Transatlantic Politics

It’s common popular knowledge that Skype calls are allegedly un-spyeable. Investigative journalists frequently tell their sources to use this Estonian-designed computer-to-computer telephone system in order to avoid being wire-tapped. Provided the computer itself is bug-free, as well as the webcam/microphone used. And of course, with no mobile phone around, which can be used as an eavesdropping device, even if it’s turned off.

A recent decision of the European Union’s judicial coordination body - Eurojust - indicates that popular knowledge is not so far from the truth. Eurojust decided to support Italian prosecutors who claim that their anti-Mafia and drug dealers investigations would be so much easier if Skype allowed them to tap into conversations.

So far, VoIP programs are not subject to EU or US wiretapping or data retention legislation. Skype told EUobserver it had "extensively debriefed Eurojust on our law enforcement programme and capabilities" and said it did cooperate with police and prosecutors "where legally and technically possible."

German authorities apparently also tried to tap into Skype conversations and commissioned an IT firm to develop Trojans which could perform this task, according to documents obtained by Piraten Partei, an European movement promoting freedom on the Internet. However, the Bavarian’s efforts proved unsuccessful, as the German police publicly admitted.

Of course, Eurojust claims that wiretapping Skype and other voice-over-IP programs (VoIP) such as Yahoo messenger talk, InternetCalls etc, would only take place as part of criminal investigations, with a court order. But once they have the power and it is technically and legally possible, who can really guarantee that no abuses will happen?

Update: After some media frenzy on the matter, Eurojust decided to drop its plans and announced it had issued the statement "prematurely" and that it was "incorrect". Lovely EU institutions, aren’t they? Very professional and consistent…

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

"A dream president", "what a great victory for democracy", "the hope we needed" - were some of the lines you could hear on the night of Nov. 4th in Brussels, where over 2000 expats and internationals partied in a posh hotel as the results from overseas were coming in.

Great expectations, and false ones, as some might argue, meaning that the disappointment is set to hit Europe accordingly.

Just a recent example of this utopian approach: A talk show  on the Belgian national tv earlier today was entitled "Will president Obama change the world?" On the show were US ambassador to NATO Kurt Volker (speaking in great French, by the way) and Belgian politicians.

From the debate it became pretty clear that the moment president Obama will "pick up the phone and call up" European leaders to ask them to commit more troops to Afghanistan, the EU-Obama honey moon will end.

In Belgium "the army must first and foremost seek peace", as one Socialist lady senator put it. Quite some ally there for the US…

"Diplomacy first", meaning "talking to the Talibans" was the idea advocated by former Belgian foreign minister Louis Michel, currently an EU commissioner for development and humanitarian. Yet Mr Michel would back a decision of sending more troops to Afghanistan if the decision was taken within NATO after a "real dialogue" of the Europeans with the US, he said, acclaiming that the "leadership" of the US in world affairs was over and "multilateralism" was dawning again.

Interesting were also the remarks on EU-Russia and US-Russia relations. The announcement of Russian president Dmitri Medvedev that he would deploy short-range missiles in Kaliningrad - a Russian enclave on the shores of the Baltic Sea squeezed between Poland and Lithuania - was presented by the host of the talk show as just an "odd way to congratulate the new US president on November 5th".

Mr Michel stressed that for the EU it’s "a matter of priority" to resume talks with Russia - suspended after the Georgian war - since this was the "bigger and very important neighbor" of Europe. As to the fears of the Baltic states and Poland - these were only "fuelled" by the outgoing Bush administration and Barack Obama would certainly adopt a more "flexible" attitude towards Russia, he argued.

The Green senator went even further, claiming that the Bush administration had played Eastern and Western Europe against each-other (not Russia!!!) and that all this would soon be over once president Obama takes over.

The Belgian politicians seemed also already disappointed with Mr Obama’s nuanced stance on Iran lately and still hoped he would sit down and talk to the mullahs and Ahmadinejad, as diplomacy was, in their view, the only solution to stop Tehran from aquiring nuclear bombs. And here, again, Mr Michel said the EU should "speak on one voice" and show more initiative.

The hypocrisy of EU "initiative" and "soft power" as opposed to the alleged blunt "hard power of the US" can be seen in Georgia: Russia has basically taken over for good the two breakaway provinces - although the war was only about one of them - has massed up thousands of troops on these territories and meanwhile everybody in Western Europe is happy to go back to business as usual with the Kremlin. Lithuania’s opposition to this move is expected to be silenced tomorrow at a meeting of the EU foreign affairs meeting, ahead of an EU-Russia summit this Thursday.

Rembember that op-ed in the WSJ entitled  "Stop! or we’ll say stop again!"? This is how the EU acts towards Russia. And this is how it acts towards Iran as well.

Luckily, president Obama will not take onboard his team day-dreaming, tree-hugging European politicians. And he should not fear to disappoint them.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

The Eastern European countries are engaging in what seems to be a race to the bottom in the implementation of a flat tax policy & rate. Trying to attract ore foreign investments than its neighboring country Romania, who adopted the flat tax at a rate of 16% in 2005, Bulgaria now announced it will introduce a flat tax of 10% in January 2008, the lowest rate so far. But other Eastern European countries are contemplating the idea of adopting this fiscal policy, and one has to wonder how low they can go with the taxation bar. For instance, the Czech Prime Minister announced in March that a 15% flat tax is "certain" to be introduced next year.

Implemented correctly, the flat tax policy has proved to be successful, at least in the Baltic states (which had higher rates though, between 24%-26%) when combined with strong emphasis on collecting the taxes and cutting red tape. In Romania, though, the policy is a mixed bag, the current Liberal minority government being backed by the Socialists in Parliament, has recently adopted a new pensions law that will most probably increase the social contributions and other hidden taxes. Cutting red tape has not been a priority so far, and foreign investors, although drawn by the new EU country, complain about the lack of transparency, bureaucracy and lingering corruption.

In the same race to the bottom spirit of Bulgaria, the Balkan country of Macedonia lowered its flat tax from 12% to 10% this year, claiming it's a "new business heaven in Europe". According to the Index of Economic Freedom,

"Macedonia is ranked 32nd out of 41 countries in the European region, and its overall score is lower than the regional average. Macedonia faces many challenges, including weak freedom from government, investment freedom, property rights, and freedom from corruption. Government expenditures are high, although state-owned businesses do not account for a significant portion of total revenue. The court system is prone to corruption, political interference, and inefficiency, partially as a result of the country's political turmoil."

Macedonia's agressive PR campaign might be thus a slight overstatement, though perfectly understandable as it is coming from a country that wants to join the EU and become more prosperous. Still, just by lowering the taxation bar and failing on deeper economic and political reforms doesn't do the trick.  Not in the long run.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

There is something about the Baltic states… something refreshing, inspiring and courageous.

Their recent history after the breakup of the Soviet Union is an economic success story with double-digit GDP growth rates. Estonia is the most high-tech society in Europe - with e-government & online voting - having earned the nickname "E-stonia".

Yet listening to the their three foreign ministers speaking about the 85 years of US-Baltic relations at the Heritage Foundation last Thursday, some differences do become obvious. Especially concerning their relationship with Russia.

The most pro-Russian stance was the Lithuanian one. Foreign Minister Petras Vaitiekunas, with a strong Russian accent, underlined several times that "Russia is not the USSR anymore, it differs profoundly" when the discussions were becoming too critical of Moscow. He also spoke of a "political brand of the three Baltic states", a brand that was not reflected in their very different views on Russia.

"We need Russia, so in our relationship, patience is the word" - Petras Vaitiekunas, Lithuanian Foreign Minister

Trying to strike a balance, the Latvian Foreign Minister Artis Pabriks first payed his tribute to the role of the US in the Baltic states' quest for freedom:

"All our achievements, in our economies, but also on a personal and professional level, could not have been accomplished if we weren't free countries. During the Soviet occupation, we used every opportunity to listen to Radio Free Europe, despite the Russian scrambling, and we really believed that one day we will be free countries." 

But talking about the Latvian relationship to Russia, Pabriks said that "this relationship shouldn't be a prisoner of the past".

Latvia just recently ratified a border-treaty with Russia, and the Foreign Minister proudly announced that his Russian counterpart Sergei Lavrov promised to visit Riga, Latvia's capital, soon.  Of the three Baltic states, Latvia should be considered the occupier of the middle ground with respect to how they view Russia.

A tougher stance came from Urmas Paet, the Estonian Foreign Minister, who was much more outspoken and than his Slavic counterparts.

"Russia is building up its foreign policy through confrontation with the US & EU, and through confrontations with its neighbors and the new democracies surrounding it." 

The recent row with Russia over the displacement of a Soviet statue and the following cyber-attacks against Estonian websites prompted the government in Tallinn, Estonia's capital, to take a firm stance against the Kremlin: Estonia successfully pushed to expand NATO powers onto the Internet.

"We experienced three weeks of cyber attacks, with 400 times greater traffic than normal, aimed to completely paralyze our country. The Internet has become the battlefield of the 21st century. It is possible to inflict serious damage in highly digitalized societies, just like a regular attack on conventional infrastructures", explained Paet.

The Estonian Foreign Minister requested that a "legal definition of cyber warefare" be formulated as soon as possible and announced the upcoming opening of a "cyber defense center" in Tallinn. 

Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary of State for European and Eurasian Affairs,  confirmed the fact that "NATO is already working on the technical cooperation"  regarding  "these unconventional threats: Using energy for political aims, cyber attacks or financial pressure", obviously alluding to Russia's new power policies.

"Russia's policy is to surround these countries, to encircle them. The EU is very many things, but certainly not a conquering imperialist force. And isn't it in Russia's best interest to be surrounded by democracies? Russia should have learned from its experience that it is not democracies who pose a threat, but totalitarian regimes and dictatorships." - Daniel Fried, Assistant Secretary of State

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!

There is a good analysis on Eastern Europe in the current Economist edition. Bottom line:

"Overheating economies, slow reform and messy politics make a grim mixture"

Common problems: Governments and politicians totally  lack accountability, there is no real desire to further reform the countries now that they joined the EU, they have no strategy for clever economic and social development (similar to Ireland, for instance). And yet, all 10 former communist countries that joined the EU in 2004 and 2007 have "surprising" GDP growth: the Baltics even over 10%. But politics seem to get in the way of the economic boom:

"The underlying failing is weak and indecisive government across the region, which needs years of good government if it is to catch up. Romania, the second-largest east European EU member, is paralysed by a political feud between the prime minister and president. As a by-product, the upper house of parliament has voted to dismiss the justice minister, Monica Macovei. In sunny economic weather, such political shenanigans would be mere details. In a chillier climate, they make east Europe’s future more worrying."

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!