Business climate and freedom of expression are two major pillars of an open and dynamic democratic society and it seems Georgia is scoring negative marks on both these arenas.
Following the unceremonious silencing of the pro-opposition Imedi television channel and other business ventures under different pretexts, there are more attempts to silence the voice of opposition led by Badri Patarkatsishvili, a presidential candidate and to vitiate the business climate so that business knows where the buck stops.
The heat recently turned up on Standard Bank, owned by Salford Capital Partners, a London-based private equity firm, which manages Patarkatsishvili's business assets in Georgia. On November 24, Standard Bank, one of the country's largest retail banks, was placed under the temporary administration of the National Bank of Georgia, a measure usually taken when there is concern about the liquidity of a bank's assets.
Speaking to New Europe, Peter Nagle of Salford Capital said: "Standard Bank was seized by the Georgian authorities on 24 November. This was part of a series of attacks and confiscation of assets believed to be related to Badri Patarkatsishvili, a presidential opposition candidate."
"When the bank was seized it was in full compliance with all Georgian Banking requirements, particularly those related to liquidity. This attack on private property raises serious questions about the actions of the Georgian Government and potential conflicts of interests related to the Bank of Georgia. It sets a very poor precedent and signal for foreign investment into Georgia. We are especially unhappy about the detention and harassment of our employees."
On the other hand a National Bank of Georgia press release said that the central bank stepped in when it became apparent that Standard Bank was on the verge of bankruptcy. "We believe that this is due to the perception by the Georgian Government that Salford and its controlled companies are fully owned and controlled by Mr. Partarkatsishvili and have been used to actively support his political aspirations," Salford said in a statement.
The statement further explained, "In order to clarify this we wish to provide a clear explanation of Salford and its operations in Georgia and its relationship with Mr. Partarkatsishvili." "Salford is an international private equity firm that focuses on investments in CEE and CIS. Salford has offices in Moscow, Tbilisi, Kiev, Belgrade and London and employs approximately 35 professionals globally. Mr. Partarkatsishvili does not, (and never has) hold a direct or indirect beneficial financial interest in Salford nor does he participate in the management of Salford."
"Salford's advisory board members include Lord Bell (Chairman of Chime Communications Plc, Dr. Klaus Mangold (Former Vice Chairman Daimler Chrysler and Former Chairman Daimler Chrysler Financial Services) and Philip von Stauffenberg (CEO Solidus and former senior executive with Hicks Muse Furst & Tate and Warburg Pincus, two of the worlds leading private equity firms)."
Political observers and financial pundits have been unequivocal in raising doubts about the alleged motives behind these moves as the affected bank raised questions like:
"After the imposition of a state of emergency on November 7, a large number of the deposits (nearly 25 percent of total deposits) were withdrawn from Standard Bank in an attempt to create a artificial liquidity crisis, Why?"
"If indeed there were liquidity concerns, why prior to the seizure was there no engagement by the Regulator with Bank management or shareholders to discuss and remedy them?"
"Why has no written explanation been given to shareholders by the Regulator specifying the liquidity concerns?"
"Why has the Regulator refused to respond to written documentation from shareholders demonstrating that, at the time of the seizure, the Bank was in full compliance with all liquidity requirements?"
"Police from the Georgian Constitutional Security Department ("CSD") were present during the seizure. How do liquidity concerns at a Georgian bank represent a threat to Georgian national security?"
Commenting on the situation, Eugene Jaffe, CEO of Salford Capital Partners, stated: "This is an outrage - an artificial liquidity crisis engineered by the Georgian Government in order to seize a leading Georgian Bank for political motives; to the benefit of Bank of Georgia. All under the knowledge of the Prime Minister who knows better, I have not seen an abuse of power like this since Russia in the mid 1990's. This is a complete disregard for the rule of law and investor rights in Georgia - a truly appalling precedent has been set. We will take all means necessary to defend our interests."
Salford has engaged the international law firm of Debevoise & Plimpton LLP to represent it in this matter and has put the Georgian Government and Bank of Georgia on formal legal notice regarding this matter.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Islam means Peace
Ahmadiyya Muslims show path of love and tolerance
The clash of civilisations and talk of jihad are not non-existent in the worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim community, but used to condemn all forms of terrorism and highlight that Islam’s true teaching is of love and compassion for all of God’s Creation.
Denouncing the fear instilled among populations around the world with the justification of terrorism in the name of religion, Naseer Ahmed Shahid, missionary of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Belgium told Tejinder Singh, “Islam rejects any kind of violence and against any kind of people or religion.” He said, “Islam means peace according to Arabic lexicon,” adding that the Muslim greeting, “Assalaamo alyikum” means, “Peace be on you.” Naseer said, “It will be hypocritical to say that and then use a knife.”
Explaining the inherent meaning of Jihad, Naseer told New Europe, “Based on sayings of the Prophet Mohammad and the words of Koran, the greatest and most significant Jihad is the fight against one’s own evil. Another Jihad is to convey the message to other people through wisdom, good behaviour and logic, making friends out of even enemies.” “Koran does not say call to Mohammad or Islam but call to Allah.” “Smallest or least form of Jihad is that if because of one’s faith, one gets attacked by people who are around, and then one can defend oneself,” he argued.
Reiterating that the obligation of every Muslim is to show love to all people, irrespective of their religion, caste, creed or race, Naseer said, “In this regard the Ahmadiyya Community wants to extinguish the fire of Jihad which is misrepresented by vested interests and misunderstood thus giving Islam a label of intolerant religion while the Ahmadiyya Community calls for ‘Love for all, hatred for none.’”
The Ahmadiyya Community is trying to carry the message of love and brotherhood of Islam through inter-faith conferences and trying their best to explain teachings of Islam through gatherings.
Asked to comment on punishments being meted out to media writers or cartoonists, Naseer told New Europe, “Islam does not sanction corporal punishment against blasphemy and those judgments are more based on personal gains and wrong beliefs.” There have been attacks on the Ahmadiyya Community in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Indonesia in the recent past but the “Community has not responded with violence and sticks to the principle of the spirit of love for humanity and with out taking the law in our hand we only inform the authority to its responsibility to provide peace and security for every citizen of the country.”
Going down memory lane, Naseer said, “The Ahmadiyya Community was established in 1889 by Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) in a small and remote village, Qadian, in the Punjab, India. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is a religious organisation, international in its scope, with branches in over 189 countries in Africa, North America, South America, Asia, Australasia, and Europe. It represents the most dynamic denomination of Islam in modern history, with worldwide membership of tens of millions.”
Advocating “peace, tolerance, love and understanding among followers of different faiths,” Naseer concluded, “The Community firmly believes in and acts upon the Qur’anic teaching: ‘There is no compulsion in religion.’ (2:257). It strongly rejects violence and terrorism in any form and for any reason.”
The clash of civilisations and talk of jihad are not non-existent in the worldwide Ahmadiyya Muslim community, but used to condemn all forms of terrorism and highlight that Islam’s true teaching is of love and compassion for all of God’s Creation.
Denouncing the fear instilled among populations around the world with the justification of terrorism in the name of religion, Naseer Ahmed Shahid, missionary of Ahmadiyya Muslim Community in Belgium told Tejinder Singh, “Islam rejects any kind of violence and against any kind of people or religion.” He said, “Islam means peace according to Arabic lexicon,” adding that the Muslim greeting, “Assalaamo alyikum” means, “Peace be on you.” Naseer said, “It will be hypocritical to say that and then use a knife.”
Explaining the inherent meaning of Jihad, Naseer told New Europe, “Based on sayings of the Prophet Mohammad and the words of Koran, the greatest and most significant Jihad is the fight against one’s own evil. Another Jihad is to convey the message to other people through wisdom, good behaviour and logic, making friends out of even enemies.” “Koran does not say call to Mohammad or Islam but call to Allah.” “Smallest or least form of Jihad is that if because of one’s faith, one gets attacked by people who are around, and then one can defend oneself,” he argued.
Reiterating that the obligation of every Muslim is to show love to all people, irrespective of their religion, caste, creed or race, Naseer said, “In this regard the Ahmadiyya Community wants to extinguish the fire of Jihad which is misrepresented by vested interests and misunderstood thus giving Islam a label of intolerant religion while the Ahmadiyya Community calls for ‘Love for all, hatred for none.’”
The Ahmadiyya Community is trying to carry the message of love and brotherhood of Islam through inter-faith conferences and trying their best to explain teachings of Islam through gatherings.
Asked to comment on punishments being meted out to media writers or cartoonists, Naseer told New Europe, “Islam does not sanction corporal punishment against blasphemy and those judgments are more based on personal gains and wrong beliefs.” There have been attacks on the Ahmadiyya Community in Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Indonesia in the recent past but the “Community has not responded with violence and sticks to the principle of the spirit of love for humanity and with out taking the law in our hand we only inform the authority to its responsibility to provide peace and security for every citizen of the country.”
Going down memory lane, Naseer said, “The Ahmadiyya Community was established in 1889 by Hadrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (1835-1908) in a small and remote village, Qadian, in the Punjab, India. The Ahmadiyya Muslim Community is a religious organisation, international in its scope, with branches in over 189 countries in Africa, North America, South America, Asia, Australasia, and Europe. It represents the most dynamic denomination of Islam in modern history, with worldwide membership of tens of millions.”
Advocating “peace, tolerance, love and understanding among followers of different faiths,” Naseer concluded, “The Community firmly believes in and acts upon the Qur’anic teaching: ‘There is no compulsion in religion.’ (2:257). It strongly rejects violence and terrorism in any form and for any reason.”
Friday, December 14, 2007
Kosovo independence fallout
Basque welcomes rights of self-determination across Europe
Interview with: Joseba Azkarraga Rodero, Minister, Department of Justice, Employment and Social Security, Basque Country
The Basque region of Spain hit the headlines recently with the fatal shooting of two Spanish Civil Guards, Raul Centeno and Fernando Trapero in Capbreton, in southwest France. It is the first such attack by ETA, an acronym for Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, or Basque Homeland and Freedom, in France since 1976. ETA members want an independent Basque state in northwest Spain and southwest France. The Basque country has its own government and police force and enjoys considerable autonomy from Spain. With the status determination of Kosovo being closely watched by all, especially regions with inspirations for independence Joseba Azkarraga Rodero, Basque Minister for Justice, Employment and Social Security, spoke to Tejinder Singh in Brussels about his assessment of the situation and its fallout on other simmering conflicts.
What is your opinion on the ongoing Kosovo demands for independence and related subjects?
Positive! It’s basically positive for all the people. Fighting for self-determination is the right of the people. We support the rights of self-determination of Scottish and Kosovo people through peaceful and democratic means to reach such ends.
How do you view the upcoming referendum in your region next year?
The deal by the (regional) premier Juan Jose Ibarretxe calling for a referendum is positive on behalf of three political parties including his. It calls for rights of people to self-determination. It is the will of the Basque government to go ahead and see the will of the people. We do not understand why there is opposition from Spanish government for this referendum. Are they afraid of what the result may be? What people want should be given as a right to determination.
If the referendum gives a yes vote, will your party press for independence?
The referendum is actually not for independence. My opinion and that of my party is that there are questions that are being put to people. There is the ethical question to Basque society if it wants to reject violent scenes. And then there is the democratic concept asking people what do they require of Basque parties in order to define their relationship with Spain. Thus this referendum is on these two major issues.
So how do you expect society to react?
Looking at results of recent elections, we can see thinking of people. In those elections people clearly voted for parties who go for independence. As there is a trend in position of society towards freedom, it shows the fear in Madrid.
What is the position of the Basque language and culture today?
Basque language and culture is suffering under the shadow of Spain. Earlier, also a Basque leader spoke in Basque in the European parliament and I believe that it was a very important sign to all. I will also speak in Basque language. Moreover, we are confident in running a good tax administration with good collections and then invest in uplifting of Basque culture. Spain defends its nationality in the Senate as Spanish is only spoken and Catalan or Basque can not be spoken. Spain talks of plural nationalities but does not practice.
Is it because Basque is a rich region, you are aspiring for independence?
No! It is not correct that Basque is aspiring for independence because of richness. Probably if they were poor they will become rich through independence.
But your region is rich?
True, we have a good situation. We have full employment in Basque country and industries are generating wealth. People now want to go towards independence because it’s positive for citizens.
Can you visualise a time frame for Basque independence if Kosovo gets independence?
There is talk of independence not because of Kosovo and it’s not only the process of Kosovo. People have been fighting for their own states. Large states talk of borders and that is not correct. We can see cases of Kosovo and Scotland – similar cases where people are fighting for self determination.
So have you contacted those like-minded people fighting for self-determination?
Yes, there are talks and cooperation but relationships are not at state level. These are more at party level like with Scottish Nationalist Party and others. There are no platforms yet but at the EU level, there is an active European Free Alliance.
What is your reaction to the incident in France resulting in the death of two police personnel?
First of all, we need to clear up what happened with the presence of the civil guards. This being one further step of ETA as there was no attack outside Spanish territory till now. ETA is a setback to dialogue and democratic ways to self-determination.
In case of independence will ETA be a part of the new government?
No! ETA is a negative factor and negative influence over Basque independence efforts. ETA is dramatic and it has no right to kill on behalf of Basque people. They do not do politics; they only know how to kill. Batsuana (political wing of ETA) will be considered for inclusion as it is doing political work.
Talking of Batsuana, your party is demanding the appearance of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Interior minister Alfredo Perez Rubaleaba and conservative former premier Jose Maria Aznar to appear as witness for cases against your regional premier Juan Jose Ibarretxe. Will you comment on that?
Legislature is influenced by political factors as the question arises why the Spanish Prime Minister can speak with ETA and its ok, while the Basque political leadership can not even talk with Batsuana for political dialogue. We have to make clear that majority of judges are very professional but there are instances of particular cases where political influences take place and these are weakening the judicial system.
What is your message?
I really do believe that there is a worsening image of Basque people who are hardworking and are seeking independence through democratic means. Self-determination is a right of all people.
Interview with: Joseba Azkarraga Rodero, Minister, Department of Justice, Employment and Social Security, Basque Country
The Basque region of Spain hit the headlines recently with the fatal shooting of two Spanish Civil Guards, Raul Centeno and Fernando Trapero in Capbreton, in southwest France. It is the first such attack by ETA, an acronym for Euskadi Ta Askatasuna, or Basque Homeland and Freedom, in France since 1976. ETA members want an independent Basque state in northwest Spain and southwest France. The Basque country has its own government and police force and enjoys considerable autonomy from Spain. With the status determination of Kosovo being closely watched by all, especially regions with inspirations for independence Joseba Azkarraga Rodero, Basque Minister for Justice, Employment and Social Security, spoke to Tejinder Singh in Brussels about his assessment of the situation and its fallout on other simmering conflicts.
What is your opinion on the ongoing Kosovo demands for independence and related subjects?
Positive! It’s basically positive for all the people. Fighting for self-determination is the right of the people. We support the rights of self-determination of Scottish and Kosovo people through peaceful and democratic means to reach such ends.
How do you view the upcoming referendum in your region next year?
The deal by the (regional) premier Juan Jose Ibarretxe calling for a referendum is positive on behalf of three political parties including his. It calls for rights of people to self-determination. It is the will of the Basque government to go ahead and see the will of the people. We do not understand why there is opposition from Spanish government for this referendum. Are they afraid of what the result may be? What people want should be given as a right to determination.
If the referendum gives a yes vote, will your party press for independence?
The referendum is actually not for independence. My opinion and that of my party is that there are questions that are being put to people. There is the ethical question to Basque society if it wants to reject violent scenes. And then there is the democratic concept asking people what do they require of Basque parties in order to define their relationship with Spain. Thus this referendum is on these two major issues.
So how do you expect society to react?
Looking at results of recent elections, we can see thinking of people. In those elections people clearly voted for parties who go for independence. As there is a trend in position of society towards freedom, it shows the fear in Madrid.
What is the position of the Basque language and culture today?
Basque language and culture is suffering under the shadow of Spain. Earlier, also a Basque leader spoke in Basque in the European parliament and I believe that it was a very important sign to all. I will also speak in Basque language. Moreover, we are confident in running a good tax administration with good collections and then invest in uplifting of Basque culture. Spain defends its nationality in the Senate as Spanish is only spoken and Catalan or Basque can not be spoken. Spain talks of plural nationalities but does not practice.
