Speaker 1: Welcome to the Bloomberg Surveillance Podcast. I'm Tom Keane Jay Ley.
Speaker 1: We bring you insight from the best in economics, finance, investment,
Speaker 1: and international relations. Find Bloomberg Surveillance on Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud,
Speaker 1: Bloomberg dot Com, and of course on the Bloomberg. It
Speaker 1: is the Eurasia top risks Ian Bremmer's with us, the
Speaker 1: president of Eurasia Group, the driving force of what has
Speaker 1: become a Jeeves zero America, and joining us now a
Speaker 1: gentleman from the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Joseph Kennedy is a
Speaker 1: former congressman because he went after that far left Senator
Speaker 1: Mr Markey and went down in flames. That's the latest
Speaker 1: treatment that we've seen in the newspapers. The former unemployed
Speaker 1: congressman joins us right now. Joe Kennedy, thank you so
Speaker 1: much for joining us. I would love to know your
Speaker 1: view of Mr Biden is the last of your grand
Speaker 1: uncle's Democratic Party, what he needs to do to bring
Speaker 1: normalcy to the Democratic Party, to find a democratic center
Speaker 1: versus what is perceived by so much of America is
Speaker 1: a far left looks tough. Good morning, um, and thanks
Speaker 1: for having me, and wonderful to be with you. But
Speaker 1: I think you have in the president elects somebody whose service,
Speaker 1: whose dignity and decency, and at his core, a politics
Speaker 1: that is about building consensus and putting in that hard
Speaker 1: work to bring people together. Is literally defined who Joe
Speaker 1: Biden is. I think you're you're gonna see that. We've
Speaker 1: already seen that outstretched hand to an American public across
Speaker 1: the flippal spectrum to try to ask, he has said
Speaker 1: many times, heal the wounds of of these past years.
Speaker 1: The question is going to be, is that outstretched hand
Speaker 1: going to be met? And what we've seen already in
Speaker 1: the past coming days you all just alluded to this
Speaker 1: is from leaders of the United States Senate rather than
Speaker 1: folks that for people that know better and know the
Speaker 1: damage that they might very well instill upon this country,
Speaker 1: on our institutions and honor democracy. Rather than trying to
Speaker 1: turn the page and actually restore our country to doing
Speaker 1: that hard work, are trying to put ego and political
Speaker 1: ambition ahead of the good of the nation. And I
Speaker 1: it's not very often these days that I have been
Speaker 1: left speakless because I've been expecting um communi erosion here.
Speaker 1: But but this is quite something not all grew up
Speaker 1: with your advantages, the history of the all BBN in
Speaker 1: school in Boston and not to Stanford and such. Ian
Speaker 1: Bremer took a different path. Tom Kane took a different path,
Speaker 1: and all of that was in a different America. How
Speaker 1: far is this two thousand twenty one America removed from
Speaker 1: that of your father, from that of your grandfather, from
Speaker 1: the rest of your family. How far are we removed
Speaker 1: from the Kennedy of another time? I think part the
Speaker 1: island as we're seeing is unfortunately, I think, in many respects,
Speaker 1: were not far enough removed from those challenges that the
Speaker 1: number of times Dolan and Ian and I have had
Speaker 1: this conversation as well, the number of times of the
Speaker 1: course the past year eighteen months that you hear these
Speaker 1: questions about comparing are not insignificant. The battles that are
Speaker 1: on the front lines today about racial justice, about economic dignity,
Speaker 1: about trying to ensure that this is a country that
Speaker 1: actually meets its founding ideals of equality in the pathway
Speaker 1: for all those art That's what the end of the
Speaker 1: sixties was all about. That's what these are the fights
Speaker 1: on the forefront today. And I think in many regards
Speaker 1: that the challenges that knowing what we know that you've
Speaker 1: got a government as an institution that continues to lag
Speaker 1: behind the will of its people. And and very briefly
Speaker 1: here I agree with what in articulated in these challenges.
Speaker 1: But you look at look at what has happened on
Speaker 1: state ballot initiatives, on public referendum, on minimum wage, on
Speaker 1: voting rights, on healthcare. It is very clear where the
Speaker 1: country wants to go. The obstacle at this point is
Speaker 1: the government that continues to put up roadblocks and to
Speaker 1: prohibit our people from getting there. But Congressman, good morning
Speaker 1: from London. Is it that clear? I mean, many people
Speaker 1: still voted for President Trump. And how does Joe Biden
Speaker 1: actually bring the nation together? You know, as as Ian
Speaker 1: put it, it's it's a very divided country, probably the
Speaker 1: most divided in the last couple of centuries. So a
Speaker 1: couple of things. One, when you look at those issues
Speaker 1: like ballot initiatives, there's a clear pathway for their minimum
Speaker 1: wage has raised, a minimum wage has actually brought appeal
Speaker 1: across many parts of the country. We've seen voting rights
Speaker 1: have increased um popularity across the country. We saw that
Speaker 1: in Florida two years ago with the ballot initiative that
Speaker 1: restored voting rights to convicted felons, while Donald while Republicans
Speaker 1: actually want a governorship there in a Senate race in
Speaker 1: a very tight rate. So there are, in fact policies
Speaker 1: here that have widespread support. We've had a number of
Speaker 1: states that have increased access to healthcare through Medicaid expansion,
Speaker 1: yet having a Republican party continue to put up obstacles
Speaker 1: to it. So I think on many issues here, it's
Speaker 1: not quite as divided as a Republican leadership or Republican
Speaker 1: base would like you to believe. Without question, it's a
Speaker 1: divided country. Yes, I'd also point out that for all
Speaker 1: of the challenges we're seeing, we're not the challenges that
Speaker 1: we've seen. We haven't seen the level of of unrest
Speaker 1: and violence in our streets that we've seen in other
Speaker 1: parts of our century. So look, I'm not gonna sit
Speaker 1: here and try to kind of paper over the real
Speaker 1: challenges we have. I think what you have here those
Speaker 1: You've got a president of the voice of the American
Speaker 1: public that spoke and elected Joe Biden has said we
Speaker 1: want to actually heal those wounds. The ultimate question is
Speaker 1: whether though that effort going to be met with a
Speaker 1: good faith effort by Republicans in Washington Congress. And let
Speaker 1: me get in also, Ian Bremer, Ian, Yeah, I just
Speaker 1: want to say that there's no question I think Joe
Speaker 1: and I would agree that, UM, Joe Biden has the temperament,
Speaker 1: the inclination, the experience to truly try to reach across
Speaker 1: the aisle and bring the country together. But but no
Speaker 1: one's arms are long enough in this environment. I mean, domestically,
Speaker 1: the ability to pass the two three trillion dollar additional
Speaker 1: stimulus that clearly would be necessary this year. Unless the
Speaker 1: Democrats pull off two seats in the Senate races in
Speaker 1: Georgia UM tomorrow, UH is a dead letter UM. And internationally,
Speaker 1: there are so many that prefer to see Joe Biden
Speaker 1: to Donald Trump, but they also recognize that they don't
Speaker 1: believe that they can trust the United States going forward.
