Second-generation immigrants in the Italian schools are on the increase

In the Italian schools, nearly 60% of pupils of foreign origin were born in Italy: equal to almost 479,000 out of a total of about ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/second-generation-immigrants-in-the-italian-schools-are-on-the-increase/

Foreign Minister Gabriel on NATO

Today, 31 March, in Brussels, Foreign Minister Gabriel issued the following statement on the tasks of NATO:

Zusatzinformationen

The Alliance is at a crossroads and faces multiple challenges in and around Europe. In view of these challenges, a strong transatlantic bond is key! We share the same priorities and fundamental interests – based on a common set of values and principles.

NATO is unique in this regard. And it is vital that the summit in May sends a clear message of unity – including a reinvigorated US commitment to our collective defense!

Germany understands and accepts the call for burden-sharing within the Alliance. And there is a clear need to better resource our armed forces in Europe, given the security challenges we face. We have already reversed the trend in our defense budget – because this is in our genuine interest, not because somebody forced us to do so.

Our defense spending has increased by 13.7% under NATO criteria. This year’s budget alone will mark an increase by 7.9%! More than 11% of the federal budget will be spent on defense. The overwhelming part will be made available to NATO directly. It is this “output” for NATO which we need to focus on more– especially with a view to capability shortfalls.

We respect the 2% guideline – but we should not move the goalposts: it was formulated in Wales as a guideline and not as a goalpost. Defense spending and military means are important to provide for more security, but they are by far not the only means.

One of the results of the G20 Foreign Ministers’ meeting in Bonn was that crisis prevention, humanitarian aid, economic development and non- military stabilization are indispensable additional elements for security.

This is why our defense spending should not be driven by quantitative targets only. We should also look at quality and impact. Our spending needs to be embedded in a political strategy. The objectives of our political strategy determine the quantity and the quality of our approach.

In Syria, Iraq or Afghanistan we need more than military means to end the conflict. This is the lesson we have all learned since 9/11.

In Iraq, for example, non-military stabilization efforts are more crucial than ever – especially with regard to the ongoing liberation of Mosul. Unless we succeed in improving security and living conditions quickly we risk that the hard-fought victories of the coalition will not be sustainable.

Regarding Syria we need to continue our work to ensure that negotiations in Geneva continue. A lasting ceasefire and full humanitarian access in the entire country are urgently needed.

We cannot defeat ISIS and other terrorist groups without a political solution for Syria and without stabilizing Iraq politically and economically.

Germany today is one of the biggest contributors to international humanitarian aid – 1.2 billion EUR in 2016. We will fulfill the ODA benchmark of 0.7% GDP for development aid this year. Let me add: A big part of our spending today regarding the refugee crisis is related to the consequences of failed military interventions in the past. What we saw was, without a political strategy we cannot achieve sustainable stabilization.

Non-military stabilization efforts, humanitarian aid and development are all important investments that should be taken into account. They will help us reduce the need for costly military intervention in the future.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170331_BM_NATO.html?nn=479796

Foreign Minister Gabriel baffled by anti‑dumping investigation against German steel companies

Foreign Minister Gabriel issued the following statement today (31 March) on the United States anti‑dumping investigation against German steel companies: 

Zusatzinformationen

I very much fail to comprehend the decision taken by the United States Department of Commerce in connection with its anti‑dumping investigation concerning Salzgitter AG and Dillinger Hütte. Despite all of our efforts and repeated interventions by the European Union, the United States Department of Commerce has used calculation methods that run counter to WTO agreements, for the purpose of harming the US’s competitors in the steel sector. The intention is to protect the US steel industry by creating disadvantages for the stronger German steel industry.

This decision is all the more significant because it is the first anti‑dumping investigation in the steel sector conducted by the new US administration. The US Government is apparently prepared to provide American companies with unfair competitive advantages over European and other producers, even if such action violates international trade law.

WTO rules are the backbone of the international trade system. Knowingly breaching them is a dangerous step. It is the first time the US is, in the context of such an investigation, resorting to methods that distort competition and are not in line with WTO rules. We Europeans cannot accept this. The EU must now consider whether it, too, will lodge a complaint with the WTO. I strongly support this. We must take a decisive stance vis‑à‑vis the United States, in defence of fair competition and against creative accounting practices that disadvantage our German steel industry, which is hard‑working and produces exceptionally high quality products, making it very competitive on the international market. If the US effort to force through unfair competition were to succeed, the same development may also occur in other industrial sectors. 

Background information: 

On 30 March, the United States Department of Commerce concluded its anti dumping investigation, finding producers in Austria, Belgium, France, Italy and Germany (Salzgitter AG in Lower Saxony and Dillinger Hütte in Saarland) to have dumped steel plate and thereby also setting final duty rates for these exporters. Both Germany and European Commissioner for Trade Cecilia Malmström had intervened prior to this decision, demanding that established WTO rules and standards be adhered to. The United States Department of Commerce chose to use different calculation methods. The affected companies may now take their case to court.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170331_BM_US-Anti-Dumping.html?nn=479796

Foreign Minister Gabriel on support for the peace agreement in Colombia

Today (30 March) Foreign Minister Gabriel commented as follows on the signing of a cooperation agreement on practical support for the UN Mission in Colombia provided by the Federal Agency for Technical Relief (THW):

Zusatzinformationen

The United Nations and Germany have launched a unique form of cooperation, under which THW experts are doing their bit to help stabilise Colombia and in particular to support the recently commenced disarmament of former combatants.

The conflict lasted for more than 50 years and claimed more than 200,000 lives. It is thus now of vital importance that the peace agreement between the Government and the FARC guerillas be implemented rigorously and rapidly. The United Nations is playing a key role in this process with its Mission in Colombia. It can rest assured of Germany’s support.

Background information:

Strengthening the United Nations is one of Germany’s key foreign policy priorities. At the request of the United Nations, a group of experts from the THW is working in Colombia, with Federal Foreign Office support, to put in place essential information and communications technology for the UN Mission. This THW mission is the first ever mission by a civilian organisation of its kind under UN auspices.

The UN Mission in Colombia was charged by the UN Security Council, in resolution 2261 of 25 January 2016, with monitoring and verifying the ceasefire between the Colombian Government and the FARC rebels and supporting the peace process between the parties.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170330_BM_COL.html?nn=479796

Speech by Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel at the international symposium in honour of Hans-Dietrich Genscher

Barbara Genscher,
Maxim Kantor,
Klaus Kinkel,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

I am delighted to welcome you all to the Federal Foreign Office today.

A few moments ago, we formally renamed the Europafoyer behind this room in memory of Hans-Dietrich Genscher.

The Federal Foreign Office has a tradition of naming rooms after great political figures. And there’s something you should know about this building: it used to house the Central Committee of the SED, the Socialist Unity Party of the GDR. And the room where the Politbüro used to meet is now protected – as is the way here in Germany – as a historical monument. But, civil society has had its ultimate revenge on the SED. The wallpaper, which is of course also protected, shows traces of the pictures that used to hang on the walls – but the modern Foreign Office has simply hung a big portrait of Bismarck on top and called it the Bismarck Room. Now that’s what I call society’s revenge!

I admit that, as a Social Democrat, I am much happier about a room being renamed the Hans-Dietrich Genscher Forum.

I am really pleased that we have managed to make this happen here at the Federal Foreign Office – at Frank-Walter Steinmeier’s initiative and in collaboration with the Friedrich Naumann Foundation.

Few people have left a more lasting impression on Germany than Hans-Dietrich Genscher. I am now 57 years old. I was 15 or 16 when I started getting interested in politics, and Genscher – even though he was in a different party – has been a feature of my entire political life.

For me, Genscher always stood for an idea of liberality that we need more of in Germany. It encompassed more than his party-political affiliation; it shaped our country’s constitution and our way of life in a manner that transcended political differences. Genscher is one of our country’s outstanding liberal figures, who have advanced its development in a liberal direction. That did my generation good. And I believe that, at a time when we are sometimes not entirely sure where to go next, that memory of liberality, in the best sense, is one of the great traditions this country ought to preserve. And that goes beyond party politics. Genscher’s contribution to this liberal Europe gives us a reason to look back at his life, but it is also a reason to take something with us as we face what lies ahead. His idea of a tolerant, liberal, free and surely also social Europe  – that is a Genscher idea we can carry into the future.

Ladies and gentlemen,

That being said, Hans-Dietrich Genscher never really left the Federal Foreign Office. Despite the intervening move from Bonn to Berlin, you can sense his presence particularly clearly if you head down into the subterranean levels of this building. Below us here, under your feet, there are vaults with fat doors where the Nazis once stashed their gold. These days, they house our political archives.

Frank-Walter Steinmeier gave me a good tip for finding my way around down there. It’s quite simple, really. All the files are just arranged into two categories. There are those that DO involve Hans-Dietrich Genscher – filling metres of shelving as high as your head – and there are those that DON’T involve Genscher, in a little box.

It was 43 years ago, in 1974, that Hans-Dietrich Genscher took office. And he did so in a very interesting constellation.

Genscher became Foreign Minister, and his predecessor, a good friend from the same party, became Federal President... I find it very easy to imagine what that might have felt like!

From his very first day, Genscher left no‑one in any doubt as to how passionately the new Foreign Minister would fight for his visions. I found a note in the archives that made this abundantly clear. According to this note, there was a meeting held just a few days after Genscher took office. It was chaired by the head of Genscher’s personal office, a certain Mr Kinkel. The staff who would work most closely with the Minister came and listened to Mr Kinkel outlining the new boss’ expectations.

In future, according to Kinkel, all information prepared for the Minister on important topics should be not just concise and precise – but “pin sharp”. That is what it says.

Kinkel went on to warn that Genscher had a tendency to call ad‑hoc meetings and, for those looking forward to the upcoming summer lull, that the Minister would be in the office VERY LATE – until 10 p.m., to be precise. And he would apparently expect the same from his close colleagues and his State Secretaries.

Well, Klaus Kinkel, I must say that was a pretty clear message.

And perhaps it was already clear back then, in those first days of his tenure, how Genscher would do the job: pragmatically, with a keen eye on outcomes; with a firm hold on his principles; and with his already legendary, self-deprecating humour.

Genscher said once, “They say God couldn’t possibly be everywhere at once – but a Foreign Minister is expected to manage it, naturally.” He was probably on the way to the airport yet again at the time.

***

Genscher left his mark on this country as only few others have. The fact that our country, that Germany is an integral part of a liberal and peaceful Europe today is thanks to courageous people like Hans-Dietrich Genscher. He understood early on that it was essential to find some balance between the interests of East and West. He threw himself passionately into the Germany policy and Ostpolitik that Willy Brandt had started and Helmut Schmidt had continued.

What made Genscher so remarkable in this work and earned him so much respect – in Germany and abroad – came down chiefly to two qualities, I think.

The first was his outstanding ability to communicate. Genscher could build trust even among the most difficult of negotiating partners. He really could put himself into the other man’s shoes. When talks stalled again and again, he never gave up. He insisted that they had to go on – patiently but firmly.

Genscher shaped not only our country’s politics with that great gift, but also the empathetic face Germany turned to the outside world. If there is one thing he can teach us, I believe it is this empathetic approach to the countries we Germans are in contact with. After all, there is a wide range of attitudes a country can take. With the clout our country has gained, we get a certain amount of attention all around the world. But I believe it is important, especially for a particularly strong country like Germany, to show our empathetic side in our dealings with others. The focus shouldn’t be on strength; there should be no demanding that others give us their allegiance. We know that Europe is made up of a lots of small countries and only a few large and medium-sized ones. We Germans must therefore not fall into the trap of thinking that we are the only people in Europe anyone needs to talk to. That is an assumption which the Chinese, Russians and Americans unfortunately have in common at the moment.

Helping even those countries that are weaker than us, whose governance we criticise and whose finances are in difficulties, and approaching them with respectful empathy – that is something we can learn from Hans-Dietrich Genscher. That empathetic face is something we can rightly take as a model for the way our country should present itself in the world today.

Genscher used that great gift to shape our country’s politics and engineer several crucial steps – from the CSCE to the Two-Plus-Four Treaty to the architecture of German unity.

Hungary’s Foreign Minister Gyula Horn, who ripped the first tear in the Iron Curtain in 1989, called his counterpart Genscher “the number one diplomatic politician of our time”. Former US Secretary of State James Baker saw him as a “Titan among diplomats” who could be “as tough as the leather of a Texas cowboy boot”.

I am convinced that Genscher’s readiness to seek pragmatic solutions even with the most difficult of partners can and must be our yardstick today.

Klaus Kinkel, I felt you said just the right thing a moment ago, when you told us what Hans-Dietrich Genscher would do today with respect to the United States, for example. The US is a country we are closely tied to, and it will remain so. This is a partnership to which we bring an outstretched hand – and self-confidence too.

Turning to Russia, obviously we frequently criticise and indeed are obliged to criticise the country’s policies, but at the same time we clearly have to be aware that trying to proceed without Russia would be more likely to exacerbate problems in the world rather than solve them. We just have to accept that we cannot choose our neighbours.

We have to keep working on political solutions, despite the conflicts that seem to grow from one day to the next, the new wars, new arms races and all the other setbacks. That is not an easy task, but we mustn’t take that as a reason to give up. Hans-Dietrich Genscher’s legacy also teaches us perseverance and patience – which he always paired, notably, with clarity about where he stood. He never pandered to his opposite numbers. After all, to be pragmatic does not mean giving up your own values; it means attempting to understand the other person’s interests without being led by them – and then seeking some way of accommodating both sides’ interests.

In Genscher’s own words, “You recognise a good pilot by a steady hand not the loudest voice.”

***

To come to the second quality I want to highlight, Hans-Dietrich Genscher was brilliant at drawing the right conclusions in a changing situation. He was able not only to spot changes and recognise the signs of the times, but also to use them and actively influence the shape those changes took. He was prepared to strike out in courageous new directions to do so, not infrequently facing resistance from others on the same side.

In his famous Davos speech in February 1987, Genscher called on the West to take Gorbachev’s reform efforts seriously  and use them as an opportunity.

“Europe is our destiny. That is even more true for us than for all the other nations. Humanity is facing a choice either to be destroyed in confrontation or to survive together.”

His passion for a peaceful and free Europe shaped him throughout his life – a man who had lived through the war and had fled from the GDR.

Right up until he died, Genscher exhorted us to fight for that Europe.

And he was right. We need a strong Europe now more than ever. And now more than ever, we Europeans need to read the signs of the times and not only spot but also help shape the changes taking place around us.

A clear and brutally honest analysis also includes the realisation that we as Europeans have not yet completed the transition from the old to the new, constantly changing world order. And I don’t mean this as an accusation. After all, it is true that the European Union was not designed to be a global player. It was intended to ensure peace and prosperity for its members. However, what we haven’t managed to do is to learn how to get on top of the reality of the crises and wars in our neighbourhood outside the EU.

At the same time, we must keep a further point in mind, which has to do with a development at the heart of Europe. We are – and it is no exaggeration to say this – experiencing what can be termed a crisis of confidence. Instead of rapprochement in Europe, we are witnessing new levels of drifting apart every day.

But if we Europeans intend to continue to play an influential role in a changing world, then we must change ourselves; we need to develop a strong Europe ready to shoulder responsibility; and we need to ensure that our children are heard in the world of the future. They will not be heard if they only speak with a national voice. We will only be listened to in the world of tomorrow if we have a common European voice.

Perhaps Genscher’s empathetic face – the empathetic face Germany turns to our neighbours – is one of the most important ways for us to convince the sceptics, the critics and the fearful that they have a partner in Germany that is not only strong but also reliable and well disposed towards them and towards European unity. If we do that, I think we will not only be obeying the letter of Hans-Dietrich Genscher’s legacy but also rediscovering the Europe of tomorrow in the spirit he would have wanted. Thank you very much.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2017/170328_BM_GenscherSymposium.html?nn=479796

Engineering Mathematics at Bristol

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XmlRcF6aXik

Speech by Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel at the security policy conference of the SPD parliamentary group “Impetus for a European defence union”

Wolfgang Hellmich,
Rainer Arnold,
Distinguished guests,
Ladies and gentlemen,

Many thanks for your invitation and many thanks to all those who helped to prepare this conference.

You couldn’t have picked a more eventful week to discuss impetus for the future of Europe if you’d tried.

At the weekend, we celebrated the anniversary of the Treaties of Rome. And I’m delighted that we managed to adopt a joint declaration. However, the fact that this was difficult shows that we have reached a critical point.

There are many questions and discussions regarding how the European Union should safeguard its cohesion and the form that its cooperation should take in the future.

This is partly to do with Brexit. The EU is likely to receive a letter from the UK on the day after tomorrow, which will begin the process of the country’s exit from the European Union.

Incidentally, we must, with regard to security policy, have a strong interest in keeping relations with the UK as close as possible. I would advise anyway that we conduct the withdrawal process with self‑confidence and without inflicting any harm on the remaining 27 member states. And neither should this be done along the lines of “How can we punish the British people for their decision?”, rather we must see to it that we remain as close to each other as possible because, at the end of the day, as the British people will also come to realise, we need each other. This is obvious particularly in the realm of foreign, defence and security policy.

Above and beyond this, many intensive discussions are being held on the various models of integration and cooperation. Europe has kept its promise of peace. And you can tell quite quickly how unstable the situation is wherever the European Union’s hand of peace is absent. The European Union has not kept its promise of prosperity, however. We have a division between a relatively prosperous north and a less prosperous south undergoing difficulties. Irrespective of our take on how this problem ought to be tackled, we will, at any rate, need to be mindful to ensure that this social division in Europe does not run so deep that it jeopardises projects such as common foreign and security policy as we drift ever further apart from each other.

I believe that we are also witnessing great political differences between Central Eastern Europe and Western Europe when we consider the developments that we see in Poland and in Hungary. And, of course, this means that we must try, for instance in the area of security and defence policy, to identify new fields where greater cooperation is desired on the part of these countries and where integration is being driven forward by them while other fields might elude us in this regard.

I think we are all aware that we face immense challenges here in Europe. The prevailing narrative of years past – “muddling through” or “it’ll work out somehow” – will no longer fit the bill. A state of affairs that is untenable in the long term is if it is exclusively our country that is looked to on every issue. It is also tempting as we are, more and more, being called upon to take a leading role. However, we must take care not to lose sight of the fact that Europe isn’t just a collection of a few major countries, but that we are many small countries that are on an equal footing in Europe. We must constantly remind our partners in Washington, Moscow and Beijing that this isn’t just about Germany, which sticks out because it is strong economically. This is about the whole of Europe. We want us to stick together here. We Germans must sometimes take care to show smaller member states that we do know we are all equals here. Sometimes it would be more desirable if our dealings with the many other nations in Europe, to whom we must not come across as presuming to take the leading politically, economically and, ultimately, militarily, were a little more informed by the Bonn Republic and a little less by the Berlin Republic. This is not how Europe was built. Europe was built so that we could master challenges as a community. The paradox here is that while Europe is getting more important on the one hand, it is dogged by so many difficulties on the other.

It is becoming more important as events in the world at large that have such an intense and immediate impact on us are directly linked to European issues of the future.

Europe is surrounded by countless crises and conflicts that are putting all of us to the test.

The conflicts in our neighbourhood have not only increased in number, but are also getting closer to us – both on our eastern and on our southern borders.

Crises triggered by political failure, corruption, hunger and climate change are being added to the mix. All of this is keeping us immensely busy. Crises keep on emerging and, as we have seen, often remain unsolved.

We are feeling the consequences of this directly.

We are being forced to deal with refugees and increased migratory flows.

Terrorist threats are on the increase – as the recent attack in London reminded us once again all too clearly.

At the same time, raw power politics has made a comeback on the international stage. We are witnessing trends towards greater armament in many countries of the world. And we too are embroiled in a debate on how we must come to grips with this.

Europe is navigating a state of global affairs that has seldom seemed so complex and threatening.

And it is precisely for this reason that we need clever analyses and strong common responses – especially in foreign and security policy. To my mind – and this isn’t terribly surprising coming from a Foreign Minister – security and defence policy is a function of politics and foreign policy. It is not an accoutrement of foreign policy, but is obviously a function of politics in general. I cannot imagine how anyone would seek to define security and defence policy objectives and instruments without having a common perception of foreign policy. Foreign policy must therefore precede security and defence policy. We will only be able to deal with all of the crises and conflicts if we Europeans undertake common efforts across the board.

By the way, it is quite interesting to ask people where they think Europe must do more. One of the first answers they give is “foreign, security and defence policy”. It is most fascinating to see that citizens see this to be quite normal whereas career politicians have great difficulty reaching consensus on this matter. You don’t need to have studied politics to understand that 27 friends may not all have the same needs. And it would perhaps be fairly wise to think together about which skills we share and what we intend to achieve with them. Another reason for doing this is to be efficient and avoid wasting vast amounts of money in the wrong areas. I think this is something that citizens in Europe consider to be entirely normal – just as they consider it to be normal that the protection of the European Union’s external borders is ensured at community level. It was the Federal Republic of Germany that took a leading role in opposing this in the past. Germany thought of the protection of external borders as a national task. It is only now that awareness is growing that this is also part of a common security policy. At any rate, I think it is a very good sign that when people are asked what the European Union should do, they quite naturally cite foreign, security and defence policy as one of the major tasks that we can only master together. And, at the same time, citizens also have a number of ideas for things that the European Union does, but which we could perhaps do better at the national, regional or municipal level. Not “more Europe in all things”, but rather a different, a better Europe that concentrates on what works well at the supranational level and what we can no longer manage by ourselves. Incidentally, this is not about surrendering sovereignty. Europe and the European Union are there to ensure that where the member states no longer enjoy sovereignty in the world of tomorrow, we can regain this sovereignty as a community. Europe helps its nation states to enhance their sovereignty and not to forfeit it, as some people claim.

Granted, the European Union has also evolved in the area of foreign and security policy in recent years.

The Treaty of Lisbon laid important foundations for this, including the mutual assistance clause set out in Article 42 of the Treaty on European Union.

This shows that Europe is committed to the security of its citizens and to the territorial integrity of its member states.

The European Union has become, to an extent, a stabilising power, especially in its direct neighbourhood, but also beyond.

It emanates stability beyond its own borders in many ways – politically, with a proactive security policy and, of course, economically.

However, ladies and gentlemen,

the truth is that Europe’s abilities to project security and stability beyond its own borders are most certainly not yet sufficiently well developed. In a nutshell, you could say that the European Union, taken by itself, is not yet able to project power. In view of developments in the world, where military power has gained in prominence as a factor of international policy once again, you cannot ignore this fact, even if we wish the world were different. I therefore believe that Europe should not develop a special form of exceptionalism of a kind that we a familiar with from the US, one which is simply inverted. The message preached by the doctrine of American exceptionalism goes like this: “We have the best model for coexistence and we are bringing this to the world.” Europe should take care to ensure that we do not preach the inverse of this, namely: “We too know what the best way to coexist is. However, we actually don’t want to have all that much to do with the world. We don’t want to be drawn into conflicts.”

And we prefer to think about how we can make the walls on Europe’s borders a little higher once again than to consider how we can demonstrate with political, economic and, if necessary, military power, that we have a voice in this world. That we are prepared to defend ourselves and also to help others. We cannot blame the European Union for the fact that this is not yet the case today and that we lack instruments and capabilities for helping to prevent and manage crises and conflicts more comprehensively and effectively and to become a global actor promoting security and stability.

At the end of the day, the EU lacks the means to safeguard its own security to the extent that would be desirable.

This can come as no surprise and is not meant as an accusation. The European Union was not designed to be a global player. It was intended to ensure peace and prosperity for its members.

It has successfully performed this role for decades.

However, the EU is not yet in a position to play an active and shaping as well as a mediating, mitigating, de‑escalating and stabilising role at the global level.

And yet Europe as a credible actor in the world would be more important today than ever before.

I’m not the only one who sees things this way. Two‑thirds of Europeans want there to be more, and not less, European integration in the area of foreign, security and defence policy.

***

So what needs to be done? I want to mention two principles that I believe should guide us, before outlining a number of concrete steps that we should take. 

Firstly, the primacy of foreign policy must apply especially with regard to security policy issues in Europe. I emphasise this not in my capacity as Foreign Minister, but because I firmly believe that we must always consider the political challenges that we face. For this, we need, more so today than in the past, a common European understanding of these problems and challenges as the basis for our common action. The High Representative Federica Mogherini took an important step forward in this regard last year with the Global Strategy on Foreign and Security Policy for the European Union. We must build on this.

After all, it is clear that, in a world in which the balance of power is shifting, we will only have a voice if it is a common European voice. For this, we need a common foreign policy at European level on the basis of which we can develop our security policy instruments. 

The basis for this must – this is the second principle that I wish to mention – be a comprehensive concept of security that comprises all available means and instruments. We must focus on what it is that characterises us Europeans.

Our strength lies precisely in the fact that we approach crises with a broad toolbox – with diplomatic, civilian, police and, yes, also with military means. But not exclusively. The European Union in particular is in a position to make all of these instruments available. This is a hallmark of European foreign and security policy that we must preserve and expand.

Please don’t misunderstand me. I am strongly in favour of continuing to develop our military capabilities in Europe and also advocate strengthening our common defence. I will say a bit more about this in just a moment. However, because this has been an issue on a number of occasions recently, I would like to explain briefly why the tenor of the current discussion surrounding our military spending worries me.

I simply believe that we are too preoccupied with the matter of military spending in the public debate, and also within NATO. I believe that we have to be a bit careful not to revert to the times when we thought increased military spending equated to increased security. A mathematician would say that being able to defend oneself militarily is a necessary, but not a sufficient, condition for security.

This is why we must indeed do more and also increase our spending. What is decisive, however, is how we go about this.

At a purely national level? Should we as Germans also pursue a two percent target, which, by the way, doesn’t exist in NATO? There is no stipulation of an apodictic two percent target. The predilection in the public debate with talking this up gives me cause for thought. This two percent target would mean that Germany would spend nearly 70 billion euros on the Bundeswehr each year. Looking to the future, I’m not so sure whether our European partners would still actually consider this to be an especially safe bet in twenty years’ time with twelve years of such investment under our belts. We would, at the heart of Europe, with the biggest economy and the country with the largest population, spend gigantic sums of money on the German Bundeswehr each year. I doubt whether this would be in line with the concept of interconnected and common security.

Boiling the discussion down to defence spending is therefore a mistake in itself. However, it is also a mistake to consider this issue in national terms – especially for us in Europe. The actual way to make a difference is to invest now – in common capabilities and structures where we assume responsibility for each other. And for which the Federal Republic of Germany must make do its own part.

I think it will be to Germany’s credit for us to take such debates seriously. This seriousness is manifested firstly by being honest with others. I don’t know of anyone who would put together and approve a federal budget like that. And certainly no one who, like my colleague Jens Spahn, believes that cutbacks should be made to welfare spending. Incidentally, I know of no one in Europe who, like the US President, would allow an increase in the military budget to go hand in hand with cutbacks in funding for the World Food Programme, development aid and crisis prevention.

You can probably see why I view this two percent debate with a bit of concern. If it results in cutbacks to the civilian part of security policy among the strongest proponents of this policy, then I sense that we would be heading in the wrong direction were we to simply replicate this.

And no matter how difficult it is to take a nuanced position in such debates, we should adopt one. Namely that we are, firstly, committed to modernising the Bundeswehr and to assuming a greater share of the defence burden. However, we do not intend to pursue such gigantic and, in the final instance, false demands such as the two percent target. That, instead, we aim to maintain an enhanced security concept in which we also live up to our responsibility.

Ladies and gentlemen,

The core of the matter is, after all, that the EU brings about security for Europe together and works together to promote peace and stability in the world – without countries going it alone any more. These are the key points of the European project and our European efforts to achieve this should also be recognised internationally. The primacy of foreign policy and a comprehensive concept of security – this is the framework in which, to my mind, the member states of the European Union must deepen their common foreign policy and also their cooperation in common defence.

***

Ladies and gentlemen,

We must be prepared to have the courage to achieve greater European integration in these areas.

I have seen a high level of consensus among the member states in many areas. This isn’t true across the board though, and our cooperation within the EU is also not yet efficient enough. This is why I feel an obligation to strengthen the High Representative in her role.

In the negotiations on the Iranian nuclear programme, it was a boon that Europe was directly represented by the High Representative at the table and able to negotiate successfully. The fact that the European External Action Service is organising the next conference on Syria in the coming week is a vital signal for European engagement for this reason too. However, together with our European partners, we should also consider, in other fields, how we can ensure that the High Representative is able to attend decisive talks and negotiations. This might sound like a small step. However, it is important in order to trigger changes in mindsets, in European thinking – both among our European partners and our negotiation partners.

I firmly believe that we must also find new ways to make our work in the Foreign Affairs Council, where the Foreign Ministers meet, more efficient.

It is time to put national sensitivities that block our common action as Europeans on the back burner.

For example, when this has to do with forging ahead with important projects and the whole thing collapses because a single country doesn’t want to join the consensus.

Can’t we as member states show more willingness to refrain from holding the entire EU back with a single veto?

We don’t need an amended treaty for this, but the political will of each and every member state. Political self‑commitment isn’t something that only applies to the economy, but also to ourselves. Why shouldn’t it be possible to say something like this: “If we are alone in such a vote, we will not hold up the European project with our veto.” This would help us to take European foreign policy a major step forward.

Positioning ourselves better as a Union also means improving the coordination of our political, civilian and military instruments. Civilian experts, diplomats, police officers and soldiers are currently deployed in 15 EU crisis management missions. Our work in this area extends from Ukraine to the Horn of Africa. This week, we are going to seek an extension to the mandate for the Bundeswehr’s involvement in the EU mission in Mali, where the EU training mission is training Malian soldiers. At the same time, the EU has deployed a civilian advisory mission in order to strengthen Mali’s security sector. It is important that our activities complement each other in this regard. And I welcome the fact that German police officers are training their Malian counterparts.

In general, I think that we are taking the right approach in supporting police missions around the world more strongly than in the past with our Federal Police – be it with the EU in Mali, within the OSCE or in the United Nations. This was something that the German Bundestag called for some time ago. What we Europeans are doing in Mali is part of an overall strategy and we are liaising closely with the United Nations.

However, the example of Mali also shows where we must make progress in Europe as regards the coordination of our various instruments.

Let me give you an example. The Commander of the EU training mission in Mali has had to tackle two difficult tasks simultaneously. Firstly, taking responsibility for a challenging mission in the field. And, secondly, seeing to the planning and decision‑making process in Brussels at the same time. Juggling two tasks makes little sense. And this brings me to the concrete steps to be taken in the area of security and defence policy. We have made important progress at the European level in recent times.

While some of the things in this area may appear to be minor or technical at first sight, they actually have a major impact. A few weeks ago, we agreed to the establishment of the “Military Planning and Conduct Capability” for military training missions in Brussels – this was an important step. This somewhat cumbersome name denotes a European command centre where all efforts are coordinated – an institution that Europe still doesn’t dare call by its actual name. Moreover, there will be a civil‑military coordination cell where civilian and military aspects can now, finally, be better dovetailed with each other. This will be immensely important in the case of Mali, for example.

We are also working on “enhanced structured cooperation”. We must continue to do this and pursue the debate on which member states are prepared to follow suit and do more together. We are giving greater thought to our common capabilities. An important step in this direction could be a European defence fund equipped with the financial resources to develop and procure military capabilities jointly. It is important to organise extra investments in Europe such that they are efficient and result in greater common European strength – and not to further imbalances between individual member states.

We must increasingly come to understand that our capabilities are “embedded” within the European framework. And we must organise these capabilities so that they go hand in hand with what we are doing in NATO. I think that we are still a long way from having a “European army” or joint armed forces. However, thinking more in European terms as well as coordinating capabilities and developing and procuring them in concert – this must be the objective that we commit ourselves to with all our might.

However, this will also mean – and we must be realistic when we call for and aspire to this – that we in Germany must think about how we can be best prepared for this.

We rightly have the requirement for parliamentary approval for Bundeswehr missions abroad. And the jurisprudence of the Federal Constitutional Court and the Parliamentary Participation Act offer us clear guidelines.

However – and we must be honest about this – more integrated capabilities at European level will also mean that there will be a greater focus on the reliability of each and every partner, including Germany. In a situation in which, for example, the European Union says: “We are taking part in a UN mission” – and certain capabilities can only be made available by member states when Germany provides the necessary back‑ups for this. This must not be contingent upon objections by the German Bundestag because election time is looming or we are locked in difficult debates. We must be aware that politics will be facing challenges in our country. We can talk about many things with each other, however the basis for this is reliability in our capabilities and reliability in our common security policy. Our partners must be able to expect this from us and we must meet their expectations.

***

Ladies and gentlemen,

You will hold talks and discussions today on how we can inject impetus into a Europe that must be better able to hold its own in a world that, unfortunately, does not appear to be getting any more peaceful.

And allow me to add one more thing with respect to the letter awaited from London, which is that I am really not happy about the Brexit decision. However, if it means that we in Europe close ranks and we manage, especially in foreign and security policy, to keep our British friends by our side, then we shouldn’t have any cause to fear this letter or its consequences.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Things will not get any less complex in the future. However, our real task for the future is to continue to work on our common Europe in spite of all of the eurosceptic trends out there. We are reminded now of the fact that we mustn’t simply take for granted what our parents and grandparents built up so painstakingly. If we manage now to achieve “more Europe” in foreign policy, security and defence, then we will have laid important foundations for the future of this Europe that posterity will thank us for.

Common values in Europe are guiding us in these endeavours – freedom, democracy and human rights – and a European shared responsibility for our security, and also for global peace and stability.

Thank you for listening.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2017/170328_europ_Verteidigung.html?nn=479796

Speach by Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel at the 97th Liebesmahl  of the German Asia-Pacific Business Association, City Hall of the Free and Hanseatic City of Hamburg

Mr Frey,
Mr Horch,
Members of the Hamburg City Parliament and the German Bundestag,
Excellencies,
Ladies and gentlemen,

First I would like to thank you, Mr Frey, for what was my second invitation to the Liebesmahl of the German Asia‑Pacific Business Association!

I had the privilege of being your guest once before, in 2009. On that occasion it took place in the port. Today, of course, the port looks rather different than it did at the start of the 20th century, when your association was founded. The port of Hamburg has become one of the most modern in Europe. It has always been Hamburg’s and indeed even Germany’s gateway to the world. And this world is increasingly being shaped by Asia.

The businesspeople in the German Asia‑Pacific Business Association have been aware of this for 117 years. One of the reasons your association was established was because, according to the official chronicles, the significance of East Asia in Germany’s politically and socially influential circles was still constantly underestimated.

I fear that there is still considerable truth in this analysis even today, although much has been achieved. The future of Europe, transatlantic relations, the crises around us, in Ukraine, in Syria ‑ all these issues are huge foreign policy and domestic policy concerns. And rightly so. Yet amid all this, we cannot afford to lose sight of Asia, and the opportunities for cooperation with this region.

I firmly believe that Asia is and remains a crucial region for the future of both Germany and Europe. It isn’t just about our country. Europe’s prospects are also at stake. However, that means that Europe needs to become stronger. After all, we have to admit that Asia, Washington, Moscow don’t look quite so closely at Europe, they focus more on Germany. Yet we will only have a voice in the world of tomorrow if it is a single European voice. And even the loud voice of Germany will not be heard in the world of tomorrow, in which Asia, Latin America and Africa are growing and we are shrinking. Our children’s future will depend on us holding this Europe together ‑ and I think that is also an important message when we turn our eyes towards the East.

That is why in Germany and Europe we need to redefine our policy on Asia. We want to intensify our relations with Asia. And above all we want to organise them strategically. We can also learn from others in this area. China, for example, has a strategy. And we are of course part of this strategy. That isn’t a bad thing. It would just be good if Europe were also involved. We, too, ought to develop our own strategic perspective, not only with regard to China but for the entire continent. That is what we need to do now.

Ladies and gentlemen,

When we look towards Asia, a world of superlatives opens up.
Asia is home to the world’s largest economies, the most rapidly growing markets.
Four and a half billion people live in Asia, making it the most densely populated region of the earth.
Half of all goods shipped worldwide are loaded or unloaded in Asia. Nine of the ten largest container terminals are located in Asia. European ports only feature in the top 20 ‑ and of course Hamburg is one of them!

Ladies and gentlemen,

these statistics are impressive. And they testify to the fact that we are witnessing the recalibration of the world as we know it. The economic centre of gravity is shifting further and further towards Asia.

Yet we should not allow these figures to tempt us to paint a simplistic picture of this region. Ladies and gentlemen, as specialists on Asia you know that the Asia‑Pacific region is not homogeneous. It is full of dynamism and diversity. That is its hallmark.

Asia is the largest investor in green energy ‑ and at the same time the world’s greatest carbon consumer!

Asia has the largest number of internet users ‑ yet only 37 percent of the population have access to the internet, compared to 77 percent in Europe.

Over the past few decades, more people in Asia have been released from poverty than ever before ‑ yet Asia is still home to 60 percent of the world’s poor.

The same is true of urbanisation: the majority of the urban population lives in Asia ‑ yet the majority of Asians still live in rural areas.

Asia is home to 60 percent of the global population ‑ and this figure is rising, whereas population levels in Europe are shrinking. Yet that also means, for example, that India has to create around 10 million jobs each year to cater for the generations of people pouring into the labour market.

Ladies and gentlemen,

we need to sharpen and refine our view of Asia so that we are better able to understand this complexity and diversity and draw conclusions from it. To this end we need to undertake some radical adjustments in some areas. To dispense with some of our familiar ideas about Asia.

That is definitely the case with regard to business. For decades, we thought of Asia, and especially China, as the place to sell our goods, as cheap production sites. That is not fundamentally wrong ‑ Volkswagen, for example, now sells 40 percent of all its vehicles in China. But China has long been on track to become an exporter of technology. And rightly so. The country doesn’t merely want to be a market place, but also wants to guarantee its people growth, prosperity and increasing social security. But that can only happen if the country unleashes its own power. Other Asian countries are following the same route. They are partners, but also competitors.

That is also true in the field of politics. For a long time we focused particularly closely on China – which is without question a key player. But here, too, we need to become more aware of Asia’s variety and take account of this in our policies. For Asia is also home to

the world’s largest democracy, India;

the world’s largest Muslim democracy, Indonesia.

In the Asia‑Pacific region we are witnessing reforms moving in the direction of democracy but also fragile transformation processes and sometimes even setbacks.

This political diversity is unfolding in a region full of security policy challenges.

The situation on the Korean Peninsula, of course, is particularly critical. There, the North Korean regime is pursuing irresponsible and inhumane policies and exacerbating conflict.

A glance at arms spending in the Asia‑Pacific region also speaks volumes: it has increased by 62 percent in the last ten years. That can undoubtedly also be attributed to the fact that tensions arising from territorial disputes, among other things, are leading to mounting insecurity and unease in the region.

At the same time, Asia is developing its own regional network of institutions, the most prominent being ASEAN, the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.

Ladies and gentlemen,

This is, of course, just a rough sketch of the developments we are observing in Asia.

And we cannot now say precisely what consequences the interaction of political, economic, ecological and social developments in the region will have.

Neither can we predict exactly what global impact the rise of major Asian countries such as India and China will have.

Yet amid all uncertainties, one thing is clear: the dramatic upheaval that Asia is currently experiencing will have a significant effect on us in Germany and in Europe.

For us, that means that Asia is a crucial region for our future here at home. For it will no longer be possible to map out the ways to resolve our global challenges merely on the basis of the old structures from the period after the Second World War. Instead, the ways to resolve our global challenges pass through Asia.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is why I am convinced that we need to give our policy on Asia a new strategic focus.

For we cannot and do not wish just to observe the developments there and simply assume that we will automatically benefit from them ‑ as we have so often done in the past. After all, that isn’t a feasible policy! We want to get involved, take an active role and not leave it to others to determine how the dawning century of Asia will develop as far as we are concerned.

The new focus that we need cannot take the form of a straitjacket in view of the dynamics, uncertainties and multiple facets of Asia I have just mentioned. On the contrary, we will have to respond flexibly to change. And nonetheless follow clear guidelines ‑ based on our values and our interests.

And it is also clear that no European Member State ‑ not even a large one ‑ has enough power and influence in the long term to hold its own against the players in Asia and on the global stage.

Or to put it more positively, by joining forces we as Europeans have the best chance of promoting our interests in Asia ‑ together with our Asian partners.

Of course, there is stiff competition among Europeans particularly with regard to our trade relations with Asia. It would be naive to pretend otherwise. But at the same time there are enough interests that unite us in this area: for example, the quest for open markets, for the elimination of trade barriers, for rules-based free but fair trade.

I therefore don’t view Asia as a continent that threatens the coherence of the European Union. Even if there are some interesting developments. There is a group of 16 countries, some of which are European Union Member States, which cooperate with China. In Europe this group is known as “16 plus 1”. In China the group is called “1 plus 16”. That shows that we aren’t the only ones who have reason for self-confidence, others do too. We need to recognise that fact to be able to define common interests.

In the context of Asia particularly it is clear that we as Europeans are taken seriously when we act together. That should be an incentive for us always to anchor our activities in Asia in a European framework. Because we will only have a voice in the world of tomorrow if it is a single European voice.

***

Ladies and gentlemen,

In my opinion our policy on Asia should be guided by the following principles:

Firstly, establishing reliable regulations for free trade.

For you as businesspeople it goes without saying that a reliable and legally binding framework is what allows you to tap the massive potential of the Asian economies in cooperation with the region. The ties between our economies are already considerable: in Germany more than two million jobs depend directly on trade with Asia.

Admittedly, for a while it looked as if we Europeans had been left out in discussions on trade policy with Asia. But now the United States has decided to shelve the Trans‑Pacific Partnership, TPP. And instead just to do deals with individual states. That is not our policy! Rather, we want to place our trade relations with Asia on a reliable and permanent footing. It is also true that if one partner turns away, there are always others who can replace them. And I believe that is exactly what we should be doing now. Turning towards one another and not getting cold feet about free trade agreements. The European Member States should really be asking the EU Commissioner for Trade how many members of staff she needs and make them available to her so that we can make swifter progress on concluding free trade agreements with Asian countries.

In Germany we had an intensive debate on the free trade agreement with Canada. Just imagine if, in this situation, Germany had hindered the agreement and the European Union had pulled out. We would have become a laughing stock in the global economy and nobody would regard us as a serious partner. That just shows how important it was to conclude this agreement with Canada.

In spite of this, so far we only have a free trade agreement with Korea. We need to make progress in this area, we need to move forward much more quickly.

The European Union has already concluded negotiations with Singapore and with Viet Nam. We are eager to rapidly conclude talks with Japan. With Indonesia and India we are still in the early stages, but here, too, we want to make progress.

And last but not least, we quickly need the investment agreement with China, which will allow fair market access for companies on both sides. For that is what it’s about: free and fair trade! If that comes about, it could form the basis for progress on creating major joint free trade prospects for the European Union at the moment in which others are turning their backs on free trade.

Essentially, our policy on trade relations with Asia is also concerned with regulating globalisation. But not at the expense of the environment, not at the expense of workers’ rights, not at the expense of social security and cultural diversity.

Ladies and gentlemen,

It is always better to set standards ourselves than to wait for others to do so and then have to comply with their standards.

But it isn’t the case that we as Europeans only have to formulate our wishes and everything else falls into place. We also need to be prepared to stand up for our interests with “firm politeness”, if I may put it that way. A clear stance may initially make our discussion partners uneasy. But formulating interests is necessary if we are ultimately to find a balance of interests.

Secondly, ladies and gentlemen, our new focus should promote peaceful ways to resolve disputes in Asia.

For in Europe we can currently feel the shock waves that unilateral and violent attempts to demarcate new borders are sending across the entire continent.

We as Europeans therefore need to work particularly in connection with Asia to ensure that tensions are defused through dialogue and simmering conflicts are contained by means of international mechanisms and legal instruments such as courts of justice and arbitral tribunals.

We therefore encourage all players in the region not only to use these peaceful tools but also to recognise decisions made by independent international institutions.

We also want to help strengthen maritime security in Asia. This is important for shipping but also for the stability of the entire region.

We Europeans in particular have learned that bringing large and small countries together in a regional alliance is a successful recipe for peace and prosperity.

That is why we want, thirdly, to strengthen the regional institutions in Asia and at the same time expand Asian ownership in global institutions.

In Europe we have taken decades to establish such institutions ‑ the EU founding fathers had a vision of a united Europe, but we have only gradually developed the relevant instruments. Germany is willing to support Asian efforts and to play an active role, for instance as a privileged partner of ASEAN.

However, we also need to firmly anchor the Asian countries in our global structures. For without Asia, we will be unable to make any progress in the fight against climate change, poverty and starvation and for global equality.

But we also have to realise that the global order that was developed after 1945 is no longer taken for granted by all countries, particularly in Asia. I can understand that to some extent. After all, the world has changed over the last few decades. It is therefore perfectly normal that growing regions are articulating their desire for participation and co‑determination much more clearly, and have every right to do so.

We saw evidence of this at the G20 Foreign Ministers Meeting in Bonn last month, where six of the 20 participating states came from the Asia‑Pacific region.

I think this desire is something we have to embrace. In the United Nations, in formal and informal forums, we have to ensure that Asian states are involved ‑ and are also prepared to do their part to resolve global problems.

At the same time, we need to support newly emerging regional institutions. That is one reason why Germany, like many other European partners, has become a member of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank.

Fourthly, our new focus needs to be based on the universal values we promote and defend. Against the backdrop of the recalibration of the world, we are seeing not only conflicts of interests but also competing ideas of values and order. This has gone so far that some people ‑ I’m not revealing any secrets here ‑ declare the Western system of values obsolete. Some believe “Western values” means double standards and undeclared interests, and it seems they’re not always entirely mistaken.

We have to work to counter this trend by credibly disproving that belief through our own policies. We need to make it clear that these so-called “Western” values are not anchored in geography. Sometimes people who fight, not in the West but in other parts of the world, for democracy and freedom live out these values more convincingly than some Western states. And we have to make clear that they do not contradict a multipolar global order. On the contrary, that they are an integral part of our cooperation with the world. That is why I believe that we in Germany, in Europe need to uphold the universality of our values. We shouldn’t impose them on anyone. But neither should we hide or downplay them. We need to channel them into our partnership with Asia. Not aggressively, and certainly not in an arrogant or preachy fashion. But wisely and consistently.

***

Ladies and gentlemen,

Rules-based trade, a peaceful balance of interests, the strengthening of regional integration, more global responsibility for Asia and the promotion of universal values ‑ these are the hallmarks of the new approach to Germany’s, to Europe’s policy on Asia.

Indeed, not all of that is completely new. And why should it be? We can already build on a firm foundation of relations with Asia.

And it is also true that “more Asia” doesn’t mean that we will pay less attention to other world regions and other partners. Or that transatlantic relations will lose some of their significance ‑ that’s not the case! Neither is it a “pivot”, as the United States has described its shift towards Asia at times.

Rather, we want to take a more strategic policy approach and intensify our relations with Asia.

To this end we will also create the necessary structural framework. With 38 embassies and consulates, we already have a dense network in Asia. Now we at the Federal Foreign Office in Berlin also want to ensure that our approach is geared even better than before to Asia. Linguistic and cultural competence, as well as regional knowledge and experience are crucially important in our interactions with Asia. That is why we have decided to strengthen these competences at the Federal Foreign Office and to combine them in a new Directorate-General for Asia and the Pacific region.

Ladies and gentlemen,

Our policy on Asia will be successful if we manage to develop our partnerships ‑ in the Asia-Pacific region, in Germany and in Europe.

Ladies and gentlemen, we need a partnership with you, our business partners, here and in Asia. For at the end of the day, you are the ones who have a decisive impact on our relations. You are experiencing economic growth, which is still rapid, but have also been feeling the pressure of competition. And you are the ones grasping the opportunities that Asia offers.

And I hope that we, the Federal Government, are a good partner for you in this context. For example, by promoting strategically important major private sector projects abroad, particularly in Asia, over and above the well-known official export guarantee scheme. In the last few years we have significantly expanded the entire palette of foreign policy instruments.

And we need a closer partnership within Europe on the topic of Asia. For only a common European policy on Asia will find a voice.

It is clear to me that ultimately, we can only redefine our approach successfully in cooperation with our Asian partners. What I have just described is therefore first and foremost an offer of cooperation to our Asian friends and partners.

***

Ladies and gentlemen,

117 years ago, Hamburg’s merchants were not intimidated when they looked to Asia. Today, too, there is no reason to be so. For we have something to offer the world, and to Asia. And Asia has plenty to offer us. Let us embrace this challenge together ‑ as Germans and above all as Europeans.

Thank you very much.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Reden/2017/170324-BM-Ostasiatischer_Verein.html?nn=479796

In Italy, the Church has won the right to continue blessing schools during Easer

In Italy, Easter benediction of schools is legitimate. In the region of Emiglia-Romagna, an earlier sentence by the Regional Administrative Court (TAR) had cancelled the ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/in-italy-the-church-has-won-the-right-to-continue-blessing-schools-during-easer/

Foreign Minister Gabriel on United Kingdom giving notification of intention to withdraw from the EU

Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel issued the following statement today (29 March) on the United Kingdom’s letter giving notification of the intention to withdraw from the European Union:

Zusatzinformationen

A long nine‑month wait is now over. It is good that the state of limbo has finally ended, and that negotiations can begin soon.

The European Union’s 27 remaining member states have made good use of the time prior to official notification. We know what we want, we have a clear and detailed negotiating position, and we can give the European Commission a strong mandate.

Michel Barnier and his team at the Commission can count on our full support as they work to make sure our common aims are achieved during the negotiations. I will underscore this fact during my first visit to London as Foreign Minister, right at the beginning of next week.

The negotiations will certainly not be easy for both sides.

It is understandable that there may be hard feelings. For many, it may still be hard today to understand how anyone could believe themselves better off standing alone in these uncertain global times. However, all this must not be what our future relations will be built on.

Although it may sound like a hollow phrase, particularly when two individuals separate, “Let’s still be friends” is the right thing to say in this situation. The United Kingdom will remain our neighbour, and the EU will remain Britain’s neighbour. We need one another. We should do everything we can so that we continue to have close and amicable relations with London.

It is therefore good that the British side, too, has made clear it desires a strong European Union.

In Germany’s view, an essential guiding principle during the negotiations is that the EU 27 must remain together. We must not only preserve the great achievement of European integration, but also develop it further and prepare it for upcoming challenges.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170329_BM_Austritt.html?nn=479796

Two educational apps will help millions of refugee kids learn

The mobile games Antura and the Letters and Feed the Monster received top honors for EduApp4Syria, which leverages the widespread availability of smartphones to develop ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/two-educational-apps-will-help-millions-of-refugee-kids-learn/

Chancellor's Installation

The mobile games Antura and the Letters and Feed the Monster received top honors for EduApp4Syria, which leverages the widespread availability of smartphones to develop free, educational alternatives for millions of Syrian children forced out of school due to conflict.aaa

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PRPFQWJpdBM

Professor Phil Syrpis on the triggering of Article 50

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8JbvpTKgyRI

Dogs, Daughters and "Disinheritance" in the Supreme Court

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFd_ytyM4Xs

Federal Foreign Office on anti-corruption legislation in Ukraine

A Federal Foreign Office spokesperson today (28 March) issued the following statement on electronic income declarations in Ukraine:

Zusatzinformationen

The law signed yesterday, which requires representatives of civil society active in driving anti-corruption reforms to disclose their income and assets via e-declarations, is a step in the wrong direction.

The Ukrainian Government’s endeavours towards reform have earned it the respect of the international community and considerable recognition in society at home. The 2016 introduction of an e‑declaration system for public officials, in particular, is an important step.

This latest move, however, pushes public accountability into the background. Rather, it gives the impression that, counter to official anti-corruption policy, the targets are now the very people who are committed to ending corruption.

Hampering this civil-society engagement cannot be in Ukraine’s interest. We very much hope that the intimated revisions to the law will be made soon.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170328-UKR.html?nn=479796

Asylum-seekers in Germany have to have faith in luck

Refugee status in Germany is a game of roulette. The “yes” or “no” changes from region to region. A large-scale study from the University of Costanza ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/asylum-seekers-in-germany-have-to-have-faith-in-luck/

Youth hostels with a different twist

A residential complex where Syrian refugees live together with autochthonous residents in their own age group. “Startblok” is a project for residential integration created and ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/youth-hostels-with-a-different-twist/

Understanding the OCD Brain part 2: Animal research at Cambridge

A residential complex where Syrian refugees live together with autochthonous residents in their own age group. “Startblok” is a project for residential integration created and now being tested in experimental stage in Amsterdam, by the association Socius Wonen with the Dutch municipality.aaa

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A2zY12k1m2E

Understanding the OCD Brain part 3 : Inside a patient's head

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=txvVZxScCL8

Understanding the OCD Brain part 1: OCD and me

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YpCOAqxbfpA

Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel on the demonstrations in Belarus

Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel issued the following statement today (28 March) on the demonstrations in Belarus: 

Zusatzinformationen

The action taken by the Belarusian authorities against peaceful citizens demonstrating for important social issues sends a challenging signal. The people who took to the streets on Saturday and also in recent weeks have exercised a right that is indispensable for a pluralist society. Taking violent action against this is out of proportion. The same goes for the many arrests of protesters and journalists in their midst.

An open society must tolerate a plurality of opinions and be capable of withstanding a dialogue on critical questions. The responsible authorities must not only respect the right to peaceful demonstrations and the freedom of opinion, but must also ensure that people are able to exercise these rights.

Those who are still in administrative detention must be released as swiftly as possible. There must be no further unjustified arrests and sentences only because people say what they think.

We remain committed to good and thriving relations on the basis of common interests and our European values. However, there is no denying that these developments represent a setback.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170328_BM_BLR.html?nn=479796

The Unseen Boat Race 2 – The Middle

Nearly 80 countries worldwide still criminalise sexual orientation; in five the sentence can be death. Although such persecution is a ground for claiming asylum under EU law, official figures are not collected, making it difficult to assess numbers of LGBTIaaa

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pd4yeTx7FfU

German Government steps up international engagement in the dual system of vocational training

Conference on international vocational training paints positive picture/Vocational training abroad, however, often not granted due recognition

Many countries are struggling with the consequences of high youth unemployment and the shortage of skilled workers. Improving vocational education is therefore a political focus in these countries. The German vocational training system is regarded as a successful model throughout the world and the demand for cooperation with Germany is growing steadily.

The German Government’s strategy is to interlink the activities of the four federal ministries involved in international vocational training. This has been successful and the German Government now intends to further expand its long-standing engagement. This was the decision taken by the Federal Education Ministry, the Federal Foreign Office, the Federal Economics Ministry and the Federal Development Ministry at a conference held in Berlin today.

Each of the ministries involved has increased its own contribution to cooperation on vocational training during the last few years.

The Federal Ministry of Education and Research is gradually expanding its strategic partnerships with industrialised countries and emerging economies in order to foster training courses which can serve as a model as well as strategy projects between the social partners.

By promoting German chambers of commerce abroad, the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy has created a platform for the dual system of vocational training based on the German model.

The Federal Foreign Office organises round tables at numerous German missions abroad on coordinating the various activities, exchanging experiences as well as ensuring a unified strategy in host countries.

The Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development fosters the development of efficient vocational training systems in developing countries and emerging economies.

“We advise states both within and outside Europe on how vocational training can take place not only in schools but also in companies”, said Georg Schütte, State Secretary at the Education Ministry. “The aim is to establish the principle of in-company training in the education system of partner countries, to involve companies and to give them responsibility for training young people.”

Dirk Wiese, Parliamentary State Secretary at the Federal Ministry for Economic Affairs and Energy: “Industry needs qualified workers. That’s why we are getting our worldwide network of German chambers of commerce abroad involved in cooperation on vocational training. Through skills experts, we are helping German and local companies to provide demand-oriented in-company training for young people locally.”

Maria Böhmer, Minister of State at the Federal Foreign Office, stated: “The dual training principle offers great advantages. It raises training standards and boosts a country’s economic performance. The dual system opens up to young people new career options, a wider range of vocational prospects and a greater chance of social and economic participation. Through our engagement in vocational training, we are making an important contribution towards stabilising societies and cultures.”

Dr Friedrich Kitschelt, State Secretary at the Federal Ministry for Economic Cooperation and Development said: “Vocational training is an outstanding hallmark of our development policy. Well-trained workers, who master their professions and their lives with their hearts, minds and hands are key to sustainable development. We have again massively expanded vocational training during this legislative term and on average invest more than 75 million euros annually in the training of young people in developing countries. Around two million people have gained vocational qualifications during the last few years as a result of this. In Tunisia alone, 12,500 men and women were able to greatly improve their chances on the labour market. ”

International bodies are also attaching greater importance to promoting vocational training. It is anchored in several of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) contained in the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development. This issue is also receiving more attention at G20 summits. Germany shares its expertise and is taking on responsibility.

Many challenges remain: in many partner countries the inclusion of companies and the social partners in vocational training is still inadequate, as companies, chambers of commerce or trade unions are traditionally not involved in training young people. The German Government’s advisory strategy therefore places considerable importance on involving companies and the social partners in shaping vocational training.

Moreover, the image of vocational training is not good in many partner countries and often compares unfavourably to that of a university education. Even when politicians regard the dual system of vocational education as a good model, more has to be done to convince young people, parents and employers.

The German Government’s international engagement is supporting the efforts of partner countries to expand and improve their training systems as well as to enhance the employability of young people. It is thus helping to tackle the causes which lead people to leave their home regions or migrate.

Support is provided to German companies which operate internationally to help them train their skilled workforce locally. Finally, German vocational training also benefits from the experiences of other countries and through learning together gains impetus for the further development of the German system.

The German Government’s strategy ensures that German players involved in vocational training abroad speak with one voice. GOVET was set up as a central point of contact for international cooperation in vocational training and is much used both nationally and internationally.

Further information can be found online at:

external link, opens in new windowwww.govet.international

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170323-Duale_Ausbildung.html?nn=479796

LGBTI asylum seekers lack adequate support

Nearly 80 countries worldwide still criminalise sexual orientation; in five the sentence can be death. Although such persecution is a ground for claiming asylum under ...

from
http://www.west-info.eu/lgbti-asylum-seekers-lack-adequate-support/

Human Rights Commissioner Kofler on the floods in Peru

Bärbel Kofler, Federal Government Commissioner for Human Rights Policy and Humanitarian Aid at the Federal Foreign Office, issued the following statement today (25 March) on the severe flooding in Peru:

Zusatzinformationen

The major impact which climate change can already have on people is evident time and again. The images from Peru and the magnitude of the severe flooding speak a clear language. We grieve with the families and friends of the victims and we feel for the many people who have lost everything. We will not leave the Peruvian Government to deal with this difficult situation on its own. We have already taken action to provide assistance. I would like to commend all helpers from Peru and the rest of the world for the work they are doing in the current emergency.

Background information on the assistance being provided

Germany is making available bilateral assistance totalling up to 225,000 euros within the framework of an emergency aid project in cooperation with the German Red Cross (water supply and treatment; reconstruction of houses/roofs to provide protection from further rainfall). The German Embassy in Lima will initiate measures to the tune of 50,000 euros (emergency household kits for 700 people, equipment and material for local disaster relief/health care facilities) to help those affected.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170325_Kofler_Peru.html?nn=479796

Gernot Erler on the demonstrations in Belarus

Gernot Erler, the Coordinator for Intersocietal Cooperation with Russia, Central Asia and the Eastern Partnership Countries, issued the following statement today (24 March) on the large number of demonstrators who were arrested during socially motivated public protests:

Zusatzinformationen

Current developments in Belarus are extremely worrying. The freedom of public assembly and of expression are precious rights that must also be respected in Belarus.

Regarding the actions that Belarusian authorities have taken against peaceful demonstrators, the question arises as to their proportionality. It is time for the Belarusian Government to release, as soon as possible, all peaceful demonstrators, including the journalists, who are in administrative detention, in accordance with the demand made by the European Union on 21 March.

Moreover, I expect the Belarusian authorities to take a measured approach towards the Freedom Day demonstrations that have been announced for tomorrow, 25 March. This means there should be no use of force in connection with the demonstrations.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170324_Erler_Belarus.html?nn=479796

Rêve d'hiver à Berchtesgaden

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VYNBUncLMic

Speaking today (24 March) to the Funke-Mediengruppe, Foreign Minister Gabriel said:

Speaking today (24 March) to the Funke-Mediengruppe, Foreign Minister Gabriel said:

Zusatzinformationen

“We are currently seeing crises, upheavals and new dynamics in many areas of international policy. One has the impression that the world is being measured anew – and that everyone is using his own measure. One thing, though, is clear: Asia’s emerging economies will occupy a key position in this recalibration of the world.

I am therefore convinced that we need to redefine our policy on Asia. We must intensify our relations with Asia and shape them more strategically in order to do even greater justice to the ever-growing importance of this region, with its population of over four billion and its rapidly expanding markets.

That is why I have decided to establish the first ever Asia Directorate-General at the Federal Foreign Office. The aim is to harness our regional competences more effectively and develop them further. The current structures still reflect in part the bipolar, Cold War global order. It is high time they were adapted to take account of Asia’s increasing importance.

However, that can only be a first step. It is important that Asia, as a key region for the future, becomes even more firmly established in our minds and in our day-to-day work – at the Federal Foreign Office, in the Federal Government, and in the EU.

Today more than ever, Europe needs reliable partners in the world. With that in mind, we want to further expand our existing partnerships in Asia and push forward on new agreements. We need reliable rules for free and fair trade which creates jobs both here and in Asia and which respects social standards. Furthermore, we want to do even more for conflict prevention in the region, as well as to strengthen regional institutions and to promote multilateralism.

This policy realignment must be flexible enough to take account of all facets of this complex continent. At the same time, it must be firmly oriented to the values to which we adhere and which we wish to defend.

More and more frequently, the paths to solutions to the global issues facing us lead through Asia. We therefore need openness and cooperation.”

Background information:

With 38 embassies and consulates, we already have a dense network in Asia. Now we want to ensure that our structures and organisation in Berlin are geared even better than before to Asia as an important focus of our foreign policy.

The aims are to ensure greater coherence in our policy on Asia through improved coordination, to expand our contacts with Asian partners at all levels, and to enhance our competence with an eye to this important continent.

The establishment of the Asia Directorate-General is to be backed up with linguistic and cultural training programmes, as well as initiatives to enhance regional expertise and cross-sectoral knowledge of the region. We also want to promote the creation of flexible pools of experts and to foster exchange on the subject of Asia both among the ministries here in Germany and within the EU.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170324_BM_Asien.html?nn=479796

Curious Objects: Sumerian Clay Tablet

Speaking today (24 March) to the Funke-Mediengruppe, Foreign Minister Gabriel said:

Speaking today (24 March) to the Funke-Mediengruppe, Foreign Minister Gabriel said:

Zusatzinformationen

“We are currently seeing crises, upheavals and new dynamics in many areas of international policy. One has the impression that the world is being measured anew – and that everyone is using his own measure. One thing, though, is clear: Asia’s emerging economies will occupy a key position in this recalibration of the world.

I am therefore convinced that we need to redefine our policy on Asia. We must intensify our relations with Asia and shape them more strategically in order to do even greater justice to the ever-growing importance of this region, with its population of over four billion and its rapidly expanding markets.

That is why I have decided to establish the first ever Asia Directorate-General at the Federal Foreign Office. The aim is to harness our regional competences more effectively and develop them further. The current structures still reflect in part the bipolar, Cold War global order. It is high time they were adapted to take account of Asia’s increasing importance.

However, that can only be a first step. It is important that Asia, as a key region for the future, becomes even more firmly established in our minds and in our day-to-day work – at the Federal Foreign Office, in the Federal Government, and in the EU.

Today more than ever, Europe needs reliable partners in the world. With that in mind, we want to further expand our existing partnerships in Asia and push forward on new agreements. We need reliable rules for free and fair trade which creates jobs both here and in Asia and which respects social standards. Furthermore, we want to do even more for conflict prevention in the region, as well as to strengthen regional institutions and to promote multilateralism.

This policy realignment must be flexible enough to take account of all facets of this complex continent. At the same time, it must be firmly oriented to the values to which we adhere and which we wish to defend.

More and more frequently, the paths to solutions to the global issues facing us lead through Asia. We therefore need openness and cooperation.”

Background information:

With 38 embassies and consulates, we already have a dense network in Asia. Now we want to ensure that our structures and organisation in Berlin are geared even better than before to Asia as an important focus of our foreign policy.

The aims are to ensure greater coherence in our policy on Asia through improved coordination, to expand our contacts with Asian partners at all levels, and to enhance our competence with an eye to this important continent.

The establishment of the Asia Directorate-General is to be backed up with linguistic and cultural training programmes, as well as initiatives to enhance regional expertise and cross-sectoral knowledge of the region. We also want to promote the creation of flexible pools of experts and to foster exchange on the subject of Asia both among the ministries here in Germany and within the EU.

from
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HO57WfOUe4s

Foreign Minister Gabriel presents the case for the German steel industry in dispute with the United States

Foreign Minister Gabriel writes to European Commissioner Malmström.

Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel today (24 March) wrote a letter to the European Commissioner for Trade Cecilia Malmström presenting the case that the Commission unequivocally call upon the US Administration in its current talks to respect WTO regulations in force.

In the United States, an anti-dumping investigation is currently underway in the steel sector affecting, inter alia, the German companies Salzgitter AG (Lower Saxony) and Dillinger Hütte (Saarland).

“There is reason to fear that the American rivals of these two companies are hoping that the new US Administration could be prepared to allow US companies to engage in unfair dumping even if this violates international law. We Europeans must not accept this,” Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel explained. At the same time, he called for the companies to be self-confident. “The Dilllinger Hütte and Salzgitter AG steelworkers produce high quality steel and have nothing to fear from fair competition. Politics has the job, if necessary, of confidently presenting the case for this fairness and to retain jobs and of fighting side by side with the steelworkers,” as Gabriel pointed out.

According to the two companies involved, the investigation led by the US Department of Commerce wrongly accuses European companies of dumping when they sell steel products in the United States. The EU and Germany are advocating that the US Administration apply WTO regulations when calculating anti-dumping duties. Calculation methods which run counter to WTO agreements could potentially lead to the companies paying higher duties and thus facing huge competitive disadvantages internationally. The Federal Government has thus presented the case at various levels of the US Administration that recognised, fair rules be applied in the investigation. The investigation due to be decided soon will be the first anti-dumping investigation in the steel sector concluded by the new US Administration.

“That is why I believe it to be extremely important to take a clear position now to prevent starting the transatlantic business dialogue with the new US Administration with a negative and unjustified decision,” as Federal Foreign Minister Gabriel wrote to Malmström.

from
http://www.auswaertiges-amt.de/EN/Infoservice/Presse/Meldungen/2017/170324-Stahlindustrie.html?nn=479796