Policy primer

In Brussels, trans fats impasse nears resolution

With the Commission poised to back EU-wide rules, the fight will be over how long companies have to adapt.

The European Commission is gearing up to propose a legal limit on industrially produced trans fats, breaking a years-long legislative logjam that has frustrated health care campaigners and major food companies — both of which support a cap.

Where advocates and industry diverge is over how long companies should have to adapt to the change — making this the likely battleground once the Commission issues its trans fats proposal in the fall.

These unsaturated fatty acids are added to foods such as margarine and pre-packaged biscuits and cakes to lengthen shelf life. But they also increase the risk of heart disease, one of the leading causes of death in the EU.

In 2003, Denmark became the first EU country to impose a legal limit on industrial trans fats of 2 percent of the total fat content. Nearly 15 years later, the Commission is expected to propose the same limit, according to an official who was not authorized to speak on the record.

DG SANTE Director General Xavier Prats-Monné said at a POLITICO event in July that “the time is ripe” for a trans fats initiative. “I think industry is willing. I think there’s a clear need, and most importantly, there is clear scientific evidence,” he said.

And a spokesperson confirmed the Commission’s objective is to “submit a proposal” to member countries “by the end of the year.”

That proposal will take the form of an implementing act to add to rules on the addition of substances to food, according to the Commission official. It would need to be signed off on by a committee of national experts, which could happen as early as October, the official said.

Health care NGOs have accused the Commission of dragging its feet on the EU-wide standard, since it already released a preliminary report backing a legal limit on trans fats more than two and a half years ago. By that point, food giants including Nestlé and Mars also publicly supported the 2 percent limit. The Commission then launched an impact assessment under the “better regulation” evaluation of EU policies championed by President Jean-Claude Juncker, which NGOs say was unnecessary.

“This is not better regulation. This is a waste of time,” said Susanne Løgstrup, director of the health campaign group the European Heart Network. And now, several EU countries in addition to Denmark have adopted legal limits, including Austria and Hungary, while others, such as Germany and Belgium, have introduced voluntary measures.

She is now confident the Commission will target a quick win before the end of Juncker’s presidency in October 2019.

“There’s nothing to wait for anymore … This is an easy one. It’s low-hanging fruit,” Løgstrup said.

One aspect of the plan still under discussion is the length of the transition period companies will have to implement the regulation. The Commission held a meeting with both NGOs and industry on the subject in June.

NGOs want it to be as short as possible and recommend nine months, modeled after the Danish legislation. The food industry wants a runway of around two years.

Many big companies already have reformulated their products to remove trans fats over the past two decades, said Dirk Jacobs, the deputy director general of FoodDrinkEurope, which represents food and beverage companies of all sizes. The additional time is needed to allow smaller companies to adopt the changes.

“There needs to be a sufficiently adequate transition period and support for SMEs doing the work in taking out industrial trans fats,” he said.

In exchange for backing the trans fats limit, the industry also wants out of another requirement that took effect in 2014 — the need to include full and partial hydrogenation on food labels — which they argue would now be redundant.

Health groups say they’re on board with that too.

Carmen Paun contributed reporting. 

This article is part of the autumn 2018 policy primer.

Triggered Hollywood stars took to social media on the 4th of July to fire off unhinged screeds about how President Donald Trump’s much-hyped “Salute to America” event, a tribute to the U.S. military, is just more proof of the dictatorship he intends to one day establish in America.

“So we’ve got people cheering tanks that are rolling through the streets of the capitol and children in cages on our border. Happy Birthday, America!” said The Office star Rainn Wilson.

“We have a racist, fascist president who’s using armed thugs in law enforcement & illegal militias to keep us cowed & hopeless & he’ll take the 2020 election by armed force & blatant, treasonous criminality & that’s us now, we’re the country with concentration camps so happy 4th,” fumed Avengers director Joss Whedon.

Indeed, it doesn’t take much to send these Hollywood freaks into a frenzy. Add in an hour of praising the U.S. armed forces, flyovers, live musical performances, and a speech by President Trump, and let the melt down commence.

“Dear @realDonaldTrump, Donnie??…the budget for your middle finger #SalutetoAmerica was a VERY generous $15million!!,” said actress Bette Midler. “You are currently $80million OVERBUDGET!! With that, we longer want to use your services!! Pack up your desk and security will escort you out! #YOUSUCK #BeBette.”

Many of these people broke out into hives a day before the event began. Check out all the Hollywood hate below.

Follow Jerome Hudson on Twitter @jeromeehudson

Click Here: Tienda Fútbol de Leon

Talk turns to the euro currency as EU chiefs gather in Brussels on Friday for the second day of their leaders’ summit.

Click Here: Tienda Club Tijuana

Scroll down for live updates.

**A message from #RO2019EU: Romania is approaching the end of its mandate as rotating Presidency of the EU Council. Ninety files closed in 100 days, a strongly motivated and gender-balanced team, insightful expertise, commitment to a Europe that is more cohesive and closer to its citizens have been the drivers of the first #RO2019EU. Learn more here.**

Actress Gwyneth Paltrow has been branded an extortionist by attendees of her recent $5,700-per-head wellness summit hosted by her “Goop” lifestyle brand, Page Six reports.

One attendee of the weekend summit in London reportedly sent a WhatsApp message to fellow attendees branding the actress a “fucking extortionist” after being asked to book two nights at the Kimpton Fitzroy London Hotel through Goop.

Attendees later discovered that standard rooms started at $250 a night but rooms booked through Goop were suites with a “gluten-free” breakfast thrown in.

The summit in London was billed as “a mind-body-soul reset” retreat where guests would receive tips about “hydrating mindfully” and “channeling God through creativity,” as well as a seminar and panel discussions featuring Paltrow, Penelope Cruz, and Twiggy.

However, guests pointed out that Paltrow did not open herself up to attendees and complained that organizers aggressively tried to sell them Goop merchandise.

goop CEO Gwyneth Paltrow speaks onstage at In goop Health Summit Los Angeles 2019 at Rolling Greens Nursery on May 18, 2019 in Los Angeles, California. (Neilson Barnard/Getty Images for goop)

“Gwyneth acts like she’s a health goddess, but actually she’s a pretentious, greedy extortionist. She had a ton of security . . . She was unapproachable,” one attendee told Page Six. “She did the minimum, a few fireside chats with Twiggy and Penelope Cruz, then she put on her Birkenstocks and snuck out… I was a huge fan of Gwyneth; now I feel like I have lost my faith in God.”

A representative for Goop told the newspaper that the real value of the weekend was closer to $8,000 but guests received a plethora of free extras including “golden facials” and “far-infrared gemstone therapy.”

“In addition to walking around the summit, [Gwyneth] also hosted an intimate workout class with Tracy . . . followed by . . . a panel, where she and Tracy answered attendee questions in an honest, casual setting,” said the rep. “We have not received negative feedback . . . [It] was more along the lines of, ‘Thanks for an amazing weekend!’”

The negative press is merely the latest controversy surrounding the “Goop” brand, which since its launch in 2008 has become an empire worth an estimated $250 million. Last December, the company settled a $145,000 payout in civil penalties over “unsubstantiated claims” made about some of their online products, such as pricey vaginal eggs and a floral oil blend that they claimed could prevent depression.

In 2017, the brand also came under fire for promoting weight loss advice experts argued was “extremely damaging” to readers’ long-term health. The diet involved radically reducing gluten and carbohydrates, as well as working out every day with the aim of losing 14-pounds within four weeks.

Click Here: Tienda Club América

Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at [email protected]

5 things to know about the European Commission’s German auto probe

The Commission’s investigation deepens the woes of Germany’s big 3 carmakers.

BERLIN — Forget cakes and gifts.

On the third birthday of the Dieselgate scandal, the European Commission’s competition czar Margrethe Vestager slapped Germany’s big carmakers with an-depth emissions-related collusion probe.

The investigation affects the three German auto giants Daimler, BMW and Volkswagen, along with VW subsidiaries Porsche and Audi, with Brussels alleging that they conspired to restrict the development of technology that would have reduced harmful emissions from gasoline and diesel engines in their cars.

One issue deals with AdBlue, a form of liquid urea, that removes pollutants from diesel exhaust, according to industry officials. A key theory is that carmakers limited the size of the AdBlue tanks that restricted their effectiveness.

Commission spokesman Ricardo Cardoso insisted that there is “no direct link between our case and the emission scandal” that led to VW paying out billions in the U.S. and that the decision to launch the investigation comes after October raids at carmakers’ facilities.

Despite those assurances, the new case promises to cast yet another cloud over the industry’s reputation. Past scandals have already helped drive down diesel car sales — although they still make up a significant proportion of car fleets.

Here’s what you need to know:

1. The timing is a problem for German car regulation.

The case comes during an ongoing debate within Germany about how far to push the industry to clean up its cars to help tackle air pollution. So far, government policy has been to support a software update program that will see emissions systems upgraded in about 6.3 million diesel cars. But Environment Minister Svenja Schulze is among those backing a wider and much more expensive hardware upgrade program that is being fiercely resisted by the car industry. But the probe again shifts attention to the fundamental honesty of the car industry, which will weaken its argument that it is doing enough to fight the smog caused by diesel cars. Crucially, the transport ministry, traditionally a car sector supporter, has started to show signs of wobbling on the issue.

2. The car probe comes in the wake of a successful truck investigation.

This isn’t the first time EU competition busters have gone after the industry. In 2016, the Commission levied a total of €3.8 billion in penalties against a club of truckmakers over cartel activities that included colluding to slow down the introduction of new cleaner emissions technologies. Daimler was one of the club of companies affected along with VW subsidiaries. “There have been eight recent cartel cases affecting the automotive sector with cumulative fines of €4.5 billion and this investigation closely resembles the one that caught truckmakers,” said Greg Archer, who runs the clean vehicle program at NGO Transport & Environment.

3. Carmakers can ride out scandals, politicians may not.

Germany may have a mammoth auto industry (employing more than 800,000 and by some estimates making up around a quarter of national GDP) but voters are also keen on environmental issues. While VW has posted record profits and sales over recent quarters, the damage for politicians seen to be backing the industry is beginning to show, not least in the split over whether to push for software or hardware fixes. The continued bad press makes it difficult for Germany to adopt its traditional approach of browbeating Brussels regulators to go easy on emissions rules — crucial at a time when the EU is setting CO2 emissions standards up to 2030 for both cars and trucks.

4. It’s a question of how much cooperation is OK.

Despite the competitive nature of the auto industry, some cooperation on standards is natural, and not a problem for cartel authorities if they know about it in advance, said Ferdinand Dudenhöffer, a professor at the Center for Automotive Research at the University of Duisburg-Essen. “That does not seem to have been done [in the case of emissions technology],” he said. “This is usually punished with higher penalties — perhaps in the hundreds of millions.” The Commission said it had found evidence of wide-ranging discussions between carmakers over everything from components to car models. But not every conversation had an impact on competition. Cardoso said the Commission didn’t find “sufficient evidence” to widen the scope of the investigation beyond emissions technology.

5. It’s not the first scandal for Germany’s carmakers.

The German transport ministry said it would not respond to the probe, but Transport Minister Andreas Scheuer quickly posted a video that tried to shift attention beyond Germany. “I don’t only see German diesel cars on German roads,” said Scheuer. “That is why I call on foreign car manufacturers to make their contribution in the German diesel debate.” While carmakers like Fiat have also faced emissions investigations, the bulk of the attention has been focused on Germany’s big three. A problem for them is that the stream of lurid scandals keeps coming. Earlier this year, it turned out that they had financed emissions research that included exposing caged monkeys to diesel exhaust fumes.

Kalina Oroschakoff and Matthew Karnitschnig contributed reporting.

Click Here: Tienda Atlas

A television producer has said that the BBC should cancel repeats of classic British comedy Dad’s Army because it makes the broadcaster appear pro-Brexit and inspires pro-Leave sentiments in Britons.

Writing in the Radio Times, Daisy Goodwin, writer of the ITV drama Victoria, said that the late 1960s show was affecting Britons’ attitudes about Brexit, writing: “Forget Game of Thrones, Dad’s Army is the show that is embedded in this country’s imagination.”

“The world of Dad’s Army is a comforting place – it was reassuring during the mayhem of the three-day week and it’s soothing to those of us who worry about the effects of a No Deal Brexit,” she added in comments reported by  The Sun.

On her belief that the notoriously left-wing, anti-Brexit BBC is actually demonstrating a pro-Brexit bias by showing the programme, Ms Goodwin said: “If you really want to nail the BBC for influencing the nation’s state of mind about Brexit, you might look at how often Dad’s Army has been shown on BBC2.

“The BBC, if it wants to maintain its claim to impartiality, needs to retire the Home Guard (or send them on leave), because in the words of Private Frazer, ‘We are all doomed!’”

Dad’s Army, which ran from 1968 to 1977, was a British BBC comedy depicting the Home Guard — volunteers who prepared to defend Britain’s coastline in the event of a German invasion — during World War Two and enjoys cult status, being repeated frequently on the taxpayer-funded network and other channels.

This is not the first time that a classic television programme has fallen foul of modern, progressive-left sensibilities. A spiritual sequel to Dad’s Army‘s created by the same writing team, It Ain’t Half Hot Mum, set in India and Burma during the end of World War Two, is no longer shown on British television after accusations that it was homophobic and racist.

Co-creator and World War Two veteran Jimmy Perry based the series on his experiences serving in the Far East, and said the comedy show reflected “historical truth” and “the reality” of the times.

Mr Perry told The Telegraph in 2013: “It was at the time the only British sitcom to have been set outside of Britain. I’ve proposed doing a short film to introduce it which would explain how we came from having the biggest Empire in the world to having a multi-racial society.

“It Ain’t Half Hot Mum helps us understand an important part of our history and the changes which came about.”

Speaking to The Times a year later, Mr Perry, who passed away in 2016, rejected suggestions that the show was politically incorrect and warned against the rising culture of sensitivity, saying: “You might as well be in Stalin’s Russia. You don’t want to upset anyone.”

Click Here: Spain Rugby Shop

The center-right European People’s Party clung to first position in Sunday’s European election but will have a slimmer plurality in the European Parliament after voters delivered big gains to far-right populists, Liberals and Greens.

Voter turnout surged across the Continent to exceed 50 percent for the first time in a quarter century — suggesting renewed relevance for the EU amid Britain’s so-far failed effort to quit the bloc, and mounting external challenges from Russia, China and the United States.

Initial results and exit polls showed the EPP is likely to hold 179 seats — a sharp decline from the 216 it won last time. The center-left Progressive Alliance of Socialists and Democrats (S&D) is expected to come second with 150 seats, down from 187.

A new centrist-liberal coalition led by French President Emmanuel Macron and Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte is predicted to come third, with 108 seats, followed by the Greens with 68 seats. A disparate array of far-right and anti-EU forces, including the U.K.’s Brexit Party, is set to win at least 115 seats — but it is unclear how coordinated they will be, and they are currently divided into multiple groups.

The fragmented outcome suggests upcoming negotiations to fill the EU’s top jobs — including the presidencies of the European Commission, the Council and Parliament as well as the post of high representative of foreign affairs — will be particularly fraught.

Altogether, pro-EU parties will still control a substantial majority in the Parliament, but the balance of power among them will be difficult to ascertain. Even as the EPP holds on to the top spot, it will be far outnumbered by the other main pro-EU groups — the Socialists, Liberals and Greens — which together are expected to control 326 seats, and which have vowed to break the conservatives’ monopoly on the leadership of the EU institutions.

Udo Bullmann, the German MEP who leads the Socialists’ group in Parliament, said the EPP’s days in power are over.

“The EPP does not have the results, nor the political strength anymore to lead the EU and the European Commission,” Bullmann said. “We need a new a coalition for reform.”

However, Joseph Daul, the president of the EPP, declared victory for his party and laid claim to the Commission presidency for its nominee, the German MEP Manfred Weber.

“We have won the election,” Daul said at a rally with Weber at the Renaissance Hotel in Brussels. “There is only one job for us — it’s president of the Commission. It’s Manfred Weber.”

Margrethe Vestager, the European commissioner for competition and one of the Liberals’ nominees for Commission president, called the election a “landmark” and “a signal for change.” She said both the EPP and the Socialists had been put on notice that they could not carve up the EU to suit themselves.

“This is not anymore just a two-party majority,” she told reporters, referring to liberal gains. “I have been working with breaking monopolies, that is what I have been doing for five years now — this is also what voters have been doing today.”

Le Pen’s symbolic win

While voter turnout was a bright spot for the Brussels establishment, any celebration was tempered by the steep losses for the mainstream center-right and center-left parties that have led the EU since its founding. Gains by the far right suggest the bloc will continue to struggle with a populist insurgency for years to come. Most immediately, the higher numbers of nationalists could create new obstacles during legislative debates.

The EU also faces the highly unpredictable presence of a large contingent of pro-Brexit MEPs from Britain. The Brexit Party, led by the EU antagonist-provocateur Nigel Farage, was projected to win 29 seats. Farage, in a brief victory speech, declared that his party wants a role in the internal negotiations in London over how to accomplish Brexit.

The mainstay Conservative and Labour Parties took a severe drubbing in the U.K. and Farage warned that those results would be repeated in a national election if Britain fails to meet the latest Brexit deadline.  “If we don’t leave on October 31, then the scores you see for the Brexit Party today will be repeated in a general election and we are getting ready for it,” Farage said.

Beyond Brexit, the EU’s unsettled landscape is most clearly illustrated in France, where Macron’s La République En Marche party has devastated the traditional big two parties — the conservative Les Républicains and the Socialists. According to projections, Les Républicains lost 13 of their 20 seats, while the Socialists fell from 13 seats to just six.

But Macron’s party, which was predicted to win 21 seats, was bested by Marine Le Pen’s far-right National Rally, which won 22 seats.

In Germany, the collapse of the Social Democrats was even more dramatic than in France, with a projected loss of 11 seats — to 16 from 27 in the current Parliament. Chancellor Angela Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union and its Bavarian partner, the Christian Social Union, finished first but are still projected to suffer an overall loss of five seats, to 29 from 34 in 2014.

As the two mainstream parties fell, the Greens soared in Germany, winning a projected 22 seats, up from 13. The far-right Alternative for Germany party also jumped in support, and is projected to win 11 seats.

In Spain, Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez led his Socialist Party (PSOE) to a strong victory.

With 95 percent of ballots counted, PSOE won 33 percent of the vote, and captured 20 seats in Parliament, a pickup of six seats. The conservative People’s Party finished second with 20 percent and 12 seats in Parliament, a loss of four seats.

The liberal Ciudadanos won seven seats, and the far-right Vox won three seats. The far-left Podemos will have six MEPs, while former Catalan President Carles Puigdemont, now living in Belgium, and his former deputy Oriol Junqueras (jailed in Spain) will both enter the European Parliament.

But the victory by the Socialists in Spain, as well as a surprise first-place finish in the Netherlands, and a gain of seats in Portugal, Malta and Denmark, are not enough to offset the center-left’s losses in France and Germany, the EU’s biggest countries. The Socialists are also predicted to lose six seats in Romania.

Frans Timmermans, the Socialists’ nominee for Commission president, acknowledged the mixed results for his party.

“My political family has lost seats,” Timmermans, a former Dutch foreign minister who is currently first vice president of the Commission. “We have lost seats and that means we have to be humble. But I’m also optimistic.”

Timmermans said his party is hoping to forge a left-leaning alliance. “We will create a platform on the basis of progressive politics, forward-looking, dynamic,” he said.

In Greece, left-wing Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras announced snap national elections after his Syriza party suffered steep losses.

‘People’s victory’

While the French nationalist Le Pen narrowly edged out a victory over Macron, her party — which she rebranded National Rally from National Front after losing the presidential election in 2017 — is projected to win one fewer seat than in 2014.

 

Still, that did not stop Le Pen from claiming victory and insisting, without basis, that Macron would have no choice but to dissolve the French National Assembly. “I see this as the people’s victory, which has taken power back tonight with pride and dignity,” Le Pen declared in a speech to supporters. “We welcome this result with joy.”

She added, “A great movement for change is born tonight. I invite all patriots, regardless of where they come from, to come and join the National Rally.”

Among far-right forces, the biggest winner of the night was Italy’s League, led by Deputy Prime Minister Matteo Salvini, who made hard-line immigration policies a cornerstone of his campaign. Initial results show the League has won some 33 percent of the vote and captured 28 seats — a huge leap from the five seats that the party won in 2014.

In Poland, the governing right-wing Law and Justice Party is projected to win five additional seats, bringing to 24 its number of MEPs.

In the Netherlands, the new far-right Forum for Democracy party performed worse than expected, but still won three seats.

But the picture is not entirely positive for right-wing parties. In Denmark, the Danish People’s Party, which is part of the European Conservatives and Reformists (ECR) group, is projected to lose three of its four seats. Overall the ECR is projected to lose 20 seats, most of them British Conservatives who were decimated by the backlash over their handling of Brexit.

Jacopo Barigazzi, Maïa de la Baume, Lili Bayer, Laura Kayali, Rym Momtaz, Eline Schaart, Silvia Sciorilli-Borrelli, Diego Torres, Nicholas Vinocur and other POLITICO journalists across Europe contributed reporting. 

This article has been updated.

Britain’s Prince Harry and the Duchess of Sussex Meghan Markle are famous climate change advocates but recently pop icon Elton John had to come to their defense over their habitual use of private jets to fly around the world on vacation.

The Duke and Duchess of Sussex recently took heat for flying off to vacation at singer Elton John’s $18 million mansion in Nice, France, on the French Rivera, even though they both regularly speak about climate change. Worse for the critical activists, it was the couple’s fourth private jet flight in only 11 days.

But, on Monday, Sir Elton spoke up for the royal couple saying that he not only paid for the flights out of his own pocket, but he also claims to have made a “carbon neutral” donation to paper over the trip, according to the Daily Mail.

Click Here: USA Rugby Shop

The “Rocketman” singer insisted that when he arranged for the pair to visit his home, he also made sure to donate money to an “appropriate” carbon footprint fund.

In his remarks, Elton John said he is “deeply distressed” over the “distorted and malicious” attacks on Harry and Markle, and he feels the need to defend them “from the unnecessary press intrusion that contributed to Diana’s untimely death,” TMZ reported.

John insisted that he offered the couple a short vacation stay at his mansion because they have had a “hectic” year. He also wanted to reward them for their work for charity.

The singer pleaded with the couple’s detractors to “cease these relentless and untrue assassinations on their character that are spuriously crafted on an almost daily basis.”

But critics pounced. The couple had only just returned from a trip to the Spanish island Ibiza — where villas rent for up to $23,000 a week — to celebrate Markle’s 38th birthday. Critics also pointed out that the private jet trip to Nice sports a more than $23,000 price tag and that the pair could have flown commercial 200 times for that cost.

In addition, the private jet flight to and from Ibiza would create 12.5 tons of carbon dioxide per person, an amount of pollution that would take 14 commercial flights to emit, according to activists.

Buckingham Palace has refused to comment on the trips, or the costs involved.

Follow Warner Todd Huston on Twitter @warnerthuston.

The Trump administration’s global campaign against telecom giant Huawei is pitting Europe against itself over China.

In the midst of a ballooning U.S.-China trade conflict, Washington has spent the past few months pressing its EU allies via its ambassadors to take a stronger stance against Chinese telecom vendors such as Huawei and ZTE.

The American push, which continued Wednesday with public accusations by U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, is exposing fault-lines between U.S. allies in Europe as well as the so-called “Five Eyes” intelligence community — which have largely followed the U.S. lead — and others that resist the American pressure by stopping short of calling out Chinese tech.

It’s another Cold War — this time over information technology.

In the first group there is the United Kingdom, which pushed Huawei to open up its products for constant government audits, and to a lesser extent allied countries like Belgium that are considering steps against Chinese vendors. Even the European Commission, which usually avoids stepping on national capitals’ toes over security, waded into the debate last week when a top official declared that the EU “should be worried” about firms like Huawei.

On the other side there is Germany, which wants proof from the United States that Huawei poses a security risk, as well as France, Portugal and a slew of central and eastern EU nations.

The increasingly divergent attitudes show how Donald Trump is forcing allies to take sides in a global dispute and measure their economic interests — often deeply embedded with the Chinese vendors — against the value of a security alliance with Washington.

“The message of the U.S. [on Chinese tech] is targeted in part at European governments,” said Paul Triolo, head of the “geo-technology” practice at think tank Eurasia Group.

Part of that message has to do with pointing a finger at China. Pompeo did that on Wednesday when he accused the Chinese government of hacking the Marriott hotel chain and stealing the information of up to 500 million people. Top U.S. intelligence officials also testified to senators Wednesday that they sense an “awakening” among allies regarding how they deal with Chinese tech vendors.

“As we shift into 5G, it is important to communicate the risk,” Christopher Krebs, a high-ranking cybersecurity official at the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, told senators.

The United States’ Five Eyes partners — the U.K., Canada, Australia and New Zealand — “have an increasing common understanding of these risks,” Krebs said, adding that Washington is reaching out to other international allies on this as well.

Up until now, no intelligence service has published clear evidence that Huawei inserted “backdoors” for Chinese authorities to access the data that passes through its networks. Huawei itself vehemently denies it has ever helped any intelligence service with espionage requests. “We categorically reject any allegation that we might pose a security threat,” it said in a statement last week.

But the company faces long-standing suspicions that it’s too close to Beijing’s intelligence services — concerns that stem from U.S. and U.K. government reports. Fueling such worries is the opaqueness of the company’s ownership structure. The company, which is privately held, was founded in 1987 by Ren Zhengfei, a former Chinese military officer, leading some to conclude that it has retained ties with the government.

The discussion over its position in Europe fits into a broader geopolitical shift, as Europe seeks ways to keep control over its technologies and industries under the banner of “strategic autonomy.” The Continent is also trying to relieve pressure on its once-dominant telecom equipment champions Ericsson and Nokia, which are feeling the heat from their Chinese competitors around the globe.

The U.S. diplomatic campaign has so far managed to convince counterparts in Canada, Australia, Japan and New Zealand to restrict Huawei.

The beef worsened last week when Canadian authorities arrested Huawei’s chief financial officer, Sabrina Meng, at the request of U.S. authorities.

They were set to ramp up the pressure in a coordinated release of indictments and statements this week slamming Beijing for continued aggression in cyberspace and for violating a 2015 agreement on cyber espionage activities, the Washington Post reported.

These moves add fuel to an escalating trade war between the United States and China. Trump previously used such judicial procedures as bargaining chips in his feud with Chinese counterparts over trade barriers and market access, and suggested Wednesday he could do the same with the Huawei case.

The U.S. indictments are aimed at sending a message to the European Union, analysts said.

“Huawei has a large market share,” a senior European diplomat said who asked not to be named due to the issue’s sensitivity. “Some Europeans haven’t seen a reason to change that. But the U.S. is more geo-politically driven.”

Germany resists

Overall, Europe’s response to concerns about Huawei has been: Show us proof, then we’ll consider the actions.

In critical markets such as Germany, France and the United Kingdom, authorities have charged security agencies with verifying telecom equipment. In the U.K., Huawei has a longstanding deal with the intelligence agency GCHQ to have its equipment audited at a center called “the Cell,” in Banbury, a provincial town in southeast England, where cybersecurity experts check its code for backdoors.

But pressure on EU governments is rising by the week for more public criticism of Huawei.

Alex Younger, the U.K.’s foreign intelligence chief, issued a public warning when he told an audience at St Andrews University: “We need to decide the extent to which we are going to be comfortable with Chinese ownership of these technologies and these platforms in an environment where some of our allies have taken a quite definite position.” The U.K.’s main telecom operator BT also decided to phase out Huawei equipment from its core network, the Financial Times reported earlier this month.

At the EU level, officials are scrambling to come up with a policy response. An internal paper obtained by POLITICO previously showed the European Commission recognized the risks associated with giving foreign vendors control over telecom networks. The Commission also commissioned a study on “cyber-enabled theft of intellectual property” that references the same hacker groups targeted by the expected U.S. statements this week.

Belgium’s Centre for Cybersecurity, which reports to Prime Minister Charles Michel, is advising the government about risks related to Huawei. It said it had “recently requested studies through national and international channels that [would] show that the use of Huawei technology comes with risk,” according to Miguel De Bruycker, head of the cybersecurity agency.

If Europe decides to side with the U.S. on Huawei, Germany would be the tipping point.

But Germany asserts that its security checks are sufficient and allows telecom operators to choose their vendors. The country’s biggest telecom companies said this week they would continue to work with Huawei to roll out fifth-generation, or 5G, networks.

“Considering the near-term needs for extension and investment, Germany will hardly be able to afford to exclude high-performance suppliers,” Deutsche Telekom said in a statement to POLITICO. Telefónica Deutschland and Vodafone echoed that statement.

Underscoring the friendly ties between German authorities and Huawei, the firm last month opened a center in Bonn called the Security Innovation Lab, where “a close and regular cooperation between the [German Federal Office for Information Security] and Huawei is planned” that would include “the verification of product safety,” the company said at the launch.

Arne Schönbohm, president of the Federal Office for Information Security (BSI), said in a statement that the lab “will allow further and deeper technical exchange between Huawei and BSI to address the future challenges of cyber security.”

Huawei last month tried to get German consumers on its side too, through an advertisement campaign that included quips referencing Berlin’s struggle to upgrade its telecom networks to 5G. The underlying message is that the country needs Huawei’s gear to make its transition to fifth-generation internet networks happen.

“What will cover more of Berlin,” one ad said, depicting an elderly lady holding a Maltese dog. “5G or dog poop?”

Janosch Delcker and Annabelle Dickson contributed reporting.

Click Here: South Africa Rugby Shop