Too bad Orban is getting money in spite of his terrible behavior -- internally with his own people and within the EU. So great to see the rest of Europe stand up against the bully.
Scholz has really stepped up to the plate. What was it? The Hamas invasion? The attacks on NATO member Romania? The realization that solar and wind was not going to provide energy security? In any case, it is certainly appropriate that the richest countries in Europe realize that they need to help Ukraine stem the most recent invasion of Europe.
Now to kick Justin Trudeau to the curb and get a real Canadian leader with more brains than pretty socks!!!! Canada is the weakest link in energy thru no fault of our own - just a minced meat head of a leader more interested in 'image' than common sense. (can I say that without being in trouble?)
I agree - Hungary has shown its true colors - RUssian - NOT a good player in the defence for Europe - Will they oust Hungary? Will watch to see if they have the 'mettle' to do it - for the better of the union & safety.
All those reasons and also I'd say Scholz doesn't like being out-Polanded, he's kind of had enough of Poland being talked of as the new Germany! But now Donald Tusk is the new man in change in Warsaw, the Germans are going to have to stay on their toes. Healthy competition!
I am bawling!!!!! I am so happpppy!!!!!! Beyond what I thought was going to happen - Western Europe has STEPPED UP!!!! Thanks for letting us know so soon - I've been so 'depressed' and feeling so helplessly down but ------ No more!!!! Thanks thanks thanks Diane!!!!! Tears of JOY! I can't imagine what the people of UKR are feeling right now - WOWOWOWOW
This is so important to counter the "official Chinese story" that the Ukranian struggle is just a US financed war against Putin. Perhaps a slightly different tactic will be taken in the East.
Excellent as always, but what about Orban now blocking 50 billion of EU aid to Ukraine? Is this just blackmail until he receives more money for Hungary from the EU?
NYTimes: "If Orban continues to block the funds, the E.U. can still create a trust with the other 26 member countries, which have all signaled their approval. But doing so would be cumbersome and would further illustrate the problems that Mr. Putin relishes: cracks in the group’s support for Ukraine."
The outcome is good but the way it had to get there "shucks". Orban is as close to being a one-man ruler as one can get without having to produce bloodied heads to prove it. But, even there, he has toughened on "dissent" recently. The EU has been putting up with a great many deviations from EU standards and requirements and holding out financial incentives to have Orban fix one thing or another which Orban should be doing to stay a member in good standing with the EU.
Promising $20 billion in payments to a fundamentally corrupt government and treating him as if no one knows of the close business relationship and loans he and his party have been getting from Putin to ensure that Putin can refer to him as "our man in NATO and the EU" does not speak well of EU's members. They are pussy cats and subsidizing extortion.
The members should toughen up and face down a sleazebag like Orban by telling him that he's not getting a penny from the EU until he drops his links to Putin, conforms to EU standards, and stops obstructing proceedings. The organizers of both the EU and NATO made a huge mistake in requiring unanimity.....any law student in his first year in law school will tell you that this is an open invitation to bribery and extortion. A 75% vote would have been more than adequate. Most commercial enterprises have rules requiring only a majority vote by Directors and may go as high as 75% when a company is faced with a termination or corporate acquisition decision.
The "ascension" process may take years and Orban will have numerous opportunities to frustrate and sabotage proceedings throughout that whole period. He would have gotten his money, pried EU off his back in his efforts to further corrupt his country, and return to do Putin's work.
Someone in the EU and NATO should take the lead in seeking a modification of the by-laws to eliminate such tinpot dictator wannabes from shaking down the other members.
I fully understand your strong emphasis on unanimity. And, of course, articles 5 and 6 of the NATO charter reflect this. However, we should also look at the Charter and its weaknesses from the enemy's (in this case Russia's) perspective. They will be looking for its weaknesses and vulnerabilities and are fully aware of them.
Orban is one example of a weakness or vulnerability. The Charter allows one out of 30 NATO members to veto a course of action chosen by the other 29. That means that Putin can count on Orban to forever do his will on decisions facing NATO. There appears to be no way that NATO can kick out Putin's agent in its midst. Turkey showed that it alone could prevent NATO's expansion to include Finland and Sweden.
But there is another major vulnerability that we often overlook. While all 30 countries are
"bound" to take some action in case of an "armed attack" as defined in Article 6, there is nothing in Article 6 that requires what kind of action is required. Orban may choose to send an ambulance with an armed medic to Estonia under attack and no one can claim that he failed to honor his obligation. NATO, itself, has barely any force - other than a rapid response force - at its disposal, so it must rely on each member's "trustworthiness" to carry its load or go begging hat in hand.
My comment about institutional by-laws (and both NATO and the EU are institutions) and placing some percentage.....let it be 90%.....on decision-making by that institution's "Board" (presumably the authorized representatives of each member government) on critical issues such as enlargement or (as in this case, providing an EU financial lifeline to Ukraine) one country should not be allowed to frustrate the will of all others.
My objection was not towards the clause of unanimity to respond (as one) towards an armed attack but towards leaving it entirely to the will of anyone -or two or three members- to frustrate the decision and will of all the rest. This would be unthinkable and unworkable in almost all private and public institutions of the world and the dissenting member (as you say) can leave or be a team player. But what if the dissenting member chooses not to leave and not to be a team player? Do they all go home and hold a requiem for the institution as it goes under?
When the "crunch" comes, who will be able to fault Orban for failing to do more than send one ambulance with a uniformed medic to his NATO member? Or, when Ukraine folds because it can not sustain its armed forces without financial support..... who will take the blame for an obscene decision: Orban (who has even stated that Ukraine is not really a viable state) or the other 26 members who wanted to support Ukraine?
For organizations - any organizations - to function and survive, its members must have rules providing for the type of decisions its "board" may be obliged to make and by what level of "preponderance". And dissenting members who disagree (after having an opportunity to express their views) must be respectfully asked to ensure that the door does not.....etc.
I don't emphasize unanimity, that's the organizing principle for the EU and NATO. Orban's a saboteur working for Putin and must be kicked out. This demonstrates why.
That Macron is a loose cannon but can sometimes hit the mark and a lavish dinner at the Elysee Palace is not like being invited to a bun fight in London or god forbid Washington. And that Orban is a fleshy man with compromised arteries. Good score, Emmanuel and good stroke, Olaf Scholz. The prostitutes are dancing in the streets of Kyiv; although it is freezing the Ukrainians are jubilant.
Too bad Orban is getting money in spite of his terrible behavior -- internally with his own people and within the EU. So great to see the rest of Europe stand up against the bully.
i agree totallly
Scholz has really stepped up to the plate. What was it? The Hamas invasion? The attacks on NATO member Romania? The realization that solar and wind was not going to provide energy security? In any case, it is certainly appropriate that the richest countries in Europe realize that they need to help Ukraine stem the most recent invasion of Europe.
AMEN
Now to kick Justin Trudeau to the curb and get a real Canadian leader with more brains than pretty socks!!!! Canada is the weakest link in energy thru no fault of our own - just a minced meat head of a leader more interested in 'image' than common sense. (can I say that without being in trouble?)
And being licksppittle to the left. Well done Germany France and Belgium. Time to oust Hungary in bed with Russia
I agree - Hungary has shown its true colors - RUssian - NOT a good player in the defence for Europe - Will they oust Hungary? Will watch to see if they have the 'mettle' to do it - for the better of the union & safety.
They shoukd
He's in or he's out.
YES !!! Trudeau the dangerous lightweight.
All those reasons and also I'd say Scholz doesn't like being out-Polanded, he's kind of had enough of Poland being talked of as the new Germany! But now Donald Tusk is the new man in change in Warsaw, the Germans are going to have to stay on their toes. Healthy competition!
I am bawling!!!!! I am so happpppy!!!!!! Beyond what I thought was going to happen - Western Europe has STEPPED UP!!!! Thanks for letting us know so soon - I've been so 'depressed' and feeling so helplessly down but ------ No more!!!! Thanks thanks thanks Diane!!!!! Tears of JOY! I can't imagine what the people of UKR are feeling right now - WOWOWOWOW
Now the offensive defence must be played out against the tyrants. Take over the Venezuelan off shore
Oil Assets. Teach them to threaten Guayan oil assets , urged on by Russians.
John Pacey
There's lot of work for the free 'leaders' to do - no more sit back and watch!!!
Such a smart move, getting the boor to leave the room. Now for NATO to pull off the same.
Lets hope this gets Ukraine closer to NATO membership.
good!
This was a very important step for Europe to solidify
the EU for Ukraine and against Russia.
Due to the dysfunction of the
Republican portion of the
Congress and portions in our
Senate as well, due to pressure from Donald Trump
and his backers, no aid for
Ukraine is moving. The border is a carrot the Republicans hold out, but
would never agree to any
compromise on their H.R.2
Thank you, Diane for the good news from EU and
how they stood up to a
bully.
This is so important to counter the "official Chinese story" that the Ukranian struggle is just a US financed war against Putin. Perhaps a slightly different tactic will be taken in the East.
Excellent as always, but what about Orban now blocking 50 billion of EU aid to Ukraine? Is this just blackmail until he receives more money for Hungary from the EU?
NYTimes: "If Orban continues to block the funds, the E.U. can still create a trust with the other 26 member countries, which have all signaled their approval. But doing so would be cumbersome and would further illustrate the problems that Mr. Putin relishes: cracks in the group’s support for Ukraine."
Thank you for taking the time to reply. Let’s hope the money goes to Ukraine soon
Agree 1000%
The outcome is good but the way it had to get there "shucks". Orban is as close to being a one-man ruler as one can get without having to produce bloodied heads to prove it. But, even there, he has toughened on "dissent" recently. The EU has been putting up with a great many deviations from EU standards and requirements and holding out financial incentives to have Orban fix one thing or another which Orban should be doing to stay a member in good standing with the EU.
Promising $20 billion in payments to a fundamentally corrupt government and treating him as if no one knows of the close business relationship and loans he and his party have been getting from Putin to ensure that Putin can refer to him as "our man in NATO and the EU" does not speak well of EU's members. They are pussy cats and subsidizing extortion.
The members should toughen up and face down a sleazebag like Orban by telling him that he's not getting a penny from the EU until he drops his links to Putin, conforms to EU standards, and stops obstructing proceedings. The organizers of both the EU and NATO made a huge mistake in requiring unanimity.....any law student in his first year in law school will tell you that this is an open invitation to bribery and extortion. A 75% vote would have been more than adequate. Most commercial enterprises have rules requiring only a majority vote by Directors and may go as high as 75% when a company is faced with a termination or corporate acquisition decision.
The "ascension" process may take years and Orban will have numerous opportunities to frustrate and sabotage proceedings throughout that whole period. He would have gotten his money, pried EU off his back in his efforts to further corrupt his country, and return to do Putin's work.
Someone in the EU and NATO should take the lead in seeking a modification of the by-laws to eliminate such tinpot dictator wannabes from shaking down the other members.
It's like making sausages, same everywhere
Unanimity is key. Hungary doesn't have to remain a member
Diane,
I fully understand your strong emphasis on unanimity. And, of course, articles 5 and 6 of the NATO charter reflect this. However, we should also look at the Charter and its weaknesses from the enemy's (in this case Russia's) perspective. They will be looking for its weaknesses and vulnerabilities and are fully aware of them.
Orban is one example of a weakness or vulnerability. The Charter allows one out of 30 NATO members to veto a course of action chosen by the other 29. That means that Putin can count on Orban to forever do his will on decisions facing NATO. There appears to be no way that NATO can kick out Putin's agent in its midst. Turkey showed that it alone could prevent NATO's expansion to include Finland and Sweden.
But there is another major vulnerability that we often overlook. While all 30 countries are
"bound" to take some action in case of an "armed attack" as defined in Article 6, there is nothing in Article 6 that requires what kind of action is required. Orban may choose to send an ambulance with an armed medic to Estonia under attack and no one can claim that he failed to honor his obligation. NATO, itself, has barely any force - other than a rapid response force - at its disposal, so it must rely on each member's "trustworthiness" to carry its load or go begging hat in hand.
My comment about institutional by-laws (and both NATO and the EU are institutions) and placing some percentage.....let it be 90%.....on decision-making by that institution's "Board" (presumably the authorized representatives of each member government) on critical issues such as enlargement or (as in this case, providing an EU financial lifeline to Ukraine) one country should not be allowed to frustrate the will of all others.
My objection was not towards the clause of unanimity to respond (as one) towards an armed attack but towards leaving it entirely to the will of anyone -or two or three members- to frustrate the decision and will of all the rest. This would be unthinkable and unworkable in almost all private and public institutions of the world and the dissenting member (as you say) can leave or be a team player. But what if the dissenting member chooses not to leave and not to be a team player? Do they all go home and hold a requiem for the institution as it goes under?
When the "crunch" comes, who will be able to fault Orban for failing to do more than send one ambulance with a uniformed medic to his NATO member? Or, when Ukraine folds because it can not sustain its armed forces without financial support..... who will take the blame for an obscene decision: Orban (who has even stated that Ukraine is not really a viable state) or the other 26 members who wanted to support Ukraine?
For organizations - any organizations - to function and survive, its members must have rules providing for the type of decisions its "board" may be obliged to make and by what level of "preponderance". And dissenting members who disagree (after having an opportunity to express their views) must be respectfully asked to ensure that the door does not.....etc.
I don't emphasize unanimity, that's the organizing principle for the EU and NATO. Orban's a saboteur working for Putin and must be kicked out. This demonstrates why.
Exactly right.
That Macron is a loose cannon but can sometimes hit the mark and a lavish dinner at the Elysee Palace is not like being invited to a bun fight in London or god forbid Washington. And that Orban is a fleshy man with compromised arteries. Good score, Emmanuel and good stroke, Olaf Scholz. The prostitutes are dancing in the streets of Kyiv; although it is freezing the Ukrainians are jubilant.