Archive for the ‘European Union’ Category

EU to Deliver COVID-19 Shots to Developing Nations – Voice of America

PARIS - The European Union pledged to deliver at least 100 million COVID-19 vaccine doses to low- and middle-income countries by year's end, and develop vaccine production capacity in poorer nations, as it wrapped up a two-day summit in Brussels.

After being criticized for a slow vaccination start, European leaders say they are steaming ahead on COVID-19 inoculations, securing 1.8 billion doses to cover the next two years enough to export to needy countries outside the 27-member bloc. The bloc says it's also on track to surpass goals of exporting 100 million doses to developing countries.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen said, "We are working on an initiative to invest one billion euros from Team Europe to develop vaccine manufacturing in Africa the capacity itself in Africa it's a specific initiative with our African partners. An initiative not only for the production, so to build up the manufacturing capacities, but also for skills development, for the management of the supply train of, for example, the necessary regulatory framework through the African Medicines Agency."

In Europe, where many countries are emerging from lockdowns and hospitalizations are dropping, von der Leyen said the EU was on track to inoculate 70 percent of its adults by the end of July. Europe's Medicines Agency is now considering whether to approve the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine for 12- to 15-year-olds.

Meanwhile, special COVID-19 digital travel passes aim to open up summer travel for EU citizens who are either vaccinated, immune from having contracted the virus, or have tested negative for it.

Together, says analyst Scott Marcus, a senior fellow at the Brussels-based Bruegel economic research group, the developments are shaping a more favorable tourism outlook for Europe.

"I think things are looking more promising," he said. "I still think that late summer will look better than early summer. But I think we're on track to have a summer at least as good as last summer, and probably better."

Other topics

On Monday, EU leaders announced a flight ban and other toughened sanctions against Belarus, after the forced landing of a Ryanair plane in Minsk and the arrest of a dissident journalist.

But speaking from Brussels, French President Emmanuel Macron said progressive sanctions had their limits and the EU needed to profoundly redefine its relationship with both Belarus and Russia.

Member states also discussed the thorny issue of national emissions targets to meet the bloc's overall goal of reducing greenhouse gases by 55 percent by 2030, and becoming climate neutral by 2050.

Read this article:
EU to Deliver COVID-19 Shots to Developing Nations - Voice of America

Remarks by President Charles Michel following the second day of the special meeting of the European Council – EU News

Today we had two key items on the agenda. The first was the COVID situation and the second was the issue of climate change and our ambitions in that area.

On the first item, we were able to express cautious optimism. We believe that we are making progress on vaccination everywhere in Europe. At the same time, we are only too well aware that we must remain vigilant and closely monitor virus mutations and variants.

The second point which we discussed today is linked to the agreement reached with the European Parliament last week on the EU Digital Certificate. We welcome the agreement reached. We are also very pleased that we can speed up the process of revising the recommendation on travel within the European Union. We have set mid-June as the target for adapting this recommendation so that we will gradually be able to return to free movement within the European Union.

Lastly, the third point was international solidarity. At the very beginning of this pandemic, at the European Council's first meeting on this subject, we immediately understood that the only way we could prevail over this pandemic was by all working together in the context of international cooperation. This belief paved the way for the first initiatives to finance research into vaccine development. It also led to the launch of the COVAX initiative and guided the decision taken within the European Union to continue to export doses manufactured in Europe. On average, 50% of the doses manufactured every month have been exported, to over forty countries worldwide.

We were also able to decide officially on the ambition to put in place a mechanism to donate, by the end of the year, at least 100 million doses. The first indications from the member states are that we will most probably go beyond that capacity.

Lastly, we support the work done with the Italian presidency, with the Commission's commitment, in connection with the G20 last week, and in particular the major initiative announced by the Commission: provision of financing to boost manufacturing capacity in the pharmaceutical sector, including for vaccines, on the African continent. Special attention must also be paid to Latin America. Several colleagues seated around the table pointed to the need to be engaged in this part of the world as well.

One last point: as I speak, meetings are being held under the auspices of the WHO in relation to the debate on progressing to the negotiation of a treaty on pandemics. And we are hopeful that, in the coming hours, another milestone will be reached in the bid to engage the international community in the multilateral framework, so that together we can learn the lessons from this crisis which is hitting the world, in an effort to take decisions that will make us more robust, stronger, more resilient, better equipped to avert future pandemics and to cooperate better when they occur.

The second topic on the agenda today was climate change. We prepared this European Council.We had a lot of consultations before.All the delegations expressed their priorities, concerns legitimate concerns in order to take into consideration this process and the responsibility of the Commission, who will put on the table concrete legislative proposals in the next week.

We trust the Commission to take this into account. We had important discussions on different topics: ETS, effort sharing, carbon adjustment mechanism and different starting points in the different countries.We reaffirmed our common goals, which are ambitious climate neutrality by 2050 but also the decisions that we took in December last year, decreasing our emissions by at least 55% by 2030.

This is a very complex debate, with many areas which are interconnected. It's important to have a global vision. It's also important to take into consideration the impact assessment for the different member states.You can be certain that we will continue to work a lot with the member states, with the Commission, and with the European Parliament.

It's a process and, in preparation for COP26 in Glasgow, we hope it will be possible for the European Union to continue to play a leading role and to be concrete in order to make progress.

We also agreed that we will come back to this matter at a future European Council meeting once the Commission has tabled its legislative proposals.

View post:
Remarks by President Charles Michel following the second day of the special meeting of the European Council - EU News

The EUs Response to SolarWinds – Council on Foreign Relations

Julia Schuetze is the Jr Project Director for International Cybersecurity Policy at Stiftung Neue Verantwortung e.V.Arthur de Liedekerke is a cybersecurity analyst with prior experience in the European Union institutions.The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the official position or policy of their employers.

On April 15, the same day that the United States imposed sanctions against Russia for the SolarWinds cyber espionage campaign, election interference, and other issues, the European Union (EU) published a declaration expressing solidarity with the United States. A month later, on May 14, the European Council extended the sanctions regime that guides response to cyber attacks that threaten the EU or its members until May 2022. As part of the EUs cyber diplomacy toolbox, a declaration falls into category three [PDF] of responsesstability measureswhich express concern or condemn general cyber trends or certain cyber activities and could have a signaling function. While the EUs issuance of the declaration in response to SolarWinds is a sign of progress, it fails to provide clarification on what, if any, further actions can be expected from Brussels.

More on:

Cybersecurity

European Union

Sanctions

Russia

The declaration still matters because it shows that the EUs response process to malicious cyber activities is maturing. This declaration differs from previous responses due to its coordinated timing with the imposition of U.S. sanctions and reference to Washingtons attribution of the campaign to Russia. This contrasts with previous EU responses where attribution was not mentioned explicitly or where member states independently coordinated their attribution efforts multilaterally with third states, avoiding attribution through a unified EU-wide response.

Net Politics

CFR experts investigate the impact of information and communication technologies on security, privacy, and international affairs.2-4 times weekly.

Additionally, the language of the EUs recent declaration deviates from prior statements, like those responding to election interference in Georgia and cyber threats targeting the health-care sector during the pandemic. Instead of condemning the SolarWinds campaign, the declaration expressed the EUs solidarity with the United States on the impact of malicious cyber activities. Simply expressing solidarity with the impact in the United States reflects that the European Union does not per se condemn this type of activity. Moreover, it treads carefully when referring to the impact the operation had on the EU and its member states.

This could have been more directly connected to where the EU explains its concern about malicious activities in general that are affecting the security and integrity of information and communication technology (ICT) products and services, which might have systemic effects and cause significant harm to our society, security and economy. This vague description could be an attempt to show that, from an EU standpoint, the seemingly indiscriminate nature of the SolarWinds breach (the compromise affected governments and businesses worldwide, including in EU Member States) and apparent disregard for collateral damage (systemic effects with potential significant harm to our society, security and economy) could result in consequences for the perpetrator. However, by not being more concrete on the damage the campaign had on the EU, falls short of indicating whether those behind it crossed a red line that requires a strong response from the EU. As the rest of the statement focuses on preventative efforts that the EU is already undertaking, the text does not signal that such incidents could be met with a more assertive response, such as restrictive measures. The statement also ignores the fact that two days before the Declaration came out technical evidence seems to suggest that the EUs sanctions regime could be applied. In an answer to a parliamentary question on April 13, European Commissioner for Budget and Administration Johannes Hahn indicated that the EUs computer emergency response team (CERT-EU) had identified cases where IT networks and systems had been significantly impacted and personal data breaches occurred. Significant impact or potentially significant effect is one threshold covered in the sanctions regime.

Whether the EU will follow up with sanctionslike the United Stateswill also likely depend on two things: the collective determination to impose costs despite the risks of retaliation, and on the outcome of further investigation mentioned in the Declaration itself vis--vis the other required thresholds for sanctions..

Member states appear ready to act. Unofficial reports indicate that a number of EU member states are toying with the idea of introducing sanctions against Russian citizens who were allegedly involved in the SolarWinds campaign. Also, given the steady deterioration of EU-Russia relations in recent months, member states could be tempted to demonstrate their collective determination to push back against Russia and their commitment to the transatlantic alliance.

More on:

Cybersecurity

European Union

Sanctions

Russia

With the second issue, its possible that sanctions have not yet been imposed by the EU because its investigation is ongoing. Historically, EU cyber sanctions have been imposed against Russian individuals and entities only after the collection of evidence and attribution by at least two EU member states. Attribution by the United States could be insufficient on its own to warrant such a response. It is also possible that the EU is taking its time to aiming to create a sanctions bundle. Like the United States, the EU has sanctioned different entities for various malicious activities at the same time.

The EU response process is maturing, showing steady improvement in its coordination with third countries. Still, it would have been better if the EU had explicitly described the impact the SolarWinds attack had on EU interests. Such clarity would, if Brussels does eventually follow through with a stronger response such as sanctions, signal that the attacks crossed a threshold. However, considering the time constraint of aligning with the U.S. response and the need for consensus-making in the EU, it is possible that the Declaration was only a first careful response and it will soon follow-up with stronger language and/ or other means.

See the article here:
The EUs Response to SolarWinds - Council on Foreign Relations

European Union Strategy for Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific and the Role for India – Modern Diplomacy

With the dramatic collapse of communism in Southeast and Eastern Europe, the newly democratically elected governments had to face the harsh reality of being unable to properly run their countries based on a liberal democratic political system. Also, neither the governments nor their productive sector was able to cope with the rising private enterprise, which was based on supply and demand, fruitful competition, and quality of products. As a result, promoting the essence of democracy and free markets, fell into the hands of the U.S, which for years tried to find a way to make its presence in the region clear. The response of the U.S government after the fall of communism in 1989 and the dissolvement of the Soviet Union in 1991, was swift and methodical. With the signing of a series of legislative acts in the period of 1989-1995, known as the Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, and their implementation through the United States Agency for International Development, the U.S has managed to leave its footprint in the region and establish a network of democratic support to all the former Warsaw Pact country members, as well as the country members of the Council for Mutual Economic Assistance.

The SEED Act and Americas objectives in post-communist Eastern Europe

The Support for East European Democracy (SEED) Act of 1989, was part of a series of legislative acts that passed by Congress in the period 1989-1995. The laws were passed under the presidency of both George H.W Bush and Bill Clinton. The legislation was passed as a response to the growing demand for international help in post-communist countries. It is regarded by many as the most successful policy act towards Central and Eastern European countries. While initially the focus of this policy was targeted towards Hungary and Poland, with the growing request from other nation-states in the region, the U.S encompassed more countries such as Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Romania, Albania e.t.c, and later on, after the end of the Yugoslavia wars, it managed to include more countries from the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia.

The primary goal of the SEED is to promote the establishment and enhancement of democratic institutions and help transit the economies of the respected countries that are part of this act, into a free market economy, that will allow any of those countries not only to overcome the centralized bureaucratic communist system but also to become more productive, reliable and trustworthy members of the greater Transatlantic community like their fellow Western democracies. At first, this legislation was focused on Poland and Hungary allowing the U.S to designate two private, nonprofit organizations such as the Polish-American Enterprise Fund and the Hungarian-American Enterprise Fund to promote the development of the Polish and Hungarian private sectors. With that being said, the initial thought of the American side was to not recreate a full-scale of the Marshall Plan, simply because the crushing budget deficits of those countries provoked little interest for the U.S. Instead through the SEED, the U.S government managed to establish different assistance programs, that over time, managed to assist more countries in Central and Eastern Europe and later on, in the Balkan region. These programs were focused on stabilization assistance, development assistance, technical assistance, and political conversion. Also, the aid that would come from the U.S would be directly focused on the agricultural sector, the private sector, educational and cultural programs, as well as scientific programs.

The core message that was expressed through the SEED was the fact that, although at the beginning, any sort of financial aid would be minimal, there would be a possibility of a change to this tactic, only if the fledgling democracies that were undergoing a massive transformation would agree to adopt the ways of Western Europe and the ways that the U.S was proposing for the. In other words, this meant that, if by any chance any of the countries that wished to benefit from the SEED Act, had to fulfill some pre-requirements. For the financial assistance to be implemented, the interested countries had to remove trade restrictions while fully liberalizing the investment and the capital of the country, including foreign investment, while allowing any interested U.S investors to export their profits from these countries. Also, there had to be an increased focus on the development of the capital financial markets that would allow privatization of any public assets. Throughout the years, the SEED Act, allowed the U.S to leave a footprint in the countries that got rid of communism and further help them through other independent agencies such as the United States Agency for International Development (USAID), which is responsible for administering foreign aid and development assistance. If we provide an analysis as to why the U.S is so keen on the development of the post-communist countries, we can identify the two main reasons as to why the U.S was and still is so interested in the democratic and free-market development of the region. The first reason was the fact that if the U.S would financially assist these countries, then it will manage to increase its economic transactions with more countries while also boosting its trading and the uninterrupted free flow of capital profits back to it. The second reason has to do with the geopolitical aspect of the SEED act and the role of the USAID.

If we examine this from a realistic point of view, the U.S has managed not only to increase its economic capital but also establish close diplomatic and military ties with the respected countries in an effort to counter any foreign interest coming from Russia or China. Also, this means that, once the U.S has assured the economic development and establishment of democratic institutions in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe, then their accession to the NATO and eventually their incorporation into the European Union, would allow the U.S to maintain close ties in the region and add to its already large military cooperation with third countries. Out of all the countries that the U.S has managed to assist, Romania is one of those interesting cases in Southeast Europe, and it has proven itself as a reliable strategic partner for the United States of America.

The case of Romania

The bilateral ties between Romania and the U.S were always more or less on warm status, but both countries built a strong bilateral relationship after the Romanian Revolution of 1989. The U.S was focused on the legal and fair transition of power in Romania. In 1990, right after the end of the revolution, Secretary of State James Baker expressed the concern of the U.S towards the unfair discriminatory treatment of opposition parties in the May elections in Romania and made it clear that the U.S would not support an undemocratic Romanian government. The Romanians quickly realized that if they wanted any support from the U.S they would have to incorporate more Western democratic values in their country. As a result, in 1992, Romania conducted fair parliamentary and presidential elections. Encouraged by the fair democratic results, Deputy Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger visited Romania in 1992. It was a symbolic visit because it allowed the Romanians to demonstrate their commitment to fully implement Western democratic values in their country. The same year, both countries signed a bilateral investment treaty (BIT), and one year later, in 1993, Romania returned to the status of Most Favored Nation (MFN). These agreements allowed Romania to completely transition its economy, allowing for American investment in energy, manufacturing, telecommunications services, consumer products sectors, and information technology.

With that being said, it was clear that Romania was managing step by step to take substantive steps toward institutionalizing political democracy and economic pluralism, the sole requirement of the SEED act. Besides that, the USAID had a critical role in Romania. In a span of 17 years, until Romanias graduation from the program in 2008, the socio-economic profile of the country has changed for the better. The USAID has managed to fund and establish various NGOs that focus on the rapid decrease of children in orphanages and improving the condition in the remaining institutions for these kids. Also, the civic organizations in Romania, have managed to establish sustainable partnerships with the public and private sector and improve transparency and fairness in both sectors. Last but not least, the private businesses in Romania have managed to become an established feature of Romanias civil society by gaining sustainable funds from the USAID that are directly invested in the tourism, agriculture, food processing, and the industrial sector that allow Romania to flourish as a stable economic power in Southeast Europe.

Apart from the socio-economic factors, the U.S has contributed to the enhancement of the military treaties between itself and Romania. On March 29, 2004, Romania joined NATO and established itself as a reliable ally of the U.S in Southeast Europe. A year after that, in 2005, Romania and the United States signed the Defense Cooperation Agreement, the framework for any future military engagements of both countries. With Romania joining NATO, the U.S managed to gain a foothold in Southeast Europe, close to Russia, and demonstrated its capabilities in creating and sustaining reliable military alliances, helping Romania avoid any influence from the East, while protecting its national interests in the region. With Romania joining NATO, the road towards a future integration in the EU was clearer. With the help of the U.S, Romania managed to meet the requirements for an EU integration. Some of those requirements were focused on reforms that would help Romania become more Western, such as the acknowledgment of respect for human rights, the commitment to personal freedom of expression, having a functioning free-market economy e.t.c. Romania joined the European Union on January 1st, 2007 and according to the European Commission, the country is set to join the Eurozone sometime in 2024. Some may argue that Romania has to be thankful to the U.S for the tremendous progress that has been made, and this will not be far from the truth, since until today both countries enjoy strong military and economic ties.

Democratization or Americanization of Romania?

However, there are always some voices from within Romania that see this whole progress with skepticism. Some argue that although Romania is a democracy, it does not have a democratic society. There are reports of high levels of corruption and nepotism in the public sector. According to Transparency International, Romania is the fourth most corrupt country in the EU, after Hungary, Greece, and Bulgaria. Besides that, the standard of living in the country has not changed significantly since the end of communism, and there is a strong demographic collapse that is connected with the so-called brain drain of the country, with high levels of labor export towards Western Europe. There is some criticism towards the U.S, that points to the fact that the changes in Romania have benefited the American side more than the Romanian one, and there is a feeling that Romania is still stuck in the past.

Although any sort of criticism should be reviewed thoroughly, one can argue that the U.S is not to be solely blamed. After all, the aid that was sent to Romania and the efforts of the U.S to westernize the country were always focused on the national and economic interests of the United States. It is safe to say that the U.S was applying a realistic aspect in its policy towards Romania, realizing the strategic geopolitical position of the country and the important economic outcomes that would come if Romania became a close ally of the United States. The alliance between the two countries and their ties are relatively strong even today, and although there are corruption problems in the country, Romania seems to have benefited more than any other post-communist country regarding aid from the United States. In a way, the policy of the U.S towards Romania was a success as both countries remain close allies, and Romania is enjoying a better socio-economic and political situation within its borders.

Related

Read the original:
European Union Strategy for Cooperation in the Indo-Pacific and the Role for India - Modern Diplomacy

Prime Minister Janez Jana: The European Union stands firmly by its values | GOV.SI – Gov.si

In his statement to the press after his arrival at todays meeting, Prime Minister Jana said that yesterdays discussion on Belarus showed that the EU stood firmly by its values. "The fact that we put human rights and the political freedom of the individual, the human being, at the forefront is the right response to what has happened," said the Prime Minister, who continued that all their efforts to bring about change for the better in Belarus and to "ensure that similar acts of terrorism or acts of domestic terrorism, such as the hijacking of a European plane in Belarusian airspace, will not happen again", are concentrated in the personal freedom and human rights of Roman Protasevich.

"All our activities have to focus on the protection of human rights and the political freedom of individuals, as human rights and political freedom are about the individual and their rights and not about the rights and freedom of the institutions," stressed the Prime Minister.

Prime Minister Jana also said that he was pleased that yesterdays discussion on EURussia relations had been very frank for the first time in years. "While differences emerged, it has been clearly stated in the search for a strategic response that the EUs key strategic response to these challenges is enlargement," said the Prime Minister, who continued that this meant the enlargement of the EU, the enlargement of the single market, and the enlargement of a space with high standards of protection of human rights and democracy. "Today, I expect that we will spur on the Commission and other institutions in their joint European efforts for an end to the epidemic and for a swift and efficient recovery without bureaucratic obstacles and that the national recovery plans will be approved by the Commission as soon as possible, with the resources for their implementation also promptly available," concluded the Prime Minister.

Read more here:
Prime Minister Janez Jana: The European Union stands firmly by its values | GOV.SI - Gov.si