Europe's search for a big stick
MALTA: For the past few days I have had glimpses of Europe's military power. The British, Swedish, German C130's dipping into Malta airport. The UK special forces going off on their rescue missions to the eastern Libyan desert. The French frigate Tourville at rest in Valletta harbour. The comings and goings of HMS Cumberland and HMS York. A German frigate and supply vessel. A nimble Italian corvette.
At times of international crisis there are gestures and there are moves that hurt and influence.
So far the European focus has been on getting its citizens out of Libya. I watched as British diplomats from Tripoli arrived in Malta.
With diplomatic missions closed and most European nationals evacuated, Europe's moment to act decisively in this crisis in its backyard has arrived.
The international community has spent the past two weeks searching for the formula to bend the will of Col Gaddafi. President Obama, President Sarkozy and Prime Minister David Cameron have all called on the Libyan leader to quit.
In truth they do not expect their words to persuade the Libyan leader to leave. He is not a quitter. He is isolated, deluded, bubble-wrapped in the belief that he and he alone is the defender of the Libyan revolution. He may prefer to make a last stand in Tripoli rather than take the slow and ignominious plane to Harare, or whichever other country provides havens for dictators.
The strategy of the international community is to turn up the heat on the officials and military commanders still loyal to him.Encourage desertions. Weaken Gaddafi by targeting his inner circle. There are signs that some of that is working.
So, the resolution passed by the UN Security Council. It bans travel by 16 senior members of the regime. It freezes assets and imposes an arms embargo. It threatens that those that commit crimes might end up before the international criminal court.
The UK is going after the Gaddafi family money and has stripped the Libyan head of state of diplomatic immunity.
The US has imposed unilateral sanctions and offered "any kind of assistance" to the Libyan opposition. It is not clear what that might involve.
Italy has agreed to suspend its co-operation treaty with Libya, so that frees Rome's hands to use Italian military bases against its former ally if they are so needed.
The EU has now decided to impose sanctions on Libya too, with an asset freeze and travel ban on Col Gaddafi and 25 members of his family and inner circle.
Although it falls into line with what others have done, the view in Washington was that the EU should embrace tougher sanctions because most of Libya's exports go to Europe.
If the EU were to cut off trade and investment links and to source its oil from elsewhere that would cripple the Libyan economy. It would risk hurting the Libyan people, but it might persuade some of Gaddafi's inner circle that the world beyond its shores has turned against them. It might not influence Gaddafi; indeed it might reinforce the script he believes - that he is facing a foreign-inspired plot.
A much tougher measure would be a no-fly zone. That would prevent gunships firing on demonstrators or mercenaries being shipped in from other parts of Africa. Such a military move would require further debate by the Security Council. It is an area where Europe could take a lead. Europe could also disrupt communications, denying the Libyan leader the means to broadcast to his country. All of these are options.
That is the question for Europe. What message is it sending?
~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~19~RS~)
I'm 
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Gavin said “So far the European focus has been on getting its citizens out of Libya”.
Sorry Gavin; there are no European 'citizens'. Citizenship is the relationship between an individual and a state, and the EU is not, no matter how it wishes otherwise, a state. States have citizens and international organisations have member-states. It is important that the BBC maintains the distinction and not fall into proto-federalists language about EU ‘citizens’, ‘borders’, etc. which are intentionally intended to blur the distinction. The BBC should say 'citizens of member-states'.
The BBC, even with Chris Patten running it, should not be an euro-federalist propaganda organ like the Financial Times and should not be using subliminal advertising like this for euro-federalism.
Complain about this comment
What message is Europe sending? Um....well they are holding meetings....
and talking about...um....hang on......oh yes,theres talk of further....
er...meetings.
Oh,and they are......er.....
Complain about this comment
"The view in Washington is that it is now the EU's turn."
Mrs Clinton - Hey, EU, I see the Greeks, British and others are doing great work but what are you guys doing???
*We apologise but the person you are trying to reach is out to lunch*
-press 1 if you wish to hear what impotence sounds like in 22 other languages.
Complain about this comment
The newly designated 'temporary' Leader of the Libyan anti-Gaddafi movement said only an hour ago in an interview with the BBC that any "on-the-ground" intervention by any "foreigners" armed forces would be met with "greater resistance" than will be used against Gaddafi's remnant.
US, UK, EU BEWARE!
Apart from Sanctions & Statements of support for the Libyan Uprising: Stay out of it.
Complain about this comment
What message Gavin?
They'll have to have a meeting scheduled for next spring before deciding what they will say......that is of course if they can all agree....but they'll probably have to have another crisis meeting in Brussels at sometime in the future where they may decide to discuss the situation.
Meanwhile the world will have moved on. Italy will continue with business as usual with Libya. France will make gestures.
And nothing will happen before you and I have retired for good.
Complain about this comment
The very clear message that Europe is sending to the international community is that it has a very soft nexus.
With respect, the selection of obscure European politicians to be President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs, in effect, told the world that the EU is not yet confident or mature enough as a political entity to have a sharp focus at its core.
Which means that decision making is tardy and ineffective, particularly in the geopolitical arena.
As Gavin points out, the EU already has substantial military assets and really it just lacks a coherent political infrastructure to effectively leverage those assets.
Does the EU need to be truly bitten before it gets its act together?
One fears that that is precisely what will happen, that is, Europe must suffer its own 9/11 before the politicians wake up.
Complain about this comment
BTW!
Nice pic of a soon-to-be dismantled or sold-off Royal Navy warship.
Now if You multiply that pic 14 times You get the amount of damage being done to Island Britain's Naval Defences by the 'Cuts' in Public Spending.
Add to it the dismantling by the same 'cuts' of 4 brand, spanking new 'state-of-the-art' RAF NIMROD RECCONNAISANCE Aircraft that would provide 'Early Warning' Defence of Island Britain's Air Space (& not have to rely on US AWAC).
Throw-in the proposed demobbing by 'cuts' of some 15% of the British Army's Frontline Armed Forces (post-Afghanistan, i.e. 2012) for the Defence of Island Britian's territory.
Isn't it good to know Island Britains' 'Defence' is in the hands of the Cameron-Clegg Coalition: I'm sure from Lands End to John O' Groats the ordinary Briton will rejoice that alongside the Coalition Government's Economic Policy effecting these Military 'cuts' goes the abandonment of their Libraries, Schools, Hospitals, Child Benefits, University entrants costs etc. in Defence of British Bankers & Investment Bonuses!
Thank goodness UK Government has its priorities right: As PM Cameron has enunciated so emphatically, "...Democracy in the Middle East cannot come soon enough... this UK Government will do all in its power to facilitate such a change.." And, in a later speech breathtakingly said, "..the benefits of Democracy cannot be overstated... the defence of freedom... defence of peoples' rights to oppose tyranny is an essential.."
PHEW! How right millionaire PM is, don't all Britons agree!?
Complain about this comment
Now , the British government is freezing Gaddafi`s assets here ; is that not against his human rights ?
Complain about this comment
Portugal's Finance Minister has said that he is not sure that the measures taken by Portugal to stay the need for a Eurozone Bailout are enough and that the risk of Portugal managing to avoid default without European financial intervention is in jeopardy if the Eurozone National Leaders don't agree to the new Fiscal Euro Bailout Scheme on time ...
I think the EU have bigger fish to fry than whether they intervene militarily (at a cost to EU taxpayers!) in Libya - unless, of course, the undemocratically imposed EU political masters want to openly now admit that regime change and interventionist wars are really about the OIL and not about getting rid of Dictators for humanitarian reasons which has been their recent propaganda line (Hahahahah!)?
The bottom line is that Libya was or, at the very least should have been kept, a pariah State whether Gaddaffi was in charge or not but most of the EU national leaders and political masters coinsidered that Libyan Oil was more important than the humanitarian needs of the oppressed citizens of Libya. To step in now with disingenuous, volte face, show of force or political/financial isolation of Gaddaffi is the worst form of hypocrisy and duplicity these 'supposedly-democratic' leaders could display.
Complain about this comment
"Italy has agreed to suspend its co-operation treaty with Libya, so that frees Rome's hands to use Italian military bases against its former ally if they are so needed."
Of all the actions this sounds like the one that will resonate most with Gaddafi. Libya and Italy are close and Italy is the one country in Europe he may listen to. However it has all gone too far for talk to work now.
Complain about this comment
6 JohnConstable writes:
"The very clear message that Europe is sending to the international community is that it has a very soft nexus."
I don't think so. Europe's message is (or should be): We have learned from past experience to keep out. After all, the bloody world wars in the 20th century started because the whole of Europe went mad and declared war on each other just because a minor arch duke had been assassinated. We've often said 'Never again' and I hope at long last we stick to it.
Just what do your propose Europe should do? Send in some gunboats or kill thousands of civilians as the USA has done in Iraq and Afghanistan or earlier on in places like Vietnam? That would really make the Arabs love us!
Sanctions against the leaders are the only thing we can do and hoping that the whole world will deny them a refuge or the opportunity to spirit their ill gotten gains into foreign banks accounts.(Some hope)
Complain about this comment
6 "Does the EU need to be truly bitten before it gets its act together?
One fears that that is precisely what will happen, that is, Europe must suffer its own 9/11 before the politicians wake up."
If the EU were to suffer a horrible attack, what are the chances of the EU doing something for the good of the people versus doing it to grab more power?
Complain about this comment
No 6.
"With respect, the selection of obscure European politicians to be President and High Representative for Foreign Affairs, in effect, told the world that the EU is not yet confident or mature enough as a political entity to have a sharp focus at its core."
I think you are quite right - there was a very clear message sent out by the Union that as far as foreign policy was concerned autonomy would be kept at a national level at the express will of countries like France, Germany and the UK. It has since been demonstrated that the effectiveness of 'senior' EU offices like the High Representative, for instance, is pretty much limited to the condemnation of actions - see the EU response to the political crisis in Egypt.
Most countries have intitiated unilateral actions against Libya as a result of the revolution, so the question is: if those actions had been coordinated and delivered as an EU response, would it have greater or lesser effect, and would the message be delivered with the full backing of the Member States, consistently and in a timely fashion. As pointed out already, the ability of the EU to act on anything in a timely fashion is questionable. Member States have varying ties and interests in Libya and trying to get them all to agree on a policy on how to deal with the crisis could very easily be impossible.
As far as the correct level of action to be taken, I think Member States are right to be nervous and there will be those that do not want to appear to be involved in the role of Kingmaker given Europe's history in the region. If cool_brush_work at no: 4 is correct, then heavy handed action could cause more trouble than good.
The chief concern for Member States should be their own citizens and damage limitation as far as preventing a humanitarian catastrophe.
