Twitter and email info

Showing posts with label Denmark. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Denmark. Show all posts

Saturday, May 16, 2015

Europe takes a giant leap to the Right. (Part II)

The Italian love/hate relationship with Silvio Berlusconi is truly something to admire.  He has been charged with a variety of crimes, with only a few inconsequential accusations amounting to convictions.  At press time, Berlusconi was in the news regarding the potential sale of his football team, Italian giant AC Milan.  He is currently serving a "house-arrest" sentence for tax evasion (I think), but our contacts in Italy and within Berlusconi's recently reborn party Forza Italiana warn is to never count out Silvio Berlusconi.  Interestingly enough, Berlusconi has provided the Italian people with the only political consistency that they country has experienced since the second World War.  Italy is famous for having governments of spectacularly short lifespans, but Berlusconi, who shamelessly appeals to the nationalist and patriotic emotions of the Italian people, has managed to stay in office longer than any other Italian Prime Minister.  The current left-of-center government is bleeding votes as the economy struggles with the usual "confidence in banking" issues.  But at least we can count our second "left-of center" government, alongside Sweden.

The Czech Republic is a bit of a mess.  Because roughly fifteen percent of the population continues to support the Communist Party, and no other parties will work in coalition with the Communists, its virtually impossible to put together an effective coalition government.  The center-right and the center-left usually end ever election with only a small percentage difference in votes.  Two important issues to watch: the far-right has been growing rapidly, especially with unemployed young people and in rural areas.  Also, if a center-left coalition were to include the Communists, would that impact the Czech Republic's membership in NATO and relationship with Russia, vis-a-vis the United States?  Poland, on the other hand, is not a difficult country to size up politically.  Poland is, and has been (and will probably continue to be), the most right-of-center country in Europe.  The Polish people are strongly pro-U.S. and anti-Russian, even after the fall of Communism.  The Catholic Church continues to influence the lives of most Poles, and, learning from history, the Polish government has built a powerful Army and Air Force.  Another country that appears to be most comfortable with a right-wing government is Hungary.  The Fidesz (Hungarian Civic Alliance) Party has a substantial majority in the Hungarian parliament, and Fidesz leader Viktor Orban is Hungary's Prime Minister.  The Fidesz Party has come under attack from international human rights organizations because of accusations that the party is anti-Semitic, racist and xenophobic.  Fidesz has made serious efforts to clean up its image, but it makes no bones about its opposition to immigration, especially from Turkey and other Islamic nations.

The United Kingdom just re-elected David Cameron to a second term as Prime Minister.  Last time around, Cameron had to spend the first few days after the election, trying to put together a coalition government; this time around, he gets to watch TV and fool around with his lovely wife.  Cameron's Conservative Party absolutely destroyed the opposition, with a result that shocked even the most optimistic Tory punter.  Now the poor British people will have to listen to a few weeks of Sky News and BBC analyzing and re-analyzing how this development came to pass. For me, its not rocket science.  Since Cameron took office, there have been a number of racially-connected mini-riots in various UK cities.  Not to mention the incident involving the British soldier who was brutally murdered on the street, practically in front of his post.  And who can forget the look of fear on the faces of Prince Charles and Camilla as their car was attacked by a group of protesters in London?  I'm sure the fact that the ISIS commander who appears to be in charge of the beheadings department proudly brags about his English heritage, is something that sticks in the craw of every English person.  The UK is not a haven for extremist and future terrorists should not consider relocating there.  The voters wanted to make sure that the right message was delivered to the bad guys. Although I'm not sure what the Tories plan on doing to tighten immigration and fight the growth of Islamic extremism in the Black and Arab ghettos of London, Liverpool, Manchester and Bristol (just to name a few), but I'm sure the message was received, loud and clear.

We haven't reached the Balkans and Greece, but I think we've arrived at a good place to take stock of our research.  Twelve of the countries we reviewed, including Germany, the UK, the Netherlands, Spain and Austria, have right-of-center government.  Only three (France, Sweden and Italy) are sailing against the wind.  I expect France and Italy to elect right wing governments in their next elections, especially if the terrorist issue continues to be a priority.  How can it not be?  With the entire continent embracing conservative governments, what does that mean for the rest of the world?  The EU will probably adopt more market-friendly policies, which includes encouraging tax cuts and tax code reform.  Also, Immigration faucet will be turned down to a trickle.  In a number of European countries, the fear isn't that foreigners will arrive with a terrorist agenda, but that desperate Africans, Algerians, Libyans and Ethiopians will arrive and take all the jobs.  Getting in a shoe box with twenty other people and managing to get it from Tripoli to Reggio on the coastal boot of Italy, will no longer guarantee someone legal residency in Europe.  I believe that this is the first change that Europe will embrace.  And right-wing governments from Warsaw to Lisbon will be on too happy to introduce the legislation to their constituents.

Thursday, May 14, 2015

Europe takes a giant leap to the Right. (Part I)

One of the most interesting political trends I've been watching on the international scene recently has been the growth of right-of-center political parties in Europe.  This development does not follow a trend, as Asian countries seem content to continue the trend of hopping from one extreme to the other, and South America is on a decidedly leftist run at the moment (trying to gauge African politics with a western yardstick is a dangerous game, so we'll just leave the African nations out of today's discussion).  From my optic, and with some countries is can be difficult to judge; a number of new political movements have shown up on the scene, who really skate a thin line between fascist and eco-terrorist.  Teaching a modern European politics class in college must be an interesting job.  But a quick analysis of the major players in Europe show a definite swing to the right.  The Christian Democrats of Angela Merkel seem as entrenched as during the best Helmut Kohl days.  In fact, the popularity of the right in Germany may be the only hope for the opposition, as new right-of-center and extreme right parties threaten to draw votes away from the CDU.  To put it simply, the CDU may not be conservative enough anymore.  Everyone seems to be watching France with baited breath, as Marine Le Pen shows no sign of weakening.  In fact, the other players involved appear to be hoping for some screw-up on Le Pen's part.  She does live on the political edge, and she doesn't appear to speak with a delay (so as to think through everything she says beforehand), but let's face it; everyone expects a mistake sooner or later.  Her political party, the National Front (FN), did very well in the last European Union Parliamentary election, and polls show her consistently on top of her two rivals (but by the smallest of margins).  Some things are certain: the Socialists (PS) will not abandon Francois Hollande, who was lucky to squeak out a win against Sarkozy when all the elements were in favor of a PS blowout.  Many expect Sarkozy to emerge as the UPM candidate, completing a remarkable "phoenix-rising-from-the-ashes" comeback, and I agree.  Le Pen and Sarkozy may split the right vote so evenly that Hollande gets a second term.  Regardless, its impossible to deny that the French electorate has moved to the right.

The conservative government of Mariano Rajoy continues to face the tremendously difficult job of rebuilding the Spanish economy.  The fact the his People's Party (PP) has managed to stay in power this long is more a case of the electorate remembering what an unmitigated disaster the last government was.  But Spain is not a lost cause, as the country has been registering very encouraging growth.  But unemployment remains an issue, and with local elections coming at the end of the month, and the national election occurring before the end of the year, its very possible that the Spanish electorate could flip the players once again.  I don't think so.  I believe a number issues, with immigration and crime being near the top, will keep the PP in charge in Madrid.  Portugal also has a right-of-center government, which is trying to tackle an economic situation which is one of the worst in the EU.  Portugal has benefited from low oil prices, low interest rates and the low performance of the Euro, but debt and a struggling banking sector continue to blunt recovery.  Portugal will have national elections in either September or October.  It will be interesting to see if the current government tries to push through any additional reforms before the election, which might result in a negative response by the electorate.

I'm not ambitious enough to tackle the subject of the Belgian government.  Its a solid candidate for a posting all on its own.  The Netherlands is a fascinating country, politically.  The right-of-center "People's Party for Freedom and Democracy" (VVD) won the last election, but the left-of-center "Labour Party" (PvdA) is not far behind.  The recent trend in Holland has been to the right, and there is no reason to believe it will end.  Immigration is a big issue, with many Dutch fearing the Islamization of their society.  The government in Denmark is right-of-center, with the Liberal Party (V) leading a coalition that includes the increasingly popular far-right Danish People's Party.  Denmark is an interesting society, though, as the monarchy, highly limited by the constraints of the constitution, is obliged to perform ceremonial functions and not much else, similar to other European monarchies.  But Queen Margrethe II will not hesitate to make her opinions known; in fact, if she moved to increase her own power I would be surprised if she were not supported by the Danish people.  The monarchy is Holland is just as popular, where former Queen Beatrix continues to be adored by the Dutch.

In Scandinavia, Norway and Finland continue a recent trend towards conservative governments, while the Swedish refuse to break their tradition of left-of-center politics.  The continued growth of the conservative parties in Norway has been surprising, although the immigration issue is huge in both Sweden and Norway.  Many consider Norway to be the wealthiest country in the world, with the highest standard of living (Luxembourg, Lichtenstein and Switzerland might disagree); Norwegians are beginning to show a desire to protect the benefits that they believe they deserve as native Norwegians.  Speaking of Switzerland, the Swiss People's Party has a strong hold on the reigns of government, and just happens to be a right-wing political party (not simply "right-of-center"); this is not surprising as the Swiss have always appeared to associate their famous neutrality with Nationalism. Austria has been electing conservative governments for over a decade, and the trend continues to move to the right.  The issue of immigration has threatened to cashier the current government, in favor of a political party with even more right-wing credentials.  The Austrians don't screw around.

         

Monday, May 4, 2015

Illegal immigration is an international problem, not something unique to North America.

Links: A. Europe faces a flood of sea-bound illegal immigrants.
           B. France's NF calls for an end to allowing migrants entry.

In the last few weeks, calm seas have resulted in thousands of illegal immigrants attempting to cross the Mediterranean Sea, hoping to reach Europe and a brighter future.  I can't blame these folks; I would probably being taking the same action if I were in their shoes.  It's not a difficult issue to understand.  People in north and sub-Saharan Africa, who struggle to feed their families and have no real hope of bettering their lives, will spend whatever meager amount of money they can raise to try and hire a smuggler to find a place on a boat that will sail in the direction of Europe.  One difference between the illegal immigration in this part of the world and the problem on the U.S./Mexico border: persons attempting illegal entry into the southern United States (mostly from Mexico and Central America) usually don't bring their families.  They settle in, find a job, and send for their families later (ideally), who then repeat the process as a group.  Border Patrol officers on the U.S./Mexico border normally encounter adult males, between the ages of sixteen and fifty, who are attempting illegal entry.  Certainly families will attempt to cross together on occasion, but usually the male bread winner will come first.  For most persons attempting the crossing of the Mediterranean, it will be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity; therefore a much higher percentage of families will attempt the crossing together.  This detail increases the number of children and elderly who are at risk, and ultimately, become casualties.

The various Republics that constitute the European Union (EU) in 2015 (and those who cling to the periphery, like the UK and Norway), have elbowed and bruised each other to see who can be the most "progressive" and "liberal".  This  has resulted in a number of positive developments, especially in the area of minority rights.  A serious movement exists to guarantee women equal pay for equal work, and the gay community has been granted certain protections that combat homophobia not only in the workplace but in public environments as well.  The move to appear more progressive has really focused on the social issues of each respective nation.  Certainly Germany, Italy, Austria, France, and others have taken steps to strengthen the so-called "social safety net" of unemployment, disability, paternity leave, gay-partner benefits, and other concerns.  Its almost as if one day the EU decided that it had reached a level of maturity and wealth that obligated its member countries to leave no person without lodging, food, clothing, medicine, and a certain degree of comfort.  This is a very worthy goal, but a bit too utopian for my reality.  Not every EU member state is drowning in wealth.  In fact, Greece, Italy, Portugal and Spain threaten to scuttle the entire EU scheme in debt sometime within the next decade.  Sadly enough, these four countries have each been forced to deal with the ever-increasing issue of seaborne illegal-migrant traffic (in this instance, Europeans use the word "migrant" instead of "immigrant").  Part of the EU's effort to deny no person basic human rights was the decision to not repatriate these sea-borne migrants who come by the hundreds of thousands every year (except in the case of terrorists or murderers....good luck checking everyone).  Once these refugees from Niger, Libya, Burkina Faso, Sudan, Congo, etc., either land or are intercepted at sea (lets not reflect too long on the poor souls who never make it to this point....its too heartbreaking for me to consider), they are distributed to various immigrant processing locations.  Just because a boatload of migrants was intercepted in Italian waters does not guarantee that they will become wards of the Italian state.  They may end up in Austria, or Denmark.  But wherever they end up, one fact is guaranteed: they are the responsibility of the state, i.e. the taxpayers of whatever country we are dealing with.  Some nations, including France and Austria, have been very proactive in creating education and employment training programs for the migrants.  Ideally, the new arrivals will soon become productive, job-holding, tax-paying members of society.  Sadly, it just doesn't happen that way; at least not often enough.

Recently I saw an interview with Marine Le Pen, the leader of France's National Front political party and possibly the front runner for the presidency in 2017.  I can't say that I agree with everything this lady has to say, but I give her credit for being intelligent, clear and to-the-point.  As is highlighted in the second link above, Le Pen points out that the longer the EU states continue the policy of guaranteed legal residency for all persons who manage to float a dinghy in the direction of Europe, then the number of migrants will continue to increase.  Soon the numbers will become unsupportable.  If residency is no longer a guarantee, and persons who attempt an illegal entry by sea are treated in the same manner as those who attempt an illegal entry by land (repatriation), then people will stop risking their lives and their meager savings in this effort.  Look, its normal for decent folks to have sympathy for persons who are trapped in the third world and have little hope for the future.  But there are other avenues to help that do not involve drowning your own country and crippling the future of your children and grandchildren.  Europe is not financially able to support a third of the population of Africa.  In fact, the more I look at Greece, Portugal, Spain, Cyprus, and Italy, the more concerned I become regarding the EU's ability to support itself. 

Saturday, January 24, 2015

Russia Makes A Play For The Arctic

Link: Russia Militarizes The Arctic

In the past few months, I 've seen a number of disturbing reports about Russia's intention to
militarize the Arctic.  The Business Insider and stratfor.com have been right on top of the development, which comes in the wake of Russia's unilateral annexation of the Crimea.  During the Cold War, the Russian military had a tremendous presence north of the Arctic Circle.  The Russians kept a chain of airbases functional and well-defended, to support both bomber and fighter squadrons, should the need arise.  In the past six months, the Russians have re-occupied abandoned military and air bases on Novaya Zemlya Island, and also re-established a military presence on Franz-Josef Land.  Why is Vladimir Putin exhausting resources north of the Equator, when the Ruble is in the tank, inflation is taking off, and the Ukrainian Conflict is nowhere near being settled?  It's simple.  Geologists and other nerdy smart guys that used to always beat me at Trivial Pursuit in High School, have determined that thirty percent of the world's natural gas reserves lie under the Arctic shelf, along with thirteen percent of the world's remaining oil reserves.  It makes complete sense that Putin wants to militarily muscle-out the Denmarks and the Norways, before they find a way to get NATO involved.

We all have been reading the news lately that the Russian economy is in a freefall....yawn.  To be honest, the state of an economy is best represented by the attitude of the people, and the Russian
people seem to be just fine, thank you very much.  They continue to support Tsar Vlad the Shirtless in almost unbelievable numbers.  It has everything to do with a gene that the Russian people developed sometime around 1942, when German panzers were rolling across the Russian Steppe, seemingly hurrying to a date in Moscow.  Something in the collective soul of the Russian people clicked, and everyone became a dedicated nationalist.  That doesn't mean that the Russians can't go after each other with a long knife now and then, but when it comes to diplomacy and issues with foreign countries, the Russians demand a strong, aggressive leader.  Maybe Hitler's betrayal after the
successful treaty between Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany to butcher innocent Poles and carve up Poland in 1939, still has the Russian people feeling nationalistic.  Certainly the Russian government's actions in Ukraine are supported by the majority of the Russian people.  They may grumble a bit about the latest group of Putin political opponents who are thrown in jail without being charged, and they may whine occasionally about the increasing cost of Borsht and Vodka. But in the end, the Russian people will support Putin.  That issue is decided.

The Russian government was obliged to cut spending in every department except the Department of Defense.  Putin managed to wrangle a twenty-percent increase in defense spending, almost the exact amount which was cut from the education budget.  As you can determine for yourself from reviewing the link, Putin has been spending this largesse on beefing up Russia's military resources north of the Arctic Circle.  Already, two-thirds of the Russian Surface Fleet is in the North Sea, and the Russian Navy continues to be the only navy in the world with nuclear-powered Ice Breakers; what a luxury!
Maybe they will trade us one for a few Zamboni?  During the dark days of Soviet militarism and the
Iron Curtain, the Russian military would send its special forces to camps in the Arctic to train and "toughen up".  Still doesn't hold a candle to Camp Pendleton, Ft. Benning, Ft. Bragg., or Ft. Hood.  Putin has created new, modern units of ground forces with the latest equipment, and it's my understanding that these poor bastards are up on Novaya Zemlya right now, trying to find a way to cook tundra for dinner. 

So the Russians have decided to make the issue of ownership of the Arctic natural gas and oil
 reserves a fait accompli.  Considering the amount of natural gas and oil the Russians already own, and their willingness to use it as a diplomatic battering ram in eastern Europe, this is an issue which should be addressed.  Can you hear the crickets coming from the Obama Administration?  When it comes to foreign policy, amateur hour has been in full session for six years.  A quick review of a map will illustrate that Russia does not have undisputed rights to the territory they claim (no big surprise there).  The United States, Canada, and even Denmark have unresolved boundary issues with Russia in the Arctic region.  We aren't really a player, because even if we were in complete possession of the
area, our own politicians wouldn't let us exploit that economic bounty.  The real loser in this picture is Norway.  The Norwegians have made a serious effort to delineate its northern boundary in recent years.  Norway has also spent a surprising amount of money on its military, and even conducted military exercises in Finnmark, the land of the Lapp Folks, reindeer and Santa Claus.  Its also within the toss of an empty Vodka bottle from Russian territory.  If the Norwegians were so inclined, they could declare possession of certain areas that appear to contain a shit load of natural gas. Norway could take their claim to the International Court, or the UN, or this group, or that group, and demand that Russia not infringe upon Norway's territorial integrity.  Russia could probably do without the little piece that belongs to Norway and still end up way ahead of the field, but that is not Putin's style.  Putin is like the prize-fighter who isn't satisfied winning a judges decision.  Putin wants to pummel the other guy until both his eyes are swollen shut and he is called down for the count in the five round.  Putin doesn't like taking prisoners.  What will be very interesting is if Putin allows Norway to keep partial possession of Spitsbergen.  The Russians will not come to an agreement with a member of NATO.  In the end, might will trump manners as it usually does, especially if the issue is resolved before 2016.  Not that the Norwegian people need anymore dough themselves.  Jeez, talk about the rich getting richer.  Norway is like the Oman of the north.  A small population made drunk by a never-ending supply of petro-dollars.  But I like Oman and the Omanis, and I like the Norwegians.  They gave the Germans hell in World War II, and for that I hold them in high esteem.  God help me, I don't like the Russians (save the e-mails...I adore Russian-Americans), which is sad, because I used to be fascinated by all things east of the Vistula.  I just recently devoured a new biography of Rasputin that I stumbled upon.  But Putin has me out of sorts, and for the time being, I can't help but see them as the enemy....again.