European Union

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

General : The Conference of Presidents endorsed a motion for a resolution drawn up by the leaders of four political groups and the Constitutional Affairs Committee, in which they set out their conditions for a final approval by the European Parliament of any withdrawal agreement with the United Kingdom. The draft resolution will be debated and voted on by the full house next Wednesday.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Today’s an important one in the Brexit saga. With the submission of formal notification to begin Article 50 negotiations, the UK has crossed an important threshold that cannot be easily crossed, whatever the legalities.

It also matters because it represents the final opportunity for the UK to shape the agenda of that process. This cannot be underestimated, even if it’s been largely ignored in the UK debate: Article 50 is about the EU decided what to offer a departing member state, not about that state choosing what to keep or bin.

Oddly, both the Lancaster House speech and the subsequent White Paper offered little of substance, something that was perhaps shaped by a desire to keep the powder dry until the last moment, so that there wasn’t an immediate out-manoeuvring by the EU27. However, the suspicion that the government simply didn’t have a plan in the first place has been hard to shake off.

The notification letter (available here) is thus vitally important in putting down a marker.

How does it do?

To the government’s credit, this is a concise and focused letter. With rumours of a 100-page version floating around, the danger always was that one might throw in everything into the mix, to lay down markers and set up red lines. However, that is also a recipe for stasis and endless unintended consequences.

Instead, the approach has been one that fits with good negotiating practice, namely to focus on principles rather than specifics. The seven principles set out are directed at creating a positive framework, within which the parties can find mutually-acceptable outcomes. Put differently, if you focus on underlying interests then you’ll see that there are different ways of skinning the proverbial cat. That’s true for any negotiation, but especially one as complex as this.

At the same time, it’s worth noting that of the seven, there is only one focused squarely on substance, rather than process. And all of them point strongly towards the desirability of reaching an agreement: there is an echo of ‘no deal is better than a bad deal’, but only an echo. Indeed, the tone is conciliatory rather than bombastic, again reflecting the looming dynamic of the discussions.

This does still leave the question of what the UK wants: there has been a lot about what it doesn’t want, but not much of the flipside.

Here, the letter does not give much direction. It talks of a ‘deep and special relationship’ and ‘a bold and ambitious Free Trade Agreement’ that is comprehensive in scope, but this is not fleshed out into areas of activity. Even free of movement – such a central part of May’s rhetoric to date – is notable more by its absence than anything: the UK doesn’t want to be part of the single market, but that’s as far as it goes. The avoidance of CJEU control is completely dropped, much to the relief of all involved, one imagines, given that the court will have to have powers any final agreement.

Indeed, it is only the Northern Irish issue that makes it into the text; a plea to recognise the particular relationship with the Republic, couched in language of maintaining the peace process. No solutions to this most intractable of problems is offered.

And this is perhaps the most lasting of impressions. This is a letter from a government that still hasn’t articulated a strong and clear sense of what it seeks: yes, there are fine words about the need to ‘advance and protect our shared European values’ – language that might stick in the throats of some eurosceptics – but this doesn’t point to a way forward in determining what should be the tools for building a new relationship post-exit.

As far as it, it’s about as much as could be expected. Whether that is enough to set the two years of negotiation off with a fair wind remains very much to be seen.

The post Moving determinedly towards the door: the UK’s Article 50 notification letter appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/6598efb4-145b-11e7-aec9-bc764e093073_1.46_thumb_169_1490777052_1490777051_129_97shar_c1.jpg

UK Brexit notification (article 50)

Download this video here.

To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.

 

Read more

On 29 March 2017, the Council's Permanent Representatives Committee backed a proposal to increase EU support for regions affected by earthquakes, floods, droughts and other natural disasters. The EU share in the costs of reconstruction would raise to up to 90%. This would almost double the EU financial contribution for some regions from the current level of 50%. Today's decision allows the Maltese Presidency to start negotiations with the European Parliament. 

"Anybody who has seen at first hand the effects of a natural disaster knows what a devastating impact it can have on people's lives. Whilst we cannot prevent natural disasters, we can offer support to affected regions and help them in the task of reconstruction. That's why we have taken this decision today".

Ian Borg, parliamentary secretary for EU funds of Malta and President of the Council

The increase of the EU financing rate would apply to payments from the European fund for regional development (ERDF). The total volume of the EU financed part of the ERDF of around €196.4 billion for the period 2014-2020 would remain unchanged.

