European Union

The US Senate has followed the lead of the House of Representatives and approved by a large majority new sanctions against Russia. The corresponding legislation will now be presented to US President Donald Trump for signing. The EU Commission has threatened to react with countermeasures if Trump signs the measure into law. Europe's commentators view the developments with concern.

The EU Commission has shown understanding with Eastern Europeans who refuse to be fobbed off with supermarket products of inferior quality. The Commission now plans to develop guidelines banning double standards on food products. With this measure Brussels is reacting to a complaint brought by the Visegrád states. The media of these countries are full of praise for the initiative.

Bulgaria and Macedonia plan to sign a "good neighbours" agreement at the start of August. This is intended to mark the beginning of a new chapter in relations between the two countries. In concrete terms the construction of a new railway line is in planning. Bulgarian journalists are delighted.

EU regional policy spending accounts for about a third of the EU’s total budget. It is the EU’s main mechanism for financial redistribution. In addition to supporting jobs, economic growth, sustainable development and so on, one of its key stated aims is to underpin European solidarity. In this way it is a key part of the European integration project. This is why the Commission places a lot of emphasis on how its regional spending is communicated to citizens, and it’s why they are particularly concerned with how spending is perceived and making sure it is well publicized. For this reason, recipients of EU funds are required to acknowledge the EU’s contribution on public signage and in literature.

 

A Huggins family day out funded by EU regional policy…

 

Despite these efforts, communication of EU regional policy is far from perfect and awareness of EU spending varies significantly across the EU. To get a feel for how it is doing on this front, the European Commission sporadically looks at public opinion about EU regional policy through the Eurobarometer survey. The results of the latest survey were published last month. There are some interesting findings when looking at the UK.

 

In June 2015, just 9% of UK respondents said they had “heard about any EU co-financed projects to improve the area where you live”. This was the lowest level of awareness among any EU member state (the EU average was 34%, Poland had the top spot at 76%). In March 2017, however, this had doubled to 18%. This is still very low (though no longer the lowest), but on a percentage point basis this represents the joint highest increase (with Ireland) in the EU.

 

Large increases are found in other measures in the survey too. 35% had heard of the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) in March 2017 (EU28 average 28%), compared to 29% in June 2015. Again this 6 percentage point difference was the highest increase across the EU28.

 

27% said they were aware that EU funding fosters cross-border co-operation between regions (EU28 average 22%), up 13 percentage points from June 2015 and again the joint highest increase across the EU28.

 

Of the respondents who had heard of either the ERDF or Cohesion Fund, 22% felt they had benefited from an EU funded project (EU28 average 24%), up 12 percentage points from June 2015 and the second highest increase across the EU28.

 

What accounts for the increased awareness of EU regional policy in the UK between 2015 and 2017? The survey itself does not answer this question, but one obvious possibility is the EU referendum and Brexit. EU investment in UK regions was a feature of the referendum campaign, and was frequently linked to wider debates about the overall costs and benefits of the UK’s membership.  In this way Brexit may have given EU regional policy an unintended publicity boost.

 

The potential impact of this shouldn’t be over stated, though. At 18%, the overall level of awareness is still low and behind the EU average of 35%. Indeed, this overall lack of awareness might be part of the reason why areas which received relatively large amounts of EU investment (Wales, Cornwall, the north-east) nevertheless voted to leave. It is also entirely possible that increased awareness of EU funding may have had a negative impact on support for EU membership. There were, after all, many more respondents stating they had not benefited from an EU-funded project (65%) compared to those that said they had (22%). Nevertheless it may indicate that part of the solution to raising EU citizens’ awareness of EU regional spending may be to incorporate it into national discourses.

The post Brexit boost? Did the EU referendum improve the awareness of EU regional policy in the UK? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

The EU has added 3 Russian nationals and 3 companies involved in the transfer of gas turbines to Crimea to the list of persons subject to restrictive measures in respect of actions undermining Ukraine's territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence. 

The EU has not recognised the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol by the Russian Federation. As part of its non-recognition policy, the Council has prohibited the supply of key equipment for infrastructure projects in Crimea and Sevastopol in important sectors, including gas turbines in the energy sector. Establishing an independent power supply for Crimea and Sevastopol supports their separation from Ukraine, and undermines the territorial integrity, sovereignty and independence of Ukraine. Gas turbines are a substantial element in the development of new power plants. 

The 3 persons have been added to the sanctions list for their responsibility in supplying Crimea with gas turbines from Russia. The turbines were originally sold by Siemens for use in the territory of the Russian Federation. The subsequent transfer of the turbines to Crimea was in breach of contractual provisions covering the original sale by Siemens. The companies placed under sanctions are the contracting party which purchased gas turbines and is responsible for the transfer, the current owner of the gas turbines, and a company specialising in control and communication systems for power plants, including in Sevastopol and Simferopol.  

