China

I'm in Hong Kong this week on a business trip, my first trip to East Asia. So far it's been very interesting.

I came in early for the weekend to see my friend from grad school Liz, who is living and working in Shenzen. The first thing I noticed about the area is the big difference between Hong Kong and the mainland. Of course for all of its history as a city until 1997 Hong Kong was under the control of the British, and it was just a little over ten years ago that it was handed over to the Chinese, but with special stipulations. Hong Kong became the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region under the "one country, two systems" policy, continuing to operate as a seperate country for most intents and purposes until 2047.

The world's newest country

It’s official, Kosovo is now an independent state. Or is it?

On Saturday a long-awaited vote by Kosovo’s parliament declared it to be an independent state and no longer part of Serbia. In reality, Serbia hasn’t controlled Kosovo for nine years. The territory has been run by the United Nations and NATO since 1999 when NATO intervened to stop a Serbian crackdown on the separatist movement there, a crackdown which sometimes took the form of ethnic cleansing and genocide. Kosovo is today dominated by ethnic Albanians, but is the historic heartland of the medieval Serbian state.

However the road to nationhood isn’t as simple as just a proclamation. Serbia vehemently opposes the move, and its leaders say they will fight to the end to prevent Kosovo’s independence. Serbia filed legal charges against Kosovo's leadership Monday for creating a "false state" and vowed to block any attempts to allow Kosovo to join international associations. It has also declared the new state invalid and illegal. Serbia’s traditional ally Russia has said it also rejects the move and will use its seat on the UN security council to block the body from recognizing the country. The US, Britain, France and Germany are expected to recognize the state within days.

Report: Blair dropped Saudi probe after being threatened

This story in today's Guardian reveals an absolutely shocking allegation made against Tony Blair in court: Saudi prince and close Bush ally Bandar Bin Sultan cajolled Tony Blair into dropping Britain's bribery investigation into a Saudi oil deal by threatening to unleash terroist attacks on Britain.

Bandar bin Sultan, who was the Saudi Ambassador to the US for 20 years, and a close personal friend of the Bush family, is under investigation for taking $2bn in bribe payments from BAE for arranging an arms deal. The British government investigation into this was mysteriously halted after Bandar visited Tony Blair in December 2006.

Now people have testified in court that Bandar, who's now the head of the Saudi National Security Council, basically told Blair that if he didn't stop investigating his corruption, he'd withhold information on suspected terrorists and there'd be a loss of "British lives on British streets." The Guardian writes:

Brussels doesn't like to be ignored

Brussels is baring some teeth this week, as it becomes increasingly assertive in the face of US efforts to negotiate with different EU countries separately in areas now handled by Brussels.

This week’s spat is over a new set of security requirements the US wants to impose on European countries designed to keep track of who is entering and leaving the country. The US is demanding in-flight security officers aboard transatlantic flights, an electronic travel authorization system, and an accord to share further data on air passengers and lost and stolen passports.

The European Commission today shot the proposal down saying it was "unacceptable" and went "too far". But what they seem to be most angry about is that the US didn’t consult them and instead attempted to circumvent Brussels, taking their demands to the individual EU capitals. Jonathan Fauli, the head of the Commission’s Home Affairs department, told reporters yesterday,

"We don't negotiate matters which are dealt with in Washington with the state of California - that would be disrespectful and we expect the US to be similarly respectful of our law and system here. The USA knows perfectly well that there some things you come to Brussels to talk about.”

France to Europe: grow up

French president Nicolas Sarkozy may be considering returning French forces to NATO military command, but comments yesterday by the French defence minister reveal that the country might want something in return: the go-ahead from the Americans to build an EU army.

France has for years floated the idea to build up an EU army with a military headquarters, but it has met resistance from both Washington and its European allies. Washington has regarded the efforts as a threat to NATO unity and as an unnecessary duplication of NATO’s functions. At the same time, European nations have refused to increase their defence budgets in order to develop a European standing army.

French president Charles De Gaulle pulled the French military out of NATO (the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation) 40 years ago over concern about American domination of the alliance. The system, set up primarily for the defense of Europe from the Soviet Union after World War II, has historically been considered by many as an American military protectorate over Europe. In April a conference in Bucharest, Romania is scheduled to work out a major overhaul of the alliance, largely in reaction to its difficulties in Afghanistan but also to deal with its proposed enlargement to Eastern European and Caucasus nations bordering Russia. The conference could also bring a commitment by Sarkozy to hand French troops back over to the alliance.

The archbishop and sharia law

The big news in the UK today, splashed across the front pages of the morning rags, is yesterday’s observation by the leader of the Anglican Church, Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams, who said that it "seems inevitable" that elements of Sharia Muslim law would be incorporated into British legislation.

Almost instantly the comments have been greeted with shock and condemnation from nearly every corner of British society. Christian groups, secular groups, the head of the equality watchdog, several high-profile Muslims and MPs from all parties have all strongly condemned the statement. A spokesman for Prime Minister Gordon Brown said this morning, “sharia law cannot be used as a justification for committing breaches of English law, nor should the principles of sharia law be included in a civil court for resolving contractual disputes.”

The essential question is whether Muslims living in Britain should have a different set of laws that apply to them that are in accordance with Sharia law. The issue is especially pertinent in divorce proceedings, which under Sharia law are extremely strict and not very favorable to women.