Speaker 1: They see how divided it is, their skeptical, they understand
Speaker 1: how Trump could have won, and indeed their watch change.
Speaker 1: Everything that's playing out in the United States right now
Speaker 1: is being magnified all over the world. And when I
Speaker 1: saw the Europeans cut that new Chinese multilateral trade deal
Speaker 1: just a week ago, right before Biden becomes president. That's
Speaker 1: a hedge, that's a really significant hedge from a lot
Speaker 1: of leaders that are thinking to themselves. I don't really
Speaker 1: believe that Biden is going to be able to accomplish
Speaker 1: what he says he wants to do. We can't come
Speaker 1: back to the United States that we once had and
Speaker 1: clearly so many people would like to see on the
Speaker 1: global stage. And I I don't disagree with you, Congressman
Speaker 1: to that, And how do you think, Yeah, I said,
Speaker 1: I don't disagree with you. I do think that the
Speaker 1: optimists in me here just points out the fact that
Speaker 1: this is in fact a choice. Right. This is not
Speaker 1: because Joe Biden doesn't want to get there. It's not
Speaker 1: because I think most of the Democratic Party wants we
Speaker 1: do actually want to heal those ones and move forward.
Speaker 1: What we need is Republican leaders to be able to
Speaker 1: meet us halfway. And what we've got that that is
Speaker 1: in fact what we're seeing play out. And I think,
Speaker 1: uh shocking ways so far to have twelve U. S.
Speaker 1: Senators that they're going to actively dispute the certification of
Speaker 1: the electoral College and they know better, right, um, So,
Speaker 1: this is the underlying fundamentals that you point out are
Speaker 1: I agree with the question. I think in large part
Speaker 1: is going to be left to American political leadership to
Speaker 1: have the choice as to whether they want to sew
Speaker 1: that disruption or they want to move our country forward
Speaker 1: into a more powerful position in the twenty first century. Congressman,
Speaker 1: has President Trump actually changed US politics forever in US democracy? Uh,
Speaker 1: He's certainly changed it for the short and intermediate term.
Speaker 1: And look, I think that hud percent agree with in
Speaker 1: the analysis here that what you're seeing is essentially twelve
Speaker 1: Republican centers as of now that have political aspirations that
Speaker 1: know in order to be successful for the presidency that
Speaker 1: they are going to need to have the support of
Speaker 1: a Donald Trump base. And I think that Donald Trump
Speaker 1: is going to remain the loudest voice in the Republican
Speaker 1: Party until there is a next Republican president, or at
Speaker 1: least for the next four years. And again, that is
Speaker 1: a choice that Republicans have to make as to whether
Speaker 1: they're going to continue to countenance, forget the kind of
Speaker 1: irrationality or the norm breaking or anything else. Once again,
Speaker 1: actions that border on, if not cross legality and yet
Speaker 1: another reason why a president could and should be, in
Speaker 1: my mind, impeached. Joseph What you just tried to do,
Speaker 1: Joe Kennedy. I want to circle back to where we
Speaker 1: were at the beginning of trying to stagger into two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty one. Republicans, Democrats all disaffected. Dr Bremer and
Speaker 1: his report mentions college educated urbanites is defining your Democratic party.
Speaker 1: How does your party get to the labor centric a
Speaker 1: leaf that was in other generations? How do you get
Speaker 1: back to labor support? What's the what's the actual method
Speaker 1: of doing that? The actual method doing that is showing
Speaker 1: up and fighting for working families across this country. And yes,
Speaker 1: obviously I think we would all agree we should be
Speaker 1: about expanding access to education and access to higher education.
Speaker 1: But that does not mean you leave behind people that,
Speaker 1: as we say, shall or after work rather than before.
Speaker 1: That means that you've got to understand that the policies
Speaker 1: that for on all a long time Democrats have championed
Speaker 1: about increasing access to opportunity, that if people still didn't
Speaker 1: get them because of the get that opportunity, because the
Speaker 1: barrier's domestic or international, that they've not felt left behind.
Speaker 1: They have been left behind and for Democrats to not
Speaker 1: recognize that and not turn around and say, hey, we're
Speaker 1: gonna fight for YouTube. That has been Donald Trump's observation.
Speaker 1: And that's part of that success um that he's had
Speaker 1: in his rhetoric, if not the political the policy of him.
Speaker 1: That Ian Bremer within the top risk that you right
Speaker 1: up here on the United States of America, there's just
Speaker 1: the time ticking on the demographic changes out into the
Speaker 1: two thousand thirties, the two thousand forties. What do you
Speaker 1: perceive over the next one, two, three and even five
Speaker 1: years is being the democratic shift in what it will
Speaker 1: do for our politics? A demographic shift, I should say. Well,
Speaker 1: one thing that's exciting, um is that when you look
Speaker 1: at millennials that are educated around the world. Um, you're
Speaker 1: not just talking about white full You're talking about you know,
Speaker 1: emerging markets suddenly dominating and sharing ideas. I mean, when
Speaker 1: I was a kid growing up in Chelsea, Massachusetts and
Speaker 1: the projects, you know, not that far from Joe by
Speaker 1: the way, you know, I didn't know any of those kids.
