політика, бізнес, народ

The Northern Irish party that props up British Prime Minister Theresa May’s minority government is demanding a seat at post-Brexit trade talks as its price for supporting her twice-defeated divorce deal, The Sunday Telegraph newspaper reported.

The Democratic Unionist Party also wants a guarantee that Northern Ireland will be treated no differently from the rest of the United Kingdom, the newspaper said.

“We are determined that Brexit should happen in accordance with the referendum result, but the only way it can happen which is acceptable to us is if the United Kingdom is treated as one,” DUP deputy leader Nigel Dodds told The Sunday Telegraph. “The government is now focused on this key issue, but political statements or pledges are not enough.” 

Earlier, May warned lawmakers that unless they approved her twice-defeated Brexit divorce deal, Britain’s exit from the European Union could face a long delay and could involve taking part in European Parliament elections. 

After 2½ years of tortuous divorce negotiations with the EU, the final outcome is still uncertain with options including a long delay, exiting with May’s deal, a disorderly exit without a deal, or even another referendum. 

An ultimatum

May has issued Brexit supporters a clear ultimatum: Ratify her deal by a European Council summit March 21 or face a delay to Brexit way beyond June 30 that would open up the possibility that the entire divorce could be ultimately thwarted. 

Negotiation of a new deal “would mean a much longer extension — almost certainly requiring the United Kingdom to participate in the European Parliament elections in May,” she told The Sunday Telegraph.

“The idea of the British people going to the polls to elect MEPs three years after voting to leave the EU hardly bears thinking about. There could be no more potent symbol of Parliament’s collective political failure.”

EU leaders will consider pressing Britain to delay Brexit by at least a year to find a way out of the domestic maelstrom, though there is shock and growing impatience at the political chaos in London. 

Her deal, an attempt to keep close relations with the EU while leaving the bloc’s formal structures, was defeated by 230 votes in parliament on Jan. 15 and by 149 votes on March 12. 

But May continues to fight to build support for her plan, which is expected to put before lawmakers for a third time next week, possibly on Tuesday.

To get it through Parliament, the prime minister must win over dozens of Brexit-supporting rebels in her own Conservative Party — and the Democratic Unionist Party. 

The DUP has voted against May’s plan because of concerns about the Northern Ireland backstop, which is an insurance policy aimed at maintaining an open border between the British province of Northern 

Ireland and EU member Ireland.
…

Thousands of supporters of Catalan independence marched through central Madrid on Saturday to protest the trial of 12 separatist leaders who face years in prison for their role in organizing a failed independence bid from Spain in 2017.

Demonstrators, many who made the journey from the northwestern Catalonia region for the protest, waved Catalan flags and carried signs reading “Self-determination is not a crime.”

Protest organizers put the turnout at 120,000 while police gave a figure of 18,000. 

Tensions between Madrid and Barcelona have thawed since the political crisis triggered by Catalonia’s independence declaration in late 2017, but the trial of 12 separatist leaders for their role in the secession bid and events leading up to it has been one of several sticking points to derail negotiations. 

The 12 are on trial in Madrid on charges ranging from rebellion to misuse of funds, which they deny. 

The Catalan crisis is set to play a major role in April 28 elections, with three right-leaning parties — the conservative People’s Party (PP), the center-right Ciudadanos and the relatively new far-right Vox party — calling for Spain to take a tougher position with separatists. 

Polls show the support of Catalan parties may prove decisive if Prime Minister Pedro Sanchez is to form a government after the vote. Most polls indicate Sanchez’s Socialists winning the most seats but falling short of a parliamentary majority. 

Sanchez came to power by winning a confidence motion last year with the support of Catalan separatist parties but was unable to secure their backing for his budget, effectively dooming the project and leading him to call an early election. 
…

Russia on Saturday slammed the “hypocrisy” of new Western sanctions against its officials over their role in a naval confrontation with Ukraine last year, and vowed to respond to the “unfriendly” move.

The United States, Canada and the European Union Friday slapped new sanctions on more than a dozen Russian officials and businesses in response to Moscow’s “continued aggression in Ukraine.”

“The pretext for including our countrymen in the illegitimate sanctions list of the EU astounds with hypocrisy and cynicism,” the Russian foreign ministry said.

In a previous statement late on Friday, it said Russia “will not leave the unfriendly act of the EU without a response” and accused Brussels of siding with Kyiv on the eve of its presidential election due on March 31.

“It cannot be ignored that the decision came not long before the presidential election in Ukraine,” it said.

It also accused Washington and Ottawa of “Russophobia” and said the sanctions will “not lead to the results the U.S. and Canada want”.  

A U.S. Treasury statement Friday said six Russian officials, six defense firms and two energy and construction firms had been targeted, either over the seizure of Ukrainian vessels in the Kerch Straight last November, or for their activities in Russian-annexed Crimea or separatist eastern Ukraine.

The U.S. sanctions freeze all property and interests in property belonging to the designated individuals and entities, and prohibit U.S. persons from transacting with them.

Four of the individuals are border guard or coast guard officials, singled out for their role in a November 25, 2018, naval confrontation, in which Russian ships fired on and seized three Ukrainian vessels in the narrow Kerch Strait the two countries share.

The four were targeted jointly with the EU and Canada according to the State Department.

Twenty-four Ukrainian crew members were detained in the naval incident.

In the statement on Saturday, Russia said its border guards were “bravely fulfilling their duty to defend the state borders of our country” and that the confrontation was the result of a “provocation” by the Ukrainian side.

It said Moscow was acting “within the norms of international law” in arresting the Ukrainians.

Russia has said the sailors will go on trial for violating its maritime borders. They face up to six years in prison for illegally crossing Russian borders, lawyers have said.

 
…

A dissident organization committed to overthrowing North Korean leader Kim Jong Un was behind a raid on the North Korean embassy in Spain last month, The Washington Post reported Friday, quoting people familiar with the planning and execution of the mission.

The newspaper, which did not further identify its sources, identified the group as Cheollima Civil Defense, which also goes by the name Free Joseon. It said the group came to prominence in 2017 after evacuating a nephew of Kim from Macau when potential threats to his life surfaced.

The Post’s sources said the group did not act in coordination with any governments and U.S. intelligence agencies would have been especially reluctant to be involved given the sensitive timing of the mission ahead of a second summit between Kim and U.S. President Donald Trump in Hanoi from Feb. 27-28.

According to Spanish media accounts, broadly confirmed by a Spanish Foreign Ministry source, a group of unidentified men entered North Korea’s embassy in Madrid on Feb. 22, bound and gagged staff, and drove off four hours later with computers.

There has been no claim of responsibility.

The dissident group identified by The Washington Post could not be reached for comment and its purported website has made no mention of any involvement in the raid.

On Feb. 25 the website posted a statement saying the group had “received a request for help from comrades in a certain Western country” and that “it was a highly dangerous situation but (we) responded.” The group said an important announcement would be coming that week, but no details of any operation have been released.

The Madrid embassy is where North Korea’s chief working-level negotiator in talks with the United States, Kim Hyok Chol, was ambassador until 2017.

Intelligence experts said computers and phones reportedly seized in the raid would be eagerly sought by foreign intelligence agencies given the information they might contain on Kim Hyok Chol and others.

Asked about The Washington Post report, the U.S. State Department referred queries to the Spanish authorities. The CIA declined to comment.
…

As British politicians wrestle with Brexit, Britain’s lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community — like others around the world — is grappling with a potential split of its own.

Can the coalition of allies, which traces its roots back to the early days of gay liberation in the 1960s, survive in its current form?

Caught in the crossfire between trans activists and feminists over the nature of what it is to be a woman, calls for a break-up of the longstanding LGBT+ alliance back to its constituent elements are starting to emerge.

At the heart of the increasingly toxic debate is whether trans rights are compatible with those of other women, particularly in terms of access to single-sex spaces, such as rape crisis centers or women’s refuges.

On one side, trans campaigners say that transgender women are women and deserve equal access. On the other, some feminists and lesbians disagree, making the distinction between natal and trans women.

The result has been a progressively poisonous row that threatens to tear the LGBT+ community apart.

Last year, a group called Get the L Out staged a protest against what they saw as “lesbian erasure” — or lesbians being written out of history — at the beginning of London’s annual Pride march.

“The only way to fight lesbian erasure within ‘LGBT+’ groups is to … create an autonomous and strong lesbian community and build alliances with all feminists willing to fight against male domination,” a spokeswoman said in an email.

Yet, while the debate has raged with particular ferocity in Britain, other countries have also seen tempers flare.

In New Zealand, a lesbian group said on Wednesday that it had been banned from Wellington Pride on Saturday for “not being inclusive enough” of trans people.

On Twitter, Charlie Montague, spokeswoman for the Lesbian Rights Alliance Aotearoa, said the group would now organize “a lesbian-only event of our own.”

Wellington Pride has not replied to a request for comment.

And in the United States, lesbian activist Julia Beck was last year voted off the Baltimore city LGBTQ commission after clashes with fellow commissioners over trans issues.

Community must remain together

At an event organized by campaign group LBQWomen in the Victorian Gothic splendor of one of the British parliament’s grand state rooms, Baroness Barker, LGBT spokeswoman for the Liberal Democrat party in the House of Lords, is adamant.

The community must remain together, she told Reuters.

“It matters, because we [LGBT+ people] are all outsiders and [on our own] we can be picked off by the forces that are against us,” Barker said.

However, she added a caveat.

“I stand alongside my gay brothers, as I always have done, but there comes a time when lesbians and bisexual women have to be able to come to the fore,” she said, referring to one of the aims of the LBQWomen event.

But for many, the trans debate is at the heart of the matter.

The tension partly stems from ignorance on the part of the LGB community about the issues faced by trans people, said Michelle Ross, founder of cliniQ, which provides sexual health services to the trans community and others.

“There’s a lack of awareness and there always has been in the LGB community,” she said. “Things have changed for the better … but there is some kickback around not seeing trans people as part of the LGBTQI community.”

National debate

In recent months, the debate has spilled out of social media and onto the letters pages of Britain’s national newspapers, drawing in characters as disparate as Star Trek actor George Takei and former British cabinet minister Lord Mandelson.

In October, a group of high-powered campaigners took aim at Britain’s leading LGBT+ charity, Stonewall, which they saw as stifling debate over the issue.

Last month, chief executive Ruth Hunt said she would step down in August after a tenure marked by debates that she said have “not always been a comfortable conversation” as transgender rights took greater prominence.

“We will only make progress if we stand together,” said Paul Twocock, Stonewall’s executive director of campaigns and strategy.

“We are a diverse community made up of lesbian, gay, bi and trans people, who come from different faiths, who live in different neighborhoods and do different jobs.

“But we are united in our desire to create a world where we can be free to be ourselves.”

The debate has polarized society at large, and pitted former allies within the LGBT+ movement against one another, said singer and actor Mzz Kimberley.

“Unfortunately, some parts of the LGBT+ community are not coming together,” she told Reuters.

“There are many different communities under the LGBT+ umbrella, but you also have [the] radical feminist community who are very against the trans community. You even have parts of the gay community who are against the trans community.

“It’s quite sad as we fought so hard to establish where we are at the moment and there are many who are starting to fight with each other.”

Gay men support trans colleagues

On Thursday, more than 70 prominent gay men, including YouTube star Riyadh Khalaf and Oscar-winning screenwriter Dustin Lance Black, backed an open letter from Britain’s equalities tsar Anthony Watson to rally together and support the trans community.

“One of the things I find flabbergasting is that we wouldn’t enjoy the rights we have today without trans activists,” Watson told Reuters, citing the involvement of campaigners at the start of gay liberation in the late 1960s.

“For gay men to sit silent on the sidelines and say it is not our battle is tremendously arrogant.

“And guess what?” Watson added. “[The bigots] are coming for our rights next.”

Tensions at play

Sport has become the latest frontline.

Tennis star Martina Navratilova and British Olympic medalist swimmer Sharron Davies both spoke out recently in support of more research into what they saw as competitive advantages for trans women.

Others have countered that the testosterone-blocking effects of hormone therapy undergone during transition would negate any advantage.

For many, the debate is reminiscent of how gay men and lesbians were portrayed by the media in the 1970s and ’80s when headlines warned of a “gay plague” at the advent of HIV/AIDS and similar concerns were raised about bathrooms and changing rooms.

“Rights can easily slip backwards,” said Watson.

But the question many are now asking is what is next for the LGBT+ community? Calls for a break-up may remain on the fringes, but concerns for its future are growing.

For the Lib Dems’ Barker, the current tensions are signs that the 50-year-old gay and trans community needs to address concerns from both sides.

“We should start to create spaces in which — safely — the LGBT+ community can have arguments and differences,” she said.

“And we need to do it so we’re not giving ground to those who are doing us down.

“We’re a community that is 50 years old and we are maturing. We should be big enough to do this.”
…

Slovakia could get its first woman president as voters elect a new head of state on Saturday.

The leading contenders are Zuzana Caputova, an environmental activist who is in favor of gay rights and opposes a ban on abortion in this conservative Roman Catholic country, and Maros Sefcovic, an establishment figure who is the European Commission Vice-President.

In all, 13 candidates are vying to become the country’s fifth head of state since Slovakia gained independence in 1993 after Czechoslovakia split in two.

Andrej Kiska, a successful businessman-turned-philanthropist, is not standing for a second five-year term in the largely ceremonial post.

His term in office was marked by clashes with former prime minister Robert Fico, considered a populist leader.

Kiska supported the huge street protests that led to the fall of Fico’s coalition government amid a political crisis triggered by the slayings last year of an investigative reporter and his fiancee. The reporter, Jan Kuciak, was investigating possible widespread government corruption and Italian mob influence.

If no single candidate wins a majority on Saturday, a runoff will be held on March 30 in this central European nation of 5.4 million people.

What’s at stake

The president has the power to pick the prime minister, appoint Constitutional Court judges and veto laws. Parliament can override the veto with a simple majority, however. The government, led by the prime minister, possesses most executive powers.

The favorites 

Zuzana Caputova

Caputova, a 45-year-old lawyer, is a rising star of Slovak politics. She became known for leading a successful fight against a toxic waste dump in her home town of Pezinok near the capital of Bratislava, for which she received an international environmental prize in 2016. She was also part of a campaign in 2017 that led to the annulment of pardons granted by former authoritarian prime minister Vladimir Meciar. She is deputy chairman of “Progressive Slovakia,” a non-parliamentary party that supported the massive street protests after Kuciak’s death.

Maros Sefcovic

A career diplomat, 52-year-old Sefcovic was a member of the Communist Party before the anti-Communist 1989 Velvet Revolution. Sefcovic accepted an offer to stand from Fico’s left-wing Smer-Social Democracy party, a dominant political group in Slovakia in recent years whose reputation has been tarnished by corruption scandals. 

Other notable candidates

Stefan Harabin

A former justice minister and chief judge of the Supreme Court, 61-year-old Harabin was a close ally of Meciar, whose rule in the 1990s was marred by repeated flouting of the law. A populist, Harabin exploits the fear of migration and presents himself as a guardian of traditional conservative values. As a vocal opponent of the sanctions against Russia for its actions against Ukraine, Harabin is a favorite candidate of pro-Russian media.

Marian Kotleba

The 42-year-old heads the neo-Nazi People’s Party Our Slovakia, which has 14 lawmakers in the 150-seat Slovak Parliament. Kotleba and his party speak admiringly of Slovakia’s time as a Nazi puppet state during World War II. Party members use Nazi salutes and consider NATO a terror group. They want Slovakia to leave the military alliance and the European Union.

What’s ahead

Caputova and Sefcovic are predicted by polls to be the two candidates to advance to a runoff. But the last polls allowed were published two weeks before Saturday’s ballot. Analysts say there’s a room for a surprise result, particularly for Harabin who was running third in the polls.

                  
…

The United States, in coordination with the European Union and Canada, Friday slapped new sanctions on more than a dozen officials and businesses in response to Russia’s “continued aggression in Ukraine.”

Six Russian officials, six defense firms and two energy and construction firms were targeted, either over the seizure of Ukrainian vessels in the Kerch Straight, or for their activities in Russian-annexed Crimea or separatist eastern Ukraine, a U.S. Treasury statement said.

“The United States and our transatlantic partners will not allow Russia’s continued aggression against Ukraine to go unchecked,” Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin was quoted as saying.

The U.S. sanctions freeze all property and interests in property belonging to the designated individuals and entities, and prohibit U.S. persons from transacting with them.

Four of the individuals are border guard or coast guard officials, singled out for their role in a November 25, 2018 naval confrontation, in which Russian ships fired on and seized three Ukrainian vessels in the narrow Kerch Strait the two countries share.

The four were targeted jointly with the EU and Canada according to the State Department.

Twenty-four Ukrainian crew members were detained in the naval incident.

“We call upon Russia to immediately return to Ukraine the seized vessels and detained crewmembers, and keep the Kerch Strait and the Sea of Azov open to ships transiting to and from Ukrainian ports,” added State Department spokesman Robert Palladino in a statement.

“We also call on Russia to respect Ukraine’s sovereignty and territorial integrity within its internationally recognized borders, including its territorial waters.”

The United States additionally imposed sanctions on two Ukrainian separatists — Aleksey Naydenko and Vladimir Vysotsky — involved in organizing November elections in the breakaway east, which Washington says were a “sham.”

The six defense firms were targeted over their operations in Russian-annexed Crimea, where the United States says several “misappropriated Ukrainian state assets to provide services to the Russian military.”

Among them are Russian shipbuilding giant Zelenodolsk, the hydroacoustic equipment producer Okeanpribor, a diesel engine supplier to the Russian military, Zvezda, and an electronic parts supplier to the military, Fiolent.
…

Turkey’s unemployment rate has hit a near-10-year high, bringing more bad economic news for President Recep Tayyip Erdogan ahead of critical local elections.

According to figures released Friday, Turkey’s jobless rate surged to 13.5 percent, the highest since 2010. The number of unemployed is a record 4.3 million.

The unemployment figures are just the latest economic bad news with soaring inflation and the country in recession.

Erdogan is leading his AK Party campaign to maintain control of most of Turkey’s cities. However, with a slew of bad economic news, the March 31 polls are now being hotly contested.

With the passing of constitutional reforms, that centralized power in the hands of the presidency in 2017, the control of Turkey’s main cities is one of the few remaining sources of political power and patronage outside Erdogan’s control.

Erdogan is campaigning hard, seeking to draw heavily on his own popularity. In the past, the Turkish president used to make economic prosperity the centerpiece of his campaign strategy. Seventeen years of nearly unbroken growth is widely acknowledged as a critical factor for his political success.

However, Erdogan is largely sidestepping the economy, angrily dismissing what he characterizes as calls for assistance. “Don’t expect anything from us. We gave all that we could. Moreover, don’t provoke this rally,” Erdogan reprimanded an audience demanding jobs in the provincial city of Sivas.

Instead, the Turkish president is looking to highlight other achievements. Tuesday, Erdogan opened a new urban rail link in Istanbul, promising crowds an end to the city’s chronic traffic problems.

“This line will by itself carry the same number of passengers who are transported with 100,000 vehicles,” he declared to cheering supporters.“ Istanbul’s 10 districts will have the opportunity to use this line. It will importantly relieve the Istanbul traffic,” he added.

Istanbul is Erdogan’s home, and his political powerbase, ever since he won the mayorship back in 1994, which was the springboard to him going on to dominate Turkish politics.

‘Stagflation’

Erdogan has never lost an election, a success he uses to silence critics who accuse him of authoritarianism. “Winning the elections constitute the unique sole source of legitimacy for this regime. So therefore it’s very important for the regime, “said political scientist Cengiz Aktar.

“But this (election) is definitely a challenge (to Erdogan)” he added. “Turkey is in stagflation, it’s a recession with inflation and this is why the regime is so nervous.”

Advertisements for Erdogan’s AK Party saturate the airwaves, listing its achievements. With mainstream media in the iron grip of Erdogan’s supporters, watching TV, it is easy to forget that other parties are contesting the polls.

According to official Turkish figures, during the campaign, the state broadcaster TRT, devoted 53 hours to the ruling AKP in contrast to seven hours for other parties. The pro-Kurdish HDP, Turkey’s second main opposition, received only two minutes.

However, according to opinion polls, the economic discontent is the main issue of concern with voters, with unemployment second. The same poll points to the main opposition CHP securing many of Turkey’s cities, including the capital, Ankara. While Istanbul is the economic powerhouse of the country, the AKP lead has been whittled down to within the margin of error.

Istanbul CHP candidate Ekrem Imamoglu, a local Istanbul suburban mayor, was little known. However, his touring food market places across the city focusing on rising discontent over inflation, appears to striking chord among many.

“I don’t understand the prices. One day you come, there is this price and the next day another price,” said an exasperated trader.

“Believe me, I can’t understand how these prices come about,” he added. “The sales are affected. The prices are all shot to pieces. How come it doesn’t affect us. Prices are all in pieces.”

Old loyalties

Small-time traders traditionally are a vital constituent of support of the ruling AKP. However, in the market place, there are still many people who remain loyal to Erdogan.

“I haven’t personally been affected that much (by inflation) but I am of course concerned about the effect of it on other people and this makes me sad. Of course, I want the prices to be lower,” said a woman wearing a religious headscarf. “But the president is working to reduce prices, and, God willing, he will continue to succeed.”

Turkey’s large conservative, religious population is the foundation of Erdogan’s electoral support. Until now they have remained mostly loyal.

Under Erdogan’s rule as prime minister and now president, he introduced many reforms, lifting restrictions under Turkey’s secular constitution, preventing head-scarved women from going to university and working for the state. A dominant, prosperous religious middle class also flourished under his rule.

The AKP, with its deep financial pockets and the resources of the Turkish State at its disposal along with control of mainstream media, still has considerable advantages over its opponents. However analysts point out, Erdogan’s AKP is facing growing anger in the country over rising prices and unemployment.

 
…

Poland’s Catholic Church authorities revealed Thursday they have recorded cases of 382 clergymen who have abused 625 victims under the age of 18 since 1990.

The figure includes 198 priests and friars who abused minors under 15 years old and 184 clergy who abused victims between 15 and 18, according to Wojciech Sadlon, head of the church’s Institute of Statistics.

In both confirmed and unconfirmed cases, there were 345 victims under age 15 and 280 victims between 15 to 18. The crimes occurred from 1990 through June of last year, Sadlon told a news conference. More than 58 percent of the victims were male.

Archbishop Wojciech Polak, the primate of Poland, expressed “pain, shame and the sense of guilt that such situations took place.”

Authorities said in 25 percent of the cases before church courts, the clergymen were defrocked and in 52 percent of the cases they had their duties limited and were banned from working with children. Acquittals amounted to 10 percent of the cases and 13 percent of the cases were discontinued.

Church leaders said the cases call for a change in the way that vocational seminaries educate clergymen.  

The figures were released following a three-day session of Poland’s Episcopate in Warsaw that discussed abuse and ways of protecting children. The news came just weeks after Pope Francis convened church leaders from around the world to the Vatican, where they discussed how to stop sex abuse by clergy. 

Church leaders in predominantly Catholic Poland have previously admitted they knew that some priests had abused minors in Poland but did not reveal how many.

Compensation for victims

A private foundation supporting victims of abuse has given Francis a list of more than 90 court verdicts concerning priests in Poland and over 300 cases of alleged abuse. The “Have No Fear” foundation on Thursday criticized the Episcopate’s revelation, saying it lacked words of apology or any mention about compensation for victims.

Despite the millions in compensation paid out to victims by Catholic authorities in other countries, Polish church leaders argue that the church as an institution has no obligation to compensate victims because the crimes were committed by individual persons.

Last month, a statue of a prominent Solidarity-era priest was torn down at night in the northern city of Gdansk amid allegations that the late Rev. Henryk Jankowski, respected for his pro-democracy activity in the 1980s, abused minors. It was later officially removed from the Rev. Jankowski Square, which was also renamed.

Poland’s Catholic church has the support of the country’s conservative government and enjoys special respect in the nation due to its role in preserving Poland’s national identity during World War II and under decades of communist rule.
…

A Spanish human rights activist quoted survivors Thursday saying that 45 migrants have died trying to cross the Mediterranean Sea to Spain.

Helena Maleno, who runs a Tangiers-based non-governmental organization, said she based her figure on accounts from seven female survivors. They told her a pregnant woman was among the dead.

A Moroccan official said he couldn’t confirm the report. He said he was aware of 21 migrants who were rescued by the Royal Marines after their rubber dinghy floundered.

He said he knew of only one body being recovered Thursday, a day after the boat went adrift as it crossed the Mediterranean.

The official, who had information about the incident, wasn’t authorized to discuss it and asked to remain anonymous. He said the migrants, all sub-Saharans, were in a critical state when pulled from the water north of Nador.
…

Northern Ireland’s Public Prosecution Service has announced there is enough evidence to charge one British soldier with murder for the so-called Bloody Sunday killings in Northern Ireland nearly 50 years ago.

Bloody Sunday is the nickname given to an incident that took place during a civil rights march on Jan. 30, 1972. On that day, 13 people were shot and killed as they fled police or tried to help those who were wounded. A 14th shooting victim died months later.

British authorities announced Thursday that a soldier known only as Soldier F will be prosecuted for the murders of protesters James Wray and William McKinney. Soldier F will also face charges for the attempted murders of Patrick O’Donnell, Joseph Friel, Joe Mahon and Michael Quinn.

The director of the Public Prosecution Service, Stephen Herron, said there was not enough evidence admissible in criminal proceedings to charge the other soldiers with the shootings. But the PPS has announced it will begin considering perjury charges against them.

“I am mindful that it has been a long road for the families to reach this point and today will be another extremely difficult day for them,” Herron said. “As prosecutors, we are required to be wholly objective in our approach.”

John Kelly, a representative for the families of the victims, told reporters and onlookers, “There’s a terrible disappointment at the outcome. … The full cost of Bloody Sunday cannot be measured just in those who died that day.”

After Thursday’s announcement, British Defense Secretary Gavin Williamson promised the government’s full support to Soldier F, including paying his legal costs. He also promised that the government will pass a new package of safeguards to protect members of the armed forces from unfair treatment.

“Our serving and former personnel cannot live in constant fear of prosecution,” he said.

The families of the victims of Bloody Sunday have hoped for years to have those who fired the fatal shots held accountable for the deaths. 

The original investigation in 1972 concluded by clearing the soldiers and British authorities of blame, accepting the explanation that they shot at armed men.

A second investigation in 1998 concluded that the soldiers had given false testimony and that none of the shooting victims were armed or posed a threat to the soldiers. With that, British authorities began a murder investigation.

At the close of the second investigation in 2010, then-Prime Minister David Cameron made a public apology for the shootings, saying the shootings were “unjustified and unjustifiable.”
…

Three days of voting in Britain’s parliament culminates Thursday with lawmakers deciding whether to ask the European Union for a delay in Britain’s exit from the bloc.

The House of Commons overwhelmingly voted against Prime Minister Theresa May’s negotiated terms for Brexit on Tuesday, and it followed that with another vote Wednesday rejecting the possibility of leaving the EU on March 29 with no deal in place.

If Thursday’s extension measure passes, it would need further approval from the other EU members in order to go forward.

EU officials have repeatedly said they would need proper justification to agree to pushing back the deadline. And after Wednesday’s vote they said that while it is one thing for the British government to reject a so-called no-deal exit, at some point they would have to figure out the alternative, a deal they could actually pass.

The EU also prefers any extension be limited, finishing before its own elections in late May. If the process is still ongoing, Britain would take part even though it wants to remove itself from the EU.

May brought what she said was an improved deal to parliament for Tuesday’s vote, one that sought to remove concerns about the border between Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland. Opponents want to make sure Britain is not locked into a long-term customs agreement that subjects the country to EU trade rules.

May hinted Wednesday that she could try for a third time to get lawmakers to approve the deal that negotiators from Britain and the EU worked on for two years.

The Wednesday vote rejecting a no-deal exit does not carry legal weight, only political force, meaning it is still possible that without an extension and without an agreement during the next two weeks, Brexit could proceed with no divorce terms in place.
…

Estonia’s president called for continued unity among democratic allies in the face of Russian aggression on Wednesday and expressed a wish for even greater U.S. involvement in the Baltics.

Kersti Kaljulaid, on her second visit to the United States in less than a year, told an audience at the Brookings Institution that membership in the European Union and NATO have served to defend and enhance her country’s sovereignty.

With only 1.2 million people and located on the Baltic Sea near Russia, the former Soviet republic has been especially concerned about growing Russian assertiveness, particularly since its annexation of the Ukrainian region of Crimea and its military support for two breakaway regions in Georgia.

‘Direct involvement in Baltics’

The United States has responded with military exercises along NATO’s borders with Russia and a troop presence in Poland, actions acknowledged by Kaljulaid. While “America’s contribution to enhanced forward presence in Poland is appreciated, we would love to see more U.S. direct involvement in the Baltics as well,” she said.

Rachel Ellehuus, deputy director and senior fellow with the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), said Estonia and its Baltic neighbors have served as model members of NATO since being admitted to the defense alliance in 2004, but cannot defend themselves without help.

“Due to their small size, they need our and NATO’s help in procuring big-ticket capabilities,” Ellehuus said in an interview.

Quick US response appreciated

The former Pentagon official noted that the United States was the first country to send forces to the Baltics following Russia’s takeover of Crimea.

She said she would like to see “a persistent rotational presence of U.S. forces in the Baltics and possibly funding in the appropriations bill to support regional capability development in areas such as air and maritime surveillance.”

In an age of increasing attention devoted to big-power politics and competition, it is understood that small states like the Baltic countries cannot win a war against a power like Russia, but they can raise the cost of war for their potential adversaries.

“Their strategy is to increase resilience and hold the line until reinforcements, i.e., NATO, regional partners, can come to their aid,” said Ellehuus. She quoted her former boss at the Pentagon, Secretary of Defense James Mattis, saying that “even the bear knows to avoid the porcupine.”

In Ellehuus’s words: The Baltics can take steps “to make themselves as indigestible as possible,” even though they don’t have the capacity to win an all-out war against their giant neighbor to the east.

‘Follow-up plan’

In her speech on Wednesday, Kaljulaid said her country was prepared to “hold the line” against an initial assault but that the “follow-on plan” involving sufficient allied forces was not yet in place.

Her visit to Washington comes at a time when the Pentagon made it clear in the latest national defense budget proposal that it is focused on countering rising capacities from both Russia and China and ensuring that potential adversaries know there is “no path to victory” if they choose to fight the United States.
…

A proposed permanent U.S. military base in Poland, nicknamed “Fort Trump,” is one step closer to becoming a reality. 

Negotiations on establishing the base are “ongoing this very week,” Kathryn Wheelbarger, the acting assistant secretary of defense for international security affairs, told the House Armed Services Committee on Wednesday. 

Wheelbarger’s comments came as John Rood, the undersecretary of defense for policy, met with his Polish counterpart to work out details of what Rood called a “generous offer” from Poland, according to defense officials.  

Warsaw has offered to contribute at least $2 billion to place permanent U.S. forces and assets in Poland, a NATO ally, in an attempt to deter any possible Russian aggression. NATO has expanded its presence near Russia’s borders to reassure its eastern members, a buildup Russia has described as a threat to its security. 

“We’ve come forward with, we think, a very serious, robust offer, and we’re working out some of the technicalities this very week,” Wheelbarger said. “We hope to have a very solid foundation to work from coming out of this meeting today.” 

She added that it would most likely take six months to a year for any base agreement to be finalized. 

Permanent base seen as ‘helpful’

The U.S. military would not need to start budgeting for the base for at least two or three years, according to Army Gen. Curtis “Mike” Scaparrotti, the head of U.S. European Command. 

Asked about making rotational U.S. forces permanent in Poland, Scaparrotti told lawmakers he’s “perfectly content with the large forces that we are rotating,” but a more permanent base would be “helpful.” 

Negotiations on the proposed base with Warsaw come amid reports that the Trump administration is considering a plan in which wealthy nations such as Germany, Japan and South Korea would be required to pay the full cost of U.S. soldiers deployed on their territory, plus 50 percent more for the privilege of American defense. 

Wheelbarger denied that the “cost plus 50” idea was being discussed for European allies, telling lawmakers, “My understanding is that rhetoric came from conversations from the Pacific; it’s not a conversation we’ve had in my portfolio at all.”
…

British lawmakers are set to vote Wednesday on whether Britain should leave the European Union without agreeing on any of the details of its departure.

The so-called “no-deal” Brexit is opposed by Prime Minister Theresa May, but lawmakers have resoundly rejected the agreement her government struck with the EU.

The House of Commons voted 391-242 against the latest version of May’s plan on Tuesday, setting up the Wednesday vote. 

If lawmakers reject a no-deal Brexit as well, a third vote will come Thursday on whether to ask the EU for more time beyond the March 29 deadline to figure out how to conduct the divorce. EU member states would have to approve any extension.

Ahead of Tuesday’s defeat, May implored lawmakers to adopt the deal she negotiated Monday with European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker for “legally binding changes” to ensure that the border between EU member Ireland and Britain’s Northern Ireland would remain open after Brexit.

But the outcome mirrored a January vote on an earlier plan, which May lost even more decisively, by 230 votes.

After losing again, May, the Conservative Party leader, told the House of Commons, “I continue to believe the best and only way” to quit the EU is “in an orderly way.”

​She said the next options “are unenviable choices” — leaving without a deal, or asking for more time to negotiate after already spending months to reach terms of the now-defeated pacts.

Jeremy Corbyn, leader of Britain’s main opposition Labor Party, told the parliamentarians, “The government has now been defeated by an enormous majority. The prime minister has run down the clock, and the clock has run out on her.” He called for a new election.

Before Tuesday’s vote, May told lawmakers, “The danger for those of us who want to deliver, to have faith in the British public and deliver on their vote for Brexit, is that if this vote is not passed tonight, if this deal is not passed, then Brexit could be lost.”

Key opponents to her plan quickly emerged.

Northern Ireland’s Democratic Unionist Party said May had only made “limited” progress in negotiating the new terms, and said its 10 members in parliament would vote against her plan.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel said the EU had made “clear, far-reaching proposals” to address Britain’s concerns about the deal. But she deflected a question about whether she was willing to delay the British exit from the EU if British lawmakers could not agree on a plan.

The original deal, rejected two months ago, called for a backstop agreement that would keep Britain and the EU in a customs union until they agree on a new trade agreement. Opponents in Britain’s parliament said they were concerned about being locked into EU rules instead of being able to gain full control of trade policies.

​May said the new terms agreed to on Monday would ensure the backstop deal is not a permanent part of Britain’s exit from the EU.

The Labor Party rejected the plan, saying it still does not go far enough to allay its concerns.

Juncker warned that Britain is running out of options. 

“It is this deal, or Brexit might not happen at all,” he said.
…

Rome, the heart of Christianity now has its own Mormon temple. The entire leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints for the first time gathered outside of the United States for the dedication of their temple in the eternal city. VOA’s Sabina Castelfranco has more from Rome.
…

Now that British lawmakers overwhelmingly rejected Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit divorce deal for a second time, the country’s planned March 29 departure from the bloc is an open question. 

Lawmakers now have two starkly different choices: no deal or delay. 

A look at what might happen in the days ahead:

Destination no-deal 

The House of Commons voted 391-242 against May’s EU withdrawal agreement Tuesday, snubbing changes she secured from the bloc the night before to allay concerns about the deal’s Irish border provisions. Lawmakers voted down the deal in January by an even bigger margin.

After the tally, May said Parliament would  vote Wednesday on whether to abandon efforts to secure an agreement and to leave the EU as planned in a little more than two weeks without a deal.

A phalanx of pro-Brexit politicians supports that idea. They argue it would free the U.K. from  EU rules and red tape, allowing the country to forge an independent global trade policy.

But economists and businesses fear a so-called “no-deal Brexit” would hammer the economy as tariffs and other trade barriers go up between Britain and the EU, its biggest trading partner.

In the short term, there could be gridlock at British ports and shortages of fresh produce. In the long run, the government says a no-deal scenario would leave the economy 6 percent to 9 percent smaller over 15 years than remaining in the EU.

Last month, Parliament passed a non-binding amendment ruling out a “no-deal” Brexit, and it is unlikely they will support it now. May said lawmakers would be free to follow their consciences rather than party lines when they consider the question Wednesday.

Delay, delay, delay

If lawmakers give leaving the EU without an agreement a thumbs down, they have one choice left: seeking more time. A third vote scheduled for Thursday is on asking the EU to delay Brexit day by up to three months.

This option is likely to prove popular, since politicians on both sides of the Brexit debate fear time is running out to secure an orderly withdrawal by March 29.

Extending the timeframe for Brexit would require approval from all 27 remaining EU member countries. They have an opportunity to grand such a request at a March 21-22 summit in Brussels. But the rest of the EU is reluctant to postpone Brexit beyond the late May elections for the EU’s legislature, the European Parliament.

The EU said Tuesday that Britain needs to provide “a credible justification” for any delay.

Crisis deferred 

Whatever Parliament decides, it will not end Britain’s Brexit crisis. Both lawmakers and the public remain split between backers of a clean break from the EU and those who favor continuing a close relationship through a post-Brexit trade deal or by reversing the June 2016 decision to leave.

May is unwilling to abandon her hard-won Brexit agreement and might try to put it to Parliament a third time, although the latest margin of defeat makes that tricky.

Some lawmakers want her to have Parliament consider different forms of Brexit to see if there is a majority for any course of action.

Some think the only way forward is a snap election that could rearrange the forces in Parliament and break the political deadlock. May has ruled that out, but could come to see it as her only option.

And anti-Brexit campaigners haven’t abandoned efforts to secure a new referendum on whether to remain in the EU. The government opposes the idea, which at the moment also lacks majority support in Parliament.

However, the political calculus could change if the paralysis drags on. The opposition Labour Party has said it would support a second referendum if other options were exhausted.

It all means more twists are coming in the Brexit drama.

“No one really believes this is the last chance saloon,” said Oliver Patel, a research associate at the European Institute at University College London.

 
…

The BBC, Britain’s public broadcaster, is to be investigated over suspected discrimination following complaints that women have been paid less than men, the country’s equality watchdog announced on Tuesday.

The issue made headlines last year when senior broadcaster Carrie Gracie quit her job as BBC China editor in a highly public protest at being paid less than her male counterparts.

This followed an outcry in 2017, when the BBC published a list of its best-paid on-air staff, revealing two-thirds were men, some of whom were paid far more than their female peers.

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC), which is looking at records dating back to January 2016, said the BBC had provided a large amount of information on its pay policies.

“Having reviewed all of the information … we suspect that some women at the organization have not received equal pay for equal work,” the EHRC said in a statement.

The equality regulator, which acknowledged that the BBC had begun making reforms, will examine formal and informal pay grievances raised by staff and look at how they were resolved.

“Paying men and women the same salary for the same job has been a legal requirement for almost 50 years,” EHRC chief executive Rebecca Hilsenrath said in a statement.

The EHRC said it hoped to finish the investigation by the end of 2019.

Lawmaker Damian Collins, chairman of parliament’s media committee, welcomed the inquiry, saying it had been “a very distressing time for many BBC employees”.

BBC Director General Tony Hall said the organization had been through a “tremendous period of reform” and improvements had already been made.

“We try to be the gold standard of what everyone wants from society – openness, respect and equality,” he was quoted as saying on the BBC’s news site.

“We may not always succeed, but I am confident that we are a decent and fair employer.”

The BBC said in January 2018 it would implement “substantial” pay reductions for some men and pay increases for some men and women, following a report by auditors PricewaterhouseCoopers.

Britain enacted legislation outlawing sex discrimination in the 1970s and this was followed by an equality act in 2010.

But Sam Smethers, head of the Fawcett Society, a women’s rights charity which campaigns on equal pay, said pay discrimination was still common.

“We hope this results in lasting change at the BBC and acts as a warning to other employers too,” she said.
…

At the ripe old age of 30 and with half the globe using it, the World Wide Web is facing growing pains with issues like hate speech, privacy concerns and state-sponsored hacking, its creator says, trumpeting a call to make it better for humanity.

Tim Berners-Lee on Tuesday joined a celebration of the Web and reminisced about his invention at CERN, the European Organization for Nuclear Research, starting with a proposal published on March 12, 1989. It opened the way to a technological revolution that has transformed the way people buy goods, share ideas, get information and much more.

It’s also become a place where tech titans scoop up personal data, rival governments spy and seek to scuttle elections, and hate speech and vitriol have thrived — taking the Web far from its roots as a space for progress-oriented minds to collaborate.

As of late 2018, half of the world was online, with the other half often struggling to secure access.

Speaking at a “Web@30” conference at CERN, Berners-Lee acknowledged that a sense among many who are already on the Web has become: “Whoops! The web is not the web we wanted in every respect.”

His World Wide Web Foundation wants to enlist governments, companies, and citizens to take a greater role in shaping the web for good under principles laid out in its “Contract for the Web.”

Under the contract, governments are called upon to make sure everyone can connect to the internet, to keep it available and to respect privacy. Companies are to make the internet affordable, respect privacy and develop technology that will put people — and the “public good” — first. Citizens are to create and to cooperate and respect “civil discourse,” among other things.

“The Contract for the Web is about sitting down in working groups with other people who signed up, and to say, ‘Ok, let’s work out what this really means,’” Berners-Lee said. It was unclear, however, how such rules would be enforced.

Berners-Lee cautioned it was important to strike a balance between oversight and freedom but difficult to agree what it should be.

“Where is the balance between leaving the tech companies to do the right thing and regulating them? Where is the balance between freedom of speech and hate speech?” he said.

The conference, which brought together Internet and tech experts, also gave CERN the chance to showcase its reputation as an open-source incubator of ideas. Berners-Lee worked there in the late 1980s, and had been determined to help bridge a communications and documentation gap among different computer platforms.

As a young English software engineer at CERN, Berners-Lee, who is now 63, came up with the idea for hypertext transfer protocol — the “http” that adorns web addresses — and other building blocks for the web.

The “http” system allowed text and small images to be retrieved through a piece of software — the first browser — which Berners-Lee released in 1990 and is considered the start of the web. In practice, the access to a browser on a home computer made the internet easily accessible to consumers for the first time.

Speaking to reporters on Monday, Berners-Lee recalled how his research was helped his former boss at CERN, Mike Sendall, who wanted a pretext to buy a then-new Next computer by Steve Jobs’ Apple needed for his research.

Berners-Lee said Sendall told him to ”‘pick a random program to develop on it … Why don’t you do that hypertext thing?’”

Berners-Lee has since become a sort of father figure for the internet community, been knighted by Queen Elizabeth II and named as one of the 100 most important people of the 20th century by Time magazine.

While he now wants to get the debate going, other panelists expressed concerns like the increasing concentration of control of the internet by big corporate players, and fretted about a possible splintering of cyberspace among rival countries.

“The challenges come from the same things that make it (the Web) wonderful, and that’s the difficulty,” said conference panelist Zeynep Tufekci, an associate professor at the University of North Carolina’s School of Information and Library Science.

“The openness is wonderful, the connectivity is wonderful, the fact that it was created as a network for academics who are kind of into trusting each other…” she said.

Now with the Web, “there’s an enormous amount of centralization going on, with a few big players becoming gatekeepers. Those few big players have built, basically, surveillance machines,” she said. “It’s based on surveillance profiling us and then targeting us for ads — which wasn’t the original idea at all.”
…

The influential speaker of Chechnya’s parliament has declared a blood feud against a popular exiled blogger in what appears to be another example of intimidation of critics in Chechnya.

Magomed Daudov, a close ally of Chechen leader Ramzan Kadyrov, on Saturday called blogger Tumso Abdurakhmanov “an enemy to me and my brothers” after Abdurakhmanov criticized Kadyrov’s late father, the former Chechen leader, on his YouTube channel.

In a video published last week, Abdurakhmanov called Akhmat Kadyrov, who switched sides in Russia’s separatist wars in Chechnya in the 1990s, “a traitor” of the Chechen people.

Daudov’s response, in Chechen, was translated into Russian and reported on Tuesday by several Russian news outlets.

During a live broadcast on his Instagram which is now unavailable, Daudov said that he is “not going to kill” the blogger but pledged to track him down and retaliate.

“Let’s settle this according to Muslim laws,” the official said. “From now on, when you go to bed, make sure that you lock the door with a key. When you go outside, be vigilant. If you get a kick in the back, know that it’s no accident.”

Speaking from Poland, Abdurakhamnov said on Tuesday that he does not feel safe due to his complicated, ongoing asylum case although he now lives far from Chechnya.

“I take Daudov’s words very seriously,” he told The Associated Press. “He is a person who has the power to follow through on his threats.”

Abdurakhmanov, 32, who fled Chechnya in 2015, is seeking asylum in Poland, from where he continues to criticize Kadyrov and his rule. His YouTube channel, which has over 140,000 subscribers, focuses on human right violations and endemic corruption in this predominantly Muslim region in Russia’s North Caucasus.

With his first asylum application rejected, and his second case hanging in the balance, Abdurakhmanov is now facing deportation from Poland, despite strong opposition from human rights activists who warn he will face torture or death if he returns to Chechnya.

This is not the first time Daudov has publicly threatened the blogger. Last year, he allegedly phoned Abdurakhmanov to try to coax and threaten him to return to the Chechen capital, Grozny. The blogger later released the recordings of his conversation with Daudov.

The speaker of the Chechen parliament has been described as Kadyrov’s right-hand man and has been named as one of the main perpetrators of the 2017 crackdown on gay people in Chechnya. He and other Chechen authorities denied the crackdown ever happened.

International rights groups have accused Kadyrov and his security forces of extrajudicial arrests, torture and killings. Kadyrov has denied these claims. In 2016, Kadyrov warned in a report broadcast on Chechen state television that any Chechen residents who fled abroad would pay dearly for their criticisms of his rule if they return home.

Asked about Daudov’s threat, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov on Tuesday said that there is “no such thing” as blood feuds in Russian law, although it is still widespread in Chechnya, but stopped short of directly criticizing the Chechen official.
…

French President Emmanuel Macron on Tuesday sought to reassert the importance of France in its former colony Djibouti with Paris increasingly fearing China’s muscular role in Africa as it expands economic and military influence across the continent.

Djibouti, strategically located at the southern entrance to the Red Sea on the route to the Suez Canal, hosts France’s largest naval base on the continent and is home to some 1,400 personnel used to train African troops as well as to monitor the Horn of Africa and Yemen.

While it was seen as a vital outpost in the past, French administrations have disregarded it in recent years with Macron only the second French leader to visit the East African country in the last 20 years.

“France considered Djibouti for too long to be a territory that was won,” said a senior French diplomat based in the region. “But now the competition from China is fierce.”

Those comments echoed President Ismail Omar Guelleh’s public criticism in 2015 accusing France – from which it gained independence in 1977 – of abandoning Djibouti and investing very little.

Djibouti also hosts a U.S. military base used as a launch pad for operations in Yemen and Somalia, but in 2013, China opened its largest overseas military base in the country rivaling Paris and Washington directly.

In recent years, Beijing has provided economic aid, developed industrial production in the country and invested massively in high-profile public infrastructure projects, including restoring a French-made railway from 1917 linking Djibouti to Ethiopia’s capital Addis Ababa.

With a population of less than a million, it also handles 95 percent of the goods imported by Ethiopia, its landlocked neighbor with 100 million people.

“Strategically we need to strengthen the French presence threefold: economically, culturally and militarily,” Marielle de Sarnez, the head of France’s parliamentary foreign affairs committee, said after being dispatched by Macron last May. “It’s urgent. Otherwise we will lose ground.”

The unexpected peace accord between Ethiopia and Eritrea in 2018 has also reshuffled the cards for Djibouti.

The lifting of the United Nations Security Council’s arms embargo on Eritrea and other sanctions in November sparked Djibouti’s ire. It accuses Eritrea of occupying part of its territory and holding 13 Djiboutian soldiers.

French officials say they have raised this at the U.N. and see it as a way for Paris to assert its diplomatic influence in the region.

“What the Djiboutian authorities are expecting from us is that we remain active so that Djibouti fully has its place in the recomposition of the region,” a French presidential source said.
…

Eurozone ministers on Monday held back granting Greece debt relief because the government failed to implement reforms promised during the massive bailout that ended last year, officials said.

Greece exited its third and final international bailout in August, a turning point in its progress out of the catastrophe that engulfed the country during the financial crisis.

The Greek government has still failed to complete housing insolvency rules that have raised fears in Greece for families threatened with foreclosure on their homes.

European officials, however, played down the delay, not wanting to rekindle memories of the eurozone debt crisis that nearly destroyed Europe’s single currency.

“It’s too early to decide formally on the disbursement today,” said EU Economics Affairs Commissioner Pierre Moscovici ahead of a Eurogroup meeting of eurozone finance ministers.

“The signal given to the markets is decisive, the message of today’s Eurogroup will be and must be positive,” he added.

The debt relief measures are mainly profits made by the European Central Bank (ECB) and other EU central banks on Greek government bonds during the bailout period.

Greece could receive just short of one billion euros from its eurozone partners in the debt relief scheme.

The delay comes days after Greece issued a 10-year bond, the country’s first since its 2010 debt crisis.

The bond was hailed as a major milestone marking Greece’s return to normalcy after almost a decade of being avoided by the markets.

The country hopes to raise a total of around nine billion euros in the markets this year to boost investor confidence in the Greek economy.

Growth is expected to reach 2.4 percent in 2019 after an estimated 2.1 percent in 2018, according to the latest International Monetary Fund (IMF) projections.
…

Democrats and Republicans are inviting NATO Secretary-General Jens Stoltenberg to address a joint meeting of Congress next month around the 70th anniversary of the trans-Atlantic alliance.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, with agreement from Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell and other members of Congress, is expected to extend the invitation, the leaders’ offices said. The address is expected to be one of several events in the U.S. capital celebrating the treaty’s signing in 1949, congressional officials said.

The bipartisan show of support for NATO comes after President Donald Trump has criticized the alliance’s 29-member nations for, in his view, not paying their fair share to protect against threats, such as Russian aggression. He has threatened to pull the U.S. out of the alliance. 

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

Each of NATO’s countries spends money on its own military capabilities in an effort to lessen dependence on the U.S. for defense against threats. Stoltenberg said that some NATO allies will spend an additional $100 billion by the end of 2020. 

The celebration of the alliance’s anniversary is the latest bipartisan defiance of Trump on the issue. McConnell in particular among Republicans has been outspoken about his support for NATO, issuing a memorable rebuke of Trump’s behavior at Russian President Vladimir Putin’s side in Helsinki last summer. 

“We value the NATO treaty,” McConnell declared. “We believe the European Union counties are our friends, and the Russians are not.”

For his part, Trump campaigned on the idea that the U.S. is paying too much to defend European countries and vowed to make them pay their fair share. In his State of the Union address in January and in Hanoi last week, Trump misleadingly suggested that the U.S. has “picked up” $100 billion from NATO since he’s been president. 

“A hundred billion dollars more has come in,” he said in Hanoi.

In reality, Stoltenberg said on Feb. 15 that NATO allies in Europe and Canada had spent an additional $41 billion on their own defense since 2016, and that by the end of 2020 that figure would rise to $100 billion. So, the $100 billion refers to additional military spending over a four-year period, not over the past two years.

In 2014, during the Obama administration, NATO members agreed to move “toward” spending 2 percent of their gross domestic product on their own defense by 2024. Trump’s pressure may have spurred some countries to increase their spending faster than they planned or to become more serious about moving to the 2 percent goal.

The United States is the biggest and most influential NATO member, contributing about 22 percent of the alliance’s budget. 

Member-state contributions were a central point of friction at a NATO summit in Brussels last year. However, in a January interview with Fox News, Stoltenberg said NATO countries heard Trump “loud and clear” and were “stepping up.”

Some analysts have warned diminished U.S. leadership in NATO has already weakened the alliance. Former Ambassador Nicholas Burns said in a recent report NATO is facing its ”most difficult” crisis in seven decades and “the single greatest threat (to NATO) is the absence of strong, principled American presidential leadership for the first time in its history.”

Stoltenberg has said Trump will meet with his counterparts from the military alliance at a summit in London in December.

Stoltenberg said Wednesday that the leaders will “address the security challenges we face now and in the future, and to ensure that NATO continues to adapt in order to keep its population of almost 1 billion people safe.”
…

After months of Brexit deadlock, this is it: decision time. At least for now.

With Britain scheduled to leave the European Union in less than three weeks, U.K. lawmakers are poised to choose the country’s immediate direction from among three starkly different choices: deal, no deal or delay.

A look at what might happen:

Deal deja vu

The House of Commons has a second vote scheduled Tuesday on a deal laying out the terms of Britain’s orderly departure from the EU. Prime Minister Theresa May and EU officials agreed to the agreement in December, but U.K. lawmakers voted 432-202 in January to reject it. To get it approved by March 29, the day set for Brexit, May needs to persuade 116 of them to change their minds — a tough task. 

Opposition to the deal in Parliament centers on a section that is designed to ensure there are no customs checks or border posts between EU member Ireland and the U.K.’s Northern Ireland. Pro-Brexit lawmakers dislike that the border “backstop” keeps the U.K. entwined with EU trade rules. May has been seeking changes to reassure them the situation would be temporary, but the EU refuses to reopen the withdrawal agreement.

Around 100 hard-core Brexit supporters in May’s Conservative Party look set to oppose the deal unless the backstop is altered. To offset them, May has courted the opposition Labour Party with promises of money for urban regeneration.

Oliver Patel, a research associate at the European Institute at University College London, says “it’s highly unlikely the deal will be passed. The big question is, what will the margin be?”

If, against the odds, lawmakers approve the deal, a short delay to Brexit may be needed so Parliament can translate the agreement’s terms into British law. But the U.K. would be on course to leave the EU in the next few months, with a long transition period built in to help people and businesses get used to the new relationship.

May will have delivered on her promise of an orderly Brexit — and snatched an astonishing political victory from the jaws of widely predicted defeat.

Destination no-deal

If the deal is rejected, lawmakers expect to vote Wednesday on whether to abandon efforts to secure an agreement and leave the EU as planned on March 29 without a deal.

That idea is backed by a phalanx of pro-Brexit politicians, who say it would cut Britain free of EU rules and red tape, allowing the country to forge an independent global trade policy.

But economists and businesses fear a so-called “no-deal Brexit” would hammer the economy as tariffs and other trade barriers go up between Britain and the EU, its biggest trading partner. 

In the short term, there could be gridlock at British ports and shortages of fresh produce. In the long run, the government says a no-deal scenario would leave the economy 6 percent to 9 percent smaller over 15 years than remaining in the EU.

Last month, Parliament passed a non-binding amendment ruling out a “no-deal” Brexit, so lawmakers are unlikely to go with it now.

Delay, delay, delay

If lawmakers reject leaving the EU without an agreement, they have one choice left: seek more time. A vote scheduled for Thursday would decide whether to ask the EU to delay Britain’s departure by up to three months.

This is likely to pass, since politicians on both sides of the debate fear time is running out to secure an orderly Brexit by March 29.

An extension requires approval from all 27 remaining EU member countries. They will probably agree, possibly at a March 21-22 summit in Brussels. But they are reluctant to grant a delay that stretches past elections for the EU’s legislature, the European Parliament, in late May.

Crisis deferred

Whatever the U.K. Parliament decides, this week will not bring an end to Britain’s Brexit crisis. Both lawmakers and the public remain split between backers of a clean break from the EU and those who favor continuing a close relationship — either through a post-Brexit trade deal or by reversing the decision to leave.

May is unwilling to abandon her hard-won Brexit agreement and might try to put it to Parliament a third time, especially if she loses by a small margin on Tuesday. But some lawmakers want her to have Parliament consider different forms of Brexit to see if there is a majority for any course of action.

Maddy Thimont-Jack, a researcher at the Institute for Government think tank, said this week’s votes could force the famously stubborn May to compromise.

“If she loses the vote by quite a significant margin again, it really suggests that what she has done is just not going to fly,” Thimont-Jack said. “In which case she will be under a lot of pressure to follow what Parliament wants.”

Some think the only way forward is a snap election that could rearrange the forces in Parliament and break the political deadlock. May has ruled that out, but could come to see it as her only option.

And anti-Brexit campaigners haven’t abandoned efforts to secure a new referendum on whether to remain in the EU. The government opposes the idea, which at the moment also lacks majority support in Parliament. 

But that could change if the political paralysis drags on. The Labour Party has said it would support a second referendum if other options were exhausted.

It all means more twists are coming in the Brexit drama.

“No one really believes this is the last chance saloon,” Patel said. 
…

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan on Sunday accused International Women’s Day protesters of being led by political rivals and of “disrespect” during the Islamic call to prayer, after Friday’s march was broken up by police firing tear gas.         

Thousands of people took to the streets of Istanbul on Friday in defiance of a ban by authorities, crowding the famous Istiklal avenue, before a police crackdown brought the demonstration to a chaotic end.

In his comments on Sunday, Erdogan referenced an unverified viral video showing women and men continuing to chant during the call to prayer.

“A group which came together in Taksim led by the (main opposition Republican People’s Party) CHP and (pro-Kurdish Peoples’ Democratic Party) HDP supposedly for women’s day behaved rudely with whistling and chanting during the call to prayer,” Erdogan said.

The avenue is close to Taksim square, a traditional rallying point.

The president has been holding daily rallies across the country and often slamming the opposition ahead of local elections on March 31. He has accused the CHP of being in an alliance with the HDP, which Erdogan says is a political front for Kurdish insurgents.

The “March 8 Feminist Night march” group issued a statement on Sunday decrying the attempt to use Friday’s rally as “election material” in the press and on social media.

“Police violence against tens of thousands of women taking part/trying to take part in the night march cannot be covered up with polarising language… fake news and hate,” the group said, without making any direct reference to Erdogan.

In his statement the Turkish leader also played a short clip of the video as well as footage of an opposition rally from 2011 and said that participants did not carry the Turkish flag.

“(The opposition is) attacking our liberty and our future with this disrespect to our flag and our call to prayer,” he said during a rally in the southern city of Adana.

Although polls suggest Erdogan’s ruling Justice and Development Party (AKP) remains dominant, the opposition may make larger gains as the economic slowdown and the weaker Turkish lira impacts households.

Erdogan often says that his Islamic-rooted party has given greater freedom to Muslims in Turkey where until a few years ago, women were banned from wearing the Islamic headscarf, known as the hijab, in state institutions and universities.

But he has been accused by critics of eroding the secular pillars of modern Turkey.

The call to prayer has been at the centre of controversy in the Turkish republic since its foundation in 1923.

From 1932 to 1950, the call to prayer was banned in Arabic in Turkey.

Most recently in 2018, there was a row after CHP MP Ozturk Yilmaz called for it to be in Turkish rather than Arabic.
…

Europe’s largest Mormon temple will be dedicated over three days starting Sunday. Russell Nelson, president of the world’s 16 million Mormons, will be in Rome for the dedication ceremonies. No expense has been spared on Italy’s first temple, a magnificence, Mormons say, that is justified by faith.

The entire leadership of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, widely known as the Mormon Church, has for the first time gathered outside of the United States for a very special occasion, the dedication of its temple in the eternal city. For the more than 25,000 Italian Mormons and the many others who will travel to Rome, this temple has special significance, as Italy’s representative of the Mormons, Alessandro Dini-Ciacci explains.

“Rome is the center of Christianity. Here’s where the apostles Peter and Paul, the early apostles of the Church of Christ came to preach and bear their testimony. We are followers of Jesus Christ. We love the Savior,” says Dini-Ciacci. “The temple we just built as a statement of our belief in Jesus Christ as the Savior of the world in our belief that life goes on after we die and that families can be together. That is the focus of our temples. The ordinances that bind families together.”

The Mormons have 162 temples in different parts of the world and 40 more have already been announced for a church growing in numbers. No expense was spared for Rome’s towering white “house of the Lord.”

“The temple was built with the finest materials, is very refined, as our offering of love. Our show of love for the Savior and his father. That’s why we choose the best materials possible,” said Dini-Ciacci. “There’s Carrara marbles, stained glass, fine fabrics. It is all a tribute to our heavenly father.”

Elder Dini-Ciacci said it took a decade to build the 3,800 square meter temple.

He would not give a figure for how much the temple cost but simply said “it’s a cost of faith.” One of the 10 commandments of the Mormons, he added, is to keep the law of tithing which allows the church to pay for temples and all operations. He said the money spent on temples is far less than what the Church spends on humanitarian aid.

Members of the Church abide by rules which include chastity outside of marriage.

“We keep the Ten Commandments. We ask people to treat their bodies as temples. So we ask them not to pollute them with drugs or alcoholic beverages. We ask them not to smoke. That is what we believe was revealed to one of our prophets for the benefit of all out members,” said Dini-Ciacci.

The church’s leader, Prophet Russel Nelson, met with Pope Francis on Saturday at the Vatican. It was the first time a head of the Church of Latter Day Saints met with a pope. While the two churches differ in doctrine, they share concerns like human suffering, the importance of religious liberty and of building bridges of friendship.

 
…

After months of Brexit deadlock, this is it: decision time.

With Britain scheduled to leave the European Union in less than three weeks, U.K. lawmakers are poised to choose the country’s direction, at least for now, from among three starkly different choices: deal, no deal or delay.

A look at what might happen:

Deal deja vu

The House of Commons has a second vote scheduled Tuesday on a deal laying out the terms of Britain’s orderly departure from the EU. Prime Minister Theresa May and EU officials agreed to the agreement in December, but U.K. lawmakers voted 432-202 in January to reject it. To get it approved by March 29, the day set for Brexit, May needs to persuade 116 of them to change their minds — a tough task.

Opposition to the deal in Parliament centers on a section that is designed to ensure there are no customs checks or border posts between EU member Ireland and the U.K.’s Northern Ireland. Pro-Brexit lawmakers dislike that the border “backstop” keeps the U.K. entwined with EU trade rules. May has been seeking changes to reassure them the situation would be temporary, but the EU refuses to reopen the withdrawal agreement.

Around 100 hard-core Brexit supporters in May’s Conservative Party look set to oppose the deal unless the backstop is altered. To offset them, May has courted the opposition Labour Party with promises of money for urban regeneration.

Oliver Patel, a research associate at the European Institute at University College London, says “it’s highly unlikely the deal will be passed. The big question is, what will the margin be?”

If, against the odds, lawmakers approve the deal, a short delay to Brexit may be needed so Parliament can translate the agreement’s terms into British law. But the U.K. would be on course to leave the EU in the next few months, with a long transition period built in to help people and businesses get used to the new relationship.

May will have delivered on her promise of an orderly Brexit — and snatched an astonishing political victory from the jaws of widely predicted defeat.

Destination no-deal

If the deal is rejected, lawmakers expect to vote Wednesday on whether to abandon efforts to secure an agreement and leave the EU as planned on March 29 without a deal.

That idea is backed by a phalanx of pro-Brexit politicians, who say it would cut Britain free of EU rules and red tape, allowing the country to forge an independent global trade policy.

But economists and businesses fear a so-called “no-deal Brexit” would hammer the economy as tariffs and other trade barriers go up between Britain and the EU, its biggest trading partner.

In the short term, there could be gridlock at British ports and shortages of fresh produce. In the long run, the government says a no-deal scenario would leave the economy 6 percent to 9 percent smaller over 15 years than remaining in the EU.

Last month, Parliament passed a non-binding amendment ruling out a “no-deal” Brexit, so lawmakers are unlikely to go with it now.

Delay, delay, delay 

If lawmakers reject leaving the EU without an agreement, they have one choice left: seek more time. A vote scheduled for Thursday would decide whether to ask the EU to delay Britain’s departure by up to three months.

This is likely to pass, since politicians on both sides of the debate fear time is running out to secure an orderly Brexit by March 29.

An extension requires approval from all 27 remaining EU member countries. They will probably agree, possibly at a March 21-22 summit in Brussels. But they are reluctant to grant a delay that stretches past elections for the EU’s legislature, the European Parliament, in late May.

Crisis deferred

Whatever the U.K. Parliament decides, this week will not bring an end to Britain’s Brexit crisis. Both lawmakers and the public remain split between backers of a clean break from the EU and those who favor continuing a close relationship — either through a post-Brexit trade deal or by reversing the decision to leave.

May is unwilling to abandon her hard-won Brexit agreement and might try to put it to Parliament a third time, especially if she loses by a small margin on Tuesday. But some lawmakers want her to have Parliament consider different forms of Brexit to see if there is a majority for any course of action.

Maddy Thimont-Jack, a researcher at the Institute for Government think tank, said this week’s votes could force the famously stubborn May to compromise.

“If she loses the vote by quite a significant margin again, it really suggests that what she has done is just not going to fly,” Thimont-Jack said. “In which case she will be under a lot of pressure to follow what Parliament wants.”

Some think the only way forward is a snap election that could rearrange the forces in Parliament and break the political deadlock. May has ruled that out, but could come to see it as her only option.

And anti-Brexit campaigners haven’t abandoned efforts to secure a new referendum on whether to remain in the EU. The government opposes the idea, which at the moment also lacks majority support in Parliament.

But that could change if the political paralysis drags on. The Labour Party has said it would support a second referendum if other options were exhausted.

It all means more twists are coming in the Brexit drama.

“No one really believes this is the last chance saloon,” Patel said.

 
…

It could have been another achievement that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu could boast of in his frantic election campaign. The prime ministers of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic — the Visegrad Group, or V4 — accepted his invitation to hold last month’s summit in Jerusalem, Israel’s controversial capital.

Then came Israel Katz, the acting Minister of Foreign Affairs, and spoiled it all.

“Poles collaborated with the Nazis,” Katz asserted in a TV interview on the eve of the summit. He quoted former Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir as having said that Poles “suckled anti-Semitism from their mothers’ milk.”

That affront the Poles would not bear. They canceled their participation, leaving the others who did come to hold informal and bilateral meetings.

​Cultivating the right

The invitation to meet in Jerusalem was part of Israel’s attempt to cultivate relations with the EU’s eastern and central European members. Those countries, especially the right-wing, nationalist governments of Poland and Hungary, have been critical of the mainstream, Western, liberal EU members.

Netanyahu has attended summit meetings of the Visegrad Group, the three Baltic States and the Craiova Forum that includes Bulgaria, Romania and Serbia.

He complained to the V4 that Israel was being criticized “more than any other place in the world.”

“I unabashedly asked the help of my friends here in making, correcting … a distorted position, a distorted view on Israel in the EU,” he said at a press conference with the leaders of the Baltic states.

​EU objections

Much of the friction is over Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank and construction in East Jerusalem which, the EU maintains, violate international law.

The EU has deterred Israel from evicting Palestinian refugees from a decades-old encampment beside the Jerusalem-Jericho road. It sought to have Israel label goods produced in the settlements and deny them customs benefits available to products made in Israel proper. It wants Israel to pay for, or return, EU-funded materials that Israel destroyed or confiscated from West Bank Palestinians; Israeli scientists in the occupied territories are not eligible for EU research grants; and it supports Israeli NGOs that criticize the government.

​Right-wing coalition

Israel and nationalist governments share perceptions, noted Joanna Dyduch in a paper published by the German Institute for International and Security Affairs. Netanyahu’s coalition is the most right-wing coalition in Israel’s 70 years history.

According to Dyduch, having experienced Soviet domination, the Visegrad four share the view that “they are entities which continually need to be defended.” They focus on power relations while “liberalism, which emphasizes the significance of the individual, human rights and civil liberties, is often consciously portrayed as being inadequate, or even dangerous.”

Security threats

Netanyahu strikes a sensitive chord among European leaders when he addresses threats to their security.

“The biggest common adversary to our common civilization is the force of militant Islam, its radical forces, the terrorists that seek to bring down our planes, bombard our cities, murder our civilians,” he said with Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban at his side. 

Israel can help, he said. Its intelligence saved many lives. It built a border fence that blocks illegal migrants, has an effective airport security system and is tops in cybertechnology.

​Turning point was Turkey

The breakthrough to those countries followed the deterioration of its relations with Turkey. The Israeli air force could no longer train in Turkish skies and needed an alternative, the Foreign Ministry’s former Director General Alon Liel recalled.

It started warming relations with Turkey’s enemies, Greece and Cyprus, then with Bulgaria and Romania. A very strong friendship ensued and produced “excellent results in reducing EU pressure,” Liel said.

Israel then decided to expand ties to other former East Bloc countries that were interested in its security technologies, weapons and intelligence to cope with the influx of Syrian refugees and militant Islam.

Political gains, dangers

Security cooperation intensified and political gains emerged.

Hungary and Poland sided with Israel in U.N. and EU forums. Hungary, the Czech Republic and Romania blocked a proposal that all 28 EU states criticize the United States for moving its embassy to Jerusalem. EU foreign ministers differed on whether to let Netanyahu address one of their breakfast meetings. Lithuania went ahead and invited him.

The EU sanctioned Israeli firms that were conspicuously based in the occupied territories but did not pursue others who were discreet, recalled Avi Primor, a former ambassador to the EU.

Nevertheless, former Israeli ambassadors criticized the close ties with right-wing governments as being short-sighted, on thin ice, and severing an umbilical cord to Western culture. 

It places Israel with allies such as Orban, “who distances himself from democracy and his campaign contains anti-Semitic characteristics,” said Nimrod Goren, head of the Israeli Institute for Regional and Foreign Policy.

Israel’s agreements with the EU must be renewed or updated periodically, and each member state can block it. Israel’s close ties with the United States and memories of the Holocaust moderates them, but if Israel would resist U.S. pressure, “the Europeans will act more decisively,” Primor predicted.
…