Switzerland’s vote to ban minarets on mosques there raises the question of whether anything similar might happen elsewhere in Europe. Researching this for an analysis of the vote today, I found experts distinguished between actually banning an Islamic symbol such as the minaret and using the minaret example to fan voters’ fears and boost a (usually far-right) party’s chances at the polls. It seems Switzerland’s trademark direct democracy system makes it possibly the only country in Europe where both seem possible right now. This distinction could become more important in coming months as far-right parties, as they are expected to do, try to exploit the minaret ban to rally support for their anti-immigration policies. The Swiss far right has already suggested going for a ban of full facial veils (aka burqas and niqabs) next. Marine Le Pen, deputy leader of France’s National Front, has called for a referendum in France not only on minarets, but also on immigration and a wide array of other issues linked to Muslims. Filip Dewinter, head of Belgium’s Vlaams Belang, said he wanted to change zoning laws there to ban “buildings that damage the cultural identity of the surrounding neighbourhood”. It remains to be seen how far they can get with these demands. Muslims in Europe were naturally shocked by the vote and worried about what might come next. The possibility of further pressure on them cannot be ignored because globalisation is forcing European societies to deal with increasing religious, ethnic and cultural diversity. The integration of Islam in Europe has not been easy and will continue to create tensions and misunderstandings for some time to come, on both sides of the supposed divide. But this is a dynamic process that changes all actors involved, sometimes in contradictory ways.
Serbia told a U.N. court at the start of hearings on Tuesday that Kosovo's 2008 declaration of independence was a "flagrant violation" of Serbia's territorial integrity and undermined international law and order. Serbia, Kosovo's former ruler, rejected the declaration and called on the International Court of Justice to give an advisory opinion on its legality. A decade after NATO bombing ended a two-year war between Serbia and ethnic Kosovo Albanians, Serbian ambassador to France Dusan Batakovic told the court "Kosovo is the historic cradle of Serbia and ... one of the essential pillars of its identity." The envoy told the 15-judge panel in The Hague on the first day of oral hearings he hoped the court's ruling would provide scope for talks with Kosovo about its future status and contribute to "peace and stability". "This opportunity on no account should be wasted," he said. The United States and most other Western nations have recognised Kosovo's independence, but Serbia rejected it, as did its ally Russia, which fears it could set a dangerous precedent for separatist movements. Observers say a ruling in Kosovo's favour would lead more countries to recognise its independence, while an adverse opinion could push it into negotiating a settlement with Serbia. Kosovo's independence has been recognised by 63 countries, 22 of them European Union member states, but it will need many more before it can become a full U.N. member state. The court is due to hold nine days of hearings and to give its non-binding but influential opinion in several months.
Some EU member-states will very soon join the investigation into the fate of the kidnapped Kosovo Serbs, a Belgrade daily writes. The case, known also in the media as the Yellow House, after a house in northern Albania where the victims were allegedly held before being murdered, was picked up last year by the Serbian War Crimes Prosecution. The prosecution believes that hundreds of Kosovo Serb civilians were kidnapped by the ethnic Albanian Kosovo Liberation Army (KLA) in 1999, to be taken to neighboring Albania and murdered for their vital organs, which were later sold in the black market. Now, the newspaper says, it has emerged that after the 1999 NATO attacks on Serbia, four Czech citizens also went missing in Kosovo. According to this, it is suspected that they too became the victims of the human organ trade in northern Albania. Serbian investigators will soon visit some of the countries in the region where the potential witnesses are, according to the report. “Recently, the border police discovered several men transporting drugs,” the daily’s source close to the investigation said. One of them had 30 kilograms of heroin in his possession, while the other carried five. The third, it turned out, was a human trafficker. Police immediately placed them all in custody. "As time went by," said the unnamed source, "they started talking, and said that the drugs were being trafficked from Kosovo to the EU market. During the interview, some names popped up that were mentioned before in the human organ trafficking case. To us, that meant that a connection had been established, and that we got ourselves new witnesses – two, it appears, immediate witnesses." But the source could not say where the witnesses were or when they might be interviewed regarding the case, and explained that the reason for the secrecy was also their safety. “We found out that their bosses and accomplices in Kosovo left them high and dry and that they were on their own now,” the source said. According to unofficial information, however, one of the witnesses has confirmed the location of a mass grave where about 20 bodies of the victims had been buried. The investigation about these crimes has expanded beyond Serbia's borders. The Foreign Ministry is currently working to establish connections with European institutions that would help the domestic investigators interview potential witnesses by means of bilateral cooperation. Meanwhile, War Crimes Prosecutor Vladimir Vukčević would not comment on the daily's report, saying only, "It's true that we have new findings. But, the investigation is ongoing. We expect to have a much clearer picture by the end of the year."
Canada has blocked the adoption of all documents to be considered at an upcoming Russia-NATO meeting, the Russian envoy to NATO said on Tuesday. "Representatives of the Canadian delegation blocked today the adoption of all documents prepared for the upcoming ministerial meeting of the Russia-NATO Council," Dmitry Rogozin said in an interview with Vesti television. The meeting of the Russia-NATO Council's foreign ministers has been scheduled for December 4 in Brussels. The upcoming session, the first official talks to be held since the August 2008 armed conflict between Russia and Georgia over South Ossetia, is aimed at drafting a "roadmap" for improving relations between Russia and the Western military alliance. Rogozin said there were factions in NATO that still regard Russia as a "Cold War" rival and oppose any "reset" of relations. "Feeling the need for assistance from Russia, they [these factions] nevertheless refuse to discuss issues that are vital to Russia's national interest, primarily, improving European security and the creation of a more balanced situation globally and on the European continent," the Russian diplomat said. He added that the attitude of several NATO members has hampered concrete steps toward the improvement of Russia-NATO relations, as all decision-making processes in the alliance are based on consensus, and even a single member can block progress in dialogue with Moscow. Rogozin urged NATO partners to return to the negotiating table and "start doing business rather than continue getting caught up in bureaucratic rhetoric." During an informal ministerial meeting in Greece in June, Russia and NATO agreed to renew cooperation on security issues, which was frozen after Russia and Georgia fought a five-day war in August over the former Georgian republic of South Ossetia, after which Russia recognized the independence of South Ossetia and Abkhazia, another former Georgian republic. Relations have also been strained by Russia's resistance to Georgia and Ukraine's bids to join NATO. Russian President Dmitry Medvedev said in October that "Russia is ready to harmonize relations with the United States and other Western partners, including constructive cooperation with NATO in solving common tasks."
A foreign ministry spokesman on Thursday referred to a closely watched EU summit next month that is expected to make crucial decisions regarding Turkey's EU course. "Greece is in cooperation and close coordination with the Republic of Cyprus," spokesman Grigoris Delavekouras said, adding that Cypriot Foreign Minister Markos Kyprianou will be in Athens for next week's OSCE Summit. Referring to a letter by Cypriot President Demetris Christofias to the leaders of the Union's 26 other member-states, he pointed out that the course of negotiations is not satisfactory. The issue will be discussed in the European Council and the Greek side has expressed a hope that there will be progress with Turkey making steps toward the right direction, "…because Turkey will be judged very strictly and objectively. This is a given," Delavekouras stressed. Asked to comment on a letter sent by Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan to Prime Minister George Papandreou, he replied that it will be answered. Meanwhile, the spokesman said that Papandreou proposed a tripartite meeting in the Lake Prespes region with his counterparts from Albania and FYROM to discuss environmental cooperation in the verdant and ecologically significant region only a few days before the Copenhagen Summit on climate change. Athens seeks the creation of a framework involving community programmes and know-how that will allow Greece, FYROM and Albania to cooperate and deal with environmental issues. "Negotiations between FYROM and the EU will not be launched if the 'name issue' is not settled with the adoption of a name for all uses (erga omnes) that will include a geographic qualifier," the foreign ministry spokesman said in response to a press question. Responding to a question on the likelihood of any discussion on the 'name issue', Delavekouras stated that it is understandable that "the entire spectrum of issues that concern participating countries will be discussed, and therefore, it is reasonable to have a discussion on the name issue with prime minister of the Former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia (FYROM) Nikola Gruevski." "However, there shouldn't be any misinterpretations. The framework for a solution is the process followed in the United Nations under UN envoy Matthew Nimetz. This is where a solution will come from and we expect that the other party will participate in the process constructively. Direct and private meetings can contribute by giving a momentum in the UN dialogue process," he stated. "Skopje should adopt a constructive attitude to reach a mutually acceptable solution. EU accession negotiations cannot be launched for as long as such a solution is not achieved," Delavekouras said, adding that this should be made clear to avoid any surprises, misunderstandings and expectations that cannot be met.
People today speak of religion in mostly an ambiguous sense: about why it exists in the first place, about why it so often claims to do the world a great deal of good while yet, in actuality, it often does so much harm, about why some Islamic “believers” show their all-out commitment to God by blowing themselves – and others - up, about why here in America the media purposefully ignores the fact that during the course of one week more people attend “a church or synagogue of their choice” than attend all of the football, baseball, basketball or hockey games combined, and finally, about why this country is, statistically at least, the most religious country on the face of the earth despite its rampant, progressive, godless secularism. All of this begs the question, does religion here in the West have a future, as Freud himself once questioned? Or, will it begin to die a slow, miserable death, as many of its antagonists believe, once we humans have learned to function by the god of “Reason” instead of the illusion of “heavenly projected fantasies” (aka religion.) Enlightenment thinkers were convinced that all they needed to do in order to better their world was to refocus the center of human functioning and experience from the heart to the mind. The ascent of right thinking was the way to future peace and prosperity, to a new world order. Yet, having glanced backward at the last two hundred years or so since the Age of Reason, (which itself remains the underlying philosophical grid of the “post-modern” world), I think we are still, regrettably, a very long way from being able to shout out any “eureka!” for having found, or even come close to, a humanly conceived utopia. A statistical look, even at the past century alone, indicates that something is seriously amiss with the secularism of the day. During the 20th century more human blood was spilled through armed conflict than all centuries of previous human history combined, and that is an impressive statistic. In one 20-year period alone, thanks to Joseph Stalin, the “enlightened” socialism of the former Soviet Union was responsible for the death of approximately 20 million of its own people. Can anyone today imagine, let’s say, the complete annihilation of the collective populations of Chicago and Los Angeles - poof, gone, in a single generation? Surely not in a million years. But what drove Stalin and his associates to do such a thing? Well everyone knows it was Atheistic-Socialistic-Marxism, which for some strange coincidence, continues to be enthusiastically taught at many, if not most, of America’s public universities. Surely, religion is a scary, loaded word these days. For most of us Westerners, it has at the very least a disapproving association, as when someone says, “I’m very spiritual, but I don’t believe in or practice any organized religion.” As a phenomenon in and of itself, religion brings to mind the mindless repetition of old, empty rituals that no longer communicate meaning to the contemporary situation. It summons up a picture of a hypocritical, mechanistic piety, of dim-witted devotees who kneel and pray in their churches on Sunday mornings but go about the rest of the week behaving as if God never existed, (which is often quite true) or of television evangelists who prey upon people and are nothing but barefaced opportunists. (This, sadly, is true too). Still, for others, religion is nothing less than a kaleidoscope of horrors, a swirling catastrophe of absolutism, oppression, rigidity, intolerance, sexism, cruelty, and prejudice. This, basically, was the Marxist criticism, that as an “opiate of the people,” religion gave the poor and the browbeaten an illusion of righteous suffering, that suffering was their divinely ordained lot in life and that if they only endured it with patience and passivity, a much happier afterlife would be their "reward." As Orthodox Christians, we take a neutral stance towards religion, remembering that it was the religion of Jesus’ own day that crucified Him upon the Cross. We know that Christ has come down from heaven to earth, not to institute yet one more religion, but to reveal to the world the fullness of life. Even so, no matter how hard we try to deny it, we moderns remain religious to the core. Why so? Because no matter how hard we try, we cannot completely shut out the summons of eternity. Something calls us to look beyond what we can see only with our physical senses, and we are not truly human until we do so.
Andrew was one of the twelve Apostles and is known as the "Protocletus" (the First Called) because he was the first Apostle to be summoned by Jesus into His service. Andrew and his brother Peter made their living as fishermen on the Sea of Galilee. Both men became Apostles, and while Peter symbolically came to represent the Church of the West, Andrew likewise represents the Church of the East. Saint Andrew In Greece: According to ecclesiastical tradition, Andrew began his missionary activity in the Provinces of Vithynia and Pontus on the southern shores of the Black Sea. Later he journeyed to the City of Byzantium and founded the Christian Church there, ordaining the first Bishop of Byzantium, Stachys, who was one of the 70 disciples of the Lord. In one of his several missionary journeys to Greece, Andrew visited the City of Patras. Through his preaching and the miracles of healing he performed, in the name of Jesus, many persons were converted to Christianity. Among those healed was Maximilla, the wife of the Roman Proconsul, Aegeates. Seeing this miracle of healing, Stratoklis, the highly intellectual brother of the Proconsul, also became a Christian, and Andrew consecrated and enthroned him as the first Bishop of Patras. The Crucifixion Of Saint Andrew: These conversions to the Christian Faith by members of his own family infuriated the Proconsul Aegeates, and he decided, with the urging of the idolators who advised him, to crucify Andrew. The crucifixion was carried out on an X-shaped cross with the body of the Apostle upside down so that he saw neither the earth nor his executioners, but only the sky which he glorified as the heaven in which he would meet his Lord. His body was tenderly removed from the cross by Bishop Stratoklis and Maximilla, and buried with all of the honor befitting the Apostle. Soon countless numbers of Christians made their way to Patras to pay reverence to the grave of Andrew, and when Aegeates realized that the man he had put to death was truly a holy man of God his conscience became so tormented that he committed suicide. Re-Burial In Constantinople: In the month of March in the year 357 the Emperor Constantine (son of Constantine The Great) ordered that the body of St. Andrew be removed from Patras and be reinterred in the Church of the Holy Apostles in Constantinople. With all the magnificence and honor of the Byzantine Empire and the Great Church of Christ at Constantinople, St. Andrew was returned to the City that had first heard the message of Jesus Christ from his lips. Thus he became in death, as well as in life, the founder of the Great Church of Christ in Constantinople. Patron Saint Of Scotland: The deeds and preaching of St. Andrew became known in all parts of the world. According to tradition a part of the remains of St. Andrew were taken to Scotland, and he was chosen as the Protector of the Scottish people. The Cross of St. Andrew also adorns the British flag where it was placed after the union of Scotland and England. The skull of St. Andrew was kept in Patras until the year 1460 when Thomas Paleologos, the last ruler of the Morea brought the skull to Rome. In 1967, under the orders of Pope Paul, the skull was returned to Patras with al of the pomp and dignity of the Papal State. The Call Of Saint Andrew: Today the voice of St. Andrew continues to call on all Christians, especially the Greek Orthodox Christians throughout the world. His unstilled spirit beckons across the centuries proclaiming: "The Saviour of the world has come! He is the Christ, the Son of God!" This is the call of St. Andrew to all men for "Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and tomorrow." (Hebrews 13:8)