The European Project: the future of the EU.

[Thorgalaeg]

In fact it is mostly old weaponry which is receiving a good use for a) defending Ukrine b) destroying Russia, instead of rootting in some depot. Cant think of a better deal.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

What Britain looks like after Brexit

You’re reading Reaction.

www.reaction.life

It’s 24 June, 2025, and Britain is marking its annual Independence Day celebration. As the fireworks stream through the summer sky, still not quite dark, we wonder why it took us so long to leave. The years that followed the 2016 referendum didn’t just reinvigorate our economy, our democracy and our liberty. They improved relations with our neighbours.

The United Kingdom is now the region’s foremost knowledge-based economy. We lead the world in biotech, law, education, the audio-visual sector, financial services and software. New industries, from 3D printing to driverless cars, have sprung up around the country. Older industries, too, have revived as energy prices have fallen back to global levels: steel, cement, paper, plastics and ceramics producers have become competitive again.

The EU, meanwhile, continues to turn inwards, clinging to its dream of political amalgamation as the euro and migration crises worsen. Its population is ageing, its share of world GDP shrinking and its peoples protesting. “We have the most comprehensive workers’ rights in the world”, complains Jean-Claude Juncker, who has recently begun in his second term as President of the European Federation, “but we have fewer and fewer workers”.

The last thing most EU leaders wanted, once the shock had worn off, was a protracted argument with the United Kingdom which, on the day it left, became their single biggest market. Terms were agreed easily enough. Britain withdrew from the EU’s political structures and institutions, but kept its tariff-free arrangements in place. The rights of EU nationals living in the UK were confirmed, and various reciprocal deals on healthcare and the like remained. For the sake of administrative convenience, Brexit took effect formally on 1 July 2019, to coincide with the mandates of a new European Parliament and Commission.

That day marked, not a sudden departure, but the beginning of a gradual reorientation. As the leader of the Remain campaign, Lord Rose, had put it during the referendum campaign, “It’s not going to be a step change, it’s going to be a gentle process.” He was spot on.

In many areas, whether because of economies of scale or because rules were largely set at global level, the UK and the EU continued to adopt the same technical standards. But, from 2019, Britain could begin to disapply those regulations where the cost of compliance outweighed any benefits.

The EU’s Clinical Trials Directive, for example, had wiped out a great deal of medical research in Britain. Outside it, we again lead the world. Opting out of the EU’s data protection rules has turned Hoxton into the software capital of the world. Britain is no longer hampered by Brussels restrictions on sales, promotions and e-commerce.

Other EU regulations, often little known, had caused enormous damage. The REACH Directive, limiting the import of chemical products, had imposed huge costs on manufacturers. The bans on vitamin supplements and herbal remedies had closed down many health shops. London’s art market had been brutalised by EU rules on VAT and retrospective taxation. All these sectors have revived.

Financial services are booming – not only in London, but in Birmingham, Leeds and Edinburgh too. Eurocrats had never much liked the City, which they regarded as parasitical. Before Brexit, they targeted London with regulations that were not simply harmful but, in some cases, downright malicious: the Alternative Investment Fund Managers Directive, the ban on short selling, the Financial Transactions Tax, the restrictions on insurance. After Britain left, the EU’s regulations became even more heavy-handed, driving more exiles from Paris, Frankfurt and Milan. No other European city could hope to compete: their high rates of personal and corporate taxation, restrictive employment practices and lack of support services left London unchallenged.

Other cities, too, have boomed, not least Liverpool and Glasgow, which had found themselves on the wrong side of the country when the EEC’s Common External Tariff was phased in in the 1970s. In 2016, the viability of our commercial ports was threatened by the EU’s Ports Services Directive, one of many proposed rules that was being held back so as not to boost the Leave vote. Now, the UK has again become a centre for world shipping.
Shale oil and gas came on tap, almost providentially, just as the North Sea reserves were depleting, with most of the infrastructure already in place. Outside the EU, we have been able to augment this bonanza by buying cheap Chinese solar panels. In consequence, our fuel bills have tumbled, boosting productivity, increasing household incomes and stimulating the entire economy.

During the first 12 months after the vote, Britain confirmed with the various countries that have trade deals with the EU that the same deals would continue. It also used that time to agree much more liberal terms with those states which had run up against EU protectionism, including India, China and Australia. These new treaties came into effect shortly after independence. Britain, like the EFTA countries, now combines global free trade with full participation in EU markets.

