The European Union Conspiracy to Delegitimize the June 5, 2021 Ethiopian Election EXPOSED!

        <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 3.7.9-->Al Mariam’s Commentaries

For months, I have been predicting and warning the U.S. and the European Union are locked in a conspiracy to delegitimize the June 5, 2021 Ethiopian parliamentary election.

In my February 14, 2021 commentary, I laid out my case on the U.S./E.U. conspiracy to “sabotage democratic reform in Ethiopia and undermine confidence in the 2021 Election”.

I provided further explanation on that conspiracy in my March 2, 2021 commentary, “(War)game of Thrones and Delegitimize the 2021 Election”.

We are now beginning to see the wheels of that conspiracy spinning.

On May 3, 2021, Joseph Borrel, Vice President of the European Commission, issued a statement announcing cancellation of deployment of the European Union Electoral Observation Mission (EU EOM) to Ethiopia because “it was not possible to reach an agreement with Ethiopian authorities on key parameters.”

Borrell’s statement provided no inkling on the “key parameters” that prevented an agreement.

However, Ambassador Dina Mufti, the spokesperson of the Ethiopian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, exposed the reasons for the cancellation with crystal clarity:

(Commentary author’s translation.) The reasons the European Union cancelled its observer mission deployment in Ethiopia are clear. They raised two issues. Both issues are anti-Ethiopian sovereignty, affront Ethiopian independence and endanger Ethiopian national security.

First, they insisted on bringing in a technology called VSAT which completely bypasses the Ethiopian telecommunications system.

There are two things to note. Now and in previous times — there have been six previous elections in Ethiopia — such a question has never been presented from any election observer group.

Second, in light of the existing circumstances, all of the locations to be monitored by election observers have full telecommunication access under the national Ethiopian telecommunication system. They can use the system. But they EU EOM wants to deploy a technology that is outside the control and supervision of our national telecommunication system. That is the same as demanding to administer a superordinate telecommunication system in our country. It is clear that is what they want to deploy.

Why they want to have a superordinate telecommunication system is not clear. If their aim is to observe the election, they can do so. The security situation is safe. There is accessibility and there is communication. They are welcome to conduct their observations.

However, they insist on bringing in their own VSAT technology. That is what they are demanding.

Second, they demanded that they be the first to make a statement on the election before the official Ethiopian Elections Commission makes its statement. We said, “You cannot do that.”

Such a demand cannot be met under the election law of any country, in our country or in any foreign country. Even they will not contemplate allowing such a thing in their own country.

Our Election Commission is duly authorized by law to administer elections and issue authoritative statements. It is an  independent entity. But they want to override the Election Commission and make the first statement on the election.

From the start, it is the Ethiopian people who certify our election and then the Ethiopian Election Commission, an independent body.

What they are effectively saying is, “You cannot have an election we have not approved.”

These are the reasons why they canceled their observer mission.

It is they who asked to come and observe in the first place. They said they have an observer team ready. But now they concoct these two reasons in refusing to come.

What they are demanding of us as a sovereign and independent country is equivalent of saying, “I  come into your house and command, ‘You’ll sleep on the floor. You’ll sleep under the bed. You’ll sit up in the chair all night long.”

There is no country in the world that will allow such a thing.

Unless it is a colony.

Such are the facts.

European Union Election Observer Mission Demands Violate Its Own Code of Conduct and Handbook for European Union Election Observation  

The EU EOM has glaringly lacked transparency in disclosing its reasons (“parameters” resulting in disagreement) for cancelling its observer mission.

It is ironic that EU EOM can talk the talk on transparency but cannot talk the walk.

If the EU is going to take such major action and cancel its observer mission after inviting itself (contrary to its own policy, see below) to Ethiopia, it should come clean and tell the world its reasons.

Unless, of course, the cancellation is part of EU EOM’s dirty tricks game being played on Ethiopia.

Let’s look at the facts.

First, the EU EOM’s demand to bring its own VSAT (Very Small Aperture Terminal) is a clear violation of its own rules and principles.

VSAT is a private earth station designed to transmit and retrieve data signals via satellite.

Using VSAT, the EU EOM will be able to establish a completely independent voice, internet and intranet communication system with public and private networks outside of control and oversight of the Ethiopian telecommunication system.

The very first and thirteenth principle of the Code of Conduct for EU Election Observers provide:

1. Observers will respect the laws of the land. They enjoy no special immunities as international observers, unless the host country so provides.
2. Observers must comply with all national laws and regulations.

These principles are prominently affirmed in the Handbook for European Union Election Observation (“Handbook”) (p. 21).

The EU EOM mission statement provides:

EU election observation missions do not interfere in the organisation of the election itself. Instead, they collect and analyse factual information concerning the election process and provide an independent public assessment.”

The EU EOM Handbook (p. 37) dictates:

3.6 Cooperation with the host country EU observers respect and adhere to the laws of the host country. An EU EOM is deployed only after receipt of an invitation from the State and/ or the electoral authorities of the host country. Memorandums of Understanding (MoUs) between the EU and the host country (usually one with the Election Management Body (EMB) and one with the government) outline the rights and responsibilities of both parties… The MOUs provide guarantees that the EU EOM is able to enjoy the necessary conditions for effective and credible observation which include:

– unimpeded access to all aspects of the electoral process and to all persons concerned with the election;
– the freedom to operate without interference, including the freedom to issue public statements and reports;
– the freedom of movement around the country and conditions that ensure the safety and security of EU observers;
– the issuing of appropriate accreditation by the electoral authorities, which should be provided on a non-discriminatory basis;
– guarantees that there will be no adverse action against its national or foreign staff or others who assist the EU EOM with its work.

3.7 Openness in findings and visibility in work An EU EOM issues a public preliminary statement shortly after voting has been completed (usually within 48 hours) at a press conference, where the Chief Observer is open to questions…

Moreover, the EU EOM specifically describes the role of its mission on election day as follows:

On election day, observers visit pooling (sic) stations in order to observe the opening, voting, counting and aggregation of results.

The facts are:

1) Borrell and EU EOM have flagrantly violated EU-established elections observation Code of Conduct, handbook and policies;

2) the EU EOM under the leadership of Joseph Borrell invited itself to observe the June 5 Ethiopian election without an invitation by the Ethiopian Government in violation of its own Code of Conduct;

3) Borrell and the EU EOM, by demanding exceptional accommodations for deployment of VSAT technology and the right to issue a first statement on the election results, acted in flagrant violation of Ethiopian laws and the legal duties of the Ethiopian Elections Commission in violation breaching its own Code of Conduct and Handbook;

4) by pressuring the Ethiopian government to compromise its sovereignty, independence and right to self-determination, Borrell and the EU EOM violated their own Code of Conduct, Handbook and and international law.

The hypocrisy of the European Union

The EU EOM has a strange history of election observation in Ethiopia.

In its 2005 Final Report, the EU EOM reported, “… the counting and aggregation processes were marred by irregular practices, confusion and a lack of transparency. Overall, therefore, the elections fell short of international principles for genuine democratic elections.

On August 30, 2005, the late TPLF boss Meles Zenawi incinerated the European Union Election Observer Report:

The [EU EOM] statement, in my view, shows that the mission has turned out to be something worse than a farce. We shall, in the coming days and weeks, see what we can do to expose the pack of lies and innuendoes that characterise the garbage in this report. … What the implications of this will be in terms of relations between Ethiopia and the EU we will have to wait and see. But I don’t think you will be surprised if Ethiopia were to insist that it should not be patronised…

After being trashed by TPLF leader Meles Zenawi over the 2005 election, the EU provided millions in budget support to the TPLF regime.

EU EOM slithered back to observe the 2010 election.

In my October 2009 commentary I observed”

It is foolish to believe the ‘2010 election’ will make any difference in the lives of Ethiopians. It is an election about NOTHING; and we should condemn it as a travesty and caricature of democracy and a shameless mockery of popular sovereignty.

The EU EOM did not register a complaint or cancel its observer mission in 2010, despite the fact that the Meles-TPLF regime had humiliated and demeaned it as a bunch of  “election garbage reporters”.

The EU EOM knew full well that the 2010 parliamentary election was going to be stolen. They had documented it in 2005. They had every reason to press the TPLF regime to correct the problems and issues in the 2005 election or withdraw from the 2010 observation to preserve their integrity.

But they did not.

They showed to observe the 2010 as if all of the problems in 2005 had been resolved.

In the 2010 election, the TPLF claimed to have won 99.6 percent of seats in parliament. In its 2010 Final Report, the EU EOM stated, “The electoral process fell short of certain international commitments, notably regarding the transparency of the process and the lack of a level playing field for all contesting parties.”

De ja vu 2005!

Ambassador Dina Mufti in his press conference made a critical observation:

It is they [EU EOM] who asked to come and observe in the first place. They said they have an observer team ready. But now they concoct these two reasons to refuse to come.

The Handbook (p. 37) dictates:

3.6 Cooperation with the host country EU observers respect and adhere to the laws of the host country. An EU EOM is deployed only after receipt of an invitation from the State and/ or the electoral authorities of the host country.

For the 2015 election, the EU decided not to send an EU EOM because its previous recommendations to Ethiopia were ignored.

At the time Ethiopia’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs spokesperson Redwan Hussien noted:

“Whatever prescription they made, it had nothing to do with the election. It has to do with the entire democratic system, and legal system and policy issues. So we didn’t subscribe to it because it has nothing to do with elections.”

Joseph Borrell is an ignoramus who has had a special long knife to cut Ethiopia

It is manifest that Joseph Borrell is an ignoramus.

If not, he must think Ethiopians are dumb as hell and won’t be able to figure out his intrigue.

Borrell pontificates about EU EOM integrity, transparency, rule of law, democracy, etc. However, he has not even read the EU EOM Handbook or the Code of Conduct for EU Election Observers which mandate integrity, transparency etc.

Albert Einstein said, “The world is a dangerous place to live, not because of the people who are evil, but because of the people who don’t do anything about it.”

I say, “Democracy cannot bloom in Africa not because the ‘African savages’ are incapable of creating and thriving in it, but because of those who carry the White Man’s Burden and toil day and night to make Africa a dangerous place to live for Africans. Regrettably, few have the courage to stand up and do something about it.”

Borrell, a good friend of Tedros Adhanom, (a member of the terrorist organization Tigray People’s Liberation Front) and current Director General of the World Health Organization (WHO), has threatened, bullied and made good on his threat against Ethiopia by championing the TPLF terrorist cause.

In December 2020, the EU announced it is  “withholding nearly 90 million euros ($109 million) in budget support payments due before the end of the year to Ethiopia because of the conflict in the northern Tigray region.”

Among the conditions to be fulfilled by the Government of Ethiopia for EU Budget Support to resume include: “Granting full humanitarian access for relief workers, access for civilians seeking refuge in neighbouring countries, an end to ethnically targeted measures and hate speech, and restoring communication lines and media access in the Tigray region.”

Borrell said he told Ethiopia’s Foreign Minister Demeke Mekonnen that “in particular in the absence of full humanitarian access to all areas of the conflict, the EU cannot disburse the planned budget support to the Ethiopian government.”

The fact of the matter is that Borrell and the EU are violating their own policies, rules and guidelines on budget support:

The EU Budget Support Guidelines (p. 31) provide the specific criteria that must be met for disbursement, which completely negate the “conditions” cited by the EU:

4.1. Eligibility criteria for approval & disbursement

Budget support contracts are subject to the following four eligibility criteria covering:

➔ National/sector policies and reforms (“public policies”);

➔ Stable macro-economic framework;

➔ Public financial management; and

➔ Transparency and oversight of the budget

There is no requirement whatsoever that makes budget support contingent upon humanitarian access, refugees, hate speech and the rest.

The weaponization and politicization of budget support was made crystal clear in November 2020 by Hans Stausboll, head of unit for Eastern Africa, Horn of Africa at the European Commission’s development department

I would … not underestimate the political leverage we have collectively, the EU and the member states, when it comes to using in the appropriate way the financial cooperation in order to support our political goals.”

So, budget support is simply a political tool the EU uses to break the back of Ethiopia and make her lick the stinking boots of the European Union.

Joseph Borrell and the European Union should know one eternal fact: ETHIOPIANS USE BOOTS FOR ONE AND ONE PURPOSE ONLY. KICK ASS!

If they Borrell and the EU don’t believe it, they should ask the descendants of the white Italian colonial imperialists who invaded Ethiopia in 1896 and 1935.

The FIX IS IN! The FIX WAS UNFIXED!

The U.S., with the invisible guiding hand of Susan Rice and the European Union, with the blathering mouth of  Joseph Borrell, are working day and night to delegitimize the June 5, 2021 election.

Why are they doing it?

THE U.S. AND THE E.U. WANT TO BE THE KINGMAKERS IN ETHIOPIA. There is no doubt about it!

Here are some facts to consider:

The EU EOM announced its cancellation of its observer mission a month before the election to capture and sustain the narrative that the June 5 election will not be free and fair.

The reason the EU EOM insists on having its own VSAT is for twin purposes: 1) to use the Western press-titutes to spread disinformation on the election and control the international narrative, and 2) to deliver VSAT equipment to TPLF terrorists in Tigray and other terrorists throughout Ethiopia so they could conduct propaganda to destabilize Ethiopia.

The EU EOM desperately wanted to be the sole source of reliable election information to the Ethiopian people and shape public opinion on the outcome of the election by demanding that it be the first to issue a statement.

The EU believes it has bought the political souls of the Ethiopian people by dropping crumbs of $109 million for budget support.

The EU believes only the White Man who colonized the Black African for centuries knows what is best for him.

The EU and the U.S. are scared s**tless that a real democracy — a democracy they have not fabricated, massaged and manipulated, a democracy of African people, by African people, for African people  — is going to take place in Ethiopia. What does that mean for the rest of Africa? The African “savages” are finally going to be free following the beacon of Ethiopia!

“Oh! no. The sky is falling on Africa. We gotta save Africans from themselves!”

The EU is declaring and walking out and by doing so send a signal to the Western world that the Ethiopian election not blessed by White men and women cannot possibly be free and fair. After all, the White Man invented free and fair elections.

The Princess of Darkness Susan Rice and her Axis of Evil will toil day and night to discredit and delegitimize the June 5, 2021 election in Ethiopia.

It is said that “Evil never sleeps.”

They are counting on the “hear no evil, see no evil, speak no evil” sold out, lily-livered, chicken-hearted Ethiopians in Ethiopia and in the diaspora to carry their banner and spread their message.

Susan Rice, Jeffrey Feltman, Antony Blinken, Joe Borrell and the whole lot of them can scheme and do their voodoo dance to discredit and legitimize the June 5, 2021 election.

They will fail because we the Forces of Light are foreordained to defeat the Forces of Darkness!

VICTORY TO THE PEOPLE OF ETHIOPIA!

Looking forward to dealing with more U.S/E.U. dirty tricks to sabotage the June 5, 2021 election!

My message to Joseph Borrell:  Take your “garbage” observer mission along with your budget support and shove it…

I never mince my words.

My short message to Joseph “Dumbbell” Borrell:  “Take your “garbage” observer mission along with your “garbage budget support” and shove them up your …

EUROPEAN UNION = ETHIOPIAN DISUNION.

Professor Alemayehu G. Mariam teaches political science at California State University, San Bernardino. His teaching areas include American constitutional law, civil rights law, judicial process, American and California state governments, and African politics. He has published two volumes on American constitutional law, including American Constitutional Law: Structures and Process (1994) and American Constitutional Law: Civil Liberties and Civil Rights (1998). He is the Senior Editor of the International Journal of Ethiopian Studies, a leading scholarly journal on Ethiopia. For the last several years, Prof. Mariam has written weekly web commentaries on Ethiopian human rights and African issues that are widely read online. He blogged on the Huffington post at  http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alemayehu-g-mariam/ and later on open.salon until that blogsite shut down in March 2015.

Prof. Mariam played a central advocacy role in the passage of H.R. 2003 (Ethiopia Democracy and Accountability Act of 2007)  in the U.S. House of Representatives in 2007. Prof. Mariam also practices in the areas of criminal defense and civil litigation. In 1998, he argued a major case in the California Supreme Court involving the right against self-incrimination in People v. Peevy, 17 Cal. 4th 1184, cert. denied, 525 U.S. 1042 (1998)  which helped clarify longstanding Miranda rights issues in California criminal procedure. For several years, Prof. Mariam had a weekly public channel public affairs television show in Southern California called “In the Public Interest”. Prof. Mariam received his Ph.D. from the University of Minnesota in 1984, and his J.D. from the University of Maryland in 1988.

        <!-- Share buttons by mashshare.net - Version: 3.7.9-->&#13;

European Union Cancels Election-Observer Mission to Ethiopia

The European Union abandoned a plan to send monitors to observe elections in Ethiopia next month, citing concerns about security.

The decision risks undermining the credibility of a long-delayed vote that will be a critical test of reforms implemented by Prime Minister Abiy Ahmed in one of Africa’s fastest-growing economies. The nation’s electoral authorities are facing difficulties organizing the ballot because of unrest that’s flared in various parts of the country.

<

p class=”paywall”>READ: Why Ethiopia’s Nobel Peace Prize Winner Is Waging War: QuickTake

    <p class="paywall">The EU canceled the observer mission after the Ethiopian government refused to fulfill “standard requirements” needed for its deployment, according to a statement on the bloc’s website. The vote is scheduled to take place on June 5.</p><p class="paywall">The EU’s conditions included the independence of the mission and the importing of communication systems needed “in the context of a challenging security environment,” the EU said. “It is disappointing that the EU has not received the assurances necessary to extend to the Ethiopian people one of its most visible signs of support for their quest for democracy.”</p><h3 id="government-surprise" class="paywall">Government Surprise</h3><p class="paywall">Ethiopia’s foreign ministry said in a statement it was unfortunate the EU had presented the need to import communication systems as a condition to monitor the vote.</p>

    <p class="paywall">“As an important strategic partner and staunch supporter of the reform process, this demand by the EU has come as a surprise to the government of Ethiopia, as none of these elements were a bone of contention in past elections,” the ministry said.</p><p class="paywall">Unrest has flared in Ethiopia since Abiy began freeing up the country’s once tightly regulated political space after he came to power in April 2018. He’s given room for opposition parties and rebel groups to operate, which critics say has stoked fragmentation and long-suppressed rivalries among ethnic communities.</p>

    <p class="paywall">Voting won’t take place in the northern Tigray region, where federal troops have since November been fighting dissident forces loyal to the state’s former ruling party. And the Oromo Federalist Congress, one of the nation’s biggest opposition parties, has said it won’t participate in the election with its leaders Jawar Mohammed and Bekele Gerba still behind bars facing charges of terrorism and inciting ethnic violence.</p><h3 id="opposition-concerns" class="paywall">Opposition Concerns</h3><p class="paywall">Anti-government activists have flagged concerns about the nation’s preparedness for the polls.</p><p class="paywall">The opposition Afar People’s Party last month submitted a list of five complaints to the National Election Board of Ethiopia ranging from concerns over how voters are being registered to some of its candidates being fired from government positions.</p><p class="paywall">Adding to the complexity of the situation in the Afar region are border clashes with the neighboring Somali region, which have left more than 100 people dead in recent weeks, according to government officials.</p><p class="paywall">In the Amhara region, the opposition National Movement of Amhara last month raised concerns that the government has arbitrarily arrested and beaten demonstrators involved in protests held across the region against the killing of Amharans by rival ethnic militia groups.</p><p class="paywall">“The government is harassing and detaining Amhara youths, elders, and religious leaders who have spoken out, coordinated and led the protests for the citizens who were massacred,” the group said in a statement on April 28.</p><h3 id="amhara-attacks" class="paywall">Amhara Attacks</h3><aside class="left-rail-newsletter paywall"/><p class="paywall">Hundreds of Amhara citizens have been killed in recent months in the Benishangul-Gumuz region’s Metekel zone by ethnic Gumuz militia men as well as in Oromia’s West Wollega and Horo Gudru zones, according to the Amhara Association of America, a lobby group documenting attacks against Amharas.</p>

    <p class="paywall">Solyana Shimeles, a spokesman for the Ethiopian National Election Board, didn’t respond to questions sent by email about the opposition’s grievances in the Afar region or the general conditions in the country for holding free and fair elections.</p>

    <p class="paywall">The government is also grappling with widespread inter-communal violence elsewhere in the country. The Ministry of<span id="394801e0-acf8-11eb-ba06-fa163eeee231"> Defence</span> last month announced a state of emergency in the southern part of the Amhara region after gunmen killed an unspecified number of people in attacks between people belonging to the Amhara and Oromo ethnic groups.</p><p class="paywall">The Prime Minister’s office said last month that the government had established a National Election Security Committee comprising of the Federal Police, the Attorney General, the National Intelligence and Security Service, and the Ministry of<span id="394802c6-acf8-11eb-ba06-fa163eeee231"> Defence</span> “to ensure a peaceful and legitimate election.”</p><p class="paywall">The committee will try and identify areas where there is a risk of conflict and deal with any election-related grievances, the office said.</p><p class="paywall"><em>— With assistance by Paul Richardson, and Samuel Gebre</em></p>

(Updates with Ethiopian government comment in fifth paragraph)

    <aside class="bottom-left-rail-touts" readability="0.67241379310345">

        <div class="terminal-tout-v2" readability="6.6666666666667">
    Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal.
    <a href="https://bloom.bg/dg-ws-core-bcom-a1" class="terminal-tout-v2__link">LEARN MORE</a>
</div>
    </aside>

Over 120 Members of European Parliament urge EU to increase pressure on Azerbaijan to release Armenian POWs

More than 120 members of European Parliament have urged the EU to increase pressure on Azerbaijan to release Armenian prisoners of war captured last year in fighting over Nagorno-Karabakh, Euroactiv reports.

“We ask you to act to demand the return of all Armenian prisoners of war to their country,” they said, in a letter to the heads of the European Commission, European Council and EU diplomatic service.

It called on the officials — Ursula von der Leyen, Charles Michel and Josep Borrell “to bring all our weight, and use all levers at our disposal, to demand that Azerbaijan purely and solely respect international law”.

Armenia suffered a harrowing defeat in the six-week war last year that left at least 6,000 dead on both sides as Azerbaijan won back swathes of territory it lost in fighting some three decades earlier.

Under a Russia-brokered peace deal on 9 November to halt the bloodshed, the two sides agreed to return all prisoners of war and the remains of those killed in the fighting.

Armenia says it has returned all the captives it took but accuses Azerbaijan of keeping an unknown number of detainees as a bargaining chip.

“It is difficult to precisely draw up the number of remaining prisoners and captives, due to the high number of missing persons and the lack of cooperation from the Azerbaijani side,” the MEPs wrote.

“But it would include 72 people whose captivity Azerbaijan admits, 112 people about whom Azerbaijan did not provide any information, and 61 people whose captivity Azerbaijan categorically denies, but about whom there is concrete evidence to the contrary.”

Azerbaijan insists it has returned all prisoners of war — but does admit it is holding some who were captured in clashes after the peace deal was signed.

Baku has insisted they were not covered by the Russian-brokered agreement and are “terrorist-saboteurs” who should go on trial.

The EU said in a statement last week that all prisoners of war and detained people should be returned “regardless of the circumstances of their arrest”.

Karabakh MFA commends letter of 121 Members of the European Parliament

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Artsakh (Nagorno-Karabakh) has commented on the letter that 121 Members of the European Parliament regarding the release of Armenian prisoners of war and civilians being illegally kept in Azerbaijan and issued a statement.

The statement reads as follows:

“We commend the letter by 121 members of the European Parliament addressed to the President of the European Commission and the President of the European Council on urgent need to release Armenian Prisoners of War currently unlawfully held in Azerbaijan. We highly appreciate the position of the members of the European Parliament to voice about the violations by Azerbaijan of international humanitarian law and uphold the legal demand by Artsakh. This is an exemplary manifestation of humanism, moral values and adherence to norms and principles of international law.

European Union, India to revive stalled trade talks, draft statement says, in counterweight to China

The European Union and India will agree to relaunch free-trade talks stalled since 2013 at a virtual summit on Saturday, according to a draft statement seen by Reuters, as concerns about China‘s rise bring Brussels and New Delhi closer.
The draft statement, which must be signed off by EU ambassadors on Wednesday and needs New Delhi’s final approval, would bind together two of the world’s biggest economies in an alliance seen as a counter to China’s power.

If approved, the EU and India will say: “We agreed to resume negotiations for a balanced, ambitious, comprehensive and mutually beneficial trade agreement which would respond to the current challenges,” according to the draft statement.

The draft said that leaders would also seek an investment protection agreement, and a third deal on so-called geographical indications, which aim to protect specialised agricultural produce from France’s champagne to India’s Darjeeling tea.

A 2020 study by the European Parliament put the potential benefits of a trade deal with India for the EU at up to 8.5 billion euros ($10.2 billion), although the estimate was made before Britain’s departure from the bloc.

The draft statement also sets the stage for an agreement for the EU and India to build joint infrastructure projects around the world, to be described at the summit as a connectivity partnership in transport, energy and digital sectors.

The deal would follow on from a similar accord signed between the EU and Japan in 2019, seeking an alternative to Chinese largesse that raised suspicion in the West and Tokyo.

“Our partnership will promote a transparent, viable, inclusive, sustainable, comprehensive, and rules-based connectivity,” the draft summit statement said, in a veiled criticism of Chinese-financed projects that have sent debts in some central Asian and Balkan countries soaring.

Since 2013, China has launched construction projects across more than 60 countries, known as the Belt and Road Initiative, seeking a network of land and sea links with Southeast Asia, Central Asia, the Middle East, Europe and Africa.

The EU will also win Indian support for its new plan to step up its influence in the Indo-Pacific region, using areas from security to health to protect its interests and counter China, although the bloc insists its strategy is not against Beijing.

“We emphasized our commitment to a free, open, inclusive and rules-based Indo-Pacific space, underpinned by respect for territorial integrity and sovereignty, democracy, and rule of law,” the draft statement said.

EU must show real support for Ukraine’s European integration aspirations – Zelensky

The European Union’s drug regulator has started reviewing the efficacy and safety of China’s Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine

AMSTERDAM (AP) — The European Union’s drug regulator has started reviewing the efficacy and safety of China’s Sinovac COVID-19 vaccine.

              Copyright © 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, written or redistributed.

European Union recommends members open borders to vaccinated travelers

The European Union on Monday proposed that its member states open their borders to nonessential travelers who have been vaccinated and come “from countries with a good epidemiological situation.”

In its proposal, the EU acknowledged that the coronavirus pandemic still posed an ongoing threat and said this proposal would set up an “emergency brake” mechanism if member states require help in avoiding or limiting the spread of new, more infectious COVID-19 variants.

“On the other hand, the roll-out of COVID-19 vaccination campaigns in third countries, and the subsequent positive effect in limiting the spread of the virus, indicate that there is room to ease travel restrictions, particularly for those already vaccinated,” the EU wrote. “In this sense, this proposal aims at progressively resuming travel from third countries in a safe manner, relaunching tourism, especially in view of the summer season, and business travelling, thus fostering the recovery of Europe’s economy.”

The European bloc argued that scientific evidence had been gathered that demonstrated vaccinations stop the spread of COVID-19.

“This evidence suggests that travel restrictions could be safely waived in certain cases for persons who can demonstrate having received the last recommended dose of a COVID-19 vaccine authorised in the EU,” the organization wrote.

The proposal also stated that children, who have largely not been approved to receive current COVID-19 vaccines, should be allowed to travel with their vaccinated parents if they test negative for the coronavirus at least 72 hours before crossing an EU border.

Denmark was excluded from this recommendation and would not be subject to its proposed rules.

The president of the European Commission, Ursula von der Leyen, told The New York Times in an interview published last week that Europe would allow fully vaccinated Americans to travel to Europe this summer.

“The Americans, as far as I can see, use European Medicines Agency-approved vaccines,” von der Leyen told the newspaper. “This will enable free movement and the travel to the European Union.”

Why did Russia go after the European Parliament?

David Sassoli did not draft the EU’s sanctions against Russia. He hasn’t set foot in Moscow during his time as European Parliament president. And officials close to him say he wasn’t planning to go there any time soon.

Yet last Friday, Sassoli was banned from entering Russia, included on a list of eight senior European officials that Moscow issued.

Some of the names made sense. European Commission Vice President Věra Jourová, for instance, has led the EU’s campaign against Russian disinformation.

But Sassoli’s inclusion was somewhat perplexing. The Parliament does not carry out the EU’s foreign policy — that’s the External External Action Service (EEAS). Yet the EEAS head, Josep Borrell, wasn’t on Russia’s list. The Parliament doesn’t adopt sanctions against foreign countries — that’s the Council of the European Union. Yet officials from that body weren’t targeted, either.

Still, from a PR perspective, there are myriad reasons Russia would go after Sassoli — and, by extension, the European Parliament. Free from the diplomatic or bureaucratic constraints of working with the Russians, MEPs are relatively unconstrained to criticize, harangue and bludgeon Moscow over its malign behavior. And it’s these barbed critiques and resolutions that flow into news stories and circulate on Twitter. Essentially, it’s what the public often sees coming from the EU about Russia.

And the Parliament has been specifically vocal about an issue seemingly at the heart of Russia’s move — the poisoning and jailing of opposition leader Alexei Navalny.

“In the public view, Parliament has seized the leadership role in this debate,” Sergey Lagodinsky, a German Green MEP who grew up in Russia, told POLITICO. “It’s a voice that is directly legitimated, and it’s more political, more ambitious.”

“We are politicians more than the bureaucrats or the executive branch,” he added.

Or, as Sassoli put it, the ban simply wasn’t about him.

“It’s not a personal issue,” he told Italian daily La Stampa on Sunday. “One hits the president to hit the Parliament.”

European Parliament vs. Russia

MEPs have been beating the drum about Navalny’s case for months.

Last August, Navalny — Russia’s most prominent critic of President Vladimir Putin — was poisoned while flying within Russia, nearly dying. The EU and many of its allies swiftly accused Moscow of orchestrating the attack.

Over in Parliament, MEPs began lashing out at the Kremlin.

In September, MEPs adopted the first of three strongly worded resolutions condemning Moscow for its mistreatment of Navalny — first, for his poisoning, then later, for his arrest and jailing.

The resolution, backed by 532 MEPs (out of 705), “strongly condemns the attempted assassination of Alexei Navalny,” and urges Russia to “put an end to the harassment, intimidation, violence and repression of their political opponents.”

Two months later, in November, Parliament asked Navalny himself to appear at an online meeting of its foreign affairs committee. At the gathering, Navalny pleaded for EU action.

“It is extremely important for Russians to know that Europe as a whole and the European Parliament will not keep silent on such events,” he told MEPs.

In January, after Navalny had returned to Russia — only to be immediately detained on what were considered specious charges — Sassoli introduced a plenary session in Brussels by calling on the Russian authorities to release Navalny.

“His detention represents a violation of human rights,” he proclaimed. “And we support him.”

That same month, 581 MEPs approved a resolution calling on EU member states to “take an active stance” on Navalny’s arrest and to “significantly strengthen the EU’s restrictive measures vis-à-vis Russia.”

On March 2, the EU did act, sanctioning several senior Russian officials.

Yet in speeches, some MEPs went further than the EU itself, calling on the bloc to penalize Russian oligarchs linked to the regime, as well as members of Putin’s inner circle — a step they said would hit harder than punishing government officials. Others also called on the EU and its member states to abandon the controversial Nord Stream 2 pipeline, which will move natural gas between Russia and Germany.

Just last week, 569 MEPs adopted a text that called for “the immediate and unconditional release of Alexei Navalny,” whose sentencing is “politically motivated” and “runs counter to Russia’s international human rights obligations.”

It’s this behavior that put Parliament in the Kremlin’s crosshairs, said David McAllister, another German MEP who chairs the Parliament’s foreign affairs committee. Russia’s travel ban, he said, targeted “an independent institution,” one that “has been and remains vocal when it comes to controversial issues around the world.”

Beyond Navalny

The Parliament’s handling of the Navalny case represents a broader trend of needling Russia during Putin’s reign.

In recent years, MEPs have passed countless resolutions denouncing Russia’s illegal 2014 annexation of Crimea. They also refused to recognize the 2020 re-election victory of Belarus’ authoritarian leader Alexander Lukashenko, a close Putin ally, pointing to reports of widespread fraud.

MEPs have also used the annual Sakharov Prize for Freedom of Thought to send political messages to Moscow.

In 2018, they awarded the prize to Oleg Sentsov, a Ukrainian film director who spoke out about Russia’s Crimea annexation. Most recently, they awarded the prize to the democratic opposition in Belarus trying to oust Lukashenko.

Still, Sassoli is not the first Parliament official to be banned from traveling to Russia.

In 2014, former MEP Rebecca Harms, a long-time Putin critic and co-chair of the European Greens, was banned from entering into Russia after being held at Moscow’s Sheremetyevo airport for four hours.

And in 2015, after the EU introduced sanctions against Russia for its annexation of Crimea, the country imposed an entry ban on 89 European citizens, including Anna Maria Corazza Bildt, a former Swedish MEP.

European Union mulls move to welcome vaccinated travelers from U.S., other countries

The European Commission proposed Monday to open member countries to vaccinated tourists from the U.S. and other places by early summer, while including an “emergency brake” in case the COVID-19 picture suddenly worsens from aggressive new variants.

                  Many European nations rely heavily on tourism revenues in their overall economy, and the 27-nation bloc had been working on ways to improve movement within its vast territorial reach. Monday’s announcement was a way to demonstrate the <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a>‘s splendors will be open to countries elsewhere as vaccines reach more and more arms.












                  “This reflects the latest scientific advice showing that vaccination considerably helps to break the transmission chain,” the <a href="/topics/european-commission/">commission</a> said.
















                  The picture was not all bright: In Germany, the state of Bavaria confirmed Monday it will cancel Oktoberfest, known locally as “Wiesn,” for a second year instead of welcoming revelers from Sept. 18 to Oct. 3 as planned. Other major tourist draws, including the famed running of the bulls in Pamplona, Spain, have already been scrubbed because of COVID-19 concerns












                  “The risk is simply too great that people could be infected with the coronavirus here,” Munich’s Lord Mayor Dieter Reiter told reporters. “I know how hard this is not only for the visitors, but also how much it affects all those who work at the Wiesn and now have to do without income once again — from the waiters and waitresses to the stall operators, showmen and innkeepers. But the Wiesn can only exist completely or not at all.”














                  The festival involves vast crowds of beer drinkers gathered around tables in a party atmosphere.




























                  More broadly, however, <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> officials sent out a message Monday that the bloc wants to welcome tourists back onto its streets, cathedrals and picturesque beaches.












                  A person would be considered fully vaccinated 14 days after receiving the last recommended dose of a vaccine that has received market authorization in the <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a>. Children of vaccinated people would be admitted with a negative test.












                  The plan, which will be debated this week, also envisions making it easier for unvaccinated people to visit by raising the threshold for what’s considered unacceptable transmission in their home countries. For instance, Chinese tourists might not be immunized with an <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a>-approved vaccine but they could still enter if their country continues to maintain a tight lid on domestic transmission rates.









                    <a name="pagebreak"/>




                  Individual <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> members can still require a negative test from travelers, though the Monday’s proposals were designed to encourage nonessential trips instead of banning tourists and other travelers outright.










                  “Time to revive Flag of <a href="/topics/european-union/">European Union</a> tourism industry &amp; for cross-border friendships to rekindle — safely,” <a href="/topics/european-commission/">Commission</a> President Ursula von der Leyen tweeted. “We propose to welcome again vaccinated visitors &amp; those from countries with a good health situation.”

                  Like other places, the <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> issued lockdowns, canceled big events and limited travel throughout the year-plus pandemic. Parts of Southern Europe such as Italy and Greece are particularly dependent on travelers to keep their struggling economies afloat.

                  Europe is working on a vaccine passport, or <a href="/topics/digital-green-certificate/">Digital Green Certificate</a>, to facilitate the proposal.

                  “Until the Digital Green Certificate is operational, [<a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> states] should be able to accept certificates from non-<a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> countries based on national law, taking into account the ability to verify the authenticity, validity and integrity of the certificate and whether it contains all relevant data,” the <a href="/topics/european-commission/">commission</a> said.

                  The <a href="/topics/european-commission/">commission</a> said it remains concerned bout dangerous mutations in the virus and has prepared a fallback plan to tighten things again as necessary.

                  “The emergence of coronavirus variants of concern calls for continued vigilance,” it said. “Therefore as counter-balance, the <a href="/topics/european-commission/">commission</a> proposes a new ‘emergency brake’ mechanism, to be coordinated at <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a> level and which would limit the risk of such variants entering the <a href="/topics/european-union/">EU</a>.”

                  The threat of variants from elsewhere is the main threat to countries seeing progress due to vaccination. That’s why the U.S. and other places banned travel from India as New Delhi sees an unprecedented surge that may be fueled by variants.

                  Australia recently took things to an extreme, saying as of Monday even its citizens could not enter from India. The decision outraged Indian Australians and others who said it was without precedent.







              <div id="newsletter-form-story">

                  <div class="block-content" id="news-signup-block">
                    <h3 class="block-title">Sign up for Daily Newsletters</h3>

                  </div>


             </div>

EU Commission proposes easing of travel restrictions from non-EU countries

EUROPE. In a potentially important step to rebuilding the European travel business, the EU Commission today proposed that Member States ease restrictions on non-essential travel into the region, to take account of the progress of vaccination campaigns worldwide.

The Commission suggested its member countries allow entry for non-essential reasons not only for all travellers coming from countries with a “good epidemiological situation” but also to all people who have received an EU-authorised vaccine.

In addition, the Commission proposes to raise the threshold related to the number of new COVID-19 cases that is used to determine the list of countries from which all travel should be permitted. This should allow the Council to expand this list and encourage more travel into the region.

With the emergence of coronavirus variants of concern, as a counter-balance, the Commission has proposed an ‘emergency brake’ mechanism, to be coordinated at EU level and which would limit the risk of such variants entering the EU. This will allow Member States to act quickly and temporarily limit all travel from affected countries for the time needed to put in place appropriate sanitary measures.

An easing of restrictions would represent a signal of hope for the EU travel market, and for airports from Frankfurt to Dublin

Non-essential travel for vaccinated travellers

The Commission proposed that Member States lift restrictions on non-essential travel for vaccinated people travelling to the EU. This reflects the latest scientific advice showing that vaccination helps to break the transmission chain.

Member states, said the Commission, “should allow travel into the EU of those people who have received, at least 14 days before arrival, the last recommended dose of a vaccine having received marketing authorisation in the EU. Member States could also extend this to those vaccinated with a vaccine having completed the WHO emergency use listing process. In addition, if member states decide to waive the requirements to present a negative PCR test and/or to undergo quarantine for vaccinated persons on their territory, they should also waive such requirements for vaccinated travellers from outside the EU.”

The EU noted that this will become easier once the Digital Green Certificate becomes operational [potentially in June -Ed]. Until then, states should be able to accept valid certificates from non-EU countries, it added.

Lifting of non-essential travel restrictions

Non-essential travel regardless of individual vaccination status is currently permitted from just seven countries with a good epidemiological situation. This list is decided by the Council on the basis of epidemiological criteria contained in the current recommendation.

The Commission is proposing to amend the criteria to take into account the mounting evidence of the positive impact of vaccination campaigns. The proposal is to increase the threshold of 14-day cumulative COVID-19 case notification rate from 25 to 100. This remains considerably below the current EU average, which is over 420.

The adapted threshold should allow the Council to expand the list of countries from which non-essential travel is permitted regardless of vaccination status.

The Commission said that a first discussion on the proposals is scheduled at the European Council’s political crisis response (IPCR) meeting taking place on 4 May, followed by a discussion at the meeting of EU Ambassadors (Coreper) on 5 May.

Once the proposal is adopted by the Council, it will be for Member States to implement the measures.

EU executive recommends opening up to non-EU foreign travel

Coronavirus: Commission proposes to ease restrictions on non-essential travel to the EU while addressing variants through new ‘emergency brake’ mechanism

Today, the Commission is proposing that Member States ease the current restrictions on non-essential travel into the EU to take into account the progress of vaccination campaigns and developments in the epidemiological situation worldwide.

The Commission proposes to allow entry to the EU for non-essential reasons not only for all persons coming from countries with a good epidemiological situation but also all people who have received the last recommended dose of an EU-authorised vaccine. This could be extended to vaccines having completed the WHO emergency use listing process. In addition, the Commission proposes to raise, in line with the evolution of the epidemiological situation in the EU, the threshold related to the number of new COVID-19 cases used to determine a list of countries from which all travel should be permitted. This should allow the Council to expand this list.  

At the same time, the emergence of coronavirus variants of concern calls for continued vigilance. Therefore as counter-balance, the Commission proposes a new ‘emergency brake’ mechanism, to be coordinated at EU level and which would limit the risk of such variants entering the EU. This will allow Member States to act quickly and temporarily limit to a strict minimum all travel from affected countries for the time needed to put in place appropriate sanitary measures.

Non-essential travel for vaccinated travellers

The Commission proposes that Member States lift restrictions on non-essential travel for vaccinated persons travelling to the EU. This reflects the latest scientific advice showing that vaccination considerably helps to break the transmission chain.

Member States should allow travel into the EU of those people who have received, at least 14 days before arrival, the last recommended dose of a vaccine having received marketing authorisation in the EU. Member States could also extend this to those vaccinated with a vaccine having completed the WHO emergency use listing process. In addition, if Member States decide to waive the requirements to present a negative PCR test and/or to undergo quarantine for vaccinated persons on their territory, they should also waive such requirements for vacccinated travellers from outside the EU.

This should be facilitated once the Digital Green Certificate becomes operational, in line with the rules the Commission proposed on 17 March. In particular, travellers should be able to prove their vaccination status with a Digital Green Certificate issued by Member States’ authorities on an individual basis, or with another certificate recognised as equivalent by virtue of a Commission adequacy decision.

Until the Digital Green Certificate is operational, Member States should be able to accept certificates from non-EU countries based on national law, taking into account the ability to verify the authenticity, validity and integrity of the certificate and whether it contains all relevant data.

Member States could consider setting up a portal allowing travellers to ask for the recognition of a vaccination certificate issued by a non-EU country as reliable proof of vaccination and/or for the issuance of a Digital Green Certificate. 

Children who are excluded from vaccination should be able to travel with their vaccinated parents if they have a negative PCR COVID-19 test taken at the earliest 72 hours before arrival area. In these cases, Member States could require additional testing after arrival.

Full lifting of non-essential travel restriction from more countries

Non-essential travel regardless of individual vaccination status is currently permitted from 7 countries with a good epidemiological situation. This list is decided by the Council on the basis of epidemiological criteria contained in the current recommendation.

The Commission is proposing to amend the criteria to take into account the mounting evidence of the positive impact of vaccination campaigns. The proposal is to increase the threshold of 14-day cumulative COVID-19 case notification rate from 25 to 100. This remains considerably below the current EU average, which is over 420.

The adapted threshold should allow the Council to expand the list of countries from which non-essential travel is permitted regardless of vaccination status, subject to health-related measures such as testing and/or quarantine. As now, the Council should review this list at least every 2 weeks.

Essential travel to remain permitted

Those travelling for essential reasons, including notably healthcare professionals, cross-border workers, seasonal agricultural workers, transport staff and seafarers, passengers in transit, those travelling for imperative family reasons or those coming to study should continue to be allowed to enter the EU, regardless of whether they are vaccinated or which country they come from. The same applies to EU citizens and long-term residents as well as their family members. Such travel should continue to be subject to health-related measures, such as testing and quarantine as decided by Member States.

‘Emergency brake’ to counter the spread of variants

When the epidemiological situation of a non-EU country worsens quickly and in particular if a variant of concern or interest is detected, a Member State can urgently and temporarily suspend all inbound travel by non-EU citizens resident in such a country. The only exceptions in this case would be healthcare professionals, transport personnel, diplomats, transit passengers, those travelling for imperative family reasons, seafarers, and persons in need of international protection or for other humanitarian reasons. Such travellers should be subject to strict testing and quarantine arrangements even if they have been vaccinated.

When a Member State applies such restrictions, the Member States meeting within the Council structures should review the situation together in a coordinated manner and in close cooperation with the Commission, and they should continue doing so at least every 2 weeks.

Next steps

It is now for the Council to consider this proposal. A first discussion is scheduled at technical level in the Council’s integrated political crisis response (IPCR) meeting taking place on 4 May, followed by a discussion at the meeting of EU Ambassadors (Coreper) on 5 May.

Once the proposal is adopted by the Council, it will be for Member States to implement the measures set out in the recommendation. The Council should review the list of non-EU countries exempted from the travel restriction in light of the updated criteria and continue doing so every 2 weeks. 

Background

A temporary restriction on non-essential travel to the EU is currently in place from many non-EU countries, based on a recommendation agreed by the Council. The Council regularly reviews, and where relevant updates, the list of countries from where travel is possible, based on the evaluation of the health situation.

This restriction covers non-essential travel only. Those who have an essential reason to come to Europe should continue to be able to do so. The categories of travellers with an essential function or need are listed in Annex II of the Council Recommendation. EU citizens and long-term residents as well as their family members should also be allowed to enter the EU.

Following a proposal by the Commission, the Council agreed on 2 February 2021 additional safeguards and restrictions for international travellers into the EU, aimed at ensuring that essential travel to the EU continues safely in the context of the emergence of new coronavirus variants and the volatile health situation worldwide. These continue to apply.

On 17 March 2021, in a Communication on a common path to Europe’s safe re-opening, the Commission committed to keeping the operation of the Council Recommendation on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU under close review, and propose amendments in line with relevant developments. Today’s proposal updates the Council recommendation.

In parallel to preparing for the resumption of international travel for vaccinated travellers, the Commission proposed on 17 March 2021 to create a Digital Green Certificate, showing proof that a person has been vaccinated against COVID-19, received a negative test result or recovered from COVID-19, to help facilitate safe and free movement inside the EU. This proposal also provides the basis for recognising non-EU countries’ vaccination certificates.

The Council Recommendation on the temporary restriction on non-essential travel into the EU relates to entry into the EU. When deciding whether restrictions on non-essential travel can be lifted for a specific non-EU country, Member States should take account of the reciprocity granted to EU countries. This is a separate issue from that of the recognition of certificates issued by non-EU countries under the Digital Green Certificate.

The Council recommendation covers all Member States (except Ireland), as well as the 4 non-EU states that have joined the Schengen area: Iceland, Liechtenstein, Norway and Switzerland. For the purpose of the travel restriction, these countries are covered in a similar way as the Member States.

The latest information on the rules applying to entry from non-EU countries as communicated by Member States are available on the Re-open EU website.