Complain about this comment
Gaddafi's assets must be seized and all that, in this country; all the right political and economic moves need to be made, but we must not intervene and interfere militarily in Libya - it is their revolution and their national pride at stake here. When (I hope) Gaddafi is removed there shouldn't be any whiff of 'the Americans/Europeans/whoever were the cavalry who came over the horizon and fixed things, and stole the glory'. That would cause more trouble than it would be worth. Of course it's obvious that outside powers could finish off Gaddafi with a well-aimed airstrike, but that's not the point: it's for Libyans to sort this out for themselves.
Complain about this comment
12 Freeman writes:
"If the EU were to suffer a horrible attack, what are the chances of the EU doing something for the good of the people versus doing it to grab more power?"
Are you trying to say that we are in grave danger of an attack from Libya? Is that where you believe Europe's 9/11 is going to come from? And just what has that to do with 'the EU doing something for the good of the people'? Like what - send our young into battle like previous generations did? I really don't understand your reasoning here.
Complain about this comment
Operation Desert Libya doesn't somehow sound as good as Desert Storm, does it now?
Complain about this comment
Equally interesting would be France to finally owning up to it's strong ex-colonial arms; nuclear 'technology' and other 'business' links across North Africa; and certain African nations that I have posted on for several years.
France has quietly continued such trades - and are now collaborating with Chinese companies too, in order to continue exploitation of French ex-colonial empires. The same could be said of the Netherlands too?
But whose naming and shaming - it's all Britain's fault - not.
Complain about this comment
The EU had an agreement with Libya to restrict migrants from sub Saharan Africa moving through Libya and then proceeding to Europe. I suspect that as Gaddafi is otherwise occupied this will be null and void. Even the prospect of sanctions will not hurt the Libyan economy that much.
My hunch is that Gaddafi is holding all the cards versus whatever Europe could do. I doubt that the European airforces would want to risk their brand new shiny toys (sorry I meant the Typhoon Eurofighter) in a combat situation whilst they are still training to fly them. As there is no western reporting in Libya what evidence is there that widespread strafing of civilians is taking place? A heavy machine gun on the ground can do as much damage as strafing...
Complain about this comment
Gavin Hewitt.
"With diplomatic missions closed and most European nationals evacuated, Europe's moment to act decisively in this crisis in its backyard has arrived."
a European military intervention in Libya would be the moral equivalent of denying the significance the now infamous picure of "Donald Rumsfeld in a friendly handshake with Saddam Hussein". I can appreciate that the victor always (re-)writes the history, but that does not make right. is is not correct that lies simply beget more lies?
Complain about this comment
The EU, as an organisation, has very little military clout. The member states of the EU have got quite a lot, but mostly choose to work through NATO. Therefore the idea that "Europe's moment to act decisively in this crisis in its backyard has arrived" is simply not going to happen.
It will take years to achieve this capability. The relevant expertise, experience and doctrine simply does not exist. This is how the member states want it, and that is what they have got. Demanding decisive military action from the EU, at the moment, is like asking a vegetarian to make black pudding. No ability, no training, and no inclination.
If we exclude direct military intervention, and most experts seem to be of the opinion that such action would be both foolish and counter-productive, what options does the EU have? We do have a long and successful history of building state institutions, both in the old Eastern Bloc and in the Balkans. There are trade, aid and financial tools available, and these should be used. Sanctions, asset freezes and visa/travel bans are all available.
The Libyan Revolution will be decided, and must be decided, by the Libyan people themselves. Any direct military intervention by European countries would probably blow up in our faces. It also has the potential to poison any future relationships with the countries of the Maghreb. There is major negative PR involved in the idea of ex-colonial powers intervening in this conflict. The best idea is probably some sort of UN-mandated, EU-enforced, no-fly rule over Libya. That would remove the loon's most potent force multipliers - air transports and helicopter gunships - from the equation.
There will be no fleet of EU warships steaming to teach the fuzzy-wuzzies what's what. There will hopefully be ongoing programs to strengthen civil societies in those countries which are part of Europe's backyard. This will pay handsome dividends, if only in the simplest terms: prosperous countries tend to produce tourists, not economic migrants.
Complain about this comment
One does not have to invade/occupy/bomb a country to limit its thuggish leadership's destructive potential.
A case in point: it turns out that all fuel rods in the just finished Russian-build nuclear reactor in Busher will have to be removed from its vessel since Iranian experts cannot figure out what's caused malfuctioning of homicidal ayatollahs' brand-new toy.
P.S. Gavin, how can EU create and enforce a no-fly zone in Libya, if Brussels has been unable so far to even create, let alone efficiently operate a single unified air traffic control system in Europe?
Complain about this comment
GH: "He [Gaddafi] may prefer to make a last stand in Tripoli rather than take the slow and ignominious plane to Harare"
Judging by positive and supportive comments made about G. by an even longer ruling fellow dictator, Fidel Castro, it looks more like Havana.
Complain about this comment
#6 JohnConstable
One fears that that is precisely what will happen, that is, Europe must suffer its own 9/11 before the politicians wake up.
#12 Freeman
If the EU were to suffer a horrible attack, what are the chances of the EU doing something for the good of the people versus doing it to grab more power?
Aside from attacking the Berlaymont or one of the two parliament buildings - which might finally become useful in confusing any attackers (e.g. they might show up with the bomb in the Strasbourg parliament building and the fuse in the Brussels parliament building) - How could the EU suffer a 'horrible attack' or 'its own 9/11' ?
An attack in Paris would be deemed an attack on France; an attack in Berlin an attack on Germany and so on.
I find it difficult to conceive an attack anywhere outside the limited confines of some office buildings in Brussels that would be seen as 'an attack on the EU'.
Complain about this comment
Eurabia will do nothing.The unelected EU mandarins multicult has stripped sovereignty from individual members for the collective good.There is no will for national interests or identity as the real fear is the body of the camel now owns the tent.Do not upset the landlords.
Complain about this comment
#19 jr4412
...the now infamous picure of "Donald Rumsfeld in a friendly handshake with Saddam Hussein"...
In the document your URL points to, it says:
...And yet Bush's third claim about liberating the citizens of Iraq has its merits. Everybody agrees that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant that has committed unspeakable atrocities during the past decades. Hussein launched wars of agression against his neighbors Iran and Kuwait, has oppressed the citizens of Iraq and committed genocide against the kurdish minority. ...
I do not advocate any military intervention in Libya by anyone, not now.
Still, is there no point at which you would allow military intervention ?
Suppose he killed 10,000 people ? 100,000 ? A million ?
It is wrong to say never. Not for other people. Not when you are not being massacred.
Even then, I would hope an Arab force would resolve the situation.
Complain about this comment
15 Try reading both posts MH.
No. I doubt we are going to get attacked by Gaddafi...
He can barely keep his own people in check, never mind attack a foreign country.
JC at 6 wonders if a 9/11 could lead to more integrated, quick to respond EU...
I point out who is likely to benefit from 'emergency legislation' and it is certainly not the people of Europe.
Complain about this comment
I am baffled by the first post. Is it wrong to report on what a variety of European countries are doing in this 'crisis'? I can see no mention of an EU State.
The UK is part of Europe, or so I led to believe and sometimes it acts on its own and other times it finds it more convenient to act with other states to produce a greater effect than it otherwise would. Why is it wrong to report this?
I can honestly say that, having read the article and then scrolled down to see intelligent comments, the first post's angle is one that I wouldn't have ever dreamed of seeing.
But then perhaps I don't see Feds Under the Bed wherever I look. I am not even technically a citizen of anything, I am a subject. So perhaps the first poster should get shirty with the BBC on this angle.
Truly bizarre that, in all of the comings and goings in Libya, the only thing this post says is that the BBC is being a Federalist tool. I know there is a button to press to complain about posts being nasty, sexist, racist etc, can we have a button to complain about posts being just plain strange?
Complain about this comment
Many commenters seem to be entirely missing that at no point does Gavin say anything about military intervention in Libya aside from suggesting that Italy's hands are now free to do so without their treaty. There has been no sign of such action in Egypt or Tunisia, so why does anyone think there would be for any other country. We have learnt our lessons and no one wants war.
The EU and the world will do whatever it can but this is limited and all in all, not even really that important. As many politicians and governments have stated, this is Libya's revolution and they will decide how it goes - eventually Gaddafi will fall; it has gone too far now for him not to.
As for the first comment about EU citizens, you are entirely irrelevant and unhelpful to any discussion here. You can be a citizen of anywhere, your county, your country, your continent, even your planet. There is absolutely no need for your syntactical nonsense here.
Complain about this comment
@7 The picture is of a german frigate (Rheinland-phalz). And the RAF already has 7 boeing awacs aircraft, that are being used for over 20 years.
Complain about this comment
The message from Europe to the free peoples along the southern shores of the Mediterranean is:
"we want you, we need you and we love you and in doing all this we will if necessary defend your human rights in accordance with UN Charter, as a first step."
Complain about this comment
#1 Freeborn John "Sorry Gavin; there are no European 'citizens'. Citizenship is the relationship between an individual and a state, and the EU is not, no matter how it wishes otherwise, a state. States have citizens and international organisations have member-states. It is important that the BBC maintains the distinction and not fall into proto-federalists language about EU ‘citizens’, ‘borders’, etc. which are intentionally intended to blur the distinction. The BBC should say 'citizens of member-states'."
Good grief. Gavin (European, not EU, correspondent) just meant a number of European nations acting to get their people out. It's a sort of short-hand and has no relationship to the EU. I think we have the intelligence to cope with the distinction. Just because so many nations are also in the EU is just a coincidence and we have to like it or lump it.
If not, then Help! Help! the Beeb's masterminding a giant pro-EU conspiracy far too subtle for we lesser mortals to grasp. And the world's going to end in 2012, my neighbours are 10-foot lizards, and there are fairies at the bottom of my garden.
Complain about this comment
Number 7, your 'Nice pic of a soon-to-be dismantled or sold-off Royal Navy warship' is actually a picture of a German frigate - the Rheinland-Pfalz. So probably not.
Complain about this comment
#11 Margaret Howard wrote:
"After all, the bloody world wars in the 20th century started because the whole of Europe went mad and declared war on each other just because a minor arch duke had been assassinated."
Err, I think it was a little more complicated than that! And he wasn't a 'minor' arch duke either, its so funny how you people re-write history to suit your simplistic views.
Also thanks for reminding us yet again that all the US wants to do is kill thousands of civilians. If we didn't hear that line once every fifteen mins...
Complain about this comment
@ 7 Although I agree in general with your sentiment with regard to the cuts in UK defence spending please get your facts right before posting...
The frigate in question is the German F209 RHEINLAND-PFALZ and as for the Nimrods they were never used for Airborne Early Warning(or AWACS if you prefer)that´s a role covered by the Boeing E-3 Sentry which is very much still in use by the RAF.
