France: Delaying Brexit without compromise won’t solve crisis 

De Montchalin said France was continuing to prepare for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit. (File/AFP)
Updated 05 September 2019
Follow

France: Delaying Brexit without compromise won’t solve crisis 

  • France’s European Affairs Minister Amelie de Montchalin reacted skeptically to MPs’ quest for a third delay
  • MPs voted three times to reject a deal negotiated by Johnson’s predecessor Theresa May with the EU

PARIS: France’s European Affairs Minister Amelie de Montchalin reacted skeptically Thursday to British MPs’ quest for a third Brexit delay, saying that delaying the process again, “without changing anything,” would not solve Britain’s Brexit “problem.”
De Montchalin was speaking a day after British MPs approved a bill that could force Prime Minister Boris Johnson to delay Brexit until January or later.
“It’s not because a problem is complicated that by diluting it over time and delaying it for three months without changing anything, it will be resolved,” she told France’s Radio Classique.
“When I hear the British saying ‘Give us three months more and we will solve the problem’, we can see that another six months would not solve the problem, nor another three months.
“They have to be able to tell us what they want,” she said.
MPs voted three times to reject a deal negotiated by Johnson’s predecessor Theresa May with the EU while at the same time making clear they opposed leaving the EU without an agreement.
“We know what they don’t want but we are still struggling to understand what they do want,” De Montchalin said, describing the situation as “a bit blocked.”
Initially scheduled for March 29, Brexit has already been delayed twice due to the failure of Britain’s parliament to agree on the manner of the country’s exit from the EU.
Johnson has vowed to take Britain out of the union by October 31, regardless of whether he has an agreement with the EU.
De Montchalin said France was continuing to prepare for the possibility of a no-deal Brexit.
Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said Tuesday that he considered it “the most likely scenario.”
De Montchalin also called it a “very strong possibility.”


Pakistan killed over 80 militants in strikes on TTP camps in Afghanistan — official

Updated 5 sec ago
Follow

Pakistan killed over 80 militants in strikes on TTP camps in Afghanistan — official

  • Saturday’s airstrikes followed a series of attacks inside Pakistan amid a surge in militancy
  • The Afghan Taliban authorities accuse Pakistani forces of killing civilians in the airstrikes

ISLAMABAD: Pakistan’s airstrikes in Afghanistan destroyed seven Tehreek-e-Taliban Pakistan (TTP) camps and killed over 80 militants, a Pakistani security official said on Sunday, with the Afghan Taliban accusing Pakistani forces of killing civilians in the assault.

Saturday’s airstrikes followed a series of attacks inside Pakistan amid a surge in militancy. Authorities say the attacks, particularly in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa province and the Pakistani capital of Islamabad, were carried out by the TTP and allied groups that Islamabad alleges are operating from sanctuaries in Afghanistan. Kabul denies this.

According to Pakistan’s information ministry, recent incidents included a suicide bombing at a Shiite mosque in Islamabad, separate attacks in Bajaur and Bannu, and another recent incident in Bannu during the holy month of Ramadan, which started earlier this week. The government said it had “conclusive evidence” linking the attacks to militants directed by leadership based in Afghanistan.

“Last night, Pakistan’s intelligence-based air strikes destroyed seven centers of Fitna Al-Khawarij TTP in three provinces of Nangarhar, Paktika and Khost, in which more than eighty Khawarij (TTP militants) have been confirmed killed, while more are expected,” a Pakistani security official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Arab News.

An earlier statement from Pakistan’s information ministry said the targets included a camp of a Daesh regional affiliate, the Islamic State Khorasan Province (ISKP), which claimed a suicide bombing at an Islamabad Shiite mosque that killed 32 people this month.

In an X post, Afghan government spokesperson Zabihullah Mujahid said Pakistani forces had violated Afghan territory.

“Pakistani special military circles have once again trespassed into Afghan territory,” Mujahid said. “Last night, they bombed our civilian compatriots in Nangarhar and Paktika provinces, martyring and wounding dozens of people, including women and children.”

 The Afghan Taliban’s claims of civilian casualties could not be independently verified. Pakistan did not immediately comment on the allegation that civilians had been killed in the strikes.

In a post on X, Afghanistan’s foreign ministry said it had summoned Pakistan’s charge d’affaires to Afghanistan Ubaid-ur-Rehman Nizamani and lodged protest through a formal démarche in response to the Pakistani military strikes.

“IEA-MoFA (The Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs) vehemently condemns the violation of Afghanistan’s airspace and the targeting of civilians, describing it as a flagrant breach of Afghanistan’s territorial integrity & a provocative action,” it said in a statement.

“The Pakistani side was also categorically informed that safeguarding Afghanistan’s territorial integrity is the religious responsibility of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan; henceforth, the responsibility for any adverse consequences of such actions will rest with the opposing side.”

Tensions between Islamabad and Kabul have escalated since the Afghan Taliban returned to power in 2021. Pakistan says cross-border militant attacks have increased since then and has accused the Taliban of failing to honor commitments under the 2020 Doha Agreement to prevent Afghan soil from being used for attacks against other countries. The Taliban deny allowing such activity and have previously rejected similar accusations.

Saturday’s exchange of accusations marks one of the most direct confrontations between the two neighbors in recent months and risks further straining already fragile ties along the volatile border.