Speaker 1: I wasn't into K pop, for example, I wasn't share ring,
Speaker 1: I wasn't on Fortnite, you know, sort of doing gaming
Speaker 1: with kids from India or Cambodia or whatnot. Millennials today
Speaker 1: are doing that. And one of the reasons why climate
Speaker 1: change is really moving. And if there's one place that
Speaker 1: Biden will truly be effective compared to Trump, it's in
Speaker 1: actually embracing a post fossil fuel trajectory for the US
Speaker 1: government in the U s economy, precisely because the markets
Speaker 1: have already been moving in that direction for some for
Speaker 1: some time. But they're doing that because young people all
Speaker 1: over the world are connected to a global understanding that
Speaker 1: climate is going to screw them as young people in
Speaker 1: the future if they don't actually take action. So there
Speaker 1: are reasons to believe that millennials will be more global,
Speaker 1: they will be more connected, they will be less stovepiped.
Speaker 1: But but that is those are not the people that
Speaker 1: are running Washington right now. And and that demographic shift
Speaker 1: you're talking about, when so many Americans are feeling disenfranchised,
Speaker 1: when so many Americans are are are taking it on
Speaker 1: the chin on the back of this coronavirus. Not those
Speaker 1: of us in the knowledge economy that can socially distanced,
Speaker 1: but those that are stuck, the essential workers that are
Speaker 1: treated like anything, but and that that gap, that gap
Speaker 1: is immense and painful and drives incredible risk and uncertainty
Speaker 1: in Ian. Thanks so much and Bremer there of your
Speaker 1: Asia group, and we'll talk a lot more about climate change.
Speaker 1: And thank you to the former Congressman, of course, Joseph
Speaker 1: Kennedy of Massachusetts. A quick look at the chart of oil.
Speaker 1: Maybe it is the chart here of the day Brent
Speaker 1: crude when we knew it above a hundred dollars of
Speaker 1: barrel for sustained time, and then the collapse of oil
Speaker 1: and of course in negative prices that we saw earlier
Speaker 1: this year, back to fifty dollars a barrel. That's a
Speaker 1: precursor for Daniel Jurgen. The New Map is his new book.
Speaker 1: It's my book of the year. It is just a
Speaker 1: beautifully written exercise in our geopolitics and the course of
Speaker 1: oil and the new oil. I should say as well, Dan,
Speaker 1: you're going wonderful to have you with us here with
Speaker 1: Dr Bremer. I need to go right to our immediate geopolitics.
Speaker 1: What should President Biden's approach be to Saudi Arabia and
Speaker 1: to Russia. I think his approach to Saudi Arabia will
Speaker 1: be measured to Saudi has not been looking forward to
Speaker 1: a Biden presidency. There will be new stresses in the relationship,
Speaker 1: and there will be no sword dance as there was
Speaker 1: when President Trump made his first visit there. I think,
Speaker 1: so it will be a different relationship, and Saudi Arabia
Speaker 1: will be doing some things to try and uh, you know,
Speaker 1: kind of amiliorated, but it will be frosty. The check
Speaker 1: on Russia, it's obviously what there will be always a
Speaker 1: discussion how do we get back into some reasonable relation
Speaker 1: ship with Russia. But after this massive cyber attack on
Speaker 1: government and private business, that's just gonna make it much
Speaker 1: more difficult. So it starts off on a very bad foot.
Speaker 1: And you ask, once again what were the Russians thinking?
Speaker 1: What did they achieve by doing this? The commanding heights
Speaker 1: of oil at fifty dollars a barrel? Are they commanding
Speaker 1: heights or is it a oil global oil complex that
Speaker 1: is desperate and fragile. I would say it's more of
Speaker 1: the latter, because well, it's said it is creeping out
Speaker 1: of that virus alley of fifty. It's now just a
Speaker 1: little over fifty if you look at Brent. But you
Speaker 1: have a big overhang of oil UH supplies in terms
Speaker 1: that OPEC and non OPEQ OPEC plus are holding back.
Speaker 1: Plus you have the question of whether there will be
Speaker 1: some dialogue between the US and Iran that will relieve
Speaker 1: sanctions on Iranian oil. So there's a lot of overhang.
Speaker 1: But the good news is that is virus. You know,
Speaker 1: it's not as asks it should be, but as vaccination spread,
Speaker 1: as economies will open up again. One result of that
Speaker 1: will be more economic activity and oil will get into
Speaker 1: an area that is would support future investment, which has
Speaker 1: really been cut very dramatically over the last year. Daniel,
Speaker 1: good morning from London. Are we going to see peak
Speaker 1: oil sooner than we think because of climate change action,
Speaker 1: because of concerns surrounding fossil fuel and carbon emission. Well,
Speaker 1: I think that is the probably that an energy transition
Speaker 1: are the two big questions that you run into in
Speaker 1: oil circles, energy circles around and climate circles around the world.
Speaker 1: I still think that peak oil peak demand is probably
Speaker 1: about a decade away. We're seeing these announcements about banning
Speaker 1: internal combustion engines. Let there will be twenty thirty or
Speaker 1: twenty five on the other side, you're gonna add other
Speaker 1: billion people or so to the world economies hopefully will recover.
Speaker 1: And so I don't think it's as imminent as we think.
Speaker 1: And something else people forget is in for instance, the
Speaker 1: United States, cars stay on the road for twelve to
Speaker 1: fifteen years. You don't just go away somewhere. So I
Speaker 1: think it is an energy transition. I think it's a
Speaker 1: longer process than snapping your fingers. And how do you
Speaker 1: see this developing? Well, it's so funny. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: the the lifespan of a horse, uh is about twelve
Speaker 1: to fifteen years. And you know, once you got the
Speaker 1: steam engine, you still didn't, you know, crush the horse
Speaker 1: population until after the existing horses no longer had a lifespan,
Speaker 1: and then you just stopped. And then within one generation
Speaker 1: horses went to about ten percent of what they were before.
Speaker 1: They became useful for entertainment and for food, and that
Speaker 1: was it. And the question is is that where we're
Speaker 1: going with cars, with with you know, with a mission,
Speaker 1: with with the combustion engines. Uh. Look, it's it's an
Speaker 1: extraordinary change. Um, when you have the United States government
Speaker 1: with by far the most important uh, appointment that by
Speaker 1: and is making is John Kerry, who ran for president,
Speaker 1: who was Secretary State, who believes he should have been president,
Speaker 1: certainly thinks he's smarter than than Joe Biden, and he's
Speaker 1: and he's creating a new cabinet position that will be
Speaker 1: staffed to focus on climate, climate climate. I think it's
Speaker 1: a massive shift. And by the way, I think one
Speaker 1: of the more interesting things that we're gonna see over
Speaker 1: the coming year as the Americans as a polity start
Speaker 1: taking this very seriously as a government, is that we're
Speaker 1: gonna want to look forward after these ten years when
Speaker 1: it's no longer as much about fossil fuels. Who's gonna
Speaker 1: dominate these new technologies? And you know, under the Trump administration,
Speaker 1: if you want to talk about solar or wind or
Speaker 1: electric vehicle infrastructure, you're talking about China. So actually this
Speaker 1: is going to create more geopolitical competition between the two
Speaker 1: largest economies, the U. S And China. Then a lot
Speaker 1: of people might have thought thinking, oh, when the Americans
Speaker 1: talk about I'm gonna be clumb by off for everyone together,
Speaker 1: Actually a lot more geopolitical competition coming. I think, if
Speaker 1: I can, if I please do it, please do. That
Speaker 1: means that the supply chains, you know, the supply chains
Speaker 1: of oil have always had a lot of tension around them.
Speaker 1: As Ian is saying there's gonna be tension now around
Speaker 1: the supply chains because look at the way China dominates
Speaker 1: the lithium ion battery supply chain. One thing about cars,
Speaker 1: it's very interesting. If every car in the world today
Speaker 1: was an electric car running on wind and solar, you
Speaker 1: would reduce emissions CO two emissions by about six percent.
Speaker 1: So you have to look at the whole totality in
Speaker 1: terms of really having an effect. But if you look
Speaker 1: at where the automakers are, their investment is certainly shifting
Speaker 1: to electric cars, so they see that there is going
Speaker 1: to be a tipping point. Daniel, you're gonna dr Bremer
Speaker 1: mentions John Kerry I said on a stage in Davos
Speaker 1: with John Carey, and he was really quite something. The
Speaker 1: facts involved the knowledge basity on climate change. He also
Speaker 1: has a knowledge base that there is a U WES
Speaker 1: Senate Heaven forbid, if one senator went from the prize
Speaker 1: and read it, and then they went to the quest
Speaker 1: and read it, and then they went to the new
Speaker 1: map and read it, could you have a Senate that
Speaker 1: would go along with President Biden and support some form
Speaker 1: of political climate change policy, or does the Senate block
Speaker 1: all No. I think well, it depends, uh what happens
Speaker 1: tomorrow in Georgia. But on that's in a very near term.
Speaker 1: I think that you would have people supporting it. But
Speaker 1: I think it's a question of understanding the time frames
Speaker 1: involved in the cost. And Ian's report about the risk
Speaker 1: makes makes a very important point that may not be
Speaker 1: looked at right now, but it's the cost of COVID
Speaker 1: and the cost of dealing with COVID afterwards. So government's
Speaker 1: budgets are going to be strained between what they want
Speaker 1: to do in terms of climate and energy transition on
Speaker 1: one side and actually continuing to heal the economy on
Speaker 1: the other. So there will be a fiscal pressure there
Speaker 1: that will also have to be part of the equation. Yeah.
Speaker 1: And you look at the countries like Brazil and India
Speaker 1: that are very carbon intensive on the back of all
Speaker 1: of this that, you know, it's going to be very
Speaker 1: very hard for them in a post COVID environment to
Speaker 1: say we're gonna get on in aligne with all these countries. Yeah, yep.
Speaker 1: And is it two tenus to make the link between
Speaker 1: you know, Russia oil rich country, sad Arabia oil rich country,
Speaker 1: and what role they have to play do you politically?
Speaker 1: So if Russia sees the price of oil go down
Speaker 1: peek oil, maybe sooner than we think, do they become
Speaker 1: more belligerent? Um? I think Russia is becoming more belligerent
Speaker 1: because generally they are a country in decline um, and
Speaker 1: they blame the United States for that and Putin has control,
Speaker 1: where in the case of the Saudiast, I mean, I
Speaker 1: do think that this is going to move them more
Speaker 1: quickly towards diversifying their economy. It's gonna and they may
Speaker 1: not be effective, and some of their vision jin is
Speaker 1: obviously pie in the sky. But but I think they're
Speaker 1: gonna be buffeted much more by their environment, where in
Speaker 1: the case of Putin, he's angered by that, he's lashing out.
Speaker 1: So belligerents is the right question when you talk about
Speaker 1: moscow Ian bremer with us. It is the top risks
Speaker 1: of two thousand twenty one. And we think Daniel Jurgen
Speaker 1: of I H. S Market and of course his new
Speaker 1: book The New Map uh most readable. Dr Jorgina thank
Speaker 1: you so much. Right now, not spin but science, and
Speaker 1: I want to pause here and say that our team
Speaker 1: all through two thousand twenty I thought had great leadership
Speaker 1: on speaking to science into political experts of how to
Speaker 1: handle this pandemic. David Nebarrow will join us with the
Speaker 1: World Health Organization here, but I need to turn to
Speaker 1: the chairman of your age, your group, Cliff Cupchain, right
Speaker 1: now on their take on two thousand twenty one and COVID. Cliff,
Speaker 1: before we get to Dr Nobarrow, help us here with
Speaker 1: the distinction of your COVID risk. The COVID risk is
Speaker 1: that the scar tissue, the lingering effects, the effects, the
Speaker 1: economic impacts of COVID are going to go away quickly
Speaker 1: or easily. For a few reasons. We will have within
Speaker 1: every country the so called K curve. Different socio economic
Speaker 1: groups recover different rates, usually have growing inequality. Internationally, you
Speaker 1: will have different rates of recovery, of multi speed recovery
Speaker 1: based on vaccine access and other rollout factors. So what
Speaker 1: what will you have as a result of this carcasue?
