European Union

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

Sweden will be completely online by 2025, according to the government’s new three-part broadband strategy. One-quarter of the population currently does not have access to fast broadband.

As reported by The Local, Digitalisation Minister Peter Eriksson said: “We cannot continue with a strategy that leaves people out. It is unacceptable that not everyone is included”.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Stefan Löfven has also promised that over half a million more Swedes will gain access to fast broadband Internet over the next four years.

Under the government’s new strategy, three targets have been set: 2020, 2023 and 2025. More specifically, in 2020, 95% all households will have access to broadband of at least 100 Mbps. In 2023, all of Sweden will be connected to stable mobile services of high quality.

“We have beaten our current targets and our new target is for all of Sweden to be connected by 2025,” said Eriksson.

According to The Local, the government expects that more than 500,000 more Swedes will have access to fast broadband within the next four years.

The post Fast broadband for all Swedes by 2025 appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

Dublin is telling Brussels that tax policy is a national matter.

The Irish government said on Monday that the European Commission overstepped its mandate in a tax ruling against Apple in August, asking the American multinational to pay €13bn to Dublin for illegal state aid.

Political context

The former Danish economy minister and European Competition Commissioner, Margrethe Vestager, has argued that Apple’s Irish tax bill implied a tax rate of 0.005 percent in 2014.

Apple is one of many multinationals drawn to Ireland due to a favourable tax regime, as well as a highly trained workforce and the English language. Dublin is keen to maintain its competitive advantage that has generated 10% of its jobs, often the best paid.

Apple has its European Headquarters in Cork, Ireland.

On Monday, Apple and the Irish government on made their legal case against the European Commission, opposing the ruling in concert.

The standoff between Dublin, Apple, and the European Commission takes place against the backdrop of the election of President-elect Donald Trump. Trump has promised to slash corporate tax rates and to provide incentives for companies to repatriate global profits.

Government

“The Commission has manifestly breached its duty to provide a clear and unequivocal statement of reasons for its decision,” said the Irish government in a statement.

Dublin denies Apple was granted a special tax regime neither in 1991 nor 2007. In addition, the Irish government considers that the Commission has overstated Apple’s corporate profits in Europe.

In effect, The European Commission is attributing to the Irish-based company all profits made outside the United States rather than Europe alone. The decision in August infuriated the White House.

Apple

For its part, Apple is also legally challenging the Commission’s ruling. The US multinational will argue that the Commission is mistaken when it claims that Apple Sales International (ASI) and Apple Operations Europe are phantom entities created for tax avoidance purposes.

The company’s General Counsel, Bruce Sewell, and Chief Financial Officer, Luca Maestri, told Reuters that Apple is a “convenient target” that Margrethe Vestager is aiming to soar her political capital and become “Dane of the year for 2016.”

They suggest that the case against Apple is weak and the complying with the ruling would require Ireland violating its own past tax laws, setting different rules for resident and non-resident companies.

The post Dublin and Apple lash out against the Commission appeared first on New Europe.

Joint press release following the 3rd Association Council meeting between the European Union and Ukraine

The European Union and Ukraine held the third meeting of the Association Council on 19 December 2016 in Brussels, one month after a successful 18th EU-Ukraine Summit. The Association Council reaffirmed the close and comprehensive partnership between the EU and Ukraine, based on common values of democracy, rule of law and human rights. It reaffirmed the continuing commitment to political association and economic integration between the EU and Ukraine. The importance of the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, including its Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area, was underlined in this regard. The Association Council took note of the decision by EU Heads of State and Government on the EU-Ukraine Association Agreement, which opens the way towards its full entry into force. 

The Association Council welcomed the substantial progress achieved by Ukraine in the reform process since its last meeting, including approximation with EU norms and standards across the board. The EU welcomed the commitment and determined work of the Government of Ukraine on implementation of political and economic reforms during its first nine months, reaffirming resolute support for these efforts and encouraging their continuation in a swift and sustainable manner. The Association Council welcomed the work of the European Commission's Support Group for Ukraine in coordinating this support. The Association Council took stock of progress and discussed the way forward in the reform process as committed to jointly by the EU and Ukraine in the Association Agenda, notably regarding human rights, constitutional and electoral reforms, rule of law and judiciary, decentralisation and local self-governance, public administration, public procurement, energy sector, deregulation, trade related reforms and health sector reform. The recent launch of electronic-asset declarations, the ProZorro public procurement system and the establishment of new anti-corruption bodies are notable successes in this regard. The Association Council underlined that progress should be consolidated and continued notably in the field of anti-corruption by strengthening the capacities and independence of the anti-corruption institutions. 

The EU reaffirmed its support for Ukraine's independence, sovereignty and territorial integrity, along with efforts aimed at a sustainable and peaceful settlement in eastern Ukraine. The EU and Ukraine agreed that the complete implementation of the Minsk arrangements by all sides was crucial, underlining Russia's responsibility in this regard. The EU outlined its support for further efforts in the "Normandy" format and in the context of the OSCE, including for the OSCE Special Monitoring Mission. The EU signalled its readiness to step up its support for the implementation of the Minsk agreements, including through a possible OSCE election security mission subject to discussion in the OSCE, as well as an important role in early recovery and future reconstruction efforts. The EU recalled that the duration of economic sanctions imposed against the Russian Federation was linked to the complete implementation of the Minsk agreements. The EU recalled its policy of non-recognition of the illegal temporary occupation of Crimea and the city of Sevastopol by the Russian Federation and condemned the severe deterioration of the human rights situation on the peninsula and its militarisation by Russia. The EU reiterated its solidarity as regards the humanitarian situation in eastern Ukraine, calling on all sides to facilitate the freedom of movement of civilians, and for the effective provision of social benefits to all Ukrainian citizens. 

