2022年2月28日月曜日
ロシア、金利2倍の20%に上げ ルーブル急落で防衛
Germany Backs New LNG Plants to Cut Russian Gas Dependence
Germany to Boost Military Spending in Latest Historic Shift
西欧は経済におけるロシアとの相互依存から方向転換を余儀なくされた
2022年2月27日日曜日
NATO's Eastward Expansion: Did the West Break Its Promise to Moscow?
【馬渕睦夫】プーチン大統領がウクライナ国境付近に軍隊を集結？
2022年2月26日土曜日
西欧文明は国家の独立と個人の自由を求め続ける。しかし、プーチンも習近平も古典的帝国主義の復活を夢みている。
プーチンも習近平も古典的帝国主義の復活を夢みていたわけです。
2022年2月25日金曜日
長い目で見ると、今回のロシアの行動がヨーロッパ側にとってよかったと思えるところ
エルピーダ破綻、巨額投資で官民協力に綻び
エルピーダの教訓 破綻から10年
2022年2月23日水曜日
小野寺氏は「米国とロシアの主戦場はいま千島列島付近になっている」
参院選で東京選挙区（改選数6）に代表の荒木千陽（ちはる）都議（39）を擁立する方向で調整
https://mainichi.jp/articles/20220221/k00/00m/010/219000c
都民ファーストの会、参院選に荒木千陽代表を擁立へ 東京選挙区
東京都の小池百合子知事が特別顧問を務める地域政党「都民ファーストの会」が、今夏の参院選で東京選挙区（改選数6）に代表の荒木千陽（ちはる）都議（39）を擁立する方向で調整を進めていることが判明した。国政進出に向けて設立した政治団体「ファーストの会」として公認する予定。都民フと東京選挙区での候補者一本化を表明している国民民主党が推薦するとみられる。
荒木氏は衆院議員時代の小池氏の公設第1秘書を務め、2017年7月の都議選で初当選し、現在は2期目。17年9月から代表を務めている。都民フは今月、選考委員会を開いて候補者を荒木氏とする方針を確認した。小池氏と関係が深く都政と国政の橋渡し役として適任と判断したとみられる。
2022年2月22日火曜日
“Modern Ukraine was entirely and fully created by Russia, more specifically the Bolshevik, communist Russia,” Mr. Putin said.
https://www.reddit.com/r/worldnews/comments/sycub7/putin_calls_ukrainian_statehood_a_fiction_history/
KYIV, Ukraine — In his speech to the Russian nation on Monday, President Vladimir V. Putin buoyed his case for codifying the cleavage of two rebel territories from Ukraine by arguing that the very idea of Ukrainian statehood was a fiction.
With a conviction of an authoritarian unburdened by historical nuance, Mr. Putin declared Ukraine an invention of the Bolshevik revolutionary leader, Vladimir Lenin, who he said had mistakenly endowed Ukraine with a sense of statehood by allowing it autonomy within the newly created Soviet state.
“Modern Ukraine was entirely and fully created by Russia, more specifically the Bolshevik, communist Russia,” Mr. Putin said. “This process began practically immediately after the 1917 revolution, and moreover Lenin and his associates did it in the sloppiest way in relation to Russia — by dividing, tearing from her pieces of her own historical territory.”
As a misreading of history, it was extreme even by the standards of Mr. Putin, a former K.G.B. officer who has declared the Soviet Union’s collapse the greatest geopolitical catastrophe of the 20th century.
The historical reality of Ukraine is complicated, a thousand-year history of changing religions, borders and peoples. The capital, Kyiv, was established hundreds of years before Moscow, though both Russians and Ukrainians claim Kyiv as a birthplace of their modern cultures, religion and language.
The history and culture of Russia and Ukraine are indeed intertwined — they share the same Orthodox Christian religion, and their languages, customs and national cuisines are related.
But the happy brotherhood of nations that Mr. Putin likes to paint, with Ukraine fitted snuggly into the fabric of a greater Russia, is dubious. Parts of modern-day Ukraine did indeed reside for centuries within the Russian empire. But other parts fell under the jurisdiction of the Austro-Hungarian empire, or Poland or Lithuania.
“Putin’s argument today that Ukraine is historically subsumed by Russia is just not right,” said Cliff Kupchan, chairman of the Eurasia Group, a political risk consulting organization. While the themes of Mr. Putin’s speech were not new for the Russian leader, Mr. Kupchan said, “the breadth and vehemence with which he went after all things Ukrainian was remarkable.”
The newly created Soviet government under Lenin that drew so much of Mr. Putin’s scorn on Monday would eventually crush the nascent independent Ukrainian state.
During the Soviet era, the Ukrainian language was banished from schools and its culture was permitted to exist only as a cartoonish caricature of dancing Cossacks in puffy pants.
Mr. Putin also argued on Monday that the myth of Ukraine was reinforced by the crumbling Soviet government of Mikhail Gorbachev, which allowed Ukraine to slip free of Moscow’s grasp. It was a weakened Moscow that “gave” Ukraine the right to become independent of the Soviet Union “without any terms and conditions.” “This is just madness,” he said.
It was not Moscow that granted Ukraine’s independence in 1991, but the Ukrainian people, who voted resoundingly to leave the Soviet Union in a democratic referendum.
Now, with an estimated 190,000 Russian troops now surrounding Ukraine like a sickle, Mr. Putin’s declaration that Ukraine’s very existence as a sovereign state was the result of historical error threatened to send a shudder through all the lands once under Moscow’s dominion. It also elicited expressions of contempt from Ukrainians.
“For the past few decades, the West has been looking for fascism anywhere, but not where it was most,” said Maria Tomak, an activist involved in supporting people from Crimea, a Ukrainian territory Mr. Putin annexed in 2014. “Now it is so obvious that it burns the eyes. Maybe this will finally make the West start to sober up about Russia.”
It is not clear whether Mr. Putin believes his version of Ukrainian history or has simply concocted a cynical mythology to justify whatever action he plans next. But his contention that Ukraine exists solely within the context of Russian history and culture is one he has deployed at least as far back as 2008, when he attempted to convince George W. Bush, after the former president had expressed support for Ukraine’s NATO membership, of the country’s non-existence.
Last summer, Mr. Putin published a 5,300-word essay that expounded on many of the themes he highlighted in Monday’s speech, including the idea that nefarious Western nations had somehow corrupted Ukraine, leading it away from its rightful place within a greater Russian sphere through what he called a “forced change of identity.”
Few observers, though, believe that historical accuracy is of much importance to Mr. Putin as he sets forth justifications for whatever he has planned for Ukraine.
“We can be clear that Putin was not trying to engage in a historical debate about the intertwined histories of the Russian and Ukrainian peoples,’’ said Joshua A. Tucker, a political science professor at New York University and an expert on Russia. Instead, Professor Tucker said, the Russian leader was laying the groundwork for the argument “that Ukraine is not currently entitled to the sorts of rights that we associate with sovereign nations.”
“It was a signal that Putin intends to argue that a military intervention in Ukraine would not be violating another country’s sovereignty,” he added.
Moscow had vowed to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty as a condition of Ukraine’s giving up its nuclear weapons after the Soviet collapse. But Mr. Putin, analysts said, has made clear that pledge is of little importance to him. In 2014, after protesters drove a Kremlin-backed government from power in Kyiv, he ordered his military to seize the Crimean Peninsula and then instigated a separatist war that resulted Ukraine’s de facto loss of two rebel territories in the east.
On Monday, Mr. Putin moved to formalize that separation by recognizing those territories, the Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics, as independent. Soon afterward, he ordered troops into the so-called Donetsk and Luhansk People’s Republics in Eastern Ukraine.
But Mr. Putin’s efforts to wrest Ukraine back into Russia’s orbit have, in many ways, had the opposite effect. In a country that was once ambivalent about NATO at best, or openly hostile at worst, polls show that a solid majority now favor membership in the American-led military alliance.
In Kyiv, where Ukrainians had been nervously awaiting Mr. Putin’s decision, the reaction to his speech was one of disgust and foreboding.
Kristina Berdynskykh, a prominent political journalist, gathered with colleagues at a bar called Amigos and sat around a phone watching Mr. Putin’s speech, by turns crying and cursing.
“It is hatred for all of Ukraine and revenge for the country’s movement toward the E.U. and NATO and democracy — albeit chaotic, with huge problems, slow reforms and corruption — but where people elect and change power in elections or revolutions,” Ms. Berdynskykh said. “The worst dream for an old lunatic is both scenarios: fair elections and revolutions.”
今夏の参院選東京選挙区（改選数6）に代表の荒木千陽都議（39）を擁立する方向で調整している
https://japan-indepth.jp/?p=48420
「都民ファーストの会」今夏参院選東京選挙区に荒木千陽代表擁立で調整 小池都知事の元公設秘書
- 都民ファーストの会の荒木千陽代表（2021年7月4日撮影）
小池百合子東京都知事が特別顧問を務める地域政党「都民ファーストの会」が、今夏の参院選東京選挙区（改選数6）に代表の荒木千陽都議（39）を擁立する方向で調整していることが21日、関係者への取材で分かった。同会所属の都議が設立した「ファーストの会」が公認予定。都民ファと選挙協力を進める国民民主党が推薦し、候補者を一本化するとみられる。
国民と都民ファは既に複数回勉強会を開催。連携強化のため共通政策や国への提言を取りまとめる方針を確認している。関係者によると、合流については双方に慎重意見がある。
荒木氏は熊本市出身。小池氏の公設秘書を務め、2017年の都議選で初当選し、現在2期目。（共同）
https://japan-indepth.jp/?p=48420
国民民主党と都民ファーストの会は２月14日、共通政策の素案をまとめた
国民民主党と東京都の小池知事が特別顧問を務める地域政党「都民ファーストの会」は14日、共通政策の素案をまとめた。両者は合流する方向で調整を続けていて、今年夏の参院選に向けて政策のすり合わせを図る意味合いもあると見られる。
両党は国会内で4度目となる意見交換会を開催。この中で、新型コロナ対策、経済・産業、女性政策、国と地方・統治機構、社会保障、子育て・教育の6分野について共通政策の素案が提示された。両党は2月中の合意を目指す。
会見で国民民主党の大塚政調会長は「6分野は、現在の我が国にとって都政も含めて重要な分野であろうという認識だ」と説明した。
一方、共通政策の参院選に向けた位置づけについて問われると「その先がどうなるかというのは、今後の課題だ」などと述べるにとどめた。
両党は、引き続き意見交換会を開催するなどして共通政策に最終合意し、合流に向けて弾みをつけたいものと見られる。
https://www.fnn.jp/articles/-/315118
国民民主党と都民ファーストの会が国会内で3度目の勉強会を行い、玉木代表は「政策作りで合意した」と述べた
今夏の参院選をにらんだ選挙協力や合流も視野に協議を行っている国民民主党と、小池百合子東京都知事が特別顧問を務める地域政党「都民ファーストの会（都民ファ）」が27日、国会内で3度目の勉強会を行った。
国民の玉木雄一郎代表は「共通の政府に対する提言、政策作りで合意した」とし、参院選へ向けた協議については「慎重に着実に前に進んでいるという感じ」と語った。
この日、立憲民主党が敗退した昨年衆院選の総括を発表したが「あいまいだな、という印象。そこをあいまいにしている限りにおいては、わが党は（立民と）、なかなか連携だ、と言うことはできない」とした。
https://mainichi.jp/articles/20220129/k00/00m/010/178000c
2022年2月21日月曜日
「ファースト政経塾」が29日、オンラインで開かれ、110人が参加
地域政党「都民ファーストの会」が新たに設立した「ファースト政経塾」が29日、オンラインで開かれ、110人が参加した。初回は、都民フ特別顧問でもある小池百合子東京都知事が講師を務めた。今後は夏の参院選や2023年の統一地方選を視野に入塾者に出馬の意欲を尋ね、候補者の掘り起こしを進める。
小池氏は冒頭のあいさつで「政経塾で人が育ち、日本が、東京が大きく改革され、持続可能な成長を続ける。そのことを担っていく人材が増えれば」と期待した。都民フ代表の荒木千陽都議は「『東京大改革』に共感された皆様に政治を身近に感じてもらい、共に東京、日本の未来を変えていく人材を創出するために塾を創設した」と述べ、改めて国政進出への意欲を示した。その後、講義は入塾者限定で約2時間行われた。
https://mainichi.jp/articles/20220129/k00/00m/010/178000c
2022年2月15日火曜日
世界全体では６５万人以上が毎年受動喫煙で死亡
国立がんセンターの研究結果によると、日本では受動喫煙が原因で年間１万５千人が死亡。ＣＤＣによれば、米国では受動喫煙が原因で年間４万１千人が死亡。ＰＭＣによれば、英国では受動喫煙が原因で年間１万１千人が死亡。WHOの報告によると、世界全体では６５万人以上が毎年受動喫煙で死亡している。
2022年2月14日月曜日
65 000 die each year from illnesses attributable to second-hand smoke.
