Tag archive

The Liberal Party

Chrystia Freeland and her Ukraine

in Conflicts · Crisis · Economics · EN · Europe · Euroskepticism · EX-USSR · Money · Nation · Person · Politics · Power · Ukraine · USA · World 45 views / 5 comments

GEOMETR.IT csweb.brookings.edu

In March 24 last year, I was in my Toronto kitchen preparing school lunches for my kids when I learned from my Twitter feed that I had been put on the Kremlin’s list of Westerners who were banned from Russia. This was part of Russia’s retaliation for the sanctions the United States and its allies had slapped on Vladimir Putin’s associates after his military intervention in Ukraine.

For the rest of my grandparents’ lives, they saw themselves as political exiles with a responsibility to keep alive the idea of an independent Ukraine.

Four days earlier, nine people from the U.S. had been similarly blacklisted, including John Boehner, the speaker of the House of Representatives, Harry Reid, then the majority leader of the Senate, and three other senators: John McCain, a long-time critic of Putin, Mary Landrieu of Louisiana, and Dan Coats of Indiana, a former U.S. ambassador to Germany. “While I’m disappointed that I won’t be able to go on vacation with my family in Siberia this summer,” Coats wisecracked, “I am honored to be on this list.”

I, however, was genuinely sad to be barred from Russia. I think of myself as a Russophile. I speak the language and studied the nation’s literature and history in college. I loved living in Moscow in the mid-nineties as bureau chief for the Financial Times and have made a point of returning regularly over the subsequent fifteen years.

I’m also a proud member of the Ukrainian-Canadian community. My maternal grandparents fled western Ukraine after Hitler and Stalin signed their non-aggression pact in 1939. They never dared to go back, but they stayed in close touch with their brothers and sisters and their families, who remained behind. For the rest of my grandparents’ lives, they saw themselves as political exiles with a responsibility to keep alive the idea of an independent Ukraine, which had last existed, briefly, during and after the chaos of the 1917 Russian Revolution. That dream persisted into the next generation, and in some cases the generation after that.

My late mother moved back to her parents’ homeland in the 1990s when Ukraine and Russia, along with the thirteen other former Soviet republics, became independent states. Drawing on her experience as a lawyer in Canada, she served as executive officer of the Ukrainian Legal Foundation, an NGO she helped to found.

My mother was born in a refugee camp in Germany before the family immigrated to western Canada. They were able to get visas thanks to my grandfather’s older sister, who had immigrated between the wars. Her generation, and an earlier wave of Ukrainian settlers, had been actively recruited by successive Canadian governments keen to populate the vast prairies of Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta.

Today, Canada’s Ukrainian community, which is 1.25 million-strong, is significantly larger as a percentage of total population than the one in the United States, which is why it is also a far more significant political force. And that in turn probably accounts for the fact that while there were no Ukrainian-Americans on the Kremlin’s blacklist, four of the thirteen Canadians singled out were of Ukrainian extraction: in addition to myself, my fellow Member of Parliament James Bezan, Senator Raynell Andreychuk, and Paul Grod, who has no national elective role, but is head of the Ukrainian Canadian Congress.

I made the Russian list of the unwelcome as a three-fer: an activist Ukrainian-Canadian, a politician (I was elected to Parliament in 2013 to represent Toronto Centre), and a journalist with a long paper trail that frequently displeased the Kremlin, since I covered Moscow’s brutal war in Chechnya in the 1990s and also wrote a book about the rise of the Russian oligarchs. I interviewed Putin himself in 2000, shortly after he took over as president. When, in 2011, he decided to take the presidency back from his protégé, Dmitry Medvedev, I wrote a column in The New York Times arguing that Putin’s Russia was on its way to becoming a full-fledged dictatorship that would eventually be vulnerable to a popular uprising.

Until March of last year, none of this prevented my getting a Russian visa. I was, on several occasions, invited to moderate panels at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, the Kremlin’s version of the World Economic Forum in Davos. Then, in 2013, Medvedev agreed to let me interview him in an off-the-record briefing for media leaders at the real Davos annual meeting.

Hear Chrystia on Putin’s “Novorossiya”

That turned out to be the last year when Russia, despite its leadership’s increasingly despotic and xenophobic tendencies, was still, along with the major Western democracies and Japan, a member in good standing of the G-8. Russia in those days was also part of the elite global group Goldman Sachs had dubbed the BRICs — the acronym stands for Brazil, Russia, India, and China — the emerging market powerhouses that were expected to drive the world economy forward. Putin was counting on the $50 billion extravaganza of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics to further solidify Russia’s position at the high table of the international community.

President Viktor Yanukovych’s flight from Ukraine in the face of the Maidan uprising, which took place on the eve of the closing day of those Winter Games, astonished and enraged Putin. In his pique, as Putin proudly recalled in a March 2015 Russian government television film, he responded by ordering the takeover of Crimea after an all-night meeting. That occurred at dawn on the morning of February 23, 2014, the finale of the Sochi Olympics. The war of aggression, occupation, and annexation that followed turned out to be the grim beginning of a new era, and what might be the start of a new cold war, or worse.

http://csweb.brookings.edu

GEOMETR.IT

* * *

Америка и Трамп. ПРЯМОЙ, ЕЩЕ ПРЯМЕЕ…

БОЛЬШЕВИЗМ возвращается ?

МЕЛАНИЯ ТРАМП и кризис либерального сознания. Ни хрена себе!..

КОГО НАЗЫВАТЬ ПОПУЛИСТОМ ?

Украина. Майдан. ТЕХАС ДОЛЖНЫ ГРАБИТЬ ТЕХАСЦЫ

Idea «Wielkiej Ukrainy» — 2

Ukraine-Canadian minister and the Global Affairs

Ukrainische Kanadierin bringt eine «diplomatische Eiszeit»

Ukraine: Pro-europäisch? Pro-russisch? Pro-oligarchisch! -1

Ukraine. ‘OTHERNESS’ AND IDENTITY — 2

Ukraine-Canadian minister and the Global Affairs

in Conflicts · Crisis · Economics · EN · Europe · Euroskepticism · EX-USSR · Money · Nation · Person · Politics · Power · Ukraine · USA · World 17 views / 0 comments

GEOMETR.IT  opencanada.org

A cabinet shuffle within the Trudeau government on Tuesday saw a change in leadership for Global Affairs Canada, with Chrystia Freeland, former minister of international trade, replacing party stalwart Stéphane Dion as minister of foreign affairs.

Freeland, a multilingual former journalist whose star has been rising in the Liberal Party since her election as an MP in 2013, is now the third woman ever to hold the post — and the first female Liberal to do so.

“Truly humbled,” Freeland tweeted after her swearing in. “I will continue each and every day to represent the best of Canada around the world.»

Other moves were made in the shuffle that suggest the government is re-positioning itself on key international files: in a high-level appointment, John McCallum has been named Canada’s ambassador to Beijing, leaving his post as immigration minister (he will be replaced by Ahmed Hussen, Canada’s first Somali-Canadian MP), and François-Philippe Champagne, a champion of liberal economic policy, will replace Freeland as trade minister.

On Thursday, it was announced that Transport Minister Marc Garneau will take over from Freeland as chair the Cabinet Committee on Canada-United States Relations.

The ministerial changes, made 14 months after Justin Trudeau’s government took office, are widely seen as a reaction to the election of Donald Trump in the United States and the uncertainty that comes with it.

With questions surrounding the future of the North American Free Trade Agreement and the Canada-U.S. auto industry, in Freeland the government gets a minister who has extensive connections in the U.S., whose trade experience makes her well-positioned to protect Canada’s interests and whose views often match the prime minister’

Some experts failed to see a coherent strategy for foreign affairs under Dion, and there were a few instances over past months where Dion’s pronouncements differed from those of others in government.

Freeland’s number one challenge this year will undoubtedly be managing relations with the U.S., but she will also face a myriad of other foreign policy issues: navigating Canada’s relationship with China and Russia, for example (the latter which she is barred from entering), and overseeing a department many still consider to be reeling under cuts made by the Harper government.

As Freeland takes up her new post, here are five things to know about her:

  1. She got her professional start as a journalist.

Freeland received a B.A. in history and literature from Harvard University, and was a Rhodes Scholar at Oxford University, where she earned a Master’s degree. At 21, while on exchange from Oxford at the University of Kyiv, she worked as a fixer and translator for New York Times reporter Bill Keller, launching her successful career as an international journalist. After starting out as a stringer in Ukraine writing for the Financial Times, The Washington Post and The Economist, she worked in various editorial positions including both Moscow bureau chief and U.S. managing editor at the Financial Times, deputy editor at The Globe and Mail, and managing director at Thompson Reuters.

  1. She had to be convinced to enter politics.

In July 2013, after being courted for months by then-Liberal party leader Justin Trudeau to run for the Toronto Centre seat vacated by Bob Rae (as reported by the Toronto Star), Freeland made the decision to leave journalism and move back to Toronto from New York City with her husband, New York Times reporter Graham Bowley, and their three children. After being elected as the member of parliament for Toronto Centre in 2013’s by-election and then re-elected in October 2015 as the MP for University-Rosedale, Freeland was appointed minister of international trade for Trudeau’s new government. Freeland has described the decision to make the leap into politics as a tough one — but it is one that appears to be paying great dividends, given this week’s announcement.

  1. Her new position is viewed as a promotion.

Freeland’s move to Global Affairs is widely seen as a reward for a job well done in her last portfolio. From November 2015 to January 2017, Freeland served as Canada’s 18th minister of international trade, promoting Trudeau’s vision of free trade and an open global economy. Last February, she signed Canada on to the Trans-Pacific Partnership, though she said in November that the deal would be unable to go ahead without the U.S. (Trump has promised to pull the U.S. out of the pact).

