US asked North Korea to hand over all nuclear weapons: Report - Aljazeera.com

On the day their talks in Hanoi collapsed last month, US President Donald Trump handed North Korean leader Kim Jong Un a piece of paper that included a blunt call for the transfer of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and bomb fuel to the United States, according to a document seen by Reuters news agency.

Trump gave Kim both Korean and English-language versions of the US position at Hanoi's Metropole hotel on February 28, according to a source familiar with the discussions, speaking on condition of anonymity. It was the first time that Trump himself had explicitly defined what he meant by denuclearisation directly to Kim, the source said.

A joint lunch for the two leaders was cancelled the same day. While neither side has presented a complete account of why the summit collapsed, the document may help explain it.

The document's existence was first mentioned by NSA John Bolton in television interviews he gave after the two-day summit. Bolton did not disclose in those interviews the pivotal US expectation contained in the document that North Korea should transfer its nuclear weapons and fissile material to the US.

'Libya model'

The document appeared to represent Bolton's long-held and hardline "Libya model" of denuclearisation that North Korea has rejected repeatedly. It probably would have been seen by Kim as insulting and provocative, analysts said.

Trump had previously distanced himself in public comments from Bolton's approach and said a "Libya model" would be employed only if a deal could not be reached.

The idea of North Korea handing over its weapons was first proposed by Bolton in 2004. He revived the proposal last year when Trump named him as his national security adviser.

The document was meant to provide the North Koreans with a clear and concise definition of what the US meant by "final, fully verifiable, denuclearisation", the source familiar with discussions said.

The document Trump reportedly gave to Kim followed a 'Libya model' of denuclearisation [File: Leah Millis/Reuters]

The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment, while the State Department declined to comment on what would be a classified document.

After the summit, a North Korean official accused Bolton and Secretary of State Mike Pompeo of "gangster-like" demands, saying Pyongyang was considering suspending talks with the US and may rethink its self-imposed ban on missile and nuclear tests.

The English version of the document, seen by Reuters, called for "fully dismantling North Korea's nuclear infrastructure, chemical and biological warfare program and related dual-use capabilities; and ballistic missiles, launchers, and associated facilities".

Four key points

Aside from the call for the transfer of Pyongyang's nuclear weapons and bomb fuel, the document had four other key points.

190228160948599

It called on North Korea to provide a comprehensive declaration of its nuclear programme and full access to the US and international inspectors; to halt all related activities and construction of any new facilities; to eliminate all nuclear infrastructure; and to transition all nuclear programme scientists and technicians to commercial activities.

The summit in Vietnam's capital was cut short after Trump and Kim failed to reach a deal on the extent of economic sanctions relief for North Korea in exchange for its steps to give up its nuclear programme.

The first summit between Trump and Kim, which took place in Singapore in June 2018, was almost called off after the North Koreans rejected Bolton's repeated demands for it to follow a denuclearisation model under which components of Libya's nuclear programme were shipped to the US in 2004.

Seven years after a denuclearisation agreement was reached between the US and Libya's leader, Muammar Gaddafi, the US took part in a NATO-led military operation against his government and he was overthrown by rebels and killed.

Last year, North Korea officials called Bolton's plan "absurd" and noted the "miserable fate" that befell Gaddafi.

After North Korea threatened to cancel the Singapore summit, Trump said in May 2018 he was not pursuing a "Libya model" and that he was looking for an agreement that would protect Kim.

"He would be there, he would be running his country, his country would be very rich," Trump said at the time.

"The Libya model was a much different model. We decimated that country," Trump added.

In limbo

190328014837331

The Hanoi document was presented in what US officials have said was an attempt by Trump to secure a "big deal" under which all sanctions would be lifted if North Korea gave up all of its weapons.

US-North Korean engagement has appeared to be in limbo since the Hanoi meeting. Pompeo said on March 4 he was hopeful he could send a team to North Korea "in the next couple of weeks" but there has been no sign of that.

Jenny Town, a North Korea expert at the Washington-based Stimson Center think-tank, said the content of the US document was not surprising.

"This is what Bolton wanted from the beginning and it clearly wasn't going to work," Town said. "If the US was really serious about negotiations, they would have learned already that this wasn't an approach they could take."

190315082924550

Town added, "It's already been rejected more than once, and to keep bringing it up ... would be rather insulting. It's a non-starter and reflects absolutely no learning curve in the process."

North Korea has repeatedly rejected unilateral disarmament and argues that its weapons programme is needed for defence, a belief reinforced by the fate of Gaddafi and others.

In an interview with US broadcaster ABC's This Week programme after the Hanoi summit, Bolton said the North Koreans had committed to denuclearisation in a variety of forms several times "that they have happily violated".

"We define denuclearisation as meaning the elimination of their nuclear weapons programme, their uranium enrichment capability, their plutonium reprocessing capability," Bolton said.

Asked who authored the document, Bolton said it had been "written at staff level and cleared around as usual".

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/03/asked-north-korea-hand-nuclear-weapons-report-190330093325886.html

2019-03-30 10:37:00Z
52780253561091

‘We’re in the Last Hour’: Democracy Itself Is on Trial in Brexit, Britons Say - The New York Times

LONDON — This week, as two members of Parliament interrupted a debate on Brexit to rib each other about the elite boarding schools they attended four decades ago, 23-year-old Eve Alcock looked on with deep disgust.

The whole world of Britain’s Parliament — its effete codes of conduct, its arcane and stilted language, its reunions of Oxbridge school chums — seemed impossibly remote from the real, unfolding national crisis of Brexit, the process of extricating the country from the European Union.

“We’re in the middle of a national emergency, and you have schoolboys squabbling about who went to the best school in the House of Commons,” she said. “It’s almost as if they are operating in this complete alternate reality.”

Over the past weeks, as factions within the British government have grappled for control over the country’s exit from the bloc, the mood among voters has become dark.

Those Britons who wished to remain are reminded, daily, that a risky and momentous national change is being initiated against their will and judgment. More striking is the deep cynicism among those who voted to leave, the group that Prime Minister Theresa May is trying to satisfy. They are now equally bitter and disillusioned, as the government’s paralysis has called into question whether Britain will ever leave.

Parliament’s rejection of Mrs. May’s withdrawal plan on Friday — for the third time — means the turbulence will continue.

In interviews, many Britons expressed despair over the inability of the political system to produce a compromise. No one feels that the government has represented their interests. No one is satisfied. No one is hopeful.

It has amounted to a hollowing out of confidence in democracy itself.

“I don’t think the central institutions of government have been discredited like this in the postwar period,” said William Davies, who teaches political economy at Goldsmiths, University of London.

Image

Hundreds of thousands of people marched in London last weekend in support of a second referendum.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

“There’s a fin-de-siècle sense that modern British politics has run out of road,” said Mr. Davies, author of “Nervous States: How Feeling Took Over the World.” “Maybe the best thing to come out of this is the recognition that the political elites — people just want them to get off the stage. I don’t know who they want to replace them. But there’s a sense that a reboot would be something people would be in favor of.”

It was barely seven summers ago that Britain presented itself to the world as a confident, outward-looking, post-imperial country. The opening ceremony of the 2012 Olympics — featuring a flock of sheep, a snippet of the Sex Pistols’ music and a skit about a skydiving Queen Elizabeth — suggested a country unburdened by longing for its more orderly, homogeneous past.

It’s hard to conceive of that now. The referendum question has divided Britain into warring tribes, unable to settle on any shared vision of the future. An ancient, robust democracy is groaning under the weight of conflicting demands — on the executive, to carry out the will of the people; and on the members of Parliament, to follow their conscience and to act in what they believe to be the people’s interest.

In such a situation, the country might have united in its resentment of the European Union, which had vowed to make Britain’s withdrawal painful. But that has not happened. Britons are blaming their own leaders.

“I think people have totally lost confidence in democracy, in British democracy and the way it’s run,” said Tommy Turner, 32, a firefighter. He was perched on a stool at the Hare & Hounds, a working-class pub in Surrey, where nearly everyone voted to leave the European Union. Among his friends, he said, he sensed a profound sense of betrayal that Britain was not exiting on March 29, as promised.

“You’ve got egotistical people in politics, and they want to follow their own agenda,” he said. “They don’t want to follow what the people have voted for.” Asked how he felt about the approaching Brexit deadline, Mr. Turner said, “worried.”

“We’re in the last hour,” he said. “I’m wondering: What does more damage? Leaving without a deal? Or the total annihilation of faith in democracy?”

Polling has borne out his worry. Britons’ assessment of their leaders is scathing, with 81 percent saying that Britain has handled Brexit badly, and 7 percent saying it has handled it well, according to data released recently by NatCen Social Research, an independent agency. (Two years ago, the numbers were 41 percent negative and 29 percent positive.)

Particularly drastic, researchers said, is the souring of Leave voters in the past six months, as Mrs. May concluded her negotiations on the withdrawal agreement and shared the terms of departure with the country. Expectations that Brexit would have concrete effects — by lifting the economy or slowing immigration — have diminished sharply, the data show.

Image

CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

Neil Bligh, 45, who sat by Mr. Turner at the Hare & Hounds, could dimly recall the buzz of triumph he felt in 2016, when he discovered that his side had won. But that feeling has long since dissipated, replaced by a gathering sense of gloom and mistrust as the promised reward of a free-trading Britain recedes further and further.

“Now, it’s like an ache,” he said. “That’s the best way to describe Brexit, as the remnant of a hangover. It’s just always there. A lot of people, if they could go back and make it all not happen, they would.”

The bartender, Chauntelle Hartley, known by her clientele as “Squid,” said the process was so maddening that she could no longer focus on it for long periods.

“It was on the telly earlier, and I watched ‘Friends’ on my phone,” she said. “I want to listen to it; I realized that it was on. But I think I only made it 40 seconds.”

Views on Brexit were almost diametrically opposed at The Highbury Barn, a pub in North London that offers haddock from the fishmonger across the street and provides pans of water for visiting dogs. In this neighborhood, Islington North, in the constituency of the opposition Labour leader, Jeremy Corbyn, the number of signatories on a petition asking the government to revoke Article 50, the part of the European Union treaty that lays out the terms of Britain’s exit, reached one-quarter of the population.

But people here took an equally dismal view of the government’s performance.

Aidan Hughes, 58, who works in finance, was waiting for a cab in the back of the bar.

“What we’re seeing is that the process the government’s involved in has been effectively hijacked by an even smaller segment of the ruling government, the right-wing element of the party,” he said. He blamed the first-past-the-post voting system, which tends to increase polarization between two large parties and exaggerate geographical divides, setting up stark conflict between sections of society.

He said it was time for Britain to move toward a system of proportional representation, common to democracies that evolved later than Britain’s, which allows smaller parties to enter Parliament more easily.

“We would then have people with different views coming together to compromise, to find a way forward,” he said. “Whereas whoever wins an election now can currently push their views, irrespective of support.”

Image

CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

Geoff Peddie, 46, a high-school English teacher, was waiting for a friend as the evening wore on and the pub quieted down. He was angry that such a slim majority had triggered a national act of this magnitude and permanence.

“I don’t feel that I’ve been listened to, or that nearly half the population have been listened to,” he said. “The majority has essentially been pandering to the worst elements in our society.”

A sense of impotence and paralysis now colors Britain’s image abroad. This was given visual form recently when a Bulgarian diplomat posted a photo on Twitter of senior European officials in a cluster as they conferred in a corridor. No Briton was present.

“Britain is forced out of the room while other countries make decisions about its future,” said Mark Leonard, director of the European Council on Foreign Relations, a research institute.

As Mrs. May stalled for time, keeping her plans tightly hidden from the public, Brexit sucked so much oxygen from the government that it left no time for anything else.

“There is a parochialization as Britain loses ambition in anything bigger than itself; it’s a shrinking of horizons and a self-obsession,” he said.

He compared it to the Suez crisis, the Egyptian nationalist uprising that signaled the end of the British and French empires.

“The thing has been humiliating; there is a sense of no one being in the cockpit,” Mr. Leonard added. “Britain was a different country after Suez, and that’s where we are now. I don’t think there is any way back if we go ahead with Brexit.”

In a landscape of pervasive gloom, Mr. Hughes, the finance worker, did see one reason for hope: That Britons, young and old, were passionately engaged, as never before, in the inner workings of their own government. Even if it was because they were so angry.

“This is starting to drag people into an interest in what’s actually happening,” he said. “Clearly it’s a total mess and it’s been handled appallingly by the government. Be that as it may, at least it’s gotten people animated in talking about these topics.”

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/30/world/europe/uk-brexit-democracy-may.html

2019-03-30 07:01:54Z
52780249686109

Europe watches Brexit events with frustrated disbelief - Fox News

BRUSSELS – The date for the U.K.'s departure from the European Union was seemingly chiseled in stone — March 29, 2019. When it finally arrived with no Brexit, Europeans could only shake their heads in frustrated disbelief.

They saw three years of bluster on how Britain would leave the EU on its own terms dissolve Friday with the last of three votes in Parliament that failed to approve Prime Minister Theresa May's divorce deal, leaving an uncertain course.

"There was no game plan. Well, no strategy," Philippe Lamberts, a key member of the European Parliament's Brexit steering group, said of the British approach in an interview with The Associated Press.

Few in Britain would disagree.

For decades, the bloc was the target of ridicule in Britain for what was perceived as European hubris and an inefficient bureaucracy. But on Friday, there was very little gloating on the continent as May failed to get the deal through the U.K. Parliament, sending London deeper into the Brexit morass.

"We have resisted the temptation to position the (EU) Commission in terms of sentiments," said EU spokesman Margaritis Schinas. "We don't do that."

The EU called another emergency summit for April 10, two days ahead of a new withdrawal date. A chaotic "no-deal" departure scenario is expected to be costly to U.K. businesses and inconvenient at its border. May said there would be "grave" implications.

The EU doesn't want to inflame passions even more, because it also stands to suffer, with hundreds of billions of euros and tens of thousands of jobs at stake for a U.K. exit without transitional measures in place.

"In Brexit, everybody loses," said Ewa Osniecka-Tamecka, a vice rector of the College of Europe, speaking at a branch in Natolin, Poland. "Brexit diminishes both the EU and the U.K."

There was frustration among EU officials who felt that they and their star negotiator Michel Barnier did their part and Britain didn't.

Even Nigel Farage, a British driving force behind Brexit and staunch EU opponent, has nothing but admiration for Barnier who kept 27 nations aligned as one while Britain, as one, crumbled into chaos.

"Oh, in terms of doing his job. Goodness gracious me. Look, you know, I wish he was on my team and not their team," Farage, a member of the European Parliament, told the AP.

Almost three years after the June 23, 2016, Brexit referendum, the British government and Parliament seem to be still at a loss over what they really wants from the EU.

"Britain is at a dead end," said Nathalie Loiseau, who was France's Europe Minister until she resigned this week to run in the May 23-26 EU elections. "Europeans have other priorities than having to wait until the U.K. takes a decision."

What also is in tatters is a European admiration of Britain as a symbol of a well-run parliamentary democracy, with its sometimes brilliant discourse and vigorous debate.

Lamberts said he was stunned at how May's Conservative Party as well as those in the Labour Party seemed to act in their own interests, rather than the needs of the country.

"It's the inability to build compromise," Lamberts said. "That's it. Party above country, in the most brutal sense of the word."

Manfred Weber, a European lawmaker from Germany and center-right candidate to head the European Commission, said the repeated rejection of the deal highlighted "a failure of the political class in Great Britain — there's no other way to describe it."

Some saw Friday's events as another blow to Britain's international standing.

"The British have given the world a great deal, from modern parliamentarism to the world title in the discipline of 'muddling through,'" historian Michael Stuermer wrote in a front-page commentary in German daily Die Welt.

Now, however, "the damage to the country's reputation is unmistakable."

___

Associated Press writer Geir Moulson in Berlin and Angela Charlton in Paris contributed.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.foxnews.com/world/europe-watches-brexit-events-with-frustrated-disbelief

2019-03-29 19:47:09Z
52780249686109

US warns Russia, others against sending troops to Venezuela - Al Jazeera English

The White House on Friday warned Russia and other countries backing President Nicolas Maduro against sending troops and military equipment to Venezuela, saying the United States would view such actions as a "direct threat" to the region's security.

The warning comes after two Russian air force planes landed outside of Caracas on Saturday, believed to be carrying nearly 100 Russian special forces and cybersecurity personnel.

"We strongly caution actors external to the Western Hemisphere against deploying military assets to Venezuela, or elsewhere in the Hemisphere, with the intent of establishing or expanding military operations," White House National Security Adviser John Bolton said in a statement.

"We will consider such provocative actions as a direct threat to international peace and security in the region," Bolton added.

Bolton's statement also condemned Maduro's "use of foreign military personnel in his attempt to remain in power, including the introduction of Russian military personnel and equipment into Venezuela".

He added, "Maduro will only use this military support to further repress the people of Venezuela; perpetuate the economic crisis that has destroyed Venezuela's economy, and; endanger regional stability."

Pre-existing contracts

190328184741984

Russia said on Thursday it had sent "specialists" to Venezuela under a military cooperation deal but insisted they posed no threat to regional stability, brushing aside a call by Trump for Moscow to remove all military personnel from the country.

Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov said Russian military specialists were in Venezuela to service pre-existing contracts for the supply of Russian arms.

Peskov said Russia is not interfering in Venezuela's internal affairs and that the Kremlin hopes other countries would let Venezuelans decide their own fate.

Trump has called on Russia to "get out" of Venezuela.

On Wednesday, Trump said that "all options" were open to force Russia to pull troops out of Venezuela after two Russian air force planes landed outside Caracas on Saturday carrying nearly 100 Russian troops, according to media reports.

Elliott Abrams, the US special representative for Venezuela, said that those options include sanctions.

"We have a list of options we have given" US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Abrams told reporters on Friday.

"There are a lot of things we can do in economic terms, in terms of sanctions," he added. "We have options and it would be a mistake for the Russians to think they have a free hand."

