China‘s and Switzerland’s central banks have signed an agreement to make Zurich the newest hub for trading the renminbi currency (RMB).

Switzerland will receive a quota of RMB50 billion (CHF7 billion) to establish itself as a so-called RMB Qualified Foreign Institutional Investor, or RQFII, according to an announcement from the Swiss National Bank (SNB). Switzerland’s status as a “renminbi hub“ will give Swiss commercial traders the ability to make and clear direct trades with their Chinese counterparts in China.

The agreement suggests that a Chinese commercial bank may also establish itself in Switzerland in the coming months, since such a presence is necessary for renminbi clearing arrangements to take place.

The SNB called the agreement, which was reached on the sidelines of the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting in Davos, “a sign of fresh progress in bilateral financial cooperation between China and Switzerland.“

In July of last year, the SNB and the People’s Bank of China signed a preliminary renminbi swap agreement worth CHF21 billion. However, in the ensuing months, Luxembourg emerged as a competitor to Switzerland for RQFII status. Wednesday’s announcement clearly demonstrated Switzerland’s advantage over Luxembourg in this arena in the eyes of the Chinese and indicates a high level of trust between Switzerland and China.

Currently, around half a dozen countries, including Britain, Germany and France, hold RQFII status.

The post China Names Switzerland A Renminbi Hub appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Kemal Monteno: A Legend has died, but hope arises … does it?

It is really a pity how only pain can unite the area of South-East Europe! In the Spring of 2014 the flood of century united the area of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia and Serbia and on this January 21, unification went even further, after the death of the legend, a famous singer and song writer from Sarajevo, Kemal Monteno, who died at thr age of 66 at the Croatian hospital in Zagreb (Croatia) being from Sarajevo (Bosnia and Herzegovina).

Yes, within his soul you had everything what nationalistic exclusivity wanted, and even today want to destroy: identity of unification: a mixture of Catholicism (father – Italian) and Islam (mother – Bosnian Muslim) with the touch of the Ortgodox (through his wife – Bosnian Serb); altruism; love for the country(ies) – identification with the people of Slovenia, Croatia, Montenegro, Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia. In one word: the area of former Yugoslavia.

Today, all the major regional news agencies wrote about Kemal Monteno:

1. Daily DNEVNI AVAZ, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Federation BiH)
2. Daily NEZAVISNE NOVINE, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina (Republic of Srpska)
3. Daily POLITIKA, Belgrade, Serbia
4. Daily 24 SATA, Zagreb, Croatia
5. VIJESTI ONLINE, Podgorica, Montenegro
6. RTV SLOVENIA, Ljubljana, Slovenia

So, we should all again and again listen to his songs of love, unification and that lack any harsh and tough words of hatred and exclusiveness.

So, we should all re-think again, and try to be like “Kemo”, who united us once more – in pain.

So, we should put aside all the stupidity of everyday life of nationalism and mediocrity and instead try to focus at least, for once, on humanity. Kemal Monteno was a human. He belongs to everybody, to all of us — as we all should all belong to each other, regardless that we are from different “nations”.

Can we be like him? At least we must try to be.

Unfortunately, as of tomorrow, on above news links the hatred will, just in different size and volume, like a waves of destiny, again continue to destroy the already destructed humanity. Yugoslavia sent a message to the world once upon a time. The world did not listen. That is why the Balkanization virus is all around the world now.

And Kemal Monteno has died.

Even while he was singing a song titled, “We eternally swear that we will not deflect from your path” (singing about Josip Broz Tito, most noble dictator of Socialist Federal republic of Yugoslavia back in 1980, in the year of his death).

Humanity over here and beyond died long time ago.

The post South-East Europe On Edge Of Civilization: Depending On Who You Ask – Essay appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Arthur Berman

Exporting crude oil and natural gas from the United States are among the dumbest energy ideas of all time.

Exporting gas is dumb.

Exporting oil is dumber.

The U.S. imports almost half of the crude oil that we use. We import 7.5 million barrels per day. The chart below shows the EIA prediction that production will slowly fall and imports will rise (AEO 2014) after 2016.

This means that the U.S. will never be self-sufficient in oil. Not even close.

What about the tight oil that is produced from shale? That’s included in the chart and is the whole reason that U.S. production has been growing. But there’s not enough of it to keep production growing for long.

Here is a chart showing the proven tight oil reserves just published last month by the EIA.

Total tight oil reserves are 10 billion barrels (including condensate). The U.S. consumes about 5.5 billion barrels per year, so that’s less than 2 years of supply. Almost all of it is from two plays–the Bakken and Eagle Ford shales. We hear a lot of hype from companies and analysts about the Permian basin but its reserves are only 7% of the Bakken and 8% of the Eagle Ford.

Tight oil comprises about one-third of total U.S. crude oil and condensate reserves. The U.S. is only the 11th largest holder of crude oil reserves (33.4 billion barrels) in the world with only 19% of Canada’s reserves and 12% of Saudi Arabia’s reserves.

In other words, the U.S. is a fairly minor player among the family of major oil-producing nations. For all the fanfare about the U.S. surpassing Saudi Arabia in production of crude oil, we are not even players in reserves. What that means is that we may temporarily pass Saudi Arabia in production because it chooses to restrict full capacity, and U.S. production will fade decades before Saudi Arabia’s production begins to decline.

Let’s put all of this together.

• The U.S. will never be oil self-sufficient and will never import less than about 6 million barrels of oil per day.
• U.S. total production will peak in a few years and imports will increase.
• The U.S. is a relatively minor reserve holder in the world.

How does this picture fit with calls for the U.S. to become an exporter of oil? Very badly. For tight oil producers to become the swing producers of the world? Give me a break.

Perhaps we should send congressional proponents of oil export like Joe Barton (R-TX), Ted Cruz (R-TX) and Lisa Murkowski (R-AK) to “The Shark Tank” TV show to try to sell their great idea to the investors and judges.

I’m out.

Source: http://oilprice.com/Energy/Energy-General/Crushing-The-U.S.-Energy-Export-Dream.html

The post Crushing The US Energy Export Dream – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Saumitra Mohan*

Pragmatism informed by the appreciation of national interests seems to have given way to a garbled policy of compromising national security in favour of playing safe to avoid the accusations of ‘kickbacks’ in defence purchases. One really fails to understand as to why it took so long to comprehend the emergent need for replenishing our defence hardware, more so when the same has serious implications for national security.

The best that could have been done under the circumstances by the then decision-makers was to evolve a consensual policy in consultation with all the stakeholders to shop for the required military equipment and hardware. A transparent defence purchase policy predicated on a well-thought out guideline would have long done the needful in this regard. It is good that the new dispensation in New Delhi has finally seen through the problem to effect the necessary changes to keep our war machine fighting fit as the same was slowly becoming rusted for want of due care and nurturing it needed. After all, they rightly say, ‘if you want peace, it is better to prepare for war’.

As per the decision taken by the government, the operations of ‘representatives’, another term for agents or brokers, will now be officially recognised and allowed in defence purchases, something that could have been done long back. The fact remains that these ‘brokers’ have always been there and working behind the scenes to facilitate defence deals for governments across the world. However, the same has often complicated defence acquisitions over the years to the chagrin and detriment of the armed forces in this country. Such priggish thinking has at times tarred every ‘agent’ with the same brush, vilifying each of them as a crook of the first order who must be shunned at any cost.

Defence purchases in this country have continued languishing in the wilderness for want of timely decision to the extent that our arsenals were said to have become dangerously depleted. The state-of-affairs only got worse as the list of black-listed defence suppliers grew longer with every inquiry instituted to probe into such accusations. There came a time when it became really difficult to find a single established producer with credentials from whom military hardware could be procured.

Reportedly, former Indian Defence Minister George Fernandes attempted to put in place a system of ‘registered agents’, but the initiative did not go very far for want of clarity and response from stakeholders. Against this background, it would be rather premature to give a verdict on the success of the newly-drafted Modi-Parrikar formula, but the silver lining is the framing of a well-delineated policy backed by a clear thinking on the issue that has eventually accepted that defence agents are important facilitators in defence procurement.

The presence of ‘agents’ or ‘brokers’ is a hard reality across the world. Few defence deals could move without their doing the necessary facilitation that is deemed to be a very mechanical and specialised task – though the method of their payment still remains ambiguous and woolly in this country. Terms like ‘commission’ or ‘brokerage’ have become dirty expressions in defence lexicon, something that is integral to business and commerce in a laissez-faire economy in a globalised world.

After all, what problem should be there with commissions in a commercial deal to purchase defence hardware if the same is buttressed by a well-laid out transparent policy. After all, commissions are nothing for ‘remuneration’ paid for the services provided and promote a healthy competition that could actually work to our advantage in securing the best available deal. Have not we allowed brokerage or commissions in many other sectors of our economy and day-to-day life? If yes, why should we have any objection with the same when it comes to defence procurements?

One feels that as long as the defence deals and the cognate ‘commission’ are transparent and known to all the stakeholders, there should be no problem. The authorised, registered, commissioned, or empanelled ‘representatives’, ‘agents’ or ‘brokers’, whatever we may call them, can rightfully claim their ‘commission’ or ‘brokerage’ as offered by the suppliers as per declared pre-laid and pre-declared norms. The problem arises only when the alleged ‘sweetener’ is offered to an office holder (read a Minister or a bureaucrat) for their legal or illegal facilitation of the process, thereby vitiating the process.

Be it noted that while kickbacks in major deals have become ‘hot’ political issues, corruption is deeply entrenched in all the purchase processes down the line – be it footwear, foodstuffs or clothing. A perusal of the government or independent probes into corrupt deals will confirm the same. Hence, if New Delhi sincerely intends to effect a clean-up, the entire defence purchase architecture needs to change across the spectrum; and the same should be extended to other sectors of government operations as well.

* Saumitra Mohan
District Magistrate and Collector, Burdwan, West Bengal, India

The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect those of the Government of India.

The post India’s Defence Procurement: The Indigenisation Challenge – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Turkey’s Prime Minister Ahmet Davutoğlu called for national ministers to set aside their parochial interests and act in the broader interests of humanity. Speaking in the context of Turkey’s presidency of the G20, he told participants at the World Economic Forum’s 45th Annual Meeting that his country’s priorities are an inclusive approach to global growth, implementation of the decisions taken by the G20, and investment and trade.

“If we tackle the issues with a shared sense of responsibility, we will send a strong message,” he said.

The G20, which represents countries that account for more than 70% of global GDP, provides an unprecedented platform for policy coordination, he said. Over the next 12 months the goal is not only to lay the foundations for more robust growth but also to include the perspective of low-income developing countries, extending cooperation to include food security and nutrition.

On inclusiveness, the Turkish Prime Minister said he hoped to address the growing challenge of youth unemployment and to bring 100 million more women into the global workforce by 2025.

Davutoğlu hinted at past shortcomings in emphasizing the importance his presidency places on the actual implementation of decisions taken by the G20. “Trust and confidence among nations are essential if we are to take our shared agenda forward,” he said.

Investment, especially in infrastructure, is key to improving growth prospects. But growth strategies must take account of the threats posed by climate change. Describing inclusive growth as a priority for the G20, Davutoğlu spoke of the role that SMEs (small to medium enterprises) play in achieving sustainable development and the importance of creating the conditions in which they can flourish. He singled out trade as an area where trust is vital and is negatively affected when new bilateral trade agreements fail to take account of past commitments.

He told participants that Turkey is continuing to play the role of mediator and bridge-builder. “Turkey is well-placed to play this role because of its impressive economic achievements, self-confidence and democratic credentials,” he said.

The post Turkey’s Prime Minister Says Inclusiveness, Implementation And Investment Key Goals Of G20 Presidency appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Ukraine’s President Petro Poroshenko told participants at the 45th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting that despite the aggression his country faces, Ukraine is strong and unified. “Ukraine has become stronger. Ukraine has become more democratic. And Ukraine has become more European,” he said.

In a special session on The Future of Ukraine at the Annual Meeting, held from 21 to 24 January, Poroshenko said that last year’s presidential and legislative elections were free and fair. He added that these elections showed a highly unified country, while polls indicate that support is stronger than ever for the country’s territorial unity and for integration with the European Union.

Poroshenko said that last year was “the most difficult in our history”, with parts of the country occupied by foreign troops. However, he also saw strong motives for optimism that peace can be achieved. He noted that shelling has fallen dramatically since a December agreement that called for “artillery silence”.

Poroshenko asked for the international community to continue its support of Ukraine, with political solidarity, with economic aid, and with the provision of defensive military technology. “We are not only fighting for our territorial integrity and independence, we are fighting for European values,” he said.

Ukraine is fully committed to economic reform, Poroshenko said. “We want to create a new country, free from corruption, with independent courts and the rule of law. We want to build a new climate for investment.” The country is already cracking down on corruption with a new anti-corruption bureau, and it is reducing bureaucracy. It is working to achieve energy independence from Russia through a mix of conservation, new suppliers and a clear, transparent energy market that will increase domestic shale gas production.

Poroshenko said that in Davos he has received several promises of major investment, as well as many expressions of support for his country. “I am thankful for this support. It is what Ukraine needs,” he said.

In his speech introducing President Poroshenko, Klaus Schwab, Founder and Executive Chairman, World Economic Forum, said that the conflict’s costs, in human lives and economic resources, were increasingly unacceptable for both sides, and that he hoped the President’s participation in the 45th World Economic Forum would help show “how we, the international community, can assist you in your efforts”.

The post Ukraine’s President Poroshenko Reaffirms Country’s Unified, Democratic And European Nature appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Waleed Abu al-Khair

In the last two months of 2014, the “Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant” (ISIL) executed 116 foreign fighters in the Syrian provinces of al-Raqa, Deir Ezzor and al-Hasakeh who had joined the group but later wanted to return home, the Syrian Observatory for Human Rights said.

During this period, the group also killed four of its elements on other charges, said the monitoring group, which gets its information from a network of activists and professionals on the ground in Syria.

The issue of foreign fighters who join extremist groups in Syria and Iraq, then find the reality different from what they were led to believe, is not new.

From early 2013 to August 2014, the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation at King’s College London conducted interviews with more than 450 foreign fighters at the time in Iraq and Syria, a number of whom expressed deep regret over their travel abroad.

“We were pumped up with propaganda,” a foreign fighter, Abu Mohammed, using an alias, told the Centre in August.

Abu Mohammed said that he, along with scores of other British fighters, wants to return to the United Kingdom.

When he first travelled to Syria, he said, he was focused on fighting the regime. “But now it is just Muslims fighting Muslims. We did not come here for this.”

In a video that seeks to reflect this reality, a foreign fighter is shown taking his last breath, telling the story of what happened to him and expressing his remorse over going to Syria.

The fighter says, “I came to help our Syrian Muslim brothers. The bullet in my body was shot by my brothers, not the enemy. I used to think there was only one enemy. My blood is flowing onto the ground in Syria for nothing.”

The fighter continues, citing a verse from the Qur’an: “Fitna is worse than killing.”

He then addresses other fighters who like him were tricked into going to Syria and fighting in the ranks of extremist groups, telling them, “I am dying for no reason. Do not do what I did.”

‘Fitna worse than killing’

Sheikh Abdul Baqi al-Gizawi of the sharia research department at Egypt’s Dar al-Iftaa said the Qur’anic verse cited by the fighter in the video — “Fitna is worse than killing” — has two common interpretations.

“The first is the popular interpretation, in which the term fitna is interpreted as the act of driving a wedge between Muslims through the passing on of information or inciting them [against each other], while the sharia and jurisprudential interpretation — according to a consensus among a large number of scholars, past and present — says fitna results from a misinterpretation and distortion of the principles of sharia,” al-Gizawi said.

“The meaning of fitna, as it pertains to the Syrian situation and in ISIL’s case specifically, is the refutation of sharia, and misinterpretation and distortion thereof, that leads to polytheism, and this in fact is what is being done by the terrorist groups in Syria and Iraq, which are distorting the Qur’an and hadith to serve their own goals,” he told Al-Shorfa.

This led to bloody confrontations among the armed groups in Syria, and to the takfir of all those who oppose the views of those groups, and the execution or application of hadd punishment against them, he said.

“The killing of civilians under the pretext of hadd is also a form of fitna, because those who are issuing these rulings have no legitimate authority to do so,” al-Gizawi said.

“Fitna that leads to the killing of Muslims is a form of polytheism, and therefore in the eyes of God is more serious than killing because it spreads through and permeates communities, often with disastrous consequences,” he said.

‘Distortion of Islam’

In the same vein, Al-Azhar professor of sharia and law Mahmoud al-Jabali described the “mutual-takfir” campaign carried out in Iraq and Syria among ISIL, al-Nusra Front (ANF) and other extremist groups — which exploit and distort the teachings of Islam and incite Muslims to kill Muslims — as “one of the most serious forms of fitna that could occur among Muslims”.

“Both the killer and the victim were tricked into coming to Syria under the pretext of ‘jihad for the cause of God’,” he said.

“But the majority of foreign fighters are surprised that their bullets are directed at other opposition fighters,” either unknowingly or after being brainwashed with the notion that what they are doing has religious motive, he added.

Al-Jabali said the only beneficiaries from the spread of the infighting are the emirs of ISIL and other groups that are taking advantage of these conditions to expand on the ground and impose their control.

Political researcher Abdul Nabi Bakkar, a professor at Al-Azhar University’s faculty of sharia and law, said that “in examining the course of the fighting in Syria, we find that internal conflicts dominated the general scene and increased dramatically after the emergence of ISIL due to the takfir campaigns the group launched and targeted at all opposition factions without exception, even those that identify themselves as having an Islamic orientation.”

The war in Syria has been transformed from a war between the opposition and the regime to a war among the armed opposition groups because of the fitna ISIL sowed among the ranks of these fighters, Bakkar said.

“The major massacres took place in both Syria and Iraq, and most were carried out against Muslims, most notably the Camp Speicher massacre in Iraq [carried out by ISIL], which left more than 700 Muslim Iraqis dead,” he said.

In Syria, the biggest massacres were carried out against the Sunni Shaitat tribe, “whose members dared to stand up to ISIL”, Bakkar said, adding that the group also is waging a bloody war against Iraqi and Syrian Kurds in Syria’s Kobani region.

The post Islamic State Executes Foreign Fighters Trying To Quit appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Adam Dick

A handful of bipartisan members of the US House of Representatives, in a short Tuesday afternoon session preceding the State of the Union speech, passed by voice vote a resolution (H.Res. 37) using the killings in Paris on January 7-9 to justify war. In particular, the resolution reaffirms the US government’s commitment to fighting the Global War on Terror, praises France for its foreign interventions in the Middle East and Africa, and calls on the governments of all nations “to join a global effort to combat violent extremist ideologies and terrorist groups.”

This is the first House vote following through on House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy’s (R-CA) desire, expressed the day of the killings at the Paris office of Charlie Hebdo, to use the killings to justify the US recommitting to fighting wars around the world.

The resolution’s “resolved” clauses regarding foreign intervention follow:

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—
….
(5) appreciates and supports France’s continuing efforts to combat terrorism and promote stability throughout the Middle East and West and North Africa;

(6) appreciates France’s contributions to the multilateral effort to destroy the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant;

(7) recognizes the growing threat posed by radical Islamist terrorist groups worldwide and reaffirms the commitment of the United States to the multilateral, global fight against such violent extremists;

(8) calls upon all nations to join a global effort to combat violent extremist ideologies and terrorist groups; …

Read the complete resolution here.

The post US House Passes Resolution Using Paris Killings To Justify Global War On Terror – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Hasan Selim Ozertem

The gradual rise in the complexity of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014 has necessitated a multidimensional review of relations between Russia and the West. Current circumstances have sparked the emergence of new parameters in the EU-Russia-Turkey Triad with regard to energy policy.

The gradual rise in the complexity of the Ukrainian crisis in 2014 has necessitated a multidimensional review of relations between Russia and the West. While increasing the depth and scope of sanctions against Russia, the EU was also busy formulating new strategies that are to shape its relations with Moscow through 2020.

In this respect, the EU’s revised energy policies actually represent the demarcation of its relations with Russia, which up until then had largely been characterized by the former’s dependency on the latter. Moreover, questions of resource efficiency and supply security came to occupy top positions of the agenda in Brussels. These changes have paved the way for the EU’s reassessment of its existing structure and prompted the emergence of new equations within the EU-Russia-Turkey Triangle.

Stress tests and the growing importance of the Southern Corridor

The EU Commission’s Energy Security Strategy released on 28 May 2014 differentiated EU-wide energy policies between those with short and medium term outlooks. Hereunder, short term measures outlined in the document included “stress tests” that were aimed at evaluating the extent of risks faced by EU members in terms their dependency on Russian gas. Following these assessments, it was to be decided to what extent the following actions should be taken: i) increasing gas stocks, ii) developing new systems that enable reverse flows, iii) reducing short-term energy demand, and iv) expanding the use of renewable energy technologies.

Concurrently, the Commission decided to perform a simulation that would allow for an evaluation of the possible consequences of a six-month interruption of the gas flow coming from Russia in the case that the country opted to cut off its supply of gas to the EU or if a problem were to arise in the transportation of gas through Ukraine.

Announced on 16 October, the results of the stress tests revealed that Eastern European countries and non-members of the EU’s Energy Community were the most vulnerable to such dramatic fluctuations. It was also shown that even after necessary gas swaps within the EU and the Energy Community, all relevant countries, excluding Ukraine, would still need 5-9 billion m3of natural gas to fulfill their energy needs. Additionally, the results of the stress tests showed that cooperation between member states was necessary to avoid the outright collapse of EU solidarity in times of crisis.

As for the policies exhibiting a medium term perspective, achieving a common EU energy policy, diversifying supplier countries, and creating more efficient market dynamics came to the forefront. On the subject of a common EU energy policy, former Prime Minister of Poland Donald Tusk’s concept of the Energy Union became rather popular. Here, it is expected that Tusk’s accession to the Presidency of the Council of the European Union will help to progress this vision.

In April, Tusk remarked that the EU should bear 75 percent of the costs which are needed to develop the natural gas infrastructures of its member countries, while also providing some valuable insight on liaising in the case of crisis.

It is obvious that every ounce of progress that is made in this very sensitive realm will ultimately strengthen the supra-national structure of the EU and ease the creation of a common energy policy. For now, the EU’s tensions with Russia act as a propulsive force, but considering the limited influence of the EU’s institutions on member states, only time will tell to what extent these policies will be realized. In this regard, “diversifying suppliers”, which is one of the medium term goals of the new strategy, can function as an important test.

Remembering that the Commission suspended the South Stream project pending its adherence to EU law in the May strategy document, and also considering that Russia later withdrew from cooperating with the EU in this regard, the Southern Corridor, of which Turkey is a key player, has become a crucial alternative that has the great potential to actualize the EU’s goal to diversify suppliers. Realizing this, the EU is prepared to take the necessary steps to expedite the development of the Southern Corridor, underscoring that 10 billion m3 of gas could be transported in the initial stages of the project. With later investment in the infrastructure of the Corridor, it is foreseen that 25 billion m3 of gas could be delivered to the EU from the Middle East and the Caspian regions via Turkey.

With the EU’s renewed interest in this southern route, discussions have arisen on increasing the transportation capacity of the Trans-Anatolian Natural Gas Pipeline (TANAP) to 31 billion m3 seeing that 6 billion m3 would be needed by Turkey and 25 billion m3 by the EU. However, some analyses have claimed that the flow of gas from Azerbaijan would not be sufficient enough to allow TANAP to operate at such a capacity.

With these medium to long term considerations in mind, the May strategy also mentions the possibility of including Iran, right along with alternatives such as Turkmenistan and Iraq, in the Southern Corridor depending upon the loosening of sanctions imposed on the country. In the case that all of these source countries are included in the Southern Corridor, the expected volumes will naturally increase, and thus, Turkey may come to host the fourth principle artery of the EU’s energy supply, with the others entering the EU from the North Sea, Africa, and by land from Russia.

Nonetheless, for this to become a reality, the quality of both Turkey and the EU’s relations with suppliers will be of critical important. Overcoming the current political obstacles and achieving a straightforward model of cooperation are directly related to the EU’s success in harmonizing the political will of the member states with Tusk’s concerted principle of the Energy Union.

Is there room for new Russia-EU projects?

The EU’s distrust of Russia and its efforts to develop a new energy strategy have prompted Russia to reevaluate its future energy prospects. A combination of competitive conditions and political factors has come to pose an obstacle to Russia’s access to the European market. In the meantime, Moscow has signed new treaties with Beijing. Thus, while the EU has once again decided to diversify its energy resource suppliers, Russia has begun to hasten the diversification of its market strategy.

Here, when Russia’s expectations about the South Stream project were not met, a rapid turn of events took place. In his visit to Turkey, Vladimir Putin shocked all parties involved by declaring that Russia would cancel the South Stream pipeline project that would have passed through Bulgaria. The second shock came with the Russian leader’s declaration that Russia had decided to construct another pipeline, yet this time through Turkey.

However, some questions remain unanswered and uncertainty as to what strategy will be pursued by Russia have come to the fore. It is proposed that the new pipeline would enter the EU from Turkey via Greece, yet experts question how Russia will overcome the EU legal regulations in Greece that are in fact the same as those that caused problems in the construction of the South Stream that was to enter the EU via Bulgaria. In this regard, President of Gazprom Aleksey Miller has indicated that the energy giant could establish a new company called Gazprom Russkaya charged with constructing the new pipeline, yet exactly how the Kremlin will overcome these constraints outlined in the EU’s Third Energy Package is still unclear. Nonetheless, the establishment of such a company could actually allow Russia to pursue different methods in selling its gas to Europe. Here, it can be said that Gazprom, and the Kremlin, are working on formulas that bypass existing legal regulations of the EU.

What’s next?

Putin’s statements have given credence to analyses that argue Moscow is determined to bypass Ukraine in sending gas to the EU. On the other hand, current uncertainties have triggered many debates as to whether or not Russia’s behavior constitutes a political maneuver to halt the West’s efforts to isolate the country.

The question of “how Russia will realize this new multibillion dollar project in an environment in which oil prices are plummeting” should not be understated. Yet, Putin’s assertion that Turkey could become an energy transport hub of Russian gas to the EU has aroused excitement. Nonetheless, he also stated to the press that Greece could assume this role if the EU so allows, thus causing a whirlwind of confusion. Here, although the name Turkish Stream has been thrown around for the new pipeline, it can be said that Russia is trying to develop new political leverage by instrumentalizing the possibility of Greece’s inclusion in the game.

Moreover, before the hopes of Turkish Stream become any stronger, it should be noted that the route of the new pipeline actually remains unclear. Firstly, Putin has mentioned Southern Europe, naming Turkey-Greece-Macedonia-Serbia and Austria. In this respect, it seems that Russia has not given up on the Eastern Europe market, and that it is in reality trying to set a new balance by way of political maneuver.

Considering the current state of affairs, pipeline routes will be evaluated differently in 2015. Turkish Stream is sure to occupy the agenda this year, and sooner or later it will be seen if Russia is serious about creating a new route in order to debilitate Ukraine. However, it should be remembered that, in order to achieve this, there are many meetings that still need to be set, a sizeable amount of money that still needs to be found, and legal obstacles that still need to be dealt with.

Furthermore, Turkey and Azerbaijan need to start constructing TANAP by the spring of 2015. If this happens, TANAP, one of the most important elements of the Southern Corridor, will be completed by 2020. However, security considerations in the Caucasus and changes in the oil market must also be taken into consideration. Lastly, it should be noted that while Russia moves at a rapid pace to diversify its market strategy, as seen in the agreement it struck with China, the EU still needs to develop concrete steps that go beyond being flash strategies jotted down on paper. The EU’s performance will surely show the extent to which the new faces of the EU such as Donald Tusk, Jean-Claude Juncker, and Federica Mogherini prioritize a comprehensive energy security strategy that simultaneously manages EU-Russian relations.

The post New Energy Supply Security Dynamics Of EU-Russia-Turkey Triad – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Masood Ahmed*

The steep decline in oil prices presents new economic realities for countries in the MENA region. Global oil prices have declined by more than half from their peak last summer, to levels not seen since a short period in 2009. The combination of unexpectedly higher oil production from unconventional sources, weak global demand, and the decision of OPEC to maintain their production levels has led to both a sharp price decrease and uncertainty about how long the current trend will last. Where prices will eventually settle is, of course, uncertain, making it hard for policymakers to gauge how much of the shock is temporary in nature and what share of it they should expect to last. What is clear, however, is that lower oil prices present economic challenges for oil exporters in the region, while benefits for oil importers remain contained.

MENA oil exporters are now faced with large export and government revenue losses. In our upcoming Regional Economic Outlook Update, we estimate that in the countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council alone, oil and gas export losses will amount to around 300 billion US dollars this year. And all oil exporters in the region, with the exception of Kuwait, will now have to dip into their accumulated savings or borrow to finance deficits in their government budgets for this year.

Fortunately, most oil exporter governments have the resources to avoid a steep reduction in their spending plans for this year, and it is likely that they will choose to do so, thus limiting the immediate impact on growth and living standards for their populations.

But foreign asset buffers are exhaustible and many MENA oil exporting countries will empty their buffers within a few years if policies remain unchanged and if oil prices stay low. Therefore, the time is right for these countries to re-assess their medium-term spending plans and target a gradual but decisive adjustment to lower oil prices. Reducing capital expenditure in a phased manner will probably be unavoidable given the magnitude of the task, but preference should generally be given to reining in recurrent expenditures and reducing generalized energy subsidies, which remain large in many countries even with the new lower oil prices. In addition, lower oil prices could present incentives to craft new plans, or rekindle longstanding existing ones, to raise non-oil revenue collection.

With a more constrained fiscal outlook over the next few years, growth models of the past decade that were anchored in rising government spending may no longer be sufficient. Instead, the challenge will be to enable the private sector to become a much more self-sufficient engine of growth. This will require reorienting incentives toward export-driven production of goods and services, for instance by reducing barriers to competition and stepping up trade facilitation and export promotion policies. Similarly, in many countries it will be important to enable nationals to participate more in the private sector labor market to avoid pressures on governments to play the role of employer of first and last resort, a role they will find much harder to maintain in a world of lower oil prices.

In contrast to the oil exporting countries, the fall in oil prices provides welcome relief to the region’s oil importers. Their energy import bills are reduced, pressures on government budgets will ease to reflect the lower cost of energy subsidies and, where lower energy costs are passed on to companies and consumers, they lower production costs and raise disposable income.

However, in most oil-importing countries, gains from lower oil prices are being offset by other factors. A deteriorating outlook for demand in the euro area and the GCC, along with the drop of prices for non-oil commodities which some countries export, will erode some of the windfalls from lower oil import bills. Even so, growth prospects for MENAP (the Middle East, North Africa, Afghanistan and Pakistan) oil importers in 2015 are expected to show a significant improvement over 2014 (nearly 4 percent compared with 3 percent last year), and their budget and balance of payment positions will also show some improvement.

Welcome though the relief from lower oil prices is, it is important to recognize that the future course of oil prices remains highly uncertain. Thus, countries would be well-advised to avoid entering into spending commitments that would be hard to reverse if oil prices returned to higher levels or in the face of other adverse developments. The key is to use this period of lower oil prices to step up the reform efforts that would support faster and more inclusive growth and create better jobs for the population.

*Masood Ahmed, Director of the IMF’s Middle East and Central Asia Department.

This article was first published in “Asharq Al-Awsat” and released by the IMF.

The post The Boon And Bane Of Cheaper Oil – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

The worldwide community has split over the Charlie Hebdo issue No. 1178, originally printed at 3 million copies. However, the increased demand caused the journal to increase the print run 5 million, later – 7 million copies. The “survivors’ issue” released on January 14, 2015, featured a cover cartoon that depicted the Prophet Mohammad holding a “Je Suis Charlie” sign, titled “Tout est pardonné” (All is forgiven).

This was the first issue of the French magazine since the brutal January 7 attack. Only a few hours after the release of the previous issue that featured the drawing of Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, leader of the Islamic State radical group, two armed men burst into the Charlie Hebdo headquarters. 12 people, including two policemen and editor-in-chief Stephane Charbonnier, were killed in the attack.

Over 2 million people condemned the act of terrorism and shown their solidarity with Charlie Hebdo during Republican marches that took place on January 11. At the same time, leaders and representatives of Muslim communities in France, Britain, Canada, US, United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and other countries stated the attack completely violates the Islamic ideals.

However, the cover of the “survivors’ issue” has caused massive public outcry and numerous protests in Pakistan, Niger, Algeria, Turkey, Lebanon, Palestine, Sudan, Russia and other countries, with demands to stop discrimination against Muslims. The protesters also denounced the strategy chosen by Charlie Hebdo that deepens the hatred between nations and religions.

Uwe Halbach, Senior Associate at Eastern Europe and Eurasia research division of the German Foundation for Science and Politics, expressed his skepticism about the decision to publish the “survivors’ issue” with a cartoon of the Prophet Mohammad on the cover.

“I am on the side of solidarity for ‘Charlie Hebdo’ and totally on the side of giving a clear message to religious violence. But I would say we have to accept that a caricature of the prophet [Muhammad] is a serious challenge for any Muslim,” he stressed.

According to the expert, the attack against the satirical magazine has absolutely no justification; however, the event must become a start for the public debate on whether certain actions are morally acceptable.

“I think we have to think about the degree of provocation, of insult, which can come even from satire. “I am also a partisan of the freedom of speech, but we should think about how far it goes in insulting others. For me personally, there are certain lines,” Uwe Halbach explained.

At the same time, Johann Bihr, head of Eastern Europe and Central Asia Desk of Reporters Without Borders, clarified that Charlie Hebdo did not abuse its freedom of expression from the legal point of view.

According to rights activist, the content published by the magazine are fully compliant with norms and statements of the European Convention of Human Rights, and Article 19 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.

“An important thing to note is that ‘Charlie Hebdo’ is a satirical paper. By definition, cartoons and satire imply excess insolence, sometimes a share of exaggeration, irony, et cetera. The European Court of Human Rights has repeatedly stressed that these are parts of freedom of expression, that freedom of expression includes the rights for cartoons to sometimes go further than what people are used to see. Freedom of expression includes not only the ideas that are widely welcomed or accepted, but also the ideas that shock, that worry the majority of the population of a certain country,” he said.

According to Johann Bihr, this position is further supported by the decision made by the French authorities during a February 2007 court process that began when Charlie Hebdo reprinted the notorious Mohammad cartoons first published by the Danish newspaper Jyllands-Posten in 2006. The Paris court decided that the magazine did not violate the law and simply used its freedom of speech.

At the same time, the expert noted that the events in France created “very interesting questions on the boundaries and the mutual relations between the right to free expression and the right to religion.”

In his turn, Jean-Marie Fardeau, France Director of Human Rights Watch, stated that HRW condemns the acts of terrorism and urges the authorities to punish the attackers. However, he warned that the attacks must not be used as a cover for introducing limitations to the freedom of speech or violating human rights under the pretext of protecting the public.

“The only line not to be crossed is call for violence against minorities, people, individuals,” the human rights activist reminded in an interview to “PenzaNews” agency.

At the same time, the expert explained that every journalist bears responsibility for his or her material and chooses whether it should be published under current circumstances.

Jean-Marie Fardeau condemned the Charlie Hebdo attack and stressed that such an atrocity has no absolutely justification.

“There are many means to protest against cartoonists or journalists – either through justice, trial, or by combating through other media. Violent attacks against journalists – harassment, beatings or killings – are unacceptable,” he added.

Meanwhile, Mattia Toaldo, Policy Fellow for Middle East and North Africa at the European Council of Foreign Relations (ECFR), said the way Muslims all over the world reacted to the January 7 shooting has great importance.

“They distanced themselves from these attacks, which have nothing to do with Islam. I think isolating these people [extremists] politically and culturally is very important,” the expert said.

In his opinion, freedom of speech must have certain limits to eliminate any potential of abusing it for inciting violence and discrimination against others.

“I am not sure there are universal guidelines. I think a lot of this has to do with the wisdom of each individual, and should not be enforced by law. If there is a population that is discriminated in a particular society, making jokes about that population is particularly heavy,” Mattia Toaldo said, adding that similar cartoons aimed at African Americans would cause great outburst of critique and anger in the United States.

At the same time, he greatly stressed that using violence against journalists is never acceptable.

“Whatever is in that paper, it will never justify the attack,” the ECFR Policy Fellow said.

John Laughland, Director of Studies at the Institute of Democracy and Cooperation in France, holds the same position.

“I think no reasonable person would regard murder as the appropriate response to an offensive cartoon,” he noted.

At the same time, he suggested that Charlie Hebdo strategy sometimes balanced on the brink of what is acceptable.

“They claim that they have the right to insult religions and people’s religious feelings. I think that they did cross the line. When we talk about freedom of expression and freedom of speech, we mainly think about the right to express a political opinion and the right to put information into the public domain. Charlie Hebdo was not putting any information into the public domain; it was not expressing a political view or taking part in a political debate. It was simply publishing cartoons whose purpose was to shock people and shock religious sensibilities,” the expert explained, saying that the journalists themselves called their magazine “irresponsible.”

At the same time, he reminded that Charlie Hebdo satire was mostly aimed at Catholicism, and noted that certain acts of expression do attract attention from the law.

“Last year, a comedian was prevented by the public authorities from insulting the memory of the Holocaust in France. So there are clear examples even in France of the law being used to restrict freedom of expression when it is a matter of insulting things which people hold sacred. It just so happens that Charlie Hebdo was never prosecuted. But if you insult the memory of the Jewish Holocaust or the Jewish religion, then I think the reactions would be very different,” John Laughland clarified.

However, he stressed that even such acts can and must never be punished by brutal terrorist attacks.

“I am not saying for a minute that the journalists there [provoked] their deaths, they certainly did not. And I condemn, like everybody, in the strongest possible terms the act of Islamic barbarism which was carried out in France,” said the expert.

Nadezhda Azhgikhina, Secretary of the Journalists Union of Russia, Vice-President of the European Journalists Association, also stressed this point.

“Our colleagues died. I doubt that thousands of people who went out to the streets of European cities, cities all over the world, including Russia, were all avid supporters of the magazine. But they all were strongly against the slaughter of journalists, and paid respects not only to the French cartoonists, but many other journalists who lost their lives in the last few years. It does not matter what radical ideas they had, and it is completely unimportant whether they were religious, atheists, communists, pacifists or not. They were killed, and it is the worst thing. This may not and will not be left without any reaction from their colleagues and all people. It is a point of no return,” she reminded.

According to the expert, the issue of limitations to freedom of speech is highly intricate, and most countries solve it using established moral norms, media self-regulation, and public opinion.

“One of the cornerstones of media ethics in any and all countries is ‘Thou shalt not harm.’ Freedom of speech in journalism is inseparable from responsibility. Mostly the balance is preserved by moral norms developed through a discussion between the professional community and the public. The law may not account for all details and particularities,” explained the Secretary of the Journalists Union of Russia.

From her point of view, numerous countries, including Russia, has great need in a public debate on this highly problematic issue.

“It is high time to speak about what the journalism theory, the journalists, and, by the way, the audience – they are also involved in the media – can say about our profession, about the role of reporters in the process of depicting and improving our life,” Nadezhda Azhgikhina stressed.

Source: Penza News

The post New Charlie Hebdo Issue: Finding Balance Between Rights And Morals In Media – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Lundin Petroleum said Wednesday that its wholly owned subsidiary Lundin Norway AS has been awarded eight exploration license interests in the 2014 Norwegian Licensing Round (Awards in Predefined Areas, APA).

The awarded licenses include six licenses in the North Sea, one license in the Norwegian Sea and one license in the Barents Sea. Six of the awarded licenses will be operated by Lundin Petroleum.

The license interests are detailed below.

License Lundin Norway AS, license interest
PL778 (Block 15/6)*: 40% – Central North Sea
PL779 (Block 16/1): 20% – Central North Sea
PL674CS (Block 26/10)* 35% – Central North Sea
PL678C (Blocks 25/3, 6): 20% – Central North Sea
PL579B (Block 33/5)*: 50% – Northern North Sea
PL789 (Blocks 33/5, 6)*: 40% – Northern North Sea
PL700B (Block 6407/10)*: 40% – Norwegian Sea
PL805 (Blocks 7120/2, 3 & 7121/1)*: 40% – Barents Sea

*operator Lundin Norway AS

Lundin Petroleum is a Swedish independent oil and gas exploration and production company with a portfolio of world-class assets primarily located in Europe and South East Asia. Lundin Petroleum has proven and probable reserves of 187.5 million barrels of oil equivalent (MMboe).

The post Lundin Petroleum Awarded Eight Licenses In Norwegian Licensing Round appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Miguel Otero-Iglesias*

Finally, some good news for the Eurozone. The Advocate General of the EU’s Court of Justice (ECJ), the Spaniard –but European as to his official duties– Pedro Cruz Villalón has declared that the ECB’s Outright Monetary Transactions (OMT) programme (which gives it the power to buy unlimited amounts of government bonds in the secondary markets) might be legal under certain conditions. The use of the conditional here is important because the ‘opinion’ of the ECJ’s Advocate General is only a recommendation and hence, although in 90% of the cases the ECJ follows his advice, is not legally binding.

The ECJ, which has its headquarters in Luxembourg, will publish its verdict in the autumn. If it follows Cruz Villalón’s recommendation and ultimately the German Constitutional Court –which doubted the OMT’s legality in the first place– accepts the decision, this would be a big step towards the Euro’s ‘irreversibility’. The OMT saved the common currency at the peak of the Euro crisis in the summer of 2012 when Spain –which was too big to fail and too big to be rescued– asked the European Stability Mechanism for a €100 billion rescue credit-line to bail out its banking system.

Shortly after that, in July 2012, Mario Draghi uttered his much-quoted statement that the ECB will do ‘whatever it takes’ to save the euro, and after the summer he outlined the conditionality attached to the OMT programme. The countries that would require OMT purchases would need to negotiate a rescue programme with the ESM and accept the reform plans drawn up and supervised by the Troika (in other words, they would need to give up part of their economic sovereignty).

In addition to conditionality, the ECJ’s Advocate General now adds his own conditions, which are all controversial and will spark considerable debate: (1) the use of the OMT needs to be proportional (an ambiguous term that will trigger an intense debate between lawyers and economists); (2) The ECB needs to provide a proper legal and detailed reasoning for its support (this might be advisable, but sometimes –in order to prevent market panic– a central bank cannot disclose all it knows); and (3) if an OMT programme finally takes place, the ECB cannot be part of the Troika.

This makes a lot of sense. The ECB is the only institution in charge of monetary policy (and in this respect both European and national –even German– judges should themselves refrain from interfering because they lack the necessary expertise and experience in this domain, Cruz Villalón argues), but when it comes to economic policy the ECB has no competence whatsoever. Thus, it should not be at the negotiating table as part of the Troika with the democratic representatives of the Eurozone member states that are in financial need.

However, excluding the ECB from the Troika can be problematic. First, fiscal, economic and monetary policies are not watertight compartments. This is the reason why in the US the Secretary of the Treasury and the Governor of the Federal Reserve meet on a regular basis. Dispensing with the ECB’s expertise from the Troika would be to short-change it. Especially after the creation of the Single Supervisor, the Eurosystem is the institution that is best informed about the state of the financial sector in a given country, and thus it can hardly be a good idea to do without its input.

