The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
Most of the EU states are broke. I don't think giving the Ukraine significant sums of money is an option.
No:
Greece is definitely broke; Portugal is probably broke. Italy and France might well be broke in the future, but aren't right now. Spain and Ireland were broke, but are probably not broke anymore.
Germany is not broke. We are not broke. The Netherlands is not broke. Austria is not broke. Nor are Finland, Denmark, or Sweden.
€11bn is less than 0.1% of Eurozone GDP, and probably about 0.05% of EU GDP. And it is proposed that it will be over four years. So, really we're talking about 0.01% of EU GDP a year.
The Ukraine is reported to need USD35 bn. The EU is offering €1 bn. The €11 appears to be conditional on Ukraine making a deal with the IMF.
Russia can pay cash.
Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who joined the EU $13,000 Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who stayed in Russia's orbit $4,000
Now I know you're not a fan of the EU, but if you were sitting in Kiev, with whom would you like to align yourself with?
Average monthly salary higher in eastern Ukraine than in the western part?
@AveryLP The story is that Qatar is flexing its muscles regionally by financing all sorts of oppositions and the hated (at least by the old royal families) Al Jazeera network. Qatar's policies often cut across Saudi Arabia's diplomatic efforts and, at least in Syria, have resulted in the balance of power amongst the opposition shifting to the more extremist Sunnis. While it is a while since I focussed on Saudi foreign policy and it has seen marked shifts in the last year, my guess is that Saudi Arabia, with a significant Shia population and terrorism concerns of its own to worry about, is none too keen on policies which exacerbate sectarian divide regionally and which encourage revolution against established regimes.
The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
Most of the EU states are broke. I don't think giving the Ukraine significant sums of money is an option.
No:
Greece is definitely broke; Portugal is probably broke. Italy and France might well be broke in the future, but aren't right now. Spain and Ireland were broke, but are probably not broke anymore.
Germany is not broke. We are not broke. The Netherlands is not broke. Austria is not broke. Nor are Finland, Denmark, or Sweden.
€11bn is less than 0.1% of Eurozone GDP, and probably about 0.05% of EU GDP. And it is proposed that it will be over four years. So, really we're talking about 0.01% of EU GDP a year.
The Ukraine is reported to need USD35 bn. The EU is offering €1 bn. The €11 appears to be conditional on Ukraine making a deal with the IMF.
Russia can pay cash.
Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who joined the EU $13,000 Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who stayed in Russia's orbit $4,000
Now I know you're not a fan of the EU, but if you were sitting in Kiev, with whom would you like to align yourself with?
An odd - and seemingly unlikely - claim by Mikhail Margelov, the Chairman of the Russian Federation Council's (Upper House of Parliament) Foreign Affairs Committee.
His intent is to claim that China is supporting Russia in the Ukraine crisis:
there are indications that in the event of sanctions against Russia, China may demand that the United States pay an astronomical sum of debts - 1,169.9 billion dollars - and probably in gold.
A move to destabilise markets? Or just a Parliamentarian shooting without thinking?
Is Yokel around? I noticed that Saudi Arabia, UAE and Bahrain have withdrawn their ambassadors to Qatar. Do you have any thoughts on how serious this is and how badly it could escalate? I wonder if (not tomorrow, but in the near- to medium-term) Saudi Arabia might lose patience with Qatar's meddling in the region sufficiently to send in the tanks.
Welcome back TimT!
What is the underlying story here?
My eyes have been too focused on Eastern Europe.
Something to do with Al Jazeera would be my guess.
@AveryLP The story is that Qatar is flexing its muscles regionally by financing all sorts of oppositions and the hated (at least by the old royal families) Al Jazeera network. Qatar's policies often cut across Saudi Arabia's diplomatic efforts and, at least in Syria, have resulted in the balance of power amongst the opposition shifting to the more extremist Sunnis. While it is a while since I focussed on Saudi foreign policy and it has seen marked shifts in the last year, my guess is that Saudi Arabia, with a significant Shia population and terrorism concerns of its own to worry about, is none too keen on policies which exacerbate sectarian divide regionally and which encourage revolution against established regimes.
Thanks, Tim.
I guess a lot of this is that Qatar's efforts in Syria have simply simply not worked with the Saudis becoming increasingly frustrated.
The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
Most of the EU states are broke. I don't think giving the Ukraine significant sums of money is an option.
No:
Greece is definitely broke; Portugal is probably broke. Italy and France might well be broke in the future, but aren't right now. Spain and Ireland were broke, but are probably not broke anymore.
Germany is not broke. We are not broke. The Netherlands is not broke. Austria is not broke. Nor are Finland, Denmark, or Sweden.
€11bn is less than 0.1% of Eurozone GDP, and probably about 0.05% of EU GDP. And it is proposed that it will be over four years. So, really we're talking about 0.01% of EU GDP a year.
The Ukraine is reported to need USD35 bn. The EU is offering €1 bn. The €11 appears to be conditional on Ukraine making a deal with the IMF.
Russia can pay cash.
Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who joined the EU $13,000 Average GDP per capita of ex-communist countries who stayed in Russia's orbit $4,000
Now I know you're not a fan of the EU, but if you were sitting in Kiev, with whom would you like to align yourself with?
As has already been pointed out EU membership is not on offer to Ukraine. Nor is it likely to be at any time in the foreseeable future. Rather more important perhaps is the $15 billion loan package that had been agreed between Russia and the Ukraine but was scuppered by the Ukrainian opposition back in mid February.
Russian Foreign Ministry has published a batch of documents of the Soviet People’s Commissariat of the Interior (NKVD) dating back to the years from 1942 through to 1945 and related to the operations of far-right Ukrainian nationalist paramilitaries during World War II.
The documents contain the eyewitnesses’ reports speaking about cooperation of members of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN/UIA) with the Nazis, as well as their involvement in mass purges of the population.
A long article on ITAR-TASS. Quoting classified NKVD reports, this section gives a flavour:
"People of different nationalities became victims of nationalists. In particular, an agent report from the area of Rivne dated August 4, 1943, tells about a mass execution of Poles. “An agent of the NUD group that returned from the mountains of Vladimir-Volynsk, reported that July 18, 1943, he became witness to a mass execution of Polish population of Vladimir-Volynsk carried out by Ukrainian nationalists – Banderovites. During service in catholic churches, the Banderovites killed 11 Roman Catholic priests and up to 2000 Poles on the town’s streets. The German garrison, police and Cossacks numbering 600 people did not take any measures against the execution of Poles, and only after that the German command hung out a notice urging Poles to enroll in the gendarmerie to fight against Banderovites. Many Poles for fear of repressions went to serve for the Germans."
It is the confirmation of long suspected but denied war crimes which will open up wounds which have been slowly healing for decades.
Very nasty.
I first watched "Escape from Sobibor" at school - in History class, so it was deemed appropriate - and I remember the guards were described as "Ukrainians".
Countries which suffered occupation by both the Nazis and the Soviets suffered most. The Baltic states being examples but the real atrocities which have mostly gone unnoticed and unreported were committed in the vast tracts of Polish, Belarussian and Ukrainian territories.
All made worse by the massive resettlement and population movements which took place both during and post WWII.
With most of the Nazi records destroyed or captured by the Soviets the NKVD files in the Lyubyanka must hold a lot of very unpleasant secrets.
Independence news: sounds like RBS and Lloyds would be forced by law (though it might be their choice were it not so) to move south should Yes win: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26455655
Brass nameplates may need to be moved, possibly but we do not really know yet as we have not really read or understood what the EU directive actually says, but let us make it into a scare story anyway..................Yawn
Lord Hawhaw broadcasting to Scotland
They will need to be registered in Both countries actually as any fool would know.
As time goes by, this Tories fortune is becoming reminiscent of 1992 - 1997. While the omnishambles budget may not have been as catastrophic as being thrown out of the ERM, it will remain the worst decisions taken by the Tories in this term.
Presumably they mean 'Next Scottish Parliament Elections' rather than 'Scottish seats in the next (UK-wide) GE'?
The correct term for a general election to the Scottish Parliament is... unsurprisingly... "general election". Who says? Well, the UK Parliament for one. That is the terminology used in the Scotland Act, an act of the Westminster parliament. So, the term "Scottish GE" is perfectly clear to people that don't look at the world from the Westminster bubble.
The more talk of "Tory surge" the more SLab activists stay at home rather than knocking doors on behalf of David Cameron and his chums.
I think it was you who first drew my attention to it, Stuart.
Sad now to see you reveal your shady motives!
You are surprised that an SNP supporter likes to see Tories bragging about "surges" because it disillusions SLab activists? How sweetly naïve of you. And folk wonder why the Tories haven't won a majority since 1992...
The more talk of "Tory surge" the more SLab activists stay at home rather than knocking doors on behalf of David Cameron and his chums.
I think it was you who first drew my attention to it, Stuart.
Sad now to see you reveal your shady motives!
You are surprised that an SNP supporter likes to see Tories bragging about "surges" because it disillusions SLab activists? How sweetly naïve of you. And folk wonder why the Tories haven't won a majority since 1992...
I sense that your sarcasm meter needs recalibrating. ;-)
@SophyRidgeSky: Unite cuts annual affiliation to Labour by 1.5m - they can now (if want) dripfeed political fund cash in exchange for policy concessions
@SophyRidgeSky: Unite cuts annual affiliation to Labour by 1.5m - they can now (if want) dripfeed political fund cash in exchange for policy concessions
This 'fight' has been great for Ed. No, really.
Any blue on blue action today? Haven't heard any for a full 24 hours.
As time goes by, this Tories fortune is becoming reminiscent of 1992 - 1997. While the omnishambles budget may not have been as catastrophic as being thrown out of the ERM, it will remain the worst decisions taken by the Tories in this term.
At this point in that parliament, 1996, the Tories were 25+ points behind. They are currently 5 or 6 points behind. Hardly comparable, even if there is a "recovery problem".
The BBC's Berlin correspondent, Steve Evans, says German business is speaking through its powerful collective voice to stress it fears that sanctions against Russia would lead to retaliation, with Western property being confiscated.
17:44:
The industry association representing a large section of the German economy warns that sanctions against Russia would cause sustained damage to the European economy. The Eastern Committee of German Industry, which contains some of the biggest corporate names from Deutsche Bank to Volkswagen, fears a spiral of damage if Russia then retaliates with economic measures."
One way of looking at this is that Germany got rid of its nuclear power stations in order to prove how peaceful and modern it is, and now it's having to appease Russia because they provide so much of the country's energy.
I fear this debate. Not least because I expected Farage to brush the offer aside by requiring Cameron and Milliband to join in. He clearly sees it as an opportunity, when he does not really need a boost. Perhaps this is part of UKIP's plan to target LD Westminster seats? Farage, if my experience is any guide, will go for the man as much as the issue, and lack of trust in NC, which the polls seem to show, could taint the whole pro-European cause. Trust is central to so critical and complex a question as the EU. Also there is the basic asymmetry of the current argument: NC cannot mention the euro, or Schengen, or even probably free movement of people, relying therefore on the Single Market. Farage, on the other hand, can play the whole pseudo patriotic range of the withdrawalist case. NC could win by getting Farage to sound bizarre and extreme. But he must begin by realizing that he himself comes across in that light to many people already: the acme of the career politician, the Establishment that UKIP hates. MS's belief that both will win because they are appealing to their own faithful misses the more serious consequence of this theatre: if, as seems likely UKIP do very well in the euros (for reasons that have little to do with Europe) and the LDs do very badly (again for reasons that have little to do with Europe) it is the UKs connection with Europe which will suffer. Once again, vital national interests are threatened by narrow party strategy.
Evening all and an interesting development. My worry if I was either Clegg or Farage is that no-one who is not already a committed LibDem or Kipper will bother watching if it is on BBC2.
At this point in that parliament, 1996, the Tories were 25+ points behind. They are currently 5 or 6 points behind. Hardly comparable, even if there is a "recovery problem".
In 1992-7 the issue was that the recovery was over the Tories' economic policy's dead body. It happened despite them.
The BBC's Berlin correspondent, Steve Evans, says German business is speaking through its powerful collective voice to stress it fears that sanctions against Russia would lead to retaliation, with Western property being confiscated.
17:44:
The industry association representing a large section of the German economy warns that sanctions against Russia would cause sustained damage to the European economy. The Eastern Committee of German Industry, which contains some of the biggest corporate names from Deutsche Bank to Volkswagen, fears a spiral of damage if Russia then retaliates with economic measures."
One way of looking at this is that Germany got rid of its nuclear power stations in order to prove how peaceful and modern it is, and now it's having to appease Russia because they provide so much of the country's energy.
The Germans like making money. They will sell to anyone. That's why they don't get involved in foreign tensions.
Evening all and an interesting development. My worry if I was either Clegg or Farage is that no-one who is not already a committed LibDem or Kipper will bother watching if it is on BBC2.
Same thought struck me. Does anybody watch BBC2 these days? I'm sure somebody has some stats to hand, but I'd guess that they have about 1% of the audience most nights.
I fear this debate. Not least because I expected Farage to brush the offer aside by requiring Cameron and Milliband to join in. He clearly sees it as an opportunity, when he does not really need a boost. Perhaps this is part of UKIP's plan to target LD Westminster seats? Farage, if my experience is any guide, will go for the man as much as the issue, and lack of trust in NC, which the polls seem to show, could taint the whole pro-European cause. Trust is central to so critical and complex a question as the EU. Also there is the basic asymmetry of the current argument: NC cannot mention the euro, or Schengen, or even probably free movement of people, relying therefore on the Single Market. Farage, on the other hand, can play the whole pseudo patriotic range of the withdrawalist case. NC could win by getting Farage to sound bizarre and extreme. But he must begin by realizing that he himself comes across in that light to many people already: the acme of the career politician, the Establishment that UKIP hates. MS's belief that both will win because they are appealing to their own faithful misses the more serious consequence of this theatre: if, as seems likely UKIP do very well in the euros (for reasons that have little to do with Europe) and the LDs do very badly (again for reasons that have little to do with Europe) it is the UKs connection with Europe which will suffer. Once again, vital national interests are threatened by narrow party strategy.
So to summarise your contribution you don't want this debate because you think the Eurosceptic argument is far stronger than the Europhiliac argument and Clegg is a discredited politician. It's always surprising and refreshing when a Europhile is so honest about their cause.
Evening all and an interesting development. My worry if I was either Clegg or Farage is that no-one who is not already a committed LibDem or Kipper will bother watching if it is on BBC2.
You are either hoping that that will be the case; a forlorn hope. Or indeed, you must be joking. I sincerely hope the latter. None on PB wants you busting your spleen.
In 1992-7 the issue was that the recovery was over the Tories' economic policy's dead body
The tories' economic credibility had been blown to pieces by the EMS crisis early in the Major government. After that we were first into recession, and last out of it.
I fear this debate. Not least because I expected Farage to brush the offer aside by requiring Cameron and Milliband to join in. He clearly sees it as an opportunity, when he does not really need a boost. Perhaps this is part of UKIP's plan to target LD Westminster seats? Farage, if my experience is any guide, will go for the man as much as the issue, and lack of trust in NC, which the polls seem to show, could taint the whole pro-European cause. Trust is central to so critical and complex a question as the EU. Also there is the basic asymmetry of the current argument: NC cannot mention the euro, or Schengen, or even probably free movement of people, relying therefore on the Single Market. Farage, on the other hand, can play the whole pseudo patriotic range of the withdrawalist case. NC could win by getting Farage to sound bizarre and extreme. But he must begin by realizing that he himself comes across in that light to many people already: the acme of the career politician, the Establishment that UKIP hates. MS's belief that both will win because they are appealing to their own faithful misses the more serious consequence of this theatre: if, as seems likely UKIP do very well in the euros (for reasons that have little to do with Europe) and the LDs do very badly (again for reasons that have little to do with Europe) it is the UKs connection with Europe which will suffer. Once again, vital national interests are threatened by narrow party strategy.
I think you're complete wrong about Mr Farage. He wants a national debate about the merits of membership of the EU.
"I have been waiting for 20 years to have a national debate on the great EU membership question. And so I felt that I had no choice but to accept, given that my motivation for leaving business and coming into politics was to win back the independence, self-government and self-respect of this nation.
I am now very excited that this debate will make sure that the European elections are contested on proper, EU-related issues. That doesn’t mean obscure clauses of treaties that virtually nobody has ever read. It means money; open door immigration; our inhibition of global trading opportunities; and how impotent our Westminster Parliament has become in governing UK matters. "
I fear this debate. Not least because I expected Farage to brush the offer aside by requiring Cameron and Milliband to join in. He clearly sees it as an opportunity, when he does not really need a boost. Perhaps this is part of UKIP's plan to target LD Westminster seats? Farage, if my experience is any guide, will go for the man as much as the issue, and lack of trust in NC, which the polls seem to show, could taint the whole pro-European cause. Trust is central to so critical and complex a question as the EU. Also there is the basic asymmetry of the current argument: NC cannot mention the euro, or Schengen, or even probably free movement of people, relying therefore on the Single Market. Farage, on the other hand, can play the whole pseudo patriotic range of the withdrawalist case. NC could win by getting Farage to sound bizarre and extreme. But he must begin by realizing that he himself comes across in that light to many people already: the acme of the career politician, the Establishment that UKIP hates. MS's belief that both will win because they are appealing to their own faithful misses the more serious consequence of this theatre: if, as seems likely UKIP do very well in the euros (for reasons that have little to do with Europe) and the LDs do very badly (again for reasons that have little to do with Europe) it is the UKs connection with Europe which will suffer. Once again, vital national interests are threatened by narrow party strategy.
PS And would you trust people who cannot understand that no means no or renege on referendum commitments? Europhile politicians are not to be trusted.
@SophyRidgeSky: Unite cuts annual affiliation to Labour by 1.5m - they can now (if want) dripfeed political fund cash in exchange for policy concessions
This 'fight' has been great for Ed. No, really.
Any blue on blue action today? Haven't heard any for a full 24 hours.
When do we expect Boris to break cover and attack the government?
P.S. I think he's right not to get drawn into Ozzy's trap. Keep well clear would be my advice.
Scottish independence: 'Court could arbitrate' any negotiations
... "On EU membership, it also seems to me that the UK will be the continuator state and Scotland would have to apply, but Scotland has entitlements to membership."...
smithersjones. You have completely misunderstood me. The pro European case needs to be made fully, as can only happen in an in/out referendum, and when the future of the nation is on the line. It cannot be judged in a media side-show, as part of a domestic party political battle on the margins of an election, which, alas, most electors regard as also a side-show. UKIP's rise is not primarily to do with Europe, any more than is the LD's fall. It is about a general malaise over how we are governed and of a disconnect between the Establishment/London and the rest of the country, about winners and losers from globalization and much besides. Pretending the euro elections are some sort of substitute for a referendum merely compounds this malaise. This debate is thus more likely, I fear, to help UKIP than the LDs, but it will do little to impact upon the issue of our EU membership itself, any more than will UKIP winning the euro elections (if they do.)
The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
"Documentary about Bombay's vast suburban rail network, which serves six-and-a-half million commuters every day. As Bombay's population swells by tens of thousands each week, the railway and the people whose lives revolve around it struggle to cope with the pressure and the peaktime 'super-dense crush load'. From the train driver to the illegal hawker and the homeless shoe-shine boy, each has a story to tell about this remarkable railway system, often described as the lifeline of India."
Because, Jack, we aren't going to go to war in defence of Poland again. It didn't work out well last time. Nor is France, The USA, Germany, let alone the other NATO members who have essentially disarmed. The idea that Belgium would go to war in defence of, say Latvia, is laughable.
The countries of NATO faced with an attack on one of their eastern members by, say, Russia may well respond fully in accordance with Article 5 by complaining to the security council and, perhaps, by tabling a strongly worded resolution at the UN.
The principle of NATO is that it is a collective security arrangement not just Belgium supporting Latvia.
If NATO is so defunct why has Russia before and now been so desperate to ensure countries, even smaller one, do not join ?
I know what NATO is, Jack, I have even read the treaty. It is a busted flush. Why Russia cares about I don't know, but they could, if they still had the means, roll West with the Third Shock Army and none of the Major Western Countries would, or probably even could, put any force in their way.
Think it through, Jack, lets us just suppose that Russia takes over Ukraine. Then in a couple of years they decide to go for Poland - what military force would the UK able to commit to the defence of Poland? And we are one of the strongest military nations in the alliance. And that assumes there would be the political will to go to war in the first place.
NATO is a busted flush, it should have been wound up twenty years ago. Nowadays its just a paper tiger, whose only purpose is to give a pretence to the gullible that there a system of defence.
NATO is a busted flush, but it need not have been. European populations prioritise welfare benefits over adequate armed forces. As Alan Clark put it, why bother to fight when you can enjoy the pleasures of wine, adultery, and civilised conversation?
I fear this debate. Not least because I expected Farage to brush the offer aside by requiring Cameron and Milliband to join in. He clearly sees it as an opportunity, when he does not really need a boost. Perhaps this is part of UKIP's plan to target LD Westminster seats? Farage, if my experience is any guide, will go for the man as much as the issue, and lack of trust in NC, which the polls seem to show, could taint the whole pro-European cause. Trust is central to so critical and complex a question as the EU. Also there is the basic asymmetry of the current argument: NC cannot mention the euro, or Schengen, or even probably free movement of people, relying therefore on the Single Market. Farage, on the other hand, can play the whole pseudo patriotic range of the withdrawalist case. NC could win by getting Farage to sound bizarre and extreme. But he must begin by realizing that he himself comes across in that light to many people already: the acme of the career politician, the Establishment that UKIP hates. MS's belief that both will win because they are appealing to their own faithful misses the more serious consequence of this theatre: if, as seems likely UKIP do very well in the euros (for reasons that have little to do with Europe) and the LDs do very badly (again for reasons that have little to do with Europe) it is the UKs connection with Europe which will suffer. Once again, vital national interests are threatened by narrow party strategy.</
The Lib Dems should do very well. It should cement their support among people who are committed to EU membership.
But, UKIP will do even better. And, that's excellent.
smithersjones. You have completely misunderstood me. The pro European case needs to be made fully, as can only happen in an in/out referendum, and when the future of the nation is on the line. It cannot be judged in a media side-show, as part of a domestic party political battle on the margins of an election, which, alas, most electors regard as also a side-show. UKIP's rise is not primarily to do with Europe, any more than is the LD's fall. It is about a general malaise over how we are governed and of a disconnect between the Establishment/London and the rest of the country, about winners and losers from globalization and much besides. Pretending the euro elections are some sort of substitute for a referendum merely compounds this malaise. This debate is thus more likely, I fear, to help UKIP than the LDs, but it will do little to impact upon the issue of our EU membership itself, any more than will UKIP winning the euro elections (if they do.)
No I haven't. Hiding behind that shallow excuse that 'Its complicated' frankly just doesn't work anymore. Europhiles have had 40 years or more to hone their justification for their superfluous oligarchical bureaucracy and the fact you are still bleating that you can't only demonstrates the parlous nature of your case. Frankly today the hackneyed arguments that are used seem more and more ridiculous as each day goes by and if they are complex people will turn their backs on them anyway (as they did on the AV issue).
Not only that but for decades Europhiles have closed down debate by browbeating and abusing anyone who dares question their self serving cause (Xenophobes, Little Englander,Fruitcakes, Nutters etc.) and a similar period denying the very referendums you now call for. Whilst certainly being more polite about it aren't you just trying to close down debate for fear that Clegg will further highlight the lack of real justification your sort have for that out of control exercise in political narcissisism?
Scottish independence: 'Court could arbitrate' any negotiations
... "On EU membership, it also seems to me that the UK will be the continuator state and Scotland would have to apply, but Scotland has entitlements to membership."...
smithersjones. You have completely misunderstood me. The pro European case needs to be made fully, as can only happen in an in/out referendum, and when the future of the nation is on the line. It cannot be judged in a media side-show, as part of a domestic party political battle on the margins of an election, which, alas, most electors regard as also a side-show. UKIP's rise is not primarily to do with Europe, any more than is the LD's fall. It is about a general malaise over how we are governed and of a disconnect between the Establishment/London and the rest of the country, about winners and losers from globalization and much besides. Pretending the euro elections are some sort of substitute for a referendum merely compounds this malaise. This debate is thus more likely, I fear, to help UKIP than the LDs, but it will do little to impact upon the issue of our EU membership itself, any more than will UKIP winning the euro elections (if they do.)
Possibly the most astounding thing about your response is your casual dismissal of the significance of the Euro elections. As it stands there is no referendum on the future of Europe and until there is when else should the issues relating to the EU be debated if not during the EU election campaign?
Clegg will win hands down. Farage can't beat Clegg AND the hand-picked audience (if you think the picking will be random by a polling organisation think again) AND the BBC Pro-EU mediator. Easiest wager for a long time.
Clegg will win hands down. Farage can't beat Clegg AND the hand-picked audience (if you think the picking will be random by a polling organisation think again) AND the BBC Pro-EU mediator. Easiest wager for a long time.
Clegg will win hands down. Farage can't beat Clegg AND the hand-picked audience (if you think the picking will be random by a polling organisation think again) AND the BBC Pro-EU mediator. Easiest wager for a long time.
I cannot really see how the moderator or the audience will make a difference in this case. Neither Farage or Clegg will judge winning by if they sounded the most coherent or got the most applause or whatever. They've both already gotten what they want out of it, and regardless if Clegg twists himself in knots trying to justify the less palatable parts of EU membership, or Farage stumbles over some obscure fact, both sides will already have plans on how to brief it as a win for their guy depending on how the details went down.
Farage's people and anti-EU people will not care if Clegg comes out looking informed and principled, because they are chasing different voters, and Clegg won't mind if Farage looks dynamic and convincing, because his whole point is about scaring the pro-EU people into throwing their weight behind the LDs, and while Farage looking a fool would be helpful, Farage looking like he will gather up more anti-EU votes may make pro-EU people more keen to vote LD as well, especially if Clegg makes a good showing.
The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
Evening all and an interesting development. My worry if I was either Clegg or Farage is that no-one who is not already a committed LibDem or Kipper will bother watching if it is on BBC2.
Same thought struck me. Does anybody watch BBC2 these days? I'm sure somebody has some stats to hand, but I'd guess that they have about 1% of the audience most nights.
I can't say I recall the last time I watched anything on TV which was not a sporting event - I wait for DVD boxsets when it comes to drama/comedy- although it has been a few months at least. Of course few people will watch the debate, but then few people pay close attention to politics, and the event will be noted and have clips and analysis and may help develop a narrative favourable to either man, and if those become set enough eventually the broader public may get a sense of it.
The impact could range from useful to negligible, but at the least is unlikely to be harmful, so worth looking at at least.
@ SeanT Ah, but 24 hours news and YouTube, plus the hijacking of serious journalism into point of view human interest storytelling, makes the misery of war so much more vicariously available to us in our armchairs as we sip our cocoa.
@SophyRidgeSky: Unite cuts annual affiliation to Labour by 1.5m - they can now (if want) dripfeed political fund cash in exchange for policy concessions
This 'fight' has been great for Ed. No, really.
Any blue on blue action today? Haven't heard any for a full 24 hours.
When do we expect Boris to break cover and attack the government?
P.S. I think he's right not to get drawn into Ozzy's trap. Keep well clear would be my advice.
I am all for Team Boris they just get stuck in there against anyone in the cabinet and sod the consequences. I think he is great, in a helping Labour type way.
Evening all and an interesting development. My worry if I was either Clegg or Farage is that no-one who is not already a committed LibDem or Kipper will bother watching if it is on BBC2.
Same thought struck me. Does anybody watch BBC2 these days? I'm sure somebody has some stats to hand, but I'd guess that they have about 1% of the audience most nights.
6.7%. The average person watches it for 2 houtrs a week.
I think that Mike is right that it will give both at least a temporary boost, regardless of how they perform. The media are starved of decent debates to watch, so it will be well reported, and each will please their core audiences unless they totally fluff it, which they're experienced enough not to do.
The Spectator article on Putin's catastrophe in Ukraine is quite excellent. We are being misdirected. While we fret about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, we are ignoring that Ukraine has apparently decisively slipped from Russia's orbit to look westward. What we are watching is Vladimir Putin's attempt to salvage crumbs from the wreckage. But in fact he is making his position worse, by cementing Ukraine still more firmly in the hands of the west.
We need to grasp this golden opportunity. We need to give Ukraine a clear path to EU membership, a clear path to NATO membership and some cold hard cash to assist them.
While we're about it, we might take a look at what we can do to help Moldova too.
@ SeanT "a "Crimean War" which has, so far, seen 0 people killed, and two men waving their arms a lot in south central Simferopol"
Think back to how THE Crimean War would have reported this. News would not have reached London for some three weeks. I suspect that only more substantial news would have made it into the papers in those days.
anotherDave I am not doubting Nigel Farage's sincerity on the EU. Only that he goes into this debate from a position of strength that has almost nothing to do with the EU issue itself, and everything to do with a general anti-establishment tide, rooted in a range of deep domestic economic and social divisions. This is a tide that NC is, I fear, in a weak position to turn. This will not therefore really be a debate about the issue of Europe itself. NC must show that the problems which have brought UKIP to prominence will not be solved by Farage's catch-all solution of leaving the EU. But that will mean admitting that many of the concerns UKIP is plugging into are legitimate. Only a Conservative, I think, can do that. Anti-European feeling is essentially a crisis within Conservatism. That NC is now the bearer of the pro-European banner, is a further proof of this. And an indictment of what remains of the pro-European Conservative tradition.
smithersJones I see nothing astounding about the notion that the euro elections are about electing MEPs. I am not clear why UKIP wish to sit in a Parliament in which they believe Britons should not be represented. Of course these elections serve as a proxy for a debate about the EU, but they are also a proxy for all sorts of other issues too. UKIP is not a one issue party, as you seem to think, even if it is, to a degree, a one solution party. What really matters is the impact of UKIPs performance in the euro elections on Conservative perceptions of their performance at the next General Election. Only the Government can call the referendum which must come, the sooner the better, in my view, and which I am confident will lead to us remaining in the EU. Everything else is detail.
Comments
His intent is to claim that China is supporting Russia in the Ukraine crisis:
there are indications that in the event of sanctions against Russia, China may demand that the United States pay an astronomical sum of debts - 1,169.9 billion dollars - and probably in gold.
A move to destabilise markets? Or just a Parliamentarian shooting without thinking?
Probably the latter.
I guess a lot of this is that Qatar's efforts in Syria have simply simply not worked with the Saudis becoming increasingly frustrated.
A defeated alliance tends to turn in on itself.
SNP 38% (+2)
Lab 29% (-5)
Con 17% (+2)
LD 9% (+2)
http://www.ipsos-mori.com/researchpublications/researcharchive/3351/SNP-open-up-nine-point-lead-over-Labour.aspx
SNP 4/6
Lab 11/10
Any other 150/1
All made worse by the massive resettlement and population movements which took place both during and post WWII.
With most of the Nazi records destroyed or captured by the Soviets the NKVD files in the Lyubyanka must hold a lot of very unpleasant secrets.
anyway..................Yawn
Lord Hawhaw broadcasting to Scotland
They will need to be registered in Both countries actually as any fool would know.
As time goes by, this Tories fortune is becoming reminiscent of 1992 - 1997.
While the omnishambles budget may not have been as catastrophic as being thrown out of the ERM, it will remain the worst decisions taken by the Tories in this term.
twitter.com/FT/status/441255161898758144/photo/1
The more talk of "Tory surge" the more SLab activists stay at home rather than knocking doors on behalf of David Cameron and his chums.
The 8,000 plus German companies located in or around Birmingham are presumably car manufacturing related.
I suspect Alanbrooke will know who they are and what they are up to.
Sad now to see you reveal your seedy motives!
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dDRiT1FSRTF2bjVYRThSTnRaNzFXMlE#gid=0
Con targets:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dEk1TlVqMHhNUXFBWlhSNU1hd0FYSHc#gid=0
LD targets:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dHJvOXRkdEVLNUhBWG1JQzBVekVjWnc#gid=0
Combined target list:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0At91c3wX1Wu5dHNjRUpXY2ZYamVrVlJPbmRNdzNTd0E&usp=sheets_web#gid=0
When oh when is Ed Miliband going to be held to account on what is going on in Labour's dirty little fiefdom??
'A miniature Mid-Staffs every day'
http://youtu.be/EFp3S_5ZkOI
@SophyRidgeSky: Unite cuts annual affiliation to Labour by 1.5m - they can now (if want) dripfeed political fund cash in exchange for policy concessions
This 'fight' has been great for Ed. No, really.
The BBC's Berlin correspondent, Steve Evans, says German business is speaking through its powerful collective voice to stress it fears that sanctions against Russia would lead to retaliation, with Western property being confiscated.
17:44:
The industry association representing a large section of the German economy warns that sanctions against Russia would cause sustained damage to the European economy. The Eastern Committee of German Industry, which contains some of the biggest corporate names from Deutsche Bank to Volkswagen, fears a spiral of damage if Russia then retaliates with economic measures."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26445666
One way of looking at this is that Germany got rid of its nuclear power stations in order to prove how peaceful and modern it is, and now it's having to appease Russia because they provide so much of the country's energy.
The tories' economic credibility had been blown to pieces by the EMS crisis early in the Major government. After that we were first into recession, and last out of it.
"I have been waiting for 20 years to have a national debate on the great EU membership question. And so I felt that I had no choice but to accept, given that my motivation for leaving business and coming into politics was to win back the independence, self-government and self-respect of this nation.
I am now very excited that this debate will make sure that the European elections are contested on proper, EU-related issues. That doesn’t mean obscure clauses of treaties that virtually nobody has ever read. It means money; open door immigration; our inhibition of global trading opportunities; and how impotent our Westminster Parliament has become in governing UK matters. "
http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/nigel-farage-im-immensely-looking-forward-to-saying-i-dont-agree-with-nick-clegg-9152731.html
P.S. I think he's right not to get drawn into Ozzy's trap. Keep well clear would be my advice.
... "On EU membership, it also seems to me that the UK will be the continuator state and Scotland would have to apply, but Scotland has entitlements to membership."...
http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-26448572
You have completely misunderstood me. The pro European case needs to be made fully, as can only happen in an in/out referendum, and when the future of the nation is on the line. It cannot be judged in a media side-show, as part of a domestic party political battle on the margins of an election, which, alas, most electors regard as also a side-show. UKIP's rise is not primarily to do with Europe, any more than is the LD's fall. It is about a general malaise over how we are governed and of a disconnect between the Establishment/London and the rest of the country, about winners and losers from globalization and much besides. Pretending the euro elections are some sort of substitute for a referendum merely compounds this malaise. This debate is thus more likely, I fear, to help UKIP than the LDs, but it will do little to impact upon the issue of our EU membership itself, any more than will UKIP winning the euro elections (if they do.)
On BBC4 tonight at 8pm:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007t30p
"Documentary about Bombay's vast suburban rail network, which serves six-and-a-half million commuters every day. As Bombay's population swells by tens of thousands each week, the railway and the people whose lives revolve around it struggle to cope with the pressure and the peaktime 'super-dense crush load'. From the train driver to the illegal hawker and the homeless shoe-shine boy, each has a story to tell about this remarkable railway system, often described as the lifeline of India."
"...Scottish independence...which Alex Salmond is quite in favour of..."
Not only that but for decades Europhiles have closed down debate by browbeating and abusing anyone who dares question their self serving cause (Xenophobes, Little Englander,Fruitcakes, Nutters etc.) and a similar period denying the very referendums you now call for. Whilst certainly being more polite about it aren't you just trying to close down debate for fear that Clegg will further highlight the lack of real justification your sort have for that out of control exercise in political narcissisism?
Swedish turnip quotes "Unionist" media. Wha's dat a'l a'boot...?
Farage's people and anti-EU people will not care if Clegg comes out looking informed and principled, because they are chasing different voters, and Clegg won't mind if Farage looks dynamic and convincing, because his whole point is about scaring the pro-EU people into throwing their weight behind the LDs, and while Farage looking a fool would be helpful, Farage looking like he will gather up more anti-EU votes may make pro-EU people more keen to vote LD as well, especially if Clegg makes a good showing.
http://blogs.spectator.co.uk/coffeehouse/2014/03/vladimir-putin-is-losing-the-battle-for-ukraine/
@David_Cameron: I've been speaking to @BarackObama about the situation in Ukraine. We are united in condemnation of Russia's actions. http://t.co/7Rk2k8iOIK
The impact could range from useful to negligible, but at the least is unlikely to be harmful, so worth looking at at least.
Poor Denmark are going to be walloped.
(Then again this is England)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BBC_Two (and the BARB link).
I think that Mike is right that it will give both at least a temporary boost, regardless of how they perform. The media are starved of decent debates to watch, so it will be well reported, and each will please their core audiences unless they totally fluff it, which they're experienced enough not to do.
It's quite worrying that it's pretty hard for seasoned England fans like us to name our starting XI.
One thing in our favour - at least the hype won't follow us this time.
Defence is the main issue.
Think back to how THE Crimean War would have reported this. News would not have reached London for some three weeks. I suspect that only more substantial news would have made it into the papers in those days.
I am not doubting Nigel Farage's sincerity on the EU. Only that he goes into this debate from a position of strength that has almost nothing to do with the EU issue itself, and everything to do with a general anti-establishment tide, rooted in a range of deep domestic economic and social divisions. This is a tide that NC is, I fear, in a weak position to turn. This will not therefore really be a debate about the issue of Europe itself. NC must show that the problems which have brought UKIP to prominence will not be solved by Farage's catch-all solution of leaving the EU. But that will mean admitting that many of the concerns UKIP is plugging into are legitimate. Only a Conservative, I think, can do that. Anti-European feeling is essentially a crisis within Conservatism. That NC is now the bearer of the pro-European banner, is a further proof of this. And an indictment of what remains of the pro-European Conservative tradition.
I see nothing astounding about the notion that the euro elections are about electing MEPs. I am not clear why UKIP wish to sit in a Parliament in which they believe Britons should not be represented. Of course these elections serve as a proxy for a debate about the EU, but they are also a proxy for all sorts of other issues too. UKIP is not a one issue party, as you seem to think, even if it is, to a degree, a one solution party. What really matters is the impact of UKIPs performance in the euro elections on Conservative perceptions of their performance at the next General Election. Only the Government can call the referendum which must come, the sooner the better, in my view, and which I am confident will lead to us remaining in the EU. Everything else is detail.