The apex of Freeland’s time as trade minister came during the tense and dramatic negotiations with the Belgian region of Wallonia over the Canada-European Union Comprehensive Economic and Trade Agreement (CETA). After an emotional walkout during the talks in October, which seemed on the verge of collapse, Freeland and Trudeau were able to strike a deal that satisfied the Walloons.

Before Tuesday’s shuffle, Freeland was poised to begin exploring trade talks with China and examining possibilities for “maintaining or increasing” Canada’s trade relationship with the United Kingdom as it sorts out the mechanics of its Brexit — efforts which presumably will continue under new minister François-Philippe Champagne.

  1. Her views on Russia have been shaped by her family history and reporting experience.

Freeland, whose maternal grandparents fled western Ukraine before the Second World War, describes herself as a “proud member of the Ukrainian-Canadian community” but also as a “Russophile.” In a 2015 essay for the Brookings Institution, she wrote: “I speak the language and studied the nation’s literature and history in college. I loved living in Moscow in the mid-nineties as bureau chief for the Financial Times and have made a point of returning regularly over the subsequent fifteen years.”

Even so, over her career as a journalist, Freeland’s work was often critical of the Kremlin and of Vladimir Putin (who she interviewed in 2000). But it wasn’t until after Russia’s 2014 annexation of Crimea and military intervention in Ukraine that she was put on a list of Westerners banned from Russia — making her rocky relationship with the country at odds with Trump’s sympathetic views at the moment. It remains to be seen if Freeland’s status will change; the decision rests solely with Putin.

  1. Her progressive worldview is an antidote to protectionism and elitism. 

Freeland’s credentials as a progressive are unassailable. She has years of experience exploring issues related to international business and economics; her book Plutocrats: The Rise of the New Global Super-Rich and the Fall of Everyone Else (2012) is an international bestseller. Her subsequent 2013 TED Talk on global income inequality, in which she explores how globalization and advancements in technology are contributing to the stratification of society, has been viewed almost two million times.

Freeland made the case for what she called “inclusive prosperity” in an interview with OpenCanada in 2015: “We are all going to benefit when our economy can grow together…in the long run, it’s not going to be good for anyone, including the 0.1 percent, if we have a society where the chasm between those at the very top and everyone else is too great. That is a recipe for gated communities and a polarized society.”

Canadians will have to wait and see how Freeland will incorporate this mindset into her dealings on the international stage as foreign minister — but it’s one that will be welcomed in many circles, at a time when protectionist sentiments and close-mindedness are on the rise.

https://www.opencanada.org

GEOMETR.IT 

 * * *

2. Украина. Майдан. ТЕХАС ДОЛЖНЫ ГРАБИТЬ ТЕХАСЦЫ

Дональд Трамп — это относительное ОТНОШЕНИЕ !?..

Евро, КАК ФРАНКЕНШТЕЙН, взаглот гложет Европу

УКРАИНА — КРАСНАЯ ШАПОЧКА нашего времени.Сказка стала ложью…

NATO-2017. И вот «Абрамсы» приползли в Польшу. Каков будет ответ?

Ukraina. Genetyka w służbie nieuków -2

1. Украина. Майдан. ТЕХАС ДОЛЖНЫ ГРАБИТЬ ТЕХАСЦЫ

Moldova. If there were parliament elections…

in Conflicts · Crisis · Culture · Economics · Europe · Euroskepticism · EX-USSR · Moldova · Nation · Person · Politics · Power · World 9 views / 5 comments

GEOMETR.IT  .jurnal.md  25.03.2016

1

If next Sunday would take place parliamentary elections, in the Parliament would accede seven parties, according to a sociological study presented today by the Public Opinion Fund.

So, the Party of Socialists of the Republic of Moldova would accumulate 24,4% of electors’ votes, Our Party – over 18%, the Platform Dignity and Truth – 14,8%.

On the fourth place would position the Party Action and Solidarity “Pas”, led by Maia Sandu, with 14,6 percent of votes, followed by the Party of Communists of the Republic of Moldova – with over 10%, the European People’s Party of Moldova with 7% and the Democratic Party with 6,9%.

The Liberal Party and the Liberal Democratic Party of Moldova would remain under the electoral threshold. The Liberals accumulated in poll a score of 3,2%, and the Liberal Democrats – 0,8%.

The poll was performed at the request of the newspaper Timpul, in the period March 11-20 2016, on a sample of 1792 respondents from 107 localities and has a margin of error of 2,3%.

http://www.jurnal.md/en/politic/2016/3/24/poll-seven-parties-would-accede-the-parliament-if-next-week-would-take-place-elections/

GEOMETR.IT

Go to Top