The EU Courts the Arab League

by Judith Bergman • May 7, 2019 at 5:00 am

[President of the European Council, Donald] Tusk referred to the value gap between the states of the Arab League and those of the European Union as "differences between us". Such euphemisms however, do not explain the evident lack of even the pretense, on the part of the EU, to comply with its own stated human rights policies.
"We've been witnessing a spike in gross human rights violations across the Arab region, including in extrajudicial executions, enforced disappearances, arbitrary detentions, and torture and other ill-treatment. The region is in dire need of a credible and independent judicial mechanism to provide justice for human rights violations, the overwhelming majority of which presently go unaddressed". — Said Benarbia, MENA Programme Director of the International Commission of Jurists.
In uncomfortably Orwellian fashion, the summit "Reaffirmed our resolve to combat cultural and religious intolerance, extremism, negative stereotyping, stigmatisation and discrimination leading to incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief and condemn any advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement, hostility or violence, including on the internet and social media".
Instead, Mogherini's words came across as references to the EU's own continued efforts to monitor and police free speech and thus, gradually, to extinguish any kind of diversity of opinion within the EU.

The first summit between the European Union (EU) and the Arab League, formally known as the League of Arab States (LAS), took place on February 24-25. Pictured: EU and LAS leaders at the summit meeting. (Photo by Dan Kitwood/Getty Images)

The first summit between the European Union (EU) and the Arab League, formally known as the League of Arab States (LAS), took place on February 24-25. "Europeans and Arabs have a long and rich history of cultural, economic, commercial and political exchanges. This, together with the geographical proximity and interdependence, has contributed to institutionalise a strong relationship between the EU and the League of Arab States (LAS). Within this framework, the common aim is to develop closer cooperation to realise their shared aspirations to ensure peace, security and prosperity in both regions," the website of the European Union announced.

Continue Reading Article

Limiting Nuclear Arms, Not Freezing Them: Like Reagan, Like Trump

by Peter Huessy • May 7, 2019 at 4:00 am

Nearly 40 years ago, critics of President Ronald Reagan's "peace through strength" policy used the same template of criticism. This brush-off existed not because Reagan was putting forward unworkable or unrealistic ideas. The real root of the criticism was, and still is, frustration over the fact that their bumper-sticker ideas (such as a "nuclear freeze" or "Global Zero") have never been accepted by top U.S. national-security officials or approved by Congress.
Reagan did not oppose arms control; he opposed "bad" and unverified arms control that gave huge advantages to Soviet Union, and opened what he famously described as a "window of vulnerability."
The secret is that the push for a nuclear freeze or "Global Zero" -- in 1981 as in 2019 -- was not then, and is not now, about strategic stability or eliminating Russian or Chinese nuclear coercion. It is, rather, an effort to curtail U.S. military power.
Such a tethered America cannot be the leader of the Free World, after having jettisoned the twin fantasies of China's "peaceful rise" or a "reset" with Russia. In a world in which enemies of liberty are on the march, the presence and judicious use of American power is critical.

President Ronald Reagan did not oppose arms control; he opposed "bad" and unverified arms control that gave huge advantages to Soviet Union. Pictured: President Ronald Reagan and Mikhail Gorbachev, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union, sign the Intermediate Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty at the White House on December 8, 1987. (Image source: The White House)

It comes as no surprise that U.S. President Donald Trump's reported plan to forge a new nuclear-arms deal with Russia and China -- when New START expires in 2021 -- is being attacked by American advocates of unilateral disarmament.

Take Daryl G. Kimball, executive director of the Arms Control Association, for example. Echoing Russian complaints, Kimball wrote recently:

"[T]his new grand-deal gambit does not represent a serious attempt to halt and reverse a global arms race. It is more likely that Trump and [National Security Adviser John] Bolton are scheming to walk away from New START by setting conditions they know to be too difficult to achieve."

Kimball added:

Continue Reading Article