A 15-year-old girl has been arrested for taking nude photographs of her self and posting them on the Internet, police said.
The girl, whose identity was withheld, was accused of sending out photographs of herself in various states of undress and performing a variety of sexual acts. She sent them to people she met in chat rooms on the Internet, police said.
Police seized her computer and found dozens of photographs stored on the hard drive. Authorities did not say how police learned about the girl.
She has been charged with sexual abuse of children, possession of child pornography and dissemination of child pornography.
Sunday, February 4, 2007
How to be a real beauty
Do you want to be beautiful — or attractive? You’ve probably never thought about it, but there’s a big difference, with big implications. In essence, the beautiful want to please the person they see in the mirror, whereas the attractive see themselves through the eyes of others; the men they want to be desired by, the women they hope to inspire envy in.
The distinction was driven home to me in 2004 while touring the world to write a book about what I call the “affluenza virus”, the placing of a high value on money, possessions, appearances (physical or social) and fame.
Studies by the American psychologist Tim Kasser and colleagues in 14 countries show that people infected by this “virus” are at greater risk of developing mental illnesses. They also want to attract rather than be beautiful, are dominated by confected wants rather than true needs.
On my travels, I found that among the English-speaking societies (New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and New York), although there were variations on the theme, being attractive was much more the goal than beauty. But the opposite was true in Moscow and Copenhagen.
It seemed unimaginable that being sexy was not the goal of Muscovite women. I got the message only when it was spelt out to me by Sonja, a 24-year-old Russian trainee executive in an American merchant bank; although she was so beautiful it was hard to concentrate on what she was saying. Six feet tall, slender yet full-breasted, her face was delicate-featured, with a snub nose. She had clear blue eyes and short blonde hair. Her clothing was plain, a pink cotton dress. Like virtually all the young women I had interviewed in Moscow, Sonja had read Helen Fielding’s book Bridget Jones’s Diary. She observed that Jones “only does her job to be able to buy the things she doesn’t have, which is not a good way to live — we don’t”.
But surely she and her friends shared Bridget’s worries about being attractive? “Personally, it’s not a problem to be slim. We are not obsessed with going to a gym. I knew a girl at university who constantly talked about going on a diet, but that’s unusual.”
Another beautiful Muscovite was Janna, 24. She wore a long flowery skirt, a white T-shirt and a grey, zip-up cardigan. When I asked about her clothes, she explained that since there were few chain stores in Moscow there was a greater variety of styles compared with Britain and the US, both of which she has visited. “Most of us like to make our own clothes or adapt ordinary purchases to create our own appearance. We’re more concerned with expressing ourselves than with being clothes horses for designers. We like to do it for fun or to invent something lovely-looking, but more for ourselves than for men; we don’t bother what men think, or women, come to that.”
Looking out of the taxi on the way into Copenhagen, a remarkable contrast with Moscow is instantly visible: the men seem more overtly desirable than the women, slim and well turned out, a nation of gentle Vikings. Not that there’s anything wrong with the women.
The most obvious difference is that the female form is less in evidence. I saw few skirts worn above the knee, even on teenagers, even on Saturday nights. Rather, they aspire to looking well-fed without being fat, wear natural-looking clothes and go for unaffected, simple designs that do not accentuate the body shape.
Helena, a 34-year-old housewife, explained the Danish ideal. “The fashion is for natural beauty. Perfect is not incredibly thin here. There are a few teenagers who don’t eat, but that’s not the main thing.”
It so happened that she had visited Russia recently. “The women were so beautiful, and coming back here you really noticed the difference. Our fashion designers produce different styles, much more relaxed. We aspire to a different kind of beauty, but that’s the goal.”
Studies, such as those by the Australian psychologist Shaun Saunders, suggest that it is far better for your mental health to be beauty-orientated like the Muscovites and Danes. Attraction-driven women are prone to an obsessive concern with their weight, a love of cosmetics, expensive brands and willing to countenance cosmetic surgery. They are also more likely to suffer depression and eating disorders.
Affluenza-infection, is greater among English-speaking nations, which is why we have twice as much mental illness as other Western Europeans. In a WHO study, nearly one quarter of English speakers had been ill in the past 12 months, compared with 11.5 per cent of mainland Western Europeans.
