interdependent
Introduction Issue of Heartbeat. - European Forum Budweis 2012
Budweis
Introduction Issue
Welcome... ...is pretty much all we can say right now. Some of you will be diving into the world of EYP for the first time and feel like they are thrown into the cold water while others are just happily jumping back into it just a couple of weeks after the previous session. But all of you make up the core of this event. It is you looking weird from time to time during the teambuilding, you will be sitting in a circle for a couple of days in committee work and it will be you suiting up for GA looking really important and smart. You are not the only ones having prepared for your topics. Your committees will all be looked after by one of our fantastic journalists who have already written articles related to your topic. In this introduction issue you will find out what their opinion about your topic is. Yours, Timm and Oona
Oona Kiiskinen - Editress (FI) Timm Brünjes - Editor (DE) Sebastian Gerbeth - Video Editor (DE) Theodor Hall - Video Editor (CH) Berkok Yüksel - Journalist (TR) Ognjen Mirkovic - Journalist (RS) Katerina Zejdlova - Journalist (CZ) Gonzalo Rodriguez - Journalist (ES) Tua Malmberg - Journalist (SE) Dmitry Vyskrebentsev - Journalist (RU) Lāra Reinfelds - Journalist (CH) Kensa Traore - Journalist (FR) Jan Janouch - Journalist (CZ)
2
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Introduction Issue
By Gonzalo Rodriguez
EMPL II
Does the thought of you, despite all your best efforts, ending up jobless scare you? Well right now it is a very possible and, at least for me, very scary scenario. As it stands, 1 in 4 of you, regardless of whether you graduate university or not, will be unemployed by the time you turn 25. This is the plight our generation is suffering under, our hurdle to overcome. With youth unemployment at its highest in years a solution must be found for the future, for our future. The crisis has especially hit Greece, Spain, Italy and France with their youth unemployment rates varying from 25% to over 50%. It may not be long before southern Europe contains more unemployed people under 25 than employed. But what is being done against it? In the Europe 2020, a programme by the EU aiming to improve Europe’s living standards and economy, a target was set to reduce unemployment and
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Budweis
school drop-out rates. The way they aim to do this is through a restructuring of the labour market and by funding the improvement of education. Educatory programmes also include Youth on the Move or the Erasmus exchange programme. There remain problems posed by this, as education is not necessarily the only issue. Many educated university graduates are unable to find a workplace in the EU due to a lack of experience and the fact that we live in an aging society, where unemployment for the elderly is also an issue. So in a way it is a catch-22. Somehow a solution must be found to stop this excessive youth unemployment, and it must be found soon, otherwise a whole generation may find itself jobless. And this would be our generation. There are ideas and plans for a EU common policy regarding youth unemployment but I wonder if that is a good idea. One must keep in mind that the EU consists of countries in very
different states of economy and unemployment. Take for example Germany, in which the youth unemployment rate has hardly risen comparably. This then leads to the conclusion that it is completely up to the single governments to deal with their problems, but what can the EU do? Should we aim to provide more jobs for the market or to provide greater skills for the future employees? It is very hard to find a solution for youth unemployment with all the different problems posed, especially in an economy such as this where investments into new job opportunities seem rather unfeasable. After all there are enough problems in our economy without making new deficits. This is a problem that faces us, as today’s youth, especially and it is a problem we must try to address and fight as best we can. What will you do to save your future?
3
Budweis
Introduction Issue
By Kensa Traore
December, 10th of 1948. The General Assembly of the United Nations met in Paris, gathering the representatives of 58 states. At the conclusion of one of the most decisive councils ever founded, a worldwide charter was adopted : the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). Its main principle: freedom of expression. 64 years later, this concept stands as the first political right and is part of the fundamental rights recognized everywhere on the planet. For instance, as Member States of the European Union, it seems we all have signed the clauses of the European Convention. This 1950 international agreement referring to the UDHR aims to safeguard all of the Human Rights and tends to be controlled by institutions such as the European Court of Human Rights. With all this being said, one can not deny that freedom of expression is more than important in our Union. This is not only a theoretical assertion : it could be proven just by taking a look to what is surrounding us. Most of the time, people dress however they want,
4
LIBE I listen to the music and radio stations of their choice, read whatever papers they want and above all, live with their own political opinions.
