Category: Spain

  • Caribbean states demand reparations from European powers for slave trade

    Caribbean states demand reparations from European powers for slave trade

    Most of the Caribbean nations have adopted a single plan to solicit from former slaving nations an apology, more aid and damages for 300 years of slavery, which they say have hobbled their economies and public health

    slavery
    Sugar Plantation Slaves 1858 engraving of slaves in the British West Indies working the sugar cane Photo: Lordprice Collection/ Alamy

    By Philip Sherwell, New York

    A coalition of Caribbean countries has unveiled its demands for reparations from Britain and other European nations for the enduring legacy of the slave trade.

    The leaders of 15 states adopted a wide-ranging plan, including seeking a formal apology from former colonial powers, debt cancellation, greater development aid as well as unspecified financial damages for the persisting “psychological trauma” from the days of plantation slavery.

    The series of demands to be made of former slaving nations such as Britain, France, Spain, Portugal and The Netherlands were agreed at a closed-door meeting of the Caribbean Community (Caricom) in St Vincent and the Grenadines.

    The Atlantic slave trade took place from the 16th through to the 19th centuries.

    The group hired Leigh Day, the British law firm, to push their claims after the company secured a £20 million compensation award for Kenyans who were tortured by colonial authorities during the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s.

    The reparations debate has long simmered in the Caribbean where many blame slavery for modern ills, ranging from economic weakness to health epidemics such as diabetes and hyper-tension allegedly caused by their ancestors’ poor diets.

    Caricom is pushing for increased technological assistance as it says European powers shackled the region during the world’s industrialisation by confining it to producing and exporting raw materials such as sugar.

    The plan also demands an increase of aid for public health and educational and cultural institutions such as museums and research centres.

    And it calls for the creation of a “repatriation programmes” to help resettle members of the Rastafarian movement in Africa. Repatriation to Africa has long been a central belief of Rastafarians.

    Martin Day, of Leigh Day, said he would request a meeting with European officials to seek a negotiated settlement, but would pursue a legal complaint if Caribbean nations are not satisfied with the outcome of any talks.

    It has been 180 years since Britain abolished slavery but the demand for an unqualified apology remains as controversial as the calls for financial damages.

    In 2007, Tony Blair, the then prime minister, expressed “deep sorrow and regret” for the “unbearable suffering” caused by Britain’s role in slavery but stopped short of a formal apology. His words angered many in the Caribbean as inadequate and resonating of legal caution.

    The British government, which currently contributes about £15million a year in development to the Caribbean, said that it has not been presented with the demands, but has consistently signalled opposition to financial reparations.

    “The UK has been clear that we deplore the human suffering caused by slavery and the slave trade,” a Foreign Office spokesman said. “However we do not see reparations as the answer. Instead, we should concentrate on identifying ways forward with a focus on the shared global challenges that face our countries in the twenty-first century.”

    But Professor Verene Shepherd, the chairman of Jamaica’s reparations committee, told The Daily Telegraph last month that British colonisers had “disfigured the Caribbean”, and that their descendants should now pay to repair the damage.

    “If you commit a crime against humanity, you are bound to make amends,” she said. “The planters were given compensation, but not one cent went to the freed Jamaicans”.

    The Caricom nations highlighted the region’s enduring troubles as well the suffering of the victims of the trade in humanity and the profits made by the slaving powers.

    “The transatlantic slave trade is the largest forced migration in human history and has no parallel in terms of man’s inhumanity to man,” their claim reads. “This trade in enchained bodies was a highly successful commercial business for the nations of Europe.”

    www.telegraph.co.uk, 11 Mar 2014

  • Spain’s Princess Cristina charged with tax fraud, money-laundering

    Spain’s Princess Cristina charged with tax fraud, money-laundering

    Spain's Princess Infanta Cristina (C) smiles she visits Den Do temple in Bac Ninh province near Hanoi November 20, 2009. CREDIT: REUTERS/KHAM
    Spain’s Princess Infanta Cristina (C) smiles she visits Den Do temple in Bac Ninh province near Hanoi November 20, 2009.
    CREDIT: REUTERS/KHAM

    (Reuters) – Princess Cristina, the younger daughter of Spain’s King Juan Carlos, has been charged with tax fraud and money-laundering, piling further scandal on the once-beloved but increasingly unpopular royal family.

    Palma de Mallorca Examining Magistrate Jose Castro said in a 200-page ruling after a lengthy investigation that there was evidence that Cristina, 48, had committed crimes.

    He summoned her to appear in court on March 8, possibly paving the way for an unprecedented trial of a Spanish royal.

    The princess’s defense lawyer, Miguel Roca, told Spanish television he would appeal the summons, saying “I am absolutely convinced of her innocence”.

    Her husband, former Olympic handball player Inaki Urdangarin, was earlier charged with fraud, tax evasion, falsifying documents and embezzlement of 6 million euros ($8 million) in public funds through his charitable foundation, which put on sports business conferences in Mallorca and elsewhere in Spain. Urdangarin has denied any wrongdoing.

    The case is one of many high-level corruption scandals in Spain that have undermined faith in public institutions at a time of economic crisis marked by deep cuts in public spending.

    Opinion of the royal family in particular has sunk to its lowest level ever.

    A Sigma Dos poll published on Sunday showed almost two thirds of Spaniards want King Juan Carlos to abdicate after 38 years on the throne and hand over to Prince Felipe, who is still well regarded and is not implicated in his sister’s case.

    Juan Carlos became king with the restoration of the monarchy in 1975 following the death of the dictator General Francisco Franco. He won respect from Spaniards for his role in the transition to democracy, notably his actions in foiling a coup attempt in 1981.

    But various scandals, shows of extravagance, and incidents such as an elephant-hunting trip to Africa at the height of the crisis in 2012 have tarnished his standing along with the Urdangarin affair.

    While they have been under investigation, Princess Cristina and her husband have ceased to participate in public appearances. She and the couple’s four children moved last year to Geneva where she works for a Spanish bank’s charity. Urdangarin remains in Spain.

    The case is centered on Urdangarin’s non-profit Noos Foundation. He is accused of using his connections to win public contracts to put on events in Mallorca and elsewhere in Spain. Judge Castro has said there is evidence the foundation overcharged for organizing conferences and hid the proceeds abroad.

    In his ruling, Castro detailed dozens of personal items the princess paid for – from Harry Potter books to home redecorations – out of a shell company the judge said was used to launder proceeds from the Noos Foundation.

    “These sums were used on strictly personal spending…And they should have been declared in income tax statements… But it is evident that neither Inaki Urdangarin nor Mrs. Cristina de Borbon ever did so, which means they repeatedly defrauded the tax authority,” he wrote in his ruling.

    However, the judge also said it was not clear whether the princess had evaded more than 120,000 euros in taxes a year, the division between an infraction and a felony.

    The charges brought on Tuesday are known as an “imputacion” in Spanish, and could be thrown out before trial.

    An “imputacion” is not as strong as an indictment that would immediately precede a trial, but it is more significant than a subpoena of an accused party because the judge argues there is evidence of specific criminal activity.

    Castro, who opened his investigation into the royal couple three years ago, has struggled to make charges stick against Princess Cristina.

    In April last year he ruled there was evidence she had aided and abetted Urdangarin. A higher court threw out those charges in May, saying the evidence was not sufficient, but gave Castro more time to investigate alleged tax fraud.

    In bringing the new charges, Castro went against the recommendations of the anti-corruption prosecutor on the case, who has argued there was not evidence she committed crimes.

    In Spain, the prosecutor and the judge on a case carry out separate investigations and may disagree on proceedings.

    Activist anti-corruption group Clean Hands has filed a criminal complaint against Princess Cristina, and is a party to the judicial investigation. The group disagreed with the public prosecutor and recommended the judge bring criminal charges.

    In Spain, civic groups can force prosecutors and judges into action by filing criminal lawsuits known as “people’s accusations”. Clean Hands has spurred action on several ongoing corruption cases in Spain, by filing this sort of lawsuit.

    (Additional reporting by Jesus Aguado; Editing by Angus MacSwan)

  • The American-Western European Values Gap

    The American-Western European Values Gap

    American Exceptionalism Subsides

    The American-Western European Values Gap

    UPDATED FEBRUARY 29, 2012

    Survey Report

    As has long been the case, American values differ from those of Western Europeans in many important ways. Most notably, Americans are more individualistic and are less supportive of a strong safety net than are the publics of Britain, France, Germany and Spain. Americans are also considerably more religious than Western Europeans, and are more socially conservative with respect to homosexuality.

    Americans are somewhat more inclined than Western Europeans to say that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world. Moreover, Americans more often than their Western European allies believe that obtaining UN approval before their country uses military force would make it too difficult to deal with an international threat. And Americans are less inclined than the Western Europeans, with the exception of the French, to help other nations.

    These differences between Americans and Western Europeans echo findings from previous surveys conducted by the Pew Research Center. However, the current polling shows the American public is coming closer to Europeans in not seeing their culture as superior to that of other nations. Today, only about half of Americans believe their culture is superior to others, compared with six-in-ten in 2002. And the polling finds younger Americans less apt than their elders to hold American exceptionalist attitudes.

    These are among the findings from a survey by the Pew Research Center’s Global Attitudes Project, conducted in the U.S., Britain, France, Germany and Spain from March 21 to April 14 as part of the broader 23-nation poll in spring 2011.

    Use of Military Force

    Three-quarters of Americans agree that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world; this view is shared by seven-in-ten in Britain and narrower majorities in France and Spain (62% each). Germans are evenly divided, with half saying the use of force is sometimes necessary and half saying it is not.

    Germans are more supportive of the use of military force than they have been in recent years. For example, in 2007, just about four-in-ten (41%) Germans agreed that it was sometimes necessary, while 58% disagreed. Opinions have been more stable in the U.S., Britain and France.

    For the most part, opinions about the use of force do not vary considerably across demographic groups. In Germany and Spain, however, support for the use of military force is far more widespread among men than among women. Six-in-ten German men agree that it is sometimes necessary to use military force to maintain order in the world, compared with just 40% of women. And while majorities across gender groups in Spain believe the use of force may be necessary, more Spanish men than Spanish women say this is the case (68% vs. 56%).

    In Britain, France, Spain and the U.S., conservatives, or those on the political right, are more likely than liberals, or those on the left, to agree that the use of force is sometimes necessary to maintain world order. However, in the four countries, majorities across ideological groups express this view.1

    When asked whether their country should have UN approval before using military force to deal with international threats, American opinion differs considerably from that of Western Europeans. Americans are almost evenly divided on the question, with 45% saying that the U.S. should have UN approval while 44% say this would make it too difficult to deal with threats; in contrast, solid majorities in the four Western European nations surveyed, including about three-quarters in Spain (74%) and Germany (76%) say their country should have UN approval before it takes military action.

    In Western Europe, those with a college degree are more likely than those with less education to say their country should have UN approval before using military force, although majorities across both groups share this view. For example, in Spain, 84% of those who graduated from college say UN approval should be obtained, compared with 70% of those who do not have a college degree. Double-digit differences are also evident in Britain (15 percentage points), Germany (11 points) and France (10 points). This is not the case in the U.S., where respondents across education groups offer nearly identical views.

    In Germany, gender differences are also notable; even though German men are more likely than women to say the use of military force is sometimes necessary, more men than women say their country should have UN approval before using force (83% vs. 70%).

    The view that their country should have UN approval before using military force to deal with threats is far more prevalent among American liberals than among conservatives. Close to six-in-ten (57%) liberals favor obtaining UN approval, while 33% say this would make it too difficult for the U.S. to deal with threats; in contrast, most conservatives (52%) say getting UN approval would make it too difficult to deal with threats, while 38% say this is an important step. Political moderates fall between the other two groups, with 49% saying the U.S. should seek the approval of the UN before using military force and 42% saying this would make it too difficult to deal with threats. The same ideological difference is generally not evident in Western Europe.

    Views on International Engagement

    About four-in-ten (39%) Americans say the U.S. should help other countries deal with their problems, while a narrow majority (52%) says the U.S. should deal with its own problems and let other countries deal with their problems as best they can. In this regard, Americans are not drastically different from respondents in France, where 43% believe their country should help other countries and 57% say it should focus on its own problems.

    The British are nearly evenly divided; 45% say their country should help other countries deal with their problems and about the same number (48%) believe Britain should deal with its own problems.

    Compared with the U.S., France and Britain, Spain and Germany stand out as the only countries where majorities favor international engagement: 55% and 54%, respectively, say their countries should provide assistance to others, while 40% in Spain and 43% in Germany take the more isolationist view.

    Opinions about international engagement have changed somewhat in the U.S., France and Spain since last year, but while publics in the two Western European countries are now more in favor of helping others than they were in 2010, more Americans currently take an isolationist position. Last year, about the same number of Americans said their country should help other countries (45%) as said it should let other countries deal with their own problems (46%). Similarly, the Spanish were nearly evenly divided, with 49% favoring engagement and 47% taking an isolationist approach. In France, where a majority continues to take an isolationist view, even more (65%) did so a year ago.

    In the U.S. as well as in the four Western European countries surveyed, those with a college degree are far more likely than those with less education to offer an internationalist view. This is especially the case in Germany, where about three-quarters (73%) of those who graduated from college believe their country should help other countries deal with their problems, compared with a narrow majority (52%) of those without a college degree.

    Political ideology is also a factor in Germany, France and Spain. In these three countries, those on the right are more likely than those on the left to take the isolationist view when it comes to international engagement. For example, while about half (48%) of left-wing French say their country should deal with its own problems and let other countries deal with theirs as best they can, about six-in-ten (59%) on the right offer this opinion.

    Cultural Superiority

    About half of Americans (49%) and Germans (47%) agree with the statement, “Our people are not perfect, but our culture is superior to others;” 44% in Spain share this view. In Britain and France, only about a third or fewer (32% and 27%, respectively) think their culture is better than others.

    While opinions about cultural superiority have remained relatively stable over the years in the four Western European countries surveyed, Americans are now far less likely to say that their culture is better than others; six-in-ten Americans held this belief in 2002 and 55% did so in 2007. Belief in cultural superiority has declined among Americans across age, gender and education groups.

    As in past surveys, older Americans remain far more inclined than younger ones to believe that their culture is better than others. Six-in-ten Americans ages 50 or older share this view, while 34% disagree; those younger than 30 hold the opposite view, with just 37% saying American culture is superior and 61% saying it is not. Opinions are more divided among those ages 30 to 49; 44% in this group see American culture as superior and 50% do not.

    Similar age gaps are not as common in the Western European countries surveyed, with the exception of Spain, where majorities of older respondents, but not among younger ones, also think their culture is better than others; 55% of those ages 50 or older say this is the case, compared with 34% of those ages 30 to 49 and 39% of those younger than 30.

    As is the case on other measures, opinions about cultural superiority vary considerably by educational attainment. In the four Western European countries and in the U.S., those who did not graduate from college are more likely than those who did to agree that their culture is superior, even if their people are not perfect. For example, Germans with less education are about twice as likely as those with a college degree to believe their culture is superior (49% vs. 25%); double-digit differences are also present in France (20 percentage points), Spain (18 points) and Britain (11 points), while a less pronounced gap is evident in the U.S. (9 points).

    Finally, among Americans and Germans, political conservative are especially likely to believe their culture is superior to others. In the U.S., 63% of conservatives take this view, compared with 45% of moderates and just 34% of liberals. Similarly, a majority (54%) of right-wing Germans see their culture as superior, while 47% of moderates and 33% of those on the political left agree.

    Individualism and the Role of the State

    American opinions continue to differ considerably from those of Western Europeans when it comes to views of individualism and the role of the state. Nearly six-in-ten (58%) Americans believe it is more important for everyone to be free to pursue their life’s goals without interference from the state, while just 35% say it is more important for the state to play an active role in society so as to guarantee that nobody is in need.

    In contrast, at least six-in-ten in Spain (67%), France (64%) and Germany (62%) and 55% in Britain say the state should ensure that nobody is in need; about four-in-ten or fewer consider being free from state interference a higher priority.

    In the U.S., Britain, France and Germany, views of the role of the state divide significantly across ideological lines. For example, three-quarters of American conservatives say individuals should be free to pursue their goals without interference from the state, while 21% say it is more important for the state to guarantee that nobody is in need; among liberals in the U.S., half would like the state to play an active role to help the needy, while 42% prefer a more limited role for the state.

    Those on the political right in Britain, France and Germany are also more likely than those on the left in these countries to prioritize freedom to pursue one’s goals without state interference. Unlike in the U.S., however, majorities of those on the right in France (57%) and Germany (56%) favor an active role for the state, as do more than four-in-ten (45%) conservatives in Britain.

    American opinions about the role of the state also vary considerably across age groups. About half (47%) of those younger than 30 prioritize the freedom to pursue life’s goals without interference from the state and a similar percentage (46%) say it is more important for the state to ensure that nobody is in need; among older Americans, however, about six-in-ten consider being free a higher priority, with just about three-in-ten saying the state should play an active role so that nobody is in need. No such age difference is evident in the four Western European countries surveyed.

    Asked if they agree that “success in life is pretty much determined by forces outside our control,” Americans again offer more individualistic views than those expressed by Western Europeans. Only 36% of Americans believe they have little control over their fate, compared with 50% in Spain, 57% in France and 72% in Germany; Britain is the only Western European country surveyed where fewer than half (41%) share this view.

    In the U.S. and in Western Europe, those without a college degree are less individualistic than those who have graduated from college; this is especially the case in the U.S. and Germany. About three-quarters (74%) of Germans in the less educated group believe that success in life is largely determined by forces beyond one’s control, compared with 55% of college graduates. Among Americans, 41% of those without a college degree say they have little control over their fate, while just 22% of college graduates share this view.

    Religion More Important to Americans

    Americans also distinguish themselves from Western Europeans on views about the importance of religion. Half of Americans deem religion very important in their lives; fewer than a quarter in Spain (22%), Germany (21%), Britain (17%) and France (13%) share this view.

    Moreover, Americans are far more inclined than Western Europeans to say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values; 53% say this is the case in the U.S., compared with just one-third in Germany, 20% in Britain, 19% in Spain and 15% in France.

    In the U.S., women and older respondents place more importance on religion and are more likely than men and younger people to say that faith in God is a necessary foundation for morality and good values. About six-in-ten (59%) American women say religion is very important in their lives, compared with 41% of men; and while a majority (56%) of Americans ages 50 and older say religion is very important to them, 48% of those ages 30 to 49 and 41% of those younger than 30 place similar importance on religion.

    Similarly, while a majority of American women (58%) say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, men are nearly evenly divided, with 47% saying belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality and 51% saying it is not. Among Americans ages 50 and older, 58% say one must believe in God in order to be moral and have good values; 50% of those ages 30 to 49 and 46% of those younger than 30 share this view.

    Education also plays a role in views of religion in the U.S., to some extent. Although Americans with a college degree are about as likely as those without to say religion is very important to them (47% and 51%, respectively), the less educated are far more inclined to say that one must believe in God in order to be moral; 59% of those without a college degree say this, compared with 37% of those who have graduated from college.

    Views of religion and whether belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality vary little, if at all, across demographic groups in the Western European countries surveyed. In Spain, however, respondents ages 50 and older place more importance on religion than do younger people, although relatively few in this age group say it is very important to them; 33% say this is the case, compared with 16% of those ages 30 to 49 and 11% of those younger than 30.

    Politically, conservatives in the U.S., Spain and Germany are more likely than liberals to say it is necessary to believe in God in order to be moral and have good values, but while solid majorities of conservatives in the U.S. (66%) take this position, fewer than half of conservatives in Spain (31%) and Germany (46%) share this view. Meanwhile, just 26% of liberals in the U.S., 11% in Spain and 19% in Germany say belief in God is a necessary foundation for morality. Conservatives in the U.S. are also far more likely than liberals to consider religion very important in their lives (67% vs. 29%); in Western Europe, few across ideological groups place high importance on religion.

    Religious vs. National Identity

    American Christians are more likely than their Western European counterparts to think of themselves first in terms of their religion rather than their nationality; 46% of Christians in the U.S. see themselves primarily as Christians and the same number consider themselves Americans first. In contrast, majorities of Christians in France (90%), Germany (70%), Britain (63%) and Spain (53%) identify primarily with their nationality rather than their religion.

    In Britain, France and Germany, more Christians now see themselves in terms of their nationality than did so five years ago, when national identification was already widespread in these countries. This change is especially notable in Germany, where the percentage seeing themselves first as Germans is up 11 percentage points, from 59% in 2006.

    Among Christians in the U.S., white evangelicals are especially inclined to identify first with their faith; 70% in this group see themselves first as Christians rather than as Americans, while 22% say they are primarily American. Among other American Christians, more identify with their nationality (55%) than with their religion (38%).

    Homosexuality

    Tolerance for homosexuality is widespread in the U.S. and Western Europe, but far more Western Europeans than Americans say homosexuality should be accepted by society; at least eight-in-ten in Spain (91%), Germany (87%), France (86%) and Britain (81%), compared with 60% in the U.S.

    Acceptance of homosexuality has increased in recent years, and the shift is especially notable in the U.S., where only slightly more said it should be accepted (49%) than said it should be rejected (41%) in 2007. Today, more Americans accept homosexuality than reject it by a 27-percentage point margin.

    While there are some differences in opinions of homosexuality across demographic groups in the Western European countries surveyed, overwhelming majorities across age, education and gender groups believe homosexuality should be accepted by society. In the U.S., however, these differences are somewhat more pronounced. For example, while 67% of American women believe homosexuality should be accepted, a much narrower majority of men (54%) share that view. Among Americans with college degrees, 71% accept homosexuality, compared with 56% of those with less education. Finally, about two-thirds (68%) of Americans younger than 30 say homosexuality should be accepted by society; 61% of those ages 30 to 40 and 55% of those ages 50 and older share this view.

    In addition to demographic differences, an ideological divide on views of homosexuality is also notable in the U.S., where more than eight-in-ten (85%) liberals and 65% of moderates express tolerant views, compared with 44% of conservatives. In the four Western European countries surveyed, at least three-quarters across ideological groups say homosexuality should be accepted by society.

    1. In the U.S., respondents were asked, “In general, would you describe your political views as very conservative, conservative, moderate, liberal or very liberal?” In Western Europe, respondents were asked, “Some people talk about politics in terms of left, center and right. On a left-right scale from 0 to 6, with 0 indicating extreme left and 6 indicating extreme right, where would you place yourself?” Throughout this report, we use the terms left/liberal and right/conservative interchangeably. In the U.S., an analysis of partisan differences shows that, for the most part, the views of Democrats align with those of liberals, while views of Republicans mirror those of conservatives; we refer to ideology rather than partisanship for a more direct comparison between Americans and Western Europeans. ↩

    2011 VALUES0014

    Source :

  • Britain ready to back Palestinian statehood at UN

    Britain ready to back Palestinian statehood at UN

    Mahmoud Abbas pledge not to pursue Israel for war crimes and resumption of peace talks are UK conditions

    Ian Black, Middle East editor

    Palestinians hold posters
    Palestinians hold posters of President Mahmoud Abbas during a rally supporting the UN bid for observer state status, in the West Bank city of Ramallah. Photograph: APAimages/Rex Features

    Britain is prepared to back a key vote recognising Palestinian statehood at the United Nations if Mahmoud Abbas pledges not to pursue Israel for war crimes and to resume peace talks.

    Abbas, president of the Palestinian Authority, has called for Britain’s backing in part because of its historic responsibility for Palestine. The government has previously refused, citing strong US and Israeli objections and fears of long-term damage to prospects for negotiations.

    On Monday night, the government signalled it would change tack and vote yes if the Palestinians modified their application, which is to be debated by the UN general assembly in New York later this week. As a “non-member state”, Palestine would have the same status as the Vatican.

    Whitehall officials said the Palestinians were now being asked to refrain from applying for membership of the international criminal court or the international court of justice, which could both be used to pursue war crimes charges or other legal claims against Israel.

    Abbas is also being asked to commit to an immediate resumption of peace talks “without preconditions” with Israel. The third condition is that the general assembly’s resolution does not require the UN security council to follow suit.

    The US and Israel have both hinted at possible retaliation if the vote goes ahead. Congress could block payments to the Palestinian Authority and Israel might freeze tax revenues it transfers under the 1993 Oslo agreement or, worse, withdraw from the agreement altogether. It could also annex West Bank settlements. Britain’s position is that it wants to reduce the risk that such threats might be implemented and bolster Palestinian moderates.

    France has already signalled that it will vote yes on Thursday, and the long-awaited vote is certain to pass as 132 UN members have recognised the state of Palestine. Decisions by Germany, Spain and Britain are still pending and Palestinians would clearly prefer a united EU position as counterweight to the US.

    Willian Hague, the foreign secretary, discussed the issue on Monday with Abbas and the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, offiicals said.

    Palestinian sources said Hillary Clinton, the US secretary of state, raised the issue with Abbas at his Ramallah headquarters last week, shortly before a ceasefire was agreed in the Gaza Strip, as had Tony Blair, the Quartet envoy.

    Abbas has been widely seen to have been sidelined by his rivals in the Islamist movement Hamas, as well by his failure to win any concessions from Israel. Abbas, whose remit does not extend beyond the West Bank, hopes a strong yes vote will persuade Israel to return to talks after more than two years.

    Officals in Ramallah have opposed surrendering on the ICC issue so it can be used as a bargaining chip in future, but views are thought to be divided. Abbas said at the weekend: “We are going to the UN fully confident in our steps. We will have our rights because you are with us.”

    Leila Shaid, Palestine’s representative to the EU, said: “After everything that has happened in the Arab spring, Britain can’t pretend it is in favour of democracy in Libya, Syria and Egypt but accept the Palestinians continuing to live under occupation. As the former colonial power, Britain has a historic responsibility to Palestine. Britain is a very important country in the Middle East, it has extensive trade relations, and David Cameron should know he risks a popular backlash from Arab public opinion if he does not support us.”

    Palestinians have rejected the claim that they are acting unilaterally, calling the UN path “the ultimate expression of multilateralism”. Israel’s apparent opposition to unilateralism has not stopped it acting without agreement to build and expand settlements, they say.

    guardian.co.uk, 

  • Turkey proud of naming Cakir as Portugal v Spain referee

    Turkey proud of naming Cakir as Portugal v Spain referee

    ccakir

    Euro semi-final referee gives Turks reason to smile

     

    Missing out on Euro 2012 was painful for soccer-mad Turkey but having a Turkish referee at the finals has helped restore some pride to a country still smarting from match-fixing allegations and high-profile arrests.

     

    Cuneyt Cakir, a 35-year-old Istanbul native who runs an insurance branch office, is the youngest referee at the tournament and will take charge of the semi-final between Spain and Portugal in Donetsk on Wednesday.

    “Cuneyt Cakir… makes us Turks smile once again through his appointment to blow his whistle at the Euro semi-final,” newspaper Milliyet wrote this week.

    Hurriyet newspaper said on Wednesday the Iberian clash would resemble Spain’s El Clasico and was a great honor for Cakir.

    Cakir, whose father was a referee, regularly officiates at the notoriously volatile derbies between the three major Istanbul clubs.

    Turkey, semi-finalists at Euro 2008, lost to Croatia in a playoff for the Euro 2012 finals after finishing second behind Germany in their qualifying group.

    However, Germany playmaker Mesut Ozil, who was born in Gelsenkirchen but whose family hail from Turkey, is another favorite with the Turkish public.

     

     

     

     

    […]

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Ahram online sports

  • Turkey’s Economy Minister Says Spain Should See Turkey as Springboard

    Turkey’s Economy Minister Says Spain Should See Turkey as Springboard

    MADRID (A.A) – Turkey’s economy minister said on Thursday that Spain should see Turkey as a springboard, and vice-versa due to their geographies.

    Zafer Caglayan said Turkey was not a country that could be invested and sold goods only.

    “Turkey is the second country in world in contracting industry, and Turkey would like to share advantages it has gained in this industry in Africa, Middle East and Caucasus with Spanish businessmen,” Caglayan told Spain-Turkey Investment & Cooperation Summit in Madrid, Spain.

    Caglayan said Turkey would make significant energy, health, infrastructure and other investments, and many Turkish firms were investing in Spain and more than 400 Spanish companies had investments in Turkey.

    The minister said Turkey was the sixth biggest economy in Europe and Spain was the fifth biggest economy in this continent.

    “Turkey’s national income was 740 billion USD in 2010, and national income of the two countries totalled 2.2 trillion USD,” he said.

    Caglayan said the 8 billion USD of trade volume between the two countries was too low, and this figure could easily be raised to 18 billion USD.

    The minister said Turkey would invest 120 billion USD in energy till 2023, and 50 billion USD in transportation in ten years.

    Caglayan said Spanish companies would continue their investments in high-speed train system in Turkey, and Spanish companies that had submitted bids for Marmaray project were advantageous.

    Moreover, Caglayan said the only way out of global crisis was global cooperation, and Turkey’s year-end exports would reach 135 billion USD and Turkey aimed to raise it to 500 billion USD.

    Caglayan said direct investments in Turkey would climb over 13 billion USD by the end of 2011, and 91 percent of direct investments in Turkey in 2011 were Europe-oriented.

    Minister Caglayan said Turkey made public medium-term economic program earlier on Thursday, and it forecast 7.5 percent year-end growth, but 5 percent annual growth in 2013 and 2014.

    Caglayan said Turkey would exert significant efforts to cut down its current account deficit forecast to 7 percent of the Gross National Product (GDP) from 9.4 percent till 2014, and diminish inflation to 5 percent from 8 percent.

    Turkey would reduce its budget deficit to 1 percent by 2014, Caglayan said.

    Caglayan also said Turkey would implement a new incentive system by the end of this year.

    After the meeting, Turkey’s Foreign Economic Relations Board (DEIK) and Spanish Confederation of Employers’ Organizations (CEEOE) signed a cooperation agreement.

    via Turkey’s Economy Minister Says Spain Should See Turkey as Springboard, 13 October 2011 Thursday 17:17.