Feed aggregator

Miközben az európai intézmények és pártok vezetői pénteken sorra gratuláltak a brit konzervatívok biztos választási győzelméhez, egyes szakértők már arról értekeztek, hogy az ismétlő David Cameron számára nem is annyira követeléseinek az EU-val való elfogadtatása, hanem a skót nacionalisták kezelése jelentheti a fő kihívást.

On Saturday in Moscow events marking 70th anniversary of the victory over Nazi Germany kick off, which are to be the biggest celebrations of the kind that the Russian Federation has ever held.

Most Americans have never heard of Edward Miliband. And given this week’s result in the U.K. elections it is very likely they never will. After a crushing defeat he has already resigned as leader of the Labour Party and is poised to return to the Wallace & Gromit animated films from which he seems to have been discovered. His electoral failure and that of his party once again proves the old electoral adage that unappealing leaders and incompetent campaigns often produce bad results.

That’s not to take anything away from David Cameron, whose Conservative Party won a resounding victory that was so surprising that not only has it left Miliband out of a job, but in all likelihood he has taken scores of U.K. pollsters with him. Cameron stunned the pundits to a degree that echoes the recent electoral victory of Bibi Netanyahu in the elections in Israel, the country that along with the U.K. has historically had the greatest claim on having a special relationship with the United States.

Both elections however, suggest on several levels that those special relationships, neither of which has been what it used to be during the past several years, are in for a period of further decline.

In part, the decline in the relationships has been due to historical reasons that have made both countries less important to the United States. The United Kingdom is a shadow of its former self, the sun long ago having defied the old saying and actually having set on the former empire. British school children no longer study maps that show a quarter of the world in red or pink to depict the lands loyal to their monarch. Even Britain’s last great claim on global domination — in the area of TV car shows — suffered a devastating blow this year when “Top Gear,” broadcast in 214 countries with an audience of hundreds of millions, saw its blowhard, politically troglodyte host Jeremy Clarkson unceremoniously booted off the air for behaving like an ass, thus shutting down production.

Perhaps the fact that puts this decline in clearest focus is the steep decline in the size of the British Army. With cuts slated to take it from 102,000 to 82,000 regulars and a recent report suggesting that further cuts could reduce it in size to 50,000 within a few years, we face the prospect that in the not too distant future the military that once conquered the world will be roughly the same size as the New York Police Department. (A promise of Cameron and the Tories was that they would stop such cuts from taking place, but whether Britain’s financial health — more on that later — will permit them to honor that pledge is another matter.)

Similarly, whereas a generation ago Israel was seen as central to U.S. Mideast policy, today, while it is still America’s most important and best-supported ally in the region, events have undercut its importance in practical terms. Once it was key to the U.S. Cold War strategy in the region, but the Cold War ended. Once the Middle East was more important to the United States as a source of energy, but that is clearly less true today than at any time since the Second World War. Once the Israel-Palestine conflict was seen as central to all the problems and geopolitical issues of the region; now that is far from being the case. Indeed, that issue, once number one among U.S. regional priorities, might have a hard time making the top ten today. (Coming in after: Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, containing Iran, the Iranian nuclear deal, the spread of extremism, the current crisis in Yemen, the looming crisis in Libya, Egyptian stability, maintaining eroding support among our traditional Arab allies, and a host of other such issues.)

Further, both special relationships are fading in the minds and hearts of Americans as a new generation starts assuming power, one that has few memories of the historical reasons for the founding of Israel or of Britain’s vital partnership with the United States in two world wars.

Part of the deterioration in these two relationships has to do with policy decisions made by the governments that have just won second terms in power. The U.S.-Israel relationship sure doesn’t feel that special when the prime minister of Israel tries to politically body-slam the U.S. president. It is devalued when the prime minister of Israel appears to choose sides in the U.S. political debate, seeming to be willing to save his specialness for his Republican friends. And it is certainly deeply damaged when Israel wages a brutal and unjustifiable campaign against the people of Gaza that violates international norms and offends the sensibilities of all with a hint of conscience, as the Netanyahu government did last year.

Britain has not so much offended as it has simply slinked away from center stage. Perhaps in the wake of British public revulsion at the degree to which Tony Blair was seen to have become George W. Bush’s “poodle,” perhaps due to the degree to which national attention has been drawn to domestic problems, we have seen a reordering of the power landscape of Europe. Britain, once our closest and most important ally, now falls third on that scale behind Germany (more important) and France (more supportive of the United States in recent years). Add in the belligerent, erratic, dangerous Vladimir Putin and a newly aggressive Russia, and Britain is now only the fourth most important power with which the United States regularly deals in Europe.

