The European Political Newspaper

A declaration to tackle global wildlife trafficking routes has been signed by the Sustainable Shipping Initiative (SSI) – a coalition of companies from across the global shipping industry.

As reported by Hellenic Shipping News online, the declaration was unveiled by The Duke of Cambridge, President of United for Wildlife, and is the culmination of 12 months of work to develop a plan, led by the transport sector, to crack down on illegal wildlife trafficking routes.

The declaration states that shipping must earn a reputation for being a trusted and responsible partner in the communities that it touches around the world.

The United for Wildlife Transport Taskforce Buckingham Palace Declaration is a landmark agreement, outlining 11 commitments aiming to help support the private sector in fighting the illegal wildlife trade. These include: increasing passenger, customer, client, and staff awareness about the nature, scale, and consequences of illegal wildlife trade, promoting the declaration’s commitments across the entire transport sector , improving the training of staff within the transport sector to enable them to detect, identify and report suspected illegal wildlife trade, and acknowledge staff who champion this cause, and notifying relevant law enforcement authorities of cargoes suspected of containing illegal wildlife.

The post Global shipping industry sails against wildlife trafficking appeared first on New Europe.

Russian authorities have imposed a climate of fear in Crimea, according to a today’s report by the Human Rights Watch.

“Crimea’s isolation has made it very difficult to conduct comprehensive human rights monitoring there,” said Hugh Williamson, Europe and Central Asia director for Human Rights Watch. “But serious human rights abuses in Crimea should not slip to the bottom of the international agenda.”

Since Russian forces began occupying Crimea in early 2014, the space for free speech, freedom of association, and media in Crimea has shrunk dramatically, the humanitarian organization said. HRW accused the authorities of not conducting investigations into actions of armed paramilitary groups, implicated in torture, extra-judicial killings, enforced disappearances, attacks and beatings of Crimean Tatar and pro-Ukraine activists and journalists.

According to NGO, under the pretext of combating extremism or terrorism, the authorities have harassed, intimidated, and taken arbitrary legal action against Crimean Tatars, an ethnic minority who openly opposed Russia’s occupation.

“For the last two years, many Crimean Tatars have consistently, openly, and peacefully opposed Russian actions in Crimea,” Williamson said. “Russia has been making Crimean Tatars pay a high price for nothing more than their principled stance.”

Local authorities declared two Crimean Tatar leaders personae non gratae and prohibited them from entering Crimea. Moreover, the authorities also harassed and intimidated Crimean Tatar activists and conducted intrusive and sometimes unwarranted searches at mosques and Islamic schools.

HRW reported that under international law, the Russian Federation is an occupying power in Crimea as it exercises effective control in Crimea without the consent of the government of Ukraine, and there has been no legally recognized transfer of sovereignty to Russia.

“Russia bears direct responsibility for the surge in rights abuses in Crimea,” Williamson said. “Russia’s international partners should sustain constant pressure on Russia to stop human rights abuses on the peninsula.”

The post HRW: Climate of fear established in Crimea appeared first on New Europe.

France launched a new prison program aiming to combat fundamentalism among prison inmates. The plan was initially unveiled in February 2015.

France established designated wards in French prisons for detainees, who adopted the jihadism ideology. The specialized units accommodate all but the more radicalized inmates. The detainees in the anti-jihadist units are supervised by more guards and receive a special treatment which focuses more on mental health and education. Psychologists are meeting with the prisoners who they are also encouraged to engage in political discussions, attend theatre workshops and discuss with experts about the jihadist ideology. Inmates who refuse to participate in the de-radicalization process are expelled from the program.

In 2015, Newsweek reported that even though Muslims make up less than 10 percent of France’s 66 million population, half of the prison population in the country are Muslim. After the fatal Paris attacks and the fact that most of the attackers were French nationals, many criticized the authorities because it provided many Jewish and Christian preachers for the prisoners in need but very few Muslim preachers.

Last month the French newspaper Le Fiagro reported France’s Interior Ministry had identified 8,250 “radicalized” French people.

In the meantime, the French government is also trying to establish the first de-radicalization center aiming at freeing those who have been convinced by the ideology of extremist Islam. The center is expected to open in the summer, but its location remains unknown.

According to the Local France, the center will be a kind of boarding school for radicalized French youths aged 18 to 30, who may have tried and failed to travel to the Middle East. It will officially be called a centre for “reintegration and citizenship”.

The post French government reforms prison system to combat jihadism appeared first on New Europe.

ASTANA – Kazakhstan will not opt to purchase shares of BG Group in the Karachaganak Petroleum Operating (KPO) consortium, Kazakh national company KazMunayGas head Sauat Mynbayev said on March 17 in Astana.

The merger of the Anglo-Dutch oil and gas giant Royal Dutch Shell and of the British oil company BG Group was completed in February of this year.

As reported, according to the laws of Kazakhstan, after the completion of this deal government of Kazakhstan can opt to purchase shares of BG Group in the Karachaganak field. “No, we will not opt to purchase shares of BG, Shell is a potential buyer,” Mynbayev said at the briefing, responding to a question of journalists.

Karachaganak field is controlled by a group of investors, which, in addition to the BG Group, include ENI (29,25%), Chevron (18%), LUKoil (13.5%) and KazMunaiGas (10%).

As noted on the website BG Group, As noted on the website BG Group, production at the field is conducted at the highest level and is about 45% of the total gas production in Kazakhstan and 16% liquid hydrocarbons.

