UK

Lammy: Trump has the ‘right concern’ about European defence spending

LABOUR SHADOW FOREIGN SECRETARY 

PA Reporters
Fri, 17 May 2024 

Donald Trump has “the right concern” about European defence spending, David Lammy said as he resisted calls from Labour’s London Mayor Sadiq Khan to challenge the Republican presidential candidate on his views.

The shadow foreign secretary said some countries are not committing enough money and that the UK could share a “common cause” with the US in pushing for that to “improve”.

Mr Trump prompted alarm in western capitals earlier this year when he suggested he would encourage Russia to “do whatever the hell they want” to Nato allies failing to meet their financial obligations.

Mr Lammy has sought to build diplomatic relationships with both Democrats and Republicans ahead of the US election this year, promising that Labour would work with whoever returns to the White House to preserve the transatlantic “special relationship”.

However, in an interview with Politico published earlier this week, London Mayor Mr Khan said Britain should call out Mr Trump as a “racist, sexist” and “homophobe”.



Sadiq Khan has been heavily critical of Donald Trump (PA)

Asked whether he would heed his party colleague’s advice, the shadow foreign secretary told an Institute for Government event on Friday: “This is a profoundly serious moment and it requires seriousness. That seriousness means that the special relationship between the United Kingdom and our American friends is core not just to our own national security, but security of much of the world.

“So, just like Wilson, Nixon, Blair, Bush, whoever is in the White House in a big election year in the United States or whoever is in No 10 in a big election year in our own country, of course we must work together.

“The truth is that you’re going to be hard-pressed to find any politician, particularly politicians who were on the back benches, who haven’t had something to say about Donald Trump.

“I take very seriously the responsibility of being on the front bench and the responsibility of finding common cause on behalf of the national interests of this country.”

Mr Lammy also expanded on recent remarks in which he described the former president’s approach to Nato as “misunderstood”, saying he had been referring specifically to European defence spending.



Donald Trump has criticised some Nato members for not paying enough on defence spending (AP Photo/Wilfredo Lee, File)

“He (Mr Trump) in his own unique way, I think, is concerned about burden-sharing across Europe – that is a concern shared by my friend Barack Obama, it is a concern that has been echoed since Kennedy, and it is the right concern because it is still the case that there are European countries not spending as much as they should on defence and that needs to improve, and that is something where the United Kingdom can join common cause with the United States,” the shadow minister said.

It marks a shift in tone from 2017 when the Labour frontbencher described Mr Trump as “racist” and a “Nazi sympathiser,” saying he would protest on the streets if the then-president visited the UK.

Mr Trump has repeatedly denied accusations of racism levelled against him but railed against what he describes as “political correctness.”

The London Mayor said earlier this week: “(Donald Trump is) a racist. He’s a sexist. He’s a homophobe. And it’s very important, particularly when you’ve got a special relationship, that you treat them as a best mate.

“If my best mate was a racist, or a sexist or a homophobe, I’d call him out and I’d explain to him why those views are wrong.”

Mr Lammy also indicated that Labour would not pursue a trade deal with the US unless the White House changed its position because “it feels pretty clear to me that America has set its face against trade deals”.

“That’s not particular to the United Kingdom, but the political establishment, both Democrat and Republican, is not focused on trade deals at the moment and therefore I think unless that changes we would be expending a lot of effort unnecessarily,” he said.

Elsewhere in his remarks, Mr Lammy made a series of pledges aimed at putting expertise at the heart of the UK’s foreign policy agenda.

He promised that Labour would establish a “college of diplomacy”, teaching courses in areas such as languages and artificial intelligence (AI) which would be open to all of Whitehall as well as foreign mandarins “from friendly countries” as part of a Foreign Office shake-up.

The college, which would replace the Diplomatic Academy, would seek to set the “global gold standard” for both diplomacy and development, Mr Lammy said.

Leading figures from the arts, culture and academia would also be brought together as part of a new “soft power council”, he told the event.

The council would work alongside the British Council and BBC World Service to advance the UK’s national interests, he said.

Mr Lammy said: “At present neither the FCDO (Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office) nor the National Security Council is delivering the sharp, coherent international strategy which the country urgently needs.

“Without such strategy, we should expect to be buffeted by the tides of superpower competition, not only between the United States and China, but also by the many rising powers who are threatening our competitive advantages economically and militarily.”

'Progressive realism': 

UK Labour lays out foreign policy pitch

Peter HUTCHISON
Fri, 17 May 2024 

David Lammy is likely to become foreign secretary if Labour wins 

the general election 

(Paul ELLIS)

Closer relations with Europe, continued support for Ukraine, and a desire for Palestinian statehood: Britain's likely next government is outlining its foreign policy plans -- and much is similar to the current administration's.

If opinion polls are correct, the UK's main opposition Labour Party will defeat the ruling Conservatives at a general election due later this year and return to government for the first time since 2010.

Labour's foreign policy priority will be forging a closer relationship with European neighbours, rebuilding bridges since the country's acrimonious exit from the EU.

At the heart of that approach will be a new EU "security pact" that Labour wants to negotiate with the 27-member bloc.

The accord would drive "closer coordination across a wide variety of military, economic, climate, health, cyber, and energy security issues," Labour's international affairs spokesman David Lammy wrote recently in Foreign Affairs magazine.

