Advertisement

We need your help now

Support from readers like you keeps The Journal open.

You are visiting us because we have something you value. Independent, unbiased news that tells the truth. Advertising revenue goes some way to support our mission, but this year it has not been enough.

If you've seen value in our reporting, please contribute what you can, so we can continue to produce accurate and meaningful journalism. For everyone who needs it.

What does euroscepticism in the EU look like now that Brexit has happened?

Up to 30% of MEPs have been characterised as being of various shades of eurosceptic.

“YOU’RE NOT LAUGHING now” was how Nigel Farage attempted to rub salt into the wounds of MEPs in the European Parliament five days after the 2016 Brexit vote.

Farage was in full gloating mode and then-Commission president Jean-Claude Juncker was baited into replying: “The British people voted for the exit. Why are you here?”

If only it were so easy. As Brexit dragged on, Farage remained in Brussels for almost four more years until the UK officially left the EU and lost all its MEPs.

But whether he meant it or not, there was a deeper meaning to Juncker simply asking Farage why he thought it necessary to be in the chamber.

The question of why Farage was there can also be taken to mean why someone so implacably opposed to the European project would devote so much time and effort to being there in the first place.

Many argue that in Farage’s particular case self-interest played a huge part – but speaking more generally, is the European Parliament the best place for a hardline eurosceptic?

It can be fairly argued that the best place to oppose the EU is at its heart, and that UKIP proved this by ultimately wedging the UK out.

But what if your goal isn’t an exit but rather to oppose greater integration?

Dr Ariadna Ripoll Servent is professor of EU politics at Salzburg Centre of European Union Studies and has written extensively about EU institutions and euroscepticism.

She has spoken about the various shades of eurosceptic MEPs elected to the European Parliament and says you can roughly group them as being either ‘hard eurosceptics’ or ‘soft eurosceptics’.

While the former may be opposed to membership or the very existence of the European Union, the latter are merely opposed to its goals and policies.

european-parliament-strasbourg-france-europe-the-louise-weiss-building The European Parliament building in Strasbourg, France. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo

“Soft eurosceptics could be those that are more critical of specific policies or are critical of the system not being democratic enough,” she tells The Journal.

If you have more of a softer form of euroscepticism, we could compare that to some sort of opposition politics. So it’s not much different than when, in national parliaments, you have opposition parties that maybe criticise what is being done by the government.

She adds: “Some of the criticisms are perfectly fair: issues of transparency or migration policies, which, if you think of the EU becoming a “fortress Europe”, is something that the radical left tends to criticise a lot and many people agree with. So yes, I think it can be good for democracy and offers a broader range of opinions.”

2019

The European Parliament elections in May 2019 were among the most closely-watched such votes in the history of the bloc, a fact that was reflected in EU-wide turnout that reached a 25-year high.

The Brexit vote itself, and to a larger degree the election of Donald Trump in 2016, had many EU politicians nervous that a surge of eurosceptic MEPs would be elected as part of a wider populist wave.

The result saw an increase in the number of eurosceptic MEPs elected but the much-expected revolution failed to materialise.

Instead, the outcome led to a greater fragmentation within the European Parliament and alliances that are less clear.

In an analysis Ripoll Servent carried out in the months after the vote, she determined that about 31% of MEPs elected in 2019 could be considered eurosceptic, an increase on the 27% following the 2014 vote.

This 31% would however drop to 28% within the year when the Brexit Party’s members departed along with the rest of the UK’s cohort.

The nature of Brexit also had an impact on euroscepticism across Europe.

While some sceptics may have been emboldened by the result, the tortuous negotiations that followed did not present an attractive proposition for eurosceptics to sell to voters.

Brussels-based Dutch journalist Caroline de Gruyter has covered European politics for well over a decade and says that Brexit has caused eurosceptics to change tack.

“Many eurosceptics have seen that actually it’s not very smart to go for an exit,” she explains.

They don’t want to follow the example of the UK, I think they’ve seen the mess. So we should thank the UK for not having made any plans, for the messiness of it and for the hardness of their Brexit, because it really opened the eyes of a lot of sceptics on the continent.

“What they do want now is instead to stay in and change the EU from the inside. And this is what many of them are doing. They are forming groupings on a European level, contacting each other ever more frequently.”

De Gruyter argues that in the case of the UK – Northern Ireland issues aside – Brexit should have been “relatively easy” because the country wasn’t part of the Euro or the Schengen travel area, whereas other Member States are more intertwined.

Namechecking Poland and Hungary, she adds that another issue for eurosceptics in some states is that their countries “depend on the money” from the EU.

“UKIP never depended on European money. But the the ruling party in Poland does, Fidesz in Hungary [does]. [Hungarian prime minister] Viktor Orban’s power base is almost is almost exactly based on European subsidies and how they are distributed among partners or friends,” she says.

Ireland

When it comes to euroscepticism, making a precise calculation about how prevalent it is within a parliament or a political system is difficult because parties either reject the label or because the label simply doesn’t fit.

It is also complicated by the fact that euroscepticism exists from both left and right of the traditional ideological divide. It is for this reason that the term ‘Lexit’ became popular during the UK Brexit debate, representing those in favour of Brexit from a left-wing standpoint.

In last year’s book Euroscepticism and the Future of Europe, the book’s three editors outline this phenomenon:

Euroscepticism represents a self-standing cleavage cutting through the left-right divide. With the exception of Austria, Cyprus, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Poland and Slovakia, most European countries have experienced right and left-wing Euroscepticism in parallel, with the left focusing their discourse largely on a rejection of the so-called “ultraliberal” Europe.

krakow-poland-07th-nov-2021-flags-of-the-european-union-and-poland-are-seen-pinned-up-during-the-protest-thousands-take-to-the-streets-of-poland-in-protest-after-the-death-of-30-year-old-izabela A pro-EU rally in Warsaw, Poland earlier this month. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo

The book goes on to detail the prevalence of euroscepticism in the politics of each member state, including Ireland.

The specific chapter on Ireland is written by Róisín Smith of the Institute of International and European Affairs (IIEA) and notes that “there are no true Eurosceptic parties influencing the political system”.

This would likely lead to some debate, with political opponents frequently pointing out that Sinn Féin has opposed every Irish referendum that sought greater EU integration.

Sinn Féin representatives have defended this history and have argued that critiquing “the European project” should not equate to the label of eurosceptic.

In any event, Smith’s contention that euroscepticism does not influence Irish politics does not mean it doesn’t exist here, but rather that there is “no evidence” to suggest it is “shaping the political landscape”.

Candidates for the Irish Freedom Party, for example, which directly campaigns for an Irish exit from the EU, received 2% or less in first-preference votes in last year’s general election.

Smith writes:

Levels of euroscepticism exist in every EU Member State. In Ireland, there are varying degrees of anti-European, anti-establishment, anti-immigration and populist sentiments. Protest voting, political discontent and distrust for the governing parties did result in an increase in the vote for self-described ‘Euro-critical’ parties such as Sinn Féin, and gains for new groupings, for instance, the Anti-Austerity Alliance, People Before Profit and Independents in the 2016 general election.Notwithstanding this, it is inaccurate to overestimate and conflate the importance of anti-establishment and anti-elitist sentiment in the Irish context and in shaping the Irish voter towards an anti-European view. Anti-establishment sentiment, however, does not lead to a distinctly eurosceptic force.

Smith goes on to argue that the initial rejection of the Nice and Lisbon treaties in Ireland “had more to do with domestic and anti-establishment stances than hard euroscepticism”.

She adds that the “Brexit factor” has also improved the status of the EU among Irish people, arguing that it has “harnessed support for the EU”.

An annual poll by the European Movement Ireland has tracked sentiment about Ireland and the EU since 2013.

This year’s poll found only 9% of people supported Ireland leaving the EU whereas, in 2015, 23% of people said the country should leave if the UK voted to do so.

2022

french-far-right-leader-marine-le-pen-and-hungarian-prime-minister-viktor-orban-shake-hands-after-holding-a-joint-news-conference-in-budapest-hungary-october-26-2021-reutersbernadett-szabo French far-right leader Marine Le Pen and Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban. Alamy Stock Photo Alamy Stock Photo

The coming year represents an important juncture for the EU’s stability and for the development of euroscepticism across the bloc, specifically the euroscepticism of the far-right.  

A growing east-west divide was highlighted during last month’s EU summit when Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic stood in opposition to Brussels after Poland’s Supreme Court had ruled that certain EU laws were unconstitutional.

It came on the back of a showdown at an earlier summit when Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban defended his parliament’s anti-LGBTQ law from criticism from various EU leaders.

Orban’s authoritarian regime in Hungary has been an increasing concern for many western nations and earlier this year his Fidesz party was forced out of the EPP European Parliament grouping which includes Fine Gael.

The departure of Fidesz from the group ended the debate between EPP parties over whether to kick Orban’s party out or keep his MEPs inside the tent to prevent them siding with far-right eurosceptics.

This fear was realised a number of months later when Orban, Marine Le Pen’s National Rally party and 14 other parties across the right and far-right said they would work towards a “grand alliance” in the European Parliament.

Efforts at forming a coherent eurosceptic alliance of the right have long provided elusive but the joint declaration by the parties sought to move it a step closer.

Other signatories included Matteo Salvini, leader of Italy’s anti-immigration League, Santiago Abascal of the Spanish populist movement Vox and Jaroslaw Kaczynski, leader of Poland’s governing PiS party.

In the statement, they say that the EU “continues to pursue the federalist path that inexorably distances it from the peoples who are the beating heart of our civilisation”.

They urged “reform” of the bloc, adding that Europe’s “most influential patriotic parties” had “understood the importance” of joining forces.

Crucially, both Le Pen and Orban are facing elections next year that will go a long way to determining how influential the alliance may be.

Le Pen is facing an uphill struggle and, based on current polling, may not even make the run off vote against Emmanuel Macron, as she did in 2017.

Even if she or her similarly far-right rival Eric Zemmour do make the head-to-head vote against Macron, it is not expected that they will win the presidency outright.

Le Pen was in Budapest last month and met with Orban, refusing while there to criticise Hungary’s anti-LGBTQ law that’s at the centre of the row with Brussels.

Orban himself is facing tough parliamentary elections in April 2022 after six opposition parties took the unprecedented step of backing a single candidate as part of their efforts to unseat him.

Marki-Zay became the opposition candidate after a primary, consolidating an anti-Orban coalition in the first-past-the-post electoral system.

Polling is said to be neck-and-neck in the contest but the UN has already warned about the staunchly pro-Orban media attempting to “distort” the race.

Reflecting on the coming year, De Gruyter says that while you “never know” what can happen in elections, there have been various examples in recent years of centrist parties defeating populism in places like Switzerland and Austria, a fact she hopes is repeated:

“If we put our heads down and let them walk all over us, we can get into the kinds of scenarios where the far-right wins. But under normal circumstances we should keep answering these guys, because perhaps while they ask the right questions they never provide answers, so we should keep answering them and when they attack democracy, we should defend it.”

This work is co-funded by Journal Media and a grant programme from the European Parliament. Any opinions or conclusions expressed in this work is the author’s own. The European Parliament has no involvement in nor responsibility for the editorial content published by the project. For more information, see here.

Readers like you are keeping these stories free for everyone...
A mix of advertising and supporting contributions helps keep paywalls away from valuable information like this article. Over 5,000 readers like you have already stepped up and support us with a monthly payment or a once-off donation.

Close
50 Comments
This is YOUR comments community. Stay civil, stay constructive, stay on topic. Please familiarise yourself with our comments policy here before taking part.
Leave a Comment
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Dylan
    Favourite Dylan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 7:55 AM

    I wish news outlets covered these stories with more consistency. You hear nothing about these conflicts for days or weeks depending on the country, and then you’re expected to take in one massive news story that outlines months of conflict, and then you’ll hear nothing about it again for another while. RTE could axe half the fluff news stories and give running coverage of these kinds of stories as well as Irish news. That would be too much like informative journalism I suppose.

    204
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Austin Rock
    Favourite Austin Rock
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:07 AM

    Saudi Arabia is a rogue terrorist state run every bit as worse as the likes of Syria. They are simply attacking Shia rebels because of their patholigical hatred of Shia’s and their terror of Iran. They are solely attacking Shia’s only while ignoring their Sunni creations in Yemen like ISIS and Al-Qaida (who blew the crap out of a few mosques last week). This is all in line with their growing fear of Shia strenght in Iraq. They will probably get sucked into a murderous war, but I’d say genocide is on the cards with these people. America and the West has strange friends and allies – but none weirder than SA.

    167
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Roger Burke
    Favourite Roger Burke
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:07 AM

    Saudi Arabia just wants to reassert it’s dominance in the middle eastern region. It supports any organisation that is anti-Iran.

    52
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:41 AM

    Correct, and Iran also supports any organisation that’s anti-Sunni.
    Therein lies the problem – two regional superpowers in a protracted dick-waving contest.

    53
    See 2 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Bill Madden
    Favourite Bill Madden
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 1:46 PM

    @ Saudi v Iran aka Shia v Sunni (wahabi) nothing news there. It’s been going on for nearly 1000 years on and off!

    19
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Tony Canning
    Favourite Tony Canning
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 4:47 PM

    Sunni=\=wahabi

    4
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 7:51 AM

    Oh the hypocrisy.

    Saudi Arabia(an unelected dictatorship) , other countries in the region(more unelected dictatorships) and the US have decided to act to prevent the fall of the guys they back in Yemen. No issues with this with the Western Media.

    If Russia had decided to intervene in Ukraine when the elected government was overthrown in a coup and decided to use its army can you imagine the headlines in the press that has utterly berm bought by corporations and intelligence agencies. They would read ‘Russian Aggression’ etc with the moral West advising Russia not to intervene in the internal affairs of its neighbour.

    This is illegal aggression that is and will get whitewashed in the Western Media. What will also get covered up by the media will be the fact the US has launched over 1,100 done and air strikes in Yemen under President Obama with the deaths of over 1,200 people, the vast majority of them innocent women and children burnt to cinders.

    132
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:06 AM

    It’s amazing how people can still manage to complain about the US even when a military operation is launched which they are not involved in.

    The drone strikes in Yemen have been conducted with the consent of the Yemenis government. Where are your facts that prove the “vast majority” of people killed in air strikes were civilians?

    76
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mick Jordan
    Favourite Mick Jordan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:12 AM

    Jason. You are around long enough to not actually expect the Anti West brigade to provide facts or proof.

    71
    See 14 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:17 AM

    Well Jason, even a most rudimentary search on Google relating to US drone strikes and civilians will turn up a host of investigations.

    Here is another. http://securitydata.newamerica.net/drones/yemen/analysis.html

    43
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Austin Rock
    Favourite Austin Rock
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:20 AM

    America is not the problem here, Obama in fairness understands what is going on – unlike Republicans. Which is why they supporting the Shia led fight against IS in Iraq, but they have been duped into supporting SA.
    Now I have to disagree “…. consent of the Yemenis government” – your joking right? The Sunni president? North Yemen Shia, South Yemen Sunni. There is NO Government in Yemen, just because a bunch of gold plated princes call “their man” a president doesn’t make him one. America has been targeting al-qaeda elements only up to now, but these are not the threat SA is interested in – its Shia’s. This is just part of a geo-sectarian war the gulf state loons are waging. Just look at the states that have backed SA? Pakistan, Sudan, Egypt and the gulf states. IS/al-qaeda are sunni creations. SA have a day of reckoning – hopefully soon for all the misery they have inflicted on the ME.

    53
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:33 AM

    Even using your own link RM, at the upper level out of 1100 killed, 87 were civilians.
    Now don’t get me wrong, this is still way too many, but which school did you go to that taught you that 87 out of 1100 is the “vast majority”?

    43
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute KalEll
    Favourite KalEll
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:44 AM

    Avina that’s because any adult male in the area is counted as a militant . The US also use a system known as a signature strikes whereby they attack based on particular behaviours and not identification of a target. So potentially you could have a group of civilians driving an SUV in the wrong area or doing some jumping jacks being blown up and confirmed as militant kills

    36
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:52 AM

    So, by your own admission, you only have assumptions and interpretations rather than hard facts to prove your point.

    Thanks for clearing that up.

    34
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Top Cat
    Favourite Top Cat
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:00 AM

    @Austin Rock: Obama hasn’t a clue what’s going on, he’s busy golfing while the world burns, thanks though I needed a chuckle this morning.

    18
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:11 AM

    As explained to Jason and Avina before by other greats such as Horgay and BLowe, the US classes anyone within a couple hundred metre blast radius as enemy combatants. Yes, it is outrageous and barbaric but that is the policy of the moral US government. So basically a ‘suspected’ terrorist is killed based on meta data and his immediate family are killed and even his neighbours who are killed are all classed as ‘enemy combatants’. Disgusting and barbaric yet never covered by Western Media.

    30
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:16 AM

    Horgay and BLowe was one and the same person, and like yourself was high on rhetoric but always ran a mile when asked for evidence to back up his claims.

    21
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:28 AM

    Horgay also had a habit of referring to B Lowe as a “great” despite them obviously being the same person. Not only that, Horgay had a habit of bringing up old arguments Avina and I had with B Lowe. Funny how there’s a few similarities starting to show.

    18
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:34 AM

    And just as in RM’s post to Mick Jordan lower down this thread, Horgay and BLowe also had a habit of opening his posts with “Re Mick” etc…

    Nice try Horgay, but your cover is blown again.

    21
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:36 AM

    You’ve had more identities than a retiring Mossad operative at this stage….

    20
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Top Cat
    Favourite Top Cat
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:40 AM

    Nice work special agents Jason & Avina.

    16
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Conor O' Halloran
    Favourite Conor O' Halloran
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 11:09 AM

    Speaking of hypocrisy, we were the ones lowering our flag to half mast when Saudi Royals kick the bucket, not the Americans.

    17
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute BannerBoyDesmond
    Favourite BannerBoyDesmond
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:12 PM

    America identified targets and passed them to Saudi Arabia so they were involved

    1
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Deborah Behan
    Favourite Deborah Behan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 7:56 AM

    As we have learned, it’s always a good idea to interfere with these things. Especially with Saudi Arabia cos they never do anything bad….. Except ISIS and Boko Haram

    70
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:02 AM

    According to assessments by even its own closet ally, the US, Saudi Arabia is the biggest financial supporter of terrorism in the queue.

    Of course, saying that, the US operates the biggest terrorist program in the world in the firm of its drone program so maybe the two countries go well together.

    92
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Joe Sullivan
    Favourite Joe Sullivan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:08 AM

    You said it rm.

    36
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mick Jordan
    Favourite Mick Jordan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:18 AM

    The Saudis were never going to permit an Shia dominated Iranian backed government on their door step. The Sunni – Shia war has been on going for 1500 years. Both sides despise the other with a hatred only found in religion. Both see each other as Heretics and Usurpers. And will quite happily slaughter each other with abandon.

    36
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:19 AM

    Re Mick

    You say this as if it is a perfectly natural conclusion and a natural turn of affairs.

    Your bias shines through though Mick because if Russia had done likewise in Ukraine you would be the first to criticise and lambast.

    25
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute John R
    Favourite John R
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:34 AM

    RM, a religious dispute going on for 1400 years or so – It seems reasonable for Mick to describe it as a perfectly natural state of affairs in human conflict. This is not making an excuse for it. I suspect that the primary reasons the Saudis are intervening is that Iran, their regional nemesis, is involved in the rebel side, the conflict is in their own borders and they fear a destabilisation of the gulf which could impact on their primary means of income – oil. It wouldn’t matter is SA were democratic we would be seeing the exact same response. This is regional power politics. Unsavoury but there it is. As for those who hope SA get their comeuppance; be careful what you wish for. They are likely to be replaced by some thing far worse.

    25
    See 2 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mick Jordan
    Favourite Mick Jordan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:49 AM

    RM. The Russia – Ukrainian war has nothing to do with religion as this conflict has. If it was as simple as one country invading another for territorial gain then your analogy may have some cohesion.
    But this is a regional religious war that has been continuing unabated for 1500 years. And your efforts to blame others outside this conflict for your own biased reasons is pathetic.

    20
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Avina Laaf
    Favourite Avina Laaf
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:04 AM

    Good assessment John. KSA and Iran are as bad as each other in so many ways. Just as KSA funds proxies to further its agendas, so also does Iran fund and control various proxy armies all over the middle east in pursuit of its geopolitical objectives.

    According to some commenters on here though, Iran are just a misunderstood peace-loving nation who “haven’t invaded anyone for thousands of years”.

    26
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Gaeltán
    Favourite Gaeltán
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 7:51 AM

    Cé chomh fada anois go mbeidh cogadh cathartha san Araib Shádach féin?

    24
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Glen
    Favourite Glen
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 8:20 AM

    These stories tend to bring out the most condescending of commenters.

    23
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute trickytrixster
    Favourite trickytrixster
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 7:55 AM

    My comment deleted,what a load of shi’ite

    20
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Turfy
    Favourite Turfy
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 11:03 AM

    So..US backed Saudi fighting Houthi backed Iran in the south…while in the east Iran are being supported by the US in Iraq…all awhile the Iranian nuclear talks were on the verge of an agreement.
    How convenient…

    19
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Pat O'Dwyer
    Favourite Pat O'Dwyer
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:56 AM

    Some interesting background information on the present conflict :
    “There’s much more than meets the eye here. In reality, inserting a foreign coalition military force into the country will increase the risk of spill-over. Looking at the harsh sectarian war brimming in Yemen, is it possible that Saudi Arabia and its ‘Sunni coalition’ may be attempting to provide air support and military assistance to its Islamic militant ‘affiliates’ inside Yemen? Recently, we exposed Saudi’s funding and supporting of al Qaeda in Yemen, in an attempt to remove the Shia Houthis who have just seized power. Perhaps Saudi is afraid that al Qaeda and AQAP (al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula) will be wiped out by the Shia Houthis if they did not intervene now. If this is indeed the case, it reveals just how important these extremist Sunni Islamic militant terrorist groups (including ISIS) are to Saudi Arabia in its strategy subterfuge to maintain its position as the ranking power in the region.”
    “The fact that Yemen did not attack Saudi Arabia or any of the other GCC allies means that Saudi and its GCC partners are now in direct violation of international law, specifically the Nuremberg Principles and the Geneva Conventions.”
    More :
    http://21stcenturywire.com/2015/03/25/war-saudi-arabia-launches-airstrikes-against-neighboring-yemen/

    10
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Pat O'Dwyer
    Favourite Pat O'Dwyer
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 11:43 AM

    Referring to some comments above : It’s very convenient to attempt an explanation of this war by stating “ Shi’a and Sunni factions have fighting each other for 1500 years.” There were differences and conflicts, yes, but insignificant if we study our own history. Napoleon’s wars across Europe, Christian conflict in NI, two devastating world wars, Vietnam etc, etc. (Any body counts ?) The illegal invasion of Iraq and intentional exploitation of the religious divisions added to the Sunni – Shi’a conflict. The total destruction of Iraq, Libya etc plus the droning of Yemen and many other countries has created an ideal and fertile ground for terrorists. Some self reflection may be helpful here.

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 12:34 PM

    The Napoleonic Wars, World Wars, Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya and Vietnam had absolutely nothing to do with religious conflicts. You’re comparing apples and oranges.

    10
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Micheal S. O' Ceilleachair
    Favourite Micheal S. O' Ceilleachair
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:47 AM

    The form of governance in the Middle East is what it is. It suits their mentality. Sunni and Shia will always seek ways to get a dig at each other whether there is oil or no oil. Sunnis and Shias hate each other even more than they hate Christians and Jews because their differences revolve around the basic very early interpretations of Mohamed’s teachings which are the absolute fundamentals of their respective religions. The American and West are only interested in oil and will manipulate in order to get it as it is a vital interest. Remember 1979 when OPEC jacked the price leading to shortages in the West. Interesting that Oman has its own form of Islam and seems detached from the problems in the surrounding countries, same form of governance though, absolute monarchy, but not as much oil.

    9
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jarlath Costello
    Favourite Jarlath Costello
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 4:12 PM

    Good old Saudi Arabia! They have the best weapons that money can buy and the worst human rights record that money can hide.

    9
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Anne Marie Devlin
    Favourite Anne Marie Devlin
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 9:33 AM

    The military intervention will lead to a rise in oil prices. Couldn’t possibly be in Saudi’s interests

    8
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Mick Jordan
    Favourite Mick Jordan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:19 AM

    Anne. Its the Saudis that are keeping the price low by pumping surplus oil. High oil prices make shale oil economicly viable and that means less need for Saudi oil.

    17
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:49 AM

    True Mick.

    Yet, the Saudis only pimped their old wells with salt water at the behest of the US. The process is irreversible and there will be a good deal of surplus oil for a while yet.

    Was the US trying to evert a chance of government in Russia, Iran, Venezuela etc. Who knows. More than likely, certainly on Venezuela where the US was caught red handed three weeks trying another coup. That failed and now the US has declared war on Venezuela with President Obama believing the threat from Venezuela to be so significant he has declared a state of emergency in the US so he can tackle the threat. Strange though the way more of this has been covered in the Western mainstream media…

    10
    See 3 more replies ▾
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 11:04 AM

    “That failed and now the US has declared war on Venezuela”

    I knew you posted some ridiculous drivel but this takes the cake.

    16
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 1:33 PM

    Well, you obviously missed that boat Jason.

    The US, over two weeks ago now I think, declared Venezuela a threat to national security with the threat being so severe that President Obama has declared a state of emergency in the US to combat it.

    Smell the coffee Jason

    12
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Jason Culligan
    Favourite Jason Culligan
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 2:50 PM

    Please link to the US’ declaration of war on Venezuela, as you directly claimed the US has declared war on them.

    12
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Stephen Earle
    Favourite Stephen Earle
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:39 AM

    Where’s Frank?

    7
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute R M
    Favourite R M
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 10:45 AM

    I miss Frank. He always provided some great insights.

    11
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Baldy Brian
    Favourite Baldy Brian
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 5:17 PM

    95% of the Saudi Army are Pakistanis… The other 5% are useless pen pushing Saudis.

    5
    Install the app to use these features.
    Mute Micheal S. O' Ceilleachair
    Favourite Micheal S. O' Ceilleachair
    Report
    Mar 26th 2015, 5:37 PM

    Can you substantiate that statement?

    1
Submit a report
Please help us understand how this comment violates our community guidelines.
Thank you for the feedback
Your feedback has been sent to our team for review.

Leave a commentcancel

 
JournalTv
News in 60 seconds