Connect with us

World

Analysis: How the EU’s gas addiction is helping Russia’s war machine

Published

on

It’s been greater than a month since Russia launched its invasion of Ukraine and the European Union is taking a second to look again on the most frantic month in its historical past.

Watching a warfare unfold on the EU’s doorstep, Brussels unleashed a raft of sanctions in contrast to something the bloc had ever imposed.

If previous conflicts had been characterised by torpid motion, inner trifles and factionalism, Russia’s warfare in Ukraine has injected the EU with a renewed spirit of willpower, ironclad unity and unheard-of pace.

The 27 international locations have punished nearly each possible sector of the Russian economic system: the central financial institution, the monetary system, the plane business, semiconductors, luxurious items, state-owned media – all of them have fallen sufferer to the EU’s retaliation.

The ache from the far-reaching measures is already being felt inside Russia: Western corporations have left the nation en masse, inflation has soared to 12.5%, international reserves have turned inaccessible and the prospect of a sovereign default looms giant over the entire nation.

Advertisement

However the Kremlin, unfazed by worldwide condemnation, continues its navy marketing campaign, even when the advance has largely stalled on the bottom and Ukrainian forces battle to push the invading military out. For the EU, the stagnation provides an opportunity to catch its breath and take inventory.

The respite comes after a failed try and slap an embargo on Russian oil merchandise, one in all Moscow’s most worthwhile sources of income. The proposed punishment, already launched by america, proved an excessive amount of to bear for some oil-dependent EU international locations, who feared the potential disruption from such a radical transfer would inevitably outweigh all its doable advantages.

With the power ban off the desk, at the very least in the intervening time, the EU’s response is getting into a reflective part to evaluate the sensible success of its huge catalogue of sanctions.

Following a two-day assembly in Brussels, whose record of visitors featured none apart from US President Joe Biden, EU leaders shunned any form of new announcement and easily vowed to “shut loopholes” and “goal precise and doable circumvention” of the measures to this point imposed.

“Don’t neglect that the sanctions bundle in place for the time being is by far the hardest bundle I’ve seen in my life as a politician,” mentioned Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte final week.

Advertisement

“If we need to have new sanctions, we’d like them to have them as a response to one thing,” mentioned his Luxembourg counterpart, Xavier Bettel, describing the present stage of the warfare because the “establishment.”

The absence of novelty stood in stark distinction with the scathing phrases of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy, who name-checked EU leaders in a gloves-off digital tackle.

“As soon as and for all. You must determine for your self who you might be with,” Zelenskyy informed Viktor Orbán, the Hungarian Prime Minister, who had come ahead to oppose the power ban.

Even when Zelenskyy’s plea was not sufficient to sway EU leaders, who’ve grown used to the president’s impassioned speeches, it however underscored the dilemma surrounding the bloc at this explicit level of the battle: Can the EU afford to take a seat again and await sanctions to kick in?

Ready for the fifth bundle

All through the battle, Brussels has numbered every set of sanctions to be able to emphasise its amount and accumulative character. The newest raft, billed because the “fourth”, established, amongst different measures, an export ban on EU-made luxurious items value greater than €300 and the elimination of Russia’s most-favoured nation standing below the World Commerce Group.

Advertisement

The European Fee confirmed to Euronews that “nothing new is within the pipeline” for a fifth bundle however the govt is ready to current member states with choices based on the warfare’s evolution.

Nonetheless, the spokesperson famous, the introduction of extra sanctions just isn’t depending on a particular growth on the bottom and is as much as member states to determine in the event that they need to take issues up a notch.

Russia’s use of organic and chemical weapons in opposition to Ukrainians could be a “complete game-changer” that may require a unprecedented response not solely from the EU but additionally from NATO, the official mentioned.

In the interim, the EU is concentrated on tightening current penalties, fine-tuning their implementation and stopping blacklisted people and corporations from discovering a approach out.

The wait-and-see strategy has been welcomed in some international locations, like Germany and the Netherlands, which have deep commercials hyperlinks with Russia and want extra time to adapt to the brand new regular, however it has additionally raised issues about sanctions fatigue that would give Putin short-term respiration area.

Advertisement

“It’s key that these sanctions are absolutely efficient by proscribing doable circumventions. Loopholes should be closed instantly,” mentioned David McAllister, a German MEP who chairs the European Parliament’s committee on international affairs, in a press release to Euronews.

“Additional restrictive measures stay on the desk, relying on the Kremlin’s actions.”

His colleague Nathalie Loiseau, a French MEP from Renew Europe who’s an in depth affiliate of President Emmanuel Macron, disagreed with the evaluation, arguing the “unthinkable” degree of destruction and civilian loss of life toll justify placing “extra stress on Russia to cease this brutal warfare.”

“I don’t suppose we should always wait to set off extra sanctions,” Loiseau informed Euronews. “I favour a complete and short-term ban on Russian oil and coal to be able to cease funding the warfare.”

Her feedback echoed these of Gabrielius Landsbergis, Lithuania’s international affairs minister, who not too long ago mentioned Europe can’t “tire of imposing sanctions” and “give an impression of fatigue.”

Advertisement

Though the Fee has refused to supply any particular particulars for a possible filth bundle, choices may embrace proscribing EU entry to Russian ships, increasing {the catalogue} of banned exports, enlarging the record of sanctioned oligarchs and expelling extra Russian banks from the SWIFT system.

Regardless of grabbing headlines world wide, the SWIFT ban was thought of disappointing upon its launch as a result of it solely focused seven banks and conspicuously ignored Russia’s first and third largest establishments, Sberbank and Gazprombank, resulting from their position dealing with energy-related transactions.

‘Bankrolling either side of the battle’

In Brussels and throughout the opposite capitals, officers insist the EU’s arsenal of sanctions remains to be broad and wealthy and Europeans ought to really feel pleased with the sweeping response in opposition to Vladimir Putin.

However because the warfare enters its second month, the all-important query of power has steadily taken over the entire debate, overshadowing previous sanctions and capturing all the eye.

“Russia is committing critical and horrible crimes in opposition to harmless civilians in Ukraine day by day,” Urmas Paet, an Estonian MEP, informed Euronews. “So long as we’re shopping for power from Russia, we’re serving to the Russian warfare machine to commit these atrocities.”

Advertisement

Because the invasion of Ukraine started on 24 February, the EU has spent over €21 billion on Russian fossil fuels, together with €13 billion on gasoline, based on a monitoring instrument arrange by the Centre for Analysis on Vitality and Clear Air (CREA), an unbiased analysis organisation.

The bloc’s refusal to focus on the power sector, which brings over 40% of Russia’s federal finances income, is hindering the effectiveness of all the opposite “large” sanctions, as Brussels calls them, and providing Putin a much-needed lifeline to hold on along with his marketing campaign.

“In that sense, EU sanctions usually are not producing the short-term results which are commensurate with the huge violence and devastation that the Russian military is exacting in Ukraine,” says Steven Blockmans, director of analysis on the Centre for European Coverage Research (CEPS).

The obtrusive exemption has changed into a headache for the EU, notably after the US, a rustic with a better diploma of self-reliance, introduced a complete ban on Russian power imports.

Blockmans believes the 27 nonetheless have room to manoeuvre and may improve coordination with allies to ensure the sanctions in place change into bulletproof and inescapable. However, he notes, the bloc finds itself in a contradictory place, “bankrolling either side of the battle” by shopping for gasoline to Moscow and sending weapons to Kyiv.

Advertisement

EU leaders have change into painfully conscious of their complicit actions and are nudging one another to take drastic measures and reduce the Kremlin’s faucet. However political consensus, essential within the bloc to approve new sanctions, is just not there and appears unlikely to materialise so long as the warfare is caught in an deadlock.

“The fundamental rule is that sanctions should have a a lot larger affect on the Russian aspect than on the European aspect. We do not wage warfare on ourselves,” mentioned Belgian Prime Minister Alexander De Croo.

Weighing closely on capitals is the persisting energy crunch that has stricken the continent since late summer season. Gasoline costs have skyrocketed over a mismatch between provide and demand, bringing shoppers and corporations impossibly excessive payments. The warfare has solely served to exacerbate the disaster and made some leaders cautious of toying with delicate power provides.

However the invasion has additionally laid naked the EU’s nice vulnerability: its deep, expensive dependency on Russian fossil fuels. The Fee has unveiled an bold roadmap to slash imports of Russian gasoline by two thirds earlier than the tip of the 12 months, though concrete particulars are nonetheless being thrashed out.

The plans current the EU with a novel probability of inflicting nice ache on the Russian state and crippling the costly navy equipment. A lot of the gasoline that Russia sends to the bloc comes through pipeline, which signifies that, if the EU begins to significantly reduce off its purchases, the important thing infrastructure might be rendered out of date and Moscow might be unable to search out a direct substitute to fill the entire hole.

Advertisement

“Even when [the roadmap] just isn’t a sanction,” Blockmans mentioned, “within the medium time period, it’s most likely extra devastating than the present sanctions, which might be finally lifted.”

Continue Reading
Advertisement
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

World

Jeff Goldblum Is Zeus in KAOS: Get Release Date for Greek Mythology Riff

Published

on

Jeff Goldblum Is Zeus in KAOS: Get Release Date for Greek Mythology Riff


‘KAOS’ Season 1 Cast, Release Date, Trailer — Jeff Goldblum Is Zeus



Advertisement






















Advertisement





















Advertisement



Advertisement

ad


Advertisement




Advertisement




Quantcast



Advertisement
Continue Reading

World

ISIS remains global threat a decade after declaring caliphate, US military official says

Published

on

ISIS remains global threat a decade after declaring caliphate, US military official says
  • A decade after declaring its caliphate, ISIS no longer controls any land, has lost many leaders, and is mostly out of the news.
  • The group continues to recruit members and conduct deadly attacks globally, including recent operations in Iran and Russia.
  • ISIS sleeper cells in Syria and Iraq continue to attack government forces and U.S.-backed Syrian fighters.

A decade after the Islamic State militant group declared its caliphate in large parts of Iraq and Syria, the extremists no longer control any land, have lost many prominent leaders and are mostly out of the world news headlines.

Still, the group continues to recruit members and claim responsibility for deadly attacks around the world, including lethal operations in Iran and Russia earlier this year that left scores dead. Its sleeper cells in Syria and Iraq still carry out attacks against government forces in both countries as well as U.S.-backed Syrian fighters, at a time when Iraq’s government is negotiating with Washington over a possible withdrawal of U.S. troops.

The group that once attracted tens of thousands of fighters and supporters from around the world to come to Syria and Iraq, and at its peak ruled an area half the size of the United Kingdom was notorious for its brutality. It beheaded civilians, slaughtered 1,700 captured Iraqi soldiers in a short period, and enslaved and raped thousands of women from the Yazidi community, one of Iraq’s oldest religious minorities.

AUTHORITIES NAB 8 SUSPECTED TERRORISTS WITH TIES TO ISIS IN MULTI-CITY STING OPERATION

“Daesh remains a threat to international security,” U.S. Army Maj. Gen. J.B. Vowell, the commanding general of Combined Joint Task Force — Operation Inherent Resolve, said in comments sent to The Associated Press. Daesh is the Arabic acronym for the Islamic State group.

Advertisement

Iraqi Army soldiers celebrate as they hold a flag of the Islamic State group they captured during a military operation to regain control of a village outside Mosul, Iraq, on Nov. 29, 2016. Ten years after the Islamic State group declared its caliphate in large parts of Iraq and Syria, the extremists now control no land, have lost many prominent founding leaders and are mostly away from the world news headlines. (AP Photo/Hadi Mizban, File)

“We maintain our intensity and resolve to combat and destroy any remnants of groups that share Daesh ideology,” Vowell said.

In recent years, the group’s branches have gained strength around the world, mainly in Africa and Afghanistan, but its leadership is believed to be in Syria. The four leaders of the group who have been killed since 2019 were all hunted down in Syria.

In 2013, Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, then the leader of the Islamic State in Iraq group, which was formed as an offshoot of al-Qaida, distanced himself from the al-Qaida global network and clashed with its branch in Syria, then known as the Nusra Front. The group renamed itself the Islamic State in Iraq and the Levant and launched a military campaign during which it captured large parts of Syria and Iraq.

TERROR FEARS MOUNT AFTER ARRESTS OF BORDER CROSSERS LINKED TO ISIS: ‘WE’RE HEADED FOR ANOTHER 9/11’

Advertisement

In early June 2014, the group captured the northern Iraqi city of Mosul, Iraq’s second largest, as the Iraqi army collapsed. Later that month, it opened the border between areas it controlled in Syria and Iraq.

On June 29, 2014, al-Baghdadi appeared as a black-robed figure to deliver a sermon from the pulpit of Mosul’s Great Mosque of al-Nuri in which he declared a caliphate and urged Muslims around the world to swear allegiance to it and obey him as its leader. Since then, the group has identified itself as the Islamic State.

“Al-Baghdadi’s sermon — an extension of the extremist ideology of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi — continue to inspire ISIS members globally,” said retired U.S. Army officer Myles B. Caggins III, senior nonresident fellow at the New Lines Institute and former spokesman for the Global Coalition to Defeat ISIS. He was referring to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, al-Qaida’s leader in Iraq who was killed in a U.S. strike in 2006.

From the self-declared caliphate, the group planned deadly attacks around the world and carried out brutal killings, including the beheading of Western journalists, setting a Jordanian pilot on fire while locked inside a cage days after his fighter jet was shot down, and drowning opponents in pools after locking them in giant metal cages.

A coalition of more than 80 countries, led by the United States, was formed to fight IS and a decade , the alliance continues to carry out raids against the militants’ hideouts in Syria and Iraq.

Advertisement
Iraqi Army soldiers

Iraqi Army soldiers secure streets in a village recently liberated from Islamic State militants outside Mosul, Iraq, on Dec. 1, 2016. (AP Photo/Hadi Mizban, File)

The war against IS officially ended in March 2019, when U.S.-backed and Kurdish-led fighters of the Syrian Democratic Forces captured the eastern Syrian town of Baghouz, which was the last sliver of land the extremists controlled.

Before the loss of Baghouz, IS was defeated in Iraq in July 2017, when Iraqi forces captured the northern city of Mosul. Three months later, IS suffered a major blow when SDF captured the Syrian northern city of Raqqa, which was the group’s de-facto capital.

The United Nations says the group still has between 5,000 and 7,000 fighters in Syria and Iraq.

Still, at least in Iraq, government and military officials have asserted that the group is too weak to stage a comeback.

“It is not possible for (IS) to claim a caliphate once again. They don’t have the command or control capabilities to do so,” Iraqi army Maj. Gen. Tahseen al-Khafaji told the AP at the headquarters of the Joint Special Operations Command in Baghdad, where Iraqi officers and officials from the U.S.-led coalition supervise operations against the extremists.

Advertisement

BIDEN’S ‘PRE-9/11 POSTURE’ TO BLAME FOR ISIS MIGRANTS SLIPPING THROUGH CRACKS: EXPERT

The command, which was formed to lead operations against the group starting weeks after the caliphate was declared, remains active.

Al-Khafaji said that IS is now made up of sleeper cells in caves and the desert in remote areas, as Iraqi security forces keep them on the run. During the first five months of the year, he said, Iraqi forces conducted 35 airstrikes against IS and killed 51 of its members.

Also at the headquarters, Sabah al-Noman of the Iraqi Counter Terrorism Service said that having lost its hold on Iraq, the militant group is focused mostly on Africa, especially the Sahel region, to try to get a foothold there.

Smoke rises as Iraq's elite counterterrorism forces fight against Islamic State militants

Smoke rises as Iraq’s elite counterterrorism forces fight against Islamic State militants to regain control of al-Bakr neighborhood in Mosul, Iraq, on Dec. 12, 2016. (AP Photo/Hadi Mizban, File)

“It is not possible for them to take control of a village, let alone an Iraqi city,” he said. He added that the U.S.-led coalition continues to carry out reconnaissance and surveillance in order to provide Iraqi forces with intelligence, and the security forces “deal with this information directly.”

Advertisement

Although IS appears to be under control in Iraq, it has killed dozens of government forces and SDF fighters over the past several months in Syria.

“Daesh terrorist cells continue in their terrorist operations,” SDF spokesman Siamand Ali said. “They are present on the ground and are working at levels higher than those of previous years.”

In northeast Syria, SDF fighters guard around 10,000 captured IS fighters in around two dozen detention facilities — including 2,000 foreigners whose home countries have refused to repatriate them.

The SDF also oversees about 33,000 family members of suspected IS fighters, mostly women and children in the heavily-guarded al-Hol camp, which is seen as a breeding center for future extremists.

Advertisement

Their worst attack since the group’s defeat occurred in January 2022, when the extremists attacked the Gweiran Prison, or al-Sinaa — a Kurdish-run facility in Syria’s northeast holding thousands of IS militants. The attack led to 10 days of fighting between SDF fighters and IS militants that left nearly 500 dead on both sides, before the SDF brought the situation under control.

Caggins said that the U.S.-led coalition’s “military advice and assistance” to Iraq Security Forces, Kurdish Iraqi fighters and the SDF “is essential to maintain dominance against ISIS remnants as well as securing more than 10,000 ISIS detainees at makeshift jails and camps in Syria.”

Continue Reading

World

Tension and stand-offs as South Africa struggles to launch coalition gov’t

Published

on

Tension and stand-offs as South Africa struggles to launch coalition gov’t

Johannesburg, South Africa – Nearly a month since landmark national elections saw the African National Congress (ANC) lose its majority for the first time, forcing it to form a coalition to govern South Africa, a deadlock stemming from the allocation of cabinet positions threatened to topple the whole house of cards.

Tense negotiations, mainly between the ANC and the Democratic Alliance (DA), the two biggest parties in the coalition, led to delays this week of President Cyril Ramaphosa announcing his cabinet in the Government of National Unity (GNU).

Fears were heightened and markets reacted badly to news of DA leader John Steenhuisen threatening to withdraw from the coalition amid leaks of letters between the two parties’ leaders showing them at loggerheads.

But by Friday, as Ramaphosa was due to meet Steenhuisen, the political bartering that characterised the last two weeks of talks showed signs of an imminent agreement.

The rand – which fell amid news of the discord – strengthened following indications that a cabinet announcement was pending and that the government would include the market-friendly, right-leaning DA.

Advertisement

Political analyst Khaya Sithole said markets were in favour of the DA being part of the GNU – a multiparty coalition – because the party is unlikely to demand radical shifts in economic policy.

“A GNU with the DA gives the perception that there will be continuity in economic policy because the ANC will maintain the trajectory it was on,” Sithole told Al Jazeera.

He said the DA – which holds 87 parliamentary seats compared with the ANC’s 159 – would not demand new policies or have sufficient political muscle to push through radical changes.

“Markets are buying into the continuation of government policies and programmes,” Sithole said, adding that, “an ANC partnership with the DA does not upend the script.”

He said markets adversely reacted to fears that the DA may pull out of the GNU because the alternative – a possible allegiance between the ANC, the left-wing Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) and other smaller parties – represented uncertainty.

Advertisement
ANC supporters hold placards protesting against partnering with the DA [Siphiwe Sibeko/Reuters]

Leaked letters

The negotiations between parties in the GNU over cabinet positions were marked by a flurry of meetings and correspondence between Ramaphosa and party leaders.

During talks, the DA’s demands for specific powerful ministerial positions prompted a stern warning by Ramaphosa in a letter, leaked to the media, that the “DA has jeopardised the foundation of setting up a Government of National Unity by moving the goalposts”.

The DA began negotiations with a long list of demands which included 11 cabinet minister posts, a dozen deputy minister positions – including the deputy finance post – and other changes in governance legislation.

The party first demanded the deputy president position but conceded when ANC negotiators pushed back.

The ANC labelled the initial demands from the DA as “outrageous” and sought to negotiate with other parties as a backup.

Advertisement

A subsequent meeting between Ramaphosa and Steenhuisen appeared to have settled differences and calmed tensions.

However, after agreeing to six positions in the cabinet, the DA dug in.

Steenhuisen – in a letter to Ramaphosa – threatened to withdraw from their coalition agreement if Ramaphosa did not award the party eight ministerial positions.

“On a pure proportional basis, out of a Cabinet of 30, the DA’s share of support within the GNU translates to nine positions rather than the six that are currently on the table. Similarly, we cannot see the rationale for reducing the number of DA Deputy Ministries to only four,” Steenhuisen said in a letter to Ramaphosa dated June 24.

John Steenhuisen
Democratic Alliance (DA) party leader John Steenhuisen [Nic Bothma/Reuters]

Ramaphosa took a hardline response, giving the DA a take-it or leave-it offer, after refusing to increase the number of positions offered to the DA.

“I must advise that we are continuing to hold discussions with other parties over the portfolios they could occupy as we seek to finalise the agreement on the GNU. I need to advise that the task of setting up government is quite urgent as we cannot continue with this paralysis,” Ramaphosa wrote in a letter dated June 25 that was leaked to the media.

Advertisement

The DA has 21 percent of electoral support compared with the ANC’s 40 percent. The other parties who have signed a declaration of intent make up 8.5 percent of combined electoral support.

‘Almost done’

On Friday, media reports quoting DA officials said the party is still committed to working out a deal with Ramaphosa.

Meanwhile, Fikile Mbalula, the ANC secretary-general, posted on X that parties were “almost done with GNU discussions … It will be done as promised.”

Also on Friday, Ramaphosa announced that the opening of the new parliament would take place on July 18.

Advertisement

The 71-year-old leader was re-elected for a second full term after the ANC’s unprecedented loss of support in the May 29 election – the first time since the end of apartheid in 1994 that the party got less than a 50 percent majority.

In the aftermath, the ANC opted to form a coalition government. But they decided against a firm grand coalition with the DA, and opened up negotiations with the smaller parties represented in government to be part of the GNU.

The GNU now comprises 10 parties, including the nationalist Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP), right-wing populist Patriotic Alliance (PA), and the Pan Africanist Congress (PAC), among others.

Political analyst and commentator Lukhona Mnguni said the DA’s demands proved that their participation in government alongside the ANC remained “an absolute gamble for them”.

“They want enough insulation from the ANC and they want to prove that they have enough isolation from the ANC,” Mnguni told Al Jazeera.

Advertisement

He said the DA fears being swallowed by the ANC in the GNU and want to assert themselves despite the ANC having twice as much support as they have.

“The fight is about their political interest as political parties and how it affects their standing in the 2029 elections,” he said.

‘Anxieties’ and differing interests

Mnguni said the back and forth gave an indication of the “anxieties” the DA had about being part of government with the ANC and other smaller parties.

While the DA preferred a grand coalition with the ANC to co-govern the country, the ANC has insisted on bringing smaller parties into a unity government.

Following its list of demands, ANC leaders accused the DA of negotiating in bad faith and pushed back on all fronts.

Advertisement

“The ANC’s actions show vulnerability and assertiveness. The two could be a dangerous combination because it can create a deadlock,” Mnguni noted.

During a final series of talks between Ramaphosa and Steenhuisen, the latter insisted that the DA be awarded the Department of Trade, Industry and Competition.

That ministry is key in developing economic policy and oversees the government’s transformation efforts, as well as efforts to break monopolies.

The DA, a largely white-led party, is not in support of all the ANC’s Black empowerment programmes.

The party’s demand for the trade and industry position raised the ire of ANC leaders who insisted that the DA were overplaying their hand in negotiations.

Advertisement

Mnguni said the DA sought to ensure they had influence in the executive.

“Both parties could back out,” he said when asked about the possibility of the DA walking out of the GNU.

Continue Reading

Trending