How about when it comes to very particular opinions, involving racial hatred, homophobia, chauvinism and many other things that are disgracing Europe even today? We are told of historical atrocities to make us learn from our mistakes and nevertheless it seems that the same scenarios are repeating themselves. Let us hold up the following European political parties as examples : Jobbik, the openly racist and conservative Movement for a better Hungary and the more right-wing the better. Greek party Chryssi Avghi, bluntly Neo-Nazi, with a very explicit logo, and dangerously present in the Greek Parliament. French extremist FN (National Front) whose leader Marine Le Pen was seen at Austrian Nazi events, while the British National Party goes on rampaging throughout the UK. It goes without saying that all these organizations actively participate in
spreading discriminatory opinions against ethnic, religious and sexual minorities. They also are threatening their whole states’ population by manipulating minds, whether it is by conveying general violence or impressions of fear and insecurity. One the one hand then, such a phenomenon is profoundly opposed to European and universal principles since it strikes a blow to the rights and safety of millions of people. On the other hand, Neo-nazis, racist, homophobic or extremely conservative people not being able to speak their minds doesn’t respect freedom of expression. Can we allow anyone to say and do anything, as harmful as it could be to some people, or do we need to restrict freedom of expression so that there are no excessive cases? Here is our dilemma, and we are urged to sort it out . Europe’s future is at stake indeed. The only way to save us is to remember this one thing: one’s freedom ends where the freedom of others begins.
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Introduction Issue
By Lara Reinfelds
Generation for generation Europe has struggled and developed through immigration and the exposure to foreign cultures. There has always been a certain level of prejudice against anything new and different, be it something coming from outside or inside. But all these emotions are part of a cycle. The basis for our society is trust, we need to be able to trust each other, trust strangers and trust the people closest to us. Fear, which is evoked by things that are new to us, leads to paranoia and suspicion, which is the total and obvious opposite to trust. This fear, this paranoia, gets fed by and creates incidents such as 9/11, the attacks in London and Madrid and of course the horrible attacks in Norway, one year ago. But do these horrible events justify what is coming now, new laws that take away our freedom, the most fundamental right? And shouldn’t it be a moral right, an ethical decision to let us at least keep our dignity that
facebook.com/Budweis2012
SEDE
comes from being a free human being? Does fighting the evil terrorist, who yes indeed, commit terrible acts, justify choosing security over freedom? Or are these just the useless, overly liberal European ideas of someone who has no idea what she is talking about? Is her wish for a liberal, multicultural Europe without hate a silly little unrealistic dream? Or is it something to strive for, a possibility, a goal? It is my belief that security comes from trust and trust comes from knowledge and experience. Shouldn’t we be trying to fight the root cause of these horrifying happenings, rather than the monster we created through our own human shortcomings? Should we not have the responsibility to be a role model, if we want others to follow our lead? As we saw after Utoya, extremists are not just radical Islamist fighters; they are also that Norwegian who killed 77 people in Norway, because he was scared of multiculturalism, Islam
Budweis
and left-wing ideas. When people are scared, when the economic situation is bad, they often look for solutions in political extremism. Be it left or right, it can harm and doesn’t bring good, long-term solutions. The kind of security laws we will see in the future are going to be tainted by this fear. They are going to be so focused on eliminating any possible threat, that our rights, our freedom will become less and less important. Is it acceptable for deeply flawed anti-terrorism laws to crush free speech, as it did recently when an independent journalist was sentenced to 18 years in prison? Is this what you want? Can you imagine living in a police state? Should we lower our standards of personal freedom for our safety? Or do we need this security; does safety matter more than being free? You decide.
5
Budweis
Introduction Issue
By Kate Zeijdlova
Every single generation has its way to communicate. From smoke signals and sending letters we have come a long journey and nowadays we are not even talking about sending texts on a boxsized heavy mobile phones anymore... The variety of these means of communication has rapidly accelerated in the recent years. The current generation is living their life basically half-online, because the communication has simply increased to this level. But is it different this time? Along with the new technologies, new problems we were not used to deal with emerged, though many people still don’t fully realise that. However, the crucial question is the following: should we really be extremely careful about every word we leave behind in the virtual world? Being the biggest social network with over 900 million users, Facebook has become the easiest and the most efficient way to keep in touch with the people from all different spheres of our life. Sadly, not possessing an account is no longer just a matter of keeping up with the fashion; it is more of a disadvantage and a complication not to be connected in that world.
