Mediaboss Marketing

Editors note: Moscows buildup of troops on and near Ukraines borders and bellicose rhetoric have raised the prospect of a major conventional war in Europe.The phone call today between US President Joe Biden and Russian President Vladimir Putin underscores the dangers of this Kremlin-manufactured crisis. Below is a statement by twenty-four distinguishedexperts and former senior officials offering their ideas on how to deter Moscow from escalating its current war of aggression against Ukraine and more broadly to discourage Moscow from future provocations. The statement represents the views of the signatories and not of their institutions.

Since President Bidens virtual summit with President Putin on December 7, Russia has increased its troop presence on or near Ukraines borders. Having created this crisis, the Kremlin has demanded security guarantees for Russia that the United States and its allies cannot possibly provide. It has made provocative statements at high levels, including outlandish claims that US private military contractors intend to launch a chemical weapons attack in eastern Ukraine. Moscow wrongly asserts that NATO enlargement has created a military threat to Russia; the Alliance has fully abided by its commitments in the NATO-Russia Founding Act to refrain from deploying nuclear weapons or permanently stationing substantial combat forces on the territory of new member states, despite the fact that Russia has violated many of its own Founding Act commitments, as well as the UN Charter, the Helsinki Final Act, the Paris Charter, and the Budapest Memorandum.

In short, Moscow appears to be setting the stage for launching a major conventional assault on Ukraine, even though the United States and NATO have shown a willingness to sit down and discuss Kremlin concerns.

We believe the United States should, in closest consultation with its NATO allies and with Ukraine, take immediate steps to affect the Kremlins cost-benefit calculations before the Russian leadership opts for further military escalation. This means raising the costs that would ensue should the Russian military launch a new assault on Ukraine, building on the excellent set of measures the Biden administration has already laid out: enacting punishing sanctions on Moscow, sending major military supplies to Ukraine, and strengthening NATOs force posture on its eastern flank.

The administration should continue its good work with the European Union and other partners to ensure agreement on the elements of a response to any Russian assault on Ukraine, regardless of the extent or form of Russias escalation. Such a response would include a package of major and painful sanctions that would be applied immediately if Russia assaults Ukraine. Ideally, the outline of these sanctions would be communicated now to Moscow, so that the Kremlin has a clear understanding of the magnitude of the economic hit it will face. In particular, Washington should consult with Berlin and secure German agreement that it would prevent Nord Stream 2 from going into operation in the event of a Russian attack, making clear that otherwise the administration will not again waive sanctions on the pipeline.

The most important thing that the West can do now is to enhance the deterrent strength of Ukraines armed forces by providing military assistance and equipment on an expedited basis. For the Kremlin, a large invasion of Ukraine works only if Russian forces are able to seize and hold Ukrainian territory without sustaining significant and constant casualties. Western countries should act now to equip Ukraines military and territorial defense units with additional capabilities that can impose such costs.

Western military officials should consult urgently with their Ukrainian counterparts as to what assistance and equipment the Ukrainian military needs and could most quickly integrate into its operations to bolster its defensive strength. Such assistance might include additional Javelin anti-armor missiles and Q36 counter-battery radar systems as well as Stinger and other anti-aircraft missiles. The Biden administration should also encourage NATO allies to do more to enhance Ukraines defensive capabilities, making clear that the entire NATO Alliance stands together in opposing Russian aggression.

We believe that NATO should act now to begin bolstering its military presence on its eastern flank and communicating to Moscow that Russias escalation would bring a substantial number of US and Allied forces and a permanent presence in the Baltic states and Black Sea region. NATO should also signal to Moscow that any additional deployments could be reconsidered if/when the current crisis abates.

The West should also widen its political counteroffensive to retake the initiative from Moscow as it tries to use the threat of force to intimidate Ukraine, Europe, and the United States into acquiescing to its demands, many of which are plainly unjustified and unacceptable. The Biden administration should seek a Group of Seven (G7) statement at the head of state level condemning Moscows threat of wider war against Ukraine and work with allies and partners to use other fora, including the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe and possibly the United Nations, to highlight the unacceptability of Russian military action and coercive threats.

The Biden administration should consult with NATO, the European Union, Ukraine, and key allies such as Poland on extensive preparations for dealing with the humanitarian crisis that a major Russian invasion would create.

Finally, the United States and its allies should continue to make clear their readiness for dialogue with Russia, to include concerns of NATO and other parties about Russian military and other aggressive activities. They have indicated that some elements in the Russia-proposed US-Russia treaty and NATO-Russia agreement may offer a basis for discussion and possible negotiation. The United States and NATO should make clear to the Kremlin that it must de-escalate the threatening military situation around Ukraine before there can be any substantive negotiation, and any negotiation must involve all parties whose security interests will be affected. These issues cannot simply be resolved in a bilateral US-Russia channel. Moreover, any negotiation should be consistent with the principles agreed to by all NATO members, Russia, and Ukraine, such as those in the Helsinki Final Act and the Charter of Paris.

Signed,

Dr. Stephen Blank

Senior Fellow

Foreign Policy Research Institute

General Philip Breedlove, USAF ret.

17th Supreme Allied Commander Europe

Distinguished Professor, Sam Nunn School, Georgia Institute of Technology

Ian Brzezinski

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Europe and NATO Policy

Senior Fellow

Atlantic Council

Debra Cagan

Former US State and Defense Department official

Distinguished Energy Fellow

Transatlantic Leadership Network

General Wesley K. Clark

US Army (ret.)

12th Supreme Allied Commander, Europe

Senior Fellow, UCLA Burkle Center

Dr. Larry Diamond

Senior Fellow, Hoover Institution

Mosbacher Senior Fellow in Global Democracy

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Ambassador Paula Dobriansky

Former Under Secretary of State for Global Affairs

Vice Chair, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security

Atlantic Council

Senior Fellow, Harvard University Belfer Center

Dr. Evelyn Farkas

Former Deputy Assistant Secretary of Defense for Russia, Ukraine, and Eurasia

Ambassador Daniel Fried

Former Assistant Secretary of State for Europe and US Ambassador to Poland

Weiser Family Distinguished Fellow

Atlantic Council

Dr. Francis Fukuyama

Olivier Nomellini Senior Fellow

Center on Democracy, Development and the Rule of Law

Director, Ford Dorsey Masters in International Policy

Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Melinda Haring

Deputy Director, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

John E. Herbst

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine and Uzbekistan

Senior Director, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Lieutenant General (Ret.) Ben Hodges

Former Commander US Army Europe

Dr. Donald N. Jensen

Director, Russia and Strategic Stability

United States Institute of Peace

Andrea Kendall-Taylor

Center for a New American Security

Ambassador John Kornblum

Former US Ambassador to Germany

Senior Adviser (Non-resident), Europe, Russia, and Eurasia Program

Center for Strategic International Studies

Ambassador Michael McFaul

Former US Ambassador to Russia

Director, Freeman Spogli Institute for International Studies

Stanford University

Ambassador Steven Pifer

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine

Willian Perry Fellow

Stanford University

Herman Pirchner, Jr.

President

American Foreign Policy Council

John Sipher

Former Officer and Chief of Station, CIA Clandestine Service

Nonresident Senior Fellow, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Strobe Talbott

Former Deputy Secretary of State

Distinguished Fellow

The Brookings Institution

Ambassador William Taylor

Former US Ambassador to Ukraine

Vice President for Strategic Stability and Security

United States Institute of Peace

Ambassador Alexander Vershbow

Former US Ambassador to Russia

Former Deputy Secretary General of NATO

Distinguished Fellow, Scowcroft Center for Strategy and Security, Eurasia Center

Atlantic Council

Ambassador Kurt Volker

Former US Ambassador to NATO and US Special Representative for Ukraine Negotiations

Read the rest here:
How to deal with the Kremlin-created crisis in Europe - Atlantic Council

In one of the flowerbeds in Esteban el Grande Square, in the center of Chisinau, a light blue European Union flag, with its 12 stars, welcomes office workers who tap on its cobblestones, a gang of kids who enjoy of a winter walk and some female deputy hurrying to the white, broad, Soviet Moldovan Parliament. The authorities placed the banner last May, Europe Day, and there it remained, between a sculpture of the famous prince of Moldavia from the 15th century, the carving of the Russian writer Alexander Pushkin and a bust of the Romanian Moldovan romantic poet Mihai Eminescu. Quite a metaphor for the small country wedged between Romania and Ukraine, where since the independence of the Soviet Union, three decades ago, political battles have been fought between groups that want greater closeness with their Romanian neighbor or with the EU and those who bet on closer ties with Russia.

Moldovas geopolitical orientation has been lurching cyclically between Brussels and Moscow. It is one of the poorest countries in Europe, with less than three million inhabitants, a population depleted by emigration, a still vulnerable economy, high levels of corruption and a prevailing disillusionment with the political and economic elites. Now, 50% of the public supports the accession to the EU while 33% are against and look towards Russia, according to the Public Opinion Barometer.

For the Kremlin, Moldova is a strategic country. President Vladimir Putin, with his expansionist policy and his aspirations to return to Russia the role of great superpower that the USSR had, tries to maintain his influence over the former Soviet republics. And in Moldova it has important political and economic ties that serve as levers. As its role as the sole supplier of gas, emphasizes the energy expert Sergiu Tofilat.

In November, amid the global energy crisis due to rising prices, the pro-European Moldovan government declared a state of emergency after its agreement with the Russian gas company Gazprom expired and it was unable to close a new one at prices that the small country could afford. . Chisinau had been paying 170 euros for 1,000 cubic meters and happened to pay 680 euros. A clear blackmail and punishment against the new government, says Tofilat. Moscow manages the gas tap to undermine the credibility of the new Executive and to open windows of influence in the population that add to the electoral interference and its propaganda in the media, he says. The Kremlin and Gazprom have ensured that everything surrounding the Moldovan gas crisis is due to economic disagreements.

Join MRT to follow all the news and read without limits.

Subscribe

Also in Brussels they saw the gas chapter as the movement of one of Moscows most powerful tentacles, trying to gain a foothold in the country after the pro-European technocrat Maia Sandu, a 48-year-old former World Bank official, seized the presidency. Kremlin ally Igor Dodon last year and his party, Action and Solidarity, swept the parliamentarians last July. After weeks of crisis, Chisinau ended up reaching an agreement with Gazprom for 400 euros per 1,000 cubic meters over five years. A much less advantageous price than the Russian giant has signed with Belarus or Serbia, which pays about 238 euros. Despite this, the contract has raised the suspicions of analysts, who believe that the Kremlin has tried to obtain important concessions from Chisinau, such as curbing the impulse to approach Brussels. Already when Moldova signed the Association Treaty with the EU in 2014, Moscow restricted Moldovan imports.

The government of Prime Minister Natalia Gavrilita, a Harvard-educated reformist, has denied any concessions. And just a few weeks ago, Sandu, who repeated that Moldova wants to build a Europe at home as a formula for navigating between Moscow and the West, also made it clear that the country wants to be a member of the EU one day.

Alina Yunuspecova believes that Moldova should not choose between Russia and the community club. In a cafe with aesthetics eco-hipster From the center of Chisinau, the 26-year-old graphic designer assures that the path to enter the EU is long and with few guarantees; and that the ties with Moscow are quite powerful. I dont like politics very much, but now we have seen how the gas problem affects us, he says. Yunuspecova was one of the tens of thousands of Moldovans who have left the country, expelled by the economic crisis and low salaries (the average salary is around 350 euros per month). Although after some time in the Baltics he decided to return and seek opportunities at home, he tells in Russian. Romanian is the official language of the country, and is spoken by four-fifths of its inhabitants (according to 2014 data), but Russian is also very widespread.

The EU has not given high hopes of membership to Moldova, which has yet to launch a series of substantial reforms in the economy, good governance and justice, to even be nominated as a candidate. But Brussels which this summer has delivered an unprecedented economic recovery package of some 600 million euros to Chisinau is trying to maintain close ties and collaboration with Moldova and the rest of the Eastern and Caucasian countries. Not only because of the benefits for the Union of maintaining democratic-minded neighbors in such a strategic area, but also to counteract the Russian strength, which has another important element of influence in Moldova, an anchor in a region that is turning increasingly to the West. : the Transnistria.

The region on the left bank of the Dniester River, recognized as part of Moldova by the international community (including Russia), declared itself independent in 1990. 31 years later, it is still trapped in the Cold War. After the brief war of 1992 in which hundreds of people died, Moscow financially supports Transnistria, where there was a majority Slavic population (Russians and Ukrainians), which has held several referenda for independence and to join Russia.

The territory has become a kind of theme park with Soviet aesthetics although it has nothing to do with communism and the vast majority of companies are in the hands of Viktor Gushan, the local oligarch, and his holding business Sheriff, And in something like a Russian protectorate, which maintains in the enclave several bases and more than 1,500 soldiers that the Kremlin defines as peacekeepers, who also watch over the old powder kegs of the USSR. It is a military contingent that worries many. And even more so now when Western intelligence warns of a possible new Russian aggression against Ukraine. A few months ago, President Sandu reiterated her request to Moscow for the soldiers to withdraw, but the Kremlin has warned that changes in the the status quo of the region could seriously destabilize regional security.

In Tiraspol, the capital of Transnistria, in all official buildings the Russian flag flies along with that of this region. Tatiana Yegorova, 68, and her husband, Yuri, 80, dont even want to hear about it. You never know if there might be another conflict and with the peacekeepers we feel safer, says Yegorova, a retired programmer. In the enclave, which in Soviet times hosted a large part of the industry installed in the republic, there is also the main power station of Moldova. Its multi-million dollar debt for the gas that feeds it is one of the points in conflict between Chisinau and Gazprom. And the price of gas is cheaper in Transnistria than in other parts of the country: one ruble to nine, the Yegorovs say. In the living room of their apartment, next to the shelves overflowing with a large collection of Russian classics that Yegorov appreciates so much, the couple assures that there are people from Chisinau who spend the winter in Transnistria, about 90 minutes by car, by energy prices. A narrative that local television (in the hands, like everything else of the owner of the holding Sheriff) and also the Russian comment regularly, although the Yegorovs dont know anyone in that situation.

In Moldova, points out Ana Mihailov, director of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation in the eastern country, a vision of development and a rethinking of the economic model are needed. Thanks to European funds and loans from the International Monetary Fund (IMF), Chisinau has undergone a thorough facelift, has renovated many buildings and is working on improving the roads of the country, still eminently rural.

But if achieving macroeconomic stability and the painful transition from state-dominated economies to new paths has been challenging, eradicating endemic corruption is even more challenging, experts say. Moldova ranked 115 out of 180 in Transparency Internationals corruption perception index in 2020 (with number one being the least corrupt). It is also a challenge to increase trust in the institutions of a citizenry traumatized by scandals such as the one known as the robbery of the century, in which more than 1,000 million dollars (the equivalent of an eighth of gross domestic product) vanished. the countrys top three banks in 2014, causing an unprecedented crisis. Moldovan justice has already indicted several politicians and businessmen for this scandal; and now he is looking for the oligarch Vladimir Plahotniuc, one of the countrys strong men, a great donor to the Democratic Party and who left the country a few years ago, in full scandal.

Nicu Popescu, an analyst at the European Council on International Relations, believes that it was mainly his intransigent speech against corruption that gave Maia Sandus party its significant victory, which accumulated votes from pro-EU people and also from voters without specific political preferences but deeply. tired of constant scandals. The Action and Solidarity Executive has also launched a technological development plan.

The engineer Anatoli Golovco assures that the growing sector of the new technologies can be one of the strengths of the country. Another of our advantages is relations with Russia, we could be a bridge, says Golovco, a university professor and businessman, in a restaurant in Chisinau, under the gaze of his wife, Irina, a specialized translator who has retrained as a stylist. Pragmatic, the couple also speak enthusiastically of the Sandu government and its anti-corruption program at all levels, from the one that led to the robbery of the century to the bites of doctors or middle-class officials. We have lacked a vision of the country, we are still building ourselves, says Irina. Changes take time, sometimes you dont see the quick result, but its there, they are here to stay, he concludes.

Follow all the international information at Facebook Y Twitter, o en our weekly newsletter.

Disclaimer: This article is generated from the feed and not edited by our team.

Here is the original post:
European Union: Moldova moves closer to the EU despite pressure from the Kremlin | International - Market Research Telecast

On 2 December 2021, the Council adopted Council Decision (CFSP) 2021/21251 amending Council Decision 2012/642/CFSP.

The Council Decision adds 17 persons and11 entities to the list of persons and entities subject to restrictive measures set out in the Annex to Decision2012/642/CFSP.

The Candidate Countries The Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania2, and the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area, align themselves with this Council Decision.

They will ensure that their national policies conform to this Council Decision.

The European Union takes note of this commitment and welcomes it.

1Published on 02.12.2021 in the Official Journal of the European Union no. L 430 I, p.162The Republic of North Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia and Albania continue to be part of the Stabilisation and Association Process.

Read more from the original source:
Declaration by the High Representative on behalf of the European Union on the alignment of certain countries concerning restrictive measures in view...

Opponents of Britains decision to leave the European Union have often wrung their hands and predicted a whole series of negative consequences.But heres one that hardly anybody foresaw: that the United Kingdom might become a major center for the trade in plundered antiquities.

Among the EU laws that the U.K. has repealed in a bid to differentiate itself from the bloc following Brexitis a measure aimed at suppressing the trade in ancient objects stolen from war-torn countries, like Syria and Iraq.

Critics of the move claim that by scrapping this measure,the U.K. is in danger of further encouraging a trade that is already flourishing in Britain.

The most infamous recent example of a looted artifact was handed back to Iraq at a repatriation ceremony in Washington, D.C., in the fall: a 3,500-year-old clay tablet. Inscribed in cuneiform script,the Gilgamesh Dream Tablet, believed to be the worlds oldest surviving work of literature, was pillaged from an Iraqi museum during the first Gulf War.

It may have been seized and returned by the United States, but as Assistant Attorney General Kenneth Polite pointed out during the repatriation ceremony, the stolen tablet first surfaced in London.

The tablet turned up in the U.K. in 2001, Polite said. It was then smuggled to the U.S. and sold for $50,000.

The fact that this priceless object, whichwaseventually sold for $1.6 million to an American museum, was traffickedin London does not cause much surprise in the U.K.

For various reasons, London has become an important center in this illicit trade, observed archaeologist Mark Altaweel of University College London. He said the trade in looted artifacts especially in lower-profileitems like coins, mosaics and jewelry has boomed in the British capital in recent years.

Because its very much a global city, its a key point where traders and others have come to. Many people here have connections to other parts of the world, Altaweel said, adding that in his view the laws banning the importation of stolen artifacts are not enforced rigorously enough in Britain.

The post-Brexit decision to repeal EU antiquities legislation makes matters worse, said Fionnuala Rogers, chair of Blue Shield United Kingdom, a group dedicated to protecting cultural property.

Now that the U.K. has left the EU and the EU has brought in much stronger legislation, the U.K. is going to be vulnerable because our legislation is much weaker comparatively, Rogers said.

Unlike the EU, the U.K. doesnt now require an import license to bring antiquities into the country, and anyone caught importing stolen artifactscan only be convicted of an offense if it can be proven that they knew the item was illegal, which is quite a high bar for prosecutors to clear. The disparity between EU and UK law is going to cause trouble, Rogers said.

The problem with having Europe with a much stricter piece of legislation and the U.K. with essentially nothing comparable, it automatically makes the U.K. a gateway, she said.

Her main anxiety centers on one of the most contentious features of the Brexit withdrawal agreement: the unique status of Northern Ireland. The British province retains a wide-open border withthe Irish Republic, and therefore with the European Union.

Rogers fears that criminal gangs may ship looted objects quite easily into the U.K. mainland and then useNorthern Ireland as a backdoor into the EU.

Over time, that backdoor is likely to become an even more attractive option for the smugglers as the EU tightens its controls on every other stretch of its external border.

Neil Brodie, an archaeologist with Oxford University, believes that the EU will enact further measures aimed at discouraging this illicit trade. Two of the key member states demand nothing less.

The European Union includes countries such as Italy and Greece, which historically have been subject to quite heavy looting and the theft of their cultural objects, their antiquities, Brodie said. These countries have a long history of being victims of this trade, and their opinions and policy priorities will always be taken on board by the EU.

The Greeks have been at loggerheads with the Brits for decades over this very issue. The government in Athens recently stepped up its long campaign for the return of the greater part of the Parthenons marble frieze, which it says the U.K.stole in the early 1800s and now resides in the British Museum.

The Brits, said Brodie, seem to have a bit of a blind spot when it comes to the trade in looted artifacts.

We have a history in a way of benefiting from it culturally and financially. So the urgency and the impetus isnt there to act against it in the way the Europeans will, Brodie said.

In a statement, the British government said: We remain committed to combatting illicit trade in cultural objects and believe that existing U.K. law is sufficient to deal with this issue.

But the campaign to toughen up the U.K. law goes on.

The campaigners argue that a crackdown is imperative as the illicit antiquities trade causes so much damage, not least providing finance for terrorist groups like the Islamic State and al-Qaida.

This trade is one of the top earners for these violent groups, and they use that money to perpetuate that violence, buying more arms, buying more weapons, recruiting more people, said archaeologistAltaweel, whos worked on excavation sites in northern Iraq.

This trade also damages our knowledge. It destroys the context in which these items were found, he said.

Altaweel has a keen personal as well as academic interest in Iraqi artifacts. He was born in Baghdad and left at the age of 7 when his parents migrated to America. He believes that the theft of antiquities undermines the cultural cohesion of war-torn countries like Iraq and further hobbles their chances of recovery.

Theres a loss of the kind of things that can help heal societies and bring cultures together, he said.

At that repatriation ceremony in Washington in the fall, the Iraqi Minister of Culture Hassan Nazim made the same point as he took possession of the Gilgamesh Dream Tablet and scores of other looted artifacts that the U.S. authorities had seized and were handing back.

Recovering Iraqi artifacts means recovering Iraqs self-esteem, he said. It means restoring Iraqs confidence.

.

See original here:
Will Brexit turn the U.K. into a hub for the trade in looted antiquities? - Marketplace

On Friday of last week, the Polish parliament rushed through a new national law that would ban media outlets owned by non-Europeans. Many critics claim that the legislation targets the American-owned Discovery media group. Discovery controls Polish broadcaster TVN Group, whose popular news network show, TVN24, has openly criticized Polands ruling right-wing Law and Justice party.

When addressing the legislation, a spokesperson for the European Commission shared that this bill may lead to limitation of media freedom in Poland, where the media landscape already suffers under growing politicization. Discovery has also come forward with a statement, calling the bill an attack on freedom of speech and claiming that it threatens the future of independent media in Poland. Over this past weekend, masses of protestors gathered across Poland to decry the legislation.

According to Reuters, TVN also launched an online petition on Sunday to encourage Polish president Andrzej Duda to veto the bill. A portion of the petition reads, The attack on media freedom has far-reaching consequences for the future of PolandMutual relations with the USA, the greatest ally and guarantor of our countrys security, are being destroyed. We cannot allow it! In a country of 38 million people, over 2 million have already signed the petition. Government backers of the bill have shared that the necessity for the bill comes from the fear of state-controlled broadcasters from countries like Russia and China.

History is full of precedents that show how infringing on freedom of the press hampers democracy. So far, it seems as though the European Union has come forth with rhetoric but no clear plans of action. Moving forward, it is difficult to predict if calls from the European Commission or the TVN petition will likely change Dudas decision to veto the bill or not. In a wider context, many European countries have seen a large shift of power to more right-wing political groups within the past five years. Given these developments, it makes it more unpredictable how other Europeans may react to the passing of this legislation, should it occur. Additionally, it is important to note that this legislation is also coming forward during a time when Russias presence is steadily growing around its shared border with Ukraine. Just as the spokesperson for the European Commission claimed, the world will closely follow the situation.

Continued here:
European Union Shares Concerns Over New Polish Media Bill - The Organization for World Peace