|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on May 2nd, 2010 This is a sequel that we announced in our article posted http://www.sustainabilitank.info/#14986 on the meetings at Columbia University on Friday, April 30, 2010. This sequel deals with the presentation, and the discussion following it, by the President of the European Parliament, Professor of Chemical Engineering Jerzy Buzek, formerly the Prime Minister of Poland (1997-2001). ( the speech – http://www.ep-president.eu/president/view/en/press/speeches/sp-2010/sp-2010-April/speeches-2010-April-3.html ) The European Parliament was created in 1979 as an eventual development from what was started May 9, 1950 – 60 years ago – by the Robert Schuman declaration that formed the coal community. The coal and steel industries of six European, previously warring countries, united to show that after WWII a new Europe was born. This led to new peaceful International relations as a way of reconciliation and eventually to the creation of the EU. Jerzy Buzek was born on 3 July 1940 in Smilowice, a town in south-eastern Silesia which is now in the Czech Republic, to a prominent family, which participated in Polish politics in the Second Polish Republic during the period between the two World Wars. The family was part of the Polish community in Zaolzie. Buzek’s father was an engineer. After the Second World War, his family moved to Chorzów. He is a Protestant. In 1963 Jerzy Buzek graduated from the Mechanics-and-Energy Division of the Silesian University of Technology in Gliwice specializing in chemical engineering. He became a scientist in the Chemical Engineering Institute of the Polish Academy of Sciences in Gliwice. Since 1997 he has been a professor of technical science. He is also an honorary doctor of the universities in Seoul and Dortmund. Mr. Buzek told at the meeting that he went to study a hard science because in those days you could go nowhere with politics – politics were “of one color and falsified”he said, but in politics you can influence much more then in hard sciences he also said. Solidarity was the first non-communist party controlled trade union in a Warsaw Pact country. In the 1980s it constituted a broad anti-bureaucratic social movement. The government attempted to destroy the union during the period of martial law in the early 1980s and several years of political repression, but in the end it was forced to start negotiating with the union. in December 1989 Tadeusz Mazowiecki was elected Prime Minister. Since 1989 Solidarity has become a more traditional trade union, and had relatively little impact on the political scene of Poland in the early 1990s. A political arm founded in 1996 as Solidarity Electoral Action (AWS) – a rather rightist or center-right party – won the parliamentary election in 1997, but lost the following 2001 election. Those were the years that Jerzy Buzek was Prime Minister 1997-2001. In the 1980s Jerzy Buzek was an activist of the democratic anti-communist movements, including the legal (1980–1981 and since 1989) and underground (1981–1989) Solidarity trade union and political movement in communist Poland. He was an active organizer of the trade union’s regional and national underground authorities. He was also the chairman of the four national general meetings (1st, 4th, 5th and 6th) when the Solidarity movement was allowed to participate in the political process again. Jerzy Buzek was a member of the Solidarity Electoral Action (Akcja Wyborcza Solidarnosc, AWS) and co-author of the AWS’s economic program. After the 1997 elections he was elected to the Sejm, the lower house of the Polish Parliament, and was soon appointed Prime Minister of Poland. In 1999 he became the chairman of the AWS Social Movement (Ruch Spoleczny AWS) and in 2001 he became the Chairman of the Solidarity Electoral Action coalition. After losing the parliamentary elections in 2001, he stepped back from Polish political life (although he was elected a member of the European Parliament in 2004) and focused more on his scientific work, becoming the prorector of Akademia Polonijna in Czestochowa and professor in the Faculty of Mechanical Engineering of the Opole University of Technology in Opole. Buzek was elected to the European Parliament (MEP) from the Silesian Voivodeship, basing his candidacy only on the popularity of his name and on direct contact with the voters. He received a record number of votes, 173,389 (22.14% of the total votes in the region). His current party affiliation is with the Platforma Obywatelska, the governing party in Poland, which is a member of the European People’s Party – rather to the right in the European Parliament. On 7 June 2009, in the European Parliament election, Buzek was re-elected as a Member of the European Parliament from the Silesian Voivodeship constituency. Just as in the previous election, Buzek received a record number of votes in Poland: 393,117 (over 42% of the total votes in the district). In the 2004-2009 European Parliament, he was a member of the Committee on Industry, Research and Energy, an alternate member of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety, a member of the Delegation to the EU–Ukraine Parliamentary Cooperation Committee, and an alternate delegate for the delegation for relations with the countries of Central America. He served as rapporteur on the EU’s 7th Framework Programme for Research and Development, a multi-billion euro spending programme for the years 2007-2013. On 14 July 2009, Buzek was elected President of the European Parliament with 555 votes, becoming the first person from the former Eastern Bloc and the first former Prime Minister since Emilio Colombo to gain that position. He succeeded the German Christian Democrat MEP, Hans-Gert Pöttering. He has pledged to make human rights and the promotion of the Eastern partnership two of his priorities during his term of office, which will last two and a half years until, due to a political deal, Social Democrat MEP Martin Schulz will take over. At the meeting at Columbia University President Buzek said that we are in a time of transition period in the EU – going from treaty to treaty and enlargement. What does this mean for Europe and the US after Lisbon ? - and he will thus read from a prepared paper that said – A STRENGTHENING EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT IN THE TRANSATLANTIC PARTNERSHIP. How does the EU work? – he asked. And proceeded explaining that it is in a rising curve of power in the last 25 years. We used to have a Council guided by a rotating Presidency and now we moved further on with Lisbon. To his credit, he sounded self-deprecating when mentioning that actually there will be now several Presidents. This because Lisbon still left intact that half-year-long rotating structure. The EU Council is a system of Collective President. Europe 2020 is the project of how to learn to organize ourselves. There is still need for progress in the EU political system. Will ever the collection of 27 proud Independent States really agree to give up some of their sovereignty to a Central Government? Will the Council agree to be a Senate to the Parliament’s House of Representatives? How indeed can the US find its way across the Ocean and form a bridge with a body that has Three Presidents? THAT IS THE REAL QUESTION – and progress via just a strengthened Parliament will not do. Nevertheless, Mr. Buzek pointed out that the European Supra-National level has been strengthened by doing away with the previous requirement of unanimity that is reduced now to a qualified majority. The inter-governmental contact at head of state level still exists – but it is less. Passing on to the issue of Foreign Policy – with problems that are today global, there is the “Baroness” – Baroness Catherine Ashton or Lady Ashton – just one person now at the EU. She is a member of the Council and the Commission bringing thus one person to the position of power and the responsibility to deal in Foreign issues – and that is the point – unless the West is united – we will not be able to defend our interests in multilateralism at G8 or G20 etc institutions. Then he digressed by saying that Transatlantic Community is not enough anymore – we need partners all over the world for a united purpose in democracy and civilization. He quoted by name an interesting list of countries – that we give here in the order he said them – Russia, China, India, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, South Africa – that have to become stakeholders in the new order – they must have a sense of owner on issues like climate change. Everyone must feel that they are responsible. Then back to the topic – on the Transatlantic economic Council – we must have a more ambitious program. There is already freedom of flow of products, goods, capital, people in Europe – the four freedoms we have – transatlantic markets could build on these great success stories he said. The business community looks at the 800 million citizens of the Common Market in Europe. We must think of this common space of the Community. Then came the Q & A: Q: One big difference is that the US Congress spends 25% of the GDP but the European Parliament only 1.5% – will the Common Agriculture policy (the CAP) be decided bythe Parliament or the council? A: The answer is not about money but on the organization. Money and budget are not important but the “community.” Two World Wars were started in Europe and we have to change. We like diversity in language – we have 23 – you have one. We say it is our strength – “Unity in Diversity.” We have buses that leave the Parliament to the regions every weekend. They come back with ideas from home. We will have a European Energy Efficiency new Policy. — The Consul-General from Austria – Ambassador Peter Brezovszky, who was Consul-General in Krakow at the time Mr. Buzek was Prime-Minster, asked about the priorities – in democracy, on enlargement and what can the Parliament do to support parliaments in other Nations. As Europe does not pass the budget through the Parliament such activities are more limited, but he had interaction with his meetings in Washington (actually that was his main reason for coming to the States and I will be attaching more material on this) he had a meeting with Nancy Pelosi to develop the Transatlantic Parliamentary partnership. There are the European Energy Community, the European External Action Service, The European Human Rights activities. Next step in enlargement will probably involve Croatia and Iceland. He said that Iceland being located right in the middle between the US and Europe, had a hard time in deciding where they belong, but then Croatia and Turkey have problems that stem from ethnic conflicts – Croatia because of what goes on with the Serb minority and Turkey because of Cyprus. There is the Non-Visa regime and then the further potential of Bosnia-Hezegowina, Montenegro under some name, and Albania. Mr. Buzek further evaluated European recent history in periods – the 1950-1960s as French-German reconciliation. then came the 1980-1990s as German-Polish reconciliation. Now we need not only Polish-Russian reconciliation that might have been made easier because of the dignified way Russia reacted after the terrible recent air accident, but also the reconciliation with further border neighbors. The real problem is what happened in Katyn 70 years ago. Asked about an EU constitution, the President said – look the UK is doing fine and also has no constitution. —— These questions went on for an hour and Greece was not mentioned – this until someone observed the gap and said so! Mr. Buzek said two words; SOLIDARITY and RESPONSIBILITY. We wish him luck and that this does the trick. —– As we said earlier, we found out that the reason for The EU Parliament President’s trip to the US was his opening a Washington liaison office for the Parliament with US Congress. This is the first office of the EU Parliament outside Europe. That was April 29, 2010. We have what was said there and the follow up speech at the Johns Hopkins University. Also, the timing of this trip falls coincidentally when the EU is very much in the cross-hairs of the world economy because of the failure of Greece, the potential failure of Spain and Portugal, the danger to the EURO and what amounts – not to a strengthening of the EU, but rather to the unraveling of a system that created a common currency without having first secured a common policy. It is just inconceivable that voters in Germany can accept that their country pays tens of billions to save the people in Greece who enjoy much lower tax rates and get much better social conditions. The same voters will not think that much of the Greek debt is actually owned by German Banks, while much of the losses of German banks came on because of a lack of regulation that did not stop them from buying low grade financial products that were inspired by the Wall Street self-enrichment gurus. Yes – we know – much of the global financial problem originated in the US, but then the EU had its own internal structure faults that created imbalances that were just as easy – foreseeable. As Fareed Zakaria pointed out on CNN today the German voters talk of why they have to work for 45 years before being entitled to retire with a 46% pay, while a Greek worker gets 80% of his pay after only 35 years of employment. While the Greeks demonstrate now that they do not want a cut in their social conditions, the Germans by a majority of 92% say they will not let their leaders bail-out the Greeks. Is this leading to a call for the expulsion of Greece from the EU? The elimination of Greece from the EURO Club? The bailout by their own governments of German and French banks hurt by these debacles? Is it the end of the easy EU? Or are we moving into a stronger union where the member States give up some more of their independence? All this shows that after all – the European Problematique has to do with money because they have not yet created the structure that some day may bring the EU into the China-US G2 league as a third partner to turn it into a G-3. Until then, we fear, the days of Transatlantic talk are over. —————– www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=126436512&ft=1&f=1004Crisis In Greece Puts E.U. At Risk May 1, 2010