Oh and before someone suggests that this proves the need for the Ark Royal and the Harriers it doesn´t . The RFA Argus & the Bay´s (landing ships)are much more capable of dealing with evacuations etc. If it comes to offensive operations, God forbid stretched as we already are, there are plenty of NATO airbases which are much more capable of hosting the CAP.
And yes I am ex-Services so unlike many posting on here I do have an inkling about what Im talking about.
Complain about this comment
The Europhobes obsessions are laughable, the quote "So far the European focus has been on getting its citizens out of Libya.", explains just what has been happening, every European country has concentrated on evacuating their nationals. No Euro-federalist agenda there, except in the Europhobic mindset.
The French are reported to have sent two ships to Libya with aid for the opposition, food, medical supplies etc. Smart move.
A 'no fly zone' would prevent Gaddafi's forces from moving against the opposition.
Our response should be to provide assistance but allow the Libyan people alone deal with removing the old regime.
Complain about this comment
Would someone explain how Qaddafi's assets, or any other dictators for that mater are to be frozen. I'd imagine you'd have to know where they are Every EU country complains about tax dodgers hiding funds so how do you intend to find these
Complain about this comment
The message Europe should be sending is the same as the message sent to ex Soviet countries to the east, namely to uphold human rights, provide a framework for economic and political development and to guarantee freedom and democracy within the rule of law.
Also, this is a prize worth fighting for and defending and the assembly of naval vessels in Malta indicates a willingness on the part of member states in Europe to do just this.It is called "Gunboat Diplomacy" and the rules of engagement remain unchanged.
Complain about this comment
#1 - Freeborn John
Oh please, FBJ! Even my passport, which was issued by - God bless it and preserve it - Her Majesty's Foreign and Commonwealth Office, states that I am a Citizen of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and of the European Union. Get real. What was that? A typo?
On the more general issue, is anyone seriously suggesting any military action above and beyond very selective action to rescue vulnerable expats in exposed situations? I think not. What it is a about is the EU either being seen to be of one mind and adopting a firm and resolute policy or acknowledging that it is inherently incapable of so doing, going back from whence they came and leaving it to those who know what the hell they are doing.
Complain about this comment
--✄-- Although it falls into line with what others have done, the view in Washington was that the EU should embrace tougher sanctions because most of Libya's exports go to Europe. --✄--
Only Italy will lose at that game (13% of Italy's gas supplies and almost a quarter of its oil)
Btw nice U.S. tip...too bad Europeans haven't done it for the, at that time, Bush administration since most of the US exports went to Europe...
--✄-- If the EU were to cut off trade and investment links and to source its oil from elsewhere that would cripple the Libyan economy. It would risk hurting the Libyan people, but it might persuade... --✄--
... some more U.S. tips of the embargo effects & various persuasion policy techniques...
o-----------------------------o o-----------------------------o
US persuasion policy technique 1 Vs US persuasion policy technique 2
o-----------------------------o o-----------------------------o
Complain about this comment
One of the most important and immediate things we should be helping with is setting up a new, legitimate government. Libya is descending into anarchy and the further it goes, the harder it will be to get back on track.
Complain about this comment
As the EU's foreign policy is still based on unanimity, by necessity it goes at the pace of the slowest member-state. Most people would guess that that is Italy.
It is not a system designed to be quick and nimble, it is designed to carry a lot of weight, once everyone agrees.
A challenge here is that the member-states overestimate their individual weight, and underestimate the force of a quick, co-ordinated EU response.
On the other hand, is it possible to have foreign policy on the basis of majority voting? Unlikely at the moment.
Best thing to do is probably continue to integrate the military capability of the EU countries ever deeper, so that the military part of the answer is fully integrated.
At political level, it would help to have only one permanent member at the UN, which should be the EU and not a member-state. Both France and the UK are punching way above their weight in New York - and it shows. They are not really taken seriously, unless they team up and show they represent the EU as a whole.
It's a hard reality, but individual EU member states are fairly insignificant these days.
Crises like this clearly demonstrate it. Can we find the politicians who will take the appropriate lessons, and act in the interest of all EU nationals (citizens, whatever)?
Complain about this comment
I think this is an excellent article. It is a shame that Europeans do not come together more often in a common cause. One quibble; as ateacher I find that I am increasingly correcting what some call the "Greengrocer's apostrophe." There is no need for an apostrophe after C130. It is a simple plural.
Complain about this comment
Could someone please keep the American ´war-mongers´under control ?
http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/features/2011/02/2011227153626965756.html
Complain about this comment
cool_brush_work wrote:
"BTW! - Nice pic of a soon-to-be dismantled or sold-off Royal Navy warship."
I think the point of showing this warship was to show a wider European interest/involvment somewhat earlier than in previous international incidents...
and to that end it's a not a photo of a Royal Navy Vessel - it's German -the whole point of Gavins blog..
Yes.. Libya's fate should be decided by the mass population in Libya.. but you cannot tell me we would sit comfortably in front of our TV's with news programs showing Gadaffi mowing down thousands of civilians willy nilly..
I believe the Libyan people have already hinted they don't want the US in there on the ground and I think the EU would not be wise (at this stage), but if the EU/US supported the mass population directly in some other means, maybe starting a with no fly zone then those close to the Gadaffis might see sense before things get too messy..
Complain about this comment
#30 - Chris Chittenden
The message from Europe to the free peoples along the southern shores of the Mediterranean is:
"we want you, we need you and we love you and in doing all this we will if necessary defend your human rights in accordance with UN Charter, as a first step."
- and don't forget guys, at nearly 120 USD a barrel, you have never had a better opportunity to ingratiate yourselves with your old colonial masters and new found buddies. In fact, we are pleased to offer you a once in a lifetime deal. Just keep the black stuff coming, keep the fundamentalists under the thumb and we guarantee you that, as soon as we come up with a policy, you will be the first to know.
Complain about this comment
"That would prevent gunships firing on demonstrators or mercenaries being shipped in from other parts of Africa."
Are you seriously suggesting that European aircraft would open fire on unarmed transport aircraft that might just be carrying mercenaries?
Complain about this comment
#44 SSB
A No-Fly-Zone in itself is insufficient --but IS military intervention !
Medical, food and weapons assistance to the protestors should be the first options considered.
Egypt has enough weapons to smuggle into Libya without active US or European participation.
Complain about this comment
Threnodio (38): In that case you have been writing things in your own passport yourself, because in a British passport, the ‘nationality’ is stated as “British citizen” alone. The notes on “Citizenship and national Status” also refer only to “British citizens”.
Also British passports are not issued by the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, but by the UK Identity and Passport Service which is part of the Home Office.
http://www.ips.gov.uk/cps/rde/xchg/ips_live/hs.xsl/index.htm
Are British EU supporters are so woolly-minded they cannot even distinguish which part of the government deals with its own citizens and which deals with foreign states? No doubt this confusion is closely related to their inability to differentiate the EU from a state as well. And explains all the fuzzy arguments of the EU supporters which fall apart upon first inspection. The world must be just one big haze for the EU supporter.
Complain about this comment
48 Freeborn John. Sock it to them !
Complain about this comment
It is not question of a big or small stick, but rather a very smart stick.
For example, the suggestion mooted by Gavin that {Europe} could disrupt communications, denying the Libyan leader the means to broadcast to the country.
These Arab peoples have had their noses rubbed in it by their 'leaders' for a very long time and the last thing they want is to suffer even further humiliation by having 'the West' riding to the overt rescue.
They have to do it for themselves, even if they have some covert assistance, preferably that they are completely unaware of.
The EU as a whole needs to get its act together in this respect.
Complain about this comment
33 Ed the Ted wrote:
"Err, I think it was a little more complicated than that! And he wasn't a 'minor' arch duke either, its so funny how you people re-write history to suit your simplistic views."
OK Ed, you tell us then what really happened in 1914 - but please no more than two sentences as this blog is about EU reaction to Libya and not the origins of the WW1.
Complain about this comment
#48 - Freeborn John
Well, if you will excuse me, I will just pop down to Harmincad utca and tell them that they now work for the Home Office. I think you may find that the FCO still pays them but, hey, you are the expert. Passport renewals for UK nationals living in Hungary are actually dealt with in Germany. You may even be right about the wording on my passport. It is so long since I have looked at it, all I remember is that one day it was blue and cardboard and the next it was red and plastic.
But then again, it just sits in its comfy location and only sees the light of day when crossing into no mans land.
Complain about this comment
Hey all free minded people in this blog (plus Mr. Hewitt) please tell me why are the lifes of Libyans worth thatmuch more than the lifes or Afghanis or the Bahrainis or Zimbabweans?
Is really oil that important?
Complain about this comment
"OK Ed, you tell us then what really happened in 1914 - but please no more than two sentences as this blog is about EU reaction to Libya and not the origins of the WW1."
Ed, please do not demean yourself by even responding to this. This poster will swear black is white rather than admit she is wrong.
Complain about this comment
#51 - margaret howard
Sorry to barge in, Ed the Ted, but before she chucks any more garbage our way, Franz Ferdinand was heir apparent (first in line of succession? Next Emperor? Getting through to you are we we?)
Not sure where fragrant gets her info from Ed. Probably the same place she found out about Iraq war casualties and the German statutory min . . . . no, no Threnodio, let it rest.
Complain about this comment
To ChrisArta (53):
Dude, the Libyans hate us because of our freedom! I have heard that they have even aligned with Al-Queda!
...What memo? ... No I didn't get it! ...Oh!
Dude, the Libyans love freedom like we do! It is our duty as freedom loving people to help these brave people in their fight against oppression and tyranny!
Complain about this comment
#55
threnodio
"Probably the same place she found out about ....... the German statutory min . . . . no, no Threnodio, let it rest."
Now you've done it. I'll be waking up in cold sweats at 3am pulling out what little hair I have left :(
Complain about this comment
Gavin writes a sensible blog about how there is a lot more going on than just the RAF and RN single handeddly fighting their way through the desert and is immediately attacked by nutters like freeborn John talking about Fedaralist plots.
Whether via EU or NATO or individual co-operation the European powers need to co-operate and they are. The British media wants to talk as if Britain is going to go to war with Libya single handed, if there is a no fly zone it will have to be enforced by the RAF on it's own. If ex pat oil workers are to get out they have to be brought out by the RAF.
What is actually happening is in the oil fields there are expats fom all over the world, when the RAF flight goes in it picks up 350 people of which less than 100 are British, when the Germans go in on the same day and get no mention in the UK press they bring out 200 of which 30 are British. HMS Cumberland has brought people out of several nationalities but so has the German, French, Italian, Greek, and Turkish navies.
Complain about this comment
Clive Hill #25.
"Still, is there no point at which you would allow military intervention ?
Suppose he killed 10,000 people ? 100,000 ? A million ?