These sanctions consist of an asset freeze and a travel ban which will now apply to a total of 153 persons and 40 entities. The measures were introduced in March 2014 and were last extended in March 2017 until 15 September 2017. 

The legal acts, including the names of the persons and the statements of reasons for listing them, are available in the EU Official Journal of 4 August 2017. The Council adopted these legal acts by written procedure.  

Link to official journal 

Other EU measures in place in response to the Ukraine crisis include:   

• economic sanctions targeting specific sectors of the  Russian economy, currently in place until 31 January 2018; 
• restrictive measures in response to the illegal annexation of Crimea and Sevastopol, limited to the territory of Crimea and Sevastopol, currently in place until 23 June 2018.

DRAFT REPORT on Annual Report on Human Rights and Democracy in the World 2016 and the European Union’s policy on the matter
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Godelieve Quisthoudt-Rowohl

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

The Council has received 27 proposals by the member states, related to 23 cities, to host  the EU agencies currently based in the UK. There have been 19 offers to host the European Medicines Agency (EMA) and 8 for the European Banking Authority (EBA). All offers are available on the website of the European Council.

The two agencies will need to be relocated in the context of the UK's withdrawal from the EU. The future locations need to be decided by common agreement of the EU27 member states. On 22 June 2017, in the margins of the European Council (Article 50), the EU27 leaders endorsed a specific procedure for this decision. The first step was the submission of offers by the member states by 31 July 2017. 

European Medicines Agency

These are the cities proposed to host the EMA, as on 1 August 2017:

• Amsterdam (The Netherlands)
• Athens (Greece)
• Barcelona (Spain)
• Bonn (Germany)
• Bratislava (Slovakia)
• Brussels (Belgium)
• Bucharest (Romania)
• Copenhagen (Denmark)
• Dublin (Ireland)
• Helsinki (Finland)
• Lille (France)
• Milan (Italy)
• Porto (Portugal)
• Sofia (Bulgaria)
• Stockholm (Sweden)
• Malta (Malta)
• Vienna (Austria)
• Warsaw (Poland)
• Zagreb (Croatia)

The European Medicines Agency (EMA) is responsible for the scientific evaluation, supervision and safety monitoring of medicines in the EU. The EMA is essential to the functioning of the single market for medicines in the EU.

European Banking Authority

These are the cities proposed to host the EBA, as on 1 August 2017:  

• Brussels (Belgium)
• Dublin (Ireland)
• Frankfurt (Germany)
• Paris (France)
• Prague (Czech Republic)
• Luxembourg-City (Luxembourg)
• Vienna (Austria)
• Warsaw (Poland)

 The European Banking Authority (EBA) works to ensure effective and consistent prudential regulation and supervision across the European banking sector. Among other tasks, the EBA assesses risks and vulnerabilities in the EU banking sector through regular risk assessment reports and EU-wide stress tests.

Assessment criteria

The applications will be assessed on the basis of six criteria agreed by the 27 member states: 

• guarantees that the agency will be operational when the UK leaves the EU
• accessibility of the location
• schools for the children of the staff
• access to the labour market and health care for the employees' families 
• business continuity
• geographical spread

Next steps

The Commission will publish an assessment of the offers based on the agreed criteria by 30 September 2017. Ministers will have a political discussion based on the Commission's assessment in October 2017 in the margins of the General Affairs Council (Art. 50).

The decision will be taken in the margins of the General Affairs Council (Art.50) in November 2017 by a vote of the 27 ministers. All offers will be submitted to the vote unless they are withdrawn by the countries concerned. The vote will consist of successive voting rounds as needed, with the votes cast by secret ballot and each of the 27 member states having the same number of votes.

The year 2016 will go down in European history as a time of striving to maintain the political, systemic, and social unity of the European Union as a community of countries, people, and values. It was a time of uncertainty and highly visible failures. But it was also a year marked by real achievements.

Above all, the United Kingdom's vote in June to exit the EU stands out as a bitter disappointment. And yet  a new pan-European consensus on the protection the EU's external borders, together with the conclusion of the Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA) with Canada, warrants cautious optimism.

Most of the problems the EU has been grappling with for some time now have not been fully resolved. The migration crisis, tensions with Russia over Ukraine, and other external and internal security threats continue to test our unity and efficiency - and will continue to do so in the year ahead.