The increased EU financing rate from the ERDF would complement the financial assistance that the EU already provides through its solidarity fund. The solidarity fund can be mobilised for an amount of up to €500.0 million per year to help member states to cope with natural disasters.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

The UK should revise its trading powers following Brexit

One of the major drawbacks for the United Kingdom, of remaining in the European Union was the single currency market and the regular billion pound payments annually, which were required from the state to the European Union. Following only as recent a paying off Second World War’s loans as late 2006, and the recovery from multiple national recessions it does not seem like a wise idea to count additional payments for the United Kingdom as a necessity simply because of a European Union membership. Two of the underlying principles of Brexit should, to that end, be about securing a better future for the United Kingdom than before, through a mercantile approach to the national economy and by addressing the big migration question.

Migration to the United Kingdom

Despite the United Kingdom’s longstanding multicultural outlook, proof of which can be seen in the nation’s demographics – approximately 217,000 British citizens were born in Bangladesh, most of the migration happens from countries such as Spain, China, India, and Pakistan. When Brexit happened, ‘freedom of movement’ for EU citizens was expected to be curbed because what is nationally desired is a balanced control on net migration numbers, and as per demand for both low-skilled and high-skilled labour. Only last year, did migration numbers balloon into Leeds’ population and there have also been wage cuts for low-skilled workers, in job sectors such as catering for increased migration rates and these workers do not have a large income to begin with.

Britain’s economy is naturally in want of labour from overseas and some trade areas are already too reliant on such migratory labour. However, workers from the EU might now require a work permit to get a job in the United Kingdom, and there is also worries about a brain-drain situation occurring for Eastern Europe and how EU citizens’ access to the welfare state might bear down too much on the British public purse. Meanwhile, one of the primary reasons for high migration rates was possibly joblessness in the rest of Europe, and this is inclusive of poor European states, since migration could act as a problem solver for many migrants from Europe to the United Kingdom. If Brexit could provide better access to public goods for British people, it would resolve a major migration problem.

Mercantile and the United Kingdom

Brexit is offering that rare opportunity to carve out better trade channels with Commonwealth member states, such as Australia, Singapore, Canada, Bangladesh, India and Malaysia. The nation’s imperial past can never be erased and the significance of understanding its important place in United Kingdom’s society, politics etc. is crucial to creating a better national economy. The country use to be a great trading nation, not so very long ago, and through effective diplomacy and trade ideals, post-Brexit, trade with former British colonies can be a surplus. Already in 2015, 16percent of exports to the EU came from Commonwealth states, and trade routes inbetween the Commonwealth and the United Kingdom is both strong and had also in 2015, seen an increase in earnings. Meanwhile, trade with other important nations, for example China, Israel, Saudi Arabia and UAE should be considered, alongside maintaining better ties with the United States of America, a world-leading military and economic powerhouse, which could makeup for any lost momentum of power for United Kingdom, following Brexit.

The post Brexit Issues: Migration and Mercantile appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

General : The UK government will announce today it is invoking article 50 of the Treaty of the EU, which serves as formal notification of its intent to withdraw from the Union. Starting today the UK and the EU have two years to negotiate a withdrawal agreement. In addition the two will need to start determining the future trade relations, though this is expected to take significantly longer. Read on to find out more about the procedure and the role played by Parliament.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

So, here it is, six pages: the notification from Prime Minister Theresa May, triggering Article 50 and formally starting the negotiations of the United Kingdom's withdrawal from the European Union. There is no reason to pretend that this is a happy day, neither in Brussels, nor in London. After all, most Europeans, including almost half the British voters wish that we would stay together, not drift apart. As for me I will not pretend that I am happy today.

But paradoxically there is also something positive in Brexit. Brexit has made us, the community of 27, more determined and more united than before. I am fully confident of this, especially after the Rome declaration, and today I can say that we will remain determined and united also in the future, also during the difficult negotiations ahead.

This means that both I and the Commission have a strong mandate to protect the interests of the 27. There is nothing to win in this process, and I am talking about both sides. In essence, this is about damage control. Our goal is clear: to minimise the costs for the EU citizens, businesses and Member States. We will do everything in our power - and we have all the tools - to achieve this goal. And what we should stress today is that, as for now, nothing has changed: until the United Kingdom leaves the European Union, EU law will continue to apply to - and within - the UK.

Finally, I would like to say that we have just released an official statement by the European Council, in which leaders stress that we will act as one and start negotiations by focusing on all key arrangements for an orderly withdrawal. On Friday I will share a proposal of the negotiating guidelines with the Member States, to be adopted by the European Council on 29 April.

I will refer to this and I will comment on our proposals on Friday during our press conference with Prime Minister Joseph Muscat in Malta.

What can I add to this? We already miss you.

Statement by the European Council 1

Today, the European Council received a letter from the British Prime Minister, Theresa May, notifying the United Kingdom's intention to leave the European Union. This notification follows the referendum of 23 June 2016 and starts the withdrawal process under Article 50 of the Treaty. We regret that the United Kingdom will leave the European Union, but we are ready for the process that we now will have to follow.

For the European Union, the first step will now be the adoption of guidelines for the negotiations by the European Council. These guidelines will set out the overall positions and principles in light of which the Union, represented by the European Commission, will negotiate with the United Kingdom.

In these negotiations the Union will act as one and preserve its interests. Our first priority will be to minimise the uncertainty caused by the decision of the United Kingdom for our citizens, businesses and Member States. Therefore, we will start by focusing on all key arrangements for an orderly withdrawal.

We will approach these talks constructively and strive to find an agreement. In the future, we hope to have the United Kingdom as a close partner.

President Tusk has convened the European Council on 29 April 2017.

 1 Following the notification under Article 50 TEU, the member of the European Council representing the withdrawing Member State shall not participate in the discussions of the European Council or in decisions concerning it.

Over the last twelve months the Greens have had quite a few celebrations across Europe: Winfried Kretschmann was re-elected as minister-president of Baden-Württemberg in March 2016; in December Alexander von der Bellen succeeded in stopping the rise of the Austrian populists in the presidential elections, and in the Dutch general elections, Jesse Klaver quadrupled the seats of his GroenLinks party in the parliament.

So will the French ‘Verts’ be next? Not exactly. In a campaign of many uncertainties, we can be sure of at least one thing: the green candidate will not do well for the simple reason there is no green candidate anymore. Although environmentalist movements have presented a candidate in each French presidential election since 1974, the winner of the Green Primary, MEP Yannick Jadot, credited with a potential of 2% of the vote, decided to step down and (with the blessing of primary voters) to endorse the PS candidate Benoît Hamon.

But that does not mean Green ideas have entirely disappeared from the campaign. It is true: the latter has been polluted by ‘les affaires’ of Fillon and Le Pen and the shake-up of the party spectrum with Les Républicains and the Parti Socialiste threatened by post-electoral implosion. And the entire media attention for the Left seems to be focused on counting how many PS officials finally back Macron rather than their own party’s primary winner. And yet there is, in both Mélenchon’s and Hamon’s programmes, a discreet, arguably very positive, change unfolding. The French left is slowly but surely weaning itself off their traditional productivist beliefs and embracing political ecology. The Greens may not be on the ballot anymore, but their ideas have percolated. Never has Jean-Luc Mélenchon’s socialism been greener, while Hamon has rather credibly argued he’s left the ‘cult’ of economic growth.

This is a profound change. The French left has long been a staunch supporter of nuclear power and oversized public infrastructure projects. The shift towards an ecological perspective is all the more surprising as it comes after five years of a left-wing government with a decidedly mixed environmental record.

In terms of policies, François Hollande’s Presidency earned external recognition for the Paris 2015 agreement on Climate Change, which was heralded as a diplomatic victory for France. Internally, that same Presidency’s environmental record is much more questionable. It has been marred by stubborn local opposition to two controversial infrastructure projects. On the site of an irrigation dam in Sivens (South West) protest ended tragically in the death of a young ecologist, killed by a gendarme’s grenade in October 2014. Since then, the courts have sided with protestors and development of the dam has stopped.

Notre-Dame-des-Landes : long-running soap opera with many episodes.

Then there is the never-ending story of the new airport in the West in Notre-Dame-des-Landes (close to Nantes). This 50-year old saga, which sees opponents to the project occupy the airport’s planned location has all the hallmarks of a political soap opera, with repeated cliff-hangers. Would the courts side with the government? (They did). Would the ad-hoc local referendum support or oppose the airport project? (It supported it). Will the European Commission get involved? (Watch the next episode!). All this bears strong echoes of the occupation of the Larzac plateau in the 1970s and 1980s.

The Notre-Dame-des-Landes debacle is a case study of non-decision making, with the Government trying to distance itself from the project, through commissioning further studies or organising a local referendum. Similar dithering is at work at the Eastern end of the country, in dealing with Fessenheim, France’s oldest nuclear power station, close to the German border. Closing Fessenheim – indeed closing eventually 24 nuclear reactors! – was part of Hollande’s political agreement with the Greens ahead of the 2012 election. Needless to say that not a single reactor was closed during his 5 years in the Elysée.

Yannick Jadot, MEP.

Five years which have been hard on the Greens (currently labelled ‘Europe Ecologie Les Verts’), especially with regard to maintaining a coherent political organisation. Their high-water mark was the 2009 European Parliament election. Since then, it has been down-hill. Want another soap opera? They joined government in 2012 despite a very low election score, but left it in 2014 citing irreconcilable policy differences, before some of its figure-heads were poached by Hollande and came back into government in 2016 (without the support of their party). The party’s disaffection with the Valls government erupted in its November 2016 primaries which opposed 3 MEPs with a former minister (until 2014), with the minister, Cécile Duflot, kicked out in the first round already. And a winner, Yannick Jadot, who unlike many other candidates, listens to reason rather than his ego and joins forces with Hamon.

Green policies largely ignored by successive governments, the party in disarray – how does that fit with the assertion that green ideas are stronger than ever? Doubts are legitimate, but it is just as legitimate to claim that the future of the French Left is green. Hamon’s deal with Jadot has led to shared public speaking, raising the profile of environmental policies. And while Hamon and Mélenchon still continue to disagree, their divisions centre on the EU and international policy much more than on the environment or the French energy mix.

Neither is likely to make it to the second round, though. And, as usual, the environment has not, so far, featured highly in the television debates. The presidential election, however, is not all there is. In the case of a victory by Macron or Le Pen, the parliamentary elections in June will become a very complicated matter, since none of them seems able to gain an outright parliamentary majority. Coalition building will be necessary, a very un-French exercise, and especially Macron will have to woe the Green electorate and prove he has integrated some environmental red lines. Chances are he will not even have to force himself: beyond the surface, the greening of the Left and Centre may have already progressed further than what is visible in a superficial presidential campaign all focused on personalities rather than issues and policies.

This is post # 15 on the French 2017 election marathon.
All previous posts can be found here.

The post France 2017: Where have all the flowers gone? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

29 March 1967: 50 years ago, Le Redoutable, first French SSBN to ensure the permanence of nuclear deterrence, was launched in the presence of General de Gaulle in France, single autonomous nuclear military power in Europe. Nuclear deterrence is designed to protect people against any aggression of state origin against our vital interests, wherever it may come from and whatever form it may take. Strictly defensive, its use is conceivable only in extreme circumstances of self-defense.

Following the Second World War, France, wants to make nuclear the keystone of the energy and strategic independence of the country. In 1958, the French military nuclear program was formalized by General de Gaulle. By mastering this technology France ensures a place alongside the American and Soviet superpowers. In the 1960s, it was decided to equip the navy with a nuclear launching submarine. On March 29, 1967, Le Redoutable was launched ..

A step is taken. But that activity still to be deployed before the presentation to the tests planned for 1969! The outer shells and thick shells are finished, but the access chambers, flaps of the torpedo tubes, the hydroreactors intended to stabilize the SNLE during the firing of the missiles must be mounted and the breach of the machined reactor compartment.

The gateway, the platforms and the incorporated boxes are installed at 90%. But the partitions are installed only 70% and the carlingages, the crossings of hull, the definitive ballasting to 35%. As for the sailing shelter with its ailerons, too high, it can not be mounted before the launch. For the propulsion, tank, exchangers and pressurizers were embarked, the primary circuit was tried, but clutch, turbo-reducer group, condensers and cradles of the turbo-generator group are being lineed. The main cable layers have been fitted, but the circuit-breaker cabinets are just embedded.

This launch seems modest at a time when the US nuclear submarine fleet is hosting its 41st SSBN and the Soviet fleet already has twenty such units. But with the completion in May of the construction of the Pierrelatte isotope separation plant, which is essential for the enriched uranium of the reactors, and the continuation of the experiments to reach the H-bomb, a major step is taken. "An additional and costly illustration of a ruinous, dangerous and inefficient military policy", according to L'Humanité, or "a capital day for our navy, our defense and, hence, our independence", according to General Le Redoutable does not leave indifferent.

Source

Tag: SSBNLe RedoutableFrance

Monday 27 March
11.00 Meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas

Tuesday 28 March 2017
12.30 Meeting with President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker
16.00 Meeting with Prime Minister of Georgia Giorgi Kvirikashvili (press statements ± 16.30)
19.15 Phone call with UK Prime Minister Theresa May

Wednesday 29 March 2017
+/- 13:20 Handover of UK Prime Minister Theresa May's letter of notification (article 50) by Ambassador Tim Barrow - Photos will be made available (no video footage)
+/- 13:45 Press statement on the UK notification (Europa Building, press room)
17.30 Meeting with Prime Minister of the Republic of Moldova Pavel Filip
Malta
22.45 Bilateral meeting with Boyko Borissov

Thursday 30 March 2017
Malta
EPP Enlarged summit
10.30 Bilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Croatia Andrej Plenković
10.45 Bilateral meeting with President of Ukraine Petro Poroshenko
12.30 Speech at the summit

Friday 31 March 2017
Malta
09.15 Bilateral meeting with Prime Minister of Malta Joseph Muscat (press conference ± 09.45)

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/Flag_of_Georgia_1_thumb_169_1403862673_1403862468_129_97shar_c1.png

Georgia is a priority country within the Eastern Partnership initiative and the wider European Neighbourhood Policy, launched in 2004 with the objective of bringing the enlarged EU and its neighbours closer to each other and to enhance prosperity, stability and security of all of those concerned. It has helped to build ties in new areas of cooperation and encouraged Georgia’s objective of further approximation with European structures.

Download this video here.

Anniversaries are special moments. They can be sombre affairs, such as the first anniversary of the Brussels terror attacks, an occasion made even grimmer by the 22 March tragedy in London.

Anniversaries can also be a time for reflection and sober deliberation. The European Union’s celebration of its 60th anniversary on 25 March was just such a moment.

And then there is 29 March. History is being made today as Britain triggers Article 50 and starts negotiations on its divorce from (sorry, its ‘new relationship’ with) the EU.

Brexiteers are in celebratory mood. After all, it’s not every day that a nation takes back control of its destiny, unshackles itself from 44 years of EU domination and morphs magically into an independent and intrepid world power (also known as ‘Global Britain’).

But pro-EU demonstrations in London are proof that not everyone is dancing with joy. Many share European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s description of Britain’s departure from the EU as a “tragedy”.

Not to be forgotten amid the Brexit focus is a simple fact: it’s not just Britain that is starting over.

29 March will also be remembered as the formal birthday of the new ‘EU-27’. Having renewed their vows in Rome, EU leaders embark on a new journey together, without Britain.

It will be a difficult voyage. Far-right populism, increased polarisation of minorities and unending economic problems are not going away anytime soon. Refugees and migrants will continue to knock on Europe’s doors, creating divisions and challenging EU solidarity. Difficult elections lie ahead in France, Germany and possibly Italy.

“29 March will be remembered as the formal birthday of the new ‘EU-27’”

The American and Russian presidents, Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin, now joined by Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, have made no secret of their dislike of the EU and all it stands for.

But the conversation is changing. Thankfully last year’s talk of a ‘collective depression’ and ‘existential crisis’ is no longer making headlines. Instead, as Paolo Gentiloni, the Italian premier and host for the Rome celebrations underlined, “the EU is choosing to start again”.

This is good news. Starting over, as John Lennon sang to us all those years ago, can be exciting and exhilarating. EU-27 leaders would do well to take Lennon’s advice and put more poetry, emotion and imagination into their courtship of EU citizens.

The thousand-word Rome declaration is good enough, but won’t really do the trick. If Europeans are to fall in love again with the EU, leaders, ministers, politicians, even EU officials, must – as Lennon sings – “spread their wings and fly”.

Perhaps for the first time in recent history, the public in many parts of Europe wants the EU to soar.

Brexit, Trump’s election and just plain common sense about the need to work together in a difficult world have galvanised many Europeans into supporting the EU.

Importantly, there are European politicians who are passionate about countering the anti-EU message of xenophobic far-right politicians.

“We will miss Britain – but we can also make sure that the heartbreak of Brexit goes hand-in-hand with the emergence of a reinvigorated European Union”

Jesse Klaver, the charismatic young leader of the Dutch GreenLeft party, Emmanuel Macron in France, and Martin Schulz of the German Social Democrats are upfront about their support for the EU, embracing the vision of an open and diverse Europe.

Klaver, who increased his party’s seats in the Dutch parliament by a factor of four, has shown that being Dutch-Moroccan-Indonesian is not a barrier to success.  His advice to young people is to “never give up” in the face of challenges.

