t. It now revolves around big air forces, big cyber capabilities, big capabilities that are in different pockets. We’ve tried to – we’re trying to make sure we get all of this right. So it’s no longer reasonable just to think about hey, do we have a thousand soldiers or 5,000 soldiers or 10,000 soldiers, but what’s the threat that’s posed to the United States of America and our friends and allies, and how is it that we collectively can best respond.
So what you saw the President announce the other day was part of that review process. It is extensive. It extends not only to Europe but throughout the Middle East. We’re thinking – you’ve seen decisions the President has made there about how it is that we can do the right things to meet the challenges of the day.
And then lastly, this very much connects up to the topic I spoke about today. Make no mistake about it: The United States does believe that it has a real responsibility to show that we have the capability and the capacity to challenge any threat that the Chinese Communist Party should make militarily to the United States of America. So we are constantly thinking about how we engage diplomatically, economic, and militarily to meet that challenge. So as the President thinks about Europe and the Middle East and our soldiers that are stationed in Africa, we are ever mindful that a free and open Indo-Pacific matters to all of us, including to Europe, and we want to make sure that we have allocated resources appropriately to address those concerns.
MR RASMUSSEN: I got a question from the audience. I’ll read it: “Do you understand if European friends and allies see a threat to democracy generate from the U.S. due to a slow and dangerous breakdown of state institutions and democratic principles?”
SECRETARY POMPEO: No.
MR RASMUSSEN: That’s a clear answer. (Laughter.)
SECRETARY POMPEO: No, I – look, 200-plus years on, we have the most – and I should be careful because I tend to want to brag about the United States – but this is a democracy that has withstood enormous challenges throughout its history and our institutions have withstood enormous challenges. And as the world changes, I am confident we will still have challenges. But I know this: Our founders nailed it. Our founders got it right. The principles, the laying down a set of God-given rights for the American people, saying that the United States government is designed and purposed to preserve those rights, has provided both a textual and a structural mechanism for democracy in the United States to survive each and every one of these challenges.
Doesn’t mean it happens automatically. I now as the Secretary of State am a steward for this very set of rights. I have a responsibility, a duty to ensure that I do everything every day to be part of furthering the capacity for our republic to continue to remain strong. But if you ask the question can I understand how anyone would stare at this and think that American democracy was at risk, it’s a really simple answer.
MR RASMUSSEN: Very often we see the Chinese Government use divide and rule tactics where they single out individual countries for punishment if they don’t listen to Beijing, follow the instructions from Beijing, or are going against Beijing. I will ask you: Shouldn’t the world’s democracies form a united front, an alliance of democracies that can stand up against the autocracies, protect each other, and promote freedom and prosperity?
SECRETARY POMPEO: Anders, it’s an incredibly important question. A number of thoughts, but I’ll start with this: You’ll recall – you said should we create a united front. This is China’s name, the united front. This is what is in your countries (inaudible) united front. So maybe we’ll choose just a slightly different name, but conceptually you nailed it. You’ve got it exactly right. And I think the wonderful news for democracies and freedom-loving peoples is that I see that happening. I can tell you that when I met with my Chinese counterpart, he could see it happening while we were sitting in the room. While we were meeting a statement from all G7 members came out about Hong Kong. The timing I’d love to claim was intentional and very well thought out, but the truth of the matter is we were just doing what freedom-loving peoples do, continuing to demand an ever more expansive conception of freedom and forcing as best we can other countries to honor commitments that they’ve made.
So your core point – China’s objective is in fact to single out and indeed to threaten to single out more directly. It’s not just European countries. We’ve seen them do it in the Middle East. We’ve seen them do it in Africa. We’ve seen them do it in Southeast Asia, closer to their own nation. What I have begun to see over my two and a half years as Secretary of State is the world awakening to this threat. Right now, many of these conversations about just what you described are happening to me privately. The calls are, “Hey, Mike, here’s what we’re observing the Chinese Communist Party engaged in here. How can you help?” We do our best in each case to provide them the type of assistance that makes most sense.
We need to raise this to another level, to where countries are prepared and in position to respond to these things in a public way. When we do that, the Chinese Communist Party will be more isolated, and I hope – because my objective isn’t bad things for the Chinese people – I hope that the Chinese Communist Party will begin to recognize that if they want to rise, if they want to continue to build out their nation, that they need to do so on a Western rule set, a rule set that honors the rule of law and honors freedom and respect for sovereignty. If they can flip, if they can make that difference because the rest of the world demands that of them, just like we do of every other nation with which we interact – it’s not unique; it’s simply reciprocal. We don’t ask the Chinese Government to do anything we don’t ask the Belgian Government to do. Just honor sovereignty, engage in the rule of law, compete fairly around the world without subsidization of state-owned enterprises – if they will do those things, then I think the world will be in a better place if freedom-loving nations could be secure in their freedoms.
MR RASMUSSEN: Thank you. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary. Thank you, Mike, for taking time to talk to us. It’s a very important conclusion of two days democracy summit here in Copenhagen. We appreciate very much your support for freedom and democracy and your dedication to American leadership, so I feel confident that my three grand – American grandchildren will be raised in a much better world. Thank you very much.
SECRETARY POMPEO: Anders, thank you very much, sir. And thanks to everyone for giving me this time. So long.
Secretary General
U.S. Department of State. 06/19/2020. Secretary Pompeo’s Remarks at the 2020 Copenhagen Democracy Summit
The below is attributable to Spokesperson Morgan Ortagus:
Secretary of State Michael R. Pompeo delivered remarks on “China and the Challenge to Free Societies” at the Copenhagen Democracy Summit 2020 today. The Summit’s theme this year is Defending Democracy during COVID-19 – Transatlantic Perspectives. The Secretary spoke to an audience of international leaders and thinkers from business and politics, civil society, media, and academia to discuss the state of democracy. Secretary Pompeo thanked the Alliance of Democracies organization for successfully transitioning this year’s Summit to a virtual event and continuing to show the power of democratic values.
UN
U.S. Department of State. 06/20/2020. On the Hypocrisy of UN Human Rights Council. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State
The United Nations Human Rights Council, now comprised of Venezuela and recently, Cuba and China, has long been and remains a haven for dictators and democracies that indulge them. It is a grave disappointment to those genuinely seeking to advance human dignity. Even so, the Council’s decision to vote yesterday on a resolution focusing on policing and race in the United States marks a new low.
The ongoing civic discourse about the tragic death of George Floyd in the United States is a sign of our democracy’s strength and maturity. Americans work through difficult societal problems openly, knowing their freedoms are protected by the Constitution and a strong rule of law. We are serious about holding individuals and institutions accountable, and our democracy allows us to do so. The United States works every day with partners around the world who share our commitment to fundamental freedoms.
Unfortunately, the Council has once again reaffirmed the wisdom of our decision to withdraw in 2018. If the Council were serious about protecting human rights, there are plenty of legitimate needs for its attention, such as the systemic racial disparities in places like Cuba, China, and Iran. If the Council were honest, it would recognize the strengths of American democracy and urge authoritarian regimes around the world to model American democracy and to hold their nations to the same high standards of accountability and transparency that we Americans apply to ourselves.
U.S. Department of State. 06/20/2020. On the Occasion of World Refugee Day. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State
World Refugee Day is an opportunity to recognize the courage and the struggles of millions of refugees who have fled their homes due to persecution and conflict. According to the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR), the number of those forcibly displaced worldwide rose to nearly 80 million in 2019. The United States reaffirms its commitment to achieving the best humanitarian outcomes for the millions of displaced people around the world. To this end, the U.S. National Security Strategy directs us to continue to lead the world in humanitarian assistance and to support displaced people as close to their homes as possible to help meet their needs until they can safely and voluntarily return home.
This year marks the 40th anniversary of the 1980 Refugee Act, which established the Office of the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs that evolved into the Department of State’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration. The Refugee Act was the first comprehensive piece of U.S. legislation designed to address the realities of modern refugees by providing flexible mechanisms to address rapidly shifting refugee situations.
From Venezuela to Syria and Afghanistan, to South Sudan and Burma, the United States is a catalyst for international humanitarian crisis response. It is essential for the international community to work together to be effective in addressing the crises that drive displacement and lead to dire situations. This starts with the responsibility of the governments involved and their regional partners to take steps to end conflict quickly and to create safe conditions for their people. By focusing on ending conflicts and by providing assistance to prevent further displacement, we can help mitigate the destabilizing effects displacement has on affected countries and their neighbors.
The United States is the largest single donor of humanitarian assistance worldwide, continuing a tradition of generosity. In Fiscal Year 2019, the United States provided more than $9.5 billion, and over the past decade we have provided nearly $70 billion in humanitarian assistance. This assistance reaches tens of millions of displaced and crisis-affected people worldwide, providing urgent, life-saving support and services, including food, shelter, health care, education, and access to safe drinking water. U.S. support for host countries, provided through contributions to humanitarian organizations, encourages them to continue providing shelter and increasing access to work, education, and public services for those fleeing persecution.
But the United States cannot address these needs alone. We work tirelessly to encourage our partners and allies to share the burden and to ensure limited resources are used in a coordinated and effective manner toward sustainable solutions. Our calls for greater resources from the broadest possible group of donors, including governments and the private sector, are essential to address these urgent and growing needs. We applaud those who are making critical contributions to support refugees throughout the world. We will continue to work with international organizations, donor countries, non-governmental organizations, and refugee-hosting countries to find sustainable solutions to displacement while we simultaneously seek lasting political solutions to the conflicts that drive it.