Speaker 1: You'll have instability, You'll have anti incumbent anchor and a
Speaker 1: lot of elections coming up in Latin America, for example,
Speaker 1: and you'll have a debt crutches as as lenders become
Speaker 1: more discriminated, a lot of emerging markets are gonna have
Speaker 1: trouble getting capital and that's going to create big pressure
Speaker 1: in debt markets this year. David and Borrow, thank you
Speaker 1: so much for joining us. Thrilled to have you answer
Speaker 1: two thousand twenty and for you to provide a voice
Speaker 1: here to start the year. I want to speak not
Speaker 1: about cases which I can't count, or deaths general trust,
Speaker 1: but the hospitalization surge in the sinceanity over the long
Speaker 1: weekend that we can't get vaccinated fast enough. What is
Speaker 1: the the Borrow solution to jump start the rate of
Speaker 1: vaccinations and double dose vaccinations? Thanks very much. Indeed, there
Speaker 1: is no alternative but to make vaccines available as widely
Speaker 1: as possible as soon as they get approved. I don't
Speaker 1: want any corners to be cut on the approval process.
Speaker 1: So each vaccine must go through their Phase three trials
Speaker 1: and then be properly assessed by national regulators as well
Speaker 1: as by the World Health Organization. But that's the only
Speaker 1: option that we have if we're going to rely on
Speaker 1: vaccines to get this pandemic to subside just one last point.
Speaker 1: Vaccines won't be enough on their own. We will need
Speaker 1: to continue to pay attention to the rules that were
Speaker 1: set over the last few months about physical distancing, mask wearing,
Speaker 1: isolating when sick, looking after those who are frail and vulnerable,
Speaker 1: because these basic principles, backed up by strong public health
Speaker 1: work at local level, still will be key for the
Speaker 1: coming months even years, to enable societies to get on
Speaker 1: top of this pandemic. Dr Nabarro there were trials with
Speaker 1: vaccines and they told us, for example, Fiser, that you
Speaker 1: take the first dose and then you have to take
Speaker 1: a second dose after three or four weeks. Does it
Speaker 1: make a difference, And how much of a difference if
Speaker 1: you delay that second dose by months. What we're seeing
Speaker 1: now is more and more countries wondering whether a wide
Speaker 1: spread use of a single dose of one of these
Speaker 1: vaccines may in the end be more effective at helping
Speaker 1: slow down the pandemic and reduce suffering than making sure
Speaker 1: that everybody receives their two doses at four weeks or
Speaker 1: so intervals. I am not really at this stage able
Speaker 1: to come out in favor of one option or the other,
Speaker 1: because they are so situation dependent. The move towards a
Speaker 1: longer interval between vaccine doses reflects an anxiety in some
Speaker 1: countries that this situation is so intense that to protect
Speaker 1: health services, getting single shots into as many people as
Speaker 1: possible is the only right way to go. But as
Speaker 1: you picked up during the last few days, there's been
Speaker 1: quite a lot of controversy over exactly how to go
Speaker 1: down this quite experimental path. Yeah, there's also a lot
Speaker 1: of controversy and you know, a lot of citizens calling
Speaker 1: symbolic vaccination programs because a lot of the European countries
Speaker 1: have the vaccines, but they're just not administering them quickly enough.
Speaker 1: Would you ask countries to be quicker to find more
Speaker 1: ways of finding pharmacies for example, to administer these vaccines
Speaker 1: not only hospitals. Yes, So that what this really means
Speaker 1: is that the administration of vaccines must be thoroughly planned.
Speaker 1: We know from so many different campaigns that if you
Speaker 1: don't have proper planning at local, state, national, regional and
Speaker 1: global level for the use of scarce vaccines, especially when
Speaker 1: you're in a crisis situation, you can end up with
Speaker 1: a lot of waste and indeed quite a lot of
Speaker 1: potential errors being made. I really would like to appeal
Speaker 1: to every leader just to really slow down a bit
Speaker 1: on the rush to get the vaccine into as many
Speaker 1: arms as possible and put more time into systematic planning
Speaker 1: of what has to be a really effective global operations. David,
Speaker 1: you went right, David, you went right where I want
Speaker 1: to go. I want to go to you on this
Speaker 1: and then the Cliff if we have time dr to borrow.
Speaker 1: This is real simple. It's about federalism versus state distribution
Speaker 1: as well. Do you have any optimism or any trek
Speaker 1: record that the United States can provide a polio equivalent
Speaker 1: or a diphtheria equivalent from a hundred years ago, a
Speaker 1: hundred and twenty years ago. Can we do that with
Speaker 1: the state mess we're in versus a federal application. Well,
Speaker 1: you will anticipate Tom that I'm I'm to have to say,
Speaker 1: not only should they be national and state planning that
Speaker 1: he's done from the center in the United States, there's
Speaker 1: also got to be global planning. This is a global
Speaker 1: pandemic accelerating just because we must have a global response,
Speaker 1: because just because the time day. But I want to,
Speaker 1: like Cliff in here to be sure he has a
Speaker 1: voice in this cliff. Do you see any ability of
Speaker 1: President elect Biden to create a more federal mandate in
Speaker 1: America versus the state centric mandate of President Trump. I
Speaker 1: think the President Biden president like Biden, is going to
Speaker 1: have much more moral suasion capability, much more talent to
Speaker 1: do that, much more commitment to do that. These are
Speaker 1: state state programs. We have to get the funding to them,
Speaker 1: we have to enable the infrastructure. But I do think
Speaker 1: a big voice like Ms Merkel has done in Europe
Speaker 1: is gonna probably make a difference in making this more successful.
