Новини

The United Nations has added reggae music to its list of International Cultural Treasures worthy of protection and promotion. Perfume-making in a southern French city and a religious tradition in Mexico are among traditions that have joined the list of UNESCO’S Intangible Cultural Heritage of Humanity. VOA’s Zlatica Hoke has more.
…

A U.S. judge in California has granted preliminary approval of a $48 million settlement for investors who said Volkswagen AG made false and misleading statements about its excess diesel emissions. 

Lawyers for the investors, who include police and other municipal pension funds, had estimated that the maximum they could have recovered was $147 million. But Judge Charles Breyer said the settlement agreed to in August appeared “fair, adequate and reasonable.” 

VW, in a statement, said Friday that the “proposed settlement agreement eliminates the uncertainty and considerable costs of protracted litigation in the United States and is in the best interests of the company.” The ruling was issued late Wednesday. 

Buybacks

In total, Volkswagen has agreed to pay more than $25 billion in the United States for claims from owners, environmental regulators, states and dealers, and has offered to buy back about 500,000 polluting U.S. vehicles. The buybacks will continue through 2019. 

The German automaker admitted in September 2015 to secretly installing software in nearly 500,000 U.S. cars to cheat government exhaust emissions tests. The vehicles had emitted up to 40 times the legally allowable pollutants. 

In 2017, VW also pleaded guilty of fraud, obstruction of justice and falsifying statements in a U.S. court. Under the plea deal, the automaker agreed to sweeping reforms, new audits and oversight by an independent monitor for three years. 

Federal prosecutors in Detroit unsealed criminal charges in May against former VW Chief Executive Officer Martin Winterkorn, who remains in Germany. Two other former VW executives have pleaded guilty in the investigation and are in prison. 

In total, nine people have been charged in the United States. 

Breyer set a date for a fairness hearing to allow further comment on the August settlement for May 10, after which a final ruling will be issued. 
…

British Prime Minister Theresa May accused the opposition Labor Party of betraying the British people by trying to stop Brexit as she went on the offensive Friday in her battle to win approval of the widely criticized divorce agreement she negotiated with the European Union. 

With less than two weeks to go before a vote in the House of Commons, May is trying to win support from lawmakers of all parties who have balked at the deal. She declined to entertain questions about what alternative she might offer if the current agreement is rejected Dec. 11. 

“I’ve got a plan, I’ve got a proposal, I’ve got the deal that I’ve negotiated,” she said ahead of the G-20 summit in Argentina. “We don’t see any alternative coming forward from the Labor Party. … Instead, what I see from Labor is an attempt to frustrate what the government is doing to deliver Brexit for the British people. That is actually a betrayal of the British people.” 

The agreement ratified by EU leaders last weekend came more than two years after a U.K. referendum in which 52 percent of those who cast ballots voted to leave the bloc. Some opponents are calling for a second referendum now that the costs of leaving the EU have become clear, but May says that would violate the trust of the 17.4 million people who voted for Brexit in 2016. 

The prime minister has been highlighting the risks of leaving the EU without a deal in a bid to persuade skeptical lawmakers — including many of her fellow Conservatives — to back the agreement.    

Her efforts suffered a blow Friday when Universities Minister Sam Gyimah quit the government, saying accepting the deal would mean surrendering “our voice, our vote and our veto” in the EU. 

“Britain will end up worse off, transformed from rule makers into rule takers,” Gyimah wrote in the Daily Telegraph. 

Several other ministers have quit the government in the past two weeks, saying they cannot support the agreement. Some, like Gyimah, supported remaining in the bloc in Britain’s 2016 EU referendum, while others back a definitive break with the EU. 

Many members of Parliament on both sides of the Brexit debate oppose the deal — Brexiters because it keeps Britain bound closely to the EU, pro-EU politicians because it erects barriers between the U.K. and the EU, its biggest trading partner. 

Leaving the EU without a deal would end more than 40 years of free trade and disrupt the flow of goods and services between Britain and the EU. The Bank of England warned this week that a no-deal Brexit would plunge Britain into a severe recession. 

May’s comments came after lawmakers proposed an amendment that could stop Brexit if Parliament rejected her agreement. The amendment says Parliament must be able to express its view on how the government should proceed if the prime minister’s plan is defeated.  

Conservative MP Jacob Rees-Mogg, a staunch Brexiter who is one of the most vocal critics of the deal, said Friday that the government was trying to frighten people into accepting it with dire forecasts about the impact of leaving the EU without an agreement.  

Some lawmakers urged May to return to the EU for better terms. But European Council President Donald Tusk, who is also at the G-20 meeting in Buenos Aires, warned that the agreement ratified by the EU last weekend is “the only possible one.” 

“If this deal is rejected in the House of Commons, we are left with an alternative: no deal, or no Brexit it all,” Tusk said. “The European Union is prepared for every scenario.” 

May urged British lawmakers to remember that the country voted for Brexit, and she insisted that the public wanted government to get on with it.  

“This is about what is in the national interest,” she said. “It’s about delivering the vote to leave the EU and doing it in a way that protects people’s jobs and livelihoods and protects our security and our United Kingdom.” 
…

Ukrainian officials on Friday upped the ante in the growing confrontation with Russia, announcing a travel ban for most Russian males and searching the home of an influential cleric of the Russian Orthodox Church.

The long-simmering conflict bubbled over Sunday when Russian border guards rammed into and opened fired on three Ukrainian vessels near the Crimean Peninsula, which Moscow annexed in 2014. The vessels were trying to pass through the Kerch Strait on their way to the Sea of Azov. The Russians then captured the ships and 24 crew members.

The Ukrainian parliament on Monday adopted the president’s motion to impose martial law in the country for 30 days in the wake of the standoff.

There has been growing hostility between Ukraine and Russia since Moscow’s annexation of the Crimean Peninsula from Ukraine in 2014. Russia has also supported separatists in Ukraine’s east with clandestine dispatches of troops and weapons. Fighting there has killed at least 10,000 people since 2014 but eased somewhat after a 2015 truce.

Petro Tsygykal, chief of the Ukrainian Border Guard Service, announced at a security meeting on Friday that all Russian males between 16 and 60 will be barred from traveling to the country while martial law is in place.

President Petro Poroshenko told the meeting that the measures are taken “in order to prevent the Russian Federation from forming private armies” on Ukrainian soil.

The announcement follows Thursday’s decision by U.S. President Donald Trump to scrap the much-anticipated meeting with Russian leader Vladimir Putin. Trump said it isn’t appropriate for him to meet with Putin since Russia hasn’t released the Ukrainian seamen.

Meanwhile, the Ukrainian intelligence agency announced on Friday that they are investigating a senior cleric of the Russian Orthodox Church.

Ihor Guskov, chief of staff of the SBU intelligence agency, told reporters that its officers are searching the home of Father Pavlo, who leads the Pechersk Monastery in Kiev. He said the cleric is suspected of “inciting hatred.”

The Pechersk Monastery, the spiritual center of Ukraine, is under the jurisdiction of the Russian Orthodox Church.

The Ukrainian church, which has been part of the Russian Orthodox Church for centuries, moved close to forming an independent church — fueled by the conflict with Russia Ukraine’s Orthodox communities earlier this year.

There are currently three Orthodox communities in Ukraine, including two breakaway churches. Ukrainian authorities sought to portray the Russian Orthodox clerics in Ukraine as supporting separatists.

Ukraine’s president announced on Thursday that the Constantinople patriarchy has approved a decree granting the Ukrainian Orthodox Church independence from the Russian Orthodox Church, a major boost to the president’s approval ratings.

Both the Russian Orthodox Church and Russian authorities are strongly against the move and have warned Ukraine not to do it, fearing sectarian violence.

Russian government-appointed ombudswoman for Crimea told Russian news agencies that all the seamen have been transported from a detention center in Crimea. The three commanders have been taken to Moscow, she said. It wasn’t immediately clear where the other 21 have been taken.

A Crimea court earlier this week ruled to keep the Ukrainian seamen behind bars for two months pending the investigation.
…

Russia and China are among several countries attempting to “stress-test” the resolve of traditional powers, according to a report from the London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies.

It claims so-called “challenger” nations are persistently testing the tolerance of established powers for different forms of aggression, from proxy wars to cyberattacks.

The researchers cite the seizure this week of three Ukrainian naval vessels by Russian forces in the Azov Sea off Crimea, the territory that was forcibly annexed in 2014. Moscow claims these are Russian waters, in contravention of a 2003 deal between Moscow and Ukraine, which agreed the Azov Sea would be shared.

Ukraine warns its Black Sea ports are being cut off. A bridge built by Russia linking it with Crimea now limits the size of ships able to navigate the Kerch Strait.

Probing for weaknesses

The aim is to change the facts on the ground, said Nicholas Redman, co-author of the institute’s “Strategic Survey” report.

“They’re testing tolerances, probing for weaknesses, getting a measure of the resolve of other states by acts that are generally aggressive but are below the threshold of something that would obviously require a military response,” Redman told VOA.

Iran is also accused of conducting “tolerance warfare” by using its Revolutionary Guard and proxies across the Middle East to destabilize other countries, such as Syria.

Beijing’s activities in the South China Sea are also seen as part of the strategy to test Western resolve in that arena.

“China has used not its navy, but its coast guard or some other at-water capabilities in order to slowly push the envelope in the South China Sea. And obviously, the island-building campaign and the growth of infrastructure around there is about — without directly confronting anyone — nevertheless changing facts on the ground,” Redman said.

How to respond

So how should those on the receiving end of “tolerance warfare” respond? The report’s authors praise Britain’s reaction to the attempted chemical poisoning of a former double agent on British soil earlier this year, which London blamed on the GRU, the intelligence branch of Russia’s armed forces.

“What we saw was a powerful, asymmetric response. Sanctions, a tremendous degree of allied solidarity over diplomatic expulsions, and then an information operation over several months to systematically expose GRU activity,” Redman said.

The report warns a new era of geopolitical competition urgently requires new rules governing international behavior but negotiating such a global framework is fraught with difficulty.
…

The British prime minister says she intends to talk about the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi with Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the G-20 meeting in Argentina.

Theresa May said on the airplane to Buenos Aires that the British government “wants to see a full and transparent investigation in relation to what happened and obviously those responsible being held to account.”

The Guardian, a British newspaper, said Downing Street sources have not officially confirmed a bilateral meeting but have suggested that May and the crown prince would be “engaging.”

Khashoggi, a Saudi national and critic of the crown prince, was killed last month after entering the Saudi Arabian consulate in Istanbul, where he had gone to obtain documents needed for his upcoming wedding.

Saudi Arabia has denied allegations that Salman played a role in Khashoggi’s death, blaming the killing on rogue agents. U.S. President Donald Trump has echoed Riyadh’s denials and said the matter remains an open question.

South Carolina Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham, a frequent defender of Trump has joined other U.S. lawmakers in demanding a briefing by the CIA on Khashoggi’s death and has threatened to withhold votes on urgent legislation if it does not occur.
…

Until the Russian attack Sunday on Ukrainian vessels in the Black Sea, the White House and the Kremlin had at least agreed on one thing, the agenda for Saturday’s scheduled face-to-face between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, their second summit meeting.

Arms control, security issues as well as the Middle East and North Korea were all set to figure prominently, senior U.S. and Russian aides told reporters in the run-up to the meeting.

The Kremlin had earmarked as their key issue, say Russian officials, Trump’s recent decision to abandon a landmark Cold War-era agreement prohibiting the U.S. and Russia from possessing ground-launched short-range nuclear missiles.

For the White House, securing a public commitment from the Russians to enforce United Nations sanctions on North Korea before next month’s planned summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was a key objective, according to U.S. officials.

But the Russian attack on three Ukrainian vessels shifted the dynamics of Saturday’s planned two-hour face-to-face between Trump and Putin on the sidelines of the G-20 summit in Argentina, say analysts, with the U.S. leader being urged to take a tough line that might imperil his overall determination to improve U.S.-Russian relations.

Trump suggested Tuesday he might cancel the meeting after Russian ships opened fire on and seized the Ukrainian ships near Crimea.  Then on Thursday, after telling reporters the meeting will go ahead, he tweeted that he has canceled the meeting “based on the fact that the ships and sailors have not been returned to Ukraine from Russia.”  “I look forward to a meaningful Summit again as soon as this situation is resolved!” he said.

Kremlin officials had earlier said they expected the meeting to be held.

“We don’t have to agree on all issues, which is probably impossible, but we need to talk.  It’s in the interests of not only our two countries, it’s in the interests of the whole World,” Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

Earlier this week John Bolton, the U.S. National Security Adviser, said Trump was planning to discuss security, arms control and regional issues with Putin.  “I think it will be a continuation of their discussion in Helsinki,” he said, referring to the first summit meeting between the two leaders held in Finland in July, when they met for more than two hours with only their translators present.

The Helsinki sit-down prompted widespread criticism of Trump from across the U.S. political spectrum, with Republican and Democrat lawmakers expressing dismay at what they saw as the U.S. leader’s amplifying of Putin denials of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

State Department Spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Washington wanted to see tougher enforcement of sanctions against Russia as a consequence of the Russian action, the first time the Kremlin has staged open aggression against Ukraine since Putin annexed Crimea four years ago and launched a destabilization campaign in Ukraine’s Donbas region.

German chancellor Angela Merkel is expected to address the Kerch incident at the G-20 meeting.

Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko piled pressure Thursday on the G-20 by calling for a tough collective response to Russia, saying he fears Moscow intends broader military action against his country.  European Union hawks have called for more sanctions to be imposed on Russia, although with the bloc already divided over policy towards Russia it is unlikely that will happen swiftly without a strong lead from Washington, say diplomats.

Trump waited more than 24 hours after the maritime clash before he commented on the incident, prompting criticism, once again, that he was going lightly on his Russian counterpart.  But once he did address the clash, his irritation was clear.  “I don’t like that aggression.  I don’t want that aggression at all,” he told the Washington Post.

Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and now an analyst at the Washington-based Brookings Institution told VOA if Trump “does not raise the question of the Russian conflict against Ukraine … the Russian would calculate the President is weak on this issue.  That’s going to be bad for Ukraine, but also bad for American foreign policy.”

 
…

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan and U.S. President Donald Trump are due to meet  on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Buenos Aires, Argentina. Erdogan indicated U.S. support for a Syrian Kurdish militia would top their agenda.

Speaking before leaving for Buenos Aires, Erdogan said the planned talks would pick up on themes raised in Wednesday’s telephone call with Trump. Ongoing tensions between Ukraine and Russia initiated the call.

“They agreed to meet again at G20 to discuss this concern and other important issues in the bilateral relationship,” read the White House readout of the call.

Trump and Erdogan have again started to work together on the many crises in Turkey’s region after months of diplomatic tensions. October’s release by a Turkish court of American pastor Andrew Brunson was the trigger for renewed cooperation and talks.

“There are some very thorny issues that have been postponed rather than resolved,” said analyst Atilla Yesilada of Global Source Partners. “But the release of Brunson has ended a psychological barrier to dialogue.”

At the top of Erdogan’s list of issues to be resolved is Washington’s ongoing support for the YPG Syrian Kurdish militia in its war against the Islamic State.

Turkey considers the YPG terrorists linked to a decades-long insurgency inside Turkey and is pushing for a road map agreement with Washington to end YPG presence in the strategically important Syrian City of Manbij.

Under the deal, American and Turkish forces would replace the militia. “We will discuss the Manbij issue at the [G-20] meeting with U.S. President Trump,” Erdogan said Thursday.

Former senior Turkish diplomat Aydin Selcen, who served widely in the region, sees the Manbij deal as a blueprint for future efforts that would feature “joint Turkish-US patrols to push the YPG away from the border.”

Time is against the Kurds, he said. “We are at a new phase in U.S. Turkish relations with greater cooperation.”

Greater cooperation

A major stumbling block to greater cooperation between the U.S. and Turkey are the deepening Turkish-Iranian ties. Observers point out Washington increasingly sees curtailing Iran’s presence in Syria a priority, a role the YPG could play given it controls a fifth of Syrian territory.

“They [Washington] will ask Turkey to follow in line against Iran and hold the ground.” said Selcen, “Then, this will push Turkey to distance itself from the Astana process, from Iran and Russia altogether.”

The Astana process brought together Ankara, Moscow, and Tehran in efforts to end the Syrian civil war.

Leverage over Turkey

Trump does retain leverage over Erdogan. Turkish State-owned Halkbank is facing potential multi-billion dollars fines for violating U.S. Iranian sanctions.

“The fact that Halkbank is still on the hook with the American judiciary obliges Turkey to be nice to the U.S.,” said Yesilada.

Erdogan is expected to raise Halkbank with Trump at the G20 summit.

Turkey’s controversial purchase of S400 Russian missiles also is likely feature in the talks. The U.S. is calling for an end to the deal, claiming the missiles threaten to compromise NATO weapons systems, in particular, America’s latest fighter the F-35.

Tit-for-tat

A U.S. Congressional report cautions against the delivery of the F 35 to Turkey if the delivery of S400 goes ahead in mid-2019. Such a move could also jeopardize Turkey’s ongoing participation in the manufacture of the fighter.

“The F-35 is important to Erdogan as part of the development of Turkey’s defense industry, which is a priority for the president,” said Yesilada.

Erdogan insists the S-400 purchase will go ahead, although he has suggested readiness to consider buying an American missile system as well.

International relations professor Huseyin Bagci, of Ankara’s Middle East Technical University, says Turkey has “had enough with the economic and political crisis and now wants to repair relations. And Trump appears prepared to do this.”

Trump has received plaudits in Ankara for taking steps against Turkish Islamic cleric Fethullah Gulen, who lives in self-imposed exile in the United States and denies Erdogan’s charges he was behind a 2016 coup attempt.

“Ankara is quite content with the state of a recent investigation by the FBI on Gulen’s approximately 180 charter schools in the U.S.” wrote columnist Cansu Camlibel for Hurriyet Daily News. “The FBI has been investigating tax and visa fraud, as well as money laundering, allegations against schools known for their ties to Gülen.”

The Erdogan-Trump meeting is not expected to result in any breakthroughs on critical issues that continue to plague bilateral ties. But analysts suggest both leaders share an interest in working to defuse tensions.
…

Until the Russian attack Sunday on Ukrainian vessels in the Black Sea, the White House and the Kremlin had at least been agreed on one thing: the agenda for Saturday’s scheduled face-to-face between U.S. President Donald Trump and his Russian counterpart Vladimir Putin, their second summit meeting.

Arms control, security issues as well as the Middle East and North Korea were all set to figure prominently, senior U.S. and Russian aides told reporters in the run-up to the meeting.

Russian officials say the Kremlin had earmarked as their key issue Trump’s recent decision to abandon a landmark Cold War-era agreement prohibiting the U.S. and Russia from possessing ground-launched short-range nuclear missiles.

For the White House, securing a public commitment from the Russians to enforce United Nations sanctions on North Korea before next month’s planned summit between Trump and North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was a key objective, according to U.S. officials.

But analysts say the Russian attack on three Ukrainian vessels risks shifting the dynamics of Saturday’s planned two-hour face-to-face between Trump and Putin on the sidelines of the G20 summit in Argentina, with the U.S. leader being urged to take a tough line that might imperil his overall determination to improve U.S.-Russian relations.

Trump suggested Tuesday he might cancel the meeting after Russian ships opened fire on and seized the Ukrainian ships near Crimea. But on Thursday he indicated the meeting will go ahead.

“I probably will be meeting with President Putin. We haven’t terminated that meeting. I was thinking about it, but we haven’t. I think it’s a very good time to have the meeting,” he told reporters at the White House.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov told reporters Wednesday in Moscow the White House hadn’t indicated to the Kremlin the meeting wouldn’t be held.

“We don’t have to agree on all issues, which is probably impossible, but we need to talk. It’s in the interests of not only our two countries, it’s in the interests of the whole World,” Peskov said.

Asked what would be discussed, he said, “First of all, questions related to bilateral relations, we need to think about how to start talking on matters of bilateral relations, on matters of strategic security and disarmament and on regional conflicts.”

Earlier this week John Bolton, the U.S. National Security Adviser, said Trump would discuss security, arms control and regional issues with Putin.

“I think it will be a continuation of their discussion in Helsinki,” he said, referring to the first summit meeting between the two leaders held in Finland in July, when they met for more than two hours with only their translators present.

The Helsinki sit-down prompted widespread criticism of Trump from across the U.S. political spectrum, with Republican and Democrat lawmakers expressing dismay at what they saw as the U.S. leader’s amplifying of Putin denials of Russian meddling in the 2016 U.S. presidential elections.

Bolton did not confirm whether the naval clash in the Kerch Strait, a shared Russian-Ukrainian waterway linking the Black Sea with the Sea of Azov, would be on the table. But it is hard to see how it won’t be amid Western clamor about what U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has labelled a “dangerous escalation and a violation of international law.”

State Department Spokeswoman Heather Nauert said Washington wanted to see tougher enforcement of sanctions against Russia as a consequence of the Russian action, the first time the Kremlin has staged open aggression against Ukraine since Putin annexed Crimea four years ago and launched a destabilization campaign in Ukraine’s Donbas region.

German chancellor Angela Merkel is expected to address the Kerch incident at the G20 meeting before the Trump-Putin sit-down.

Ukrainian president Petro Poroshenko piled pressure Thursday on the G20 by calling for a tough collective response to Russia, saying he fears Moscow intends broader military action against his country.

European Union hawks have called for more sanctions to be imposed on Russia, although diplomats say with the bloc already divided over policy towards Russia, it is unlikely that will happen swiftly without a strong lead from Washington.

Trump waited more than 24 hours after the maritime clash before he commented on the incident, prompting criticism, once again that he was going lightly on his Russian counterpart. But once he did address the clash, his irritation was clear.

“I don’t like that aggression. I don’t want that aggression at all,” he told the Washington Post.

Steven Pifer, a former U.S. ambassador to Ukraine and now an analyst at the Washington-based Brookings Institution said if Trump “does not raise the question of the Russian conflict against Ukraine … the Russian would calculate the President is weak on this issue.

“That’s going to be bad for Ukraine, but also bad for American foreign policy,” he told VOA.
…

British Prime Minister Theresa May’s bid to win approval for her Brexit deal will have to overcome attempts to block or change it by rival lawmakers on Dec. 11, a proposed format for the debate published on Wednesday showed. 

The government has set out the details of a debate on a motion to approve May’s plan to take the country out of the European Union, allowing for amendments to be discussed that could try to reshape the deal she brought back from Brussels. 

The format of the debate has been keenly awaited to see whether rivals would have a chance to test their alternative exit plans, such as remaining in the EU’s customs union or making the exit conditional upon a second referendum. 

Any such amendments would not be legally binding on the government but would prove politically hard to ignore. 

May already has an arduous task to get the motion approved. It is opposed by a large group of lawmakers from her own party, the Northern Irish party that props up her minority government and by all opposition parties who say they will vote against it. 

Defeat would most likely unleash huge political uncertainty and could roil financial markets. 

According to documents filed at Britain’s Parliament on Wednesday, debates will be held on Dec. 4, 5, 6, 10 and 11, with up to six amendments selected on the final day. The opposition Labor Party said on Twitter the debate would conclude at 1900 GMT on Dec. 11. 

The amendments could be put to several votes, meaning that as well as overcoming the huge opposition to her plan, May will have to defeat attempts to add extra conditions to it or to thwart the exit agreement altogether. 

The government has previously voiced concerns that any of these so-called amendments that win support in the House of Commons could prevent the government from ratifying the exit deal because the amended motion would not provide the necessary unequivocal approval required under previously passed legislation.  
…

Kosovo President Hashim Thaci says defining the borders between Kosovo and Serbia is a key step toward easing tensions between the two nations. Border talks come 10 years after Kosovo declared independence from Serbia.

Kosovo has been recognized by more than 110 countries as a sovereign nation, though Serbia refuses to recognize it. Both countries want to join the European Union, but Brussels said disagreements over Kosovo’s sovereignty must be settled first.

“One thing should be clear: Without defining the borders, there cannot be a final, peaceful agreement that would guarantee mutual recognition [between Kosovo and Serbia],” Thaci said in an interview with VOA’s Albanian Service.

He added that teams from Kosovo and Serbia, as well as representatives from the United States, NATO and the European Union, will work together to “clearly define the border between Kosovo and Serbia.”

His comments follow meetings in Washington with National Security Adviser John Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo. Pompeo “encouraged Kosovo to seize this unique window of opportunity to reach a historic comprehensive normalization deal with Serbia.”

Bolton tweeted that “the U.S. stands ready to help both parties achieve this historic goal.”

Thaci did not elaborate on what has changed to allow progress after 10 years of tension and apparent stalemate.

​Border change

Neither Bolton’s nor Pompeo’s statements mention border changes, although in August, Bolton was the first senior U.S. official to say that Washington would contemplate the idea if the parties agree to it.

“Our policy, the U.S. policy, is that if the two parties can work it out between themselves and reach agreement, we don’t exclude territorial adjustments. It’s really not for us to say. It’s obviously a difficult issue. If it weren’t, it would have been resolved a long time ago. But we would not stand in the way, and I don’t think anybody in Europe would stand in the way if the two parties to the dispute reached a mutual and satisfactory settlement?” he said back then.

Bolton’s comments came after Thaci and his Serbian counterpart, Aleksandar Vucic, floated the idea that could see Serbia getting parts of northern Kosovo with a mostly Serb population, and Kosovo getting parts of Serbia’s Presevo Valley, inhabited mostly by ethnic Albanians.

But neither leader explicitly addressed where the border would be redrawn and have not — at least publicly — put forth a detailed plan. The idea has sparked fierce opposition within their countries.

Thaci said Wednesday that there cannot be mutual recognition without defining borders.

“Everything will have to go through Kosovo’s parliament, whether it is approved or not. Or the other alternative is a referendum. But it is easy to be a skeptic. It is more difficult to take responsibility and do the work. That is why, invite everyone to act together, take responsibility, discuss. We can all agree to it, or we don’t. But if we don’t, we all together pay a price,” Thaci told VOA.

Vucic has rarely spoken about redrawing borders but recently complained that the idea seems to have little support in Serbia.

Western experts have warned that changing borders in the Balkans could destabilize the region.

​Precarious relationship

Flare-ups are common between the two countries. A tariff scuffle is the latest example.

A week ago, Kosovo’s government imposed a tariff of 100 percent on imports of Serbian goods. It was retaliation for Belgrade’s efforts to block Kosovo’s membership in international organizations.

Tariffs were imposed a day after Kosovo failed to become a member of Interpol, widely seen as a result of Serbia’s strong lobbying effort to prevent it.

After meeting Thaci on Monday, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo urged Kosovo to “rescind the tariffs placed on imports from Serbia and Bosnia and Herzegovina, and to work with Serbia to avoid provocations and de-escalate tensions.”

Washington seems to be pushing the two countries to normalize their relations. Efforts to reach that goal will test both nations’ leaders and show how high a price Kosovo and Serbia are willing to pay to trade their troubled past for a more prosperous European future.
…

The owners of a vast majority of Hungary’s pro-government media outlets said Wednesday that they were donating their companies to a foundation, creating a huge right-wing media conglomerate. 

The Central European Press and Media Foundation’s assets will include cable news channels, internet news portals, tabloid and sports newspapers, all of Hungary’s county newspapers, several radio stations and numerous magazines, among others. Among the brands to be under its control are Hir TV, Echo TV, Origo.hu, Nemzeti Sport, Bors, Magyar Idok and Figyelo. 

Most of the publications donated to the foundation were acquired or founded by allies of Prime Minister Viktor Orban in the past few years. Some of them turned from relatively independent outlets into unabashed supporters of the government, with copious state and government advertising. Since Orban’s return to power in 2010, international studies consider media freedoms to have steadily declined in Hungary. 

Agnes Urban, a media analyst at Budapest’s Mertek Media Monitor, said that after the “unprecedented” move “it makes little sense to speak about freedom of the press in Hungary” because of the power the conglomerate will have. 

“From now on, there will be total control over the right-wing media close to the government,” Urban said. “These companies were competing with each other for state advertising … but now the system will be much more centralized and it will be much cheaper to operate. 

More difficulty in operating

“The few remaining independent media companies will also find it much, much harder to operate, since they will be up against a single, huge competitor,” Urban concluded. 

Attila Toth-Szenesi, editor-in-chief of index.hu, which has seen its access to public information and state officials drastically reduced in recent years by the Orban government, said the consolidation of the right-wing media may help advertisers see more clearly where each media outlet belongs. 

At the same time, he said, it would simplify having the same centrally edited content in all the publications controlled by the foundation. 

“We already saw this happen a couple of years when Lorinc Meszaros took over most of the county newspapers,” Toth-Szenesi said. Meszaros, an Orban friend and former gas fitter who is now considered one of Hungary’s richest people, was among those who donated their media portfolio. 

The foundation, or CEMPF, said that one of its goals is to “help the survival of the Hungarian written press culture.” 

“In our conviction, this simultaneously serves the interest of readers and the representation of civic values,” the foundation said. 

The foundation will be led by Gabor Liszkay, a newspaper publisher known for his loyalty to Orban. 

In surveys on media freedom published annually by Freedom House, a Washington-based think tank, Hungary’s score was 23 in 2010 and 44 this year, with zero the best score and 100 the worst. Since 2012, Freedom House has described Hungary’s media status as “partly free.” 

Donated for free

The 10 companies that joined the foundation donated their media outlets and publications for free, even though their joint estimated value was possibly $100 million (88 million euros) or more. 

“The fact that such valuable firms were practically gifted to the foundation at the same time and in such an obviously coordinated way shows very well how the Orban system works,” said Daniel Pal Renyi, a journalist specializing in media matters at Hungary’s 444.hu news portal. “This demonstrates that the owners did not have real ownership rights, but were carrying out political tasks … and ultimately it’s the political will that gets its way.” 
…

The European Union’s climate chief on Tuesday called on the bloc to aim for net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2050, the most ambitious path in a long-term strategy due to be announced Wednesday.

With President Donald Trump pulling the United States out of international efforts to curb global warming, Miguel Arias Canete said the EU had to lead by example at the next round of United Nations talks on climate change opening Sunday in Katowice, Poland.

The 2050 strategy to be presented by the EU executive on Wednesday sets out eight scenarios for the bloc’s 28 nations to cut emissions in line with the Paris Agreement — two of which chart of a course for the Europe to become climate neutral.

“It’s worth becoming the first major economy to fully decarbonize, to fully reach net-zero emissions,” Europe’s Climate Commissioner Arias Canete told Reuters on Tuesday. “It is absolutely possible. For sure, it will require lots of investment. It will require lots of effort, but it is doable.”

Under a package of climate legislation passed since the 2015 Paris accord from energy efficiency to renewable targets and curbs on transport pollution, the EU is on track to overshoot its pledge to reduce emissions by 40 percent from 1990 levels by 2030.

The bloc currently is set to reduce emissions by 45 percent by 2030 and 60 percent by 2050.

“The message of the commission is: ‘That’s OK, but we need to do more,'” Arias Canete said. “The thing is, do you want to be a front mover, or a follower?”

The U.N. talks are the most important since the Paris Agreement, with delegates from 195 nations set to haggle over the details and produce a “rule book” for the pact, which the United States has announced it will quit.

By publishing its ambitious strategy Wednesday, EU officials hope to pull more weight at what are expected to be tough talks amid division among world powers.

“It will not be an easy COP but the European Union arrives with lots of credibility to these talks and we can show the rest of the world, developed and developing, that we take climate policy very seriously,” Arias Canete said.

“The role of the United States is less relevant and that puts more burden on our shoulders because we have to occupy territory that in the past was occupied by Americans.”

EU divisions

While Trump on Monday rejected projections that global warming will cause severe economic harm, a U.N. report detailing the dangers has spurred ministers from 10 EU nations to call for greenhouse gas emissions to be cut at a faster rate than planned.

Calls for more ambition, however, have divided the EU. Many nations, including economic powerhouse Germany, who are struggling to meet their targets are worried that tougher cuts would threaten industry.

EU national governments have until the end of 2019 to draft their own plans for reducing energy usage to keep in line with the bloc’s goals.

To respond to the U.N. report and achieve net negative emissions, Arias Canete said the bloc’s economies will have to invest more in carbon capture and storage but also encourage consumers to change their habits.
…

Ex-Soviet Georgia votes in a presidential election runoff on Wednesday that pits a candidate backed by the ruling party who favors a policy balancing ties with Moscow and the West against a rival who advocates a stronger pro-Western line.

If the opposition challenger Grigol Vashadze wins, he is likely to use the presidency’s limited powers to push a vocal message of integration with the U.S.-led NATO alliance and the European Union — sensitive issues in a country that fought a war in 2008 with its neighbour Russia.

The ruling party and its candidate in the vote, Salome Zurabishvili, take a more pragmatic line, balancing Georgia’s aspirations to move closer to the West with a desire to avoid antagonising the Kremlin. 

Zurabishvili, a former French career diplomat and Georgia’s foreign minister from 2004-2005 who is supported by the ruling Georgian Dream party, received 38.7 percent of the vote in the first round on Oct. 28.

That was just one percentage point ahead of Vashadze, who was a foreign minister in 2008-2012 in the resolutely pro-Western government that was in power when the conflict with Russia broke out over a Moscow-backed breakaway territory.

Constitutional changes have reduced the authority of the president, and put most levers of power in the hands of the prime minister, a Georgian Dream loyalist.

International observers said that the first round of voting had been competitive, but had been held on “an unlevel playing field” with state resources misused, private media biased, and some phoney candidates taking part.

The first round result was a setback for Georgian Dream and its founder, billionaire banker Bidzina Ivanishvili. He is Georgia’s richest man, and critics say he rules the country from behind the scenes.

Zurabishvili’s supporters say she would bring international stature to the presidency. But her opponents have criticised her for statements that appeared to blame Georgia for war with Russia in 2008 and remarks about minorities that some see as xenophobic.

Zurabishvili cut back her public meetings with voters and media appearances after the first round.

The opposition said there have been attacks on opposition activists during campaigning. One opposition coordinator was stabbed and and a petrol bomb was thrown into the the yard of another activist.

The second round will be under close scrutiny, from opposition and international observers, for any sign the ruling party is using its control of the state machinery to help Zurabishvili win.

The ruling party has denied any link to attacks on opposition activists, and denied attempting to unfairly influence the outcome of the vote.
…