6
IMCO Facebook has faced widespread criticism regarding its privacy policy. One of the most well-known cases let’s is the so-called ‘right to be forgotten’. After being pressured by various users and even threatened with legal actions, Facebook provided its users in 2010 with the option of permanently terminating their accounts. Until then, disabling an account meant it was not visible but your data remained preserved on the social network’s servers in case you wanted to return. Other minor cases worth mentioning are for instance how Facebook allegedly keeps track of the pages one has visited, in order to better target ads on individual users. Alternatively, there is the controversial face recognition tool used for automatic tagging (at least for now- Facebook is evidently planning on expanding the tool since it just bought the company creating those software). Facebook recently launched a scanning software that analyses comments and chats discussions. As this software detects a suspicious conversation containing certain phrases and keywords, it notifies a Facebook employee in
order to review whether the conversation is inappropriate or potentially criminal. In case the suspicion proves right the employee notifies local law enforcement. This system is already in use - in the USA a first criminal has been arrested. The software focuses on the new Facebook ‘friendships’ rather than the pre- existing ones. Although it is viewed as a very controversial one by the users, Facebook sees it as a rather positive measure because ‘it is not the employees who check private conversations in the first place, it is the software with a very low false-positive rate’. In addition, the legal cases where Facebook posts were used as evidence are not sporadic: there are certain exceptional cases where the private conversations have been given to the court. There are many complicated questions to be asked. Is it still possible nowadays to remain anonymous? Do we still have a control over data released to the virtual world? Has the time come to redefine the term ‘privacy’? Where does our right to a protection of privacy stand and how is it going to change? And will it be affecting not only us, but also the future generations?
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Introduction Issue
By Jan Janouch
The choice between our energy sources is becoming ever more critical, it is a real crunch time for our energy. It seems we are in a clinch, stuck in between the possible energy sources all riddled with disadvantages and dangers. Our huge energy demand means that we need to find some way to satisfy ourselves without risking our health, our planet’s health or our economy. The main options are dwindling and the search for the perfect, renewable yet efficient and safe energy source continues. Which road should we take on our way to sustaining our energy demand? I believe that we must not just focus on sustaining our needs but also on lowering them. At the rate that our population and energy demand is rising it is an uphill task to even try to compensate our needs. We must try to lower our energy usage as much as possible in order to avoid the different damages caused by our various energy sources. The general consensus is that we
facebook.com/Budweis2012
ITRE
should, at least for the long-term, be aiming towards a solely renewableresource driven energy aside from nuclear power. The main debate revolving around natural renewable energy sources is their feasibility. It is a sad but hard fact that no renewable energy, excluding maybe nuclear energy, could handle our requirements in their current state. Not solar, not wind, not biomass, tidal, hydro or geothermal. And yet non renewable energies pose great dangers in global warming and in how long they may last. So we must find an alternative of some kind. As always, the elephant in the room comes to the forefront- nuclear power. Can we still turn to nuclear power following the horrific events at Chernobyl and Fukushima? And do we even have a choice? I am generally very liberal-minded person, but here my opinion differs from the view of people I share political ideals with. I believe nuclear power is the lesser of a large amount of evils. In the short-term we need a replacement for our mineral non renewable energies
Budweis
and nuclear power could serve as a transitional energy source in securely, safely built nuclear plants. As shocking as these catastrophes were we must not let them cloud our sight, and keep in mind our requirements as a modern society. Nuclear power is our only choice- non renewable energy sources are not only a great cause contributor on global warming, a in my eyes far more imminent and dangerous threat, but more importantly they are running out and fast. In 50 years we could well find ourselves stranded without any energy sources, if we further rely on non renewable sources. On the other hand natural, renewable sources seem like the best solution, but there is no way they suffice in efficiency or quantity. So, again, which path do you choose to take? Lower our energy needs, move to nuclear power, stick with non renewable sources and attempt a transfer to solar, wind or some other possible one. Whichever path you take there are many problems, so choose wisely and think it through.
7
Budweis
Introduction Issue
By Dmitry Vyskrebentsev
Taking into account what is happening in Europe today, it has become evident to everyone by now that change is not only needed but would also be lifesaving. However let us take a look at the current situation from an unbiased point of view. The EU has been in a crisis for the last 2 years. The measures undertaken either did not prove to be effective enough or effective at all. But one thing is certain - European authorities are good at maintaining the situation at some baseline level, which is an achievement worth acknowledging, given the severity of the recession. At the same time European leaders understand that in such a situation there are two options: further integration or the collapse of the single currency as a whole, initiated by the exit of the ailing countries such as Greece or Spain. United Europe’s answer to this dilemma is the fiscal compact. But what does it mean? The Fiscal Compact is an intergovernmental treaty that was signed on March 2, 2012 by all the member-states of the EU except the Czech Republic and the United Kingdom. The treaty will enter
8
ECON into force on January 1, 2013, if by that time 12 members of the euro area will have ratified it. The Fiscal Compact requires its parties to introduce a national requirement to have national budgets that are in balance or in surplus. The European Court of Justice would fine a country up to 0.1% of GDP if this was not done a year after ratification. It means that this initiative is supposed to tackle not only today’s crisis but also the so-called “democratic deficit”. Consequently, this leads to the revision of previous treaties such as Maastricht, Lisbon and everything that was in between. Yet some experts believe that the proposed solution does not include the necessary steps towards a sound economy. Thus, solving the crisis becomes a problem for the countries in crisis. Although 25 of the European Union’s 27 members signed the fiscal compact in January in order to enforce budget discipline, it will be years before the countries’ legislatures ratify it. So that is a non-solution for the current debt, banking and economic mess. And each “solution” - the 100 billion
euros ($127 billion) for Spain’s or a favorable Greek election outcome in June - produces shorter and shallower relief rallies in financial markets. On the one hand the new framework has many draw-backs such as the exclusion of the EU citizens from the decision-making process, its centralization and intervention into home affairs of the member-states. On the other hand Europeans should not forget that these drawbacks are nothing more than the price to be paid for the common project (Maastricht) that produced evident benefits in the form of prosperity, economic opportunities and job creation. So as long as the EU did not touch the most important political issues for ordinary voters - such as tax, spending, education, defence or health care - its apparent lack of accountability would not matter. In conclusion I would like to quote Mr. Draghi. “The progress in undertaking deficit control, structural reforms has been remarkable. They’ll have to continue doing so, of course, but the pace has been set.”
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Introduction Issue
by
Berkok Yüksel
It has been a century since the first industrial multi-national war (the Great War as it was called at that time and WWI as it is called today), but despite its continuous struggle in the past humans have not been able to create a globally peaceful environment. And still today, it lacks of harmony. Perhaps the most outraging conflicts that threat the peace nowadays take place in the Middle East. As you read this article, there are innocent children, women and men dying on the battlefield, because of the clash among doctrines, not only Islamic but also Jewish and several others. In fact, the IsraeliPalestinian war in the West Bank area is maybe the fiercest collision in the Middle East. The numerous casualties are a consequence of the conflict between Jewish Israeli and Muslim Palestinians, who have both lived in West Bank for centuries. Needless to say these endless conflicts following the conquest of West Bank by Israel are putting at risk the balance in the Middle East. Experts even speculate that it is a gateway to the third World War, consider-
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Budweis
AFET ing US’ and Russia’s interest in the area as well as the political proximity of the UN and the EU to the issue at hand. Neither the Muslim inhabitants nor the Jewish have the right to abolish the other from their homeland. But with the non-ending disputes between the two sides due to the meddling of doctrinaire terrorist sources such as Hamas, Hezbollah, etc. the current situation in the territory does not remark a bright future. Perhaps the best path to be taken, although being a fantasy regarding the facts, is that of ‘the Zohan’. ‘You Don’t Mess With the Zohan’(2008) is a Hollywood-produced film starring Adam Sandler as the Zohan, a former invincible Israeli military agent who decides to leave everything behind and cut hair in America. As Zohan leaves his duty for Israel in order to become a hairdresser in New York, he sees that for the immigrants of both nationalities: there are many common points other than the over-consumption of hummus. For instance, by satirically implying that the average American considers every Middle Eastern (maybe even
everyone with a beard) as a terrorist, the movie indicates that the Israelis and Palestinians are not that different indeed. Disregarding the romance and the comedy factors in the plot, the American-made film does have a message concerning the conflict in West Bank. There may be a very long past of war and hatred but the homeland has enough space for both Jews and Arabs. And maybe, just maybe, there is a slight possibility that Arabs and Jews will eventually understand they are neighbours living on the same soil. Putting aside the need to quote John Lennon, you as the next generation of Europe are urged to think that the future might contain peace. This could happen by making people realise their resemblances rather than making them obey sanctions and political agreements, and to take action for this cause. As Zohan once said: “So let’s do it.”
9
Budweis
by
Introduction Issue
Ognjen Mirkovic
LIBE II
One of the most controversial issues facing the EU is drug legalisation. This dispute relates to every category of drug, however, marijuana has been the only drug in the EU to gain widespread legalization support, so this paper must narrow its focus on the facts that pertain particularly to marijuana.
