Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.

Global Britain is increasingly isolated

by Frank Schnittger Sun Jan 24th, 2021 at 08:31:50 PM EST

My letter (minus the last sentence) has also been published by the Irish Times here.


For those who are too young to get the Ministry For Silly Walks reference...

To get a sense of the UK's isolation from Europe, you need only study this graphic:

The UK is in splendid isolation in the top right hand corner.

But what really promoted my letter is puzzlement at why the UK government would want to remind the US of its Trumpian characteristics. Biden is already reported as being extremely hostile to all things Boris Johnson, in part because of the latter's racist "half Kenyan" jibes at his former boss, Barack Obama. Vice President Kamala Harris is reported to be even more vituperative in her comments about Tory Britain. Perhaps it is because she is half Indian, half Jamaican. Those once ruled by Britain have long memories.

So how does the attempt to downgrade the EU ambassador fit in with the UK's reported first priority of a trade deal with the USA? How does the UK think it will progress all those other issues it needs to sort out with the EU, such as access to the EU for the UK's service industry?

The UK still seems to think it can negotiate on a bilateral basis with the E3 - Germany, France and the UK. That may work on some external issues such as the Iran nuclear deal, but even here, how does it add value to what the EU can discuss directly with the USA and Iran?

Germany and France will be ultra-vigilant for further attempts by the UK to divide and conquer the EU. It didn't work very well during the Brexit negotiations, and there is no reason to believe it will work now. And given the the UK's past attempts to resile from its treaty obligations to the EU in the form of the Internal Market's Bill, there is no way the EU ambassador isn't going to be front and centre of any future relations the UK will have with eternal powers.

If all the UK can do is seek to deprive the ambassador of elementary protections and the chance to present his credentials to the Queen, it is a sign of weakness, not of strength. The UK will soon find it does not get to define the terms of its relations with the EU, no more than the US. It is the UK which is now the supplicant nation. It just doesn't quite realise it yet.

Display:
Brexit EU VAT & customs options for UK ecommerce sellers

UK ecommerce sellers face hard choices on taxes and customs if they want to keep selling to EU consumers in 2021 following the end of the Brexit transition period. Import VAT and customs declarations are due for the first time. Failure to address them now will mean extra taxes, delayed shipments and frustrated customers. UK sellers can also no longer rely on the EU distance selling thresholds - they must register immediately if they are selling goods to EU consumers.

Dutch webshops have suspended commerce with the UK for now ... it's easier to sell products to China.

by Oui on Sun Jan 24th, 2021 at 08:33:48 PM EST
Move to EU to avoid Brexit costs, firms told - Observer
Referring to discussions with a senior DIT adviser on trade, Moss said: "This guy talked complete sense. What I said to him was, have I got another choice [other than to set up a company abroad]? He confirmed that he couldn't see another way. He told me that what I was thinking of doing was the right thing, that he could see no other option. He did not see this as a teething problem. He said he had to be careful what he said, but he was very clear."

There is another way to interpret such events:



Schengen is toast!
by epochepoque on Sun Jan 24th, 2021 at 11:32:09 PM EST


Index of Frank's Diaries
by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Sun Jan 24th, 2021 at 11:44:38 PM EST
Vice President Kamala Harris is reported to be even more vituperative in her comments about Tory Britain. Perhaps it is because she is half Indian, half Jamaican.

Dear Frank, I know you mean well. But this statement is problematic. To assume someone's political position can be derived from their parental ethnic ancestry is, well, ... flawed.

Yes, both Biden and Harris have shown dismay towards Boris Johnson. And maybe even toyed with using their heritage as a backdrop for their quip. That does not mean it is the actual underlying cause for this decision.
Yes, I remember Biden's offhand comment to a BBC questioner "BBC? I'm Irish!" well, as do you. Maybe you can find a similar quote for Harris, maybe not.

But that shouldn't be used to simplify political reasoning along ethnic lines. If Kamala Harris is critical of BoJo, it is because of the content of his politics (or rather, its absence), and not because she is somehow genetically predisposed as a "half Jamaican/ half Indian" to dislike the English. That is a fallacy which only behooves the logic of racism, and while I do know it is easily said and you do not mean it in that sense, it is implied.

The clear and obvious reasons why both Harris and Biden dislike the Johnson Tory Brexit adventure are -- Occam's Razor -- that they run counter any notion of a liberal world order based on humanist, enlightened principles that cherishes cooperation and consensus over conflict wrangling and tug of war; and, in particular, because it endangers the Good Friday agreement, which clearly is not only an Irish cause but also one on which the United States government's (self perceived) laurels as peacemakers do rest. Believe it or not, the Washington establishment cherishes the GFA not just for what it means for Ireland, but also for what it says about American soft power: as long as it works, Washington can pat its own shoulder as being a godfather of a Good ThingTM. Or, differently put, the foreign policy establishment of Washington DC is proud of the GFA in a way that somehow eludes the chums of Downing St.

Which is exactly why the Biden administration will be trying to be "reasonable" again, even in the face of utter unreasonableness in the form of the current GOP and Tory policies. Biden will try to reach across the aisle, again. That might turn out to be Biden's Achilles heel. The battle over the filibuster regulations will tell us soon where we're headed.

Having said all that, please refrain from ascribing certain political notions to Harris because of her parental background. It would be both a tactical error to underestimate Harris, and also applies a racial logic that does not square with reality.

by Averett on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 03:39:39 PM EST
Perhaps it is because she is half Indian, half Jamaican.

Maybe because she's American? I seem to remember they had some disagreements back in 1776 and 1812.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 04:10:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Also, Harris being herself a woman of color, couldn't miss the underlying racism aimed at Obama by Johnson. I agree that ethnic background does not explain everything (else, what would the son of a Jewish judge do with a 6MWE mob?), but being part of a minority group which is one of the main targets of racism, makes you quite sensitive to it.
by Bernard on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 06:52:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for your considered and obviously deeply felt response. But I think you mistake my meaning and intent.

Firstly the "perhaps" is there to indicate a possibility, not a definitive conclusion or judgement. I don't have the evidence to support that.

Secondly, I'm not implying a genetic, ethnic or racial determination, rather a possible political and cultural one. India, in particular, had a long and bitter struggle against British imperialism which any Indians I know have not forgotten, and which shapes their world view to some extent, and in particular their view of Britain and a British government which tends towards imperial nostalgia  and a rose tinted view of their imperial past. As an Irish man I am particularly sensitive to that as well. I am less familiar with Jamaican politics, but can imagine many there were less than impressed at Johnson's jibes at Obama's part African heritage.

My comment about Kamala Harris' fierce antagonism towards the Johnson regime was based on some insider tittle tattle I read somewhere, which did not give a context or a substantive reason for her anger. "If you think Biden is antagonistic towards the Boris administration, you should hear Kamala on that subject". I somehow doubt she is overly exercised by Johnson's domestic policies one way or the other, however. More likely his close alignment with Trump while the latter was in office. As Trump is widely considered a racist in the USA, it does not require a great leap of the imagination to regard Johnson as one as well, especially given his references to Islamic women as letterboxes etc.

I don't have a problem with people drawing on their ethnic/cultural background as an inspiration for their politics. After all, democratic politics is largely about representing others, and Biden has made no secret of his close attachment to his Irish/Catholic background, and yet no one accuses him of racism.

Yes, I am sometimes surprised at the degree to which the GFA looms large in US politics, way beyond the "American Irish" community, insofar as it still exists. Perhaps it is, in part, because there are not too may examples of the US actively, and disinterestedly  pursuing a peaceful settlement in another part of the world. Both Clinton's and Obama's contributions are still remembered fondly here, even though many on the left would criticise their foreign policy adventures in Shannon and other parts of the globe.

I'm not a fan of Biden's "reaching across the aisle" rhetoric insofar as it is more than just rhetoric. For me it is a recipe for Democrats doing little to undo Republican atrocities while the Republicans were in office, and implementing Republican lite policies while Democrats are in office. Not only are such policies objectively flawed and inadequate to meet pressing peace, climate change, healthcare and economic inequality challenges, but they undermine Democrat's claims to provide a genuine alternative, and demoralise their base who depend on the enactment of more progressive policies, and cannot wait forever to see them implemented.

