VITERBO: Tutti, ma proprio tutti, ormai, abbiamo sentito parlare del GDPR, ossia della General Data Protection Regulation. Chi non ha sentito parlare di questo acronimo, però, ha sicuramente percepito che “qualcosa” è cambiato. La privacy stessa, il suo concetto intrinseco, ontologico, ed il suo modo di manifestarsi, sono cambiati. Continue reading “Tra GDPR e rischi della rete. Il 24 maggio verrà presentato a Viterbo un libro sulla nuova normativa in materia di privacy.” »
Fabio Mini, generale, docente e saggista, ha tenuto, nello scorso weekend, una lezione al master in Intelligence dell’Università della Calabria, introdotto dal direttore Mario Caligiuri. Mini ha esordito dicendo che più sono le incertezze e maggiori risorse e deroghe alle procedure si richiedono per farvi fronte. Ha quindi evidenziato che le capacità previsionali della politica democratica si orientano nell’immediato.
Sotto tale aspetto, nelle grandi potenze, ma anche nei paesi meno orientati alla militarizzazione come l’Italia, l’apparato militare-industriale insieme all’intelligence e ad altri apparati istituzionali partecipano alla formazione del Deep State che mantiene obiettivi chiari e costanti prescindendo dalle temporanee maggioranze parlamentari, ma talvolta anche dalle obiettive mutazioni geopolitiche. A tale proposito, ha messo in rilievo la fornitura dei 130 aerei F35, che costano adesso 130 milioni di euro l’uno, che partono da progetti avviati negli anni ’90 e che ora non ci possiamo permettere e difficilmente potremo utilizzare nel quadro di una politica di difesa quanto meno erratica.
Varie volte su European Affairs Magazine ci siamo occupati di intelligence e della possibilità che questa scienza umana potesse assurgere al rango di disciplina universitaria (leggi, ad esempio, qui, qui, ed in parte anche qui). In questo ambito, pioniere assoluto in Italia è stata l’Università della Calabria che, prima con il Master di 2° Livello in Intelligence e, poi addirittura con un corso di laurea in Intelligence ed Analisi del rischio ha riconosciuto l’importanza di questa materia. Continue reading “La Calabria e l’intelligence.” »
È stato comunicato ufficialmente oggi dall’OSCE che la 19esima conferenza sull’Open Journalism in Asia Centrale (che si terrà a Tashkent dal 17 al 19 ottobre), verrà presieduta dal Rappresentante dell’OSCE per la libertà di stampa, Harlem Désir, che ricopre questo incarico dal luglio scorso. La conferenza sull’Open journalism nell’Asia Centrale si tiene ogni anno e garantisce un form per la discussione di questioni relative alla libertà di espressione ed integrai
doveri istituzionali dell’OSCE nello specifico settore, ovviamente in territorio centroasiatico. Désir incontrerà nella circostanza alti funzionari degli Stati aderenti e rappresentanti della società civile e dei media per discutere, in particolare, dello stato della libertà di stampa in Uzbekistan ed in tutte le aree di competenza dell’OSCE. Ma oltre alla rappresentativa uzbeka, lo stato dell’arte in materia verrà discusso in questi due giorni da oltre 100 partecipanti, tra cui attori istituzionali, giornalisti ed accademici provenienti da Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan e Turkmenistan, con rappresentanti provenienti persino dalla Mongolia ed altri esperti internazionali. Il Rappresentante OSCE ha il compito di monitorare gli sviluppi della libertà di stampa e di espressione presso i 57 Stati membri dell’OSCE e di denunciare le violazioni in tali settori, indicando anche quali siano le prescrizioni dell’OSCE in materia. E proprio oggi, per esempio, ha chiesto alle autorità maltesi di indagare velocemente sull’omicidio di Daphne Caruana Galizia, giornalista uccisa in questi giorni sull’isola. Nel formulare le sue condoglianze alla famiglia, Désir si è detto “profondamente scioccato ed offeso dall’omicidio” della giornalista, che ha definito “fiera, investigatrice e coraggiosa”, ed ha chiesto che tutto il mondo conosca chi ne ha cagionato la morte.
La collega era infatti autrice su Malta Indipendent, e scriveva su un suo blog personale. È morta questo lunedì (16 ottobre) pomeriggio in una macchina appena noleggiata, che è esplosa con lei a bordo: aveva denunciato di essere stata minacciata di morte due settimane prima. Già da febbraio – si legge in una nota dell’OSCE – l’ufficio del Rappresentante per la libertà di stampa aveva invitato le autorità maltesi a proteggere la giornalista e la libertà di stampa, in generale. È pur vero che lo stesso Rappresentante – cha ribadito come “silenziare i giornalisti uccidendoli sia un fatto inaccettabile” ha apprezzato sin da subito le indagini immediatamente avviate dagli inquirenti della polizia maltese ed ha ulteriormente espresso apprezzamento per il fatto che il Primo Ministro Muscat e le altre autorità abbiano immediatamente condannato l’attacco. Non esistono delle stime ufficiali e universalmente condivise sullo stato della libertà di stampa nel mondo. Annualmente l’organizzazione Reporters san frontières stila una classifica di 180 Paesi: quest’anno l’Italia si è classificata solamente al 52° posto. Ma come vengono compilati questi elenchi? Ce lo spiega in un suo articolo di aprile u. s. la giornalista de La Stampa Nadia Ferrigo. L’ONG per giornalisti invia ai suoi partners dei questionari da compilare in merito a “pluralismo, indipendenza dei media, contesto e autocensura, legislatura, trasparenza, infrastrutture e abusi”. All’ultimo posto? Ovviamente la Corea del Nord, di cui abbiamo svariate volte esaltato le prodezze geopolitiche su questa rivista. Ma come mai l’Italia è in una zona quasi di pericolo? Parrebbe che i giornalisti si sentano in parte minacciati dalla pressioni politiche, ed optino talvolta per non esprimersi. La colpa, sembrerebbe, è da attribuirsi ad alcuni partiti populisti, che hanno assunto talvolta posizioni anti-media. Ma per correttezza (e non per paura) preferiamo non entrare nella discussione politica.
Apprezziamo invece il lavoro dell’OSCE e ci rammarichiamo davvero per la scomparsa di una collega, vittima della sopraffazione e dell’ignoranza che, purtroppo, non hanno bandiera e non hanno colore. Anzi: forse hanno proprio tutte le bandiere e tutti i colori. Alla sua famiglia ed ai suoi colleghi, le espressioni più sentite della redazione di European Affairs.
Ci fa piacere e ci entusiasma, invece, come proprio oggi anche l’UE abbia ribadito l’importanza dei diritti umani e, tra questi, quello ad esprimersi liberamente. Il Consiglio “Affari esteri”, in data odierna, ha discusso infatti della politica dell’UE in materia di diritti umani e delle modalità migliori per promuoverli nei contesti bilaterali e multilaterali. L’Istituzione europea ha ribadito l’impegno dell’UE a promuovere e proteggere i diritti umani ovunque nel mondo, adottando conclusioni sulla revisione intermedia del piano d’azione per i diritti umani e la democrazia. Ha adottato anche la sua relazione annuale sui diritti umani e la democrazia nel mondo nel 2016. Ma questa è (anche) un’altra storia.
Prime Minister Haider Al-Abadi chaired a meeting with Iraq’s National Security Council, where the group of civilian officials and military officers discussed the Mosul offensive to ensure “final victory”. “The Council discussed right axis of liberation battle, triumphs achieved while enhancing battle requirement and ensuring the final victory elements were confirmed in the meeting” was posted on the prime minister’s website.
Azerbaijan’s central bank could revise interest rates next year if needed to preserve macroeconomic stability, the bank’s governor, Elman Rustamov, said on Tuesday. “In 2017, in connection with the need to achieve our objective of macroeconomic stability and banking sector liquidity, the central bank of Azerbaijan will increase the scale of operations to sterilise the money supply, (and) if necessary, interest rates will be revised,” he said.
This is the second of five articles in the series “Athens: The Crisis Within the Crisis” (click here) INSERT LINK: http://www.europeanaffairs.media/2016/05/28/athens-crisis-within-cris
In the middle of an industrial area is Eleonas Hospitality Camp for Refugees. Friendly men in worn working clothes happily indicate the way, along a very dusty road, where one has to dodge rattling cars, and watch out for steel trash on the ground. Suddenly, through an opening in a wall, appears a village of simple barracks. The lazy police dog lets me through, and while the camp workers check my permission, I have a look around.
Within the walls
The area is covered with asphalt. The barracks are standardized, industrially produced, mounted on concrete bollards, with roofs made from tin plates. They look old and worn out, grass and flowers growing around the bollards. This is the old part of the camp, which was build about a year ago. Many children are playing around, and there are more women than men, most of them with headscarf. Some are queuing in front of one barrack called AΠOΘHKH (“apothiki”), where something is distributed. The people in the queue wear cheap clothes, a random mix. But there are also some more elegantly dressed “middle class refugees”. Some are coming and going through the gate, apparently registering at an office barrack. Most of the people look like Syrians, some like Afghans. In-between the other tasks, one office worker makes several phone calls to the ministry, while I also call my contact in the state administration. Eventually, one camp worker brings me for a tour.
A guided tour
The oldest part of the camp was made at the beginning of the refugee crisis. Here is one part for families, another for singles. Next to the family barracks is one barrack for the Red Cross / Red Crescent, another one for the interpreter’s association and the SOS Children Villages. Some young men are playing football in the sunshine. Besides the barracks for singles, we find the improvised office of the UNHCR, and a barrack for food distribution. The food is delivered from a large kitchen that belongs to the navy. A few people are standing in line to pick up their lunch packages. At dinnertime, there is much more activity, my guide tells me. Next to the main camp is a new one. It was made to accommodate refugees who lived in tents at Pireus Port. The army has installed the barracks, with water and wastewater system. The new camp is divided by country of origin: one part for persons from Syria, another for persons from Afghanistan, and a small part for persons from Iraq. It is easy for people to interact with someone from the same place as themselves. My guide leaves, and I head for the Syrian section.
The “Syrian quarter”
Between the barracks are narrow paths. Under the laundry, a small boy is playing. He points a plastic machine gun at me. The “Syrian quarter” of the camp is overcrowded. Only the very basic infrastructure is in place. The wastewater system is solid enough for disease control, but each toilet has to be shared by several families. I meet two young men who look after their daughters and nieces. They tell that they get food every day, but they are worried about the nutritional value of eating mostly pasta. The meat comes from donations. My guide had told me that all food donations have to be delivered in the original packages from the supermarket, for food safety reasons. The refugees show me vacuum packed chicken with mould inside. The fresh food had become uneatable before arriving to them. Local people donate clothes, shoes, and products of personal hygiene. There are plenty of clothes, and it is a logistic task to put winter clothes on storage and getting the summer clothes out. One father had brought his sick daughter to the Red Cross barrack, but they advised him to go to the Ambolokipi Hospital. This treats poor Greeks and asylum seekers, but is hard to find for a foreigner. With many technical worries, there is a need for practical and mental relief. Eight youngsters arrive with drums and other instruments, led by girl and a boy who are somewhat older. The boy wears a black t-shirt with a red star. The young people start to play with the children in the camp.
The camp is run by the Ministry of Immigration, under the Syriza government. It provides the most vital services, but not much more. This is achieved with very little funding, by mobilizing the kitchen from the navy, plumbers from the army, social services from the United Nations, health services from Non-Governmental Organizations, and cultural activities from volunteers. Old resources are combined in innovative ways, to provide vital services.
An old woman comes up to my guide, complaining about the lack of electrical power. “Ma fi kahraba” she says in Arabic, pointing to the cables. The worker explains in simple English that she does not know when it would be fixed. The electric power comes from the municipality. After the new part of the camp was build, the municipality ha s failed to upgrade the capacity of the electric power supply, resulting in constant power breaks. We look around: The camp is located in the middle of an industrial area. The weak power supply cannot be due to bad capacity, but must be a result of absent coordination.
As I leave the camp, it appears that a third section is being constructed. People with vehicles from the fire brigade are involved in setting up new barracks. Behind them are some men with military vehicles, busily installing new water and wastewater tubes.
Photo: From the “Syrian quarter” within Eleonas refugee camp (by Helge Hiram Jensen)
The mainstream rhetoric in the Middle East tends to deliberately or unintentionally portray that the Russian have always posed an imminent threat to Israel’s security neglecting the significant role the Soviets played in the creation of the Jewish State. Without such support at the very beginning, Israel would not have been born.
Unsurprisingly, the recent military coordination between both countries regarding the on-going proxy war in Syria did not emerge out of nowhere and is not only based on common interests, but can be traced back to the history of the formation of Israel in which Russia played a vital, if often forgotten, role.
Many believed that the birth of Israel owed a lot to Stalin’s Russia. However, others argued that this was unlikely since the Stalinist period was the toughest era in the modern history of Russia due to the restrictive, intolerant and totalitarian policies that Stalin adopted. A number of discriminatory policies against Soviet Jews were carried out during the ‘Soviet Jewry’ period in the early 1950s, which led to a total embargo on Jewish immigration from Eastern Europe.
Taken into consideration the large number of Jewish officers who notably contributed in Soviet arms production during WWII, it would have been a gigantic advantage the fledgling state to increase its manpower both in number and experience.
Despite this, Stalin played an essential role in the formation of Israel particularly during the vote on the UN Partition Plan in 1947, where his Ambassador Andrei Gromyko deliver an unprecedented speech that addressed the horrible fate that Jews have undergone in Europe and their right to have their own state. Moreover, Stalin ordered his allies in the Eastern Communist States to support the establishment of Israel as the decisive bloc that provided the two thirds majority required to win the vote at the UN. Until the late 1940s, Stalin’s Russia supported Israel politically, militarily, and demographically.
Demographically, the USSR made a decisive contribution in increasing Israel’s manpower in which it was one-third of total inhabitants at that time. Stalin supported the Jewish Agency immigration operations, where almost 67% of Jewish immigrants who arrived in Palestine came from Eastern Europe. He also supported Israel politically at the UN through voting against resolution 194, which demanded immediate return of 700,000 Palestinian refugees forcefully expelled from their homeland and absolved Israel of responsibility and blamed Britain.
Militarily, Stalin permitted the Skoda factory to supply the struggling Israeli forces with heavier artillery during the 1948 War. By the early 1950s, Israel received military aid from Stalin’s Russia that exceeded its expectation without having to worry about its relationship with Western powers. Even David Ben-Gurion publicly announced that without the Soviet support at the very beginning, Israel would have never survived the full-scale attack of Arab armies.
However, the explicit objectives of the Soviets support to Israel remained ambiguous. So why did Joseph Stalin support Israel despite of his totalitarian policy? What was his strategy?
It was obvious that Stalin had two complicit strategic ends. Firstly, he aimed at supporting the creation of Israel in order to bring disorder and political unrest to the region and hence, seize the influence of the British Empire. Secondly, he believed that Israel would become a strong ally to the USSR particularly with its socialist ideology that it adopted in the first few years of its establishment.
In the 1950s, Golda Meir put Israel in a neutral position during the Cold War and refused to militarily participate alongside the US in the Korean War. However, Israel relation with Moscow begun to deteriorate because of a number of political events that provoked Stalin’s power, particularly the incident of 1953 Doctor’s Plot.
Israel-USSR relation encountered another drop following Stalin’s death in 1953, where his successors relatively turned against Israel through signing arm deals with Arab states such as the Egyptian-Czechoslovak deal in 1955. As late as 1980s, the USSR signed billion of dollars of arm deals with its Arab clients, which altered the balance of power in the region. As Ariel Sharon declared that Israel faced two sources of existential threats; the Arab military build-ups and the Soviet expansionist policy that supported the Arabs politically and militarily.
Following the dissolution of the USSR, Israeli-Russian relation was restored to the extent that both countries have been sharing common interests in the periphery of the Middle East. The recent bilateral efforts between both countries to avoid unintended conflicts of their airpower in Syria, explicitly demonstrate that Putin’s Russia is still committed to Israel’s security. Perhaps the recent targeted-killing strike of Samir Al-Kuntar in Syria portrays the close Israeli-Russian relation. But not as close as in late 1940s, where, without the Soviet support at the very beginning, Israel would not have seen the light.
Migration flows unstoppable created by war and poor economic conditions of many southern states of the world are pushing the frontiers of the European Community. The debate on how to react to this problem unfolds between acceptance and rejection in a Europe that is suffering the most severe economic and demographic crisis of the modern era.
Our project wants to make a report along the borders of Europe to tell the chronicle of this phenomenon, collect the testimonies of migrants, citizens and the institutions of the various countries border giving a chance to those who follow the reports of being able to compare the different policies and listen to all the voices in the game without any mediation.
The young journalists of our editorial staff in teams of two will travel to the places where the flows are more intense and the reaction of the institutions more waiting while preparing a team of analysts and journalists will gather all the information with research on open sources.
EUROPEAN AFFAIRS is an online magazine published by the Centro Studi Roma 3000, a non-profit organization that promotes the socio-economic studies and research projects for new models of sustainable development.
The report should contribute to the analysis of the phenomenon of migration flows in support of new models of welcome.
The support required will be used for travel expenses and production in addition to the purchase of any material helping to achieve.
Editorial Board: Alessandro Conte, James Pratali Viviana Passalacqua
Producer: Alessandro Conte
Mounting: 3K Production
Original Music: Francesco Verdinelli
Reporter: Giacomo Pratali Viviana Passalacqua, Sabiena Stefanj, Paola Longobardi, Carla Melis, Leonardo Pizzuti, Fabrizio Ciannamea
As announced following the International Conference in Rome, the Libyan factions, all of Tripoli and Tobruk, signed deal for unitt government in Skhirat (Morocco).The Presidential Council, composed of president Sarraj Fayez, three vicepresidents on behalf of Tripolitania, Cyrenaica and Fezzan and other five representatives, have to form new government within 40 days. Moreover, the UN Security Council will vote terms of military operation in the next days, to make safe Tripoli and train local forces. This international coalition will be led by Italy, while Great Britain will send 1000 troops.
December 17 the 90 representatives of the Assembly of Tobruk and 27 of the GNC Tripoli signed the agreement. The new Presidential Council, in addition to choose new government, will have to convince the presidents of two parliaments to accept the deal. Among the problems which should be solved, there is also the military intervention because several factions prefer the training of Libyan army, rather than a foreign operation.
The most important perspective is about the presence of a unique executive to allow, after Syria, to open another front to fight the Islamic State in Libya, where Sirte became the Caliphate stronghold.
Some US troops are already present, as reported by many international media. As well as France and Great Britain, which reached Libya through southern borders.
And Italy? As leaked out by Italian Defence, the non-intervention in Syria, the contribution to the NATO mission in Iraq (450 soldiers will defende the strategic Mosul Dam), clearly show Italian line: optimize the best efforts, humanly and logistically, to the nearest, and therefore more crucial, Libya.