What we know from 2016 is that great change lies ahead - disconcerting, still unidentified, but nonetheless clearly palpable change. Indeed, the type of change that has been happening, and will happen in the future, is baffling political forecasters. It has been a long time since reality made such a cruel mockery of pundits and pollsters' predictions, even in the short-term context of upcoming elections or referenda. Politics has become as unpredictable as the weather in Brussels. And as with weather forecasts, if any predictions proved correct, it was the pessimistic ones.

The political tectonic shifts (and what else can one call the sudden drift of a huge island away from the continent?) now occurring are not just aftershocks of the financial crisis. Their source and essence are deeper than the anger of unemployed youth or the dissatisfaction with stagnant economic growth among European and American middle classes, although no sensible person would downplay these sentiments. But we all feel that these tremors may signal a more profound change: the end of an era, which in Europe could be called the Era of Great Stabilisation.

It is an era that has lasted 70 years, based on three pillars: an international order, in which the domination of the West commanded respect for rules and agreements, and which has protected Europe against global conflict; liberal democracy; and the relative prosperity of European societies.

The widespread anticipation of change should not frighten or, still less, paralyze us. As historians know all too well, it is stability, rather than crisis, that is transitional and short-lived. And, just as it is beyond our power to prevent crises, as they are inevitable by nature, it is not in our interest to cling to the status quo, as stabilisation sooner or later enters a phase of stagnation, when expectation of change becomes universal. This does not necessarily lead to catastrophe. But it may.

Everything depends on our collective ability to navigate stormy seas. The first prerequisite is to maintain the EU's basic unity. I will repeat this like a mantra: an internally broken EU will be incapable of rising to any of the challenges it faces, as will its member countries, including the largest.

The foundations of European solidarity remain fragile, and the real tests lie ahead. Without solidarity, Europe will have no influence over the direction of future changes, becoming their victim rather than their co-author. In order to avoid this bleak scenario, we must once again seek what connects us, what we have in common, what we are ready to defend with full determination, equal to that demonstrated by our opponents. We must once again define our territory, not geographically, but in a civilizational, cultural and perhaps even symbolical sense.

What we are observing today is that people, nations, and states are discovering the power of myth and simplification. This may foreshadow a politics, which is more brutal, rather closer to nature than to culture. The most important thing will be to distinguish accurately between what is shallow and unimportant in European tradition and what is lasting, valuable, and unique - what the historian Jacob Burckhardt called the freedom of spirit.

It is precisely in culture and freedom, where we will rediscover the essence of Europe. In politics this should mean that we must be prepared for change, on the condition that it does not restrict freedom as a core value. Before we overhaul the EU's structure, before we start solving fundamental dilemmas about the extent of integration, we must all agree that we want to carry the ideal of Europe as a continent of freedom from the past and into the future.

Today's world is full of barbarians, for whom freedom and culture, as we understand them, have become main targets of attack. Europeans will be able to overcome their current challenges only when we agree that we will not compromise in this confrontation. Symptoms of barbarity are around us, among us and within us. If we give in to external pressure and internal weakness, the coming changes may thwart Europe's most important political invention: the power of majority, the rule of law, and limited government, which only together guarantee human freedom and civil rights. This is why we must bravely and consistently defy those who stand up against our freedoms, whether from within or without.

https://www.project-syndicate.org/onpoint/europes-values-are-its-best-defense-by-donald-tusk-2017-01?barrier=accessyef

During the extended period of crisis and recession which has eroded more than a quarter of its gross domestic product, Greece has gone a long way towards correcting its severe macroeconomic imbalances and implementing the structural reforms necessary to achieve economic stability and growth.

During 2016 fading fears over a possible Greek departure from the euro, or ‘Grexit’, and the easing of capital controls have helped release the growth potential generated by the adjustment process, bringing the country closer to what seemed like a turning point towards recovery. In the third quarter of 2016 a strong rebound in private consumption, investment and exports pushed the country’s rate of change of real GDP to an eight-year high – up 2.0% against the corresponding quarter of the previous year. Substantial improvements were recorded across indicators related to industrial production, retail trade, business and consumer expectations, and labour market conditions.

Although these developments suggest that Greece is moving towards recovery, more recent trends in both GDP and key indicators underline persistant fragility.  Current provisional GDP data points to a fall-back to negative growth during the fourth quarter of 2016 while the latest economic sentiment, consumer and retail confidence indicators show signs of weakening, in reaction to the uncertainty induced by delays in the completion of the second review of the Greek bailout programme. Nevertheless, recent official forecasts from domestic and international institutions agree on a positive outlook for the Greek economy, with the European Commission estimating GDP growth at 2.7% in 2017 and 3.1% in 2018. Some of the requirements to fulfil these prospects are already in place, including improved competitiveness and considerable opportunities for investment and exports. But other crucial pre-conditions are yet to be satisfied, with decisive policy action urgently required from both Greece and Europe.

There are immediate policy changes that could curtail uncertainty and provide a much-needed liquidity boost to the economy, such as completion of the bailout review and the inclusion of Greek sovereign bonds into the European Central Bank’s quantitative easing programme. Progress with structural reforms and major privatisation projects could promote investment and signal positive change.

Finally, the importance of deciding on a set of medium-term debt relief measures cannot be emphasised enough. This will be crucial for restoring confidence in the Greek economy and adjusting primary surplus targets to levels compatible with a sustainable economic recovery. Although debt relief will undoubtedly require some difficult decisions to be taken, it will ultimately be in the interests not only of Greece but of Europe as a whole, enabling Greece to safeguard the interests of Europe in a volatile region.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC/Flickr – Michael Korcuska

The post Emerging economic recovery depends on urgent policy action appeared first on Europe’s World.

The term ‘development aid’ is no longer in fashion in Brussels. Burdened by its history and ineffective results, the preferred term now is – as observed at the European Development Days (EDD) held on 7‒8 June this year ‒ ‘partnership’: among and between countries and the European Union, as well as between members of civil society, private sector and NGOs.

This approach was also conveyed by the European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, and reaffirmed by the leaders and spokesmen of the African countries: the countries no longer want neo-colonialist programmes but instead ask for actions in which they are treated as equals.

In this year’s EDDs, the ‘Davos of cooperation’ as some call them, it was Italy that gained a prominent place: not only because many of our leading figures working on international cooperation attended the event and have been involved in the various discussions, but also because three years after the introduction of a new law on development cooperation (Law 125/2014), Italy seems to have the necessary equipment to keep pace with international trends.

And perhaps Italy is even capable of something more: not only it has the tools, such as a dedicated deputy minister, its contribution to the European Migration Compact and the recognition of the private sector as an actor of cooperation, but also the ambition to conduct wide-ranging action. Or at least it wants to try.

“Migration cannot be solved by investing funds that should be used to fight poverty to increase the number of border police and controls”

Some international issues create cross-cutting crises that require innovative ideas and experience from the field. Migration and development, and migration and security, are often two sides of the same coin.

The issue of migration to Europe from Africa cannot be solved by moving Europe’s borders to Africa, or by investing funds that should be used in the fight against poverty to increase the number of border police and controls. This plan shows its weaknesses under demographic pressure, hunger, drought and wars. And in any case, migratory flows always find openings through which to pass.

But there is one key fact which echoes all other pulling factors for migration: jobs – an  essential condition to limit migrants’ departures and to facilitate their integration into destination countries. The External Investment Plan (EIP) that the EU is implementing, and which could mobilise US$60bn to be allocated to companies that intend to invest in Africa, could be a great opportunity to create real jobs with the involvement of civil society and other local realities and institutions.

The same reality also applies to refugees. Those working in refugee camps know from experience that a cash-for-work project may help those who are staying for endless periods in camps in Lebanon, Jordan or Kenya (just to mention some of the many cases) to recover their own dignity. This is proven in detail by a project implemented in Lebanon with the support of Italian Development Cooperation.

Cash granted for a job, which is often of public interest, is useful for both Europe and the migrants’ countries of origin. In fact, this kind of approach prevents the dispersion of ‘human resources’, a precious capital for countries like Syria that one day, once the war is over, will have to relaunch with the help of its people. Those who fled to Europe during the conflict are not likely to return.

“Work without education has a poor future”

But work alone is not enough. Work without education has a poor future ahead, just as the opposite does. Education used as a mantra in cooperation, but it is not just about schooling, but about inclusivity: in addition to the transmission of technical skills, education must provide a precise ‘essence’. Just consider that even those recruiting violent extremists open schools and invest in some forms of training.

At AVSI, we try to summarise the definition as follows: accompanying young people to think critically and discover that the other ‒ someone of a different culture or religion, for example ‒ is good, and should not be perceived as an obstacle to get rid of.

This is the challenge of the Back to the Future project, funded by the MADAD fund, which AVSI and other partners are implementing in Lebanon and Jordan. Numbers help to understand the extent of this: 30,000 children involved in Lebanon, 10,000 in Jordan, with a total of 200,000 indirect beneficiaries.

Work and education undoubtedly deserve the maximum investment that can be allocated to development and security.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC/Flickr – European Commission DG ECHO

The post From development aid to partnership programmes and job creation appeared first on Europe’s World.