You are of course free to disagree. But it is a political disagreement, even if the protagonists are from different ethnic backgrounds, and remember different versions of history.


Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 07:43:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Frank, thank you for your considered reply.
You know I did not mean to imply that you are "racist" in the sense of a Boris Johnson (who, against the advice of the British ambassador, begins reciting Kipling's Road to Mandalay in a Burmese temple, or speaks of veiled muslim women as black letterboxes).
Rather I meant to point out that ethnic stereotyping, a tool fondly used by racists everywhere, seeps into language everywhere making ethnic identity branding for a politician a very thin rope to walk when using it as an explanation for their reasoning, which is what I think happens all too lightly in daily conversations.
The number of times I get to hear (as a German living in the US) "You say that because you're German" is mind boggling at times, when what I said is often the most obvious thing said by Americans in similar situations. Stereotyping is a short cut through careful analysis, and it misjudges protagonists more often than not.
I don't think VP Harris is dominated by such ethnic thinking when it comes to Boris, though I do agree with you that one might surmise a certain historical experience might have a background effect on her view of Johnson's politics. I doubt though that it is blinding her to the details of it all. And as a political animal, she will be most likely as well versed (and briefed) on foreign policy as anyone on this forum. Which leads me to believe that her view of Johnson derives more from the overall picture of his actions than any larger ethno-historical backdrop one might assign.
And surely that picture isn't pretty: a man who has lied for a living professionally before his political career, has yet to keep the letter of any of his promises, was a total failure in foreign policy, and is generally mistrusted even by closely allied nations. One does not need to conjure misgivings about the British imperial past to dislike and distrust Johnson. He (and that Reese-Mogg character) are perfidious Albion personified, with not a whiff of a Bertrand Russell about them; the worst England has brought into the upper echelons of power in half a century.
There really is no need to say that Harris dislikes them because of her background.
by Averett on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 09:58:28 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I grant you there are plenty of rational political reasons for disagreeing with Boris' politics, and no doubt these will factor into the equation in due course. But I took the tone of the insider comment I read as indicating something entirely different - a visceral hatred if you like - something that goes far beyond a policy disagreement and engages in deep emotions conjured up, perhaps, by childhood experiences of racial discrimination and how Trump, and by extension, Johnson, have come to embody those who had evoked those feelings of anger, fear, mistrust and hatred.

I don't think you can reduce politics entirely to rational policy discourse and disagreements. People's feelings matter too, and especially their childhood experiences and the stories handed down to them by preceding generations. I know a lot of liberal politics is about trying to sublimate those feelings of fear and anger, and about trying to harness people's intellectual qualities and "their better angels". But if Biden/Harris don't somehow tap into and divert the maelstrom of anger that Trump unearthed and unleashed, they will fail to achieve any deep reconciliation or healing at an emotional and political level.

Similarly, improved minimum wages, better public education and healthcare and higher taxes on the rich can all alleviate the sense of injustice and inequality felt by many in the USA. But if Biden/Harris don't also address the institutionalised racism, misogyny, rural deprivation and class snobbery in US society, they will make very little progress in building social solidarity and harmony and reducing alienation in US society. Feelings matter too. The history of slavery and ethnic cleansing of native Americans matters too.

I know little enough about the emotional make-up of Kamala Harris and what really motivates her. However I believe she will fail if she doesn't address these political challenges. I suspect Boris Johnson offends her because he is on the wrong side of history in these still all too real and alive conflicts. But ultimately her motivations are for her biographers to worry about. What matters to me and most others is what she actually does about them.  Telling Boris Johnson to "go whistle" if he thinks he is going to be allowed to disrupt the ongoing process of integration and unification of Ireland and the EU would be a good start. Giving the EU the diplomatic recognition it requires to conduct its business ought to be a no brainer. A visit to Paris, Dublin and Berlin while omitting London might send a signal even Johnson could not misconstrue or misunderstand.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 10:38:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Judging by the order of phone calls Biden had with European leaders - London on Saturday, Paris on Sunday and Berlin on Monday - he does not seem to want to upset the apple cart from his side. And given Johnson's propensity to wish to please Washington, for now it seems it's all diplomacy as usual. As a trained foreign policy historian I reckon all of this was to be expected in line with governments trying to keep up traditions and standards.
Which means that, whatever the actual policy differences are, the cracks haven't shown. Yet.
Given that Biden is interested in reviving the transatlantic trade initiative, however, any separate negotiations with the UK on a separate US-UK deal will be handled from a US perspective with how they might influence each other. And make no mistake: If the Biden administration is offered a chance for a UK-US deal that massively indulges US industry desires, they will go for it as long as it does not negatively interfere with a much more important US-EU deal.
Given BoJos incapability to actually administer haggling out good deals for the UK, I dare say the odds are the Tories will get what they want: a UK sell-out to US interests.
IF, however, the EU gets its act together and focuses on the more problematic side of having a US-dominated market on their doorstep, they might want to throw in wrenches from their side. Strangely, this could end up in the EU defending UK workers' rights. Time will tell.
by Averett on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 03:21:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Well the US and EU almost had an "oven ready" trade deal which fell at the last hurdle because some EU members baulked at its ISDS provisions - an issue which also threatens the ratification of the CETA deal - see my Letter to the Editor published by the Irish Times here and discussed further here.

Take out those ISDS or Investor Court System provisions, and both deals can probably be ratified without too much controversy. One thing you can be sure about. Anything the US concedes to the UK, the EU will demand with embellishments.

On the other hand, the EU will not be keen to allow the Johnson regime to make the running with wholesale concessions to the USA, as the USA will then demand similar of the EU. So it is probably in everyone's interest to agree the existing deals on the table minus their offending arbitration provisions as quickly as possible.

The issue of a supra-sovereign judicial system determining commercial disputes involving global corporations and sovereign states is a much larger issue, too big to be bundled into individual trade deals.

If the USA wants a global judicial system, ratifying existing conventions on war crimes and torture and submitting to the authority of the ICJ in the Hague would be a good start. Somehow I don't think that is going to happen, despite any commitment Biden/Harris may have to a "notion of a liberal world order based on humanist, enlightened principles that cherishes cooperation and consensus over conflict wrangling and tug of war."

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 04:03:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I agree that Biden/Harris and esp. the Senate will probably shy away from subscribing to the ICJ. Too much at stake, going all the way back to Kissinger. And both Biden and Harris have probably little appetite to spend their time defending past administrations' actions in the court at the Hague when the US' domestic problems require all their other political capital, especially when the next administration or Senate can demand withdrawal from the ICJ again, nilly willy. No one likes to do Sisyphean mea culpa work while Rome is burning.
by Averett on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 05:12:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yea, accountability can be a bummer, even when it is the fault of previous administrations. But it is generally individuals who are accused and prosecuted for war crimes, and there is no reason for a subsequent administration to take ownership of those crimes - and every reason for them to disown them if they want to "move on".

Those US "contractors" accused of mass murder should have been prosecuted for war crimes rather than given a Presidential pardon, and if one of them steps a foot outside the US, I hope they will be arrested and prosecuted before the ICJ. Just think of the outrage among Republicans that an American should be held accountable for war crimes.

But the USA won't change until that starts to happen, and that probably goes for Russia and China as well.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 07:09:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]
there is no reason for a subsequent administration

Biden (and others) were in some previous administrations.

by gk (gk (gk quattro due due sette @gmail.com)) on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 07:11:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]
If some contractors committed a war crime, even on Biden's watch, he shouldn't have a difficulty disowning them and seeing justice done.

Since when is a President directly accountable for the actions of every private sector employee in the USA? If he can't unpardon them, he should send them straight to the Hague, but we all know that won't happen.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 07:51:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]
I don't think or meant that that would be Biden's fear. It would be more the fact that certain chauvinist Murdoch media in the States would have a blast derailing public discussion about anything else but this issue if it came to pass. Hence Democratic presidents cannot easily afford even beginning a discussion to join up until the timing is just right -- it is too expensive, politically, if you consider that Obama had to spent nearly all of his political capital pushing a meagre first step to a (fairly banal) health care reform. I've been saying this for years now: America is on the brink of ungovernability, the system is so self-paralyzing that it is almost unfit for purpose. The largest military power underpinning the world's safety system is in dire need of repair; that should give everyone pause for thought. Every other major nation had also major constitutional reform in the past 5 decades. The United States? Desegregation in '68 -- and that. was. it. The chicken have long come home to roost, but have been roasted instead.
by Averett on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 02:28:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]
Desegregation of 1957

Started a bit earlier under the Eisenhower/Nixon administration and before the  John F. Kennedy, MLK and RFK assassinations.

The Civil Rights Act of 1964 was passed under pressure from Lyndon B. Johnson, the last Socialist from Texas. The backlash has been very costly as the Barry Goldwater doctrine persevered in the Republican Party and was strenghtened by the loss of the South for the Democrats.

Goldwater, the John Birch Society and Me | WSJ |

Tom Pauken refights the cultural wars of the sixties--and loses | Texas Monthly |

The old division of the early sixties between Nelson Rockefeller and Barry Goldwater continues to cleave the GOP into two wings. Call them traditionalist conservative and ultra-conservative, establishment and populist [faction].

...

The biggest difference between the two factions is that one of them wants to use the government and the other has no use for government. Bush is a traditional conservative. He has an ambitious legislative program, and he knows he can't pass it unless he wins the confidence of Democrats, who control the Legislature.

Indeed, there's no hope for America as progress is not part of the U.S. Constitution. Can't even Impeach the Insurrectionist president!

by Oui on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 01:14:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Thanks for the clarification, and yes, I was glib with the details. While desegregation began earlier, it took until '68 to be fully implemented (with the completion of the Civil Rights act) as an enchilada of equal rights that should have been granted in '65.
1865, that is.
In other words, America spent over a century to push into law the meaning of the victory of the civil war, and as recent events have shown that work is far from finished.
At this pace, we will need another century to get a reliable public health care option.
by Averett on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 03:29:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The Return of School Segregation in Eight Charts, 2014

Segregation has soared in America's schools as federal leaders largely looked away , 2020

Hidden Segregation Within Schools Is Tracked in New Study, 2020
.
.
.
and I'm not even trying to dig up dirt! Wait 'til you get to the "studies" on school resource officers (police)

by Cat on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 06:14:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
The USA has been the dominant world power since 1945, and overwhelmingly so since the fall of the Soviet Union. But it has been squandering its political capital at an alarming rate, reminiscent of Nero and the burning of Rome. Now even its overwhelming military dominance, and faltering economic dominance cannot make up for its political dysfunctionality, so much so that former allies are abandoning it, or at least only giving lip service to past alliances.

What is most striking from abroad is the timidity of what passes for the US left, such that even minor reforms are compromised almost from day one; in sharp contrast to the brashness of the radical right, where the whole point is often to offend and intimidate everyone else. Johnson's civil rights and social welfare reforms are probably the last radical changes brought in by the left. Everything since has been Nixonian, Reaganite, or Republican lite.

If I were Biden and had only a limited amount of political capital to spend, I would probably bring in Medicare for all, under cover of the pandemic, and resource up the public health services to cope with the increased demand. Those who want to, and can afford it, can cling to their health insurance and private healthcare.  I would probably try to enact a similar reform to provide free or almost free third level education if I had sufficient political capital to spare.

No doubt subsequent Republican administrations would try to gut both, but the Overton window would have moved, and they would be starting from a different base. Republicans have excelled at creating "facts on the ground" while leaving the subsequent carnage for Democrats to clean up. It's time those roles were reversed.

Index of Frank's Diaries

by Frank Schnittger (mail Frankschnittger at hot male dotty communists) on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 03:32:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Amen, Frank.

Alas, the very voters one would try to supply with public health care are overwhelmingly the ones who vote Republican. Similarly, it is Republican-led states who receive the per-capita largest sums of federal subsidies, yet their leaders play a cost-free game of blaming the center/capital for any misbegotten policy effects they themselves have triggered by constantly watering down political decisions at the center to keep harming their own populace indirectly, in the successful attempt to mobilize them for the next wave of anti-government sentiment.
The dysfunctionality of American polity boggles the mind.

by Averett on Wed Jan 27th, 2021 at 07:58:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]
International Court of Justice in The Hague

Highest International Court for disputes between nations - UNGA.

The US will never become member of the ICC, nor will for example Israel. States that act with impunity and flounder international law and Security Council Resolutions.

US Sanctions International Criminal Court Prosecutor | HRW |

US-ICC Relationship - 2013

See also the The Hague Invasion Act 🤣

by Oui on Tue Jan 26th, 2021 at 07:07:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]
...that's a bit like saying Boris Johnson does everything he does because he's Turkish, innit...
by Averett on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 05:43:19 PM EST
...to be fair, Turkey is about as isolated as the UK on that chart...
by asdf on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 05:52:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Correlation is not causation tho.
by Averett on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 06:27:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]
And the hits keep on coming...

Mastercard to raise fees by at least 400% for EU firms selling to UK customers  - Guardian

Mastercard is to increase the fees EU firms face to take payments from online shoppers from the UK by at least 400%, in a move that could mean higher prices for consumers.

When a credit or debit card is used, a percentage of the purchase price is paid by the retailer to the bank that issued it as an interchange fee, which is set by a payments firm.

And the kicker?

Since 2015, the EU has capped these fees across the European Economic Area (EEA), including within the UK.
by Bernard on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 06:58:41 PM EST
Another fine example of Brexit "gains".
by Averett on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 09:59:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]
New European: European parliament agrees to add British overseas territories to post-Brexit tax haven blacklist
MEPs have voted to add British overseas territories such as the British Virgin Islands, Guernsey, and Jersey to its post-Brexit tax havens blacklist.

The resolution passed through the European parliament with a majority of 537 and saw territories with 0% tax regimes automatically added to the list.

Britain's membership of the European Union had afforded it some protection, and allowed it to protect its overseas territories from scrutiny.

The text of the vote explicitly mentioned the Brexit deal - suggesting that the UK's departure from the EU was based on "mutual values and geared towards common prosperity, which automatically excludes aggressive tax competition".

So, no they're out, the EU is no longer going to ignore the UK's role as a criminal money laundry. Good.

by IdiotSavant on Mon Jan 25th, 2021 at 10:44:58 PM EST
oh
As vaccination centres in Germany, France and Spain cancelled or delayed appointments, the EU publicly rebuked Anglo-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca for failing to deliver and even asked if it could divert supplies from Britain.
[...]
"If no satisfactory solution can be found, I believe we should explore all options and make use of all legal means and enforcement measures at our disposal under the Treaties," Michel said in the Jan. 27 letter.

EU rules on monitoring and authorising exports of COVID-19 vaccines in the 27-nation bloc could lead to exports being blocked if they violated existing contracts between the vaccine maker and the EU, an EU official said.

by Cat on Thu Jan 28th, 2021 at 04:30:24 PM EST
Contract law not well understood?
by Bernard on Thu Jan 28th, 2021 at 08:54:42 PM EST
[ Parent ]
"Anglo-Swedish drugmaker AstraZeneca" - Astra was a Swedish company until 1999, I think AstraZeneca in political terms should be understood to be a British company with legacy facilities in Sweden.

In similar vein Pharmacia was absorbed by UpJohn and later Pfizer.

Though Sweden has a lot of small pharmaceutical companies, there is as far as I know nothing on the scale of what existed until the late 90ies.

Some ten years ago a Swedish minister - can't remember who and search engines has been crapified - suggested we should build a pharmaceutical factory in Sweden. It was laughed at, doesn't she understand that the market provides?

by fjallstrom on Fri Jan 29th, 2021 at 09:46:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]
by Oui on Wed Feb 3rd, 2021 at 06:52:55 AM EST


Display:
Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]