North Macedonia, Britain agree on boosting ties
SKOPJE: North Macedonia and Britain have agreed on a major partnership deal that would boost trade and investment between the two countries, North Macedonia's prime minister said on Saturday. British Prime Minister Keir Starmer and his North Macedonian counterpart Hristijan Mickoski finalised the strategic partnership agreement, the first of its kind between Skopje and London, on the sidelines of a summit of European leaders in Tirana. "This partnership means much more than a bilateral engagement," Mickoski told a press conference in Skopje on Saturday.
Serving as a base for a six-billion-euro investment cycle, "it will enable the strongest possible economic cooperation... including capital investments, infrastructure, health and energy," he added. It also provides for cooperation in defence, fighting organised crime and human trafficking, education, healthcare, culture and youth policy, Mickoski said. Matthew Lawson, British ambassador to North Macedonia, a Nato member country that hopes to join the EU, hailed the deal as a "highlight in our bilateral relations... built on common values and membership in Nato as well as very rich trade connection". — AFP
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Observer
17 hours ago
- Observer
London stocks steady, eyes on US employment report
LONDON: London shares remained nearly flat on Friday as investors adopted a wait-and-see approach ahead of crucial US jobs data. As of 09:50 GMT, the blue-chip FTSE 100 was up 0.05 per cent, poised for its fourth consecutive weekly gain. The domestically focused FTSE 250 was up 0.03 per cent on the day, heading towards its second straight weekly advance. The upcoming US non-farm payrolls report will likely set the market tone, offering insights into how US President Donald Trump's trade policies are affecting the labour market and how the Federal Reserve might navigate the uncertain trade environment. British government bond yields eased across the curve, mirroring eurozone counterparts ahead of the data release. Earlier this week, Trump doubled tariffs on steel and aluminium imports, though the UK received an exemption following a limited trade deal signed in early May that established a framework for future negotiations. Global attention also remained fixed on trade negotiations, with potential easing in US-China trade tensions following Trump's phone call with Chinese President Xi Jinping on Thursday. On the stock indexes, homebuilders were leading the way with a gain of 0.9 per cent. Life insurers were up 0.5 per cent after Deutsche Bank upgraded Phoenix and Prudential to "buy", with both stocks climbing nearly 1 per cent. On the flip side, industrial metal miners dropped 1.1 per cent. The heavy-weight aerospace and defence index shed 0.8 per cent with Babcock International Group sliding 3.4 per cent, making it the biggest decliner on the blue-chip index. In other major developments, Finance Minister Rachel Reeves said on Thursday that upbeat business surveys and strong first-quarter GDP indicate the British economy is recovering from its weak end to 2024, though the public remains concerned about slow improvements in living standards. Purchasing managers' indexes released this week have shown a recovery in activity after a sharp fall in April due to the shock of Trump's tariffs. — Reuters
Times of Oman
a day ago
- Times of Oman
India accelerates EU trade deal push with three high-level meetings in five weeks
Brescia [Italy]: India is fast-tracking negotiations for a comprehensive free trade agreement with the European Union, with Commerce and Industry Minister Piyush Goyal holding three crucial meetings with EU Trade Commissioner Maros Sefcovic within just 35 days. Speaking to reporters during his two-day visit to Italy, Goyal emphasised the unprecedented pace of discussions as evidence of both sides' commitment to concluding the long-awaited trade pact. "We have held three meetings in 35 days. It shows our shared commitment to the FTA... we are trying to do it faster," Goyal said Thursday, highlighting India's determination to expedite the negotiation process. The rapid-fire diplomatic engagement included meetings on May 1 and May 23 in Brussels, followed by a third round of talks that concluded June 2 in Paris. This intensive schedule reflects the urgency both sides attach to finalising the agreement. India brings significant momentum to these talks, having recently concluded similar agreements with the four-nation European Free Trade Association (EFTA)--comprising Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway, and Switzerland--and the United Kingdom. The current EU negotiations represent the resumption of talks that stalled for over eight years. India and the 27-member European Union bloc restarted comprehensive FTA discussions in June 2022, alongside negotiations for an investment protection agreement and a geographical indications pact. The political commitment reached its peak in February when Prime Minister Narendra Modi and European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen agreed to seal the trade deal by year-end, setting an ambitious timeline for conclusion. "We are making rapid progress on the very vibrant FTA, which would open opportunities for businesses on both sides," Goyal said, describing the potential agreement as "very strong and mutually beneficial." However, the minister acknowledged that current India-Italy bilateral trade remains "low and sub-optimal" at approximately $15 billion in goods, despite enormous untapped potential between the two economies. Italian Deputy Prime Minister and Foreign Minister Antonio Tajani echoed the sentiment for enhanced economic cooperation, describing India and Italy as "natural partners." He emphasised Italy's focus on boosting exports to India while actively seeking Indian investments in Italian markets. "Our goal is to reduce trade barriers," Tajani said, addressing broader concerns about global trade tensions. When questioned about US tariffs on steel and aluminium, he maintained that "duties are never positive" and reiterated the importance of reducing trade barriers. The accelerated pace of India-EU negotiations comes at a critical time for global trade relationships, with both sides seeking to diversify economic partnerships and reduce dependence on other major trading blocs. Success in these talks could establish a template for India's engagement with other European partners and significantly reshape trade flows between Asia and Europe.
Observer
2 days ago
- Observer
Is Europe facing civil war?
Whether the debate is occasioned by a polemical book or a movie like last year's 'Civil War', I consistently take the negative on the question of whether the United States is headed for a genuine civil war. In those debates, it's usually liberals warning that populism or Trumpism is steering the United States towards the abyss. But with European politics the pattern is different: In France and Britain; and among American observers of the continent, a preoccupation with looming civil war tends to be more common among conservatives. For years, figures associated with the French right and French military have warned of an impending civil conflict driven by the country's failure to assimilate immigrants from the Muslim world. (The great reactionary novelist Michel Houellebecq's 'Submission' famously imagines this war being averted by the sudden conversion of French elites to Islam.) Lately there has been a similar discussion around Britain touched off by an essay by military historian David Betz that argues that multicultural Britain is in danger of tearing itself apart and lately taken up by political strategist, Brexit-campaign architect and former Boris Johnson adviser Dominic Cummings in an essay warning that British elites are increasingly fearful of organised violence from nativists and radicalised immigrants alike. When I've written skeptically about scenarios for a US civil war, I've tended to stress several realities: the absence of a clear geographical division between our contending factions; the diminishment, not exacerbation, of racial and ethnic polarisation in the Trump era; the fact that we're rich, aging and comfortable, not poor, young and desperate, giving even groups that hate each other a stake in the system and elites strong reasons to sustain it; the absence of enthusiasm for organised communal violence as opposed to lone-wolf forays. Does the European landscape look different? On some fronts, maybe. Tensions between natives and new arrivals are common on both sides of the Atlantic, but ethnic and religious differences arguably loom larger in Europe than they do in the US: There is more intense cultural separatism in immigrant communities in suburban Paris or Marseilles than in Los Angeles or Chicago, more simmering discontent that easily turns to riots. At the same time, British and French elites have been more successful than American elites at keeping populist forces out of power, but their tools — not just the exclusion of populists from government, but an increasingly authoritarian throttling of free speech — have markedly diminished their own legitimacy among discontented natives. This means that neither underassimilated immigrants nor working-class whites feel especially invested in the system, making multiple forms of political violence more plausible: pitting immigrant or native rebels against the government, or pitting immigrants against natives with the government trying to suppress the conflict, or, finally, pitting different immigrant groups against one another. (English cities have already played host to bursts of Muslim-Hindu violence.) Then, too, Western Europe's economies have grown more sluggishly than America's for the last decade, reducing ordinary people's stake in the current order and encouraging alienation and resistance. Finally, there are arguably geographic concentrations of discontent — in the north of England, or in immigrant-dominated cities that Betz warns could become ungovernable — that don't exist in quite the same way in the US. All of this adds up, I would say, to a useful corrective to the progressive tendency to regard America in the Trump era as a great outlier, uniquely divided and deranged and threatened by factional strife, while liberal politics continues more or less as usual among our respectable and stable European allies. Not so: There are clearly ways in which Europe's problems and divides are deeper than our own, with economic and demographic trends that portend darker possibilities and the establishment attempt to keep populist forces at bay may end up remembered as accelerating liberal Europe's downfall. Yet many of the reasons to doubt the imminence of civil war in America still apply to Western Europe. The continent is more stagnant than the US but still rich, comfortable and aged; there's enthusiasm for rioting but rather less for organised violence; and for all the palpable disillusionment, it is hard to glimpse any elite faction yet emerging — right or left, nativist or 'Islamo-Gauchiste' — that would see violent revolution as an obvious means to its ambitions. Meanwhile, there are distinctive European conditions that make civil war less likely there than in the US: Smaller nations with more centralised political systems generally find it easier to police dissent and there's no Second Amendment or American-style gun culture to challenge the European state's monopoly on force. Ultimately, I agree with British writer Aris Roussinos, a pessimist but not a catastrophist, when he writes that the most likely near-future scenarios involve increasing 'outbursts of violent disorder' but not the kind of collapse of central government authority, complete with ethnic cleansing and refugee flows, that the language of 'civil war' implies. And that imprecision matters: As I've suggested before, if you use a civil-war framing to describe a world where rioting is more commonplace and assassination attempts and random forms of terrorism make a comeback, you're describing realities that big diverse societies often have to live with, using terms that misleadingly or hysterically evoke Antietam or Guernica. I don't think America in the 1960s and 1970s experienced a civil war, even though those were certainly chaotic decades. I don't think modern France, with its long tradition of student protests and urban riots, has existed in a perpetual state of civil war. And as we face a future that's clearly more destabilised than the post-Cold War era, it still behooves us to be realistic about the most plausible scenarios: We are still far more likely to be navigating a more chaotic landscape together, as fellow citizens, than shooting at one another across a sectional divide. — The New York Times
