LONDON: Britain’s new parliament on Friday gave its initial approval to a revised EU divorce deal that sets up a high-stakes clash with Brussels over their future ties.
The 358 to 234 vote paves the way for Prime Minister Boris Johnson to deliver on his winning general election promise to “get Brexit done” by January 31.
But it also pushes Britain and the remaining 27 European Union member states closer to another cliff edge that could end decades of unfettered trade when the post-Brexit transition period shuts at the end of 2020.
A snap poll last week gave Johnson’s pro-Brexit Conservatives a commanding majority of 365 seats in the 650-member lower House of Commons.
The main opposition Labour party — out of power since 2010 and riven by internal conflicts over Britain’s place in the world — was relegated to its worst defeat since 1935.
Johnson’s triumph dispelled any doubts over whether Britain would follow through on the results of its 2016 referendum and become the first nation to leave the bloc.
It has been a rocky 47-year sojourn that saw Brussels and London wrangle over currency controls and whose laws take precedence in specific fields.
The 2016 Brexit campaign was also dominated by debates over migrants and Britain’s right to control its own border.
“We are one step closer to getting Brexit done,” Johnson tweeted after the vote.
The House of Commons is expected to formally approve Johnson’s separation terms on January 9.
Yet Britain remains a politically divided country in which debates over Europe rage on.
Labour leader Jeremy Corbyn is stepping down in the wake of the election fiasco.
But he told parliament ahead of Friday’s vote that Johnson was setting the country on a “reckless direction” that handed power to big business and risked consumers’ health.
“We still believe it’s a terrible deal,” Corbyn said.
“Given the chance, they’ll slash food standards to match those in the United States, where what are called ‘acceptable levels’ of rat hairs in paprika and rat hairs in orange juice are allowed,” he said.
The secessionist Scottish National Party’s parliamentary head Ian Blackford also maintained his doom-laden vision of Brexit.
Blackford warned that Britain was now “blindly hurtling toward the cliff-edge” that would “cost thousands of jobs in Scotland.”
“This UK government cannot drag Scotland out of the European Union before gaining the legislative consent of the Scottish parliament,” he said.
The SNP’s independence drive is likely to remain a concern for Johnson’s government in the months to come.
Businesses and investors are also worried about a series of small but potentially consequential changes into the official Withdrawal Agreement Bill.
Britain’s formal departure on January 31 is due to be followed by an 11-month transition period during which things are to stay pretty much as now.
London and Brussels are supposed to use the time to negotiate a comprehensive new agreement covering everything from trade to security and data protection.
EU officials warn that such deals usually take years to hammer out.
But Johnson ruled out the possibility of asking for a deadline extension in the version of the bill before parliament on Friday.
“A Minister of the Crown may not agree... to an extension of the implementation period,” the bill now says.
It puts psychological pressure on European officials to back off some of their stiffer demands on London and seek a limited deal that leaves some big issues unresolved.
Welsh nationalist MP Jonathan Edwards told Johnson he had “boxed himself into a corner” by ruling out an extension.
But the prime minister said the lesson of Brexit talks thus far — the departure date was delayed three times from March 29 — was that a firm deadline “strengthens our negotiating position.”
The EU’s chief Brexit negotiator Michel Barnier said on Tuesday that the bloc “will do the maximum” to meet the end-of-2020 deadline.
Johnson’s Brexit deal secures first win in new parliament
https://arab.news/jwn2w
Johnson’s Brexit deal secures first win in new parliament
Mosque attack in Nigeria leaves 8 people dead, as police say the motive was a family dispute
The incident caused panic in Kano, northern Nigeria’s largest state, where periodic religion-related unrest has occurred over the years
ABUJA: At least eight worshippers were killed and 16 others injured early Wednesday morning after a man attacked a mosque with a locally made explosive in northern Nigeria’s Kano state, resulting in a fire outbreak, the police said.
The suspect, a 38-year-old local resident, confessed that he attacked the mosque in Kano’s remote Gadan village “purely in hostility following (a) prolonged family disagreement,” police spokesman Abdullahi Haruna said in a statement on Wednesday.
