#Brexit: pessimism reigns in Europarl

Anna van Densky OPINION The European Parliament Brexit negotiator Guy VERHOFSTADT (Belgium, ALDE) cancelled his press-conference, so did his major ally – Esteban GONZALES-PONS (Spain EPP). There are no traces of optimism in the corridors of power in spite of British Prime Minister Theresa MAY the last minute spontaneous visit to Strasbourg, attempting to obtain compromises on the Article 50 Agreement.

However the legally-binding interpretations of Brexit deal will be hardly enough to convince the Westminster to accept it in tonight’s vote.

In case of voting down the Article 50 Agreement the relations between the EU and UK will be entering the uncharted waters, as Prime Minister May has stated already. The extension of the deadline (March 29) is possible in the framework of the agreed Brexit only to avoid legal vacuum. The Remainers already threaten to sue their government in the European Court (CURIA) for breaching the Article 50, which clearly describes the timetable, and does not foresee any prolongations.

Originally there were two fixed deadlines: Brexit date on March 29, and the latest date of its possible extension on May 24 (European elections), before which the UK should leave, or it is obliged to participate, according to the Treaties to ensure the right of the citizens to elect their representatives to the European Parliament. In any case the status of the incumbent MEPs could not be extended beyond July 2, when the newly elected Parliament will be constituted.

However there are very few politicians eager to model possible developments in case tonight of House of Commons will vote down the deal. It will be not only the downfall for Theresa May, and her government, but also considered as a major failure for the EU27 to secure orderly Brexit, preserving from blow economies, jobs, and citizens rights. The  failure will certainly reflect on upcoming European elections disfavoring predominant political forces, unable to preserve mutually beneficial relations with one of major European economies.

 

Amorphous Macron’s LaREM in identity crisis?

Anna van Densky OPINION All new political parties and movements, who have not yet declared their intentions are categorised as “other” in the first chart of the European Parliament projection for the composition of the upcoming in May 2019 assembly. The Movement of the President of France Emmanuel Macron LaRem is among “others” – the political entities, who have not decided upon their political family 100 days before the European elections.

7ADE8198-E513-48F6-A95E-A59F8B0DBE70

Monsieur Macron has an ambition to lead Europe, but he is not able to decide his political color?... An identity crisis or “felix culpa”?

The European Parliament has published a first set of projections on how the next chamber would look like based on national polling data taken up to the beginning of February 2019.

However Macron’s LaREM “En Marche” is not the only”amorphous” European political entity: the other indecisive congregation is the Italian Five Star Movement  (M5S) also labeled with grey color on the chart. However one should not conclude that the grey color in Europe is a disadvantage: Europeans have a penchant for grey since it was noted once upon a time by Marquis de Custine. And even within grey they are able to distinguish many sophisticated shades:)

Undoubtedly there will be voters dropping ballots for amorphous entities, which allow them to stay in grey  zone of comfort, avoiding clear choice between classical political right and left, but in the end with the UK leaving the bloc, the identity crisis of the President of France political party is not a major challenge for the EU27. The turn out will be the major indicator for the life expectancy of the bloc. Will it stay or decline? Up to the European to decide.

France: Mutilation of democracy

Anna van Densky OPINION The images of a Yellow Vest protester with a ripped off hand agonizing in arms of street medics, attempting to deliver first aid, is hundred times more shocking, because of the place of the incident – the National Assembly of France – the parliament, the democratic institution, representing citizens.

If such an image had come from Venezuela there would have been an immediate call for a Security Council meeting for discussing the violations with human rights there, and most probably to make the resolution more convincing, the Americans would sent there a couple of missiles, just to be sure the warning is taken seriously.

However if the events are taking place in a country which is a permanent member of the UN Security Council, and founding member of the European Unionthere is nobody to remind the French government about the respect of human rights. Equally silent is the European Union, proudly celebrating the anniversary of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR), a milestone document, adopted by the United Nations General Assembly (10.12.1948) at the Palais de Chaillot in Paris, France.

While Europe is celebrating the Declaration, it is also carefully watching the compliance, but mainly in oil-rich countries, like Venezuela, where you have to be careful with human rights, or you are risking to lose everything like it happened with the leaders of Iraq or Libya after the riot in Benghazi…

Benghazi. The most striking is the silence of the leading French human rights defenders like Bernard-Henry Lévy, known as BHL, who was promoting the intervention to Libya without the UN resolution, insisting the international organisations are far too slow to react adequately on ongoing human tragedy there. But nowadays who from famous French human rights defenders is  standing against mutilation of citizens, manifesting their indignation with the government’s policies?..

Mid-January the LCI TV channel has revealed statistics pointing at 1700 wounded, among them around 100 people with serious injuries.

Among grave injuries the most common were head wounds,  and often with serious consequences, leaving people with lifelong disabilities: 13 have lost an eye since the beginning of the movement as a result of police shooting. There were are 9 (+1) hand injuries caused by grenades; 5 in the leg, one in the reproductive organs, and one in the foot. The wounded are mostly men. There are 10 women out of 93 cases, according to BFMTV assembling data mid-January.

Nevertheless the numbers of injured and mutilated don’t motivate international organisations, obliged to defend human rights, to say a word on French government repressions, reducing the human rights to a tool of foreign policy, a reason to interfere in home affairs of the other countries, especially those which are oil-rich…

GJ target

INF funeral revives nuclear war threat

Russia‘s defense minister Sergey Shoygu announced the  intention to build mid-range, nuclear-capable missiles a week after the President Trump has decided to abandon INF Treaty, which is considered to be one of the biggest achievement of humanity, closing the chapter of  the Cold War. The world is pushed back full force into the situation of the imminent risk of the World war III, triggered by will or by an accident. The dangerous perception of possibility to wage and win a nuclear war is back.

It would be very naive to think that technology is perfect: in 1983 Soviet officer on duty has prevented the nuclear war just because of his exceptional capacity for analysis, assuming the information he received from computers was erroneous – an episode of Cold War known as “false nuclear attack“.

The humanity was exceptionally lucky, that Stanislav Petrov was on duty on September 26, 1983 to identify the missile attack warnings as “false alarm“. His personal decision to disobey the rules is seen as having prevented a retaliatory nuclear attack based on erroneous signals on the United States and its NATO allies missiles, which could have resulted in immediate escalation to the full-scaled nuclear war. Now we, as humanity are back to the situation when our survival depends on decision of an officer on duty, watching the monitor.

Last five years both the Americans and Russians blamed each other the violation of the INF, however it was NATO rapidly expanding.

Kremlin accuses the U.S. of violating the INF by the deployment of Aegis missile defence system in Romania and Poland, indicating that the launchers used in that system for defensive interceptors could be adapted to fire offensive cruise missiles.

In return Washington accused Russians of employment mystery missile  9M729  for Iskander launchers being more powerful than declared (480 km).  Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Sergey Ryabkov acknowledged its existence but firmly denied it was capable to hit targets between 500 -5,500 km away, strictly compliant with the INF.

The problems accumulating in the US-Russia relations have created a toxic mass within a new political and military context, caused by NATO galloping enlargement with a subsequent advancing of the military infrastructure to Russian borders: after including the East European countries, belonging to the Warsaw Pact the moment of the INF signature between Reagan and Gorbachev. nowadays the Alliance moved further to the East opening its door for Georgia and Ukraine. The perspective of installing Aegis there will create a vulnerability for Moscow, impossible to neglect.

However existing problems of relations between superpowers do not give a right to cancel the greatest achievement of the past, reversing progress, and pushing humanity to the brink of a fatal nuclear conflict, of which Europe is becoming a hostage. The American ambition for the hegemony has price too high to pay – the extinction of our civilization.

French hypocrites versus Yellow Vests

In prime time indignant Prime minister Edouard Philippe ensures audiences that hundreds of thousands of people in the streets would be not allowed to overthrow the French institutions. He called for new tough laws against the Yellow Vests protesters.

But why French  are so DOUBLE passionately supporting protest movements elsewhere, immediately blaming the leaders in oppression of their citizens? Why cheering at violence of Maidan revolution in Kiev, overthrowing the legitimate, but unpopular President Viktor Yanukovych? He was elected in the procedures, which were acknowledged across the world as democratic.  In Ukraine in the capital the uprising was performed by minority groups, who were actively supported by French government in their fight to overthrow the legitimate head of the state, and the government.  Subsequently the coup d’état in Ukraine was ‘legitimate‘ because it brought to power the pro-Western candidate.

It would be interesting to hear the comment of the oust President Yanoukovich on intention of French government to crush the protests of the Yellow Vests. Does he think the Ukraine history would have taken a different cause, if he had not listen the French hypocrites, applying double standards to themselves, and the rest of the world?..

Quod licet Iovinon licet bovi”,  Romans said, enshrining double standard for the God Jupiter, and his bull. But in XXI century this arrogance of playing Jupiter in guided palace will certainly not pass, serving as a seance of an aversion therapy vis-à-vis French leadership.

Macron-Philippe might scorn the grievances of people, and wrestle down the discontent of Yellow Vest, but they will certainly lose respect of European, despising pretensions hypocrites, claiming leadership: false democrats, false republicans, false human beings.

 

Russia barred Navalny visit to ECHR

Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny, says border guards prevented him from flying out of a Moscow airport to Strasbourg for a hearing at the European court of human rights in Strasbourg.

Border guards are saying that leaving is forbidden for me. There is some kind of letter that says I am prohibited from leaving, but there is no explanation why,” Navalny tweeted. The politician  learnt about the ban to leave Russia while  boarding a flight to Frankfurt and and from there further to Strasbourg, where the European Court on Human Rights is expected to rule on whether his detentions this year were politically motivated. The ban of to leave Russia of the appellate will not lead to any change in  ECHR scheduled hearing.

#MeTooEP side effects

While the progressive part of the European Parliament enthusiastically welcomes #MeToo campaign against sexual harassment at work place it is right time to mention it’s overlooked side effects. First of all, only very naive souls could believe that the movement is a universal remedy of the problem. It is sufficient to take a close-up  to understand that so far #MeToo had very selective implications.

While some reputations and businesses are in ashes, the others, wanted by police, enjoy impunity. Since March 1977 film director Roman Polanski has been avoiding justice in his Parisian ‘refuge’ unattainable for FBI, protected by a French state, and a number of celebrities, considering themselves above laws reflecting “mediocre‘ morality.

However they are not only Bohemian personalities, who insist on deviation from laws, and unconventional perception of good and evil. The Minister of Culture of the V Republic, Fédéric Mitterand was questioned in a special program of French TV channel, requesting explanations of his involvements in sexual relations with boys  in Thailand, described in his book “Mauvaise vie” ‘ (The Bad life).  The Minister managed to keep his job, in spite of the public indignation of his so-called “fantasies” of Bangkok brothels.  The controversy around the book uplifted it to best-seller status to benefit of the author, encouraging him to continue  his  spicy publications. In his diaries “La Récréation” Mitterand  enjoyed sexual outlook towards politics while being a minister: struck by the “physical beauty” of then prime minister François Fillon and diving into fantasies of another minister, Laurent Wauquiez.                     

From condemned Hollywood lustful filmmakers, to obsessed by sexual fantasies provocative ministers, – the defenders of morality have a considerable challenge in absence of a ‘benchmark‘ of admissible within different cultures and subcultures, confronted with subjective assessments of victims, pointing at abuse, and insisting on protection from sexual advances at work place.

Word against word. A common contemporary practice of sexual scandals, rocking US politics entered the European Parliament with opening a special blog on sexual harassment for the employees.  In case a verbal statement is sufficient to trigger the accusation as it happens in the US , any politician at any given moment can face a provocation, aiming at destruction of his reputation – a hidden shredder, which can be brought in action suddenly.

How will the Members of the European Parliament react to defend themselves from possible provocations in ruthless jungle of politics? The answers are on the surface: first, to avoid employment of candidates without references, and avoid employing young people, whose looks might be considered as seductive. At present we can expect a number of #MeToo scandals shuttering European elections, some tears, some juicy publications and some ruined reputations. But learning from this drama, the newly elected MEPs pursuing safety will certainly employ mainly their relatives, and friends, and in case it is impossible to find a needed expert among them, opt for wrinkled candidates of advanced age.  And… warm welcome to Quasimodos!