Speaker 1: The only hope we have, and I think we're gonna
Speaker 1: get not to a good place, but to a much
Speaker 1: better place than we are right now. We've got to
Speaker 1: leave it there. We could go all the guess the
Speaker 1: quality of this with the Top Risks of Eurasia Group.
Speaker 1: We could do what we could do, like a ten
Speaker 1: hour show today, Francine, maybe we ought to do that.
Speaker 1: Do a ten hour show, an hour with Dr bar,
Speaker 1: an hour with Mr Kupchin and uh and Ian Bremer.
Speaker 1: It's gonna be great. Dr Nabarrow, don't be a stranger.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for joining us with the world
Speaker 1: Health Organization. There's a special edition of the show this morning.
Speaker 1: Francing and Lakwad in London. I'm Tom Keane in New
Speaker 1: York and we've been doing this now for a good
Speaker 1: number of years with Ian Bremer and Cliff Kupchin, Eurasia
Speaker 1: Group chairman is with us right now the Top Risks
Speaker 1: of two thousand twenty one, and I can tell you
Speaker 1: that December of two thousand twenty was more than unusual,
Speaker 1: which makes for must reading of their top risks. Look
Speaker 1: for that release today by your Asia Group. It is
Speaker 1: really terse, sharp reading on climate change, wonderful section that
Speaker 1: I learned a lot, frankly on the hacking and cyber threats,
Speaker 1: and I really want to draw your attention to their
Speaker 1: oil and climate paragraphs. And of course, Daniel, you're going
Speaker 1: to join us in the next hour. My book of
Speaker 1: the year, the New Map. Last year the Top Risks
Speaker 1: of Eurasia Group absolutely nailed the challenges of Europe, not
Speaker 1: predicting a successful outcome to Brexit. It has come to pass.
Speaker 1: I believe joining us now is a gentleman from Germany
Speaker 1: with immense perspective on this. Sigmar Gabriel is a former
Speaker 1: German Foreign Affairs minister, but that barely touches upon his
Speaker 1: domestic politics of Germany and his association with length of tenure,
Speaker 1: going back to Billy Brant among others, and were thrilled
Speaker 1: that Mr Gabriel could join us this morning. Sigmar Gabriel.
Speaker 1: What will be the legacy of Chancellor miracle and particularly
Speaker 1: the replacement of her European leadership christ and good morning
Speaker 1: to everybody. Um. If you ask me how the Germans
Speaker 1: and maybe others in Europe will look back to the
Speaker 1: chanceorship of Angela Michael, I would say at first that
Speaker 1: during her term it's at the end, it will be
Speaker 1: sixteen years. She will be seen as a leader which
Speaker 1: steered Germany through heavy waters in difficult crisis which we
Speaker 1: were faced with. I remember when we started together at
Speaker 1: the government two thousand thirteen. After a few weeks we
Speaker 1: had the crimea crisis, then we had the crisis in Greece,
Speaker 1: then the euro crisis at then the end of the
Speaker 1: term the refugee crisis. So her her chanceorship will be
Speaker 1: seen as a successful leading the country and leading Europe
Speaker 1: through major crisis at the at the beginning of the century.
Speaker 1: Click coption just since you've written the top risk, we
Speaker 1: have of course seen a successful Brexit negotiation. How do
Speaker 1: you and Dr Bremer perceive Europe in two thousand twenty one?
Speaker 1: Is it fractured or can can it coalesce around a theme? Perhaps?
Speaker 1: And say Mr mccong, we think that the main challenge
Speaker 1: facing Europe is lack of leadership, that that after the
Speaker 1: real Queen of hero of Angelo Merkel steps down, mccram
Speaker 1: will take over. He'll be as your episode pre eminent leader. Anyway,
Speaker 1: he will be distracted by his own domestic politics. And
Speaker 1: and we fear that if we're more stimulus money is needed,
Speaker 1: there's no sort of space for a creative new fiscal deal.
Speaker 1: That that foreign policy could get very complicated with Turks
Speaker 1: in the Eastern Mediterranean, and that we could even see
Speaker 1: a resurgence of populism as the scar tissue of COVID
Speaker 1: really bites into European economies. So where we come out
Speaker 1: on Europe Sigma Gabriel, how do you think Europe should
Speaker 1: actually engage with China? And depending on investments or a
Speaker 1: cooperation with China will weaken the relationship Europe has with
Speaker 1: the new Biden administration. My first of all, this is
Speaker 1: not a really big agreement. And Europe and China is
Speaker 1: negotiating about an investment agreement since more than seven years,
Speaker 1: and China always asked the Europeans to to negotiate about
Speaker 1: a real free trade agreement, and the Europeans said no,
Speaker 1: as long as investments from European countries in China are
Speaker 1: in such difficult they as they were in the past,
Speaker 1: we will not be able to negotiate a real free
Speaker 1: trade agreement. So the precondition was to have a better
Speaker 1: and more secure environment for European investments in China. That's
Speaker 1: that's first of all, the starting point to these negotiations.
Speaker 1: You're right looking to the US and the bipartisan approach
Speaker 1: to China UM. The new President Joe Biden will be
Speaker 1: not happy about this unilateral approach from from Europe to China.
Speaker 1: On the on the other hand side, I think there
Speaker 1: is enough room for for for a common approach between US, Europe,
Speaker 1: South Korea, Japan, Australia and New Zealand towards China UM
Speaker 1: although the countries like Australian others had a much more
Speaker 1: developed free trade agreement that the Europeans did. During the
Speaker 1: last week, so yes, it may be seen um as
Speaker 1: a more strategic um autonomous approach from from Europe to China.
Speaker 1: But but on the on the other hand, I would
Speaker 1: say there's another room for maneuvers to join hands. Mr
Speaker 1: Gabriel Cliff cooptation. There was talking about, you know, a
Speaker 1: leadership vacuum in Europe once Angelo mercle leaves. Who's the
Speaker 1: right person to replace mercle or even before that, we
Speaker 1: we have a big vote on the CDU coming up
Speaker 1: mid January, who's the right person to actually take on
Speaker 1: that role. I totally agree with what the Cliff said.
Speaker 1: There is no person who will be in the same
Speaker 1: position in Germany and in Europe as well. Germany is
Speaker 1: now a period of transition. Uh Merkele will go out
Speaker 1: of her office, Maybe she will more concentrated on Europe
Speaker 1: as she did during the very hot time of the pandemic.
Speaker 1: Maybe she will not so um involved in in the
Speaker 1: German election campaign and more uh in in in in
Speaker 1: the European uh politics because there she is interested to
Speaker 1: have a long, long scene legacy. On the other handside,
Speaker 1: France of course want to be the new leader of
Speaker 1: Europe after miracle, but the country is in a very
Speaker 1: difficult economic situation and uh and mccron has challenged in
Speaker 1: the country, so I don't think that he will be
Speaker 1: so strong to replace Miracle in the leadership of Europe.
Speaker 1: And by the way, the next elections in France are
Speaker 1: on the horizon. So that's I think the difficult situation
Speaker 1: in Europe. That's why Eurasia is right to put Europe
Speaker 1: at one of the top risks of the year two
Speaker 1: thousand twenty one. Cliff Cook, what does the Biden administration
Speaker 1: actually need from Europe in this bit of what in
Speaker 1: their fight with China? Is there a role that Europe
Speaker 1: can play well President Biden. President like Biden has has
Speaker 1: rhetorically really distinguished himself from from current President Trump by
Speaker 1: arguing the need the multilateralize China policy, but to d
Speaker 1: risk the US in a way with unilateral sanctions and
Speaker 1: this head to head slug fest that we've been seeing
Speaker 1: and bring in the EU, Japan, India encouraged China to
Speaker 1: change these these you know, perceived unfair policies by putting
Speaker 1: a broader squeeze on them, and that is our fourth
Speaker 1: risk actually at US China tensions broaden. Now the Biden
Speaker 1: people were openly discouraging Europe from this this this investment treaty,
Speaker 1: this investment agreement, and it is going to be a setback.
Speaker 1: I think they're going to need to find ways to
Speaker 1: put it back together again to move forward with this,
Speaker 1: with with this broad coalition that they have in mind.
Speaker 1: Uh and and the risk here is that we will
Speaker 1: see a global bidding war between Ching and Big and
Speaker 1: Joe Biden over over allies. Now that may be good
Speaker 1: for the allies, but it will just increase tension I
Speaker 1: think between the US and and and trying. What we
Speaker 1: really need from Europe is whether the United States really
Speaker 1: needs from Europe is a creative way that Europe can
Speaker 1: still benefit from China's large and productive economy, but stay
Speaker 1: in sync with with with the US striving to bring
Speaker 1: them bring China around. It's gonna be done difficult, Mr Gabriel.
Speaker 1: We're looking at the top risks that erais you group
Speaker 1: sees for two thousand and twenty one, and of course
Speaker 1: that's an international feel. But I've got to turn to
Speaker 1: the German election this year. It's a huge and important
Speaker 1: generational election. And Chris writer of our Berlin operation, tells
Speaker 1: me very simply that this could be your Conservatives in
Speaker 1: the Greens together. That is unusual, to say the least.
Speaker 1: How do you get a coalition developed in the new Germany,
Speaker 1: the future Germany? I would say the coalition between Conservatives
Speaker 1: and the Greens is something which should have happened four
Speaker 1: years ago. If you look to the German society, this
Speaker 1: is the coalition the majority of the Germans want to have.
Speaker 1: Um it was not able because they needed for four
Speaker 1: years ago the liberals and the rebels had the feeling
Speaker 1: that they would be the fifth wheel on the wagon,
Speaker 1: and so that they decided not to join the government.
Speaker 1: And that only was the reason that we have again
Speaker 1: as a coalition between Conservatives and Social Democrats. Normally, four
Speaker 1: years ago we should have had a conservative green coalition
Speaker 1: at that time with the Liberals. Now I would say
Speaker 1: the prospect tip is to have a coalition between Conservatives
Speaker 1: and the Greens without any party. They will need nobody
Speaker 1: and in in in the terms of German politics, it
Speaker 1: will look like the next Grand Coalition, but only the
Speaker 1: second biggest party will not be the Social Democrats but
Speaker 1: the Greens. But so Mr Gabriel is a red red
Speaker 1: Green alliance actually possible. Who has the most to lose
Speaker 1: on how the pandemic was handled in Germany. Of course
Speaker 1: the government and and especially the person who is responsible
Speaker 1: in the government, Yan Spahn. That's the reason I think
Speaker 1: that all the ideas that he would come out as
Speaker 1: the a new candidate for the for the chair of
Speaker 1: the Conservative Party is will not will not be the case.
Speaker 1: He's in a in a tough political position. Of course,
Speaker 1: um many criticism, what what what was done during the
Speaker 1: last weeks and months. Uh, He's at the center of
Speaker 1: the criticis so I would say, uh, maybe he as
Speaker 1: a person is in the biggest risk to lose, Not
Speaker 1: Angela Merkel and not I would say not the Conservative
Speaker 1: Party as a whole. They will go down a bit
Speaker 1: when people recognize that Miracle will not be the next chancellor. Man,
Speaker 1: you must know, everybody in the political arena knows that
Speaker 1: Miracle will not be the next chance but ordinary citizens
Speaker 1: are not very much aware that for the first time
Speaker 1: they will have to choose between different candidates for the
Speaker 1: chances office. But at the beginning of spring, people more
Speaker 1: and more were recognized and then the Conservative they will
Speaker 1: lose uh some percentage in the opinion polls. But at
Speaker 1: the end the Conservative Party will stay at the biggest
Speaker 1: party and Gemen and you will not have a chance
Speaker 1: to get a coalition but without them, So I'm I
Speaker 1: don't think that that that is any opportunity for a
Speaker 1: Green red red coalition with the Greens and the Chances Office.
Speaker 1: Thank you so much for the insights, Mar Gabriel. They're
Speaker 1: a former German for Affairs Minister. On Cliff Kupchin of
Speaker 1: Eurasia with his top risks on good morning everyone, your
Speaker 1: Raisor Group, the top risks of two thousand twenty one.
Speaker 1: I've got fifteen ways to go here with Francis Lacroix
Speaker 1: on those top risks. Right now we can look at
Speaker 1: the markets up the ascent of the markets for the halves.
Speaker 1: It's a beautiful chart in Eurasia Group on American income
Speaker 1: disparity and income inequality. Ian Bremer with us right now,
Speaker 1: Eurasia Group President, and and I want to fold in
Speaker 1: here something you were so pressing on, and that is
Speaker 1: China and of course a stronger Reran Membi is a
Speaker 1: single chart here about you know, crouching dollar in the
Speaker 1: hidden wheak no that we've seen in the dollar right now,
Speaker 1: Dr Bremer, part of this is also the politics of
Speaker 1: China is noted by the two months absence of Jack
Speaker 1: Ma within capitalism and within his business affairs. What is
Speaker 1: the symbolism of Jack Ma, unreported to the China US dialogue. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's quite something. I mean, Jack Ma basically has done
Speaker 1: a better job of antagonizing powerful actors than probably any
Speaker 1: other individual in the world. And you know, that's a
Speaker 1: pretty dangerous thing to do. It's not illegal, but it's dangerous.
Speaker 1: I mean you can ask navalni Uh, the opposition leader
Speaker 1: that was poisoned in Russia about that. Um, it's quite something.
Speaker 1: He's you know, mys incredibly wealthy, he's prescient, he's a
Speaker 1: hero for the average Chinese, and that makes him a
Speaker 1: threat and unacceptable to Jun Paying and the leaders of China.
Speaker 1: And also the fact that the Chinese government has decided
Speaker 1: and you look at their coming five your plan, this
Speaker 1: dual circulation idea where they focus more on domestic consumption
Speaker 1: but also on securing ing Chinese supply chain for critical
Speaker 1: strategic sectors. And that because they see that the Americans
Speaker 1: on five G on Huawei, that they've been hitting the
Speaker 1: Chinese pretty hard, and they know that financial technology, fintech
Speaker 1: where you know and financial that jack Ma has been
Speaker 1: dominating that is critical strategically to the success of the
Speaker 1: Chinese economy. The Chinese government that means they want control.
Speaker 1: So the fact that jack Ma has said these things
Speaker 1: at the same time that this is that this fight
Speaker 1: with the Americans coming down the pike has really created
Speaker 1: big problems global finances, global finance. Certainly the purview of
Speaker 1: Bloomberg Dr Bremer, what is the responsibility of Western banks
Speaker 1: and particularly America can too big to fail banks within
Speaker 1: the US Chinese relationship, what should be their action plan?
Speaker 1: For example, on Hong Kong. I mean, the banks that
Speaker 1: are in Hong Kong aren't going anywhere, uh. They they
Speaker 1: they understand if your HSBC, if your standard chartered, you
Speaker 1: understand that Hong Kong as a critical node for doing
Speaker 1: business in mainland China is much more valuable to you
Speaker 1: and your global business than standing up for Hong Kong
Speaker 1: as a Western uh place where your expats can feel
Speaker 1: comfortable that there's rule of law. So they're dealing with
Speaker 1: the fact that Hong Kong no longer has a separate
Speaker 1: political system. There is no longer any democratic opposition in
Speaker 1: the leg CO in Hong Kong, there is no longer
Speaker 1: any capacity UM to speak uh your mind in a
Speaker 1: free and open media. In Hong Kong. It is no
Speaker 1: longer a Western environment in any way, shape or form.
Speaker 1: The one country that's done something, it's not the banks.
Speaker 1: The fact that the UK. Everyone's talked about how many
Speaker 1: mistakes they've made, but they are actually giving a lot
Speaker 1: of passports out UM to Hong Kong. Nationals that you
Speaker 1: know are are basically getting done over by China, by
Speaker 1: the Chinese government not willing to support one system, one state,
Speaker 1: two systems. At number two for your top risks, you
Speaker 1: have long COVID. Are we underestimating how quickly our economies
Speaker 1: can bounce back once we have the vaccines? UM? I
Speaker 1: don't think we're underestimating that in the developed world. I
Speaker 1: think that the United States rebound will be fast and
Speaker 1: very robust. It's just that it's not going to affect
Speaker 1: as many Americans as I think we would like. UM.
Speaker 1: In other words, in the United States. In Europe, there's
Speaker 1: gonna be much more division of are you in the
Speaker 1: knowledge economy are you not? Are you able to socially
Speaker 1: distance are you not? Are your jobs coming back? Have
Speaker 1: you in evicted from your from your home. How can
Speaker 1: you handle the closure of schools for a year? These
Speaker 1: things are going to have major knock on consequences for
Speaker 1: inequality and political and social instability across the United States
Speaker 1: and Europe. Where for the developing world, for emerging markets,
Speaker 1: And we talked with Dan You're going a little bit
Speaker 1: about this in the last segment. Um they're not getting
Speaker 1: vaccines as quickly as the United States and Europe is.
Speaker 1: They're not bouncing back as quickly, and their budgets are
Speaker 1: under a lot more strain. So you have divisions inside
Speaker 1: the wealthy economies, and then you have the growing gap
Speaker 1: between rich and poor countries in the world, both of
Speaker 1: which play out as long covid in Ian. Thank you
Speaker 1: so much, I and Bremer there of Eurasia group with
Speaker 1: the top risks of your age. Thanks for listening to
Speaker 1: the Bloomberg Surveillance podcast. Subscribe and listen to interviews on
Speaker 1: Apple Podcasts, SoundCloud, or whichever podcast platform you prefer. I'm
Speaker 1: on Twitter at Tom Keane Before the podcast, you can
Speaker 1: always catch us worldwide. I'm Bloomberg Radio