EuroVisie September 2016 by Eurovisie

eurovisie

een uitgave van studievereniging europese studies a publication of the study association of european studies

political correctness also In this issue: georgia and ukraine / the european bureaucrat / state doping / post-conflict justice

volume 12 issue 1 september 2016

(ad) (ad)

WRITE FOR EUROVISIE Do you like writing, or do you have good ideas for our renewed magazine? consider applying for the position of editor, or send in your article, opinion piece, or column - all subjects are welcome, both dutch and english are accepted.

just email us at eurovisie@ses-uva.nl

eurovisie / september 2016

contents

editorial mats licht

o and behold, you have acquired one of the coveted issues of this magazine, you might want to

hold onto this one. Not only because of the amazing quality of the design and

the content, but also because it might be worth some money at some time.

welcome to ses! page 4

Because it is my number one issue.

Don’t set your hopes for retirement in that, though.

LEERSSEN page 7

Maitrie was right, people do not like

change, generally. Otherwise we would already live in Communist Utopia,

but the insecure prospect of future prosperity does not outweigh the

relative ease of sticking with the status

POLITICAL CORRECTNESS page 8

quo. In this case, I am happy I opted

for change and accepted this position.

This way, I have something in common with all of you: some are only starting

state-provided doping page 11

a new year of uni, some are starting over altogether, in a new city, with

new people, as a new person even,

depending on how much you hated

yourself in school. But we are all slightly

post-conflict justice in the balkans Page 12

nervous, anxious as to what is to come. But in Amsterdam, you can be whoever you want. That is the one quality that sets this city apart. If you are willing

to spend €5 on a pint. And are a good enough cyclist to avoid the stoned

an ode to the european bureaucrat page 15

tourists on the road. Other than that, we’re really having a swell old time.

Because things are the way they are, things will not stay the way they are. -Bertolt Brecht

georgia and ukraine pagina 18

imprint

Editorial office Kloveniersburgwal 48, room E2.04/2.05, Amsterdam Editor-in-chief Mats Licht Editors Michelle Kooiman, Levente Vervoort, Ruben Wissing Final editing Inge Getkate Design Emiel Janssens With contributions by Joep Leerssen, Marlieke Ruiter, Nevenka Tromp September 2016

S ES - N EWS

WELCOME TO

SES! marlieke ruiter

ear (new) SES members, students, teachers and other readers, On behalf of the entire association I will use these pages to tell you something about SES in a more detailed manner. Most of you probably already got to know SES in these first few weeks of your introduction period. Or at least, I hope you did. The new board and other people from SES most likely tried to convince you to become a member. If they succeeded, the following will only confirm your excellent decision. If they haven’t, you can still become a member when you’re ready. Anytime. Some of you know exactly what we do and what we stand for, but it came to our attention that a lot of international (and Dutch) students did not know anything about the concept of a study association. So what’s so important about it? Well, we believe that a study association can be of great value in many ways. Through this channel, students can engage in extra activities besides their studies. You can get to know a lot of people besides your seminar groups, who might have the same interests as you. You’ll meet students from other years, other majors and even from other studies – with whom you are able to discuss and share your thoughts on study-related topics. We have several committees that

organise debates, a conference, study and city trips and other activities. But do not worry. Not only do we organise study-related activities, there are plenty of events, weekly drinks (borrels!) and pub quizzes to blow off some steam. Our goal is to complement the studies and student life and to organise activities for everyone. You can take part in these activities, but you can also help with the organisation. Every year a new board will take care of the organisation, but they need some help in the form of committees. On the next page you can find the committees that are open for application this year. The application deadline is 19 September. The board of 2016-2017 will be officially installed on the 13th of September. We would like to introduce you to the first international board of SES! First of all, your new chairman is going to be Lodewijk Rijksbaron. This guy is the perfect mix between Amsterdam street life and fancy Oud-Zuid. You could also describe him as a relaxed dude, who is always straightforward and knows how to handle any situation. Lodewijk will be coordinating the Career Dinner Committee and the Introduction Committee. The new secretary will be Kevin Menagie. Already in his third year, Kevin has been an active member since day one. Dedication is a word that comes to

