Tag Archives: european union

Tom Arms’ World Review

Germany

Germany’s Friedrich Merz is gambling big. The leader of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) is gambling with the upcoming elections, his political career, his country’s future and Europe’s future.

He is gambling that by opening—ever so slightly—the door to the German far-right that he will be able to slam it shut again after winning elections on February 23.

Ever since the end of the Second World War the mainstream political parties have maintained a firewall (or “Brandmauer”) between themselves and any far-right, neo-Nazi party that might undermine the political consensus that Germany maintain a sense of contrition for its Nazi past.

In recent years that has meant no coalitions, no deals, no talk of parliamentary support with the far-right Alternative for Deutschland (AfD).

Merz blew a hole in the Brandmauer at the end of January when he used AfD votes in the Bundestag to push through the first reading of an anti-immigration bill.  The “Influx Limitation Law” would have tightened existing immigration laws and grant police powers to detain people due for deportation and to deport immigrants at the border.”

The move provoked a stern protest from Merz’s predecessor, elder statesperson Angela Merkel. “I consider it wrong,” she said in a statement, “to abandon this commitment (the firewall) and, as a result to knowingly allow a majority vote with AfD votes in the Bundestag for the first time.”

The vote also sparked off a series of anti-AfD and pro-immigration demonstrations over the weekend.

The result was defeat for the bill at its second reading this week as 12 members of Merz’s own party voted against him.

Merz was unrepentant and has vowed even tougher anti-immigration laws if he wins the election. At the moment his party is predicted to win 30 percent of the vote. The AfD is projected to secure the number two slot with 20 percent of the vote while the opposition coalition of the Social Democrats, Greens and Liberals is likely to come in third with 29 percent.

Merz is gambling that his politics will steal some of the AfD’s far-right clothes and push up his share of the vote. But he also risks losing the centrist votes that were secured by Angela Merkel’s moderate positions. And his defeat at the second reading undermines Merz’s leadership of the CDU and runs the risk of pushing Germans concerned about immigrants into the arms of the AfD.

Europe

“Europe,” Trump recently warned, “you are next.”

The newly-elected American president was referring to those “lovely, lovely tariffs” that he is imposing left, right and centre, especially on those who dare to disagree with him.

Trump has never liked the EU. With half a billion reasonably well-off people, it is the world’s largest trading bloc, and trading bloc’s exist to protect the economic interests of their members, and they use the leverage that their size gives them to negotiate the best possible trading terms.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 7 Comments

Trump’s Election: A wake up call for Europe and Britain

The recent election of Donald Trump as President of the United States marks a pivotal shift in the transatlantic alliance, forcing Europe to reassess its position on defence, economic policy, and international relations. For Great Britain, the European Union, and NATO allies, Trump’s presidency presents both immediate and long-term challenges. His ambivalence toward NATO’s traditional role, compounded by isolationist and protectionist policies, signals a tectonic change in the foundation of post-World War II alliances. With Trump back in office, Europe must adopt a more strategic, coordinated, and self-reliant approach to ensure regional stability and security.

Trump’s stance on NATO introduces real uncertainty into Europe’s defence calculus. Historically, NATO has underpinned European security, offering a powerful deterrent against aggressors like Russia. However, Trump’s prior remarks about “free-riding” by European nations and his willingness to reconsider U.S. commitments cast doubt on the assumption that the U.S. will always be the principal guarantor of European security. This is particularly concerning as Russia’s actions in Ukraine demonstrate the enduring risk of territorial aggression on the continent. Europe, therefore, faces a strategic imperative to assume a larger share of its defence burden, fortify its military capabilities, and reinforce collective defence mechanisms.

The European Union and NATO must now confront their limitations in readiness, force projection, and rapid response capability. While NATO’s Article 5 provides a mutual defence framework, its effectiveness is compromised if member states lack interoperability and standardized response capabilities. Thus, Europe’s emphasis must shift toward enhancing interoperability among its forces, modernizing its military infrastructure, and bolstering cybersecurity defences. Major urban centres like Milan, Geneva, Krakow, Berlin, and London must be prepared to withstand a range of threats, from cyber incursions to hybrid warfare and missile strikes. Europe’s major powers, particularly Germany and France, need to accelerate their defence spending and expand joint military exercises to build a resilient and autonomous defence posture.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 7 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

Middle East

Every geopolitical shift offers opportunities and dangers. The escalating war in the Middle East is no exception.

At the moment the world is focused on the dangers. But the opportunities are there as the major players realise the need to step back from the brink and consider measures that were hitherto unthinkable in order to avoid a catastrophe nobody wants.

The biggest opportunity could involve Iran’s nuclear weapons programme.

There is a strong body of opinion in the US and Israel that the best way to deal with Iran’s nuclear weapons programme is to destroy it. The problem with that is three-fold:
1- You cannot destroy the know-how
2- the necessary installations are deep underground, heavily protected and would probably require direct American involvement and
3- Destruction of Iran’s nuclear installations would only increase hatred of Israel and the US.

Many Israelis and Americans also fear that a religiously-zealous Iran would use nuclear weapons against Israel—and possibly the US—as soon as they acquire them.

Rubbish. The Iranians may be religious extremists, but they are not stupid. They know that they would be wiped out in any nuclear exchange.

To them a nuclear weapon is a deterrent against an Israeli—or possibly joint US-Israeli—nuclear or overwhelming conventional attack.

However, nuclear weapons do give Iran greater flexibility in any conventional scenario as any potential enemy would think twice about attacking a nuclear-armed Iran. This would mean a serious movement in the Middle East goalposts.

So how can the US (with Israel looming large in the background) and the Mullahs avoid escalation and a nuclear Iran. From the Iranian side, Washington would expect Tehran to immediately stop refining and testing missiles and enriching U-235 and converting it to fissile material. From the US-Israeli side, Iran would expect guarantees that Iran would not be attacked by either Israel or the US.

Iran is reckoned by the CIA to be seven months away from having THE bomb. An agreement could freeze development at the current level—or slightly more advanced– so that if it was attacked, Iran could quickly move to a nuclear capable position.

The above scenario is not impossible. According to intelligence sources, Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khameini has not given the final go-ahead for nuclear weapons. He has also told newly-elected President Masoud Pazeshkian that he can resume nuclear negotiations with the five members of the Security Council and Germany.

There are other important tangential issues including: Iranian support for Russia’s war in Ukraine; Iranian support for Hezbollah and the Houthis; Israeli attacks on Hezbollah; Saudi and UAE attacks on the Houthis; the Syrian civil war; Western sanctions against Iran and Iran and China’s growing economic co-dependency.

All of —or some of—these issues could be dealt with as part of nuclear talks. Or nuclear talks could open the door to separate discussions on these problems.

European Union

British Foreign Secretary David Lammy has called it the “EU Reset.” It started this week with Lammy attending a regular meeting of EU foreign ministers in Luxembourg. The Foreign Office has promised more of the same.

The talks were on big global security issues—China, Russia, Ukraine, the Middle East, US elections—all those things on which it is very easy for the UK and EU to agree. Not on the agenda was the EU-UK 2020 Trade and Cooperation Agreement (TCA) which continues to bedevil or threaten to bedevil EU-UK relations.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 9 Comments

Republic of Ireland, Brexit and the EU Elections

A few weeks ago, I visited Dublin for the first time. The Republic of Ireland is a wonderful place. During my trip, I’ve learnt about the symbolism of the Irish flag. I visited the Society and State exhibition at Dublin Castle, which was truly fascinating! I now feel much stronger connected with the country, its culture, people, and at times very difficult history.

However, during my short stay in the capital, I immediately noticed a huge difference; the city was full of posters in relation to the upcoming European Elections. In contrast, in Britain, we spoke very little about these elections, which in my view, will have a major impact on the “European project” and the direction of the EU as a whole.

Apart from the Green and Liberal Democrats and of course the Reform Party, I am still surprised that the major “political powers” are avoiding discussing the B word. Yes, I get it, we left the EU. We can all agree that, with a bit of sarcasm, the journey has been a successful one! We have regained sovereignty, we are able to control our borders and the net migration has been reduced to tens of thousands…The current government produced 5 manifestos in the last few years. In all honesty, they have really badly let down the country, its people and the society as a whole.

Our politicians must realise that the relationship with our closest neighbours should be embedded in their policies. Every single subject that has been discussed at various national debates needs to be looked at also from the European perspective; immigration, employment, high and low-skilled economy. All of it is so closely interconnected. The most recent figures; NO growth in April, the NHS waiting list went up to 7.57 million people. Scary stuff. Would re-joining the EU help to address all of these issues? No, however it is impossible to square some of it without talking about it. I simply don’t buy the rhetoric of people like Mr Farage, who claims that the county must reduce the immigration to zero. Some of these promises are simply unachievable and unworkable.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 54 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

United States

The Ukraine aid bill is starting to inch its way through the American House of Representatives. Up until this week the $60 billion much-needed package has been blocked by Speaker Mike Johnson’s refusal to allow Congress a vote on the issue.

He also tied the aid bill (which also includes money for Israel and Taiwan) to tougher laws on immigration.

This has clearly been done in collusion with Donald Trump who opposes aid to Ukraine and wants to delay any agreement on immigration so that he can make it his key election issue.

Senate Republicans have already passed the Ukraine aid bill and have been piling the pressure on Speaker Johnson to allow a vote. This week he agreed. But with several huge caveats. For a start, aid to Israel, Ukraine and Taiwan will be voted on separately. Next, he wants to change the wording of the legislation from “aid” to “loan” or possibly “lend-lease.”

Johnson also wants to explore the possibility of applying the profits from $300 billion of frozen Russian assets to the aid that Ukraine needs. This would involve something called the REPO Act or, The Rebuilding Economic Prosperity and Opportunity for Ukraine Act which authorizes the President to seize Russian assets.

The problem with the REPO Act is that it specifies that the seized assets should be used for reconstruction. Ukraine needs money to fight. Reconstruction comes after the fighting.

There are other problems with Johnson’s apparent change of heart. To start with, separating out the different clauses and turning aid into a loan will seriously delay the bill. Next, because it is substantially changed the bill will have to go back to the Senate and, finally, both houses of Congress are about to start their 22-day Easter recess.

Mike Johnson’s change of heart may actually be a change of delaying tactics.

European Union

Meanwhile the Europeans are trying to fill the gap and smooth over their differences over Ukraine. The last few weeks have seen French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olof Scholz sniping at each other over who is more generous to the brave Ukrainians.

Macron talked about the possibility of sending troops to Ukraine and urged Scholz to provide Volodomyr Zelensky with long-range Taurus missiles. The more cautious Scholz delivered a firm “nein” to sending troops and ruled out the despatch of Taurus because German soldiers would be needed to operate the system. Scholz also pointed out that Germany was providing a lot more money than France and that if the French leader wanted to help Ukraine he should put his money where his mouth is.

Enter Donald Tusk, former European Commission president and current prime minister of Poland. He called a meeting of the leaders of the EU’s two biggest countries to smooth out difficulties that were threatening to derail EU support for Ukraine.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , and | 5 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

United States

The ripple effects following the ejection of Kevin McCarthy from the Speaker’s chair in the US House of Representatives are severe and wide-reaching. The issues most affected are moderates in the Republican Party, Ukraine and the credibility of the United States.

The mainstream of the Republican Party – or at least the congressional caucus – is not as unreasonably far-right as it is portrayed. Out of the 221 Republican members of the lower house, only 40 are signed up members of the right-wing Freedom Caucus. And of those, only about 20 could be considered extreme right by American standards.

The problem is that the Freedom Caucus – especially the far-right 20 or so members – are really a separate political party using the broad coattails of the Republican establishment to pursue policies which are antithetical to their own party. They can succeed in their aims because the Republicans’ majority as a whole is so narrow that the Freedom Caucus holds the balance of power.

In practice this means that the next Speaker could easily be Congressman Jim Jordan, a rabid Trump supporter and founding member of the Freedom Caucus. He has already secured the ex-president’s endorsement.

It also means that Ukraine will find it difficult to secure the next tranche of US military aid it has been promised. For the Freedom Caucus and Donald Trump the issue of self-determination and respect for the rule of law comes after support for Vladimir Putin.

The ejection of McCarthy also makes a US government shutdown almost certain.  It was McCarthy’s successful 11th-hour deal to prevent a shutdown which provided the straw that broke the back of the caucus camel. Any future Speaker will be all too aware that he will suffer the same fate if he allows Biden’s budget through Congress.

All of the above bolsters the belief that political divisions are rendering the US ungovernable. This in turn undermines credibility at home and abroad. America is the recognised standard bearer of world democracy. Alternative systems—especially Russia, China and Iran—argue that if democracy can’t work in America… then it can’t work.

Ukraine

Support for Ukraine this week suffered a blow on the European side of the Atlantic as well as the American.

It came in the form of an election victory for the pro-Russian Slovakian politician Robert Fico and his Direction-Social Democracy (or SMER-SD) Party. Fico’s party failed to win an outright majority in parliament, but with 24 percent of the votes it is the largest single party and is currently in coalition talks with smaller pro-Russian parties.

They have until 16 October to form a government and in the interim period have announced an end to all aid to Ukraine; a block on Ukrainian membership of NATO and an end to Slovakian support for EU sanctions against Russia.

Unlike most of the current batch of European populist parties, SMER-SD is left as opposed to right-wing. This, however, has not prevented Hungary’s populist right-winger Viktor Orban from welcoming Fico’s victory. Clearly common ground on the populist positions on the EU, Russia, gay rights, woke culture, immigration, media restrictions, curbs on the judiciary, sanctions and the war in Ukraine trumps the political spectrum issue.

This is not Fico’s first run at Slovak prime minister. He was initially elected to the job in 2012 with a whopping 83-seat majority. He was forced into coalition after the 2016 election and shortly afterward ran unsuccessfully for the presidency. In 2018 he was forced to resign as prime minister after the murder of investigative journalist Jan Kuciak. He had been investigating the Slovakian mafia and police later linked Maria Troskova, Fico’s assistant, to the gangs.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , , and | 7 Comments

We should be proud of our approach to the EU

For many Liberal Democrats like us, rejoining the European Union is an article of faith and a top political priority.  Helen and her family were advocates of European integration in the 1950s; William joined the Liberal Party when Jo Grimond was arguing for joining the EEC, Harold Macmillan was struggling to persuade his party, and Gaitskell was moving to oppose the idea.

We’re now back at a similar juncture: outside, increasingly aware of the costs of exclusion, this time with Labour edging awkwardly towards a half-commitment to closer relations, the Conservatives divided between realists wanting to re-establish a degree of mutual trust and collaboration and a hysterical anti-European right wing.  We are the only party that has set out a road map for moving back towards the EU, in stages, including rejoining the Single Market, with the intention in time of rejoining the EU.

Many Liberal Democrats are unhappy that we have not come out for a faster path to rejoining than the stage-by-stage road map set out by the working group in last year’s policy paper.  The contrast between that strategic path, from re-establishment of mutual trust to association to eventual membership, and Starmer’s effort ‘to make Brexit work better’ without joining either the customs union or the single market, is clear enough.  But we need to recognise, as we re-assert that we are committed to moving back towards the closest possible relationship with our European neighbours, that the EU is itself changing rapidly, and that the UK cannot fully rejoin until public opinion has accepted the full consequences of doing so.

The Ukraine conflict and the need to respond both to China’s technological and industrial challenge and the USA’s commitment to an industrial strategy have shifted priorities within the EU.  After years of prevarication, further enlargement is now firmly on the agenda: to include Ukraine first and foremost, but also Moldova and the Western Balkan states.  That will necessitate major increases in shared funding, above all to pay for Ukrainian reconstruction.  It will also require painful changes in the way over 30 diverse states agree decisions, in a context in which Hungary and Poland have already shown the difficulties that recalcitrant governments can create for collective policy-making.

Posted in Op-eds | 26 Comments

Embrace the Elephant

The elephant is of course that big, and growing, elephant in the corner of the sitting room: Brexit. Now that Project Fear has become Project Here, it is time for us in the Lib Dems to be much more open about our belief that Britain’s place lies back at the heart of Europe.

Ever since the Brexit vote I’ve been reasonably sure this time would come. Voting to leave was a mistake, and its costs would sooner or later become apparent. The ideological nature of the vote was such that many people would cling stubbornly to their belief that it was right – for some years, I thought. But once it began to crumble, it would crumble quickly. I was right about the trajectory, wrong about the timing. I thought it would be at least another couple of years. (I didn’t allow for the damage to be so deep, or the government to be so negligent.)

As long as the bulk of Brexit voters held to their beliefs, and, equally, as long as the bulk of the British population continued to be hoodwinked by the idea that to campaign for our beliefs was somehow undemocratic, we were probably right to soft pedal on it. I have thought for a long time that the backlash would outweigh the potential gains; but I believed we only needed to be patient.

Our policy has become clear with  “Rebuilding Trade and Cooperation with Europe”, though the mainstream media have been, as usual, exceedingly quiet about it. Our leadership on the whole has remained reticent, but now the time for reticence has passed. There was some indication of this at the spring conference – the European passages of Ed’s speech were highly optimistic and were loudly and enthusiastically applauded. (Not reported in the mainstream press of course – maybe Ed was counting on that.)

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 65 Comments

I have about twenty years left

I have about twenty years or so left on this planet. I very much hope that before I shuffle off, the UK will have rejoined the EU. I think it will be touch and go whether we manage it. Apologies to our more enthusiastic Europhiles if that disappoints you, but I think it is realistic.

The EU needs to see a steady majority in favour of joining over a period of time. We don’t have that stable majority yet, though I expect we will. It will then need to remain stable for a number of years (particularly important for us, given Britain’s current and immediate past tendencies towards exceptionalism and fascism). Then the process of accession will take several years even if, in the meantime, we have laid the groundwork by joining the EEA, rejoining the single market, rejoining Horizon, or whatever we choose to do.

It will take a lot of work, and although we are enthusiastic about this ourselves, it is very difficult to persuade other people of an objective that may be fifteen or twenty years off. So it is not necessarily helpful to make a greater noise about wanting to rejoin, as some would have us do. It may make more sense for us to stand for an intermediate objective, one which is necessary for this country, as well as necessary if we are to have any realistic prospect of rejoining.

If we are to hope to rejoin, we need to make this country different to what it is now. We actually need to do that anyway. Regardless of our chances of joining the EU, I do not want to live in a country where millions rely on foodbanks to fend off starvation while the Prime Minister changes the grid to have electricity delivered to his swimming pool; a country where a previous Prime Minister seeks to ennoble his wife-beating father; a country where the Home Secretary uses language about asylum seekers reminiscent of 1930s Germany (yes, I will say that, because it is true); a country where the heroism of NHS staff is rewarded with applause but not with a pay rise.

So I propose a slogan: “Let’s fix this country”. Let’s fix things so that they actually work for the people and not just the elite.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 25 Comments

Irredentism: the greatest geopolitical threat of our time

Today, many countries around the world are nation-states: sovereign political entities in which one “nation” (a particular ethnic, cultural, or linguistic group) comprises a large majority of a country’s population. In a way, it does make sense; after all, it is easier to communicate with people who speak the same language as you. But some issues do arise: what about people groups who fall outside of the “nation”? What if members of your “nation” live outside of your country’s borders? Despots of all creeds have answered these questions with the same response: genocide and irredentism.

Irredentism is defined in the Free Dictionary as “a national policy advocating the acquisition of some region in another country because of common linguistic, cultural, historical, ethnic, or racial ties.”  This is a fair description of Russia’s and China’s “national policy” towards Ukraine (especially Crimea and the other Russian-majority areas of the country) and Taiwan, respectively. Putin has been loudly proclaiming the Russian people’s historical rights and interests in that country whilst denying that the Ukrainians even exist as a distinct people. Meanwhile, the People’s Republic of China is building up its military to potentially invade the island of Taiwan, which the Beijing government regards as a breakaway province.

Both geopolitical crises have the potential to spiral into a new global conflict, and this threat has historical precedence. Irredentism is the intersection between ethnonationalism and war, as irredentist movements can spiral from a “political talking point” to an invasion.

National unification appeals to people who oppose an irredentist regime, hence irredentism’s political usefulness to dictators. In Russia, for example, Putin’s popularity increased following the annexation of Crimea. Irredentist regimes thrive in an environment of perceived persecution, whether the Germans in the Sudetenland or Russians in the eastern and southern Ukraine, so the irredentist can claim that the invasion of a neighbouring country can be justified as “helping your own”.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 8 Comments

Welcome to my day: 13 February 2023 – time to unfurl our internationalist colours

I’m a believer in an interconnected world, where the United Kingdom builds strong links with its neighbours and across the globe on the basis of mutual interest and cooperation. That means that I’m not a Conservative, as they evidently believe that such links should be purely transactional and, given their sense of entitlement, heavily weighted in our favour. Funnily enough, that doesn’t seem to be working out for them or, more importantly, for the rest of us.

There’s been a good deal of disappointment on this website about the fact that, whilst Liberal Democrats have been vocal about what is wrong with the Government’s approach in addressing the ills of Brexit, the seemingly obvious next step – talking about the advantages of rebuilding some, perhaps all, of the relationship has been very much soft-pedalled.

Does the Party’s private polling suggest that voters have given up on any hope of rejoining the European Union, or perhaps that it isn’t a priority for enough voters yet?

Posted in Op-eds | 24 Comments

If Not Us, Who? If Not Now, When?

Why does Ed Davey never talk about Europe? To be clear, I am not advocating launching a campaign to rejoin the EU. Although party policy supports this as a longer-term objective, there is no chance that the EU would treat an application from the UK seriously until a new government has taken steps to rebuild the EU–UK relationship –the kind of measures we set out in the policy paper Rebuilding Trade and Cooperation with Europe, endorsed by conference last year. This set out a detailed strategy for moving progressively towards a closer relationship with the EU, including ultimately joining the Single Market. These are of direct benefit in themselves, as well as steps the UK will have to take if we are to rejoin one day.

Over the last few months hardly a week has gone by without someone arguing for this, both here in Lib Dem Voice and in the mainstream press. So why isn’t our party leadership talking about it? I’m not defending their position – I think it’s wrong – but it’s worthwhile thinking through the reasoning behind it to see whether it’s justified. Although Ed Davey hasn’t shared his thinking with the party at large, I think we can identify three main reasons behind his consistent avoidance of the topic.

First, because, like Keir Starmer, he’s worried about alienating former Leave voters, particularly in the party’s 30 or so top target seats, almost all of which are Conservative-held. But opinions change – and over the last year they’ve changed significantly. Compared to most of 2021, when more people supported being outside the EU than inside, by the end of 2022, average support for reversing Brexit had reached 57 per cent. This is mainly due to Leave voters changing their minds: in November, one in five Leave voters told YouGov that they regretted voting Leave – the highest number yet recorded. In December Savanta found that 47 per cent of all respondents would favour a closer relationship with the EU compared with 14 per cent who wanted to be further apart. Even 30 per cent of Leave voters said they wanted the relationship to be closer, while 18 per cent wanted to be further away. So our position, of rebuilding the UK–EU relationship, has substantial support.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 60 Comments

Britain and Europe: Turning Around

Keir Starmer promises to do no more than tinker with Britain’s EU relationship during his ‘first’ term of government. By accepting the EU’s regulations on food safety and animal welfare, Labour will ease the worst problems facing Northern Irish trade. But Starmer’s stated intention of “making Brexit work” is no different in principle to that of Rishi Sunak’s. That leaves the field wide open for the Liberal Democrats.

Many Lib Dems would like the UK to rejoin the European Union as soon as possible. That will not happen. Leaving aside the necessity of surmounting a divisive referendum campaign, unless the UK accepts the goal of political, economic and monetary union it is not eligible for full EU membership. There is really no appetite in Brussels to make a special case for the UK as a prodigal member state. On the contrary: once bitten, twice shy. In any case, EU enlargement is stalled and will remain stalled unless and until its constitutional treaties are revised in a federal direction.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 11 Comments

A significant day (or not?) for Croatia

Embed from Getty Images

Christmas is always a good time to catch up with the family. I am Polish, however my wife comes originally from Croatia, a truly spectacularly beautiful country in the southern part of Europe. I had a chance to live in Croatia for a number of years between March 2001 and November 2004, when I was studying and conducting research for my Master’s Degree.

On 1st January 2023, Croatia joined the Eurozone and the Schengen Area. During the Festive Season, at least on a couple of occasions, this was one of the main topics of our conversations; would my friends and family members be worried about some of these changes? How will they affect their lives and/ or their standard of living?

Croatia and Bosnia and Herzegovina in particular have suffered a lot in recent years. The war in the former Yugoslavia has left many people dead, misplaced and hugely traumatised. The Dayton Agreement, which was signed in 1995, put an end to the three-and-a-half-year-long Bosnian War. However, many people have criticized the agreement, which created a weak democratic structure and which has not resolved several complex issues such as borders, cultural, social and faith heritage as well as the political inheritance of the diverse post-Balkan nations.

Whilst Croatia and Slovenia, some will argue, have moved on, other countries are still trying to find a clear pathway to economic stability. Slovenia joined the European Union in 2004 and Croatia in 2013. Croatia in particular has become a traveling destination for many tourists from Europe. It is worth saying that this relatively small country with 3.8m people has a stunning coast, which attracts many visitors each year. Moreover, in 2019, just before the pandemic, tourism revenue contributed 21% of Croatia’s GDP.

So what do these most recent changes mean in practice? Many experts hope and argue that this significant milestone will strengthen Croatian economy, in particular its tourism industry. Others worry that the residents of Croatia, due to the currency change, will lose its “spending power” and to some extent, its monetary sovereignty.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 15 Comments

Introducing “Letter from Brussels”

Letter from Brussels is a 15-minute podcast that will help Lib Dem local councillors, activists, and supporters stay in touch with what is happening in the European Union from the perspective of local authorities. It is produced by the liberal “Renew Europe Group” in the European Committee of the Regions, the EU’s assembly of municipalities and regions, and is written and narrated by Sean O’Curneen, Secretary General of the Group, and a former BBC journalist.

Every episode starts with a fascinating story about the city of Brussels, the capital of the Union, and is followed by the latest news, opinions, and proposals, by leaders who are making the Union a reality on the ground, in their local communities, be it in decarbonising the economy, or integrating migrants and refugees, developing rural communities, or creating new opportunities for young people.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 4 Comments

Is it time to come out in favour of rejoining the EU?

Recently we’ve seen a Yougov poll putting support for Brexit at new lows, with just 32% of the British public overall and 70% of those who voted Leave thinking it was the right decision. We’ve seen stories of both the Tories and Labour denying that they have plans to rejoin the Single Market and/or Customs Union — with the implication that there is something to deny.

For a while I’ve thought the opposite on the grounds that people who voted Leave might find it easier to change their minds if we’re not telling them they were wrong. But, if 30% have already done that, things are different.

With neither Labour nor the Tories speaking up for the majority who now think Brexit was a mistake, is it time for Liberal Democrats to say what others are whispering: we need to rejoin? That’s about speaking up for the EU vision of a peaceful, stable and prosperous Europe with deep respect for democratic values as well undoing the economic harm done by leaving.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 84 Comments

Tom Arms’ World Review

Europe is burning sounds like the title of an apocalyptic Hollywood blockbuster. Unfortunately it is an accurate newspaper headline as the continent this week sweltered in record temperatures.

In normally temperate Britain the thermometer topped 104 fahrenheit. In Spain it reached 109. Spontaneous fires were widespread. The London fire brigade reported its busiest day since the Blitz. Grass and forest fires broke out in France, Spain, Portugal, Greece and Italy. In Greece alone there were 390 forest fires in one week.

The high pressure system responsible for the heatwave is now over Poland and is expected to continue eastwards reaching China in August before eventually being cooled down by the Pacific waters. This follows record temperatures in the Middle East and South Asia and forest fires in California, the Pacific Northwest, Canada and Australia.

Climate change scientists say:  “Get used to it. This is a taste of things to come.”


Joe Biden – America’s 79-year-old president – has covid. It is not surprising. In fact it would be more surprising if he didn’t. Covid has dropped out of the US headlines but not off the health charts. As of Friday nearly a third of the American population – 91,767,460 – have had a confirmed case of coronavirus. 1,050,702 of them have died, including 592 of them this Wednesday alone.

America decided months ago to stop the mandatory wearing of face masks and social distancing and reduced pressure for vaccinations. They were going to learn to live with covid to save the economy. Since then the number of cases has risen dramatically.

The increase in coronavirus cases has not been confined to American shores. Other countries governments are also treating the pandemic as more or less done and dusted. But there have been significant increases in confirmed cases and deaths in Britain, France, Belgium, Germany, India, Greece, Japan, New Zealand, Singapore…. Someone obviously forgot to tell the virus that it was time to pack up.


There is no love lost between Japan and South Korea. In fact, there has been pretty much a hate-hate relationship ever since the Japanese warlord Toyatomi Hideyoshi raped and pillaged his way across the Korean peninsula in the 16th century.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , , , , , , , and | 12 Comments

Rebuilding trade and cooperation with Europe

Hardly a week goes by without some new evidence of the damage done by Brexit to the British economy. From rising food prices, to empty supermarket shelves, to shortages of HGV drivers and of staff in the healthcare, farming and hospitality sectors, to musicians being unable to perform abroad, to British firms, farmers and fishers facing such higher charges and bureaucracy that they give up exporting their products altogether, to scientists losing chances of collaborative projects, Brexit is affecting more and more parts of everyday life. The coronavirus pandemic has caused the biggest shock to the British economy since the war, but, as the independent Office for Budget Responsibility has predicted, the impact of Brexit will be twice as large – and, unlike the pandemic, it will not stop.

The damage is not only to the economy. Brexit has removed British citizens’ opportunities to work, to be together with their loved ones, to study and retire anywhere in the EU. Britain now has less clout in international negotiations, whether on climate change or biodiversity or trade. The existence of the UK itself is now under threat, as Brexit has weakened the arguments for Scotland and Northern Ireland – which both voted to Remain – to stay part of the union. The slogan ‘take back control’ was a lie; in reality Britain now exercises less control over the forces that determine its future than it did inside the EU.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 28 Comments

Campaigning on Europe – members’ views

Please note that the title of this piece has been amended to reflect the content of the article.

You may remember, last November, taking part in a survey on members’ views on Brexit and the party’s campaigning on the future of UK–EU relations. Thanks to everyone who participated – 6,500 members, more than any previous survey of this type – and thanks to Greg Foster and Dan Schmeising at party HQ who organised it on behalf of the Federal Policy Committee. This article gives you the results.

The first question asked how you voted in the 2016 referendum. Completely unsurprisingly, over 91 per cent voted to Remain. Most of the rest couldn’t vote (for example because they were too young); just 2.5 per cent voted to Leave. No less than 95 per cent would describe themselves now as Remainers (more than four-fifths of whom chose the option ‘Yes, I am a Remainer and I am proud of it’) and just 1.3 per cent described themselves as Leavers (a third of whom – 25 people – were proud of it).

In response to the question, ‘Do you think people in your life who aren’t Liberal Democrats associate the current problems the country is experiencing – shortages of truck drivers, farmworkers, care workers and goods in shops – with Brexit?’, on a 0–6 scale, the average answer was 3.7: in other words, they do, but not all that strongly. Of course, the pandemic and the government’s feeble response have complicated the picture substantially, but this will change over time, as the impacts of Brexit become ever clearer. Indeed, if we’d asked the question now rather than two months ago, I suspect the response would have been stronger.

We next asked which EU-related policy areas the party ought to treat as a priority, given that the impact of Brexit is being felt across so many; people could choose three out of a list of fourteen. Trade came top, listed by more than half of respondents. The others, in order, were: climate change and energy; freedom of movement and immigration; rights of EU citizens in the UK and UK citizens in the EU; standards for environment and labour issues; scientific collaboration; cultural, artistic and educational links; environment and biodiversity; defence and security; health policy; justice and police cooperation; foreign policy (countries outside the EU); international development; and crime.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 18 Comments

The UK–EU relationship: the Liberal Democrat position

Anyone who was at the last two Liberal Democrat conferences should remember the two debates that were held on the party’s position on the future relationship between the UK and the EU. In a passionately argued debate last September, conference resolved that the party should support a longer-term objective of UK membership of the EU, but we rejected a proposal for an immediate campaign to reverse Brexit, which, it was argued, was more likely to alienate voters sick of the recent history of Brexit-inspired division and bitterness. Conference also called for the closest possible alignment between the UK and the EU on trade, security, environmental, social, judicial, educational and scientific issues.

The government’s disastrous Trade and Cooperation Agreement was finalised at the end of 2020, so the motion we adopted at spring conference this year was able to add further detail.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 104 Comments

We’ll always have a pro-EU message – but it’ll take time to get to ‘rejoin now’

“That’s the final straw.”

“This isn’t our conference policy.”

“I’m furious – we MUST form a new pro-EU party.”

Those of us who speak with fellow members and supporters will have heard a lot like this over the past few days.

Ed Davey’s interview on Marr may not have fully captured the nuance of our position or even our long-term aim.  But as much as we are all still upset about Brexit, contesting the content of that one interview misses the point about the challenges we face.

As we know, the context for us is very difficult.  The UK has left the EU.  We have lost the biggest political fight in a generation.  Our party has only 11 MPs – partly as a result of our failure to get the message right.

But to get a better view on the how we make our case from now, it may be instructive to consider how we became the most pro-EU party in the first place.

The day after the 2016 referendum our then leader Tim Farron addressed a public demonstration at a time when nearly all other politicians were silent.

Tim’s brave decision placed us at the heart of the pro-EU movement.  But his message was not a blunt ‘overturn the decision’ – and nor was that our policy.

Tim started with a simple call for a referendum at some point in the future.  The formal policy followed to push for a public vote on the government’s deal.

By the 2017 election, the message was that there would be a referendum and we’d campaign for remain.  As a candidate in that election, my Eurosceptic Labour opponent told me in hustings to “be honest and just say the Lib Dems want to cancel Brexit”.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 44 Comments

What did the freedom of movement mean to me?

A couple of years ago, my daughter had a non-uniform day at school. She wasn’t sure what to wear, however at the end, she picked a Polish football top, with my nickname on it (ksiadz, which means in English priest), and a Croatian scarf (see the photo).

My kids were born into a truly European family. I am Polish and my wife comes originally from Croatia. Yes, I know; their European identity and sense of belonging to different cultures and traditions won’t be taken away, however it might affect our and their lives in the future. When I asked my daughter about the choice of her non-uniform day clothes, she simply said: “I like to call myself a foreigner”. I was pleasantly surprised.

I remember my life, as a student in Croatia, before Poland joined the EU. I remember that every once a month, I had to visit a local police station to prove that I was a genuine student. When we were living in Italy, my wife had to wait quite a long time for the study and a work permit.

The freedom of movement has been part of our lives for many years now. We have always cherished and appreciated the opportunity to live in different parts of Europe. Each experience opened up our horizons and made us more “rounded individuals” (at least, that’s what we both think!). The freedom of movement has played such a vital part in our lives. In actual fact, it was the WAY OF OUR LIFE. it enabled us to:

  • Travel freely without any restrictions
  • Work
  • Study and participate in a number of scholarship programmes
  • Gain additional qualifications
  • Enhance our live chances
Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 11 Comments

Ed Davey condemns the Future Relationship Bill

Just before noon today, Ed Davey spoke in the Second Reading debate on the European Union (Future Relationship) Bill, and we bring you his speech now. It should be noted that, due to the number of MPs wishing to speak, his intervention was limited to four minutes.

Watch here. The text is below:

Our country is gripped by two crises: Britain’s hospitals are overwhelmed and Britain’s economy is in the worst recession for 300 years. A responsible Government, faced with those crises for people’s health and jobs, would not pass this bad deal, for it will make British people poorer and British people less safe.

This is not really a trade deal at all; it is a loss of trade deal. It is the first trade deal in history to put up barriers to trade. Is that really the Government’s answer to British businesses fearing for their futures and British workers fearing for their jobs? We were told that leaving the EU would cut red tape, but the deal represents the biggest increase in red tape in British history, with 23 new committees to oversee this new trade bureaucracy, 50,000 new customs officials and 400 million new forms. Some analysts estimate the cost of this new red-tape burden for British business at over £20 billion every year. This is not the frictionless trade that the Prime Minister promised.

Posted in Parliament | Also tagged , and | 7 Comments

New Europeans

Embed from Getty Images

So we are talking about the European Union again.

Some might say we never stopped but the decision we make on this issue at this weekend’s Federal Conference is one of the most important the party has made in many years. In doing so I hope those present bear in my mind that, although the overwhelming majority of Lib Dem activists and members are pro EU, that is not the case amongst the electorate at large.

Conference fever, something I am all too familiar with, resulted in the adoption of the Revoke policy last year; a decision that no one at the top of the party seemed to be in favour of after a disastrous General Election defeat.

What needs to be understood is there is a strand of euroscepticism in Britain that stretches back decades, which is why we didn’t join the Common Market when it was formed and also why Harold Wilson held a referendum in 1975. At that point it was probably fair to say that there was majority support for economic links with our European neighbours; I would argue that it is quite likely that there still is. The transformation of the market into a political union was never put to the people and after Maastricht in 1992 British euroscepticism took on a new lease of life which culminated in the 2016 decision in favour of Brexit.

Posted in Op-eds | 23 Comments

Observations of an expat: Rogue Britain

Embed from Getty Images

Britain is becoming a rogue state. In fact, it may already be one. The Johnson government’s threat to jettison the EU Withdrawal Bill negotiated last year and an alarming philosophy of “creative destruction” threatens to leave the UK dangerously isolated on the world stage.

This is bad for Britain and bad for the world.

The UK is one of the chief pillars of the post-war rule of international law which has underwritten the world’s longest period of relative peace and prosperity. Without these legal structures dictators are emboldened to embark without fear of serious reprisal on genocide, murder of political opponents, theft and even war.

The specific issue at stake is Boris Johnson’s Internal Market Bill which will be debated in Parliament on Monday.  Under the terms of the EU Withdrawal Bill which Johnson negotiated a year ago, there would be pretty much an open border between Northern Ireland and Eire, with a de facto customs border in the Irish Sea between Northern Ireland and the rest of the UK.

The terms were unpopular and a major British concession a year ago. But they were agreed and became a legally-binding building block on which to construct a UK-EU trade deal. Talks for that deal are now deadlocked over fishing rights, legal jurisdiction and competition rules; and Boris fans say that the only way to overcome the impasse is by threatening to break the previous agreement.

The government is fully aware of that such a move is a breach of international law. Northern Ireland Secretary Brandon Lewis admitted as much. It was confirmed by the protest resignation of Sir Jonathan Jones, the government’s top legal adviser. But they don’t care. Boris Johnson is fixated on British withdrawal from the European Union on his terms. This blinkered policy put him in 10 Downing Street and he is quite happy to sacrifice the rule of law to protect his political legacy and emerging brand of radical conservatism.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged , and | 44 Comments

Rejoining the EU will be right… but it’s too soon to push for it

Nothing has emerged since the start of the referendum campaign to suggest that Brexit promises anything more than serious harm — to the British economy, British culture and Britain’s standing in the world. That didn’t change at 2300 on 31 January.

But the way forward is more complicated than switching from #RevokeArticle50 to #RejoinEU — and not just because the process for rejoining is not so simple.

Polling suggests that a majority have been opposed to Brexit for some time. Some of those will be relieved that the indecision is over, but many will not have changed their minds. But …

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 33 Comments

And, as we say au revoir to the European Union…

It’s an emotional moment for those of us who campaigned to remain in the European Union, the last moments during which we are part of something more than the sum of its constituent parts, a pooling of some national sovereignty in return for freedoms to live, love and work across twenty-eight nations. It is not a time to celebrate.

It isn’t a time to mourn either. If the United Kingdom is to go its own way, we need to be there, campaigning for a more liberal society, because if we don’t, nobody else is going to do it for us.

So, to …

Posted in Europe / International | Also tagged | 53 Comments

This is a shameful day in our country’s history

Embed from Getty Images

Today is a horrible day and I feel overwhelmingly sad about the opportunities we are losing. We won’t notice an immediate difference because of the transition period but there is no longer anything we can do if we don’t like the changes that happen at the end of this year. We will no longer have the EU to protect our workers’ rights from the worst excesses of our government. We won’t have as easy access to the single market, so our prices will go up. The next generation’s chances to live, work and study in the EU will be severely limited and those EU citizens already here – our friends, family and neighbours face the Home Office hostile environment. Settled status doesn’t offer that much protection.

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged and | 10 Comments

Keeping the flame alive

It was over two years ago that I wrote in these pages about the virtues of patience, if we desire to re-enter the EU. Roger Liddle, the Labour peer and former adviser to Tony Blair, had predicted the conservatives would inevitably triumph and our best bet would be to re-apply under article 49, once the fuss had died down and the country had woken up to reality.

He was, unfortunately, right, but as for rejoining the EU in the foreseeable future the prospects look very limited. The idea that Britons will suddenly wake up and come to their senses is mistaken; experience has shown that if the going gets rough, Leavers harden their resolve. Furthermore, an attempt to negotiate inferior membership terms from a weakened position is not likely to go down well with either the public or the media.

Posted in Op-eds | 41 Comments

The EU logic for an extension through to the summer of 2020 and implications for the UK

In a nutshell, the 7-year EU Financial Framework runs 2014-2020. More straightforward for the management of the EU budget for the European Commission and a neat end-point. Or is it?

The noise out of number 10 to be un-cooperative to our continental partners may prove to be temporary bellicose “humbug” to use the PM’s own recent rhetoric – not least if the UK’s common interest in avoiding further regional turbulence in the Levant: military, economic – should US President Trump’s threats to destroy the Turkish economy bear fruit, further potential conflagration into an already fragile middle east that could lead to further issues of migrants that Turkey itself has been in effect paid by the EU to keep in situ through the ‘EU-Turkey refugee agreement’ through a €6bn pledge of which half has already been disbursed.

From the EU’s perspective therefore, there is no other major big EU-wide decisions in the offing for another year that Britain could threaten to either derail or upon which to simply do a spoiler akin to Farage’s MEPs turning their backs in the European Parliament. For EU capitals and the new incoming Commission and European Parliament a year offers enough time for the UK to go through the political catharsis: post October 31st “do or die” deadline gone, an election, perhaps a referendum, who knows maybe yet another election still, a possible Scottish referendum..

Posted in Op-eds | Also tagged | 6 Comments
Advert

Recent Comments

  • Joseph Bourke
    At present, the USA is likely the only country with sufficient stocks to quickly supply Ukraine's needs. Buying American defence products does. however, come ...
  • Tom arms
    The Democrats have tried twice and failed to impeach Donald Trump. The reason: Congress is split along by by partisan lines and a 2/3 majority in in the Senate ...
  • Simon R
    @Tom: The proposal seems plausible - and personally I'm open to anything that might help Ukraine on the battlefield. The idea has the advantage that Trump would...
  • Tom arms
    I am delighted that my article spawned all the comments that it has. In fact I’m a bit chuffed. But none of you have addressed my central proposal which is th...
  • Craig Levene
    Rearm Nigel ; Labour have just commited to raise spending from 2.3 to 2.5 %. I don't think that will be enough to make dent in the deindustrialization that's ha...