Mediaboss Marketing

By Sophia WangJul. 7, 2022

President Joe Biden was pressed about his administrations plans to temper rapidly rising oil prices during the U.S. NATO press conference at the Madrid NATO Summit June 30.

Oil prices have risen due to the war in Ukraine, with some analysts believing that prices may reach $200 a barrel.

When asked how long drivers in the U.S. could expect to face the rising prices, Biden answered As long as it takes so Russia cannot, in fact, defeat Ukraine and move beyond Ukraine. This is a critical, critical position for the world.

The European Union (EU) and the U.S. have already taken decisive steps to weaken Russias financial institutions, foremost among them sanctions against the country: for example, the U.S. and United Kingdom have announced total bans on Russian fossil fuels.

More conservative in its measures, the EU plans to cut oil imports from Russia by two-thirds, planning to ban all Russian oil imports arriving by sea by the end of the year. The EU also announced plans to halt Russian coal imports by August.

Russia is a critical supplier to European nations, supplying over 40% of the EUs natural gas. EU negotiations for appropriate sanctions came to a compromise after significant deliberation. The EU continues to import over 800,000 barrels per day of Russian oil imports through pipeline, a temporary measure since countries like Hungary and Slovakia depend heavily on this resource.

Notably, Germany and Poland voluntarily halted pipeline imports, despite significant reliance on Russian gas. According to International Energy Agency Reports, in 2020, Germany made up 42.6% of Russias gas exports; in 2021, 58% of Polands total oil imports came from Russia.

Shipping insurance is critical to the sanctions the EU plans to implement. Following a phase in six month period, EU companies cannot provide technical assistance, brokering services or financing or financial assistance, related to the transport, including through ship-to-ship transfers, to third countries of crude oil or petroleum products from Russia, as dictated by a EU Council Regulation published June 3.

At the Madrid Summit, Biden said that the West would not insure Russian ships carrying oil. We would not provide insurance for them, so they would have great difficulty getting customers.

Taken together, the sanctions would reduce the amount of oil the EU buys from Russia by 90%.

Despite Western sanctions on Russian oil exports, Russias revenue from oil exports has risen as a function of increasing fuel prices felt across the world. U.S. Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen has been a key proponent of imposing a price cap on Russian oil sales to Europe; such a cap would allow Russian oil sales in the market, but at a lower revenue stream, especially as several of the EUs sanctions are being phased in by the end of the year.

Supporters of the price cap include Sloan professor Simon Johnson PhD 89, who serves as adviser to the Russian Tanker Tracking Group. Johnson said Theres no other active idea that would impact Putins revenues from fossil fuels over the next five months and that the Russians have been quite cynically manipulating gas markets, so this would be a chance to turn the tables, according to a New York Times article on June 26.

Critics of the approach worry that Russia could refuse to sell at too low of a price cap and utilize its market in India and China for a higher revenue stream.

Biden commented June 30 that we should consider putting a cap on the amount of money that we would pay for Russian oil. Were going to allow you to have a profit on what you make but not the exorbitant prices that youre charging for the oil now. We think it can be done, and it would drive down the price of oil, and it would drive down the price of gasoline as well.

Following the recent G-7 Summit a meeting of the leaders of Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, Britain, and the U.S. the seven countries agreed on sanctions extending beyond oil regulations. All G-7 members announced a ban on imports of Russian gold.

Altogether, the sanctions imposed from resources like natural gas to U.S. bans on debt payments using money held in U.S. banks have dealt notable blows to Russia. For the first time since 1998, Russia defaulted on a debt, a $100 million payment, which sanctions made impossible to pay.

As Ukraine enters its fifth month of war, financial sanctions implemented by alliances in the EU and abroad seek to highlight solidarity with Ukraine and isolate Russia from the global market.

Continue reading here:
European Union to reduce purchasing of Russian oil by 90% - The Tech

IOM Issues Migration Recommendations to the Czech EU Presidency

Brussels The International Organization for Migration (IOM) has shared its recommendations on migration and mobility with the Czech government. Czechia has assumed the Presidency of the Council of the European Union (EU) in a time of war impacting millions of people and with migration implications in the region and across the globe.

Czechia has been a major host country to people fleeing Ukraine, said Ola Henrikson, IOM Regional Director for the European Economic Area, the European Union and NATO. The unprecedented expression of solidarity, reception and support is shifting to a longer-term approach that will need to encompass wider economic and social inclusion.

The challenges and opportunities extend beyond the Ukraine crisis. Comprehensive migration governance, including action to mitigate climate change impacts on human mobility, is needed more than ever in todays setting, Henrikson said.

First, IOM recommends the Presidency to promote flexible and sustainable inclusion and labour mobility pathways. Migrant and refugee inclusion and access to services as well as attracting skills and talent to the EU through enhanced labour migration can help mitigate economic downturn, contribute to shared prosperity, and promote social cohesion.

The recommendations also address the fact that approximately 1 billion people globally live without legal identities and may lack access to basic services and safe movement. IOM, therefore, encourages the Presidency to promote the registration of legal identity and integrated digital tools as enablers of sustainable development and safe, orderly human mobility.

Dialogue and partnerships for migrant readmission, effective return, and sustainable reintegration continue to be crucial elements of comprehensive migration governance. In its recommendations, IOM outlines a whole-of-route policy which promotes assisted voluntary return, sustainable reintegration, and readmission cooperation frameworks that ensure return procedures adhere to international standards.

Finally, with the 2022 United Nations Climate Change Conference (COP27) in view, IOM urges the Czech Presidency to prioritize increasing support to the countries and people most vulnerable to the impacts of climate change. In particular, the EU should step up support for climate adaptation and resilience-building for people to move, for people on the move, and for people to stay.

IOM stands ready to continue its support to the Presidency, the EU, and its Member States to implement balanced, comprehensive policies and programmes across the entire migration spectrum and along migration routes.

IOM's full recommendations can bedownloaded here.

***

*For more information, please contact Ryan Schroeder at IOM Brussels, Tel: +32 495 25 02 34, Email:rschroeder@iom.int *

*About IOM *

Founded 71 years ago in 1951, IOM is the leading inter-governmental organization in the field of migration. With 174 member states and presence in over 100 countries, IOM is committed to the principle that humane and orderly migration benefits migrants and society. The Organization works with its partners in the international community to assist in meeting the operational challenges of migration, advance understanding of migration issues, encourage social and economic development through migration and to uphold the well-being and human rights of all migrants.

Continued here:
Recommendations to the Czech presidency of the council of the European Union (July - December 2022) - Czechia - ReliefWeb

A lot of people like to believe that the COVID pandemic is over, and we cant blame them. The US and many European countries are reporting a lot of infections every day, as we can easily see while taking a look at the stats from worldometers.info.

A senior official at the EU medicines agency says that a new COVID wave is affecting many nations of the Union. He believes that new mutations of the Omicron variant are to blame, according to abcNEWS.

Marco Cavaleri reveals that the BA.4 and BA.5 mutations are expected to dominate the continent, as theyll probably replace all the other variants by the end of the current month.

However, Cavalieri brings a solution to the problem, and youve probably already guessed it. He stated, as abcNEWS quotes:

As this new wave is unfolding over the EU, it is essential to maintain protection of vulnerable groups and avoid any postponement of vaccination.

If we only look at the number of infections with the coronavirus reported yesterday by several important European countries, we realize that the ongoing pandemic is still far from over. Countries such as France, Germany, and Italy reported over 100,000 infections with COVID each. On the other hand, Russia, Netherlands, Portugal, Austria, Belgium, Israel, and Greece reported thousands of infections each on the same day. These terrifying stats are brought by worldometers.info.

The same source reveals that the world has reported a total of over 558.8 million cases of infection and more than 6.3 million deaths caused by the COVID pandemic since it all began. However, there is some good news: over 532.2 million infected people with the coronavirus had already been recovered.

Link:
New COVID Wave Hits the European Union - Optic Flux

Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the last week have left dozens of people injured

SKOPJE, North Macedonia (AP) - Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other.

The most recent obstacle is a veto by EU member Bulgaria. A French proposal for a compromise to address Bulgaria's concerns has divided North Macedonia, sparking the sometimes violent protests. France's plan also met deep objections in Bulgaria and helped to bring down the government, which had accepted the compromise.

WHAT IS THE DISPUTE ABOUT?

North Macedonia has been an EU candidate for 17 years. The country emerged from the breakup of Yugoslavia in the 1990s and sought to forge a strong national identity. But in a region where borders and ethnicities have shifted and overlapped over centuries, it was beset by problems from the start.

The country's chosen name, Macedonia, sparked outrage in neighboring Greece, which said the term harbored expansionist aims against its own province of the same name and was an attempt to usurp Greek history and culture. Athens held up Skopje's EU and NATO membership bids for years, until a 2019 deal was reached that included the smaller country changing its name to North Macedonia.

But the following year, neighboring Bulgaria blocked the renamed nation's attempts to join the EU, accusing Skopje of disrespecting shared cultural and historic ties. Among Bulgaria's key demands were acknowledgment that the language of North Macedonia derived from Bulgarian, and the recognition of a Bulgarian minority.

The size of the Bulgarian community in North Macedonia is a matter of contention. Official data from the 2021 census put it at 3,504 people, or about 0.2% of the population. Bulgaria has doubted the figure, noting that about 90,000 of North Macedonia's roughly 2 million population received dual Bulgarian citizenship over the last two decades based on their family roots. About 53,000 more applications are pending.

WHY DOES IT MATTER?

North Macedonia's EU bid is tied to a similar bid by neighboring Albania. Both countries see joining the 27-nation bloc as a means of securing stability and prosperity in an increasingly unstable world. The EU prospects of the Western Balkan countries gained increased attention in the wake of the bloc's efforts to bring Ukraine closer following the Russian invasion.

WHAT IS THE FRENCH PROPOSAL?

France held the rotating EU presidency between January and June and so has been deeply involved in negotiations to break the deadlock. EU leaders held a summit with Western Balkan nations last month, during the same week they made Ukraine and Moldova candidates for EU membership.

French President Emmanuel Macron hoped to present unblocking the EU bids of North Macedonia and Albania as a major success. On Thursday, the French Embassy in Skopje posted a message from Macron.

Once again, North Macedonia has reached a crucial moment in its history. Seventeen years after receiving candidate status, a historic opportunity has opened: . The choice is yours, he said.

Macron's proposal envisages concessions from both sides. The government in Skopje would commit to changing its constitution to recognize a Bulgarian minority, protect minority rights and banish hate speech.

The French leader stressed the proposal doesn't question the official existence of a Macedonian language, but he noted that, like all deals, it rests on compromises and on a balance.

HOW WAS THE PROPOSAL RECEIVED?

The compromises in the French proposal led to rifts in both countries.

Bulgarian Prime Minister Kiril Petkov's centrist government was toppled in a no-confidence vote on June 22. A junior governing partner quit the fragile four-party coalition, describing Petkov's willingness to lift the veto of North Macedonia as a national betrayal. An early election could result in a stronger presence in parliament of nationalist and pro-Russia lawmakers.

The National Assembly already has approved the proposal, but legislators set additional conditions for agreeing to North Macedonia's EU membership. They included proper constitutional protection for Bulgarians living in North Macedonia, and no assumption that Bulgaria would recognize Macedonian as a separate language from Bulgarian.

In North Macedonia, both President Stevo Pendarovski and the government of Prime Minister Dimitar Kovacevsk backed the proposal as a reasonable compromise. Accepting it will be neither a historic triumph, as one camp would call it, nor a historic failure or debacle, as those in the other camp say, Pendarovski said.

The government has stressed the proposal does not endanger national interests or identity. But the center-right main opposition party, the VMRO-DPMNE, as well as others, disagree, saying the deal favors Bulgarian demands that question North Macedonia's history, language, identity, culture and heritage.

Biljana Vankovska, a law professor at the Saint Cyril and Methodius University's Institute for Security, Defense and Peace, slammed the French proposal as bowing to the nationalistic and chauvinistic demands of Bulgaria.

It is unbelievable that a small nation was asked to give up its language, history and constitution-making powers to external powers in order to start the EU accession process, she said.

Political analyst Albert Musliu, head of the Association for Democratic Initiatives think tank, argued the proposal offers North Macedonia a chance to start membership talks with the EU.

If you ask me whether it is fair, then yes, the proposal is unfair, but international order is not based on fairness, he said.

WHAT'S NEXT?

Bulgaria has accepted the French proposal, which now requires the backing of North Macedonia's parliament. The text is now at committee level in parliament. No plenary session has been scheduled.

___

Toshkov reported from Sofia, Bulgaria. Sylvie Corbet in Paris contributed

___

Follow AP's coverage of the European Union at https://apnews.com/hub/european-union

FILE - People wave the old and current national flags during a protest in front of the government building in Skopje, North Macedonia, Saturday, July 2, 2022. Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski, File)

FILE - People light flares and throw eggs and stones on the foreign ministry building during a protest in Skopje, North Macedonia, late Tuesday, July 5, 2022. Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski, File)

FILE - People protest in front of the parliament building in Skopje, North Macedonia, late Tuesday, July 5, 2022. Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski, File)

FILE - Police confront protesters near the parliament building in Skopje, North Macedonia, late Tuesday, July 5, 2022. Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski, File)

FILE - People enter a tunnel while marching through a street during a protest in Skopje, North Macedonia, Wednesday, July 6, 2022. Nightly protests in North Macedonia over the past week have left dozens injured. At the heart of the turmoil is the small Balkan country's long-running quest to join the European Union, a process that has faced one hurdle after the other. (AP Photo/Boris Grdanoski, File)

Read the original post:
EXPLAINER: North Macedonia: ? thorny road to the EU - The Durango Herald

On 28 June 2022, the Council of the European Union adopted its negotiating position on the draft Regulation which would ban the import and export of six core agricultural commodities to and from the European Union where these products have been linked to deforestation.

The policy driver is the belief1 that ending deforestation is a necessary condition of achieving net zero (negating greenhouse gases, such as carbon and methane, produced by human activity), delivering benefits for all. The commodities in question are beef, soya, palm oil, coffee, cocoa and timber and derived products such as leather, chocolate and furniture.

In November 2021, we published a briefing in which we set out the background and details of the draft Regulation (Regulation) proposed by the European Commission (Commission). We also provided an analysis of the likely implications of the Regulation and future developments in this area.

The Regulation is now at the first reading stage and the Council of the European Union (EU Council) adopted its negotiating position on 28 June 2022. In this article we outline the proposed changes brought about by the EU Councils negotiating position, the considerations that businesses should take into account and the likely next steps.

EU Council position

The EU Council press release2, released on 28 June 2022, confirms that it has now adopted its negotiating position (general approach) on the Regulation. This includes mandatory due diligence rules for all operators and traders who place, make available or export the six core agricultural commodities to and from the European Union (EU) beef, soya, palm oil, coffee, cocoa and timber and derived products such as leather, chocolate and furniture.

The EU Council has simplified and clarified the due diligence system to avoid duplication of obligations and reduce the administrative burden for operators and member states authorities. It has also added the possibility for small operators to rely on larger operators to prepare due diligence declarations. In addition, it has proposed a benchmarking system, which would assign EU member states and third countries a risk category (high, standard or low) depending on that countrys deforestation risk profile. The EU Council has confirmed that this would result in enhanced monitoring for high-risk countries and simplified due diligence for low-risk countries. The EU Council has also clarified the control obligations and set quantified objectives of minimum control levels for standard- and high-risk countries.

The proposed text on penalties and enhanced cooperation with partner countries was maintained. In terms of other changes, the EU Council responded to concerns by heavily forested EU member states that the definition of forest degradation in the Commission proposal, as defined in Article 2, was too broad by amending the definition. The EU Council therefore narrowed the scope of the definition to read as follows: forest degradation means structural changes to forest cover, taking the form of the conversion of primary forests into plantation forests or into other wooded land in place of the previous version: harvesting operations that are not sustainable. The EU Council also included references to the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples.

The changes adopted by the EU Council are perhaps most notable for what they have not included, than what they have included. The scope of relevant commodities, as defined in Article 2, has not been increased except insofar as to amend the detailed list of specific products in the annex3. This has received criticism from some campaigners, who believe that the Regulation should go further to cover more commodities, including rubber, and to close loopholes which they claim allow banks to finance deforestation4.

Other campaigners argue that the Regulation offers insufficient protection to indigenous communities and that it has as many holes as a Swiss cheese5. One argument raised by the environment ministers of some countries is that the Regulation is too narrow and that the definition of forest degradation that has been amended by the EU Council should be expanded to cover other ecosystems and also secondary forests6. In the adopted general approach, the EU Council emphasised the importance of assessing the need and feasibility of extending this scope to other commodities and ecosystems in the first review of the text within two years; the preparatory work for that review is due to start as soon as the text enters into force. It also highlights that the expansion of the forest degradation definition will have to be addressed in the first review of the text7.

The simplified due diligence procedure has been criticised by some environmentalists who believe that it will leave loopholes to exploit8. For instance, some environmentalists have argued that the same strict requirements should be universally applied, to prevent goods being laundered through low-risk countries9.

The EU Council has maintained the Commissions proposal to require traceability information for all volumes sourced by operators. Geolocation and traceability requirements are a core part of the Regulation. In practice, commentators indicate that would require mapping farms with precise GPS coordinates, checking that against evidence of deforestation using satellite images, inspecting the fields, tracing products digitally from farm to factory and putting in place deforestation risk assessment and mitigation measures. This may raise challenges for commodities such as palm oil where mills typically process fruit from a number of different farms which they blend. In addition, collecting geolocation data of smallholders and co-operatives could raise significant challenges.

Other concerns relating to the EUs traceability plans have been raised by industry associations including COCERAL, FEDIOL and FEFAC10. They have argued that the traceability requirements, which have been included as part of the operators risk assessment, impose an obligation on the operator to consider the risk of mixing with products of unknown origin or produced in areas where deforestation or forest degradation has occurred or is occurring. They claim that the separation of verified and non-verified products will have a disruptive effect on supply chains and would also require the building of new infrastructure. This could have the potential to undermine existing deforestation efforts in high-risk countries as operators switch to more low-risk areas11. Whilst these plans have the potential to be costly, they have received support from some NGOs12.

One further proposed change that was made was to amend the applicable timeline contained within the definition of deforestation-free from 31 December 2020 to 31 December 202113. Importers should therefore consider that the qualification of deforestation-free products applies for land not deforested since 31 December 2021 and not the original date of 31 December 2020. Whilst this imposes less of a retrospective obligation on importers, and would likely be welcomed by importers for that reason, it would still be necessary to undertake a retrospective analysis of land producing the relevant commodities.

Next Steps

The Regulation will now commence the next stage of the legislative process and will have its first reading in the European Parliament. The European Parliament is expected to adopt its position on the Regulation in the plenary session on 12 September 2022, before engaging in further discussions with the EU Council14 in the latter stages of 2022 to agree the final text.

As we stated in our first briefing15, if approval is obtained, the Regulation will enter into force on the twentieth day following its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union. The main provisions of the Regulation will apply 18 months from the entry into force of the Regulation.

Originally posted here:
An update: European Union draft law seeking to ban imports and exports of commodities from regions at risk of deforestation - Lexology