The fact that Britain’s role in Europe will now be open to question for months to come, thanks to Cameron’s pledge to hold a referendum regarding whether Britain should remain a part of the EU, only makes further deterioration more likely. That is because the doubt the referendum is likely to raise may have deleterious effects on the British economy. It is also because there is a possibility that Britain could choose to leave the EU. This would be economically foolish and would take the country from being an important player in the world’s largest market to being a more marginal independent actor. Further, should Scotland renew the push to breakaway from the United Kingdom, and the election results showed huge strides made by the Scottish National Party, it would clearly make a Not-So-Great Britain more likely.

Given the likelihood of President Barack Obama’s Iran nuclear deal being successfully concluded and the U.S. administration’s commitment to ensuring that is the case, the prospect for further bad relations between Netanyahu and the White House is great. This alienation will have multiple effects, many of which have already manifested themselves to some degree. The Israelis will seek to diversify their international alliances, reaching out to India, China, Russia, and others. And the United States will seek to emphasize and cultivate other ties in the region (whether that means with Iran or with GCC partners is unclear…. Both seem unlikely, but at the same time both may expect greater efforts at outreach from Washington even as Israel sees a further chill.)

None of this is improved upon by some of the behavior and policies of the Obama administration. It doesn’t help, for example, to call the Israeli prime minister “chickenshit,” or to get drawn into petulant exchanges with the Israelis more suited to the schoolyard than to statecraft. Matters have not been helped by America’s shying away from playing the leadership role that is expected of the United States nor by the inconsistent nature of Obama’s personal diplomacy with our friends abroad. And frankly, the likelihood of the Obama team spending much real time repairing these problems during their waning days in office is pretty slim.

Will the next U.S. president aggressively seek to reverse the course of these once-crucial but now-declining relationships cited here? Undoubtedly candidates for that job will certainly promise to do so in the months ahead. But the historical factors and current geopolitical trends cited above will make it very hard for anyone to restore these relationships to the special place they occupied in the past. For Cameron and Netanyahu and their new governments, this is a reality they may wish to deny but that they will find it very difficult to reverse.

BEN STANSALL/AFP/Getty Images

Patan, Nepal (Photo: cpcmollet via Flickr).

Nepal, Before and After the Earthquake
The New York times Magazine
Text by Jon Mooallem/Photographs by Giles Price

With pictures as beautiful and saddening as the text that describes them, The New York times Magazine depicts the beauty of Nepal and its people, and the destruction of their country after a major earthquake last week.

The Right to Blaspheme
The Atlantic
By David Frum

In response to the attempted terror attack in Garland, T.X., David Frum makes the distinction between hate speech and blasphemy, and what freedom of speech entails.

The Aesthetic Failure of ‘Charlie Hebdo’
The New Republic
By Jeet Heer

In the months following the Charlie Hebdo shooting in Paris, a debate has broken out about the satire magazine’s refusal to modernize its message.

What Happens in Atomic City Stays in Atomic City
Medium
By Cassie Benjamin

The Manhattan Project was the secret U.S. initiative to construct an atomic bomb to help end World War II. Keeping it hidden from enemies was obvious, but the extent to which it was hidden from the thousands of employees is surprising.

A League of His Own
Bloomberg Business
By Tariq Panja, Andrew Martin, and Vernon Silver

Bloomberg Business published an in-depth feature on the divisive FIFA president, Sepp Blatter, and the political orchestrating he navigates while controlling the world’s most popular game.

Blogs:
An Israel Itinerary for Scott Walker by Josh Klemons
Defending Europe by Michael Crowley
Why We All Innately Know What Justice Should Be by Richard Basas
Forty Years After the War, Vietnam Welcomes the U.S. by Gary Sands

BELGRADE, 8 May 2015 – OSCE Chairperson-in-Office and Serbia’s Foreign Minister Ivica Dačić today called on all sides in eastern Ukraine to ensure that commemoration events scheduled for this weekend are peaceful.

“Ahead of this important anniversary of the end of World War II in Europe, which will be marked across the OSCE area, I would like to call on all sides to commemorate the occasion through peaceful events, which also respect a comprehensive ceasefire and contribute to achieving a sustainable and lasting peace in Ukraine.”

“I urge all sides to support the full implementation of the Minsk Agreements by exercising maximum restraint and refraining from displaying heavy weapons during the commemoration events. The anniversary of Victory Day is the right time to send a message of peace,” he said.

Related Stories

• OSCE CiO Dačić condemns ceasefire violations in eastern Ukraine, appeals for boost to political process
• Chairperson Dačić welcomes inauguration of working groups under Trilateral Contact Group auspices
• Joint press statement of Trilateral Contact Group: Trilateral Contact Group launches activities of working groups advancing implementation of Minsk arrangements

OPINION on the proposal for a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the use of Passenger Name Record data for the prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution of terrorist offences and serious crime
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Arnaud Danjean

Source : © European Union, 2015 - EP

In early 2014, Nigerian-Cameroonian pop singer Dencia launched Whitenicious, a line of skin-care products and lightening creams. She called the products dark-spot removers and argued they were intended not to bleach users’ entire skin tone but to address small dark blemishes that left skin looking uneven.

Her controversial product line is now one of many, including Fair & White and Divine Derrière, that will likely be deemed illegal in Ivory Coast, where the government passed legislation to ban most bleaching creams on Thursday. In addition to their social controversy, the creams have a record of severely burning skin, and medical experts widely consider them to be carcinogenic.

Ivory Coast is not the first country to take action against the products. In South Africa, products with more than 2% hydroquinone — a whitening agent — have been illegal since the 1980s.

Polls published by the World Health Organization found that in some African countries, including Nigeria and Togo, the majority of women use some form of skin-whitening product.

But even if they are increasingly popular, the reaction from Dencia’s fans proved there is a growing movement against the popularity of these products. She faced public backlash after she openly stated that she thinks “white means pure” and went back and forth in interviews on whether she herself had used lightening creams to change her look.

Fans argue that photos prove her skin has become significantly lighter since she first rose to stardom, and many saw the launch of Whitenicious as her using her fame to encourage young women to regard her chemically induced whiteness, not her natural blackness, as beauty.

And the explanation behind the name Whitenicious? Dencia offered her take in an interview with Ebony magazine last year: “When you see Whitenicious, you see the container, you see the product, obviously you’re thinking this is gonna work, right? That’s what you’re thinking.”

In that same Ebony interview, she bragged that another passenger on an international flight complimented her skin and asked if she was Puerto Rican. But when asked if she regarded dark skin to be an obstacle, she said she thought dark was “beautiful.” Her products cost upward of $150 for a small container.

The lightening creams, which in all fairness can also effectively reduce the effects of hyperpigmentation, have become so popular that the industry is now estimated to be worth billions of dollars. In January, Oprah Winfrey’s television network released a documentary about the industry, featuring those who were victims of its harmful side effects.

But ask Dencia about her product’s risk, and she’ll tell you it’s worth it.

“Guess what?” she said.  “The air you breathe outside causes you cancer. Everything in the world causes cancer.”

SIA KAMBOU/AFP/Getty Images

The bipartisan push for passage of Trade Promotion Authority (TPA) is akin to epic dramas where competing leaders set aside their quarrels to join forces when the fate of the realm is in the balance. President Barack Obama and Republicans have locked arms to break down barriers that threaten our economic vitality and global leadership. Both the president and congressional leaders must skillfully outmaneuver undermining forces on each of their flanks to achieve victory.

For 75 years, America has heeded past lessons that rejecting the benefits of trade prolongs economic misery. The Smoot-Hawley Tariffs in 1930 sparked retaliatory duties that drove a drastic reduction in U.S. exports that deepened and lengthened the Great Depression. We cannot let their protectionist successors similarly prolong the Great Recession.

President Obama joins an unbroken string of Democratic presidents that have successfully championed trade. Both he and Republicans face hurdles in delivering the votes necessary to extend this record.

Republicans must overcome dissenters in their ranks that are loathe to grant this president any more authority or perceive a hidden plot to open up immigration.

The president must surmount determined opposition within his party. Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), fabricates more trade monsters than a Halloween costume factory. Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) is being bipartisan in his own unique way: opposing Obama with the same zeal that he opposed Republican presidents.

While Republicans will have to carry most of the water on this deal, Democratic votes will be pivotal. President Bill Clinton mustered 102 Democrat votes for the North American Free Trade Agreement. President Obama is no Bill Clinton. Sadly, given her absence from this historic trade debate, neither is Hillary Clinton.

With 432 House seats now filled, 217 votes will be needed in the House. Recent estimates suggest that only 180 to 200 of the 244 Republicans can be counted on for support. Fewer than 20 Democrats in the House have backed TPA so far, leaving its fate in question.

With Reid’s challenges in the Senate, 60 votes will be required to overcome procedural hurdles. If all 54 Republicans stick together against Reid’s challenge, they will need at least six Democrat votes. Even though seven Democrats supported TPA in committee, most are not saying if they will reject Reid’s leadership and vote to allow the bill to proceed to the Senate floor.

With all of that math in mind, it’s essential to remember they key components of assembling for battle on any issue: determining they paramount questions of what, where, who, and how in such a way that your answer is the best conclusion for crucial audiences to draw.

What

Those who define the question at hand win political contests. Answering the other side’s question is playing on their turf. You must establish the supremacy of your question.

Opponents of trade liberalization try to make the question some particular detail of the deal. The recent refrain of Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) is typical, “I tell everybody the same thing: I’m pro-trade, but…” The general rule in politics is to ignore everything before a “but.”

Obama has rightly focused on taking the debate to a higher level, asserting that no matter the imperfections of this deal, the alternative is far worse.

His question from the State of the Union frames the issue well, “as we speak, China wants to write the rules for the world’s fastest-growing region. That would put our workers and businesses at a disadvantage. Why would we let that happen? We should write those rules. We should level the playing field.”