The Association Council acknowledged and welcomed the economic benefits of provisional application of the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area since January 2016, which has already increased the trade volume between the EU and Ukraine by 7.5% in the period October 2015-September 2016 compared to the previous year. The Association Council acknowledged the need for improvement of the business and investment climate in Ukraine in order to restore the confidence of foreign investors. The EU also noted the prospects of possible additional trade opportunities for Ukrainian exports to the EU (beyond trade concessions included in the DCFTA) arising in the context of the European Commission legislative proposal for additional Autonomous Trade Measures. The Council also welcomed the preparations for the first session of the EU-Ukraine High-Level Industrial Dialogue to be held in Brussels in the first quarter of 2017. 

The Association Council welcomed Ukraine's ambitious agenda and progress to date in the area of the digital economy and society. Both sides noted considerable potential for EU-Ukraine cooperation in this area both at the bilateral level and in the framework of the Digital Community, opening good prospects for Ukraine's integration in the EU Digital Single Market. 

The EU commended the successful launch of the e-asset declaration system by Ukraine. The Association Council underlined the importance of processing and verifying the submitted data in an objective and transparent way. The Association Council also acknowledged and welcomed progress on visa liberalisation, on the basis of the legislative proposal by the Commission to the Council and to the European Parliament, taking into account ongoing process of approval of the suspension mechanism. The Association Council recalled the importance of a timely finalisation of the processes required for visa liberalisation, as underlined by the EU in the Council conclusions on Eastern Partnership in November 2016. 

The EU outlined the way forward in the implementation of its Macro-Financial Assistance programme, urging Ukraine to fulfil the outstanding conditions that could allow the EU to disburse the second tranche of EUR 600 million. 

The Association Council welcomed ongoing and future cooperation in the field of energy based on the principles of solidarity and trust. The EU reaffirmed Ukraine's role as a strategic transit country for gas. Both sides welcomed the recent signing of a Memorandum of Understanding on strategic energy partnership between the EU and Ukraine. The Association Council underlined the importance of uninterrupted gas delivery to Europe this winter and also took stock of trilateral talks on gas. 

The Ukrainian side expressed its concern over the revised European Commission's exemption decision on OPAL pipeline. Both sides agreed to further discussions on this matter. The Association Council confirmed the readiness of both sides to continue cooperation on the joint modernisation and operation of the Ukrainian gas transportation system and storage as well as on gas supplies from Europe to Ukraine. 

The Association Council reaffirmed the importance of closer bilateral and multilateral cooperation in justice and home affairs and welcomed in this context the recent signing of the Agreement between Ukraine and Europol on the Strategic and Operational Cooperation. 

The Association Council recalled that transport cooperation plays an essential role for safe and secure movement of people, development of business contacts, the tourism industry and reliable transportation of goods between Ukraine and the EU, fulfilling the needs and requirements of the Association Agreement. In this context the sides discussed the situation of the Common Aviation Area Agreement between Ukraine and the EU and underlined the importance of its signature at the earliest possible date. 

The Association Council stressed the importance of a continuous dialogue on the inclusion of inland waterways of Ukraine in the Trans-European Transport Network (TEN-T), based on progress to be made by Ukraine as regards compliance with international environmental conventions. 

The Council reaffirmed the readiness of both sides to continue the cooperation in order to preserve, protect, and improve the quality of the environment, the sustainable use of natural resources and promote measures at international level to address regional and global issues of the environment, particularly in the context of the Eastern Partnership. The sides agreed on the need for rapid adoption of pending legislation in Ukraine relating to good environmental governance. 

The EU recalled that its neighbourhood was a strategic priority and a fundamental interest as reaffirmed in the recent EU Global Strategy. The Association Council discussed a number of regional and foreign policy issues, taking stock of the developments in the European Neighbourhood Policy and the Eastern Partnership, including preparations of the next Eastern Partnership Summit in 2017. Both sides stressed the importance of effective and strategic communication with citizens in the framework of EU-Ukraine relations and Eastern Partnership participation, agreeing to continue cooperation in this regard. 

The EU reaffirmed its strong commitment to support a comprehensive and sustainable reform of the civilian security sector in Ukraine, notably by continuing the implementation of the enhanced mandate of the European Union Advisory Mission for Civilian Security Sector Reform (EUAM Ukraine), including hands-on support and based on good governance and human rights. The EU welcomed Ukraine's interest to continue its engagement with the EU on various Common Security and Defence Policy activities, including participation in EU-led missions and operations. 

The Association Council welcomed: 

• signing of the financing agreement for Public Administration Reform (PAR) programme, a 104 million euro contribution to support policy development, civil service and human resource management;
• announcement of the PRAVO programme of 52.5 million euro to support rule of law in Ukraine, namely judiciary and law enforcement;
• signing of financing agreements for four Cross Border Cooperation (CBC) programmes in which Ukraine participates;
• signing of five agreements between Ukraine and the European Investment Bank, underlining the importance of further successful cooperation in line with the Memorandum of Understanding between the Government of Ukraine and the European Investment Bank.

