EU now at a crossroads: Reform or self-destruction
Martin Jay, Strategic Culture, Jun 13 2024
The EU has just experienced a monumental change, following years of failed immigration policies, which has ushered in a massive number of far-right MEPs in the more powerful EU member states. It’s too early to say whether this will make too much of a change to policy decisions at the highest echelons of the European Union but certainly the European Parliament itself is, possibly for the first time ever, going to be an interesting place with now a quarter of all of the 720 MEPs coming from far-right groups. Traditionally most people who voted in EU elections were stalwart supporters of the project and the ethos of one Europe united by a policy of free movement of goods, services and people and, for many, a single currency. The few who voted against the mainstream parties, the main bloc made up of Christian democrats and socialists, were those who wanted to use their vote as a throw-away gesture to send a signal to their own elites that they want change. That protest vote in the past was always very small as the EU elite in Brussels always benefited from a voting system which was tilted in their favour. But no more.
The European Parliament, which most sceptics considered to be a fake assembly whose only real role is to rubber stamp draft legislation from either the powerful European Commission or member states (via the European Council), could now become suddenly relevant to the whole project. For the last five years, there has only been two Irish MEPs to take the floor and tackle the European Commission head on, on its genocide in Gaza or its phoney war in Ukraine. But now something like 180 MEPs will use their two minutes speaking time to tackle the commission on its failed foreign policy, immigration and trade deals with China, for example. The Ukraine war could be a central theme which will probably be a thorn in the side of the European Commission and its chief, whoever that might be, as despite supporting statements from the Christian Democratic group in the European parliament it is not a certainty that Ursula von der Leyen will return as Commission chief.
If she succeeds and stays on as EU Commission president, she will have a tough time in parliamentary plenary sessions as Europe’s biggest countries, who pay the most into the EU budget, have picked up the most far-right seats. Marine Le Pen’s Rassemblement National scored the most decisive victory, winning 30 of the country’s 81 seats, and more than double the votes of President Emmanuel Macron’s Renew party. That political slaughter pushed Macron to call a snap election. Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s Brothers of Italy won 24 seats and increased her share of the national vote, and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) came second in Germany and snapped up 15 seats. Presently the AfD doesn’t have a pan-European group to align itself to and, under EU rules, benefit from huge amounts of cash from the EU parliament as it was kicked out of one of the two ‘groups’, prompting fears that it will create one itself and invite others to join it.
In the European parliament both France’s and Italy’s far-right MEPs are in different groups, but in reality, when it comes to voting, for sure there will be a unified policy on most issues which will give them leverage with the European Commission that we have never seen in the short history of the EU. It’s important to note that far-right parties topped the polls in Austria and Hungary, too, with important gains in Spain and Cyprus. All of these countries have one thing in common: real immigration problems which neither the mainstream political groups nor the EU has addressed. But the real issue is the identity and survival of the European Union itself as this shake-up is certainly going to threaten the traditional power structure. Ursula von der Leyen represents the old guard and everything which is wrong with the EU: deluded, outdated views run by elitists who believe the only solution to the EU’s power problem is to take more. Unlike President Macron who wisely stated to the press that the far-right votes were a message which he is listening to, von der Leyen’s statements were more about fighting the new threat.
“Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Iran unite to refuse a Kurdish state in Syria” interview with Dr Nidal Kabalan
Steven Sahiounie, Strategic Culture, Jun 13 2024
According to the Iraqi Prime Minister, Mr Shia Sudani, Syria and Turkey are moving closer to a possible normalization of relations which were broken after the US-NATO attack on Syria for regime change which began in 2011. Before 2011, Erdogan and Assad were close, and Erdogan famously addressed his counterpart in Damascus as ‘brother’. The two countries shared a long and safe border with business and tourism benefits for both sides. After Erdogan supported the US side in the war on Syria, which utilized international terrorists passing through Turkey as a transit point on their way to fight in Syria, the relationship was broken. Syria successfully resisted the attack orchestrated by Obama but has not recovered fully due to US sanctions imposed. Now, it appears Syria may be close to a restored relationship with its neighbor to the north, as both countries share the same interest in a secure border and the elimination of terrorist groups and paramilitary separatist groups. SCF’s Steven Sahiounie interviewed Dr Nidal Kabalan, journalist, political analyst, and former Syrian Ambassador to Turkey.
Recently, the Iraqi Prime Minister said he hopes to announce a deal between Turkey and Syria to normalize their relationship. In your opinion, what is the groundwork necessary for this to materialize?
Syria’s conditions for normalizing relations with Turkey, which have been relaid by President Assad to the Iraqi Prime Minister, Mr. Shia Sudani, are identical to what has been relayed to previous mediators, such as the Russians and the Iranians. Top of the list is a solid commitment by Turkey to withdraw its occupying forces from parts of Syria, a cessation of support by Turkey to various terrorist groups operating in Idlib and other parts of the country, Ankara’s help in returning Idlib to the control of the Syria state, as well as control over the strategic M4 highway linking the coastal cities with Aleppo and other northern towns, Ankara’s help in lifting illegal and unilateral sanctions which have crippled the Syria economy for over a decade now, reopening legal border crossing points between Syria and Turkey, especially Bab al-Hawa, these are the main conditions that Damascus has long put forward as the basis for normalizing relations with Turkey.
Hayat Tahrir al-Sham, commanded by Mohammed al-Julani, is occupying Idlib. In your view, how will this terrorist group be dealt with, and who will clear out Idlib?
As far as Hayat Tahrir al-Sham and other groups in other parts of the country, they will have to be dismantled by politics or force, as a precondition for stability and security in the country. Joint efforts by Syria, Turkey, Iraq, Iran, and probably Russia in fighting all terrorist groups that have wreaked havoc in Syria for almost 14 years are a necessity for stability and security in the country.
The SDF, the Kurdish militia aligned with the US, had planned to hold elections on June 11, but have postponed them due to threats from Turkey. In your view, will the SDF repair its relationship with Damascus?
As far as the SDF is concerned, Syria and Turkey could cooperate in removing all armed aspects of the Kurdish militias that have been plundering the wealth of Syria, particularly gas and oil in the northern and northeastern parts of Syria with the help of the Americans, who have been exploiting Syrian gas and oil, and smuggling oil into Iraq, and from there into other parts of the region and the world. Any separatist entity that the Kurdish organizations, militias, and parties have been trying to form in the north of the country will have to be dismantled. One topic that has enjoyed a consensus between Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq is removing the possibility of any separatist Kurdish entity in this part of the region, so some solution through negotiations.
North of Aleppo is under the occupation of Turkish forces aligned with terrorists. If Turkey restores their relationship with Syria, how will Turkey deal with those terrorists who have been trying to overthrow the Syrian government?
For the political aspect of the crisis that could be initiated, but any separatist Kurdish entity in this part of Syria, or the region, is a taboo and shall not be permitted by all parties concerned. Other parts of Syria occupied by Turkish forces, or pro-Ankara militias north of Aleppo will have to go through mediation politics or military force and full control of the Syrian state of those territories is a non-negotiable condition for any normalization of ties between Damascus and Ankara.
Niqnaq 