Our universities are flourishing, taking the world’s brightest students and, where appropriate, charging accordingly. Their revenues, in consequence, are rising, while they continue to collaborate with research centres in Europe and around the world.

The number of student visas granted each year is decided by MPs who, now that they no longer need to worry about unlimited EU migration, can afford to take a long-term view. Parliament sets the number of work permits, the number of refugee places and the terms of family reunification. A points-based immigration system invites the world’s top talent; and the consequent sense of having had to win a place competitively means that new settlers arrive with commensurate pride and patriotism.

Unsurprisingly, several other European countries have opted to copy Britain’s deal with the EU, based as it is upon a common market rather than a common government. Some of these countries were drawn from EFTA (Norway, Switzerland and Iceland are all bringing their arrangements into line with ours). Some came from further afield (Serbia, Turkey, Ukraine). Some followed us out of the EU (Denmark, Ireland, the Netherlands).
The United Kingdom now leads a 22-state bloc that forms a free trade area with the EU, but remains outside its political structures. For their part, the EU 24 have continued to push ahead with economic, military and political amalgamation. They now have a common police force and army, a pan-European income tax and a harmonised system of social security. These developments have prompted referendums in three other EU states on whether to copy Britain.

Perhaps the greatest benefit, though, is not easy to quantify. Britain has recovered its self-belief. As we left the EU, we straightened our backs, looked about us, and realised that we were still a nation to be reckoned with: the world’s fifth economy and fourth military power, one of five members on the UN Security Council and a leading member of the G7 and the Commonwealth. We recalled, too, that we were the world’s leading exporter of soft power; that our language was the most widely studied on Earth; that we were linked by kinship and migration to every continent and archipelago. We saw that there were great opportunities across the oceans, beyond the enervated eurozone. We knew that our song had not yet been sung.

Daniel Hannan is a Conservative MEP and author of Why Vote Leave published by Head of Zeus

Wonderful pro-Brexit article from 2016 by a House of Lords member 'predicting' how wonderful Britain would be be in 2025 after Brexit. Deserves a read for the laughs and only for the laughs since it has showed terribly wrong and opposed to reality in every single detail, as it uses to happen with this kind of people.

 

[danjuno]

What a complete and utter clown.

 

[Ordnael]

Prepare for tough love on migration as Denmark takes over EU presidency​

Prepare for tough love on migration as Denmark takes over EU presidency

Denmark’s prime minister Mette Frederiksen pioneered hard-line migration policies despite being on the left. Now she’s bringing her special formula to the EU stage.

www.politico.eu

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has built a reputation for herself as Europe’s tough-love social democrat, with a hard line on migration that’s earned her more critiques from the left than from the right.

Now she’s getting a chance to test-drive that approach on the European stage.
As Denmark prepares to take over the EU’s rotating presidency from Poland in July, two EU diplomats said that Copenhagen would try to advance many of the same issues that Frederiksen has championed on the home front — namely stricter rules for asylum-seekers and a more robust approach to European defense in the face of an expansionist Russia.

This is in keeping with Frederiksen’s view, which she shared with POLITICO in March, that managing irregular migration and deterring Russia via bulked-up defense spending aren’t separate matters. They’re two sides of the same general concern for European voters: improving their day-to-day security.

“If I ask people about security and their security concerns, many of them will reply that Russia and defending Europe is top of mind right now. But security is also about what is going on in your local community,” Frederiksen said at the time.

To be sure, Brussels is a long way from Copenhagen, psychologically speaking if not geographically. Denmark’s approach to the presidency — which is bound by the need to act as an “honest broker,” i.e. acting in the interest of the entire union — may not be a top priority matter for Danish voters, who happen to be among Europe’s wariest when it comes to the EU.

But the presidency will offer Frederiksen a chance to argue that the policies she’s embraced at home are now winning much wider approval in the bloc. Indeed, everyone from Italian leader Giorgia Meloni to Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk and even Germany’s new chancellor, Friedrich Merz, is now in the Danish prime minister’s camp when it comes to advocating a stricter approach to migration.

That argument — “my approach is winning in Brussels” — could come in handy next year when Frederiksen comes up for reelection. While the 47-year-old, who’s already Europe’s longest-serving social democratic head of government, hasn’t publicly said that she will seek another term, observers of Danish politics strongly believe that she will.
Her poll numbers certainly offer a good case for a bid: As of mid-June, POLITICO’s Poll of polls showed her Social Democrats party as the most popular one in the country, with 23 percent support versus 13 percent for the next most popular, the Green Left.

“There’s a strong chance she will run again, perhaps even by calling a snap election if the numbers look good,” an ally of Frederiksen who asked not to be named to discuss her political planning said in April.

Pushing for return hubs​

How will Denmark bring the Frederiksen touch to Brussels? Among other things, by trying to move along discussions between EU countries on so-called return hubs — centers located outside the bloc’s borders where migrants seeking access to the EU could remain while their applications are processed, or where they could be housed after their asylum request has been rejected.

One such center located in Albania is the subject of a legal dispute between the Italian government and local courts, but Frederiksen and Meloni are both adamant that such centers are the way forward.

Danish Prime Minister Mette Frederiksen has built a reputation for herself as Europe’s tough-love social democrat. | Jonas Roosens/EPA
After the European Commission put forward a proposal on return hubs in March, Copenhagen hopes to use its presidency to push interinstitutional dialogue forward “as far as possible,” per one of the diplomats — even if finalizing the entire process remains unlikely by the end of December, when Denmark’s presidency of the Council of the EU wraps up.

Additionally, Denmark will look to pursue other “new and innovative” ways of limiting irregular migration into the bloc, both by urging the Commission to review its interpretation of human rights statutes with a view to facilitating deportation, and by striking new investment deals with third countries, the same diplomats said.
Both approaches have already won considerable support from other EU leaders. Nine countries, including Denmark, called in May for the EU to revise its interpretation of the European Convention on Human Rights.

For the next six months, migration hard-liners will have a well-placed ally in Brussels.

Common ground on defense​

Also crucial for Frederiksen’s legacy: defense.

Denmark has pushed back against U.S. President Donald Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland, an autonomous Danish-dependent territory. And Frederiksen is one of Europe’s loudest voices on the need to deter Russia, saying in her POLITICO interview that the bloc should become self-reliant on defense within the next five years.

In terms of the presidency, that translates to pushing forward discussions about European defense readiness and shared projects, the diplomats said.

While Copenhagen is unlikely to embrace the idea, touted by Southern European countries, that the bloc should jointly raise debt to finance the defense ramp-up, Copenhagen will be on the lookout for common defense projects of interest to all EU states.
The idea, per the same diplomats, is to identify projects that would be of interest for all EU countries — shared midair refueling capacity, for instance — and then broach the issue of how to raise money for it. A conversation about raising money jointly will be easier to have if everyone agrees on the project, argue the same diplomats cited above.

Avoiding ‘slow agony’​

Beyond defense and migration, Denmark’s ambassador to the EU, Carsten Grønbech-Jensen, will also have his hands full shepherding discussions around a potential expansion of the EU to new members such as Ukraine and Moldova. And there is also a focus on economic reforms, or “competitiveness” in the EU lingo, to try to stave off what former European Central Bank President Mario Draghi warned would be a “slow agony” for Europe’s economy if necessary reforms aren’t undertaken.

In this area, Denmark may tread more gingerly.

Denmark has pushed back against U.S. President Donald Trump’s interest in acquiring Greenland. | Remko De Waal/EPA
Draghi has identified the need to unify Europe’s fragmented capital markets as being crucial for the bloc’s economic survival against bigger competitors such as China and the U.S. But Copenhagen will press the matter only if “a window of opportunity” appears — which looks doubtful given the failure of other, recent attempts to establish Europe’s capital markets union.

All in all, during the next six months Denmark’s prime minister will be looking to notch up wins in the areas that have worked for her back home. Those ideas, combining European social welfare policies with strict migration controls, seem to be catching on with an ever-wider group of EU leaders.

Whether Danish voters will reward Frederiksen for her European leadership when it comes time to head to the polls next year remains to be seen.

 

[EnglishEdward]

People might suggest a return hub in Greenland.

 

[danjuno]

People might suggest a return hub in Greenland.

Would certainly be busy with all the refugees from the collapsing US.

 

[Ordnael]

Are there, already, that many refugees (I don't think we can technically call them that) from the 2nd tour of the hog emperor of doom?

 

[EnglishEdward]

Some this side of the pond are hoping for a reverse brain drain.

Britain wants in on drawing US scientists fleeing Trump

: One concrete suggestion: Looser visa requirements

www.theregister.com

 

[danjuno]

The folks who research disease are already heading for the door!

Researchers warn U.S. is on the ‘precipice’ of brain drain as Trump cuts federal grants

The Trump administration’s cuts to federal funding and hiring freezes at colleges and universities come at a crucial time, destabilizing the nation's research infrastructure and prompting many scientists to continue their work abroad if its future remains uncertain in the U.S.

www.pbs.org

 

[innonimatu]

Speaking of class war, this time in the remnant EU. When the manager classes feel their power threatened, they use state power to supress democracy through control of access to information, intimidation, repression of any plebs who speak out, and criminalization of journalism.

If any of you think any of those moves linked to above is "justifiable", you are easy prey for a government that cares nothing about "public opinoion", as all those are tools to control and manufacture consent.The kind of tool thata demos sould never allow the temporary holders of executive power to hold over them, if they want to have a democracy.

The ruling classes can smell regime change in the wind, TINA (there is no alternative) can't keep working when the rest of the world outside the neoliberal regimes shows that there are in fact alternatives.
So when the repression fails, what do you think the ruling classses of "europe" will do?
Obvious old move: they will convert from liberal speech to fascist speech, migrate into a new "national union party" and end formal parliamentarism. Militarism to justify the growth of the bureaucracy, external enemies 1984 style, more repression against internal dissidents - as they simply don't know how to change tracks, this is the natural progression for them.

 

[Snowygerry]

The no doubt interesting links are hidden behind your own tendentious words, that may lead people to not click on them imho.

​

 

[Thorgalaeg]

As always inno is describing his beloved Russia instead of Europe. Maybe his problem is simply he is bad at geography (if only it were that...) Curious as the argument goes from 'Europe militaries are in a sorry shape" to 'Europe is falling into militarism'. LoL.

Btw, the 2.1% is apparently enough for Spain to build a CATOBAR carrier (plus a second big LHD). In fact the 2.1 would mean Spain spend about $38bn, the same as Italy or Poland spend currently at the 1.6 and 4.1 respectively. So there should be more than enough money, specially having in mind Spain builds its own naval stuff and gets some money back after exporting it.

For those not aware CATOBAR carriers are catapult carriers, as the big US supercarriers (Nimitz and such). Spain's design will be smaller of course, similar to the french carrier Charles de Gaulle but not nuclear powered. Could use several kind of planes from the F-35C to the Rafale or the super hornet but particularly the future sixth generation fighter Spain is working on along Germany and France.

Spain plans its first aircraft carrier capable of operating US-style CATOBAR fighters

www.outono.net

 

[Snowygerry]

The Italians are budgeting a bridge apparently, further illustrating the idocy of a fixed % on "defence" spending.

Italy’s grand plan to meet NATO target: A €13.5B bridge to Sicily

Meloni’s deputy prime ministers are keen to class the bridge as a NATO-related project. But does it really mesh with Europe’s military goals?

www.politico.eu

In addition to its civilian use, “the bridge over the Strait of Messina also has strategic importance for national and international security, so much so that it will play a key role in defense and security, facilitating the movement of Italian armed forces and NATO allies,” the document added.

We might start reconstructing the city wall of Gent, very slowly

 

[Thorgalaeg]

The Italians are bugeting a bridge apparently, further illustrating the idocy of a fixed % on "defence" spending.

Italy’s grand plan to meet NATO target: A €13.5B bridge to Sicily

Meloni’s deputy prime ministers are keen to class the bridge as a NATO-related project. But does it really mesh with Europe’s military goals?

www.politico.eu

We might start reconstructing the city wall of Gent, very slowly

Well, it would be useful in a zombie scenery where Montgomery wakes up and tries to invade Sicily again.

 

[Snowygerry]

Reminds me of this story, if Monty was to come back the bridge would be there in no time

Monty was known for being “arrogant”, “unlikeable” and “boastful”. He was also strangely literal. For example, he made a bet with US General Walter Bedell Smith that he could capture the town of Sfax by mid-April 1943. As a joke, Smith wagered that, if Montgomery succeeded in Sfax, he would personally give him a Flying Fortress. He should have chosen his words more wisely.
While Smith was obviously joking, Monty was not. Just as he had planned, Monty captured Sfax in early April and promptly reached out to Smith to “collect his winnings”. When Smith realized that Monty wasn’t joking, he had to go hat-in-hand to Dwight D. Eisenhower who begrudgingly handed over a fully-staffed Boeing B-17 to Monty.

General Bernard Montgomery Was Brilliant And Despicable

More people need to know about Bernard Montgomery, the man Winston Churchill himself described as, “In defeat, unbeatable; in victory, unbearable.”

www.factinate.com

 

[EnglishEdward]

What Britain looks like after Brexit

You’re reading Reaction.

www.reaction.life

Wonderful pro-Brexit article from 2016 by a House of Lords member 'predicting' how wonderful Britain would be be in 2025 after Brexit. Deserves a read for the laughs and only for the laughs since it has showed terribly wrong and opposed to reality in every single detail, as it uses to happen with this kind of people.

I started to read the article.

As a Leave voter, it comes across as a provocative tongue in cheek spoof, not to be taken seriously.

I stopped reading after

We lead the world in biotech, law, education, the audio-visual sector, financial services and software.

That was not true in 2016. And I regard UK "lead the world" claims as generally spurious, at best reflecting a transient moment.

 

[EnglishEdward]

As always inno is describing his beloved Russia instead of Europe. Maybe his problem is simply he is bad at geography (if only it were that...) Curious as the argument goes from 'Europe militaries are in a sorry shape" to 'Europe is falling into militarism'. LoL.

Btw, the 2.1% is apparently enough for Spain to build a CATOBAR carrier (plus a second big LHD). In fact the 2.1 would mean Spain spend about $38bn, the same as Italy or Poland spend currently at the 1.6 and 4.1 respectively. So there should be more than enough money, specially having in mind Spain builds its own naval stuff and gets some money back after exporting it.

For those not aware CATOBAR carriers are catapult carriers, as the big US supercarriers (Nimitz and such). Spain's design will be smaller of course, similar to the french carrier Charles de Gaulle but not nuclear powered. Could use several kind of planes from the F-35C to the Rafale or the super hornet but particularly the future sixth generation fighter Spain is working on along Germany and France.

Spain plans its first aircraft carrier capable of operating US-style CATOBAR fighters

www.outono.net

I am not sure how an aircraft carrier would help Spain, as China and Russia have land routes to Spain.

I suppose Spain could always send it to the straits of Taiwan where it could, after being sunk by
Chinese missiles, accompany the UK carrier at the bottom of the sea in Anglo-Spanish harmony.

But perhaps you were thinking of sending it towards Greenland to defend a fellow EU state's oversea territory.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Yep, I see Russian and Chinese crossing the pyrenees. LoL. In fact Spain couldn't care less about Russia and China, we are far beyond range. It is mostly for deterring Morocco of thinking funny things and to do naval missions with other NATO and EU countries and such.

I started to read the article.

As a Leave voter, it comes across as a provocative tongue in cheek spoof, not to be taken seriously.

I stopped reading after



That was not true in 2016. And I regard UK "lead the world" claims as generally spurious, at best reflecting a transient moment.

He is writing in a hypothetical present, so when he says 'UK leads....' he is talking about UK leading in that hypothetical 2025 after Brexit. It is absolutely not tongue in check, the guy is/was a well known Brexiter, wouldn't make sense at all. I agree it would be necessarily tongue in check if it was written in 2025.

 

[EnglishEdward]

Well I dare say it is theoretically possible that is why he voted Leave,
but that is not why I, or any other Leave voters I know, voted Leave.
Furthermore I suspect many leading Brexiters don't know why ordinary
people voted Leave. But the idea that we voted Leave because we
thought that if the UK left, it'd lead the world is truly laughable.

 

[Thorgalaeg]

Maybe the guy goes a bit far away, or it reads like that. I think he means UK to be among the leading nations (which is or was true to some degree, UK is not an insignificant or backwards country precisely).

You may agree though that there was some assumptions and optimism among Brexiters that time has proven totally baseless.