After the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers on September 2008, there were other bank collapses. One of these was of an Iceland bank, Icesave, which held substantial accounts from overseas clients, including in Britain and the Netherlands.
The British and Dutch Governments eventually agreed with Icelandic officials that Reykjavik would repay money to depositors. In December 2009, Iceland’s Parliament approved Bill to reimburse more than 3.8 billion Euros. However Iceland’s President Olafur Ragnar Grimsson refused to sign the Bill. On Sunday, a public referendum was held to decide whether Iceland should repay.
The voters — by a margin of 93 to 2 percent — said No.
Enduring America is pleased to announce that colleagues in the Netherlands have launched The Holland Bureau, a website focusing on US-Dutch relations and international affairs. Already they have posted provocative analysis of developments in Afghanistan, Venezuelan leader Hugo Chavez’s shout-out to Dutch “imperialism”, and the warm embrace of the State Department and CIA of a special relationship with The Hague.
We may be moving towards Afghanistan as the new crisis in US-European relations, but that doesn’t mean the old one of Iraq has gone away entirely. Our colleague Giles Scott-Smith, on our partner website Libertas, discusses the emerging political scandal in the Netherlands over alleged covert support by the Dutch Government for the US invasion of 2003:
For five years Premier Jan-Peter Balkenende has refused to allow any kind of investigation into the decisions and deals surrounding the Dutch ‘political, not military’ support for the 2003 invasion. Simmering discontent over this stubbornness, coupled with persistent suspicions that there was plenty to hide, kept the issue bubbling away within the worlds of investigative journalism and the political Left, who smelled a large, US-style rat.
11:50 p.m. When Hamas Isn’t Extreme Enough….Make of this what you will. The Israeli Defense Forces say today’s bombing that killed an Israeli soldier was carried out by “an extremist pro-Iranian group, which espouses a militant ideology that surpasses even Hamas’ positions in its opposition to Israel. The group receives direct support from Tehran, but is connected in various ways to Hamas as well.”
The same article states that a group called the “Jihad and Tawhid Brigades” — “an Islamist group affiliated by Al Qa’eda” — called Ramattan TV to claim responsibility for the attack.
So we have an attack supposedly carried out on Israel by “extreme Islamsts”-Al Qa’eda-Hamas-Tehran. The perfect terrorist storm or the perfect information campaign?
A quick search turns up reports that “Jiwad and Tawhid Brigades” were formerly led by Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, a leader of the Iraq insurgency who was killed by US forces in June 2006.
11:40 p.m. Turkey continues to manoeuvre for a Middle Eastern re-alignment in which Hamas is a recognised political party. Foreign Minister Ali Babacan urged the Gazan leadership through Turkish newspapers, “”Hamas should make a decision. Do they want to be an armed organisation or a political movement?” At the same time, Babacan pointed noted Hamas’ support, “The party supported by Hamas got 44 per cent of the votes in the last elections. It is impossible to ignore this base.”
5 p.m. We’re off for some downtime. Back in the morning with overnight updates, including the latest of Obama envoy George Mitchell’s first trip to the Middle East.
3:30 p.m. Barack, We Have a Problem. Our news this morning (2:45 a.m. and 6 a.m.) was on the emerging “third country” solution for Guantanamo ex-detainees. The meeting of the 27 European Union foreign ministers, however, has failed to agree a unified approach. The French-led proposal to take up to 60 detainees has been blocked or undermined by Germany, Austria, and the Netherlands.
The cheekiest excuse of all came from British Foreign Minister David Miliban who said that, as Britain had taken back nine of its citizens and three of its permanent residents, it had already made its “significant contribution”.
6:45 p.m. An intriguing development, but one which will need some detective work to assess its significance. President Obama “asked Saudi King Abdullah for support in halting weapons smuggling into Gaza and underscored the importance of U.S.-Saudi ties” in a Friday phone call.
The call takes on added significance because an influential member of the Saudi Royal Family, Prince Turki al-Feisal, launched an attack against the Bush Administration’s “poisonous legacy” in a newspaper article on Friday morning, warning, “If the U.S. wants to continue playing a leadership role in the Middle East and keep its strategic alliances intact — especially its ’special relationship’ with Saudi Arabia — it will have to drastically revise its policies vis-a-vis Israel and Palestine.”
So the first message in Obama’s call was not to get active Saudi participation in the naval blockade of Gaza but assurances that Riyadh would not try to undermine it by moving cash and material to Palestinian groups in the area. The second message, however, is more important and hard to decipher:
Do those US-Saudi ties mean that Obama will accept Saudi ideas for Israel-Palestinian negotiations, for example, a revival of the 2002 Mecca proposals that the Bush Administration flagrantly rebuffed? Or is Washington expecting the Saudis to follow the lead of a yet-seen approach that will be unveiled in the visit of George Mitchell to the region? (cross-posted from Israel-Palestine-Gaza Updates)
Aysegül Er writes for EA:
Enduring America is pleased to announce that colleagues in the Netherlands have launched 
Entries (RSS)