Mediaboss Marketing

Heres how to immediately repair the relationship.

The transatlantic relationship has suffered a series of near-fatal blows in recent years. President Trump has openly questioned Americas Article 5 commitment to defend any attacked NATO member, dubbed the European Union a foe, and repeatedly disparaged some of Americas closest alliesfor example, calling Germany captive to Russia. The people of the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union. France and Germany, instead of joining forces to chart a future course for the European project, have spent years trapped between President Emmanuel Macrons unbridled desire to lead a more assertive Europe and Chancellor Angela Merkels caution and paralysis.

Meanwhile, Russia and other adversaries have become increasingly creative in finding ways to undermine transatlantic unity and resolve. And populist forces on both sides of the Atlantic are bringing new leaders to power who lack an interest in or exposure to Europe and Americas shared history and values. While it would be premature to issue last rites to the transatlantic relationship, theres no question that it is ailing.The next U.S. president will need to revitalize this critical partnershipit serves far too many of Americas political, economic, and security interests to allow it to deteriorate further. Over the last 70 years, the United States and Europe have established the rules-based order through an array of multilateral institutions and alliances, from NATO to the United Nations, that have protected and promoted shared values. We have, at different times, tackled global challenges ranging from Ebola to climate change to Irans nuclear ambitions. While the U.S. brings the most military assets to the alliance, Europes contribution is substantial; its economic might is hefty; and it invests disproportionately in diplomacy, humanitarian assistance, and other forms of soft power.Breathing fresh life into the relationship wont be easy. Electing an American president who refrains from name calling, supports the rules-based order, and brings stability to the alliance would be a good start. But that wont be enough to put the transatlantic partnership on a more sustainable and constructive course and restore Americas credibility.

There are certain steps, however, a new president could take to begin the rebuilding process. In the first 100 days, he or she should travel to Germanythe country that has been perhaps most relentlessly and unfairly criticized by Trumpand deliver a public address. The normal framing for such a speech is to tick off all the ways in which the two sides of the Atlantic can create a shared agenda. This speech needs to be different. Instead of promising cooperation, the president should redefine the transatlantic agenda around the concept of defending democratic values given the surge in authoritarianism globally. The target audience would be both Europe, which is experiencing its own illiberal slide, and China, which is increasingly brazen in its efforts to promote its political model and values.

In the longer term, the new U.S. president will need to focus on two separate tracks. The first involves fortifying the traditional building blocks of the transatlantic relationship. Inside NATO, that means issuing a promise to uphold our Article 5 commitments and bring fresh ideas to the table, such as a joint NATO-EU summitthe first of its kind. In addition, the new president will need to reassure Europeans that he or she doesnt see the EU as an enemy but as a partner.

At least some Europeans will listen to such statements with skepticism. Many Americans will too. It wasnt that long ago when President Obamaa president most Europeans adoredtried to negotiate an ambitious trade deal, the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, with the EU. They never got there. Convincing both Europeans and Americans to give it another go will be challenging. Instead of opening a new front, the next president will need to arrest the deteriorating U.S.-EU trade relationship and stop the tariff wars both sides have been waging for the last few years. In doing so, the new U.S. president should remind Americans and Europeans that one of the best ways for Europe and the United States to compete with a rising China and to set global standards is to strengthen their collective hand.

Thats not to say the next administration should focus only on repairing existing damage and preventing future blows. It will also have to think about preparing transatlantic partners for the future. The president should discuss how mass migration will shape our shared agenda, future elections, and economies. He or she should explore if we need new institutions to thwart attempts to undermine our democracies, and how Europe and the United States can both harness and manage a wide array of disruptive technologies like artificial intelligence.But thats a long list, especially for a president who will be consumed with an equally long list of pressing domestic priorities. Europe will have to assist. Now would be a good time for European leaders to start thinking about where they are willing to lead and how they can help. The American people may very well put a president in the Oval Office who wants to rejoin the Paris Climate Accords and try to salvage the Iran nuclear deal, two decisions that Europeans would no doubt celebrate. But that same president will also likely ask our European allies to commit more to defense spending and to stand up to China. Europe should be prepared.When Democrats talk about revitalizing the transatlantic relationship, they arent talking about returning to the pre-Trump era. They are looking to rebalance the relationship for a new era. Lets hope were all up to thatchallenge.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really worksand how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, Ill make a donation

Read more:
What the Next President Can Do to Save Our Alliances with Europe - Washington Monthly

NewsPoliticsBrexitExclusive: Ministers are preparing celebrations for 31 January but are wary of alienating Remainers

Sunday, 12th January 2020, 8:30 pm

The Government is set to encourage councils and community groups to fly the Union flag to celebrate Brexit on 31 January.

Ministers are preparing a package of announcements to mark the moment Britain leaves the EU at the end of this month, which could include a commemorative coin and Big Ben ringing out.

One of the items is likely to be a fund from the Ministry for Housing, Communities and Local Government to help local councils and other groups buy and display the Union flag, i understands. A Westminster source said: "It's prompted by Brexit but is also meant to celebrate national identity more broadly."

The i politics newsletter cut through the noise

The move has been promoted by senior Tory backbencher Sir John Hayes, who said in the House of Commons last week that flying the UK flag from public buildings "would be a fitting tribute to the decision the British people made to leave the European Union". Brexit Secretary Steve Barclay replied: "Any opportunity to do so is one that he and I would always celebrate."

Big Ben bongs

Strident Brexiteer Mark Francois is leading efforts to get the bell restarted. Commons Speaker Lindsay Hoyle has said he would back the scheme as long as MPs voted in favour, while pro-Brexit businessman Lord Ashcroft has offered to foot the 120,000 cost.

A Downing Street spokesman insisted that no final decisions had been made on how 31 January will be marked. Some in the Government are nervous about holding too many flashy events in case it alienates people who voted Remain.

Brexit celebration

Nigel Farage is backing a "Brexit Celebration" event hosted by Leave Means Leave in Parliament Square which is expected to attract thousands of supporters and will feature speechs by senior Brexiteers.

The original date on which Britain was scheduled to leave the EU, 29 March 2019, saw two rallies outside the House of Parliament - one featuring mainstream politicians and the other organised by the far right and starring Tommy Robinson, which ended up with clashes between police and protesters.

Commemorative coins

The Treasury is expected to announce it will mint a commemorative coin to mark 31 January. It would be the third time the Royal Mint, overseen by the Chancellor, has announced a special Brexit coin.

First Philip Hammond promised a souvenir 10 coin, with 10,000 copies due to be minted in time for 29 March before the first delay to Brexit.

Next his predecessor Sajid Javid ordered the Mint to work on a 50p piece to go into mass circulation, bearing the motto "Peace, prosperity and friendship with all nations" alongside the revised Brexit date of 31 October.

After Britain's departure was postponed again, thousands of the coins had to be melted down - any which survived would be hugely valuable to collectors. Some Brexit supporters have called on the Royal Mail to follow suit by producing a set of commemorative stamps, but the company has refused.

Visit link:
Brexit Day celebrations to include flying Union flag from buildings and Big Ben bonging the moment UK leaves EU - inews

It is a career that marries two very diverse and indubitably challenging professions. Add to that a workload that is both heavy and unpredictable (extending to the weekends on occasion), and you have a career that a select few have decided to embark upon; that of lawyer-linguist at the European Union.

The majority of EU lawyer-linguists work at the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU). Others work for the European Commission, the European Parliament, and the Council. The CJEU currently employs 598 lawyer-linguists, 60% women and 40% men, with an average age of 44.4 years. The language unit with the most number of lawyer-linguists is French (55), followed by English (35), German (31), and Italian (30). Other language units average about 23 lawyer-linguists, while Irish has the least at six.

Legal translation is an integral part of the proceedings at the Court of Justice: on the one hand, through their work, the lawyer-linguists enable the Court to understand all the necessary procedural documents, and on the other hand, they make the case law accessible to citizens, one such lawyer-linguist told Slator.

Asked for specific instances when their work proved critical to a major policy decision or political event that resonated with the public, the same source cited two instances. First, the ruling on the consequences of the notification by a Member State of its intention to withdraw from the European Union (C-621/18). These documents were urgently translated and paved the way for the United Kingdom for revocation of the notification under Article 50 of the Treaty on the European Union, which in fact never occurred, the EU lawyer-linguist said.

Second is a currently pending case that has to do with the imposition of record fines. As the same source pointed out, The cases where the General Court rules on fines imposed by the European Commission on large undertakings sometimes receive great resonance. A case is pending where the General Court is called to consider the action for annulment of the record fine of more than EUR 4 billion imposed by the European Commission on an undertaking within the information and communication technology sector for the abuse of its dominant position.

Lawyer-linguists at the CJEU, typically, spend most of their days preparing translations of procedural documents, opinions of Advocates General, and court judgments or miscellaneous documents (e.g., press releases). Depending on the lawyer-linguists level of expertise, they may also be expected to revise translations prepared by other lawyer-linguists and freelancers.

Lawyer-linguists are expected to translate into the language of their law studies, of which they have perfect command, from at least two other official languages. Depending on the needs of the language unit, they are also required to learn further official languages and may, therefore, spend part of their working week in language lessons, the lawyer-linguist told Slator.

The same source added, A typical day is also likely to involve some contact with other services of the Court, most often with the Judges Chambers, for example, in order to clarify an issue that has arisen in the translation of a judgment originating in the relevant Chambers.

Lawyer-linguists are expected to translate into the language of their law studies, of which they have perfect command, from at least two other official languages.

And there are other responsibilities on top of the lawyer-linguists usual workload: Delivering training, attending the workshop of another language unit on a point of national law, and participating in working groups on, say, legal terminology or translation productivity (CAT) tools.

Lawyer-linguists may also need to travel to another EU institution to undergo training or attend a conference on a relevant topic; or to their Member State for the purpose of extending the network of freelancers and the quality of their translations.

Data and Research

33 pages. Total market size, key verticals, services & tech landscape, market share by segment, M&A, and outlook.

All lawyer-linguists of the Court must have a law degree. There are no exceptions, the lawyer-linguist told Slator, adding that they also need to satisfy the following conditions to work at the European Union Court of Justice:

Although the work of lawyer-linguists is varied, the main part consists of managing a wide portfolio of translation and revision tasks with stringent deadlines and frequent interruptions due to emergencies or unexpected constraints; thus rendering the workload not only very high but also partly unpredictable, the source said.

The same lawyer-linguist pointed out, It is, therefore, expected that they periodically work long hours or even weekends when necessary. For instance, delivery of judgments is announced weeks or months in advance and, whatever the circumstances, the translation must be at hand, at least in the language of the case, otherwise it cannot be signed and delivered at a public hearing.

See the original post here:
What It Takes to Be a Lawyer-Linguist at the European Union - Slator

Since 2016, the Trump election, Brexit, and right-wing challenges across Europe have revealed an economic crisis of extraordinary proportions. Decades of laissez-faire economic policy have yielded a collapse in financial security for workers and farmers and a concentration of economic power at the very top. Now, Chinas state capitalism has emerged to challenge the liberal economic and political order, with similar implications for workers and corporate concentration.

Sadly, the nationalist response in the United States since 2016 has largely made the problems worse, while Europe is often left on its own in defending the liberal principles of broadly distributed economic power.

In 2008, the world faced a global financial crisis of similar proportions, but it responded together with extraordinary actions. Instead of our current, failing nationalist approach, America and the European Union must work together again. They can do this by building a new special relationship between Washington and Brussels, in which they commit to domestic reforms in flexible coordination with one another. This would have two economic aims: to combat corporate monopolies and to boost worker power globally. And since principle-based agreements like these rely on political will, the new relationship would work best in combination with a progressive trade deal, as Daniel Block proposed in his piece for this magazine last summer.

Block correctly argued that the United States and the European Union must address the collapse of labor power, tax evasion by companies, climate change, and related progressive concerns. But his proposal, bold as it is, is only part of the response. Thats because a trade agreement, with limited exception, is a complement to fixing domestic standards, not a replacement.

To that end, the U.S. and the EU should agree to adopt a set of domestic reforms, akin to the international response led by President Obama after the 2008 financial collapse. In the wake of the recession, the U.S. rallied the G20 around a common set of principles to guide financial reforms in each country. The reforms covered everything from standards for how many reserves large banks should maintain to protect against insolvency, to how countries could best manage the failure of large banks if and when that happened. But the principles were flexible enough to permit countries to do moresuch as a ban on high-risk proprietary trading in the U.S. and a cap on banker bonuses in the EU.

None of this was done through a trade agreement, but rather through political commitments from each country. The urgency of the crisis was the driving force for action, and while more could have been done (and still must be), U.S. leadership was critical to driving progress. Today, the rise of illiberal nationalism on both continents, coupled with attacks on our democracies by Russia and the rise of China, has given a similar urgency to our politics. The next progressive administration will have a chance to negotiate dramatic reforms that seemed impossible only a few years ago.

We could use a process similar to the post-financial-crisis reforms to increase the power of workers and farmers and rein in monopolies. To boost the economic power of workers, this U.S.-EU agreement would include commitments to raise or secure union density against the range of political interests and economic forces pressing against it. In the U.S., under a progressive administration and a progressively minded Senate, this would be achieved through a host of domestic reforms to undo 40 years of conservative attacks on unions, including enhanced strike rights and penalties for lawbreaking employers, as well as by adopting sector-wide bargaining.

In addition to giving more power to workers, the new U.S.-EU agreement would combat monopolies. It would begin by both the U.S. and Europe welcoming antitrust enforcement efforts by the other jurisdiction. And it would go one step furthercountries in this new agreement would work together on antitrust investigations to maximize their resources and effectiveness. Much like attorneys general in different states in the U.S. are working in conjunction to investigate big tech companies, different countries who had signed onto this agreement could work together when investigating multinational companies or concentrated sectors. This wouldnt bind countries to the same exact outcomes, lest that result in lowest-common-denominator enforcement. But pooling limited government resources can help us tackle enormously complex global companies and international supply chains.

Farmers in both the U.S. and the EU are being squeezed by monopolies, and they could benefit from the new agreement as well. On one end, farmers are forced to take high prices from their suppliers. The four largest suppliersfirms such as Bayer, which owns Monsantocontrol 85 percent of the corn-seed market, up dramatically in recent decades. On the other end, commodity-trading companies and massive food processors, like JBS and Tyson Foods, use their market dominance and oppressive contract terms to force farmers and ranchers to sell their products at unfairly low prices. In the U.S., farmers could be helped greatly by enforcing antitrust laws that are already on the books, which would be supported through a U.S.-EU commitment to dismantling agriculture monopolies.

These reforms would best be complemented by the progressive trade agreement outlined by Block. The forces of globalization have shifted bargaining power in favor of mobile capital and against domestic workersbut a progressive trade agreement could help mitigate that. Harking back to the Havana Charters vision, it should add standards to ensure fair competition, like clear labeling for domestically raised products, which could strengthen farmers too. And the trade deal could help enforce labor, environmental, and other standards by slapping duties on, or blocking at the border, products from any country that violates themsay, by denying workers collective-bargaining rights or permitting the emission of industrial toxins.

A coordinated anti-monopoly effort is also critical to meeting the challenge posed by China, where state-subsidized companies are angling to monopolize global markets and critical infrastructure (think Huawei gunning for dominance in 5G). A tough application of U.S. and EU antitrust law can supplement the screening of Chinese investments that might pose security risks, as well as other tough trade action against Chinese companies that get unfair state subsidies. And as the U.S. and the EU take steps to rein in the dominance of their own multinational companies, that may also reduce the pressure that China feels to build its own monopolies to compete with ours.

In the Trump era, the international economic response to the problems facing workers and farmers has not gone smoothly, leaving everyone worse off. But a more progressive administration in the United States could kick off an international process to address shared challenges and rebuild economic relationships with allies. After all, progressive priorities in the U.S.like raising labor and environmental standards and countering monopoliesare shared by Europeans and many other countries around the world. Counteracting the forces fueling economic distress for working families, the concentration of economic power, and the ensuing deep distrust in government would be a solid foundation around which to organize transatlantic economic and political relations. And with the rising challenge of China, it would help secure freedom and democratic self-government in the 21st century.

If you enjoyed this article, consider making a donation to help us produce more like it. The Washington Monthly was founded in 1969 to tell the stories of how government really worksand how to make it work better. Fifty years later, the need for incisive analysis and new, progressive policy ideas is clearer than ever. As a nonprofit, we rely on support from readers like you.

Yes, Ill make a donation

See the rest here:
Washington and Brussels Need a New Special Relationship - Washington Monthly

January 13 2020, 12:01am,The Times

David Pannick

The House of Lords will today begin its debates on the European Union (Withdrawal Agreement) Bill. There is no question of peers trying to block the Brexit that the bill implements. But we will perform our function of scrutinising the legislation and, where appropriate, make suggestions for improvements to its content. Clause 26, concerning judgments of the Court of Justice of the EU, requires particularly careful scrutiny.

We are leaving the EU but much of EU law will, for the time being, remain in our legal system. To ensure legal continuity and certainty, the bill confirms that almost all of the EU law which currently applies in this country will continue to do so unless and until parliament or ministers amend or repeal it. That

Want to read more?

Subscribe now and get unlimited digital access on web and our smartphone and tablet apps, free for your first month.

Read the rest here:
We are leaving the EU but European law remains - The Times