quinta-feira, 31 de dezembro de 2020
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
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
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
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.”
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
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”.
‘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
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
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.
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
“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.
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