The Council was chaired by the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Ms Federica Mogherini. The First Deputy Prime Minister of Ukraine, Mr Stepan Kubiv, led the Ukrainian delegation, accompanied by other members of the Government of Ukraine.

The third meeting of the EU−Ukraine Association Council took place on 19 December 2016 in Brussels. 

Following the meeting, the EU and Ukraine adopted a joint press release: 

Joint press release following the meeting of the Association Council

The Association Council discussed relations between the EU and Ukraine, specifically on: 

• Political dialogue and reform, political association;
• Justice, freedom and security;
• Economic and sectoral cooperation, as well as trade and trade-related matters,

Federica Mogherini, EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and Stepan Kubiv, First Vice Prime Minister who headed the Ukrainian delegation, also discussed developments related to Ukraine's sovereignty and territorial integrity, including efforts towards the full implementation of the Minsk agreements.

At the beginning of the plenary meeting, the EU and Ukraine signed the following agreements:

• a financing agreement governing the European Commission support to Ukraine's public administration reform worth €104 million (as part of a larger package totalling € 300 million)
• four agreements confirming Ukraine's participation in EU-funded cross-border cooperation, in the shape of new programmes involving Romania-Ukraine, Poland-Belarus-Ukraine, Hungary-Slovakia-Romania-Ukraine, and the Black Sea region.

More information on the agreements

The EU also continues to assist the reform process through the support group for Ukraine, as well as through the EU Advisory Mission in Ukraine (EUAM Ukraine), which supports security sector reform. The EU increased its budget for the mission for the period from 1 December 2016 to 30 November 2017 by 17.7%, reaching €20.8 million. 

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The outgoing president of Poland’s highest constitutional court has warned that the country’s ruling rightwing Law and Justice party (PiS) is making a systematic attempt to destroy oversight of government activity. He described the country as being “on the road to autocracy”.

As reported by the Guardian, the departure of Andrzej Rzepliński, whose term expired on December 18, is expected to pave the way for PiS appointees to assume control of Poland’s most important institutional check on executive power.

The expiration of Rzepliński’s term comes amid signs of the most serious political crisis in Poland since PiS won presidential and parliamentary elections in 2015.

On December 16, a group of demonstrators attempted to barricade MPs in the parliament building after the government sought to restrict media access to parliamentary proceedings.

Opposition MPs accuse PiS deputies of holding illegal votes outside the parliamentary chamber after an opposition MP was expelled for protesting against the media restrictions and opposition leaders occupied the parliamentary podium in protest.

Speaking to the Guardian, Rzepliński defended his attempts to uphold the independence of the tribunal, which rules on the constitutionality of legislation and decisions taken by state authorities.

He said the government’s refusal to recognise the legitimacy of a number of the court’s rulings threatened to “create a double legal system, with some courts upholding our rulings, and others not. Judges really don’t know what the law is, and without that, in a continental system, courts cannot operate.”

Meanwhile, Julia Przyłębska is tipped by some observers to be appointed as Rzepliński’s successor.

The post Andrzej Rzepliński: Poland is ‘on road to autocracy’ appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The U.S. Electoral College is expected to officially confirm Donald Trump as the next President of the United States on Monday.

Electoral College System

The election of Donald Trump will be formalized when 538 electors cast their ballots in every state. In each state, voters elects a body of electors who are supposed to confirm their vote. Electors have never produced any surprises and the process is expected to be a mere formality, verifying the November 8 result.

Trump won 306 electors and 30 states, needing 270 to secure election. The mass defection of electors does not have a precedent.

However, as the CIA reports that Russia intervened to favour President-elect Trump, there is a last minute campaign asking electors not to vote for Trump, defying the popular vote. The Trump campaign dismisses the claim that Russian state-backed hackers had a bearing on Trump’s victory. But Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, said that the question of whether the Trump campaign cooperated with Russia is still open.

Speaking to CNN on Sunday, Republican Senator John McCain calls for a select committee that is “time-limited, cross-jurisdictional, and purpose-driven” to address the allegations and confirmed he is worried that Donald Trump has never been heard being critical of Russia.

“Wisdom” or “failure” of the founding fathers?

At this point, there are two ways of looking at the Electoral College system.

First, there are those who are looking at the election of Donald Trump as a failure of the electoral system. Since the election, the system of the Electoral College has come under criticism since Hillary Clinton has in fact won the popular vote but secured fewer electors. A CBS poll suggests 54% of Americans want their President to be directly elected.

Secondly, there are those why see in this specific electoral system an opportunity to prevent Trump’s election that is in line with the spirit of the Constitution. There is still a campaign to prevent Trump from being formally confirmed, trying to dissuade electors to go rogue. Among them, there are electors who believe their role in the Constitution is to ensure that a demagogue does not come to power. Apparently, some electors are considering a rogue vote, with one of them coming out openly.

29 out of 50 states have laws binding electors to vote in line with the electorate. But, if they don’t, they either pay a small fine or nothing happens. But, what is theoretically possible is not likely.

 

The post Campaign to convince the Electoral College not to vote Trump likely to fail appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

Germany’s Justice Minister Heiko Maas has called on the country’s judges and prosecutors need to crack down on fake news disseminated through social media platforms like Facebook.

According to the Reuters news agency, Maas, who is a Social Democrat in conservative Chancellor Angela Merkel‘s coalition, has repeatedly warned the US technology company to respect laws against defamation in Germany that are more rigid than in the US.

In an interview with Germany’s Bild am Sonntag newspaper on December 18, he said the principle of free speech did not protect against slander.

