Union européenne

L'échec de la tentative de coup d'Etat par une branche de l'armée turque les 15 et 16 juillet derniers n'a toutefois pas signifié un retour à la normale en Turquie. Au contraire, le président Recep Tayyip Erdogan et son gouvernement se sont livrés depuis ces dernières semaines à une purge massive au sein de l'armée et des fonctionnaires. Quelles sont les perspectives de la Turquie après le durcissement d'un régime déjà autoritaire, en particulier vis-à-vis de l'avenir des relations avec l'Union européenne ? Toute l'Europe à posé cinq questions à Didier Billion, spécialiste de la Turquie.

La Russie n'est toujours pas fixée sur le nombre exact de ses athlètes qui auront la possibilité de participer aux Jeux olympiques de Rio de Janeiro. A trois jours de la cérémonie d'ouverture des JO, on peut dire que le temps presse.

La semaine dernière, le conseil d'administration d'Électricité de France (EDF) avait approuvé la construction de deux réacteurs nucléaires de type EPR à Hinkley Point, dans le sud-ouest de l'Angleterre. Mais ce projet géant pourrait être mis à mal, le nouveau gouvernement britannique ayant repoussé l'examen du projet face à l'urgence du Brexit. Visiblement, Londres se méfie notamment du partenaire chinois censé financer un tiers de la nouvelle centrale, CGN. Une méfiance qui passe très mal à Pékin.

Général : Le Parlement européen a connu un semestre bien rempli : les députés se sont penchés sur des mesures pour résoudre la crise migratoire et faire face à la menace terroriste. Ils ont également adopté de nouvelles règles sur la protection des données et ont débattu du résultat du référendum britannique. Découvrez les sujets de nos articles les plus lus et cliquez sur les liens pour les consulter !

Source : © Union européenne, 2016 - PE

Au Royaume-Uni, la Chambre des Lords menace de ralentir le déclenchement de l'article 50 du traité de Lisbonne. Son application permet d'entamer un processus de deux ans qui aboutira à la sortie d'un membre de l'Union européenne.

Dans le Grand Nord russe sévit la maladie du charbon, autrement connue sous le nom d’anthrax, qui a déjà fait un mort tandis que des dizaines de personnes sont hospitalisées. La population a été placée en quarantaine et les troupeaux de rennes se retrouvent décimés. Dans cette région, le dernier cas d’infection aiguë qui touche aussi bien l'animal que l'homme avait été recensé il y a 75 ans. Les autorités sanitaires russes pointent du doigt le réchauffement climatique.

En Turquie, depuis le putsch raté du 15 juillet dernier, l'exécutif tente de séduire les principaux partis d'opposition, qui ont dénoncé dès les premières heures la tentative de coup d'Etat militaire. Une union nationale de circonstance dont Recep Tayyip Erdogan tente de tirer profit au maximum, et qui a fait une victime : les forces pro-kurdes présentes au Parlement.

REUTERS/Murad Sezer

Aujourd’hui, Libération consacre sa «une» au «traquenard turc». Mon analyse sur la modération européenne face à la répression menée tambour battant par Erdogan est ici. Bonne lecture !

Chair of the European Parliament’s Human Rights committee MEP Elena Valenciano (S&D,ES) expressed on Monday her concern and solidarity with Cuban human rights activist and Sakharov Prize Laureate 2010 Guillermo Fariñas and other Cuban human rights activists on hunger strike. Mr Fariñas is on a hunger and thirst strike to protest against the torture and mistreatment of political prisoners by the Cuban Government.
Subcommittee on Human Rights

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

Chair of the European Parliament’s Human Rights committee MEP Elena Valenciano (S&D,ES) expressed on Monday her concern and solidarity with Cuban human rights activist and Sakharov Prize Laureate 2010 Guillermo Fariñas and other Cuban human rights activists on hunger strike. Mr Fariñas is on a hunger and thirst strike to protest against the torture and mistreatment of political prisoners by the Cuban Government.
Subcommittee on Human Rights

Source : © European Union, 2016 - EP

A quatre jours de la cérémonie d'ouverture des Jeux olympiques de Rio au Brésil, on ignore toujours combien d'athlètes russes participeront à la compétition. Après les révélations sur le système de dopage organisé mis en place par la Russie, le Comité international olympique (CIO) tranchait il y a quelques jours : ce serait à chaque fédération internationale de décider de la présence ou non d'athlètes russes. Retournement soudain de situation ce week-end : le CIO a repris la main sur le dossier et a décidé de traiter lui-même chaque cas.

Onze soldats accusés d'avoir fait partie du commando ayant attaqué l'hôtel de Marmaris (ouest) où se trouvait le président turc Recep Tayyip Erdogan la nuit du putsch manqué ont été arrêtés, a annoncé lundi le ministère de l'Intérieur.

À Londres, la chaîne de burger Byron est victime d'un boycott lancé sur les réseaux sociaux depuis que le quotidien El Iberico a révélé que la direction du groupe avait aidé la police à arrêter 35 salariés étrangers. Le ministère de l'Intérieur a confirmé qu’une trentaine de personnes, originaires du Brésil, du Népal, d'Égypte ou encore d'Albanie avaient été arrêtées pour infraction à la législation sur l'immigration, lors d'une descente de police organisée le 4 juillet dans plusieurs restaurants Byron.

Plus de 6 000 personnes ont été sauvées, depuis le 28 juillet, en mer Méditerranée au cours de nombreuses opérations de secours menées par la marine italienne et les organisations humanitaires.

Près de dix jours après la tuerie meurtrière d'un jeune forcené à Munich qui a fait neuf victimes, une cérémonie d'hommage a eu lieu ce dimanche 31 juillet dans la capitale bavaroise. L'Allemagne est toujours sous le choc, après une vague d'attaques dont deux revendiquées par l'organisation Etat islamique. La politique migratoire d'Angela Merkel est critiquée et ses alliés bavarois avant tout demandent de nouvelles mesures pour renforcer la sécurité, notamment en raison du danger pouvant venir de certains migrants.

Trente ans après la catastrophe nucléaire de Tchernobyl, l'Etat ukrainien cherche à exploiter ces terres irradiées pour y installer une des plus vastes fermes solaires du monde. C'est le quotidien britannique le Guardian qui révèle le contenu d'une présentation du projet envoyé par le gouvernement ukrainien à plusieurs grandes banques, pour attirer les investisseurs.

A Erevan, les opposants qui occupaient un commissariat depuis deux semaines se sont rendus dimanche 31 juillet, mettant fin à une crise qui aura fait deux morts et de nombreux blessés. La police, prête à lancer l’assaut, leur avait donné un ultimatum samedi. Vingt personnes ont été arrêtées.

La manifestation pro-Erdogan à Cologne ce 31 juillet a mobilisé environ 40 000 personnes. Les autorités allemandes étaient alarmées en raison de l'organisation de plusieurs contre-manifestations, mais aussi par crainte de l'importation sur le sol allemand d'un conflit intérieur turc.

Après l'Allemagne, les Pays-Bas ou l'Italie, la Croatie vient tout juste d'autoriser la vente d'huile de cannabis à usage thérapeutique dans les pharmacies. Mais l'homme qui a été le symbole de ce combat, Huanito Luksetic, atteint d'une sclérose en plaques, risque toujours 12 ans de prison pour avoir cultivé du cannabis destiné à apaiser ses douleurs.

The NATO Warsaw Summit wrapped up on July 9, 2016, and was arguably the most important NATO summit held since the end of the Cold War. While many heads of state considered it to be a success, just how successful it was in some respects can be left up to interpretation. Indeed, for each question it answered, the Summit produced many, many more. As expected, it was during the Summit that NATO took many decisive and somewhat controversial positions on several key issues. However, everything that was communicated during the Summit was essentially — according to NATO itself — to ensure that the Alliance remained an unparalleled community of common values, security, peace, democracy, and freedom. It acted and spoke as a single body, while putting forth a united front. The Summit was coloured by two main themes: defense and deterrence, and projecting security beyond the alliance.

With regards to the strengthening of the EU-NATO relationship, the Summit gave the allegiance new impetus and substance. It renewed the importance of the partnership with a high degree of “full mutual openness” and respect for the autonomous decision-making processes of both parties. Furthermore, the Summit confirmed a lack of prejudice to specific profiles of security and defense policy of any member of either party, and reiterated that, while individually, both parties remain important contributors to the security of the Euro-Atlantic region, the partnership between the EU and NATO is a special one that has been boosting and maintaining international security for 15 years.

The Summit also recognized the security challenges faced by both parties — in particular, challenges oncoming from the East and the South. The Summit further recognized a duty to comply with citizens’ demands for enhancement of national security in response to these threats. The Summit did not, however, clarify just how NATO and its allies could determine what the appropriate level of enhancement to national security the general public demanded. This lack of clarification raises several interesting questions, namely ones that ask: are NATO and partners simply using so-called fuzzy demands by civilian populations to engage in a military build-up passed off as a method of deterrence?

Regardless of this, the Summit did specify several areas of the NATO-EU relationship that needed honing: firstly, the Summit determined that new and innovative avenues of cooperation needed to be discovered and maintained; secondly, the Summit determined that new channels for promoting and maintaining high levels of ambition needed to be developed; thirdly, a broad array of networks to respond to oncoming challenges needed to be mobilized; and lastly, a stronger and more efficient use of resources needed to be made. What this all underscores is that a stronger NATO and a stronger EU are mutually reinforcing.

With regards to projecting stability beyond the alliance, the Summit determined that there is an urgent need to boost NATO’s ability to counter hybrid threats; this would involve necessary collaboration with partners on several fronts. Namely, this would concern: working together on analysis, prevention, and early detection; information sharing in an efficient and secure manner; and cooperating on strategic communication and response. Furthermore, a broadening and adoption of operational cooperation at sea and on migration through an increased sharing of maritime situational awareness would be required. Overall, the development of complementary interoperable defense capabilities of EU and NATO members is necessary in order to facilitate multilateral projects and coordinate exercises between the two entities.

On a broader scale, Allied ministers welcome Georgia’s participation in discussion on Black Sea security, and on recent developments in the region affecting Euro-Atlantic security (including the situations in the Abhkazia and Tshkinvali regions). Plans for further NATO-Georgia exercises were made for November, and initiatives were discussed to help strengthen Georgia’s defense capabilities, interoperability, and resilience capabilities, including increasing support for the development of Georgia’s air defense and air surveillance. This specific joint action was held as part of Georgia’s steady progress and determination towards becoming a member of NATO, which Georgia’s Foreign Minister reaffirmed was a top foreign policy priority. In exchange, Allies recognized the importance of upholding the territorial integrity and sovereignty of Georgia within its internationally recognized borders by calling on Russia to reverse its recognition of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as independent states. It is interesting to note that not much was said about any drive for self-determination by the people of these regions. Instead, the focus was entirely on Russia’s alleged violations of international law and OSCE principles.

Discussion of the security challenges facing member states from Russia and its actions across the former Soviet bloc took up a sizable chunk of the Summit. NATO declared that it stands together to ensure the collective defense of NATO territory and populations against any threat (although, in this context, it is clear the threat is a Russian one). NATO is currently working towards goals pledged at the Wales Summit by building on the Readiness Action Plan, including the bolstering of defense and resilience against cyber attacks and hybrid threats, and the bolstering of defense against ballistic missile attacks from outside the Euro-Atlantic area. Interestingly enough, NATO did unveil a $800 million missile receptor site in May with US officials. This move was a renewal of the US’s pledge to defend NATO’s territorial integrity and security from so-called “rogue states”, wherein NATO will control the site starting July, remotely commanded from a US air base in Germany. And thus, an important question arises: is NATO engaging in a militarization of its territories, specifically related to missile defense systems?

Nevertheless, throughout the Summit, NATO’s message regarding Transatlantic security was clear: all proposed measures were proportionate, appropriate, and transparent, and existed fully within NATO’s political and legal commitments. Whether or not this is the case can certainly be left up to interpretation. Interestingly enough, NATO also claimed that it remained fully committed to arms control and disarmament which seems comically hypocritical to its previous statements and actions declared prior to the Summit and throughout the Summit.

More specifically, regarding the situation in Ukraine, it was decided during the Summit that the Alliance would continue to condemn Russia’s alleged aggressive actions in Eastern Ukraine and Crimea, which the Alliance felt undermined Ukraine’s sovereignty, territorial integrity, and security. However, absolutely no mention was made of Ukrainian government forces shelling civilian areas, collaborating with fascist paramilitary organizations, and torturing captives in government facilities. In fact, the onus was placed completely on Russia. NATO released a statement that specifically condemned Russia’s supposed fostering of a persistent state of instability in Eastern Ukraine, which has led to loss of life of nearly 10,000 civilians in the Donbas region, and has deprived Ukraine of considerable economic output. Again, NATO made no mention of internal government corruption in Ukraine which has undoubtedly had a hand in affecting the economic situation in Ukraine. As expected, NATO also called upon Russia to reverse its illegal annexation of the Crimean peninsula, which NATO “does not and will not recognize”. Furthermore, NATO declared that it would continue to engage in and support Ukraine within a framework set up by the NATO-Ukraine Commission. It also welcomed the adoption of a Strategic Defense Bulletin which will serve as Ukraine’s defense reform roadmap.

NATO stated that is continues to be ready for meaningful dialogue with Russia (in order to properly communicate its positions, and to “minimize risks from military incidents”) when Russia’s actions make this possible. This is perhaps one of the more ominous statements made by NATO during the Summit, because it alludes to the possibility that there may be military conflict with Russia in the future. On the other hand, this might mean that NATO is simply ready for military conflict with Russia, should such conflict arise; however, it is not necessarily a given that this will happen if Russia chooses to reverse its actions in Ukraine.

Expanding out of the Eastern theatre, NATO pledged to step up political dialogue and practical cooperation with partners in peace in the Middle East and North Africa, which includes enhancing training and capacity building for Iraq. NATO AWACS aircrafts will also be made available to support the US-led counter-ISIS coalition. It will also deepen its engagement in the Black and Baltic Sea regions and the Western Balkans, whilst maintaining a presence in Kosovo. NATO also remains committed to its Open Door policy, and welcomes its newest member, Montenegro.

On a separate note, NATO reaffirmed its commitment to Resolute Support during the Summit, and pledge to support long-term stability and security in Afghanistan. It also declared to defend Afghanistan’s integrity and to prevent it from becoming a safe haven for terrorists ever again. More specifically, it committed to

Sustaining Resolute Support post-2016 via a flexible regional model, and to deliver training and advice to Afghan Security institutions (such as the police force, air force, and special operations forces), and to keep the mission under review

1. Continuing to pledge national contributions to the financial sustainability of the Afghan national defense and security forces until the end of 2020
2. Strengthening and enhancing the Enduring Partnership

Afghanistan, which had representation present at the Summit, reciprocally committed to

Strengthening Afghan national defense and security forces, particularly in areas of leadership

1. Increasing its contributions to Afghan national defense and security forces, with an aim to assume full financial responsibility by 2024
2. Continuing to pursue democratic reform in all possible arenas, including electoral reform, the rooting out of corruption, and the empowerment of women
3. Fully implementing Afghanistan’s National Action Plan on UNSCR 1325
4. Enacting measures to protect children from the harmful effects of armed conflict
5. Strengthening the capacity of the Afghan national defense and security institutions and forces to protect civilians

This is a positive step forward in the relationship between NATO and Afghanistan.

Another positive change that was made during the Summit was NATO’s pledge to ensure the Alliance keeps pace with the quickly evolving cyber threat in recognition of the new profile of security threats. This pledge involved a promise to beef up capabilities of cyberspace as with other dimension of warfare (air, land, sea) to ensure strong and resilient cyber defenses. It also included a hope to have joint EU-NATO coordination on enhancing cyber security, which would also work to strengthen overall security within the Euro-Atlantic region and would further support EU-NATO collaboration and cooperation.

To assist with this pledge to enhance cyber security, it was decided that the strengthening and enhancement of cyber defense of national networks and infrastructures is to be a priority. By individually enhancing cybersecurity and cyber networks across the Alliance, the importance of cyber defense and overall resilience of the entire Alliance will be reinforced. This shall be accomplished in the following ways:

Developing the fullest range of capabilities to defend infrastructures and networks on a national level, including the addressing of cyber defense at the highest strategic level

1. Designating sufficient resources nationally to strengthen cyber defense capabilities of the whole Alliance
2. Reinforcing interactions amongst national cyber defense stakeholders to deepen cooperation and exchange best practices
3. Improving the overall understanding of the nature of the cyber threat
4. Enhancing awareness among all cyber defense stakeholders nationally
5. Fostering and encouraging the spread of cyber education by training and exercising forces
6. Expediting the implementation of agreed cyber defense commitments, particularly on the national level.

The Summit marked highly significant progress in the battle against cyber warfare by decreeing this pledge, which came only weeks after NATO formally recognized cyber warfare to the fifth dimension of warfare. The progress of this pledge is to be tracked based on agreed metrics, and will be officially evaluated at the next Summit.

In summation, the Summit had many successes, but put forth many more questions. The overarching idea of the Summit was to maintain and further develop individual collective capacity to resist any form of armed attack, while projecting stability beyond the Alliance by solidifying present relations with the EU and Afghanistan, and forming new connections in the Middle East and North Africa. The Summit produced many pledges and promises that were an extension of the investment in robust, flexible, and interoperable military capabilities pledged during the Wales Summit. NATO and its partners in peace worked to address the necessary steps to enhancing resilience and reaffirming NATO foundational principles of individual liberty, democracy, human rights, and rule of law, while committing to engaging in appropriate strategic partnership with other international bodies for the purpose of providing complete protection to the Euro-Atlantic region. It is important to note, however, that the Summit did produce some decisions that could be deemed offensive, rather than defensive, to some players in the international arena. Nevertheless, they were in line with NATO’s belief that resilience is the key basis to a credible deterrence strategy. This, along with NATO’s commitment to solidarity amongst its member states, explains some of the positions taken during the Summit. It can be said that if one member is threatened, the entire Alliance is threatened, and whether or not deterrence against any threats may look like a military build-up to some international players may not necessarily be at the top of NATO’s strategic agenda. Nevertheless, the Summit played out to some degree of satisfaction for every state participant.

Maria Gladkikh

 

Classé dans:RELATIONS EXTERIEURES