European Unity: The only plan B for Europe is rebuilding power for change - by Lorenzo Marsili

Europeans today are caught between a failing and undemocratic EU and equally failing and undemocratic national states. As Yanis Varoufakis prepares to launch a new movement for the democratisation of the EU, what’s the way out of the impasse?

There is no need to believe, with George Soros, that the EU is on the verge of collapse to believe that it is on the verge of irrelevance. Becoming little more than a dysfunctional common market shunned by its citizens and promoting tensions and antagonisms between states and between people.There is no Plan A for Europe. Mild adjustments to the status quo - the Juncker investment plan, the youth guarantee, additional fiscal leeway of a few decimals points or a banking union already surpassed by history - are unable to seriously address the historical challenges banging at our doors each day.

Plans for increased integration of parts of the European Union get regularly touted. There are some grounds to being diffident of such plans. Any deepening of integration risks in fact reinforcing the undemocratic nature of a Union of financial rules deprived of democratic accountability.

At the same time there is no viable national Plan B either. There is no space for political emancipation through a more or less harmonious abandonment of the European Union. The sirens of nationalism - be they on the right or on the left - sing a song of destitution and disempowerment.

Sovereignty belongs to the people, not to states or to institutions. Too often is this forgotten. Popular sovereignty is not going to be recuperated by the construction of micro-nations barricading and barking against flows of people and of capital but ultimately at the mercy of decisions taken elsewhere. There is no return to the golden age of the Bretton Woods agreements, when financial capital could be trapped within national boundaries for an emancipatory vision of “capitalism in one country”. Today, national boundaries can only trap refugees escaping war. Their invocation plays squarely into the hands of the far-right.

Recent years have marked a watershed in a post-1989 world-view characterised by talk of the end of history and of a third way of non-conflictual management. This is evident in the return of a political rhetoric that dares put into question the fundamentals of our economic and democratic system - from Sanders to Corbyn via Spain and Portugal. While, less promisingly, it is equally evident in the rise of a new far-right in Hungary, Croatia, Poland, and France.

One thing is for sure. This is no longer the time for the status quo. And that means relinquishing despondency and melancholy and rebuilding the ambition for root-and-branch change - at all levels.

We need to stop portraying the EU as an all-powerful behemoth impeding any real change at national level. 

This rhetoric is false and only benefits supporters of the status quo. What we lack is the capacity for articulating and promoting a new vision for all those policies over which national sovereignty makes sense. Ambitious plans for income redistribution, fighting privations and the protection of the commons, fair integration of migrants, tax justice, fair and free access to education for all, and more. In this sense, the campaign of Bernie Sanders is inspiring. 

Failure to achieve progressive national policies is not due to the EU. It is due to the incapacity of the progressive field to win popular consent. I have much sympathy for Jean-Luc Mélenchon, Oskar Lafontaine, and other old left leaders who met recently in Paris to expound a Plan B for Europe. But I often feel their attacks on the EU have more to do with justifying their political failure nationally than opening up a new field of action for their countries.

At the European level, ambition means returning Europe to being the place where we can regain power to define all that is no longer possible at the national level. Not because the EU impedes it, but because on certain issues medium-sized nations no longer have a say.

Europe is the only space large enough to be able to rein in the rule of financial capital, forcefully addressing the scandal of 62 people in control of half of global wealth. It is the only space where it will be possible to free Julian Assange and Edward Snowden and provide a new technological infrastructure free of surveillance. Where a new ecological understanding of development can be fostered and forced on the rest of the world through commercial treaties based on climate justice and not competition to the bottom. Or, again, where we can nurture a multipolar alternative to US militarism and the rising nationalisms - often with an ethnic basis - of many emerging powers.

United We stand Divided  We Fall

It is the capacity to decide through political struggle how to tackle systemic and historical issues such as these that popular sovereignty should really be about.

Until today European parties have failed to articulate and organise a convincing way out of our multiple crises. National parties have hidden behind unpronounceable acronyms at the European level - who knows the meaning of GUE/NGL? - creating umbrella-groups where they individually maintain their feeble autonomy and collectively maintain their tragic impotence.

A genuine multi-level political force  - and not necessarily a political party as traditionally understood - is long overdue. A transnational coordination summing up the plurality of national forces into a single and recognisable European political actor capable of campaigning and organising over all those issues that require European-level action. 

We have an example of this multi-level dynamic – albeit limited at the national level – in Spain. Where a clearly Catalan force such as the list headed by Ada Colau participates, at state level, in a political project that is able to act as a national political subject in its own right.

Rebuilding power for change ultimately means rebuilding ambition and innovating political practices. Beyond sterile arguments over the benefits of an independent nation-state or of a united Europe, what we should really be talking about is how to organise to transform both.

EU-Digest

The Netherlands: Business Startups are moving to Amsterdam, but should you? - by Eliz D'Agostin

A couple of months ago our CEO Boris was interviewed by Tech City News, an UK publisher, to talk about why Amsterdam and The Netherlands became such a hype place for startups.

The topic has been explored a number of times, as cities in Europe furiously compete for the title of tech capital of the continent. While London and Berlin are considered top of the pile, when companies like Tesla, Uber and Netflix decided to base their European operations in Amsterdam, things changed.

There are many reasons why the Dutch city is attractive for business. There is a whole raft of insightful articles outlining  the environmental, political and even historical conditions that sparkled such a tech driven scene in the country and specially in the capital.

The city has been labelled Europe’s West Coast startup capital and Forbes went so far to say Amsterdam is a genuine alternative to Silicon Valley.

This superlatives have come about thanks to initiatives like StartupDelta, an important program that stimulates the startup environment in the city and connects companies with investor and talents.

The “Start-up Visa” is also a big facilitator to bring startups to the city. It is a new type of visa that allows entrepreneurs to apply for a one year resident permit to develop their ideas in the country.

Another great initiative is StartupAmsterdam – a public/private scheme that joined forces with the government to improve the benefits and incentives for startups to come to Amsterdam – with the aim of catapulting the city into the top three startups hubs in Europe.

While big multi-nationals have been lured to the city, there’s an ever-growing list of home-grown startups to emerge including Booking.com, TomTom and of course, The Next Web that help the city attract investment and professionals from all over the world.

The Next Web itself has more than 20 different nationalities – most of which now call Amsterdam home.

But what does the city have to offer  all these immigrants and internal migrants moving to the city? We asked around the office what people thought about living in the Venice of the North.

“Rent in Amsterdam isn’t cheap, it takes up a lot of your paycheck. But you can do a lot with what is left. You can buy so much more with your money and if you decide to stay for good, the government helps you out with the costs of buying a property, for example. That makes the choice of staying a lot easier.”

“As a “digital nomad”, I love that Amsterdam is a relatively affordable international city with lots of history and culture. I’m not a fan of all of the bureaucracy (who is?) and having to pay for public libraries/museums.ousing is extortionate. However, there’s this great “don’t care” attitude here compared with elsewhere. Coming from the UK where social class and where you went to school is still a huge deal, it’s super nice and inspiring.”

"everyone speaks English"

Read more: Startups are moving to Amsterdam, but should you?

Fear:: There Is A Far Better Way To Combat Fear Than With Yoga Or Pills: Trust - by RM

Don't let fear capture your life

Often in discussions with friends and  family the issue of fear, related to something, either from a personal problem or an outside source, will come up.
. 
If you come to think about it-there probably hasn't gone a day by in your life that there was not some kind of fear creeping into your mind.

We’re not talking about the "good" and instinctive kind of fears which alerts your whole body and pumps up your adrenaline. The one which indicates impending danger and moves you into action to protect the ones you love.

No, it is the other kind .  Where does this often nagging and irrational fear originate? And how do you keep those fears from taking a  permanent place in your life?

Wouldn’t our life's existence be wonderful without fear? Some even wonder why a God that loves us so much would even allow fear to infiltrate into our minds?

Maybe it is good to remember that God does not cause fear, but that society, the environment around us, causes fear and this fear is further nourished by Evil spirits. Yes, fear exists and can quickly work itself into our lives.

However, we can resist the emotionally disturbing grip of fear by fixing our minds on God.

God has made it clear in so many ways that He didn’t give us the spirit of fear, as illustrated in 2 Timothy 1:7: “For God has not given us a spirit of fear, but of power and of love and of a sound mind”

So where does fear come from then? Psalm 112:7 says, “He will not be afraid of evil tidings; His heart is steadfast, trusting in the Lord” . Fear is the opposite of trust. Therefore, a heart that is resolutely and faithfully trusting in God will not fear “evil tidings.” 1John 4:18 explains, ” There is no fear in love; but perfect love casts out fear, because fear involves torment. But he who fears has not been made perfect in love”. Torment is associated with Evil Spirits, as we see in 2 Corinthians 12:7: “To keep me from becoming conceited because of these surpassingly great revelations, there was given me a thorn in my flesh, a messenger of the Evil one, to torment me”. Since fear involves torment, and the Evil Spirit utilizes torment, what should we, as believers, do with the fear that we experience?

Fear can be useful by the fact that it highlights areas in our lives we have not fully surrendered to God. For example, if we are fearful about our finances, and consequently don’t help or take care of others, with far greater need than ours, as the Word has commanded.

Fear is useful in pointing out that we should trust God to provide and also have to provide to others. By trusting God to provide for us financially, we will also be able to put trust in our faith and begin giving to others in obedience to Him.   He who sacrificed his life for us on the cross to set us free of  all fears.

So  if you are struggling with fear, pray about it and  turn to Scripture to seek what God says about it. Turn your situation of fearfulness into an opportunity to trust God more. Fearful about a relationship? Put that relationship in the hands of God. Fearful about a major career decision? Seek God’s will for your professional life, instead of your own. Fearful about providing for your family? Matthew 6:26 points out, “Look at the birds. They don’t plant or harvest or store food in barns, for your heavenly Father feeds them. And aren’t you far more valuable to him than they are?”. God says we are not to be fearful. Remember that we are to trust and can commit every aspect of our lives to God who loves us.

Bottom-line: After recognizing fear in our lives, we must take every fearful thought captive, discover the root of the problem causing the fear, and pray to see what God’s Word says about our particular fear.

You can trust that God will use any circumstance for His glory to bring us restoration, and that includes victory over fear.

Almere-Digest

Graduate Educational Programs: The Netherlands extends window to apply for year-long international student residence permit

Erasmus University Medical Center, Rotterdam

A change in permit rules in the Netherlands will give international students an extended period of time to apply for year-long residence though the Orientation Year permit, following graduation, it has been announced.

Under the new rules, which are set to be implemented soon, graduates will be allowed to apply for the permit within three years of graduation from a Dutch or top international institution, instead of just one year as it stands currently.

The policy change will also make it easier for master’s and PhD students to work without a permit during their Orientation Year.

“The international student doesn’t have to decide directly after he or she finalises the study, but has time to travel back home for example.”

The Orientation Year permit currently exists in two streams: one for graduates of master’s or PhD programmes in the Netherlands or from top ranked universities abroad, and another for those graduating with any degree from Dutch universities.

These streams will be merged as a result of the changes, and new groups will be eligible including scientists who conducted research in the Netherlands; graduates of master’s programmes from the Erasmus Mundus Course; graduates of cultural studies within the frames of the Cultural Policy Act; and graduates educated through the Dutch Foreign Affairs development aid program.

Also as part of the new regulations, it will no longer be necessary for graduates of master’s a doctoral degrees to apply for a work permit during this Orientation Year.

A change in permit rules in the Netherlands will give international students an extended period of time to apply for year-long residence though the Orientation Year permit, following graduation, it has been announced.

Under the new rules, which are set to be implemented soon, graduates will be allowed to apply for the permit within three years of graduation from a Dutch or top international institution, instead of just one year as it stands currently.

The policy change will also make it easier for master’s and PhD students to work without a permit during their Orientation Year.

 Floor van Donselaar from EP-Nuffic, who works to overcome mobility obstacles for foreign students and graduates, said that the extended time to apply for the permit is a great benefit for international students.

“The international student doesn’t have to decide directly after he or she finalises the study, but has time to travel back home for example.”

The Orientation Year permit currently exists in two streams: one for graduates of master’s or PhD programmes in the Netherlands or from top ranked universities abroad, and another for those graduating with any degree from Dutch universities.

These streams will be merged as a result of the changes, and new groups will be eligible including scientists who conducted research in the Netherlands; graduates of master’s programmes from the Erasmus Mundus Course; graduates of cultural studies within the frames of the Cultural Policy Act; and graduates educated through the Dutch Foreign Affairs development aid programme.

Also as part of the new regulations, it will no longer be necessary for graduates of master’s a doctoral degrees to apply for a work permit during this Orientation Year.

“Until now the students had to look for a job without a work permit which made it harder to find a job,” explained van Donselaar.

 “From now on this work permit is no longer necessary. And since you are able to use the search [Orientation] year for an internship or temporary job as well, and we think more graduates will use this opportunity.”

Almere-Digest

EU -USA: The Geopolitics of America’s Military Presence in Europe - by Igor Pejic, Edwin Watson, and Rachel Lane

The region of Europe has three main aspects which makes it important for the US in geopolitical terms. The first aspect is the Arctic or the High North. Arctic encompasses territory (land and sea) of eight countries, six of them are in Europe including Russia. The Arctic region is becoming more popular every year in global politics, and not only because it has vast deposits of resources like natural gas and oil. Scarcely populated and with the melting of ice the Arctic will become a major shipping route, its estimated that using the Arctic route ships can shorten their way from Hamburg to Shanghai for almost 4,000 miles. T

his will be a huge boost to all shipping companies across the globe, and since its in the Arctic chances for pirates are rather low. The US has the best path for contesting this region exactly from Europe. The northern countries have good infrastructure and experience in the Arctic region, and their proximity to Russia can be helpful if the conflict occurs. The next aspect is the Europe’s access to the Middle East through the Balkans. Although the Balkan is relatively stable with semi-frozen conflicts, most of the countries are in NATO, and of course Turkey as the most important ally in this part of Europe can provide all the needed support and accessibility to the Middle East. Caucasus region and the two straits, Bosporus and Dardanelle, can also be added here as geopolitical points in which US has a lot of interest. The third aspect is the Mediterranean and North Africa.

Countries in the South of Europe provide substantial naval infrastructure and power projection capabilities across the Mediterranean Sea. Also these countries provide a base access point to the North Africa, this could be observed during the earliest years of the Arab Spring and the civil war in Libya. All these aspects combined make the European region crucial for the US especially if the object

Beside geopolitical interests the US has some of the closest allies in Europe like the United Kingdom, France and Germany. These three countries have significant military and economic power and they are also leading the European Union. One of the most important bilateral relationship is definitely with the UK.

The two countries share a lot of common values and interests, and the UK government is usually the first who supports US actions, both military and political. Also the UK and the US have a high degree of military cooperation, intelligence sharing and even transfer of some nuclear technology. France still stands for one of the most military capable NATO members with military spending of 1.9% of GPD. Good infrastructure, vast military industry and nuclear capabilities allow France to have a solid deterrent force thus strengthening the whole NATO structure. However, plans like job cuts in defense department and lower military budget which the government wants to achieve, can leave some bad marks on the relations between NATO and the US, especially since the US expects a more active approach from their allies in the conflicts across the Middle East and Ukraine. As a powerhouse in Europe, Germany doesn’t fully commit to the NATO or the US actions in terms of military power.

The budget which is 1.3% of GDP is usually spent on personnel costs and building rents which leads to a decline in money for other military equipment. Furthermore, the government is lowering the total number of servicemen in the military from 205,000 to 185,000 personnel. Also Germany lacks the capability of tactical and strategic airlift, and the government plans to cut procurement and decommission certain specific capabilities which will mostly effect the Army and the Air Force. All these remarks are not welcomed by the US or some other NATO members, despite the public call for broadening Germanys participation in peacekeeping missions made by Germanys Defense Minister Ursula von der Layen.

US military presence in Europe reached its peak in the fifties with more than 450,000 troops operating on more than 1,200 sites. After the end of the Cold War the US military presence in Europe rapidly decreased to 213,000 servicemen, and later in 1993 it decreased even further to 112,000 servicemen. Today there are 67,000 American troops permanently stationed across Europe. Military infrastructure and the US military in Europe (EUCOM) can be classified in sections.

Although the US Government is trying to cut spending on foreign military presence, the Pentagon won’t allow strategic points like EUCOM to suffer, especially now when the new global adversaries are on the rise. Still undisputed in their military spending the US is trying to become more effective with their troop deployment and the maintenance of such large military force. President Obama’s administration program of removing US troops from Iraq and Afghanistan has already shown bad results. Although Europe is nothing like those regions, further removal of US forces could result in major power shifts. Probably one of the future objectives of EUCOM and NATO will be deeper military involvement in Eastern Europe, more precisely in Baltic states. Of course, these developments will be governed by finance and the amount of threat for the US global interests in other regions like the South China Sea, the Middle East and the North Africa.

Read more: The Geopolitics of America’s Military Presence in Europe | Global Research - Centre for Research on Globalization

EU Migrant Crises: The EU must be able to face, acknowledge and fix the root of the problem - by RM

As the saying goes "concern yourself more accepting responsibility than with assigning blame".

US continuous criticism of the EU’s handling of the refugee crisis is the case in point .

Let's face it - the EU migrant crises comes as a direct result of a Europe which is still blindly following a US led foreign policy which is part of the so-called "allied commitments".

When these plans,however, as most of them usually do, turn into human disaster, Europe is required to carry the burden of fixing the mess afterwards..

The above specifically reflects on a totally flawed EU Middle-East foreign policy (a carbon copy of that of the US), specially in regions of the Muslim World, the Middle East and North Africa.

Where exactly is the line between inaction and complicity? The notion of neutrality, for a country as powerful as the United States, is illusory. Doing nothing or “doing no harm” means maintaining or reverting to the status quo, which in the Middle East is never neutral, due to America’s and Europe's  longstanding relationships with regional political actors.

Europe’s refugee crisis might feel a million miles away for many Americans, but there is something everyone can relate to: money:  and this ompletely messed up Middle East foreign policy could cost the United States several hundred billion dollars eventually.

That’s according to the Bertelsmann Foundation, a respected think tank here in Germany, which looked at the potential economic consequences if Europe were to reinstate border controls within its 26-country passport-free travel area.

As the continent buckles under the weight of the most serious refugee crisisever  since World War II, the breakdown of that zone, known as the Schengen Area, has loomed as a dark prospect.

Reinstating border checks are bad for European business, experts say. They would even stunt economic growth through a vicious cycle that starts with higher labor costs — thanks to long lines at borders — and ends with declining sales and lower production.

If this happens it would mean major economic losses for the EU could reach up to €1.4 trillion by 2025.

So what to do about it? It would basically need two essental steps to be taken by the EU .

The first would be to immediately decouple the EU foreign policy from that of the failed US Middle East foreign policy; secondly, invest in a  far reaching Euro-Mediterranean - North African Free Trade Area, which would aim at establishing peace and prosperity in the area by removing barriers to trade and investment between both the EU and countries in that area, based on mutual respect and recognition of all  freely elected governments, religious freedom and cultural ties.

It obviously would be a long and difficult process, but the results would certainly be far more rewarding, productive and beneficial to all the people in the area, and obviously less costly than the useless and destructive military campaigns most nations within the EU and the US are presently involved in.

EU Refugee Crises: Fears EU is self-destructing on migrant crisis- Holly Ellyatt

European ministers are meeting Thursday to discuss the latest escalation in the region's migrant crisis amid rising concerns that the survival of the region could be at stake.

Interior and Justice Ministers from the European Union (EU) are meeting in Brussels to discuss plans agreed by Austria and the Balkan nations on Wednesday to fingerprint all migrants entering their countries and to turn away anyone without a passport or valid documents.

This comes as Greece and Eastern Europe also threatened to not cooperate with the EU if they were refused either more help with the crisis, or more leeway with relocation quotas, respectively.

 At the meeting in Vienna on Wednesday, Austria warned that the influx of migrants needed to be reduced immediately with the country's interior minister saying it was "a matter of survival for the EU."

The country also criticized Germany for sending "mixed" messages over its stance on migrant crisis by calling on some countries to restrict the flow of migrants while supporting economically-depressed Greece by allowing migrants to travel onwards.

"Germany has to decide what signals Germany wants to send," Austrian interior minister Johanna Mikl-Leitner said after talks with her counterparts from Western Balkan countries, Reuters reported, a region which most migrants travel through on their way from Greece to northern Europe.

Read more: Fears EU is self-destructing on migrant crisis