Greece’s debt woes aren’t all that’s plaguing the European economy. Spain and Portugal have also seen downgrades in their credit ratings, and the response by the European Union to the crisis is being watched around the world. Host Scott Simon speaks with Jerzy Buzek, President of the European Parliament, about the financial crisis in Europe. SCOTT SIMON, host: We’re joined now by Jerzy Buzek, the president of the European Parliament. He’s at the European Union’s delegation to the United Nations office in New York. President Buzek, thanks very much for being with us. Mr. JERZY BUZEK (President, European Parliament): Thank you for the invitation for this interview. SIMON: You going to bail out Greece? Mr. BUZEK: Yes. It will be a response as usual in the European Union. Solidarity is our main slogan in the European Union for last six years. And I’m confident that the decision will be taken during next days. SIMON: I’ve read some opinion this week that suggests this was exactly what some people worried about with the euro, that thered economic problems in one, two or three countries and you couldn’t contain them because, of course, you had a common currency. And now you have Greece’s problems dragging in the rest of the eurozone. How do you address that concern? Mr. BUZEK: First of all, we must say that we’re at the beginning of the process of organizing our eurozone. It’s less than 10 years yet, so it’s not so easy. On the other hand, we have very deep crisis all over the world. So, it’s nothing unusual is that also some countries from the eurozone are affected by the crisis. And I’m quite sure we can manage. SIMON: But do you also, for example, in this case have countries with very different approaches to debt and spending? Say, between Greece and Germany. Mr. BUZEK: Yeah, it’s also obvious because we are saying in the European Union that we, of course, base our community on solidarity. But responsibility every separate member state is also very important. SIMON: May I ask, Mr. President, did the member states of the eurozone do a good enough job in checking out the Greek economy before they joined in 2002? Mr. BUZEK: It must be checked maybe once again by the European Commission. I wouldn’t like to say anything about that being representative of European Parliament because it was not our responsibility. It will be not our responsibility in the future as well. But of course, as members of European Parliament, we are very, very interested in everything what is connected with the recovery from crisis, exit programs, and also about Greek’s crisis. SIMON: So assuming a bailout for Greece, you think that that will have the effect of improving other particularly plagued economies in, let’s say, Spain, Portugal and Ireland, and that means they would be less likely to have to ever request a bailout? Mr. BUZEK: I’m optimistic because if we solve, and I’m sure we will solve the problem of Greece, it will be much easier in other countries. I know very well. I talked to Mr. Prime Minister Papandreou a few weeks ago and they prepared a very tough, difficult program for Greece. It will be not easy, but if you start working, it would be great progress in Greece economy and then will be no danger for the whole eurozone. SIMON: Jerzy Buzek, who’s president of the European Parliament, joining us from New York. Mr. President, thanks so much. Mr. BUZEK: Thank you much. ———————————————————————– Press Releases The office will be opened by President Buzek at midday (US, East Coast time) on Thursday. EP President Jerzy Buzek said: “We have many ideas for deepening our relations. The main purpose of the office is to build a much closer partnership between the European Parliament and Congress as the European Parliament is more powerful after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The EU and the US need to be more coherent and well informed on legislation and political activity. If we work together in advance of legislation we can improve the outcome for citizens and business in a huge transatlantic market. Together, we must face the challenges that confront us across the Atlantic, from climate change to energy security, from maintaining free trade to improving global governance.” Background EP President Buzek has been in Washington since Monday for key meetings with the US administration including Vice-President Biden, Secretary of State Clinton and Speaker Pelosi. President Buzek and will travel to New York for meetings at the UN, including with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon which will take place on Friday 30 April. * * * The Director of the new European Parliament Liaison Office with the US Congress is Piotr Nowina-Konopka, Ph.D. Tel +1 202 862 4731 Office details: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/us/ – website of the EP – Congress Liaison Office For further information: —————————————– Press Releases Buzek to open the European Parliament Liaison Office with US Congress EP President Jerzy Buzek said: “We have many ideas for deepening our relations. The main purpose of the office is to build a much closer partnership between the European Parliament and Congress as the European Parliament is more powerful after the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty. The EU and the US need to be more coherent and well informed on legislation and political activity. If we work together in advance of legislation we can improve the outcome for citizens and business in a huge transatlantic market. Together, we must face the challenges that confront us across the Atlantic, from climate change to energy security, from maintaining free trade to improving global governance.” Background EP President Buzek has been in Washington since Monday for key meetings with the US administration including Vice-President Biden, Secretary of State Clinton and Speaker Pelosi. President Buzek and will travel to New York for meetings at the UN, including with UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon which will take place on Friday 30 April. * * * The Director of the new European Parliament Liaison Office with the US Congress is Piotr Nowina-Konopka, Ph.D. Tel +1 202 862 4731 Office details: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/us/ – website of the EP – Congress Liaison Office * * * For further information: – — – President Buzek on “The New European Parliament: Politics and Power in Today’s European Union” at the School of Advanced International Studies – Johns Hopkins University I am delighted to be able to address you today. As a professor myself, I always feel at home when I come to a university. My passion has always been knowledge and passing on knowledge to the next generation, my activity in politics only came later on in life. I grew up in a system where art was censored, where history was falsified, and where politics had only one colour. This is why I chose the hard sciences and not political science – because even the Communists had to accept that ‘one plus one equals two’. Or at least they accepted that most of the time! Dear Friends, I would like to make a few remarks about the political system in the European Union, following the entry into force of the Lisbon Treaty, and what that Treaty means for both Europe and the United States. I will keep my talk fairly short. After that, I would be delighted to take questions or comments. I would be especially interested to hear your own views on these issues. =European Parliament= First, let me say a word about the European Parliament, which I now have the honour to chair. The Parliament has been on a rising curve of power over the last quarter century. The Lisbon Treaty takes that power to a new level. Already in most of the routine areas of law-making – like the single market, transport, the environment, employment, development policy, and intellectual property – the Parliament has been co-equal with the Council of Ministers for many years. It has long enjoyed a right of veto over EU law – first introduced by the Maastricht Treaty 17 years ago. However, now with the Lisbon Treaty, we move a step further. We are co-equal with the Council in law-making on agriculture and fisheries, international trade policy, and justice and home affairs. Nearly all international agreements, including all trade agreements, now need the Parliament’s explicit approval. We have a right of veto. We have already seen the implications of that on final data transfer (SWIFT or TFTP). In effect, like in the United States, we now have lower and an upper chamber – the European Parliament and the Council – in a single, bicameral legislature. =EU Political System= In parallel, things have changed on the executive side. The meetings of heads of state and government – the European Council – have been split off to become a separate, formal institution, chaired by Herman Van Rompuy. This body gives overall guidance to the Union, setting the big, long-term priorities for the Union. The European Commission remains the administration, with the special right to propose legislation. Simply stated, the Council of Ministers is now the counterpart to the European Parliament, as Europe’s legislative and budgetary authority. The Commission and the European Council jointly form the executive. In this system, the member states still remain very important, but the European level – the supranational level – has been strengthened and the exercise of power is shaped more than ever by the ‘Community method’. Now qualified majority voting, not unanimity, is the norm in the Council of Ministers. Now co-decision between the Council and Parliament is the norm. The ‘intergovernmental method’ still has its place, but in a smaller sphere – in decision-making on foreign and security policy, the financial resources of the Union, and some aspects of monetary union. =Foreign Policy Structures= We have also put in place new arrangements in the field of foreign policy. We have a new High Representative, also Vice President of the Commission – Baroness Cathy Ashton. She chairs the Foreign Affairs Council and is a member of the European Council: she is thus the only EU person officially in three institutions – the Commission, the Council of Ministers and the European Council. The external departments of the Commission and Council will be merged into a new European External Action Service. This will give the EU a more coherent structure for developing and implementing foreign policy – and present a more united face to our partners and allies around the world. =Transatlantic Perspectives= Dear Friends, So we have a new design to the political system of the European Union. The Lisbon Treaty should help Europe better coordinate its policies both internally and externally, and to develop a better way of dealing with the rest of the world. Critical to our success is the Transatlantic Partnership. In this second decade of the 21st century, the relative power of both Europe and the United States – and the rest of the West – is already decreasing. By the year 2025, OECD countries are expected produce only 40% of the world’s output, compared to well over half at the moment. Asia’s share will increase to 38%, practically on a par with that of the OECD. The rise of China, India and other new players makes this clear to Europe. In the United States, over the last decade, you have discovered the limits of American power. How are we to respond? Together, I believe, that we need to take the lead in building and shaping a new form of global governance. I have always liked how my friend Bob Zoellick has put it – that we need to ‘modernise multilateralism’. The hard truth is that unless the West is united, we will lose the ability to defend and advance our interests and values. If we are united, we can help define international responses, in the G8 or WTO or elsewhere. Of course, we will not be able to solve all major international challenges on our own. We will need to cooperate – and should want to cooperate – with a range of new partners around the world. Our interdependence can and should make us stronger. We need to use the Euro-Atlantic partnership to change the way global governance functions. The United States and Europe should play a key leadership role in defining the principles and structures of this new multipolar and multilateral world. In such a world, America and Europe should still serve as an axis of global stability and enlightened values. I believe we need to use this partnership to put in place the right policies and the right institutions on a world-wide scale. We all know the difficult challenges we face today – economic insecurity, energy independence, climate change, migration, money-laundering, piracy, and of course terrorism. Common action on these fronts is essential. And in addressing these issues, we will need to find ways of bringing on board, in different ways, Russia, China, India, Brazil and the other new regional powers. They have to become stakeholders in the new world order, or disorder – so that they can expect to have a genuine sense of ownership in the way policy is set. The time to do this is now, whilst Europe and America are still powerful enough to make a difference. If we fail, the 21st century will be a century of insecurity and instability for all of us. Dear Colleagues, Our transatlantic relationship is already very strong – we have the biggest trade and investment flows in the world. We share the same values – and very many of our interests are the same. We do have some issues on specific areas of legislation and regulation. You all know the cases – Boeing vs Airbus; Chlorinated Chicken; the REACH directive and recently SWIFT. We can address those in the Transatlantic Economic Council, but I think we should think bigger than that. We need to set ourselves a more ambitious challenge for the 21st century. In ten years time let us implement a genuine transatlantic single market, based on the four freedoms which already exist in Europe – the free movement of goods, services, capital and (yes) people. I would add a fifth freedom, the free movement of knowledge across the Atlantic. A transatlantic market could build on one of the European Union’s greatest success stories – the single market that we have building continuously for over 50 years. Yesterday I addressed the US Chamber of Commerce and challenged the business community to put forward their ideas and proposals to achieve such a free market, to look at both sides of the Atlantic as one space of 800 million citizens. Today I challenge you, the next generation of Americans, to think of a Euro-Atlantic community – a common space where you can live, work and study on either side of this inner sea which is the Atlantic Ocean. That may seem a dream, but our challenge is to change the context and create a new reality. Next weekend – on 9th May – we will celebrate the 60th anniversary of the famous declaration in Paris by Robert Schuman that lead to the European Coal and Steel Community. Jean Monnet, who wrote that declaration, once said that ‘everybody is ambitious. The question is whether he is ambitious to be or ambitious to do’. The pooling of sovereignty over coal and steel, which at the time was the core of a nation’s industry, was an incredibly bold and ambitious project. The six countries that took part changed Europe’s face and Europe’s future. Today, let us also be ambitious to do. Let us dream not just of a strong Transatlantic Partnership – let us create a genuine Transatlantic Community. =============Europe unravels in a tangle of national interests.By Philip Stephens Published: April 29 2010
