European Politics > EU-Russia Relations; Hungary's LGBTQ Stand; Poland's Lean to the Right; Belarus Snuggles up to The Bear

..

Merkel and Macron to propose revival of EU-Russia relations

& meeting with Putin – reports

23 Jun, 2021 19:18

French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Angela Merkel meet in Berlin, June 18, 2021.

©  REUTERS/Axel Schmidt/Pool

German Chancellor Angela Merkel, backed by French President Emmanuel Macron, reportedly wants the EU to consider “selective engagement” with Russia on issues of common interest and inviting President Vladimir Putin to a summit.

French and German diplomats “wrongfooted” other EU member states at a meeting in Brussels on Wednesday by proposing to invite Putin to a summit with the bloc’s leaders, the Financial Times reported on Wednesday, citing “people with knowledge of the discussions.”

According to FT, Merkel wants to revive EU relations with Russia along the template provided by last week’s Geneva summit between Putin and US President Joe Biden. Though she meets and speaks with Putin on a regular basis herself, the German chancellor reportedly wants a format that allows the EU to address Russia “with one voice.”

The proposal put forth by the ambassadors would say the EU is interested to engage with Russia on areas of common interest, such as the Arctic, climate and the environment, health, space exploration, fighting terrorism, and foreign policy issues such as Syria and Iran, among other things. 

The EU suspended summit meetings with Russia in 2014, when Brussels accused Moscow of “annexing” Crimea. The peninsula voted to rejoin Russia after the US-backed nationalists in Kiev overthrew the Ukrainian government and brushed aside a compromise brokered by France and Germany. 

Merkel and Putin spoke on the phone on Tuesday, the 80th anniversary of the invasion of the Soviet Union by Nazi Germany and its allies. On the same day, the German weekly Die Zeit also published an op-ed in which Putin said Russia was “in favor of restoring a comprehensive partnership with the rest of Europe.”

According to FT, the Franco-German proposal is “likely” to alarm Poland and the Baltic States, which are hostile to Moscow.

It's also likely to alarm NATO which is making kazillions of dollars selling weapons to those states as they accuse Russia of having aggressive desires towards them.

It was also put forward shortly after the incident in the Black Sea, in which a Russian patrol ship and fighter jet fired warning shots at a British warship that violated their territorial waters near Crimea. 

UPDATE - June 24th:

EU leaders early Friday adopted a hardline stance toward Russia — but only after Poland and the Baltic countries took their own hardline stance toward Germany and France and torpedoed a proposal by the bloc’s biggest powers to seek a summit with President Vladimir Putin.

The 27 heads of state and government adopted their tough conclusions on Russia at around 2 a.m. following a protracted and, at times, heated debate. The final result was remarkably humbling, if not utterly humiliating, for German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron, who normally exert the greatest sway in discussions around the European Council table.

Rather than endorsing the language proposed by Germany and France that would have floated the idea of “meetings at leaders level,” akin to the one held by U.S. President Joe Biden with Putin in Geneva last week, the Council approved a statement focused on setting expectations and demands for the Kremlin, which would be a prerequisite for new diplomatic engagement. The Council also threatened new economic sanctions should Moscow persist in “malign, illegal and disruptive activity.”

I wonder how much influence NATO has over Poland and the Baltic states? Certainly, their attitude is one of immaturity and is most unhelpful.

Leaders of 17 EU states sign letter against LGBT+ discrimination

as row with Hungary over controversial law escalates

24 Jun, 2021 12:07

The leaders of 17 EU states vowed to continue fighting against LGBT+ discrimination in a joint letter, a day after the EU Commission promised legal proceedings against Hungary.

The letter, published by Luxembourg Prime Minister Xavier Bettel on Twitter, says that “respect and tolerance are at the core of the European project,” and pledges to “continue fighting against discrimination towards the LGBTI community.” Among the signatories are French President Emmanuel Macron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, the prime ministers of Italy and Spain, as well as leaders of the Scandinavian and Baltic states, among others.

There are 27 member states in the EU, which leaves 9 members who did not sign the letter, not including Hungary, of course.

