Europe would have benefited from a few more years of Trump

One of the most recurrent common places among those who make European politics and those of us who comment on it is Jean Monnet’s phrase according to which “Europe will be forged in crises.” It has turned out to be true many times: had it not been for the crisis exchange rate of the early 1990s, the economic crisis of 2008 or the current crisis of the coronavirus, it is very likely that the euro would not have been founded, nor would the union levels that we currently enjoy would have been achieved. But it is a dangerous phrase: it seems to affirm, also, that when things go well (if that happens one day, in the near future), the European Union it will stand still.

But despite the risks, let me use it one more time: the biggest inadvertent crisis the EU has suffered in the last four years, when it was just emerging from the euro crisis, has its own name: Donald Trump. Trump started a trade war with the EU, encouraged Boris Johnson to carry out a hard Brexit, threatened to remove the United States from NATO, he became the political reference for the leaders of the two countries that do the most to break the founding values ​​of the EU, Poland and Hungary, he tried to impose his criteria for the use of technology on Europe and fooled with the leader of the closest adversary from the EU, Russia.

But once again that crisis ‘forged’ Europe. European countries not only committed (not very credibly, certainly) to increase defense spending to meet the requirements of the OTAN and demanded by Trump, but even began to talk about a possible European army with a self defense strategy. When Trump imposed tariffs on European imports, The EU responded by imposing its own on the importation of Harley-Davidson motorcycles, an emblem of America that votes for Trump, which ended up taking part of its production out of the United States. The EU started talking about something akin to industrial policies to strengthen the european technology, such as the one developed by Ericsson or Nokia for 5G networks. It even had, for the first time, a relatively credible tool to force unruly countries to comply with the rule of law: to condition the receipt of aid on compliance.

The two words that were repeated in the European Comission, the ‘think tanks’ and among the European intellectuals were “strategic autonomy”. The idyll with the United States, which had lasted since the end of World War II, was ending; Trump, it was thought, had done nothing but accelerate a trend that was already there underground, and now Europeans had to learn to manage alone in military, commercial and geostrategic matters. The process would be slow. Yet it was inevitable and unstoppable.

But was it? As soon as Joe Biden won the presidential election, doubts began to be expressed. First, the German Defense Minister, Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, public an article in the Brussels newspaper ‘‘in which he said that “in a world marked by increasing competition for power, the West will only be able to stand firm and defend its interests to the extent that it remains united. Europe continues to depend on the United States for its military protection, both nuclear and conventional, but the United States will not be able to carry the banner of Western values ​​alone. In an unusual act, the French president, Emmanuel Macron, disavowed it in an interview: “I strongly disagree with the German Defense Minister in ‘Politico,” he said. “I think it is a historical misinterpretation. Luckily, if I am correct, the Chancellor [Merkel] does not share this point of view. The United States will only respect us as allies if we are honest, and if we are sovereign when it comes to our defense. ” Trump’s trade for Biden, Macron said, it should be an opportunity to “continue to build our independence in the same way that the United States and China do.” In an even more unusual act, Kramp-Karrenbauer publicly stated that he agreed with the French president, but not entirely: “Without the nuclear and conventional capabilities of the United States, Germany and Europe cannot protect themselves. It is the harsh reality ”.

The two sides of the discussion are somewhat right: strategic autonomy is the objective that the EU should pursue, but it is doubtful that it has the political capital necessary to achieve it in the medium term. Meanwhile, dependence on the United States will persist. But, in any case, this public shock shows that the presence of Trump allowed to forge consensus which, in its absence, will be more difficult to sustain. His presence functioned as a accelerator of the tasks that the EU had pending but He was in no hurry to do it, and as much as we celebrate his departure from power, it is possible that the European tendency to leave things by halves is underpinning. Why should we continue with the frenetic pace of autonomous technological, military and commercial plans if old America is back in Washington, the one that was politically hardened in the Cold War and the sacred notion of protecting Europe?

Trump, in that sense, leaves a huge void in European politics. All analysts have been hoarse to repeat that the good old days will not return and that, no matter how much the Democrats rule, or later a more traditional version of republicanism, United States it will continue to urge Europeans to, for example, spend more on defense or align with them in the confrontation with China. But not seeing that man in the White House will make us relax. Macron It will try not to make it happen, but it will. And, in a sense, we will be able to invoke Monnet again, but with a twist: “The Trump presidency was a crisis that allowed Europe to be forged, but it was too short a crisis.”


Not only Brexit: the EU gambles 1.8 trillion in a summit ‘animated’ by Hungary and Poland

New key appointment in Europe. EU leaders meet again this Thursday with several key issues on the table: the financial future of the Union, give a more coordinated approach to the second wave of the Covid-19 pandemic, and the possibility of a modest post-Brexit trade deal with the United Kingdom. “They are three hard nuts to crack” that can derail the situation, because “the stakes are high.”

These are the words of Berenberg analysts, who believe that the first of the three issues, namely the financial one, “will determine the future of the EU even more than the other two.” And it is that the summit this Thursday must deal with the threat of delaying the ‘mega tax agreement’ of 1.8 billion euros that emerged after the veto of Hungary and Poland to the recovery fund and budget.

Although the German firm believes that this issue will not be settled at this meeting, but that the countries will take advantage to start negotiating and in the end there will be an agreement “in time” for the December 10-11 summit. They are optimistic in this regard, given that otherwise, the first payments of the aid provided for in the recovery fund created to face the consequences of the coronavirus crisis, which amounts to 750,000 million euros, “could be delayed from the second to the third quarter of 2021, “and that is something the Twenty-seven cannot afford.

“While this would be unfortunate, it shouldn’t make much of a difference as long as major recipients like Italy and Spain can borrow in the markets under exceptionally favorable conditions “, as is the case now, says Berenberg. In fact, he assures that it is “highly unlikely” that the € 1.8 trillion package could permanently derail.

It should be remembered that at the summit held last July, EU leaders laid the foundations for an “innovative agreement” of 1.8 trillion euros: 750,000 million euros to support the post-Covid recovery and 1, € 07 trillion for the EU’s seven-year financial framework (2021-2027). So what is the reason for the veto of Hungary and Poland? Very simple, because the agreement links payments to political criteria and the rule of law, something that these two countries do not share.

According to Berenberg, these are “loosely defined” criteria, and as in everything, “the devil is in the details.” And it is that although from a technical point of view Hungary and Poland cannot prevent the EU from adopting the mechanism of the rule of law to condition the distribution, since it can be approved by a two-thirds majority, it does require a unanimous vote for the seven-year financial framework and to allow the European Commission to issue bonds to finance the support fund of € 750 billion. “This gives Hungary and Poland an advantage”say the experts at the German firm.

Something not trivial, if you take into account everything that is at stake. And is that “the perception of a lack of solidarity within the EU could strengthen the narrative of skeptical populists” with the Union, while a “prolonged fiscal stagnation could undermine the cohesion” of the Twenty-seven. However, Berenberg is optimistic. “It is true that the stakes are high, but the probability that the problem can be solved appears to be even higher“say its analysts.

“A lot of pressure is expected in Poland and Hungary and a lot of discussions in the coming days and weeks. Most likely, the wording of the rule of law mechanism will not be changed, but these countries may obtain minor concessions,” says the German firm. The safest thing, he says, is that “the worst case scenario” does not occur, that is, the blockade, and that the controversy “can be resolved” before the end of the year.


Regarding the other two issues, they worry the experts less. Regarding the pandemicNow EU countries “are cooperating better” than during the first wave, and so even if there is not a “fully coordinated approach”, the exchange of experiences “will probably help countries in their national strategies,” says Berenberg.

And the Brexi? Well, it has become something of a never ending story. Although the British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson has once again chilled expectations of a possible trade dealThe truth is that there is a certain optimism about it. “The possibilities of an agreement seem to be increasing,” points out the German firm, which despite recalling that the three issues of discord (fishing, equal conditions and dispute resolution mechanism) have not been fully resolved, it seems that “the negotiators are working hard on a legal text “that could result in an agreement. “We expect the negotiators to present it shortly, but probably not this Thursday,” they conclude. Not without first remembering, of course, that “the result is still wide open”.


Johnson and Von der Leyen agree to “redouble efforts” toward a post-Brexit deal

The British Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, and the president of the European Commission (EC), Ursula von der Leyen, they agreed ‘Redouble efforts’ towards a post-Brexit deal in a telephone conversation held this Saturday, a British government spokesman said.

The source noted that during the call, planned to Taking stock of the negotiationsJohnson noted that, while progress has been made, “significant differences persist in several areas” of common concern, including competition and fisheries.

The two leaders agreed that their respective teams will continue negotiations next Monday in London in order to “Redouble efforts to reach an agreement”, which would enter into force at the end, on December 31, of the post-Brexit transition period, which was formally executed on January 31.

For their part, Johnson and Von der Leyen “will remain in contact,” the spokesman said. If they fail to negotiate a bilateral pact, as of January 1, 2021, the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU) will start trading based on the generic, less beneficial regulations of the World Trade Organization (WTO).


▷ Meghan Markle’s vote in the US elections

Meghan Markle’s vote in the US elections.


In these last American electionss  Meghan Markle has been encouraged to vote in its public comments. ‘Page Six’ has been confirmed by sources close to the Sussex that the Duchess voted days before by post, and they go further by adding that she would also have exercised her right as an American citizen if she continued to live in the United Kingdom.


▷ The new virtual BlizzCon will be free for everyone: Blizzard says goodbye to the classic ticket in this edition

BlizzConline will be the event to learn more about Overwatch 2, Diablo 4, and other games.

Blizzard It has been holding a face-to-face event for 15 years where it announces news for its video games, and where fans can meet to participate in all kinds of activities related to their favorite titles. As we already knew, the 2020 pandemic has caused this BlizzCon to become “BlizzConline“an exclusively digital edition destined to maintain tradition from a safer perspective. And with this new format, they also arrive monetization changes.

In a video reviewing Blizzard-related news, products and services, President J. Allen Brack announces that BlizzConline, dated to February 19 and 20, will be free for all viewers. This is, in part, a first for the event: although the opening ceremony has always been free to watch, the rest of the tournaments, contests and collectibles were part of a virtual ticket of 40 dollars / euros.

In spite of everything, a good part of the activities which WoW parents are accustomed to, including competitions, cosplay contests or the fun march of the murlocs, where fans interpret these tribal fish with greater or lesser visual fidelity. Of course, we will also have ads.

In this edition, we will have to closely track Overwatch 2 Y Diablo IV, among other novelties. The former will add campaign heroes and PvE content to Blizzard’s cooperative shooter, while the latter will take a more sinister and traditional approach to the loot progression-based RPG series. Neither has a release date for now.

More about: Blizzard, BlizzConline, BlizzCon 2020, Diablo IV Y Overwatch 2.


Vox and Trump (fear)

03/11/2020 05:00

Ahead of

The shards of speech Trump They have had an impact on the body politic of European citizen and political sectors. In 2016, first in June with the Brexit referendum and then in November with the election of the current president of the United States, the Western world entered a new phase. Nationalist populism exploded in the first world power and its great representative was installed in the White House. It seemed that the uchrony of Philip Roth it was fulfilled. The American writer published a disturbing story in 2004 (‘The conspiracy against America’): in 1940, American citizens made the mythical and Phil-Nazi aviator president Charles Lindbergh, apartando a Franklin Delano Roosevelt.

It was a fable, but 12 years later someone with ideas that would not be very different from the Lindbergh that Roth presents us – Donald Trump – settled in the White House. And the fact is that reality always surpasses fiction and there is no event that has happened or is happening – the pandemic, for example – that was not intuited or foreseen by insightful visionaries. Even the cycles of history guide us on the circular nature of collective behaviors with political incidence.

Esteban Hernandez

The motion of no confidence has been yet another setback for the extreme right, who are in retreat everywhere. Will they lose influence for sure? Let’s think about it before answering

The wake of Donald Trump’s abrupt, harsh, sometimes brutal and always arrogant speech has created a school and has made him the leader of the alternative project to conventional and representative democracy that took root in the United States and Europe after World War II. . Trump has impaired American liberties without altering the letter of the old Constitution of 1787, revamped by up to 27 amendments introduced between 1815 and 1992.

It has done so by despising its spirit, breaking the customary conventions that the future of the coexistence of its people has imposed, exploiting its broad presidential powers to the limit and even transferring them with impunity, execrating the critical media both with defamatory speeches and with the use of new technologies, which have caused the collapse of journalistic mediation. Trump reveals in his uncouth ways – speaking, eating, gesturing – the minimal quality of his ideas and of his project. And thus outlines, with extraordinary clarity, his totalitarian drive.

We are not safe from the actual political significance of Trump, win or not the elections, and we incur a serious risk of democratic involution if he is reelected. Because the Western world – and our country – is traversed by a feeling that the President of the United States has exploited with particular skill: fear, because it is a feeling that, in the words of the classic, leads us to see things worse than they are.

Donald Trump, in one of his last campaign acts.  (Reuters)Donald Trump, in one of his last campaign acts.  (Reuters)
Donald Trump, in one of his last campaign acts. (Reuters)

Perhaps we would have to go back to the thirties of the last century to remember a period of social fear as widespread as it is in 2020. For some reason, the Pope has just recalled what happened in those years when alluding to the repeal by Nazism of the Weimar Constitution. The Germans fell into the arms of the ‘strong man’ – by the decision of a weak man, the president Paul von Hindenburg, who in 1933 appointed Chancellor to Adolf Hitler after a spurious election. Then disaster struck.

Saving all the distances, and remembering that Roth’s uchrony already warned us, the shock wave of a Trump electoral victory would reach Europe with force. It would reinforce the English nationalist populism of Boris Johnson and it would give back to the authoritarian leaders of Hungary and Poland, among others, and to the extreme illiberal right in several countries.

And it would have an effect in Spain, where socio-economic, health, labor and institutional conditions are adequate for the most negative feelings to germinate: fear, uncertainty, exclusion and mistrust. Profit from misfortune – such a Trumpist technique – was summarized in the speech of Santiago Abascal, President (figurehead?) of Vox, in the plenary session of Congress on the occasion of the motion of censure against Pedro Sánchez on the 21st. In Spain, this Super Tuesday in the US is also for Vox. Win with Trump in the White House and lose without him in the presidency.

This Monday, both in this newspaper and in others, the scared founders of Vox Alejo Vidal-Quadras, Ignacio Camuñas and Luis González Quirós– they demanded of their own creature “moderation”, nothing less than “liberalism” and abandoning “eccentricities” and “over-excitement”. These characters speak of internal factors in Vox that are “right wing in ‘delirium tremens”. And they get it right, but they do it too late. Hence the speech of Pablo Casado It was produced with a miraculous opportunity, because it was a real rescue of the Spanish democratic right. A dissertation that left Abascal “perplexed” but that disconcerted Pedro Sánchez.

The left – there are tweets from Pablo Iglesias– He believes that confronting Vox is profitable for him and that the return of the PP to its liberal-conservative identity is little less than a setback. The truth is that stopping the dynamics that emerged in the West in 2016 in the two great world democracies – the United Kingdom and the United States – is a task that summons right and left.

This is the time to conduct ourselves as advised Hannah Arendt: “The essence of thought is not knowledge but that which distinguishes good from evil, between the beautiful and the ugly; and what I am looking for is that thinking gives strength to people so that they can avoid disasters in those moments when everything seems lost ”. This is the time when many things seem to be. And it is time to think and not only to feel, to control those fearful emotions that lead us to embrace dictators, to expressions of violence and collective discouragement.


Flanders wields a 1666 treaty to fish in British waters even if Brexit fails

2 hours posted

Share on Social Networks

by hatunruna a Sent: ____

Charles II of England had a hectic life. A woman he married in two separate ceremonies, no legitimate children, but a minimum of 12 with his lovers, a beheaded father, and himself spending nine years in exile before taking the thrones of England, Scotland and Ireland after the Cromwell’s death. He spent three of his years in exile in the Flemish city of Bruges and, grateful for their hospitality, in 1666 he awarded them the Privilegie der Visscherie, the privilege of fishermen who gave 50 boats from that city rights …

| labels: United Kingdom , England , Brexi , uk , fishing , boris , France , treaty

Share on Social Networks


▷ Pregnant? Meghan Markle and Prince Harry have a secret kept for “confidential reason”


October 30 2020, 11:28 am

Royal families do not usually have few members, so Meghan Markle and the prince harry They could be gearing up for the announcement of the arrival of a new royal baby.

According to British media reports, the Duchess of Sussex; who won a motion to delay the court battle with the British tabloid for a “confidential” reason, is pregnant and will confirm soon.

According to the report, the judge Mark Warby granted the delay after Meghan’s team gave a “confidential reason” for doing so.

With information from El Farandi

Shortly after the judge’s comments, royal fans began speculating about Meghan Markle’s pregnancy; as he won the bid for a confidential reason that was shared by his legal team in court.

Meghan Markle and Prince Harry became parents to their first child Archie Harrison in May 2019. It has never been confirmed whether the couple will attempt to have children again. But nevertheless; The former ‘Suits’ star is speculated to be pregnant and will confirm soon.

The tabloid, citing a source, stated: “It seems certain that the Duke and Duchess of Sussex will join your family.”

Meghan would surely be delighted when she emerged victorious in her bid to have a privacy action against a tabloid newspaper postponed for about nine months until next fall.

The trial was to begin in London in January 2021.

Prince Harry’s wife is suing Associated Newspapers by articles in the Mail on Sunday which included parts of a handwritten letter he had sent to his father, Thomas Markle, in August 2018. “My conclusion is that the correct decision in all circumstances is to grant the request”, said the judge. “That means that the test date of January 11, 2021 will become vacant and the test will be rescheduled for a new date in the fall.”


Why is it getting harder and harder for Meghan Markle and Prince Harry to spend Christmas in England?


October 29 2020, 2:02 pm

Photo: Archive

It will soon be a year since Prince Harry and Meghan Markle left for the United States never to return. They announced it on January 18 after spending more than a month on vacation in Los Angeles, where they spent Christmas with Meghan’s mother instead of with the Royal Family, as had been tradition.

By Vanity Fair

Of course, before formally abandoning their life as royals, the Sussexes returned to the UK in March to say goodbye and finalize the deals for their long-awaited freedom, which was finally granted by Queen Elizabeth II in April. And since then, they have never seen each other again in person.

That is why all the British people were anxious to know how the next Christmas would go when Harry and Meghan had to return yes or yes to England. Although not for pleasure, but because on January 11 the trial that the dukes are holding against Associated Newspaper, which owns several tabloids, is scheduled to be held in London, which they accuse of publishing false information about them.

A legal battle that demands that the couple be present in the courtroom, something that in order to comply with it forces them to travel to England two weeks before the date of the trial to keep the corresponding quarantine that the British government requires of those who enter the country from United States.

But according to what has just been learned, finally that Christmas return could not take place. Well, the judge in charge of the case accepted the formal request that Harry and Meghan’s lawyers have sent to delay this meeting in court for several months.

To read more, enter here


▷ Dos ex-Blizzard fundan Frost Giant Studios

From ex-Blizzard they have announced the founding of Frost Giant Studios in Orange County, California.

Tim Morten, CEO of the company, was the chief producer of Starcraft 2: Legacy of the Void and has worked for the last six years in the company, although he has gone through numerous studies and has been involved in sagas such as Command & Conquer.

Tim Campbell, meanwhile, was the lead designer for the Warcraft 3: The Frozen Throne campaign and has since been involved in numerous projects, most recently Wasteland 3 as director.

The first round of financing has closed with 4.7 million dollars raised by various investors, including Riot Games.

The company’s first game will be an RTS (real-time strategy game) and its goal is for it to be the next great game in the genre.

Real-Time Strategy Returns! We’re launching a new game studio to build the next great RTS! Join us on our journey at! #FrostGiant

— Frost Giant Studios (@Frost_Giant) October 20, 2020