“Defamation and malicious gossip are not covered under freedom of speech,” Maas said, just days after other top government officials called for legislation to tackle ‘hate speech’ and fake news on Facebook and other social media platforms,” he said. “Justice authorities must prosecute that, even on the internet,” he said, noting that offenders could face up to five years in jail. Anyone who tries to manipulate the political discussion with lies needs to be aware [of the consequences].”

Fears of fake news ahead of the election have increased after the head of Germany’s domestic intelligence agency, Hans-Georg Maassen, reported a rise in Russian propaganda and disinformation campaigns aimed at destabilising German society, reported Reuters.

In a separate report, Deutsche Welle (DW), Germany’s international broadcaster, noted that European Union parliamentary leader Martin Schulz has called for hard, Europe-wide laws to stem the spread of harmful fake news stories. The German government is already looking to draft its own law.

Schulz proposed that Facebook set up a 24-hour hotline to report fake news and harmful bots, and face penalties if the problems were not dealt with in a timely manner. He slammed the idea put forward by some tech companies that they were merely conduits.

The post Germany to take on fake posts on Facebook ahead of election appeared first on New Europe.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/ukraine_thumb_169_1393002992_1392999386_129_97shar_c1.jpg

On 1 January 2016 entered into force the Free Trade Area (DCFTA) between Ukraine and the European Union. The EU is seeking an increasingly close relationship with Ukraine, going beyond co-operation, to gradual economic integration and a deepening of political co-operation. Ukraine is a priority partner country within the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP).

Download this video here.

Most European citizens are fond of ‘Europe’: its values, culture and social model. When it comes to its leadership, citizens have more mixed feelings. 60% of citizens tend not to trust the EU institutions. They feel that European policy is disconnected from their daily reality.

As a tech entrepreneur who is active in big data, I too feel disconnected – in my case, from the digital agenda of the European Commission. The agenda and its priorities do not align with the tremendous potential of the digital revolution, something I have the immense privilege to experience every day.

From fighting Ebola to alleviating poverty – I am a member of a community of shapers who use technology to improve society. Every day I encounter yet more amazing digital visionaries who create robots, build networks and develop apps that affect every facet of our lives. From citizen to state to Union, we are witnessing the acceleration of the 4th Industrial Revolution.

“Ambition matters. It sets leaders apart. It allows them to inspire people through their vision of society, and to drive change”

But what are we doing about this revolution? At the EU level, we can summarise the strategy in three words: defragmentation, standards and infrastructure. All important, all relevant, but nothing near the level of ambition required.

And ambition matters. It sets leaders apart. It allows them to inspire people through their vision of society, and to drive change.

I would fight for an EU with ambitions to use digital to save the planet, or to connect citizens to their cities, or to give everyone meaning in their lives, whether through a job, a task or simply helping their peers.

In the absence of political ambition, tech entrepreneurs will set their own. But is this the road we want to take? Do policymakers want to shape the agenda or only to react?

The time has come to be ambitious. We need leaders who are willing to take up that role.

My call for a greater digital ambition comes from my entrepreneurial background. Without naming the problem you cannot correctly design a solution, but instead of simply pointing the finger at EU leaders I have three simple initiatives that could put Europe back on the global digital map.

The first solution is for the European Commission to practice what it preaches – or ‘eat its own dog food’. Is the Commission itself digital? How much paper does it produce? How much big data does it use to improve its effectiveness? How often do its politicians and officials use Amazon, Uber or Spotify?

These questions boil down to a simple task: show us that you are role models; show us that you are the champions of this revolution. I’m tired of naming American or Chinese companies as the most digital organisations. I want to name you. You can get there.

“It is time to bring back our digital visionaries. With these experts Europe can bridge the digital gap within a decade”

Second, make policies based on what people do, not on what people say. At some point in history, EU policymakers surely had reason to design a law requiring internet users to accept cookies before browsing. In 2016, I don’t get the point. Do you know a single person who refuses the cookie and declines to browse a website? Policymakers should observe our behaviour and test policies before making laws.

Third, bringing back our visionaries. Most of Europe’s most brilliant and disruptive minds have left Europe to go to the United States. It is time to find a way to bring them back. With these experts, and with their networks and ambitions, Europe can bridge the digital gap within a decade.

I’m aware that I’m biased: entrepreneurs see the world as an ocean of opportunities. Digital frontrunners believe in the positive nature of technology.

I know I am not paying attention to certain constraints. I know I don’t have the full context. And I’m not a politician. But I’m a believer in Europe, in the value of statesmanship, and in the immense potential of our citizens.

I will act to shape this European ambition. Will you join me?

IMAGE CREDIT: Believeinme/Bigstock.com

The post Europe needs ambition to make the most of the digital revolution appeared first on Europe’s World.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The situation in Syria would have gone from bad to worse if Nato had intervened, according to the alliance’s head, Jens Stoltenberg. He warned of the dangers of military escalation in warzones such as Syria.

One the same day the UN Security Council planned to meet to discuss the worsening crisis in the city of Aleppo, Stoltenberg told the German newspaper Bild am Sonntag that a military mission in the country, which has been embroiled in an increasingly brutal civil war for more than six years, could have made an already bad situation worse.

“Sometimes it’s right to use military means – such as in Afghanistan. But sometimes the costs of military missions are greater than their benefits,” he said. “If every problem, every humanitarian catastrophe were answered with military force, we would end up in a world with even more war and suffering,” he said.

