10/23/2016
EU-India Relations: Human Rights as the Fundamental Base for Agreement
The European Union and the Republic of India have been trying to negotiate a bilateral free trade agreement (FTA) for years now. Some believe it would act as a building block for the trading partners. India, being a part of the BRICS-countries, is a growing economy and the EU has to be able to work in cooperation with India in order to keep up with the change. However, the differences in human rights and legislation have postponed the negotiations time and time again.
The western views on human rights in their foreign policies have significantly affected the international relations in the post-cold war setting. The term “human right” is a powerful concept that adapts itself to the needs of different countries as well as their people. Human rights are also widely referred to as basic rights, fundamental rights and inherent rights. They are necessary for sustaining human life and promoting the progress of humanity. The human rights policies can, however, be effected by e.g. the internal political structure and levels of social, technological and economic development in various countries. In addition, the protection of human rights is what most national and international laws strive to achieve.
In India human rights are seen as a matter of great national pride. This has a lot to do with the Hinduist concept of Dharma. It signifies behaviours that are considered to be in order with rta, the order that makes life and universe possible, and includes duties, rights, laws, conduct, virtues and “the right way of living”. Taking into consideration the importance of religion, it surely comes as no surprise that India has been unwilling to consider the legislative changes that the EU has set as a requirement for the continuing of the discussion on trade.
Finally, we can consider the position of the trade partners. Is the EU really in a position to make demand despite its economic struggles and possible deteriorating power in politics? On the other hand, India’s aspirations to grow might also face a brick wall unless the country can compromise with the existing economic giants such as the EU and the United States. If India and the EU manage to realise the power of their combined recourses and realistic position of strength, the agreement has the potential to be the start of something great for both sides.
Emmi Ilmanen, Journalist (INTA)
Saturday pictures
Today was all about committee work! All delegates were working hard for their resolutions.
Click here for the facebook page for more pictures!
Tim
Click here for the facebook page for more pictures!
 |
| ©Nicole Nordström |
 |
| ©Paula Närvänen |
 |
| © Amir Abdelamir |
 |
| ©Amir Abdelamir |
 |
| ©Eerika Vihlman |
 |
| ©Eerika Vihlman |
 |
| ©Emmi Ilmanen |
 |
| ©Emmi Ilmanen |
 |
| ©Klara Forsblom |
 |
| ©Klara Forsblom |
 |
| ©Matti Lötjönen |
 |
| ©Matti Lötjönen |
 |
| ©Paula Närvänen |
 |
| ©Tim Tomic |
 |
| ©Tim Tomic |
 |
| ©Tim Tomic |
 |
| ©Tim Tomic |
10/22/2016
Brexit – the future of Europe?
The first promises of a Britain-wide EU membership referendum were made in early 2013 by the British prime minister at the time, David Cameron. Although his own views did not match with those of the more eurosceptic members in his political party, the conservatives, he was obliged to recognise the growing demand for a more cautious approach to the EU in the United Kingdom. Another factor that was likely to have had an influence on his statements was the growing popularity of the anti-EU UK Independence Party (UKIP). The conservatives felt they had to take a slightly stricter approach in order to keep their voters in the upcoming elections. When a victory came in the 2015 elections a lot was expected from the conservatives. After a few failed tries to negotiate a privileged position for the UK in the European union, more extreme measures were taken into consideration. In early 2016 the date for the referendum on the membership of the EU was set for June of the same year.
Britain was separated into two campaigns: “remain” and “leave”. The end result of the elections was 51,9% in favour of leaving the European union to 48,1% against. The state was divided regionally with England and Wales supporting the “leave”-act while Northern Ireland and Scotland still wished to remain in the politico-economic union. The “Brexit”-referendum raised the question of another referendum on Scotland’s independence after the country chose to remain as a part of the UK in the 2014 vote.
The integration of the European union has had a notable influence on the politics of its member states. The EU as a system is exceptional with the member states having voluntarily given away a part of their self-determination. It is clear that the decreased amount of national decision-making together with a poor knowledge on the work of the European union has increased the amount of criticism towards the EU and its objectives. The integration is facing a more demanding time where the citizens feel cautious about the actions of the EU. The amount of people wishing to leave is most certainly not lessened by the fact that the citizens of the European union do not share any common identity or feeling of unity that would be prevalent in all member states.
There are a few reasons why the Brits might be seeing the EU in a negative light. Firstly, the feeling of not being able to have your voice heard in a theoretically democratic environment such as the EU can make a person feel a bit frustrated. Some suggest that the EU might be suffering from a democratic deficit which means that European citizens feel like they have no realistic chances of making a difference through voting for example. Secondly, the EU’s recent struggles with its economy as well as the refugee crisis have played a part in the change in attitude. Another point that was brought up a lot in the discussions before the referendum was the freedom of movement. However, leaving the EU might not completely destroy any and all chances of working or studying in the UK if certain concessions are made in return by the EU.
However, the fate of the United Kingdom is yet to be sealed. In theory, the referendum was non-binding, but ignoring the results of it would be very risky and one can only imagine the kind of picture it would give of the state of British democracy. A fact worth mentioning is that many people of power in the UK are not very fond of the whole idea. Whether we are going to be seeing a ‘hard Brexit’ or a ‘non-Brexit Brexit’ is a question that cannot yet be answered. The latter would mean an official parting with the continuing of tight cooperation, which seems likely considering the difficult positions of the EU and the UK.
In conclusion, the vote summed up feelings of both frustration and helplessness. In case the UK really decides to follow through with their plan to leave the EU, it will be the first case of disintegration. The process will be long and painful. The future of the European union is left to be reshaped and unity is needed more than ever to resolve the problem and find a resolution that will benefit us in the future.
Emmi Ilmanen
Britain was separated into two campaigns: “remain” and “leave”. The end result of the elections was 51,9% in favour of leaving the European union to 48,1% against. The state was divided regionally with England and Wales supporting the “leave”-act while Northern Ireland and Scotland still wished to remain in the politico-economic union. The “Brexit”-referendum raised the question of another referendum on Scotland’s independence after the country chose to remain as a part of the UK in the 2014 vote.
The integration of the European union has had a notable influence on the politics of its member states. The EU as a system is exceptional with the member states having voluntarily given away a part of their self-determination. It is clear that the decreased amount of national decision-making together with a poor knowledge on the work of the European union has increased the amount of criticism towards the EU and its objectives. The integration is facing a more demanding time where the citizens feel cautious about the actions of the EU. The amount of people wishing to leave is most certainly not lessened by the fact that the citizens of the European union do not share any common identity or feeling of unity that would be prevalent in all member states.
There are a few reasons why the Brits might be seeing the EU in a negative light. Firstly, the feeling of not being able to have your voice heard in a theoretically democratic environment such as the EU can make a person feel a bit frustrated. Some suggest that the EU might be suffering from a democratic deficit which means that European citizens feel like they have no realistic chances of making a difference through voting for example. Secondly, the EU’s recent struggles with its economy as well as the refugee crisis have played a part in the change in attitude. Another point that was brought up a lot in the discussions before the referendum was the freedom of movement. However, leaving the EU might not completely destroy any and all chances of working or studying in the UK if certain concessions are made in return by the EU.
However, the fate of the United Kingdom is yet to be sealed. In theory, the referendum was non-binding, but ignoring the results of it would be very risky and one can only imagine the kind of picture it would give of the state of British democracy. A fact worth mentioning is that many people of power in the UK are not very fond of the whole idea. Whether we are going to be seeing a ‘hard Brexit’ or a ‘non-Brexit Brexit’ is a question that cannot yet be answered. The latter would mean an official parting with the continuing of tight cooperation, which seems likely considering the difficult positions of the EU and the UK.
In conclusion, the vote summed up feelings of both frustration and helplessness. In case the UK really decides to follow through with their plan to leave the EU, it will be the first case of disintegration. The process will be long and painful. The future of the European union is left to be reshaped and unity is needed more than ever to resolve the problem and find a resolution that will benefit us in the future.
Emmi Ilmanen
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)