Skip to main content

The chill in Brussels (hindu )

Donald Trump’s first NATO meet confirms America’s drift away from its NATO allies

It was not a summit to indulge the nostalgia of a painstakingly nurtured post-War partnership between the U.S. and Europe. Nor was it an occasion to pronounce declarations of mutual solidarity to face up to an uncertain world. Such political and diplomatic language might, in any case, have struck an especially awkward note when leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation gathered in Brussels, given the very public airing of differences on the notion of a shared trans-Atlantic vision by U.S. President Donald Trump since his election campaign. Soon after his election, he reportedly enquired from the president of the European Council, Donald Tusk, which country was next in line to quit the European Union after Britain voted last June to leave. In turn, his election had been received in European Union circles with considerable dismay, if not disbelief. German Chancellor Angela Merkel even spelt out, in quite candid terms, the political basis of the EU’s future engagement with Washington in her letter of congratulations to Mr. Trump.

While the alliance represents the military and security interests of the member-states, NATO member-countries are, in several other global forums, also knit together by an overarching commitment to preserve the liberal democratic world order they crafted in the aftermath of the Second World War. Against this backdrop, it was reasonable, at the minimum, to expect Mr. Trump to explicitly endorse the alliance’s pledge of mutual defence under Article 5. Yet, in a familiar replay of the “America First” script, the summit on May 25 was reduced by Mr. Trump to brass-tacks matters of burden-sharing among the 28-member alliance and apportioning blame. Indeed, compliance with the treaty stipulation of a contribution of 2% of gross domestic product by individual states has been far from satisfactory, with the U.S. shouldering the bulk of the burden. The provision has even proved controversial, with Germany and other countries voicing scepticism about increasing NATO’s defence budget. However, the fact that the issue of “chronic underpayments” to NATO should have almost dominated proceedings in Mr. Trump’s first overseas engagement with America’s European allies shows a lack of sense of the occasion and diplomatic finesse on his part. The overall stance has understandably caused considerable concern among European leaders, with prospects for the Paris climate agreement and revival of world trade looking bleak on Mr. Trump’s watch. The hope is that Washington would at some point tone down its rhetoric on the contentious questions. A more accommodative stance vis-à-vis China and a willingness to renegotiate the U.S. trade agreement with Canada and Mexico seem to be signs of a course-correction. European leaders must hope he will move nearer to the traditional U.S. line on trans-Atlantic issues too.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

NGT terminates chairmen of pollution control boards in 10 states (downtoearth,)

Cracking the whip on 10 State Pollution Control Boards (SPCBs) for ad-hoc appointments, the National Green Tribunal has ordered the termination of Chairpersons of these regulatory authorities. The concerned states are Himachal Pradesh, Sikkim, Tamil Nadu, Uttarakhand, Kerala, Rajasthan, Telangana, Haryana, Maharashtra and Manipur. The order was given last week by the principal bench of the NGT, chaired by Justice Swatanter Kumar. The recent order of June 8, 2017, comes as a follow-up to an NGT judgment given in August 2016. In that judgment, the NGT had issued directions on appointments of Chairmen and Member Secretaries of the SPCBs, emphasising on crucial roles they have in pollution control and abatement. It then specified required qualifications as well as tenure of the authorities. States were required to act on the orders within three months and frame Rules for appointment [See Box: Highlights of the NGT judgment of 2016 on criteria for SPCB chairperson appointment]. Having

High dose of Vitamin C and B3 can kill colon cancer cells: study (downtoearth)

In a first, a team of researchers has found that high doses of Vitamin C and niacin or Vitamin B3 can kill cancer stem cells. A study published in Cell Biology International showed the opposing effects of low and high dose of vitamin C and vitamin B3 on colon cancer stem cells. Led by Bipasha Bose and Sudheer Shenoy, the team found that while low doses (5-25 micromolar) of Vitamin C and B3 proliferate colon cancer stem cells, high doses (100 to 1,000 micromolar) killed cancer stem cells. Such high doses of vitamins can only be achieved through intravenous injections in colon cancer patients. The third leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, colon cancer can be prevented by an intake of dietary fibre and lifestyle changes. While the next step of the researchers is to delineate the mechanisms involved in such opposing effects, they also hope to establish a therapeutic dose of Vitamin C and B3 for colon cancer stem cell therapy. “If the therapeutic dose gets validated under in vivo

SC asks Centre to strike a balance on Rohingya issue (.hindu)

Supreme Court orally indicates that the government should not deport Rohingya “now” as the Centre prevails over it to not record any such views in its formal order, citing “international ramifications”. The Supreme Court on Friday came close to ordering the government not to deport the Rohingya. It finally settled on merely observing that a balance should be struck between humanitarian concern for the community and the country's national security and economic interests. The court was hearing a bunch of petitions, one filed by persons within the Rohingya community, against a proposed move to deport over 40,000 Rohingya refugees. A three-judge Bench, led by Chief Justice of India Dipak Misra, began by orally indicating that the government should not deport Rohingya “now”, but the government prevailed on the court to not pass any formal order, citing “international ramifications”. With this, the status quo continues even though the court gave the community liberty to approach i