CHINA / CANADA
U.S. Department of State. 06/22/2020. United States Stands with Canada Against China’s Arbitrary Detention of Canadian Citizens. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State
The United States is extremely concerned by the People’s Republic of China’s (PRC) decision to proceed with formal charges against Canadian citizens Michael Kovrig and Michael Spavor. These charges are politically motivated and completely groundless. The United States stands with Canada in calling on Beijing for the immediate release of the two men and rejects the use of these unjustified detentions to coerce Canada. Additionally, we echo Canada’s call for immediate consular access to its two citizens, in accordance with the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, as China has prohibited such access for almost six months, and the world has no knowledge of the two Canadians’ condition.
CORONAVIRUS
U.S. Department of State. 06/19/2020. Sustaining U.S. Humanitarian Assistance Leadership in Response to COVID-19. Michael R. Pompeo, Secretary of State
The United States has been, and continues to be, the undisputed leader in global foreign assistance, and our leadership in response to the COVID-19 pandemic continues that record of generosity. Today, we’re providing approximately $93 million in new humanitarian assistance to bolster our ongoing response efforts, helping the world’s most vulnerable overcome the devastation inflicted by this deadly virus. This new funding will help people across the world, including throughout Asia, Africa, and Latin America.
Of the $93 million announced today, more than $75 million from the International Disaster Assistance account will support emergency health, water, sanitation, and hygiene, logistics and protection programs, as well as food assistance to address the secondary impacts of the pandemic. In addition, nearly $18 million from the Migration and Refugee Assistance account will enhance the ability of our international and non-governmental organization partners to provide water, sanitation and hygiene supplies; livelihood support; psychosocial services; food security; and access to health services and information for refugees, vulnerable migrants, and host communities while also protecting the health of humanitarian actors serving these populations.
This new assistance is part of more than $12 billion allocated by agencies and departments across the U.S. government to benefit the global response, including vaccine and therapeutics development, preparedness efforts, and humanitarian assistance. Today’s announcement brings State Department and USAID COVID-19 response funding alone to more than $1.3 billion in health, humanitarian, and economic assistance to date. Much of this funding has already been deployed, enabling programs that are saving lives and mitigating the second order impacts of the pandemic around the world. The generosity of the American people remains unmatched, and the positive impact of American taxpayer funds in the midst of the pandemic is profound.
U.S. Department of State. 06/19/2020. Briefing with Director of U.S. Foreign Assistance Resources James L. Richardson and Acting Assistant Secretary for Population, Refugees and Migration Carol O’Connell On Sustaining U.S. Humanitarian Assistance Leadership in Response to COVID-1. Via Teleconference9
- James L. Richardson, DirectorOffice of Foreign Assistance
- Carol Thompson O'Connell, Acting Assistant SecretaryBureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration
Joining me for today’s on-the-record briefing are our Director of the Office of Foreign Assistance James Richardson, and our Acting Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration Carol Thompson O’Connell. They will offer brief introductory remarks and then be on hand to answer your questions. As always, the contents of this briefing are embargoed until the end of the call. Jim, please go ahead.
MR RICHARDSON: Great. Thanks, Cale, I appreciate it. It’s great to have a chance to have a chance to speak with you all again today as we continue to talk about U.S. global leadership in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. At nearly $10 billion a year, the United States provides around 40 percent of the worldwide global assistance for health, which is five times larger than the next highest donor. Without a doubt, our foreign assistance investments over the past 20-40 years have truly laid the foundation for our COVID-19 response today. COVID has posed a unique challenge to the United States and the entire world in a way that we haven’t seen in a century, impacting dramatically both high-income and developing countries alike.
The State Department has received almost 1,000 requests from almost every country in the world. Time and time again, when there is a global challenge, the United States steps up to lead. That’s what we’re doing with COVID-19. With today’s announcement, Secretary Pompeo has authorized us to spend another $93 million in new humanitarian assistance for this response, bringing the total so far to 1.3 billion for health, humanitarian, and economic assistance to more than 120 countries around the world.
This new humanitarian assistance bolsters our ongoing efforts and will help the world’s most vulnerable populations to overcome the devastation that has been inflicted by this pandemic. Like our response to date, this new funding will go towards a number of different programs and activities to help communities in need around the world. This provides emergency health, sanitation, hygiene, logistics, and protection programs, as well as food assistance, to address some of the secondary and tertiary impacts of the pandemic. Thanks to the expertise of the American manufacturing base, our efforts now include ventilators, delivering on President Trump’s generous commitment to meet the request from many foreign governments now that we’ve been able to meet our own domestic needs. More than 60 countries have had access to American-made ventilators, and 39 of them will be donated. From just this week, a hundred American-made ventilators were delivered to India, joining previous deliveries for South Africa, Russia, and El Salvador, with many more deliveries to our partner countries and allies yet to come in every region of the world.
Our all-of-America approach to combat COVID-19 extends beyond just the State Department and USAID, as we closely coordinate with other U.S. Government agencies, including HHS, CDC, and the Department of Defense. Impressively, more than $12 billion has been committed across the U.S. Government to benefit the global response. This includes vaccine and therapeutic developments, preparedness efforts, and humanitarian assistance.
Without a doubt, our work is making a difference. Much of our State and USAID funding is already at work, enabling programs that are saving lives and mitigating the other second- and third-order impacts of the pandemic around the world. Let me just highlight a couple key programs that sort of demonstrate what we’re talking about.
In India, the United States has virtually trained more than 20,000 people on the frontlines of COVID-19, leveraging the power of digital technology to help state leaders prepare, to help train frontline health workers in strategic messaging, screening activities, counseling of patients, and basic clinical management.
In Thailand, the United States has created a mobile application where 80,000 health volunteers can now track the location of suspected cases, manage home visits, and deliver relief kits with essential staples.
The United States’ generous and positive impact in the midst of the pandemic is profound, and all of America should be proud of it and I hope that our colleagues from other parts of the world see the result and the tenacity of U.S. assistance in the face of this pandemic and continue to join us in this effort.
While the pandemic is far from over, I think it is important for us to start thinking today about what systems the United States and world needs to lessen the likelihood of another outbreak becoming a pandemic. In the age of globalization, I do fear that the next outbreak will look more like this one than in the ones past.
Let me walk through a couple lessons learned from this pandemic that I actually shared in a hearing yesterday in front of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. The first lesson learned is that pandemics aren’t just a development or confined to the developing world. They are truly global in scope with the risk of severe health and economic impacts across the globe.
The second lesson learned is that the United States and global systems have to be prepared to respond internationally to outbreaks and pandemics. Third, the – and we need to build accountability into our global system.
Third, the world needs effective early warning system and data tracking to help detect and prevent outbreaks.
And lastly, we need to think about holistic – about preparedness and ensure that we are flexible, because we don’t know necessarily where the next outbreak will start or how it will spread.
I think the bottom line here is that we really do need more coordination, more data, more tracking, and more ability and options to respond globally.
As we look around – as we look forward with history as our guide, we have an opportunity to save lives, promote accountability, and ensure that pandemics of this size and scale are prevented to the greatest extent possible. We have a moral obligation to lead and build a safer system for the next generation.
So with that, I want to turn it over to my colleague, Acting Assistant Secretary Carol O’Connell of the Bureau of Population, Refugee, and Migration, who has been a really amazing steward of U.S. taxpayer dollars on the ongoing response to COVID. Over to you, Carol.
MR BROWN: Hi, Carol. You might be on mute.
MS O’CONNELL: I am. I was on mute, sorry. Okay. Thank you, Jim. I appreciate your remarks. Good afternoon, everyone. It’s a privilege to speak with you today as we look forward to commemorating World Refugee Day, which is, as Cale mentioned, tomorrow, June 20th. And this year, we also marked the 40th anniversary of the 1980 Refugee Act and established the Office of the U.S. Coordinator for Refugee Affairs, which has evolved into our Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration.
World Refugee is an excellent – World Refugee Day is an excellent opportunity to highlight four main points. The United States has a longstanding tradition of leadership in providing humanitarian protection and assistance worldwide. Our humanitarian assistance and diplomacy are hard at work as part of the all-of-America response to the COVID-19 pandemic. We emphasize support for refugee-hosting countries and communities, together with the refugees and other forcibly displaced people we seek to assist worldwide, and as part of the full array of our assistance, we continue the admission of refugees into the United States in line with the Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions for Fiscal Year 2020.
With regard to our longstanding tradition of leadership, we’re the single largest country provider of humanitarian assistance worldwide. To help those in need, we work with the UN High Commissioner for Refugees, International Committee of the Red Cross, International Organization for Migration, the UN Children’s Fund, and more than 80 other international and nongovernmental organizations.
For tens of millions of people worldwide, our overseas humanitarian assistance provides access to clean water, food, shelter, health care, education, livelihoods, child protection, as well as women’s protection and women’s empowerment. This commitment to the world’s most vulnerable individuals remains a critical component of the U.S. National Security Strategy. We’re focused on helping displaced people as close to their homes as possible so they may return to home safely and voluntarily to rebuild their communities.
In the context of COVID-19 pandemic, we have provided funding and response to the initial global appeals of our international and nongovernmental organization partners. We maintain an open and ongoing dialogue with our partners to assess the needs of our populations of concern, as well as the ability of our partners to meet those needs with funding both from the United States and in coordination with other governments and other actors.