According to the Wall Street Journal, the Karachaganak field is about 15% of the total production of BG Group and 9% of its revenues in 2014 in the amount of $19 billion.

The Karachaganak field, discovered in 1979, is one of the world’s largest gas and condensate fields. Located in north-west Kazakhstan and covering an area of over 280 square kilometres, it holds estimated hydrocarbons initially in place (HIIP) of 9 billion barrels of condensate and 48 trillion cubic feet of gas, with estimated gross reserves of over 2.4 billion barrels of condensate and 16 trillion cubic feet of gas.

The post Kazakhstan not to buy the shares of BG Group in KPO consortium appeared first on New Europe.

A Bucharest court upheld a two year sentence for a Romanian MP on corruption charges; the court of appeal sustained that offering his voters fried chicken was indeed bribery.

Exchanging food for votes in rural areas in not unheard of in Romania; it is usually flour and oil. Florian Popescu went the extra mile.

During the 2012 Romanian legislative elections, candidate Florin Popescu distributed no less than 60 tons of fried chicken worth €108,000.

Since the first trial in 2014, Popescu had been known with the nickname “Chicken Baron.” He protested he did not have the time to east even one chicken wing.

Popescu resigned his post as an MP in March 2nd.

Romania ranked 58th in the corruption perception index of transparency international in 2015 making strands from its 69th place in 2014.  In 2015, the famous Romanian National Anti-Corruption Agency (DNA) was pursuing 10,000 cases and was believed to be going after a third of the country’s business and political elite. Nonetheless, a Council of Europe report published in January 2016 asked Romania to do more to promote transparency, especially as at a legislative level, where the report notes “gifts” and “conflict of interest” are not unknown.

However, the use of food rather than hard cash points towards a related to corruption challenge. Besides having a serious corruption challenge, according to Eurostat, Romania has the second biggest population in Europe after Bulgaria in risk of poverty and social exclusion.

(with AP, The Telegraph)

The post Jail time for Romanian MP trading votes for chicken appeared first on New Europe.

Nearly half of Thailand’s monks are severely overweight, according to a new study. And now the government has launched a health drive among its clerics.

A new study revealed that 48% of the country’s monks are obese and face numerous physiological problems as a result.

An academic directing the health-awareness campaign told the Bangkok Post that about 10% of the clergy suffer from diabetes, while 23% have high blood pressure and 42% show excessive levels of cholesterol.

“Obesity in our monks is a ticking time bomb,” Jongjit Angkatavanich, the academic from the Faculty of Allied Health Sciences at Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok, told the Post.

The monks are often given foods laden with high fat and sugar content by devotees, which they are reportedly forbidden from refusing.

Meanwhile, the Thai government, which pays the monks’ medical expenses, reportedly spent in excess of $8.5m on them in 2012 alone.

According to The Telegraph, the obesity epidemic in Thailand seems to contradict the requirements of the monastic lifestyle. They’re supposed to live strict, plain lives, reject materialism and excess, and spend their time in meditation. But in Thailand, Buddhism isn’t without scandal. Several financial, sexual, and lifestyle controversies have befallen senior clerics and its former spiritual leader (they’re currently lacking one) has been accused of tax evasion.

The post Thailand’s Buddhist monks eating their way to obesity, taking big bites out of state health budget appeared first on New Europe.

A Russian MP prepares a law that criminalizes any comment perceived as an insult against the Russian Presidency.

The draft law is being prepared by Russian MP Roman Khudyakov, member of the nationalist Liberal Democratic Party of Russia (LDPR). The maximum penalty would be up to six years in jail. Khudyakov said the draft law was in response to several YouTube videos purportedly criticizing the Russian president, Vladimir Putin.

According to Newsweek, Khudyakov told national daily newspaper Izvestia that he started preparing the bill after citizens from his Tambov region alerted him to the videos mocking Putin. “They asked me how such videos can exist for the public to access,” Khudyakov said and added, “when I watched it I was outraged to the depths of my soul.”

The Russian MP said that he had decided to model the new bill on the 1990 law “On the protection of the honor and dignity of the president of the USSR.” Russian website, RT, reported that according to the current Russian law, insults against the Russian president can be qualified as insulting a state official, which is a criminal offense punishable by up to one year of hard labor.

The deputy head of the Russian Parliament’s Committee for Criminal Law, Sergey Fabrichnyi of the parliamentary majority United Russia party, said that he saw no obstructions to discussing Khudyakov’s proposal.

A similar law is in force in Turkey, and the Turkish authorities have used it numerous times for persecuting citizens who insulted, Turkish President, Recep Tayyip Erdogan

The post Russian MP prepares law against insulting the President appeared first on New Europe.

Every individual or country that criticizes Turkey over democracy and rule of law and doesn’t suport the war launched by the Turkish govenrment against terrorism is an enemy, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan said on Wednesday.

German news agency, dpa, reported that on Wednesday Erdogan slammed all the organizations and individuals criticizing Turkey over values like “democracy, freedom and rule of law.” During a speech he gave in Ankara to local district leaders, Erdogan said that for the Turkish government “these phrases have absolutely no value any longer,” and only “those who stand on our side in the fight against terrorism are our friend. Those on the opposite side, are our enemy,” he said. According to dpa, Erdogan’s speech was punctuated with standing ovations and regular applause.

