A Lesson To Be Learned

Birgit Püve/Spiegel International

Former Soviet Republic Could Be Next to Adopt Euro
No European country has been more adept than the former Soviet republic of Estonia in dealing with the global economic crisis. Tallinn implemented some of the toughest austerity measures seen in Europe and, in one year's time, has qualified to become the next country to introduce the euro.

Meeli Hunt is Estonia's best-known unemployed person. When she appears on TV talk shows, she is always perfectly coiffed and still wears designer glasses. She is now even slimmer than she was when she worked as a government press officer. She goes to the gym every day, and she doesn't look her age of 52. She developed her exercise habit when she suddenly lost her job.

Hunt has had a typical Estonian career, which took off after the country gained its independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, a time when everything seemed possible. But in 2008, her career took an equally precipitous nosedive when economic growth came to a grinding halt in Estonia. She managed to survive tough times with her savings, and now things are slowly starting to look up for Hunt, and for the rest of the country. "I've become tougher and more frugal," she says.

Say what? Used her savings to smooth over the bumps in the road? As these are conservative principles, coupled with her obvious beauty, the nitwits over at red-leaning Media Matters may well have another shitfit.

As a press officer at the Defense Ministry, she established a good reputation as a multimedia manager. Hunt marketed Estonia, a new NATO member, on the Internet. Later on, she handled public relations for the Freedom Monument, a source of national pride that was erected in downtown Tallinn last year.

Then, one day, her superior walked into her office and began hemming and hawing. She shouldn't take it personally, he said, but the government had to save money and she was being let go. At the time, a law protecting employees against termination, which has since been abolished, allowed her to keep her job for another month before becoming unemployed.

An Unparalleled and Painful Austerity Program

Since the fall the Soviet Union, Estonia has enacted what is probably the most liberal set of economic regulations in Europe. The Estonians can attribute a booming decade of double-digit growth to these regulations, but they have also been responsible, after the brutal crash, for an unparalleled and painful austerity program.

Fiscally, the program has been effective. Estonia has cleaned up its finances in only one year, and the country now satisfies all criteria for membership in the euro zone, the countries that use Europe's common currency. Tallinn is taking on new debt that amounts to only 2.4 percent of gross domestic product (GDP), and the country's total debt at the beginning of the year was only 7.2 percent of GDP, compared with 115 percent for Greece. Estonia intends to introduce the euro in January 2011. The coins, which have already been designed, depict the contours of the country, which is so far in the east of the European Union that the Baltic Sea is called the Western Sea.
Click to enlarge
But there is a price for this success: 137,000 people are out of work, which, for a population of 1.3 million, makes for 19.8 percent unemployment.

'A Liberal Test Laboratory'

Hunt has described her unemployment experiences in a blog. "Without a job, you're suddenly alone," she says. People who used to be good friends suddenly stop calling.

Hunt was one of 26 people who lost their jobs in her office. They formed a club and vowed not to disband until all of them had found new jobs.

What went wrong in Estonia? "We installed a liberal test laboratory in our country," says economics professor Rainer Kattel. "It worked well, too well, in fact."

In the 1990s, Tallinn privatized all unprofitable government-owned companies, ports and banks and introduced a flat income tax, which is currently at 22 percent for all Estonians.

Scandinavian banks, in particular, began investing heavily in Estonia. They took over the financial sector and acquired real estate, and investors built office towers.

And that club Meeli and her friends belonged to? Read the rest of Jahn Puhl's report at Spiegel International

They Love Us Now, They Really Love Us!

Obama's surrender to Europe has already begun paying dividends.

Austria rejects US Guantanamo detainee request
Austria said Monday it would not take detainees from the Guantanamo Bay center despite a request by President Barack Obama for help from European nations during his first major international trip as leader.

Austria was worried about the security threat to the European Union posed by the detainees, Interior Minister Maria Fekter told a meeting of her European counterparts.

Obama repeated his request Sunday for European countries to take some of the 60 inmates who will have to go to another country as they could face abuse, imprisonment or death if returned to their homelands. He has ordered the center to close within a year of his taking office.

Several EU countries, including the Czech Republic, which currently holds the EU presidency, have already declined to take inmates.

"If the detainees are no longer dangerous, why don't they stay in the U.S.," Fekter told the meeting. "For Austria, I cannot accept Guantanamo inmates."

Taking inmates poses a security headache for the EU because 23 of its members share a common passport-free zone. If one of its members takes in a prisoner with a criminal record, all others in the zone will have to be alerted.

Jacques Barrot, the EU's justice and interior affairs commissioner told reporters that U.S. officials told him they intend to take in a share of the 60 prisoners.

"We European countries are now dealing with an American government which is showing good will and this good will is expressed now in the fact that they are willing to resettle some ex-detainees on their own territory," Barrot said.

Barrot said U.S. justice officials aimed to finalize new countries for the detainees by the end of June. He said the EU was receiving "detailed answers" about why the inmates are being detained and the potential security risk they could pose.

Any final decision on taking in detainees remains one for each of the EU nations.

France said Friday that it would be willing to take one of the suspected terrorists held at Guantanamo, while Spain and Portugal have said they too could accept detainees.

About 250 detainees are still held, some without charge, at the Guantanamo Bay center, which was set up after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.

You should've talked to 'em in Austrian, nitwit.

Via Yahoo News

Orwellian Reality

As we get closer to the official rollout of Messiah Motorworks LLC™, the Brits & Euroweenies have come up with something that is sure to become a big hit in certain circles of totalitarian persuasion. Call it a juiced-up version of OnStar.

Big Brother is watching: surveillance box to track drivers is backed

The government is backing a project to install a "communication box" in new cars to track the whereabouts of drivers anywhere in Europe, the Guardian can reveal.

Under the proposals, vehicles will emit a constant "heartbeat" revealing their location, speed and direction of travel. The EU officials behind the plan believe it will significantly reduce road accidents, congestion and carbon emissions. A consortium of manufacturers has indicated that the router device could be installed in all new cars as early as 2013.

However, privacy campaigners warned last night that a European-wide car tracking system would create a system of almost total road surveillance.

Details of the Cooperative Vehicle-Infrastructure Systems (CVIS) project, a £36m [US$ 51,500,000 ed.] EU initiative backed by car manufacturers and the telecoms industry, will be unveiled this year.

But the Guardian has been given unpublished documents detailing the proposed uses for the system. They confirm that it could have profound implications for privacy, enabling cars to be tracked to within a metre - more accurate than current satellite navigation technologies.

The European commission has asked governments to reserve radio frequency on the 5.9 Gigahertz band, essentially setting aside a universal frequency on which CVIS technology will work.

The Department for Transport said there were no current plans to make installation of the technology mandatory. However, those involved in the project describe the UK as one of the main "state backers". Transport for London has also hosted trials of the technology.

The European Data Protection Supervisor will make a formal announcement on the privacy implications of CVIS technology soon. But in a recent speech he said the technology would have "great impact on rights to privacy and data".

Paul Kompfner, who manages CVIS, said governments would have to decide on privacy safeguards. "It is time to start a debate ... so the right legal and privacy framework can be put in place before the technology reaches the market," he said.

The system allows cars to "talk" to one another and the road. A "communication box" behind the dashboard ensures that cars send out "heartbeat" messages every 500 milliseconds through mobile cellular and wireless local area networks, short-range microwave or infrared.

The messages will be picked up by other cars in the vicinity, allowing vehicles to warn each other if they are forced to break hard or swerve to avoid a hazard.

The data is also picked up by detectors at the roadside and mobile phone towers. That enables the road to communicate with cars, allowing for "intelligent" traffic lights to turn green when cars are approaching or gantries on the motorway to announce changes to speed limits.

Data will also be sent to "control centres" that manage traffic, enabling a vastly improved system to monitor and even direct vehicles.

"A traffic controller will know where all vehicles are and even where they are headed," said Kompfner. "That would result in a significant reduction in congestion and replace the need for cameras."

Although the plan is to initially introduce the technology on a voluntary basis, Kompfner conceded that for the system to work it would need widespread uptake. He envisages governments making the technology mandatory for safety reasons. Any system that tracks cars could also be used for speed enforcement or national road tolling.

Roads in the UK are already subject to the closest surveillance of any in the world. Police control a database that is fed information from automatic number plate recognition (ANPR) cameras, and are able to deduce the journeys of as many as 10 million drivers a day. Details are stored for up to five years.

However, the government has been told that ANPR speed camera technology is "inherently limited" with "numerous shortcomings".

Advice to ministers obtained by the Guardian under the Freedom of Information Act advocates upgrading to a more effective car tracking-based system, similar to CVIS technology, but warns such a system could be seen as a "spy in the cab" and "may be regarded as draconian".

Introducing a more benign technology first, the report by transport consultants argues, would "enable potential adverse public reaction to be better managed".

Simon Davies, director of the watchdog Privacy International, said: "The problem is not what the data tells the state, but what happens with interlocking information it already has. If you correlate car tracking data with mobile phone data, which can also track people, there is the potential for an almost infallible surveillance system."

And somewhere along the line one neocoM or another will step up to the plate and assure the masses that it's for the children.

Via The Guardian

When A Fwenchman Speaks

Sarkozy jibes leave Czechs furious
French President Nicolas Sarkozy angered the Czech Republic, which holds the EU presidency, and drew a frosty response from Britain on Friday over disparaging comments about two key European partners.

Sarkozy, who already ruffled feathers last month by conducting a rival Middle East mission to a Czech-led EU one, caused offence this time by telling French car firms to locate plants at home rather than countries like the Czech Republic.

And his jibe about British tax measures to combat the financial crisis achieving "absolutely nothing" struck a nerve that has had British officials privately fuming.

The Czech Chamber of Commerce accused Sarkozy of encouraging protectionism and undermining the European Union's foundations with his call on Thursday for French car firms to return home.

"By this statement, the French president gave an indirect signal for the deconstruction of the European Union," the organisation said in a statement.

Sarkozy, seeking to reassure French workers about the government's response to the economic crisis, had said he expected French carmakers benefiting from state aid to keep production at home.

"Setting up a Renault factory in India to sell Renaults to Indians is justified," he said. "But when a manufacturer, I won't say any names, sets up a factory in the Czech Republic to sell cars to French people, that's unjustified."

Maybe those manufacturers consider impromptu strikes whenever some Fwenchie feels offended as something that's unjustifed and have moved to where there's a workforce that's dependable.

Sarkozy gave no details, but PSA Peugeot-Citroen has a joint plant with Toyota in the Czech Republic, making small passenger cars.

Read it all at Reuters

Obama Surrenders to EU

Forget the threats from Iran, Russia, North Korea and al Qaeda. They may die of laughter at the sheer ineptitude of Barack Obama. Two weeks in to his lame duck presidency, mired in scandal, unable to get out of his own way and just dying for some waffles, our fearless leader has surrendered on another promise and caved in to the Euroweenies.

Way to man up, Barry.

Seems like only some weak-kneed Republicans are afraid of this pantywaist.

The European Union warned the US yesterday against plunging the world into depression by adopting a planned “Buy American” policy, intensifying fears of a trade war.

The EU threatened to retaliate if the US Congress went ahead with sweeping measures in its $800 billion (£554 billion) stimulus plan to restrict spending to American goods and services.

Gordon Brown was caught in the crossfire as John Bruton, the EU Ambassador to Washington, said that “history has shown us” where the closing of markets leads — a clear reference to the Depression of the 1930s, triggered by US protectionist laws.

Last night Mr Obama gave a strong signal that he would remove the most provocative passages from the Bill.

“I agree that we can’t send a protectionist message,” he said in an interview with Fox TV. “I want to see what kind of language we can work on this issue. I think it would be a mistake, though, at a time when worldwide trade is declining, for us to start sending a message that somehow we’re just looking after ourselves and not concerned with world trade.”

Uhhh, so like, uhhh, never mind what I, uhhh, said.

Nanny State Rising

Energy-guzzling plasma TVs will be banned in Brussels eco blitz

The plasma screen television is poised to become the next victim of the battle to curb energy use legitimize and perpetuate al-Gore's Hoax.

Giant energy-guzzling flatscreens are expected to be banned under legislation due to be agreed by the EU this spring.

Plasma screens have been nicknamed the '4x4s' of the living room because they use up to four times as much electricity and are responsible for up to four times as much carbon dioxide as traditional cathode ray tube sets.

The most energy intensive will be phased out under the new EU standards for minimum energy performance, which will follow the voluntary withdrawal of the traditional 100watt light bulb.

The remaining TVs of all types will have to carry energy rating labels designed to make it easy to distinguish between the best and worst performers.

LCD flat screen TVs are much more energy efficient than their plasma cousins so are unlikely to be banned.

That is, until some nitwit deems otherwise.

A 42in LCD TV uses similar amounts of energy to a much smaller traditional set.

A spokesman for the Department-for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs said the plasma TV would not be banned completely, with eco-friendly sets remaining on the market.

The moves are part of an effort to tackle climate change by stemming the spiralling electricity consumption in households.

It involves phasing out wasteful devices and introducing low-energy alternatives.

Families have nearly three times as many electrical appliances and gadgets as a generation ago and the amount of electricity used to power them has doubled.

Today Britain has 60million television sets - one for every person in the country.

Plasma screens, which are common in pubs and supermarkets, as well as in homes, are among the most popular buys.

A Defra spokesman said that in the past five years the main TV in many households has changed from being a 24-32in cathode ray model to a 32-42 flatscreen TV.

Busy doing some housecleaning, Carol M. Browner was unavailable for comment.

Via The Daily Mail

Bring . . . It . . . On

Now that President Bush rapidly approaches retirement, the Propaganda Ministry of the Religion of Environmentalism™ has a new whipping boy: President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic.

Czech President: EU's Outspoken Global Warming Doubter

Czech President Vaclav Klaus, one of the most prominent climate change doubters, is about to get a new platform: the EU presidency. Others in the bloc worry that he could stall important climate talks next year.

Klaus has called manmade global warming a myth and questioned sanity of Al Gore, the former US vice-president who received the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize for turning a spotlight on climate change.

Most recently, Klaus expressed hopes the EU would give up its ambitious plan to spearhead the global struggle against climate change in the face of the global financial crisis.

As if that heresy isn't enough, a prospect looms that clearly scares the shit out of those who would re-order Western civilization more radically than Marx or Lenin could ever have hoped for.

From his vantage point in Prague's Hradcany castle, Klaus could be involved in negotiating a new set of EU climate laws while the Czech Republic chairs the EU in the first half of 2009.

That could happen if EU leaders fail to agree on a plan at their December summit, where a disputed proposal to cut EU greenhouse gas emissions by 20 percent by 2020 is on the table.

In any case, the Czechs will lead the EU in the run-up to a crucial global climate conference in Denmark late next year.

Climate on the backburner?

Having Klaus at the helm of the 27-member bloc "is clearly going to cause some anxiety," said Simon Tilford, chief economist at the London-based Center for European Reform.

While presidential office in the Czech Republic is largely ceremonial and the center-right government of Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek does not share Klaus' views, western Europe worries that "Czechs would not attach as much priority" to the climate efforts, Tilford said.

"It is unfair to say: If we don't agree this year we won't have it," he said. "But there are some concerns because the Czech government is not as enthusiastic."

The Czech government has tried to alleviate such fears.

James Hunt, the Czech environment minister's climate envoy, recently said that if internal EU squabbling spills into next year, "the Czech presidency will make every effort to achieve adoption" of the climate package in early 2009.

Pro business

But Czech officials also made it clear that they would prefer a softer, pro-business plan.

"We can't fight for the climate at the expense of our competitiveness," Topolanek said last week. "That is especially valid at a time of the global financial crisis."

Across the region, coal-fired power plants are a big reason why countries balked at the EU proposal.

Central European energy firms, including the Czech Republic's state-controlled CEZ that pours billions of koruny in dividends into state coffers, would like to see the package scrapped.

They especially oppose a plan that would force them to buy carbon emission permits at auction from 2013. The rule would add an extra cost amid the financial crisis and certainly hike electricity prices, they say.

"A unilateral cut of emission limits combined with a brutal start of credit auctions will not help the climate because nobody will join the EU and our emission cut of 20 percent ... will be easily offset and surmounted by a rise in emissions in China," Topolanek said.

The bloated oaf, al-Gore, was unavailable for comment.

Via Deutsche Welle

The European Union: Russia's Enabler?

Has the EU allowed Russia to get away with breaching international law?

After The Georgian Crisis, The Breaking Of Europe
The European Union is in danger of becoming the greatest long-term casualty of the Russian-Georgian conflict.

The EU's foreign policy apparatus has been exposed as ineffectual, its minor diplomatic victories as nothing more than window-dressing covering up major strategic reverses. The bloc's vision of peaceful integration through democratic and economic reforms, which enabled it to transform the eastern half of the continent over the past decade, now has a serious question mark hanging over it. August 8 -- the day Russian troops entered Georgia -- was in a sense Europe's 9/11, regardless of parallel claims for Russia made by President Dmitry Medvedev.

Alternatively, as Timothy Garton Ash predicts in "The Guardian" of September 11, 8/8 may become shorthand for a very low point in the history of the "liberal international order." Garton Ash's liberal world order has, of course, been inextricably intertwined with the rise of the EU as a global actor. Little changed in Russia itself on 8/8, but for Europe, "reality changed," as French Foreign Minister Bernard Kouchner put it on September 6 after crisis talks in Avignon with his EU counterparts.

In the wake of 8/8, the EU's illusions of emancipation have been rudely shattered and the bloc's capabilities found desperately wanting. U.S. security guarantees remain a "vital national interest" for all European countries, one of the EU's preeminent foreign-policy strategists, Robert Cooper, concluded in a recent interview with RFE/RL.

Quite plainly, the EU lacks adequate mechanisms for coping with this kind of crisis. In its efforts to be taken seriously by Russia, it has failed to come up with a realistic strategy to counter Moscow's aggression.

The EU's Common Foreign and Security Policy has turned out to be a institutional fiction. Instead, the EU has had to resort to emergency meetings and ad hoc diplomacy. There was no place, for example, for the bloc's foreign-policy chief, Javier Solana, at the side of French President Nicolas Sarkozy when the latter traveled to Moscow on August 12 as the head of the country that currently holds the EU's rotating presidency.

Worse, the EU is nearly paralyzed by a fragmentation of the will, a condition which was in ample evidence at the EU-Ukraine summit in Paris on September 9. On that occasion, in a feat of extreme verbal contortionism, the EU promised Ukraine everything but a guaranteed prospect of membership. Most EU member states fear Ukraine may already face a real threat from Russia, yet the bloc's strategic interests were nowhere in sight at the ambassadorial meetings in Brussels preceding the summit, where the Netherlands and other member states [Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Luxembourg blocked any suggestions of future EU expansion into post-Soviet territory. Ed.] skeptical of enlargement argued that giving Ukraine a binding pledge of membership would be too unpopular back home.

Of course it would be unpopular. The defense of strategic interests would require increasing the percentage of GDP to their respective defense budgets. And that might have to come at the expense of the ever-precious social benefits.

Neither has the EU done anything to match the U.S. diplomatic "surge" in which top State Department officials have visited Ukraine, Azerbaijan, and Kazakhstan, not to mention Georgia. Again, the bloc's 27 member states have conspicuously failed to marshal the requisite collective resolve.

True, the EU has had some success in mediating an end to the conflict itself. On September 8, Sarkozy returned from a second foray to Moscow with a promise of a phased withdrawal of Russian troops from Georgia following the deployment of 200 EU civilian monitors.

The EU has, in fact, been the only outside mediator. Its successes, however, remain questionable. Thus, it is arguable that the EU has in effect allowed Russia to get away with a gross breach of international law and cement its de facto annexation of South Ossetia and Abkhazia.

The price of Russian withdrawal for Georgia has been the increasing Russian entrenchment in South Ossetia and Abkhazia. EU officials admit privately that Russia is using its checkpoints in Georgia as a disposable bargaining chip in exchange for more permanent gains in the breakaway provinces.

The EU has also allowed itself to become entangled in seemingly endless disputes with Russia over the small print in the terms it has managed to extract, enabling Moscow to play for time and sow confusion. In the latest installment, Russia now says it never promised to pull its troops out of "independent" South Ossetia or Abkhazia, or to allow EU observers into those provinces.

Nicolas Sarkozy went on record on September 8 as saying all Russian troops must withdraw by October 15 to where they were stationed prior to August 8. As this is unlikely to happen, the EU has simply prepared the ground for another standoff next month -- something for which Russia appears to have an insatiable appetite.

And to which the EU will respond with a demand . . . for more dialogue.

Meanwhile, South Ossetia's and Abkhazia's secession has become a fait accompli and a dangerous precedent for Russia's other neighbors, some of them EU member states who take that threat very seriously. Even though Finland has traditionally been difficult to alarm, its president, Tarja Halonen, went on record as telling the French daily "Le Monde" of September 11 that "we cannot rule out a military conflict in our region." She also pointedly observed to "Helsingin Sanomat" on August 27 that "Finland is one of the few countries in Europe capable of defending itself militarily."

The scheduled talks in Geneva on October 15 on security and stability in South Ossetia and Abkhazia are likely to become a further bone of contention. Moscow insists that representatives from both republics should attend those talks as equal participants, while the EU has said that cannot be allowed.

The EU is quite simply out of its depth in this crisis and is likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. There can be little better demonstration of this than the fact -- as an EU diplomat told RFE/RL -- that the delegation led by Sarkozy felt compelled to ask Medvedev on September 8 whether Russia is planning to unilaterally redraw the borders of any other neighboring countries. The Russian response was to deny any such intention and to affirm that "Russia is not the Soviet Union."

Édouard Daladier was unavailable for comment.

Via Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty

Euroweenies In Panic Mode

Sarkozy warning on EU expansion
French President Nicolas Sarkozy has said the European Union will not be able to expand further without ratification of the Lisbon Treaty.

An EU summit in Brussels has exposed divisions over how to proceed with the reform treaty - which was rejected by Irish voters in a referendum last week.

A decision on what to do next is expected to be postponed until October.

The leaders are now expected to discuss Zimbabwe. A draft statement threatens increasing EU sanctions on the country.

Wrong signal

Mr Sarkozy's comments about EU expansion came after clear divisions emerged over the future of the treaty and the meeting decided that the Irish should report back in October on possible ways out of the impasse.

"Without the Treaty of Lisbon there won't be any enlargement," he said.

"You can't say no to reforms and yes to enlargement."

The BBC's Jonny Dymond says one diplomat described Mr Sarkozy's comments as a threat - and the wrong signal to send to the Irish people - and those of Croatia and Turkey, who hope to join the 27-member bloc.

Mr Sarkozy did add that he would travel to Ireland when France takes over the rotating EU presidency in July to help find a solution.

The treaty must be ratified by all member states to take effect. Nineteen have approved it so far, the latest of which was the UK, where it passed through parliament on Wednesday.

Czech brakes

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso urged respect for the Irish "No" vote but said he was confident all the countries would complete the ratification process. He ruled out renegotiating the reform treaty.

"When a treaty is signed by 27 governments it's not just for fun," he said. "It's inconceivable that a government signs a treaty without the intention of ratifying it. It's a principle of international law."

And it's a principle of Euroean Union conventions that all member states must ratify a constitution treaty. Big difference, asshat. In a free, fair and transparent election, the people of Ireland said NO to the European Constitution Treaty of Lisbon. Get it?

Slovenian Prime Minister Janez Jansa, whose country is the current holder of the EU presidency, said enlargement should not be a victim of the delay in ratifying the treaty.

"I believe we'll find a way out of the situation before any candidate country is ready for a decision on accession to be taken in the EU," he said. "I don't think the commission wants to slow down the process."

In effect telling Sarkozy to go . . . himself.

Germany rejected the idea of moving ahead on Lisbon without Ireland, which won strong Czech backing at the summit.

Our correspondent says concern is swirling around the intentions of the Czech government.

Pressed on whether he intended to ratify the treaty, Czech Prime Minister Mirek Topolanek said that he was not going to put the brakes on to halt ratification.

But he added he would not bet 100 crowns (£3; $6) on a "Yes" from parliament.

[....]

Read the rest at The BBC

While EU Elitists Kvetched About Ireland

ČR to help east during EU presidency
The Czech Republic will focus during its EU presidency in the first half of 2009 on such development aid priorities as a better use of renewable energy sources in developing countries, Czech Deputy Foreign Minister Jan Kohout told journalists Thursday.

The Czech Republic will also seek an increase in the EU aid to the countries eastward of the EU eastern border, Kohout said, adding that at present, the EU rather puts an emphasis on southern countries, mainly Africa.

Kohout Thursday met Stefano Manservisi, European Commission's Director General for Development, who welcomed the Czech presidency priorities after the meeting.

Hmmm. Desiring to increase the amount of EU largesse to former Soviet slave states while criticizing the EU's focus on Africa, Kohout and Manservisi can expect to be categorized by the Leftisphere as . . . well, you know . . . racists.

The two officials discussed the preparation of the Czech six-month EU rotating presidency.

A "good governing" in poor countries is also one of the priorities, Kohout said.

Monservisi added that the Czech Republic could be a good inspiration for these countries because it has the experience of the transition period from communism to the market economy and a civic society.

According to last year's information, the EU earmarks more than 40 billion euros [US$62,487,293,261 ed.] for development aid a year and in 2010 it should be 20 billion euros more.

The Czech Republic is one of the most generous contributors to the development aid among the new EU countries.

The Czech Republic has so far defined eight priorities for the development aid programme. It focuses on Angola, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Yemen, Moldova, Mongolia, Serbia and Montenegro, Vietnam and Zambia.

In addition, it also finances big projects in Afghanistan and Iraq.

The Czech Republic allotted 3.6 billion crowns [US$232,973,063 ed.] for development aid in 2006, 300 million [US$19,403,475 ed.] more than in 2005.

Of course, that isn't enough.

Czech non-governmental organisations criticised the government for its insufficient aid to poor countries.

ČeskéNoviny via The Prague Monitor

Red On Red: Chavez Threatens EU

Get the popcorn ready. This should be amusing.

We noted Thursday how the finger-waggers of the EU passed an anti-illegal alien measure. Now the Venezuelan psychopath is threatening to cut off the oil.

Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez on Thursday threatened to stop selling oil to European countries if they apply a new ruling on illegal immigrants that is criticized in Latin America and by human rights groups.

European Union lawmakers ruled on Wednesday that illegal immigrants can be detained for up to 18 months and face a reentry ban of up to five years.

Hey, maybe they ought to drill for oil themselves.

Illegal Immigration Legislation Finally Passes

Silly not in America. Don't you know addressing the problem in America is taboo, this is the EU (European Union).

Under the new rules illegal immigrants can be detained for up to 18 months and face a five-year re-entry ban.

Lawmakers backed the measures by a large majority despite opposition from many Socialist and Green parties, and condemnation from human rights groups.

The rules took more than two years to draft and member states will have a further two years to implement them.

It seems everybody but the United States is addressing the problems posed by illegal immigrants. We won't keep illegals out or deport them or arrest them. We won't tap into the resources we have, or build alternative energy sources. We won't stop the unbridled and unrestrained spending of our taxpayer dollars. We won't treat enemies of this country rounded up on the battlefields around the world as enemies, instead they are to be treated as common criminals. We are afraid to label or prosecute Islamic radicals and their supporters in the country.
And we won't kick out of office all of the bums whose job it is to address those problems, so ultimately Americans are getting exactly what they want since they continue to put the same bunch of folks back into congress.
It is time to quit whining about all of the inaction of the lawyers on Capitol Hill and send them to wherever old, washed up, retired lawyers go and put some real people in Congress that are more representative of a cross section of this country. I encourage people to not vote for the incumbent, try to find a candidate who is not a lawyer, and let's take back the power in this country. If congress continues to represent only one segment of our society, the legal profession, nothing will change. Everything to them is the subject of debate and no action is never made.
This year let's send a clear message that finally they are right, it won't be business as usual.

I Hear A Trainwreck Comin' . . .

While Dubya's joined McCain in capitulating to the Religion of Environmentalism, a major chink has appeared in the armor of al-Gore's 'global warming' scam.

Pressure Grows on EU to Abandon Biofuels
With food prices skyrocketing and faith in biofuels plummeting, many are demanding that the European Union back away from its commitment to eco-fuel. Even the EU's own scientists are skeptical.

Uh-oh. There goes al-Gore's holy consensus.

The timing can, at best, be described as awkward. On Tuesday, the United Kingdom's new biofuel regulations went into effect, requiring that 2.5 percent of fuel sold at pumps in the UK be made up of fuel made from grains and grass. By 2010, the mixture will be boosted to 5 percent -- all in an effort to drastically reduce the amount of carbon dioxide that gets pumped into the atmosphere.

But the regulation comes during a week of mounting critique against biofuels. With unrest around the world growing (more...) due to rising food prices, many are beginning to point their fingers at ethanol and biodiesel as important culprits. Even as the new UK regulations enact ambitious European Union goals aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions, the EU itself is facing increasing pressure to abandon its goal of seeing all fuel sold at pumps in Europe contain 10 percent biofuels by 2020.

First generation biofuels "don't hold as much potential environmental benefits as people thought when they embarked on these policies," Stefan Tangermann, Director of the Trade and Agricultural Directorate for the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "We must come to the conclusion that maybe it is time to revisit our commitment to biofuels."

[....]

Ouch.

Read it all at Spiegel International.




自由西藏

In Contrast To The UK . . . .

Czech petrol price lower, diesel oil grows in previous week

Petrol prices on the Czech market decreased slightly in the past week, while the average price of diesel oil was 30 hellers (US$0.018) higher than a week earlier, the Czech Statistical Office (CSU) said today.

Drivers paid an average Kc31.39 (US$1.91) for a litre of diesel oil on Monday, March 17, compared with Kc31.09 (US$1.89) a litre a week earlier. The top-selling petrol Natural 95 cost Kc30.77 (US$1.87) a litre on average, down three hellers against the previous week.

The unleaded petrol Special 91 with an additive dipped by five hellers (US$0.003) to Kc30.22 (US$1.87) a litre, while the average price of LPG rose by two hellers to Kc16.02 (US$0.97)/l.

A similar development was recorded by the company CCS that also monitors fuel prices on a regular basis. CCS said a litre of Natural 95 was eight hellers cheaper at Kc30.50 (US$1.85), while the average price of diesel oil increased by 20 hellers (US$0.01) to Kc30.96 (US$1.88).

Analysts say diesel oil prices will probably continue to grow in the days to come; petrol prices should rather be stagnant.

The increase in diesel oil price is caused largely by the sharp price growth on the Rotterdam bourse, Colosseum analyst Petr Cermak said. The steadily firming Czech crown currency, which to a certain extent absorbs the rising prices of commodities, will not prevent diesel oil prices from growing, he said, adding that diesel will cost dozens of hellers more in a fortnight.

Having eyes like a kestrel, I cruised al-Gore's invention looking for a Leftisphere-type boogeyman to blame this on.

Surprise, surprise, surprise! In no time at all, I struck gold.

Via FinanČíNinoviny.cz

Previously: And Not Even A Kiss

Also at A Tangled Web


Photo courtesy European Commission

EU Projects Slower Growth

Looks like we're not the only economy slowing down.

Economic growth across the eurozone will be lower in 2008 than estimated, while inflation will stay high, the European Commission has said.

Brussels now expects growth of 1.8% this year in the 15-nation eurozone.

This is lower than its November estimate of 2.2%, and below the growth rate of 2.7% recorded in 2007.

The Commission said credit market turmoil, slower US growth and surging oil prices would weigh on growth, while inflation would rise to 2.6%.

The increasing inflation is concerning, though not yet dire. What is their plan for improvement?

The Commission said that the deceleration in growth could be short-lived if the US picked up later in the year and lending costs and conditions eased.

Part of their plan seems to be stand back and hope the U.S. grows them out of it. But if Obama or Clinton get in the White House and start raising taxes and installing their socialized medicine programs, you will see a significant dampening effect on the U.S. economy.

EU Set To Take 'Moral High Ground'

Instead of capitulating to the EUSSR, maybe Gordon Brown should rethink his grand plan of denying the Brits his previously promised referendum on the new EU Constitution Treaty of Lisbon.

EU aims for moral high ground with swingeing climate change package

A blueprint for tackling global warming was put on the table yesterday by the EU, which challenged the US and other big polluters worldwide to join the battle against climate change. Setting out plans for the world's first significant low-carbon economy, the EU ordered swingeing cuts in greenhouse gas emissions which included challenging targets for Britain.

Under draft legislation unveiled by the European commission, 20% of Europe's energy mix is to come from renewable sources by 2020, while Europe's biggest polluting industries must slash their emissions by 21% against 2005 levels by the same deadline.

The climate change package, senior officials in Brussels said, would give the EU the moral high ground, letting it lead the drive for a new, post-Kyoto international bargain on global warming with the US, China and India.

Moral high ground taken by a bunch of amoral hacks. rofl

While the overall aim is to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the EU by 363m tonnes, or 20%, by 2020, Stavros Dimas, the environment commissioner, said the scheme included "automatic triggers" to take the cuts to the level of 30% if the remainder of the world signed up for similar action.

"Climate change is the great project of our generation," said José Manuel Barroso, the commission president. "Europe can be the first economy for the low-carbon age ... The package is the most far-reaching legislative proposals made by the European commission for many years."

Other than seizing the national sovreignty of member states, what other 'far-reaching legislative proposals' have been made?

The EU executive laid out binding targets for each of the 27 member countries on emissions reductions and on renewable energy in order to reach the goal of the 20% cut in greenhouse gases, as well as the 20% target for Europe's energy mix being provided by renewables, and 10% of all road fuel deriving from biofuels.

Barroso put the cost of the package at about €3 a week for every European - the price of three tanks of petrol a year.

Cool. Let the EU pay for it out of its budget - without increasing member 'fees'.

The bulk of the reduction in carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gas emissions is to be obtained through a carbon trading scheme in which the union's biggest industrial polluters, such as power generators and oil refineries, buy and sell emission permits. The "price of carbon" is expected to rise and the hope is that the market will deliver the compulsory cuts.

In the sectors not involved in the carbon trading scheme, such as transport, farming, and construction, national caps are being imposed.

The British government welcomed the commission's draft, which orders a 16% cut in emissions by Britain by 2020. The UK is also obliged to increase its reliance on renewable energy, from less than 2% now to 15% of the country's total energy needs by the same date.

Hide your wallets, folks.

The environment secretary, Hilary Benn, said: "This plan shows exactly what we are aiming for globally - a comprehensive and effective agreement to tackle climate change, with the carbon market at its heart."

John Hutton, the business secretary, said the government would review its strategy to meet the UK share of the EU renewables target. "This package will show the EU's continuing global leadership on climate change. I want to see it agreed as soon as possible to give business the certainty it needs to plan low-carbon investments with confidence."

Better results if market forces were allowed to work free of government interference, but try explaining that to a socialist.

Environmental pressure groups sounded broadly satisfied with the package, which has to go through the European parliament and be endorsed by national governments before becoming law, perhaps in a year's time.

"A work in progress", was the verdict of Rajendra Pachauri, head of the UN intergovernmental panel on climate change. "I see no reason why some of these targets may not become stronger, may not become more stringent."

Barroso said the package would unleash a money-spinning bonanza in Europe and urged EU firms to seize the opportunity to become global leaders in innovative green technologies. He predicted hundreds of thousands of new jobs, insisting that the overall €60bn cost would be less than 0.5% of Europe's economic output.

For some reason, I'm quite confident that comrade Barroso will not do the honorable thing should the cost be more.

The scheme would save €50bn a year in reduced oil and gas imports, he said. Bowing to pressure from energy-intensive industries such as the steel and cement sectors, which have threatened to pull out of Europe if the measures cripple their competitiveness, the commission held out the prospect of free pollution permits under the carbon trading scheme.

This came amid warnings that it would be "economic suicide" to penalise the sectors too heavily. But big energy groups, which amassed huge profits in the early stages of the trading scheme, will have to bid at auction for all their permits from 2013.

The commission says that by 2020, this will be adding 5%, or about €150, a year to household bills, though its own officials say that the rise could be 15%.

In other words, they haven't a clue.

A decision on free permits for sectors hit by competition from low-cost countries is to be taken from 2010 onwards.

Via The Guardian

al-Gore was too busy doing paperwork to comment.

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”. --- Vaclav Klaus, President of the Czech Republic

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Memo to Barroso

Previously: Global Warming Scam to Cost EU $100 Billion

See also Reality Confronts European Union.

On The Good Ship Lollipop

Oh, a storm is threatning
My very life today
If I dont get some shelter
Oh yeah, I'm gonna fade away

EU treaty 'will shift power to Europe'
The EU Reform Treaty backed by Gordon Brown paves the way for "a massive and fundamental" shift of power to Europe, a senior Labour MP charged by Parliament with assessing its impact will tell the Commons today.

The comments from Michael Connarty, the pro-European chairman of the all-party European Scrutiny Committee, will mark an explosive start to five weeks of Parliamentary debate on the Treaty - and stoke the growing clamour for a referendum.

Tonight - with Gordon Brown absent from the Commons - rebel Labour MPs hope to stage a substantial rebellion with between 20 and 30 said to be ready to vote for a cross-party amendment demanding a national vote.

The Tories, who support a referendum, last night accused Mr Brown, who is on the last leg of a tour of the Far East, of "running scared" over the vital issue of Europe by making sure he is out of the country when the ratification process gets under way.

Directly contradicting the Prime Minister, who claims he has protected British sovereignty by negotiating "red lines" into the text, Mr Connarty argues these will do little to halt the gradual transfer of power from national parliaments and courts to Europe.

"The Reform Treaty and the red lines are just a postponement of what will be one system for all of Europe," he told The Daily Telegraph last night.

Mr Connarty backs the new Treaty because he wants a stronger Europe but said he had decided to speak out because the British and other governments had not told the people of Europe the truth.

On criminal law, immigration and border controls, the Treaty had set up mechanisms for national vetoes to be steadily eroded and authority transferred from British ministers and UK courts to Europe.

It set the European Parliament on course to gain powers at the expense of Westminster as authority shifted from national capitals to the European centre.

The new Treaty, also known as the Lisbon Treaty, has to be ratified by national parliaments or in referendums in all 27 EU countries to come into effect.

It will scrap dozens of national vetoes, create a new full-time EU President and foreign affairs supremo, and give the EU a legal personality allowing it to sign international treaties.

Mr Brown argues that Labour's promise to hold a referendum on the abandoned Constitutional Treaty in Labour's last election manifesto does not apply to its successor because it is less far reaching.

That argument is further undermined today by a report from the Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee which says that in foreign policy there is little or no difference between the two Treaties.

"We conclude that there is no material difference between the provisions on foreign affairs in the Constitutional Treaty which the Government made subject to approval in a referendum and those in the Lisbon Treaty on which a referendum is being denied."

The Labour-dominated committee accuses the Government of seeking to downplay the importance of large parts of the Treaty such as the new post of EU High Representative for foreign affairs and security, who will be served by a new EU diplomatic External Action Service.

Pro-referendum campaigners revealed plans yesterday to stage local referendums, giving half a million people in marginal constituencies a chance to have their say. Organisers of the "I Want a Referendum" campaign say it will be the biggest vote of its kind since the 1975 Referendum on keeping Britain in the Common Market.

While the Government majority is not under threat in tonight's vote, Labour whips were said to be increasingly concerned last night about cross party alliances forming between MPs discontented with the Treaty for a range of different reasons.

The Tories who have vowed to oppose the Treaty are expected to table amendments to the ratification Bill in the House of Lords later in the ratification process.

Left-wing Labour MPs, urged on by the unions, are also planning to put down their own amendments demanding that the UK's opt-out from the Charter of Fundamental Rights be removed.

If the Tories back such amendments - as a way to kill the Treaty - then Mr Brown's faces real problems.

[...]

There's much, much more at The Telegraph

See also Trouble In Gordon Brown's Paradise

Also at A Tangled Web


Gimme Shelter lyrics, Jagger/Richards

Trouble In Gordon Brown's Paradise

Could a no confidence vote be on the near horizon?

EU treaty won't work, says Labour MP
The new EU constitution treaty "won't work", the government is warned today, as ministers prepare for a bitter Commons showdown over the controversial document.

Gisela Stuart, one of the "wise men" that drew up the original EU Constitution, said the Lisbon treaty lacked the necessary legitimacy to work across Europe.

The Labour MP has signed an amendment to the Bill, which returns to the floor of the Commons on Monday, calling for a referendum on the treaty.

Stuart believes the UK's Europe minister should be a cabinet-level post, akin to a deputy prime minister, and should be directly accountable to the Westminster parliament.

She also wants an assurance that any future changes to qualified majority voting (QMV) in the European parliament would be subject to primary legislation in the House of Commons.

In an interview with Guardian Unlimited, Stuart said: "I think this document pushes to the limits the areas I think I could just about agree with, but I would need further safeguards, so these are the limits and I think that's what this debate is going to be about."

Stuart said the revised document gave the European Union a "toolbox" of powers that would allow it to "interfere in virtually every aspect of our lives".

"There is no longer a question of saying, there are certain things that the union can't touch. Actually the union can touch everything."

Pressed on her objection to the treaty, Stuart said: "I don't think this is going to work."

Asked why, she added: "Because of a lack of legitimacy in the eyes of large swaths of people across Europe ... The crunch will be the environment. If you look at the golden opportunity to tax the little people into oblivion acceleration of climate change, at the moment on the environment we are in a comfort zone of thinking all we need to do is take our bottles to the skip, recycle our newspapers; if you are really daring you say we should put tax on plastic carrier bags. And we think that's enough.

"Well the penny is going to drop that it's not going to be enough, and you will need to make a decision on whether you tax or ration carbon emissions. Of course no one country can sensibly do this on its own, so this will be a classic case of where you need the EU to do this. And the EU will start to ask its citizens to stop doing something they have always comfortably done before. There will be some fairly hard demands.

"People accept hard demands if that's a deal from their own government. But when politicians across Europe start saying, as they have always done, 'it is not us' - it's always been the politician's way of getting out of uncomfortable positions - at that point, it doesn't have that kind of legitimacy." Describing the Lisbon treaty as the same as the failed EU constitution "in substance", Stuart said: "I've been struggling to find analogies of how you compare this. It's like a cookery recipe: all the same ingredients, but you've just rearranged them differently. Or [former French president] Giscard d'Estaing came up with a wonderful phrase: he said, 'it's the same letter; just in a different envelope'.

Stepping up pressure on Gordon Brown to call a referendum, Stuart said: "My view is whether you call it a constitution or whether you call it a treaty, in essence it is something pretty significant, and it's a matter of trust now for the political parties to honour their promise.

"The British people should be given a say, as they were promised by all the major political parties in the 2005 election.

"I certainly will find it difficult to vote for the treaty on Monday unless there is a commitment to have a referendum."

How 'bout dem apples?!? Like Gordon Brown, Gisela Stuart is a member of the Labour Party and she's just thrown down the gauntlet.

Warning of the potential for Europe creep, Stuart said: "I give you one example. Ten years ago everyone said health was [the competence of] national member states. Absolutely no doubt about it. You then started to get court cases where people from one European country were going to another European country for dental treatment. The question was, was that part of the internal market? One of the key things of the European Union.

"So we have the first court decision, the European Court of Justice, that says, 'yes, it is part of the internal market'. And then over a number of years you get more and more decisions because cases come up, until last year when someone in England goes over to France to jump waiting lists and the courts say 'well yes, you can do that, but you need prior permission and all kinds of caveats' - but the principle is established.

"You then at the same time over those 10 years have things like CJD [and] bird flu, so people say, 'well of course, bird flu and CJD don't recognise national boundaries, so public health must be an EU competence.' So we make public health an EU competence; we make health service delivery a court judgment ... so what's the next thing?

"A European commission draws up a proposals for an EU health directive, which it did before Christmas, then decides to withdraw it to consult more. It doesn't say we'll put it back on the table, and as we in the UK are the only ones to have a totally taxpayer-funded [health] system we will have particular problems. But this just illustrates that there is nothing where the EU doesn't have means - whether it's court judgments; whether it's internal market; free movement of labour - the way it makes laws. In every way it now has means, and once it has taken away a UK competence, there is no way you can ever go back."

Stuart called for a strengthening of the prime minister's assurances over QMV.

"The prime minister committed himself to saying, 'no more extension of qualified majority voting or any further powers unless this house agrees to it.' Well, I would like that tightened up," Stuart said. "First of all, the only area where that could happen is in defence and foreign policy, because everything else already has gone to QMV.

"But I would want primary legislation, so it's not just one vote the government can whip through with their majority, but [instead] it would actually have to be a bill and go through the House, and go through [all] the stages.

"The second thing is the way the House itself operates has to change - very, very significantly."

Asked how she would vote in a referendum, Stuart said: "I don't know yet. There are a number of things I would want to hear from our ministers, and assurances in terms of their interpretation, and it will be extremely finely balanced which way I will go.

"My argument is that all the deals struck in Brussels need to be answered at the dispatch box. Create a proper Europe minister, take the Europe minister out of the Foreign Office, but make that person accountable for those negotiations. And that's almost a deputy prime minister post.

"I want them to come to the dispatch box every two weeks and say 'those are the deals we have struck'. I think you would find that that person would probably be responsible for negotiating something like 50% of our legislation, and that would merit a cabinet post."


Via The Guardian

José Manuel Barroso was unavailable for comment.


And hoping to avoid Nigel Farage

See also Reality Confronts European Union.

Also at A Tangled Web

I like this guy

Memo to Barroso


Naming names
He's British politician and MEP Nigel Farage.

Calling On All Good Danes (And Other Folks, Too)

Denmark to Hold New Referendum on Euro

Denmark will hold a referendum on whether to adopt the euro and drop exemptions to closer cooperation with the EU on defense and law enforcement, the prime minister said Thursday.

Danish voters rejected the European common currency in a 2000 referendum. The Scandinavian country has also opted out of other key areas of EU cooperation.

Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen said at a news conference it was time to reassess those exemptions, which Denmark was granted in the early 1990s.

"A lot has changed since," he said. "It is the right time to take a decision."

No date was set for a vote but it would be held during the next four years, said the prime minister, whose center-right government was re-elected last week.

It was not immediately clear whether there would be a separate vote for each of the exemptions.

Danes stunned fellow EU nations in 1992 by rejecting the Maastricht treaty on closer European cooperation.

A year later, Danish voters approved a revised treaty with clauses letting the Scandinavian country stay outside a single currency and banking system and refrain from joining a European defense structure or conform to EU citizenship laws and common law enforcement.

"We have always said that the Danish exemptions are a hindrance for Denmark," said Fogh Rasmussen, Denmark's prime minister since 2001.

He said the referendum would be held after Denmark had ratified the new EU reform treaty, which includes changes in decision-making rules designed to make the union function more effectively. The treaty replaces the failed EU constitution, which was rejected two years ago.

Fogh Rasmussen's Liberal-Conservative coalition won the Nov. 13 snap election with support from its nationalist ally, the Danish People's Party, and a smaller centrist group.

Denmark, a country of 5.4 million people, has held five referendums on EU-related issues since it joined the bloc in 1973.

In the latest one, on Sept. 28, 2000, Danes voted 53.1 percent to 46.9 percent against replacing the Danish krone with the euro. Recent opinion polls have shown a narrow majority of Danes now favor switching to the euro.

Via the AP

It appears that Prime Minister Anders Fogh Rasmussen is afflicted with a serious case of -isms. To better understand that from which Rasmussen and many Old Europe politicians suffer, clarity is found in New Europe, as demonstrated by President Vaclav Klaus of the Czech Republic.

[...]
Ten-fifteen years ago I spoke many times in this country about this process of transition, about its non-zero costs, about its benefits, tenets and pitfalls. Now, when it’s over, we face a different problem.

As I said, we already succeeded in getting rid of communism. But – along with the predominant view at home and elsewhere – we erroneously hoped that the attempts to suppress freedom and to centrally organize, mastermind, regulate, control the whole society (and economy) were already matters of the past, an almost forgotten historic relic. They are, to our great disappointment, still there. I see more examples of them in Europe and in most of international organizations than in America itself, but they can be found here as well.

The reason is that there are new, very popular and fashionable “isms” which again put various issues, visions, plans and projects ahead of individual freedom and liberty. It is social-democratism (which is nothing else than a milder and softer version of communism), it is human-rightism (based on the idea of mostly positive rights applicable all over the world), it is internationalism, multiculturalism, europeism, feminism, environmentalism and other similar ideologies.

Communism is over, but attempts to rule from above, are still, or perhaps again, here.

The second main challenge I see is connected with our experience with the EU, but goes beyond it because it is part of a broader tendency towards denationalization of countries and towards world-wide supranationalism and global governance.

The special sensitivity, that I (and many of my countrymen) have, makes me view many current trends in Europe rather critically. My opponents do not seem to hear my arguments and a priori keep rejecting the views they don’t like. To understand my criticism requires familiar knowledge of the developments in the EU, its gradual metamorphosis from a community of cooperating nations to the union of non-sovereign nations and prevailing supranationalistic tendencies. This is not the standard knowledge in America.

I have always been in favor of friendly, peaceful, and for all of us enriching cooperation and collaboration of European countries. However, I have many times pointed out that the move towards an ever-closer Europe, the so-called deepening of EU, the rapid political integration, and the supranational tendencies without an authentic European identity and an European demos are not only necessary for the freedom and democracy in Europe, but damaging.

Freedom and democracy, these two, for us so precious values, cannot be secured without the parliamentary democracy within a clearly defined state territory. This is exactly what the current European political elites and their fellow-travelers are attempting to eliminate. And it bothers me.

This is from a speech Klaus delivered before the CATO Institute earlier this year and his ranking of the Religion of Environmentalism™ as the third main threat to individual freedom is a great read.

Or, kick back and see for yourself.



Writing in the Financial Times June 13th, Klaus stated that,

As someone who lived under communism for most of his life, I feel obliged to say that I see the biggest threat to freedom, democracy, the market economy and prosperity now in ambitious environmentalism, not in communism. This ideology wants to replace the free and spontaneous evolution of mankind by a sort of central (now global) planning.

The environmentalists ask for immediate political action because they do not believe in the long-term positive impact of economic growth and ignore both the technological progress that future generations will undoubtedly enjoy, and the proven fact that the higher the wealth of society, the higher is the quality of the environment. They are Malthusian pessimists.

The scientists should help us and take into consideration the political effects of their scientific opinions. They have an obligation to declare their political and value assumptions and how much they have affected their selection and interpretation of scientific evidence.

Does it make any sense to speak about warming of the Earth when we see it in the context of the evolution of our planet over hundreds of millions of years? Every child is taught at school about temperature variations, about the ice ages, about the much warmer climate in the Middle Ages. All of us have noticed that even during our life-time temperature changes occur (in both directions).

Due to advances in technology, increases in disposable wealth, the rationality of institutions and the ability of countries to organise themselves, the adaptability of human society has been radically increased. It will continue to increase and will solve any potential consequences of mild climate changes.

I agree with Professor Richard Lindzen from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, who said: “future generations will wonder in bemused amazement that the early 21st century’s developed world went into hysterical panic over a globally averaged temperature increase of a few tenths of a degree, and, on the basis of gross exaggerations of highly uncertain computer projections combined into implausible chains of inference, proceeded to contemplate a roll-back of the industrial age”.

The issue of global warming is more about social than natural sciences and more about man and his freedom than about tenths of a degree Celsius changes in average global temperature.

As a witness to today’s worldwide debate on climate change, I suggest the following:

• Small climate changes do not demand far-reaching restrictive measures
  
• Any suppression of freedom and democracy should be avoided
  
• Instead of organising people from above, let us allow everyone to live as he wants
  
• Let us resist the politicisation of science and oppose the term “scientific consensus”, which is always achieved only by a loud minority, never by a silent majority
  
• Instead of speaking about “the environment”, let us be attentive to it in our personal behaviour
  
• Let us be humble but confident in the spontaneous evolution of human society. Let us trust its rationality and not try to slow it down or divert it in any direction
  
• Let us not scare ourselves with catastrophic forecasts, or use them to defend and promote irrational interventions in human lives.

Amen, brother!


Also at A Tangled Web