Mediaboss Marketing

It was by design that Joe Biden deployed the term "inflection point" three times in his most significant foreign policy speech as president on Friday. He wanted to ensure the historic weight of his words was not missed.

Above all, he wanted his virtual audience at the Munich Security Conference to hear that global democracies faced a defining moment in their accelerating contest with authoritarianism, and that they dare not underestimate the stakes. It is an argument I have made frequently in this space, but one that had not yet been so clearly articulated by a U.S. president.

"We are in the midst of a fundamental debate about the future and direction of our world," Biden said to a receptive audience, though it was also an audience unsettled by the sudden, if welcome, shift from the cold shower of President Trump's America First to the global embrace of his successor.

"We are at an inflection point," Biden said, "between those who argue that, given all the challenges we face, from the fourth industrial revolution to a global pandemic, that autocracy is the best way forward and those who understand that democracy is essential, essential to meeting those challenges."

Biden's image, beamed to Munich from the White House, was symbolically framed on the large screens of the main stage beside German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Emmanuel Macron. After each of their three 15-minute speeches, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson, who had just finished chairing a virtual meeting of G-7 leaders, joined them for the Kumbaya moment.

Wolfgang Ischinger, chair of the Munich Security Conference, had every reason for satisfaction as he convened this reunion of the four allies who had done so much to repair Europe after World War II's devastation. Working with partners, those four countries took the lead in creating the rules-based institutions that have been at the center of global governance for the past 75 years.

Yet what lurked beneath this powerful moment was a growing recognition among senior Biden administration officials and their European counterparts of just how hard it will be to slow China's authoritarian momentum, particularly as it emerges as the first major economy to escape Covid-19, to restore growth, to engage in vaccine diplomacy and to offer the enticement of its some 1.4 billion consumers.

Thus, the Biden administration will need to develop a far more creative, far more intensive, and far more collaborative, give-and-take approach to its Asian and European allies than perhaps ever before. Galvanizing international common cause has seldom been this important, but it also perhaps has never been this difficult.

There are several reasons for that.

First, any U.S. policy must factor in China's role as the leading trading partner for most of America's key partners, including dethroning the United States in 2020 for the first time ever as the European Union's leading trade partner.

That will make most European countries, and in particular Germany, unwilling to consider any thoughts of decoupling from the Chinese economy or entering a new Cold War. The United States must be careful to consider the political and economic needs of its partnersand recognize they are unlikely to adopt a common, coordinated position on China without a cold-hearted calculation of their own national interests.

President Biden usefully factored that into his speech. "We cannot and must not return to the reflexive opposition and rigid blocs of the Cold War," he said. "Competition must not lock our cooperation on issues that affect us all. For example, we must cooperate if we're going to defeat Covid-19 everywhere."

Second, European doubts will persist for some time about the reliability of the American partnership, particularly given former President Trump's continued popularity, the political attraction of his "America First" policies, and his enduring role in Republican politics following his Senate acquittal.

That may result in many European officials hedging their bets.

A new survey by the European Council on Foreign Relations showed that although 57% of respondents saw Biden's victory as beneficial for the European Union, some 60% believe China will become more powerful than the U.S. over the next decade and 32% feel the U.S. can no longer be trusted.

Third, the Biden administration and its European partners must work to solve or head off strains across unsolved issues so that they don't sour the chance of a fresh start. These range from continued Trump administration tariffs and sanctions to Airbus-Boeing trade disputes to German-U.S. fights over the completion of the North Stream 2 pipeline from Russia to Western Europe.

Work on completing the pipeline from Russia stopped last year, though $10 billion has been invested and the project is 94% complete, due to U.S. secondary sanctions.

In particular, the Biden administration must work proactively with EU leaders to head off looming fights over how best to manage and regulate the influence of America's technology giants, including questions of competition policy, of data management, of privacy and of digital taxation.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen told CNBC that President Biden would be an "ally" in fighting disinformation online and stepping up the rules on how tech firms operate. However, growing EU talk about "digital sovereignty" underscores the potential for digital conflict across the Atlantic.

Finally, the Biden administration's reluctance to engage in new trade negotiationsand a lack of a sufficient Democratic or Republican constituency for such dealswill leave the United States competing with Beijing with a hand tied behind its back.

In the meantime, China has been reaching out to Asian partners through the 15-nation Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) and a new EU-China Comprehensive Agreement on Investment (CAI).

The thing about historic inflection points is they can turn in positive or negative directions with generational consequences. President Biden has usefully alerted us to our defining moment. So, there can be no excuse now if the U.S. and its global partners fail to engage in the hard work required in rising to this epochal challenge.

Frederick Kempe is a best-selling author, prize-winning journalist and president & CEO of the Atlantic Council, one of the United States' most influential think tanks on global affairs. He worked at The Wall Street Journal for more than 25 years as a foreign correspondent, assistant managing editor and as the longest-serving editor of the paper's European edition. His latest book "Berlin 1961: Kennedy, Khrushchev, and the Most Dangerous Place on Earth" was a New York Times best-seller and has been published in more than a dozen languages. Follow him on Twitter@FredKempeand subscribe hereto Inflection Points, his look each Saturday at the past week's top stories and trends.

For more insight from CNBC contributors, follow @CNBCopinion on Twitter.

Follow this link:
Op-Ed: Biden sought to rally U.S. allies in Munich, but unity will prove difficult as China's influence grows - CNBC

18 February 2021

Cooley LLP

To print this article, all you need is to be registered or login on Mondaq.com.

On 24 December 2020, the EU and the UK reached a deal on theterms of their future free trade and cooperation agreement("TCA"). Comprising 1,200+ pages, the TCA was asignificant achievement in such a short timescale and avoided theUK leaving the EU without a deal at the end of the transitionperiod on 31 December 2020.

Although the TCA changes little of the immediate impact ofBrexit for product stakeholders in terms of new obligations (suchas using the UKCA mark, updating Declarations of Conformity andtraceability information), it does contain important implicationsfor the longer term, including:

It remains to be seen how the EU and UK will implement thesecommitments successfully as the regulatory requirements in the UKbegin to diverge from those in the EU. In the meantime, below isour summary of some of the key effects of the TCA for productstakeholders.

By way of background, from 1 January 2021, the UK has left theEU Single Market and Customs Union. This means that the UK nolonger benefits from the free movement of goods between the EU andGreat Britain (England, Scotland and Wales). However, the NorthernIreland Protocol, which is designed to avoid a hard border on theisland of Ireland, still allows for the free movement of goodsbetween Northern Ireland and the EU (and vice versa).

The EU and UK have the "right to regulate" goodsindependently within their own territories, subject to certainprovisions in the TCA which incorporates provisions from the WTOTechnical Barriers to Trade Agreement. These provisions aim toensure technical regulations, standards, and conformity assessmentprocedures are non-discriminatory and do not create unnecessaryobstacles to trade. The TCA does not contain mutual recognitionmeasures (apart from a limited number of provisions for certainproducts such as medicines and motor vehicles - which are discussedbelow). However, in reality the UK's freedom to regulate iscurrently fettered in respect of Northern Ireland as a result ofthe Northern Ireland Protocol, which requires products placed onthe Northern Irish market to continue to comply with the EU regime.As a result, for most products companies will now have to complywith two separate regulatory regimes for the EU (and NorthernIreland), and for Great Britain.

The TCA contains important provisions to try to ensure commonapproaches to future technical requirements for EU and UK goods andto simplify access to each other's markets. These include:

The TCA contains a framework for cooperation between the EU andUK, and in particular exchanging information on non-food productmarket surveillance and enforcement activities, risk assessmentmethods and product testing, and coordinated product recalls orother corrective actions.

An arrangement is to be set-up "preferably within sixmonths" for the regular exchange of information between the EUrapid alert system for unsafe non-food products ("RAPEX")and the new UK Product Safety Database.

There are some simplified measures to facilitate cooperation andtrade for certain products including motor vehicles, medicinalproducts and chemicals.

The TCA includes agreement on tariffs and rules of origin. Wewill be blogging separately on the details of these provisions, andon practical considerations to help businesses navigate the newproduct compliance, trade and customs rules.

The TCA was ratified by the UK Parliament on 30 December 2020and has been provisionally applied since 1 January 2021, pendingratification by the EU Parliament (this needs to be completed bythe end of February 2021, unless the parties agree to extend thisdate). On 10 February, the European Commission adopted a proposalto request an extension of this period until the end of April 2021,to allow time for the legal-linguistic revision of the TCA into 24languages of the EU Member States for its scrutiny by the EuropeanParliament and the Council.

The commitments by the EU and UK to cooperate and take commonapproaches to technical requirements for products will be welcomesigns for many product stakeholders. However, these provisions maybe difficult to implement if the UK starts to diverge significantlyfrom the EU regulatory position. We've already seen some signsthat the UK is willing to adopt its own approach outside the EU(for example in the context of construction products and medicaldevices).

What's more, as the TCA does not include mutual recognitionprovisions for most products - or strong commitments in relation tofuture regulation - the real test will be how these provisions playout in practice, and especially the extent to which the UK willfollow the EU's lead when it comes to its ambitious program ofreforms of the existing EU product regulatory regime (such as therevision to the EU's General Product Safety Directive and newupcoming legislation on AI, among many other initiatives in thepipeline). At this stage, it remains to be seen to what extent theTCA simply pays lip service to the notion of a close relationshipbetween the EU and UK when it comes to product regulation, whetherthere will be continued future cooperation in these areas, orwhether we will see increasing divergence in Europe.

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

POPULAR ARTICLES ON: International Law from European Union

Gibson, Dunn & Crutcher

2020 was a uniquely uncertain and perilous year. Within the world of international trade, the steady increase in the use of sanctions and export controlsprincipally by the United States but also by jurisdictions around the world

Foley Hoag LLP

Withhold Release Orders ("WROs") are a key part of Customs and Border Protection's ("CBP") efforts to enforce the Tariff Act, which prohibits the importation of merchandise mined, produced or manufactured, wholly or in part, by forced labor, including prison labor.

Read more from the original source:
See EU Later (part 3) The UK-EU Trade And Cooperation Agreement And Its Impact On Products Regulation - International Law - European Union - Mondaq...

On March 25, 1957, the six ECSC members signed the two Treaties of Rome that established the European Atomic Energy Community (Euratom)which was designed to facilitate cooperation in atomic energy development, research, and utilizationand the European Economic Community (EEC). The EEC created a common market that featured the elimination of most barriers to the movement of goods, services, capital, and labour, the prohibition of most public policies or private agreements that inhibit market competition, a common agricultural policy (CAP), and a common external trade policy.

The treaty establishing the EEC required members to eliminate or revise important national laws and regulations. In particular, it fundamentally reformed tariff and trade policy by abolishing all internal tariffs by July 1968. It also required that governments eliminate national regulations favouring domestic industries and cooperate in areas in which they traditionally had acted independently, such as international trade (i.e., trade with countries outside the EEC). The treaty called for common rules on anticompetitive and monopolistic behaviour and for common inland transportation and regulatory standards. Recognizing social policy as a fundamental component of economic integration, the treaty also created the European Social Fund, which was designed to enhance job opportunities by facilitating workers geographic and occupational mobility.

Map showing the composition of the European Economic Community (EEC) from 1957, when it was formed by the members of the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), to 1993, when it was renamed the European Community (EC) and was subsumed under the European Union (EU).

Significantly, the treatys common market reforms did not extend to agriculture. The CAP, which was implemented in 1962 and which became the costliest and most controversial element of the EEC and later the EU, relied on state intervention to protect the living standards of farmers, to promote agricultural self-sufficiency, and to ensure a reliable supply of products at reasonable prices.

Like the ECSC, the EEC established four major governing institutions: a commission, a ministerial council, an assembly, and a court. To advise the Commission and the Council of Ministers on a broad range of social and economic policies, the treaty created an Economic and Social Committee. In 1965 members of the EEC signed the Brussels Treaty, which merged the commissions of the EEC and Euratom and the High Authority of the ECSC into a single commission. It also combined the councils of the three organizations into a common Council of Ministers. The EEC, Euratom, and the ECSCcollectively referred to as the European Communitieslater became the principal institutions of the EU.

The Commission (officially known as the European Commission) consists of a permanent civil service directed by commissioners. It has had three primary functions: to formulate community policies, to monitor compliance with community decisions, and to oversee the execution of community law. Initially, commissioners were appointed by members to renewable four-year terms, which were later extended to five years. The Commission is headed by a president, who is selected by the heads of state or heads of government of the organizations members. In consultation with member governments, the president appoints the heads of the Directorate-Generals, which manage specific areas such as agriculture, competition, the environment, and regional policy. The Commission has shared its agenda-setting role with the European Council (not to be confused with the Council of Europe, an organization that is not an EU body), which consists of the leaders of all member countries. Established in 1974, the European Council meets at least twice a year to define the long-term agenda for European political and economic integration. The European Council is led by a president, an office that originally rotated among the heads of state or heads of government of member countries every six months. Upon the adoption of the Lisbon Treaty in 2009, the presidency was made permanent, with the officeholder being selected by European Council members. The president of the European Council serves a term of two and a half yearsrenewable onceand functions as the face of the EU in policy matters. The first president of the EU, as the office came to be known, was former Belgian prime minister Herman Van Rompuy.

The main decision-making institution of the EEC and the European Community (as the EEC was renamed in 1993) and the EU has been the Council of the European Union (originally the Council of Ministers), which consists of ministerial representatives. The composition of the council changes frequently, as governments send different representatives depending on the policy area under discussion. All community legislation requires the approval of the council. The president of the council, whose office rotates among council members every six months, manages the legislative agenda. Council meetings are chaired by a minister from the country that currently holds the presidency. The exception to this rule is the Foreign Affairs Council, which, since the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty, is under the permanent supervision of the EU high representative for foreign affairs and security policy.

The Common Assembly, renamed the European Parliament in 1962, originally consisted of delegates from national parliaments. Beginning in 1979, members were elected directly to five-year terms. The size of members delegations varies depending on population. The Parliament is organized into transnational party groups based on political ideologye.g., the Party of European Socialists, the European Peoples Party, the European Federation of Green Parties, and the European Liberal, Democrat and Reform Party. Until 1987 the legislature served only as a consultative body, though in 1970 it was given joint decision-making power (with the Council of Ministers) over community expenditures.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ) interprets community law, settles conflicts between the organizations institutions, and determines whether members have fulfilled their treaty obligations. Each member selects one judge, who serves a renewable six-year term; to increase efficiency, after the accession of 10 additional countries in 2004 the ECJ was allowed to sit in a grand chamber of only 13 judges. Eight impartial advocates-general assist the ECJ by presenting opinions on cases before the court. In 1989 an additional court, the Court of First Instance, was established to assist with the communitys increasing caseload. The ECJ has established two important legal doctrines. First, European law has direct effect, which means that treaty provisions and legislation are directly binding on individual citizens, regardless of whether their governments have modified national laws accordingly. Second, community law has supremacy over national law in cases where the two conflict. The promulgation of the Lisbon Treaty signaled the acceptance of these legal doctrines by national courts, and the ECJ has acquired a supranational legal authority.

Throughout the 1970s and 80s the EEC gradually expanded both its membership and its scope. In 1973 the United Kingdom, Denmark, and Ireland were admitted, followed by Greece in 1981 and Portugal and Spain in 1986. (The United Kingdom had applied for membership in the EEC in 1963 and in 1966, but its application was vetoed by French Pres. Charles de Gaulle.) The communitys common external trade policy generated pressure for common foreign and development policies, and in the early 1970s the European Political Cooperation (EPC; renamed the Common Foreign and Security Policy by the Maastricht Treaty), consisting of regular meetings of the foreign ministers of each country, was established to coordinate foreign policy. In 1975 the European Regional Development Fund was created to address regional economic disparities and to provide additional resources to Europes most deprived areas. In the same year, members endorsed the Lom Convention, a development-assistance package and preferential-trade agreement with numerous African, Caribbean, and Pacific countries. Members also made several attempts to manage their exchange rates collectively, resulting in the establishment of the European Monetary System in 1979.

The Single European Act (SEA), which entered into force on July 1, 1987, significantly expanded the EECs scope. It gave the meetings of the EPC a legal basis, and it called for more intensive coordination of foreign policy among members, though foreign policy decisions were made outside community institutions. The agreement brought the European Regional Development Fund formally into the communitys treaties as part of a new section on economic and social cohesion that aimed to encourage the development of economically depressed areas. As a result of the act, there was a substantial increase in funding for social and regional programs. The SEA also required the communitys economic policies to incorporate provisions for the protection of the environment, and it provided for a common research and technological-development policy, which was aimed primarily at funding transnational research efforts.

More generally, the SEA set out a timetable for the completion of a common market. A variety of legal, technical, fiscal, and physical barriers continued to limit the free movement of goods, labour, capital, and services. For example, differences in national health and safety standards for consumer goods were a potential impediment to trade. To facilitate the completion of the common market by 1992, the communitys legislative process was modified. Originally, the Commission proposed legislation, the Parliament was consulted, and the Council of Ministers made a final decision. The councils decisions generally needed unanimity, a requirement that gave each member a veto over all legislation. The SEA introduced qualified majority voting for all legislation related to the completion of the common market. Under this system, each member was given multiple votes, the number of which depended on national population, and approval of legislation required roughly two-thirds of the votes of all members. The new procedure also increased the role of the European Parliament. Specifically, legislative proposals that were rejected by the Parliament could be adopted by the Council of Ministers only by a unanimous vote.

Read more:
European Union - Creation of the European Economic Community ...

European UnionThe European Union mechanics have been a main part of the mod since 30/8/2015. Similar to the Holy Roman Empire and its mechanics, the EU can be unified in a similar fashion into a single, unified European state if all the European Union reforms are successful passed.

Called "Europeanunion" on-file.

United EuropeanBirthplace of Democracy

+0.50 Yearly Republican Tradition

+15.0% Global Trade Power

-25.0% Core-Creation Cost

The main benefits of being part of the European Union are: reduced unrest and cost to increase stability, development and technology; increased prestige and trade power; however you will get a small production penalty. Members will also get many profitable events and decisions. Every country in an offensive war with a member will get +1 aggressive expansion towards every other member every month.

Every six months a new European leader is selected among the countries with the highestprestige and legitimacy/ republican tradition. The leader gets an additional increase inprestige and the ability to pass additional European reforms.

There are three different reforms and each one requires the previous one to be passed and the next one to not be already passed. AI will always pass these decisions.

Read the original:
European Union | Extended Timeline Wiki | Fandom

The European Union was officially founded on November 1, 1993. European treaties and alliances, however, have been in place since 1949 when NATO was formed. The European Economic Community was formed in 1957. Since the 1950s, various industries, including coal and steel, have worked to create one entity serving all Europeans instead of bordered nations serving small sectors of the population.

With the initiation of Brexit and an increase in terrorism, the goals of the EU stand in the balance. Here are the advantages and disadvantages of the European Union to consider.

1. It creates a more influential economic block. Individual nations within Europe struggle to hold influence on the global stage because of their size. By having several small nations join for one economic purpose, more influence can be exerted on local and global economics. Larger economic blocks create better import and export opportunities, better pricing on needs goods, and free trade opportunities all help to benefit the greater good of Europe.

2. Travel becomes easier. With the nations of Europe working together, it has created a society that is somewhat borderless for travel purposes. There are fewer checkpoints, customs entry points, and other identification verification stops required when traveling from nation to nation. This allows for free travel within the continent for those who have applied for the appropriate identification.

3. It creates harmony on the continent.In the past, European nations were often combative with one another. Many divisions have come out of Europe over the generations, including wars that are far too numerous to list. Civil wars were also common on the continent, leading up to the 20th century. The joining of the 28 member states of the European Union has helped to lessen the number of conflicts that have occurred, which has created better safety for Europeans from an overall standpoint.

4. It has helped to modernize countries. Members have become modern nations thanks to the benefits of being part of the European Union. Specific criteria for membership include making commitments to human rights, have a specific rule of law, and following a market economy. This prevents discrimination and provides due process across the continent while encouraging socioeconomic growth at the same time.

5. The European Union has helped to improve local environments. Since the formation of the EU, the quality of the seas and beaches that are found throughout the continent have improved dramatically. This is because of regulations that were implemented at a Union level. More than 90% of European tourist locations meet minimum water quality standards today, which is a vast increase from the 1950s.

6. Job creation occurs because of the existence of the European Union. In the United Kingdom, up to 10% of all employment opportunities are directly linked to the EU. The United States has employment ties to the European Union as well. Without that structure, those jobs and the economics they provide would disappear. Millions of people would be displaced and billions would disappear from the global economy.

7. It creates another level of international security. European nations have a form of mutual protection through NATO. Belonging to the United Nations provides another level of security. The European Union provides a third level of security that allows for local intelligence services to have access to improved data sharing and military resources that can keep the population safer than if the Union did not exist.

1. Fewer borders and restrictions means more opportunities for nefarious deeds. History has shown us that one person, with the right tools and motivation, can cause a lot of havoc for a society. Since 2010, there has been an increase in vehicular attacks and other terror-like events that have occurred on European soil. The highly-coordinated Paris attacks in November 2015 killed 130 people and several have occurred since then. With open borders comes more opportunity to cause trouble.

2. Creating an overseeing government doesnt heal division. The recent Brexit vote is evidence that Europe can seem united in a Union, but the old divisions still exist. The European Union has proven that it can provide helpful benefits from an economic standpoint, but there is still a sense of nationalism that provides the foundation of what has been built since 1993. When push comes to shove, Brexit proves that the harmony present is more for outward appearances only.

3. It ties the hands of local governments on certain issues. There is one primary issue which the European Union faces right now: refugee migration. More than 1 million refugees have settled in Germany. Despite the many needs that these people have, just 6 billion has been dedicated to build facilities for these refugees outside of the humanitarian aid that is already being offered. This means local governments must provide support to the EU without much in return for the crises they face at home.

4. Currency support is required for stable politics. The banking crisis in Greece was just the first step of many toward a currency that is insolvent for Europe with its current structure. Italy is facing a banking crisis in 2017, with billions in doubtful loans on the books. Austerity forced upon Greece may be forced upon Italy as well, which would create instability for the politics in the region. Add this to decline exports in Germany and the security questions that are being faced and makes for hard choices that may need to be made in the future.

5. It lacks transparency. Elections in member nations are public and transparent. The election of the European Commission is not transparent. The Commission has the authority to wield plenty of influence and power, but the average person has no say in who represents them in this way or what the quality of the representation will be. This makes it difficult for member nations to have individual control as each nation is required to follow EU laws to remain with the Union.

6. It costs money. Member states are providing billions in support to the European Union every year. This is in addition to other commitments, such as the 2% GDP contribution that is being asked of NATO nations. The argument could be made that these investments could be made within borders

The advantages and disadvantages of the European Union show us that a greater good can come from such a structure. The disadvantages must be recognized, however, and then proactively removed from the equation to prevent loss of life, reduced economic influence, and other unforeseen issues that may arise. By being competitive globally, each member state can grow locally, and that is really what the European Union is all about.

More here:
13 Advantages and Disadvantages of the European Union ...