[Majorityrights News] Trump will ‘arm Ukraine to the teeth’ if Putin won’t negotiate ceasefire Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 12 November 2024 16:20.
[Majorityrights News] Alex Navalny, born 4th June, 1976; died at Yamalo-Nenets penitentiary 16th February, 2024 Posted by Guessedworker on Friday, 16 February 2024 23:43.
[Majorityrights Central] A couple of exchanges on the nature and meaning of Christianity’s origin Posted by Guessedworker on Tuesday, 25 July 2023 22:19.
[Majorityrights News] Is the Ukrainian counter-offensive for Bakhmut the counter-offensive for Ukraine? Posted by Guessedworker on Thursday, 18 May 2023 18:55.
Posted by DanielS on Monday, 30 September 2019 21:00.
Statue of Bandera in Western Ukraine.
Ukrainian Nationalism and its Demons from the Past
By Sébastien Meuwissen at Visigrad Post
Poland/Ukraine – On January 1st, 2019, several thousands of Ukrainians marched in the streets of Kiev, Lviv and Khmelnytskyï (Western Ukraine) to celebrate the 110th anniversary of the birth of Stepan Bandera. These past years, there were plenty of similar processions in Ukraine, in particular in the Western part. Thousands of young Ukrainians take part in these nationalists marches, where they wave flags picturing Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych. Even though they contributed to the creation of an independent Ukraine, the two men have been guilty of many war crimes in their collaboration with Nazi Germany during the Second World War. Nowadays Bandera and Shukhevych remain controversial historical figures. For some they are national heroes and for others they are criminals.
A territory coveted by its powerful neighbours
In a matter of territorial size, Ukraine is the third biggest country in Europe (behind Russia and France). The name “Ukraine” (in Ukrainian: Україна [ukrɑˈjinɑ]) was used for the first time in reference to the territory of Kievian Rus in the XIIth century. Throughout its history this huge territory was targeted by many invasions and was annexed by some European powers.
During the XVIIth century almost the entire territory of what is now Ukraine fell under the control of the Kingdom of Poland-Lithuania. Later during the XVIIIth and XIXth centuries, the Austro-Hungarian (at the West) and Russian (in the Center and at the East) empires shared this Eastern European territory. After the First World War, Poland reappeared on European maps and took most of the Western parts while USSR took the rest of the territory under its control.
The Soviet context and the “Holodomor”
Ukraine suffered tremendously from soviet occupation. The most obvious example of this harsh time is certainly the Soviet caused famine of 1932-1933. The Ukrainian famine named “Holodomor” (in Ukrainian: голодомо́р, extermination by hunger) is seen by many people as a mass murder that can be related to a genocide (even though this event isn’t in a lot of history books).
In a period of just a year and a half, this starvation caused the death of six to eight million people, according to various sources, with two to five millions solely in Ukraine. Even though most of the victims were ethnically Ukrainians, they were not the only ones afflicted by the murderous policy of Stalin (hundreds of thousands of Russians, Tatars and Kazakhs also died).
A coveted multicultural area
During the first half of the XXth century, ethnic, cultural and religious tensions considerably grew in Western Ukraine. According to a population census from 1931 the Ukrainians (mostly Orthodox) constituted the major part of the local population (64%) in the Western region of Volhynia. Other ethnic and religious groups were the Poles (15,6%), the Jews (10%), Germans (2,3%) and other groups less numerous (Czech, Slovaks, Belorussians, …). (1) The already existent tensions between these various groups would considerably grow during the ’30s to evolve into a true hate during the Second World War.
At this time two Ukraines seemed to emerge. On one hand the Western Ukraine that was earlier under Polish and Austrian influence and on the other hand the russified Eastern Ukraine. To the eyes of Ukrainian independentists, Poland and the USSR were hereditary enemies of the Ukrainian nation and should be fought to allow for the creation of an independent Ukrainian state. This was precisely this goal of the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (or OUN), created in 1929.
The strategy of the OUN to reach the creation of an independent Ukraine included violence and terrorism against those who were seen as enemies of an independent Ukraine. Among those cited as the “external” enemies of Ukraine – Poland and USSR – and the “internal” enemies, so to say all people who weren’t ethnically Ukrainian or suspected to collaborate with the enemy. The Ukrainian Insurgent Army (or UPA) was a paramilitary nationalist army engaged in a series of conflicts during the Second World War. It was composed by various fighter groups of the OUN. The OUN and the UPA had for leaders, respectively, Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych.
Collaboration with Nazi Germany
A few years later, the Second World War began. In 1940, many Western Ukrainians saw Nazi Germany like a partner susceptible to help the creation of an independent Ukrainian state. Hitler was considered a symbol of hope in front of the soviet domination. The act of restoration of the Ukrainian state from the 30th of June, 1941, is very clear on this:
“3. The newly formed Ukrainian state will work closely with the National-Socialist Greater Germany, under the leadership of its leader Adolf Hitler which is forming a new order in Europe and the world and is helping the Ukrainian People to free itself from Muscovite occupation.” (2)
On April 28 the division “SS Galizien” was created. It was a military formation mostly made up by Ukrainian volunteers from the region of Galicia (Western Ukraine). Under the initiative of the Wehrmacht, the SS Galizien division slaughtered practically the entirety of the Jewish population of this region.
The massacre of Volhynia
Once the Jewish population were eliminated, the Poles were targeted. It is principally in the Western region of Ukraine that the slaughter of the Polish minority took place. While the Second World War was raging, Ukrainian nationalist leaders commanded their supporters to slaughter the Polish population in the region. Here is a passage of the order given by the OUN on the 2nd of February 1944 to its members:
“Liquidate every inch of Polishness. Destroy the Catholic churches and other Polish cult places (…) Destroy the houses so there is no trace that someone lived there (…) Keep in mind that if something Polish remains, then Poles will come to claim our territories.” (3)
The groups of Ukrainian nationalists went to the towns of Galicia and Volhynia and killed between 40,000 and 60,000 people, mostly women and children. None were spared. On the 11th of July nearly 100 villages were plundered and the population was slaughtered in the most brutal way. Besides murdering the local population, the Banderas tortured with a rare atrocity. Despite the absence of resistance, civilians were killed in their houses, at school, in the churches, or in offices. As practiced later by the Soviet army, rape was largely used as a terror weapon.
The legacy and the demons from the past
The Polish writer Jan Zaleski said: “The Poles living in Volhynia were killed twice. The first time by a weapon and the second time by silence.” With these words he was referring to the way the history of the massacre of Volhynia is often avoided and to the Ukrainian denial of the atrocities that were committed. Besides the numerous crimes committed by the members of the OUN and the UPA, many Ukrainians consider the leaders of these organizations as national heroes. We can see as a proof the various monuments to the glory of Stepan Bandera and Roman Shukhevych in the Western part of the country, particularly in the city of Lviv where they are regularly maintained.
The Prime Minister of the Czech Republic, Andrej Babis, has slammed policies promoting mass migration and population replacement which are both propagated by globalist governments in Western Europe.
While touching on the subject which is commonly referred to as ’Replacement Migration‘ during an interview with Die Welt, Babis said, “We do not see migration as a means of counteracting a shrinking population, as in Western Europe.”
Echoing his Visegrád partner Viktor Orbán, Babis also spoke about how he would like to increase the low birthrates of his own country where women, on average, have just 1.7 children.
“We want to get the Czechs to have more children,” Babis said.
After the German reporter asserted that it’s “not very climate-friendly” to set government incentives for people to have more children, Babis responded, saying: “I have four children. Then I’m probably climate-damaging.”
In Germany, a country where a large portion of the population seems to have lost touch with reality, there are now certain climate activists who measure everything in terms of carbon dioxide and would, therefore, prefer to ban child-bearing.
Babis went on to say that the only people who immigrate to the Czech Republic are invited by its government.
“We welcome foreigners, more than five percent of our population is born abroad, but we are the ones who decide who comes here and who does not,” the Czech Prime Ministere declared.
Throughout his tenure as the leader of the small central European country, Babis hasn’t wavered in his opposition to mass migration from the third world – something the EU technocrats are certainly not happy with.
In the past, Babis has suggested that the EU should model its asylum policy after the Australian model, which processes those seeking asylum outside of the country.
In a rousing speech given at an annual event hosted by the national-conservative Fratelli d’Italia (Brothers of Italy) party in Rome, Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán announced that his governments rejects the EU’s migrant redistribution quotas, but would “accept deportation quotas with pleasure”.
Once Italy holds elections, the Brothers of Italy will likely be a key player in the next ethnonational populist governing coalition, along with Salvini’s League.
Throughout the speech, Orbán implored Italy’s leadership to protect its citizens and close its borders.
While he acknowledged that the country’s new leftist coalition government appears to be realigning itself with globalists in Brussels, Orban also said that Hungary would be there to fully support Italy when and if it removes its anti-Italian and anti-European leadership.
“Hungary is ready to help Italy in whatever way we can, but there are areas where we cannot help,” Orbán said. “We cannot help with the transport and settlement of any migrants in Hungary. That is impossible.”
“But once you decide it, we can help you defend your borders, and if you are determined to send home the migrants who are already here, we can help you with that, too.”
“Mandatory settlement quotas, we cannot accept, but deportation quotas with pleasure,” Orbán declared.
Vlad Tepesblog @Vladtepesblog
Last 2 minutes of Viktor Orban speech in Italy.
“So if PM Conte were to ask the Hungarians to send home a couple of thousand migrants from Italy back to where they came from, then Hungary will be ready and help fulfill such obligations,” the Hungarian PM continued.
Orbán also touched on the steps his government has taken to support Hungarian families but asserted that there are still too few children being born.
“If we don’t do something to counter the negative demographic trend, it will never change,” Orbán added. He then insisted that he would never support globalist policies which seek to replace the children who aren’t being born with migrants.
The Hungarian then wrapped up his speech with this sobering statement: “We are in the minority in the European political elite, but in the majority among nations and people. Our opposition is big, rich, strong and well organized, thus we must fight an unjustly difficult battle for what is right.”
Rumour has if that veteran nationalist Eddy Morrison (pictured) is about to launch an online version of ‘‘Action”. I am unashamedly nostalgic but I think that Mosley’s journal should be left in peace.
“Action” was a newspaper that was sold at meetings and regular pitches. The proposed online version would have none of the feel, and smell of newsprint. The Internet is a priceless asset but it cannot recapture the past.
Seth Tyrssen, the American assistant editor of Eddy’s blog “White Voice,” produces “The New Thunderbolt” in homage to the old National States’ Rights Party. There’s not much difference in ideology between “The New Thunderbolt” and the old “Thunderbolt.” But a new “Action” produced by Eddy Morrison would be a contradiction. Oswald Mosley supported Imperialism pre-war and ‘Europe a Nation’ post-war, but he was never a parochial nationalist.
.
Jeffrey Wallder, also known as Gordon Beckwell, is revising the Friends of Mosley 18 B detainees list as more information becomes available. But most of his fellow “Action” writers are dead; Oswald Mosley, Jeffrey Hamm, Robert Rowe, and John Warburton have all passed away, and I don’t feel too good myself.
I pinched that line from the entertainer Vic Oliver, Winston Churchill’s son-in-law, who said: “all the great musicians are dead; Mozart’s dead, Beethoven’s dead, and I don’t feel too good myself.” He once asked Winston Churchill who was the greatest war leader. Churchill replied: “Mussolini, because he had the courage to have his son-in-law shot.”
Many of Union Movement’s policies have been overtaken by history. We wanted to send home immigrants with their fares paid, That would gave been possible in those days but today there are far too many of them. We also supported white rule in South Africa and Rhodesia but both countries have been taken over by the blacks.
And then there us the matter of copyright. “Action” and all other Union Movement and Action Society titles are the property of Sanctuary Press.
What is to be Done - Eddy Morrison.
In 1978 when I was a National Front organiser I firmly believed that we would have our first members of parliament by 1980. We didn’t and the period known as the ‘horrible 80s’ was upon us. Split after split with eventually a by-election where one schism of the National Front stood a candidate at the same time as another schism of that splintered wreck of a once mighty movement.
The 1990s got a bit more interesting and we achieved the election of a BNP candidate in London. Things were slow in the BNP but it was, under John Tyndall, going in the right direction. As BNP Yorkshire Organiser I was gladdened to see many old comrades returning to the BNP. Then in 1999 the British National equivalent of the Twin Towers occurred - Nick Griffin became the leader of the BNP.
He spent the next ten years building it up. BNP councillors were everywhere and two MEPs were elected. Then came the second calamity! Griffin’s appearance on a major national TV show. Griffin acted like a buffoon. He even sidled up to the Black ‘celebrity’ who was sat next to him. Be bungled his way through a barrage of outrageous Lefty opposition and made no attempt to either push himself into prominence in a public forum watched live by millions nor to say anything cohesive. He acted like the local village idiot. Was it an Act?
Now we find ourselves in the 2010s. A large number of nationalist grouplets vying for members from an ever dwindling pool of recruits. With the break up of the EDL and the BNP, one would have expected a huge rush to join an existing nationalist party. It never happened. The British Democratic Party seems to be totally static and the National Front is a shadow of its former self. The less said about ‘Britain First’ and the lunatic New British Union, the better!
Unity talks abound. Unity with who and why unity at all? It’s like putting all the hospital patients with transmittable diseases in a ward of basically healthy people. Unity serves one purpose - it gives a platform for people who like to talk about nationalist unity who can go on home and do little more than look forward to the next unity meeting ad infinitum.
It’s never going to happen folks - believe me! We need, as we did in the 1960s, a fresh start. We need a White Nationalist movement that is no holds barred. We need one that rejects the inevitable compromises that come with unity. We need a movement that rejects both internal and external democracy and runs on the meritocratic principle.
You join, you work hard and you get the benefits. You join, you gripe about provocative tactics and you should for the good of all rush off and join Ukip (if it’s still there of course).
A new movement (I can feel the shuddering from here) it must be. And for the first few years of its life it should avoid elections like the plague. It shouldn’t even be registered with the ZOG control apparatus called ‘The Electoral Commission.” Give them your membership numbers; state of finances; sign forms that bind you to a Liberal Stalinist state and for what? To get seven votes in a council election (Nick Walsh - Hull 2016).
A new movement must be uncompromising in its White Nationalist principles and uncompromising in its drive for power. What we need comrades is a movement of disciplined fanatics!
International Finance
I am a 59 year old Englishman who understands the racket that is our money creation system. Fiat money heralds the destruction of any country that is silly enough to allow it in.
The US Federal Reserve is not federal and holds no reserves. President Wilson himself said he felt he had sold his country to International Finance. What did they have on him for him to sell his country out?
I have friends who have spent 9 years in studying for professional banking examinations and still don’t understand fiat money; so cleverly is the course designed.
I believe that if the people were actually educated as to how it works their outrage would be deafening. Naturally, as the same people who own the banks own the media, reaching the people to educate them will be difficult. Remember, any mention of who these people might be may bring you up on antisemitism charges. They really have the bases covered.
Education is the way forward but it will be an uphill struggle.
Nation Revisited replies to A.L.
You appear to believe in the Jewish conspiracy theory. This was endorsed by AK Chesterton in his 1965 book “The New Unhappy Lords.” Unfortunately, he offers no evidence. In his foreword he explains:
“The strength and the weakness of this book is that it is not annotated. The weakness is that the author, having checked his facts to the best of his ability, does not cite his authorities, partly because some of the information has come to him under confidential cover from highly placed persons in different parts of the world who would face ruin if their identities were divulged, and partly because, the facts have not been filed and listed. Its strength, on the other hand, is that the reader is presented with a continuous narrative which enables him to follow the workings of the conspiracy without having his attention distracted by the abundance of foot-notes which otherwise would have been necessary.”
Jews dominate the media and they are over-represented in financial circles but they are not all powerful. There are no Jews on the boards of the Bank of China or the Bank of Japan. And they were not able to save Lehman Brothers or Northern Rock. Why didn’t they just create some more money?
An Uncertain Future
We are due to leave the European Union on October 31st - with or without a trade agreement. The Brexiteers are predicting a rosy future but most economists are pessimistic. The massive disruption to our economy resulting from Brexit coincides with America’s trade war with China and a global decline in car sales. It seems that a recession is inevitable.
To manage this chaos we have a broken party system serving a divided and discontented population. Boris Johnson (pictured), our larger-than-life prime minister, leads a right- wing Tory Party propped up by the sectarian Democratic Unionist Party of Northern Ireland. He is spending money like a drunken sailor; two billion here, two billion there, 20,000 more policemen, and 10,000 new prison places. After years of penny-pinching the Tories are being forced to spend our money on public services.
One of the main factors in the Brexit debate was immigration. Boris Johnson frightened the electorate with predictions of millions of Turks coming to the UK if we stayed in Europe. But he called for an amnesty for 500.000 undocumented migrants when he was Mayor of London, and he has promised to make immigration easier to attract the skilled workers that we need.
During the referendum campaign we heard much from the Brexiteers about ‘sovereignty’ but Boris Johnson has now made himself a dictator by suspending Parliament.
The Old Gang have left us short of doctors, nurses, policemen, scientists and engineers.. All of these workers can be recruited but they will have to be trained and provided with affordable housing. The police will also need somewhere to work as they have sold off so many police stations.
A start has been made on building affordable houses but young couples cannot get mortgages. We need social housing and New York style housing courts to control rents and prevent exploitation.
The tit-for-tat tanker war with Iran has shown that we. We don’t have enough destroyers and frigates to defend British-flagged ships in the Persian Gulf. We could send HMS Queen Elizabeth, our gigantic aircraft carrier, but “Big Lizzie” with her 14 operational F35B aircraft is hardly suitable to counter Iranian inflatables, it would be like using a sledgehammer to crack a walnut.
.
We are also short of soldiers but that doesn’t stop our government from warning the Chinese over Hong Kong. Our 81,500 regulars are ready to take on the People’s Liberation Army of two million men. But don’t worry, we always punch above our weight, and the Chinese don’t like it up ‘em.
We urgently need a Government of National Unity, not just to sort out Brexit but to realistically appraise our situation and put country before party. In the meantime we face an uncertain future.
Violent Crime
Stabbings and shootings have reached epidemic proportions in our major cities. The victims are young men, mostly black, that are involved drug running. The police are calling for drugs to be legalised but, fortunately, our laws are made by Parliament, not by the police. It would make their job easier but that is not what law and order is all about.
Boris Johnson is electioneering by promising more policemen, longer prison sentences, and extra prison places. These measures would certainly help but the real answer is better parenting and education. Many of these kids have never experienced discipline and they do not recognise authority. The liberal experiment in education has failed and we will not see an improvement in juvenile behavior until we return to traditional teaching methods.
Tony Blair made a monumental mistake when he sent British troops to invade Iraq. But he was right when he said “education, education, education.” It really is the answer to most of our problems.
Fortunately, we still have some dedicated teachers who can exert authority. Schools have been throwing out disruptive pupils rather thn deal with them but exclusion is not the answer. The art of raising children to be productive citizens has not been lost, but teachers need the backing of parents and their employers.
When I was working at the Shell building in Waterloo, some years ago, parties of schoolboys used the company’s swimming pool. Some of them were rowdy but one particular school was very well behaved. It was a private school and the pupils were all black. It’s all a matter leadership. Kids from all backgrounds can succeed in life if they are given the chance. Letting them ‘do their own thing’ is not the answer.
Theresa May’s ban on ‘stop and search’ when she was Home Secretary was misguided. She was frightened of upsetting race relations but the police need all the help they can get. They have been undermined by manpower cuts and the privatisation of the probation service. Drug-related crimes are committed by young men of all races but the majority are black. When the police stop and search them they are not being racist, they are protecting the public
We have tried ignoring the problem but it won’t go away Parents must be held responsible for their children, and teachers, magistrates, judges, social workers, probation officers, and policemen must enforce the law.
Over-sensitive concerns about race-relations should not be allowed to confuse the issue. The majority of Black people would welcome a return to law and order.
Nation Revisited
This blog seeks reform by legal means. All articles are by Bill Baillie unless otherwise stated. The opinions of guest writers are entirely their own. We are protected by the UN Declaration of Human Rights, Article 19: “We all have the right to make up our own minds, to think what we like, to say what we think, and to share ideas with other people.”
Comments
Use the facility at the end of this blog to leave your comments and read what others have to say.
.
Our flag was designed by John Bean in 1957 for his National Labour Party. It is used by Nation Revisited with his blessing.The cross represents our nation and the radiant star represents Socialism
Posted by DanielS on Thursday, 29 August 2019 05:04.
When this tweet speaks of “the socialist party” it is speaking of a party that would not delimit social accountability to native interests first and foremost.
The sane management of pervasive ecology has been dealt yet another serious blow as a central element, the management of human ecology through the accountability that ethnonationalism provides, has been pushed aside - at least temporarily - by liberal internationalist interests.
Matteo Salvini’s crucially necessary nativist, ethnonationalist anti-immigration platform has been sidelined by a coalition of the 5-Star Party, which is in cahoots with foreign interests and the corporate internationalist sell-out, Giuseppe Conte, reinstalling him as Prime Minister; allowing him to continue his border liberalization policies which are destroying Italy, Italians and European peoples broadly.
Italy’s corrupt Five-Star Movement announced Wednesday that it had made a deal with the Liberal Party to form a coalition government — keeping Prime Minister Giuseppe Conte in place while avoiding elections and ousting the ethnonationalist League led by Matteo Salvini.
Conte’s position was strengthened this week when President Trump, who pretends to share a similar vision on immigration to Salvini, tweeted his support of Conte – calling him a “very talented man who will hopefully remain Prime Minister!”
Showing his true colors form the start, Trump shunned a meeting with Salvini, who was prepared to endorse him as Trump campaigned for the Presidency.
While Salvini was able to gain popular support by broadening his party’s platform from Lega Nord, to one that represents all of Italy, he sought to gain elite support along with the 5-Stars and Conte’s party by joining the ass-kissing of the Kremlin, the Knesset and the Trumpstein agenda.
Salvini might have added Trumpstein, Putin and Netanyahu to the list of people not to trust with native European interests.
And with friends like that, highly practiced in the art of treachery, the message is: lay down with dogs and wake up with fleas.
Rather, wake up sidelined by the truly corrupt - corrupt enough to push aside your crucially necessary anti-immigration, nativist position and sell out your people and their ancient birthright.
Dr. Jörg D. Valentin@drjdvalentin
#RT
@EchoPRN: RT
@BasedPoland: It’s official.
The #FiveStarMovement & the [liberal] party have reached an agreement to form government
Ibid: #Salvini will be out of government until 2023 (unless snap elections at some point).
This article was originally published on Kurier.plus.
European Union – On July 22, French President Emmanuel Macron announced at a press conference in Paris that an agreement had been reached by 14 countries of the European Union on a temporary and voluntary redistribution mechanism for migrants taken on board European ships in the Mediterranean. Macron then once again threatened those countries that refused to take part in this “voluntary” scheme that France would no longer approve their receipt of EU structural funds. Although no specific country was named,the French media had no doubt that Macron was thinking of the Visegrád Four, and Hungary and Poland in particular. “As far as solidarity is concerned”, the French president said, “Europe is not ‘à la carte’. You cannot have countries saying ‘I don’t want your Europe when it is about sharing the burden, but I want it when it is about receiving structural funds’.”
A new Franco-German redistribution plan with similarities to the old compulsory relocation scheme
According to French sources, the temporary agreement reached in Paris is meant to avoid the endless squabbles over who should take charge of how many migrants each time an NGO ship conducts a new operation near the coast of Libya. It is based on the plan proposed earlier by German foreign minister Heiko Maas when he called for a “coalition of the willing” to replace the failed EU compulsory relocation mechanism. “We must now move forward with those member states that are ready to receive refugees – all others remain invited to participate,”Maas had said. On July 18, at an informal meeting of interior and justice ministers in Helsinki, Maas’s plan was proposed by Germany’s interior minister Horst Seehofer and supported by his French counterpart Christophe Castaner. France then organised the July 22 informal meeting in Paris with foreign and interior ministers from the “coalition of the willing”, as well as officials from the European Commission, the United Nations’ refugee agency and the International Organization for Migration (IOM). Maas’s proposal was by then being presented as a joint Franco-German initiative.
However, only eight countries were actually named and said to have agreed to “actively” take part in such a voluntary redistribution mechanism. These are France, Germany, Finland, Luxembourg, Portugal, Lithuania, Croatia and Ireland. Macron said that “in principle, 14 member states, at this stage, have expressed their agreement with the Franco-German document”, but the other six countries who are supposed to have expressed their agreement have not been named and were nowhere to be found in subsequent media reports.
One thing is for sure: Italy was not among them. And this is good news for the Visegrád Group, as Macron’s statement about EU structural funds clearly shows that, in the minds of some European leaders, this so-called “coalition of the willing”, when it is further discussed at European level in September as planned by Paris and Berlin, is meant to become a new version of the former compulsory EU relocation scheme.As soon as Germany’s foreign minister made known his proposal for a “coalition of the willing”, it was dismissed by former Austrian chancellor Sebastian Kurz. His centre-right ÖVP party being the front-runner to win the election in September, Kurz will probably soon become chancellor again. “The distribution of migrants in Europe has failed,” Kurz said on July 13, “we are once again discussing ideas from 2015 that have long proved impractical.” And he went on to explain that “the order of the day is rather to remove the business case for unscrupulous smugglers and return people after sea rescues to their home or transit countries, as well as creating initiatives for stability and economic development in Africa”, which is exactly what the Visegrád countries have been advocating since the beginning of the current migrant crisis.
In fact, not only would such a scheme take immigration out of the control of participating member states, but the discussions on the subject are sending a new signal to would-be emigrants in Africa and the Middle-East, and also to people smugglers in North Africa, that Europe’s gates are being opened wide once again, thus reinforcing the pull factor created by lenient policies in many European countries – not least in France and Germany, which allow most immigrants to stay and move freely around the Schengen area even after their requests for asylum have been rejected (see here for the figures as of 2018). At a press conference in Helsinki, French interior minister Christophe Castaner himself had to acknowledge that several EU countries fear the proposed voluntary redistribution mechanism will generate a new massive influx of migrants. This impression created by the likes of Maas, Seehofer, Castaner and Macron is further reinforced by the fact that NGO ships are now back in the Mediterranean, trying to force Salvini to reopen Italy’s ports to illegal immigrants, while France and Germany have also been making repeated calls for Italian ports to open up to boats transporting rescued migrants. The Franco-German mechanism which was agreed on in Paris on July 22 is still based on having rescued migrants disembarked in Italian ports and thereafter redistributed among participating countries. Similarly to the now defunct compulsory relocation scheme, the redistribution of migrants would only concern those asylum seekers who are likely to gain refugee status, and who are in fact a small minority of all illegal immigrants trying to cross the Mediterranean. According to the Franco-German plan, the remaining migrants would have to be kept in Italian centres until they could be deported. From the Italian point of view, there is nothing new in that proposal, and such a scheme will probably only increase the pressure on Libyan shores and increase the number of illegal immigrants making it to Europe, as well as the death toll by drowning in the Central Mediterranean.
Italy and Malta came to the summit in Helsinki on July 17–18 with a different proposal. A day after Heiko Maas had first presented his own plan to the German RND media group, namely on July 14, Italy’s foreign minister Esteri Moavero Milanesi described his alternative plan in an interview with Corriere della Sera. What Rome and Valletta proposed was to give people the possibility of applying for refugee status as close as possible to their countries of departure, so that asylum requests could be considered before migrants illegally tried to cross the EU’s external borders. Charter flights would then be organised to safely take to Europe those who really deserved refugee status, thereby weakening the smugglers’ business model and avoiding unnecessary deaths at sea. Since the number of people reaching Europe in such a manner would be smaller and better controlled, a distribution scheme could be more easily agreed among EU member states. For those who nonetheless try to reach Europe illegally by sea, the joint Maltese–Italian plan requires the creation of controlled centres (“hotspots”) in all countries of the EU-28 and common policies to force the countries of departure to take their citizens back. It rejects the idea of having all migrants on the Central Mediterranean route landing in Italy before their relocation to other countries. It also calls for NGO vessels to be kept out of the search & rescue zones of Libya and other third countries.
Salvini to Macron: “Italy will not be France’s refugee camp”
This plan was rejected at Helsinki, as both Germany and France supported Seehofer’s plan. The League’s leader, Matteo Salvini, confirmed in a statement released on the day after a meeting in Helsinki on July 17 between ministers from France, Germany, Italy and Malta that the Franco-German proposal was unacceptable to Italy, as “simply redistributing refugees will leave hard-to-expel illegal immigrants in the first country of arrival”. And while Malta’s Prime Minister Joseph Muscat announced preparations for a new meeting between interior ministers of all four countries in Malta in September, France’s Christophe Castaner announced that he was inviting ministers from the “coalition of the willing” to Paris on July 22 in order to go ahead with the Franco-German scheme.This infuriated Italy’s Matteo Salvini, who refused to take part in the Paris meeting, choosing instead to send a “technical” delegation to block any new joint declaration. On July 19, Salvini wrote his French counterpart a letter in which he expressed his surprise at the fact that only the Franco-German proposal was to be discussed in Paris,pointing out that the Maltese–Italian proposal had “gathered broad support” among EU countries. In that letter, the League’s leader insisted again on the need to review the rules on search and rescue operations in order to put an end to behaviours which encourage illegal and uncontrolled immigration, and to make NGOs comply with both international and national laws. According to Salvini, many at the Justice and Home Affairs Council held in Helsinki had “positions very close to the one expressed by Italy, in particular as regards a strict commitment to a migration policy based on the protection of the EU’s and the Schengen Area’s external borders”.
After the announcement by President Macron of an agreement reached under his auspices and supported by 14 countries (of which only eight, including France, were named and said to be ready to participate “actively”), Italy’s interior minister published a video on his Facebook profile with his own virulent reaction, mocking French leaders and saying directly to Macron, whom he called by his first name, that if he wanted ports open to migrants he should open France’s own ports in Marseilles, Corsica and elsewhere. He added that Italy would not take orders from France and would not be France’s refugee camp, as it is not a French colony.
Italy under pressure from France and Germany to take back illegal immigrants as per the Dublin Regulation
Salvini’s tone was no surprise to observers, who have been witnessing deteriorating relations between France and Italy since those whom the French president contemptuously calls “populists” and “nationalists” formed a coalition government in Rome over a year ago. Salvini’s mockery and verbal attacks have mostly come in response to Macron’s own highly arrogant and undiplomatic criticism of Italy’s leaders, particularly Matteo Salvini, which resembles some of the language he has used against the leaders of Poland and Hungary, as when he publicly asked last autumn in Bratislava: “What are these leaders doing with these crazy minds and lying to their people?”. Salvini’s anger is further fueled by the fact that, while French leaders call for Italy to open its ports to migrants for humanitarian reasons,the French authorities have been enforcing border controls for years between Ventimiglia and Menton on the Mediterranean coast, and they send back illegal immigrants to Italy, including, according to some media reports, when those immigrants are caught at some distance from the Italian border, in which case such ‘hot returns’ are in breach of European rules. The Italians have also accused Germany of breaking the rules when returning migrants to Italy as per the Dublin Regulation (the so-called “Dubliners”). Apart from being asked by Germany and France to reopen its ports to illegal immigrants, as the first country of arrival Italy is under great pressure from other EU member states to take back some 46,000 immigrants. As a consequence of the mass disembarkation which took place under the auspices of Matteo Renzi’s government, the number of asylum seekers sent back to Italy has tripled in just five years, with most of the 188,000 requests for transfer made since 2013 coming from Germany, Switzerland, France and Austria.
To make things worse, on the eve of the Paris meeting of July 22, SOS Méditerranée, an NGO based in the French city of Marseilles, announced the launch of a new joint search and rescue operation together with the Franco-Swiss NGO Doctors Without Borders (MSF), using a new boat said to be larger and faster than the Aquarius, which has remained blocked at the request of Italian prosecutors. The Ocean Viking left the Polish port of Szczecin flying the Norwegian flag and heading towards Libyan shores. SOS Méditerranée and MSF estimate the cost of this operation at around €14,000 per day. In a press release published on July 12, the city of Paris had announced that it would contribute €100,000 to this expensive operation. The grant made by the French capital was announced at the same time as the award of a medal to Carola Rackete and Pia Klemp, two German NGO vessel captains who are facing serious charges in Italy for allegedly aiding illegal immigration, including – in the case of Klemp – through active collusion with smugglers.
France’s responsibility for the situation in Libya
Hollywood millionaire Richard Gere has called upon the Italian government to assist migrants who have been stranded on a Spanish charity boat in the Mediterranean for more than a week.
The Italian government needed to stop “demonizing people”, the actor said.
Gere boarded the vessel, which has been blocked from entering Italian waters, on Friday.
Gere, who visited the Open Arms ship in a show of support, also joined a news conference on the Italian island of Lampedusa calling for the migrants to be allowed to dock.
He made comparisons between Salvini, who has made repeated efforts to block migrant ships from docking in Italy, and US President Donald Trump, who has faced widespread criticism for his immigration policies.
“We have our problems with refugees coming from Honduras, Salvador, Nicaragua, Mexico… It’s very similar to what you are going through here”, he said, accusing both politicians of demonizing migrants.
“This has to stop everywhere on this planet now. And it will stop if we say stop”, he added.
It didn’t take Salvini long to respond.
“Given this generous millionaire is voicing concern for the fate of the Open Arms migrants, we thank him: he can take back to Hollywood, on his private plane, all the people aboard and support them in his villas. Thank you Richard!”, he said in a statement. Over the course of a career spanning more than 40 years, Gere, 69, has starred in films including Pretty Woman, American Gigolo and An Officer and a Gentleman.
A campaigner for environmental causes and AIDS awareness, he is also a Buddhist who pays regular visits to Dharamshala, the headquarters of the Tibetan government-in-exile.
Richard Gere is worth an estimated £100million according to the website celebritynetworth.com.
Salvini, whose party made sweeping gains in last year’s Italian general election, has pledged to deport 500,000 migrants by 2023. Earlier this week he tabled a motion of no confidence in his own government, in a bid to force through a snap election and take control from his coalition partners Five Star Movement.
When this tweet speaks of “the socialist party” it is speaking of a party that would not delimit social accountability to native interests first and foremost.
Salvini might have added Trumpstein, Putin and Netanyahu to the list of people not to trust with native European interests.
Statue of Bandera in Western Ukraine.
Prime Minister of the Czech Republic, Andrej Babis