Turkish daily Hurriyet also reported that Erdogan pledged to “annihilate all terrorists,” on March 17, hosting a ceremony for the veterans and families of soldiers killed in the fight against the outlawed Kurdistan’s Workers Party (PKK). “Sooner or later, we will annihilate all terrorists in this country with God’s permission,” the Turkish President said.

“Since last July, more than 300 of our soldiers and police officers have been martyred. But do you know what we gained? We have shown both our friends and our enemies that these lands are our homeland,” Erdogan added.

Aggressive rhetoric and actions

On March 16, the Turkish president also strongly pressed parliament to lift the legal immunities of deputies of the Kurdish problem-focused Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP), which he repeatedly has accused of holding ties with PKK.

HDP is in favor of promoting a peaceful solution between the two sides and it has distanced itself from the use of violence deriving from both fronts. However, Erdogan said on March 16: “Believe me, if these [HDP deputies] get away with it, the resentment of our brothers who are currently fighting in the southeast and our brothers who have been martyred there would ruin us.”

When HDP entered the Turkish Parliament in summer, Erdogan stopped the peace talks with PKK and blamed the left-center party for the PKK terrorist’s actions in Turkey. Because of HDP’s entrance, Erdogan’s Justice and Development Party (AKP) lost its single-party majority and the Turkish President was unable to change the Turkish political system.

In the second elections in November, AKP secured a comfortable win but HDP managed to remain in the Parliament, despite the aggresive critic by the government.

Now, Erdogan has broadened the definition of terrorism and stressed on March 14 that a terrorist, according to the Turkish state, is not only the person who pulls the trigger, but the “one who made that possible.” The Turkish President added that “their titles as an MP, an academic, an author, a journalist do not change the fact that they are actually terrorists.”

A number of academics and journalists are now accused of being Turkey’s enemies.

The post Erdogan: War against terrorism outweighs democracy and freedom appeared first on New Europe.

More than 60,000 minors have fled warzones to arrive in Germany during the refugee influx. And each one has his or her story to tell.

The reasons behind their flight to Europe and why they are at it alone are many, according to Niels Espenhorst of the Federal Association for Unaccompanied Minor Refugees. He spoke to Deutsche Welle (DW), Germany’s international broadcaster.

As reported by DW, some were sent by their families to escape conscription enforced by the army or militias. Others were separated from their families along the way. Often children leave home because members of their family have joined a militia and there is a danger that they will be drawn into the fighting.

For 16-year-old Fahad, who is currently living in a home for unaccompanied refugee minors in Berlin, it took him nearly a month to reach Europe from Damascus, passing through seven countries. According to DW, his first few weeks in the German capital were spent sleeping in a park across the street from Berlin’s Health and Social Services Office, which serves as a registration point for the refugees. After speaking to several officials, Fahad was put up in a hostel. Once again, he was left to his own devices.

There are currently some 2,000 other youths still waiting for their appointment to meet with the Social Services Office for Minors. They are without healthcare, a guardian or the possibility of attending school.

As for Fahad, he is fortunate to be preparing for his school leaving exams. “My future is the only motivation I have,” Fahad was quoted as saying.

His goal: “To one day have people look at me and ask, ‘Who is that?’ I want to be somebody”.

The post Refugee minors on their own in Germany appeared first on New Europe.

Earth Hour, a global World Wildlife Fund (WWF) initiative to raise awareness about climate change, will be marked by the European Parliament. All lights in its buildings will be switched off between 8.30pm and 9.30pm on March 19.

“Following the COP21 agreement, this year’s Earth Hour has a particular significance,” said European Parliament President Martin Schulz. “Thanks to the agreement reached in Paris we have to move from pledges to actions, from mapping the route for the future to walking on that route. Everyone has to commit to stop global warming and saving the planet – every individual, every organisation and every institution. That’s why the European Parliament is proud to take part in the Earth Hour.”

WWF is calling on everyone – individuals, businesses, governments and communities – to participate in Earth Hour by turning off their lights for one hour on March 19.

Last year, 172 countries and territories participated in Earth Hour and more than 10,000 landmarks and monuments switched off their lights. In Europe, these included the Eiffel Tower in Paris, the Brandenburg Gate in Berlin, the Acropolis in Athens, St. Peter’s Basilica in the Vatican, the Colosseum in Rome, the Alhambra in Granada and the Houses of Parliament in London.

The post European Parliament to go dark for Earth Hour appeared first on New Europe.

Italian officials blame the good weather for a sudden increase in immigration crossings from Libya, with ships picking up 3,100 migrants over the past three days.

As reported by The Associated Press (AP), some 712 migrants were picked up March 17 on top of 2,400 the two previous days, all grouped in small, flimsy rubber dinghies in international waters near Libya. Three bodies were found during rescues by mostly Italian ships on March 15.

“In these days there has been a window of weather that has been good for transiting this section of sea,” Coast Guard Cmdr. Filippo Marini said.

Meanwhile, the United Nations refugee agency (UNHCR) says 9,800 migrants have arrived in Italy this year through March 16, compared with 7,400 in the same period last year. Spokeswoman Barbara Molinario said that it was too early to speak of trends and this kind of concentration in short periods is not unprecedented — even if periods of calm seas in the winter are limited.

Most of the arrivals this year are migrants from sub-Saharan Africa, Molinario said, a flow that indicates that the closures along the route from Greece have not led to a shift of the people in that area toward Libya.

“They are the same that transited Libya last year, and not the Syrians, Afghan and Iraqis who go through Greece There is no sign of a change of route, although we don’t exclude that there can be one.”

The post From Libya to Italy, thousands of refugees arrive in rubber dinghies appeared first on New Europe.

British MPs and an MEP wrote a letter to US President Barack Obama asking him to stay out of Britain’s referendum on the country’s membership of the European Union (EU).

The letter, was the initiative of Leave.EU and the Grassroots Out Brexit campaigns, and carries the signatures of Peter Bone (Conservative), Kate Hoey (Labor), Kelvin Hopkins (Labor), Tom Pursglove (Conservative), Sammy Wilson (Democratic Unionist Party), and UKIP leader and member of the European Parliament, Nigel Farage.

The letter states: “With so much at stake, it is imperative that the question of exiting the European Union is not one answered by foreign politicians or outside interests, but rather by the British people who must ultimately live with change or the status quo.

The British politicians declare: “issues of national sovereignty must be decided exclusively by the people of the United Kingdom”. They state: “even a passive diplomatic recommendation in the matter of our national decision will receive the opposite of the intended effect.”

“The referendum vote is an act of democracy in its most direct form, and the question of whether or not to leave the EU is a rare political topic that is not owned by any one political party. This is a chance for the British people to choose the path of their country. Interfering in our debate over national sovereignty would be an unfortunate milestone at the end of your term as President.”

Kate Hoey MP said of the warning: “We felt it is important the President of the United States is aware that feelings will run high in the UK if he chooses to make an intervention. We have chosen to respectfully request he recognizes matters of sovereignty are best left to the citizens directly affected. We would certainly never think of visiting the United States and telling the US public how to vote in an election or the amendment of their constitution.”

Peter Bone MP added: “Whatever the President perceives the interests of the US to be it would be better for the relationship between our countries and his reputation with the British people if he kept his counsel to himself.”

British daily, The Independent, reported that Obama is expected to travel to the UK in April and use his power to persuade the Britons to remain in the EU. A governmental source told the Independent: “Barack Obama is coming over at around that time. You wouldn’t look stupid saying that [the President is going to tell British voters to stay in the EU]. It would be pretty shocking if he didn’t ask voters to stay in the EU.”

Bob Corker, the chairman of the US Senate foreign relations committee, said in February, that Obama was planning “a big, public reach-out” to convince the British citizens about the positives deriving from the EU Membership.

Tim Farron, leader of the pro-EU Liberal Democrats, told the British daily that the visit of the US President was “welcome”. He added: “This is a reminder that if Britain wants to be a big player on the world stage, then being in the EU is one of the ways we achieve it.

“Sometimes our friends from outside have a clear picture on where we stand. People often refer to the fact that we’re the fifth biggest economy in the world, but they forget we were only the seventh biggest economy when we joined the European Community [in 1973]. Our political relevance is enhanced by the EU,” Farron stressed.

The post British MPs ask Obama not to intervene in EU referendum debate appeared first on New Europe.

Syrian Kurds declared a de-facto federal region in Kurdish-controlled areas of northern Syria, after the end of a two-day conference in the town of Rmeilan in the Syrian province of Hassakeh on Thursday.

Representatives of the Kurdish, Arab, Assyrian communities and other ethnic groups participated in the conference and commonly decided to bring the three Kurdish-led autonomous areas (Jazira, Kobani and Afrin) under the umbrella of one federal region, called Rojava. According to the statement released after the conference, the federal region will be a part of Syria and an autonomous state.

“At least 200 representatives have met in Rmeilan to put forward this decision. We expect to hold several other meetings to discuss how the administration of this region will be organized… a federal and democratic Syria is a guarantee of coexistence and brotherly relations,” the statement reads.

The announcement was not welcomed by the Syrian government, as the Syrian Foreign Ministry said that “any such announcement has no legal value and will not have any legal, political, social or economic impact as long as it does not reflect the will of the entire Syrian people.” One of the main enemies of the Syrian regime, the Syrian National Coalition, also rejected the Syrian Kurds declaration and warned of any attempt to form autonomous regions that “confiscate the will of the Syrian people.”

According to Reuters, Washington, which supports Rojava forces in their battle against the Islamic State, also said that it would not recognize the new federation. “We don’t support self-ruled, semi-autonomous zones inside Syria. We just don’t,” said State Department spokesman John Kirby and added. “What we want to see is a unified, whole Syria that has in place a government that is not led by Bashar al-Assad, that is responsive to the Syrian people. Whole, unified, nonsectarian Syria, that’s the goal.”

On the other hand, according to the Associated Press (AP), Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov this week said that a federal system in Syria, is one possible option if the Syrian people agree to it.

Turkey, which is on war with the Syrian Kurds, also rejected the establishment of the federal region. A Turkish official told Reuters: “Syria must remain as one without being weakened and the Syrian people must decide on its future in agreement and with a constitution. Every unilateral initiative will harm Syria’s unity.”

However, the move most probably angered the Turkish government which fears that the growing Kurdish power in Syria will cause separatism movements in Southern Eastern Turkey, where most of the Turkish Kurds live. The Turkish government has already started military operations against the Syrian Kurdish Democratic Union Party (PYD) in Northern Syria and against the outlawed Kurdistan’s Worker’s Party (PKK) in Southern Eastern Turkey.

