French Government Warns opponents on EU Treaty Delay

The upcoming French election poses a threat for Sarkozy's proposal to write a requirement to balance the state budget with a "golden-rule" ideal into France's constitution. A large majority agrees that the change in the constitution should be delayed due to the impending election. The call for national unity is the opposing party's reasoning for continuing with the changes. EU leaders have agreed that it is important to enact the new treaty, however there is much backlash that will occur if the changes proceed before the election. Without the support of the Socialist party there is a lack of a two-thirds party agreement. They have agreed that Sarkozy's plan is weak and should be postponed in hopes to not use it at all.

Elisabeth Guigou, the ex-European Minister, has openly voiced that she sees this push for legislation change as a "grotesque political trap". Although others agree with her opinion, the need for change should happen before the election if citizens truly wish to see this passed. After the election it is not certain that it will be seen through. Their push for this can be seen as a political move, but can also be viewed as an act to provide security within the economy.

The election is in May, thus, if the French citizens want this to pass, they need to move quickly.

http://news.yahoo.com/french-government-warns-opponents-eu-treaty-delay-231957535.html;_ylt=AgPGXnb8m_GC4cJ52eugoLqs0NUE;_ylu=X3oDMTNta29oZTk0BG1pdANUb3BTdG9yeSBGUARwa2cDOGI3MTEzYjYtZjE3MS0zM2ZiLWJhNmUtMDM4YzdkOGRiNjJiBHBvcwMxMgRzZWMDdG9wX3N0b3J5BHZlcgNkMjczNWI5MC0yNDRlLTExZTEtOWY3Ni1iOGEyZGI1NWRkMDA-;_ylg=X3oDMTFvdnRqYzJoBGludGwDdXMEbGFuZwNlbi11cwRwc3RhaWQDBHBzdGNhdANob21lBHB0A3NlY3Rpb25zBHRlc3QD;_ylv=3

Early last Friday, Israeli aircraft attracted the Gaza Strip in order to pre-emptive stop attacks as well as respond to a single RPG that harmed no one.  This over aggressive tendency of Israel is, to me, an extremely self-destructive tendency for Israel.  Their minister of defense says these kind of responses are necessary in order to keep up the understanding that Israel will not accept any kind of violence.  For years Israel has believed that by responding to any violence with swift much more powerful violence, they will manage to keep aggression from surrounding nations down.  

But in the end all they build is resentment.  I realize that Israel has dealt with an immense amount of aggression towards it, much of which has been unprovoked.  For this reason they inevitably are quick to respond with such violence, but even though they have managed to keep the aggression from there neighbors at bay they can not keep this up forever.  Eventually the resentment for Israel’s violence, especially in the many cases that have affected innocent citizens, will grow out side the region.  Even in the UN we are beginning to see a growth of countries supporting Palestine for state hood.

Israel has to come to a new relationship with its neighbors.  As we are seeing with Iran, the surrounding nations are growing in military capabilities.  Iran has described vividly how many missiles it would be prepared to attack Israel with and in a few years it is possible that they may even have necular weapons.  The world around them is changing in lieu of the Arab Spring, and its time they find a way to get on the right side of this new wave.  My point is that with a few concessions of sincere commitment to the Palestinian people’s grievances, then they may manage to show the changing Arab people that they really want a peaceful and economically successful middle-east as well.

Here is the article that inspired this blog: http://www.npr.org/2011/12/08/143402473/gaza-official-dozens-wounded-in-israeli-airstrikes

Vladimir Vs. Clinton

Vladimir Putin, the Russian Prime Minister, has spoken out and criticized the United States Secretary of State, Hillary Clinton, for supporting the the protesters in Russia that have spoken out against his continuous reign over the Russian government. Hillary Clinton believes that the Russian people “deserve a full investigation of electoral fraud and manipulation” over the parliamentary votes that were casted on Sunday.
There have been accusations made by some that there have been ballot box stuffing’s and fraudulent manipulations over the vote count in the parliamentary elections. With the outcomes of the Russian elections, and the fact that Vladimir Putin’s approval rate amongst the Russian people has decreased, there have been a significant amount of riots and protest across Russia.
It seems that the Russian government has taken these riots and protest very seriously and have put out 50,000 police and 2,000 paramilitary troops on the streets, which have all been backed by water cannons. Vladimir Putin has warned that more extreme measures will be taken if these riots and protests continue.
I believe that even though there have been significant protest made against these recent elections, websites such as Facebook.com and Live Journal should not be take a credible sources to aid protestors in making city-wide protests.
http://www.taiwannews.com.tw/etn/news_content.php?id=1782357

The Question of the UK in the EU

There are many pros in cons to the UK staying in the EU. The bad part about Great Britain staying in the EU is that the EU is in a state of economic crises and the UK is suffering economically as a result of all of the bailouts. But if the UK left the EU than it would have no say EU economic policy and the EU could basically do whatever it wanted in relation to Great Britain because the UK would have no say in the European Union. Also, because of the fact that about fifty percent UK trade occurs with other European Union countries, tariffs would probably rise and the result would be that domestic industries would suffer. On the other hand, if the UK left the EU, the British parliament would again have complete control of its country and its policies. In conclusion, unless Great Britain leaves the European Union than it will never truly be a sovereign nation with complete autonomy over its own affairs.

The Beginning of 'Inner' and 'Outer' Europe

A summit began today in Brussels, as an attempt to find a solution to the crisis currently facing the Eurozone and the European Union at large. At the forefront of this agenda is the Franco-German proposal for Eurozone reform, which previously failed to gather the necessary support to be placed in effect for the EU bloc. The new proposal, which would apply solely to Eurozone countries, would force automatic penalties on Euro members that overspend, place pressure on Eurozone nations to pass amendments requiring balanced budgets, and create common corporate and financial tax laws.

The reason this proposal and who it applies to is so interesting is that this might well be the deal to save the Euro and the overall Union; after all, it is backed by both France and Germany, with France being long-time political leader and Germany emerging as the primary economic powerhouse of the EU - making it very difficult for those nations going under (hi, Greece) or rapidly approaching the cliff (Spain and Italy) to refuse the offer itself.

So are we seeing the beginning of a new era for European integration? Quite possibly. This proposal, if accepted, would further integrate the community of Eurozone countries within the context of the larger European Union. In this new era, we truly would be seeing Europe in, as Sarkozy recently said, 'two gears' - the Eurozone and tighter, supranational regulations being the first, and the more politically sovereign nations of the EU. These next few years will be interesting for the Euro and the Union - and may be remembered as the time leaders either proved or discredited the idea of European unity.

(As a final, interesting aside, France and Germany have supported their 'steamrolling' of smaller EU/Eurozone states by arguing that, as larger and more fiscally sound nations, they hold a greater deal of the risk. In addition, Sarkozy made mention at the preliminary meetings of the history between the two countries - both France and Germany, once holding centuries of bloody conflict between them, had not only worked together for the past fifty years, but were now actively fighting for the idea that brought them together: European unity.)

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-16100258

The Vatican and Global Oversight

I do not think that this global oversight institution will work. First it was proposed by the Roman Catholic Church (The Vatican) which is in itself suspicious to me. The Vatican is already in all likelihood the most powerful institution the world has ever seen. And now it wants to head an institution that could carry more weight than any individual country in relation to economic affairs. Second the fact that some institution could have more power over a country’s economy than the country itself seems absurd. Lastly, the idea of this institution seems to only reinforce the idea of globalization which, in the years to come, could strip away a country’s autonomy.

The U.S. as the World Police

I believe that the U.S. has a duty to play the role of being the “world police” only to a certain extent. On the one hand, the U.S. has a duty to protect humanitarian interests abroad as it is the most powerful military power in the world. On the other hand, by interfering in these foreign nations it only increase the hate that these nations have for the West especially in countries like Nigeria where the West had taking advantage of the country for hundreds of years. I think that it is a necessary evil to do this. We must protect humanitarian rights, we cannot sit back and watch people die and so if the people in these foreign countries hate us for trying to protect them then so be it. We cannot just do nothing about the situation.