The letter features 16 names, but Austrian Chancellor Sebastian Kurz also added his signature after the letter was released, bringing the number of signatories to 17.

The letter is addressed to the top brass of the EU and comes ahead of International LGBT+ Pride Day on June 28. It doesn’t name Hungary explicitly, but it comes a day after the European Commission promised legal procedures against Hungary, with the commission’s president, Ursula von der Leyen, calling Hungary’s new anti-LGBT+ legislation “a shame.”

The document was released as EU leaders gather in Brussels for a summit to discuss “global challenges and geopolitical issues.” Upon his arrival at the event, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban defended the controversial law, passed by the country’s parliament last week, which bans school materials from including LGBT+ content for children.

“The law has been approved. It is not about homosexuality, it is about education being a matter for parents,” Orban told the media.

The legislation is part of a larger bill cracking down on sexual crimes against minors, and has triggered strong criticism from Brussels as a threat to fundamental European values. Critics say the bill discriminates against and stigmatizes the LGBT+ community. Hungary has defended the provisions, which were supported by both the ruling party and the opposition. It insists that the law “protects the rights of children” and denies it is discriminatory.

Such 'fundamental European values' as did not exist 20 or 30 years ago. It is not Hungary that has departed from Europe's fundamental values, it is much of the rest of the EU.

Prime Minister Viktor Orban’s government accused von der Leyen of making “false allegations” and said the bill “does not contain any discriminatory elements” because it “does not apply to the sexual orientation rights of those over 18 years of age.”

The EU summit convenes in Brussels this Thursday and Friday, to discuss Covid-19, economic recovery, migration, and external relations, according to the official agenda.

European court rules Polish justice minister violated rights of judges

by firing them without appeal

29 Jun, 2021 15:56

FILE PHOTO. The building of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, France. © Reuters

/ Vincent Kessler; (inset) Polish Minister of Justice Zbigniew Ziobro. © Reuters / AGENCJA GAZETA

The decision by Polish Justice Minister Zbigniew Ziobro to dismiss court officials without appeal violated their right to challenge their early removal from the posts, the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) has ruled.

Following a series of judicial reforms introduced by Poland’s ruling Law and Justice Party since 2015, judges Mariusz Broda and Alina Bojara were removed from their positions as vice presidents of the Kielce Regional Court without justification or the right to appeal their firing.

“As the premature termination of the applicants’ term of office as court vice-presidents had not been examined either by an ordinary court or by another body exercising judicial duties, the respondent state had infringed the very essence of the applicants’ right of access to a court,” the ECHR stated in its judgement on Tuesday.

For violating their rights, the ECHR ruled that Poland should pay the two judges €20,000 ($24,810) each in damages, though the Polish government has three months to appeal the ruling.

While the Polish Justice Ministry said it would comment after reviewing the verdict, the country’s prime minister, Mateusz Morawiecki, told a press conference that his government will “respect the court.” The PM also made it clear that his officials will continue “implementing our programs, including the reform of the justice system, in line with our schedule.”

In other words, they may get their €20,000, but they won't get their jobs back. Poland's right-wing government seems to be replacing left-leaning judges with conservative-friendly judges.

The judicial reforms, which were criticized by the EU when they were introduced for infringing on the independence of the courts, gives the justice minister the power to both hire and fire judges. 

After the new rules were brought in, the minister removed more than 150 court presidents and vice presidents within a six-month period spanning part of 2017 and 2018.

As Belarus ends partnership with EU, Minsk plans to merge tax system

with Russia & establish common markets for energy, transport

29 Jun, 2021 09:42

FILE PHOTO. State colors of Russia and Belarus on the building of the Minsk Philharmonic. © Sputnik

Neighbors Russia and Belarus plan to further deepen their close economic ties by creating multiple integrated markets and working together to unify vital tax and customs legislation, Minsk’s representative in Moscow has revealed.

Vladimir Semashko, the Belarusian ambassador to Russia, explained on Monday that the pair were working towards uniting their energy and transport sectors, and would also be making plans to transition to a joint industrial and agricultural policy. The two nations expect to have concluded this by January 1, 2022, he said.

