EU plans to tighten sanctions on Iran. The New York Times has the story:
The European Union is considering tough new sanctions against Iran to protest its nuclear program, including banning investment in the oil and gas sector and tightening restrictions on shipping and finance.
The new measures, which are subject to agreement by European Union foreign ministers, cover dozens of senior Iranian officials and companies, and aim to put new pressure on the government in Tehran by cutting off Europe’s investment in major sectors of the Iranian economy.
A draft of the proposed new measures names 41 Iranian people, 57 companies or other entities, 15 additional companies thought to be controlled by the Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps and three deemed to be under the control of the Islamic Republic of Iran Shipping Lines.
Senior European diplomats will discuss the proposed sanctions on Thursday. If approved, they are likely to represent a significant tightening of Europe’s economic pressure on Tehran.
“These are tough, substantial measures,” said Mark Fitzpatrick, director of the nonproliferation and disarmament program at the International Institute for Strategic Studies in London. “The prohibitions on investment in and transfer of equipment and technology to the oil and gas sector is particularly important, as are the draft prohibitions on various financial services, including provision of insurance and reinsurance.”
Last month, European Union leaders agreed in principle to go ahead with tighter measures as part of a two-track strategy to try to deal with Tehran’s nuclear program. While trying to tighten the economic screw, the bloc’s foreign policy chief, Catherine Ashton, has also made it clear she is ready for talks with Iran’s chief negotiator, Saeed Jalili.
Thursday’s meeting of European Union diplomats will give the first indication of whether national governments inside the bloc will exert pressure on it to water down its plans. But discussion at a summit meeting of the bloc in June led to a swift agreement on the sectors to be the focus of penalties. “Under these circumstances, new restrictive measures have become inevitable,” the bloc’s leaders said then in a statement.
At Foreign Policy, Marc Lynch argues that “the argument for a military strike (on Iran) is no stronger now than it has been in the past — and in many ways it is considerably weaker.”
Afghan conference in Kabul today. The conference will focus on increased Afghan responsibility and ownership of its own security, governance and development, the so-called “Kabul process”, according to a press statement from Catherine Ashton’s office.
HR/VP Ashton will at the conference present plans for continued EU engagement in Afghanistan, stressing the priority areas which include sub-national governance; reform of the justice and police sectors; and human rights. The EU fully supports the peace and reconciliation process and is standing ready to support Afghan efforts to reintegrate those ready to renounce violence.
On the margins of the Kabul conference HR/VP Ashton will also meet with President Karzai and Foreign Minister Rassoul of Afghanistan, as well as with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon. She will attend a meeting with Afghan women’s organisations alongside US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Danish Foreign Minister Lene Espersen.
“The EU is keeping its promises to Afghanistan. We have a multi-annual commitment and will take steps to further align this assistance with the Afghan Government’s priorities. We plan to raise our level of support in line with the new EU Action Plan.” HR/VP Ashton said ahead of the Kabul Conference.
But she added: “Afghanistan’s problems cannot be solved without stronger governance and respect for the rule of law. The key challenges are to extend the Government’s authority into the provinces, and to stamp out the culture of impunity and corruption that undermine the whole governance and development process. That is why our future package will put a special focus on strengthening public administration and in particular on aiming to reform of the justice sector which will complement the EU’s work with the Afghan police – helping to improve law enforcement at all levels”.
The EU Action Plan, which was approved by the EU Foreign Ministers last October, highlights governance and rule of law as areas for enhanced EU engagement in Afghanistan in the years ahead. In the run up to the Kabul Conference, the EU underlined the importance of rolling out good governance to provincial and district level and stressed that this affected progress across the range of political, social and economic sectors.
See also a backgrounder on EU-Afghanistan relations issued by the Commission, here. The New York Times has a curtain-raiser.
Anders Fogh Rasmussen, secretary general of NATO, writes in the IHT, ahead of the Kabul conference:
On Tuesday, an international conference on Afghanistan in Kabul will bring together more than 70 countries, international and regional organizations and financial institutions to support a plan for development, governance and stability. The meeting will result in a clear way forward for the transition to Afghan responsibility and ownership. In short, it will be a milestone in the process by which Afghans are finally becoming masters of their own house. (…)
All these developments point in the same direction: a gradual transition to Afghan lead. This transition will not be done on the basis of an artificial timetable. It will be done on the basis of clear assessments of the political and security situation in each area. Where and when we do it, it will be irreversible.
Starting the transition does not mean that the struggle for Afghanistan’s future as a stable country in a volatile region will be over. Afghanistan will need the continued support of the international community, including NATO. It is important that we send a clear message of long-term commitment. The Afghan population needs to know that we will continue to stand by them as they chart their own course into the future. (…)
We now have a new commander of the I.S.A.F. mission, Gen. David Petraeus. But our strategy hasn’t changed, because it is the right one. Our objective is clear: to ensure that Afghanistan does not again become a safe haven for terrorism. (…) We are building Afghans’ ability to resist terrorism and extremism on their own. We are changing the political conditions in the key strategic areas of Afghanistan; we are protecting the population; we are strengthening the capability of the elected government; and we are training the Afghan Army, to enable Afghanistan to look after its own security.
Political change to come in Egypt? Theodore May reports at Global Post:
“It’s a turning point in Egyptian history,” said Alaa Al Aswany, a prominent Egyptian author and public intellectual. “We are in a very similar moment to 1949, when the people realized that the old system is no longer valid, but they don’t yet know what form the new life will take.”
As the public dissatisfaction grows, however, the man who is supposed to be leading the opposition is now floundering to unite his ranks. And skepticism over the potential of his fledgling campaign for political change in Egypt has begun to emerge.
Many in the media and the political opposition swooned when Mohamed ElBaradei arrived in Egypt in February promising to push for change. He had international credibility, having served as the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency for 12 years — a fact that would make it difficult for the Egyptian government to discredit him.
But Egypt’s opposition is made up of an eclectic mix of communists, democrats, Islamists and others. And ElBaradei is under fire from all corners for running what they view as a meek campaign. ElBaradei has a “quarter million fans on Facebook, but on the ground, how does this translate?” asked Hossam el-Hamalawy, a prominent Egyptian blogger, activist and government critic.
ElBaradei does make public appearances, but his criticism of the ruling National Democratic Party has been tempered and his own policy positions have been vague. He said he would only run for president during elections in the fall if electoral reform happens first. On top of that, ElBaradei has continued to split his time between Egypt and Europe, drawing complaints that he is trying to lead a revolution in absentia. (…)
There is cause, though, for ElBaradei to advance his campaign cautiously. Egypt’s ruling party has a history of cracking down on opposition groups. (…)
Despite disagreements within the ranks of the opposition, ElBaradei’s camp insists that the campaign is going as planned and says that disagreements within Egypt’s opposition are to be expected. “In fact, we were not surprised by the reaction of many Egyptian opponents,” said Abdulrahman Yusuf, head of an online Facebook group aimed at boosting ElBaradei’s candidacy. “There are different agendas and there are conflicting ideologies. We are betting on the street and on the simple, ordinary Egyptian citizen who I think never let us down until now.”
With the presidential election planned for late 2011, ElBaradei has just over a year to win over his skeptics in the opposition, capture the imagination of the ordinary Egyptian citizen and deliver on the change so many are expecting from him.
Israel should hand over Gaza to the EU, says Shlomo Avineri in Haaretz:
Even those who are not fans of Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman must admit that his plan to invite European foreign ministers to visit the Gaza Strip is a creative and positive step. The initiative could also symbolize Israel’s final disengagement from Gaza, the consummation of a process that was never completed, primarily due to opposition raised by a defense establishment that has tended to look at the Gaza issue solely from a narrow security perspective, while ignoring the tremendous damage that the blockade has caused to Israel. (…)
Though we might quibble over Lieberman’s motives, it is now his turn to lead a complex series of steps that might bring to an end a policy that Ariel Sharon initiated, with wide public support: freeing Israel from control and responsibility in Gaza.
After evacuating Israeli settlers from Gaza, we found ourselves locked in an absurd predicament. Israel no longer occupies Gaza, but since it demanded that control over crossing points and the coast remain in its hands, it has created a situation that has no parallel in the world: Israel has no control, but is regarded as being responsible for Gaza. Similarly, the ludicrous idea of enforcing a blockade on 1.5 million people in order to “pressure” Hamas into releasing Gilad Shalit is a proven, unmitigated failure that is tainted by a fundamental moral flaw. And the notion that any sort of Israeli policy will determine who rules the Palestinians, and will weaken or strengthen Hamas or Mahmoud Abbas, is nothing more than sheer hubris. (…)
Should the foreign minister’s plan win the support of the prime minister and the defense establishment and be implemented, Israel would allow the European Union to take responsibility for infrastructure development in Gaza and supervision of the cargo entering the region, in coordination with Israeli security officials. (…)
Israel’s left should support the idea of the European Union’s taking effective responsibility for the development of the Gaza Strip, even if Lieberman is the one who proposed it. Anyone who wants to view this idea as European neocolonialism is free to do so. The important point is that after reaching a strategic decision to disengage from Gaza, and after coming to the brink of a civil revolt as a result of this decision, Israel should finish the job. And if the European Union is so concerned about humanitarian aspects of life in Gaza, it should take the reins of responsibility with its own hands.
Who is winning Eastern Europe’s great game, Katinka Barysch asks at the CER blog:
The US is withdrawing from the former Soviet space; the European Union struggles to be taken seriously there. Does that leave Russia free to strengthen its influence in the countries around its borders? Not necessarily, for the situation in the region is complex. (…)
While much of America’s attention has moved elsewhere, the European Union hardly has a foothold in the region. The EU’s neighbourhood policy has proved rather ineffective, and the 2009 ‘Eastern partnership’ has not yet had time to make much of a difference. Ukraine, still smarting that the EU has never offered the prospect of membership, appears to be turning towards Russia. Moldova looks keener than ever to get closer to the EU – with few people in Brussels and other capitals taking notice. The EU’s Central Asia strategy has lacked political backing and consistency. In the Caucasus and Central Asia, the EU is a rather new player and its traditional approach of exporting norms and values as the basis for bilateral relations has not been received well. The fact that the EU’s foreign policy machinery is currently in bureaucratic paralysis does not help.
In theory, US neglect and European weakness could leave Russia free to consolidate what President Medvedev likes to refer to as a ‘sphere of privileged interests’. Russia is certainly trying. But success has been patchy at best.
Although by far the most populous and prosperous country in the region, Russia does not necessarily have the means to project power into the neighbourhood. Its tools looked more formidable before they were actually used. Now some of them have turned out to be blunt.
Russia’s use of military force in Georgia last year backfired when even Moscow’s staunchest allies scrambled to become less reliant on their dangerous-looking big neighbour: Belarus turned to the EU, Armenia started talking to Turkey and not a single one of the former Soviet countries has followed Moscow in recognising the independence of Abkhazia and South Ossetia.
Russia has repeatedly used trade embargoes and other economic means to put pressure on its neighbours, in particular smaller ones where Russia’s own business interests are limited, such as Georgia or Latvia. But there is arguably not a single instance where the use of economic sanctions has got Russia what it wanted.
This leaves energy as the most promising tool of Russia’s neighbourhood policy. Russia has used pipeline plans, nuclear projects, gas prices and oil deliveries to get what it wants from its neighbours. But even here, Russia’s success rate is mixed. (…)
The perceived withdrawal of the US and the ineffectiveness of EU policy in the region has not so far played into Russia’s hands. Russia (like the EU and other players in the region) has had to learn that the former Soviet Union does not constitute a homogenous neighbourhood. There are cocky and cash-rich energy suppliers such as Azerbaijan and Kazakhstan, and there are poor and divided countries such as Moldova and Armenia. Russia can cajole and coerce in one place but it has to plead and please in another. All countries in the region will benefit from being less dependent on Russia, in trade and energy terms as well as in politics. While the US might pay less attention to the region, the EU should redouble its efforts, while also taking more account of the the specific situations of individual countries.
Ten events that shaped Russia’s recent foreign policy, listed by Fyodor Lukyanov in the Moscow Times.
EU starts association talks with Armenia. AFP reports:
The European Union on Monday launched talks with Armenia on a pact that would strengthen political and economic ties between the bloc and the former Soviet republic.
“The agreement will deepen Armenia’s political association and economic integration with the EU,” the EU’s chief negotiator Gunnar Wiegand told reporters in Yerevan. “It is a historic step and very ambitious agreement that will make Armenia more attractive to European investors and foster trade and democracy in the country.”
Armenia’s deputy foreign minister Karine Kazinian said the talks would take a long time. “It is a very protracted process and it is hard to say when it will be finalised. The talks started and we are ready to finalise them successfully,” she said.
Association agreements are treaties between the bloc and non-EU countries that create a framework for closer political ties and economic integration. Negotiations on agreements usually take from one to four years. Such talks are also ongoing with the former Soviet republics of Azerbaijan, Georgia, Moldova, and Ukraine.
German economy back on track, Spiegel reports:
The German economy has indeed come roaring back to life this summer. Two years after the outbreak of the financial crisis, the auto industry is adding extra shifts once again. The machine building, electronics and chemical industries are all reporting a rapidly growing number of orders. Total unemployment is expected to drop below the 2.8 million mark this fall, the lowest level since 1991.
For the first time in decades, the former “sick man of Europe” is back to being an engine for economic growth. According to an internal government assessment, the country’s gross domestic product increased by more than 1.5 percent in the second quarter of this year. In their last prognosis, completed in April, government officials had predicted only 0.9 percent GDP growth. Production in the manufacturing industry increased by 5 percent over the previous quarter. The government assessment also shows that exports grew by more than 9 percent in May.
If the trend continues, say the experts, the German economy will grow by well over 2 percent this year, or almost twice as much as in most neighboring countries. Economists are already proclaiming a second economic miracle, while a former French foreign minister is complaining that Germany is “number one in Europe” once again.
Ashton’s diplomacy too quiet? In the Guardian, George Lyon, Liberal Democrat MEP for Scotland, says that the EU foreign policy chief must become more visible and audible on major issues:
In December, Cathy Ashton, the new EU high representative for foreign policy, said: “I believe that a lot can be achieved with quiet diplomacy.” Unfortunately, Lady Ashton seems to have mistaken quiet diplomacy for deafening silence.
In seven months in the job, she has been faced with an aid crisis in Haiti, international furore after Israel boarded ships on their way to Gaza, and most recently an unprecedented oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico. In all of these situations we haven’t heard a peep, not a whimper from the person charged with representing the EU on the world stage. This has left many MEPs wondering why they voted to confirm Ashton’s candidacy in January.
Ashton has been widely criticised for not visiting Haiti in the wake of the devastating earthquake. This was her first real test in the job and by not showing solidarity with Haitians it gave the impression that she, and by extension the EU, was disengaged from the disaster.
I am sure that Ashton was co-ordinating aid shipments and speaking with foreign ministers by phone, but shouldn’t this be done by diplomats in her team? As EU foreign minister, isn’t it her job to do the work that people can see? Even Nixon was greeted by Brezhnev on the tarmac in Moscow occasionally.
In fairness, Ashton did meet with all 27 foreign ministers from the EU in the aftermath of the Gaza aid ship shooting that saw nine people killed. But everyone knows that Ashton is not the story when it comes to the Israel-Palestine conflict. (…)
While there are many foreign policy issues where the merits of quiet diplomacy can still be seen, not least in efforts to halt Iran’s nuclear ambitions, in the post-cold-war era we expect our leaders to step into the spotlight and express our collective compassion, indignation or reservations. If Ashton is to stay in this role for the full five-year term, then she must abandon the silence of quiet diplomacy and instead start to make some noise.
From the think tanks: Franco Zallio, Direct Investments and Institutional Cooperation in the Euro-Mediterranean Region. GMF, here.
Read today on Global Europe: Coalitions of the weaklings. Why the EU states must continue to play a global role. By Richard Gowan, an Associate Director at New York University’s Center on International Cooperation, and a Policy Fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR).
To sign up for the Global Europe Morning Brief, please send an email to globeurope@gmail