The president has also rightly kept the focus on how trade benefits America’s workers and the middle class.

Where

Today’s contentiousness requires a strong outside game, speaking out publically about the merits of a deal, and a dedicated inside game through individual meetings with undecided members. This president prefers the former to the latter, but in this instance both are essential.

Who

United States Trade Representative Michael Froman has assured me that regular cabinet huddles are occurring on TPA and the entire administration’s shoulder is pressed to the wheel. That is excellent, but no substitute for presidential leadership.

Clearly Republican leadership and the coalition of groups that have historically advocated for trade must also be fully engaged if the coalition resisting passage is to be overcome.

How

Obama’s bold public statements rejecting determined opposition from within his own party are an essential element of building public support. His discussions with House and Senate members on the fence at the White House reflect this commitment to aggressively build Congressional approval. It must continue.

America’s embrace of trade following World War II drove its rise to global leadership. Continuing to push for trade liberalization is essential to preserving our ability to continue to be the stabilizing force that averts anarchy.

Completing pending trade agreements in both Asia and Europe would strengthen each region’s commitment to the global order and boost our allies’ economic prospects, while boosting opportunities for American workers, our middle class. Not passing these accords would be seen as America raising a white flag. May this epic saga instead have a happy ending!

 Natalie Behring/Getty Images

Vadim Makhorov and Vitaliy Raskalov are two of my favorite lunatics in the world right now. They travel the world and illicitly scale tall buildings, videotaping and photographing their journeys. I’ve written about their adventures before, and the climbing pair have a new video out documenting their climb of what will be China’s tallest building. It’s harrowing and totally amazing.

When completed, the Ping An Finance Center in Shenzhen will be the world’s second-highest skyscraper, behind only the Burj Khalifa in Dubai. Makhorov and Raskalov’s climb took place over Chinese New Year, explaining why the construction site was totally deserted at the time of their summit. Presumably, the building’s owners will be none too pleased when they find out that these Russian daredevils made it not only to the building’s roof and then proceeded to climb to the top of the crane being used to build it.

YouTube/on the roofs

Valami nagyon rossz dolog zajlik most Burundiban, valami olyasmi, ami minden eddiginél jobban riogat az egy évtizeddel ezelőtti szörnyűségek megismétlődésével, hiszen ha csak a tegnapi (05.08.) híradásokat megnézzük, a burundi fővárosban, Bujumburában az erőszak az úr – csak tegnap legalább hárman haltak meg, amikor a hatóságok emberei, ellenzéki tüntetők és a jelenlegi elnök, Pierre Nkurunziza híve csaptak össze több negyedben. Az elmúlt napok eseményei azért váltak igazán erőszakossá, mert a hadsereg a korábban állított semlegességét feladva nekilátott a barikádok felszámolásának, ami miatt a tüntetők egy része úgy értelmezte, hogy átállt Nkurunziza oldalára.

Az egyik városnegyedben ismeretlenek gránátokkal támadtak a tüntetőkre és az akciókban többen meghaltak valamint tucatnyian megsérültek majd ezután a lakosság az Imbonerakurét, Nkurunziza pártjának ifjúsági szárnyát kezdte vádolni a cselekményekkel és elszabadultak az indulatok. A megvadult emberek vad kutatásba kezdtek az Imbonerakure tagok után, majd megostromoltak egy házat, ahol állítólag a csoporthoz tartozó fiatalok rejtőztek, de még a hadsereg közbelépése sem tudta megakadályozni, hogy egyiküket halálra verjék és felgyújtsák (állítólag a házban még katonai egyenruhákat is találtak, ami igazolná azt az ellenzéki vádat, hogy a hadsereg soraiba is beszivárogtak a kormányhű aktivisták).

Szóval ez történik most Burundiban, az országban, amely állítólag sikerrel túllépett az etnikai alapú véres háború sebein és a megbékélés útjára lépett. A nemzetközi közösség képviseletében az Afrikai Unió azonnal felszólított a júniusra tervezett választás elhalasztására és Nkurunziza elnököt pedig mandátumának júniusi végleges befejezésére kérte. Mindezt azért, mert az elnök nemrégiben bejelentette, hogy ha júniusban nyerne még egy mandátumot, akkor negyedikért már nem indulna a jövőben, mindezt úgy, hogy az ország alkotmánya kettőben maximálja a lehetséges elnöki mandátumok számát – Nkurunziza szerint első alkalommal őt nem az emberek, hanem a képviselők választották az arushai békemegállapodásnak megfelelően.

