#EU commission president

[thoughtlessarse]

European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen is set to unveil her new top team on Tuesday, navigating complex political dynamics as she balances member state interests for the EU's next five years. After weeks of fierce political horse-trading, European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen unveiled Tuesday her new top team to help steward the EU through the next five years of global uncertainty. Faced with Russia's war in Ukraine, the potential return of Donald Trump as US president and competition from China, the formation of the new commission comes at a crucial moment. To confront the challenges, von der Leyen handed powerful economic portfolios to France, Spain and Italy -- putting a hard-right candidate from Rome in a top role. "It's about strengthening our tech sovereignty, our security and our democracy," the commission chief said as she announced the team at the European Parliament in Strasbourg. French candidate Stephane Sejourne was handed an executive vice president role overseeing industrial strategy, after von der Leyen ousted Paris's first nominee. Spain's candidate Teresa Ribera, a socialist climate campaigner, was also made an executive vice president, tasked with overseeing the bloc's economic transition toward carbon neutrality. As Russia's war against Ukraine grinds on through a third year, security and defence roles assumed a new prominence. Former Lithuanian prime minister Andrius Kubilius was handed a new defence role overseeing the EU's push to rearm, making him one of several hawkish Russia critics in eastern Europe to receive a prominent role.

continue reading

Great, we now have our first fascist vice president, Raffaele Fitto who, unsurprisingly, has been involved in various trials for bribery and corruption, one in which he was banned from public office for 5 years and got 1 year in jail. He was later acquitted.

He was given a “cohesion” portfolio, whatever that may be. If it related to EU cohesion, then he's a strange choice given his previous anti-EU stance.

[notayesmanseconomics]

Can Mario Draghi reform the European economic performance?

The last year or so has seen the leaders of the European Union forced to start to come to terms with the economic under performance of their bloc. In our terms we looked at a facet of this back on February 19th when ECB policymaker Dr. Isabel Schnabel said this. Over the past three decades, a striking gap in the real IT-related capital stock has emerged between the euro area and the United States…

[suetravelblog]

Exploring Kraków

[head-post]

Advances in EU fiscal rules

The prospect of an agreement on fiscal rules has long been surrounded by doom and gloom, with Germany’s opposition to the far-reaching changes proposed by the European Commission providing the greatest cause for pessimism. However, it is possible that the expected changes are coming, POLITICO reports.

Last month, the French and German governments succeeded in unlocking the positive momentum now seen in the talks. Both countries say the two-day retreat between President Emmanuel Macron and Chancellor Olaf Scholz was a “huge atmospheric success,” which, given the current state of relations between the two countries, is very important.

According to those present in Hamburg, Germany and France committed themselves to reaching agreement on the two biggest outstanding issues: electricity market reforms and economic governance. And in line with that commitment, after months of unsuccessful negotiations, an agreement on the latter was finally reached earlier this month.

Overall, the Commission’s aim is to migrate the single set of Stability and Growth Pact fiscal adjustment requirements into more individualised, bilaterally agreed fiscal adjustment plans unique to each member state, based on debt sustainability analyses.

Read more HERE

[niveditaabaidya]

EU’s Von Der Leyen Praises Amazing Pace of Ukrainian reforms. eu #nato #...

[tanadrin]

My brother linked me this wonderful document of EU-isms in English. One big sticking point the author points out is nouns that are countable/uncountable in English but the other way around in another European language. Occasionally pronunciation as well--i.e., pronouncing "cabinet" as "cabinay."

One example he cites that must be extremely annoying is the way "concerned" means two different things depending on whether it comes before or after a noun: "the concerned official" vs "the official concerned [with something]." I actually have no idea what's happening grammatically there, or whether there are any other words that do that.

Also I did not know that "actor" in the generic sense (as in "state actor") was a particularly North American expression.

Other highlights:

In English, the term ‘Anglo-Saxon’ is generally used to describe a member of any of the West Germanic tribes (Angles, Saxons and Jutes) that settled in Britain from the 5th century AD. ... Furthermore, the Anglo-Saxon language ceased to exist in the 12th century (I am ill-informed about Brussels, but the last known speaker in Luxembourg was St Willibrord, 658-73922). This term is particularly inapplicable (and, I gather, irritating for those concerned) when used to describe the Irish, Scots and Welsh, who partly base their national identities on not being descended from the Anglo-Saxons (everybody seems to have forgotten about the poor Jutes), and verges on the ridiculous when used to include West Indians or people like the incumbent US president, who, in EU terminology, would be the leader of the Anglo-Saxon world.

Every now and then a job advertisement appears, saying, for example, that the Commission is looking for a ‘head of sector to animate 12 staff members’. Looking in the Oxford online dictionary for a clue as to what this might mean, we can probably exclude the fact that the person in question will be expected to: ‘bring [the staff members] to life’, or ‘give [them] the appearance of movement using animation techniques’. This means that we are left with ‘giving them inspiration, encouragement, or renewed vigour’, which also sounds a trifle unlikely. Actually the new employee will probably find that he/she will just be expected to lead a team.

[motsimages]

Info about European Parliament elections

Because the elections to the European Parliament are approaching (6-9 of June), I wanted to make some kind of master post about it to see if I understand it better and to give some tips. But I forgot we're talking about the fucking European Union and all its levels and sublevels and the respect to each country doing whatever the fuck they want. You may want to watch the series Parliament. It's funny and you will understand how the EU works better than I could ever explain it (I am not kidding).

THANKFULLY, the EU knows the mess it all is and they created a very clear and easy to use website just for this: https://elections.europa.eu.

It gives you general info and a guide for your country. I want to kiss in the mouth to whoever designed the website and wrote the text. Whatever it is they are paid, it's not enough.

IF READING THIS POST IN ENGLISH IS HARD FOR YOU, THAT WEBSITE, AS MOST EU WEBSITES/INFO, IS TRANSLATED INTO EVERY OFFICIAL LANGUAGE OF THE EU.

The most important thing about these elections is that the European Parliament represents the interests of the European citizens. Copying from that website I gave: The European Commission is the EU’s executive branch, responsible for proposing and implementing EU law and the day-to-day running of the EU. The European Parliament, representing the interests of EU citizens, and the Council, representing the interests of the countries, shape Commission proposals and, if they agree on them, adopt them.

This is important to know because the Parliament will elect the new President of the European Commission who later will examine and approve the entire College of Commissioners. But this is another thing, so go check wikipedia about the President of the European Comission. In the last elections there was some mix-up between the candidate, the system and who ended up being president (current president is Ursula von der Leyen, chosen in 2019).

The European parliament is separated into 7 political groups. 23 members are necessary to create a group and each group must represent at least a quarter of the countries in the EU (again, watch Parliament, this is very well explained there in a fun way). Here you can find the list of the political groups (if you click each link, they send you to the website of the group and you can look for who/which party from your country is part of it). Some people do not belong to any political group.

From what I see, those 7 political groups include:

4 Right-wing groups (some say "center-right" but they may be right-right. 2 of them are clearly called something like "Christian democrats" or "Conservatives")

1 green party

1 left party

1 center-leftish party

Not all of the websites for these political groups are in several languages of the EU, but they are all in English. Here you can see how many members of the parliament belong to each group by country. In short, you can see where your country is leaning in the European parliament. For instance, Spain has 13 christian democrats, 9 "center-right" and 4 right vs 21 "center-left", 3 green and 6 left, plus 3 non registered in any group for a total of 59 members.

In reality, we do not vote for those political groups. We vote for politicians in our countries and then, they, if they want, they join one group or another. In short, if you vote a left-wing party from your country, it is likely that they will be part of The Left political group of the European parliament.

Historically, over 50% of the parliament is a group of right and another group of center-right. No sé qué de los nazis por Europa estos últimos años. This is how it looks like right now. The yellow party is right-wing adjacent too (Renew Europe), so you can see how it currently looks for the left (green and red colours, where the dark red colour is The Left and the bright red is center-left). The gray one do not belong to any political group.

In other elections, about 50% of the population did not vote (which may be why there are more right-wing parties than others, just saying).

So yeah, vote. This organ represents you and your interests directly. They are the ones who adopt laws that affect anyone and everyone.

Vote because the European Parliament is your voice in the EU.

[mariacallous]

Europe’s center of political gravity is veering to the right.

Center-right and far-right parties are set to take the largest number of seats in Sunday’s European Union election in the most populous nations: Germany, France, Italy, Spain and Poland.

France led the rightward lurch with such a crushing victory for the far-right National Rally that liberal President Emmanuel Macron dissolved France’s parliament and called an early election. Early results suggested the National Rally would win some 32 percent of the vote, more than twice that of the president’s party.

“The president of the Republic cannot remain deaf to the message sent this evening by the people of France,” National Rally’s President Jordan Bardella told his supporters at the Parc Floral in Paris.

In Germany, the center-right is cruising to a comfortable victory, with the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD) coming second and beating Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s Socialists into third place.

Voters across 27 nations have voted over the past week to select 720 members of the European Parliament, who will serve over the next five years. Their first main role with be to approve or reject the main candidate for Europe’s top job: president of the European Commission.

In a Continent that has sought to exorcise the ghosts of fascism for eight decades, the scale of the presence of far-right will be one of the hottest topics of conversation.

Even though they are highly unlikely to be able to coordinate as a unified group inside the European Parliament — thanks to divisions on topics such as Russia — they will still be able to influence the overall direction of the EU, on everything from immigration to climate policies.   

Collected together, the radical right parties would theoretically represent the second biggest bloc in the Parliament — being on track to come first in France and Italy, and second in Germany, the three biggest and most important countries in the 27-nation bloc. In Italy, Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing party secured the most support, projected to be about 28 percent.

The far-right is also expected to win in Hungary, and picked up five more seats in the Netherlands. The center-right was comfortably first in Greece and Bulgaria.

The single most ominous warning signal for the future of the EU is France, given the scale of the far right’s win over Macron. All eyes will now be on whether France’s populist wave can maintain its momentum through the impending parliamentary elections and on to presidential elections in 2027 — where a victory for far-right leader Marine Le Pen would threaten to throw the whole EU into turmoil.

The official winner of the evening looks set to be European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen whose center-right European People’s Party will still make up the single-biggest bloc in Parliament. 

With early projections showing the EPP will secure about 181 out of the 720 seats in Parliament, the center right will be the dominant force but can hardly govern alone as it will be miles from an absolute majority in the chamber.

The main challenge for von der Leyen in the coming days and weeks will be whether she can strike a deal with the traditional centrist parties — the socialists and liberals — to build a majority of 361 or more in the Parliament.

“Today is a good day for [the] EPP. We won the European elections, my friends. We are the strongest party, we are the anchor of stability … Together with others we will build a bastion against the extremes from the left and from the right. We will stop them!”

Her supporters replied with chants of “Five more years.”

In all, the three big center groups look set to have just over 400 seats. That means von der Leyen’s reapproval will go down to the wire, because she will be rejected if only about 10 percent of lawmakers from the main parties rebel against their party lines. The rebellion rate is normally higher.

This raises a big question of whether she will need to fish around for other allies, ranging from the Greens to Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni’s right-wing Brothers of Italy.

Von der Leyen’s center-right is quick to reject the xenophobia and euroskepticism of the far right, but it knows its voters share the same concerns on the cost of living, migration and a sense that Europe’s traditional core businesses — manufacturing and farming — are being strangled by green regulation.

Staking out its ground in the culture war over the EU’s identity, the EPP opened its EU election manifesto with its commitment to Europe’s “Judeo-Christian roots.”

[zvaigzdelasas]

Kyiv is in talks to transit gas from Azerbaijan to the EU after the contract to transit Russian gas expires in December 2024, President Volodymyr Zelensky said in an interview with Bloomberg on July 3.

Kyiv and the EU have said they would not seek the prolongation of the transit deal for Russian gas at the end of the year. The deal was signed in 2019.

Energy Minister Herman Halushchenko told Bloomberg in March that he does not "see the possibility" that Russian gas would continue to flow through Ukraine after December.[...]

Transiting gas from Azerbaijan instead is "one of the proposals," Zelensky said.

According to Bloomberg, Ukraine earned around $1 billion from transit revenue in 2021, and therefore continuing to use the extensive system of pipelines "would help provide crucial funding for the war-torn economy."[...]

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen signed a deal with Azerbaijani President Ilham Aliyev in Baku in July 2022 to bring imports of Azeri natural gas to "at least" 20 billion cubic meters annually by 2027.

4 Jul 24

[dividedindiversity]

So far, this blog has mostly been about silly EU-themed polls. But ultimately, the EU is a very powerful institution that influences the lives of hundereds of millions of people, for better or worse. I have made some serious posts on here before- but with the EU election coming up, I was wondering if we could do something with that.

I won't do a political party bracket or anything like that, but I'm honestly kinda interested in how much tumblr knows about the EU, how tumblr Europeans have been using their voice in EU politics, etc. With the bonus of maybe spreading some knowledge. So let's start off simple:

Do you have any ideas for more polls? My ask box is always open, and as long as posts from this blog don't get too many notes, I read those too!

[historyforfuture]

Now they left GAZA a lone

🚨The EU is Just scattering phrases right and left but no actions to stop the massacre , the eu like the us also supply the zionists with weapons and huge amounts of aids .

The EU and US official statements are in a way and their actions are in another completely different way

Too much hypocrite 👀

The vice president of the european commission says :

~ The situation in GAZA is shocking "OMG🙈" , and aid workers are being killed . (so what did u do ?)👇🏼

~ UN activities have been suspended .

(Now GAZA between the fangs of a beast . This decision has sure harm the opressed civillians in gaza )

~He says : The quantity of the human aids that entered GAZA in July is the lowest since the beginning of the war (so what did you do ?! )👇🏼

He proposed to the EU expanding the sanction list to include more occupation ministers but there was no consensus🤮

This is a clear complicity

[head-post]

Paris sued the Commission over discrimination against the French language

France is ready to defend the “language of Molière” in the EU Court of Justice.

France has not given up hope that all of Brussels will speak French, even though the use of Euro-English and Globish, a simplified version of English, has become widespread in the EU.

Brussels currently recruits new staff in areas such as space, defence and the economy using a selection process that includes some tests that are conducted in English only. Paris has strongly criticised this selection criterion. According to France, these criteria favour English-speaking candidates over their rivals. Paris has therefore filed two complaints with the EU’s highest court, one of which was made public on Monday.

France has suggested that English-only tests are discriminatory and violate EU treaties. The bloc’s rules provide for equal treatment of all EU citizens, regardless of their nationality. The rules on hiring EU employees also prohibit discrimination on the basis of language in general and allow it only under certain conditions.

Learn more HERE

[follow-up-news]

The European Union announced Friday it had made 1.5 billion euros ($1.6 billion) available to support Ukraine, the first tranche of money generated from profits on frozen Russian assets. In May, the EU’s 27 member states reached an agreement to use the interest earned on some 210 billion euros ($225 billion) in Russian central bank assets for military support for Ukraine and rebuilding efforts in the war torn country. The money, most of which is held in Belgium, was frozen as part of sanctions packages in retaliation for Moscow’s full-scale invasion. Brussels estimates that the interest on those assets could provide around 3 billion euros each year. “The EU stands with Ukraine. Today we transfer 1.5 billion euros in proceeds from immobilised Russian assets to the defence and reconstruction of Ukraine. There is no better symbol or use for the Kremlin’s money than to make Ukraine and all of Europe a safer place to live,” European Commission president Ursula von der Leyen said in a statement.

[eurovision-facts]

Eurovision Fact #643:

During the 2024 contest, the flag of the European Union was banned from being brought into the arena by fans. This led to the EU Commission Vice President, Margaritis Schinas, to write the EBU a letter in which they spoke out in anger against the decision:

“The incoherence in the EBU’s stance has left myself and many millions of your viewers wondering for what and for whom the Eurovision Song Contest stands..."

The EU argues that neglecting to include the flag cast a shadow over what was supposed to be a "joyous occasion," and that the EU plans to have "a very lively discussion” with the EBU about why the ban was instated in the first place.

Despite the apparent ban, EU flags were seen on stage during the second semi-final as Joost Klein performed his song "Europapa" in which one of his backup dancers bore the flag on their chest. Moreover, as the camera panned to the crowd, a fan could be seen wearing an EU flag directly in front of the camera.

[Sources]

"EU accuses Eurovision bosses of handing gift to ‘enemies of Europe’ with flag ban," Politico.eu.

"Eurovision banned the EU flag from the song contest. The EU is angry and wants to know why," apnews.com.

Joost Klein - Europapa (LIVE) | Netherlands 🇳🇱 | Second Semi-Final | Eurovision 2024, YouTube.com.

"Strangest prohibited items in Eurovision history as total bag ban is enforced from handcuffs to mugs," mirror.co.uk.

Prohibited items Malmö Arena - Audience, PDF.

[mariacallous]

Unbox a new phone in the US and it's almost certain to have Google as the default way to search the web. Federal judge Amit Mehta on Monday ruled in favor of the US Department of Justice that the contracts Google uses to secure that position violate fair competition laws. Now Mehta must decide what to do about it.

The jurist could order big changes to the unboxing experience, with users having to select their default search provider. He also could go as far as to force Google to sell parts of its business. Mehta scheduled a hearing for September to begin the process of deciding the penalties, but with Google appealing the verdict, it could be years—if ever—before the search giant must comply.

Though legal and economics experts say it’s difficult to guess where Mehta might land with his remedies, they have some ideas of what he might be considering. Here’s a look at five options.

Ban Revenue Sharing

US courts have generally tried to resolve antitrust violations by ordering an end to the illegal behavior, setting rules to prevent it from recurring, and taking any additional measures needed to ensure that the culprit and its competitors are moved onto an even field.

To satisfy that first prong, Mehta is widely expected to ban Google from continuing with arrangements under which it splits tens of billions of dollars in ad revenue among Apple, Samsung, Mozilla, and other companies that agree to set Google as the default search on their devices or software.

“At a minimum, the Justice Department will ask for an injunction that forbids Google from engaging in the conduct that the court deemed to be improper,” says William Kovacic, who previously served as an antitrust regulator on the US Federal Trade Commission.

An injunction might prevent Google from using its unmatched economic might to outspend smaller search companies, such as Bing, DuckDuckGo, or Ecosia, to secure exclusive default status. Positioning matters; Mehta’s ruling found that even when it’s easy for users to switch defaults, most people don’t adjust the setting. But some do prefer Google. That’s why “Google.com” is the most popular search term on Bing, which is the default on some Microsoft devices, according to Mehta’s ruling.

In the future, users who prefer Google may end up having to query “Google.com” in other search engines, too.

Require Choice Screens

Mehta could follow the lead of the European Union, which for years has required Google to offer a menu of search options on Android devices, and recently expanded the rule to the Chrome browser.

Experts don’t believe the European regulation has led to a significant increase in the popularity of Google alternatives because users recognize Google better than other options. “The horse is already out of the barn,” says Herbert Hovenkamp, an antitrust scholar at Penn Law School who has researched tech platforms. “One problem with free choice is that it won’t necessarily take down Google’s market share.”

But if Mehta pursues the approach, he should make some improvements on the EU’s rules, says Kamyl Bazbaz, senior vice president of public affairs at DuckDuckGo. Users should be prompted with the choice screen periodically, not just once, Bazbaz says. They shouldn’t have to deal with popups from Google urging them to switch the default to Google, he adds. And when users first interact with a competing search app, there should be an easy way to set it as the default app.

With these added measures, some searchers could find themselves more reliably ditching Google. Others could be frustrated by the recurring requests.

Order a Divestiture

Contract bans and choice screens are examples of conduct remedies. But the Justice Department in recent years has expressed a preference for what are known as structural remedies, or breaking off parts of a company.

Most famous is the breakup of telephone giant Bell in the 1980s, creating a variety of independent companies, including AT&T. But courts aren’t always on board. When Microsoft lost an antitrust battle in the 1990s, a federal appeals panel rejected an order to break up the company, and Microsoft eventually settled on a range of conduct changes.

A one-time sale is preferred by regulators in part because it doesn’t require them to invest in monitoring the ongoing compliance of companies in terms of conduct remedies. It’s a much cleaner break, and some antitrust experts contend that structural remedies are more effective.

The challenge is figuring out what parts of a company need to be separated. John Kwoka, an economics professor at Northeastern University who recently served as an adviser to FTC chair Lina Khan, says the key is identifying businesses in which ownership by Google are “distorting its incentives.” He says that, for instance, breaking off search could open the door to Google’s Android partnering with a different search engine.

But Hovenkamp doubts the potential of a search sell-off to increase competition because the service would remain popular. “Selling Google Search would just transfer the dominance to another firm,” he says. “I don't know what sort of breakup would work.”

Some financial analysts who study Google parent Alphabet are also skeptical. “Alphabet's scale, continued strong execution, and financial strength mitigate this legal risk and the possible ensuing financial and business model ramifications,” Emile El Nems, vice president for Moody's Ratings, said in a press statement.

Other legal experts envision a future in which search results would come from Google and the ads in the experience from another company that’s spun off from Google. It’s unclear how that remedy would affect users, but it’s possible ads could end up being less relevant and more intrusive.

Force Google to Share

Mehta found in his judgment that Google provides users a superior experience because it receives billions of more queries than any other search engine, and that data fuels improvements to the algorithms that decide which results to show for a particular query.

Rebecca Haw Allensworth, a law professor at Vanderbilt University following the Google case, says one of the most aggressive remedies would be requiring Google to share data or algorithms with its search competition so they too could improve. “Courts do not like to force sharing between rivals like that, but on the other hand, the judge seemed very concerned about how Google’s conduct has deprived its rivals of what they really need to compete—scale in search data,” she says. “Forcing data sharing would directly address that concern.”

Potential shareable data could include all the queries that users are running on Google and which results they are clicking, DuckDuckGo’s Bazbaz says.

Another option would have Google hold on to its data while instead providing a service on a nondiscriminatory basis, with adequate customer support, for other apps to pull results from Google and present them to users as part of a competing experience. Rivals have called Google’s existing offering in this regard inadequate.

“Only a multipronged remedy will allow rivals to enter the market and fairly compete for consumers based on the merits of their own product,” says Lee Hepner, senior counsel at the American Economic Liberties Project, an anti-monopoly advocacy group.

Any approach that involves Google sharing data is likely to raise questions about its users’ privacy. Strengthened rivals also would have a better shot at securing defaults, meaning those who’d rather use Google would again have to take a few more steps to get back to regular old Google.

Increase Oversight

It’s up to the Justice Department to propose to Mehta potential remedies, which Google would then get a chance to rebut. Neither side has previewed what it wants.

In some other antitrust battles, Google has found ways to design product and policy changes to continue to limit competition in part by making competing unaffordable for rivals. “Google will do anything it can to get in the way of progress,” Bazbaz says. That’s why he hopes Mehta establishes a monitoring body to administer the remedies and hold Google to their spirit.

Bazbaz also wants to see Google have to invest in public education initiatives to let users know about the benefits they can get from switching search engines. With oversight and PR measures in place, users may have no choice but to hear about the Google Search antitrust case for a long time to come.

[wolveswolves]

Sweden’s biggest, controversial endangered wolf cull has started but campaigners fight on 

February 2023 - Hunters have already shot dead 54 wolves in Sweden’s largest ever cull, while scientists warn that wolf numbers are not large enough to sustain a healthy population

Hunters have shot dead 54 wolves in a month in Sweden’s largest and most controversial cull of the animals yet, prompting fury from conservationists and satisfaction among farmers who consider the predators a threat to their livelihoods.

The Stockholm government has authorised the shooting of 75 wolves in its 2023 cull, more than twice last year’s figure, despite warnings from scientists that wolf numbers are not large enough to sustain a healthy population.

“Wolves are a threat for those of us who live in rural areas,” said Kjell-Arne Ottosson, a Christian Democrat MP and vice-president of the parliament’s environment and agriculture committee. “We have to manage that. We have to take this seriously.”

Farmers say more than 340 sheep were killed in 2021 by a Swedish wolf population estimated at about 460. The predators, which in the 1960s were thought to be extinct in Sweden, are also resented by hunters, who say the dogs they use to track and drive deer and elk are regularly attacked.

“This cull is absolutely necessary to slow the growth of wolves. Sweden’s wolf population is the largest we have had in modern times,” Gunnar Glöersen, predator manager at the Swedish Hunters’ Association, told public broadcaster SVT.

However, the scale of this year’s planned cull – only 203 wolves have been shot in total in Sweden in the 12 years since authorised hunting resumed – has alarmed conservationists. “It’s tragic,” said Daniel Ekblom of the Nature Conservation Society. “It could have consequences for a long time to come.”

Scientists have said that to sustain a healthy population, the wolf population roaming Sweden and Finland should not fall below 500, and Sweden’s Environmental Protection Agency has said at least 300 are necessary to avoid harmful inbreeding.

Led by centre- and far-right parties, however, Sweden’s parliament voted two years ago to cap the wolf population at 270, while the Swedish Hunters’ Association wants to go even further and lower the limit to 150 animals.

Wolf numbers fell steeply in Sweden after 1789, when a law was passed allowing commoners to hunt. That led to the decimation of the deer and elk populations, prompting wolves to prey more on livestock – and the state to pay a bounty for every wolf killed.

The population shrank to the brink of extinction and the predator was declared a protected species in the 1960s. Numbers began growing again 20 years later, however, when three wolves from the Russian-Finnish population migrated to central Sweden.

Conservation organizations in the country have attempted to overturn the wolf hunting mandate but have been unsuccessful.

Groups used the Bern Convention as their main argument. An international treaty agreed upon in 1979, the convention seeks to protect both wildlife and their habitats. Actions to do so are taken in the name of conservation.

“Wolves as top predators in the food chain are a prerequisite for biodiversity. Killing a quarter of the population through hunting has negative consequences for animals and nature,” Marie Stegard, president of Swedish anti-hunting group Jaktkritikerna told the Guardian.

“It’s disastrous for the entire ecosystem. The existence of wolves contributes to a richer animal and plant life. Human survival depends on healthy ecosystems.”

The European Commission has previously opened infringement proceedings against Sweden, warning that the annual cull falls foul of the EU’s habitats directive since “the wolf population has not reached a level that guarantees its conservation”.

“It’s astonishing that Sweden keeps on making these decisions,” said Marie Stegard Lind of the anti-hunting group Jaktkritikerna. “The commission has been very clear about its opinion that these hunts are, in fact, illegal,” Lind told AFP.

This year’s cull began in early January and ends on 15 February, although several regional authorities have already called it off having reached their quota. Experts have said the government’s planned national total of 75 wolves may not be reached.

Under pressure from farmers and hunters, the government authorised limited annual culls again in 2010. Since then, the wolf “has become a symbol of the conflict between the city and rural areas”, Johanna Sandahl of the Nature Conservation Society told AFP.

Sources: [x], [x]