How the NATO summit really ended?

Trump…the US President… Many people all over the world hate him, are scared of him, admire, o does not understand him. More recently he has been the main newsmaker for the leading world’s mass media. As a true businessman, he tries to suppress junior partners, but at the same time he engages in an equal dialogue with those who are not weaker, or even stronger than him. His method of government is not similar to any of his predecessors in the White House. And it is getting interesting…

And now, it should be noted that he cares about his own image among Americans and the national treasury enrichment. He is ready to destroy the order that was set until he came to power to achieve high results in this matter. He is very aggressive towards European partners. He is introducing new import duties. He does not care about someone from Brussels, Paris and Berlin. At the same time, he sits at the table to negotiate with North Korean dictator, hoping for the Nobel Peace Prize, and then, passes to the Russian president.

Another place, where he showed his aggressive behavior was the NATO summit. Even before the beginning of this event, he attacked some European partners by sending letters. In them he stated the need to increase defense spending to 2 % of GDP. This theme was the main one during his speech at the summit. Trump stated again that his country did not have to pay for the security of Europe. The US President tries to meet the expectations of electorate, as well as the Congress, through this pressure because one of his pre-election promises was to force Europe to increase defense spending that it could defend itself.

It seemed that the European politicians did not have any answer to the US President. However, it only seemed… But later it turned out, that the leaders of Denmark expressed the loudest disagreement with the demand of Trump. The Prime Minister of this small country, Lars Løkke Rasmussen, said that his country was nothing to be embarrassed about NATO partnership, and added that not everything was measured in money. The Prime Minister cited the example of human losses of Denmark in Iraq and Afghanistan that are compatible with US losses, given the ratio of the size of both countries. The Danish media also reported that after such a statement, Donald Trump approached him, saying ‘a nice point’.

It turns out that Trump understands only strength. And unfortunately, Rasmussen does not find support among the other European leaders. Or it’s just for now?

What can we expect from the NATO summit 2018?

Between 11 and 12 July 2018, a meeting of the heads of state and government of NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) will be held in Brussels, Belgium. However, the European members of the alliance do not expect much this event. The reason lies in a person, like the US President Donald Trump. According to some observers of The New York Times, the US’ Atlantic allies are not quiet sure what to expect from the head of the White House on this summit. “No one knows in what mood Trump will arrive: aggressive, or insulted the allies for inadequate defense spending, or as a boaster, who brags of the recent cost increase”, notes journalist Steven Erlanger.

The EU allies are very concerned that they will face Trump what he was at the G7 leaders meeting in June. The present members described him as angry, sarcastic and rude, especially concerning Justin Trudeau and Angela Merkel. According to the former US ambassador to NATO Nicholas Burns, the focus of the meeting “should be Russian deterrent by the forces of the alliance in Eastern Europe, but Trump can ruin everything for Putin”. If Trump “arrives to enhance the dialogue with Russia and there is no clearity what Moscow will do in return, it will cause confusion in the North Atlantic alliance”, he said.

According to the president of the International Institute for Strategic Studies, François Heisbourg, “Trump can act instinctively, trying to arrange a bilateral deal with Putin and sacrifice the interests of NATO. He can lift sanctions imposed because of Crimea, put off maneuvers or withdraw US troops from the Baltic countries. We have seen it with Kim Jong-un”.
It is possible that Donald Trump can increase the expenses in common defense up to 2% of the GDP to the American allies of the NATO, that do not fulfill the condition. According to Defense News, Trump has already sent letters to some of his NATO allies in which he complained that they have not contributed enough to the Atlantic Alliance. In addition, the US leader has warned that this problem will be a key issue at the summit in Brussels.

The only document in this regard was published in Norway’s most important newspaper, VG, in which a letter was published to Prime Minister of Norway Erna Solberg on June 19. However, there is information that some NATO member states have received similar letters, and Foreign Policy magazine confirmed it.

The Norwegian letter says: “Norway however, remains the only NATO Ally sharing a border with Russia that lacks a credible plan to spend 2 percent of its gross domestic product on defense…I understand domestic political pressures, as I myself have expended considerable political capital to increase our own defense spending. It will, however increasingly difficult to justify to US citizens why some countries continue to fail to meet our shared collective security commitments.

