
EU elite celebrated again Europe Day when they had succeed to maintain the fasade their to the score rotten creation with taxpayer money squeezed from the common people. The Day went again so that I noticed it only next day from newsreel. It might be not so exceptional as the institutions – the commission, the parliament and the council - and its 27 member states use the day for celebrating mainly themselves. For the rest of Europe as well for people outside elite there was not any reason to celebrate.
The EU is a bold and unique project. It resembles less that of the United States of America and more that of the Soviet Union. Until the last decade the EU has been more or less a community of democratic nations. While the USSR was a communist dictatorship the EU has been following its steps last years due a full-on economic crisis. Vladimir Bukovsky a former soviet dissident, once made a comparison: ‘We were told, that the purpose of the Soviet Union is to create a a new historic entity, the soviet people, and that we must forget our nationalities, our ethnic traditions and customs. The same seems to be true to the European Union. They don’t want you to be British or French, they want you to be a new historic entity: European.’ There is amazing similarity in decision making between EU and ex-Soviet Union. USSR had also some “democratic” institutions like parliament and government, but the real power was in party machine and its “politburo”. Anyway as USSR already went so when will we celebrate EU remembrance Day.
The supranational organisation planned by Nazis?
'In 50 years' time nobody will think of nation states.' (Joseph Goebbels)
EU gratuitously got Nobel award as a peace project: to underscore the very reason that it was created on 9 May 1950, which was to limit any future wars or conflicts on the continent (more in my article Devaluation of Nobel Peace Prize Continues But EU Could Show Way For Better Crisis Management ). An alternative history shows that EU is continuation of war with economic means. This view came to my mind while reading about now published secret report about how Nazis were planning the Fourth Reich.

The document, also known as the Red House Report, is a detailed account of a secret meeting at the Maison Rouge Hotel in Strasbourg on August 10, 1944. There, Nazi officials ordered an elite group of German industrialists to plan for Germany's post-war recovery, prepare for the Nazis' return to power and work for a 'strong German empire'. In other words: the Fourth Reich.detailed how the industrialists were to work with the Nazi Party to rebuild Germany's economy by sending money through Switzerland.
They would set up a network of secret front companies abroad. They would wait until conditions were right. And then they would take over Germany again. The industrialists included representatives of Volkswagen, Krupp and Messerschmitt. Officials from the Navy and Ministry of Armaments were also at the meeting and, with incredible foresight, they decided together that the Fourth German Reich, unlike its predecessor, would be an economic rather than a military empire - but not just German. The Third Reich was defeated militarily, but powerful Nazi-era bankers, industrialists and civil servants, reborn as democrats, soon prospered in the new West Germany. There they worked for a new cause: European economic and political integration.
Ludwig Erhard (economist) pondered how German industry could expand its reach across the shattered European continent. The answer was through supranationalism - the voluntary surrender of national sovereignty to an international body. German industrialists were also members of the European League for Economic Co-operation, an elite intellectual pressure group set up in 1946. The league was dedicated to the establishment of a common market, the precursor of the European Union. Ludwig Erhard flourished in post-war Germany. Adenauer made Erhard Germany's first post-war economics minister. In 1963 Erhard succeeded Adenauer as Chancellor for three years.
Germany and France were the drivers behind the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC), the precursor to the European Union. The ECSC was the first supranational organisation, established in April 1951 by six European states. It created a common market for coal and steel which it regulated. This set a vital precedent for the steady erosion of national sovereignty, a process that continues today. However one should remember that the German economic miracle – so vital to the idea of a new Europe - was built on mass murder and gold looted from the treasuries of Nazi-occupied countries and that a European federal state is inexorably tangled up with the plans of the SS and German industrialists for a Fourth Reich - an economic rather than military empire.
Note: I have summarized this secret report item from: The secret report that shows how the Nazis planned a Fourth Reich - in the EU by Adam Lebor
EU today
Forgetting EU’s organogram as illusion and speaking today's reality one can easily find different decision making practices in EU depending about importance of issue. Most important core group is cooperation between France and Germany sometimes earlier (pre-€) adding UK to group. Commission of course has great de facto power not only on implementation level but also designing proposals handled in EUs inner cores; the same can be said about bureaucrats in national ministries who are designing policies decided EU meetings at summit/ministry levels.
So
where is this leaving European Parliament? It may handle some energy
bulb level issues but honestly the whole institution seems to be
unnecessary creation only to keep some democratic illusion on show. As
EU citizens are not so stupid to keep his institution more than a puppet
theatre they show their attitude by low turnout percentage. Before last EU Parliament elections I proposed and argumented (in my article Let’s elect Donkey Parliament) why replacing MEPs with monkeys might not be so bad idea. Today EP
is practical place to locate some second class politicians for
retirement or out to not make any mess in national policy. They also can
show good places to get fresh mussels while voters are visiting in EP
as their quests. Designing EU policy happens anyway somewhere else.
EU Out
Today there is increasing EU Out movement lead by Britain. Besides populist UKIP party many leading Tories are supporting cutting ties with Brussels. Former Tory chancellor Nigel Lawson supports a referendum for Britain to leave the EU while Michael Portillo, former Tory cabinet minister, describes the Euro as a "disaster" and says the UK does not share the EU's vision. The Tories might have their own motivation to pull out from EU (to save speculators and money laundry in London City) as well UKIP and other populist movements in EU (to keep poor immigrants out, rich ones can bye entrance anyway as usual) and leftist grassroot movements (to stop austerity measures). Whatever reasons are the aim is against EU's federalist development.
Quite
common view is that EU is an opaque bureaucracy cut off from the
citizens it was (publicly) intended to serve. The unofficial core and
value of EU in my opinion is that EU is a system to protect, favor and
facilitate the interests of big economic powers. A steady decline in
voter turnout over the past three decades for European elections has
lent credence to the idea that citizens feel increasingly estranged from
the European project. The crisis appears to be making this worse by
prompting politicians to rush through policies that concentrate more
power in Brussels with limited public understanding or support.
From my point of view subsidiary principle should be widen so that more legislation should be implemented at national level and those few remaining issues could be decided between governments and implemented by slimmed European Commission and its agencies. With this approach the whole EP could be closed as useless extra body. This outcome – which I have called as EU lite version - is about the opposite to ongoing federalist tendency and indeed I support rebuilding EU with confederalist approach. This subject I dealt recently with my article My 1st May Manifesto .
Epilogue
The two dominating trends among EU leaders are to cut losses of players in virtual economy at the expense of taxpayers and to guide EU towards strict federation at the expense of democracy. (Ari Rusila)
After 63 years of existence of EU what do we have to celebrate? Financial speculators, banksters and EU elite can congratulate themselves for creating such a massive well connected system that it is hard to break. The citizens have enjoyed from few benefits such as student exchange programme, Schengen area and common agricultural policy which subsidized farmers to produce goods that nobody wanted, dumped excess supply on world markets creating falling incomes for world farmers. The decline of EU as actor in international politics continues with its disastrous European External Action Service (=foreign policy, EEAS) so that the union can concentrate to its core function as distributor of agricultural funds and as aggregate of high-flown statements. The present challenge is, how to distance unsatisfied citizens and state parliaments away from disturbing egocentric and sel-governing elite. I hope that grassroots finally will get fed up with this experiment and starts to demand some power back.

I
An
important consequence of the Balkan Wars was also the mass expulsion of
Muslims from the Balkans. Already beginning in the mid-19th century,
hundreds of thousands of Muslims were expelled or forced to flee from
the Caucasus and the Balkans as a result of the Russo-Turkish wars and
the conflicts in the Balkans. Muslim society in the empire was incensed
by this flood of refugees and overcome by a desire for revenge.

Turkey
has consistently denied responsibility for the genocide, which is
sometimes referred to as the Armenian Holocaust. Azerbaijan, being in
deep strategic alliance with Turkey and in a state of war against
Armenia, shares the position of Turkey.

The
operation “Storm” successfully finalized the ethnic cleansing of the
Republic of Serbian Krajina. Croat president Franjo Tudjman cynically
described the pogrom of Croatia Serbs at the opening of the Military
school Ban Josip Jelacic in Zagreb, on December 14 1998: “We have,
therefore, resolved the Serbian question! There will no longer be 12
percent of Serbs, nor 9 percent of Yugoslavs, as before. One may find
some equivalence between terms of Serbian question and Jewish question
and not by coincidence as Mr.
protests
erupted. Since then, the Syrian civil conflict has become increasingly
violent. About 70,000 people have died in the country's civil war over
the past two years. Millions of people have been displaced, both
internally and abroad. For months regional and Western capitals have
officially held back on arming the rebels, in part out of fear that the
weapons would fall into the hands of terrorists. 







The
focus of the government will be socioeconomic issues, changing the
electoral system, matters of religion and state, which topped the
election’s agenda, and the security issues that were not brought up in
the campaign because they were a matter of consensus.The new government
encompasses a wide range of views on the peace process, from Tzipi
Livni, who believes a deal is vitally in Israel’s interests, to Naftali
Bennett, who rejects the two-state solution, while PM Netanyahu is
somewhere between of them. Government’s combination of doves and hawks
may help push peace process forward.


One
obstacle with this new approach could be a Jordanian national movement
who are anti-Palestinian, more than most Israelis and Right Wing. They
don’t want the West Bank, they want the Palestinians in Jordan to go
back to Palestine. Therefore, they are the most emphatic supporters of
the two-state solution. Not because they like the Palestinians, but
because they dislike the Palestinians! However a way to circumvent this
problem could be creation a Jordan-Palestine confederation. 










The
Jordanian option has on occasion been raised as a promising approach.
Given some of the facts from history this is not surprising, after all,
most of Jordan’s population is Palestinian. In 1948, Arab armies
attacked the newborn State of Israel. Transjordan annexed the area
intended for an Arab state, and renamed itself the Kingdom of Jordan,
calling the annexed area the “West Bank”. In 1967 West Bank came under
Israeli control during the Six Day War of 1967.
Hamas
has intentionally used the civilian areas of Gaza as staging grounds
for their attacks on Israel. Knowing that the IDF wishes to avoid
civilian casualties, Hamas places its own civilians in the line of fire
in order to hide and protect its own operations. Women and children,
victims of the Hamas human shield tactics, usually ignore warning
signals to evacuate buildings prior to an IDF strike. The victims remain
in the house with Hamas members, knowing ahead of time that the IDF
will not target civilians. Many innocent bystanders are killed as a
result of Hamas’ abuse of its own civilians. Instead of keeping its
citizens out of harm’s way, Hamas encourages and even forces its
population to join the violent resistance against Israel, sometimes
forcing women and children to remain in the positions that they would
use to launch attacks from. Hamas used their people too on the strategic
level, luring IDF troops to attack and kill them. People whose deaths
would be callously exploited in the media as a means of discrediting the
IDF.
There
are several reasons for this: Hamas, of course, operates from within a
civilian population and conceals its arsenals in built-up areas. The
same is true of missile launchers, rockets and more. In addition, most
Hamas militants make sure not to remain above ground most of the day.
They stay in the network of tunnels built by Hamas beneath the Gaza
Strip in recent years and, in effect, are at very low risk compared to
the vast majority of the Gaza population. And the process of launching
the rockets is extremely quick and is sometimes done by remote control,
so that the ability to strike at those militants is very limited. 



Aircraft
dropped leaflets in Gaza stating that the residents should “keep their
distance from Hamas terror operatives”. There were similar warnings also
via twitter a a couple of days ago. These early warnings were not
enough.




Of
course its is unrealistic to wait that there would be a Middle East ban
on nuclear, chemical and biological weapons in near future. However
from my point of view even discussing the possibility between Iran and
Israel at the anticipated Helsinki event would be giant progress and
will give hope that a non military development might be possible.
F

Many
years there has been debate are peace laureates reflecting Nobel's last
will. Norwegian lawyer and Nobel historian Fredrik S. Heffermehl claims
the Norwegian Nobel Committee isn't following Alfred Nobel's wishes.
His interview in
The
key question is how to replace U.S. hard power with EU soft power. In
Eastern Europe U.S. controls crucial foreign and/or domestic policies of
another nation through ties with its military and intelligence
institutions. EU’s military, political, and corporate elites have
already increasingly become dependents or confederates of the US
military-industrial complex. To take step forward EU must work to
establish its own security structure in order to free itself from
tactics which are now used under the current US-dominated Alliance. EU
should stop outsourcing its strategical planning to U.S. The key
question is focusing on EU civilian capabilities.







At least two aspects explain why there are still refugees after more than six decades: 

