European MPs listen European Commission President’s first state of the union speech during a plenary session at the European Union Parliament in Brussels on September 16, 2020. (Photo by JOHN THYS / AFP)
(Eagle News) – Members of the European Parliament expressed alarm about what they claimed was a “deteriorating level of press freedom in the Philippines” and called on the Philippine government to “renew” the franchise of ABS-CBN, as well as to drop all charges against Rappler CEO Maria Ressa.
This was contained as part of the resolution of the European Parliament which is composed of 705 members,
The text of the resolution which also expressed “deepest concern” at the allegedly “rapidly deteriorating human rights situation in the Philippines under President Rodrigo Duterte” got the vote of 626 members of the European Parliament, with only 7 voting against it, and 52 abstaining.
It also called on the Philippine government to release opposition senator Leila de Lima from detention while she is awaiting trial, and for the authorities “to drop all politically motivated charges” against her.
The full text of the European Parliament resolution was made available on Friday, Sept. 18.
In its resolution, the European Parliament said it “Is alarmed about the deteriorating level of press freedom in the Philippines; condemns all threats, harassment, intimidation, unfair prosecutions, and violence against journalists, including the case of Maria Ressa.”
It also called for the dropping of all allegedly “politically motivated charges” against Ressa and her colleagues as it stressed that “press freedom and freedom of expression are fundamental components of democracy.”
The European Parliament also “calls on the Philippine authorities to renew the broadcast licence of the main audio-visual group, ABS-CBN” as it noted how the Philippine Congress voted to deny the renewal its franchise in July.
It said that the “refusal to renew its broadcasting licence by President Duterte is seen as an act of retaliation for the media’s coverage of the anti-drugs campaign and serious human rights abuses.”
It “calls on the EU Delegation and EU Member States’ representations in Manila to closely monitor the cases against Maria Ressa and Reynaldo Santos Jr, and to provide all necessary assistance,” the resolution also said.
The members of the European Parliament (MEPs) also strongly denounced what they claimed were “the thousands of extrajudicial killings and other serious human rights violations related to the so-called ‘war on drugs’.”
“They also condemn all threats, harassment, intimidation, rape and violence against those who seek to expose allegations of extrajudicial killings and other human rights violations in the country, including human rights and environmental activists, trade unionists and journalists,” a release from the European Parliament read.
-PHL gov’t rejects European Parliament claims-
The Philippine government immediately rejected the claims of the 705-member strong European Parliament.
“The freedom of expression and press freedom have never been and will never be curtailed by the Duterte administration. This as we continue to promote our shared democratic ideals with the international community. In fact, the Philippines continues to enjoy a plurality of voices, expression, opinions, and beliefs; hence, the continued operations of Rappler and Ms. Ressa’s pursuit for self-justification in response to their legal obligations,” said a statement from Presidential Communications Operations Office Secretary Martin Andanar.
He said that the Duterte administration will continue to remain “concerted and composed towards the promotion of the inherent rights, freedom, and security of media workers and in observance of the rule of law and due process as part of our collective, sincere, honest, and genuine commitment to serve the Filipino people.”
Bayan Muna Rep. Carlos Zarate and Albay Rep. Edcel Lagman lauded the adoption by the European Union Parliament of a resolution urging the United Nations to lead “an independent investigation into widespread killings in the Philippines” in connection with the Duterte administration’s war on drugs.
“This is a very positive and welcome move coming as it is from one of the world’s major and influential parliaments. The Duterte administration should seriously heed the recommendation of the EU parliament, otherwise, it will only further its isolation internationally,” said Senior Deputy Minority Leader Zarate.
Lagman stated: “Neither braggadocio nor self-serving claims of sovereign independence can hide the dismal human rights record of the Duterte administration.”
“Human rights violations are global concerns which transcend sovereign boundaries justifying the call of lawmakers from the European Parliament for the United Nations to lead “an independent investigation into widespread killings in the Philippines related to President Duterte’s war on drugs,” said Zarate.
He added: “We have long been calling for an independent international probe on the spate of killings in the country like that of Bayan Muna coordinator Jory Porquia, Randall Echanis, and Zara Alvarez, as well as other human rights violations. This is a push in the right direction.”
Lagman, an independent House member, also cited the fate of human rights defenders Echanis and Alvarez, saying that they have been “summarily killed.”
“It is self-serving to bar an independent United Nations investigation, through the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC), on the country’s worsening state of human rights on the pretext of sovereign immunity when the Philippines is a state party to many human rights conventions obligating signatories to promote and protect human rights,” the Bicolano solon said.
Human rights group Karapatan welcomed the resolution.
Karapatan Secretary General Cristina Palabay said this resolution was a “strong statement from the international community that there would be consequences for these abuses.”
“The sham drug war has continued to kill the poor with impunity while human rights defenders face vilification, violence, and death for their work in exposing these human rights violations even in the middle of a pandemic,” she noted.