Az ország alkotmánybírósága egy rendkívül furcsa körülmények között született döntéssel engedélyezte Nkurunziza újabb indulását – nem sokkal a döntés bejelentése után a hétből öt bíró elmenekült az országból, hangsúlyozva, hogy a bíróságnak nem volt más lehetősége, csak az új mandátum jóváhagyása, hiszen mindannyiukat életveszélyesen megfenyegették a döntéshozatal előtt. A kérdés igazából most csak az, hogy ténylegesen mi volt az oka ezeknek a tüntetéseknek és milyen jövőkép vár erre az ezer sebből vérző kis közép-afrikai országra? Az biztos, hogy Nkurunziza vágya a harmadik mandátumra egyértelműen kiváltó ok volt, de a politikai feszültség már hosszú hónapok óta érezhető volt az országban, hiszen még az elnök pártjának, a CNDD-FDD-nek a berkein belül is komoly ellenállás ütötte fel fejét Nkurunzizával szemben.

Burundiban ma a többségi vélemény az, hogy a sok ezer halottal járó háborúskodás eredményeként elért demokráciát nem szabadna kockára tenni egy újabb elnöki mandátumért, viszont jelenleg pont az újabb mandátum elleni tiltakozás sodorta a szakadék szélére az országot, főleg azért, mert az elnök hajthatatlannak tűnik. Szóval nehéz jót mondani, az biztos, hogy amennyiben Nkurunziza nem fog önmérsékletet tanúsítani, Burundi a káoszba süllyed, a hadsereg egysége megroppan, elszabadul az Imbonerakure és az egész országra kiterjedő erőszakhullám következik majd. Persze a polgárháború nem elkerülhetetlen, viszont jelenleg minden azon múlik, melyik oldal eltökéltsége lesz az erősebb. Ha nincs erősebb oldal, akkor bekövetkezhet a szörnyűség.

twitter.com/napiafrika

7 ember kedveli ezt a posztot.Tetszett az írás.Tetszett az írás.

Tíz Európába érkező migráns közül durván nyolc potenciális menekültnek számít, és körülbelül csak kettő a gazdasági bevándorló, aki tisztán a jobb élet és a munkavállalás reményében kel útra – véli az uniós külső határőrizeti ügynökség, a Frontex második embere. Gil Arias-Fernández szerint február óta drasztikusan csökkent a magyar határokon illegálisan belépő koszovóiak száma, és nagyjából azonos szinten van az afgánokkal és a szírekkel.

The SMM monitored the implementation of the “Package of measures for the implementation of the Minsk agreements”. The SMM, based on its monitoring – which was restricted by third parties and by security considerations* – observed ongoing fighting in and around Donetsk airport and Shyrokyne. The SMM observed the presence of heavy weapons on both sides of the contact line, noting in particular a large concentration of tanks in a “DPR”-controlled area north-east of Mariupol.

* Please see the section at the end of this report entitled “Restrictions on SMM access and freedom of movement” for further information.

Fighting continued to rage in and around the destroyed “Donetsk People’s Republic” (“DPR”)-controlled Donetsk airport, with the SMM during the reporting period recording hundreds of explosions. At the Joint Centre for Control and Co-ordination (JCCC) observation post at “DPR”-controlled Donetsk Railway Station (8km north-west of Donetsk), the SMM, between 13:25 and 18:00hrs, observed a total of 573 explosions. Members of the JCCC at the observation post told the SMM that there had been two unsuccessful attempts to introduce local ceasefires at 9:00 and 9:30hrs. The SMM observed that the second attempt had lasted over an hour. The SMM also accessed “DPR”-controlled Spartak (8km north of Donetsk) and the airport, noting sporadic low-level incoming mortar rounds.

From an observation point on the eastern outskirts of government-controlled Berdianske (1.5km west of Shyrokyne; 18.5km east of Mariupol), the SMM, from 17:24 to 17:34hrs, heard more than a hundred detonations, assessed to have been incoming fire from Grad multiple launch rocket systems (MLRS) located approximately 6km north-north-east of its position[1].

An SMM Unmanned Aerial Vehicle (UAV) spotted three tanks in government-controlled territory and 30 tanks in “DPR”-controlled territory, all in or around villages close to the line of contact. Thirteen of these tanks were seen in or around “DPR”-controlled Sontseve (57km south of Donetsk). In addition, two mobile 122mm Grad 9P132 rocket launchers were observed 5km west of “DPR”-controlled Novoazovsk (43km east of Mariupol).

On the western outskirts of “DPR”-controlled Bezimenne (30km east of Mariupol), the SMM observed eight fresh artillery craters. Continuing east – on its way to the “DPR”-controlled international border crossing point on the Russian Federation-Ukraine border (52km east of Mariupol) – the SMM entered “DPR”-controlled Novoazovsk, where it visited the local market, noting that prices were generally double those in Mariupol.

The SMM observed defensive fortifications being constructed on both sides of the contact line in areas around “DPR”-controlled Debaltseve (55km north-west of Donetsk) and government-controlled Luhanske, 16km north-west of Debaltseve.

In government-controlled Artemivsk (66km north of Donetsk), the director of the local Unemployment Office told the SMM that 50 mid-sized companies had left the town since the start of the conflict. Although larger industrial companies have remained, they have had to cut back on production and working hours. Many companies, he said, have had trouble with distribution and acquisition of raw materials, particularly since the fall of Debaltseve, a major transport hub.

In “DPR”-controlled Hrozne (49km north-east of Donetsk), the SMM on 6 May met the family of a 15-year-old boy who had died in hospital a few days previously, according to local residents the SMM had spoken to before. The family told the SMM that the boy, while tending livestock, had stepped on a landmine. They added that others had previously been injured from landmines around the village.

On 6 May, while in an area south of Debaltseve, the SMM observed for the first time a shooting range which covers approximately 16 sq. km and is being used, according to the “DPR” “commander” there, to test anti-tank weapons, mortars, and small fire arms. The SMM observed an ongoing exercise with “DPR” armoured personnel vehicles and armed persons. There was also a 100mm anti-tank weapon at the location as well as three support trucks.

In government-controlled Starobilsk (84km north-west of Luhansk), a Security Services of Ukraine (SBU) commander told the SMM that there had been a marked increase in the number of people seeking passes to cross the contact line. He said currently there were 1,000 applications a day – up from 600 – and that, as of 7 May, 28,000 passes had been issued.

The SMM re-visited one “DPR” and three Ukrainian Armed Forces heavy weapons holding areas, observing that the weapons previously recorded were in situ, and that their locations comply with the respective withdrawal lines. In addition, the SMM visited for the first time another Ukrainian Armed Forces heavy weapons holding area, noting the presence of four 122mm self-propelled artillery pieces. At another two Ukrainian Armed Forces heavy weapons holding areas, personnel there refused to allow the SMM to inspect the facilities, at one site, saying no orders had been given to allow such an inspection, and at the other, saying the commander was unavailable to authorize SMM entry.

Despite claims that the withdrawal of heavy weapons was complete, the SMM observed the following weapons’ movements/presence in areas that were non-compliant with the withdrawal lines: (i) in “DPR”-controlled areas, 31 tanks, one 100mm anti-tank cannon, and two Grad MLRS; and, (ii) in government-controlled territory, nine tanks.

The SMM continued to monitor the situation in Kharkiv, Dnepropetrovsk, Odessa, Kherson, Chernivtsi, Ivano-Frankivsk, Lviv and Kyiv.

* Restrictions on SMM access and freedom of movement:

The SMM is restrained in fulfilling its monitoring functions by restrictions imposed by third parties and security considerations including the lack of information on whereabouts of landmines.

The security situation in Donbas is fluid and unpredictable and the cease-fire does not hold everywhere.

• The “DPR” deputy “commandant” in Debaltseve told the SMM that it was not permitted to travel to “DPR”-controlled Lohvynove (8.5km north-west of Debaltseve), saying live-fire exercises were ongoing there
• At a checkpoint close to government-controlled Lebedynske (16km east-north-east of Mariupol), members of the Dnepro-1 volunteer battalion incorporated into the Ukrainian National Guard kept the SMM waiting for an hour.

 

[1]   For a complete breakdown of the ceasefire violations, please see the annexed table.

 

 

Related Stories

• The Chief Monitor of the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine urged all sides to respect ceasefire during the forthcoming commemoration events
• Latest from OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM), based on information received as of 19:30 (Kyiv time), 6 May 2015
• Latest from OSCE Special Monitoring Mission to Ukraine (SMM), based on information received as of 19:30 (Kyiv time), 5 May 2015

RT will air a live broadcast of the Victory Day parades from all around Russia as part of the extensive project that marks the 70th anniversary of the Soviet Victory in the Great Patriotic War. Dubbed Parade Relay, the event will stream on RT channels and online platforms around the world in Russian, English, Spanish and Arabic on May 9.

Er bleibt in der Downing Street Nummer 10 - die britische Parlamentswahl war für ihn ein Triumphzug: David Cameron holte die absolute Mehrheit und…

« C’est un paradoxe : le Royaume-Uni se méfie de plus en plus d’une Union européenne qui n’a jamais été aussi en ligne avec ses idées », s’exclame un haut fonctionnaire de la Commission de nationalité britannique. Du libre-échange à l’anglais, devenu langue quasiment unique des institutions communautaires, en passant par l’élargissement, le marché unique, le moins légiférer, la baisse du budget communautaire, l’Europe à géométrie variable, bref tout ce dont rêvait depuis toujours Albion. « Aujourd’hui, c’est la France qui souffre: l’Europe puissance, la défense européenne ou encore la politique industrielle, autant de choses qui effrayaient la Grande-Bretagne et qui ne sont plus d’actualité », s’amuse ce haut fonctionnaire. Or, plus l’Europe devient britannique, plus Londres s’y sent mal à l’aise au point de vouloir la quitter.

Le Royaume-Uni a su parfaitement manœuvrer pour imposer ses idées au fil des ans. Tout commence avec Margareth Thatcher, la dame de fer, qui comprend rapidement que le Grand Marché lancé par Jacques Delors en 1985 n’est pas seulement un projet fédéral, mais va lui permettre de faire sauter les barrières intérieures aux échanges et ainsi de réaliser une zone de libre échange européenne. Même si elle était plus organisée qu’elle ne l’aurait souhaité, c’est bien ce qui s’est passé, Londres ayant toujours bloqué toute harmonisation fiscale et sociale qui aurait dû en être la contrepartie. Ses successeurs, John Major et Tony Blair, ont, eux, réussi à créer une Europe à géométrie variable en obtenant des « opt out » dans plusieurs domaines : la monnaie, bien sûr, l’immigration et l’asile, la justice et la police, Schengen ou encore la défense. Londres a aussi milité activement pour un élargissement rapide, en s’alliant pour le coup avec l’Allemagne, meilleur moyen de tuer l’idée même d’Europe puissance, un concept qui la hérisse.

La Grande-Bretagne a aussi su renforcer sa présence à Bruxelles. Même si les Britanniques ont toujours été inférieurs en nombre (4,3 % parmi les fonctionnaires de la Commission, par exemple, contre 9,8 % de Français, 10,5 % d’Italiens ou 8,3 % d’Allemands), leur qualité a plus que compensé ce handicap. Ainsi, dans l’exécutif présidé par Jean-Claude Juncker, on compte six chefs de cabinets (et adjoints) britanniques contre trois Français. Parmi les directeurs généraux (chef d’administration centrale), il n’y a certes que cinq Britanniques (sur 68 postes), contre six Français et dix Allemands, mais là aussi à des postes importants. Il faut rajouter la toute puissante secrétaire générale de la Commission, Catherine Day, certes irlandaise, mais très proche des Britanniques. « Il ne s’agit de placer des gens qui prennent leurs ordres de Londres », précise un haut-fonctionnaire britannique, « mais d’avoir des gens qui ont une culture anglo-saxonne et qui influent donc directement sur la législation européenne ». La Représentation permanente (RP, ambassade) britannique auprès de l’UE sait entretenir des relations régulières avec ses fonctionnaires, à la différence de son homologue française qui ne s’intéresse pas aux petits grades. « Même les stagiaires sont reçus par la RP britannique, alors que les Français ignorent qu’on existe », témoigne un Français.

Mais le vent a tourné : depuis 2010, le nombre de candidats britanniques aux concours européens est en chute libre. « Les jeunes ne parlent plus autre chose que l’anglais, ce qui leur barre la route de la fonction publique européenne, l’Europe ne les fait plus rêver et les diplômés sont bien mieux payés dans le privé », analyse un responsable européen. Un phénomène que l’on retrouve dans l’ensemble des pays du nord de l’Europe.

L’explication de cet éloignement de l’Europe tient à la crise financière, qui a porté un coup fatal au laisser-faire économique, et surtout à la crise de la zone euro. Avec l’approfondissement de la zone euro qui a suivi la crise des dettes publiques de 2010-2012 (Mécanisme européen de stabilité, gouvernance économique et budgétaire, union budgétaire, Union bancaire, etc.), la Grande-Bretagne a vu se réaliser son pire cauchemar : une fédéralisation de l’Europe dont elle ne peut ralentir la marche puisqu’elle s’est auto-exclu de la monnaie unique. Désormais, le lieu du pouvoir dans l’Union, c’est la zone euro, une évolution qui n’a échappé à personne, tous les pays européens voulant désormais la rejoindre. Sauf la Grande-Bretagne et la Suède (le Danemark, qui vient de rejoindre l’Union bancaire, est de facto dans la zone euro, la couronne danoise étant liée à la monnaie unique). Au conseil des ministres (l’instance législative qui représente les États), « c’est l’Eurogroupe qui dicte la marche sur des dossiers comme la fiscalité, la réglementation bancaire, les questions budgétaires, etc. », souligne un eurocrate. Désormais, Londres vit dans la hantise que les Etats de la zone euro se mettent d’abord d’accord entre eux afin d’ensuite lui imposer leur volonté…

De même, la crise en Ukraine a redonné du lustre aux partisans d’une Europe puissance, d’une Europe de la défense : « la Grande-Bretagne est dans une position bizarre entre les États-Unis qui se retirent des affaires du monde et l’Union qui s’affirme de plus en plus sur la scène internationale », regrette un haut fonctionnaire britannique.

Cette évolution institutionnelle du cœur de l’Europe s’est accompagné d’une auto-marginalisation politique des conservateurs britanniques qui, en juin 2009, ont quitté le PPE (parti populaire européen, conservateurs) pour créer un groupe sans influence au Parlement européen. Autrement dit, les Tories ont décidé de ne plus rien peser au moment où cette Assemblée a vu ses pouvoirs s’accroitre considérablement avec l’entrée en vigueur du traité de Lisbonne fin 2009. Un exemple ? Les Britanniques n’ont pas pu participer à la désignation du candidat du PPE à la présidence de la Commission, en l’occurrence Jean-Claude Juncker qui leur fait horreur. Et, en dépit du vote négatif de David Cameron, celui-ci a été confirmé par le Conseil européen des chefs d’État et de gouvernement en juin 2014, ce qui n’était jamais arrivé jusque-là. Autre faute diplomatique : la campagne contre la libre circulation des travailleurs d’Europe de l’Est qui lui a fait perdre ses soutiens traditionnels.

À la différence d’un Tony Blair, qui voulait placer son pays « au cœur de l’Europe » afin de contrôler au plus près son développement, David Cameron a fait un choix inverse qui se paye comptant. « L’image de la Grande-Bretagne est en plein déclin à Bruxelles. Surtout, elle n’est plus à l’initiative, elle est en blocage, ce qui l’empêche de peser sur les textes en discussion en participant à un compromis », analyse un diplomate français. Pour autant, nul ne se résout, à Bruxelles, au départ de la Grande-Bretagne, car cela ouvrirait une nouvelle ère, celle de la déconstruction communautaire. Si l’Union est prête à faire des efforts en légiférant moins, , elle n’ira pas beaucoup plus loin, notamment parce que personne ne veut s’amuser à négocier un nouveau traité. « D’autant qu’en réalité, David Cameron veut participer aux institutions communautaires, mais pas aux politiques européennes. Et, ça c’est inacceptable même pour les plus anglophiles des Européens ».

N.B.: version longue de mon article paru le 7 mai

http://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_c96321.r21.cf3.rackcdn.com/15126_169_full_129_97shar_c1.jpg

On 14 November 2005, the Council established an EU Police Mission in the Palestinian Territories (EUPOL COPPS) under the European Security and Defence Policy. The operational phase began on 1 January 2006 with an initial duration of 3 years.

Download this video here.

VIENNA, 7 May 2015 – From 11 to 12 May, officials and key stakeholders from 57 OSCE participating States will meet in Belgrade, Serbia, to discuss water governance in the OSCE area from the security perspective, followed by a field visit on 13 May to the areas affected by the 2014 flood in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia.

The meeting, hosted by Serbia’s Chairmanship, will be opened by the Serbian State Secretary of Interior Ministry, Aleksandar Nikolić and the Co-ordinator of OSCE Economic and Environmental Activities, Dr. Halil Yurdakul Yigitgüden, followed by keynote speeches of the President of the International Commission for the Protection of the Danube River Basin, Dražen Kurečić, and the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe Environment Division Director, Marco Keiner.

The meeting will focus on water governance in the context of disaster risk reduction and on raising awareness of the importance of water governance. One year after the unprecedented flooding disaster in South Eastern Europe, participants will share experiences of transboundary co-operation in flood response in the region and beyond.  Water governance in the context of foreign and security policies, investments and development assistance and the upcoming Sustainable Development Goals, along with public participation and awareness-raising in water governance are among the issues that will be addressed in this meeting.

On 13 May, the participants will visit Bijeljina, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Sremsko-Macvanski district in Serbia, one of the most affected regions during the May 2014 floods.

The Second Preparatory Meeting will be followed by the Concluding Meeting of the 23rd Economic and Environmental Forum on 14-16 September 2015 in Prague.

Journalists are invited to the opening session of the meeting on 11 May, Monday, from 09:00 to 10:30, at the Palace of Serbia, in Belgrade.

Media interested in attending the opening session should register by sending an e-mail to dinfmsp@gmail.com, by Sunday, 20:00, 10 May 2015.

Press opportunity in Bosnia and Herzegovina will take place on 13 May at 10:30 in village Raca, (next to old mill), Bijeljina municipality. Please register via Zeljka.Sulc@osce.org

Related Stories

• OSCE Chairperson-in-Office Dačić completes two-day visit to OSCE Mission to Bosnia and Herzegovina, supports the country’s commitments to positive reform-oriented agenda
• Chairperson Dačić welcomes inauguration of working groups under Trilateral Contact Group auspices
• Joint press statement of Trilateral Contact Group: Trilateral Contact Group launches activities of working groups advancing implementation of Minsk arrangements

50 Jahre diplomatische Beziehungen sind ein Erfolg, aber auch Anlass zur Korrektur

Jean Cavaillès (1903-1944) était professeur de philosophie des sciences, et grand logicien. C'est précisément en tant que philosophe et logicien qu'il s'engagea dans la Résistance. / France, Culture, Idées, Intellectuels, Personnalités, Politique, Science, Seconde guerre mondiale 1939-1945 - (...) / France, Culture, Idées, Intellectuels, Personnalités, Politique, Science, Seconde guerre mondiale 1939-1945 - 2014/05