European Politics

Re: European Union

Yes, and then what?  Give them the same rights as any individual?  Then they can all just get together if they want.  If they go to different countries, some in the Eurozone, elsewhere, they are more divided.  I don't know, I don't think there's a good solution to it.
 
Re: European Union

I think it's unfair to ask European countries to take in these inmates for a number of reasons, the first being the fact that many European countries did not want anything to do with the war on terror, and were opposed to it, so they should not have to help clean up the mess. Why should these people be given the right to work in E.U. countries when other people apply for visas and get rejected every day, or get deported for not having the necessary visa or work permit?

Yes there are many Muslim communities in Europe, but that's like saying if someone Christian was held captive by Iraqis and then released they could be placed in most countries of the western world as they would have strong Christian links. Its not exactly the same, but you get the general gist.

I personally don't see anything wrong with E.U. leaders condemning Guantanamo Bay but not wanting to get involved. If people are being tortured, would you, in a position of power, give no opinion on the situation? The countries that were involved in the various campaigns in Afganistan and Iraq should take responsibility and shelter the prisoners possibly, however making an appeal to the entire E.U. is, in my opinion, total bullshit.
 
Re: European Union

I actually think it's mostly NATO countries being asked about this.  Countries bound by the enabling of Article 5 in 2001.  However, Iraq terror suspects should only be distributed to members of the Coalition of the Willing.

I guess it comes down to my (continued) frustration that most NATO countries are not contributing so much to Afghanistan compared to their weight class, and that now most are not wanting to help clean up this part of the mess.
 
Re: European Union

I may have gotten the wrong end of the stick, just the way that it was presented in that article, about a 'common European position', makes it sound more than just NATO countries are involved.
 
Re: European Union

I guess the EU is taking a stand, but I'm talking about what ought to be, not what is.
 
Re: European Union

Parliament calls for EU-wide commemoration of Srebrenica genocide
15-01-2009

In July 1995, the Bosnian town of Srebrenica fell into the hands of Serbian militias leading to "several days of carnage". In a resolution adopted by 556 votes to 9 with 22 abstentions, the European Parliament calls on the Council and Commission to commemorate appropriately the anniversary of the Srebrenica-Potočari act of genocide by supporting the European Parliament's recognition of 11 July as the day of commemoration throughout the EU.

After the fall of Srebrenica, Bosnian Serb forces, commanded by General Ratko Mladić, and paramilitary units rapidly executed more than 8 000 Muslim men and boys, who had sought safety in the area. Moreover, nearly 25 000 women, children and elderly people were forcibly deported, "making this event the biggest war crime to take place in Europe since the end of the Second World War".

Tragedy a symbol of international impotence

Declared an act of genocide by the International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia (ICTY), the tragedy took place in a UN-proclaimed safe haven, making it "a symbol of the impotence of the international community to intervene in the conflict and protect the civilian population," the EP says.

Urging all countries, including those of the western Balkans, to do the same, (Parliament commemorates and honours all the victims of the atrocities during the wars in the former Yugoslavia and expresses its condolences to and solidarity with the families of the victims, many of whom are living without final confirmation of the fate of their fathers, sons, husbands or brothers.

An important step towards peace and stability

In view of the fact that General Ratko Mladić is still at large almost 14 years after the tragic events, Parliament also demands that further efforts be made to bring the remaining fugitives to justice, stressing that bringing to justice those responsible for the massacres in and around Srebrenica is an important step towards peace and stability in the region.

The EP stresses that reconciliation is an important part of the European integration process, a process in which the religious communities, the media and the education system play a significant role.
 
Re: European Union

We only trade Mladic. If the Serbs don't like it, they can peel their own potatoes. I kind of like this "last stand", I hope it won't cause any friction though. I don't really understands why the rest of Europe likes to forget about it, so soon already.

Dutch block EU accord on Serbia trade benefits

BRUSSELS, Sept 15 (Reuters) - The Netherlands prevented the European Union on Monday from agreeing to extend new trade benefits to Serbia despite a positive report from the chief U.N. war crimes prosecutor on Belgrade's cooperation.

The Dutch insisted that Serbia arrest former Bosnian Serb military commander Ratko Mladic, the top remaining war crimes indictee at large, following the July capture of Bosnian Serb ex-president Radovan Karadzic, now on trial in The Hague.

EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana said he was almost certain that the 27 EU foreign ministers would agree at their next meeting in October to implement an interim agreement on closer ties, including trade.

But Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen warned: "The outcome will only change when I conclude there is full cooperation."