It is wrong to say never. Not for other people. Not when you are not being massacred."
next you'll be telling me that 'we' aren't trying to protect our (vested) trade interests, that all of our concern is solely about the people of Libya and their rights.
and the 'numbers' argument is pretty shallow too -- did we stop importing Coltan because we were concerned about the Congolese? (800,000+ died)
no Clive Hill, you either have an ethical position (in which case even one death would be one too many) or you don't; your relative 'values' argument doesn't do it for me.
Complain about this comment
Ellinas #39.
"Only Italy will lose at that game (13% of Italy's gas supplies and almost a quarter of its oil)"
Germany too uses a lot of Libyan oil.
Complain about this comment
Yes that is right freedom loving people, until 6 weeks ago we were selling them weapons, now they lost the trust of their people!!! Is Obama really trying to be funny here or did he say something he did not meant to say? "The Libyan regime lost the trust of its people, so it has to go" Did they have the trust of their people 6 weeks ago?? What about the King of Saudi Arabia, he has the trust of his people (women are also people by the way) ohhh but why go that far! Did Tony Blair & Gordon Brown had the trust of their people??
I think Obama was trying to be funny with that, he did not mean it!
Complain about this comment
To JR4414
(59)
Well said, as long as dictators buy our weapons and sell us "stuff" we want how many people die in their countries does not register a great deal with our national media or with our national politicians. It is so obvious yet people don not see it or they choose not to see it.
Complain about this comment
#59 - jr4412
#25 - Clive Hill
I am sorry people but this will not do. However much it might offend the sensibilities of the idealistic or the analysis of the more mathematically minded, you cannot simply write off the pragmatic element. Like it or not, in confrontations of this kind, casualties are inevitable. The questions are whether responsible people have used their best endeavours to minimise them, whether the force used could be considered reasonable and whether that force was used in defense of a legitimate position or merely the maintenance of a status quo. Bombarding defenseless and innocent civilians from the air clearly crosses this line. It is the behaviour of crude monsters. Importing outsiders to do your dirty work for you because your own people will not do it is the work of crude monsters by proxy. The numbers, offensive though they may be, are secondary. This is a crime against humanity and should be treated with the contempt it deserves.
Complain about this comment
Right now there is a huge talk of the american-enforced american-led Greek government which seems to be heading to yield Greek (and thus EU) sovereignty to Turkey, a non-EU country and (no matter its candid-candidacy) an extremely hostile one towards the three EU members (Greece, Cyprus, Bulgaria).
EUians do not mind that. They do not mind that EU sovereignty will be cut. They are more pressed to do what encircle Libya and press Gaddafi to step down - whom? The one who was ready to provide them with what they wanted?
US has played excellent their game one more time (congrats.) and Europeans have simply to admit they are one more time as pathetic as they can be. They have to resolve to the fact that as long as Britain remains in there having a say and as long as pathetic powerless Germany will insist to lead trying to impose ridiculous micromanagerial policies, Europe will have no future and its decline will be irreversible. Kick out Britain, make Germans go back in their factories and stick to producing BMWs and other unecessary things rather than having them trying to play in international geopolitics, something they never comprehended, and leave the French lead Europe (not with Sarko... he is proven too short...). French are not necessarily having the best policy, but they are the only ones that combine 1) Defese 2) Full range military production 3) spatial applications 4) space access 5) massive nuclear capabilities.
As long as Europeans do not get serious they will keep declining.
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II #63.
"However much it might offend the sensibilities of the idealistic or the analysis of the more mathematically minded, you cannot simply write off the pragmatic element ... This is a crime against humanity and should be treated with the contempt it deserves."
pragmatic -- yes, and in any case, you can always go to church and ask for absolution. ;-(
the real 'crime against humanity' is that we allow our commercial interests to take priority whenever we feel the need to do so (which appears to be all of the time).
so, I may be an idealist, but at least I'm not dreaming about making money.
Complain about this comment
Freeborn John you are perfectly correct. EU citizenship does NOT exist. It is simply a figment of the imagination which the EU dreamed about to try to influence the people into believing in the EU. That is the federalists plot to try to subjugate all the European countries citizens under their dictatorial rule.
Complain about this comment
threnodio_II #63.
"Bombarding defenseless and innocent civilians from the air clearly crosses this line."
choice quote, and I missed it...
"anger as civilians killed in Nato air strike"
"estimated that perhaps 5,000 of the Vietnamese dead were civilians"
"loss of civilian life in US Baghdad airstrike"
"Within the first two to four months of the bombings, the acute effects killed 90,000–166,000 people in Hiroshima and 60,000–80,000 in Nagasaki"
I can almost hear your reply already: 'Ah, but that's war.'
anyway, relative values and all that..
Complain about this comment
@#1 & #48
Article 20.1 Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union - 'Citizenship of the Union is hereby eastablished. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union.'
This is of course given domestic effect by the European Communities Act 1972.
It would appear regardless of which agency issues passports the substantive law has established a supra-national European citzenship which is parasitic upon national cutizenship.
Complain about this comment
55 threnodio writes:
"Franz Ferdinand was heir apparent (first in line of succession? "
Oh sorry, I thought they were a Glasgow rock band.
Complain about this comment
Comments from anti-Ghadaffi groups about Western military intervention seem to be mixed at best but we should be careful, specifically asking these groups what they want us to do. I find it hard to imagine however any objection to, for example, warships sailing to Al-Zawiyah to deliver non-military supplies to the beseiged anti-Ghadaffi citizens, while at the same time sending a very strong psychological signal to the beseiging forces. The West could also quite cheaply win a lot of friends by helping to evacuate Egyptian refugees in Tunisia back to Egypt.
Complain about this comment
#64
Nik;
Two biggest net contributors to the EU budget: Germany, UK
Biggest receiver of EU funds: France
And you want to kick out Germany and the UK and put France in charge? lol
Complain about this comment
The one thing that EU leaders really need to do above all is to move away from their traditional policy of backing Arab autocrats. David Cameron's trip to Qatar with weapons salespeople in tow not only made his criticism of Ghadaffi for attacking his people appear outrageously hypocritical, but it seems unbelievably shortsighted. What happens when his friendly host uses British-bought guns against his people in a week's time? What happens to these deals if the Qatari absolute monarchy is overthrown? Business as usual has to be a casualty of these protests!
Complain about this comment
...By the way Gavin will you also write a few posts about Bahrein or are they too close to our interests to be critical of them? i.e. brutality and represion is ok as long as it is done by dictators we like???
Complain about this comment
Richard #70.
"Comments from anti-Ghadaffi groups about Western military intervention seem to be mixed at best but we should be careful, specifically asking these groups what they want us to do. I find it hard to imagine however any objection to ... non-military supplies.."
but it's already gone beyond that:
"The United States, Britain and France have sent several hundred “defence advisors” to train and support the anti-Gadhafi forces in oil-rich Eastern Libya.."
Complain about this comment
German. that thing :o))))) sorry, cool-brush, you already know 7 times in this thread :o)))))))
Nevermind I wonder what is that eh centrepiece scaffolding type structure init :o))) that looks like an oil tower or an Eiffel tower or a high power electricity line eh pillar.
As to Libyan oil there isn't much of it relatively but it is of prime quality around, absolutely the best, does not need to be purified, and it makes up European aviation diesel. The USA has purification things to make aviation benzine out of any oil, while Europe doesn't.
That's why uninterrupted supply of it is so important.
But we heard here that their dissidents :o) have already began today shipping that Libyan oil, about 20% of the norm is already in opposition's hands.
As to Gaddafi's fate I am worried for him because 1. he seems to be plain insane by the way (we know the symptoms :o)))))
2. Libya has a very cruel historical traditions in this respect.It's not Egypt that lets its ex go. Not so bad as Iraq, which has even more cruel traditions than Libya, in terms what they do with theirs. But bad, bad enough.
Complain about this comment
Re #75
AiW: "Libya has a very cruel historical traditions in this respect.
It's not Egypt that lets its ex go."
You mean that ex-prominent assassinated in Mexico with an ice-pick
was Libyan? ;-)
Complain about this comment
Muammar : "Every Libyan loves Muammar"
Fidel: "Every Cuban loves Fidel"
Hugo: "Every Venezuelan loves Hugo"
Those who oppose them are adolescents drugged and armed by al-Qaeda.
Complain about this comment
champagne_charlie, going back to your comment about shortage of C-17s...
We have quite a few spare C-5 Galaxies parked in an Arizona desert.
And one could put in them even all Chinese working for Qaddafi.
Let alone oil/construction workers of other nationalities.
And I'm sure they could be leased rather cheaply.
[on the other hand we have C-130 gunships equipped with howitzers. :-)]
Complain about this comment
For those who've suggested that any intervention in Libya should be undertaken by the UN.
"The UN team was attacked in the capital, Yamoussoukro.
They were looking into reports that Belarus had provided attack helicopters for supporters of Laurent Gbagbo, who refuses to give up the presidency.
Belarus has denied the allegations as "groundless".
The UN Sanctions Committee on Ivory Coast says it has not been able to positively confirm the shipment, though it said UN personnel should continue monitoring the situation.
A planned meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss the reports has been cancelled."
Complain about this comment
#6 JohnConstable
"Europe must suffer its own 9/11 before the politicians wake up".
You mean a similar 9/11 in Brussels ? That would certainly wake up the politicians ! Most likely it would also be the end of the EU .
Complain about this comment
#20 MacTurk
Aren't you getting rather near the bone ? "Fuzzie Wuzzies"?
Complain about this comment
#53 ChrisArta
This Blog is not about Libyan lives , it is about Libyan Oil .
Libya is a huge producer of Oil and the world is afraid the price will go sky high .
Complain about this comment
Manneken
Reading your various posts in preceeding blogs and here , I am of the impression that you are a student . You have read the history of the EU from its conception ; you evidently read the information put out by the EU on its website Europa .
You seem to be unaware that the EU is more than a theory , that many of its practical aspects don't work ; that it doesn't have the coordinated response of its member states . British and French military forces are prepared to go on agressive military service ; whereas most of the other countries are passive , even if they have armed services . A coordinated EU military force is no more than EU wishful thinking .
In commenting on these blogs it helps to observe the EU as it actually is , not as what it dreams to be .
Complain about this comment
#83
huaimek;
Not that I'm advocating disbanding it, but as long as NATO exists, the possibility of the EU taking a defence role without the US seems highly unlikely and indeed unwelcome due to duplication of effort and possible conflict of purpose. And as long as the EU has no track record of performance in the number one role that any state has to perform, namely security and defence, it cannot consider itself nor aspire to be a nation, nor should any nation put its security in their hands. Catch-22.
Complain about this comment
#74. At 01:30am on 01 Mar 2011, jr4412
That article has amongst other things the sentence :-
"Meanwhile, three Indian Navy warships, are also being dispatched to be deployed in the rebel-held areas of Libya"
Unless a ship is now able to sail on sand it makes the whole article of dubious quality both in terms of Indian involvement and special forces involvement. It also seems to have come from Islamabad, enough said even from that.
Complain about this comment
#64. At 9:33pm on 28 Feb 2011, Nik wrote:
"leave the French lead Europe (not with Sarko... he is proven too short...). French are not necessarily having the best policy, but they are the only ones that combine 1) Defese 2) Full range military production 3) spatial applications 4) space access 5) massive nuclear capabilities."
It is a shame you exhibit absolutely no knowledge of the fatal flaw in the French psyche, they quite simply can't organise a drink in a brewery, as soon as any project gets close to succeeding the psyche kicks in and all have to try and claim credit and insist it was their involvement that makes the difference. This then leads to the inevitable collapse of the project and the saying 'yet another disaster pulled from the jaws of victory'.
Yet you seriously propose the French should run an EU, the current Paris-Berlin EU construct is imploding because of its corruption, incompetence and cronyism and you wish to remove the Berlin influence, unbelievable.
Complain about this comment
JR,
Mr Emminence JR, I'm sure you do have ideas of your own...but it seems finding fault with other posters comments is the big success of your posting career. Good for you...that you know what you do do best
:) No solutions, just deadly enertia instead of energy. One doesn't have to worry too much that you will encounter insanity. As your posts don't go into the grey areas too too much.
No offense, I'm just wandering Who(m) are the perfect and preferred would be interventionists in this obvious EU backyard massacre?
Perhaps those with the least of aspirations ..ie, the cynics, the finders of flaws? You would be the perfect interventionist, doing the dirty deed of stopping a massacre, yes?
That is what I would prefer--actions done by the supremely critical--you stooping to do the flawed policy..not the USA--
Step up and do the best you can, please, I'm waiting:)))
Complain about this comment
Re 71 champagne_charlie
"Two biggest net contributors to the EU budget: Germany, UK
Biggest receiver of EU funds: France"
As always with the like of CC biased information, or rather disinformation. France is the third net contributors of the EU.
Germany : 86 billions
UK : 57 billions
France : 51 billions
France receives more than the UK but pays out much more as well, which means the two countries are in the same bracket (same for Italy by the way).
I know you guys love propaganda but sometimes facts must be set straight.
Complain about this comment
Hey Powermeekat how is doing that great dreamliner of yours? I heard some guys in the plane industry were calling it the dramaliner already?
Complain about this comment
As a follow up, what I really suggesting is WITH the backing of France,
Germany, Sweden, Switzerland and Belgium Should do "the doing," then Take the responsibility if it all blows up in their faces--that is...
what people who are wanting responsibility and some trancendence over their past actions sometimes must do
No offence but as Americans we've gone belly up too many times with others blood and deaths (and our financial imbecility) on our own faces..so please do take the initiative--its the hour of Europe--show the world how this sort of thing ..could be done.
Its your hour.
We'll be judging the outcome, but with differing opinions..like in real life:))
Complain about this comment
Buzet,
Sorry about the neutral Belgium thing. They tried... and failed to be neutral twice,
but being the victimizer instead of the victim might be interesting to see.
You see if one does nothing here there will be another civil war situation near Europe and it may take all the glow and attention off the Israel/Palestine civil war--(victims and victimizers debate)
would that be too too much?
Complain about this comment
Actually, I do prefer the French/German "axis" be responsible for this--they being the most powerful of the "EU foreign possible policy" bunch.
Complain about this comment
Think about all the people who would be upset at their success...hmmmm
Complain about this comment
The conclusion of article says "No Fly Zone" by European countries may be best potion . Is it enough for the situation?.The France has started helping to eastern Libya.US Ambassador to UN has ruled out arming of eastern Tripoli.So it is to see when US led NATO forces[Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]) or UN peace keeping forces enter into Libya as per UN security Council sanction or UN,NATO &EU succeed through sanctions against libya.It is very important to see post Tunsia regime and Post-Egypt regime after removal of Current regime.
Complain about this comment
Freeborn John(no 1)wrote "Gavin said “So far the European focus has been on getting its citizens out of Libya”. Sorry Gavin; there are no European 'citizens'".
Freeborn John(no 48) wrote "Threnodio (38): In that case you have been writing things in your own passport yourself, because in a British passport, the ‘nationality’ is stated as “British citizen” alone".
DestroytheEU(no 66) wrote "Freeborn John you are perfectly correct. EU citizenship does NOT exist. It is simply a figment of the imagination which the EU dreamed about to try to influence the people into believing in the EU. That is the federalists plot to try to subjugate all the European countries citizens under their dictatorial rule".
Guys, sorry to burst your bubble, but since the Maastricht Treaty of 1992, as in force since 1993, the situation is as follows;
Article 20 (1) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union(aka Maastricht Treaty) states that "Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to and not replace national citizenship.
All nationals of Member States are citizens of the union. "It is for each Member State, having due regard to Community law, to lay down the conditions for the acquisition and loss of nationality."
The treaty further and specifically establishes the rights of EU citizens to first, move and reside freely within the EU, and second, to work anywhere within the EU, and to do so under the same conditions as all other nationals.
Freeborn John, with reference to the statements "Are British EU supporters are so woolly-minded they cannot even distinguish which part of the government deals with its own citizens and which deals with foreign states? No doubt this confusion is closely related to their inability to differentiate the EU from a state as well. And explains all the fuzzy arguments of the EU supporters which fall apart upon first inspection. The world must be just one big haze for the EU supporter", could I suggest that you look in the mirror?
The postings on this issue by the two contributors quoted above are typical of the rabid anti-EU stance; strident and mostly fact-free.
Huaimek(no 81) wrote :#20 MacTurk. Aren't you getting rather near the bone ? "Fuzzie Wuzzies"?"
Have you read some of the coverage in the English print media? One thing I have found deeply depressing about the reaction of the right wing commentariat in particular was the speed with which they all started singing from Mubarak's song sheet. You know, the old refrain of "It is my strong hand or a series of failed Islamic terrorist states".
Several things have beconme evident since the Arab Revolution started;
a) No intelligence service saw anything coming.
b) The assembled army of "expert commentators" were equally as blind to the fragility of the Arab regimes.
c) The Muslim Brotherhood and al-Quaeda had absolutely no part in starting or continuing this process.
d) The main loser is Israel, as it has put all its foreign policy eggs into the basket labelled "We like strong reliable authoritarian states".
e) The US can rescue its good name if it changes its policies to reflect its claimed aspiratuions to freedom and democracy, and if it does so quickly.
f) Iran will be a loser in two ways. First, because the illegitimacy of its current regime will be cruelly exposed. Second, its influence will be automatically diminished by a resurgent Egypt reclaims its lost position of local cultural leader.
g) Europe needs to focus on support for the civil societies of Arab countries, and on trade support. If life is good at home, people do not tend to migrate.
Complain about this comment
#88 Commodus
I have been checking the figures . I think you should verify your figures .
Champagne_Charlie is quoting Net Contributions . Your figures must be gross contributions .
In terms of net contributions , France is about fourth , taking by far the biggest amount from the EU , so her net contribution is about 1.9bl.
Complain about this comment
#91 Stevenson
Could Armageddon be on the way ; perhaps we shall all be joining the not so civil war ?
Complain about this comment
________________________________________
BRITISH RACIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTY (BRDP)
________________________________________
If the British Racial Democratic Party (BRDP) existed and was in power they would be the most trust worthy group to handle any international crisis. We'll have to wait for the British Racial Democracy movement to catch on.
_________________________________
ECONOMIC PIIGS AS CANNON FODDER
_________________________________
It looks like the Northern Europeans will be using the Southern Europeans as economic "cannon fodder" if the White Deficit is allowed to get much worse.
__________________
STRONG MEDICINE
__________________
Britain might be able to prepare the strong medicine Europe, and perhaps the whole world, needs with British Racial Democracy.
What say ye? (What say you all?)
Complain about this comment
#97...superstition from a humanist?..I'm just thinking of change, only.
Complain about this comment
95 "a) No intelligence service saw anything coming"
To be fair, it was unlikely they would. These things can simmer for years and come to nothing...or they can blow up into a full scale civil war and tyrants hanging from lamp posts within hours/days.
A comfortable thought for all those authoritarian types out there.
Sleep tight. ;)
Complain about this comment
A no-fly zone is military assistance.
At the end of the day if military force is used it can only be equalled by military force - sad I know, but thats the way its been since homo-sapiens picked up rocks and sticks. The UNHCR/ICRC are not going to stand in front of warplanes & helicopters with flags to try and protect humanitarian aid and the people being targetted.
There needs to be a credible deterant in place to encourage Gaddafi not to use his air-force on what are civilians, who want political change. They are not asking for military change, but they are being met with miliary force - and so they pick up arms to.
What really amazes me is how Mr.Cameron now sounds like Tony Blair - so soon into his term. International events not only distracting him but actually driving him down a road that only 12 months ago he would have been opposed to - intervention in another state when we are up to our necks in conflicts elsewhere - just as we shut-down, sell off, mothball the armed forces - welcome to the real world Mr.Cameron.
Complain about this comment
#88
commodus;
"I know you guys love propaganda but sometimes facts must be set straight."
Germany and the UK are the biggest net contributors to the EU, France is the biggest recipient. I never said France is the biggest NET recipient. The facts cant be "set straight" because the figures you quoted are the ones I used, with France being the single biggest receiver of EU funds.(89 billion).
The post was meant to illustrate to Nik what would happen to France's financial position with the EU if it intended to remain as the biggest recipient after becoming leader of an EU that didnt have Germany or the UK in it. It was pretty simple, Huaimek got it easily enough.
Complain about this comment
Sorry Freeborn John, don't know were you got your definition of a Citizen from, (probably from the "Daily I Really Hate The EU") but the first one I found when I Googled it was."A Citizen is a member of a Political Community". The EU is a Political Community.
Complain about this comment
98 Is your mate a bloke called Creedy by any chance?
Complain about this comment
"Germany too uses a lot of Libyan oil."
So why don't you built some new 3rd generation nuclear power plants rather than shutting down the existing ones?
Just because of ignorant (but PC) ecoterrorists?
Complain about this comment
#102
Additional:
I guess that Nik also doesnt like the idea that , despite having been in the Euro-project for 30 years, 25 billion euros (Net) is still expected to go to Greece in this period (2007-13). Who do you think pays for all that Nik? The tooth fairy?
Complain about this comment
Commodus wrote:
Hey Powermeekat how is doing that great dreamliner of yours? I heard some guys in the plane industry were calling it the dramaliner already?
Much better, thank you, than your virtual A-350.
P.S. Watch a a video of a roll-out of the first B-747-8I.
Already fully booked (with a launch customer being ....LUFTHANSA. :-)))
Complain about this comment
#103
Try typing in "definition:citizen", read the first page of references, then come back and try again.
Complain about this comment
Gavin, In view of impotent EU's inaction: shouldn't you change a heading of that thread to "Europe's biggest shtick"?
Complain about this comment
MacTurK (95): Citizenship is the relationship between individual and state, and cannot be created by an international treaty whose contracting parties are states and not individuals. So-called ‘EU citizenship’ is nothing but citizenship of a state that is a member of the EU. This is clear because no individual can renounce ‘EU citizenship’ the way they can renounce their real (nation-state) citizenship, nor keep ‘EU citizenship’ should the state they are a citizen of leave the EU. Real citizenship comes with serious obligations for the individual, including the obligation to respect the law, pay taxes, and even (if called upon) fight and perhaps die in a war. So-called ‘EU citizenship’ introduces no additional obligations beyond those one has a citizen of a member-state of the EU. All these show that so-called ‘EU citizenship is empty of meaning, and is simply a lexical device intended to blur the distinction between an international organisation and the 'state under construction' that euro-federalists dream of. This is also true of all talk ‘EU soil’ or ‘EU borders’ which the BBC should avoid using. The EU is an international organisation and has no more soil than the Red Cross.
The BBC also should not be using the term ‘Europe’ when it means ‘EU’ or ‘states that are members of the EU’ or 'European states' if it means all states whose territory is on the Continent of Europe irrespective of whether they are members of the EU or not. i.e. Europe is a geographic construct alone. Euro-federalists want to confuse terms that refer to geography, people(s), states and international organisations as part of the campaign to undermine the nation-state. The BBC should be precise and use each word or phrase with its correct meaning. Othwerwise they are, either intentionally or otherwise, conveying a federalist message.
For example, it makes no more sense for Gavin to talk about “Europe’s military power” than it does to talk about the military power of the Norfolk Broads or the Pacific. Gavin should be referring to the military power of states that are members of the EU or NATO if that is what he means. But when he uses the words he did, it can convey the message that the EU should have military power. Similarly, since a geographic entity is passive, it cannot act. Therefore it makes no sense to say “Europe's moment to act decisively in this crisis in its backyard has arrived”. The BBC should be saying “the moment has arrived for European states to take action” (using European only as an adjective to refer also to non-EU states like Switzerland or Turkey) or “the moment has arrived for the EU institutions to take action”, etc. depending on what he means. Otherwise the words he is using convey an implication that the EU should be doing something that is rightfully the role of a state, which those states might do better through another international organisation of which they are members like NATO.
The BBC has to stop using language like this in its coverage, either lazily or deliberately, which turn its reporting into license-payer funded subliminal advertising for euro-federalism.
Complain about this comment
richard390 (103): The EU is a political community whose members are states and not individuals. It has no more citizens than does the UN or NATO or the IMF or any other international organization.
While i am sure you can read words, it is rather clear you do not have a precise understanding of the words you use. Yet it is impossible to discuss the EU and its problems without being precise when discussing the relationship between geography, institutions (either states or international organisations) and people (either citizens or nations or ad-hoc groupings of individuals). Most of the errors that EU-supporters make are in mixing these things up.
Complain about this comment
Re #110
The problem, as I see it, is not so much whether EU should have its own unified military force (preceded of course by a unified defense policy, preceded of course by a unified foreign policy, preceded of course by a unified energy policy, etc.), but that it's clearly unable to CREATE one.
Complain about this comment
#95 MacTurk
I only know of two sorts of Fuzzy Wuzzies . Perhaps you are refering to the one associated with a particular brand of Blackcurrent Jam , the other is more personal .
Complain about this comment
Europe and its citizens (stuff it, you pedants!) should take the lead in the West's response to the Libyan issue -- and if they do, it may well prove a pivotal moment in the development of the EU.
The citizens of the West (again, stuff it!) are watching with intense interest.
One point though: a "no fly zone" sounds fine as long as no one violates it. But watch out for an outcry when a planeload of African citizens (again!) is brought down in flames outside Tripoli on its way to rescue the Colonel -- in violation of "no fly."
Complain about this comment
Freeborn John, your self-serving definitions used to try to deny a legal fact, cut very little ice.
I pay taxes wherever I reside. Neither my country of origen, my current country of residence nor the EU is likely to declare war on anyone, so...?
European citizenship confers rights, therefore is not "empty of meaning".
Your refusal to accept or examine anything, except through the lens of your federal phobia, is wearing. It reminds me of Sinn Fein people, who see the nefarious hand of England everywhere.
I find it amusing that while you characterize this blog(and the entire BBC) as "either intentionally or otherwise, conveying a federalist message" and "license-payer funded subliminal advertising for euro-federalism", I find commenters such as Burtine(no 6 here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2011/02/desert_raids_from_malta.html), who classify him as totally anti-Euro.
I think he is probably doing a good job.
I also found your comment(no 22 here: http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/gavinhewitt/2011/02/europe_twisting_over_libya.html )to the effect that "It is not simply a matter that only English-speaking countries have this capability to intervene to protect civilians" profoundly silly. I mean, have you noticed how many vessels the Frnch Navy has? Or Spain? Or Italy? You might care to compare the number of hulls deployed by Turkey and Germany in the current Libyan crisis to the number deployed by Britain? No? No surprise there, then.
Complain about this comment
Stevenson #87.
"Mr Emminence JR.."
sneer if you wish, but if you have an open mind, try get some information from media businesses not based in the US of A or Europe. you could start with this article:
"Africans hunted down in "liberated" Libya"
Complain about this comment
Powemeerkat (112): Military capability is the exclusive privileges of states. Indeed one famous definition of the state (from Max Weber) is ‘the entity with the monopoly on legitimate use of violence’. The EU is not a state, and never must become one. Therefore no EU military; ever.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly_on_violence
When it comes to military power, the only thing above the level of the state is the international military alliance, with each state having the final word when it comes to deployment of its forces, i.e. decision-making by unanimity. And there is already just such a military alliance (NATO) more effective than any alliance of only EU member-states by virtue of the additional military capability that the USA and Canada bring to the collective effort. Only those with an atavistic desire to cut off their noses to spite the Americans (of which there are many on these pages) would support a less effective military alliance than NATO composed only of member-states from the European continent.
Complain about this comment
The real question here is not so much what is best for the EU or its member states, but what is best for Libya and other countries in turmoil.
Most past experience would suggest that the wise policy for all foreign powers and international organisations is to stay out of it. If you do not have very good reasons to believe that you can make things better and that the locals will appreciate your intervention, mind your own business.
Complain about this comment
MacTurk (115): There are no so-called EU citizen rights which did not exist prior to the treaty which supposedly created this "EU citizenship". Freedom of movement of workers, etc. were in the original treaty of Rome of 1957 so existed for many decades before the treaty articles you reference, which therefore obviously did not create those supposed “EU citizen” rights. This is another clear example that so-called “EU citizenship” is a concept void of any substance meaning no more than citizen of a state which is a member of the EU.
Complain about this comment
#119
FBJ;
I'm surprised you haven't exploded over the "It reminds me of Sinn Fein people" comment.
Complain about this comment
83 Haimek writes:
"In commenting on these blogs it helps to observe the EU as it actually is , not as what it dreams to be ."
---------------------------
108 Haimek (Europe twisting over Libya) wrote:
"The next event will be a revolution in Europe , like those in north Africa."
Should you not follow your own advice?
Complain about this comment
Re "no fly zone"...
I recall the French have quite an experience in that area, since they created just such a zone for American F-111s flying to Libya.
And that Italian politicians actually warned Gaddafi about an imminent U.S. retaliatory strike thus saving the monster's life.
So, since France and Italy are so close to Libya, let their mighty air forces take care of the problem.
Complain about this comment
The fact is that the various countries in Europe will have to start some form of Military Union fairly soon. The factors driving this are;
a) The upcoming withdrawal/rationalisation of worldwide US deployment, as the financial hole they are in gets deeper, and the cuts bite. The Defence Secretary(Mr Robert Gates) has announced large cutbacks, which have seen the scrapping of various programs, such as the "Virginia" class submarine, the Marine Corps' Expeditionary Fighting Vehicles. The US military machine will be cut dramatically. The US forces/bases in Europe will be on the list for return to the USA or closure. Europe will simply have to do more for itself.
b) The ongoing duplication, and resultant wasted money, of national programs in the areas of fighter jets, armoured vehicles and warships. Europe needs to achieve agreed programs for building these systems. And the fact that some collaborative programs were not too successful in the past is not relevant - the diminishing defence budgets and the need to maximise value per defence spend is.
c) The simple inability of any single European nation to cover all their defence needs. The specialisation already ongoing within NATO will have to geared up in a European context. Examples include the Czech, which specialises in Special Forces(present in Afganistan) and a dedicated unit for NATO NBC detection and monitoring. Obviously not Naval units.
d) If there is to be any large expeditionary force/Quick Reaction Force, then it will have to be based around the Armed Forces of France and Britain, as these are the two nations with the history, training, experience and forces structured for this role. Support and reinforcements would be available from the Netherlands(amphib ship), Italy(Harrier Carriers, amphib ships) and Spain(Harrier Carriers, amphib ships).
Ultimately, if the member states decide in Council that such cooperation makes sense, it will happen. If not, not.
And moaning on about British defence cuts is a waste of time. The Empire is over, and no-one in the UK is willing to pay the taxes which would be required to maintain the defence establishment that The Daily Mail and The Daily Telegraph want. You simply cannot afford it, not without demolishing the entire modern British state.
Complain about this comment
#84
Thank you for your comment.
I think you underestimate the amount of integration that happens in the military backroom (I know, it sounds a bit suspect).
Fact is, and most EU member states know this, they are pretty impotent on their own.
Unless EU member states start to pool technical military capability, there's very little they can achieve.
The political side needs to come to terms with this, but it is probably the best method to achieve EU-wide military and foreign-policy capability.
That's not the EU "as it should be", but as it is today.
The observation is clear: individual EU states are pretty powerless.
The question is: how to improve things? More division (as the eurosceptics keep saying)? What good will that do?
Integration is the only reasonable answer. It does not carry the emotional weight of "national identity", but it not just "as things should be" - it is the only rational way forward.
It is also the way forward favoured by most EU-citizens, when actually asked the question. Let's pool military and foreign policy, so we can be efficient, rather than impotent (either as US poodles, or as divided small states).
Complain about this comment
#121. At 5:28pm on 01 Mar 2011, margaret howard
"The next event will be a revolution in Europe , like those in north Africa."
"Should you not follow your own advice?"
Quite so in England, lets have a large scale demonstration demanding the removal of all Scots. We've already seen French, Greeks etc getting close to serious unrest so my advice to an impossible English hating Scot is head for the (Scottish) hills.
Complain about this comment
#119. At 4:17pm on 01 Mar 2011, Freeborn John,
There are since Lisbon and before a number of political agreements giving so-called EU citizen rights, however I'm yet to see any citizen responsibilities being included. You are right to decry EU citizenship as in truth it means very little, you have freedom of movement for three months true, after that you must not be a drain on the resources of where you live. If you lose your work you must return to the state you have nationality with unless you can qualify for their benefits. The EU and its so called rights are a conjurers trick, slight of hand and using odd shaped mirrors to distort the reality.
