European Banking Industry: the Netherlands-Depositing cash into your account is not free at major Dutch banks

Depositing cash into their own  bank accounts is costing Dutch Citizens approximately €5 ($6.82) at a time - after they have done six free deposits -

Dutch banks says it had to introduce these charges and fees because "processing cash is expensive". Children and students, they say  will not have to pay a fee.

As unbelievable as this may sound it is true and worse is that the Dutch center right coalition Government of Rutte and Samson has not taken any action against this disguised form of pure " robbery",

Cash still has a "dominant role" when it comes to small-value transactions. It also remains essential form of payment for lower-income consumers who may not have access to alternative payment options, and it is widely used for retail sector payments.

"Small folks" have made businesses, including banks, who they are, and many companies can collapse as a result of the same "little people" united strength. It's really sad that in 2014 - people still constantly need to fight for what is theirs instead of sharing what we have, so we all can gain.

EU-Digest

Suriname: President Bouterse wants Cocaine conviction retrial in Netherlands and goes on "redemption" campaign at home

Desi and Dino: 'shame and scandal in the family'

President of Suriname, Desi Bouterse, wants his sentence to 11 years in prison due to cocaine trade be scrapped, and has asked the Supreme Court for a retrial, the NRC reports.

Bouterse’s lawyer Inez Weski presented the Court with a request for a review on Tuesday against the 2000 conviction by the court in The Hague.

According to the lawyer, the key witness in the court case, Belgian Patrick van L. said that he gave a falsely incriminating statement to the court because he was under pressure from the Public Prosecution Service (OM). The witness said that Bouterse was involved in the transport of 474 kilos of cocaine, which was intercepted in the Stellendam port in 1997.

Weski states that the witness made this statement because the OM promised him several favors that were never made public. Van L. has retracted his earlier statements with the notary public.

In the request for a retrial, Bouterse’s lawyer also asks for “a thorough investigation into the established violations of the probe and the judicial process, not only so that the client (Bouterse) be done right by, but at the same time it be prevented that an investigative team no longer be able to operate beyond every rule of law in this blinding manner.”

Bouterse stood trial for a number of drug transporting claims, but was only convicted for the Stellendam case, and got 11 years. Then-lawyer in that case, Bram Moszkowicz asked for a retrial in 2002. According to him, the statement given by key witness Van L. was untrustworthy.

But problems with drugs are not only isolated to the President, his son Dino Bouterse, who had been appointed by his father as director of Suriname's anti-terrorism unit, was arrested last year in Panama by local authorities and turned over to U.S. agents and is on trial in New York on terrorism and drug charges

His arrest came just when his father, President Desi Bouterse, a former coup leader and himself convicted of drug offenses, hosted the annual UNASUR summit for political leaders of South American countries.

In the meantime President Desi Bouterse in a "look how clean and good I am campaign" has promised the Suriname legislature that his government will go to war against all proven cases of corruption. He instructed vice president Robert Ameerali to order the Government Accounting Agency (CLAD) to start immediate investigation in all government departments and semi-government enterprises to unearth malpractices and corruption.

"This is hypocrisy in overdrive", said a member of the Suriname opposition in the  legislature.

EU-Digest

US Foreign Policy-A New Intelligent Approach ? : Obama: "Being The Best Hammer Doesn't Mean Every Problem Is A Nail" - by Mark Lander

Not every Problem is a nail

President Obama on Wednesday May 28 tried to regain his statesman’s mantle, telling graduating cadets here that the nation they were being commissioned to serve would still lead the world and would not stumble into military misadventures overseas.

Speaking under leaden, chilly skies, Mr. Obama delivered the commencement address at the United States Military Academy.

“America must always lead on the world stage,” he said. “But U.S. military action cannot be the only – or even primary – component of our leadership in every instance. Just because we have the best hammer does not mean that every problem is a nail.”

Under pressure from critics who say the United States has been rudderless amid a cascade of crises, the president said that those who “suggest that America is in decline, or has seen its global leadership slip away – are either misreading history or engaged in partisan politics.”

A day after announcing that the last American soldier would leave Afghanistan at the end of 2016, the president told this latest class of Army officers that the United States faced a new, more diffuse threat in an arc of militancy stretching from the Middle East to the African Sahel.

Mr. Obama has been deeply frustrated by the criticism of his foreign policy, which during his first term was generally perceived as his strong suit. He has lashed out at critics, whom he accuses of reflexively calling for military action as the remedy for every crisis.

The overriding objective he said  is to avoid an error on the order of the Iraq war.

He brushed aside as reckless those who say the United States should consider enforcing a no-fly zone in Syria or supplying arms to Ukrainian troops.

In the speech, Mr. Obama described an array of priorities, ranging from the Iran nuclear negotiations to a new global climate change accord, which he said would occupy his final two-and-a-half years in office.

He also spoke of the need for the United States to look eastward to Asia, promoting his long efforts to negotiate a trans-Pacific trade agreement and pledging to defend American allies in the region in their territorial disputes with China in the South and East China Seas.

Note EU-Digest: Kudos to President Obama for at least showing the intention of his Administration to the world, in this major foreign policy speech at West Point, that the "gun-boat diplomacy" of the US is not acceptable anymore and has come to an end.   

Read more: ‘America Must Always Lead,’ Obama Tells West Point Graduates - NYTimes.com

Europe Fondly Remembers The USA On Memorial Day

Europe will and should never forget the sacrifices the US made in liberating Europe from the Nazi's and making it possible for brilliant minds like Schuman, Monnet, Churchill, Adenhauer, Mansholt and others to create the EU and the Peace and Prosperity we have in Europe as a result today.

U.S. combat troops who died during the second world on the European-Atlantic combat and civilian war theaters included 183,588; Army ground forces 141,088; United States Army Air Forces 36,461 and Navy/Coast Guard 6,039.

Europe salutes these brave women and men who gave their life for freedom and democracy in Europe.

EU-Digest

European Parliamentary Elections: More Controversy Or More Democracy With Eurosceptics As Part Of Equation? - by RM

The number of people voting in the EU elections this year was around 43.09% - a small increase from the turnout 5 years ago.

In comparison with other countries; at the last US 2010 Congressional elections, which you can compare to the EU Parliamentary elections, the turnout based on US government statistics was 37.8%.

As for what the radical conservatives and their supporters in the press call the BIG win of the EU "Radical Nationalist Conservatives" like Le Pen and Nigel Farage, that should probably be taken with a grain of salt.

Obviously this must be raising concerns with the ruling centrist pro-EU parties, but the success of those fringe party's should also be put into a realistic context of comparing numbers and percentages.

No doubt, when one party goes from having 3 seats in the EU parliament to 6 seats that statistically is a 100% gain for the party, but in the actual number of seats they gained versus the number of seats controlled by the ruling majority, it only represents a drop in the bucket.

Nevertheless, moderate European politicians have had their wake-up call. Europe now has its own equivalent to the US Tea party.

The EU-Commission, the EU-Parliament and the EU member state Parliaments have to start doing a far vbetter job at informing their close to half a billion EU constituents about the benefits of the European Union.

It certainly won't hurt, at least in this case, to copy some of the "Proud to be an American" campaign techniques from the US, so eventually we can also say without any doubt - "Proud to be a European".

EU-Digest

Opinion: We must value the EU once again - by Christoph Hasselbach

No one can say it was inevitable, but it was expected. The next European Parliament will be even more fragmented than the last. Representatives from both far-left and far-right parties will be moving to Strasbourg in greater numbers than before. As for turnout, the picture is mixed: in some countries more people voted than before, but those votes often went to Euro-skeptic parties.

All in all, the general public's interest in the EU is shockingly low - even though all the parties tried their best to motivate the electorate. For the first time, they chose leading candidates to tour the continent and debate each other. They tried hard to personalize and enliven the election, and make it more relevant. It did little good.

The only reassuring thing is that the parliament will remain functional, despite all the enemies in its own ranks. The representatives from UKIP, the Front National, the Danish People's Party will deliver angry speeches, but they won't really be able to block anything - because they differ from one another too much - they're too focused on their own nationalism.

By the same token, their rhetoric is always directed at their own voters in their respective home countries. They prefer to be the voice of the dissatisfied, rather than develop a major common project. This will cause the centrist, Europe-friendly parties to stick closer together. No, the Euro-skeptic extremists don't present a threat, at least not in the European Parliament.

The debt crisis of a few years ago showed how quickly an old order could be overthrown. The EU itself was peering into the abyss. That crisis has been overcome, more or less, but only thanks to common effort, mutual aid, and discipline. If each country had tried to find its way out of its crisis on its own, they would all have lost - even the stronger among them. Is that too long ago to still be a lesson?

How high the stakes are in Europe can also be seen from the Ukraine crisis: 25 years after the end of the Cold War, we're in danger of entering a new long-term European conflict. Astonishingly, the Ukraine crisis barely played a role in the election campaign, even though the EU is perhaps the best example of what balance and cooperation can achieve.

I met an African election observer at the last European election in 2009. When he saw the turnout figures - of 43 percent, the same as this time around - he shook his head and said, "In a lot of African states we'd be glad to have any free elections at all. And you Europeans throw away your rights!" It was a humbling meeting.
If we in the EU have no bigger problems than a few over-bureaucratic directives, then we really do have it good. Maybe we have it too good to appreciate the miracle of peace and common prosperity that we gained 70 years ago.

Read more: Opinion: We must value the EU once again | Europe | DW.DE | 26.05.2014

Ukraine: New Ukraine president Petro Poroshenko vows to stop war- by Shaun Walker and Alec Luhn

Ukraine's new president, Petro Poroshenko, has vowed to make his first goal in office to stop the war in the east of the country.

The pro-European businessman won the presidential election with 54% of the vote, according to early results on Sunday, clearing the 50% threshold to win outright without a second round. The former prime minister Yulia Tymoshenko was trailing far behind, with about 13%.

In an impromptu victory speech after an official exit poll showed his convincing first-round win, Poroshenko praised the record turnout and reiterated the pledge that his first official trip would be to conflict-riven eastern Ukraine. He promised an amnesty to pro-Russian rebels who turned in their weapons, but said those who had killed people in the region were terrorists who deserved no quarter.

"Today we can definitely say all of Ukraine has voted, this is a national vote," Poroshenko said. "The first steps that we will take at the beginning of our presidential term should be focused on stopping the war, to put an end to this chaos and bring peace to a united Ukraine."

According to Poroshenko, his strong support at the polls confirmed three major policy directions for his presidency: the preservation of a "unified Ukraine", including stability in the east; a "European choice" for closer ties with the west; and the return of Crimea, which was annexed by Russia in March. In reality, all of these tasks will be difficult to accomplish.

Poroshenko also promised to hold parliamentary elections before the end of the year, arguing that the lack of a majority coalition has made the body unable to respond to security threats.
"When there is a parliamentarian crisis, the only solution in a democracy is early elections," he said.

Ukrainians flocked to the polling stations on Sunday in what was seen as the most important election since independence. Millions of citizens in the restive east, however, did not vote, either because of separatist sympathies, feelings of intimidation by pro-Russian militias or simply a lack of polling stations.
Many of those voting for Poroshenko said they wanted to ensure he won the poll in the first round, without a runoff.

Read more: New Ukraine president Petro Poroshenko vows to stop war | World news | theguardian.com

European Parliament: Results of the 2014 European elections

Click here for results of the 2014 European elections - European Parliament

EU-Digest

European Parliament: Final Results EU Elections Watch LIVE

he last European elections had a turnout of just slightly over 43%. The results of the elections will be announced at 10pm GMT today Sunday May 25 when the rest of the EU countries will have voted on who all will take up the 751 seats of the European Parliament.
 
For live updates and material for the press on the European elections click here

EU-Digest

EU-US Trade: Did you know?

Did you know …

• EU and U.S.-based companies account for nearly two-thirds (65 percent) of the top R&D companies worldwide.  (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• EU-U.S. trade climbed to $787 billion in 2013, double the level of 2000. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• The transatlantic economy generates close to $5 trillion in total commercial sales a year and employs up to 15 million workers in mutually “onshored” jobs on both sides of the Atlantic. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• The transatlantic economy is the largest and wealthiest market in the world, accounting for over 50 percent of world GDP in terms of value and 40 percent in terms of purchasing power. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• The U.S. and Europe are each other’s primary source and destination for foreign direct investment, together accounting for 56.7 percent of the inward stock of foreign direct investment (FDI), and a whopping 71 percent of outward stock of FDI. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• U.S. investment in the Netherlands since 2000 was 14 times more than US investment in China during the same period. US investment in the UK was more than 10 times more, and in Ireland nearly six times more, than in China. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• Eliminating or harmonizing just one-quarter of current non-tariff barriers in bilateral trade could boost a combined EU and US GDP by $106 billion. (Source: Transatlantic Economy 2014)

• According to a 2013 study, gains from a free trade agreement between the EU and U.S. could add up to a €210 billion (approximately $273 billion) boost to the two economies. (Source: Center for European Policy Research)

• The EU and US together contributed over $120 billion in official development assistance in 2012.  (Sources: OECD, USAID,EuropeAid)

• As of January 2011, nearly 1.7 million refugees from around the world call the US or an EU Member State home. (Source: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees)

• In 2011/12, more than 168,000 students from the US and EU studied abroad on the other side of the Atlantic. (Source:Institute of International Education)

• More than 11 million EU tourists traveled to the US in 2012. (Source: US Department of Commerce, International Trade Administration) ---------------------------------------------------
• EU-Digest

European parliamentary elections: better together

Divided we fall - United we win

This week's European parliament elections are the most important of their kind for years. Since the last vote in 2009, Europe has been buffeted by banking failures and sovereign debt crisis, while Europeans in and out of the eurozone have been compelled to undergo prolonged austerity programmes.

The social damage of these measures, however necessary some may argue they were in economic terms, has been profound, lowering living standards and calling into question the long-term sustainability of European welfare and employment models. Hostility to the European Union has increased to new levels in many nations, fuelled by tensions over migration, and often matched by a wider domestic disillusionment with the national political classes of the member states, whose authority has rarely seemed more compromised.

Meanwhile, the EU is confronted with a foreign policy crisis in Ukraine which exposes the limits of Europe's influence in its own near-abroad. This is resetting relations with Russia into a more confrontational form at the same time as a relatively weakened United States redirects its principal focus towards Asia, and hopes of greater stability in Turkey and the Arab world recede. Europe's defence response is in disarray, with a poll this week showing four Germans in five opposed to future military missions. In such circumstances, elections to a parliament which has just acquired new powers might logically seem a moment of importance, and the way we cast our votes this week a matter of consequence, not least because the parliament can shape the next European commission, which must wrestle with these issues, one of which may include Britain's future in the EU.

In some respects, Europe's politicians have tried to rise to the occasion, although their efforts have been ignored in Britain. Elsewhere, the main European parliamentary blocs have attempted a pan-European debate, in which differing approaches to austerity and its legacies have been clearcut. But the elites' worthy attempts to connect with the public in Europe founder on the reality that the elites are widely and in some ways rightly perceived (the ludicrous Strasbourg-Brussels shuttle, for instance) as part of the problem.

Most of the main party blocs favour shifting more authority to the centre, to the Brussels institutions, the parliament prominent among them. The problem is that the elite debate excludes growing numbers who want far less power at the centre (or none at all), and overlooks the 70% or so of the population in many countries, including Germany and France (where a poll this week found only 39% support for the EU), who do not want more power at the centre and who favour significant reform of the EU.

Read more: European parliament elections: better together | Editorial | Comment is free | The Guardian

Middle East Chaos: Egypt, Libya, Palestine, Syria, Israel - back to square one

Middle East Chaos

It has not been a pretty picture in the Middle East for some time now after the euphoria of the Arab Spring - better still it is a total mess and certainly not a feather on the cap of any EU, Russian or Chinese diplomat, especially not for the cap of the US's Mr.Kerry. 

In Libya when one might have thought the mess there could not have gotten worse, it has. The latest round in the multidimensional chaos that has prevailed since the overthrow of Muammar Gaddafi was initiated by an ex-general named Khalifa Hiftar, who was trained in the Soviet Union, participated as a junior officer in the coup that brought Gaddafi to power in 1969, later broke with the Libyan dictator, and lived for years in the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, DC, where he apparently also became a U.S. citizen.

Hiftar returned to Libya after Gaddafi was ousted. Now he has put together a force he calls the “Libyan National Army” and aims at removing the interim parliament in Tripoli.

So probably also for Libya there is a new dictatorship in the making?

Israel and the Palestinians were back to square one in the peace process last Friday after the Jewish state torpedoed US-sponsored talks in response to a Fatah-Hamas reconciliation deal.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu set the tone, telling the BBC that Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas could "have peace with Israel or a pact with Hamas (but) he can't have both".

"As long as I'm prime minister of Israel, I will never negotiate with a Palestinian government that is backed by Hamas terrorists that are calling for our liquidation," he added.

In Syria tyrant Bashar Assad may have to stay temporarily as Syrian president despite the death toll in the country’s civil war heading higher than the number killed in Iraq, Tony Blair said recently.

The former Prime Minister branded the situation in Syria an “unmitigated disaster” and insisted the West should intervene in such conflicts.

“We are now in a position where both Assad staying and the Opposition taking over seem bad options,” he said in a speech at Bloomberg HQ in central London.

“Repugnant though it may seem, the only way forward is to conclude the best agreement possible even if it means in the interim President Assad stays for a period.” 

Egypt : In a statement dripping with cynicism, the White House said that Obama was “deeply troubled” by the recent  mass death sentences in Egypt.

“While judicial independence is a vital part of democracy, this verdict cannot be reconciled with Egypt’s obligations under international human rights law,” the White House statement read. It appealed to Sisi and his fellow military rulers to “take a stand against this illogical action.”

Whom do they think they’re kidding? The niceties of “judicial independence” are hardly an issue in Egypt.

The hanging judge Youssef—popularly known as “the butcher”—was installed in a special court created by the junta to do precisely what he is doing. Moreover, the draconian sentences have a very clear logic: they are an act of state terror designed to intimidate the Egyptian masses.

The statement continued: “Since the January 25 Revolution, the Egyptian people have aspired to be represented by a government that rules justly, respects their dignity, and provides economic opportunities. The United States supports these aspirations and wants Egypt’s transition to succeed.”

It seems hardly a coincidence that these mass death sentence came only days after Washington approved the provision of 10 Apache attack helicopters on top of some $650 million in military aid already approved for the Egyptian junta this fiscal year.

This is half of what the administration wanted to supply to the country’s repressive forces, the other half being held up by laws restricting aid to regimes brought to power through military coups.

Obviously the helicopter deal was correctly interpreted by the Egyptian junta as a green light to escalate its brutal crackdown.

All this disaster unfortunately is only the top of the Iceberg when one looks at the total Middle East picture. Maybe only one word to describe this is: total chaos .

EU-Digest

Our EU Digest Poll in relation to this weeks EU Parliamentary Elections which was closed today showed the following results.

The Poll shows a potential strong showing by the so-called Eurosceptic parties while traditional pro-EU political  parties will remain in power.

Our new poll which runs through June 22 asks the question:  

"Do Corporations Have Too Much Influence On Global Governance?"

EU-Digest

European Parliamentary Elections - Eurosceptics: Netherlands' Geert Wilders cuts up EU flag in Bruxelles - by Nikolaj Nielsen

The Mouse which roared

Scissors in hand, anti-EU nationalist Geert Wilders of the Netherlands on Tuesday (20 May) vandalised the European Union flag in front of the European Parliament in Brussels.

In a publicity stunt amid the dozen or so cafes at Place Luxembourg, overlooked by the parliament’s tall glass structures, Wilders cut out a yellow star before unfolding the Dutch flag in its place.

The nationalist, who runs the Dutch Freedom Party, is convinced he will be able to form a new group of eurosceptic MEPs following the upcoming European Parliament elections. He wants the Netherlands to leave the Union, regain its sovereignty, and shut down its borders to asylum seekers.

His other goal - to pull apart the EU from within by forming the anti-EU faction in parliament - will require at least 25 MEPs from seven EU member states.Wilders says he will be meeting with other eurosceptic politicians next week in Brussels to work out a deal.

“It is our task to try to work together to overstep our differences, to not get into fights about our leadership, to overstep ‘our shadows’ as we say in the Netherlands,” he said.

He was short on details.

Note EU-Digest: Europe gets a taste of the type of politicians which represent the Eurosceptic group running in the elections for the European Parliament.

Read more: EUobserver / Netherlands' Geert Wilders cuts up EU flag

Banking Industry: EU - You won’t believe this, but some big banks may have broken the law again – by Jason Karaian

Just as markets were digesting the Euro 1.9 billion (US $2.6 b) penalty imposed on Credit Suisse for helping American clients avoid taxes, news from Brussels suggests that yet another big fine is looming for a few other banking giants. 

Today the European Commission accused JPMorgan, HSBC, and Crédit Agricole with rigging euro interest rates, alleging that they acted in a cartel to manipulate Euribor, a key interbank lending rate.

The three banks refused to settle the antitrust case in December last year, when the commission fined eight other banks and brokers a record €1.7 billion ($2.3 billion) for their roles in the rate-rigging cartel. Settling the case saved the accused 10% of the headline fine, on top of other discounts based on their degree of co-operation with regulators.

JPMorgan, HSBC, and Crédit Agricole must now answer the commission’s charges without the offer of leniency that comes from settling. 

That said, throughout the financial crisis European regulators have been seen as softer than their American counterparts, with Brussels wielding more limited powers and showing less of an appetite to impose big penalties. Even after settling with the EU in last year’s euro interest rate case, Société Générale is challenging its €446 million fine in court, alleging “a manifest error of assessment” in calculating it.

The three banks that were charged today will hope to benefit from the eurocrats’ presumed timidity. In theory, EU cartel fines carry a penalty of up to 10% of a company’s global revenue, which would imply a combined fine of more than $18 billion, according to the bank’s latest annual results.

But the commission is highly unlikely to ask for this much in damages, and the depressing regularity with which big banks land in legal trouble these days means that they are well prepared to pay the penalties. From interest rate-rigging to mortgage mis-selling, tax avoidance, foreign-exchange manipulation, money laundering and much else besides, banks now operate under the constant threat of large fines, and they’ve built up enormous litigation reserves to cope. 

Note EU-Digest: one can only hope the EU Commission will not act with their usual timidity in dealing with this serious fraudulent issues.

Read more: You won’t believe this, but some big banks may have broken the law again – Quartz

De Europese Verkiezingen: Wat dacht Pim Fortuyn over de EU? - RM

Pim Fortuyn - "at your service"

Het tv-programma Altijd Wat van KRO-NCRV zendt vanavond een nooit eerder uitgezonden interview uit met Pim Fortuyn. Het gesprek werd begin mei 2002, vier dagen voor de moord op Fortuyn, opgenomen; de NCRV besloot destijds om het niet uit te zenden.

In het vraaggesprek zei Fortuyn dat hij voor uitbreiding van de Europese Unie was. Hij zei letterlijk: "als premier zal ik vurig voor uitbreiding van Europa pleiten, vooral vanwege de veiligheid en stabiliteit."

Hij noemde Europa een uniek politiek project dat door de Europese bevolking moet worden gedragen. "Als dat niet gebeurt, zal alles uiteenvallen wat is opgebouwd."

En gelijk had Pim Fortuyn, zelf tot op de dag van vandaag.

 Als we ooit mochten teruggaan naar "eigen landje, eigen muntje, eigen zegje" worden we niet alleen levend "opgegeslokt" door de "grote machten"  - maar dan krijgen de multi-nationals zoals Monsanto, Dow, CitiBank, Google, Facebook, etc. in dat geval zeker een nog grotere greep op alles wat we kopen, eten en drinken en nog veel meer. Je moet er niet aan denken..

Gelukkig kunnen wij nu nog steeds via de EU tenminste gezamenlijk wat "tegen-gas" geven aan al die invloeden van buitenaf.

Stem daarom deze week tijdens de Europese verkiezingen vooral met uw gezond verstand en laat u niet beinvloeden door populistische uitlatingen van politici die niet verder kunnen of willen kijken dan hun neus lang is.

Jammer dat Pim er niet meer is om het ons nog eens een keer op zijn altijd scherpe en intelligente wijze goed en duidelijk uit te leggen.

EU-Digest

Chemical Cartel: Six multinational companies dominate the agricultural input market

Six multinational companies dominate the agricultural input market, and they’re in cahoots.

When a handful of corporations own the world’s seed, pesticide and biotech industries, they control the fate of food and farming. Between them, Monsanto, Dow, BASF, Bayer, Syngenta and DuPont control the global seed, pesticide and agricultural biotechnology markets. This kind of historically unprecedented power over world agriculture enables them to:

• control the agricultural research agenda;
• dictate trade agreements & agricultural policies;
• position their technologies as the “science-based” solution to increase crop yields, feed the hungry and save the planet;
• escape democratic & regulatory controls;
• subvert competitive markets;

…and in the process, intimidate, impoverish and disempower farmers, undermine food security and make historic profits - even in the midst of a global food crisis.

According to the UN, corporate concentration of the agricultural input market “has far-reaching implications for global food security, as the privatization and patenting of agricultural innovation (gene traits, transformation technologies and seed germplasm) has been supplanting traditional agricultural understandings of seed, farmers' rights, and breeders' rights.”

Read more: Chemical Cartel | Pesticide Action Network

EUROPE – What makes the EU tick?

The EU was not always as big  as it is today. When European countries started to cooperate economically in 1951, only Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, Luxembourg and the Netherlands participated.

Over time, more and more countries decided to join. The union reached its current size of 28 member countries with the accession of Croatia on 1 July 2013.

The creation of the single market and the corresponding increase in trade and general economic activit transformed the EU into a major trading power. The EU is trying to sustain economic growth by investing in transport, energy and research, while also seeking to minimize the environmental impact of further economic development.

The EU's economy — measured in terms of the goods and services it produces (GDP) — is now bigger than the US's: EU GDP in 2012: €12 945 402 million.

With just 7% of the world’s population, the EU's trade with the rest of the world accounts for around 20% of global exports and imports.

Around two-thirds of EU countries’ total trade is done with other EU countries.

Trade has been hit by the  global recession, but the EU remains the world’s largest player accounting for 16.4% of global imports in 2011. The EU is followed by the United States with 15.5% of all imports, and China with 11.9%. The  EU was also the biggest exporter, accounting for 15.4% of all exports -  compared with 13.4% for China and the 10.5% for the United States.

The EU's also has a unique institutional set-up:

• the EU's broad priorities are set by the European Council, which brings together national and EU-level leaders
• directly elected MEPs represent European citizens in the European Parliament
• the interests of the EU as a whole are promoted by the European Commission, whose members are appointed by national governments
• governments defend their own country's national interests in the Council of the European Union.

The European Council sets the EU's overall political direction – but has no powers to pass laws.

Led by its President – currently Herman Van Rompuy – and comprising national heads of state or government and the President of the Commission, it meets for a few days at a time at least every 6 months.

Law making: There are 3 main institutions involved in EU legislation:

• the European Parliament, which represents the EU’s citizens and is directly elected by them;
• the Council of the European Union, which represents the governments of the individual member countries. 
• The Presidency of the Council is shared by the member states on a  rotating basis.
• the European Commission, which represents the interests of the Union as a whole.

Together, these three institutions produce through the "Ordinary Legislative Procedure" (ex "co-decision") the policies and laws that apply throughout the EU.

In principle, the Commission proposes new laws, and the Parliament and Council adopt them. The Commission and the member countries then implement them, and the Commission ensures that the laws are properly applied and implemented.

Read more: EUROPA and the European project

European Parliamentary Elections: Polls show Europe's centre-right leads by a sliver before next weeks EU elections

EU-Digest Poll shows close race

The center-right is set to win the most seats in European Parliament elections next week, but its wafer-thin poll lead suggests the chances of securing the presidency of the European Commission are uncertain.

The European People's Party (EPP) will take 212 seats in the May 22-25 vote, according to an analysis of national polls on Wednesday by PollWatch 2014, only three more seats than its center-left rivals, the Socialists and Democrats (S&D).

There are 751 seats in the parliament, around 70 percent of which are expected to go to Europe's four mainstream groups - the center-right, center-left, Liberals and Greens.

Around a quarter of seats look likely to be won by anti-EU or protest parties on the far-right and far-left, almost double their standing at the last election in 2009. That's largely because of voter frustration with high unemployment and low growth.

Under EU rules introduced in 2009, the party that wins the election is best placed to have its top candidate become the president of the European Commission, one of Brussels' most powerful jobs, with far-reaching influence over legislation.

But while the EPP may just edge out the Socialists in the vote, according to Wednesday's survey, the Socialists are better placed to secure allegiances with other parties on the left, potentially helping them secure a majority in parliament.

Since the nominee for Commission president must be approved by parliamentary majority, the Socialists may be able to argue that their candidate has greater legitimacy than the center-right EPP's.
The nomination for Commission president will be made by EU leaders, who are required to "take into account" the results of the election in making their choice.

The EPP has chosen Jean-Claude Juncker, 59, the former prime minister of Luxembourg and a central broker during the euro zone debt crisis, as their candidate to succeed Portugal's Jose Manuel Barroso, who has led the Commission since 2004.

The Socialists are backing Germany's Martin Schulz, 58, the current head of the European Parliament and an ardent campaigner for more money to be spent helping young people get jobs.

The Alliance of Liberals and Democrats, known as ALDE, have chosen former Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt as their candidate for Commission president. But PollWatch's latest survey sees the Liberals taking just 63 seats.

The European Parliamentary elections will be held throughout the 28 EU member states from 22 to 25 May 2014 - let your voice be heard - VOTE -  IT IS OUR EUROPEAN UNION.

Read more: Europe's centre-right leads by a sliver before EU election: poll | Reuters

Prtivacy Laws v Freedom of Speech: US v Europe - a cultural gap on the right to be forgotten

The reverberations from this week's landmark European Court of Justice ruling on the right to be forgotten continue to be felt.

Legions of lawyers are still trying to work out what it will mean for the search engines, and for millions of EU citizens who may want to force them to remove links to their past online lives. And the cultural divide between Europe and the US appears wider than ever, with two very different views of how we should live our lives online.

On the one hand there is what you might call the web utopian view, held by the US internet giants and some in Europe who look to Silicon Valley for inspiration. This sees the ECJ ruling as unworkable, illiberal and just out of touch.

The Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales, who divides his time between London and the US, explains to me why something like it could never happen across the Atlantic because of the constitutional guarantee of free speech: "This is not a debate the United States is even capable of entering into.

You'd have to repeal the First Amendment - and that's like a religious artefact - so that's never going to happen."

So a battle between two views of freedom - the US belief that free speech trumps everything, and the European view that individuals should have some control over what the world knows about them. But there is something else in play here, a growing unease about the power wielded by what are nearly always US web giants over our lives.

Note EU-Digest:  US Corporations, including Facebook, Yahoo and Google are comparing apples with Pears. The European Court of Justice decision is the right one because there is a distinct difference between Personal Privacy Laws and Freedom of Speech. Storing private information and selling that information to third parties without pernission is in no way linked to Freedom of Speech.

Congratulations to the European Court of Justice for a job well done. 

Read more: BBC News - US v Europe - a cultural gap on the right to be forgotten

Far Right Dangers in Europe: "In parts of Europe, the far right rises again" - by Sonni Efron

As Europe marks the 100th anniversary of the outbreak of World War I, the war that destroyed Old Europe, far-right parties are gaining ground across New Europe.

Most of the far-right parties are pro-Russia, opposing U.S. and European Union efforts to isolate President Vladimir Putin for his intervention in Ukraine. They are expected to do well in the May 25 European Parliament elections.

Last month, I traveled to Hungary and Greece, where the neo-fascist movements are strongest. In Hungary, the extreme-right Jobbik party won 1 in 5 votes in last month's parliamentary election. In Greece, even as the neo-Nazi Golden Dawn party is being prosecuted by the government as a criminal organization, it remains the fourth-largest political party in the country. Golden Dawn lawmaker Ilias Kasidiaris, who sports a swastika tattoo and once read from "The Protocols of the Elders of Zion" on the floor of Parliament, is running for mayor of Athens.

Both parties deny being inherently anti-Semitic or anti-Roma, but their symbols and rhetoric suggest otherwise. Party leaders are unapologetically hostile to LGBT rights, and Golden Dawn is vehemently anti-immigrant. And in both Greece and Hungary, many voters appear to be either overlooking the neo-fascist message or embracing it.

Despite international condemnation of Jobbik's anti-Semitic, anti-Roma vitriol, support for the party rose from 18% in the 2010 elections to 21% last month. Among those reelected to office was a Jobbik member of parliament who demanded that the government draw up a list of Jews in official positions because they posed a "national security risk." Another winning candidate claimed that "the Gypsy people are a biological weapon" of the Israelis who have "occupied" Hungary. These are not idle words in a country where Roma have been terrorized or killed in organized attacks.

Read more: In parts of Europe, the far right rises again - Los Angeles Times

Turkey - Mine disaster: PM Erdogan 'now with blood on his hands' under pressure after deadly mine explosion

The prime minister's critics mobilized even as the search for survivors and victims of the coal mine accident in the western town of Soma gathered speed.

Opposition parties and unions called rallies against the government in several cities across Turkey. In some regions, students have gone on strike. The DISK union spoke of the "massacre" of the workers in Soma - a term that has made the rounds.

Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's government has declared three days of national mourning and sent Energy Minister Taner Yildiz to Soma to coordinate rescue operations. The minister had little to do but to announce the ever-rising number of casualties. "We're losing hope," he admitted on Wednesday (14.05.2014) morning.

PM Recep Tayyip Erdogan "blood on his hands"

The government stands accused mainly of having neglected the supervision of the coal mines in the wake of their privatization over the past few years. There are not enough state inspectors for the mines and mere weeks ago, Erdogan's ruling AKP party rejected a motion by the opposition to look into security deficiencies at the Soma mine.
Government opponents claim 22 people have died in fires in the coal mine since September 2012.

Erdogan's government faces allegations that it risked the health and lives of miners as a result of unilateral employer-friendly policies. Energy Minister Yildiz inspected the Soma mine last year, and praised investments in costly security systems for the employees that, it turns out, were insufficient.

"This is what it comes down to: The government ignored all warnings concerning the Soma mine, and the workers are paying the price," Murat Yetkin, a well-respected editorial writer, said on the website of Turkey's "Radikal" newspaper on Wednesday.

On Turkish social networks, people have been calling for the respective government ministers to step down. Several spontaneous demonstrations were reminiscent of the anti-government protests last year in Istanbul's Gezi Park.

In the city's Levent business district, students and other protesters waving black flags demonstrated in front of the Soma-Holding mine operator's offices and sprayed the word "murderers" on the building in blood-red paint. Students gathered for protests at Ankara University, and more demonstrations were planned for the evening. The CHP opposition party has demanded a special session of parliament, while several unions called for nationwide strikes and protests on Thursday.

Note EU-Digest: in most democratic countries after an accident of this magnitude has taken place the PM and the minister of the ministry governing the industry where such a major accident has happened would step-down. This is not the case in Turkey, where instead of stepping down, Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who now has blood on his hands, is even planning to run for President in the next Presidential elections.


Read more: Erdogan under pressure after deadly mine explosion | Europe | DW.DE | 14.05.2014

Eurovision 2014 Song Festival: The Netherlands emerges as major rival to UK at Eurovision

The United Kingdom has seen Molly rise to become the favourite to win Saturday’s Eurovision Song Contest in Copenhagen but a new rival for the title emerged during last night’s first semi final.

The Netherlands’ entry Calm After The Storm’, sung by The Common Linnets has caused a major stir in Denmark.

It sailed through in the semi final and has seen its odds cut from 100/1 outsiders to 7/1 overnight.  A week ago, the song was written off as a 250/1 rank outsider.

The Common Linnets are Ilse DeLange and Waylon, a male-female duet with a country music background. The song is perhaps the most simple ever seen at the Eurovision Song Contest. It has just three chords and the first half of the song is shown in a single camera take.

The Eurovision Song Festival celebrates its 60^th Birthday next year, and rather than thinking about retirement, the contest is stronger than ever, pulling in a staggering 180million television viewers. It is the most watched music event in the world.

There are still some storm clouds ahead for The Netherlands though. Of the ten songs to qualify from last night’s semi final, seven were ballads. There is still stiff competition from Armenia and Sweden in the genre and Malta also have a country song which is tipped to qualify from tomorrow night’s semi final.

One thing we do know is that the Eurovision Song Contest reputation for cheese and irrelevance is dying fast.

It is quickly becoming a showcase for musical talent, quality music and a great night’s television.

Read more: Eurovision 2014: The Netherlands emerges as major rival to UK at Eurovision | Metro News

Germany not satisfied with US assurances over NSA spying on EU Citizens

The chancellor of Germany spoke alongside United States President Barack Obama on Friday about the National Security Agency's surveillance practices for the first time in the US since she voiced concerns last year about leaked NSA operations.

A joint news conference Friday afternoon at the White House Rose Garden in downtown Washington, DC between the two primarily concerned the escalating situation in Ukraine, but both Pres. Obama and Chancellor Angela Merkel also discussed the NSA in the wake of disclosures that last year propelled the secretive American spy agency into the international spotlight.

Although Merkel has adamantly spoken out against the NSA's surveillance practices in the months since those disclosures first surfaced last June, Friday's meeting at the president's home marked her first visit to the White House since.

After both Obama and Merkel made prepared remarks at the Rose Garden about the Ukrainian crisis, the American president took a moment to put aside queries from the press and instead bring it upon himself to address the tensions between America and Germany that have worsened as a result of the NSA leaks.

Read more: Germany not satisfied with US assurances over NSA spying — RT USA

Ukraine: It’s Not All Russia’s Fault - by Balázs Jarábik

Ukrain political and ethnic crises

The crisis in eastern Ukraine is far from over.

On Monday, the moderate mayor of Kharkiv, the country’s second-largest city, was shot while riding his bicycle. Pro-Russian separatists have seized another government building in the region, and some are holding hostage a group of European military observers. The United States, convinced the chaos is all being driven by Moscow, slapped new sanctions on top Russian officials Monday, and the Europeans will probably go along.

To understand what’s driving this crisis, though, it’s necessary to look at the region the way its residents see it, not just the way it appears to the outside world.

The dominant Western narrative is all too familiar: It’s good guys vs. bad guys. Russian aggression against Ukraine and covert backing for separatist groups are the main sources of conflict, creating a very real danger that southeastern Ukraine may soon erupt into full-scale war or split off and join Russia.

Throw in the kidnappings of journalists, targeted killings of local politicians and residents and renewed Ukrainian military operations against the separatists, and the whole region appears to be in flames—and it’s all Moscow’s doing. As U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry put it over the weekend, the Kremlin is behind the “distraction, deception and destabilization” in eastern Ukraine.

Unfortunately, the real story is much more complicated, and it has as much to do with the murky nature of Ukrainian politics as it does with Russia’s blatant meddling. On one level, the clashes in eastern Ukraine are just the latest battle between the country’s powerful and fractious oligarchs, for whom business interests—not the fate of Ukraine—are always priority number one.

The good news is that the separatists are actually quite isolated, according to recent accounts by the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe’s monitoring mission in eastern Ukraine. Even Kerry, despite his stern rhetoric, has indicated that fewer than 30 buildings have been occupied. And a recent poll conducted by the Kyiv International Institute of Sociology found that the majority of southeastern Ukraine’s residents do not favor joining Russia; 70 percent want to remain in Ukraine, and only 15 percent support secession; 60 percent do not approve of armed separatists seizing government buildings.

There is no doubt that Russia has been trying to destabilize Ukraine in the wake of the annexation of Crimea and that both sides could yet tumble into full-scale military conflict. But Russia is not the only factor shaping public opinion toward the central government in Kyiv, the Ukrainian capital.

From the outside, the Kyiv government is usually depicted as a band of selfless reformers. In fact, the differences in how it is perceived across the country are vast, with 78 percent of western Ukrainians but only 16 percent of easterners registering their approval in one recent poll.Easterners (and southerners, for that matter) see a cabinet dominated by former prime minister and current presidential candidate Yulia Timoshenko and her Fatherland political party, whose base of support is in the pro-European west of the country. Both the Party of Regions and Vitaly Klitchko’s UDAR party refused to join the government, leaving it dangerously low on eastern support.

The importance of looking beyond simplistic narratives also extends to politics at the regional level. When the Kyiv interim government appointed steel magnate and local oligarch Serhiy Taruta as governor of Donetsk, a major city close to the Russian border, he encountered strong local opposition, and the Donbas region, which includes Donetsk and Luhansk, soon became the main hotbed of separatist activity. Why? Many experts point to the influence of Ukraine’s richest businessman Rinat Akhmetov, who reportedly holds considerable sway over Donbas’s economic life, not to mention the activities of local law enforcement and municipal officials.

In Ukraine, political power almost always translates into control of property. The business elite of southeastern Ukraine is not prepared to surrender to a Kyiv government it sees as an instrument of Timoshenko (an old-school oligarch in her own right), and is likely using all means at its disposal, including the separatist card, to make its point.

The May 25 presidential election is the next big test, pitting Timoshenko against Petro Poroshenko, a prominent businessman who has held many senior posts in previous Ukrainian governments. A Timoshenko victory would spell trouble for the region’s business elite. Thus, the separatist unrest, which has put the actual viability of the elections in jeopardy, may be a hedging tactic by local oligarchs.

Ukrainian political insiders believe that Timoshenko’s control over the interim government in Kyiv has set off enough alarm bells that many oligarchs are pooling their resources and backing Poroshenko. (There is some evidence that Poroshenko and Klitchko traveled to Vienna in late March to hammer out a deal with Dmitro Firtash, a prominent Ukrainian oligarch who was recently indicted by U.S. law enforcement and is fighting extradition on racketeering charges.) After all, various Ukrainian oligarchs helped bankroll the Maidan movement, the protests that ousted President Viktor Yanukovych in February, because they were angry with the Yanukovych “family” for squeezing them out of lucrative businesses. They certainly do not want to see Timoshenko install herself as the top dog and make their lives miserable.

The unseemliness of Ukrainian politics certainly makes for strange bedfellows. In this instance, it has put some Ukrainian oligarchs on the same side as Vladimir Putin and against Timoshenko, who has long been rumored to be on good terms with the Russian president. Both the Kremlin and these oligarchs have an interest in undermining the current government in Kyiv. The Kremlin and the oligarchs may have their own distinct reasons for doing so, but both see the separatist card as a source of extra leverage.

Read more: It’s Not All Russia’s Fault - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

EU Elections: "An EU of multinationals, of harmonization – makes people uneasy. People like difference and identity." - by Jon Henley

EU:  Multinational Lobbyists have taken over

The Foire aux Fromages et aux Vins in Coulommiers, an attractive town on the undulating Brie plateau an hour east of Paris, is a fabulously French affair: a monumental marquee, hordes of happy visitors and more than 350 stalls laden with Gallic bounty.

Among the cheeses are tomme from Savoie, crottins de chèvre from Aveyron, and great roundels of brie from nearby Meaux, alongside case upon case of chablis, Pouilly-Fumé, Nuits-Saint-Georges. And today, in amiable conversation with a local cheesemaker, there is Aymeric Chauprade, academic, author, consultant, and leading candidate in the European elections for Marine Le Pen's freshly fumigated Front National.

Here's the problem, explains an immaculately suited Chauprade, who besides degrees in maths and international law has a doctorate in political science from the Sorbonne: all this – he gestures around him as the throng prods, nibbles, squeezes, swills and swallows – is at risk.

"American farmers and 'big food' will rule; our regulations and standards will count for nothing," Chauprade continues. "This is an EU that has no respect for national specificities; it's an EU of bureaucrats, of ever greater normalisation, in the service of big banks and corporations. It is not the EU we want."
Understandably, this message plays well here. But not only here.

Across the EU, insurgent parties from right and left are poised to cause major upset, finishing at or near the top of their respective national votes. As a result, rejectionist parties look set to send their largest contingent of anti-European MEPs ever to the European parliament: perhaps 25% of the assembly's 751 members. (Down from 766 in the current parliament.)

Disillusion with the EU, certainly, is at record highs across the continent. The surveys are unequivocal: 60% of Europeans "tend not to trust" the EU now, against 32% in 2007; in 20 of the 28 member states a clear majority feels the EU is going "in the wrong direction"; for the first time, Eurosceptics outnumber supporters by 43% to 40%.

"In our analysis, the real turning point came in the late 1980s, when the big industrialists started laying down the plans for the future of Europe," says Dennis de Jong, a leading MEP from the impeccably leftwing but fiercely Euro-critical Dutch Socialist party. "Until that moment, the EU seemed like a logical post-war development. But industry, not ordinary people, has driven much of what's happened since, from opening internal borders to the euro.

This EU – the EU of multinationals, of harmonisation – makes people uneasy. People like difference. They like identity."

Read more: The enemy invasion: Brussels braced for influx of Eurosceptics in EU polls | World news | The Guardian

European Elections: Candidates spar in live EU TV debate

With flashes of wit, much earnestness and a certain reluctance to go for the jugular of their opponents, four candidates for the European Commission presidency broke new ground on Monday night by holding a live televised debate designed to drum up public interest in the May 22-25 elections for the European parliament.

If social media are one measure of that interest, the debate may have worked. Halfway through the 90-minute programme, broadcast from the Dutch city of Maastricht, an organiser announced that 10,000 tweets a minute were coming in.

The harder question to answer is whether any candidate did enough to convince potential voters that the elections will truly make a difference in a EU blighted by a long recession, mass unemployment and a squeezed welfare state.

Although the debate never turned nasty, Ska Keller, the Greens candidate, got in a sharp jab at Jean-Claude Juncker, the centre-right candidate, when she accused him of “presiding over a tax haven” during his time as prime minister of Luxembourg. An indignant Mr Juncker rejected the charge and managed later to slip in the image-softening remark that one reason why he favoured a EU-wide minimum wage was that he remembered his father’s tough life as a steelworker.

Guy Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister who is the centrist, liberal candidate, turned his fire on José Manuel Barroso, the outgoing Commission president, saying Mr Barroso had never taken a decision without first flying to Berlin and Paris to get the green light. “The Commission needs to lead,” he thundered.

He also put Mr Juncker on the spot by challenging him to explain why his centre-right group still included Silvio Berlusconi, the former Italian prime minister, who caused outrage last weekend by suggesting Germans denied the existence of Nazi concentration camps. But Mr Juncker hit back with the succinct sentence: “I was sickened by the statements of Mr Berlusconi.”

Martin Schulz, the centre-left candidate, made a valiant effort to distinguish himself from the other three by repeating on several occasions that he was against a Europe of “banks and speculators”.

When the debate moved on to Europe’s insurgent far-right parties, he spoke with some passion in saying he found it “unimaginable” as a German that “a Nazi party could sit in the European parliament and make propaganda for the party of Adolf Hitler”.

Read more: Candidates spar in live EU TV debate | Brussels blog

Benefits of EU Membership: Czech economy would be in the tank without EU membership

If the Czech Republic was not a member of the European Union, its gross domestic product (GDP) for 2013 would be 12 percent lower than it was, the Czech state secretary for European affairs, Tomáš Prouza, said at a business forum during the visit of European Council President Herman Van Rompuy to Prague.

Prouza presented the results of an economic study that several important economists have prepared for the Government Office.

"If we were not an EU member, could not take advantage of the single market and had no revenues from the Cohesion Policy, Czech GDP for the past year would be some 12 percent lower than it was," Prouza said.

"If we were not in the EU, there would have been almost no change in the level of incomes of Czech citizens vis-à-vis Western Europe in the 18 years since 1995," he added.

If the Czech Republic was a eurozone member, the revenue of the Czech economy would increase 25 billion Kč to 60 billion Kč annually, and domestic GDP would be between 0.6 percent and 1.2 percent higher.

"If we became a eurozone member in 2007 like Slovakia did, the contribution would be some 270 billion Kč," Prouza said.

The study puts the direct cost of eurozone membership, that is the potential contribution to the European Stability Mechanism, at 35 billion Kč.

The study shows that during EU membership, the Czech economy has gained 770 billion Kč. Without the internal market, its GDP would be 2.5 percent lower and unemployment 1.5 percent higher.

"If it were not for the internal market, if the barriers that were here before our entry to the EU stayed in place, the higher costs, lower trade volume, smaller exports and lack of foreign investments would have deprived us of some 100 billion Kč annually and another 75,000 people would be jobless," Prouza said at the business forum.

Since 2004, EU membership has brought 3.1 trillion Kč to the Czech Republic. The membership thus brought more than the Czech economy produced in 2004: some 300,000 Kč per person.

Read more: Czech economy would be in the tank without EU membership - PRAGUE POST | The Voice of Prague