Prime Minister Boris Johnson won a thundering election victory that will allow him to take Britain out of the European Union in a matter of weeks.

UK PM Boris Johnson: Threat of 2nd referendum no more

Boris Johnson won a decisive victory in the UK election, putting the country on course to leave the European Union next month after the biggest shift in British political allegiances for decades. The Conservatives have cross-passed the majority mark of 326 seats. It's a historic win for the party as reports suggest that the rival Labour Party has suffered the worst defeat in the last many years. The Labour Party is far behind at 194 seats.

UK Election 2019: Boris Johnson wins parliamentary elections

The mantra of British Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/we-will-leave-eu-on-january-31-no-ifs-no-buts-says-uk-prime-minister-johnson-amid-resounding-victory-268054">Boris Johnson</a> and his Conservative Party during the national election campaign was aimed at harnessing voter frustration at a parliamentary logjam over Britain’s exit from the European Union.

It worked.

Beyond the traditional strategy of swaying voters in swing districts held by the main opposition Labour Party, Johnson wanted to strike directly at Labour’s heartlands in the hopes of winning support from people who had never voted Conservative but for whom Brexit had come to trump even traditional party allegiances.

The Conservatives secured a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/britain-and-us-free-to-strike-lucrative-trade-deal-after-brexit-trump-268038">sweeping victory</a>, winning more than 360 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons - the party's largest majority since under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. The result handed Johnson his first national election victory but also delivered a dramatic blow to his main competitor, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, whose Labour Party suffered heavy losses.

For 55-year old Johnson, who only entered Downing Street this summer after his Conservative predecessor resigned, calling an election had been a high-stakes gamble.

But he also considered it a necessity to convert his party’s minority in the House of Commons into a majority and move his government’s agenda forward. Notably, that includes Britain – the world’s fifth-largest economy - exiting the European Union by the end of January, which would mark the country’s most significant trade and foreign policy move since World War Two.

The five-week campaign also saw Johnson facing questions about his personal trustworthiness after his repeated failed promises during the year to deliver Brexit by the end of October “do or die.”

He faced allegations of failing to disclose close personal ties with a U.S. businesswoman who had received thousands of pounds in public business funding while he had been mayor. Jennifer Arcuri publicly said during the campaign she had had “a very special relationship” with Johnson, who has denied any impropriety. A government audit report ruled that a ministerial department’s decision to award a 100,000 pound ($128,000) grant to a company run by Arcuri was appropriate.

The plan early in the campaign was to target around 40 traditionally Labour-supporting seats in northern and central England, a party source close to the campaign said. Johnson launched the Conservative campaign battle bus in Middleton in northwest England, in a district with a slim Labour majority but which saw 62% of voters back Brexit in 2016.

"The strategy is to woo Brexit Party supporters of all colours and to specifically court Labour leave voters especially in the North and Midlands,” said the source, speaking on Oct. 29, the day the House of Commons approved an early election.

"The themes are people versus parliament, let's get Brexit done and move on, and a very merry Brexit to everyone."

Exit polls Thursday evening suggesting a major victory for Johnson caught some in the Conservative camp off guard. “I was stunned,” said one member of Johnson's campaign team, who described the sense of relief that the campaign strategy to keep on message had worked.

As the results of the election rolled in early Friday, it became clear that the Conservatives had succeeded in scooping up seats in districts that had voted Labour for generations, including places like Bishop Auckland and Sedgefield, the seat held by former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair. However, Johnson’s party had lost seats in some more pro-EU constituencies, such as Putney in London.

"This election means that getting Brexit down is now the irrefutable, irresistible, unarguable decision of the British people," said an ebullient Johnson on Friday morning.

He also addressed those who had voted Conservative for the first time by saying "you may only have lent us your vote" and "you may intend to return to Labour next time round." He added: "I and we will never take your support for granted."

Core message

His often-ruffled appearance, including a distinctive mop of blonde hair, marks a contrast to the discipline and ruthlessness he displayed to get to this point.

Johnson – full name is Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson – took office in July after winning a Conservative Party leadership contest triggered by the resignation of former Prime Minister Theresa May. She had failed to win backing by parliament for a Brexit divorce agreement she had negotiated with the EU.

The new prime minister and his team concluded early on that the only way to change the arithmetic in the House of Commons was to force a new election. But he needed a united front – no easy feat for a party where the issue of Europe has caused infighting and played a role in the downfall of the previous four Conservative prime ministers.

During his first weeks in office he oversaw one of the biggest purges of cabinet ministers in modern British history and expelled from his party 21 Conservative lawmakers who had voted against the prime minister on Brexit, including the grandson of Winston Churchill.

“We weren’t bluffing, and they were wilfully ignorant if they thought differently,” said a senior prime ministerial aide at the time, referring to a message from Johnson to lawmakers that he expected loyalty.

The election campaign officially started in early November and Johnson sought to convince voters that his party was the only one which could break the impasse among politicians in Westminster to enable the country to move forward.

The campaign focused heavily on core Brexit-related messages and was relatively light on policy detail, several members of his campaign team said. "The whole point of this campaign was to keep it tight and focused," said one of his team. "It's all about the messaging."

Team Johnson received a boost when the Brexit Party led by veteran eurosceptic Nigel Farage early on in the campaign said his candidates would not fight for 317 Conservative-held seats to avoid splitting the Leave vote.

Labour, meanwhile, pursued a compromise position on Brexit.

In an effort to unite his party, which was also divided over Europe, Labour’s leader Corbyn settled on a policy of negotiating a new deal to leave the EU followed by a second referendum – a stance that was unpopular with the party’s Brexit voters and even some in his own team.

He instead sought to focus the campaign agenda on a manifesto that included widespread nationalization and spending on public services such as the National Health Service, which the Labour Party established in 1948 and provides health care to all free at the point of delivery.

'Fairy tale'

Johnson’s pitch included a pledge to lower immigration and that Brexit would free up money that Britain would otherwise pay to the EU that could be redirected to spending on public services, including the NHS, at home.

One pledge was to add 50,000 more nurses but, under scrutiny from the opposition and media, the prime minister acknowledged that 19,000 were already working in the NHS, adding that his policies would retain those workers that might otherwise leave.

During an Oct. 13 visit to the northern town of Doncaster, a female member of the public accused him of peddling fiction by promising a rosy future for Britain outside of the EU and being part of a government that had made cuts to public services.

“You've got the cheek to come here and tell us that austerity's over and it's all good now - we're gonna leave the EU and everything's going to be great," the woman told the prime minister during a visit to Doncaster. "It's just a fairy tale."

His responded by saying his government was investing in the area.

Some voters said they planned to support him even if lack of trust was a factor.

"It's tough to believe what they're saying after the time that we've had recently," said Tim Turner, 41, operations director at knitwear manufacturer John Smedley, during a visit by Johnson to a company mill in Derbyshire in central England on Dec. 5, questioning his assertion over the 50,000 nurses.

"I think he's got the best chance, but whether I believe him or not is a different matter," he said. Turner said he had voted before for other parties, including Labour, but would vote for Johnson in this election.

Johnson has repeatedly said that any breach of trust should be blamed on parliament, not him. “The issue before the country is after three and a half years politicians of all parties are held in low esteem because they have refused to get on and deliver on the mandate of the people,” he said on the campaign trail.

Potential liability

Conservative strategists considered Johnson’s personal popularity and proven ability to reach across party lines a key election asset. The charismatic politician helped lead the successful Brexit campaign in the 2016 referendum and is the only Conservative to have been London mayor.

By contrast, recent polls have ranked Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn the least popular opposition leader in decades.

But Johnson’s team were also aware the prime minister, known for his often-colourful turn of phrase and a tendency to go off-script, was a potential liability. On the campaign trail, his team sought to minimise the risk of unflattering encounters with members of the public and with some television interviewers, according to a campaign source.

Many of his interactions with voters were in Conservative-held seats, while in traditional Labour districts the prime minister often visited businesses with sympathetic bosses or organised rallies in venues where attendees could be screened.

In the final days of the campaign, Johnson crisscrossed districts in the north and central England, regions where Labour has traditionally had strong support.

At a factory of British construction equipment maker JCB near Uttoxeter in central England on Tuesday, Johnson drove a digger emblazoned with “get Brexit done” through a makeshift wall emblazoned with the word “GRIDLOCK.”

The mantra of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Conservative Party during the national election campaign was aimed at harnessing voter frustration at a parliamentary logjam over Britain’s exit from the European Union.

The mantra of British Prime Minister Boris Johnson and his Conservative Party during the national election campaign was aimed at harnessing voter frustration at a parliamentary logjam over Britain’s exit from the European Union. It worked. Beyond the traditional strategy of swaying voters in swing districts held by the main opposition Labour Party, Johnson wanted to strike directly at Labour’s heartlands in the hopes of winning support from people who had never voted Conservative but for whom Brexit had come to trump even traditional party allegiances. The Conservatives secured a sweeping victory, winning more than 360 of the 650 seats in the House of Commons - the party's largest majority since under Margaret Thatcher in the 1980s. The result handed Johnson his first national election victory but also delivered a dramatic blow to his main competitor, opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn, whose Labour Party suffered heavy losses. For 55-year old Johnson, who only entered Downing Street this summer after his Conservative predecessor resigned, calling an election had been a high-stakes gamble. But he also considered it a necessity to convert his party’s minority in the House of Commons into a majority and move his government’s agenda forward. Notably, that includes Britain – the world’s fifth-largest economy - exiting the European Union by the end of January, which would mark the country’s most significant trade and foreign policy move since World War Two. The five-week campaign also saw Johnson facing questions about his personal trustworthiness after his repeated failed promises during the year to deliver Brexit by the end of October “do or die.” He faced allegations of failing to disclose close personal ties with a U.S. businesswoman who had received thousands of pounds in public business funding while he had been mayor. Jennifer Arcuri publicly said during the campaign she had had “a very special relationship” with Johnson, who has denied any impropriety. A government audit report ruled that a ministerial department’s decision to award a 100,000 pound ($128,000) grant to a company run by Arcuri was appropriate. The plan early in the campaign was to target around 40 traditionally Labour-supporting seats in northern and central England, a party source close to the campaign said. Johnson launched the Conservative campaign battle bus in Middleton in northwest England, in a district with a slim Labour majority but which saw 62% of voters back Brexit in 2016. "The strategy is to woo Brexit Party supporters of all colours and to specifically court Labour leave voters especially in the North and Midlands,” said the source, speaking on Oct. 29, the day the House of Commons approved an early election. "The themes are people versus parliament, let's get Brexit done and move on, and a very merry Brexit to everyone." Exit polls Thursday evening suggesting a major victory for Johnson caught some in the Conservative camp off guard. “I was stunned,” said one member of Johnson's campaign team, who described the sense of relief that the campaign strategy to keep on message had worked. As the results of the election rolled in early Friday, it became clear that the Conservatives had succeeded in scooping up seats in districts that had voted Labour for generations, including places like Bishop Auckland and Sedgefield, the seat held by former Labour Prime Minister Tony Blair. However, Johnson’s party had lost seats in some more pro-EU constituencies, such as Putney in London. "This election means that getting Brexit down is now the irrefutable, irresistible, unarguable decision of the British people," said an ebullient Johnson on Friday morning. He also addressed those who had voted Conservative for the first time by saying "you may only have lent us your vote" and "you may intend to return to Labour next time round." He added: "I and we will never take your support for granted." Core message His often-ruffled appearance, including a distinctive mop of blonde hair, marks a contrast to the discipline and ruthlessness he displayed to get to this point. Johnson – full name is Alexander Boris de Pfeffel Johnson – took office in July after winning a Conservative Party leadership contest triggered by the resignation of former Prime Minister Theresa May. She had failed to win backing by parliament for a Brexit divorce agreement she had negotiated with the EU. The new prime minister and his team concluded early on that the only way to change the arithmetic in the House of Commons was to force a new election. But he needed a united front – no easy feat for a party where the issue of Europe has caused infighting and played a role in the downfall of the previous four Conservative prime ministers. During his first weeks in office he oversaw one of the biggest purges of cabinet ministers in modern British history and expelled from his party 21 Conservative lawmakers who had voted against the prime minister on Brexit, including the grandson of Winston Churchill. “We weren’t bluffing, and they were wilfully ignorant if they thought differently,” said a senior prime ministerial aide at the time, referring to a message from Johnson to lawmakers that he expected loyalty. The election campaign officially started in early November and Johnson sought to convince voters that his party was the only one which could break the impasse among politicians in Westminster to enable the country to move forward. The campaign focused heavily on core Brexit-related messages and was relatively light on policy detail, several members of his campaign team said. "The whole point of this campaign was to keep it tight and focused," said one of his team. "It's all about the messaging." Team Johnson received a boost when the Brexit Party led by veteran eurosceptic Nigel Farage early on in the campaign said his candidates would not fight for 317 Conservative-held seats to avoid splitting the Leave vote. Labour, meanwhile, pursued a compromise position on Brexit. In an effort to unite his party, which was also divided over Europe, Labour’s leader Corbyn settled on a policy of negotiating a new deal to leave the EU followed by a second referendum – a stance that was unpopular with the party’s Brexit voters and even some in his own team. He instead sought to focus the campaign agenda on a manifesto that included widespread nationalization and spending on public services such as the National Health Service, which the Labour Party established in 1948 and provides health care to all free at the point of delivery. 'Fairy tale' Johnson’s pitch included a pledge to lower immigration and that Brexit would free up money that Britain would otherwise pay to the EU that could be redirected to spending on public services, including the NHS, at home. One pledge was to add 50,000 more nurses but, under scrutiny from the opposition and media, the prime minister acknowledged that 19,000 were already working in the NHS, adding that his policies would retain those workers that might otherwise leave. During an Oct. 13 visit to the northern town of Doncaster, a female member of the public accused him of peddling fiction by promising a rosy future for Britain outside of the EU and being part of a government that had made cuts to public services. “You've got the cheek to come here and tell us that austerity's over and it's all good now - we're gonna leave the EU and everything's going to be great," the woman told the prime minister during a visit to Doncaster. "It's just a fairy tale." His responded by saying his government was investing in the area. Some voters said they planned to support him even if lack of trust was a factor. "It's tough to believe what they're saying after the time that we've had recently," said Tim Turner, 41, operations director at knitwear manufacturer John Smedley, during a visit by Johnson to a company mill in Derbyshire in central England on Dec. 5, questioning his assertion over the 50,000 nurses. "I think he's got the best chance, but whether I believe him or not is a different matter," he said. Turner said he had voted before for other parties, including Labour, but would vote for Johnson in this election. Johnson has repeatedly said that any breach of trust should be blamed on parliament, not him. “The issue before the country is after three and a half years politicians of all parties are held in low esteem because they have refused to get on and deliver on the mandate of the people,” he said on the campaign trail. Potential liability Conservative strategists considered Johnson’s personal popularity and proven ability to reach across party lines a key election asset. The charismatic politician helped lead the successful Brexit campaign in the 2016 referendum and is the only Conservative to have been London mayor. By contrast, recent polls have ranked Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn the least popular opposition leader in decades. But Johnson’s team were also aware the prime minister, known for his often-colourful turn of phrase and a tendency to go off-script, was a potential liability. On the campaign trail, his team sought to minimise the risk of unflattering encounters with members of the public and with some television interviewers, according to a campaign source. Many of his interactions with voters were in Conservative-held seats, while in traditional Labour districts the prime minister often visited businesses with sympathetic bosses or organised rallies in venues where attendees could be screened. In the final days of the campaign, Johnson crisscrossed districts in the north and central England, regions where Labour has traditionally had strong support. At a factory of British construction equipment maker JCB near Uttoxeter in central England on Tuesday, Johnson drove a digger emblazoned with “get Brexit done” through a makeshift wall emblazoned with the word “GRIDLOCK.”

How Boris Johnson's election gamble paid off

Corbyn quits as Labour Party Leader. To know more watch

Labour Party Faces Worst Poll Failure

President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/photos/rising-seawater-levels-threaten-livelihoods-and-homes-in-indonesias-java-265711">Joko Widodo</a> warned on Thursday that there would be no going back on his policy to curb exports of nickel ore and other minerals, and Indonesia would defend itself against a complaint lodged with the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/fate-of-wto-top-court-threatened-with-trump-administrations-move-to-block-new-appointments-267597">World Trade Organisation</a> by the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/new-climate-pact-is-eus-man-on-the-moon-moment-chief-executive-267730"> European Union</a>.

In September, resource-rich Indonesia announced it would stop nickel ore exports from January 1, two years earlier than initially indicated, a decision set to disrupt global supply.

"When we're sued, we face it. The most important thing is we don't turn, we don't go back," Widodo said in a statement released by the Cabinet Secretariat.

Widodo repeated his longstanding stance that Southeast Asia's largest economy should be exporting less raw materials and more processed goods to create more added value and jobs at home.

Indonesia - the world's biggest nickel ore producer has become a major exporter of stainless steel since Widodo adopted a stricter export policy on nickel ore. It has also seen a surge in foreign investment in smelting, particularly from China.

The European Union lodged its complaint last month over Indonesia's curbs on exporting nickel and other raw materials to the benefit of its own smelting and stainless steel industries.

"For our national interest, whatever is being protested by other countries we will face. We don't have any doubt," Widodo said.

The president is now pushing for the development of electric vehicles and battery production facilities that would use its nickel ore supply.

President Joko Widodo warned on Thursday that there would be no going back on his policy to curb exports of nickel ore and other minerals, and Indonesia would defend itself against a complaint lodged with the World Trade Organisation by the European Union.

President Joko Widodo warned on Thursday that there would be no going back on his policy to curb exports of nickel ore and other minerals, and Indonesia would defend itself against a complaint lodged with the World Trade Organisation by the European Union. In September, resource-rich Indonesia announced it would stop nickel ore exports from January 1, two years earlier than initially indicated, a decision set to disrupt global supply. "When we're sued, we face it. The most important thing is we don't turn, we don't go back," Widodo said in a statement released by the Cabinet Secretariat. Widodo repeated his longstanding stance that Southeast Asia's largest economy should be exporting less raw materials and more processed goods to create more added value and jobs at home. Indonesia - the world's biggest nickel ore producer has become a major exporter of stainless steel since Widodo adopted a stricter export policy on nickel ore. It has also seen a surge in foreign investment in smelting, particularly from China. The European Union lodged its complaint last month over Indonesia's curbs on exporting nickel and other raw materials to the benefit of its own smelting and stainless steel industries. "For our national interest, whatever is being protested by other countries we will face. We don't have any doubt," Widodo said. The president is now pushing for the development of electric vehicles and battery production facilities that would use its nickel ore supply.

Indonesia president defends nickel export curbs after European Union complaint at World Trade Organisation

Voters go to the polls on Thursday in an election that will pave the way for Brexit under Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/with-conservatives-leading-polls-britain-heads-to-landmark-winter-election-to-determine-its-road-ahead-267785">Boris Johnson</a> or propel Britain towards another referendum that could ultimately reverse the decision to leave the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/british-general-election-a-look-at-possible-outcomes-of-the-uk-vote-267764">European Union</a>.

After failing to deliver Brexit by an October&nbsp;31 deadline, Johnson called the December&nbsp;12 election to break what he cast as political paralysis that had thwarted Britain's departure and sapped confidence in the economy.

The face of the "Leave" campaign in the 2016 referendum, 55-year-old Johnson fought the election under the slogan of "Get Brexit Done", promising to end the deadlock and spend more on health, education and the police.

His main opponent, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, 70, promised higher public spending, nationalisation of key services, taxes on the wealthy and another referendum on Brexit.

All major opinion polls suggest Johnson will win, though pollsters got the 2016 referendum wrong and their models predict outcomes ranging from a hung parliament to the biggest Conservative landslide since the era of Margaret Thatcher.

"We could have a Conservative majority government which will get <a href="https://www.wionews.com/videos/uk-three-election-in-four-years-all-for-brexit-267773">Brexit</a> done and unleash Britain’s potential," Johnson told campaigners. "This election is our chance to end the gridlock but the result is on a knife-edge."

Corbyn said the Conservatives were the party of "billionaires" while Labour represented the many.

"You can vote for despair and vote for the dishonesty of this government, or you can vote Labour and get a government that can bring hope to the future," he said.

Polls open at 0700 GMT and close at 2200 GMT when an exit poll will give the first indications of the result. Official results from the bulk of United Kingdom's 650 different constituencies begin to come in from 2300 GMT to 0500 GMT.

While Brexit framed the United Kingdom's first December election since 1923, the tortuous exit from the EU has variously fatigued, enthused and enraged voters while eroding loyalties to the two major parties.

A majority would allow Johnson to lead the country out of the club it first joined in 1973, but Brexit would still be far from over. He faces the daunting task of negotiating a trade agreement with the EU in a self-imposed deadline of 11 months.

After January&nbsp;31, Britain would enter a transition period during which it would negotiate a new relationship with the EU27. He has pledged to do that by the end of 2020.

Sterling markets are pricing in a Johnson win. But a five-year flurry of two historic referendums&nbsp;on Scottish independence in 2014 and Brexit in 2016 and two national elections in 2015 and 2017 have delivered often unexpected results that ushered in political crises.

The election pitches two of the most unconventional British politicians of recent years against each other. Both have been repeatedly written off by opponents and both offer starkly different visions for the world's fifth-largest economy.

Johnson's pitch is Brexit but he shrank from anything more radical in a heavily choreographed campaign. Corbyn pitched what he calls a radical transformation for a country long wedded to free-market liberalism.

Johnson, the New York-born former mayor of London, won the top job in July. His predecessor, Theresa May, resigned after failing to get parliamentary backing for her Brexit deal with the EU and then losing her party's majority in a snap election.

Johnson defied critics by striking a new deal with the EU but was unable to navigate the maze of a divided British parliament and was defeated by opponents whom he portrayed as traitors subverting the will of the people.

The United Kingdom voted by 52 per cent -48&nbsp;per cent in 2016 to quit the EU. But parliament has been deadlocked since May's failed bet on a 2017 snap election over how, when and even whether to leave.

Corbyn, once an opponent of the EU who now says he would remain neutral if he was a prime minister overseeing another referendum, was repeatedly grilled over his Brexit plans. He pledged to overthrow a "rigged system" he said was run by billionaires and tax dodgers.

Both made missteps during the campaign.

Johnson in one interview refused to look at a picture of a sick four-year-old boy forced to lie on the floor of a hospital and then inexplicably took the phone from a reporter and pocketed it. He later apologised.

Corbyn, a veteran campaigner for Palestinian rights, repeatedly avoided apologising for what some party members, lawmakers and Jewish leaders say is his failure to tackle anti-Semitism from some elements within the party. He apologised eventually.

Johnson's strategy was to breach Labour's so-called "Red Wall" of seats across the Brexit-supporting areas of the Midlands and northern England where he described his political opponents as the out-of-touch enemies of Brexit.

"If I’m honest with you, there’s no choice," said voter Andrew Davis, from Kent in southern England. "I don’t like any of the main candidates, so I’m struggling."

&nbsp;

Voters go to the polls on Thursday in an election that will pave the way for Brexit under Prime Minister Boris Johnson or propel Britain towards another referendum that could ultimately reverse the decision to leave the European Union.

Voters go to the polls on Thursday in an election that will pave the way for Brexit under Prime Minister Boris Johnson or propel Britain towards another referendum that could ultimately reverse the decision to leave the European Union. After failing to deliver Brexit by an October 31 deadline, Johnson called the December 12 election to break what he cast as political paralysis that had thwarted Britain's departure and sapped confidence in the economy. The face of the "Leave" campaign in the 2016 referendum, 55-year-old Johnson fought the election under the slogan of "Get Brexit Done", promising to end the deadlock and spend more on health, education and the police. His main opponent, Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn, 70, promised higher public spending, nationalisation of key services, taxes on the wealthy and another referendum on Brexit. All major opinion polls suggest Johnson will win, though pollsters got the 2016 referendum wrong and their models predict outcomes ranging from a hung parliament to the biggest Conservative landslide since the era of Margaret Thatcher. "We could have a Conservative majority government which will get Brexit done and unleash Britain’s potential," Johnson told campaigners. "This election is our chance to end the gridlock but the result is on a knife-edge." Corbyn said the Conservatives were the party of "billionaires" while Labour represented the many. "You can vote for despair and vote for the dishonesty of this government, or you can vote Labour and get a government that can bring hope to the future," he said. Polls open at 0700 GMT and close at 2200 GMT when an exit poll will give the first indications of the result. Official results from the bulk of United Kingdom's 650 different constituencies begin to come in from 2300 GMT to 0500 GMT. While Brexit framed the United Kingdom's first December election since 1923, the tortuous exit from the EU has variously fatigued, enthused and enraged voters while eroding loyalties to the two major parties. A majority would allow Johnson to lead the country out of the club it first joined in 1973, but Brexit would still be far from over. He faces the daunting task of negotiating a trade agreement with the EU in a self-imposed deadline of 11 months. After January 31, Britain would enter a transition period during which it would negotiate a new relationship with the EU27. He has pledged to do that by the end of 2020. Sterling markets are pricing in a Johnson win. But a five-year flurry of two historic referendums on Scottish independence in 2014 and Brexit in 2016 and two national elections in 2015 and 2017 have delivered often unexpected results that ushered in political crises. The election pitches two of the most unconventional British politicians of recent years against each other. Both have been repeatedly written off by opponents and both offer starkly different visions for the world's fifth-largest economy. Johnson's pitch is Brexit but he shrank from anything more radical in a heavily choreographed campaign. Corbyn pitched what he calls a radical transformation for a country long wedded to free-market liberalism. Johnson, the New York-born former mayor of London, won the top job in July. His predecessor, Theresa May, resigned after failing to get parliamentary backing for her Brexit deal with the EU and then losing her party's majority in a snap election. Johnson defied critics by striking a new deal with the EU but was unable to navigate the maze of a divided British parliament and was defeated by opponents whom he portrayed as traitors subverting the will of the people. The United Kingdom voted by 52 per cent -48 per cent in 2016 to quit the EU. But parliament has been deadlocked since May's failed bet on a 2017 snap election over how, when and even whether to leave. Corbyn, once an opponent of the EU who now says he would remain neutral if he was a prime minister overseeing another referendum, was repeatedly grilled over his Brexit plans. He pledged to overthrow a "rigged system" he said was run by billionaires and tax dodgers. Both made missteps during the campaign. Johnson in one interview refused to look at a picture of a sick four-year-old boy forced to lie on the floor of a hospital and then inexplicably took the phone from a reporter and pocketed it. He later apologised. Corbyn, a veteran campaigner for Palestinian rights, repeatedly avoided apologising for what some party members, lawmakers and Jewish leaders say is his failure to tackle anti-Semitism from some elements within the party. He apologised eventually. Johnson's strategy was to breach Labour's so-called "Red Wall" of seats across the Brexit-supporting areas of the Midlands and northern England where he described his political opponents as the out-of-touch enemies of Brexit. "If I’m honest with you, there’s no choice," said voter Andrew Davis, from Kent in southern England. "I don’t like any of the main candidates, so I’m struggling."

United Kingdom votes to decide the fate of Brexit, again

Czechs protest against PM Babis after damning EU report

European Commission head Ursula Von Der Leyen today said that the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/european-union-to-prolong-russia-sanctions-german-minister-267216">European Union</a> intends to mobilise 100 billion euros worth of investment in a bid to make the union's economies more environmentally friendly.

"This is Europe's man on the moon moment," Von Der Leyen exclaimed before making her climate pitch.

Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have expressed dismay at cutting greenhouse gas emissions further. Leyen's deal is expected to bring back discussions surrounding this.

Leyen is set to propose her much-awaited ''Green Deal'' for the bloc later today to showcase <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/european-union-permits-state-aid-to-develop-electric-battery-giants-267202">commitment to achieve climate neutrality</a> by 2050.

(With inputs from Reuters)

European Commission head Ursula Von Der Leyen today said that the European Union intends to mobilise 100 billion euros worth of investment in a bid to make the union's economies more environmentally friendly.

European Commission head Ursula Von Der Leyen today said that the European Union intends to mobilise 100 billion euros worth of investment in a bid to make the union's economies more environmentally friendly. "This is Europe's man on the moon moment," Von Der Leyen exclaimed before making her climate pitch. Poland, Hungary, and the Czech Republic have expressed dismay at cutting greenhouse gas emissions further. Leyen's deal is expected to bring back discussions surrounding this. Leyen is set to propose her much-awaited ''Green Deal'' for the bloc later today to showcase commitment to achieve climate neutrality by 2050. (With inputs from Reuters)

New climate pact is EU's 'man on the moon moment': Chief executive

India and the European Union need to sort out outstanding issues such as government procurement, labour standards, and sustainability as part of the negotiations of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/united-states-mexico-canada-to-sign-deal-finalising-new-trade-agreement-267522">Free Trade Agreements</a> (FTAs) which have been held up since 2013, European Union Ambassador to India, Ugo Astuto, said on Tuesday.

Responding to a question on as to what are the points of contention pertaining to the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/economy-debate-narendra-modis-nda-versus-manmohan-singhs-upa-267271">FTA</a>, Astuto said, "There are a few. At the outset, I must say these are difficult negotiations. We have issues on tariff, we have issues to discuss on government procurement, labour standards, and stainability."

"These are part and parcel of all our Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). These are all complex issues that require thorough discussions. That is why technical conversation continues," he added.

The negotiations have been held up since 2013 due to differences on several contentious issues between the two sides.

Responding to a question on Kashmir, the envoy said that the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/we-can-rip-up-the-european-union-rule-book-johnson-tells-uk-voters-267447">European Union</a> is concerned over the situation in Kashmir and believes it is important to restore freedom of movement and normalcy in the region.

He said that India and <a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/us-blacklists-encounter-specialist-pakistan-cop-rao-anwar-for-serious-human-rights-abuse-267554">Pakistan</a> should resolve the issue through dialogue. "Our position on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/india-news/not-one-bullet-fired-situation-in-kashmir-normal-amit-shah-267372">Kashmir</a> hasn't changed since August. We have stressed a dialogue between India and Pakistan through diplomatic channels; means of communication should be restored in Kashmir. Our position has been consistent," he added.

India and the European Union need to sort out outstanding issues such as government procurement, labour standards, and sustainability as part of the negotiations of the Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) which have been held up since 2013, European Union Ambassador to India, Ugo Astuto, said on Tuesday.

India and the European Union need to sort out outstanding issues such as government procurement, labour standards, and sustainability as part of the negotiations of the Free Trade Agreements (FTAs) which have been held up since 2013, European Union Ambassador to India, Ugo Astuto, said on Tuesday. Responding to a question on as to what are the points of contention pertaining to the FTA, Astuto said, "There are a few. At the outset, I must say these are difficult negotiations. We have issues on tariff, we have issues to discuss on government procurement, labour standards, and stainability." "These are part and parcel of all our Free Trade Agreements (FTAs). These are all complex issues that require thorough discussions. That is why technical conversation continues," he added. The negotiations have been held up since 2013 due to differences on several contentious issues between the two sides. Responding to a question on Kashmir, the envoy said that the European Union is concerned over the situation in Kashmir and believes it is important to restore freedom of movement and normalcy in the region. He said that India and Pakistan should resolve the issue through dialogue. "Our position on Kashmir hasn't changed since August. We have stressed a dialogue between India and Pakistan through diplomatic channels; means of communication should be restored in Kashmir. Our position has been consistent," he added.

India, European Union need to resolve issues of labour standards, sustainability holding up FTA talks

Britain is set to go back to the ballot boxes in three days, to pick its Prime Minister for the third time since 2015.

It's predicted to be one of the most volatile general elections in decades.

It is not just Brexit that is at stake, whoever gets the keys to Downing Street will radically influence the country's economy, public services and the road ahead. 
&nbsp; 
The people of Britain are set to elect 650 Members of Parliament into the House of Commons that is going to decide laws and policies for the country. While most of those contesting elections belong to a political party, some do stand as Independents.

Like India, the United Kingdom also holds general elections every five years but due to Brexit, three elections have already taken place in the last four years.

In the 2015 general elections, the National Health Service and immigration were the biggest concern for the voters. In 2019, however, these concerns have been overtaken by Britain's departure from the European Union - Brexit - as the prime concern for everyone. 
&nbsp; 
The purpose of these Christmas elections is to break the Brexit deadlock in parliament, but it is a huge gamble for Prime Minister of Britain and leader of the Conservative Party, Boris Johnson.

Politicians remain divided on the issue with some demanding the UK to leave the EU as soon as possible, some demanding another referendum, and others to cancel Brexit altogether.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson does not currently have enough MPs to easily pass new laws, he hopes an early election will increase the number of Conservative MPs, making his Brexit plans easier to achieve.

If the UK Prime Minister fails, pro-remain parties will try to stop Brexit altogether.

The Labour Party wants to renegotiate Johnson's Brexit deal and put it to another referendum.

The Liberal Democrats under the leadership of Jo Swinson have pledged to cancel Brexit if they are voted to power at the general elections.

The Scottish National Party, Welsh Party plaid CYMRU and the Greens are all in favour of a second referendum.

Britain is to start voting between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm on December 12. The results are to declared through the night and the following day.

Once the final result is announced, the leader of the winning party visits Buckingham Palace to ask the Queen for permission to form a new government after which they might stand outside to deliver a speech about their party's plans for the coming term.&nbsp;

Britain is set to go back to the ballot boxes in three days, to pick its Prime Minister for the third time since 2015. It's predicted to be one of the most volatile general elections in decades.

Britain is set to go back to the ballot boxes in three days, to pick its Prime Minister for the third time since 2015. It's predicted to be one of the most volatile general elections in decades. It is not just Brexit that is at stake, whoever gets the keys to Downing Street will radically influence the country's economy, public services and the road ahead. The people of Britain are set to elect 650 Members of Parliament into the House of Commons that is going to decide laws and policies for the country. While most of those contesting elections belong to a political party, some do stand as Independents. Like India, the United Kingdom also holds general elections every five years but due to Brexit, three elections have already taken place in the last four years. In the 2015 general elections, the National Health Service and immigration were the biggest concern for the voters. In 2019, however, these concerns have been overtaken by Britain's departure from the European Union - Brexit - as the prime concern for everyone. The purpose of these Christmas elections is to break the Brexit deadlock in parliament, but it is a huge gamble for Prime Minister of Britain and leader of the Conservative Party, Boris Johnson. Politicians remain divided on the issue with some demanding the UK to leave the EU as soon as possible, some demanding another referendum, and others to cancel Brexit altogether. Prime Minister Boris Johnson does not currently have enough MPs to easily pass new laws, he hopes an early election will increase the number of Conservative MPs, making his Brexit plans easier to achieve. If the UK Prime Minister fails, pro-remain parties will try to stop Brexit altogether. The Labour Party wants to renegotiate Johnson's Brexit deal and put it to another referendum. The Liberal Democrats under the leadership of Jo Swinson have pledged to cancel Brexit if they are voted to power at the general elections. The Scottish National Party, Welsh Party plaid CYMRU and the Greens are all in favour of a second referendum. Britain is to start voting between 7:00 am and 10:00 pm on December 12. The results are to declared through the night and the following day. Once the final result is announced, the leader of the winning party visits Buckingham Palace to ask the Queen for permission to form a new government after which they might stand outside to deliver a speech about their party's plans for the coming term.

With Brexit and economy at stake, Britain braces for third election in four years

The&nbsp;US&nbsp;Treasury has imposed&nbsp;sanctions&nbsp;on a businessman and a senior government official with close links to&nbsp;Cambodian&nbsp;Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cambodian-opposition-leader-still-to-face-treason-trial-pm-262867">Hun Sen,</a> accusing them of&nbsp;corruption.

The measures come as western countries step up pressure on Hun Sen&nbsp;over&nbsp;a crackdown on the opposition and after the United States expressed concern&nbsp;over&nbsp;Cambodia’s military ties with China.

The&nbsp;US&nbsp;Treasury said it had sanctioned Kun Kim, a former joint chief of staff of the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cambodian-strongmans-son-assumes-powerful-military-roles-148066">Royal&nbsp;Cambodian&nbsp;Armed Forces</a> (RCAF),&nbsp;over&nbsp;his role in a real estate development in Koh Kong province and his relationship with Chinese state-owned entity that he reaped significant financial benefit from.

"Kim used RCAF soldiers to intimidate, demolish, and clear-out land sought by the (<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/peoples-republic-of-china-celebrates-70th-anniversary-in-beijing-253107">People's Republic of China</a>)-owned entity. Kun Kim was replaced as RCAF Chief of Staff because Kim had not shared profits from his unlawful businesses with senior&nbsp;Cambodian&nbsp;government officials," the department said in a statement.

Three members of Kim's family and five entities that are owned or controlled by these individuals were also sanctioned, the department said.

Cambodian&nbsp;tycoon Try Pheap, a member of Hun Sen's ruling party, was also sanctioned for building a large scale illegal logging consortium with collusion of officials.

Try Pheap's 11 Cambodia-registered entities were also sanctioned.

Kun Kim and Try Pheap could not be reached for comment on Tuesday.

Ruling party spokesman and Senator Sok Eysan said the&nbsp;sanctions&nbsp;were ineffective and only served as the support for the opposition.

"They don't have assets abroad and if they are stupid to keep assets outside, let them freeze," Sok Eysan told Reuters.

"They did this just to support their puppets, it's not effective," he said, in reference to the opposition <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/cambodian-court-dissolves-main-opposition-party-24372">Cambodia National Rescue Party </a>(CNRP) which was dissolved in 2017.

The CNRP dissolution paved the way for Hun Sen's ruling party to win all the seats in parliament in an election last year.

The United States has called for the release of detained opposition leader Kem Sokha. It has also voiced concern at reports Cambodia is cooperating with China on a naval base, something Hun Sen has denied.

Cambodia has also come under growing pressure from the European Union, which is considering the scrapping of trade preferences&nbsp;over&nbsp;Cambodia’s crackdown on the opposition.

The US Treasury has imposed sanctions on a businessman and a senior government official with close links to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, accusing them of corruption.

The US Treasury has imposed sanctions on a businessman and a senior government official with close links to Cambodian Prime Minister Hun Sen, accusing them of corruption. The measures come as western countries step up pressure on Hun Sen over a crackdown on the opposition and after the United States expressed concern over Cambodia’s military ties with China. The US Treasury said it had sanctioned Kun Kim, a former joint chief of staff of the Royal Cambodian Armed Forces (RCAF), over his role in a real estate development in Koh Kong province and his relationship with Chinese state-owned entity that he reaped significant financial benefit from. "Kim used RCAF soldiers to intimidate, demolish, and clear-out land sought by the (People's Republic of China)-owned entity. Kun Kim was replaced as RCAF Chief of Staff because Kim had not shared profits from his unlawful businesses with senior Cambodian government officials," the department said in a statement. Three members of Kim's family and five entities that are owned or controlled by these individuals were also sanctioned, the department said. Cambodian tycoon Try Pheap, a member of Hun Sen's ruling party, was also sanctioned for building a large scale illegal logging consortium with collusion of officials. Try Pheap's 11 Cambodia-registered entities were also sanctioned. Kun Kim and Try Pheap could not be reached for comment on Tuesday. Ruling party spokesman and Senator Sok Eysan said the sanctions were ineffective and only served as the support for the opposition. "They don't have assets abroad and if they are stupid to keep assets outside, let them freeze," Sok Eysan told Reuters. "They did this just to support their puppets, it's not effective," he said, in reference to the opposition Cambodia National Rescue Party (CNRP) which was dissolved in 2017. The CNRP dissolution paved the way for Hun Sen's ruling party to win all the seats in parliament in an election last year. The United States has called for the release of detained opposition leader Kem Sokha. It has also voiced concern at reports Cambodia is cooperating with China on a naval base, something Hun Sen has denied. Cambodia has also come under growing pressure from the European Union, which is considering the scrapping of trade preferences over Cambodia’s crackdown on the opposition.

US imposes sanctions Cambodian PM's associates over alleged corruption

Prime Minister <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-pm-boris-johnson-rejects-calls-for-no-deal-brexit-in-election-pitch-259559">Boris&nbsp;Johnson</a>&nbsp;will bolster his argument on Tuesday for leaving the<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/european-union-presses-uk-to-resubmit-brexit-plan-as-end-game-looms-254002">&nbsp;European Union </a>early next year, urging&nbsp;voters&nbsp;to return him to power so Britain&nbsp;can&nbsp;"rip&nbsp;up&nbsp;the&nbsp;EU&nbsp;rule&nbsp;book&nbsp;and write a new one for ourselves".

Just days before Britain votes in an election he called to try to break the deadlock over Brexit,&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;will repeat his desire to "finally get Brexit done" on a tour of traditionally Labour supporting areas he hopes to win over.

He will also hope to get his campaign back on track after he was criticised on Monday for his response to being shown a photo of a sick child lying on a hospital floor and after being heckled by a voter over his election tactics.

Johnson&nbsp;has put his oft-repeated pledge for a quick Brexit at the heart of his election campaign, hoping to win the backing of those who voted to leave the&nbsp;EU&nbsp;in the 2016 referendum.

The main opposition Labour Party has also said it will get Brexit "sorted" in six months, but its leader, <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/boris-johnson-or-jeremy-corbyn-who-will-be-the-next-uk-prime-minister-265670">Jeremy Corbyn</a>, has put more emphasis on policies to increase spending on healthcare and education, and increase the role of the state.

"If (we) do break free, there's a bright future waiting for us with all the opportunities of Brexit," he will say on a campaign trip&nbsp;to Staffordshire in central England, according to excerpts of his speech.

"We&nbsp;can&nbsp;literally&nbsp;rip&nbsp;up&nbsp;the&nbsp;EU&nbsp;rule&nbsp;book&nbsp;and write a new one for ourselves.&nbsp;We&nbsp;can&nbsp;do all this and so much more if&nbsp;we&nbsp;regain our independence -&nbsp;we&nbsp;just need to vote for it, one more time, this Thursday."

Opinion polls put&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;in the lead before Thursday's vote, but some have shown Labour is catching&nbsp;up, and with so many Britons as yet undecided, the result is hard to predict.

Johnson's team hopes to break the opposition party's hold on&nbsp;voters&nbsp;in regions of northern and central England, the country's so-called red-wall, who have, sometimes for generations, rejected his party's overtures.

The Conservative message is a simple appeal to those Labour supporters who backed Brexit - only&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;will get it done. Labour says even if Britain leaves at the current deadline of January&nbsp;31, that would only mean the beginning of what could be lengthy new trade talks with both the&nbsp;EU&nbsp;and other countries.

"The stalemate in parliament has held this country back for too long,"&nbsp;Johnson&nbsp;will say. "It's time to send in the bulldozers and smash through the gridlock."

Prime Minister Boris Johnson will bolster his argument on Tuesday for leaving the European Union early next year, urging voters to return him to power so Britain can "rip up the EU rule book and write a new one for ourselves".

Prime Minister Boris Johnson will bolster his argument on Tuesday for leaving the European Union early next year, urging voters to return him to power so Britain can "rip up the EU rule book and write a new one for ourselves". Just days before Britain votes in an election he called to try to break the deadlock over Brexit, Johnson will repeat his desire to "finally get Brexit done" on a tour of traditionally Labour supporting areas he hopes to win over. He will also hope to get his campaign back on track after he was criticised on Monday for his response to being shown a photo of a sick child lying on a hospital floor and after being heckled by a voter over his election tactics. Johnson has put his oft-repeated pledge for a quick Brexit at the heart of his election campaign, hoping to win the backing of those who voted to leave the EU in the 2016 referendum. The main opposition Labour Party has also said it will get Brexit "sorted" in six months, but its leader, Jeremy Corbyn, has put more emphasis on policies to increase spending on healthcare and education, and increase the role of the state. "If (we) do break free, there's a bright future waiting for us with all the opportunities of Brexit," he will say on a campaign trip to Staffordshire in central England, according to excerpts of his speech. "We can literally rip up the EU rule book and write a new one for ourselves. We can do all this and so much more if we regain our independence - we just need to vote for it, one more time, this Thursday." Opinion polls put Johnson in the lead before Thursday's vote, but some have shown Labour is catching up, and with so many Britons as yet undecided, the result is hard to predict. Johnson's team hopes to break the opposition party's hold on voters in regions of northern and central England, the country's so-called red-wall, who have, sometimes for generations, rejected his party's overtures. The Conservative message is a simple appeal to those Labour supporters who backed Brexit - only Johnson will get it done. Labour says even if Britain leaves at the current deadline of January 31, that would only mean the beginning of what could be lengthy new trade talks with both the EU and other countries. "The stalemate in parliament has held this country back for too long," Johnson will say. "It's time to send in the bulldozers and smash through the gridlock."

We can rip up the European Union rule book, Johnson tells UK voters

The European Union confirmed tariffs on Indonesian biodiesel imports on Monday to counter what it sees as unfair subsidies, the latest blow to producers after the bloc ruled that palm oil should be phased out of renewable transport fuels.

In the conclusion to a case that has lasted seven years, the duties, which normally remain in place for five years, have been set at between 8% and 18%, the same level as the provisional rates proposed by the EU in August.

The EU biodiesel market is worth an estimated 9 billion euros ($10 billion) a year, with imports from Indonesia worth about 400 million euros, the European Commission said.

Indonesian producers sold at unfairly low prices, the Commission, which coordinates trade policy for the EU, said, adding that its investigation found they benefit from grants, tax benefits and access to raw materials below market prices.

This was driving EU producers into losses, it added.

Master Parulian Tumanggor, chairman of Indonesia's biofuel producers association, told Reuters his group would ask the government to file a legal challenge at the World Trade Organization (WTO).

The EU and China are Indonesia's biggest markets for its biodiesel exports and the Indonesian government has threatened to impose its own tariffs on EU dairy products amid fraught relations with the bloc.

The EU said in March that Indonesian palm plantations were contributing to deforestation and said palm oil should no longer be used in renewable fuels.

It has also imposed anti-subsidy duties on Argentine biodiesel producers, although they have tariff-free access for about 1.2 million tonnes as long as they sell no lower than a set minimum price.

The EU began looking into biodiesel from both major producers in 2012 and imposed anti-dumping duties on companies in 2013. However, the firms subsequently won challenges at the European Court of Justice and the WTO.

This prompted the EU to remove duties on most biodiesel imports from the two countries, but the Commission also started an investigation into possible unfair subsidies.

The European Union confirmed tariffs on Indonesian biodiesel imports on Monday to counter what it sees as unfair subsidies, the latest blow to producers after the bloc ruled that palm oil should be phased out of renewable transport fuels.

The European Union confirmed tariffs on Indonesian biodiesel imports on Monday to counter what it sees as unfair subsidies, the latest blow to producers after the bloc ruled that palm oil should be phased out of renewable transport fuels. In the conclusion to a case that has lasted seven years, the duties, which normally remain in place for five years, have been set at between 8% and 18%, the same level as the provisional rates proposed by the EU in August. The EU biodiesel market is worth an estimated 9 billion euros ($10 billion) a year, with imports from Indonesia worth about 400 million euros, the European Commission said. Indonesian producers sold at unfairly low prices, the Commission, which coordinates trade policy for the EU, said, adding that its investigation found they benefit from grants, tax benefits and access to raw materials below market prices. This was driving EU producers into losses, it added. Master Parulian Tumanggor, chairman of Indonesia's biofuel producers association, told Reuters his group would ask the government to file a legal challenge at the World Trade Organization (WTO). The EU and China are Indonesia's biggest markets for its biodiesel exports and the Indonesian government has threatened to impose its own tariffs on EU dairy products amid fraught relations with the bloc. The EU said in March that Indonesian palm plantations were contributing to deforestation and said palm oil should no longer be used in renewable fuels. It has also imposed anti-subsidy duties on Argentine biodiesel producers, although they have tariff-free access for about 1.2 million tonnes as long as they sell no lower than a set minimum price. The EU began looking into biodiesel from both major producers in 2012 and imposed anti-dumping duties on companies in 2013. However, the firms subsequently won challenges at the European Court of Justice and the WTO. This prompted the EU to remove duties on most biodiesel imports from the two countries, but the Commission also started an investigation into possible unfair subsidies.

EU hits Indonesian biodiesel with import duties over subsidies

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/european-union-permits-state-aid-to-develop-electric-battery-giants-267202">EU leaders</a> will renew economic sanctions against Russia when they meet for a summit this week, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said Monday.

Maas said he saw no reason to relax the measures imposed on Moscow over its role in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. The sanctions target whole sectors of the Russian economy, including its valuable oil and gas industries.

European measures were first put in place after Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over rebel-held eastern Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people, and EU leaders have renewed them every six months ever since.

France is hosting a highly-anticipated four-way summit with Russia, Ukraine and Germany on Monday in the hope of making progress towards peace in Ukraine.

French President Emmanuel Macron has been pushing for a thaw between Europe and Russia, but Maas said it was too early to ease sanctions.

"We will continue what we thought was right so far,&nbsp;to extend the sanctions,&nbsp;because the reasons that led to the sanctions continue to exist," Maas said as he arrived for a meeting of <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/will-act-and-react-as-one-european-union-on-proposed-us-tariffs-on-french-goods-265977">EU foreign ministers</a> in Brussels.

"At the moment, for me there is no reason to change anything in the sanctions policy of the European Union towards Russia."

Monday's meeting in Paris of Macron, Russian leader Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is the first so-called "Normandy Format" summit in three years.

It seeks to implement accords signed in Minsk in 2015 that call for the withdrawal of heavy weapons, the restoration of Kiev's control over its borders, wider autonomy for Donetsk and Lugansk, and the holding of local elections.

Thousands have been killed since pro-Russia militias in eastern Ukraine launched a bid for independence in 2014, kicking off a conflict that deepened Russia's estrangement from the West.

The EU insists the Minsk accords must be implemented if sanctions are to be lifted or relaxed.

EU leaders will renew economic sanctions against Russia when they meet for a summit this week, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said Monday. Maas said he saw no reason to relax the measures imposed on Moscow over its role in the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

EU leaders will renew economic sanctions against Russia when they meet for a summit this week, German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said Monday. Maas said he saw no reason to relax the measures imposed on Moscow over its role in the conflict in eastern Ukraine. The sanctions target whole sectors of the Russian economy, including its valuable oil and gas industries. European measures were first put in place after Malaysian Airlines flight MH17 was shot down over rebel-held eastern Ukraine in 2014, killing 298 people, and EU leaders have renewed them every six months ever since. France is hosting a highly-anticipated four-way summit with Russia, Ukraine and Germany on Monday in the hope of making progress towards peace in Ukraine. French President Emmanuel Macron has been pushing for a thaw between Europe and Russia, but Maas said it was too early to ease sanctions. "We will continue what we thought was right so far, to extend the sanctions, because the reasons that led to the sanctions continue to exist," Maas said as he arrived for a meeting of EU foreign ministers in Brussels. "At the moment, for me there is no reason to change anything in the sanctions policy of the European Union towards Russia." Monday's meeting in Paris of Macron, Russian leader Vladimir Putin, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky is the first so-called "Normandy Format" summit in three years. It seeks to implement accords signed in Minsk in 2015 that call for the withdrawal of heavy weapons, the restoration of Kiev's control over its borders, wider autonomy for Donetsk and Lugansk, and the holding of local elections. Thousands have been killed since pro-Russia militias in eastern Ukraine launched a bid for independence in 2014, kicking off a conflict that deepened Russia's estrangement from the West. The EU insists the Minsk accords must be implemented if sanctions are to be lifted or relaxed.

European Union to prolong Russia sanctions: German minister

The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/will-act-and-react-as-one-european-union-on-proposed-us-tariffs-on-french-goods-265977">EU's</a> powerful anti-trust authority on Monday approved billions of euros in subsidies from seven member states as Europe seeks to make up lost ground in the highly strategic sector of electric batteries.

The move is part of a major push led by Germany and France to prepare Europe for the emergence of electric cars, as gas combustible engines are phased out over concerns for the environment.

The European car industry employs over 10 million people and the EU,&nbsp;led by Germany and France,&nbsp;is deeply concerned about Europe's dependence on car batteries from Asia.

The mega subsidy of 3.2 billion euros ($3.5 billion) from Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Belgium, Sweden and Finland will go to a consortium of 17 companies and will help generate an extra 5 billion euros in private investment, a statement said.

The commission, the EU's anti-trust enforcer, usually holds a strict line against state subsidies, but in 2014 gave more leeway for countries to back strategic transnational projects.

The wave of new subsidies are part of something called the European Battery Alliance.&nbsp;

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/european-union-leaders-to-push-for-climate-neutrality-by-2050-sources-265831">The campaign</a>, launched in 2017, was designed to entice European industry to create an Airbus of batteries, in reference to the aviation giant that was born of a similar ambition a generation ago.

Companies involved include German car giant BMW and chemical multinationals BASF and Solvay.

The EU's powerful anti-trust authority on Monday approved billions of euros in subsidies from seven member states as Europe seeks to make up lost ground in the highly strategic sector of electric batteries.

The EU's powerful anti-trust authority on Monday approved billions of euros in subsidies from seven member states as Europe seeks to make up lost ground in the highly strategic sector of electric batteries. The move is part of a major push led by Germany and France to prepare Europe for the emergence of electric cars, as gas combustible engines are phased out over concerns for the environment. The European car industry employs over 10 million people and the EU, led by Germany and France, is deeply concerned about Europe's dependence on car batteries from Asia. The mega subsidy of 3.2 billion euros ($3.5 billion) from Germany, France, Italy, Poland, Belgium, Sweden and Finland will go to a consortium of 17 companies and will help generate an extra 5 billion euros in private investment, a statement said. The commission, the EU's anti-trust enforcer, usually holds a strict line against state subsidies, but in 2014 gave more leeway for countries to back strategic transnational projects. The wave of new subsidies are part of something called the European Battery Alliance. The campaign, launched in 2017, was designed to entice European industry to create an Airbus of batteries, in reference to the aviation giant that was born of a similar ambition a generation ago. Companies involved include German car giant BMW and chemical multinationals BASF and Solvay.

European Union permits state aid to develop electric battery giants

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/frances-emmanuel-macron-to-hold-meeting-on-pensions-as-strike-bites-266909">French President Emmanuel&nbsp;Macron</a>&nbsp;this week&nbsp;faces&nbsp;the&nbsp;first&nbsp;major&nbsp;test&nbsp;of his policy of directly engaging with&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;that has disturbed some European allies, as he hosts a summit seeking progress in ending the Ukraine conflict.

Joined by German Chancellor Angela Merkel,&nbsp;Macron&nbsp;will bring together Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky for their&nbsp;first&nbsp;face-to-face meeting at an afternoon summit at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Monday.

The stakes are high: this will be the&nbsp;first&nbsp;such summit in three years and while diplomats caution against expecting a major breakthrough, a failure to agree concrete confidence-building steps would be seen as a major blow to hopes for peace and also&nbsp;Macron's personal prestige.

Macron, who is pressing ahead with the summit despite crippling public transport strikes at home over contested pension reforms, has invested hugely in efforts to end the conflict in the east of Ukraine that has claimed 13,000 lives since 2014.

And he has also placed his bets on a risky&nbsp;strategy&nbsp;to deal directly with Putin, based on the assumption that one day&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;will understand it is in the national interest to see Europe as its long-term strategic partner.

"It is an important&nbsp;test&nbsp;for&nbsp;Macron&nbsp;and for the Europeans," said Michel Duclos, a former ambassador and senior fellow at the Institut Montaigne, a French think tank.

"He is already very isolated. And if he obtains nothing on Ukraine he is going to be even more isolated," he added.

But he added the Kremlin was "astute enough" to understand that the summit had to be declared a success and Putin was gladdened by&nbsp;Macron's overtures as he "sees in that a chance to divide the Europeans".

'Threat but also a partner'

Macron&nbsp;has adopted an <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/french-strike-against-macron-reforms-enters-day-two-266522">increasingly assertive presence</a> on the international stage in recent months, at a time when&nbsp;Germany is a less imposing diplomatic player as Merkel prepares to leave the office.

His thoughts were summed up in an explosive interview with The Economist last month when he declared NATO was brain dead and said Europe needed to have a strategic dialogue with&nbsp;Russia.

Examining&nbsp;Russia's long-term strategic options under Putin,&nbsp;Macron&nbsp;said in the interview that&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;could not prosper in isolation, would not want to be a "vassal" of China and would eventually have to opt for "a partnership project with Europe".

Macron&nbsp;notably described ex-KGB agent Putin as a "child of Saint Petersburg", the former Russian capital built by Peter the Great as a window onto the West.

His comments disturbed newer EU members that want a tough line against their former master&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;like the Baltic States and, in particular, Poland. And they added to a raft of growing tensions between France and Germany.

But after a summit of NATO leaders in England earlier this month,&nbsp;Macron&nbsp;was unrepentant and categorical about his&nbsp;strategy&nbsp;of cultivating&nbsp;Russia.

"Who is NATO's&nbsp;enemy?&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;is no longer an&nbsp;enemy. It remains a threat but is also a partner on some subjects. Our&nbsp;enemy&nbsp;today is international terrorism and in particular Islamist terrorism," he said.

'Being a nuisance no&nbsp;strategy'

A French diplomatic source argued&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;could not forever pin its&nbsp;strategy&nbsp;on being a "power of disturbance" with policies like its military intervention in Syria to keep President Bashar al-Assad in power or its alliance with NATO member Turkey which has rattled the West.

"If having a capacity to be a nuisance is your only lever it is not a lasting and viable&nbsp;strategy," said the source, adding there was also a "profound Russian concern about being locked into a rivalry with China".&nbsp;

Konstantin Kalachev, director of the&nbsp;Moscow-based Political Expert Group, warned "it would be naive to think Emmanuel&nbsp;Macron&nbsp;can exercise any kind of influence on Vladimir Putin with the aim of bringing&nbsp;Russia&nbsp;closer to the EU.

"There is only one person who can influence President Putin. And that is President Putin himself."

In a <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-braces-for-shutdown-as-macron-clashes-with-unions-266219">glimmer of hope for&nbsp;Macron</a>, he added: "Mr Putin has no interest that this (Ukrainian) conflict worsens. But he wants any solution to be drawn up according to his conditions".

French President Emmanuel Macron this week faces the first major test of his policy of directly engaging with Russia that has disturbed some European allies, as he hosts a summit seeking progress in ending the Ukraine conflict.

French President Emmanuel Macron this week faces the first major test of his policy of directly engaging with Russia that has disturbed some European allies, as he hosts a summit seeking progress in ending the Ukraine conflict. Joined by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Macron will bring together Russian President Vladimir Putin and his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelensky for their first face-to-face meeting at an afternoon summit at the Elysee Palace in Paris on Monday. The stakes are high: this will be the first such summit in three years and while diplomats caution against expecting a major breakthrough, a failure to agree concrete confidence-building steps would be seen as a major blow to hopes for peace and also Macron's personal prestige. Macron, who is pressing ahead with the summit despite crippling public transport strikes at home over contested pension reforms, has invested hugely in efforts to end the conflict in the east of Ukraine that has claimed 13,000 lives since 2014. And he has also placed his bets on a risky strategy to deal directly with Putin, based on the assumption that one day Russia will understand it is in the national interest to see Europe as its long-term strategic partner. "It is an important test for Macron and for the Europeans," said Michel Duclos, a former ambassador and senior fellow at the Institut Montaigne, a French think tank. "He is already very isolated. And if he obtains nothing on Ukraine he is going to be even more isolated," he added. But he added the Kremlin was "astute enough" to understand that the summit had to be declared a success and Putin was gladdened by Macron's overtures as he "sees in that a chance to divide the Europeans". 'Threat but also a partner' Macron has adopted an increasingly assertive presence on the international stage in recent months, at a time when Germany is a less imposing diplomatic player as Merkel prepares to leave the office. His thoughts were summed up in an explosive interview with The Economist last month when he declared NATO was brain dead and said Europe needed to have a strategic dialogue with Russia. Examining Russia's long-term strategic options under Putin, Macron said in the interview that Russia could not prosper in isolation, would not want to be a "vassal" of China and would eventually have to opt for "a partnership project with Europe". Macron notably described ex-KGB agent Putin as a "child of Saint Petersburg", the former Russian capital built by Peter the Great as a window onto the West. His comments disturbed newer EU members that want a tough line against their former master Russia like the Baltic States and, in particular, Poland. And they added to a raft of growing tensions between France and Germany. But after a summit of NATO leaders in England earlier this month, Macron was unrepentant and categorical about his strategy of cultivating Russia. "Who is NATO's enemy? Russia is no longer an enemy. It remains a threat but is also a partner on some subjects. Our enemy today is international terrorism and in particular Islamist terrorism," he said. 'Being a nuisance no strategy' A French diplomatic source argued Russia could not forever pin its strategy on being a "power of disturbance" with policies like its military intervention in Syria to keep President Bashar al-Assad in power or its alliance with NATO member Turkey which has rattled the West. "If having a capacity to be a nuisance is your only lever it is not a lasting and viable strategy," said the source, adding there was also a "profound Russian concern about being locked into a rivalry with China". Konstantin Kalachev, director of the Moscow-based Political Expert Group, warned "it would be naive to think Emmanuel Macron can exercise any kind of influence on Vladimir Putin with the aim of bringing Russia closer to the EU. "There is only one person who can influence President Putin. And that is President Putin himself." In a glimmer of hope for Macron, he added: "Mr Putin has no interest that this (Ukrainian) conflict worsens. But he wants any solution to be drawn up according to his conditions".

French President to face test of direct engagement with Russia

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn clashed over Brexit on Friday in the last televised debate before next week's election that will determine the path for Britain's departure from the European Union.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson and opposition Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn clashed over Brexit on Friday in the last televised debate before next week's election that will determine the path for Britain's departure from the European Union. Six days before Britain votes in its second national election in less than three years, the debate was seen as the last chance for Corbyn to squeeze Johnson's lead in the polls, which mostly point to victory for the prime minister. A snap poll by YouGov found 52% of viewers thought Johnson had won the debate. The two leaders set a combative tone over how to leave the EU and in their very different offers for domestic policy - "socialism carried out in a democratic way" from Corbyn, or "one-nation Conservatism" that will not "rack up debts" from Johnson. More than three years after Britain voted to leave the EU, the Dec. 12 election will determine when, how and even whether Brexit happens. Johnson ridiculed Corbyn's support for a new referendum in which Corbyn has said he would remain neutral, while the Labour leader said the prime minister's pledge to "get Brexit done" actually meant years of trade talks. "We have ample time to get on and build a new free trade partnership, not just with the EU but with countries around the world," Johnson said in the BBC television debate. But Corbyn countered that it would take the government seven years to negotiate a trade deal with the United States and said business could not live with the uncertainty that Britain might still leave the EU without a deal next year. Polls show Johnson's governing party is well ahead of Labour. A Panelbase survey on Friday showed the Conservatives extending their lead slightly over the opposition party to nine points, up from eight a week ago. Johnson, who renegotiated a new divorce deal with the EU in October, has promised to "get Brexit done", a slogan he has repeated constantly during campaigning to try to win over Labour supporters who backed leaving the bloc, and those who are simply fed up of the political haggling over the issue. Britons voted by 52%-48% in 2016 for Brexit but parliament has been stuck in deadlock over the way forward. If Johnson wins the majority he says he needs, Britain will leave by Jan. 31 and then seek to secure a trade deal with the bloc by the end of 2020. Damaging dossier Keen to land a blow, Corbyn doubled down on an earlier attack on Johnson, calling his Brexit promises a fraud and saying his deal would simply be the start of years of "painful negotiations and broken promises". The Labour leader waved at him documents he had unveiled earlier in the day, which he said showed the divorce deal would lead to customs declarations and security checks between Britain and Northern Ireland, a direct contradiction of Johnson's statements that it would not create any barriers. "How about the prime minister showing a degree of honesty about the arrangements he's actually made with Northern Ireland," Corbyn said. "It is a question of openness." Johnson said the document was "complete nonsense" and his team said they believed he had weathered the attack successfully. Both were taken to task over accusations of prejudice in their parties, and questioned over their approaches to Britain's much loved public health service and their stance on security, a week after another terror attack hit the capital. But with less than a week until the election, it looks as though many people are still undecided and the Conservative lead, so far, intact. Sterling this week hit a 2-1/2-year high versus the euro and a seven-month high against the dollar on expectations that the Conservatives will win the election. "Given the Conservatives went into this debate in the lead, they will hope the lack of a knockout blow means they can maintain this until voting day," said Chris Curtis, YouGov's Political Research Manager.

Johnson, Corbyn wage Brexit battle in final debate before UK election

Brazil's President Jair Bolsonaro said on Thursday (December 5) that the South American trade bloc Mercosur needs to hurry up and implement agreements the group has negotiated.

Brazil's president urges Mercosur to quickly implement trade deals

British Prime Minister Boris Johnson on Thursday (December 5) bemoaned a "punctured parliament" that was "refusing" to do its job, while on the campaign trail in Derbyshire.

"We've got a punctured parliament that won't do its job"- UK PM Johnson

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent&nbsp;this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result.

"The competition is getting tougher, the headwinds are getting stronger," Bernhard Mattes, president of industry association VDA, told reporters, adding that the association expected global car sales to fall by 4.1 million to 80.1 million this year.

Germany's export-dependent car industry is struggling with weaker foreign demand, tariff disputes sparked by US&nbsp;President <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/after-trump-china-says-no-time-limit-on-trade-deal-with-us-266194">Donald Trump</a>'s 'America First' policies and business uncertainty linked to Britain's decision to leave the European Union.

The sector, an important driver of overall growth in Europe's largest economy, is also having trouble adjusting to stricter regulation following an emissions-cheating scandal and managing a broader shift away from combustion engines toward electric cars.

"Capacity utilization has declined, limited-term employment contracts are not being renewed, and the instrument of short-time work is being employed once again," Mattes said. This meant that the number of permanent staff in car factories was likely to fall further.

Mattes said the association already expected a drop in employment this year, and this trend would worsen in 2020, though he gave no figures for the predicted layoffs.

In 2018, employment in the car industry in Germany reached 834,000, its highest level since 1991.

VDA expects car sales in Germany to fall by 4 per cent&nbsp;to 3.43 million in 2020 and to drop by 2 per cent&nbsp;to 15.3 million in Europe.

The US&nbsp;market for light vehicles is seen shrinking by 3 per cent&nbsp;to 16.5 million while car sales in China are expected to go down by 2 per cent&nbsp;to 20.5 million, VDA said.

Mattes called on Chancellor Angela Merkel's shaky ruling coalition to get its act together and help companies to better master the structural changes in the car industry that also include trends like digitisation and autonomous driving.

"Now it must be all about improving the framework conditions in Germany as an industrial business location," Mattes said. "What we need right now, therefore, is a stable government capable of taking action."

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result.

Germany's main automobile industry body said on Wednesday it expects global car sales to fall by 5 per cent this year, the steepest drop since the financial crisis, and warned of more job cuts in 2020 as a result. "The competition is getting tougher, the headwinds are getting stronger," Bernhard Mattes, president of industry association VDA, told reporters, adding that the association expected global car sales to fall by 4.1 million to 80.1 million this year. Germany's export-dependent car industry is struggling with weaker foreign demand, tariff disputes sparked by US President Donald Trump's 'America First' policies and business uncertainty linked to Britain's decision to leave the European Union. The sector, an important driver of overall growth in Europe's largest economy, is also having trouble adjusting to stricter regulation following an emissions-cheating scandal and managing a broader shift away from combustion engines toward electric cars. "Capacity utilization has declined, limited-term employment contracts are not being renewed, and the instrument of short-time work is being employed once again," Mattes said. This meant that the number of permanent staff in car factories was likely to fall further. Mattes said the association already expected a drop in employment this year, and this trend would worsen in 2020, though he gave no figures for the predicted layoffs. In 2018, employment in the car industry in Germany reached 834,000, its highest level since 1991. VDA expects car sales in Germany to fall by 4 per cent to 3.43 million in 2020 and to drop by 2 per cent to 15.3 million in Europe. The US market for light vehicles is seen shrinking by 3 per cent to 16.5 million while car sales in China are expected to go down by 2 per cent to 20.5 million, VDA said. Mattes called on Chancellor Angela Merkel's shaky ruling coalition to get its act together and help companies to better master the structural changes in the car industry that also include trends like digitisation and autonomous driving. "Now it must be all about improving the framework conditions in Germany as an industrial business location," Mattes said. "What we need right now, therefore, is a stable government capable of taking action."

German car industry to slash more jobs in 2020

&nbsp;The <a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/wto-authorises-chinese-tariffs-on-36-billion-in-us-goods-in-anti-dumping-tiff-259385">World Trade Organization</a> on Monday rejected&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/south-asia/fatf-european-union-offers-technical-assistance-to-pakistan-262766">European Union</a>&nbsp;claims&nbsp;that it no longer provides subsidies to planemaker&nbsp;Airbus, prompting the United States to say it could&nbsp;increase&nbsp;retaliatory&nbsp;tariffs&nbsp;on a wider range of&nbsp;European goods.

A new compliance report from the Geneva trade watchdog found that the&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;A380 and A350 jetliners continue to be subsidised as a result of past&nbsp;European government loans.

US&nbsp;Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the decision affirmed that&nbsp;European subsidies to&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;continued to harm the&nbsp;US&nbsp;aerospace industry, and strong action was required to eliminate such market-distorting subsidies.

It was the latest salvo in a record transatlantic trade dispute involving mutual&nbsp;claims&nbsp;of illegal aircraft subsidies, which comes to a head at a time of rising global trade tensions and has grabbed the attention of financial markets this year.

The United States was in October awarded the right to impose&nbsp;tariffs&nbsp;on $7.5 billion of annual&nbsp;EU&nbsp;imports in its case against&nbsp;Airbus. It placed partial&nbsp;tariffs&nbsp;on most&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;jets and products from cheese to olives and single-malt whisky.

A decision on retaliation rights for the&nbsp;EU&nbsp;in a parallel case on aid for Boeing is due next year.

Officials on both sides have expressed support for a negotiated settlement, while accusing the other of failing to take the prospect of a negotiated solution seriously.

In Monday's finding, a three-person panel rejected&nbsp;EU&nbsp;claims&nbsp;that a recent decision by&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;to stop producing the slow-selling A380 meant the giant airliner could no longer be seen as a threat to Boeing, whose competing 747 is also out of fashion.

While the&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;no longer faulted&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;for causing lost sales to Boeing with the A380, which is no longer marketed, it ruled that the superjumbo would cause market-share damage to Boeing for as long as it is produced and delivered.

<a href="https://www.wionews.com/business-economy/ge-unit-orders-25-airbus-jets-including-12-rolls-powered-a330neo-260791">Airbus</a>&nbsp;plans to shut production in mid-2021.

The&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;appeared to strengthen findings against the A350, saying it had both cost sales and damaged Boeing's market-share prospects - a process called impedance - in the busier twin-engined long-haul market where Boeing offers its 787 Dreamliner.

A previous&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;ruling had focused only on lost sales.

The latest report put the world's largest corporate trade dispute squarely on the agenda for new&nbsp;EU&nbsp;Trade Commissioner Phil Hogan, who started his term on Sunday.

The Commission said the new findings contained serious legal errors and that it would consider its next steps, including a possible appeal, while seeking an accord with the United States.

USTR, which imposed&nbsp;tariffs&nbsp;of 10 per cent&nbsp;on large civil&nbsp;EU&nbsp;aircraft and 25 per cent&nbsp;on selected farm and other products in October, said it would look at raising tariff rates and subjecting additional&nbsp;EU&nbsp;products to the&nbsp;tariffs. It gave no immediate details on the size of the possible&nbsp;increases, or which products could be added to the current list.

As so often following the dozens of rulings in the 15-year-old trade case,&nbsp;Airbus&nbsp;and Boeing were left starkly at odds.

Boeing claimed a complete loss for its&nbsp;European rival&nbsp;Airbus, which it said continued to harm the&nbsp;US&nbsp;aerospace industry by receiving billions of&nbsp;euros in illegal aid.

Airbus&nbsp;said the&nbsp;WTO's decision to drop previous references to the A380 causing lost sales to Boeing meant the United States should slash its authorised&nbsp;tariffs&nbsp;by $2 billion to $5.5 billion.

The USTR rejected that argument, saying it saw no basis in the report to justify reducing&nbsp;US&nbsp;retaliatory&nbsp;tariffs.

US&nbsp;sources said only full compliance or a political settlement - which is widely seen as remote amid fragile economic ties - could legally cancel&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;approval for&nbsp;tariffs.

European executives warned against a "lose-lose" trade war.

Both sides can appeal the latest finding but doing so could place the&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;in uncertain legal territory, experts said.

The&nbsp;WTO&nbsp;Appellate Body will cease to function&nbsp;after&nbsp;December 10, due to&nbsp;US&nbsp;blocking of new appointments, leaving a tight deadline for a challenge to Monday's ruling.

Appeals launched&nbsp;after&nbsp;that risk falling into a legal void, and it is unclear if the body will be allowed to rule on appeals filed before then.

The World Trade Organization on Monday rejected European Union claims that it no longer provides subsidies to planemaker Airbus, prompting the United States to say it could increase retaliatory tariffs on a wider range of European goods.

The World Trade Organization on Monday rejected European Union claims that it no longer provides subsidies to planemaker Airbus, prompting the United States to say it could increase retaliatory tariffs on a wider range of European goods. A new compliance report from the Geneva trade watchdog found that the Airbus A380 and A350 jetliners continue to be subsidised as a result of past European government loans. US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer said the decision affirmed that European subsidies to Airbus continued to harm the US aerospace industry, and strong action was required to eliminate such market-distorting subsidies. It was the latest salvo in a record transatlantic trade dispute involving mutual claims of illegal aircraft subsidies, which comes to a head at a time of rising global trade tensions and has grabbed the attention of financial markets this year. The United States was in October awarded the right to impose tariffs on $7.5 billion of annual EU imports in its case against Airbus. It placed partial tariffs on most Airbus jets and products from cheese to olives and single-malt whisky. A decision on retaliation rights for the EU in a parallel case on aid for Boeing is due next year. Officials on both sides have expressed support for a negotiated settlement, while accusing the other of failing to take the prospect of a negotiated solution seriously. In Monday's finding, a three-person panel rejected EU claims that a recent decision by Airbus to stop producing the slow-selling A380 meant the giant airliner could no longer be seen as a threat to Boeing, whose competing 747 is also out of fashion. While the WTO no longer faulted Airbus for causing lost sales to Boeing with the A380, which is no longer marketed, it ruled that the superjumbo would cause market-share damage to Boeing for as long as it is produced and delivered. Airbus plans to shut production in mid-2021. The WTO appeared to strengthen findings against the A350, saying it had both cost sales and damaged Boeing's market-share prospects - a process called impedance - in the busier twin-engined long-haul market where Boeing offers its 787 Dreamliner. A previous WTO ruling had focused only on lost sales. The latest report put the world's largest corporate trade dispute squarely on the agenda for new EU Trade Commissioner Phil Hogan, who started his term on Sunday. The Commission said the new findings contained serious legal errors and that it would consider its next steps, including a possible appeal, while seeking an accord with the United States. USTR, which imposed tariffs of 10 per cent on large civil EU aircraft and 25 per cent on selected farm and other products in October, said it would look at raising tariff rates and subjecting additional EU products to the tariffs. It gave no immediate details on the size of the possible increases, or which products could be added to the current list. As so often following the dozens of rulings in the 15-year-old trade case, Airbus and Boeing were left starkly at odds. Boeing claimed a complete loss for its European rival Airbus, which it said continued to harm the US aerospace industry by receiving billions of euros in illegal aid. Airbus said the WTO's decision to drop previous references to the A380 causing lost sales to Boeing meant the United States should slash its authorised tariffs by $2 billion to $5.5 billion. The USTR rejected that argument, saying it saw no basis in the report to justify reducing US retaliatory tariffs. US sources said only full compliance or a political settlement - which is widely seen as remote amid fragile economic ties - could legally cancel WTO approval for tariffs. European executives warned against a "lose-lose" trade war. Both sides can appeal the latest finding but doing so could place the WTO in uncertain legal territory, experts said. The WTO Appellate Body will cease to function after December 10, due to US blocking of new appointments, leaving a tight deadline for a challenge to Monday's ruling. Appeals launched after that risk falling into a legal void, and it is unclear if the body will be allowed to rule on appeals filed before then.

US may increase tariffs after World Trade Organisation rejects European union claims over Airbus

European Union&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;meeting in Brussels next week will&nbsp;push&nbsp;to agree to put the bloc on net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by&nbsp;2050, their draft joint statement showed on Monday, heralding a bitter fight looming at their gathering.

The December&nbsp;12-13 summit of the bloc's national&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;will aim to endorse "the objective of achieving a&nbsp;climate-neutral&nbsp;EU&nbsp;by&nbsp;2050", according to the&nbsp;document&nbsp;seen by Reuters.

Previous attempts, however, were blocked by Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, who rely on highly polluting coal. They have previously said they oppose&nbsp;climate&nbsp;neutrality by&nbsp;2050&nbsp;for fear cutting greenhouse emissions will stifle their economies.

To convince the reluctant camp, the draft summit conclusions refer to "just and socially balanced transition", the&nbsp;European Investment Bank's announcement to unlock 1 trillion&nbsp;euros worth of green investment until 2030, the need to ensure energy security and competitiveness vis-à-vis foreign powers not pursuing such&nbsp;climate&nbsp;goals.

The draft, prepared in advance of the&nbsp;leaders' discussions, may still change. But it will eventually need unanimous backing of all&nbsp;EU&nbsp;national&nbsp;leaders&nbsp;for there to be an agreement at the summit.

The bloc's new executive&nbsp;European Commission also aims to&nbsp;push&nbsp;for&nbsp;climate&nbsp;neutrality by mid-century and wants to make the&nbsp;EU's 2030&nbsp;climate&nbsp;targets more ambitious.

Current targets envisage cutting the&nbsp;EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent&nbsp;by 2030 from 1990 levels. The new Commission, led by Germany's Ursula von der Leyen, hopes to raise the goal to at least 50 per cent.

European Union leaders meeting in Brussels next week will push to agree to put the bloc on net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, their draft joint statement showed on Monday, heralding a bitter fight looming at their gathering.

European Union leaders meeting in Brussels next week will push to agree to put the bloc on net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, their draft joint statement showed on Monday, heralding a bitter fight looming at their gathering. The December 12-13 summit of the bloc's national leaders will aim to endorse "the objective of achieving a climate-neutral EU by 2050", according to the document seen by Reuters. Previous attempts, however, were blocked by Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, who rely on highly polluting coal. They have previously said they oppose climate neutrality by 2050 for fear cutting greenhouse emissions will stifle their economies. To convince the reluctant camp, the draft summit conclusions refer to "just and socially balanced transition", the European Investment Bank's announcement to unlock 1 trillion euros worth of green investment until 2030, the need to ensure energy security and competitiveness vis-à-vis foreign powers not pursuing such climate goals. The draft, prepared in advance of the leaders' discussions, may still change. But it will eventually need unanimous backing of all EU national leaders for there to be an agreement at the summit. The bloc's new executive European Commission also aims to push for climate neutrality by mid-century and wants to make the EU's 2030 climate targets more ambitious. Current targets envisage cutting the EU's greenhouse gas emissions by 40 per cent by 2030 from 1990 levels. The new Commission, led by Germany's Ursula von der Leyen, hopes to raise the goal to at least 50 per cent.

European Union leaders to push for climate neutrality by 2050: Sources

By Raluca Bejan

Irregular migrant entries within the European Union increased by 546 per cent in 2015. The instability in the Middle East, particularly the Syrian war, led to 1,015,078 sea arrivals on the Italian and Greek coasts.

This influx prompted the European Commission to adopt two decisions intended to transfer 120,000 people to the least affected EU member states from the countries struggling to provide timely assistance with asylum claims: 15,600 people from Italy, 50,400 from Greece, and 54,000 from Hungary.

The relocations were meant to be distributed over the following two years, 2016 and 2017, on a mandatory basis and through an equalizing formula based on four national indicators: GDP (40 per cent), population size (40 per cent), unemployment rate (10 per cent) and past numbers of asylum applications (10 per cent).

It’s important to note that relocation is different from resettlement. Resettlement refers to the transfer to an EU state of non-EU/stateless people in need of international protection, whereas relocation refers to the transfer of persons already in Europe to another member state.

Spain and Germany initially contested the quota agreements. Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden and the U.K. were in favour of resettlement efforts. Most of the Eastern Bloc countries refused by invoking a lack of consensus among member states and by emphasising the need for voluntary participation in the relocation scheme.

Challenged in court

The matter ended up in court by December 2015, with Hungary and Slovakia launching two separate claims at the EU Court of Justice contesting the validity of the decisions.

The claims were dismissed by the Court of Justice in July 2017. Subsequently, in October 2019, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland were found to have breached EU law by refusing to participate in the relocation scheme.

The question of relocation fell out of the public eye throughout most of 2018 and 2019, as sea arrivals diminished significantly after the signing of the EU-Turkey deal in March 2016. For six billion euros and the promise of EU integration, Turkey was now accepting irregular migrants who had made it to Greece

The relocation matter returned to public attention this September, when Germany, France, Italy and Malta called for the implementation of a new system (known as the Malta Declaration) to automatically distribute migrants across the EU.

The EU’s interior ministers met in Luxembourg in October to discuss the “state of play on migration” and the newly proposed agreement.

The Malta proposal showed low uptake. Only three additional countries signed onto it: Ireland, Portugal and Luxembourg, totalling seven countries out of 28 EU member states to endorse the new mechanism.

The plan intended to fast-track screening and redistribution processes but remained vague in essence.

Expedited streamlining procedures (for example, allotting a maximum of four weeks to pledge relocation commitments) will have an insignificant impact. That’s because the countries’ reluctance to participate in the scheme has little to do with the speed of the process and everything to do with varied national interpretations of what constitutes fair responsibility-sharing.

A philosophical problem 
 
I conducted a qualitative study in Romania in the spring of 2019, examining how Romanian elected representatives interpret the idea of shared responsibility among EU member states in relation to the union’s relocation system.

Preliminary findings show that the relocation scheme was generally seen as inefficient in measuring whether member states had the economic capacity to welcome asylum-seekers.

Participants argued that different qualitative and quantitative indicators needed to be included to better capture national idiosyncrasies. Those included a state’s system of service provisions and its administrative structure for managing migration. They also argued that refugees’ preferences needed to be taken into account when choosing their respective countries, and that there needed to be greater consideration of the economic capacity of a member state.

The relocation scheme was drafted on the basis of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), according to the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, which stated in its provisions that, "“In the event of one or more member states being confronted by an emergency situation characterized by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council … may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the member states concerned.”

Implicit here is the idea that member states are expected to show solidarity in emergency situations and that solidarity efforts should be equally shared by all.

The ideological debate, however, is about commonly agreeing on what constitutes an equal share of responsibility and what type of indicators are best suited to reflect a fair and equitable distributive scheme.

Why some indicators and not others?

The GDP per capita measurement was most likely chosen to reflect national wealth. Yet the GDP can be high because the rich are so rich that they pull up the average measurement, statistically speaking. It mostly accounts for marketed economic activity and not economic quality.

The GDP purchasing power parity, which divides national income per population while considering living costs, or GDP per hours worked, which divides national income by the number of countrywide working hours, might be better fitted measures to gauge a country’s economic performance.

The national unemployment rate was the second economic indicator selected in the scheme. Yet unemployment inaccurately reflects the living standard in a society.

Romania, for example, has a low unemployment rate, if compared with other EU member states. At 3.9 per cent, it’s four times lower than Greece’s unemployment rate, which sits at 16.9 per cent. However, half of the population in Romania works for minimum wage. A minimum wage indicator would therefore be better suited to account for the economic capacity of the poorer member states.

What’s population got to do with it? 
 
As for the demographic measure, it is unclear why states with larger populations are seen as better equipped to settle refugees. Is it because newcomers would mingle among nationals and become less visible in high-density places?

The incentive indicator, which considers a state’s past number of asylum applications, does little in the equation besides dividing the “good” versus the “bad” nations among the EU member states. It fails to take into account the difficulties in settling migrants, such as the lack of national migrant integration schemes.

Member states aren’t equal at the EU table. To achieve fairness, any efforts to transfer people in need of international protection must proportionally rather than equally distribute responsibility.

No workable policy has truly addressed the ongoing humanitarian crisis at the EU borders. That’s mostly because of the EU’s deep ideological divisions over what constitutes, and what should constitute, a fair method of sharing responsibility for migrants.

Consensus on solidarity efforts and on how responsibility should be shared and implemented might lead to less political friction and more fruitful co-operation in the EU.

(Raluca Bejan is Assistant Professor, Social Policy, St. Thomas University (Canada))

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the<a href="https://theconversation.com/why-some-eu-countries-are-struggling-to-relocate-migrants-124827"> 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 Raluca Bejan Irregular migrant entries within the European Union increased by 546 per cent in 2015. The instability in the Middle East, particularly the Syrian war, led to 1,015,078 sea arrivals on the Italian and Greek coasts.

By Raluca Bejan Irregular migrant entries within the European Union increased by 546 per cent in 2015. The instability in the Middle East, particularly the Syrian war, led to 1,015,078 sea arrivals on the Italian and Greek coasts. This influx prompted the European Commission to adopt two decisions intended to transfer 120,000 people to the least affected EU member states from the countries struggling to provide timely assistance with asylum claims: 15,600 people from Italy, 50,400 from Greece, and 54,000 from Hungary. The relocations were meant to be distributed over the following two years, 2016 and 2017, on a mandatory basis and through an equalizing formula based on four national indicators: GDP (40 per cent), population size (40 per cent), unemployment rate (10 per cent) and past numbers of asylum applications (10 per cent). It’s important to note that relocation is different from resettlement. Resettlement refers to the transfer to an EU state of non-EU/stateless people in need of international protection, whereas relocation refers to the transfer of persons already in Europe to another member state. Spain and Germany initially contested the quota agreements. Belgium, the Netherlands, Sweden and the U.K. were in favour of resettlement efforts. Most of the Eastern Bloc countries refused by invoking a lack of consensus among member states and by emphasising the need for voluntary participation in the relocation scheme. Challenged in court The matter ended up in court by December 2015, with Hungary and Slovakia launching two separate claims at the EU Court of Justice contesting the validity of the decisions. The claims were dismissed by the Court of Justice in July 2017. Subsequently, in October 2019, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland were found to have breached EU law by refusing to participate in the relocation scheme. The question of relocation fell out of the public eye throughout most of 2018 and 2019, as sea arrivals diminished significantly after the signing of the EU-Turkey deal in March 2016. For six billion euros and the promise of EU integration, Turkey was now accepting irregular migrants who had made it to Greece The relocation matter returned to public attention this September, when Germany, France, Italy and Malta called for the implementation of a new system (known as the Malta Declaration) to automatically distribute migrants across the EU. The EU’s interior ministers met in Luxembourg in October to discuss the “state of play on migration” and the newly proposed agreement. The Malta proposal showed low uptake. Only three additional countries signed onto it: Ireland, Portugal and Luxembourg, totalling seven countries out of 28 EU member states to endorse the new mechanism. The plan intended to fast-track screening and redistribution processes but remained vague in essence. Expedited streamlining procedures (for example, allotting a maximum of four weeks to pledge relocation commitments) will have an insignificant impact. That’s because the countries’ reluctance to participate in the scheme has little to do with the speed of the process and everything to do with varied national interpretations of what constitutes fair responsibility-sharing. A philosophical problem I conducted a qualitative study in Romania in the spring of 2019, examining how Romanian elected representatives interpret the idea of shared responsibility among EU member states in relation to the union’s relocation system. Preliminary findings show that the relocation scheme was generally seen as inefficient in measuring whether member states had the economic capacity to welcome asylum-seekers. Participants argued that different qualitative and quantitative indicators needed to be included to better capture national idiosyncrasies. Those included a state’s system of service provisions and its administrative structure for managing migration. They also argued that refugees’ preferences needed to be taken into account when choosing their respective countries, and that there needed to be greater consideration of the economic capacity of a member state. The relocation scheme was drafted on the basis of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), according to the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, which stated in its provisions that, "“In the event of one or more member states being confronted by an emergency situation characterized by a sudden inflow of nationals of third countries, the Council … may adopt provisional measures for the benefit of the member states concerned.” Implicit here is the idea that member states are expected to show solidarity in emergency situations and that solidarity efforts should be equally shared by all. The ideological debate, however, is about commonly agreeing on what constitutes an equal share of responsibility and what type of indicators are best suited to reflect a fair and equitable distributive scheme. Why some indicators and not others? The GDP per capita measurement was most likely chosen to reflect national wealth. Yet the GDP can be high because the rich are so rich that they pull up the average measurement, statistically speaking. It mostly accounts for marketed economic activity and not economic quality. The GDP purchasing power parity, which divides national income per population while considering living costs, or GDP per hours worked, which divides national income by the number of countrywide working hours, might be better fitted measures to gauge a country’s economic performance. The national unemployment rate was the second economic indicator selected in the scheme. Yet unemployment inaccurately reflects the living standard in a society. Romania, for example, has a low unemployment rate, if compared with other EU member states. At 3.9 per cent, it’s four times lower than Greece’s unemployment rate, which sits at 16.9 per cent. However, half of the population in Romania works for minimum wage. A minimum wage indicator would therefore be better suited to account for the economic capacity of the poorer member states. What’s population got to do with it? As for the demographic measure, it is unclear why states with larger populations are seen as better equipped to settle refugees. Is it because newcomers would mingle among nationals and become less visible in high-density places? The incentive indicator, which considers a state’s past number of asylum applications, does little in the equation besides dividing the “good” versus the “bad” nations among the EU member states. It fails to take into account the difficulties in settling migrants, such as the lack of national migrant integration schemes. Member states aren’t equal at the EU table. To achieve fairness, any efforts to transfer people in need of international protection must proportionally rather than equally distribute responsibility. No workable policy has truly addressed the ongoing humanitarian crisis at the EU borders. That’s mostly because of the EU’s deep ideological divisions over what constitutes, and what should constitute, a fair method of sharing responsibility for migrants. Consensus on solidarity efforts and on how responsibility should be shared and implemented might lead to less political friction and more fruitful co-operation in the EU. (Raluca Bejan is Assistant Professor, Social Policy, St. Thomas University (Canada)) (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)

Why some EU countries are struggling to relocate migrants

By Simon J Smith

In the face of growing security challenges to Europe, from an antagonistic Russia, to instability in the Middle East, cyberwar and terrorism, there is a growing recognition that enhanced cooperation between the EU and NATO will be key to an effective response.

Calibrating such cooperation to respond to perceived common threats, however, has never been straightforward. The political context, as well as rivalry between the EU and NATO, have often hampered the capacity of the institutions to work together.

The meeting of NATO leaders in London on December 3-4 offers an occasion to further move that relationship forward. But having tracked EU-NATO relations for over a decade, I wouldn’t count on any major strategic or political breakthroughs.

Ever since NATO was created in 1949, with the dual aim of keeping the peace among the Allies and providing a security alliance against the Soviet Union, there has been a tension between whether or not NATO should drive the security agenda in Europe.

Since 1949, a number of European-wide organisations have tried to coordinate European defence policy – from the failed attempt at a French proposal for an integrated European Defence Community in 1954, to its alternative, the Western European Union (WEU), a military alliance of the UK, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands.

Forging a relationship 
 
The precursor to the EU, the European Community, didn’t really put security matters on its agenda. So it was in the mid-1990s following the Maastrict Treaty that the newly-formed EU began to develop its own common foreign and security policy and the relationship with NATO began to shift.

NATO had already developed a good working relationship with the WEU, but this really became germane in 1996 with attempts to use the WEU as an institutional bridge between the EU and NATO.

As long as the EU remained an organisation without a defence component to support its common security policy, and NATO an organisation focused strictly on collective defence of its members, the EU had little need to develop military ties with NATO. However, as some EU member sates started to consider an autonomous EU defence and security instrument towards the end of the 1990s, this relationship became unavoidable.

After a 1998 joint summit between the UK and France at Saint Malo, the formal process began towards creating the EU’s Security and Defence Policy (ESDP – now termed CSDP). Attention started to focus on an alternative arrangement to the WEU as the bridge between the two institutions.

Once the EU formally adopted the WEU’s “Petersberg Tasks”, which set out the conditions under which militaries could be deployed, the relationship between the EU and NATO changed from one of informal meetings to something more institutionalised. Formal committees and structures began to be mapped out by 1999.

However, cultural and institutional differences between the EU and NATO still had to be reduced before any official arrangements could be finalised. NATO retained a very strict security regime dating back to its Cold War years, while in contrast, the EU was designed as an open and transparent organisation. In order to adapt to a stricter security policy, the EU modelled its security framework on NATO. This was also helped by the fact that most EU states have also been NATO member states – currently 22 are members of both.

Formal and informal 
 
By 2000, both the US and France had overcome enough of their initial reservations about the relationship to pursue joint EU-NATO committees, set up to tackle various common security challenges. Formal political exchanges started up between NATO and the EU, such as those between the EU’s Political Security Committee (PSC) and NATO’s North Atlantic Council (NAC).

The Berlin Plus agreement was then negotiated between 1999 to 2002. This became the framework agreement between the two organisations to allow the EU to access NATO assets and capabilities that it did not possess (and in some cases, still do not) for its own operations such as the EU-led military Operation ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Berlin Plus arrangements also created an EU-NATO security agreement to allow non-NATO members access to classified NATO documents.

Turkey and Cyprus 
 
The American NATO expert David Yost set out the problems at the heart of the EU-NATO relationship in a 2007 book. As he put it: “Difficulties include institutional and national rivalries, the participation problem, and disagreements about the proper scope and purpose of NATO-EU cooperation.”

The “participation problem” is a central impediment to formal EU-NATO relations that stems from the ongoing dispute between Turkey (a NATO-only member) and Cyprus (an EU-only member). This led to Turkey directly blocking formal EU-NATO cooperation in 2004 beyond that of Operation ALTHEA. Formal meetings between the PSC and NAC were suspended as Turkey objected, and still does, to Cyprus sitting in on such meetings without a NATO security agreement – which Turkey refuses to allow.

Informal meetings do take place but these have been described to me by both PSC and NAC ambassadors during my research as “dull”, “highly scripted” and “uninspiring”. As a result, there has been a move towards enhancing cooperation at the inter-organisational level to compensate for deficiencies at the formal political level.

As I have argued elsewhere, the reality today is that the EU and NATO cooperate far more outside of the formal Berlin Plus relationship than they do inside it. There has been a renewed impetus to enhance relations since the signing of a EU-NATO Joint Declaration in 2016 but there are still major obstacles to an effective strategic partnership between the two institutions.

 
(Simon J Smith is Associate Professor of Security and International Relations, Staffordshire University

(This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the<a href="https://theconversation.com/nato-and-the-eu-a-short-history-of-an-uneasy-relationship-126710"> original article</a>)

(Disclaimer: The opinions expressed above are the personal views of the author and do not reflect the views of ZMCL) &nbsp; 
&nbsp;

By Simon J Smith In the face of growing security challenges to Europe, from an antagonistic Russia, to instability in the Middle East, cyberwar and terrorism, there is a growing recognition that enhanced cooperation between the EU and NATO will be key to an effective response.

By Simon J Smith In the face of growing security challenges to Europe, from an antagonistic Russia, to instability in the Middle East, cyberwar and terrorism, there is a growing recognition that enhanced cooperation between the EU and NATO will be key to an effective response. Calibrating such cooperation to respond to perceived common threats, however, has never been straightforward. The political context, as well as rivalry between the EU and NATO, have often hampered the capacity of the institutions to work together. The meeting of NATO leaders in London on December 3-4 offers an occasion to further move that relationship forward. But having tracked EU-NATO relations for over a decade, I wouldn’t count on any major strategic or political breakthroughs. Ever since NATO was created in 1949, with the dual aim of keeping the peace among the Allies and providing a security alliance against the Soviet Union, there has been a tension between whether or not NATO should drive the security agenda in Europe. Since 1949, a number of European-wide organisations have tried to coordinate European defence policy – from the failed attempt at a French proposal for an integrated European Defence Community in 1954, to its alternative, the Western European Union (WEU), a military alliance of the UK, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. Forging a relationship The precursor to the EU, the European Community, didn’t really put security matters on its agenda. So it was in the mid-1990s following the Maastrict Treaty that the newly-formed EU began to develop its own common foreign and security policy and the relationship with NATO began to shift. NATO had already developed a good working relationship with the WEU, but this really became germane in 1996 with attempts to use the WEU as an institutional bridge between the EU and NATO. As long as the EU remained an organisation without a defence component to support its common security policy, and NATO an organisation focused strictly on collective defence of its members, the EU had little need to develop military ties with NATO. However, as some EU member sates started to consider an autonomous EU defence and security instrument towards the end of the 1990s, this relationship became unavoidable. After a 1998 joint summit between the UK and France at Saint Malo, the formal process began towards creating the EU’s Security and Defence Policy (ESDP – now termed CSDP). Attention started to focus on an alternative arrangement to the WEU as the bridge between the two institutions. Once the EU formally adopted the WEU’s “Petersberg Tasks”, which set out the conditions under which militaries could be deployed, the relationship between the EU and NATO changed from one of informal meetings to something more institutionalised. Formal committees and structures began to be mapped out by 1999. However, cultural and institutional differences between the EU and NATO still had to be reduced before any official arrangements could be finalised. NATO retained a very strict security regime dating back to its Cold War years, while in contrast, the EU was designed as an open and transparent organisation. In order to adapt to a stricter security policy, the EU modelled its security framework on NATO. This was also helped by the fact that most EU states have also been NATO member states – currently 22 are members of both. Formal and informal By 2000, both the US and France had overcome enough of their initial reservations about the relationship to pursue joint EU-NATO committees, set up to tackle various common security challenges. Formal political exchanges started up between NATO and the EU, such as those between the EU’s Political Security Committee (PSC) and NATO’s North Atlantic Council (NAC). The Berlin Plus agreement was then negotiated between 1999 to 2002. This became the framework agreement between the two organisations to allow the EU to access NATO assets and capabilities that it did not possess (and in some cases, still do not) for its own operations such as the EU-led military Operation ALTHEA in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Berlin Plus arrangements also created an EU-NATO security agreement to allow non-NATO members access to classified NATO documents. Turkey and Cyprus The American NATO expert David Yost set out the problems at the heart of the EU-NATO relationship in a 2007 book. As he put it: “Difficulties include institutional and national rivalries, the participation problem, and disagreements about the proper scope and purpose of NATO-EU cooperation.” The “participation problem” is a central impediment to formal EU-NATO relations that stems from the ongoing dispute between Turkey (a NATO-only member) and Cyprus (an EU-only member). This led to Turkey directly blocking formal EU-NATO cooperation in 2004 beyond that of Operation ALTHEA. Formal meetings between the PSC and NAC were suspended as Turkey objected, and still does, to Cyprus sitting in on such meetings without a NATO security agreement – which Turkey refuses to allow. Informal meetings do take place but these have been described to me by both PSC and NAC ambassadors during my research as “dull”, “highly scripted” and “uninspiring”. As a result, there has been a move towards enhancing cooperation at the inter-organisational level to compensate for deficiencies at the formal political level. As I have argued elsewhere, the reality today is that the EU and NATO cooperate far more outside of the formal Berlin Plus relationship than they do inside it. There has been a renewed impetus to enhance relations since the signing of a EU-NATO Joint Declaration in 2016 but there are still major obstacles to an effective strategic partnership between the two institutions. (Simon J Smith is Associate Professor of Security and International Relations, Staffordshire 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)

NATO and the EU: A short history of an uneasy relationship

The European Union warned today that it will "act and react as one" as the Trump administration <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/france-will-be-pugnacious-over-new-us-tariff-threat-minister-265915">tariffs on French goods</a> ranging from Champagne, handbags to cheese and other products.

US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer had said that the US "is focused on countering the growing protectionism of EU member states, which unfairly targets US companies" while adding that the Trump administration "was exploring whether to open similar investigations into the digital services taxes of Austria, Italy and Turkey".

The move comes as the US government concluded that France's new digital services tax would harm US tech companies. The French parliament had earlier passed a law taxing digital giants like Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon for revenues earned inside the country.

"As in all other trade-related matters, the EU will act and react as one and it will remain united," said EU commission spokesman Daniel Rosario after the US threatened tariffs on French goods.

The USTR said its "Section 301" investigation found that the French tax was "inconsistent with prevailing principles of international tax policy, and is unusually burdensome for affected US companies," including Alphabet Inc's Google, Facebook Inc, Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc.

The list of products that the US could target also includes cosmetics, porcelain, soap. The new French tax laws target three per cent levy on the revenues earned by technology firms in France.

French finance minister Bruno Le Maire and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin were involved in months of talks over the issue.

Meanwhile, stocks prices of French luxury handbag maker Hermes fell by around 2 per cent, while luxury goods companies LVMH and Kering fell 1.5 per cent and 1.2 per cent after the announcement by the USTR on taxing French goods.

The shares of glass bottle maker Verallia, which makes glass containers for brands like Dom Perignon champagne, fell 2.5 per cent.

The European Union warned today that it will "act and react as one" as the Trump administration tariffs on French goods ranging from Champagne, handbags to cheese and other products.

The European Union warned today that it will "act and react as one" as the Trump administration tariffs on French goods ranging from Champagne, handbags to cheese and other products. US Trade Representative Robert Lighthizer had said that the US "is focused on countering the growing protectionism of EU member states, which unfairly targets US companies" while adding that the Trump administration "was exploring whether to open similar investigations into the digital services taxes of Austria, Italy and Turkey". The move comes as the US government concluded that France's new digital services tax would harm US tech companies. The French parliament had earlier passed a law taxing digital giants like Google, Apple, Facebook and Amazon for revenues earned inside the country. "As in all other trade-related matters, the EU will act and react as one and it will remain united," said EU commission spokesman Daniel Rosario after the US threatened tariffs on French goods. The USTR said its "Section 301" investigation found that the French tax was "inconsistent with prevailing principles of international tax policy, and is unusually burdensome for affected US companies," including Alphabet Inc's Google, Facebook Inc, Apple Inc and Amazon.com Inc. The list of products that the US could target also includes cosmetics, porcelain, soap. The new French tax laws target three per cent levy on the revenues earned by technology firms in France. French finance minister Bruno Le Maire and US Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin were involved in months of talks over the issue. Meanwhile, stocks prices of French luxury handbag maker Hermes fell by around 2 per cent, while luxury goods companies LVMH and Kering fell 1.5 per cent and 1.2 per cent after the announcement by the USTR on taxing French goods. The shares of glass bottle maker Verallia, which makes glass containers for brands like Dom Perignon champagne, fell 2.5 per cent.

Will act and react as one: European Union on proposed US tariffs on French goods

Brexit&nbsp;pressures and political uncertainty have prompted the Confederation of British&nbsp;Industry&nbsp;and a manufacturing trade body, Make&nbsp;UK, to downgrade their growth forecasts for next year.

Official figures have shown that Britain's economy is growing at the&nbsp;weakest annual pace since 2010, and&nbsp;industry&nbsp;leaders see little or no improvement in&nbsp;2020, even if Prime Minister Boris Johnson wins re-election and secures a&nbsp;<a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/uk-pm-johnson-says-uk-will-leave-eu-by-jan-31-at-the-latest-265230">Brexit&nbsp;divorce deal</a> by a January&nbsp;31 deadline.

The CBI on Monday predicted economic growth of 1.3 per cent&nbsp;this year and 1.2 per cent&nbsp;in&nbsp;2020, followed by a pick-up to 1.8 per cent&nbsp;in 2021, assuming Johnson reaches a trade deal with the EU that leads to no tariffs and little divergence from EU rules.

"Alongside perennial&nbsp;Brexit&nbsp;uncertainty, (businesses) are also contending with softer&nbsp;global&nbsp;demand," CBI chief economist Rain Newton-Smith said.

Back in July, the CBI forecast growth of 1.4 per cent&nbsp;this year and 1.5 per cent&nbsp;next.

Make&nbsp;UK&nbsp;halved its forecast for manufacturing growth next year to 0.3 per cent&nbsp;from 0.6 per cent, though it kept its forecast for growth in the overall economy in&nbsp;2020&nbsp;unchanged at 1.4 per cent, up from 1.3 per cent this year.

"Export orders have increased slightly this quarter, indicating greater confidence from foreign customers about purchasing&nbsp;UK&nbsp;goods as concerns about an end of year no-deal&nbsp;Brexit&nbsp;fade," Make&nbsp;UK's chief executive, Stephen Phipson, said.

Britain's economy has slowed since the June 2016 referendum decision to leave the European Union, with manufacturing especially hard hit due to concerns about disruption to supply chains, on top of pressures from the <a href="https://www.wionews.com/world/china-wants-us-tariffs-rolled-back-in-phase-one-trade-deal-report-265517">US-China trade war</a>.

Johnson's&nbsp;Brexit&nbsp;plan - which he was unable to pass through parliament before he called an early election on <a href="https://www.wionews.com/opinions/uk-elections-2019-five-reasons-to-vote-265079">December&nbsp;12</a> - sees Britain leaving the EU on January&nbsp;31, and then negotiating a new trade deal to take effect at the end of&nbsp;2020.

Johnson has said he will not allow transitional arrangements to continue beyond the end of&nbsp;2020, but many trade experts say this leaves too little time to negotiate a good deal.

If a post-EU transition deal expires at the end of&nbsp;2020&nbsp;without an agreement settled for future trade ties, the CBI predicted a sharp slowdown in growth in 2021 to just 0.4 per cent&nbsp;- the&nbsp;weakest since the financial crisis.

"A no-deal&nbsp;Brexit&nbsp;would put the brakes on&nbsp;UK&nbsp;growth and realise businesses' worst fears," Newton-Smith said.

Brexit pressures and political uncertainty have prompted the Confederation of British Industry and a manufacturing trade body, Make UK, to downgrade their growth forecasts for next year.

Brexit pressures and political uncertainty have prompted the Confederation of British Industry and a manufacturing trade body, Make UK, to downgrade their growth forecasts for next year. Official figures have shown that Britain's economy is growing at the weakest annual pace since 2010, and industry leaders see little or no improvement in 2020, even if Prime Minister Boris Johnson wins re-election and secures a Brexit divorce deal by a January 31 deadline. The CBI on Monday predicted economic growth of 1.3 per cent this year and 1.2 per cent in 2020, followed by a pick-up to 1.8 per cent in 2021, assuming Johnson reaches a trade deal with the EU that leads to no tariffs and little divergence from EU rules. "Alongside perennial Brexit uncertainty, (businesses) are also contending with softer global demand," CBI chief economist Rain Newton-Smith said. Back in July, the CBI forecast growth of 1.4 per cent this year and 1.5 per cent next. Make UK halved its forecast for manufacturing growth next year to 0.3 per cent from 0.6 per cent, though it kept its forecast for growth in the overall economy in 2020 unchanged at 1.4 per cent, up from 1.3 per cent this year. "Export orders have increased slightly this quarter, indicating greater confidence from foreign customers about purchasing UK goods as concerns about an end of year no-deal Brexit fade," Make UK's chief executive, Stephen Phipson, said. Britain's economy has slowed since the June 2016 referendum decision to leave the European Union, with manufacturing especially hard hit due to concerns about disruption to supply chains, on top of pressures from the US-China trade war. Johnson's Brexit plan - which he was unable to pass through parliament before he called an early election on December 12 - sees Britain leaving the EU on January 31, and then negotiating a new trade deal to take effect at the end of 2020. Johnson has said he will not allow transitional arrangements to continue beyond the end of 2020, but many trade experts say this leaves too little time to negotiate a good deal. If a post-EU transition deal expires at the end of 2020 without an agreement settled for future trade ties, the CBI predicted a sharp slowdown in growth in 2021 to just 0.4 per cent - the weakest since the financial crisis. "A no-deal Brexit would put the brakes on UK growth and realise businesses' worst fears," Newton-Smith said.

Brexit, weak global demand to hurt UK in 2020, industry warns

The European Union special envoy on Afghanistan Roland Kobia and Uzbekistan's special envoy on Afghanistan Irgashev Ismatulla Raimovich will be visiting New Delhi next week.

The European Union special envoy on Afghanistan Roland Kobia and Uzbekistan's special envoy on Afghanistan Irgashev Ismatulla Raimovich will be visiting New Delhi next week. While Raimovich will be visiting on December 2-3, Kobia will be visiting on 3-4. The visit highlights the role played by New Delhi, especially development, in the landlocked South Asian country, and how other countries are eager to understand India's view on the future of Afghanistan. "India had a position on the developments in Afghanistan and it engages with all International partners for exchange of views", a source told WION. India is building major infrastructure projects in Afghanistan including the Afghan parliament in Kabul and the India Afghan friendship dam in Herat province and will soon start work on Shatoot dam in Kabul for which Geotechnical survey is started. Additionally, New Delhi has committed to take up 116 high impact community development projects in all 34 provinces of Afghanistan. With the help of Chabahar port and the India Afghan air corridor, new Delhi has increased connectivity to Afghanistan, which was otherwise was being denied by Pakistan. The visit by special envoys comes even as US President Donal Trump made a surprise visit to Afghanistan last week and announced resumption of dialogues with the Taliban. Earlier in September, the US president had cancelled talks with the group after an attacked killed US Solider. India's official policy has been an Afghan-led, Afghan-owned peace process and has backed the government in Kabul.

EU, Uzbek special envoys on Afghanistan to visit India next week 

European Union lawmakers gave final approval to German conservative Ursula von der Leyen on Wednesday to take over at the helm of the bloc's executive European Commission from December 1.

Ursula von der Leyen: 1st woman chief of European Union

European members of NATO have increased their defence spending for four years in a row, secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday, ahead of next week's summit.

US President Donald Trump has repeatedly accused Washington's allies of failing to pay their fair share, straining ties in the alliance as it celebrates its 70th birthday.

Officials are worried that Trump's frustration -- combined with doubts about the direction of the alliance expressed by France's President Emmanuel Macron -- will overshadow next week's summit.

So NATO has coordinated a week of spending announcements in Brussels to encourage a display of unity in London.

On Friday, Stoltenberg said European countries and Canada would increase defence spending by 4.6 per cent in 2019, stressing that they would have spent a combined $130 billion between 2016 and the end of next year.

This would keep the countries on course to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence by 2024. But only nine countries have hit the target so far, and Germany admits it will not do so.

"President Trump is right about the importance of the European allies and Canada spending more and he has conveyed that message very clearly to allies several times," Stoltenberg told reporters.

"But European allies and Canada should not invest in defence to please President Trump. They should invest in defence because we are facing new challenges, our security environment has become more dangerous."

Bid to mollify Trump

Stoltenberg said the NATO members apart from the US had mainly been cutting defence budgets before 2014 when they signed up to a pledge to "move towards" the two per cent of GDP target by 2024.

But Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted this week that Germany, Europe's economic powerhouse and a frequent target of Trump's ire, will not hit the goal until "the early 2030s".

France's Macron outraged the allies this month by demanding a new strategy that focused more on terrorism and less on deterring Russia, complaining that NATO was experiencing "brain death".

Stoltenberg, meanwhile, is attempting to mollify Trump ahead of the summit by talking up a billion-dollar contact with US planemaker Boeing to upgrade NATO reconnaissance planes.

And the allies have agreed to lower the cap on US support for NATO's relatively small $2.5-billion operating budget, meaning Germany and other Europeans -- but not France -- pay a bigger share.

The 29 NATO leaders will gather in Watford near London on Tuesday and Wednesday next week.

European members of NATO have increased their defence spending for four years in a row, secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday, ahead of next week's summit.

European members of NATO have increased their defence spending for four years in a row, secretary-general Jens Stoltenberg said on Friday, ahead of next week's summit. US President Donald Trump has repeatedly accused Washington's allies of failing to pay their fair share, straining ties in the alliance as it celebrates its 70th birthday. Officials are worried that Trump's frustration -- combined with doubts about the direction of the alliance expressed by France's President Emmanuel Macron -- will overshadow next week's summit. So NATO has coordinated a week of spending announcements in Brussels to encourage a display of unity in London. On Friday, Stoltenberg said European countries and Canada would increase defence spending by 4.6 per cent in 2019, stressing that they would have spent a combined $130 billion between 2016 and the end of next year. This would keep the countries on course to spend two per cent of their GDP on defence by 2024. But only nine countries have hit the target so far, and Germany admits it will not do so. "President Trump is right about the importance of the European allies and Canada spending more and he has conveyed that message very clearly to allies several times," Stoltenberg told reporters. "But European allies and Canada should not invest in defence to please President Trump. They should invest in defence because we are facing new challenges, our security environment has become more dangerous." Bid to mollify Trump Stoltenberg said the NATO members apart from the US had mainly been cutting defence budgets before 2014 when they signed up to a pledge to "move towards" the two per cent of GDP target by 2024. But Chancellor Angela Merkel admitted this week that Germany, Europe's economic powerhouse and a frequent target of Trump's ire, will not hit the goal until "the early 2030s". France's Macron outraged the allies this month by demanding a new strategy that focused more on terrorism and less on deterring Russia, complaining that NATO was experiencing "brain death". Stoltenberg, meanwhile, is attempting to mollify Trump ahead of the summit by talking up a billion-dollar contact with US planemaker Boeing to upgrade NATO reconnaissance planes. And the allies have agreed to lower the cap on US support for NATO's relatively small $2.5-billion operating budget, meaning Germany and other Europeans -- but not France -- pay a bigger share. The 29 NATO leaders will gather in Watford near London on Tuesday and Wednesday next week.

NATO praises Europe defence spending boost as summit looms

Afghan security officials have released two rights activists detained by the country's powerful intelligence agency for exposing an alleged paedophile ring operating in the country's schools.

Musa Mahmudi -- a youth social worker -- told Britain's Guardian newspaper earlier this month that teachers and local officials were involved in the ring based in Logar province, sparking outrage across the country.

Mahmudi and activist Ehsanullah Hamidi were later detained by the National Directorate of Security (NDS) on their way to meet with the European Union ambassador in Kabul last week.

"They are in Kabul now and reunited with members of their families. There is no restriction to their movement," Naeem Nazari, deputy head of Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), told AFP.

At least 546 boys from six schools were allegedly abused, the Guardian reported.

Some victims went on to be murdered, the newspaper said, adding that rights campaigners had uncovered more than 100 videos of the abuse.

Authorities have not confirmed the allegations.

The two were released Wednesday just a day after the NDS released a video of Mahmudi appearing to retract his account, which sparked harsh condemnation of the spy agency's conduct by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and the US envoy in Kabul -- who blasted the agency over its "Soviet-style tactics". &nbsp;

Amnesty International had also called for the pair's immediate release and warned that Mahmudi had been receiving death threats accusing him of "dishonouring the people of Logar".

Hamidi's role in revealing the scandal was not immediately clear, and he was not referenced in the Guardian story.

Sexual abuse is widespread in Afghanistan despite efforts to clamp down on the crime, and boys are often reluctant to come forward in a culture that still shames victims rather than going after perpetrators.

Parts of Afghanistan still tolerate the practice of bacha bazi, or "boy play", where older men force boys to dress up as women and then force them to have sex. 
&nbsp;

Afghan security officials have released two rights activists detained by the country's powerful intelligence agency for exposing an alleged paedophile ring operating in the country's schools.

Afghan security officials have released two rights activists detained by the country's powerful intelligence agency for exposing an alleged paedophile ring operating in the country's schools. Musa Mahmudi -- a youth social worker -- told Britain's Guardian newspaper earlier this month that teachers and local officials were involved in the ring based in Logar province, sparking outrage across the country. Mahmudi and activist Ehsanullah Hamidi were later detained by the National Directorate of Security (NDS) on their way to meet with the European Union ambassador in Kabul last week. "They are in Kabul now and reunited with members of their families. There is no restriction to their movement," Naeem Nazari, deputy head of Afghanistan's Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC), told AFP. At least 546 boys from six schools were allegedly abused, the Guardian reported. Some victims went on to be murdered, the newspaper said, adding that rights campaigners had uncovered more than 100 videos of the abuse. Authorities have not confirmed the allegations. The two were released Wednesday just a day after the NDS released a video of Mahmudi appearing to retract his account, which sparked harsh condemnation of the spy agency's conduct by Afghan President Ashraf Ghani and the US envoy in Kabul -- who blasted the agency over its "Soviet-style tactics". Amnesty International had also called for the pair's immediate release and warned that Mahmudi had been receiving death threats accusing him of "dishonouring the people of Logar". Hamidi's role in revealing the scandal was not immediately clear, and he was not referenced in the Guardian story. Sexual abuse is widespread in Afghanistan despite efforts to clamp down on the crime, and boys are often reluctant to come forward in a culture that still shames victims rather than going after perpetrators. Parts of Afghanistan still tolerate the practice of bacha bazi, or "boy play", where older men force boys to dress up as women and then force them to have sex.

Afghan officials release men who exposed alleged paedophile ring

Iran said Thursday that European parties to the 2015 nuclear deal could not trigger a dispute mechanism in the agreement that could lead to the reimposition of UN sanctions.

French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian had Wednesday raised the possibility of triggering the mechanism, but Iran's foreign ministry disputed that this would be permissible.

The deal "does not allow the European parties to invoke the mechanism as Iran is exercising its legal right in response to the United States' illegal and unilateral actions," ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said, quoted by semi-official news agency ISNA.

The nuclear deal -- known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action -- has been unravelling since May 2018 when the United States unilaterally withdrew from it and began reimposing sanctions on Iran.

The three European countries still party to the deal -- Britain, France and Germany -- have been trying to salvage it.

But their efforts have borne little fruit and one year after the US pullout Iran began retaliating by taking a series of steps to row back its commitments to the accord.

On Wednesday, Le Drian said that "every two months there is another notch (from Iran) to the extent that we are wondering today... about the implementation of the dispute resolution mechanism in the treaty".

"Given the succession of actions taken by the Iranian authorities, who are progressively at odds with the contents of the JCPOA, the question comes up," he added.

Iran's foreign ministry spokesman hit out at what he called the "irresponsible and unconstructive" remarks.

"It extremely discredits the effectiveness of political initiatives for the whole implementation of the JCPOA by all sides in line with the system of lifting sanctions," said Mousavi.

Iran said Thursday that European parties to the 2015 nuclear deal could not trigger a dispute mechanism in the agreement that could lead to the reimposition of UN sanctions.

Iran said Thursday that European parties to the 2015 nuclear deal could not trigger a dispute mechanism in the agreement that could lead to the reimposition of UN sanctions. French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian had Wednesday raised the possibility of triggering the mechanism, but Iran's foreign ministry disputed that this would be permissible. The deal "does not allow the European parties to invoke the mechanism as Iran is exercising its legal right in response to the United States' illegal and unilateral actions," ministry spokesman Abbas Mousavi said, quoted by semi-official news agency ISNA. The nuclear deal -- known formally as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action -- has been unravelling since May 2018 when the United States unilaterally withdrew from it and began reimposing sanctions on Iran. The three European countries still party to the deal -- Britain, France and Germany -- have been trying to salvage it. But their efforts have borne little fruit and one year after the US pullout Iran began retaliating by taking a series of steps to row back its commitments to the accord. On Wednesday, Le Drian said that "every two months there is another notch (from Iran) to the extent that we are wondering today... about the implementation of the dispute resolution mechanism in the treaty". "Given the succession of actions taken by the Iranian authorities, who are progressively at odds with the contents of the JCPOA, the question comes up," he added. Iran's foreign ministry spokesman hit out at what he called the "irresponsible and unconstructive" remarks. "It extremely discredits the effectiveness of political initiatives for the whole implementation of the JCPOA by all sides in line with the system of lifting sanctions," said Mousavi.

Iran says Europeans cannot invoke nuclear deal's dispute mechanism

european-union

European Union, News on European Union, stories on European Union, articles on European Union, European Union stories at Wion, European Union news, European Union latest news

european union