EuroVisie

From left to right: Emilie Tvede Steffensen mind and this boy has given his heart to the association. He is also a good companion for some shots at the weekly drink! When he wants to get something done, he will give a hundred percent. Kevin will be coordinating the Activity Committee, the Hitchhike Committee and the Book Committee. Tom Dautzenberg will be the new treasurer. Although Tom is the youngest member of the board, he has a lot of experience within SES. In his spare time, he likes to count the little money he has, so that’s why Tom will take care of your money. Tom has a bright and fun personality, but knows how to be serious when he has to. Tom will be coordinating the EuroVisie Editorial Board and the

n, Kevin Menagie, Tom Dautzenberg, Pearse Quinn, and Lodewijk Rijksbaron. Event Committee. The new Commissioner of Internal Affairs will be Pearse Quinn. This English-Italian sportsman is always enthusiastic and will help get the party started. Fun fact: he did not miss one weekly drink last year â&#x20AC;&#x201C; that has to mean something. Pearse will be coordinating the Travel Committee and the Debate Committee. Last but not least, our Commissioner of External Affairs will be the lovely Danish Emilie Tvede Steffensen. Another pretty blonde this year, who will deal with potential sponsors and other associations. Emilie will be coordinating the Conference Committee, the Introduction Committee and the Book Committee (You go girl!).

JOIN A Committee!

TURN PAGE > September 2016

S ES - N EWS

become an active member! Activity Committee The Activity Committee is responsible for the organisation of various study-related activities. The committee is meant to complement the studies by organising interesting and fun activities such as a weekend trip to Brussels and a day trip to The Hague. Besides this, they also organise a family day at the university, sport activities and pub quizzes. You can apply for this committee by sending an e-mail to: secretary@ses-uva. nl Debate Committee This Committee organises a Model United Nations event, called ‘SESMUN’. All participating students will represent an EU country in a meeting of the European Council. The committee is also responsible for regular debates about relevant topics. You can apply for this committee by sending an e-mail to: internalaffairs@ses-uva.nl Conference Committee Every year in the beginning of April a SES Conference is held. This day is full of interesting lectures, interactive workshops and a final debate about a subject related to European Studies. Would you like to devise a relevant or controversial subject? Are you able to convince leading figures to speak at the conference - such as ambassadors, multinationals and members of the European Parliament? Then we would be happy to receive your application for this committee! You can apply by sending an e-mail to: externalaffairs@ses-uva.nl

Travel Committee Every spring, SES organises an interesting and fun study trip to exotic (European) destinations. The past years we have been able to visit three countries each trip. Think about the Balkans, the Baltic States and even Turkey or Morocco. The committee has the honour to decide on the destination. They are responsible for accommodation and transport and the composition of a programme. The programme includes activities such as visiting universities, embassies or museums. Of course the aim of the trip is also to have fun and enjoy the culture of the countries we are visiting. The study trip is extremely popular amongst members and is one of the highlights of the year. You can apply by sending an e-mail to: internalaffairs@ ses-uva.nl Career Dinner Committee Since 2011, the ‘Career Dinner’ has been taking place each year in March. During a three-course dinner, students will be given the opportunity to orientate on a future master’s degree, internship or job. On this night, the students will engage in a dialogue with representatives from various companies and institutions from your category of choice. The representatives will share their stories, answer your questions and offer advice based on their experiences in the working field. CEO’s, lawyers, managers and recent graduates will be invited. Among the tasks are deciding on a location, inviting the representatives and looking for sponsors. Post-propaedeutic students will be given priority. You can apply for this committee by sending an e-mail to: chair@ses-uva.nl

EuroVisie

Hitchhike Committee The past two years, SES has been hitchhiking through Europe. The Hitchhike Committee, quite a new phenomenon within SES, will plan a great trip for us around the end of the year. The destination will be a secret until the day of departure. As a member of this committee, you will decide on the destination(s), rules and assignments among other things. Of course you will also make sure that every team makes it to the destination. You can apply for this committee by sending an e-mail to: secretary@ses-uva.nl EuroVisie Editorial Board The EuroVisie is the magazine you are reading right at this moment! It is issued five times a year. It serves as a platform for students so they can write articles that are interesting to European Studies students (and teachers). It also keeps you up to date about SES activities. Do you have a passion for writing and would you like to contribute to this magazine? It is possible to apply for the position of editor. It is also possible to send in papers, essays or letters for a single edition. If you are interested in joining the Editorial Board, you can apply by sending an e-mail to treasurer@ses-uva. nl Event Committee The Event Committee is responsible for bringing fun into the association. This committee organises parties, special-themed drinks (‘borrels’) and a Christmas gala. Together with your colleagues, you would have to come up with themes, venues and DJ’s. For some of the parties, you will cooperate with other associations. You can apply for this committee by sending an e-mail to: treasurer@ses-uva.nl Introduction Committee The Introduction Committee is responsible for the organisation of the Introduction weekend and the Introduction Party and dinner (during Intreeweek). They will do their best to make your introduction to SES as much fun as possible. They will start organising this somewhere in January, so the applications for this committee are not open yet.

co lu m n

leerssen “www.AcademicsAgainstBullshit.edu”

hese are interesting times to do European Studies. Not because Europe is in crisis. It is not, despite the ingrained media hysteria that will proclaim a “European crisis” every other Thursday, over any problem that hits Planet Earth. Warfare involving roving militias with civilian targets, from Boko Haram and Janjaweed to Isis; climate change; loose-cannon statesmen in the Berlusconi mold, from Putin to Trump by way of Erdoğan and Boris Johnson; uncontrollable financial markets and reckless banks: there’s crises for you. They are everywhere, not just in Europe. No, the real reason why these are interesting times has to do with what is variously called “post-truth” politics or “fact-free” politics. We see a trend where politicians can tell blatant untruths (you know, those things that in a pre-Facebook age used to be called “lies”) and get away with it. The tweets and hoots of Donald Trump are an obvious example, but what caught my attention was the Brexit farce. Here was a campaign that was fought between sensational lies and boring facts, and the facts lost. The lies included assertions that the EU was about to let Turkey join as a member state, that the EU would unleash hordes of sex-crazed

asylum seekers on the British shores, and that Brexit would save the government hundreds of millions of pounds per week, all of which could be spent on the national healthcare system. When Michael Gove, government minister and figurehead of the Brexit campaign, was confronted with the fact that not a single reputable economist endorsed these outlandish claims, he calmly and notoriously asserted that “people in this country have had enough of experts”. And, by God, he was right: Brexit won the vote; fiction defeated the facts, the liars defeated the experts. What counts in politics, quite obviously, is not the boring old facts but the snappy retweetable soundbites, the sort of stuff that the Three Dumb Blondes (Trump, Boris Johnson and Geert Wilders) are such past masters in. Right or wrong, who cares? In semantics we make a difference between lies and bullshit (Harry G. Frankfurt, On Bullshit, Princeton U.P. 2005). Lies consist of deliberate untruths designed to mislead your audience. Bullshit consists of deliberate untruths which you know in advance your audience won’t believe but hey, who cares? It better than nothing (“Welcome to our helpdesk.

September 2016

We are passionate about guaranteeing superlative customer satisfaction”. No you’re not, and you know I know you’re not, but you tell me so anyway.) So – these populist untruths, are they lies or bullshit? In fact they are neither. They are what I call not-even-bullshit, or NEBS for short. NEBS are verbal gestures aiming to create fellow-feeling amongst your followers. They can be as meaningless as “Woohoo!”, or “Let’s do this!”). What matters are not the NEBS’s contents but the fact that they flag a shared preassumption: “we are facing a hostile outside world from which we have to distance ourselves”, “our enemies are Bad Guys, I mean really, really thoroughly Baaaad Guys” – and then you give a fictional or quasi-factual instance of that pre-assumption, the substance of which is inconsequential. I should like to think that we have witnessed the high tide of NEBS, of factfree-ness and post-truth politics. “Had enough of experts”? Think again. The real world is no Eurovision Song Contest, and people in Britain are waking up from their NEBS delusions to that cold hard fact.

Joep Leerssen is Professor of European literature at the University of Amsterdam.

l a n g uag e

the good, the aesthetically EuroVisie’s Levente Vervoort shares his thoughts on the gains and losses of different kinds of political correct language. While some harmful words should be avoided, demonising others has helped populists normalise racism and other forms of hate speech.

ave you ever called a garbage man a waste collector, a sanitation engineer or recycling tech? Probably not. The last two terms are just some examples of what has become known as ‘political correctness’ or ‘PC’. A garbage man collects garbage much like a mailman (PC: letter carrier) delivers mail. Still, the sheer trashiness of the occupation, as well as the growing amount of female garbage men, changed recycling discourse as a whole. While the political agency of garbage seems slight, the garbage man is just one of countless examples of how changing social and political circumstances influence the way we talk about people and society. After gaining popularity in the 1990s, the term has become a dominant topic and key instrument in contemporary politics. Paradoxically, calling something PC is, most of the time, criticism rather than praise (“Levente, that was so PC of you; to call that bald man follicularly

challenged!”). So why would we call something politically correct, whilst we believe it is incorrect to call it that very word? I will try to explore this by setting apart two different kinds of PC I have found.