It would also complement both parties' "unshakeable commitment to NATO", added Lammy, who wants Britain to "double down on its close relationships with France, Germany, Ireland, and Poland".

"The next election is an opportunity to turn the page on the post-Brexit rancour of the past," Lammy, 51, told reporters in London on Friday.

"I want to get back to structured dialogue with the European Union on the issues that matter."

Labour has enjoyed double-digit leads over the Conservatives for about 18 months, so Lammy has been laying out his vision for UK diplomacy.

He calls it "progressive realism" that combines the fact-based approach of arguably Labour's most famous foreign secretary, Ernest Bevin, with the idealism of Robin Cook, who served as Britain's top diplomat in the late 1990s.

Bevin helped establish NATO and pushed for Britain to acquire nuclear weapons, while Cook oversaw successful interventions in Kosovo and Sierra Leone before resigning from Tony Blair's cabinet over the invasion of Iraq.

"Our diplomacy needs to rediscover the art of grand strategy," Lammy said Friday.

Analysts say much of Labour's current positioning on foreign affairs is about providing reassurance after it was perceived as weak on security and defence under left-winger Jeremy Corbyn's leadership.

Its stance on the Israel-Hamas war in Gaza has echoed Sunak's, as has its commitment to backing Ukraine in its fight to repel Russia's invasion.

Labour is expected to continue with the Conservatives' more robust approach to China and shares the same aim to return aid spending to 0.7 percent of Gross National Income only when economic conditions allow.

- Multilateral institutions -

"The policies that they've set out are very, very similar to the government's," Bronwen Maddox, director of the Chatham House international affairs think-tank told AFP.

She expects to see a change in tone, a different migration policy since Labour has pledged not to follow Sunak's plan to deport irregular migrants to Rwanda, and a move to get closer to Europe.

Labour leader Keir Starmer, who voted to remain in the EU in the 2016 referendum, has said Beethoven's "Ode to Joy" -- the European Union anthem -- best sums up his party.

But he has ruled out returning to the European single market, customs union or free movement if Labour wins power, with Brexit still a toxic political issue in the UK.

Labour does plan, however, to pursue a British-German defence accord similar to the Lancaster House agreement that the UK signed with France in 2010.

Lammy suggested that a youth mobility scheme proposed by the European Commission recently making it easier for Britons aged 18-30 to live, study and work in the EU could be included in a future relationship.

Brexit saw the UK withdraw from the EU's Erasmus student exchange programme, then propose its own global version, the Turing Scheme.

"That's part of the discussions that we'll enter into," said Lammy.

Prime Minister Rishi Sunak, who voted to leave the EU, has yet to announce the date of the election but it must be held by January 28, 2025.

If Labour wins, analysts expect to see Britain engage more with global bodies.

Sunak became the first UK leader in a decade to skip the UN General Assembly last year while Tories regularly call for Britain to quit the European Convention on Human Rights.

"There will be greater focus on the reform of international institutions," and "a renewed push for the UK to promote its international leadership on climate policy", Sophia Gaston of the right-wing Policy Exchange think-tank told AFP.

pdh/phz/rlp

 Jared Kushner’s Latest Massive Foreign Investment Deal Sparks Uproar

Talia Jane
Thu, May 16, 2024

NEW REPUBLIC


Jared Kushner secured a massive $500 million contract with the state of Serbia to build a hotel on the memorialized ruins of a former military base in Belgrade, The New York Times reported Thursday.

The announcement of the contract reportedly provoked protests in Belgrade against the deal, which is being bankrolled by Kushner’s Saudi-backed investment company, Affinity Partners. In defense of the contract, a Serbian government official described Kushner’s company primarily funded by foreign interests as a “reputable American company.”

“The government of Serbia has chosen a reputable American company as a partner in this venture, which will invest in the revitalization of the former Federal Secretariat for National Defense complex,” the statement read. The deal with Kushner’s company inked by Serbian officials includes a 99-year lease to convert the site into a luxury hotel, commercial space, and over 1,500 residential units.

This is one of the biggest investment deals Kushner has landed while his father-in-law, Donald Trump, runs for president.

Prior to approval of the contract, public officials in Serbia heavily opposed the deal for its insensitivity and potential for political manipulation. Serbian politician Borko Stefanovic described the location as “one of the pearls of pre-war architecture” to The Daily Beast, noting, “Most Serbs believe this site should not be desecrated in any way.”

A petition was launched in Serbia against the contract with Kushner in late March that generated 10,000 signatures in a matter of hours and over 25,000 within days, according to The Daily Beast. The location has long been sought after by Trump and his acolytes: In 2013, Trump expressed interest in turning the site into a hotel. In 2020, while serving as a diplomat for Trump, Richard Grenell—who joins Kushner on this contract—suggested “repairing” the complex.

The Yugoslav Ministry of Defense military complex was bombed by NATO forces in 1999 during a U.S.-backed campaign that killed an estimated 2,000 civilians and lasted until the Yugoslav Army retreated from Kosovo during the Kosovo War. The prospect of a U.S. company building anything on the site was described by Politico as “if the Taliban wanted to build a luxury apartment compound on the site of New York’s Twin Towers.”

Protests are planned in Serbia against a real estate project financed by Trump's son-in-law Kushner

DUSAN STOJANOVIC
Updated Fri, May 17, 2024 


A tram car passes by former Serbian army headquarters, destroyed during NATO's bombing campaign in Belgrade, Serbia, March 24, 2013. Opposition groups in Serbia are planning protests against a real estate development project that will be financed by the firm of Donald Trump's son-in-law, Jared Kushner, at the site of the former Serbian army headquarters destroyed in a U.S.-led NATO bombing campaign in 1999. The Serbian government earlier this week signed a deal with a Kushner-related company for the 99-year lease of land in central Belgrade for the "revitalization" of the bombed-out buildings. (AP Photo/Darko Vojinovic, File)

BELGRADE, Serbia (AP) — Opposition groups in Serbia are planning protests against a real estate development project that will be financed by the firm of Donald Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner, at the site of the former Serbian army headquarters destroyed in a U.S.-led NATO bombing campaign in 1999.

The Serbian government earlier this week signed a deal with a Kushner-related company for the 99-year lease of land in central Belgrade for the “revitalization” of the bombed-out buildings. Kushner has confirmed reports that his company plans to finance the $500-million project. It would feature a high-rise hotel, a luxury apartment complex, office spaces and shops.

“The economic progress in Serbia over the past decade has been impressive,” Kushner said in a statement confirming the approval of the deal. “This development will further elevate Belgrade into the premier international destination it is becoming.”

Government officials have welcomed the project, but opposition groups and many in the general public have spoken out against it.

For many, the site of the bombed-out army command building is a potent symbol of Serbia’s resistance against what they call “NATO aggression” 25 years ago.

Serbian forces fought a 1998-99 war with ethnic Albanian separatists in Kosovo, which was then a Serbian province. About 13,000 people, mostly ethnic Albanians, died until a 78-day, U.S.-led NATO bombing campaign pushed Serbian troops out of Kosovo.

Kosovo declared independence in 2008, but the government in Belgrade doesn’t recognize its neighbor as a separate country.

The leader of the Ecological Uprising opposition group, Aleksandar Jovanović, announced that the organization “will use all means, including physical” to defend the demolition of the old General Staff building and the handover to an American company.

“The moment the first bulldozers appear, we will be waiting for them,” Jovanović said at a press conference and called on all citizens to join them, especially members of the Serbian Armed Forces, “all those who have the courage to defend the old General Staff and not allow this crime to happen.”

Government officials defended the deal that was signed with Kushner's Affinity Partners company on Wednesday.

“We will restore the building 25 years after it was destroyed in the bombing,” construction minister Goran Vesić said. "For a quarter of a century, no one, before this Government, had thought to rebuild the complex. When this space is revitalized, it will contribute to the development of Belgrade and Serbia.”

He said that a bombing memorial will be built at the site, financed by the investor.

Earlier this year, the Albanian tourism ministry acknowledged it received an investment project application from Affinity Partners to turn a former military base on Sazan Island in the Adriatic Sea into a resort. Prime Minister Edi Rama said Albania was proud to have attracted such interest.

Serbia Approves Contract With Jared Kushner for Hotel Complex
Eric Lipton
Updated Thu, May 16, 2024 

Serbia Approves Contract With Jared Kushner for Hotel Complex

WASHINGTON — The Serbian government has approved a contract with Jared Kushner on plans to build a luxury hotel on the site of the former Defense Ministry in Belgrade, putting him directly into business with a European state as his father-in-law, Donald Trump, vies to return to the White House.

Kushner is pursuing the $500 million hotel project in partnership with Richard Grenell. A former Trump administration aide, Grenell first proposed that U.S. investors attempt to redevelop the long-vacant bombed-out site of the former Yugoslav Ministry of Defense while Grenell was still a diplomat, serving as a special envoy to the Balkans.

The deal, which provoked protests in Belgrade on Thursday, is with an affiliate of Kushner’s Affinity Partners, the 3-year-old, $3 billion investment fund backed by the sovereign wealth fund of Saudi Arabia.

“The government of Serbia has chosen a reputable American company as a partner in this venture, which will invest in the revitalization of the former Federal Secretariat for National Defense complex,” a Serbian government official said in a statement released Wednesday.

The complex was bombed in 1999 by NATO forces with the backing of the United States during the war Serbia was then waging with Kosovo. It is now considered a prime undeveloped real estate site in the middle of a much-changed city, and Trump himself considered building a hotel on it in 2013.

For Kushner, who is also planning two luxury hotel projects in neighboring Albania, these deals in the Balkans are among the largest he has made since starting his investment firm.

“The economic progress in Serbia over the past decade has been impressive,” Kushner said in a statement confirming the approval of the deal. “This development will further elevate Belgrade into the premier international destination it is becoming.”

The projects in Serbia and Albania both involve direct concessions from the governments there, meaning Kushner will be financially benefiting from foreign government acts potentially while his father-in-law is in the White House, even as these overseas officials might seek actions by the United States, such as support for Serbia’s bid to join the European Union.

The investments Kushner is making — with business partners in Israel, Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Brazil, Germany and the United States, among other locations — are also backed by a fund where the bulk of the money comes from the Saudi government, again creating questions about potential conflicts of interest if Trump returns to office, ethics lawyers said.

“It is a conflict of interest in the most stark sense: The president of the United States needs to be advancing the interest of the United States and not the financial interests of family members,” said Adav Noti, executive director of Campaign Legal Center, which tracks ethics issues in the federal government.

In total, 99% of the money placed with Kushner’s firm by investors has come from foreign sources, according to a filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission in late March. Kushner says his overseas investments will not constitute a conflict of interest, as he has said that he does not plan to return to the White House if Trump is reelected.

Kushner and his partners plan to build a hotel, retail space and more than 1,500 residential units. The approved plan includes a museum and memorial complex to those injured or killed during the NATO bombings. The memorial will be owned and managed by the government and designed “in collaboration with Serbian architects,” Kushner’s company said in a statement.

Kushner is working with a longtime real estate partner on the Serbia project, Asher Abehsera, who will oversee the actual development. “Reconstruction does not only mean building buildings, but also building bridges between cultures, respecting the past and creating the foundation for a prosperous future,” Abehsera said in a statement.

Grenell, in a prior interview, said his original proposal from the time he was in the Trump administration and his current involvement in the project reflect his belief that the United States should help rebuild the site that it had played a role in bombing 25 years ago. He said the redevelopment could be part of a “healing” of relations between the two countries.

The Serbian government, in its own statement, said it would retain ownership of the site and that the investor group, Affinity Global Development, has a set period of time to complete the project, or the land will be returned to the government’s control.

But the approval of the contract — which includes a 99-year lease and an agreement to share profits from the development of the three-block area with the Serbian government — has drawn criticism from opposition leaders in the Serbian parliament, among others.

Protesters blocked traffic in front of the former Defense Ministry headquarters Thursday and put up signs questioning the decision, including some that said: “Stop Giving Army HQ as a Present to American Offshore Companies.”

Some in Serbia object to the plan because of the United States’ role in the bombing 25 years ago.

“Somebody is trying to clear up the mess that they did, and they are not those who should do anything in this place,” said Dragan Jonic, a member of parliament, who participated in the protest Thursday. “We’ll use all the legal means and civil disobedience to stop this.”

The project also has drawn attention from House Democrats who asked Republicans on the House Oversight and Accountability Committee to investigate the proposed deals, though there has been no movement by Republicans to do so.

“Jared Kushner is pursuing new foreign business deals, just as Donald Trump becomes the presumptive Republican nominee for the presidency,” Reps. Jamie Raskin, D-Md., and Robert Garcia, D-Calif., wrote in March, after The New York Times disclosed details of the planned projects.

Kushner, in an interview, has said that as a private citizen he has the right to pursue international real estate and business deals, even if they involve foreign governments.

But Kushner has played a role in the background, advising a nonprofit set up by backers of Trump that already is working on Trump’s possible transition back to the White House.

“One of the reasons I think firms like us as investors, they know that if Affinity comes in we’re a mark of kosher,” Kushner said in an interview in March. “Because again, we’re a highly scrutinized firm. We operate very professionally.”

SEE

Serbia leases ex-army HQ in Belgrade to Trump son-in-law's firm

Serbia leases ex-army HQ in Belgrade to Trump son-in-law's firm

Reuters
Wed, May 15, 2024 

U.S. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One beside first lady Melania Trump at Joint Base Andrews in Maryland

BELGRADE (Reuters) - The Serbian authorities and Jared Kushner's U.S.-based investment firm Affinity Global Development, signed a 99-year lease deal on Wednesday, allowing the company to overhaul two buildings which housed the headquarters of the former Yugoslav People's Army.

The Serbian construction ministry said in a statement that the "reputable American company" connected to Kushner, the son-in-law of U.S. former President Donald Trump, was chosen for the work it described as "revitalisation of the compound."

"Everything ... will be in line with the Serbian laws, in cooperation with the government and relevant institutions ... that are responsible for urban planning and the protection of cultural heritage," the statement said.

It did not specify the value of the investment, nor the deadline for its completion.

In March, Kushner announced that a wider investment by his Affinity Partners in the Balkans would include projects in Albania and in Belgrade at the site of the headquarters buildings, where it would include a hotel, apartments, shops and office spaces.

Kushner, a former top aide to Trump when he was president, set up the investment firm after stepping down from the job in 2021. Affinity did not immediately respond to request for comment.

The two buildings were damaged in 1999 during the NATO bombing of the former Yugoslavia launched to force the then strongman Slobodan Milosevic to end his bloody crackdown against Albanians in Kosovo.

The statement said that the investor agreed to return the land without compensation if it fails to complete the investment in time and to build a memorial center dedicated to all the victims of the NATO bombing.

The statement also quoted Asher Abershera, the CEO of the Affinity Global Development as saying that Serbian architects and designers would be invited to submit ideas for the memorial center.

Over 22,000 people in Serbia have so far signed a petition calling for the buildings to be preserved. The buildings designed by Serbian architect Nikola Dobrovic were built between 1957 and 1965.

Their design is meant to resemble a canyon of the Sutjeska river in Eastern Bosnia, where one of the major World War Two battles against the Germans in the Balkans was fought in 1943.

(Reporting by Aleksandar Vasovic; Editing by Diane Craft)

Xi's Euro Trip Showcases Beijing's Expanding Influence

By RFE/RL staff - May 11, 2024

• 
  
  
  
• 
  
• Xi received warm welcomes and inked strategic partnerships in France, Serbia, and Hungary, emphasizing China's expanding influence in Central and Eastern Europe.
• 
  
• Despite tensions over issues like trade and Ukraine, Xi effectively navigated diplomatic challenges and strengthened ties with key European leaders.
• 
  
• China's assertive diplomacy aims to position the country as a dominant player on the world stage, with investments and agreements reflecting its ambition to shape global dynamics.

While Xi’s trip dealt with everything from trade ties with the European Union to China’s relationship with Russia amid the war in Ukraine, the tour can be boiled down to one overarching message from China: Xi leads a rising global superpower that can’t be contained and its influence in Europe is here to stay.

The Chinese leader received opulent red-carpet welcomes in Paris from French President Emmanuel Macron and from China-friendly leaders like Serbia’s Aleksandar Vucic in Belgrade and Hungary’s Viktor Orban in Budapest.

In France, Macron looked to hammer home some tougher European positions on Ukraine and trade subsidies -- particularly over the ongoing EU probe into Chinese electric vehicles on the European market -- while still looking to charm Xi on other issues.

Ahead of the visit, Macron had argued in public statements for Europe to establish “a more balanced” trade relationship with China, and that issue was tackled on May 6 during three-way talks with Xi and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen.

As Theresa Fallon, director of the Center for Russia Europe Asia Studies, told me ahead of the visit, this would allow for Macron to “play good cop” and von der Leyen “to play bad cop” in dealing with Xi.

However, Xi looked effective at deflecting concerns and driving a wedge between Macron and von der Leyen by either flatly denying any problems, misrepresenting China’s position, or offering concessions that were only rhetorical.

In Belgrade and Budapest, meanwhile, Xi looked triumphant and received highly choreographed welcomes that reinforced Chinese messaging about deep divisions within Europe over how to engage with China.

Xi left both countries after announcing new strategic partnerships and investments that will further cement China’s relevance in Central and Eastern Europe.

Why It Matters: Public opinion on China across much of Europe has soured dramatically in recent years, particularly in Central and Eastern Europe.

When Xi last visited Europe in 2016, he was warmly embraced in Prague by then-Czech President Milos Zeman amid a wave of high-profile investments and visits to the Czech Republic, Serbia, and Poland.

Poland has since slowed its engagement with Beijing, and the Czech Republic, under new leadership, has become one of Europe’s more hawkish governments on China. Only Serbia has continued to deepen its ties out of that 2016 grouping.

While that marked a notable step back in the region, along with the irrelevance of the 14+1 Chinese format for engaging with Central and Eastern Europe, this recent visit shows that China can’t be blocked and that Beijing has plenty of new cards to play in its broader relations with Europe.

Reflecting this Chinese view, Renmin University Professor Wang Wen wrote in a recent column that the strategic scales look set to tilt in China’s favor because “Europe is eager for economic recovery more than ever.”

“Europe is having a rethink: After losing Russia, it can't afford to lose China, too,” Wang wrote.

Three More Stories From Xi's Visit

1. France: Wining And Dining Can Only Go So Far

Macron, who has sought to develop Europe as a strategically autonomous military and economic power, tackled a host of issues with Xi, but was hoping that this independent line could shine through when discussing the war in Ukraine.

What It Means: During joint statements to the press, Xi announced that he backed Macron’s call for an “Olympics truce,” which the French president saw as an opportunity to “work toward a sustainable resolution [of conflicts] in the full respect of international law.”

The comments and behind the scenes talks reportedly left some in Macron’s circle cautiously upbeat that Xi could be receptive to curtailing some of China’s backing for Russia amid the war in Ukraine.

But Xi also conceded very little, at least publicly.

He reiterated that China will not deliver weapons to Russia and would “strictly control” exports of dual-use equipment, both of which are positions that his government has already vowed to enforce.

Xi also made no acknowledgement of Western concerns that China is helping to keep the Russian economy running by giving it access to goods sanctioned by the West, and he then accused Washington and other Western countries of hypocrisy by fueling the conflict through weapons deliveries to Ukraine.

“We oppose using the Ukraine crisis to cast blame, smear a third country, and incite a new Cold War,” Xi said on May 6.

While some French officials may have walked away with some glimmers of hope, that assessment is not widely shared. As I reported ahead of Xi’s visit, EU officials said that China was looking to bargain its participation this summer in a peace conference on Ukraine as a way to pave “the way for Moscow's participation in similar meetings in the future,” one official told RFE/RL.

Xi’s true stance is also borne out in Russia and on the battlefield in Ukraine. A U.S. intelligence assessment said that, in 2023, about 90 percent of Russia’s microelectronics came from China, which Russia has used to make missiles, tanks, and aircraft. The same research said that nearly 70 percent of Russia’s approximately $900 million in machine tool imports in the last quarter of 2023 came from China.

2. Serbia: Reverence, Shared Grievance, And A Dose of Caution

Greeted by cheering crowds, Xi and Vucic praised their countries’ “ironclad friendship” with one another, as they signed 28 new cooperation agreements and announced a new deal that would “deepen and elevate the comprehensive strategic partnership between China and Serbia.”

The Details: The visit to Serbia touched on both substance and symbolism.

Serbia under Vucic has remained solidly pro-Chinese and still looks to China for billions of dollars in investment, something that Vuk Vuksanovic, a senior researcher at the Belgrade Center for Security Policy, told RFE/RL’s Balkan Service has turned Beijing into Serbia’s “most important partner in the East at the moment,” even surpassing Moscow now that “Russian-Serbian ties are under constant scrutiny because of Ukraine.”

The elevated strategic partnership reflects that trend, as does a new free-trade agreement signed before the visit that Vucic said would allow Serbia to export 95 percent of its goods duty-free to China.

Belgrade and Beijing also signed 28 documents that would continue to deepen their ties. While most of the agreements were vague and did not have dollar figures attached, they covered a range of issues, from ministerial exchanges to state media agreements, that chart a course for a larger Chinese role in the Balkan country.

When it came to the symbolism of the visit, Xi arrived on the 25th anniversary of NATO’s accidental 1999 bombing of the Chinese Embassy in Belgrade. In an article published on May 7 by Politika, a Serbian newspaper, Xi said that “NATO flagrantly bombed the Chinese Embassy,” which “will stay in the shared memory of the Chinese and Serbian peoples.”

But Xi also decided to skip the former embassy site during his visit, which is now a large Chinese cultural center that also includes a memorial for the bombing.

While the Chinese Foreign Ministry used the occasion to criticize NATO, the move shows a cautious approach from Xi when it comes to exciting anti-Western bombast at home and abroad, where it could have overshadowed other aspects of his visit.

3. Hungary: A Risky Gamble That's Paying Off

Xi finished his Europe trip with a stop in another friendly nation, touching down on May 8 in Budapest, where he inked new investments and elevated Hungary’s relationship with China to new heights.

What You Need To Know: Xi’s visit marks a capstone for Orban’s embrace of China that positions Hungary as a bridgehead for Chinese influence in Central and Eastern Europe.

In an article in Magyar Nemzet, which is controlled by Orban’s governing Fidesz party, Xi called for Hungary to “lead” the region’s relations with Beijing and said that China wanted to work closely with Budapest on Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) projects. The Chinese leader also promised to “speed up” construction of a high-speed train line between Budapest and Belgrade that has been delayed for years.

During the visit, Xi and Orban also pledged to elevate their ties to an “all-weather comprehensive strategic partnership” -- a Chinese classification that denotes the highest possible type of relationship that Beijing can have with another country. Only Belarus, Pakistan, and Uzbekistan are labeled as “all-weather” partners.

The move is sure to further strain Hungary’s already fraught relationship with Brussels, as will the 18 joint projects with China that were announced by Hungarian Foreign Minister Peter Szijjarto.

While the announcement of the deals lacked details, they would include a high-speed rail project to Budapest’s international airport from the city and a new rail line across the country to transport electric cars, batteries, and other products from Chinese factories planned to be built in eastern Hungary. Budapest and Beijing also vowed to cooperate on nuclear energy projects.

The focus on electric vehicles is noteworthy as Hungary is looking to Chinese investment to establish itself as Europe’s premier manufacturing hub for electric vehicles, batteries, and other new technologies.

China’s electric vehicle giant BYD announced in December that it would build an assembly plant in Hungary, its first production facility in Europe. Great Wall Motor, another major Chinese electric vehicle maker, is also looking into building an even bigger factory in Hungary.

More From Xi’s Europe Trip

Taiwan and Kosovo: During his shared remarks with Xi, Vucic used the occasion to tie Serbia’s territorial claims with Kosovo to Beijing’s own claims over Taiwan.

“Just as we have clear positions on the issue of Chinese integrity -- that Taiwan is China -- so they support the territory of Serbia without any reservation,” Vucic said. Xi later said that China “supports Serbia’s efforts to preserve its territorial integrity regarding Kosovo.”

The Next Issue: Ahead of Xi’s visit and amid a slew of Chinese espionage and trade scandals in Europe, my colleagues and I looked at the spread of Chinese-made surveillance cameras from Dahua and Hikvision, two partially Chinese state-owned companies, across Central and Eastern Europe.

An RFE/RL survey of nine countries in the region shows that governments have purchased millions of cameras over the last five years, despite the devices’ security vulnerabilities and the manufacturers’ lax data practices.

No Presser: After their talks on May 9, Xi and Orban held what was billed as a news conference, but was instead just both leaders reading statements without taking any questions.

Xi famously avoids any unscripted media encounters. MTVA, a state-owned and financed Hungarian channel, had the exclusive broadcast rights to Xi’s visit, and my colleagues in RFE/RL’s Hungarian Service were not granted accreditation from the Hungarian prime minister’s office to attend.

Prime Time: As Xi arrived at Belgrade's airport on May 7, Serbia’s state-owned television station even interrupted a broadcast of the Eurovision Song Contest to make way for coverage of the welcoming ceremony for the Chinese leader.

One Thing To Watch

Now that Xi’s big Europe trip is a wrap, attention will turn to Russian President Vladimir Putin’s upcoming visit to China. The dates for the Russian leader’s trip have not yet been confirmed, but Bloomberg quoted Kremlin sources saying that it would take place May 15-16.

By RFE/RL

Canada abstains on Palestine recognition at UN, open to statehood before peace

The Canadian Press
Fri, May 10, 2024 



OTTAWA — Canada abstained from another United Nations vote Friday aimed at formally recognizing Palestine, while opening the door to supporting statehood before the end of the current conflict.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said it's part of Canada's efforts to stop the Israeli government from blocking an eventual Palestinian state.

"Our long-standing position (was) that you could only recognize the State of Palestine as an outcome at the end of a process leading to a two-state solution," he told reporters in West Kelowna, B.C.

"We now recognize that it may happen sooner than at the end of the process, as a way of pushing toward that two-state solution."

The UN General Assembly voted by a wide margin Friday morning to grant the Palestinian delegation more procedural rights in UN forums, and ask the Security Council to reconsider blocking Palestine from full status as a member state.

Canada was among 25 countries to abstain, and Trudeau said this is a deliberate change from Canada's stance of voting against most motions that target Israel. Ottawa has previously deemed these to be one-sided motions that hinder peace talks.

"The Israeli government under Prime Minister (Benjamin) Netanyahu has unacceptably closed the door on any path toward a two-state solution and we disagree with that fundamentally," Trudeau said, in explaining his rationale.

He reiterated positions Canada has taken for months on the conflict, including the need for Hamas to surrender its hostages and stop fighting, and for Israel to stop limiting humanitarian aid due to "famine conditions that are quickly developing and the horrific loss of life."

In a statement, Global Affairs Canada wrote that it will recognize the State of Palestine "at the time most conducive to lasting peace," adding that this isn't necessarily after a final peace accord with Israel, and that peace talks "cannot delay the creation of a Palestinian state."

The Palestinian delegation in Ottawa wrote in a press release that the shift is "a positive step forward" but argued a full recognition would better reflect Canada's aspirations for peace in the region. Israel's ambassador in Ottawa argued that full UN membership for Palestine would reward Hamas.

Canada has also joined the European Union in condemning two arson attacks by Israeli settlers in the occupied area of eastern Jerusalem on the local building used by UNRWA, a UN agency supporting Palestinians.

Israel has accused UNRWA of links to terrorism, which led Western countries to suspend or freeze funding, though an independent probe found Israel had not provided evidence for its claims. The statement notes "the services UNRWA provides in Gaza and across the region are essential," and it calls on Israel to ensure the safety of UN staff and premises.

Despite that concern, Canada has yet to follow through on a promise three months ago to sanction violent West Bank settlers, a move taken by the U.S. and the U.K. months ago.

Instead, Foreign Affairs Minister Mélanie Joly applied sanctions to four men in Iran whom Ottawa accused of providing military training and resources to help bolster Hamas. Those listed are members of the militant group, or of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published May 10, 2024.

Dylan Robertson, The Canadian Press


Australia’s support for UN resolution on Palestinian membership ‘not recognition of statehood’

Daniel Hurst and Tory Shepherd
Fri, May 10, 2024

Australia's foreign minister Penny Wong addressing the UN general assembly in September 2023. Australia appears likely to back a vote on Palestine’s status after resolution was watered down.Photograph: Craig Ruttle/AP


Australia’s support of a UN vote on Palestinian membership is “the opposite of what Hamas wants”, and is not about recognising Palestine as a state, according to the foreign affairs minister, Penny Wong.

The draft resolution was significantly watered down in last-minute negotiations and Australia was among 143 UN general assembly members to pass the resolution calling on the security council to reconsider granting full membership to Palestine.

On Saturday, Wong said the vote was about awarding “modest additional rights to participate in United Nations forums”, and that Australia would only recognise Palestine “when we think the time is right”.

She said Australia’s policy had changed to be open to recognition during a peace process, “not necessarily only at the end of the peace process”.

That small but significant shift in policy was revealed in April, and some interpreted it as a signal Australia could recognise Palestine in the near future, although Wong said there is no move to do that. Wong also emphasised there would be no role for Hamas in a future Palestinian state.

Sign up for Guardian Australia’s free morning and afternoon email newsletters for your daily news roundup

The prime minister, Anthony Albanese, said the backing of the resolution was consistent with Australia’s support for a two-state solution.

He said the government continued to “unequivocally condemn” Hamas’s actions on 7 October and call for the release of the hostages. But he said Palestinians have a right to live in peace and security side-by-side with Israel.

In a statement explaining the vote, the Australian government said the resolution’s language expressed “unwavering support for the two-state solution of Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security within recognised borders”.

“Like many other countries, our vote for this resolution is not bilateral recognition of Palestinian statehood,” it said.

“Nevertheless, Australia no longer accepts that recognition can only come at the end of the peace process.

“We have been clear there is no role for Hamas in a future Palestinian state.”

France, Japan, South Korea and New Zealand were among the countries that voted for the resolution at an emergency session of the general assembly in New York on Friday.

The US and Israel were among nine countries to oppose the resolution, while 25 others abstained.

Australia was leaning towards abstaining on the original resolution, in which the UN general assembly would have requested the 15-member security council to “favourably” reconsider Palestine’s application for full UN membership status.

Last month the US used its veto power to scuttle the proposal at a security council meeting, and full membership is impossible without that body’s consent.

In addition to the symbolic move of requesting a rethink by the security council, the general assembly was to consider granting Palestine rights and privileges “to ensure its full and effective participation … on equal footing with member states”, according to a draft version of the resolution circulating among diplomats last week.

An official with knowledge of the negotiations said the most recent version circulated by the United Arab Emirates was significantly watered down from earlier drafts and demonstrated “major concessions” by the Palestinians and the Arab Group.

The amended version enhanced the Palestinian mission to the UN with a range of new rights and privileges but made clear that these did not include voting rights.

After a week in which pro-Palestinian encampments were accused of antisemitism, Wong said she understood the Australian Jewish community were “feeling distressed and isolated”.

“You have a right to be safe … and antisemitism has no place anywhere. I stand against it, we all must stand against it.

“This resolution that we have supported is about long-term peace and security for both Israelis and Palestinians.”

The vote was the “opposite of what Hamas wants”, Wong said.

The Coalition’s foreign affairs spokesperson, Simon Birmingham, said the government had “proven overnight that they lack the courage to stand against pressure and by sound principles”.

Birmingham said the resolution sent “a shameful message that violence and terrorism get results ahead of negotiation and diplomacy”.

The Executive Council of Australian Jewry had also urged Wong to vote against the resolution.

The ECAJ president, Daniel Aghion, said it was “grandstanding” that would “do nothing to free the Israeli hostages or break the grip of Hamas and alleviate the plight of Gazan civilians”.

“One can only conclude that Australia’s vote was driven by domestic political considerations, and not by principle, which makes it a sad and shameful day for all Australians,” he said.

“Australia should have joined the UK, Canada and the US in abstaining or voting against the resolution.”

Related: Why Anthony Albanese will face a tough call when the UN votes on full membership for Palestine

This was Australia’s most highly anticipated UN vote since December, when it supported an immediate humanitarian ceasefire in Gaza and the unconditional release of hostages.

The Australian government continues to express alarm about the “devastating” consequences of an impending Israeli ground offensive into the southern Gaza city of Rafah, where more than 1 million Palestinians have taken shelter.

The Greens leader, Adam Bandt, said the UN vote was a “positive step” but wouldn’t be enough to stop “Netanyahu’s catastrophic invasion of Rafah”.

Australia was not inclined to oppose the UN resolution, after signals from Wong, about the need to kickstart progress towards a two-state solution to end the cycle of violence.

Palestinian diplomats at the UN represent the Palestinian Authority, which exercises limited self-rule in parts of the Israeli-occupied West Bank. The Palestinian Authority is dominated by Fatah, a rival to Hamas.

The Australia Palestine Advocacy Network’s president, Nasser Mashni, said the UN had still “failed to recognise Palestinians’ basic, inherent right to participate in decision-making about issues that directly affect their lives and political aspirations”.

UN General Assembly set to back Palestine’s bid for membership

Shweta Sharma
Fri, May 10, 2024 

Scroll back up to restore default view.


The UN General Assembly will vote on Friday on a resolution to grant membership to Palestine, a longstanding pursuit for the Palestinians that has faced staunch resistance from Israel and its allies.

The draft resolution has been put forward by the UAE in its capacity as the Arab Group’s chair for the month, and includes a call for the Palestinians to be given new “rights and privileges” within the UN. Palestine has been a UN non-member observer state since 2012.

The final text of the draft has been reached after amendments were made to try and alleviate the concerns of key member states, including the US, Russia and China.

Nonetheless, the US said late on Thursday that the Biden administration opposes the draft resolution, which still requires the approval of the UN Security Council before a state of Palestine could be granted full General Assembly membership.

Under the UN Charter, prospective members must be deemed "peace-loving”. The draft resolution does not explicitly say that Palestine is a “peace-loving state” in the General Assembly’s judgement – instead, simply that the body “determines” that it qualifies for membership. It recommends that the Security Council reconsider its request “favourably”.

On 18 April, the US vetoed a widely-backed council resolution that would have made Palestine a full member. During the vote, Britain and Switzerland abstained, while the other 12 council members voted in favour.

Robert Wood, US deputy ambassador to the UN, suggested American opposition to the resolution was based on a question of due process.

"We’ve been very clear from the beginning there is a process for obtaining full membership in the United Nations, and this effort by some of the Arab countries and the Palestinians is to try to go around that," Mr Wood said. "We have said from the beginning the best way to ensure Palestinian full membership in the UN is to do that through negotiations with Israel. That remains our position."

But unlike the Security Council, there are no vetoes in the 193-member General Assembly and the resolution is expected to be approved by a large majority, three Western diplomats told the Associated Press.

The Palestinian UN mission in New York, in a letter to UN member states, said the adoption of the resolution would be a step towards a two-state solution in the Middle East.

It said it would "constitute a clear reaffirmation of support at this very critical moment for the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination, including the right to their independent state."

The renewed effort to secure full Palestinian membership in the UN comes amid a growing humanitarian crisis in Gaza, one that may only be compounded further by an expected Israeli ground offensive into the refugee city of Rafah.

The humanitarian crisis confronting Palestinians in Gaza, coupled with the reported death toll of over 34,000 individuals in the territory, has drawn widespread condemnation in numerous Security Council and General Assembly sessions.

According to diplomats, Russia and China, which have called on Israel to cease its action in Gaza, were concerned that granting the list of rights and privileges detailed in an annex to the resolution could set a precedent for other would-be UN members – with Russia concerned about Kosovo and China about Taiwan.

The first draft conferred on Palestine “the rights and privileges necessary to ensure its full and effective participation” in the assembly’s sessions and UN conferences “on equal footing with member states”.

The final text in the draft has dropped the language that called for putting Palestine “on equal footing with member states.”

And to address Chinese and Russian concerns, it would decide “on an exceptional basis and without setting a precedent” to adopt the rights and privileges in the annex.

The draft also adds a provision in the annex on the issue of voting, stating categorically: “The state of Palestine, in its capacity as an observer state, does not have the right to vote in the General Assembly or to put forward its candidature to United Nations organs.”

Additional reporting by agencies