It’s important to note that this unprecedented global response requires all donor governments, international financial institutions, and also the private sector to work together. Our longstanding leadership in humanitarian advocacy has focused on increasing humanitarian access and long-term solutions for refugees and displaced persons, urging states to uphold their international obligations, and expanding the number of donors to increase global contributions to humanitarian responses.
The United States applauds national governments and local communities that play a critical role by hosting refugees, even in situations where their own resources are already scarce. In many crisis situations, our assistance helps bolster national government and local community capacity to support refugees in ways that also benefit the host community, such as by increasing health care capacity. We welcome host country efforts to expand opportunities for refugees to thrive in their communities through access to legal employment and education. We also encourage host countries to provide durable solutions for refugees by offering local integration through permanent residency or granting citizenship.
Globally, permanent resettlement is a durable solution for a very small percentage of the world’s most vulnerable refugees. But we in the United States continue the admission of those who remain vulnerable even in a country of first asylum and meet the categories of the Fiscal Year 2020 Presidential Determination on Refugee Admissions. The United States has welcomed more than three million refugees since the Refugee Act was signed in 1980. Through the full array of our assistance, we’ll continue to help the world’s most vulnerable, reflecting the generosity of the American people.
Thank you very much, and look forward to your questions.
MR BROWN: Okay, it looks like our – let’s see, if you want to get in the queue, dial 1 and 0. Our first question comes from Jessica Donati.
QUESTION: Hi, and thank you for doing this. It’s a question for Director Richardson. The World Health Organization is seen as the best position to take the lead in any global response to COVID-19 once treatments and vaccines are found. Are you prepared to work with the WHO?
And separately, we have not heard anything from the administration since Trump said that the U.S. was breaking, and from the WHO it seems that work continues business as usual. So could you enlighten us on what’s going on there? Thank you very much.
MR RICHARDSON: Sure. Thanks so much for that question. As the President has said, the WHO has failed to uphold its responsibility and grossly mismanaged its – this response. We have consistently seen the WHO be unable to live up to the world’s expectations, and we have seen this with Ebola, which is why the Obama administration paused contributions to the WHO, and now we’ve seen it with COVID. And so I think – I think the reality is that the WHO has not been able to live up to what the world needs, and it’s important for us to have partners that are transparent, accountable, and results-oriented, and unfortunately we have not seen that with the WHO.
In terms of our relationship, we are in the process of notifying the WHO that we are withdrawing. This is not a light switch moment. It’s more like unscrewing a light bulb, so it does take a little bit of time. But we are – the State Department is working very hard to give the proper notice that we are withdrawing from the WHO.
MR BROWN: Okay, next question. Let’s go to the line of Nick Wadhams.
QUESTION: Hi. I just had a follow-up on Jessica’s question. Any – I had two questions. The first is that the withdrawal from the WHO would essentially require a one-year notification and grace period. Could you confirm whether that’s the case? And then second, in April Secretary Pompeo recommended that the U.S. keep funding WHO programs where countries that were fighting polio and coronavirus essentially had no other option. The seven countries were Afghanistan, Egypt, Libya, Pakistan, Sudan, Syria, and Turkey. Is the U.S. still planning to fund WHO operations in those countries? Thank you.
MR RICHARDSON: Great. Thanks, Nick. On the one year, I have heard the same thing but I am not an attorney and I’m not with the International Organizations Bureau at the State Department, so I really would defer to them. But my – everything I have read has said a year, but I’ll defer to the experts.
On the exemptions piece, I think what the Secretary was referencing is that at that point in time there was a series of countries where there was no alternative for implementation, and since then State and USAID has found alternative implementers in most of those countries and those regions. We still have a hard time finding implementing partners for polio, for instance, and so we’re still working through an interagency process to come to resolution on that issue and see how we want to proceed as the government in those unique cases. But for many of the countries previously identified that the WHO was the only alternative, which was true at the time, it’s amazing – where there’s a void, other partners come in and fill that. We have an amazing cadre of faith-based, of NGOs, of contractors, and of other multilateral organizations that do a lot of the same work that the WHO does. The WHO is not a super-unique organization in that sense in terms of its ability to implement health programs.
And I’ll just remind that from a budget standpoint, the U.S. spends only about 4 percent of its annual health budget through the WHO. So it’s actually a fairly small implementing partner for the United States. We have a lot of other implementing partners when it comes to the health space, and we’re committed to ensuring that we find the right partner that we can trust that has the right set of accountability and structures and the results-oriented that the American people deserve.
MR BROWN: Okay. Our next question comes from Jennifer Hansler.
QUESTION: Hi, thanks for doing this. To follow up on my colleague’s WHO question, can you tell us exactly how much the U.S. has already paid this fiscal year to the WHO? And then separately, is there still a hold on NGOs and humanitarian organizations using USAID funding to purchase PPE? Thank you.
MR BROWN: Hey, your question about USAID funding’s best addressed by them, but I believe there’s been clarity provided on parameters under which they can purchase PPE.
MR RICHARDSON: Yeah, sorry, Cale. I was on mute. I apologize. So yes, so the specific amounts – there’s two accounts. There’s a mandatory account and then there’s a voluntary account, so we’d have to go back and get you the exact amount. In terms of PPE, the Secretary has provided guidance that covers both State and USAID to allow our implementing partners to purchase PPE locally and other sources that don’t divert from requirements and needs domestically here in the United States. So we have done that and that guidance has – is starting to go out.
MR BROWN: Okay. If anyone has a question, dial 1 0. We’ll give it about 20 seconds.
(No response.)
MR BROWN: Okay, looks like there are no other questions in the queue. Thanks to our briefers for coming on and taking the time to brief all of us on this most recent announcement, the continuation of the U.S.’s continued leadership in this space, and thanks to everyone who dialed in. Have a great Friday, great weekend.
CIVIL RIGHTS / FIRST GENERATION PROFESSIONALS PROGRAM
U.S. Department of Commerce Communications. Jun 20, 2020. First Generation Professionals
Create the Conditions for First Generation Professionals to Thrive
- Tinisha Agramonte, Director;
- Cristina Bartolomei, Senior EEO Specialist; and
- Hillary Shah, Emerging Professionals Pilot Program Intern, U.S. Department of Commerce, Office of Civil Rights
It was with that mission in mind that the Department’s Office of Civil Rights took the unprecedented steps in developing and launching the First Generation Professionals (FGP) Initiative, a first-of-its-kind endeavor in the Federal government that focuses on an often-overlooked dimension of diversity—socio-economic status. Launched in September 2019, the initiative creates the conditions that will enable the successful recruitment, advancement, inclusion, and retention of first-generation professionals, many of whom come from working-class, low-income backgrounds. This initiative champions the idea that humble beginnings should not limit how far one’s talents and drive can take them.
Who are these first-generation professionals? They are trailblazers who are one of the first in their immediate families to enter the professional workforce. They have varying socio-economic backgrounds, life experiences, skills, and talents that diversify our workforce. When leveraged, first-generation professionals can help Federal agencies optimally accomplish our mission by delivering culturally competent and relevant programs, products, and services to diverse public constituents.
The FGP Initiative has been active since day one, hosting an Inaugural Summit with high-ranking Federal officials, many of whom are FGPs. The program also presented numerous workshops; established a First Generation Professionals Community of Practice; and most recently conducted a virtual stakeholder information session with over 450 representatives from academic institutions.
This stakeholder information session served as a launching pad for the Pilot First-Generation Professionals Academy (FGPA) for Emerging Professionals, which will provide a series of webinars on topics that research shows are germane to the success of first-gen students when preparing to join the workforce. With the launch of the Academy, the Federal government, for the first time, is taking a coordinated, proactive, and intentional approach to address the challenges that first-generation, low-income emerging professionals may face as they leave the college campus and enter the workforce.
First-Gen college graduate and Superior Court Judge Tadia Whitner, served as a guest speaker for the stakeholder session and shared how first-generation professionals still experience unique struggles in the workplace as a result of their backgrounds. She discussed the conscious and unconscious biases FGPs encounter based on social class markers; the lack of support, networks, and mentorships; and how many deal with imposter syndrome. Our FGP programs, designed for both college students and working FGPs serve to mitigate those challenges. We are helping first-gen students successfully transition from the college campus to the workplace AND creating conditions for first-gen trailblazers to thrive in their professional careers.
Our goal is to foster a Federal workforce that is beneficial and wholly representative of the talents in our diverse society.
FULL DOCUMENT: https://www.commerce.gov/news/blog/2020/06/create-conditions-first-generation-professionals-thrive
DoC. US CENSUS. JUNE 19, 2020. Population. Low-Income and Younger Adults Hardest Hit by Loss of Income During COVID-19. Census Bureau’s New Household Pulse Survey Shows Who Is Hardest Hit During COVID-19 Pandemic
- BRIAN MENDEZ-SMITH, Survey statisticians in the Census Bureau’s Social, Economic and Housing Statistics Division
- MARK KLEE, Survey statisticians in the Census Bureau’s Social, Economic and Housing Statistics Division.
These findings come from an analysis of Household Pulse Survey data released Wednesday by the U.S. Census Bureau.
Among adults living in households where someone experienced losses in employment income, the rate of adults who reported feeling worried, down, depressed or hopeless during the past week was higher for younger and lower-income households.
Paying Next Month’s Rent or Mortgage
Among households that experienced lost employment income, half of adults in households with an income of less than $25,000 had either “no confidence” or “slight confidence” in their ability to pay the next month’s rent or mortgage on time, compared with 8.4% of adults in households with an income of $100,000 or more.
Among respondents ages 25 to 39, 33.7% had either “no confidence” or “slight confidence” in their household’s ability to pay the next month’s rent or mortgage on time, while 12.2% of respondents ages 65 and above felt this way.
Worried, Depressed or Hopeless
Among adults living in households where someone experienced losses in employment income, the rate of adults who reported feeling worried, down, depressed or hopeless during the past week was higher for younger and lower-income households.
For example, 41.8% of adults in households with an income of less than $25,000 reported an inability to stop worrying “more than half of the days” or “nearly every day” in the past week, compared with 23.8% of adults in households with an income of $100,000 or more.
Among adults ages 25 to 39, 36.6% reported an inability to stop worrying “more than half of the days” or “nearly every day” in the past week, while 21% of adults ages 65 and above reported this same level of worrying.
Adults in households with an income of less than $25,000 reported feeling down, depressed or hopeless “more than half of the days” or “nearly every day” in the past week 39.9% of the time, compared with 19.5% of adults in households with an income of $100,000 or more.
Among adults ages 25 to 39, 32.2% reported feeling down, depressed or hopeless “more than half of the days” or “nearly every day” in the past week, while 18% of adults ages 65 and above reported that same frequency.
Food Insecurity
Among adults living in households where someone experienced losses in employment income, 36% of adults in households with an income of less than $25,000 reported either “sometimes not having enough to eat” or “often not having enough to eat” in the past week, compared with 2.1% of adults in households with an income of $100,000 or more.
Among adults ages 25 to 39, 20.5% reported “sometimes not having enough to eat” or “often not having enough to eat” in the past week, while 5.8% of adults ages 65 or over reported this same level of food insufficiency.
What Is the Household Pulse Survey?
The Census Bureau along with other government agency partners designed the Household Pulse Survey to collect and disseminate data in near real-time to provide vital insights into how American households are doing during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The first round of data were collected for the April 23-May 5 period. The most recent round were collected June 4-June 9. During this most recent round, the Census Bureau sent invitations to 979,236 households across America by email and SMS text message, and 83,302 households responded.
For a closer look at Census Household Pulse Survey data, see the Household Pulse Survey tables and Public Use File (PUF) microdata.
FULL DOCUMENT: https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2020/06/low-income-and-younger-adults-hardest-hit-by-loss-of-income-during-covid-19.html?utm_campaign=20200622msacos1ccstors&utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery
ECONOMY
FED. REUTERS. 19 DE JUNHO DE 2020. Powell diz que trajetória da economia deverá ser desafiadora
Por Lindsay Dunsmuir
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - A recuperação econômica dos Estados Unidos da epidemia do coronavírus é desafiadora e não haverá solução rápida, disse nesta sexta-feira o chair do Federal Reserve, Jerome Powell, em declarações que reforçaram sua recente postura de cautela.
“Vamos tomar o nosso caminho de volta disso, mas levará tempo e trabalho... A trajetória à frente provavelmente será desafiadora”, afirmou Powell em comentários introdutórios em videoconferência com líderes locais em Youngstown, no Estado de Ohio, sobre a construção de uma força de trabalho resiliente.
“Vidas e sustento têm sido perdidos, e a incerteza parece grande”, afirmou ele.
Mais cedo nesta semana, em duas aparições a parlamentares no Congresso norte-americano, Powell deixou claro que os Estados Unidos enfrentam uma longa recuperação geral, apesar de recentes dados econômicos encorajadores sobre geração de vagas de emprego e gastos do consumidor.
Uma recuperação completa, de acordo com ele, depende do controle da epidemia pelo país, que já vitimou mais de 118 mil norte-americanos.
Os Estados da Califórnia e da Carolina do Norte e uma série de cidades dos EUA determinaram ou exigiram na quinta-feira uso obrigatório de máscaras para controlar uma espiral de casos de coronavírus, conforme pelo menos seis Estados registraram recordes diários.
Mais cedo nesta sexta-feira, o presidente do Fed de Boston, Eric Rosengren, também alertou que a disseminação contínua do vírus poderia prejudicar a recuperação econômica dos EUA e que provavelmente será necessário mais apoio fiscal e monetário.
Powell e várias outras autoridades do Fed já solicitaram ao Congresso que forneça mais auxílio governamental.
Reportagem adicional de Jonnelle Marte
FED. REUTERS. 19 DE JUNHO DE 2020. Kashkari, do Fed, diz que recuperação econômica dos EUA pode demorar mais que o esperado
Por Jonnelle Marte
(Reuters) - A recuperação econômica da crise provocada pelo novo coronavírus nos EUA pode ocorrer de forma mais lenta do que os formuladores de política monetária inicialmente previam, incluindo com uma possível segunda onda de contaminações no outono no país e outro aumento na taxa de desemprego, afirmou nesta sexta-feira o presidente do Federal Reserve de Minneapolis, Neel Kashkari.
“A recuperação vai demorar mais do que havíamos esperado há alguns meses”, disse Kashkari durante uma conversa no Twitter moderada pela CBS News. “Muitos empregos levarão muito tempo para voltar.”
O governo federal precisa continuar apoiando os norte-americanos que perderam o emprego por causa da crise provocada pela pandemia do coronavírus e podem não voltar ao trabalho por um tempo, disse.
Os pedido de auxílio-desemprego podem ajudar a levar dinheiro para pessoas desempregadas que precisam de ajuda para pagar suas contas, e limitar esses benefícios à remuneração anterior dos trabalhadores poderia “eliminar o desincentivo em voltar ao trabalho”, disse.
Kashkari também alertou que os bancos podem sofrer um impacto se a desaceleração for prolongada. “Estou preocupado que, quanto mais isso durar, mais perdas os bancos enfrentarão”, afirmou.
Os grandes bancos possuem mais capital do que antes da crise financeira de 2008, mas pode não ser suficiente, disse Kashkari, solicitando às instituições financeiras que parem de pagar dividendos e aumentem capital.
_________________
ORGANISMS
CORONAVIRUS
IMF. 06/22/2020. YOU’VE GOT MONEY: MOBILE PAYMENTS HELP PEOPLE DURING THE PANDEMIC
- Sonja Davidovic,
- Delphine Prady and
- Herve Tourpe
Togo, a small West African nation of 8 million, was able to quickly distribute emergency financial support to half a million people in less than two weeks using mobile phones. The technology helped deliver benefits to women in particular, and it supported a transparent rollout of the program. Informal workers in Morocco are also receiving government help through their phones quickly and efficiently.
Social assistance and cash transfers
Many emerging and low-income countries are scaling up direct support to households and individuals because they cannot directly protect jobs. Missing data on employment status and blurry lines between corporations and individuals in the informal sector hinder the effectiveness of labor market policies. Therefore, governments bet on cash transfers when trying to boost their social protection systems, while trying to expand their coverage.
In sub-Saharan Africa, over 80 percent of measures announced since the beginning of the pandemic are in the form of transfers, and only 4 percent were labor market policies. Globally, 30 percent of all the initiatives taken by countries are cash transfers.
Typically, the delivery of income support targeted to the most vulnerable households relies on a robust national identification (PDF) system linked to socioeconomic information, and requires a variety of approaches in distributing cash to those most in need. Missing any one of these components in their immediate response to the crisis can generate difficult challenges (PDF): for instance, if a government cannot target beneficiaries due to the lack of socioeconomic information, it may have to choose between either spending more to cast a wider safety net or keeping the budget in check and excluding households in need of support.
Effective cash transfer mechanisms
Mobile money is as an effective and physical-distancing-friendly option to deliver cash transfers in large scale, given that ownership and use of mobile phones in emerging and developing economies is very high, and globally, there are 228 mobile money agents (the small retailers where customers can deposit or withdraw cash in and out of mobile accounts, buy phone airtime cards, etc.) per 100,000 adults compared to only 11 banks and 33 ATMs. Mobile money can therefore help rural and remote populations gain access to government transfer programs without traveling long distances or waiting in lines, or even having a bank account—a critical advantage in a world where 1.7 billion still don’t have access to formal financial institutions.
The pandemic has led many countries to strengthen their mobile money ecosystems and address specific constraints. Governments with more developed operations were able to react faster.
Ecuador doubled the number of licensed cash agents in two weeks. Malaysia expanded free mobile internet access. Nigeria partnered with mobile network operators to identify vulnerable informal workers in urban areas through airtime purchase patterns. Saudi Arabia reduced mobile usage fees to encourage mobile payments. Some years ago, Peru fostered the creation of a platform that allows transfers across three leading mobile operators and 32 banks.
Mobile money does have risks and limitations. People in rural and remote areas may lack mobile coverage, easy access to money agents, or simply electricity. Exchanging mobile money for cash can still be expensive. And digital and financial illiteracy are known to hinder adoption of digital mobile services.
In many countries, the pandemic has forced policymakers to react quickly to reduce regulatory weaknesses around mobile money issued by telecom or fintech firms, whose customers are often not protected by regulation in the same way as banks’ clients. It’s important to ensure that the risks of accelerating mobile money, including cyber-risks and digital fraud, don’t outweigh the benefits.
A mobile-money framework
Beyond the crisis horizon, many countries have sought to boost mobile payment platforms to reduce corruption, improve efficiency and budget transparency, and broaden financial inclusion, especially for the informal sector and women.
While scaling mobile cash transfers quickly to help alleviate the impact of the pandemic, governments should take a broad approach that goes beyond the technology and consider the whole ecosystem behind a robust and resilient mobile program.
A holistic approach should be considered by policymakers and the industry to integrate all the “building blocks” of a sustainable mobile-money platform, including stakeholders and design and policy elements that help maximize benefits against risks.
As countries move from crisis mode to a new normal, it’s a good time to also take note of the impediments they encountered in expanding support to people suffering the economic consequences of lockdowns. At the same time, they can build on solutions that worked best to make up for income losses, focusing on sustainable solutions instead of workarounds deployed at the height of an emergency. This should be part of broader government strategies to strengthen social protection systems in the medium term through technology.
FULL DOCUMENT: https://blogs.imf.org/2020/06/22/youve-got-money-mobile-payments-help-people-during-the-pandemic/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=govdelivery
_________________
INDICADORES/INDICATORS
- US ECONOMIC INDICATORS
- US INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN GOODS AND SERVICES
- BALANÇA COMERCIAL BRASILEIRA
- BACEN. BOLETIM FOCUS: RELATÓRIO SEMANAL DE MERCADO (Projeções atualizadas semanalmente pelas 100 principais instituições financeiras que operam no Brasil, para os principais indicadores da economia brasileira)
- BACEN. Indicadores Econômicos Consolidados
- BACEN. Indicadores Econômicos Selecionados
- BACEN. IBC-Br
- BACEN. Câmbio
- BOVESPA
- INDICADORES DO BANCO MUNDIAL
________________
BACEN. BOLETIM FOCUS: RELATÓRIO SEMANAL DE MERCADO
(Projeções atualizadas semanalmente pelas 100 principais instituições financeiras que operam no Brasil, para os principais indicadores da economia brasileira)
ANÁLISE
BACEN. PORTAL G1. 22/06/2020. Mercado interrompe sequência de 18 semanas de piora na previsão do PIB de 2020 e vê tombo de 6,5%. Projeção da semana anterior era de queda de 6,51%. Analistas também elevaram estimativa de inflação para este ano de 1,60% para 1,61%. Dados são do Boletim Focus, do Banco Central.Por Alexandro Martello, G1 — Brasília
Após 18 semanas, os economistas do mercado financeiro interromperam as previsões de piora do Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) neste ano. A estimativa passou de uma retração de 6,51% para 6,50%.
A projeção faz parte do boletim de mercado, conhecido como relatório "Focus", divulgado nesta segunda-feira (22) pelo Banco Central (BC). Os dados foram levantados na semana passada em pesquisa com mais de 100 instituições financeiras.
O PIB é a soma de todos os bens e serviços produzidos no país e serve para medir a evolução da economia.
A expectativa para o nível de atividade foi feita em meio à pandemia do novo coronavírus, que tem derrubado a economia mundial e colocado o mundo no caminho de uma recessão.
PREVISÕES DO MERCADO PARA O PIB DE 2020
(EM %)
09/04/2020
● : -1,96
● : -1,96
Fonte: BANCO CENTRAL
Em 13 de maio, o governo brasileiro estimou uma queda de 4,7% para o PIB de 2020, tendo como base a perspectiva de que as medidas de distanciamento social terminariam no fim de maio.
O Banco Mundial prevê uma queda de 8% no PIB brasileiro e o Fundo Monetário Internacional (FMI) estima um tombo de 5,3% em 2020.
Em 2019, segundo dados do Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (IBGE), o PIB cresceu 1,1%. Foi o desempenho mais fraco em três anos. Nos três primeiros meses de 2020, foi registrada uma retração de 1,5% na economia brasileira.
Para o próximo ano, a previsão do mercado financeiro para o crescimento do Produto Interno Bruto (PIB) permaneceu estável em 3,50%.
Inflação abaixo de 2%
Segundo o relatório divulgado pelo BC, os analistas do mercado financeiro elevaram, de 1,60% para 1,61%, a estimativa de inflação para 2020.
Se a previsão for confirmada, será o menor patamar da inflação desde o início da série histórica do Instituto Brasileiro de Geografia e Estatística (BGE), em 1995. O menor nível já registrado foi em 1998 (1,65%).
A expectativa de inflação do mercado para este ano segue abaixo da meta central, de 4%, e também do piso do sistema de metas, que é de 2,5% neste ano.
Pela regra vigente, o IPCA pode oscilar de 2,5% a 5,5% sem que a meta seja formalmente descumprida. Quando a meta não é cumprida, o BC tem de escrever uma carta pública explicando as razões.
A meta de inflação é fixada pelo Conselho Monetário Nacional (CMN). Para alcançá-la, o Banco Central eleva ou reduz a taxa básica de juros da economia (Selic).
Para 2021, o mercado financeiro manteve em 3% sua previsão de inflação. No ano que vem, a meta central de inflação é de 3,75% e será oficialmente cumprida se o índice oscilar de 2,25% a 5,25%.
Taxa básica de juros
O mercado segue prevendo manutenção da taxa básica de juros da economia brasileira neste ano. Atualmente, a taxa Selic está em 2,25% ao ano. A previsão dos analistas é de que a taxa continue neste patamar até o fim do ano.
Para o fim de 2021, a expectativa do mercado permaneceu estável em 3% ao ano. Isso quer dizer que os analistas seguem estimando alta dos juros no ano que vem.
Outras estimativas:
- Dólar: a projeção para a taxa de câmbio no fim de 2020 continuou em R$ 5,20. Para o fechamento de 2021, ficou estável em R$ 5 por dólar.
- Balança comercial: para o saldo da balança comercial (resultado do total de exportações menos as importações), a projeção em 2020 permaneceu em US$ 52,50 bilhões de resultado positivo. Para o ano que vem, a estimativa dos especialistas do mercado continuou em US$ 55 bilhões de superávit.
- Investimento estrangeiro: a previsão do relatório para a entrada de investimentos estrangeiros diretos no Brasil, em 2020, ficou estável em US$ 60 bilhões. Para 2021, a estimativa dos analistas permaneceu em US$ 75 bilhões.
SÃO PAULO (Reuters) - Analistas do mercado fizeram pequenos ajustes a suas estimativas econômicas, mantendo a previsão de que a taxa básica de juros será mantida no atual patamar de 2,25% até o final do ano, enquanto o grupo dos que mais acertam passou a ver a Selic ainda mais baixa.
A pesquisa Focus divulgada pelo Banco Central nesta segunda-feira apontou que a expectativa permanece sendo de que a Selic encerrará este ano a 2,25% e 2021 a 3,00%, depois de o BC ter feito um corte de 0,75 ponto percentual, para a nova mínima histórica de 2,25% ao ano, ao mesmo tempo em que deixou aberta a porta para nova redução “residual” à frente.
Entretanto, o Top-5, grupo dos que mais acertam as previsões, reduziu o cenário para a Selic este ano a 1,75%, de 2,25% antes. Para 2021, a conta subiu a 2,63% na mediana das projeções, de 2,25%.
O mercado aguarda agora a divulgação da ata do encontro na terça-feira e do Relatório de Inflação na quinta-feira em busca de mais indicações sobre a visão do BC para a política monetária e o cenário econômico.
O levantamento semanal apontou que a expectativa para a alta do IPCA aumentou em 0,01 ponto percentual para este ano, a 1,61%, permanecendo em 3% para 2021.
O centro da meta oficial de 2020 é de 4% e, de 2021, de 3,75%, ambos com margem de tolerância de 1,5 ponto percentual para mais ou menos.
Para o Produto Interno Bruto (PIB), a estimativa para este ano é de contração de 6,50%, contra queda de 6,51% prevista antes, passando a um crescimento de 3,50% no ano que vem.
Por Camila Moreira
__________________
ECONOMIA BRASILEIRA / BRAZIL ECONOMICS
PIB
FGV. IBRE. 22/06/2020. Monitor do PIB FGV IBRE aponta retração de 9,3% na atividade econômica em abril
O Monitor do PIB-FGV aponta, na análise da série dessazonalizada, retração de 9,3%, na atividade econômica em abril, na comparação com março. No trimestre móvel findo em abril, a retração da atividade foi de -6,1%, em comparação ao trimestre móvel findo em janeiro. Na comparação interanual a economia retraiu 13,5% em abril e 4,9% no trimestre findo em abril.
“O dado de abril mostra que, a retração recorde da economia, não apenas no PIB, porém disseminada em diversas atividades e componentes da demanda, é a pior da história recente. A indústria e o setor de serviços, que respondem por aproximadamente 95% do valor adicionado total da economia também tiveram os maiores recuos de sua série histórica iniciada em 2000, assim como o consumo das famílias e a formação bruta de capital fixo. Em um país que, após três anos de fraco crescimento, ainda não havia conseguido se recuperar da última recessão, finda em 2016, que causou uma retração de 8,1% no PIB ao longo de 11 trimestres, o resultado de retração de 9,3% do PIB em apenas um mês, registrado em abril não é nada animador e só evidencia os enormes desafios que serão enfrentados pela economia no decorrer de 2020.”, afirma Claudio Considera, coordenador do Monitor do PIB-FGV.
A economia apresentou recorde de retração em abril, tanto na comparação contra o mês imediatamente anterior, quanto na interanual em decorrência das medidas de isolamento social necessárias para o combate a pandemia de COVID-19. Esse padrão de recuo recorde também foi observado na indústria e no setor de serviços. Na análise da série livre de efeitos sazonais a indústria caiu 15,7% influenciada pelos expressivos recuos da transformação (-24,3%) e da construção (-11,7%) enquanto o recuo de 7,3% dos serviços reflete a deterioração, principalmente, das atividades de comércio (-18,3%), transporte (-15,1%) e de outros serviços (-14,0%). Pela ótica da demanda, a formação bruta de capital fixo e o consumo das famílias também apresentaram recorde de retração com recuos de 23,0% e de 7,7%, respectivamente. A desagregação
desses dois componentes mostra que, na margem, houve queda tanto dos componentes da FBCF de máquinas e equipamentos, construção e outros tanto dos componentes do consumo das famílias de bens não duráveis, semiduráveis, duráveis e de serviços.