Others need to have a similarly positive message of inclusion and participation. A safe and secure Europe must also be an inclusive one, not one that fears diversity.

The EU in the 21st century may be ‘multi-speed’, with less being done in Brussels and more in capitals. It may or may not be able to become a more powerful global player and may or may not have a real common defence and security policy.

But what’s important is that the conversation about Europe’s future has started.

Indian author and diplomat Shashi Tharoor pointed recently to the “shambles of that original Brexit” when the British departed from India in 1947, leaving behind chaos and violence – and the birth of independent India and Pakistan.

This time it’s different. We will miss Britain – some of us very much. But we can also make sure that the heartbreak of Brexit goes hand-in-hand with the emergence of a reinvigorated European Union.

Related content:

• Friends of Europe: The awakening, by Etienne Davignon, President of Friends of Europe
• Europe’s World: 60 years after Rome: how is the EU really doing? By Jacques Bughin
• Debating Europe: What does the future hold for Europe?

IMAGE CREDIT: CC – Flickr / Number 10

The post Brexit and the joys of starting over appeared first on Europe’s World.

Let me welcome Prime Minister Kvirikashvili to Brussels today.

And today is not just any day. It is a very special day for both the European Union and Georgia, as your visit coincides with the entry into force of the visa-free regime between the European Union and Georgia.

It has been a long journey, but one that has brought us closer together. A journey, I believe, that also has helped to reform and develop Georgia itself. 

Georgia has done a great job and achieved much! Today is a historic day for all of us but especially the Georgian people who from now on will be able to travel freely to the Schengen area. It is an important step to building an even closer EU-Georgia relationship.

In our meeting, I praised Georgia for its ambition and dedication to implement the Association Agreement (AA).

We expect intensified growth in Georgia's trade with the European Union, which today accounts for a quarter of your country's  overall trade. The EU will continue to assist Georgia in making increasingly better use of the Association Agreement in order for citizens to enjoy its full benefits.

I also paid tribute to the government's strong engagement within the Eastern Partnership and its concrete contributions to exploring new areas of collaboration ahead of the Summit this autumn.

I was glad to hear about the government's commitment to media pluralism in Georgia, particularly in light of developments around the Rustavi 2 TV channel case. The EU attaches great importance to media pluralism and looks forward to seeing concrete steps taken to ensure it.

I also expressed to the Prime Minister my concerns about the latest developments regarding the breakaway regions of Abkhazia and South Ossetia, in particular the closure of two crossing points along the Administrative Boundary Line with Abkhazia on 6 March.

I note, in this context, that while the European Union is opening its borders to Georgia, you have a neighbour that assists in creating new borders to limit your freedom, even inside your sovereign country.

I reaffirmed to the Prime Minister the EU's firm support for the sovereignty and territorial integrity of Georgia and our strong commitment to a peaceful resolution of the conflict in Georgia, including through our co-chairmanship of the Geneva International Discussions and the EU Monitoring Mission. Continued efforts to engage with Abkhazia and South Ossetia remain crucial to achieving long-term solutions to these conflicts. 

The East and South China Sea is a strategic maritime link and a major trade route with rich fishing grounds and oil and gas reserves. Mounting conflicts between neighbouring countries (in particular China, the Philippines and Vietnam) have resulted in growing security tension and militarisation of the region. The hearing will therefore address security implications of the territorial disputes for global and European security, and the role the EU could play in easing tensions in the region.
Location : Paul-Henri Spaak 5B001
Further information
Draft programme
Presentation by Dr. Eva Pejsova, Senior analyst, EUISS
Presentation by Dr. Frans-Paul van der Putten, Senior Research Fellow, Clingendael
Presentation by Prof. Bernard Oxman, University of Miami
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

The East and South China Sea is a strategic maritime link and a major trade route with rich fishing grounds and oil and gas reserves. Mounting conflicts between neighbouring countries (in particular China, the Philippines and Vietnam) have resulted in growing security tension and militarisation of the region. The hearing will therefore address security implications of the territorial disputes for global and European security, and the role the EU could play in easing tensions in the region.
Location : Paul-Henri Spaak 5B001
Further information
Draft programme
Presentation by Dr. Eva Pejsova, Senior analyst, EUISS
Presentation by Dr. Frans-Paul van der Putten, Senior Research Fellow, Clingendael
Presentation by Prof. Bernard Oxman, University of Miami
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP