#Euro-Bloc

[communist-ojou-sama]

I know I'm always grumbling about tumblr people being incapable and unwilling of even for a lark trying to understand the worldview of people outside the imperial core, but I really want you to try to imagine that some of us out there really and genuinely don't recognize the US and Europe as "civilization".

I know that for many of you the development of Euro-USian societies up to the point of the Westphalian nation-state and eventually the postwar liberal democracy is definitionally and tautologically-civilization, but what if I told you that a large and growing contingent of people in the global south, especially since the beginning of al-Aqsa Flood, have began to view this bloc of nations as civilization's opposite?

What if I told you that to a great many people, the US and Europe are nothing more than brutal, bloodthirsty bandits and looters, who have not developed civilization but instead have used their mass stores of stolen wealth to avoid doing so? That they've used their masses of wealth gained through mass murder, banditry, and establishment of puppet leaders to flood the world with literally Orwellian propaganda, which defines civilization as its opposite, and merely hides the blood-stained, heartless cruelty of the white-lead "international community" under a petty façade of civility?

How might that fundamentally change the way you read global events?

[wordsandrobots]

IBO reference notes on . . . the economic blocs

In episode 4, we are shown this map, depicting the current national organisation of the Earth in Iron-Blooded Orphans' setting.

This raises a number of questions, primarily 'what were they smoking when they decided to combine Canada and Russia'?, secondarily 'what does Gundam have against Australia?', and further, 'what's the deal here?' In the spirit of obsessive nerdery -- and inspired by @qqchurch posting about a particular map prop -- I thought I'd have a crack at pulling together some answers.

Some spoilers and a rhetorical swerve ahead.

The bigger picture

Geographically -- astrographically? -- the solar system of Iron-Blooded Orphans is split into different 'spheres', principally the Earth Sphere and the Outer Sphere. This is a holdover from the original 1979 Gundam series, which used 'Earth Sphere' to refer to the region of space containing Earth, the Moon, and the various orbital colonies located within this gravitational system.

I should note, mostly for myself, that while writing fan-fic for IBO I fell into the habit of writing Outer Spheres, pluralising a term I believe is only ever singular within the canon. This stems from the grouping of both Mars and Jupiter (and presumably the Asteroid Belt) into the Outer Sphere. I would argue that post-canon, the pluralisation makes sense since we then have the Mars Sphere as a discrete political entity, but even without this, grouping two distinct planet/moon groups into one sphere seems to cut against the Universal Century definition given above.

[EDIT: I was mistaken here; Kudelia does in fact use 'Outer Spheres' when discussing Earth and the colonies' reorganisation following the Calamity War. She in fact refers to Mars and Jupiter as Outer Spheres, so either I am misremembering the usage elsewhere, or the terminology drifts later.]

Nevertheless, as a in-universe division it makes sense. Earth is the centre of power in this setting, the other planets existing as its colonial holdings. An 'Inner Sphere' or 'Venus Sphere' (depending on which logic we follow to style it) is also visited in spin-off game Urdr Hunt, having been left to decay now its utility in terraforming Mars is over.

In terms of political organisation beyond the Earth Sphere, we spend most of our time with Mars, which is sub-divided into colonies following present-day naming conventions for Martian topography. The principle action takes place on the Chryse Planitia, with the city of Chryse being this region's capital. The city of Noachis, presumably capital of the neighbouring Noachis Terra, is also mentioned.

In practice, Mars is administered as a whole by Gjallarhorn, on behalf of the Earth political blocs that own the various individual colonies, with the officer in charge of the occupation ruling from the Ares space station. The Venus colonies, including the tethered Radonitisa Colony, are likewise overseen from an Aphrodite station, and we might therefore infer a Zeus station exists too. This is in fact one of the few guesses we can reasonably make about Jupiter, since we never actually visit it during the course of the series. Jupiter's moons are likely inhabited, since four subsidiaries of the Teiwaz conglomerate are named after them (IOS, Ganymede Farm, Euro Electronics, Callisto), and it is also probable there are a number of O'Neil cylinder space colonies in the vicinity (flashbacks with Naze and Amida show them sharing a hotel room aboard such a structure). But we never get any hint of how Jupiter is governed, except that the most powerful organisation there seems to be the aforementioned Teiwaz, a corporate mafia/yakuza (they are at once both Italian and Japanese; it's glorious). No other official body ever comes up.

The division of Mars dates to a few years after the Calamity War, when Gjallarhorn was directed to recreate the Martian government from scratch, following on from overseeing the reorganisation of the Earth into four 'economic blocs', abolishing old national borders. And it is here I shall be focusing this post, to take a look at what we are told about each bloc. For the sake of a structure, I am going to take them in reverse order to how much we know, which means we start with the Oceanian Federation.

The Oceanian Federation

Well, first off, their flag goes the hardest of the four. Just look at this.

That aside, of all the blocs, it is a little peculiar that we know the least about the Federation given theirs is the only non-Arbrau, non-Gjallarhorn territory we spend any time in while on Earth. It is they who offer refuge to Arbrau's ousted Prime Minister Makanai after all, setting him up on a tropical island retreat while he awaits the chance to regain power.

This is an impressively sprawling place, befitting a man of Makanai's station. It displays distinctly Japanese style architecture and decoration, which makes sense given this is the bloc in which Japan is situated (it combines Asia with Oceania). Given Makanai's name and preferred form of dress, it is plausible he is himself from the Federation originally, although there is sufficient cultural overlap on display elsewhere that this is far from a necessary conclusion. Regardless, for their own reasons, they give him sanctuary, up to the point Carta Issue pressures them into rescinding their protection and allowing her to pursue Tekkadan.

In a similar vein, the Federation offers Tekkadan's space-based forces safe harbour at their colonies, as quid pro quo for interfering with the African Union's operations. A different set of (specifically industrial) colonies is later shown in Season 2, undergoing an attempted workers' uprising. Having watched the African Union suffer from the Dort uprising in Season 1, the Federation's leaders are not prepared to risk the same happening to them and they give Gjallarhorn a free hand to violently suppress those involved.

Beyond this, we learn nothing whatsoever of the Federation's people or government. The world map aboard the Montag Company ship that carries Tekkadan from Makanai's island to Arbrau centres Japan, an indication that while Gjallarhorn uses Euro-centric maps, this doesn't represent cultural (or navigational) homogeneity. But this is I think more interesting on a meta level, in regards the positioning of the two maps within friendly and antagonistic factions, respectively. As a world-building detail, it's merely logical for a Pacific-based freighter to carry such a chart.

Going beyond the text and doing a quick spreadsheet calculation based on Wikipedia's summary of 2023 data, the Oceanian Federation would account for a full 50% of the Earth's population, with the African Union encompassing approximately 35%, the SAU 13% and Arbrau a paltry 2%. That, however, does not account for the Calamity War and the consequent extermination of a quarter of the human race. In light of this, we might spin the division as a subtly horrific bit of environmental storytelling. We know mobile armours will prioritise targetting the largest concentration of human beings they can detect. What would this have meant for places like India or China when things ran out of control?

Obviously we don't know the state of population distributions pre-War and the quarter figure is given for the solar system as a whole. Still, if we are to assume the four-way sub-division made some sort of sense in the immediate aftermath of the Calamity War, a proportionally heavy casualty rate for the most populous nations on the planet could provide a possible justification for such an uneven-looking arrangement.

(In case you're wondering, subtracting the entire quarter from the Oceanian Federation shifts the percentages as follows: OF: 34%, AU: 47%, SAU: 17%, A: 2%. I present this as an illustration of alternative distributions rather than a feasible scenario; I don't actually believe there's a way to make the division follow purely from current world population.)

Oh, yes, and per tradition, Australia has a big honking hole in it, a call-back to the original Gundam anime's opening colony-drop, that presumably marks an event from the Calamity War. Like the damage done to the Moon, this is never expanded upon, but it does lend some credence to assuming Oceania bore the brunt of the conflict.

The Strategic Alliance Union (SAU)

Hello, yes, this is American one.

The SAU's principle role in the plot is to be incited into war against Arbrau as part of Galan Mossa's plan to embarrass McGillis. This scheme takes advantage of a pre-existing border dispute, the exact details of which are not provided: they're far over the heads of our point of view characters. The conflict occurs on 'Balfour Plain', which I take to mean in the vicinity of Balfour, British Columbia. Beyond that, things are left vague.

It does highlight that friction between the blocs is present along lines going beyond mere economic competition. Indeed, it underlines the blocs as competing entities. They operate as nation-states, advancing their own agendas. This extends, following the events of Season 1, to amassing overt military strength.

We can't attribute the mobile suit storehouse show in the opening montage for Season 2 to any particular bloc. But it does house several Hexa frames in addition to Rodis, which ties in with the later appearance of Gildas at the head of the SAU's army. These are Calamity War-vintage 'suits brought out of mothballs after Tekkadan shook things up by deploying at Edmonton, and they make for a notable contrast with Arbrau's own mecha contingent, which consists of brand new Hloekk Grazes bought from Gjallarhorn.

Gjallarhorn also deploys to provide battlefield support to the SAU, indicating the extent to which this peace-keeping force can intervene in inter-bloc conflicts. Perhaps McGillis' forces act on behalf of the putative defender, given the war was instigated when an SAU jet crashes following exposure to an Arbrau Hloekk Graze's unshielded Ahab reactor. Having not considered the situation critical enough to require mobile suits, the SAU views this as unprovoked escalation and appeals for support.

Which brings us to the rest of the SAU's military forces, consisting of planes use for reconnaissance and mobile workers. This tells us jet fights still have a place Post-Disaster, and that the mobile worker industry is eccentrically prolific.

Like Arbrau, the SAU's military is described as inexperienced. I am not sure where to fit an evident air force into that picture: it could be the lack of experience does not denote newness, as it does for Arbrau's defence force, but simply the absence of any active role prior to the declaration of war. Although the bloc's name -- Strategic Alliance Union -- sounds atypically militaristic compared to the others (rather like naming a country after NATO), it is not ascribed greater martial prowess. The conflict boils down to two rag-tag armies chipping ineffectually away at another, falling for Mossa's attempt to bog the region down in a petty, protracted war and thus ruin McGillis' reputation as a peacekeeper.

That about covers the extent of the information we learn about the SAU in the main series. For more, we must turn to Urdr Hunt and...

Well. OK. I am obliging myself to include this, aren't I? The Zahn Clan are introduced in the game as a crime family from the SAU. The two sons of the Clan's founder, Rubian, are dispatched to take part in the titular hunt to test whether they have the chops to succeed him as head of the organisation. I won't go into the plot here; you can look up my summaries or simply go watch it for yourselves. (Note: official translations of the names have since been provided on the website for the upcoming animated adaptation, but some of these seem of slightly dubious quality compared to earlier fan-sourced versions [I don't think 'Lubian' can be right].)

The thing is, the Zahn family -- Rubian, Rome and Aiko -- are African American gangsters. Stereotypically so. Their mobile suits are styled after cars, they're decked out in rings and gold chains, Aiko has a baseball cap, Rome, extravagant piercings, etc. They're a caricature of United States criminality and the problem is, IBO's art-style tends grotesque when it comes to the underworld, meaning the result is, in motion, when the detail level drops, extremely uncomfortable. It certainly doesn't help that the brothers are depicted as buffoons, playing straight the 'comedy relief idiot' trope Iok subverts in the anime proper (that is, Iok is an idiot and it is not remotely funny).

Their dad is *not* a fool, nor is fellow gangster Jabiro, but I really, really wish this didn't hit quite so many racism buttons at once. Nonetheless, they are a depiction of an aspect of the SAU and must be included in a post covering what we know about the blocs.

Rubian has been wildly successful at running his underworld empire. Though old and infirm, he remains extremely sharp, ruling the Zahn Clan from an honest-to-goodness castle in his home territory. I have no idea which way this cuts with regard to racist caricatures. It seems to be suggesting a level of in-universe tastelessness but quite frankly, I don't think I can fault a mobster who gets wealthy enough to go, 'I'll live like a literal king'.

In terms of the Zahns' relationship to their home bloc, I noted in another post that they are remarkably well-equipped, fielding top-of-the line 'suits alongside more venerable models (including a lot of Gildas) and surplus Gjallarhorn spacecraft. While we know 'top-down' corruption is rife in the Earth Sphere in the sense of Gjallarhorn members empowering themselves by overstepping the bounds of neutrality, the Zahns demonstrate that 'bottom-up' corruption is alive and well too. Indeed, they are described as being explicitly 'backed' by the SAU , with a presence in all of the SAU's territory on Earth and having both Gjallarhorn and government officials in their pocket.

As is to be expected, the blocs are as sordid as contemporary nations, with the criminal classes very much in on the act.

The African Union

That's the Republic of Gambia's flag rearranged into something less cool.

I hesitate to classify the African Union conspiring with Gjallarhorn against the workers unions as an act of corruption, on the principle that 'corruption' implies the system is not functioning as intended. Far from being broken by moving to curtail the activism of people who are (theoretically) its citizens, the Union works to perpetuate its interests, something judged to have been harmed when it eventually concedes to some of the workers' demands. These are economic blocs, after all. Extracting profit and generating wealth is the tacit reason for their existence.

Let's back up. I've re-litigated Season 1's Dort Colony arc in multiple essays at this point, largely because it is a capsule of the series' themes. The struggles of the people who operate industrial facilities for the benefit of "rich factory owners from Earth" -- who live in splendour compared to the slums where the masses are relegated -- culminates with a bloody massacre, Gjallarhorn having manufactured an excuse for violence by allowing tensions to escalate to the point of armed insurrection. These events provide a snapshot of how the writers conceive of colonial and anti-labour oppression, a demonstration of the injustices that permeate every level of the society they have imagined, and an ambiguous moment of success for the protagonists. Kudelia Aina Bernstein gets to be the brave, fearless 'maiden of revolution', photogenically turning the media apparatus against government overreach. But it is underpinned by dubious backroom deals and a sense of how easily things could have gone the other way. This won't be the last time Tekkadan faces the Arianrhod Fleet and their visible insignificance before hundreds of ships and mobile suits is sinisterly prefigurative in retrospect.

For my purposes today, there are two important components to this arc. Well, three really, but we can take Gjallarhorn's utility as the blocs' enforcer as read. So -- the first is how the African Union relates to those living aboard the space colonies, and the second is the way in which those colonies are run for its benefit.

The Dort Company is described as running the colonies as a 'public enterprise' for the Union. As I mentioned in an aside while writing about how IBO engages with capitalism, this creates a surface-level contradiction where we have factories privately owned, presumably for profit, but the colonies themselves framed as a public service. Yet I don't think anybody familiar with how privatisation consumes such services will have a hard time reconciling this. The degree to which the Union is or is not doing state capitalism is ultimately irrelevant: the conflict is between the workers and the company that employs them, as a proxy for the bloc that consigned them to a miserable existence as expendable labour.

The Dort Company is an extremely prominent presence, their branding displayed at scale and their workers all sporting green jackets. 'Dort', by the way, is the historical English name for Dordrecht, the oldest city in Holland and a shipbuilding centre for the Netherlands Trading Society, which maintained shipping lines to the 'Dutch East Indies' (Indonesia). Dordrecht also gave its name to a town in South Africa, in a further link to European imperialism. I can't be sure to what extent IBO's writers were deliberately evoking that history, but it seems unlikely to be an idle connection. The Dort Company is a tool of an Earth-centric empire, maintaining the industrial mechanisms that sustain the African Union, space colonies having taken the place of 'third-world' manufacturing centres. This is where consumer goods are produced, for those who live well, by those who scrape by in poverty.

The visuals sell this with straightforward bluntness. We are shown the slums that house the workers and we are shown the shopping centres frequented by the factory-owning class. Yamagi comments, on seeing the home of labour union leader Navona Mingo on Dort 2, that he expected the colonies to be a lot nicer. He was perhaps picturing the kind of environment Mikazuki, Biscuit, Kudelia, Atra and Fumintan explore aboard Dort 3, a 'first-world' cityscape. The point being made is that these contrasts go together, often in the very cities that look so good on the surface. There is always a disposable underclass, always exploitation required to fuel superficial prosperity.

What I find interesting is that in none of this do we ever see the 'true' African Union, the society the Dort Colonies exist to serve. We never meet any representatives of the Union itself: Gjallarhorn deals with Dort Company executives and faceless communiques. Even in spin-off manga Moon Steel, where the bribery of Gjallarhorn officers by African Union officials is a key plot point, the action remains focused on the space colonies, on the people living in what is essentially captive territory.

This is likewise true for the previous two blocs I've covered and it's a canny choice, centring the struggles of the colonial subjects. The African Union has a 'ruling council'. But our sole insight into them is that they decide to reverse course and put a stop to Gjallarhorn's anti-labour operation at the last minute, afraid of the media exposure Nobliss Gordon arranged for Kudelia. The Dort Company then comes to the table with the (remaining) workers, granting labour rights equal to those existing on Earth.

Obviously this tells us such rights are not the general rule in the colonies, that employees on Earth enjoy privileges denied to those in space, and that the Union leadership is sufficiently sensitive to bad press, they don't want to be seen to sanction the killing of hundreds of colonists. At the same time, what is not said is also significant. We don't know, precisely, what 'rights equal to workers on Earth' materially entails. McGillis' backstory establishes the existence of a terrestrial underclass. There is every reason to believe Yamagi's misapprehensions hold true for the planet as they do for the space colonies: there is no land of wholesale luxury, just the same hierarchical, exploitative structures repeated in different locations.

I admit to finding the idea of Europe being subsumed into an African Union a deliciously ironic one. As a background detail, it's shallowly pleasing. Implied turnabout. But that doesn't matter, does it? Any redress of historical crimes is overshadowed by the fact nothing has been fixed. The same old imperial structures are reiterated, the same old injustices perpetuated. Who is being exploited is of lesser concern than that exploitation is occurring. That's why the details of the blocs' governmental structure and home conditions are largely irrelevant. They are powerful national entities engaged in the operation of capitalism at the expense of their subjects. Whether those operations occur in Indonesia, high orbit or on Mars, the flaw lies in the basic structure of the relationship.

Someone is being worked to death so that someone else, distant or otherwise isolated from this material reality, can profit.

Arbrau

OK, now you're just throwing shapes at a background.

It is inevitable that the bloc we are told the most about should be the one that owns the territory in which the story begins. Chryse is an Arbrau colony; ergo, it is with the Arbrau government that Kudelia must negotiate in order to improve the lot of her fellow Martians. Season 1 is about reaching the heart of this bloc's power, the parliament in Edmonton, Alberta, an aim that morphs into restoring Togonosuke Makanai to the office of prime minister and stymieing the machinations of his Gjallarhorn-backed rival, Henri Fleurs. At last, we can take a look at how Iron-Blooded Orphans conceptualises the political functions of its quartered Earth.

Gundam Wiki states that Arbrau "appears to be a parliamentary democracy" and, while I occasionally have cause to take issue with the editors at that site, this is entirely correct. There is a parliament, as mentioned, a prime minister, a debating chamber, and elections. It is an overtly civilian institution, in contrast to Gjallarhorn's militaristic aristocracy. It is overtly civilised, in the sense of being a bunch of people in business suits ruling a nation.

I should clarify immediately, not least because this threw me on first viewing, that it is not the form of parliamentary democracy found in modern-day Canada. The way the election of the prime minister works is modelling (unsurprisingly) on the Japanese system, where the legislative body holds responsibility for nominating someone to that position (rather than it being de-facto filled by the leader of the dominant party). Hence Makanai and Fleurs courting the support of various ministers and the election being entirely contained within the bounds of the sitting government.

In the epilogue to the series, Lasker Alessi talks about having a constituency, hoping Takaki will take over from him there in the future. We can take from this that Arbrau is a representative parliamentary democracy (not a given; parliaments can operate without representing the citizenry), and therefore that it is more or less the assumed default in the context where the show was written. This is what politics is 'supposed' to look like.

These markers of familiarity are worth bearing in mind when considering the ways Arbrau is depicted as being overtly sympathetic. Makanai has long championed greater economic freedom for the Chryse region; indeed, Arbrau was the first of the blocs to grant limited autonomy to its Martian colonies, some hundred odd years prior to the present. The parliament members respond favourably to Kudelia's landmark speech before them. Later, Alessi takes Takaki on as his protegee, and Edmonton is where the Human Debris Abolishment Treaty is signed.

Furthermore, Chyrse is the only colonial holding Arbrau is shown to possess. While Governor Norman Bernstein is a craven, cowardly man who sells out his own daughter, he is also depicted as being in Gjallarhorn's pocket, part of the (textual, actual) corruption miring the governance of Mars. It is Gjallarhorn who work to uphold the present colonial arrangements, opposing those more open to change. They are behind Fleurs and her temporary ousting of Makanai. Lord Iznario Fareed might be acting for his own personal gain, but he also represents the factions who wish for things to continue as they are, in opposition to McGillis's revolutionary movement and Rustal Elion's (eventual) reforms.

If Arbrau has its own equivalent of the Dort Company, this is kept off-screen. Is it reasonable to assume it does? We know from Urdr Hunt that Dort is one colony management company among many -- the Omden Colony Company is arguably even worse -- so it's far from implausible that Arbrau would have a similar arrangement with its own set of industrial colonies. There is also mention of an 'Outer Sphere Development Corporation' on Mars, which sounds very much like what you would name something that went around exploiting poorer nations for the betterment of shareholders in richer ones. And besides, Chryse has definitely not done well out of Arbrau's nominal stewardship. Abandoning the colony to Gjallarhorn's rule speaks to how little regard has been shown to the people living there, not to mention that while Makanai says his belief in advancing their cause is long-held, it has amounted to very little concrete difference over the course of his presumably lengthy career. Kudelia's trip to Earth is a clearly necessary spur to action.

Action results, though. The restrictions on Chryse are eased, a step toward Mars becoming an independent state. Arbrau is the vanguard of a change in attitude towards the red planet. Perhaps then we should ask why this bloc among the four would be the one to begin this process (beyond the mere narrative convenience of 'that's where the majority of the cast come from').

As I alluded to at the top of this post, I struggle to see the sense in joining Canada, Alaska, Russia and Svalbard together when you're also combining India and China, the entirety of Europe with the entirety of Africa, and the majority of the Americas into one. It really doesn't follow from modern population distributions, nor can I imagine it being an easy stretch of geography to manage. That it should be ruled from Edmonton is additionally baffling; it's not like Russia doesn't have existing civic infrastructure, placed at an awkward distance from this capital.

We can of course attempt to fill in the blanks. We might say a large number of refugees were displaced north during the Calamity War, fleeing densely populated areas for the relative safety of Russian and Canadian wildernesses. There is something compelling about this idea, that Gjallarhorn had to redraw the map simply based on where people ended up once the dust settled.

But let's take Arbrau as given: an expanse of tundra, connected by trains the prime minister doesn't seem to have known were there. Even admitting there are a great many large cities continued within its borders and assuming an increased population, it looks paltry in comparison to the other blocs, seeming to lack large amounts of colonial territory and needing to create a defence force from the ground up when tensions escalate. Where the SAU and the African Union display pre-existing mobile suit stockpiles (placed in the hands of the SAU military and the Dort Company, respectively), Arbrau must buy new 'suits from Gjallarhorn and rely on mercenary groups like Tekkadan to train its recruits.

Overall, everything we learn of Arbrau makes it appear weaker than its counterparts and maybe that in itself is why it should be at the forefront of letting go of Mars. Empires are only worthwhile so long as the costs are outweighed by the gains. A weaker bloc is less likely to make that equation work. Ergo, once Chryse is more trouble than it's worth -- say, because the governor's daughter just parked a paramilitary group run by teenagers on the front lawn -- letting it go becomes an inevitability.

As much as Makanai is broadly on the side of our protagonists, he remains an ambiguous character. He is openly self-serving, threatening Tekkadan into assisting him and frequently espousing a hard-hearted, cynical world-view. If he wasn't just flattering Kudelia, then he genuinely gave little thought to the infrastructure that operated at the ground-level of his nation. He later goes on to treat a greater sense of the moral weight of his actions (following a brush with death) as a personal failing. Given all this, it is unfeasible he would act without considering the economic realities of possessing colonies, good and bad. Thus, his decision to support Kudelia must also benefit Arbrau, freeing them of an economic burden and -- perhaps -- sowing discord among Arbrau's rivals.

This is, once again, speculation, filling space in the narrative where details are not required. To return to my earlier point, the nature of the blocs is far less important than their presence as oppressive forces. They and their representatives signify wealth and power imposing itself upon a wider world. Indeed, signifiers of wealth take the place of any technicalities of the colonial system. The Governor's residence in Chryse is of a piece with Dort 3 and even with Rubian Zahn's castle. This is what the ruling class looks like, in Iron-Blooded Orphans, and the visual obviates the need for explanation.

The Arbrau parliament is the same kind of shorthand. The image of a reasonable political system that, though it may suffer from bad actors, can still be gamed to create good results. It's only natural for it to resemble the form of government socially agreed upon to be correct, by dint of it being the one outside.

Yet, as with everything else IBO does, there is a pleasing degree of problematisation on display. Makanai is the only significant human face provided for the blocs and he is, beneath his oft-times jovial affect, a cold, aloof pragmatist who acts to secure his own position first and foremost, personal beliefs subject to the flow of power around him. His status as a helpful, progressive figure is tinged by his being at home within the broader context. Reasonable and proper though parliamentary democracy is in principle, the reality is still assumed to be unpleasant.

Indeed, can a 'democracy' that owns/owned colonies be anything else?

Cartographical gestures

Let's get this out of the way: the economic blocs as depicted are exactly as fleshed-out as the block-colour map shown in episode 4. That is to say, they are shorthand for global superpowers engaged in a vast, sprawling competition. There is little culture, political nuance, or comprehensible structure instilled into them. These are simply not things Iron-Blooded Orphans cares about exploring and there's no connective tissue to be 'decoded' from what we're shown.

As ever, we can speculate wildly (and have a lot of fun doing so), and unpick what the sketched background tell us about the creators' assumptions and approach. We can question how they envision government bodies, military build-up, American criminality, even what 'rich' looks like. But it is important to be able to step back and really grasp what we are looking at.

The episode 4 map is there to inform the audience that the world is divided between massive superpowers, that the division was enacted by Gjallarhorn, and that the results define where and why our heroes are going on their journey. The actual details of the division are irrelevant. Further, the differences between the blocs are far less significant than their similarities. At the start of the show, they all possess colonies, they can all be assumed to be party to oppressive acts, we have no reason to think their systems of government differ much (they were all set up by the same group of people, at the same time), and their reactions to developments in the setting are of a piece. They even release their hold on Mars in unison! Arbrau gets cast in a more positive light than the others, but that has more to do with Makanai's role as a (relatively) reasonable authority figure. It's not hard to imagine the introduction of equally reasonable characters representing the other blocs, with no change to the underlying message that the blocs at large are callous, indifferent, and imperialistic.

Suffice to say, I think this is the right decision for the story Iron-Blooded Orphans is telling. It is also an entirely unremarkable move, hand-waving a larger world as justification for a particular plot. But I find myself considering the a conceptual floor represented by that map. A geopolitical why underlying Makanai's behaviour is not extant because the story is about the difficulty of reaching those in power with pleas for improvement. Within this framework, he just is a supporter of Martian autonomy and that's that. Digging beneath this is writing fan-fic, not extracting 'lore' or canonical detail.

Ultimately, I take from that a lesson in a piece of fiction's priorities. We have here a marker of a certain geopolitical relationship, within a tale about oppression primarily told from the perspective of the oppressed, that is not strictly concerned with the mechanics of said relationship but rather what it entails.

The map is wallpaper.

Interesting, simplistic, potentially insensitive wallpaper that can be used as the basis for some good stories.

Yet wallpaper all the same.