Syrian peace talks

Meanwhile, the UN envoy for Syria emerged from the fourth day of peace talks in Geneva to tell reporters that significant gaps remain between the two sides.

Staffan de Mistura said he’d host both sides separately on Friday to accelerate the process. He also said there were “no discussions about federalism” — a reference to the Syrian Kurdish declaration. De Mistura has said though that the Syrian Kurds deserve a spot at the negotiating table in Geneva.

Even though the Syrian Kurds are the most effective ground forces in the war against the Islamic State (IS) in Syria the PYD was left out of from the peace talks. The exclusion of the Syria Kurds, was in line with the demand of the Turkish government, which sees the Syrian party as a terrorist group which co-operates with PKK and threats the Turkish interests equally as the IS.

However, the rest of the international community doesn’t see PYD as a terrorist group and Moscow, strongly insisted that the Kurds should have been invited to the upcoming peace talks, suggesting that leaving them out could endanger Syria’s territorial integrity.

Rodi Osman, the head of Syrian Kurdistan’s office in Moscow, told Russian news agency, RIA Novosti, that the exclusion of the Syrian Kurds from the peace talks was a definite factor for the Rojava declaration.

“The second round of inter-Syrian talks is underway in Geneva, but Syrian Kurds were not invited. It means that the future of Syria and its society is decided without Kurds. In fact, we are pushed back into a conservative, old-fashioned system which does not fit well with us,” Osman said and added. “In light of this, we see only one solution which is to declare the creation of [Kurdish] federation. It will serve the interests of the Kurds, but also those of Arabs, Turks, Assyrians, Chechens and Turkomans – all parts of Syria’s multinational society. Given the complicated situation in Syria, we would become an example of a system that may resolve the Syrian crisis.”

The post Syrian Kurds declare de-facto federal region in Northern Syria despite criticism appeared first on New Europe.

European Union leaders will try to convince Turkey’s prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu on Friday to accept a common plan to help end Europe’s migration crisis in return for financial and political concessions but they remain unsure if Friday’s Brussels summit can clinch a deal.

“Tomorrow’s negotiations with Turkey won’t be very easy,” said German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who devised the outlines of the plan with Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, after EU leaders agreed a common stance on Thursday.

At late night talks in Brussels on Thursday, leaders arrived at a common for negotiations with Turkey that they said would not result in mass deportations and some differences were bridged over sweeteners to give Turkey in exchange for its help.

But Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said that reaching an agreement had not been easy.

“There too, it is a complicated process,” he said. “I think we can get a deal out of this, we have to get a deal out of this. But the race is not really finished yet.”

A senior Turkish official told Reuters that Davutoglu would press the EU to open up new areas of negotiation on its long-stalled bid to join the bloc, despite a veto threat by Cyprus.

“We’re on the right track but we’re not there yet,” French President Francois Hollande told reporters after the first day of talks in Brussels. “I can’t guarantee you a happy ending.”

Even if they can overcome possible Turkish objections, Thursday’s EU discussions revealed considerable doubts among the Europeans themselves over whether a deal could be made either legal in international law, or workable.

Desperate to ease the pressure placed on Europe’s borders by the arrival of more than 1 million migrants in a year, the EU has turned to Turkey hoping to stem the flow of refugees into overburdened Greece.

The plan would essentially outsource Europe’s biggest refugee emergency in decades to Turkey, despite concerns about its sub-par asylum system and human rights abuses.

Under it, the EU would pay to send new migrants arriving in Greece who don’t qualify for asylum back to Turkey. For every migrant returned, the EU would accept one Syrian refugee, for a total of 72,000 people to be distributed among European states.

In exchange for the help of Turkey — home to 2.7 million Syrian refugees — the EU will offer up to 6 billion euros in aid, an easing of visa restrictions for Turkish citizens and faster EU membership talks.

The summit chairman, EU Council President Donald Tusk, and Rutte are scheduled to present Europe’s terms for an agreement to Davutoglu on Friday for his endorsement.

If Davutoglu objects, the heads of state and government of the 28 EU nations will meet again to reconsider their position.

But Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel warned that Turkey must not expect a free ride: “We’d rather have no agreement than a bad agreement.”

Human rights groups and leading EU legislators have decried the plan as a cynical cave-in, sacrificing universal rights to pander to a restless electorate fed up with hosting people who are fleeing war and poverty.

Even some leaders acknowledged the EU was walking a tightrope.

“It is on the edge of international law,” Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite said before leaders signed off on the tentative deal.

The post EU reaches common position on proposals for Turkey, but deal far from sure appeared first on New Europe.

As the 28 EU heads of state and government went to dinner, they discussed economic issues with the European Central Bank (ECB) president Mario Draghi. “We need reforms and investments”, suggested an EU source, referring the to Jean-Claude Juncker investment plan of €72 billion.

Regarding the discussions that took place during the first part of the EU summit, the UK appears to have raised objections over VAT issues.

Concerning the migration issue, “atmospheric indications from EPP and S&D pre-Summit sessions were moving into a direction of the two political sides showing “understanding”. “Europe is facing a dilemma, either Idomeni, or Turkey”, an EU source insisted, talking about an agreement where Turkey would have a “processing role”. “None of the member states opposed” this, the EU source confirmed, while continuing to say that there would be a tripartite meeting between Turkish prime minister Ahmet Davutoğlu, European Council president Donald Tusk and European Commission president taking place either on Thursday late at night or on Friday morning.

On issues that remain open – like the Turkey agreement, the source pointed out that the EU’s determination remains intact, as there is a struggle in finding the correct wording on the five or six chapters in the negotiation of the country’s accession to the EU that appear to be “frozen”, due to Turkey’s refusal to implement the Ankara agreement on Cyprus. There is a common initiative on behalf of France and Cyprus concerning Turkey’s rejection of free circulation within Cyprus.

The 28 leaders are working at the moment in order to find a formula that secures Cyprus’ interests, but that will also provide acceptable wording for Turkey, “even in visual terms”. However, there is a second “objective difficulty”, if a deal between EU and Turkey is to be reached, as the plan has to be worked out in logistics terms, bearing a huge weight not only for Greece but for the EU as a whole. “Greece will then become a de facto outer border of Europe”.

New Europe has earlier presented the detailed plan that the European Commission was to present to the EU leaders tonight. “The alternative to this plan is not one, but many Idomeni-like situations”, the EU source concluded.

As far the visa liberalisation process is concerned, Turkey still has to fulfil the requirements of about half of 72 criteria by the end of April 2016, so that the EU can recommend to the member states the lifting of visa obligations for Turks on brief trips by the end of June.

The remaining problems consist of the French government’s opposing the visa liberalisation for Turks, partly on security grounds, due to popular fears that this would mean even more immigration, because modern, biometric passports would not be issued immediately. Cyprus also seeks for its citizens to be treated like all other EU citizens, something Turkey rejects since it does not recognise Cyprus as a state.

The post 28 EU leaders show ‘understanding’ while issues over Turkey and Cyprus remain open appeared first on New Europe.

EU leaders seem to be arriving at an agreement concerning their plan to send back to Turkey tens of thousands of would-be asylum seekers who set out by boat for the Greek islands, in exchange for concessions that would reward Ankara with billions of dollars in aid, unprecedented visa access to Europe and promises of faster European Union membership talks.

Leaders will meet on Friday with Turkish prime minister Ahmet Davutoglu.

Earlier today, Belgium’s Prime Minister Charles Michel said that he would rather have no agreement than a bad one. “We are going to defend European interests.”

“Turkey is really asking for a lot. I refuse to accept negotiations that sometimes resemble a form of blackmail,” said Charles Michel.

Human rights groups and leading EU legislators decried the plan as a cynical move, sacrificing universal rights to reward a restless electorate fed up with hosting people who are fleeing war and poverty.

Even some leaders acknowledged the EU was walking a tightrope.

“It is on the edge of international law,” Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaite said of the outline deal that the 28-nation bloc hopes to sign off on before putting it up for approval to Turkey on Friday.

Some also criticized Turkey, which hosts 2.7 million refugees, complaining it was cynically trying to exploit the situation to win concessions well beyond its reach under normal circumstances.

Desperate to plug a yawning border hole that has seen more than 1 million people arrive in Europe in search of sanctuary or jobs, EU leaders have been increasingly looking to outsource management of the influx to Turkey.

They see the deal with Turkey as a way to halt the flow by land and sea, especially as the weather turns warmer, and prevent people from turning to unscrupulous smugglers.

Under the plan, set to be finalized Friday in the presence of Turkish Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, the EU would resettle one Syrian refugee currently in Turkey to the EU, in exchange for each person that Turkey takes back to Greece.

Other issues of trust have surfaced. The EU will provide Turkey with 3 billion euros to help Syrian refugees, but will only increase that fund by up to another 3 billion euros more if Ankara uses the money appropriately.

Guy Verhofstadt, leader of the Liberal ALDE group in the European Parliament, said that “it cannot be the Turks who decide who enters the EU as a refugee. We have to keep the keys to Europe in our own hands.”

Spain also opposes any blanket return of migrants, even though the EU’s executive Commission insists that every migrant will have an individual interview and the right to appeal.

Cyprus is threatening to veto one of the sweeteners meant to win Turkey’s backing; faster EU membership talks. Turkey does not recognize the Mediterranean island’s Greek-Cypriot government.

“Every candidate country should fulfill its obligations, and it’s obvious that unfortunately, until now, Turkey hasn’t,” President Nicos Anastasiades said today.

The post EU leaders are nearing an agreement on Turkey, refugees appeared first on New Europe.

Privacy Shield is a transatlantic framework agreement that will “limit” and “regulate” how US firms handle European citizens’ data.

The agreement was concluded by the European Commission on February 2nd. But, the European Parliament feels the agreement is neither limiting nor regulating enough. And in any case, it is unlikely to survive legal scrutiny.

The digital transatlantic partnership

On Thursday, March 17, Members of the European Parliament were holding a hearing trying to scrutinize a transatlantic partnership worth billions of Euros and Dollars, but one that has received much less media attention. That is the so-called “Privacy Shield.”

Privacy Shield was the fruit of a negotiation that started in November 2015 to be concluded within three months, that is, a record by any measure. The Members of the “Citizens’ Rights, Justice and Home Affairs Committee” are scrutinizing an agreement that technology firms are quite eager to see ratified as soon as possible.

4,000 US-based tech-corporations operating in Europe, from Facebook and Google to Twitter and LinkedIn do not have a legal framework that regulates how the data they mine from individual citizens can be stored, used, and shared.

For an industry whose bread and butter is data that is quite consequential.

An industry on thin air

On October 6 2015, the European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruled that permitting US public authorities “access on a generalized basis” to the content of electronic communications “must be regarded as compromising the essence of the fundamental right to respect for private life,” that is, article seven of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. In effect, the ECJ obliterated the Safe Harbour agreement concluded by the Prodi Commission in 2000.

This was of course the result of a battle initiated by the Austrian litigation-activist, Max Shrems. Since Edward Snowden revealed the US intelligence operation “PRISM,” through which US authorities drew personal data from Facebook, Twitter, and Google, Schrems sought to find out whether his own data were protected. The Austrian law graduate began his litigation battle in Ireland – Facebook’s tax heaven of operations – and moved on to the ECJ.

Following the ECJ ruling in October 2015, the whole tech-sector in Europe was standing on regulatory thin air. A working group of 28 data protection regulators in the EU gave the European Commission a January deadline to come up with an agreement. Meanwhile, US-based technology firms were asked to limit Europeans’ personal data transfer to the United States.

For the industry, the clock was clearly ticking.

But, politics requires time

Today, the European Commission contends that Privacy Shield improves data protection standards. New standards include a US-based dedicated ombudsman to allow Europeans to raise concerns or complaints.

European Commission Vice-President Andrus Ansip, says that “personal data is fully protected.” Vĕra Jourová added that “the United States has given the EU binding assurances that public authority access for national security purposes will be subject to clear limitations, safeguards and oversight mechanisms.”

The EPP spokesperson, Axel Voss, moved to support the European Commission suggesting that the agreement is “of paramount importance to our digital economy” calling the new framework “clear” and “reasonable.”

Others are less convinced.

The Socialists and Democrats spokesperson, Birgit Sippel, said that the agreement does nopt seem “to rectify the problems with the previous system,” which means “it is unlikely to stand up in court.” ALDE group First Vice-President Sophie in ‘t Veld  also doubted “an ombudsman will have sufficient powers to oversee US intelligence services.” GUE/NGL accused the Commission of “merrily letting data transfers to the US continue” despite the ECJ ruling. The Greens/EFA group MEP Jan Albrecht called the “Privacy Shield” a reheating of the “Safe Harbour.”

The post Privacy Shield: a transatlantic partnership with many opponents appeared first on New Europe.

An extraordinary assistance programme to Greece is being drafted by the EU in order to achieve the fast implementation of the new asylum scheme, as well as the already approved relocation and readmission plan for refugees.

An EU source stated that in order to transfer migrants and refugees from the Greek islands to the mainland, and to implement the 1/1 scheme between Greece and Turkey, solid further assistance will be needed.

Greece will need 200 supplementary border control officers who will register the incoming migrants and refugees as supervisors of the whole procedure. Athens will also need 400 asylum handlers from the European Asylum Support Office (EASO), 50 repatriation specialists through the FRONTEX mechanism, 40 judges and other specialists in asylum law, 150 translators and further technical assistance.

EU sources confirm that the EU Commission’s plan has not yet been presented to any member state, not even to Greece.

At the moment, the heads of states and governments are taking a 20 minutes break, after dinner, in order to resume their negotiations surrounding the draft reports on migration that are on the table.

The post European Commission presents plan on human capital and technical assistance to Greece appeared first on New Europe.

The Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries and non-OPEC members will meet on April 17 in Doha in a bid to stabilise falling crude prices, Qatar’s Energy Minister Mohammed Bin Saleh Al-Sada reportedly said on March 16.

The Qatari minister, who is also the current OPEC president, said in a statement that 15 OPEC and non-OPEC members accounting for some 73% of global oil output supported the initiative, including the world’s top exporter Saudi Arabia, and Russia.

Russian Energy Minister Alexander Novak also said some 15 countries were expected to take part in the meeting. “We talked with ministers of different countries today and discussed the date of the relevant meeting and consultations between OPEC and non-OPEC countries. We agree such meeting will take place on April 17 in Doha,” TASS quoted Novak as saying, adding that documents for the meeting will be prepared during the remaining time.

“This is most likely to be a resolution or a joint declaration setting forth intentions of the parties to freeze oil production at the level not higher than in January 2016,” Novak added.

Brent crude was trading just under $39 a barrel on March 16, up from a 12-year low of $27.10 reached in January.

Iraq, the biggest source of OPEC supply growth in 2015, reportedly said on March 14 that the freeze initiative was acceptable.

“Measures to monitor arrangements will be discussed, he said. “Qatar, the chairing country in the OPEC, will now send invitations to all countries, both OPEC and non-OPEC members. About fifteen countries confirmed participation within the consultations framework,” Novak said.

Iran is ready to take part in the meeting, Novak said. The meeting will also discuss proposals on measures if production stabilisation arrangements are breached, he added.

Meanwhile, RT quoted Novak as saying that Tehran needs an individual approach in an oil production freeze, as the Islamic Republic’s production is at its lowest.

Konstantin Simonov, the general director of Russia’s National Energy Security Fund, told New Europe on March 17 that even without Iran, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iraq, “all of them together, produce some 26-27 million barrels per day so it will be enough. But, of course, there are a lot of obstacles in this story because first of all you can avoid Iran if you are speaking about the real amount of production. But if you are speaking about psychological aspect you can’t avoid Iran”. Simonov added that Iran is a member of OPEC and without the Islamic country “psychologically you cannot have the full deal”.

“But it is not only the Iran problem. This triangle Russia-Iran-Saudi Arabia is a very problematic. Saudi Arabia is one of the most serious political enemies of Russia. At least now we have a common threat – low oil prices,” he said.

“We can say this common threat can unite us and we can have common position on this issue but in reality we’re still enemies and it’s also the question what will be the result of this Syrian story, withdrawal of Russian troops from Syria because for Iran it was a very bad surprise. Iran was disappointed by this decision of [Russian President Vladimir] Putin but we were disappointed by the policy of Iran in Syria because the idea was very simple: Russia will give air force but Iran will give ground operations and Iran was not involved in this war,” Simonov said.

The post Oil producers want to prop up prices appeared first on New Europe.

The Presidential election that is taking place in the Republic of Congo will tell us much about the progress of democracy in the country, as well as our own western attitudes towards African democracy.

The pundits are confident that Angela Merkel will next year enter a fourth term as leader of one of the world’s great democracies. Shortly after that, David Cameron will voluntarily hand over his role as UK prime minister to whoever the UK Conservative Party – as opposed to the UK public – chooses. Two of Cameron’s three immediate predecessors served three terms. And, indeed, Lynton Crosby, the strategist credited with Cameron’s election successes, carried out exactly the same role for four-term Australian premier John Howard.

In Europe, the question of term limits for national leaders is never mentioned by voters. Where it is referred to at all, it is the stuff of rarefied discourse in academic common rooms. The priorities for electors are, as ever, the economy, public safety and security, healthcare, education and other staples.

In broad terms, the priorities of African voters are no different: why would they be? So when these voters are told by people in developed nations, often their former colonial masters, that they should not re-elect the same person more than once – regardless of any perceived public benefit that person or party may bring – this makes so little sense to them and appears so nakedly hypocritical that they suspect ulterior motives.

The democratic period was proceeded by a Marxist one-party state and civil war, and began early this century. It has been one of consistent economic growth, increasingly successful healthcare, literacy rates that rank amongst Africa’s highest, and a tax-to-GDP ratio at the EU average. The Republic’s main cities, Brazzaville and Pointe Noire, are safe and public security is significantly better than in most neighbouring states.

The nation works constructively with the Bretton Woods institutions, has an inflation rate of around 2% and a declining unemployment rate. It is an exemplary member of the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), the leading world body that works to assure transparency in the extractives sectors. The country is presently being punished as much as any other economy reliant on oil revenue, yet it is working hard to diversify.

It is far from perfect, of course.  In terms of social policy and development, there is much work to do. The Congolese understand this. In their streets, bars, homes and workplaces people talk keenly about priorities and hopes; and about their aspirations for their children (the average age in the Congo is a fraction under 20).

In many ways, though, Congolese people want more of the same – only better. They do not seem blinkered or downtrodden. They are as quick with criticism of government and politicians as citizens across Europe – an evening spent watching television brings this home quite forcibly. The fundamental difference is that they understand how bad things could be. Only last week, they saw on their televisions the terrorist murders in neighbouring Cote d’Ivoire and gaze daily across the great Congo river at the much less well-off and unstable Democratic Republic of Congo. They believe that things will continue to progress in their own country, and for the largest part believe that the president who has delivered all of this change remains preferable to the unknown.

I prefer to think, however, that it is goodwill, and not hypocrisy that has led to this ‘third-term’ disconnect. Many Europeans are passionate in wanting the best for those African states that we harmed at birth or later through neglect and brutal interventionism. In the 21st century, some of that passion translates into postcolonial guilt. But it is no less real for all that.

Yet here in Brazzaville, it feels very much like the European insistence on a two-term maximum ought to be a suggestion rather than a demand disguised as a moral imperative. If we truly wish to assist these proud sovereign states, Africans should never be expected to interpret our advice as orders.

The 2015 constitutional change that allowed Sassou Nguesso to stand again also brought in shorter presidencies, and passed to parliament the important power to appoint the re-instated post of prime minister. It reformed and gave significant new powers to the constitutional court. Additionally, it gave official status to the opposition, created a series of new national consultative bodies, beefed up human rights guarantees and introduced significant electoral reforms. It abolished the death penalty: no small feat. Yet these measures have been largely overlooked whilst we in the west remain fixated on the “third-term”.

It may be true that political term-limits foster strong institutions that act to check and balance governments and to prevent poor practice. Yet we in Europe have not reached consensus on that question ourselves, and therefore can hardly place it as the over-riding requirement of a nation’s progress. Moreover, Congo-B is a good example of a democratic African country whose people choose their leader freely but only for one more term, and even then on a strict basis of social and economic ‘deliverables’.

In this new, and dare one say even optimistic, era of African democracy the same laws of physics and politics seem likely to apply eventually. So, for now, Denis Sassou Nguessou is as popular as the Congo’s progress under his leadership would seem to justify. And perhaps for now we should accept African third-termers as a historical conclusion of the lifetimes’ work of the actual individuals who brought their nations through the tough times we ourselves created in the early 1960s.

Given a choice between a hopelessly split, ineffectual and often self-serving opposition against a capable operator and leader who won his political spurs in the toughest of ways and is committed to building on the solid foundations that he has created, the people of the people of the Republic of Congo look set to chose Denis Sassou Nguesso. That seems fair enough.

The post Republic of Congo: the power of democracy in Africa appeared first on New Europe.