Connect with us

World

Commissioner mutiny grows over von der Leyen's controversial hire

Published

on

Commissioner mutiny grows over von der Leyen's controversial hire

Four senior lieutenants aren’t happy on hearing that fellow CDU member Markus Pieper starts his taxpayer-funded duties next week

ADVERTISEMENT

A rebellion by senior EU commissioners concerning a controversial hire made by President Ursula von der Leyen shows no sign of abating, as Markus Pieper prepares to start his lucrative post next week.

MEPs and activists have called for von der Leyen to rethink the appointment of Pieper, a member of her own German Christian Democrat party, who’s now expected to take up duties in his €17,000-per-month job of Envoy for Small and Medium Sized Businesses next week.

They were joined by commissioners Josep Borrell, Thierry Breton, Paolo Gentiloni and Nicolas Schmit — who have raised concerns over transparency and collective decision-making, in a 27 March letter previously reported exclusively by Euronews.

The quartet appear unimpressed by an 8 April response to their letter from EU Human Resources Commissioner Johannes Hahn, seen by Euronews, which states that the decision to hire Pieper was “within the usual margin of discretion for such senior appointments”.

“This was not the point we raised in our letter,” said the four commissioners in a response also seen by Euronews, reiterating their request to discuss how to respond to European Parliament queries on the matter.

Advertisement

The commissioners’ letter — which is, pointedly, addressed to von der Leyen rather than Hahn, and appears to have been sent on 8 April immediately after receiving Hahn’s response — also says that “a broader discussion is warranted on the transparency and the collegiality of the process surrounding high-level appointments in the Commission.”

Commissioners are worried von der Leyen, who is bidding for a second term in office, is hijacking the supposed collective responsibility of the EU executive’s highest decision making body, given that she tabled the Pieper appointment for a day on which Borrell and Breton were set to be absent on official business.

Those concerned about von der Leyen’s objectivity also cite her recently naming Sauli Niinistö, the former Finnish President who’s also a fellow member of the European People’s Party, to write a report on defence policy.

But Hahn said the Pieper appointment “is fully in line with the Commission’s rules and established practice … all procedural requirements were fully observed.”

“The purpose of each stage is to ensure that the best qualified candidates pass to the next one; there is no ranking at the final stage based on the previous stages,” Hahn added, addressing rumours that Pieper had been outperformed by two other female candidates before being interviewed by von der Leyen’s own chief of staff.

Advertisement

Pieper “signed his employment contract on 31 March and he is expected to take up duties on 16 April 2024,” Hahn said.

On 4 April, European Commission Chief Spokesperson Eric Mamer told reporters that his understanding was that no contract had yet been signed, but corrected his error the following day.

A European Parliamentary amendment calling for the appointment to be rescinded is scheduled to be debated on Wednesday, and MEPs appear unhappy with the rushing through of the apparent case of political favouritism.

“This does not look good at all,” Daniel Freund (Germany/Greens) told Euronews in a statement, saying that the 16 April start date suggested von der Leyen was “pushing this through in expedited procedure.”

“Jobs in the Commission have to be filled based on merit,” Freund added. “If that wasn’t the case here, the whole procedure has to be repeated.”

Advertisement

One other candidate, MEP Martina Dlabajová (Czechia, Renew) has also raised a formal complaint with the Commission over the process, her office confirmed.

Asked if von der Leyen would hold the debate requested by the four Commissioners, a Commission spokesperson said it could be addressed under any other business, and confirmed the 16 April start date.

Continue Reading
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

Social media operation linked to Iran manipulated public through fake Irish and Scottish profiles

Published

on

Researchers say that social media accounts affiliated with Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps posed as Scottish and Irish nationals in order to cultivate their following, before switching their narrative to spread pro-Iranian discourse online.

Continue Reading

World

Trump Says Iran Has Agreed to Not Have a Nuclear Weapon

Published

on

Trump Says Iran Has Agreed to Not Have a Nuclear Weapon
June 3 (Reuters) – ⁠U.S. ⁠President ⁠Donald Trump said on Wednesday ‌that Iran ‌has ⁠agreed ⁠to not have a nuclear weapon and that Iran’s Ayatollah ⁠is involved ⁠in ⁠negotiations with the United States. “They’ve already agreed ⁠they’re not ⁠going to have a nuclear weapon,” ⁠Trump told a podcast …
Continue Reading

World

Trump expands Cuba sanctions beyond US companies in major crackdown on foreign enablers

Published

on

Trump expands Cuba sanctions beyond US companies in major crackdown on foreign enablers

NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!

The Trump administration is rolling out what experts describe as the most significant expansion of U.S. sanctions on Cuba in decades.

The administration is attempting what supporters say is the first broad application of Cuba-related secondary sanctions against foreign firms, aiming not only at Havana itself but also at foreign companies and banks that continue doing business with the island’s military-linked economic empire. 

The new framework, established under an executive order signed by President Donald Trump May 1, applies pressure beyond U.S. companies for the first time, threatening foreign firms with sanctions exposure if they continue operating in key sectors of the Cuban economy linked to Grupo de Administración Empresarial S.A., or GAESA.

TRUMP ADMINISTRATION PRESSED TO CLOSE CUBA EMBARGO LOOPHOLE AS OIL SET TO RUN OUT WITHIN DAYS

Advertisement

Supporters say the move closes a loophole that allowed foreign investors to sustain Cuba’s communist regime while the longstanding U.S. embargo largely restricted Americans.

Critics argue the measures risk worsening an already severe humanitarian crisis on the island without meaningfully weakening the government.

Demonstrators attempt to burn the Communist Party headquarters in Morón, Cuba, after authorities allegedly opened fire on protesters without warning. (Obtained by Fox News Digital)

“At the top of the month, what the Trump administration did was for the first time extend the application of U.S. sanctions from just prohibiting trade between U.S. firms and U.S. persons and the Cuban island to third-party countries and enablers,” Max Meizlish, a former Treasury Department official now serving as a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, told Fox News Digital in an interview.

“For the first time ever in a truly unprecedented fashion, that’s the same logic that the administration is now applying to Cuba,” he said.

Advertisement

The sanctions focus heavily on GAESA, a sprawling military-linked conglomerate that analysts estimate controls between 40% and 70% of Cuba’s economy, including tourism, mining, retail, ports and financial services. 

A recent Foundation for Defense of Democracies report authored by Meizlish and Connor Pfeiffer argued that foreign companies doing business in Cuba are effectively helping sustain the regime’s military and political leadership.

TRUMP DECLARES NATIONAL EMERGENCY OVER CUBA, THREATENS TARIFFS ON NATIONS THAT SUPPLY OIL TO COMMUNIST REGIME

An image of Fidel and Raul Castro and Miguel Diaz-Canel, Cuba’s president and first secretary of the Communist Party, is displayed in a billboard in Havana, April 12, 2023. (Alexandre Meneghini/Reuters)

The State Department sanctioned GAESA and several affiliated entities in May under the new authorities, opening the door for potential penalties against foreign companies and financial institutions that continue dealings with them after a June 5 wind-down deadline.

Advertisement

Meizlish argued previous sanctions regimes failed because they isolated American companies while allowing foreign actors to continue financing the Cuban state.

“There’s a lot of Spanish firms, for instance, that have invested millions of dollars in luxury hotel properties, villa properties in Cuba that partner with GAESA, all funding this military enterprise at the expense of the Cuban people,” he said.

He also pointed to Canadian involvement in Cuba’s nickel and cobalt sectors, saying foreign investment has generated “huge amounts of money for the regime.”

“A lot of people think about the U.S. embargo over the years is actually being responsible for a lot of the problems on the Cuban island, but they don’t give consideration to the fact that GAESA, this newly sanctioned entity, has been sitting on an estimated $20 billion in assets and cash over the year while depriving the people of Cuba,” Meizlish told Fox News Digital.

But critics of the policy warn the economic fallout could land the hardest on ordinary Cubans.

Advertisement

William LeoGrande, a longtime Cuba expert at American University, said the May 1 measures represent a major escalation because they specifically target foreign businesses rather than just Americans and aim to deter foreign companies from doing business with GAESA by threatening sanctions exposure.

LeoGrande acknowledged the measures could deprive the Cuban government of revenue but argued the broader population is likely to suffer most.

CUBA’S ENTIRE ELECTRICAL GRID COLLAPSES, LEAVING WHOLE ISLAND WITHOUT POWER

A woman with her son signals a car on a dark street during a blackout in Bauta municipality, Artemisa province, Cuba, on March 18, 2024. (Yamil Lage/AFP via Getty Images)

“This would potentially deprive the Cuban government of funds, but the impact will fall mainly on ordinary citizens because it means the government has fewer resources to import food, medicine and fuel,” he said.

Advertisement

The debate comes as Cuba faces its deepest economic and humanitarian crisis in years. 

The World Food Programme says food insecurity is worsening amid fuel shortages, inflation and declining access to imported goods, while U.N. officials have warned that electricity shortages and blackouts are disrupting hospitals, vaccination programs and food distribution networks across the island.

LeoGrande also warned tougher sanctions could contribute to another migration crisis.

NICARAGUA BLOCKS PATHWAY USED BY CUBAN MIGRANTS TO REACH THE US

Protesters take to the streets in Cuba over food and electricity shortages.  (Reuters)

Advertisement

“Another unintended effect is that by making living conditions in Cuba even more desperate, tougher sanctions could trigger a mass migration like we saw in 1980 or 1994,” LeoGrande said.

On background, a U.S. official rejected arguments that American sanctions are responsible for Cuba’s humanitarian crisis.

“The suffering of the Cuban people is not caused by the U.S. embargo but by the Cuban dictatorship’s failed Communist policies and human rights violations,” the official told Fox News Digital. “The embargo does not prohibit Cuba’s access to world markets or trade with third countries.”

The official added that U.S. law explicitly permits exports of food, medicine and medical equipment to Cuba and accused the regime of hiding “billions in overseas bank accounts instead of investing in electricity, infrastructure and the daily needs of its people.”

The debate mirrors long-standing arguments surrounding U.S. sanctions on countries like Iran and Venezuela, where supporters view economic pressure as a tool to weaken authoritarian governments while critics argue regimes often survive and civilians absorb the economic damage.

Advertisement

CLICK HERE TO DOWNLOAD THE FOX NEWS APP

Meizlish argued sanctions should not be judged simply by whether they immediately topple governments.

“The problem isn’t that the embargo went too far,” he said. “It’s that it didn’t go far enough.”

Fox News Digital reached out to the Cuban Embassy in Washington for comment but did not receive a response by the time of publication.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending