Europe

My post below mentions a Code of Conduct that needs to be implemented to make a lifting of the EU’s arms embargo somewhat more palatable for the United States. The EU will have to work very hard at creating and enforcing a Code that is worth more than the paper it is written on, though, for the existing Code simply doesn’t work:

Although officially the European Parliament’s hands are tied regarding armaments questions, parliamentarians increasingly see it as their duty to comment on controversial developments. This criticism has now been made into a 26-page report by Spanish Parliamentarian Raul Romeva Rueda.

Rueda’s report took issue with the EU’s code of conduct for weapons sales, which is supposed to provide a set of ethical guidelines for countries to follow. However, the document, which was created in 1998, is not legally binding. The European Parliament is overwhelmingly in favor of changing that.

“The main problem with the code of conduct is that it is a very weak instrument,” Rueda said.

The code of conduct sets a series of minimum standards for arms exports. Those include stipulations that no weapons should be sold to countries that might use them to abuse human rights. Weapons are also not to go to countries where regional conflicts are taking place, or where weapons purchases will further poverty in the population.

“Some of the equipment being sent to countries is torture equipment, or equipment that is being used to apply the death penalty,” he said. “You have electric sticks, for instance, that is sometimes used by some police to force confessions.”

(Emphasis mine)

Read more

In September of last year, I posted on the efforts of Germany, Japan and Brazil to gain a seat on the UNSC. I wasn’t impressed. Neither, apparently, is David Frum. In his piece, The End of the Transatlantic Affair, he writes:

Over lunch at a Washington think-tank some time ago, a high-ranking German official told the room about his country’s determination to win a seat on the United Nations Security Council. The reaction? From the Americans present, indifference verging on boredom. For the Europeans, though, it was as if the official had dropped a concrete block on their toes.

It was a fascinating moment of culture clash that demonstrates some ominous truths about American-European relations. The first truth is the traditionalism of American policy elites. Even when the evidence is thrust into American faces, it is hard for them to accept that things have changed in the old alliance. From 1947 until 1991, US-European relations were guided by the rule that America would provide the protection and Europe the deference.

With the collapse of Soviet military power, the deal became obsolete. Yet this large geopolitical change has made little impression on American policy elites. Indeed, John Kerry won the backing of almost all of this elite by running a presidential campaign that promised that the alliance could be restored with just a few sweet words.

Read more

The post I wrote yesterday was entitled “Hope for the Future”. In the post, I stated my opinion that the European Union might not survive.

Fellow Chicago Boy Ralf Goergens left a comment….

“…why did you call the post ‘hope for the future’ when you are predicting the end of the EU? Surely you know that this would be a very bad thing, including the United States?”

If the only purpose for the EU was to increase trade between the member nations and allow them to compete more effectively in the global markets, then I’d have no problem. I also wouldn’t mind if they pooled defense assets and formed something that would be effective. Both developments would actually help the US, since healthy competition is good for business and having an effective military means that the US wouldn’t have to keep paying good money to protect those freeloaders any more.

At least I wouldn’t have a problem if they went about it in the right way, and if they confined themselves to their stated goals.

Read more

Via Instapundit comes a link to Professor Brainbridge’s observations on the European Union, in which he points out numerous problems with the EU’s future. Most EU optimists argue from a position that “bigger is better,” but while the EU certainly brings major advantages, internal free trade for one, I think the optimists miss that the EU could be in the business of building the world’s biggest dinosaur.

Read more

The election in Ukraine is getting more attention as Kuchma’s hand-picked successor, Victor Yanukovych, is rejected by the populace. Putin was quick to embrace Yanukovych, who is considered pro-Russian (Ukraine has a large Russian ethnic minority in its eastern region). The opposition candidate, Victor Yushenko, was apparently denied a victory by widespread fraud. With no expertise but a great deal of sympathy, let us refer you to others with more insight.

On the scene:

Tulipgirl
Le sabot post-moderne
Maidan
Orange Ukraine

On the Case:

The Argus specializes in Central Asia and the Causasus.
A Fistful of Euros is a general interest group blog on Europe, center-left politically (by US standards), that has been following events in Ukraine.
SCSU Scholars has been devoting most of its space to the election in Ukraine. Comprehensive and well-presented.