Latest news with #MarshallPlan
Euronews
4 days ago
- Politics
- Euronews
Brussels, my love? War in Gaza - what's Netanyahu's endgame?
In the Middle East, we've come to a turning point. Many of Israel's remaining allies have broken publicly with Benjamin Netanyahu's government for its relentless pummelling of Gaza and freezing of desperately needed humanitarian aid. In a highly unusual move, Canada, France and the UK threatened Israel with consequences. And even Donald Trump seems to run out of patience. Will Netanyahu listen? What leverage does the international community have on Israel? And on Hamas? Questions to this week's panel: James Moran, associate senior research fellow at the Centre for European Policy Studies (CEPS), Kathleen Van Brempt, member of the European Parliament from the Belgian Social Democrats and Jacob Reynolds, head of policy at Hungarian think tank MCC Brussels. International pressure has been mounting on Israel over the past several days over its strategy in Gaza. The European Union said it will review its wide-ranging trade and cooperation pact with Israel over what Brussels sees as a catastrophic situation in Gaza . And even Germany, usually a staunch Israeli ally, voiced strong criticism, signalling that Berlin is unwilling to become isolated in the EU over Israel. It doesn't look like Netanyahu is willing to change anything. Israel launched a new military offensive into the enclave amid the reports that Israel's military plans to control 75% of Gaza within the next two months. Should Europe push (again) for a two-state solution? Behind the innocent acronym SAFE lies a risky gamble, a continental ambition, and perhaps the beginning of an assertive military divorce from Washington. SAFE stands for 'Security Action for Europe', an unprecedented 150 billion-euro plan to revolutionize the Old Continent's defence capabilities. A kind of Marshall Plan for the 21st century, but with support no longer coming from the United States. The EU Commission proposed SAFE through a legislative instrument that allows it to bypass a vote by the Parliament. And this is the problem. Was this a smart move? The president of the European Parliament threatened to sue the Commission over this plan - are we running into a constitutional crisis here? Finally, participants discussed the latest fight between Brussels and Hungary. The European Commission is setting the stage for an all-out confrontation with Budapest. Brussels has demanded that Budapest withdraw its controversial draft law aimed at limiting foreign funding of media organizations and NGOs. If the law were to come into force, it would give the government far-reaching powers to crack down on the press and critical voices in society. The EU Commission sees this as a serious violation of European principles and laws. Some members of the European Parliament from five different groups are urging the Commission to immediately freeze all EU funding to Hungary. Is this the right reaction and would it even be legally possible? What is the end game here? Can Hungary survive as a member of the European Union? Poland's two presidential candidates held their last election campaigns on Friday ahead of a runoff vote on Sunday. It will follow a first round on May 18, in which Warsaw Mayor Rafał Trzaskowski won more than 31% of the vote and Karol Nawrocki, a conservative historian, earned nearly 30%. Eleven other candidates were eliminated. In the seaside city of Gdansk, Trzaskowski referenced the city's role in the Solidarity movement while addressing supporters. 'We all remember the shipyard workers who said, 'enough fear, enough lies, enough contempt.' Today, once again, we must stand together,' he said. 'For you, it will be just a few steps to the polling station, but together we can make a milestone towards realising our dreams and aspirations.' In his closing address, Nawrocki presented himself as a candidate who is 'simply one of you.' He described himself as 'a citizen of the Polish state who has come a long way to compete with a man created by a political laboratory.' Under Polish law, all campaigning and political advertising must cease at midnight. No public comment is allowed until polls close on Sunday.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Opinion - How Maryland's governor can reframe the politics of reparations
Maryland's Gov. Wes Moore (D) recently caused a stir in the movement for reparations in his state. The nation's only Black governor, he vetoed a bill to assess the wrongs of slavery and Jim Crow and propose various remedies. The act had been championed by the state legislature and the Black Caucus, and there is even now talk of overriding his veto. However, Maryland's Black political leadership may be overlooking an alternative strategy to address the politics of reparations. It draws inspiration from how America handled the rebuilding of Europe and Japan after World War II. And Moore, as the nation's only sitting Black governor, can reframe the issue's politics and enhance Black community self-governance. He can initiate a summit to establish a development bank for the descendants of slavery and Jim Crow. What follows is a description of how such a bank can benefit the quest for reparations, why Moore was probably wise to veto the state bill and why Maryland is the place to incorporate a 'reparations bank.' After World War II, the U.S. led the effort to establish a development bank to finance the reconstruction of war-torn Europe and Japan. The multilateral initiative was crucial to a broader package of assistance that came to be known as the Marshall Plan. In a similar fashion, Moore can take the lead to charter a bank to finance the reconstruction of distressed Black communities. Beyond the current efforts of advocates to pursue restitution through piecemeal claims, a bank could be a more efficient way to center the creation of Black institutional wealth. Moore could oversee a summit of political leaders and community banking professionals to craft a mission statement for the reparations bank. It could include members of Maryland's legislative Black Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus and consultants from Black-owned financial institutions like the Harbor Bank of Maryland. The charter would designate the entity under federal regulations for community development financial institutions and Maryland's community banking laws. Though located in Maryland, the fund would invest in worthy projects for moderate-income Black communities across the country. It would be administered by banking professionals and monitored by an independent accounting service. The development bank would primarily seek private donations and corporate depositors and would pool the funds and collaborate with Black-owned banks, credit unions and attuned financial institutions to vet proposals for planning grants, microfinancing and long-term loans. It could invest in small-scale projects in areas such as cooperative housing and stores, community development corporation charter schools, healthcare and infrastructure projects, and programs for occupational training and entrepreneurship. It would have a rotating board of directors selected from dues-paying organizations that represent the foundational Black community — namely, those that suffered the wrongs of slavery and Jim Crow. Moore was wise to veto the state bill. American political culture has changed dramatically since the days of racial justice activism after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd. During that period, advocates for reparations in California, Illinois and New York found sympathetic allies for legislation to study the subject. But even those initiatives skirted the issue of cash reparations in favor of noneconomic measures like a formal apology. Since then, public sentiment has turned against proposals for racial remedy, and especially the use of public funds for restitution. Other than Black Americans, most groups tend to oppose the idea of reparations, and the empathy for the Black Lives Matters movement was short lived, according to the Pew Research Center. And Democratic Party leaders have expressed concern about the effect of identity politics in the presidential election. As such, advocates may need to explore alternative strategies other than lobbying for a public accounting in the states. The development bank proposal would rely on private funding rather than public. The Trump administration is openly dismissive of Black history and its meaning for contemporary justice. On the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution, for example, the president condemned diversity policies in the armed services during a speech at West Point. Yet Trump brushed aside the historic role of 700 Black patriots — free and enslaved — that participated in the founding of the U.S. Army under frigid conditions at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. And, though speaking to cadets during the Memorial Day weekend, he neglected to describe how ex-slaves started the Memorial Day holiday after the Civil War. The first commemoration of American war casualties is believed to have occurred on May 1, 1865. That's when emancipated Black workers unearthed a mass grave of Union soldiers near a Confederate prison in Charleston, South Carolina. They reburied the men in a dignified manner and honored their sacrifices to preserve the Union and to end slavery. Additionally, Maryland is the place to get the ball rolling. In criticizing Moore's veto, the legislative Black Caucus noted that the statehouse in Annapolis is less than a mile from the old slave port at the city dock. Yet Maryland symbolizes far more in Black history and contemporary political culture — foremost, its distinction for a high level of statewide political influence. This trend began in 2022 with the election of Moore as governor and Anthony Brown as attorney general — the first Black leaders elected to those offices in the 237-year history of the 'Free State.' Meanwhile, Angela Alsobrooks extended the momentum in her winning campaign for a U.S. Senate seat last year. Maryland is thus the only state where representatives of a sizable Black community have deep roots in the political culture. As such, it is arguably the symbolic capital of Black America. And as governor, Moore is in a position to host a historic summit for the establishment of a development bank for the descendants of slavery and Jim Crow. Roger House is professor emeritus of American Studies at Emerson College and the author of 'Blue Smoke: The Recorded Journey of Big Bill Broonzy' and 'South End Shout: Boston's Forgotten Music Scene in the Jazz Age.' His forthcoming book is 'Five Hundred Years of Black Self-Governance: A Call to Conscience.' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Business
- Yahoo
Are hegemonies a relic of the past? The role of coercion and consent in global domination
The era of U.S. hegemony has come to an end – or so declare headlines emanating everywhere from Tehran to Washington. But what does that mean? The concept of hegemony has been central to international relations since the advent of the field. In addition to being a measure of state power, hegemony reflects the ability of a single nation to influence both the actions of others and the rules, norms and institutions that govern international politics. It's this dynamic mix of coercion and consent that makes hegemony distinct from mere dominance and highlights the complexities of maintaining leadership in a contested world. The term hegemony originates from the Greek hegemon, meaning leader or guide. It was initially applied to the dominance of one city-state over others. In ancient Greece, Athens exemplified hegemony in its leadership of the Delian League of city-states, where it combined military superiority with political influence to direct the actions of its allies. While this dominance involved coercive power – primarily Athens' naval strength – it also relied on consent, as the league's members benefited from collective security and economic ties. The modern understanding of hegemony emerged during the 19th century as a way to describe Britain's role in the global order. Britain's dominance was underpinned by its unparalleled naval power and economic leadership during the Industrial Revolution. It was not, however, just material capabilities that made Britain a hegemon. The global trade networks it built and the norms of free trade it championed established a system that other nations, mainly in Europe, accepted, often because they too benefited from the stability and prosperity it provided. This era demonstrated how hegemony involves more than coercion. Indeed, it requires a dominant state to shape an international order that aligns the interests of others with that of the dominant nation. Antonio Gramsci, the early 20th-century Italian Marxist theorist, expanded the concept of hegemony beyond international relations into a class analysis. He argued that hegemony involves not only coercive power of the dominant class but also the ability to secure consent by shaping cultural, ideological and institutional norms. Applied back to international politics, this means that a hegemonic nation's dominance is sustained by creating a system that others perceive as legitimate and beneficial, not just through military or economic might. In the 20th century, the United States emerged as the quintessential modern hegemon, particularly after World War II. U.S. hegemony was defined by its material power – unmatched military strength, economic dominance and technological leadership – but also by an ability to construct a liberal international order that aligned with its interests. The Marshall Plan, which facilitated postwar Europe's economic recovery, exemplified the combination of coercion and consent: The U.S. provided resources and security guarantees but also set the terms for participation, embedding its leadership within the system. Into this mix, the Soviet Union emerged as a secondary hegemon, establishing its own equivalents to the U.S. aid program through the Molotov Plan and an alternative order to exert influence among the world's socialist countries. Defenders of hegemonies argue that a dominant power is necessary to provide public goods such as security, economic stability and rule enforcement. And thus the decline of a hegemon can often lead to instability. Yet critics argue that hegemonic systems often mask the self-interest of the dominant state, using consent to obscure coercion. For instance, while the U.S.-led order promoted free trade and democracy, it also advanced American strategic priorities, sometimes at the expense of weaker states. And hegemony is difficult to maintain in the long run. Those that rely too heavily on coercion risk losing legitimacy, but excessive reliance on consent without the backing of power can undermine the hegemon's ability to enforce rules and protect core interests. In today's multipolar world, the concept of hegemony faces new challenges. The rise of China, along with regional powers such as Turkey, Indonesia and Saudi Arabia, has disrupted the unipolar dominance of the U.S. These would-be regional hegemons bring with them their own means of imposing influence through economic incentives and coercion. In China's case, infrastructure and trade development through the Belt and Road Initiative is counterbalanced with shows of military strength in the South China Sea. As the global order becomes increasingly fragmented, the future of global hegemony is uncertain. While no single power currently has the capacity to dominate the international system, the need for leadership remains critical. Many observers would argue that issues such as climate change, technological regulation and pandemic responses require coordination that only a hegemonic or collective leadership framework can provide. Whether hegemony evolves into a more shared model of leadership or gives way to a more anarchic system could shape the trajectory of international relations in the 21st century. This article is part of a series explaining foreign policy terms commonly used but rarely explained. This article is republished from The Conversation, a nonprofit, independent news organization bringing you facts and trustworthy analysis to help you make sense of our complex world. It was written by: Andrew Latham, Macalester College Read more: The Thucydides Trap: Vital lessons from ancient Greece for China and the US … or a load of old claptrap? What is the rules-based order? How this global system has shifted from 'liberal' origins − and where it could be heading next Disinformation and other forms of 'sharp power' now sit alongside the 'hard power' of tanks and 'soft power' of ideas in policy handbook Andrew Latham does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organization that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.
The Hill
4 days ago
- Business
- The Hill
How Maryland's governor can reframe the politics of reparations
Maryland's Gov. Wes Moore (D) recently caused a stir in the movement for reparations in his state. The nation's only Black governor, he vetoed a bill to assess the wrongs of slavery and Jim Crow and propose various remedies. The act had been championed by the state legislature and the Black Caucus, and there is even now talk of overriding his veto. However, Maryland's Black political leadership may be overlooking an alternative strategy to address the politics of reparations. It draws inspiration from how America handled the rebuilding of Europe and Japan after World War II. And Moore, as the nation's only sitting Black governor, can reframe the issue's politics and enhance Black community self-governance. He can initiate a summit to establish a development bank for the descendants of slavery and Jim Crow. What follows is a description of how such a bank can benefit the quest for reparations, why Moore was probably wise to veto the state bill and why Maryland is the place to incorporate a 'reparations bank.' After World War II, the U.S. led the effort to establish a development bank to finance the reconstruction of war-torn Europe and Japan. The multilateral initiative was crucial to a broader package of assistance that came to be known as the Marshall Plan. In a similar fashion, Moore can take the lead to charter a bank to finance the reconstruction of distressed Black communities. Beyond the current efforts of advocates to pursue restitution through piecemeal claims, a bank could be a more efficient way to center the creation of Black institutional wealth. Moore could oversee a summit of political leaders and community banking professionals to craft a mission statement for the reparations bank. It could include members of Maryland's legislative Black Caucus, the Congressional Black Caucus and consultants from Black-owned financial institutions like the Harbor Bank of Maryland. The charter would designate the entity under federal regulations for community development financial institutions and Maryland's community banking laws. Though located in Maryland, the fund would invest in worthy projects for moderate-income Black communities across the country. It would be administered by banking professionals and monitored by an independent accounting service. The development bank would primarily seek private donations and corporate depositors and would pool the funds and collaborate with Black-owned banks, credit unions and attuned financial institutions to vet proposals for planning grants, microfinancing and long-term loans. It could invest in small-scale projects in areas such as cooperative housing and stores, community development corporation charter schools, healthcare and infrastructure projects, and programs for occupational training and entrepreneurship. It would have a rotating board of directors selected from dues-paying organizations that represent the foundational Black community — namely, those that suffered the wrongs of slavery and Jim Crow. Moore was wise to veto the state bill. American political culture has changed dramatically since the days of racial justice activism after the 2020 police killing of George Floyd. During that period, advocates for reparations in California, Illinois and New York found sympathetic allies for legislation to study the subject. But even those initiatives skirted the issue of cash reparations in favor of noneconomic measures like a formal apology. Since then, public sentiment has turned against proposals for racial remedy, and especially the use of public funds for restitution. Other than Black Americans, most groups tend to oppose the idea of reparations, and the empathy for the Black Lives Matters movement was short lived, according to the Pew Research Center. And Democratic Party leaders have expressed concern about the effect of identity politics in the presidential election. As such, advocates may need to explore alternative strategies other than lobbying for a public accounting in the states. The development bank proposal would rely on private funding rather than public. The Trump administration is openly dismissive of Black history and its meaning for contemporary justice. On the 250th anniversary of the American Revolution, for example, the president condemned diversity policies in the armed services during a speech at West Point. Yet Trump brushed aside the historic role of 700 Black patriots — free and enslaved — that participated in the founding of the U.S. Army under frigid conditions at Valley Forge, Pennsylvania. And, though speaking to cadets during the Memorial Day weekend, he neglected to describe how ex-slaves started the Memorial Day holiday after the Civil War. The first commemoration of American war casualties is believed to have occurred on May 1, 1865. That's when emancipated Black workers unearthed a mass grave of Union soldiers near a Confederate prison in Charleston, South Carolina. They reburied the men in a dignified manner and honored their sacrifices to preserve the Union and to end slavery. Additionally, Maryland is the place to get the ball rolling. In criticizing Moore's veto, the legislative Black Caucus noted that the statehouse in Annapolis is less than a mile from the old slave port at the city dock. Yet Maryland symbolizes far more in Black history and contemporary political culture — foremost, its distinction for a high level of statewide political influence. This trend began in 2022 with the election of Moore as governor and Anthony Brown as attorney general — the first Black leaders elected to those offices in the 237-year history of the 'Free State.' Meanwhile, Angela Alsobrooks extended the momentum in her winning campaign for a U.S. Senate seat last year. Maryland is thus the only state where representatives of a sizable Black community have deep roots in the political culture. As such, it is arguably the symbolic capital of Black America. And as governor, Moore is in a position to host a historic summit for the establishment of a development bank for the descendants of slavery and Jim Crow. Roger House is professor emeritus of American Studies at Emerson College and the author of 'Blue Smoke: The Recorded Journey of Big Bill Broonzy' and 'South End Shout: Boston's Forgotten Music Scene in the Jazz Age.' His forthcoming book is 'Five Hundred Years of Black Self-Governance: A Call to Conscience.'
Scroll.in
24-05-2025
- Business
- Scroll.in
Interview: Apple's India move is about perception, Chinese dependency is reality
Apple's India move only in perception, Chinese dependency is reality This article was originally published in Rest of World, which covers technology's impact outside the West. Apple, the world's second-most valuable company, is caught between the US, its home country, and China, its primary manufacturing base. Over the past few years, Apple has set up more production lines in Vietnam and India, and Chief Executive Tim Cook recently said most iPhones sold in the US would be made in India. The company has also pledged to buy chips from TSMC's Arizona plant and to make servers in Texas starting next year. Yet McGee, who reported on Apple for the Financial Times, argues that the company is still far from withdrawing from China. The company has invested billions of dollars in talent and equipment in China, and the country's authoritarian government now has more influence over Apple's fate than any other country, he writes. As China and the US held their closely watched trade talks, McGee spoke to Rest of World about where Apple stands. The interview has been edited for length and clarity. What is the main thrust of your book? My argument is essentially that Apple is playing the role of Prometheus handing the Chinese the gift of fire. Apple's influence on China exceeds that of the Marshall Plan's impact on Europe after World War II. Apple acknowledges that it's trained 28 million workers in China since 2008. It's greater than the labour force of California. And the figure is a decade old, but they were investing $55 billion a year in China. The Achilles heel of the company is that everything is made in China … [and] we were not putting enough attention on it. Apple has been expanding its manufacturing presence in countries like India and Vietnam. Do you think Apple is on its way to reduce its reliance on China? I think Apple wants the perception that they are moving a lot to India, that they are responding to what Donald Trump is asking for. And they want the reality of continuing to build as much as they can out of China because its capabilities there are second to none. If next year you buy an iPhone and it says 'Made in India' on the box, that phone will not be any less dependent on the China-centric supply chain than any other iPhone you have ever purchased. If for some reason something hits the fan in China, no iPhones will be made in India because all of the sub-assembly, and the years of work leading up to it, is still all taking place in China. Why is Apple so slow on diversifying out of China? Is the company worried about anything happening to its supply chains there? One is that China can make it really difficult for them. Are they going to more publicly move things to India? And say 'yep, we are rounding down our investments in China?' I quote someone saying that they need to walk out of China, but they can't run. If they run, they risk the ire of Beijing as well as the Chinese consumers. But if they go too slowly, then they remain stuck in China. So they have to find this perfect pace to exit because they can't become the poster child of de-risking from China. I have got sourcing that Apple has told China, 'OK, more stuff is going to India, but the supply chain is becoming more and more Chinese.' The rise of the 'red supply chain,' which includes companies like BYD, [electronics firm] Luxshare, [acoustic parts maker] Goertek, and [semiconductor company] Wingtech, is of geopolitical importance. Can Apple replicate its powerful supplier network in China elsewhere? I wouldn't say never, but I'm not optimistic. I think China was a once-in-a-century partner that operated at a level of investment, of speed, of political quickness that it's going to be really difficult for any other country to replicate. Things are moving to India, just way more slowly than anybody seems to understand. Apple started with zero phones made in China in 2007. By the end of the year, they had made 3 or 4 million. And by 2014, they were building about 200 million phones. A decade later [2017], the first phones were made in India. And by 2024, about 25 million phones were made in India. At best, the diversification to India has happened at one-tenth the speed that happened in China a decade earlier. Why Vietnam is so proficient at manufacturing is that they are close enough to China to be able to get all the materials and components. But if something blew up in China, again, you wouldn't be like, Oh well, thank God for doing this in Vietnam. Because in that scenario, Vietnam would be as exposed to China as anybody else is. You write that the supply chains Apple cultivated have also benefited China's homegrown tech giants. Apple is now losing market share to Chinese brands like Huawei and Xiaomi; are the Chinese tech industry and consumers ready to live without Apple? The reason why Beijing at the moment would not take any action against Apple is because they learn so much from them. For instance, the Vision Pro headset is all being assembled by Luxshare. So you can imagine it's a bunch of PhDs from Apple teaching them how to do it. I don't know that iPhone share is going to fall apart anytime soon, just because there are so many other reasons why, if you're in that ecosystem, you stick with it. But consumer loyalty is less explicit in China. So many of the applications that they use are not from the app store, but the WeChat universe. And Chinese customers have reasons for supporting a national champion. As China and the US negotiate tariffs and trade now, can Beijing use Apple as a bargaining chip? The way you phrased the question is already really revealing, right? You didn't ask, can Washington use Apple as a bargaining chip? That's a crazy thing to say, that it's America's most iconic company and it's a bargaining chip of Beijing's. Yeah, I mean, you're totally right. Beijing clearly has more of a hold on Apple's day-to-day operations than Washington does.
