Geneva – Addressing the Impact on Human Security of Environment and Migration Issues – Ensuring human security in a world challenged by the three pressing issues of the day - climate change, environmental degradation and migration – will be the focus of an international conference in Geneva on 19 February.

Jointly organized by Greece under its chairmanship of the Human Security Network and IOM, the conference will examine both the impact of environmental degradation and climate change on human security and migration as well as the impact of migration on the environment and how interaction on these two phenomena can lead to potential conflict.

While there has been increasing international focus on climate change, environmental degradation and migration as separate subjects, the impact of both on human security and the potential for conflict, has not received the same level of attention from policy makers and researchers.

Although data on the number of existing environmental migrants – those “persons or groups of persons who, for compelling reasons of sudden or progressive changes in the environment that adversely affect their lives or living conditions, are obliged to leave their habitual homes, or choose to do so, either temporarily or permanently, and who move either within their country or abroad” - and projections on future numbers are unclear with the latter varying enormously from an estimated 25 million to one billion by 2050, people across the world are having to leave their homes or countries because of rising sea levels, scarcity of water, inability to farm sustainably as well as vulnerability to an increasing number of weather phenomena that destroy lives and livelihoods.

Human displacement caused by natural disasters both sudden and slow on-set, in addition to political conflicts, also play a critical role in environmental degradation and tensions over decreasing resources especially water and land.

The conference, which will have keynote presentations by Theodoros Skylakakis, Secretary General for International Economic Relations and Development Cooperation at the Greek Foreign Ministry, IOM Director General Brunson McKinley, the Secretary General of the World Meteorological Organization (WMO), Michel Jarraud and Kyung-wha Kang, UN Deputy High Commissioner for Human Rights will not only identify key issues surrounding climate, environmental degradation, migration and human security, but will also explore ways of mitigating the impact of migration on the environment as well as using migration strategies to help limit environmental damage and potential human crises.

Panellists include E.Angus Friday, Grenada’s Ambassador to the UN in New York with Grenada chairing the Alliance of Small Island States, as well as prominent representatives of the academic and NGO community.

“Early planning and action on this complex and multi-dimensional issue can go a long way in lessening the impact of climate change, environmental degradation and migration on human security. We have an opportunity here of taking a step forward in addressing this issue,” says Brunson McKinley.

“Greece, presiding now the Human Security Network felt that people’s migration due to worsening climate and environment constitutes a challenge for human security. Geneva, where many of those who understand this serious and complex issue work and live, seems the right place to tackle this issue,” says Greece’s Ambassador to the United Nations in Geneva, Franciscos Verros.

The Human Security Network is a group of 13 countries from various regions of the world which maintains dialogue at Foreign Ministers level on questions pertaining to human security and as an informal, flexible mechanism, identifies concrete areas for collective action.

The conference, which is being held at the headquarters of the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO) in Geneva, is open to the media.

For background papers and the agenda, please go to www.iom.int and http://www.greeceun.org.

 THE EU LOOKS TO THE MEDITERRANEAN AND TO THE BLACK SEA AS ITS NATURAL FRONTIERS. SYNERGIES IN THESE AREAS WILL SERVE ITS INTERESTS. IN THE CASE OF THE BLACK SEA, VIA EU NEW MEMBERS BULGARIA AND RUMANIA, THE EU IS ALREADY PART OF LOCAL REGIONAL ORGANIZATIONS.

[Comment by Fabrizio Tassinari on Euobserver] Sailing the black sea at last.

February 7, 2008EUOBSERVER / COMMENT - At a meeting between the EU and Black Sea countries foreign ministers in Kiev on February 14th, the EU will finally kick off its new Black Sea policy.

In view of the 2007 expansion of the EU to Bulgaria and Romania, and after some ten years since the European Commission’s only communication on Black Sea cooperation, the launch of the Black Sea Synergy last spring was a long-awaited and welcome step.

Now it’s time to deliver, which is where things could begin to look difficult.

In this new initiative, the commission identifies as many as thirteen cooperation areas. It plans to draw the EU closer to the existing regional organisations, primarily the Black Sea Economic Cooperation (BSEC) organisation. And it aims to correlate region-wide developments with the resolution of the ‘frozen conflicts’ in Georgia, Moldova and between Armenia and Azerbaijan. All this is not endowed with new financial means, but will draw on existing resources, as well as on mechanisms for joint financing with other international actors operating in the region.

These indications appear sensible and promising, but they also raise a number of important questions that the Black Sea countries and the commission will have to address if the proposed policy is to be effective and sustainable.

First, there is the sector-specific focus of the initiative. The commission places a strong emphasis on sectors such as the environment, energy and transport, where EU programmes and initiatives are already up and running. This is understandable. EU-sponsored mechanisms in these fields deserve a new boost, particularly the case of energy, where enhanced Black Sea cooperation could play a key role in the EU’s fledging goal of supply diversification.

The inclusion in the Synergy of issues such as democracy and internal security is also noteworthy.

Regional cooperation and exchange of best practices in these fields could potentially have a major impact on the fragile governance structures of most former Soviet countries. Likewise, EU initiatives when it comes to the promotion of democracy could take particular advantage of the interest shown for the Synergy by local and regional authorities, as well as non-governmental actors in the region.

Overall, however, the list of priorities is a bit on the long side: issues such as employment, science and technology have little regional specificity and could in the long run dilute the effectiveness of the new initiative.

The second question relates to the institutional level. The Synergy will not create new institutions, and the commission has obtained observer status in the BSEC. These are, as such, sound moves. Black Sea cooperation is already a jungle of agreements, associations, and acronyms. And BSEC, with a membership spanning from the western Balkans to the Caspian shores, represents the most comprehensive forum to discuss pan-regional issues.

At the same time, the EU would be well advised not to rely exclusively on this organisation for its Black Sea policy. What should warn against it is, on the one hand, BSEC’s relatively modest implementation record over the past fifteen years. Furthermore, the EU would have much to gain from including in its plans the other regional initiatives and their main sponsors: Romania, Ukraine and Georgia. As these countries emerge from a turbulent couple of years of domestic power struggles, they should be encouraged to revive and streamline the core business of organisations such as the Black Sea Forum and the Community of Democratic Choice.

Third, the launching of a Black Sea Synergy presents unavoidable challenges at the broader strategic level. Russia’s assertiveness in the region is of course the major stumbling bloc here. Should the new EU policy really fulfil its promise, it may further ratchet up Moscow’s aggressive posturing, especially in relation to its western neighbours, energy and the frozen conflicts. But this need not necessarily be so. Moscow’s recent constructive BSEC chairmanship suggests that the prospect of isolation can give way to a more cooperative attitude towards the EU in due course.

Lastly, and just as importantly, there is the issue of visibility and ‘branding’ of the region. A new framework organising Black Sea cooperation should send a strong signal about the importance that the EU attaches to this region. At the same time, regional leadership must necessarily come from the region itself, not from Brussels. One indirect outcome of the new EU initiative, in this respect, has to be a more concerted effort of the littoral actors to enhance cooperation and promote the region at the wider European level.

May the meeting next week point the way in that direction.

Fabrizio Tassinari, author of “A Synergy for Black Sea Regional Cooperation” (CEPS, 2006), is an Assistant Professor of Political Science at the University of Copenhagen, a non-resident Fellow at SAIS, Johns Hopkins University and at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), Brussels.

EU encouraged not to cut off moderate Islamists.

24.01.2008 - By Elitsa Vucheva for the EUobserver from Brussels.

The EU should include Mediterranean Arab states run by non-violent Islamist parties in more initiatives aimed at better governance and the development of civil society, as isolating them could lead to the reinforcement of radical Islamism, argues a study presented on Wednesday (23 January).

“Despite frequent assertions of a commitment to engage with moderate Islamists, Western governments have in fact remained reluctant to offer such groups support,” says the study titled Political Islam and European Foreign Policy – Perspectives from Muslim Democrats of the Mediterranean, published by the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS).

“Many talking shops have been convened on ‘Islam and democracy’ and ‘cultural understanding’ between Islam and the West. However, Western governments have declined to provide concrete backing for moderate Islamists engaged in pro-democracy campaigning,” it continues.

It is a “fair point” that the 27-member bloc has been neglecting civil society, said Merete Bilde, a policy advisor from the Council of the EU, underlining that she was speaking in a private capacity.

She added that the EU should start looking at the members of this civil society as genuine agents of reform, regardless of their religious beliefs.

However, the question of how to best approach “political Islam” very much depends on the different member states. Reaching a common EU position on the matter would be very difficult, she noted.

EU losing credibility
Alongside the recommendation that the EU needs to engage more with the so-called “Muslim democrats” of the Middle East and North African countries, the study also examines their views of the EU.

The EU has recently been losing credibility among these states, due in particular to its “procrastination over Turkey’s quest for [EU] accession” and the suspension of aid to the Hamas government in Palestine.

But the 27-nation bloc still has a more favourable reputation than the US in this region, the study notes.

In addition, members of Islamist political groups questioned by the different experts in the study mostly expressed positive views of European democracy, saying it could be used as a reference for their own countries.

The guarantee of freedom of association is particularly attractive to them, according to the document.

On the other hand, they are much less enthusiastic when it comes to liberal civil rights, rejecting in particular the “decline of spirituality, permissive homosexual rights, a certain conception of women’s rights, and the lack of ’social justice’ judged to be prevalent in European societies”.

Slovenia hopes for Kosovo solution by end of EU presidency.

By Elitsa Vucheva, for EUobserver, January 8, 2008
Slovenia is hoping the status of the Serbian breakaway province of Kosovo will be solved by the end of its EU presidency in June, and has indicated that an outcome other than independence for the province is unlikely.

Legally still a part of Serbia, Kosovo has been administered by the United Nations since 1999 and wants full independence from Belgrade.

“For Kosovo it’s clear what will happen, it’s more a question of how to do it”, Slovenian prime minister Janez Jansa told journalists on Monday (7 January) in Ljubljana.

It is “obvious” that a solution that satisfies both parties cannot be found and “it’s not possible” to force Serbs and Kosovars to live together after the way ethnic Albanians were treated during the regime of former Serbian president Slobodan Milosevic, Mr Jansa was reported as saying by AFP.

Kosovo will probably not obtain “total independence” right away though, he added.

It is likely to remain internationally supervised and dependent on NATO troops to guarantee its internal security.

While avoiding giving a concrete timetable, the Slovene premier has expressed the hope that the future status of Kosovo would be solved by the end of June – when his country’s presidency of the 27-member bloc comes to an end, according to French daily Liberation.

Further developments on the thorny issue are unlikely before the Serbian presidential elections, which take place on 20 January and 3 February.

The EU is still struggling to come up with a common position on Kosovo, with Mr Jansa stating that “it won’t be easy” to reach a unified stance among the 27 EU members.

While a large majority of member states are ready to recognise an independent Kosovo, some – such as Cyprus, Greece and Slovakia – are still reluctant to do so fearing this may set a precedent for other separatist regions.

Besides Kosovo, Slovenia is hoping to make headway on another sensitive dossier during its presidency.

It will try to push ahead with Turkey’s EU accession talks, despite opposition from some member states, notably France.

“We will try and enter negotiations on some new chapters” with Turkey, Mr Jansa said, but did not give any guarantees that there would be progress.

The opening of legislative chapters to be negotiated on the way to EU membership has to be approved by all national capitals.

“Of course we need total support from other member states. We will work on that but we cannot guarantee the outcome”, the Slovene premier added, according to Reuters.

—————————–

Further, as you can find on our EUobserver.com link, there is a change in the position of France regarding EU enlargement - this could make easier for the Slovenes to achieve what they set out to do.

France open to further EU enlargement - 08.01.2008                      —————————————————————————-
France has indicated that it is ready to support further enlargement of the
European Union, no longer believing that a greater number of member states
will prevent the effective working of the union.

 http://euobserver.com/9/25406/?rk=1

Rival priests do battle in Bethlehem church - The Church of the Nativity.
By Nasser Shiyoukhi in Bethlehem for AP.
Published: December 28, 2007.

Robed Greek Orthodox and Armenian priests attacked each other with brooms and stones inside the Church of the Nativity yesterday as long-standing rivalries erupted in violence during holiday cleaning.

The basilica, built over the grotto in Bethlehem where Christians believe Jesus was born, is administered jointly by Roman Catholic, Greek Orthodox and Armenian Apostolic authorities. Any perceived encroachment on one group’s turf can set off vicious feuds.

Yesterday, dozens of priests and cleaners came to the fortress-like church to scrub and sweep the floors, walls and rafters ahead of the Armenian and Orthodox Christmas, celebrated in the first week of January. Thousands of tourists visited the church this week for Christmas celebrations.

But the clean-up turned ugly after some of the Orthodox faithful stepped inside the Armenian church’s section, touching off a scuffle between about 50 Greek Orthodox and 30 Armenians.

Palestinian police, armed with batons and shields, quickly formed a human cordon to separate the two sides so the cleaning could continue, then ordered an Associated Press photographer out of the church.

Four people, some with blood running from their faces, were slightly injured.

 Excerpts From MaximsNews Network / - November 11, 2007 — A global public opinion survey by Gallup International - conducted in collaboration with the European Council on Foreign Relation (ECFR) - shows that there is growing public support for a more multi-polar world, and one in every three citizens around the world (35%) would like to see the European Union’s influence to grow.  Authors Ivan Krastev and Mark Leonard point out that “the EU is unique among the four big powers (the other three being the US, China and Russia) in that no-one wants to balance its rise”.

The 2007 edition of “Voice of the People”© - the world’s largest survey this year based on interviews with 57,000 people from 52 countries - shows that world citizens most disapprove of an expansion of Iranian and US power.

39% of respondents would like to see Iran’s power decrease, while 37% would like less US power in the world. Russia and China also provoke more negative than positive reactions. Whilst 23% and 24% of respondents, respectively, would like Russia’s and China’s importance to increase, 29% and 32% believe the world would benefit from a decline in their power.

According to the authors, the poll results show that the public does not yearn for a world order where US hegemony is simply replaced by rivalry between other military powers such as Russia and China. There seems to be increasing support for countries whose rise is not connected in the global imagination with military might.

India, South Africa and Brazil each received a positive overall approval rating in the survey, and are referred to as ‘herbivorous powers’ by Krastev and Leonard.

While most European countries are keen on an increasing global role for the EU, citizens in the UK are ambivalent about the issue. The UK scored the lowest within the EU in terms of its support for increased EU influence: only 32% of UK respondents support this idea, while 24% think the EU’s global role should decrease. In contrast to that, 65% of France’s population supports an increased EU role, while 69% of Greek, and 56% of Spanish and Italian citizens share this view.

Turkey is also amongst the countries with highest values of negative attitudes to the influence of the US (56% for the decrease, and barely 4% for an increase), as well as of Russia (43% for decrease and 4% for increase). Overall, the influence of the US is most welcome on the African continent (37%) and in Russia ((26%). However, the positive Russian attitude is not reciprocated in the US, where 34% of respondents want Russian power to decrease. Over half of all respondents in Canada (54%) and Latin America (53%) are opposed to increasing US influence.