Is it possible to assess the state of an economy, and to decide how to fix it, without taking into account the credit system? Certainly not. Europe should avoid falling into the trap of becoming too legalistic and dogmatic about how best to deploy its macroeconomic policy.

The second concern is that throughout the Euro crisis the ECB has been the only institution which has looked at it from a truly European perspective. In fact, the IMF is not a European institution and the Commission has all too often done the bidding of the most powerful member states, such as France and Germany. Undoubtedly, the ECB lacks the democratic legitimacy necessary to decide on the economic policies of member states, and this needs to be remedied. But do the IMF, the Commission, the EFSF or even the Eurogroup have such a legitimacy? Again, not really.

The reality is that because the Eurozone does not have a democratically legitimised European treasury –which should do the job of supervising the rescue programmes– the ECB has been forced to fill the gap. The solution, therefore, cannot be to take the ECB out of the picture without creating a legitimate institution to fulfil that necessary role.

*Miguel Otero-Iglesias is Senior Analyst at the Elcano Royal Institute | @miotei

Source: Elcano Royal Institute

The post Beware Of Taking The ECB Out Of The Troika – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Spain’s Minister for Home Affairs, Jorge Fernández Díaz, met on Wednesday morning with the Georgian Home Affairs Minister, Aleksandre Chikaidze. This is an unprecedented meeting as it is the first time that a Georgian Home Affairs Minister has visited Spain; and similarly there is no previous precedent of a trip by a Spanish Home Affairs Minister to Georgia.

At the meeting, held at the headquarters of the Spanish Ministry of Home Affairs in Madrid, the two ministers tackled issues relating to matters of police cooperation, the fight against terrorism and organized crime.

The Spanish Minister for Home Affairs congratulated Aleksandre Chikaidze on the efforts being made by the Georgian Government in the fight against terrorism and the support it is offering in international initiatives to combat this global threat.

In this regard, Jorge Fernández Díaz conveyed, “Spain’s firm commitment to the fight against any form of crime, in whatever shape or form”, to his Georgian counterpart.

At the close of the meeting, Jorge Fernández Díaz and Aleksandre Chikaidze signed a Cooperation Agreement on the fight against crime that will enable relations to be enhanced on home affairs issues and raise bilateral relations to a new phase of heightened cooperation. This agreement, which ranks as an international treaty, aims to step up police cooperation between Spain and Georgia, both from an operational and a training perspective, as well as to prevent terrorism and organized crime though mutual collaboration.

Jorge Fernández Díaz underlined that, by signing this agreement, “we are putting the seal on home affairs relations between Spain and Georgia, and establishing the main pillars for strengthened and effective cooperation”.

The post Spain And Georgia Home Affairs Ministers Meet For First Time appeared first on Eurasia Review.

(EurActiv) — Germany’s latest immigration statistics show 1.23 million persons moved to Germany in 2013, a rate the country has not seen since 1993, causing Social Democrats and Greens to call for better regulation of immigration. EurActiv Germany reports.

The number of people moving to Germany increased in the year 2013 compared to 2012, with more than 1.23 million individuals immigrating (2012: 1 million) to the country in 2013.

The statistics were released in the Migration Report 2013 compiled by Germany’s Federal Office for Migration and Refugees and approved by the Federal Cabinet on Wednesday (21 January).

Numbers this high have not been recorded in Germany since 1993 and, according to the Federal Statistical Office, 2013 immigration numbers will probably be exceeded again in 2014.

An initial estimate released on Wednesday predicted that the number of people coming into the country would outweigh the number of moves out by at least 470,000. The highest previous number of immigrants to arrive in a single year was in 1992, when an estimated 782,000 people came to Germany.

The Migration Report also indicated that the 2013 outflow increased to 800,000 persons (2012: 712,000), meaning a 430,000-person increase in net migration for 2013 (2012: 370,000). Around 118,000 of people who moved to Germany were Germans, the report said. Around 708,000 were EU citizens, while 400,000 were from so-called third countries.

The highest number of immigrants came from Poland (190,000), followed by Romania (139,000) and German citizens (118,000). Around 61,000 people came from Bulgaria. The most who moved out of the country were also German (140,000), Polish (119,000), Romanian (87,000) and Bulgarian (39,000) citizens.

After the immigration of skilled and highly qualified persons continually rose from 2009 to 2012 (16,000 in 2009 and 27,000 in 2012), there was a decrease in 2013 (24,000). The report attributed this fact particularly to Croatia’s EU accession – and thereby the freedom of movement for Croatians within the bloc – causing stagnation around last year’s level.

The report made it clear that Germany is well positioned with regard to immigration, said German Internal Affairs Minister Thomas de Maizière in Berlin.

“All of us know that Germany depends upon skilled workers from abroad. The migration report shows that the course is still set correctly for immigration of skilled workers from third countries.”

Regarding the acceptance of refugees and asylum seekers, the Internal Affairs Minister said it has become clear that Germany takes its humanitarian commitments seriously and upholds them.

“Our acceptance of Syrian and Iraqi refugees sets an example for most states in Europe,” he emphasised.

From 1990 to the end of 2013, Germany received 2.584 million asylum applications. Since 2007, applicant numbers are growing again. In 2013, the number of first-time applicants was 109,580, a 70% increase compared to the previous year.

Approximately 39% of all applicants came from Europe in 2013, compared to almost 39% from Asia. The share of asylum seekers from Africa increased compared to the previous year, with 20.5% coming from Africa in 2013 (2012: 12.9%).

SPD calls for new immigration legislation

Amid these trends, Germany’s governing coalition is currently mulling the creation of a new immigration law.

The Social Democratic Party (SPD), in particular, is making a special effort to attract foreign skilled workers. The party’s Bundestag faction leader Thomas Oppermann also sees this as an opportunity to shift the critical immigration debate, spurred by the anti-Islamist Pegida movement, in a different direction.

“If one wants to cut off Pegida’s resources, the immigration question has got to be cleared up,” Oppermann said last week in Berlin. The SPD faction leader said he would submit a position paper for an immigration law in February, hoping to bundle existing regulations.

Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel (SPD) is also calling for such a law. In a guest essay for Tagesspiegel, he said it is necessary regardless of the reception of refugees. It must be made clear, he explained, “to whom we would like to extend an offer, because we depend on it economically”. But at the same time, Gabriel said the immigration law must “also make it clear, who we cannot and do not want to take in”.

For the Green Party (Bündnis 90/Die Grünen), a law like this one is long overdue. In light of the latest peak in immigration, Green faction leader Katrin Göring-Eckardt is calling on the German government to develop a plan.

Speaking with the Neue Osnabrücker Zeitung, she said she wants immigrants and their families to be offered the best-possible living and integration opportunities.

“Otherwise the people we would like to receive will not come to us but, rather, go to more attractive countries,” Göring-Eckardt pointed out.

A law on immigration and a large-scale debate in society on the issue are both long overdue, she said. “A country, in which right-wing populism is breaking fresh ground is anything but attractive for immigrants,” the Green politician commented. Evidence, especially from recent years, demonstrates that immigration benefits everyone, she pointed out.

At the presentation of the report on Wednesday, de Maizière referred to the four principles of existing law in paragraph 1 of the German Residence Act. “I have again come to the conclusion, that our legal regulations fulfill all the criteria of an immigration law and that, for this reason, we already have an immigration law and do not need a new one,” he said.

At a time when Pegida is gaining strength in Germany, de Maizière was asked whether such a law could send a message to right-wing populists, showing that Germany is an immigration country. “Of course”, the Minister said, he could understand such an argument “and surely our residence law does not take the prize for clarity”.

But, de Maizière said he would like to know from those calling for a new law: “What do they actually want? To make existing law more clear and put a different title on it? Or other regulations? If other regulations are desired, then it should be clear which ones.” And the fact that now the SPD and the Eurosceptic Alternative for Germany (AfD) now both want a new immigration law, de Maizière said makes him rather sceptical.

The populist AfD is calling for a controlled immigration model similar to that in Canada. On Tuesday (20 January) Frauke Petry, spokesperson for the AfD, accused the SPD of taking over the AfD’s call for a new immigration law. Petry said, it was not clear to her how Gabriel could set plans for such a law in motion against the “declared will” of the centre-right alliance, the SPD’s counterpart in the Grand Coalition.

EurActiv.de, Daniel Tost.  Translated from German by Erika Körner

The post Latest Immigration Statistics Show 1.23 Million Persons Moved To Germany In 2013 appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Ignacio Molina*

Spain is back on the UN Security Council. The General Assembly’s 193 members recently elected the five non-permanent members for the period 2015-16 and, after three rounds of voting in the European group, Spain came ahead of Turkey.

The outcome was in the air throughout the whole selection process, making it seem more like a race to host the Olympic Games or even a thriller. But the cinematic simile can also serve for a preliminary analysis from four different angles. We start with the most general shot, looking at the role of mid-range powers in the international system, then move on to two angles centred on Spanish foreign policy and end with a close look at the seamier side of domestic politics.

