MS Risk Blog

French Election: Leading Candidates Clash in First TV Debate

Posted on in Uncategorized title_rule

 

The two leading candidates in the French presidential election clashed on Monday 21 March during a fiery TV debate.

Five candidates participated in Monday evenings debate: far-right candidate Marine Le Pen, centrist Emmanuel Macron, centre-right contender Francois Fillon, and left-wingers Benoit Hamon and Jean-Luc Melenchon. All five discussed the big issues for France, including jobs, terrorism and the countrys place in Europe.

Le Pen and Macron clashed over the full-body burkini swimsuit worn by some Muslim women, with Ms Le Pen stating that multiculturalism must end. Mr Macron accused the National Front leader of making enemies of Muslims in France. Throughout the debate, Mr Macron appeared to be keen to take on Ms Le Pen, arguing that the burkini was a public order matter and not a challenge to Frances tradition of secularism as Ms Le Pen has suggested. Last summer, a number of southern French resorts banned the swimsuit before Frances highest administrative court found that the ban breached fundamental freedoms.

During the debate, Mr Macron stated that he would change the countrys traditional political divisiveness, while Ms Le Pen said that she wanted a France that was not a vague region of the EU or subservient to Chancellor Angela Merkels Germany. She later vowed to stop all immigration. Meanwhile Mr Fillon stated that if was elected, he would be the president of what he called the national recovery. Mr Macron also appeared to take a swipe at Mr Fillon. After accusing Ms Le Pen of defamation, he stated that justice would prevail as it would in the case of certain presidential candidates. That was an apparent reference to the ongoing judicial investigation into allegations that Mr Fillon paid his wife hundreds of thousands of euros for parliamentary work that she did no do. Mr Fillon has denied the allegations and has refused to quit the race, stating that he is a victim of a political assassination. The candidates also clashed over how to tackle the unemployment situation, which has long stood at about 10%. In a bid to broaden her appeal, Ms Le pen called for a patriotic economy, which is a protectionist measure that favours French companies. Mr Fillon however stated that her plans would cause economic chaos. On the left, Mr Hamon called for the introduction of a universal basic income, which he said was the only innovative idea in the election campaign.

Focus groups have suggested that Mr Macron was the winner of the debate.

Voters will go to the polls on 23 April and if no candidate wins more than 50% of the votes, the two top contenders will go into a second round on 7 May. The latest Odoxa poll states that Mr Macron would lead first-round voting with 26.5 percent, just ahead of Ms Le pen on 26 percent, before beating her 64 36 in the run-off. Mr Fillon scored 19 percent of first-round voting intentions in the poll, confirming the task faced by the on-time frontrunner to revive a campaign that has been severely hit by the fraud investigation. A separate poll by Kantar Sofres-Onepoint showed a similar trend for the first round, with Mr Macron and Ms Lepen tied on 26 percent, ahead of Mr Fillon on 17 percent. The polls were taken before Mondays TV Debate.

On Saturday 18 March, the officials campaign period got under way when Frances Constitutional Council announced a list of eleven contenders who had met conditions to stand.

US Charges Russian Spies, Hackers in Yahoo Hack

Posted on in Uncategorized title_rule

The United States last week charged two Russian intelligence agents and two criminal hackers with masterminding the 2014 theft of 500 million Yahoo accounts in a move that marks the first time that the US government has criminally charged Russian spies with cyber offenses.

The 47-count Justice Department indictments on Wednesday 15 March included charges of conspiracy, computer fraud and abuse, economic espionage, theft of trade secrets, wire fraud, access device fraud and aggravated identify theft. The charges also paint a picture of the Russian security services as working hand-in-hand with cyber criminals, who helped spies further their intelligence goals in exchange for using the same exploits to make money. Speaking at a press conference to announce the charges, Acting Assistant Attorney General Mary McCord disclosed that the criminal conduct at issue, carried out and otherwise facilitated by officers from an FSB unit that serves as the FBIs point of contact in Moscow on cyber crime matters, is beyond the pale. Russias Federal Security Service (FSB) is the successor to the KGB. McCord further disclosed that the hacking campaign was awarded by the FSB in order to collect intelligence but that the two hackers used the collected information as an opportunity to line their pockets.

The indictment named the FSB officers involved as Dmitry Dokuchaev and his superior, Igor Sushchin, both of whom are in Russia. According to Russian news agency Interfax, Dokuchaev was arrested for treason in December. According to the Justice Department, the alleged criminals involved in the scheme include Alexsey Belan, who is amongst the FBIs most-wanted cyber criminals and was arrested in Europe in June 2013 however he escaped to Russia before he could be extradited to the US. Karim Baratov, who was born in Kazakhstan but also has Canadian citizenship, was also named in the indictment. The Justice Department disclosed that Baratov was arrested in Canada on 14 March. Officials in Toronto have confirmed the arrest. The US does not have an extradition treat with Russia, with McCord stating that she was hopeful that Russian authorities would cooperate in bringing criminals to justice. The US often charges cyber criminals with the intent of deterring future state-sponsored activity.

The charges announced last week are not related to the hacking of Democratic Party emails during the 2016 US presidential election. US intelligence agencies have stated that they were carried out by Russian spy services, including the FSB, in order to help the campaign of Republican candidate Donald Trump.

Yahoo disclosed when it announced the then-unprecedented breach last September, that it believed that the attack was state-sponsored. On Wednesday, the company stated that the indictment unequivocally shows that to be the case.

According to the indictment, in the 2014 breach, at least thirty million of the Yahoo accounts were the most seriously affected, with Belan being able to burrow deep into their accounts and taking user contact lists that were later used for a financially motivated spam campaign. The indictment went on to say that Belan also stole financial information, such as credit card numbers and gift cards. Yahoo had previously stated that about 32 million accounts had fallen victim to the deeper attack, which it said leveraged forged browser cookies to access accounts without the need for a password. According to Wednesdays indictment, FSB officers Sushchin and Dokuchaev also directed Baratov to use the information gained in the Yahoo breach to hack specific targets who possessed email accounts with other service providers, including Google. The incitement charged that when Baratov was successful, Dokuchaev would reward him with a bounty.

In December 2016, Yahoo announced another breach that occurred in 2013 and which affected 1 billion accounts. At the time, Special Agent Jack Bennett of the FBIs San Francisco Division disclosed that the 2013 breach is unrelated and that an investigation of that incident is ongoing. The hacks forced Yahoo to accept a discount of US $350 million in what had been a US $4.83 billion deal to sell its main assets of Verizon Communications Inc.

The charges come amidst a number of controversies relating to alleged Kremlin-backed hacking of the 2016 US presidential election and the possible links between Russian figures and associates of US President Donald Trump, as well as uncertainty about whether President Trump is willing to respond forcefully to aggression from Moscow in cyberspace and elsewhere.

EU Breathes Easier After Dutch Vote

Posted on in European Union title_rule

Late on Wednesday 15 March, Prime Minister Mark Rutte stated that Dutch people rejected the wrong kind of populism, as he celebrated victory in the election.

The Prime Ministers centre-right VVD party lead positioned him for a third successive term as prime minister and easily beat the anti-immigration Freedom party of Geert Wilders. With all but two vote counts complete, the prime ministers party won 33 out of 150 seats a loss of eight seats from the previous parliament. The Freedom party came in second place with 20 seats, a gain of fiv, while the Christian Democrats (CDA) and the liberal D66 party, tied for third with 19 seats each. The Green-left party gained 14 seats, an increase of 10. The Labour Party (PvdA), which is the junior party in the governing coalition, suffered a historic defeat by winning only nine seats a loss of 29. Labours defeat appeared to signal that voters were shifting to the right, as many of the seats it lost did not go to other left-wing parties. Voter turnout was 80.2% – the highest for thirty years, with analysts saying that this may have benefited pro-EU and liberal parties.

The Dutch race was seen as a test of support for nationalist parties that have been gaining ground across Europe. Mr Wilders however has insisted that the patriotic spring would still happen.

Fellow eurozone countries France and Germany also face elections this year. France will hold its first round of voting in its presidential election on 23 April, with the second round being held on 7 May. The far right National Front is forecast to increase its vote dramatically. Meanwhile, Germany will hold its general election in September, where the popularist Alternative for German (AfD) may win seats in parliament for the first time. Mr Rutte had already spoken of the election as a quarter-final against populism, ahead of the French and German polls, and his victory was warmly greeted by other European leaders and politicians. French President Francois Holland stated that Mr Rutte had won a clear victory against extremism, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel hailed a very pro-European result, a clear signaland a good day for democracy. Spanish Prime Minister Mariano Rajoy praised Dutch voters for their responsibility, while Martin Schulz, president of the European Parliament until earlier this year, stated that he was relieved that the Freedom Party had lost, adding we must continue to fight for an open and free Europe.

Dutertes War on Drugs

Posted on in Philippines title_rule

“Son of a b****, if your name is there, you have a problem; I will really kill you,” said the Philippines President Rodrigo Duterte early this year. He has made public a list of what he claims are thousands of narco-politicians and has warned mayors involved in drug trade to either resign or die. Over 8000 alleged drug users and dealers have been killed in the war on drugs since Duterte took office in June 2016. Dutertes anti-drug campaign known as Operation Double Barrel has allegedly been a spree of extrajudicial killings of suspected drug dealers and users in Manila and other cities.

Human Rights Watchs (HRW) investigations into various incidents have revealed police involvement in extrajudicial executions. Witnesses in HRW investigations have said that armed assailants in civilian clothes with their faces covered would bang on doors and barge into rooms, but would not identify themselves or show warrants. Family members have reported hearing beatings and their loved ones begging for their lives. The shooting could happen instantly, behind closed doors or on the street; or the gunmen might take the suspect away, where minutes later shots would be heard and local residents would find the body; or the body would be dumped elsewhere later, sometimes with hands tied or the head wrapped in plastic. No evidence so far, however, shows that Duterte has planned or ordered specific extrajudicial killings. But the Philippines Presidents repeated calls for killings as part of his anti-drug campaign could prompt law enforcement to commit murder.

Although the White House has consistently condemned the allegedly extrajudicial killings in the name of war on drugs, the U.S. appears somewhat reluctant to take stronger actions for fear of jeopardizing geo-strategic priorities in the region.

The alleged extrajudicial killing of thousands of suspected drug dealers and users in the Philippines and Dutertes repeated death threats against drug dealers and users offer several legal grounds for which he and his top subordinates could be incriminated in the Philippines or by a court abroad. Dutertes statements instigating the general population against suspected drug users could also incite violence in the country. ‪The killing spree is also likely to have adverse effects on public health. Punitive drug enforcement can lead to drug users going underground, choosing not to avail critical health services. This can trigger the transmission of HIV and Hepatitis C among people who have used drugs and may discourage people with drug dependence from seeking effective treatment.

Brexit: What Occurs When Article 50 is Triggered?

Posted on in Uncategorized title_rule

 

If the UK government sticks to its timetable, then Article 50 will be triggered by the end of this month. But how and when? And what happens next?

What is Article 50?

The referendum last June was the UK’s signal that it wants to leave the European Union, and Article 50 is the format notification of the UK’s intention to leave – effectively it is the start of the leaving process, which will last two years.

The article itself is a short, five-point text that was enshrined into EU law as part of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009. Prior to that, there was no process for leaving the EU. The text is vague, brief and is open to interpretation. Furthermore, it has never been tested before as no member has ever left the EU. Likewise there is no precedent, no patter to follow and therefore the process and procedures for leaving the EU are unclear.

How is Article 50 Triggered?