[Index of other writing]

[ptseti]

FVCKING FACTS

DOLLAR IS JUST PAPER

At the 16th annual BRICS summit (22-24 October), member states adopted the ‘Kazan Declaration’, with provisions to strengthen multilateralism, enhance cooperation for global and regional stability and security, foster economic and financial cooperation, and strengthen people-to-people exchanges for social and economic development. They also approved a BRICS ‘grain exchange’ to ensure food stability.

Some, like Zimbabwe-born motivational speaker Joshua Maponga in this clip, argue that fiat currencies, like the US dollar, Euro, British pound and Japanese yen, should be abandoned in favour of a gold-backed system.

At the summit, the bloc of five original members (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) plus four new members (Egypt, Ethiopia, Iran and the United Arab Emirates) welcomed using local currencies for transactions between BRICS countries and their trading partners.

Many African presidents have called for de-dollarisation, but the biggest win may be when Saudi Arabia pulls away from a decades-old petrodollar deal with the US.

The US dollar was pegged to gold’s value until US President Richard Nixon (1913-94) removed the gold standard in 1971. Since then, the US has printed the world’s reserve currency at will, sealing its status as a global hegemon.

So, how can countries break free of the US dollar's grip? Maponga argues gold is the answer.

[ayeforscotland]

Is it weird to say I think your grievances are correct but your solutions aren't?

Like agreed the UK is a shithole and getting shitholier by the day in a menagerie of ways but I don't think independence would fix any of that? For Scotland anyway.

Like Scotland is probably one of the best places to be in the UK rn but once it's out of the UK it won't be able to keep doing the things that achieve that (currency trade fiscal deficit etc). Plus you have the Maastricht issue.

Its a weird place to be. Objectively better than the UK at large but only so far as it's a part of it.

Idk why I'm sending this to a Scottish independence blog like this is going to radically shift your perception of the world but eh.

I hope you know how weird you sound claiming that Scotland is uniquely incapable of being an independent country when there are successfully countries out there with less population and less resources.

You can’t just rhyme off ‘Currency, trade, fiscal deficit’ as if those problems aren’t what every other country faces.

Will we have a currency? Yes. We’ll need an independent currency. Whether or not we join the Euro will be dictated by whether or not we choose to meet the requirements of ERM II. If we want to delay joining the Euro we can simply fail to meet the requirements.

Will we trade? Yes. Rejoining the EU will give us access to the largest trading bloc on the planet. Our ability to trade is currently hampered in the UK.

Will we have a huge fiscal deficit? The UK government would certainly like to think that, but this really all comes down to negotiation. Currently, Scotland is *assigned* a proportion of debt the UK Government borrows. It’s not an indication of the economic decisions of an independent Scottish government.

If the UK does want to Scotland to take on its share of UK national debt, then Scotland will be entitled to its share of UK national assets.

I’ve been doing this a long time. Your points aren’t new, it’s what unionists were saying back in 2014 and since then the UK government has committed economic and social vandalism on communities with Scotland spending hundreds of millions to mitigate bad UK government policy like the Bedroom Tax.

Yes, there’s a lot of facets to independence but the most important thing for me is having the responsibility to make decisions for ourselves.

[shemulnewslive00]

Trump hosts Apple CEO at Mar-a-Lago as big tech leaders continue outreach to president-elect

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. (AP) — Donald Trump hosted Apple CEO Tim Cook for a Friday evening dinner at the president-elect’s Mar-a-Lago resort, according to a person familiar with the matter who was not authorized to comment publicly.

Cook is the latest in a string of big tech leaders — including OpenAI’s Sam Altman, Meta’s Mark Zuckerberg and Amazon’s Jeff Bezos — who have sought to improve their standing with the incoming president after choppy relations with Trump during his first term.

Trump has said he has spoken with Cook about the company’s long-running tax battles with the European Union.

The meeting comes less than two months after Trump said he spoke to Cook by phone, and soon after Apple lost its last appeal in a dispute with the EU over 13 billion euros ($14.34 billion) in back taxes to Ireland.

“He said the European Union has just fined us $15 billion,” Trump recalled of his conversation with Cook, in an October interview with podcaster Patrick Bet-David. “Then on top of that they got fined by the European Union another $2 billion.”

The decision by the EU top court was the finale to a dispute that centered on sweetheart deals that Dublin was offering to attract multinational businesses with minimal taxes across the 27-nation bloc. The European Commission in 2016 ruled that Ireland granted Apple unlawful aid that Ireland was required to recover.

Trump’s transition team and Apple did not immediately respond to a request for comment about his dinner with Cook.

[mariacallous]

As 400 million Europeans get set to elect 720 EU parliamentarians in June, polls are predicting big gains for right-wing populists. As a result, for the first time since the European Parliament was directly elected in 1979, it is expected to have a solid majority on the right. This will mark a “sharp right turn” for Europe, the European Council of Foreign Affairs (ECFR) recently noted. The consequences for European politics and policy are already coming into view.

The center-right European People’s Party (EPP) and the left-leaning Socialists and Democrats party (S&D) are again expected to finish in first and second place, although both may lose a handful of seats. The EU’s far-right groups, Identity and Democracy (ID) and the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR), will improve their tally mainly at the expense of liberals and Greens. According to ECFR, populists are likely to be the top vote-getter in nine countries, including Austria, the Netherlands, France, Hungary, Poland, and Italy. In nine others, including Spain and Germany, they could emerge as strong second or third-place contenders.

ID—which includes the main anti-immigrant and Eurosceptic parties in Germany (Alternative for Deutschland or AfD), France (National Rally), and Italy (the League or Lega)—is likely to become the EU parliament’s third-largest group after elections are held between June 6 and 9. The ECR is led by Georgia Meloni, Italy’s prime minister and leader of the post-fascist Brothers of Italy party, and is home to Sweden’s Sweden Democrats and Poland’s Law and Justice party (PiS). If authoritarian Hungarian leader Viktor Orban’s Fidesz party, a member of the EPP until a few years ago, joins the ECR as expected, the far-right could claim a quarter of the total seats.

Political machinations already seem to be underway among some establishment parties to create cooperation with this newly powerful bloc. Experts say if the EPP, the strongest conservative party in the EU, welcomes far-right politicians in its fold or co-opts their policies, as it has lately been accused of, the balance of power in Europe will decisively shift to the right and have major implications for not just the EU’s common agenda but may also influence how member states decide critical policies.

“I think in our campaign we will ask the EPP to be pragmatic, to pick the alternative to a center-left majority,” Marco Campomenosi, a Lega politician and the head of the Italian delegation in ID, told Foreign Policy.

Experts say any such shift will have major implications for the EU as a whole, tainting its recent promises to pursue a humane migration policy and to establish rule of law at home that encourages democratic checks and balances. An empowered far-right may also keep coordination on a common defense policy to the bare minimum in the face of a looming threat from Russian President Vladimir Putin.

The EU’s flagship Green Deal climate framework, which has set a goal of net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, is also at stake, as the populists try to push the EU to erode its commitment to renewable energy development and other climate policies.

Charlie Weimers, a member of the far-right Sweden Democrats that supports Sweden’s minority center-right government, said, his party’s priority is to push for a “Migration Pact 2.0,” with more stringent measures to stop the influx of immigrants than already listed in the new migration pact. “We need to stop asylum,” he told FP over the phone. “We need breathing space to deal with the immigrants already here otherwise we can never catch up.”

Lega’s Campomenosi said, “it’s not about the money” but about the “trouble” immigrants make. (Under the new migration pact an EU member state which refuses to accept an asylum seeker should pay a sum of 20,000 euros to an EU fund.) “If there are too many immigrants they can’t be integrated,” he added.

Three far-right parliamentarians told FP that with bigger numbers in Parliament they will be able to apply more pressure on the EU commissioner to throw out or dilute the green deal.

It “needs to go away,” Joachim Kuhs, the acting head of the AfD delegation in EU which is polling as the second strongest party in Germany, told FP in his office in the parliament. “It should be repealed and replaced,” Weimers added.

The liberal groups say the center-right has strengthened the far-right by co-opting its policies and forming alliances in individual member states.

Pedro Marques, a vice president of the S&D group, said the EPP parties have been “eroding the Cordon Sanitaire,” erected to keep the far-right out of governments and important positions. “The EPP is dancing with the far right,” he added, with grave consequences for the future of the union.

The cordon sanitaire is crumbling in many European nations. In Italy, the far-right is in power, in Sweden the center-right government is backed by the far-right. In Austria, center-right and far-right have been in a coalition, and the latter is polling ahead of all others in the run up to national elections. In France, Marine Le Pen is leading the polls, and in Germany, the conservatives have hinted at future cooperation at a regional level with the far-right AfD.

The legitimization of the far-right isn’t limited to member states. Ursula Von Der Leyen, a member of the EPP and EU commissioner, has alluded to Meloni’s inclusion in her grouping. She said it wasn’t clear which parties will remain in the ECR after the elections and which will leave, and “join EPP.”

Hans Kundnani, writer of a book called Eurowhiteness, said the boundaries between the ID, ECR and the EPP have always been “very fluid.”

“As soon as Meloni indicated she won’t be disruptive in the Eurozone, that she won’t be pro-Russian, centrist pro-European EPP said that’s great, we don’t mind,” Kundnani said. “The center right has no problem with far-right at all, they just have a problem with those who are Eurosceptic.”

Experts say Von Der Leyen has often backed off on key policies to appease the far-right. Just over the last few months as the farmers protested against the provisions of the green deal, the far-right found another issue to mobilize against mainstream parties. During election season, Von Der Leyen quickly conceded and granted several concessions to the agriculture sector that will affect the 2050 net zero target.

The best example of how the EU commissioner validated the far-right’s worldview, Kundnani argued, was when she created a post for an EU commissioner to promote a European way of life.

“The big theme of the European far-right is that the immigrants threaten European civilization,” he said. When Von Der Leyen created the position, she framed “immigration as a threat to the European way of life,” and in doing so legitimized the far-right.

It is unclear if co-opting the far-right’s talking points benefits the center right in keeping their traditional voters from moving towards populists, but there is an emerging consensus that it strengthens the radical right in the longer run. For its part, the far-right has moderated its own positions on many issues to appeal to the voters more to the center. The far-right parties say they are no longer calling for an exit from the EU, but merely to reform it from within. They say they back Ukraine and not Putin.

Many parties on the far-right advocate return of border controls in violation of the EU’s founding principle of free movement of people and goods. Last year, the AfD described the EU as a “failed project,’’ while Sweden Democrats said they had “good reasons to seriously reevaluate our membership in the union.” There is still a lingering suspicion that the rank-and-file members of the far-right parties harbor sympathy for Putin. Last month, Lega’s leader Matteo Salvini deflected when asked if he blamed Putin for Russian opposition leader Alexei Navalny’s sudden death.

The parliamentarians of the ID and ECR with whom FP spoke expressly rejected Von Der Leyen’s proposal to appoint a dedicated defense commissioner to improve coordination among member states on matters of defense.

“We say that we want to manage immigration in a humane way, we can do better to manage the borders,” added Marques of the S&D. In response to the far-right’s demand to externalize the screening of asylum seekers, he said it was difficult to find credible partners. “We did this agreement with the Tunisian authorities, but when we tried to go there to check the conditions, to see how European money will be spent, they said we don’t want your agreement anymore. These have to be credible partnerships.”

The center-left S&D party simply dismisses the moderated stances of far-right parties as a charade. They believe the far-right simply wants the benefits of being in the union, not the costs that sometimes come with upholding its values. “They want an EU without the rule of law, without humanity,” Marques said. “That’s not what we built after the Second World War. They want to change the EU into something that it isn’t. Their values are not European.”

[mist-the-wannabe-linguist]

I see the Qun being compared to communism by many DA fans as criticism but honestly yes, gimme. hire people who studied the history of the Eastern Bloc or people who grew up and lived under communism, show both the good and the bad and turn it up to 11. make my east euro heart happy

and they better have paneláky on Par Vollen

[follow-up-news]

Google lost its last bid to overturn a European Union antitrust penalty, after the bloc’s top court ruled against it Tuesday in a case that came with a whopping fine and helped jumpstart an era of intensifying scrutiny for Big Tech companies. The European Union’s top court rejected Google’s appeal against the 2.4 billion euro ($2.7 billion) penalty from the European Commission, the 27-nation bloc’s top antitrust enforcer, for violating antitrust rules with its comparison shopping service. Also Tuesday, Apple lost its challenge against an order to repay 13 billion euros ($14.34 billion) in back taxes to Ireland, after the European Court of Justice issued a separate decision siding with the commission in a case targeting unlawful state aid for global corporations. Both companies have now exhausted their appeals in the cases that date to the previous decade.

[allthebrazilianpolitics]

European Union and Mercosur trade bloc announce free trade deal that’s 25 years in the making

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen says the European Union and the Mercosur trade bloc have agreed to terms for a long-anticipated free trade deal

The European Union on Friday finalized a blockbuster free trade agreement with Brazil, Argentina and three other South American nations in the Mercosur trade alliance, a long-awaited breakthrough despite fierce opposition from France that caps a quarter-century of on-off negotiations.

The accord would create a market of over 700 million people, nearly 25% of the world’s gross domestic product, and save businesses an estimated 4 billion euros ($4.26 billion) in duties each year.

From Uruguay, the host of the Mercosur summit, European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen hailed the deal — which would create one of the largest free trade zones in the world — as a “truly historic milestone" at a time when global protectionism is on the rise.

Provided it is ratified, the deal promises benefits especially to European manufacturers and South American farmers, slashing red tape and removing tariffs on products like Italian wine, Argentine steak, Brazilian oranges and German Volkswagens.

Continue reading.

[darkmaga-returns]

European Central Bank President Christine Lagarde has warned that Europe’s bolstering welfare state is at risk due to its declining economic environment. Lagarde said the EU “will not be able to generate the wealth we will need to meet our rising spending needs to ensure our security, combat climate change and protect the environment.”

Rather than considering whether these measures are essential, Lagarde believes that the European Union must work to integrate all member state economies into one to prevent “fragmenting into rival blocs, where attitudes toward free trade are being called into question.” A unified Europe to end all wars with a uniform currency. The euro was doomed to fail from the onset. Everything from failing to consolidate member debt to ignoring sovereignty spelled trouble.

The structure of the euro is fundamentally flawed. To put it in American terms, it would be  as if all fifty states were able to issue federal bonds. It would be total, absolute chaos. To be politically correct, they said that since every member issues its own federal-type bonds, they all have to be reserves, and the large banks have to fairly allocate them among themselves.

Lately, we have seen European policies come under fire amid the Ukraine war. Some members want to ship off as much in aid as permitted, while others want to hold off. Some members want to focus on national security while others support open borders. Europe The entire premise of creating the European Union was really to eliminate democracy —  those in Brussels are unelected and above each member’s elected officials. On nation can say they don’t want to fund climate change initiatives but it matters not as the EU forces its will on everyone.

“We can no longer see ourselves as a loose club of independent economies,” Lagarde warned. Yet, Europe is a continent of vastly different and proud cultures. You cannot force a German to hold the same ideals as a Greek or expect every member nation to blindly agree to whatever proposal comes down from the unelected officials in Brussels.

There are so many fundamentals working against the EU from social to geopolitical issues. Socrates indicated a panic cycle and high volatility coming into play in the euro around 2026 and into 2027. We see a massive turning point in 2029, and although I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I simply do not see how the euro or European Union can survive. CENTRALIZED CONTROL NEVER WORKS!

[max1461]

I've said this many times before, but the terms "West" and "East" are massively overloaded, geographically inaccurate, excessively value laden, and a bunch of other bothersome stuff. Here are some alternatives.

For referring to sets of countries with specific attributes that already have commonly known names, just use those names; e.g. "rich countries", "poor countries", "primarily agrarian countries", "industrialized countries", whatever.

For referring to European settler colonies, there is an adjective "Eurocolonial".

For referring to the set of countries including those in Europe and their present and former settler colonies (one common meaning of "the West", and IMO the one most difficult to find an alternate term for) I am tempted to suggest the cumbersome "Euro-Eurocolonial", as in "the Euro-Eurocolonial world". This is unambiguous but ugly. You might also try "Eurocolonial sensu lato", and oppose to the above "Eurocolonial sensu stricto". When it's clear from context, both can be shortened simply to "Eurocolonial".

For referring to the geopolitical alignment emergent from the former Western bloc, I think "the West" is technically appropriate but is confusing. The phrase "Western Bloc" itself is unambiguous but anachronistic; I am tempted to say something like "the ascended Western bloc", accurate but goofy. Hmm. Any ideas? Might just drop the pretense and call it "America's bloc" ("American bloc" is somewhat ambiguous as well). Any other ideas?

[stackslip]

The European Union is set to generate millions of euros more from the high rejection rates of visa applications by African visitors with a new increase in non-refundable fees.

Citizens of the 26 member states within Europe’s Schengen area have unhindered borderless access within the area, while most travelers from elsewhere require visas. A 12.5% price hike that takes effect on June 11 increases the cost of a short-term (90 days) visa application to €90.

But while the price hike applies equally to all non-EU residents who require a Schengen visa, it raises the prospect of the bloc making disproportionately more money from its rejection rates for applicants from Africa, analysts say.

Of the €130 million the EU earned in 2023 from rejected visa applications, about 42% of that was from applicants living in Africa, even though the continent accounts for 24% of Schengen visa applications, according to London-based research firm LAGO Collective. Prospective visitors who apply from Ghana, Senegal and Nigeria receive rejection rates of between 40% and 50%, LAGO estimated, based on data from the European Commission’s migration and home affairs office.

“We found a relationship between the GDP of countries and rejection rates for short-term visas,” Marta Foresti, LAGO’s founder, told Semafor Africa. A similar rejection trend in 2024 with the new price would deepen long-standing inequality of outcomes between consumers paying for the same service from high and low-income countries, Foresti said.

While these encourage dangerous attempts to reach Europe across seas and deserts, most African migration is via “regular channels,” the Africa Center for Strategic Studies in Washington DC notes.

Yet Africans applying to visit Europe for short-term stays, such as business engagements or conferences, continue to face a stumbling block.

Average rejection rates for African applicants are generally 10 percentage points higher than the global average, Mehari Taddele Maru, a researcher at the EU-owned European University Institute in Italy, found. Seven of the top ten countries with the highest rejection rates for Schengen visa applications in 2022 were in Africa.

The EU’s more expensive visa and its potentially disproportionate impact on Africans comes as the bloc takes a tougher stance on migration.

New rules approved by the EU Commission in April impose a higher standard for screening non-EU nationals at borders, including the collection of biometric data, and health and security checks. Border fences set up by member states within the Schengen area have become longer in the last decade, stretching from 315 km to 2,048 km as of 2022.

Higher visa prices could be another type of fence, which when combined with high rejection rates, will continue to enrich European consulates at the expense of residents of low income countries who nevertheless have legitimate reasons to be in Europe.

Africa’s high rejection rate is sometimes explained as a consequence of visitors overstaying their visas. But “there is no evidence to suggest that a higher rejection rate leads to a decrease in irregular migration or visa overstays,” Maru argues. In essence, an unexplained bias against Africans is at play.

The costs of rejection to African entrepreneurs, career professionals, artists and other seekers of the EU’s short-term visa calls for a reform of the approval process, Foresti told me. Consulates with high unequal outcomes should review their decision-making to ensure “systematic discrimination” against some countries isn’t an underlying cause.

And should some EU members enforce high rejection for short-term visas to dissuade overstays by residents of particular African countries, more paths to legal migration should be considered, she argued.

[beardedmrbean]

European Union members discussed on Wednesday ways to increase the voluntary return of Syrian refugees to the war-torn country, an idea that has gained traction in recent months but that remains controversial.

The talks among ambassadors were promoted by Hungary, the country currently chairing the EU Council's presidency, and were based on a document presented by the European Commission, several diplomats said.

The document stressed the role played by the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) in supporting the return of Syrian refugees, which the EU is looking to strengthen.

These returns would take place on a strictly voluntary basis. The bloc cannot forcibly deport Syrians because they are almost always granted asylum. Additionally, the principle of non-refoulement forbids authorities from deporting migrants to nations where they could face persecution, torture or any other form of ill-treatment.

Ambassadors also touched on the lack of diplomatic relations with the autocratic regime of Bashar al-Assad, who has publicly called on his citizens to return, and the fraught situation in the Middle East, where hostilities between Israel and Lebanon have triggered the movement of tens of thousands into Syria.

The start of the Syrian Civil War in 2011 prompted millions to flee their homes and seek international protection in nearby countries, with many crossing into Europe.

The UNCHR estimates that European countries host over one million Syrian asylum seekers and refugees, with 59% of them based in Germany alone. Sweden, Austria, Greece, the Netherlands and France also host significant populations.

Last year, about 38,300 Syrian refugees chose to go back, the agency said in an annual overview, noting the conditions inside the country "were not yet conducive for the facilitation of large-scale voluntary returns in safety and dignity."

Concerns over security, livelihoods, basic services and housing were cited as reasons for the low rate of repatriations. About 90% of people in Syria live in poverty.

Meanwhile, Human Rights Watch has warned that "Syrians fleeing violence in Lebanon face risks of repression and persecution by the Syrian government upon return, including enforced disappearance, torture and death in detention."

A similar assessment is shared by the Commission, which has repeatedly said current circumstances in Syria cannot ensure safe and dignified repatriations.

Talks are expected to continue among member states in the coming months, with no immediate breakthrough in sight. However, the fact the discussion is happening at all signals a growing political willingness to address the controversial matter.

Earlier this month, EU leaders endorsed a hardened approach to migration management and tasked the Commission with exploring outsourcing projects and reviewing the concept of "safe third countries" to speed up deportations.

The summit in Brussels featured Syria as one of the items on the agenda. "The European Council reaffirms the need to achieve conditions for safe, voluntary and dignified returns of Syrian refugees, as defined by UNHCR," leaders said in their conclusions.

In July, Italy and Austria led a joint letter of eight member states asking for a new EU strategy on Syria that should be "more active, results-oriented, and operational."

The European External Action Service (EEAS), the bloc's diplomatic arm, has confirmed it is considering appointing a special envoy for Syria, one of Italy's key demands.

Since 2011, the EU and member states have allocated more than €30 billion in humanitarian and development aid to support Syrians in the country and the region.

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

Nonetheless, Palestinians have illegally built on more than 2,000 acres of Area C, spread across 250 different locations. This does not include 600 km of illegally-built roadways and more than 112,000 meters of retaining walls and terracing.

Investigative author Edwin Black, in a report entitled “EU Funding of Illegal Palestinian Settlement in Area C,” noted that Palestinian settlements “are often strategically scattered to effectively carve up Area C, sometimes surround Jewish villages, and sometimes push onto Israeli nature or military reserves.”

Black also described some of the various structures in these new, illegal settlements: Makeshift structures adorned with the EU logo on them, multi-floor office centers and palatial homes. “A broad gamut of construction styles can be seen,” he wrote.

All of this is being done in accordance with a joint Palestinian-EU plan to take control of land—without negotiations—for the creation of a de-facto Palestinian state based on the 1948 armistice lines that resulted from Israel’s war of independence.

An article in the Palestine-Israel Journal of Politics, Economics and Culture described the implementation of this plan: “Since August 2009, [Palestinian Prime Minister Salam] Fayyad, with the help of the Barack Obama administration and the European Union, has been quietly building national institutions and physical infrastructure . . . in the West Bank.”

Last year, it was revealed that the EU, too, has a secret plan to fund illegal Palestinian construction, known as the “European Joint Development Programme for Area C.” It has an annual budget of 300 million Euros.

One illegal Palestinian structure financed by the EU was a school located inside an Israeli nature reserve. Last May, Israel demolished it. In a statement, the IDF said the school was built illegally and “was found to be dangerous to the safety of anyone studying or otherwise visiting there,” therefore an Israeli court, “ordered it demolished.”

Instead of praising Israel for ensuring the safety of Palestinian children, the EU condemned the Jewish state. A spokesperson for the bloc said, “(Such) demolitions are illegal under international law and children’s rights to education must be respected.” Apparently, Palestinian children have the right to education, but not to safety.

As Edwin Black wrote in his report, “The European governments and the PA have thus joined forces to complete the final shredding of the already weakened Oslo agreements.”

[head-post]

EU to invest €1.8 bn in Moldova’s economy ahead of membership referendum

The European Union will allocate a record 1.8 billion euros ($2 billion) to Moldova to support the country’s plan to join the bloc, EU NeighboursEast reports.

The plan, which is the largest EU financial support package since Moldova’s independence, will boost Moldova’s economy, bring the country closer to EU membership by accelerating reforms and provide significant financial assistance.

Moldova’s growth plan is based on three pillars aimed at increasing financial assistance over the next three years through a special Reform and Growth Fund for Moldova, enhancing access to the European Union’s single market and supporting socio-economic and fundamental reforms in Moldova.

European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, who arrived in Moldova to announce the package, said on Thursday that the EU could start bringing the Moldovan economy closer to the EU now. She also added:

Today I’m in Chișinău to present a support package with the potential of doubling the size of the country’s economy in a decade. To do so we invest in jobs, growth, services and infrastructure – from new hospitals in Balti and Cahul to the road from the capital to Odesa. We open the doors to our Single Market to Moldovan companies. And we support Moldova’s reform efforts.

Now, the European Parliament and the Council will have to consider the European Commission’s proposal to set up a Growth Fund for Moldova. Once it is adopted, Moldova will be invited to present its Reform Programme outlining the key socio-economic and fundamental reforms it intends to undertake to accelerate growth and convergence with the EU.

Read more HERE

[warningsine]

https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/eu-countries-back-landmark-artificial-intelligence-rules-2024-05-21/

BRUSSELS, May 21 (Reuters) - Europe's landmark rules on artificial intelligence will enter into force next month after EU countries endorsed on Tuesday a political deal reached in December, setting a potential global benchmark for a technology used in business and everyday life.

The European Union's AI Act is more comprehensive than the United States' light-touch voluntary compliance approach while China's approach aims to maintain social stability and state control.

The vote by EU countries came two months after EU lawmakers backed the AI legislation drafted by the European Commission in 2021 after making a number of key changes.

Concerns about AI contributing to misinformation, fake news and copyrighted material have intensified globally in recent months amid the growing popularity of generative AI systems such as Microsoft-backed (MSFT.O), opens new tab OpenAI's ChatGPT, and Google's (GOOGL.O), opens new tab chatbot Gemini.

"This landmark law, the first of its kind in the world, addresses a global technological challenge that also creates opportunities for our societies and economies," Belgian digitisation minister Mathieu Michel said in a statement.

"With the AI Act, Europe emphasizes the importance of trust, transparency and accountability when dealing with new technologies while at the same time ensuring this fast-changing technology can flourish and boost European innovation," he said.

The AI Act imposes strict transparency obligations on high-risk AI systems while such requirements for general-purpose AI models will be lighter.

It restricts governments' use of real-time biometric surveillance in public spaces to cases of certain crimes, prevention of terrorist attacks and searches for people suspected of the most serious crimes.

The new legislation will have an impact beyond the 27-country bloc, said Patrick van Eecke at law firm Cooley.

"The Act will have global reach. Companies outside the EU who use EU customer data in their AI platforms will need to comply. Other countries and regions are likely to use the AI Act as a blueprint, just as they did with the GDPR," he said, referring to EU privacy rules.

While the new legislation will apply in 2026, bans on the use of artificial intelligence in social scoring, predictive policing and untargeted scraping of facial images from the internet or CCTV footage will kick in in six months once the new regulation enters into force.

Obligations for general purpose AI models will apply after 12 months and rules for AI systems embedded into regulated products in 36 months.

Fines for violations range from 7.5 million euros ($8.2 million) or 1.5% of turnover to 35 million euros or 7% of global turnover depending on the type of violations.

($1 = 0.9199 euros)