The long shot

Viewed from the broader perspective of the global influence wielded by mid-range powers (such as Spain and Turkey, although for different reasons) the Assembly’s decision can be interpreted as a confirmation that the acceptable interval for these countries to be part of the Security Council is about 10-12 years.

It is perhaps admissible that Germany, Brazil, India or Japan should sit on the council more often. But that group of major powers, who are trying to break into the club of the five permanent members that designated themselves as such in 1945, does not include Turkey. For this reason Turkey’s hurried desire to shorten the wait and return to the council just six years after its last turn has been penalised, just as New Zealand’s prudence in admitting its status as a medium-to-low diplomatic power and thus wait 20 years to seek a seat has been rewarded. Of course, there is no criterion of fairness in these votes. But it is reasonable to think that States gauge very carefully the messages they wish to transmit, because to a certain extent they determine what the international community thinks of the weight of each of them. In that sense we cannot conclude so much that Madrid is more influential than Ankara, but rather that Spain has been more adept at measuring its strength.

Along with this explanation, which is probably the most important, there are three other factors that helped Spain and that correspond to a mid-strength European power: membership of the EU, influence in other regions and the absence of enemies. Indeed, it should be pointed out first that not once since the 1980s has the group made up of ‘Western Europe and others’ not elected a member state from the EU and this time Spain was the only one in the running.

Secondly, it was critical to have the votes of Latin America and the Caribbean lined up (with the noteworthy exception of Brazil). This once again shows the importance of having a traditional influence in a region that is so vast and important. Finally, there is a factor that is something of a paradox bearing in mind that what was being chosen was one of the members that is going to lead world governance in terms of peace and security: Spain’s relatively low profile in foreign policy in recent years helped it win the seat, as opposed to the growing (and at times controversial) high-profile position of Turkey in the Middle East and Africa.

The medium shot

Focusing now on the voting result’s effect on Spain’s presence in the globalisation process, it is also possible to carry out a nuanced evaluation of Spain’s diplomatic success. This is the fifth time that Spain has been elected to sit on the UN Security Council and when this turn ends in 2016 it will have accrued a total of 10 years as a member of that body.

It is a reasonable figure that more or less matches the country’s weight and objective international presence. In other words, Spain is in 14th place since the founding of the UN, or 11th since the 1980s. That is exactly the spot that Spain holds in the Elcano Global Presence Index. Of course, to the extent that the race for the council seat was hotly contested and by no way assured for Spain, it is perfectly reasonable for Spain to be satisfied in having managed to retain its level of influence and its role among the world’s middling nations, in a rank right behind those mentioned earlier (and alongside Canada, Italy, Argentina, Australia and perhaps Egypt, Pakistan and Turkey itself). But as this means that Spain is ranked just where it should be, its satisfaction should be measured and restrained.

Furthermore, it should be borne in mind that this indicator is in no way exact, as the workings of the voting system and historical circumstances have benefited certain countries (mainly in Latin America and Western Europe) and penalised others (Israel, South Korea, Indonesia, South Africa and Saudi Arabia are the clearest cases). So Spain is neither rising nor falling in its level of influence, but remaining in its rightful place in the UN system.

Close-up

Narrowing the focus a bit more and examining Spanish foreign policy from a more limited time-frame, it can be stated that Spain has indeed triumphed. It is a success for the country as a whole for, as the Foreign Ministry highlighted, the candidacy had been presented 10 years ago by the government of the party then in power, which was not the current one, while both the King and the opposition had taken part in the lobbying campaign. In any case, the success adds in an important way to the relatively positive overall showing of Spanish diplomacy which had operated in a tough economic environment, with less money for foreign development aid, peacekeeping missions and the fight against climate change and while Spain’s image as a major player in the international community had not yet been restored.

Early this year the Elcano Royal Institute itself said there was significant doubt as to whether Spain would be elected to the Security Council, and that its success or failure would be a good indicator of how Spain’s international relevance is perceived. Well, the goal has been achieved. And Spain has managed this at a delicate moment, so Foreign Minister José Manuel García-Margallo can feel reasonably satisfied with the results of a year that has yielded a slight improvement in Spain’s position in Europe, with the approval of the Foreign Action Law and the compiling of a new paper on Spanish foreign policy strategy.

That said, given the announced strategic overhaul, it would be a good idea for Spanish diplomacy to move to consolidate the country’ status firmly and seize the moment to move from just sitting at the Security Council to actually making a difference. It is time to show that, just as Spain argued during its lobbying campaign, it will engage in global issues and use its seat to show it is committed to acting on major crises, the fight against the death penalty, the prevention of terrorism, promoting gender equality, encouraging dialogue between different cultures and promoting foreign aid. The true yardstick for this two-year period should be how Spain handles these issues and not simply the fact that it has a seat on the council.

The extreme close-up

Unfortunately, there is a fourth possible perspective from which to look at the issue: the extreme close-up, so close that we look no further than Spanish domestic politics in the most parochial sense of the word. In this short-sighted view Spain’s election to the Security Council is linked to the issue of independence for Catalonia, arguing that the 131 countries that voted for Spain were preserving its territorial integrity (were the 60 that voted for Turkey doing the opposite?).

Another instance is the confrontational attitude that strives to downplay Spain’s achievement but that would have overstated the failure had that been the case. It is not necessary for public opinion to be able to determine precisely the place a country should have in the international multilateral system and to decide if the fact is more or less important (here we argue that it is, but deploring any display of unreasonable triumphalism). However, it is essential to enhance the quality of democratic debate in Spain. It is necessary to be more aware of the influential role that Spain and its people can play in a globalised world. And it is to be regretted when a healthy critical spirit is distorted into mere destructiveness, or when, conversely, a reasonable sense of satisfaction is transformed into a weapon for day-to-day political infighting.

Original version in Spanish: España en el Consejo de Seguridad de la ONU 2015-2016: apuntes desde cuatro planos.

About the author:
*Ignacio Molina is Senior Analyst for Europe at the Elcano Royal Institute | @_ignaciomolina

Source:
This article was published by Elcano Royal Institute.

The post Spain In UN Security Council In 2015-16: Views From Four Different Angles – Analysis appeared first on Eurasia Review.

Italy’s Prime Minister, Matteo Renzi, called for politicians around the world to “carpe diem” and tackle complex risks head-on. “Not to see the risks is stupid for a politician, but the transformation of risks into opportunities is the quality of leadership,” he said. “The economy is important, but without political leadership, we are not in a condition to invest in a different world.”

Renzi was speaking at the 45th World Economic Forum Annual Meeting in Davos-Klosters, from 21 to 24 January, at which there are more than 2,500 participants.

The Prime Minister acknowledged that new risks abound, but he said that if leaders around the world can invest in the future “not as a problem, but as an opportunity, it will resonate with a very important message – carpe diem”. He told participants that new reform in Europe is important and that a key point for a “new Europe” is the idea of a future focused on the ability to invest in the new generation and not simply to maintain the traditional approach where the future is a problem.

According to Renzi, Europe’s economic direction needs to change. “At the G20 summit in Brisbane last November, every country spoke about the need to invest in growth,” he said. “Europe and the Eurozone spoke only about austerity. It is important to pay attention to budgets, but it is also important to invest in a new relationship with citizens.”

The next 12 months are critical, Renzi said. “Europe must eliminate the red tape of bureaucracy or it will be finished.” European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker’s massive investment plan to boost jobs, growth and investment, announced last November, must be implemented. Renzi also pointed to “the new role” for the European Central Bank, which is expected to unveil a plan this week to boost the Eurozone’s flagging economy.

In today’s turbulent geopolitical context, involving countries such as Iraq, Libya, Russia, Syria and Ukraine, the Prime Minister said it is important to “show the real importance of a very strong idea of Europe around the world”. If structural reform is reinforced by a “change of mind of European people” and the need for a new international order, it will be possible to help these unstable countries solve their problems. “A lot of instability in Libya can be [dangerous] for every country in Europe,” he said. “It is a place where we can receive a global attack.”

Philipp Rösler, Head of Centre for Regional Strategies, Member of the Managing Board, World Economic Forum, pointed out that the Prime Minister has achieved more in one year than all of his predecessors, including labour reform.

Renzi pointed to a long list of reforms, including education, the constitution (40 articles are being reviewed), the judicial system, the electoral process (to close the revolving door of Italian politics) and public administration. He added: “The most important structural reform for Italy is credibility.”

The Prime Minister concluded: “My country is famous around the world as a country of division. We want a new vision, not division; a renaissance. I am not here to present a future of tomorrow for my country. The future is today, not tomorrow. Italy [for my children] will be an innovation lab, not a museum.”

The post Politicians Must Act Now To Transform Risks Into Opportunities, Says Italy’s Prime Minister appeared first on Eurasia Review.