Eight of those injured died later in a hospital, Haruna later told local Channels Television on Thursday. Four children were among the injured worshippers, although it was not clear if any of the children died.
The incident caused panic in Kano, northern Nigeria’s largest state, where periodic religion-related unrest has occurred over the years, sometimes resulting in violence.
The suspect invaded the mosque with “a locally prepared bomb and exploded it,” local police chief Umar Sanda told reporters. “It has nothing to do with terrorism.”
Footage broadcast by the local TVC station showed charred walls and burned furniture in the mosque, the main place of worship for Gadan village in Muslim-dominated Kano state.
Local media also reported the worshippers were locked inside the mosque, making it difficult for them to escape.
“Some children ran for their lives with fire all over them. We had to put water to quench it,” Hussaini Adamu, a resident, told TVC.
The police cordoned off the scene while the injured were rushed to a hospital in the state capital.
“The disagreement (was) over sharing of inheritance of which those that (the attacker) alleged to have cheated on him were in the mosque at that moment and he did that for his voice to be heard,” the police statement said.
What to expect as new, guitar-playing PM takes helm in Singapore
- Lawrence Wong went viral for his guitar cover of Taylor Swift’s ‘Love Story’ in March
- Best chapters of our Singapore story lie ahead, new PM said in inaugural speech
SINGAPORE: As Singapore gets a new prime minister for the first time in 20 years, experts have told Arab News what to expect from the city-state’s fourth leader, Lawrence Wong, who came to the fore with his handling of the successful COVID-19 response.
Wong was inaugurated on Wednesday evening, taking over the reins from Lee Hsien Loong, son of the founding father of modern Singapore Lee Kuan Yew.
The 51-year-old began his career as an economist at the trade ministry with a US educational background, before moving up to occupy some of the biggest jobs in Singapore’s bureaucracy, including the Energy Market Authority and Lee’s principal private secretary.
The civil servant-turned-politician was catapulted into the spotlight in 2020, when he coordinated Singapore’s successful fight against COVID-19. He has also garnered public support by showcasing his guitar skills online, including a cover of Taylor Swift’s “Love Story” that went viral in March.
“Lawrence Wong has been in charge with the COVID-19 pandemic, and he did very well. Singapore did very well by and large; that was something that the international community noticed,” said James M. Dorsey, a senior fellow at the Nanyang Technological University.
Compared with Lee, Wong will still have to work on his global exposure, but should be able to capitalize on the enduring image of Singapore’s “serious stability,” Dorsey added.
“As we watch the process of build-up toward the transition, we will have greater confidence in Lawrence Wong. And simply the confidence in the way Singapore does things, working in Wong’s favor.”
Southeast Asia analyst Adib Zalkapli is expecting Wong to continue the policies of his predecessor, who oversaw the country’s economic growth into an international financial hub and top tourist destination, more than doubling the island’s gross domestic product per capita.
“It’s a well-planned change of leadership that will ensure continuity. We are unlikely to see major policy changes in the short to medium term,” he told Arab News, adding that the same approach will likely apply on matters related to foreign policy.
Bridget Welsh, an honorary research associate at the Asia Research Institute in the University of Nottingham Malaysia, is also expecting continuity.
“Essentially status quo. Arguably, there will be more engagement, as issues remain complex in the region, and the new leadership will want to establish or deepen his own personal ties in the region,” Welsh said.
But so far, little is known about the policies Wong is likely to adopt, said Ian Chong, an associate professor of political science at the National University of Singapore.
“Lawrence Wong has said that he will bring continuity, make tough decisions, and is pro-Singapore. What these mean in practice is not yet known. Wong has not so far stated what his policy direction and vision is, why it is important, and why Singaporeans need to support it,” he said.
The new prime minister arrives at a particularly challenging time in geopolitics, a departure from a period of “stable external environment” that worked in Singapore’s favor.
“Intensifying US-PRC (People’s Republic of China) competition, internal circulation, on-shoring, friend-shoring, trade barriers, as well as data and technology in all the developed economies challenge Singapore’s business model,” Chong said.
“Wong has yet to articulate a plan on how he intends to deal with these challenges, even though he concedes their seriousness.”
In his first speech as prime minister, Wong paid tribute to his predecessors, but said that the country’s new leadership would adopt a style that “differs” from that of previous generations.
“We will lead in our own way. We will continue to think boldly and to think far. We know that there is still much more to do,” he said. “The best chapters of our Singapore story lie ahead.”
Outrage grows in India over UN staffer killed by Israeli forces in Gaza
- Army veteran Waibhav Anil Kale was working for UN Department of Safety and Security
- More than 190 UN staff killed since beginning of Israel’s onslaught on Gaza last year
NEW DELHI: The killing of an Indian army veteran serving as a UN staffer in Gaza has stirred outrage in India and calls for the government to hold Israel accountable, with activists calling New Delhi’s reaction ‘inadequate.’
Col. Waibhav Anil Kale, a former peacekeeper, was on duty with the UN Department of Safety and Security when his UN-marked vehicle was hit on Monday en route to the European Hospital in Rafah by what the international organization said was Israeli tank fire.
The Indian government’s response was a condolence statement issued on Wednesday by the Ministry of External Affairs, saying it was “deeply saddened by the death” and “in touch with relevant authorities” regarding an investigation.
The statement did not issue a condemnation, unlike in July 2022, when two Indian peacekeepers were killed in an attack on a UN Organization Stabilization Mission base in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. At that time, India’s foreign minister said the perpetrators “must be held accountable and brought to justice” and convened a special meeting of the UN Security Council to discuss the attack.
Talmiz Ahmad, former Indian ambassador to Saudi Arabia, said the government’s response was “grossly inadequate” given what he called the “calculated killing” of an Indian army officer and UN staffer.
“The Indian government can hold Israel accountable. India is a sponsor of a resolution related to the protection of the UN personnel,” he told Arab News.
“This particular killing of a UN officer is a targeted killing because it was very obvious to Israelis that this was a UN vehicle, and it was on an official UN mission. A tank deliberately targeted this vehicle.”
New Delhi had always been sensitive to assaults on UN personnel given that it is one of the largest contributors to the organization’s peacekeepers.
The reaction to Kale’s killing was insufficient, according to Kavita Krishnan, a women’s rights activist.
“If a person is a UN employee, he is entitled to protection,” she said. “The Indian government should specifically hold Israel accountable for this killing. They cannot treat it just as a casualty of war or a collateral damage.”
“IT’S NOT A DEATH”
Since October last year, Israel’s deadly siege and bombardment of Gaza has killed more than 35,000 people, wounded 70,000, and left most of the enclave’s population starving and with no access to medical, food and water supplies.
The UN estimates that more than 190 of its staff members have also been killed in the ongoing onslaught. Kale was the first international UN employee to be killed.
“It’s condemnable that India does not name the fact of assassination. It’s not death. He did not die of illness. He was killed by Israel,” said Apoorvanand Jha, a public intellectual and professor at the University of Delhi.
“Israel kills people who are involved in the health services ... kills journalists, aid workers and kills workers involved in the peacekeeping forces. So, it does it knowingly. It is not a collateral damage. Israel does it knowingly — this is what has been recorded many times. Israel needs to be held accountable for all the individual crimes of assassinations and the collective crimes, mass deaths.”
From a legal point of view, the killing of UN personnel is against norms and customs of international law and international humanitarian law.
“New Delhi should tell Tel Aviv that it should respect international law,” said Anwar Sadat, a senior assistant professor at the Indian Society of International Law.
“The Indian government should issue a diplomatic demarche to the Israeli government.”
Since the beginning of its invasion of Gaza, Israel has revoked work permits for tens of thousands of Palestinian laborers and sought to facilitate their replacement with manpower from South Asia.
In November, the Indian government signed a three-year agreement with Tel Aviv on the “temporary employment” of workers in the construction and caregiving sector.
“If this is the statement that the Indian government can bring for an official who works with the UN, imagine what if it happens with any of the workers. No one is going to speak,” said N. Sai Balaji, assistant professor at Jawaharlal Nehru University.
“This seriously compromises India’s super-power ambitions, it seriously compromises India’s own foreign policy.”
15 EU states demand plan to send asylum seekers to third countries
- The letter asks the European Union’s executive arm to “propose new ways and solutions to prevent irregular migration to Europe.”
- EU law stipulates that people arriving in the bloc without documents can be sent to a third country
COPENHAGEN: Fifteen EU states have demanded a further tightening of the bloc’s asylum policy, making it easier to transfer undocumented migrants to third countries, including when they are rescued at sea.
The demand, sent in a letter to the European Commission that AFP received on Thursday, comes less than a month before European Parliament elections, in which far-right anti-immigration parties are forecast to make gains.
The letter asks the European Union’s executive arm to “propose new ways and solutions to prevent irregular migration to Europe.”
The group includes Italy and Greece, which receive a substantial number of the people making the perilous journey across the Mediterranean Sea to reach the EU — many seeking to escape poverty, war or persecution, according to the International Organization for Migration.
They want the EU to toughen up its recently adopted asylum pact, which introduces tighter controls on those seeking to enter the 27-nation bloc.
That reform includes speedier vetting of people arriving without documents, new border detention centers and faster deportation for rejected asylum applicants.
The 15 proposed in their letter the introduction of “mechanisms... aimed at detecting, intercepting — or in cases of distress, rescuing — migrants on the high seas and bringing them to a predetermined place of safety in a partner country outside the EU, where durable solutions for those migrants could be found.”
They said it should be easier to send asylum seekers to third countries while their requests for protection are assessed.
They cited the example of a controversial deal that Italy has struck with non-EU Albania, under which Rome can send thousands of asylum seekers plucked from Italian waters to holding camps in the Balkan country until their cases are processed.
The concept in EU asylum law of what constitutes “safe third countries” should be reassessed, they continued.
EU law stipulates that people arriving in the bloc without documents can be sent to a third country, where they could have requested asylum — so long as that country is deemed safe and the applicant has a genuine link with it.
That would exclude schemes like the divisive law passed by the UK, which has now left the EU, enabling London to refuse all irregular arrivals the right to request asylum and send them to Rwanda.
Rights groups accuse the African country — ruled with an iron fist by President Paul Kagame since the end of the 1994 genocide that killed around 800,000 people — of cracking down on free speech and political opposition.
The 15 nations said they wanted the EU to make deals with third countries along the main migration routes, citing the example of the arrangement it made with Turkiye in 2016 to take in Syrian refugees from the war in their home country.
The letter was signed by Austria, Bulgaria, Cyprus, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Finland, Estonia, Greece, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Malta, the Netherlands, Poland and Romania.
It was not signed by Hungary, whose Prime Minister Viktor Orban has resisted EU plans to share out responsibility across the bloc for hosting asylum seekers, or to contribute to the costs of that plan.
German police raid properties as pro-Palestinian group banned
- Palestine Solidarity Duisburg had repeatedly propagated its anti-Israeli and antisemitic worldview, at meetings and on social media channels goverment claimed
BERLIN: German authorities banned a pro-Palestinian group on Thursday for its alleged support of Hamas and police raided properties to confiscate devices and documents, the interior minister of North-Rhine Westphalia said.
Herbert Reul said the group, Palestine Solidarity Duisburg, had repeatedly propagated “its anti-Israeli and antisemitic worldview, at meetings and on social media channels.”
Some 50 police officers searched the properties in the northwestern state, confiscating laptops, cash, cell phones and documents, he said in a statement.
Palestine Solidarity Duisburg was not immediately available for comment.
The group had been known to the authorities since May 2023, the minister said. It organized a rally in front of German arms maker Rheinmetall’s headquarters, protesting the delivery of weapons to Israel, which is fighting Hamas in Gaza.
The German government last year imposed a complete ban on the activities of Palestinian militant group Hamas, already a designated terrorist organization in the country.
North-Rhine Westphalia’s Office for the Protection of the Constitution recommended the ban on Palestine Solidarity Duisburg, Reul said.