Women who seek beauty select clothes primarily because they like them, not because they are fashionable. They define for themselves what they like about their body’s shape, or their face, or hair, rather than feeling pressured to conform to a norm. And they are less likely to be mentally ill. They may be dissatisfied with aspects of themselves but their reason for wishing to change it is to look more like their own internally created notion of beauty rather than an externally generated norm of how to be “sexy” or “pretty” in the eyes of others.
That the Danish women are so much less preoccupied with being attractive contradicts the beliefs of evolutionary psychologists, nearly all of them male. For example, David Buss argues that prettiness is a genetic indicator of fecundity and of good home-making and mothering skills. The evolutionary ideologist’s woman looks after the children, sweeps the cave and keeps the home fires burning to cook the sabre-toothed tiger stew for when daddy gets home from his hunter-gathering. She will maximise her desirability to attract men with the best hunter-gatherer genes. In not playing up their secondary sexual characteristics by body-revealing clothes, the Danish women are going against their natures, according to evolutionists.
They base their claims on surveys of patterns of attraction around the world. Buss’s research in 37 nations found that women are attracted by wealthy, high-status, older men, whereas men everywhere seek nubility and do not care about the status or wealth of women.
However, two re-analyses of the 37-nation survey have shown that in societies where women can gain access to wealth and status through education and a career, they are less likely to be attracted by alpha mates. Denmark would seem to be a prime example of this: the women do not aspire to nubility; if anything, it is men who use appearance to attract women.
The implication is clear: the next time you look in the mirror or try on clothes, concentrate on what pleases you, not anyone else. Stick at it and not only will you be beautiful, you will be vaccinated against the commonest mental illnesses.
Do you want to be beautiful — or attractive? You’ve probably never thought about it, but there’s a big difference, with big implications. In essence, the beautiful want to please the person they see in the mirror, whereas the attractive see themselves through the eyes of others; the men they want to be desired by, the women they hope to inspire envy in.
The distinction was driven home to me in 2004 while touring the world to write a book about what I call the “affluenza virus”, the placing of a high value on money, possessions, appearances (physical or social) and fame.
Studies by the American psychologist Tim Kasser and colleagues in 14 countries show that people infected by this “virus” are at greater risk of developing mental illnesses. They also want to attract rather than be beautiful, are dominated by confected wants rather than true needs.
On my travels, I found that among the English-speaking societies (New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and New York), although there were variations on the theme, being attractive was much more the goal than beauty. But the opposite was true in Moscow and Copenhagen.
It seemed unimaginable that being sexy was not the goal of Muscovite women. I got the message only when it was spelt out to me by Sonja, a 24-year-old Russian trainee executive in an American merchant bank; although she was so beautiful it was hard to concentrate on what she was saying. Six feet tall, slender yet full-breasted, her face was delicate-featured, with a snub nose. She had clear blue eyes and short blonde hair. Her clothing was plain, a pink cotton dress. Like virtually all the young women I had interviewed in Moscow, Sonja had read Helen Fielding’s book Bridget Jones’s Diary. She observed that Jones “only does her job to be able to buy the things she doesn’t have, which is not a good way to live — we don’t”.
But surely she and her friends shared Bridget’s worries about being attractive? “Personally, it’s not a problem to be slim. We are not obsessed with going to a gym. I knew a girl at university who constantly talked about going on a diet, but that’s unusual.”
Another beautiful Muscovite was Janna, 24. She wore a long flowery skirt, a white T-shirt and a grey, zip-up cardigan. When I asked about her clothes, she explained that since there were few chain stores in Moscow there was a greater variety of styles compared with Britain and the US, both of which she has visited. “Most of us like to make our own clothes or adapt ordinary purchases to create our own appearance. We’re more concerned with expressing ourselves than with being clothes horses for designers. We like to do it for fun or to invent something lovely-looking, but more for ourselves than for men; we don’t bother what men think, or women, come to that.”
Looking out of the taxi on the way into Copenhagen, a remarkable contrast with Moscow is instantly visible: the men seem more overtly desirable than the women, slim and well turned out, a nation of gentle Vikings. Not that there’s anything wrong with the women.
The most obvious difference is that the female form is less in evidence. I saw few skirts worn above the knee, even on teenagers, even on Saturday nights. Rather, they aspire to looking well-fed without being fat, wear natural-looking clothes and go for unaffected, simple designs that do not accentuate the body shape.
Helena, a 34-year-old housewife, explained the Danish ideal. “The fashion is for natural beauty. Perfect is not incredibly thin here. There are a few teenagers who don’t eat, but that’s not the main thing.”
It so happened that she had visited Russia recently. “The women were so beautiful, and coming back here you really noticed the difference. Our fashion designers produce different styles, much more relaxed. We aspire to a different kind of beauty, but that’s the goal.”
Studies, such as those by the Australian psychologist Shaun Saunders, suggest that it is far better for your mental health to be beauty-orientated like the Muscovites and Danes. Attraction-driven women are prone to an obsessive concern with their weight, a love of cosmetics, expensive brands and willing to countenance cosmetic surgery. They are also more likely to suffer depression and eating disorders.
Affluenza-infection, is greater among English-speaking nations, which is why we have twice as much mental illness as other Western Europeans. In a WHO study, nearly one quarter of English speakers had been ill in the past 12 months, compared with 11.5 per cent of mainland Western Europeans.
Women who seek beauty select clothes primarily because they like them, not because they are fashionable. They define for themselves what they like about their body’s shape, or their face, or hair, rather than feeling pressured to conform to a norm. And they are less likely to be mentally ill. They may be dissatisfied with aspects of themselves but their reason for wishing to change it is to look more like their own internally created notion of beauty rather than an externally generated norm of how to be “sexy” or “pretty” in the eyes of others.
That the Danish women are so much less preoccupied with being attractive contradicts the beliefs of evolutionary psychologists, nearly all of them male. For example, David Buss argues that prettiness is a genetic indicator of fecundity and of good home-making and mothering skills. The evolutionary ideologist’s woman looks after the children, sweeps the cave and keeps the home fires burning to cook the sabre-toothed tiger stew for when daddy gets home from his hunter-gathering. She will maximise her desirability to attract men with the best hunter-gatherer genes. In not playing up their secondary sexual characteristics by body-revealing clothes, the Danish women are going against their natures, according to evolutionists.
They base their claims on surveys of patterns of attraction around the world. Buss’s research in 37 nations found that women are attracted by wealthy, high-status, older men, whereas men everywhere seek nubility and do not care about the status or wealth of women.
However, two re-analyses of the 37-nation survey have shown that in societies where women can gain access to wealth and status through education and a career, they are less likely to be attracted by alpha mates. Denmark would seem to be a prime example of this: the women do not aspire to nubility; if anything, it is men who use appearance to attract women.
The implication is clear: the next time you look in the mirror or try on clothes, concentrate on what pleases you, not anyone else. Stick at it and not only will you be beautiful, you will be vaccinated against the commonest mental illnesses.
Beauty
* Is an ideal of how you would like to look.
* Is based on your personal aesthetic, idiosyncratic, individual and developed from early childhood onwards.
* Is authentic, expressing your self.
Attractiveness
* Is an ideal of what will attract men and make other women envious.
* Is based on what pleased parents and school peers, in the first instance, and subsequently, what mass media have pressurised you to want. It confuses consumer choices with true uniqueness.
* Is inauthentic, reflecting false selves confected by others.
The distinction was driven home to me in 2004 while touring the world to write a book about what I call the “affluenza virus”, the placing of a high value on money, possessions, appearances (physical or social) and fame.
Studies by the American psychologist Tim Kasser and colleagues in 14 countries show that people infected by this “virus” are at greater risk of developing mental illnesses. They also want to attract rather than be beautiful, are dominated by confected wants rather than true needs.
On my travels, I found that among the English-speaking societies (New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and New York), although there were variations on the theme, being attractive was much more the goal than beauty. But the opposite was true in Moscow and Copenhagen.
It seemed unimaginable that being sexy was not the goal of Muscovite women. I got the message only when it was spelt out to me by Sonja, a 24-year-old Russian trainee executive in an American merchant bank; although she was so beautiful it was hard to concentrate on what she was saying. Six feet tall, slender yet full-breasted, her face was delicate-featured, with a snub nose. She had clear blue eyes and short blonde hair. Her clothing was plain, a pink cotton dress. Like virtually all the young women I had interviewed in Moscow, Sonja had read Helen Fielding’s book Bridget Jones’s Diary. She observed that Jones “only does her job to be able to buy the things she doesn’t have, which is not a good way to live — we don’t”.
But surely she and her friends shared Bridget’s worries about being attractive? “Personally, it’s not a problem to be slim. We are not obsessed with going to a gym. I knew a girl at university who constantly talked about going on a diet, but that’s unusual.”
Another beautiful Muscovite was Janna, 24. She wore a long flowery skirt, a white T-shirt and a grey, zip-up cardigan. When I asked about her clothes, she explained that since there were few chain stores in Moscow there was a greater variety of styles compared with Britain and the US, both of which she has visited. “Most of us like to make our own clothes or adapt ordinary purchases to create our own appearance. We’re more concerned with expressing ourselves than with being clothes horses for designers. We like to do it for fun or to invent something lovely-looking, but more for ourselves than for men; we don’t bother what men think, or women, come to that.”
Looking out of the taxi on the way into Copenhagen, a remarkable contrast with Moscow is instantly visible: the men seem more overtly desirable than the women, slim and well turned out, a nation of gentle Vikings. Not that there’s anything wrong with the women.
The most obvious difference is that the female form is less in evidence. I saw few skirts worn above the knee, even on teenagers, even on Saturday nights. Rather, they aspire to looking well-fed without being fat, wear natural-looking clothes and go for unaffected, simple designs that do not accentuate the body shape.
Helena, a 34-year-old housewife, explained the Danish ideal. “The fashion is for natural beauty. Perfect is not incredibly thin here. There are a few teenagers who don’t eat, but that’s not the main thing.”
It so happened that she had visited Russia recently. “The women were so beautiful, and coming back here you really noticed the difference. Our fashion designers produce different styles, much more relaxed. We aspire to a different kind of beauty, but that’s the goal.”
Studies, such as those by the Australian psychologist Shaun Saunders, suggest that it is far better for your mental health to be beauty-orientated like the Muscovites and Danes. Attraction-driven women are prone to an obsessive concern with their weight, a love of cosmetics, expensive brands and willing to countenance cosmetic surgery. They are also more likely to suffer depression and eating disorders.
Affluenza-infection, is greater among English-speaking nations, which is why we have twice as much mental illness as other Western Europeans. In a WHO study, nearly one quarter of English speakers had been ill in the past 12 months, compared with 11.5 per cent of mainland Western Europeans.
Women who seek beauty select clothes primarily because they like them, not because they are fashionable. They define for themselves what they like about their body’s shape, or their face, or hair, rather than feeling pressured to conform to a norm. And they are less likely to be mentally ill. They may be dissatisfied with aspects of themselves but their reason for wishing to change it is to look more like their own internally created notion of beauty rather than an externally generated norm of how to be “sexy” or “pretty” in the eyes of others.
That the Danish women are so much less preoccupied with being attractive contradicts the beliefs of evolutionary psychologists, nearly all of them male. For example, David Buss argues that prettiness is a genetic indicator of fecundity and of good home-making and mothering skills. The evolutionary ideologist’s woman looks after the children, sweeps the cave and keeps the home fires burning to cook the sabre-toothed tiger stew for when daddy gets home from his hunter-gathering. She will maximise her desirability to attract men with the best hunter-gatherer genes. In not playing up their secondary sexual characteristics by body-revealing clothes, the Danish women are going against their natures, according to evolutionists.
They base their claims on surveys of patterns of attraction around the world. Buss’s research in 37 nations found that women are attracted by wealthy, high-status, older men, whereas men everywhere seek nubility and do not care about the status or wealth of women.
However, two re-analyses of the 37-nation survey have shown that in societies where women can gain access to wealth and status through education and a career, they are less likely to be attracted by alpha mates. Denmark would seem to be a prime example of this: the women do not aspire to nubility; if anything, it is men who use appearance to attract women.
The implication is clear: the next time you look in the mirror or try on clothes, concentrate on what pleases you, not anyone else. Stick at it and not only will you be beautiful, you will be vaccinated against the commonest mental illnesses.
Do you want to be beautiful — or attractive? You’ve probably never thought about it, but there’s a big difference, with big implications. In essence, the beautiful want to please the person they see in the mirror, whereas the attractive see themselves through the eyes of others; the men they want to be desired by, the women they hope to inspire envy in.
The distinction was driven home to me in 2004 while touring the world to write a book about what I call the “affluenza virus”, the placing of a high value on money, possessions, appearances (physical or social) and fame.
Studies by the American psychologist Tim Kasser and colleagues in 14 countries show that people infected by this “virus” are at greater risk of developing mental illnesses. They also want to attract rather than be beautiful, are dominated by confected wants rather than true needs.
On my travels, I found that among the English-speaking societies (New Zealand, Australia, Singapore and New York), although there were variations on the theme, being attractive was much more the goal than beauty. But the opposite was true in Moscow and Copenhagen.
It seemed unimaginable that being sexy was not the goal of Muscovite women. I got the message only when it was spelt out to me by Sonja, a 24-year-old Russian trainee executive in an American merchant bank; although she was so beautiful it was hard to concentrate on what she was saying. Six feet tall, slender yet full-breasted, her face was delicate-featured, with a snub nose. She had clear blue eyes and short blonde hair. Her clothing was plain, a pink cotton dress. Like virtually all the young women I had interviewed in Moscow, Sonja had read Helen Fielding’s book Bridget Jones’s Diary. She observed that Jones “only does her job to be able to buy the things she doesn’t have, which is not a good way to live — we don’t”.
But surely she and her friends shared Bridget’s worries about being attractive? “Personally, it’s not a problem to be slim. We are not obsessed with going to a gym. I knew a girl at university who constantly talked about going on a diet, but that’s unusual.”
Another beautiful Muscovite was Janna, 24. She wore a long flowery skirt, a white T-shirt and a grey, zip-up cardigan. When I asked about her clothes, she explained that since there were few chain stores in Moscow there was a greater variety of styles compared with Britain and the US, both of which she has visited. “Most of us like to make our own clothes or adapt ordinary purchases to create our own appearance. We’re more concerned with expressing ourselves than with being clothes horses for designers. We like to do it for fun or to invent something lovely-looking, but more for ourselves than for men; we don’t bother what men think, or women, come to that.”
Looking out of the taxi on the way into Copenhagen, a remarkable contrast with Moscow is instantly visible: the men seem more overtly desirable than the women, slim and well turned out, a nation of gentle Vikings. Not that there’s anything wrong with the women.
The most obvious difference is that the female form is less in evidence. I saw few skirts worn above the knee, even on teenagers, even on Saturday nights. Rather, they aspire to looking well-fed without being fat, wear natural-looking clothes and go for unaffected, simple designs that do not accentuate the body shape.
Helena, a 34-year-old housewife, explained the Danish ideal. “The fashion is for natural beauty. Perfect is not incredibly thin here. There are a few teenagers who don’t eat, but that’s not the main thing.”
It so happened that she had visited Russia recently. “The women were so beautiful, and coming back here you really noticed the difference. Our fashion designers produce different styles, much more relaxed. We aspire to a different kind of beauty, but that’s the goal.”
Studies, such as those by the Australian psychologist Shaun Saunders, suggest that it is far better for your mental health to be beauty-orientated like the Muscovites and Danes. Attraction-driven women are prone to an obsessive concern with their weight, a love of cosmetics, expensive brands and willing to countenance cosmetic surgery. They are also more likely to suffer depression and eating disorders.
Affluenza-infection, is greater among English-speaking nations, which is why we have twice as much mental illness as other Western Europeans. In a WHO study, nearly one quarter of English speakers had been ill in the past 12 months, compared with 11.5 per cent of mainland Western Europeans.
Women who seek beauty select clothes primarily because they like them, not because they are fashionable. They define for themselves what they like about their body’s shape, or their face, or hair, rather than feeling pressured to conform to a norm. And they are less likely to be mentally ill. They may be dissatisfied with aspects of themselves but their reason for wishing to change it is to look more like their own internally created notion of beauty rather than an externally generated norm of how to be “sexy” or “pretty” in the eyes of others.
That the Danish women are so much less preoccupied with being attractive contradicts the beliefs of evolutionary psychologists, nearly all of them male. For example, David Buss argues that prettiness is a genetic indicator of fecundity and of good home-making and mothering skills. The evolutionary ideologist’s woman looks after the children, sweeps the cave and keeps the home fires burning to cook the sabre-toothed tiger stew for when daddy gets home from his hunter-gathering. She will maximise her desirability to attract men with the best hunter-gatherer genes. In not playing up their secondary sexual characteristics by body-revealing clothes, the Danish women are going against their natures, according to evolutionists.
They base their claims on surveys of patterns of attraction around the world. Buss’s research in 37 nations found that women are attracted by wealthy, high-status, older men, whereas men everywhere seek nubility and do not care about the status or wealth of women.
However, two re-analyses of the 37-nation survey have shown that in societies where women can gain access to wealth and status through education and a career, they are less likely to be attracted by alpha mates. Denmark would seem to be a prime example of this: the women do not aspire to nubility; if anything, it is men who use appearance to attract women.
The implication is clear: the next time you look in the mirror or try on clothes, concentrate on what pleases you, not anyone else. Stick at it and not only will you be beautiful, you will be vaccinated against the commonest mental illnesses.
Beauty
* Is an ideal of how you would like to look.
* Is based on your personal aesthetic, idiosyncratic, individual and developed from early childhood onwards.
* Is authentic, expressing your self.
Attractiveness
* Is an ideal of what will attract men and make other women envious.
* Is based on what pleased parents and school peers, in the first instance, and subsequently, what mass media have pressurised you to want. It confuses consumer choices with true uniqueness.
* Is inauthentic, reflecting false selves confected by others.
Plan Merkel sets Britain up for EU clash
AMBITIOUS plans by Chancellor Angela Merkel to revive the defunct European Union constitution have set Britain on a collision course with Berlin and most of the EU’s 27 member states.
Merkel has promised to resurrect the “core” of the constitution — whose provisions include the creation of an EU foreign minister and the scrapping of national vetoes on justice and home affairs — despite its rejection by French and Dutch voters in 2005.
Her position conflicts with the British preference for a “mini-treaty” to streamline voting rules and end the rotation of the EU presidency every six months.
New tensions emerged last week after Gordon Brown, the chancellor, was reported to have indicated that he would not even consider such technical changes without a promise that the constitution was off the agenda.
Government sources confirmed this weekend that Britain did not believe a formal constitution was necessary for the EU to work efficiently with 27 members. Britain also wants to avoid changes that would encroach on sensitive national interests such as defence policy.
“Several British ministers have gone on record saying the constitution in its current form is not a viable option. The challenge now is to agree on some sensible institutional reforms that suit all 27 member states,” a senior British official said.
Burying the constitution — recently described by John Reid, the home secretary, as a “dead parrot” — would release Tony Blair and his successor from the promise of a potentially damaging referendum.
Britain’s stance may anger the 18 countries who have ratified the constitution. At a meeting in Madrid this month, the 18 “friends of the constitution”, plus Portugal and Ireland, reaffirmed support for the document and discussed expanding it to cover climate change and immigration.
Merkel will try to break the deadlock during Germany’s six-month presidency of the EU before a summit in June.
Britain’s opposition is shared by Poland and the Czech Republic. The recent dismissal of the constitution by Mirek Topolanek, the Czech prime minister, as a “pile of crap” does not bode well for negotiations.
Merkel must wait for the outcome of the French elections to assess her prospects. Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate, has promised a new referendum in 2009. Nicolas Sarkozy, of the centre right, has called for a simplified treaty in 2008, with a beefed-up version to follow later.
Merkel has promised to resurrect the “core” of the constitution — whose provisions include the creation of an EU foreign minister and the scrapping of national vetoes on justice and home affairs — despite its rejection by French and Dutch voters in 2005.
Her position conflicts with the British preference for a “mini-treaty” to streamline voting rules and end the rotation of the EU presidency every six months.
New tensions emerged last week after Gordon Brown, the chancellor, was reported to have indicated that he would not even consider such technical changes without a promise that the constitution was off the agenda.
Government sources confirmed this weekend that Britain did not believe a formal constitution was necessary for the EU to work efficiently with 27 members. Britain also wants to avoid changes that would encroach on sensitive national interests such as defence policy.
“Several British ministers have gone on record saying the constitution in its current form is not a viable option. The challenge now is to agree on some sensible institutional reforms that suit all 27 member states,” a senior British official said.
Burying the constitution — recently described by John Reid, the home secretary, as a “dead parrot” — would release Tony Blair and his successor from the promise of a potentially damaging referendum.
Britain’s stance may anger the 18 countries who have ratified the constitution. At a meeting in Madrid this month, the 18 “friends of the constitution”, plus Portugal and Ireland, reaffirmed support for the document and discussed expanding it to cover climate change and immigration.
Merkel will try to break the deadlock during Germany’s six-month presidency of the EU before a summit in June.
Britain’s opposition is shared by Poland and the Czech Republic. The recent dismissal of the constitution by Mirek Topolanek, the Czech prime minister, as a “pile of crap” does not bode well for negotiations.
Merkel must wait for the outcome of the French elections to assess her prospects. Ségolène Royal, the Socialist candidate, has promised a new referendum in 2009. Nicolas Sarkozy, of the centre right, has called for a simplified treaty in 2008, with a beefed-up version to follow later.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)