XL

There was an especially egregious (sorry, those two words together are redundant) argument, regarding energy policy, put forth by a senior U.S. Democrat this past week in Washington D.C.

Construction of the Keystone XL pipeline from Hargisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska, originally proposed in 2008 by TransCanada Corporation, and still waiting approval by the Obama administration, would, according to this argument, have limited employment impact. And, once completed, it would not add to America's "economic security", as product refined from the heavy oil flowing through the pipeline would be "for export". Thus spoke Nancy Pelosi, the minority leader in the U.S. House of Representatives.

One wonders from this statement whether the staff that advises Ms. Pelosi is economically illiterate, or if Ms. Pelosi is simply being a good Democrat, or both. Of course, Ms. Pelosi is not alone in her critical assessment of the pipeline. Environmental groups also object - Oil Change International, for example, noted that 60 per cent of gasoline from Texas refineries was exported in 2012, and that the "Keystone XL pipeline is a pipeline through America not to America". More on this "security argument" in a moment.

Regarding the employment question, TransCanada Corporation is budgeting for the direct hiring of, at minimum, 9,000 American workers (and 2,500 Canadian workers) - welders, mechanics, electricians, pipe fitters, heavy-equipment operators, and the like -​ to construct the pipeline over an estimated two-year period. Then there are an additional 7,000 American jobs created in the manufacturing of the steel pipe and associated parts. And once open, there are the permanent jobs related to the operation  of the pipeline, and the direct boost to property taxes for communities along the route, revenues that typically support school and hospital employment. These impacts are well-known, and none is particularly difficult to grasp. So how does Ms. Pelosi justify her objection, even if some of these jobs are only temporary, and especially when unemployment in America is still hovering just under 8 per cent, and governments at all levels are desperate for stronger tax revenue bases?

​But Ms. Pelosi also objects because the products refined from Keystone's oil would be exported, hence, she says, detracting from, or at least not contributing to, America's economic security. This argument is more than just odd. First, there are the data - figures from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (an agency funded by the U.S. Congress, and widely regarded as a definitive source for energy statistics and analysis) show that while the US has become a net exporter of refined products, this is likely a temporary phenomenon, with a return to net-importer status as early as next year. More specifically, most of the products refined on the Gulf Coast (where Keystone oil would ultimately end up) remain within America, and of course even for exported products, the refining work - and hence the jobs - are in the United States.

But the really odd part of the Pelosi objection is this - even if every bit of Keystone XL oil ended up in refined exports from the Gulf Coast, why would this be a bad thing for America? The country has run large and growing trade deficits since 1980 (in part because of oil imports), at times creating political frictions domestically and with external trading partners (especially China). So, in such an environment, a new source of exports could hardly be considered unwelcome. Moreover, since Gulf refiners are uniquely structured to process heavy oil, and have rapidly expanded capacity for such, they are hungry for this kind of raw input. In past years, heavy oil has typically come from Mexico and Venezuela. Is it not obvious to Ms. Pelosi that Keystone XL would deliver this key input from a much friendlier - and more "secure" - Canada?

Seems to this writer that Mr. Obama's approval of XL is considerably overdue.​ Certain House and Senate members, both Republican and Democratic, think so too. As for Ms. Pelosi, well.....

White and Black

White smoke billowed from the roof of the Sistine Chapel earlier this week, signifying that the Conclave of Cardinals had settled, in relatively short fashion, on a new pope to replace the retired (and tired) Benedict XVI.​ Cardinal Jorge Mario Bergoglio, the 76-year-old Jesuit, Archbishop of Buenos Aires, is the new Pope Francis I.

