"What's New? How Is the World Treating You?"
Table of Contents for the First Quarter of 2017
The noted British historian of Nazi Germany, Richard Evans, during an interview with Slate, saw disturbing parallels between Germany, on the eve of the Nazi takeover, and the current world situation. He cautioned that history does not repeat itself but that there are similarities between the early 1930s and now. Evans is concerned about the undue fear of Muslim extremism and the “stigmatization of minorities.” There is a contempt of the court system in America that is disconcerting. He views Donald Trump as “irrational,” which does not describe Adolf Hitler, and Trump cannot concentrate on one issue in his speeches, which is something Hitler was able to do. Both, however, are self-centered. “Lies and insults” reigned in the public discourse in Germany, a parallel with Europe today that he finds disturbing. While it is true that Europeans [this also is true of Americans–DEM], unlike Germans in the late 1920s and early 1930s, are not killing each other on the streets,
they’re just killing each other in tweets. The level of verbal abuse that you find now in the public discourse is just astonishing. Of course history never repeats itself. Democracy dies in different ways at different times. The First World War did have this brutalizing effect on public life right across Europe. It was heavily militarized. You can’t go out on the street without seeing squads of thugs in uniform beating each other up. That’s simply not characteristic of our own times. I think the Second World War cured Western society of that level of violence. But there has been an economic crisis. America is deeply divided. Britain is deeply divided. There are massive and bitter political divisions and social divisions in many European countries, so there is a parallel there, certainly.
The roots of the current crisis, according to Evans, are “the credit crunch and the economic crisis of 2008, and the feeling of a lot of people that they’ve been left out, that globalization has harmed them, or they’ve not seen an improvement in living standards or reductions in social and economic inequality.” He regrets that the United Kingdom has left the European Union, at a time when there is “a very unpredictable administration in Washington with no guarantee that it will in any way protect or look after our interests.” He equated Brexit to “spurning international agreements and organizations just as Hitler left the League of Nations in 1933. I think it’s a dangerous moment for Britain, and I think it’s a huge miscalculation to leave the European Union. The European Union needs to be strengthened, not weakened.”
The entire interview is at http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2017/02/h_r_mcmaster_can_donald_trump_s_new_national_security_advisor_get_through.html.
An article in the New York Times traces the connections between Donald Trump and the Russians through a proposal to solve the crisis in Ukraine and lift the sanctions against Russia. There are a number of individuals with questionable connections involved in the matter, and among the most disturbing is Paul Manafort, Trump’s former campaign manager. Manafort cooperated with Russian channels to support Viktor Yanukovych, the ousted Ukrainian president. The new scheme essentially would have the result of returning Ukraine to the Russian orbit, likely with someone other than Yanukovych at the helm.
A Ukrainian legislator, Andrii V. Artemenko, is the author of the plan, and he is among the opponents of the current Ukrainian government that Manafort helped to create. Artemenko’s proposal involves toppling the current Ukrainian president, Petro O. Poroshenko, with information about corruption that came from the Russians. Russian forces would withdraw from separatist areas in the eastern part of Ukraine, and a referendum in Ukraine would lease Crimea to Russia for 50 or 100 years.
Although not explicitly stated in the New York Times article, Ukraine would return to the Russian orbit. In order to prepare the ground for the proposed scenario, Poroshenko would have to go (that is where the charges of corruption enter into the picture), as would the achievements Ukraine has made in the past few years and the country’s cooperation with the European Union. Ukraine would relive the Yanukovich days, without Yanukovich.
The article includes additional twists, all of which hinge on the Ukrainian gamble.
Armenian voters in Nagorno-Karabakh, which declared itself a republic in 1991, have voted to adopt a new constitution that changes the name of their country to Artsakh, the name of a medieval kingdom that included Nagorno-Karabakh and some Azerbaijani territory. The vote has little meaning in international circles, however, since Nagorno-Karabakh has no recognition from any country in the United Nations, although several American states have passed resolutions calling on the United States to recognize Nagorno-Karabakh. The voter turnout was 75.91 percent (79,380 out of 104,566 citizens), and 87.6 percent of those voting approved the new constitution.
Although functioning independently, Nagorno-Karabakh, now Artaskah, is dependent upon Armenia and uses its currency. Russia backs Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh in the dispute, while Turkey supports Azerbaijan. Iran has strained relations with Azerbaijan because approximately 16 percent of Iranians are Azeris, a Turkic people, located in the northwestern part of Iran.
Conflict between Armenia and Nagorno-Karabakh, on the one hand, and Azerbaijan, on the other hand, broke out on 1 April 2016 and ended on 5 April. Azerbaijan regained some territory, but the amount is under dispute. Given the tense situation in the region, analysts fear renewed conflict.
See http://hetq.am/eng/news/75979/artsakh-referendum-voter-turnout-76-as-of-8pm.html; and http://www.panorama.am/en/news/2017/02/21/Constitutional-reforms-Srbuhi-Arzumanyan/1731712.
When the American secretary of defense, James Mattis, told NATO partners to “step up” their defense spending or risk American “moderation” of its commitment regarding their security, they did not take kindly to the remark. Although they have been diplomatic in their responses, they did not overreact to Mattis’s demand. This is likely because of the mixed signals from the White House. Donald Trump notably has called NATO obsolete and reiterated America’s commitment to the alliance. Vice President Mike Pence has been more circumspect than Mattis. While addressing the Munich Security Conference on 18 February, Pence reassured listeners that Americans are “unwavering in our commitment” to the alliance and that supporting Europe “is President Trump’s promise.” Regarding Russia, Pence stated, "know this: the United States will continue to hold Russia accountable, even as we search for new common ground, which as you know, President Trump believes can be found.” At the same time, he mildly reiterated the need for NATO member states to increase their defense spending to the 2 percent NATO requires:
Nowhere was there quite the tone of Mattis’s speech a few days earlier, implying that America will not defend a country that does not meet the 2-percent target.
The applause for Pence were reserved, likely because, as the former American ambassador to Moscow and former deputy secretary general of NATO, Alexander Vershbow, stated “Many in this hall are still asking if this is the real policy.” It is apparent that the White House is suffering from a lack of governmental and diplomatic experience and still is wrestling with sorting out campaign rhetoric from useable policy.
European leaders, however, are not complacent and simply waiting for the Trump administration to steady the helm of American foreign policy. In response to the comments of Mattis, Angela Merkel stated that “we must do more here, no question, but the matters of development aid and crisis prevention are also important.” She added that Germany has raised its defense spending and will continue to do so. Like Merkel, Jean-Claude Juncker, the president of the European Commission, noted that, “if you look at what Europe is doing in defense, plus development aid, plus humanitarian aid, the comparison with the United States looks rather different. Modern politics cannot just be about raising defense spending.”
Statistics support Juncker’s assertion. According to OECD figures, the United States spent 0.168 percent of its GDP on foreign aid in 2015, which is less than several other NATO countries. Norway spent the most, giving away 1.046 percent of its GDP. Other NATO states that donated more aid than the US, in descending order, are Luxembourg (0.952 percent), Denmark (0.847 percent), Netherlands (0.749 percent), the UK (0.704 percent), Germany (0.523 percent), Turkey (0.501 percent), France (0.368 percent), Canada (0.280 percent), Iceland (0.240 percent), and Italy (0.221 percent). There are a number of NATO countries that provided less in foreign aid than the US: Portugal (0.158 percent), Estonia (0.154 percent), Slovenia (0.149 percent), Lithuania (0.135 percent), Hungary (0.134 percent), Greece (0.122 percent), Czech Republic (0.118 percent), Spain (0.117 percent), Slovakia (0.101 percent), Poland (0.096 percent), Romania (0.091 percent), Bulgaria (0.086 percent), and Latvia (0.086 percent). No figures were available for Albania and Croatia. The EU member states long have used economic diplomacy as a means of deterring enemies as well as a way of making and keeping friends.
See http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/02/17/european-leaders-resist-trumps-ultimatum-increase-defence-spending/; http://www.reuters.com/article/us-germany-security-usa-idUSKBN15X06Q; https://www.c-span.org/video/?424248-1/vice-president-pence-remarks-munich-security-conference; and https://data.oecd.org/oda/net-oda.htm.
In December 2016, after the tenure of Andrzej Rzepliński as member and president of the Constitutional Court expired, the Law and Justice (PiP) candidate, Julia Przyłębska, replaced him. This ends the standoff between the PiP-controlled government and the Constitutional Court, which involved appointments (PiP did not like the appointments of the previous government) and procedures (among other things, new regulations required a two-thirds vote instead of a majority vote in the court). The constitutional crisis in Poland has come to an end, and PiS effectively has gained control not only over the Constitutional Court but over all of Poland’s courts. In a convoluted reasoning process, it also has emasculated the Constitutional Court by declaring that it cannot consider or overturn any government order that is “immediately effective.” That means PiP, which controls the government and the legislature, can rule by decree, without any court interference.
Given the political atmosphere in the European Union, it appears the EU will not invoke Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union (2007) because attempting to do so would inflame the far right. Furthermore, invoking Article 7 requires unanimity, and Hungary is likely to vote down any action against Poland because it, too, is challenging the principles of democracy.
See http://www.euractiv.com/section/justice-home-affairs/news/poland-rejects-eu-warning-on-constitutional-court-crisis/; https://euobserver.com/opinion/136463; and http://www.pap.pl/en/news-/news,748194,julia-przylebska-appointed-new-constitutional-tribunal-chair-in-poland.html. The current Constitution of Poland is available at http://www.sejm.gov.pl/prawo/konst/angielski/kon1.htm. Article 7 of the Treaty on European Union is at http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?uri=celex:12012M007.
The Russians take their efforts to extend their influence in Europe and even the United States from a page of the Soviet cold-war playbook, according to Maksym Beznosiuk, a specialist in international affairs based in Kyiv, Ukraine. One strategy of the Soviets was to use covert or “black” means to influence the West. “Gray” meant influencing policy through various organizations that were linked to the Soviet Union or appeared to be independent. Finally, “white” methods involved information directly from known Soviet sources, such as Radio Moscow. See http://neweasterneurope.eu/articles-and-commentary/2211-russia-s-information-techniques-in-europe-a-new-strategy.
Typical of the “gray” efforts is the December 2016 five-year agreement between the Austrian Freedom party (FPÖ) and the United Russia party of Vladimir Putin. Among other things, the document is intended to foster communication between the two parties that involve economic issues and youth. Heinz-Christian Strache, one of the FPÖ leaders who traveled to Moscow to sign the document, commented that it only is a means of furthering Austria’s neutrality as a “peace mediator” between countries, such as Russia and the United States, whose leaders, he suggested, could meet in Vienna. See https://euobserver.com/beyond-brussels/136356; and http://www.reuters.com/article/us-austria-farright-russia-idUSKBN1481MJ.
Recently, Hungarian authorities dissolved a far-right party, the Hungarian National Front (MNA), after its leader shot a police officer involved in a search of the politician’s home. In the ensuing investigation, evidence emerged that Russian GRU military intelligence agents had infiltrated the party–another “gray” effort on behalf of the Russians. The MNA was not directly tied to the ultra-right Jobbik, but other such groups are. Furthermore, all of these extremist organizations have supported improved relations with Russia, and they have close ties with similar groups in other states, including Slovakia. Jobbik, however, wants to gain in the elections, so the party gives the appearance of distancing itself from some of the most extreme far-right groups. It appears that Viktor Orbán, Hungary’s prime minister who prides himself on being an illiberal democrat, endeavors to shift Hungary toward authoritarianism, and flaunts his alliance with Putin, will have his hands full as he strives to control the potentially violent extreme right and stem the political aspirations of Jobbik, the extremists’ wolf in sheep’s clothing. The Kremlin, however, is in a win-win situation, since all these actors on the Hungarian scene are anxious to associate themselves with Russian interests. See https://euobserver.com/opinion/136354; and http://hungarianspectrum.org/tag/magyar-nemzeti-arcvonal/.
Extremist parties in Hungary, Austria, and elsewhere are only the tip of the iceberg, when it comes to Russian interference in democratic states. Even the United States is not immune to such problems, as the accusations about Russian interference in the recent American presidential elections demonstrate. Recent arrests in Moscow of four individuals accused of treason demonstrate the extent of Russian infiltration, even into American society, using both "gray" and "black" methods (incidentally, one of the detainees worked for Kaspersky Lab but was arrested for his activities when he was with the Moscow police). While some news outlets focused on the tantalizing news that the United States apparently had an operative working in the Federal Security Service of Russia, which is no surprise, far more important is why the agent, Sergei Mikhailov, is under arrest. Apparently, he provided information to the American authorities about Vladimir Fomenko, who owns King Servers, which rents managed and unmanaged dedicated servers. This firm, it appears, has aided the FSS in carrying out cyberattacks. See https://www.theregister.co.uk/2017/01/25/kaspersky_cybercrime_investigator_cuffed/; https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russian-state-cyber-security-specialist-to-face-treason-charges-56915; and https://themoscowtimes.com/news/americas-alleged-spy-in-the-heart-of-russian-cybersecurity-56945. For general information on Russian efforts to spread fake news in the US and elsewhere, see http://www.npr.org/2017/01/06/508032496/how-russias-disinformation-campaign-could-extend-its-tentacles.
It sometimes is difficult to determine what is fake news and who may be a Russian ally. Certainly, becoming too paranoid is not only harmful for a society, which can resort to witch hunts, but it also can be counterproductive. It is important to remember what the leadership of Russia intends: first, divide NATO, the European Union, and the trade networks they have; and second, internally weaken individual member states. The way Russia can succeed in these goals is to support politicians and groups that feed on the fears of voters by preaching isolationism, economic autarky, racism, and other views that are contrary to democracy and the social progress of plural societies.
Martin Mycielski, who established KOD International, a branch of the Polish Committee for the Defense of Democracy (KOD), which opposes the current anti-democratic Law and Justice (PiS) party in Poland, has proposed a list of actions that authoritarians take to erode democracy. He recommends that Americans watch for them and devise means of combating them:
Mycielski, who published his list on 26 January 2017, is well aware of the tactics of creeping authoritarian regimes because the very points he listed have been part of the Polish experience for the past year. See https://euobserver.com/opinion/136674.
For those who are concerned that Donald Trump may well sell out American interests to Russia, which aspires to assert hegemony over at least part of Europe, there are some encouraging thoughts. Even though there may not be a mechanism to stop Trump from improving relations with Moscow, and the American public either may not be concerned about the matter or may find that its wishes are ignored, there are reasons for hope. Taras Kuzio, a senior fellow at the Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies, at the University of Alberta, has posited seven reasons why any initiative to improve relations dramatically with Russia will fail:
On 1 January 2017, the Czech Republic opened its Center against Terrorism and Hybrid Threats (Centrum proti terorismu a hybridním hrozbám, CTHH), an office in the Ministry of Interior. According to the CTHH website, it will track disinformation and attempt to anticipate terrorism as well as hybrid threats, which are cases when an attacks on soft targets (for example, a public space, instead of a hard or military target) occur in conjunction with information spread on social media. The CTHH does not have “a button to turn off the Internet.” It will not censor, spread its own propaganda, imprison, or conduct surveillance on individuals. It will communicate with the public, media, and state institutions. Similar institutions exist elsewhere, including in the United Kingdom and the Baltic states.
The prime minister, Bohuslav Sobotka, expressed his support for the CTHH and noted that the government also is behind the effort. Andrej Babiš, the finance minister, however, does not like the CTHH because he believes that the people can decide, on their own, what is valid information. Likewise, Czech President Miloš Zeman indicated that he is against the “censorship [of the Internet], with the exception of pornography, and specifically child pornography.” Zeman is an outspoken supporter of Vladimir Putin and would like the Czech Republic to improve its ties with Russia. The government does not share his standpoint, and Zeman’s main power, in this regard, is the Czech president’s bully pulpit.
See https://zpravy.aktualne.cz/domaci/premier-sobotka-nastviil-centrum-proti-dezinformacim-ktere-k/r~bebc387ce48511e6b781002590604f2e/; and http://www.rozhlas.cz/zpravy/domaci/_zprava/centrum-proti-terorismu-a-hybridnim-hrozbam-startuje-nepujde-o-cenzuru-ujistilo-ministerstvo-vnitra--1684404. The CTHH website is at http://www.mvcr.cz/cthh/clanek/centrum-proti-terorismu-a-hybridnim-hrozbam.aspx. All of these sources are in Czech.
The American secretary of defense, James Mattis, told NATO members in Brussels, during his first official meeting with them, that America may “moderate” its commitments to NATO if member states do not carry their fair share of the financial burden for defense. The target is 2 percent of a country’s GDP, and only the US (at 3.61 percent), Greece (2.38 percent), the United Kingdom (2.21 percent), Estonia (2.16 percent), and Poland (2.00 percent) meet the requirement. A few other states are close, like France (1.78 percent) and Turkey (1.56 percent), and others have promised to meet the 2 percent figure.
Jens Stoltenberg, the secretary general of NATO, said that Mattis’s comment “is a fair message, it is a fair demand, that we need fairer burden sharing.” Stoltenberg made similar comments at a 14 February press conference before the meeting of NATO defense ministers. He stated that “after many years with steep cuts in defence spending, we have turned a corner. Today, I can present to you new updated figures for 2016. Defence spending in real terms has increased by 3.8% among European Allies and Canada.” He also noted that more needs to be done for each state to meet its 2 percent goal.
See http://www.cnn.com/2017/02/15/politics/james-mattis-nato-brussels/; and http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/opinions_141005.htm.
Information is emerging that the presidential campaign of Donald Trump had more contacts with the Russians than just Mike Flynn. It appears that Paul Manafort, who spent some time as Trump’s campaign manager, had phone calls with the Russians, as did other unnamed individuals. Manafort once was an advisor to Viktor Yanukovych, the Russian-backed president of Ukraine whom demonstrators pushed out of power in February 2014.
See https://www.msn.com/en-nz/news/world/trump-campaign-aides-had-repeated-contacts-with-russian-intelligence/ar-AAmWP7M. For an earlier report on the ties the Trump and Clinton campaigns had with the Russians, see the posting on this site at https://sites.google.com/a/centraleuropeanobserver.com/central-european-observer/-what-s-new-how-is-the-world-treating-you-3q2016#TOC-Trump-and-Clinton-Connections-in-Eastern-Europe-28-July-2016.
The upcoming French election is likely to be the target of a Russian cyber attack, supplementing the disinformation the Russians already have launched against the front runner, Emmanuel Macron, a moderate who supports the European Union. Similarly, Russia interfered in the American presidential election. Russia’s first such attack was in 2007, against Estonia, and subsequent attacks occurred during the 2008 war between Russia and Georgia and against Ukraine. Putting this new aspect of international aggression into perspective is an article by David Batashvili, who, in 2008-2013, worked for the National Security Council of Georgia. See https://euobserver.com/opinion/136909.
The Munich Security Conference has published Munich Security Report 2017: Post-Truth, Post-West, Post-Order? The MSC, an unofficial annual global gathering of security advisors and decision makers, made its debut in 1963. It began producing the report two years ago as a means of spurring conversation during the event.
This year’s report focuses on the concerns related to the crises in democratic countries. In the past, voters marginalized politicians who challenged the democratic order, but such politicians now are succeeding in many countries because they are taking advantage of genuine frustration with current political and economic conditions as well as fear about the future. Populist leaders care less about democracy, representative institutions, globalization, and free trade, and they believe that they alone can solve their countries’ problems, without interference from legislative institutions and courts. They favor isolationism or unilateralism, along with economic protectionism.
The report examines the various actors and problem areas in the world state: the United States, the European Union, Turkey, Russia, the Middle East, East Asia, and the Arctic. The major issues it covers are disinformation, migration, radical Islamists, world healthcare issues, and defense-related problems.
Even though the Romanian government withdrew its intention to decriminalize corruption less than roughly USD 47,000, and after it survived a no-confidence vote, protests against it continue. This Sunday, 70,000 people crowded one of the main squares in Bucharest, calling on the government to resign because it no longer has the confidence of the people. See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/12/world/europe/romania-bucharest-protests-corruption.html?_r=0.
On 10 February, the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, met with the Ukrainian prime minister, Volodymyr Groysman, in Brussels. Afterward, Juncker indicated that visa-free travel for Ukrainians to the European Union “will happen before summer.” He also indicated that the EU soon will release EUR 600 million in foreign aid, the first part of a larger package, because Ukraine continues with reforms. In particular, Juncker cited Ukrainian preparations to lift a ban on exporting timber to the EU. The ban was to protect Ukrainian forests and to spur local industry, but research suggests that the ban is not having the desired effect.
The news from the Juncker-Groysman meeting is very positive for Ukraine, which continues to struggle with a new separatist thrust, in the eastern part of the country, that has Russian backing. Both the EU and the United States have called on Russia to cease the renewed fighting, which began immediately after a phone call between Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. The Economist titled its news about the offensive with its usual dose of dry humor: “Tanks for Calling: As America and Russia Talk, Ukraine Fights.”
See http://www.enpi-fleg.org/news/ukrainian-timber-export-ban-to-be-or-not-to-be/; http://www.rferl.org/a/ukraine-live-blog-events/28023694.html; http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21716091-new-clashes-donbas-may-show-vladimir-putin-testing-donald-trump-america-and-russia-talk; and http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-17-263_en.htm.
Once again, Pawel Adamowicz, the mayor of Gdańsk and a member of Civic Platform, Poland’s largest opposition party, is in the news. First, he commented on the desire of Gdańsk to offer more assistance to migrants from the Middle East (see the posting here). Now, he is challenging the ruling Law and Justice party (PiS), which is trying to take over the newly-opened Second World War museum in Gdańsk because it claims that the museum’s message does not provide enough about the Polish experience. The real issue, however, is the independence of the museum. Its content currently is in the hands of historians and other experts, while under the PiS, it would become another instrument of a populist government that has eroded crucial aspects of Poland’s democracy. The Administrative Court has thus far protected the museum’s independence, and Adamowicz, in an article in the Huffington Post, has vowed to keep the museum free of PiS domination. See http://www.huffingtonpost.com/pawel-adamowicz/is-museum-of-the-second-w_b_14630752.html.
A Russian court renewed a conviction against the most prominent Russian opposition leader, Aleksei A. Navalny, for defrauding a state company. Other cases against him are pending, including the death of an elk. These difficulties exclude him from running against Vladimir Putin in Russia’s 2018 presidential elections. Navalny claims they are trumped-up charges. See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/08/world/europe/russia-aleksei-navalny-putin.html?_r=0.
The interior ministers of Albania, Austria, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Croatia, Greece, Kosovo, Hungary, Macedonia, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, and Serbia have agreed to tighten controls on Middle East migrants this spring, but the details are unknown. At this point, some of the migrants in Italy and Greece have turned to smugglers to get them to other countries in the EU. See http://www.rferl.org/a/european-ministers-agree-fortify-blockade-balkans-route-eu-migrants/28299241.html.
Given Brexit and the difficulties the European Union faces at the moment, it is good to take stock in the progress it has made in the past 25 years, since it has signed the Maastrict Treaty, which not only transformed the European Community into the European Union, but also set up the process for creating the euro.
Not all is rosy, but there are a number of positive features that appear in an article Chris Harris wrote for Euronews.com. Government debt exceeds the 60 percent target of the EU, although that is not the case for Estonia and Romania. Overall, GDP has grown. The Great Recession resulted in some loss, but not for Germany, France, and Luxembourg. Otherwise, member states have recovered, aside from Greece, Italy, and Spain. Population has grown or has held steady in France, Germany, Ireland, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom, but it has declined in Greece, Hungary, Portugal, and Romania. Life expectancy has increased overall in the EU, including the largest states as well as Bulgaria, Estonia, Portugal, and Romania. For the most part, unemployment surged, during the Great Recession, but it constantly declined in Germany. It is still high in Cyprus, Greece, and Spain, although it is diminishing. Bulgaria, France, Italy, Portugal, and the UK still have not reached the low levels of unemployment that existed before 2008, although the UK is very close.
The article only provides a sampling of statistics, but they paint a generally positive picture of the health and progress of the EU.
The mayor of Gdańsk, Pawel Adamowicz, a member of Civic Platform, the largest opposition party, would like to welcome more refugees from the Middle East, but he is facing overwhelming odds. The Ruling Law and Justice party (PiS) officially opposes migrants from the Middle East, and the party’s stance has fueled the suspicions of average citizens. The Catholic Church, claims Adamowicz, is silent, when it should be assisting the needy. As a result, despite Poland’s need for workers, given its low unemployment rate, refugees do not find Poland attractive. It is hard to imagine moving to a country where a foreign accent makes it difficult to find an apartment and may prompt various forms of harassment. See https://euobserver.com/regions/136477.
Pro-Russian forces, continually reinforced with supplies from Russia, have escalated fighting in Eastern Ukraine, particularly around Avdiivka, which is facing a humanitarian crisis. Ukraine’s vice prime minister for European and Euro-Atlantic integration, Ivanna Klympush-Tsintsadze, reported about the matter to the Security and Defense Subcommittee of the European Parliament. The members of the subcommittee called for adherence to the Minsk Agreement and committed themselves to maintaining the sanctions against Russia. They called for further investigation into the matter and recommended the implementation of visa-free travel for Ukraine, which has met all of the requirements. Further debate will take place in the next plenary session and will result in a resolution, which will pressure on the EU Council and Commission to take action. The MEPs reached the conclusion that Russia and separatist forces in Ukraine are probing to determine the response of the EU and the United States, in the wake of Donald Trump’s comments about improving relations with Russia and his ambivalence about the situation in Ukraine. On 5 February, during an interview with Fox News, Trump did not specifically link the recent fighting in Eastern Ukraine with Russia, stating that “we don’t really know exactly what that is.” See http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/news-room/20170206IPR61320/russian-probing-in-eastern-ukraine-must-stop-say-security-and-defence-meps; and https://www.nytimes.com/2017/02/06/us/politics/ukraine-trump-putin-separatists-poroshenko.html?_r=0.
A more detailed account of the escalation in fighting and the connection with the likely Putin’s testing of Trump’s resolve is at http://europe.newsweek.com/putin-trump-lift-sanctions-or-ukraine-gets-it-554691.
On 5 February, during an interview with Donald Trump on Fox News, Bill O’Reilly referred to Vladimir Putin as “a killer.” Now, the Kremlin spoksperson, Dmitry Peskov, would like an apology from Fox News. O’Reilly’s comment came after Trump had stated that he respects Putin, and after the remark, Trump interjected that America also has “a lot of killers.” See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-foxnews-kremlin-idUSKBN15L0XC; and http://www.salon.com/2017/02/06/kremlin-demands-apology-from-fox-for-bill-oreilly-calling-vladimir-putin-a-killer/.
On 5 February, the Romanian government rescinded a decree that would eliminate the prosecution of corruption cases under 200,000 lei because of continuous mass protests in Bucharest and elsewhere. The experience showed the success massive peaceful protests can have, especially when combined with the support of courageous politicians. In this case, the most prominent was the country’s president, Klaus Iohannis. With victory in hand, the protesters continue to gather and now are chanting for the resignation of the government, which they no longer trust.
The leadership of the center-right European People’s party, the liberal Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe, and the Socialists and Democrats have written letters to request that the European Council, the European Commission, and the European External Action Service not accept the credentials of Ted Malloch as ambassador to the European Union, should he receive the formal nomination of the Trump administration.
The letters cite Malloch’s various anti-EU comments, explaining that someone who desires the destruction of the EU should not be in a position of working with the EU. In the recent past, Malloch stated that the euro will collapse and that the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, should return to being “a very adequate mayor . . . of some city in Luxembourg.” Malloch boasted that he “had in a previous career a diplomatic post where [he] helped bring down the Soviet Union. So maybe there’s another union [that is, the European Union–DEM] that needs a little taming.”
The leader of the Socialists and Democrats, Gianni Pittella, called on the EU to treat Malloch as a “persona non grata.” He wrote that “we firmly believe that ignoring this unacceptable stance [of Malloch] would undermine our future relationship with the US administration and could potentially contribute to the spread of populism and Euroscepticism across Europe.” The letter from Guy Verhofstadt, of the liberals, and Manfred Weber, of the EPP, cite Malloch’s “outrageous malevolence regarding the values that define this European Union” as the reason “not to accept the accreditation credentials” of Malloch as the American ambassador to the EU.
With such a unified resistance to Malloch, it is likely that Trump will face an embarrassing defeat, should he proceed with Malloch’s nomination as ambassador. Another candidate–be that person conservative or liberal–may be more suitable, but it is difficult to know whether Trump will back down, something which is not in his nature, or wear the defeat of Malloch as a badge of honor.
See https://www.theguardian.com/world/2017/feb/02/european-union-trump-ambassador-ted-malloch-parliament; and http://www.politico.eu/article/how-eu-can-block-donald-trump-ambassador-pick-ted-malloch/.
The letters are at https://twitter.com/GuyVerhofstadt/status/827199163305705473 (only Verhofstadt’s signature appears on this version of the letter from the ALDE site); and http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/sites/default/files/Letter_Pittella_President_Tusk%20170202.pdf.
The law that allows the Austrian government to expropriate the birthplace of Adolf Hitler, in Brannau, Austria, now has gone before the Constitutional Court. If the Austrian government assumes ownership of the structure, it may undertake renovations, to satisfy a new tenant, or even demolish the structure. See https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/31/world/europe/hitler-house-braunau-austria.html?_r=0.
On 31 January, the Romanian government issued an order that shielded from prosecution anyone accused of corruption if the amount involved was less than the equivalent of USD 48 thousand. The socialist-liberal government had discussed the measure for some time, and it had generated protests from the streets and criticism from the country’s president, Klaus Iohannis. Most opponents assume the measure is to protect a number of politicians accused of corruption, and many fear that it will negate efforts to stem rampant corruption in the state. See http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/world/2017/02/01/romania-anti-corruption-protests/97328852/.
As Romania’s president prepares to fight the new law that limits prosecution for corruption in the Constitutional Court, Romania’s minister of business, trade, and entrepreneurship resigned, asking what he will tell his son in the years to come–whether “his father was a coward and supported actions he does not believe in, or that he chose to walk away from a story that isn't his.” Protests against the new law were the largest since 1989, when the people demonstrated against the communist regime. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-romania-government-protests-idUSKBN15H0P9.
In an open letter, Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, listed the various threats to the European Union, in advance of a summit of the 27 member states in Malta.
The first challenge is from abroad: China, Russia, Middle East, Africa, and the United States. Tusk expressed concern about the “worrying declarations by the new American administration all make our future highly unpredictable. For the first time in our history, in an increasingly multipolar external world, so many are becoming openly anti-European, or Eurosceptic at best. Particularly the change in Washington puts the European Union in a difficult situation; with the new administration seeming to put into question the last 70 years of American foreign policy.”
Second, Tusk noted anti-EU nationalism and xenophobia within the EU that results in “national egoism . . . becoming an attractive alternative to integration.” Finally, “the pro-European elites suffer from uncertainty about integration, the need to placate populism, and doubt in the values of liberal democracy.”
As a remedy, Tusk suggested that “courage, determination and political solidarity of Europeans” is necessary. He added that “today we must stand up very clearly for our dignity, the dignity of a united Europe–regardless of whether we are talking to Russia, China, the US or Turkey. Therefore, let us have the courage to be proud of our own achievements, which have made our
continent the best place on Earth. Let us have the courage to oppose the rhetoric of demagogues, who claim that European integration is beneficial only to the elites, that ordinary people have only suffered as its result, and that countries will cope better on their own, rather than together.”
Vladimir Putin will visit Viktor Orbán, in Hungary, on 2 February, as part of what has become an annual meeting between the two leaders. Since Donald Trump’s election, Orbán has been outspoken about improving relations with Russia, including the elimination of sanctions. Hungary’s foreign minister even stated that he expects stronger bilateral ties with Russia because, since Trump’s election, he anticipates that “there will be no American pressure,” as was the case during the presidency of Barack Obama.
Peter Kreko, a visiting professor at Indiana University, predicted that Orbán will not challenge Putin on sensitive issues, “such as a Hungarian MEP accused of being a Russian spy, ex-governmental officials with shady Russian links, Russian support for paramilitary extreme-right organisations in Hungary, and the allegations by pro-Kremlin media outlets that the 1956 Hungary anti-Soviet uprising was a ‘fascist coup’ and ‘CIA plot,’ to mention a few.” Instead, the topics of conversation will be a new deal for Hungary to purchase Russian natural gas and to bolster bilateral relationships that undermine the solidarity of the European Union and strengthen Russia’s hand.
As part of the new bilateral trend in international affairs, Orbán, with the tacit support of Putin, is backing far-right political parties, including the National Front in France, which Steve Bannon, Trump’s strategist, openly hopes to assist in the upcoming election. The far-right parties throughout Europe have one common agenda: weaken Brussels–something that Moscow (and now apparently Washington) supports.
Kreko hopes that the European People’s party, which will have the presidency of the European Parliament, will censure Orbán, whose party is a member of the EPP. That will be at least one gesture toward preserving European unity.
Read Kreko’s article at https://euobserver.com/opinion/136706.
A new image is emerging about Donald Trump’s foreign policy that has disturbing implications for America’s economic and political security. Before becoming president, there were inklings of his views regarding the European Union, but since taking office, Trump has become far more specific in his statements. Furthermore, the actions of his administration provide further evidence about the position of Trump and those around him regarding the EU.
Even before the inauguration, members of Trump’s transition team called on various offices of the EU to determine which country might be the next to follow the United Kingdom in leaving the EU. Afterward, during his early days in office and when Theresa May visited the United States, Trump praised Brexit as being good for Britain. At one meeting between Trump and May, Trump stated that “I think Brexit’s going to be a wonderful thing for your country. I think when it irons out, you’re going to have your identity and you’re going to have the people that you want in your country.”
Ted Malloch, Trump’s choice for ambassador to the EU, told the BBC that it is likely Trump will engineer a free trade deal with the UK quickly, even before one is arranged with the EU. He added that, after the next round of elections in the Netherlands, France, and Germany, “I personally am not certain that there will be a European Union with which to have [free trade] negotiations.” He added that “I think Donald Trump is very opposed to supranational organisations, he believes in nation states, in bilateral relations and I think that he thinks the EU has overshot its mark.” He added that “I think [the euro] is a currency that is not only in demise but has a real problem and could in fact collapse in the coming year, year and a half. I am not the only person or economist of that point of view.”
Trump’s positions are not critical of individual aspects or policies of the EU, an attitude which is known as soft or mild Euroskepticism, but he challenges the existence of the EU itself, one of hard Euroskepticism’s defining characteristics. Euroskepticism certainly has its opponents in the 28 (soon to be 27) member countries and even abroad. For example, in several countries that seek entry into the EU, such as Serbia and Moldova, the Euroskeptic opponents of the EU favor a closer relationship with Russia. Nevertheless, there has not been such a powerful foreign leader to date who has taken such an outspoken and negative approach to the EU and the euro.
The repercussions of Trump’s policies about the EU are enormous. By encouraging more secession crises and the collapse of the euro as well as his mixed messages about America’s commitment to NATO, Trump is challenging the stability that Western and Central Europe has built since 1945, with the support of the US. His motives do not make economic sense because a divided Europe would stunt economic development on both sides of the Atlantic. They would remove from the world scene a powerful force for the support of democracy in Europe and in underdeveloped regions. Furthermore, it would play into the hands of Russia.
Vladimir Putin, who realizes the need to operate stealthily, sees the demise of the EU and NATO as a means of exerting hegemony in Europe and ensuring Russia’s position as a superpower. After the Brexit vote, however, he openly expressed his support for Britain’s separation from the EU and commented that the British did not care to prop up struggling EU economies. Oddly enough, the “Yes California” movement, which hopes to see California cede from the US, is the brainchild of an American currently living in Russia. A separate Californian state would be one step toward fulfilling the 1998 prediction of a Russian academic, Igor Panarin, whose ideas stem from Soviet KGB prognosticators of the 1980s.
Fortunately, EU leaders are taking a strong stand against any notions, not only those that emanate from home but also externally, about the breakup of the EU and the single market. French President Hollande, on 28 January, said that “whenever there are statements from the US president on Europe and whenever he talks of Brexit as being a model for other countries, I believe we must respond.” He added that, if Trump “adopts protectionist measures, which could destabilise economies . . . and when he refuses to accept refugees, while Europe has done its duty, we have to respond.” Europe must be “a space for liberty and democracy,” according to Hollande, whenever “the talk we hear coming from the United States encourages populism and even extremism.” On 26 January, Jeroen Dijsselbloem, the president of the Eurogroup of finance ministers and the European Stability Mechanism, spoke about the future of Europe and referred to the threats Brexit and the Trump administration posed:
Pierre Moscovici, the EU commissioner for economic and financial affairs, noted that “the euro is not going to collapse, neither in 18 months, not in 10 years, nor in 20 years. We have a single currency, which is a major factor of unity among us, [and] it is no use trying to divide the Europeans. . . . We will disappoint those who see us already dead.” These statements demonstrate that Angela Merkel does not stand alone in supporting European integration and human rights.
As an external hard Euroskeptic, Trump supports the politics of Nigel Farage, Marine Le Pen, Václav Klaus, Heinz-Christian Strache, Geert Wilders, and others who seek the destruction of the EU. Furthermore, he is backing soft Euroskeptics, who include Viktor Orbán and Jarosław Kaczyński, the leaders of Hungary and Poland who take exception to certain EU policies, particularly those that challenge their growing authoritarian and undemocratic tendencies. Given the historic domestic and global interests of the US, Trump has chosen rather odd bedfellows.
See http://www.centraleuropeanobserver.com/yyy#TOC-Height-of-Folly-14-January-2017; http://www.centraleuropeanobserver.com/yyy#TOC-Trump-s-Times-Bild-Interview-16-January-2017; https://www.nytimes.com/2017/01/27/world/europe/theresa-may-britain-trump.html?_r=0; http://www.bbc.com/news/business-38749884; http://www.cnbc.com/2017/01/27/california-succession-movement-starts-gathering-petition-signatures.html; https://www.rt.com/news/348201-putin-brexit-weak-economies/; https://www.rt.com/politics/panarin-usa-collapse-economy-905/; https://www.ft.com/content/bbed82d6-e589-11e6-967b-c88452263daf; http://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/press/press-releases/2017/01/26-eurogroup-jd-remarks/; http://in.reuters.com/article/us-eurozone-usa-euro-idINKBN15A23D.
After the recent presidential elections in Bulgaria, the government resigned because of the defeat of the candidate whom the prime minister had favored. Shortly after taking office, the new president, Roumen Radev, appointed a caretaker government, under Ognyan Gerdzhikov, who is a law professor and the former speaker of the parliament. Speculation remains as to the members of the caretaker government. Furthermore, the president also decreed that new elections will take place on 26 March 2017. See http://sofiaglobe.com/2017/01/24/bulgarian-president-radev-decrees-march-26-2017-date-for-early-parliamentary-elections-names-gerdzhikov-caretaker-pm/.
In the late 1990s, the Belgian legislature introduced free beer and wine in the coffee room, along with a bell to announce when a vote was about to take place, to deter legislators from imbibing off the premises. After a recent verbal incident in the parliament, a committee recommended the elimination of free alcohol, among other things, to deter the members of parliament from becoming “quite unpleasant.” Party leaders, however, rejected the proposal, claiming that alcohol had not fueled the remarks in question.
Stay thirsty, my friendly representatives, but drink responsibly.
See http://www.politico.eu/article/belgian-mps-to-keep-free-alcohol-in-parliament/; and http://www.nieuwsblad.be/cnt/dmf20170119_02684758.
CREST, which is the name of the CIA’s 25-year Program Archive, which includes any declassified materials that are at least 25 years old, is now available online. A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit by Muckrock forced the CIA to place the materials on line. Earlier, researchers had to travel to the National Archives in College Park, MD, where they could access the primary sources on a few specific computers. As of January 2017, there were 13 million pages of documents available through https://www.cia.gov/library/readingroom/collection/crest-25-year-program-archive. For an article about Muckrock’s lawsuit, see https://www.muckrock.com/news/archives/2016/dec/14/lawsuit-cia-crest/.
Moldova’s new president, Igor Dodon, recently claimed that Moldova has received nothing from the European Union, which is not true, considering the country’s exports to the EU have increased 27 percent, and the EU has invested more than 300 million euros into Moldavia in the past three years. Still Dodon has used disinformation to justify a promise to scrap the treaty with the EU and move Moldova into Russia’s Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU) if his Socialist party wins the 2018 parliamentary elections. See https://euobserver.com/foreign/136582. For additional statistics about Moldova-EU trade, see http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/moldova/.
For threatening the 1995 Dayton Accords with his celebration commemorating the establishment of the Srpska Republika (see the posting of 11 January 2017 below), the United States has placed Milorad Dodik, the president of the Srpska Republika, on its sanctions list. As a result, Dodik cannot access any of his assets in the United States and its territories. See http://www.rferl.org/a/dodik-republika-srpska-united-states-sanctions/28239895.html.
On 15 January, Donald Trump gave a simultaneous interview to reporters from the London Times and Bild, a German newspaper. Readers may be shocked at the future president’s lack of coherence, but the content is far more troubling.
Trump openly criticized Angela Merkel’s humanitarian approach to migrants from the Middle East and said that he would not reveal how he will deal with ISIS. His remark was reminiscent of Richard Nixon’s comment about his secret plan to end the Vietnam war, which turned out to be bombing Cambodia and expanding the war. NATO, Trump said, was “obsolete, because it was, you know, designed many, many years ago.” Noting that European leaders conceived the European Union “to beat the United States on trade,” Trump neglected the EU’s important goal of preserving European stability. He went on to state, regarding the EU, that “I don’t really care whether it’s separate or together, to me it doesn’t matter.”
On the issue of Brexit, Trump exclaimed that it is “going to end up being a great thing.” He reasoned that the Brexit vote occurred because the people of the United Kingdom did not want “other people coming in and destroying their country.” According to his logic, the reason the UK is separating from the EU is because the EU is “basically a vehicle for Germany.”
When asked whether putting America first will make the rest of the world suffer, Trump responded that
Never has an American president been so openly critical of European allies and NATO. Furthermore, Trump’s support of dismantling the EU displays his willingness to destabilize Europe, which has worked so hard to overcome its divisions since the Second World War. The question is what Trump thinks he or America will gain from a divided Europe and a weakened Transatlantic defense.
For the full interview, see http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/full-transcript-of-interview-with-donald-trump-5d39sr09d. European leaders reacted with dismay to Trump's comments, and some of their opinions are available in a New York Times article at http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/2017/01/16/world/europe/ap-eu-germany-trump.html?_r=0.
On 14 January, Serbian officials stopped the first train since the late 1990s headed for the Serbian area of Kosovo before it reached the border. The Serbian prime minister claimed that the tracks, on the Kosovo side, were mined to destroy the train and that the Serbs stopped the train in an effort to preserve peace. The train, however, was completely decorated with the slogan “Kosovo is Serbian” in 20 languages and had other nationalist symbols. The prime minister of Kosovo said that stopping the train was appropriate and that it would not have been able to enter Kosovo. The Serbian prime minister claimed that the provocation was on Kosovo’s side, where there were plans to blow up the train, even though Kosovo police found no evidence of explosives on the tracks. See https://www.yahoo.com/news/serbia-sends-train-kosovo-north-despite-pristina-protest-101041343.html.
Anthony Gardner, the ambassador of the United States to the United Kingdom, held a farewell press conference in which he uncharacteristically condemned the incoming American administration’s approach to the European Union. He responded to Donald Trump’s transition team’s recent phone calls to various offices of the EU to ask what is the next state to leave the EU. Gardner warned that “for us to be the cheerleaders of Brexit and to be encouraging Brexit Mark 2, Mark 3, is the height of folly.” He also indicated that Nigel Farage, who has met with Trump, is misleading the president-elect. “We should not depart from 50 years of foreign policy with regard to the EU,” noted Gardner, and “we should not become the cheerleaders for Brexit, particularly if Brexit appears more likely to be a hard, disorderly unmanaged Brexit.” He added that “a hard Brexit or a fragmentation of the European market would be very bad news for American business.” Finally, Gardner criticized the unusually abrupt demand that non-career staff at his embassy vacate their offices and residences in short notice. See http://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-trump-eu-envoy-idUSKBN14X1TF?feedType=RSS&feedName=topNews.
In an effort to further eliminate opposition, the Hungarian prime minister, Viktor Orbán, is attacking NGOs, particularly the several dozen that receive funding from the Open Society Foundation (OSF) of George Soros, the billionaire who also funds Central European University. One of those targeted is the Hungarian Helsinki Committee, which monitors human rights. Russia has banned OSF. Orbán and Donald Trump seem to be developing close ties, and Soros has criticized Trump, who, in turn, has linked Soros to global economic ills. See https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-01-11/soros-group-to-stay-in-hungary-despite-trump-inspired-crackdown. For the statement of Christopher Stone, the president of OSF, regarding the situation in Hungary, see http://www.reuters.com/article/us-hungary-soros-idUSKBN14V2CY.
Jeremi Suri, with the Department of History and the Lyndon B. Johnson School of Public Affairs at the University of Texas at Austin, devised four scenarios that describe how Donald Trump could lead the United States into international conflicts. In Europe, he focused on the Baltic region, predicting that Trump’s posturing might provoke the Russians into attempting a military incursion. During the course of events, some Russian soldiers might become casualties, giving the Russians a pretext for invading a NATO member. The US would appear weak if it did not respond in kind. The resulting NATO-Russian war would be far less attractive than the East-West standoff that prevailed during the cold war. His other three possibilities for conflict involve the Middle East and Asia. The likelihood of such events taking place is high, Suri maintained, because Trump “does not appreciate complicated multilateral relations, and he does not value delicate diplomacy.” Furthermore, he noted that “Trump’s instinct for shortcuts and issue avoidance will cede on-the-ground influence to others, especially the Chinese and the Russians. Trump’s parading of toughness will provoke more tests, challenges, and ultimately disappointments.” He warned that “this time, the damage will be much greater and perhaps existential.” If Suri is correct, it will fall upon Congress and public pressure to curb any tendencies to begin military engagement, but it will take diplomacy and restraint to diffuse a potential conflict.
The nervousness of the states along NATO’s eastern border already is palpitating. In the past few days, NATO troops have augmented their presence in Poland, and the Polish government supposedly wanted them in place before Trump’s inauguration. The US military rejected that interpretation, stating that the plans already were in place. The Russians already have strengthened their western defenses and have placed Iskander missiles, which are capable of carrying nuclear warheads, in Kaliningrad. They have branded the NATO buildup, with its 87 tanks and 3,000 soldiers, as a threat, and they likely will respond with even more defensive measures along their border with NATO. Containing the already escalating militarization of the NATO-Russian frontier will require courage and diplomatic finesse, and the likelihood of success for such an effort will diminish as more armaments are in place.
See http://prospect.org/article/blustering-toward-armageddon; http://www.newsweek.com/us-tanks-reinforcement-military-deployment-poland-europe-russia-540965; http://www.npr.org/sections/parallels/2017/01/12/509520482/u-s-troops-arrive-in-poland-but-will-trump-keep-them-there; and http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-38592448.
Defying a Constitutional Court ruling and the wishes of the political leaders of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republika of Srpska held a parade to commemorate the founding of the Bosnian Serb state on 9 January (the feast of St. Stephen for the Orthodox Church) 1992. During the event, the president of the Republika of Srpska, Milorad Dodik, stated that “the Serb Republic will not stay inside Bosnia” without additional powers. The celebration not only has implications for the stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina but also the Balkans because the president of Serbia and several Serbian cabinet ministers attended the event. Serbia’s participation also brings into question that country’s pending membership in the European Union. Taking a page from the playbook of Valdimir Putin, the Serbian government earlier stated that it supports the integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina, although its actions indicate otherwise. See http://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-bosnia-serbs-holiday-idUKKBN14T1TJ; and http://www.b92.net/eng/news/politics.php?yyyy=2016&mm=12&dd=29&nav_id=100110.
The European Union is heightening its awareness of fake news, which is difficult to combat, and cyber hacking, which sometimes is relatively easy to combat. The most recent warnings came from the individuals handling the EU’s digital single market and the justice portfolio, an Estonian and Czech who had lived under regimes that controlled the media. One example of the latest fake news is that the United States had sent 3,000 tanks to prepare for war with Russia. In reality, it sent 87 tanks. The concern is not only about Russia but also about outlets from the West that thrive on fake news, including Breitbart, which is expanding in Europe and whose CEO is Steve Bannon, in line to be Donald Trump’s chief strategist. See https://euobserver.com/foreign/136503.
Juan Cole, a professor at the University of Michigan, an expert on Middle East affairs, and the author of the popular blog "Informed Comment," has coined a new term for degenerate democracies: psychopathocracy, a regime under the control of psychopaths. He focused his comments on the incoming American administration, butthey well could apply, with little modification, to what has emerged in Russia, under Vladimir Putin, Poland, under PiS, Hungary, under Viktor Orbán, and elsewhere. See http://www.juancole.com/2017/01/welcome-to-psychopathocracy.html.