A question so old, it has concerned scholars for decades:
How can we get Europe to agree on one phone number? Europe should have one by now, with the post-Lisbon office of the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy. It is indeed one of her tasks to “represent CFSP/CSDP externally” (Common Foreign and Security Policy/Common Security and Defence Policy). She is also the one to speak for the Union in international organisations and conferences.
Who did Mubarak call, when he wanted to know Europe’s opinion, did he ask at all? He will have called Angela, Nicolas, Dave and probably Silvio. He might probably not have called Lady Ashton. Is this the her fault, and is this her problem at all?
I don’t see it so much as her fault. I think she was appointed by the European Council in order to establish the European External Action Service, and not to intervene with the Foreign Policies of the member states. Of course one can argue that someone else who could have been chosen, would be a brighter star in the international scene. But wouldn’t that be a fading glance? I think it would have been at the cost of a long-term sustainable creation of an influental office, that a bright star (like Tony Blair, who has not been chosen also for several other reasons) had been appointed. I see it as her main task to establish a well functioning service. I am sure that the next one in office will be able to profit from this work, and will be able to establish his or her own agenda.
So is this a problem for her, that she can only present watered down statements, while others like Angela Merkel can shine with their revolutionary experiences? I don’t think so, because this is not her task. Right now, she represents more of a behind the scenes diplomatic office, while the elected heads of state and government can express more subjective and not so balanced views. This is a good thing to do, while you still are suited with only little resources, and are not able to sufficiently push your agenda within Brussels. As soon as the EEAS is up and running this will change, trust me. It’s a principal/agent problem and as soon as the agent has his own resources, he will be able to become more independent. So, until then, the European Heads of state will continue to be the choir they have always been. But do not underestimate this movement: The turn from intergovernmental to supranational policy-making has been done. It will not go back beyond this.
By the way: External Action is more than CFSP/CSDP. Trade, Environment and others are externally already represented by Commission president Barroso.
Since Hungary took on the EU presidency in the beginning of this year, it has enjoyed plenty of media attention. The attention has turned especially to the Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and his government, who have been criticized for ‘undemocratic’ media law and ‘unjust’ transport taxes for multinational companies. The competence of Orban’s cabinet to stabilize the European euro crises has been questioned as well. Up to now, it can be said that the majority of the media analyses presented a slightly unbalanced view on the Hungarian presidency. These media are being rather skeptical about Hungary’s performance in the upcoming 6 months. However, the question is whether their criticism is justified.
In the past, Hungary has often approached the EU responsibly. It has completed all the pre-entry requirements two years before it officially entered the European community. Whilst accessing the EU in 2004, Hungary showed some strong economic performance and political stability. In 2005 it performed 4 per cent growth of GDP compared to the European average of 1.6 per cent. However, not everything went well with Hungary. Deficit grew since the 2004 due to ineffective fiscal policy and to inescapable borrowing in order to catch up with the rest of Europe. When in 2009-10 the global financial crisis escalated, it started to become clear that the public debt of many EU countries is unsustainable. By that time, Hungary had one of the largest EU public deficits, amounting to a gross debt-to-GDP ratio around 90%. In the second half of 2010, BBC reported, Fitch put Hungary’s public debt at BBB minus, which is one notch above junk status. Hungary’s new relatively strong government, under the conservative leadership of PM Viktor Orban, has pursued necessary steps to cut the country’s debt (raising the age of retirement, cutting public sector salaries and state pensions by one month, number of government officials have been reduced, etc.). These actions give the impression that Hungary knows what it takes to limit the impact of the financial crisis. However, it is questionable whether the country’s relatively responsible approach towards its domestic economic policies is in some way going to be reflected whilst presiding the EU. Is Hungary able to mediate tougher financial discipline throughout the rest of Europe?
It is crucial to look at the new media law which has been passed in the Hungarian parliament in December 2010. This law is said to undermine the European principle of free press. Nonetheless, these claims lack credibility since its authors are not well informed about Hungary’s internal press situation. Hungarian authorities say the media legislation was an essential step, because anti-semitism and hate speech have recently spread amongst Hungarian media. This is a real problem in Hungary. The Hungarian party Jobbik has gained enormous support over the pat years, even earning almost 17 per cent (3rd strongest party) in last summer’s parliamentary elections. This unprecedented ‘success’ has evoked much apprehension concerning this new wave on nationalism and its possible outcomes. The Hungarian government tries to eliminate this extreme form nationalism by stopping the media from taking part in spreading its influence. Left-wing newspapers Nepszabadsag and Nepszava as well as both conservative and liberal media in the west expressed their disapproval of the new legislation, whereas Hungary’s conservative media defended the law, as did the American Hungarian Federation, the Hungarian Civil Co-Operation Forum reported. On a different note, Viktor Orban showed respect for the EU institutions and is willing to amend the legislation after the law has been investigated further by the European Commission.
Beside the economic matters which acutely need to be addressed during the Hungarian presidency, there is also the social issue concerning the integration of Roma people, which Hungary wants to tackle. Viktor Orban is committed to fight Roma unemployment and to integrate this community more into the society by improving their education and their overall living conditions. Challenging the current Roma population’s status quo is an inescapable task for Hungary since Romania as well as Bulgaria will be considered to become part of the Schengen area in the first half of 2011. It is essential to improve Roma’s status in eastern Europe before opening the borders. This is mainly to prevent their mass migration to the western Europe, where they are offered better living conditions. It will certainly be a challenge to achieve considerable progress in this area since the EU devotes more attention to economic rather than social issues.
It seems that, in their coverage of Hungary’s EU presidency, the media completely lost its focus on EU politics. Instead, there is an ongoing debate whether Hungary opposes European principles while passing media legislation. Nevertheless, I believe that Hungary has a potential to succeed in its mission, no matter whether the media law is passed or not. It has a potential (in terms of location) to be a good mediator concerning Romania’s and Bulgaria’s possible admittance into the Schengen area. Also, it could potentially stabilize the current economic crisis within the EU since it has dealt so efficiently with its own domestic matters. We will have to wait and see.
After finishing her studies at Gymnasium Hejcin in Olomouc, Czech Republic, Andrea Jamborova moved to the UK to study Politics and International Relations at the University of York. Besides this, she has experience working in various social and environmental project, such as an asylum seekers centre in the Netherlands. Her special interests include developmental politics and security policies.
Europolit will host its first workshop, titled “Approaching the EU – Practitioners Views” on January 15th 2011 in Cologne. There will be three Speakers, who will give short speeches about their experiences on how to approach the EU.
Andrew Byrne, wo was the managing director of “Generation Yes”, the irish pro-Referendum campaign will speak about his experiences on how to approach the EU. He has founded and built up the organization together with some friends. He will be able to speak about how to retrieve Information and how to approach them under these special circumstances.
Hans H. Stein is the Director of the Representation of the State North-Rhine Westphalia to the European Union. he will be able to tell about the Role of public Lobbying and the Problems and Opportunities that his position bring with it.
Thomas Traguth is a lecturer of the Jean Monnet Chair of Professor Wolfgang Wessels at the University of Cologne. He obtains a Masters degree of the College of Europe as well as the University of Oxford. He is researching European Integration and will explain some basics of the political system of the EU.
Also the team of Europolit will share their experiences in approaching the EU and will invite all guests to share their experiences as well.
today we have something new: Our Video Tutorial which is supposed to show, how the EU works (briefly). I think its a good mix between understandable and informative! It deals with the Codecision procedure after the Lisbon Treaty, so for those of you, who know about this kind of stuff, it might be only a new kind design!
As some of you might have noticed, we have already uploaded this on our webpage. You can see it there in better resolution and appearance!
Today we launched a new debate. It is dealing with the European Citizens Initiative and is supposed to highlight what problems the MEPs are facing, who are at the moment concerned with a proposal of the Commission. Also we added one thing to the debate: The view of the citizens: While the politicians write about the decision making, the citizens write about their culture. They describe what the political culture in their countries looks like, and how their fellow citizens might use a tool like the European Citizens’ Initiative.
Authors are:
Alain Lamassoure, french MEP
Zita Gurmai, hungarian MEP
Cecilia Wikström, swedish MEP
Diana Wallis, british MEP
Anne-Marie Sigmund, Rapporteur for the EESC
Michael Efler, board-member of Mehr Demokratie, a german NGO
Well, once more I have to say: Hooray for Schengen! I love visiting a friend in Madrid, seeing Paris for a Weekend, and going to Lublin for a wedding. Thanks to anyone who has been fighting for the freedom of movement in the EU. I really mean this. But I also mean this one: Schengen, Dublin and Dublin II are a shame for the EU. What? A shame? Yes, indeed, it sounds cool to open the gates, and allow the EU citizens to move freely. But thats only the shiny part of the medal. What’s the ugly part? It is keeping everyone elese out. Asylum seekers are factually unable to come to Europe. Only by Land, and thats as we know hard to do. So most of them are coming on small ships, from northern africa (though Italy has made nice deal with Libya, giving them ships + money to control the coast for them), or as the borders there are being closed, from turkey and the middle-east. They are stuck in Greece and Italy (Lampedusa) and both are completely overstrained with the situation. Again and again local authorities have sent cries for help, but national governments didn’t hear anything – on purpose? Germany, and others still think they have too much Asylum seekers. As probably a lot of germans think there is too much or too less of everything (note, I’m german, I will always complain about my fellow nationals).
So, bad situation for anyone out there, but we can’t take take responsibility for anyone out there? That’s probably true. Everyone has to create their own way, and fleeing probably isn’t always the best thing to do. But there are legitimate reasons for fleeing your yountry, and demanding asylum. And those shouldn’t be wiped away by some of the countries that are proud of their tradition as the defenders of human rights. One of them is France (you might see where this is going). France, land of the liberté, fraternité, egalité. France, a major power, that cannot be spoken to, as Viviane Reding did. A major, the mother of human rights. Yeah, go forget that. I know it’s a loophole, I know it’s basically legal, I know Sarkozy did it only in a turn of populism. But honestly, there is one more thin I know: the whole Schengen-thing is worthless, if we start acting like that. Not that it’s too valuable, with the restriction I described above, but that last splinter of good development in the Schengen Agreement will be worthless, if some are allowed to stay, while others are not, based on their origin or race.
France wasn’t talking about origin? Well in fact there was a try, a few years back to treat french nationals with african origin different from ‘real’ french (if I remember right that concerned a debate about naturalization, and double nationalities). I think it wasn’t realized, but the serious discussion about this alone shows, that there is a lot of potential for politics based on origin in the motherland of the human rights.
So, back to Schengen and Dublin. What I’m trying to say is: The free movement within the EU was bought for a high prize. If this free movement is now being restricted, I want my money back. It then is time for a rollback in Asylum-policy!
In Germany there has been some buzz lately about referendums and direct democracy. At first, people in bavaria have been voting for the strictest regulation on smoking. Last week then, people in Hamburg have been voting against a new school-concept. There have been ongoing debates about this, and people have been discussing the pro’s and con’s of referendums. But, one thing has not been mentioned. The biggest referendum of all – the European Citizens’ Initiative. It has been introduced with the Lisbon Treaty, and right its details are being negotiated between the Commission and the European Parliament.
I’m preparing now a debate on the European Citizens’ Initiative. I will ask the Commission aswell as Members of the EP and NGO’s for their opinion. This a debate that will show, what is being deliberated in the EU. But there is more to it. Since this is a relatively easy topic, we’re asking anyone out there, to contribute their opinions on the European Citizens’ Initiative.
Will people in your country use this Instrument?
Will they be able to understand, how helpful this can be?
Or will they only move to the cabins, if the big organisations have called them?
Will they use this to change the EU, or will they try to keep their benefits?
If you think, you know what people think about this, contact me markus.krischer@europolit.net ! You could then contribute one position for you country. So don’t be shy, tell us what people can do with this Instrument!
Hey, today I was working, searching for a new topic. I read through some Commission proposals, and other documents. I found out, that
there is a commission proposal on the Frontex-agency, to give the agency further powers. For example they want to send frontex officers to third countries, to prevent people from coming to Europe.
there is a proposal, to share statistical data between the EU and the member states. This isn’t regulated yet, but will be, if the proposal is adopted by the EP and the Council. The data is already shared, the basis of this is a ‘Gentlemen’s Agreement.
I was asking myself: Isn’t a Gentlemen’s Agreement something that keeps it’s conditions secret? And, more important, are the EU and the member states Gentlemen? Shouldn’t there be any affirmative action to make it a Lady’s Agreement (I mean with Angela Merkel, Catherine Ashton, in power and Jóhanna Sigurðardóttir knocking on the door)?
Hey everyone. It’s been done. We launched Europolit. From now on you will find interesting debates, positions and views on politics in the European Union there. Check in at www.europolit.net and find out about the debates in the EU.
Right now we’re working on new topics, aswell as to find more positions on the debates we already have. We have decided not to wait, until there are about ten positions to every debate. So we decided to publish now. While we have been working on these first debates one thing became clear: It’s hard to get statements. While one would think that politicians aswell as lobbyists or experts do have a natural interest in getting their views expressed, the opposite has been the case. Most of them don’t find the time to write something. I think, partly this was beacuse the site was not yet online, because we’re not so well known, and of course because we don’t really have any connections to the politicians.
Nontheless we think that there already is interesting content, and you should come and see if this is something for you.
Helmut Schmidt and Jürgen Habermas. Two german authorities calling upon the leaders of the EU: Be more decisiv… (cont) http://deck.ly/~kZgBP8 months ago
A very balanced and insightful analysis of the High Representative Ashtons performance from Foreign Policy http://bit.ly/fl6FxJ10 months ago
Great to see @blogginportal featured at the #EP Facebook page. Good to direct attention to those who deserve it. 10 months ago