The US recognised Juan Guaido, the leader of the national assembly, as Venezuela's interim president earlier this year after the opposition leader declared himself the country's leader, calling Maduro's presidency illegitimate. 

Meanwhile, Russia has emerged as a key backer of Maduro's government.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2019/03/warns-russia-sending-troops-venezuela-190329135237891.html

2019-03-29 18:17:00Z
52780254212842

Theresa May's Brexit deal suffers third defeat in Parliament - CNN

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=shKL4dWUKzM

2019-03-29 16:34:05Z
52780249686109

Theresa May’s Brexit Deal Is Rejected by U.K. Parliament - The New York Times

• With Britain in political crisis and a new deadline to leave the European Union two weeks away, Parliament on Friday rejected, by a vote of 334 to 286, Prime Minister Theresa May’s Brexit plan for a third time.

• Lawmakers voted down the 585-page withdrawal agreement, which details Britain’s relationship to the European Union through the end of 2020.

• The vote means that Britain is moving closer to a withdrawal on April 12 without an agreement — the “no-deal” scenario that many economists and officials have warned would do serious economic damage. The only alternative may be a long delay, a move opposed by pro-Brexit lawmakers.

• In a bid to win over hard-line Brexit supporters, Mrs. May promised Conservative lawmakers this week that she would step down as prime minister if the deal were approved. She had hoped that enough lawmakers would reverse course, despite their concerns, rather than risk crashing out without a deal.

Image

Prime Minister Theresa May has offered to step aside if Parliament approves her withdrawal plan.CreditJessica Taylor/UK Parliament, via Reuters

May is rejected for a third time, adding to political turmoil

British lawmakers on Friday rejected Prime Minister Theresa May’s plan for withdrawing from the European Union for the third time, leaving her policy in ruins and casting the nation’s politics into further confusion with the scheduled departure date looming two weeks away.

The vote on Friday might have been Mrs. May’s last chance to succeed on the issue that has dominated and defined her time in office, and the result left open an array of possibilities, including renewed demands for her resignation, early parliamentary elections and a second referendum.

The defeat, while narrower than in the previous two votes, appears to leave the increasingly weakened prime minister with two unpalatable options in the short run:

Britain can leave the bloc on April 12 without an agreement in place, a chaotic and potentially economically damaging withdrawal that threatens to leave the country with a shortage of food and medicine; or Mrs. May can ask European leaders — who have ruled out a short delay if her plan failed — for what would almost certainly be a long postponement.

“The implications of the house’s decision are grave,” she said after the vote, warning that it was not guaranteed that the bloc would give Britain more time.

The European Commission posted on Twitter, “ ‘No-deal’ scenario on 12 April is now a likely scenario.”

Hoping to win over Brexit hard-liners in her Conservative Party, Mrs. May promised lawmakers this week that she would step down if her plan were approved, giving the party a chance to choose a leader more to their liking to oversee the next round of negotiations. That got her some votes, but not enough.

Mrs. May has seen party discipline and her own authority shredded by successive parliamentary defeats, cabinet resignations and party defections over Brexit, and the vote on Friday left her even more battered — but apparently still in office.

In January, Parliament rejected her plan, 432 to 202 — a historic margin of defeat for a prime minister’s bill. A second vote on March 12 was another defeat, 391 to 242.

“If you want to deliver Brexit, this is the moment,” Mrs. May told Parliament before the vote.

But Parliament rebuffed her once again.

Video

The future of the Irish border has been a contentious issue during Britain’s Brexit negotiations. We went to Northern Ireland, where residents worry that the free flow of goods and people could end once the United Kingdom leaves the European Union.

What exactly were lawmakers voting on?

Parliament has twice rejected Mrs. May’s proposal, but this time there was a twist: Lawmakers were only voting on the withdrawal agreement, the legally binding part of the deal.

They set aside a decision on the nonbinding “political declaration,” a statement of what both sides want in Britain’s long-term relationship with the European Union. The two parts were separated to get around a procedural rule that had complicated Mrs. May’s efforts at a third attempt to get the deal through.

Mrs. May told Parliament that if lawmakers approved the withdrawal agreement, they would still have an opportunity to vote for a larger bill that would include the agreement — an assessment some Labour members disputed.

What Is Brexit? A Simple Guide to Why It Matters and What Happens Next

The basics of Brexit, the troubled plan for Britain to quit the European Union.

The withdrawal agreement sets the terms of a transition period after Britain leaves the bloc, while long-term arrangements are negotiated. It would last through the end of 2020, but could be extended for two years.

[Interested in our Brexit coverage? Join the conversation on April 1, and hear how our reporters in London are tracking these updates.]