In another part of Rome, the Italian Parliament reconvened today, following last month's indecisive election. Had the parliamentarians indulged in Catholic Church ritual and ceremony, black, not white, smoke would have emerged today from the rooftops of the Palazzo Montecitorio (which houses the Lower House, or Chamber of Deputies) and the nearby Palazzo Madama (where the Upper House, or Senate, sits). Three weeks after the election, not only has no coalition of political parties been formed, and no new Italian Prime Minister selected, but neither of the two houses of Parliament was able to agree even on the respective Speaker positions. Luigi Bersani's PD party, which won a plurality of seats in the Chamber of Deputies, and therefore, under Italy's arcane rules, is awarded a majority, nonetheless does not have sufficient seats in the Senate for control of that body. Without both houses, his party cannot form a new government, except by partnering with others - something of a tradition in Italian politics.

But this time around, such partnering seems especially problematic. It's a case of many politicians having sufficient power to block, but not one having sufficient power to lead. Thus, Mr. Bersani's left-leaning party wants nothing to do with Mr. Berlusconi's right-leaning coalition (which holds the second-largest number of Senate seats), nor indeed with Mr. Berlusconi himself. Mr. Bersani has approached Beppe Grillo and his Five Star Movement, but the Movement's whole raison d'etre is, if nothing else, to oppose the political establishment, right or left. They have rebuffed all overtures from Mr. Bersani. And former Prime Minister Monti and his centrist coalition didn't win enough seats in either house to make any difference - a fine irony given that it was Mr. Monti who had, over the past two years, begun just the sort of programs of spending restraint and structural reform sorely needed to reverse years of Italian economic stagnation.

President Giorgio Napolitano (quick primer: the Presidency in Italy is a largely ceremonial position) will begin formal consultations with party leaders next week to assess coalition options. Given the deadlock in Parliament, readers are cautioned not to expect white smoke anytime soon.

Science and Religion

In just this past week, there were these developments in the world of science:​

​ - nano particles infused with toxic bee venom were found to kill HIV; a man had 75% of his skull replaced with a 3D-printed plastic prosthetic;​  the first documented case of a child being cured of HIV was announced;​ new evidence suggests the thick ice on Europa (a moon of Jupiter) has leaks, and that the water is salty; a breath test for stomach cancer was announced; the Hubble telescope spotted a "space-invader"-shaped galaxy (thanks to IFLS for this list).

Meanwhile, in the world of religion, a smokestack was erected on the roof of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican. White smoke has just emerged, so we have a new Pope.

Roman Dysfunction(s)

In Rome, dysfunctional governing comes in not just one, but two, distinct forms.

Two weeks after the indecisive election for another Italian government (Luigi Bersani's left coalition now holds a slim majority of the seats in the Chamber of Deputies, but only  about 40% of the seats in the equally important Senate), there is no clear way out of the political impasse. Mr. Bersani is attempting to form a coalition government, proposing, on March 6, an eight-point program that would remove Italy from the European clutches of a "cage of austerity". He has solicited the support of the Five Star Movement (M5S). But forming a coalition seems next to impossible this time. Beppe Grillo, the "spokesman" for the Movement (which holds the balance of power in the Senate) is having none of it, rejecting any and all of Mr. Bersani's overtures, as well as talk of a new, non-party technocratic government much like the outgoing one. Mr. Grillo himself  wants a referendum on whether Italy should default on its massive outstanding public debt, and remain part of the euro zone. And neither of these two parties wants to align with the right-leaning coalition led by former Prime Minister Mr. Berlusconi (who on March 7 was yet again sentenced to a jail term), even though Berlusconi's PdL coalition won nearly as many Senate seats as did Mr. Bersani's PD party. Parliament is set to reconvene on March 15, but very likely with no Prime Minister. One can only think that sooner rather than later financial markets will again say "basta", and Italian/German bond-yield spreads will widen to another crisis point. And if, as the way out of the deadlock, it is decided to ask Italians to vote again, would another election make any difference?

Meanwhile, in the walled-off-state-within-Rome known as the Vatican, there's also an effort underway to pick a new leader - Cardinals will begin their Conclave deliberations on Tuesday, during which they will seek to replace Benedict XVI. The Pope announced last month he was retiring, ostensibly because he was too old and frail to keep going (his words were that he no longer had the "strength of mind and body"). But many now think it was because he was unable to keep order. Scandal and turmoil are roiling the Roman Curia (the central administration of the Catholic Church), especially since the leaking of secret documents last year (the so-called "Vatileaks' affair) by the Pope's butler, Paolo Gabriele. Pope Benedict's police arrested Mr. Gabriele (who apparently was motivated by disgust with Vatican plotting, in-fighting, and scandal) ; but a few months later, Benedict changed his mind, pardoned the butler, and instead appointed three cardinals to investigate. Their report - all 300 pages - was submitted in December. Word is the contents were of such an explosive nature - replete with material relating to the blackmailing of gay priests, and to continuing, gross "irregularities" at the Vatican Bank (its official name is the Institute for Works of Religion; one of its unofficial functions is reportedly the laundering of Mafia money) - that Benedict decided right then to quit. Pity the new cardinal who steps in as the new Pope.    

Effective leadership, sorely needed in Rome, though elsewhere too, seems a rarity. Without it, the sweeping structural reforms required for the Italian economy, and the Catholic church, won't happen.

Updates

Updates are in order for developments in Italy, and in Northern Africa, particularly Tunisia and Mali.

​The worst-case election scenario occurred, in Italy, with a vote that produced no clear winner for a new government in Rome, and not even the emergence of one political party with support sufficient to permit the formation of a coalition government. With its huge public indebtedness, and years of virtually no economic growth, Italy's need is an effective central government that can continue former Prime Minister Monti's policies of structural reform and restoration of fiscal sanity. The Italian electorate, however, thought otherwise, voting against austerity (Mr. Monti garnered a mere 9-10% of the seats in each of the Chamber and Senate) and against politics as usual (Beppe Grillo's 5-Star Movement received sufficient support to hold a balance of power in the Senate between the right and the left). The country is now politically deadlocked; the cost of financing public sector debt has risen (10-year bond yields jumped in today's auction, from 4.1% to 4.83%); even another election may be required. Watch for Mr. Bersani (leader of the centre-left Democratic Party, which won the most seats in the Chamber of Deputies) to attempt an alignment over the next two weeks with Mr. Monti's centrist supporters. All of Europe, especially the Germans (who end up funding Europe's bail-outs), have a vested interest in at least some semblance of political stability in Italy. But the improbable ease by which so many earlier coalition Italian governments were pasted together, appears unlikely this time.

Across the Mediterranean, in Tunisia, where the Arab Spring movement began over two years ago, there's an extraordinarily positive development: the Islamist-led government in Tunis has just agreed to a re-do of its cabinet, admitting non-Islamist figures as replacements in certain key Ministry positions. Prime Minister Hamadi Jebali resigned last week after his own, Islamist Ennahda party rejected his plan for exactly this kind of technocratic cabinet - to calm unrest, fueled by the murder of secular politician Chokri Belaid on February 6. Moderate, secular, middle-class Tunisians are no doubt encouraged. Moreover, Mr. Morsi's government in Cairo, and others in Middle East capitals, should take heed. This "Tunis tune-up", broadening the government's representation - and hence its legitimacy - may be early evidence of a spreading "Turkish" model of governance for 21st-century, Middle East, post-autocratic,​ societies.

And moving south and west from Tunisia, French and supporting pan-African forces have had success in routing Islamic-Jihadists, not only from Malian cities, but even from their desert hide-outs in the northern fringes of Mali's border with Algeria. French President Hollande must be elated by his African success (especially since, at home, the French economy is faltering). His prediction at the beginning of this month that French forces could be withdrawn from Mali "within a few weeks", and replaced by perhaps a UN peace-keeping contingent, is, however, yet to be born out. Indeed, President Obama announced late last week that America would add a few hundred troops in neighboring Chad, as a means of supporting drone surveillance over Mali, Niger and Algeria. Expansion, then, rather than withdrawal, of French and other Western involvement in northern Africa seems at least as likely. ​