Meanwhile, Deutsche Welle (DW), Germany’s international broadcaster, quoted German Defence Minister Ursula von der Leyen has saying: “Neither the Syrian people nor the international community will forget the merciliness of [their actions in] Aleppo, which is unjustifiable. Whoever is responsible for the deployment of poison gas and bombs on hospitals and children can’t simply go back to normal.”

According to the Reuters news agency, the UN Security Council agreed on a French draft resolution aimed at ensuring that UN officials can monitor evacuations from the Syrian city of Aleppo. They were slated to vote on the text on December 18.

But DW noted that Russia’s UN Ambassador Vitaly Churkin said he would examine the draft. It was unclear whether the council would pass it.

According to the UN, some 40,000 civilians and rebels remain trapped in opposition-held parts of Aleppo, which recently has seen some of the worst violence of the entire war.

In a separate report, Turkey’s Anadolu news agency noted Syria has been locked in a vicious civil war since early 2011, when the Bashar al-Assad regime cracked down on pro-democracy protests – which erupted as part of the “Arab Spring” uprisings.

More than a quarter of a million people have been killed and more than 10m displaced across the war-battered country, according to the UN.

The post Nato chief defends decision not to intervene in Syria appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The United Nations atomic energy watchdog chief, Yukiya Amano, told reporters in Tehran on December 18 that Iran has shown full commitment to an internationally-backed deal on its nuclear programme. His statement follows Iran’s decision to start working on nuclear-powered vessels and complaints over the US disrespect for the deal.

“We are satisfied with the implementation of the [agreement] and hope that this process will continue,” he said, Iran’s IRNA news agency.

“Iran has been committed to its engagement so far and this is important,” Amano was quoted as saying after a meeting with Iran’s nuclear chief Ali Akbar Salehi.

As reported by Tehran Times, Amano arrived at Tehran on December 18 for “high-level consultation with between Iran and the [International Atomic Energy Agency] IAEA”.

Tehran has complained that the recent US Congress vote to a bill which extends sanctions against Iran for another ten years infringes on the terms of the nuclear deal.

“We are satisfied with the implementation of the [agreement] and hope that this process will continue,” Yukiya Amano says.

But Washington says the Iran Sanctions Act would not affect the overall implementation of the nuclear agreement.

Under the deal reached in 2015, Iran rolled back its nuclear programme in exchange for relief from economic sanctions, mainly imposed by the US and European countries.

In a separate report, The Associated Press (AP) noted that the IAEA in November said Iran exceeded its heavy water limit by 100kg over the 130 metric tonnes allowed under the agreement. Heavy water is used to cool reactors that produce plutonium, which can be used in atomic bombs.

Iran later said it transferred 11 tonnes of heavy water to Oman.

The post UN says Iran committed to nuclear deal appeared first on New Europe.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/a8444298-56f0-11e5-83d1-bc764e084e2e_243.67_thumb_169_1479832445_1479832445_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Ministers for Environment meet in Brussels on 19 December 2016 to discuss the review of the emissions trading system (ETS) and adopt conclusions on the sound management of chemicals.

Download this video here.

On 19 December 2016 the Council adopted its position at first reading on revised rules to perform official controls along the agri-food chain. The Council's position is based on the compromise agreed with the European Parliament (EP) in June 2016, and paves the way for the final adoption of the regulation by the EP at a next plenary session. 

The new rules aim to improve the controlscarried out by member states to ensure the application of the Union legislation on food and feed safety, animal health and welfare, plant health, and plant protection products. It will also apply to genetically modified organisms (GMOs) for feed and food production, organic farming, protected designations of origin, protected geographical indications and traditional specialities guaranteed. Additionally, marketing standards for agricultural products will be covered with respect to possible fraudulent practices. 

"The new rules will help combat food fraud and scandals, thus enhancing consumer confidence. They have strong requirements on transparency and stringency of controls that will bite effectively.  We want our citizens to trust our control regimes and to be reassured by the quality of what they eat", said Gabriela Matečná, minister for agriculture and rural development of Slovakia and president of the Council.

An improved and more comprehensive single system of controls

The new system of official controls simplifies and streamlines the existing legal framework. It establishes a unique set of control rules applicable to most sectors of the agri-food chain, including for the first time plant health. The extended scope guarantees uniform enforcement across sectors, but still allows for adjustments taking into account the specific needs of individual sectors (e.g. meat inspections, animal welfare controls), or newly identified risks.

Less fraud and scandals 

The member states' authorities in charge of checking compliance with EU legislation through official controls, will have strengthened instruments at their disposal to prevent food fraud and scandals. For instance they will be able to perform regular unannounced official controls and impose deterrent financial penalties on operators committing intentional violations. To ensure consistency and resource-efficiency, the work of national competent authorities will be carried out on the basis of multi-annual national control plans and be risk-based. This means that a higher level of control will be applied to businesses and products in line with the level of risk, thereby avoiding unnecessary controls and administrative burdens.

Protection of whistle blowers 

For the first time the revised rules require member states to ensure that effective mechanisms are in place to allow for reporting of potential or actual breaches of the regulation, including in particular, appropriate protection for people who report such breaches against retaliation, discrimination or other types of unfair treatment. 

Increased transparency 

The agreed text require competent authorities to ensure a high level of transparency on the controls they carry out (type, number and outcome), and on the fees they collect to finance them.

Competent authorities will also have the possibility to publish the rating of individual operators based on the outcome of the controls they have carried out. 