So now in Libya there may be a no-fly zone, if the EU is involved the French will want to be a part so that they can sell arms to the new government, the Italians, well who knows, the Germans if they can make money, the pacifist states and greens will worry about desert ants, scorpions etc and the rest will get frustrated. Hopefully only Nato will be involved as that has safely kept European peace for decades (note, not the EU).
Complain about this comment
#124 - Manneken
Good stuff, well argued. Let's hear it for the EU defense force. Just one tiny problem. You can almost hear the Ashton phones buzzing can't you?
"Hi Kathy! You know this army we have invented - well we need to use it. Do we need permission? What, all 27? Get real, the crisis will be over and done with by the time we get that far. Oh, I see, that was the original idea. So we don't need a policy at all? Very clever, nice talking to you, have a nice day".
Complain about this comment
#123. At 5:57pm on 01 Mar 2011, MacTurk
#124. At 6:22pm on 01 Mar 2011, Manneken
You two still haven't got it, if it ain't broke don't fix it and Nato is certainly still working very well indeed and showing remarkable little of the patronising self interest that the states making up the EU institutions perpetually show.
"Unless EU member states start to pool technical military capability, there's very little they can achieve."
That is already being done without the EU institutions being involved to screw it up, it's called Nato.
"b) The ongoing duplication, and resultant wasted money, of national programs in the areas of fighter jets, armoured vehicles and warships. Europe needs to achieve agreed programs for building these systems. "
By the time they agree who builds what bits and then realise that some bits are incompatible with others or badly made they will be obsolete.
Too many cooks always spoil the broth, have you two yet to realise that, yes there should be cooperation between nations but the whole EU, you are truly jokers.
Complain about this comment
#127. At 6:54pm on 01 Mar 2011, threnodio_II,
Quite so, were one to be contemplating an invasion of the EU the best way to prepare that would be to place fifth columnists on the ground to talk up ever increasing union, an EU defence force and any other merging of resources so that everything became moribund. On Invasion and by the time the various committees had finished deciding the ethnic origin of the food to be served in the numerous dinners after the meetings and the French having insisted that French cooking was the only cuisine to be served, the invaders would have already had enough time to reach Brussels.
Complain about this comment
16 powermeer wrote:
"Operation Desert Libya doesn't somehow sound as good as Desert Storm, does it now?"
What about Operation Flipper? That was in Libya too and didn't end too well either.
Complain about this comment
Hi
A few things.
I was looking on Europa a couple of weeks back looking for hard figures on where EU money comes from and where it goes. I didn't get very far. Where are Huaimek, Champagne-Charlie etc getting the figures from, I would like a peek at the numbers myself? I'm not looking for an article someone else has written but the source data. (E.g. If you go to WHO's website you can download an Excel spreadsheet of healthcare data and perform your own analysis.)
The idea of some sort of merged EU army has come up. This idea troubles me. When a US soldier dies in Afghanistan does it honestly cause the same degree of emotional distress to the British citizens reading this as it does when it is British soldier who dies? I know that it should, I'm asking if it honestly does.
My experiences from various nations is that the most harmfull casualties are not the ten suffered by another nation but the one suffered by your own.
In a united EU army a disproportionate amount of responsibility would be borne by UK and French troops. Would the EU value the lives of British and French soldiers as much as their respective governments do? I'm sure that all the right platitudes would be wheeled out saying that they do. I'm just not sure that the words would match the reality of their actions.
I'm opposed to the formation of an EU army because I value the lives of the servicemen who serve their respective nations. I worry that a united EU force would hold consider the lives of its soldier to be of less value than is the case with the current national armies.
As concerns Libya. They don't seem to like Ghaddafi much any more, but this doesn't mean that they love Europeans.
Complain about this comment
The number of British casualties in Afghanistan exceeds those suffered by all other EU nations combined.
Just something to chew on.
Complain about this comment
#131
ulkomaalainen;
"Where are Huaimek, Champagne-Charlie etc getting the figures from, "
I just make 'em up for propaganda purposes apparently.
Complain about this comment
127 Threnodio:
Quote: ""Hi Kathy! You know this army we have invented - well we need to use it. Do we need permission? What, all 27? Get real, the crisis will be over and done with by the time we get that far. Oh, I see, that was the original idea. So we don't need a policy at all? Very clever, nice talking to you, have a nice day".
Well, only 27 states?
There are 28 in NATO and they can get decisions made.
But your point is a fair one. An EU force would have to have a common policy as NATO has and the 27 may fight like ferrets in a bag before evolving one. Who would be their common enemy? That big growly bear out East possibly.
Complain about this comment
Buzet23 #85.
missed this earlier, sorry.
"Unless a ship is now able to sail on sand it makes the whole article of dubious quality both in terms of Indian involvement and special forces involvement."
further on it says: "[INS] Jalashwa, formaly the USS Trenton, has the capability to embark, transport & land various elements of an amphibious force & its equipped with mechanised landing craft, Sea King helicopters & armed with raders, ship to air missiles & rapid firing guns. Experts say that Indian ship Jalashwa has a Landing Platform Dock with a capability 1000 fully armed troops."
so what point were you trying to make?
"It also seems to have come from Islamabad, enough said even from that."
uh, are you saying if it isn't BBC or CNN it must be untrue?
given that you do appear genuine in your interest, how about this for a perspective: http://www.afrol.com/articles/37465
Complain about this comment
MacTurk (123): Pretty weak arguments, all of which by their own logic suggest greater economies of scale can be realised by working with the US and Canadians in NATO (and ANZUS countries too) than France & UK alone or even all EU27 together (25 of which are not prepared to spend on defence).
The fact is that NATO is the most successful military alliance ever created and will always be more capable than a smaller grouping without US capability. Anyone who favours defence via the EU despite its lack of capability is plainly prepared to sacrifice effective defence on the alter of euro-federalism.
Also Euro-federalists need to be consistent. You cannot say that the USA is so powerful that we need the EU as a countervailing force. And that the USA is so weak that NATO cannot be relied upon...
-----------
“8. The followers must feel humiliated by the ostentatious wealth and force of their enemies.
When I was a boy I was taught to think of Englishmen as the five-meal people. They ate more frequently than the poor but sober Italians. Jews are rich and help each other through a secret web of mutual assistance. However, the followers of Ur-Fascism must also be convinced that they can overwhelm the enemies. Thus, by a continuous shifting of rhetorical focus, the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak. Fascist governments are condemned to lose wars because they are constitutionally incapable of objectively evaluating the force of the enemy.” (Umburto Eco, 14 ways of looking at a Blackshirt’)
Complain about this comment
Manneken (124): Intergovernmental co-operation between nation-states worldwide, as with the Joint Strike Fighter (JSF) program can achieve all that with greater efficiencies than the EU ever good (remember Galileo?), without any democracy-destroying supranationalism.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Strike_Fighter_Program
Complain about this comment
#131. At 8:23pm on 01 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen
I pull the figures from the horses mouth so to speak, try searching for [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator] and you will find the EU's budget document that has the figures since inception.
Hint, look at annex 2c, although if you wish to see before 2000 look for the 08 or 07 reports as they had all figures. I put the last few years in a spreadsheet so that they can be played around with, most revealing.
Whether anyone believes all the figures is another matter.
Complain about this comment
Another factor that it must never be forgotten that EU integration is modelled on German integration which started with a customs union (the ‘zollverein’) and proceeded via confederation to an undemocratic state that started two world wars.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zollverein
('Italian integration' is the other reference for the EU whose record is only marginally less bad than the German integration project.). Those who work in the EU institutins show exactly the same contempt for democracy and relentless lust for power ('power' is word mentioned in every comment from Manneken). The world today would be an infinitely better place if Hitler had been leader of Bavaria and not Germany. So it is far better for the future of mankind if this latest ‘integration project’ is kept well away from ‘big sticks’.
Complain about this comment
#135. At 9:05pm on 01 Mar 2011, jr4412,
Interesting report in your reference and one that has been reported elsewhere, I noticed one side effect is that the innocents being attacked are returning to their home African countries. Whilst I hope they make it safely I hope the word get around that it is no longer safe to try and get to the EU via North Africa, it would help solve that problem for the EU for a while. The reports also show how unstable this area is and I suspect that human rights legislation is the last thing being considered by all the sides.
As to the Islamabad report what I was saying is that I would treat anything coming out of Pakistan that concerns India as being suspect or slanted in some way. Maybe I'm wrong but the two countries are not exactly best of friends and is the media truly free? As for the report, it claimed the vessels were deployed in East Libya rather than next to the coast which is a different scenario, as they are probably there for rescue ops rather than internal deployment.
Complain about this comment
Hi Buzet #138.
Thanks, but it looks as though the moderator objects to your link.
Complain about this comment
#138. At 9:40pm on 01 Mar 2011, you
##131. At 8:23pm on 01 Mar 2011, Ulkomaalainen
It would seem the EU budget report (pdf) is classified by the mods, maybe it was the underscore characters between fin and report and 09 and en.
Complain about this comment
I just love the way the 'nice' BBC reporter (on Newsnight) phrases the concluding remarks of his latest report (from somewhere deep in the Libyan desert, apparently): "the movement is losing momentum..".
an indication that a majority of Libyans are not in favour/support of 'the revolution'??
Complain about this comment
Freeborn John, 110:
The EU is Europe, and Europe is the EU.
The BBC says so. It must be true.
Complain about this comment
142. Buzet23
cute........
Complain about this comment
Europe has spent a decade criticizing the U.S. who was doing the dirty work of the rest of the western world. Europeans are now finding out its not so easy when you have to do the dirty work yourself.
Complain about this comment
margaret howard wrote:
16 powermeer wrote:
"Operation Desert Libya doesn't somehow sound as good as Desert Storm, does it now?"
What about Operation Flipper? That was in Libya too and didn't end too well either.
True, but it wasn't an American operation.
Operation El Dorado Canyon (April 15, 1986) was an American one.
You may want to read on it, just as about a glorious role the French and the Italians played in it. ;-)
In the meantime dozens of thousands indeed Desert Libya.
Complain about this comment
A propos Desert Libya...
Interesting that the deserters choose to escape to such unstable countries like Egypt and Tunisia rather than to such oases of peace and stability like Chad and Sudan.
Complain about this comment
"As concerns Libya. They don't seem to like Ghaddafi much any more, but this doesn't mean that they love Europeans."
Just like Persians: they don't seem to like Iranian ayatollahs much anymore, but that doesn't mean that they love Arabs.
Complain about this comment
Buzet wrote: So now in Libya there may be a no-fly zone, if the EU is involved the French will want to be a part so that they can sell arms to the new government, the Italians, well who knows, the Germans if they can make money, the pacifist states and greens will worry about desert ants, scorpions etc.
But you must admit that Operation Desert Scorpion would sound better than Operation Desert Libya (already in progress)?
Complain about this comment
champagne_charlie wrote:
#131
ulkomaalainen;
"Where are Huaimek, Champagne-Charlie etc getting the figures from, "
I just make 'em up for propaganda purposes apparently.
charlie, are you the one who's claimed here (for propaganda purposes) that the number of native Native Americans living in N. America before pale faces showed up there was much smaller than a number allegedly "exterminated" later by Britons and Americans)?
And are you the one who's claimed here (again: for propaganda purposes) that most deaths in Iraq have been caused by Shia-Sunni violence (with Shia being supported by Iran, and Sunni by Syria) and not by American Crusaders?
Or was it another numbers conjurer, CBW?
Complain about this comment
FreebornJogn wrote re (forceful)integration
"The world today would be an infinitely better place if Hitler had been leader of Bavaria and not Germany.
Better still if Hitler had been leader of merely Austria and Stalin of merely Georgia.
P.S. Sorry to hear about a plight of doctor von und zu Guttenberg in whom so many Germans saw a greate future Chancellor.
Complain about this comment
CornwallCoastPath wrote:
Freeborn John, 110:
The EU is Europe, and Europe is the EU.
The BBC says so. It must be true.
Could you possibly get me an updated map of Europe?
Since on my old one Europe stretches all the way to Ural Mountains.
And from Istanbul to Tromso.
thank ya,
Complain about this comment
134 Ad
" Who would be the common enemy "? The EU commission and parliament at Brussels ?
Complain about this comment
131 Ulkomaalainen
Try writing " Net Contrubutions to the EU " and click ; you will get several choices , read them all .
Europa is exclusively the EU commission propaganda machine .
They used to have a blog about the future of the EU ; but so much pessimism and vitriol was poured in , that they closed it down .
The internet can tell you many things you want to know , just ask the question .
Complain about this comment
#152
"P.S. Sorry to hear about a plight of doctor von und zu Guttenberg in whom so many Germans saw a greate future Chancellor."
He'll have to return to his life as an ordinary Freiherr now, at his castle...on his inherited lands...spending his CAP millions . Perhaps he could console himself with wife Stephanie, Bismarcks very own great-great grand-daughter. His brother described him as a "relentlessly swaggering super-baron" Yes, he would have been the perfect guy to have in charge of the great (we dont do aristocracy and nationalism like you Brits) German Republic :)
Complain about this comment
Reaching for the stick? Seriously, I hope not. It's just the opposite that is needed not just in Libya but throughout the Middle East. However, with such a fragmented approach to just about everything both internally and externally, it is hard to see what the EU can do but provide others with their 'mouth music'.
Europe could help if it could overcome its customary arrogance and learn to offer help rather than demand reform.
Complain about this comment
"There has been a series of large explosions in Libya's capital, Tripoli.
They were caused by oil tanker which had fallen on its side." (BBC)
It must have been them Gaddafi's staunch supporters celebrating their victories with fireworks perhaps a little too carelessly .
Complain about this comment
Champagne_charlie wrote: "He [Guttenberg]'ll have to return to his life as an ordinary Freiherr now, at his castle...on his inherited lands...spending his CAP millions .
Some German commentators have pointed out that since Guttenberg cannot call himself doctor or minister anymore, his only title to fame now is Herr Baron.
At least Gaddafi has been smart enough to claim out that he does not hold any titles or official positions.
So he has none to loose, obviously. :-)(
Complain about this comment
Just to clarify things about EU citizenship, may I quote The Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, Art. 20:
"Article 20
1. Citizenship of the Union is hereby established. Every person holding the nationality of a Member State shall be a citizen of the Union. Citizenship of the Union shall be additional to and not replace national citizenship.
2. Citizens of the Union shall enjoy the rights and be subject to the duties provided for in the Treaties. They shall have, inter alia:
(a) the right to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States;
(b) the right to vote and to stand as candidates in elections to the European Parliament and in municipal elections in their Member State of residence, under the same conditions as nationals of that State;EN C 83/56 Official Journal of the European Union 30.3.2010
(c) the right to enjoy, in the territory of a third country in which the Member State of which they are nationals is not represented, the protection of the diplomatic and consular authorities of any Member State on the same conditions as the nationals of that State;
(d) the right to petition the European Parliament, to apply to the European Ombudsman, and to address the institutions and advisory bodies of the Union in any of the Treaty languages and to obtain a reply in the same language.
These rights shall be exercised in accordance with the conditions and limits defined by the Treaties and by the measures adopted thereunder."
Complain about this comment
ACTION IN LIBYA
Everyone seems to be very cautious about initiating any direct action in Libya at present, though Cameron in his recent speech would not rule anything out. After the 1986 bombings of Tripoli and Benghazi by the US, this caution is understandable: those bombings handed Gadaffi a huge propaganda victory.
The US, Britain and other European states interested in overthrowing Gadaffi's régime should attempt to co-opt the support of at least some major players in North Africa and the Middle East, rather as happened in the First Gulf War. But all of this would take time which may not be on the side of the opposition forces in Libya. Gadaffi is counter-attacking. An all-out civil war threatens.
I still support the idea of a no-fly zone providing Gadaffi's air defences can be suppressed without civilian casualties on the ground. If this can't be done then this thing could drag on for ages with all the attendant consequences.
Complain about this comment
139 Freeborn John wrote:
"Another factor that it must never be forgotten that EU integration is modelled on German integration which started with a customs union (the ‘zollverein’) and proceeded via confederation to an undemocratic state that started two world wars."
I googled to find a list of the wars England started during,say, the last 300 years in its lust for power during its empire building days, but it was too long and cumbersome to reproduce (I gave up by the one about 'Jenkin's ear'). However, is there anyone in the world England hasn't fought against or invaded? Once Ireland, Scotland and Wales were overwhelmed, the continent was next. Interminable wars against the Spanish, the French, 3 Dutch wars. Then the rest of world was the target: American wars (including burning down the White House), various uprisings in India cruelly put down, the three Boer wars, Afghan wars (now in the middle of the 4th one there),Russia, Crimea, Iraq, Opium wars against the Chinese etc etc.
In fact curiously enough about the only country England didn't go to war against was Germany right until the 20th century. No doubt because all the kings and queens in the last 300 years were German right up to the present queen, and she is half German, half Scottish, married to Philip of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg!
Complain about this comment
#162
margarethoward;
With that level of historical knowledge its no wonder no one is able to take you seriously. I'd be ashamed to put that post up in any public domanin.
Complain about this comment
margaret howard #162.
"..England didn't go to war against was Germany right until the 20th century. No doubt because.."
one could argue with some justification that Germany didn't exist until 1870/1, Bismarck, etc.
Complain about this comment
@162 Margaret Howard
"In fact curiously enough about the only country England didn't go to war against was Germany right until the 20th century. No doubt because all the kings and queens in the last 300 years were German right up to the present queen, and she is half German, half Scottish, married to Philip of the House of Schleswig-Holstein-Sonderburg-Glucksburg!"
Poster jr4412 is quite correct. The centuries before German unification were dominated by French (and to some extent Russian) hegemonial influence over Europe. There simply was no reason for Great Britain to wage war against "Germany".
On the contrary, German states proved invaluable in supporting the British efforts of containment on mainland Europe.
Complain about this comment
156 Champagne_Charle
"He'll have to return to his life as an ordinary Freiherr now, at his castle...on his inherited lands...spending his CAP millions . Perhaps he could console himself with wife Stephanie, Bismarcks very own great-great grand-daughter. His brother described him as a "relentlessly swaggering super-baron" Yes, he would have been the perfect guy to have in charge of the great (we dont do aristocracy and nationalism like you Brits) German Republic :)"
I take it that only former aristocracy can inherit land, money and names in Germany? I better apply for a proper name then. =/
I never was a real fan of Guttenberg as I don`t like to buy into hypes.
But the way he was hunted by the media and opposition as well as bigotted scholars frankly disgusts me.
And in so many critial comments you could feel this vibe of anger and hatred towards what he is: a member of the former aristocracy.
As if it was his fault to be born into such a family.
Titles like Dr/Phd are nothing but mental masturbation for academics.
Not like this is new, already Goethe was highly critical of these titles.
To me, Guttenberg mostly is the minister who abolished the unfair and unconstitutional system of conscription in Germany. Someting other ministers of defense proved to be incapable of.
He also sent the first real arms and armored vehicles to Afghanistan rather than having German soldiers die due to insufficient equipment.
Expect losses in the BaWü-elections for SPD/Grüne/Linke.
My friends and environment are mostly leftist, but many of them are now turning away from those parties mentioned above in disgust for what happened.
Complain about this comment
#166. At 5:43pm on 02 Mar 2011, DurstigerMann,
Your words give me the impression that German politics and its media are now experiencing the same as the UK has experienced for the last twenty odd years. Firstly a minister or PM upsets the establishment by not listening and then all the leaks, exposures start, and of course the opposition promises to be squeaky clean. It happened with the Tories under Thatcher and then Major and surprise surprise, those Scots Bliar and McClown came in and the disaster is now being paid for. I hope you're right and that the establishment and opposition in Germany do not profit from this as that is the distasteful side of modern day politics.
However knowing the way politicians like prestige and what this guy did in getting a qualification by lying, he does not deserve to be feted in any way no matter how good he seems to be. Look at all the nose in the trough national and EU politicians, is this guy just another one, albeit a bit more brighter (or not maybe)?
Complain about this comment
#166
DM
"And in so many critial comments you could feel this vibe of anger and hatred towards what he is: a member of the former aristocracy."
Was that what happened do you think? The plagiarism thing was perhaps just a cover for anti-aristocratic attitudes? I waas only being facetious, a touch of schadenfreude at my mate quietaoktree's expense.
Complain about this comment
#168. At 6:37pm on 02 Mar 2011, champagne_charlie
Of course you're right, if this was in England there would be a veritable torrent of accusations let by MH, QOT and Manneken, but it's not, it's in Germany. They must be truly frustrated by that, rofl.
Lets see if the SPD/Grüne/Linke now receive the same treatment as I suspect things like this stem from the establishment and by that I mean civil servants, after all these are supposedly highly qualified and faceless, with nobody to question how poor they actually are.
Complain about this comment
Guttenberg got what he deserved. Not only did he use the intellectual property of others to an extent unparalleled in the academic society, he lied to the public and the parliament ans still claims he did not intentionally cheat.
Everybody knows that he did cheat because there is no other reasonable explanation on how a quarter of his entire text is a collection of different sources copied word by word.
People loose faith in the democratic institutions already and now they were expeced to observe a person such as this stay in the government ? That would have been disgusting.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS