President Donald Trump said Wednesday he is barring a US-born former Islamic State propagandist from returning home, making the highly unusual case that she is not a US citizen.

Trump's refusal to admit 24-year-old Hoda Muthana comes just as <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/take-back-jihadists-trump-tells-europe-197895">he is pressing Europeans to repatriate their own Islamic State fighters</a> and will likely face legal challenges, with US citizenship extremely difficult to lose.

Trump said on Twitter he has "instructed" Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the country" — a break with usual US protocol not to comment on individuals' immigration issues.

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
I have instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and he fully agrees, not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country!
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1098327855145062411?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 20, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

"Ms. Hoda Muthana is not a US citizen and will not be admitted into the United States," Pompeo said in a terse statement.

"She does not have any legal basis, no valid US passport, no right to a passport, nor any visa to travel to the United States," he added.

The US generally grants citizenship to everyone born on its soil and the Alabama-raised Muthana is believed to have traveled to Syria on a US passport.

But a US official said a later investigation showed that she had not been entitled to her passport, adding: "Ms. Muthana's citizenship has not been revoked because she was never a citizen."

Officials declined further comment but in a loophole that could boost the government case, Muthana's father had been a diplomat from Yemen -- and children of diplomats are not automatically given citizenship.

Muthana's lawyer, Hassan Shilby, showed a birth certificate that demonstrated she was born in New Jersey in 1994 and said her father had ceased being a diplomat "months and months" before her birth.

"She is a US citizen. She had a valid passport. She may have broken the law and, if she has, she's willing to pay the price," Shilby told AFP at his office in Tampa.

He said Muthana wanted due process and was willing to go to prison if convicted.

"We cannot get to a point where we simply strip citizenship from those who break the law. That's not what America is about. We have one of the greatest legal systems in the world, and we have to abide by it."

US-born and radicalised 
Just this weekend, Trump took to Twitter to chastise European allies that have not taken back hundreds of Islamic State prisoners caught in Syria, where Trump plans to withdraw US troops.

Comparatively few Americans have embraced radical Islam, with the Counter Extremism Project at George Washington University identifying 64 who went to join the Islamic State group in Syria or Iraq.

Muthana, raised in a strict household in Hoover, Alabama, said she was brainwashed by social media messages and headed to Syria without her parents' knowledge in 2014.

Shortly afterward, Muthana posted on Twitter a picture of herself and three other women who appeared to torch their Western passports, including an American one.

She went on to post vivid calls on social media to kill Americans, glorifying the ruthless extremist group notorious for its beheadings that for a time ruled vast swathes of Syria and Iraq.

But with the Islamic State group down to its last stretch of land, Muthana said she has renounced extremism and wants to return home with her toddler son, born to one of her three jihadist husbands.

"To say that I regret my past words, any pain that I caused my family and any concerns I would cause my country would be hard for me to really express properly," she said in a handwritten note to her lawyer.

Tough to lose US citizenship 
The US decision on Muthana comes amid rising debate in Europe on the nationality of extremists. Britain recently revoked the citizenship of Shamina Begum, who similarly traveled to Syria and wants to return to her country of birth.

Britain asserted that she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship due to her heritage, but the Dhaka government on Wednesday denied that she was eligible, leading her to become effectively stateless.

US citizenship is significantly more difficult to lose. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War as slavery was abolished, establishes that anyone born in the country is a citizen with full rights.

The US Supreme Court in the landmark 1967 Afroyim decision rejected the government's attempt to revoke the nationality of a Polish-born naturalized American after he voted in Israel.

And last year a federal judge rejected a bid to strip the nationality of a Pakistani-born naturalized American who was convicted in a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge.

But Trump has campaigned on a hard line over immigration and raised the prospect of ending birthright citizenship ahead of last year's congressional elections.

In 2011, President Barack Obama ordered drone strikes that killed two Americans in Yemen — prominent Al-Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son — but did not believe it was possible to revoke citizenship.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he is barring a US-born former Islamic State propagandist from returning home, making the highly unusual case that she is not a US citizen.

President Donald Trump said Wednesday he is barring a US-born former Islamic State propagandist from returning home, making the highly unusual case that she is not a US citizen. Trump's refusal to admit 24-year-old Hoda Muthana comes just as he is pressing Europeans to repatriate their own Islamic State fighters and will likely face legal challenges, with US citizenship extremely difficult to lose. Trump said on Twitter he has "instructed" Secretary of State Mike Pompeo "not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the country" — a break with usual US protocol not to comment on individuals' immigration issues. I have instructed Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, and he fully agrees, not to allow Hoda Muthana back into the Country! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 20, 2019 × "Ms. Hoda Muthana is not a US citizen and will not be admitted into the United States," Pompeo said in a terse statement. "She does not have any legal basis, no valid US passport, no right to a passport, nor any visa to travel to the United States," he added. The US generally grants citizenship to everyone born on its soil and the Alabama-raised Muthana is believed to have traveled to Syria on a US passport. But a US official said a later investigation showed that she had not been entitled to her passport, adding: "Ms. Muthana's citizenship has not been revoked because she was never a citizen." Officials declined further comment but in a loophole that could boost the government case, Muthana's father had been a diplomat from Yemen -- and children of diplomats are not automatically given citizenship. Muthana's lawyer, Hassan Shilby, showed a birth certificate that demonstrated she was born in New Jersey in 1994 and said her father had ceased being a diplomat "months and months" before her birth. "She is a US citizen. She had a valid passport. She may have broken the law and, if she has, she's willing to pay the price," Shilby told AFP at his office in Tampa. He said Muthana wanted due process and was willing to go to prison if convicted. "We cannot get to a point where we simply strip citizenship from those who break the law. That's not what America is about. We have one of the greatest legal systems in the world, and we have to abide by it." US-born and radicalised Just this weekend, Trump took to Twitter to chastise European allies that have not taken back hundreds of Islamic State prisoners caught in Syria, where Trump plans to withdraw US troops. Comparatively few Americans have embraced radical Islam, with the Counter Extremism Project at George Washington University identifying 64 who went to join the Islamic State group in Syria or Iraq. Muthana, raised in a strict household in Hoover, Alabama, said she was brainwashed by social media messages and headed to Syria without her parents' knowledge in 2014. Shortly afterward, Muthana posted on Twitter a picture of herself and three other women who appeared to torch their Western passports, including an American one. She went on to post vivid calls on social media to kill Americans, glorifying the ruthless extremist group notorious for its beheadings that for a time ruled vast swathes of Syria and Iraq. But with the Islamic State group down to its last stretch of land, Muthana said she has renounced extremism and wants to return home with her toddler son, born to one of her three jihadist husbands. "To say that I regret my past words, any pain that I caused my family and any concerns I would cause my country would be hard for me to really express properly," she said in a handwritten note to her lawyer. Tough to lose US citizenship The US decision on Muthana comes amid rising debate in Europe on the nationality of extremists. Britain recently revoked the citizenship of Shamina Begum, who similarly traveled to Syria and wants to return to her country of birth. Britain asserted that she was entitled to Bangladeshi citizenship due to her heritage, but the Dhaka government on Wednesday denied that she was eligible, leading her to become effectively stateless. US citizenship is significantly more difficult to lose. The 14th Amendment to the US Constitution, ratified in 1868 after the Civil War as slavery was abolished, establishes that anyone born in the country is a citizen with full rights. The US Supreme Court in the landmark 1967 Afroyim decision rejected the government's attempt to revoke the nationality of a Polish-born naturalized American after he voted in Israel. And last year a federal judge rejected a bid to strip the nationality of a Pakistani-born naturalized American who was convicted in a plot to blow up the Brooklyn Bridge. But Trump has campaigned on a hard line over immigration and raised the prospect of ending birthright citizenship ahead of last year's congressional elections. In 2011, President Barack Obama ordered drone strikes that killed two Americans in Yemen — prominent Al-Qaeda preacher Anwar al-Awlaki and his 16-year-old son — but did not believe it was possible to revoke citizenship.

Trump says US woman who joined Islamic State cannot return

By Elizabeth Pearson

Just days after Shamima Begum called for public sympathy for her return to the UK, another young woman was jailed in Baghdad for her role with the so-called Islamic State. Linda Wenzel is German and, like Begum, was 15 years old when she joined Islamic State in 2016. Wenzel has also asked to return to Europe to serve her sentence. There are no signs this will be allowed.

In 2016 I was in Germany, trying to understand young women like Wenzel, for a five-country study on the gender dynamics of violent extremism with my colleague Emily Winterbotham, a senior research fellow at the RUSI think tank. We talked to communities and families affected by radicalisation in the UK, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Canada.

These countries had diverse approaches to radicalisation. France produced counter-radicalisation strategies after the Paris attacks of 2015, while the UK and Netherlands have worked on policy to counter violent extremism since the mid-2000s. Both the Netherlands and UK permit deprivation of citizenship without criminal conviction – which is what has now happened to Begum.

We heard stories of people prevented from travel by police, as well as of both women and men who left for Syria and Iraq. Across the five countries, we noted differences in how men and women were recruited, such as more cases of online approaches to women. We also saw how Muslim community anger was often reserved for the young men who fled to join the Islamic State. Focus groups within Muslim communities often told us women were “naïve”, lacking in self-esteem, “tricked” by “lover-boys” they met online. They were seen as victims.

Back in 2015-16 this sentiment was mirrored in government policy. France, Germany and the Netherlands tended to treat women jihadists as “victims” of Islamic State. Recent research on returning foreign fighters in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands noted that back then women were “treated with more clemency” and routinely not prosecuted.

That position has changed, with toughening measures for both men and women across Europe. Countries including the UK, Netherlands, Germany and France now investigate and risk-assess both men and women returners. From a position where women and their agency in joining Islamic State were not recognised, the pendulum swung firmly in the other direction.

Hardening attitudes

The first reason why this shift happened was numbers. Countries have had to evolve to catch up with events on the ground. From the Islamic State’s announcement of a “caliphate” in 2014, Europe saw a significant minority of women travel – and women made up around 16-17 per cent of the approximately 6,000 people who left Europe to join the caliphate.

In the case of France, which was new to counter-radicalisation strategies at home and where women made up around 28 per cent of its returners, the shift in policy meant sharp changes to the law and procedures. Canada, which had fewer fighters, adopted a liberal response with few prosecutions of returners – both fighters and others.&nbsp;

This prompted accusations from Canada’s opposition Conservative Party of a policy of “group hug sessions”.

A second reason for the hardening of attitudes to women who joined IS was increased knowledge of women’s role in Islamic State. Women were active propagandists, recruiters, ideologues, supporters of current warriors and producers of the next generation. They were involved in the abuse of other women, whether enslaved Yazidis, or in the al-Khansaa brigade, which policed women. Both Begum and Wenzel suggested they were only housewives. But for Islamic State, the wife is the key to the endurance – or baqiya – of both ideology and “caliphate”.

The perception of women’s threat was also explicitly influenced by cases involving women and a seemingly new phenomenon: the all-female jihadist cell. In 2016, three women were arrested in France after a failed attack near Notre Dame. This proved a game-changer for both public opinion and policy regarding returners, despite the fact that these women were radicalised in France. In the UK, another all-female plot was uncovered in 2017.

An increase in threat levels linked to male returners also had an influence on how women were viewed. In 2015, male returners were involved in the Paris attacks and the following year in attacks in Brussels. While women have not yet returned in large numbers, the fear is that women, newly recognised as ideologically committed, might also carry out an attack. 
 
The gender dimension

Both policy and public opinion are shifting from ignoring women in jihadist movements, to “adding” them into counter-extremism strategies, and increasingly treating the threat they pose as equal to men. There is now an increased assumption in France, the Netherlands and Germany of parity in male and female potential for violence. However, it’s not enough to just to “add women” into existing strategies – governments must recognise the ways in which terrorist groups understand men and women differently.

This means acknowledging two important facts related to power. First, compared to men, instances of women perpetrators of jihadist violence are rare, not because women are “naturally” less violent, or do not support jihad, but because patriarchal jihadi ideology judges female violence is highly transgressive.&nbsp;

The second relates to the power imbalances in women’s radicalisation. Islamic State ran a systemised online recruitment campaign targeting women, with parallels to child sexual exploitation and grooming. Often older men sought out teenage girls. Women desperate to return emphasise their own victimhood. Some women radicalised to join Islamic State report experiences of sexual abuse, domestic or honour-based violence.

This doesn’t deny women agency or excuse them from complicity in Islamic State atrocities but recognises the context within which their choices were made. It is more important now, in the current chaos of the end of the caliphate when many women may return to their countries of origin, including within Europe and North America, to recognise the complexity of what it meant to be involved in Islamic State.

 
(Elizabeth Pearson is Lecturer at the Cyber Threats Research Centre, Swansea University)

(This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the <a href="https://theconversation.com/shamima-begum-how-europe-toughened-its-stance-on-women-returning-from-islamic-state-112048">original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

 
&nbsp;

By Elizabeth Pearson Just days after Shamima Begum called for public sympathy for her return to the UK, another young woman was jailed in Baghdad for her role with the so-called Islamic State.

By Elizabeth Pearson Just days after Shamima Begum called for public sympathy for her return to the UK, another young woman was jailed in Baghdad for her role with the so-called Islamic State. Linda Wenzel is German and, like Begum, was 15 years old when she joined Islamic State in 2016. Wenzel has also asked to return to Europe to serve her sentence. There are no signs this will be allowed. In 2016 I was in Germany, trying to understand young women like Wenzel, for a five-country study on the gender dynamics of violent extremism with my colleague Emily Winterbotham, a senior research fellow at the RUSI think tank. We talked to communities and families affected by radicalisation in the UK, Germany, France, the Netherlands and Canada. These countries had diverse approaches to radicalisation. France produced counter-radicalisation strategies after the Paris attacks of 2015, while the UK and Netherlands have worked on policy to counter violent extremism since the mid-2000s. Both the Netherlands and UK permit deprivation of citizenship without criminal conviction – which is what has now happened to Begum. We heard stories of people prevented from travel by police, as well as of both women and men who left for Syria and Iraq. Across the five countries, we noted differences in how men and women were recruited, such as more cases of online approaches to women. We also saw how Muslim community anger was often reserved for the young men who fled to join the Islamic State. Focus groups within Muslim communities often told us women were “naïve”, lacking in self-esteem, “tricked” by “lover-boys” they met online. They were seen as victims. Back in 2015-16 this sentiment was mirrored in government policy. France, Germany and the Netherlands tended to treat women jihadists as “victims” of Islamic State. Recent research on returning foreign fighters in Belgium, Germany and the Netherlands noted that back then women were “treated with more clemency” and routinely not prosecuted. That position has changed, with toughening measures for both men and women across Europe. Countries including the UK, Netherlands, Germany and France now investigate and risk-assess both men and women returners. From a position where women and their agency in joining Islamic State were not recognised, the pendulum swung firmly in the other direction. Hardening attitudes The first reason why this shift happened was numbers. Countries have had to evolve to catch up with events on the ground. From the Islamic State’s announcement of a “caliphate” in 2014, Europe saw a significant minority of women travel – and women made up around 16-17 per cent of the approximately 6,000 people who left Europe to join the caliphate. In the case of France, which was new to counter-radicalisation strategies at home and where women made up around 28 per cent of its returners, the shift in policy meant sharp changes to the law and procedures. Canada, which had fewer fighters, adopted a liberal response with few prosecutions of returners – both fighters and others. This prompted accusations from Canada’s opposition Conservative Party of a policy of “group hug sessions”. A second reason for the hardening of attitudes to women who joined IS was increased knowledge of women’s role in Islamic State. Women were active propagandists, recruiters, ideologues, supporters of current warriors and producers of the next generation. They were involved in the abuse of other women, whether enslaved Yazidis, or in the al-Khansaa brigade, which policed women. Both Begum and Wenzel suggested they were only housewives. But for Islamic State, the wife is the key to the endurance – or baqiya – of both ideology and “caliphate”. The perception of women’s threat was also explicitly influenced by cases involving women and a seemingly new phenomenon: the all-female jihadist cell. In 2016, three women were arrested in France after a failed attack near Notre Dame. This proved a game-changer for both public opinion and policy regarding returners, despite the fact that these women were radicalised in France. In the UK, another all-female plot was uncovered in 2017. An increase in threat levels linked to male returners also had an influence on how women were viewed. In 2015, male returners were involved in the Paris attacks and the following year in attacks in Brussels. While women have not yet returned in large numbers, the fear is that women, newly recognised as ideologically committed, might also carry out an attack. The gender dimension Both policy and public opinion are shifting from ignoring women in jihadist movements, to “adding” them into counter-extremism strategies, and increasingly treating the threat they pose as equal to men. There is now an increased assumption in France, the Netherlands and Germany of parity in male and female potential for violence. However, it’s not enough to just to “add women” into existing strategies – governments must recognise the ways in which terrorist groups understand men and women differently. This means acknowledging two important facts related to power. First, compared to men, instances of women perpetrators of jihadist violence are rare, not because women are “naturally” less violent, or do not support jihad, but because patriarchal jihadi ideology judges female violence is highly transgressive. The second relates to the power imbalances in women’s radicalisation. Islamic State ran a systemised online recruitment campaign targeting women, with parallels to child sexual exploitation and grooming. Often older men sought out teenage girls. Women desperate to return emphasise their own victimhood. Some women radicalised to join Islamic State report experiences of sexual abuse, domestic or honour-based violence. This doesn’t deny women agency or excuse them from complicity in Islamic State atrocities but recognises the context within which their choices were made. It is more important now, in the current chaos of the end of the caliphate when many women may return to their countries of origin, including within Europe and North America, to recognise the complexity of what it meant to be involved in Islamic State. (Elizabeth Pearson is Lecturer at the Cyber Threats Research Centre, Swansea University) (This article was originally published on the Conversation. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL.)

Shamima Begum: How Europe toughened its stance on women returning from Islamic State

European nations must take back hundreds of Islamic State group fighters captured in Syria, President Donald Trump said late Saturday, after a delay in announcing what he said would be the end of the "caliphate."

Trump shocked allies in December by declaring the pullout of roughly 2,000 US troops who had been assisting local forces in Syria against IS, whose sole remaining territory is half a square kilometer (one-fifth of a square mile) in eastern Syria.

The pending US pullout set off a countdown for governments whose citizens, having joined IS, were captured by the US-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF).

"The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/us-backed-syrian-forces-launch-final-battle-against-islamic-state-enclave-196295">800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria</a> and put them on trial," Trump said in a tweet, using another acronym for IS.

"The Caliphate is ready to fall. The alternative is not a good one in that we will be forced to release them. The US&nbsp;does not want to watch as these ISIS fighters permeate Europe, which is where they are expected to go."

<div class="ui-state-default" contenteditable="false">
<div class="twitter-block" draggable="false">
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-lang="en">
The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria and put them on trial. The Caliphate is ready to fall. The alternative is not a good one in that we will be forced to release them........
— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) <a href="https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1096980408401625088?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">February 17, 2019</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script></div>
<a class="close-mark close-div" href="#" id="jqclosemark">×</a></div>

Once the US-led coalition declares it has taken all IS territories, the White House is expected to withdraw American troops.

When that happens, the risk is high that "foreign terrorist fighters" will escape SDF control, posing a new threat.

For about two weeks, the Trump administration has been pushing its allies to take their citizens home, and the US said it was ready to help in the repatriation, but time has been running out.

Several countries, including France, that have chosen to leave the jihadists in SDF detention now confront a diplomatic, legal, political and logistical puzzle.&nbsp;

"We do so much, and spend so much - Time for others to step up and do the job that they are so capable of doing. We are pulling back after 100% Caliphate victory!" Trump said in his late-Saturday tweets.

On Friday he said announcements on the fall of the caliphate would be made "over the next 24 hours," but that deadline came and went.

Deep transatlantic rift 
An SDF commander said his US-backed forces slowed their advance to protect civilians.

The jihadists declared a "caliphate" in large parts of Syria and neighboring Iraq in 2014, but have since lost all but a tiny patch of territory near the Iraqi border.

Trump's Syria pullout has highlighted the deep trans-Atlantic rift that emerged under his presidency, and the differing views of the two sides were on display Saturday at a security conference in Munich.

A French government source criticized the Trump administration's approach as "we're leaving, you're staying" and added: "They're trying to manage the consequences of a hasty decision and making us carry the responsibility."

European nations must take back hundreds of Islamic State group fighters captured in Syria, President Donald Trump said late Saturday, after a delay in announcing what he said would be the end of the "caliphate.

European nations must take back hundreds of Islamic State group fighters captured in Syria, President Donald Trump said late Saturday, after a delay in announcing what he said would be the end of the "caliphate." Trump shocked allies in December by declaring the pullout of roughly 2,000 US troops who had been assisting local forces in Syria against IS, whose sole remaining territory is half a square kilometer (one-fifth of a square mile) in eastern Syria. The pending US pullout set off a countdown for governments whose citizens, having joined IS, were captured by the US-backed, Kurdish-led Syrian Democratic Forces (SDF). "The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria and put them on trial," Trump said in a tweet, using another acronym for IS. "The Caliphate is ready to fall. The alternative is not a good one in that we will be forced to release them. The US does not want to watch as these ISIS fighters permeate Europe, which is where they are expected to go." The United States is asking Britain, France, Germany and other European allies to take back over 800 ISIS fighters that we captured in Syria and put them on trial. The Caliphate is ready to fall. The alternative is not a good one in that we will be forced to release them........ — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) February 17, 2019 × Once the US-led coalition declares it has taken all IS territories, the White House is expected to withdraw American troops. When that happens, the risk is high that "foreign terrorist fighters" will escape SDF control, posing a new threat. For about two weeks, the Trump administration has been pushing its allies to take their citizens home, and the US said it was ready to help in the repatriation, but time has been running out. Several countries, including France, that have chosen to leave the jihadists in SDF detention now confront a diplomatic, legal, political and logistical puzzle. "We do so much, and spend so much - Time for others to step up and do the job that they are so capable of doing. We are pulling back after 100% Caliphate victory!" Trump said in his late-Saturday tweets. On Friday he said announcements on the fall of the caliphate would be made "over the next 24 hours," but that deadline came and went. Deep transatlantic rift An SDF commander said his US-backed forces slowed their advance to protect civilians. The jihadists declared a "caliphate" in large parts of Syria and neighboring Iraq in 2014, but have since lost all but a tiny patch of territory near the Iraqi border. Trump's Syria pullout has highlighted the deep trans-Atlantic rift that emerged under his presidency, and the differing views of the two sides were on display Saturday at a security conference in Munich. A French government source criticized the Trump administration's approach as "we're leaving, you're staying" and added: "They're trying to manage the consequences of a hasty decision and making us carry the responsibility."

Take back jihadists, Trump tells Europe

Breaking News: A380 SuperJumbo to be scrapped

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday.

Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels ahead of a meeting with NATO defence ministers that Russia's "violation" of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) would be one of the topics on the agenda.

"We do not intend to deploy new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe," Stoltenberg said. "At the same time, we remain committed to meaningful arms control and non-proliferation efforts."&nbsp;

"NATO does not want a new arms race, because that would be in nobody's interest," added Stoltenberg.

The NATO chief said the United States and other allies had called on Moscow to abide by the treaty "over many years," and that was why the US recently announced its intention to abandon the treaty within six months.&nbsp;

"We all know that a treaty that is only respected by one side cannot keep us safe," said the politician.

He urged Russia to "take the responsible path" and "return to compliance and save the INF Treaty," something that was being offered as a "last opportunity."

The Norwegian politician acknowledged, however, that NATO allies were "planning for a world without the INF Treaty."

NATO defence ministers were to meet in the Belgian capital on Wednesday and Thursday.

Stoltenberg said other topics on the agenda would be NATO missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo.

Ministers would also attend a session on NATO-European Union cooperation and EU defence efforts, the head of the Alliance said.

"Of course, EU efforts on defence cannot replace NATO," he said, adding that any EU efforts must complement and not compete with existing ones.

The chief ended his speech by welcoming the defence minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Radmila Sekerinska, whose country joined a NATO meeting for the first time after member states last week signed an accession protocol for the eastern European nation.&nbsp;

The INF Treaty was signed on December 8, 1987, between the US and Soviet Union, an agreement aimed to eliminate short-range missiles (covering a range of up to 1,000 kilometres; 620 miles) and intermediate ones (up to 5,500 km; 3,420 miles). 
&nbsp;

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has no intention of deploying new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe in the event that a Soviet-era treaty aimed at eliminating short- and medium-range missiles is abandoned, the head of the Alliance said Tuesday. Jens Stoltenberg told reporters in Brussels ahead of a meeting with NATO defence ministers that Russia's "violation" of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty (INF Treaty) would be one of the topics on the agenda. "We do not intend to deploy new ground-based nuclear missiles in Europe," Stoltenberg said. "At the same time, we remain committed to meaningful arms control and non-proliferation efforts." "NATO does not want a new arms race, because that would be in nobody's interest," added Stoltenberg. The NATO chief said the United States and other allies had called on Moscow to abide by the treaty "over many years," and that was why the US recently announced its intention to abandon the treaty within six months. "We all know that a treaty that is only respected by one side cannot keep us safe," said the politician. He urged Russia to "take the responsible path" and "return to compliance and save the INF Treaty," something that was being offered as a "last opportunity." The Norwegian politician acknowledged, however, that NATO allies were "planning for a world without the INF Treaty." NATO defence ministers were to meet in the Belgian capital on Wednesday and Thursday. Stoltenberg said other topics on the agenda would be NATO missions in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kosovo. Ministers would also attend a session on NATO-European Union cooperation and EU defence efforts, the head of the Alliance said. "Of course, EU efforts on defence cannot replace NATO," he said, adding that any EU efforts must complement and not compete with existing ones. The chief ended his speech by welcoming the defence minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, Radmila Sekerinska, whose country joined a NATO meeting for the first time after member states last week signed an accession protocol for the eastern European nation. The INF Treaty was signed on December 8, 1987, between the US and Soviet Union, an agreement aimed to eliminate short-range missiles (covering a range of up to 1,000 kilometres; 620 miles) and intermediate ones (up to 5,500 km; 3,420 miles).

NATO rules out new missiles in Europe, says it does not want arms race

When the global oil trading industry gathered for its biggest annual meeting in Asia in September last year, US oil producing companies came well prepared.

US giant Exxon Mobil and European rival Royal Dutch/Shell prepared brochures for oil buyers detailing various US crude grades and why they were suitable to replace part of Asia's long-standing supplies from the Middle East, Africa and Russia.

As the oil industry gathers in London this month for the annual IP Week, US crude producers may have every reason to toast the success of their campaign in Europe, as well as Asia.

Only a few years ago, before the hydro-fracking and shale revolution overturned the economics of US oil production, the United States was the world's largest oil importer by far and prohibited exports of oil by law.

Now shipments of US crude into Europe have just hit a new record. January imports were 630,000 barrels per day, still - behind Russia and Iraq but above other OPEC producers including Nigeria and Libya.

Higher US crude exports have been helped by lower supplies of Iranian and Venezuelan crude, which Washington has put under sanctions, scaring buyers across the world.

In the whole of 2018, US supplies to Europe doubled to 430,000 bpd, according to Refinitiv Eikon flows data. That represented 6 per cent of overall imports or equal to the levels of Iranian oil imports to Europe before the United States imposed fresh sanctions on Tehran.

"US crude is a real headache. It puts a lot of pressure on regional light grades. In fact, prices for all grades are affected because it is such a significant extra supply," said a trader with a European trader selling Russian oil.

Pressure will likely only increase as for 2019 US crude oil production is expected to average 12.06 million bpd, up 1.18 million bpd from last year, according to US government.

Future predictions say the United States could produce as much as 15 million bpd of crude and up to 20 million bpd of total oil liquids, giving it complete self-sufficiency as it would fully cover its consumption of 18-19 million bpd.

Booming US production has prompted OPEC and major non-OPEC producers like Russia to slash output by 3-4 per cent since 2017 to prop up prices. The pact has helped double prices to $60 per barrel but at the expense of a market share loss to US firms.

"Welcome to the free market," said a US-based executive of an international trading firm. "Local producers either need to drop their pricing to compete or find other markets".

Competition is particularly acute in northwest Europe, where Britain and the Netherlands imported 6.5 and 5.1 million tonnes of US crude in 2018 respectively.

BP, Litasco, Equinor, Total and ExxonMobil were among the main buyers in the Baltic replacing North Sea barrels with US grades, traders say.

"WTI is the new dated Brent," said a senior crude trader referring to the US and European benchmarks.

BP takes US oil to its Gelsenkirchen refinery in Germany while Poland's PKN Orlen said in January it would cut Russia's Urals purchases from Kremlin oil major Rosneft by 30 per cent and partially replace it with US barrels. In Britain, the main US oil buyers are Essar Oil and Exxon Mobil, traders said.

In the Mediterranean, buyers of US barrels - Italy, Spain, France - tend to use them to replace light Caspian CPC Blend, Russia's Urals and Iranian oil, traders said.

Greece's Hellenic Petroleum added WTI to its list of preferred crude options alongside Urals and CPC as did Turkey's Tupras. In Italy, US oil flows to Kuwait Petroleum's Milazzo refinery and the Swiss Varo Energy's plant.

WTI was by far the most popular US grade among European buyers in 2018, followed by Midland Eagle Ford, Bakken and Mars.

As the world moves to tighter marine fuel regulations, which will increase demand for light barrels, demand for US oil - which is predominantly light - will only rise.

"I expect US crude to become even more popular in Europe. It seems that whatever is happening to oil markets these days, the US benefits," said a trader with large European major.

When the global oil trading industry gathered for its biggest annual meeting in Asia in September last year, US oil producing companies came well prepared. US giant Exxon Mobil and European rival Royal Dutch/Shell prepared brochures for oil buyers detailing various US crude grades and why they were suitable to replace part of Asia's long-standing supplies from the Middle East, Africa and Russia.

When the global oil trading industry gathered for its biggest annual meeting in Asia in September last year, US oil producing companies came well prepared. US giant Exxon Mobil and European rival Royal Dutch/Shell prepared brochures for oil buyers detailing various US crude grades and why they were suitable to replace part of Asia's long-standing supplies from the Middle East, Africa and Russia. As the oil industry gathers in London this month for the annual IP Week, US crude producers may have every reason to toast the success of their campaign in Europe, as well as Asia. Only a few years ago, before the hydro-fracking and shale revolution overturned the economics of US oil production, the United States was the world's largest oil importer by far and prohibited exports of oil by law. Now shipments of US crude into Europe have just hit a new record. January imports were 630,000 barrels per day, still - behind Russia and Iraq but above other OPEC producers including Nigeria and Libya. Higher US crude exports have been helped by lower supplies of Iranian and Venezuelan crude, which Washington has put under sanctions, scaring buyers across the world. In the whole of 2018, US supplies to Europe doubled to 430,000 bpd, according to Refinitiv Eikon flows data. That represented 6 per cent of overall imports or equal to the levels of Iranian oil imports to Europe before the United States imposed fresh sanctions on Tehran. "US crude is a real headache. It puts a lot of pressure on regional light grades. In fact, prices for all grades are affected because it is such a significant extra supply," said a trader with a European trader selling Russian oil. Pressure will likely only increase as for 2019 US crude oil production is expected to average 12.06 million bpd, up 1.18 million bpd from last year, according to US government. Future predictions say the United States could produce as much as 15 million bpd of crude and up to 20 million bpd of total oil liquids, giving it complete self-sufficiency as it would fully cover its consumption of 18-19 million bpd. Booming US production has prompted OPEC and major non-OPEC producers like Russia to slash output by 3-4 per cent since 2017 to prop up prices. The pact has helped double prices to $60 per barrel but at the expense of a market share loss to US firms. "Welcome to the free market," said a US-based executive of an international trading firm. "Local producers either need to drop their pricing to compete or find other markets". Competition is particularly acute in northwest Europe, where Britain and the Netherlands imported 6.5 and 5.1 million tonnes of US crude in 2018 respectively. BP, Litasco, Equinor, Total and ExxonMobil were among the main buyers in the Baltic replacing North Sea barrels with US grades, traders say. "WTI is the new dated Brent," said a senior crude trader referring to the US and European benchmarks. BP takes US oil to its Gelsenkirchen refinery in Germany while Poland's PKN Orlen said in January it would cut Russia's Urals purchases from Kremlin oil major Rosneft by 30 per cent and partially replace it with US barrels. In Britain, the main US oil buyers are Essar Oil and Exxon Mobil, traders said. In the Mediterranean, buyers of US barrels - Italy, Spain, France - tend to use them to replace light Caspian CPC Blend, Russia's Urals and Iranian oil, traders said. Greece's Hellenic Petroleum added WTI to its list of preferred crude options alongside Urals and CPC as did Turkey's Tupras. In Italy, US oil flows to Kuwait Petroleum's Milazzo refinery and the Swiss Varo Energy's plant. WTI was by far the most popular US grade among European buyers in 2018, followed by Midland Eagle Ford, Bakken and Mars. As the world moves to tighter marine fuel regulations, which will increase demand for light barrels, demand for US oil - which is predominantly light - will only rise. "I expect US crude to become even more popular in Europe. It seems that whatever is happening to oil markets these days, the US benefits," said a trader with large European major.

With Iran squeezed out, US oil takes on new rivals in Europe

Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban during his state of the nation address unveiled his grand plan to increase the fertility rate in the country by exempting Hungarian women with four or more children from paying income tax for life.

Hungary's population has been falling by 32,000 individuals per year, and they also have a lower fertility rate than Europe. Orban insisted that the baby boom was the way to defend the future of the country and also a way to put an end to immigration.

"We are living in such times when there are fewer and fewer children born in Europe. For the West, the answer (to that challenge) is immigration. For every missing child there should be one coming in and then the numbers will be fine. But we do not need numbers. We need Hungarian children," Orban said.

Orban has been particularly opposed towards Muslim immigrants. In fact, the biggest applause during his state of the nation address was for his plans to increase Hungary's fertility rate for which he announced that a young Hungarian couple will be given an interest-free loan of 10 million forints, which would be cancelled when the couple has a third child. Besides this, a married couple with three or more children can receive a loan of almost 35 million forints or a whopping $124,390.

Orban also announced creating at least 21,000 nurseries in the next three years, besides offering housing subsidies and investing an additional $2.5 billion in the country's health system.&nbsp;

The fertility rate in Hungary is 1.45, while the average in the eurozone is 1.55. France has the highest fertility rate in the European Union at 1.96, while Spain has the lowest at just 1.33.

Though the announcement did not please everybody which led to a thousand people protesting against the prime minister policies outside the parliament.

The world population as of this year stands at a staggering figure of 7.5 billion. And the trend is that the population will continue to grow. But this is in stark contrast to the first world industrialised countries such as Japan and other parts of Europe, which have seen their populations shrink in recent decades.&nbsp;

Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban during his state of the nation address unveiled his grand plan to increase the fertility rate in the country by exempting Hungarian women with four or more children from paying income tax for life.

Hungarian Prime Minister Victor Orban during his state of the nation address unveiled his grand plan to increase the fertility rate in the country by exempting Hungarian women with four or more children from paying income tax for life. Hungary's population has been falling by 32,000 individuals per year, and they also have a lower fertility rate than Europe. Orban insisted that the baby boom was the way to defend the future of the country and also a way to put an end to immigration. "We are living in such times when there are fewer and fewer children born in Europe. For the West, the answer (to that challenge) is immigration. For every missing child there should be one coming in and then the numbers will be fine. But we do not need numbers. We need Hungarian children," Orban said. Orban has been particularly opposed towards Muslim immigrants. In fact, the biggest applause during his state of the nation address was for his plans to increase Hungary's fertility rate for which he announced that a young Hungarian couple will be given an interest-free loan of 10 million forints, which would be cancelled when the couple has a third child. Besides this, a married couple with three or more children can receive a loan of almost 35 million forints or a whopping $124,390. Orban also announced creating at least 21,000 nurseries in the next three years, besides offering housing subsidies and investing an additional $2.5 billion in the country's health system. The fertility rate in Hungary is 1.45, while the average in the eurozone is 1.55. France has the highest fertility rate in the European Union at 1.96, while Spain has the lowest at just 1.33. Though the announcement did not please everybody which led to a thousand people protesting against the prime minister policies outside the parliament. The world population as of this year stands at a staggering figure of 7.5 billion. And the trend is that the population will continue to grow. But this is in stark contrast to the first world industrialised countries such as Japan and other parts of Europe, which have seen their populations shrink in recent decades.

'Need Hungarian children': PM Orban plans to provide tax exemption for women with four kids

Several thousand <a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/yellow-vest-leader-handicapped-for-life-by-protest-injury-lawyer-193191">"yellow vest" protesters</a> marched through Paris and other French cities on Saturday on the 12th weekend of action against the government despite opinion polls pointing to a recovery in President Emmanuel Macron's popularity.

The protests - named after the fluorescent jackets French motorists are required to carry in their cars - began in mid-November over plans to raise fuel taxes before developing into a broader revolt against the government that mobilised tens of thousands of demonstrators nationwide each Saturday.

The government warned on Friday police would not hesitate to use flash balls in case of violence by demonstrators after it was authorised by France's highest administrative court.

Protesters on Saturday paid homage to those injured in the past months, denouncing the use of flash-ball riot control guns banned in much of Europe.

About 1,000 police officers have been injured along with 1,700 demonstrators since the start of the protests, according to official figures.

"It's true that this intermediate weapon can hurt, but faced with rioters, the police need it to defend themselves against those who attack them," said Interior Minister Christophe Castaner.

Opinion polls show a recovery in Macron's battered popularity rating after he launched consultations, including townhall debates, to try to quell social unrest.

A Harris Interactive poll of 1,000 people on Friday showed Macron gaining 4 percentage points since December taking him to a 35 per cent approval rating.

As in previous weeks, protesters on Saturday carried French flags and held signs attacking Macron as out of touch or calling for referendums tabled by citizens.

Protesters injured in previous weeks of violence were put at the front of the protests with some wearing eye patches with a target sign on them.

In Valance in the south of France, the mayor said measures had been taken to prepare for about 10,000 demonstrators. Authorities fear about 10 per cent of those could be violent rioters.

The Interior Ministry said 80,000 security officials had been mobilised, including 5,000 in Paris.

Several thousand "yellow vest" protesters marched through Paris and other French cities on Saturday on the 12th weekend of action against the government despite opinion polls pointing to a recovery in President Emmanuel Macron's popularity.

Several thousand "yellow vest" protesters marched through Paris and other French cities on Saturday on the 12th weekend of action against the government despite opinion polls pointing to a recovery in President Emmanuel Macron's popularity. The protests - named after the fluorescent jackets French motorists are required to carry in their cars - began in mid-November over plans to raise fuel taxes before developing into a broader revolt against the government that mobilised tens of thousands of demonstrators nationwide each Saturday. The government warned on Friday police would not hesitate to use flash balls in case of violence by demonstrators after it was authorised by France's highest administrative court. Protesters on Saturday paid homage to those injured in the past months, denouncing the use of flash-ball riot control guns banned in much of Europe. About 1,000 police officers have been injured along with 1,700 demonstrators since the start of the protests, according to official figures. "It's true that this intermediate weapon can hurt, but faced with rioters, the police need it to defend themselves against those who attack them," said Interior Minister Christophe Castaner. Opinion polls show a recovery in Macron's battered popularity rating after he launched consultations, including townhall debates, to try to quell social unrest. A Harris Interactive poll of 1,000 people on Friday showed Macron gaining 4 percentage points since December taking him to a 35 per cent approval rating. As in previous weeks, protesters on Saturday carried French flags and held signs attacking Macron as out of touch or calling for referendums tabled by citizens. Protesters injured in previous weeks of violence were put at the front of the protests with some wearing eye patches with a target sign on them. In Valance in the south of France, the mayor said measures had been taken to prepare for about 10,000 demonstrators. Authorities fear about 10 per cent of those could be violent rioters. The Interior Ministry said 80,000 security officials had been mobilised, including 5,000 in Paris.

French 'yellow vests' march through Paris denouncing police violence

Ukraine's pro-Western President Petro Poroshenko launched his bid for a second five-year term in front of thousands of supporters on Tuesday, ahead of a tight election race in March.

A 53-year-old confectionary magnate and one of Ukraine's richest men, Poroshenko has steered the country on a pro-Western and pro-NATO course since coming to power in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan protests and Russia's annexation of Crimea.

"The feeling of deep responsibility before the country, before contemporaries, before past and future generations prompted me to decide to run again for the presidency," Poroshenko said.

Among his policy priorities, Poroshenko said Ukraine would apply to join the European Union by 2024 and that a special court to try corruption cases would be up and running this year.

Poroshenko's popularity has dwindled over patchy efforts to tackle corruption and his failure to end the conflict in the eastern Donbass region that has killed more than 10,000 people.

He has also failed to raise living standards in one of Europe's poorest countries.

Poroshenko, however, may be a more predictable option for investors than his nearest challengers such as former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko or Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a political novice who achieved fame as a comic actor.

Tymoshenko, the frontrunner, wants to cut gas prices for households, which may set her on a collision course with the International Monetary Fund and other foreign backers who pumped billions into Ukraine to keep its war-scarred economy afloat.

Ukraine's pro-Western President Petro Poroshenko launched his bid for a second five-year term in front of thousands of supporters on Tuesday, ahead of a tight election race in March.

Ukraine's pro-Western President Petro Poroshenko launched his bid for a second five-year term in front of thousands of supporters on Tuesday, ahead of a tight election race in March. A 53-year-old confectionary magnate and one of Ukraine's richest men, Poroshenko has steered the country on a pro-Western and pro-NATO course since coming to power in the aftermath of the 2014 Maidan protests and Russia's annexation of Crimea. "The feeling of deep responsibility before the country, before contemporaries, before past and future generations prompted me to decide to run again for the presidency," Poroshenko said. Among his policy priorities, Poroshenko said Ukraine would apply to join the European Union by 2024 and that a special court to try corruption cases would be up and running this year. Poroshenko's popularity has dwindled over patchy efforts to tackle corruption and his failure to end the conflict in the eastern Donbass region that has killed more than 10,000 people. He has also failed to raise living standards in one of Europe's poorest countries. Poroshenko, however, may be a more predictable option for investors than his nearest challengers such as former Prime Minister Yulia Tymoshenko or Volodymyr Zelenskiy, a political novice who achieved fame as a comic actor. Tymoshenko, the frontrunner, wants to cut gas prices for households, which may set her on a collision course with the International Monetary Fund and other foreign backers who pumped billions into Ukraine to keep its war-scarred economy afloat.

Ukraine's Poroshenko launches bid for second term as president

Alpine tunnel strokes tension in Italy

Real Madrid and Barcelona were the highest earning clubs in European <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/india-news/it-is-my-request-to-all-please-do-not-make-evms-a-football-says-cec-sunil-arora-191353&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwjE4Y3YzIXgAhVGKY8KHeJTCgMQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw1GWcece2JOcH_7NNaYmVGN">football </a>last season, knocking Manchester United off top spot, according to the latest Deloitte 'Football Money League' published on Thursday.

Deloitte based their survey of the top 20 earning clubs in Europe on the annual financial statements of the company or group running each club, or other direct sources, covering the 2017/18 season.

Real returned to top spot for the first time since 2014/15 with revenues of 750.9 million euros ($854.6 million). Their revenue increased by more than 75 million euros year-on-year as they secured their third successive Champions League title.

Deloitte said the rise was "primarily due to the commercial growth of 54.8million euros including an uplift in sponsorship, merchandising and exploitation of increasingly lucrative pre-season fixtures."

Dan Jones, a partner in the <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/india-news/cbi-conducts-raid-at-sports-authority-of-india-office-in-delhi-191061&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwj0jJS-zYXgAhUTUI8KHbcnCW8QFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3jVchPzkIErDz2wgPexxl0">Sports</a> Business Group at Deloitte said: “Real Madrid’s outstanding financial performance in 2017/18 is built on their long history of success on the pitch, most recently three consecutive Champions League titles.

"This has enabled the club to continue to drive commercial revenue as the appetite to partner with Europe’s most successful clubs remains stronger than ever," he added.

Barcelona had earnings of 690.4 million euros, a rise from 648.3 million in the previous year.

Manchester United, who topped last year's table, saw their revenue calculation fall slightly to 666 million euros from 676.3 million but they are one of a record six Premier League teams in top 10.

Football finance expert Rob Wilson, of Sheffield Hallam University, said United's drop to third in the rankings was expected.

"This was predictable mainly due to the timing of commercial and sponsorship renewals. The big-ticket items; shirt manufacturing and shirt sponsorship being renewed and improving the overall position of a number of clubs.

"MUFC don’t go back to the negotiating table for a while yet. Expect them to stay off the top spot for a good few years yet, particularly with a possible reduction in matchday revenue if they miss out on qualification to the Champions League."

United's position was also affected by exchange rates as their actual revenue measured in pounds sterling rose slightly from 581.2 million to 590 million.

The club is rated the number one football brand by KPMG and the most valuable club by Forbes.

There are no Italian clubs in the top 10 with Juventus slipping to 11th place, while Bayern Munich is the sole German club.

Real Madrid and Barcelona were the highest earning clubs in European football last season, knocking Manchester United off top spot, according to the latest Deloitte 'Football Money League' published on Thursday.

Real Madrid and Barcelona were the highest earning clubs in European football last season, knocking Manchester United off top spot, according to the latest Deloitte 'Football Money League' published on Thursday. Deloitte based their survey of the top 20 earning clubs in Europe on the annual financial statements of the company or group running each club, or other direct sources, covering the 2017/18 season. Real returned to top spot for the first time since 2014/15 with revenues of 750.9 million euros ($854.6 million). Their revenue increased by more than 75 million euros year-on-year as they secured their third successive Champions League title. Deloitte said the rise was "primarily due to the commercial growth of 54.8million euros including an uplift in sponsorship, merchandising and exploitation of increasingly lucrative pre-season fixtures." Dan Jones, a partner in the Sports Business Group at Deloitte said: “Real Madrid’s outstanding financial performance in 2017/18 is built on their long history of success on the pitch, most recently three consecutive Champions League titles. "This has enabled the club to continue to drive commercial revenue as the appetite to partner with Europe’s most successful clubs remains stronger than ever," he added. Barcelona had earnings of 690.4 million euros, a rise from 648.3 million in the previous year. Manchester United, who topped last year's table, saw their revenue calculation fall slightly to 666 million euros from 676.3 million but they are one of a record six Premier League teams in top 10. Football finance expert Rob Wilson, of Sheffield Hallam University, said United's drop to third in the rankings was expected. "This was predictable mainly due to the timing of commercial and sponsorship renewals. The big-ticket items; shirt manufacturing and shirt sponsorship being renewed and improving the overall position of a number of clubs. "MUFC don’t go back to the negotiating table for a while yet. Expect them to stay off the top spot for a good few years yet, particularly with a possible reduction in matchday revenue if they miss out on qualification to the Champions League." United's position was also affected by exchange rates as their actual revenue measured in pounds sterling rose slightly from 581.2 million to 590 million. The club is rated the number one football brand by KPMG and the most valuable club by Forbes. There are no Italian clubs in the top 10 with Juventus slipping to 11th place, while Bayern Munich is the sole German club.

Real and Barca replace United as top-earning clubs: Deloitte

The top US diplomat for European affairs, Wess Mitchell, has resigned, according to his resignation letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday at a time of strains in the trans-Atlantic relationship over US President Donald Trump's policies.

In the letter to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo dated January 4, Mitchell said he felt he had completed his goals for the post and wanted to spend more time with his young family.

He will leave the post on February 15, according to the State Department.

There were no obvious signs that Mitchell, a former policy analyst on central and eastern Europe, was resigning out of protest against Trump administration policies.

Mitchell was brought on board by former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in 2017 as Trump threatened to withdraw the United States from the NATO military alliance and Washington accused Moscow of meddling in the 2016 US presidential campaign.

The trans-Atlantic relationship has been further strained by Trump's decisions to impose US tariffs on European steel and aluminum, pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and global climate pact, and recently to withdraw troops from Syria.

Ties with Germany have been strained over Trump's sharp criticism of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's migration policies and support for a Baltic Sea gas pipeline with Russia. He has also lashed out at French President Emmanuel Macron for his "low approval rating," France's near defeat to Germany in two world wars and accused Paris of unfair trade practices over wine.

Pompeo said on Twitter that Mitchell had done "an outstanding job as Assistant Secretary."

"I have valued his counsel and wisdom as he has led our European team in this administration. I wish him and his wife Elizabeth, who is also a committed public servant, much happiness with their two young children," Pompeo tweeted.

In his resignation letter, Mitchell said he had helped to craft the administration's European strategy and reorganize the European bureau at the State Department.

He said he was proud of diplomatic efforts in sustaining transatlantic unity on sanctions against Russia, securing the release of American pastor Andrew Brunson from Turkey, and US support for resolving a dispute between Greece and Macedonia over the former Yugoslav republic's name.

"I am proud of what we have accomplished in creating and beginning to implement the Europe Integrated Strategy in support of the National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy," he wrote. "The emphasis that these strategies place on the need to prepare our country and the nations of the West for sustained competition with big-power rivals is both urgently necessary and long overdue," he added.

The top US diplomat for European affairs, Wess Mitchell, has resigned, according to his resignation letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday at a time of strains in the trans-Atlantic relationship over US President Donald Trump's policies.

The top US diplomat for European affairs, Wess Mitchell, has resigned, according to his resignation letter seen by Reuters on Tuesday at a time of strains in the trans-Atlantic relationship over US President Donald Trump's policies. In the letter to US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo dated January 4, Mitchell said he felt he had completed his goals for the post and wanted to spend more time with his young family. He will leave the post on February 15, according to the State Department. There were no obvious signs that Mitchell, a former policy analyst on central and eastern Europe, was resigning out of protest against Trump administration policies. Mitchell was brought on board by former Secretary of State Rex Tillerson in 2017 as Trump threatened to withdraw the United States from the NATO military alliance and Washington accused Moscow of meddling in the 2016 US presidential campaign. The trans-Atlantic relationship has been further strained by Trump's decisions to impose US tariffs on European steel and aluminum, pull out of the Iran nuclear deal and global climate pact, and recently to withdraw troops from Syria. Ties with Germany have been strained over Trump's sharp criticism of German Chancellor Angela Merkel's migration policies and support for a Baltic Sea gas pipeline with Russia. He has also lashed out at French President Emmanuel Macron for his "low approval rating," France's near defeat to Germany in two world wars and accused Paris of unfair trade practices over wine. Pompeo said on Twitter that Mitchell had done "an outstanding job as Assistant Secretary." "I have valued his counsel and wisdom as he has led our European team in this administration. I wish him and his wife Elizabeth, who is also a committed public servant, much happiness with their two young children," Pompeo tweeted. In his resignation letter, Mitchell said he had helped to craft the administration's European strategy and reorganize the European bureau at the State Department. He said he was proud of diplomatic efforts in sustaining transatlantic unity on sanctions against Russia, securing the release of American pastor Andrew Brunson from Turkey, and US support for resolving a dispute between Greece and Macedonia over the former Yugoslav republic's name. "I am proud of what we have accomplished in creating and beginning to implement the Europe Integrated Strategy in support of the National Security Strategy and National Defense Strategy," he wrote. "The emphasis that these strategies place on the need to prepare our country and the nations of the West for sustained competition with big-power rivals is both urgently necessary and long overdue," he added.

Top US diplomat for Europe resigns, cites personal, professional reasons

<a href="http://www.wionews.com/world/russia-calls-on-japan-to-recognise-outcome-of-world-war-two-190737">Russia </a>said on Wednesday it was ready to work with Washington to save a crucial arms control treaty and called on Europe to help in faltering talks.

Tensions have raged for months over the fate of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty (INF) signed in 1987 by then US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

US President Donald Trump has promised to walk away from the agreement and President Vladimir Putin threatened a new arms race, saying Europe would be its main victim.&nbsp;

Speaking after fresh talks between US and Russian officials in Geneva to salvage the INF led nowhere, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow was ready to continue talks.

"We are still ready to work to save the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty," Russia's top diplomat told reporters.&nbsp;

He called on European nations to help influence Washington, saying they had a major stake in the issue and should not be "at the tail-end of the US position".

Last month Washington said it would withdraw from the INF treaty within 60 days if Russia did not dismantle missiles that the US claims breach the deal.

Moscow's top negotiator in Geneva, deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov, said the Geneva talks centred on Russia's 9M729 system but that US demands regarding the missile were unacceptable.&nbsp;

Lavrov said on Wednesday the Russian side in Geneva came up with "constructive proposals" aiming to give the US an idea of what the 9M729 system was.

"However, US representatives arrived with a prepared position that was based on an ultimatum and centred on a demand for us to destroy this rocket, its launchers, and all related equipment under US supervision," Lavrov said.&nbsp;

The US negotiators never explained why Washington did not want to consider Russia's proposals, he added.

'You are violating, we are not'

Talks have essentially ground to a halt, Lavrov said, describing Washington's logic as: "You are violating the treaty and we are not."

Russian negotiators on Tuesday proposed holding another round of talks on the agreement but received no reply from the US side, Ryabkov has said.&nbsp;

Russia denies it is in violation of the treaty, which forbids ground-launched short- and intermediate-range missiles.

In Geneva on Tuesday, US and Russian diplomats blamed each other for pushing the agreement to the brink of collapse. &nbsp; &nbsp;

Russia said Washington had confirmed its intention to exit the February 2 treaty.&nbsp;

US Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, Andrea Thompson, has said the Geneva meeting was "disappointing" and Russia continued "to be in material breach of the treaty."

US trying to 'impose its will'

Lavrov also expressed hope it would be possible to save another key arms control agreement, the New START.&nbsp;

The agreement, which caps the number of nuclear warheads held by Washington and Moscow, expires in 2021.

"We are doing a lot to remove possible irritants regarding it and are interested in having it extended," he said.

He slammed Washington's overall position, saying the potential for conflict was increasing due to the West's unwillingness to accept "the reality of an emerging multi-polar world" and its desire to "impose its will" on the rest of the global community.

Putin has threatened to develop nuclear missiles banned under the INF treaty if it is scrapped.&nbsp;

He said in December he was open to the idea of other countries joining the INF treaty or to starting talks on a new agreement.

Putin has also said that if Washington moved to place more missiles in Europe after ditching the deal, Russia would respond "in kind" and that any European countries agreeing to host US missiles would be at risk of a Russian attack.

The INF deal resolved a crisis over Soviet nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles targeting Western capitals, but put no restrictions on other major military actors such as China.

Russia said on Wednesday it was ready to work with Washington to save a crucial arms control treaty and called on Europe to help in faltering talks. Tensions have raged for months over the fate of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty (INF) signed in 1987 by then US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev.

Russia said on Wednesday it was ready to work with Washington to save a crucial arms control treaty and called on Europe to help in faltering talks. Tensions have raged for months over the fate of the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces treaty (INF) signed in 1987 by then US president Ronald Reagan and Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev. US President Donald Trump has promised to walk away from the agreement and President Vladimir Putin threatened a new arms race, saying Europe would be its main victim. Speaking after fresh talks between US and Russian officials in Geneva to salvage the INF led nowhere, Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said Moscow was ready to continue talks. "We are still ready to work to save the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty," Russia's top diplomat told reporters. He called on European nations to help influence Washington, saying they had a major stake in the issue and should not be "at the tail-end of the US position". Last month Washington said it would withdraw from the INF treaty within 60 days if Russia did not dismantle missiles that the US claims breach the deal. Moscow's top negotiator in Geneva, deputy foreign minister Sergei Ryabkov, said the Geneva talks centred on Russia's 9M729 system but that US demands regarding the missile were unacceptable. Lavrov said on Wednesday the Russian side in Geneva came up with "constructive proposals" aiming to give the US an idea of what the 9M729 system was. "However, US representatives arrived with a prepared position that was based on an ultimatum and centred on a demand for us to destroy this rocket, its launchers, and all related equipment under US supervision," Lavrov said. The US negotiators never explained why Washington did not want to consider Russia's proposals, he added. 'You are violating, we are not' Talks have essentially ground to a halt, Lavrov said, describing Washington's logic as: "You are violating the treaty and we are not." Russian negotiators on Tuesday proposed holding another round of talks on the agreement but received no reply from the US side, Ryabkov has said. Russia denies it is in violation of the treaty, which forbids ground-launched short- and intermediate-range missiles. In Geneva on Tuesday, US and Russian diplomats blamed each other for pushing the agreement to the brink of collapse. Russia said Washington had confirmed its intention to exit the February 2 treaty. US Under Secretary for Arms Control and International Security, Andrea Thompson, has said the Geneva meeting was "disappointing" and Russia continued "to be in material breach of the treaty." US trying to 'impose its will' Lavrov also expressed hope it would be possible to save another key arms control agreement, the New START. The agreement, which caps the number of nuclear warheads held by Washington and Moscow, expires in 2021. "We are doing a lot to remove possible irritants regarding it and are interested in having it extended," he said. He slammed Washington's overall position, saying the potential for conflict was increasing due to the West's unwillingness to accept "the reality of an emerging multi-polar world" and its desire to "impose its will" on the rest of the global community. Putin has threatened to develop nuclear missiles banned under the INF treaty if it is scrapped. He said in December he was open to the idea of other countries joining the INF treaty or to starting talks on a new agreement. Putin has also said that if Washington moved to place more missiles in Europe after ditching the deal, Russia would respond "in kind" and that any European countries agreeing to host US missiles would be at risk of a Russian attack. The INF deal resolved a crisis over Soviet nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles targeting Western capitals, but put no restrictions on other major military actors such as China.

Russia ready to 'save' INF arms treaty, urges Europe to help

Coastguards on Tuesday recovered a dead body after a boat loaded with dozens of migrants sank off western <a href="https://www.google.com/url?q=http://www.wionews.com/opinions/syrian-kurds-the-new-frontline-in-confronting-iran-and-turkey-190389&amp;sa=U&amp;ved=0ahUKEwiR_LmOz-_fAhUDtY8KHehuAmAQFggFMAA&amp;client=internal-uds-cse&amp;cx=006054055338965708568:09spwrlibei&amp;usg=AOvVaw3PkOPnTQmmTNbLAm_t2suA">Turkey</a>, the authorities said in a statement.&nbsp;

The coastguard said it rescued 46 people after the vessel capsized off the Guzelcamli region in the Aegean province of Aydin.&nbsp;

The identity of the migrants was not immediately known.&nbsp;

Initial testimonies revealed there were no missing migrants, the Turkish coastguard said.

Turkey has been the main transition route for people trying to reach Europe, especially since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011.&nbsp;

The number of migrants coming to Europe has declined since hitting a peak in 2015 when more than a million people landed in Greece from Turkey, mainly on boats.

Turkey and the European Union reached a deal in 2016 to stem the flow, with Ankara agreeing to take back migrants landing on Greek islands in exchange for incentives including financial aid.

Coastguards on Tuesday recovered a dead body after a boat loaded with dozens of migrants sank off western Turkey, the authorities said in a statement. The coastguard said it rescued 46 people after the vessel capsized off the Guzelcamli region in the Aegean province of Aydin.

Coastguards on Tuesday recovered a dead body after a boat loaded with dozens of migrants sank off western Turkey, the authorities said in a statement. The coastguard said it rescued 46 people after the vessel capsized off the Guzelcamli region in the Aegean province of Aydin. The identity of the migrants was not immediately known. Initial testimonies revealed there were no missing migrants, the Turkish coastguard said. Turkey has been the main transition route for people trying to reach Europe, especially since the start of the Syrian conflict in 2011. The number of migrants coming to Europe has declined since hitting a peak in 2015 when more than a million people landed in Greece from Turkey, mainly on boats. Turkey and the European Union reached a deal in 2016 to stem the flow, with Ankara agreeing to take back migrants landing on Greek islands in exchange for incentives including financial aid.

Migrant drowns as boat sinks off Turkey

Asian players are proving to be conceptually and bureaucratically better positioned in the 21st century’s 'great game' that involves tectonic geopolitical shifts with the emergence of what former Portuguese Europe minister Bruno Macaes terms the fusion of Europe and Asia into a “supercontinent.”

Yet, in contrast to the United States, Asian players despite approaching Europe and Asia as one political, albeit polarised and disorganised entity populated by widely differing and competing visions, may find that their historic legacies work against them.

US Naval College national security scholar Nikolas K Gvosdev argued that the United States, for example, was blinded to the shifts by the State Department’s classification of Russia as part of Europe, its lumping of Central Asia together with Pakistan and India and the Pentagon’s association of the region with the Arab world and Iran.

“The (State Department’s) continued inclusion of Russia within the diplomatic confines of a larger European bureau has intellectually limited assessments about Russia’s position in the world by framing Russian action primarily through a European lens. Not only does this undercount Russia’s ability to be a major player in the Middle East, South Asia and East Asia, it has also, in my view, tended to overweight the importance of the Baltic littoral to Russian policy,” Gvosdev said.

He warned that the US government’s geographical classification of Central Asia, Eurasia’s heartland has “relegated it to second-tier status in terms of US attention and priorities.”

US failure to get ahead of the tectonic shifts in global geopolitics contrasts starkly with the understanding of Central Asian nations that they increasingly exist in an integrated, interconnected region that cannot isolate itself from changes enveloping it.

That understanding is reflected in a report by the Astana Club that brings together prominent political figures, diplomats, and experts from the great game’s various players under the auspices of Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev.

Entitled, ‘Toward a Greater Eurasia: How to Build a Common Future?,’ the report warns that the Eurasian supercontinent needs to anticipate the Great Game’s risks that include mounting tensions between the United States and China; global trade wars; arms races; escalating conflict in the greater Middle East; deteriorating relations between Russia and the West; a heating up of contained European conflicts such as former Yugoslavia; rising chances of separatism and ethnic/religious conflict; and environmental degradation as well as technological advances.

The report suggested that the risks were enhanced by the fragility of the global system with the weakening of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and NATO.

Nazarbayev, Russian president Vladimir Putin and Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan may be better positioned to understand the shifts given that they govern territories at the heart of the emerging Eurasian supercontinent and see it as an integral development rooted in their countries’ histories.

The then Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu made as much clear in 2013, “The last century was only a parenthesis for us. We will close that parenthesis. We will do so without going to war, or calling anyone an enemy, without being disrespectful to any border; we will again tie Sarajevo to Damascus, Benghazi to Erzurum to Batumi. This is the core of our power. These may look like different countries to you, but Yemen and Skopje were part of the same country a hundred and ten years ago as were Erzurum and Benghazi,” Davutoglu said drawing a picture of a modern-day revival of the Ottoman empire.

Erdogan has taken that ambition a step further by increasingly expanding it to the Turkic and Muslim world.

At its core, Erdogan’s vision, according to Eurasia scholar Igor Torbakov, is built on the notion that the world is divided into distinct civilisations. And upon that foundation rise three pillars: 1) A just world order can only be a multipolar one; 2) No civilisation has the right to claim a hegemonic position in the international system, and 3) Non-Western civilisations (including those in Turkey and Russia) are in the ascendant. In addition, anti-Western sentiment and self-assertiveness are crucial elements of this outlook.

Expressing that sentiment, Turkish bestselling author and Erdogan supporter Alev Alati quipped: “We are the ones who have adopted Islam as an identity but have become so competent in playing chess with Westerners that we can beat them. We made this country that lacked oil, gold and gas what it is now. It was not easy, and we won’t give it up so quickly.”

The Achilles Heel, however, of Putin and Erdogan’s Eurasianism is the fact that its geographies are populated by former empires like the Ottomans and Russia whose post-imperial notions of national identity remain contested and drive its leaders to define national unity as state unity, control the flow of information, and repress alternative views expressions of dissent.

Turkey and Russia still “see themselves as empires, and, as a general rule, an empire’s political philosophy is one of universalism and exceptionalism. In other words, empires don’t have friends – they have either enemies or dependencies,” said Torbakov, the Eurasia scholar, or exist in what Russian strategists term “imperial or geopolitical solitude.”

Erdogan’s vision of a modern-day Ottoman empire encompasses the Turkic and Muslim world. Different groups of Russian strategists promote concepts of Russia as a state that has to continuously act as an empire or as a unique “state civilisation” devoid of expansionist ambition despite its premise of a Russian World that embraces the primacy of Russian culture as well as tolerance for non-Russian cultures. Both notions highlight the pitfalls of their nations’ history and Eurasianism.

Both Erdogan and Russia’s vision remain controversial. In Erdogan’s case, it is Muslim more than the Turkic world that is unwilling to accept Turkish leadership unchallenged with Saudi Arabia leading the charge and Turkish-Iranian relations defined by immediate common interests rather than shared strategic thinking.

Similarly, post-Soviet states take issue with Russia’s notion of the primacy of its culture. Beyond the Russian-Ukrainian conflict over the annexation of Crimea and Moscow’s support for Russian-speaking rebels in the east of the country, Ukraine emphasised its rejection of Russian cultural primacy with this month’s creation of a Ukrainian Orthodox Church independent of its Russian counterpart.

Earlier, Ukraine’s parliament passed a law in September 2017 establishing Ukrainian rather than Russian as the language of instruction in schools and colleges. The law stipulated that educational institutions could teach courses in a second language, provided it was an official language of the European Union. National minorities were guaranteed the right to study in Ukrainian as well as their minority language.

Similarly, Kazakhstan, the Eurasian nation par excellence, shifted from Cyrillic to Latin script.

“Russia’s influence (in Central Asia) has been largely mythologised, and its role in both national and regional security has not been properly and honestly discussed. Different fears and phobias still influence the decision-making process, including those over Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, its annexation of Crimea, the concept of the ‘Russian World’ as a pillar of its national identity, and its soft power,” said Kazakh Central Asia scholar Anna Gussarova.

Ukraine may put a dent in the Russian World’s attractivity, but it does not amount to a body blow.

Gussarova cautioned that while Central Asian elites may recognise the risks involved in embracing Russian primacy, the region’s public remains far more aligned with Russian culture, at least linguistically.

“Whereas the expert community, which is supposed to shape public opinion, uses the English-language platforms Facebook and Twitter, the general public relies on Russian-language social media. This dichotomy underscores the limitations of any effort by the government and affiliated experts to shape public perceptions. At the same time, this gap shows greater public support for Russia and its activities, which makes nation-building and language issues difficult and sensitive,” Gussarova said. 
 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Asian players are proving to be conceptually and bureaucratically better positioned in the 21st century’s 'great game' that involves tectonic geopolitical shifts with the emergence of what former Portuguese Europe minister Bruno Macaes terms the fusion of Europe and Asia into a “supercontinent.

Asian players are proving to be conceptually and bureaucratically better positioned in the 21st century’s 'great game' that involves tectonic geopolitical shifts with the emergence of what former Portuguese Europe minister Bruno Macaes terms the fusion of Europe and Asia into a “supercontinent.” Yet, in contrast to the United States, Asian players despite approaching Europe and Asia as one political, albeit polarised and disorganised entity populated by widely differing and competing visions, may find that their historic legacies work against them. US Naval College national security scholar Nikolas K Gvosdev argued that the United States, for example, was blinded to the shifts by the State Department’s classification of Russia as part of Europe, its lumping of Central Asia together with Pakistan and India and the Pentagon’s association of the region with the Arab world and Iran. “The (State Department’s) continued inclusion of Russia within the diplomatic confines of a larger European bureau has intellectually limited assessments about Russia’s position in the world by framing Russian action primarily through a European lens. Not only does this undercount Russia’s ability to be a major player in the Middle East, South Asia and East Asia, it has also, in my view, tended to overweight the importance of the Baltic littoral to Russian policy,” Gvosdev said. He warned that the US government’s geographical classification of Central Asia, Eurasia’s heartland has “relegated it to second-tier status in terms of US attention and priorities.” US failure to get ahead of the tectonic shifts in global geopolitics contrasts starkly with the understanding of Central Asian nations that they increasingly exist in an integrated, interconnected region that cannot isolate itself from changes enveloping it. That understanding is reflected in a report by the Astana Club that brings together prominent political figures, diplomats, and experts from the great game’s various players under the auspices of Kazakh president Nursultan Nazarbayev. Entitled, ‘Toward a Greater Eurasia: How to Build a Common Future?,’ the report warns that the Eurasian supercontinent needs to anticipate the Great Game’s risks that include mounting tensions between the United States and China; global trade wars; arms races; escalating conflict in the greater Middle East; deteriorating relations between Russia and the West; a heating up of contained European conflicts such as former Yugoslavia; rising chances of separatism and ethnic/religious conflict; and environmental degradation as well as technological advances. The report suggested that the risks were enhanced by the fragility of the global system with the weakening of multilateral institutions such as the United Nations, the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and NATO. Nazarbayev, Russian president Vladimir Putin and Turkish president Recep Tayyip Erdogan may be better positioned to understand the shifts given that they govern territories at the heart of the emerging Eurasian supercontinent and see it as an integral development rooted in their countries’ histories. The then Turkish foreign minister Ahmet Davutoglu made as much clear in 2013, “The last century was only a parenthesis for us. We will close that parenthesis. We will do so without going to war, or calling anyone an enemy, without being disrespectful to any border; we will again tie Sarajevo to Damascus, Benghazi to Erzurum to Batumi. This is the core of our power. These may look like different countries to you, but Yemen and Skopje were part of the same country a hundred and ten years ago as were Erzurum and Benghazi,” Davutoglu said drawing a picture of a modern-day revival of the Ottoman empire. Erdogan has taken that ambition a step further by increasingly expanding it to the Turkic and Muslim world. At its core, Erdogan’s vision, according to Eurasia scholar Igor Torbakov, is built on the notion that the world is divided into distinct civilisations. And upon that foundation rise three pillars: 1) A just world order can only be a multipolar one; 2) No civilisation has the right to claim a hegemonic position in the international system, and 3) Non-Western civilisations (including those in Turkey and Russia) are in the ascendant. In addition, anti-Western sentiment and self-assertiveness are crucial elements of this outlook. Expressing that sentiment, Turkish bestselling author and Erdogan supporter Alev Alati quipped: “We are the ones who have adopted Islam as an identity but have become so competent in playing chess with Westerners that we can beat them. We made this country that lacked oil, gold and gas what it is now. It was not easy, and we won’t give it up so quickly.” The Achilles Heel, however, of Putin and Erdogan’s Eurasianism is the fact that its geographies are populated by former empires like the Ottomans and Russia whose post-imperial notions of national identity remain contested and drive its leaders to define national unity as state unity, control the flow of information, and repress alternative views expressions of dissent. Turkey and Russia still “see themselves as empires, and, as a general rule, an empire’s political philosophy is one of universalism and exceptionalism. In other words, empires don’t have friends – they have either enemies or dependencies,” said Torbakov, the Eurasia scholar, or exist in what Russian strategists term “imperial or geopolitical solitude.” Erdogan’s vision of a modern-day Ottoman empire encompasses the Turkic and Muslim world. Different groups of Russian strategists promote concepts of Russia as a state that has to continuously act as an empire or as a unique “state civilisation” devoid of expansionist ambition despite its premise of a Russian World that embraces the primacy of Russian culture as well as tolerance for non-Russian cultures. Both notions highlight the pitfalls of their nations’ history and Eurasianism. Both Erdogan and Russia’s vision remain controversial. In Erdogan’s case, it is Muslim more than the Turkic world that is unwilling to accept Turkish leadership unchallenged with Saudi Arabia leading the charge and Turkish-Iranian relations defined by immediate common interests rather than shared strategic thinking. Similarly, post-Soviet states take issue with Russia’s notion of the primacy of its culture. Beyond the Russian-Ukrainian conflict over the annexation of Crimea and Moscow’s support for Russian-speaking rebels in the east of the country, Ukraine emphasised its rejection of Russian cultural primacy with this month’s creation of a Ukrainian Orthodox Church independent of its Russian counterpart. Earlier, Ukraine’s parliament passed a law in September 2017 establishing Ukrainian rather than Russian as the language of instruction in schools and colleges. The law stipulated that educational institutions could teach courses in a second language, provided it was an official language of the European Union. National minorities were guaranteed the right to study in Ukrainian as well as their minority language. Similarly, Kazakhstan, the Eurasian nation par excellence, shifted from Cyrillic to Latin script. “Russia’s influence (in Central Asia) has been largely mythologised, and its role in both national and regional security has not been properly and honestly discussed. Different fears and phobias still influence the decision-making process, including those over Russia’s aggression in Ukraine, its annexation of Crimea, the concept of the ‘Russian World’ as a pillar of its national identity, and its soft power,” said Kazakh Central Asia scholar Anna Gussarova. Ukraine may put a dent in the Russian World’s attractivity, but it does not amount to a body blow. Gussarova cautioned that while Central Asian elites may recognise the risks involved in embracing Russian primacy, the region’s public remains far more aligned with Russian culture, at least linguistically. “Whereas the expert community, which is supposed to shape public opinion, uses the English-language platforms Facebook and Twitter, the general public relies on Russian-language social media. This dichotomy underscores the limitations of any effort by the government and affiliated experts to shape public perceptions. At the same time, this gap shows greater public support for Russia and its activities, which makes nation-building and language issues difficult and sensitive,” Gussarova said. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

The rise of Eurasia: Geopolitical advantages and historic pitfalls

Nationalist and populist anger over immigration has brought down the Belgian government, forcing prime minister Charles Michel to offer the king his resignation. The catalytic spur to the no confidence motion initiated against the prime minister was Charles Michel’s agreement with the United Nations over the issue of burden sharing of refugees.&nbsp;

While there are idiosyncratic reasons peculiar to Belgium for the crisis but generally, the crisis stems from the broad sweep if nativist populism and nationalism across Europe which, in turn, is rendering the political centre in the region increasingly tenuous and fragile. (There is a consensus among analysts over the occlusion of the political centre in and across Europe).

The ramrod issue for the rise in nationalism and nativist populism in Europe, which potentially even threatens the longevity of the European Union (EU), has been immigration. This issue assumed poignancy after hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees crossed into Europe (especially Germany) where the bold Angela Merkel staked her political capital and career in accepting these hapless victims of the conflict. &nbsp;But, this assessment is running ahead of the issue, so to speak.

Europe’s problems and issues with immigrants and refugees span generations. It began with the guest worker programs in the sixties and seventies, where on account of the demand generated by the Marshall Plan (the Cold War program initiated by the Americans to check and contain the Soviets), there was a need for extra labour. This need was filled by the Turkish immigrants who were labelled as “gastar baider”( guest workers). But, the guest workers stayed on. Since most were Muslim and there were obvious issues with both integration and assimilation, &nbsp;these immigrants remained on the margins of European societies, which always viewed them as outsiders and with jaundiced eyes. This “history” created both frisson and friction within European societies.&nbsp;

As Muslims in Europe, ghettoized, the estrangement with host societies, which was mutual, only grew.

Fast forward a few decades.

The European Union deepened and widened, and paralleled by the forces of globalisation, created among other things, the “democratic deficit” in Europe. This meant that people gradually started becoming estranged from the processes and structures of the EU and felt that the system was not responsive to them. Thus got incubated the putative forces of nationalism and nativism in Europe. &nbsp;These broader macro historical themes and processes were complemented by the September 11 attacks on the United States homeland, followed by the country’s “war of choice”, the Second Gulf War, which by creating a vacuum in post-war Iraq and United States inept and callous handling of a fragmented Iraq , led to the formation of the ISIS and the breakdown of the Syrian state.

The ISIS directed its ire against and in Europe, where it found estranged second and third generation willing recruits who, in turn, went not only to fight in Syria and elsewhere but also launched attacks in and within Europe. This carried a chain reaction wherein the extant estrangement between Muslims in Europe and their host societies morphed into outright hostility. &nbsp;

The repercussions were political: With an identifiable “Other” to lash out against, for various and variegated frustrations and angst, ire was directed against Muslims which reached a crescendo with the arrival of Syrian and assorted Muslim refugees into Europe, the region’s politics veered to extremes with the far right not only gaining traction but also mounting a challenge to the centre.

All this, to a large extent, explains the fall of the government in Belgium. &nbsp;To employ the language of the Cold War, Belgium is another “domino” to fall which bodes ill for the political future of the European Union, especially against the backdrop of Brexit. Can the question be, this inexorable drift of &nbsp;European politics be stemmed? Can the “tide” be reversed?

There are no clear answers to these questions. If there is no Centre to hold in Europe, then the region’s left and right might increasingly look alike in terms of trying to usurp or try to mirror populist nativist rage in their respective political agendas. As Merkel goes in Germany, and the country’s politics succumbs to populist pressures, the last holdout in Europe will be Macron’s France. But, as the tide might increasingly turn against centrist politics toward extremes, even he might succumb. The casualty, if this scenario comes to pass, will not only be centrist politics but also the European Union which, contemporarily is facing a &nbsp;frontal challenge from Italy. &nbsp; The continuation of the politics of extremes, if not nipped in the bud, &nbsp;which might spell the end of the EU, will have far-reaching consequences across the world. A bold and beautiful experiment in supranationalism and post-nationalism which could have been an inspiration for others will come to an end. But, this outcome is not foreordained. A salvage job can still be done. This job would need sagacity, foresight and boldness of vision, themes which are sorely missing in contemporary Europe. Absent these, the region can fall into disarray, a condition in which there will no clear winners but Muslims will be made to cop both blame, hostility and animus.

POST SCRIPT: I became victim of Europe’s slide into nativist populism and a review of policies thereof. I was denied a visa by the Dutch despite having watertight documentation, and an invitation by a Dutch national to visit the Netherlands for a short visit. 
&nbsp;

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Nationalist and populist anger over immigration has brought down the Belgian government, forcing prime minister Charles Michel to offer the king his resignation.

Nationalist and populist anger over immigration has brought down the Belgian government, forcing prime minister Charles Michel to offer the king his resignation. The catalytic spur to the no confidence motion initiated against the prime minister was Charles Michel’s agreement with the United Nations over the issue of burden sharing of refugees. While there are idiosyncratic reasons peculiar to Belgium for the crisis but generally, the crisis stems from the broad sweep if nativist populism and nationalism across Europe which, in turn, is rendering the political centre in the region increasingly tenuous and fragile. (There is a consensus among analysts over the occlusion of the political centre in and across Europe). The ramrod issue for the rise in nationalism and nativist populism in Europe, which potentially even threatens the longevity of the European Union (EU), has been immigration. This issue assumed poignancy after hundreds of thousands of Syrian refugees crossed into Europe (especially Germany) where the bold Angela Merkel staked her political capital and career in accepting these hapless victims of the conflict. But, this assessment is running ahead of the issue, so to speak. Europe’s problems and issues with immigrants and refugees span generations. It began with the guest worker programs in the sixties and seventies, where on account of the demand generated by the Marshall Plan (the Cold War program initiated by the Americans to check and contain the Soviets), there was a need for extra labour. This need was filled by the Turkish immigrants who were labelled as “gastar baider”( guest workers). But, the guest workers stayed on. Since most were Muslim and there were obvious issues with both integration and assimilation, these immigrants remained on the margins of European societies, which always viewed them as outsiders and with jaundiced eyes. This “history” created both frisson and friction within European societies. As Muslims in Europe, ghettoized, the estrangement with host societies, which was mutual, only grew. Fast forward a few decades. The European Union deepened and widened, and paralleled by the forces of globalisation, created among other things, the “democratic deficit” in Europe. This meant that people gradually started becoming estranged from the processes and structures of the EU and felt that the system was not responsive to them. Thus got incubated the putative forces of nationalism and nativism in Europe. These broader macro historical themes and processes were complemented by the September 11 attacks on the United States homeland, followed by the country’s “war of choice”, the Second Gulf War, which by creating a vacuum in post-war Iraq and United States inept and callous handling of a fragmented Iraq , led to the formation of the ISIS and the breakdown of the Syrian state. The ISIS directed its ire against and in Europe, where it found estranged second and third generation willing recruits who, in turn, went not only to fight in Syria and elsewhere but also launched attacks in and within Europe. This carried a chain reaction wherein the extant estrangement between Muslims in Europe and their host societies morphed into outright hostility. The repercussions were political: With an identifiable “Other” to lash out against, for various and variegated frustrations and angst, ire was directed against Muslims which reached a crescendo with the arrival of Syrian and assorted Muslim refugees into Europe, the region’s politics veered to extremes with the far right not only gaining traction but also mounting a challenge to the centre. All this, to a large extent, explains the fall of the government in Belgium. To employ the language of the Cold War, Belgium is another “domino” to fall which bodes ill for the political future of the European Union, especially against the backdrop of Brexit. Can the question be, this inexorable drift of European politics be stemmed? Can the “tide” be reversed? There are no clear answers to these questions. If there is no Centre to hold in Europe, then the region’s left and right might increasingly look alike in terms of trying to usurp or try to mirror populist nativist rage in their respective political agendas. As Merkel goes in Germany, and the country’s politics succumbs to populist pressures, the last holdout in Europe will be Macron’s France. But, as the tide might increasingly turn against centrist politics toward extremes, even he might succumb. The casualty, if this scenario comes to pass, will not only be centrist politics but also the European Union which, contemporarily is facing a frontal challenge from Italy. The continuation of the politics of extremes, if not nipped in the bud, which might spell the end of the EU, will have far-reaching consequences across the world. A bold and beautiful experiment in supranationalism and post-nationalism which could have been an inspiration for others will come to an end. But, this outcome is not foreordained. A salvage job can still be done. This job would need sagacity, foresight and boldness of vision, themes which are sorely missing in contemporary Europe. Absent these, the region can fall into disarray, a condition in which there will no clear winners but Muslims will be made to cop both blame, hostility and animus. POST SCRIPT: I became victim of Europe’s slide into nativist populism and a review of policies thereof. I was denied a visa by the Dutch despite having watertight documentation, and an invitation by a Dutch national to visit the Netherlands for a short visit. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Europe’s disappearing centre and the politics of extremes

Embattled British Prime Minister Theresa May launched a tour of European capitals on Tuesday in a desperate bid to salvage her Brexit deal, a day after delaying a parliamentary vote on the text to avoid a crushing defeat.

May held talks in The Hague with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte before heading to Berlin to meet Chancellor Angela Merkel as she struggles to unite British lawmakers behind her faltering plan.

She was then to see EU President Donald Tusk and European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker in Brussels.

"I'm surprised because we had reached an agreement on the 25th of November" at the last EU summit, Juncker told the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday, dubbing Brexit a "surprise guest" at this week's summit.

"The deal we have achieved is the best deal possible, it's the only deal possible. There is no room whatsoever for renegotiation but of course there is room, if used intelligently, to give further clarification and further interpretations," he said.

'A political declaration'&nbsp;

Tusk said the other 27 EU leaders would discuss Brexit at a special meeting on Thursday, at the start of a pre-planned summit in Brussels which May will attend.

Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney told national broadcaster RTE that Dublin ruled out changes to the wording of the withdrawal agreement but said there could be "a political declaration coming from a European Council".

"The Irish government doesn't have an issue with providing reassurance if that's helpful," he said.

The embattled May is facing a rebellion in her own party and from parliamentary allies over a clause in the deal relating to Northern Ireland that is threatening to sink both the agreement and her leadership.

"I will now do everything I possibly can to secure further assurances," May told mutinous MPs Monday on her dash to Europe ahead of the EU summit.

If no deal is secured, Britain will still have to leave the EU on March 29 with the government warning a no-deal Brexit will be hugely damaging to the economy.

Anand Menon, a European politics professor at King's College, London, said May needed Brussels to make it "absolutely clear" no major concessions are on offer -- no matter who is prime minister.

"What they might do is add some language to the political declaration, not the withdrawal agreement," he added.&nbsp; 
"I imagine they'll add some language saying that both sides remain convinced that we'll never need to use the backstop".

Lawmaker outrage

MPs had been due to vote on Tuesday on the deal with Brussels, which covers the terms of Britain's withdrawal from the European Union after 46 years.

But facing a huge rebellion of her own Tory MPs, primarily over the backstop clause designed to keep open Britain's border with Ireland, May conceded she expected to lose and delayed it.

The decision sent the pound plunging and both sides said they would step up preparations for a no-deal Brexit.

May suffered a barage of scathing headlines on Tuesday, with the Sun calling her move a "Brexmas Turkey" while the Guardian called it "desperate".

The right-leaning Daily Telegraph carried the headline "the lady is for turning", an uncomplimentary comparison to former leader Margaret Thatcher.

Government 'in complete disarray'

In a sign of the uproar, an opposition Labour MP was ejected from the House of Commons after picking up the ceremonial mace in protest at the government's conduct.

The mace -- a symbol of royal authority required to sit in its place for parliament to pass laws -- was last taken from its place in protest in 2009.

Leader of the House and Tory MP Andrea Leadsom defended May on Tuesday saying she was aiming to secure "legally-binding reassurances" that Britain would not be indefinitely stuck in a backstop customs arrangement.

"The EU is always in a position where it negotiates at the last possible moment," she told BBC Radio 4.

She said the assurances could take the form of "an addendum".

Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is facing calls to table a no-confidence vote in the prime minister.

"The government has lost control of events and is in complete disarray," he said.

But Labour said it would hold off on trying to unseat May for now.

Embattled British Prime Minister Theresa May launched a tour of European capitals on Tuesday in a desperate bid to salvage her Brexit deal, a day after delaying a parliamentary vote on the text to avoid a crushing defeat.

Embattled British Prime Minister Theresa May launched a tour of European capitals on Tuesday in a desperate bid to salvage her Brexit deal, a day after delaying a parliamentary vote on the text to avoid a crushing defeat. May held talks in The Hague with Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte before heading to Berlin to meet Chancellor Angela Merkel as she struggles to unite British lawmakers behind her faltering plan. She was then to see EU President Donald Tusk and European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker in Brussels. "I'm surprised because we had reached an agreement on the 25th of November" at the last EU summit, Juncker told the European Parliament in Strasbourg on Tuesday, dubbing Brexit a "surprise guest" at this week's summit. "The deal we have achieved is the best deal possible, it's the only deal possible. There is no room whatsoever for renegotiation but of course there is room, if used intelligently, to give further clarification and further interpretations," he said. 'A political declaration' Tusk said the other 27 EU leaders would discuss Brexit at a special meeting on Thursday, at the start of a pre-planned summit in Brussels which May will attend. Irish Foreign Minister Simon Coveney told national broadcaster RTE that Dublin ruled out changes to the wording of the withdrawal agreement but said there could be "a political declaration coming from a European Council". "The Irish government doesn't have an issue with providing reassurance if that's helpful," he said. The embattled May is facing a rebellion in her own party and from parliamentary allies over a clause in the deal relating to Northern Ireland that is threatening to sink both the agreement and her leadership. "I will now do everything I possibly can to secure further assurances," May told mutinous MPs Monday on her dash to Europe ahead of the EU summit. If no deal is secured, Britain will still have to leave the EU on March 29 with the government warning a no-deal Brexit will be hugely damaging to the economy. Anand Menon, a European politics professor at King's College, London, said May needed Brussels to make it "absolutely clear" no major concessions are on offer -- no matter who is prime minister. "What they might do is add some language to the political declaration, not the withdrawal agreement," he added. "I imagine they'll add some language saying that both sides remain convinced that we'll never need to use the backstop". Lawmaker outrage MPs had been due to vote on Tuesday on the deal with Brussels, which covers the terms of Britain's withdrawal from the European Union after 46 years. But facing a huge rebellion of her own Tory MPs, primarily over the backstop clause designed to keep open Britain's border with Ireland, May conceded she expected to lose and delayed it. The decision sent the pound plunging and both sides said they would step up preparations for a no-deal Brexit. May suffered a barage of scathing headlines on Tuesday, with the Sun calling her move a "Brexmas Turkey" while the Guardian called it "desperate". The right-leaning Daily Telegraph carried the headline "the lady is for turning", an uncomplimentary comparison to former leader Margaret Thatcher. Government 'in complete disarray' In a sign of the uproar, an opposition Labour MP was ejected from the House of Commons after picking up the ceremonial mace in protest at the government's conduct. The mace -- a symbol of royal authority required to sit in its place for parliament to pass laws -- was last taken from its place in protest in 2009. Leader of the House and Tory MP Andrea Leadsom defended May on Tuesday saying she was aiming to secure "legally-binding reassurances" that Britain would not be indefinitely stuck in a backstop customs arrangement. "The EU is always in a position where it negotiates at the last possible moment," she told BBC Radio 4. She said the assurances could take the form of "an addendum". Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is facing calls to table a no-confidence vote in the prime minister. "The government has lost control of events and is in complete disarray," he said. But Labour said it would hold off on trying to unseat May for now.

May tours Europe in desperate bid to save Brexit deal

I was in Paris on November 11, 2018, and drove 200 km north to Lille to participate in the hundredth anniversary of Armistice Day with the people of the township of Levantie where my regiment fought during the Great War. Paris was as beautiful as ever especially as one drove along the Champs de Elysees past the Arc de Triomphe. Sitting at a roadside cafe, one could sense how busy Parisians were with their lives. The multitudes of ethnicities and faiths could be sensed in the hustle and bustle of lunch hour. French President Emmanuel Macron, in a long coat and thick woollen scarf, looked immaculate and confident on television as he welcomed world leaders for the Armistice Day celebrations and even offered advice on resolving the world’s problems.

Within a week after my return, everything seemed to have gone berserk in Paris. In France, after every few years, this happens with fair regularity. This time it’s the Yellow Vests rebellion, the name coming from the high-visibility vests that the protesters wear. My recall of France inevitably starts with the French Revolution of 1789, which in many ways gave the world the lasting socialist slogan. ‘Liberty, equality, fraternity’, the motto of the French Revolution may have many interpretations but France keeps returning to that socialist clarion call ever so often. 
 
The street rebellion of 1968 removed as iconic a leader as Charles de &nbsp;Gaulle. These are the most violent protests since then. It is being said that this time it’s all about an ecological transition; earlier rebellions in the not-too-distant past were against the markets and globalisation.

Not too many people are really aware how this started but apparently protests and demonstrations have been on in almost 2000 locations all over France since early November. Despite being social media instigated and triggered, somehow it took the political communities of France and Europe by relative surprise. It’s Macron’s supposed obsession with his own sense of responsibility which many times does border on idealism. He is committed to ecology and wishes to see France transit very early to clean fuels, renewable energy and the likes. Putting it simply, the trigger is the increase in fuel prices, done primarily to reduce consumption of hydrocarbons, reduce harmful emissions and force the transition he has in mind. He probably hoped it will reduce private transport and force people to use public transport in a much bigger way. Nothing wrong with that but the execution is akin to Marie Antoinette’s famous quip: “If the people don’t have bread, give them cake.” Macron’s perception of public transport is probably limited to cities such as Paris, Nice and Marseilles. In the little driving that I did around, in the smaller towns in the north I found no public transport worth the name. People have to use private vehicles and the fuel price increase has hit them hard. Diesel prices would increase by 30 cents a gallon and petrol by 17 cents if Macron’s proposals are finally implemented.

Yet, fuel price hike is only a trigger. Beneath that lies much more than meets the eye. It’s a lot to do with France’s societal makeup today. Macron who was enthusiastically voted to power with a 66 per cent vote over the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen is today largely considered a rich man’s President. He scrapped wealth tax on taxpayers worth 1.3 million Euro and hiked taxes on the pensioners and retirees. Very few think he has an understanding of the financial predicament of the common French people. The protests are also fuelled by the presence of immigrants and are a cause of worry regarding the security of the cities. Just two years ago, France was the victim of horrific terrorist violence perpetrated by the ISIS, an entity which still exists in the virtual networked state. Such situations with high public antipathy can give the opportunities transnational terrorist organisations seek. The Yellow Vests are in no mood for compromise although Macron has partially learnt his lessons and is willing to roll back fuel prices. They are now seeking higher pensions and minimum wages. In one of Europe’s highest taxed nations, France is unable to generate jobs for its restive young. This being a leaderless rebellion, with low profile online leaders, it’s going to be difficult to focus on neutralisation of the leadership.

Besides the immediate problems of instability in France, Macron’s future is at stake. Earlier, he was placing himself as a potential successor to German Chancellor Angela Merkel as the leader of Europe. Macron‘s chances of re-election would be greatly reduced unless the economy witnesses a turnaround. Fresh elections now could throw up unpredictable results. It could also have a snowballing effect on other European nations in the manner of the Arab Spring. That could see a resurgence of nationalism and an advantage to the right wing which, two years ago, were on the rise but whose growth was arrested by a spate of centrist parties. Security wise that would not be a very conducive thing in light of the continuing crisis all over Europe with increasing presence of immigrants.

If there is a lesson for the world in these events it is about the necessity to keep channels open for talks with different societal groups. We have yet not seen the fully unleashed power of social media as a facilitator of getting far-flung regions and people together to express their discontentment, often quite violently. 
 
(This article was originally published on DNA. Read the <a href="https://www.dnaindia.com/analysis/column-fuelling-the-french-rebellion-2693395">original article)</a>

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

I was in Paris on November 11, 2018, and drove 200 km north to Lille to participate in the hundredth anniversary of Armistice Day with the people of the township of Levantie where my regiment fought during the Great War.

I was in Paris on November 11, 2018, and drove 200 km north to Lille to participate in the hundredth anniversary of Armistice Day with the people of the township of Levantie where my regiment fought during the Great War. Paris was as beautiful as ever especially as one drove along the Champs de Elysees past the Arc de Triomphe. Sitting at a roadside cafe, one could sense how busy Parisians were with their lives. The multitudes of ethnicities and faiths could be sensed in the hustle and bustle of lunch hour. French President Emmanuel Macron, in a long coat and thick woollen scarf, looked immaculate and confident on television as he welcomed world leaders for the Armistice Day celebrations and even offered advice on resolving the world’s problems. Within a week after my return, everything seemed to have gone berserk in Paris. In France, after every few years, this happens with fair regularity. This time it’s the Yellow Vests rebellion, the name coming from the high-visibility vests that the protesters wear. My recall of France inevitably starts with the French Revolution of 1789, which in many ways gave the world the lasting socialist slogan. ‘Liberty, equality, fraternity’, the motto of the French Revolution may have many interpretations but France keeps returning to that socialist clarion call ever so often. The street rebellion of 1968 removed as iconic a leader as Charles de Gaulle. These are the most violent protests since then. It is being said that this time it’s all about an ecological transition; earlier rebellions in the not-too-distant past were against the markets and globalisation. Not too many people are really aware how this started but apparently protests and demonstrations have been on in almost 2000 locations all over France since early November. Despite being social media instigated and triggered, somehow it took the political communities of France and Europe by relative surprise. It’s Macron’s supposed obsession with his own sense of responsibility which many times does border on idealism. He is committed to ecology and wishes to see France transit very early to clean fuels, renewable energy and the likes. Putting it simply, the trigger is the increase in fuel prices, done primarily to reduce consumption of hydrocarbons, reduce harmful emissions and force the transition he has in mind. He probably hoped it will reduce private transport and force people to use public transport in a much bigger way. Nothing wrong with that but the execution is akin to Marie Antoinette’s famous quip: “If the people don’t have bread, give them cake.” Macron’s perception of public transport is probably limited to cities such as Paris, Nice and Marseilles. In the little driving that I did around, in the smaller towns in the north I found no public transport worth the name. People have to use private vehicles and the fuel price increase has hit them hard. Diesel prices would increase by 30 cents a gallon and petrol by 17 cents if Macron’s proposals are finally implemented. Yet, fuel price hike is only a trigger. Beneath that lies much more than meets the eye. It’s a lot to do with France’s societal makeup today. Macron who was enthusiastically voted to power with a 66 per cent vote over the far-right candidate Marine Le Pen is today largely considered a rich man’s President. He scrapped wealth tax on taxpayers worth 1.3 million Euro and hiked taxes on the pensioners and retirees. Very few think he has an understanding of the financial predicament of the common French people. The protests are also fuelled by the presence of immigrants and are a cause of worry regarding the security of the cities. Just two years ago, France was the victim of horrific terrorist violence perpetrated by the ISIS, an entity which still exists in the virtual networked state. Such situations with high public antipathy can give the opportunities transnational terrorist organisations seek. The Yellow Vests are in no mood for compromise although Macron has partially learnt his lessons and is willing to roll back fuel prices. They are now seeking higher pensions and minimum wages. In one of Europe’s highest taxed nations, France is unable to generate jobs for its restive young. This being a leaderless rebellion, with low profile online leaders, it’s going to be difficult to focus on neutralisation of the leadership. Besides the immediate problems of instability in France, Macron’s future is at stake. Earlier, he was placing himself as a potential successor to German Chancellor Angela Merkel as the leader of Europe. Macron‘s chances of re-election would be greatly reduced unless the economy witnesses a turnaround. Fresh elections now could throw up unpredictable results. It could also have a snowballing effect on other European nations in the manner of the Arab Spring. That could see a resurgence of nationalism and an advantage to the right wing which, two years ago, were on the rise but whose growth was arrested by a spate of centrist parties. Security wise that would not be a very conducive thing in light of the continuing crisis all over Europe with increasing presence of immigrants. If there is a lesson for the world in these events it is about the necessity to keep channels open for talks with different societal groups. We have yet not seen the fully unleashed power of social media as a facilitator of getting far-flung regions and people together to express their discontentment, often quite violently. (This article was originally published on DNA. Read the original article) (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Fuelling the French rebellion

Europe must curb immigration: Hillary Clinton

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Tuesday urged Turkey to swiftly process the legal case of the ex-head of the pro-Kurdish opposition, saying his pre-trial detention had gone on longer than could be justified.

Selahattin Demirtas, former co-chairman of the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) and one of Turkey's best known politicians, was sentenced in September to more than four years in jail on terrorism charges related to a speech he gave in 2013.

Having already spent nearly two years in prison awaiting trial for those alleged offences, he had effectively already served out the prison term handed down by the Turkish court.

But Demirtas remains in prison facing several more terrorism-related charges, mostly for other speeches he gave, that could see him sentenced to up to 142 years in jail if found guilty.

"The Court found that the judicial authorities had extended Mr Demirtas' detention on grounds that could not be regarded as 'sufficient' to justify its duration," the Strasbourg-based ECHR said in a statement.

The ECHR ruled that Ankara "was to take all necessary measures to put an end to the applicant's pre-trial detention."

Turkish Justice Minister Abdulhamit Gul dismissed the court's ruling, saying the country's judiciary would decide on Demirtas' cases.

The government accuses the HDP of links to the outlawed Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), considered a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the European Union and the United States. The HDP denies this.

The ECHR also criticised Turkey for keeping Demirtas detained during two elections: a constitutional referendum in 2017 and this year's presidential ballot.

"The extensions of Mr Demirtas' detention, especially during two crucial campaigns... pursued the predominant ulterior purpose of stifling pluralism and limiting freedom of political debate," it said.

The court, which awarded Demirtas 10,000 euros ($11,430) in damages and a further 15,000 euros in costs, ruled against a number of his other complaints and accepted that he had been arrested and detained on "reasonable suspicion" of having committed a criminal offence.

Kati Piri, EU Rapporteur on Turkey, said the clear ECHR verdict meant Demirtas should be released immediately. "His detention is of a political, not a criminal nature."

Kerem Altiparmak, a prominent Turkish human rights advocate and professor, also called for Demirtas' immediate release, as his pre-trial detention was now in violation of both domestic and international law.

ECHR rulings are in theory binding, but there have been many instances in which Turkey has not implemented them, paying fines instead.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Tuesday urged Turkey to swiftly process the legal case of the ex-head of the pro-Kurdish opposition, saying his pre-trial detention had gone on longer than could be justified.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) on Tuesday urged Turkey to swiftly process the legal case of the ex-head of the pro-Kurdish opposition, saying his pre-trial detention had gone on longer than could be justified. Selahattin Demirtas, former co-chairman of the Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) and one of Turkey's best known politicians, was sentenced in September to more than four years in jail on terrorism charges related to a speech he gave in 2013. Having already spent nearly two years in prison awaiting trial for those alleged offences, he had effectively already served out the prison term handed down by the Turkish court. But Demirtas remains in prison facing several more terrorism-related charges, mostly for other speeches he gave, that could see him sentenced to up to 142 years in jail if found guilty. "The Court found that the judicial authorities had extended Mr Demirtas' detention on grounds that could not be regarded as 'sufficient' to justify its duration," the Strasbourg-based ECHR said in a statement. The ECHR ruled that Ankara "was to take all necessary measures to put an end to the applicant's pre-trial detention." Turkish Justice Minister Abdulhamit Gul dismissed the court's ruling, saying the country's judiciary would decide on Demirtas' cases. The government accuses the HDP of links to the outlawed Kurdistan Worker's Party (PKK), considered a terrorist organisation by Turkey, the European Union and the United States. The HDP denies this. The ECHR also criticised Turkey for keeping Demirtas detained during two elections: a constitutional referendum in 2017 and this year's presidential ballot. "The extensions of Mr Demirtas' detention, especially during two crucial campaigns... pursued the predominant ulterior purpose of stifling pluralism and limiting freedom of political debate," it said. The court, which awarded Demirtas 10,000 euros ($11,430) in damages and a further 15,000 euros in costs, ruled against a number of his other complaints and accepted that he had been arrested and detained on "reasonable suspicion" of having committed a criminal offence. Kati Piri, EU Rapporteur on Turkey, said the clear ECHR verdict meant Demirtas should be released immediately. "His detention is of a political, not a criminal nature." Kerem Altiparmak, a prominent Turkish human rights advocate and professor, also called for Demirtas' immediate release, as his pre-trial detention was now in violation of both domestic and international law. ECHR rulings are in theory binding, but there have been many instances in which Turkey has not implemented them, paying fines instead.

European court says Turkey holding Kurdish politician too long without trial

It would appear, in hindsight, that the European Union, forged after the devastating world wars that consumed Europe in fratricidal conflicts fuelled by nationalism and balance of power politics, was more an attempt to tame nationalism than expunge it. &nbsp;This may have been both fundamentally practical, given the potency of nationalism, but also a folly that is now panning out in the Union.&nbsp; 
&nbsp; 
The aspiration to tame nationalism might have been practical because the historical memory of the concept was fresh in Europe; it then could on have been erased and banishing it might even have meant its recrudescence. Through functional integration and gradualism, the aspiration might have morphed into taming nationalism. But, as the West’s ( except for outliers like Australia and Canada) descent into nativism and populism suggests, merely mellowing nationalism could have been a folly. 
&nbsp; 
&nbsp;Against the backdrop of the return of the nationalism in the West, more poignantly in Europe, it is leaders like Emmanuel Macron who represent the best hope for the continent. He is cosmopolitan, unencumbered by past legacies and is beholden to both a world order that is not zero-sum and insular. Macron also has a vision for France that is at odds at bottoms up demand for a more parochial, inward-looking, and nationalist entity. &nbsp;Stripped of accretions, Europe is France and Germany complemented by a few other smaller entities (nations). So, whatever direction either take will determine the nature and future of the larger European Union. But, within this Franco-German combine (or core Europe), Germany and its politics, is fragmenting into the solvent of reaction and polarisation, it is perhaps Macron’s France that is the last holdout against these forces. 
&nbsp; 
Can, the question, is Macron hold the forte so to speak? 
&nbsp; 
Perhaps. 
&nbsp; 
But, for the French president to be a beacon amidst gloom and doom, he needs clarity of vision, &nbsp;a deft and a pragmatic approach to policy making and a bit of a review of himself. 
&nbsp; 
I will dwell on each theme in reverse sequence.

Youth and idealistic exuberance can, at times, lead to what may be called a semblance of arrogance. This is perhaps what is happening to Macron. To obviate the perception of arrogance, Macron must mellow down in terms of attitude and approach and develop communication strategies and techniques that do not jar with people. &nbsp;He must not only be accessible but also come across as someone who the people of France can relate to and identify with. Having said this, communication skills can go only so far. Unless and until communication has substance, it is mere rhetoric and spin. What, the question here is, would constitute substance for Macron? 
&nbsp; 
The young president of France must gain conceptual clarity on the nature of nationalism and structural clarity on the European Union. Broken down, this means that Macron must understand that nationalism cannot be wished away and his aspiration of cosmopolitanism, howsoever noble, at this stage in world history, remains just that: an aspiration. But this does not mean caving in to the pressures of nationalism. It means sublimating the concept and its emotional wellsprings and projecting them onto the larger Union. Herein lies the challenge for Macron whose nature is to fund a delicate balance defined by equipoise between the two, with the ultimate goal of a more expansive European identity. 
&nbsp; 
The natural concomitant to the clarity of vision in terms of the conceptual and the emotional must lie in policy grids and frameworks which actually work for the people. These must be informed by the past, defined by the present and oriented towards the future, in ways that enhance peoples’ welfare, in the expansive sense of the term. 
&nbsp; 
In combination, the admixture of “prescriptions” offered here might constitute a useful starting point to inject sobriety and proportion in Europe but, more importantly, redeem the entity, especially in its eyes. Europe and the European Union are too special and unique to be frittered away at the altar of competing nationalisms and consumed by these along with forces and clamour of nativist populism. 
&nbsp; 
The challenge to salvage Europe is, counter-intuitively, exacerbated by the Democrat’s successes in the United States’ midterm elections. The Democrats, neither have a conceptual toolkit nor practical policy markers to deal with and counter Trumpism. In all likelihood, they will, if not mimic but take a leaf from Trump and bend to the forces of nativist populism in the United States. There then is no one in the West who can actually take on substantively these insalubrious forces and trends. With faith in himself, whose feature must be humility complemented by a robust understanding of the nature of challenge(s), Macron must gird his sleeves and set to save and redevelop project Europe.&nbsp; 
 
(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

It would appear, in hindsight, that the European Union, forged after the devastating world wars that consumed Europe in fratricidal conflicts fuelled by nationalism and balance of power politics, was more an attempt to tame nationalism than expunge it.

It would appear, in hindsight, that the European Union, forged after the devastating world wars that consumed Europe in fratricidal conflicts fuelled by nationalism and balance of power politics, was more an attempt to tame nationalism than expunge it. This may have been both fundamentally practical, given the potency of nationalism, but also a folly that is now panning out in the Union. The aspiration to tame nationalism might have been practical because the historical memory of the concept was fresh in Europe; it then could on have been erased and banishing it might even have meant its recrudescence. Through functional integration and gradualism, the aspiration might have morphed into taming nationalism. But, as the West’s ( except for outliers like Australia and Canada) descent into nativism and populism suggests, merely mellowing nationalism could have been a folly. Against the backdrop of the return of the nationalism in the West, more poignantly in Europe, it is leaders like Emmanuel Macron who represent the best hope for the continent. He is cosmopolitan, unencumbered by past legacies and is beholden to both a world order that is not zero-sum and insular. Macron also has a vision for France that is at odds at bottoms up demand for a more parochial, inward-looking, and nationalist entity. Stripped of accretions, Europe is France and Germany complemented by a few other smaller entities (nations). So, whatever direction either take will determine the nature and future of the larger European Union. But, within this Franco-German combine (or core Europe), Germany and its politics, is fragmenting into the solvent of reaction and polarisation, it is perhaps Macron’s France that is the last holdout against these forces. Can, the question, is Macron hold the forte so to speak? Perhaps. But, for the French president to be a beacon amidst gloom and doom, he needs clarity of vision, a deft and a pragmatic approach to policy making and a bit of a review of himself. I will dwell on each theme in reverse sequence. Youth and idealistic exuberance can, at times, lead to what may be called a semblance of arrogance. This is perhaps what is happening to Macron. To obviate the perception of arrogance, Macron must mellow down in terms of attitude and approach and develop communication strategies and techniques that do not jar with people. He must not only be accessible but also come across as someone who the people of France can relate to and identify with. Having said this, communication skills can go only so far. Unless and until communication has substance, it is mere rhetoric and spin. What, the question here is, would constitute substance for Macron? The young president of France must gain conceptual clarity on the nature of nationalism and structural clarity on the European Union. Broken down, this means that Macron must understand that nationalism cannot be wished away and his aspiration of cosmopolitanism, howsoever noble, at this stage in world history, remains just that: an aspiration. But this does not mean caving in to the pressures of nationalism. It means sublimating the concept and its emotional wellsprings and projecting them onto the larger Union. Herein lies the challenge for Macron whose nature is to fund a delicate balance defined by equipoise between the two, with the ultimate goal of a more expansive European identity. The natural concomitant to the clarity of vision in terms of the conceptual and the emotional must lie in policy grids and frameworks which actually work for the people. These must be informed by the past, defined by the present and oriented towards the future, in ways that enhance peoples’ welfare, in the expansive sense of the term. In combination, the admixture of “prescriptions” offered here might constitute a useful starting point to inject sobriety and proportion in Europe but, more importantly, redeem the entity, especially in its eyes. Europe and the European Union are too special and unique to be frittered away at the altar of competing nationalisms and consumed by these along with forces and clamour of nativist populism. The challenge to salvage Europe is, counter-intuitively, exacerbated by the Democrat’s successes in the United States’ midterm elections. The Democrats, neither have a conceptual toolkit nor practical policy markers to deal with and counter Trumpism. In all likelihood, they will, if not mimic but take a leaf from Trump and bend to the forces of nativist populism in the United States. There then is no one in the West who can actually take on substantively these insalubrious forces and trends. With faith in himself, whose feature must be humility complemented by a robust understanding of the nature of challenge(s), Macron must gird his sleeves and set to save and redevelop project Europe. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Can Emmanuel Macron save Europe?

The United States wants a "strong Europe" and is willing to help its ally, but Europe must be fair when it comes to sharing the defence burden, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday.

"We want a strong Europe, it's very important to us and whichever way we can do it the best and more efficient would be something we both want," Trump said in remarks after being greeted by President Emmanuel Macron in Paris.

Asked what he meant when he tweeted that he felt insulted by Macron's comments that Europe should reduce its dependence on the United States for security, Trump said: "We want to help Europe but it has to be fair. Right now the burden sharing has been largely on the United States."

Macron said he shared Trump's view that Europe needed to finance a greater share of the NATO military alliance's costs. "That's why I do believe my proposals for European defence are fully consistent with that," he said, speaking in English.

The two leaders would discuss issues including Iran, the conflicts in Syria and Yemen, climate change and trade during an hour-long meeting, Macron said.

Trump has toned down his threat of tariffs on cars manufactured in the European Union while the two sides discussed the removal of tariffs on EU aluminium and steel imports.

Trump said negotiations were making progress.

"We'll see if we can get it over the line," Trump added.

The United States wants a "strong Europe" and is willing to help its ally, but Europe must be fair when it comes to sharing the defence burden, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday.

The United States wants a "strong Europe" and is willing to help its ally, but Europe must be fair when it comes to sharing the defence burden, U.S. President Donald Trump said on Saturday. "We want a strong Europe, it's very important to us and whichever way we can do it the best and more efficient would be something we both want," Trump said in remarks after being greeted by President Emmanuel Macron in Paris. Asked what he meant when he tweeted that he felt insulted by Macron's comments that Europe should reduce its dependence on the United States for security, Trump said: "We want to help Europe but it has to be fair. Right now the burden sharing has been largely on the United States." Macron said he shared Trump's view that Europe needed to finance a greater share of the NATO military alliance's costs. "That's why I do believe my proposals for European defence are fully consistent with that," he said, speaking in English. The two leaders would discuss issues including Iran, the conflicts in Syria and Yemen, climate change and trade during an hour-long meeting, Macron said. Trump has toned down his threat of tariffs on cars manufactured in the European Union while the two sides discussed the removal of tariffs on EU aluminium and steel imports. Trump said negotiations were making progress. "We'll see if we can get it over the line," Trump added.

Trump says wants 'strong Europe', but more defence cost-sharing

Know how Europe is tackling pollution by using green tech

If Saudi Arabia is under pressure to give chapter and verse on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in its consulate in Istanbul, Iran risks straining relations with Europe at a time when it needs European support the most by targeting ethnic rights activists.

Khashoggi’s murder has focused attention on Saudi harassment and intimidation of dissidents as part of the kingdom’s effort to silence critical voices. The Saudi campaign had little geopolitical significance until Khashoggi’s killing.

By contrast, Iran’s long history of targeting ethnic rights activists, including Iranians of Arab descent and Kurds, has long been rooted in the Islamic republic’s belief that they enjoy the support of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel in a bid to destabilise the country.

If Saudi Arabia has suffered severe reputational damage with the killing of Khashoggi and could face sanctions for the first time in its history, Iran, long struggling to polish its tarnished image, could face sanctioning by Europe at a moment when it needs the Europeans the most.

In the latest Iranian incident, Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and intelligence chief Finn Borch Andersen are calling for European Union sanctions after they discovered a plot to kill Danish residents associated with the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahvaz (ASMLA), an Iranian Arab group.

The plot, together with at least two other incidents in Europe in the last year, complicates European efforts to salvage a 2015 international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program after the United States withdrew from the deal and imposed crippling sanctions on Iran despite Iran’s denials of involvement.

The alleged Danish plot came to a head when authorities in late September closed bridges into Copenhagen and suspended train operations in connection with the case. Andersen said that Norway had since extradited to Denmark a Norwegian national of Iranian descent who was seen taking pictures of the Danish home of an ASMLA leader.

ASMLA strives for the independence of Iran’s south-eastern oil-rich province of Khuzestan that is home to Iran’s ethnic Arab community and borders on Iraq at the head of the Gulf.

Two other groups, the Islamic State and the Ahvaz National Resistance, claimed responsibility in September for an attack on a Revolutionary Guards parade in the Khuzestan capital of Ahwaz in which 29 people were killed and 70 others wounded.

Iranian officials blamed the United States and its allies, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Israel for the attack.

Iran at the time summoned the ambassadors of the Netherlands, Denmark and Britain to protest the three countries’ hosting of Iranian ethnic rights militants.

The Danish plot followed the killing by unidentified gunmen in the Netherlands in November 2017 of Ahmad Mola Nissi, another ASMLA leader. Shot dead on a street in The Hague, Mola Nissi died the violent life he was alleged to have lived.

A 52-year-old refugee living in the Netherlands since 2005, was believed to have been responsible for attacks in Khuzestan in 2005, 2006 and 2013 on oil facilities, the office of the Khuzestan governor, other government offices, and banks.

Together with Habib Jaber al-Ahvazi also known as Abo Naheth, another ASMLA activist, Mola Nissi focussed in recent years on media activities and fundraising, at times creating footage of alleged attacks involving gas cylinder explosions to attract Saudi funding, according to Iranian activists.

Mola Nissi was killed as he was preparing to establish a television station backed by Saudi-trained personnel and funding that would target Khuzestan.

The Netherlands has emerged in recent years as a hub for Iranian activists alongside Britain.

A group of exile Iranian academics and political activists, led by The Hague-based social scientist Damon Golriz, announced in September the creation of a group that intends to campaign for a liberal democracy in Iran under the auspices of Reza Pahlavi, the son of the ousted Shah of Iran who lives in the United States.

Compounding the fallout of Iran’s targeting of activists is last month’s expulsion by France of an Iranian diplomat accused of being part of a plot to bomb a rally in Paris organised by the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, a Saudi-backed Iranian exile group that calls for regime change in Tehran. The diplomat was among six people arrested for allegedly plotting the bombing.

Mujahedeen enjoy the support of prominent Western politicians like US President Donald J Trump’s national security advisor, John Bolton, his personal lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, and Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal. Giuliani addressed the targeted rally.

US officials say Iran plotted to attack the group’s massive base in Albania in March.

Support for the Mujahedeen has figured prominently in broadcasts of UK-based television station Iran International that according to The Guardian is owned by a secretive offshore entity with close links to Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman.

The Guardian reported that Saud al-Qahtani, Prince Mohammed’s menacing information czar who was one of several senior Saudi officials removed from office in the wake of the killing of Khashoggi, was among the station’s main funders.

“I can say that Iran International TV has turned into a platform … for ethnic partisanship and sectarianism,” The Guardian quoted a source as saying.

The Danish, French and Dutch incidents suggest that Iran takes serious indications that Saudi Arabia is considering attempting to destabilise the Islamic republic by stirring unrest among its ethnic minorities.

Bolton advocated a similar strategy before becoming Trump’s national security advisor.

Iran has been the target in the past year of various insurgent groups believed to have Saudi support, sparking repeated clashes with Iranian security forces and the interception of Kurdish, Baloch and other ethnic rebels.

Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif arrived in Islamabad this week on an unscheduled visit to discuss the recent kidnapping of at least 12 Iranian border and Revolutionary Guards believed to have been abducted on the Iranian side of the Pakistani-Iranian border by Jaish al-Adl, a Pakistani group that often issues its statements in Arabic rather than Baloch, Urdu or Farsi.

As the United States prepared to next week impose a new round of sanctions against Iran, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo used the Iranian attacks in Europe to weaken European rejection of the US move.

“For nearly 40 years, Europe has been the target of Iran-sponsored terrorist attacks. We call on our allies and partners to confront the full range of Iran’s threats to peace and security,” Pompeo tweeted.

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) 
&nbsp;

If Saudi Arabia is under pressure to give chapter and verse on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in its consulate in Istanbul, Iran risks straining relations with Europe at a time when it needs European support the most by targeting ethnic rights activists.

If Saudi Arabia is under pressure to give chapter and verse on the killing of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in its consulate in Istanbul, Iran risks straining relations with Europe at a time when it needs European support the most by targeting ethnic rights activists. Khashoggi’s murder has focused attention on Saudi harassment and intimidation of dissidents as part of the kingdom’s effort to silence critical voices. The Saudi campaign had little geopolitical significance until Khashoggi’s killing. By contrast, Iran’s long history of targeting ethnic rights activists, including Iranians of Arab descent and Kurds, has long been rooted in the Islamic republic’s belief that they enjoy the support of the United States, Saudi Arabia and Israel in a bid to destabilise the country. If Saudi Arabia has suffered severe reputational damage with the killing of Khashoggi and could face sanctions for the first time in its history, Iran, long struggling to polish its tarnished image, could face sanctioning by Europe at a moment when it needs the Europeans the most. In the latest Iranian incident, Danish Prime Minister Lars Lokke Rasmussen and intelligence chief Finn Borch Andersen are calling for European Union sanctions after they discovered a plot to kill Danish residents associated with the Arab Struggle Movement for the Liberation of Ahvaz (ASMLA), an Iranian Arab group. The plot, together with at least two other incidents in Europe in the last year, complicates European efforts to salvage a 2015 international agreement to curb Iran’s nuclear program after the United States withdrew from the deal and imposed crippling sanctions on Iran despite Iran’s denials of involvement. The alleged Danish plot came to a head when authorities in late September closed bridges into Copenhagen and suspended train operations in connection with the case. Andersen said that Norway had since extradited to Denmark a Norwegian national of Iranian descent who was seen taking pictures of the Danish home of an ASMLA leader. ASMLA strives for the independence of Iran’s south-eastern oil-rich province of Khuzestan that is home to Iran’s ethnic Arab community and borders on Iraq at the head of the Gulf. Two other groups, the Islamic State and the Ahvaz National Resistance, claimed responsibility in September for an attack on a Revolutionary Guards parade in the Khuzestan capital of Ahwaz in which 29 people were killed and 70 others wounded. Iranian officials blamed the United States and its allies, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Israel for the attack. Iran at the time summoned the ambassadors of the Netherlands, Denmark and Britain to protest the three countries’ hosting of Iranian ethnic rights militants. The Danish plot followed the killing by unidentified gunmen in the Netherlands in November 2017 of Ahmad Mola Nissi, another ASMLA leader. Shot dead on a street in The Hague, Mola Nissi died the violent life he was alleged to have lived. A 52-year-old refugee living in the Netherlands since 2005, was believed to have been responsible for attacks in Khuzestan in 2005, 2006 and 2013 on oil facilities, the office of the Khuzestan governor, other government offices, and banks. Together with Habib Jaber al-Ahvazi also known as Abo Naheth, another ASMLA activist, Mola Nissi focussed in recent years on media activities and fundraising, at times creating footage of alleged attacks involving gas cylinder explosions to attract Saudi funding, according to Iranian activists. Mola Nissi was killed as he was preparing to establish a television station backed by Saudi-trained personnel and funding that would target Khuzestan. The Netherlands has emerged in recent years as a hub for Iranian activists alongside Britain. A group of exile Iranian academics and political activists, led by The Hague-based social scientist Damon Golriz, announced in September the creation of a group that intends to campaign for a liberal democracy in Iran under the auspices of Reza Pahlavi, the son of the ousted Shah of Iran who lives in the United States. Compounding the fallout of Iran’s targeting of activists is last month’s expulsion by France of an Iranian diplomat accused of being part of a plot to bomb a rally in Paris organised by the Mujahedeen-e-Khalq, a Saudi-backed Iranian exile group that calls for regime change in Tehran. The diplomat was among six people arrested for allegedly plotting the bombing. Mujahedeen enjoy the support of prominent Western politicians like US President Donald J Trump’s national security advisor, John Bolton, his personal lawyer, Rudolph Giuliani, and Saudi Arabia’s former intelligence chief, Prince Turki al-Faisal. Giuliani addressed the targeted rally. US officials say Iran plotted to attack the group’s massive base in Albania in March. Support for the Mujahedeen has figured prominently in broadcasts of UK-based television station Iran International that according to The Guardian is owned by a secretive offshore entity with close links to Saudi crown prince Mohammed bin Salman. The Guardian reported that Saud al-Qahtani, Prince Mohammed’s menacing information czar who was one of several senior Saudi officials removed from office in the wake of the killing of Khashoggi, was among the station’s main funders. “I can say that Iran International TV has turned into a platform … for ethnic partisanship and sectarianism,” The Guardian quoted a source as saying. The Danish, French and Dutch incidents suggest that Iran takes serious indications that Saudi Arabia is considering attempting to destabilise the Islamic republic by stirring unrest among its ethnic minorities. Bolton advocated a similar strategy before becoming Trump’s national security advisor. Iran has been the target in the past year of various insurgent groups believed to have Saudi support, sparking repeated clashes with Iranian security forces and the interception of Kurdish, Baloch and other ethnic rebels. Iranian foreign minister Mohammad Javad Zarif arrived in Islamabad this week on an unscheduled visit to discuss the recent kidnapping of at least 12 Iranian border and Revolutionary Guards believed to have been abducted on the Iranian side of the Pakistani-Iranian border by Jaish al-Adl, a Pakistani group that often issues its statements in Arabic rather than Baloch, Urdu or Farsi. As the United States prepared to next week impose a new round of sanctions against Iran, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo used the Iranian attacks in Europe to weaken European rejection of the US move. “For nearly 40 years, Europe has been the target of Iran-sponsored terrorist attacks. We call on our allies and partners to confront the full range of Iran’s threats to peace and security,” Pompeo tweeted. (Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL)

Saudi Arabia and Iran: When it comes to exiles, the pot calls the kettle black

europe-0

Europe, News on Europe, stories on Europe, articles on Europe, Europe stories at Wion, Europe news, Europe latest news

europe 0