German Finance Minister Wolfgang Schaeuble said on Thursday it would be possible to develop the euro zone’s European Stability Mechanism (ESM) rescue fund into a European monetary fund soon.
Asked if this would be possible in the short term, Schaeuble replied: “Yes, I think so.”
Speaking on the sidelines of International Monetary Fund meetings in Washington, he also said any new aid programs for euro zone countries should be without the international lender and so under European auspices.
The reception of State Secretary Rext Tillerson in Kremlin gives hope that the superpower leaders are prepared to assume their responsibilities towards global community, and stabilize the rapidly deteriorated US-Russia relations.
The high expectations of Russians did not come true – the change of the administration did not bring a major change in foreign policy. Whoever is the master of the White House, it is the US military-industrial complex having the last say. In this way Trump’s presidency will not become any different. Bowing to the Pentagon, Trump had to retreat into admitting that NATO is ‘not obsolete’. Acceding power, he had to follow the path of his predecessors, meaning to stay in a rut of the US expansionist foreign policy. We all have to come to the terms that none of his revolutionary anti-war proposals, captivating the moods of his electorate, can be transformed into reality, and both Russian and American people have to live with that sinister truth.
In spite of the economic crisis the US launched without blinking a missile offensive on Syria – the firing a shot worth USD 88 mln demonstrates that there will be no savings on military adventures. The offensive that also left in ashes the Kremlin hope of ‘peaceful coexistence’ of the nuclear superpowers. Syria and Ukraine as the frontlines set ablaze.
However the pressure of the international terrorism still might push even those the most reluctant into a coalition with Russians. The rapidly spreading network of jihadists worldwide has no other solution, but a united effort.
Although the agenda of almost two-hour discussion between Putin and Tillerson was not revealed, it is certain that the anti-terrorist coalition proposal had its prominent place.
(Photo: illustration)
Anna van Densky OPINION
It does not make much sense to discuss the possible outcome of Secretary of State Rex Tillerson’s (pictured) first visit to Moscow, because the new US administration was not given an opportunity to work out their political strategy, or even modify the concept of the Obama’s administration. From the moment of the inauguration the inner political struggle took all the energy and resource, hardly leaving an opportunity to bring to live any of campaign foreign policy promises, including the alliance with Russia against international terrorism.
While eager to play the doves of peace, the Democrats intentionally pushed the Republicans into the role of demons of war. The first visit of #Hillary to Moscow with a ‘reset button’ was a sheer public relations operation, however it worked on global popularity of Obama’s administration, profiling him on long-term as Nobel peace prize winner. On contrary the faux pas of the missile offensive in Syria shapes the image of Trump as a hawk, representing the unpredictable punitive forces with tyrannic inclinations, ignoring the international laws. Rex Tillerson’s mission is defined and shaped by this spontaneous US offensive in Syria.
However the US military action in Syria by no means is a result of a profound political thought, neither a beginning of a new strategy, but a haphazard tactical move to distract attention from #russianconnectons scandal during the initial period of Trump’s presidency.
It seems that in the eyes of President Trump’s advises the offensive in Syria is about a creation of a backdrop to spoil the game of the Democrats, an answer to #russianconnections allegations. The allegations intensely undermining president’s Trump image in an attempt of the Democrats to win majority in the Congress in the future.
Tillerson’s call to Russians to abandon president Assad is largely a rhetoric exercise for a number of reasons, not the least an absence of an alternative – there is no opposition figure in Syria able to take the responsibilities, and enhance the reconciliation process.
The talks about dismissing Assad in military action in ‘regime change’ favorite US concept are even more surrealistic after the assassination of Libya’s leader colonel Gaddafi, whose death marked a beginning of an ongoing turmoil, transferring the entire country in a huge playground of jihadists. Afghanistan, Iraq, Libya – the US foreign policy has demonstrated an out of ordinary capacity to destroy, but not reconstruct. Subsequently in Kremlin there is an understanding of that ‘creative capacity’ of the US, and certainly there is no slightest desire to give up a secular ally as Assad, who was educated in London, to one of the so-called ‘moderate opposition’ bearded fanatics.
The decision of Kremlin to decline the meeting between Putin and Tillerson indicates the initial pessimistic modality of the talks in Russian foreign ministry, because in first place there is no political agenda or strategy. Today State Department activity is a hostage of the warfare the Democrats declared to the Republican president, rejecting to accept his power and the choice of American people.
