European Union

Plans to update EU civil aviation safety rules to address emerging risks were amended and approved by Transport and Tourism Committee MEPs on Thursday. The updated EU regulation will also introduce the EU-level requirements for drones, to ensure safety and privacy.
Committee on Transport and Tourism

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Plans to update EU civil aviation safety rules to address emerging risks were amended and approved by Transport and Tourism Committee MEPs on Thursday. The updated EU regulation will also introduce the EU-level requirements for drones, to ensure safety and privacy.
Committee on Transport and Tourism

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

The historic victory of Donald Trump in the US 2016 presidential election has been readily compared with the UK’s vote to leave the European Union – a ‘Brexit effect’ that some would suggest to have emanated from the UK, migrated across the Atlantic and impacted on the US. The notion that the UK has that much influence on the US, or the world more broadly, is rather bemusing. However, a similar kind of self-styled populist, anti-establishment surge has clearly manifested itself in both contests.

US Official Visit to the European Parliament, European Parliament, CC-BY-NC-ND-2.0

At a moment when Europe faces so many critical challenges, the incoming Trump presidency will, for now at least, bring even more uncertainty into the environment in which those challenges play out. In the first instance, it is not especially clear what his positions will be on key areas of Europe/EU-US relations – on the shape and credibility of the NATO alliance, on the future of TTIP (which was already precarious) or even free trade in general, on relations with Russia (and by extension the situations in Ukraine and Syria).

Foreign policy did not play a pivotal role in this election (nor did many issues, in what was a strongly personality-driven campaign). Moreover, many of the conventions associated with US presidential races were upended. For instance, after winning the party primary contest, candidates typically pivot from a party-focused agenda designed to win over party loyalists to a broader message intended to appeal to moderate independents and undecided voters who usually swing the balance, particularly in battleground states. Trump did not make such a pivot – nor, evidently, did he need to in order to win.

Consequently, his positions on issues did not substantially moderate during the general election campaign. The question then becomes whether they do so in the transition to and then in office. Power and responsibility can often exert a moderating influence on radical leaders and their ambitions – but this has not been an election of rules and norms, and the immediate US political environment could well be similar.

Despite the progressive accrual of power to the Executive Branch in recent decades, the success of a president still depends on his/her relationship with Congress. At first reading, the Republican majorities in the House and Senate would seem to make a Trump agenda easy to deliver. However, Congress values its own power and influence – ideological differences between Trump and ‘traditional’ Congressional Republicans will be relevant, as well – and it is not a rubber-stamping institution. Even if the executive has relatively more freedom to act in foreign policy, trade deals (if there are any) still have to be ratified and spending plans for foreign affairs and defence still have to be approved.

The fear in Europe would be that the US (or at least its government) will trend towards protectionism, introspection and small-mindedness – at a time when others are moving in that direction, and the US was meant to be a champion of global engagement and shared values. Europe and its concerns could potentially be neglected or forgotten, as other issues take priority or as the Trump presidency focuses more on persona and spin rather than substance (following the style of his campaign).

It is also possible that instead there is a great deal of delegation to others – to the Vice President or the Secretary of State, for instance. Alternatively, there could also be a prolonged policy inertia, in which little change in the US government’s positions is matched by an absence of action (minimal progress, but minimal regression). Combined with the fact that most presidents make or keep themselves popular (and build up a chance of winning a second term) by succeeding on domestic issues, rather than foreign policy, the capitals of Europe certainly have genuine cause for concern.

With the Republicans in control of the White House and both houses of Congress, the Democrats’ only glimmer of hope is that the Republicans do not have a supermajority of 60 seats in the Senate, with which it is much easier to get things done. The checks and balances of the US political system are also mentioned as a limitation on the use of power. While it might be more difficult to imagine how institutions run by the same party might check each other, the substantial powers reserved to the states could result in multi-level political battles. Depending on how radical new proposals are, it is hard to imagine that those in opposition will simply stand by. Confrontational politics could begin to take a whole new dimension.

Following the result, Donald Tusk and Jean-Claude Juncker have called for a high-level EU-US Summit to begin to map out how both sides will work together. Donald Trump may not be in so much of a rush to meet with the EU’s leaders. Considering his support for Brexit (which could impact future UK-US relations), perhaps he is not as keen on European integration as other US presidents have been.

Other European leaders have been equally reserved in their comments on Trump’s victory. It was noteworthy that Angela Merkel’s statement was structured around the argument of cooperation based on values. The day when a German Chancellor feels the need to remind a US President-elect about democratic values is one many would not have expected to come to pass.

