Mediaboss Marketing

And it wasnt just the mishandling of the migrant crisis, fuelled by EU member states destabilisation of the Middle East and exacerbated by Angela Merkels decision to throw open Germanys borders to refugees, that forced the EUs hand. The detentions, the deportations and the grubby deals with Third World dictators have been going on for years. In August 2010, Muammar Gaddafi met with the EU to strike a deal aimed at avoiding, in his words, a black Europe. The EU offered Libya 50million over three years, to stop Africans and Arabs crossing the Mediterranean. Everyone knew this was going on. In 2014, Amnesty International criticised the EU for outsourcing migration control to Turkey, Morocco and Libya.

Leavers should take no lectures about immigration, openness and egalitarianism from supporters of this brutal institution. The chaos across Europes borders gives the lie to the neat divide between inward-looking Leavers and open-minded Remainers. If these people were so compassionate, so open to outsiders, how can they stomach whats going on? And isnt it suspicious that a political elite that cares little for liberal values, which across Europe bans hate speech, e-cigs and, er, power vacuum cleaners, has suddenly discovered a passion for freedom? Indeed, for the most controversial and potentially disruptive freedom there is: the freedom to move, work, live and flourish in different parts of the world. Clearly, they never gave a damn about it in the first place.

Given their horrendous track record on migration, what are we to make of the EUs and leading Remainers sudden interest in defending migration against what they see as backward Brexiteers? This is where their behaviour becomes deeply cynical. They are interested in free movement now only insofar as it can be used to dilute democracy. Weve glimpsed that in the wake of the Brexit vote: immigration has become the primary means through which Leavers are deligitimised, their 17.4million-strong vote for greater democracy reduced to a nativist howl. But it runs deeper than that. The dissolving of borders between European nations, enshrined in the EUs four freedoms, and its imposition of non-EU-migrant quotas on member states, look more and more like an expression and institutionalisation of disdain for the ideal and practice of national sovereignty. The attack on borders is really an attack on the democracies, and the democratic citizens, contained within them. Migration, scandalously, is now used as a weapon in that attack.

No one benefits from this. Turning migrants into battering rams against any sense of attachment to sovereign principles, against the right of nations to control their borders, is a recipe for conflict. It pits migration against national democracy. For those of us committed to free movement, this weaponisation of immigration is a tragedy. Its clouded the issue. Immigration is no longer a question of freedom but an instrument of elite control, used to burnish politicians moral credibility, fulfil treaties and batter the native demos. Its taken immigration out of the publics hands and in doing so turned it into a symbol of peoples feelings of disorientation and lack of control. The real divide in Britain, and across Europe, is not between open-hearted liberals and fearful nativists its between democratic citizens and the elitists who loathe them. Its only by embracing democracy that we can demystify free movement, and reclaim it from its phoney defenders.

Tom Slater is deputy editor at spiked. Follow him on Twitter: @Tom_Slater_

For permission to republish spiked articles, please contact Viv Regan.

Visit link:
How the EU uses migration to batter democracy - Spiked

NEWS Center for Politics to host fellows for five weeks by Mairead Crotty | Mar 01 2017 | 13 hours ago

Twenty-three nonprofit, journalist and civic leaders from 11 countries in the Middle East and North Africa arrived in Charlottesville Feb. 18 to participate in the Leaders for Democracy Fellowship. The Universitys Center for Politics Global Perspectives on Democracy Program operates the fellowship in Charlottesville.

The goal of the fellowship sponsored by the Department of States U.S.-Middle East Partnership Initiative is to provide civic leaders with experience and practical skills they can use when they return to their home countries.

For five weeks the fellows participate in workshops and design a civic action plan for Charlottesville that will serve as a model for projects in their own communities. The fellows remain in Charlottesville until March 26, and after they go to Washington, D.C. to participate in internships for eight weeks.

The internships are coordinated by World Learning, a nonprofit organization dedicated to empowering people, communities and institutions around the world. The fellows will be placed in organizations related to their interests.

Maram Suleiman, from Amman, Jordan, works for Oxfam and volunteers with the World Youth Alliance. She said her passion is working for youth and womens rights, and she applied to the program to learn different advocacy strategies.

Im hoping to gain more tools to work with youth and gender, especially mens enrollment in womens rights projects, Suleiman said. Im hoping I will have some new ideas and initiatives that I can work on as a personal level and in my community with youth and the people in my network. Maybe our project will open more doors for grants or sponsors and donors.

The fellows have participated in workshops and seminars, such as a briefing on U.S. politics by Center for Politics Director and Politics Prof. Larry Sabato Tuesday. The fellows also have the opportunity to tour the University and meet with University and Charlottesville advocacy groups.

We also get a chance to meet with very good speakers from Charlottesville, like women in leadership positions, Suleiman said.

While many of the fellows have different interests, Suleiman said she believes the program will provide each fellow with the knowledge and experience to better their communities.

Theres exchange experience, theres many experiences you can have, and it will open the doors for us to learn from each other, to network and to get the chance to gain more expertise from the State Department, World Learning and U.Va, Suleiman said. So I think its a very interesting opportunity for all of us, and it will open many doors.

The fellowship will specifically benefit Suleimans work in Amman, as she applied to learn more about lobbying, advocacy and campaigning. She is interning with Youth Service America in Washington, D.C., where she will learn those specific skills.

My work in Jordan for the rest of the year will be an advocacy campaign on my project, so it will be interesting for me, Suleiman said.

Abdulrahman Elgheriani, a Libyan who recently earned his masters degree in the United Kingdom, applied to the fellowship program to learn more about American politics.

Since I studied in the UK, Im familiar with the UKs administrative model and Westminster model of politics, Elgheriani said. I was excited to learn about the American model of politics and administration and to network.

Elgheriani was recently appointed acting manager of a new government organization in Benghazi, Libya called the Elmresia Free Zone. He hopes to be able to implement what he learns as a fellow when he returns to Benghazi.

I would love to apply as much as possible from what Ive learned, but it would be quite difficult because of the context on the ground, Elgheriani said. However, it would be great if we can establish channels of communication.

Libya was one of seven countries affected by President Donald Trumps executive order signed on Jan. 27. Until the suspension of the executive order was upheld by the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Feb. 9, Elgheriani was unsure he would able to attend the program.

Elgheriani said he was relieved when he learned the executive order was suspended.

I was excited as much as when I applied to the program the first time, Elgheriani said. I knew from the beginning it was going to be a great opportunity to learn, network and sharpen my skills to hopefully better serve my country.

The fellows are part of the 21st exchange group that the Politics Global Perspectives on Democracy Program has hosted at the University.

Read the original here:
Leaders for Democracy Fellows arrive on Grounds - University of Virginia The Cavalier Daily

by Danny Haiphong

Feeling not a bit ridiculous, so-called progressives carry signs depicting the right-wing billionaire Donald Trump under a hammer and sickle flag. TheDemocratic Party and its loyal white liberal base have spearheaded adangerous Neo-McCarthyist campaign that pits anyone who doesn't align with the Democratic Party line a dupe of the Russian government. The truth is, Trump is a (ruling) classmate of Clinton. Its a war within the One Percent.

Donald Trump is a lot of things, but a communist is not one of them. Yet signs sporting the communist symbol of the hammer and sickle have been spotted in protests against Trump across the country. These signscould be seen at the Women's March in Washington D.C. the day after the inauguration as well as the most recent "Not my President" rallies in a number of US cities. White liberals have been the primary messengers of the false connection between Trump and communism. Behind them is the Democratic Party, whose loss in the Presidential elections has intensified only intensified their anti-Russia narrative.

Many left groups and activists have become energized by the election of Donald Trump. Anarchist and socialist formations have taken to the streets in opposition to the Trump Administration. Trump's proposals to build a wall on the US-Mexico border and create an even more Wall Street-friendly regulatory apparatus are indeed affronts to anarchist and socialist principles. But so too should the Democratic Party's claim that Russia meddled in the elections in favor of Donald Trump. TheDemocratic Party and its loyal white liberal base have failed to provide convincing evidence that links Trump to Russia. Instead, these forces have spearheaded adangerous Neo-McCarthyist campaign that pits anyone who doesn't align with the Democratic Party line a dupe of the Russian government.

The neo-McCarthyism of white liberals and their friends in the Democratic Party is completely detached from reality, as most lies are. Those who link Russia to communism ignore the fact that Russia has not been under a socialist, Marxist-oriented planned economy since 1991. It was in the Western-backed destruction of the Soviet Union where the US was caught meddling in the so-called "democratic" elections held in 1996 in favor of Boris Yeltsin. Under Yeltsin's reign, poverty exploded andlife expectancy for men decreased fiveyears all in the name of "shock therapy."

The US and Western-backed destabilization of the Soviet Union allowed global capitalism to spread its misery unfettered from pesky socialism. Russia came under the control of oligarchs concerned only for their own enrichment and that of its billionaire partners in the West. The transition of power to Vladimir Putin in the 21st century led to a number of reforms that curbed the disastrous looting of the nation by the oligarchic bandits. Putin and his allies vowed to build an independent, capitalist Russia that was capable of determining its own affairs free from US and Western domination. Such an orientation placed Putin in direct confrontation with US imperialism's plans for unipolar global hegemony.

It is this context that white liberals and the Democrats work hard to ignore. The Democratic Party's loss to Donald Trump has laid bare US imperialism's existential crisis. Anti-communist, anti-Russia narratives provide a useful distraction from the symptoms of the crisis. These symptoms include a stagnate capitalist infrastructure with nothing to offer but joblessness and poverty, an increasingly repressive state apparatus built on the racial oppression of Black Americans and the surveillance of all Americans, and endless warfare that produces nothing but chaos. Trump took advantage of the vacuum left by these unpopular policies; but to acknowledge this means to acknowledge the bankruptcy of the system.

Furthermore, Trump as an individual is the antithesis of communism. Communismisdefined as the final stageof economicdevelopment. The basis of communism is a classless global society made possibleby economic conditions of abundance made possible by a worker-controlled socialist state. Under communism, the state has "withered away" -- or in other words become gradually irrelevant to the needs of humanity. The state is rooted in the formation of class society where a separate body mediating the conflict between classes is necessary to maintain the power of the oppressing class. Without classes, there is no need for such a formation to exist.

Donald Trump is a member of the capitalist ruling class. Communists worldwide have struggledto overthrow this class for well over a century. Trump accumulated his fortune from the exploitation of labor's surplus value, which is true of any billionaire. His class position alone makes him an enemy of communists. By this logic, Trump should be a friend of the ruling class. However, Trump has come under fire, and not just from Democrats. Leading Republicans such as John McCain and Lindsay Graham and billionaires like the Koch Brothers have all voiced their opposition to Trump.

Ruling class antipathy towards Trump is rooted both in the anti-communism of the past and the crisis of the present. John McCain and Lindsay Graham insist, without proof, that Trump is an agent of Russia. A section of the billionaire capitalist class has other concerns, such as the viability of an Administration that openly targets the extremely profitable undocumented labor force. The capitalists aligned with the Democratic and Republican Party establishments view Trump as a blemish and a stain on the political legitimacy of the system. Trumps very presence in the White House is a reflection of a broader economic crisis of the system.

Trump and his administration must be opposed by the left on every front when it comes to its attacks on working people both here and abroad. The fact is,even if such opposition must intensify, the corporate assault on working people was a staple of prior administrations. Trump's bigotry may not becoded like prior administrations, but it certainly isn't new. What is new is the revival of McCarthyism and anti-communism brought to us bythe so-called "progressive" wing of the US capitalist state.

The arbiters ofneo-McCarthyism have significant institutional power. Ask Michael Flynn, Trump's former National Security Advisor. Flynn was dismissed not too long after US intelligence caught him having a mere discussion with Russia's Ambassador to the US. While Flynn was dangerous in his own right for his position on Iran, his ouster provides no cause for celebration. Flynn's forced removal reveals that in many cases the Neo-McCarthyist faction of the establishment can determine policy without the aid of the executive branch.

The Neo-McCarthyist agenda of the ruling class cannot be defeated merely by forcing Trump into an early exit from the Oval Office. Only the independent organization expressed by the oppressed and working class masses can push back against the forces peddling the false connection between Trump, Russia, and communism. The popular struggle against this false connection will reveal the decrepit state of imperialism and the true character of communism. Communism was embraced by Black revolutionaries such as Assata Shakur, W.E.B. DuBois, and Harry Haywood. In order to follow their example in a manner applicable to the current period, we must refuse to align with the ruling class forces seeking to bury Trump with anti-communist and anti-Russia lies.

See the original post:
Contrary to White Liberal Opinion, Donald Trump is no Communist - Black Agenda Report

Ukraines navy is looking into the possibility of purchasing decommissioned NATO ships in order to add to its fleet, Ukraines Channel 5 reports.

Speaking on air, the navys commander, Ihor Voronchenko, said that to satisfy Ukraines role in occupying a significant portion of the Black Sea coastline, it should be better equipped to police these waters.

Ukraine is a transit state and we are obliged as naval forces to ensure the peaceful sailing of all vessels in the Black Sea, he said. We cannot fulfill the full spectrum of this work with only one minesweeper, Henichesk, that we obtained.

Try Newsweek for only $1.25 per week

Vice Admiral Ihor Voronchenko, commander of the Ukrainian Navy, speaks during an interview with Reuters in Kiev, Ukraine, October 27, 2016. He has just proposed using old NATO ships to boost Ukraine's coastal fleet. Valentyn Ogirenko/Reuters

The navy received the ship in question from the Black Sea Fleeta Crimea-based Soviet-era unit that in modern times existed under much facility-sharing between Ukraine, on whose territory the main port of the unit fell, and Russia. Henichesk was one of the handful of ships Ukraine received in the messy divorce between the two navies after Russias annexation of Crimea in 2014.

Voronchenko said a Ukrainian naval delegation recently returned from a NATO state that he was not authorized to name, where they discussed purchasing older Western ships to fill out Ukraines ranks.

Several options were looked at and we decided that for the resources that we have, we will be able to buy a mine-sweeping set, he said. The same (solution) is being worked on for acquiring ships for the coastal area.

Here is the original post:
Ukraine Looks Into Beefing Up Navy With Old NATO Ships - Newsweek

A EurasiaNet Partner Post from:

To a casual observer, Moldova and Ukraine appear quite similar with their common Soviet histories, heavily corrupt domestic politics, and a frozen conflict on their eastern borders. However, while Ukraine remains entrapped in a war with Russia over eastern Ukraine, Moldova has maintained amicable relations with both Russia and Ukraine, positioning itself as a bridge between East and West. Some have noted that Moldovas status as an interlocutor between East and West has become threatened with the recent election of President Igor Dodon in December 2016. Dodon has consistently promised closer relations with the Kremlin. Yet, while the Moldovan economy is dependent on Russia and the Moldovan public is exposed to a steady stream of Russian propaganda, these factors do not preclude the development of strong Ukrainian-Moldovan relations as long as a pro-EU coalition retains control of Moldovas parliament. Moldova and Ukraineno matter their differences and disputesmust maintain close relations in order to combat Russian incursions and aggression. Main Interests and Obstacles Traditionally, Ukrainian-Moldovan foreign relations have centered on issues such as border demarcation and property disputes leftover from the collapse of the USSR. For Moldova, its main interests towards Ukraine are the development of infrastructure projects, environmental protection of the Dniester River, closer economic cooperation, and maintaining Ukraines territorial integrity. For Ukraine, interests include resolving the conflict in Transnistria, helping Moldova resist Russian propaganda, settling the state border between Ukraine and Moldova, and promoting economic partnerships. Some of the main issues that have blocked deeper Ukrainian-Moldovan relations include the status of the Dniester HES-2 hydroelectric station, a 1990s land agreement near the village of Giurgiulesti, and a planned railway connecting Moldova to Odessa, which would have bypassed the breakaway region of Transnistria. These long-lasting concerns, combined with the implementation of protective quotas and duties on certain Ukrainian and Moldovan goods in 2016 have hindered relations between the two countries. However, a February 2017 negotiation between President Petro Poroshenko of Ukraine and Prime Minister Pavel Filip of Moldova has helped restore cooperation between the two countries. This has led to talks of energy cooperation and restoration of stable electricity supply from Ukraine to Moldova, as well as breakthroughs in discussions of environmental issues concerning the Dniester water basin. Additionally, Moldova decided not to extend restrictive measures to Ukrainian meat and dairy products introduced in 2016. These positive developments in Ukrainian-Moldovan relations are critical at a time when Dodon continues to cozy up to the Kremlin. Russias Role One cannot discuss relations between Ukraine and Moldova without analyzing the countries respective ties to Russia. After the annexation of Crimea in March 2014, observers were concerned that Moldova would follow a similar path as Ukraine due to the similarities between the two countries. However, the pro-EU coalitions within the parliament backed Ukraine and condemned Russias annexation. Former Prime Minister of Moldova Iurie Leanca visited Kyiv after the annexation as a sign of support for the Ukrainian government, while Petro Poroshenko visited Chisinau in November 2014, prior to parliamentary elections, to support the pro-European coalition in Moldova. Attitudes within Moldovan society were split with 29% supporting Russias annexation of Crimea with 44% against. Moreover, the pro-Russian Communist Party of Moldova continued to support Russia and helped to serve as a conduit for the Kremlins narrative of events within the country. Notably, in April 2014, the breakaway region Transnistria held a referendum to join the Russian Federation, leading many to worry that the Kremlin was planning to recreate the Ukraine scenario in Moldova. However, Vladimir Putin did not find it in Russias best interest to formally annex the region, given its de facto control of the territory. Rather, the Kremlin uses existing domestic cleavages within Moldova to shape the countrys politics such as exploiting nostalgia for the Soviet Union and targeting citizens who feel as if theyve not benefited from greater integration with the European Union. While Russias economic leverage over its post-Soviet neighbors is declining, approximately 20% of Moldovan exports still go to Russia. This dependency gives the Kremlin influence over Moldovan politics, which it has used to ban Moldovan wines and implement measures against EU food products when the Moldovan government moves in a pro-European direction. It has not helped that Ukrainian authorities have made it difficult for Moldovan wines to enter the Ukrainian market, further incentivizing closer ties between Moldova and Russia, while breeding resentment amongst local producers. From a domestic standpoint, the major corruption scandal in 2014, where over 1 billion dollars disappeared from Moldovas leading banks, implicated many pro-European politicians and helped strengthen the pro-Russian coalitions in Moldovas government. The pro-Russian opposition expertly utilized the corruption scandal to link the domestic troubles within Moldova to the European Union and the West. Most notably, Former Prime Minister and founder of the pro-EU Liberal Democratic Party of Moldova Vlad Filat was arrested in October 2015, helping pave the way for a pro-Russian president to win the presidential election. Consequences of Moldovas Pro-Russian President With growing distrust towards Europe and the West, the pro-Russian Socialist candidate Igor Dodon managed to win 54 percent in the 2016 presidential election, compared to his pro-European challenger, Maia Sandu, who received just under 45 percent. Since his victory, Dodon has expressed that most Moldovans would support joining the Russia-led Eurasian Union, adding that Moldova has not benefited from European integration, and warned about closer ties with NATO (only 21% of Moldovans expressed support for joining NATO). According to a September 2016 poll by the International Republican Institute (IRI), Russia is consistently seen as a more important economic partner than Ukraine (62% to 27%), and there is an even split between those who want to join the EU (40%) and the Eurasian Customs Union (43%). Perhaps most notably, the percentage of Moldovans who think that Russian troops in Transnistria are not a threat to Moldova has increased from 21% in September 2014 to 39% in September 2016. Moreover, during a January 17 visit to Russia, Dodon noted that he would certainly support a policy that would terminate Moldovas 2014 Association Agreement with the European Union. While he expressed hope that Russian-Ukrainian relations will resume as friendly and brotherly ones, his close relations to the Kremlin do not inspire confidence in those who hope for stronger Ukrainian-Moldovan relations. Future of Ukraine-Moldova Relations Despite these recent developments, it is important not to overemphasize the pro-Russian turn in Moldovas foreign policy. More Moldovans say their country has better relations with the European Union (57%) and Ukraine (47%) than Russia (43%). Additionally, the current parliament continues to express dissatisfaction and opposition towards the presidents pro-Russian orientation. Prime Minister Filip expressed deep displeasure with Dodons statements about terminating the Association Agreement with the European Union and tried to assure international actors of the presidents inability to unilaterally make such decisions for the country. Additionally, Moldova and Ukraine have enduring inter-governmental institutions like the Ukraine-Moldova Commission for Trade and Economic Cooperation, which serves as a forum for the two countries to work together to promote their economic and security interests. Therefore despite, Russian economic leverage over the Moldovan economy and targeted Russian propaganda towards Moldovan citizens, it is possible for Moldova to maintain both close relations with Russia and Ukraine as long as a pro-EU coalition controls the parliament to serve as a check on the Moldovan president. Observers of the region and Ukrainian-Moldovan relations should continue to pay close attention to the 2018 parliamentary elections, which could shape Moldovas foreign policy agenda for the foreseeable future.

Editor's note:

Read more here:
Moldova and Ukraine: Diverging Neighbors? - EurasiaNet