Without any new doctrine, scattered in tactical moves the US administration is chosing for spectacular actions and loud declarations to disguise its huge problems at home. No one expects any results from Tillerson-Lavrov (illustration) talks: Russians will not bow to the US to retreat from the Middle East, leaving Assad to the wolves and Americans, stuck with home politics problems, will continue to use tactic of distracting of public attention from its interior weakness and failures by the belligerent rhetoric and operations, flexing steroid muscles of the military-industrial complex, – the true master of the game behind the scenes.
Dulce bellum inexpertis! *
(* War seems lovely to unexperienced, Latin)
PUBLISHED in @EuropeDiplomatic
The President Trump’ missile strikes on Syria amid #RussianConnections investigation give a déjà vue feeling reminiscent of Bill Clinton’ bombing of Iraq amid #MonicaGate. The initiative of a crusade for alleged chemical weapons used by president Assad reminded many, including UN diplomat is, the bulb with white powder, demonstrated by gen.Powell before US invasion in Iraq. Trump’s missile strike evoked so many memories…
It is hard to belive the US President was so touched by the dead babies in Syria, as some suggest, to order a strike in an emotional move. Just couple of weeks ago (17.03.2017) he let pass unnoticed the assassination of 300 civilians in residential area of Mosul. There were certainly babies among the Iraqi victims too, but it was qualified as an ‘an unintentional accident of war’ without any consequences for the perpetrators.
Nobody was indignant about these casualties, the slain were not honored by Ambassador Haley demonstrative grief and indignation at UN emergency meeting, and there was no urgent meeting as such. The information in the beginning came to public attention through non-American media sources, while the US representatives were trying to find excuses for the massive loss of human live, ‘further investigating’ and ‘learning lesson’.
In case of late US missile strike on Syria is became clear that is was planned sometime before the alleged chemical incident reported by human rights NGOs used by the administration in bona fide, and merely as a pretext to intervene. Why ?
The first explanation is on the surface: it allows to distract attention from ongoing #RussianConnections investigation fuelled by the Democrats. Startled to discover the President is acting towards Assad in the same lines as Hillary Clinton suggested, the opponents have to put their criticism of Trump’s foreign policy on a halt, finding themselves in confusion over the U-turn strategy of the Commander-in-Chief.
Even more so the Democrates were puzzled with stakes in prism of policy towards Russia – just a week before Rex Tillerson visit to Moscow, – the missile attack on Syria, a Russian ally, transforms the US Foreign Secretary in a powerful foe, entering Moscow in the context close to the dark times of Cold War. Although there is some feeling that the Americans were sure, that president Putin would not clash with them over a remote airbase in Syria.
Awkwardly the ‘imperialistic’ ambition of Trump’s administration would help a great deal to President’s Putin re-election (endorsement) for the fourth term, uniting the nation in face of ‘American threat’, convincing a regular Russian in need of a ‘strong man’ at a steering wheel in turbulent times.
Altogether with one strike President Trump hit many goals: distracting attention of his opponents at home, pleasing his electorate with an image of a powerful and fearless world leader, protecting world order and going back to blacks of international politics making some of the European leaders delighted by clashes with Kremlin, and later paradoxically not so discontent, how it might look at first glance, benefiting from US unlawful military action in domestic political discourse. The revival of the US ‘imperialistic ambitions’ will help Putin in re-elections (endorsement) of his fourth term by regular Russians, convincing them he is a ‘strong man’ they need to withstand the predator’s instinct of ‘American imperialism.’
Machiavelli style of President Trump, making it an almost perfect a ‘knights move,’ is certainly impressive in many ways, if not contributing to Daesh survival, but never mind. Most probably DAESH was not ment to vanish, creating a protracted conflict in the Middle East. However it is a different issue. Today the mega-winner of the strikes is the Commander-in-Chief himself. Vivat!
In Brussels the triggering Article 50 day is a sunny for Sir Tim Barrow, who handed the letter, for the UKIP MEPs, for all those who voted #Brexit, and quite a grim experience for those who laments the departure of the UK, venturing how to remain in the European projet without its avantgarde.
The word whispered in Brussels corridors of power is the one Nigel Farage articulates aloud: would the European project exist in two-years time? And even if it does, how far its mutation goes?.. With Marine Le Pen as a front-runner of the French elections, and Geert Wilders promise to get 300 000 signatures to launch #Nexit referendum initiative for Dutch…
Whatever the way the project goes, the moral blow of leaving the EU by Brittons is not to be recovered: feeling unwanted by the nation of so many virtues, the European adventure loses its glam and glitter, converting the remainers into “down-shifters” on the ruins of the great ambitions, resembling the bunch of herders on the antiquities of Ancient Rome.
