Sarkozy's ambitious agenda
President Nicolas Sarkozy looks like a man who likes nothing better than being at the centre of a crisis, unless it's being at the centre of four of them at once. If the normal way of doing EU business is about delicate compromise, he seems more in favour of push, punch and swagger. But he wants a triumph at today's summit, to round off an exceptionally busy six months in the hot seat.
He's written to fellow leaders telling them that they face a series of decisions that will be highly significant for the future of Europe. Wagging his finger, even before they are physically in front of him, he tells them in a letter of invitation that he is determined that they live up to their responsibilities, and show vision and a spirit of compromise.
What are the big issues ?
CLIMATE CHANGE
Agreeing the climate change package will be the most difficult task. Although the commitment to cut greenhouse gases by 20% by the year 2020 is not being directly questioned, both the newer countries of the east and big industrial countries are worried that the package is too tough, especially during an economic crisis.
Germany wants nearly all its industry to be protected from foreign competitors, who will not have to meet similar standards. They want carbon trading to be cost-free for nearly all their industry.
The Poles are leading Eastern European countries who say that they need more help, and more money, converting from coal.
This Brussels summit takes place while the world's environment ministers gather in Poznan in Poland. Diplomats say if the EU can't get its act together then the global talks may be doomed to failure.
LISBON
The Irish are likely to signal they will re-run a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, after the summer's No vote. I wrote about this a short while ago and haven't much to add. I'm pretty sure this is going to develop during the day and I will update when I can.
ECONOMY
The Commission hopes that the prime ministers and presidents will back their 200bn-euro rescue package, but Germany isn't keen. The sign that the Commission has won is if the figure 1.5% of European Union GDP appears in the final documents. If it doesn't Mrs Merkel has blocked it.
AGRICULTURE
The French want to make some reference to the recent review of the Common Agricultural Policy. The British want to make sure it doesn't signal an end to reform.
DEFENCE
There will be a declaration that over the last decade the EU has become a global political player and has assumed more ambitious responsibilities. It will say that current military resources are inadequate and need to meet specific new targets. One of them is to be able to deploy 60,000 people within 60 days.
That is quite enough for a two-day summit. I'm told that the French desire for a conclusion by Friday afternoon is really serious: no lunch has been ordered for ministers. Although Chris Patten suspected that the French admiral who accompanied Jacques Chirac everywhere really had snacks, rather than nuclear codes, in his briefcase, President Sarkozy has nothing like that to fall back on.
By the way, I do intend to answer freebornjohn's serious allegations of bias. But I keep running out of green ink and patience. A post by the beginning of next week is not quite a promise, but it is an intention.
Welcome to my 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~09~RS~)
CommentsSign in
You need to sign in to contribute to this page. If you're new to BBC Blogs, creating your membership is quick and easy.
About "freebornjohn's serious allegations of bias": bias is mainly a matter of perspective.
For someone who is a left-wing extremist, a centrist political party is "right-wing", for a right-wing extremist, the same party is "left-wing".
The same is true about the EU: to some opponents anything about the EU that might sound positive is biased. Fanatical EU proponents (if those actually exist they are not half as fanatical as the opponents) might see your bias just in the other way.
Taking a moment for self-reflection is very good, but please keep stress under control. Semi-anomymous people reacting to your blog are generally very biased themselves (in either way).
Complain about this comment
Mark it's quite easy to be fair and balanced about the EU: just add an off hand comment about straight bananas and how the EU is trying to destroy the British identity in each of your blog entries. ;-)
Complain about this comment
1. At 08:51am on 11 Dec 2008, JohaMe wrote:
About "freebornjohn's serious allegations of bias": bias is mainly a matter of perspective.
I totally agree with this judgement. From my European (non British) perspective, Mark's blog is quite balanced and documented.
I never take part in other British media which I consider anti-EU biased.
By the way, as a Londoner citizen, I am also a TV-license payer.
Complain about this comment
Mr Barroso is this man the most dangerous man in europe?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Mark,
The most interesting nugget I read in your piece is the suggestion that Germany wants nearly all its industry to be protected from foreign competitors, who will not have to meet similar standards. They want carbon trading to be cost-free for nearly all their industry.
Is this not Protectionism rearing its ugly head?
I personally believe that the EU has shot itself in the foot by creating a populist idea that only automotive engines and airplanes are responsible for Climate Change and the EU has imposed unrealistic restriction upon the car industry in particular. However, if the EU goes that route and imposes restriction upon its car industries then the Member States have to live with the consequences of that policy. Imposing EU driven European standards upon the rest of the world as if is the European way "is the only way to do things right" is humbug and a facile attitude towards the rest of the world.
If Germany wants to agree to EU imposed carbon emission controls upon its industries then it has to live with the consequences of that "shot in the foot" politically motivated action or not adopt the limitations and remain competitive with the world.
In my view, Europe should set examples of how to do thing right but not try to tell the world how to do things "the right european way!" by imposing trade restrictions upon imported alternative not-so-green items . . . . that will only lead to trade wars - the direct result of protectionism measures.
Complain about this comment
In view that my previous comment has been censored I will have a second attempt:
I think it is appalling that members of the anti-EU camp bully a BBC correspondent on the basis of a supposed pro-EU bias. I struggle to see where this pro-EU bias is.
What F-J should do is respect democracy and fight for his party UKIP (or the Tories?) to win power and call an IN or OUT referendum and if they win it then this country can then leave the EU, and then he/they can pursue their dreams of an Anglosphere or joining NAFTA. This, of course, wouldn?t threaten British sovereignty or identity. Only the EU does, possibly because the vast majority of EU countries are not English speaking countries. This is, deep down, the root of the EU antagonism from the anti-EU camp.
And, mind you, I am the first one to acknowledge that the EU is far, far, far, far, far from perfect. But is the UK perfect? Evidence please. The EU may be far, far, far, far, far from perfect, but the reality is that European integration is taking place in earnest, without the UK, and whether the UK likes it or not: For example, Switzerland officially joins Schengen tomorrow, becoming the 25th European country to join - any chance of an article about this, Mark?
Schengen is a vision for the future of Europe that all EU and EEA countries (31 of them) share, except the UK. The UKs vision of the future of Europe, embraced by the bipartisan UK political consensus and the likes of F-J has been perfectly defined by a member (or dissident member?) of the Anti-EU camp: ?A big brother-controlled internment island?.
Foreigners be warned ? paranoia rules at the British border
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/a395ccd4-9fb1-11dc-8031-0000779fd2ac.html
Complain about this comment
#6,Menedemus:
When Europe applies quality standards on items it produces itself, it should certainly apply the same standards to items it imports.
These quality standards all have a rationale, whether it's health, safety, environment, human rights, animal welfare or something else completely.
Otherwise, these quality standards would not have any meaning at all and will only put European producers at a severe disadvantage.
If people want to produce for the European market, they should do so according to European quality standards.
This has nothing at all to do with protectionism, although it could be abused that way.
Complain about this comment
CLIMATE CHANGE
I agree with the Germans that Industry needs to be protected in this time of Global Financial difficulty. However the current proposals should stand.
Whilst i think that the Mania about Global arming is usually overstated and often exaggerated, I do believe that the exploitation of raw materials and resulting pollution can and will and has changed the enviroment in which we live. If the Germans and Pole's are made to adopt these measure i'm sure they will recieve some sort of bribe sorry incentive.
LISBON
The Irish Government are likely to signal they will re-run a referendum .
This is a terrible disrespectful slur on the Irish People. Rerunning a referendum aftyer a number of years or on a redrafted and substantially different treaty is fine but Bribing sorry offering assurrance to the Irish government in order for a second referedum within a year is wrong.
ECONOMY
Again following the previous discussion on this topic I think that the Germans have got it right this is no time to go on a spending splurge without tackling the reel problem which is the way in which debt is regulated and the way it is packaged up and sold between banks. There are still lots of people out there who have huge personal debt as well as a huge morgage they can hardly afford the E.U and the National Governments should be saving for when the problems really start to hit there is no point in delaying the inevitable and putting off the full extent of the recession by borrowing more money when it finally hits in 3-4 years then the added governmental debt to the personal and morgage debt will make the Great Depression look like a mild slump.
AGRICULTURE
The soon french farmers lose their grossly unfair subsidies the better, maybe then British farmers can start growing food again.
DEFENCE
I have no problem with Europe agreeing to work together and commit troops to a region, however i still struggle with the idea of a European army or Rapid defence forcre that has an indepentant status and command from those of the State who the Soildiers belong to.
FREEBORNJOHNS ALLEGATIONS OF BIAS
From my perspective Mark is definately pro-EU. The inflections i get from his blogs are that he is always ready to congratulate the E.U on a job well done but is rarely willing to critise them. (Maybe hes worried about the E.U gestapo getting him if he does?)
Complain about this comment
menedemus @ 6
you are right. i think we are going to see a lot more protectionism throughout the globe over the next 12 months, particularly regarding trade with china. the consequences will be very very bad, just as they were in the 1930s.
Complain about this comment
Re post 8, Johame, from what you say you would also understand if other countries from around the world also imposed their own standards on imported goods. So the E.U. would have to meet the standards set by the U.S., Russia, China etc. These standards would almost certainly be different to those set by the E.U.
We would be in a position of each manufacturer having to produce items to different standards depending on where they were being exported to. In effect we would shut down global trade.
The E.U. needs to understand they do not have the monopoly on waht standards are best for the rest of the world. Of course that does not mean that there should not be a minium standard for safety etc, but that is very different to setting precise standards re environmental issues for each product for example.
Complain about this comment
I have no idea what Freeborn John said.
The BBC Governors (as was) were sufficiently concerned about perceived bias to commission a report in January 2005 into allegations of bias in the BBC's output. It is available here.
In the summary, it says:
It says in the detail:
I have no idea whether the 'urgent action' was ever taken. Perhaps Mark Mardell knows ?
The BBC has also had money from the EU. This article in The Times can itself hardly be called unbiased since The Times is in the same Murdoch empire as Sky. I doubt its facts are wrong, however.
Of course I agree with the respondent who said that perspective matters. I am generally anti-EU so the BBC looks almost perpetually biased in favour of the EU to me. The report addresses that issue.
Somewhat ironically, the report also says:
Complain about this comment
Mark, does what is happening in Greece has to do with European Union? Y
Why instead of looking at where the problems are, EU is just trying to dilute the problems of curroption, missuses, abuse of position in one big common entity called EU through a Lisbon treaty or Constitution, so that nobody after will never know where the problems come from and what they are. This is done just to get more time for the rich to get richer and that's why this bailouts are for.. just to keep the rich still rich, no change no opportunity for the others. The old EUphiles must understand one thing.. that power IS with the young.. and if young people dont accept old ways of doing business, elites will go bunkrupt..
EU keeps quite on peoples revolt, they bring police to shoot at people. Have you ever seen police be on the side of the people? Never.. they are there to protect the big fat Cats, they ones who recieve the bailouts, the ones who studied in Oxford or Havard because they were rich with no brains and now those collapse our economies.. but why do we realy need to work and feed except our family the big EU fat cats? was not enought we feed the national fat cats?
Complain about this comment
JohaMe @ #8
That is a very simplistic rationale if I may say so.
Let us call an egg and egg and discuss the issue as it relates to the car industry.
What the EU is doing is making its car manufacturers produce leaner, smaller cars to match the requirements of the EU to reduce the carbon emissions of vehicles produced within the EU.
There is a cost attached to that requirement and one can be sympathetic to the Germans who feel that those additional costs should be offset by restrictions upon the foreign-to-Europe car manufacturers who do not have political interference in their product output.
You can blithely say that the foreign-to-Europe importers should have quality and safety standards equal to the EU requirements but what actually will happen is that the Indian and Chinese Car Manufacturers will simply sell their cheaper-to-produce (and probably gas-guzzling 4x4 vehicles) into the emerging markets such as Asia , South America and Africa where the populace don't give a hoot to the populist European mania for engaging with Global Warming as definitely being man-made.
Meanwhile, the German car manufacturers will have a nice cosy European car market to sell their now expensive-to-produce cars into as a protected market. Yippee for them.
Have you seen the fall-off in demand for new cars and the stockpiles of vehicles that are building up in Europe? What about the production layoffs and output suspensions that are occurring thoughout Europe as we correspond - some people are going to have a very bleak Christmas especially those employed in the Automotive Industries of Europe.
One day Europe will have the smallest carbon footprint in the planet and we can look beyond the borders of Europe at the Americas (North and South), the Middle East, Eurasia and the Far East as well as Africa where they will be busy driving around in fuel-inefficient vehicles, creating a huge carbon footprint and laughing at Mercedez drivers travelling around the fast roads of Europe at 30kph in a cramped, fuel-efficient tinbox that costs as much to produce as a rugged all-terrain 4x4 which is far more popular in those countries outside of the EU because they are cheap, look better and the drivers do not give a monkey's brass nuts for Carbon Footprints.
Complain about this comment
ref. #11
Requiring locally produced goods to conform to stricter standards than imported goods, as in the current situation, is very bad for (and unfair to) our own producers.
There are some silly or protectionist standards (which should be dropped), but there are many other requirements that actually make sense. The latter should certainly be enforced.
This would certainly not shut down global trade. It might force foreign producers to raise production standards to European levels. As long as these are sensible requirements, that's ok. If it aren't, we shouldn't enforce them to our own producers either.
Complain about this comment
Hi Mark,
As a Brit living in the Netherlands, I enjoy your postings and think your reporting is pretty straightforward. To anyone who thinks the BBC is biased towards the EU or anyone else, I'd advise them to get their news from a variety of sources and make up their own minds. With a few mouse clicks you can read all of the day's newspapers from all around the world, news channels, as well as countless message boards. After all, we all have our biases and preferences, so why not try to broaden your mind a little.
Complain about this comment
Can I just say what a refreshing change its been to have a positive, energetic, dynamic president in charge of the EU. Remember Tony Blairs presidency, nothing happened (not much anyway), Mr Sarkozy has raised the profile of the Union so much it is now seen as an obvious counterweight to american imperialism and he shown what can be acheived when someone puts some real energy behind the EU. If we ever get the chance to vote for the presidency he would get my vote, french or not.
Complain about this comment
karolina001 @ #13
Your comment about the Police of any democratic nation not being on the side of the "people" is very naive.
Suggesting that a Police in a Democracy should assist agitators to overthrow a legitimately elected but unpopular government is the road to anarchy and, sooner or later, anarchy breeds non-democratic government - when that happens you would resent the Police even more as they would no longer be representative of the people (by being a force comprised of personnel drawn from the People) but merely government apparatchiks and stooges.
Woe betide anyone who wants to bring that plague down upon themselves in a democracy.
Complain about this comment
djwlomax
Are you joking his handling of the Russia-Georgia crisis made the E.U a laughing stock around the world, his reaction to the ecconomic crisis was what do we do i know lets do what Brown say's he knows what he's talking about. he's a muppet.
Complain about this comment
Sarkozy is playing a clever game: Brown has the central bank within the country, Sarkozy has not. If Sarkozy manages to tempt the Germans into trying to spend their way out of recession, the Germans will also have an interest to let inflation move up because higher inflation reduces the debt-to-GDP ratio. Next stop for Sarkozy will then be to start digging away the ECB's independence or change its remit in order to make it more dovish and let inflation make the debt look more bearable.
Complain about this comment
Mark Mardell: As evidence that I am correct I would point to the numerous comments about bias that have appeared on this blog over the last year. I have never seen a single comment from a pro-EU poster on your blog to say that you are displaying an anti-EU bias. These people generally fall over themselves to praise your 'balance'. Comments on the issue from the anti-EU side are very different though; they rarely (if ever) praise your balance, with the overwhelming majority speaking of a pro-EU bias. I hope you will offer an explanation in your promised blog post as to how this observation can be consistent with neutral reporting
I have said I think your individual reports are balanced (though you frequently slip in your final paragraph) but that your selection of topics is not balanced. I perceive a real difference in the tenor of your articles and those of EU attack-dogs in the press such as Tony Barber or Wolfgang Munchau in the Financial Times, as evidenced for example by your respective pieces on Declan Ganley. However I also perceive you do your best to avoid reports on politically sensitive stories that would show the EU in a bad light (e.g. the CAP 'health check', Barosso's comments on the UK joining the Euro, anything to do with Lisbon or the federalist direction of travel, etc.) and that this results in a litany of blogs and broadcasts on minor topics (e.g. fishing, which employs only 13,000 people in the UK) whose soporific effect on the public must be greatly appreciated by the proponents of 'integration by stealth'.
I find this systematic suppression of the big issues about the EU all the more surprising from someone who has said that the two stories he would most like to have covered in the 20th century were the Russia Revolution and the rise of the 3rd Reich. A key step in the rise of Hitler was the passing of the Enabling Act which allowed him to legislate without the need for votes in the German parliament. It was no doubt far from obvious in 1933 where this might lead. The Treaties on European Union (including the Lisbon treaty) stealthily expand the range of issues on which the 27 heads of government may legislate via an EU Commission and Council of Ministers that they appoint without the need for votes in national parliaments. So following your performance on the Today programme this week, I am wondering how you might really have reported on the rise of Hitler? Would you have gone on the radio and trivialized the issue by cracking jokes that those opposing the Enabling Act are the same people complaining about the 1930's equivalent of 'Commissioners for Paper-clips'?
I hope that you will also explain in your promised blog post how the BBC defines neutrality on EU stories. It is my impression that you seek to triangulate the views of major politicians and parties, but I do not see that this could ever lead to a neutral reporting line on EU matters when there is such a gulf between political elites and the people on this issue. If you are trying to triangulate the views of politicians then it seems to me that you will automatically be perceived as displaying a pro-EU bias by the public.
Complain about this comment
#19
WEP,
Actually Sarkozy handled the Russia-Georgia crisis a lot beter than the USA and its cronies (UK, Poland, Baltic states). At least he managed to persuade the Russains not to take Tbilisi and kick out Saakashvili. The laughing stock now is USA who showed to the world that it promises a lot to convenient dictators, but does not deliver on their promises.
Complain about this comment
The reason that a lot of people are anti EU like me has nothing to do with paranoia or parochialism it is simply that the EU is demonstrably NOT DEMOCRATIC and also CORRUPT. It is not democratic because there are UNELECTED commissioners who run the thing and the EU has promoted regional assemblies in Britain that are only two thirds elected. When the EU wants a president it wonders who it will APPOINT!(you couldn't make it up!) Look across the pond at America - that's how a democratic country chooses a president - a fierce democratic process with no holds barred and ANYBODY - just ANYBODY can have a go... The eeyew is CORRUPT because the auditors have been unable to sign off the accounts for TWELVE YEARS! That means that funds have gone missing. There is absolutely no excuse for that and people should have been made to answer for it TWELVE YEARS ago. Britain left all this behind centuries ago and we had to relieve a king of his head to really get started... When the eeyew decides finally to abandon
dictatorial practices and become DEMOCRATIC I'll be the first to be an enthusiastic supporter but a Portuguese MP remarked three days ago 'the people who matter in Britain support the EU' - in other words not the ordinary people like me. When that MP reverses his view and realises that it IS the ordinary people like me that matter and in fact prevent Salazars, Francos, Mussolinis, Hitlers etc, etc arising I'll be happy and so will HIS grandchildren...
Complain about this comment
#21.
You cannot prove a pro-EU-bias with referring to reactions to this blog if only for the fact that you yourself, together with a few other people, are responsible for a huge share of these reactions.
The huge variety of topics covered makes this blog interesting and makes it even more unbiased.
I wouldn't be reading this blog and it's reactions for over a year if the only topics would be the "big issues" you list (which actually do get their share of attention).
Bias is just a matter of perspective.
Complain about this comment
#23 SimonTMorrison
"regional assemblies in Britain that are only two thirds elected"
Which ones are those?
Complain about this comment
SimonT Morrison. The reason why the auditors refuse to sign off the accounts every year is because the member states - including the UK - can't or won't account for where the money has gone.
The combined heads of government sign-off the budget - but most of it is spent, or mis-spent, or whatever, by the governments/agencies of those same heads of states.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
Please look past these accusations of bias. For myself, I find your blog to be humane, dispassionate, informed and extensive.
They say choose your friends well and your enemies better. You have chosen excellent enemies!!
In relation to post 21, and the comparison between the Enabling Act and the Lisbon Treaty, I would note that the EU has adopted Directives 2000/43 and 2000/78, two of the more wide-ranging and progressive pieces of legislation combatting race and religious discrimination in Europe's history. By contrast, the policies of the Nazis on these matters were rather different, and I would be incredulous that the latter were not referred to precisely because of their policies on these matters.
Btw, to some others on this blog, the best way to silence debate about an imperfect organisation, such as the EU, is to accuse all reporters of bias other than those who report about what you want in the way you want. Is that really what you want?
Complain about this comment
#1 JohaMe. Thank you for well balanced and tolerant contribution. MM deserves it as no one has to agree with him or with anyone else for that matter in full.
#7 JorgeG1. While most of what you say could come from me you are making one grave mistake. As someone who has come from the cold and lived in England most of my life I object strongly to your statement implying foreigner phobia. England or United Kingdom is the most tolerant the most welcoming and the easiest country to come to. It offers its hospitality to all and sundry and often to those who ultimately have views and even action against it. It is easy to fall into a mistaken view that English people are xenophobic by reading MM?s blog. There may be some but then show me a country where such feeling does not exist. England certainly is one of the most democratic countries in the world, yet it is not perfect and we all have to work to keep it that way. It would only serve well if EU adopted some of the democratic ways of England.
#9 wrote: ?Gestapo?. Really such loaded words. I am surprised you are not worried for yourself considering what you are writing. Then may be you are not White, English and Proud. I distinctly have an impression that a lot of nasty foreigners are using this blog to give English people a bad name and to stir up anti English feeling.
Mark Mardell you are an EU reporter not anti-EU reporter so that some people would like you to shut up completely should bear no relevance to what you are doing. I think you are very critical of EU policies and deep down you are not a pro-European but it is evident that you are trying to be balanced to say the least.
Complain about this comment
thre is no question of your bias. I wouldn't say the same of all the bbc bloggers but you seem neutral. He is just so hard in his position, he sees any other as bias. You are not obligated to respond to unfounded accusations.
Complain about this comment
26.frenchderek:
"SimonT Morrison. The reason why the auditors refuse to sign off the accounts every year is because the member states - including the UK - can't or won't account for where the money has gone."
Oh, pooh! You got there before me.
But I bet he won't believe you. He doesn't want little things like facts to get in the way. They don't match his prejudices you see.
Complain about this comment
Mark
"By the way, I do intend to answer freebornjohn's serious allegations of bias. "
I hope that you've taken on board the pointers that I've given as to FBJ's hidden agenda. I, for one, would like blog on FBJ's bias.
I think it's most unfair of him to attack you repeatedly for blogging on issues other than his hobbyhorse.
Complain about this comment
Isenhorn @22,
thank you. About dictators, LOL. I think what happened is our army stuck on approach to Tbilisi awaiting the most probable further command. While Kremlin was busy solving the main question - "is Saakashvili a dictator or a democrat."
The thing is it goes against Rus. rules to somersault local dictators when invading; not traditional. Russia never touches local rulers esp. dictators; all monsters are 100% immune. So Saakashvili indeed saved Tbilisi as Georgians like to think, LOL. If he were a decent chap he might have been grabatised.
Complain about this comment
And overall. I think any government, well, surely Russian government, has an in-born idiosyncrasy about taking down rulers in other countries. It sets a very very bad precedent. one ruler, another, people might develop a taste for the process, and get wrong ideas. nothing sacred! LOL.
Besides. Easy to start. try to finish it. Chechnya, Iraq etc.
Complain about this comment
so i think they didn't want to, no intention originally. but how to explain it? if Saakashvili is so so bad, would be natural to finish the business. And here comes Sarkozy! why, a natural saviour. It's now whole Europe who asks/says not to.
to mutual happiness.
Complain about this comment
Would be really interesting to see EU's decision on 'Defense' and how well it can challenge US's dominance.
No one likes Monopoly, do we?
Complain about this comment
Agora9
Mark Mardell you are an EU reporter not anti-EU reporter
No he is European Editor (not E.U editor)
9 wrote: ?Gestapo?. Really such loaded words
Get a sense of humour
Complain about this comment
I wonder which EU countries are going to provide the troops to the new EU Defence Force.
I think we can all rest assured that the Germans will do their bit . . . .
or perhaps not?
German troops deemed too fat to fight
It could put a whole new connotation upon the term "the troops rolled over the border!" ;=)
Complain about this comment
Probably the same countries that are providing troops for NATO. At least the European Defence Force might serve European interests and not Uncle Sam's.
Complain about this comment
28. Agora9
*I object strongly to your statement implying foreigner phobia.*
I think that you are misinterpreting my comment from beginning to end. I was referring to the Anti-EU brigades agenda: Anything to do with closer integration with, or even membership of, the EU, is the devil incarnate. Anything to do with closer submission to the US and handing them British sovereignty on a silver tray is fine. The agenda of the likes of F-B is the Thatcherite myth of the superiority of the English speaking peoples (in turn this doctrine goes back centuries, e.g. the American Manifest Destiny, now rehashed by the NeoCons). This is what I meant by saying that the root of the EU-antagonism of the anti-EU camp is that the vast majority of the EU countries are not English speaking countries. I wasn?t referring to the British people as a whole.
Now, referring to the British people as a whole, can you imagine this happening in the UK?
Switzerland opens its borders
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/7778022.stm
No, it wont happen in the foreseeable future. The *big brother-controlled internment island* is here to stay.
If the *United Kingdom is the most tolerant the most welcoming and the easiest country to come to* how come it is the only country out of 31 EU and EFTA countries that has refused to join Schengen, which is basically a legal framework designed to give human beings the same rights already enjoyed by goods and capital in the EU/EEA's Single Market?
Complain about this comment
Damian_Chalmers (27): Hitler used two blows to establish his dictatorship. The Enabling Act was his strike against democracy. The Reichstag Fire Decree was his strike against civil liberties. I only compare the forced ratification of the Lisbon Treaty to the former.
If the EU continues along its current path it would not lead to the 3rd Reich but rather something more like a giant pre-1997 Hong Kong where the people have liberty but not the ability to replace their rulers or really influence their policies. That is not dictatorship, but I much prefer liberal democracy.
Complain about this comment
In regards of defense I have to say that I'm little bit bothered with this whole notation of European Defense Force.
The European Defense Force discussed here is really not for the defense of Europe, but for peace keeping purposes, protection for humanitarian missions and maybe for evacuating European citizens from conflict zones. Its a bit misleading to call this formation European Defense Force when it clearly is not.
I think that many European countries, especially France, has a agenda on establishing an European NATO, but they are too afraid that the Americans will freak out. What they are doing now is to advance slowly, but that tactic won't work as eventually this issue must be hoisted to the table.
I really would welcome if the French or somebody else would openly start the process of forming European NATO, a military alliance under EU.
NATO as it now is certainly isn't the answer as it is US lead and centric alliance which carries its disadvantages. Our neighbors, especially Russia, is already upset for enlargement of NATO, and its future enlargement especially to Ukraine and Georgia could threaten European relations to Russia. Besides being in NATO obligates, formally or informally, members to participate on US operations: for example Iraq and Afghanistan. We should also remember that at this time NATO doesn't give security in case of major war for some of its members: i.e. there is still no defense plan for Baltics.
I think that if European countries created common defense organization it would allow now military non-allied countries to participate it and if done right it would balance the costs of European defense and increase its efficiency...
For example France and UK pay alone for their nuclear umbrellas; conscription based countries like Germany and Finland bind large number of their citizens into service and to reserve; and some countries like Ireland and Baltics have only nominal defense capabilities
What we need to do is to pool our resources together. We should pay together for common resources from nuclear umbrella and force projection capabilities (i.e. aircraft carriers) to common support organizations (i.e. European versions of the CIA and NSA). We should also negotiate minimum levels of troop and equipment levels that all countries would reserve for their regional defense. That would be real European defense, not some peace keeping force that has nothing to do with real defense.
Complain about this comment
Jukka_Rohila
I sound to me like you just want to stick two fingers up to the Americans without whom you would be in Greater Russia or Greater Germany right now.
It seems stange that you oppose a european Rapid response force, but want a European Amry surely the first is the logical stepping stone to the second.
The E.U does not need and has no right to an E.U army, it is possibly the most stupid concept i have ever heard.
An Army which could be sent anywhere to crush anti-E.U feeling sounds lovely.
Complain about this comment
To WhiteEnglishProud (42):
Actually European army is giving fingers to both Americans and to Russians, the message being "we mind our business, you mind yours".
Now what comes to logical order of things, I disagree. The European Defense Force doesn't have capabilities or mandate on anything more than simple peace keeping and that could and should be done under the UN.
The idea of European army is not a stupid concept. The thing is that whatever happens to a one European country is with high probability to happen or affect other countries. If we talk about worst case scenario, a full blown world war either with nuclear or conventional arms, there is no way that any European country can bypass it. For the worst case scenario we all have to contribute together.
I should also point out that the need for European army, for European defense, comes from us living in here. Russia is our immediate neighbor. Middle-East is just right next to us. Those are the direction on where we have to concentrate. For US and Russia on the other hand, their directions of interest are different and thus preferred outcomes possibly quite different from us. For example for US war with Iran to change its regime is an option, for us Europeans as we are much closer to them its not a preferred option to take.
What I would suggest you do to is to take a map and take hard look in. Geopolitics is something that stays and we have to live by it.
Complain about this comment
to a one European country is with high probability to happen or affect other countries.
Yes the rioting in Greece has spread thoughout the E.U.
European army, for European defense, ...Russia ..Middle-East ....direction ... we have to concentrate.
You want a strong army you fund it mate, the only reason England isn't still a world power is because defended the world from Fascism and Communism. You want to a E.U army to defend you and no doubt like the the E.U itself you'll want the UK Germany and Holland to fund it.
I agree the Middle-east is a threat, thats why we need a relationship with the U.S.A to put pressure on Israel to behave itself and find a peaceful out come to the problem.
Complain about this comment
To WhiteEnglishProud (44):
You said: "Yes the rioting in Greece has spread thoughout the E.U."
Actually there has been some youth and student movement in other countries too, but that wasn't the point. The point was war. If war happens to a one EU country it will happen or affect all EU countries.
You said: "You want a strong army you fund it mate, the only reason England isn't still a world power is because defended the world from Fascism and Communism. You want to a E.U army to defend you and no doubt like the the E.U itself you'll want the UK Germany and Holland to fund it."
We have a strong army in Finland. The only problem is that we are a small country and if there would ever be war with Russia, hopefully not, then we would loose it badly...
Just to give you an example...
The war with Russia would begin with a Russian strategic strike to Helsinki. After week or two of intense fighting, the city the itself would be in ruins. Other major cities Tampere, Turku and Oulu would certainly hit by airborne divisions or be targets of intense cluster bombing.
If we had any luck on anticipating the war, the government would have initiated evacuation of all Finnish cities to country side (yes, there are concrete plans for this), reservist would have been armed (that is 300 thousand troops). If we would have had bad luck, our leadership eliminated, then civilians would be caught between fighting and heavy casualties would be taken and the army would operate as many separate independent fighting forces.
Either way the facts are that after approx two weeks of fighting, our air-force would run out of ammo. The ground troops would be in big trouble too and without air support the organized resistance would fall to guerrilla war. Either way, all our major cities would be totally destroyed, our infrastructure too would be in ruins (combination of fighting and burned land tactics), land full filled with mines and cluster bombs, etc.. and of course the country would be occupied.
The thing is that no country in Europe is strong enough nor can spend enough money to have credible defense alone. The only way is to be allied and to be allied with people who have the same interests: that is us Europeans. Our interests are not in Asia, not in Pacific and not in South-America.
The big point of Euroarmy would be, that I already said in my last post, is that we all should contribute to it, we all should pay the equal amount for our common defense.
And on middle East I disagree with you. The US is part of the problem. US bankrolls Israel and Israel bankrolls US politicians via AIPAC. What we need to do is to make US cut down its support for Israel, for it to pull out of the middle East, for us to tie the middle East states with us trough trade and politics, that is the only stable solution.
Complain about this comment
The big point of Euroarmy would be, that I already said in my last post, is that we all should contribute to it, we all should pay the equal amount for our common defense.
I would conceed on an equal amount per capita.
however surely if war broke out at the moment all other E.U countries other than those who have a neautral status would come to your aid. if not then the E.U is as pointless as i believe. Whats the point of working together if were not prepared to defend each other. I don't see the need for an independant Euro Army though.
Israel
I agree that presently the U.S is part of the problem however it is a problem that can only by solved by working with them NOT antaginising them. By creating an E.U Army / EU NATO you would push the US and Israel closer togeather.
An Army which could be sent anywhere to crush anti-E.U feeling sounds lovely.
Complain about this comment
To WhiteEnglishProud (46):
The basis of Euroarmy should be funded by equal percentage of GDP/GNI per capita. The money gathered by this would go to funding of Euroarmy and common support organizations and activities. Besides the Euroarmy member states could and should fund their own armies in the same way as US has state based National Guards.
Now if war broke out now, there would be no guarantees of help from other EU countries. Other EU countries probably would help, but as there is no treaty for it, then one can't really rely on it or expect nothing from it. That is why we have to start negotiations on common defense, on how it should work and how it should be paid: not on common peace keeping force named European Defense Force.
Now in regards of US and Israel... I really can't see on how US and Israel could become anymore more closer than they are now. In this sense having EU army would only be a benefit for us.
The job of Euroarmy would be the defense against external enemy. The job of keeping up internal security is the job of member states and their police forces and armies or national guards.
Complain about this comment
I'm all in favour of the EU and President Sarkozy's idea of a European defence Force:
The sooner the preening, laggardly, anti-NATO French Armed Forces are obliged to step-up-to-the-plate and commit its personnel at the sharp end of the 'wests' opposition to terrorism, the sooner their gutless, self-serving, anti-USA mentality will be exposed for all to see.
As for the rest of it: Nothing would surprsie me less than the Paris-Berlin axis cooking up a deal where France gets its rich-pickings of Common Agricultural Policy re-endorsed in return for Germany being let-off committing to Fiscal investment to help other EU nations economic recovery.
London's pathetic meandering along the EU path towards greater 'Federal' integration will continue.
Complain about this comment
Jukka_Rohila @45,
Why am I not surprised to discover that you and I would hold diametrically opposed views about the Middle East?
I guess that disregard for freedom and independence in one sphere applies in all areas.
Complain about this comment
To MaxSceptic (49):
How about the freedom and independence of the other side?
Palestinians are living in the biggest prison camp after North Korea. Where is their freedom and independence?
Persians are living in constant fear of strike from Israel and invasion from US. Where is their freedom and independence?
Saudis are living in under US backed up regime that robs the oil riches from the people and funds global terrorism. Where is their freedom and independence?
The thing is that for the last 60 years Israel has gotten more than enough support and the problems facing middle east have just increased. The British and US backed up regime changes and setting up of dictators haven't for sure helped things. If we want to get stable middle east then we have to change current politics as they are not working.
The peace will come to middle east when keeping up the conflict starts to cost Israel too much, and Arabs and Persians have more to gain from peace than keeping up the conflict. For that to come true we have to start normalizing relations not just to Persians, but to all countries in there. We have pull out even if that would mean that fundamentalist governments would take their place, if we have any luck they will be democratically elected fundamentalist governments.
Complain about this comment
Jukka,
The Arab/Muslim world has over twenty states from the Atlantic Ocean in the west to Indonesia in the East.
Most of them are repressive, authoritarian dictatorships, one-party and/or theocratic states, or despotic monarchies. None of them believe in or exercise what we call liberal-democratic values. Women are usually de-facto second class citizens.
If Israel were to disappear tomorrow would they suddenly become beacons of tolerance and enlightenment?
The Palestinians have been used as a political football by their Arab 'brothers' since long before 1948 (The 'Hashemite Kingdom of Trans-Jordan' was carved out of British Mandatory Palestine some years before the creation of Israel. Jordan annexed the West Bank after the 1948-9 first Israel-Arab war). And, as was famously said, the Palestinian 'leadership' never loses and opportunity to love an opportunity.
While from 1949 hundreds of thousands of Palestinians were rotting in refugee camps, Israel successfully absorbed greater numbers of Jewish refugees expelled from arab states such as Morocco, Iraq, Yemen, etc. All a matter of attitude and priorities.
The Iranians overthrew the secular despotic Shah and voted in a repressive theocratic regime. Out of the frying pan into the fire? It's funny that they weren't under threat from anyone until they started to support religious terrorism and declared their intentions to wipe certain nations from the map....
Saudi Arabia is a repressive dictatorial theocratic monarchy. Obviously Israel's fault....
Complain about this comment
Ooops !
And, as was famously said, the Palestinian 'leadership' never loses and opportunity to love an opportunity.
Should read:
And, as was famously said, the Palestinian 'leadership' never loses an opportunity to lose an opportunity.
Complain about this comment
Mark....
i am very glad that sarkozy has many goals on the agenda.....
Complain about this comment
Jukka_Rohila @45.
Jukka, a side note sorry, total LOL "Russian strategic strike on Helsinki...other major cities Tampere, Turku, Oulu.." Jukka! ?
Also, LOL. With the amount of St. Pete VIPs holding dacha-s in Finland... You are immune to attack, in the same way as my dacha village along the highway to Helsinki is.
We were also very afraid in the dacha village it will be built up by city buildings,
St. Petersburg spreading out, approaching, 2 bus stops left btw our "suburbs" and the big city by now! 9 miles to the nearest city subway station !
but then city government chaps bought houses in the village and we relaxed. no way they'll have their rich houses destroyed. the city will make a U-turn and grow in any direction but our village. same with Finland. if you are not convinced by, how to say it, ordinary Russians peaceful disposition and mindset towards Finland.
the only decent abroad that we have nearby! in case of anything! I know of some who go to your hospitals to crack kidney stones down and other ambulance emergencies.
where would VIPs fly to urgently for health matters if there is no Finland, but the same Russia again?!!
Complain about this comment
To all other "abroads" you need to fly and fly or drive via third countries! or by sea. nothing decent nearby but you. dear compact and nearby "West". you are very precious in this respect and I am sure I hope we all here agree it continues in exactly the same manner.
Complain about this comment
To WebAliceinwonderland (54):
I know, I know... It must sound and look from a point of view of outside observer that we are very paranoid in security matters.... and that is true, we are, I can confess that :-)
I think this is because of our attitude of 'hope for the best and prepare for the worst'. We hope that everything goes well in Russia, but just in case it doesn't... Its actually same with Euro, all our Finnish marks, both paper money and coins, are in secure vaults in Finnish National Bank in case of collapse of Euro. And for same reason we have food reserves for the whole nation for one year and for one harvest. Essentially all these preparations are for some end of the world scenario. I don't know why we prepare so much... maybe because pessimism and melancholy are so disseminated to our national psyche and culture ;-)
There is so much stuff about how our state prepares for worst case scenarios that it would take days to tell all the rumors that I have heard... In case of large group of Russians coming with out a visa and refusing to go back... these are public knowledge... there is a large secret tunnel network under Helsinki where one can drive straight with trucks and tanks from far out side the city in to the heart of it... all bridges, that means literally all bridges, have ready made holes or hooks for explosives, just in case one needs to blow it in a hurry...
The good thing about these preparations and especially for our state and army 'educating' all males in armed service is nobody wants any kind of war. Its the worst case scenario that has nothing good in it. If the war would come today, then I would be probably dead in few weeks... either from radio guided missile (signalist best friend), from artillery concentration or from Spetsnaz strike... that really doesn't sound so charming way to go, so I do, as everybody other, to our friendly relationships continue :-)
Now if we move to other things... as barrels are flying... a figure of speech we have on people, that is all reservist after the armed service, that recollect all things too much, especially when drunk. ;-)
I do hope that you can keep your village. I do fear however that things will change when the motorway to Finland will be completed. Is the Helsinki road in St. Petersburg already motorway? ...Of course you could make complaint to your 'National Board of Antiquities'. In Finland if you want to stop something to be build or want to slow it down, just complain to them... in the case of your village it would be probably protected, maybe for something like 'a unique place and architecture that connects the pre-Russian Finnish village life to traditional Russian and Soviet dacha culture in St. Petersburgh area" ...a valid reason I would say. In Turku for example they have protected cowhouses and barns. Sometimes they have a point, but just times it just goes way overboard. In this regard the Russian joke that you told some time ago "Headline news in Europe, a cat has dropped from a tree" does has some backing on it ;-)
Its nice to hear that we are decent, compact and nearby west :-) ...But may I also suggest that it could be because we just seem homely... many old parts of Helsinki look like a Russian town... many new parts of Helsinki look like a Soviet town... actually in Vaasa, when we had ESTIEM meeting there, we had a Sava from Serbia whose job was to get his school joined on to ESTIEM... we nice and funny guy, we liked him very much... either way... when he and my friends were in downtown... it seemed to my friends that every time he wanted a picture to be taken from him, there was a big modern/Soviet style building in background... so maybe Finland is just a safe place to visit, same Empire style buildings, same Soviet style buildings, but all in nice friendly slightly different packet ;-)
Now I thought have to stop... I have to get up early to babysit my goddaughter. Will be very hard day... playing with Lego, just playing, going out to play for the whole day... so a nice hard day ahead :-)
Complain about this comment
21. Freeborn-John:
"Mark Mardell: As evidence that I am correct I would point to the numerous comments about bias that have appeared on this blog over the last year. I have never seen a single comment from a pro-EU poster on your blog to say that you are displaying an anti-EU bias. These people generally fall over themselves to praise your 'balance'. "
Evidence? Well I could suggest that that's "evidence" that anti-EU posters can't recognise balance when they see it.
By the way your use of the term "these people" is clearly intended to be disparaging and belittling. Unfair debating tactic N° 7 if I remember correctly.
Shall I publish the list so that you can work through them one-by-one or do you have them all memorised by heart?
Complain about this comment
@ WhiteEnglishProud [sic]
"[Sarkozy] handling of the Russia-Georgia crisis made the E.U a laughing stock around the world"
Muhahahaha, having an effective CEASE-FIRE -not withdrawal dude- within two (three?) days from the Russians was a major achievement. Anybody telling otherwise is completely delusional or dishonest intellectually (if not both).
Complain about this comment
Jukka_Rohila @56
Yes, I wanted to start from "Finland feels like home" (a greatly improved version of it of course) hilarious "to attack" oneself or rather one's own dear past, if you wish.
but was afraid to scare you LOL by our homely approaches!
Jealous of your Lego plans mine are vets and vets. All takes so much time here idiotically arranged. Can't even yet complete the research part on dog and cat, what is exactly wrong, to move over to "what to do about it." And can't sleep worry.
Your idea of applying to "Antiques" committee Rus. equivalent, like saving heritage and a piece of old Finland and traditional dacha life-style sample. not bad.
we have here an equivalent but their paths are crossed over ruthlessly by anyone in power wishing smth. (smelling money in some project). Like i'm looking after a palace "forgotten" here by friends in UK in Russian revolution can't say my overseeing matters LOL did much good to the house practically next to the Hermitage. Will become a 5-star hotel, all absolutely forbidden by laws has happened to the building already. Inner yards' buildings destroyed, an addit. floor added on top, all room partitians taken away, and re-designed. And an undeground floor sure they are building now that gives St. Isaac's cathedral nearby cracks (common foundation). to say nothing of the palace itself.
In spite of the "Antiques" committee shouts, media screams. signatures collected by activists in the streets. and even I published a couple of articles last winter alongside architects' moans "How can you do that to the national heritage". "Farms"!
A 4 seasons and that's it.
But the "seasons" will be the operator. The owner is Russian. Son of the national railroads' director I heard a gossip.
Before was municipal. How much the city got for selling it away no way to find out. Also, were they paid, or just told to give the palace away. Looks like exactly told to forget ab it and said Aye aye Sir.
("cat" fell from a tree - headline news" - forget ab it. A squirrel, squirrel it was in the joke. Cat! are you joking! it'll be headline news with me!! "And Alice threw herself onto the ground in a giant leap - in time - to cushion the flight". So - A squirrel.)
That you prepare for all occasions, I don't know, I find it normal. Better to prepare at least you feel better about things. Morally pacifying. With holes for explosives in the bridges and all. Reminds me of Russian ways LOL of course.
We lived on explosives for decades, all mined in case of Germans coming over in that war. Then seems either people who knew what is mined what not were killed in the war... or lost papers in evacuation of offices to Siberia.. may be a train or another was blown up en route with those papers...
The fact is we still discover war time explosives here and there! When the Moscow hotel was taken down in Mosc. in Gorky street next to the Red Square, for a sec. - tons of dynamite were discovered carved into, cemented into the whole ground floor and undeground floors. There was a hysterical laughter, extraordinary luck, that the builders began to dismantle it piece by piece carefully. Forgot 3 tons of dynamite? 4? Hilarios. I paid attention because I lived in that hotel for 4 months! On 3 tons of dynamite in the walls! When just began to work in Moscow had nowhere to live and the company paid for the hotel.
And I thought back then that the main danger was I was the only Russian in the hotel. Absolutely all the rest were Chechens, run-aways to the capital from the Chechen war. Looked like a gypsy refugee camp. Children running everywhere, not a word of Russian, men looking at me with interest, and me hopping around. Meat grilled in all the rooms for national cuisine things and all that jazz. Only now I discovered I also resided on 4 tons of dynamite in ship-shape condition, all dry and wires not broken, all very nicely prepared with precautions and survived to this day. All concluded that in Stalin times Russians knew how to work and not to fool around (dead scared).
Complain about this comment
@ ikamaskeip
"The sooner the preening, laggardly, anti-NATO French Armed Forces are obliged to step-up-to-the-plate and commit its personnel at the sharp end of the 'wests' opposition to terrorism, the sooner their gutless, self-serving, anti-USA mentality will be exposed for all to see."
What a lovely nonsense you can regurgitate all by yourself, brilliant... I guess that to see the French Armed Forces in Afghanistan since seven years, or in peacekeeping -rather than warmongering- missions throughout the world make of your pathetic litany something relevant. :rollingeyes:
Complain about this comment
Sensi-fr "... nonsense.. French forces.."
That would be the nonsense of French forces in Afghanistan who have not once fired a shot in anger, refuse to accept NATO leadership command, will only assist in 'humanitarian projects', and are listed by USA & UK forces as having refused to even come to the aid of injured troops in other regions of Aghanistan?
Yes, nonsense indeed!
Complain about this comment
Jukka_Rohila,
In fact found a great reason for a new Rus.-Fin. war. LOL.
You've got our things! A ship! That you stubbornly don't want to return. For the past 10 years.
Sank in your waters, opp. Turku, in storm.
A minor 280 yrs approx. ago.
Carried paintings bought by Empress Catherine (the II or the Great) in Holland for her Hermitage museum.
Well, she didn't buy. Count Golitsyn went to the auction, on her behalf, and bought what she fancied from the list.
Knowing that the ship sank Catherine raged and bombarded the Swedish king with letters demanding the goods back.
Because back then Finland was not Finland not Russia but was Sweden.
The place was known, close to the shore, 6 paintings the sailors evacuated, and then as the Swedes did nil the wreck drifted apart, wobled about by strorms, and vanished from view.
Stubled upon by a Finnish man next time and accordingly, re-discovered, in 1999.
Since which time Russia is bombarding Finland this time with papers type "return our paintings back" but Finland says ha-ha our waters.
Holland confirmed has no claims or whatever, all the papers, goods are Russian. The ship, though, was Dutch. But Holland doesn't want the ship itself either.
Now, dear Finland, you don't lift up the ship, do not save our paintings, and don't allow us to do this either.
Referring to the article in the Finnish law that says anything that spent 50 yrs in Finnish waters or on land being originally foreign and not claimed before the time expires - becomes the property of Finland.
Russian audiences meanwhile put together 50 mln dollars (Hermitage museum a bit, rich people a lot) for the lifting of the ship (depth 48 metres). This is enough, the price was quoted to us by some Western ship-lifting companies.
So, how about returning the pictures back to origin?
Hermitage can do with more Dutch paintings. LOL. Their collection of these is only the 2nd in the world. After Holland itself. And the pics were intended for the museum exactly, not for the royal family.
Because Catherine started the Hermitage museum, like a small museum, couple of million of exhibits only, to be seen by her small circle of friends and acquaintance (several hundred of people), on some week days, in the "place of solitude" /Hermitage
and peaceful mediation and gazing upon the art.
Complain about this comment
So Jukks, when you are packing the pictures to send to me, pls don't miss anything from the list. You can direct all "poste restante" to the Central P Office, St. Petersburg 190000.
(Because I have encountered today already one vivid example of the protestant code of ethics ! So, caution, and caution and once again - caution - won't harm. a Russian Orthodox vivid sample.)
So:
Breigel "Jesus Christ young"
Gerard Terborch "A girl with a dog", "A Musician with a guitar", "An officer writing a letter".
Isaac Gedik "A room with a winding staircase", "A woman at a table".
Gerard Doy "A girl in yellow", "At a surgeon", a Triptich.
Don't miss the Triptich, please. It's 9 metres. If not soaked through has good chances to become the most expensive painting in the world. At least Russia paid for it 15,000 "guldens". On July 31st, 1771 in Amsterdam.
Ian van Goyen, Willem Joseph Lakai, Johannes Lingelbach, Gabriel Metsu, Frants van der Miin, Adrian van Ostade, Pauls Potter, Abraham Stork, Adrian van de Velde, Jacob de Vit, Philips Bauerman, German Tsaftleven, Hedriik Martens Tsorg, etc.
28 paintings Hermitage is missing.
Meanwhile your divers have fun lifting up porcelain smoking pipes of the Dutch sailors! :o) From poor Vrouw Maria, captain Reinud Lawrence. Sank 8 Oct. 1771, 11 miles off-shore, hitting the rocks.
And remember your law states "can't be exported without a special permission if stayed 50 yrs in Finland within the past 100 years."
We like it about the "100 years". Because Finland itself is not yet 100 years old.
SMIT Internationale and Mammoet Salvage each expressed a desire to help us lift the ship up, as they are now kind of in the habit of lifting up ships for Russia, having lifted up Kursk sub.
50 mln euros are packed (not dollars, sorry, Russia collected euros for the enterprise), the ship is in such great condition that you can't even knock down a nail into the deck, oak absolutely hard, depth per today 41 metres, all the pictrures Hermitage ever bought were water-tight packed so we are sure it's allright (elk skin tubes in candle wax in containers in lead) - so what are we waiting 10 years for?
Complain about this comment
OK, I thought, if you'd like we can ope a branch of the Hermitage in Finland. :o)
Kind of silly, for you to get to the Hermitage is a short home drive, but if you wish - we would.
(The highway along the beach to Finland that you worried ab is allright. Looks like no one stole asphalt or components from that road, and done well, in the Federal road status. Just been at the dacha in snow today trying to convince the village vet to go visit us in the city. No luck)
Or we can open a special hall in the Hermitage and call it "Finnish Art - Frau Maria". There are options. Hermitage has a world to share anyway, only 2.4% on display, for the rest no place to show, in cellars and separate palaces, so they rotate the exhibits. Once in 5-10 yrs some things go down to the cellars, some up.
Some get out only once in 25 yrs. Like I've seen once "2000 ball gowns of Elizabeth" niciest silk ball slippers on earth ! and all, and then hop! all vanished down again. Don't know if will see ever after.
Complain about this comment
To WebAliceinwonderland (63) and (64):
I think I have to disappoint you... I think the paintings that are in the wreck have perished a long time ago. Let me explain...
You pointed out that the paintings were in water tight packaging. The first problem is that the paintings are 40 meters below see level which means that they are under pressure: approx 3.8 times of normal atmospheric pressure or 392.3 kilonewtons per square meter. The container was from lead which is a soft metal and from candle wax and elk skin which are biodegradable. When applied pressure to this container, different parts start to behave differently and that leads to the failure of the container. Now we add 228 years to this process: 228 years for the pressure to break the container, 228 years for candle wax and elk skin to degrade. And remember, even tiniest leeks does the deed: water, bacteria and organism go in and start the destruction. I really don't believe that there are any paintings left there.
If you have any friend working in school teaching physics you could easily make an experiment to test this. Just build container from lead, elk skin and candle wax that is water tight: close the other side of the container, fill it with water, if it doesn't leak you can proceed to next part. The next part is to connect water pipe on the open end of the container, secure the water pipe so that only water goes in, apply constant 4 bar pressure to the container and see if it starts to leek. Remember to video tape the experiment and add it to Youtube for peer review. :-)
Anyhow in regards of the wreck itself, I took the initiative and read what our National Board of Antiquities thought about it. They made a study paper about it where they recommended that for the time being the wreck should be actively monitored, its externals and external fragments to be researched, but it to be otherwise left as it is. They leave the uplifting of the wreck as an future option. Their reasoning is that uplifting the wreck is risky and that we don't have enough knowledge or expertise on how to protect the wreck at land: in example Swedish have had major problems with the degradation of the Vasa ship. Essentially: "it has been 228 years there, its fine and its not threatened by anything, so why not let it be there"
I also noted that they noted that the wreck belongs and is the sole responsibility of the Finnish state. That essentially means is that if anything is lifted from the wreck or if the wreck itself is lifted, everything will remain here. I really don't see any alternative to this. If there would be any political pressure I believe that the Board of Antiquities in that situation would just choose to let the ship reside where it is. I believe they are already in mids of this option and on lifting it up. I myself would put my money on the option that they wait until they get equipment to do full body scan of the wreck under water and build a virtual model of the wreck, maybe even a full hologram, as it is and then left it be there. That would be the perfect Finnish solution, a highly technical solution.
Actually I do have to confess that I even didn't understand that you put so much value on those paintings. In my mind they are more or less uninteresting. Modern art is what is interesting. Post-modern and contemporary art are both interesting and challenging. Pre-modern art on the other hand is not reason to get excited. I can't say that this attitude is shared by most of the Finns, but Kiasma, state museum of modern and contemporary art, has steadily competed and equaled with Ateneum and lets not forget that Atenum too has modern artists in its collections.
In example this interesting work of art was published just recently... [Unsuitable/Broken URL removed by Moderator]...for the love god don't click on any other links on the site, its dedicated for youth humor and thus can for an adult and more mature person induce psychic disorders... regardless... the text in the photo...
"Winter 2008 is art work set under mercy of the weather.
Today, at Wednesday morning, a big pile of snow has been folded In front of Kiasma, near Mannerheim rider statue.
The snow pile is the art work of Antti Majava and Nestori Syrjälä called Winter 2008 that belongs to their White House -collection. Environmental- and climate-political work is simply a snow pile set under mercy of weather."
The picture and the text are a screen caption from net version of Helsingin Sanomat.
The big picture with Helsinki under it, and text asking something like "for real..." are then again part of an Internet meme, essentially making the big picture an art work of itself, an act of collective will combining local and global culture into a anonymous expression of an opinion about the contemporary world that questions its sanity.
PS. I actually noted when Menedemus and threnodio decoded your info from a message that you left. I however didn't bother, too much work ;) ... and besides... you have a datsa in Lakhta so if I would ever need or want to see you I could just drop there and ask for a lady who teaches England and whose brother is a lawyer and whose father served in the navy as an officer (did I get this right?)... I would imagine that would be sufficient enough info.
PS2. I looked from the Google Maps, the road indeed is two lanes in to each direction but it isn't yet a motorway. When it will become a motorway and continuing to Helsinki, it will become endless collection of business parks, logistic areas, shopping centers etc.. If St. Petersburg area was as developed as Finland is, I would imagine that with your population the St. Petersburg would continue to Vyburg as an collection satellite towns and suburbs. I'm afraid that in some time if you don't protect your village it will become another collection of glass and steel.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
View these comments in RSS