By openly invoking the role of investors, financial markets and the defense of the eurozone in his speech on Sunday, the president [Italian President Sergio Mattarella] lends credence to the populist argument that Italy has become the battleground in a war between the international establishment and national democracies. Even if populists win the elections, their supporters believe, they will never be allowed to hold power for fear that they would oppose the dogma that dominates the eurozone.
Australia is finding much of its exports to the People’s Republic of China piling up in PRC ports (Australian wine is the proximate subject of the WSJ piece at the link)—not because the customers no longer want them but because the PRC government objects to Australian policies designed to limit PRC meddling in Australian domestic affairs.
From that, there’s this remark by Rob Taylor, the piece’s author:
Australia faces an awkward diplomatic balancing act in trying to address concerns about political interference while relying heavily on China for its economic well-being.
Much has been made of National Security Advisor John Bolton’s remark that the “Libya Model” would make a good example for handling northern Korea’s nuclear weapons and its nuclear weapons development program. That todo is centered on what the NLMSM is pleased to describe as the “Libya Model.” Deutsche Welle‘s characterization is typical:
…North Korea could end up like Libya, which found itself in a civil war and its leader killed after giving up its nuclear weapons.
Walter Russell Mead had an op-ed in Monday’s Wall Street Journal wherein he suggested that, while Europe…is dismayed…with President Donald Trump, they still need us, as we need them. There are, though, a couple of remarks that want response.
The Europeans should have checked the relevant clauses in the American Constitution, assessed the state of congressional sentiment, and realized that Mr Obama simply lacked the authority, political or constitutional, to commit the country permanently to such an agreement.
The Europeans knew—and know—this stuff full well. They’re just desperate for Iran’s post-JCPOA nuclear-armed missiles to fall elsewhere than Europe and hoping that their continued appeasement today might achieve that.
Iran says that not only are Germany, France, and Great Britain not doing enough to satisfy the demands it’s made as a quid pro quo for staying in the nuclear weapons deal. All of the EU must pay some vig. Here’s Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif:
With the exit of the United States from the nuclear deal, the expectations of the Iranian public towards the European Union have increased….
That’s one mindset; unfortunately, it’s not unique to Iran: we exist, therefore, you owe.
Here’s another Iranian mindset:
The cascade of decisions by EU companies to end their activities in Iran makes things much more complicated[.]
German Chancellor Angela Merkel met with Russian President Vladimir Putin a few days ago in the Russian city of Sochi, which is next door to Russia-partitioned Georgia and a short Black Sea hop from Russian-occupied Crimea and eastern Ukraine. While the two talked of many things: of cease fires—and peace keepers—and pipelines—of Iran—and deals—and things—and why the region is boiling hot (they didn’t get to flying pigs), one thing they discussed jumped out at me. Deutsche Welle cited Merkel as insisting that
…the Minsk accord was the “only basis” to achieve peace in eastern Ukraine….
That’s the headline of a Deutsche Wellepiece regarding the impact on Europe of President Donald Trump’s withdrawal of the US from ex-President Barack Obama’s (D) Executive Agreement that sought to codify Iran’s “right” to obtain nuclear weapons, if Iran were to have only a little patience and wait until the Agreement’s blocks, such as they are, expire in a few years.
Then Ten Schultz, the author of the article, opened with this statement.
The United States’ withdrawal from the Iran deal, despite the personal pleadings of Europe’s most powerful politicians, has provided one more example that President Donald Trump has no hesitation in dismissing European interests and trans-Atlantic concerns.
It’s epitomized by a carefully unsigned piece in Spiegel Online, coming only from “Der Spiegel Staff.” After you’ve read it, you’ll see why the author(s) were too embarrassed to sign their names to it.
…Trump’s Tuesday announcement that the US was withdrawing from the nuclear agreement with Iran, one of the core pieces of international diplomacy in recent years….
Northern Korea has announced that it will dismantle “its nuclear test site” sometime between 23 and 25 May. It’s one of several sites, though, not its only one.
Still, it’s a hopeful move, to be sure.
On the other hand, it also could be a disingenuous con job. Northern Korea has lied before about dismantling its nuclear facilities; it also has dismantled and then rebuilt nuclear facilities. In the present case, the facility Baby Kim is purporting to dismantle is the same site that People’s Republic of China researchers have indicated is already ruined by earthquakes and collapses from northern Korea’s latest nuclear bomb test. That test generated an explosion far greater than the mountain under which the test occurred could handle.