New European Parliament looks to flex political muscle

BRUSSELS) - The freshly-elected European parliament meets Tuesday for its first plenary session, keen to test the new political muscle it will develop once the EU's new reform package enters force.
In a short session, starting in earnest in Strasbourg, the 736-member assembly will elect its president, but not the head of the EU's executive arm, the European Commission.
Despite pressure to vote this week on the return of Jose Manuel Barroso for a second five-year term as president of the commission, the lawmakers have taken a stand and postponed any endorsement until the autumn.
"We can see even more that the parliament has decided to make its voice heard," said Julia de Clerck-Sachsse, an analyst at the Centre for European Policy Studies think-tank in Brussels.
The parliament is the European Union's only elected body and some deputies, notably the Greens bloc which won extra seats in the June 4-7 polls, believe the return of Barroso would weaken a key EU institution.
Known as the "lowest common denominator" when he was appointed in 2004 as a compromise candidate, the former Portuguese premier has been criticised for failing to react quickly to the financial and economic crisis.
But Barroso was officially anointed by EU nations Thursday after a 48-hour "silence procedure" during which none of the 27 member countries objected to his candidacy.
In the parliament, which sits in Brussels as well as Strasbourg, he has the backing of his own centre-right bloc, but doubts remain as to who exactly will endorse him, and he is reluctant to rely on fringe parties for backing.
The Greens in particular see Barroso as a lackey of the member nations, and have expressed bewilderment that no one else can be found.
"We do not trust him to wholeheartedly implement the policies that Europe urgently needs," Greens leaders said in a statement.
The commission is responsible for drawing up legislation that impacts daily on the lives of almost half a billion Europeans, as well as enforcing the rules already in place.
It will have a budget of 138 billion euros in 2010.
Its president -- who like the commissioners is appointed, not elected and whose term ends at the end of October -- has significant leverage to influence legislative priorities.
The question is: how much will the deputies be emboldened by their impending new powers under the Lisbon Treaty, which is likely to enter force next year if Irish voters back it in a second referendum on October 2?
They rejected the treaty -- meant to facilitate decision-making and create new posts including a longer-term president and a sort of foreign minister -- a year ago but opinion polls suggest the Irish will say 'yes' this time.
The assembly's liberal democrats group staked out clear ground ahead of the session.
"The newly elected European parliament's credibility and standing should be upheld and strengthened by the process" of nominating the next commission president, the group said.
"The stronger the European parliament, the more democratic and transparent the whole of the European Union.
Socialist leader Martin Schulz said EU nations had made a mistake by trying to force an early vote on Barroso.
"They wanted to rush this through, and we have prevented that. We will see and hear in September what Mr Barroso has to say and discuss with him. What I have seen over the past weeks does not make me hopeful," he said.
The assembly's agenda is slim ahead of the summer break.
Poland's Jerzy Buzek is to be the parliament's first president from the former communist east after an agreement was reached between the conservatives and the socialists to share the post over the next five years.
The heads of influential parliamentary commissions will also be named, while the Swedish presidency, which took over from the Czech Republic on July 1, will lay out its priorities for the next six months.
Text and Picture Copyright 2009 AFP. All other Copyright 2009 EUbusiness Ltd. All rights reserved. This material is intended solely for personal use. Any other reproduction, publication or redistribution of this material without the written agreement of the copyright owner is strictly forbidden and any breach of copyright will be considered actionable.

Obama works to undo long legacy of damage in Russia

One of President Obama’s goals of his travels to Russia and the G-8 meeting in Italy this week was indirectly to undo damage done long ago by Robert Strange McNamara, whose errors in judgment colored world history for more than half of the 20th Century.
Obama met with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev and Prime Minister Vladmir Putin; the two governments announced they would work toward cutting back nuclear stockpiles. At the G-8 meeting, Obama went further — calling for a major non-proliferation summit next year in Washington in which as many as 30 countries would participate.
How does this relate to McNamara, who died July 6? As Secretary of Defense in the Kennedy and Johnson years, he earned the dubious distinction of being father of the MIRV — multiple independently targetable reentry vehicles — which revolutionized nuclear brinksmanship and made the world a great deal more dangerous.
McNamara’s role had world-changing results, and well-noted in this Washington Post obituary by Thomas Lippman, published the same day of Obama’s trip. McNamara, late in life recognized his mistakes – and came close to acknowledging them.
McNamara sponsored development of missiles that could carry up to 14 nuclear warheads each, giving the United States the ability to strike more Soviet targets without adding missiles and the capability of launching more warheads than the Soviets could fend off. This, McNamara later acknowledged, was substantially responsible for the nuclear arms race.
“I have no question,” he said in a 1982 interview, “but that the Soviets thought we were trying to achieve a first-strike capability. We were not. We did not have it. We could not attain it. We didn’t have any thought of attaining it. But they probably thought we did.” Their response, he said, provoked a counter-response by the United States, and the cycle became self-perpetuating.
This new president wants to undo that self-perpetuating cycle, although he faces suspicion from some quarters, in part a result of a long-lasting hangover from eight years of the Bush presidency.
Obama calls his presidency a “reset.” After his meeting with Medevedev, Obama said, “The President and I agreed that the relationship between Russia and the United States has suffered from a sense of drift.”
“We resolved to reset U.S.-Russian relations so that we can cooperate more effectively in areas of common interest,” he added.
Obama did get some good reviews for his incipient effort. The British newspaper The Independent said:
The U.S.-led initiative could pave the way for the world to warn Iran and North Korea that they would be treated as “pariah states” unless they stop developing nuclear weapons. The burden of proof would be on countries that are not yet members of the nuclear club to show they had not breached the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, raising the prospect of attempts to send weapons inspectors in if they refused to comply.
This all has to do with international cooperation and a pragmatic approach, breaking with years of arrogance and an unwillingness to negotiate. The goal is to defuse the drive to war: If you’re talking, you’re not fighting.
War was what McNamara was about. As early as World War II, he was close by when Gen. Curtis LeMay ordered the firebombing of Tokyo — as he famously said, “He, and I’d say I, were behaving as war criminals.” Late in life, he also saw his own errors in Vietnam and beyond. During the 1962 Cuban Missile crisis, we came closer than ever to what became known as MAD — mutually assured destruction.
McNamara was on the front line, facing down the Soviet Union. Again, quoting the Washington Post obit:
McNamara wrote in a Newsweek essay about the crisis that “as I left President Kennedy’s office to return to the Pentagon, I thought I might never live to see another Saturday night” — so great was the threat of nuclear war.
- Peter Eisner

Another roadblock for the EU’s treaty, a German court

The EU’s drive to get any sort of a constitution, defeated in France and the Netherlands when it was rejected by voters in 2005, and kicked back in its new form last year in Ireland, has run into a new obstacle after Germany’s top court ruled that the Lisbon Treaty is compatible with German law, but said parliament’s role must be strengthened before it can formally be ratified. German opponents of the treaty, which is designed to streamline the running of the European Union, challenged it in the constitutional court, arguing that the document undermined German sovereignty. Both houses of the German parliament have endorsed the treaty, which was signed by EU leaders in 2007. But President Horst Koehler withheld his signature pending the decision by the top court. “The Basic Law says ‘yes’ to the Lisbon Treaty, but demands a strengthening of parliamentary responsibilities at the national level,” said the court’s Vice President, Andreas Vosskuhle. Only when this happened could ratification be completed, Vosskuhle said in reading out the 150-page judgment. “The court is optimistic the final hurdle before ratification will be cleared quickly,” he added. In response to the court decision, the German lower house, or Bundestag, agreed to meet in August to draft a law giving parliament more powers in matters related to EU affairs. A second reading of the bill is scheduled for September 8, less than three weeks before the nation goes to the polls on September 27. Chancellor Angela Merkel said she was optimistic the ratification process would be completed before the general election. The legal challenge to the treaty was mounted by more than 50 federal legislators, among them Peter Gauweiler, a maverick deputy in the Christian Social Union (CSU), the Bavarian sister party of Merkel’s Christian Democrats. The Left Party also sought an injunction against the treaty, claiming it breached parliamentary rights. Outright rejection of the treaty by the German court would have sounded a death knell for the future of the 27 EU states’ reform process. In addition to Germany, three other countries - Poland, the Czech Republic and Ireland - have still to approve the treaty before it can come into force at the start of 2010. The biggest hurdle is likely to be a second public referendum on the treaty in Ireland, after voters there rejected it in June 2008. The Lisbon Treaty replaced the earlier proposed EU constitution, which was vetoed by French and Dutch voters in referendums in 2005. The treaty would, among other reforms, create a post of president of the European Union, and a permanent high representative for foreign affairs, and bring in more qualified majority voting. EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, welcomed the German court ruling, but couldn’t explain why.“I am confident that, with this judgment, the court has cleared the way for a swift conclusion of the German ratification,” he said in a statement released in Brussels. “I am confident that we can complete the process of ratification of the Treaty of Lisbon in all countries by the autumn,” he added. Swedish Foreign Minister Carl Bildt, whose country took over the EU presidency on July 1, told journalists in Sweden that the court decision “is not a big sensation.” He said it would not influence the presidency timetable and that it was “not necessarily a bad thing” to strengthen the role of parliament. In its ruling, the court noted the German parliament had “not been accorded sufficient rights of participation in European lawmaking procedures and treaty amendment procedures.” It said the process of European unity should “not be allowed to undermine the ruling democratic order in Germany.” Members of the EU should have sufficient scope for political decision making in relation to economic, cultural and social living conditions, it said. In particular, this applied to criminal law, police issues, the military, tax matters, social expenditure and family law, the judges wrote in their ruling. But the treaty, which beefs up governing structures in the 27-nation European Union from next year, still faces hold-ups in four nations with only half a year left to go until it is targeted to take effect. Besides the new German problem, Ireland is expected to hold a fresh referendum in early October. Irish voters rejected the Lisbon Treaty in June 2008 by a majority of 53.4 percent, but polls suggest that EU assurances of no interference in key Irish policies will sway voters to vote yes this time. Ratification by the Czech Republic is being held up by President Vaclav Klaus. The Eurosceptic president has said he would not reconsider unless all the other nations have ratified. He described the recent verdict by Germany’s top court that the stalled EU Lisbon treaty was compatible with the country’s constitution as both “toothless and predictable.” Klaus, probably the most Eurosceptic head of state within the EU, slammed that verdict in a first-person editorial piece. “I do not believe that it is possible to annul the known defects of the Lisbon Treaty by an accompanying law,” Klaus wrote in the Mlada Fronta Dnes daily. “That would have been too simple,” the op-ed continued. “The vast shift of competences and decision-making mechanisms in the EU cannot be changed by this law.” The Lisbon Treaty has been stalled since Irish voters rejected it in a June 2008 referendum. The EU hopes that a new Irish vote in October would bring the pact back to life. All 27 members must ratify it before it comes to force, but only Ireland has put it to a plebiscite. Klaus, whose signature is required to complete the Czech ratification, called the verdict “a result known in advance.” He also wrote that the judges based their decision on “the dominant paradigm of beneficial influence of deeper European integration.” Klaus, who rejects the treaty as a threat to national sovereignty and an inconvenient deal for small EU countries, is dragging out its ratification in the Czech Republic. The Czech bicameral parliament finished voting on the accord in May. But Klaus said that he would make up his mind on whether to ink the pact only after all other EU members complete ratification. In Poland, another Eurosceptic, President Lech Kaczynski, has held off putting his signature on ratifying legislation. He says he is waiting to see whether the Irish vote in favour of the Lisbon Treaty in their referendum. While January 1, 2010 is not legally prescribed as a deadline, it is politically important as a target to stop the process unraveling. The majority of national parliaments have approved the treaty without holding any referendums. After years of wrangling, the European Union has been hoping it can end this year in a more upbeat mood. The plan so far has been to hold a summit in late October celebrating the Irish yes to the treaty.

second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty

The Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen has set October 2 as the date for the country's second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, reports RTE.

Irish voters rejected the Treaty in the first referendum last June, 53.4% to 46.6%.

RTE reports that the first election was marked by debates over issues which were not included in the Treaty text.

The Irish Independent reports that Mr Cowen said that legal guarantees had been given for Ireland on issues which concerned voters ahead of the first referendum, such as abortion, military neutrality, taxation, and the retention of a European Commissioner per EU member.

According to the Irish Times, the Irish Minister for Foreign Affairs today published a guide to the treaty and said it was in the interests of both Ireland and Europe to vote 'yes'.

Critics of the government's decision to hold a second referendum on the Treaty have questioned the legality of the move.

Roger Cole of the Peace and Neutrality Alliance told the Irish Times, "it must be open to question the constitutionality of forcing the people to vote again on exactly the same treaty since they have already given their final decision."

AP writes that a second refusal by the Irish electorate could doom the Lisbon Treaty, as it requires unanimous ratification by all 27 EU member states.

All of the other 26 EU countries have approved ratification of the treaty.

Fears of property price nosedive

Property prices will nose-dive in NI if the Irish Republic's new toxic assets agency dumps developments on the market, Stormont ministers have warned.
Finance ministers from both sides of the border are to hold emergency talks over fears the north could be swamped with repossessed homes and offices.
The issue was raised at a North-South Ministerial Council meeting in Dublin.
An agency has been set up in Dublin to recoup debt run up by banks on property bought in NI and in the Republic.
The National Assets Management Agency (NAMA) will attempt to recover nationalised bank losses for the Irish government through the selling-off of developments that collapsed during the property crash.
Taoiseach Brian Cowen said there were concerns about the number of Northern Ireland properties which will be taken over by NAMA.
'Implications'
"Obviously some of these assets are located in the Republic, in Northern Ireland and other jurisdictions as well," Mr Cowen said.
"It's important that we fully agreed in our discussions that both finance ministers would meet to consider the implications over the period ahead.
"It's obviously a matter of co-ordinating policy decisions."
Northern Ireland First Minister Peter Robinson said Finance Minster Sammy Wilson would meet with his counterpart in the Republic, Brian Lenihan, in an attempt to stave off any threat to Northern Ireland's house prices.
"There are assets which are being held by NAMA which impact upon Northern Ireland, those disposals need to be handled in a way that don't swamp the property market and impact adversely on property prices in Northern Ireland," he said.
It is estimated that Irish banks hold anything between 60bn and 90bn euros of so-called toxic assets, the money loaned to property developers and others which might never be repaid.
Around 30bn euros worth are thought to be outside the Republic and as many as 15bn to 20bn euros worth of bad property-related debts are thought to be in Northern Ireland.
BBC

Expanding Government Is Destroying Liberty in the European Union

The American republic was connected to Europe at birth. The original 13 British colonies shared the mother country’s classical liberal roots and created a national government of uniquely limited powers. The new nation then drew to it dissenters and entrepreneurs from across Europe, and exported freedom ideals back across the Atlantic.
Now America’s influence may be running the other way — to Europe’s disadvantage. More than a century ago the Civil War subordinated the theretofore sovereign American states to the newly empowered national government. Today a transcontinental elite centered in Brussels is attempting to achieve a similar end in Europe, though through stealth rather than war.
The European Union began small. The horrors of World War II encouraged Europeans to integrate Germany into rather than isolate it from the continent, unlike after World War I. The European Coal and Steel Community came first, which was transformed into the European Economic Community (or “Common Market”). The EC became the European Union in 1993.
The original purposes of a continental European organization were simple: increase economic opportunity and political cooperation. Despite the inevitable quirks of any transnational organization, the EU proved to be a boon: it lowered trade barriers, expanded commercial ties, and sublimated national rivalries. The slow, steady development of the EU was one reason war became unthinkable in “Old Europe.”
An important aspect of the organization’s success was its lack of political authority. The EU was more continental association than continental government. The principal national decisions continued to be made by national governments. There were obvious tensions, of course: creating a continental market inevitably meant limiting national regulations. Nevertheless, there was no pretense that Brussels would supplant the essential authority of individual countries.
That has begun to change, however. The European Commission and European Parliament have taken over an increasing number of “competencies,” as they are called, from member states. Micro-management has become the norm: for instance, the British government prosecuted a grocer for violating EU regulations banning imperial measurements. German bakers fear proposed Commission rules limiting the salt content of bread. London is fighting EU proposals to impose stricter restrictions on work hours and regulate Britain’s financial industry
Doug Bandow Campaign For Liberty

Bush then Sarkosy صارت موضه ضرب رؤساء الدول

It is important to show objection against your leader, but sometimes this leader will go ahead with the wrong plan and opposition have no way of stopping him. some people go a bit further!! Please see the video below.



يستاهل هالتعبان وخصوصا بعد استهزائه عالنقاب وقال عنه انه مظهر من مظاهر تخلف المرأه...نييييييييييهههههههههههاههههههاي صارت موضه ضرب رؤساء الدول