C-SPAN - 2.28.02 European Union, Jose Maria Anzar, EU Council President: agenda:

1: Unity in divesity pluralist constiTutionalism with community rights.
2: Gradual assumption of powers by the European Union.

Two large pentagrams on a blue background probably part of the EU flag was the backdrop.
Fundamental human rights shared prosperity, single currency, and a lot of prestigious people were part of the convention. The European Council in charge needed to meet deadline for new Treaty reforms.
Euro will widen and deepen integration.

The room looked like the United Nation in a circle around the podium. It was called the EU Parliament. Pat Cox, EU Parliament President, in October 2000, stated: Constitutionalization Convention became a necessity. EU Treaty Reform and Democracy wished to achieve transparency and creativity.

Reconciliation never walked before summoned to answer a call of Europe. A generational challenge added value, global responsibility, efficient, open and democratic dialog with citizens.

Romano Prodi said integration more successful than they ever imagined. New reconciliation rather than wars, rule of law prevails. Court of justice is a better course. Exchange and trade is causing growth. Extending EU can be a success.

1. Take responsibility for peace and development can't act alone.
2. Balanced model of society: prosperity, growth, social justiice, environmenal protection.
3. Security, justice and liberty.
4. Censor of EU cannot itself to be left behind.

We have to have a Constitution. We are a political entity not a super state. Classical globalisation, advanced supernatural democracy, separation of powers, public debate, approval of taxes by Parliament.

EU has to be true to itself. Reform of the union is farreaching and should result in a closer union, share sovereignty, all states treated equally shared with citizenry, union of minority. No state can impose on another.

Valery Giscard D'Estaine, Spain, former president of France spoke in multiple languages. "This work is essential for the world. 2 commission representatives, 39 members. Secretary General of the convention. UK government to be nominated, handpicked people, a brilliant think tank. EU history, their presence is beyond imagination. Hungarians, Romanians, from One Treaty to the next. Changed currency, national currency disappears into history. It demonstrates to prove usefulness of EU process stretched to the limit.
Mastricht last Treaty didn't entirely meet goals. Europe is becoming immobile which must be addressed. The world need EU to speak in a single voice:

REASON, HUMANISM AND FREEDOM are European concepts.

and listened to as political and economical powers. International peace is anther phase in our multinational venture. National identity has to be integrated into EU. Conflicts have to be overcome. Citizens have to develop a feelling that they are Europeans using a national identity.

What do citizens expect? Societies are economic partners.. Two parallel approaches.
1. A single voice for International Affairs.
2. Constitution

Document modernizing communities, federation of nation state and a second chamber. Third stage: options or single recommendations need broad consensus.

Draft text given a year. We are a convention which proposes solutions. We are not elected to draft policy but a group for sole purpose of a personal contribution.

1 Chairman, 2 Vive Chairmen and 12 members is the order of presidium plenary. Public debates.

A peaceful continent. Old faiths can dream and perfect a culture which needs solidarity.

C-Span 5.13.02 - Speaking of foreign affairs: I listened to the European Parliament Convention Chairman, Valery GisCard d'Estaing stated, the reason the E.U. was formed was peace. The European Union (E.U.) was established by the Treaty of Rome (EEC Treaty or TEC) signed in 1951, with the objective of safeguarding peace and promoting economic and social progress in Europe. The EU is essentially an area of economic activity and trade without internal frontiers. Valery said that the E.U. unified for itself, not against anyone. It is not its purpose to dethrone the dollar.

"Europeans were tired of wars,' he said. That is the reason why there is hesitation about getting involved with the "Axis of Evil." That is the reason there was no resistance about the change that is going on with NATO becoming a form of United Nations in Europe rather than a military organization. There are now 12 permanent members in the E.U. and 3 countries are candidates to become members but probably won't be, but they do have input into the E.U. decision making.

Britain has not fully integrated because the British pound has a higher value and they are a monarchy. The Queen of England would have to relinquish her reign to come into the E.U. due to the fact that there will be one voice speaking for the European Union and in foreign affairs. The E.U. cannot impose the choice which would complicate matters.

France and Britain joined forces, on Wednesday, to demand the creation of a powerful new president of the European Council for a five-year term who British Prime Minister, Tony Blair, believes will become the public face and driving force of Europe. The goal is to give Europe a high-profile political leader, who would also serve as the European Union’s face in international affairs and take a key role in developing defense and foreign policies, reports the Financial Times. http://www.euobserver.com/index.phtml?selected_topic=9&action=view&article_id=6293

There is the usual resource problem and different methods have been tried. The burden always ends up on Germany who has the best economy and that causes squabbles. What E.U. has to decide is, what are they going to take on as their responsibilities and go from there. The Constitution is in process.

The problems they are dealing with are cultural which are vastly different in each member country than the U.S. states. Languages are decidedly different from country to country and so are traditions. To develop some sort of protections are difficult matters.

What was interesting, on May 13, 2002 (C-Span) when this conference occurred at New York University, N.Y. the E.U. Convention Chairman got up to thank everyone and leave, an American from the University handed him a book and told him that the book contained the new E.U. Constitution. The French Chairman was quite stunned but thanked him for his advice.

BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) -- The European Union approved on Tuesday rules that will require U.S. and other non-EU firms to levy value-added tax (VAT) on products such as computer games and software they sell on the Internet to private customers in the 15-nation bloc.

The new rules, which come into force in July 2003, may irk the United States and add to its ongoing trade row with the EU over U.S. steel imports.

The European Commission said the new regulations were designed to address what the bloc saw as a competitive disadvantage against the United States.

Under U.S. rules designed to boost e-commerce, business is not taxed for selling digitally delivered products -- items such as children's games, music or other services that are sent electronically to a consumer's home computer.

BRUSSELS, Belgium (Reuters) -- The European Union approved on Tuesday rules that will require U.S. and other non-EU firms to levy value-added tax (VAT) on products such as computer games and software they sell on the Internet to private customers in the 15-nation bloc...

The new rules, which come into force in July 2003, may irk the United States and add to its ongoing trade row with the EU over U.S. steel imports.

The European Commission said the new regulations were designed to address what the bloc saw as a competitive disadvantage against the United States.

But from July next year, U.S. and other non-EU companies will have to be registered with a tax authority in one of the 15 member states and be required to levy that country's VAT rate on all applicable Internet transactions. The member country will then distribute the taxes collected to other countries, based on where the actual sales are made.

The VAT liability will also cover electronic services that are downloaded or consumed online, as well as subscription-based and pay-per-view radio and TV broadcasting.

U.S. sees rules as discriminatory
The U.S., which threatened in February to take the case to the World Trade Organization (WTO), believes the rules are discriminatory and will put additional administrative pressure on U.S. companies.

The EU's new tax rules come at a time when the bloc is locked in a trade battle with the U.S. over steel duties it has imposed on European and some other foreign companies.

EU trade officials are meeting on Tuesday in Brussels to give further consideration to plans drawn up by the European Commission to hit back at the U.S. steel duties with sanctions.

Under the Commission's plans, a first set of sanctions will come into force from June 18, hitting a range of goods including U.S. citrus fruit and some steel products, with duties of 100 percent in a move worth more than $300 million. http://www.cnn.com/2002/TECH/industry/05/07/eu.vat.reut/index.html

THE WASHINGTON TIMES April 26, 2002 - The European Union is demanding that foreign companies be allowed to compete with the U.S. Postal Service as part of World Trade Organization talks that began last year...
It also will call for foreign companies to be given access to Small Business Administration loans. The European demands, which will be formally presented to the U.S. government by the end of June, mark the opening salvo in WTO negotiations on trade in services, an area that includes industries from finance to telecommunications to energy.
Harry Freeman, a Washington-based analyst of trade negotiations, said "What the European Union is going after is pretty predictable," .. "These are the clear bones of contention."..
The Office of the U.S. Trade Representative, which will present a list of U.S. demands to Europe later this year, had no comment on the document.
Europe is renewing a long-standing demand that the United States allow foreign-owned ships to ferry lucrative cargo between U.S. ports, something that is prohibited by the Jones Act. The law requires these ships be built, owned and operated by Americans.
http://washingtontimes.com/business/20020426-51693010.htm

In the recent debates over Fast Track legislation for President Bush [which passed] Senator Hollings addressed what is happening due to free trade. WASHINGTON - New York Time - April 25, 2002 by Ernest F. Hollings - In their eagerness to move production offshore, the National Association of Manufacturers, the Chamber of Commerce and the National Federation of Independent Business all join in a chant of "free trade, fast track." The retailers who make a bigger profit on imported goods cry "free trade, fast track," .. they are for transferring power over trade to the executive branch and favored corporate interests [Ed note: what he really means is transferring power to the WTO].

