quinta-feira, 31 de dezembro de 2020

Don Lemon rolls the tape on Trump's 2020 'insane reality show'

Sen. Shaheen: Hawley's Electoral College Challenge Borders on Sedition Or Treason | Andrea Mitchell

New Year’s Eve in France: What’s allowed and what's not?

Boris Johnson: 2021 will herald the return of 'things that seem lost in the past'

Germany faces 'hard times' in 2021 says Chancellor Merkel in New Year's ...

Secret Service adding former Biden agents to new presidential detail // Joe Biden to have new Secret Service team amid concern about Trump loyalty

 


Secret Service adding former Biden agents to new presidential detail

 

By Sarah Mucha and Paul LeBlanc, CNN

Updated 0442 GMT (1242 HKT) December 31, 2020

https://edition.cnn.com/2020/12/30/politics/joe-biden-secret-service/index.html

 

(CNN)The US Secret Service has been planning to bring back to the White House a group of agents that previously worked with President-elect Joe Biden when he was vice president to fill out his security detail, a law enforcement source confirmed to CNN.

 

It's not uncommon for the presidential detail to change agents who are familiar with the new president, the source said, but these moves, which have been in place for several weeks, come at a time of considerable political tension as President Donald Trump continues to falsely claim that his second term is being stolen while Biden prepares to take office.

The staffing changes, first reported by The Washington Post, also come amid concern from Biden allies about the political loyalty of some current agents to Trump, two people familiar with the situation told the newspaper. Some presidential detail members even encouraged other agents not to wear face masks this year, the Post reported, out of loyalty to the President, who didn't like the way they looked.

A former Secret Service executive told the Post the staffing changes were a "smart" decision in order to "give the incoming president the comfort of the familiar."

"You want him to be with people he knows and trusts, and who also know how he operates," the person said.

Secret Service spokeswoman Catherine Milhoan told the newspaper the agency "is uniquely authorized to provide protection to designated U.S. and other world leaders and remains steadfastly dedicated to a standard of excellence in those operations, wholly apolitically and unaffiliated with the political parties of protectees."

"As a matter of practice and due to operational security, the agency does not comment on protective operations inclusive of internal decisions on agency assignments," she added.

The White House and the Biden transition declined to comment to the Post.

Biden took the first step to formally request Secret Service protection after protesters stormed the stage at one of his rallies.

He was just minutes into a speech when two women rushed toward the podium where he was celebrating his Super Tuesday wins. The first woman was grabbed by Biden's private security guard and led offstage.

Seconds later, the second woman climbed onto the stage and Jill Biden put herself between the protester and her husband. Symone Sanders, a senior campaign adviser at the time, charged onto the platform and hauled the protester off the stage.

In an interview with NBC News at the time, Biden said "it's becoming increasingly" clear that protection would be necessary.

"I think that that's something that has to be considered the more outrageous it becomes," he said.

He received protection in March, CNN reported. Former vice presidents receive protection for six months after they leave office, which means Biden's Secret Service protection ended had ended in mid-2017. Before that, he consistently had private security nearby, and larger venues for campaign rallies often had local police or private security on hand as well.

In early November -- after the election but ahead of his projected victory -- the Secret Service sent more agents to Wilmington, Delaware, in anticipation of his presidential win.

 

Joe Biden to have new Secret Service team amid concern about Trump loyalty

 

Agents familiar from time as vice-president to return

 

Victoria Bekiempis in New York

Thu 31 Dec 2020 16.48 GMTLast modified on Thu 31 Dec 2020 16.49 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/dec/31/joe-biden-secret-service-team-trump-loyalty

 

Joe Biden is expected to receive Secret Service protection with a new team that is more familiar to him and replacing some agents amid concerns that they may be politically allied with Donald Trump.

 

In a changing of the guard as well as the man to be guarded at the White House, Biden’s security detail will undergo some staffing changes, the Washington Post reported on Thursday.

 

Several “senior” Secret Service agents are poised to return to the president-elect’s protection team and Biden knows these agents well because they guarded him and his family during his time as vice-president, according to the article, echoed in a report by CNN, citing a law enforcement source.

 

Re-assignments and promotions are common during transition periods between presidential administrations and are meant to increase comfort and trust between a president-elect and his security team, who shadow the commander-in-chief closely, including during private moments and sensitive discussions.

 

Although staffing changes are typical, several incidents reportedly contributed to the heightened concerns from Biden’s allies that some agents and officers might be loyal to Trump.

 

Some members of the president’s detail reportedly urged their colleagues not to wear masks during trips, for example – despite the federal government’s official guidance on Covid-19 – as Trump himself disparaged mask-wearing and held out for months before being seen wearing one in public.

 

In what was described as an “unprecedented” move, the Secret Service had permitted former detail leader Anthony Ornato to temporarily leave his role and serve as White House deputy chief of staff.

 

Ornato was among the coordinators of the June photo op for which Trump marched through Washington DC’s Lafayette Square to stand with a Bible – after peaceful protesters were forced from the area by troops on federal order, sparking uproar in political circles as well as among the public..

 

Ornato also assisted in the planning of many Trump campaign rallies even as Covid-19 tore through the US and gatherings were being discouraged or banned outright. In addition to members of the public, many Secret Service members contracted coronavirus or were exposed.

 

The Secret Service declined to discuss the reports. Biden has had a security detail since March, when he was campaigning for the Democratic nomination.

 

While former vice-presidents are given a security detail for six months after leaving office, he formally requested Secret Service protection after protesters rushed on to the stage at a campaign rally, CNN said.

 

 

Brexit’s Silver Lining for Europe

 



NEWS ANALYSIS

Brexit’s Silver Lining for Europe

 

Both sides lost in Britain’s departure, but the European Union has been galvanized. And the Biden administration will encounter European allies bent on their own “strategic autonomy.”

 

By Roger Cohen

Dec. 31, 2020

Updated 10:35 a.m. ET

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/12/31/world/europe/brexit-eu-advantages.html?action=click&module=Top%20Stories&pgtype=Homepage

 

PARIS — It is done at last. On Jan. 1, with the Brexit transition period over, Britain will no longer be part of the European Union’s single market and customs union. The departure will be ordered, thanks to a last-minute deal running to more than 1,200 pages, but still painful to both sides. A great loss will be consummated.

 

Loss for the European Union of one of its biggest member states, a major economy, a robust military and the tradition, albeit faltering, of British liberalism at a time when Hungary and Poland have veered toward nationalism.