“Domestic mechanisms have been ineffective and outright failing in bringing the perpetrators of these gruesome crimes to justice,” Palabay said.
When radio host Tashia Kalondo visited a conservancy in Namibia, she didn’t realize just how close she would get to the wildlife. Ms. Kalondo had travelled widely and seen wildlife before, but when the camp staff said they’d have to camouflage the gate to their campsite with shrubs to prevent elephants from coming in overnight, she found it hard to believe. “I laughed because, what a joke, right?” she recalls. “Wrong!”
African elephants (file)
The next morning, she found tracks made by elephants, which, during the night, had loped silently in, just a stone’s throw from where Kalondo was sleeping. “My mind was blown,” she remembers.
Namibia has 86 communal conservancies, which are run by the local residents, and are highly appreciated by tourists. Their desert landscapes of ochre sand, black rock, shining blue skies are stunning, and an array of wildlife species, including black rhinos, lions, cheetahs, hyenas, and zebras, roam the land.
Communal conservancies play an important role in sustainable development. People who live on conservancy land are granted rights to utilize wildlife sustainably, which include the harvesting of meat and the sale of trophy hunting rights, both based upon regulation and quotas. This way they benefit from wildlife management and tourism, and have less incentive to trade illegally in animal parts.
The conservancies protect and even recover wildlife, building back the population of animals lost to poachers. In 2019, poaching in Namibian conservancies decreased by more than 60% over the preceding year, thanks to greater intelligence and law enforcement operations — supported by the UN Development Programme (UNDP) — and tougher sentences and fines.
Zero tourists
This success now risks being undermined by COVID-19. Compared to other countries, the health toll of the virus has been relatively low, thanks largely to a ban on international arrivals put in place by the Namibian government in March. However, the impact on the economy, and tourism in particular, has been devastating: Namibia’s Ministry of Tourism is expecting zero tourist arrivals for the entirety of 2020.
Tashia Kalondo (centre) is a popular radio host in Namibia, by UN Namibia
Tashia Kalondo is from Namibia, where she’s a popular radio personality, but most tourists come from Europe, the US, China, and neighbouring African countries. In 2019, there were 1.7 million foreign visitors — that’s in a country of 2.5 million people. The conservancies alone bring in $3.2 million in income, not to mention $3.5 million in annual staff salaries. That’s a lot of money in a country that falls in the bottom third of the Human Development Index: nearly a third of Namibians are poor.
Due to the pandemic, tens of thousands of conservancy jobs are in jeopardy. With many people more desperate for food and income than before, poaching is expected to increase, yielding valuable products such as elephant tusks, rhino horns, or simply meat for local consumption.
“Namibia is facing three challenges at once,” explains Alka Bhatia, UNDP Namibia Resident Representative. “There’s the pandemic. There’s the economic crisis. And then there’s the threat of increased poaching, which strikes a blow to the tourist industry and the economy.”
‘Conservancies must survive’
In response, UNDP and the World Health Organization (WHO) are supporting the government by procuring medical supplies. UNDP also collaborated with the United Nations Information Centre (UNIC) in the capital, Windhoek, and WHO on health education initiatives, to slow the spread of the coronavirus
The conservancies are one of the biggest tent poles holding up the national economy. If they fall, then a lot more will collapse around them. Alka Bhatia, Namibia Resident Representative, UNDP
In addition, UNDP partnered with a local online shop to launch an e-commerce platform to help informal traders regain some of their lost income. And the agency made a grant to conservancies to stay afloat, covering their salaries and anti-poaching work. That’s just the latest move in years of support that UNDP has provided to the conservancies, including training and equipment to fight fires, and help with fire and land management policy.
“For the long-term health of the Namibian economy, the communal conservancies must survive,” says Ms. Bhatia. “The conservancies are one of the biggest tent poles holding up the national economy. If they fall, then a lot more will collapse around them.”
It’s not just the economy that will be affected. The loss of natural areas, as well as the poaching and consumption of wildlife, increase the chance that viruses will jump from animals to humans. That means more zoonotic infectious diseases — such as Ebola or HIV/AIDS that pass from animals to humans — which leads to more economic crises, more poverty, more hunger. By protecting flora and fauna, conservancies act as a natural buffer against disease.
“The human-wildlife relationship is an intricate one,” says Ms. Kalondo, reflecting on her conservancy visit. “Besides admiring the wildlife, I spent time with some community members, including a Himba tribe settlement. I saw first-hand people and wildlife living together.” Her experience points to one of the greatest values of the conservancies.
“Conservancies create jobs. They provide jaw-dropping experiences of wildlife,” says Ms. Bhatia. “But they also give us something else. They provide a lesson on how to coexist with the natural world. It’s a lesson we should all be mindful of.”
Gary Rynhart: When COVID-19 spread around the world, many migrants were shipped home unceremoniously or left to fend for themselves. Migrants have also – because of the sectors they work in, and the poor conditions in which many lower skilled migrants live and work – been vectors for spreading the virus. Examples we’ve seen include workers in meat factories in Germany, and construction workers in the United Arab Emirates and Singapore.
UN News: are migrants more likely to have lost work, due to the economic crisis?
Gary Rynhart: Job losses have often hit migrant workers hardest, because they are more likely to work in informal jobs which can lack safety nets, in case of job loss or illness. This is particularly the case for migrants in developing countries, and temporary migrants, such as seasonal workers, where social protection tends, at best, to be limited to work injury compensation or health benefits.
Over thirty countries in the world get more than 10 per cent of their GDP from remittances. This money sent home by around one billion workers overseas or internally to their families is collectively higher than either foreign direct investment or official development assistance. It was almost three-quarters of a billion dollars last year. The World Bank estimates a drop of 20% this year. Families across the developing world are being impacting, creating ripple effects throughout their economies.
IOM/Thierry Falise
Burmese migrants work in fishing boats and coastal communities in Phang Nga, Southern Thailand.
UN News: will migrants be able to find jobs, once the global economy recovers?
Gary Rynhart: The disruption to supply chains and closed borders resulting from the pandemic will probably lead to more firms turning to technology, automation and Artificial Intelligence. In a recent survey by accounting firm EY, around half of company bosses surveyed, in 45 countries, said that they are speeding up plans to automate their businesses, and some 41 per cent said they were investing in accelerating automation, as businesses prepared for a post-crisis world.
This is potentially bad news for migrants. Southeast Asia is a case in point: take the garment factories in the region, which is mostly filled with internal migrants, or the shrimp peeling industry in Thailand, which is done by Myanmar migrants.
Technology to reduce, or eliminate, the need for human workers in these industries already exists.
Even call centres in the Philippines, which benefited from outsourcing that began in the 1990s, are affected. It’s estimated that up to 90 per cent of these ‘new’ jobs are under high threat from automation. That’s one million jobs, accounting for around seven per cent of the country’s GDP.
UN RWANDA
Stephen Rodriques, (2nd left) UNDP Rwanda Resident Representative pose for a group photo with Rwanda government officials as well representative of Zorabots, after handing over the robots in Kigali.
Manufacturing, retail, health care and hospitality will be significantly impacted sectors. In the Japanese healthcare sector robotic care workers, or ‘carebots’ are increasingly deployed to, quite literally, do the ‘heavy lifting’. This does away with many of the physically demanding orderly positions traditionally filled by migrants.
The retail sector has typically relied on migrant workers, but the COVID-19 pandemic has seen a dramatic growth in online shopping. In the hospitality sector, automated experiments include robots that provide bartending services on cruise ships and in airports, and that deliver food to hotel guests’ rooms. More hotels are offering automated check-in via app or even, in China, via facial recognition. Alexa-enabled speakers in hotel rooms let guests ask for sightseeing tips and order toothbrushes without talking to staff.
Using GPS technology, robots can be used in precision agriculture for weed control and harvesting. The pandemic may also have given another nudge to technology for Driverless cars which could soon see taxi driving, another job many migrants do, fall by the wayside.
ILO Photo/Marcel Crozet
A school teacher in France connects with her students remotely during the COVID-19 pandemic.
What the last few months have shown is that an awful lot of processes and meetings (e.g. doctors’ appointments, visa renewals) can be done online. There has been a surge in telemedicine, and, as video technology improves, diagnostics such as measuring temperature, heart rate, and blood pressure may also be done via a webcam. Certain elements of teaching can be done through digital platforms, and there is currently a big increase in internet-based education services.
Improvements in virtual reality, augmented reality, hologram technology, and collaboration tools will make all of that even easier. Many administrative functions can be carried out remotely:
There are many new employment opportunities here, which could reduce the need for migration, and remote working could open the door for women to access opportunities commensurate with their talent by going elsewhere virtually, without moving physically. This is especially important in regions where there are cultural biases against women actively searching for jobs: platforms have been found to help women find work, and remote working can offer them an important veil of anonymity.
UN News: has the pandemic affected attitudes towards migrants?
Gary Rynhart: There has been an increase in discrimination, in particular anti-Asian discrimination specifically related to COVID 19, and some populist political parties have sought to scapegoat migrants (we’ve seen this in Italy, Spain, Greece, France, and Germany, amongst others).
But the post-pandemic world is not necessarily all bad news, and there are signs that it may bring about new opportunities for migrants, and even improved perceptions.
For example, many migrants are filling frontline medical roles or providing essential services like stacking supermarket shelves or cleaning hospitals. Additionally, we have seen some softening of restrictions on foreign-trained and foreign-born health workers in high-income countries to cope with the crisis: refugee doctors without recognized qualifications were called up in Germany, and had recognition of their qualifications fast-tracked in the UK, some US States have allowed foreign-trained doctors to work, and Australia lifted working hour caps on foreign-trained nurses.
In fact, despite recent populist rhetoric, attitudes towards migrants have been steadily, and markedly, improving in recent years. According to a survey of 18 countries published last year, 63 per cent of US citizens felt immigrants were a burden on the country, back in 1994, and only 31 per cent felt they strengthened it.
Fast forward 25 years and the figures are reversed. By a ratio of two to one US citizens are pro-migration. According to the same survey, majorities in top migrant destination countries, which host half of the world’s migrants, say immigrants strengthen their countries. Majorities in the UK, France, Spain, Australia, Canada, Sweden and Germany all agree with the statement ‘migrants make my country stronger’.
Maybe one outcome of this crisis will be more inclusivity, and more diversity, in the global workplace, and an improvement in some of the factors that drive people to leave their homes and countries, in search of better livelihoods.
MANILA, Philippines — The European Parliament threatened to revoke the Philippines’ trading privileges with the European Union if it will not implement international conventions on human rights and urged the International Criminal Court (ICC) to continue its inquiry into allegations that President Rodrigo Duterte committed crimes against humanity in his bloody war on drugs.
Voting 626 to 7, with 52 abstentions, the elected legislative body of the European Union on Thursday adopted a resolution expressing its “deepest concern at the rapidly deteriorating human rights situation” in the country under Duterte and strongly condemned the thousands of alleged extrajudicial killings.
The European parliamentarians also called on Philippine authorities to “step up efforts to tackle corruption effectively,” reminding the country that it enjoys trade benefits under the Generalised Scheme of Preferences Plus (GSP+), which could be revoked if the government failed to meet certain standards.
The privilege allows the Philippines to export 6,200 products tariff-free to the 27 EU member states.
“This status is dependent upon its ratification and implementation of 27 international conventions on human rights, labor rights, environmental protection and good governance,” the resolution said.
The EU lawmakers want to start the process of taking away the trade benefits, unless the Duterte administration demonstrated a “substantial improvement and willingness to cooperate.”
“Given the seriousness of the human rights violations in the country, [the European Parliament] calls on the European Commission … to immediately initiate the procedure which could lead to the temporary withdrawal of GSP+ preferences,” the nine-page resolution said.
‘DEEPEST CONCERN’ Voting 626 to 7, with 52 abstentions, the elected legislative body of the European Union on Thursday adopted a resolution expressing its “deepest concern at the rapidly deteriorating human rights situation” in the Philippines under President Duterte. | AP FILE PHOTO
Angered by the move, presidential spokesperson Harry Roque dared the European parliamentarians to “go ahead” and revoke the country’s trading privileges.
“I’m sorry I’m being very undiplomatic in my answer, but what else can I say? At the time of a pandemic, they are threatening us? What else do we lose?” he said at a press briefing in Baguio City on Friday.
“Our economy will shrink more because of COVID-19, and so we expect that this plan of Europe to suspend our GSP privilege will be an added burden,” Roque said.
He went on to say that if the Europeans “really want to do it, we cannot do anything. Let them watch as the Filipino people suffer.”
Roque said the Europeans would be “the biggest contributor to the violation of right to life of Filipinos” if they revoked this trading privilege.
He slammed the move by “former colonial masters” which he said was triggered by a “classic case of misinformation” by Jose Maria Sison, the founding chair of the Communist Party of the Philippines who lives in exile in the Netherlands.
Press freedom, De Lima
Roque urged members of Congress and the country’s ambassadors to European nations to “tell them the truth” about the real situation in the Philippines to stop the spread of Sison’s “lies.”
Other than trade sanctions, the resolution also called on the EU members to support a proposal at the ongoing 45th session of the UN Human Rights Council (UNHRC) to establish an “independent, international investigation” of human rights violations in the Philippines since 2016.
The parliamentarians listed other reports that have raised alarms, including: threats, harassment, intimidation, rape and violence against those exposing extrajudicial killings; the killings of human rights workers Jory Porquia and Zara Alvarez, and peace consultant Randal Echanis; and the “deteriorating” press freedom in the country.
It cited the case of Rappler CEO Maria Ressa, who has been convicted of cyberlibel, and the shutdown of broadcast giant ABS-CBN.
The resolution also called for the immediate release of detained Sen. Leila de Lima, saying she was being held on “politically motivated charges.” It also “expressed serious concern” about the recently passed Anti-Terrorism Act.
In a statement on Friday, De Lima lauded the European Parliament’s resolution, saying that it “reminds us that the world is constantly watching and that justice will catch up to those who do injustice to others one way or another.”
Duterte’s staunchest critic also appealed to the UNHRC, the ICC and foreign governments to “step up their efforts in fighting rights violators in the country.”
‘Heavy thumbs down’
Edre Olalia, president of the National Union of Peoples’ Lawyers, said his group “profoundly welcomes” the resolution.
“It is high time that governments must step up the displeasure and pressure over the unmitigated and persisting human rights atrocities [in the Philippines,]” he said.
The resolution is proof that the “whole world is giving the perpetrators and enablers of the brazen violations the heavy thumbs down,” Olalia said.
The European Parliament also called on the Duterte government to halt all efforts to reinstate the death penalty, to protect the human rights of indigenous peoples and the LGBT, and to disband private and state-backed paramilitary groups which target suspected drug offenders.
Lopez sees no basis
Trade Secretary Ramon Lopez tried to play down the resolution, saying he didn’t see any reason for the European Union to withdraw the trading privilege that has been enjoyed by the country since December 2014.
The GSP+ is also a way for the European Union to encourage developing countries to pursue sustainable growth, since this perk is conditioned on the beneficiary’s commitment to international conventions on human and labor rights, environmental protection and good governance.
This is the third time that the European Parliament had threatened to take such action against the Duterte administration.
Lopez said the main agency that has a say in the GSP+ was not necessarily the European Parliament but the European Commission, which has a mechanism to “verify issues before sanctions are imposed.”
He said in a Viber message that Filipino officials have been able to “explain objectively the Philippines’ side on issues that are raised and we don’t see any reason why our GSP+ privilege will be withdrawn.” —with reports from Julie M. Aurelio, Roy Stephen C. Canivel and Marlon Ramos
Last April, while Dutch and Italian politicians were trading insults on the European COVID recovery package, the Corriere della Sera wrote that in early days of European integration, young Italian diplomats posted to Brussels were told to apply the following principle: “In case of doubt, f… the Dutch.” There was even a diplomatic version in circulation in Rome’s foreign ministry, the Farnesina: “Let the Dutch speak and take the diametrically opposite position’.”
This is not just an amusing anecdote. It is probably as true today as it was at the start of the European communities: In many respects the Dutch are, again, more skeptical about European integration than the Italians.
Yes—again. Nowadays, many who remember the Dutch as engaged, enthusiastic Europeans are puzzled by the harsh positions on eurozone reform or the COVID-19 package coming from The Hague. But this is not new. During the first two decades of European integration, the Dutch behaved the same way. They only softened their stance after the accession of the United Kingdom in 1973.
Taking a closer look at recent history, it is clear the Dutch feel better in Europe with the British on their side. And that the problems they currently have are partly the result of Brexit.
After the Second World War, the Dutch dreamed of a loose, transatlantic alliance focused on trade with the UK, United States and others. Apart from a protestant culture they have much else in common with the British: their love of the sea, a sober outlook on life and a commercial disposition. Both are liberal, seafaring and trading nations that once had overseas empires, used to striking out on their own.
But the transatlantic alliance never materialized. Instead, in 1950 the Dutch heard (on the radio) that France and Germany decided to form the European Coal and Steel Community, run by a supranational authority. The Dutch were not informed of this Schuman plan, which was officially launched on 9 May 1950: Paris and Berlin assumed—correctly—that they would oppose it. Indeed, the Dutch government was unhappy that its two large neighbors, one a recent occupier, planned to join political forces. The small, liberal, pragmatic country always looking west, fearing being smothered by, alternately, the heavy German legalistic culture and French étatisme that the Dutch love to hate.
But the Netherlands had little choice. The post-war economy was weak. Losing its colonies, the country needed to earn its income closer to home. Its first post-war trade agreement with Germany functioned well—already the Netherlands was, economically speaking, becoming a German province. In short, the Dutch couldn’t afford to say no to the Schuman plan. Since France and Germany would go ahead anyway, it would be smarter to join and water it down from the inside.
This is what the Dutch have been doing ever since, to various degrees. It is their own, instinctive European Pavlovian response.
From the first day, The Hague had a mission: to get the UK to join. In 1973, after several French vetoes, it finally managed. For the Dutch, UK accession finally brought cultural and political meaning to the continent’s economic reality. The Dutch have always been Anglophiles. They set up multinationals like Shell and Unilever with the UK. They speak much better English than German or French.
Alongside the British the Dutch finally felt at home in continental Europe, and became more confident. The two countries fought, and won, many liberal battles together—for the single market and several enlargements, for example. This is when the Dutch lost some of their aversion to political integration, jumping head-on into Schengen, the monetary union and much else. From the mid-Seventies till the mid-Nineties, roughly, they could definitely be described as euro-enthusiasts.
But the British drifted off. While the Dutch proposed full political union for the Maastricht treaty—an unthinkable move today—London refused to join Schengen, the euro or judicial cooperation. The British wanted the internal market and little else, and negotiated several opt-outs. They became outsiders.
This is when Dutch ambivalence in Europe resurfaced, and euroskepticism started to rise. It is partly directed against the EU itself, but mainly against many successive Dutch governments that failed to explain why the country sits in the heart of European integration. At school, Dutch children learn nothing about the EU, its purpose and history. Newcomers wanting to become Dutch must pass an exam, for which they must be able to answer how the Dutch celebrate birthdays and what the waterworks are for—but in the accompanying textbook Europe is mentioned just twice: as a market. Most Dutch citizens, while opinionated about the EU, can’t tell the difference between the Council and the Commission.
For an open, exporting country dependent on European networks, this is an awkward situation. The Dutch central bank president Klaas Knot recently said that thanks to the EU, each Dutch household earns between 6,000 to 10,000 euros more per year. Knot is no cheering Europhile. But he understands that more European integration, including beefed-up eurozone resilience, will be necessary in today’s mercantilist world where raw power prevails. Knot urged party leaders to discuss this more often ahead of parliamentary elections early next year.
Debating Europe, however, is difficult in a country that still loves looking west. Former Prime Minister David Cameron’s insistence on the “repatriation of powers” from Brussels was popular in the Netherlands. Most Dutch love the internal market and are positive about EU membership, but many reject the political aspects of European integration. European defense, a common foreign policy, or European taxes make them jittery. Their first reflex is to oppose those things.
The central question in The Netherlands is therefore an existential one: What are we doing in the heart of Europe? The honest answer is, of course, something like this: We are there because Germany and France are there to avoid more war, and we thought it wasn’t wise not to join. This is too complicated a pitch for most politicians. So they stick to the economic narrative—“the EU is a market”—ignoring the political origin and character of European integration. That’s why in a Europe whose main challenges are now profoundly political, the Dutch behave like bookkeepers. When Italy needs solidarity, the Dutch respond by counting beans.
This reflex grew stronger because of Brexit and the phantom pain it caused. Brexit weakens the liberal, northern voice in Brussels. It strengthens the power of Germany and France, and of Europe’s south.
The Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte is traumatized by Britain’s departure. He knows it could happen in his country, too. Rutte’s liberal-conservative party, the VVD, is the largest in the Netherlands. But the far-right euroskeptic PVV, led by Geert Wilders, is second. Another far-right party, Democratic Forum, is also fanning anti-European sentiment. Mr Rutte is determined to avoid a Dutch exit. It would devastate a country that participates in every European program under the sun.
But the more Rutte wants to avoid the political debate about Europe, the more the opposition presses the point. In this respect, he is in the same spot as David Cameron was before the Brexit referendum: failing to make a strong, convincing case for continued membership. But there’s also a difference between the two: the Dutch Prime Minister doesn’t withdraw from Brussels. On the contrary, he’s actively forming new alliances across the continent. He understands that Brexit changes the political ballgame in Europe.
The UK often amplified positions in Brussels. Now, if the Dutch want to be heard, they need new allies. Dutch diplomats and civil servants are fanning out to European capitals, listening, trying to make deals. The shape of these alliances depends on the issue. In some aspects, the Dutch are getting closer to Germany. They are reaching out to France, too, on single market issues and even trade. Spain and Austria have also come into the picture. For financial and economic issues, the Dutch formed a kind of new Hanseatic league, which puts pressure on Germany not to make too many concessions to France. The fact that the group partly consists of small Nordics outside the eurozone and banking union doesn’t seem to bother The Hague.
In the budget and COVID-19 recovery battles of the summer, the Dutch fought like lions. But with Germany and France teaming up because both felt Europe’s political future was at stake, the Dutch did not manage to fundamentally alter the plan—they mostly got financial concessions. When Chancellor Angela Merkel returned to Berlin afterwards, she talked about having averted a European disaster. President Emmanuel Macron spoke about Europe, too. Mr Rutte, back at The Hague, said he was happy that Dutch contributions to Brussels had not risen. End of story.
No wonder Rutte needed an extensive session in Parliament afterwards to explain himself, before securing approval for the deal. Just 10 percent of the Dutch thought he should have been more lenient during the July Council. According to a recent ECFR poll in 27 capitals, the Netherlands is currently seen as the fourth “most disappointing country” in the EU.
Of course the Dutch care about the diplomatic fallout. In The Hague the dominance of the Finance Ministry on European affairs, to the detriment of the diplomats in the Foreign Ministry, has led to fierce discussions. The government was also quick to take in 100 children from Greece’s burnt Moria camp, a clear gesture of goodwill to other EU countries. But its financial and monetary positions that caused the fallout in the first place, haven’t changed. Few observers expect this to happen before the elections.
So, no, it isn’t surprising that Italian diplomats are sometimes reminded of Dutch obstructionism in the early days in Brussels. They call it the fracassi principle—from the Italian fracassare: to shatter. And fracassi, it so happens, rhymes beautifully with the Italian word for the Netherlands: ‘Paesi Bassi’.
US farming is tasteless, toxic and cruel – and its monstrous practices have no place here
British farming and food production are a remarkable success story. In recent years, this sector has been at the forefront of a revolution that’s transformed the quality of our food — and acted as a guardian of our countryside.
Through the vision and dedication of our farmers, Britain is increasingly a global leader in animal welfare, environmental protection and high standards of produce. Now all these achievements are at mortal risk. As we prepare to leave the European Union at the end of this year, our impressive agricultural system could soon be wrecked by ruthless competition and a flood of cheap imports.
The most serious threat comes from the U.S., whose vast and unwieldy farming industry is far less regulated than ours.
In the name of efficiency, it has built a highly mechanised, intensive and shockingly cruel approach which keeps animals in conditions so appalling it’s hard for us in the UK to grasp. Meanwhile, an arsenal of chemicals that are banned here are also deployed on these poor creatures.
It is not the sort of produce that should be allowed to swamp our own. When Brexit supporters spoke of ‘taking back control’, they did not envisage the destruction of British farming caused by mass-produced goods soaked in chlorine and cruelty.
In an attempt to prevent this grim eventuality, a last-ditch battle is under way at Westminster aiming to establish essential safeguards in post-Brexit Britain.
US farming tasteless, toxic and cruel 9
It’s all part of Britain’s deep and enduring compassion for animals. We have 25 million free-range hens here, more than any other country — and more free-range pigs than anywhere in Europe
As the Agriculture Bill — which sets out a new domestic, post-Brexit alternative to the EU’s Common Agricultural Policy — makes its way through Parliament, MPs in the Commons and peers in the Lords have tried to impose amendments to keep Britain’s high standards of animal husbandry and environmental care. So far the Government has rejected all such proposals. Desperate to reach a trade deal, ministers seem unwilling to block the hugely influential U.S. food and agriculture lobby from gaining access to our market.
Their argument is that, in the brave new world of deregulation, consumers will enjoy more choice and, crucially, will have access to ‘cheap’ food. But cheapness will come at a huge cost to our health, our countryside, our rural economy and our animals.
The reality is that choice will be restricted — because British farmers and producers will find it impossible to compete. From the supermarkets to takeaways, this ugly juggernaut of American food will sweep all before it.
The Agriculture Bill is about to go to the final stage of its passage through Parliament. There is one last chance for legislators to stop a free-for-all from which our agriculture would emerge the loser.
As someone who has covered the food industry for 20 years presenting The Food Programme on BBC Radio 4, I am deeply alarmed at the prospect of the advances British food has made in recent decades going into reverse.
Before Covid, British food was flourishing as never before. I think of the surge in high-quality bakeries, of our farmhouse cheeses beating rivals across the world — we produce more than France.
Even McDonald’s UK now uses free-range eggs and organic milk and recently won an RSPCA award for its animal welfare standards. I need hardly say it’s not how McDonald’s operates in the U.S.
It’s all part of Britain’s deep and enduring compassion for animals. We have 25 million free-range hens here, more than any other country — and more free-range pigs than anywhere in Europe.
In frequent talks with farmers, I have been struck by how they see themselves, not just as producers, but as custodians of the land, a vital role they fill with imaginativeness in an age of mounting concern about climate change.
The U.S. farming model is completely different. Its aim is not to work with nature but to dominate it. Industrialised and chemicalised, the entire system is a monument to the denial of biology.
I am not in any way anti-American — I’ve lived across that wonderful country in Indiana, California, Massachusetts and New York. I’m married to an American: my son and his family live in Pennsylvania.
It’s precisely because I visit regularly, and have seen at first hand the harshness of U.S. food production, that I feel so strongly.
The ‘chlorinated chicken’ has rightly become a symbol of U.S. farming at its worst, but few ask why poultry has to be washed in chlorine before it can be sold. It is because the birds are kept in such over-crowded squalor and so pumped with chemicals during their brief, unfortunate lives.
The same applies throughout American industry. Even the British Government’s farming Secretary George Eustice has admitted U.S. animal welfare law is ‘woefully deficient’. Pigs are reared in grotesquely inhumane battery farms. More than 60 million are treated with the antibiotic Carbadox, which promotes growth and is rightly banned in the UK.
Similarly, U.S. cattle are fed steroid hormones to speed growth by 20 per cent — the use of such chemicals has been illegal in Britain and the EU since 1989. And as the cattle are kept in vast confined feeding pens, they need regular antibiotics.
Incredibly, some staff processing carcasses at huge meatpacking plants wear nappies because they are not allowed time off to go to the lavatory. In arable production, pesticides are used on a scale far beyond anything in Britain. In recent decades, the U.S. has banned or controlled just 11 chemicals in food, cosmetics and cleaning products — the EU has banned 1,300.
US farming tasteless, toxic and cruel 10
Polar opposites: Cows in a British field, and in beef pens in Texas
In U.S. farming there’s almost no effort to mitigate climate change yet here the National Farmers’ Union is committed to achieving zero carbon production by 2040. What will happen to that commitment if cheap U.S. food floods in?
The U.S. genetically modified crops to be resistant to Roundup weedkiller — but after weeds grew resistant to Roundup and flourished, one U.S. farmer told me proudly crops were now engineered to be resistant to the infamous Agent Orange, a defoliant used by the U.S. military to kill vegetation in the Vietnam War.
Environmental devastation and health problems — including disabilities to as many as a million people — were caused in Vietnam by Agent Orange. Is this a road we want to go down in Britain?
The so-called cheapness of American produce is a delusion. These farming methods carry a heavy price in quality and health. A battery chicken is tasteless compared to an organic one, just as factory-farmed salmon has nothing of the flavour of wild.
Cheap, low quality foods have brought with them disturbing health problems including obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
The coronavirus crisis proved the need for resilient supply lines. But that cannot be achieved if we ruin our own domestic agricultural system and become reliant on imported food.
In World War II, when the survival of the nation was imperilled, the Government attached huge importance to domestic food output, reflected in the propaganda campaign ‘Dig for Victory’ and the Women’s Land Army. We need that collective spirit today.
It would be stupidity beyond measure to obliterate our farming industry for a short-term, unbalanced trade deal with the U.S.
A trade deal without agricultural safeguards would be a calamity for British farming and our prosperity. One in eight jobs in Britain is in food supply, while food exports brought in £9.6 billion to the economy. All that will be lost if cut-throat competition prevails.
And a vital part of our heritage will also be lost. From the robust imagery of John Bull as a yeoman squire to William Blake’s Jerusalem, with its evocation of our ‘green and pleasant land’, the countryside has always held a central place in our national soul. It must not be sacrificed on the altar of illusory cheapness or trans-Atlantic subservience.
n Sheila Dillon presents BBC Radio 4’s The Food Programme.
The Office of the European Union Representative and the Palestinian Ministry of Agriculture joined 28 Palestinian farmers at the opening of “Baladi Market” al-Istiqlal Park in al-Bireh city. “Baladi Market” supports Palestinian farmers in marketing their products and encourages Palestinian consumers to go local.
“Baladi Market” is the first joint initiative by the EU and the Ministry of Agriculture to promote and market Palestinian agricultural products to the Palestinian public. It included a variety of fresh and organic fruits, vegetables, dairy products, jams, and many more.
The market was promoted through the campaign “Go Local” – Khaleek Baladi. Hundreds of shoppers visited the market while respecting the Covid-19 health protocols issued by the Palestinian Ministry of Health.
Some of the farmers who attended the market and sold their products are receiving EU support through EU-funded projects. Many of them live in Area C where they are facing daily challenges including water shortage, denied access to their land, and attacks by Israeli settlers.
“It is my pleasure to be part of “Souq Baladi” today with Palestinian farmers who struggle on a daily basis to grow their lands and protect their crops. In Palestine, it is a challenge to be a farmer, to sustain productivity, and to protect your living. In light of this reality, the European Union and its Member States are working together with the Palestinian Authority and civil society to empower farmers and support them.
Agricultural development remains a key requirement for a future independent Palestinian state. This is part of our contribution towards maintaining the prospects of the two-state solution,” said the European Union Deputy Representative Maria Velasco.
The EU is supporting the agricultural sector in Palestine with an emphasis on promoting an agribusiness in enabling the environment and mitigating the increasing risks for agriculture-based livelihoods, especially in Area C and the Gaza Strip.
In particular, it aims to facilitate the access of women and youth, and vulnerable groups in general, to better opportunities for their potential competitiveness and sustainability. It does so by supporting job creation and developing small-medium agribusinesses initiatives and reinforcing the management and technical skills of the Palestinian farmers, with special attention to the environment and climate-sensitive initiatives.
Together with EU development partners, the European Union channels this support through programs implemented by international organizations, local and international civil society organizations, and the Palestinian Authority.
Although the World Health Organization (WHO) and World Bank set up the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB) two years ago to break the cycle, WHO chief Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus told a media press briefing that “reviews and reports are only as good as the recommendations that are implemented”.
“COVID-19 has shown that collectively, the world was woefully under prepared”, he stated.
Since the turn of the millennium, SARS, MERS, H1N1, Zika and Ebola have all demonstrated the increasing occurrences of viruses making the zoonotic leap from animals to humans – and most recently, COVID-19.
In a new report, the GPMB lays out critical lessons learned from the coronavirus pandemic so far, as well as some concrete actions which can be taken to protect ourselves moving forward.
Developing “muscle memory”, which is done through repetition, “is key to pandemic response”, according to the WHO chief, who cited how Thailand drew from its experience with SARS and H5N1 to swiftly scale up an effective track and trace system, that has left them among the least affected nations in the world by COVID-19.
“The whole world” must do this to strengthen preparedness.
Unite in solidarity
While acknowledging that there will certainly be future novel viruses and unknown diseases, the WHO chief stressed that “the only way” to confront these global threats is “as a global community, united in solidarity and committed to long-term cooperation”.
“With the right political and financial commitment and investment now, we can prevent and mitigate future pandemics”, Tedros upheld.
‘Do it all’
At this critical juncture, WHO is asking leaders to “put targeted measures in place” that will suppress the spread and protect health systems and workers.
And the UN agency is also requesting everyone “continue to do the basics”, including maintaining physical distance, washing hands, wearing masks, avoiding crowds and keeping windows and doors open when outside visits are impossible.