Watching the slow-motion train crash that is the Greek debt crisis invites the question as to whatever happened to European solidarity. Listening to politicians in Berlin explain that parsimonious German voters will not stomach a bail-out of their spendthrift continental cousins offers only half an answer. There is more to the story than an angry collision between Greek profligacy and German moral superiority. Behind the proximate threat lies a more unsettling truth. The crisis is symptom as well as cause. For all its upheavals, there used to be something reassuringly ineluctable about the European Union. Now the enterprise is beginning to unravel. Greece’s predicament, and the response of its eurozone partners, holds dangers on many levels: a sovereign default within the single currency; contagion as markets test the resilience of Portugal, Spain and Ireland; and a breakdown of the political trust and mutual support mechanisms on which the monetary union depends. As my FT colleague Alan Beattie observed in a searing commentary earlier this week, recent events have underlined also the sheer incompetence of those charged with stewardship of the eurozone. Given Angela Merkel’s central role, perhaps we should not have been surprised at the vacillation. Berlin’s stumbling response to the collapse of Lehman Brothers provided a template for the ineptitude that has again left the authorities playing catch-up with unforgiving markets. Lest I am accused by my German friends of taking the side of the sinner against the sinned against, Ms Merkel has right on her side in saying that Athens must not be rewarded for disdaining its solemn obligations to its partners. It is no use writing cheques unless Greece has a credible fiscal plan. As Berlin should have learnt, however, there comes a point when finger-wagging becomes self-defeating. The price of righteousness turns out to be chaos; and chaos does not discriminate – as the German banks holding billions of euros of Greek sovereign debt well understand. We sometimes have to live with moral hazard. More worrying is what all this tells us about the fundamental cohesion of the Union. Until quite recently if someone asked what the EU would look like, say, 20 years hence my reply was that its essential contours would be pretty much unchanged. Sure, my argument would have run, the guiding purpose had changed with the end of the cold war, the reunification of Germany and enlargement to central and eastern Europe. But a collection of middle-ranking powers with common borders, values and interests had sensibly concluded that they were better together than apart. The rise of new powers – China, India, Brazil and the rest – presaged a much diminished role for Europe on the global stage. Proud nations such as France, Germany, Britain or Spain would not surrender their identities; but they would pursue their interests collectively. Maddening as it could often be, “Europe” would always be around. That is what I used to think. Even now, I still believe the logic is compelling. Look at any problem touching the peoples of Europe – from crises in the international financial system to global warming, from terrorism and uncontrolled migration to a newly assertive Russia – and they tell the same story. Europeans must act together if they want to exert influence. For all that, Europe no longer carries the stamp of inevitability. Quite suddenly, it has become almost as easy to foresee a future in which the Union fractures. The risk is not so much of a great rupture – though if Greece defaults the immediate shocks will be profound – but of the atrophy that flows from the absence of political leadership. European governments still pay lip service to the logic of co-operation; they are no longer willing or able – sometimes both – to admit its implications. They know where their national, and the continent’s, strategic interests lie, but they lack the purpose to marry them. Germany relishes instead the chance to become a “normal” country, separating what it sees as its national from the European interest. Helmut Kohl’s historical insights are forgotten in the insistence that German taxpayers should not be asked to remain the continent’s paymaster. So too are Berlin’s long-term interests in European-wide political stability and in open markets for its exports. France struggles with the dynamics of a Union in which more Europe no longer necessarily means more France. Nicolas Sarkozy’s admirable energy is unconnected to strategic purpose. Britain, as ever, stands half on the sidelines. Italy, led by Silvio Berlusconi, has removed itself from influence. There have been moments of stasis before. But the rules have changed. The fall of the Berlin Wall and the collapse of communism have turned an enterprise of necessity into one of choice. If the Union falls into disrepair everyone will still be the loser; but the threat no longer seems an existential one. The EU has become a victim of one of the awkward paradoxes of globalisation. Even as it robs nation states of power, global interdependence increases the domestic pressure on national politicians to shelter voters from the insecurities of a borderless world. The response of Europe’s politicians has been to sacrifice the strategic to the tactical. They boast that they can “reclaim” power from the EU – and promise they will not be pushed around by Brussels. This explains Ms Merkel’s Germany-first approach to the single currency; and the reluctance of other leaders to match pieties about Europe’s role in the world with anything resembling common policies. There is nothing strange or wrong about politicians pursuing national interests. That is what they are paid for. The problem for the EU is that governments now see this as a zero-sum game. During the era of postwar reconciliation and the cold war the coincidence of national and European interests spoke for itself. Europe’s waning influence in a world no longer owned by the west means that the convergence is as powerful as it has ever been. But without the threat of war or invasion, it is harder to identify. It requires leaders of stature to make a case to their electorates. Look around the continent and there are no such politicians in sight. More columns at www.ft.com/philipstephens ============================= Speech by Professor Jerzy Buzek,President of the European Parliament,Columbia University, New York City When I look back upon my life I sometimes have to remind myself of the journey we in Central and Eastern Europe took to get here. As some of you may know my true vocation has always been that of a scientist and academic. I am an Engineer not a political scientist. The science of politics came later in life but my passion has always been knowledge and passing on knowledge to the next generation. I grew up in a system where art was censored, where history was falsified, and politics had only one colour. I chose science, because even the Communists had to accept the iron discipline of mathematics. One of your greatest Presidents, Abraham Lincoln, once said that “you can fool some of the people all the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all the time”. The Communist regimes tried to fool all of the people all of the time, but they forgot that liberty, that justice, that human rights, that dignity and solidarity will always beat a lie. With the entrance of ten new member states to the European Union in 2004 and Romania and Bulgaria in 2007, we have reunited our continent, but more importantly we have reconciled our continent. Today, we live in a different European Union, one where the President of the European Parliament is from a country that not long ago would imprison me for speaking to you freely, and would probably not give me a passport to come to Columbia University! Dear Friends, First, let me say a word about the European Parliament. We have been on a rising curve of power over the last quarter century. The new Lisbon Treaty takes that power to the next level. Already, in most of the routine areas of law-making – such as transport, the environment, employment, the single market, development, intellectual property – the European Parliament has been co-equal with the Council of Ministers for many years. It has long enjoyed a right of veto over EU law. Now, with Lisbon, we are also co-equal with the Council in agriculture, international trade, and justice and home affairs. Nearly all international agreements, including all trade agreements, now need the Parliament’s approval. We already saw the implications of that on SWIFT which the European Parliament rejected in February. In effect, like in the United States, we now have an upper chamber and a lower chamber – the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament – in a single legislative system. Dear Colleagues, The Lisbon Treaty will help Europe better coordinate its policies both internally and externally – and we hope, help both of us to develop a new way of dealing with the rest of the world. I believe that together we need a new form of global governance. We need to ‘modernise multilaterism’ – as my friend Bob Zoellick has put it. This is something I have said over the past couple of days in Washington. In this second decade of the 21st century, the relative power of both Europe and the United States – and the rest of the West – is already decreasing. By the year 2025, OECD countries will produce only 40% of the world’s wealth, as compared to 55% in 2000. Asia’s share will increase to 38%, practically on a par with that of the OECD. The hard truth is that unless the West is united, we will lose the ability to defend our interests and values. Even then, we will no longer be able to solve major international challenges on our own. We need to cooperate – with each other, but also with our partners around the world. Our interdependence can and should make us stronger and should not be seen as a threat but as an opportunity. We need to use the Euro-Atlantic partnership to change the way global governance functions. The United States and Europe can and must take a leadership role in defining the principles and structures of this new multipolar, multilateral world. We all know the difficult challenges we face today – economic insecurity, energy independence, climate change, migration, terrorism. Common action on these fronts is essential. And in addressing these issues, we need to find ways of bringing on board Russia, China, India, Brazil and the other new regional powers. They must have a sense of ownership since they too are stakeholders in this world’s governance. I often use the small example of combating piracy in the Gulf of Aden. For the first time, Chinese war ships operate next to Russian, American, European and South Korean vessels. Why? Because these pirates are a threat to the 30 000 ships which sail through this passage. Ships which are bound for Europe, and Asia. But in such a world, America and Europe must still serve as an axis of global stability and enlightened values. We are home to the world’s most successful democracies. I believe we need to use this partnership to put in place the right policies and the right institutions on a global scale. We represent 60% of the world’s GDP. If we have the right policies, the rest will follow. If we fail to work together the 21st century will be a century of insecurity and instability for all of us. I believe fundamentally that the EU’s unique model of sharing sovereignty – of promoting common solidarity and common responsibility – is working well and can be a model for the rest of the world. Dear Colleagues, Next week is the 60th Anniversary of the Schuman Declaration, when six countries pooled sovereignty over coal and steel, making war between them virtually impossible and laying the foundation of today’s EU. Schuman said that ‘Europe will not be made all at once, or according to a single plan. It will be built through concrete achievements which first create a de facto solidarity” He was right. Our trade relations are already 95% problem free, we respect each others regulations, customs and laws. Our legislators and our executives talk and negotiate with each other non-stop. It is time to create a space of freedom so that 800 million people can benefit from our relationship. An area based on the four freedoms we have in Europe – free movement of people, goods, services and capital. I am convinced that this should be the next step in the evolution of our partnership. It is a dream, but it is up to you, the next generation of Europeans and Americans to make it a reality. Thank you for your attention. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 24th, 2010 Media speculation on whether the collapse of the government would impact negatively on Belgium’s EU presidency stint began immediately following Belgian prime minister Yves Leterme’s decision on this Thursday to resign after a key partner, the Flemish Liberals, withdrew from the Federal governing coalition over a long running linguistic rights dispute between the Dutch-speaking Flemish and Francophone communities.The collapse of the Czech government during its 2009 EU presidency term caused serious disruption to the EU’s agenda, and concerns have been raised that a long running bout of political turmoil during the Belgian presidency could similarly paralyse the EU’s workload. The FT quoted an unnamed Brussels diplomat as saying, “The last thing we need is another presidency hobbled by domestic events. “There are serious institutional, economic and diplomatic questions to be resolved – we cannot afford another vacuum in leadership.” So, this is the political mess at an EU burdened with three “Presidents” where one Belgian Mr. Herman Van Rompuy heads the Brussels so called two year-term “Permanent” Presidency of the European Council, while his successor is losing his Belgian cabinet just in time he was going to take over the 6-months temporary EU Rotating Presidency. All that while the finances of a monetary EURO union that was not backed by a common treasury, is unraveling because on incompetency in Member States that cannot be disciplined, because there is no powerful central home to this chaotic assembly of States calling itself a Union. —————- Greece formally requests EU-IMF aid – Euro area states have pledged to give up to €30 billion this year.23.04.2010 EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Greece has formally placed a request to activate a €40-45 billion EU-IMF aid package, a day after new budget deficit figures revealed the country’s 2009 shortfall to be worse than previously forecast. The country’s finance minister, George Papaconstantinou, transferred the message on Friday (23 April) in a letter addressed to Eurogroup President Jean-Claude Juncker, EU economy commissioner Olli Rehn and European Central Bank President Jean-Claude Trichet.
“In accordance with the Statement of the Heads of State and Government of 25 March 2010 to provide financial support to Greece, when needed, and the follow up Statement of the Eurogroup, Greece is hereby requesting the activation of the support mechanism,” reads the letter. Earlier, Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou said he would instruct his finance minister to place the request. “It is a national and imperative need to officially ask our partners in the EU for the activation of the support mechanism we jointly created,” he said in statements broadcast live from the remote Aegean island of Kastellorizo. “Our partners will decisively contribute to provide Greece the safe harbour that will allow us to rebuild our ship,” said the embattled premier against a picturesque backdrop. Fresh figures released by the EU’s statistics office, Eurostat, on Thursday revealed Greece’s 2009 deficit to be 13.6 percent of GDP, significantly higher than the previous 12.7 percent forecast. Markets subsequently leapt on the new EU data, sending the yield on 10-year Greek bonds to 8.83 percent, the highest since 1998, and prompting credit rating agency Moody’s to cut the country’s sovereign rating from A2 to A3. On Friday, bond yields retreated marginally following the formal aid request. Next steps? A significant amount of uncertainty remains however. Greece, swamped by a €300-billion debt pile, is currently negotiating the lending terms with EU and IMF officials in Athens, with the talks potentially lasting for several more weeks. An agreement between EU leaders in late March indicated that any request for aid must first be approved by the ECB and the European Commission, before then being formally agreed by euro area states. While governments may be willing to bail-out their profligate partner, doubts remain as to how quickly member states will be able to release the funds, with at least one legal challenge being mounted in Germany against the unpopular transfer to Greece. Responding to questions from MEPs in Strasbourg on Tuesday, Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso said several times that he is confident the Greek plan does not breach the EU treaties. The solution found so far is “fully in line with the treaty,” he said. “It is simply wrong to say that it is some kind of bailout.” Chancellor Angela Merkel, faced with crucial regional elections in May, has been at pains to stress that any support must be considered ‘ultima ratio’, or a last resort. As well as the legal uncertainty, total contributions to the three-year support package have yet to be finalised. Euro area states have agreed to contribute €30 billion, this year, but figures for 2010 and 2011 remain unclear. German central bank chief Axel Weber recently conceded that “the numbers are changing all the time”, according to reports in the Wall Street Journal, adding that total euro area contributions over the three years could reach as much a €80 billion. ——————————– Further on Greece: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/24/opinio… —————————– New York Times Editorial
Greece and Who’s Next?
Published: April 23, 2010
As Greece careened ever close to default this week, frightened investors also rushed to dump bonds from financially troubled Portugal, Spain and Ireland. But while the markets increasingly see this as a euro zone crisis, many European leaders are in denial. Unless the European Union and the International Monetary Fund back up Greece, it could default on its debts. And the roughly $40 billion bailout promised — grudgingly — by Brussels with an additional $15 billion to $20 billion from the International Monetary Fund is unlikely to be enough. Greece has more than $50 billion in debt coming due over the next 12 months alone. Meanwhile, Germany is resisting turning over the money. After George Papandreou, the prime minister of Greece, called on Friday for the bailout plan to be “activated,” Chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany said Greece first had to negotiate “a credible savings program.” Georg Nuesslein, a lawmaker in Merkel’s governing coalition, told Bloomberg the program “has to hurt.” Greece’s efforts to curtail public spending have not made enough of a dent in its deficit to persuade investors it can bring its debt under control. But amid a severe recession, which is likely to be exacerbated by budget cuts, even the tightest belt-tightening can’t eliminate a deficit that amounted to more than 13 percent of its gross domestic product last year. To stop a rout, the European Union must commit to activating the bailout. Then Europe and the International Monetary Fund must start negotiations with Greece for a much bigger bailout package. This would help restore investors’ confidence, allowing interest rates on its debt to fall from the punitive heights of nearly 9 percent reached last week. While some economists believe Greece would still have to restructure its debts, it would have space to negotiate the terms. As investors made clear this week, the turmoil doesn’t end with Greece. Portugal, Spain and Ireland have seen their deficits balloon as the housing bust and the economic downturn took a toll. The European Union and the International Monetary Fund must put together a pre-emptive bailout package to convince investors of the stability of their finances and head off a flight to dump their bonds on a bigger scale. Speed is essential. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and European finance ministers should start working on that during this weekend’s International Monetary Fund meeting in Washington. This is mainly a European problem. But Washington must ensure that the fund commits adequate resources. The good news, if there is any here, is that American banks do not own much Greek debt. But the American economy won’t be immune if the Greek crisis spreads much further. —————— But who should work on The EU CHRONIC STRUCTURAL POLITICO-ECONOMIC DISEASE? A simple intervention by the Belgian King attempting to beat sense into the heads of his two different National groups warring in his own country, doe nothing to the much larger problem of many more ethnically different groups in the EU that have not yet digested the idea that building a Federal Nations means giving up the previously held pretenses at National Sovereignty. If they do not digest this their model becomes the UN and not the US – so they exist on the grace of their interdepedence but not on the basis of being a major global player to sit at the UN-China discussions table – not even as outsiders like India and Brazil, not even as a tolerated South Africa that is there because they represent the consumers of all-of-Africa. Fall of Belgium coalition threatens its Brussels chair role.By Stanley Pignal in Brussels, The Financial Times Published: April 23 2010 The Belgian government was in turmoil yesterday after the federal coalition collapsed, driven apart by tensions between French and Dutch-speaking factions that will threaten the upcoming presidency of the European Union. Yves Leterme, prime minister, tendered his resignation to the king after the Flemish liberal party pulled out of the coalition, making it all but impossible for the five-month-old ruling grouping to carry on. King Albert II sought to avert an outright political crisis by withholding his acceptance of Mr Leterme’s resignation, leaving his government in place but with no viable political mandate. The upheaval threatens to damage its leadership of the EU, whose six-month rotating presidency Belgium takes on in two months. “The last thing we need is another presidency hobbled by domestic events,” said an EU diplomat. “There are serious institutional, economic and diplomatic questions to be resolved – we cannot afford another vacuum in leadership”. The collapse of the Czech government in early 2009 while it was in the EU chair caused turmoil in Brussels and forced it to drop large swathes of its presidency agenda. The king said a political crisis would harm Belgium’s standing in Europe and hamper its economic prospects as it emerged from the downturn. In an interview with the French-language state broadcaster, Mark Eyskens, a former prime minister, warned: “If we have a deep political crisis, we could find ourselves in a similar position to Greece. We have a debt of over 100 per cent [of GDP] that we must finance.” Spreads on Belgian debt widened to 50 basis points over equivalent German paper, partly driven by EU deficit statistics published yesterday. Lieven De Winter, a professor at Université Catholique de Louvain, said new elections in June now appeared inevitable. “We are in a position where the government has been put on hold, it cannot take important decisions. It would be a massive face-losing situation to take on the EU presidency in such circumstances.” Part of Belgium’s latest bout of political instability can be traced back to the EU; Herman Van Rompuy, Mr Leterme’s predecessor, left national politics to take on the European Council presidency in November. His departure paved the way for the return of Mr Leterme, a centre-right politician from the Dutch-speaking northern half of the country with a record of antagonising the French-speaking Walloons living in Belgium’s southern half. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on April 5th, 2010 Peru Seen With $1 Billion In Green Energy InvestmentsDate: 06-Apr-10 Peru should get about $1 billion in investments after signing 26 green energy contracts, companies involved said on Monday. The contracts last for 20 years and will generate about 9 percent of current power demand in the Andean country, the government said. The deals, signed with foreign and domestic companies, include a total of 412 potential megawatts of “clean” energy produced by wind farms, solar panels, dams and biomass, among other natural resources. Among the companies are Spanish firms T-Solar and Solarpack, which will together build an 80 megawatt solar project. “The investment forecast are some $1 billion for the 26 projects,” said Juan Coronado, head of a project put together by a firm called Energia Eolica. All of the contracts come with pacts enabling the generators to sell power to Peru’s main distribution companies. The deals include 162 megawatts of hydro power, 142 megawatts of wind power, 80 megawatts of solar and 27 megawatts of biomass, Peru’s energy ministry said. All projects should be in operation by 2012, the government said. The green energy contracts come as Peru has also pushed to open up vast sections of its land and sea to petroleum exploration as part of a drive to become a net exporter of oil and gas. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 29th, 2010 http://www.upi.com/Science_News/Resource… China overtakes U.S. in green investments. WASHINGTON, March 26 (UPI) — China in 2009 for the first time led the world in clean energy investments, with Britain jumping up to the No. 3 spot. China spent a staggering $34.6 billion in clean energy over the past year, almost double the United States’ $18.6 billion, a study by the Pew Charitable Trusts said. With $11.2 billion spent, Britain surprisingly claims the No. 3 spot, followed by Spain and Brazil. South Korea impressed with a 250 percent growth of installed capacity. Britain’s ascent is due to huge government-backed offshore wind power projects and investments into the relatively young marine energy sector. “In relative terms, Spain invested five times more than the United States last year and China, Brazil and the United Kingdom invested three times more,” the researchers write, adding that half of the G20 nations spent a greater percentage of their gross domestic product on clean energy. “Finally, the Unites States is on the verge of losing its leadership position in installed renewable energy capacity, with China surging in the last several years to a virtual tie.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 26th, 2010 Egypt completes restoration of Maimonides Synagogue of Cairo – Dignitaries from Israel and abroad fly in for Sunday’s rededication. By Ron Friedman After a year-and-a-half of careful restoration work by the Egyptian authorities, the Maimonides Synagogue in Cairo is set to be rededicated on Sunday. The 19th-century synagogue and adjacent yeshiva, which stand on the site where Rabbi Moses ben Maimon, the Rambam, worked and worshiped more than 800 years ago, was restored by the Egyptian Supreme Council of Antiquities (SCA). According to the Egyptian press, the restoration of the synagogue is part of a plan by the SCA to restore all the major religious sites in Egypt, including 10 synagogues. The rededication ceremony will be attended by members of the Cairo Jewish community, the Egyptian diplomatic corps, former Israeli ambassadors and representatives of the state. A group of Chabad Hassidim will also attend the ceremony and help in rededicating the synagogue. “My initial reaction to the situation of the Jewish heritage sites in Egypt was not easy,” he said. “The authorities have protected the site from thieves and vandals by placing guards around them, but things were in a sorry condition.” Baker said that over the past few years he went back and forth from the United States to Egypt and met with state officials to discuss the preservation and future of Egypt’s Jewish sites. Among the people he met were Culture Minister Farouk Hosny and SCA director Zahi Hawass. On other occasions he met with the foreign minister and some of the chief advisers to President Hosni Mubarak. “The Egyptians were reluctant to form a formal partnership with us, but were willing to step forward themselves to do the restoration work,” Baker said. “They even endorsed our proposal that one of the restored synagogues should serve as a Museum of Egyptian Jewish Heritage.” Upon taking on the task, the Egyptians proceeded to carefully renovate the Maimonides Synagogue, known to the community as Rav Moshe. Baker said that the Egyptians had transformed the structure from an earthquake-damaged, roofless and moldy wreck to a near picture-perfect replica of the synagogue that was built in the 19th century. “They dug a cistern under the building to drain up excess water that had flooded the yeshiva. They reinforced the ceiling with steel beams. They made new marble columns to replace old ones that had fallen to rubble. They even built a new ark for the Torah scrolls and carefully restored intricate artwork on the walls,” Baker said. The cost of the renovation is estimated at between $1.5 million and $2m. Baker said the Egyptians were cautious about highlighting their work on Jewish sites. “The authorities are tentatively embracing Maimonides as part of their own heritage, but as in most places in the Middle East, Jew and Israeli are often equated and the conflict has a way of entering any discussion,” he said. Former ambassador to Egypt Zvi Mazel and his wife flew to Cairo on Thursday to attend the event. “Many of Egypt’s Jewish institutions are in bad shape,” said Mazel who was stationed in Cairo between 1996 and 2001. “The Jewish community is very small and is not capable of preserving all the sites. Once there was a large Jewish population there but most people left in the 1950s.” Mazel characterized the path to renovation as “entangled.” “The Egyptians consider the synagogues and the ancient Torah scrolls as part of their heritage, but the fact of the matter is that they were built and purchased by the Jewish community. I think it’s good that they conducted the renovations, but sad that they won’t let Israel be a part of it. “There is a real fear in Egypt of the appearance of normalized relations, which reflects the prevalent anti-Semitism in the Arab world. If there is no dialogue on an issue like this, I think it’s a bad sign,” Mazel said. Rabbi Yosef Hecht will be leading 12 men from the Chabad community in Eilat to take part in the rededication. Hecht said he had been to Cairo more than 20 times to pray and to close the cycle of readings of Maimonides’ Mishneh Torah. “We were there when we prayed in a pile of rubble and it will be exciting to be there now that it’s restored,” Hecht said. Some people believe that the synagogue and accompanying yeshiva have miraculous healing powers. The Rambam was a physician and it is believed that those who enter the synagogue may be cured of illness. Originally published here: http://www.jpost.com/JewishWorld/JewishNews/Article.aspx?id=170268. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 20th, 2010 At the UN a good journalist, not the ever-wish of the UN – the kind that just reports on the UN Press releases, can have fun indeed and throw some light on what goes on in the world. We bring here the essence of the EU charade as seen by Matthew Russell Lee in his reporting of March 18 and February 4, 2010. Matthew looks at the personal involvements of the IMF head Dominique Strauss-Kahn who might run against President Sarcozy – thus making an internal rivalry of France into one of the centrifugal powers active in the EU. So it is this rather then a German – French rivalry that puts in motion the threat of IMF undoing the EU with its involvement in the crisis named Greece. Could you imagine California going to the IMF, or as a matter of fact, Rhode Island or even Puerto Rico? —————– With Euro Tanking On Reports of Greece Turning to IMF, of Half Answers, on Dodd Bill and Sri Lanka By Matthew Russell Lee, UNITED NATIONS, March 18, updated.
As Angela Merkel speaks darkly about ejecting from the Euro zone non compliant countries like Greece, that country’s renewed threat of turning for help to the International Monetary Fund has the market selling off the Euro.
Near the end of the IMF’s fortnightly press briefing on Thursday morning, spokesperson Caroline Atkinson, beyond saying the IMF has not had a request for financial assistance, declined to describe various aspects of Greece’s relations with the IMF. Her boss, Dominique Strauss Kahn, previously bragged that the IMF would “intervene” in Greece upon request. France’s finance minister Lagarde, belatedly added to the UN’s climate finance group after Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was confronted with the fact he’d named men to all 19 positions on the panel, has said the EU can still be Greece’s interlocutor and helper, not the IMF. Her president Sarkozy has a personal motive to oppose IMF help to Greece: Strauss Kahn is polling ahead of him for the next French election. Inner City Press submitted to the IMF during its briefing, but without answer yet, questions about financial reform and the Fund’s apparently stalled consideration of a third tranche to Sri Lanka. It was mostly Greece on Thursday, with few answers from the IMF. Update: later these two answers came in from the IMF: Re Senator Dodd’s bill, overall, we support the thrust toward comprehensive reforms that would address the gaps in financial regulation illustrated by the crisis. Strong and prompt implementation would both help to secure financial stability going forward. Re Sri Lanka, not much update. As you know, staff will visit Colombo after the parliamentary elections and the formation of the new cabinet, to discuss with the government its plan for a 2010 budget. Best regards, * * *
IMF’s Strauss-Kahn Coy on Opposing Sarkozy and Intervening in Greece, IMF and Greek Denials, Yemen Deferrals By Matthew Russell Lee UNITED NATIONS, February 4, updated — The managing director of the International Monetary Fund Dominique Strauss-Kahn bragged Thursday to radio station RTL in his native France that he might leave the IMF early — and perhaps challenge Nicolas Sarkozy for the French presidency — and that if asked by Greece, the IMF could “intervene” in the country. Questions about both comments were dodged later on Thursday by the spokesperson for Strauss-Kahn and the IMF, Caroline Atkinson. Strauss-Kahn is quoted that “As it stands… I am planning to see out my mandate. But if you ask me whether in certain circumstances I could reconsider this question, the answer is yes, I could reconsider this question.” This is consciously leaving open the door to reconsider and leave. But Ms. Aktinson emphasized only his “planning to see out my mandate” and called everything else “hypothetical.” On Greece, Strauss-Kahn said regally, “I have a mission on the ground to provide technical advice requested by the Greek government. And if we’re asked to intervene, we will.” He added, “I understand that the Europeans don’t want this for the moment.” Inner City Press on Thursday morning asked Dimitris Droutsas, Alternate Foreign Minister of Greece, to describe his government’s thinking about IMF help. Mr. Droutsas responded on the record, “Categorically may I state, any idea of the IMF… there is no idea about that.” Still, at Thursday’s IMF biweekly briefing, Ms. Aktinson emphasized the “the IMF” — not just Strauss-Kahn — “had a technical team in Athens because the Greeks are very interested in getting any help from us on the technical implementation of the plan.” Later on February 4 Droutsas told Inner City Press, on camera, that he was unaware of any IMF team having been in Athens. Video here, last question. One wag wondered, has the IMF become like the CIA, or Xe / Blackwater, whose presence is alleged and denied? But the IMF under Strauss-Kahn brags about being present. As with the wider UN, the rush to be relevant. It was surprising, then, that when Inner City Press asked Ms. Aktinson about Yemen — using as the lead in a quote by UK Foreign Secretary (Ivan Lewis) that “we address the economic problems that face Yemen, especially through the IMF program” — Ms. Atkinson said she didn’t have information about Yemen and would have to respond later to Inner City Press. But as February 4 hit midnight, no information was provided. Yemen is in the news, and one would expect the omnipresent Strauss-Kahn to be all over it. We’ll see. Ms. Atkinson gave a pro-IMF spin in responding to Inner City Press’ question about the IMF’s new loan to Haiti, but we’ll be writing about that later, along with the IMF’s Yemen response. ——————— Top EU officials push for agreement on Greek aid next week19.03.2010 EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – Two of the European Union’s most senior officials have called on member states to agree on a financial aid plan for Greece when they meet in Brussels for a summit next week. “It is essential that when we deal with a euro area country there is a European lead and a European responsibility,” EU economy commissioner Olli Rehn said at a conference in Brussels on Friday (19 March). “It is important that the EU in the course of next week comes to a more specific conclusion, specific political conclusion about the European framework for co-ordinated and conditional action, if needed and required,” he told journalists afterwards.
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso appears set to go further on Saturday, indicating the EU is ready to provide financial aid to Greece if it is requested, according to a leaked transcript of an interview with French radio, seen by Dow Jones Newswires. And despite recent suggestions that Germany is moving against the idea, Mr Barroso is set to include aid from Berlin in the potential package. “Germany is ready in case Greece needs it, and so far Greece has not asked for financial support,” the commission president will tell radio channel France 24, according to the document. All sides stress however that full implementation of the austerity measures announced by Athens in recent weeks is the best means to bring the country’s borrowing costs down. Roughly €20 billion in Greek bonds are due to mature before the end of May, with Athens indicating its unwillingness to keep offering highly expensive interest rates that threaten to create future refinancing problems down the line. In the interview transcript however, Mr Barroso does not exclude the possibility of a financing role for the IMF, insisting there would be no shame in this for Europe. “What I want to remind is that Greece and all the member states of the EU are members of the IMF … EU member states are by far the biggest source of revenue for the IMF,” says the text. “So it’s not a question of prestige. It’s a question of seeing what is the best way to respond to the situation,” he is set to say. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 17th, 2010 We were in a state of confusion when posting that James A. Goldston, the founding executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative, an operational program of the Open Society Institute that promotes rights-based law reform and the development of legal capacity worldwide, was the same as Judge Goldstone of South Africa. The event last night dealt with racial profiling in Spain. It was an important case that involves a black American artist originally from San Francisco, Rosalind Williams, that moved to Spain in 1968, is Spanish citizen, and was singled out in 1995 to identify because of her color. It took 15 years to win this case and the resulting verdict is yet to be made public. ============= Europe’s Highest Court Rules Roma School Segregation by Language Illegal. The Oršuš case involved 14 children attending mainstream primary schools in three different Croatian villages who were placed in segregated Roma-only classes due to alleged language difficulties. The applicants argued that actually, placement in these Roma-only classes stemmed from blatant discrimination based on ethnicity. The schools’ policies were reinforced by the local majority population’s anti-Romani sentiments. Represented by the European Roma Rights Centre (ERRC), the Croatian Helsinki Committee, and local attorney Lovorka Kusan, the case went to the European Court in 2004. After a negative judgment in 2008, it reached the Grand Chamber upon appeal. “The Grand Chamber’s decision is of great importance to the applicants and other Romani children in Croatia, as it acknowledges that they have suffered unlawful discrimination,” said Ms Kusan. “It is now up to the government to ensure that these illegal practices stop and that remedies are offered to affected Romani children.” The Court awarded the applicants 4,500 Euros each in non-pecuniary damages, plus a total of 10,000 Euros for costs and expenses. “Today’s judgment rounds out the European Court’s jurisprudence concerning the most common grounds of segregation experienced by Romani children in education across Europe,” said ERRC managing director Robert Kushen. “National governments must now take decisive action to end segregated education in all its forms and truly integrate their school systems.” The Grand Chamber decision builds on the Court’s groundbreaking judgments in D.H. and Others v. the Czech Republic and Sampanis v. Greece, which rejected the segregation of Romani students into special schools for children with mental disabilities or within mainstream schools on the basis of ethnicity. “Oršuš makes clear that language deficiency cannot serve as a pretext for racial segregation,” said ERRC board member and Open Society Justice Initiative executive director James A. Goldston, who helped argue the case. “Segregation remains all too common in Europe, and it is time to end this deeply degrading practice.” The positive judgment by the Grand Chamber marks great progress for the advancement of Roma rights in general, as well as the right to quality education on equal terms for Roma and other marginalized groups. —————— Challenging Ethnic Profiling in Europe On a brisk winter day in 1992, Rosalind Williams—an African-American woman and naturalized Spanish citizen—stepped off the train at a railway station in Valladolid and was immediately asked to produce her identity document. It was December 6, a national holiday celebrating Spain’s new constitution—one of the most modern in Europe. Yet when asked why Williams was the only person on the platform to be stopped, the police officer explained that he was following orders: it was because of the color of her skin. Williams produced her identity document, and took the number of his badge. Eighteen years later, after winning a landmark ruling from the UN Human Rights Committee on her case, Williams is still waiting for the Spanish government to issue a public apology and end ethnic profiling by police. Today, racial and ethnic profiling remains a pervasive—and ineffective—practice across Europe. With security concerns heightened, the debate on profiling has only intensified. At this Open Society Institute forum, Rosalind Williams will discuss her personal experience challenging racial profiling in Europe, and what impact she hopes the Human Rights Committee’s landmark judgment will have in her adopted homeland. Rachel Neild of the Open Society Justice Initiative will talk more broadly about the prevalence of ethnic profiling throughout the European Union, and its ineffectiveness. Neild will discuss the steps being taken to document and eradicate ethnic profiling, including innovative projects being carried out in cooperation with Spanish police. Jim Goldston, executive director of the Open Society Justice Initiative—which helped bring Williams’ case to the UN Human Rights Committee—will moderate. Speakers ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on March 5th, 2010
### | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 22nd, 2010 Saturday, February 20, 2010, Funchal and most of the the Portuguese holiday island of Madeira was hurt by torrential rains that caused massive floods and mud slides. Casualty numbers rose to at least 42 as search teams began digging for survivors and environmentalists blamed greed and overbuilding for the scale of the tragedy. For full article: —————– I also provide here a link to “Rediluvism as a distinct eco-faith.” This is an effort to turn Global Warming into a flooding issue so it is easier understood by Climate Change Skeptics. Please Join http://cli.gs/REDIS http://tr.im/REDIS ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 20th, 2010 The case of accession of Macedonia is no laughing matter. It is still unknown how Greece’s current financial and economic troubles will have an impact on the Macedonian name dispute. Athens is currently under tremendous pressure from big eurozone countries such as Germany and France to cut back spending and provide accurate data on its deficit, while facing unprecedented scrutiny by the European Commission. Some diplomats suggest that this offers a window of opportunity for clearing the name dispute and should be seized, while others say that because of the painful economic measures, Athens will be even less inclined to compromise on the name issue, a matter of national pride. But neither are some gestures from the government in Skopje of any help, such as naming the airport and a major highway after Alexander the Great, a king of the ancient Greek kingdom of Macedon – moves which prompted fierce criticism in Greece. Brussels officials familiar with the matter say that if a solution is found, Macedonia’s membership could be coupled with Iceland’s, which has also applied to join the club. Their accession would happen after Croatia’s, which is the closest to EU membership at this stage. “Once we open negotiations, people are in for a big surprise. Everybody thinks Iceland will have no problems in joining, but actually it is Macedonia who will be flying through the negotiating chapters. Apart from some classical problems with the judiciary and fight against corruption, Macedonia has harmonised its legislation and implemented a lot of EU requirements,” one EU source told