The Atlantic: The Brexiteers Are Defeating Brexit

The problem for May, and for the U.K., is simple: There does not yet appear to be any deal that both the British government and the EU will accept. Any deal acceptable to the government will be far too generous to Britain for Brussels, while any deal acceptable to Brussels will be too strenuous for Westminster. May acknowledged this on Monday, telling members of Parliament to brace for the possibility of Britain leaving the EU without any agreement, which would create serious problems for the movement of goods and people between the U.K. and its nearest trading partners. [...]

In fall 2016, after the vote, Davis said, “There will be no downside to Brexit, only a considerable upside.” In May 2017, he said, “Most of the EU states are very sympathetic to our view.” Davis was in a position to shape the course of the negotiation, and his decision to step down is a testament to how wrong his predictions were. In his resignation letter, Davis wrote, “I am ... unpersuaded that our negotiating approach will not just lead to further demands for concessions.”  [...]

Now May’s government seems to be crumbling around her as she struggles to handle the situation created by men like Johnson, Davis, and Farage—one she tried to avoid in the first place. Johnson, who is painfully ambitious, strangely charming, and only 54 years old, is surely not gone from politics for good; indeed, he is positively Nixonian in his comeback skills (as well as his tendency toward ethnic slur). Farage is already threatening his return. One could forgive May if she was tempted to sardonically welcome both of them to relieve her of the mess they created and clean it up themselves.  

read the article

Haaretz: Splitting the EU: Israel’s Tightening Alliance With Central Europe’s Nationalist Leaders

hese two countries, led by ultra-nationalist right-wing leaders, have been challenging the EU in recent years, using the massive wave of migration in 2015 and the rise in global terror to cast doubt on the common liberal values on which the EU was founded. Hungary, led by Orban, is the extreme symbol of the opposition. During his three terms in office Orban has led a campaign to restrict democracy in his country through a legislative assault. This included limits on civil society and on media freedom of expression, as well restrictions imposed on the courts. Part of this campaign over the last two years has included attacks against the Hungarian-born Jewish-American billionaire George Soros, who donates money to human rights groups in Hungary. Netanyahu also attacks Soros as part of his campaign against left-wing NGOs. The Hungarian government’s inflammatory campaign is perceived by many Hungarian Jews as replete with anti-Semitic elements. [...]

Israel has been exploiting this internal, complex and delicate European dissent in recent years in order to change the way decisions about its policies are made in the EU. Observers in Brussels point to a chilling effect created by the alliance between Israel and the V-4 on the ability to issue joint statements in the name of all 28 EU members. “Netanyahu succeeded in using this group in order to undermine European unity,” they say. This effect is not limited to just these four countries. There are similar ties with Austria, Romania, Bulgaria, Lithuania, Cyprus and even Greece. “When the Union wants to issue something in the name of all its members, as happens in foreign affairs, there are specific cases in which Hungary objects or demands a softening of the criticism of Israel, to the extent that other countries cannot agree, so that the declaration is void,” say these observers. [...]

Dr Nimrod Goren, the head of the think tank, Mitvim, the Israel Institute for Regional Foreign Policies, believes that fostering relations with these countries at the expense of larger liberal European countries is a mistake which harms important friendships. “Israel has traditionally preferred strengthening ties with specific countries, but in the past it recognized the importance of its ties with the EU, in terms of common interests and values. This was never politically controversial. In recent years there has been a change and the ties with the Visegrad group reflect this well. The choice of these countries attests to Israel’s moving away from the values of a liberal democracy. The Economist’s democracy index ranks all these countries lower than Israel. These should not be Israel’s allies in a continent which prides itself on democratic ideals and human rights. Germany, Britain and France are much more important for ensuring Israel’s security and for fulfilling its national interests. Choosing the V-4 distances Israel even more from the EU, which is investing a lot in contending with challenges posed by these countries. It also contradicts Israel’s efforts to fight extreme right-wing elements in other European countries, as well as Israel’s ties with Cyprus and Greece, which consider democracy a strong binding factor to Israel. Israel should diversify its foreign policy but without losing its moral compass.”

read the article

SciShow: Turns Out, Spiders Use Electricity to Fly

SciShow: Does Microwaving Food Destroy Its Vitamins?

Many people avoid using microwave ovens, fearing how it changes the molecular structure of your food, but studies have some evidence that may surprise you.

France 24: French and noble in 2018: What remains of France's aristocracy?

 This week we're at the Château de Courson, a stunning 17th-century property. It's the perfect backdrop for this week's show because we're talking about the French nobility. It's a social class which no longer has any legal status. However, you would be wrong to assume that "la noblesse" no longer exists! According to some estimates, there may actually be more people who can claim to be part of the French aristocracy today than before the French Revolution.