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

Germans still prefer cash over Credit Cards

For the complete report go to : http://m.dw.com/en/times-change-but-german-obsession-with-cash-endures/a-43718626

Turkish EU relations minister slams Netherlands, Austria for undemocratic move over election campaign

Turkish EU Relations Minister U Minister Ömer Çelik criticized the
"It is evident that Austrian Chancellor [Sebastian Kurz] and Dutch [Prime Minister Mark Rutte] do not base such decisions on democratic values and greet anti-Turkey and racist political movements," Çelik said, adding that these leaders contribute to the growth of racist groups which oppose European values.

The minister urged the Netherlands and Austria to act using commonsense and refrain from damaging democratic values, which threatens the rise of populism and animosity in the political sphere.

Netherlands' "undemocratic" decision to follow Austria's lead to ban Turkish politicians from campaigning for the upcoming snap elections in Turkey, accusing both countries of hypocrisy for being in favor of democracy in Europe but the opposite outside of the bloc.

In a statement posted on his official Twitter account, Çelik said that the leaders of both countries welcome anti-Turkey and xenophobic political movements.

He criticized the hypocritical stance of both countries by saying that they should not defend democracy solely for the bloc but should defend the same principles when it comes to countries outside of the bloc.

"If they really want their words regarding democracy to be credible, they should make decisions without the influence of anti-Turkey sentiment" he added.

Austrian Prime Minister Kurz announced Friday that his country will ban Turkish politicians from holding meetings in the country, which has a sizeable Turkish minority.

The Dutch PM followed Kurz's lead and also said any campaign event regarding the snap elections would not be welcome in his country.

Relations between Turkey and some European countries, including the Netherlands, Austria and Germany were significantly damaged last year during the constitutional referendum. Turkish ministers and politicians in favor of a "yes" vote for the referendum were banned from holding rallies, while those in favor of the "no" vote freely hytelany interference.

Note EU-Digest: If President Erdogan likes it or not, it is high time the EU Commission launches a law which prohibits foreign immigrants, who have become European citizens, to vote in elections of their country of origin, and prohibits foreign politicians to campaign in the EU on behalf of their own local campaigns. This is not only a question of Democracy, but also one which guarantees the sovereignty of nations without foreign intervention on any level.

Read more: EU minister slams Netherlands, Austria for undemocratic move over election campaign - Daily Sabah

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

European Weather: now falls on first day of spring in much of Germany

Berlin in particular turned into a vast snowscape, with all parts of the city from Treptower Park to Alexanderplatz coated in a growing amount of white.

The day has a historic average temperature of 8 degrees, according to Accuweather.com, in contrast to today's high temperature of 3 degrees and low temperature of -4 degrees.

Read more: Snow falls on first day of spring in much of Germany - The Local

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

Germany: Social Democrats sign up to new Merkel-led German government - by Thomas Escritt, Michelle Martin

Germany’s Social Democrats (SPD) decisively backed another coalition with Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservatives on Sunday, clearing the way for a new government in Europe’s largest economy after months of political uncertainty.

Two thirds of the membership voted“yes” to the deal in a ballot — a wider margin than many had expected. That means Merkel could be sworn in for a fourth term as early as the middle of the month, in a repeat of the grand coalition that has governed since 2013.

Read more: Germany Social Democrats sign up to new Merkel-led German government

Germany: Angela Merkel′s CDU approves grand coalition deal

The chancellor's conservative party has given a green light to forming a new government with the Social Democrats. But despite the harmonious front, the internal tensions in the party are impossible to ignore.

Read more: Angela Merkel′s CDU approves grand coalition deal | Germany| News and in-depth reporting from Berlin and beyond | DW | 26.02.2018

Germany: EU relieved after Merkel clinches grand coalition deal - by Eric Maurice

Germany's Christian Democratic Union (CDU/CSU) and Social Democratic Party (SPD) concluded a coalition agreement on Wednesday (7 February), taking a step closer to ending a five-month long period of political limbo in Berlin.

The deal, under which the two partners will share what they considered as the most crucial ministries for themselves, will however to be approved by SPD members in the coming weeks.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats will occupy the ministries of interior, defence, agriculture, economy and health.

The sensitive interior portfolio - with the management of migration policies - was expected to go to Horst Seehofer, the leader of the CSU, the CDU's Bavarian branch. Seehofer, a hardliner, has been one of the main opponents of Merkel's migration policy since 2015.

Peter Altmeier, one of Merkel's closest allies, and finance minister since September, was expected to become economy and energy minister.



The finance ministry has been attributed to the SPD, with Hamburg's mayor Olaf Schorf being the favourite for the post, also as vice-chancellor.



Social Democrats will also get the ministries of labour and social affairs, justice, as well as foreign affairs for Martin Schulz, Merkel's opponent in the elections last September.


Schulz meanwhile will quit the SPD leadership and be replaced by Andrea Nahles, the leader of the party's group in the Bundestag.

Read more:  - EU relieved after Merkel clinches grand coalition deal

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

Germany: German coalition talks reach breakthrough: A look at what comes next

The all-nighter appears to have focused minds: Germany's two biggest political parties — the Christian Democratic Union (CDU) and the Social Democratic Party (SPD) — announced on Friday morning that they had made a breakthrough in their exploratory talks, paving the way to formal coalition negotiations and, if all goes to plan, another iteration of the grand coalition.

The new agreement represents an important stage victory in the marathon negotiations for Chancellor Angela Merkel, who would certainly prefer a grand coalition to the other two options currently on the table: heading an unstable minority government, or a new election.

Should the negotiations with the SPD fail, a new election could well usher in the end of Merkel's time in office, as her CDU attempts to revive its fortunes following its worst election results ever. Her party took 32.9 percent in September's election, a drop of 8.6 percentage points on the 2013 result. This has resulted in much self-reflection in the party, along with speculation that Merkel's era was drawing to a close — and even debate about potential successors.

Read more: German coalition talks reach breakthrough: A look at what comes next | Germany| News and in-depth reporting from Berlin and beyond | DW | 12.01.2018

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

EU: Turbulent times require peoples involvement and action

Today we were discussion among a group of friends how it seems that the world is going through very turbulent times, specially if you are American, British, Catalan, Spanish, Turkish, Middle East, or a citizen from another country in the European Union. 

Unfortunately this appears to be because populists and demagogues’ communication styles,designed to confuse audiences and convince citizens that there are facts that matter, and facts that don’t, have taken over the political scene. 

As Ken Wilber outlines in his most interesting book “Trump and a Post-Truth World”: It now appears we are living in a no-truth culture, where liars are considered the most truthful, since the truth becomes whatever they want it to become. 

Regretfully many politicians have embraced this theory, because they have realized that the battle for citizens´ hearts and minds is to be won by crafted narratives and Orwellian language.Young and old, it is time to wake-up and become involved in any way you can, within the field of your expertise, and protest. A revolution for positive change can only start with you, but the time is now.

Almere-Digest

Britain thinks Germans care about Brexit — they don’t

Brexit is not a political issue in Germany. No election will be won or lost because of it. Angela Merkel’s position — to walk in lock-step with France and the Commission — is not controversial, it is consensus across the political landscape.

For Berlin, Brexit is less of a negotiation than a punchline. Germans officials like to joke that Brits are quickly becoming the largest refugee group in Berlin.

They are bemused at how the British have become more literate in the minutiae of EU rules than at any time during their unlucky four decades as members of the bloc.

Few in Berlin are following the finer points of the U.K. debate, however. Boris Johnson’s recent pronouncements on clearing out “the dead bodies” in Libya and his recitation of Rudyard Kipling in Myanmar got more notice than Theresa May’s Florence speech, for example.

Read more: Britain thinks Germans care about Brexit — they don’t – POLITICO

Brexit: Europe will be big Brexit winner, says German economics minister-by Guy Chazan and Claire Jones

Europe will be the big winner of Brexit, Germany’s economics minister said, as UK-headquartered companies move to the continent and Emmanuel Macron’s reform push leads to a new “spirit of revival” that will benefit the whole of the EU.

 Brigitte Zypries made the prediction on Wednesday as she revealed the German economy was growing at a faster rate than previously estimated. The government now expects gross domestic product growth of 2 per cent this year, up from a forecast of 1.5 per cent, as Europe’s economic powerhouse continues to charge ahead.

The economy will also grow by 1.9 per cent in 2018, she said. Ms Zypries said Germany’s economic boom had “gained momentum and become more broad-based”.

The economy would “also remain on a growth trajectory in the years to come”. “Germany is doing well and the next government must ensure that it continues to do so,” she said at a press conference in Berlin.

The global economic recovery had stimulated German exports and led to an increase in private sector investment: incomes were rising and unemployment falling. The number of people in work had grown by 2.5m during the past four years. 

Read more: Europe will be big Brexit winner, says German economics minister

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

The Netherlands - Wind Power: 4 TSO's join forces for North Sea Power Hub - by M. Jonk and C van der Weijden

EU: A new wind power hub in the North Sea

Dutch state owned Gasunie has joined the consortium of Danish Energinet.dk and Dutch and German TenneT to study the possible development of a wind power hub in the North Sea. The power hub will consist of one or more large-scale artificial island(s) for sustainable energy supply in the North Sea near the Doggersbank.

The island should produce 100,000 MW of wind energy. It is expected to contribute substantially to achieving the agreed European targets set out in the Paris climate agreement. If the Paris targets are to be met, it is expected that an additional 180 GW offshore wind capacity will need to be developed. According to the four TSO's these volumes will require power-to-gas solutions as energy transport in gas-form is cheaper than transportation through the electricity grid.

The island is to be situated in a location with favorable winds and the possibilities of tie-ins to offshore wind parks. Power surpluses will be converted to hydrogen for large-scale transportation to shore or for storage purposes.

Gasunie will contribute its gas transport expertise and its expertise in the field of hydrogen conversion and gas storage. Gasunie an TenneT are already combining forces to develop a factory for the conversion of solar and wind energy into hydrogen in the Dutch city of Zuidwending. The hydrogen is expected to be used for municipal busses. If the North Sea Wind Hub is deemed feasible, construction is expected by 2030-2050.

EU-Digest

Germany: AfD leader Frauke Petry stuns Germany by quitting hours after being elected - by Emma Beswick

Just one day after her party’s success in the German federal elections yesterday (September 24), Frauke Petry, co-chair of far-right party Alternative for Germany, said she would not be part of the parliamentary group.

Read more: AfD leader Frauke Petry stuns Germany by quitting hours after being elected | Euronews

German election results live: Angela Merkel′s CDU largest party, record low for SPD, AfD to be third power in Bundestag

What we know so far:
— Angela Merkel's Christian Democrats stretch their lead as the strongest force in parliament, despite a severe dip compared to their 2013 haul.
— Martin Schulz's Social Democrats slip to their worst election result in post-war Germany.
— The right-wing populist Alternative for Germany (AfD) wins its first seats in the federal parliament, also becoming the Bundestag's third power in the process.
— The pro-business Free Democrats return to parliament, after missing the cut for the first time since the war last time around.
— The Greens and the Left hold station, scoring very similarly to four years ago.
— No coalitions are practically viable without Merkel's CDU taking the lead.
— The Social Democrats say they do not want to be in a coalition and intend to lead the opposition.
— Turnout will be higher than 2013's level of 71.5 percent, around 75 percent.

Read more: German election results live: Angela Merkel′s CDU largest party, record low for SPD, AfD to be third power in Bundestag | Breaking News | DW | 24.09.2017

Ramstein Air Base anti-drone protests: The Germans taking on the US military

At first it's difficult to reconcile the week's itinerary at the "peace camp" — yoga, reggae, poetry slam - with the gray-haired audience gathered in this dusky room.

Taking up every seat and windowsill, the crowd of at least 150 listens intently as each speaker outlines how the US government is leading an 'illegal war" in their backyard. The city is Kaiserslautern, the Air Force base in question is Ramstein and the war is that waged by US's drone operations, which they say violate German law.

"Our government must review and prohibit the drone war," Otto Jaeckel tells the crowd to loud applause. He called on German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Defense Minister Ursula von der Leyen to take action: "Ms. Merkel and Ms. von der Leyen bear personal responsibility here!"

Under the banner of "Stop Ramstein Air Base," a nationwide campaign has drawn peace activists from across Germany and other countries to Kaiserslautern, calling for the base to be shut down.

Note EU-Digest: Given the international scope of these illegal US military operations conducted from sovereign German soil this should become an issue which must be dealt by the EU.  Also read http://www.dw.com/en/berlin-powerless-to-challenge-us-drone-operations-at-ramstein-air-base/a-17545327. 

Read more: Ramstein Air Base anti-drone protests: The Germans taking on the US military | News | DW | 09.09.2017