The move came on the same day that Belarus announced it would be withdrawing from the European Union’s ‘Eastern Partnership’, a scheme designed to pull former Soviet states into Brussels’ orbit and away from Russia.

Another act of aggression from NATO against Russia.

Minsk and Moscow have been part of a so-called Union State since 1999, when current Belarusian leader Alexander Lukashenko and the former Russian President Boris Yeltsin signed a treaty and agreed to begin integration. According to the document’s text, the two nations planned to create a joint parliament, court, and cabinet. Since then, unification has regularly been discussed, including the creation of a shared currency, military, and customs space. However, 22 years later, many of these ideas are yet to come to fruition.

“Much has already been done [to integrate] in social policy, economic policy, defense, and so on,” Semashko told Belarusian state media agency BelTA. “Today, we have really reached the time when we have to bolster the economic foundation of the union of Belarus and Russia.”

The ambassador noted that the two countries would work on integrating 28 sectors of the economy, including oil, gas, and electricity. They would also be focusing on unifying tax and customs legislation, he said.

“We are now at a fundamentally new stage,” he noted, explaining that Belarusian-Russian trade turnover had increased by 30% in the past year. Minsk is Moscow’s fourth-largest trading partner.

Further integration of Russia and Belarus has long been discussed, with both President Lukashenko and his Russian counterpart, Vladimir Putin, regularly returning to the topic. Discussions between the two leaders have intensified in recent months, especially following the unrest in Belarus after last year’s disputed presidential election and the subsequent Western interest in working with Svetlana Tikhanovskaya. Her supporters claim she was the real winner of the contest.

Earlier this month, Belarusian Prime Minister Roman Golovchenko revealed that negotiations between Moscow and Minsk were “entering the home stretch.”

How Big a Threat is Russia to the Baltic States?

When Russia walked into Crimea and took over without firing a shot it was because Crimea is mainly Russian-speaking and they saw Russia as a better patron than Ukraine. Both countries are hopelessly corrupt, but Crimeans preferred Russia anyway.

In 2016, a UN vote was held calling Russia an occupying power, only 70 out of 193 voted in favor, 77 abstained and 26 nations voted against calling Russia an occupying power.

Consequently, there was no general condemnation for Russia moving into Crimea and protecting their only naval base on the Black Sea, after the western-backed coup that suddenly made Ukraine NATO-friendly. NATO, in their ambition to establish a raison d'etre, however, has been working feverishly in the last 2 years to demonize Russia pretending it is an imminent threat to Europe. They have been so effective at this that half of Europe is in near hysteria. Meanwhile, weapons manufacturers are getting even more filthy, and I mean 'filthy' rich than they already were.

I have accused Putin of desiring to rebuild the Soviet Empire and I'm not convinced that he has abandoned that ambition. But when I look for evidence of it, other than Crimea and eastern Ukraine, I'm hard pressed to see any.

The most obvious route of Russian expansion into Europe would come through the Baltic States: Latvia, Estonia and Lithuania. They have a large number of Russian-speaking citizens and some history with the Soviet Union. I have been watching for unrest among Russian-speaking people in these countries and today I finally see it.

Colossally stupid!

The problem is, the unrest was provoked by unconstitutional education reforms by the government of Latvia. Their move against Russian speaking people was either provoked by the hysteria stirred up by NATO, or they were provoked by some more clandestine persuasion. In any event, it is a colossally stupid thing to do. It is poking the sleeping bear and daring him to respond. I have no doubt that NATO is behind this either overtly or covertly.

Russian-speaking minority in Latvia protests against new legislative attack on their identity

A protest in Riga against the introduction of Latvian as language of instruction in ethnic minorities schools

© Mikhail Korytov / Sputnik

Latvia’s largest opposition party has called for the reversal of education reforms that threaten Russian-language classes in the country’s schools, claiming they contradict the national constitution and international convention.

The Social Democratic Party, called "Harmony," represents the interests of Russian speakers that constitute up to 40 percent of Latvia’s population. The call to reverse the education reforms was made to President Raimonds Vejonis on Thursday.

