Milestones to the Kingdom

27 Jun: Angelic hands at work-Britain and the EU-Where does Britain’s future lie? Don Pearce

Reproduced here with kind permission of and in association with Bro Don Pearce (Rugby UK).

This article first featured in the spring edition of the Bible Magazine 2016

Keep up to date with Bro Don’s Snippets – Email Don at Snippets@MilestonesUK.org  Just put in the subject line ‘Snippets Request’ state if you would prefer word doc or pdf format. ( If not stated, both will be sent as samples so you can decide) It’s that easy!

 

Bible Magazine Spring 2016

Can the arena of interest to Bible students awaiting their Master’s return get any more exciting? At the end of September, we saw Russia moving stealthily into Syria, pouring her advanced weaponry into the bases that she had been quietly enlarging in preparation for this move. When writing our last update, Russia was in full action in Syria, propping up President Assad and conducting bombing raids on the IS forces. Now President Putin has taken the world by surprise by saying he is withdrawing his troops, as the task is now done!

Meanwhile the tidal flow of refugees flooding Europe has grown and grown. Far from abating during the bad weather it has greatly increased. As EU countries place fences on their borders to deter these people, new routes are opened up. The main beneficiaries are the people-smugglers who ferry this mass of humanity who are fleeing the horrors of war.

As Europe struggles to deal with this seeming unstoppable problem, they are having to come to terms with what appears to be unthinkable, Britain choosing to leave the EU and striking an independent path in today’s complex world of trade and politics and defence agreements.

The hand if the IS suicide bombers reaches into Turkey, Brussels, Paris and Bonn. Where next? London? Moscow? Holiday makers are shunning Turkey in favour of Spain

Meanwhile Israel looks on anxiously at the situation in Syria, Iraq and Lebanon. Although number 11 in the rankings of the happiest place to life, way above Britain and America, and just trailing Canada, Australia and New Zealand, the threats from the Islamic State are very real. The alliances which she is making with her Arab neighbours indicate that her heart is still trusting in her own abilities to defend herself, rather than trusting in Israel’s God.

Angelic hands at work

So for Zion’s watchmen there is much to ponder. Behind the scenes, the angels are at work, not only in our lives but in the political world around us. Their work is to bring about the fulfilment of God’s Plan and Purpose. In shaping individuals and in ensuring nations move forward along pathways that God has already planned.

In amazing ways, we experience angelic hands in our lives, causing doors to open, or words to be spoken which, in hindsight, we recognise as being the Hand of God working in our lives. It is very humbling to appreciate that the Great Creator takes such interest in the lives of His creatures. The angels also use many and varied means to move the political and military leaders of the nations to forward God’s Purpose. We have many Biblical examples of wind, rain, hail, locusts, hornets being used under angelic control to alter the pathways planned by the rulers of this world. Those same powers are still at work today. The angels can’t just wave a wand and God’s wishes are carried out! We have a very practical example recorded in Daniel chapter 10 where it took three weeks and additional angelic help to ensure that the King of Persia was moved from his original intentions, in order to go in a different direction, which would move forward God’s Purpose.

Then said he [Gabriel?] unto me, Fear not, Daniel: for from the first day that thou didst set thine heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy God, thy words were heard, and I am come for thy words.

But the prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood me one and twenty days: but, lo, Michael, one of the chief princes, came to help me; and I remained there with the kings of Persia. Dan. 10:12,13.

It could well be the persuading of Cyrus to pronounce that the Jews could return to their land, in fulfilment of God’s Purpose. This would fit the context of verse 14

Now I am come to make thee understand what shall befall thy people in the latter days: for yet the vision is for many days.

It is clear that, what-ever the context was, it was no simple matter, it needed time and help.

Britain and the EU

The big issue in Britain at the moment is Brexit – Britain exiting the EU. The Prime Minister, David Cameron, is minded to persuade the British public to remain in the EU. It is what we know, having been a member for over 40 years. Leaving has been described as ‘a leap in the dark’. In other words, into the unknown. It does take courage to leap, when, because of darkness, you can’t see what lies ahead. Smooth road or precipitous crags? Dangers or calm? There is safety in keeping the status quo. The British, however, in the main, don’t like the institutions of the EU, seeing them as corrupt and not working for the good of its citizens, but to the furtherance of the officials’ positions. Remaining a member would, it is argued, ensure that Britain had her say in this huge economic institution; leave and one would have no power to influence the decision making. And so Mr Cameron, having pledged to put the matter to a vote on Thursday June 23rd, is keen to remain within the EU, having won some limited concessions in relation to opt-outs from various EU regulations.

Where does Britain’s future lie?

Bible students have become increasingly excited at the possibilities of a Brexit. Many of us thought that Britain would never join the European Economic Community, as the fledgling EU was then called; but in 1973, Britain, Ireland and Denmark did join the original six members of the Common Market, boosting its membership and trade potential, as well as world influences. It neatly illustrates why, in spite of our interest in these things from a prophecy-fulfilling viewpoint, it is not for us to cast our votes in such matters. We have to leave all to the Hand of God. We can see in hindsight that this was a necessary step for Britain to take in order to humble her arrogance.

Why did we think that Britain would never join a continental alliance? Scriptures have indicated a latter-day role for the merchants of Tarshish which was in support of Israel and the southern Arab States.

Sheba, and Dedan, and the merchants of Tarshish, with all the young lions thereof, shall say unto thee, Art thou come to take a spoil? hast thou gathered thy company to take a prey? to carry away silver and gold, to take away cattle and goods, to take a great spoil? Eze. 38:13

It hinges on the fact that we strongly believe that Britain fulfils the requirements for the latter-day Tarshish trading power. This is not the place to show the supporting evidence, an earlier Bible Magazine edition Vol xx :y extensively covered these matters. And 40 years ago the evidence was more tenuous as Britain was no close friend of Israel and had withdrawn her troops from the region in the Suez Crisis of 1956. Britain was the sick man of Europe at the time.

Additionally, there are clear references to a latter-day Tyrian/Tarshish power submitting to Zion’s king.

And the daughter of Tyre shall be there with a gift; even the rich among the people shall intreat thy favour. Psa. 45:12

The kings of Tarshish and of the isles shall bring presents: the kings of Sheba and Seba shall offer gifts. Psa. 72:10

Again, Bible students have seen Britain as being this power. Queen Victoria spoke of her desire to cast her crown at the feet of the returned Lord Jesus. But it was not for her to perform. Queen Elisabeth is in a similar mould; this year she is celebrating her 90th birthday. In the forward to a book on her life which is due to be released shortly, she writes of her feeling of duty to God.

“The Servant Queen and the King She Serves”

English royalty rarely speak of their beliefs, but Queen Elizabeth II has written about her religious faith in a foreword to a new book entitled The Servant Queen and the King She Serves.

“I have been—and remain—very grateful to you for your prayers and to God for His steadfast love,” Queen Elizabeth wrote. “I have indeed seen His faithfulness.” CBN News 22-Feb-16

The picture of submission is in sharp contrast to that seen as the future of Europe.

Europe’s contrasting latter-day role

Europe’s latter-day role is in sharp contrast to that of the Tarshish power. Sadly, Europe will resist the coming challenge of Israel’s King. They will not wish to submit their power and authority to a Jewish ruler. Indeed, it is mainly the “Christian” countries of Europe who will rally to finally drive the Jews out of their land as the nations come to fight against Jerusalem, as depicted in so many of the prophets (Eze. 38, Joel 3; Zec. 12-14, Rev 16.) In spite of the humiliating defeat that awaits Gog’s armies on the mountains of Israel, they will not submit. It is the time of punishment for the Roman and Orthodox Churches for their long centuries of persecution against the Jews and against the true believers. The sad Biblical picture is of Europe (the Beast’s territory) becoming a lake of fire. (Rev. 19:19-21) Knowing the widespread teaching about the coming of “Antichrist”, where allegedly he will defeat the Russian armies, establish his kingdom in Jerusalem, build a Temple, etc., etc. which are the very things that we know the Lord Jesus will indeed do, one can see how they will bring upon their own heads the wrath of God as they resist the true claims of Christ, believing that he is the Antichrist!

What we had not appreciated is the time-scale. Here we are, over 40 years on, and it is Europe that is the one who is sick and it is Britain who is prospering. Britain now sees that Israel and the Middle East are key, expanding, markets, whilst the EU market is shrinking. Britain has been humbled by being shackled to Europe. Her Protestant work ethic has had the effect of making her enforce the EU regulations, so that often Britain “gold-plates” the regulations, making them much more onerous, applying them to the letter. The man-in-the-street wonders whether the majority of EU nations actually abide by much of the steady stream of legislation that pours out of Brussels!

The burden of the EU

The UK is second only to Germany as the main contributor to the EU coffers, putting in much more than she gets out. These things were hidden when she joined. She was sold the concept of joining a trade market, in which she could prosper. It was not to be. Recently released papers show that the British leaders played down the obvious politic desires of the founding fathers of the EU. As a letter from journalist and author, Frederick Forsyth, to the editor in the Daily Telegraph 01-Apr-16 pithily stated:

SIR – Anna Soubry, the industry minister (Comment, March 28), argues that the EU is about trade and prosperity, not politics. On the contrary, the EU is entirely political.

The clash beneath the verbiage is between two distinct governmental systems: Britain’s parliamentary democracy and the system of Jean Monnet, the prime visionary and instigator of a wholly unified continent of Europe. His title was President of the Action Committee for the European Superstate. The superstate is not a myth; it is the intent.

Monnet wrote: “Europe’s nations should be guided towards the superstate without their people understanding what is happening. This can be accomplished by successive steps, each disguised as having an economic purpose, but which will eventually and irreversibly lead to federation.”

Trade and prosperity are merely an adjunct; the EU’s true destination is post-democratic government by unelected committee.

Frederick Forsyth

In the years following membership, industrial relations in Britain were dire and her labour costs were high due to low productivity in many businesses. It truly was a rather disastrous time for Britain, climaxing in the withdrawal of the pound from the European Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM) in 1992. It is estimated that the ERM Brexit cost Britain £3.4bn, a not inconsiderable sum in those days.

When the euro was floated in 1999 as an accounting currency (although coins and notes were not introduced until 2002) Britain resisted pressure to sign up. The 1992 ERM disaster played a strong, cautionary role. There were many industrialists who pushed for Britain to sign up to the euro and join in the perceived benefits of a shared currency. If we didn’t, we would be left behind, they warned. To begin with they appeared to be right, but as time went on, Chancellor Gordon Brown’s reluctance to further integrate into Europe proved to be a life-saver for Britain. He became Chancellor in 1994, and in 1997 he set five economic tests which would have to be met before joining the as yet un-named euro. Mr Brown’s father was a minister in the Church of Scotland and had a strong influence on Gordon Brown. This may well have given him a distrust of the EU which was heavily influenced by the religious beliefs of the Roman Catholic founding fathers. Britain’s spirit of adventure and trust in the Bible served her well in carving out an independent role for the country, but this had all but evaporated under the heavy burden of the cost in lives and money of opposing Hitler in WWII. Britain never did meet the five tests and has remained outside the eurozone.

During the boom years, the euro proved to be beneficial to its members, but has shown its weaknesses in times of economic stress. There is little flexibility between countries to adjust to changing circumstances. In the past countries could devalue to improve their competitiveness, but the euro does not allow any individual adjustments. We have witnessed the crippling steps that have been imposed on Greece, Italy and Spain to improve their economic competitiveness. It has involved soaring joblessness, deep cuts in social benefits including pensions and no certainty that it will prove effective.

Few today advocate that Britain should join the euro. Outside the euro, Britain has been able to fix her own interest rates to suit her needs rather the disparate needs of the 19 members of the eurozone who have interest rates imposed upon them by their Central Bank.

Tyre singing as an harlot

Is Britain destined to come under the influence of France and Germany for ever? It is interesting that the EU started off as the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951, in order to prevent Germany from using her coal and steel resources to wage war upon her neighbours. Britain lost her coal industry several years ago and is now poised to lose her steel industry. The demise of the coal industry can be laid at the feet of the EU regulations being pursued to control CO2 emissions. Coal is regarded as a “dirty” fuel, leading to the shutting of the majority of Britain’s coal-fired power stations. Steel production sprang up in areas of coal as it is a high energy user. Is it just at such a time when EU regulations have brought much of Britain’s manufacturing base to its knees, that Britain throws off the shackles?

There is an intriguing passage in Isaiah 23:

And it shall come to pass in that day, that Tyre shall be forgotten seventy years, according to the days of one king: after the end of seventy years shall Tyre sing as an harlot.

Take an harp, go about the city, thou harlot that hast been forgotten; make sweet melody, sing many songs, that thou mayest be remembered.

And it shall come to pass after the end of seventy years, that the LORD will visit Tyre, and she shall turn to her hire, and shall commit fornication with all the kingdoms of the world upon the face of the earth.

And her merchandise and her hire shall be holiness to the LORD: it shall not be treasured nor laid up; for her merchandise shall be for them that dwell before the LORD, to eat sufficiently, and for durable clothing. Isa. 23:15-18

It clearly has a latter-day application. Here we are, nearly 70 years from the founding of the ECSC and just over 70 years from the ending of WWII. Is the latter-day Tarshish power about to resume her role as a trading power? A Brexit would certainly propel her upon such a pathway. Even if the vote was lost, the rest of the EU members have lost their confidence in Britain’s role in the European project. It wouldn’t take too much to see a situation arise that sees Britain sailing off to trade with warmer climes.

Preparing for a Brexit?

It is interesting to see how Britain’s trade has changed over the past 20 years.

Based on the UK’s negative current account balance and negative trade balance with the EU, there is simply no evidence that the UK’s balance of trade has experienced a net benefit from EU membership. Quite to the contrary, the reciprocal nature of the UK’s access to the EU marketplace and the associated regulatory restrictions appears to have benefited foreign producers selling their products into the UK at the expense of indigenous British industry. TheSoundingLine.com 26-Mar-16

When one sees how the US and Canada’s trade has increased with the EU, the UK seems to be getting a poor bargain. (Chart 2.)Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_04_Image_0001Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_05_Image_0002

 

 

When one looks at the UK’s trade with the rest of the world, it shows positive growth whilst that to the EU is steadily falling. (Chart 3.)Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_05_Image_0001

There is little prospect of EU trade growing over the next few years. The core EU members, all of whom are in the eurozone, have recorded much smaller growth over the past 15 years than the non-euro EU members, but even that is considerably smaller than the average growth of non-EU countries. (See Chart 4) The eurozone is still in crisis and there is little good news on the horizon. Greece can still well exit the eurozone and that would shake investors’ confidence in the value of the euro.

Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_06_Image_0001

 

It is clear that Britain hasn’t really prospered inside the EU. It is only in recent years when under the more pro-Commonwealth Conservative government that there has been a growth in Britain’s interest in the wider world. In previous updates we have seen her interest with trading with Israel and going back to her traditional markets of the Commonwealth and the Middle East countries; countries which are expanding.

With the referendum some three months away at the time of writing, the two main Brexit parties, Leave.EU and Vote leave have been in disarray. They do not appear to have really got their acts together. A substantial number of David Cameron’s cabinet members are opposed to their leader’s desire to remain in Europe. With Mr Cameron stating he will not stand again at the next General Election, which needs to be held by 2020 at the latest, there is a feeling that the split in the cabinet is leading to an unofficial leadership contest. Various prominent politicians like Boris Johnson, the ebullient London mayor and Ian Duncan Smith are two such contenders. With the passage of time the gap between the two sides is shrinking and several polls have put Brexit ahead of Staying.

Interestingly, I was told of a large UK company being advised by the European expert called in to address the company leaders as to whether they should be preparing for a Brexit, was that, Yes, they should! Not on economic grounds but because a study of recent referenda showed that they were all affected by sentiment rather than cold facts. In his opinion the sentiment was for a Brexit!

It is clear that the cost of membership is high. The sums that Britain is called upon to pay are mouth-wateringly high. Last year Britain paid £13bn to the EU coffers. This was after the rebate, won by Mrs Thatcher has been applied, reducing the initial demand for £18bn by £5bn. Britain does get moneys from the EU which are around £5bn., leaving the UK “out-of-pocket” to the tune of about £8.5bn! (Chart 5)Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_07_Image_0002

Germany is the biggest net contributor to the EU budget, the UK is the second. (Chart 6) For Germany the money is worth it as she plays a large role in the EU affairs, ensuring that, where possible, she benefits.

 

The migrant crisis.

Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_07_Image_0001

The effect of the migrant crisis

One of those almost unpredictable consequences of the Arab Spring, is that it has caused a lot of people to flee from the destruction of their way of life and to wish to come to Europe. Often people are displaced in time of war, but normally it is to travel to a neighbouring country who is friendly. The main source of immigrants to Europe at the moment are Syrians fleeing the terrible pounding of their homes, originally by President Assad’s forces or the “rebels” trying to oust him and more recently by the Russians. (Chart 7) Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_08_Image_0001The surprising element of this refuge crisis is that they wish to turn their backs on their neighbouring Arab countries and have chosen to attempt to come to Europe. The numbers of those fleeing the many conflict zones have been staggering, with an estimated 1.3 million claims for asylum in the EU alone in 2015. (Chart 8)

Bible Magazine Spring 2016 1.0_Page_09_Image_0001Not all make claims, many seek to live illegally. With the Syrian crisis entering its 5th year, the damage that has been inflicted by Russia has been enormous. Large areas have been bombed in order to beat those in opposition to President Assad into submission. The tide of refugees from Syria has not let up, numbers are increasing.

Public ‘must be told the truth on immigration’

Many find their way to Britain and an interesting article in the Daily Telegraph 31-Mar-16 with the above headline spoke of the concern expressed by the UK Statistics Authority watchdog over the figures published by the Office of National Statistics. The population of the UK is set to soar to 80 million by 2039, (incidentally set to overtake Germany who is currently the largest EU member, but with a falling population.) However, these projections are based on 2 year-old figures for immigration that were far lower than in the past two years. There is also a problem with the actual numbers. The ONS says that 904,000 EU nationals had moved to Britain since June 2010, yet the Department of Works and Pensions issued 2.25 million National Insurance numbers to this category over the same period. A significant difference. Also the ONS showed 617,000 non-EU nationals in the past 12 months compared to the 828,000 NI numbers issued to this group. It seems that Britain is gaining immigrants at a far higher rate than indicated. This has serious consequences on housing, hospitals, maternity facilities, school places, etc.. Many in this country are concerned as to the long-term consequences of this boost in population. It will be an interesting factor as people decide whether Britain should retain her sovereignty again by leaving the EU.

There are many subtle influences. At the moment there are crisis talks over Britain’s steel industry. Cheap Chinese imports have reduced British steel mills to a shadow of their former position. Britain can only follow EU rules. The US has imposed very high tariffs on imported steel in order to protect their own steel plants.

Many would like to see Britain take control of her once proud fishing industry, now reduced to a shadow of its former strength, due to her fishing grounds being opened up to other EU members.

Tabloid says Queen wants UK to leave EU

The majority of UK papers are Eurosceptic. The leading “popular” paper, the Sun 08-Mar-16, had the splash headline: Queen backs Brexit. It is not a done thing to report what the Queen privately thinks about political matters. I feel quite certain that indeed, in private, this is what the Queen thinks. We shall probably never know if this is what the Queen actually thinks. The matter has been referred to the Press Standards Authority, which is likely to give its ruling shortly before the vote, which again will publicise the Queen’s alleged thoughts on Europe. But this euro-sceptic paper has sown the seeds, it will be hard to refute the statement. And so in a subtle way, extra pressure has been put upon the situation in favour of a Brexit. The Queens’s remarks just before the Scottish referendum on whether Scotland should break from Britain has been credited with turning the tide against Scotland breaking up the existing Union.

What would a Brexit involve?

Nobody really knows. There has been little discussion as to how one separates from membership of the EU. It is an unknown pathway. Those who advocate a Brexit point out that the EU needs Britain far more than Britain needs the EU. If barriers to the UK trade were put up in protest to Britain’s actions, then if Britain matched those barriers it would be the EU that loses out. Yes, it is a leap in the dark, but if angelic hands are for it, Britain will surely take it in her stride. It clearly will not be the work of a moment; it will involve a lot of negotiation. Eurosceptics argue that Britain remaining is an equal step in the dark! The EU in a few years may be quite a different beast to what we see now. The eurozone could well collapse, bringing even more misery to those who remain. It is clear that the drive is for ever-closer union, an aspect which is so alien to Britain.

Napoleon’s challengers didn’t fear Brexit and nor should we

Andrew Roberts, a British historian and author of Napoleon the Great recently drew a parallel with the refusal of Britain to agree to work with Napoleon, choosing to take the short-term loses in order to have independence.

Instead, because we refused, Napoleon set up the Continental System, a gigantic protectionist organization that cut Britain out of all European Trade for nearly a decade. It was disastrous for British trade in the short run, and of course there were those in the City of London, larger business corporations and amongst the Radical Whigs in parliament who clamoured for the British Government to capitulate to Napoleon, believing as they did that there was nothing more important than protecting people’s financial security.

… If it turns out that Sir John Major, Michael Heseltine, Peter Mandelson and the other doom-sayers are right in predicting that Britain would be worse of if she left the European Union – and I do not for one moment believe they are – there are still some people in this country who would prefer to be poorer but free, as Britain was when fighting Napoleon, than better off but having their laws ultimately under the control of foreign jurists sitting in Strasbourg. The threats made by the doom-sayers that we will be punished by the European Union if we have the temerity to leave might be cowing our present-day generation, but they would have had absolutely nil purchase on the ordinary Britons of the past, although it is interesting how the people who wanted to surrender to Napoleon’s blandishments in 1806 were precisely the same kind of people who want to surrender to Brussels’ similar blackmail threats 210 years later. To set against Major, Heseltine, Mandelson, Ken Clarke, Roland Rudd et al, therefore, one can set William Pitt, Admiral Nelson, the Duke of Wellington and all the other heroes who didn’t fear being cut out of a European protectionist bloc, because they believed there were even higher duties of government than the (admittedly very important) one of protecting people’s financial security.

We await with interest the result of the forthcoming referendum; content that what-ever happens it will be under the control of God. We watch and wait for its outcome with interest. In so many ways we have recently seen the indications that at last the day of our Master’s coming draws near. We may not be here to see the outcome. The Master could well be back on earth again and calling his followers to him.

We will now briefly look at events in Syria – a Russian withdrawal, or a Russian double bluff?

Putin playing chess again!

Most commentators were startled when Mr Putin announced that he had finished the job in Syria and was withdrawing his forces. What had changed? President Assad was still in a weak position, although he had made some significant territorial gains following the extensive Russian bombing campaigns. IS too, was still a threat.

On March 14, the day of the announcement of its withdrawal, Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov and Defense Minister Sergei Shoigu; during the meeting, he ordered the Defense Ministry to begin withdrawing the main part of Russia’s military group from Syria and asked the Foreign Ministry to step up Russia’s participation in organizing the peace process to resolve the Syria crisis. Putin then specified that Russia’s naval base at Tartus and its strategic Hmeymin airbase will continue operating as before, saying, “They must be protected securely from land, sea and air.” In a phone conversation the same day with Syrian President Bashar Al-Assad, Putin said that Russia will maintain an aviation support center in Syria to monitor all parties’ compliance with the ceasefire. MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis Series Report No.1235 15-Mar-16

So it was clear that he was there to stay, it was to be a limited withdrawal only.

As time passed it was clear the little had changed. Some of the planes withdrawn have been replaced by helicopter gunships. In fact, according to Debka 01-Apr-16, Russia has increased her sorties against the “rebel” forces and with the fall of Palmyra from IS control, was planning to take Raqqa some 170 km to the east. Raqqa is the IS main control centre and if Putin succeeds in his plans would deal a heavy blow to IS.

Putin’s “Sacred Mission” in Syria

This was the headline to a fascinating article on Putin’s strategy written in the BESA Center Perspectives Paper No. 335, 27-Mar-16. Here are a few extracts.

In 1453, the Byzantine Empire was defeated by the Turks. In Russia, the fall of Constantinople was seen as a divine punishment to the Greeks for straying from true Orthodoxy. In 1492, Metropolitan Zosimus called Moscow “the new city of Constantine,” the original capital of Christianity. In the first quarter of the sixteenth century, Philotheus, a monk in the Pskov monastery, wrote a memorandum to Tsar Vasilii III in which he developed this idea further.

The “first Rome” and the “second Rome” (Constantinople), Philotheus claimed, had lapsed into heresy and ceased to be the centers of the Christian world, and should be replaced by Moscow. Because of their great sins, the “two Romes have fallen, a third stands, and a fourth there will not be.” Until the day of final redemption, Philotheus wrote, Moscow would be the spiritual center of the whole Christian world. This idea became known as “Moscow—the Third Rome.”

Russia’s role was to be properly messianic, with Moscow taking upon itself no less than the “special responsibility … [for] the salvation of all humanity.” For centuries, this doctrine remained an integral part of the Russian national mythology and the “fundamental principle of the official ideology” of the Russian state. The dogma justified Russian imperial ambitions, insofar as it legitimized the idea that it was Russia’s destiny to be a “light unto the nations” and to lead the world, which had lost true faith, to its final salvation.

Ever since this dogma crystallized in the sixteenth century, Russians have been persistently taught that their political history is “suffused with sacred significance,” representing “the culminating chapter of a sequence of historical events leading up to and including the apocalypse.” Many experts regarded the “reality of the apocalypse as an historical event . . . [that] can be seen with great frequency through the records of Russian history.”

Putin’s nationalist supporters emphasize the sacred aspirations that supposedly guide Moscow’s policies in faraway lands. The ever-popular stage star Zhanna Bichevskaia, for example, sang in a hit performance in May 2014 that “[we] will recapture Russia’s Sevastopol. The Crimean Peninsula will be Russian again [as well as] our sovereign Bosporus, our Constantinople, and Jerusalem, the shrine of humanity.”

Putin’s sudden statements of a few days ago about partly disengaging from the Syrian conflict caused much commotion in the press and a great deal of speculation as to what the Russians might be up to now. But a partial military disentanglement does not by any means imply that Putin is about to give up on the Middle East.

As former US Naval Intelligence officer J.E. Dyer notes, Russia has already “punched a military air route to Syria through Iran and northern Iraq”—an option it has tried in vain to secure for itself since the end of WWII, and in which it was consistently thwarted by the US. Furthermore, “by not settling Syria through force of arms,” Putin is netting all the numerous advantages of fishing in the muddy waters of the Mediterranean crisis. Like the leaders of Iran, Putin sees the entire region as part of a worldwide “theater of war and influence,” and acts with long-term and visionary goals in mind.

[contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]

Follow us on our dedicated Facebook page
Facebook Page ‘Alethia’ BibleTruthandProphecy
Or our website
BibleTruthandProphecy (Subscribe for updates)

If you would like to subscribe to our YouTube channel, once you have clicked ‘Subscribe’ make sure you click the cog next to the subscribe button and select ‘Send me all notifications for this channel’

Note: Bad language and comments with links to other videos or websites will be removed.

Download our ‘Free’ Bible APP – ‘KeyToThe Bible’ for i-phone or Android
Download here…

Bible Truth and Prophecy, – Welcome to our channel run by the Christadelphians Worldwide to help promote the understanding of God’s Word to those who are seeking the Truth about the Human condition and Gods plan and Purpose with the Earth and Mankind upon it.
We are always keen to receive your feedback, you may leave comments in the comments area below or alternatively email us at Feedback@ChristadelphianVideo.org and we will get back to you with a reply as soon as we can.

For more information on the Christadelphians Thisisyourbible

Read a variety of booklets on-line concerning various key Bible subjects.
Free Bible Booklets

Bible Truth & Prophecy is a remarkable on-line tool for establishing just how far removed from the teachings of the Bible mainstream Christian teaching has become.

End Time Prophecies are interpreted using the Bible, not man made ideas or notions.
Key Biblical subjects such as the Trinity, Devil/Satan worship, Holy Spirit Gifts & much more are all dealt with extensively from the Bible’s viewpoint and not man’s.We will demonstrate how Christian beliefs have become corrupted, and reveal the ‘Truth’ as taught by the 1st Century Apostles.

 

Milestones to the Kingdom

27 Jun: New Out Today -Don Pearce’s Snippets 21.6.16

In association with Bro Don Pearce (Rugby UK)  Keep up to date with Bro Don’s Snippets – Email Don at Snippets@MilestonesUK.org  Just put in the subject line ‘Snippets Request’ state if you would prefer word doc or pdf format. ( If not stated, both will be sent as samples so you can decide) It’s that easy!

Here is the latest Snippets…

U.K.-EU:160619:(21-JUN-16): Brexit Campaigns Resume. 1

CO:160619:(21-JUN-16):Greece: Orthodox Church Council Convenes In Crete, Russia Absent 1

EGE-RU:160619:(21-JUN-16):Germany: Phase Out Sanctions On Russia If Peace Talks Progress, Foreign Minister Says  1

US-MSA:160618:(21-JUN-16):US-Saudi tech, security and economic ties get a reboot 2

UK-EU-EGE:160617:(21-JUN-16):Walesa: Germany should lead ‘new EU’ after possible Brexit 3

UK-EU:160620:(21-JUN-16):Brexit: EU prepares for the morning after 3

IS-TU:160620:(21-JUN-16):Israel, Turkey poised for decisive meeting on normalisation. 5

DISASTER:160620:(21-JUN-16):U.N.: Refugee Numbers Reach Record High. 5

CO-RUK:160615:(21-JUN-16):As Orthodox leaders gather in Crete, Ukraine calls for an independent church. 5

UK-EU:160618:(21-JUN-16):What if?. 6

UK-EU:160619:(21-JUN-16):Tracing the global market thread that could be unravelled by Brexit 7

UK-EU:160620:(21-JUN-16):After Brexit 8

RU-EU:160617:(21-JUN-16):To the first, the spoils: Western investors venture back to Russia. 9

DISASTER:160620:(21-JUN-16):Global migrant tide swells to record 65 million. 10

RU-CV-EU:160621:(21-JUN-16):Russian, Vatican’s diplomats discuss situation in Europe, Ukraine crisis. 11

MSY-MIN-IS:160621:(21-JUN-16):Assad’s survival, Iran’s ‘radical axis’ called primary threat to Israel 11

TIS-MSY:160621:(21-JUN-16):ISIL expands its footprint in southeast Syria with consolidation. 12

TIS-MSY-CO:160621:(21-JUN-16):Christian militias fighting ISIL in Iraq hope for U.S. support 13

EU-RU:160621:(21-JUN-16):EU Diplomats Agree To Extend Sanctions Against Russia. 13

EU-RU:160620:(21-JUN-16):EU to extend Russia sanctions, divided over next steps. 14

 

U.K.-EU:160619:(21-JUN-16): Brexit Campaigns Resume

Stratfor 19-Jun-16

 

The campaign to decide the United Kingdom’s membership of the European Union restarted on June 19 after a three-day hiatus following the killing of lawmaker Jo Cox on June 16, Reuters reported. The campaign to stay in the European Union has urged voters to consider the economic impact that leaving the 28-member bloc would have. The rival ‘Leave’ campaign, meanwhile, has said leaving would actually improve Britain’s economic position. Immigration is one of the public’s chief concerns ahead of the referendum, tapping into fears that EU freedom of movement threatens national security and strains public services.

 

Top of the Document

CO:160619:(21-JUN-16):Greece: Orthodox Church Council Convenes In Crete, Russia Absent

Stratfor 19-Jun-16

 

A gathering of Orthodox Churches called the Holy and Great Council has opened on the Greek island of Crete on June 19, despite the absence of four denominations including Russia’s, BBC reported. The Russians decided to stay away after the Churches of Antioch, Bulgaria and Georgia refused to take part after disputes about the meeting. Disagreements included recent efforts to reconcile with the Vatican. The council will run until June 27. The Russian Church’s decision to stay away potentially highlights geopolitical tensions, as the Russian Orthodox Church has often been a way for the Kremlin to expand its influence. There is a struggle for power between Russia and Turkey’s Ecumenical Patriarch of Constantinople, Bartholomew I, considered the driving force behind the meeting. Moscow also fears that Patriarch Bartholomew will give support to the Ukrainian branch of the Church, as negotiations in the country’s conflict continue.

 

Top of the Document

EGE-RU:160619:(21-JUN-16):Germany: Phase Out Sanctions On Russia If Peace Talks Progress, Foreign Minister Says

Stratfor 19-Jun-16

 

The European Union should gradually phase out sanctions imposed against Russia over the Ukraine crisis if there is substantial progress in the peace process, German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said June 19, Reuters reported. His comments reflect divisions in Germany’s ruling right-left coalition over policy toward Russia. Steinmeier’s Social Democratic Party supports a more conciliatory stance toward Moscow than Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative bloc. Merkel has repeatedly said that sanctions can only be lifted once the peace agreement to end the conflict in Ukraine is fully implemented, not only partially. On June 17, the European Union extended for a year a ban on business dealings with Crimea, which Russia annexed from Ukraine in 2014. In addition, the bloc is expected this week to extend until the end of 2016 its broader economic sanctions on Russia over its role in the crisis in Ukraine. Steinmeier has also criticized NATO’s decision to stage military maneuvers this month in Eastern Europe, warning that such moves could worsen tensions with Russia.

 

Top of the Document

US-MSA:160618:(21-JUN-16):US-Saudi tech, security and economic ties get a reboot

Al Arabah News 18-Jun-16

 

Saudi Deputy Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s significant visit to the United States cannot be understated. This week, he is heading to California for the second leg of his American tour, following a trip to Washington.

His visit to San Francisco seeks to boost links between Silicon Valley and the Kingdom with new high-tech projects and solutions. The aim is to create one of the most advanced technology sectors in Saudi Arabia itself. The Kingdom seeks to be the number one importer of US high technology, in addition to making the best use of American know-how in the high-tech sector to help meet the goals of Vision 2030’s digital economy. It also stimulates other industrial sectors such as industrial equipment, communications and information technology, which in turn aims to create more job opportunities in the Kingdom.

Prince Mohammed US tour is a defining moment not only for American-Saudi relations, but also the deputy heir to the throne’s introduction to Washington DC’s elites. His message is simple: The Kingdom is open for major investments on a strong, robust, bilateral footing. It’s not a reset; it’s a reboot to a new upgrade.

Friday’s meeting between Prince Mohammed and US President Barack Obama was no exception. During the encounter in the White House’s Oval Office, Obama expressed his country’s commitment to continue cooperation with Saudi Arabia and for the two nations to work together to support the security and stability of the Middle East region, and the challenges the region faced. The two also discussed Saudi Arabia’s Vision 2030 economic diversification plan.

Obama had previously described Prince Mohammed as “extremely knowledgeable, very smart” and “wise beyond his years.” This ringing endorsement from a US President, who had been criticized as ineffective in the Middle East, sets a positive tone for the next presidential administration and its management of US-Saudi relationship. On Friday, following the Obama-Prince Mohammed meeting, Saudi Foreign Minister Adel al-Jubeir said as much: “Saudi Arabia will have strong ties with the future US president.”

Jubeir also said Saudi Arabia supports a more aggressive approach against Syrian President Bashar al-Assad’s government, including imposing a no-fly zone and arming rebels with surface-to-air missiles. Finally, the Saudi foreign minister expressed the Kingdom’s determination to handle Iran’s aggressive behavior.

At the Pentagon on Thursday, US Secretary of Defense Carter noted that his meeting with Prince Mohammed, who is also the kingdom’s defense minister, showed a productive and close security relationship between the two countries. Carter noted plans to expand bilateral coordination on special operation forces, as well as security and intelligence cooperation on a variety of issues including Yemen, the fight against ISIS, operations against al-Qaeda and “countering Iran’s belying influence.”

Clearly, US-Saudi financial deals and future contracts are setting a new pathway forward between the two countries. The future King of Saudi Arabia seeks to go beyond the concept of a “reset” to a “reboot” to a new understanding between the two countries based on economic security

Innovation

Prince Mohammed is spending more than 10 days in America. His tour to Washington, Silicon Valley and New York are a roadshow of the Kingdom’s hope for the next generation, their aspirations, and a Saudi desire to interact with the world with innovation and expansion of industries through private partnerships.

Context is important. The visit is occurring roughly one week after the Saudi cabinet was briefed on Saudi Arabia’s National Transformation Plan (NTP), a pivotal metric program to measure progress on the “Vision 2030” reforms announced on April 25. In addition, deals with American company’s GE and Uber before Prince Mohammed’s Washington visit stand out as a harbinger of transactions to come between the two countries.

According to the Saudi Press Agency, the kingdom intends to build the biggest sovereign wealth fund in the world through nationalization of key sectors and offering IPOs (Aramco for instance) and other instruments such as bonds.

Right now, rules in Saudi Arabia regarding green cards and 100 percent ownership in the retail sector shows the Kingdom moving quickly to open up to the world. Dow Chemical received the first ever foreign company business license in the Kingdom.

Clearly, US-Saudi financial deals and future contracts are setting a new pathway forward between the two countries. The future King of Saudi Arabia seeks to go beyond the concept of a “reset” to a “reboot” to a new understanding between the two countries based on economic security.

Youth

Significantly, the Saudis are embracing their youth as part of Vision 2030. As Prince Mohammed landed in Washington D.C., back in Riyadh, King Salman decreed that 3000 male and female students who are studying in the United States to be put immediately on scholarship.

The youth factor here is important: Prince Mohammed’s visit shows the young face of the new Saudi Arabia. Saudi Arabia is effectively creating a healthier environment for creativity for the country’s youth so that Saudi graduates of American universities help to build the Kingdom’s future generations by returning home after completion of their academic studies.

The solution to the Kingdom’s youth bulge is to be put to work based on advances in American technology, innovation, and training plus education. The signing of an agreement between Babson College and Saudi partners to establish the Prince Mohammed Bin Salman College of Administration and Entrepreneurship is a first step.

Overall, the Prince Mohammed’s visit to Washington DC is a rousing success. It appears a new understanding between America and Saudi Arabia has arrived in time to be partners in a number of key areas especially Vision 2030. That’s a real upgrade.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU-EGE:160617:(21-JUN-16):Walesa: Germany should lead ‘new EU’ after possible Brexit

EurActiv.com 17-Jun-16

 

Poland’s freedom icon Lech Walesa believes powerhouse Germany should lead either a deeply reformed, or an entirely rebuilt European Union, in the wake of a possible Brexit.

Walesa’s comments come as a series of opinion polls show a growing lead for the campaign rallying British voters to leave the 28-nation EU in a landmark referendum on 23 June.

“Germany in particular must calculate what would be better for development (of the EU): do we create a completely new organisation… or do we fix the old EU?” Walesa told AFP during an interview in Gdansk, the cradle of Poland’s 1980s anti-communist Solidarity movement.

“It’s up to the Germans to decide because they are the leaders and they must also decide with whom they want to build” the new EU, he added.

The Nobel Peace Prize winner — renowned for negotiating a bloodless end to communism in Poland in 1989 — also insisted that Germany, along with EU partners France and Italy, “should have a contingency scenario prepared to put in place 15 minutes after the EU falls apart.”

“After the current European Union falls apart, a new union must be created, but it must be thought out much better in order to avoid the kind of problems we have now.

“Whoever wants to join it, can join, while those who don’t, can just say ‘no thanks’,” Walesa said.

The 72-year-old veteran Polish statesman believes the crisis gripping the 28-member European Union is rooted in its lack of shared values.

“Europe, this European construction has no foundation.

“We rejected Christianity, we rejected ideologies like communism and now, there’s nothing left. What can we expect from societies when each of them has different foundations?”

Solid foundations?

An ardent globalist, Walesa also believes it is high time for a more federal Europe based on greater political and economic integration.

“Changing mindsets is the most difficult thing. Our mindsets are still strongly anchored in the old divisions between states.

“But the notion of the state as the most important, is something from the past: Germany, Poland, no, that’s finished. Europe is the overarching value.”

The former shipyard electrician, who as the Solidarity union leader was central to changes that saw Poland shed communism in favour of capitalism in 1989, believes that repairing the EU is preferable to rebuilding it from scratch.

“I’m rather more in favour of repairing what we already have. What’s the use of starting all over again?

“But we need to do it (repair the EU) in a more efficient and transparent way. We have to explain things better to people; they need to understand what we’re doing and why it (the EU) exists.

“What we’ve got now is mistrust, suspicions, bureaucracy, dissatisfaction and trickery, because we don’t have any solid foundations!”

Poland and other eastern EU members are particularly keen to see Britain to stay.

Some 800,000 Poles and hundreds of thousands of Czechs, Slovaks and Hungarians have migrated there seeking jobs and a better life since the EU’s eastward expansion in 2004.

In the event of a Brexit, Walesa believes his own country should continue to be firmly anchored in European structures.

“Regarding Poland, either we get involved in this Union straight away, or we’ll be sidelined and after 50 years we’ll join it anyway.”

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160620:(21-JUN-16):Brexit: EU prepares for the morning after

EUObserver 20-Jun-16

 

EU leaders have been saying for weeks that there is no plan B if British voters chose to leave the EU in Thursday’s (23 June) referendum.

But if they wake up Friday morning with the unprecedented reality of a member state quitting the club, they will have to react quickly to contain markets instability and political uncertainty, as well as to prepare the first steps of the divorce process.

EU leaders will take the political decisions to address the situation at a EU summit on 28-29 June. (Photo: Council of the European Union)

“There are two ways to divorce: an orderly one and a messy one,” an EU official said. Although no one in EU circles wants to speak of a divorce, the main institutions believe that the initial reaction could be crucial to avoid the messy type.

The clock will start ticking between 5AM and 7AM British time, when the final results come out. The political decisions at the EU level will then be taken at an EU summit on 28 and 29 June.

But one can expect the following from the European Commission, Council, Parliament and European Central Bank in the next few days.

Central Bank

In case of Brexit, the first institution to be tested would be the European Central Bank (ECB).

Global markets will follow the counting all night and the risk is that European banks could face a shortage of liquidity. Plans on how to cope have been laid down in recent months between the ECB, the Bank of England, eurozone national banks and all concerned banking establishments.

“For each bank that is likely to be impacted, we have a plan,” the head of the ECB’s supervisory body, Daniele Nouy, told MEPs at a hearing last week.

“We challenge these plans. We make sure that they are adequate to the headwinds that might be coming from the market,” she said.

A source with knowledge of the plans told EUobserver that banking authorities think “there is enough liquidity” available. But in case of a problem, central banks would open so-called swap lines: the Bank of England would provide British banks with euros while the ECB would provide eurozone banks with sterling.

Several other central bank governors also pledged to provide additional liquidity if needed, the source said.

“It’s difficult to know how all players [markets and political leaders] will act,” the source added. “We will need to pass on reassuring messages and to coordinate all efforts”.

ECB president Mario Draghi will speak in Sintra, Portugal, at an ECB forum which takes place on 27-29 June.

But if the post-Brexit vote market reaction requires it, he could take to the podium earlier and say he would be ready to “do whatever it takes” – the expression he used at the height of the eurozone debt crisis in 2012.

Commission

On Friday morning, European Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker will host a meeting with Donald Tusk and Martin Schulz, his counterparts from the European Council and Parliament, as well as with Dutch prime minister Mark Rutte, whose country chairs the Council of the EU until 30 June.

The meeting will be the first coordinated effort by institution leaders in Brussels to prepare the next steps – implementation of the agreement on EU reform reached in February between the EU and the UK, or the Brexit process.

Their decisions and comments will set the tone of the following days and weeks.

In the Berlaymont building, the European Commission HQ, seven people will be ready to act whatever the result of the referendum is.

The Task Force for Strategic Issues related to the UK Referendum, which was put in place last year, helped to draw up the agreement on EU reform reached in February between the EU and the UK. It would be in charge of implementing it if the UK remains in the EU.

The commission will not say what Juncker would propose in case of Brexit, nor whether the task force is also preparing to participate in an eventual Brexit process.

But an official who was in close contact with the commission during the EU-UK agreement process told this website he would “be surprised” if the commission really had no plan B.

Parliament

In the highest floors of the EU parliament, Friday will kick off at 8.00AM with an extraordinary conference of political group leaders and Schulz.

A parliament official said the meeting would be to determinate the EP’s position on the referendum result before Schulz goes to the meeting with Juncker, Tusk and Rutte.

Another source told EUobserver that in case of Brexit, the parliament could propose a resolution saying that article 50 of the Lisbon treaty should be seen as having been triggered as soon as British prime minister David Cameron informs other EU leaders about the result of the vote.

Article 50 is the article that organises a country’s exit from the EU. It is applied when the member state which decides to withdraw notifies the European Council of its intention.

With the resolution, the parliament would ask EU leaders not to wait for a formal notification but instead to use the mere notification of the vote’s result to start the process.

This is to avoid letting Cameron – or his successor if he resigns – delay the notification and to try to use the delay to obtain more favourable term in the UK’s future relationship with the EU.

The resolution would be put to the vote in an extraordinary plenary session, probably on 28 June just before the start of the EU summit.

Council

All meetings and declarations from Friday will be part of preparations for the summit, where EU leaders will set the direction for what has to be done.

At their last meeting on Wednesday (15 June), EU states’ ambassadors worked on the other issues on the summit agenda but did not mention Brexit.

”The idea is to have all other issues agreed so leaders can focus on the UK” when they meet, an EU source told EUobserver, referring to migration, economy and external affairs.

The first discussion at a political level between the 28 countries will be on Friday morning in Luxembourg at a Europe ministers’ meeting, known as the general affairs council.

The EU ambassadors will then meet once or more to include the UK in the draft summit conclusions.

But the most important discussions ahead of the summit will be between EU capitals and the leaders’ sherpas or aides.

In case of Brexit, “the main goal will be to avoid cacophony” between the remaining 27 member states, a diplomat told EUobserver, adding that it would be almost impossible to reach an agreement by the summit on how to proceed.

He said that France and Germany had taken the lead in discussions between the six EU founding countries – together with Italy, Belgium, Netherlands and Luxembourg – to present a proposal that other countries could rally round.

Last week, after a meeting with his French counterpart Jean-Marc Ayrault, German foreign minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier said that “whatever the UK decides,” the two countries “will jointly take on the responsibility of ensuring that the European Union continues and can function”.

Sources from other countries and in Brussels said the June summit would not be ripe for a Franco-German initiative.

Real discussion

When leaders meet on Tuesday (28 June), they could have a quick first discussion on the outcome of the referendum, before moving to other issues on the agenda and spending the dinner talking more extensively about the UK, a source said.

If Brexit happens and article 50 is triggered, they could spend the second day of the summit in a group of 27 only, without Cameron.

“The real discussion would be at 27,” the source said. “The question will be: what do we want with the Union now?”.

But there would be no deal on the table to agree on, just a political direction to lay out.That means that a second summit in July, after more discussion and preparatory work on how to proceed with the Brexit process, would be possible, the source said.

“But it’s pure speculation,” he said, using a word journalists have heard from all institutions recently.

“Don’t forget that the UK staying in is still a possibillity,” another EU official said.

 

Top of the Document

IS-TU:160620:(21-JUN-16):Israel, Turkey poised for decisive meeting on normalisation

BICOM (Britain Israel Communication & Research Centre 20-Jun-16

 

Media reports suggest that Israel and Turkey could reach agreement on normalising ties within the coming week, following several rounds of reconciliation negotiations.

It is thought that several sticking points remain, including Turkey’s demand for a relaxation of Israeli restrictions on the Gaza Strip and Israel’s request that Turkey close Hamas’ office in Istanbul. However, an unnamed Israeli official indicated that agreement is close, telling YNet: “We have finalised almost every single aspect of the negotiations, there are only a few details outstanding, but 95 per cent of the agreement is there. It should be a matter of days.”

Meanwhile, Haaretz reports this morning that a decisive, final meeting between the two sides will take place in an unnamed European capital on 26 June. A similar scenario was also reported by Channel One. Turkey’s new Prime Minister Binali Yildirim also addressed the talks with Israel over the weekend and said: “I don’t think there’s a lot of time left till we reach a reconciliation agreement with Israel.”

Over the past several weeks there have been a number of indications of warming bilateral ties. For example,  Dore Gold, director general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, led a delegation at the recent United Nations’ Humanitarian Summit in Istanbul. Meanwhile, for the first time in several years, Turkey sent senior foreign ministry officials to an Independence Day reception at the Israeli Embassy.

In 2010, the previously warm relationship between Israel and Turkey deteriorated and diplomatic relations were ceded after the deaths of ten Turkish citizens who were killed whilst trying to prevent Israeli commandos taking over a Gaza-bound protest ship, the Mavi Marmara. In 2013, Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu paved the way for reconciliation by issuing an apology. It is thought that arrangements were made in 2014 over a compensation deal for the families of those killed aboard the Mavi Marmara. Subsequent talks resumed last year and have been ongoing, which have included a meeting between representatives in London in April.

 

Top of the Document

DISASTER:160620:(21-JUN-16):U.N.: Refugee Numbers Reach Record High

Stratfor 20-Jun-16

 

The U.N. refugee agency said June 20 that the number of people in the world displaced by conflict has reached more than 65 million, the highest it has ever been, BBC reported. That means that roughly one in 113 people throughout the world is either a refugee, an asylum seeker or an internally displaced person. One-third of these people come from Afghanistan, Syria or Somalia, according to the United Nations. Moreover, despite the media’s heavy focus on Europe’s refugee crisis, the vast majority of those displaced by war — around 86 percent — are currently living in low- and middle-income countries such as Turkey and Pakistan.

 

Top of the Document

CO-RUK:160615:(21-JUN-16):As Orthodox leaders gather in Crete, Ukraine calls for an independent church

Economist 15-Jun-16

 

ONLY a few hours ago, Orthodox Christian bishops from many countries were preparing smoothly enough for an historic gathering in Crete which although diminished by some last-minute withdrawals will still be a huge landmark in the history of eastern Christianity. As I explain in this week’s print edition (see article), preparations for the Holy and Great Council, the first of its kind for many centuries, were disturbed by the late pullout of four of the 14 participating churches: those of Bulgaria, Georgia, Antioch (based in Syria) and finally the Patriarchate of Moscow, which is the biggest.

But bishops from such countries as Romania, Serbia, Poland, Greece, Cyprus and Egypt were still converging on the Greek island; and the meeting’s host, Patriarch Bartholomew of Constantinople (pictured), insisted that the Council’s authority would not be diminished by the absentees. He urged the nay-sayers to relent and attend after all. The Council, whose main business will begin after Pentecost celebrations this weekend, is due to issue pronouncements on topics such as marriage, fasting and Orthodoxy’s relations with the wider Christian world.

This morning, however, another political bombshell reached the ears of the Cretan gathering. Parliamentarians in Ukraine formally called on Bartholomew I (who, as Ecumenical Patriarch, is Orthodox Christianity’s first among equals) to recognize and help establish a fully independent Orthodox church in that country. A resolution backed by 245 legislators, comfortably above the required minimum of 226, urged the Istanbul-based Patriarch to facilitate a “unification council” for Orthodox Christians in Ukraine, out of which a single, internationally recognized national church would emerge.

Such a turn of events would be greeted with deep dismay both in the Kremlin and the Patriarchate of Moscow, which is now accepted by most other Orthodox bodies as the legitimate church authority in Ukraine. When communism collapsed, the Patriarchate of Moscow had more active parishes in Ukraine than in Russia. After Ukraine became independent, a breakaway “Kiev Patriarchate” proclaimed itself the new Orthodox authority in the country, and it controls thousands of parishes. But it has won very little international recognition.

According to the Ukrainian parliamentarians, granting the country an independent, recognized church would simply be righting an historical wrong: the fact that in 1686, the metropolis (ecclesiastical authority) of Kiev was transferred from Constantinople to Moscow. In other words, the fact that Russia religiously annexed Ukraine. But Muscovite religious scholars have a very different reading of church history and insist that their own hierarch, Patriarch Kirill, is the legitimate spiritual leader of the eastern Slavs.

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow has already warned Patriarch Bartholomew that any move to detach Ukraine from Muscovite authority would be devastating for the relationship between Orthodox Christianity’s two most important sees, those of Constantinople and Moscow.

Patriarch Bartholomew will certainly not act hastily over a change which could have huge strategic repercussions. But thanks to Moscow’s last-minute withdrawal from the Cretan Council, Patriarch Kirill has lost a bit of leverage over his Istanbul-based counterpart. Patriarch Bartholomew has hitherto walked a delicate line over Ukraine. When he visited that country in 2008, he accepted the legitimacy, for now, of Moscow’s religious authority but also expressed understanding for many Ukrainians’ wish for an independent church. We can all expect to hear more about the ecclesiastical tug-of-war between Moscow, Kiev and Istanbul.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160618:(21-JUN-16):What if?

Economist 18-Jun-16

 

The aftermath of a vote to leave the European Union will depend on unpredictable responses in all sorts of places. It is unlikely to be pretty

BEFORE the campaigning for Britain’s referendum on the European Union hit its stride, some people quaintly imagined that it might settle things once and for all, lancing the boil of an argument that has been festering for the best part of a generation. Fat chance. A victory for Remain would leave Britain divided, the losers embittered and political life coarsened (see article). A victory for Leave, which is what the latest opinion polls predict, would see economic turmoil and political strife as the winning side learned that, for all it might have talked of taking back control, it remained at the mercy of economic forces and the members of the union it had spurned.

David Cameron says that if Britain votes to leave he will immediately invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon treaty, which sets out the rules for negotiating a member state’s departure. That would give the two sides two years to finalise a deal—a timetable that can be extended only with the consent of all concerned. If no agreement were reached Britain would have to fall back on trading with the EU under World Trade Organisation (WTO) rules, which would imply tariffs and no special deal for financial services.

Mr Cameron also says he will stay on as prime minister and represent Britain in those negotiations; some in the Leave camp, such as Michael Gove, the justice secretary, say that they, too, would like him to stay. But it is hard to imagine that the victorious Leavers would really be happy seeing the leader of the Remain campaign negotiating Britain’s new deal with the EU. The odds are that the Tories would be looking for a new leader within days.

All or nothing at all

What sort of deal might that new leader try to get? Some want no deal at all. A group called Economists for Brexit (EFB) suggests simply abolishing all import tariffs. The ensuing rise in trade, it says, would boost GDP by 4%. Yet this prediction relies on small changes in trade costs having implausibly large effects on how much trade goes on, say researchers at the London School of Economics. Besides, the EFB assumptions are politically implausible.

At the other end of the range of options is a deal in which Britain, while leaving the EU in accord with the will of its people, remains part of the EU’s single market. This is the arrangement Norway has, by dint of the European Economic Area; Switzerland, though not a member of the EEA, has something similar. In Norway’s case the deal means accepting the free movement of labour and observing almost all EU regulations while having no say in writing them. And it contributes heavily to the EU budget for this privilege.

The Leave campaign’s strongest cards are the public’s distaste for immigration, its desire for self-determination and its dislike of sending money to Brussels (see article). This suggests that the Norwegian option would be unacceptable to the pro-Leave majority of the Tory rank and file, who will get the final say in the choice of the next party leader. The prospective leader who wins their support is likely to have to promise blocks on the free movement of labour. That probably means getting nothing more than a bespoke free-trade deal for some sectors at best, with WTO rules the fallback option.

Once that leader becomes prime minister, though, he or she will have to deal with the will of Parliament. Fewer than 150 Conservative MPs and only a handful from Labour are openly backing Leave; even if some others are playing a waiting game, that suggests a large majority for Remain among the 650 members of the House of Commons. Those MPs might well prefer a Norwegian option to WTO rules. If push came to shove—and the campaign has shown a marked tendency for pushing and shoving—a Tory leader committed to a right-out-of-the-single-market version of Brexit might not be able to win a vote of confidence. An autumn general election could then follow.

Whether MPs go that far will depend in part on how dire the economic response to a Leave vote turns out to be; the worse things look, the more important it will seem to try and stay in the single market. Estimates of Britain’s economic growth this year have already dropped to 2%, barely above what is expected of the euro-zone (though were Brexit to come about, the euro-zone’s growth would be hit, too). Investors have been selling sterling assets at the fastest rate since the financial crisis of 2007-08; the pound has dropped by 7.5% over the past 12 months. This is part of a broader move into safer assets (see article), but it also reflects Brexit fears.

The National Institute for Social and Economic Research (NIESR), a think-tank, predicts a 2.9% fall in GDP in the short run and worse in the long run, brought about by factors like lower trade and falling foreign direct investment. The knock-on effects would hit productivity and wages; a further fall in sterling would push up prices. Tighter controls on migration would make things worse.

Wonks are poor forecasters, say Brexiteers. Indeed, the Leave camp claims that recent data suggest Brexit might help the economy. In April exports rose to their highest level for three years in nominal terms. A Brexit-induced slump in sterling, the argument goes, would boost the economy further. This is not necessarily true. Foreign orders do not respond instantly to depreciation—which also raises the cost of imported inputs. The hit to confidence and credit from Brexit would hurt exporters more than a weak pound would help. In 2008-09, when sterling slumped, exports barely responded.

On June 14th George Osborne, the chancellor, said that in light of these likely effects a Leave vote would necessitate an emergency budget to raise taxes and cut spending. Mr Osborne’s announcement feels more like an attempt to frighten voters—or perhaps a scorched-earth strategy—than a politically plausible plan. But at some point a deficit swollen by Brexit would have to be dealt with.

The severity of the prompt economic fallout may determine what sort of deal Britain tries to get. But the results of any negotiations will depend on how generous its EU partners would be. The terms of any new trade deal would have to be agreed on unanimously, which could make the complexity of the negotiations overwhelming. Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, says it might easily take seven years. And the three biggest economies, Germany, France and Italy, while all wanting Britain to remain, are not willing to let it leave unscathed.

France is the foremost scold. Although its president, François Hollande, has kept quiet during the referendum campaign, for fear of provoking greater pro-Brexit feeling, he made his views clear at a Franco-British summit in Amiens in March. “I don’t want to scare you,” he said, but a Brexit vote would have “consequences”.

The kindness of soon-to-be strangers

French politicians see playing hardball in the negotiations rather as Voltaire saw the execution of Admiral Byng following his loss of Minorca; the sort of thing that has to be done “pour encourager les autres”. The worse Britain does on its own, the more it will encourage others to stick with the EU. This includes the others at home; France’s populist National Front is promising voters their own referendum. In 2005 the French voted down the draft EU constitution, shocking their political leaders. Today they are second only to Greece in their Euroscepticism. A new Pew poll finds that 61% of French voters have an unfavourable view of the EU; the British figure is just 48%.

The French government is also working on ideas to breathe life into the European project that will focus on defence and security co-operation. There is irritation in Paris that the government has put European initiatives on hold for many months to avoid upsetting British voters. “This can’t go on for ever,” says one minister. France wants to present these ideas to the European Council at the end of June and hopes for Germany’s support. Thomas de Maizière, the German interior minister, sat in on a French cabinet meeting on June 15th; Mrs Merkel was due to watch the Germany-Poland football match with Mr Hollande at the Stade de France the next day.

Like the French, German politicians are cautious in discussing Brexit for fear that foreign warnings could boost the Leave campaign. But the country is keen for Britain to stay. Germany wants the EU to move in a broadly Anglo-Saxon direction (see article). It would like it to concentrate on cutting bureaucracy, returning powers to governments (while limiting state intervention) and co-operating more in foreign policy rather than pushing deeper integration. “In Berlin everyone’s keeping fingers crossed,” says David McAllister, a German member of the European Parliament who has a Scottish father. If Brexit wins, he says, he will cry for days.

Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s finance minister, has warned that Britain cannot expect favourable treatment after an exit vote. “In is in. Out is out,” he says. But many expect Germany, which has a big trade surplus with Britain and would not want to damage its own exporters, to take a softer line than France. “Germany will play the good cop, and France will play the bad cop,” says Yves Bertoncini, director of the Jacques Delors Institute. But this does not mean Germany will truly be on Britain’s side, any more than good cops really side with crooks. The National Front and Frexit frighten Germany, too.

Matteo Renzi, the Italian prime minister, has played down Brexit, saying that it would be a disaster for the British, but not a huge drama for Italy and the EU. But Italy would definitely like Britain to stay. For one thing Mr Renzi often finds himself on the same side as Britain in the council; he would feel more isolated without it. There is also scarcely a middle-class family in Italy’s big cities that does not have a child working or studying in Britain.

And, as in France, there is a fear that Brexit would encourage Euroscepticism at home, both in the xenophobic Northern League and the populist Five Star Movement. Given the sick state of Italy’s economy, which has barely grown since it joined the euro, they might easily be convinced to leave.

Would Mr Renzi’s government join others in taking a tough line? “We are not particularly tough. It is not in our DNA,” says Marta Dassu at the Aspen Institute, who is also a former junior foreign minister. “But I think we would wish to align our positions with those of France and Germany. We would want to stay in the core.”

If Brexit means that this core fears for its continued cohesion, or is unable to persuade all the other members of the EU to accept a new trading arrangement, the chances of Britain getting a good deal from its former partners will be slim indeed.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160619:(21-JUN-16):Tracing the global market thread that could be unravelled by Brexit

Reuters 19-Jun-16

 

If Britons vote to take their country out of the European Union on June 23, no corner of the global financial market complex will emerge unscathed.

The invisible thread that links assets as diverse as gold, bank stocks, the Japanese yen and government bonds would be yanked sharply by Brexit, an event the Bank of England said on Thursday risks “adverse spill-overs to the global economy”.

With global interest rates and bond yields the lowest on record, central banks running low on crisis-fighting tools and the post-2008 economic recovery flagging, that thread could quickly unravel, with serious consequences for all markets.

So why will the will of one country’s people in one referendum have such a profound impact on global markets?

The answer is partly how interconnected global markets are, and partly timing – the world economic cycle is already very long in the tooth and central banks have far fewer options open to them after nearly a decade of extraordinary policy support.

INTEREST RATES, YIELDS

Global interest rates are their lowest for 5,000 years, according to Bank of America, but central banks could still cut them further. That could mean the U.S. Federal Reserve reversing its slow-starting tightening cycle, and European Central Bank and Bank of Japan rates going deeper into negative territory.

Lower rates would also depress bond yields even further, tightening the screw on central and commercial banks.

Over $8 trillion worth of sovereign bonds already carry a negative yield, according to JPMorgan. This means holders of Japanese, German and Swiss debt are paying these governments for the privilege of lending to them, in some cases out to 20 years.

They are willing to accept they will not get all their money back. Even deeper negative yields would increase these losses, raising further doubt that these are truly “safe haven” assets.

But the immediate economic and political uncertainty after a Brexit vote would likely be so great that demand for these bonds would rise anyway, pulling yields even lower. Yield curves, the difference between short- and longer-dated bond borrowing costs, would flatten further.

They are already their flattest for years around the developed world, meaning the premium investors expect for holding longer-dated bonds is shrinking. This is often an ominous signal of low inflation or deflation, and slowing economic growth or possibly recession.

If “core” bond yields would likely fall, yields on lower-rated and riskier bonds would likely rise, widening the spread between the two. This would increase the financing pressure on a wide range of companies around the world and governments in euro zone “periphery” countries like Greece, Italy and Spain.

BANKS – CENTRAL AND COMMERCIAL

Flat yield curves are bad news for banks, who make money from borrowing short-term at low rates and lending longer-term at higher rates. Financial stocks have been hit hard this year as the curve flattening has accelerated.

Euro zone banks are down 30 percent this year, Japanese banks 35 percent, UK banks 20 percent, and U.S. banks 10 percent.

Banks are also being squeezed by negative deposit rates. The ECB, Bank of Japan and Swiss National Bank all charge banks for depositing cash.

It may even become cheaper for banks to put billions of yen, euros or francs of their customers’ cash in vaults — a possibility German lender Commerzbank is examining.

As for central banks, any move deeper into the uncharted world of negative interest rates would be taken reluctantly.

In the case of the ECB, declining yields would further cut the amount of bonds eligible for purchase as part of its quantitative easing stimulus programme. That would make its inflation target of just under 2 percent much harder to achieve, in turn putting its credibility under even greater scrutiny.

FINANCIAL PLUMBING

Just as the 2007-08 financial crisis was caused by unprecedented stress in the banking system, analysts fear Brexit fallout could again threaten to block the global financial system’s plumbing.

Banks have recovered from 2007-08 but stresses are already appearing in more obscure pockets of dollar-based FX and rates markets that are hitting levels more associated with periods of crisis. The premium for dollars over yen in the cross currency basis market is its highest in years.

Spreads between Libor rates and overnight index swap (OIS) rates, broadly a measure of investors’ perception of credit risk in the banking system, are also widening. In normal conditions, Libor/OIS spreads should be virtually zero.

STOCKS

World stocks are in their longest bull run in history that began on 9 March, 2009. But Wall Street’s peak was reached over a year ago, profit growth has slumped, and companies are reluctant to reinvest their record cash piles.

European stocks are down 13 percent this year, Japan down 20 percent, and Wall Street is flat. Would they be able to withstand the political, economic and investment shock a Brexit would likely deliver, especially with risk appetite so fragile?

CURRENCIES

Like 2008, a vote for Brexit would almost certainly increase demand for the pre-eminent currency in global trade, banking and financial market trading: the dollar.

Dollar credit to non-U.S. banks stands at almost $10 trillion, according to the Bank for International Settlements, of which $3.3 trillion is in emerging markets. A stronger dollar will increase the overall debt burden for these companies, and many emerging market countries, who would be forced to draw down their FX reserves to counter the expected capital outflow and downward pressure on their currencies.

Japan’s yen, another safe-haven currency, would probably rise too, perhaps as much as 14 percent, according to Goldman Sachs. This would not be welcome in Tokyo, where policymakers are struggling to kill off deflation once and for all, stoke inflation, reflate the economy and heal the banking system. A higher exchange rate would be damaging on all those fronts.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160620:(21-JUN-16):After Brexit

German Foreign Policy 20-Jun-16

 

Initial outlines of Berlin’s possible reaction to Britain’s EU exit (“Brexit”) are beginning to seep out to the public. According to a report, government circles, who themselves see no reason to fear the turbulences of the financial markets, are hoping that these will persuade a sufficient number of the British to vote in favor of “remaining.” If this does not work, and the British opt for the Brexit, drastic measures should not be excluded. To avoid negative effects on the German economy, some members of the administration are pleading in favor of granting the UK an EU-associate status, similar to that of Norway. However, “a front should be established” to prevent other EU members from following suit and converting to an associate status. The transition to a “core Europe” remains an option and a discussion of it could be initiated at the end of this week. The foreign ministers of the six EU founding countries have planned an exclusive meeting to discuss the consequences of the British referendum.

Forecasts, not Advice

While Berlin continues to discuss adequate reactions to a possible Brexit, representatives of business and finance are seeking a last minute change of course. In Great Britain, advice from abroad is not at all appreciated, and threatens to have the contrary effect. Therefore, it should not be voiced. Hence, interested circles operate using forecasts. Martin Wansleben, Chief Executive of the German Chambers of Industry and Commerce (DIHK), for example, predicts that, in the case of a Brexit, three fifths of the German enterprises, currently active in Britain, would slow down their business. In turn, British companies, now active in Germany, could also encounter more problems.[1] However, British experts point out that Germany profits far more from trade with the UK than vice versa. Threats that common accords for prosperous economic exchange outside the EU would become impossible, should, therefore, not be taken seriously.

Desired Turbulence

Threats are also arriving from the financial sector. Andrea Enria, Chair of the European Banking Authority (EBA), announced that in the case of a Brexit, his institution would leave London. “If the British should decide to leave the EU, we actually would have to move to another European capital.”[2] Berlin is taking note with satisfaction of recent turbulence on financial markets, just prior to the Brexit referendum. “The Brits will get a foretaste of what is in store after Brexit. Perhaps, they will reconsider,” an unnamed member of the German government was quoted saying.[3] However, the German government is not really worried. Central banks in London and Frankfurt have taken all necessary precautions to stabilize the markets if needed. “A bit more panic” on the financial markets prior to the referendum would be welcomed, because it could possibly improve the perspective of a “remain” vote.[4]

Project Fear

However, the effects of these forecasts and threats to attempt to influence the results become dulled with time. The experience in Denmark is a confirmation. (german-foreign-policy.com reported.[5]) Also in Britain, these attempts have been dubbed “project fear” and are being taken seriously to a dwindling degree. Even if this time “project fear” would be effective, the EU establishment’s possibilities for orienting future referendums are continuing to subside.

“Germanophobe Brexit Advocates”

In light of the uncertainties, as Thursday’s referendum approaches, there is a possibility that an EU-level crisis meeting will be held. It has been reported that Chancellor Merkel has “prudently planned no public appearances” for Friday. In case there is a “remain” victory, she – for example, with her participation in the Bundestag – can “demonstrate business as usual.”[6] In any case, a meeting of the foreign ministers of the six EU founding nations has been announced for Friday or Saturday, to make clear that the “European Project” still stands, according to reports. The fact that, at such a possibly decisive historical moment, the meeting will be limited to only six of the 28 EU countries is an indication of plans, which have not yet been officially made public. The reason given for keeping the plans under wraps is that “no one wants to provide additional arguments to Great Britain’s Germanophobe Brexit advocates.”[7]

Isolated Case

There are two aspects to the plan. On the one hand, according to the chancellery, it is not out of the question that, following Britain’s exit, it still could remain in association with the EU – on a basis similar to that of Norway. This continuation of intact business relations with the United Kingdom would, in fact, accommodate Germany’s massive economic interests.[8] However, that other EU countries also opt for a looser association with the EU, must be prevented according to the German Ministry of Foreign Affairs. “We must immediately establish a front under the motto, No Cherry Picking.”[9] Any eventual EU association agreement with Great Britain would strictly be an isolated case.

Core Europe

On the other hand, some in Berlin’s establishment – including Finance Minister, Wolfgang Schäuble – are currently calling for a change of course toward a “core Europe.” Recently former Vice President of the EU Commission, Viviane Reding (Luxembourg) and, Jean Asselborn, Luxembourg’s Foreign Minister, made declarations pointing in this direction. “We need a core Europe, this must be imposed quickly,” Reding declared.[10] Asselborn was a bit more diplomatic in his formulation, saying that although “a core Europe, wherein a number of countries would be excluded, … is not the ideal solution,” nevertheless, “a debate on how we define solidarity among ourselves will in any case have to be held.”[11] That debate could be initiated, when the six foreign ministers of the EU’s founding member countries – Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, The Netherlands and Luxembourg – meet at the end of the week. With these six countries, the EU’s innermost kernel of prosperity would be set. The broader point of orientation would be the Euro zone. However, those countries, that have not adopted the common currency, will be completely left out, and must comply with decisions handed down by the EU’s core.

For more on this theme: The Brexit Summit Show, Project Fear, and No Social Europe.

[Footnotes to articles in German removed]

[5] See Project Fear.

 

Top of the Document

RU-EU:160617:(21-JUN-16):To the first, the spoils: Western investors venture back to Russia

Reuters 17-Jun-16

 

Western investors are jostling with each other for position in Russia in anticipation of the moment when sanctions imposed over the Ukraine crisis are softened and they can do lucrative business again.

Most are not yet coming with money and specific deals – at least, not in the same numbers as before the crisis – so the objective instead is to win favor with the Kremlin by being the first to turn back toward Russia.

“Look how many American investors are here, not to mention the Europeans,” Sergei Chemezov, head of the state conglomerate Rostec, said at Russia’s biggest annual investor show this week, held in St Petersburg.

“They understand that we have an enormous market. And whoever comes here first, they get all the spoils,” said Chemezov, who used to work with President Vladimir Putin in the Soviet foreign intelligence service.

Two years ago, the United States and the European Union imposed sanctions on Moscow over its annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea region and its support for a separatist rebellion in eastern Ukraine.

Western governments say in public that the sanctions will not be eased until an internationally brokered peace deal on eastern Ukraine, the Minsk agreement, is fully implemented.

But many diplomats say in private that deal can never be implemented – not only through Russia’s fault but also because the conflict is intractable. At the same time, European economies are stagnating, leaving businesses anxious to get back into the lucrative Russian market.

Pressure has therefore been building inside Europe, according to officials with EU member states, for governments to move beyond the Ukraine impasse and lift some of the sanctions, perhaps within the next 12 months.

“I think the politicians do listen to business. The politicians have to find their solution,” Rainer Seele, chief executive of Austrian energy company OMV (OMVV.VI), told Reuters.

GUEST OF HONOR

Italy had the coveted status of guest of honor at the forum in St Petersburg, where investors vie to catch Putin’s eye.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi was the only head of an EU government to attend apart from the prime minister of Malta.

Italy also had the most lavish pavilion of any foreign country at the forum, a large hall whose interior was decorated to resemble an Italian palazzo.

Italian Economic Development Minister Carlo Calenda said Rome would like to take on the role of building bridges with Russia on behalf of the rest of Europe, and Renzi echoed the sentiment when he took the stage alongside Putin during the forum. “It’s a logic of bridges, not walls,” he said.

Calenda said the two countries had a pipeline of 340 proposed investments, in areas from leather goods to agriculture, that they would work to realize over the next few months.

Italy did not have the field to itself, however.

“There are a lot of French people here,” said an executive at a major Russian company at the St Petersburg forum. “Probably we can interpret this as a signal.”

Patrick Pouyanne, chief executive of French oil major Total (TOTF.PA), said France had maintained the highest rate of investment in Russia among all Western countries during sanctions.

He said there was political rapprochement in the air, in part because France and Russia had learned to work together over the conflict in Syria.

“The forum is clearly more active this year. I’m meeting more people this year,” he said. “People are adapting.”

“SANCTIONS AREN’T FOREVER”

To be sure, Western investments in Russia are still far from being back to normal.

Several of the biggest Russian companies are subject to targeted sanctions, forcing their Western business partners to put joint projects on hold, while the financial sanctions bar many forms of lending to Russia.

Even in areas not covered by sanctions, fear of a worsening in political tensions and the hostile atmosphere over Ukraine are still keeping many investors away.

A slate of deals were unveiled at the forum, but none on the scale seen at the event in years before the sanctions.

“The mood has improved but the facts aren’t there,” said Vadim Shvetsov, majority owner of Russian automotive company Sollers.

He said for investors to return, it would take higher world prices for oil and gas, Russia’s biggest export, and a change in the Western rhetoric toward Russia.

Still, other people at the forum said Western investors were looking ahead to the future.

“Sanctions aren’t forever,” said Russian Deputy Energy Minister Alexei Texler.

In an interview with Reuters, Pavel Grachev, chief executive of Russia’s largest gold producer Polyus, said investors were coming back partly because Russia was dialing down the tension in political relations with the West.

But there was another reason.

“Given that profitability is being squeezed on Western markets, investors are coming here looking for ideas, for profits, whether it’s in shares or bonds,” Grachev said.

“Not for the first time, greed – in the positive sense of the word – is trumping caution.”

 

Top of the Document

DISASTER:160620:(21-JUN-16):Global migrant tide swells to record 65 million

Yahoo News 20-Jun-16

 

The number of refugees and others fleeing their homes worldwide has hit a new record, spiking to 65.3 million people by the end of 2015, the United Nations said Monday.

Europe’s high-profile migrant crisis, its worst since World War II, is just one part of a growing tide of human misery led by Palestinians, Syrians and Afghans.

Globally, close to one percent of humanity has been forced to flee.

“This is the first time that the threshold of 60 million has been crossed,” the UN refugee agency said.

The figures, released on World Refugee Day, underscore twin pressures fuelling an unprecedented global displacement crisis.

As conflict and persecution force growing numbers of people to flee, anti-migrant political sentiment has strained the willingness to resettle refugees, said UNHCR chief Filippo Grandi.

“Instead of burden-sharing, we see borders closing. Instead of political will, there is political paralysis and humanitarian organisations like mine are left to deal with the consequences and struggling to save lives on limited budgets,” Grandi told reporters in Afghanistan’s capital Kabul.

– Unprecedented risk –

The number of people displaced globally rose by 5.8 million through 2015, according to the UN figures.

Counting Earth’s population at 7.349 billion, the UN said that one out of every 113 people on the planet was now either internally displaced or a refugee.

They now number more than the populations of Britain or France, the agency said, adding that it is “a level of risk for which UNHCR knows no precedent.”

“Every 24 minutes a person is forced to choose exile from his home,” Grandi said in Kabul.

Displacement figures have been rising since the mid-1990s, but the rate of increase has jumped since the outbreak of Syria’s civil war in 2011.

Of the planet’s 65.3 million displaced, 40.8 million remain within their own country, 21.3 million have fled across borders and are now refugees, while the remainder are asylum seekers.

Palestinians are the largest group of refugees at more than five million, including those who fled at the creation of Israel in 1948 and their descendants.

Syria is next on the list, with 4.9 million refugees, followed by Afghanistan (2.7 million) and Somalia (1.1 million).

– Rising conflict, shrinking solutions –

A mixture of worrying factors has led to rising displacement and narrowing space for refugee resettlement.

“Situations that cause large refugee outflows are lasting longer,” the agency said, including more than 30 years of unrest in both Somalia and Afghanistan.

New and intense conflicts as well as dormant crises that have been “reignited” are further fuelling displacement, UNHCR said, pointing to South Sudan, Yemen, Burundi and the Central African Republic, aside from Syria.

Beyond the refugee hotspots in the Middle East and Africa, UNHCR said there were also troubling signs in Central America, where growing numbers of people fleeing gang violence led to a 17-percent rise in those leaving their homes through 2015.

Faced with an increasing need to resettle those facing persecution, the answers are not always obvious.

“The rate at which solutions are being found for refugees and internally displaced people has been on a falling trend since the end of the Cold War,” the UN agency said.

“We simply do not have the option of turning our backs and walking away,” Grandi warned in Kabul, echoing wider calls among humanitarian chiefs for world powers, especially in the West, to be more welcoming of migrants and refugees.

Turkey — which struck a controversial deal with the European Union in March to stem Europe’s migrant crisis — hosted the highest number of refugees through 2015 at 2.5 million, mostly Syrians.

Germany received the highest number of asylum requests (441,900) over the 12-month span, demonstrating the country’s “readiness to receive people who were fleeing to Europe via the Mediterranean.”

 

Top of the Document

RU-CV-EU:160621:(21-JUN-16):Russian, Vatican’s diplomats discuss situation in Europe, Ukraine crisis

Tass 21-Jun-16

 

Chief of Vatican’s diplomacy calls for walking in step with Russia

The situation in Europe and the Middle East, as well the Ukrainian crisis were in focus of talks between Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Alexei Meshkov and Under-Secretary for the Holy See’s Relations with States Antoine Camilleri, the Russian foreign ministry said on Tuesday.

“The talks focused on topical international problems, such as the situation on the European continent, including issues of cooperation within the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) and the Council of Europe, the crisis in Ukraine, and problems of protecting Christians in the world and the situation in the Middle East,” the ministry said.

“The bilateral agenda primarily included development of Russia-Vatican relations in the spheres of culture, education, science and medicine in line with the existing agreements,” the ministry said.

 

Top of the Document

MSY-MIN-IS:160621:(21-JUN-16):Assad’s survival, Iran’s ‘radical axis’ called primary threat to Israel

GeoStrategyDirect we. 21-Jun-16

 

Israel must seek the ouster of Syrian President Bashar Assad and take a stand against “the radical axis led by Iran that runs through Assad-controlled Syria to Hizbullah in Lebanon,” a former Israeli Air Force general said.

That axis “embraces the strategic goal of putting an end to Israel,” and “is the most concrete threat the State of Israel faces today,” Amos Yadlin wrote for The Institute for National Security Studies.

From left, Syrian President Bashar Assad, Iran’s then-President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei at a technology expo near Damascus, Feb. 9, 2011. Reuters

Yadlin, who also served as military attaché to Washington, D.C. and head of the IDF Military Intelligence Directorate, said that “the axis’s current military capabilities, and the additional capabilities it can be expected to acquire, constitute the industrial and scientific potential resources of a regional power.”

Israel should coordinate with others in the Middle East and global superpowers to “prevent this problematic strategic development,” Yadlin wrote.

“Moreover, recent reports confirm suspicions regarding cooperation between the Assad regime and the Islamic State and bolster the assumption that these two extremist parties share a common interest in weakening and eliminating any moderate alternative and helping safeguard the survival of one another.

“Israel, on the other hand, remains virtually alone against the pro-Iranian radical axis and can rely on no one but itself. For this reason, it must make action against strengthening the Russian-supported axis a high priority. The bottom line is that the Islamic Republic of Iran (and its allies) is exponentially more dangerous to Israel than the Islamic State.”

The Jewish state “has a fundamental interest” to ensure that Iran and Hizbullah “will not be the forces that are strengthened within the framework of a new order in the Middle East,” Yadlin wrote.

“Gone are the days in which Israel could impartially observe the developments in Syria from the sidelines.”

Israel has mostly stayed out of the fray in Syria, occasionally striking convoys delivering arms to Hizbullah.

“The time has come for Israel to reassess its position on the civil war that rages across its border,” Yadlin said.

On May 2, Haaretz military analyst Amos Harel wrote: “Syria’s embattled Assad regime used chemical arms against ISIL east of Damascus…The regime apparently decided to use the lethal gas sarin after ISIL fighters attacked two Syrian air force bases considered vital military assets.”

Since that incident, however, Yadlin said “the international community has ignored Bashar Assad’s blatant violation of his 2013 commitment to rid his regime of its chemical weapons and cease any use of them, and as such, his defiance of universal norms and international conventions. In addition, despite the ceasefire, the Assad regime and its allies have resumed their indiscriminate killing in Aleppo, Idlib, and the Damascus region. These developments underlie the conclusion that Israel must adopt a position opposing Bashar Assad and his regime.

“The renewed use of chemical weapons reminds us that the party bearing the most responsibility for the massacre underway in Syria has yet to be punished. It also highlights Israel’s obligation to acknowledge that Assad is a murderer whose actions have led to a chilling human tragedy. Assad is responsible for 90 percent of the deaths during the war, which thus far total approximately 400,000. He is also accountable for the more than two million wounded and the 11 million refugees within Syria and neighboring countries. The outcome is a humanitarian disaster, the likes of which have not been seen since the genocide in Cambodia four decades ago and the genocide in Rwanda 22 years ago. In light of these occurrences, Israel cannot stand idly by.”

While the threat from ISIL “must not be underestimated,” Yadlin said that “contending with this issue should not prevent Israel from assigning a clear strategic preference to the Teheran-Baghdad-Damascus-Beirut challenge.

“After all, under U.S. and Russian leadership, and regardless of the involvement of Israel, the international community has mobilized to contend with the Islamic State phenomenon and has thus far succeeded in halting its advance and reducing the area under its control. Furthermore, although the Islamic State attracts some Sunnis in Syria while Assad remains in power, it is extremely likely that an end to the Assad regime and the evolution of a moderate Sunni alternative will greatly weaken the Islamic State appeal.”

Yadlin said Israel could look into establishing a “covert alliance” with Sunni forces in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf states, Turkey, Jordan, and Egypt.

“The prominent Sunni states in the Middle East and Israel have overlapping interests and seek to advance similar aims: the weakening of Iran and Hezbollah and the ousting of Assad. For this reason, they should be mobilized to promote essential processes aimed at advancing these goals. All this should be implemented in partnership with the United States and perhaps also through quiet understandings with Russia, which, unlike Iran, does not regard Assad as a necessary component of a future Syrian order.

“First, a clear political and legal process should be launched against the crimes committed by the Assad regime that will help hold it accountable for its role in the mass murder and its use of chemical weapons. Israel can help in the disclosure of most of the information regarding the killing perpetrated by Assad and Hezbollah in Syria and the use of chemical weapons.

“Second, a dialogue with the United States must be launched regarding the formulation of a strategy to remove the Assad regime, Iranian forces, Hezbollah, and the Islamic State from Syria

 

.

Top of the Document

TIS-MSY:160621:(21-JUN-16):ISIL expands its footprint in southeast Syria with consolidation

GeoStrategyDirect we. 21-Jun-16

 

The merger of three militias has enabled Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) to expand its presence in southeast Syria, sources say.

The militias, in strategically important Deraa province, which borders Israel and Jordan, were identified as the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade (YMB), Islamic Muthanna Movement (IMM) and Mujahideen Group. The three merged to form the Jaysh Khaled bin Al Walid Army, according to an ISIL announcement on June 17.

Members of the Yarmouk Martyrs Brigade show off tanks and other seized vehicles.  YouTube

The U.S. State Department recently designated the YMB as a terrorist group.

Jihadists who fight for the newly-merged army are mostly locals from Deraa and part of prominent tribes in the province. Members are said to consider the movement as “more extreme” than Nusra Front, Al Qaida’s affiliate in Syria.

Unlike other areas in Syria, the three militias had become loyal to ISIL voluntarily. The merger is seen as the first of its kind and gives ISIL an opening in southeast Syria after suffering several setbacks.

“For the past three years, ISIL had tried to establish a footing in southern Syria, including the mountainous Qalamoun region near the Lebanese border, but was expelled after clashes with Nusra Front and Hizbullah,” analyst Hassan Hassan, a resident fellow at the Tahrir Institute, wrote.

ISIL’s “attempts to co-opt forces near Damascus” also failed, Hassan said.

“Following its failure to grow organically, it opted last year for a pincer strategy to link up its pockets of control between Palmyra and Homs to ones in Damascus’s north east, such as Dumayr. That effort also failed since its territory in the Homs desert was largely cleared by the pro-government forces in April. The group was also expelled from the Palestinian Yarmouk camp after a brief takeover in April last year.

“Nowhere in Syria has ISIL succeeded in growing organically as it has done in Deraa. ISIL will probably seek to alter the way the new force operates. Before they unified, the three forces were in a constant conflict against rebel forces in Deraa but they rarely coordinated.”

 

Top of the Document

TIS-MSY-CO:160621:(21-JUN-16):Christian militias fighting ISIL in Iraq hope for U.S. support

GeoStrategyDirect we. 21-Jun-16

 

Assyrian Christian militiamen, many who speak a dialect of Aramaic, the language spoken by Christ, are looking to the United States for support as they battle for the survival of a civilization that has endured for 1,000 years in Iraq.

When Islamic State of Iraq and Levant (ISIL) spread across northern and western Iraq in the summer of 2014, Assyrian Christians were brutally targeted and thousands of members of the community were displaced from their homes, fleeing to Kurdish-controlled areas.

The militia, known as the Nineveh Plain Protection Units (NPU), is one of three Christian armed groups seeking American support after the U.S. House of Representatives called for direct assistance to be delivered to local security forces in northern Iraq.

American assistance “will give equality to all the ethnic groups here,” said Col. Jawat Habib Abboush, the deputy commander of the NPU. “This is our country, we had a civilization here for a thousand years and we are still citizens of this country. We cannot be marginalized.”

The House’s draft 2017 U.S. defense bill specifies that direct assistance may be provided to “local security forces, including ethnic and religious minority groups, with a national security mission.”

The wording of the bill, which still needs to be approved by the Senate and signed by the president, is vague and gives Washington considerable discretion over who to support and how.

Currently, the U.S. and other Western countries are providing direct military assistance to the Iraqi security forces and the Kurdish peshmerga, but not to groups such as the NPU.

Several militias have a presence in Iraq, including Kurds, Arabs, Assyrians and Yazidis.

Col. Abboush said the NPU formed to protect the community after ISIL’s onslaught and the collapse of the Iraqi army. Abboush said his men are currently be trained by U.S. military personnel.

“We joined to fight terrorism and Daesh, and to liberate our land, to protect our dignity and honor,” said NPU recruit Michael Rai Staef. His hometown, Qaraqosh, is still held by ISIL.

A spokesman for the anti-ISIL coalition couldn’t confirm if the NPU was receiving training from the U.S. military but said they were considering training another Christian group, known as Dwekh Nawsha.

Another Christian militia, the Nineveh Plains Forces (NPF), have received training from private American military trainers and are supported by the Kurdish peshmerga.

The Kurdish regional government and the Iraqi government in Baghdad are locked in a battle for influence over Ninevah province, which analysts say has hardened divisions between the Christian groups.

Hajar Ismail, a spokesman at the Ministry of Peshmerga, said the policy of the Iraqi Kurdish regional government was to encourage Assyrian Christians who want to fight to join the peshmerga, not to form their own armed groups.

 

Top of the Document

EU-RU:160621:(21-JUN-16):EU Diplomats Agree To Extend Sanctions Against Russia

RadioFreeEurope 21-Jun-16

 

EU ambassadors have agreed to extend sanctions against Russia for another six months over Moscow’s actions in Ukraine, despite some calls for a more conciliatory approach from within the bloc.

Ambassadors from the 28 member states of the European Union approved the decision in principle.

The measure will now go to EU ministers for formal approval, possibly on June 24, and EU leaders will have to okay it at a summit in Brussels next week, but diplomats said there was no doubt they would.

The sanctions, which target the energy, financial, and defense sectors of Russia’s economy, were due to expire at the end of July and will now run to January 2017.

They were first imposed in June and July 2014 after Russia’s annexation of Crimea and its support for pro-Moscow separatists in eastern Ukraine.

The EU last week rolled over for another year separate measures regarding an investment ban and other economic sanctions applicable to Crimea.

The EU has also imposed a separate set of visa-ban and asset-freeze measures against individual Russians and Ukrainians for backing the separatist cause in early 2014. These measures run until September.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel had pushed for prolonging the sanctions, with reports suggesting she convinced countries such as Slovakia, Hungary, and Italy to set aside their objections and keep sanctions in place for another six months.

RFE/RL’s correspondent in Brussels says the June 21 decision appears to be a victory for EU states that have taken a harder line on Russia, such as Poland and Lithuania, as well as European Council President Donald Tusk, who sought a decision on the sanctions well ahead of the official July 31 deadline for renewal.

Merkel has guided the bloc toward maintaining sanctions over Russia’s occupation and seizure of Ukraine’s Crimean Peninsula and its support for Russia-backed separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko said on June 21 that there was no alternative to the EU sanctions to pressure Russia to implement the cease-fire agreement it signed up to in Minsk in February 2015.

“Sanctions are the only instrument left,” Poroshenko said ahead of a meeting with French President Francois Hollande. “There is no alternative to that.”

However, there are signs of divisions emerging even within Merkel’s own cabinet.

German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier recently suggested that the EU should gradually phase out sanctions against Russia if there were substantial progress in the peace process.

“Sanctions are not an end in [and of] themselves. They should rather give incentives for a change in behavior,” he told the RedaktionsNetzwerk Deutschland, a network of local newspapers.

French lawmakers, meanwhile, signaled that they are becoming impatient with sanctions when the approved a resolution earlier in June urging that the sanctions be gradually lifted.

But French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault on June 20 repeated his government’s assurances that the sanctions will stay in place for now, saying that Russia and Ukraine are still not complying with their obligations under the Minsk accords.

Ayrault said the EU needed to see “real, concrete, significant progress” toward implementing the Minsk agreements, which are aimed at resolving the conflict in eastern Ukraine between Russia-backed separatists and Ukrainian government forces.

“Whatever sympathy we can have for the Russian people and for Russia, we must be clear,” Ayrault said, “the Minsk agreements must be implemented and respected.”

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, speaking at an economic forum in St. Petersburg last week, said he attended the event to keep the lines of communication open with Moscow, but added that he supported ongoing sanctions.

The visit by Juncker, who was accompanied by Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi, would have been unthinkable a year ago.

Slovakia, one of the biggest skeptics on Russia sanctions, is due to take over the EU presidency in July and will be in that role in January when the issue of another six-month extension of sanctions is revisited.

 

Top of the Document

EU-RU:160620:(21-JUN-16):EU to extend Russia sanctions, divided over next steps

Reuters 20-Jun-16 [Britain takes a hard line, will Thurs vote stop that anti-Russian influence? Don]

 

The European Union was divided on Monday over how to end a stand-off with Moscow over the crisis in Ukraine, as Britain called for governments to maintain their tough stance and Slovakia said the current sanctions policy was untenable.

France reiterated the West’s position that there could be no change to the punitive sanctions on Russia’s defense, energy and financial sectors until Moscow dropped its support for separatist rebels in eastern Ukraine, although Paris wants EU leaders to also seek a rapprochement with the Kremlin.

Incoming EU presidency chair Slovakia said EU governments could not ignore the political pressure in some EU countries for a shift in sanctions policy with Russia, the bloc’s biggest energy supplier.

Slovakia’s Foreign Minister Miroslav Lajcak, whose country will help shape European policy from July to December, said it was necessary to hold talks because there was “a growing demand for a political discussion” about sanctions levied on Russia.

Diplomats said such talk was code for potentially softening the measures implemented by the West in July 2014 after Moscow’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimea in February of that year. Italy, Bulgaria and Greece are keen to see some sanctions lifted.

“I am not calling for abolishing the sanctions. But what I don’t want to see is that we formally maintain the sanctions and behind the sanctions, everyone is signing big deals with Russia, visiting, meeting people who are blacklisted,” Lajcak said.

“This is the reality today, so I think it is fair to discuss,” he told reporters in the margins of the EU foreign ministers’ meeting in Luxembourg.

EU envoys in Brussels are set to extend the sanctions on Russia on Tuesday until the end of the year. The United States and other Western nations have imposed similar sanctions.

The West accuses Russia of directly supporting the rebels, which Moscow denies. Western governments say any relaxation of the sanctions are linked to progress on a peace deal signed in Minsk last year to end the conflict in eastern Ukraine.

The war has killed more than 9,000 people since April 2014 and NATO warned last week the internationally-monitored ceasefire in eastern Ukraine was barely holding..

That view was restated in Berlin on Monday by German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who helped negotiate the Minsk accord, following comments by her foreign minister saying he was in favor of lifting sanctions gradually if the Russian government took some steps linked to Minsk.

Britain’s foreign minister said there could be no middle ground and that the Minsk peace deal, which includes a complete ceasefire in eastern Ukraine, needed to be implemented in full.

“If you want the sanctions relaxed, deliver your commitments at Minsk, not some of them, or moving towards, or talking about, but delivering,” Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said. “The Russians are playing a game, frankly a game of divide and rule, targeting those who are temperamentally inclined to talk about relaxation, pressuring them. It is a big mistake.”

 

Top of the Document

Follow us on our dedicated Facebook page
Facebook Page ‘Alethia’ BibleTruthandProphecy
Or our website
BibleTruthandProphecy (Subscribe for updates)

If you would like to subscribe to our YouTube channel, once you have clicked ‘Subscribe’ make sure you click the cog next to the subscribe button and select ‘Send me all notifications for this channel’

Note: Bad language and comments with links to other videos or websites will be removed.

Download our ‘Free’ Bible APP – ‘KeyToThe Bible’ for i-phone or Android
Download here…

Other Christadelphian Channels we recommend
BibleProphecyHD
ChristadelphianVideo
ChristadelphianHUB
BibleStudiesHD
BibleTruthVideos
BibleProphecyHD
BibleProphecyHub
CPDLIVE
BibleProphecyChannelUpdate

Bible Truth and Prophecy, – Welcome to our channel run by the Christadelphians Worldwide to help promote the understanding of God’s Word to those who are seeking the Truth about the Human condition and Gods plan and Purpose with the Earth and Mankind upon it.
We are always keen to receive your feedback, you may leave comments in the comments area below or alternatively email us at Feedback@ChristadelphianVideo.org and we will get back to you with a reply as soon as we can.

For more information on the Christadelphians
b­logspot
Twitter
Thisisyourbible

Read a variety of booklets on-line concerning various key Bible subjects.
Free Bible Booklets

Bible Truth & Prophecy is a remarkable on-line tool for establishing just how far removed from the teachings of the Bible mainstream Christian teaching has become.

End Time Prophecies are interpreted using the Bible, not man made ideas or notions.
Key Biblical subjects such as the Trinity, Devil/Satan worship, Holy Spirit Gifts & much more are all dealt with extensively from the Bible’s viewpoint and not man’s.We will demonstrate how Christian beliefs have become corrupted, and reveal the ‘Truth’ as taught by the 1st Century Apostles.

 

Origin of Nations Part 2

22 Jun: How did all the races of the world come from two people?

There is really only one race, the HUMAN race! Whatever our beliefs are about the origins of

life, and humanity, we all believe we come from common ancestry, whether that be Adam and

Eve, stone age man, or whatever. We also know that all humans can produce offspring with

each other, whatever their skin colour, etc..

“God, that made the world and all things therein…hath made of one blood all

nations of men to dwell on all the face of the earth” – Acts 17:24-26

Adam begat sons & daughters – Genesis 5:4

Three sons of Noah Japheth (European), Ham (Africa), Shem (Middle East) – Genesis 10:1 

Division – Genesis 10:25

The human race divided along language lines. This division in time – Genesis 11:1 cp 8-11

produced some minor genetic differences in the human race (particularly in the amount of

melanin, which determines skin colour), but the entire race remains HUMAN!

There are no racial differences when it comes to salvation. – Galatians 3:26-28 

 

 

[contact-form][contact-field label=’Name’ type=’name’ required=’1’/][contact-field label=’Email’ type=’email’/][contact-field label=’Comment’ type=’textarea’ required=’1’/][/contact-form]

Q&A ANSWERS

Milestones to the Kingdom

10 Jun: New Out Today -Don Pearce’s Snippets

In association with Bro Don Pearce (Rugby UK)  Keep up to date with Bro Don’s Snippets – Email Don at Snippets@MilestonesUK.org  Just put in the subject line ‘Snippets Request’ state if you would prefer word doc or pdf format. ( If not stated, both will be sent as samples so you can decide) It’s that easy!

Here is the latest Snippets…

UK-EU:160605:(08-JUN-16):Britain asked for more cash as migrant crisis strains EU budget 1

MAR-MSY-RU-TIS:160605:(08-JUN-16):Syria: Loyalist, Russian Warplanes Continue Strikes On Aleppo. 2

THA-IS:160606         Analysis: Hamas under pressure as Israel makes progress on tunnels. 3

IS-MSA:160606:(08-JUN-16):Saudi official says peace with Israel is possible. 3

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu heads to Moscow for Putin meeting. 3

UK-EU:160605:(08-JUN-16):Johnson and Gove have an exciting chance to shift the axis of politics. 4

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Agreement on Pensions Reaffirms Special Nature of Israel-Russia Ties. 5

IS-MPA-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Coincidence? Palestinian FM Says Moscow Trip Unrelated to Netanyahu’s Visit 5

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu heads to Russia as ties with Moscow strengthen. 6

EGR-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Putin’s visit to Greece as omen to Middle East 6

EUO-NATO-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Poland: Large-Scale NATO Exercise Begins. 7

RU-TU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Russia: Putin Says South Stream, TurkStream Not Definitely Cancelled. 7

RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Putin’s New Stealth Jet Is on a Mission: To Prove Russia Can Still Fight 7

TIS:160608:(08-JUN-16):Why the Islamic State Is in Retreat 8

IS-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu, Putin hail strong bilateral ties and cooperation. 9

EU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Enthusiasm for EU in sharp decline throughout Europe, not just UK. 9

IS-UK:160608:(08-JUN-16):Mark Regev reveals UK and Israel working on public celebration of Balfour 10

IS-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Israel’s Netanyahu frequents Russia as U.S. influence in Mideast recedes. 10

RU-RCR:160608:(08-JUN-16):Russia: Construction On Bridge To Crimea Facing Major Funding Issues. 11

IS-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu invites Russia to develop Israel’s gas fields. 11

IS-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Israel Courts Russian Investors. 11

MAR-MSY-RU-IS:160607:(08-JUN-16):Israel’s PM seeks role in Russian-US duo in Syria. 12

EFR-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):New French law would shield Russian assets. 12

RU-NATO-EU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Russia deploys troops westward as standoff with NATO deepens. 13

 

UK-EU:160605:(08-JUN-16):Britain asked for more cash as migrant crisis strains EU budget

Daily Telegraph 05-Jun-16

 

Britain will face demands to pay billions more into the EU budget following a vote to Remain in Europe on June 23 as Brussels looks to set to ask for more cash from national governments to pay for the unfolding migrant crisis.

The European Parliament has passed a resolution demanding greater spending which – if followed through- would tear a hole in David Cameron’s historic cut to the seven-year EU budget, which was capped at £847bn until 2020.

And in moves that could see Britain asked to increase its current net contributions of £10.4bn a year, the EU vice president for budgets issued ominous warnings last week on the sidelines of an European conference that member states should be “making room for new commitments”.

The unguarded remarks by Kristalina Georgieva to the Chinese state news agency Xinhua have raised fresh fears that Mr Cameron will face calls for big budget increases, particulary when the current settlement comes up for its mid-term review this autumn.

“We have to make sure that our budget for next year absorbs all the commitments made so far to deal with the migration crisis, while at the same time making room for new commitments,” said Ms Georgieva.

“We have exhausted to a great extent flexibilities offered within the budget. Member states and the European Parliament need to allow more room for flexibilities.”

Her warning follows complaints from Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the Commission, last year that the budget is “too small” to handle the migration crisis and will require “exceptional financing”.

Europe is facing the worst migrant crisis since the Second World War and has already pledged up to pledged £1.8 billion for 2016-17 in aid to Syria, and €2 billion of a €6 billion aid deal for Turkey, designed to halt migrant flows.

A new European Border and Coast Guard to intercept migrant boats and man checkpoints will cost £945 million over the next four years, including £219 million next year.

And a single EU asylum system will cost £1.4 billion over the same period, covering accommodation centres, transporting refugees to new homes around the bloc and major IT networks.

With the bills piling up – but mindful that UK contributions to the EU are a hot topic in Britain’s EU membership referendum – MEPs’ hearings on drawing up a draft budget for 2017 were postponed until the end of the month.

A vote on the seven-year budget has also been delayed.

Critics say the move was designed to avoid giving ammunition to Brexit campaigners who have made the cost of Britain’s EU membership a key plank of their campaign, arguing the money would be better spent directly on the NHS and UK schools.

David Cameron has a veto over any mid-term spending increases – a stance likely to be backed by other big net contributors to the EU budget like Germany and the Netherlands – but any move to block spending risks antagonising the European Parliament.

In ordinary times that might not matter much to Mr Cameron, but this autumn it is the European Parliament that must past the legislation enacting the “migration brake” and child benefit cuts that Mr Cameron won in his EU renegotiation package brokered with Europe last February.

EU sources insisted that Mrs Georgieva can deliver the 2017 budget without increasing national contributions or breaking the ceilings – but precisely how is still under discussion. Current rules make it hard to shift money between spending columns.

Attempts to use the migrant crisis to ramp up EU budgets will face resistance from critics who say radical cuts are long overdue.

Open Europe, a reformist EU think-tank with close ties to Downing St has calculated that ending merry-go-round of rich countries sending money to the EU, only for it to be returned to their poorer regions in grants, could have saved £84.6bn over the current seven-year spending period.

Another £63.5bn could have been found by cutting agricultural subsidies by 30 per cent. Reviewing the generous conditions of the EU’s 55,000 civil servants and shutting down its quangos could yield £43.9 billion.

“I think the UK wouldn’t mind seeing the EU spending more money on addressing migration  – given we ultimately end up being affected by it if left unresolved – but this should be done by refocussing money from existing resources,” said Pawel Swidlicki, an analyst with Open Europe.

The Parliament’s resolution demands that the seven-year budget ceilings are raised and denounces national leaders for their “duplicitous” behaviour in treating budget contributions like “burden” and “an adjustment variable, subject to macroeconomic conditions.”

But there is plenty of fat to trim. A recent report by the European Court of Auditors – the EU’s spending watchdog – detailed how €13 billion of spending on roads and schools in rural communities has been blighted by waste, mismanagement and potentially inflated costs.

In one of the most egregious cases inspectors found that a £1.8 million project to repair 11 miles of roads and build an after-school club in a remote Romanian commune became a “road to nowhere”, after the Romanian government failed to deliver funds to keep its side of the bargain.

As a result, the trunk road that connected the newly re-tarmacked commune to the rest of civilisation simply never turned up, leaving it a muddy, pot-holed track.

“In theory, it could have been a good example of how different funds complement each other. In practice, the national funding has not arrived yet,” the auditors told the Sunday Telegraph.

“The whole idea is to provide better access for rural populations, provide easier access for when the weather is bad, and for ambulances and other public services to access that area.”

They found that officials in Sicily had cancelled their budget for repairing rural roads once EU funds became available. When one road became unusable for lack of maintenance, they simply built a second one with EU money – something auditors noted was was “clearly inefficient.”

On a project to build infrastructure for the forestry industry in Extremadura, Spain, officials “arbitrarily” awarded €14 million contracts to a state-owned builder on the grounds of “confidentiality” and “urgency”.

In Saxony, Germany – the biggest contributor to the EU budget and often regarded as a model of financial probity – authorities accepted bills that were 50 per cent more expensive than the going rate “without performing further inquiries”.

The European Commission said it has issued new guidance for the 2014-2020 programme of works, but the EU auditors warned that weaknesses over the coordination of funds and performance information were “likely to persist.”

The report was not an isolated case. The Court’s annual report found a “persistently high level of errors” in how EU funds were spent at a national level, resulting in an “adverse opinion on the legality” of the payments.

Spending had become so high that countries were “struggling to absorb it”.  Vitor Caldeira, the Court’s president, declared EU spending needed a “wholly new approach”.

Ivan Kuhn, the vice-chairman of the Slovak Civic Conservative party, blames a torrent of EU money into the country for epic waste – such as the state plumbing academy that paid €251 for plastic u-bends.

“Our motorways are much more expensive than those in Austria, even though the wages and construction costs should be lower,” he claimed.

“When the money comes from taxpayers, the city councillors care how it is used. But if it is EU money, nobody cares, so it doesn’t matter if we pay €1,000 or €5,000 for a computer. As a British citizen I would be very angry,” he adds. “And I am angry as a Slovak.”

Nigel Farage, the Ukip leader who has spearheaded the campaign to leave the EU, said the report showed that the Commission was acting like a “thirsty vampire” and that it would continue to “get stuck into British taxpayers’ necks” unless they voted to leave.

Chris Heaton Harris, a Tory MP who spent ten years on the European Parliament’s budget audit committee, said that Mr Cameron “invested all his political capital in a getting the budget capped, meaning we basically sellotaped the lid shut rather than dealing with what’s inside.

“But given the 28 players, the MEPs and all the vested interests, it probably is unreformable, and so our contribution will balloon.”

 

Top of the Document

MAR-MSY-RU-TIS:160605:(08-JUN-16):Syria: Loyalist, Russian Warplanes Continue Strikes On Aleppo

Stratfor 05-Jun-16

 

Nearly 40 airstrikes by Russian and Syrian government warplanes hit rebel-held areas in and around Syria’s Aleppo city on June 5, residents said, Reuters reported. Syrian raids targeted the main road that leads into rebel-held Aleppo as well, part of a campaign to cut the main rebel route in the area. But rebels also hit government-held parts of the city with mortar attacks. The city, which has been divided for years between rebel- and government-held zones, has borne the brunt of bombardments. Full control of Aleppo would be a huge prize for Syrian President Bashar al Assad. Russia’s military intervention in support of Damascus in September has helped bolster al Assad’s government.

 

Top of the Document

THA-IS:160606  Analysis: Hamas under pressure as Israel makes progress on tunnels

Jerusalem Post 06-Jun-16

 

For the first time since the August 2014 cease-fire came into effect ending Operation Protective Edge, Hamas launched cross-border mortar attacks throughout Wednesday.

Hamas is targeting IDF units engaged in hi-tech tunnel detection work on the border between Israel and northern Gaza. It is escalating the situation due its fear that it is about to lose its trump card.

Hamas has invested much treasure and blood in its cross-border tunnel network, and its military wing is alarmed by what it perceives as one Israeli breakthrough after another in tunnel detection.

Although Hamas is keen on honing its rocket, drone and sea-based attack capabilities, its tunnel construction program remain its crown jewel.

During the two-month conflict in 2014, those tunnels terrorized civilians in southern Israel.

Hamas fighters popped up from seemingly nowhere to attack and kidnap soldiers.

The IDF responded to Wednesday’s stream of mortar shells with pinpoint tank fire at Hamas positions. Yet the cease-fire is now facing its first real challenge, and an escalation could easily occur in the near future. This is also a test of previous claims by defense officials of a zero-tolerance policy to Hamas breaches of the truce.

As noted in previous coverage last month, the discovery in April of a tunnel going from southern Gaza into Israel, and subsequent progress in detection in other areas, means Israel has obtained what it hasn’t had before: a precise ability to know where Hamas’s tunnels snake their way underground.

Hamas knows its rockets have launched their punch due to the ever-growing effectiveness of the Iron Dome air defense batteries, which have grown in both number and ability since 2014.

Since the end of Operation Protective Edge, Israel has invested more than NIS 600 million in tunnel detection technology, and those hi-tech efforts are now bearing fruit.

The defense establishment is not about to stop its work for fear of an escalation. The tunnels violate Israel’s sovereignty, and Hamas stands far more to lose from an escalation than Israel.

The tunnels are supposed to enable Hamas to insert its highly trained and heavily armed Nuhba Force members into Israel in a future war. These terrorist units would then act as death squads, murdering and maiming Israelis, or kidnapping them.

The fact that Gaza’s economy is, once again, on the brink of imploding – due to Hamas’s insistence of using its enclave as a bastion of jihad against Israel, rather than investing in its people’s welfare – is another factor that could hasten another war.

 

Top of the Document

IS-MSA:160606:(08-JUN-16):Saudi official says peace with Israel is possible

Britain Israel Com & Research Center 06-Jun-16

 

A senior Saudi figure has said that regional peace with Israel is possible in a rare interview to Israeli newspaper daily Yediot Ahronot.

Anwar Majed Eshki, a retired Saudi general and ex-adviser to Prince Bandar bin Sultan, is a former Saudi ambassador to the US. He was pictured publicly shaking hands last year with Dore Gold, the director general of Israel’s Foreign Ministry, on the sidelines of an international conference. Eshki holds no official office, but is considered to be close to Saudi Arabia’s King Salman bin Abdulaziz Al Saud.

In the interview, Eshki said “I assure you, from personal knowledge, that there is now a real opportunity for peace.” He further said: “Everyone around wants to reach an agreement. I can tell you that in the era of the former Saudi king, Abdullah… there was no chance of reaching a comprehensive and true peace. Today, in the era of King Salman, it is possible. The circumstances have changed. The prospects and opportunities have improved immeasurably.”

Eshki indicated that in the past, there was no flexibility on the terms of the Saudi-spearheaded Arab Peace Initiative, which proposes a regional peace settlement in return for the establishment of a Palestinian state. Eshki said, “I know that Israel has reservations about the peace plan… Some of them can be solved,” adding, “compared with the Saudi position of the previous king… today we can have meetings and deliberations to consider your requests”. Eshki indicated that these include final borders, West Bank settlement blocs, the status of Jerusalem and the Palestinian claim to a right of return.

Eshki’s comments come after Israel’s Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and incoming Defence Minister Avigdor Lieberman both last week endorsed the possibility of a wider regional peace based on the Arab Peace Initiative. Eshki said that following Netanyahu’s statement last week, “it is possible… to reach agreements satisfactory to all parties”. However, he cautioned that “if peace is not achieved during Netanyahu’s tenure… peace will not be achieved at all”.

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu heads to Moscow for Putin meeting

Britain Israel Com & Research Center 06-Jun-16

 

Israel’s prime minister will travel to Moscow today to discuss strategic issues and mark 25 years of diplomatic relations between the two countries.

Speaking yesterday, PM Benjamin Netanyahu said that ties with Russia are important “for our national security and prevented unnecessary violence along our borders,” in what was likely a reference to ongoing coordination between Israeli and Russian militaries, to ensure that their activities do not conflict near the Syrian border. Russia’s air force continues to support the Assad regime in Syria, while Israel has admitted to undertaking occasional action to prevent the transfer of weapons to terror groups such as Hezbollah and to prevent terror threats on the Golan Heights.

Netanyahu’s office said that he and President Vladimir Putin “will also discuss various regional issues including the global fight against terrorism, the situation in and around Syria and the diplomatic horizon between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as bilateral economic and trade cooperation and the strengthening of cultural and humanitarian ties”. In particular, Russia’s sale of the S-300 advanced anti-missile system to Iran will likely be discussed, as it would significantly improve Iran’s defensive capability against air strikes.

Netanyahu’s visit will be his third to Russia since September 2015. It marks 25 years since Israel and Russia established diplomatic ties following the collapse of the Soviet Union. The Israeli delegation is expected to sign two agreements with Russian counterparts during the visit. Outgoing Immigrant and Absorption Minister Ze’ev Elkin will finalise an agreement on pensions for immigrants to Israel from the former-Soviet Union. Meanwhile, Agriculture Minister Uri Ariel is poised to pen a memorandum of understanding over dairy produce.

Netanyahu is scheduled to visit the museum where an Israeli tank captured during the First Lebanon War in 1982 is housed. Three of the tank crew have been missing ever since the battle of Sultan Yacoub. Putin agreed last month to return the tank to Israel.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160605:(08-JUN-16):Johnson and Gove have an exciting chance to shift the axis of politics

Daily Telegraph 05-Jun-16

 

While we are fixating on the messy referendum debate, we may be missing one of its most tumultuous consequences. What is taking shape before our eyes is nothing less than an accidental realignment of British politics. We now have an alternative government that seems more popular than the sitting one – and it certainly isn’t the official Labour opposition. Boris Johnson and Michael Gove now lead what you might call the independent UK government-in-exile. This was not, I believe, the intention – at least not yet.

This stage was not supposed to be reached until the referendum result either went for Brexit or was such a narrow win for Remain that it undermined the credibility of David Cameron’s leadership, taking George Osborne down with it. But things, as they are inclined to do in politics, got out of hand.

The Remain camp would keep insisting that the Leave people set out a detailed proposal for what a post-EU future might look like – obviously thinking that this was an impossible demand. Thus the failure to provide any practical vision of life after exit could be used to alarm the electorate with the terrifying prospect of endless uncertainty (“leap into the unknown”, “adrift in uncharted waters”, etc, etc). What happened next was quite unexpected.

Leave began coming up with concrete suggestions for policies that an independent Britain might adopt if it was free to make its own decisions, most notably on the problem that is Remain’s nightmare: immigration. What Mr Cameron and his friends were counting on was that the Leave camp would be forced into hopeless contradiction over whether migrants helped the economy more than they depressed wages. Or, better yet, end up depicting themselves as benighted bigots who were opposed to any foreigners entering the country ever.

“Over the next few weeks, I predict, we will see a more and more plausible and detailed picture emerging not just of a post-Brexit future but of what it would be like to be governed by, say, Mr Johnson as prime minister with Mr Gove as his chancellor.”

Since the leaders of the Leave campaign are not, in fact, racist or stupid, this did not go according to plan. In fact, they were able to produce a plausible proposal for a points-based immigration system that would not just control the numbers but would permit the UK to select those particular categories of migrant which were most needed. And what is more, those nurses and information technology whizz-kids and electronics experts could be recruited from anywhere in the world: candidates from the Commonwealth countries would have just as good a chance for admission as EU citizens.

Over the next few weeks, I predict, we will see a more and more plausible and detailed picture emerging not just of a post-Brexit future but of what it would be like to be governed by, say, Mr Johnson as prime minister with Mr Gove as his chancellor. In effect, the Leave team will be providing a manifesto for post-Cameron Conservatism. This will involve reviving the alliance between intellectuals on the Right and the aspirational working class that was a feature of the Thatcher-Keith Joseph brand of Toryism.

But this contest for the heart of the Conservative Party will go back much further historically than the Eighties. I don’t think it is far-fetched to see this as one more chapter in the long struggle between Cavaliers and Roundheads: between the patrician paternalism with which Mr Cameron (who has described himself as a “Macmillan Conservative”) feels comfortable, and the ambitious working and lower middle classes who see free market economics as a way up and out of where they started.

The issue of immigration is central to this. Whether you see migrants as convenient manpower for corporate economic growth or as cheap competition for your job is largely determined by whether you are looking down from the top or up from the bottom.

It is also affected by whether you regard yourself as an individual struggling to make his own way, or as part of a collective vested interest (like the TUC) that uses the weight of its mass numbers to play political power games. This is the most fundamental division in British social life.

The values of the lower middle class – industriousness, financial good sense (sometimes called “thrift”), proud independence and civic responsibility – are the officially recognised virtues of all political parties. These are Gordon Brown’s “hard-working families” and David Cameron’s “people who do the right thing”. But when it comes down to the archetypical white van man – the self-employed tradesman or the skilled employee – who is worried about being priced out of work, the hard-working hero suddenly becomes a despicable oik.

“Exit from the EU would offer a kind of national renewal: a chance to embed those values of self-reliance and resourcefulness into a political culture suited to a modern independent state.”

The immigration argument isn’t about bigotry vs tolerance: it’s about whether a whole category of people who want to make an honest, self‑sufficient living should be disregarded in the interests of larger economic forces that may, or may not, ultimately create “more jobs”, as Mr Cameron keeps saying.

What he does not say is that those jobs will almost certainly not be ones that would be suitable for the tradesmen who were put out of business by incoming migrants. In other words, a swathe of the indigenous workforce is simply being thrown to the wolves for the sake of big corporate developments for whom the endless regulation and legal interference of the EU is a trivial consideration.

And, needless to say, those ambitious, hard-working, self-reliant individuals are not easily fooled. They know perfectly well when they are being disregarded or duped and they have a hereditary distrust of the class that has traditionally regarded them with contempt – of which Mr Cameron, I’m afraid, is the living embodiment and Corbynite Labour’s Islington groupies are just a variant. Labour in its present incarnation is making precisely the same mistake about working-class people as it did in the Eighties, by assuming that they prefer glorious collective defeat to individual success and personal fulfilment.

Paternalism takes many forms. The Left‑wing version is far more pernicious than the aristocratic one. It is quite astounding how little the Cameron-Corbyn axis seems to know about the character of the British people, who are too brave (or obstreperous) to be bullied and too humorous to be taken in by ludicrous threats.

But there is once again a political grouping on the Right that is taking up the cause of real working people. The bond that forms, at rare moments in national life, between a section of the educated middle class and the skilled working class can produce electrifying political reform (as indeed it did in the Eighties), which the great Blob of paternalist snobbery generally attempts to extinguish as rapidly as possible. This time there is an unprecedented opportunity. Exit from the EU would offer a kind of national renewal: a chance to embed those values of self-reliance and resourcefulness into a political culture suited to a modern independent state.

There are some exciting possible answers to the question, what would a post-EU Britain be like? Maybe it could reflect the social virtues that politicians of all parties have been claiming to revere: self-determination and initiative. So the state could become a mirror image of what it attempted to reward and encourage among the people. Perhaps it could restore to its institutions the direct relationship with its population that was once its great constitutional gift to the world.

This may all sound rather grandiose but, as it happens, the Leave campaign – this government in exile – is led by a pair of the most intelligent men in British public life. Mr Johnson and Mr Gove are possessed of the intellect and (sorry) the arrogance to take on this task, to articulate its goals, and just possibly to shift the axis of politics for a generation.

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Agreement on Pensions Reaffirms Special Nature of Israel-Russia Ties

Sputnik 06-Jun-16

 

The agreement to provide Russian pensions to residents of Israel who previously lived and worked in Russia and the USSR is confirming a special nature of relations between the two countries, the speaker of the upper house of the Russian parliament said Monday.

Earlier in the day, Elkin told Sputnik that the proposed Russian-Israeli agreement on providing Israelis formerly possessing Russian citizenship with Russian state pensions would double the number of Russian pension recipients to 60,000.

“As you know, the agreement [on pensions] is reached. We have left nothing unattended. I think this is a very important agreement between Russia and Israel, which restores social justice and reaffirms the special nature of Russian-Israeli relations,” Valentina Matvienko said at a meeting with Jerusalem Affairs and Heritage Minister Zeev Elkin.

The deal is set to be signed during Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Russia dedicated to the 25th anniversary of the reestablishment of diplomatic relations between the countries. The prime minister is visiting Russia between Monday and Wednesday.

The agreement makes provisions for those who worked in the Russian Federation, or its predecessor, the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic, to receive Russian state pensions regardless of whether they have retained their citizenship.

Russian Jews migrated to Israel from the Soviet Union in large numbers throughout the 1970s when Soviet authorities lifted the ban on Jewish emigration. The next wave of Jewish emigration took place after 1989. Currently, Israel’s Russian Jewish population amounts to around 1,000,000, according to Israeli government statistics.

 

Top of the Document

IS-MPA-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Coincidence? Palestinian FM Says Moscow Trip Unrelated to Netanyahu’s Visit

Sputnik 06-Jun-16

 

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu will “coincidentally” visit Moscow at the same time.

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki told Sputnik that his visit to Moscow is unrelated to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to the Russian capital around the same time.

“We discussed several possible dates for the visit and agreed on this one, which coincidentally coincides with the Israeli prime minister’s stay in Moscow. This shows that Russia can have good relations with Palestine and maintain the same relations with Israel. Our presence in one place at one time means nothing more. Our task is to discuss relations with Russia, not with Israel,” al-Maliki told Sputnik.

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu heads to Russia as ties with Moscow strengthen

Arutz Sheva 06-Jun-16

 

Israeli PM heads to Kremlin for fourth meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin; extended trip to last for 2 and a half days.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu headed to Moscow this morning, for his third visit to the Kremlin in nine months, as Israel-Russia ties continues to burgeon.

The meeting is the fourth one between Netanyahu and Russia President Vladimir Putin during the same period, after the pair also met at the sidelines of the recent UN climate change conference in Paris. Israeli President Reuven Rivlin has also met with Putin during that time, even cancelling a trip to Australia to visit the Russian leader at the Kremlin.

In an illustration of the growing alliance between their two countries, this time Netanyahu is scheduled to stay in Russia for an extended trip of two and a half days, meeting other leading Russian officials as well as the Russian President.

The official pretext for this visit is to mark 25 years of official diplomatic relations between Israel and Russia. Until then, Israel’s relationship with what was then the Soviet Union had been hostile one, with Moscow backing Israel’s Arab enemies and declaring itself opposed to Zionism.

Today, however, things are very different. Official explanations aside, the two leaders will be engaging on a range of issues of mutual interest and potential cooperation, most notably the ongoing bloody civil war in Syria.

Russia, which supports Syrian dictator Bashar al-Assad, has been heavily engaged in Syria on the side of the regime. While Israel considers the Assad regime – a close ally of Iran – an enemy, and is still technically at war with it, Jerusalem and Moscow have seen their interests in Syria converge as of late.

Last year, Netanyahu and Putin reached a landmark agreement to coordinate all Israeli and Russian forces in and over the skies of Israel’s northern neighbor.

Israel, concerned over the growing Iranian presence in Syria, has operated extensively to thwart the transfers of sophisticated weaponry and radar equipment to Hezbollah, which is also fighting on behalf of the Syrian regime. The Israeli air force has also assassinated several leading Hezbollah terrorists based in Syria, who were plotting attacks against Israeli targets.

While Russia is working to secure its own strategic interests in Syria – most crucially by preserving its naval and other military bases in western Syria – the Kremlin has made it clear it has no interest in facilitating attacks against Israel, and has allowed Israeli aircraft free movement over the skies of Syria. In return, among other things, Israel has committed to alerting Russia of impending airstrikes to ensure no Russian casualties, and has allowed Russian aircraft to cross into Israeli airspace when operationally necessary for its operations in southern Syria.

In a symbolic illustration of the growing alliance, last week Putin signed an executive order to hand over an Israeli tank seized by pro-Soviet Arab forces in Syria during the First Lebanon War.

But while previous – far more speedy – visits by Netanyahu have focused purely on the Syrian crisis, this extended trip is expected to also deal with a range of other issues, according to sources close to the PM. Among other things, the pair will discuss the battle against global Islamic terrorism, as well as the diplomatic process with the Palestinian Authority.

Both topics come at a particularly important time. Russia – which is in Syria ostensibly to fight jihadist terrorists – is also a backer of Iran, the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, and Israeli leaders hope they can persuade the Russians to use their leverage with Iran to curb Tehran’s increasingly aggressive designs in the region.

On the diplomatic front, Netanyahu will look to Russia as a way to offset a hostile White House’s recent veiled threats to not use its veto in the Security Council, as well as increased pressure from Europe to impose a two-state solution over the heads of the Israeli government.

The growing Israeli-Russian alliance also illustrates Moscow’s rising influence in the Middle East, as US President Barack Obama has pulled back America’s presence and influence in the region considerably.

 

Top of the Document

EGR-RU:160606:(08-JUN-16):Putin’s visit to Greece as omen to Middle East

Pravda 06-Jun-16 (Russian press is under state control. Don)

 

The countries of the Middle East paid great interest to the recent visit of Russian President Vladimir Putin to Greece. According to the expert community of the region, Vladimir Putin made it clear that Syria and Greece were under Russia’s protection, and the enemy would not pass. NATO and the US heard the Russian message.

Message to NATO

Covering Putin’s recent visit to Greece, Arab media saw his negotiations with the president and prime minister of Greece as a message to the West and NATO. During the talks, the Russian president said that the refugee crisis in Europe could be resolved only after the establishment of peace in Syria. To achieve peace in Syria, one needs to destroy terrorism in the country first. It goes about a simple mechanism.

Based on the principle of rights of the Syrian people to self-determination, without external interference in internal affairs of the country, all those who agree to take part in elections shall obtain all necessary guarantees (both in the field of security and politics) and shall not be declared terrorists. The people who refuse to participate in free democratic elections and prefer to continue armed struggle for political purposes, shall be declared terrorists.

This is a simple test to terrorism, because terrorism is an attempt to achieve political goals by violence. The above mechanism appears to be a very correct approach, especially in a situation when there is interregnum in the USA, and when Europe has finally realized the fruit of the adventurist policy of Turkish President Erdogan.

Migration crisis

It was as a result of NATO’s aggression in Iraq, Libya and failed attempts of aggression in Syria, when Europe faced an acute refugee crisis. Benefits of immigration (professional labor force ready to work for small salaries, as well as the solution of Europe’s demographic problems) do not outbalance resulting social problems and are accompanied with infiltration of terrorists.

This applies to refugees from both the East and from the South, for whom the NATO-bombed Libya  has become a major trans-shipment point.

Russian President Putin said that he could understand the complicated position of Greek Prime Minister Tsipras, because Greece is a NATO member. Today, Greece acts as a dissident not only at the EU but also at NATO. Like all other Turkey’s neighbors, Greece suffers from the refugee crisis, as well as from the policy of Turkish President Erdogan, who switched from “zero problems with neighbors” policy to aggressive policies in the relations with all of its neighbors, including Greece and Russia.

US leaves the Middle East

America has been losing interest in the Middle East lately, concentrating its foreign policy efforts in the Far East and the Pacific region. The USA tends to destroy the Middle East before stabilizing it again to give the initiative to other forces, including to those that try to establish law and order in Syria.

Vladimir Putin said that the history of relations between Russia and Greece counts hundreds of years. Greek PM Tsipras challenged the European bureaucracy by inviting Putin. The Middle East saw Putin’s visit as a breakthrough on the way to the peaceful settlement of the war in Syria, when all the forces that agree to participate in the elections receive all necessary guarantees and lay down their arms to fight for their political agenda with the help of elections, rather than weapons.

 

Top of the Document

EUO-NATO-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Poland: Large-Scale NATO Exercise Begins

Stratfor 07-Jun-16

 

A NATO exercise that includes 31,000 soldiers from 18 NATO members and five partner countries began in Poland on June 7, Radio Poland reported. The exercise is the largest military exercise held in Poland since 1989 and will run until June 17. It also comes ahead of a two-day NATO summit in Warsaw set to begin July 8. According to reports, the exercise will focus on coordination between the coalition and the military leadership of individual member states in the case of hybrid warfare.

 

Top of the Document

RU-TU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Russia: Putin Says South Stream, TurkStream Not Definitely Cancelled

Stratfor 07-Jun-16

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin said on June 7 that Moscow has not definitely canceled the South Stream or TurkStream natural gas export pipeline projects, Reuters reported. Russian officials froze discussions over TurkStream, a project that would ramp up Russian natural gas exports to Southern Europe through Turkey, after Turkey shot down a Russian fighter jet near the Syria-Turkey border in November 2015. South Stream was scrapped after a dispute arose between the European Union and Moscow over issues related to competition, Russia’s annexation of Crimea and the Western economic sanctions against Russia that followed. Putin said Russia wanted a clear position from the European Union on both projects.

 

Top of the Document

RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Putin’s New Stealth Jet Is on a Mission: To Prove Russia Can Still Fight

The Daily Beast 07-Jun-16

 

Not that long ago, Russia’s air force was all but wrecked. Now the Kremlin’s most advanced warplane is soaring over the seized territory of Crimea.

Russia’s new stealth fighter made an eyebrow-raising surprise appearance on June 5—soaring over the Crimean Peninsula, which Moscow ripped from Ukraine in early 2014.

The T-50—Russia’s answer to the U.S. Air Force’s F-22—is far from war-ready. Indeed, the twin-engine, radar-evading warplane is suffering such serious design, quality-control, and financing problems that it might never enter frontline service in large numbers.

But practical realities may very well be beside the point. The T-50’s flights over territory that once belonged to Russia’s bitter rival Ukraine sends an apparently powerful message, albeit one that doesn’t necessarily hold up to close scrutiny.

After flying air cover for the annexation of Crimea in 2014, supporting Russia’s ground war in eastern Ukraine through 2015, and undertaking an intensive air campaign in defense of Syrian president Bashar al-Assad in 2016, the Russian air force could be near the point of exhaustion.

But a big, powerful, high-tech stealth fighter, roaring impressively over captured enemy terrain, is a statement to the contrary. The implication of the T-50’s maneuvers over Crimea is that Russia—in particular, its struggling air force—is still strong.

At least once a year since 2013, the Russian military has hosted an international aerial war game it calls “Aviadarts.” Loosely modeled on the U.S. Air Force’s hyper-realistic Red Flag air exercise, Aviadarts is open to all those countries that, for obvious reasons, wouldn’t be welcome at Red Flag.

China’s a regular participant. Belarus and Kazakhstan have also sent planes and crews. As many as 50 warplanes converge on some air base for several days of simulated bombing runs and mock air combat. And the kicker—unlike most Russian military exercises, Aviadarts takes place more or less in public. Portions of the war game are even open to civilian spectators.

The T-50 that appeared over Crimea on June 5 was taking part in the 2016 Aviadarts—a first for the type. And the pro-Russian local public was there to celebrate the occasion. “Russian military planes and helicopters competed in a competition testing their flying prowess and marksmanship, while stunning crowds of observers,” state-owned broadcaster RT reported.

The publicity is no accident. Arguably, it’s the main point.

The Russian air force all but collapsed owing to a lack of funding in the chaotic yeas following the Soviet Union’s 1991 collapse. It wasn’t until President Vladimir Putin’s second term starting in 2004 that the air force finally began to receive the money it needed to repair old jets, buy new planes, and restore training for frontline pilots.

Aviadarts was an opportunity for Moscow to show the world that its air arm was, once again, a force to be reckoned with. “Russian media has made much of this fighter-pilot competition in a bid to show off an air force that is now, finally, dragging itself out of the doldrums,” Thomas Newdick, author of Modern Military Aircraft, wrote about the 2014 edition of Aviadarts.

But the cash injection was short-lived—and could only do so much good, anyway, considering the deplorable condition of the Russian aerospace industry. The air force managed to repair hundreds of Soviet-era aircraft and buy additional hundreds of new planes. But the “new” planes are, in fact, almost all upgraded versions of Soviet-vintage jets. While Russian industry has devised new radars and missiles, the T-50 is one of Russia’s few truly new airframe designs—and it’s a mess.

Specially shaped to avoid detection by radar, the T-50 shares the powerful engines, sensors, and missiles of older Russian warplanes. But its stealth features have proved difficult for Sukhoi, the plane’s developer, to master—and for the Kremlin to afford as plummeting oil prices have drained state coffers.

India had offered to co-develop the T-50 and buy scores of copies. But in 2014, Indian officials complained of “shortfalls… in terms of performance and other technical features” in the handful of T-50 prototypes Sukhoi’s engineers had hand-built by then. New Delhi put its version of the T-50 on ice.

And not long afterward, Moscow did the same. “Given the new economic conditions, the original plans may have to be adjusted,” Yuri Borisov, a deputy defense minister, said in March 2015. The original plan was for Russia to build at least 50 T-50s by 2020. The new plan was for just a dozen—half of which are already flying as prototype test vehicles.

By comparison, the U.S. Air Force possesses more than 180 F-22s—and should have hundreds of newer F-35 stealth fighters in service by 2020. The T-50 might never be a significant part of the Russian air force. But it’s still a stealth fighter—a symbol of technological prowess that only a few countries can afford in any quantity.

And that makes it all the more valuable in 2016. As far as propaganda goes, this year’s Aviadarts is arguably even more important than previous war games—and that helps explain the T-50’s presence at the exercise. In late 2015, the Russian air force deployed more than 30 of its best fighter planes and scores of its most experienced pilots to western Syria.

Putin claimed his forces were intervening to defeat the so-called Islamic State widely known as ISIS. In fact, they helped to shore up the Assad regime’s flagging defenses against all opponent. The Russian planes have flown hundreds of missions, targeting ISIS fighters, U.S.-backed moderate rebels and even civilians in rebel-held territory. “The intention is to make life unbearable in those areas so that oppositions leaders accept Moscow’s conditions,” wrote Tom Cooper, an aviation expert and author.

Not only is the Russian air force indiscriminately bombing civilians in Syria—it’s losing a substantial number of aircraft in the process. Turkish jets shot down one Syria-based Russian bomber after it strayed into Turkish air space in November 2015. Russia has also lost around half a dozen helicopters to crashes and ground fire in Syria in recent months.

The costly Syria intervention has all but maxed out Russia’s capacity for aerial warfare. True, on paper the Kremlin possesses nearly 3,000 military aircraft. But even after Putin’s reforms, only a few hundred of the planes and helicopters are fully modern. Experienced pilots are in even shorter supply.

In mid-2014, Moscow had a choice. It could expand its annexation of Crimea to include a direct attack on eastern Ukraine—an assault that would have required heavy air support. Or the Russian government could, as tradition dictated, plan for the annual Victory Day parade that, every May 9, commemorates the Soviet Union’s defeat of Nazi Germany—and includes a huge flyover of Moscow involving up to a hundred military aircraft, with scores more waiting nearby as back-ups in case some planes or copters break down.

The flyover required months of preparation and rehearsal—and effectively precluded another war. “From the beginning of intensive training, there was little capacity left for a military intervention,” Stefan Buettner wrote in Combat Aircraft, a trade magazine.

Today Russia is in a similar predicament. Outside of the Syria intervention, Moscow possesses precious little extra air power. But it only takes on T-50 to make an impressive statement and at least imply that Russia has warplanes to spare. It doesn’t actually matter that, as a frontline warplane, the T-50 is probably doomed to fail. It can at least do its job as a propaganda piece.

 

Top of the Document

TIS:160608:(08-JUN-16):Why the Islamic State Is in Retreat

Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs 08-Jun-16 Top of the Document

IS-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu, Putin hail strong bilateral ties and cooperation

Britain Israel Com & Research Center 08-Jun-16

 

Israel’s and Russia’s head of State met in Moscow yesterday to discuss strategic issues, marking 25 years of diplomatic relations between their countries.

President Vladimir Putin gave PM Benjamin Netanyahu an unexpected personal tour of the Kremlin before their meeting. This was followed by a press conference in which Netanyahu said: “We discussed the continued coordination between our two militaries in the region, which already works quite well.”

During the past year Russia and Israel agreed a military mechanism to avoid unintended clashes in Syria while protecting their respective interests, where Moscow backs the Assad regime and Israel works to prevent arms transfers to Hezbollah. Putin said: “We spoke about the necessity to pool efforts to counter international terrorism. Israel knows only too well what it means and it is fighting against terrorism. In this sense, we are unconditional allies.”

Netanyahu added: “We want to avoid conflict and make sure we are operating against those same entities that endanger everyone.”

Providing an overall perspective of Israel-Russia ties, Putin said, “We place great importance on our relationship with Israel.” In response, Netanyahu said that although “today we marked the first 25 years of renewed relations” between Israel and Russia, his talks with Putin “focused mainly on looking ahead to the next 25 years” and cooperation “in the fields of technology, innovation, high-tech, economics, trade, tourism, and culture and in many other areas”.

Putin also called for a free trade zone between Israel and the Eurasian Economic Union. Turning to the prospects for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, Putin endorsed “achieving a just peace” and called for “continued efforts” from the Quartet of which Moscow is a member. Putin also said that the  re-establishment of ties between Israel and Turkey would be “a positive outcome for all”.

During Netanyahu’s visit, an agreement was finalised on pensions for immigrants to Israel from the former-Soviet Union, while a memorandum of understanding over dairy produce was also signed.

 

Top of the Document

EU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Enthusiasm for EU in sharp decline throughout Europe, not just UK

Financial Times 08-Jun-16

 

While the UK’s possible exit from the EU has been the centre of attention, the popularity of the European project has suffered an even steeper decline in France, according to a survey.

The US-based Pew Research Center found that only 38 per cent of French people have a favourable view of the EU, down from 69 per cent in 2004. By contrast, 44 per cent of Britons felt positively about the EU, down from 54 per cent in 2004.

“The British are not the only ones with doubts about the European Union. The EU’s image and stature have been on a rollercoaster ride in recent years throughout Europe,” Pew said.

The survey of 10,491 people across 10 EU countries found a broad trend of declining enthusiasm over the period that the continent was shaken by the eurozone financial crisis. In Spain, only 47 per cent now view the EU favourably, from 80 per cent in 2007. Over the same period in Italy, pro-EU sentiment has slumped to 58 per cent from 78 per cent.

Following their country’s bruising financial crisis and austerity programmes, the Greeks were the ultimate Europhobes, with only 27 per cent backing the EU. In Germany, support is at 50 per cent.

The results will add to fears among EU officials that Brexit could spark a rush for similar referendums among other European states where populist parties are building electoral momentum.

Despite regular criticism from Brussels over constitutional and rule of law issues, Poland and Hungary were the most robustly positive about the EU. Some 72 per cent of Poles held a favourable view of the bloc, while 61 per cent of Hungarians did so.

Amid a diversity of views across the 10 countries, one of the few things nearly everybody seemed to agree on was that Britain’s departure would be bad. Only 16 per cent saw it as a “good thing”.

A generational divide between younger people supporting the EU and older sceptics was visible in all of the countries surveyed, apart from Italy.

France was the only country where the generational gulf was more stark than in the UK. Among French 18 to 34-year-olds, 56 per cent were pro-EU. But that enthusiasm was shared by only 31 per cent of the over-50s.

Discontent with the EU’s handling of the economy and migration was more pronounced in Greece and Italy than in the UK.

For the British, it was the prospect of an “ever closer union” that appeared to irk the most. Some 65 per cent of British wanted some powers returned to London. This was a concern for only 43 per cent of Germans and 39 per cent of the French.

Pew’s research chimes with other surveys showing growing Euroscepticism. Ipsos, a polling group, found recently that Brexit was liable to trigger a domino effect of similar votes on EU membership.

But it also found people were more enthusiastic on referendums than actually leaving the EU. In France 41 per cent would vote to do so, while in Germany only 34 per cent wanted to quit, Ipsos said.

Pew and Ipsos are somewhat at odds over Italy. While Pew found 58 per cent support for the EU, Ipsos found Italians were more inclined to leave the bloc, with 48 per cent wanting an exit.

 

Top of the Document

IS-UK:160608:(08-JUN-16):Mark Regev reveals UK and Israel working on public celebration of Balfour

Jewish News 08-Jun-16

 

The Israeli envoy to the UK made his remarks in his first interview with the Jewish press

Britain and Israel are working together on plans for a public celebration of the Balfour declaration’s centenary, Mark Regev has revealed in his first interview with the Jewish media since becoming ambassador to the UK.

The envoy said he was looking forward to what will be a “huge” milestone with special events in both countries in the months leading up to the anniversary next November.

Benjamin Netanyahu’s long-time spokesman said: “It’s being taken very seriously at the highest levels. We’re hoping to do a public celebration together with the British government with senior leadership from both sides uniting to celebrate Balfour.

“It’s a crucial, historic document. The Balfour declaration is a manifestation of the principles of self-determination of the Jewish people and there’s every reason to celebrate. We’re doing celebrations here and in Israel and I’m looking forward to it. It’s an important milestone.”

While Jerusalem has decided to stay out of the debate on Britain’s future in the European Union, Regev is known to audiences in Britain and around the globe for going into the lion’s den of international media to defend Israel’s actions, particularly at times of conflict.

And, just two months into the job in London, he’s proved he’s not shy of taking on the big challenges head on by making a visit to SOAS one of his first engagements after arriving – a trip that led to anti-Israel graffiti being scrawled across the campus. He has also spoken out on another political hot potato – anti-Semitism within the Labour party.

Asked whether he thought he could engage effectively with the Labour leader, he said: “I’ve seen Jeremy Corbyn speaking proudly about how his parents marched against the fascists in Cable Street. I look forward to meeting and having a serious conversation with him.”

He added: “Labour has a proud history of standing up for the Jewish people, for Zionism and for Israel. If you look at some of the iconic figures of Labour in 20th century – Bevan, Wilson – these are people that understood the essential justice in zionism. They saw a Jewish people discriminated against, a minority suffering persecution and they saw in Zionism the desire of the Jewish people to have self-determination. They saw an essential part of an agenda of making the world a better place. Zionism fitted in with that agenda and that’s why they whole-heartedly supported Zionism.

“I know today is 2016 and not 1946 but I know Israel has many friends in the Labour movement and as ambassador I would not be doing my job if I wasn’t reaching out to the leadership in Labour and making the case for Israel.”

While Regev said anti-Semitism had simply morphed into a version that focused on hatred of the Jewish state, he insisted an independent Israel had “changed everything” in terms of the plight and prospects of Jews.

“Today we are sovereign and independent,” he said.” Today a homeless people going from place to place looking for refuge has a homeland. We have the ability to defend ourselves in a way our parents’ generation didn’t. That’s the real change – that’s the victory of Zionism.”

He also used the opportunity to laud the support and love of British Jewry for Israel, saying: “Almost everyone you speak to has been, has family there. The relationship is very strong. If I think of british Jews who’ve had an influence on Israeli society it goes from Moses Montefiore until the current time. Go to places to Raanana, Modiin and Jerusalem you see people making a difference to society, the economy, across all areas.”

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Israel’s Netanyahu frequents Russia as U.S. influence in Mideast recedes

Reuters 07-Jun-16

 

With the Obama administration in its final months, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been a more frequent and feted visitor to Moscow than Washington, his eye on shifting big-power influence in the Middle East.

No one expects Netanyahu, who was hosted by Russian President Vladimir Putin on Tuesday for the third time in the last year, to break up Israel’s bedrock alliance with the United States. But he is mindful of Putin’s sway in the Syrian civil war and other Middle East crises as the U.S. footprint in the region wanes.

“Netanyahu’s not defecting, but what we see here is a bid to manoeuvre independently to promote Israel’s interests,” said Zvi Magen, a former Israeli ambassador to Russia now with Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies.

With Russian forces fighting alongside Iran and Lebanese Hezbollah guerrillas to keep Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in power, Putin is the closest thing to a guarantor that Israel’s three most potent enemies will not attack it from the north.

He is also the first port of call for Netanyahu’s argument that Assad’s loss of central control vindicates Israel’s de facto annexation of the Golan Heights in 1981, a move never recognised internationally. Israel took the area in a 1967 war.

Netanyahu can offer Putin reciprocal Israeli restraint in Syria, where Russia maintains a strategic Mediterranean base, and a chance to play a greater role in Israeli-Palestinian peacemaking that has long been dominated by the United States.

With the Obama administration and France hinting they might back a future U.N. Security Council resolution against Israeli settlements on occupied Palestinian land, Netanyahu also has an interest in sounding out the views of veto-wielding Russia.

Moscow’s guest-list suggests mediation may be under way.

When Netanyahu last came, in April, it was three days after a visit by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. On Wednesday, when Netanyahu departs, Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov is scheduled to host Palestinian counterpart Riyad al-Maliki.

Yaakov Amidror, one of Netanyahu’s former national security advisers, played down the scope of Israeli-Russian relations. He said they focused on preventing the sides accidentally trading fire over Syria and were underpinned by Netanyahu’s personal rapport with Putin – hence their meetings every few months.

By contrast, while Netanyahu and Obama have feuded on Iran and the Palestinians and are wrangling over a new memorandum of understanding (MOU) for future U.S. defence aid to Israel, their countries’ partnership ticks over thanks to a network of military, diplomatic and parliamentary channels, Amidror said.

“In Syria, there is liable to be a clash tomorrow morning that neither we nor the Russians want,” said Amidror, now with the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Israel’s Bar-Ilan University and the U.S. think-tank JINSA, alluding to the risk of a friendly-fire incident.

“It’s not like the MOU, which we can spend months discussing with the Americans and be assured a resolution will be found.”

Russia has been closed-lipped about any wider statecraft initiatives it may have in store for Israel. The two countries “each express their positions in a pretty constructive manner, and all of this contributes to this rather frequent and intensive communication”, Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said.

“But of course, there cannot be any talk of the intensity of these contacts reflecting any kind of rivalry with anyone,” he added, alluding to Washington, where Netanyahu was last hosted by U.S. President Barack Obama in November. A trip expected in March was cancelled given the difficult MOU talks.

That’s different from the dignified optics Netanyahu can be assured of in Russia. This time, he will leave with state gifts likely to buoy Israeli public opinion: an Israeli army tank captured by Syrian forces during battles in Lebanon in 1982 and recovered by Russia, and Moscow’s agreement to pay pensions to tens of thousands of Russian immigrants to Israel.

 

Top of the Document

RU-RCR:160608:(08-JUN-16):Russia: Construction On Bridge To Crimea Facing Major Funding Issues

Stratfor 08-Jun-16

 

Construction on a bridge from the Taman Peninsula in Russia to the Kerch Peninsula in Crimea is facing major funding issues, according to a letter written by the head of the company contracted to build the bridge to top-ranking Russian transport officials, Forbes reported June 8. Once completed, the bridge would link Russia with Crimea, which it has controlled since 2014. According to a source with knowledge of the situation, the Russian government allocated around $1 billion toward building the bridge in 2016, but payments have been held up due to bureaucratic procedures. Without funds, the Stroygazmontazh company, a leading construction group in Russia, has been forced to stall work on the bridge and has been unable to invest in the heavy equipment it will need to finish the job. According to the letter written by the company’s head Andrei Kirilenko to First Deputy Minister of Transport Yevgeny Dietrich and Roman Starovoit, the head of the Federal Road Agency, the project’s funding situation has become extremely urgent.

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160607:(08-JUN-16):Netanyahu invites Russia to develop Israel’s gas fields

Russia Today 07-Jun-16

 

On Tuesday, Russian President Vladimir Putin met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Moscow. They discussed economic cooperation including energy ties.

“Our doors are open for every company from any country that has vast experience in the development of gas fields, including Russia, of course,” said Netanyahu at a joint news conference, adding that there are no legislative barriers stopping Russian companies working in Israel.

Putin was also asked about the gas contract with Poland which expires in 2022. The Russian President said Gazprom is looking for another partner in Europe who will buy the volume taken by Poland, including Israel.

“Our partners in Poland haven’t refused anything yet. However, the statement we are talking about, was made by a high-ranking official and the company purchasing our gas is state-owned, that’s why we don’t rule out such a possibility,” Putin said, adding that the gas may go to Israel to be then resold to Poland.

The Russian President added that plans for future Turkish Stream and South Stream gas pipeline projects have not been scrapped.

“All we need is a clear position from the European Commission. A clear, understandable and unambiguous stand. There isn’t one for either project,” said Putin.

The Turkish Stream project was frozen in December 2015 after a sharp deterioration in relations between Moscow and Ankara after a Russian warplane was shot down by Turkey. The pipeline was intended to substitute another suspended gas project, South Stream, which was going to deliver Russian gas to southern Europe through Bulgaria, Serbia and Hungary.

 

Top of the Document

IS-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Israel Courts Russian Investors

NaturalGasEurope 08-Jun-16

 

Russia’s president, Vladimir Putin met Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu in Moscow June 7 – their fourth meeting in 12 months.

For the first time, in a press conference, they talked publicly about the possibility of Russian companies investing in Israel .

“There are no legal restrictions on Russian companies participating in gas projects in Israel,” Netanyahu said in an answer to a question by a Russian reporter, according to a transcript on the Kremlin website.

“What has really limited and slowed down our participation in gas field development projects with all the companies was the time it took to adopt the decision that allowed us to expand and develop our gas fields, regardless of the company. We managed to resolve this problem, so our door is now open to all companies from all countries that have vast experience in developing gas fields, including, of course, Russia.”

Without specifying the exact time Putin said that Russia had once had a project to deliver gas to Israel, however following the gas discoveries off shore Israel that project was cancelled “which is natural,” he added. However, he advised Israel of one project “a small but good one – is to switch public transport in Israel to liquefied natural gas.”

It is not clear what Putin tried to suggest by this remark since Israel has no onshore facilities either for producing or storing LNG. Export monopoly Gazprom however is seeking new markets for the fuel, and transport is one area where demand may develop.

Putin also addressed the difficulties of selling Russian gas to Poland and said jokingly “Perhaps, the Israelis will buy this gas from us and sell it to Poland – this is also an option.”

At the end of the press conference, Netanyahu emphasized once again his open mindedness to Russian involvement in the Israeli energy industry. “I would like … to clarify things. Once again, I encourage Russian energy companies to participate in all tenders in this area.”

During the press conference Putin was asked about the impending rapprochement between Turkey and Israel, and his answer was positive. “I am exceptionally positive about it. We believe that any movement of these states and peoples towards each other will have a positive impact on the international situation in general. The fewer problems there are between the states, the better. We welcome this process.”

 

Top of the Document

MAR-MSY-RU-IS:160607:(08-JUN-16):Israel’s PM seeks role in Russian-US duo in Syria

DEBKAfile 07-Jun-16

 

During his 48-hour trip to Moscow (Monday and Tuesday June 6-7), Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will try and talk President Vladimir Putin into cutting Israel into the military teamwork evolving between Washington and Moscow for combating the Islamic State in Syria. As a quid pro quo, he will offer to elevate Moscow to senior broker in the Israeli-Palestinian dispute, with Moscow or Geneva selected as the venue for direct Israeli-Palestinian talks, if they occur – and with US participation. Netanyahu is also keen on a role for Egypt’s Presidents Abdek-Fattah al-Sisi.

debkafile sources in Jerusalem and Moscow report exclusively that the floating of this deal was the reason why Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov abstained from attending the Mid East conference staged last weekend by France’s President Francois Hollande in Paris. The UK and German foreign ministers followed the Russian lead and stayed away.

And Friday, June 3, on the day of the Paris meeting, Russian Deputy Foreign Minister Mikihail Bogdanov, who is in charge of Kremlin Middle East policy, offered a formula for resolving the problem of Israeli settlements on the West Bank.  That formula was very similar to the land swaps plan proposed by Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman a few years ago.

It consisted essentially of the transfer to the Palestinian state of parts of Israel with dense Arab populations, in return for Palestinian recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Israeli communities of Judea and Samaria.

In comments to Tass news service, Bogdanov said that Moscow is willing to host an Israeli-Palestinian peace conference, and also offered to mediate between the rival Palestinian factions, including Abu Mazen’s Fatah and the radical Hamas which rules the aza Strip.

While some Israeli politicians see the French initiative as offering President Barack Obama a handle for settling accounts with PM Netanyahu before he leaves the White House at the end of the year, Moscow and Jerusalem are concocting a parallel strategy – not merely to block the Franco-American move, but also to lift Washington’s drive for an Israeli-Palestinian accord from Paris to Moscow.

debkafile sources say that this maneuver is based on the early stages of military and political coordination between Washington and Moscow in the Syrian arena, including the fight against ISIS.

No such coordination exists between Washington and Paris.

Netanyahu envisages the tightening military cooperation between Russia and Israel for Syria, along with Israel’s active participation in the airstrikes against ISIS, as becoming integral to American-Russian understandings, and extending also to the Israeli-Palestinian issue.

Moscow and Jerusalem both estimate that an offer of US-Russian-Arab guarantees to the Palestinians, underwritten by Egypt and Saudi Arabia, can move the negotiations forward.

 

Top of the Document

EFR-RU:160608:(08-JUN-16):New French law would shield Russian assets

EUObserver 08-Jun-16

 

The French government is trying to pass a law that would help Russia to protect its assets from being frozen in business conflicts.

A government amendment to a bill on transparency and the fight against corruption says that assets could be frozen only if the state that owned them “has expressly agreed to the implementation of such a measure”.

The amendment also says that assets can be frozen only when they are “specifically used by the state for other purposes than non-commercial public service”.

The bill comes after former shareholders of Yukos, the giant Russian oil firm broken up by Russia more than 10 yes ago, won $50 billion in damages from Russia in an arbitration tribunal in The Hague last year.

Judges said Russia had violated the Energy Charter Treaty, an investor protection pact, when they dismantled the oil company, which had been run by Mikhail Khodorkovsky.

Khodorkovsky, an oligarch who became a Kremlin critic, was also jailed for 10 years on tax evasion charges.

He now lives in the UK and is still a prominent opponent of Russian president Vladimir Putin.

The ex-Yukos group had used The Hague ruling to try to seize Russian assets, such as foreign bank accounts or the building of the Russian embassy to Unesco, a UN heritage body based in France, in lieu of the $50 billion fine.

It is taking similar action in Belgium, Britain, Germany, India and the US.

Last December, a French court rejected Russia’s appeal to suspend the asset-freezes.

According to France Info radio, the Russian government threatened France with retaliations after it lost the appeal.

France Info radio said it had seen a letter sent in March by the Russian foreign minister to the French embassy in Moscow saying that “any attempt to apply measures … with regard to Russian assets … will be considered as giving right to adoption of appropriate and proportionate measures with regard to the French republic”.

“The ministry of foreign affairs will be grateful if the embassy could bring the content of this note to the attention of the French tribunal,” the minister added.

His proposal to warn French judges of the consequences of their decision ignored the separation of political and judicial powers that is normal in France and in Europe more broadly.

The anti-asset freezing bill is currently under discussion in the National Assembly, with a vote expected later this month.

Russia also won a legal victory in April when a Dutch district court overturned the decision of The Hague tribunal. But the ex-Yukos group is to appeal the district court verdict in a higher tribunal.

 

Top of the Document

RU-NATO-EU:160608:(08-JUN-16):Russia deploys troops westward as standoff with NATO deepens

Reuters 08-Jun-16

 

Russia is building an army base near its border with Ukraine, the latest in a chain of new military sites along what the Kremlin sees as its frontline in a growing confrontation with NATO.

While there have been no clashes between the former Cold War rivals, Russia is building up forces on its western frontiers at a time when the NATO alliance is staging major military exercises and increasing deployments on its eastern flank.

A Reuters reporter who visited the Russian town of Klintsy, about 50 km (30 miles) from Ukraine, saw a makeshift army camp, large numbers of newly-arrived servicemen and military vehicles.

Two soldiers in camouflage gear who were manning a checkpoint in a forest turned the reporter away, saying they were guarding a “special military site”.

Last year, Reuters also reported on construction of two other bases further to the south on Russia’s border with Ukraine.

The defense ministry has not acknowledged the deployment of troops to Klintsy, which usually serves as a stop for truck drivers traveling between Russia, Ukraine and Belarus.

However, a town council official said Klintsy had been chosen as the site of a newly-formed division, and that so far about 240 soldiers had arrived. “What’s to hide? That they’ve come? They’ve arrived,” said council deputy chairman Oleg Kletny. “They’re going to be garrisoned here.”

When completed, the base will be the latest component in a build-up of forces along a line running from the Baltic Sea in the north to the Black Sea in the south.

On the western side of the line, NATO has been rotating troops and equipment in greater numbers to members states that were part of the Soviet-led Warsaw Pact during the Cold War.

The Western alliance, which says it’s responding to Russian military intervention in Ukraine, was this week staging one of its biggest exercises in eastern Europe since the end of the Cold War.

To the east, Russia is building up its own forces, saying it needs to protect itself from NATO’s eastward advance.

Each side says it is only responding to steps taken by the other, but the build-up risks locking NATO and Russia into a spiral of measure and counter-measure from which it will be difficult to escape.

Russia and NATO member states share borders around the Baltic Sea, while further south the two blocs are separated by Ukraine and Belarus.

But since Ukraine’s pro-Moscow president was ousted in a popular uprising two years ago and replaced with a Western-leaning administration, the perception in Moscow is that Ukraine has become, de facto, a NATO satellite.

ANTI-TANK DEFENSES

Russia has pulled out of the treaty on Conventional Forces in Europe, a post-Cold War pact that limits the deployment of troops in Europe, so it is free to move extra troops and hardware to its western border.

On Monday Klintsy, normally a sleepy town, was a hive of military activity. The Reuters reporter saw about a dozen tents and the same number of military vehicles in a temporary camp in a clearing in a forest where the troops will be billeted until their permanent base is ready.

Military trucks drove through the town, which lies in an area that is the closest point on Russian territory to the Ukrainian capital, Kiev, 280 km away.

About a dozen servicemen were at a gas station near the camp, buying food supplies. A road near the camp was blocked off by antitank obstacles and road spikes.

Last week, Russia’s Interfax news agency quoted an unnamed source familiar with the deployment to Klintsy as saying it “can be seen as a response to the growing activity of the North Atlantic Alliance near Russia’s borders”.

The defense ministry did not reply to questions from Reuters about the base and its purpose.

Council deputy chairman Kletny said the troops, from a motorized infantry division, started arriving on May 30. They came from a base in Yekaterinburg, in the Ural mountains region about 2,000 km to the east of Klintsy.

He said they were deployed following a decision earlier this year by Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu to create three new divisions. The soldiers will be eventually garrisoned in the grounds of a disused military base in Klintsy which they are renovating, said Kletny.

“It’s good that the military will come; our demographic situation will improve, we’ll get a bigger population. If servicemen come her with their families, that will be good too,” he told Reuters.

A notice lodged with Klintsy town council and seen by Reuters stated that approval is being sought for re-zoning and construction works on two plots of land with a total area of 142 hectares (351 acres), or about the size of 140 soccer pitches.

The plots of land would be used “for the interests of the Russian armed forces”, according to the notice.

 

Top of the Document

Follow us on our dedicated Facebook page
Facebook Page ‘Alethia’ BibleTruthandProphecy
Or our website
BibleTruthandProphecy (Subscribe for updates)

If you would like to subscribe to our YouTube channel, once you have clicked ‘Subscribe’ make sure you click the cog next to the subscribe button and select ‘Send me all notifications for this channel’

Note: Bad language and comments with links to other videos or websites will be removed.

Download our ‘Free’ Bible APP – ‘KeyToThe Bible’ for i-phone or Android
Download here…

Other Christadelphian Channels we recommend
BibleProphecyHD
ChristadelphianVideo
ChristadelphianHUB
BibleStudiesHD
BibleTruthVideos
BibleProphecyHD
BibleProphecyHub
CPDLIVE
BibleProphecyChannelUpdate

Bible Truth and Prophecy, – Welcome to our channel run by the Christadelphians Worldwide to help promote the understanding of God’s Word to those who are seeking the Truth about the Human condition and Gods plan and Purpose with the Earth and Mankind upon it.
We are always keen to receive your feedback, you may leave comments in the comments area below or alternatively email us at Feedback@ChristadelphianVideo.org and we will get back to you with a reply as soon as we can.

For more information on the Christadelphians
b­logspot
Twitter
Thisisyourbible

Read a variety of booklets on-line concerning various key Bible subjects.
Free Bible Booklets

Bible Truth & Prophecy is a remarkable on-line tool for establishing just how far removed from the teachings of the Bible mainstream Christian teaching has become.

End Time Prophecies are interpreted using the Bible, not man made ideas or notions.
Key Biblical subjects such as the Trinity, Devil/Satan worship, Holy Spirit Gifts & much more are all dealt with extensively from the Bible’s viewpoint and not man’s.We will demonstrate how Christian beliefs have become corrupted, and reveal the ‘Truth’ as taught by the 1st Century Apostles.

 

Milestones to the Kingdom

04 Jun: Today’s Snippets By Don Pearce

We apologise that the snippets have been somewhat sparce of late, Bro Don has been busy preparing for his tour of Austrailia and New Zealand.#

Here Is an extended version of the Snippets which covers the 10 days from 21-31st May.

In association with Bro Don Pearce (Rugby UK)  Keep up to date with Bro Don’s Snippets – Email Don at Snippets@MilestonesUK.org  Just put in the subject line ‘Snippets Request’ state if you would prefer word doc or pdf format. ( If not stated, both will be sent as samples so you can decide) It’s that easy!

Here is the latest Snippets… scroll down

CV-RU:160521:(31-MAY-16):Russia and the Vatican: Why the Holy See Seeks Cooperation With Moscow.. 1

UK-EU:160522:(31-MAY-16):Trade wars: memo shows EU is costing UK billions. 2

IS:160522:(31-MAY-16):Israel’s government approves Leviathan natural gas deal -official 3

EGR:160522:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Parliament Passes New Budget Cuts, Tax Increases. 3

IS-MLE:160523:(31-MAY-16):New Watchtowers on Border Between Israel and Lebanon. 3

IS-NAC:160523:(31-MAY-16):Israel And Canada Increase Technology Cooperation – Countries To Double Funding For Joint R&D. 3

MEG-US:160523:(31-MAY-16):Egypt’s military cooperation with US continues to move forward. 4

RU:160524:(31-MAY-16):Russia: Eurobond Purchases Higher Than Expected. 5

EU-UK:160526:(31-MAY-16):Europe is reducing soldiers to ‘civilians in uniform’, General warns. 5

IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Agreement on New Israeli Government 5

EGR:160525:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Breakthrough Deal Reached With Creditors. 6

NATO-RU:160525:(31-MAY-16):NATO defends largest buildup in years near Russia’s borders. 6

IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Actually, Avigdor Lieberman Is Just What Israel Needs Right Now.. 6

RU-IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Gazprom No Longer Interested in Israeli Gas Field Development 7

IS-MJO:160525:(31-MAY-16):Israel-Jordan gas agreement moves closer 7

RU-EFR:160526:(31-MAY-16):Putin says Russia, France reactivate economic cooperation mechanisms. 8

RU:160527:(31-MAY-16):Russia: Government Plans To Extend Food Imports Embargo. 8

RU-MED:160527:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s emerging naval presence in the Mediterranean. 8

EGE:160527:(31-MAY-16):Is Germany Heading for Economic Crisis?. 9

RU-EGE:160527:(31-MAY-16):German Foreign Minister Steinmeier says extending Russia sanctions more difficult 11

RU-EU:160526:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Gazprom sees record 2016 gas exports to Europe. 11

EGR-RU:160527:(31-MAY-16):Greece and Russia to Sign New Oil Supply Deal 11

EU-UK:160527:(31-MAY-16):EU leaders are planning a post-Brexit future without the UK. 11

RU-EU:160528:(31-MAY-16):Putin: Romania ‘in crosshairs’ after opening NATO missile defense base. 12

RU-MIN:160529:(31-MAY-16):Russia Said To Suspend S-300 To Iran. 13

TIS:160529:(31-MAY-16):ISIS Revenue Down 23%; Policies Change to Compensate. 13

IS:160529:(31-MAY-16):Leviathan partners sign $3 bln Israeli natgas supply deal 13

TU-MPA-IS:160529:(31-MAY-16):Turks and Palestinians Look for Ways to Supplant Israeli Exports. 14

RU-EU:160530:(31-MAY-16):Juncker to visit Putin in June on background of Russia sanctions. 14

RU-IS:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Friend at Court in Israel 15

CV-CR:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russian Orthodox Church welcomes new papal envoy to Moscow.. 15

RU-EGR:160529:(31-MAY-16):Putin visits Russian Orthodox monastic community in Greece. 15

RU-EGR:160528:(31-MAY-16):Russian Tourist Numbers to Greece Up More Than 500 Percent 16

IS-MEPT:160531:(31-MAY-16):Netanyahu Ready to Discuss Arab Peace Initiative. 16

EGR-EU:160531:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Minister Says Country Cannot Perform Additional Obligations For Loans  17

RU:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russia To Spend More Than $16 Billion On Arms Industry. 17

UK-EU:160529:(31-MAY-16):The battle for Brexit 17

 

CV-RU:160521:(31-MAY-16):Russia and the Vatican: Why the Holy See Seeks Cooperation With Moscow

Sputnik 21-May-16

 

Moscow and the Holy See are working together on the issue of moral values and persecuted Christians. This cooperation is beneficial for both parties, from a diplomatic and political viewpoint, the French newspaper Le Figaro wrote.

According to Le Figaro, since the end of the Cold War, the Vatican has always been willing to hold a dialogue with Moscow.

“Russia has become one of the centers of a new polycentric world order, an empire in the process of establishment, which one should offer one’s hand,” political expert Canstance Colonna-Cesari said cited by the newspaper.

After the dissolution of the Soviet Union, the relations between Moscow and the Vatican were characterized by significant tensions. However, over the past few years ties between Russia and the Holy See have strengthened, especially after Vladimir Putin’s conversation with Pope Francis in November 2013, and the historical meeting of Pope Francis with Patriarch Kirill in Havana in February 2016.

On February 12, Patriarch Kirill of Moscow and All Russia met Pope Francis at an airport in Havana, Cuba, where they signed a joint declaration. It was the first time that Catholic and Russian Orthodox spiritual leaders held face-to-face talks since Christianity split into western and eastern branches in 1054.

Restoring ties with the Vatican, representatives of the Russian Orthodox Church speak about strategic alliance with the Catholic Church aimed at defending “traditional Christian values.” In their joint declaration, the leaders of the two churches urged to protect the persecution of Christians in the Middle East and called on the international community to take action in this direction.

According to the expert, the Vatican is interested in rapprochement with Russia for several reasons. First of all, one needs to come to terms with Russia as it is a strong energy and military power, which at the same time is restoring its status as a world power, getting more and more oriented to the east and adheres to Orthodox values.

On the other hand, there is a diplomatic reason behind the Vatican’s desire to cooperate with Moscow: a possibility to enhance its involvement in Syria thanks to Vladimir Putin’s good relationship with Damascus as well as Russia’s ability to veto any decision of the UN Security Council with regard to the Syrian crisis.

According to the newspaper, the alliance also has its political relevance for Moscow, especially taking into account the close connection between the Kremlin and the Russian Orthodox Church, the newspaper wrote.

“Relations with the Holy See are intertwined with the main goal of Putin’s foreign policy: to return the status of a super power,” the newspaper wrote.

“The situation in the Middle East gives Putin an opportunity to emphasize Russia’s role in the international arena and present himself as a defender of eastern Christians in the spirit of Catherine the Great,” it continued, citing political expert Yves Hamant.

 

 

UK-EU:160522:(31-MAY-16):Trade wars: memo shows EU is costing UK billions

Daily Telegraph 22-May-16

 

David Cameron claims that the power of Brussels to negotiate these free-trade agreements is a critical reason why Britain must not leave the EU

A secret government memo today reveals how a trade war between European Union countries is damaging the British economy.

The damning Whitehall assessment – seen by the Telegraph – has found that France and other EU countries are hampering new “free-trade” deals because they want to protect their farmers from the extra competition.

David Cameron claims that the power of Brussels to negotiate these free-trade agreements with parts of the world such as the United States is a critical reason why Britain must not leave the EU.

But the memorandum suggests that Britain is losing out on £2.5 billion a year in potential trade as a result of the ongoing delays to a proposed deal between the EU and Latin America.

Under EU treaties, the UK cannot negotiate its own trade arrangements and has to wait until Brussels reaches agreements that are acceptable to all 28 member states, a process that often takes years to complete.

Details of the internal government document, written earlier this year, have come to light at a critical time in the referendum contest, as rival ministers clash in an increasingly bitter campaign over Britain’s future in Europe.

Dominic Raab, the justice minister who is campaigning to leave the EU at next month’s referendum, said: “The raw truth is that the EU hates genuinely free trade. That holds Britain back, costs us jobs, and keeps prices on the high street artificially high.”

Meanwhile, on the other side of the debate, Patrick McLoughlin, the Transport Secretary, warned that the long-term future of Britain’s car industry – which employs 200,000 people – would be put at risk by a vote for so-called Brexit.

In an interview with the Telegraph, Mr McLoughlin said he feared global motor manufacturers such as Toyota and Nissan would choose to open new factories in rival countries if Britain pulled out of the EU’s single market trade zone, with its 500 million consumers.

There is “an unknown risk” that the “long-term future” of the UK’s highly successful motor industry could fall into decline, as happened with coal mining, he said.

Mr Cameron and other EU leaders, such as Germany’s Angela Merkel, are pushing for a range of new trade deals between Europe and other world trading blocs, including Latin America, Japan, Australia, and the United States.

George Osborne, the Chancellor, has warned that leaving the EU’s single market free-trade zone would be “catastrophic” for the British economy.

The secret Whitehall briefing found that one key initiative for a sweeping new “free-trade agreement” between Europe and five South American countries has run into trouble amid opposition from other EU countries.

The private memorandum was prepared for ministers ahead of the EU’s latest round of trade talks with Latin America. It said that 14 member states – half of the EU’s 28 members – are trying to limit the agreement because they fear their farmers will suffer from the increased competition.

““The EU’s record at putting free trade deals in place is weak and getting worse.””Andrea Leadsom, the pro-Brexit energy minister

These EU countries want to stop cheaper imports of beef and other farm products being allowed into the Europe from rivals including Brazil and Argentina.

Crucially, the Whitehall assessment said this kind of opposition to free-trade deals is growing across Europe.

It could even affect plans for a high-profile transatlantic trade deal between the EU and the United States, the report said.

It warned that France and other countries have been trying to water down the proposed agreement between Europe and five South American countries, the so-called “Mercosur” group – Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay, Uruguay, and Venezuela.

The Government believes this deal would generate £2.5 billion a year for Britain by reducing tariffs and reforming quotas to open up trade between Europe and Latin America in beef, chicken, plant-based fuels, cars, medical drugs, and services such as banking.

Andrea Leadsom, the pro-Brexit energy minister, said: “The EU’s record at putting free trade deals in place is weak and getting worse.”

Priti Patel, the employment minister, said EU membership meant the British economy was being “tied to a sinking ship”.

She said: “Being a member of the EU has rendered us powerless to reach our own trade deals and these missed trading opportunities are costing our economy money, jobs and growth.”

A No 10 source said: “Independent experts … have warned that Britain will be rocked by a massive economic shock and risks recession if we take a leap in the dark and leave the EU. British businesses get huge benefits from having access to the EU single market of 500million people – three million jobs are linked to the EU. On top of that, firms across the UK can take advantage of the EU’s trade deals with more than 50 countries around the world – and we would lose access to every single one of those deals if we leave, doing even more damage to our economy.”

 

 

IS:160522:(31-MAY-16):Israel’s government approves Leviathan natural gas deal -official

Reuters 22-May-16

 

Israel approved on Sunday a deal meant to fast-track the development of the huge offshore natural gas field Leviathan, an Energy Ministry spokeswoman said.

Israel’s energy minister said on Wednesday he reached a deal with Texas-based Noble Energy and Israel’s Delek Group that will allow the firms to move forward with the field’s development, hopefully bringing it online by the end of 2019.

A ministry spokeswoman said the deal was approved at a weekly cabinet meeting.

A previous agreement was struck down by Israel’s Supreme Court, and the government hopes that new phrasing, which gives the state more leeway in handling future regulation, will stave off another court objection.

 

 

EGR:160522:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Parliament Passes New Budget Cuts, Tax Increases

Stratfor 22-May-16

 

The Greek parliament passed new budget cuts and tax rises May 22, BBC reported. The government led by the leftist Syriza coalition passed the bill by 153 votes to 145. The legislation comes two days before a eurozone meeting in Brussels, which is expected to unblock much-needed bailout funds. The bill creates a state privatization fund requested by its eurozone finance ministers, as well as a contingency mechanism that will trigger automatic spending cuts if the country fails to meet the targets of the bailout deal agreed to last year. Earlier this month, parliament approved reforms of the pension and income tax system. The legislation also comes ahead of a sizeable debt payment due in July. Demonstrators gathered outside parliament in in Athens to protest against the law.

 

Top of the Document

IS-MLE:160523:(31-MAY-16):New Watchtowers on Border Between Israel and Lebanon

Media Line MidEast Daily News 23-May-16

 

Israelis living on the northern border with Lebanon say the Lebanese Army has built a series of new watchtowers over the past month that allow them to see into Israeli military bases, the border fence, patrol road and civilian enclaves, according to Ynet News. The watchtowers are currently being manned by soldiers from the Lebanese Army, but residents fear that in a conflict with Israel, Hizbullah could take over the watchtowers. Residents say the towers have gone up almost overnight and from one place, Kibbutz Admit, there are three towers within sight. An Israeli military spokesman said the army is following the developments and there has been no change in the security situation. According to a United Nations resolution, the areas where the watchtowers were built is supposed to be a demilitarized area, meaning that the towers should not have any weapons in there. Israel says that Hizbullah, with which Israel fought a cross-border war in 2006, has 100,000 rockets that can reach all parts of Israel. At the same time, Israel’s assessment is that Hizbullah is not interested in a war with Israel at the current time. After the recent assassination of a Hizbullah leader, the group made clear that they did not believe Israel is responsible. The Shi’ite militant group has been fighting in Lebanon alongside Syrian President Bashar al-Assad against rebel groups such as the al-Nusra Front and Islamic State.

 

 

IS-NAC:160523:(31-MAY-16):Israel And Canada Increase Technology Cooperation – Countries To Double Funding For Joint R&D

Israeli Science Info 23-May-16

 

The success stories behind Israeli hi-tech companies greatly contribute to helping establish extensive technological cooperation between Israel and countries around the world. One such collaboration growing stronger year by year is that between Israel and the Canadian Province of Ontario. Cooperation between the two states has been ongoing for more than a decade and their joint R&D program has already yielded impressive technological achievements – for both the countries and their companies. Today, representatives of Israel and Ontario will sign an agreement to increase the joint funding they offer to companies at a value of $2 million annually, and to budget an extra $5 million a year for cooperation between Israeli and Canadian industries and universities.

The signing of the expanded agreement is taking place within the framework of an official visit by the Premier of the Province of Ontario. She arrived in Israel with the largest official tech delegation ever to come from Canada, including 180 businesspeople, heads of organizations, industrialists and researchers from Canada’s finest universities, seeking to do business with Israeli companies and entrepreneurs. Half of the members of the delegation are businesspeople focusing on manufacturing and promoting technological opportunities between the two countries.

According to the Chairman of the Israel Innovation Authority, Mr. Avi Hasson: “Canada is a wonderful option for any Israeli company interested in establishing its presence in North America. The Canadians see Israel as a significant hub of innovation and they are here to forge new collaborative relationships in several technological fields, including cleantech, biotech, med-tech and medical devices, IT, cyber-security, energy and e-Health, projects that can benefit both sides.”

 

 

MEG-US:160523:(31-MAY-16):Egypt’s military cooperation with US continues to move forward

Ahram online 23-May-16

 

The delivery of MRAPs to Egypt is part of the continuing strong relationship between the US and Egypt, says Major General Charles Hooper, the US embassy’s senior defence official in Cairo

On 12 May Egypt received the first shipment of armoured vehicles from the US. The US Embassy in Cairo featured an article on its official website on the details of the Mine-Resistant Ambush Protected (MRAP) vehicles, designed to protect soldiers from improvised explosive devices (IEDs), landmines and other forms of attacks.

Thursday’s delivery was “the first batch of a total of 762 MRAP vehicles that the United States is transferring to Egypt,” the article reported.

“Originally designed to support United States military operations in Afghanistan, MRAPs provide enhanced levels of protection to soldiers and are proven to save lives.”

“The delivery of these MRAPs to Egypt provides a crucial capability needed during these times of regional instability and is part of the continuing strong relationship between the US and Egypt,” said Major General Charles Hooper, the US embassy’s senior defence official in Cairo.

The website explained that the shipment of the MRAPs “is part of the US Department of Defence’s excess defence articles grant program, in which the vehicles are transferred at no cost to the government of Egypt.”

“This delivery is the most recent step taken by the US government in support of Egypt’s fight against terrorism and is part of a broad range of military cooperation initiatives between the two countries.”

Also last week, Egyptian Defence Minister Sedky Sobhy met with Vice Admiral Joseph Rixey, director of the US Defence Security Cooperation Agency (DSCA).

The DSCA oversees contractual arrangements for armaments and defence assistance abroad, for which it is required to gain congressional approval.

“The military ties that bind Egypt and the US are moving towards closer cooperation and coordination in the coming period,” said Sobhy, according to a press release issued by the Egyptian army following the meeting.

Vice Admiral Rixey expressed his gratitude to the Egyptian army for the efforts they have exerted to preserve stability in the region and said the US hopes to increase the scope of military cooperation between the two countries’ armed forces.

The meeting took place as arrangements were being finalised for the arrival of the MRAP shipment to Alexandria. A day after the delivery, on 13 May, the DSCA website reported that the US State Department had approved a possible sale to Egypt of a number of UGM-84L Harpoon Block II Encapsulated Missiles, manufactured by Boeing. The estimated cost of the deal is $143 million. The report added that the DSCA has already notified Congress of the possible sale.

MRAPS, the specifications

MRAP vehicles were designed to withstand attacks by IEDs, landmines and other explosive devices. The V-shape hull and raised chassis are designed to deflect explosive forces.

The body of the vehicle and glass are heavily armoured and explosive resistant. The vehicles are designed to operate efficiently in extreme environments and rugged mountainous or desert terrains.

In 2007, the US Defence Department allocated $50 billion for the production of 27,000 MRAPs of which 10,000 were produced in the first year.

Hossam Ibrahim, a researcher specialising in US affairs, says both Cairo and Washington “are moving to strengthen partnership and cooperation in the fight against terrorism.”

“Washington wants Egypt to achieve real success against the extremist organisations in the Sinai. There is a trend in strategic and security thinking in the US that believes that, while Cairo has a clear vision and is determined and serious in its fight against terrorism, it tends to handle the campaign against terrorist organisations in the framework of conventional warfare.”

Fixed roadblocks, checkpoints and similar measures are manifestations of this conventional approach, which is no longer appropriate given the “qualitative shift in the direction of unconventional security threats.” The MRAP, said Ibrahim, signals a necessary move in the direction of non-conventional means of confrontation.

So is there is a link between the armament consignments and the restructuring of the Multinational Force and Observers (MFO) in Sinai?

Ibrahim believes it is more useful to view the deal not in terms of a military purchase by Egypt but in terms of what it means in the framework of the fight against terrorism in which Washington is keen to see major progress.

“It should be viewed as part of the process of military cooperation between the two countries which is itself a facet of the political evolution of Egyptian-US relations in the post-30 June Revolution period.”

A senior military official told Al-Ahram Weekly that the Ministry of Defence had earlier explored the acquisition of advanced mine detection equipment from countries that cooperate militarily with Egypt but was unable to find what it was looking for. Most terrorist operations in Sinai use roadside mines, IEDs and other such explosives. Such attacks have become a major threat to military personnel and equipment, and the army was eager to acquire the best possible protection.

Military experts view military cooperation between Cairo and Washington independently from political relations, which have had their ups and downs in recent years. President Abdel-Fattah El-Sisi and political and military leaders from both sides have all described the two countries’ military relations as “strategic.”

 

 

RU:160524:(31-MAY-16):Russia: Eurobond Purchases Higher Than Expected

Stratfor 24-May-16

 

Foreign investors bought more than 70 percent of Russia’s eurobonds during the country’s first sovereign debt offering since the outbreak of the crisis in Ukraine in 2014, Russian Finance Minister Anton Siluanov said May 24, Sputnik reported. Siluanov added that despite alleged attempts by outside actors to discourage investors from buying Russian bonds, Moscow was satisfied with the placement. Russian analysts estimate some $6.3 billion worth of eurobonds were purchased, more than double the Kremlin’s goal of $3 billion. The country’s financial concerns, particularly those brought on by low oil price, its weak currency and Western economic sanctions, remain a top issue for the Kremlin.

 

 

EU-UK:160526:(31-MAY-16):Europe is reducing soldiers to ‘civilians in uniform’, General warns

Daily Telegraph 26-May-16

 

The European Union has “seriously undermined” the armed forces and risks reducing soldiers to “civilians in uniform”, one of Britain’s most respected military generals warns today.

General Sir Michael Rose, a former director of special forces, has come out in favour of a Brexit just three months after Downing Street mistakenly added his name to a letter promoting EU membership.

He is one of 12 retired senior military leaders who have announced that they are backing Veterans for Britain, a group which will seek to encourage serving and retired personnel to vote for a Brexit.

The military leaders backing a Brexit include commanders who have served in Iraq, Afghanistan and the Falklands.

It comes after Downing Street was left embarrassed in February over a letter saying that Britain must stay in the EU on national security grounds.

No 10 was forced to apologise to Sir Michael after an “administrative error” saw his name included on the letter while Field Marshal Lord Bramall, the former head of the army, said that he felt pressured into signing it.

In a statement released today, Sir Michael claims that soldiers will be left unable to rise to the “uncompromising demands of the battlefield” because of European laws.

He argues that Britain’s contribution to European defence “can manifestly be better made solely through Nato” than through the European Union.

He also says that it is an “insult” to EU nations to suggest that Britain’s membership of the European Unino is necessary to secure peace in Europe.

He says: “European law, in my view, has already seriously undermined UK’s combat effectiveness as a result of the intrusion of European law into national law, and today, our service men and women are in danger of becoming no more than civilians in uniform.

“Yet it clearly takes an entirely different set of disciplines to prepare soldiers sailors and airmen for war from those that exist in the civilian work environment. ”

If the necessary psychologies and disciplines cannot be developed in training during peacetime, then it is unlikely that our people will rise to the uncompromising demands of the battlefield in time of war.”

Major General Tim Cross, who was Commander of UK forces in Iraq, says: “Our history and our trading links give us global interests, global links and friends on every continent.

“We do not need to subcontract our future to an organisation constantly juggling the views of 28 countries whilst moving inexorably towards full political union and all that comes with it: unified armed forces, unified systems of justice, unified monetary and economic policies.”

Major General Julian Thompson, who commanded 3 Commando Brigade during the Falklands War, says: “The result of this referendum will determine irrevocably what kind of country we, our children and our grandchildren will live in.

“Either Great Britain will remain in the EU, dominated by people who we do not elect, who we cannot throw out and who dictate many of the laws which govern us, or we will take back control and return to what we were: an independent country in which our Parliament is elected by us, and answerable to us as the lawmaker.”

However Michael Fallon, the Defence Secretary, warned yesterday that a vote to leave would be welcomed by Russia as a “payday for Putin”. He told the Commons that a Brexit would be “extraordinarily irresponsible” and said that “Putin would certainly be voting Leave”.

 

 

IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Agreement on New Israeli Government

Media Line MidEast Daily News 25-May-16

 

Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu finalized a deal to bring the hardline Yisrael Beytenu party into his coalition, giving him a larger 66 seat majority out of 120 Knesset members. The deal also makes Yisrael Beytenu leader Avigdor Lieberman, who immigrated from Moldova and has little military experience, the defense ministry. Negotiations were expected to have been completely last week but got snagged on Lieberman’s demands for pensions for elderly immigrants from the former Soviet Union. After late night negotiations, Lieberman announced that the government will allocate more than $350 million over four years for pension reform. He is expected to be sworn in as defense minister next week, after his appointment is approved by the Knesset. Israel’s former Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon stepped down earlier this week after he was pushed out of his job to make room for Lieberman. Palestinians have slammed the expected new government, saying Lieberman is a “settler” who will advance a hardline agenda.

 

Top of the Document

EGR:160525:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Breakthrough Deal Reached With Creditors

Stratfor 25-May-16

 

Eurogroup finance ministers agreed to release 10.3 billion euros ($11.48 billion) in bailout funding for Greece on May 24 in recognition of fiscal reforms pushed through by Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras’s leftist-led coalition, Kathimerini reported. This will allow Greece to make a repayment to the European Central Bank in July and avoid another looming default. Greece was also promised debt relief in the future, though this will only happen after 2018. The promise of debt relief is important for Tsipras, who needed something to show voters at home. However, the promise of debt relief is vague. and the details will not be discussed in the short term. This allows Germany to postpone the controversial debate until after its general election in 2017. This vague promise of debt relief was enough to keep the IMF involved in the bailout, one of Germany’s main demands.

 

 

NATO-RU:160525:(31-MAY-16):NATO defends largest buildup in years near Russia’s borders

Vatican Radio 25-May-16

 

A NATO senior official says the alliance’s planned biggest military build-up since the end of the Cold War in especially Eastern Europe is to counter a more aggressive and unpredictable Russia. The announcement by the chairman of NATO’s Military Committee came shortly after Moscow summoned a U.S. defense attache this week after American military aircraft allegedly flew into civilian airspace during a reconnaissance mission near Russia’s Far Eastern border.

Russia’s Defense Ministry says the American defense attache was summoned to explain why a U.S. Air Force RC-135 surveillance plane risked colliding with passenger planes as it flew over the Sea of Japan on May 22.

Moscow alleged that the plane had turned its transponders off and could not be detected by civilian radar, although it was flying at an altitude typically used by passenger jets.

However in turn, Washington has repeatedly accused Russian aircraft of buzzing U.S. warships and aircraft in what it calls an “unprofessional” and dangerous manner. Russia says however that the U.S. military should not get too close to its borders.

Despite the already rising tensions, the chairman of the NATO military alliance’s military General Petr Pavel has defended a decision to continue a massive military buildup closer to Russia’s borders in what is known as the NATO’s eastern flank.

RUSSIAN ACTIONS

His comments are important as the military committee is NATO’s senior military authority and crucial source of military advice. General Pavel said the buildup is a direct response to Russian military actions in Georgia, Ukraine, and Syria. “If there was no increase in Russian assertiveness demonstrated in actions in Georgia, in Ukraine in Crimea [and] in Syria,

there wouldn’t have to be a reaction from NATO’s side,” he told Radio Free Europe/Radio Liberty in an interview.

“NATO, and especially NATO’s Eastern allies, feel threatened by Russian assertiveness, Russian aggression in several areas. And especially nations who are directly bordering Russia wanted to be more assured about NATO’s presence and NATO’s willingness and preparedness to act,” the general added.

The United States said earlier that it to build up forces in Central and Eastern Europe in response to Russian intervention in Ukraine where it annexed the Crimean Peninsula. The West has also accused Russia of supporting pro-Russian separatists in eastern Ukraine with weapons and troops, charges Moscow denies.

Britain has suggested that NATO’s largest build-up since the cold war in eastern Europe could include up to 3,500 troops near Russia’s borders, with Britain, Germany and the United States taking the bulk of command duties.

 

 

IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Actually, Avigdor Lieberman Is Just What Israel Needs Right Now

The Jewish Forward 25-May-16

 

Peaceniks may be up in arms about the appointment of Avigdor Lieberman as Israel’s next minister of defense, but the country’s enemies are worried — and rightly so.

Yes, as the inevitable flurry of articles accompanying his appointment are sure to point out, Lieberman once said that Israel could bomb the Aswan dam in the event of war with Egypt and he also said that captured Palestinian terrorists should be “drowned in the Dead Sea.” But Lieberman, arguably the biggest loudmouth in Israel (he recently called Netanyahu — the man he’s been angling to work for — “a liar, cheater and crook”), is also a reasonable politician.

Lieberman’s core beliefs are squarely rooted in principles that most Israelis accept and that make good sense. He has expressed support for the establishment of a Palestinian state alongside Israel as part of a final settlement, but he also maintains, as he put it at the Saban Forum in 2006, that the negotiating process is based on three fundamentally erroneous assumptions: “that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the main fact of instability in the Middle East, that the conflict is territorial and not ideological, and that the establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders will end the conflict.”

Although willing to trade land (including the West Bank settlement of Nokdim, where he lives) under certain conditions, Lieberman resents the Obama administration’s relentless pressure for upfront Israeli concessions, noting that two decades and more of concessions to the Palestinians “brought neither results nor solutions.” He is correct that finding more things for Israel to give up, even as the cycle of Palestinian incitement and violence continues, is not the answer.

Having experienced poverty first-hand while growing up in the Soviet Union, Lieberman has spoken eloquently about the need to address the deplorable socioeconomic conditions among Palestinians. This is partly why he has long called for toppling the Hamas regime in Gaza, which Netanyahu, former defense minister Moshe Ya’alon and the rest of Israel’s political and military establishment have come to accept as a manageable problem.

Not everything Lieberman believes is nestled firmly within Israeli public consensus, but even his more extreme ideas are rooted in hard-nosed realism, not ideology or ethnic particularism. His long-standing advocacy of the death penalty for convicted terrorists, for example, is premised on the simple recognition that Palestinian terrorists are today free to murder based on the correct expectation that they will later be released in prisoner exchanges.

Lieberman is also cognizant of the fact that the U.S.-Israel relationship is of the utmost importance. When Israeli minister Naftali Bennett attacked U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry’s attempt to rekindle the peace process, Lieberman quickly fired back, stating, “There can be disagreements among friends, but one [Israel] doesn’t have to attack someone [the U.S]. When the supply of ammunition ran out during Operation Protective Edge, it was the United States that supplied it. The Americans were the ones who gave the money for Iron Dome. The United States was the one that helped us at the United Nations Human Rights Council and they prevent a lot of trouble in the Security Council with vetoes.”

Of course, Obama administration officials hoped that Netanyahu would stabilize his coalition by drawing in the center-left, not someone like Lieberman. Just days before the announcement, it was widely expected that Netanyahu would form a coalition with Isaac Herzog’s Zionist Union, which advocates greater accommodation of Palestinian demands.

But the Zionist Union has been paralyzed by internal divisions, with numerous members of this bloc openly opposing Herzog’s coalition talks with Netanyahu, while Lieberman’s MKs are expected to remain loyal. A stable, right-leaning government may have more credibility with the Israeli public than a fragile “national unity” government when it comes to making compromises for peace. After all, it was the “hard-line” Likud leader Menachem Begin who signed the Camp David Accords with Egypt in 1978.

My esteemed colleague David Makovsky worries that Netanyahu is “closing the door” on policies that “could have blunted a string of international initiatives” targeting Israel in the months ahead. This couldn’t be farther from the truth. Lieberman accepts the Middle East Quartet’s conditions for a two-state solution. Most important, he stated, “When there is a dispute between the integrity of the nation and the integrity of the land, then integrity of the nation is more important. I support a [peace] agreement…when we insist on security arrangements, this is just to avoid the crazy reality we are in.”

The doom-and-gloomers are right that Lieberman’s appointment to the defense ministry will almost certainly be consequential. Word has it that he demanded and received assurances regarding the latitude he will have in office. But Lieberman may just be the man of consequence Israel needs right now.

Gregg Roman is Director of the Middle East Forum, a research center based in Philadelphia. He is a former party official in Yisrael Beytenu and served as an adviser in the Israeli Ministry of Defense

 

 

RU-IS:160525:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Gazprom No Longer Interested in Israeli Gas Field Development

Sputnik 25-May-16 9 (we wait to see! See later article. Don)

 

Russian energy giant Gazprom will not continue the collaboration with the Israel’s Leviathan gas field in the Mediterranean Sea, Russian media reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed Gazprom source.

Russian energy giant Gazprom is no longer interested in participating in the development of Israel’s Leviathan gas field in the Mediterranean Sea, Russian media reported Wednesday, citing an unnamed Gazprom source.

According to the Vedomosti newspaper, the source did not specify why the company had decided to abandon the project. Gazprom is reportedly not considering any other projects in Israel at the moment.

In 2012, the company was in talks with Leviathan’s operating firms on buying a 30-percent stake in the development project. At the time, Total, ExxonMobil, ConocoPhillips, Chevron, Woodside Petroleum also wanted a part in the project, however Gazprom offered the largest sum.

Currently, the Leviathan gas field, first drilled in 2011, is one of the largest young gas reserves in the world. According to the US Geological

 

Survey, Leviathan’s volume of undiscovered reserves amounts to some 620 billion cubic meters of natural gas.

 

IS-MJO:160525:(31-MAY-16):Israel-Jordan gas agreement moves closer

Globes 25-May-16

 

Noble Energy SVP Keith Elliot says an agreement for the export of gas to Jordan will be signed soon.

Senior figures in the Israeli natural gas sector and Noble Energy senior VP Eastern Mediterranean Region Keith Elliot today predicted that an agreement for the export of gas to Jordan would be signed soon. At a conference this week in New York, Elliot asserted, “That’s one example of a situation where Israel has the opportunity to take advantage of the gas not only for its own internal benefits but for a broader geopolitical benefit,” adding that his company was in the process of “consummating a contract” to provide Jordan with natural gas from the Leviathan gas reservoir.

At the same time, the Jordanian parliament yesterday approved investments by Israeli companies in Jordanian infrastructure projects, following several months in which such investments were forbidden. In September 2014, the Leviathan partners signed a letter of intent to supply 45 BCM of gas over 15 years to Jordanian National Electric Power Company (NEPCO). The contract’s amount was estimated at $15 billion. The discussions about the gas plan, however, which have been taking place for nearly 18 months, also led to an impasse in the negotiations between the two countries.

The deal is economically worthwhile for both Israel and Jordan. The distance between the Israel and Jordanian gas transportation networks is only a few dozen kilometers, and NEPCO is considered a reliable customer with a high payment ethic, in contrast to Egypt, for example, which still owes billions of dollars to international energy companies. Jordan does not have its own energy resources, and has remained dependent on imports to this day, despite having been burned by its suppliers quite a few times.

Saudi Arabia halted the supply of its oil to Jordan, after the latter supported the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait. Iraqi oil replaced Saudi Arabia oil until the fall of Saddam Hussein’s regime in 2003. Egyptian gas began flowing in that year, supplying a significant proportion of Jordan’s energy needs, but was cut off completely in 2013, after repeated explosions in the Arab gas pipeline.

Since then, Jordanian industry has been operating on expensive and highly polluting fuel, such as diesel oil. Up until a year ago, this fuel cost six times the price that Jordan paid for Egyptian gas, and took up 30-40% of the state budget in the past two years. At the same time, Jordan has been importing liquefied natural gas (LNG) in the past two years, among other things from Qatar, and from Royal Shell, Vitol, and others.

Up until now, there have been two main obstacles to signing a final gas import agreement: regulation in Israel and poor relations between Israel and the Hashemite kingdom. Now that the discussions about the gas plan are nearing an end (the cabinet this week approved the gas plan with the less restrictive stability clause) , however, it appears that the two countries are ready to move ahead with the agreement.

Elliot said this week that the natural gas that has been flowing from the Tamar reservoir for the past three years had reduced air pollution in Israel and saved Israel billions of shekels. He added that Noble Energy was determined to continue its contribution with a flow of gas from Leviathan by the end of 2019. The Jordanian press and the Al Jazeera news agency both reported that the Jordanian parliament had approved new Israeli investments in the country for the first time in several months.

A senior Israeli gas industry source said today, “Jordan is waving the white flag, and signaling that it wants to import Israeli gas, and the Israeli government is also interested.”

 

 

RU-EFR:160526:(31-MAY-16):Putin says Russia, France reactivate economic cooperation mechanisms

Tass 26-May-16

 

Growth of mutual investments of Russia and France was recorded in 2015 and French companies invested over 1 bln euro, Putin says

Russia and France reactivate mechanisms of economic cooperation, Russian President Vladimir Putin said on Wednesday.

“We are reactivating mechanisms of cooperation. After a long break, we resumed the work of the Interdepartmental Council for Economic Cooperation and the Intergovernmental Commission, which is headed by Prime Ministers on both sides. We agreed to hold another meeting before the end of this year,” Putin said.

The president said growth of mutual investments of Russia and France was recorded in 2015 and French companies invested over 1 bln euro.

“We will definitely welcome that and will do our best to create conditions for further investments, including mutual ones,” Putin said. France is a traditional, long-standing and reliable partner of Russia, he added. At the same time, turnover between Russia and France dropped by more than 30% against the background of surging investments, the Russian president said.

“Despite all the complications we registered growth of mutual investments last year. France’s investments into the Russian economy were growing at an outperforming rate,” Putin said.

None of over 500 French companies left Russian market despite economic and political complications, Putin added.

“Despite known complications of economic nature and the ones motivated by political considerations, none of more than 500 France’s companies operating on the Russian market left it. All of them are working and we are very happy with that,” the Russian president said.

 

 

RU:160527:(31-MAY-16):Russia: Government Plans To Extend Food Imports Embargo

Stratfor 27-May-16

 

Russian Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev plans to extend until the end of 2017 the embargo on food imports from the European Union, the United States and other countries, LETA reported May 27. Medvedev announced the decision during a meeting with members of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs. He said that an appeal would be submitted to President Vladimir Putin and that a government resolution over extending the embargo would be drafted. The embargo is Russia’s response to sanctions leveled on Moscow by the European Union and other Western countries over Russian aggression in Ukraine.

 

 

RU-MED:160527:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s emerging naval presence in the Mediterranean

Aljazeera 27-May-16

 

Russians know that access to the Mediterranean means access to the world.

Luke Coffey is a research fellow specialising in transatlantic and Eurasian security at a Washington DC based think tank. He previously served as a special adviser to the British defence secretary and was a commissioned officer in the United States army.

The centenary of the Sykes-Picot Agreement this month has focused attention on the division of the Middle East into French and British zones of influence after World War I.

Less well known, however, is the Constantinople Agreement made a year before the Sykes-Picot Agreement. Under this, the UK and France agreed to give Russia control of the Turkish Straits as well as Constantinople, then capital of the Ottoman Empire, in the event of a Triple Entente victory in World War I.

Unfettered access to the Mediterranean Sea was crucial for Russia. In 1914, the first year of the Great War, 50 percent of all Russian exports and 90 percent of its agriculture exports passed through the Turkish Straits.

Inside Story – A new Cold War?

The 1917 revolution in Russia took the country out of the war, which meant that the Constantinople Agreement was never realised.

Unhindered access

Even today, Russians know that access to the Mediterranean means access to the world.

During the Cold War, the Soviet Union’s 5th Operational Squadron patrolled the Mediterranean to keep an eye on what the United States and NATO were doing in the region.

After the fall of the Berlin Wall this fleet was disbanded and, until recently, Russia’s maritime presence in the Mediterranean remained limited.

Russian President Vladimir Putin is eager to bring Russia back to its imperial ways and has made the Mediterranean Sea a priority for the Russian Navy.

Earlier this year during a visit to Russian-occupied Crimea, Russian Defence Minister Sergey Shoigu said that the “Mediterranean region was the core of all essential dangers to Russia’s national interests”.

He also announced that a new Russian naval task force for the Mediterranean would be established, probably based on the 5th Operational Squadron which operated during the Cold War.

Russia’s emerging naval presence in the Mediterranean is made possible by US disengagement from the region following the so-called “pivot” or rebalance to Asia.

Putin, always eager to advance his grand strategy for Russia, saw this as an opportunity for the Russian Navy to try to fill the void left by the US Navy.

From the Levant to Gibraltar

In order to operate in the Mediterranean, Moscow has secured access to a chain of ports for refuelling and resupplying the Russian Navy from the Levant to the Strait of Gibraltar – many of which, astoundingly, are located in NATO and the EU countries.

This is a particular concern because NATO has broken off relations with Russia and the European Union has imposed economic sanctions against Moscow.

Russia maintains an important naval base in the Alawite-dominated region of Tartus in Syria and Vladimir Putin wants to maintain this base at all costs. This is why Putin is so eager to see Syrian President Bashir al-Assad remain in power.

Assad in Damascus guarantees Russian ships in Tartus and a naval presence in the Mediterranean Sea.

It’s not just Syria.

Since Russia seized Crimea, the Russian warship Vice Admiral Kulakov visited Malta in July 2014 and the Yaroslav Mudry visited in February 2015. Although Malta is not a member of NATO, it is a member of the EU.

In June 2015, the Russian navy landing ship Korolev 130 visited Greece – a member of both NATO and the EU.

Rumours abound that Moscow is seeking basing rights in Cyprus – another EU member state.

Spanish hospitality

Of all the NATO and EU members hosting the Russian Navy, Spain is the worst. In 2011, Moscow started to regularly use the port facilities at Ceuta – a Spanish enclave in North Africa.

Ceuta is legally part of Spain and is one of only two EU cities  – the other being the Spanish enclave of Melilla – located in mainland Africa. It is also part of the Schengen Agreement and the eurozone.

Since 2011, at least 58 Russian Navy ships have called into the Spanish port, including destroyers, frigates, amphibious assault ships and even an attack submarine.

In total, at least 21 Russian naval vessels have visited Spain to refuel and resupply since Russia invaded and annexed Crimea in March 2014 and the EU began economic sanctions against Moscow.

Disunited for Ukraine

It is irresponsible for European countries to allow Russian warships – especially some of Russia’s most advanced submarines – to use their ports, especially ports located a short distance from important NATO naval bases.

It is also unacceptable that NATO and EU members offer support to the Russian Navy at a time when Moscow is actively attempting to dismember Ukraine and economic sanctions are in place.

By getting access to naval bases in EU and NATO countries, Putin is able to kill two birds with one stone. On one hand, access to these ports makes it easier for the Russian Navy to operate in the Mediterranean Sea to the determent of NATO. On the other hand, Putin shows how divided Europe really is over its policy towards Russia

Once again, Putin is running circles around the West.

 

 

EGE:160527:(31-MAY-16):Is Germany Heading for Economic Crisis?

The Trumpet 27-May-16

 

Germany could be heading for an economic crisis that could revolutionize Europe, wrote George Friedman this month. In an undated pamphlet titled “Germany’s Invisible Crisis,” he warns that Germany’s export-based economy could take a major hit from the global economic slowdown: Germany is the world’s fourth-largest economy. It is also Europe’s largest economy, and any European economic recovery depends, in large part, on Germany’s trajectory.

Germany is the third-largest exporter in absolute terms in the G-20 and is nearly as dependent on exports as Saudi Arabia and South Korea. Given the enormous size of the German economy, the country must export vast amounts every year to maintain social and political stability. Prosperity for exporters depends on the appetites of their customers, and since 2008, their ability to rely on exports has been diminishing. While other major exporters have been struggling, Germany has actually increased its export levels. Germany has thus created a significant vulnerability for itself and will be the next country to face an export crisis. Given the country’s high dependence on exports, this crisis will likely be extreme and destabilizing with negative implications for other European countries. …

Germany appears, on the surface, to have weathered the crisis well to this point. However, in our view, Germany’s growth model will not help the country avoid a crisis for much longer. The strategies Germany has used to maintain high export rates are unsustainable. … At its root, the EU is a free-trade zone. At the center of this is Germany. The free-trade zone, then, is built around a massive exporting machine—which is great for Germany … but makes it difficult for less developed countries (particularly in southern Europe) to develop. Germany’s response to the euro crisis was designed to prevent it from having to pay off the huge debts of southern Europe. But the result was massive unemployment and economic recession. Friedman continues: The level of unemployment in many countries surged but did so most dramatically in the south where unemployment among the Mediterranean countries soared to over 20 percent … and in some cases to 25 percent. These were the same levels reached in the United States during the Great Depression. Countries outside the eurozone weathered the crisis better, but southern European members of the eurozone went into a recession, and as their economies suffered, demand for goods—including German exports—declined. Germany staved off feeling the pain by increasing its exports to China, the United States, and to a lesser extent, the United Kingdom. Demand in China, however, has begun to fall. And there is a limit to how much and how long the U.S. and the UK can fill the gap in demand for Germany’s exports. Germany poses the central problem in Europe. It was structured to be an exporter. Germany did not simply become an exporter after World War ii; it was an exporter from the beginning. Like Japan, it was a latecomer to the

Industrial Revolution. In order to catch up, it had to rely on exports while limiting its domestic consumption. After World War ii, Germany merely returned to this model. In 1989, when the Berlin Wall fell and Germany reunified, it faced the problem of massively uneven development between East Germany and West Germany and the need to finance the integration. The solution was, once again, to increase exports, discourage domestic consumption, and increase savings rates.

Germany’s economic strategy was part of the German dna. It was a strategy in which a highly educated and disciplined society would excel. … Eurasia’s interrelated crises—coupled with the ongoing crisis of exporters and Germany’s fraught relationship with the European Union—have brought Germany’s core economic vulnerability to the fore. There are three indications that the country is heading toward its own crisis. German trade patterns have shifted, return on capital has diminished, and some German companies have begun cutting prices in an attempt to maintain export levels. The tactics Germany has relied on to weather the storm are ineffective in the long term, and there are already signals that Germany’s economy is slowing down as a result. … Germany is not yet in crisis, and many German companies are still sporting at least steady returns. But this report is as much a forecast as it is an analysis. We are looking for where the needle will just begin to waver, and the earnings reports of some large German companies produced some … worrying observations ….

The Germans appear to be attempting to increase exports by decreasing return on capital. This is something that can work, but only temporarily. The first signs of problems in Japan were in the banking system, where the decrease in margins became apparent in rising nonperforming loans and increasing stress as government policy and banking requirements clashed. It is noteworthy that the German banking system is already under pressure even before the crisis we are predicting in Germany has begun to fully unfold. … German banks are still exposed to many of the European countries that have not yet recovered in any meaningful way from 2008. Deutsche Bank currently has about $41.9 trillion worth of derivatives on its books, and in January 2016, Moody’s downgraded Deutsche Bank’s long-term debt and assigned a negative outlook to both the bank’s debt and deposit ratings. German banks are grappling with serious problems, especially with interest rates remaining low and Eurasia’s crises intensifying. Commerzbank’s 2016 first quarter net profits fell by 52 percent while Deutsche Bank’s profits fell by 58 percent. … Germany, one of the world’s largest exporters, is facing a global export crisis. The fact that it has not yet experienced an overall annual export decline is not a comforting thought. With Europe barely recovering from its economic stagnation and other markets similarly constrained, German exports should decline. The fact that they haven’t, and that German banks are troubled in spite of cash flow, indicates that significant price adjustments are being made that affect the profit margins on these exports.

It appears that the problem of contracting exports is being postponed rather than solved. Germany’s high dependence on exports causes the German state, bankers and corporations to want to avoid export decline for as long as possible. Since exports are over 45 percent of Germany’s gdp, a 5 percent drop would result in a decline in gdp of more than 2 percent, which would have a staggering impact. Therefore, the Germans are postponing this decline for as long as possible. However, delaying it compounds the problems in the long run, particularly for already weak

German banks that may be forced to deal with delayed or restructured debt repayments. The Germans are facing a profound financial crisis that can be postponed but not avoided. The world’s economy is stagnating, and exporters around the world are seeing declines. Germany has not so far. When it does, which is inevitable, the fourth-largest economy in the world will suddenly see massive export contractions, declines in gdp, and a significant financial crisis with global implications.

 

 

RU-EGE:160527:(31-MAY-16):German Foreign Minister Steinmeier says extending Russia sanctions more difficult

Reuters 27-May-16

 

An agreement on renewing sanctions against Russia when they run out on July 31 has become more difficult with growing opposition from some EU countries, Germany’s foreign minister said on Thursday.

European Union economic sanctions against Russia were introduced for one year in July 2014 in response to its actions in Ukraine and twice extended in 2015.

“We are aware that resistance in the EU to extending the sanctions toward Russia has increased,” Frank-Walter Steinmeier was quoted by Lithuania’s BNS news agency saying in an interview.

“It will be more difficult than it was last year to find a common position on this issue.”

Germany wants to keep the sanctions until the Minsk peace accords between Russia and Ukraine are implemented, Steinmeier said.

“One thing is for sure. We cannot ignore Russia’s annexation of Crimea in violation of international law and the destabilization of Eastern Ukraine,” he said.

The 28-strong EU needs unanimity to keep the sanctions in place and the bloc’s unity has been increasingly tested on that.

Last week diplomats and officials told Reuters the EU was still on track to renew them, though an extension could be contested and only short-term.

Italy, Greece, Cyprus, Hungary and Bulgaria are among EU states skeptical that sanctions should be extended, diplomats said, facing off against Britain, Sweden, Poland and the Baltic states.

 

 

RU-EU:160526:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Gazprom sees record 2016 gas exports to Europe

Reuters 26-May-16

 

Russia’s Gazprom plans to export a record 165 billion cubic metres (bcm) of gas to Europe this year, the company’s deputy chief executive Alexander Medvedev told reporters on Thursday.

Gazprom generates more than a half its revenue in Europe and falling gas prices have made its gas more attractive to European consumers. It has also tweaked long-term deals with European clients, who have become more demanding thanks to rival sources of fuel, such as seaborne liquefied natural gas (LNG).

“We are going for a record,” Medvedev said about expected gas supplies to Europe and Turkey this year.

Gazprom supplied about 159 bcm of gas to Europe in 2015, or about a third of the region’s needs.

Medvedev did not give an explanation for the expected record. Last week, a Gazprom executive said it planned to produce 452.5 bcm of natural gas in 2016, up from 418.5 bcm last year.

Despite Gazprom’s attempts to raise its exposure to the lucrative European Union market, some European countries have been trying to wean themselves off their dependence on energy supplies from Russia.

Medvedev said the average gas price for the year was expected to be $167-$171 per 1,000 cubic metres.

That price is broadly in line with average levels at Europe’s main freely-traded gas hubs in Britain and the Netherlands, showing how Gazprom has sweetened its sales pitch to encourage consumption by customers, analysts said.

Gazprom’s prices have typically been higher than the average level at European hubs.

A wave of competing supplies from LNG export plants in the United States threatens to undercut Russia’s dominant share of European gas markets, which currently stands at 31 percent.

Analysts have predicted that Gazprom may try to sweeten its terms and pump more supply to Europe to hold onto that market share.

Medvedev also said he was against breaking up Gazprom’s monopoly on gas exports to Europe via pipelines, because it would harm Russia’s export revenues.

Gazprom has faced increased competition in Russia from Novatek and Rosneft, with its pricing policy constrained by government-imposed tariffs.

Both companies have been actively pushing the government to allow them to export gas to Europe via pipelines.

 

 

EGR-RU:160527:(31-MAY-16):Greece and Russia to Sign New Oil Supply Deal

The Moscow Times 27-May-16

 

State energy company Rosneft is to sign a new deal supplying Greece with oil, the RBC news outlet reported Thursday.

The contract between Rosneft and the Greek Hellenic Petroleum company will be signed on Friday to coincide with President Vladimir Putin’s visit to Athens, presidential aide Yury Ushakov said.

Ushakov did not reveal how much the deal was worth.

Energy Minister Alexander Novak announced in July 2015 that Russia was ready to “support Greece’s economic recovery through increased cooperation in the energy sector,” and was looking into ways of directly supplying the country with raw materials, the Vedomosti newspaper reported.

 

 

EU-UK:160527:(31-MAY-16):EU leaders are planning a post-Brexit future without the UK

Independent 27-May-16

 

EU leaders are planning a post-Brexit future without the UK

Concerns over ‘contagion’ of anti-EU sentiment is thought to be a key reason why Britain is unlikely to be offered a favourable trade deal in the event of Brexit

Senior EU leaders are preparing the ground for a possible Brexit vote with high-level meetings aimed at a “plan B” future of the bloc without the UK, including closer co-operation on security and defence matters.

The leaders of Germany, France, Italy, Belgium and other core members are likely to “double down” on closer union, the Financial Times reported, amid concern that Brexit could encourage separatist sentiments in other EU states.

Officials expect a punitive approach to Britain, with an official meeting of 27 leaders – excluding David Cameron – expected shortly after a potential Brexit vote.

Senior Whitehall figures have identified EU leaders’ concerns over “contagion” of anti-EU sentiment as a key reason why, despite the reassurances of Leave campaigners, the bloc will be unlikely to offer Britain a favourable trade deal in the event of Brexit. One senior civil servant said Berlin, Paris and Brussels would see the post-Brexit landscape as an “existential battle” to save the European project.

Officials in Paris have taken a hard line, with one senior figure telling the FT: “Playing down or minimising the consequences of [of leaving the EU] would put Europe at risk…the principle of consequences is important.”

German Chancellor Angela Merkel is said to favour a softer approach. German officials, however, told the FT, that they expected the market realities for the post-Brexit economy could prove punitive enough.

Speaking at the G7 summit in Japan, where leaders agreed a short statement warning of the “potential shock” of Brexit and its “serious risk for growth”, David Cameron said it was right to listen to allies, but appeared to dial down his recent warnings of the consequences of a Leave vote. “Britain is an amazing country,” he said. “We can find our way whatever the British people choose.”

Closer integration in a post-Brexit EU is likely to take the form of tighter security and defence collaboration, against the backdrop of aggression from Russia in the East, and the threat of Islamist terrorism enhanced by the war in Syria and instability in neighbouring Turkey.

Plans to enhance the military role of the European Union, potentially paving the way for a future EU army, are being held back until after the UK referendum, according to reports.

The plans, which have only been shown to EU diplomats, are understood to include proposals for new European military structures, including a headquarters.

According to The Times, which has seen extracts of the plans from diplomatic notes, the proposals will not be sent to national governments until after Britain’s EU referendum on 23 June to avoid giving succour to the Leave campaign. Similar plans were vetoed by the UK in 2011, and the Government has repeatedly insisted that Britain will never be part of any EU army.

However, it is understood the plans, drawn over 18 months by EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini, are supported by other leading EU countries, and refer to powers set out in the 2009 Lisbon Treaty, which could allow nine or more member states to embark on their own plans for an EU military headquarters.

The draft paper states that “in turbulent times, we need a compass to navigate the waters of a faster-changing world” adding that the EU can “step up its contribution to Europe’s security and defence“, according to a diplomatic note seen by The Times.

However, Ms Mogherini’s spokesman told the newspaper the defence plan “would in no way aim to set up the EU army”.

A Ministry of Defence spokesman said: ”We will never be part of an EU army. We retain a veto on all defence matters in the EU and we will oppose any measures which would undermine member states’ military forces.”

 

 

RU-EU:160528:(31-MAY-16):Putin: Romania ‘in crosshairs’ after opening NATO missile defense base

RT News 28-May-16

 

During a visit to Greece intended to repair ties with the EU, Vladimir Putin said that Russia has “no choice” but to target Romania, which has recently opened a NATO missile defense base, and Poland, which plans to do so within two years.

“If yesterday people simply did not know what it means to be in the crosshairs in those areas of Romania, then today we will be forced to carry out certain measures to ensure our security. And it will be the same with Poland,” Putin said during a joint press conference with Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras in Athens on Friday.

The Russian President was referring to the Deveselu facility that officially became operational in May after nearly a decade and $800 million of planning and construction.

“At the moment the interceptor missiles installed have a range of 500 kilometers, soon this will go up to 1000 kilometers, and worse than that, they can be rearmed with 2400km-range offensive missiles even today, and it can be done by simply switching the software, so that even the Romanians themselves won’t know,” said Putin, who is in Greece for a two-day tour.

“We have the capability to respond. The whole world saw what our medium-range sea-based missiles are capable of [in Syria]. But we violate no agreements. And our ground-based Iskander missiles have also proven themselves as superb,” continued Putin.

Russia’s political and military leadership has repeatedly spoken out against the missile defense shield since it was proposed during the George W. Bush administration, and Putin reiterated that Moscow does not believe the European part of it is targeted against a potential threat from Iran.

“NATO fend us off with vague statements that this is no threat to Russia… That the whole project began as a preventive measure against Iran’s nuclear program. Where is that program now? It doesn’t exist,” said Putin, referring to the nuclear treaty that was concluded between the world’s major powers and Tehran last year. “We have been saying since the early 2000s that we will have to react somehow to your moves to undermine international security. No one is listening to us.”

Alexis Tsipras in his turn reiterated that Russia is a player in the European security theater and that current attempts to alienate Moscow with measures such as sanctions reminds him of Cold War times.

“European security cannot be achieved without cooperation and dialogue with Russia,” Tsipras said in an interview with Sputnik. “I don’t believe that we can move forward or ensure compliance with international law while caught in a vicious circle of sanctions, militarization and Cold War rhetoric.”

President Putin arrived in Greece on Friday for a two-day visit that involves meetings with his Greek counterpart, Prokopis Pavlopoulos, Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras, and other top-level discussions.

It is the Russian president’s first EU trip in seven months, and comes just weeks before Brussels decides on whether to extend EU sanctions against Russia.

Bilateral trade and investment, as well as joint energy and transport projects, were said to be major issues on the agenda for the visit. Another pressing matter for both Athens and Moscow, the economic sanctions against Russia, will also be on the table. Prime Minister Tsipras has already told RIA Novosti that the restrictions have had a negative impact on Russian-Greek economic ties, but added there are areas not covered by the sanctions where business between the two countries could perform well.

The Greek PM laid a foundation of trust with the Russian leader and even proposed a visa-free travel regime in the EU for Russian nationals.

“We overcame all the difficulties that arose due to changes in the issuance of Schengen visas, strengthened the work of our consulates in Russia by attracting dozens of new employees, and we are ready to meet the high demand of Russian nationals for travel to Greece. At the same time, I find it necessary, as I have already mentioned at a European level, that dialogue is relaunched on easing the visa regime for Russian citizens,” Tsipras said.

Promoting international security and tackling illegal migration, which is the hot issue in Greece, are also points of mutual interest.

On Saturday, President Putin will attend a prayer service at Mount Athos, which is home to 20 monasteries and is an important spiritual site for Orthodox Christians. Joined by Patriarch Kirill, leader of the Russian Orthodox Church, the president is expected to take part in millennial celebrations of the Russian monastic presence on Athos.

 

 

RU-MIN:160529:(31-MAY-16):Russia Said To Suspend S-300 To Iran

MiddleEastNewsLine 29-May-16

 

Russia was said to have suspended the delivery of the S-300 air defense system to Iran.

Israeli sources said the Kremlin has ordered a halt to the delivery of the S-300PMU2 to Iran. They said three batteries have arrived but the last two were held back by Russia because of lack of Iranian payment.

“Russia has yet again frozen transfers of S-300 missile systems to Iran,” Israeli defense analyst Alex Fishman said.

On May 26, Fishman said in a report for Israel’s Ynet news agency that Moscow transferred three out of five S-300 missile batteries. But Fishman said delivery of the remaining two batteries was suspended because Iran has not paid for them.

“The systems that have already arrived are incomplete systems, as the Iranians have been unable to pay for all of the components,” Fishman said.

The sources said Russia has not delivered complete interceptors for the S-300. But they said Russia has failed to guarantee that the missiles would not be operational in 2016.

“It’s clear that the Russians want to drag this out, but it’s not clear how long this can go on without another crisis with Iran,” a source said.

“Moscow, however, does not want a crisis.”

 

 

TIS:160529:(31-MAY-16):ISIS Revenue Down 23%; Policies Change to Compensate

RT News 29-May-16

 

The Islamic State is losing significant amounts of its oil revenue as it loses control of territory in Iraq and Syria. According to a report by the US-based analysis group IHS, ISIS is compensating for the fiscal downturn – estimated to be 23% — by implementing additional taxes and penalties, one such being a penalty for possessing alcohol. The amount of revenue ISIS is believed to have made by selling deeply discounted oil on the black market ranges from “several hundred thousand dollars to $2 billion,” according to IHS, which pegs the commensurate loss of territory due to international efforts to fight the terrorist group at 22 per cent. The US Department of Defense is working on a strategy called Operation Tidal Wave II which, according to the analysts, focuses “specifically on supply lines tied to the illicit movement of oil said to be financing regional terrorism operations.” As part of a military operation that is under way to recapture Fallujah in Iraq, the US announced on Saturday that the ISIS commander was among 70 of the group’s operatives killed in an airstrike last week. In Syria, ISIS is reported to be successful in defeating rebel forces near the border with Turkey, capturing a key town on the rebel supply route.

 

 

IS:160529:(31-MAY-16):Leviathan partners sign $3 bln Israeli natgas supply deal

Reuters 29-May-16

 

The partners in Israel’s Leviathan natural gas field said on Sunday they had signed a deal to supply as much as $3 billion worth of gas to a new private power plant in central Israel.

Leviathan, one of the largest offshore discoveries of the past decade, was found off Israel’s Mediterranean coast in 2010. It has an estimated 622 cubic meters of natural gas (BCM) of reserves and is expected to become operational in 2019.

Under the deal, Leviathan will provide up to 13 billion BCM for 18 years to the IPM plant in Be’er Tuvia once gas starts flowing from Leviathan.

The contract comes a week after Israel’s government approved a revised deal aimed at fast-tracking development of the huge field, which has been mostly earmarked for exports.

In January Leviathan signed a $1.3 billion gas supply contract with Edeltech, Israel’s largest private power producer.

Texas-based Noble Energy, Israeli conglomerate Delek Group and Israel’s Ratio Oil Exploration own the Leviathan site, which will cost more than $5 billion to develop.

“This deal is an important milestone, in that it establishes another domestic contract that, together with additional domestic and export contracts, are essential for the quick development of Leviathan,” said Niv Sarne, Noble’s manager of business development.

The Leviathan project hit a major obstacle in March when Israel’s Supreme Court blocked a previous agreement between the field’s shareholders and the Israeli state, the terms of which would have stayed unchanged for 10 years.

It had been opposed by opposition parties and public advocacy groups on grounds that Noble and Delek – which also own the adjacent Tamar field – would control too much of Israel’s natural gas supply.

The ruling will allow the government to change taxes, export quotas or other regulations in connection with the Leviathan field. (Reporting by Steven Scheer; Editing by Raissa Kasolowsky)

 

 

TU-MPA-IS:160529:(31-MAY-16):Turks and Palestinians Look for Ways to Supplant Israeli Exports

Media Line MidEast Daily News 29-May-16

 

Turkish and Palestinian businessmen met in Ramallah on Sunday to explore ways to increase trade between them with the goal of supplanting Israeli exports with their own goods. The meeting was described as the first assembly of the new organization, the Palestine Turkey Coordination Council, which, according to the Ma’an news agency, was created “to strengthen commercial exchange between Turkey and Palestine in attempt ‘to replace Israeli products consumed in Palestine with Turkish products.’” The agency quoted the Turkish participants as complaining that Israel initially banned entry of its delegation but succumbed to pressure from Turkey’s foreign ministry. The value of Palestinian imports from Israel is pegged at $3 billion annually, while it imports $700 million worth of goods from Turkey. For their part, Turks import about $100 million worth of goods from the Palestinian Authority. Only Israel and China send more to the Palestinians than does Turkey. Palestinian leaders have for some time been encouraging a boycott of goods that are made in Israel, asking consumers not to buy them. But those efforts have fallen short because of the lack of replacement products not originating in Israel. Osama Amr, who headed the Palestinian delegation, told the agency that, “Several Turkish economic sectors are willing to fill the needs of the Palestinian market and we hope we can have a direct commercial exchange between Palestine and Turkey without any obstacles.”

 

 

RU-EU:160530:(31-MAY-16):Juncker to visit Putin in June on background of Russia sanctions

New Europe 30-May-16

 

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker confirmed that he has accepted the invitation to attend an event in Russia on 16 June, in a move that may stir debate on the EU’s tense relations with Moscow.

Ten days ago, EU officials were still insisting that it was unclear if Juncker would accept the invitation from the Kremlin to participate in the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), though Russian officials already knew that he would attend.

The St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF) is an annual Russian business event for the economic sector, which has been held in St. Petersburg since 1997. Putin takes part in every event since 2005. According to TASS, the Russian state-controlled news agency, every year 10,000 from 70 countries take part in the event. Outside sources give a much lower figure of participants.

Juncker will be the first leader of an EU institution to visit Russia since sanctions were imposed in March 2014 in response to Russia’s annexation of Ukraine’s Crimean peninsula and support for separatists in eastern Ukraine.

Juncker’s visit could weigh on EU’s decision on whether to renew the sanctions on Russia, possibly strengthening President Vladimir Putin’s position.

Juncker, who has called for a “practical relationship” with Moscow, has faced criticism from some European officials who favor keeping sanctions in place.

In a statement of guiding principles issued in March, EU foreign ministers reiterated that a change in sanctions was conditional on a peace accord in Ukraine and called for better defenses against varied threats from Russia. But they also supported “selective engagement with Russia” and a “need to engage in people-to-people contacts”.

In November, Juncker wrote to Putin, suggesting closer trade ties between the EU and the Russian-led Eurasian Economic Union once a ceasefire was implemented in Ukraine. Putin dismissed the idea.

In October, Juncker stirred controversy by saying “we can’t go on like this” with the confrontation with Russia and that Europe should not be “dictated” to by the US.

On Friday last week, during a state visit to Greece, Putin on Friday sharply criticised western policy toward Moscow. He accused the EU and the USA of stifling trade and energy cooperation with Russia.

Some Russia-friendly EU countries are against maintaining the sanctions. Thus, Hungarian foreign minister Peter Szijjarto said on Wednesday last week, after meeting Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov, that Hungary will not accept an “automatic” decision regarding the sanctions currently in place until the end of July.

“EU members have to make a decision about (the sanctions) at the highest level,” Szijjarto said. “What we will not accept for sure is for the decision to take place below the surface.”

Hungary has expressed opposition to the sanctions because Russia is an important market for Hungarian goods, but has said it will abide by the EU position.

 

 

RU-IS:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russia’s Friend at Court in Israel

Natural Gas Europe 30-May-16

 

Avigdor Lieberman, an ultra-nationalist pro-Russian right-wing politician, is expected to be confirmed as Israel’s next minister for defense, which could influence the development of Israel’s gas industry.

Lieberman was born in Moldova when it was still a part of the Soviet Union and he speaks fluent Russian. He immigrated to Israel in 1978 at the age of 20. Following a short business career he became the director-general of the prime minister’s office when Benjamin Netanyahu became prime minister for the first time, exactly 20 years ago this month.

He later resigned this post, established his own party and became foreign minister, a job he held for six years from 2009. From time to time he left politics and became involved in international trade particularly with eastern European and Eurasian regimes. His friendship with Vladimir Putin, the Russian president, is not a secret.

Opposition to rapprochement with Turkey

During the last few months when Turkey negotiated the rapprochement agreement with Israel, Lieberman, still in the opposition, sided with the Russian position, opposing the rapprochement and said that it was better for Israel to strengthen its ties with Greece and Cyprus, two of Russia’s allies in the region. Israel’s outgoing defence minister, Moshe Ya’alon, was also against the rapprochement unless Turkey expelled Hamas operatives from Turkey. Now Lieberman is expected to support Gazprom’s engagement in Israel’s natural gas market.

Last week, after Lieberman’s appointment, he met – accidentally, according to his associates – Yossi Abu, the CEO of Delek Drilling and Avner, two Delek Group’s subsidiaries, at an upscale restaurant in Jerusalem. The meeting lasted just a few minutes.

For many years Lieberman has been the main pillar of support for the gas monopoly among Israel’s political elite. Uzi Landau, his party member, who served as energy minister at the beginning of the decade, opposed all legislation aimed at raising taxes on producers or limiting their export rights. When those issues were debated and voted in parliament, Lieberman’s party objected, despite being part of the coalition.

Lieberman was defeated on both those issues. Lieberman also supported the natural gas framework, although his party voted against it in parliament. Lieberman sought the post of minister for defence, a position now his subject to confirmation by parliament.

Now that his aim has been achieved and the framework has been approved, the Israeli natural gas industry might be on a verge of a new, pro-Russian, era.

Winners and losers

A gas deal with Russia would serve a few of the stakeholders well. Russia would gain an important geopolitical coup and would bring Israel, a long-time US ally in the Middle East, into its sphere of influence. It would also enable the Leviathan shareholders to monetize their holdings, something they could not otherwise do, in the foreseeable future because of gas market conditions; Israeli officials might find a Russian involvement attractive as it may secure a second connection from  the gas fields to the shore and increase energy security in the country.

A Russian deal would displease the Turkish government who sees Israeli gas as a means of escaping reliance on Gazprom. It would also displease the US administration which, unlike Turkey, would be in a position to try to stop it.

However even if a deal does go through it would not guarantee the development of Leviathan. In the framework there are no binding obligations on gas companies to develop the gas fields and there is no mention of sanctions against them if they do not develop the field by 2019. However bringing Gazprom into play would limit the options of Israeli regulators and the ability of the Israeli government to act against the gas monopoly if they do not adhere to the framework’s guidelines.

 

Top of the Document

CV-CR:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russian Orthodox Church welcomes new papal envoy to Moscow

Catholic World News 30-May-16

 

The Russian Orthodox Church has welcomed the appointment of a seasoned Vatican diplomat as apostolic nuncio to Russia.

Archbishop Celestino Migliore, who has most recently been serving as the papal nuncio in Poland, was named on May 28 to become the Pope’s representative in Moscow. A spokesman for the Orthodox Church saw the appointment as a hopeful sign for closer relations between Rome and Moscow, noting Archbishop Migliore’s reputation and “especially the fact that he is among the most expert Vatican diplomats.”

Archbishop Miglione has been the Vatican’s representative to the Council of Europe; the deputy Secretary of State; and from 2002 to 2010 the Holy See’s representative at UN headquarters in New York.

In Moscow he replaces Archbishop Ivan Jurkovic, who was named in February to become the Vatican’s representative at UN offices in Geneva.

 

Top of the Document

RU-EGR:160529:(31-MAY-16):Putin visits Russian Orthodox monastic community in Greece

Washington Post 29-May-16

 

Russian President Vladimir Putin visited a Russian Orthodox monastery Saturday as he wrapped up a two-day visit to Greece, which is looking for more Russian investment and tourism as it copes with a prolonged financial crisis and a massive wave of migrants.

Putin, who has sought to capitalize on the strained relations between Greece and many other European Union members, said Russia seeks to cooperate with Greece in the energy sector. Several Russian ministers also expressed interest in the privatization of Greek railways and in the northern port of Thessaloniki, but no major deals were announced. Only lower lever “cooperation agreements” were reached during the visit.

Greek Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras had said the Russian president’s visit was a chance to “upgrade” relations.

On Saturday, Putin visited a Russian Orthodox monastery Saturday on the northern Greek peninsula of Mount Athos. The Russian leader praised the spiritual uplift and moral guidance provided by the austere monastic community in a sacred place. Putin said the Orthodox tradition shared by Russia is particularly important at this moment in history.

“Today, as we resurrect the values of patriotism, historical memory and traditional culture, we hope for … a strengthening of relations” with Mount Athos, he said.

During his trip, Putin expressed gratitude for Greece’s friendship — and used his visit to blast U.S. policy toward Moscow. He described a newly expanded U.S. missile defense system in Europe as a threat to Russia’s national security and said his country would retaliate.

At the height of Greece’s financial crisis last year, Athens had sought aid from Russia as a counterbalance to its difficult negotiations with its EU and International Monetary Fund creditors. The limited concrete results of Putin’s long-anticipated visit left some disappointed.

Panagiotis Lafazanis, a former energy minister who has left the ruling Syriza party, said the Greek government had de-emphasized the Putin visit in order to curry favor with U.S. and NATO officials.

Greek opposition figures were pleased with Putin’s decision to meet opposition leader Kyriakos Mitsotakis. Greek tourist officials said Putin’s visit would help encourage more Russians to visit Greece. Strained ties with Turkey and lax airport security in Egypt have reduced the number of Russian tourists going to those sun-drenched countries.

During his visit to Mount Athos, where women are not allowed to visit any of the 20 monasteries there, Putin repeatedly praised the spirit of the monastic community.

“Here in Mount Athos, there is great and important work done on moral values,” Putin said after a Mass in his honor, where he was seated in the bishop’s throne.

Putin flew from Athens to Thessaloniki on Saturday morning, traveled by road to a port near Mount Athos and then took a boat — the only way to reach the isolated community. Instead of the usual small ferry, the Russian president used a 33-meter (110-foot) yacht provided by the Greek navy.

Patriarch Kirill of Moscow traveled to the monastery with Putin to help celebrate 1,000 years of Russian presence at Mount Athos.

At Karyes, the administrative center of Mount Athos, Putin was greeted by the 20 abbots of the monasteries and 20 representatives of the monks on the peninsula, as well as a representative of the Greek Orthodox Patriarch of Constantinople, under whose jurisdiction Mount Athos falls.

Security in Mount Athos was extremely tight. Besides Putin’s large entourage, there was a heavy Greek police and coast guard presence, with divers guarding and inspecting the landing site and snipers deployed throughout Putin’s route.

Trips by other male pilgrims to the Russian St. Panteleimon monastery were canceled two weeks ago.

Putin headed to Thessaloniki on Saturday night for a flight back to Moscow.

 

Top of the Document

RU-EGR:160528:(31-MAY-16):Russian Tourist Numbers to Greece Up More Than 500 Percent

The Moscow Times 28-May-16

 

The number of Russian tourists visiting Greece has skyrocketed by more than 500 percent, the Russian Tour Operators Association announced Friday.

A total of 10,000 Russian travelers moved to visit Greece in March, up 523.6 percent on the previous year, the group said in a statement. Between January and April, 20,000 Russians visited Greece, a 135 percent rise on 2015.

Russians spent almost 8 million euro ($8.9 million) in Greece during the month of March, a 180 percent increase on last year.

In late April, the Russian Tourism Industry Union reported that the Greek Consulate in Moscow was overwhelmed with visa applications submitted by Russians wanting to travel to Greece for the May holidays.

The increased interest in Greece comes amid Moscow’s ban on flights to Turkey and Egypt, both once popular Russian tourist destinations.

 

Top of the Document

IS-MEPT:160531:(31-MAY-16):Netanyahu Ready to Discuss Arab Peace Initiative

ICEJ News Briefs 31-May-16

 

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a surprising announcement Monday evening, saying that his government is now ready to enter into negotiations with the Palestinian Authority based on the so-called Arab Peace initiative, which would see Israel withdraw from the West Bank and make other concessions in return for diplomatic relations with the 22 members of the Arab League.

“I remain committed to making peace with the Palestinians and with all our neighbors,” Netanyahu said in a press conference following the swearing- in ceremony. “The Arab peace initiative includes positive elements that can help revive constructive negotiations with the Palestinians. We are willing to negotiate with the Arab states revisions to that initiative so that it reflects the dramatic changes in the region since 2002, but maintains the agreed goal of two states for two peoples.”

The issue is expected to cause friction within the governing coalition going forward.

 

Top of the Document

EGR-EU:160531:(31-MAY-16):Greece: Minister Says Country Cannot Perform Additional Obligations For Loans

Stratfor 31-May-16

 

Greek Finance Minister Euclid Tsakalotos said in a recent letter to the European Commission, European Central Bank and International Monetary Fund that Greece will not be able to implement a number of the changes required of it to receive fresh bailout loans, EUobserver reported May 30. In the letter, which has since become public, Tsakalotos said Greece would be unable to cut aid for small pensions and that the country would like to exempt state-guaranteed loans from a plan to sell non-performing loans. Much remains unclear about the letter, including how it could affect an understanding reached May 25  between Athens and its creditors to temporarily forestall a Greek default, giving Greece 10.3 billion euros (nearly $11.5 billion) in bailout funds over the coming months. The letter was sent sometime last week, though it is still unclear when.

 

Top of the Document

RU:160530:(31-MAY-16):Russia To Spend More Than $16 Billion On Arms Industry

Radio free Europe 30-May-16

 

Russia will spend around 1.1 trillion rubles ($16.7 billion) on its military manufacturing sector in the 2016-2020 period.

According to TASS, Russian Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin made the remark during a meeting attended by Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev on May 30.

Medvedev told his deputies that Russia was currently the second-largest arms exporter in the world and it should retain this position.

The Russian military suffered years of neglect after the Soviet collapse, but in recent years has undergone a major overhaul.

 

Top of the Document

UK-EU:160529:(31-MAY-16):The battle for Brexit

New Europe 29-Mar-16

 

Martin Callanan, a member of the House of Lords and former Chairman of the European Conservatives and Reformists, does not shy away from expressing his political convictions. A proponent of the Leave campaign in the UK referendum for European Union membership, Lord Callanan sat down with New Europe to discuss the June 23 vote, and the state of the European Union

What are your comments on statements of foreign leaders like those of US President Barack Obama? How have they affected the situation in the UK with the referendum?

Actually, I think Obama’s statement backfired on the Remain campaign. I think it would be perfectly legitimate for Obama to come to the UK and say: “It’s your decision but in my view and in the US view you should remain and influence the EU in a direction, in which we would approve.”

But he did not just say that. Instead there were apocalyptic warnings about what might happen if we leave, saying that we will be at the ‘back of the queue’ for the trade deals etc. Most people took offence at that because when the US needed our help in Afghanistan, Iraq and Kuwait, and obviously through NATO we have always been in the front of the queue – then, when they needed our assistance. So are they really saying that if we make a democratic decision to leave the EU and want to conclude trade agreements – they are really going to say ‘no’?

As a politician, how do you ‘sell’ to the voters that the UK should leave the EU?

I think it’s all about the democracy and taking back control of our affairs. Politicians are elected to Westminster. They take decisions on the people’s behalf. If [the people] do not like these decisions, they can kick them out. The problem of the EU’s supranational government is that nobody elects Jean-Claude Juncker. You may like him or not like him, but if you don’t you can’t get rid of him. In fact, the qualification to be the Commissioner is almost as if you have to have lost an election to do it. Juncker was a successful Prime Minister of Luxembourg and as soon as he loses an election in Luxembourg he is made the President of the Commission. Neil Kinnock and Peter Mandelson were also appointed Commissioners when they lost domestic support. It’s almost as if the EU is an anti-democratic project.

For the first time we had the Spitzenkandidaten process – isn’t that a positive step?

At the end of the day, in the European elections people are were still electing the Members of the European Parliament. I know that they are trying to pretend that this Spitzenkandidaten process is trying to lend some air of democratic legitimacy. We did some polling and the level of knowledge of voters whether they are voting for the Spitzenkandidaten candidate or candidates is almost zero.

Despite your pessimistic views of the EU, how would you like this system to work?

It is not going to work because for it to work, it has to be a pan-European democracy. Because ideally, people have to think that they are voting the same as the citizens from all of the Europe in order to elect a government to run Europe, but it just doesn’t happen! People don’t think this, and in most cases they vote for local candidates who they are familiar with. Most people have no idea about these pan-European political parties or their members. Nobody has heard of them.

Domestically, is the referendum battle being fought on a level playing field?

Not at all. The financial advantage has been with the Remain campaign. They are backed by big corporate bankers, including the Goldman Sachs of this world and by the taxpayers! The government, quite disgracefully in my view, spent 10 million pounds of taxpayers’ money on leaflets for every single house in the UK, explaining why the government thought we should stay in the EU. The problem with that is two fold, first of all, they promised at the time of the referendum bill that they wouldn’t, and secondly, it produces a skewed playing field. If Brexit loses, then they’ll complain that the referendum wasn’t fair which is not what anybody wants. We want a fair and balanced referendum that will allow for everyone to make an informed choice.

European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker said the UK will not get any special treatment if they decide to leave. What are your expectations in theory if the UK decides to leave?

In my opinion, not many things are going to change. There is a two-year negotiation process at least, maybe even longer, if they choose to accept it. We already have all the legislation aligning our legislation with the Single Market. We fulfil the criteria for entry to the Single Market. Obviously, one of the advantages of Brexit is that we can change some of that for our domestic companies that won’t trade with Europe in the future.

When something is obviously in commercial interests of both parties; Germany will continue to want to sell BMWs and Mercedes in the UK, and the UK is quite keen to keep selling Land Rovers and Jaguars, I just think it is inconceivable that there won’t be some kind of a deal coming out for both sides.

At the end of the day, I am not supporting Brexit because I want to build a big wall around the UK and insulate ourselves from the rest of the Europe. Europe is a great place and I have many friends living there. I want the closest possible cooperation between the governments of Europe and I hope this will continue after Brexit. Nowhere else in the world do we have to have a political federation in order to have good relations. New Zealand has good relation with Australia and no one asks them to join Australia. The same applies to relations between Canada and the US.

How are the current affair topics, such as migration and terrorism affecting the vote? Is it a good idea to leave when there are so many crises?

When are we going to have this referendum then? We promised it in our election manifesto and I am a believer in politicians doing what they say. So, it’s right that we delivered it. Credit to David Cameron for doing that. Indeed, we could have delayed it until 2017, but then France and Germany said they don’t want it in 2017 because they have domestic elections. Europe is in a perpetual crisis and there’s never a right time. It’s right that we give people the choice, and it’s right that we do it in the background of all the crises Europe is facing. We’re having a bit of a lull in the Euro crisis, but that will come back again before long. Migration will be a problem for years to come, terrorism is also likely to be on our agenda for years to come as well unfortunately.

Don’t you think that sharing intelligence can benefit the UK?

Of course I do, but why could we not continue to share intelligence afterwards? We have fantastic intelligence sharing cooperation with the US and Canada. It is in our interests to cooperate together with the EU and it is in our interests to fight terrorism together, but we do not have to be in the EU for this. It’s nonsense to try and say that this is related to us leaving the EU.

The talks on the referendum caused a lot of friction among and within the political parties in the UK. How do you expect it will affect the political structures of the UK?

No question that it has caused a lot of tension and division within my party and I regret that. Given the rancour and the poison it will be very difficult for the party to get back together again afterwards. It’s no question that the way the referendum campaign is being conducted will make this very difficult.

Do you think the EU leaders learned a lesson from their strong campaigning in the referendum in Greece, and that this has something to do with the decision of European leaders not to campaign in the referendum?

This is an issue that didn’t exactly turn out well for them is it? But then of course that’s an example of the anti-democratic nature of the EU. The Greeks vote one way and their votes get completely ignored. They might as well not have bothered.

Any prediction about the outcome of the referendum?

I think it’s going to be very close. It’s safe to say that in referenda across the world the status quo has an inbuilt advantage. Trying to get people to vote for change is always more difficult.

 

Top of the Document

Facebook Page ‘Alethia’ BibleTruthandProphecy
Or our website
BibleTruthandProphecy (Subscribe for updates)

If you would like to subscribe to our YouTube channel, once you have clicked ‘Subscribe’ make sure you click the cog next to the subscribe button and select ‘Send me all notifications for this channel’

Download our ‘Free’ Bible APP – ‘KeyToThe Bible’ for i-phone or Android
Download here…