By Vanit Sharma*

With the world’s largest nation and second largest economy posting the lowest GDP growth rate in nearly twenty five years, many international organizations and world leaders have been quick to note of what is happening in China. With its explosive growth and rapid accent towards global domination in recent decades, many this week are reassessing the economic prospects of China.

Among several key actors in the sphere of global economics, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) has officially become the latest entity to give India the much needed acknowledgement it has wanted to hear for quite some time. In its latest World Economic Outlook Forecast, the IMF declared that India is set to outpace its Asian neighbor towards becoming the world’s largest growing economy.

The IMF forecasts predict that India will grow at a rate of 6.3 percent and 6.5 percent over the next two years. With these figures; projected growth in 2016 places the Indian economy to outpace that of China, leaving the nation as the fastest growing large scale emerging economy globally.

With its new leadership last year and election of Narendra Modi of the BJP party in a landslide victory, India, the world’s largest democratic nation has seen a much needed boost of energy and political and economic reform. This new vigor from a more centralized method of governing, and excellent planned economic reforms drawn out by Prime Minister Modi, are working to revitalize and invigorate the potential for India in the coming years. The government push for further foreign direct investment with its highly branded ‘Make In India’ campaign urge the world community to come invest in its dynamic market, making India a more desirable destination for multinational firms.

In conjunction with the IMF’s backing, the World Bank came out stating that India’s growth would outpace China’s in 2017, and investment bank Goldman Sachs predicts the Indian economy would surpass its Asian counterpart by 2016.

Additionally, the IMF officially downgraded economic outlook on more the a dozen of the world’s largest economies, expecting the global economy to grow by 3.5 percent this calendar year, and 3.7 in 2016.

*Vanit holds a BA in Political Science and International Affairs, and a MS in International Relations and Global Development from Northeastern University in Boston, Massachusetts. He is a multinational citizen of the United States, United Kingdom, and Overseas Citizen of India, currently living and working in London. His research interests include the importance of emerging markets, global immigration concerns, and the future of the Eurozone.

The post IMF Backs India As Being On Track To Outpace China – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

South Africa’s upcoming State of the Union Address could easily pass for one of those State events that are merely compelled by law to be held, but at which there is nothing more exhibited than a talk shop, appealing only to a handful of lawmakers and politicians.

Often, State of the Nation Addresses have been filled with platitudes, more and more political rhetoric and the occasional lighthearted joke meant to portray the Head of State as having that whiff of charisma and humanity. Apart from that though, the addresses are as entertaining, as they are fleeting. Nothing more than a ceremonial event that just needs to be done, and everyone gets on with their lives.

Perhaps, in recent memory, the State of the Union Address that has been a complete opposite of the ones we in South Africa have become accustomed to is the rather infamous 2003 State of the Union Address by President Bush that came less than two months before America’s invasion of Iraq. This speech is said to have contained the famed “16 words” that were used to justify eight years of occupation and war in Iraq. But it seems President Bush’s 2003 address now potentially faces worthy competition in South Africa President Jacob Zuma’s February 12 State of the Nation Address. That is, if Julius Malema’s EFF has its way on the ‘Nkandlagate’ debacle.

The recently wed, 34-year-old firebrand leader says that Thursday, 12 February will be the day of reckoning on ‘Pay back the money’. This is a phrase that has made its way into South African parlance ever since Public Protector Thuli Madonsela’s report recommended that President Zuma repay a portion of the costs used for upgrades to his personal homestead in rural Nkandla — this, as a corrective measure to what was deemed as undue benefits President Zuma enjoyed. The EFF intends to usher in this “day of reckoning” with a big flourish, as they plan on interjecting President Zuma’s State of the Union Address by rising on a point of order when he stands to address the nation, and ask him when he will pay back the money.

Forget about the sanctity of the address as a joint sitting of the Houses of Assembly, the EFF have firmly set their sights on a full-blown confrontation with the President until they get an answer.

Despite a strongly worded letter from the Speaker of Parliament, Baleka Mbete cautioning the EFF against interrupting the President during the State of the Nation Address, it looks like the EFF’s train will march full-steam-ahead in a show of brute defiance. And it’s not exactly unfamiliar terrain for the party, as just last August they were accused of not observing protocol, undermining democracy as they chanted “Pay back the money” in the National Assembly, and staged a sit-in and forced parliamentary proceedings to be suspended in the process.

It would appear, therefore, that President Zuma is precariously caught between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, Zuma is presiding over a nation that is feeling some strain; unprecedented power cuts, a weakening economy, growing restlessness over the slow pace of economic reforms and inclusivity, as well as a national education system that is gnawed by massive frailties. And these issues typically should be the keystone areas of President Zuma’s speech when he opens parliament on February 12.

No doubt the President will touch on these challenges as he apprises the ‘rainbow nation’ on the state of the country. To the more discerning observer though – judging from his two most recent speeches at the ANC`s fundraising dinner and the anniversary rally at Cape Town stadium, where the President ever so gloriously squandered the opportunities to reassure his fellow citizens of his party’s grip on the challenges the country is facing – this could well turn out to be a monotonous, and rambling speech bereft of any real ideas to strategically respond to the country’s increasing list of challenges. It could even be the platform on which he absolves himself and his administration of responsibility for the country’s woes, like he did with the energy crisis at the ANC’s 103rd anniversary rally.

So potentially what would have otherwise been a dull, insipid state event apart from the grandiose red carpet moments when attendees strut their designer clothes, could now be punctuated by a showdown between President Zuma and Julius Malema together with his 25 member strong ‘squadron’ of MPs. The EFF have vowed to not relent on the “Pay back the money” campaign until Zuma repays the money, in their crusade against corruption and lack of accountability.

This then will be a State of the Nation Address not to be missed. It will likely go down as an event pitting the wits of President Zuma, the ANC, Speaker Mbete, the EFF, and will provide fodder for the local dailies and tabloids. Could it then change State of the Nation Addresses as we know them?

The post South Africa: February 12 Day Of Reckoning For President Zuma – OpEd appeared first on Eurasia Review.

A Hindu group is thinking of approaching Advertising Standards Bureau (ASB), “foremost authority in Australia for adjudication of complaints about advertising and marketing communications”, on Ganesh-Lakshmi beer labels.

Despite apologizing and promising to re-design their bottles and packaging and removing the objectionable images from the website in 2013, Brookvale (New South Wales, Australia) based “Brookvale Union” brewery’s ginger beer is still carrying juxtaposed images of Hindu deities Ganesh and Lakshmi; upsetting Hindus worldwide again.

Hindu statesman Rajan Zed, who spearheaded the protest in 2013, calling juxtaposed images of Ganesh and Lakshmi on a beer bottle “highly inappropriate”, and then thanked the brewery for apologizing and focusing on redesigning the beer; has now asked it to show some responsibility, respect and maturity and understand the hurt feelings of Hindu community.

Zed, who is President of Universal Society of Hinduism, in a statement in Nevada (USA), indicated that inappropriate usage of Hindu deities or concepts or symbols for commercial or other agenda was not okay as it hurt the devotees. Lord Ganesh and Goddess Lakshmi were highly revered in Hinduism and they were meant to be worshipped in temples or home shrines and not to be used in selling beer for mercantile greed.

Rajan Zed urged Brookvale Union to remove the Ganesh-Lakshmi images from the beer label, packaging and website; recall all the beer with Ganesh-Lakshmi images from the market; and re-apologize.

Zed further said that such trivialization of Hindu deities was disturbing to the Hindus world over. Hindus were for free expression and speech as much as anybody else if not more, but faith was something sacred and attempts at trivializing it tormented the devotees, Zed pointed out and added that businesses should be respectful to various faith traditions.

In a statement released on November 14, 2013, and published in “Beer & Brewer” magazine from New South Wales, the brewery said: “We have subsequently apologised for any distress caused and begun the process of removing the images from the website. We’re lovers, not fighters, we want to make it right… We are now focused on redesigning the Ginger Beer which hopefully all can be happy with!” It asked “graphic designers, artists, and even doodlers” to come up with a better design by November 24 and reportedly urged them not to use imagery that may be deemed offensive.

“It seems we have unintentionally offended our Hindu friends with the imagery on our Ginger Beer packaging…Brookvale Union is about great tasting, fun beverages and not about disrespecting anyone or their beliefs”, the statement added.

In an email to Rajan Zed on November 12, 2013, Brookvale Union wrote: “…it was not intended to cause any offence. With the recent feedback brought to our attention, we will be re-designing our bottles and packaging.”

In Hinduism, Lord Ganesh is worshipped as god of wisdom and remover of obstacles and is invoked before the beginning of any major undertaking. Lakshmi is the goddess of good fortune and beauty and is also known as ‘world-mother’. Moksh (liberation) is the ultimate goal of Hinduism.

The post Hindu Group Mulls Approaching Australia Advertising Standards Bureau On Ganesh-Lakshmi Beer Labels appeared first on Eurasia Review.