While 51% of respondents in Western Europe (i.e. countries that were in the EU prior to the 2004 enlargement) oppose an increase in US power, in Central and Eastern Europe the negative view is only shared by some 37%. The survey also shows that as regards the US, the countries with the most positive view of expanding US power are Albania (71%), Kosovo (61%), Panama (45%), and the US itself (45%). Conversely, the countries with the highest proportions of people declaring that the US should have less influence are Bosnia and Herzegovina (80%), Luxembourg (74%), Greece (73%), Serbia (72%), and Finland (71%).

Krastev and Leonard argue that the EU’s increase in power is supported by many former European colonies, demonstrating that the colonial legacy of EU member states is declining in importance. They also point to worrying trends for the EU, such as a growing resistance to EU influence in places where the Union acts as a quasi-colonial power, such as Bosnia and Herzegovina. In Kosovo, the EU’s increasing influence is desired by 55%, while that of the US is wished for by 61%.

With reference to Iran, the only two countries producing more positive than negative answers are Senegal (31%), and Hong Kong (28%). In the world, Luxembourg citizens are the most reluctant about Iran’s rise (72%), followed by 64% of Dutch and 57% of US citizens. Significant proportions of people in the Scandinavian countries (between 4-6 in ten) share this view.

Finally, some of China’s neighbours oppose the idea of an increase of its power. Considerable proportions of citizens in India, Philippines (both 42%), Japan (39%) and South Korea (34%) think it would be best for the world if China had less influence. Nearly half of US respondents (45%) feel the same way. Conversely, three quarters of citizens in Hong Kong (75%) would like to have a more influential China.

As per amNY.com the first three among the 20 contenders for a spot on the UNESCO list of the NEW SEVEN WONDERS OF THE WORLD are: The GREAT WALL OF CHINA, The Colosseum in Rome, and Peru’s MACHU PICCHU.

These are the leaders in this massive poll as it draws to an end. The Final results will be announced tomorrow, July 7, 2007, in Lisbon, Portugal. 90 million votes were counted so far, by the morning of Thursday July 5, 2007!

The top ten also include: Greece’s ACROPOLIS, Mexico’s CHICHEN ITZA pyramid, the EIFEL TOWER , EASTER ISLAND, Brazil’s Statue of Christ Redeemer, The Taj Mahal, and Jordan’s Petra.

The New York Statue of Liberty did not make it into the top ten. Is this a judgement based on the US war in Iraq?

Our personal preference, and vote, for the additional four were: the Acropolis, the Eifel Tower, the Statue of Liberty, and Easter Island.

To be honest, we also prefered STONEHENGE to the Colosseum.

From:        conferences at hartenergy.com
Subject:     Hear the latest in U.S. Biofuels Developments

Reply-To:        conferences at hartenergy.com

Policy & Technology Briefing

The Latest in U.S. Biofuels Developments
Tuesday, June 26, 2007, 10:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m.
GM Powertrain Offices, Pontiac, Michigan

Register now by emailing Gretta Pieper, Conference Manager

CONFIRMED SPEAKERS INCLUDE:

· David Fleischaker, Secretary of Energy, State of Oklahoma

. Paul N. Argyropoulos, Senior Policy Advisor, Office of Transportation & Air Quality (OTAQ), U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

· Michael McAdams, Executive Director, Government Affairs, Hart Energy Consulting

· Scott Mason, Director, Business Development, ConocoPhillips

COVERED TOPICS:

· The future of cellulosic ethanol

· California’s Low Carbon Fuel Standard

· Status report on global biofuels policy developments

· Where will Congress take biofuels next?

· Update on EPA’s activities in the biofuels arena

Seating for this Briefing is extremely limited, and we urge you to RSVP as soon as possible!   Registration is complimentary for International Fuel Quality Center, Global Biofuels Center and World Refining & Fuels Service (WRFS) members - see list.  Registration for non-members is $495.

To reserve your spot, contact Gretta Pieper, Conference Manager,  gpieper at ifqc.org or +1.713.260.6417.

With appreciation to General Motors Corporation for hosting this event.

Hart Energy Consulting   |   1616 S. Voss, Suite 1000   |   Houston, Texas 77057 USA   |   1.713.993.9320