Due to the lack of precedent, the mechanics of triggering Article 50 are only now being discussed by officials in both London and in Brussels. The only requirement is that the notification is made in writing to the President of the European Council. Therefore it could be as simple as one line and sent in the form of an email, however given the enormity of the decision and the symbolism of the moment, it is likely that the UK government will make more of it. The notification letter may therefor include a reference to the UK government’s repeated desire that the EU remain a strong partner for Britain after Brexit. The letter could also be hand-delivered to the European Council building in Brussels. However by who it remains unclear, although it could be by Britain’s Ambassador to the EU, Sir Tome Barrow, or the Brexit Secretary, David Davis MP.

When Will Article 50 Be Triggered?

When to pull Article 50 is entirely up to the country that is planning to leave the EU. In the case of the UK, Prime Minister Teresa May has repeatedly indicated that she will do it by March. Time however is quickly running out, and the process have been further complicated by politics and sensitivities both in the UK and in Europe.

Domestically, politics between the House of Lords and the House of Commons has deployed the process. Only once the Brexit bill has been cleared by both houses and received royal ascent, will Prime Minister May be in a position to trigger it. However there are several dates which have been deemed as being inappropriate for a triggering.

  • 15 March – All eyes will be on the Dutch election, which could be a potentially tricky day for the EU if anti-EU far-right candidate Geert Wilders does well. Triggering Article 50 on that day would also dominate the news agenda and could, potentially, influence Dutch voters. The result of the election will trickle in on 16 March, which will be another bad day to trigger Article 50.
  • 25 March – This day marks the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome, which laid the foundations of the present-day EU. The heads of state from all EU members, with the exception for now at least the UK, will gather in Rome for a weekend of celebrations.

IS the UK Still a Member of the EU After Article 50 Has Been Triggered?

Yes, the UK will remain a member of the EU for precisely two years from the day the article is triggered. Therefore if Article 50 is triggered on 31 March 2017, then the UK would case to be a member of the EU at the end of the day on 31 March 2019. During this two-year period, the UK will remain bound by EU laws and regulations. It will also be entitled to near-full membership rights, however it must also honour its commitments as a member and those include financial. The only areas in the two-year period where the UK is excluded from EU affairs are when the 27 remaining countries are discussing the UK withdrawal or where they are discussing internal EU business.

Once Article 50 Has Been Triggered, Is there Any Turning Back?

Article 50 does not state whether it is reversible and EU lawyers have never pronounced on the issue.

Will Negotiations Between the UK and the EU Begin As Soon As Article 50 is Triggered?

No. There is a common misconception that in the first week after the triggering of Article 50, the two negotiators – Michel Barnier for the EU and David Davis MP for the UK – will face off across a table and begin negotiating Britain’s exit. It will not work like this for a number of reasons. Firstly, the EU side will need at least two months in order to draw up guidelines. The remaining 27 states will also decide on negotiating topics and re lines, which they will then feed into the EU Council. While the EU has already presented a united front on Brexit, it will quickly become clear that many of the negotiating topics and red lines are unique to individuals states. Subsequently things will become more granular, complicated and divided as the process goes along. It will be up to the European Council’s behind-the-scenes Brexit negotiation, Belgian diplomat Didier Seewus, to co-ordinate with the member countries and try to keep negotiations on track. Secondly, while Mr Barnier is the chief negotiator on behalf of the EU Commission, the negotiations will be carried out by large teams on both sides.

 What if the Withdrawal Process Takes Longer than the Designated Two Years?

 The exit clock to leave the EU effectively begins the moment that Article is triggered. Precisely two years later the UK ceases to be a member of the EU. During that period, the negotiations for the exit must be concluded. However this is an extremely unrealistic timetable to conclude such complicated negotiations and in reality, because of the time taken at the beginning and the end for the process to wind up and wind down the negotiations, the actual negotiating time will probably be only 15 months at best. The two-year Article 50 period can however be extended, and the UK continue to be an EU member, however only if all 27 remaining countries agree to it unanimously.