The Drug PROHIBITION Arguments There are several reasons for keeping drugs illegal. The most popular is because of their intoxicating effects on the brain, damaging impact on the body, adverse impact on behavior, and potential for abuse. Although many users insist that smoking marijuana is not harmful to the body, studies show that joints contain “50 to 70 percent more carcinogenic hydrocarbons than tobacco smoke increasing one’s risk of chronic cough, bronchitis, and emphysema“. Legalisation opponents claim that marijuana consumers are less likely to have a permanent job and as a result are more likely to commit robbery. Regardless of whether or not marijua-
10
na users are likely to commit a violent crime such as armed robbery, there is another crime that may be even more detrimental: driving while impaired. Also, there is the youth issue, which is closely tied to the gateway drug theory. Legalisation activists usually acknowledge that use by minors should not be permitted, just as use of alcohol and tobacco by minors is not permitted. The gateway drug theory states that marijuana use inevitably leads to the use of other substances, especially in groups of young people. For example, one study suggests that 62 percent of people who consume marijuana before the age of 15 are likely to go on to use cocaine.
cerous” They also say that prohibition of drugs causes more crime than legalisation. Numerous studies show that drug users commit far fewer crimes when the price of drugs drops” Perhaps the strongest reason for ending the war on drugs is the economy. If marijuana was legalised but all hard drugs were still prohibited, this would drastically cut down the number of drug arrests in the EU. Prisons would be less crowded, fewer individuals would lose their jobs, and the government could highly tax these products. Hemp would be a vital industry, since it is useful as a bio-diesel fuel making the gasoline prices go down.
The Drug LEGALISATION Arguments Legalisation supporters state that although marijuana may be harmful, adults should have the right of selfharm, with cannabis just as with alcohol and tobacco. Scientist also discovered that THC may even help protect against it by killing “aging cells and [keeping] them from becoming can-
The EU does not have a unique stance on the matter. Portugal has legalised a great variety of drugs, Holland allows drug use in coffee shops while in Sweden there is minimum tolerance for all kind of drugs. Surely the first step in solving this issue would be a mutual EU level attitude towards drugs legislation.
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Introduction Issue
By Tua Malmberg
EMPL I
I grew up in a segregated town. A town, divided into two sides. I lived on one side, where I was a happy, bright and privileged little girl. I was the daughter of educated parents whose parents were also educated. We were never judged, never ridiculed or discriminated against by anyone. We were a happy little family. And I had the world at my feet, waiting for me to explore it and, when the time was right, to find my place in it. On the other side of the town life for little bright boys and girls was very different. Those boys and girls were the sons and daughters of drug addicts, of ex-convicts, alcoholics and immigrants. The sons and daughters of people society had shunned, banned and neglected. Those boys and girls were not privileged. They did not have the world at their feet. No, those boys and girls were destined to end up like their parents. Left out, shunned, banned and neglected by everyone. “A tragedy is a representation of an ac-
facebook.com/Budweis2012
Budweis
tion that is whole and complete and of a certain magnitude. A whole is what has a beginning and middle and end.� Aristotle To be socially unequal is, in many cases, to be denied your basic human rights. Freedom of speech, access to education and affordable proper health care is nothing you, as a socially unequal, can take for granted. The foundation of social inequality is set in pride and prejudice. It exists between races, social classes, countries and sexes. It has existed since we all still lived in trees and its results are visible throughout the globe and are often labelled as injustice. One would think that a problem rooted back to when mankind consisted of uncivilised primates on the savannah would have been solved by now, in this modern age. Yet, it has not. Since its beginning, the problem has grown and expanded. Now, it has reached huge proportions. The gap between the socially unequal and the socially
privileged is larger than ever and the vicious circle has grown proportionally more difficult to break. The children of today are the adults of tomorrow. We, you and I, are the adults of tomorrow. It is up to us to fight the problem. It is up to us to take serious action against social inequality. It is up to us to make it end. It is a problem of a large magnitude, rooted deep down in us. A great change is necessary; a great change in order to improve the world as we know it. I leave it up to you to find the solution. To put an end to the tragedies caused by social inequality. I leave it up to you to write the next chapter in European history. As the adults of tomorrow your minds and your ideas are the key to the solution. I urge you all to stop social inequality. Make it your mission. Then, in the future, every child born into this world will have the same opportunity as the next to enjoy it.
11