EU Report Urges a Much Tougher Stance on Transnational Repression
That Draft Report on Addressing Transnational Repression of Human Rights Defenders is now being considered by the EU Parliament, which must decide how to overhaul a system that is failing to protect EU citizens from countries as far afield as Iran and China.
Ridel spoke with The Diplomat's Luke Hunt about the links between transnational repression, international crime syndicates, and autocratic governments in Asia, Eastern Europe, and the Middle East, and what the EU needs to do to fight the scourge.
She says the EU has fallen behind nations like Australia and Canada in tackling transnational repression. It even lacks its own data base and relies on Freedom House to document repression that has included killings, abductions, torture, and the jailing of opposition politicians, rights activists, and journalists.
In February, Freedom House released a report that found a quarter of the world's governments were using tactics of transnational repression. China topped the list of 'physical and direct incidents' with 22 percent of recorded cases between 2014 and 2024.
Among the major problems are Interpol, which Ridel says is not fit for the purpose, given that red notices issued by authoritarian regimes are then used by Interpol agents to detain and return political dissidents to their countries of origin, and too often to a tragic fate.
Ridel became a Member of the EU Parliament for France's Socialist Party in 2024. She has been spokesperson for the party since March 2023 and sits on the EU parliament's subcommittee for human rights.
Prior to this, she was a French civil servant and a member of the Jean-Jaures Foundation in Paris. In 2020, she co-founded a think tank, the Rousseau Institute.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Kyodo News
14 hours ago
- Kyodo News
Trump says U.S. to impose 15% tariff on goods from South Korea
WASHINGTON - The United States will impose a 15 percent tariff on goods from South Korea under a trade deal between the two countries, President Donald Trump said Wednesday. Trump said on social media that South Korea will give $350 billion for investments "owned and controlled by the United States" and selected by him, as well as buying $100 billion worth of American liquefied natural gas and other energy products. Trump added that South Korean President Lee Jae Myung will travel to the White House for a meeting within the next two weeks when he will unveil an additional "large sum of money" for the key U.S. ally's own "investment purposes." Trump's announcement via a Truth Social post came before the expiration on Friday of a 90-day pause on the implementation of his so-called reciprocal tariffs, targeting dozens of countries with which the United States runs trade deficits. The post provided no information about whether his higher auto tariff of 27.5 percent will continue to apply for cars imported from South Korea. The country-specific tariff rate of 15 percent, reduced from the 25 percent threatened in early July by Trump, is the same as that imposed on Japan and the European Union, both of which recently struck deals with his administration. For Japan and the EU, Trump also set a 15 percent tariff on imported cars in exchange for commitments to make large investments in the United States.
The Diplomat
a day ago
- The Diplomat
Albanese Wants International Cover Before Australia Recognizes Palestine as a State
France and the U.K. are moving toward recognizing Palestine – and pressure is growing within the Labor Party for Australia to follow suit. Australia's Anthony Albanese will recall well when another Labor prime minister was feeling the heat over Palestinian status. It was 2012 and then-Prime Minister Julia Gillard was forced into a corner over the stand Australia should take on a motion to give Palestine observer status at the United Nations. Gillard and her foreign minister, Bob Carr, clashed over the matter. Gillard wanted to oppose the motion, siding with the United States and Israel. Carr and others pushed back hard. In the end Australia abstained. In his book, 'Diary of a Foreign Minister,' Carr recorded that in the Cabinet debate back in 2012, 'Albanese [then the minister for infrastructure and transport] gave a no-holds-barred robust presentation of the case for voting 'yes' or abstaining.' Now Albanese faces another, albeit different, iteration of the Palestinian status issue. The circumstances are much more direct and acute. As mass starvation grips Gaza, France has declared it will recognize Palestine as a state at the United Nations General Assembly in September. The United Kingdom has indicated it will follow suit, unless Israel agrees to a ceasefire in Gaza. On this occasion, Albanese is arguing for time. The Labor rank and file are strongly pro-Palestine. They are backed by the party platform, which calls for Palestine to be recognised as a state. Carr is still out there advocating. But a more central voice is former minister Ed Husic (who was around in 2012, too, but still on the backbench). Even as a minister in the last parliamentary term, bound by Cabinet solidarity, Husic pushed the boundaries when speaking out about the Middle East conflict. Having been dumped from the frontbench in factional maneuvering after the election, he is free to say bluntly what he thinks. Now he is putting his shoulder to the wheel to advocate recognition. In a Guardian article on Monday he reminded his Labor peers and betters 'that our party has twice agreed at its highest decision-making forum – the National Conference of the Australian Labor party – to recognize the state of Palestine. 'The time to do so is absolutely right now.' Albanese is caught between his party and his caution. It is a fair assumption the prime minister, with his long history of being pro-Palestinian, would like to follow the lead of French President Emmanuel Macron. Equally, however, he would want Australia to move in concert with like-minded countries, including the United Kingdom, Canada, and New Zealand. Australia has previously banded with these countries in joint statements about the Middle East conflict. Albanese said over the weekend that Australian recognition of a Palestinian state wasn't imminent – although last year Foreign Minister Penny Wong opened the way for possible recognition as part of a peace process (rather than only accorded at the end of it). The prime minister put some context around recognition. 'How do you exclude Hamas from any involvement there? How do you ensure that a Palestinian state operates in an appropriate way which does not threaten the existence of Israel? And so we don't do any decision as a gesture. We will do it as a way forward if the circumstances are met.' In caucus on Tuesday, Husic pressed his point, asking how long the preconditions for statehood could be expected to take. Albanese essentially went through what he'd said before. Labor's Friends of Palestine group is pressing for sanctions on Israel, as well as recognition. The group's spokesperson, Peter Moss, said: Over the past 21 months, Labor members in branches and conferences have repeatedly urged the government to join 147 U.N. member states and now France in recognizing Palestine. By making recognition contingent on a non-existent peace process, the government has effectively ruled out delivering on policy that has broad public support. We call on the Australian government to implement official platform policy and immediately and unconditionally recognise a Palestinian state on the pre-4 June 1967 borders. In recent weeks more than 80 Labor branches and other party units have passed a strong motion calling for sanctions and an arms embargo on Israel. In the last few days, the group wrote to Wong, seeking a meeting to discuss its calls for sanctions and for the Albanese government 'to work with international partners to develop a practical plan for the establishment of a free and independent Palestinian State.' No meeting has yet been arranged. This article was originally published on The Conversation. Read the original article.
Yomiuri Shimbun
a day ago
- Yomiuri Shimbun
Japan-U.S. Tariff Agreement: Collaborative Projects Should be Steadily Promoted
The tariff negotiations between Japan and the United States have been settled, and the focus will now shift to managing the progress of implementing the agreement. Japan needs to urgently realize signature projects through fresh industrial collaboration with the United States. According to the agreement between the two governments, the 'reciprocal tariff' will be reduced from the originally planned 25% to 15%. Additional tariffs on automobiles will also be halved from 25% to 12.5%, bringing the total to 15% when combined with the basic tariff of 2.5%. Japan and the United States did not draft a general joint document for this agreement, and they reportedly have no plans to do so going forward. This decision was likely made because both countries wished to explain the agreement to their own people in a manner convenient to them. However, for Japan, concerns remain as there is no clear guarantee that tariff rates will be reduced. The Japanese government reportedly envisions Aug. 1 as the date the agreed tariff rates will take effect. It should strongly demand that the U.S. side issue an executive order that will take effect at an early stage to implement the reduction to 15%. The European Union has also reached an agreement with the United States under a similar framework. It is important for the Japanese government to work with the EU to urge Washington to implement the agreements. There are also noticeable discrepancies regarding Japan's $550 billion (about ¥80 trillion) investment in the United States, which was welcomed by U.S. President Donald Trump. According to the announcement by the Japanese side, government-affiliated financial institutions will provide funds and loans, and Japan's understanding is that it has outlined a broad framework of financial support. However, the U.S. announcement states that Japan will invest that amount at the direction of the United States. U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has said that he will assess Japan's implementation of the agreement quarterly, and if the implementation is insufficient, Washington will revert the tariff rates to 25%. If differences in perception surface in the future, it could become a cause of conflict between Japan and the United States. The key to the steady implementation of the agreement is the materialization of the investment in the United States. It is hoped that Japan will quickly formulate signature projects. At the end of 2024, Japan's balance of direct investment in the United States amounted to about $820 billion, the highest among all countries for the sixth consecutive year. Japanese companies should be highly motivated to invest. The nine fields that are the targets for close collaboration include semiconductors, iron and steel, shipbuilding, critical minerals, energy and automobiles. From an economic security perspective, it will be important to advance the development of supply chains in these fields with China in mind. While Japan has avoided the devastating impact of even higher tariffs, a 15% tariff still imposes a significant burden on Japanese companies. More than a few small and midsize enterprises are finding it difficult to pass the tariff costs along to export prices even if they want to do so. The hope is that the Japanese government will also soundly implement measures to support their immediate cash flow. (From The Yomiuri Shimbun, July 30, 2025)