 

Loss for Britain of diplomatic heft in a world of renewed great power rivalry; of some future economic growth; of clarity over European access for its big financial services industry; and of countless opportunities to study, live, work and dream across the continent.

 

The national cry of “take back control” that fired the Brexit vote in an outburst of anti-immigrant fervor and random grievances withered into four and a half years of painful negotiation pitting a minnow against a mammoth. Posturing encountered reality. The British economy is less than one-fifth the size of the bloc’s. President Trump is leaving office, and with him goes any hope of a rapid offsetting British-American trade agreement.

 

“Brexit is an act of mutual weakening,” Michel Barnier, the chief European Union negotiator, told the French daily Le Figaro.

 

But the weakening is uneven. Britain is closer to fracture. The possibility has increased that Scotland and Northern Ireland will opt to leave the United Kingdom and, by different means, rejoin the European Union. The bloc, by contrast, has in some ways been galvanized by the trauma of Brexit. It has overcome longstanding obstacles, lifted its ambitions and reignited the Franco-German motor of closer union.

 

“Brexit is not good news for anyone, but it has unquestionably contributed to a reconsolidation of Europe, which demonstrated its unity throughout the negotiations,” François Delattre, the secretary-general of the French foreign ministry, said.

 

What Is Brexit? And What Happens Next?

 

The European Union — prodded by Brexit, facing the coronavirus pandemic, and confronting the hostility of Mr. Trump — has done things previously unimaginable. It has taken steps in a quasi-federal direction that Britain always opposed.

 

Germany abandoned a tenacious policy of austerity. The federalization of European debt, long taboo for the Germans, became possible. The European Union can now borrow as a government does — a step toward sovereign stature and a means to finance the $918 billion pandemic recovery fund that a British presence would probably have blocked.

 

“Brexit made Angela Merkel willing to abandon positions that had been sacred,” said Karl Kaiser, a former head of the German Council on Foreign Relations. “There has long been a debate about widening or deepening the European Union. Well, it has deepened.”

 

Part of this process has been a rethinking of Europe’s role. President Emmanuel Macron of France now speaks often of a need for “strategic autonomy.” At the heart of this idea lies the conviction that, confronted by Russia and China and a United States whose unreliability has become evident, Europe must develop its military arm to buttress independent policies. European soft power goes only so far.

 

“Who would have said three years ago that Europe would adhere so quickly to a budgetary relaunch through shared debt, and to strategic military and technological autonomy?” Mr. Macron told the French weekly magazine L’Express in December. “This is essential, because France’s destiny lies in a sovereign Europe.” He alluded to an autonomous Europe operating “beside America and China,” a telling formulation.

 

Military autonomy is a long way off, probably a pipe dream. The attachment of Central and Eastern European states to NATO, and through it to the United States as a European power, is strong. Germany recognizes the need for an adjusted trans-Atlantic bond but does not question the bond itself. Nor, in the end, does France.

 

Still, the European Union, through its European defense fund, agreed in 2020 to invest more than $10 billion in jointly developed military equipment, technology and greater mobility. Not a lot, and less than planned, but enough to indicate a new European state of mind. When France and Germany plan a “euro-drone,” something has shifted.

 

This change will almost certainly lead to tensions between the European Union and the incoming administration of President-elect Joseph R. Biden Jr., who, as one official put it, “is part of the Euro-American décor.”

 

Mr. Biden, a regular at the Munich Security Conference for decades, is by formation and experience a man with a traditional view of the alliance: The United States leads, allies fall into line. But the world has changed. The impact of the Trump years, and of an America AWOL during the global crisis caused by the pandemic, cannot be waved away.

 

“You can only lose trust once,” said Nicole Bacharan, a French political analyst. “When it’s gone, it’s gone. We’ve learned that an American president can just undo things.”

 

Most European governments are delighted to see Mr. Trump go. They believe American decency has returned in Mr. Biden. They do not, however, necessarily equate their relief with a long honeymoon, even if the incoming president and Antony J. Blinken, his nominee for secretary of state, are aware that times have changed, and that solving big problems demands the give-and-take multilateralism that Mr. Trump shunned.

 

On China policy, on Iran, on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, on climate issues, a Europe girded by the experience of an American president who scorned NATO and coddled Russia will be more assertive. Already France and Germany have cooperated on a voluminous dossier covering all major international issues and handed it to officials in the future Biden administration.

 

Of course, the ailing European Union that produced Brexit and rising nationalism has not gone away. A union perceived as too bureaucratic and insufficiently democratic. The divisions that plague a now 27-member entity, with 19 of those countries sharing a currency but none of them sharing a government, will not disappear.

 

Still, the European Union has been jolted into a new sense of its value. Brexit looks like a one-off. The nations of Europe have seen up close that a divorce is always a defeat — and a negotiation whose end point is new barriers is, too.

 

Britain’s decision to leave was quintessentially of its era. An act inspired by an imaginary past, borne aloft by an imaginary future, turbocharged by social media and enabled by the withered hold of truth. It was a failure of the dream of a “United States of Europe” — on the continent that British and American troops died to liberate from the Nazis — first articulated by Winston Churchill in 1946, when he spoke of a free Europe offering “the simple joys and hopes that make life worth living.”

 

Everyone in Europe, and Britain is, has lost something. But as Jean Monnet, one of the founding fathers of what would become the European Union, observed: “Europe makes itself in crises.”

 

Roger Cohen is the Paris Bureau Chief of The Times. He was a columnist from 2009 to 2020. He has worked for The Times for more than 30 years and has served as a foreign correspondent and foreign editor. Raised in South Africa and Britain, he is a naturalized American. @NYTimesCohen

Turkey dismisses fears that new deal will result in mass deportation of Uighurs to China

View from the EU: Britain 'taken over by gamblers, liars, clowns and their cheerleaders'

 



View from the EU: Britain 'taken over by gamblers, liars, clowns and their cheerleaders'

 

European commentators weigh in on what Britain’s departure from the EU means

 

Jon Henley

Jon Henley Europe correspondent

@jonhenley

Thu 31 Dec 2020 12.21 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2020/dec/31/the-view-from-europe-uk-taken-over-by-gamblers-liars-clowns-and-their-cheerleaders

 

Britain faces an uncertain future as it finally pulls clear of the EU’s orbit, continental commentators have predicted, its reputation for pragmatism and probity shredded by a Brexit process most see as profoundly populist and dangerously dishonest.

 

“For us, the UK has always been seen as like-minded: economically progressive, politically stable, respect for the rule of law – a beacon of western liberal democracy,” said Rem Korteweg, of the Clingendael Institute thinktank in the Netherlands.

 

“I’m afraid that’s been seriously hit by the past four years. The Dutch have seen a country in a deep identity crisis; it’s been like watching a close friend go through a really, really difficult time. Brexit is an exercise in emotion, not rationality; in choosing your own facts. And it’s not clear how it will end.”

 

Britain’s long-polished pragmatic image had been “seriously tarnished”, agreed Nicolai von Ondarza, of the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. But trust in the UK, too, had taken a heavy battering on the Brexit rollercoaster.

 

“That’s particularly been the case over the past year,” Von Ondarza said. “Boris Johnson has always been seen as a bit of a gambler, displaying a certain … flexibility with the truth. But observing him him as prime minister has only made that worse.”

 

Germans tended to view international politics “very much through the prism of international law”, Von Ondarza said, so Johnson’s willingness to ignore it – in the form, particularly, of the internal market bill – was deeply shocking.

 

“The idea that you’d willingly violate an international treaty that you’d negotiated and signed barely eight months previously … That’s just not something you do among allies,” he said. “That whole episode really damaged Britain’s credibility.”

 

Others were more brutal still. In Der Spiegel, Nikolaus Blome said there was “absolutely nothing good about Brexit … which would never have happened had Conservative politicians not, to a quite unprecedented degree, deceived and lied to their people”.

 

Much of the British media, Blome said, “were complicit, constantly trampling on fairness and facts”, leaving Britain “captured by gambling liars, frivolous clowns and their paid cheerleaders. They have destroyed my Europe, to which the UK belonged as much as France or Germany.”

 

But Johnson’s lies were the biggest of all, he said: “‘Take back control,’ Johnson lied to his citizens. But all the British government will finally have achieved is to have taken back control of a little shovel and a little sand castle.”

 

The “sovereignty” in whose name Brexit was done remained, essentially, a myth, said Jean-Dominique Giuliani, of the Robert Schuman Foundation in France. “It is history, geography, culture, language and traditions that make up the identity of a people,” Giuliani said, “not their political organisation.”

 

It is “wrong to believe peoples and states can permanently free themselves from each other, or take decisions without considering the consequences for their citizens and partners. ‘Take back control’ is a nationalist, populist slogan that ignores the reality of an interdependent world … Our maritime neighbour will be much weakened.”

 

The German historian Helene von Bismarck doubted Brexit would end what she described as a very British brand of populism. “British populism is a political method, not an ideology, and it does not become redundant with Brexit,” she said.

 

Von Bismarck identified two key elements in this method: an emotionalisation and over-simplification of highly complex issues, such as Brexit, the Covid pandemic or migration, and a reliance on bogeymen or enemies at home and abroad.

 

“Populists depend on enemies, real or imagined, to legitimise their actions and deflect from their own shortcomings,” she said. If the EU has been the “enemy abroad” since 2016, it will steadily be replaced by “enemies within”: MPs, civil servants, judges, lawyers, experts, the BBC.

 

“Individuals and institutions who dare to limit the power of the executive, even if it is just by asking questions, are at constant risk of being denounced as ‘activists’” by the Johnson government, Von Bismarck said. “Everyone has political motives – except for the government, which seeks to define ‘neutrality’.”

 

Brexit itself is being framed as “the grand departure, the moment the UK is finally free and sovereign, when all problems can be solved with common sense and optimism – justifying a more ‘pragmatic’ approach to rules, constitutional conventions and institutions” that actually amounts to a “worrying disregard for the rule of law”.

 

“British populism” would continue, she said, especially when the real, hard consequences of the pandemic and Brexit started to bite.

 

“It is naive to expect a political style which ridicules complexity, presents people with bogeymen to despise, and prides itself on ‘doing what it necessary’ even if ‘elites’ and institutions get in the way, to lose its appeal in times of hardship,” she said.

 

Elvire Fabry, of France’s Institut Jacques Delors, said the past four years had shown Europeans and Britons “just how little we really knew each other”. They had also revealed, she said, the fragility of a parliamentary system seen by many on the continent as a point of reference.

 

“It’s been difficult for us to anticipate, at times even to interpret, what’s happened” in the UK, Fabry said. “The direction Johnson has taken the Conservative party in – we didn’t see that coming. The course he’s setting for the country. The polarisation. And the way MPs have been bypassed since he became prime minister ….”

 

Most striking of all, she said, was how the politics prevailing in Britain had become “detached from geopolitical reality – from the way the world is developing. It’s a political vision turned towards yesterday’s world. Ideological. The way the trade deal focused on goods at the expense of services … It’s not the way the world’s going.”

 

Painful as the Brexit process may have been for Europeans, however, it had at least demonstrated “the reality and value of the single market, its rules and norms, and of the EU’s basis in law”, Fabry said. “Those are at the heart of the European identity – and defending them has given the union a new political maturity.”

 

It had also, concluded Korteweg, served as a warning. “I think it’s taught us all just how vulnerable our political processes are,” he said. “Just eight years ago, leaving the EU was a seriously fringe proposition in British politics, and now look where you are. So we’ve seen how fragile it all is, what we’ve built – and how worth defending.”

EU-China Investment deal: At what expense? | DW News

Livraria Barata acorda parceria com a Fnac



LIVROS

Livraria Barata acorda parceria com a Fnac

 

Por iniciativa da Câmara de Lisboa, a histórica livraria da Avenida de Roma, que corria o risco de fechar, irá sobreviver com o apoio da cadeia de lojas francesa.

 

Luís Miguel Queirós

17 de Dezembro de 2020, 14:14

https://www.publico.pt/2020/12/17/culturaipsilon/noticia/livraria-barata-acorda-parceria-fnac-1943350?fbclid=IwAR1T24gnFLL7ShR3hQjrsCrplgz1LOZSubflTLQpqhYs0YaejfOeFpgGUs8

 

Criada em 1957 por António Barata, que seria várias vezes detido por vender livros proibidos pelo regime, a Livraria Barata começa agora uma nova vida aliada à Fnac, numa parceria promovida pela Câmara Municipal de Lisboa (CML) no âmbito do programa Lojas com História.

 

“Numa altura em que as livrarias tradicionais enfrentam um grave período de crise, a Fnac, desafiada pela Câmara Municipal de Lisboa, juntou-se a uma iniciativa tripartida com o objectivo de preservar o património cultural e de cidadania da Livraria Barata”, diz um comunicado enviado ao PÚBLICO.

 

Há já algum tempo que a livraria da Avenida de Roma vinha procedendo a obras de remodelação no seu piso térreo, com nova estantaria e a criação de um espaço onde a Fnac venderá, segundo o mesmo comunicado, “vinis, produtos de papelaria, jogos e brinquedos, instrumentos musicais, merchandising, e equipamentos de som e de telecomunicações”. Caberá ainda à Fnac “a gestão do catálogo” e a “disponibilização do stock de livros”.

 

Um modelo de negócio que “posiciona a Fnac no mercado tradicional, sem concorrência directa nas novas categorias a explorar, e numa localização na qual a marca ainda não está presente, área essa com uma população residente cada vez mais jovem”, diz o documento enviado à imprensa, acrescentando que, para a Livraria Barata, se trata de “uma sinergia importante no quadro de um plano mais amplo de reposicionamento da marca e do espaço da livraria, numa aposta de futuro que pretende reestruturar o negócio, aproximando-o de novos públicos e oferecendo novos produtos e actividades”.

 

O comunicado assegura ainda que esta “oportunidade de renovar a sua atitude” não implicará, para a histórica livraria lisboeta, “perder ou condicionar os seus valores humanistas e de cidadania, de defesa da cultura, da arte, do livro e da educação.

 

No início do próximo ano, o piso inferior da livraria, onde António Barata guardava os livros proibidos, deverá sofrer obras de remodelação para se transformar num local para exposições e outras iniciativas.

 

A Câmara de Lisboa começou a acompanhar mais de perto a situação da livraria no final de Abril deste ano, quando surgiram as primeiras notícias de que o encerramento imposto pela pandemia deixara a Barata em risco de ter de fechar definitivamente as portas. E esta parceria com a Fnac é apenas “o primeiro pilar” de um plano de apoio à livraria que está ainda a ser desenvolvido e que irá ser apresentado em 2021, esclarece a nota enviada à imprensa.

 

A livraria manterá a sua designação comercial, e o apoio da cadeira francesa à loja portuguesa será apenas publicitado num acrescento ao logótipo tradicional da Barata, no qual se lerá “powered by Fnac”.


French businesses prepare for post-Brexit relationship with UK

Brexit deal goes into force on New Year's Day | DW News

‘I fell in love with the overall society — the organisation, biking culture, openness to change’ 10 questions

 



‘I fell in love with the overall society — the organisation, biking culture, openness to change’ 10 questions 

 December 30, 2020

https://www.dutchnews.nl/features/2020/12/i-fell-in-love-with-the-overall-society-the-organisation-biking-culture-openness-to-change/?fbclid=IwAR34G3cy5GsCKoTGpswqDtchw-l-U5oG1FxsOJ8ll5VbODPgjxwJ_cksm9I

 

Originally from the seaside town of Ayvalık in Turkey, Ozan Ozavci is an assistant professor of trans-imperial history at the University of Utrecht. He says he’s fallen in love with Dutch cycling culture and Old Amsterdam goat’s cheese and would relish the opportunity to discuss politics with Thierry Baudet. How did you end up in the Netherlands? I ended up here because I started a job as a post-doctoral research fellow on a project on security history at Utrecht University. This was five years ago. The same year, I was offered a permanent contract by the university so I stayed. How do you describe yourself – an expat, lovepat, immigrant, international? I think when I first arrived in the Netherlands, I was an expat because I only planned to live here for about four years, which was the duration of my post-doctoral research. Then I guess I became a lovepat. Not because I fell in love with a Dutch woman but because I fell in love with the overall society — the organisation, the biking culture, openness to change, Albert Heijn, and Utrecht, which is where I live. Living in Utrecht is like living in a village with the perks of a big city. It fits quite well with my personality. I feel like I’m constantly moving between being an expat, lovepat, immigrant, etc., which perhaps tells us that these terms don’t really help describe our life trajectories. How long do you plan to stay? I’m happy here. For the foreseeable future, I have no plans to live anywhere else. My mortgage also suggests that I’ll be here for at least a few more decades. Do you speak Dutch and how did you learn? I do, but not to the level of sophistication I would want as a historian whose work is mostly about words, texts, and subtexts. I might need to do more. I first went to a language school here in Utrecht before I had private lessons that the university arranged for me and a number of other international staff. I also did language exchanges, and now I’ve moved back to private courses to improve my speaking. Writing and reading is a less difficult problem at this stage. What’s your favourite Dutch thing? There are a lot of Dutch things that I would consider my favourites. I very much like the biking culture here and how the traffic is organised around it. It’s something I’ve missed in the other countries I’ve lived in. I very much like Old Amsterdam goat’s cheese. I would even dare to say that Dapp Frietwinkel on the Vinkenburgstraat in Utrecht is making the best fries in the world, in my experience. There is also local Utrecht beer like the ones from Brouwerij De Leckere. Those are some of my favourite ones, too. But I think my favourite Dutch thing overall is the individuals that make up Dutch society. Having lived relatively easier lives compared to the peoples in other parts of the world, they are very nice and kind people. In my experience, they are very welcoming. They live their lives mostly in search of and in pursuit of what they call gezellig moments. This is what I believe makes them happy people. It creates a positive cycle. I’ve been impressed with this kindness and happiness, time and time again. How Dutch have you become? This is a difficult one. In the beginning, I made an active attempt to think and act more like the Dutch in my professional environment. One day, a colleague, one of the senior ones, told me, ‘We want you here and we hired you, Ozan, so that you would offer us what the Dutch cannot.’ This triggered in me the importance of my non-Dutch or international identity at the university. I’ve come to think that it’s my asset, and I’ve clung to it more and more. The courses I teach and the epistemological basis of my research, if I may be an academic for a second, are all connected to this. On a daily basis, I’ve certainly become more punctual since I’ve moved here. I’ve started to eat sandwiches a lot more than before, and I’ve become more direct when I communicate my ideas and arguments. Sometimes I think I should be more direct though. But in my eyes the real threshold of being Dutch is something that I deducted from an outstanding moment one day. In one of my first months in the Netherlands, I saw this young guy peeling an orange with both hands while riding his bike. He rode past my office. I consider myself good on a bike. I used to cycle to work when I lived in London and Manchester. Since I saw that guy, I think that being Dutch pertains also to the ability to peel an orange while riding a bike. I don’t think I’ll ever be able to do that. Which three Dutch people (dead or alive) would you most like to meet? As I mentioned earlier, I quite like Old Amsterdam goat’s cheese. I would like to meet the inventor of it and thank him or her in person for all the moments of pleasure it’s given me. That would be number one. I’ve read a lot about and by Baruch Spinoza, the philosopher. He had an unassuming lifestyle and modesty. I would like to talk to him about the everyday conduct of life. That would be fascinating, so that’s number two. Number three, I don’t know which of the two, but I would like to talk to either of the far right leaders. The more popular one these days is Thierry Baudet. I would like to ask him in a private conversation his sincere opinions about George Floyd, racial discrimination, which is a serious problem here in the Netherlands also, and see how he responds when I tell him about the emotional vocabulary he adopts in his politics that centre on negativity, differentiation of people, and exclusion of immigrants, especially non-white ones. It seems counterproductive in larger Dutch society. Some of the defining characteristics of the Dutch are an openness to learning, to changing, and inclusion. I think the change towards a more inclusive and antithetic direction in the debate over Zwarte Piet exemplifies this. I would want to hear what he genuinely thinks about all this. What’s your top tourist tip? All of the major tourist attractions are fantastic, but I think to be able to really appreciate the Dutch culture and landscape, I would advise visitors to rent a bike and cycle into the countryside when the weather is good, and go somewhere between Utrecht and Amsterdam. The coast is also really nice. My favourite spot is Bergen aan Zee so far. Zuid Limburg is a great site, and it’s worth exploring too. Tell us something surprising you’ve found out about the Netherlands Aside from the kindness of the people and their awe-inspiring cycling skills, I was surprised by the absence of the blending of cultures. White and non-white Dutch people tend to live in different compartments, especially in smaller cities. Being from Turkey, I find it surprising that after a decades-long presence, the Turkish immigrant community here is still considered ‘the Turkish community’, not as Dutch. Perhaps consequently, they are much more closed and much more conservative than in Britain and France and certain parts of Turkey. They mostly live in their own shell. I was also surprised by the two way racism. Not just the racism towards the Turkish or especially the Moroccan populations here, but also by the Turks towards the native Dutch. It was very evident from the moment I first arrived here that the community needs to have more inter-cultural dialogue and engagement. Finally, I can say I was a bit surprised when I noticed on a few occasions that, even though the Dutch tend to be direct, frank, and speak their minds, which I appreciate, they usually don’t like being on the receiving end of it. If you had just 24 hours left in the Netherlands, what would you do? It would be sad to think about because I’m happy here but, if I were to do that, I would walk around Utrecht one last time. Of all the Dutch towns I’ve been, this is where I feel the most at home, and it’s the closest to my heart. I would sit with the people I love here at my favourite spot, just outside the Muzieklokaal, which is by the water and you can see the Dom Tower and the boats passing by. We would also possibly cycle toward Oud Zuilen, which was my routine on the weekends when I first arrived in this country. It would be a nice, nostalgic way to say goodbye. Dr. Ozavci will be publishing a book in 2021 titled Dangerous Gifts: Imperialism, Security and Civil Wars in the Levant 1798-1864. You can learn more about it via this link. Ozan Ozavci was talking to Brandon Hartley

 

Read more at DutchNews.nl:

U.S.-China Trade Deal: What’s Ahead From Biden?


Beijing and Brussels agree to open Chinese market to European investment

 

The historic agreement was confirmed on Wednesday by Chinese President Xi Jinping and European Commission President Ursula von derLeyen.

 

Vincent Lawrence

Vicente Lourenço vicentelourenco@negocios.pt

December 30, 2020 at 14:11

https://www.jornaldenegocios.pt/economia/mundo/detalhe/pequim-e-bruxelas-chegam-a-acordo-para-abrir-o-mercado-chines-a-investimento-europeu?fbclid=IwAR09I6w0Q1o3HMzJpDqSoAEWI2UTbnVgG8UNvFeAZo1A23eQaoGY4vysv_Y

 

The European Union and China have reached a historic agreement representing the opening up of the world's second largest economy to European investment. Since 2013, the two powers have been in dialogue to try to reach an investment agreement.

 

The announcement was made on Wednesday by Chinese President Xi Jinping and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

 

The agreement opens the Chinese market to European investment, while also addressing practices that raise concerns in Brussels, including illegal subsidies granted by Beijing to various industries, state control of various companies and forced technology transfer.

 

According to Brussels, this political agreement "will create a better balance in EU-China trade relations", since "the EU has traditionally been much more open than China to foreign investment".

 

Beijing "is now committed to opening up to the EU in a number of key sectors" and to ensuring "fair treatment" of European companies so that they can compete on an equal footing, the Commission said.

 

 In a statement released in Brussels, Von der Leyen called the agreement "an important milestone" in the EU's relations with China, noting that it "will provide European investors with unprecedented access to the Chinese market", while "committing China to ambitious principles of sustainability, transparency and non-discrimination".

 

Vladis Dombrovskis, vice-president of the European Commission, told the British newspaper Financial Times that it was the "most ambitious agreement ever between China and another power."

 

"We hope that from now on European companies can have greater confidence in their operations," he said, noting that the agreement implies a "change in the rules of the game, given that for a long time trade relations with China have been unbalanced."

 

For its part, China sees a long-standing ambition fulfilled by ensuring access to the European renewable energy market.

 

The agreement is also proof that European business is increasingly focused on the Asian market, despite criticism from Brussels of Xi Jinping's government for alleged human rights violations.

 

However, the Financial Times points out that the agreement could create tension between the European Union and the Biden administration. The Us president-elect has stressed the importance of transatlantic cooperation to meet Beijing's might.

 

China has sought to assert itself as the great power of the 21st century and the strengthening of trade ties with the European Union is yet another geopolitical maneuver of the great middle empire.

 

Bloomberg writes that the document is expected to take effect in 2022.

 

News of the agreement is however a surprise given the evolution of relations between the two powers in 2020. This year, Brussels publicly repudiated Beijing's interference in Hong Kong and accused Xi Jinping's government of launching a disinformation campaign about the new coroanvirus.

 

According to a joint communiqué from the Commission and the Council, during today's videoconference the leaders also addressed other dossiers, including the fight against climate change, the covid-19 pandemic, Hong Kong and human rights, with European leaders welcoming "important progress on a number of key issues", but "continuing expectations and concerns in other areas", without specifying.

 

The European Union also reiterated the invitation to Chinese President Xi Jinping for an EU-China summit at the highest level, with the participation of heads of state and government of the 27, which was scheduled for this year but was postponed due to covid-19, and should then take place in Brussels in 2021, on a date yet to be defined.


Amid 2020’s gloom, there are reasons to be hopeful about the climate in 2021

 



Amid 2020’s gloom, there are reasons to be hopeful about the climate in 2021

John Sauven

 

The concerted global response to the pandemic could be replicated for the fight against the climate crisis

 

Thu 31 Dec 2020 09.00 GMT

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/dec/31/amid-2020s-gloom-reasons-hopeful-climate-2021

 

In a world rife with disputes and divisions, there will be one emotion likely to unite most people at the stroke of midnight on 31 December: sheer relief that 2020 is finally over.

 

There’s no risk of overstating it: this past year has pushed our world right to the edge. A single virus leaping from animals to humans was enough to kill 1.6 million people, bring major economies to their knees, and cause untold anguish and suffering all over the world.

 

And while the pandemic was raging, so was the climate emergency, like two horror films overlapping. We saw record-breaking wildfires engulf the west coast of the US, a record number of powerful Atlantic storms, the Arctic ice failing to freeze in late October and deadly floods hitting countries from Italy to Indonesia. We got a glimpse of a chaotic world battered by multiple crises, each making the other worse, and it was terrifying.

 

Exceptional as the calamities of 2020 may seem, they could be just a taste of what’s to come unless we change direction. Neither the pandemic nor extreme weather are random events. Disease outbreaks are on the rise and about 70% are the result of viruses crossing the barrier from animals to humans.

 

From rampant deforestation in the Amazon to Covid-infected mink farms in Denmark, industrial farming is opening up a viral Pandora’s box that could unleash pandemics even worse than the present one. While scientists were busy developing a vaccine, destructive industries were even busier clearing forests and displacing wildlife, increasing the risk of awakening the next deadly virus. We’re mopping up the floor while making the leak worse.

 

When it comes to the climate, there’s no vaccine, no single fix for it. Technology can help, but the real breakthrough can only come from a radical change in political and corporate will. Despite the economic slowdown caused by the pandemic, levels of planet-heating gases in the atmosphere have hit a new record high this year. It’s clear that nothing short of a complete transformation of our economy and society can save us from climate breakdown.

 

This is why sliding back to the old normal is not an option. Unless we stop oil firms drilling for more oil, food giants destroying rainforests, and destructive fishing depleting our seas, the worst isn’t over – it’s just begun. Ending the pandemic is only half the job – we must also start something new and better. We must create new green jobs, invest in communities and tackle the hardship faced by many at the same time. And 2021 is the year to do it.

 

For all the devastation it has caused, the pandemic has taught us some important lessons. It’s forced us to slow down and rethink what really matters in life, what the important jobs are, the value of family, friends and access to nature. And the most basic lesson of all: if we get complacent about the threats we face, there’s hell to pay.

 

There are reasons to be hopeful. In this past year, what previously would have been considered impossible turned out to be possible. The chancellor, Rishi Sunak, found the money to increase protection for people’s jobs and health. Ministers prioritised working together to tackle the virus, and world leaders have collaborated to develop vaccines. If our politicians can do all that to respond to a health crisis, why not do it to tackle the climate crisis, too?

 

Across the Atlantic, US voters have defied the odds by defeating a sitting president who also happens to be the world’s most powerful climate crisis denier. With Donald Trump out of the White House and a stronger focus on climate action from leading economies such as China, South Korea and Japan, we now have a fighting chance to bring the world back together in a moonshot effort to cut planet-warming emissions.

 

Climate summits rarely turn out to be the make-or-break, all-or-nothing moment people imagine them to be. But next year’s UN climate conference in Glasgow could be the catalyst for the breakthrough we so badly need. For that to happen, real leadership from Boris Johnson and his government in the UK will be key, yet so far the signals have been mixed. We have seen a big leap forward with the phase-out of new diesel and petrol cars by 2030, but a lurch backward with the proposed aid budget cuts. The UK’s newly set emissions-slashing target for the next decade is among the most ambitious in the world, but the prime minister’s much-vaunted 10-point plan would leave us nearly 10 percentage points short of it, provided it gets implemented in full.

 

What ministers must do now is ramp up the action needed to cut emissions from homes, roads, farms and power sources in the UK. Britain should lead by example and show that by stopping the climate crisis, we can also restart our economy and create the jobs and industries of the future that can benefit everyone. This isn’t a burden, it’s an opportunity.

 

If we want the future to look as different as possible from the crises-ravaged mess of the past year, then tackling the climate and nature emergency head-on really is the only way forward. If we can muster the energy for a new year resolution as we toast good riddance to 2020, let it be a determination to leave behind the old normal and make a truly new beginning.

 

John Sauven is the executive director of Greenpeace UK

Querem combater o Chega? Deixem André Ventura falar

 



Querem combater o Chega? Deixem André Ventura falar

 

Será a proibição da exposição de André Ventura e do Chega no palco político e mediático eficaz ou moral? Vejamos porque é que a resposta é não.

 

Margarida Valença

Estudante de Engenharia do Ambiente que se preocupa com questões de ordem política e que, eventualmente, gosta de dar a sua opinião.

 

31 de Dezembro de 2020, 8:48

https://www.publico.pt/2020/12/31/p3/cronica/querem-combater-chega-deixem-andre-ventura-falar-1944548

 

“Discordo do que dizes, mas defenderei até à morte o direito de o dizeres”, dizia Voltaire. Com o surgimento de partidos políticos de extrema-direita e populistas, a defesa da liberdade de expressão nunca foi tão posta à prova e, em vez da máxima de Voltaire, a frase que comanda os dias de hoje é mais parecida com algo do género: “Discordo do que dizes e vou defender até à morte o meu direito de te impedir de o dizeres”.

 

Falemos do Chega. Desde que este partido surgiu, muitas pessoas que consideram o mesmo uma abjecção, têm-se questionado como se deve combatê-lo: Fingimos que não existe, não deixando que André Ventura fale e tenha qualquer tipo de exposição? Ou debatemos ideias com o mesmo e expomos André Ventura ao contraditório?

 

Para muitos, a resposta é a primeira opção. Um exemplo relevante é a agora candidata à Presidência da República Ana Gomes que defende que o Chega não deveria ter sido legalizado e que, como Marisa Matias, diz que não daria posse a um governo com apoio parlamentar do Chega, o que não passa de uma falsa promessa já que o Presidente da República não pode não dar posse a um governo com apoio parlamentar de um partido legalizado.

 

Mas será a proibição da exposição de André Ventura e do Chega no palco político e mediático eficaz ou moral? Vejamos porque é que a resposta é não. Stuart Mill, no seu ensaio sobre a Liberdade disse o seguinte: “O mal peculiar de fazer calar a enunciação duma opinião está em que é um roubo (…) Se a opinião é justa, são privados da oportunidade de trocar o erro pela verdade; se injusta, perdem, o que é um benefício quase do mesmo quilate, o chegar à percepção mais clara e à impressão mais viva da verdade que a colisão desta com o erro produz.”

 

Embora pareça mais intuitivo, apetecível e fácil, o acto de calar e proibir não é eficiente. Ao recusar trazer uma ideia para um debate intermediado e com contraditório, Ventura acaba por falar sozinho com os seus admiradores, até tendo em conta que hoje em dia existem muitos meios para o fazer. Mas se nos focarmos em mostrar as contradições de André Ventura e combater as suas ideias com ideias melhores estaremos a ser mais eficientes e até democráticos, já que a recusa de ouvir uma opinião parte do princípio de que a nossa certeza é a certeza absoluta, mas a realidade é que ninguém é infalível.

 

“A liberdade de expressão só faz sentido se a defendermos para ideias que detestamos.”

 

Dir-me-ão que estou a ser contraditória, já que ao não nos recusarmos a ouvir outras ideias podemos estar a legitimar ideias anti-democráticas. E, de facto, a democracia tem essa contradição. Mas da mesma forma que partidos anti-democráticos podem ganhar relevância e posição nas instituições democráticas, enquanto vivermos em democracia, a persuasão e o combate através de ideias são utensílios que todos temos o poder e dever de usar para combater os nossos opositores. Como disse a deputada do PS Isabel Moreira: “Às vezes, custa muito ser democrata. Pode até ser impopular. Mas uma pessoa que respeita a Constituição não excepciona o respeito quando a dureza espreita. Levanta a cabeça e luta. Politicamente.”

 

E, portanto, a liberdade de expressão só faz sentido se a defendermos para ideias que detestamos. Se isto implica defendermos o direito de demagogos, negacionistas ou mentirosos poderem falar? Claro. Mas tal como dizia José Mário Branco sobre a cantiga ser uma arma, também a palavra é uma arma, e se os nossos opositores usaram dela para proferirem imbecilidades, usemos da mesma moeda para desconstruí-las.

Brexit explained: Boris Johnson's new trade deal with the EU

20m more people in England under toughest Tier 4 rules as deaths soar - BBC News

Sen. Hawley To Challenge Biden Electors | The 11th Hour | MSNBC

Audio tapes show Melania Trump saying she has no interest in appearing in magazines

Britain braces for not-so-special relationship with Biden

 



EUROPE

Britain braces for not-so-special relationship with Biden

 

Boris Johnson is unlikely to seal a trade deal with the U.S. in 2021.

 

By RYAN HEATH

12/31/2020 12:00 AM EST

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/31/britain-biden-relationship-boris-johnson-451498

 

Boris Johnson has a problem named Joe Biden.

 

Although the U.K. has now sealed a trade deal with the European Union, covering $900 billion in tariff-free goods and services annually, the British prime minister’s hopes for a new arrangement with the United States are confronting the reality of a transatlantic relationship that is now anything but special.

 

Johnson allies fear his courtship of Donald Trump is now a liability in a Democratic Washington, along with his advocacy for a break with the EU against the advice of Trump’s predecessor. And while Biden’s tight-lipped transition team won’t reveal its plans for the U.K., interviews with 16 officials and former officials on both sides of the Atlantic make clear that Brexit has changed the dynamic.

 

“When you wanted to get something done with Europe, you made the first or perhaps second call to London,” said Charles Kupchan, who served as a senior National Security Council European affairs official in both the Obama and Clinton administrations. In 2021, “you’re still going to call London, but that call will be lower down in the queue. Britain doesn’t have a seat at the table anymore,” thanks to Brexit, he said.

 

Other Democrats speak in wistful terms about a relationship Winston Churchill once described as “fraternal.” “London will still be a player” and “we will always look to the U.K. as an ally,” are common refrains. But it’s the power corridors of Brussels, Paris and Berlin, not No. 10 Downing St. and Whitehall, that increasingly command Washington’s attention.

 

While Democrats welcome Britain’s recent $22 billion defense spending increase, and plan close climate cooperation, “Biden is seeking to strengthen and renew ties with the EU, and Britain is not going to be a part of that,” said one person familiar with Biden’s thinking.

 

President Donald Trump had a sometimes rocky relationship with Johnson’s predecessor Theresa May, but his distrust of the EU and NATO meant London was always the White House’s preferred partner in Europe. In Johnson, a champion of Brexit, Trump saw a kindred spirit. London’s hoped-for dividend: a trade deal in 2021.

 

The Biden administration doesn’t plan to play along. “Boris Johnson needs a trade deal to show the domestic utility of Brexit,” the person familiar with the president-elect’s thinking said.

 

Biden’s team is promising only to review any trade deal chapters agreed with the Trump administration to ensure they are “in line with Biden priorities,” the person said, “taking domestic factors into account.”

 

“The first task is trying to get our house in order at home,” said James Clapper, director of National Intelligence under President Barack Obama. Based on his interactions with the Biden transition team, Clapper said, helping post-Brexit Britain “doesn't appear to me to be real high on their priority list right now.”

 

No trade deal before 2022

It’s not hard to see why: The sheer number of domestic challenges that will occupy Biden during his first 100 days will overshadow British efforts to secure a fast-track trade deal in that same timeframe.

 

“I’d say the best case scenario for a deal is 2022,” said Lewis Lukens, who served as U.S. deputy ambassador to the U.K. under Presidents Trump and Obama.

 

Kupchan agrees that London will have to wait until the second year of Biden’s team being in place, given the lack of a clear Democratic majority in the Senate and a wafer-thin margin in the House. “There’s an important conversation to be had on broader economic issues, but not on bilateral trade,” he said.

 

Politically, it would be “quite a big blow” for the U.K. if a trade deal can’t be secured quickly, said one former senior British diplomat. But in economic terms, it would hardly be noticed. The U.K. and U.S. were each other’s biggest investors in 2018 but the proposed deal would add only about $10 billion to the combined $23 trillion U.S. and U.K. GDP.

 

Some leading politicians from Britain’s ruling Conservative party think the deal is a transatlantic distraction. Tom Tugendhat, chair of the U.K. Parliament’s foreign affairs committee told POLITICO he thinks the U.K. should instead focus on getting the U.K. and U.S. to join the Trans-Pacific Partnership, an 11-country trade bloc including Japan, Canada and Australia, designed in part to counter China’s growing economic leverage.

 

The US-UK trade talks Joe Biden inherits

The Obama administration helped negotiate an early version of that deal before President Trump withdrew from it. “We should be working with the U.S. on global regulatory reform, carbon pricing, and defending the rules-based system against China,” Tugendhat added, echoing what Biden’s transition team told POLITICO.

 

With the U.K. serving as G-7 president and hosting the U.N.’s annual climate conference in 2021, Democrats are keen to prioritize issues from Covid-19 to climate to global economic recovery, ahead of a trade deal.

 

The U.K. government isn’t ready to talk about “Plan B” for the deal, but a spokesperson acknowledged the challenge ahead: "securing a comprehensive deal that matches the depth of the U.K.-U.S. trading relationship is more important than meeting any particular deadline," the spokesperson said.

 

The timeline for a trade deal in 2021 is indeed daunting. USTR must notify Congress of a pending agreement before April 1 in order for it to be signed before congressional fast track authority expires on July 1. Further complicating matters, the last formal U.S.-U.K. negotiations ended October 30, meaning progress is limited to technical discussions during the transition. Meanwhile, political staffers at USTR have been blocking meetings throughout December between the Biden transition team and career officials, potentially hampering Biden’s ability to begin work immediately upon his inauguration.

 

To chime with Biden’s team, Britain is positioning a trade deal as an economic recovery tool. “This agreement would support both of our economies to build back better from Covid-19,” said a U.K. government spokesperson, who described the talks as being “at an advanced stage, with a significant proportion of legal text agreed.”

 

Several draft chapters of the deal are close to final, according to negotiation documents seen by POLITICO, including texts on small and medium-sized businesses, investment and digital services. But significant differences remain including on pharmaceutical regulation, textiles and intellectual property.

 

Johnson’s historic miscalculation

In the view of many Democrats, Johnson bet too heavily on Trump. “The [U.K.] government continued to believe Trump was going to do favors for them and that hasn’t panned out. The trade deal was going to happen in a matter of weeks, then months, and it’s now four years later and it hasn’t happened,” said a senior former American diplomat.

 

It was only after the U.S. Trade Representative published his trade deal wish list in 2018 that Johnson realized there would be no favors from Republicans. Having stacked his Cabinet with relatively inexperienced Brexit supporters, with marching orders to deliver Brexit above all else, Johnson’s team “doesn’t have the relationships they might need with a new Democratic administration,” the former diplomat said.

 

The U.K. government insists that’s an unfair reading of the situation. “From the outset, we have engaged with U.S. partners on a bipartisan basis — at the federal and state level,” a government spokesperson said. British diplomats also say they have long standing links with Katherine Tai, Biden’s pick for USTR.

 

That’s counted for little so far in the transition: Biden’s team is “hyper-disciplined” about not engaging with foreign officials before inauguration, according to both British officials and Democrats POLITICO spoke with.

 

 

Johnson and his allies may instead have to rely on President-elect Biden’s trademark capacity for not holding grudges.

 

So far, British officials are breathing a sigh of relief that Biden’s team isn’t publicly buying into the sharp, public criticisms former Obama administration officials have made about Johnson.

 

But privately, Democrats continue to take offense at Johnson’s often inflammatory rhetoric, including a racially charged description of President Barack Obama as America’s “part-Kenyan president” in 2016, raising the matter in discussions with a range of British officials. Biden himself described Johnson at a 2019 fundraiser as “a physical and emotional clone” of Trump.

 

Yet those close to Biden insist “it’s not helpful to over-personalize things,” according to a person familiar with his thinking. “You have perfect couples in the mold of Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, or Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher, and then there’s pairings where the personalities don’t mesh but they make it work,” the person said, describing the likely Biden-Johnson relationship.

 

While “there’s not a lot of warmth,” a former American ambassador admitted, the pair’s differences “will be water under the bridge, frankly, because the U.S. wants the U.K. to thrive.”

 

Paris preferred over London

While President-elect Biden and his team respect Britain’s choice to leave the EU, Democrats nonetheless tend to view Brexit as a poorly executed policy.

 

Secretary of State-designee Antony Blinken has called Brexit a “total mess,” while Kupchan called it “an act of self-isolation that will inevitably diminish Britain’s weight in the world.”

 

They also lament that Britain’s departure from the EU will make it harder to influence the unwieldy 27-member club. Britain’s open economy often acted as a counterweight to the protectionist instincts of France and Germany. “The U.S. lost its most effective EU member,” said a former senior American diplomat. “Now life for the U.S. becomes more complicated. We have messier coalitions to deal with.”

 

Kupchan said Brexit merely accelerates a trend since the end of the Cold War, of Washington engaging more directly with Paris and Berlin. Paris has the edge because of its defense investments. “What will really irritate the U.K. is we will now return to engaging the EU as an essential partner, and it’s fair to see France as on the up,” said a former senior American diplomat. “France is the one that still aspires to be a global actor and has more ambition,” said Ellen Laipson, director of George Mason University’s Center for Security Policy Studies.

 

By signing up you agree to receive email newsletters or updates from POLITICO and you agree to our privacy policy and terms of service. You can unsubscribe at any time and you can contact us here. This sign-up form is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

 

Senior Democrats back Biden’s wish to prioritize better relations with the EU. Sen. Chris Murphy (D-Conn.), a close Biden ally, wants a trade deal with the EU to take priority over the U.K. deal. Richard Neal (D-Mass.), chairman of the powerful House Ways and Means Committee has also urged the incoming administration to renew trade negotiations with the EU.

 

Biden will continue to follow the U.K.’s negotiations with the EU, particularly how peace arrangements in Northern Ireland are handled. “Folks are watching what’s happening, where that lands,” said a person familiar with the president-elect’s thinking.

 

While the Biden team welcomes the U.K. government’s Dec. 8 recommitment to uphold the Good Friday Agreement in full, that move doesn’t guarantee or speed up a bilateral trade deal, which remains a “separate discussion,” the person said.

 

In other words, Britain will have to earn its trade deal.

 

“I think the ball is really in the U.K.’s court,” said Lukens, the former ambassador. “Whether Boris and his team are capable of developing a worldview beyond Brexit remains to be seen.”

 

Nahal Toosi and Doug Palmer contributed reporting