European Political News

This is Dave Cole’s second “Politics Decoded” Guest Column. As we all know, America is the home of the free market. Right? Wrong. A story little-noticed outside the trade and financial press is an exception that proves, by the shock and anger it has caused, the general rule for US procurement to be a good distance away from the free market. Air to Air Refuelling Tankers The United States Air Force wanted to buy some new air-to-air refuelling tankers and have awarded the contract to EADS, who own Airbus, over Boeing; a European company over an American. Boeing were expected to win the US$4bn contract and, it seems, Boeing expected Boeing to win the contract. However, the EADS bid was technically superior, outscoring on just about every area on an evaluation. The deal was also conducted to the letter so that it would be hard to challenge on grounds of impropriety. Here is where the tale starts to become a little twisted. The Back Story Back in 2003, the USAF decided to lease some Boeing tanker aircraft as a stop-gap to replace its ageing fleet with an option to purchase after ten years. It turned out that a Pentagon staffer had been passing information to Boeing about the opposing EADS bid; said staffer had started working for Boeing by the time this was discovered. None of this is new, but it suggests that Boeing weren’t playing by the rules. One of the charges made against EADS is that it is receiving illegal subsidies, which seems pretty rich given Boeing’s actions. The Front Story Now, various congresspersons are mightily annoyed by the decision because, unsurprisingly, a contract for four billion dollars carries a lot of jobs with it. Senator John McCain was the driving force behind the investigation of Boeing over the lease-purchase deal. Moreover, he would want to see both best value for money and best equipment for troops and so would want to step on corruption in general and, in this case, get the better piece of kit. On the other side, Democrats are wanting jobs to stay in their areas rather than move overseas or to Arkansas, as will happen with EADS. Both Senators Clinton and Obama have criticised the deal and there is now to be a congressional inquiry. (more…)

Garbo is away for a fortnight and Dave Cole is writing the Politics Decoded column as a Guest Author for these two weeks. Dave blogs at davecole.org. In this first column Dave puts forward some ideas about the situation in Kosovo and Serbia. What to do in Kosovo and Serbia? An unusual alignment is taking place in the Balkans at the moment; it is one that means that we must support Kosovo and Serbia going forward. Serbia’s opposition to Kosovo’s independence is based on the idea that Kosovo is the birthplace of Serbs and an integral part of the Serbian state. The latter part is dubious - it was a unit of federation in the former Yugoslavia - and the former idea would make either central Germany or Troy the birthplace of Londoners. However, as we well know, mythologies have a surprising strength. European identity The undertone in Serbia’s assertion of suzerainty over Kosovo is similar to one being played out here, in the UK. This undertone follows on from the comments made by Dr Rowan Williams about sharia in the UK and ultimately comes down to a simple question: is Europe Christian? History has tripped over Serbia from both sides The Battle of Kosovo - way back in 1389 - saw an alliance of Serb lords being thumped by the Ottomans. The key point is that it was an alliance of Serb lords against a common enemy, and it was the first time that had happened. Serbia became a bastion of resistance to the Ottomans and, by implication, of Christian Europe against the Muslim East. Albanians, however, can make a similar claim; Skenderbeg, the national hero, successfully held the Ottomans at bay for a couple of decades. We now see a reversal, of sorts. Serbia is being supported most strongly by Russia. While Christian, Russia seems increasingly distant from modern, liberal, democratic Europe. (more…)