Next steps 

The European Parliament is expected to vote in second reading at a next plenary session, thus approving the Council's position at first reading without amendments and completing the legislative process. 

Afterwards, the legal texts will be published in the Official Journal of the EU.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

To avoid a state bailout, Italy’s troubled bank Monte deiPaschi di Siena is trying to raise €5bn by the end of the year. The troubled bank will offer new shares for sales between December 19 and 22.

As reported by the Reuters news agency, the European Central Bank told Italy’s third-largest bank to raise capital this year and offload €28bn in bad loans. Finding investors, however, has proved difficult amid political turmoil and this month’s change of government.

Monte deiPaschi said on December 18 its share offer for institutional investors, which accounts for 65% of the total, would run until 1300 GMT on December 22.

The offer aimed at current shareholders and retail investors will end at 1300 GMT on December 21.

Monte deiPaschi said in a document on its website that, if successful, the share issue could raise up to €3.2bn.

The rest of the capital needed would come from a voluntary debt-to-equity conversion offer on the bank’s junior debt which has already raised around €1bn.

In a separate report, The Wall Street Journal noted that the Italian government has been readying a rescue plan, should the bank fail to raise the funds it needs from private investors.

According to people familiar with the matter, it could step in and, among other things, inject capital into Monte deiPaschi, if it became evident that private investors are unwilling to shore up the bank.

According to European rules, losses to shareholders and bondholders will likely be imposed if the Italian government rescues the lender.

The post Italy’s Monte deiPaschi sells shares to raise 5bn appeared first on New Europe.

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/800px-Flag_of_Russia.svg_thumb_169_1390486880_1390483269_129_97shar_c1.png

EU and Russia co-operate on dealing with a number of global and bilateral challenges. In 1994, the Parties concluded a Partnership and Co-operation Agreement.

Download this video here.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

MOSCOW – US President-elect Donald Trump seems determined to revive a forgotten Hollywood genre: the paranoid melodrama. Perhaps the greatest film in this genre, The Manchurian Candidate, concerns a communist plot to use the brainwashed son of a leading right-wing family to upend the American political system. Given the fondness that Trump and so many of his appointees seem to have for Russian President Vladimir Putin, life may be about to imitate – if not exceed – art.

To be sure, the attraction for Putin that Trump, Secretary of State-designate Rex Tillerson, and National Security Adviser General Michael Flynn share is not the result of brainwashing, unless you consider the love of money (and of the people who can funnel it to you) a form of brainwashing. Nonetheless, such Kremlinophilia is – to resurrect a word redolent of Cold War paranoia – decidedly un-American.

Consider the derision shown by Trump and his posse for CIA reports that Kremlin-directed hackers intervened in last month’s election to benefit Trump. In typical fashion, Trump let loose a barrage of tweets blasting the CIA as somehow under the thumb of his defeated opponent, Hillary Clinton. His nominee for Deputy Secretary of State, John Bolton, went even further, suggesting that the hacking of the Democratic National Committee and Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, was a “false flag” operation designed to smear an innocent Kremlin.

The idea that a US president-elect would take the word of the Kremlin over that of CIA officials and even the most senior members of his own party is already bizarre and dangerous. But the simultaneous nomination of Tillerson – the long-time CEO of ExxonMobil, America’s most powerful energy company, which has tens of billions of dollars invested in Russia – to be America’s top diplomat takes this love affair with a major adversary to a level unprecedented in US history.

For Tillerson, taking Russia’s side against the US is nothing new. Consider the sanctions that the US and Europe imposed on Russia in response to the country’s annexation of Crimea – a blatantly illegal act – in 2014. Instead of supporting US policy, Tillerson belittled it. Instead of fully honoring President Barack Obama’s call for ExxonMobil not to send a representative to the annual Saint Petersburg International Economic Forum after the annexation, Tillerson cynically sent the head of one of ExxonMobil’s international operations. And instead of returning the Order of Friendship that he received from Putin months before the invasion of Crimea, Tillerson continues to celebrate his status as a “friend of Vladimir.”

Flynn, like Tillerson, has also been feasting at the Kremlin trough. After being fired by Obama for his incompetent management of the Defense Intelligence Agency, Flynn immediately began to cultivate Russian business contacts. And Putin seems to have been more than happy to see that commercial doors were opened to Flynn. There is a now-infamous photograph of Flynn seated next to Putin at a banquet for RT (Russia Today), the Kremlin-backed cable news network that was a prime source of the slanted, and even fake, news that inundated the US during the recent election campaign.

As for Trump, statements made by his sons suggest that, if the American public ever got a look at his tax returns and business loans, they would find that he has also been feathering his nest with Kremlin gold for some time. He has undoubtedly taken money from countless Russian oligarchs. In 2008, he unloaded one of his Palm Beach mansions on Dmitry Rybolovlev, a fertilizer oligarch, for $95 million. Sergei Millian, who heads the Russian-American Chamber of Commerce, is said to have facilitated countless investments from Russians into Trump projects. For Trump, no money is too tainted to pocket.

