View Source

Blinken and G-7 Allies Turn Their Focus to ‘Democratic Values’

LONDON — The Group of 7 was created to help coordinate economic policy among the world’s top industrial powers. In the four decades since, it has acted to combat energy shortages, global poverty and financial crises.

But as Secretary of State Antony J. Blinken meets with fellow Group of 7 foreign ministers in London this week, a key item on the agenda will be what Mr. Blinken called, in remarks to the press on Monday, “defending democratic values and open societies.”

Implicitly, that defense is against China and, to a lesser extent, Russia. While the economic and public tasks of recovering from the coronavirus remain paramount, Mr. Blinken is also employing the Group of 7 — composed of the United States, Britain, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, and Japan — to coordinate with allies in an emerging global competition between democracy and the authoritarian visions of Moscow and Beijing.

One twist in the meeting this week is the presence of nations that are not formal Group of 7 members: India, South Korea, Australia and South Africa. Also in attendance is Brunei, the current chair of the Association of South East Asian Nations.

Ash Jain, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council.

Mr. Jain noted the way the group is now emphasizing common values over shared economic interests. “The G-7 is being rebranded as a group of like-minded democracies, as opposed to a group of ‘highly industrialized nations.’ They’re changing the emphasis,” he said.

Many of the countries represented at the meeting do big business with China and Russia, complicating efforts to align them against those nations. China’s pattern of economic coercion was one specific topic of conversation on Tuesday, participants said.

was expelled in 2014 from what was then the Group of 8 after its annexation of Crimea from Ukraine.

Nor is it likely a coincidence that the expanded guest list matches, with the additions of South Africa and Brunei, a group of 10 countries and the European Union, collectively short-handed as the “D-10” by proponents of organizing them in a new world body. Those proponents include Prime Minister Boris Johnson of Britain, the host of this week’s gathering and architect of its guest list.

Mr. Johnson has also invited India, Australia and South Korea to send their heads of state to this summer’s Group of 7 summit in Cornwall, citing his “ambition to work with a group of like-minded democracies to advance shared interests and tackle common challenges.”

President Biden has similarly suggested that the world is grouping into competing camps, divided by the openness of their political systems. In his address to Congress last week, Mr. Biden said that “America’s adversaries, the autocrats of the world, are betting” that the nation’s battered democracy cannot be restored.

also committed to holding a “Summit for Democracy” during his first year in office, and officials say planning for such an event is underway. Asked in a Tuesday interview with The Financial Times which countries might be invited to such a summit, Mr. Blinken did not answer directly.

And Wednesday’s agenda for the gathering includes a session on open societies, including issues of media freedom and disinformation. Other sessions over the two days include Syria, Russia and its neighbors Ukraine and Belarus, Myanmar, and Afghanistan.

interview with CBS’s “60 Minutes” broadcast the night before, Mr. Blinken made clear how the United States views China’s rise.

Jeremy Shapiro, a former State Department official in the Obama administration who is now research director at the European Council on Foreign Relations, said that informally expanding the Group of 7 is far easier than constructing a new body.

“It is always a pain, from a governmental perspective, to invent a new forum, because you need to have an endless discussion about who’s in and who’s out, and how it works, and its relationship to the U.N.,” Mr. Shapiro said.

He added that the Group of 7, whose mission had grown nebulous in recent years, may have acquired a new sense of purpose as it tries to organize a post-Trump democratic world in the face of Chinese and Russian threats.

“You would be hard-pressed to look back the past five years or more since they kicked out Russia to name a single thing the G-7 has done of interest,” Mr. Shapiro said. “It didn’t have much to do.”

View Source

D.C. Gives Tech Giants an Earful

Just about every day now in D.C., lawmakers seem eager to show their might against Big Tech. Yesterday gave them the opportunity to flex their muscles in two high-profile events at the Senate: the confirmation hearing for Lina Khan, a “progressive trustbuster” who was nominated for a seat at the F.T.C., and a judiciary committee hearing about Apple and Google’s control over their app stores. For good measure, a group of seven House Republicans yesterday announced a pledge to no longer take donations from major tech companies.

Here’s what you may have missed on a busy, and bruising, day for Big Tech — and what it means.

Lina Khan said she’d bring her tough-on-tech stance to the F.T.C. Ms. Khan referenced a “whole range of potential risks” she sees in the tech giants, including how they could parlay their dominance in one market into adjacent spaces. She said that when it comes to online advertising, which is fueled by consumer data, “companies may think it’s worth the cost of doing business to risk violating privacy laws.” The Democratic nominee received little pushback on her views during questioning.

At the other hearing, companies complained about Apple and Google. Spotify, which is suing Apple in Europe, said the company blocked it from telling customers that they could find cheaper subscription prices outside its iPhone app. Match Group testified that it now paid nearly $500 million a year to Apple and Google in app store fees, its single largest expense. Tile said Apple boxed out its products and then copied them, referencing the AirTag product Apple unveiled Tuesday.

Google made a questionable call. Match Group’s chief legal officer, Jared Sine, said Google had called the company the night before, after its planned testimony became public, wondering why the comments appeared to be tougher than what Match had said on a recent earnings call. “It looks like a threat, it talks like a threat, it’s a threat,” Senator Richard Blumenthal said. Wilson White, a government affairs official at Google, told senators that Match was an important partner and that Google would never aim to intimidate the company.

sweeping antitrust bill, but a more targeted piece of legislation focusing on app store conduct could go through more easily.

  • In a trial next month, Apple is set to face off against Epic Games, which is suing Apple over the payment terms for its iPhone app, potentially providing more fodder for the critics of Big Tech who are looking to rein it in.

The E.U. plans to clamp down on A.I. Draft rules would set tight limits on the use of the technology, including in self-driving cars, hiring decisions, bank lending, school enrollment and more. It’s one of the most ambitious efforts to regulate A.I. before it becomes mainstream.

India suffers a surge in Covid-19 cases. The country recorded 312,731 new infections in a 24-hour period, the highest one-day level since the onset of the pandemic, raising concerns about its ability to control the coronavirus. Separately, Pfizer said it had identified counterfeit versions of its vaccine in Mexico and Poland.

Credit Suisse is raising nearly $2 billion after two trading scandals. The Swiss bank has been forced to rebuild its balance sheet following the collapse of Greensill Capital and the meltdown of Archegos. Meanwhile, it faces a new inquiry by Switzerland’s financial regulator over potential risk-management faults in its handling of Archegos.

Janet Yellen calls on corporate America to help the U.S. reach its climate goals. The Treasury secretary said the private sector would bear much of the burden of greening the American economy, and said the Biden administration was devising a financial reporting framework to make it easier to invest in assets like green bonds.

barred from the OTCQB over-the-counter market for failing to comply with listing rules. The investor David Einhorn had flagged the penny stock’s puzzling market cap as a sign of a “fractured” market.

Around 100 blank-check funds went public each month in the first quarter of the year. So far in April, you could count the number of those I.P.O.s on two hands. The sudden drop in debuts of special purpose acquisition companies, or SPACs, has market watchers asking whether this is a pause for breath — or a more permanent plunge in popularity.

a statement at the end of last month highlighting “the key considerations related to the unique risks and challenges of a private company entering the public markets through a merger with a SPAC.” Not long after, another note offered “guidance” on some of the trickier accounting issues related to blank-check funds. Neither statement suggested any rule changes, but with Gary Gensler, the S.E.C.’s new enforcement-minded chairman, taking over this week, SPAC sponsors have slowed their roll.

SPACs’ recent performance has also been lousy. Analysts at Goldman Sachs note that a stock price index of 200 SPACs (pre- and post-merger) has badly underperformed the market this year, down 17 percent versus a 10 percent gain in the S&P 500. SPACs have also lagged an index of unprofitable tech stocks, suggesting that investors have particular concerns about SPACs, since plenty of them have acquired other unprofitable tech companies.

But we haven’t heard the last of SPACs. The amount of money these shell companies have raised to date could drive $900 billion in M.&A. activity over the next two years, according to the Goldman analysts. And more than 25 SPACs filed I.P.O. registration documents this month, per SPAC Research, adding to a pipeline of more than 200 others that have disclosed plans to go public but haven’t yet sealed the deal, for whatever reason.

reassessing his approach to life and work has been shared more than 200,000 times.


players, coaches, fans and politicians — as an effort to import American-style competition and economics. Frank McCourt, the American owner of the storied French soccer team Olympique de Marseille, told DealBook that the league — which he publicly denounced — never made sense.

The Super League would have created a closed competition with guaranteed places for 15 clubs, and would have introduced revenue sharing and spending caps. That more closely resembles U.S. leagues like the N.F.L. than the more freewheeling system of European soccer.

“It felt like imposing an American flavor on a different culture,” said Mr. McCourt, who previously owned the L.A. Dodgers before buying control of Marseille (l’OM to its fans) in 2016. JPMorgan Chase’s role in financing the Super League bolstered this notion, though its architect was Florentino Pérez, the Spanish president of Real Madrid.

to drop out. “There is no football without fans,” Mr. McCourt said. “What is their perspective?” (Fan demands are something that he knows well: He met with several earlier this year after supporters stormed Marseille’s training grounds to protest the club’s performance.)

Deals

Politics and policy

Tech

Best of the rest

We’d like your feedback! Please email thoughts and suggestions to dealbook@nytimes.com.

View Source

Trudeau Was a Global Climate Hero. Now Canada Risks Falling Behind.

OTTAWA — Prime Minister Justin Trudeau of Canada will arrive for President Biden’s climate summit on Thursday with an outsize reputation for being a warrior in the global fight against climate change.

But one facet of Canada’s economy complicates his record: the country’s insistence on expanding output from its oil sands.

Between Mr. Trudeau’s election in 2015 and 2019, Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions increased by 1 percent, despite decreases in other rich nations during the same period, according to government data released last week. In fact, Canada is the only Group of 7 country whose emissions have risen since the Paris climate agreement was signed six years ago.

Canadian officials insist that Mr. Trudeau’s policies simply need more time to work. But environmentalists counter that Canada can’t reduce emissions without reducing oil production from the sands.

declared them obsolete, the political backlash would be overwhelming.

A spokeswoman for the Canadian Association of Petroleum Producers, which represents oil companies, didn’t immediately respond to a request for comment.

“There’s a disconnect, at least on the international stage, between Canada’s reputation on climate and the reality of action on the ground,” said Catherine Abreu, the executive director of Climate Action Network Canada, a coalition of about 100 labor, Indigenous, environmental and religious groups. “We have to really have to stop selling ourselves that perhaps comforting, but dangerous, lie that there is room for the oil sands in the future.”

Mr. Trudeau’s commitment to stopping climate change. Canada increased its carbon price — which provinces must adopt or have imposed by the federal government — to 40 Canadian dollars a metric ton this month and it is scheduled to rise to 170 dollars by the end of the decade. The government has also moved forward on clean fuel standards, as well as limiting leaks of methane, a potent climate change gas, and other measures.

reversed American policies to combat it.

Now Mr. Biden has made climate a central issue for his administration. At the summit, he is expected to announce that the United States will cut its greenhouse gas emissions by about half by 2030, compared with 2005 levels.

Mr. Trudeau is expected to announce a new reduction target for the same period, but few experts expect him to match Mr. Biden’s cut.

The timing could leave Canada in a bind, according to Dale Beugin, vice president for research and analysis at the Canadian Institute for Climate Choices, a nonpartisan research group.

Mr. Trudeau’s pledge to raise the carbon tax to 170 Canadian dollars, announced late last year, is already seen as ambitious, Mr. Beugin said.

percent of its electricity comes from sources that do not emit carbon, the largest one being hydroelectric dams. In 2019, emissions from Canada’s electricity generation fell below oil sands emissions for the first time.

capture carbon dioxide and store it underground is only being used at a single plant that turns bitumen into crude oil.

“We still have a huge challenge,” said Professor Leach. “You see people almost declaring victory before the first battle’s been fought.”

In its budget this week, Mr. Trudeau’s government set aside 2 billion Canadian dollars to offer Canadian industries a tax credit for carbon capture, but its details still need to be worked out.

The offer comes a month after Jason Kenney, the Conservative premier of Alberta, called on Mr. Trudeau’s government to provide 30 billion Canadian dollars for the development of carbon capture technologies.

While a step of that magnitude might be popular in Alberta, where Mr. Trudeau attracts little support, it could be seen as an oil industry subsidy and alienate voters elsewhere in country who support the Liberals, carbon taxes and other climate measures.

Many environmentalists in Canada say that rather than subsidize the energy industry, Mr. Trudeau’s government should openly acknowledge that the oil sands are a declining industry and start focusing on managing that decline and investing in new job opportunities for its thousands of workers.

“Canada’s oil gas sector produces some of the dirtiest and most expensive fossil fuels in the world,” said Ms. Abreu of Climate Action Network Canada. “It’s really unrealistic for governments in this country to keep telling the public that we can expect that industry to continue indefinitely.”

Christopher Flavelle reported from Washington. Brad Plumer contributed reporting from Washington.

View Source