The Bush administration contends that trade agreements are passing us by because the president doesn't have fast track authority. This is baloney. During the 90's we entered into more than nearly 200 international commercial agreements without fast track, including the Caribbean Basin Initiative, and agreements with sub-Saharan Africa, Jordan and Vietnam.

Under Article 1, Section 8 of the Constitution it is not the president but Congress that shall "regulate commerce with foreign nations." But the fix is in. The fast track bill will be called in the Senate only when the White House knows it has the 60 votes necessary to invoke cloture.. The United States will continue to lose business.

This failure to protect American workers is of relatively recent vintage. Since American independence, controls on trade gave government a way to shelter industries from foreign competition so they could grow or restructure. Tariffs were also an important source of government revenue. (There was no income tax until 1913.) President Lincoln protected steel, President Franklin Roosevelt instituted protectionism for agriculture and President Eisenhower for oil. The industrial giant of America was built on careful protectionism... [Ed note: which is prohibited under WTO]

As our [foreign] competitors began to prosper.. They learned that moving work overseas could save money. Labor costs in manufacture can be 30 percent of sales. [profits up 20%] Accordingly, manufacture has been leaving the United States in droves... [his state] South Carolina has lost 53,900 textile jobs since the free trade agreement with Mexico. Since the 1979 Tokyo Round agreements in which fast-track authority took on its current form America has lost more than four million manufacturing jobs, or 20 percent of our manufacturing work force.Giving fast-track authority to President Bush will only worsen this problem.

A plant can move to Mexico and find a workforce with none of these requirements and an average individual wage that is 11 percent of the American equivalent.

Today, more than half of what we consume as a nation is imported, and we produce little to export.

[Hollings was told on one occasion:] "Senator, that world power that loses its manufacturing capacity will cease to be a world power." [Article by Ernest F. Hollings (D)]
http://www.nytimes.com/2002/04/25/opinion/25HOLL.html?todaysheadlines

BRUSSELS, Belgium -- The European Union has described the U.S. decision to impose [30%] steel tariffs as political, and without legal or economic foundation... [It's called] protectionism is a major setback for the world trading system.

"The EU will of course launch an immediate complaint in Geneva (at the WTO) against this clear violation of WTO rules and we will take whatever measures are necessary to safeguard our own market."

Japan, the world's second-biggest steel producer after China, exported 2.2 million tonnes of steel to the United States in 2001. Shares in its top steelmaker, Nippon Steel Corp, fell after the news. More Asian reaction

The tariffs will take effect on March 20 and will stay in place for three years.

U.S. steel firms and unions blame cheap imports for 31 bankruptcies in the past four years and had demanded a 40 percent tariff to protect the domestic industry. Bush backs tariffs

The EU and the United States have the world's biggest trade relationship. Total bilateral trade in 2000 was 430 billion euros ($373 billion).

Democratic Represenative Joshua H. Terry - Serving the 25th Congressional District of New York

To change horses for a minute: Senator Bob Kerrey introduced former 'greatest' Secretary of the Treasury ever, Bob Rubin, to address the world and U.S. economy. The former Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund also attended this conference at the New School University.

They discussed that the legal system is not developed in Russia and China to protect the economies is one of the reason for their failures. The reason behind globalization is supposedly to attain a higher standard of living. E.U. out paces the U.S.with a higher quality of life.

There are downers to globalization. Tradeoffs are repealed consumer's protections. People lose their jobs during this process. It is about economic growth not about who gets a job and who doesn't.

MARKET CONFIDENCE IS GONE INTERNATIONALLY and going to be very difficult to rebuild. The E.U. currency is more efficient. Former Treasury Secretary Rubin said that the tariffs President Bush called for recently have created major problems with the WTO (World Trade Organization) which is above our Constitution).

Rubin said that the boom of 90s came from fiscal discipline (which was hard to do in Washington) but it worked. He said that the country is in $290b deficit again which will escalate to $600b in one year due to the interest. Lower interest rates encouraged investments. A credible market restored confidence. What the Bush administration should have done is to stay with fiscal discipline. The tax cut was a serious mistake.

The I.M.F. has 183 members who all have to support decisions of who gets what and they came into existence to help countries that get in trouble. All members contribute to this organization.

My own observation about the skirmishes in India, Pakistan, Afghanistan and the Middle East are about the same commodity: money. By watching the Middle East shenanigans the leaders of these countries have learned the process of how to milk the cash cow in Washington, D.C. The U.S. again paid a billion dollars to get their way with Russia. They know the world wants peace at any cost. In the meantime they are using the issue to collect billions of dollars that are not a debt to the U.S. but free. In the meantime Americans have to slave to bring this money into the trough. A caller on C-Span said we are up to 72% total tax to the government. Where is it going to stop? End of note

LONDON: Currently, there is much unease in Europe about Bush's "axis of evil". European politicians have been lining up to criticize it. Chris Patten, the European commissioner in charge of external relations and former governor of British Hong Kong called it "absolutist and simplistic". The British Foreign Sec. Jack Straw dismissed Bush's speech. He said it is "best understood by the fact that there are midterm congressional elections in November." The usual outspoken opponents of the Americans in the West, the French, retained the most scathing attack on the speech. Their Foreign Minister, Hubert Vedrine said

"Today we are threatened by a simplistic quality in US policy that reduces all the problems of the world to the struggle against terrorism. It is not properly thought out."

What happened to the "trench warfare" cameraderie of post 9/11? There are certainly many answers to this question. It would be safe to suggest interests have diverged once more. The unity initiated by the attack on the US has served its purpose. This was to give the US carte-blanche to annihilate anyone it presumed guilty (with or without evidence mind you).

But it couldn't last for ever, not in the greedy capitalist world we live in. You see, since capitalist nations are motivated by selfish interests and cannot resist the urge to colonise and commandeer the resources of weaker nations, it is inevitable they will squabble amongst themselves over these resources.

One of the reasons for US belligerency towards Iran, besides the smokescreen of weapons proliferation and supporting terrorism is also because the Europeans have been ignoring America's Helms-Burton Act to deal with Iran. This law forbids any company to deal with Cuba and Iran, countries which America considers as misfits namely.

America has as such the fat oil and gas contracts have been going to EU countries rather than American ones. For example, in March 1999 the French oil company, Elf Aquitaine and Agip of Italy, sealed a deal with Tehran to exploit the Darood oil and gas field in the northern Gulf.

Even if American companies wanted a piece of the action they weren't allowed to benefit because of their own country's law hindering them.

Now the EU has used the cover story of "constructive engagement" with Iran, rather than US style threats to moderate Iran's "hardliners", to acquire all the lucrative deals. Washington must have thought "well if we can't have it, neither will you". So, by declaring Iran a rogue state it seeks to isolate it once more from the international community and make it difficult for any country to do business with Iran.

No wonder the Europeans are cheesed off (France in particular).

One may ask the question why now? Well, even in America there has been criticism of the Helms-Burton law and the harmful effects it is having on American business interests. With open season declared on Islam and Muslims there is no better time than now to consolidate many foreign policy objectives, this being one of them. Implicating Iran in the arms shipment to Palestine serves as an added reason to isolate them now.

The Bush administration must have reasoned it is better to take on the "hardliners" than to play ball with the "moderates".

This is the nature of nations built upon secular capitalist creeds. It is the same capitalist greed that motivates Russia, China and France to speak against the 10 year sanctions on Iraq. Since, if and when the sanctions are eventually lifted these countries are counting on Iraq to remember her good friends in good times as they remembered her in bad times. An axis of interests, how convenient. The US on the other hand backs the Iraqi National Congress (INC) which it is currently nurturing to help overthrow Saddam. No prizes there for guessing who will get the reconstruction and oil contracts if they manage to overthrow him. Source: Salihu Mahmud talgans@yahoo.com ]