US FBI Director Comey: FBI probing links between Russia, Trump associates, knocks down Trump wiretap-by E.Sullivan and E.Tucker

FBI Director James Comey confirmed Monday that the bureau is investigating possible links and coordination between Russia and associates of President Donald Trump as part of a broader probe of Russian interference in last year's presidential election.

The extraordinary revelation came at the outset of Comey's opening statement in a congressional hearing examining Russian meddling and possible connections between Moscow and Trump's campaign. He acknowledged that the FBI does not ordinarily discuss ongoing investigations, but said he'd been authorized to do so given the extreme public interest in this case.

"This work is very complex, and there is no way for me to give you a timetable for when it will be done," Comey told the House Intelligence Committee.

Earlier in the hearing, the chairman of the committee contradicted an assertion from Trump by saying that there had been no wiretap of Trump Tower. But Rep. Devin Nunes, a California Republican whose committee is one of several investigating, said that other forms of surveillance of Trump and his associates have not been ruled out.

Comey was testifying at Monday's hearing along with National Security Agency Director Michael Rogers.

Trump, who recently accused President Barack Obama of wiretapping his New York skyscraper during the campaign, took to Twitter before the hearing began, accusing Democrats of making up allegations about his campaign associates' contact with Russia during the election. He said Congress and the FBI should be going after media leaks and maybe even Hillary Clinton instead.

"The real story that Congress, the FBI and others should be looking into is the leaking of Classified information. Must find leaker now!" Trump tweeted early Monday as news coverage on the Russia allegations dominated the morning's cable news.

Trump also suggested, without evidence, that Clinton's campaign was in contact with Russia and had possibly thwarted a federal investigation. U.S. intelligence officials have not publicly raised the possibility of contacts between the Clintons and Moscow. Officials investigating the matter have said they believe Moscow had hacked into Democrats' computers in a bid to help Trump's election bid.

Monday's hearing, one of several by congressional panels probing allegations of Russian meddling, could allow for the greatest public accounting to date of investigations that have shadowed the Trump administration in its first two months.

The top two lawmakers on the committee said Sunday that documents the Justice Department and FBI delivered late last week offered no evidence that the Obama administration had wiretapped Trump Tower, the president's New York City headquarters.

But the panel's ranking Democrat said the material offered circumstantial evidence that American citizens colluded with Russians in Moscow's efforts to interfere in the presidential election.

"There was circumstantial evidence of collusion; there is direct evidence, I think, of deception," Rep. Adam Schiff, D-Calif., said on NBC's "Meet the Press." ''There's certainly enough for us to conduct an investigation."

Nunes said: "For the first time the American people, and all the political parties now, are paying attention to the threat that Russia poses."

"We know that the Russians were trying to get involved in our campaign, like they have for many decades. They're also trying to get involved in campaigns around the globe and over in Europe," he said on "Fox News Sunday."

The Senate Intelligence Committee has scheduled a similar hearing for later in the month.

Read more: Comey: FBI probing links between Russia, Trump associates

Thousands join pro-Europe rallies across Germany and EU

Thousands of people have joined rallies across Germany and other European countries to show their support for the idea of a united Europe.

The weekly protests began last year as an attempt to counter growing nationalist sentiment on the continent, often expressed in opposition to the European Union.

Protesters in Berlin, Frankfurt, Cologne and dozens of other locations danced, sang and waved the EU flag — 12 stars on a blue background — during the rallies Sunday.

The protests are organized on social media by a group calling itself Pulse of Europe .

The group says it isn’t tied to any particular political party.

EU=Digest

Netherlands -Turkey: Economics of the standoff between Turkey and the Netherlands - by Altay Atli

 Mark Rutte and Recep Tayip Erdogan in the better days

As the diplomatic squabble between Turkey and the Netherlands continues to fester, concerns are raised about whether — and to what extent — the tensions will harm bilateral relations, particularly in economics where the two countries have robust trade and investment connections.

For Turkey, the Netherlands offers a large and expanding export market. Trade between the two countries has roots in the 17th century when the Ottomans exported wool and cotton (later tobacco as well) to the Netherlands and imported clothes and linen in return. Commerce between the two
countries remained strong into modern times; in 2016 the bilateral trade volume was US$6.6 billion.

The Netherlands is the 10th largest export destination for Turkey, and perhaps more importantly from the Turkish perspective, it is also a fast-growing market. Last year Turkish exports to the Dutch market amounted to $3.6 billion, against $3 billion in imports. And while the annual increase in imports was 3.4%, exports expanded much faster, at 13.8%. For the Turkish economy, which is suffering an acute current-account deficit, the increasing trade surplus with the Dutch is a precious commodity.

On the other side of the equation, Turkey is and has always been a favored destination for Dutch investment. A process that started in 1930 when the Dutch company Philips set up shop in the newly established Republic of Turkey has reached new levels since then, making the Netherlands by far the largest source of foreign direct investment in Turkey today. According to data by the Turkish Central Bank, Dutch investment stock in Turkey was $22 billion in 2016, compared with $11.2 billion in US investments in second place, and $9.8 billion from Austria in third place.

Turkey is home to 2,700 companies funded by Dutch capital. This figure includes those transnational companies registered in the Netherlands for legal and tax-related purposes. This sizeable Dutch involvement in the Turkish economy benefits both sides. For Dutch multinationals such as Unilever, ING Bank, Philips, Perfetti, Royal Dutch Shell and Philip Morris, Turkey is not only a favorable production base but also a lucrative market and a trading and logistics hub for access to the Middle East and North Africa, Balkans, Caucasus and Central Asia. More Dutch investment is set to come to Turkey, such as the recent purchase by Vitol Group of the Turkey-based fuel products distribution company Petrolofisi for $1.47 billion. Investment needs a stable political climate, and the diplomatic spat between Turkey and the Netherlands doesn’t help.

It is also worth nothing that while the amount of Turkish investment in the Netherlands is considerably smaller, there are several large Turkish firms that have set up subsidiaries enabling access to the larger EU market.

For the past week, Dutch pundits have been commenting that Turkey is more dependent on the Netherlands, so possible sanctions imposed by Ankara would only mean “shooting themselves in the foot.” Turkish authorities have imposed political sanctions over the Dutch government’s refusal to allow Turkish ministers to meet with members of the Turkish diaspora there, including halting high-level political discussions between the two countries and the closing of Turkish airspace to Dutch diplomats. But Ankara has carefully ruled out economic sanctions. Turkey’s economics minister, Nihat Zeybekçi said: “If we take these steps, both sides would be hurt.” Ömer Çelik, minister of EU affairs said the Dutch business community, which is “investing in Turkey, doing commerce and generating employment” is “certainly not a part of this crisis,” and “Dutch investment in Turkey is by no means under risk.”

Economic sanctions between Turkey and the Netherlands don’t seem likely at the moment, but longer-term threats remain. First, even if no sanctions are imposed, the significant loss of confidence caused by recent events will take a toll on bilateral economic relations for some time.
Second, the sizeable Turkish diaspora in the Netherlands, as well as the relatively smaller Dutch community living in Turkey, will face uncertainty, and this will have an economic impact too. An estimated 400,000 Turks live in the Netherlands, according to a diaspora association, and there are 25,000 businesses with Turkish owners, most of them smaller enterprises. Many of these companies are doing business with Turkey, and they are negatively affected by the current dispute between the two governments. So is the much smaller Dutch community in Turkey. But it is equally active in the economy, especially in the tourism sector. Declining tourist numbers will hurt Turkish and Dutch operators alike, and it might take some time to recover to pre-crisis levels of business.

Third, the diplomatic spat is likely to have a negative effect on efforts to revise the Turkish-EU Customs Union. The union, which took effect in 1996, is outdated, failing to catch up with the requirements of today’s global trade. Ankara and Brussels had begun talks to improve the deal, but the current circumstance is likely to overshadow attempts based on economic rationality.

This week Turkish football team Beşiktaş played the Greek side Olympiakos in the European cup. The Turks won 4-1 helped by two goals from Ryan Babel, the Amsterdam-born Dutch striker. Turkey and the Netherlands have links that are closer than many realize, and it will benefit both to keep them intact.

Read more: Economics of the standoff between Turkey and the Netherlands | Asia Times

German-US Relations: Donald Trump and Angela Merkel "make nice" - sort of .....

Trump : considers EU non-existent 

If the cancellation of their previously planned meeting due to severe weather in Washington could be perceived as a fitting symbol for Chancellor Merkel's and President Trump's earlier relationship - frosty, if not icy - then today's weather in the US capital - sunny, but crisp - might have served as a sign that the two are trying to move beyond past grievances.

And their public statements during the highly anticipated press conference only underscored the palpable wish to restart the personal relationship between both leaders, after Trump's vicious comments about Merkel during the election campaign and to restore the traditionally close partnership between both countries, which has been in question ever since Trump took office.

It was, of course, up to Trump try to reset the relationship with Merkel and to reaffirm the commitments to transatlantic ties, and at first glance, he did.

But below the surface, things were not as smooth as it seemed. That is because on some crucial issues, including trade and the EU, Merkel and Trump took a very different tack. But that is not entirely accurate since Trump - in a noteworthy and unusual move for a US president - did not even mention the European Union once in his remarks.

"Trump made no reference whatsoever to the European Union, either in general terms or, more pointedly, on the specific issue of trade relations," said Anderson. "The closest he came to acknowledging the EU was when he stated that the US would respect 'historic institutions,' but then added that there needed to be balance and fairness in the relationship to the US." 

Merkel, meanwhile, "spoke from an entirely different - and actually much more grounded and accurate - perspective, answering in effect that the EU negotiates trade deals with member state input and that the principle of mutual benefit in EU trade deals is well established," said Jeffry Anderson, who directs Georgetown University's Center for German and European Studies.

"So on trade, which had not been discussed at that point in the visit, the two leaders seemed to be speaking past one another, which will not be a reassuring message for Germany or for Europe," Anderson added.

That impression was shared by presidential rhetoric scholar Farnsworth.

"The news conference suggested that these two leaders have little in common, other than a desire to avoid exchanging harsh words in public," he said. "Mainly they talked past each other." 

Having made some boilerplate statements about the importance of German-American ties, but really having spoken past one another on a substantial level may sound like a harsh verdict for a meeting between a German Chancellor and an American president.

But given Merkel and Trump's past and their very different political and personal backgrounds as well as the fact that this was their first ever face-to-face encounter it may have been all that could have been reasonably expected at this point.

Read more: Donald Trump and Angela Merkel make nice - sort of | Americas | DW.COM | 17.03.2017

German US Relations: Merkel Calls Chinese President Ahead of Trump Visit – by Thomas Sigmund

It’s a sign perhaps of a shift in the weight of EU-German foreign policy. Shortly before departing for a trip to Washington, German Chancellor Angela Merkel spoke by telephone with Chinese President Xi Jinping.

The two leaders reportedly sought to reach a common negotiation position on the Trump administration’s policies ahead of a summit of the Group of 20 nations, government sources in Berlin told Handelsblatt. The conversation can be seen as a sign that Germany and China hope to move closer together.

The two export-led nations have been deeply concerned by anti-free trade rhetoric stemming from the U.S. administration, a dispute which has already spilled over to preparatory talks for a meeting of G20 finance ministers in Baden Baden later this week.

Read more: Merkel Calls Chinese President Ahead of Trump Visit – Handelsblatt Global

Netherlands says No to Trump and Wilders populism in General election-as Rutte wins again - by Philip Blenkinsop

Mark Rutte

Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte said his VVD party was on course for victory in Dutch parliamentary elections on Wednesday in a result he declared represented a rejection of "the wrong kind of populism".

"It appears that the VVD will be the biggest party in the Netherlands for the third time in a row," a beaming Rutte told supporters at a post-election party in the Hague.

Rutte, who beat off a challenge from anti-Islam and anti-EU far-right firebrand Geert Wilders, said he had spoken to a number of European leaders already by telephone.

"It is also an evening in which the Netherlands after Brexit, after the American elections said stop to the wrong kind of populism," he said.

Read more: Dutch PM Rutte - Netherlands said no to 'the wrong kind of populism' - World | The Star Online

The Netherlands: What the Dutch elections are all about … and what they’re not about - by Cas Mudde

Mark Rutte benefiting  from his brawl with Erdogan?

The Dutch parliamentary elections are tomorrow and, like most Dutch political scientists, I cannot wait for them to be over. Never before have Dutch elections been so intensely followed by the international media and I am, honestly, tired of having to answer another question about “the Dutch Trump” (Geert Wilders) or “the Dutch Trudeau” (Jesse Klaver). Obviously, the international media are not really interested in Dutch politics. Rather, they have declared the Netherlands to be the bellwether of European politics. Never mind that the country has a fairly specific political culture, and party politics has changed from ultra-stable in the 20th century to ultra-volatile in the 21st century, the Netherlands is Europe’s future.

Given that the Dutch elections are covered in the same frame as the British EU referendum and the US presidential elections, and are the first of a series of similar elections in Europe, much of what is truly at stake is missed. Moreover, much of what is focused on is secondary at best and irrelevant at worst. So, what is (not) at stake tomorrow?

1 These are not “winner takes all” elections

2 The Dutch are not voting on the European Union

3 The Dutch are not electing a president

International media style the Dutch elections as a “neck-and-neck race” between conservative prime minister Mark Rutte of the People’s Party for Freedom and Democracy (VVD) and radical-right challenger Wilders, to fit the broader frame of status quo versus populism. Understandably, Rutte has tried to push this idea on the Dutch media too, positioning himself as the only democratic hope to stave off a populist victory. But however convenient it is for selling newspapers or for Rutte, this formula is inconsistent with the essence of the elections. The Dutch are electing a parliament, not a president or premier, and it is not guaranteed that the leader of the biggest party will be the premier. In a parliamentary system the government needs the support of the parliamentary majority, not necessarily of the biggest party. Moreover, the struggle between Rutte and Wilders captures only a minority of the voters: together the VVD and PVV are only polling between 30 and 35%. In other words, the real story is somewhere else.

4 The Dutch are uninspired …

The most stunning number regarding the Dutch elections is that, four days before election day, a majority of the population (54%) did not yet know for which party they were going to vote.

5 … (partly) because the parties discuss the wrong issues

Since the beginning of the 21st century Dutch political campaigns have been dominated by the “three Is” – immigration, integration and Islam – and this year is no different.

In fact, voters are being beaten around the head with those issues on the campaign trail, even if few concrete solutions are offered, at the expense of some of the basic bread-and-butter issues that are actually concerning the majority of population: economic inequality, education, healthcare, and protection of the welfare state.

Note EU-Digest: Unfortunately the Turkey-Holland  brawl has not helped the candidates on the left in this Dutch election, who have hammered on more and real pressing problems, like economic inequality, education, healthcare, and protection of the welfare state on a sure footing, to the contrary. 

So basically, if there are no major surprises it unfortunately could turn out to be business as usual in Holland with Mark Rutte benefiting from the weekend crises with Turkey?

Read more: What the Dutch elections are all about … and what they’re not about | Cas Mudde | Opinion | The Guard