Tag Archives: Michel Barnier

WHERE THERE IS NO VISION

This is a crucial weekend for Theresa May and for Britain itself.   The final Brexit proposals are on the table (all 585 pages of them) and parliament has to vote to approve the “deal” that will determine the UK’s future.

It hasn’t been mentioned all week on network television in the United States, but the Brexit deal between the EU and the UK is in its climactic stage.   By next week at this time, Britain’s future should be decided.   At the same time, Theresa May’s future will be clear – if she cannot get the latest proposals through parliament, there will be a “vote of no confidence” and her government may be gone.   The immediate future does not look good for Mrs. May or for Britain.

It’s been over two years since the British people voted in a referendum to leave the European Union, to once again be an independent nation as the United Kingdom was before 1973.   Membership of the EU has not been good for the British people. After 46 years, it’s time to depart.   But there are many, including the prime minister, who cannot see a future for Britain without the EU. Mrs. May voted to “Remain” in the referendum, but says she wants to honor the will of the people; however, she clearly wants Britain tied as closely as possible to Brussels and the 27-nation union.   She is fearful of the country going it alone!

Following the referendum there was talk of Britain becoming a second Singapore, a low tax, free enterprise economy that would boost living standards for the British people.  Singapore now has the highest per capita income in the world.   The irony here is that the city-state was founded by a British entrepreneur less than two hundred years ago, at a time when Britain had the most successful economy in the world.   The proposed revival has not gotten anywhere.

Note the following comment from yesterday’s Wall St Journal:

“Some Conservatives are nonetheless threatening another leadership challenge to Mrs May, and maybe this time they mean it. The Prime Minister’s withdrawal plan at least clarifies the choice. Mrs. May has reached this pass because she and much of her party have lacked the conviction to push for a Brexit that would require widespread economic reform at home and a Singapore-style free-trade policy abroad.   If Britain won’t have that kind of Brexit, business groups are right that the country needs to preserve as many of the benefits of existing EU ties as possible to compensate for the disadvantages of Britain’s high-taxing, high-spending, hyper-regulated economy . . .   Any Tory inclined to challenge Mrs. May will need a plan for persuading skeptical British voters to follow a reform path.”   (“The Best Bad Brexit Deal,” Wall Street Journal, November 15th)

A famous proverb makes clear the problem here:   “Where there is no vision, the people perish” (Proverbs 29:18).     The people were not given a clear vision that would have launched Britain on a new course.   Instead, they cling to their generous welfare state and free medical system, fearful of change.   They “need” a deal with the EU so as not to rock the welfare boat.

Perhaps a different leader would have made a difference?   Jacob Rees-Mogg, a prominent Conservative, said only yesterday that: “Leaving the EU is the most fantastic opportunity for the UK.”   If only Mrs. May felt that way.   If only Margaret Thatcher were still prime minister.   Or Winston Churchill.   Alas, there are lots of “if only’s” . . . the reality is that the country and the ruling Conservative Party are very divided.

Surprisingly, the 27 members of the EU are not divided, not on Brexit anyway.   They have all given their full support to the EU’s Brexit negotiator, Michel Barnier, an uncompromising man whose inflexibility came up against the UK’s constant dithering.   He took full advantage of London’s desperate pursuit of a “deal” that will ensure the UK’s future as a “vassal state” of the European Union (the words of former Foreign Secretary, Boris Johnson).

Mrs. May is quite a bit younger than myself, so I hesitate to describe her as an old woman; but, like many older people, she is showing timidity in this crisis, as her 27 immediate neighbors  on the European bloc treat her badly. She wants peace at all costs (“peace in our time” as Neville Chamberlain said eighty years ago when confronted with other continental bullies).   She is too nice to stand up to Messrs Barnier, Macron and Merkel.   But somebody is urgently needed to stand up to them – and opt for the Singapore option.

It’s interesting to note the contrast between Mrs. May and Donald Trump – the former lacks confidence in standing up to the Europeans; the latter is overly-confident, which is just as bad in its own way.   When President Macron announced that the new European Army will defend Europe against Russia, China and the US, Mr. Trump responded in a tweet accusing the French president of an “insult.”   A clear head and a determined resolve are needed here by the two leaders of the two English speaking powers.

The present scenario brings to mind the following prophetic words about Ephraim:

“Aliens (strangers, foreigners) have devoured his strength,
But he does not know it;
Yes, gray hairs are here and there on him,
Yet he does not know it” (Hosea 7:9)

Advertisements

EUROPE:  “AMERICA’S WORST IDEOLOGICAL ENEMY”

Europe is the worst enemy of the US?   You cannot be serious. Islamism, Russia, illegal immigrants . . .  whatever, but surely not Europe!  Are we not still together in NATO?  Do we not conduct huge amounts of trade every day?  Do we not share the same cultural roots, the same civilization, the same vision of the future? Did France not give the US her famous Statue of Liberty – “Liberty Enlightening the World?

Not anymore. In a sense, Europe looks like a continent where American Democrats have been in power for 30 years, not only in the European states, but also at the level of the European Union. (Gatestone Institute, 20th July).

Wanted: US ambassadors in Europe

 The Trump administration’s slow pace in appointing ambassadors, which has left major posts vacant around the world, is hampering the ability to carry out US policy.   “Now is a bad time not to have an ambassador in Germany,” the top US Army commander in Europe said. (Politico)   (FT 7/20)

Melanie Phillips writes on Brexit:

Good gracious!   Someone tell me I’m not dreaming!   A Eurocrat has spoken the truth about Britain’s negotiations with the EU.

In an article in The Times Hans-Olaf Henkel, a senior German politician who is deputy head of the European Parliament’s industry, research and energy committee, accuses the European Union’s chief negotiator Michel Barnier of trying to punish Britain by making a deliberate “mess” of key elements of Brexit.

You don’t say!

Mr. Henkel writes that the European parliament’s Brexit negotiator, Guy Verhofstadt, was responsible in “no small part for the disaster of Brexit” and “now wants to punish the British, full stop.”

“He says he doesn’t want to, but I’m afraid he does.   My impression is that Mr. Barnier wants to do the same.   The reason is simple.   They would seek to make sure that Brexit is such a catastrophe that no country dares to take the step of leaving the EU again.”

Precisely.

(“So just who is really messing up Brexit talks?”  7/20)

KING AND QUEEN OF SPAIN VISIT UK

The King and Queen of Spain were on a state visit to the United Kingdom last week.   Predictably, the King brought up the question of Gibraltar, a British Overseas Territory at the southern tip of Spain. It’s been under British rule for over three centuries, far longer than it ever belonged to Spain.

There’s an element of hypocrisy here.

Spain rules two enclaves in North Africa, Ceuta and Melilla, which are both claimed by Morocco. They are the only African territories still ruled by Europeans.

———————————————————————-

 ISRAEL

UNESCO is an Immoral, Anti-Semitic Organization 
- Decent Countries Should Leave

by Guy Millière  •  July 19, 2017 at 5:00 am

Although Europe claims to respect human rights and the rights of peoples, it has been a party to violating the most essential right of the Jewish people:  the recognition of its existence for more than 3,000 years, and the anchoring of this existence to its sacred monuments.   Worse, Europe does so in the name of a people fictitiously invented less than 50 years ago.   No serious scholar can find any trace of a “Palestinian people” before the 1960s.   Europe has apparently been all too happy to accept lies.

While claiming to fight terrorism, Europe complies with the demands of a terrorist movement that does not even bother to hide its terrorist nature.   When Mahmoud Abbas speaks Arabic, he continually incites the murder of Jews.   He recently repeated that he would not stop paying tried, convicted and imprisoned murderers of Jews, and still calls these murderers heroic “martyrs.”   On all maps used by the Palestinian Authority and in Palestinian textbooks, Israel does not exist;   it is called Palestine.

Europeans, imbued with a generic sense of guilt, began attributing all that is wrong in the world to Western civilization.   Because they had colonized parts of the Muslim world, they failed to note that Muslim culture had, in fact, colonized Persia, the Byzantine Empire, the Middle East, Greece, Cyprus, the Balkans, North Africa, Southern Spain, and, more recently, northern Cyprus.  (Gatestone Institute 7/20)

__________________________________________________

Turkish schools drop Darwin

Turkey’s new school curriculum drops the theory of evolution and adds the concept of ” jihad as patriotic in spirit”.   The move has fueled fears that populist President Recep Tayyip Erdogan is subverting the republic’s secular foundations. (Independent)


 

POLITICAL INCORRECTNESS

a.  A white Australian woman was shot dead by a policeman In Minneapolis over the weekend.

Headlines around the world announced that she was shot by an American cop.

The cop, it turns out, was a Somali immigrant, a Muslim named Mohammed Noor.

Was the fact that he is a Somali Muslim a factor?    Possibly.

What was certainly a factor is that he is an immigrant from Somalia, one of the most violent countries in the Islamic world, a country famous for its mistreatment of women.

Once again, an innocent victim would still be alive if there were stricter controls on immigration.

b)  I’m looking forward to going to see the movie “Dunkirk” which begins this weekend.   The movie tells the true story of the 1940 evacuation from the French coastal town of Dunkirk of 330,000 British troops who were about to be captured by the German army.

USA Today gave it a good review.   However, the reviewer fell victim to political incorrectness when he ended his review with these words:   “… the fact that there are only a couple of women and no lead actors of color may rub some the wrong way.”   (“Dunkirk an immersive look at heroism,” 7/18).

It wasn’t until 1948 that non-whites started arriving in Britain in significant numbers; and women were not used in combat until fairly recently.

But how would a generation raised on political correctness possibly know that?

Note the following from a review of the movie “Atonement” (2007) which featured the evacuation from Dunkirk.   The same problem perplexed the historical adviser to the movie.

“She said that as a historical advisor on Atonement (2007), there was a decision that had made her uneasy – the depiction of a black soldier appearing with Robbie (the main character) in Dunkirk.   She asserts:  “In fact, it was almost impossible for there to have been a black soldier in the British Expeditionary Force in France.”   She suspects this was done “to reflect today’s multicultural society” and “gave a misleading impression of how Britain was at the time.”   The film did prompt discussion.”

(Presenting the black past – how history must change the media,11/14/13).