Majorityrights News > Category: Activism

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).

Italians can prepare for a new …

Ergo, maybe you can ‘weenie the Salvini’...

Euractiv File photo. Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro attends the BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) Leaders’ meeting on the sidelines of G20 summit in Osaka, Japan, 28 June 2019. [Kremlin pool/EPA/EFE]

G7 agrees on €18 million plan for forest fires but Brazil refuses aid

Euractiv 27 Aug 2019:

On Monday (26 August), the second day of the G7 meeting in Biarritz, France, climate protection was on the agenda. Even though states agreed on a plan to tackle forest fires in the Amazon rainforest, Brazil rejected foreign aid. EURACTIV Germany reports

During the G7 summit, heads of state and government agreed on an emergency programme with almost €18 million to tackle the forest fires in the Amazon region. French President Emmanuel Macron had put the topic on the meeting’s agenda at short notice.

However, only a few hours later, Brazil’s cabinet chief Onyx Lorenzoni rejected the programme. He told a news portal that Brazil was not prepared to take the money and urged Europe to reforest ‘its own backyard’. The Brazilian press office of the presidency confirmed the rejection to AFP.

The Amazon rainforest, which is about twice the area of France (1.2 million km2), has been seeing many forest fires. For Macron, this is “a drama that concerns all of humanity”. That is why states want to provide Brazil with immediate financial and technical help.

The UK has been the largest donor, as it has proposed to deploy €11 million for the emergency fund. The UK also pledged to double its contribution to the international climate fund. Since 2014, the fund has provided $100 billion each year for regions afffected by climate change. The UK will therefore contribute almost €1.6 billion over the next four years.

Green Climate Fund
@GCF_News
The UK announces a doubling of their contribution to the #GreenClimateFund! Cheers for your leadership in turning #ClimateAmbition into #ClimateAction. #G7 #G7Biarritz @DFID_UK https://g.cf/2Nz89vB

10:29 - 26 Aug 2019

Macron also stated that a comprehensive reforestation programme for the Amazon region should be agreed at the climate summit in New York in September. Nine countries affected by the forest fires – Brazil, French Guyana, Peru, Colombia, Venezuela, Suriname, Bolivia, Ecuador and Guyana – should benefit from the programme.

In these areas, forest fires have increased dramatically in recent weeks. Many of the fires are not natural as they result from fire clearances that create free space for animal breeding, for example.

According to Brazil’s National Institute for Space Research, 60% more rainforest was subject to slash-and-burn practices in June compared to the same month last year.

G7 weekend sum-up: Trump deepens divisions by pushing for Russia’s readmission
The readmission of Russia in the Group of Seven most industrialised countries became a bone of contention between Donald Trump and his partners during a summit held in Biarritz (France), as the Europeans and Canada insisted on maintaining the group as a “club of liberal democracies”.

Forest fires for financial interests

Brazil rejecting aid is not that surprising. The country’s right-wing populist president Jair Bolsonaro said such foreign aid had a “colonialist mentality” behind it.

It was not until France and Ireland threatened to block the long-planned trade agreement between the EU and Mercosur states that Brazil started to act. The president deployed 43,000 army troops and two military aircraft to deal with the forest fires over the weekend. Observers accuse Bolsonaro of at least tolerating the fires in his own country and of expecting economic benefits from the clearance.

France and Ireland threaten to vote against EU-Mercosur deal
Irish Prime Minister Leo Varadkar has threatened to vote against a trade deal between the EU and South American trade bloc Mercosur unless Brazil, where wildfires continue to devastate the Amazon rainforest, takes its environmental obligations more seriously.

The trade agreement between the EU and the Mercosur states has thus become a driver of forest fires, criticised Martin Häusling, a spokesman for agricultural policy for the Greens/EFA group in the European Parliament.

“Brazil is creating space for grazing land and soy plantations – because Europe is to be supplied with the meat of 600,000 cattle and countless chickens. And that needs space,” Häusling said.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel was satisfied with the talks on climate protection. Yesterday morning, Merkel held talks with UN Secretary-General António Guterres. It had been agreed that in the run-up to the COP25, the “commitment of as many countries as possible to climate neutrality by 2050 was of utmost importance”.

Trump’s chair remained empty

Further details on the G7 climate session are not yet known.

In addition to fires in the Amazon rainforest, the states at the G7 summit had also debated the protection of the oceans. In July, the EU and Canada launched a joint ocean programme.

Why the ocean should be on the G7 agenda
Surfrider Europe, a French organisation fighting for clean oceans,  is organising an event ahead of the G7 summit in France. The aim is to call for incorporating ocean protection into international negotiations, particularly those concerning climate change. EURACTIV’s partner la Tribune reports.

US President Donald Trump did not take part in the working session on environment issues.

When journalists asked him whether he had been present after the working session, he replied that “the meeting will take place soon” and did not respond to the objection that it had already taken place.

According to media reports, US government representatives had snubbed Macron’s agenda for including “niche issues” such as biodiversity rather than economic issues.

According to Macron, there should be a final summit statement, albeit a minimalist one. At the previous summit, Trump withdrew his support from the joint statement At the last G7 summit, Trump decided not to sign the final summit statement.

[Edited by Zoran Radosavljevic]

The Race War of 1919 (and why historians ignore it)

Here’s Fredo, the Aryan overman - or is he the ghost of Armenia, which Hitler suggested as an example of genocides that would be forgotten once a war of annihilation was long completed?

In recent months I’ve had the misfortune to have been confronted by an idiot going by the handle “ovfuckyou.” I did not seek him out. I found myself encountered by him in circumstances where people with overlapping (White Nationalist) concerns thought it might be constructive to “debate” him and his idea that WN should rally under Hitler and his programmatic leadership.

As I have said many times, Majorityrights is a platform that plainly rejects that idea; it rather functions as recourse for people who are able to see the obvious - that the people of today are not responsible for the World Wars, and all reasonable European peoples should be able to rally and coordinate under the rubric of ethnonationalism (while diaspora can be coordinated by the DNA Nations concept), but not all Europeans will be able to rally under Hitler and his program, quite the opposite. Thus, while there was obvious provocation from Jewry (unless we ascribe to the absurd position that Germans were ex-nihilo violent en mass) we reject the program of trying to redeem Hitler on balance and to engage in elaborate attempts to justify or deny his bad judgments and misdeeds.

These are such obvious and easy points to make by means of numerous references that I don’t like to discuss the issues, as I have no desire to lay guilt trips or stir up animosity among present day Europeans, for whatever side of WWII their ancestors were on. Hence, I have endeavored to post reference material to state in as brief and conciliatory a manner as possible, why it is that White Nationalism should Not try to redeem Hitler and Nazism as proponents of White Nationalism; they are rather significantly divisive and stigmatizing influences where adhered to the extent that an idiot like ovfuckyou does.

Sure ov is falling out with former White associates (e.g., people calling themselves “the gas station”). The right is inherently unstable. Typically, he’s talking to Jews now, of course - because they want to maintain the association of Hitler and WN. It’s divide and conquer.

ovfuckyou unabashedly identifies with the swastika.

It is one thing to say, “ok, Hitler and the Nazis had their reasons, and they had some things right”... but if one is to exercise 20/20 hindsight the place to find it is not in Nazi propaganda.

Having gotten myself lured into testing “debate” with ovfuckyou (accompanied by a few other Nazophiles) because he was hanging-out with Norvin, whom I hope to help around into a more stable position (his association with ov is broken, so that’s good, at least for the time being), I endeavored to explain the perspective of the nations between The Soviet Union and Nazi Germany, viz. Poland, Belarus, Ukraine, and Czech.

Understanding the perspective of these nations goes far to debunk an argument critical to Nazi apologists, i.e., that “Hitler was acting defensively against a Soviet invasion.”

Further debunking the Nazi position is to show that territorial concessions required of Germany by the Treaty of Versailles and St. Germain were not wholly arbitrary and without justification.

It is apparent why, at this point, ovfuckyuou and friends started to shout over me, talking in mock Jewish voices, saying that I was whining about things (whining? I don’t even like talking about this history ..if anyone is whining it is them and if anyone should be complaining about the war, it is the victims - including the Germans - of Hitler’s hair-brained program).

He’s been making the rounds in what appears to be The Regnery Circus 2.0

While I can kind of understand Norvin and a few other newbies, especially German Americans coming up through American right wing auspices, not being quite ready to be finished with ov’s angle, he’s been propped up, making the circuit on other White advocacy platforms, with people who’s intelligence and audience I have some regard for otherwise, and whose platforms overlap Majorityrights in significant ways - should be entirely; hence, to simply walk away from them is not on order.

After the mishap with the debate proposal by Norvin, which demonstrated that I ought not bother bringing the good-willed Per Nordin let alone the consummate professional, Dr. Christian Lindner, into the mudslinging of Ov, I found myself in a hangout with him, Claire Khaw and Church of Entropy. We were both opposed to Church of Entropy, no need to go into details - but that and other temporary alignments with ov caused me to let my guard down a bit when he found his way onto Eccelux streams.

When people are as apparently intelligent as Eccelux I have difficulty suspending disbelief that they can be blinded to the obvious.

Part of Ecce’s blindness may stem from fairly commercial aspirations. One can say that we need to get our voice out there, but then is it our voice when a litmus test is put in place that we represent ourselves by means of eye rolling right wing perfidy?

There seems to be something like a Regnery circus 2.0 in re-formation. The Regnery perspective was the structural backing of The Alt-Right. Richard Spencer was a central figure and apparently remains. Litmus tests were in order to join the club: an anti social identity - Nazi sympathy, German supremacism, Christianity, scientism, right wing elitism generally - including Jews if sufficiently Germanophilic.

Richard Spencer once said that we have to make sure that people are right on the “PQ”, the Polish question, and if they are not, they need to be ostracized. He added, “there’s not going to be your little Poland.” Well, why not? Why not “little Poland” and “little Germany”?

Apparently because Spencer is not an ethnonationalist, he’s an imperialist surpremacist who wishes for a Molotiv-Ribbentrop Pact 2.

The Rengery perspective is not simply Gemanophilic, though it is that, it is not simply Nazophilic, though it is that. It is tolerant of pagans and other non Christians but it prefers Christians. It’s tolerant of Jews, will even include them in the big tent if they’re against “the left” and more particularly, if they are Germanophilic Jews, added points if they do apologetics for Nazi Germany or Holocaust deniers.

The Regnery Circus platform was The Voice of Reason Broadcasting Network a few years back. Now defunct, the circus functions through a few Youtube channels.

Josh Neal shows all the hallmarks of being a focal point for its rounds, many of the same ironic combination of Nazi apologetics and Jews/those who believe that Jews should be included in orchestrating White advocacy.

Recently, Josh was talking to Brett Stevens - the guy and his site, “Amerika,” are clearly shills for Jewish interests.

Ovfuckyuou is playing the Carolyn Yeager role of pure Nazi.

I know, I know, it’s 4D chess, the Rubix Cube.

Interestingly, in his last talk with Eccelux (and Faustian Spirit), ovfuckyou had the nerve to say that ‘there’s a void resulting from White people being cast into a binary decision between liberalism or Nazism’ when in fact, I’ve been offering a clear alternative to that for ten years now - while ovfuckyou talked and blustered over me when I attempted to articulate this position.

Here are some of the perfidies that ovfuckyou tried to put across as “argument”:

When I said that I wash my hands of coal burners (burn the coal pay the toll), ovfuckyou issued the ridiculous non-sequitur that I was being ‘hypocritical’ in not believing that nationals, e.g., French, defending their nations and people against Nazi Germany should die.

He said that.

Just to test further how absurd he might be, I asked, what would you expect me to say to Polish people regarding Hitler?

Ovfuckyou said that I should say to them that “Hitler was not so bad.” He said that, he really said that. I laughed, genuinely.

On two different occasions he spoke of the good relations between Germans, including Nazi Germany, and Russia.

Do I really need to look beyond the Leningrad and Stalingrad to cite examples of how relations were not necessarily so great between Hitler’s platform and the Russian folk? How about the Russian rapes of German women by war’s end for good Russian/Nazi rapport?

Because I am not overly sympathetic to Germany’s arguments for WWI or WWII, let alone the destruction wrought by their war efforts in both cases, citing examples of destruction that ovfuckyou apparently didn’t want to hear about, he tried to insist that I was anti German.

I repeat, in truth, that I am not anti German. I advocate Germans as I advocate all European peoples; but not only as arbitrary Europeans, I advocate the maintenance of our discreet kinds; in other words, Germany as an ethnostate for Germans and the capacity of German diaspora to maintain their kinds as well, whether coordinated through the DNA Nations or their German clubs and so on… the same rule structure that I advocate for all European peoples.

When it would become clear to him that there were cogent White Nationalist arguments to be made without, even against the Nazi position, ovfuckyou not only tried to talk over, but to shout over; and when I recognized that he’s not going to talk in good faith and rose above his din by raising my own volume, he tried to say that he was triggering me and had won the debate - said that he couldn’t believe that I was Italian because Italians are not so “thin-skinned.”

First of all, I thought that Italians were notoriously temperamental - my family certainly was.

Secondly, why would I be so “thin skinned” as to not want to platform his stupidity, for ‘little issues’ like not wanting to include Hitler redemption in a WN platform, nor wanting to be bothered with holocaust denial - why would I be ‘so thin skinned as to not want to be associated with that?’

OvFredo presses down on his diaphragm for his trademark “well adjusted” fake chuckle that’s supposed to unnerve and disarm.

When it didn’t work, when I did not want to be bothered with this recalcitrant idiot, he proceeded to berate me as a faggot, a Pollock and he said he would kick my ass. Ecce and I were off the air with ovfuckyou when he launched into this little tirade.

Look at him. Who’s ass is he going to kick? Who is he going to unite with this sort of incitement under the banner of Hitler?

This was followed by a series of abusive emails from ovfuckyou - all because I don’t love Hitler.

It’s not enough to be ok with Germans, to want to ally with them, to fight on the same side in coordination of their interests, to advocate their German ethnostate, their diasporic species, not enough to view Jews as other, aliens with interests other than ours, predominantly hostile, requiring separatism - no. If I don’t love Hitler this asshole is going to to try to trash me.

The road to hell can be paved with bad intentions as well.

I’m asking you too, Ecce. Is that too hard a Rubix cube? Is there a sack big enough to accommodate ovfuckyou’s shit?

And yet Ecce is all cool with him, says I’m being over sensitive.

Perhaps the Regnery Circus might be there to rescue and underwrite ovfuckyou. Josh Neal endorses him. Checking all the right boxes.

“Unite the right”, works real good

.................

In sum, for me to take the honest position of advocating all European peoples, and the maintenance of their discreet kinds - I’m an ethnonationalist, so, Germany for Germans - and to extend the DNA Nations to maintain the discreet kinds of Europeans in diaspora as well; and furthermore, to say that I do not want present day Germans to feel guilty about history, nor do I - this was not enough for ovfuckyou. He starts attacking me, trying to belittle me as a “Pollock” and a “faggot”, and ostracize because I won’t genuflect to Hitler.

Watch it kiddo. The road to hell can be paved with bad intentions as well.

I’ve invited ovfuckyou to Europe, including Poland and parts east. You can tell the people for yourself how great Hitler was, how he was “not that bad.”

Ovfuckyou, your stupidity is so destructive that there is no negative consequence that could come to you that would not leave me feeling just fine about it.

Engaged in a bitter dispute with France and Germany over illegal immigration, Italy sides with the Visegrád Group

By Olivier Bault, Visigrad Post, 8 Aug 2019:

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.

       
        Total death toll from January 1 to July 26 each year (Central Mediterranean route only).
        Source: https://missingmigrants.iom.int/region/mediterranean

The Italian–Maltese plan

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

READ MORE...

Related at Majorityrights:

As Kumiko Predicted: Bolton appointed to Alt-Lite/Right/Trump Admin coalition w Israel. Next up Iran

John(((1/8)))Bolton

These Are White Nationalists? What Is Behind TRS And The Alt-Right’s Gushing Effusion For Trump?

Unite the Right Charlottesville: successful neocon/liberal operation forces wedge against paleo-Cohn

Though previously fired over clandestine meetings with Israelis, Priti Patel named UK home secretary