JEWISH KING JESUS IS COMING AT THE RAPTURE FOR US IN THE CLOUDS-DON'T MISS IT FOR THE WORLD.THE BIBLE TAKEN LITERALLY- WHEN THE PLAIN SENSE MAKES GOOD SENSE-SEEK NO OTHER SENSE-LEST YOU END UP IN NONSENSE.GET SAVED NOW- CALL ON JESUS TODAY.THE ONLY SAVIOR OF THE WHOLE EARTH - NO OTHER.
1 COR 15:23-JESUS THE FIRST FRUITS-CHRISTIANS RAPTURED TO JESUS-FIRST FRUITS OF THE SPIRIT-23 But every man in his own order: Christ the firstfruits; afterward they that are Christ’s at his coming.ROMANS 8:23 And not only they, but ourselves also, which have the firstfruits of the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body.(THE PRE-TRIB RAPTURE)
THE EUROPEAN UNION TAKES WORLD CONTROL THREW ECONOMIC MEANS
THE EUROPEAN UNION TAKES WORLD CONTROL THREW ECONOMIC MEANS
DANIEL 7:23-24
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (EU,REVIVED ROME) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,(7TH WORLD EMPIRE) which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.(TRADING BLOCKS-10 WORLD REGIONS/TRADE BLOCS)
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings(10 NATIONS-10 WORLD DIVISION WORLD GOVERNMENT) that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.(EITHER THE EU FUTURE WORLD LEADER BOOTS THREE COUNTRIES OUTTA THE EU. OR THE DICTATOR OVER TAKES 3 WORLD TRADE BLOCS AND TAKES WORLD CONTROL THREW ECONOMIC MEANS). AND THE EU CONTROLS THE WORLDS ECONOMIES THEN. WHICH GIVES THEM WORLD GOVERNMENT CONTROL.
23 Thus he said, The fourth beast (EU,REVIVED ROME) shall be the fourth kingdom upon earth,(7TH WORLD EMPIRE) which shall be diverse from all kingdoms, and shall devour the whole earth, and shall tread it down, and break it in pieces.(TRADING BLOCKS-10 WORLD REGIONS/TRADE BLOCS)
24 And the ten horns out of this kingdom are ten kings(10 NATIONS-10 WORLD DIVISION WORLD GOVERNMENT) that shall arise: and another shall rise after them; and he shall be diverse from the first, and he shall subdue three kings.(EITHER THE EU FUTURE WORLD LEADER BOOTS THREE COUNTRIES OUTTA THE EU. OR THE DICTATOR OVER TAKES 3 WORLD TRADE BLOCS AND TAKES WORLD CONTROL THREW ECONOMIC MEANS). AND THE EU CONTROLS THE WORLDS ECONOMIES THEN. WHICH GIVES THEM WORLD GOVERNMENT CONTROL.
REVELATION 13:16-18
16 And he (FALSE POPE) causeth all, both small and great, rich and poor, free and bond, to receive a mark in their right hand, or in their foreheads:(CHIP IMPLANT)
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM.
17 And that no man might buy or sell, save he that had the mark, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name.
18 Here is wisdom. Let him that hath understanding count the number of the beast: for it is the number of a man; and his number is Six hundred threescore and six.(6-6-6) A NUMBER SYSTEM.
EU SIGNS FUTURE ISRAEL-PALESTINIAN-ARAB 7 YEAR PEACE TREATY
DANIEL 9:26-27
26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince (ROMANS) that shall come (ROMANS IN AD 70) shall destroy the city and the sanctuary;(ROMANS DESTROYED THE 2ND TEMPLE) and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.
27 And he (EU ROMAN, JEWISH DICTATOR) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:( 7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,( 3 1/2 YRS) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.James Paul Warburg appearing before the Senate on 7th February 1950
Like a famous WWII Belgian General,Paul Henry Spock said in 1957:We need no commission, we have already too many. What we need is a man who is great enough to be able to keep all the people in subjection to himself and to lift us out of the economic bog into which we threaten to sink. Send us such a man. Be he a god or a devil, we will accept him.And today, sadly, the world is indeed ready for such a man.
No one will enter the New World Order... unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.- David Spangler Director of Planetary Initiative United Nations.
27 And he (EU ROMAN, JEWISH DICTATOR) shall confirm the covenant with many for one week:( 7 YEARS) and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease,( 3 1/2 YRS) and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.
We shall have World Government, whether or not we like it. The only question is whether World Government will be achieved by conquest or consent.James Paul Warburg appearing before the Senate on 7th February 1950
Like a famous WWII Belgian General,Paul Henry Spock said in 1957:We need no commission, we have already too many. What we need is a man who is great enough to be able to keep all the people in subjection to himself and to lift us out of the economic bog into which we threaten to sink. Send us such a man. Be he a god or a devil, we will accept him.And today, sadly, the world is indeed ready for such a man.
No one will enter the New World Order... unless he or she will make a pledge to worship Lucifer. No one will enter the New Age unless he will take a Luciferian Initiation.- David Spangler Director of Planetary Initiative United Nations.
AN EU WORLD LEAD ARMY
REVELATION 19:19
19 And I saw the beast,(EU LEADER) and the kings of the earth, and their armies,(UNITED NATIONS TROOPS) gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse,(JESUS) and against his army.(THE RAPTURED CHRISTIANS)
WELL TODAY IS THE DAY THAT BRITAIN DECIDES IF IT STAYS IN OR LEAVES THE EUROPEAN UNION. BY THE BIBLE EITHER 3 COUNTRIES OR 3 WORLD TRADE BLOCS GET TAKEN OVER BY THE FUTURE EU DICTATOR. SO BY THIS BIBLE PREDICTION.BY MY TAKE. UNLESS THERES 3 COUNTRIES TOGETHER LEAVING THE EUROPEAN UNION. I DO NOT BELIEVE A SINGLE COUNTRY WILL LEAVE. SO MY PREDICTION BY BIBLE PROPHECY. BRITAIN STAYS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. WHEN THERES 3 COUNTRIES THAT WANT OUT TOGETHER. THEN THEY WILL GET THE BOOT I PREDICT. BUT NOT JUST A SINGLE EU COUNTRY. BUT WE WILL SEE TODAY IF MY PREDICTION BY THE BIBLE IS CORRECT OR WAY OFF THE MARK.AND IF BRITAIN STAYS IN THE EU. I PREDICT THEY WILL PUSH HARD FOR AN EU ARMY. AND TO HAVE THE LEAD ROLE IN THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE TALKS. THIS WILL GET THE UNITED STATES OUT OF THE LEAD ROLE IN THE PEACE TALKS. LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS-IT WILL BE THE EUROPEAN UNION THAT SIGNS THE FINAL 7 YEAR PEACE CONTRACT WITH THE ISRAELIS-ARABS AND MANY.
EUROPEAN UNION TREATIES-AND OPT OUT
http://europa.eu/eu-law/decision-making/treaties/index_en.htm
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/opting_out.html
Opting out
Certain European Union countries have what are known as ‘opt-outs’, which are a means of ensuring that when a given country does not wish to join the others in a particular field of EU policy, it can opt out, thus avoiding an overall stalemate.
Examples of opt-outs include:Schengen Agreement: Ireland and the United Kingdom;economic and monetary union: Denmark and the United Kingdom;defence: Denmark EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Poland and the United Kingdom;area of freedom, security and justice: Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom (the latter two countries may opt into given initiatives if they wish).
Protecting Europe’s family ties in trying times-DISCLAIMER: All opinions in this column reflect the views of the author(s), not of EurActiv.com PLC.By Anthony Silberfeld | Bertelsmann Foundation-Jun 6, 2016
In 1946, it was British Conservative Winston Churchill who famously called for the creation of a European family and the establishment of a United States of Europe. So perhaps it is fitting that another Tory may preside over the family’s dissolution, writes Anthony Silberfeld.Anthony Silberfeld is the director of transatlantic relations for the Bertelsmann Foundation.The upcoming British EU referendum is a step in the wrong direction for the European Union, but it certainly isn’t the first. What began as a dream of an ever-closer union has devolved into a collection of states in which national interest trumps unity.One foot in, one foot out-Bringing together 28 member states with diverse histories, cultures and languages naturally complicates a one-size-fits-all approach to policy. But the European Union has transformed the opt-out into an art form. From the Schengen zone to defense and justice, many countries have treated their EU obligations like an à-la-carte menu from which they can pick and choose at their leisure. But these member states are not entirely to blame; the EU has made a conscious decision to allow its members to adhere to the responsibilities that suit them and ignore those that do not. And while it was a deliberate decision to allow member states to strike a balance between its national and European commitments, the unpredictability it has engendered has weakened the ability of European institutions to act in concert when faced with crises that affect the entire continent. Member states have often fulfilled their EU obligations to the letter, but have selectively made choices that are out of step with the spirit of the EU.-Staying together for the kids-This fraying of the European family has been exposed by the recent flow of asylum seekers from Syria (and elsewhere) to the EU. With a population of more than 500 million, the EU should be able to absorb the approximately one million refugees who arrived on European shores in 2015. Yet, this history of selective participation gave member states the political cover to ignore their obligations, not just to the 1951 Refugee Convention, but to the EU itself. This played out in September 2015 with an EU agreement to relocate 120,000 migrants over a two-year period. The vote was contentious, and Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary voted against the proposal. The UK, for its part, points to this migration crisis as yet another justification for a British exit from the EU. Nevertheless, the quota plan was adopted in principle, but has since been ignored in practice. According to the European Commission, the EU set a target to relocate 6,000 refugees by April 2016. But due to procedural challenges and resistance from some member states, only 208 people were relocated during that period.The inability of the EU to equitably share the burden of accepting refugees led to its decision to seek alternatives to stem the flow. With that in mind, the EU (led by Germany) struck an agreement with Turkey in which “irregular migrants” crossing from Turkey to Greece would be returned to Turkey and the European Union would, in turn, resettle Syrian refugees on a one to one ratio. In exchange, Turkey is poised to receive an additional €3 billion in economic aid and a commitment to visa-free travel for Turks visiting the EU.From a statistical perspective, this deal has been a success. Reports indicate that there has been a 90% decrease in the number of refugees entering the EU since this pact came into effect. But the numbers belie the true impact of this decision. In addition to moral questions raised by returning refugees to a country with a troubling human rights record, the EU has cleared a path for member states to side-step their commitments to the union, thereby further undermining it.-Breaking up is hard to do-There is an adage that if you give someone an inch, they’ll take a mile. If converted into the metric system, this would certainly apply to the current march toward a “Brexit”. The UK has had a long history of getting special treatment from the EU. Prime ministers at 10 Downing Street have featured prominently in the opt-out demands mentioned earlier, including, most notably, the eurozone and Schengen deals. In a last ditch effort to make membership in the EU more enticing, European Council President Donald Tusk negotiated a series of sweeteners with British Prime Minister David Cameron to keep the UK in the EU. The tête-á-tête resulted in British exemptions from funding future euro bailouts and lower administrative burdens to improve the UK’s competitiveness in the EU, among other concessions.Perhaps most disturbingly, Cameron requested an opt-out from the EU’s founding ambition: an ever-closer union. The deal’s final language made clear that any references to that end, “do not apply to the United Kingdom”. The British vote for Brexit or Remain on 23 June will have significant economic repercussions, but the political and symbolic damage to the European family remains an open question. Will the British departure encourage other member states to seek their own exit, or will a chaotic unwinding from the EU discourage others from following a similar path? If the British people decide to leave the EU, there will be a process in place to make that divorce final. But if the UK decides to stay, what other opt-outs will it ask for down the line and when will it demand another referendum? -Blood is thicker than water-Despite the recent political, economic and social turmoil in Europe, the European Union has proven its resilience over time. Emerging from the 2008 economic crisis, coordinating and maintaining sanctions on Russia and rallying to the aid of neighbours targeted by terrorists are just the most recent examples.Like most families, this European one has at times been petty, selfish and has failed to live up to expectations. And like most families, this one is also built on a foundation of strong historic bonds, decades of trust and shared values. With so many challenges on the horizon, Europe has reached an inflection point. In an effort to create a sustainable union, the EU has given its members too much latitude in its decision-making processes. Rather than a debate about more Europe or less Europe, there should be a serious debate about a smart Europe. The crises ahead will demand collective action and unity on the continent, so member states need to re-commit themselves to the Union, not just on paper but in spirit too.
Rivals trade harsh words in final Brexit debate By Eszter Zalan-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
BRUSSELS, Today, 09:29-Rivals in Britain's vote on EU membership locked horns on Tuesday night (21 June) in a final push to win over voters in the neck-and-neck race.Leading politicians from the Leave and Remain camps exchanged harsh words in a TV debate at the Wembley Arena in London, clashing over immigration, the economy and the UK's role in the wider world.Remain supporter and London mayor Sadiq Khan accused the Leave side of "scaring people" by saying Muslim-majority Turkey could join the EU any time soon."That's scaremongering, Boris, and you should be ashamed... ," Khan, from the opposition centre-left Labour party told the former London mayor, Boris Johnson, from the ruling centre-right Conservatives.Johnson branded the pro-EU campaign as "project fear" over its warnings that leaving the EU would cause economic harm to Britain.Khan hit back saying the Leave camp is guilty of a "project hate" on immigration.On the economy, Johnson said it was "extraordinary" to suggest that the EU would impose tariffs on the UK, arguing that Germany would be "insane" to do so because it sells lots of cars to Britain."They [Remain] say we have no choice but to bow down to Brussels. We say they are woefully underestimating this country and what it can do," Johnson said. He spoke of an "independence day" on Thursday if Britons voted to leave the 28-member club.Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson also accused the Leave side of "lying" on Turkish membership and for saying that 60 percent of UK laws and regulations are imposed by Brussels.Davidson said the Remain side "refused to dismiss the experts" who all agreed that "Britain is better-off in."In an earlier TV debate, UK justice minister and Brexit supporter Micheal Gove drew criticism for urging Britain not to rely on the opinions of experts that warned against Brexitl-He compared their interventions to how the Nazis forced scientists to denounce Albert Einstein in the 1930s.The debate represented a last chance for the two camps to get their message across to voters who remain split ahead of Thursday's ballot, which could decide the fate of the 60 year-old European project.The exchange also showed how detached the debate on EU membership had become from facts and the extent to which it is now dominated by emotional and combative rhetoric.A snap YouGov poll for the Times found 39 percent thought Leave had won the debate, with 34 percent for Remain and 17 percent undecided.-Countdown-The referendum result will be very close, prime minister David Cameron admitted in an interview with the Financial Times.“Nobody knows what is going to happen,” he said ahead of Thursday's vote.He insisted he will stay on as prime minister even if he loses the referendum.Italy's prime minister also came to help the Remain camp by arguing in the Guardian newspaper that British voters should not make the "wrong choice"."Seen from Italy, a vote to leave Europe would not be a disaster, a tragedy or the end of the world for you in the UK. It would be worse, because it would be the wrong choice”, Matteo Renzi said.“It would be a mistake for which you the voters primarily would pay the price. Because who really wants Britain to be small and isolated? … It would swap autonomy for solitude, pride for weakness, and identity for self-harm”.
Bloomberg: City of London 'more profitable' inside EU By Peter Teffer-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
Brussels, Today, 13:48-The former mayor of New York City and businessman Michael Bloomberg said he hoped the United Kingdom would vote to stay in the European Union.“I don't know what the British public is going to do, and it's not my job to tell them,” he told EUobserver and a handful of journalists in the European Parliament on Wednesday (22 June), one day before UK citizens go to the polls in a referendum that will determine whether the country will give up its EU membership.“But I hope from my point of view, from America's point of view, from my company's point of view, that they vote to stay in the EU. We'll see what happens”, he added.Bloomberg was mayor of New York City, home of Wall Street, from 2002 to 2014.This website asked him to reflect on the future of the British financial hub, the City of London. Some fear that after a British exit from the EU, companies would be tempted to leave.“I think that London will be a financial centre no matter what,” Bloomberg said.“The question is: would it be easier and more profitable, and will it be able to adapt to change better, if it is part of the EU? And I think yes it would be”, he added.“I can only speak from my company's point of view and my perspective about the financial industry. The situation today is much better than it would have been without the EU or would be if you took the UK out of the EU”, he said.The billionaire former mayor is founder and CEO of the financial data and media company that shares his name: Bloomberg.He is also a special envoy for cities and climate change for the United Nations.He visited Brussels on Wednesday to launch the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, a merger of a European and a global network of city leaders.Speaking in the European Parliament alongside Italian centre-right MEP Giovanni La Via, he praised the European project.“We appreciate in America everything that the EU does. I've always been a big EU fan,” he said.“If you think about it, the real benefit of the EU to me has always been: it's taken a continent where we had an awful lot of wars, and it's made peace for a lot of years, and helped the populations of every country grow and deal with the changing world.”
Opinion-China's high stakes in the British EU referendum By Jan Gaspers-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
Berlin, Today, 12:44-During its final hectic days, the British EU referendum debate has come to be dominated by party politics and soul-searching after the murder of Labour parliamentarian Jo Cox. As Britain is caught up in its domestic woes, interest in what the world thinks about the prospects of a Brexit has taken a back seat again.The media stir Barack Obama caused during his April state visit to the UK when he let it be known that he is no fan of a Brexit seems like a distant memory.Outside of Whitehall there is also hardly any recollection of Chinese president Xi Jinping expressing discontent with the British EU referendum during his visit to the UK in late October 2015.However, China remains concerned about the prospect of Britain finding itself outside the EU.In recent months, high-ranking Chinese officials have repeatedly expressed their government’s worries about the prospect of a British EU exit.Beijing’s diplomatic campaign constitutes an unusual departure from the Chinese foreign policy principle of not interfering with the domestic matters of other countries. It shows how much Chinese investors in Britain worry about access to the single market and how much Beijing fears losing the UK as an advocate in Brussels.-Prime destination for investments-Over the past 15 years, the UK has become the prime destination for Chinese investments in Europe.Total greenfield and mergers and acquisitions transactions since 2000 amount to €15.1 billion, making up for about 25 percent of Chinese investment into all 28 EU member states.But uncertainty about the future of Britain’s relations with the rest of Europe now calls the value of these investments into question.A post-Brexit scenario that entails the loss of unrestricted access to the EU’s single market would align poorly with the business plans of many Chinese-owned companies operating in the UK.A recent analysis of UK-based companies set up by emerging market investors since 2003 suggests that access to the single market was a key reason for Chinese investors to establish business operations in Britain.Out of 508 companies surveyed, almost half of them Chinese-owned, more than 58 percent specified continental Europe as the actual market for the goods and services they sell, compared with 33 per cent who cited the UK market.One of China’s richest citizens and owner of various UK-based businesses, Wang Jianlin, warned that a Brexit could prompt Chinese businesses to abandon their UK operations.This may be an empty threat since relocating companies to continental Europe would be a costly venture. But many Chinese investors will think twice about setting up new operations in the UK as long as access to EU markets remains in limbo.-Strategic partner in the EU-Apart from concerns over China’s investments in Britain, Beijing’s political leadership fears the deterioration of the strategic value of its relationship with London. Over the past two years, Beijing has increasingly relied on London as an advocate for its interests within the EU.The conservative government has placed specific priority on the expansion of trade and investment relations with China.Prime minister David Cameron became the first EU head of state and government to publicly push for the conclusion of a free trade deal between Beijing and the EU - much to the dismay of Brussels bureaucrats who considered the statement "premature".The UK was also the first EU member state to support granting China the status of a full market economy (MES), which would make it more difficult for the EU to impose tariffs on cheap Chinese imports.Even though the Tory government has recently toned down its support for this move in light of protests from the national steel industry, London continues to block proposals by the European Commission and other EU member states to raise tariffs on Chinese steel imports.In another first, the UK also led the way in Europe in signing up to China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which was perceived in the past as a rival to the World Bank.In doing so, the British government publicly defied its ally Washington, triggering complaints from within the US administration about London’s "constant accommodation of China."If the UK were to leave the EU, neither of the other two big member states Germany and France would make for obvious substitutes as advocates of Chinese interests.Berlin has a track record of criticising China’s human rights situation. Moreover, senior members of the German administration have lately called for an "aggressive position against China" on the MES issue – a stance that was echoed by prominent members of the French government.Of course, there are also those in Beijing who underline the positive effects that a British departure from the EU would have for China.Some Chinese experts have suggested that once outside of the EU, the UK may be free to sell arms to China. And some Chinese nationalists like the idea of a Brexit for the sole reason that it would place the UK at loggerheads with China’s perceived arch-rival, the US.But these voices are clearly in the minority compared to those who fear losing an important partner in Europe.Jan Gaspers is head of research at the European China Policy Unit at the Mercator Institute for China Studies in Berlin.
19 And I saw the beast,(EU LEADER) and the kings of the earth, and their armies,(UNITED NATIONS TROOPS) gathered together to make war against him that sat on the horse,(JESUS) and against his army.(THE RAPTURED CHRISTIANS)
WELL TODAY IS THE DAY THAT BRITAIN DECIDES IF IT STAYS IN OR LEAVES THE EUROPEAN UNION. BY THE BIBLE EITHER 3 COUNTRIES OR 3 WORLD TRADE BLOCS GET TAKEN OVER BY THE FUTURE EU DICTATOR. SO BY THIS BIBLE PREDICTION.BY MY TAKE. UNLESS THERES 3 COUNTRIES TOGETHER LEAVING THE EUROPEAN UNION. I DO NOT BELIEVE A SINGLE COUNTRY WILL LEAVE. SO MY PREDICTION BY BIBLE PROPHECY. BRITAIN STAYS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. WHEN THERES 3 COUNTRIES THAT WANT OUT TOGETHER. THEN THEY WILL GET THE BOOT I PREDICT. BUT NOT JUST A SINGLE EU COUNTRY. BUT WE WILL SEE TODAY IF MY PREDICTION BY THE BIBLE IS CORRECT OR WAY OFF THE MARK.AND IF BRITAIN STAYS IN THE EU. I PREDICT THEY WILL PUSH HARD FOR AN EU ARMY. AND TO HAVE THE LEAD ROLE IN THE ISRAELI-PALESTINIAN PEACE TALKS. THIS WILL GET THE UNITED STATES OUT OF THE LEAD ROLE IN THE PEACE TALKS. LIKE THE BIBLE SAYS-IT WILL BE THE EUROPEAN UNION THAT SIGNS THE FINAL 7 YEAR PEACE CONTRACT WITH THE ISRAELIS-ARABS AND MANY.
EUROPEAN UNION TREATIES-AND OPT OUT
http://europa.eu/eu-law/decision-making/treaties/index_en.htm
http://eur-lex.europa.eu/summary/glossary/opting_out.html
Opting out
Certain European Union countries have what are known as ‘opt-outs’, which are a means of ensuring that when a given country does not wish to join the others in a particular field of EU policy, it can opt out, thus avoiding an overall stalemate.
Examples of opt-outs include:Schengen Agreement: Ireland and the United Kingdom;economic and monetary union: Denmark and the United Kingdom;defence: Denmark EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: Poland and the United Kingdom;area of freedom, security and justice: Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom (the latter two countries may opt into given initiatives if they wish).
Protecting Europe’s family ties in trying times-DISCLAIMER: All opinions in this column reflect the views of the author(s), not of EurActiv.com PLC.By Anthony Silberfeld | Bertelsmann Foundation-Jun 6, 2016
In 1946, it was British Conservative Winston Churchill who famously called for the creation of a European family and the establishment of a United States of Europe. So perhaps it is fitting that another Tory may preside over the family’s dissolution, writes Anthony Silberfeld.Anthony Silberfeld is the director of transatlantic relations for the Bertelsmann Foundation.The upcoming British EU referendum is a step in the wrong direction for the European Union, but it certainly isn’t the first. What began as a dream of an ever-closer union has devolved into a collection of states in which national interest trumps unity.One foot in, one foot out-Bringing together 28 member states with diverse histories, cultures and languages naturally complicates a one-size-fits-all approach to policy. But the European Union has transformed the opt-out into an art form. From the Schengen zone to defense and justice, many countries have treated their EU obligations like an à-la-carte menu from which they can pick and choose at their leisure. But these member states are not entirely to blame; the EU has made a conscious decision to allow its members to adhere to the responsibilities that suit them and ignore those that do not. And while it was a deliberate decision to allow member states to strike a balance between its national and European commitments, the unpredictability it has engendered has weakened the ability of European institutions to act in concert when faced with crises that affect the entire continent. Member states have often fulfilled their EU obligations to the letter, but have selectively made choices that are out of step with the spirit of the EU.-Staying together for the kids-This fraying of the European family has been exposed by the recent flow of asylum seekers from Syria (and elsewhere) to the EU. With a population of more than 500 million, the EU should be able to absorb the approximately one million refugees who arrived on European shores in 2015. Yet, this history of selective participation gave member states the political cover to ignore their obligations, not just to the 1951 Refugee Convention, but to the EU itself. This played out in September 2015 with an EU agreement to relocate 120,000 migrants over a two-year period. The vote was contentious, and Romania, the Czech Republic, Slovakia and Hungary voted against the proposal. The UK, for its part, points to this migration crisis as yet another justification for a British exit from the EU. Nevertheless, the quota plan was adopted in principle, but has since been ignored in practice. According to the European Commission, the EU set a target to relocate 6,000 refugees by April 2016. But due to procedural challenges and resistance from some member states, only 208 people were relocated during that period.The inability of the EU to equitably share the burden of accepting refugees led to its decision to seek alternatives to stem the flow. With that in mind, the EU (led by Germany) struck an agreement with Turkey in which “irregular migrants” crossing from Turkey to Greece would be returned to Turkey and the European Union would, in turn, resettle Syrian refugees on a one to one ratio. In exchange, Turkey is poised to receive an additional €3 billion in economic aid and a commitment to visa-free travel for Turks visiting the EU.From a statistical perspective, this deal has been a success. Reports indicate that there has been a 90% decrease in the number of refugees entering the EU since this pact came into effect. But the numbers belie the true impact of this decision. In addition to moral questions raised by returning refugees to a country with a troubling human rights record, the EU has cleared a path for member states to side-step their commitments to the union, thereby further undermining it.-Breaking up is hard to do-There is an adage that if you give someone an inch, they’ll take a mile. If converted into the metric system, this would certainly apply to the current march toward a “Brexit”. The UK has had a long history of getting special treatment from the EU. Prime ministers at 10 Downing Street have featured prominently in the opt-out demands mentioned earlier, including, most notably, the eurozone and Schengen deals. In a last ditch effort to make membership in the EU more enticing, European Council President Donald Tusk negotiated a series of sweeteners with British Prime Minister David Cameron to keep the UK in the EU. The tête-á-tête resulted in British exemptions from funding future euro bailouts and lower administrative burdens to improve the UK’s competitiveness in the EU, among other concessions.Perhaps most disturbingly, Cameron requested an opt-out from the EU’s founding ambition: an ever-closer union. The deal’s final language made clear that any references to that end, “do not apply to the United Kingdom”. The British vote for Brexit or Remain on 23 June will have significant economic repercussions, but the political and symbolic damage to the European family remains an open question. Will the British departure encourage other member states to seek their own exit, or will a chaotic unwinding from the EU discourage others from following a similar path? If the British people decide to leave the EU, there will be a process in place to make that divorce final. But if the UK decides to stay, what other opt-outs will it ask for down the line and when will it demand another referendum? -Blood is thicker than water-Despite the recent political, economic and social turmoil in Europe, the European Union has proven its resilience over time. Emerging from the 2008 economic crisis, coordinating and maintaining sanctions on Russia and rallying to the aid of neighbours targeted by terrorists are just the most recent examples.Like most families, this European one has at times been petty, selfish and has failed to live up to expectations. And like most families, this one is also built on a foundation of strong historic bonds, decades of trust and shared values. With so many challenges on the horizon, Europe has reached an inflection point. In an effort to create a sustainable union, the EU has given its members too much latitude in its decision-making processes. Rather than a debate about more Europe or less Europe, there should be a serious debate about a smart Europe. The crises ahead will demand collective action and unity on the continent, so member states need to re-commit themselves to the Union, not just on paper but in spirit too.
Rivals trade harsh words in final Brexit debate By Eszter Zalan-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
BRUSSELS, Today, 09:29-Rivals in Britain's vote on EU membership locked horns on Tuesday night (21 June) in a final push to win over voters in the neck-and-neck race.Leading politicians from the Leave and Remain camps exchanged harsh words in a TV debate at the Wembley Arena in London, clashing over immigration, the economy and the UK's role in the wider world.Remain supporter and London mayor Sadiq Khan accused the Leave side of "scaring people" by saying Muslim-majority Turkey could join the EU any time soon."That's scaremongering, Boris, and you should be ashamed... ," Khan, from the opposition centre-left Labour party told the former London mayor, Boris Johnson, from the ruling centre-right Conservatives.Johnson branded the pro-EU campaign as "project fear" over its warnings that leaving the EU would cause economic harm to Britain.Khan hit back saying the Leave camp is guilty of a "project hate" on immigration.On the economy, Johnson said it was "extraordinary" to suggest that the EU would impose tariffs on the UK, arguing that Germany would be "insane" to do so because it sells lots of cars to Britain."They [Remain] say we have no choice but to bow down to Brussels. We say they are woefully underestimating this country and what it can do," Johnson said. He spoke of an "independence day" on Thursday if Britons voted to leave the 28-member club.Scottish Tory leader Ruth Davidson also accused the Leave side of "lying" on Turkish membership and for saying that 60 percent of UK laws and regulations are imposed by Brussels.Davidson said the Remain side "refused to dismiss the experts" who all agreed that "Britain is better-off in."In an earlier TV debate, UK justice minister and Brexit supporter Micheal Gove drew criticism for urging Britain not to rely on the opinions of experts that warned against Brexitl-He compared their interventions to how the Nazis forced scientists to denounce Albert Einstein in the 1930s.The debate represented a last chance for the two camps to get their message across to voters who remain split ahead of Thursday's ballot, which could decide the fate of the 60 year-old European project.The exchange also showed how detached the debate on EU membership had become from facts and the extent to which it is now dominated by emotional and combative rhetoric.A snap YouGov poll for the Times found 39 percent thought Leave had won the debate, with 34 percent for Remain and 17 percent undecided.-Countdown-The referendum result will be very close, prime minister David Cameron admitted in an interview with the Financial Times.“Nobody knows what is going to happen,” he said ahead of Thursday's vote.He insisted he will stay on as prime minister even if he loses the referendum.Italy's prime minister also came to help the Remain camp by arguing in the Guardian newspaper that British voters should not make the "wrong choice"."Seen from Italy, a vote to leave Europe would not be a disaster, a tragedy or the end of the world for you in the UK. It would be worse, because it would be the wrong choice”, Matteo Renzi said.“It would be a mistake for which you the voters primarily would pay the price. Because who really wants Britain to be small and isolated? … It would swap autonomy for solitude, pride for weakness, and identity for self-harm”.
Bloomberg: City of London 'more profitable' inside EU By Peter Teffer-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
Brussels, Today, 13:48-The former mayor of New York City and businessman Michael Bloomberg said he hoped the United Kingdom would vote to stay in the European Union.“I don't know what the British public is going to do, and it's not my job to tell them,” he told EUobserver and a handful of journalists in the European Parliament on Wednesday (22 June), one day before UK citizens go to the polls in a referendum that will determine whether the country will give up its EU membership.“But I hope from my point of view, from America's point of view, from my company's point of view, that they vote to stay in the EU. We'll see what happens”, he added.Bloomberg was mayor of New York City, home of Wall Street, from 2002 to 2014.This website asked him to reflect on the future of the British financial hub, the City of London. Some fear that after a British exit from the EU, companies would be tempted to leave.“I think that London will be a financial centre no matter what,” Bloomberg said.“The question is: would it be easier and more profitable, and will it be able to adapt to change better, if it is part of the EU? And I think yes it would be”, he added.“I can only speak from my company's point of view and my perspective about the financial industry. The situation today is much better than it would have been without the EU or would be if you took the UK out of the EU”, he said.The billionaire former mayor is founder and CEO of the financial data and media company that shares his name: Bloomberg.He is also a special envoy for cities and climate change for the United Nations.He visited Brussels on Wednesday to launch the Global Covenant of Mayors for Climate & Energy, a merger of a European and a global network of city leaders.Speaking in the European Parliament alongside Italian centre-right MEP Giovanni La Via, he praised the European project.“We appreciate in America everything that the EU does. I've always been a big EU fan,” he said.“If you think about it, the real benefit of the EU to me has always been: it's taken a continent where we had an awful lot of wars, and it's made peace for a lot of years, and helped the populations of every country grow and deal with the changing world.”
Opinion-China's high stakes in the British EU referendum By Jan Gaspers-JUNE 22,16-EUOBSERVER
Berlin, Today, 12:44-During its final hectic days, the British EU referendum debate has come to be dominated by party politics and soul-searching after the murder of Labour parliamentarian Jo Cox. As Britain is caught up in its domestic woes, interest in what the world thinks about the prospects of a Brexit has taken a back seat again.The media stir Barack Obama caused during his April state visit to the UK when he let it be known that he is no fan of a Brexit seems like a distant memory.Outside of Whitehall there is also hardly any recollection of Chinese president Xi Jinping expressing discontent with the British EU referendum during his visit to the UK in late October 2015.However, China remains concerned about the prospect of Britain finding itself outside the EU.In recent months, high-ranking Chinese officials have repeatedly expressed their government’s worries about the prospect of a British EU exit.Beijing’s diplomatic campaign constitutes an unusual departure from the Chinese foreign policy principle of not interfering with the domestic matters of other countries. It shows how much Chinese investors in Britain worry about access to the single market and how much Beijing fears losing the UK as an advocate in Brussels.-Prime destination for investments-Over the past 15 years, the UK has become the prime destination for Chinese investments in Europe.Total greenfield and mergers and acquisitions transactions since 2000 amount to €15.1 billion, making up for about 25 percent of Chinese investment into all 28 EU member states.But uncertainty about the future of Britain’s relations with the rest of Europe now calls the value of these investments into question.A post-Brexit scenario that entails the loss of unrestricted access to the EU’s single market would align poorly with the business plans of many Chinese-owned companies operating in the UK.A recent analysis of UK-based companies set up by emerging market investors since 2003 suggests that access to the single market was a key reason for Chinese investors to establish business operations in Britain.Out of 508 companies surveyed, almost half of them Chinese-owned, more than 58 percent specified continental Europe as the actual market for the goods and services they sell, compared with 33 per cent who cited the UK market.One of China’s richest citizens and owner of various UK-based businesses, Wang Jianlin, warned that a Brexit could prompt Chinese businesses to abandon their UK operations.This may be an empty threat since relocating companies to continental Europe would be a costly venture. But many Chinese investors will think twice about setting up new operations in the UK as long as access to EU markets remains in limbo.-Strategic partner in the EU-Apart from concerns over China’s investments in Britain, Beijing’s political leadership fears the deterioration of the strategic value of its relationship with London. Over the past two years, Beijing has increasingly relied on London as an advocate for its interests within the EU.The conservative government has placed specific priority on the expansion of trade and investment relations with China.Prime minister David Cameron became the first EU head of state and government to publicly push for the conclusion of a free trade deal between Beijing and the EU - much to the dismay of Brussels bureaucrats who considered the statement "premature".The UK was also the first EU member state to support granting China the status of a full market economy (MES), which would make it more difficult for the EU to impose tariffs on cheap Chinese imports.Even though the Tory government has recently toned down its support for this move in light of protests from the national steel industry, London continues to block proposals by the European Commission and other EU member states to raise tariffs on Chinese steel imports.In another first, the UK also led the way in Europe in signing up to China’s Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank, which was perceived in the past as a rival to the World Bank.In doing so, the British government publicly defied its ally Washington, triggering complaints from within the US administration about London’s "constant accommodation of China."If the UK were to leave the EU, neither of the other two big member states Germany and France would make for obvious substitutes as advocates of Chinese interests.Berlin has a track record of criticising China’s human rights situation. Moreover, senior members of the German administration have lately called for an "aggressive position against China" on the MES issue – a stance that was echoed by prominent members of the French government.Of course, there are also those in Beijing who underline the positive effects that a British departure from the EU would have for China.Some Chinese experts have suggested that once outside of the EU, the UK may be free to sell arms to China. And some Chinese nationalists like the idea of a Brexit for the sole reason that it would place the UK at loggerheads with China’s perceived arch-rival, the US.But these voices are clearly in the minority compared to those who fear losing an important partner in Europe.Jan Gaspers is head of research at the European China Policy Unit at the Mercator Institute for China Studies in Berlin.
