- Get link
- Other Apps
By Max Coutinho
The European Union decided to counter the US-organised Warsaw Middle East Conference by setting up, 10 days later, the EU-League of Arab States Summit (a.k.a. the EU-LAS Summit) in Egypt. This article is divided in two chapters: in this first one we are going to comment some of the most interesting points in the Summit's Declaration and remind the Arab League why it is to take heed of European motivations.
The Main Points of the EU-LAS Summit Declaration
1. Confident that strengthened interaction between the member states of LAS and EU has great potential to enhance the stability, prosperity, and well-being of the two regions and the world at large, working in tandem within the multilateral, rules-based global order.
Comment: Europe, since 1973 (the first oil crisis), has been playing an insidious game in the Middle East that has had nothing to do with the stability, prosperity and well-being of Middle Eastern countries; au contraire, everything Europe does is for the stability, prosperity and well-being of people in Europe.
Fact: Europe hasn’t experienced conflicts and extreme poverty since the end of the Second World War. The EU was created to ensure that a Great War would never plague the continent again and therefore all political efforts have been done to guarantee that outcome – even at the expense of other peoples (e.g. African, North African and Middle Easterners).
“Global order”, “multilateral”, “rules-based” are beautiful empty words; but what does the EU really mean by Global Order: Globalism, One World Government – led by whom? MENA States should take heed of these words because one thing is certain, LAS will be the one benefiting the less from any relationship with Europe – as it has been the case. What does the EU mean by “rules-based”: imposition of rules on MENA states, dictating on how MENA states are to behave in order to continue enjoying a stable relationship with Europe?
LAS should be suspicious of such subtle words because the EU is not about Principled Realism (that respects your sovereignty, your identity and customs); the EU is based on Liberalism (rejection of Power Politics) and Constructivism (shunning human nature and other significant elements from world politics) which forcibly go against Islamic Principles.
2. We also expressed our commitment to (..) further deepen the Euro-Arab partnership in order to realise our shared aspirations, to promote peace, stability and prosperity, guarantee security, foster economic, social and technological development (..).
Comment: the European Intelligence Services, especially the French and the British ones, have been using the European privileged relationship with the Arab States to undermine the Arab People for decades. Therefore, what are exactly the shared aspirations to promote peace, stability and guarantee security in the region: undermine the Jews? This is so démodé and déclassé it hurts.
LAS needs only to ask one question: 23% of all EU oil imports come from LAS States, but how much do Arab states buy from the EU? LAS has a trade deficit of circa €72Bn (2017 data), meaning LAS is being taken advantage of, and their people is not exactly better off, is it?
Why do you think the EU continues to promote the Conflict between the Arabs and Israel? Because they make a lot of money from it: if the Arab side continues to pour money on Hamas and Fatah, they won’t invest heavily on their own Human and technological Development nor on technology for sustainable food production remaining, thus, dependent on supplies from Europe and others.
At the same time, Europe maintains close ties to Iran and is now proposing a mechanism to help Iran circumvent the Sanctions Imposed by the United States of America. In broad terms, this means the EU is helping Iran to finance its expansionist and terrorist stance in the Middle East.
3. We renewed our commitment to effective multilateralism and to an international system based on international law in order to tackle global challenges, including through increased cooperation between the LAS, EU, the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU).
Comment: Multilateralism can never be effective as it represents dispersed energies – too many elements offering their special interest input. Whenever the EU invokes the international law (IL) it makes us laugh because the IL only suits them when expedient – as exemplified by their positions regarding the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
5. We are committed to developing a positive cooperation agenda especially in the fields of trade, energy, including energy security, science, research, technology, tourism, fisheries, agriculture and other mutually beneficial areas; all with the aim to create wealth, increase growth rates and reduce unemployment to better respond to our peoples’ needs.
Comment: this is basically a repetition of point number 2; therefore, all LAS needs to do is to remember that whenever the EU speaks of strengthening economic cooperation, development etc it means a higher financial strain for the Arab side (i.e. more imports, more investment in European countries [meaning more jobs for Europeans], more weapon acquisitions [again to secure Euro jobs] etc) – what do the Arab People have to gain in tangible terms? More wars, more destruction, more displaced people and desolation.
6. We reiterated that reaching political solutions to the regional crises, in accordance with international law, including international humanitarian law, is key to achieving the peace and prosperity that the peoples of the region need and deserve.
Comment: in other words, proceed to using Arabs as a political instrument against Israel. This is clear by the way the EU blatant and conveniently ignores the International Law when it comes to the Land of Israel.
7. We reaffirmed our common positions on the Middle East Peace Process, including on the status of Jerusalem, and on the illegality under international law of Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Comment: the EU is going to be isolated from the rest of the world if it continues on this path, because not only is the world slowly beginning to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish State but also LAS will be the first bloc to recognise it as such. But again, this point is the EU’s reaffirmation that it intends to stagnate and continue to use LAS as a weapon against the Jews in the Middle East.
DS sees no problem in this as we have already foreseen the future of the EU: the countdown to its demise has started – as they are about to see in the European elections, in May.
8. We affirmed the need to preserve the unity, sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of these countries [Syria, Libya and Yemen – Ed].
Comment: how, when Europe contributed greatly to the disunity, breach of sovereignty, territorial violation and dependence of those countries by (directly or indirectly) supporting the proxies (that destroyed them) and their sponsors? How much did Germany, and other weapons manufacturing states, make from these conflicts? There is the official weapons market and then there is the black market where Governments sell weapons through independent weapon traders (e.g. Angolagate, Irangate and other unknown weapongates out there).
9. On Syria, (..) We condemned all acts of terrorism and human rights violations committed against the Syrian people by any perpetrators and underlined the need for all those responsible to be held accountable.
Comment: that is noble of you. However, take a close look at the words issued – do you see any perpetrator identified by name? Of course not and this omission bears a lot of interesting meanings, like the EU playing a double game and since it colludes with Iran it doesn’t want to offend Tehran by mentioning Bashar Al-Assad or Hezbollah; and because its intelligence agencies probably work closely with some Jihadist groups for the “greater good” they don’t want to offend Al-Qaeda, the Khorasan or any other terrorist group operating in the region.
12. We acknowledged that peace and security, human rights and economic and social development are mutually reinforcing.
Comment: Human Rights…what does the EU mean by Human Rights when discussing it with Arab Muslim States? Their Moral Code is not even close similar to yours, their sense of Ethics differs from yours, their views on rights for certain Humans are diverse from yours, so…what was acknowledged exactly?
13. We discussed the importance of preserving the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture, based on the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the objective of a Middle East region free of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.
Comment: this point is an absolute joke. All the most powerful countries in the world have nuclear weapons, let’s not kid ourselves. Therefore, any nuclear non-proliferation architecture has been modified a long time ago: Russia, US, Germany, France, the UK, India, Pakistan, North Korea/China, Iran have nukes; others either have them in secret or are already in the process of developing them (Japan, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, etc). The ME is not a region free of WMDs - it never has been with the help of the French State.
14. We further reaffirmed our resolve to combat cultural and religious intolerance, extremism, negative stereotyping, stigmatisation and discrimination leading to incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief and condemn any advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement, hostility or violence, including on the internet and social media.
Comment: nice; however, this point doesn’t state what are the penalties to LAS if they don’t stop the wave of hatred that floods their societies (most of the times incited by governments themselves)? How is the EU going to stop the Ex-Nihilo State of Palestine from inciting against Jews on TV, on School books, on the streets etc?
And did the EU promise to issue a gag order to “Populist” parties (conveniently called “far right”) regarding the Islamisation of Europe (in other words, violate their free speech rights)? And how does the EU intend to monitor LAS’ resolve to combat intolerance, extremism and discrimination? This point sounds dangerous as it treads on a very fine line between authoritarianism and counter-extremism efforts.
The Main Points of the EU-LAS Summit Declaration
1. Confident that strengthened interaction between the member states of LAS and EU has great potential to enhance the stability, prosperity, and well-being of the two regions and the world at large, working in tandem within the multilateral, rules-based global order.
Comment: Europe, since 1973 (the first oil crisis), has been playing an insidious game in the Middle East that has had nothing to do with the stability, prosperity and well-being of Middle Eastern countries; au contraire, everything Europe does is for the stability, prosperity and well-being of people in Europe.
Fact: Europe hasn’t experienced conflicts and extreme poverty since the end of the Second World War. The EU was created to ensure that a Great War would never plague the continent again and therefore all political efforts have been done to guarantee that outcome – even at the expense of other peoples (e.g. African, North African and Middle Easterners).
“Global order”, “multilateral”, “rules-based” are beautiful empty words; but what does the EU really mean by Global Order: Globalism, One World Government – led by whom? MENA States should take heed of these words because one thing is certain, LAS will be the one benefiting the less from any relationship with Europe – as it has been the case. What does the EU mean by “rules-based”: imposition of rules on MENA states, dictating on how MENA states are to behave in order to continue enjoying a stable relationship with Europe?
LAS should be suspicious of such subtle words because the EU is not about Principled Realism (that respects your sovereignty, your identity and customs); the EU is based on Liberalism (rejection of Power Politics) and Constructivism (shunning human nature and other significant elements from world politics) which forcibly go against Islamic Principles.
2. We also expressed our commitment to (..) further deepen the Euro-Arab partnership in order to realise our shared aspirations, to promote peace, stability and prosperity, guarantee security, foster economic, social and technological development (..).
Comment: the European Intelligence Services, especially the French and the British ones, have been using the European privileged relationship with the Arab States to undermine the Arab People for decades. Therefore, what are exactly the shared aspirations to promote peace, stability and guarantee security in the region: undermine the Jews? This is so démodé and déclassé it hurts.
LAS needs only to ask one question: 23% of all EU oil imports come from LAS States, but how much do Arab states buy from the EU? LAS has a trade deficit of circa €72Bn (2017 data), meaning LAS is being taken advantage of, and their people is not exactly better off, is it?
Why do you think the EU continues to promote the Conflict between the Arabs and Israel? Because they make a lot of money from it: if the Arab side continues to pour money on Hamas and Fatah, they won’t invest heavily on their own Human and technological Development nor on technology for sustainable food production remaining, thus, dependent on supplies from Europe and others.
At the same time, Europe maintains close ties to Iran and is now proposing a mechanism to help Iran circumvent the Sanctions Imposed by the United States of America. In broad terms, this means the EU is helping Iran to finance its expansionist and terrorist stance in the Middle East.
3. We renewed our commitment to effective multilateralism and to an international system based on international law in order to tackle global challenges, including through increased cooperation between the LAS, EU, the United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU).
Comment: Multilateralism can never be effective as it represents dispersed energies – too many elements offering their special interest input. Whenever the EU invokes the international law (IL) it makes us laugh because the IL only suits them when expedient – as exemplified by their positions regarding the Arab-Israeli Conflict.
5. We are committed to developing a positive cooperation agenda especially in the fields of trade, energy, including energy security, science, research, technology, tourism, fisheries, agriculture and other mutually beneficial areas; all with the aim to create wealth, increase growth rates and reduce unemployment to better respond to our peoples’ needs.
Comment: this is basically a repetition of point number 2; therefore, all LAS needs to do is to remember that whenever the EU speaks of strengthening economic cooperation, development etc it means a higher financial strain for the Arab side (i.e. more imports, more investment in European countries [meaning more jobs for Europeans], more weapon acquisitions [again to secure Euro jobs] etc) – what do the Arab People have to gain in tangible terms? More wars, more destruction, more displaced people and desolation.
6. We reiterated that reaching political solutions to the regional crises, in accordance with international law, including international humanitarian law, is key to achieving the peace and prosperity that the peoples of the region need and deserve.
Comment: in other words, proceed to using Arabs as a political instrument against Israel. This is clear by the way the EU blatant and conveniently ignores the International Law when it comes to the Land of Israel.
7. We reaffirmed our common positions on the Middle East Peace Process, including on the status of Jerusalem, and on the illegality under international law of Israeli settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
Comment: the EU is going to be isolated from the rest of the world if it continues on this path, because not only is the world slowly beginning to acknowledge Jerusalem as the capital of the Jewish State but also LAS will be the first bloc to recognise it as such. But again, this point is the EU’s reaffirmation that it intends to stagnate and continue to use LAS as a weapon against the Jews in the Middle East.
DS sees no problem in this as we have already foreseen the future of the EU: the countdown to its demise has started – as they are about to see in the European elections, in May.
8. We affirmed the need to preserve the unity, sovereignty, territorial integrity and independence of these countries [Syria, Libya and Yemen – Ed].
Comment: how, when Europe contributed greatly to the disunity, breach of sovereignty, territorial violation and dependence of those countries by (directly or indirectly) supporting the proxies (that destroyed them) and their sponsors? How much did Germany, and other weapons manufacturing states, make from these conflicts? There is the official weapons market and then there is the black market where Governments sell weapons through independent weapon traders (e.g. Angolagate, Irangate and other unknown weapongates out there).
9. On Syria, (..) We condemned all acts of terrorism and human rights violations committed against the Syrian people by any perpetrators and underlined the need for all those responsible to be held accountable.
Comment: that is noble of you. However, take a close look at the words issued – do you see any perpetrator identified by name? Of course not and this omission bears a lot of interesting meanings, like the EU playing a double game and since it colludes with Iran it doesn’t want to offend Tehran by mentioning Bashar Al-Assad or Hezbollah; and because its intelligence agencies probably work closely with some Jihadist groups for the “greater good” they don’t want to offend Al-Qaeda, the Khorasan or any other terrorist group operating in the region.
12. We acknowledged that peace and security, human rights and economic and social development are mutually reinforcing.
Comment: Human Rights…what does the EU mean by Human Rights when discussing it with Arab Muslim States? Their Moral Code is not even close similar to yours, their sense of Ethics differs from yours, their views on rights for certain Humans are diverse from yours, so…what was acknowledged exactly?
13. We discussed the importance of preserving the global nuclear non-proliferation architecture, based on the Treaty on the Non- Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons, and the objective of a Middle East region free of weapons of mass destruction and their means of delivery.
Comment: this point is an absolute joke. All the most powerful countries in the world have nuclear weapons, let’s not kid ourselves. Therefore, any nuclear non-proliferation architecture has been modified a long time ago: Russia, US, Germany, France, the UK, India, Pakistan, North Korea/China, Iran have nukes; others either have them in secret or are already in the process of developing them (Japan, Brazil, Saudi Arabia, etc). The ME is not a region free of WMDs - it never has been with the help of the French State.
14. We further reaffirmed our resolve to combat cultural and religious intolerance, extremism, negative stereotyping, stigmatisation and discrimination leading to incitement to violence against persons based on religion or belief and condemn any advocacy of religious hatred against individuals that constitutes incitement, hostility or violence, including on the internet and social media.
Comment: nice; however, this point doesn’t state what are the penalties to LAS if they don’t stop the wave of hatred that floods their societies (most of the times incited by governments themselves)? How is the EU going to stop the Ex-Nihilo State of Palestine from inciting against Jews on TV, on School books, on the streets etc?
And did the EU promise to issue a gag order to “Populist” parties (conveniently called “far right”) regarding the Islamisation of Europe (in other words, violate their free speech rights)? And how does the EU intend to monitor LAS’ resolve to combat intolerance, extremism and discrimination? This point sounds dangerous as it treads on a very fine line between authoritarianism and counter-extremism efforts.
Next Chapter: Arab States Listened but Will They Comply?
(Image: EU-LAS Summit Logo[Ed] - Google Images)
Comments
Post a Comment
Dissecting Society™ welcomes all sorts of comments, as we are strong advocates of freedom of speech; however, we reserve the right to delete Troll Activity; libellous and offensive comments (e.g. racist and anti-Semitic) plus those with excessive foul language. This blog does not view vulgarity as being protected by the right to free speech. Cheers
European politicians are hypocritical! They lecture the Arabs but say nothing to the Chinese. Double standards much?
ReplyDeleteHello again,
DeleteYes, much...
Cheers
Very good point, Max: if the Arabs keep putting money into the Palestinian cause, and they do it by the millions, they won't invest it on their own countries' development and so the Arab people go on living in misery and destruction! This is one of the European plots! At the same time they keep us Jews on our toes, or so they think!
ReplyDeleteThe gay lesson was pathetic!!!!!!
How many Europeans will actually listen? If they are bent on fighting Israel it won't matter if they make an ass of themselves and if they are bent on embarrassing Trump then definitely won't matter if they make an ass of themselves!! I hope people won't vote in May!
ReplyDelete+1
Delete