this website. As for Iceland, although it is part of the EU’s internal market, negotiations are likely to run into trouble over fisheries and other topics dear to the Nordic islanders. The current financial dispute with Great Britain and the Netherlands is also not looking good for the EU prospects of Reykjavik. And contrary to the situation with the Balkan country, some parts of the Icelandic political establishment are against EU membership. For now, both Macedonian and Greek officials, despite the declared willingness to find a solution, have not yet inched closer to a result. The UN mediator on the issue, Matthew Nimetz, is due in Skopje next week. The UN is just the bigger international body to stir the EU soup. OK, more important to us seems the Financial Times comment from Washington about “Baroso’s man goes to Washington.” The comment is by Tony Barber who runs a Brussels blog and he addresses the EU appointment of Joao Vale de Almeida to be EU’s next Ambassador to the US. The outgoing Ambassador is John Bruton who was a former Irish Prime Minister and well known to Congress and the White House when he got his appointment in 2004. The incoming Ambassador is a Portuguese Eurocrat who worked for Mr. Baroso and is totally unknown to Washington. Indeed some in Washington have seen him as involved as a by-stander to the G8 and G20 meetings, but when faced with him, following the EU elected so called Permanent President and sort of Foreign Ministers, both of whom are totally unknown to Washington, all what they see as qualifications for Mr. Vale de Almeida is that for five years – 2004 – 2009 he was Chief of Staff for the EU Commission’s President Mr. Baroso – the non-permanent and non-rotating – third EU President – of that nebulous intractable – so called European Union – the symbol of its refusal to be united, even though he was the one that did in effect push for the Lisbon rules for creating that goal of a United Europe. The laughs come up when the author of the note points out that the perception is reinforced by the fact that Baroso has engineered the Ambassadorial appointment for his man in advance of the newly being created EU foreign service under Dame Ashton – who will have her job as who chooses ambassadors. OK, we hope the EU helps squeeze Greece into allowing its neighbors to chose their own names, and to squeeze Island of allowing its fish to be caught by Greek fishermen. The mess in Cyprus can then be left to the UN to handle that other tough issue and in the meantime – the EU of 27 will require from the world to be seen as an EU of 28 – with the EU itself being the added state that enlarges meeting tables with one more unproductive participant. The sad thing is that the world needs an EU that amounts to the missing G3 with which China and the US can sit down at a small table before inviting over India, Brazil, South Africa, Turkey, Mexico, Japan, Australia, Russia . . . one or two more, and start looking at what is of highest importance for the future of the Planet – issues such as global warming and climate change. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 11th, 2010 Post-Copenhagen – ALDE MEPs Corrine Lepage (MoDem, France) and Chris Davies (Liberal Democrat, UK) have called on the EU to be bolder in its strategy to help forge a legally binding global deal on carbon emission cuts in the wake of the failed Copenhagen Climate Change Summit. Speaking after the European Parliament voted today to set a target of cutting EU emissions by more than 20% Lepage, vice-chair of the Environment Committee said: “This resolution should be considered as a first step. Our priority must be to re-establish the trust of our citizens in scientific data. It is vital to convince them that the promotion of a low carbon economy is a response both to the effects of climate change and, in part, to the economic crisis. It is equally crucial that Europe speak with one voice in favor of an agreement with the main emitters of CO2, notably the US and China. Finally, it is essential to stick to our financial commitments with regard to developing countries.” “After the disappointment of Copenhagen the EU has to raise its game and take a lead. By saving energy and improving energy efficiency we will save resources, drive down emissions, and make our economy more competitive.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 10th, 2010 Green groups have warned that electric cars could actually increase carbon emissions. Spain pushes for common strategy on electric cars. January 10, 2010, EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS http://euobserver.com/9/29443/?rk=1 EU industry ministers on Tuesday (9 February) discussed plans to establish a common strategy for electric cars, a pet project of the Spanish EU presidency. Following the informal talks in the northern Spanish city of San Sebastian, the country’s industry minister Miguel Sebastian said it was not an exaggeration to say that the electric vehicle “has been born today in Europe,” and that it has done so under the Spanish presidency. “Obviously there are lots of questions …issues of legal security, validation, the safety of the vehicles themselves …and cost,” he admitted, however. Madrid also wants the electric car included in the bloc’s economic strategy for the next ten years, the so-called 2020 Agenda, as it would boost its ailing auto sector, stem soaring unemployment rates and use the renewable energy produced domestically. The EU would compete against already established electric car manufacturers in Japan, China and the United States. “It is good for people’s pockets, good for European income and employment, good for Europe as a whole, and it will be good for the planet from an environmental perspective,” the Spanish minister said. The report, commissioned by Friends of the Earth, Greenpeace and Transport & Environment, says that existing EU legislation on car emissions is flawed because it allows manufacturers to use sales of electric vehicles to offset the continued production of high gas-consuming cars. Increasing sales of electric cars to 10 percent of the total could lead to a 20 percent increase in both oil consumption and CO2 emissions in the EU car sector, the groups warn. About 400 grams of carbon dioxide are emitted on average for every kilowatt-hour of electricity in the EU, but this can more than double if coal is used, says the report. The answer, in their view, is to integrate electric cars with a “smart” electricity network, which would charge vehicles only when there was an abundance of green power from sources such as wind farms. But smart power networks are still in their early phase, despite EU pledges to develop them further. “Just as every car sold today has to have an odometer to show how far it has driven, every electric car needs a smart meter to show how much electricity has been used and better still, whether or not that electricity came from a renewable source,” Nusa Urbancic from Transport & Environment said in a statement. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 3rd, 2010 The EU refuses to see the multi headed Hydra it has become and expects President Obama to play along. Reality calls – EU please get serious at becoming some sort of one headed entity! The US President is a busy man now with all that US Jazz. It slowly starts sinking in – we said it a long time ago! February 3, 2010, http://euobserver.com/9/29354/?rk=1, EUOBSERVER / ANALYSIS – “The EU’s post-Copenhagen strategy should be For the last three years, if it hasn’t been the institutional reform With its climate boy-scout badge afixed to its sleeve, Brussels headed But in the end, the EU ended up the goody-two-shoes pupil who’s top of Denmark’s Connie Hedegaard, now incoming EU “It was the strangest conference I have been at in my life, from all “It was a really great failure and we have to learn from that,” he Glass half full! However, after the holidays, a clutch of pollyanna-ish EU officials Ms Hedegaard during the parliamentary hearing to confirm her “I would very much have liked to have seen more progress in But even as the EU begins to view the Copenhagen glass as half full, Last week, realising that only around 20 countries had listed their At the same time, EU member states that have never been comfortable At the same time, the commission itself is in the ‘twenty-percenter’ The US is looking to a 17 percent emissions reduction on 2005 levels, Separately, four of the five architects of the Accord, Brazil, South Last weekend, meeting in New Delhi, the four so-called Basic countries Indian environment minister Jairam Ramesh said: “We support the “The two-track negotiating process …is the only legitimate process But with the surprise election to the US Senate of Massachusetts For all the public talk of Latin American, Chinese and African climate A popular post-Copenhagen analysis from the Brookings Institute, the Nevertheless, despite the dark days and the cynicism of some EU Council President Herman Van Rompuy has already said he hopes to One of the main lessons the European Commission has drawn from the “We are fragmented from a negotiating point of view,” President Ms Hedegaard is of the same mind. In her parliamentary hearing, her “A lot of Europeans in the room is not a problem, but there is only an In a similar vein, the commission president has also suggested that Until now, this sort of bilateral pressure has been left up to the Before last autumn’s federal election in Germany, While this sort of member-state activity is likely to continue, the Related to this, the major task will be to break the remarkable unity The third world has said that it would be happy to develop along a The key advantage of the Copenhagen Accord for rich countries is that In many ways, Copenhagen was a victory for the developing world, in For this reason, the US has called for a junking of the UN process, EU leaders however “are less neurotic about the UN than the Americans At the same time that President Barroso admitted to pulling his hair Although some Spanish presidency officials at one point said that Instead, according to Mr Runge-Metzger: “The next step for the EU is One arena in particular that climate watchers should keep an eye on is Border tariff: Meanwhile, EU officials are briefing heavily against the awkward Elsewhere, the EU is also almost certain to take a fresh look at It’s always easy to dismiss such ambition when expressed by a man But this is what a trade commissioner has to say. Many analysts The EU is still essential here. Washington could not move ahead with a It should also be remembered that many other major powers were
This feature was originially written for the Nordic Council’s Analys { We wonder at the last sentence of the article because we think that unless the EU does in fact unite under one leadership it will not amount to much when the US continues to deal with the BASICs – I mean the countries that are form the basic future. The EU should aim at becoming the G3 to be added to China and the US in future global negotiations that will include also the IBSA and one or two more states. See please next article.} US blames Lisbon Treaty for EU summit fiasco. Mr Obama – the Madrid summit decision is being seen as a diplomatic snub to Spain. February 3, 2010, http://euobserver.com/9/29398/?rk=1 State department spokesman Philip J. Crowley told press in Washington on Tuesday (2 February) that the treaty has made it unclear who the US leader should meet and when. { that sounds very clear to me.} “We are working through this just as Europeans themselves are working The Lisbon Treaty came into force on 1 December, 2009. It created the post It kept the institution of the six-month rotating EU presidency as The Spanish EU presidency is being closely watched to see how the EU The state department’s Mr Crowley said the US and Spain have been in “Obviously, there’s been some disappointment expressed by the Spanish Prime Minister Jose Luis Zapatero and Mr Obama are both The informal event sees some 3,500 celebrities, businessmen, Mr Zapatero, a centre-left secularist, has taken flak for his trip in ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on February 2nd, 2010 The White House has said that the US President would not be attending what used to be the regularly scheduled EU-US talks, which have been planned to take place in Madrid in May 24-25, 2010 by the Spanish Rotating EU Presidency for the First half of 2010. Honestly, why should he participate in the European Games while there are so many real problems on his plate? The EU has three Presidents – if they cannot decide who is their President in fact – do they really expect for Obama to travel trans-Atlantic, and sit at Summits chaired by all three of them – Herman Van Rampuy, The Permanent EU President, Jose Manuel Baroso, the President of the European Commission, and the Spanish Prime Minister, Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, who is presently the Rotating President of the EU? Papers write of a “Snub.” This is ridiculous and for us who watched the Copenhagen Conference that was saved by President Obama under a G-2 arrangement with China, because he had to act fast if he wanted to save the meeting from itself, and there was no strong man or woman of the EU to stand at his side, the above “News” are old hat – and we say – we told you so! Actually, we welcome Charles Forelle writes as “World News” in the Wall Street Journal of today: “Things haven’t been good recently for Europe’s position on the world stage. Despite the new treaty ambition to make the EU a bigger player, the bloc has sometimes seen itself shut out. At climate talks in Copenhagen in December, Mr. Obama hammered out a last-minute accord with China and other emerging nations. The Europeans were left out of the picture.” This recognition of reality in a WSJ article is very unusual – but this is real life. If the EU does not get together – and still claims 7 seats at the G-20 – rather then one seat for real – they are turning themselves, by their own choice, into world political irrelevancy. The same is true at the UN where we see more and more a 2 1/2 seats situation – with France and the UK in Security Council seats but Germany on practical UN Security Commissions, and no EU representative with any powers what so ever. Obama’s decision not to go to Madrid is no snub to Mr. Zapatero or to Spain – but rather the cleareeded sign that he wants to go and meet the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED EUROPE. Had Obama decided to go to Masdrid it would have been as if someone from Europe would come to a meeting of the US Governor’s Association. Just think – Germany id California, France is New York, the UK is Texas, Spain is Florida, Poland is Illinois, Austria is Vermont … etc etc. Perhapse indeed Van Rampuy should come to the US Governor’s Association meeting in order to learn what is needed in order to create out of the EU the neededpartner for Obama in order to turn the G-2 into a G-3 and to create out of the G-20 a new meaningful global body. ———————– The best article on this we found is from The Telegtaph: By Bruno Waterfield in Brussels – from Telegraph.com The White House has said that Barack Obama will not be attending the EU-US talks planned to take place in Madrid in May. Honestly, why should he particioate in the European Games while there are so many real problems on his plate. Even the venue for the summit, Madrid or Brussels, has been “up in the air” after a tussle between Spain, which holds the EU’s rotating presidency and Herman Van Rompuy, the new created President of Europe. Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, Mr Van Rompuy, President of the European Council which represents EU heads of government, should host the summit in Brussels as Europe’s lead negotiator in global bilateral talks. But Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, the Spanish prime minister, insisted that he should host the summit because the EU was in “transition” after the Lisbon Treaty entered into force in December. A US official told the Wall Street Journal that President Obama had not yet received an a formal invitation to the EU-US summit, a twice yearly meeting that has taken place since 1991. “We don’t even know if they’re going to have one. We’ve told them, ‘Figure it out and let us know’,” said the official. Other American diplomats have blamed confusion over which of the three EU “presidents” is in charge of the summit – Mr Van Rompuy, Mr Zapatero or José Manuel Barroso, the European Commission president. “Who attends from the US and at what point will depend on who’s calling the meeting,” said a US state department official. Many national and EU diplomats are dismayed at the institutional infighting that has followed the entering into force of the Lisbon Treaty. “The Spanish are behaving badly. They’ve made a mess of the summit but Van Rompuy and the post-Lisbon EU institutions will carry the can in the long term. The squabbling has damaged the EU in the eyes of the most powerful nation in the world,” said a senior source. A European Commission spokesman hinted that the meeting would have to be downgraded or cancelled if Mr Obama did not show up. “Normally a summit is a summit because it is attended by heads of state and government,” said the spokesman. A Spanish foreign ministry spokesman said: “The EU-US summit is scheduled to take place in May in Madrid, as was foreseen and we are still preparing it.” US officials have indicated that Mr Obama might reschedule talks with the EU in the wings of a Nato summit in Portugal this autumn. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 30th, 2010 From sergeberdugo@yahoo.fr The Statement by Morocco Itinerant Ambassador Serge Berdugo, a Jew of prominent standing in Morocco, to the UN International Holocaust 2010 Commemoration. The Importance of the Panel was more then anything else – towards the Islamic World of today. January 28, 2010 Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, It is my privilege to be part of this ceremony on the history of the Jewish Community of Morocco during the Second World War and to tell you how the European policy on Holocaust impacted the lives of this community. This presentation will illustrate and I quote His Majesty Mohammed VI: “tell the rest of the world how Arab and Islamic countries, such as mine, resisted Nazism and said “No” to the barbarity of the Nazis and to the villainous laws of the Vichy government”. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, First, let me remind you that in 1939 Morocco was under the French and Spanish protectorate. Following the defeat of France and the coming into power of the Vichy Government, the Jews were faced with a systematic ideological anti-Semitism that led to the implementation of the Vichy anti Jewish legislation in Morocco. According to the second concession, bans and quotas were not applied to the Jewish religious institutions. This concession allowed Jewish institutions including schools to function properly and to receive 80% of their funding from the State budget. Furthermore, business and handicrafts activities remained open to Jews. The anti Jewish laws had only a little impact on them. They continued to practice their religion and do business. Their children received a Jewish and secular education of good quality. Nevertheless, the minority of Jews, who embraced modernity and the European lifestyle, suffered all types of discrimination, humiliation and exactions. They were forced to live in overpopulated Mellah. They were excluded from the civil service, from the private sector (no more than 2% of Jewish doctors and lawyers) and from French schools (a maximum of 10% of Jewish students in high schools and 3% in universities). From 1940 to 1943, the life of the Jews was certainly difficult and precarious but not more than that of the Muslims, who were themselves victims of discrimination by the Europeans. Discrimination against Jews as well as Muslims included access to swimming pools, public places, theaters and stadiums. During this enduring period, no major tension existed between the Jews and Muslims. In fact, the war had a little impact on the relationship between the two communities. The opposite was true of relations with the European which were enterable to the extent that the Jews lived in a permanent fear to be humiliated and sometimes beaten by European mobs. This violence reached its climax with the French fascist group “S.O.C.” which planned a pogrom targeting Jews in Casablanca on November 15th, 1942. In these circumstances, the Jews could not rely on the French police to protect them. Fortunately, on November 8th, 1942, the landing of American forces in Casablanca prevented the implantation of such hideous action. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, It was thanks to the courage and fairness of the young Moroccan Sultan that the discriminatory laws targeting those whom the King referred to as “his loyal Jewish subjects”, were never applied in an integral and uniform way. Indeed the Presidents of the 4 most important Jewish communities were taken secretly in a covered small van, walking then through the kitchens and the offices, to be received thereafter by the Monarch in his Apartment without any Protocol present. The King said ‘I know your fears but I ask you to assure my Jewish subjects of my constant and full protection. Let them know that nothing will affect them that it did not affect first my family and myself’. Informed that the French requested an inventory of the Jewish assets, while the law concerned only the real estate, the Sultan gave then his instructions to slow down the census and abstain from transmitting the files to the French authorities. Following the landing of the US in November, 1942, and upon a request by the Sultan, my father was an eyewitness of the destruction of all the documents related to the census. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, Beyond all these clear statements and positions, in favour of his Jewish subjects, the King of Morocco undertook courageous actions. He took brave initiatives that the recent disclosures of French and British archives illustrate eloquently. Let me quote from a confidential report drawn in 1985 from the French MFA archives: Credible sources informed us that the relations between the Sultan of Morocco and the French authorities became much tenser the day the Residence put into application the decree on the “measures” against the Jews despite the strict opposition of the Sultan. The Sultan refused to make differences amongst his loyal people and he was offended to see that his authority was overtaken by the French authorities. The Sultan waited for his crowning anniversary and publicly announced that he forbade the measures against the Jews. On this occasion, the Sultan generally offered a banquet attended by the French representatives and eminent Moroccan personalities. For the first time, the Sultan invited to the banquet the representatives of the Jewish community who sat next to the French officials. He declared to the French officials, who were surprised by the presence of Jews at this meeting: “I absolutely do not agree with the new anti-Semitic laws and I refuse to associate myself with a measure I disagree with; I reiterate as I did in the past that the Jews are under my protection and I reject any distinction that should be made amongst my people”. End of quote. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, In assuming his spiritual role as “Commander of the faithful”, the King of Morocco, as descendant of the Prophet, is bound to protect Jews as much as he does Muslims. The Sultan guarantees the security and the safety of the three components of the Kingdom: Arab, Berber and Jew, who for centuries lived in Morocco in harmony and brotherhood. Today, “His Majesty the King Mohammed VI reiterated ‘His religious, historical and constitutional responsibility in the preservation of the persons, the rights and the sacred values of His subjects of Jewish confession”. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, We cannot address the issue of Holocaust in North Africa without referring to ‘forced labor camps’; these real ‘concentration camps’ created by Vichy to receive Gaullist, socialist, and communist opponents, Germans anti-Nazis, Spanish Republicans, Jewish refugees of Central Europe, Gypsies and even Muslim resistants. These camps were under the total control of the French Army. The prisoners who were at the mercy of their European Guardians experienced horrible conditions of detention. The 2000 Jews detainees representing 30% of the overall number of prisoners kept in over 30 camps. The camp of Berguent received exclusively 400 Jewish prisoners. According to testimonies made by former prisoners in these camps, collected by British Foreign Office. ‘The only signs of humanity came from Muslim guards who took risks to relieve our sufferings’. I draw your attention to the fact that as long as Moroccan Jews were enjoying the protection of the Sultan, no one was in custody in any of these camps. This dramatic episode of the war was forgotten rather than hidden. Since the publication of this book, which tackles the Holocaust in the Arab countries, the Moroccan media published long surveys and articles on this ‘Forgotten story’, thus demonstrating that in an Arab and Muslim country, such as Morocco, one could speak about the Holocaust without taboos or any temptations of delayed . This attitude of the Moroccan populations is in perfect symbiosis with the message of support addressed by King Mohammed VI to the ‘Aladin Project on the Holocaust’. In this message read by the Moroccan Minister of Religious Affairs in UNESCO in March 2009, the Monarch stated: ‘My reading and that of my people are not one of amnesia. Our reading is the one of a memorial wound which we recorded in one of the most painful chapters in the Pantheon of the World history’. The King invited also the participants: ‘to think differently about one of the most tragic and the most terrible stigmas of the Contemporary History, while nobody can pretend to make a total reading of the Holocaust, that is irrefragable and without concession nor dishonest compromise’. Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen, One has to draw one lesson it is the importance of a Head of State in setting the tone for recognition, respect and treatment of minority faiths within its territory. We can only hope that other Heads of State, seeking the enduring affections of their people, will come to realize that the way forward lies not in fanning the expedient fires of the moment, but in setting, as the King of Morocco does, a tone for tolerance and peaceful coexistence that will endure forever. In conclusion, I would like to stress that although life for the Jews in Morocco was not always one of “wine and roses”, it was better than what other Jews experienced in most parts of the world, particularly in Europe. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 27th, 2010 Ranjit Devraj writes for IPS Terra Viva at the UN that the BASIC Group meeting concluded with an amazing – ‘Copenhagen Accord Not Legal, Kyoto Protocol Is.’ Nevertheless Brazil, South Africa, India and China – will submit their plans for voluntary mitigation actions by the Jan. 31, 2010 deadline stipulated by the Copenhagen Accord. That amounts to positive participation and denying it also. WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 27, 2010 ‘Copenhagen Accord Not Legal, Kyoto Protocol Is’ NEW DELHI, Jan 26 (IPS) – While the BASIC bloc countries – Brazil, South Africa, India and China – will submit their plans for voluntary mitigation actions by the Jan. 31 deadline stipulated by the Copenhagen Accord, they have taken care to emphasise that the agreement, reached at the end of the December climate change summit in the Danish capital, has no legal basis. Ramesh explained that the Accord was not a legal document and that the “understanding reached at Copenhagen was that the accord will facilitate the two-track negotiating process which is the only legitimate process to reach a legally binding treaty in Mexico.” The two-track negotiation process was agreed upon at the December 2007 Bali conference, pertaining to Long-Term Cooperative Action under the UNFCCC and the 1997 Kyoto Protocol. The BASIC meeting and the press conference were attended by Carlos Minc, the Brazilian environment minister, his counterpart from South Africa, Buyelwa Sonjica, and the vice-chairman of China’s National Development and Reform Commission, Xie Zhenhua. Pathak said that while BASIC appeared keen to consolidate itself as a group and also take along the G-77 countries, it needed to “demonstrate leadership, both in furthering negotiations on a fair, ambitious and legally binding agreement, and in terms of pushing industrialised counties to urgently reduce GhG (greenhouse gas) emissions and make their own appropriate contributions.” Other analysts said the BASIC meeting had the potential of cementing differences both within and outside the bloc. “What is crucial now is to see whether China and India will stick to carbon intensity figures in their action plans, as they announced before the Copenhagen meet,” said Siddharth Mishra, director at CUTS International, a leading economic policy and advocacy group. Carbon intensity is a measure of carbon dioxide emissions per unit of production. “This will suit China well because it is already on a trajectory of lowering its energy intensity and it has voluntarily announced cuts of 40-45 percent before Copenhagen,” said Mitra. “India, too, can reduce the trend of the growth of its emissions and specify domestic regulations to ensure reductions in emissions from its dirty industries,” Mitra told IPS. Mitra added: “We don’t know what the back-of-the-envelope calculations are, but both China and India may benefit from the pledge of 100 billion U.S. dollars by the end of the decade for developing countries to adapt to climate change and limit the global rise in temperatures, since industrialisation began, from exceeding two degrees Celsius.” After the BASIC countries joined hands with the United States in negotiating the Copenhagen Accord, at the end of the summit in the Danish capital, several developing countries expressed fears that the document would become legal and dilute the Bali two-track process. BASIC ministers have also asked the rich nations to speedily distribute the 10 billion dollars they had pledged to the least developed countries and the islands to address climate change this year. Brazil’s Minc said at the press conference that BASIC had decided to create its own fund to help small island states and the least developed countries. “The actual contributions will be decided at the next meeting of the BASIC in South Africa,” he said. A day before the BASIC meet, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh let it be known that he had reservations over pressure from Danish Prime Minister Lars Løkke Rasmussen and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon for follow-up action on the Copenhagen Accord and get results by the Jan. 31 deadline. While the Accord had called for “economy-wide emission targets” by 2020 by the Annex-1 (rich countries) and the other countries to submit “mitigation actions,” Rasmussen and Ban had written separately to all heads of state and governments on Dec. 30, urging them to submit their commitments by Jan. 31. Their joint letter was silent on the Kyoto Protocol, raising suspicions. Mitra said that such suspicions first surfaced after the UNFCCC executive secretary, Yvo de Boer, failed to mention the Kyoto Protocol at a press conference held soon after the Copenhagen Accord. “The impression that there is a plan afoot to bury Kyoto is not helped by the fact that the European Union is pushing it as a first step to new negotiations.” The Accord was opposed by Venezuela, Bolivia, Cuba, Nicaragua and Sudan on both substantive and procedural grounds. For that reason, it could not be accepted or endorsed by the CoP, which only “took note” of it, denying the document status at the U.N. The Hindu editorial said one positive outcome of the “common strategy” adopted by BASIC countries was the fostering of “active South-South cooperation” to advance science. “Given that intellectual property rights on technology remain a major barrier to achieving higher energy efficiencies, such joint efforts involving India and China hold great promise.” ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 26th, 2010 THAT IS AMAZING – EVEN THOUGH IT IS CARNAVAL 2010 TIME IN PERNAMBUCO,
>> “AO RECIFE O QUE O RECIFE NÃO CONHECE” Serviço: —————– EXPOSIÇÃO CONTA A HISTÓRIA DA GUERRA CIVIL ESPANHOLA Serviço: —————- Carnaval 2010 – Baile Municipal Serviço: ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 7th, 2010 This was received from Sudha Ravi from the Indian Consulate, New York, Trade Commission commerce at indiacgny.org and here we learn two things: (1) that the Indians are proud og having earned a green future contest that was set up by Mayor Bloomberg (2) that the immigration regulations will make it difficult for the US to take maximum benefit from the participation of bright minds from developing countries. The loser will thus be the US. Mayor: Difficulty Teams Now Face Obtaining Visas and Launching Plans Highlights Need for Comprehensive Immigration Reform. MAYOR BLOOMBERG ANNOUNCES WINNER OF “NYC NEXT IDEA” GLOBAL BUSINESS PLAN COMPETITION: ENTREPRENEUR TEAM FROM INDIAN INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY “Cities around the world hope to be a place of innovation where entrepreneurs want to go to launch businesses,” said Mayor Bloomberg. “New York City doesn’t have to hope – we are that place. Just look at the talented teams from the world’s leading business and engineering schools that participated in our NYC Next Idea inaugural global business plan competition. But it’s not enough to be a place entrepreneurs want to go; we also have to make sure our city – and our country – is a place they can go. That’s why we are committed to working with the Obama Administration to pursue sensible immigration reform. No one can say for sure whether the finalists’ ideas will translate into successful job-creating businesses. What a shame, though, if they and countless others are denied the opportunity even to try.” Business plans targeted sectors such as Financial Services, Media & Technology, Green Technology and Bioscience, and included a new screening product for infectious diseases, a zero-emission bike-share program, and new telecom technology. In addition to the cash prize, the winning team will be offered free space within one of the City’s new business incubators for two years. “A key to maintaining New York’s status as the world’s economic capital is ensuring that we continue to attract and retain talented entrepreneurs from around the globe,” said New York City Economic Development Corporation President Pinsky. “To this end, we recently launched our new NYC Next Idea competition – a competition designed to bring the business leaders of tomorrow to the City, today. We are thrilled that this competition has been such a success in its inaugural year and are proud to add it to our growing list of offerings aimed at the entrepreneurial community, including programs providing access to much-needed start-up financing and inexpensive space, as well as training and networking opportunities.” “This competition is about discovering the next generation of business innovators in New York City, and we’re grateful that the city’s development leaders have turned to Columbia for support in that endeavor,” said Laura Resnikoff, director of the Columbia Business School Private Equity Program and adviser to the New York City Economic Development Corporation’s competition team. The teams were judged in the final round by FirstMark Capital CEO and Managing Director Lawrence Lenihan, RRE Ventures General Partner Will D. Porteous, Greycroft LLC Partner Andrew B. Lipsher, Ascent Biomedical Ventures Partner Arthur Tinkelenberg, Ph.D, and NYCEDC Executive Vice President Steven Strauss, Ph.D. Columbia Business School alumni including W Capital Partners Vice President Eugene Song, Latin America Venture Capital Association Director of Strategy and Product Development Ariel Muslera, and Greenhill Capital Partners Vice President Somak Chattopadhyay judged the second round. This week, NYCEDC released a Request for Proposals today to solicit a university partner for NYC Next Idea 2010-2011. Information on the RFP will be available at www.nycedc.com In the last year alone, the City has announced more 50 initiatives to address a wide range of obstacles faced by the small- and medium-size businesses throughout the five boroughs who are creating the building blocks of our new economy. These range from lowering taxes, to increasing capital availability, to starting training and networking programs, to providing opportunities to secure thousands of discounted work stations across the five boroughs. —— BIOFONT · University: INSEAD: Institut Européen d’Administration des Affaires (European Institute for Business Administration) – FRANCE —— NYCYCLING ——- The Greenext Technology Solutions team strongly believes that today’s challenges in the energy sector can be addressed through clean-technology solutions such as smart grids that hold the potential to meet growing energy demands. Greenext Technology Solutions team is convinced that with energy demand continuing to rise rapidly on the one hand and both energy availability and supply efficiency struggling to meet it on the other, financial incentives and deregulation of electricity markets will make their solution a highly viable one in the future. And New York City is a prime locale for such technology because of its burgeoning population and energy needs, as well as an electric grid in need of innovative upgrades. Warm Regards Sudha Ravi ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on January 6th, 2010 There is fun out there on the web – is it not? Mischievous Hackers Go After World Leaders. Carl Franzen (Jan. 5) — The Web sites of the Iranian President and the Spanish Prime Minister were taken down in the past day for two surprising reasons: Mr. Bean and Michael Jackson. Late Monday night, someone slapped a message on Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s official site that pleaded to God for the leader’s death in 2010, strangely mixing celebrity references with cold threats. “Dear God,” the statement read, “In 2009 you took my favorite singer – Michael Jackson, my favorite actress – Farrah Fawcett, my favorite actor – Patrick Swayze, my favorite voice – Neda,” a reference to the first name of a woman killed by gunfire during Iranian’s post-election protests in June 2009. Continuing, the message said, “Please, please, don’t forget my favorite politician – Ahmadinejad and my favorite dictator – Khamenei – in the year 2010. Thank you.” Around the same time, Spanish Prime Minster Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero once again played the victim in a long-running joke in his nation. Readers of the newly unveiled site for the incoming European Union president saw his portrait replaced with the British comedy character Mr. Bean. The comparisons spring from their similarities in physical appearance and bumbling ways, at least according to critics of Zapatero’s economic leadership. By Tuesday morning, both Web sites were rendered inaccessible, but early observers managed to save screen shots of the quixotic, pop-culture savvy messages. There were no claims of responsibility in either incident, though both countries have faced plenty of challenges from hackers as of late. Last month, the Spanish Ministry of Culture announced it was drafting plans to shut down popular file-sharing Web sites in the country. In response, self-described “hacktivists,” or hacker activists, defaced a leading Spanish anti-piracy Web site, replacing it with their manifesto. In June, pro-democracy activists around the Internet supported efforts to hack and “flood” Iran’s government Web sites with “junk traffic” in an effort to take them temporarily offline. On the ground, protesters also used the Internet to organize their activities and upload images of the crackdown by the Iranian security forces. In mid-December, Twitter’s domain name system was hijacked and its home page defaced by hackers calling themselves the “Iranian Cyber Army.” The microblog is one of the primary channels that dissidents and journalists have used to spread the news of the on-and-off opposition protests in Iran over the past six months. While the source of that attack also remains anonymous at this time, the message left by the hackers claimed it was retaliation against the United States for “Controlling And Managing Internet By Their Access” and for the U.S. trade embargo against Iran. ### |
|
Posted on Sustainabilitank.info on November 30th, 2009 SAN FRANCISCO SPANISH CONSULATE PROTEST SLATED DECEMBER 2 – EXCLUSION OF ISRAELI STUDENTS FROM A SOLAR ENERGY COMPETITION. The U.S. Department of Energy created the first Solar Decathlon in 2002, and agreed in 2007 to have Spain host the competition in alternating years, and is co-sponsoring the 2010 event. Spain is hosting the 2010 Solar Decathalon, a world solar energy research competition and has now announced that it is excluding students from Ariel University, one of 20 finalist teams. Spain has capitulated to demands from those groups promoting BDS (boycott, divestment and sanctions) against Israel and will not allow the team from Ariel to participate. The San Francisco Chronicle writes to us: Join StandWithUs/San Francisco Voice for Israel will protest Spain’s exclusion of Israeli students from solar energy competition outside the Consulate of Spain December 2, 2009. The 5:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m. demonstration will be held at the Consulate General of Spain, 1405 Sutter Street at Franklin, San Francisco. We will be part of a nationwide series of protests that will also be taking place at Spanish consulates in New York, Chicago and Los Angeles. Please see standwithus.com for further details and to sign the petition to the government of Spain as well as the US government which should now withdraw its sponsorship of this event. ### |






















