Latest news with #EuropeanCouncilonForeignRelations
Int'l Business Times
2 days ago
- Politics
- Int'l Business Times
Libya Commander Haftar Seeks To Force International Engagement
Libya's eastern authorities recently expelled a senior European delegation in a move analysts say was meant to send a message: the unrecognised administration backed by military leader Khalifa Haftar cannot be ignored. On July 8, an EU commissioner and ministers from Greece, Italy and Malta were in Libya to discuss irregular migration from the North African country. Their visit was divided in two, as is Libya, which is still grappling with the aftermath of the armed conflict and political chaos that followed the 2011 NATO-backed uprising that toppled longtime dictator Moamer Kadhafi. The delegation first visited the capital Tripoli, seat of the internationally recognised Libyan government of Prime Minister Abdelhamid Dbeibah. They then travelled to Benghazi, in the east, where a rival administration backed by Haftar and his clan is based, and with whom the EU has generally avoided direct contact. Almost immediately, a reported disagreement prompted the eastern authorities to accuse the European delegation of a "flagrant breach of diplomatic norms", ordering the visiting dignitaries to leave. In Brussels, the European Commission admitted a "protocol issue". Tarek Megerisi, a senior policy fellow at the European Council on Foreign Relations think tank, said the scene at the airport "was a calculated move". Haftar was playing to EU fears of irregular migration in order "to generate de facto European recognition", and thus "broaden relations with Europe away from just engagement with him as a local military leader". Turning the delegation away showed that declining to engage with the eastern civilian administration was no longer an option. The complex situation in Libya has required unusual diplomacy. European governments recognise and work with the Tripoli-based government and not the eastern administration, but still hold contact with Haftar's military forces. In their visit earlier this month, the European commissioner and ministers were meant to meet with eastern military officials. But once at the Benghazi airport, they saw "there were people there that we had not agreed to meet", a European official in Brussels told journalists on condition of anonymity. "We had to fly back," the official said, adding that "of course" it was linked to recognition of the eastern government. Claudia Gazzini, a Libya expert at the International Crisis Group, said she did not believe "it was a premeditated incident". But "the question does present itself as to why" ministers from the eastern government were at the airport in the first place, and why Haftar would let it play out the way it did, she said. "We can't completely rule out that there was some particular issue or bilateral disagreement with one of the countries represented in the delegation," Gazzini added. Libya expert Jalel Harchaoui suggested Greece may have been the target. On July 6, two days before the axed visit, "the Greek foreign minister had come to demand concessions on migration and maritime (issues) without offering any tangible incentives", Harchaoui said. Despite Haftar's personal involvement, the July 6 visit "had yielded nothing", added the expert. Then, on July 8, "a Greek representative -- this time as part of an EU delegation -- wanted to negotiate on the same day with the rival Tripoli government, placing the two governments on an equal footing", he said. This was "an affront in Benghazi's view", Harchaoui said, and the administration wanted to "punish Athens". To Harchaoui, the diplomatic flap was a sign not to "underestimate" the Haftars' foreign policy. "The Haftar family is an absolutely essential actor" in tackling the influx of migrants or, for example, advancing energy projects, due to its key role in securing Libya's eastern coast, said Harchaoui. The message delivered at the Benghazi airport "is clear: take the eastern faction seriously", he added. Harchaoui said that the Haftars, already "rich in cash and strong" in terms of strategic assets, have recently increased efforts to "consolidate their legitimacy". Haftar himself was hosted in February by French President Emmanuel Macron, and in May by Russia's Vladimir Putin. And Haftar's son, Saddam, recently visited the United States, Turkey, Italy and Niger. Even Ankara, which has provided support for the Tripoli-based government in repelling attacks from the east, "is now seeking to further profit off the Haftars through things like construction projects", said Megerisi. He added that Turkey also has wider geopolitical ambitions, hoping to see the Haftars endorse a maritime border agreement in the eastern Mediterranean, which Tripoli had already signed but Athens regards as illegal.
Observer
14-07-2025
- Business
- Observer
Britain and Europe are changing together
Many state visits are empty, symbolic acts that have little to no policy content or lasting significance. But every now and then, such a visit changes the shape of international relations. Could French President Emmanuel Macron's recently concluded trip to London be one of them? Macron's three-day trip, the first state visit to the United Kingdom by a European Union head of state since Brexit in 2020, had plenty of pomp and pageantry. But it also focused on policy and politics, which reflects a profound shift in the UK's circumstances since leaving the EU. During the upheaval of the Brexit psychodrama, there was little interest in constructive exchange, and the UK's relationship with Europe remained defined by its lurching departure from the bloc. But nearly a decade on, Donald Trump is back in the White House and has launched a trade war on the world. Russian President Vladimir Putin has shredded the European security order. And Chinese President Xi Jinping has resorted to threats of economic coercion – a striking reversal from the 'golden era' of UK-China relations proclaimed in 2015. Even more dramatic, perhaps, are the changes in the EU. The big policy initiatives launched during Macron's UK visit reflect the forces that are turning the bloc on its head. First, the EU is moving from a peace project to a war union. For most of its existence, the EU sought peace through economic integration. But Putin's war of Ukraine in 2022 reoriented the bloc towards security – a goal that has taken on greater urgency since Trump cast doubt on the United States' commitment to collective security on the continent. There is broad support for this new orientation. According to a recent opinion poll conducted by the European Council on Foreign Relations, many Europeans favour increased defence spending, conscription and the development of a European or national nuclear deterrent. Against this backdrop, Macron and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer took a bold first step towards establishing an independent nuclear deterrent with the Northwood Declaration, in which they agreed that 'there is no extreme threat to Europe that would not prompt a response by our two nations.' A second major change is the development of 'securonomics.' The EU economy is under pressure from Trump's tariffs and China's export restrictions on magnets and critical minerals. EU policymakers now talk of de-risking, diversifying and deepening the single market, rather than pursuing free-trade agreements. While the UK has made it clear that it will not rejoin the single market or the customs union, the question is whether it can persuade the EU that it can be counted on to help the bloc achieve its new trade goals, or whether it will be given unfriendly treatment because it is seen as posing a risk to those objectives. Domestic politics in Europe has also undergone a rapid transformation. It has been fascinating to watch Macron – once a poster boy for liberal universalism – reinvent himself as a champion of secure borders and protectionism, while taking a tougher stance on crime. This volte-face has seen mainstream European politicians shift focus towards defending national sovereignty – from Russia, China, Trump, and migration – while they try to contain populist parties such as Marine Le Pen's National Rally and Alternative für Deutschland. That is the backdrop for the ground-breaking deal that Starmer and Macron signed on migration returns. Starmer's approach to Europe is a marked improvement from that of former Conservative prime ministers Boris Johnson (who compared the EU to Napoleon and Hitler) and Liz Truss (who questioned whether Macron was a friend or a foe). Starmer has proved himself, particularly with his deft diplomacy on Ukraine, to be a reliable partner and stakeholder, regaining the trust of EU institutions and member states. One senior German policymaker told me how impressed he was by the UK filling the leadership vacuum created by Trump's disregard for Ukraine. In other words, the UK is widely seen in Europe as being 'part of the team' again. The EU-UK summit in May provided a clear framework for deepening the relationship, not least through a Security and Defence Partnership that paves the way for British participation in European defence programmes. But the UK government has remained far too cautious in other areas. Most notably, Starmer has been careful not to cross the Labour Party's self-imposed red lines: no freedom of movement, no customs union and no single market. Future historians may well wonder why Starmer did not aim higher. The changing international environment offers Starmer a clear opportunity to redraw Europe's political map, which would establish him as one of Britain's most consequential leaders. But to do so, Starmer must convince British voters that today's Europe is a different creature from the one they imagine: a defence community that is more focused on safeguarding the continent than on transcending the nation-state. And he must explain how the UK can help build this new European security order, so long as it banishes the Brexit mindset. As a post-liberal Europe emerges, Britain must stop clinging to the past and seize the chance to shape the continent's future in a way that advances its interests. That requires acknowledging that both the EU and the UK have entered a new era. Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2025
DW
04-07-2025
- Politics
- DW
'One event' arms pause troubling for Ukraine – DW – 07/04/2025
The US says its pause on arms shipments is a one-off. But amid the turbulent US-Ukraine relationship, the assurance is little comfort to Volodymyr Zelenskyy or his European supporters. Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelenskyy will seek "clarity" from Donald Trump on Friday amid a challenging week that saw a scheduled US arms shipment paused and Kyiv pummeled by another Russian drone strike. The US confirmed earlier this week that a batch of arms shipments to Ukraine would be paused in yet another reminder that the eastern European country's supply of advanced military equipment is not as secure as it once was. The US has downplayed this decision to withhold crucial arms shipments to Ukraine, as a state department spokesperson told reporters it was a one-off. "This is not a cessation of us assisting Ukraine or of providing weapons," said spokeswoman Tammy Bruce. "This is one event and one situation, and we'll discuss what else comes up in future." The US president has continued to press both sides of the conflict to negotiate a ceasefire and spoke with Russian leader Vladimir Putin on the matter on Thursday. But progress, according to Trump said, was limited. "I didn't make any progress with him today at all," he told reporters. "I'm not happy about that. I'm not happy… I don't think he's looking to stop." Russia followed that call with a massive drone strike on the Ukrainian capital. Zelenskyy is due to speak with Trump on Friday about the shipment pause. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video The pair have had a strained relationship during Trump's second term, publicly evidenced in a televised falling out during a White House sit-down in early March. Following the disastrous visit, Zelenskyy sought to shore up support closer to home with key European allies. Europe has since stepped up their support in financial and supply terms. But if the US were to continue to withhold support, it would significantly undermine Ukraine's position versus Russia. "If this were to be a longer-term issue, it would definitely be a challenge for Ukraine to cope," Jana Kobzova, a senior policy fellow specializing at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told DW. "Partly because some of the US systems are not easily replaceable, that goes especially for air defense, but also some of the longer-range capabilities which Ukraine has started to produce domestically but not in the quantities needed." Despite the spat between Trump and Zelenskyy, the pause on shipments could be as much about the US needing to weigh its own interests against the support it gives to dozens of other countries, including Israel. "After the Israel-Iranian exchange, I can imagine that Trump wants to relocate resources," Marina Miron, a defense researcher specializing in military technology and Russian capability at Kings College London, UK, told DW. Brent Sadler, a research fellow at the conservative think tank The Heritage Foundation, told Politico the move is likely a "due diligence" measure to ensure adequate resourcing for US forces elsewhere, including the Indo-Pacific in the event of a conflict outbreak in that region. Retired US Army General Ben Hodges, took a different view, saying the shipment pause was not about stockpiles. "It's a choice of this administration to placate Russia, at the expense of Ukraine," Hodges said. "It also shows the very limited understanding this administration [has] of the importance to America's strategic interests to help Ukraine and Europe deter Russia." Irrespective of the US' reasons for pausing its military shipments, the signals from the first months of the new administration suggest Europe's transatlantic ally is not the steadfast partner it once was. "There is a sober analysis both in Kyiv and the European part of NATO that relying on US military assistance to continue forever in Ukraine is not an option," said Kobzova. "And that has been there ever since March when the assistance was stopped for the first time." Among the American weapons due for shipping were Patriot air defense missiles and precision-guided artillery, according to officials speaking to newswires anonymously. The pause on these shipments comes at a critical time, with Russia ramping up weapons production and attacks. Those include strikes on soldier draft hubs in Poltava, the national capital Kyiv, the port city Odesa, and ground advances in key regions in Eastern Ukraine. Despite increased spending on defense from Europe's NATO members — now 5% of GDP following its June meeting — any long-term US stall on weapons will likely squeeze Ukraine and its neighbors. "There is recognition at the political level … that [Europe] would need to be increasing production, but none of that happens quickly enough for Ukraine," said Kobzova. Kobzova also pointed to investments being made into Ukraine's own defense industry to buffer against future supply-line cuts from the US. Europe is now the biggest investor in Ukraine's domestic defense industry. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video But even that might not be enough. Experts interviewed by DW highlighted the offer made by Zelenskyy to directly purchase armaments from the US, but in reality, arms manufacturing is a time-consuming process. "It takes two years to produce one [air defense missile] battery," the defense expert Miron told DW. "So even if you buy them now, it doesn't mean that they will be on the battlefield. You place a purchase order and you get in the queue." Finding a way to more effectively repair and adapt equipment for different missiles could be a potential stopgap to meet immediate needs. But, as defense supplies are again in doubt, Miron questioned whether Ukraine has what it needs to push back Russia's offensive. "The problem is time and money and we also have the variable of people," she said, adding that about 90 people are needed to operate a Patriot air missile battery. And Ukraine, Miron pointed out, is losing people, with no guarantee of replacement as the war grinds through its fourth year. Ukraine's support in Europe has been increasing — both rhetorically and materially. As it took over the presidency of the EU for the next six months, Denmark has seized the early opportunity to put Ukraine's membership application into the bloc back on the agenda. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Thursday said the EU "must strengthen Ukraine. And we must weaken Russia." "Ukraine is essential to Europe's security. Our contribution to Ukraine is also a protection of our freedom. Ukraine belongs in the European Union. It is in both in Denmark's and Europe's interest." Her comments come on the back of a visit to Ukraine from German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, who branded Ukraine's plight Berlin's most important foreign policy task. These statements from Europe might be more important than ever, as Miron says she is pessimistic about the future of the US-Ukraine relationship. "Certainly you can try some diplomacy, and explain to Trump that Ukraine matters, but I think Trump has already made up his mind," she said. "Trump has much more to solve with Russia in terms of global problems than with Ukraine."
DW
03-07-2025
- Politics
- DW
'One event' arms pause will be little comfort to Ukraine – DW – 07/03/2025
The US says its surprise pause on arms shipments is a one-off. But amid the turbulent US-Ukraine relationship, the assurance will offer little comfort to Volodymyr Zelenskyy or his European supporters. A US announcement this week that a batch of arms shipments to Ukraine would be paused is yet another reminder that the eastern European country's supply of advanced military equipment is not as secure as it once was. That's despite the US downplaying its decision to withhold crucial arms shipments to Ukraine, where a state department spokesperson told reporters it was a one-off. "This is not a cessation of us assisting Ukraine or of providing weapons," said spokeswoman Tammy Bruce. "This is one event and one situation and we'll discuss what else comes up in future." Ukraine's president Volodymyr Zelenskyy is due to speak with Donald Trump on Friday about the decision, however it comes amid difficult relations during the US leader's second term, stemming most notably from the globally broadcast falling out between the two leaders during a White House sitdown in early March. Trump confirmed in a post on his social media platform that he will first speak with Russian leader Vladimir Putin on Thursday. Following the disastrous White House visit, Zelenskyy sought to shore up support closer to home with key European allies. Europe has since stepped up their support in financial and supply terms. But if the US were to continue to withhold its support, it would significantly undermine Ukraine's position versus Russia. "If this were to be a longer-term issue, it would definitely be a challenge for Ukraine to cope," Jana Kobzova, a senior policy fellow specializing at the European Council on Foreign Relations, told DW. "Partly because some of the US systems are not easily replaceable, that goes especially for air defense, but also some of the longer-range capabilities which Ukraine has started to produce domestically but not in the quantities needed." To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video Among the American weapons due for shipping were Patriot air defense missiles and precision-guided artillery, according to officials speaking to newswires anonymously. The pause on these shipments comes at a critical time, with Russia ramping up weapons production and attacks. Those include strikes on soldier draft hubs in Poltava, the national capital Kyiv and port city Odesa and ground advances in key regions in Eastern Ukraine. Despite increased spending on defense from Europe's NATO members — now 5% of GDP following its June meeting — any long-term US stall on weapons will squeeze Ukraine and its neighbors. "There is recognition at the political level … that we would need to be increasing production, but none of that happens quickly enough for Ukraine," said Kobzova. Kobzova also pointed to investments being made into Ukraine's own defense industry to buffer against future supply line cuts from the US. Europe is now the biggest investor in Ukraine's domestic defense industry. To view this video please enable JavaScript, and consider upgrading to a web browser that supports HTML5 video But even that might not be enough. Marina Miron, a defense researcher specializing in military technology and Russian capability at Kings College London, UK, told DW. She said despite the acrimony between Trump and Zelenskyy, the pause on shipments could be due to logistics, with the US potentially needing to weigh its own domestic supply needs against the support it gives to dozens of other countries, including Israel. Experts interviewed by DW highlighted the offer made by Zelenskyy to directly purchase armaments from the US, but, in reality, arms manufacturing is a time-consuming process. "It takes two years to produce one [air defense missile] battery," said Miron. "So even if you buy them now, it doesn't mean that they will be on the battlefield. You place a purchase order and you get in the queue." Finding a way to more effectively repair and adapt equipment for different missiles could be a potential stopgap to meet immediate needs. But, as defense supplies are again in doubt, Miron asked whether Ukraine has what it needs to push back Russia's offensive. "The problem is time and money and we also have the variable of people," he said, adding that about 90 people are needed to operate a Patriot air missile battery. And Ukraine, Miron points out, is losing people with no guarantee of replacement as the war grinds through its fourth year. Ukraine's support in Europe has been increasing — both rhetorically and materially. As it took over the presidency of the EU for the next six months, Denmark has taken the early opportunity to put Ukraine's membership application into the bloc back on the agenda. Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen on Thursday said the EU "must strengthen Ukraine. And we must weaken Russia." "Ukraine is essential to Europe's security. Our contribution to Ukraine is also a protection of our freedom. Ukraine belongs in the European Union. It is in both in Denmark's and Europe's interest." That's on the back of a visit to Ukraine from German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul, who branded Ukraine's plight Berlin's most important foreign policy task. But the signals from the US suggest to the continent that its tarnsatlantic ally is not the steadfast partner it once was. "There is a sober analysis both in Kyiv and the European part of NATO that relying on US military assistance to continue forever in Ukraine is not an option," said Kobzova. "And that has been there ever since March when the assistance was stopped for the first time." That view is echoed by retired US Army Europe Commanding General Ben Hodges, who said the US decision to pause shipments was not about stockpiles. "It's a choice of this Administration to placate Russia, at the expense of Ukraine," Hodges told DW. "It also shows the very limited understanding this administration [has] of the importance to America's strategic interests to help Ukraine and Europe deter Russia." Miron's also takes a pessimistic view on the US-Ukraine ties, even with attempts to entice Trump back to the Ukrainian cause. "Certainly you can try some diplomacy, and explain to Trump that Ukraine matters, but I think Trump has already made up his mind," he said. "Trump has much more to solve with Russia in terms of global problems than with Ukraine."
IOL News
03-07-2025
- Politics
- IOL News
What do we know about the latest push for a Gaza truce?
Smoke billows from an Israeli airstrike that targeted the area of Jabal al-Rihan in the southern Lebanese province of Jezzine. US President Donald Trump this week urged the Palestinian militant group Hamas to seize the opportunity for a 60-day truce in Gaza, saying Israel had agreed to the proposal. After almost 21 months of devastating fighting in the Palestinian territory and following a speedy resolution to Israel's 12-day war with Iran, Trump's exhortations have reignited hopes for a third ceasefire in the Gaza war. But, with familiar obstacles to a truce still in place and an upcoming meeting between Trump and Israel's Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu critical to the outcome, the likelihood of a deal remains in the balance, analysts say. What's holding up a Hamas response? Efforts to strike a deal in numerous rounds of indirect talks have repeatedly failed, with the primary point of contention centred on Hamas's calls for an enduring ceasefire in Gaza. In a Wednesday statement, Hamas said it was weighing its response to the new proposal and sought "an agreement that guarantees ending the aggression" as well as the withdrawal of Israeli forces from Gaza and the entry of aid into the territory. Hugh Lovatt, a Middle East analyst at the European Council on Foreign Relations (ECFR), said there could be flexibility in Hamas's position if they adopt a "pragmatic understanding that this is as good as they'll get for the foreseeable future". He nonetheless noted that there were "still extremely sizable gaps" on Hamas's demands, including the path to a permanent end to the war, the re-opening of Gaza to humanitarian aid and Israel's withdrawal. "Those will be ultimately the most critical matters in deciding whether that initial 60-day period is put on," he added. Andreas Krieg, a Middle East analyst at King's College London, said Hamas's "deep mistrust of Israel's intentions -- given past ceasefires that collapsed under renewed strikes -- means Hamas would need firm guarantees before agreeing" to a deal. In January, Hamas and Israel agreed to a truce which broke down in March, with the two sides unable to agree on the next steps and Israel resuming air and ground attacks.