Trump’s adoration of Russia – or, more accurately, Russian riches – was apparent well before Americans went to the polls, as was his habit of surrounding himself with likeminded advisers. For months, Trump’s presidential campaign was run by Paul Manafort, a political operative who had worked to secure the disgraced President Viktor Yanukovych’s victory in Ukraine’s 2010 presidential election. Trump severed public ties with Manafort only after Ukraine’s current democratic government revealed documents that hinted at the millions of dollars that Yanukovych had paid Manafort, in cash. As Trump’s inauguration draws near, Americans must confront three big questions. One, in a sense, is a take on a question that Trump raised about Clinton during the campaign: what happens if the FBI finds evidence of criminal conduct by the president? Or, perhaps more likely in Trump’s case, what happens if the president tries to shut down FBI investigations into his commercial activities involving Russia, or into the actions of cronies like Manafort?

The second question, which the US Senate should ask before confirming Tillerson as Secretary of State, concerns the extent of his and ExxonMobil’s financial interests in Russia. The Senate should also probe how closely Tillerson has cooperated with Igor Sechin, the chairman of Rosneft and a notorious ex-KGB operative, particularly in renationalizing much of the Russian oil industry and placing it under Sechin’s personal control. (Similar questions should be asked about Flynn, though, because the National Security Adviser doesn’t need to be confirmed by the Senate, little can be done about his appointment.)

The biggest question of all concerns the American people. Are they really willing to accept a president who denounces men and women who risk their lives to defend the US, and equally quick to praise and defend Putin and his cronies when their reckless, even criminal, conduct is exposed?

At the end of The Manchurian Candidate, another brainwashed character – Frank Sinatra’s Marco – escapes his programming to foil the communist plot. But that was Cold War Hollywood: of course the good guys won. Trump the Movie is unlikely to end so well.

© Project Syndicate 1995–2016

The post The Manchurian Cabinet appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

The post #New Europe Shooting Gallery Issue 1191 appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

TOKYO – December will be a month of reconciliation for Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe, as he meets with leaders from two countries that fought Japan in World War II: the United States and Russia.

It might seem promising that Abe is hosting Russian President Vladimir Putin and then being hosted by US President Barack Obama in such short order. But these events actually presage an uncomfortable, potentially destabilizing time for Japan – and all of East Asia.

On December 26, Abe will shake hands with Obama at Pearl Harbor – weeks after the US marked the 75th anniversary of the Japanese attack there – to reciprocate Obama’s visit to Hiroshima’s atomic bomb sites last May. The mutual demonstration of forgiveness is meant to emphasize the values that Japan and the US now share.

But this gesture will come just ten days after Abe hosts Putin in his Yamaguchi prefecture hometown; and theirs will be a rather different sort of reconciliation. Russia is one of the few countries with which Japan never signed a peace treaty after 1945, because in the war’s final days, the Soviet Union occupied four then-Japanese islands just north of Hokkaido, the country’s northernmost main island.

The four islands sit at the southern tip of the Kuril Islands chain that separates the Sea of Okhotsk from the Pacific Ocean. While they are not of any particular economic value beyond providing some fishing grounds, they do have sentimental significance for Japan – as is often the case with lost territories. And for Russia, which is never keen to cede territory anyway, the islands are strategically valuable; the Kremlin recently decided to install missile-defense systems on two of them.  While the dispute over the islands has prevented Japan and Russia from ever formalizing a peace agreement, both countries now seem to want to cuddle somewhat closer. Putin’s trip will be his first official visit to Japan in a decade; and Abe plans to honor him with personalized treatment; their discussions will take place in the manly environment of an onsen (hot spring), rather than in dull offices.

These overtures reflect Russia and Japan’s respective concerns about China. While Russia has warmed to China in recent years, not least by entering into a big natural gas deal and engaging in joint military exercises, it has largely done so as a gesture of defiance against the US and the European Union. In the long term, Russia does not want to look as though it is dependent on its increasingly powerful southern neighbor. Japan, for its part, fears Chinese domination of East Asia, and is more than happy to be Russia’s new Asian friend.

Previously, it would have been difficult, if not impossible, for Japan to invest in Russia’s Far East, owing to its participation in Western sanctions against Russia, imposed in response to Russia’s aggression in Ukraine. But now that Donald Trump has been elected to the US presidency, those sanctions might be eased or eliminated. Indeed, this could explain why Abe broke protocol to become the first foreign leader to meet President-elect Trump in New York, on November 17.

Had Hillary Clinton won the election, Abe would have been forced to downplay expectations for his summit with Putin. Now, Putin and Abe will have more room to negotiate the contested islands’ status, and to develop a future framework for economic cooperation, which will likely include regular bilateral summits.

But this will only be a consolation prize for Abe. Trump’s victory has sounded a death knell for the 12-country Trans-Pacific Partnership, which Obama had made the centerpiece of his Asia strategy. Abe supported the TPP, and saw it as a means to prevent China from becoming the rule-setter in Asian trade. Without the TPP, it is now increasingly likely that China will step into that role.

That will be a big loss for Japan, and the country will lose out even more if Trump follows through on his campaign promise to make allies such as Japan and South Korea pay more for their own defense. And if Trump continues to provoke China by communicating with Taiwan and questioning America’s “One China” policy, regional tensions will escalate. This, in turn, will only increase Japan’s defense needs, especially with respect to the Senkaku Islands in the East China Sea, which China claims as its own.

So, Abe faces political danger, but he also has an opportunity. Trump’s election and escalating regional tensions have created the perfect pretext for Abe to push for his ultimate political goal: to abolish Article 9 – the pacifist clause in Japan’s post-war, US-imposed constitution, which limits the Japanese military to a “self-defense force,” and has generally kept Japanese defense spending at 1% of GDP.