From upheaval to little change, from neglect to delegation, US foreign policy in Europe could take many different shapes under the new presidency. For now, Europe (and everyone else) waits to see the look of the new administration and the development of its priorities. Many Americans are often surprised at how US politics, even on ostensibly ‘domestic’ issues, is observed so intently around the world. It clearly goes beyond general interest – the US is an essential global actor and what happens internally affects its external approach to the world. Europe may well see a different America – or, moreover, an attempt to construct a different America – in the years ahead. With all the other challenges it faces, such change could be the last thing Europe wants, or needs.

This article was originally published on European Futures.

Please read the comments policy before commenting.

Shortened link: britainseurope.uk/26

How to cite this article:

Salamone, A (2016) ‘America Decides: Foreign Policy Implications for Europe’, Britain’s Europe (Ideas on Europe), 10 November 2016, britainseurope.uk/26

The post America Decides: Foreign Policy Implications for Europe appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/6_3_2014-102811-stockshot-on-trade-16-9-preview_19.07_thumb_169_1477321516_1477321516_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Ministers for Foreign Affairs and Trade meet in Brussels on 11 November 2016 to Ministers are also discussing the WTO and the post Nairobi process and the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership.

Download this video here.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_c96321.r21.cf3.rackcdn.com/15241_169_full_129_97shar_c1.jpg

The European Defence Agency was established under a Joint Action of the Council of Ministers on 12 July, 2004, to support the Member States and the Council in their effort to improve European defence capabilities in the field of crisis management.

Download this video here.

DTS Distribuidora de Televisión Digital v Commission
The Court confirms that the financing of the Spanish public television system (RTVE) is compatible with the EU rules regarding State aid

Simba Toys v EUIPO
Intellectual and industrial property
The Court sets aside the judgment of the General Court and annuls the EUIPO decision which confirmed registration of the shape of the Rubik’s Cube as an EU trade mark

Commission v Greece
Environment and consumers
The Court finds that Greece has failed to fulfil its obligation to protect the sea turtle Caretta caretta in the Bay of Kyparissia

“Their world collapses. Ours is built.” So said Florian Philippot, the main adviser to Marine Le Pen, hailing Donald Trump’s victory as the start of a new order in world politics. Elections in France, the Netherlands and Germany will give this theory a thorough real-world test in 2017.

 

France

In France, Ms Le Pen of the National Front leads the way in first-round voting, but lags comfortably behind potential rivals in polls on a presidential run-off. Now, after duff calls in both Britain and the US pollsters are viewed with scepticism.

“Before the American result, the question seemed absurd,” says the Economist. “Now, the unthinkable has become conceivable.” The FT’s Anne-Sylvaine Chassany quotes Dominique de Villepin, a former French prime minister: “France and the US are like twins. What is possible in the US is possible in France, even if the system is refusing to see it.”

Read more

When I start thinking of the Czech general public’s view of the European Union, my thoughts are almost all negative.

Public trust in the EU – and politics overall – has been damaged by the misuse of EU funds and by red tape. It has been harmed by senior politicians who appear not to listen to citizens’ views, or to admit that some problems may need to be solved at European level. It has been eroded by abuse of European themes in domestic political campaigns – notably the refugee and migration crisis, which in reality doesn’t affect our country at all. Watch any Czech media, and it’s almost impossible to hear anything positive about the EU. As a PhD candidate researching European integration, I strongly believe in the European idea – yet I am unable to hide from this ubiquitous Euroscepticism.

Although the current Czech coalition government initially presented itself as willing to improve cooperation at EU level, this promise doesn’t seem to have been fulfilled after three years in power. Domestic debates concerning the EU are focused almost entirely on winning European funding, or on regulations that, in the end, are rarely the result of imposition from Brussels. There have been several attempts to communicate a Czech European policy to the public, but these initiatives usually don’t come from the government – instead, they are the work of think-tanks or civic organisations. Moreover, the ideas and policies generated by these groups struggle to find support in the government or in parliament.

So are the Czechs really Eurosceptic, or do we just ignore what happens beyond our borders? For people who’ve spent time abroad, it’s often difficult to connect again with friends who stayed. You can’t stop wondering how people can narrow-mindedly believe whatever fallacy the media serves them, without any thought of verifying claims or understanding their wider consequences. People have a lot of other issues in their lives to solve, true; their reliance on the media for political opinion is, from their perspective, entirely justifiable. Such division between a generally uninformed public and people with a wider knowledge or experience is, of course, not specific to the Czech Republic – but we do have a particularly small number of people who go abroad to work or study.

In my opinion, it should be the responsibility of our most educated elites, especially politicians, to ensure that the public debate on Czech foreign and European policy is at a satisfactory level and
there is some common understanding. When there is no such effort to provide this standard, no-one can reasonably blame the media for not reporting European issues seriously or comprehensively.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Roman Boed

The post Ignorance at the root of Czech Euroscepticism appeared first on Europe’s World.

Location : Brussels JAN 2Q2Further information
Programme
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Length of video : 200'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.8Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Although many of us may find it difficult to say so given recent events, it is important to recognise that the European project is – and remains – a success. For my generation, and all those who were born and grew up afterwards, “freedom without borders” in Europe is second nature. It is modern Europe’s greatest achievement. Where I go, where I live, where I work or study, who I trade or do business with – as a European, my opportunities are almost limitless. But history teaches us that some things cannot be taken for granted.

The fact is that building Europe has taken decades of laborious compromises. And now, yet again, we need people who are willing to fight hard – and honestly – for the continent’s future. Europe is
at a pivotal crossroads. This is not only the result of Brexit. Even before June’s vote, it was clear that the European Union has to change. The EU is a sluggish colossus that no longer touches or
engages with many of its citizens. Solutions to urgent problems are often not found, or are too slow to come forward. And Europe’s almost permanent fire-fighting mode, as it oscillates between the
financial and the refugee crises, gives many people the impression that decision-makers in Brussels are no longer setting the agenda, but are on the back foot.

Since the refugee crisis began in earnest last year, the question was not whether Europe wanted to help. We should help to eradicate oppression, first and foremost, in the regions from which refugees are fleeing, but we must also support those people arriving in Europe who are in need of protection. The offer of refuge, though, has to come with conditions. Someone who sets out by boat and reaches a European island cannot automatically expect to remain indefinitely in the EU, and certainly cannot choose the country in which they will settle. Smart management and setting boundaries are as much part of Europe as the desire for freedom and the willingness to help.

“We need a strong and effective European border police to protect the EU’s external borders and curb irregular migration”

Without this management, our social welfare systems and rule of law will be eroded, tolerance in society will be stretched, and those who sow the seeds of fear on the far-left and far-right of the political spectrum will be strengthened. Whenever our focus on this clear European position becomes even slightly blurred, illiberal and sometimes anti-democratic forces bring their shallow answers successfully to the fray. This phenomenon, which we know exists in France and is part of daily life in Italy, is emerging in other countries as well – including here in Germany. We need a clear
strategy to deal with it.

We also need a strong and effective European border police to protect the EU’s external borders and curb irregular migration. This must include harmonised rules on asylum and migration based on
fair burden-sharing among member states, with processing taking place at the external borders, not in Central Europe.

Europe must also invest far more in cooperation with its neighbours in the Middle East and North Africa to combat the causes of displacement and migration, and promote regional stability. By taking action at the local level, where the need is greatest, we can also make the most of the resources at our disposal.

It is precisely in a diverse and pluralist society that boundaries and governance are needed, internally as well as externally, to enable freedom to be a reality. The high level of immigration experienced in recent years, coupled with increasing individualisation, has created new conflicts and fault lines within society, partly in response to the different traditions, cultures and faiths that many immigrants bring with them. Social integration has been successful in millions of cases, but there are too many instances in which it has not worked, especially among immigrants from the Arab world. Too many regard their faith as incompatible with our Western values. Terror has become a bitter consequent reality.

But along all these fault lines, where many see only fear and change, there is a great opportunity. We need committed Europeans, who do not bury their head in the sand, to discard “business as usual” – let alone “even more integration!” – as their reflex response. We need to make sure that all the people are with us as we embark on this new path, and show them that their lives are better when Europe is united.

“Europe must invest far more in cooperation with its neighbours in the Middle East and North Africa in order to combat the causes of displacement and migration”

To many in Britain, it must have been obvious that Brexit would come at a price and that their own costs of living would go up – and yet they voted to leave. Many of them surely did so because
they felt Brussels was too remote and their voices were no longer being heard. But “Europe” does not just mean “Brussels”. Europe is held together by the diversity of its nations. The union should not try to make everyone the same. It is all-embracing. We simply need to prove that yet again.

 

The post Openness and pluralism are good – but so is effective management appeared first on Europe’s World.

AMENDMENTS 12 - 312 - Draft opinion on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Union Agency for Asylum and repealing Regulation (EU) No 439/2010
Committee on Foreign Affairs

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_c96321.r21.cf3.rackcdn.com/15524_169_full_129_97shar_c1.jpg

Together, the EU and the USA have the largest bilateral trade and investment relationship in the world, roughly 31% of the world trade and over 49% of the world GDP. In keeping with the evolving political and legal personality of the EU, there is active cooperation across a host of sectors: cooperation in justice and home affairs, energy and energy security, environment, science & technology, education & training. On 14 June 2013, the Council of the European Union adopted negotiating directives  for a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with the US.

Download this video here.

Lulled by the opinion polls and its own wishful thinking, Europe expected US foreign policy continuity following a Hillary Clinton victory. Now, Europeans must awaken to the unpredictable change and volatility a Donald Trump presidency will bring.

The EU’s foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini tweeted her reaction only minutes after Hillary Clinton conceded defeat. It was, as is usual with the tweets of political leaders, or those generated by their staff, anodyne. She said that transatlantic ties “are deeper than any change in politics. We’ll continue to work together, rediscovering the strengths of Europe.”

Waiting to see whether President-elect Trump implements his campaign pledges once he moves into the White House is definitely not the course the EU should adopt. On the contrary, Europe must set out very clearly what it sees as the transatlantic and even global agenda for 2017 to 2020.

All too often, the European Union only reacts to developments, and even then reveals its disarray. It is usually loath to set out in advance its own red lines on foreign policy issues. That’s understandable, due to the EU’s complex consensus-building mechanisms – but it’s also a major hindrance.

“Hoping for restraining influences is not a policy the EU should espouse”

The prospect of a Trump administration signals not just a tectonic shift in American politics but also a potentially huge disruption to global growth and security.

It may be that the Republican Party, with its majorities in both the House of Representatives and the Senate, will furnish the new president with a cabinet, and especially a Secretary of State, with the authority and experience needed to mitigate his campaign promises and threats.

But hoping for restraining influences is not a policy the EU should espouse. Europe’s national leaders must resist the temptation to grandstand with their own reactions to Trump’s election win, and instead fashion a common European response. And they must do so proactively, before President Trump sets foot in the Oval Office in the third week of January.

The elements of the agenda the EU must set out are clear enough. On security, the countries grouped in both the EU and NATO need to reassert their commitments to collective security, and invite the United States to do the same within the Alliance. Trump’s campaign rhetoric has raised significant question marks over the future of NATO, as well as over developments in the Washington-Moscow relationship.

Security is set to be among Europe’s greatest concerns, given the uncertainties in Ukraine, Syria and the wider Mediterranean and Caspian regions.

Far from being the main security guarantor, it seems possible the United States will soon be the source of greater instability. That possibility demands the preparation of a concerted European position capable of heading off trouble.

“The EU must unite to ensure that surging American nationalism does not further disrupt the extremely vulnerable international system”

On the economic front, Trump’s protectionist sentiments and his opposition to multilateral trade deals like the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) pose a serious threat to US and EU trade and investment – and to the global economy too. Trade in goods and services between Europe and America is worth US$1.5 trillion a year, and transatlantic investment stands at $2.5 trillion annually. A dent in that would send shockwaves around the world, so the EU needs to set out its intentions clearly and quickly.

Donald Trump’s election reflects an alarming mood swing in America. It echoes the Brexit referendum in the UK and populist trends around Europe. Many voters in the rich industrialised countries of the West now contest globalisation. At first it was welcomed, opening new markets; but increasingly globalisation is being rejected as unfair because business investors are moving to lower-wage countries.

If Trump’s ‘America first’ slogan means that the US will oppose the global governance reforms being demanded by emerging economic giants then great dangers lie ahead. Instead of being the world’s policeman, America will become its principal threat.

That’s why the European Union must prepare to take centre stage. The EU’s governments must unite to ensure that surging American nationalism does not further disrupt an international system whose economies and security are already extremely vulnerable. Doing so will prove the true worth of the European project, and would reverse its decline.

 Related content

• Friends of Europe: Ten ideas to make Europe more relevant to its citizens
• Europe’s World: US exceptionalism or withdrawal from the world?, by Philip J Crowley
• Debating Europe: Will President Trump make America great again?

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / FLICKR – Gage Skidmore

The post Why the EU must fashion a tough pre-Trump agenda appeared first on Europe’s World.

General : The election of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States will undoubtedly affect the country’s relations with the EU. Not only could it have an impact on the ongoing negotiations for free-trade agreement TTIP, there could also be repercussions for the other pillar of Euro-American cooperation, Nato. We talked to German EPP member David McAllister, chair of Parliament's delegation for relations with the United States, what Europe can expect from a Trump presidency.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

General : The election of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States will undoubtedly affect the country’s relations with the EU. Not only could it have an impact on the ongoing negotiations for free-trade agreement TTIP, there could also be repercussions for the other pillar of Euro-American cooperation, Nato. We talked to German EPP member David McAllister, chair of Parliament's delegation for relations with the United States, what Europe can expect from a Trump presidency.

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Length of video : 66'
You may manually download this video in WMV (544Mb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Length of video : 108'
You may manually download this video in WMV (997Mb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP