Category: Europe

  • Credit crisis ‘is God punishing us’

    Credit crisis ‘is God punishing us’

    An Anglican bishop says the credit crunch is God’s way of punishing Britain for being too materialistic.

    The Rt Rev Wallace Benn, Bishop of Lewes, thinks the country is obsessed with cash, which has a ‘stranglehold’ over our lives.

    The credit crisis has been caused by greed and ‘God has allowed it for good’, he writes in a newsletter.

    The Adam Smith Institute think-tank criticised the comments, saying: ‘Many people who have not worshipped materialism have seen their lives made poorer.’

    Source: METRO, 28 October 2008

  • French envoy says EU supports Turkey’s fight against PKK violence

    French envoy says EU supports Turkey’s fight against PKK violence

    Emie, the French ambassador in Ankara, said that the EU would stand with Turkey on the fight against PKK since nothing could justify violence.

    Wednesday, 29 October 2008 07:53

    The ambassador of France, holding the rotating presidency of the European Union (EU), reaffirmed on Tuesday the union’s support for Turkey’s fight against PKK violence.

    Bernard Emie, the French ambassador in Ankara, said that the EU would stand with Turkey on the fight against PKK since nothing could justify violence.

    “The PKK is for all of us a terrorist organization and is treated accordingly in all our countries,” Emie said during a luncheon he hosted in honor of Turkey’s Foreign Minister Ali Babacan, who is also the chief negotiator for the EU.

    Emie said that the EU was very much confident that the Turkish government would deal with that issue (terrorism) with the arms of democracy.

    On the crisis in Caucasus, Emie said that the French presidency of the EU supported Turkey’s initiatives (the Turkish idea of a platform for cooperation and stability in the Caucasus and President Abdullah Gul’s trip to Yerevan on September 6).

    Emie said that there was yet much that remained to be done to restore the full stability of the region and the EU presidency had decided to work hand in hand.

    Referring to Turkey’s EU membership bid, the ambassador said that the French presidency was holding its course and keeping its promises.

    “I am glad that Turkish authorities acknowledged the fact that France’s pledge of a neutral, objective and impartial presidency towards Turkey was kept,” Emie said.

    Emie expressed belief that the draft for the national program on integration of the acquis had the potential to become an important roadmap for the reforms that still needed to be done.

    “We also very much hope that some further progress will be registered in terms of freedom of expression,” the ambassador said.

    Emie also said that the French presidency was doing its utmost to carry on, with all the European partners, the preparatory work for the opening of new chapters.

    “We very much hope that the full involvement of the Turkish side that we have witnessed in the past weeks, under your leadership, will continue to prevail so that we should be in a position to open two chapters,” the French ambassador said.

    Emie expressed hope that the talks held in Cyprus would yield results some time soon, and said that the EU stood ready to assist and to continue to bring its direct assistance to the Turkish Cypriots that were also members of the European family.

    The French ambassador also congratulated Turkey on its election as a non-permanent member of the United Nations (UN) Security Council for the term 2009-2010.

    AA

    Source: www.worldbulletin.net, 29 October 2008

  • RUSSIA TAKES INITIATIVE IN INTERNATIONAL PUSH FOR KARABAKH PEACE

    RUSSIA TAKES INITIATIVE IN INTERNATIONAL PUSH FOR KARABAKH PEACE

    By Emil Danielyan

     

     

    Russia has taken the center stage in international efforts to resolve the Karabakh conflict, which could yield a breakthrough before the end of this year. President Dmitry Medvedev is expected to host a potentially decisive meeting of his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts next month. Moscow may thus be trying to sideline the OSCE’s so-called Minsk Group on Karabakh, which it has long co-chaired with the United States and France.

    When he paid an official visit to Yerevan on October 21, Medvedev publicly urged Presidents Serzh Sarkisian of Armenia and Ilham Aliyev of Azerbaijan to meet in his presence in Russia. The Karabakh dispute was high on the agenda. “I hope that the three presidents will meet in the very near future to continue discussions on this theme,” he told a joint news conference with Sarkisian. “I hope that the meeting will take place in Russia” (Regnum, October 21). He noted that the Karabakh peace process now seemed to be “in an advanced stage.”

    Medvedev discussed what the Kremlin described as preparations for the Armenian-Azerbaijani summit in a phone call with Aliyev the next day (Interfax, October 22). Konstantin Zatulin, a Kremlin-linked Russian pundit, told Armenian journalists afterward that the crucial summit would likely take place in early November; but neither conflicting party has yet confirmed the meeting, let alone announced any dates for it. Aliyev’s chief foreign policy aide, Novruz Mammadov, has said only that it was “possible” (Trend news agency, October 22). Armenian officials have not commented on the matter at all.

    Medvedev announced his initiative following unusually optimistic statements on Karabakh peace prospects that were made by his foreign minister, Sergei Lavrov. In an October 7 interview with Rossiiskaya Gazeta, Lavrov spoke of a “very real chance” to end the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict in the coming weeks. “There remain two or three unresolved issues that need to be agreed upon at the next meetings of the presidents of Armenia and Azerbaijan,” he said. He added that the future of the so-called Lachin corridor, which is the shortest overland link between Armenia and Karabakh, is now the main stumbling block in the peace talks. Three days later, Lavrov held a trilateral meeting with his Armenian and Azerbaijani counterparts on the sidelines of a CIS summit in Bishkek.

    Many analysts in the South Caucasus and the West have long contended that Russia was uninterested in a Karabakh settlement, lest it lose leverage against Azerbaijan and, even more, Armenia, its main ally in the region. Peace with Azerbaijan, they have argued, would reduce the significance for Armenia of maintaining close military ties with Russia and make the Armenian economy less dependent on Russian energy supplies. Medvedev’s desire to host the crucial Aliyev-Sarkisian encounter is, however, a clear indication that Karabakh peace is not necessarily incompatible with Russian goals and interests in the region, especially if Moscow plays a key role in a multinational peace-keeping force that would have to be deployed in the conflict zone.

    Armenia is rife with speculation that Moscow is trying to cajole Azerbaijan into agreeing to a Russian troop presence and pursuing a more pro-Russian policy on other issues, notably the transportation of Caspian oil and gas to the West. “To that end [the Russians] need to force Armenia into making essentially unilateral and absolutely unacceptable concessions on the Karabakh issue,” Yerkir, a Yerevan weekly controlled by the governing Armenian Revolutionary Federation party, wrote on October 24, reflecting the growing opinion among local observers.

    Sarkisian appeared to rule out such concessions when he said after his talks with Medvedev that the peace process had to proceed on the basis of the framework peace agreement that was formally put forward by the Minsk Group’s U.S., Russian, and French co-chairs in November 2007. The document calls for a phased settlement of the conflict that would start with the liberation of at least six of the seven Azerbaijani districts around Karabakh that were fully or partly occupied by Armenian forces during the 1991-1994 war. In return, Karabakh’s predominantly Armenian population would be allowed to determine the disputed territory’s status in a future referendum.

    According to U.S. officials privy to the talks, Baku and Yerevan essentially agreed to this peace formula as of late last year and only needed to work out some of its details. Political turmoil in Armenia that followed the February 2008 presidential election and the ensuing toughening of Azerbaijani leaders’ Karabakh rhetoric, however, have dealt a serious blow to the mediators’ efforts to negotiate a peace deal. Those efforts gained new momentum after the Russian-Georgian war, with all three mediating powers stressing the danger posed by unresolved ethnic disputes in the region.

    However, the sharp deterioration of U.S.-Russian relations resulting from the Georgia crisis called into question Moscow’s and Washington’s ability to continue to work together on Karabakh. Medvedev’s seemingly unilateral initiative raised more such questions. Washington has yet to react officially to the move. Incidentally, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Daniel Fried flew to Yerevan ahead of the Russian’ president’s visit. Fried said after talks with Sarkisian on October 17 that the signing of a Karabakh peace accord before the end of the year was “possible” but “not inevitable” (RFE/RL Armenia Report, October 20).

    Meanwhile, Bernard Fassier, the Minsk Group’s French co-chair, told the Azerbaijani APA news agency on October 21 that he and his American and Russian opposite numbers planned to visit Baku and Yerevan jointly next week; but two days later he said that the trip had been postponed, ostensibly because of the co-chairs’ conflicting work schedules.

  • BBC boss says Islam should be treated more sensitively than Christianity

    BBC boss says Islam should be treated more sensitively than Christianity

    Islam should be treated more sensitively by the media than Christianity, according to the director general of the BBC

    By Martin Beckford, Religious Affairs Correspondent
    Last Updated: 2:39PM BST 15 Oct 2008

    Mr Thompson had earlier warned of a “growing nervousness about discussion about Islam” Photo: OLI SCARFF

    Mark Thompson claimed that because Muslims are a religious minority in Britain and also often from ethnic minorities, their faith should be given different coverage to that of more established groups.

    His comments come after the comedian Ben Elton accused the BBC of being scared of making jokes about Islam, while Hindus have claimed it favours Muslims over other religions.

    But Mr Thompson, speaking at the annual public theology lecture of the religion think-tank Theos, insisted the state broadcaster would show programmes that criticised Islam if they were of sufficient quality.

    The director general, whose corporation faced accusations of blasphemy from Christians after it allowed the transmission of the musical Jerry Springer -The Opera, also said his Christian beliefs guided his judgments and disclosed that he had never watched the Monty Python film Life of Brian which satirises the story of Jesus.

    In his speech last night, Mr Thompson claimed there are now more programmes about religion on BBC television and radio than there have been in recent decades, whereas coverage has declined on ITV.

    But asked whether it was correct that the BBC “let vicar gags pass but not imam gags”, as Elton claimed, he admitted it did take a different approach to Islam, which has 1.6million followers in Britain, compared to its approach to the Church of England or the Roman Catholic Church.

    Mr Thompson said: “My view is that there is a difference between the position of Christianity, which I believe should be central to the BBC’s religion coverage and widely respected and followed.

    “What Christian identity feels like it is about to the broad population is a little bit different to people for whom their religion is also associated with an ethnic identity which has not been fully integrated.

    “There’s no reason why any religion should be immune from discussion, but I don’t want to say that all religions are the same. To be a minority I think puts a slightly different outlook on it.”

    However he pointed out that he had commissioned the comedy series Goodness Gracious Me, which he claimed had made fun of many religions, and claimed the BBC had shown more of the controversial Danish cartoons of the prophet Mohammed than other newspapers and television channels had done.

    Earlier this year Mr Thompson had warned of a “growing nervousness about discussion about Islam” and said no debate about religion should be censored.

    Mr Thompson said the broadcast of Jerry Springer – The Opera, which features Jesus as a talk show guest who admits to being “a bit gay”, had been the most controversial programme he had dealt with during his time at the corporation.

    “No political issue has so far come near Jerry Springer in terms of anger and emotion. It wasn’t politics that put a security guard outside my house, it was a debate about how the BBC handles religion.”

    However despite the storm over the programme, Mr Thompson, a practising Catholic, said his beliefs do play a part in the editorial judgments he makes and disclosed that he dislikes watching shows about the Bible.

    “I’ve never seen Life of Brian,” Mr Thompson said. “I’ve taken a personal choice very seldom to watch programmes that have depictions of Jesus.

    “I’m very sensitive about depictions of the Gospel story.”

    He also dismissed the idea that television is a “wellspring or accelerant” of immorality in society, and also that the BBC gives too much weight to the secular ideals of science or employs “moral relativism” when covering contentious issues such as medical ethics.

    Mr Thompson defended programmes that have been accused of promoting selfishness or nastiness, such as The Apprentice and The Weakest Link, claiming that viewers know they are only entertainment and do not ape the behaviour shown on them.

    He said that programmes such as EastEnders and The Archers deal with the consequences of people’s actions, even when they cover controversial topics, and claimed even science-fiction series such as Doctor Who have a moral backbone.

    “Doctor Who is not just about Daleks and Cybermen, it is about mothers and families and friendships,” he said.

    However Mr Thompson did admit the corporation had given over too much coverage last month of the launch of the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland.

    “I must say that by the end of that week, even for those of us who share my love of the Higgs-Boson, there did seem to be an awful lot of it on the air.”

    A BBC spokesman said Mr Thompson did not mean Islam should be given preferential treatment, just that all religions are different.

    He said: “People should look at his actual comments rather than trying to infer additional meaning that isn’t there. What Mark Thompson said is that all religions are not the same – he did not say Islam, or indeed any faith, should be treated more sensitively than Christianity. In fact he made it crystal clear that no religion should be regarded as off limits for the BBC.”

    Source: www.telegraph.co.uk, 15 Oct 2008

  • EU agrees “Blue Card” to lure high skilled migrants

    EU agrees “Blue Card” to lure high skilled migrants

    Wed 22 Oct 2008, 8:43 GMT

    (adds details, analyst, link to factbox)

    By Ingrid Melander

    BRUSSELS, Oct 22 (Reuters) – European Union envoys agreed on Wednesday on a fast-track “Blue Card” scheme to attract high skilled migrant workers from developing countries in a bid to compete with the U.S. Green Card, the French EU Presidency said.

    The Blue Card, valid for a maximum of four years, will offer candidates speedier work permits and make it easier for migrants’ families to join them, find public housing and acquire long-term resident status.

    It aims to make the bloc more competitive in a battle with the United States and other ageing Western societies for coveted technology workers and hospital staff from the developing world, increasingly needed to plug labour gaps.

    Highly-skilled foreign workers make up 1.7 percent of migrant workers in the EU, compared with 9.9 percent of migrants to Australia, 7.3 percent to Canada and 3.2 percent to the United States, EU data show.

    Analysts say the Blue Card scheme will not be enough to lure top-end staff and compete with the U.S. Green Card because it offers access to only one EU state at a time, not free mobility within the European single market.

    After 18 months of working with a Blue Card in one EU state, an immigrant would be allowed to move with his family to work in another EU state, but he or she would still have to apply for a new Blue Card there within a month of arrival.

    This provision was required by countries which are determined to maintain national sovereignty over their labour market, such as Germany.

    NATIONAL QUOTAS

    The fact that a Blue Card is not automatically valid for the whole of the EU takes away most of the advantage of having an EU-wide scheme because it gives access to a much smaller market and fewer opportunities, says Jakob von Weizsaecker, from the Brussels-based Bruegel economic policy think-tank.

    “It is clearly a step in the right direction but I don’t expect it to be a big success because if you compare it to the United States, a similar title gives access to the whole U.S. market,” the German labour-market specialist said.

    The Blue Card will be issued to highly skilled workers who have obtained a contract paying a gross annual salary of at least 1.5 times the average wage in the EU state concerned. The figure can fall to 1.2 times average salary in sectors with big labour shortages.

    Governments may refuse to issue Blue Cards citing labour market problems or if national quotas are exceeded.

    The new scheme enters into force 30 months after EU ministers endorse it in the coming weeks, an EU official said.

    The delay was required by new member states such as the Czech Republic, who insisted existing curbs on their citizens’ working freely throughout the bloc be lifted first.

    For a related Factbox click on: [LP656113]

    (Reporting by Ingrid Melander; Editing by Paul Taylor and Richard Balmforth)

    Source: africa.reuters.com, 22 Oct 2008

  • President’s dilemma

    President’s dilemma

    Oct 23rd 2008
    From Economist.com

    Deciding between Nabucco and South Stream

    WHICH will it be? The next American president will have to decide.
    Either Europe gets natural gas from Iran, or Russia stitches up the
    continent’s energy supplies for a generation.

    In one sense, it is hard to compare the two problems. Iranian nuclear
    missiles would be an existential threat to Israel. If Russia sells it
    rocket systems and warhead technology, or advanced air-defence systems
    (or vetoes sanctions) it matters. By contrast, Russia’s threat to
    European security is a slow, boring business. At worst, Europe ends up
    a bit more beholden to Russian pipeline monopolists than is healthy
    politically. But life will go on.

    Europe’s energy hopes lie in a much discussed but so far unrealised
    independent pipeline. Nabucco, as it is optimistically titled (as in
    Verdi, and freeing the slaves) would take gas from Central Asia and
    the Caspian region via Turkey to the Balkans and Central Europe. That
    would replicate the success of two existing oil pipelines across
    Georgia, which have helped dent Russia’s grip on east-west export routes.

    Russia is trying hard to block this. It is reviving the idea of an
    international gas cartel with Qatar and Iran. It also wants to kybosh
    Nabucco through its own rival project, the hugely expensive ($12.8
    billion) South Stream. Backed by Gazprom (the gas division of Kremlin,
    Inc) and Italy’s ENI, it has already got support from Austria,
    Bulgaria and Serbia. The project has now been delayed two years to 2015.

    But politicking around it is lively. This week the Kremlin managed to
    get Romania—until now a determined holdout on the Nabucco side—to
    start talks on joining South Stream. As Vladimir Socor, a veteran
    analyst at the Jamestown Foundation, notes, that creates just the kind
    of contest that the Kremlin likes, in which European countries jostle
    each other to get the best deal from Russia. Previously, that played
    out in a central European battle between Austria and Hungary to be
    Russia’s most-favoured energy partner in the region. Now the Kremlin
    has brought in Slovenia to further increase its leverage.

    All this works only because the European Union (EU) is asleep on the
    job. Bizarrely, Europe’s leaders publicly maintain that the two
    pipelines are not competitors. They have given the task of promoting
    Nabucco to a retired Dutch politician who has not visited the most
    important countries in the project recently (or in some cases even at
    all).

    The main reason for the lack of private-sector interest is lack of
    gas. The big reserves are in Turkmenistan, but Russia wants them too.
    Securing them for Nabucco would mean a huge, concerted diplomatic push
    from the EU and from America. It would also require the building of a
    Transcaspian gas pipeline.

    That is not technically difficult (unlike, incidentally, South Stream,
    which goes through the deep, toxic and rocky depths of the Black Sea).
    But it faces legal obstacles, and could be vetoed by both Russia and
    Iran. As Zeyno Baran of the Hudson Institute argues in a new paper,
    “the fortunes of the two pipelines are inversely related”.

    That is America’s dilemma. Befriending Iran would create huge problems
    for Russia. An Iranian bypass round the Caspian allows Turkmen gas
    (and Iran’s own plentiful reserves) to flow to Turkey and then on to
    Europe. But the same American officials, politicians and analysts who
    are most hawkish about Russia tend also to be arch-sceptics about
    starting talks with the mullahs (or even turning a blind eye to
    Iranian gas flowing through an American-backed pipeline).

    If Iran can make it clear that does not want to destroy Israel and
    promote terrorism (and stops issuing rhetorical flourishes on the
    subject) it stands to benefit hugely. The “grand bargain” has never
    looked more tempting—or more urgent.