Abe already has enough parliamentary backing to achieve this, and he could garner more with a snap election for the lower house in early 2017. But, beyond a two-thirds majority in both parliamentary bodies, constitutional reforms also require a simple majority in a national referendum. Achieving that could be harder, because pacifism runs deep in the only country to have been attacked with atomic bombs.

By shaking Obama’s hand in Hawaii, Abe will give a nod to the country’s modern pacifist creed, and signal that, despite his reputation as a nationalist, he also harbors deep feelings about the dangers of war. Such peaceful assurances, against the backdrop of growing tensions in East Asia, may or may not be enough to persuade Japanese voters that it is time to expand their country’s armed forces – 75 years after their great but fateful triumph in Pearl Harbor. This will be one of the central questions in Asian politics over the next few turbulent years.

© Project Syndicate 1995–2016

The post Japanese Foreign Policy in the Trump Era appeared first on New Europe.

Share on Facebook Share on Twitter Share on Google+ Share on LinkedIn+var sbFBAPPID = '457641991045477';

WASHINGTON, DC – Planning. It is the key to successful military action – and, in many ways, to success in general – and United States Marines like me pride ourselves on it. But if you’ve spent 30 years in the military, as I have, you know that an effective plan cannot be static; operating environments change, often in surprising or unexpected ways. Donald Trump’s victory in the US presidential election earlier this month constitutes just such a change.

It may be a long time before we fully understand the new operating environment. But we must begin adjusting – and continue adjusting as new facts come to light. Otherwise, we risk becoming vulnerable to serious strategic threats – the gravest of which is likely to be climate change.

The increase in the Earth’s surface temperature represents a fundamental shift in the global operating environment, both economically and militarily. It is not just that some so-called “elites” think that the weather is going to warm up a bit. Climate change is not trivial; nor are its security implications.

Climate change is what we in the military call a “threat multiplier.” Its connection to conflict is not linear. Rather, it intensifies and complicates existing security risks, increasing the frequency, scale, and complexity of future missions.

The urgency of the climate threat is growing quickly. Climate change is already expanding the scope of military operations, with the US Navy and Coast Guard assessing new missions in the Arctic. More intense hurricanes, typhoons, and droughts are increasing the demand for military-assisted humanitarian responses, most notably in the Pacific.

As increasingly extreme weather reshapes migration patterns, the number of displaced people (already at record highs worldwide) will rise, and competition for essential resources (such as water, food, and energy) will increase. These effects will be particularly destabilizing in already-volatile situations, exacerbating challenges like weak governance, economic inequality, and social tensions – and producing truly toxic conflicts. That is why we call climate change “an accelerant of instability.”

Don’t take my word for it. America’s entire national security establishment is clear on this. In fact, the US military has recognized climate change as a major security risk for more than a decade, making it a world leader on this front. Last year’s National Security Strategy reiterated this view, identifying climate change as a top-level strategic risk to US interests, alongside factors like terrorism, economic crisis, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction.

These are not empty words. The US military has long been integrating climate change into our planning. After all, the worst security failures – for example, the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, which dragged the US into World War II, and the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks – tend to arise from inadequate preparation.

Reflecting this lesson, during President George W. Bush’s administration, legislation was enacted to require all US defense agencies to consider the effects of climate change in future strategic policy development. In the last four years, the Department of Defense has released a series of directives that put climate-change preparedness at the center of how we do business.

It is too early to say what the Trump administration will do when it comes to climate change. On the campaign trail, he promised to undo some key climate policies, even threatening to back out of the Paris climate agreement. It is critically important that he and his cabinet recognize that to follow through on his promise would be extremely shortsighted.

The truth is that it is in America’s best interest, in terms of both security and the economy, to remain on the path toward a cleaner future. Already, the clean-energy revolution has brought jobs, money, and industry to rural America. It is a source of untold opportunities. And isn’t identifying opportunity one of America’s great strengths?

The shifting economic operating environment bolsters these opportunities. China, India, and other emerging economies are racing to be the global clean-energy superpower; it would not be in America’s interest to be left behind. If America is to be great, as Trump has promised, it needs to build more future-oriented industries that can compete globally – and that can provide jobs to American workers.

Moreover, Trump’s administration will need to continue the US military’s work and create a more resilient national security strategy. The American Security Project, of which I am CEO, looks forward to providing the Trump administration with relevant advice and solutions. We will also call the administration to account if it fails to protect US interests adequately.

Ignoring  threats might work in politics, but it does not work in security. Denying the reality of climate change will not make it go away; rather, it will erode the economy and expose the US to serious risks. That would amount to a failure by Trump to fulfill one of his most important responsibilities as president: ensuring the security of the American people.

Serious strategic risks cannot be a political plaything. The threat of climate change does not sit neatly on either side of the left-right divide; it is – and must remain – part of US strategic planning. Anyone who has been involved in such planning knows that we cannot prepare only for the wars we want to fight; we must prepare for the wars that will come, whether we like it or not.

© Project Syndicate 1995–2016

The post Trump’s choice on climate change appeared first on New Europe.

The rise of far-right and populist parties in Europe has alarmed politicians. There are some who believe this is the result of the migration waves that hit EU member states over the past few years. And there are those who think European countries have more Muslims than their populations can tolerate.
Despite the fact that authoritative institutions publish surveys showing the exact opposite, the general belief in Europe is that refugees, migrants and Muslims are to blame for the threat faced by...

This story is part of New Europe's Premium content.

To Read the Full Story, Subscribe or Sign In from the ↑ Top of the Page ↑