USA - NATO: Trump sends sharply worded letter to NATO leaders to pay more or else

Note EU-Digest: Trump says he is losing his patience with NATO allies, whom he finds should be paying more for the upkeep of NATO. 

Why don't his NATO Allies finally get the guts to tell this narcissist to go to hell, and have the Trump Administration pay for his own disastrous military adventures around the world.  

Fortunately there has been a good counter-move by Europe, which is presently setting up their own united military defense force, combining all the EU Nations military forces into one.

For the complete report click on link below

http://www.newsweek.com/trump-sends-sharply-worded-letters-nato-leaders-says-he-losing-patience-1005779?spMailingID=3670208&spUserID=MTI0NzM2NDgxNDcS1&spJobID=1070120163&spReportId=MTA3MDEyMDE2MwS2

EU Summit: Migrant Processing, Cooperation: as EU Members reach a deal on migrants early Saturday 29/6 morning

'Italy is not alone anymore': EU leaders reach agreement on migrant processing

Read full report at::

CBC News Report EU Migrant deal

Shared via the CBC News Android App

EU Immigration Deal: EU leaders seek migration deal in Brussels

European Union leaders are huddling together in Brussels on Thursday, where over the next two days they will discuss security, trade and, most importantly, migration.

Stakes are high after German Chancellor Angela Merkel described irregular migration as an issue that could "make or break" the EU. At home, she is under pressure to secure a bloc-wide deal or face the possible collapse of her government.

Some of the measures Merkel is hoping to clinch during the summit include bolstering Frontex, the EU's border management agency, establishing a "solidarity-based agreement" to share the burden of hosting asylum-seekers and shoring up support for returning migrants under the Dublin system.

"Defense of our external borders is something which unites Europe. (We will talk about ) the issues of Frontex, border protection, secondary migration. The countries that are receiving a lot of refugees need support. But the refugees and migrants can't choose in which country they request asylum," Merkel said at the summit.

Several nations, including France, Hungary, have told reporters at the summit that they are open to bilateral agreements with Germany.

But by Thursday evening, Italy had vowed to block progress on any issue to pressure fellow members into action on migration. Leaders had hoped to pass joint statements on a range of issues and then come to an agreement on migration.

A French diplomatic source said on Thursday evening that France, Italy, Malta, the Netherlands and Spain had agreed on the wording of a draft summit text on immigration.

Read  more: EU leaders seek migration deal in Brussels | News | DW | 28.06.2018

French - Italian relations: MIGRATION DISPUTE HEATS UP

Via euronews: Migration dispute escalates between France and Italy

For the full report go to:

http://www.euronews.com/2018/06/13/migration-dispute-escalates-between-france-and-italy

Heads of State Pay scale: Who are some of the best paid country leaders in Europe?

The leaders of Germany, Switzerland and Belgium are among the best paid in Europe, a new study has revealed.

Swiss President Alain Berset earns nearly €400,000 a year, while German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel take home an annual basic salary of around €300,000.

Their wages were revealed in a study of countries in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), which was conducted by UK-based financial services company

Read  more: Who are some of the best paid country leaders in Europe? | Euronews

France-US Relations:Trump touts ‘wonderful friendship’ with Macron at ceremony "as he brushes Macron's dandruff from his jacket" - by Yaron Steinbuch

Donald Trump inspect Emmanuel Macron for dandruff

Hosting his first state visit, President Trump on Tuesday morning welcomed his French counterpart Emmanuel Macron to the White House during a formal arrival ceremony on the South Lawn.

The president and First Lady Melania Trump greeted Macron and his wife, Brigitte, amid heavy pomp as almost 500 service members from all five branches of the military stood at attention for a “Review of the Troops.”

Vice President Mike Pence, Treasury Secretary Steve Mnuchin and Chief of Staff John Kelly were among those in attendance to shake hands with the two leaders and their spouses.

Trump and Macron both sent their condolences to the families of the victims of the deadly van attack Monday in Toronto, as well as to the Bush family after the death of former First Lady Barbara Bush.
Former President George H.W. Bush has since been hospitalized with a blood infection.

Speaking in French, Macron said he wished to “express our deepest sympathy to President Bush and his family,” adding that at this time, “We stand together.”

In his remarks, Trump hailed France for its role in helping to respond to a chemical attack on civilians in the Damascus enclave of Douma in Syria.

“Along with our British friends, the United States and France recently took decisive action in response to the Syrian regime’s use of chemical weapons,” Trump said.

The two leaders are meeting on a number of issues, including the future of the Iran nuclear deal and the crisis in Syria.

On Tuesday evening, Macron will be honored with Trump’s first state dinner, where about 150 guests will dine on rack of lamb and nectarine tart before enjoying a performance by the Washington National Opera

Note EU-Digest: Even though the US President tried to be on his best behavior during the Macron welcoming ceremony, he was not able to contain himself to show his "macho side",  when, while speaking about his good relationship with Macron he leaned over to him and brushed away some imaginary dandruff, and said: I like him a lot, so much so, that I even brushed off the dandruff he had on his jacket.

As Herbert Read, a famous British art historian, poet, literary critic and philosopher wrote: "The worth of a civilization or a culture is not valued in the terms of its material wealth or military power, but by the quality and achievements of its representative individuals - its philosophers, its poets and its artists. Unfortunately the President of the US, Donald Trump possesses none of these qualities. 

EU-Digest

Middle East - Syria: Limited U.S. military action leaves al-Assad looking like the winner - by Mark MacKinnon

U.S. President Donald Trump declared “mission accomplished” in the wake of Friday’s strikes against the Syrian regime of Bashar al-Assad − but if anyone emerged as a winner it was Mr. al-Assad. 

In a video posted on Twitter by his office Saturday morning, Mr. al-Assad was shown walking calmly to work just hours after the cruise-missile strikes ended. Later in the day, the Syrian military announced it was in full control of Douma, the town on the outskirts of Damascus where Mr. al-Assad’s forces are alleged to have used chlorine gas and perhaps other chemical agents in an April 7 attack.

“All the terrorists have left Douma city,” the Syrian army said in its own “mission accomplished” statement, declaring an end to the five-year siege of the wider area known as East Ghouta. The Army of Islam militia that held Douma until the weekend said that it was forced to withdraw after the attack that killed dozens.

Read more: Limited U.S. military action leaves al-Assad looking like the winner - The Globe and Mail

EU Economy: A daunting task for the EU’s economic liberals

As the Brexit process grinds on, attention elsewhere in Europe is turning to the political dynamics of the EU without one of its most reliably free-market member states.

For many years, the UK, both because of its economic heft and the often under-appreciated skills of its civil servants, has led an informal economic bloc pushing for liberalisation in the single market and external trade. Some members, usually including the Nordic nations, have frequently relied on the UK to persuade other states.

A new counterweight to economic mercantilism is sorely needed. EU member states have, regrettably, been moving in a more protectionist direction in recent years. They have, for example, rewritten their laws on antidumping and antisubsidy duties, giving themselves more leeway to impose emergency blocks on imports.

Germany, traditionally the swing voter in the EU, has shifted more towards the protectionist end of the spectrum, dominated by France and Italy. In theory, the accession of Emmanuel Macron as France’s president, with his talk of freeing up markets to boost growth, should shift the centre of gravity back towards the liberal side.

In practice, Mr Macron’s commitments to liberalisation tend to stop at the French frontier. In order to buy some political space for his changes to labour law, Mr Macron has taken restrictive positions on cross-border issues including migration, foreign direct investment and signing trade deals that will endanger France’s perennially vocal farmers.

Read more: A daunting task for the EU’s economic liberals

Middle East: Syria: U.S. fires missiles at Syria in retaliation for suspected poison gas attack - by Bob Drogin and David S. Cloud

U.S. and allied warships and warplanes in the eastern Mediterranean launched a fiery barrage of missiles at multiple military targets in Syria to punish the Russian-backed government in Damascus for its alleged use of poison gas against civilians last weekend, President Trump announced.

Trump authorized the punitive attack against President Bashar Assad's government and sought to cripple its chemical and biological weapons facilities with what he called precision airstrikes. French and British forces joined the attack, Trump said in a televised address Friday night.

The Pentagon said about 120 missiles targeted a scientific center near Damascus that was used for research, development and production of chemical and biological agents; a chemical weapons storage facility west of Homs; and a separate chemical agent storage site and command post near Homs. Officials said no U.S., French or British casualties were reported.

"We are prepared to sustain this response until the Syrian regime stops its use of prohibited chemical agents," Trump said. Loud explosions and air raid sirens were reported in the Syrian capital as he spoke at 9 p.m. in Washington. It was before dawn Saturday in Damascus

Read more: U.S. fires missiles at Syria in retaliation for suspected poison gas attack

'EU Turkish Relations: Turkey needs Europe, Europe needs Turkey'

Turkey's not exactly the flavour of the month in the EU right now, but - as the two sides meet at a summit in Bulgaria - President Erdogan says it's time for the bloc to "keep to its promises."

Ankara kicked off formal membership negotiations in 2005 and, all these years on, they have effectively collapsed.

But there's a reluctance to walk away from each other.

"Europe should take its share of the refugees, so that we don't have to depend on people like Erdogan to manage the issue," said Philippe Lamberts, a Belgian Green MEP.

"That obviously requires a little bit of political courage, but at the end of the day, it's our strategic independence from Turkey."

Erdogan's alarmed the West with a massive purge following a failed coup attempt.

But Turkey remains the destination for many Syrians fleeing war - and an important ally in the NATO alliance. So is it really curtains for the membership bid?

"If Turkey cannot relaunch the reform process and is not anymore in a position to meet EU accession criteria, relations will evolve into a kind of partnership and will be shaped more and more around common interests and strategic priorities," commented political analyst Seda Gurkan.

"And Turkey is considered in Brussels actually as an important strategic neighbour or a key partner rather a candidate."

Three billion euros of fresh cash is expected to be pledged to Turkey to lengthen a deal on it taking in Syrian refugees. And for Ankara, the EU is its biggest foreign investor and trading partner.

"Turkey is not doing very well economically, it needs outlets" said Lamberts, "and it is very clear that bad relations with Europe are harmful to Turkey, so somewhere on the economic level Erdogan needs Europe and Europe in fairness needs Turkey."

With Syria, France has been one of the biggest critics of the Turkish military operation in Afrin - saying border security concerns did not justify it.

Read more: 'Turkey needs Europe, Europe needs Turkey' | Euronews

EU-US Relations: Trump’s War on Europe Is Revving Up – by Julie Smith, Rachel Rizzo

Since U.S. President Donald Trump took office just over a year ago, America’s relationship with the European Union has been little more than an afterthought. That shouldn’t be surprising. Trump’s views toward the EU have been consistently negative for years. During the presidential campaign he made several disparaging remarks about the EU, including that it was created to “beat the United States when it comes to making money.” He also openly supported Brexit. Making matters worse, Trump has forged a close relationship with Nigel Farage, the far-right, anti-immigration, anti-establishment leader of the U.K. Independence Party who has served as Trump’s tutor on the EU since late 2016. Despite Trump’s negatives views of the EU, though, it wasn’t clear over the past year exactly how those views would play out in terms of actual policies.

Until now. In recent days, Trump has launched a two-front war with the European Union.

At first, it appeared that the Trump administration’s policy toward the EU would simply be one of benign neglect. The president has yet to appoint an ambassador to the EU, and there are no signs that anyone at the White House is in a rush to change that. The EU also barely secured mentions in the various strategy documents the administration has been rolling out in recent months. In the National Security Strategy, the U.S. relationship with the European Union is cited only once in the context of “ensuring fair and reciprocal trade practices,” and “eliminating barriers to growth.” Similarly, in his sole speech on Europe, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson hardly mentioned the EU. In fact, America’s multibillion-dollar trade relationship with the EU, long the cornerstone of our relationship with Europe, doesn’t appear anywhere in that speech.

But this week, Trump announced he would place 25 percent tariffs on steel and 10 percent tariffs on aluminum imports. The move wasn’t directed specifically at Europe, as the United States imports steel and aluminum from several countries around the world. But that didn’t ease the shock of European policymakers who were stunned last Friday (like many of Trump’s own advisors and Congress) when Trump first mentioned that he was going to take actionable steps toward such a protectionist agenda.
Given the magnitude and importance of the United States’ trade relationship with Europe, one would assume that the president would create a special carve out for America’s closest allies. Trump made no mention of such an arrangement for Europe although the White House will create exemptions for Canada and Mexico.

EU officials are furious and have threatened retaliation through their own set of import tariffs. That obviously hasn’t sat well with the President who tweeted just days ago: “If the E.U. wants to further increase their already massive tariffs and barriers on U.S. companies doing business there, we will simply apply a tax on their cars which freely pour into the U.S.” Many are now predicting that the United States is on the verge of starting a trade war with Europe — and they might be right.

Unfortunately, trade isn’t the only area where the Trump administration is directly challenging the EU. The president and his advisors have also decided to take a hostile stance toward recent EU efforts to strengthen defense cooperation and integration across the Continent. This is an odd reaction given that over that past year Trump’s main criticism of Europe is that it shirks defense spending and burden-sharing.

To be sure, the United States has admittedly had a long, complicated past with European defense. Ever since Tony Blair and Jacques Chirac signed the Saint-Malo declaration in 1998, which recognized the need for Europe to develop autonomous, credible military forces, American presidents from Clinton to Bush to Obama have warned about unnecessary duplication with the NATO alliance.

But over time, even the strongest EU skeptics have come to realize two things. First, EU ambitions aren’t that great. Europeans aren’t trying to build an EU army. Second, to the extent that the EU makes progress on strengthening its defense forces, those efforts will ultimately benefit both the EU and NATO. That’s why the Trump administration’s approach toward the EU is so counterintuitive and counterproductive.

Whether it’s on trade policy or security policy, America needs a strong, economically sound, and capable Europe with close ties to the United States. Collectively, Europe and the United States face a litany of common challenges from Russian efforts to undermine Western democracies to instability across the Middle East to the need to prepare for the post-manufacturing economy. To effectively address these challenges, the United States and Europe need to act together. Doing so becomes increasingly difficult when the two continents are engaged in a trade war or when the Unite States pushes back on European efforts to build the exact capabilities we claim they lack.

The Trump administration needs an EU policy (and an ambassador to match) that can strengthen, not undermine, our relationship with Europe. It’s an imperfect relationship but it’s the best one we’ve got

Note EU-Digest: the EU Commission and Parliament  should, as the saying goes, "stop crying over spilled milk", since they knew even before the start of the US's Trump Administration, that Trump was not only a Populist and Nationalist, who embraced the idea of Brexit, but also  on very friendly terms with many European populists, like Farage, who he openly endorsed to become the British Ambassador to the US., and the list goes on and on. 

So given Trump's actions as the President of the US, at this point in time, it is certainly not wise for the EU Commission, or for that matter, most EU member states, to "snuggle-up" to the US's Trump Administration, as it has now been proven beyond any doubt, that Trump is only in favor of the EU, when he tells them to jump and  the EU responds with "how high Mr. Trump 

Given the above sequence of events the EU must show some more muscle in dealing with the US's Trump Administration and their policies, orchestrated by a narcissist, who, if we like it or not was elected President of the USA.  

Read more: Trump’s War on Europe Is Revving Up – Foreign Policy

France presents new immigration bill

French President Emmanuel Macron's government presented a controversial immigration bill to the Cabinet on Wednesday, amid criticism from migrant organizations and members of Macron's own party.

Macron has faced pressure to act on immigration after he won the 2017 presidential election, which saw 34 percent of the second round vote go to far-right National Front leader Marine Le Pen, who had campaigned on immigration concerns.

The new legislation includes plans to: 

• Introduce fines of €3,750 ($4,620) or a 1-year jail term for people who illegally cross borders within the EU
• Double the time asylum-seekers can be held in detention to 90 days
• Halve the amount of the time asylum-seekers have to appeal if their refugee status is denied
• Hasten the deportationx of those asylum-seekers deemed to be economic migrants
• Cut the average waiting time on asylum applications from 11 months to six 

Interior Minister Gerard Collomb has said the law is "balanced" and "aligned with European procedures," arguing that if France did not tighten its laws it would attract refugees put off by tougher rules elsewhere in Europe.

Read more: France presents new immigration bill | News | DW | 21.02.2018

Governments would get more done if they bullied people less on issues like anti-vaccination — Sara Gorman

In 2016, in the midst of a devastating measles outbreak, California decided to repeal the philosophical exemption to vaccines, which allows parents to opt out of required childhood vaccines because of “personal beliefs.”

Soon after that law went into effect, the number of exemptions for medical reasons suddenly soared. Some have argued that the philosophical exemption ban may have in some ways made matters worse, since school administrators are powerless against medical exemptions, but may have had more room to question philosophical exemptions.

Responding to complex social issues such as the anti-vaccine movement requires a full view of human behavior and a solid understanding of what it really takes to change minds. We need to let go of the idea that we can just strong-arm people into complying. Policymakers must understand that changing attitudes and behaviors requires a comprehensive approach that doesn’t rely exclusively on punitive measures alone.

These kinds of laws should be familiar to anyone who has followed the evolution of the response to anti-vaxxers in the US and elsewhere.

Last year, France, Italy, and Germany all announced new laws and fines that in each case made more vaccines mandatory and raised the stakes of not complying. In India, Kerala state instituted a new vaccine mandate for the measles-mumps-rubella (MMR) vaccine after growing resistance led to serious declines in vaccination rates and constituted a major threat to India’s progress toward eliminating measles. Such policy responses to anti-vaccine sentiment are very common and often the first line of defense.

When faced with a viewpoint or behavior that seems completely irrational, it’s often very tempting to essentially “bully” people with facts, overwhelming them with all the reasons why their viewpoint is factually wrong. But recent research has found that not only does this approach often fail to change people’s minds and behaviors, it may even backfire. This is the basis for the “backfire effect,” a phenomenon in which people become more entrenched in their views after being bombarded with evidence against it.

A recent experiment from researchers at Dartmouth illustrates the principle well. Subjects were given fake newspaper articles that seemingly confirmed several very common misconceptions from recent history, such as that there were weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. When they were then given a corrective article indicating that weapons were never found, liberals who opposed the war accepted the new article and rejected the old, whereas conservatives who supported the war did the opposite. In fact, those who did not change their view reported being even more convinced that there were weapons after being exposed to the correct information.

Another recent study showed what goes on in the brain when someone experiences the “backfire effect.” Participants were surveyed about their opinions on particular political issues and then were placed in an fMRI machine to measure brain activity. They were then presented with a large quantity of information that disproved their stated opinions. In a follow-up survey several weeks later, researchers found stronger inclination toward original views in the majority of participants. More importantly for this study, however, is what they found about brain activity during these informational challenges. Regions of the brain associated with strong emotion were heavily activated while parts of the brain associated with cognitive reasoning and comprehension were suppressed. In essence, the parts of the brain needed to absorb the new information were shut down by the parts of the brain associated with strong emotion.

As we can see, when people are faced with challenges to strongly-held beliefs, they may become emotional and dig their heels in. This can be a response to a barrage of new information that challenges what they believe, or a response to new laws that challenge the behavioral outcomes of strongly-held beliefs. Either way, we can see how punitive policies to address strongly-held beliefs might be limited, even if they are necessary.

Even when new laws are passed, lawmakers must take great care about how they communicate about them, especially if the law touches on “hot-button” issues like childhood vaccines or gun control. For example, recent research has suggested that presenting people with views they disagreed with on paper made them discount the intellect of the person presenting the views much more than when there was a video explanation provided instead. This is just one of many ways in which the medium and the precise content of a potentially controversial message can change the way it is received.

When faced with difficult viewpoints and behaviors of constituents, policymakers must think very carefully about how to respond. Often laws and regulations are needed, but what gets put in place with those regulations also needs to be carefully considered before new laws are implemented, not as an afterthought.

Read more: Governments would get more done if they bullied people less on issues like anti-vaccination — Quartz

NATO: The U.S. and Turkey: Past the Point of No Return? - by Svantee Cornell

.US.-Turkish relations have deteriorated for some time. But until recently, no one would have thought that the American and Turkish militaries, closely allied since the 1950s, could end up confronting each other directly. Yet in northern Syria today, that is no longer unthinkable.

In mid-January, to forestall U.S. intentions to build a “Border Security Force” composed mainly of Syrian Kurdish fighters, Turkey launched a military operation in the Kurdish-controlled Afrin enclave in northwestern Syria. On January 24, Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan expressed his determination to move beyond Afrin into other parts of northern Syria, mentioning specifically the town of Manbij, where U.S. forces are deployed alongside Kurdish YPG troops. Turkish officials warned the United States to sever its ties to the Kurdish forces, which Turkey considers a terrorist group. This led President Donald Trump to tell Erdoğan to “avoid any actions that might risk conflict between Turkish and American forces.”

The collision course Ankara and Washington are on is making any notion of a Turkish-American alliance increasingly hollow. If a point of no return is to be avoided, both sides will have to rethink their priorities, and begin to build trust. That process can begin with an honest appraisal of how we got to this point, with America and Turkey on the verge of coming to blows.

In the United States, much of the blame has naturally been laid at the feet of Erdoğan, the headstrong and authoritarian Turkish President. To American eyes, it is easy to see how Erdoğan’s growing intolerance of dissent goes hand in hand with an increasingly adventurist foreign policy that directly challenges American interests. Yet while Erdogan is part of the problem, its full scope goes far beyond a single individual. The real story of the past several years is how the Syrian and Kurdish issues have interacted with Turkish domestic politics to pull Ankara and Washington apart.

Read more: The U.S. and Turkey: Past the Point of No Return? - The American Interest

EU: France becomes a nation of optimists

The French have become more optimistic about the future that at any time in the past eight years, a survey showed on Tuesday (2 January), belying their reputation as a nation of pessimists.

According to a Harris Interactive survey for RTL radio, 59 percent of the French were optimistic for 2018, the highest level since 2010 and 15 points higher than a trough in 2012.

Supporters of President Emmanuel Macron’s party were the most optimistic, the poll showed, while those of the far-right National Front were the most pessimistic.

“There’s probably a bit of a Macron effect,” Harris head of political polling Jean-Daniel Levy said, pointing to renewed hope about European integration, one of Macron’s policy priorities.

“There is in particular the feeling of having a presidency that holds water, with good prospects on the economic front,” he told Reuters.

Read more: France becomes a nation of optimists – EURACTIV.com

Israel-EU: Netanyahu arrives in Brussels accusing the EU of “hypocrisy” over Jerusalem

Reaving for Europe on Saturday, the Prime Minister of Israel Benjamin Netanyahu lashed out against European “hypocrisy” over Jerusalem.

The Israeli Prime Minister was visiting Paris on Sunday, a capital of a traditional ally which on Friday he described as “the lion’s den.” In a joint press conference with President Emmanuel Macron on Sunday, he argued that Jerusalem is just as much the capital of Israel as Paris is of France.
Netanyahu is expected in Brussels on Monday December 11.

His European mission follows President Donald Trump’s decision to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, moving the US Embassy. The US President has not specified any borders within the city, but has deviated from a decades old diplomatic consensus that held that Jerusalem’s final status would be the result of a negotiation with the state of Palestine.

Both the French President Emmanuel Macron and the EU foreign security chief Frederica Mogherini have condemned the recognition of Jerusalem as capital of Israel. On Saturday, the United States was isolated in the UN Security Council as eight of the 15 members – including Russia, France, Sweden and the UK – condemned Washington’s position, reiterating their position on Jerusalem’s final status.

Read more: Netanyahu arrives in Brussels accusing the EU of “hypocrisy” over Jerusalem

Iran Nuclear Deal: Europe backs original Iran deal while Saudis hail Trump's move

The European Union's Federica Mogherini said the current IRAN deal is "working and delivering", adding that the rest of the world would work to preserve the agreement.

The foreign affairs policy-maker also criticised Mr Trump's unilateral action, contending the deal is not a domestic issue and is not in the hands of any one president to terminate.

British Prime Minister Theresa May released a joint statement with France's Emmanuel Macron and Germany's Angela Merkel, saying they are "concerned by the possible implications".

"We stand committed to the [deal] and its full implementation by all sides", they wrote, adding that it "is in our shared national security interest".

"We look to Iran to engage in constructive dialogue to stop de-stabilising actions and work towards negotiated solutions," the statement said.

Mr Macron also said the latest developments "will not put an end to the Iranian nuclear accord, and that together all the parties in France and its European partners will continue to meet their commitments".

He added that he was considering visiting Tehran after speaking by phone with President Rouhani.

In a statement, the Russian foreign ministry stressed on the "inadmissibility of using aggressive and threatening rhetoric in international relations", saying Moscow "remains committed" to the deal.

The statement added that "there can be no question of any resumption of sanctions by the UN Security Council".

Read more: Europe backs Iran deal, Saudis hail Trump's move - BBC News

Europe: What do Islamic Parties Want? - by Judith Bergman

Rome Mosque

Gatestone Institute, a Non-Profit organization based in New York, USA, recently published an in-depth look at Islam in Europe, written by Judith Bergman - a columnist, lawyer and political analyst.

Ms. Bergman gives some interesting insights into the political development of the Islam community in Europe.

The Gatestone Institute is a non-political international policy council and think tank dedicated to educating the public about what the mainstream media fails to report in promoting:

• Institutions of Democracy and the Rule of Law;
• Human Rights
• A free and strong economy
• A military capable of ensuring peace at home and in the free world
• Energy independence
• Ensuring the public stay informed of threats to our individual liberty, sovereignty and free speech.

Gatestone Institute conducts national and international conferences, briefings and events for its members and others, with world leaders, journalists and experts -- analyzing, strategizing, and keeping them informed on current issues, and where possible recommending solutions.

Ms Bergman in her report on "What do Islamic Parties in Europe Want?" writes: 

*Sweden's Jasin party is not unique. Islamist parties have begun to emerge in many European countries, such as the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and France.

*In the Netherlands, Denk ran on a platform against the integration of immigrants into Dutch society (instead advocating "mutual acceptance", a euphemism for creating parallel Muslim societies); and for establishment of a "racism police" that would register "offenders" and exclude them from holding public office.

    "I consider every death of an American, British or Dutch soldier as a victory". — Dyab Abu Jahjah, leader of a group called Movement X and possibly starting an Islamist party in Belgium. The Belgian political magazine Knack named Jahjah the country's fourth-most influential person.

*The "I.S.L.A.M" party, founded in 2012, is working to implement Islamic law, sharia, in Belgium. The party already has branches in the Brussels districts of Anderlecht, Molenbeek and Liege. The party wants to "translate religion into practice".

*In France, as the journalist Yves Mamou recently reported, the PEJ has already approved 68 candidates and wants to abolish the separation of church and state, make veils mandatory for schoolgirls in public schools, introduce halal food in all schools and fight "Islamophobia".

*Sweden's brand new first Islamic party, Jasin, is aiming to run for the 2018 parliamentary elections. According to the website of the party, Jasin is a "multicultural, democratic, peaceful party" that is "secular" and aims to "unite everyone from the East... regardless of ethnicity, language, race, skin color or religion". Jasin apparently knows what the Swedes like to hear.

In an interview, the founder and spokesperson of the party, Mehdi Hosseini, who came from Iran to Sweden 30 years ago, revealed that the leader of the new political party, Sheikh Zoheir Eslami Gheraati, does not actually live in Sweden. He is an Iranian imam, who lives in Teheran, but Jasin wants to bring him to Sweden: "I thought he was such a peaceful person who would be able to manifest the peaceful side of Islam. I think that is needed in Sweden," said Hosseini.

The purpose of the Jasin party, however, does not appear to be either secular or multicultural. In its application to the Swedish Election Authority, the party writes -- with refreshing honesty -- that it will "firstly follow exactly what the Koran says, secondly what Shiite imams say". The Jasin party also states that it is a "non-jihadi and missionary organization, which will spread Islam's real side, which has been forgotten and has been transformed from a beautiful to a warlike religion..."

In mid-September, the Swedish Election Authority informed Jasin that it failed to deliver the needed signatures, but that it is welcome to try again. Anna Nyqvist, from the Swedish Election Authority, said that a political party with an anti-democratic or Islamic agenda is eligible to run for parliament if the party's application fulfills all formalities. Nyqvist considers it unproblematic that the leader of the party lives in Iran. "This is the essence of democracy, that all views should be allowed. And it is up to them to choose their party leader", Nyqvist said.

Sweden's Jasin Party is not unique. Islamist parties have begun to emerge in many European countries, such as the Netherlands, Austria, Belgium, and France.

In the Netherlands, two Dutch Turks, former members of the Socialist party, founded a new party, Denk, only six months before the Dutch parliamentary elections. Despite the short timeframe, they managed to get one-third of the Muslim vote and three seats in parliament. The party does not hide its affinity for Turkey: Criticism of Turkey is taboo just as is their refusal to name the Turkish mass-slaughter of the Armenians during the First World War a genocide. The party ran on a platform against the integration of immigrants into Dutch society (instead advocating "mutual acceptance", a euphemism for creating parallel Muslim societies); and for establishment of a "racism police" that would register "offenders" and exclude them from holding public office.

In Austria, Turkish Muslims also formed a new party, the New Movement for the Future (NBZ), established in January 2017. According to its founder, Adnan Dincer, the NBZ is not an Islamic party or a Turkish party, despite being composed mainly of Turkish Muslims. Several of the party's Facebook posts are written only in Turkish. Dincer has made no secret of the fact that his party strongly backs Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, whom it publicly supported at the time of the coup attempt in August 2016, and the subsequent clampdown by the Erdogan government.

In Belgium, several Islamic parties are preparing to run in the next elections. Dyab Abu Jahjah, apparently behind one of them, while not having presented a formal platform yet, has said he wants to "be part of an egalitarian radical renaissance that will conquer Brussels, Belgium, Europe and the whole world, with new politics of radical equality... defeat the forces of supremacy... of sustained privileges ... of the status-quo... in every possible arena".

Jahjah is a Lebanese immigrant, who emerged on the European scene, when he founded the now defunct Brussels-based Arab-European League in 2001. It was a pan-European political group aiming to create a Europe-wide "sharocracy" -- a supposedly sharia-based "democracy". In 2001, after the September 11 terror attacks, Jahjah said that he and many Muslims had felt a "sweet revenge feeling". In 2004, Jahjah said that he supported the killing of foreign troops in Iraq. "I consider every death of an American, British or Dutch soldier as a victory". He has also been opposed to the assimilation of Muslims, which he has described as "cultural rape".

Jahjah used to be considered a Hezbollah-supporting extremist, and, although he describes himself as a "political friend" of Jeremy Corbyn, he was banned from entering Britain. In Belgium, however, he is seen as a respectable activist, leader of a group called Movement X, and formerly with his own weekly column in the Belgian daily De Standaard. The Belgian political magazine Knack named Jahjah the country's fourth-most influential person, just behind Manchester City footballer Vincent Kompany. In January 2017, however, De Standaard fired Jahjah after he praised a terror attack in Jerusalem. "By any means necessary, #freepalestine," Jahjah had tweeted after an Muslim ISIS-affiliated terrorist plowed a truck through a crowd of young Israeli soldiers visiting Jerusalem, killing four and injuring countless others.

Jahjah will likely experience fierce competition from the "I.S.L.A.M" party, founded in 2012, and working to implement Islamic law, sharia, in Belgium. The party already has branches in the Brussels districts of Anderlecht, Molenbeek and Liege. The party wants to "translate religion into practice". One member explained that, "It's no coincidence that we started in Brussels. Here there are a lot of Muslims... who are not allowed to come forward with their identity too much...They are therefore frustrated. That can lead to radicalization".

 The party has put forth a mayoral candidate for the Brussels municipal elections in 2018: Michel Dardenne, who converted to Islam in 2002. In his program, Dardenne speaks mainly of how much the party respects Belgian democracy and its constitution, while simply wanting to help an undefined populace against "the elites". He may have found it easier to appeal to "progressive" non-Muslims that way. Brussels, 25% Muslim, has enormous potential for Islamic parties.

 In France, several Islamic parties are also preparing to run in elections. One party is the PEJ, established in 2015 by French-Turkish Muslims and reportedly connected to Recep Tayyip Erdogan's AKP. As the journalist Yves Mamou recently reported, the PEJ has already approved 68 candidates and wants to abolish the separation of church and state, make veils mandatory for schoolgirls in public schools, introduce halal food in all schools and fight "Islamophobia".

The obvious question is :How many Europeans are even paying attention to their agendas?
 
Read more : Europe: What do Islamic Parties Want? from the Gatestone Insitute

France Labor Laws: Macron government launches overhaul of France's labour laws - by Kim Willsher

Emmanuel Macron’s government has announced a “major and ambitious” transformation of France’s complex labour laws aimed at tackling mass unemployment and making the country more competitive in the global market.

Five decrees have been issued, containing what ministers said were “concrete and major measures” to overhaul and simplify the weighty Code du Travail, which covers every aspect of working life in France.

In an interview before the measures were unveiled on Thursday morning, the French president said the country was “turning the page on three decades of inefficiency”.

Read more: Macron government launches overhaul of France's labour laws | World news | The Guardian

Afghanistan: Trump to expand US military intervention in Afghanistan - by Julian Borger

In a televised address to troops at Fort Myer in Virginia on Monday night, Trump outlined what he claimed was a new strategy for Afghanistan and south Asia. But he did not say how many more troops he would send, how long they would stay, or what their ultimate objective was.

Before standing for the presidency and privately since entering the Oval Office, Trump had argued for a military withdrawal, but in his speech he made a rare admission that he had changed his mind. He avoided saying directly that his about-turn would lead to more soldiers being sent to Afghanistan, but his speech made clear that would be the outcome.
\
“The men and women who serve our nation in combat deserve a plan for victory,” Trump said. “They deserve the tools they need, and the trust they have earned, to fight and to win.”

In June the Trump White House gave the Pentagon authority to deploy another 4,000 more troops to bolster the 8,400 there already, but the defence secretary, James Mattis, delayed ordering the deployment until there was a clearer expression of the administration’s strategy.
\
In his own statement issued after Trump’s speech Mattis said he had ordered US military chiefs to “make preparations to carry out the president’s strategy” and that he would be talking to Nato allies, “several of which have also committed to increasing their troop numbers”.

“Together, we will assist the Afghan security forces to destroy the terrorist hub,” Mattis said.

Note EU-Digest: There they go again, as if they have not learned that US military "interventions or expansions" for the sake of "democracy", as the US likes to call it, has not worked anywhere in the world, with very few exceptions. In Europe the ongoing military operations have only resulted in a massive refugee problem for the EU and Turkey. 

Unfortunately many of the EU member states still continue to support these totally destructive US military policies in the Middle East. As someone said recently: "The sentence "collateral damage" to cover-up millions of innocent civilians killed in US bombing raids was invented by the US military". 

Democracy never can come out of the barrel of a gun, it only comes by example and war is not one of those examples. 

Hopefully the EU will stop supporting these unwinnable wars.   

Read more: Trump to expand US military intervention in Afghanistan | US news | The Guardian