It looks like Europe once again remainers failed to get together into a powerful entity, so many times desired through its history, falling apart into ‘multi-speed’ congregation, looking different directions, without a rotational axis, replaced by spindles.
Me, I just suddenly realised that the moment Sir Tim handed The Letter, that my Brussels ‘capital of Europe’ habitat has been downgraded to a provincial one, with époque d’oré bygone.
But even worse than losing the UK financial contribution, it will be a loss of British great sense of humour. It looks like without funny #Larry’s (pictured) tweet participation I have to get used to exist in quite bland space surrounded by the functionaries, devoted keepers of the acquis communautaire with a penchant for grey, pushing our lives into the Procrustes bed of regulations and directives…
#Anna van Densky (this is a highly personal, apolitical note without any relation to my professional activities as a political commentator:)
While EU Council president Donald Tusk (pictured) is preparing the anniversary of the Treaty of Rome Summit (25.03.2017), focusing of the ‘unity’ message of EU27 in post-Brexit era, the argument over his own re-appointment ignoring Polish government’s protest, remains open, poisoning the historic event.
Although the Summit is informal, the open confrontation with Poland over re-appointment of Tusk is a toxic issue, that would be impossible to play down or brush off. The EU diplomacy showed poor judgment when suggested Prime minister Beata Szydlo (53) would have no choise but submit to the will the fellow EU members, openly imposing Tusk – an active political opponent of her incumbent government. Szydlo, the miner’s daughter, showed a remarkable capacity to withstand punch, and audacity to retaliate, rejecting to sign the Council conclusions. If this pattern is chosen as a long-term strategy, it will mean, as long as Tusk chairs the EU meetings, Poland will continue to obstruct the outcome, not honoring a legal status to its decisions. This conflict over Tusk might not hinder the upcoming ‘informal’ Summit in Rome legally, but it will certainly harm its image politically.
While preparing the Declaration of the Summit in Rome, calling for ‘unity’ as a universal remedy from all kind of problems Europeans suffer, Tusk’s controversial chairmanship, weakens the message a priori. “Taken individually, we would be sidelined by global dynamics. Standing together is our best chance to influence them, and to defend our common interests and values … Our Union is undivided and indivisible,” – Tusk’s draft declaration calls, making this words to haunt him like a bitter irony.
Being ‘an apple of discord’ between Poland and the rest of the EU, Tusk himself is a at most eloquent physical evidence of the profound crisis of the EU, and a symbol of strife and decline.
The draft, dated March 16 and prepared by the contraversial chairman of EU summits Donald Tusk, will pass by all the capitals next week before being endorsed in Rome on the 25th of March.
Anna van Densky OPINION published in @EuropeDiplomatic
With Polish Prime Minister Beata Szydlo rejecting to sign the EU Council conclusions over a bitter argument of the second mandate of the Polish official Donald Tusk, the approaching celebrations of the Treaty of Rome become less of a festivity, and more of a challenge. An obstacle to overcome. Is there anything left to celebrate?..
Launching a debate on the future of the European Union, and subsequently the entire continent, Jean-Claude Juncker (pictured) – the president of the European Commission – has offered Five scenarios (5S), however none of them even hinted on a ‘catastrophic’ one – the case of French or/and Dutch citizens would follow #Brexit way.
Anna van Densky, OPINION Taking into consideration the anti-Trump rethoric of president Donald Tusk naming the new US administration an ‘existential threat’ to the EU one can not expect much from vice-president Mike Pence visit to Brussels.
“Unprecedented terrorist aggression has been seen in Europe, the United States, and the countries that are our allies under the Collective Security Treaty Organisation in Asia – all this presents a serious threat to international security”, said Russian Foreign minister Sergey Lavrov addressing MunichSecurity conference.
Russian minister expressed concern over the overall degradation of the situation in the Middle East and North Africa after ‘Arab Spring’, and migrant crisis in Europe, pointing at the threat of terrorism to expand in Middle East, North Africa.
Lavrov claimed a “certain success” in the fight against ISIS, al-Nusra Front, and the other terroristic groups, however he underlined that the international community has failed so far to create a “truly efficient anti-terrorist front”, blaming “inability” to put aside nonentity matters, and curb geopolitical ambitions.
Lavrov called for a “true union” of the leading nations against international terrorism, and also to prevent the collapse of Iraq, Libya, Yemen and Afghanistan, infiltrated by ISIS, using the lack of unified strategy to their advantage.
Anna Van Densky blog 