But there is an opposite version that lies in the fact that everyone needs the success at this forum. And the US side can make some efforts to soften the negative impression of the previous G7 meeting, in which the United States clashed with its European allies and Canada.

In any case, the next summit of the North Atlantic alliance promises to become one of the most interesting and unpredictable in recent years. And the United States will play a fundamental role there.

However, in the realities of modern world, it does not guarantee the strengthening of the European security.

 

The trade war: USA & Europe

Today there are many conversations about the complication of the relations between the Trump’s administration and Europe.
I remind you that on March 9 the head of the White House signed a decree to introduce 25-percent tariffs on steel imports and 10-percent tariffs on aluminum imports. The exemptions were for Canada and Mexico, Washington’s partners in the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA). I note that Trump’s decision to impose duties served as an impetus for the beginning of the trade war.
The Section 232 of US trade legislation allows introduce measures against imports that threaten national security. This step was explained by the high dependence on foreign metals and the reduction of domestic production and capacity. US Secretary of Commerce, Wilbur Ross, said that many steel and aluminum plants has been closed, 75,000 jobs have been lost since 1998.
The US actions became very painful for the European Union, Brussels reacted to Washington’s plans immediately. The head of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, said that if the US did not abandon its intentions, then the EU would follow the reciprocal duties on steel, bourbon, jeans and peanut butter.
It is not yet clear how this ends and until what time they will exchange duties and tariff charges, but the consequences of the trade war can be extremely destructive. If the US withdraws from NAFTA and announces new import tariffs from China, South Korea and Taiwan, the growth of global GDP will slow to 2.5% in 2018 instead of the basic 3.2%.
However, the US president believes that the US will win the trade war. For the USA, the EU is the main economic partner, it is not even among the three major US importers (China, Mexico and Canada). But for the European Union, the USA is one of the main trade partners for exports and imports. In addition, America is one of the most important markets for the EU. And if we allow America to continue to limit this market with impunity in the future, for Europeans this may end by an economic crisis.
The outcome of the confrontation, in fact, is not so obvious. The history of such trade wars shows that a country that initially has stronger positions may eventually lose out. But I think that in this trade war, caused by mutual tariff increases, no one will win. After all, you can notice that it will not just a conflict of interests between the two countries, but a clash of protectionists and globalists, which lasts for a number of years…

EU policy can lead to the collapse of the whole system or why the EU needs the countries of the Western Balkans?

The European Union, concerned by the crises, decided to take an unexpected step – the integration of the Western Balkans. The EU seeks to complete the unification of Europe by 2025 through the integration of six states: Serbia, Montenegro, Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Macedonia and Kosovo. The president of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker made such a statement the other day. Although the official website of the European Commission refers only to the real EU accession of Montenegro and Serbia, if they comply with all the requirements for EU membership.
It is still unclear why Brussels is dragging into the EU countries that are not completely ready and economically backward?!
The European Commission believes that the integration of the Western Balkans into the EU meets the political and economic interests of the European Union. And the idea of ​​constant expansion is laid down in the EU philosophy. But I would like to recall that to join the European Union new countries need unanimous support of all its members, some of them seriously doubt that the EU will benefit from this integration of poor and troubled Balkan countries. As the EU has got enough troubles already… And earlier the dictatorship of Brussels, Berlin and Paris dominated in the Union, now it is increasingly failing. In Eastern and Central Europe, there were “dissident countries” led by Hungary and Poland, who can say “no.” The Czech Republic and Slovakia also clearly will not want to sit in Brussels next to representatives of Albania or Kosovo. In the Balkan countries, there have always been and now there are internal conflicts, as a result of which there may be a conflict already within the EU.
In addition, after the expansion of the Balkan countries, the funds, whose task is to redistribute funds in order to equalize the economies of the backward members, will be seriously reduced. As a result, there will be a decrease in revenues due to the withdrawal of Britain, and a change in the structure of the cost. The rich countries of the European Union, such as Germany, France, the Netherlands or Sweden, will now have to pay even more contributions to the EU overall budget, from which the EU structural funds spent on economic development of poorer EU countries like Romania, Hungary or Lithuania. And what will happen to the EU economy if even poorer countries join it?! I think that it will just collapse. After all, rich countries clearly do not like this situation.
The implementation of the large-scale project, drafted by Juncker, together with additional transformations, suggests that by 2025 the European Union will again claim the role of one of political centers of the world. Nevertheless, taking into account corruption, criminality and the state of the market economy of the Western Balkan countries, they will definitely not be ready to join the Union by 2025. As a result, this project is unlikely to materialize. Still I would like to see Europe strong and safe!
In conclusion, I would like to say that the integration of the Balkan countries into the European Union will now simply lead to the collapse of the EU. The fact is that the situation in Europe is so sad … The European Union is already on the verge of collapse. And the accession of such backward and ruined countries will simply accelerate its disintegration. It is believed that the EU is a bastion of well-being, but it turns out that lately only economically backward, corrupt and poor countries are trying to get it.

2018 is a difficult year for the #EU

By the end of 2017, we can say that the EU had a tendency to disintegrate. And it’s not connected only with Brexit and the Catalan crisis in Spain.
First of all, the stability of the internal political situation is again under threat in the so-called “motor” of the EU – Germany, where during four months the talks on the government coalition following the results of the September elections to the Bundestag first renewed, but then again failed. And although in early 2018 the CDU / CSU and SPD started a new round of negotiations, it is still designated “deadline”, April 1. But the problem is that according to public opinion polls, a new vote between Christian Democrats and Social Democrats will lead to the same impasse as in September. After all, it was this “big coalition” that rules in Germany for two of the three terms of Angela Merkel as federal chancellor. But in 2017, the Social Democrats rested and refused to cooperate with the CDU / CSU. And now they changed their minds again.
At the same time, it is easy to see behind these vicissitudes the same split of the Western elites and their internal struggles. After all, Europe is still fundamentally not sovereign and is the actual sphere of influence of the United States, which exercises control through the institutions of NATO, and the Council of Europe.
Secondly, Emmanuel Macron, came to power in the spring of 2017 in France, changed the emphasis in the most European policy and perspective. Economic leadership of Germany, especially in the conditions of constant instability in this country, threatens to transform into a military one. And go to France as the only European nuclear power. In addition, because of numerous ambiguities in politics, Merkel’s position, openly played by influential conceptual and business circles related to the Rothschild clan, whose promoter is Macron, is rapidly and sharply weakened.
Let us remember the events in Catalonia – a part of this scenario, discovered by George Soros in his time around the Eurobond project: then it was said that Germany either should consolidate and assume all European debts, or dissolve the EU. It is indicative that recent studies by German defense ministry experts have revealed that in three of the six scenarios for the development of the situation in the EU there is no “common future” for Europe, and it will collapse.
Although, in turn, the Catalan precedent has clearly shown that the global oligarchy headed by the Rothschilds is not against a single Europe, but for expanding its own control over integration processes.
In the beginning of the year, Brussels has to resolve a number of internal political issues, including the migration problem, which France and several countries of Eastern and Central Europe have already tightened control over. Even Germany, which willingly welcomed refugees and helped them, is concerned about the possibility that because of the new rules for granting asylum in the European Union, Germany had to accept many more migrants. And that is why he asks the EU to stop this mass flow of refugees.
In addition, the problem of Brexit is quite acute. Despite the fact that the EU and the UK were able to agree in the first phase of the negotiations, they are now moving to the second phase, within which they will have to resolve the problem of regulating the border between the remaining part of the European Union, Ireland and the part of the United Kingdom, Northern Ireland, the status of three with a small million foreign professionals who currently live and work in the British territory.
And we can say that at the moment the European Union is clearly facing a political, social and economic crisis. It has to overcome a very difficult year, because this year will determine its future. As a result, the EU’s exit from the current crisis is one of the biggest issues facing the union, its citizens, institutions, leaders and politicians.

 

Useless #presidency of #Bulgaria in the #EU

Everyone knows that since January 1 Bulgaria has become the president of the European Union (EU). But it is yet unclear how it will play an important role for the union within six months during Brexit and the migration crisis… After all, the country is one of the poorest countries in the EU, moreover, it occupies the last place in the EU in terms of per capita GDP. But in the ranking of the most corrupt European countries, Bulgaria, on the contrary, takes a leading position.
Why the EU needs such president if the European Commission even allocated about 40 officials to help in presidency in the Council of the European Union?! The country, which is still under the supervision of Brussels, will have to solve the most difficult tasks: from “Brexit” to the EU financial agreement, from the migration crisis to the general European defense capability, and the list is quite impressive. Moreover, it is necessary to solve such serious problems for Europe as ensuring the unity of the EU member states against the backdrop of a split on migration policy and the rule of law in Poland.
Sofia aims to support the integration of the Western Balkans to the European Union. But how a country with a high level of corruption and organized crime will be able to become an example for such states?! In general, does the EU need countries like Bulgaria? It is believed that the EU is a bastion of well-being, but it turns out that economically backward, corrupt and poor countries are trying to join it.
During its presidency, Bulgaria will lead all ministerial meetings of European officials, except meetings of foreign ministers, and be responsible for the agenda of the EU Council meetings. And I think that the poorest member of the EU will be difficult to organize high-level meetings: it is expected that 300 meetings will be held in the country and 1,500 summit meetings in Strasbourg and Brussels.
In my opinion, the EU presidency is a very difficult task for Bulgaria. How can the leadership, which can not understand within its state and solve such serious problems as corruption, crime and poverty, propose, argue and implement important policy decisions for the EU and Europe?

#Catalonia: #Belgium – the new home of the escaped #Puigdemont?

The story with an attempt to proclaim the state sovereignty of Catalonia passed into the phase of legal proceedings. After the declaration of independence of the region was suspended, the Spanish court first decided to arrest eight ministers of the “rebellious” government of the autonomy, including Vice President Oriol Junqueras and ex-ministers Carles Mundo, Joaquim Forn, Meritxell Borras, Dolors Bassa, Raul Romeva, Jordi Turull and Josep Rull. They are accused of organizing rebellion, insurgency and waste of public funds. They face up to 30 years in prison.
After the Spanish court issued a European warrant for the arrest of politicians catalanes, on Sunday, November 5, the former head of Catalonia and 4 local government ministers appeared themselves at the police station in Brussels, accompanied by their lawyers. Let me remind you that they have been in Belgium since the end of October.
On November 6, it became known that the Belgian court released the ex-President of the Generalitat of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, and his former advisers, provided that they did not leave the country until the issue of their extradition to Madrid was resolved, that is, until November 17, when a court decision on the execution of the European warrant for arrest issued by Spain will be rendered.
It can be assumed that Belgium has already become a new home for the escaped Puigdemont and his associates from Catalonia. Puigdemont did not just choose this country. The Belgian authorities were almost the only ones in Europe with a restrained support of Catalonia’s claims for independence, and the Minister of Migration of Belgium, Theo Francken, even said that Puigdemont could well get political asylum.
That is, the escape of the ex-head of Catalonia turned out to be an escape – from obligations, from politics, from the choice of the people, from their political status. He does not control his destiny today, it is made by external players. And I believe that for a politician – this is a defeat. He lost the fate of Catalonia itself. I believe that he had to stay in Spain, no matter what the consequences. Political leadership is, first of all, a character and a personal example.
Whatever the outcome of the early parliamentary elections, the initiative for the Catalans is missed strategically, and the will to obtain national sovereignty is substantially broken by the betrayal of leaders.

The Constitutional Court of #Spain suspended the #resolution on the #independence of #Catalonia

Good evening, dear readers! So the events in Spain continue to worry me. So, today, October 31, the Сourt granted the petition of the Spanish authorities against the resolution of the Catalan Chamber of Parliament on the proclamation of independence.
Let me remind you that on October 27, the Catalan parliament voted to adopt a resolution proposed by supporters of the independence of the autonomous community from Spain. And later, Prime Minister, Mariano Rajoy, announced the removal of the head of Catalonia, Carles Puigdemont, and the dissolution of the local government and parliament.
As explained by Oriol Junqueras, K.Puchedemon’s deputy, in his address the former head of Catalonia will tell about the “work” he is performing while he is in Brussels. Although the only reason for his visit to Belgium is currently being actively discussed with a view to obtaining asylum from possible criminal prosecution by the Spanish authorities. According to El Periodico, five former members of the deported Catalan government arrived together with Puigdemont in Brussels.
In addition, lawsuits for rebellion, rebellion and embezzlement have been filed against members of the remote government of the region and a number of local parliamentarians. Maybe they’re the reason they ran …
Nevertheless, we will only hope for the best that justice will triumph and Catalonia will eventually surrender. In the meantime, it is already noted that virtually the whole of the Catalan administration submitted orders to Madrid.