ANÁLISE DESAGREGADA DOS COMPONENTES DA DEMANDA
A análise gráfica desagregada dos componentes da demanda foi feita na série trimestral interanual por apresentar menor volatilidade do que as taxas mensais e aquelas ajustadas sazonalmente permitindo melhor compreensão da trajetória de seus componentes. No entanto, como as medidas de isolamento social em decorrência da pandemia de COVID-19 iniciaram-se em meados do mês de março, tendo significativos impactos na economia, durante o ano de 2020, após a usual apresentação da composição da taxa trimestral é apresentada, também, a desagregação da taxa mensal interanual destes componentes.
Consumo das famílias
O consumo das famílias caiu 5,0% no trimestre móvel findo em abril, em comparação ao mesmo trimestre no ano anterior. Apenas o consumo de produtos não duráveis cresceu (1,2%) impulsionado, pelos produtos alimentícios e os artigos farmacêuticos. A retração recorde no consumo de semiduráveis (-31,5%) foi influenciada pelo recuo no consumo de vestuários e calçados em geral enquanto a queda no consumo de duráveis (-22,3%) deveu-se, em grande parte, ao consumo de veículos em geral.
Na análise mensal interanual, nota-se que, mesmo o consumo de produtos não duráveis mostrou retração em abril. Apesar dos produtos alimentícios ainda contribuírem positivamente, a queda dos demais segmentos de consumo não duráveis compensaram esse crescimento. A queda de 7,7% do consumo de serviços, embora tenha sido a segunda menor na análise da composição, merece destaque pelo consumo desse segmento ser menos volátil; esta retração, inclusive, é a maior da série histórica do consumo das famílias de serviços, influenciada, principalmente, pela retração dos serviços prestados as famílias de alojamento e alimentação fora do domicílio.
Formação bruta de capital fixo (FBCF)
A FBCF retraiu 8,4% no trimestre móvel findo em abril, em comparação ao mesmo trimestre de 2019. Todos os componentes apresentaram retração, porém o recuo de 18,1% de máquinas e equipamentos se destaca pela contribuição de 7,3 p.p. negativos para a retração do componente. Cabe ressaltar que o segmento de automóveis em geral foi o principal responsável pela expressiva retração de máquinas e equipamentos, sendo responsável por quase metade da contribuição negativa.
Na comparação interanual, máquinas e equipamentos também se destacam como a maior queda da FBCF. A retração de 29,4% do componente em abril é o recorde de retração mensal da FBCF, desde o início da série histórica, em 2000, assim como a retração de 54,2% de máquinas e equipamentos é a maior já registrada no segmento.
Exportação
A exportação de bens e serviços apresentou queda de 0,3% no trimestre móvel findo em abril, em comparação com mesmo trimestre de 2019. O crescimento de 22,1% da exportação dos produtos duráveis foi praticamente anulado pelas retrações das exportações de bens de capital (-33,3) e de serviços (-13,0%). Apesar do desempenho negativo, a série continua apresentando tendência ascendente, após ter retraído 8,0% no trimestre móvel findo em janeiro deste ano.
A queda de 7,9% da exportação em abril, na comparação interanual é reflexo da retração em todos os seus componentes à exceção da exportação de produtos agropecuários que cresceram 37,9% no mês. Mais uma vez, a maior retração dentre os componentes da exportação deveu-se aos bens de capital com recuo de -61,1% no mês.
Importação
A importação retraiu 0,2% no trimestre móvel findo em abril, comparativamente ao mesmo trimestre de 2019. Apesar do crescimento expressivo da importação dos bens de capital (15,0%) e intermediários (10,9%) no trimestre, a retração de 20,6% na importação de serviços compensou a elevação desses componentes. O principal destaque na retração da importação dos serviços deve-se as viagens.
A retração de 12,8% da importação foi influenciada, principalmente, pelo recuo da importação de serviços (-41,4%), bens de capital (-16,2%) e bens de consumo em geral (-14,4%).
MONITOR DO PIB-FGV EM VALORES
Em termos monetários, o PIB em valores correntes foi de aproximadamente 2 trilhões, 358 bilhões, 664 milhões de Reais no acumulado do ano até abril.
TAXA DE INVESTIMENTO
O Gráfico 10 no press release, destaca em duas linhas as médias das taxas de investimento: a de cima mostra a média das taxas de investimento trimestrais desde janeiro de 2000 (18,0%); a de baixo, a média das taxas de investimento trimestrais desde janeiro de 2015 (15,7%). Observa-se que a taxa de investimento em abril de 2020 foi de 12,1%, na série a valores correntes. Esta taxa além de estar abaixo da taxa de investimento mensal média tanto na série iniciada em 2000 quanto na iniciada em 2015, é a menor taxa de investimento mensal desde 2000, início da série histórica.
ANÁLISE ESPECIAL DAS ATIVIDADES DE SAÚDE PÚBLICA E PRIVADA
A chegada da pandemia de COVID-19 no Brasil, com a adoção das recomendações de isolamento social, tem impactos diretos e indiretos na economia, afetando, praticamente, todas as atividades econômicas. Nesta seção especial que estará disponível no Monitor do PIB-FGV durante todo o ano de 2020, busca-se compreender como duas das principais atividades econômicas diretamente afetadas pela COVID-19 (saúde pública e privada) serão impactadas pelo avanço da pandemia no país. Em conjunto essas duas atividades representavam, de acordo com o IBGE, 4,3% do PIB em 2017, sendo a saúde pública responsável por 2,0% e a saúde privada pelos outros 2,3%.
A saúde pública compõe, com participação de 13% (em 2017, de acordo com as TRUs1), a atividade de Administração Pública na desagregação do PIB em 12 atividades, nas Contas Nacionais Trimestrais do IBGE. Em abril, a atividade de saúde pública caiu 22,0%, na comparação interanual, tendo contribuído negativamente (-2,9 p.p.) para a retração de 1,2% registrado na atividade de Administração pública. Os gráficos 11 e 12 no press release mostram a evolução recente da atividade e a contribuição da saúde pública para a atividade de Administração Pública.
Apesar de ter pouca representatividade, em termos de ponderação, a atividade de saúde pública teve grande impacto na retração da Administração Pública devido a expressiva queda no mês.
A saúde privada compõe, na desagregação do PIB em 12 atividades, nas Contas Nacionais Trimestrais do IBGE, a atividade de Outros Serviços, com 15,1% (em 2017, de acordo com as TRUs) de representatividade nesta atividade. Em abril, a atividade de saúde privada retraiu 13,3%, na comparação interanual, tendo contribuído negativamente (-1,0 p.p.) para a retração da atividade de Outros Serviços. Os Gráficos 13 e 14 no press release mostram a evolução recente da atividade e a contribuição para a atividade de Outros Serviços.
Embora a saúde privada tenha contribuído para a retração de Outros serviços, a forte retração de 22,1% é explicada, principalmente, pelos demais componentes dessa atividade.
Essas quedas de produção da atividade de saúde, tanto pública como privada, estão, provavelmente, associadas ao adiamento de consultas e exames devido ao isolamento social.
É importante destacar que as estimativas realizadas para a saúde pública e privada no Monitor do PIB-FGV não abrangem toda a composição da Conta Satélite de Saúde do Brasil, divulgada pelo IBGE. Além das atividades de saúde pública e privada, a Conta Satélite abrange outras atividades, tais como fabricação de produtos farmacêuticos, comércio de produtos farmacêuticos entre outras atividades relacionadas a saúde.
Outro ponto importante de destacar é que essas estimativas são calculadas com base nos dados disponibilizados no DataSUS, e essas informações, por serem constantemente atualizadas, podem sofrer grandes alterações entre as divulgações.
APÊNDICE – NOTA EXPLICATIVA
O Monitor do PIB-FGV estima mensalmente o PIB brasileiro em volume e em valor. O objetivo de sua criação foi prover a sociedade de um indicador mensal do PIB, tendo como base a mesma metodologia das Contas Nacionais do IBGE. Sua série inicia-se em 2000 e incorpora todas as informações disponíveis das Contas Nacionais (Tabelas de Recursos e Usos, até 2017, último ano de divulgação) bem como as informações das Contas Nacionais Trimestrais, até o último trimestre divulgado (primeiro trimestre de 2020).
O indicador é ajustado as Contas Nacionais Trimestrais sempre que há mudanças metodológicas e a cada trimestre divulgado. Ou seja, nos trimestres calendários, as médias trimestrais dos índices de volume do Monitor do PIB-FGV serão iguais aos indicadores trimestrais, sem ajuste sazonal, das Contas Nacionais Trimestrais. Nos trimestres calendário, são utilizados os mesmos modelos do IBGE para calcular todas as séries desagregadas com ajuste sazonal, tanto pela ótica da oferta, como da demanda. Para o ajuste sazonal mensal é utilizado o modelo mensal do IBC-Br, do Banco Central; para os trimestres móveis utiliza-se uma média desses ajustes mensais.
Assim, as estimativas do Monitor do PIB-FGV antecedem os resultados das Contas Nacionais Trimestrais nos meses em que este é divulgado. E, nos meses em que não há divulgação, o Monitor representa uma excelente antecipação para as tendências do PIB e seus componentes.
