nEUwsletter 02/12/2019

United Nations Climate change conference

By Hélène Veysseyre

©EU, 2019

From December 2nd to December 13th 2019, COP 25 will take place in Madrid. The Conference of Parties was originally supposed to be held in Chile however, regarding the social crisis over there, Spain became the new host while the Conference remains under the presidency of Chile. Therefore, it is 196 countries who signed the Paris agreement in 2015 that are currently represented at the Conference. The Global Climate Summit will reunite 29 000 people for the next two weeks, among which won’t be present any representatives from China or India, while those countries are regarded as big actors of greenhouse gas. Carolina Schmidt, minister of environment in Chile, declared that the main objective of the COP25 is “to increase ambition, including on mitigation, adaptation and the means of implementation.”

This year, the main goal of the Conference is to prepare the COP 26 of Glasgow in Scotland, taking place next year, by changing the objectives previously fixed but having to be increased. Indeed, if the countries decide to let their objectives as they are today, the rise in temperature should be of 3,2 °C by the end of the century, which in fact is higher than the objectives fixed by the Paris agreement of 2015, limiting the rise to 1,5 °C. Today, only the Marshall Islands changed their objectives and 68 countries declared that they would present a new climate plan at COP 26.

However, the COP25 will also focus on the matter of emissions trading, as part of the Paris agreement. Indeed, Article 6 of the agreement will “allows countries that have emission units to spare - emissions permitted them but not "used" - to sell this excess capacity to countries that are over their targets”, as explained by the United Nation Climate Change. Also, ocean protection will also be one of the big matters evoked during the Conference.

Until December 13th, many subjects will be discussed, based on scientific researches, as the one presented on December 5th by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). In the Special Report on Ocean and Cryosphere in a Changing Climate, more than 100 authors and review editors from 36 countries tried to raise awareness on the impact of climate change as well as recommendations to limit the impact.

As COP25 takes place only a few days after that the European Parliament declared climate emergency, the challenges of the Conference are huge to take the necessary measures for humanity’s well-being.

NATO: You said allies?

By Alexandre Capel

The Nato summit has played host to the leaders of 29 member states (Picture: PA)

Gathered in London from 3rd to 4th December for NATO 70th anniversary, allies were invited to find a way out of the current identity crisis that the historic military organization is going through. However, the celebrations turned down to be a showoff of the disagreements of some and the snips remarks of the others. At the end of the summit, the “brain-dead” organization according to President Macron’s words, still seems to breath… but for how long?

Strategic disagreements

Founded at the beginning of the Cold War, to ensure the security of Western Europe – the liberal side of the “Iron Curtain” – against Soviet expansionism by establishing a strong relationship with the United States, NATO’s purpose seems no longer adequate nowadays.

Indeed, the threat seems to have moved to the south with the development of ISIS and international terrorism. This was even more enhanced by some recent events.

On the one hand, America – the first investor and the world’s largest military power – led by the Trump administration is turning his back on the European project, especially after the disengagement of North-East Syria. On the other hand, Turkey – one of the alliance’s largest member, considered during the Cold War as the “southern flank pillar” – no longer shares the same interests and values as other European members.

This situation is therefore increasingly worrying the European member States which are – since the failure of the European Defense Community (EDC) project in 1954 – remaining very dependent on NATO.

Can the new European Commission solve the EU's dilemma?

By Ruiling Zhang

REUTERS/Piroschka van de Wouw/File Photo

On December 1st, the new European Commission officially began its five-year term. As the UK has not nominated candidates, the European Commission has a total of 27 members, including 12 women. This is by far the most gender-balanced European Commission.

Policy claims receive attention

On November 27th, Ursula von der Leyen addressed the European Parliament, stating that Europe ''can be a shaper of a better global order" and proposed a specific plan of action.

According to the Guardian, the core of the new European Commission action plan is the "Green New Deal". Among them, the first EU-wide "climate law" will render the goal of "zero net carbon emissions by 2050" legally binding. According to the Financial Times, EU officials said that due to concerns of companies in Germany, Poland and other countries are not ready to accelerate the pace of emission reductions, the European Commission set the 2030 European greenhouse gas emission reduction range to 50% to 55% .

Adapting to the digital age is another goal proposed by Von der Leyen. According to the Forbes magazine website, the new European Commission's proposals include ethics for artificial intelligence, new taxes and a comprehensive digital services bill. In addition, Von der Leyen also mentioned immigration, employment, and anti-cancer policies.

Internal challenges to be solved

The internal challenge that the European Commission needs to address is the trend towards European fragmentation. "In the future, the new European Commission has many challenges in leading the EU to promote peace and positive change."

On the one hand, the issue of Brexit will continue to occupy the time and energy of the European Commission. According to the European Union News Agency, the outgoing European Commission President Juncker said in his farewell speech at the end of October that he was unable to pay more time to serve EU citizens because he was forced to deal with the issue of Brexit in his term of office. On the other hand, disunity among EU member States has also gradually become apparent. Bloomberg analysis said that the new European Commission faces the possibility of stalemate on the main proposal.

Europe is also facing great external pressure. The United States, as an ally, now has major differences of interest with Europe. Europe needs to consider how to handle its relationship with the United States while increasing its strategic autonomy; Europe's relationship with Russia, the largest neighbor, is still very tense, and economic sanctions are still underway. Persistent, peripheral issues such as the Middle East and North Africa also need to be resolved. If the refugees are under too much pressure, new contradictions will arise within EU member states.

Sources:

https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/pt/speech_19_6408

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2019/nov/29/first-eu-wide-climate-law-to-set-net-zero-carbon-target-by-2050

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jodywestby/2019/10/31/why-the-eu-is-about-to-seize-the-global-lead-on-cybersecurity/#610cbbb42938

US slaps France over digital tax

By Nomfundo Ndlwana

Logos Combination Photo From Reuters Files

On Monday the 2nd of December, the US Trade Representative (USTR) revealed it is on course to levy punitive pecuniary liabilities of up to one hundred percent on French imports. The US imports French goods such as Champagne, handbags, cheese, etc., worth up to a tune of $2.4bn annually. What enrages the USTR is France’s new digital tax on US tech companies, which the US considers harmful to their survival. It drew this conclusion after conducting its domestic Section 301 investigation, which uncovered that the French tax is inconsistent with the prevailing principles of international tax. Furthermore, it observed that this tax is outstandingly burdensome to the affected US companies. Robert Lighthizer of USTR divulged on the current US government prospects to open similar investigations on digital services taxes levied by Austria, Italy, and Turkey on tech US companies. The US is manifestly determined to counter the encompassing protection that the EU membership endows to its member states.

These USTR findings have been applauded by the US legislators and US tech industry groups. Top Senators from the Republicans and Democrats have issued a joint statement decrying the French digital tax, labelling it “unreasonable, protectionist and discriminatory.” Prior to the publication of the USTR report, a spokesperson for the French Embassy in Washington, asserted its country’s resolve to dispute the USTR findings, reiterating Paris’ contention that the digital tax is applied indiscriminately rather than being specifically aimed at US tech firms. France’s objective is to impose its 3% levy exclusively to firms with a revenue of more than 25m euros in French revenue and 750m euros worldwide. Paris is resolute in its intentions and is not about to give up on taxing digital firms. Likewise, the USTR has spread out its tentacles to impose biting tariffs on Canada as well, while it still contemplates opening investigations on Austria, Italy, and Turkey. No specific date has thus far been provided by the USTR on which these proposed 100 percent duties will take effect. It is scheduled to hold a public enquiry on January 7th, while the collection of public comments will be open till January 14th.

As though not enough, the USTR has extended its threat of retaliatory tariffs to include a broad range of European goods. What evokes this threat is the recent compliance report from the Geneva trade watchdog, the World Trade Organisation (WTO), which has discovered that the EU continues to subsidise the Airbus A380 and A350 jetliners. According to the WTO findings, the A350 has significantly damaged Boeing’s market-share prospects, which harm the US is pulling out all the stops to prevent. The EU has previously claimed it was not offering new subsidies to the Airbus, but, is only complying with the contractual terms of the previous loans. Even so, the USTR considers this adherence extremely harmful to the US aerospace industry. Lighthizer is adamant that stern prohibitive measures against such market-distorting subsidies should be implemented by the US.