WHO
Second-hand smoke kills
- Second-hand smoke is the smoke that fills enclosed spaces when people burn tobacco products such as cigarettes, bidis and water-pipes.
- There is no safe level of exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke, which causes more than 1.2 million premature deaths per year and serious cardiovascular and respiratory diseases.
- Almost half of children regularly breathe air polluted by tobacco smoke in public places, and 65 000 die each year from illnesses attributable to second-hand smoke.
- In infants, it raises the risk of sudden infant death syndrome. In pregnant women, it causes pregnancy complications and low birth weight.
- Smoke-free laws protect the health of non-smokers and are popular, as they do not harm business and they encourage smokers to quit.
Estimate of deaths attributable to passive smoking among UK adults: database analysis
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC556069/
Estimate of deaths attributable to passive smoking among UK adults: database analysis
Introduction
Evidence that exposure to passive smoking increases the risk of adults developing fatal diseases first emerged in 1981.1,2 Many epidemiological studies have been carried out, and reviews in three continents have now concluded that passive smoking is a cause of serious disease in adults and children.3-5 Smoke free policies have been introduced in various settings, but some workplaces still permit smoking and making hospitality venues (pubs, bars, nightclubs, hotels, and restaurants) smoke free is contentious. As the generation of tobacco smoke is not intrinsic to the process of selling food and drink, such venues could be made smoke free to protect the health of employees. Nevertheless, some organisations and individuals in the hospitality industry vigorously oppose this, claiming that such policies are an infringement of the personal liberty of their customers and will lead to damage to themselves.
It is important to distinguish between the economic impact people believe smoke free policies are likely to have before the policies themselves are introduced, the impact they are perceived to have had after their introduction, and careful studies of accepted economic indicators. The best economic indicators take into account the general economic conditions prevailing before and after smoke free policies are introduced because discretionary expenditure, such as that on drinking and dining, is particularly sensitive to these. Objective evidence has shown that smoke free policies have no adverse economic impact on the hospitality industry.6,7
By contrast, there have not been any calculations of the harm done to health from smoking in hospitality venues and certain other workplaces. I estimated the number of deaths due to passive smoking in employees of the hospitality industry and in the general workforce and general population of the United Kingdom.
===========================================================
In 2003, an estimated 617 people died from the effects of passive smoking at work across the whole of the United Kingdom, 54 of whom were long term employees of the hospitality industry. Of the 54 people who died, almost half were employed in the pub/bar/nightclub sector, despite the smaller size of its workforce, because staff are exposed to higher concentrations of tobacco smoke. In the whole population aged 20-64, more than 2700 deaths attributable to passive smoking at home brought the total fatalities related to passive smoking to 3343. In those aged ≥ 65, the total number of attributable deaths approaches 8000, with fatal strokes and heart disease each contributing more than three thousand events.
-
The bubble economy in Japan originated in the 1980s amid trade friction with the US and the Plaza Accord of 1985. The accord led to a shar...
-
https://apnews.com/article/united-methodist-lgbtq-clergy-general-conference-acabe18fe22b6838e3005ad8895534fa United Methodists repeal longs...
-
So that’s what we found. Finally, with respect to our recommendation to the Department of Justice: In our system, the prosecutors make the ...