Latvia 'purging unwanted media' by expelling Russian journalists over 'security threat' – Moscow

It followed a decision by the Latvian parliament to pass a bill that would exclude lessons in Russian from the curriculum in all of the country’s schools, including schools specifically for ethnic minorities. The only exception is for classes on Russian language and literature, or unspecified subjects “connected with culture and history.”

Unconstitutional law

“The bill in its new edition contradicts not only the Latvian constitution, but also Latvia-related international documents, such as the Council of Europe’s framework convention on protection of minorities, that was adopted and ratified by the Latvian parliament in 2005,” stated Harmony’s letter, as quoted by TASS.   

The convention mentioned by lawmakers provides that persons who belong to ethnic minorities have the right to study their languages, and the right to found private educational establishments. It also obliges national governments to undertake measures to give minorities such opportunities, especially in areas where the share of such minorities is large.

“The conditions set out in the convention fully match the situation in Latvia and the passed bill contradicts the convention because it provides that in several years all schools for ethnic minorities, in particular for Russians, should be banned, despite of the fact that historically there are a lot of Russian speakers living on Latvia’s territory. Apart from that, it is discriminating people on the basis of their ethnicity,” stated the open letter.

The first educational reform in Latvia that seriously undermined the teaching of Russians in the country’s schools was launched in 2004. After mass protests, the authorities adjusted the recommended curriculum and now the law allows about 40 percent of subjects in be taught in Russian.

The only official language in Latvia is Latvian and passing a language test is a strict requirement for receiving the Latvian citizenship. This has resulted in a situation whereby hundreds of thousands of people have to live with a “non-citizen” passport. Most of those non-citizens are ethnic Russians and large shares of them are Belarusians and Ukrainians, but there are also Poles and Lithuanians. Non-citizens have no voting rights, they cannot serve in the Latvian military and police and are officially banned from working as civil servants, lawyers or pharmacy salespersons.

The Real Reason for the NATO Build-up in Poland and the Baltic States

Poland must target Kaliningrad, Moscow Metro & RT to deter Russian invasion – think tank

FILE PHOTO Members of Poland's special commando unit Lubliniec participate in the "Noble Sword-14" NATO international tactical exercise at the land forces training centre in Oleszno, near Drawsko Pomorskie, northwest Poland September 9, 2014 © Kacper Pempel / Reuters

You should know that this report comes from RT (Russia Today), a state-run news outlet. Nevertheless, it has some excellent information that you should be aware of.

Russia is unpredictable and may attack the Baltic states and Poland at any moment, so Warsaw should strengthen its military and be prepared to hit the city of Kaliningrad with missiles and shut down RT, a think tank with close ties to NATO has said.

Called ‘Arming for Deterrence’, the 25-page document released by the US-based Atlantic Council says what NATO in general and Poland in particular should do to “counter a resurgent Russia.” The threat of such an attack is imminent, the report states.

“Even if Moscow currently has no immediate intent to challenge NATO directly, this may unexpectedly change overnight and can be implemented with great speed, following already prepared plans. The capability to do so is, to a large extent, in place,” the report warns.

"Even if Moscow..." would seem to imply that the think tank is not aware of any such plans. Nevertheless, it feels the need for Warsaw to spend kazillions of dollars buying American-made weapons. I wonder where the funding for the Atlantic Council comes from? I wonder if its members have any shares in weapons manufacturers? Not that I think they may be the least bit disingenuous.

I don't doubt that there needs to be a deterrent to keep Russia from re-absorbing the Baltic States. Putin is ambitious and would love to see Russia return to the power and influence of its 'glory days' under communism. But as in communist days there is a certain paranoia that the west wants to invade and/or destroy Russia. It was fed by the KGB and their predecessors for the purpose of empire building - making the KGB enormously large and powerful. I think it is extremely unwise to feed that paranoia.

The council says a Russian invasion cannot be predicted as it could be triggered by anything from NATO being “distracted by another crisis” to Moscow’s “misperception of NATO’s activities and a miscalculation of the Alliance’s resolve.”

While being unpredictable, “Russia rarely disguises its true intentions,” according to the report. “On the contrary, it has proclaimed them very publicly on various occasions, but, in general, the West has chosen not to believe Russia’s declarations and disregards its willingness to carry them out.”

If Russia does invade, the alliance would be slow to respond, and Russia would try to achieve a fait accompli and use nuclear deterrence to prevent a full-scale war. The goal of Poland as the biggest NATO member close to Russia would be “to delay and bog down an invading force and inflict unacceptable damage on it,” according to the Atlantic Council.

“[NATO] force [in Poland] is not required to win the war, but it must be able to fight alongside the host-nation forces to buy NATO more time for reinforcement. NATO’s presence in the region is currently not large enough to achieve this,” the report said.

Swift reforms are needed if Poland wishes to be able to deter Russia, the report says, suggesting a number of measures for Warsaw to take. Many of them are focused on the Polish military and involves strengthening its numbers and purchasing modern new weapons, such as the US-made JASSM aircraft-launched cruise missiles, which could hit targets deep inside Russia, or the coastal NSM missiles, which can be placed in range of the Russian city of Kaliningrad.

Poland should also procure more multiple rocket launchers, attack helicopters, UAVs and other weapons, the report adds. These efforts would require streamlining the procurement process so that purchases were not stalled by Polish red tape, the report suggests.

All this spending would not allow Poland to withstand the hypothetical Russian onslaught, the report says, so the country should prepare its military for a guerrilla war by building a network of shelters in its wooded areas.

This reads almost like an infomercial. "You should spend half the country's GDP buying American weapons... they won't save you, but we'll make lots of money!"

“This shelter or bunker network, built with significant redundancies, would facilitate the deployment of ‘stay behind’ units. Poland’s military tradition in forest-based guerrilla warfare dates back to the 1830s. More recently, forest units resisted the Germans and Soviets from 1939 to the 1950s,” the council said.

Poland should also make several policy statements, according to the think tank. It should “aim to join the tactical nuclear capability scheme within NATO, so enabling its F-16s to be carriers of tactical nuclear ordnance”. It should also announce targets for potential cyber offensive operations, “which could include the Moscow metro, the St. Petersburg power network, and Russian state-run media outlets such as RT.”

Other advice from the Atlantic Council includes undermining any efforts by the EU to create its own military force, as it would switch resources to it from NATO.

“Any weakening of NATO cannot be countenanced, especially at this political juncture, and particularly with a putative British exit from the EU weakening the Union’s collective military posture outside of NATO,” the report said.

After the fall of the Iron Curtain and the collapse of communism which effectively brought an end to the Cold War, people began to question the need for NATO. Suddenly, a war popped up in Bosnia and NATO was in there like a dirty shirt. The questions regarding NATO's usefulness went away, and the billions (trillions?) of dollars spent on supporting it continued to flow to militaries and arms manufacturers when it could have been put to good use elsewhere.

It's curious why an American think-tank would try to discourage the formation of an EU military which would replace NATO. It could save the US an enormous amount of money. But then, the EU military would be more inclined to buy their weapons from Germany and France. Is this all becoming clear now?

Warsaw should also “find new incentives for its citizens to remain in Poland rather than emigrate to other EU countries,” the document said, adding that “Emigration has reduced Poland’s defense capacity by draining people of military age, often with the technical and information technology (IT) skills that Poland’s forces require.”

Poland and the Baltic states are among the more vocal advocates of an increased NATO military presence close to the Russian border, saying it is needed to deter alleged Russian aggression. The alliance agreed at a summit in Warsaw earlier in July to place additional rotating troops and hardware in Poland and the Baltic States, as well as to step up naval presence in the Black Sea and the Baltic Sea.

Russia denies having any intent to attack NATO and says the alliance is trying to justify its existence by drumming up anti-Russian rhetoric. Russia considers NATO’s military buildup in Europe a threat to its national security and accuses the West of reneging on a post-Cold War promise not to enlarge the alliance towards Russia’s borders.