1.
Renewing Europe
European citizens need to learn from the Brexit impasse and apply those
lessons ahead of and after the European Parliament election in May. That means
embracing reforms that advance the three goals that lie at the heart of the
European project.
PARIS – Never, since World War II, has Europe been as essential. Yet never
has Europe been in so much danger. Brexit stands as the symbol of that. It
symbolises the crisis of Europe, which has failed to respond to its peoples’
needs for protection from the major shocks of the modern world. It also
symbolises the European trap. That trap is not one of being part of the
European Union. The trap is in the lie and the irresponsibility that can
destroy it.
Who
told the British people the truth about their post-Brexit future? Who spoke to
them about losing access to the European market? Who mentioned the risks to
peace in Ireland of restoring the former border? Nationalist retrenchment
offers nothing; it is rejection without an alternative. And this trap threatens
the whole of Europe: the anger mongers, backed by fake news, promise anything
and everything.1
We
have to stand firm, proud and lucid, in the face of this manipulation and say
first of all what today’s united Europe is. It is a historic success: the
reconciliation of a devastated continent in an unprecedented project of peace,
prosperity and freedom. We should never forget that. And this project continues
to protect us today. What country can act on its own in the face of aggressive
strategies by the major powers? Who can claim to be sovereign, on their own, in
the face of the digital giants?
How
would we resist the crises of financial capitalism without the euro, which is a
force for the entire European Union? Europe is also those thousands of projects
daily that have changed the face of our regions: the school refurbished, the
road built, and the long-awaited arrival of high-speed Internet access. This
struggle is a daily commitment, because Europe, like peace, can never be taken
for granted. I tirelessly pursue it in the name of France to take Europe
forward and defend its model. We have shown that what we were told was
unattainable, the creation of a European defence capability and the protection
of social rights, was in fact possible.
Yet
we need to do more and sooner, because there is the other trap: the trap of the
status quo and resignation. Faced with the major crises in the world, citizens
so often ask us, “Where is Europe? What is Europe doing?” It has become a soulless
market in their eyes.
Yet
Europe is not just a market. It is a project. A market is useful, but it should
not detract from the need for borders that protect and values that unite. The
nationalists are misguided when they claim to defend our identity by
withdrawing from Europe, because it is the European civilisation that unites,
frees and protects us. But those who would change nothing are also misguided,
because they deny the fears felt by our peoples, the doubts that undermine our
democracies. We are at a pivotal moment for our continent, a moment when
together we need to politically and culturally reinvent the shape of our
civilisation in a changing world. It is the moment for European renewal. Hence,
resisting the temptation of isolation and divisions, I propose we build this
renewal together around three ambitions: freedom, protection and progress.
Defend Our Freedom
The
European model is based on the freedom of man and the diversity of opinions and
creation. Our first freedom is democratic freedom: the freedom to choose our
leaders as foreign powers seek to influence our vote at each election. I
propose creating a European Agency for the Protection of Democracies, which
will provide each member state with European experts to protect their election
processes against cyber-attacks and manipulation. In this same spirit of
independence, we should also ban the funding of European political parties by
foreign powers. We should have European rules banish all incitements to hate
and violence from the Internet, since respect for the individual is the bedrock
of our civilisation of dignity.
Protect Our Continent
Founded
on internal reconciliation, the EU has forgotten to look at the realities of
the world. Yet no community can create a sense of belonging if it does not have
bounds that it protects. The boundary is freedom in security. We therefore need
to rethink the Schengen area: all those who want to be part of it should comply
with obligations of responsibility (stringent border controls) and solidarity
(one asylum policy with the same acceptance and refusal rules). We will need a
common border force and a European asylum office, strict control obligations
and European solidarity to which each country will contribute under the
authority of a European Council for Internal Security. On the issue of
migration, I believe in a Europe that protects both its values and its borders.
The
same standards should apply to defence. Substantial progress has been made in
the last two years, but we need to set a clear course: a treaty on defence and
security should define our fundamental obligations in association with NATO and
our European allies: increased defence spending, a truly operational mutual
defence clause, and the European Security Council with the United Kingdom on
board to prepare our collective decisions.
Our
borders also need to guarantee fair competition. What power in the world would
accept continued trade with those who respect none of their rules? We cannot
suffer in silence. We need to reform our competition policy and reshape our
trade policy with penalties or a ban in Europe on businesses that compromise
our strategic interests and fundamental values such as environmental standards,
data protection and fair payment of taxes; and the adoption of European preference
in strategic industries and our public procurement, as our American and Chinese
competitors do.
Recover the Spirit of Progress
Europe
is not a second-rank power. Europe in its entirety is a vanguard: it has always
defined the standards of progress. In this, it needs to drive forward a project
of convergence rather than competition: Europe, where social security was
created, needs to introduce a social shield for all workers, east to west and
north to south, guaranteeing the same pay in the same workplace, and a minimum
European wage appropriate to each country and discussed collectively every
year.
Getting
back on track with progress also concerns spearheading the ecological cause.
Will we be able to look our children in the eye if we do not also clear our
climate debt? The EU needs to set its target – zero carbon by 2050 and
pesticides halved by 2025 – and adapt its policies accordingly with such
measures as a European Climate Bank to finance the ecological transition, a
European food safety force to improve our food controls and, to counter the
lobby threat, independent scientific assessment of substances hazardous to the
environment and health. This imperative needs to guide all our action: from the
European Central Bank to the European Commission, from the European budget to
the Investment Plan for Europe. All our institutions need to have the
climate as their mandate.
Progress
and freedom are about being able to live from your work: Europe needs to look
ahead to create jobs. This is why it needs not only to regulate the global
digital giants by putting in place European supervision of the major platforms
(prompt penalties for unfair competition, transparent algorithms, etc.), but
also to finance innovation by giving the new European Innovation Council a
budget on a par with the United States in order to spearhead new technological
breakthroughs such as artificial intelligence.
Freedom,
protection and progress. We need to build European renewal on these pillars. We
cannot let nationalists without solutions exploit the people’s anger. We cannot
sleepwalk through a diminished Europe. We cannot become ensconced in business
as usual and wishful thinking. European humanism demands action. And
everywhere, the people are standing up to be part of that change.
So,
by the end of the year, let’s set up, with the representatives of the European
institutions and the member states, a Conference for Europe in order to propose
all the changes our political project needs, with an open mind, even to
amending the treaties. This conference will need to engage with citizens’
panels and hear academics, business and labour representatives, and religious
and spiritual leaders.
It
will define a roadmap for the EU that translates these key priorities into
concrete actions. There will be disagreement, but is it better to have a static
Europe or a Europe that advances, sometimes at different paces, and that is
open to all?
In
this Europe, the peoples will really take back control of their future. In this
Europe, the United Kingdom, I am sure, will find its true place.
The
Brexit impasse is a lesson for us all. We need to escape this trap and make the
upcoming European Parliament elections and our project meaningful. It is for
Europe’s citizens to decide whether Europe and the values of progress that it
embodies are to be more than just a passing episode in history. This is the
choice I propose: to chart together the road to European renewal.
2.
Huawei sues US
government over ban on its products
The China Daily 2019.03.07
Chinese
tech giant Huawei Technologies Co said on Thursday it has sued the United
States government over a ban that bar federal agencies from using its products.
Huawei
claimed the US government has called it a security threat without giving it a
chance to go through due process, the company said at a press conference in
Shenzhen, Guangdong province.
"The
US Congress has repeatedly failed to produce any evidence to support its
restrictions on Huawei products. We are compelled to take this legal action as
a proper and last resort," Guo Ping, Huawei rotating chairman, said.
"This ban not only is unlawful, but also restricts Huawei from engaging in
fair competition, ultimately harming US consumers. We look forward to the
court's verdict, and trust that it will benefit both Huawei and the American
people."
The
lawsuit was filed in a US District Court in Plano, Texas.
According
to the complaint, the ban not only bars all US government agencies from buying
Huawei equipment and services, but also bars them from contracting with or
awarding grants or loans to third parties who buy Huawei equipment or services.
In
its lawsuit, Huawei will claim the National Defense Authorization Act violates
the Bill of Attainder Clause and the Due Process Clause. And it also violates the
Separation-of-Powers principles enshrined in the US Constitution, because
Congress is both making the law, and attempting to adjudicate and execute it,
the company said.
Huawei
is a key player in introducing the next-generation 5G network technologies as
well as a leading smartphone brand that rivals key players like Apple Inc.
It
has been steadily increasing its 5G contracts despite alleged security concerns
it faces in some markets. The company said at a recent conference that so far,
it has secured more than 30 5G contracts in overseas markets.
Huawei
noted the NDAA restrictions prevent the company from providing more advanced 5G
technologies to US consumers, which will delay the commercial application of
5G.
Guo
Ping added, "If this law is set aside, as it should be, Huawei can bring
more advanced technologies to the US and help it build the best 5G networks.
Huawei is willing to address the US Government's security concerns. Lifting the
NDAA ban will give the US Government the flexibility it needs to work with
Huawei and solve real security issues."
3. Carlos Ghosn, Former Nissan Chairman, Is Released on Bail in Japan
A
man identified by the Japanese news media as Carlos Ghosn, center, the former
chairman of Nissan Motor, leaving a jail in Tokyo on Wednesday after he was
released on bail.CreditBehrouz Mehri/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images
The New York Times March 6, 2019
TOKYO
— Carlos Ghosn, the former Nissan Motor chairman facing charges of financial
wrongdoing in Japan, was released on bail on Wednesday after being held in a
Tokyo jail since late November.
A
judge approved Mr. Ghosn’s release on
bail of 1 billion yen, or almost $9 million, on Tuesday, and rejected an appeal
by prosecutors to keep him detained until trial. Mr. Ghosn paid in cash on
Wednesday and walked out surrounded by police guards in the late afternoon.
Mr.
Ghosn, who headed Nissan and was the architect of its alliance with Mitsubishi
Motors of Japan and Renault of France, has been accused of underreporting his
compensation and shifting personal losses to Nissan. He has denied the charges.
Since
his arrest in Japan on Nov. 19, he has been removed as chairman of all three companies.
He does, however, remain on their boards.
A
man wearing a grayish jumpsuit, a sky-blue cap and a surgical mask, whom the
Japanese news media identified as Mr. Ghosn, emerged from the detention center
around 4:30 p.m. surrounded by police officers. The outfit, which looked like a
crossing guard’s uniform, allowed him to sneak past a crowd of Japanese and
foreign reporters who had been waiting hours for him to appear.
After
a moment’s hesitation, Mr. Ghosn got into a small van, while the police loaded
luggage and bedding into a larger black van that was the focus of reporters’
attention.
It
has been over three months since Mr. Ghosn, who turns 65 on Saturday, was taken
away by prosecutors after his corporate jet touched down at a Tokyo airport.
Much
of the intervening time has been spent in a pitched battle for his freedom.
Japanese
prosecutors have gone to unusual lengths to keep him in detention. After a
court denied a request to extend his detention in mid-December,
prosecutors rearrested him on a new set of
chargesconnected to personal losses he incurred during the 2008 financial
crisis and reportedly transferred to Nissan.
The
bail hearing on Tuesday was Mr. Ghosn’s third. A Tokyo court had rejected two attempts by his previous
legal team over concerns that he might try to flee the country or tamper with
evidence.
A
judge approved the request by Mr. Ghosn’s new legal team at midday, but
prosecutors immediately appealed the decision and a final ruling did not come
until late in the evening.
In
exchange for his freedom, Mr. Ghosn is required to remain in Japan and accept
other conditions imposed by the court to prevent him from tampering with
evidence or fleeing. The Japanese news media has reported that those conditions
include giving his passports to his lawyers, residing in Tokyo, having no
contact with others involved in the case, being monitored by security cameras
at home and limiting his use of phones and personal computers.
As
Mr. Ghosn’s case goes to trial, prosecutors may face steeper odds than usual.
Typically, Japanese prosecutors have a 99 percent conviction rate of indicted
defendants. But with a new lawyer, and the intense international attention on
some of the flaws in the Japanese criminal
justice system, “it’s increasingly looking like it’s not a slam dunk,”
said Stephen Givens, an American corporate lawyer in Tokyo.
Mr.
Ghosn’s decision to deny the charges against him can be a somewhat risky
position to take in the Japanese justice system. The authorities in the country
are notorious for using confessions, sometimes extracted under duress, to get
convictions, and they are not used to being thwarted: In 2017, 88 percent of
those who went to trial confessed, according to data maintained by Japan’s
Supreme Court.
Receiving
bail is itself unusual in Japan, but even more so for those who refuse to
acknowledge guilt. Only around 25 percent of defendants in the country are
released before trial. Of those who maintain they are innocent, only about one
in 13 walks free, according to data from the Japan Federation of Bar
Associations.
That
makes Mr. Ghosn’s release unexpected, said Akira Kitani, a former judge now
working as a defense attorney.
“Compared
to the other cases in the past, this is definitely quick,” he said, noting that
international attention on Mr. Ghosn’s case may have influenced the judge’s
decision to release him.
Mr.
Ghosn’s new lawyer, Junichiro Hironaka, is known to advocate legal changes in
the country. In two news conferences leading up to Mr. Ghosn’s release, he
repeatedly emphasized the negative impact the former Nissan chairman’s long
detention had had on perceptions of Japan abroad, saying that he hoped the case
would drive the country to re-examine some of its harsh practices.
“They
will never, ever say that they granted bail because of the influence of foreign
media,” Mr. Kitani said, but given the intense spotlight the case has put on
Japan’s legal system, “they might have thought somewhere in their mind that
they couldn’t detain him in this way forever.”
Norio
Munakata, a former prosecutor, said that in the past, “the court always
listened to the prosecutors’ voice, but now their magic wand doesn’t work
anymore.”
Because
of globalization, “they have to respect human rights, and may have thought that
long-term detention wasn’t good,” he added. “They may start thinking about
global standards.”