Is it because Basque is a rich region, you are aspiring for independence?
No! It is not correct that Basque is aspiring for independence because of richness. Probably if they were poor they will become rich through independence.
But your region is rich?
True, we have a good situation. We have full employment in Basque country and industries are generating wealth. People now want to go towards independence because it’s positive for citizens.
Can you visualise a time frame for Basque independence if Kosovo gets independence?
There is talk of independence not because of Kosovo and it’s not only the process of Kosovo. People have been fighting for their own states. Large states talk of borders and that is not correct. We can see cases of Kosovo and Scotland – similar cases where people are fighting for self determination.
So have you contacted those like-minded people fighting for self-determination?
Yes, there are talks and cooperation but relationships are not at state level. These are more at party level like with Scottish Nationalist Party and others. There are no platforms yet but at the EU level, there is an active European Free Alliance.
What is your reaction to the incident in France resulting in the death of two police personnel?
First of all, we need to clear up what happened with the presence of the civil guards. This being one further step of ETA as there was no attack outside Spanish territory till now. ETA is a setback to dialogue and democratic ways to self-determination.
In case of independence will ETA be a part of the new government?
No! ETA is a negative factor and negative influence over Basque independence efforts. ETA is dramatic and it has no right to kill on behalf of Basque people. They do not do politics; they only know how to kill. Batsuana (political wing of ETA) will be considered for inclusion as it is doing political work.
Talking of Batsuana, your party is demanding the appearance of Prime Minister Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero, Interior minister Alfredo Perez Rubaleaba and conservative former premier Jose Maria Aznar to appear as witness for cases against your regional premier Juan Jose Ibarretxe. Will you comment on that?
Legislature is influenced by political factors as the question arises why the Spanish Prime Minister can speak with ETA and its ok, while the Basque political leadership can not even talk with Batsuana for political dialogue. We have to make clear that majority of judges are very professional but there are instances of particular cases where political influences take place and these are weakening the judicial system.
What is your message?
I really do believe that there is a worsening image of Basque people who are hardworking and are seeking independence through democratic means. Self-determination is a right of all people.
Kosovo fails to patch up NATO-Russia gap
Lavrov rejects, Rice defends Ahtisaari independence plan
Kosovo hogged the limelight at the ministerial meeting of NATO ministers on December 7, held in cloudy, rain-soaked Brussels, as Russia later joined a NATORussia Council to express strong opposition to any unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo.
The differences stayed at same levels if not widening as NATO and Russia failed to agree over the future status of Kosovo ahead of December 10 UN deadline to reach an amicable agreement.
The UN had set the deadline for internationally-brokered talks to deliver agreement on Kosovo but the talks have already ended without a deal. Kosovo’s ethnic Albanians having a majority opt for independence while Serbia does not want to let go.
Addressing journalists, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, “We are for a solution which will be acceptable to both Belgrade and Pristina and only for government bodies which will be fully empowered to ensure security.” Asked to comment on Moscow’s response to a unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo, Lavrov said, “Reaction will be based on international law and I very much hope that other members of international community will proceed on that basis too.”Lavrov called the projected solution as “as a precedent,” adding, “How the Kosovo crisis is going to evolve is being looked at by a lot of other countries in the world and not only countries in the Balkans. So it has to do with international law, Helsinki Act and any body who goes against them, will certainly go on a slippery path and not help stability of Europe.”
Asking the negotiations to continue beyond the December 10 deadline, Lavrov warned those who talk of only Kosovo independence “not to camouflage in lies” as Belgrade with “a whole series of specific compromise proposals” has been “very constructive and flexible in its proposals” and which merited further negotiations on Kosovo’s status.
Earlier, James Appathurai, NATO spokesman said, “Clearly the Russian position is different ... the NATO point of view is ... that the process should now move - that there needs to be movement towards resolution.” NATO has confirmed it will keep 16,000 troops in Kosovo - still a province of Serbia - to deter any violence.
Addressing journalists, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, “We have agreed to keep NATO troops on ground, no troop reduction, no additional caveats and to allow our military commanders to do the necessary military planning for the alliance.”
“We are committed to a stable and peaceful Balkans, that was an early commitment of NATO and it remains a commitment of NATO.”Asked to comment on Lavrov’s insistence that talks should continue, Rice said, “We hope that there can be a constructive approach that will unite all of us with responsibilities for stability in the Balkans and that includes Russia as Russia also has responsibilities for that. But there is a certain reality and that reality is that Troika which worked very hard, made some progress, got two sides to talk for the first time, laid down some important principles but I think that process is at an end.”
“If you see what we are hearing from Troika, it’s very clear and that means now that we have to move on to next step. It is not going to produce stability in the Balkans to ignore the reality of situation between Belgrade and Pristina.”
“It’s not going to help stability to put off decisions however difficult they may be. We have to make sure that we have full commitments to the principles before decisions are taken that are embodied in the Ahtisaari plan. This is going to be difficult enough and everybody has to live up to responsibilities.” According to the proposed plan of Martti Ahtisaari, UN administrator in Kosovo, there should be a “supervised independence.”
Speaking about her discussion with NATO allies, Rice said, “We have recommitment to KFOR and we are ready for all contingencies but also an understanding that there needed to be unity between the allies as we are going to move into what is undoubtedly going to be a difficult period. We have had a UN track and reaffirmation of 1244 is the most important thing that we can do right now.”
The US Secretary of State reiterated, “We can not go anywhere by ignoring reality and pretending that we don’t have to make decisions.” Echoing her views, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer had said NATO would “act resolutely against anyone who seeks to resort to violence.”
Earlier, NATO foreign ministers agreed that UN Security Council Resolution 1244 is a sufficient and appropriate legal basis for KFOR to continue its role. The alliance ministers also concluded that KFOR’s force levels will remain as they are, and that no new restrictions will be placed on the use of those forces.
There have been warnings from ethnic Albanian leaders that they may declare independence unilaterally after December 10 deadline lapses, prompting fears of a fresh outbreak of violence.
“Kosovo will remain and has to remain a place where Kosovar Albanians, Serbs and others must be able to live in peace together – free from fear, and free from intimidation. And we are determined to play our part,” stressed the NATO Secretary General.
The majority ethnic Albanians in Kosovo have nodded yes to the Ahtisaari plan which is set to gradually steer Kosovo’s institutions towards independence with guidance from international institutions while safeguarding the rights and property of the Serb minority.
Arguing that such a solution for Kosovo will set dangerous precedent for separatist inspirations elsewhere like Basque, Scottish and other regions, Russia has supported Serbia’s stance at the UN Security Council to keep Kosovo within Serbia but with greater autonomy.Kosovo is technically part of Serbia but has been under UN administration for the last eight years. Belgrade’s security forces were driven out of Kosovo by a NATO bombing campaign in 1999, launched to stop a violent Serb crackdown on ethnic Albanians.
Kosovo hogged the limelight at the ministerial meeting of NATO ministers on December 7, held in cloudy, rain-soaked Brussels, as Russia later joined a NATORussia Council to express strong opposition to any unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo.
The differences stayed at same levels if not widening as NATO and Russia failed to agree over the future status of Kosovo ahead of December 10 UN deadline to reach an amicable agreement.
The UN had set the deadline for internationally-brokered talks to deliver agreement on Kosovo but the talks have already ended without a deal. Kosovo’s ethnic Albanians having a majority opt for independence while Serbia does not want to let go.
Addressing journalists, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said, “We are for a solution which will be acceptable to both Belgrade and Pristina and only for government bodies which will be fully empowered to ensure security.” Asked to comment on Moscow’s response to a unilateral declaration of independence by Kosovo, Lavrov said, “Reaction will be based on international law and I very much hope that other members of international community will proceed on that basis too.”Lavrov called the projected solution as “as a precedent,” adding, “How the Kosovo crisis is going to evolve is being looked at by a lot of other countries in the world and not only countries in the Balkans. So it has to do with international law, Helsinki Act and any body who goes against them, will certainly go on a slippery path and not help stability of Europe.”
Asking the negotiations to continue beyond the December 10 deadline, Lavrov warned those who talk of only Kosovo independence “not to camouflage in lies” as Belgrade with “a whole series of specific compromise proposals” has been “very constructive and flexible in its proposals” and which merited further negotiations on Kosovo’s status.
Earlier, James Appathurai, NATO spokesman said, “Clearly the Russian position is different ... the NATO point of view is ... that the process should now move - that there needs to be movement towards resolution.” NATO has confirmed it will keep 16,000 troops in Kosovo - still a province of Serbia - to deter any violence.
Addressing journalists, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said, “We have agreed to keep NATO troops on ground, no troop reduction, no additional caveats and to allow our military commanders to do the necessary military planning for the alliance.”
“We are committed to a stable and peaceful Balkans, that was an early commitment of NATO and it remains a commitment of NATO.”Asked to comment on Lavrov’s insistence that talks should continue, Rice said, “We hope that there can be a constructive approach that will unite all of us with responsibilities for stability in the Balkans and that includes Russia as Russia also has responsibilities for that. But there is a certain reality and that reality is that Troika which worked very hard, made some progress, got two sides to talk for the first time, laid down some important principles but I think that process is at an end.”
“If you see what we are hearing from Troika, it’s very clear and that means now that we have to move on to next step. It is not going to produce stability in the Balkans to ignore the reality of situation between Belgrade and Pristina.”
“It’s not going to help stability to put off decisions however difficult they may be. We have to make sure that we have full commitments to the principles before decisions are taken that are embodied in the Ahtisaari plan. This is going to be difficult enough and everybody has to live up to responsibilities.” According to the proposed plan of Martti Ahtisaari, UN administrator in Kosovo, there should be a “supervised independence.”
Speaking about her discussion with NATO allies, Rice said, “We have recommitment to KFOR and we are ready for all contingencies but also an understanding that there needed to be unity between the allies as we are going to move into what is undoubtedly going to be a difficult period. We have had a UN track and reaffirmation of 1244 is the most important thing that we can do right now.”
The US Secretary of State reiterated, “We can not go anywhere by ignoring reality and pretending that we don’t have to make decisions.” Echoing her views, NATO Secretary-General Jaap de Hoop Scheffer had said NATO would “act resolutely against anyone who seeks to resort to violence.”
Earlier, NATO foreign ministers agreed that UN Security Council Resolution 1244 is a sufficient and appropriate legal basis for KFOR to continue its role. The alliance ministers also concluded that KFOR’s force levels will remain as they are, and that no new restrictions will be placed on the use of those forces.
There have been warnings from ethnic Albanian leaders that they may declare independence unilaterally after December 10 deadline lapses, prompting fears of a fresh outbreak of violence.
“Kosovo will remain and has to remain a place where Kosovar Albanians, Serbs and others must be able to live in peace together – free from fear, and free from intimidation. And we are determined to play our part,” stressed the NATO Secretary General.
The majority ethnic Albanians in Kosovo have nodded yes to the Ahtisaari plan which is set to gradually steer Kosovo’s institutions towards independence with guidance from international institutions while safeguarding the rights and property of the Serb minority.
Arguing that such a solution for Kosovo will set dangerous precedent for separatist inspirations elsewhere like Basque, Scottish and other regions, Russia has supported Serbia’s stance at the UN Security Council to keep Kosovo within Serbia but with greater autonomy.Kosovo is technically part of Serbia but has been under UN administration for the last eight years. Belgrade’s security forces were driven out of Kosovo by a NATO bombing campaign in 1999, launched to stop a violent Serb crackdown on ethnic Albanians.
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Justice prevails for journalism
Principles before personalities
“Facing the press is more difficult than bathing a leper.” -Mother Teresa, 1990
“The press is the enemy” -Richard Nixon, 1969
The above two quotes sum up the ongoing drama in Europe today. Mother Teresa with humility accepted the fact while President Nixon expressed the inherent fear of being exposed.
In Europe, justice prevailed last week when the European Court of Human Rights upheld the right of German journalist Hans- Martin Tillack to protect his sources. The court ruling ordered Belgium to pay him 10,000 Euro in damages and 30,000 Euro for court expenses. “The right of journalists to keep their sources secret ... is a true attribute of the right to information which is to be treated with the utmost regard,” the Strasbourgbased court ruled in a judgment handed down last Tuesday.
The European Court of Human Rights, which is not a European Union body, said that the ability of journalists to protect the identity of sources “could not be considered a mere privilege to be granted or taken away.”
The judgment also noted that the claims against Tillack were based on “vague and un-sustained rumours” and that the authorities were unclear whether the sums said to have been paid amounted to 8,000 Euro or DEM 8,000.
Welcoming the judgement Tillack told New Europe, “I was very happy about the judgement in Strasbourg, but I’m shocked that nobody in OLAF and the EU Commission seems to want to learn the lesson from that.
“What we need is a full investigation of how EU Commission and OLAF had prepared the action against me and how they convinced the Belgians to act according to OLAF’s wishes.
“The EU-Commission and OLAF still have to learn to accept that press freedom implies that they may read embarrassing news about themselves in the press. In this case, OLAF officials have been caught misleading the European Parliament, Public Prosecutors and the EUOmbudsman. One should not allow them to do that again.”
Commenting on the ruling Aidan White, the general secretary of the European Federation of Journalists said “At last, this shocking violation of journalists’ rights has been rectified.” White had been instrumental in calling for an investigation into the action against Tillack.
The European commission washed its hands off the episode as Johannes Laitenberger, a spokesman for the European commission pointed out that Belgium, rather than the European Union institutions, had been found at fault.
But at the press conference with journalists later, Alessandro Buttice, Head Spokesman, Communication and PR Unit of OLAF along with his deputy defended OLAF actions that saw Belgian police raid the home of a journalist. Buttice also laid the basis of the case on a then European commission official calling that a “qualified witness” who had given them “demonstration” in writing that “probably” an EU official had been paid to provide the information but OLAF had admitted getting its information from a European Commission official who said he had been told secondhand of the alleged bribe.
Defending the action of OLAF as acting on the principle of “zero tolerance,” as “what any police in any EU country will do to transfer it to judiciary” and “after that what judiciary does according to their national laws,” said Buttice, adding, “We don’t have a choice if there is information of a crime.”
During a raid on the house of Tillack in 2004, Belgian police had seized documents, two computers, four portable telephones and a filing cabinet. The authorities had said they were acting on claims that Tillack had paid an official to provide confidential documents, which is an offence under Belgian law. Tillack denied having done so, and no charges have been made against him. Belgium, however, changed the law in 2005 to protect journalists’ sources.
“The law of protection of journalistic sources would not allow these raids now,” said Annaik de Voghel, the spokeswoman of Justice Minister Laurette Onkelinx was cited in media as saying. But she clarified that raids were now only allowed at the request of an investigative judge if the information was vital to prevent someone being harmed, such as to prevent a bomb or to find a kidnapped child.
In 2002, Tillack had written a series of articles about alleged financial irregularities at the European Union’s statistics arm Eurostat with headquarters in Luxembourg. Working for the German weekly Stern, Tillack had reported that the OLAF was dragging its feel while trying to root out illegal activities but that set the OLAF on a hunt to trace down Tillack’s source.
Coming back to the articles that provoked all this trouble for Tillack and made other journalists take note of the situation, are yet to see fruits of the toil as no charges have yet been filed over the Eurostat fraud allegations, according to the OLAF. But OLAF announced two dossiers have been sent by an examining magistrate to the prosecutor in Luxembourg, and a separate judicial investigation is still under way in Paris.
The journalists were treating the case as a precedent test of the rights of reporters to keep sources confidential. In replying to a journalist’s question about the future course of action in similar cases of leaks whether the OLAF will investigate the journalist, the OLAF spokesmen said, “If there is a crime or corruption, yes but just for leak no.”
An earlier ruling in October 2006 from the European Union’s Court of First Instance in Luxembourg had dismissed Tillack’s claim for damages, saying it had no reason to get involved. Moreover, the European Union Ombudsman, in a report two years ago, ruled that OLAF’s suspicions were based merely on rumours.
Summing up the comments of the participating journalists at the press conference, Lorenzo Consoli, President of International Press Association put two points in perspective:
First, the journalists were surprised that the OLAF did not clearly welcome the judgement from ECHR and which would have been a way to distance itself from the unacceptable behaviour of the Belgian police in the case of Tillack.
Second, the fact that they were criticised for basing the demand for Belgian authorities to act on the two alleged crimes, corruption and leakage of secrets which were based on only one “demonstration” of one person who was just reporting rumours and was not a direct witness.
The question arises: Why didn’t they go further in depth in internal inquiry in order to substantiate the allegations before involving Belgian authorities?
Last but not the least the journalists demanded that Franz-Hermann Bruner, the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office should come at a press conference in immediate future to clarify the (OLAF) position on these two points.Belgium is the host of major international institutions like NATO and is capital of European Union with its executive European commission having headquarters along with European Parliament and European Council here and there are thousands of lobby groups.
With the clarity dawning on the case and in the light of new Belgium law passed in 2005, which reinforced the rights of journalists and would not permit this kind of raid today, it seems its time for the OLAF, the Anti-fraud agency to concentrate on real matters of fraud and benefit from writings of the journalist as whistleblowers.
“Facing the press is more difficult than bathing a leper.” -Mother Teresa, 1990
“The press is the enemy” -Richard Nixon, 1969
The above two quotes sum up the ongoing drama in Europe today. Mother Teresa with humility accepted the fact while President Nixon expressed the inherent fear of being exposed.
In Europe, justice prevailed last week when the European Court of Human Rights upheld the right of German journalist Hans- Martin Tillack to protect his sources. The court ruling ordered Belgium to pay him 10,000 Euro in damages and 30,000 Euro for court expenses. “The right of journalists to keep their sources secret ... is a true attribute of the right to information which is to be treated with the utmost regard,” the Strasbourgbased court ruled in a judgment handed down last Tuesday.
The European Court of Human Rights, which is not a European Union body, said that the ability of journalists to protect the identity of sources “could not be considered a mere privilege to be granted or taken away.”
The judgment also noted that the claims against Tillack were based on “vague and un-sustained rumours” and that the authorities were unclear whether the sums said to have been paid amounted to 8,000 Euro or DEM 8,000.
Welcoming the judgement Tillack told New Europe, “I was very happy about the judgement in Strasbourg, but I’m shocked that nobody in OLAF and the EU Commission seems to want to learn the lesson from that.
“What we need is a full investigation of how EU Commission and OLAF had prepared the action against me and how they convinced the Belgians to act according to OLAF’s wishes.
“The EU-Commission and OLAF still have to learn to accept that press freedom implies that they may read embarrassing news about themselves in the press. In this case, OLAF officials have been caught misleading the European Parliament, Public Prosecutors and the EUOmbudsman. One should not allow them to do that again.”
Commenting on the ruling Aidan White, the general secretary of the European Federation of Journalists said “At last, this shocking violation of journalists’ rights has been rectified.” White had been instrumental in calling for an investigation into the action against Tillack.
The European commission washed its hands off the episode as Johannes Laitenberger, a spokesman for the European commission pointed out that Belgium, rather than the European Union institutions, had been found at fault.
But at the press conference with journalists later, Alessandro Buttice, Head Spokesman, Communication and PR Unit of OLAF along with his deputy defended OLAF actions that saw Belgian police raid the home of a journalist. Buttice also laid the basis of the case on a then European commission official calling that a “qualified witness” who had given them “demonstration” in writing that “probably” an EU official had been paid to provide the information but OLAF had admitted getting its information from a European Commission official who said he had been told secondhand of the alleged bribe.
Defending the action of OLAF as acting on the principle of “zero tolerance,” as “what any police in any EU country will do to transfer it to judiciary” and “after that what judiciary does according to their national laws,” said Buttice, adding, “We don’t have a choice if there is information of a crime.”
During a raid on the house of Tillack in 2004, Belgian police had seized documents, two computers, four portable telephones and a filing cabinet. The authorities had said they were acting on claims that Tillack had paid an official to provide confidential documents, which is an offence under Belgian law. Tillack denied having done so, and no charges have been made against him. Belgium, however, changed the law in 2005 to protect journalists’ sources.
“The law of protection of journalistic sources would not allow these raids now,” said Annaik de Voghel, the spokeswoman of Justice Minister Laurette Onkelinx was cited in media as saying. But she clarified that raids were now only allowed at the request of an investigative judge if the information was vital to prevent someone being harmed, such as to prevent a bomb or to find a kidnapped child.
In 2002, Tillack had written a series of articles about alleged financial irregularities at the European Union’s statistics arm Eurostat with headquarters in Luxembourg. Working for the German weekly Stern, Tillack had reported that the OLAF was dragging its feel while trying to root out illegal activities but that set the OLAF on a hunt to trace down Tillack’s source.
Coming back to the articles that provoked all this trouble for Tillack and made other journalists take note of the situation, are yet to see fruits of the toil as no charges have yet been filed over the Eurostat fraud allegations, according to the OLAF. But OLAF announced two dossiers have been sent by an examining magistrate to the prosecutor in Luxembourg, and a separate judicial investigation is still under way in Paris.
The journalists were treating the case as a precedent test of the rights of reporters to keep sources confidential. In replying to a journalist’s question about the future course of action in similar cases of leaks whether the OLAF will investigate the journalist, the OLAF spokesmen said, “If there is a crime or corruption, yes but just for leak no.”
An earlier ruling in October 2006 from the European Union’s Court of First Instance in Luxembourg had dismissed Tillack’s claim for damages, saying it had no reason to get involved. Moreover, the European Union Ombudsman, in a report two years ago, ruled that OLAF’s suspicions were based merely on rumours.
Summing up the comments of the participating journalists at the press conference, Lorenzo Consoli, President of International Press Association put two points in perspective:
First, the journalists were surprised that the OLAF did not clearly welcome the judgement from ECHR and which would have been a way to distance itself from the unacceptable behaviour of the Belgian police in the case of Tillack.
Second, the fact that they were criticised for basing the demand for Belgian authorities to act on the two alleged crimes, corruption and leakage of secrets which were based on only one “demonstration” of one person who was just reporting rumours and was not a direct witness.
The question arises: Why didn’t they go further in depth in internal inquiry in order to substantiate the allegations before involving Belgian authorities?
Last but not the least the journalists demanded that Franz-Hermann Bruner, the Director of the European Anti-Fraud Office should come at a press conference in immediate future to clarify the (OLAF) position on these two points.Belgium is the host of major international institutions like NATO and is capital of European Union with its executive European commission having headquarters along with European Parliament and European Council here and there are thousands of lobby groups.
With the clarity dawning on the case and in the light of new Belgium law passed in 2005, which reinforced the rights of journalists and would not permit this kind of raid today, it seems its time for the OLAF, the Anti-fraud agency to concentrate on real matters of fraud and benefit from writings of the journalist as whistleblowers.
Dimas outlines Bali Agenda: The Earth’s last chance
EU maps climate change plan to halt global warming
European Commissioner Stavros Dimas is in the driving seat of European Union’s leading role in guiding international efforts to combat climate change, caused by emissions of greenhouse gases and one of the gravest challenges facing humanity.
Commissioner Dimas in a exhaustive interview with Tejinder Singh explains his vision to meet the environmental challenges both at home within the European Union and internationally to provide pragmatic and feasible progress with call for new environmental technologies development and promotion throughout the EU.
Q.
Q.
You must be very happy with the Nobel Peace Prize to Al Gore as he symbolises the fight against climate change today. What is your reaction?
A.
I sent my warmest congratulations to Al Gore immediately after the announcement by the Nobel Committee. Scientists and politicians have known about climate change since the 1970’s but it is only over recent years that it has risen to the top of the international agenda here in Europe and increasingly in the United States.
Al Gore’s vision of how we can prevent catastrophic climate change has taken us closer towards a global agreement on cutting greenhouse emissions. Any meaningful solution needs a global response and at the heart of this must be the full involvement of the United States.
Al Gore’s work has shifted American opinion decisively and the European Union is already working with several US states to share our experience in reducing emissions. I look forward to the day, which I am sure will come soon, when the US administration joins in this common effort.
With your immediate attention on the upcoming UN climate conference in Bali, will you like to elaborate on your Climate Change Strategy for the EU?
With your immediate attention on the upcoming UN climate conference in Bali, will you like to elaborate on your Climate Change Strategy for the EU?
There are two months left for the Bali, Indonesia meeting in the beginning of December about the United Nations’ Convention on climate change. The meeting is of great importance because the European Union expects there to agree on status launching of 2012 negotiations. This is the objective but there are also certain items for discussion after launching of negotiations.
What are the approaches that you have in mind?
What are the approaches that you have in mind?
Regarding climate change there is a two-pronged EU approach: international part and domestic approach.
INTERNATIONAL PART
INTERNATIONAL PART
The international part is how to exploit up to Bali the possibilities that the EU has in various possibilities in international fora like G8, Plus 5 or the unofficial meeting in Bogor in Indonesia for climate change and various bilateral meetings that the EU has with US, China, India and other bilateral meetings in order to prepare the ground for Bali.
In Bali the EU expects to agree:
In Bali the EU expects to agree:
*Launching of emissions for after 2012 regime because then the first period of Kyoto is expiring On certain building block elements that the new agreement should contain. These elements are:
* A common goal to be achieved by 2050 for reduction of carbon dioxide. According to what science tells us we need 50 percent reduction in global levels in comparison to 1990. This should be the goal for all members of the UN members of the Convention.
* A common goal to be achieved by 2050 for reduction of carbon dioxide. According to what science tells us we need 50 percent reduction in global levels in comparison to 1990. This should be the goal for all members of the UN members of the Convention.
* How much the developed countries will take to reduce? What obligation the participants including the EU will have for the reduction of carbon dioxide after 2012? This will be a binding obligation.
*The participants will ask developing countries to contribute because after a few years fast developing countries like China, India, Mexico, Brazil will contribute more to the greenhouse phenomenon than the whole of OECD countries. They have to commit also that they will in the common but different negotiated way the reduction of emissions. This can be done by reducing the rate of growth of emissions. This is the difference with the developed countries. The developed countries have to have absolute reduction while developing countries have to reduce rate of growth of emissions up to 2020 and this can be done with measures like energy efficiency for example which is going to be good for saving money because they will rely less on imported fossil fuels.
* The fourth building block is investment in more research, in development, deployment and transfer of technology especially towards developing countries.
* Development of a global carbon market and the use of market- based instruments in order to achieve reduction of emissions in the most cost-efficient ways.
* Inclusion of aviation and maritime sectors in the new global agreement.
* De-forestation: to fight deforestation and find ways to promote anti-deforestation measures because deforestation contributes to about 20 percent of global Carbon emissions. It’s very important and at the same time avoiding deforestation is very good for biodiversity.
* Adaptation is very important because climate change is already occurring. We are already about 0.7 percent above pre-industrial times. We have an increase of temperature so we have to take right measures in order to avoid disasters and catastrophes which could be caused by the warming of the planet.
We have seen we have increasing droughts, water scarcity, diseases from neo-tropical disease coming up North for example – Blue Tongue disease first time seen in Britain and this is a tropical disease coming from Africa, went up to Southern Europe and now to Northern Europe. Another example also from United Kingdom is the floods a month ago and the destruction that was caused there.
The forest fires in Southern Europe that we had this summer. In Greece, we had four heat waves which had never happened before.
In Africa, water scarcity and droughts are causing havoc with movements of populations generating social problems leading to political problems like in Darfur, Somalia. Hence, adaptation is essential.
DOMESTIC ASPECTS
DOMESTIC ASPECTS
The domestic part is very essential because what we preach internationally, we need to do at home in the European Union otherwise we will not have credibility at the international negotiating tables.
Here we have the energy and climate change package which was approved at the beginning of the current year. There we have set targets 20 percent reduction in the carbon dioxide in the European Union or 30 percent if we have an international agreement by 2020. So we have a 20 percent target to deliver and we have to take all the measures and legislation necessary in order to implement this. The other target is 20 percent renewables target for 2020 and also we have a 20 percent energy efficiency target.
How are you going to achieve these targets?
How are you going to achieve these targets?
We have a series of proposals that we are going to bring by the end of the year hopefully.
* Renewables directive which is going to be from Potochnik but it’s very important because if there is an increase in renewables and if a target of 20 percent is reached in the total consumption of energy, it means there will be less carbon dioxide and there will be a reduction in import of fossil fuels: oil and gas.
* Second one is a Burden Sharing Agreement regarding the reduction of carbon dioxide in which it will be detailed how to distribute among 27 member states of the EU. What reduction each country will achieve in order to have a final result of 20 percent reduction.
* Review of emissions trading system, the carbon market that we have established in the European Union which is the instrument by which we achieve the reduction in carbon dioxide and also the instrument by which you encourage investment in renewables.
These three aforementioned proposals are interlinked and support each other. There is a fourth piece of legislation which is called Carbon Capture and Storage. This is necessary in order to enable use of coal without the production of carbon dioxide. For example, in a power station, if one produces electricity from lignite, one gets emissions of carbon dioxide which will be captured, transported and stored in land, say former oil fields where there is space and one can put it there and seal it and it stays there.
Do you have any more proposals in addition to these?
Do you have any more proposals in addition to these?
In addition to these four legislations, we already have inclusion of aviation in emission which is in co-decision procedure; oil quality directive which is also in co-decision procedure. Then we are going to have carbon dioxide and cars: how to reduce carbon dioxide emitted from cars by establishing efficiency standards in cars. This can be seen from the point of view of emissions from the car or by the energy used by the car. This is very important as transport contributes 21 percent of carbon dioxide emissions in the EU and passenger cars are responsible for 12 percent of these emissions.
We are going to propose legislation which will limit the carbon dioxide emitted from cars to 120 grammes per kilometre by 2012. These are series of measures and there are more like revision of directive on labeling of energy efficiency of vehicles with a label on the car: what is the consumption of the car which is important because the buyer/consumer will be informed about the efficiency of the car and how much they will spend.
What are your objectives that you want to reach with these proposals?
What are your objectives that you want to reach with these proposals?
All these are aiming at the following objectives:
* Reduction of carbon dioxide and contribution in the achievement of our targets
* Fuel and energy security which is very important in the EU with less dependency on imported oil
*Less expenses for fuel/electricity for consumers
* Creation of growth and jobs through innovation for example by developing, deploying clean technologies and in this respect, the EU is world leaders for example wind mills and power generation through wind energy and solar energy.
It’s not just cars, but pesticides, nuclear power, biofuels, coal and politics
How much support do you have across the EU for your efforts?
It’s not just cars, but pesticides, nuclear power, biofuels, coal and politics
How much support do you have across the EU for your efforts?
We have full support for our targets and a mandate from the European Council in which all the 27 member states agreed to the decision which was reached in March this year. We also have support in the European Parliament and in the Environment Council.
Of course, regarding the domestic measures and implementation, we are going to have discussions and we are going to take into account the concerns of the various member states regarding their individual commitments, For example, some have doubts about renewables, some have nuclear in their energy mix which other member states do not have, so each member state has its own concerns and its own potential. We are trying to take into account all these concerns so that we will have an equitable solution for all of them. The European Council has given the directions and now the implementing measures are being prepared.
You mentioned implementation and you know that is a tough part. How much optimism you have about this phase of implementation?
You mentioned implementation and you know that is a tough part. How much optimism you have about this phase of implementation?
We are going to explain to Member States taking into account their views and the consensus already arrived at the European Council in March. We have to reach our targets in a way that will be fair for everybody but I agree that implementation always poses problems.
You mentioned an international part of the strategy. Although the US federal government has not ratified Kyoto Protocol, there are a large number of American cities which are working towards its implementation. Are you aware of this and if there is already any cooperation in this field with them?
You mentioned an international part of the strategy. Although the US federal government has not ratified Kyoto Protocol, there are a large number of American cities which are working towards its implementation. Are you aware of this and if there is already any cooperation in this field with them?
In the United States there are several levels, the federal level in which President George W Bush had a conference in Washington of 16 major economies. At the cities level, there is a coalition of more than 600 cities and towns in the US and they are cooperating and taking individual and collective measures to fight climate change at the city level.
There are also states like California and Governor Schwarzneger plus other states like New York and Florida which are taking equally important measures. For example, with California we are in close cooperation as they are planning to establish an emission trading system from 2009 onwards which will be similar to ours and because of our experience and knowledge of emission trading system, there is cooperation to not only help them in setting it up but also to make it compatible with ours. We are also in cooperation with other states on the North-East and West coasts of US which are also planning to launch emission trading mechanisms.
There is great interest at local level and state level and we hope that from the debate and dialogue that is going on in the US, we are going to have better cooperation from federal level as well. There are a number of bills in the pipeline about launching of an emission trade system and very recently the US House speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senate Majority leader Harry Reid have written a letter to President Bush asking binding reductions for introduction of a capital trade system similar to ours and also to have more cooperation to bring on board other countries. So we do see a movement going on in US and, of course, there are efforts by Al Gore to raise awareness among citizens about emission trading scheme and negative impacts of climate change. With so much debate in the US, we hope that the issue will come up with concrete measures.
Do you see a shift in the behaviour of EU citizens?
Do you see a shift in the behaviour of EU citizens?
The citizens not only in the EU but also in the US are acting in two capacities: voters and consumers. Politicians are interested in voters and businesses are looking for consumers. This is the reason we have seen the businesses offering greener products because consumer choices are changing. There is a social shift towards greener products and we see it everywhere.
Even your choice of a car was governed with green factors?
Even your choice of a car was governed with green factors?
Yes, I have a Toyota Prius. In order to get an objective opinion, I asked WWF as they have a list of top ten projects which are top ten products in various categories. I asked them to tell me a recommendation for a car. Using the studies of an environment and energy institute in Germany, they came up with a list and the one that was most recommended as energy efficient and less carbon-dioxide emitter was the car that I got. This is the official car and I do not have a private car as I prefer walking as Brussels is not a big city.
In the energy mix of the member states, there is a thrust on nuclear energy which is talked of as low carbon dioxide emitter but the handling and storage of nuclear waste coupled with safety requirements raises doubts. What is your opinion on the subject?
In the energy mix of the member states, there is a thrust on nuclear energy which is talked of as low carbon dioxide emitter but the handling and storage of nuclear waste coupled with safety requirements raises doubts. What is your opinion on the subject?
The European Commission is neutral when it comes to nuclear issue because this is a matter for the Member States to decide how they will compose their energy mix. Some countries do use nuclear energy, for example, France where 80 percent of the electricity comes from nuclear power; there are countries like Finland which are introducing nuclear energy and still some others have nuclear energy but they are phasing out while some do not have nuclear at all. So this is a matter for the member states to decide what energy mix they will choose.
Yes, nuclear energy has problems that you mentioned like what to do with radioactive nuclear waste, questions of safety and security and also decommissioning of the installations at the end of their life span. These concerns have led quite a few member states not to choose nuclear option.
There is a recommendation from the European Parliament to reduce pesticides use in the EU by 25 percent in next five years and 50 percent in next 10 years. How is the European Commission going to monitor it as it seems there is no reference level for present usage?
There is a recommendation from the European Parliament to reduce pesticides use in the EU by 25 percent in next five years and 50 percent in next 10 years. How is the European Commission going to monitor it as it seems there is no reference level for present usage?
There’s a lot going on in the field of pesticides currently. The Commission has made proposals, which are now being discussed in co-decision, in particular a regulation introducing new procedures for the authorisation and placing on the market of pesticides, under the responsibility of Health Commissioner Kyprianou, as well as a framework directive and a thematic strategy on the sustainable use of pesticides, under my responsibility. The latter pieces are new in the legislative arsenal concerning pesticides. They fill the current legislative gap regarding the use-phase of pesticides. Their aim is to reduce the risks linked to the use of pesticides and therefore to address negative impacts on health and the environment from pesticides use. They will play a key role in the environmental acquis as they have a significant impact on environmental compartments (ex., soil, water bodies, air) and environmental issues (ex., biodiversity, climate change, etc.) The European Parliament will have its First Reading vote on these proposals on October 22 in Strasbourg.
With farmland moving to energy crops, biofuels, there is intensive agriculture taking over which is set to affect climate change and water management as set aside land is also being used. What are your comments on this development?
With farmland moving to energy crops, biofuels, there is intensive agriculture taking over which is set to affect climate change and water management as set aside land is also being used. What are your comments on this development?
Biofuels is a very important development taking place. Everybody forgets what we have said about biofuels and the direction the European Council gave is that biofuels should be sustainable.
When talking of sustainable biofuels, there must be respect for environmental concerns and social factors. Biofuels can be causing various problems like bringing down rain forests to cultivate in third countries because of the demand that will be generated in Europe or elsewhere. If more biofuels are needed, more rain forests could get destroyed in third countries.
Regarding the set-aside land, there is not so much criticism as it is the agricultural land that is coming back but it will require more water and this should be looked into carefully because of water scarcity and droughts that we had. There are also social problems generated by cultivating more crops for biofuels as it means less goes towards food sector thus creating competition between food and fuel thus raising the prices not only in least developed countries but also in Europe. Recently, Italy observed a day without pasta as prices keep rising and even meat prices shot up as crops were channeled towards fuel production. As these problems are felt more in least-developed countries there is a social impact of biofuels. We need to move carefully and bearing always in mind that biofuels should be sustainable, Sustainability has two criteria: environment and social. Sometime ago there was an enthusiasm about biofuels but it’s going down due to these negative impacts.
While looking at biofuels we need to look at the whole cycle of production and look at the positive carbon dioxide and accordingly decide on its sustainability. Some biofuels are really good and they contribute a lot towards better environment.
In China there is one coal-fired new power plant going on line every week. With China saying it needs these to feed its insatiable hunger for energy, how do you plan to engage the Chinese in constructive dialogue to check its impact on environment?
In China there is one coal-fired new power plant going on line every week. With China saying it needs these to feed its insatiable hunger for energy, how do you plan to engage the Chinese in constructive dialogue to check its impact on environment?
Coal is playing a vital role in production of energy in countries like China and even in some European countries. This is why one of the legislations that we are proposing as mentioned earlier is Carbon Capture and Storage. This technology needs to be developed and commercialised so that we can have production of electricity from coal without the negative impacts on climate. Coal produces normally a lot of carbon dioxide and the fact that these plants are engaged for quite a number of years in future if you start a coal-fired power plant now.
With this in mind, we are encouraging the Chinese to go for Carbon Capture and Storage technology and we are going into partnership with China. There is an EU-China partnership on zero carbon dioxide emission plant which will be established there with our financing and UK financing and we hope it will be up by 2015. It will be a demonstration plant and we are also considering 12 demonstration plants in the European Union as well till 2015.
Interview with: European Enviromental Commissioner Stavros Dimas
14 October 2007 - New Europe, the European Weekly, Issue : 751
14 October 2007 - New Europe, the European Weekly, Issue : 751
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Journalists take a dig at Belgium scenario
Belgium, a linguistically-divided country, seems to come alive after each national election with politicians dragging their feet over the formation of incoming governments and this year is no different. While day-to-day governmental duties are still handled by the outgoing administration of Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt, the need for the new rulers is increasingly felt to chalk out fresh policy initiatives such as drafting the 2008 budget.
Last week, months since the June 10 elections, surpassing a previous record from 1998, the election winner and would-be prime minister Yves Leterme was still trying to broker a coalition alliance between four main political parties.
With the deadlock grinding on, the media, especially the foreign press corps based in Brussels to cover European and international institutions, came under fire for speculating on the ongoing political tug-ofwar leading to a Belgium split as political divisions between the Dutch-speaking Flemish, who make up 60 percent of the population, and the French-speaking Walloons kept widening.
In a lively press debate titled, “Breaking Up is Hard to Do - Media’s Role in a Divided Belgium,” on November 22, moderated by Aidan White, EFJ General Secretary, the journalists presented pros and cons of the ongoing coverage.
Agreeing on the fact that the balance of power in the country has shifted in last six decades in favour of the Flemish camp while Wallonia lost the competitive edge with the fading of the industrial age’s coal mines, there were different opinions on the hoax News Flash “Bye Bye Belgium” from the public broadcasting company RTBF, announcing the country’s separation as the Flemish region supposedly declared its independence.
Beatrice Delvaux, Editor-in-Chief of Le Soir, called “Bye Bye Belgium” a taboo subject in the ongoing history of the country, pointing out that international press played a major role in bringing out the subject. She stressed that there are social factors in play with a glaring need for reforms evident in the socio-economic fabric of Belgium.
Labelling it as a “gross example of intoxication,” Filip Rogiers, political reporter for De Morgen, wondered if it was not a “quite strange way of starting a debate.” Going down memory lane, Rogiers, who started his journalistic career in the 1990s defined the Belgian state as a compromise historically and lamented missed opportunities of the 1930s to introduce bilingualism.
Nawab Khan, a foreign journalist from India and member of API-IPA (International Press Association) countered that India with different states with completely different languages makes it mandatory for the students to learn three languages: Hindi, the national language; the concerned state language and English, thus bringing “Unity in Diversity” in pragmatic terms.
Michael Stabenow, a Brussels-based correspondent for Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and a member of API-IPA, highlighted the importance of Brussels, the capital of Europe for the international press corps calling it the “second most important place,” after Washington globally.
Stabenow lamented the fact that the international journalists get their quota of local Belgian news from second-hand sources while in the case of the European Union and other international institutions there is availability of first hand news coming out.
On the same subject, I pointed out a lack of press releases from the Belgian government to foreign journalists accredited to Belgian government and it’s a missed opportunity, as in all other countries, the governments make full use of such contacts, updating journalists on ongoing developments with the views of the governments.
The speakers agreed that independence comes from controlling the purse strings of financial coffers and autonomy demands originate in regions with bulging tax revenues, letting political parties play the mathematics of permutations and combinations, but, at the end of the day, the political parties have an obligation to take stands and be the true representatives of what the Belgian population wants.
Belgium’s parliament, including a majority of Flemish representatives, last week rejected an initiative by the radical Flemish Vlaams Belang party to divide the country between its Dutch- and French- speakers.
Earlier calling for an end of the governmental crisis, thousands in Brussels demonstrated for the unity of Belgium’s constitutional democracy.
Last, but not least, it must be reiterated that instead of blaming the foreign media as the root cause of the fallingapart scenario of Belgium, the incoming government will do well to provide first-hand news to the thousand foreign correspondents in Belgium instead of closing the existing channels like “Focus on Flanders”, as it “provided the Foreign press with a timely access to simple translations - in French, English and German - of articles and commentaries from the main Flemish newspapers. It was a useful tool enabling foreign journalist to have a more balanced view of the reality of the country and the relations between its two main communities,” according to API/IPA.
Last week, months since the June 10 elections, surpassing a previous record from 1998, the election winner and would-be prime minister Yves Leterme was still trying to broker a coalition alliance between four main political parties.
With the deadlock grinding on, the media, especially the foreign press corps based in Brussels to cover European and international institutions, came under fire for speculating on the ongoing political tug-ofwar leading to a Belgium split as political divisions between the Dutch-speaking Flemish, who make up 60 percent of the population, and the French-speaking Walloons kept widening.
In a lively press debate titled, “Breaking Up is Hard to Do - Media’s Role in a Divided Belgium,” on November 22, moderated by Aidan White, EFJ General Secretary, the journalists presented pros and cons of the ongoing coverage.
Agreeing on the fact that the balance of power in the country has shifted in last six decades in favour of the Flemish camp while Wallonia lost the competitive edge with the fading of the industrial age’s coal mines, there were different opinions on the hoax News Flash “Bye Bye Belgium” from the public broadcasting company RTBF, announcing the country’s separation as the Flemish region supposedly declared its independence.
Beatrice Delvaux, Editor-in-Chief of Le Soir, called “Bye Bye Belgium” a taboo subject in the ongoing history of the country, pointing out that international press played a major role in bringing out the subject. She stressed that there are social factors in play with a glaring need for reforms evident in the socio-economic fabric of Belgium.
Labelling it as a “gross example of intoxication,” Filip Rogiers, political reporter for De Morgen, wondered if it was not a “quite strange way of starting a debate.” Going down memory lane, Rogiers, who started his journalistic career in the 1990s defined the Belgian state as a compromise historically and lamented missed opportunities of the 1930s to introduce bilingualism.
Nawab Khan, a foreign journalist from India and member of API-IPA (International Press Association) countered that India with different states with completely different languages makes it mandatory for the students to learn three languages: Hindi, the national language; the concerned state language and English, thus bringing “Unity in Diversity” in pragmatic terms.
Michael Stabenow, a Brussels-based correspondent for Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung and a member of API-IPA, highlighted the importance of Brussels, the capital of Europe for the international press corps calling it the “second most important place,” after Washington globally.
Stabenow lamented the fact that the international journalists get their quota of local Belgian news from second-hand sources while in the case of the European Union and other international institutions there is availability of first hand news coming out.
On the same subject, I pointed out a lack of press releases from the Belgian government to foreign journalists accredited to Belgian government and it’s a missed opportunity, as in all other countries, the governments make full use of such contacts, updating journalists on ongoing developments with the views of the governments.
The speakers agreed that independence comes from controlling the purse strings of financial coffers and autonomy demands originate in regions with bulging tax revenues, letting political parties play the mathematics of permutations and combinations, but, at the end of the day, the political parties have an obligation to take stands and be the true representatives of what the Belgian population wants.
Belgium’s parliament, including a majority of Flemish representatives, last week rejected an initiative by the radical Flemish Vlaams Belang party to divide the country between its Dutch- and French- speakers.
Earlier calling for an end of the governmental crisis, thousands in Brussels demonstrated for the unity of Belgium’s constitutional democracy.
Last, but not least, it must be reiterated that instead of blaming the foreign media as the root cause of the fallingapart scenario of Belgium, the incoming government will do well to provide first-hand news to the thousand foreign correspondents in Belgium instead of closing the existing channels like “Focus on Flanders”, as it “provided the Foreign press with a timely access to simple translations - in French, English and German - of articles and commentaries from the main Flemish newspapers. It was a useful tool enabling foreign journalist to have a more balanced view of the reality of the country and the relations between its two main communities,” according to API/IPA.
Euro rally worries EU
ECB to take action; Merkel, Barroso express concern
Money is talk of the town and money, “The social lubricant” with a near free-fall of the US dollar, is sending ripples across the globe affecting all quarters of life. The steady fall of the American dollar against other global currencies and the meteoric rise of the nascent European currency, the Euro, is making financial pundits act and react.
Acknowledging the reemergence of tension in money markets, the European Central Bank (ECB) announced, “To counter the re-emerging risk of volatility, the ECB intends to reinforce in the upcoming main refinancing operation, as well as in the following ones for as long as it is needed and at least until after the end of the year, its policy of allocating more liquidity than the benchmark amount in main refinancing operations.” The benchmark amount is an estimate of the liquidity needed by banks to fulfil their minimum reserve requirements.
“In line with its communication of October 8th, the ECB will continue to closely monitor liquidity conditions, consistently with its aim to limit the volatility of very short term rates around the main refinancing operations minimum bid rate,” the bank in a move aimed at financial markets said.
Reiterating faith in the earlier ECB actions as “effective and flexible,” ECB president Jean- Claude Trichet said, “Looking ahead, and in line with its previous communications and actions, the ECB will continue to steer very short term interbank rates close (to) the minimum bid rate.”
Commenting on the strength of the Euro becoming a problem for some European exporters, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told N24 television on November 22 that the strong Euro and high oil prices pose a risk to the country’s economy — Europe’s largest. “We are pleased that Europe has a strong currency, but this obviously also creates problems for exports,” she said adding, “We are working on an international level to balance currency imbalances reasonably.”
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso echoed her sentiments last week. Speaking on the side lines of an EU-ASEAN Summit in Singapore, Barroso said, “It’s true that the very strong Euro is becoming a concern to some export sectors in some parts of the European economy.”
The European Commission this month cut its forecast for 2008 Eurozone economic growth to 2.2 percent from 2.5 percent.
In related fallout in the industry, Airbus CEO Thomas Enders said the Euro has now “crossed the pain threshold” and that the rate of the dollar’s fall “hardly leaves room for reasonable adapting.” “That is lifethreatening,” he was quoted by Der Spiegel magazine as telling the company worker’s council in Hamburg on November 22.
Although the company is expecting a record number of orders, it still must reckon with “tremendous losses,” he said. But the German economics ministry reacted the next day saying it is up to the aircraft maker Airbus and not the government to estimate the impact of the strong Euro on the company’s performance. “Only the company itself can assess how threatening such a development is for the company,” said an economics ministry spokeswoman. “Only the company can say to which degree the Euro has contributed to its development.”
Moreover, there is a flip side of the strong Euro as was pointed out by Merkel’s deputy economics minister. The rising Euro is damping the effect of rising oil prices, noted Bernd Pfaffenbach, who is also Merkel’s advisor on the Group of Eight industrial nations’ issues.
Recalling the worries during the birth of the European currency that Euro will even stay weaker than the Deutsche Mark, Pfaffenback welcome the news that China has announced plans to shift its currency reserves into Euro adding, “This shows a growth in faith in the European currency.”
Although burdened with strikes and transport chaos at home and silent directly on the rising Euro, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was about to address the currency issue during talks with Chinese leaders in Beijing.
According to media reports, a senior French official was cited as saying that Sarkozy will make proposals for an “equitable and fair” relationship among four major currencies - the US dollar, Euro, Japanese Yen and Chinese Yuan.
The common currency for the 13-nation Eurozone is hovering close to the USD 1.50 mark against the American dollar, breaking all records.
Money is talk of the town and money, “The social lubricant” with a near free-fall of the US dollar, is sending ripples across the globe affecting all quarters of life. The steady fall of the American dollar against other global currencies and the meteoric rise of the nascent European currency, the Euro, is making financial pundits act and react.
Acknowledging the reemergence of tension in money markets, the European Central Bank (ECB) announced, “To counter the re-emerging risk of volatility, the ECB intends to reinforce in the upcoming main refinancing operation, as well as in the following ones for as long as it is needed and at least until after the end of the year, its policy of allocating more liquidity than the benchmark amount in main refinancing operations.” The benchmark amount is an estimate of the liquidity needed by banks to fulfil their minimum reserve requirements.
“In line with its communication of October 8th, the ECB will continue to closely monitor liquidity conditions, consistently with its aim to limit the volatility of very short term rates around the main refinancing operations minimum bid rate,” the bank in a move aimed at financial markets said.
Reiterating faith in the earlier ECB actions as “effective and flexible,” ECB president Jean- Claude Trichet said, “Looking ahead, and in line with its previous communications and actions, the ECB will continue to steer very short term interbank rates close (to) the minimum bid rate.”
Commenting on the strength of the Euro becoming a problem for some European exporters, German Chancellor Angela Merkel told N24 television on November 22 that the strong Euro and high oil prices pose a risk to the country’s economy — Europe’s largest. “We are pleased that Europe has a strong currency, but this obviously also creates problems for exports,” she said adding, “We are working on an international level to balance currency imbalances reasonably.”
European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso echoed her sentiments last week. Speaking on the side lines of an EU-ASEAN Summit in Singapore, Barroso said, “It’s true that the very strong Euro is becoming a concern to some export sectors in some parts of the European economy.”
The European Commission this month cut its forecast for 2008 Eurozone economic growth to 2.2 percent from 2.5 percent.
In related fallout in the industry, Airbus CEO Thomas Enders said the Euro has now “crossed the pain threshold” and that the rate of the dollar’s fall “hardly leaves room for reasonable adapting.” “That is lifethreatening,” he was quoted by Der Spiegel magazine as telling the company worker’s council in Hamburg on November 22.
Although the company is expecting a record number of orders, it still must reckon with “tremendous losses,” he said. But the German economics ministry reacted the next day saying it is up to the aircraft maker Airbus and not the government to estimate the impact of the strong Euro on the company’s performance. “Only the company itself can assess how threatening such a development is for the company,” said an economics ministry spokeswoman. “Only the company can say to which degree the Euro has contributed to its development.”
Moreover, there is a flip side of the strong Euro as was pointed out by Merkel’s deputy economics minister. The rising Euro is damping the effect of rising oil prices, noted Bernd Pfaffenbach, who is also Merkel’s advisor on the Group of Eight industrial nations’ issues.
Recalling the worries during the birth of the European currency that Euro will even stay weaker than the Deutsche Mark, Pfaffenback welcome the news that China has announced plans to shift its currency reserves into Euro adding, “This shows a growth in faith in the European currency.”
Although burdened with strikes and transport chaos at home and silent directly on the rising Euro, French President Nicolas Sarkozy was about to address the currency issue during talks with Chinese leaders in Beijing.
According to media reports, a senior French official was cited as saying that Sarkozy will make proposals for an “equitable and fair” relationship among four major currencies - the US dollar, Euro, Japanese Yen and Chinese Yuan.
The common currency for the 13-nation Eurozone is hovering close to the USD 1.50 mark against the American dollar, breaking all records.
Bakoyannis’ pragmatic ideas
Greece paves way for European prospects of Western Balkans
The citizens of the Western Balkans need a specific vision to feel welcome into the fold of the European Union while the concerned governments need to embark on specific road with a goal none other than the EU, according to a Greek package with five specific proposals on giving a new impetus to the European course of Western Balkan countries.
After presenting the proposals to the European Union’s General Affairs Council in Brussels on November 19, Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis said that Greece took the opportunity of tabling a very specific new initiative on the European prospects of the Western Balkans. She said that the time is very difficult for the Western Balkans and there is an urgent need for a specific vision and a specific goal than can be none other than the European vision.
Calling on the governments of 27 member states and the executive arm, the European Commission to explore the possibility to charter a path of specific moves to implement the Greek proposals, the Greek foreign minister stressed the need to convey a loud and clear welcome message to all the people of the Western Balkans.
“We believe that we will be having the possibility of discussing this proposal in more detail in December at the EU summit,” she said. Bakoyannis added that the initial response by her European counterparts, and by Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn, was very positive. “We all realise that it is a difficult period that requires a substantive, aggressive and effective European policy on this issue,” she said.
Recalling that in 1999, Greece had formulated a comprehensive policy, the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) and in 2003, the Thessaloniki Agenda took it a step further along the elements inspired by the enlargement process, the Greek Foreign minister Bakoyannis reiterated the need to take “some new courageous decisions on the Western Balkans.”
Lamenting today’s EU accession prospect for the Western Balkans appearing distant and even uncertain, Bakoyannis said, “A clear prospect of membership is the most important and perhaps the most effective tool at out disposal, to help the countries of the Western Balkans overcome state weaknesses and political, social and economic challenges, and catch up with the rest of Europe.”
Answering journalists’ questions, Bakoyannis said, “We need to send a positive message to the whole region that they are not left alone there and we must do it by giving practical and tangible signals.” “We need to have a specific road map for moving from today’s position to further.”
Presenting the fivepoint proposal package also nicknamed “Thessaloniki II” to the journalists, George Koumoutsakos, spokesman of Greek foreign ministry summarised it as follows:
- Within this framework and as a first step, the EU should immediately sign Stabilisation and Association Agreements with Serbia and at the earliest with Bosnia Herzegovina: the two countries remaining within which internal problems haven’t permitted such a positive step so far
- Serbia, in the first place, followed by the rest of the countries that would have a SA Agreement but no candidate status, should be encouraged to apply for membership. The Commission could present the avis on the application in the fall of 2008. The December European Council of 2008 could decide about granting the candidate status to any applicant country
- A date for the start of Accession negotiations will be decided later on, depending on the progress on fulfillment of specific benchmarks that will be set. Any additional step in the accession process will depend on each country’s progress in meeting the specific and tailormade requirements set by the EU in full application of the principle of conditionality
- However, in order to have, through the European perspective, the effect we desire, we should combine it with measures that would translated this perspective into something practical and tangible for the peoples of the region. Something that corresponds to their basic requests. Already in Thessaloniki we declared, “We were aware of the importance the peoples and governments of the region attach to the perspective of liberalisation of the visa regime.” We had promised to help the countries to deal with these issues to make such a move possible. Following the visa facilitation agreements, that we signed this year, the EU should not provide the countries of the region with a road mal that would eventually lead to the visa liberalisation: A series of concrete and measureable benchmarks and an outline of the necessary steps with an indicative timetable
- Additional financial resources will also be necessary. Within out actual budgetary obligations, we should make full use of the “principle of flexibility” in order to guarantee that any additional available fund will be directed, as a priority, to the region of the Western Balkans. Furthermore and in the light of the net financial perspectives, we should explore all possibilities that would allow a substantial increase of aid, in an effort to meet the increasing needs and serve our own priorities, in this sensitive region at this very delicate of time.
The citizens of the Western Balkans need a specific vision to feel welcome into the fold of the European Union while the concerned governments need to embark on specific road with a goal none other than the EU, according to a Greek package with five specific proposals on giving a new impetus to the European course of Western Balkan countries.
After presenting the proposals to the European Union’s General Affairs Council in Brussels on November 19, Greek Foreign Minister Dora Bakoyannis said that Greece took the opportunity of tabling a very specific new initiative on the European prospects of the Western Balkans. She said that the time is very difficult for the Western Balkans and there is an urgent need for a specific vision and a specific goal than can be none other than the European vision.
Calling on the governments of 27 member states and the executive arm, the European Commission to explore the possibility to charter a path of specific moves to implement the Greek proposals, the Greek foreign minister stressed the need to convey a loud and clear welcome message to all the people of the Western Balkans.
“We believe that we will be having the possibility of discussing this proposal in more detail in December at the EU summit,” she said. Bakoyannis added that the initial response by her European counterparts, and by Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn, was very positive. “We all realise that it is a difficult period that requires a substantive, aggressive and effective European policy on this issue,” she said.
Recalling that in 1999, Greece had formulated a comprehensive policy, the Stabilisation and Association Process (SAP) and in 2003, the Thessaloniki Agenda took it a step further along the elements inspired by the enlargement process, the Greek Foreign minister Bakoyannis reiterated the need to take “some new courageous decisions on the Western Balkans.”
Lamenting today’s EU accession prospect for the Western Balkans appearing distant and even uncertain, Bakoyannis said, “A clear prospect of membership is the most important and perhaps the most effective tool at out disposal, to help the countries of the Western Balkans overcome state weaknesses and political, social and economic challenges, and catch up with the rest of Europe.”
Answering journalists’ questions, Bakoyannis said, “We need to send a positive message to the whole region that they are not left alone there and we must do it by giving practical and tangible signals.” “We need to have a specific road map for moving from today’s position to further.”
Presenting the fivepoint proposal package also nicknamed “Thessaloniki II” to the journalists, George Koumoutsakos, spokesman of Greek foreign ministry summarised it as follows:
- Within this framework and as a first step, the EU should immediately sign Stabilisation and Association Agreements with Serbia and at the earliest with Bosnia Herzegovina: the two countries remaining within which internal problems haven’t permitted such a positive step so far
- Serbia, in the first place, followed by the rest of the countries that would have a SA Agreement but no candidate status, should be encouraged to apply for membership. The Commission could present the avis on the application in the fall of 2008. The December European Council of 2008 could decide about granting the candidate status to any applicant country
- A date for the start of Accession negotiations will be decided later on, depending on the progress on fulfillment of specific benchmarks that will be set. Any additional step in the accession process will depend on each country’s progress in meeting the specific and tailormade requirements set by the EU in full application of the principle of conditionality
- However, in order to have, through the European perspective, the effect we desire, we should combine it with measures that would translated this perspective into something practical and tangible for the peoples of the region. Something that corresponds to their basic requests. Already in Thessaloniki we declared, “We were aware of the importance the peoples and governments of the region attach to the perspective of liberalisation of the visa regime.” We had promised to help the countries to deal with these issues to make such a move possible. Following the visa facilitation agreements, that we signed this year, the EU should not provide the countries of the region with a road mal that would eventually lead to the visa liberalisation: A series of concrete and measureable benchmarks and an outline of the necessary steps with an indicative timetable
- Additional financial resources will also be necessary. Within out actual budgetary obligations, we should make full use of the “principle of flexibility” in order to guarantee that any additional available fund will be directed, as a priority, to the region of the Western Balkans. Furthermore and in the light of the net financial perspectives, we should explore all possibilities that would allow a substantial increase of aid, in an effort to meet the increasing needs and serve our own priorities, in this sensitive region at this very delicate of time.
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Climate change action gets into fast lane
“Better late than never.” With that the participants heaved a sigh of relief in Valencia, Spain after a marathon 24- hour session ending November 16 as the compromise 20-page Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) document emerged to act as a manual on how to tackle global warming and set the tone for a crucial United Nations (UN) climate conference next month in Bali, Indonesia.
Officially unveiling the report in Valencia, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon pointed out that the IPCC report states that climate change is “unequivocal” and may bring “abrupt and irreversible” impacts.
Fresh from a fact-finding mission to Antarctica and South America, Ban cautioned, “All humanity must assume responsibility for these treasures,” saying, “I come to you humbled after seeing some of the most precious treasures of our planet threatened by humanity’s own hand.” “Let us recognise that the effects of climate change affect us all, and that they have become so severe and so sweeping that only urgent global action will do. We are all in this together - we must work together,” Ban added.
In Brussels, the seat of the European Union, the untiring champion of the fight against climate change, it was hailed as “vital reading for decision makers,” by top EU officials. European Union Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said in a statement, “The Fourth Assessment Report is a milestone in our scientific knowledge about climate change and the grave threats global warming poses to the planet.”
Dimas said, “The report’s findings amount to a stark warning that the world must act fast to slash greenhouse gas emissions if we are to prevent climate change from reaching devastating levels. The good news is that it also shows that deep emission cuts are both technologically feasible and economically affordable.”
He added: “This synthesis report is vital reading for decisionmakers everywhere ahead of the UN climate change conference in Bali starting in just over two weeks. It fully supports the EU policy that global warming must be limited to no more than 2ºC above the pre-industrial temperature. The global community must respond to this scientific call for action by agreeing in Bali to launch negotiations on a comprehensive and ambitious new global climate agreement.
Efforts will be needed by all major emitters if we are to have a chance of controlling climate change before it is too late.”
Reiterating its commitment, the European Commission listed the key elements of EU action:- To reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, that will be strengthened to 30 percent reduction in the context of a fair global agreement - A firm target to increase the use of renewable energy to 20 percent by 2020- A broad range of measures to improve energy efficiency by 20 percent by 2020- Further evolution and strengthening of the EU’s emissions trading scheme;- An ambitious limit to CO2 emissions from cars- A framework for introducing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in power production- Development of an effective adaptation strategy
Moreover, the United States, which has earned the wrath of climate change campaigners for not doing enough, did participate along with nearly 150 countries to nod the compromise report through after five days of haggling.
Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian scientist who heads IPCC warned that even if global emissions are curbed and the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere stayed at the same level there would be a rise between 0.4 and 1.4 metres of the present day sea-levels simply because water expands as it warms.
“If you add to this the melting of some of the ice bodies on Earth, this gives a picture of the kinds of issue we are likely to face,” Pachauri said in post-publication comments on the report.
The synthesis report forms the final part of “Climate Change 2007”, the IPCC’s report. The other three parts were released earlier this year and covered the physical science of climate change; impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and ways to mitigate climate change.
The IPCC was awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize jointly with former US Vice-President Al Gore “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”.
Officially unveiling the report in Valencia, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon pointed out that the IPCC report states that climate change is “unequivocal” and may bring “abrupt and irreversible” impacts.
Fresh from a fact-finding mission to Antarctica and South America, Ban cautioned, “All humanity must assume responsibility for these treasures,” saying, “I come to you humbled after seeing some of the most precious treasures of our planet threatened by humanity’s own hand.” “Let us recognise that the effects of climate change affect us all, and that they have become so severe and so sweeping that only urgent global action will do. We are all in this together - we must work together,” Ban added.
In Brussels, the seat of the European Union, the untiring champion of the fight against climate change, it was hailed as “vital reading for decision makers,” by top EU officials. European Union Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said in a statement, “The Fourth Assessment Report is a milestone in our scientific knowledge about climate change and the grave threats global warming poses to the planet.”
Dimas said, “The report’s findings amount to a stark warning that the world must act fast to slash greenhouse gas emissions if we are to prevent climate change from reaching devastating levels. The good news is that it also shows that deep emission cuts are both technologically feasible and economically affordable.”
He added: “This synthesis report is vital reading for decisionmakers everywhere ahead of the UN climate change conference in Bali starting in just over two weeks. It fully supports the EU policy that global warming must be limited to no more than 2ºC above the pre-industrial temperature. The global community must respond to this scientific call for action by agreeing in Bali to launch negotiations on a comprehensive and ambitious new global climate agreement.
Efforts will be needed by all major emitters if we are to have a chance of controlling climate change before it is too late.”
Reiterating its commitment, the European Commission listed the key elements of EU action:- To reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, that will be strengthened to 30 percent reduction in the context of a fair global agreement - A firm target to increase the use of renewable energy to 20 percent by 2020- A broad range of measures to improve energy efficiency by 20 percent by 2020- Further evolution and strengthening of the EU’s emissions trading scheme;- An ambitious limit to CO2 emissions from cars- A framework for introducing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in power production- Development of an effective adaptation strategy
Moreover, the United States, which has earned the wrath of climate change campaigners for not doing enough, did participate along with nearly 150 countries to nod the compromise report through after five days of haggling.
Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian scientist who heads IPCC warned that even if global emissions are curbed and the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere stayed at the same level there would be a rise between 0.4 and 1.4 metres of the present day sea-levels simply because water expands as it warms.
“If you add to this the melting of some of the ice bodies on Earth, this gives a picture of the kinds of issue we are likely to face,” Pachauri said in post-publication comments on the report.
The synthesis report forms the final part of “Climate Change 2007”, the IPCC’s report. The other three parts were released earlier this year and covered the physical science of climate change; impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and ways to mitigate climate change.
The IPCC was awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize jointly with former US Vice-President Al Gore “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”.
Climate change action gets into fast lane
“Better late than never.” With that the participants heaved a sigh of relief in Valencia, Spain after a marathon 24- hour session ending November 16 as the compromise 20-page Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) document emerged to act as a manual on how to tackle global warming and set the tone for a crucial United Nations (UN) climate conference next month in Bali, Indonesia.
Officially unveiling the report in Valencia, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon pointed out that the IPCC report states that climate change is “unequivocal” and may bring “abrupt and irreversible” impacts.Fresh from a fact-finding mission to Antarctica and South America, Ban cautioned, “All humanity must assume responsibility for these treasures,” saying, “I come to you humbled after seeing some of the most precious treasures of our planet threatened by humanity’s own hand.” “Let us recognise that the effects of climate change affect us all, and that they have become so severe and so sweeping that only urgent global action will do. We are all in this together - we must work together,” Ban added.
In Brussels, the seat of the European Union, the untiring champion of the fight against climate change, it was hailed as “vital reading for decision makers,” by top EU officials. European Union Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas said in a statement, “The Fourth Assessment Report is a milestone in our scientific knowledge about climate change and the grave threats global warming poses to the planet.”
Dimas said, “The report’s findings amount to a stark warning that the world must act fast to slash greenhouse gas emissions if we are to prevent climate change from reaching devastating levels. The good news is that it also shows that deep emission cuts are both technologically feasible and economically affordable.”
He added: “This synthesis report is vital reading for decisionmakers everywhere ahead of the UN climate change conference in Bali starting in just over two weeks. It fully supports the EU policy that global warming must be limited to no more than 2ºC above the pre-industrial temperature. The global community must respond to this scientific call for action by agreeing in Bali to launch negotiations on a comprehensive and ambitious new global climate agreement. Efforts will be needed by all major emitters if we are to have a chance of controlling climate change before it is too late.”
Reiterating its commitment, the European Commission listed the key elements of EU action:- To reduce greenhouse gas emissions by at least 20 percent below 1990 levels by 2020, that will be strengthened to 30 percent reduction in the context of a fair global agreement - A firm target to increase the use of renewable energy to 20 percent by 2020- A broad range of measures to improve energy efficiency by 20 percent by 2020- Further evolution and strengthening of the EU’s emissions trading scheme;- An ambitious limit to CO2 emissions from cars- A framework for introducing Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) in power production- Development of an effective adaptation strategy
Moreover, the United States, which has earned the wrath of climate change campaigners for not doing enough, did participate along with nearly 150 countries to nod the compromise report through after five days of haggling.
Rajendra Pachauri, an Indian scientist who heads IPCC warned that even if global emissions are curbed and the present levels of CO2 in the atmosphere stayed at the same level there would be a rise between 0.4 and 1.4 metres of the present day sea-levels simply because water expands as it warms.
“If you add to this the melting of some of the ice bodies on Earth, this gives a picture of the kinds of issue we are likely to face,” Pachauri said in post-publication comments on the report.
The synthesis report forms the final part of “Climate Change 2007”, the IPCC’s report. The other three parts were released earlier this year and covered the physical science of climate change; impacts, adaptation and vulnerability and ways to mitigate climate change.
The IPCC was awarded this year’s Nobel Peace Prize jointly with former US Vice-President Al Gore “for their efforts to build up and disseminate greater knowledge about man-made climate change and to lay the foundations for the measures that are needed to counteract such change”.
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Gas era set to dawn in India
Ships equipped with re-gasification gear an answer
Power shortages leading to blackouts are already taking their toll on production, and then the cumulative effect is filtering down to export markets. That’s the scene blurring grand visions of making India a manufacturing hub to alleviate poverty, which keeps more than two-thirds of the rural population engaged in a vicious cycle of an agricultural sector dependent on weather unpredictability.
With an economic boom touching nine percent over the last few years showing no sign of slowing down, India’s insatiable hunger for energy has not been matched by a proportionate increase in supply over the years. Estimates point that India’s energy needs are set to grow by 40 percent, moving it from sixth slot to fourth position in the world’s top consuming nations by 2012.
“Cleaner burning and more efficient than coal,” coupled with the fact that tonnes of stranded gas around the world are just looking for a market, natural gas seems to be the answer to the ever-increasing demand for power in the present Indian environs, where the ways and means to provide sustainable and reliable solutions are far from clear.
Government figures show that the country’s domestic gas supply is 65 million standard cubic metres per day, while demand stands at 231 mmscmd and the projections put it to rise to 313 mmscmd by 2011-2012. India’s Planning Commission in its approach paper to its 11th Five-Year Plan that an ongoing sequence since it was launched five decades ago identified that among other factors, “... above all, power supply are not comparable to those prevalent in our competitor countries.”
Warning that, “... this gap must be filled within the next five to 10 years if our enterprises are to compete effectively,” the paper stressed that, today, Indian companies are not asking for state protection but at least, “expect a level playing field.” It may be noted that although industrial units are savvy about their own power plants, the acute lack of feeding fuel remains a major stumbling block. With focus shifting to cleaner industrialisation, there is a gas era ready to come of age, but latest government figures show the country failed to import only a third of the gas it wanted in 2006-2007.
One of the major reasons is the inadequate infrastructure in the country to handle gas imports as only two of the planned four terminals for LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) re-gasification viz. Shell’s Hazira terminal and Petronet’s Dahej terminal, are operating while the Kochi terminal and the Dabhol are yet to get commissioned. These special terminals are needed as gas is shipped in liquid form and needs to be re-gasified when the ship berths. Lack of such specialised terminals left not only the power sector but also the fertilizer sector literally gasping for gas.
The geo-political situation around the world has cast its long dark shadows on the Indian government’s options to get international pipeline projects like the Iran-Pakistan-India, the Myanmar-India and the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India to deliver.
According to tough-talking sector observers, the first one has an American negative influence on it, the second seems to be lost to Chinese efforts, while the third is losing to its preferred sister project moving toward Russia on its journey to the more lucrative market of Europe, giving leverage to Moscow over Brussels in energy matters.
Dashing any hopes of salvaging the Myanmar-India gas pipeline project, the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, ONGC – Videsh Limited or OVL scrapped the project in the footsteps of the Gas Authority of India Limited, GAIL. R S Butola, Managing Director of OVL said in New Delhi on May 14: “Since Bangladesh has disagreed to our proposal, the project is now becoming a costly affair while China is trying hard to procure gas from Myanmar through a pipeline because the country has been suffering from a huge energy crisis for long.”
He ruled out any further bid to get back the pipeline project without a cost-benefit analysis. Such a delayed scenario for pipelines leaves the door wide open for imports of gas through ports. The Indian west coast is already dotted with ports which have emerged as leading container handlers with overstretched capacity and the time is ripe for the eastern ports of Kolkota, Haldia and Paradeep to take the initiative to grab this golden opportunity to become a hub of gas imports to meet the energy needs of the parent state, and for the onward transport to other parts of the country.
Usually, it will cost around USD 500 million to equip each port with a re-gasification terminal and a number of years of construction before gas starts flowing to consumers, but pundits offer a new pioneering working model showing a simple way out. With tailor-made delivery-driven solutions catering to exponentially increasing demands for gas, there are technologically advanced vessels which have the facility to re-gasify LNG onboard and discharge natural gas into the pipeline system through an “Energy Bridge” process. The time frame for opening the tap to consumers for this unique way of the re-gasification equipped vessels docking at the ports needs just a year from the time the final decision is taken to when work starts to install various discharge points like a buoy (deepwater port), a turret (shallow water port) or quayside.
Moreover, this also takes care of concerns of vocal environmentalists who have been campaigning against new terminals aimed to boosting imports of LNG. One market expert on India predicted that the move can lead to frenzied investment from abroad in Bengal for constructing short delivery pipelines to industrial units across the region. Calling it “the financial backbone of the future for Bengal (an eastern Indian state),” which is a state striving to transform its poor agro-economy into an industry powered financial giant in the coming years, the expert said in Brussels, “The state can contribute with tax rebates during high risk initial phases with applicant shipping companies committing to help in getting gas contracts at affordable prices.” Time will show if the industry and the state can take advantage of this opportunity to agree on terms of development of gas inlets and beyond.
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on May 19, 2007 - Issue : 730
Power shortages leading to blackouts are already taking their toll on production, and then the cumulative effect is filtering down to export markets. That’s the scene blurring grand visions of making India a manufacturing hub to alleviate poverty, which keeps more than two-thirds of the rural population engaged in a vicious cycle of an agricultural sector dependent on weather unpredictability.
With an economic boom touching nine percent over the last few years showing no sign of slowing down, India’s insatiable hunger for energy has not been matched by a proportionate increase in supply over the years. Estimates point that India’s energy needs are set to grow by 40 percent, moving it from sixth slot to fourth position in the world’s top consuming nations by 2012.
“Cleaner burning and more efficient than coal,” coupled with the fact that tonnes of stranded gas around the world are just looking for a market, natural gas seems to be the answer to the ever-increasing demand for power in the present Indian environs, where the ways and means to provide sustainable and reliable solutions are far from clear.
Government figures show that the country’s domestic gas supply is 65 million standard cubic metres per day, while demand stands at 231 mmscmd and the projections put it to rise to 313 mmscmd by 2011-2012. India’s Planning Commission in its approach paper to its 11th Five-Year Plan that an ongoing sequence since it was launched five decades ago identified that among other factors, “... above all, power supply are not comparable to those prevalent in our competitor countries.”
Warning that, “... this gap must be filled within the next five to 10 years if our enterprises are to compete effectively,” the paper stressed that, today, Indian companies are not asking for state protection but at least, “expect a level playing field.” It may be noted that although industrial units are savvy about their own power plants, the acute lack of feeding fuel remains a major stumbling block. With focus shifting to cleaner industrialisation, there is a gas era ready to come of age, but latest government figures show the country failed to import only a third of the gas it wanted in 2006-2007.
One of the major reasons is the inadequate infrastructure in the country to handle gas imports as only two of the planned four terminals for LNG (Liquefied Natural Gas) re-gasification viz. Shell’s Hazira terminal and Petronet’s Dahej terminal, are operating while the Kochi terminal and the Dabhol are yet to get commissioned. These special terminals are needed as gas is shipped in liquid form and needs to be re-gasified when the ship berths. Lack of such specialised terminals left not only the power sector but also the fertilizer sector literally gasping for gas.
The geo-political situation around the world has cast its long dark shadows on the Indian government’s options to get international pipeline projects like the Iran-Pakistan-India, the Myanmar-India and the Turkmenistan-Afghanistan-Pakistan-India to deliver.
According to tough-talking sector observers, the first one has an American negative influence on it, the second seems to be lost to Chinese efforts, while the third is losing to its preferred sister project moving toward Russia on its journey to the more lucrative market of Europe, giving leverage to Moscow over Brussels in energy matters.
Dashing any hopes of salvaging the Myanmar-India gas pipeline project, the Oil and Natural Gas Corporation Limited, ONGC – Videsh Limited or OVL scrapped the project in the footsteps of the Gas Authority of India Limited, GAIL. R S Butola, Managing Director of OVL said in New Delhi on May 14: “Since Bangladesh has disagreed to our proposal, the project is now becoming a costly affair while China is trying hard to procure gas from Myanmar through a pipeline because the country has been suffering from a huge energy crisis for long.”
He ruled out any further bid to get back the pipeline project without a cost-benefit analysis. Such a delayed scenario for pipelines leaves the door wide open for imports of gas through ports. The Indian west coast is already dotted with ports which have emerged as leading container handlers with overstretched capacity and the time is ripe for the eastern ports of Kolkota, Haldia and Paradeep to take the initiative to grab this golden opportunity to become a hub of gas imports to meet the energy needs of the parent state, and for the onward transport to other parts of the country.
Usually, it will cost around USD 500 million to equip each port with a re-gasification terminal and a number of years of construction before gas starts flowing to consumers, but pundits offer a new pioneering working model showing a simple way out. With tailor-made delivery-driven solutions catering to exponentially increasing demands for gas, there are technologically advanced vessels which have the facility to re-gasify LNG onboard and discharge natural gas into the pipeline system through an “Energy Bridge” process. The time frame for opening the tap to consumers for this unique way of the re-gasification equipped vessels docking at the ports needs just a year from the time the final decision is taken to when work starts to install various discharge points like a buoy (deepwater port), a turret (shallow water port) or quayside.
Moreover, this also takes care of concerns of vocal environmentalists who have been campaigning against new terminals aimed to boosting imports of LNG. One market expert on India predicted that the move can lead to frenzied investment from abroad in Bengal for constructing short delivery pipelines to industrial units across the region. Calling it “the financial backbone of the future for Bengal (an eastern Indian state),” which is a state striving to transform its poor agro-economy into an industry powered financial giant in the coming years, the expert said in Brussels, “The state can contribute with tax rebates during high risk initial phases with applicant shipping companies committing to help in getting gas contracts at affordable prices.” Time will show if the industry and the state can take advantage of this opportunity to agree on terms of development of gas inlets and beyond.
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on May 19, 2007 - Issue : 730
“Enough is Enough,” warns Morgantini
On the occasion of “40 years of occupation and no end in sight” for the Palestinian people, Luisa Morgantini, the Vice President of European Parliament last week spoke at length to Tejinder Singh (Tito), strongly denouncing the Israeli’s indiscriminate attacks against civilians as representing a serious breach of the principles of the Geneva Convention amounting to a war crime and called for an international UN force to protect civilians.
The Italian firebrand MEP said: “It’s very important to have one (UN force) but not forever. We need international UN peacekeeping troops to be sent to Gaza and West Bank. The international community has a duty to protect civilians, to stop the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, put an end to house demolitions and the destruction of infrastructure.”
Calling the situation as “a tragedy for both Palestinians and Israelis if there is not a rapid solution,” Morgantini said, “This month is 40 years of occupation and the Israeli occupation of West Bank and Gaza is extremely cruel and has really taken away freedom of Palestinian people with the Wall which in the beginning was build for security reasons, blocking the people; it’s a Wall that penetrates deep inside the Palestinian territories and takes away land from what should be a Palestinian state, the fertile land of the villages.”
Portraying a factual image of Israel as a “divided society,” she said: “On the other hand, Israeli society is facing a lot of problems including corruption, imagine President of the country being accused of rape, one of the ministers also accused of rape and many accusations of corruption.”
Stressing the importance of mutual trust and recognition to find a lasting solution to the ongoing sanguinary crisis, Morgantini called the international community “to recognise the democratically elected government of Palestine and to support the efforts made by all Palestinian political forces and President Mahoumud Abbas in their efforts to stop Palestinian militia groups firing rockets on Israeli towns and people.”
Accepting the fact that there are elements in Palestinian society that need taming she said, “Launching rockets is an criminal act on civilian population but the Israelis are responding to these acts through collective punishment, killing children, families, destroying homes and above all putting Palestinians in the jails.”
The Palestinian elections were held in a free and fair democratic manner and the outcome must be respected by law-abiding democratic governments argued Morgantini saying, “After 40 years the occupation continues, we have been talking about a two-state two-people solution since 1980 and we still have not even recognised a democratically-elected Palestinian government,” she said, calling for the EU to “show that it truly believes in international law.”
About the upcoming Quartet meeting, MEP said, “The real player in Middle East is United States. If it’s true what Condoleezza Rice is saying now that Palestinian state should exist along with Israel, then I am sure that Israeli government will accept and start to discuss seriously on negotiations.” “Normally Israelis say that there is no partner on Palestinian side for peace talks but as a matter of fact, President Abbas has been elected by the Palestinians on a clear platform: no violence, Palestinian state and peace with Israel. So Abbas is quite ready to have negotiations and Palestinian government is ready too now. The only way is to convince the Israeli government that it’s in their interests that they have to make peace.” “Palestinians have a Unity government based on a programme that clearly states that the government recognise agreements signed by PLO with recognition of occupied territories and a cease fire,” she said.
Asked to comment on Israel’s withholding of Palestinian customs duties, Morgantini urged the EU and the Quartet to force Israel to return the funds confiscated from Palestine. MEP lambasted Israel saying, “It is unacceptable that Israel is still withholding Palestinian tax and customs revenues and aggravating the Palestinian humanitarian crisis.” “The funds must be immediately transferred,” she demanded.
She commented, “In the European parliament while discussing Darfur, members are demanding sanctions against Sudanese government. What about sanctions against Israeli government which is violating human rights everyday and there are 11,000 Palestinian prisoners among them 370 children and 200 women?” Saying, “Gaza is a total prison,” Morgantini cited the instance of the border opening with Egypt “for only 74 days out of 365 days last year.”
Morgantini demanded the need for using Article two of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, according to which, in the case of violations of human rights the agreement should be suspended and she pointed that there was “no doubt about the human rights violations committed by the Israeli government.”“Enough is enough,” MEP Morgantini concluded urging the Europeans to step out of “guilt consciousness of the Holocaust,” and step forward for values of “justice and freedom for everyone” and to be “very honest with the Israeli government.”
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on June 9, 2007 - Issue : 733
The Italian firebrand MEP said: “It’s very important to have one (UN force) but not forever. We need international UN peacekeeping troops to be sent to Gaza and West Bank. The international community has a duty to protect civilians, to stop the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories, put an end to house demolitions and the destruction of infrastructure.”
Calling the situation as “a tragedy for both Palestinians and Israelis if there is not a rapid solution,” Morgantini said, “This month is 40 years of occupation and the Israeli occupation of West Bank and Gaza is extremely cruel and has really taken away freedom of Palestinian people with the Wall which in the beginning was build for security reasons, blocking the people; it’s a Wall that penetrates deep inside the Palestinian territories and takes away land from what should be a Palestinian state, the fertile land of the villages.”
Portraying a factual image of Israel as a “divided society,” she said: “On the other hand, Israeli society is facing a lot of problems including corruption, imagine President of the country being accused of rape, one of the ministers also accused of rape and many accusations of corruption.”
Stressing the importance of mutual trust and recognition to find a lasting solution to the ongoing sanguinary crisis, Morgantini called the international community “to recognise the democratically elected government of Palestine and to support the efforts made by all Palestinian political forces and President Mahoumud Abbas in their efforts to stop Palestinian militia groups firing rockets on Israeli towns and people.”
Accepting the fact that there are elements in Palestinian society that need taming she said, “Launching rockets is an criminal act on civilian population but the Israelis are responding to these acts through collective punishment, killing children, families, destroying homes and above all putting Palestinians in the jails.”
The Palestinian elections were held in a free and fair democratic manner and the outcome must be respected by law-abiding democratic governments argued Morgantini saying, “After 40 years the occupation continues, we have been talking about a two-state two-people solution since 1980 and we still have not even recognised a democratically-elected Palestinian government,” she said, calling for the EU to “show that it truly believes in international law.”
About the upcoming Quartet meeting, MEP said, “The real player in Middle East is United States. If it’s true what Condoleezza Rice is saying now that Palestinian state should exist along with Israel, then I am sure that Israeli government will accept and start to discuss seriously on negotiations.” “Normally Israelis say that there is no partner on Palestinian side for peace talks but as a matter of fact, President Abbas has been elected by the Palestinians on a clear platform: no violence, Palestinian state and peace with Israel. So Abbas is quite ready to have negotiations and Palestinian government is ready too now. The only way is to convince the Israeli government that it’s in their interests that they have to make peace.” “Palestinians have a Unity government based on a programme that clearly states that the government recognise agreements signed by PLO with recognition of occupied territories and a cease fire,” she said.
Asked to comment on Israel’s withholding of Palestinian customs duties, Morgantini urged the EU and the Quartet to force Israel to return the funds confiscated from Palestine. MEP lambasted Israel saying, “It is unacceptable that Israel is still withholding Palestinian tax and customs revenues and aggravating the Palestinian humanitarian crisis.” “The funds must be immediately transferred,” she demanded.
She commented, “In the European parliament while discussing Darfur, members are demanding sanctions against Sudanese government. What about sanctions against Israeli government which is violating human rights everyday and there are 11,000 Palestinian prisoners among them 370 children and 200 women?” Saying, “Gaza is a total prison,” Morgantini cited the instance of the border opening with Egypt “for only 74 days out of 365 days last year.”
Morgantini demanded the need for using Article two of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, according to which, in the case of violations of human rights the agreement should be suspended and she pointed that there was “no doubt about the human rights violations committed by the Israeli government.”“Enough is enough,” MEP Morgantini concluded urging the Europeans to step out of “guilt consciousness of the Holocaust,” and step forward for values of “justice and freedom for everyone” and to be “very honest with the Israeli government.”
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on June 9, 2007 - Issue : 733
Banana sector gets slippery
Judgment day arriving as industry awaits Kroes’ moves
Investigations take time and when it comes to investigating in environs full of banana peels, the going gets slippery, slowing down proceedings further. There was, however no slip last week on the part of Jonathan Todd, commission spokesman for competition commissioner Neelie Kroes as he told journalists, “Anti-trust inquiry is ongoing.”
Todd was replying to a question about the latest status of a “cartel probe” launched two years ago into a suspected cartel of banana wholesalers. In 2005, Kroes team had raided the offices of Europe’s largest fruit distributors after Chiquita, the world’s biggest producer of bananas blew the whistle on an alleged cartel in the European banana markets.
At the time, Fyffes of Ireland, Dole and Del Monte of the US had admitted that they had been among the targets of the raids while the European commission had confirmed the “unannounced inspections” at the premises of several producers and distributors of bananas and pineapples in Germany, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Ireland.
“The Commission has reason to believe that the companies concerned may have violated Article 81 of the EC Treaty, which prohibits price fixing and market sharing practices,” the commission statement had said clarifying that raids did not mean that the targeted companies are guilty adding that a full-scale inquiry would be carried out.
The investigation was launched at the instance of Chiquita, based in Cincinnati in the US when it had it had informed the EU competition authorities after the management became aware that several of its employees had been sharing price information with rival companies for “many years.”
Commenting on the inquiry, reliable sources in the European commission and European banana industry sector told New Europe that the regulators are targeting the five biggest banana companies – Chiquita, Del Monte and Dole of the United States, plus Noboa of Ecuador and Fyffes of Ireland for an illegal cartel activity.
The sources also confirmed recent media reports that at the end of two years the European commission has more concrete information and formal charges may be initiated before the end of the current year.
Although Commissioner Kroes has broken many records during her tenure for imposing fines on cartels, the market observers feel that the fines, if imposed may stay within the precedent cases of about 10 percent of annual sales. Moreover, it may take months before the case comes to an end as the accused firms would have several months time period to defend themselves.
One market pundit alleged that the timing is coinciding with the ongoing transatlantic banana war which got reignited last year when Ecuador was joined by the US, Columbia and Panama to open another tug-of-war a decade later.
December 15, 2006 saw the first day of the proceedings at Geneva of revival of the “1990s banana wars” with the then-winner Ecuador coming back to haunt the European Union. Ecuador, the world’s largest banana exporter, complained to the WTO against the EU’s single tariff of 176 Euro that came into force on January 1, 2006, terming it “high.”
Last year, while negotiating for a single tariff system to modify its complex web of duties and quotas for imports, the European Commission had suggested EU duties of 230 Euro and then scaling them down to 187 Euro, but WTO panels had rejected the proposals arguing that those were discriminatory against Latin American (Latam) nations. Out of that deadlock emerged the figure of 176 Euro, but the conflict simmered on.
Even after the introduction of the new EU single tariff system, there was widespread dissatisfaction, and Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere got into the driver’s seat to find a political solution based on a thorough monitoring of the EU banana imports and various price systems in force.
But, after waiting nearly for a year, Ecuador decided to go ahead with the WTO route and on November 23, 2006 was joined by Colombia as a third party. Panama and the US followed and more countries are set to join in the fray according to sector insiders.
The EU’s current banana import policy significantly differentiates access treatment as a tariff-quota volume of 775,000 tonnes is exclusively reserved for bananas of ACP origin. ACP bananas within the quota enter duty-free (i.e., at a 176 Euro/tonne margin of preference), with unlimited ACP over-quota access authorised at a tariff of 176 Euro/tonne. On the other hand, an “autonomous” tariff of 176 Euro/tonne (a rate more than double the previously-applicable rate of 75 Euro/tonne) applies to all other bananas.
Bananas are the most important agricultural product in Ecuador, and its exports account for 25 percent of all Ecuador’s agricultural exports. Some 97 percent of all banana output is aimed for the European market. On the other hand, in Europe it is a “sensitive” commodity and there is a protection regime for the sector.
While bananas grown within the bloc account for only 16 percent of the total EU supply, production is important to the Spain’s Canary Islands, the French overseas departments of Martinique and Guadeloupe and Portugal’s Madeira and Azores islands.
Europeans eat some 4.6 million tonnes of bananas every year, making the bloc the world’s biggest banana market. Over two-thirds of the fruits consumed come from Latin America and a further 17 percent from Africa and Caribbean countries.
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on June 16, 2007 - Issue : 734
Investigations take time and when it comes to investigating in environs full of banana peels, the going gets slippery, slowing down proceedings further. There was, however no slip last week on the part of Jonathan Todd, commission spokesman for competition commissioner Neelie Kroes as he told journalists, “Anti-trust inquiry is ongoing.”
Todd was replying to a question about the latest status of a “cartel probe” launched two years ago into a suspected cartel of banana wholesalers. In 2005, Kroes team had raided the offices of Europe’s largest fruit distributors after Chiquita, the world’s biggest producer of bananas blew the whistle on an alleged cartel in the European banana markets.
At the time, Fyffes of Ireland, Dole and Del Monte of the US had admitted that they had been among the targets of the raids while the European commission had confirmed the “unannounced inspections” at the premises of several producers and distributors of bananas and pineapples in Germany, Belgium, the United Kingdom and Ireland.
“The Commission has reason to believe that the companies concerned may have violated Article 81 of the EC Treaty, which prohibits price fixing and market sharing practices,” the commission statement had said clarifying that raids did not mean that the targeted companies are guilty adding that a full-scale inquiry would be carried out.
The investigation was launched at the instance of Chiquita, based in Cincinnati in the US when it had it had informed the EU competition authorities after the management became aware that several of its employees had been sharing price information with rival companies for “many years.”
Commenting on the inquiry, reliable sources in the European commission and European banana industry sector told New Europe that the regulators are targeting the five biggest banana companies – Chiquita, Del Monte and Dole of the United States, plus Noboa of Ecuador and Fyffes of Ireland for an illegal cartel activity.
The sources also confirmed recent media reports that at the end of two years the European commission has more concrete information and formal charges may be initiated before the end of the current year.
Although Commissioner Kroes has broken many records during her tenure for imposing fines on cartels, the market observers feel that the fines, if imposed may stay within the precedent cases of about 10 percent of annual sales. Moreover, it may take months before the case comes to an end as the accused firms would have several months time period to defend themselves.
One market pundit alleged that the timing is coinciding with the ongoing transatlantic banana war which got reignited last year when Ecuador was joined by the US, Columbia and Panama to open another tug-of-war a decade later.
December 15, 2006 saw the first day of the proceedings at Geneva of revival of the “1990s banana wars” with the then-winner Ecuador coming back to haunt the European Union. Ecuador, the world’s largest banana exporter, complained to the WTO against the EU’s single tariff of 176 Euro that came into force on January 1, 2006, terming it “high.”
Last year, while negotiating for a single tariff system to modify its complex web of duties and quotas for imports, the European Commission had suggested EU duties of 230 Euro and then scaling them down to 187 Euro, but WTO panels had rejected the proposals arguing that those were discriminatory against Latin American (Latam) nations. Out of that deadlock emerged the figure of 176 Euro, but the conflict simmered on.
Even after the introduction of the new EU single tariff system, there was widespread dissatisfaction, and Norwegian Foreign Minister Jonas Gahr Stoere got into the driver’s seat to find a political solution based on a thorough monitoring of the EU banana imports and various price systems in force.
But, after waiting nearly for a year, Ecuador decided to go ahead with the WTO route and on November 23, 2006 was joined by Colombia as a third party. Panama and the US followed and more countries are set to join in the fray according to sector insiders.
The EU’s current banana import policy significantly differentiates access treatment as a tariff-quota volume of 775,000 tonnes is exclusively reserved for bananas of ACP origin. ACP bananas within the quota enter duty-free (i.e., at a 176 Euro/tonne margin of preference), with unlimited ACP over-quota access authorised at a tariff of 176 Euro/tonne. On the other hand, an “autonomous” tariff of 176 Euro/tonne (a rate more than double the previously-applicable rate of 75 Euro/tonne) applies to all other bananas.
Bananas are the most important agricultural product in Ecuador, and its exports account for 25 percent of all Ecuador’s agricultural exports. Some 97 percent of all banana output is aimed for the European market. On the other hand, in Europe it is a “sensitive” commodity and there is a protection regime for the sector.
While bananas grown within the bloc account for only 16 percent of the total EU supply, production is important to the Spain’s Canary Islands, the French overseas departments of Martinique and Guadeloupe and Portugal’s Madeira and Azores islands.
Europeans eat some 4.6 million tonnes of bananas every year, making the bloc the world’s biggest banana market. Over two-thirds of the fruits consumed come from Latin America and a further 17 percent from Africa and Caribbean countries.
Written for New Europe, the European Weekly on June 16, 2007 - Issue : 734
Interview with Jean Lemierre, President, EBRD
On the sidelines of attending “The European Bank for Reconstruction and Development: Focus on Eastern and South Eastern Europe,” an event organised last week at the Parliamentary Assembly of Council of Europe, Jean Lemierre, President of the EBRD spoke to Tejinder Singh (Tito) about the EBRD’s expanding role with a new policy to go further east and south in a changing world since its inception in 1991 when communism was crumbling in central and eastern Europe and ex-soviet countries needed support to nurture a new private sector in a democratic environment.
Q: With a “no-dividend” policy for 2006 although mentioning record profits, how strong is the EBRD position to expand its business?
A: The decision to put all of the profits for 2006 into reserves was fully consistent with the new strategy for the bank unveiled in May 2006 which foresees a shift in the bank’s activities further east and south and the assumption of greater risks. The bank needs these reserves in order to prepare for possible greater risks as we increasingly step up the pace of our investments, especially in the former Soviet Union and in the Balkans. Business volume in 2006 was 4.9 billion Euro and we expect roughly the same magnitude of investment in 2007.
Q: What is your opinion on how best to use the profits?
A: The final decision on the use of the profits will ultimately be taken by our shareholders but the debate on how to allocate income started at our Annual Meeting in Kazan this year. This issue needs a thorough debate and the discussions will continue until our next Annual Meeting in Kiev in 2008. There are three options under consideration. In addition to adding further to reserves there will be the option of using funds to support the bank’s activities, in areas such as providing technical assistance, training, supporting nuclear decommissioning projects and also supporting the bank’s activities in promoting energy efficiency. And then there is the option of returning some of the profits to the shareholders. The shareholders will take this decision.
Q: You are extending your role to Balkans and the Commonwealth of Independent States. How far you ready to go in Mediterranean other than EU members?
A: An expansion outside of the current countries of operation is not under discussion.
Q: How soft are the EBRD loans and what kinds of activities are being financed?
A: Not soft at all. The EBRD does not provide soft loans. If it did it would be competing with the private sector which is precisely what the Bank does not do. The bank invests either with loans or with equity stakes, usually in projects where the commercial sector is either not prepared to go at all or not prepared to invest alone. By investing in such projects the EBRD provides what we call “additionality.” The projects are aimed at promoting the process of economic transition, whether by working to improve corporate governance, possibly by taking a seat on a company board, or by helping to develop management or to support efforts to cut energy costs via energy efficiency measures. The bank is active across all sectors. Development of a vibrant financial sector is particularly important to the development of a market economy overall. But we are also active in working on infrastructure projects to help remove the bottlenecks that are obstacles to economic development. And we support private sector industry, either by direct loans or by loans to banks which then act as intermediaries and lend on to micro and small and medium enterprises.
Q: How much does politics play a role in loan dispensing? Does EBRD give any consideration to human rights records of the countries?
A: Politics and human rights do play a role. This is stipulated in Article 1 of the bank’s founding treaty which says the Bank will foster the transition towards open market-oriented economies and promote private and entrepreneurial initiative in countries “committed to and applying the principles of multiparty democracy, pluralism and market economics.” Where this is an issue we restrict our activities largely to investments purely in the private sector. And we also use policy dialogue to help produce positive developments.
Q: What is your vision for EBRD in coming years?
A: The vision is to carry out our role in supporting the further transformation of the economies in the areas where we are active; To see more countries in Europe preparing the way to accession to the European Union and benefiting from that membership; To see other countries increasingly becoming an integral part of the global economy, by joining the World Trade Organisation and playing as an equal partner in the global economic arena; To see in oil and gas rich countries a greater diversification of the economy to build for a sustainable future.
The process of transition has been hard. The collapse of the previous system was a huge shock. The pain endured by many people was great. The vision is also to see all people in the region ultimately benefiting from this huge challenge.
Interview with: Jean Lemierre taken at the end of June 2007 for New Europe, the European Weekly - Issue : 736
Q: With a “no-dividend” policy for 2006 although mentioning record profits, how strong is the EBRD position to expand its business?
A: The decision to put all of the profits for 2006 into reserves was fully consistent with the new strategy for the bank unveiled in May 2006 which foresees a shift in the bank’s activities further east and south and the assumption of greater risks. The bank needs these reserves in order to prepare for possible greater risks as we increasingly step up the pace of our investments, especially in the former Soviet Union and in the Balkans. Business volume in 2006 was 4.9 billion Euro and we expect roughly the same magnitude of investment in 2007.
Q: What is your opinion on how best to use the profits?
A: The final decision on the use of the profits will ultimately be taken by our shareholders but the debate on how to allocate income started at our Annual Meeting in Kazan this year. This issue needs a thorough debate and the discussions will continue until our next Annual Meeting in Kiev in 2008. There are three options under consideration. In addition to adding further to reserves there will be the option of using funds to support the bank’s activities, in areas such as providing technical assistance, training, supporting nuclear decommissioning projects and also supporting the bank’s activities in promoting energy efficiency. And then there is the option of returning some of the profits to the shareholders. The shareholders will take this decision.
Q: You are extending your role to Balkans and the Commonwealth of Independent States. How far you ready to go in Mediterranean other than EU members?
A: An expansion outside of the current countries of operation is not under discussion.
Q: How soft are the EBRD loans and what kinds of activities are being financed?
A: Not soft at all. The EBRD does not provide soft loans. If it did it would be competing with the private sector which is precisely what the Bank does not do. The bank invests either with loans or with equity stakes, usually in projects where the commercial sector is either not prepared to go at all or not prepared to invest alone. By investing in such projects the EBRD provides what we call “additionality.” The projects are aimed at promoting the process of economic transition, whether by working to improve corporate governance, possibly by taking a seat on a company board, or by helping to develop management or to support efforts to cut energy costs via energy efficiency measures. The bank is active across all sectors. Development of a vibrant financial sector is particularly important to the development of a market economy overall. But we are also active in working on infrastructure projects to help remove the bottlenecks that are obstacles to economic development. And we support private sector industry, either by direct loans or by loans to banks which then act as intermediaries and lend on to micro and small and medium enterprises.
Q: How much does politics play a role in loan dispensing? Does EBRD give any consideration to human rights records of the countries?
A: Politics and human rights do play a role. This is stipulated in Article 1 of the bank’s founding treaty which says the Bank will foster the transition towards open market-oriented economies and promote private and entrepreneurial initiative in countries “committed to and applying the principles of multiparty democracy, pluralism and market economics.” Where this is an issue we restrict our activities largely to investments purely in the private sector. And we also use policy dialogue to help produce positive developments.
Q: What is your vision for EBRD in coming years?
A: The vision is to carry out our role in supporting the further transformation of the economies in the areas where we are active; To see more countries in Europe preparing the way to accession to the European Union and benefiting from that membership; To see other countries increasingly becoming an integral part of the global economy, by joining the World Trade Organisation and playing as an equal partner in the global economic arena; To see in oil and gas rich countries a greater diversification of the economy to build for a sustainable future.
The process of transition has been hard. The collapse of the previous system was a huge shock. The pain endured by many people was great. The vision is also to see all people in the region ultimately benefiting from this huge challenge.
Interview with: Jean Lemierre taken at the end of June 2007 for New Europe, the European Weekly - Issue : 736
EU expresses `surprise` as US joins `Banana War`
Have patience, do not react and this too shall pass! The mantra advocated by many in the labyrinths of power in Brussels seems to have slipped badly as eleven years down the road the "Banana Wars" of late 90s are back knocking on the doors of the European Commission. The US, latest to join the fray at World Trade Organisation said in a statement, "The US request relates to the EU's apparent failure to implement the WTO rulings in a 1996 proceeding initiated by Ecuador, Guatemala, Honduras, Mexico and America."
Launching the formal step saying, "We are hopeful that this formal step will facilitate the removal of that discrimination," the US Trade Representative Susan C Schwab added, "We regret that efforts between the EU and its Latin American trading partners to negotiate a solution to the banana issue have not been successful. We share the concern of Ecuador and several other Latin American banana exporters regarding the continued existence of a discriminatory tariff rate quota in the EU's current banana regime."
The US statement pointed out that WTO ruling had said "the EU's regime discriminates against bananas originating in Latin American countries and against distributors of such bananas, including several US companies," adding "The EU was under an obligation to bring its banana regime into compliance with its WTO obligations by January 1999."
After the 1996 WTO ruling, the EU had committed to bring its tariff-quota regime for banana in compliance with the ruling no later than January 1, 2006, said the US statement, lamenting the fact that "the EU banana regime put in place on January 1, 2006 features a zero-duty tariff quota that is allocated exclusively to bananas from African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. Bananas of Latin American origin do not have access to this duty-free tariff rate quota and are subject, instead, to a 176 Euro/ton duty."
The European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development Mariann Fischer Boel introduced a personal element of surprise to a more than decade old dispute last week.
Answering a question from New Europe about the new WTO banana dispute with US joining others, the Commissioner wondered why at the first place the US is interested in banana sector as it is not a banana producer but then she answered her own doubts with the mention of Chiquita as the possible cause for US to intervene. The Commissioner however added that the EU will look into the matter and take appropriate steps.
Chiquita, based in Cincinnati in the US could not be contacted for their immediate reaction but European banana sector sources told New Europe that other US exporters including Del Monte and Dole are also affected adding that the European Commissioner has her facts correct that no bananas are grown in the US but in the trade circle of today's era of globalisation everyone is aware of the large farming interests of these leading world exporters globally especially in the Latin American region.
Coming back to the US request to WTO panel to review whether the EU banana import regime breaches the obligations of the international trade body, the EU this week in Geneva as a defending party may veto under WTO rules the request but the WTO will comply with the US request a month later unless the complaint is withdrawn.
The US is following the footsteps of Colombia and Panama which this year decided to follow the beaten track of Ecuador.
December 15, 2006 saw the first day of the proceedings at Geneva of revival of the "1990s banana wars" with the then-winner Ecuador coming back to haunt the European Union. Ecuador, the world's largest banana exporter, complained to the WTO against the EU's single tariff of 176 Euro that came into force on January 1, 2006, terming it "high."
Commenting on the decisions, Michael Mann, European commission spokesman for agriculture had said, "This is very regrettable. We had a consultation process going which we felt was making good progress."Over the past years negotiating for a single tariff system to modify its complex web of duties and quotas for imports, the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, had suggested EU duties of 230 Euro and then scaling them down to 187 Euro, but WTO panels had rejected the proposals arguing that those were discriminatory against Latin American (Latam) nations. Out of that deadlock emerged the figure of 176 Euro, but the conflict simmered on.
Eurostat data of the first quarter 2007 compared to the same period 2005 made it clear how Latam share compared to ACP banana growing countries is slipping down the banana ladder. The imports of the latter are climbing double as fast as their counterparts in Latin America.The EU's current banana import policy significantly differentiates access treatment as a tariff-quota volume of 775,000 tonnes is exclusively reserved for bananas of ACP origin. ACP bananas within the quota enter duty-free ( i.e., at a 176 Euro/tonne margin of preference), with unlimited ACP over-quota access authorised at a tariff of 176 Euro/tonne.
On the other hand, an "autonomous" tariff of 176 Euro/tonne (a rate more than double the previously-applicable rate of 75 Euro/tonne) applies to all other bananas.Prior to the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) May 15, 2007, Spain threatened to veto the EU-ACP commitments unless its domestic producers were better protected from an expected rise in banana imports. The fallout was immediately visible when the GAERC endorsed the commission proposal to fully open European to imports from the ACP, with phased-in access for rice and sugar but the banana sector was shelved.
Debating in early December last year in the European Parliament on the need for an assistance to EU farmers, Jean-Claude Fruteau, Member of European Parliament argued, "The assistance provided for banana producers in the EU is necessary in order to compensate for the dysfunctions within the world trade system, in particular the current gap between the social and environmental standards of European countries and those of Central and Latin American countries. To be effective, these internal regulatory measures need to be in line with external regulatory tools by increasing budget allocations as and when any decrease in the customs tariff occurs."
The MEP was pointing to the fact that money coming in through import tariffs goes in to fill the coffers of EU's Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) from where the money goes to EU farmers.Boel had said that the current system of handouts to banana farmers was hard to justify in world trade talks and that it needed to be brought in line with EU agricultural reforms in other sectors.
While bananas grown within the European bloc account for only 16 percent of the total EU supply, production is important to the Spain's Canary Islands, the French overseas departments of Martinique and Guadeloupe and Portugal's Madeira and Azores islands.Europeans eat some 4.6 million tonnes of bananas every year, making the bloc the world's biggest banana market.
Over two-thirds of the fruits consumed come from Latin America and a further 17 percent from Africa and Caribbean countries.To meet all these requests the only way out is to grant duty free quotas to all regions or countries but that seems difficult with the arrival of French President Nicolas Sarkozy for whom the big chunk of winning votes came from French farmers and traders. It may have been a coincidence that Sarkozy went for his post-victory yacht trip with Vincent Bolore whose companies are loading bananas for Europe in Ivory Coast, Ghana and Cameroun.
Written on July 9, 2007 for New Europe, the European Weekly - Issue : 737
Launching the formal step saying, "We are hopeful that this formal step will facilitate the removal of that discrimination," the US Trade Representative Susan C Schwab added, "We regret that efforts between the EU and its Latin American trading partners to negotiate a solution to the banana issue have not been successful. We share the concern of Ecuador and several other Latin American banana exporters regarding the continued existence of a discriminatory tariff rate quota in the EU's current banana regime."
The US statement pointed out that WTO ruling had said "the EU's regime discriminates against bananas originating in Latin American countries and against distributors of such bananas, including several US companies," adding "The EU was under an obligation to bring its banana regime into compliance with its WTO obligations by January 1999."
After the 1996 WTO ruling, the EU had committed to bring its tariff-quota regime for banana in compliance with the ruling no later than January 1, 2006, said the US statement, lamenting the fact that "the EU banana regime put in place on January 1, 2006 features a zero-duty tariff quota that is allocated exclusively to bananas from African, Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) countries. Bananas of Latin American origin do not have access to this duty-free tariff rate quota and are subject, instead, to a 176 Euro/ton duty."
The European Commissioner for Agriculture and Rural Development Mariann Fischer Boel introduced a personal element of surprise to a more than decade old dispute last week.
Answering a question from New Europe about the new WTO banana dispute with US joining others, the Commissioner wondered why at the first place the US is interested in banana sector as it is not a banana producer but then she answered her own doubts with the mention of Chiquita as the possible cause for US to intervene. The Commissioner however added that the EU will look into the matter and take appropriate steps.
Chiquita, based in Cincinnati in the US could not be contacted for their immediate reaction but European banana sector sources told New Europe that other US exporters including Del Monte and Dole are also affected adding that the European Commissioner has her facts correct that no bananas are grown in the US but in the trade circle of today's era of globalisation everyone is aware of the large farming interests of these leading world exporters globally especially in the Latin American region.
Coming back to the US request to WTO panel to review whether the EU banana import regime breaches the obligations of the international trade body, the EU this week in Geneva as a defending party may veto under WTO rules the request but the WTO will comply with the US request a month later unless the complaint is withdrawn.
The US is following the footsteps of Colombia and Panama which this year decided to follow the beaten track of Ecuador.
December 15, 2006 saw the first day of the proceedings at Geneva of revival of the "1990s banana wars" with the then-winner Ecuador coming back to haunt the European Union. Ecuador, the world's largest banana exporter, complained to the WTO against the EU's single tariff of 176 Euro that came into force on January 1, 2006, terming it "high."
Commenting on the decisions, Michael Mann, European commission spokesman for agriculture had said, "This is very regrettable. We had a consultation process going which we felt was making good progress."Over the past years negotiating for a single tariff system to modify its complex web of duties and quotas for imports, the European Commission, the executive arm of the EU, had suggested EU duties of 230 Euro and then scaling them down to 187 Euro, but WTO panels had rejected the proposals arguing that those were discriminatory against Latin American (Latam) nations. Out of that deadlock emerged the figure of 176 Euro, but the conflict simmered on.
Eurostat data of the first quarter 2007 compared to the same period 2005 made it clear how Latam share compared to ACP banana growing countries is slipping down the banana ladder. The imports of the latter are climbing double as fast as their counterparts in Latin America.The EU's current banana import policy significantly differentiates access treatment as a tariff-quota volume of 775,000 tonnes is exclusively reserved for bananas of ACP origin. ACP bananas within the quota enter duty-free ( i.e., at a 176 Euro/tonne margin of preference), with unlimited ACP over-quota access authorised at a tariff of 176 Euro/tonne.
On the other hand, an "autonomous" tariff of 176 Euro/tonne (a rate more than double the previously-applicable rate of 75 Euro/tonne) applies to all other bananas.Prior to the General Affairs and External Relations Council (GAERC) May 15, 2007, Spain threatened to veto the EU-ACP commitments unless its domestic producers were better protected from an expected rise in banana imports. The fallout was immediately visible when the GAERC endorsed the commission proposal to fully open European to imports from the ACP, with phased-in access for rice and sugar but the banana sector was shelved.
Debating in early December last year in the European Parliament on the need for an assistance to EU farmers, Jean-Claude Fruteau, Member of European Parliament argued, "The assistance provided for banana producers in the EU is necessary in order to compensate for the dysfunctions within the world trade system, in particular the current gap between the social and environmental standards of European countries and those of Central and Latin American countries. To be effective, these internal regulatory measures need to be in line with external regulatory tools by increasing budget allocations as and when any decrease in the customs tariff occurs."
The MEP was pointing to the fact that money coming in through import tariffs goes in to fill the coffers of EU's Common Agriculture Policy (CAP) from where the money goes to EU farmers.Boel had said that the current system of handouts to banana farmers was hard to justify in world trade talks and that it needed to be brought in line with EU agricultural reforms in other sectors.
While bananas grown within the European bloc account for only 16 percent of the total EU supply, production is important to the Spain's Canary Islands, the French overseas departments of Martinique and Guadeloupe and Portugal's Madeira and Azores islands.Europeans eat some 4.6 million tonnes of bananas every year, making the bloc the world's biggest banana market.
Over two-thirds of the fruits consumed come from Latin America and a further 17 percent from Africa and Caribbean countries.To meet all these requests the only way out is to grant duty free quotas to all regions or countries but that seems difficult with the arrival of French President Nicolas Sarkozy for whom the big chunk of winning votes came from French farmers and traders. It may have been a coincidence that Sarkozy went for his post-victory yacht trip with Vincent Bolore whose companies are loading bananas for Europe in Ivory Coast, Ghana and Cameroun.
Written on July 9, 2007 for New Europe, the European Weekly - Issue : 737
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
