BRUSSELS The European Union demanded a more balanced trade relationship with China at a leaders summit on Monday.Heading the EU delegation was European Council President Charles Michel, Commission president Ursula von der Leyen, and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country holds the rotating EU presidency. Chinas delegation was led by President Xi Jinping.
The summit, initially due to be held in the German city of Leipzig, was being held via video conference because of restrictions related to the coronavirus pandemic.
At a joint press conference following the summit, Michel said the EU had warned that it would not be taken advantage of where trade issues are concerned.
Europe needs to be a player, not a playing field, Michel said. We want a relationship with China that is based on reciprocity, responsibility and basic fairness.
Michel said that while in some areas the two sides are on the right track, more work needs to be done in others.
Real differences exist and we wont paper over them but we are ready to engage, ready to cooperate where we can, the former Belgian prime minister said.
The main issues discussed were climate change, economic and trade issues, international affairs and human rights, and the COVID-19 pandemic and related economic recovery.
The EU, which has pledged to become carbon neutral by 2050, called on Beijing to show similar leadership in tackling the climate crisis and reducing greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, of which China accounts for around 27 percent of the world total.
Michel highlighted the robust trading relationship the two sides enjoy, but insisted that Brussels wants more fairness.
We want a more balanced relationship. That means reciprocity and a level playing field, he said, pointing to Mondays signature of an agreement on Geographical Indications as a a big step in the right direction.
Ahead of the start of the summit, both sides announced a landmark agreement to protect 100 European Geographical Indications (GIs) in China and 100 Chinese GIs in the European Union against usurpation and imitation.
An EU statement said: This agreement, first concluded in November 2019, should bring reciprocal trade benefits as well as introducing consumers to guaranteed, quality products on both sides.
It reflects the commitment of the EU and China to deliver on their commitment taken at previous EU-China Summits and to adhere to international rules as a basis for trade relations.
Angela Merkel, who joined Michel for the press conference from Berlin, said the EU had applied pressure on Beijing regarding the slow progress of talks on an investment agreement, and echoed Michels insistence on securing a more balanced relationship with China.
Overall, cooperation with China must be based on certain principles reciprocity and fair competition. We are different social systems, but while we are committed to multilateralism, it must be rules-based, Merkel said.
European governments have been under increasing pressure to take a more forceful position against China over its policies in Hong Kong, where Beijing has looked to put down a pro-democracy movement with a new national security law, and in Xinjiang, where the central government has been accused of oppressing members of the Muslim Uighur ethnic minority and sending millions to so-called re-education camps.
Democratic voices in Hong Kong should be heard, rights protected, and autonomy preserved, Michel said, adding that the EU called on China to keep their promises to the people of Hong Kong, reiterated our concerns over Chinas treatment of minorities in Xinjiang in Tibet and the treatment of human rights defenders and journalists.
Leaders from the European Union and China have held a video summit focused on trade as both sides sought to revive a long-running investment deal despite concerns over Hong Kong and Beijing’s human rights record.
Tensions over trade, investments and minority rights overshadowed the opening of Monday’s virtual summit, the second such formal talks between EU and Chinese officials since June.
German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency, was backed by Council President Charles Michel, Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, as they sat down for tough talks with China’s President Xi Jinping.
The two sides went into the talks hoping to make progress on a long-running investment deal, which the EU hopes will allow European companies unfettered access to Chinese markets.
Unlimited trade access
Brussels says progress has been made on issues such as forced technology transfer, but still wants China to open up sectors such as telecoms, IT, health, financial services and manufacturing.
Brussels wants the same level of access to agriculture and food markets that China gave to the United States in their phase 1 trade agreement struck in January.
Earlier, they signed a deal to protect each other’s exported food and drink products.
No major breakthrough is expected though on Monday but the EU side hopes to persuade Xi to give fresh political impetus to the talks – and to allow his negotiators more room to compromise.
Moving on climate
Since they met in June, there has been some progress on issues such as climate change, with the EU hoping to secure a pledge from Beijing to bring forward the year of peak emissions to 2025 from 2030.
Brussels is also urging the world’s top polluter to commit to climate neutrality by 2060, and to stop building fossil fuel plants abroad.
China is planning to set up an emissions-trading system, which is yet to get going. Other developing nations are reluctant to move if China does not.
The two trading partners remain at odds however over Hong Kong. The EU criticised the arrests of dozens of pro-democracy activists this year in the former British colony, including two opposition lawmakers last month.
Hong Kong activists arrested over last year’s democracy rallies
The EU was due to press Xi on Hong Kong, where Beijing has imposed a controversial new security law, a move denounced by the West as an assault on the city’s freedoms.
Europeans have also called China out over its treatment of minority Uighurs.
Several members of the European Parliament wrote a letter ahead of the summit urging EU officials to “meaningfully address” China’s human rights violations in the Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomous Region and Hong Kong.
One of the signatories was French MEP Raphael Glucksmann, who urged Angela Merkel and Von der Leyen to adopt a strong European stance in response to the “deportation” of more than one million Muslims to detainment camps in theXinjiang region.
“Will this crime against humanity be just another footnote?” he wrote on Twitter.
Disinformation campaign
The EU has also faced pressure from the United States to take a tougher stance on China.
Recent visits of US and China officials to Europe show that both care about how the EU positions itself. The bloc does not want to become a battleground between the two powers, needing both and reluctant to alienate either.
Brussels has preferred a middle path, treating Beijing as both a potential partner and a “systemic rival”.
The coronavirus pandemic has also created new obstacles, notably what Brussels sees as a China-orchestrated campaign of disinformation about the disease to deflect blame from the health crisis.
Beijing has been accused of trying to influence European officials, and foreign policy chief Borrell has twice denied this year that the External Action Service – a kind of EU foreign office that he leads – has bowed to pressure from Beijing to alter documents. China has denied any wrongdoing.
BEIJING, Sept. 14 (Xinhua) — Leaders of China, Germany and European Union (EU) on Monday agreed to strengthen communication and cooperation to ensure the success of the upcoming series of major political agenda between China and the EU, enhance mutual trust, seek mutual benefits on a win-win basis and uphold multilateralism, vowing to bring the ties up to a higher level.
That came as Chinese President Xi Jinping co-hosted a China-Germany-EU leaders’ meeting Monday evening in Beijing via video link with German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose country currently holds the EU’s rotating presidency, European Council President Charles Michel and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.
The leaders announced the official signing of the China-EU agreement on geographical indications (GI), stated their commitment to speeding up the negotiations of the China-EU Bilateral Investment Treaty to achieve the goal of concluding the negotiations within this year, decided to establish a China-EU High Level Environment and Climate Dialogue and a China-EU High Level Digital Cooperation Dialogue, and to forge China-EU green and digital partnerships.
Xi pointed out the COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating changes unseen in a century, and mankind is standing at a new crossroad faced with multiple common challenges. It is only more imperative for China and the EU, as two major forces, markets and civilizations, to firmly grasp the general trend of mutual support and united cooperation in face of such situations, unswervingly promote the sound and stable development of the China-EU comprehensive strategic partnership, to inject more positive energy into COVID-19 response efforts, economic recovery and championing justice, Xi said.
Xi proposed four principles the two sides should adhere to for developing China-EU relationship.
First, China and the EU should adhere to peaceful coexistence. As there are no identical political systems in the world, the coexistence of multiple civilizations represents the normalcy. “The more firm the strength underpinning China-EU peaceful coexistence, the more guaranteed the world peace and prosperity,” Xi said.
Second, China and the EU should adhere to openness and cooperation. China is working toward the goal of fostering a new, dual-cycle development architecture with the domestic cycle as the mainstay and with domestic and international development reinforcing each other. “China will seek better interconnectivity and effectiveness between the two markets and resources on the two sides, to promote common development in a more robust and sustainable way,” said Xi.
Third, China and the EU should adhere to multilateralism. Xi stressed China is ready to work with the EU to step up dialogue and coordination at bilateral, regional and global levels, stay committed to a global governance outlook featuring consultation, contribution and shared benefit, defend the international order and system with the United Nations at the core, promote the political settlements of international and regional hot-spot issues.
Fourth, China and the EU should adhere to dialogue and consultation. “China and the EU need to stay committed to the mainstream of cooperation, resolve misunderstanding through dialogue, overcome difficulties through development and properly manage differences.”
Noting China and Europe are important trade and investment partners to each other, Xi said the two sides should step up macro-policy coordination, take more measures and unleash more cooperation opportunities.
Noting the agreement on GI was officially signed on Monday, Xi said the two sides should adopt a positive and pragmatic attitude, speed up negotiations on the China-EU investment agreement to achieve the goal of completing the negotiations by the end of this year, working to upgrade cooperation, facilitate the post-epidemic world economic recovery and jointly safeguard an open trade and investment environment.
“The Chinese market remains open to the EU. More high-quality and safe EU agricultural products are welcome to enter China,” Xi said.
“The two sides should forge China-EU green partnerships,” Xi said, adding that the two sides need to participate constructively in the global multilateral process of tackling climate change and protecting global biodiversity, support each other in running the UN Climate Change Conference in Glasgow next year and promoting the 15th Conference of the Parties of the convention on biodiversity in Kunming to achieve positive results, and contribute to global sustainable development.
The two sides need to forge China-EU digital partnerships, Xi said, adding that China has put forward its global initiative on data security, and hopes that the EU will work with China to formulate standards and rules of the global digital field and promote the sound development of global governance in digital economy.
Xi said the two sides should properly address each other’s legitimate concerns, adding that China follows closely the recent developments of the EU in 5G, foreign investment review, government procurement and competition policy.
Xi expressed the hope that the EU will keep its trade and investment market open, foster an open, fair, just and non-discriminatory business environment and protect the legitimate rights and interests of Chinese companies.
Since the outbreak of COVID-19, China and the EU have maintained close contacts in anti-pandemic and global health cooperation, demonstrating the significance and global impact of China-EU relations, Xi said.
For the next step, the two sides should strengthen macroeconomic policy coordination and cooperation, maintain the stability of the global industrial chain and supply chain, and jointly promote the recovery of the world economy, Xi said.
Xi called for strengthening vaccine research and development cooperation, to strive for making vaccines universally available global public goods, and fully accommodate the availability and affordability of the vaccines in developing countries.
Personnel exchanges must be resumed in an orderly manner, and the cross-border movement of goods should be facilitated, Xi said.
Xi urged actively carrying out tripartite cooperation with Africa on the basis of full respect for African countries’ will, calling on the international community, especially multilateral financial institutions and commercial creditors, to take stronger actions on debt relief in Africa.
Xi also clarified China’s principled position on Hong Kong-related and Xinjiang-related issues, saying that the essence of the issues is to safeguard China’s national sovereignty, security and unity, and to protect the rights of people of all ethnic groups to live and work in peace.
“China firmly opposes any person or force creating instability, division and chaos in China, and meddling in China’s internal affairs by any country,” Xi stressed.
“There is no one-size-fits-all path to human rights development in the world. There is no best way, only the better one,” Xi stressed, adding that countries should priorly handle their own things.
Chinese people will not accept “an instructor” on human rights and oppose “double standards”. China is willing to strengthen exchanges with the European side based on the principle of mutual respect so that the two sides can both make progress, said Xi.
For their parts, Merkel, Michel and von der Leyen said China is an important strategic partner respected by the EU. It is imperative for Europe and China to strengthen cooperation, jointly safeguard multilateralism, resist unilateralism and protectionism, and respond more effectively to various global challenges, which is in line with the common interests of both Europe and China and the international community.
The EU is willing to work with China to strengthen dialogue, promote mutual trust, and push cooperation in the fields including economy and trade, investment, green economy, climate change, biodiversity, and sustainable development for more achievements.
The European side was encouraged by the signing of the agreement on GI, welcomed China relaxing market access restrictions, expanding opening up, pledging to concluding the EU-China investment agreement negotiations within this year to inject new impetus into EU-China relations.
The European side is willing to strengthen cooperation with China in international organizations, promote anti-pandemic international cooperation, maintain free trade, and promote the economic recovery in Europe, China as well as the world at an early date.
On the human rights issue, the European side admitted its problems and expressed the hope to conduct dialogue with China based on the principles of equality and mutual respect to enhance mutual understanding and handle their differences properly.
The leaders also exchanged views on international and regional issues including the Afghanistan and the Iranian nuclear issues, agreeing to strengthen communication and coordination and to make joint efforts in maintaining international and regional security and stability.
Sept 14, Colombo: The Delegation of the European Union (EU) to Sri Lanka and the Maldives in collaboration with the University of Peradeniya announced EU-funded Capacity Building for Higher Education (CBHE) projects for 2020 on 10 September 2020.
The announcement took place at the University of Peradeniya together with 15 other participant institutions. The EU in Sri Lanka is funding nine capacity-building projects in 2020 through the Erasmus+ program, which aims to promote the sustainable development of its partners in the field of higher education.
Frank Hess, Head of Cooperation at the EU Delegation, welcomed the occasion and congratulated all Sri Lankan partners. He also acknowledged the coordinating role played by the University of Peradeniya.
He noted that “Education, research, and development are key EU priorities for its external relations with partner countries such as Sri Lanka and that higher education institutions play a key role in advancing societies”. He explained that Erasmus + offers a broad range of funding opportunities which allows university staff, including academic and administrative staff, to benefit from CBHE projects.
Prof. Upul B. Dissanayake, Vice-Chancellor, University of Peradeniya said that the University has thoroughly focused on initiating both Capacity Building and International Credit Mobility (ICM) Programs with European Universities under both Erasmus Mundus and ERASMUS+.
He added that from 2015 until now, the University of Peradeniya has been a recipient of most of these awards in Sri Lanka, as a partner in many applications that were successful in winning the grants. He also mentioned that as the No.1 Ranked University in Sri Lanka, University of Peradeniya has taken the leading role in a collaborative effort with other Sri Lankan Universities as well in this venture.
Fifteen universities are participating in the EU-funded CBHE projects. They are the University of Moratuwa, University of Ruhuna, Eastern University of Sri Lanka, South Eastern University of Sri Lanka, University of Sabaragamuwa, Uva Wellasaa University, University of Colombo, General Sir John Kotelawala Defence University, University of Sri Jayawardenepura, Rajarata University of Sri Lanka, University of Jaffna, Sri Lanka Institute of Information and Technology, Sri Lanka Sustainable Energy Authority, Sri Lanka Energy Managers Association, and the SLT campus. Two institutions from the Maldives Dhivehiraajeyge Qaumee Univesrity and Villa College are also benefitting from the CBHE Erasmus+ funding.
If China’s tightening grip on its closing society has an eerie familiarity, it should. The Chinese Communist Party’s wholesale disregard for its citizens’ fundamental freedoms has long invited comparisons to rule in the former Soviet Union. The recently imposed National Security Law and Hong Kongers’ reactions bear ugly witness to the validity of that assessment. In response, Congress should look back to Cold War legislation that clearly demonstrates that America stands with the victims of totalitarianism.
Last month, the Chinese Coast Guard intercepted and stopped a speed boat with 12 people on board – including several democracy activists – attempting to flee Hong Kong. Their reported destination was Taiwan, where they intended to seek political asylum. Similar stories of political persecution and arrests in Hong Kong have multiplied this year, especially in conjunction with the National Security Law. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo correctly observed that its effect is to make Hong Kong, “Just another Communist-run city where people will be subject to the party elites’ whims.”
When British rule in Hong Kong ended in 1997 and the territory was handed over to China, it did so with Beijing’s explicit agreement that the city would for 50 years keep a locally-elected legislature and greater freedoms than were afforded other parts of China. Since then, Beijing has systematically undermined those promises, criminalizing free speech and assembly with harsh penalties for those residents living in defiance of Chinese Communist Party dogma.
Repressive steps by Beijing coupled with heated rhetoric from Washington has led to talk of a cold war redux. It remains to be seen whether the term renewed is apt; nonetheless, the parallels between China’s subjugation of Hong Kong and Soviet domination of Eastern Europe are clear.
Decades ago, the Baltic Sea was both a barrier and pathway to freedom. Today, the waters of the South China Sea between Hong Kong and Taiwan pose a similar passage. During the Cold War, Soviet and Warsaw Pact authorities turned states into penitentiaries to keep citizens from emigrating abroad. A militarized border between East and West in Europe stretched for hundreds of miles of Baltic Coast. An estimated 5,000 people attempted to reach the West over the Baltic Sea; many drowned or were arrested in their attempts. Only some 800 people are known to have safely made the maritime passage.
As the Chinese Communist Party continues to dismantle the remnants of Hong Kong’s democratic liberties, its residents will begin to seek freedom abroad over an ever-intrusive surveillance state. Beijing, like the past Soviet leaders, is embarrassed by the departure of their citizens and fearful of the truths they can bear witness to. Chinese leaders today are reacting just as their Cold War counterparts did, clamping down on borders, equating the desire to leave with criminality, suffocating Chinese individuals holding their government to account from afar.
In the 1970s, in the face of Soviet limits on emigration from the USSR, the U.S. Congress adopted what became known as the Jackson-Vanik Amendment to the U.S. Trade Act of 1974. That legislation linked open emigration policies of then-communist countries to their trade and economic relations with the United States. That provision successfully pressured the Kremlin to ease restrictions on peoples, particularly for Soviet Jews wishing to reach Israel, the United States and other points abroad. As a consequence, the U.S. was able to impose real economic, and hence political, costs on the Soviet government for its human rights abuses while also laying out a pathway for Soviet and East Bloc citizens to eventually find refuge abroad.
China had been subject to Jackson-Vanik requirements until Congress removed them in 2002, during headier days of optimism for a freer, more responsible and trustworthy China. Nearly two decades later, systemic PRC human rights abuses grievously perpetuated against the Uyghurs, Tibetans, religious minorities and now all of Hong Kong expose the Chinese Communist Party for the brutal, totalitarian force that it is.
Authoritarian regimes thrive on their people’s false perception that the world is deaf to their sufferings. Now is the time for the U.S. and its allies to stand together with the imposition of a new Jackson-Vanik amendment specifically updated for today’s China. The transatlantic community must show the freedom-loving peoples of China that they are not alone.
Scott Cullinane is the executive director of the US-Europe Alliance. Richard Kraemer is the president of the board of the US-Europe Alliance and a fellow at the European Values Center for Security Policy.
The European Union (EU) has donated EUR 500,000 in humanitarian aid to the United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA) to step up hygiene and sanitation measures. This vital donation will contribute to the Agency’s efforts to contain the COVID-19 pandemic in the West Bank, including in East Jerusalem.
Through this generous support, UNRWA will provide much-needed hygiene items to Palestine refugee families in quarantine, with the aim of controlling the spread of the virus. This humanitarian aid from the EU will improve sanitation services for refugees living in camps, and also provide families suffering from difficult economic conditions with much-needed hygiene items, especially in areas that have recorded an increase in COVID-19 infections.
“We are extremely grateful for the EU’s humanitarian support,” says Gwyn Lewis, Director of UNRWA Operations in the West Bank. “Many Palestine refugees in-home quarantine are struggling to make ends meet. Providing basic hygiene materials not only ensures that families have what they need at home to protect themselves, but also reduces the economic burden they experience, which means that they can afford to stay at home,” she noted.
Palestine refugee camps have seen an increase in the amount of waste produced due to recent lockdowns imposed by the local authorities. This has created an additional burden on UNRWA environmental health laborers. This grant will allow the Agency to hire the additional laborers it needs to keep camps clean and safe for Palestine refugees.
UNRWA has continued to provide safe and regular sanitation services to Palestine refugees throughout the COVID-19 crisis and has worked to ensure that the most affected areas inside camps are disinfected. This includes a periodic collection of solid waste and disinfection of waste collection points, as well as the sterilization of UNRWA installations and facilities especially health centers.
A World in Disorder, issued by the Global Preparedness Monitoring Board (GPMB), an independent monitoring and accountability body which prepares for global health crises, (GPMB), notes that the coronavirus has killed close to a million people, impacting health systems, food supplies and economies.
“We can no longer wring our hands and say something must be done”, said Tedros Adhanom, Director-General of the World Health Organization (WHO).
“When it comes to preparedness, our biggest obstacle is ourselves. Short-term self-interest is simply not sufficient. It is a basic principle of public health: no individual alone can protect themselves from an outbreak, & no nation can act alone in a pandemic”-@DrTedros
“It’s time for countries to get their hands dirty and build the public health systems to ensure a pandemic of this magnitude and severity never happens again”, he added.
According to A World in Disorder, it would take 500 years to spend as much on preparedness to equal what COVID-19 is costing the world, which GPMB says will be in the trillions.Last year, the Board warned that the world was unprepared for a deadly pandemic and called for urgent action to break the cycle of panic and neglect that has characterized past responses to global health crises.
The new report provides a harsh assessment of the global COVID-19 response, calling it “a collective failure to take pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response seriously and prioritize it accordingly”.
According to GPMB “the world cannot afford this”.
Accountability is crucial
In many countries, leaders have struggled to take early decisive action based on science, evidence and best practices, leading to a profound and deepening deficit in trust that is hampering response efforts, GPMB highlighted.
“Transparency and accountability are essential in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic”, said GPMB co-Chair Elhadj As Sy. “Trust is the foundation of Government-community relationships for better health but that trust dissipates when governments and leaders do not deliver on their commitments.”
Responsible leadership and good citizenship have been key determinants of COVID-19’s impact, the report notes, underscoring that “systems are only as effective as the people who use them”.
Strengthen WHO
Viruses don’t respect borders — WHO chief
The report finds that although COVID-19 has demonstrated the deep interconnectedness of the world through economics, trade, information and travel, one of the greatest challenges of the pandemic has been faltering multilateral cooperation.
“Viruses don’t respect borders. The only way out of this devastating pandemic is along the path of collective action, which demands a strong and effective multilateral system”, said GPMB co-Chair Gro Harlem Brundtland, who also served as WHO Director-General from 1998 to 2003.
“The UN system, which includes the WHO, was created after World War Two and has helped make the world a better place for billions of people”, she continued, adding, “it needs to be defended, strengthened, and revitalized, not attacked and undermined”.
Fragilities abound
The pandemic has not only shone a spotlight on the fragility of the world’s health systems, but on the global economy as well – underscoring the urgency of investing in preparedness to avoid similar tragedies in the future.
To bring order out of chaos, the report highlights the actions needed to stem the pandemic and avoid the next catastrophe, which calls for responsible leadership, engaged citizenship, strong and agile health security systems, sustained investment, and robust global governance for preparedness.
“This will not be the last pandemic, nor the last global health emergency”, said the WHO chief, “but with the right political and financial investments now, we can prevent and mitigate future pandemics and protect our future and the future of generations to come”.
The Iranian government is weighing an assassination attempt against the American ambassador to South Africa, U.S. intelligence reports say, according to a U.S. government official familiar with the issue and another official who has seen the intelligence.
News of the plot comes as Iran continues to seek ways to retaliate for President Donald Trump’s decision to kill a powerful Iranian general earlier this year, the officials said. If carried out, it could dramatically ratchet up already serious tensions between the U.S. and Iran and create enormous pressure on Trump to strike back — possibly in the middle of a tense election season.
U.S. officials have been aware of a general threat against the ambassador, Lana Marks, since the spring, the officials said. But the intelligence about the threat to the ambassador has become more specific in recent weeks. The Iranian Embassy in Pretoria is involved in the plot, the U.S. government official said.
Still, attacking Marks is one of several options U.S. officials believe Iran’s regime is considering for retaliation since the general, Qassem Soleimani, was assassinated by a U.S. drone strike in January. At the time, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo said the U.S. killed Soleimani to reestablish deterrence against Iran.
An intelligence community directive known as “Duty to Warn” requires U.S. spy agencies to notify a potential victim if intelligence indicates their life could be in danger; in the case of U.S. government officials, credible threats would be included in briefings and security planning. Marks has been made aware of the threat, the U.S. government official said. The intelligence also has been included in the CIA World Intelligence Review, known as the WIRe, a classified product that is accessible to senior policy and security officials across the U.S. government, as well as certain lawmakers and their staff.
Marks, 66, was sworn in as U.S. ambassador last October. She’s known Trump for more than two decades and has been a member of his Mar-a-Lago club in Florida. Critics of Trump have derided her as a “handbag designer,” but her supporters retort that she is a successful businesswoman — her eponymous handbags run as much as $40,000 — with numerous international connections. A personal friend of the late Princess Diana, she also was born in South Africa and speaks some of the country’s key languages, including Afrikaans and Xhosa.
In this photo taken Monday May 11, 2020 at OR Tambo Airport Johannesurg and supplied by the United States Embassy in Pretoria, South Africa, showing U.S. Ambassador to South Africa Lana Marks posing with ventilators donated by the U.S. Government. The United State is donating up to 1000 ventilators to assist with South Africa’s national response to COVID-19. (Photo/Leon Kgoedi, United States Embassy South Africa via AP)
The intelligence community isn’t exactly sure why Iranians would target Marks, who has few, if any, known links to Iran. It’s possible the Iranians took her long friendship with Trump into consideration, the U.S. government official said.
The Iranian government also operates clandestine networks in South Africa, the officials noted, and has had a foothold there for decades. In 2015, Al Jazeera and The Guardian reported on leaked intelligence documents that detailed an extensive secret network of Iranian operatives in South Africa. Marks may also be an easier target than U.S. diplomats in other parts of the world, such as Western Europe, where the U.S. has stronger relationships with local law enforcement and intelligence services.
Iran’s Islamist leaders have a history of carrying out assassinations beyond their country’s borders, as well as taking hostages, since seizing power following a popular uprising in the late 1970s. In recent decades, Iran has generally avoided directly targeting U.S. diplomats, although Iranian-backed militias have long attacked U.S. diplomatic facilities and personnel in Iraq.
Trump alleged after Soleimani’s killing that the Iranian general had been plotting attacks on American diplomatic missions, although U.S. officials later cast doubt on his claims. “They were looking to blow up our embassy,” Trump said in January, referring to the massive, heavily fortified U.S. diplomatic compound in Iraq. Later, in a Fox News interview, he said, “I can reveal I believe it probably would’ve been four embassies.”
Days after Soleimani’s death, Iran launched a ballistic missile salvo at a military base in Iraq that housed U.S. forces, causing traumatic brain injuries among dozens of American troops. Trump declined to retaliate and said, “Iran appears to be standing down, which is a good thing for all parties concerned and a very good thing for the world” — though he announced fresh sanctions on the Iranian regime and warned it against further retaliatory moves.
Some analysts, however, said at the time that Iran likely would seek other ways to avenge Soleimani’s death. Gen. Kenneth McKenzie, head of U.S. Central Command, was at the top of Iran’s hit list earlier this year, according to media reports. McKenzie said last month that he expected a new “response” from Iran to America’s ongoing presence in Iraq.
“I do not know what the nature of that response will be, but we will certainly be ready for it, should it occur,” he said. On Wednesday, McKenzie confirmed plans to cut the U.S. troop presence in Iraq from 5,200 to 3,000 by the end of September.
During an online forum in August, McKenzie said Iran was “our central problem” in the region, and acknowledged that the danger from Iranian proxies in Iraq had complicated U.S. efforts against ISIS, the radical Sunni terrorist organization and movement. “The threat against our forces from Shia militant groups has caused us to put resources that we would otherwise use against ISIS to provide for our own defense and that has lowered our ability to work effectively against them,” he said.
The White House-based National Security Council did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Neither did an Iranian official with Iran’s mission at the United Nations, nor a South African Embassy official in Washington. Spokespeople for the State Department, the CIA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence declined to comment.
The U.S. and Iran have been bitter foes for decades, openly confronting each other at times — and gingerly engaging in diplomacy at others — but more often waging a shadowy battle for power and influence across the broader Middle East. Under Trump, the two countries have veered toward outright military conflict on more than one occasion.
Last summer, the U.S. blamed Iran and its proxies for a series of explosions aimed at oil tankers. Iran took down a U.S. drone, and the U.S. later managed to take down an Iranian drone.
Trump acknowledged that, after Iran took down the U.S. drone, he nearly authorized a direct attack on Iranian soil, but he held off after being told 150 people could die — a toll he said was disproportionate.
The countries’ dispute deepened in the months afterward, especially in Iraq, where America and the U.S. have long engaged in proxy warfare. In December, an American contractor was killed in Iraq after an attack by an Iranian-allied militia. The U.S. reacted by bombing sites held by the group, killing around two dozen of its fighters. Soon afterward, protesters believed linked to the militia breached parts of the U.S. Embassy compound in Baghdad.
Then, in early January, the United States staged an airstrike that killed Soleimani as he was visiting Baghdad. It was a major escalation given Soleimani’s importance in Iran, although U.S. officials described it as a defensive measure.
Soleimani led the Quds Force, a unit of Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps that oversees much of the country’s military activities outside its borders. Americans blame him for the death of numerous U.S. troops in the region.
Iran vowed to retaliate. Its first major move was the Jan. 8 missile attack on the al-Asad military base in Iraq. But around the same time, an Iranian missile took down a civilian airliner, killing 176 people and leading to fury inside Iran at the regime’s incompetence and shifting explanations for the incident, along with condemnation abroad.
Iran and South Africa have cooperated on a number of fronts in recent decades, including at the U.N., where South Africa has at times advocated for Iran. South Africa’s uranium deposits are believed to have been a major interest for Iran as it was ramping up its nuclear program, which Tehran has always insisted was meant for peaceful energy purposes, not a bomb. The pair also have a military relationship, having signed some basic defense pacts.
Strange Iran-connected plots have been uncovered before.
Almost a decade ago, the U.S. arrested and eventually sentenced to prison an Iranian-American man who was alleged to have tried to hire Mexican drug cartel assassins to kill Saudi Arabia’s ambassador to the United States as he dined in Cafe Milano, a swanky Washington restaurant frequented by the city’s wealthy and powerful. The U.S. accused Soleimani of overseeing the plot.
Founded jointly with the Wechsler Family Foundation
<div id="jib_head">
Vol. 20, No. 20
In recent months, Turkey has increased its efforts to enhance its position as a regional power following in the path of the Ottoman Empire, adopting daring measures that border on megalomania at home, in the region, and internationally.
A video with distinct nationalistic themes was recently broadcast by the Turkish Ministry of Information. The film is entitled, “The Red Apple [kizil elma],” which is a Turkish cultural concept describing Turkey’s ambition to achieve superpower status. Beyond the context of Turkey’s religious battles in Istanbul, the Turkish video also displays a troubling appetite for Jerusalem and Saudi Arabia’s holy sites in Mecca and Medina.
In the Persian Gulf, where Qatar is at odds with the Emirates and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Turkey has allied itself with Qatar. Some 5,000 Turkish soldiers are stationed in Qatar to help Doha protect itself and deter enemies.
Turkey also displays considerable hyper-activity in Palestinian and Israeli issues. Turkey stands in solidarity with Hamas, Turkey’s partner and protégé in the Muslim Brotherhood camp. Turkish citizenship and passports were granted to a “dozen” Hamas activists, including convicted terrorists.1
For the United States, Turkey’s military acquisitions present a problem. Erdoğan’s determination to acquire Russia’s advanced S-400 anti-aircraft missile system forced the United States to cancel a deal to supply F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft to Turkey.
Do not underestimate President Erdoğan’s ability to utilize Turkey’s strategic assets to advance his bold strategies. To prevent Erdoğan from provocations against Israel, it must be made clear to him the limits to the actions that Israel is willing to tolerate.
In recent months, Turkey has increased its efforts to enhance its position as a regional power following in the path of the Ottoman Empire, adopting daring measures that border on megalomania at home, in the region, and internationally. These steps reflect President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan’s worldview that sees himself – all at the same time – as the sultan of a resurgent empire, the leader of a modern and powerful Turkish nation, and an Islamic leader according to the “correct” theological interpretation, which he sees as that of the Muslim Brotherhood. He views himself as the pillar of the Brotherhood in the region.
This weltanschauung places Erdoğan as the leader of the return to the Ottoman Empire’s glory days and protector of Muslims against the plots of local and regional enemies (such as the Turkish dissident leader Fethullah Gülen, pragmatic Muslims led by the United Arab Emirates, Egypt, Saudi Arabia), and foreign foes (Greece, Israel, Europe, and the United States).
A video with distinct nationalistic themes was recently broadcast by the Turkish Ministry of Information.2 The film is entitled, “The Red Apple [kizil elma],” which is a Turkish cultural concept describing Turkey’s ambition to achieve superpower status or some far-reaching goal no matter the sacrifice. Turkish policies reflect the official interpretation of the “Red Apple” and its implementation on a broad range of fronts.
Playing to Turkish and Islamic audiences, Erdoğan’s crowning moment in the video was the transformation of the historic Hagia Sophia church (built in 537 CE in Constantinople/Istanbul) from a museum to a mosque on July 10, 2020, and his arrival for Friday prayers there on July 24. It was a show of power domestically and to the Christian world. The move was also to serve as a boost for Turkish patriotism and Islamic adherence.
Ottoman “warriors” enter the Hagia Sophia museum, once a church, and now a mosque. (MEMRI, screengrab from Turkish video)
Beyond the context of Turkey’s religious battles in Istanbul, the Turkish video also displays a troubling appetite for Jerusalem and Saudi Arabia’s holy sites in Mecca and Medina. The first screenshot below shows the holy Kaaba in Mecca; the second shows the green dome over Muhammed’s grave in Medina, and the last shot of the video shows the Temple Mount with al-Aqsa Mosque on it. Indeed, Erdoğan ended a speech on July 10, 2020, saying that the “revival of the Hagia Sophia as a mosque is ushering the news for the liberation of al-Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem.”3
The following are some of the bold steps Turkey has recently taken:
Facing growing economic hardships, Turkey announced the discovery of a massive gas field in the Black Sea, which will ensure a bright and independent economic future and a robust international standing economically.
Turkish fighter planes flying cover for a Turkish oil exploration ship. (screengrab from MEMRI)
Turkey continues to project its power to its Arab neighbors, particularly Syria and Iraq, in order to restrain the Kurds and strengthen radical Islamic forces who are battling against opponents supported by Iran and Russia, or the United States.
Regionally, Erdoğan’s alliance with the Libyan Government of National Accord (GNA), headed by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj, stands out. This places Erdoğan in a confrontation with parties of the pragmatic Islamic camp, headed by Egypt and the Emirates, and indirectly with Russia, which supports his rival Marshal Khalifa Hafter of the Libyan National Army.
Turkey’s alliance with Libya’s Sarraj comes at a time of conflict over energy resources in the eastern Mediterranean that Erdoğan launched against Greece, Cyprus, and Egypt, who are supported by France, Italy, and the Emirates. Erdoğan’s agreement with Sarraj on the division of the economic zones of the sea between Turkey and Libya, ostensibly in reaction to an Israeli-Greece-Cyprus agreement on a gas pipeline from Israel to Europe, has led to growing military tensions. France, Italy, the Emirates, and Israel have rallied to assist Greece.
In the Persian Gulf, where Qatar is at odds with the Emirates and other members of the Gulf Cooperation Council, Turkey has allied itself with Qatar. Some 5,000 Turkish soldiers are stationed in Qatar to help Doha protect itself and deter enemies. A sizeable Turkish base is being built in the state. In 2019, Erdoğan named the base after one of Mohammed’s famous military commanders in the seventh century, Khalid bin Walid.4 In an account in the Persian press, a new base will be “inaugurated” for the Qatar-Turkey Combined Joint Force Command adjacent to the “Tariq ibn Ziyad” camp. [Tariq was a 7th-century Islamic general who captured Gibraltar, originally called Jabal Tariq, “Tariq’s mountain.”]
Erdoğan greets Turkish troops in Doha, Qatar, in 2017. (Turkish, Iranian Press)
Turkey has sent forces to the Horn of Africa region as well, particularly to Somalia, and to a lesser degree, to Djibouti. Some 200 Turkish sailors/soldiers are in Mogadishu. Turkey has also leased the Sudanese port of Suakin on the Red Sea, once a major Ottoman Port. The Turkish base in Mogadishu claims to have trained 10,000 Somali soldiers.5 (YouTube screengrab)6
For the United States, Turkey’s military acquisitions present a problem. Erdoğan’s determination to acquire Russia’s advanced S-400 anti-aircraft missile system forced the United States to cancel a deal to supply F-35 Joint Strike Fighter aircraft to Turkey. Turkey also keeps close relations with Iran in a way that undermines the U.S. economic sanctions. On September 8, 2020, Erdogan and Rouhani led a joint leadership meeting aimed at widening the economic relations between the two countries.
S-400 air defense missiles arrived from Russia in Ankara in July 2019. (Turkish Defense Ministry)
Turkey also displays considerable hyper-activity in Palestinian and Israeli issues. Turkey stands in solidarity with Hamas, Turkey’s partner and protégé in the Muslim Brotherhood camp. Erdoğan met on August 23, 2020, with Hamas’ leadership and granted Turkish citizenship and passports to a “dozen” Hamas activists, including convicted terrorists.7Erdoğan’s meeting with Hamas leadership. (Raf Sanchez, Twitter)8
At the same time, Turkey is happy to provide support for the entire Palestinian governance. It is making its presence known in Jerusalem, both in the Islamic and economic sense, thereby challenging the traditional positions of Jordan and Saudi Arabia in the city. Turkish activities center on the al-Aqsa Mosque. The bellicose Turkish video mentioned above ends with a photo of the Temple Mount. (The Ottomans, of course, lost control of Jerusalem to the British in 1917.)
The closing picture from the Turkish video, showing the al-Aqsa Mosque and the Dome of the Rock.Ottoman leaders Enver Pasha and Jamal Pasha visiting the Dome of the Rock in 1916. (Library of Congress)
The American peace plan and the peace agreement between Israel and the United Arab Emirates, which both weaken the Palestinians’ bargaining ability, drew rage in Ankara. Turkey leveled fierce criticism even though it maintains diplomatic relations and a very extensive financial relationship with Israel, all the while trying to present itself as the Palestinians’ greatest supporter.
Erdoğan’s Strategic Advantages
Turkish policies are under criticism for creating instability, for their pretentiousness and presumptuousness that do not always match Turkey’s real power or its few accomplishments, which actually show the limits of Erdoğan’s power. But one should not underestimate President Erdoğan’s ability to utilize Turkey’s strategic assets to advance his challenging strategy. Erdoğan recognizes these assets at his disposal:
Turkey’s unique geo-strategic position as the link between Europe and the Middle East and as the bridge over which a large part of the Middle East refugees reach Europe. The European nations’ fear of waves of more refugees makes them vulnerable and potential extortion targets; it weakens their bargaining ability with Turkey, despite the growing criticism of Erdoğan’s policies.
A large population of Turkish ex-pats in Europe has dual Turkish-European citizenship and is located in key countries in Europe, particularly Germany. It is clear to Erdoğan that even if European countries increase their criticism of Turkey’s provocation of Greece, a member of the EU, Turkey can presume that Germany will prevent the imposition of any significant sanctions on Ankara.
Turkey’s situation as a member of NATO, especially the only Muslim and Middle Eastern country in the alliance, requires the West’s vigilance in reacting to Erdoğan’s whims.
Turkey’s military strength gives it an advantage against any of its neighbors and in any course of action. Turkey, for instance, has a clear advantage in the naval order of battle against Greece.
Turkey has the political boldness and the readiness to invest military and economic assets to further its policies against other countries and players, many of whom are reluctant and hesitant to set clear limits on Turkey’s actions – for various reasons. Notable examples are Europe and the Christian world, who barely responded to the change of the status of the Hagia Sophia shrine, and Israel, who refused to respond to Turkish provocations and agreed to solve the Mavi Marmara ship crisis by acceding to most of Turkey’s demands, to placate the United States and prevent harm to economic ties with the Turks.
The apparent American interest expressed in both political parties to minimize military commitments in conflicts of secondary importance to the United States and the need to preserve freedom of action for U.S. aircraft based in the Turkish Incirlik airbase restrains American ability to act against Turkey.
Limited Achievements
Despite these strategic advantages, the data and statistics of the global and regional arena do not indicate Turkish achievements; rather, they reflect Ankara’s limited and accurate weight:
At home, the regime is facing acute economic difficulties that have led to a significant drop in the value of the Turkish lira. With the continuing pressures created by the coronavirus, major damage hit the tourism sector. In addition, although Erdoğan’s status is solid, the political situation is uncomfortable for him, as his opponents have won in some of the local elections.
In the regional arena, the pragmatic camp has been strengthened because of the agreement between Israel and the Emirates. This allows Israel to back this camp more significantly than in the past. At the same time, the Muslim Brotherhood continues to weaken, both due to the agreement and because the parties representing the movement in Jordan and Egypt were outlawed.
Turkey’s allies in the region are suffering from weakness. This can be said both about the Palestinians who are at an unprecedented nadir and about the Government of National Accord in Libya that almost disintegrated recently and remained alive only because of Turkish intervention. Turkish pretensions in the Palestinian context, including the attempt to gain status in Jerusalem and in the al-Aqsa Mosque, currently have produced no tangible results.
In the face of the mobilization of Egypt, the United Arab Emirates (UAE), and Russia to halt Turkish moves in Libya, and with France, Italy, and the UAE mobilizing to defend Greece from Turkish threats, Erdoğan must recalculate his steps and recognize the limitations of his power.
The United States is willing to deal with the Turkish provocations only to a certain extent, and the cancellation of the F-35 deal was evidence of that. In addition, against the background of Moscow’s sharp reaction to the downing of the Russian plane by Turkey in 2015, Russia also restricts Turkey’s freedom to act in northern Syria, given Moscow’s commitment to the survival of its ally, Assad.
So what is Turkey’s next step? The “Red Apple” video exposes the depth and roots of Erdoğan’s aspirations for hegemony in the region. As any regional bully, Erdogan will not hesitate to expand his control and influence vis-à-vis those who are willing to bow down to him or those who, out of their weakness and ideological affinity to the Muslim Brotherhood, are ready to ask for his support in promoting their interests and are ready to pay by allowing Erdogan to gain a foothold and economic benefits.
On the other hand, when Erdoğan is met with determination and willingness to set clear boundaries, he will try to avoid confrontation because, deep in his heart, he is aware of the limitations of his power. Thus, the policy that the EU will adopt towards Turkey at the expected meeting of the EU heads of states on September 23, 2020, will determine to a large extent how Turkey will act in regard to Greece in the conflict over oil exploration rights. The same is true for the other friction areas in which Turkey is involved.
Israel is perceived by Erdoğan as a powerful rival that threatens Turkish and Islamic interests and promotes an ideology opposite to that of Turkey. This can be seen, among other things, through Israel joining the pragmatic Sunni camp in the region, led by the Emirates, Turkey’s sworn rival that does not hesitate to confront Turkey in every arena, including Libya, the eastern Mediterranean, Qatar, the Palestinian camp, and Saudi Arabia – the ultimate destination of Turkish hegemonic aspirations. That can also be seen in the video, which presents images of the Kaaba in Mecca, Mohammed’s grave in Medina, and the al-Aqsa Mosque in Jerusalem.
The Turkish provocation against Israel is unrestrained and is reflected in the Turkish opposition to Israel’s normalization of ties with the Arab world, its attempts to thwart the plan to lay a gas pipeline from Israel to Europe, and, of course, in its championing the Palestinians’ cause including that of the radical and murderous Hamas.
At the same time, Erdoğan recognizes Israel’s military and political power (especially its relations with the United States, Europe, and Russia) and realizes that without relations with Israel, its ability to intervene in the Palestinian system would diminish. Turkey also recognizes the importance of diplomatic and economic ties with Israel. That is why Erdoğan avoided irreversible moves that would damage his country’s diplomatic relations.
To prevent Erdoğan from provocations against Israel, it must be made clear to him the limits to the actions that Israel is willing to tolerate. Legitimate criticism and political disagreements are certainly within the allowable limit, while harming Israel’s vital interests and aiding terrorist organizations may lead to a determined Israeli response.
Boris Johnson accused the EU of preparing to go to “extreme and unreasonable lengths” in Brexit talks as he defended breaching international law amid a mounting rebellion from Tory backbenchers.
The former chancellor, Sajid Javid, became the most senior of the prime minister’s past cabinet colleagues to say they could not support the UK internal market bill prior to a Commons vote on Monday night.
Javid joined two former Conservative attorney generals, Jeremy Wright and Sir Geoffrey Cox. David Cameron, one of Johnson’s predecessors, had earlier expressed “misgivings” about the creation of powers to row back on elements of the withdrawal agreement involving Northern Ireland. All five living former prime ministers have now expressed concern about the bill.
More than 20 Tory MPs are expected to withhold support for the bill but most will abstain unless the government makes concessions on giving parliament a vote on the new powers before the vote.
Q&A
What is the UK internal market bill?
Show
The internal market bill aims to enforce compatible rules and regulations regarding trade in England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.
Some rules, for example around food safety or air quality, which were formerly set by EU agreements, will now be controlled by the devolved administrations or Westminster. The internal market bill insists that devolved administrations have to accept goods and services from all the nations of the UK – even if their standards differ locally.
This, says the government, is in part to ensure international traders have access to the UK as a whole, confident that standards and rules are consistent.
The Scottish government has criticised it as a Westminster “power grab”, and the Welsh government has expressed fears it will lead to a race to the bottom. If one of the countries that makes up the UK lowers their standards, over the importation of chlorinated chicken, for example, the other three nations will have to accept chlorinated chicken too.
It has become even more controversial because one of its main aims is to empower ministers to pass regulations even if they are contrary to the withdrawal agreement reached with the EU under the Northern Ireland protocol.
The text does not disguise its intention, stating that powers contained in the bill “have effect notwithstanding any relevant international or domestic law with which they may be incompatible or inconsistent”.
Martin BelamandOwen Bowcott
Whips told some MPs the threat of withdrawing the Conservative whip had not been ruled out if they rebelled.
In a nod to some angry MPs, Johnson said he would never invoke the controversial powers in the internal market bill if a Brexit trade deal was reached with the EU. He said the UK would “simultaneously pursue every possible redress under international law, as provided for in the [Northern Ireland] protocol” – a measure suggested by Cox.
Opening the debate in the Commons, the prime minister claimed the EU was willing to “use the Northern Ireland protocol in a way that goes well beyond common sense, simply to exert leverage against the UK in our negotiations for a free trade agreement”.
Johnson said the measures in the bill – which would hand unilateral powers to ministers in key areas yet to be agreed with the EU, breaching the terms of the treaty agreed in January – were “a protection, it’s a safety net, it’s in an insurance policy, and it is a very sensible measure”.
He said threats from the EU, which the bloc has denied, had made the legislation necessary, claiming the bloc could prevent food exports from Great Britain to Northern Ireland.
That claim drew incredulity from the shadow business secretary, Ed Miliband, who responded for Labour. He said the bill did “precisely nothing” to address that issue, offering mockingly to give way to Johnson in the Commons if he had found anything in the bill that dealt with the “supposed threat”.
“He didn’t read the protocol, he hasn’t read the bill,” Miliband said. “What incompetence, what failure of governance, and how dare he try and blame everyone else? This is his deal, it’s his mess, it’s his failure.”
Intervening in Johnson’s speech, Wright raised the ministerial code which he said bounds ministers to respect international law. Earlier the former attorney general had said he along with many others, were “profoundly disturbed by what’s going on”.
Two former barristers – Cox and Rehman Chishti, who quit as the special envoy on religious freedom – also told the government they would not back the bill, along with former solicitor Gary Streeter.
“There is concern among some lawyers in parliament about what effect this would have on their practice after they leave parliament – the bar has made its view very clear,” one MP said.
The debate also saw the first of the 2019-intake of Tory MPs decline to back the bill. Imran Ahmad Khan, who represents Wakefield, said: “Moral authority is hard-earned and easily lost.”
Javid, who quit the cabinet earlier this year, said it was not clear why international law had to be broken and that he was “regretfully unable to support the UK internal market bill” unamended. He added the UK should wait until it was clear the EU intended to act in bad faith and until then use safeguards already enshrined in the withdrawal agreement.
Others planning to abstain include Tobias Ellwood, the chair of the defence select committee, who said: “Everything is getting very high-octane, and the collateral damage to Britain is reaching the US Congress, where people are bewildered we are going down this avenue.
“Many of us are conflicted because I came into politics to further Britain’s place on the international stage, and now we are at a time where there is an absence of political leadership, and we can’t hold our heads up high if we are being seen to challenge international law.”
Most MPs with concerns about the bill will be expected to abstain rather than vote against, saving their ire for votes next week where amendments will be tabled. Asked whether Tory MPs who rebelled on Monday night could lose the whip, Johnson’s spokesman stressed it was “critical” that Conservatives backed the bill.
An amendment next week has been put forward by the chair of the justice select committee, Bob Neill – another former barrister. It would require parliamentary approval before any future decision could be made by the government to disapply the terms of the Northern Ireland protocol in the withdrawal agreement.
Those backing the Neill amendment include the former cabinet minister Damian Green, the QC and former justice minister Oliver Heald, the Northern Ireland select committee chair, Simon Hoare, and Damian Collins, former chair of the culture select committee, who are all expected to withhold support for the bill.
Timeline
From Brefusal to Brexit: a history of Britain in the EU
Show
Brefusal
The French president, Charles de Gaulle, vetoes Britain’s entry to EEC, accusing the UK of a “deep-seated hostility” towards the European project.
Brentry
With Sir Edward Heath having signed the accession treaty the previous year, the UK enters the EEC in an official ceremony complete with a torch-lit rally, dickie-bowed officials and a procession of political leaders, including former prime ministers Harold Macmillan and Alec Douglas-Home.
Referendum
The UK decides to stay in the common market after 67% voted “yes”. Margaret Thatcher, later to be leader of the Conservative party, campaigned to remain.
‘Give us our money back’
Margaret Thatcher negotiated what became known as the UK rebate with other EU members after the “iron lady” marched into the former French royal palace at Fontainebleau to demand “our own money back” claiming for every £2 contributed we get only £1 back” despite being one of the “three poorer” members of the community.
It was a move that sowed the seeds of Tory Euroscepticism that was to later cause the Brexit schism in the party.
The Bruges speech
Thatcher served notice on the EU community in a defining moment in EU politics in which she questioned the expansionist plans of Jacques Delors, who had remarked that 80% of all decisions on economic and social policy would be made by the European Community within 10 years with a European government in “embryo”. That was a bridge too far for Thatcher.
The cold war ends
Collapse of Berlin wall and fall of communism in eastern Europe, which would later lead to expansion of EU.
‘No, no, no’
Divisions between the UK and the EU deepened with Thatcher telling the Commons in an infamous speech it was ‘no, no, no’ to what she saw as Delors’ continued power grab. Rupert Murdoch’s Sun newspaper ratchets up its opposition to Europe with a two-fingered “Up yours Delors” front page.
Black Wednesday
A collapse in the pound forced prime minister John Major and the then chancellor Norman Lamont to pull the UK out of the Exchange Rate Mechanism.
The single market
On 1 January, customs checks and duties were removed across the bloc. Thatcher hailed the vision of “a single market without barriers – visible or invisible – giving you direct and unhindered access to the purchasing power of over 300 million of the world’s wealthiest and most prosperous people”.
Maastricht treaty
Tory rebels vote against the treaty that paved the way for the creation of the European Union. John Major won the vote the following day in a pyrrhic victory.
Repairing the relationship
Tony Blair patches up the relationship. Signs up to social charter and workers’ rights.
Ukip
Nigel Farage elected an MEP and immediately goes on the offensive in Brussels. “Our interests are best served by not being a member of this club,” he said in his maiden speech. “The level playing field is about as level as the decks of the Titanic after it hit an iceberg.”
The euro
Chancellor Gordon Brown decides the UK will not join the euro.
EU enlarges to to include eight countries of the former eastern bloc including Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic.
EU expands again, allowing Romania and Bulgaria into the club.
Migrant crisis
Anti-immigration hysteria seems to take hold with references to “cockroches” by Katie Hopkins in the Sun and tabloid headlines such as “How many more can we take?” and “Calais crisis: send in the dogs”.
David Cameron returns from Brussels with an EU reform package – but it isn’t enough to appease the Eurosceptic wing of his own party
Brexit referendum
The UK votes to leave the European Union, triggering David Cameron’s resignation and paving the way for Theresa May to become prime minister
Britain leaves the EU
After years of parliamentary impasse during Theresa May’s attempt to get a deal agreed, the UK leaves the EU.
<
p class=”css-38z03z”>Others expressing serious concerns were the chair of the foreign affairs committee Tom Tugendhat, former transport minister George Freeman and the veteran Tory Sir Roger Gale who said: “An Englishman’s word used to be his bond. Under Johnson that is not so.”
<
p class=”css-38z03z”>One senior backbencher accused the whips of scare tactics. “Unfortunately this is being framed as being pro or against Brexit again, even whether you are patriotic,” the MP said. “Cox’s intervention should prevent it descending into those shallow waters.
“They are now leaning heavily on loyalty to the prime minister – and there are many people who do want to go back into government and they will be tested today, there’s no question.”
There is consternation even among loyal long-serving Conservatives who are planning to back the government. One former cabinet minister said they would only back the bill “through gritted teeth”.
On Monday, Cameron said: “Passing an act of parliament and then going on to break an international treaty obligation is the very, very last thing you should contemplate. It should be an absolute final resort. So, I do have misgivings about what’s being proposed.”