O Monitor do PIB-FGV compõe-se de um relatório descrevendo os principais resultados com ilustrações gráficas e de uma tabela Excel com informações de volume, em valores correntes, e a preços de 1995 das 12 atividades econômicas que agrupadas formam os 3 setores de atividade (agropecuária, indústria e serviços). Apresenta, ainda, o Valor Adicionado a preços básicos, os impostos sobre os produtos e o PIB e também os componentes do PIB pela ótica da demanda. Outro ponto a ser destacado é que o Monitor torna disponíveis desagregações que não são divulgadas pelo IBGE, mas que são relevantes para um melhor entendimento da absorção doméstica e da demanda externa. As desagregações disponibilizadas pelo Monitor são:
- Consumo das Famílias: bens de consumo duráveis, semiduráveis, não duráveis e serviços. Adicionalmente eles são classificados em nacionais e importados;
- Formação Bruta de Capital Fixo: em máquinas e equipamentos, construção e outros. Para máquinas e equipamentos e outros, há a desagregação entre nacionais e importados;
- Exportações e Importações: em produtos agropecuários, produtos da extrativa mineral, produtos industrializados de consumo (duráveis, semiduráveis e não duráveis), produtos industrializados de uso intermediário, bens de capitais e serviços.
Metodologia: https://portalibre.fgv.br/sites/default/files/2020-03/metodologia-preliminar-monitor-do-pib-fgv-novembro-de-2015_0.pdf
DOCUMENTO: https://portalibre.fgv.br/noticias/monitor-do-pib-fgv-ibre-aponta-retracao-de-93-na-atividade-economica-em-abril
COMÉRCIO EXTERIOR BRASILEIRO
MEconomia. 22/06/2020. COMÉRCIO EXTERIOR. Balança comercial registra superávit de US$ 1,653 bilhão na terceira semana de junho. No período de cinco dias úteis, corrente de comércio chega a US$ 6,966 bilhões
A balança comercial brasileira registrou superávit de US$ 1,653 bilhão e corrente de comércio de US$ 6,966 bilhões, na terceira semana de junho de 2020 – com cinco dias úteis –, como resultado de exportações no valor de US$ 4,31 bilhões e importações de US$ 2,656 bilhões. Os dados foram divulgados nesta segunda-feira (22/6), pela Secretaria de Comércio Exterior (Secex) do Ministério da Economia.
No ano, as exportações totalizam US$ 96,742 bilhões e as importações, US$ 76,377 bilhões, com saldo positivo de US$ 20,366 bilhões e corrente de comércio de US$ 173,119 bilhões.
Análise do mês
Nas exportações, comparadas a média diária até a terceira semana de junho de 2020 (US$ 873,22 milhões) com a de junho de 2019 (US$ 968,74 milhões), houve queda de -9,9%, em razão da diminuição nas vendas na Indústria Extrativa (-24,3%) e de produtos da Indústria de Transformação (-18,3%). Por outro lado, houve aumento nas vendas em Agropecuária (+30,2%).
A queda nas exportações foi puxada, principalmente, pela diminuição nas vendas dos seguintes produtos da indústria extrativista: óleos brutos de petróleo ou de minerais betuminosos, crus (-39,3%); minério de ferro e seus concentrados (-13,8%); minérios de cobre e seus concentrados (-26,1%); minérios de alumínio e seus concentrados (-26,3%) e outros minérios e concentrados dos metais de base (-1,8%).
Já em relação aos produtos da Indústria de Transformação, a queda nas exportações foi puxada, principalmente, por carnes de aves e suas miudezas comestíveis, frescas, refrigeradas ou congeladas (-36,0%); aeronaves e outros equipamentos, incluindo suas partes (-81,4%); veículos automóveis de passageiros (-35,7%); farelos de soja e outros alimentos para animais, excluídos cereais não moídos, farinhas de carnes e outros animais (-21,8%); e produtos semiacabados, lingotes e outras formas primárias de ferro ou aço (-30,3%).
Nas importações, a média diária até a terceira semana de junho de 2020 (US$ 530,78 milhões) ficou 22,6% abaixo da média de junho do ano passado (US$ 685,72 milhões). Nesse comparativo, caíram os gastos, principalmente, com Agropecuária (-14,2%), com a Indústria Extrativa (-2,1%) e também com produtos da Indústria de Transformação (-24,3%).
A diminuição das importações foi puxada, principalmente, pela queda dos gastos com a compra dos seguintes produtos da Indústria de Transformação: óleos combustíveis de petróleo ou de minerais betuminosos, exceto óleos brutos (-53,5%); veículos automóveis de passageiros (-70,5%); partes e acessórios dos veículos automotivos (-54,5%); torneiras, válvulas e dispositivos semelhantes para canalizações, caldeiras, reservatórios, cubas e outros recipientes (-66,3%); e veículos automóveis para transporte de mercadorias e usos especiais ( -63,1%).
Com relação a Agropecuária, a queda nas importações foi puxada pela diminuição de compras com pescado inteiro vivo, morto ou refrigerado (-52,5%); látex, borracha natural, balata, guta-percha, guaiúle, chicle e gomas naturais (-59,0%); frutas e nozes não oleaginosas, frescas ou secas (-33,0%); milho não moído, exceto milho doce (-96,2%); e Cevada, não moída ( -32,5%). Por fim, a queda nas importações também foi influenciada pela diminuição de compras com os seguintes produtos da Indústria Extrativa: carvão, mesmo em pó, mas não aglomerado (-27,5%); gás natural, liquefeito ou não (-20,6%); outros minérios e concentrados dos metais de base (-52,4%); outros minerais em bruto (-13,1%) e minérios de alumínio e seus concentrados ( -95,2%).
RESULTADOS PRELIMINARES
Na 3ª semana de Junho de 2020, a balança comercial registrou superávit de US$ 1,653 bilhão e corrente de comércio de US$ 6,966 bilhões, resultado de exportações no valor de US$ 4,31 bilhões e importações de US$ 2,656 bilhões. No mês, as exportações somam US$ 12,225 bilhões e as importações, US$ 7,431 bilhões, com saldo positivo de US$ 4,794 bilhões e corrente de comércio de US$ 19,656 bilhões. No ano, as exportações totalizam US$ 96,742 bilhões e as importações, US$ 76,377 bilhões, com saldo positivo de US$ 20,366 bilhões e corrente de comércio de US$ 173,119 bilhões.
DOCUMENTO: http://www.mdic.gov.br/index.php/comercio-exterior/estatisticas-de-comercio-exterior/balanca-comercial-brasileira-semanal
INDÚSTRIA
FGV. IBRE. 22/06/2020. Prévia da Indústria sinaliza aumento da Confiança em junho
A prévia da Sondagem da Indústria de junho de 2020 sinaliza aumento de 15,2 pontos do Índice de Confiança da Indústria (ICI) em relação ao número final de maio, para 76,6 pontos. Caso o resultado se confirme, essa será a maior variação mensal positiva da série.
O avanço da confiança em junho é resultado da melhora da avaliação dos empresários em relação ao presente e, principalmente, para os próximos três e seis meses. O Índice de Expectativas apresenta variação de 20,6 pontos, para 75,5 pontos, recuperando nos últimos dois meses mais da metade da queda observada em abril. Já o Índice de Situação Atual teria recuperação menos expressiva do que o IE, de 9,2 pontos, para 77,8 pontos, o equivalente a um terço da perda de abril.
O resultado preliminar de junho indica recuperação de 5,9 pontos percentuais do Nível de Utilização da Capacidade Instalada da Indústria (NUCI), para 66,2%. Esse resultado deixaria a média do segundo trimestre 14,5 p.p. abaixo da média do primeiro trimestre.
DOCUMENTO: https://portalibre.fgv.br/noticias/previa-da-industria-sinaliza-aumento-da-confianca-em-junho
CNI. 19/06/2020. Atividade industrial em maio teve desempenho menos negativo, aponta CNI. Sondagem Industrial mostra que o desempenho da indústria no mês passado ainda está muito baixo, mas começa a se afastar do pior momento da crise provocada pelo novo coronavírus
O desempenho da indústria foi menos negativo em maio do que em abril deste ano. A Sondagem Industrial, da Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI), divulgada nesta sexta-feira (19), mostra que os índices que medem o desempenho da indústria começam a se distanciar dos piores momentos da crise provocada pelo novo coronavírus, embora a atividade industrial ainda continue em queda.
A pesquisa foi realizada entre 1º e 10 de junho, com 1.859 empresas, sendo 724 pequenas, 663 médias e 472 grandes, e mostra que o pessimismo se reduziu de forma significativa neste mês, e aparece de forma menos intensa e disseminada que nos meses de abril e maio deste ano.
A produção e o emprego sofreram novas quedas no mês de maio na comparação com o mês anterior, ainda sob os efeitos da pandemia de Covid-19. Mas a queda é menor. O índice de evolução da produção subiu de 26 pontos em abril deste ano para 43,1 pontos em maio. O fato de estar abaixo de 50 pontos indica queda e quanto mais próximo de 50, menor e menos disseminada é a queda. Nessa metodologia, o índice varia de 0 a 100. Só há crescimento quando os dados aparecem acima de 50.
O número de empregados atingiu 42 pontos no mês passado, ante 38,2 pontos no mês anterior. A capacidade instalada da indústria cresceu seis pontos percentuais entre os meses de abril e maio, alcançando 55%. Apesar do aumento, o percentual é o segundo menor para toda a série histórica, iniciada em 2011, e se encontra 12 pontos percentuais abaixo do nível registrado no mesmo período de 2019. O índice de evolução dos estoques ficou em 46,2 pontos, apontando para uma significativa redução dos estoques.
A pesquisa mostra que os empresários seguem projetando queda de demanda, exportações, compras de matérias-primas e número de empregados nos próximos seis meses. Mas o sentimento de forte pessimismo, observado nos dois meses anteriores, diminuiu tanto quanto à sua disseminação quanto em intensidade.
Setores de limpeza, higiene e farmacêutico apresentaram aumento da produção em maio
Os setores de biocombustíveis, produtos de limpeza, perfumaria e higiene pessoal, e produtos farmoquímicos e farmacêuticos apresentaram aumento de produção em maio. Também são setores que apresentaram evolução do número de empregados menos negativa que a dos demais e Utilização da Capacidade Instalada (UCI) efetiva mais próxima ao usual.
No outro extremo os setores impressão e reprodução de gravações, couros e artefatos de couro, calçados e suas partes, e vestuário e acessórios seguem com o pior desempenho, com quedas mais acentuadas da produção e do número de empregados, além de UCI efetiva muito distante do usual.
DOCUMENTO: http://www.portaldaindustria.com.br/estatisticas/sondagem-industrial/
CORONAVÍRUS
FGV. Jun 19, 2020. Impactos da COVID-19. Efeitos da pandemia no e-commerce
Com as lojas fechadas devido ao isolamento, as vendas online tornarem-se essenciais para a sobrevivência do mercado. Diante deste novo cenário, espera-se que, em 2020, o e-commerce represente 10% das vendas no varejo. Para Leandro Guissoni, professor da FGV EAESP, a pandemia não remodelou os negócios digitais, mas fez com que os processos acontecessem mais rápido. Um exemplo disso é o projeto “Parceiro Magalu”, da rede Magazine Luiza, que foi concluído em apenas 5 dias. Neste vídeo da série #FGVImpactosdaCOVID19, falamos sobre o crescimento de marketplaces, a inserção e otimização de novos sellers nas plataformas e como os pequenos varejistas podem aproveitar as oportunidades dos meios digitais.
VÍDEO: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bZuFbTWQt6E&feature=youtu.be
PROMOÇÃO COMERCIAL
CNI. 19/06/2020. Business Connections Brazil: Food & Beverage será totalmente online. Rodada internacional de negócios, que acontecerá entre 22 e 26 de junho, é voltada para micro, pequenas e médias empresas brasileiras e compradores do setor de alimentos e bebidas. O evento começa na segunda-feira (22) e será inteiramente online
Após a abertura, as rodadas de negócios serão realizadas por meio de reuniões individuais
O Banco Interamericano de Desenvolvimento (BID), o Sebrae, a Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI), a Agência Brasileira de Promoção de Exportações e Investimentos (Apex-Brasil) e os ministérios da Economia, da Agricultura, Pecuária e Abastecimento e das Relações Exteriores convidam para a abertura do evento on-line Business Connections Brazil: Food & Beverage, nesta segunda-feira (22), às 10h. Durante a abertura, os palestrantes discutirão o tema: a Indústria de Alimentos e Bebidas no Mundo pós-coronavírus.
A conferência de abertura terá a participação do gerente de Integração e Comércio do BID, Fabrizio Opertti; do presidente da Apex-Brasil, Sergio Segovia; do diretor-presidente do Sebrae Nacional, Carlos Melles; do diretor de Desenvolvimento Industrial da CNI, Carlos Eduardo Abijaodi; do secretário de Comércio e Relações Internacionais do MAPA, Orlando Ribeiro; e do secretário de Comércio Exterior do Ministério da Economia, Lucas Ferraz, além de um representante do MRE a ser confirmado.
O Business Connections Brazil: Food & Beverage ocorre de 22 a 26 de junho e é uma rodada internacional de negócios para micro, pequenas e médias empresas brasileiras e compradores internacionais do setor de alimentos e bebidas. O evento será realizado pela primeira vez em modo on-line e contará com a participação de compradores de toda a América Latina, Estados Unidos, Canadá, Índia e Emirados Árabes, entre outros países. As rodadas de negócios serão realizadas por meio de reuniões individuais B2B entre as empresas fornecedoras do setor de alimentos e bebidas do Brasil e compradores internacionais.
As micro, pequenas e médias empresas têm um papel muito importante nas exportações brasileiras. Juntas, representam 70% do número de empresas exportadoras, segundo estudo do Sebrae de 2019, principalmente do setor da indústria. De acordo com o Sebrae, mais de 40% das empresas exportadoras brasileiras são micro e pequenas. Elas foram responsáveis por vendas externas no montante de US$1,2 bilhão em 2018.
A rodada virtual internacional é um dos desdobramentos da Connect Americas. A plataforma de negócios gratuita foi criada pelo BID para apoiar mais de 300 mil empresários cadastrados na realização de mais e melhores negociações internacionais. O evento reúne os esforços do banco com as instituições brasileiras para promover o desenvolvimento de parcerias e oportunidades de negócios para pequenas e médio empresas do setor de alimentos e bebidas.
Ao longo do evento, serão realizadas também palestras sobre o setor de alimentos e bebidas, que também podem ser acompanhadas pelos jornalistas.
SANEAMENTO BÁSICO
CNI. 19/06/2020. A indústria brasileira em defesa do novo marco legal do saneamento básico. Saiba como a CNI tem trabalhado com o Congresso Nacional, o poder público e a sociedade por regras que fomentem um novo ciclo de investimentos e permitam a universalização dos serviços de água e esgoto
Quando lançou a Agenda Legislativa da Indústria 2020, no fim de março, a Confederação Nacional da Indústria (CNI) destacou uma proposta em particular, entre as 13 consideradas urgentes pelo setor produtivo: o novo marco legal do saneamento básico. Ainda em estágio inicial no país, a pandemia do novo coronavírus já chamava atenção para as dificuldades vividas por 34 milhões de brasileiros, por não terem água encanada em casa, manterem condições mínimas de higiene para se evitar o contágio pela Covid-19.
Na visão da indústria brasileira, a crise sanitária que o Brasil atravessa tornou ainda mais urgente enfrentar o debate sobre a modernização das regras do setor mais atrasado da infraestrutura nacional. A abertura do mercado é fundamental para que o Brasil reverta um quadro dramático, no qual apenas 53,2% da população brasileira têm acesso à coleta de esgoto. Isso significa que cerca de 100 milhões de pessoas não são atendidas por redes de saneamento. Os números ainda revelam que, do total do esgoto gerado, nem metade (46,3%) é tratado.
De volta ao básico: por que o Brasil precisa avançar no saneamento
A CNI vem chamando atenção para a importância de o Brasil contar com um novo e moderno marco legal como forma de atrair os investimentos necessários para a universalização dos serviços de água e esgoto, algo que deve ocorrer apenas na década de 2060, no atual ritmo de aportes, enquanto a meta era levar água e esgoto para todos em 2033. Em 2014 e 2018, por exemplo, a indústria entregou estudos para os candidatos nas eleições presidenciais destacando que o saneamento básico deveria figurar como prioridade no programa do governo eleito.
Para ajudar o Congresso Nacional e o poder público na construção de regras que contribuam para o atendimento da população brasileira, a CNI vem elaborando estudos que mostram o cenário crítico do setor, ao mesmo tempo em que apresentam propostas para redução de burocracia, aumento da segurança jurídica e abertura do mercado para empresas privadas, fundamental para se fazer frente ao volume necessário de investimentos para a universalização dos serviços de água e esgoto.
O novo marco legal do saneamento já vem sendo discutido pelo Congresso há pelo menos três anos. A CNI sustenta que o texto atual é fruto do diálogo entre parlamentares e diversos setores da sociedade e já está maduro para deliberação. Além disso, o desafio posto pela pandemia tornou ainda mais evidente as urgências do país diante dos problemas enfrentados pela população em função do atraso no setor de saneamento.
Conheça os desafios do setor na infografia A realidade no saneamento no Brasil
Para que o leitor conheça mais sobre como a indústria brasileira vem contribuindo para o debate sobre a modernização, a CNI listou abaixo os conteúdos produzidos nos últimos anos sobre o tema. São notícias, estudos, posicionamentos e materiais informativos que reforçam o papel do investimento privado e mostram os caminhos para que o Brasil possa, enfim, levar serviços de água e esgoto para a população.
DOCUMENTO: https://noticias.portaldaindustria.com.br/noticias/infraestrutura/a-industria-brasileira-em-defesa-do-novo-marco-do-saneamento-basico/
ONU
MRE. DCOM. NOTA-66. 19 de Junho de 2020. Eleições para o Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas (CSNU) e para a Presidência da 75ª Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas (AGNU)
O Governo brasileiro congratula a Índia, Irlanda, México, Noruega e Quênia por sua eleição para o Conselho de Segurança das Nações Unidas, no biênio 2021-2022, e expressa sua disposição em trabalhar conjuntamente com os novos membros do Conselho de Segurança na busca dos objetivos da Carta das Nações Unidas.
O Governo brasileiro também cumprimenta a Turquia e o Senhor Volkan Bozkir, eleito para a presidência da 75ª Assembleia Geral das Nações Unidas, reiterando o propósito de colaborar para que seu mandato propicie avanços concretos em temas centrais da agenda do principal órgão deliberativo da ONU, dentro de sua vocação de propiciar espaço de coordenação e colaboração entre os seus países-membros.
___________________
LGCJ.:
