Category Archives: Uncategorized

MEPs Agree on Brexit Negotiation Plan

Last week, the European Parliament backed a motion setting out its position for the Brexit negotiations. The vote backed the motion 516 to 133.

The motion effectively sets out general principles at the start of the two year negotiations for the United Kingdom to leave the European Union (EU) under the Article 50 Process. Speaking at a press conference on 5 April shortly after the vote, Guy Verhofstadt, the European Parliament’s Brexit negotiator, stated that the vote meant that “the UK on the one hand and the (European) Commission on the other hand now know the position of the Parliament, what the red lines are.” He went on to say that “the interests of our citizens is our first priority” and called for an early resolution on the status of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens elsewhere in the EU.

The motion, which was supported by the two largest groups of MEPs, backs a number of positions that have been taken by EU leaders and which include the need for a “phased approach” to negotiations. This would effectively require progress on the terms of Britain’s withdrawal, including settling financial commitments, before talks on a future trading relationship can begin. It also backs the call for transparency in the talks, and for the UK to be considered liable for financial commitments that apply after it leaves the EU. It further states:

• Transitional arrangements should be time-limited to three years and be enforced by the EU’s Court of Justice
• UK citizens in the EU and EU citizens in Britain should receive “reciprocal” treatment
• The final deal should not include a “trade-off” between trade and security co-operation
• The UK should adhere to EU environmental and anti-tax evasion standards in order to get close trade ties
• The European Banking Authority and European Medicines Agency should be moved out of London
• The UK should pay towards costs for the EU that “arise directly from its withdrawal”

During the debate, Manfred Weber, chairman of the largest group of MEPs, the centre-right European People’s Party, stating that “cherry-picking will not happen. A state outside the European Union will not have better conditions than a state inside the European Union.” Gianna Pitella, chairman of the European Socialists and Democrats also agued that the UK “can not benefit from the same conditions as members do,” adding “if you leave the house, you still have to pay the bills.”

While the motion is not binding on European Commission officials, President of the European Commission Jean-Claude Juncker told MEPs that “the role of this parliament is more important than ever. You must scrutinise and validate the final agreement.” He went on to say, “we will of course negotiate in friendship and openness and not in a hostile mood, with a country that has brought so much to our union and will remain close to hearts long after they have left, but this is now the time for reason over emotion,” adding, “what’s at stake here are the lives of millions of people. Millions have family or professional links to the United Kingdom.”

GCHQ Warns Politicians About Russian Hacking Threat

GCHQ last month warned politicians that attacks by Russian hackers could threaten British democracy.

The Sunday Times has reported that the spy agencys computer security chief has written to political parties offering advice on preventing hacks. In the letter, Ciaran Martin, chief executive of GCHQs National Cyber Security Centre (NCSC) stated, you will be aware of the coverage of events in the United States, Germany and elsewhere reminding us of the potential for hostile action against the UK political system, adding this is not just about the network security of political parties own systems. Attacks against our democratic processes go beyond this and can include attacks on parliament, constituency offices, think tanks and pressure groups and individuals email accounts. He went on to say that the GCHQ would offer tailored seminars in order to help political parties understand the threats and reduce the risk of information being stolen. The letter comes after he warned back in February that Britain had been targeted with 188 attempted high-level hacks in the previous three months, noting that many of which threatened national security. Chancellor Phillip Hammond, a former defense and foreign secretary, meanwhile has disclosed that the NCSC had been blocking more than 200 attacks a day on government departments and the public over the last six months.

This comes as United States intelligence officials have accused the Kremlin of using cyber-attacks in order to influence the November 2016 presidential election. A report by US intelligence officials concluded that Russian President Vladimir Putin had ordered the hacking of the Democratic National Committee in a bid to influence the November election in favour of Republican candidate Donald Trump. Meanwhile Germanys domestic intelligence chief warned in December 2016 of increasingly aggressive cyber-espionage by a hacking group believed to be controlled by the Russian state. UK Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson however has stated that so far there has been no evidence of any successful attacks in the UK. This month, Mr Johnson told ITVs Peston On Sunday that we have no evidence that the Russians are actually involved in trying to undermine our democratic processes at the moment. We dont actually have that evidenceBut what we do have is plenty of evidence that the Russians are capable of doing that. And there is no doubt that they have been up to all sorts of dirty tricks. The foreign secretary went on to say that there was very little doubt that the Kremlin was behind the hacking in the US, cyber-attacks on French TV stations and an attempted coup in Montenegro. Russia however has rejected these allegations.

Syrian Chemical Attack

At least 70 people have been killed in a suspected chemical attack on the rebel-held town of Khan Sheikhoun in north-western Syria. Hundreds suffered symptoms consistent with reaction to a nerve agent after what the opposition and Western powers said was a Syrian government air strike on the area on Tuesday morning. Activists and witnesses say warplanes attacked Khan Sheikhoun, about 50km (30 miles) south of the city of Idlib, early on Tuesday, when many people were asleep.

The use of chemical weapons is still being confirmed. 32 victims of the attack were brought to Turkey, where three subsequently died in hospital. “Post mortems were carried out on the three bodies,” Justice Minister Bekir Bozdag said, “the results of the post-mortems confirm chemical weapons were used.”

The bodies were examined by officials from the World Health Organisation in the southern province of Adana together with officials from Organisation for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons. Russia said it was “premature” to accuse President Assad of using chemical weapons, and called for a thorough investigation. It has said the deaths and injuries were caused by a Syrian airstrike on a “terrorist warehouse” containing “toxic substances”. Witnesses described seeing victims choking, fainting and foaming at the mouth after the weapons were dropped. Medical charity Medecins Sans Frontieres said it treated patients with dilated pupils, muscle spasms and involuntary defecation “consistent with exposure to neuro-toxic agents such as Sarin.”

The West places the blame squarely on the Assad regime. Russia – one of President Assad’s few allies – has a different story.

Russia, which has carried out air strikes in support of President Assad since 2015, said the Syrian air force had struck Khan Sheikhoun “between 11:30am and 12:30pm local time” on Tuesday, but that the target had been “a large terrorist ammunition depot” on its eastern outskirts. “On the territory of the depot, there were workshops which produced chemical warfare munitions,” it added, without providing any evidence. “Terrorists had been transporting chemical munitions from this largest arsenal to the territory of Iraq.”

A Syrian military statement published by state media categorically denied the use of any chemical or toxic substance” in Khan Sheikhoun on Tuesday, adding: “It has never used them, anytime, anywhere, and will not do so in the future.”

Reports of the first significant use of chemical weapons – including Sarin nerve agent – by the Assad regime in 2013, prompted the international community’s first purposeful diplomatic intervention in the Syrian War. The Obama administration had marked down the use of chemical arms as “a red line”, which, if crossed, would lead to serious consequences for the Assad regime.In the event, President Obama decided to pull back and avoid military action. The US and Russia came together and brokered a deal under which the Assad regime would give up its chemical arsenal under international inspection.

Russia pledged its continuing support for the Syrian regime on Wednesday, despite the chemical attack. “The Russian Federation and its military are continuing… to support the anti-terrorism operation and liberation of the country, which is being conducted by the Syrian armed forces,” said Kremlin spokesperson Dmitry Peskov.

US Secretary of State, Rex Tillerson, said on Wednesday it was time for Russia to rethink its relationship with the Assad regime. “There is no doubt in our mind that the Syrian regime under the leadership of Bashar al-Assad is responsible for the horrific attack. And we think it’s time for the Russians to think carefully about their continuing support for the regime”

Informe Sobre Venezuela (6 abril 2017)

Condena internacional por la decisión del Tribunal Supremo de Justicia de Venezuela (TSJ) de suprimir la inmunidad de los diputados de la Asamblea Nacional y la adjudicación de sus competencias a la Sala Constitucional del TSJ. La decisión fue tomada tras desobedecer la Asamblea la petición del TSJ de no juramentar a los diputados del Estado de Amazonas tras irregularidades en la votación en las pasadas elecciones legislativas. La oposición acusó al Gobierno de Nicolás Maduro de cometer un golpe de estado y movilizaron a sus seguidores en protestas por todo el país. La comunidad internacional condenó la decisión del tribunal como un atentado a la democracia, con declaraciones tanto de Mercosur como de la Organización de Estados Americanos, así como de muchos países. Sin embargo, horas después Maduro exhortaba al TSJ a reconsiderar la sentencia, y el tribunal acató invalidando su propia sentencia. Esto se debe, más allá de la presión externa e interna hacia al régimen, al poco apoyo que recibió el ejecutivo por parte de sus aliados tradicionales, Cuba no se pronunció sobre la sentencia, Rafael Correa declaró que “Ecuador no es Venezuela” y solo el presidente de Bolivia, Evo Morales, salió en apoyo de su mayor aliado.

El trasfondo de la situación es, sin embargo, más complejo y se ha de prestar atención hacia Petróleos de Venezuela (PDVSA) la empresa estatal del petróleo, de la cual dependen ampliamente las cuentas venezolanas, y que se encuentra en una profunda crisis desde el golpe de estado de Hugo Chávez en 2002. La salida de los expertos de la petrolera por motivos ideológicos llevó a la empresa estatal a perder cuota de producción por la incompetencia de la nueva directiva, elegida a dedo, y ha acarreado la situación límite de estos últimos meses. En abril el PDVSA afronta el pago de 2.900 millones de dólares que, de no ser pagados, pondrían en riesgo el Gobierno de Nicolás Maduro. El presidente acordó una solución con Rosneft, petrolera propiedad del Gobierno ruso, que le proporcionaría liquidez para afrontar los pagos, pero dicho acuerdo requería de la aprobación de la Asamblea que mostró su negativa a firmar cualquier asociación para poner fin al Gobierno de Maduro. Esto llevó a la sentencia del TSJ, dominado por chavistas, que inhabilitó a la Asamblea y permitió al tribunal modificar el reglamento para permitir a PDVSA la creación de empresas mixtas público-privadas sin aprobación legislativa. De esta forma Maduro asegura el acuerdo con Rosneft y la supervivencia de su Gobierno, a pesar de que Rosneft todavía no ha tomado una decisión definitiva. Rusia consigue del acuerdo un 10% de participación en la filial Petropiar presente en la Franja del Orinoco (un 70% propiedad del Estado y un 30% de Chevron), una de las zonas de producción petrolíferas más prometedoras del mundo y, en caso de que PDVSA no afronte sus pagos, se adjudicaría la mitad de las acciones de Citgo, la filial venezolana en Estados Unidos.

French Presidential Election: Macron Clashes with Le Pen During Televised Debate

Centrist Emmanuel Macron has kept his position as favourite to win France’s presidential election after a televised debate on Tuesday night, during which he clashed with his main rival, Marine Le Pen, over Europe. The debate comes just nineteen days before the election.

Criticising Ms Le Pen, the leader of the National Front (FN) who wants to leave the euro, hold a referendum on European Union (EU) membership and curb immigration, Mr Macron stated, “nationalism is war. I know it. I come from a region that is full of graveyards.” Mr Macron, who has voiced his strong pro-European views, comes from the Somme region, which was a major battlefield during World War One. Ms Le Pen however hit back at Mr Macron, stating “you should pretend to be something new when you are speaking like old fossils that are at lest 50 years old,” to which Mr Macron replied “sorry to tell you this, Madame Le Pen, but you are saying the same lies that we’ve heard from your father for 40 years.” The comment appeared to be a swipe at Le Pen’s efforts to clean up the image of the party that her father, Jean-Marie Le Pen, founded and to make it more palatable to mainstream voters.

According to a snap survey, Mr Macron was seen as having the best political programme, with the survey also placing him as the second most convincing performer in the four-hour debate, which involved all eleven presidential candidates. The Elabe snap poll, which was tkane when the debate ended in the early hours of Wednesday, gave firebrand leftist Jean-Luc Melenchon, a veteran of France’s political circuit, first place as the most convincing performer. Ms Le Pen lagged in fourth place, behind Mr Macron and Francois Fillon. Mr Macron was also seen in the same poll as having the best programme of all the candidates by 23 percent of viewers, followed by Melenchon, whose ratings have been rising since the first televised debate in March, to the detriment of Socialist Party candidate Benoit Hamon.

While the Elabe poll did not show voting intentions, other surveys have consistently shown Mr Macron and Ms Le Pen qualifying for the 7 May runoff, with Mr Macron ultimately winning the presidential election. However the high level of undecided voters means that the ballot remains unpredictable.

It currently remains unclear if a final televised debate, due to take place on 20 April, will occur after several of the leading candidates have disclosed that it is being held too close to the election itself, with the first round of voting due to take place on 23 April.