We share the view that North Korea, a top priority on the international agenda, increasingly poses a new level of threat to international peace and security. We are seriously concerned with and condemn in the strongest terms North Korea's continued nuclear tests and ballistic missile launches, including the recent launch of a ballistic missile of possible intercontinental range, in flagrant violation of multiple UN Security Council resolutions. We stand ready to strengthen measures aimed at further restricting the transfer of relevant items and technologies and funding for North Korea's nuclear and ballistic missile programmes and, to that end, we call for the early adoption of a new and comprehensive UN Security Council Resolution. We strongly call on the international community to redouble its efforts to ensure the sustained, comprehensive and thorough implementation of all relevant UN Security Council Resolutions.
North Korea must refrain from any further provocations that further increase regional and international tensions. We call on North Korea to immediately and fully comply with its international obligations under all relevant UN Security Council resolutions, as well as the 2005 Joint Statement of the Six-Party Talks and thus abandon all nuclear, other weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missile programmes and to engage in actions for credible dialogue with the international community that pursues the complete, verifiable and irreversible denuclearisation of the Korean Peninsula.
North Korea must further promptly address the international community's humanitarian and human rights concerns, including through speedily resolving the abductions' issue.
Mr. Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, Mr. Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission, and Mr. Shinzo Abe, Prime Minister of Japan, met in Brussels today for the 24th Summit between the European Union (EU) and Japan and issued the following statement.
We, the leaders of the EU and Japan, met today in Brussels to reaffirm the strength of our Strategic Partnership and to demonstrate our resolve to work together for peace, prosperity and a rules-based international order. We remain united by our common values of democracy and the rule of law and by our determination to promote together an open and fair global economy that benefits everyone. These are the foundations of our political and economic Strategic Partnership for peace, prosperity and a rules-based international order - serving to unite us bilaterally and also to make us stronger internationally.
Today marks the beginning of a new chapter in the Strategic Partnership between the EU and Japan as we celebrate the agreement in principle of the Economic Partnership Agreement and the Strategic Partnership Agreement at political level.
The highly ambitious and comprehensive Economic Partnership Agreement will consolidate our solid and evolving trade and economic partnership and pave the way for the future. It will bring our two economies closer by addressing issues related to market access for goods, services and investment, procurement including railways, as well as those related to non-tariff measures and the protection of geographical indications as well as intellectual property rights. This agreement will allow us to renew and strengthen our joint commitment to international standards for an even closer cooperation in the future. At the same time, with this agreement in principle of the Economic Partnership Agreement, Europe and Japan demonstrate to the world - and to our citizens - that free trade, with clear and transparent rules fully respecting and enhancing our values, remains an important tool to promote prosperity in our societies. The EU-Japan Economic Partnership Agreement will constitute the basis for a strategic partnership for free and fair trade, against protectionism.
We tasked our respective negotiating teams with a rapid finalisation of the agreement that would allow for the internal procedures to start soon, both in the EU and in Japan.
With shared responsibility for achieving peace, stability and prosperity of the world, Japan and the EU also reached agreement in principle of the Strategic Partnership Agreement. This will provide a framework for an even deeper and more strategic EU-Japan cooperation that enables our partnership to grow and to face new types of challenges.
At a time where the rules-based international order is under increasing pressure, the Economic Partnership Agreement and the Strategic Partnership Agreement recapture the shared values and common principles that form the foundation of the EU-Japan partnership, including human rights, democracy and the rule of law.
We took the opportunity before attending the G20 Hamburg Summit tomorrow to discuss our cooperation in other important areas, including on our joint efforts to address the global threat of climate change and other international challenges.
Last week, I snuck in an extra posting, as part of my reflections on a workshop I attended at Sussex on Brexit and euroscepticism. As I mentioned in passing, there were other ideas that floated around my head that day, including this one.
One of the more persistent ideas that I have tried to communicate to people – both academic and non-academic – is that it doesn’t make sense to talk of ‘euroscepticism’: it implies a coherence that simply doesn’t exist, given the vast array of ideologies, motivations and manifestations that are contained therein.
My usual summary of this point is something like: there’s no euroscepticism, only euroscepticisms.
Well, suffice to say that this point is not currently enjoying wide usage, so maybe it’s me and how I express myself.
I had another bash at this last week, when I dipped my toe into popular culture – ok, the popular culture of the late 1960s, but still – to try and reframe the point. I also tried this point on Twitter earlier this week, so I’m now going to have a go and a more fulsome attempt.
The Beatles as the EU
I’m going to assume you’ve heard of The Beatles, so we can avoid an early end to this post. I’ll also assume you have a view on their work and impact.
Now think of the Beatles like the EU. Both represent the emergence and mainstreaming of a new form – of music and political organisation – in the post-war period, both building on elements that existed elsewhere, but never in such a substantial and consequential kind of way. In fusing various traditions and practices, both produce something innovative, albeit with much less screaming and protestations of love in the EU’s case.
To do this is not to attribute affect to either at this stage: like them or not, they matter.
But of course, affect does get applied to both and this is where we encounter diverging paths.
On one path, you can argue that both mark out the future: their invention and creation fundamentally change the nature of what is possible and irresistibly draw in all who follow. Sure, there are people who don’t like them, but no one can ignore them and ultimately everyone will be shaped and conditioned by them.
On the other, you might feel that they’re alright, but they are not all that: they represent just one or the many possible ways of doing things. Maybe they do influence things, but there are other traditions, other practices, that do not lend themselves to musical or political assimilation. In some cases that’s a matter of choice, but in others it’s more a matter of nature, because the basic assumptions underpinned those alternatives start in a radically different place.
The basic difference in positions is thus how one sees others: in the former, any expression of difference is largely one of the squeak of adjustment to the new reality; in the latter, it’s the legitimate expression of another world-view.
So who’s the eurosceptic in the Beatles then?
The thing about seeing the Beatles (or the EU) as the best thing since sliced bread is that one tends to become rather protective: anyone or anything that gets in the way or disrupts them is A Bad Thing.
At which point we say hello to Yoko Ono.
In the Beatles-as-the-future option, Yoko is a wrecker, a destroyer of harmony (on both senses). She comes in, distracts and then removes John from the mix and generally takes the band away from their core mission. One sometimes has the impression that some fans would prefer that the Fab Four had been locked in a room, so they could produce their work, unhindered, for the rest of their days, away from distraction.
But in the Beatles-as-one-possible-path model, Yoko is simply one more influence on a band that has always thrived on meeting and incorporating influences: think of their encounters with mysticism, drugs and their changing personal situations, all of which threw up new classics (and Yellow Submarine).
Moreover, Yoko is not simply a function of John, but a person and an artist in her own right: the Beatles did not call her into existence, but rather found her drawn into their orbit, where she changed them, just they changed her.
And I’d argue that euroscepticism is a bit like Yoko, in this second model.
The large majority of eurosceptics were previously politically active prior to their adoption of euroscepticism, and all eurosceptics have world views that extend beyond the question of European integration. But their interaction with the EU gives a focus and a direction to their political activity. And – just like Yoko – once they step away from the European issue – as is happening in the UK - they still have ideas and interests that they want to pursue.
The problem comes from those who treat eurosceptics like Yoko-the-wrecker: an annoyance, that should just go away or be ignored.
That approach has not worked and will not work, for the simple reason that eurosceptics are invested in their work, just as Yoko was invested in John. The key difference is that Yoko never tried to make the band into graphic artists.
But it does point towards a strategy for the EU, namely seeking to bring eurosceptics back into the debate, to demonstrate good faith in discussing and debating their ideas and seeing what common ground exists. I appreciate this is moving away from the Beatles/Yoko thing, but that’s always the problem of the over-extended metaphor.
So there we go, a different way of thinking about eurosceptics.
If you want to make a case for Ringo-as-eurosceptic, please feel free to write your own post on that one.
The post The ballad of Jean-Claude and Yoko: understanding euroscepticism appeared first on Ideas on Europe.
Antonio Tajani, President of the European Parliament
Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission
Federica Mogherini, High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy / Vice-President of the European Commission
Werner Hoyer, President of the European Investment Bank
Markku Markkula, President of the Committee of the Regions
Dimitris Avramopoulos, Commissioner for Migration, Home Affairs and Citizenship
Neven Mimica, Commissioner for International Development
Julian King, Commissioner for Security Union
Louise Arbour, United Nations Special Representative for International Migration
William Lacy Swing, Director General of the International Organisation for Migration
Claude Moraes, Chair of the Committee on Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee
Linda McAvan, Chair of the Committee on Development
G20 leaders meet in Hamburg, Germany, on 7 and 8 July 2017. The theme of the German presidency of the G20 is 'Shaping an interconnected world'. Leaders discuss the main topics of economic, financial, climate, trade, employment and development policy. Migration and refugee flows and counter-terrorism are other key issues of global significance that appear on the summit agenda. The President of the European Council and the President of the European Commission represent the EU at the summit.