It lays out in detail the nation’s trade relationship with the bloc, keeping Britain tied, at least temporarily, to many European Union tariff, product and immigration rules, protecting trade ties and the rights of the bloc’s citizens who are already living in Britain.

This agreement also includes language dealing with the border between Ireland, a European Union member country, and Northern Ireland, a part of the United Kingdom — a confounding and divisive issue that has proved to be the biggest sticking point in Parliament.

At the moment, goods and people flow freely between Ireland and Northern Ireland. Under the withdrawal agreement, that arrangement would continue even if the two sides have not reached a long-term pact by the end of 2020, under a provision known as the backstop.

The backstop would keep Britain, and particularly Northern Ireland, tied to many European Union rules, to avoid building physical barriers on the border. That is anathema to many Brexit supporters, who fear that it could leave Britain permanently beholden to the bloc.

Prominent Brexit supporters vowed to back May’s deal

There was little expectation that Mrs. May’s plan would be approved, but in the hours before the vote a steady stream of lawmakers did promise to switch their votes and support her.

Dominic Raab, a former Brexit secretary and one of the most hard-line Conservative supporters of withdrawal, said on Friday that he would drop his opposition.

He was switching, he said, because there was “a significant risk of losing Brexit altogether,” referring to concerns that Britain might be forced to seek a longer extension, which would give opponents of Brexit more time to muster support to fight withdrawal.

Writing on Twitter, Boris Johnson, a former foreign secretary who has been an vocal critic of Mrs. May’s proposal, said that he would support it, although it was “very painful to vote for this deal.”

Iain Duncan Smith, a staunch Brexit supporter and a former leader of the Conservative Party, said that he would vote for the deal. Ross Thomson, who voted against it twice, also said that he would change his vote.

But Mrs. May’s prospects were largely dependent on how many opposition lawmakers she could win over, and she fell far short of that threshold.

Image

Brexit supporters outside Parliament on Friday.CreditMatt Dunham/Associated Press

Outside Parliament, little love for the E.U.

“Shame on you! Shame on you! Shame on you!”

With those words, pro-Brexit activists congregated outside Parliament on Friday morning, heaping anger on lawmakers who they said were thwarting the results of the 2016 referendum.

The crowd in the morning was sparse but grew as the day went on, with people drinking tea from thermoses, waving Union Jack flags and holding placards denouncing, among other things, “anti-British globalists.”

The protesters, most of them men, cut a striking contrast with the hundreds of thousands who turned out for an anti-Brexit march in London last weekend.

“We should be leaving now,” Paul Ellis, the legal officer of the For Britain Movement, said as he was walking toward Parliament Square. “As of today, Parliament no longer has the permission of the people to surrender power to the European Union.”

If Parliament votes to delay or stop Brexit, he said before Parliament acted on Friday, “It means that Britain is no longer a democracy.”

After arriving at Parliament Square, he unfurled his group’s banner in front of a statue of Winston Churchill.

Image

Thousands of protesters gathered in London last week to demand a public vote on the government’s final Brexit deal.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

Opposition complains that the government has made things less clear

What is a blindfold Brexit?

That is the name the opposition Labour Party has given to Mrs. May’s ploy of splitting her deal in two: a withdrawal agreement that gets Britain out of the European Union’s door, and a political declaration that says where it is supposed to go from there.

For tactical reasons, the Conservative government wanted Parliament to vote on them separately. But Labour leaders said that asking lawmakers to vote on the first, without the road map provided by the second, was like putting a blindfold on Parliament.

Making matters worse for Labour, Mrs. May promised to resign if her deal passed, leaving future negotiations in a new Conservative leader’s hands. That could very well be a hard-line Brexiteer, and Labour fears that such a leader would cut trading ties with Europe at the risk of hurting Britain’s economy.

“It could be a Boris Johnson Brexit, a Jacob Rees-Mogg Brexit, or a Michael Gove Brexit,” said Keir Starmer, a senior Labour lawmaker, referring to various pro-Brexit Conservatives.

Jeremy Corbyn, the Labour leader, compared that to playing “roulette with this country’s future.”

Some Labour members proposed an amendment to Mrs. May’s deal that would have given Parliament some say in shaping the political declaration — a way of taking off the figurative blindfold. But the speaker of the House of Commons did not select the amendment for a vote.

Some British news outlets reported on Friday that, in a desperate bid to win the backing of Labour members, the government was offering money to finance projects in their districts.

Image

A security agent checking trucks this month at Coquelles, France, a border inspection post built in anticipation of a no-deal Brexit.CreditPhilippe Huguen/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images

What comes next?

Like many moments in Britain’s prolonged journey, it’s not entirely clear.

Britain was originally set to leave the European Union on Friday, but European leaders agreed last week to a short extension.

Now that lawmakers have rejected it again, and if Britain takes no further action, it would withdraw on April 12 without an agreement — an option wanted by neither the European Union nor most British lawmakers.

Mrs. May could once again ask Brussels for more time. But European leaders have said that they would be open in such a case only to a long extension, possibly of a year or more, to allow for a fundamental rethinking of Britain’s position.

“The European Union have been clear that any further extension will need to have a clear purpose,” she said after the vote, and would require agreement by the heads of government of Britain and the other 27 member nations.

Minutes after Parliament defeated the plan, Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, one of the European Union’s governing bodies, announced that, in light of the vote, he was calling a council meeting on April 10.

A long postponement would require Britain to elect representatives to the European Parliament in voting that would take place from May 23 to 26 in all member states. If Britain chose not to take part, it would leave with no deal at 11 p.m. London time on April 12.

Both Labour and Scottish National Party leaders said that Mrs. May should call an early general election. The deadlock in London could force Mrs. May to go that route, and it could also build support for a second referendum.

In addition, Ian Blackford, the leader of the Scottish National Party, said, “We must now look seriously at the option of revocation” of Article 50, the provision of the Lisbon Treaty that Britain invoked to leave the European Union.

With Mrs. May’s promise to step down, approval of the agreement would have set off a fight among Conservatives to choose a new leader.

Many people in Britain and on the Continent are getting tired of the uncertainty. Among them is Jon Worth, a political consultant who has been making (and remaking) flowcharts to map the potential outcomes of the withdrawal process.

Mr. Worth, who works as a communications consultant for European politicians, has made 27 versions of his Brexit flowcharts, mapping every twist and turn in the political saga.

After a 2-year wait to celebrate ‘Independence Day’ … more waiting

For Brexit supporters, March 29 — the originally scheduled day of Britain’s official departure from the European Union — was supposed to be one big party, with a gala celebration at 11 p.m.

Big Ben, currently silenced by a renovation of the famous London clock tower, was to emerge from the scaffolding to chime Britain out of the European Union, sounding the death knell for 45 years of European integration. A commemorative coin was planned by the Royal Mint.

Either March 29 or June 23, the date of the 2016 referendum to leave the bloc, was supposed to be established as “Independence Day.” But the champagne is still on ice.

“I dearly wish we could be toasting Britain’s freedom with champagne at 11 p.m. on Friday, just as we’d planned,” said Allison Pearson, a columnist for the stridently pro-Brexit Daily Telegraph. “Under the circumstances, half a glass of Tizer and Nurofen is more like it,” she said, referring to a British soft drink and a painkiller.

Asked this month about the fate of the March 29 commemorative coins, the chancellor of the Exchequer, Philip Hammond, said he was unsure whether they had actually been made. If so, he told the BBC, “they will become collectors’ pieces.”

Image

Bookmakers’ odds on probable contenders for prime minister were displayed outside Parliament on Thursday.CreditDan Kitwood/Getty Images

Who could be the next prime minister?

“I have heard very clearly the mood of the parliamentary party,” Mrs. May told Conservative lawmakers gathered in a meeting room in Parliament this week, as she announced plans to step aside if her Brexit plan were approved. “I know there is a desire for a new approach, and new leadership, in the second phase of the Brexit negotiations, and I won’t stand in the way of that.”

After the surprise offer on Wednesday, political analysts were quick to speculate about who might replace her. Her departure, which would not come before the May 22 withdrawal date, would leave the Conservative Party to select a new leader to see the process through.

Candidates for party leadership have to be nominated by two other members of Parliament, though if there is only one candidate, he or she automatically becomes the new leader. If more than two candidates emerge, lawmakers vote among themselves to narrow the field and then put two candidates to a vote by all party members, not just those in Parliament.

There is no obvious front-runner, but British bookmakers are already offering odds on some of the politicians they believe to be probable contenders for the job. They include hard-line Brexit supporters, vocal critics of the prime minister’s approach and supporters of her strategy.

Here’s a look at potential successors who have been given the best odds at clinching the role.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/29/world/europe/theresa-may-brexit.html

2019-03-29 16:10:27Z
52780249686109

Theresa May's 'last chance’ Brexit deal is defeated for third time, calls increase for her to resign immedi... - Fox News

On the day that Britain was originally scheduled to leave the European Union, lawmakers continued their impasse, voting down Prime Minister Theresa May's stripped-down withdrawal agreement for the third time.

The House of Commons voted 334 to 286 against the Brexit deal, triggering the possibility of the so-called "no deal" divorce between the United Kingdom and the EU. Now lawmakers have until April 12 to announce a new plan or leave the EU without a deal - a massive risk for disruption for people and businesses.

May said the implications of the lawmaker's rejection to the deal are "grave" and that it should be a "matter of profound regret" that "once again we have been unable to support leaving the European Union in an orderly fashion."

Immediately following the latest defeat, Opposition leader Jeremy Corbyn called on May to resign immediately, asking whether she now "finally accepts" that MPs will not support her deal.

The Sterling fell through the $1.30 mark against the U.S. dollar, for the first time since March 11th, as the result of the vote was announced..

UK'S BREXIT NEGOTIATIONS 'SHAMEFUL,' SIMILAR TO HOW THE LEFT REFUSED TO ACCEPT TRUMP'S WIN: NIGEL FARAGE

Parliament voted on the 585-page withdrawal agreement that sets out the terms of Britain’s departure – including its financial settlement with the EU and the rights of EU and U.K. citizens – but not a shorter declaration on future tires that is also part of the divorce deal agreed between the U.K. and the European bloc late last year.

Its removal altered the deal enough to overcome a ban against asking lawmakers the same question over and over again.

May’s deal, agreed with the European bloc in November, was previously rejected by 230 votes on Jan. 15 and by 149 votes on March 12. Ahead of Friday’s vote, May needed at least 75 lawmakers to change over, while losing none.

The EU reacted to Friday’s defeat saying it “regrets the negative vote” and that it is now fully prepared to a “no-deal” scenario on April 12.

“The EU will remain united,” a spokesperson said.

Donald Tusk, the European council president, called an emergency EU summit for April 10 in light of the vote. That is two days before the deadline for the U.K.’s departure.

Solicitor General Robert Buckland told the BBC that "we are now in completely uncharted waters".

"The prospect of no Brexit is now becoming very real indeed," he said.

BREXIT OR NO BREXIT, THE US-BRITISH ALLIANCE REMAINS VITAL

Outside the House of Parliament, pro-Brexit protesters brought traffic to a halt by blocking roads, local media reported. They chanted “We shall not be moved” and “Leave means leave.”

The EU had confirmed Friday that a U.K. Parliament vote to pass the withdrawal agreement alone would be "necessary and sufficient" to secure Britain's orderly departure on May 22.

Ahead of Friday, May needed the support of the Democratic Unionist Party in Northern Ireland, which has refused to back the agreement because it treats Northern Ireland differently from the rest of the U.K. The small party has 10 seats in the House of Commons and some Brexit backers say they will take their cue from the DUP.

TRUMP BACKS BREXIT BY PROMISING A 'LARGE SCALE TRADE DEAL' WITH UK

In a last-ditch effort to sway remaining naysayers, May pledged Wednesday to quit if lawmakers approved the deal and let Britain leave the EU in May.

"I have heard very clearly the mood of the parliamentary party," she said at the time. "I know there is a desire for a new approach – and new leadership – in the second phase of the Brexit negotiations – and I won’t stand in the way of that."

Earlier Friday, Attorney General Geoffrey Cox urged divided legislators to support the deal and finally break an impasse that has left Britons uncertain when, or even if, the country will leave the EU.

Cox said Parliament should take "a single decisive step ... to afford certainty to the millions of people who are waiting for it."

Some previously resistant Brexit-backers have moved to support the deal. Former Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson — a likely contender to replace May as Conservative Party leader — tweeted that rejecting it risked "being forced to accept an even worse version of Brexit or losing Brexit altogether."

Two years ago, Britain triggered a two-year countdown to Brexit, with the departure date set for March 29, 2019. Lawmakers were granted an extension by the EU last week amid their impasse.

The uncertainty around Brexit, the United Kingdom’s most significant political and economic move since World War Two, has left allies and investors aghast.

The EU had indicated it could grant Britain a longer delay to Brexit if it plans to change course and tack toward a softer departure. That would, however, require the U.K. to participate in elections for the European Parliament in late May.

CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP

Before the vote, a group of breakaway Tory and Labour MPs applied to become an official political party called “Change UK” – just in time for the European elections. They have named former Conservative MP Heidi Allen as interim leader.

The petitions site Change.org said Friday it's seeking urgent legal advice to prevent the group using similar branding.

"This new party is using the language of Change.org. Our movement is one of 17 million people across the UK and we can’t allow ourselves to be hijacked in this way,” a company source said.

Fox News' Adam Shaw and the Associated Press contributed to this report.

Let's block ads! (Why?)

https://www.foxnews.com/world/theresa-mays-last-chance-brexit-deal-is-defeated-for-third-time-calls-increase-for-her-to-resign-immediately

2019-03-29 15:27:33Z
52780249686109