Group items tagged

This messy, unpopular deal, the most unpopular government policy that anybody can remember, was produced by a political class that turned out to be ignorant — about Europe, Europeans, trade arrangements, institutions — and arrogant, disdaining knowledge and expertise.

It was the work of leaders who favored identity politics over economics, who preferred an undefined notion of “sovereignty” to the real institutions that gave Britain influence and power, who believed in fantasies and scorned reality.

War of the Polish Succession, (1733–38), general European conflict waged ostensibly to determine the successor of the king of Poland, Augustus II the Strong

The war resulted mainly in a redistribution of Italian territory and an increase in Russian influence over Polish affairs

After Augustus died (Feb. 1, 1733), Austria and Russia supported the election of his son Frederick Augustus II of Saxony as king of Poland

A personal union with Saxony, where Augustus II was a strong ruler, seemed at first to offer some advantages to Poland. A king with a power base of his own might reform the Commonwealth, which was still a huge state and potentially a great power. But such hopes proved vain. Pursuing schemes of dynastic greatness, Augustus II involved unwilling Poland in a coalition war against Charles XII of Sweden that proved disastrous. In 1702 Charles invaded the country, forced Augustus out, and staged an election of the youthful Stanisław I Leszczyński as king.

The country, split between two rival monarchs, plunged into chaos. The slowly proceeding demographic and economic recovery was reversed as the looting armies and an outbreak of bubonic plague decimated the people. A crushing defeat of Sweden by Peter I (the Great) of Russia at the Battle of Poltava (Ukraine, Russian Empire) in 1709 eventually restored Augustus to the throne but made him dependent on the tsar.

He was even suspected of plotting partitions of the Commonwealth. During the remaining years of his reign, Augustus’s main preoccupation was to ensure the succession of his son.

Why history says Theresa May should go

For the third time in two years, the British electorate has defied expectations.

Whether she steps down graciously or hobbles on until her government collapses under the weight of its own contradictions, she is not long for the leadership.

Despite betting markets and expert forecasts that predicted Theresa May’s Conservatives to win a large majority in the U.K. parliamentary elections, the Tories instead lost ground on Thursday, resulting in a hung parliament. As we write this in the early hours of Friday morning, Conservatives will end up with either 318 or 319 seats, down from the 330 that the Tories had in the previous government. A majority officially requires 326 seats.1Although, there are some ambiguities on account of Sinn Fein, the Irish nationalist party which traditionally does not take its seats in parliament, and the Speaker of the House of Commons, who traditionally does not vote.

There were also a lot of events during the campaign, but the compressed time frame makes them hard to sort out from one another. How much did the Conservative manifesto hurt the Tories? Did terrorist attacks in Manchester and London work against them? Was May’s perceived softness toward President Trump a factor, especially after Trump began to attack London Mayor Sadiq Khan? Given the results of the French election, is there an overall resurgence toward liberal multiculturalism in Europe, perhaps as a reaction to Trump? We don’t know the answers to these questions, although we hope to explore some of them in the coming days. We do know that elections around the world are putting candidates, pollsters and the media to the test, and there isn’t a lot they can be taking for granted.

It wasn’t supposed to be like this. Fortified by a 20-point lead in the opinion polls, Theresa May, the prime minister of the United Kingdom, called a general election in April assuming that, all things being equal, she couldn’t possibly lose. In 2015, David Cameron had won a small and fragile majority in the House of Commons, but this was Mrs. May’s opportunity to transform it into, as she said, a “strong and stable” government that would be well-placed to lead the U.K. through the choppy waters of leaving the European Union. An increased majority, she promised, would “strengthen” her hand in the forthcoming Brexit negotiations.

Perhaps that’s the real message of this election: Britain’s divisions desperately require a political party, and a prime minister, capable of rising above them. On current evidence, however, there is no sign of that kind of savior riding to the rescue. A fractious, disgruntled, country remains just that. The electorate sent a clear message on Thursday: Trust nobody. The U.K. awaits the arrival of a politician who can recognize and then surmount that; on the evidence available, it will be waiting for some time yet.

London Mayor Wants Trump State Visit Canceled The U.S. president criticized the mayor on Twitter following the London Bridge terror attack.

London Mayor Sadiq Khan has again signaled he thinks government officials should rescind U.S. President Donald Trump's invitation for a state visit to Britain later this year. "I don't think we should roll out the red carpet to the president of the U.S.A. in the circumstances where his policies go against everything we stand for," Khan told Britain's Channel 4 News on Monday. Khan and Trump have been at odds in the wake of Saturday's London Bridge truck-and-knife terror attack that left seven people dead and dozens injured. [RELATED: Police Identify All 3 London Attackers] Trump on Sunday took to Twitter to criticize Khan's response to the attack, in which the London mayor said citizens shouldn't be alarmed by seeing more law enforcement on the streets. "At least 7 dead and 48 wounded in terror attack and Mayor of London says there is 'no reason to be alarmed!'" Trump tweeted.ADVERTISING Khan's office initially said the mayor was ignoring Trump's comments, calling the tweet "ill-informed" and accusing Trump of purposefully taking the mayor's remarks out of context. And Trump again lashed out.

5 reasons why Theresa May's troubles have only just begun

Brexit Puts Britain in Need of Trade Expertise

Now the U.K. faces an unparalleled trade challenge: It must rapidly agree to new trade terms with the bloc and seek new accords with old allies and fast-growing markets. The last time the U.K. formally negotiated a trade agreement was in the early 1970s—meaning that the country has little expertise in navigating the ultracomplex world of modern deals on its own.

Juncker proposes EU military headquarters

Jean-Claude Juncker said the lack of a "permanent structure" resulted in money being wasted on missions.

The Brexit vote has given added impetus to plans for greater defence co-operation, because the UK has always objected to the potential conflict of interest with Nato.

It is a curious moment in British politics. The government is facing the most important negotiations in over 50 years. The outcome will shape the future of the UK economy - but you would not necessarily know it.

Consumers are acting "almost as though the referendum had not taken place" asserts Andy Haldane, the Chief Economist at the Bank of England.

The robust economy has bought the government political space. It is not at the moment under pressure and does not yet need to show its hand but, slowly, a narrative is emerging that carries risks for Theresa May and her tightly-wound circle; that they are hobbled by indecision.

Britain’s impending departure from the European Union has spawned a cottage industry of Brexitologists.

Market reactions have been sudden and sharp. On Monday, the British pound fell more than 1% against the dollar as traders reacted to a Sunday television interview with the prime minister they read as a sign she would pursue a clear break with the EU.

After Mrs. May reiterated her stance on Monday, both sides interpreted her comments as a sign of support.

U.K. Set to Choose Sharp Break From European Union

Prime Minister Theresa May is likely to choose to exit Europe’s single market and its customs union — a so-called hard Brexit.

Mrs. May calling for British unity “to make a success of Brexit and build a truly global Britain.”

President-elect Donald Trump vowed over the weekend to quickly work out a trade deal with Britain in a bid to help smooth the country's path out of the European Union -- further strengthening ties with the Brexit movement he lauded during his campaign. 

Trump also riled European leaders by dismissing the E.U. as a “vehicle for Germany.”

Trump ripped German Chancellor Angela Merkel over her decision to welcome more than a million Syrian refugees into her country.

Donald Trump debate: Could UK really ban him?

Donald Trump was in the spotlight

Monday in Britain's Parliament, where lawmakers debated whether the Republican presidential front-runner should be barred from entering the country. T

One month ago, before British politics turned upside down, the country faced three possible futures. Prime Minister Theresa May was negotiating a compromise Brexit from the European Union, and her odds of prevailing appeared around 50 percent. A group of hard-liners in May’s Conservative Party wanted to crash out of the E.U. without a deal, and the odds of that costly result were around 30 percent. Finally, moderates wanted some way of postponing Brexit, or putting it to a second referendum. Their chances probably stood at around 20 percent

With today’s triggering of a no-confidence vote in the prime minister, Britain has descended into maximum “Game of Thrones” chaos. Yet the odds of a stabilizing outcome have brightened. Of course, all statements about British politics should be assumed to include the word “probably” at least twice. But a fair guess would be that the odds of a delay or a revote on Brexit stand at around 60 percent. The odds of some sort of compromise stand at 30 percent. The odds of crashing out are down around 10 percent.

If May won the no confidence vote comfortably but still failed to get her compromise through, what would happen? May would not want Britain to crash out, and neither does the majority in Parliament. So the alternative to getting her deal through would be to consider other deals.