The issue is particularly sensitive for the Netherlands because Mladic is charged with genocide over the massacre of some 7,000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica in 1995, which Dutch U.N. peacekeepers stationed in the town were unable to prevent.

Deputy Serb Prime Minister Bozidar Djelic branded the Dutch position "deeply unfair".

"It is extremely disappointing that one country, and as we have heard one man, now would have to decide on the future steps of the European integration of Serbia," he told reporters on the sidelines of the talks.

UNANIMITY NEEDED

France's Bernard Kouchner, who chaired the meeting, said an overwhelming majority of member states wanted to reward Serbia's pro-European government, but that agreement required unanimity.

"The (French EU) presidency won't hide that there was a very, very big majority for unfreezing the interim agreement ... but there wasn't unanimity, and we are going to keep working to unfreeze it," he told a news conference.

EU Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn said U.N. prosecutor Serge Brammertz briefed the ministers "about the significantly intensified efforts of the Serbian government in the field of ... cooperation" with the war crimes tribunal.

"I cannot conclude from what Mr Brammertz said that we can talk about full cooperation," Verhagen said, noting Belgrade must demonstrate "considerable improvement" in areas such as witness protection.

Pressed on whether the arrest of Mladic was a precondition for unblocking the trade benefits, Verhagen said his detention would be a "significant step" and then added: "Let's get him arrested first -- then I will answer your question."

Brammertz himself, who visited Belgrade last week, made no public comment after his appearance before EU ministers.
 
Re: European Union

Yes, but in Serbia, how many people are going to lose jobs, not have food, etc. because of this?
 
Re: European Union

F*cking hell, I am so embarrassed. This news item is from last September (but it was near some other recent items). I'd like to delete it but you have already answered.  Apologies!

thousand_suns has returned..
 
Re: European Union

How has the situation changed since September, then, since it's still interesting?
 
Re: European Union

I'm afraid it hasn't. The Netherlands stay firm, and Mladic is still out in the open. I find it a difficult subject, the Serbs might indeed deserve more wealth, but against all costs?
 
Re: European Union

I am sure Serbia has much to offer the EU economy, both as a consumer and as a partner.  However, I think it is foolish to restrict the economy, which provides general poverty, over someone who is not in any position of power and not harming anyone at present.  Perhaps if Serbians felt more partnership with the EU and Europe they would be more likely to out Mladic.

I guess I question whether or not it is worth hurting more Serbians over one old man who can't directly harm anyone else.
 
Re: European Union

(I just opened a seperate topic about the following and later I realized it was not necessary. So I deleted it again and I hope this is a better choice.)


I find the following quite remarkable news:

Dutch MP Wilders is refused entry to the UK because he is 'a threat to public order'.

I just heard that this is the first time ever that a European politician is forbidden to travel to the United Kingdom. I know that his ideas are not the "cleanest" (to say the least) but according to European Union law, he ought to travel freely wherever he goes.

-------

Dutch Right-wing politician and controversial anti-Islam campaigner Geert Wilders has been refused entry to the United Kingdom despite being invited to visit by a member of the House of Lords, the British parliament's upper chamber.

Mr Wilders, who was due to go to London this Thursday, received a letter today, 10 February, from the British ambassador to the Netherlands telling him that he was not welcome, reportedly because his visit would constitute a threat to public order.

Mr Wilders responded to the decision in fighting mood, telling Dutch media that he still intended to travel to London:

"I'll see what happens at the border. Let them put me in handcuffs."

Dutch Foreign Minister Maxime Verhagen's response was also firm. He contacted his UK counterpart, David Miliband, by telephone and voiced his dissatisfaction that a member of the Dutch parliament - Geert Wilders is in fact also the leader of a political grouping, the Freedom Party - has been prohibited from entering a fellow European Union member state.

Geert Wilders, perhaps best known outside the Netherlands for having made the video Fitna, in which the religion Islam and its holy book the Qu'ran are Islam attacked as providing a basis for terrorist attacks and for the undermining of western democracy and values, had been invited to London for a showing of this film to members of the British parliament.

Mr Verhagen commented regarding the showing of Fitna in the British parliament that this was a matter for the House of Lords to decide on, but added: "the fact that a Dutch parliamentarian is refused entry to another EU country is highly regrettable."

Geert Wilders was initially to have shown his video to the British parliament in January, but those plans were cancelled following fierce protests from the UK's Muslim community.
 
Re: European Union

Him again. What's he gonna say next, that the Holocaust never happened and make a film about it?
 
Re: European Union

He was invited by the mother of parliaments. I guess they wanted to discuss with him (and he naturally wished to have attention and he certainly got it now).
 
Re: European Union

That's the problem. He got all the attention he wanted. It's not good that he was denied entry, but in my opinion, he shouldn't have been invited in the first place. Then again, he was only invited by one member of parliament. Democracy sucks alright. ;)
 
Re: European Union

By refusing him into the country he actually got more attention. I agree with that.

Check this out:

UK's ban of Dutch MP criticised
The government has come under fire after banning a Dutch MP from entering the UK over anti-Islamic remarks.

Former Conservative cabinet minister Michael Portillo said by turning away Geert Wilders, ministers had made a "populist twit and bigot" world famous.

The Freedom Party MP had been invited to a House of Lords screening of his film, linking the Koran to terrorism.

Muslim groups backed the government's decision and labelled Mr Wilder "an open and relentless preacher of hate".

'Free speech'

Mr Wilders, who faces trial in his own country for inciting hatred, caused outrage across the Muslim world last year when he posted his film, Fitna, on the internet.

Now he is at the centre of further controversy following an invitation from the UK Independence Party's Lord Pearson to show his film in the House of Lords.

Lord Pearson told the BBC it was a "matter of free speech" and the film would only be offensive to violent Islamists.

Fitna's opening scenes show a copy of the Koran followed by footage of the 9/11 attacks in the US and the bombings in Madrid in 2004 and London in 2005.

The Lords screening went ahead as planned, despite Mr Wilders' absence, although only five peer and no MPs were present.

But Mr Portillo expressed concerns those who did attend would not be the only people to view it.

Speaking on BBC1's This Week, he said the MP held "unattractive" opinions but had he been allowed in he would have arrived "unnoticed to show his film to 30 fairly eccentric peers".

Instead, he said, he has become a "globally famous figure" with thousands of people going on the internet to watch the film.

Differences and debate

Crossbench peer Baroness Cox, who hosted a later screening for the media, accused the British government of "succumbing to threats of intimidation".

She said it was "a very sad and a very disturbing day for British democracy when a European parliamentarian has not been allowed into this country".

"I don't agree with everything that Geert Wilders has to say, but I believe he has the right to say it in a democracy."

Mr Wilders defended his visit to the UK, saying he had visited two weeks ago and planned to return in the future.

He said: "I'm not doing anything wrong. I'm not protesting or running through the streets of London.

"Democracy means differences and debate. It's a very sad day when the UK bans an elected parliamentarian."

He went on to accuse Gordon Brown of being the "biggest coward in Europe".

Mr Brown's spokesman said the prime minister fully supported the decision taken by Home Secretary Jacqui Smith.

Mohammed Shafiq, chief executive of the Ramadhan Foundation, also supported the Home Secretary's decision.

"His fascist views are not welcome in our country where we pride ourselves as a multi-faith society," he said.

"This is not about freedom of speech but about stopping the incitement to religious hatred this man promotes."

Earlier, the Muslim Council of Britain said Mr Wilders was "an open and relentless preacher of hate".

The home secretary has the power to stop people entering the UK if she believes there is a threat to national security, public order or the safety of UK citizens, but she cannot exclude people simply because of their views.

Foreign Secretary David Miliband said the home secretary made a decision on an individual case.

"We have profound commitment to freedom of speech but there is no freedom to cry 'fire' in a crowded theatre and there is no freedom to stir up hate, religious and racial hatred, according to the laws of the land," he added.

Lib Dem home affairs spokesman Chris Huhne said even with freedom of speech, there was a line to be drawn.

The Dutch government said it "regretted" the decision to bar Mr Wilders from the UK, saying it believed all its MPs "should be able to travel freely in the European Union".
 
Re: European Union

It's true, if somebody is allowed to say something in his country, he should be allowed to say it in every other (European) country as well. There's enough people in Britain saying the same thing, and they're not being expelled.
But keep in mind, the British are the only ones in the EU (to my knowledge) who still officially maintain some control over who is entering their country and who isn't. For normal people, this is reduced to showing your ID when you board a plane headed for the UK, though.
 
Re: European Union

Perun said:
But keep in mind, the British are the only ones in the EU (to my knowledge) who still officially maintain some control over who is entering their country and who isn't.
Click to expand...
I had to read that a few times, once I'd put my eyes back in their sockets, and then I saw the word "officially". -_-

Foro, this is a country where people in certain jobs can be a member of certain "extremist" political parties/groups but not others. It's no suprise that the limp-wristed left-wing pansies in government banned the guy from entering, but it's definitely true that he's received a lot more attention this way - he's had a lot of air and screen time over the last few days.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top