“In 2000, the term ‘thought shower’ was coined to replace ‘brainstorm’, which could be offensive to people with cerebral disorders” The first class of PC-words’ goal is to change the way we talk about human differences. It is aimed at stripping language from words that could be demeaning to others. In the 1970s, it was commonplace to refer to Asians as ‘Orientals’. ‘Nigger’ has joined ‘fuck’

EuroVisie

as the only two words in English so bad we refer to them by their initial (N-word, F-word). Even as this kind of PC is restrictive of our choice of words, its intention is to facilitate an inclusive dialogue. From this first variety of PC terms, a second sort of ‘meta-PC’ was born, that openly ridicules PC’s excessively sensitive nature, like the aforementioned ‘follicularly challenged’. Around the year 2000, fox example, the term ‘thought shower’ was coined to replace ‘brainstorm’, which could be offensive to people with cerebral disorders. Of a similar nature is ‘living impaired’ (dead), which analogises the widely accepted visually impaired and hearing impaired for blind and deaf people respectively. The overt mockery in its own right is much more pejorative than the original word (‘dead’). This brand of PC could only come into existence as a linguistic reaction to PC-words after they earned widespread use in the new millennium. Similarly, the term ‘snowflake’ has

e bad and the y challenged

become a jeering of anything or anyone too ‘unique’, as snowflakes are believed to be all un-identical. On the internet, it is particularly associated with PC-language concerning sex, gender and sexuality. This brings us to the third kind of PCterms, which could be called parent-PC if you take into consideration what I have written above. This older generation of PC-terms replaced words that were deemed ‘normal’, rather than ‘correct’. However, their use changed to be radically incorrect after marginalised groups reached a certain point of emancipation. Unlike the parodies less political properties of man were met with (deaf, blind, etc.), political correctness surrounding race, ethnicity, sex, gender and sexuality have been heavily attacked. Some right-wing academics have even argued PC is a multiculturalist conspiracy trying to tackle JudeoChristian values that would originate from the Frankfurt School’s critical theory and cultural Marxism. In the early 1990s, conservative academics argued that PC-language

was a tool to advance self-victimisation and multiculturalism through language and affirmative action, especially in school and university curricula. Political correctness as a form of liberal bias at universities in particular is scrutinised. The political views of the faculty are generally much more liberal than those of the general population, hence PCcurricula are deemed a form of popular brainwashing. In a sense, the third kind of PCterms is indeed pretty dogmatic. Rather than being the right words to describe sensitive issues, they are liberal orthodoxies imposed on our political debate. They try to promulgate a set of correct answers to political questions but limit discussions on these topics severely. As long as pro-lifers, homophobes and sexists dare not speak their minds at university and other public spaces, precious opportunities to eradicate their ideas are wasted. Even so, the issue of PC remains very complex. Should we want to unmask deviant thinkers by leaving discourse completely open or is PC necessary

September 2016

to educate younger generations? As of now, it seems clear to me that society has yet to catch up with some progressive ideas that are current in various elites. As the traditional political elites have been losing ground against antiestablishment and populist powers, their attempts to force their ideas into speech as the one and only truth have played away credibility for a lot of people. Moreover, this contradiction may be one of the reasons aforementioned populists are still increasing in popularity. The rightist and conservatives have their own kind of PC. But for ever more people, the backing of the ‘will of the people’ has more validity than what is socially just. If we look at it this way, political correctness is at the core of changing political discourse. No social justice warrior has been able to stop Donald Trump from saying horrible things about Muslims and Mexicans or Geert Wilders from wanting to ban the Quran. In the meantime, the Gutmensch has become equivalent to the 21st-century thought police.

s po rts

THE FLIP SIDE OF THE GOLD MEDAL

MICHELLE KOOIMAN

Last summer we all enjoyed the great sports performances at the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. However, this edition seems tainted for Russian athletes. It appeared that the Russian government provided performance enhancers to their own athletes. A state that drugs their own athletes is not a new phenomenon. It seems that criticized, alleged repressive and mainly non-Western regimes crave for big successes in sports. But why is that success so important?

ntil the last moment, Russian athletes were not sure if they were allowed to participate in the Olympic Games in Rio de Janeiro. The World Anti-Doping Agency (WADA) had published, only a month before the start of the Olympics, an astounding report which said that the Russian government systematically doped athletes in all kinds of disciplines. Whistle blower Yulia Stepanova, an 800-meter track specialist, stated that the Russian government encouraged their athletes to use performance-enhancing drugs and other methods. At first, it seemed that the complete Russian delegation would be prohibited from participating, but eventually the International Olympic Committee (IOC) decided a selection of athletes would still be able to join the Olympics. However, the complete Russian delegation is not allowed to join the Paralympics. Thus, The outcome of this doping scandal has far reaching consequences. Although a doping scandal this big does not come to light that often, it has

happened before. Maybe the leading example of a state who doped their athletes was the German Democratic Republic during the sixties, seventies and eighties. Several athletes achieved many remarkable, even extraordinary successes during the glory days of the GDR. In 1991, the biggest doping scandal in Europe came to light. State Plan 14.25 was revealed. East German athletes were, whether knowingly or unknowingly, given anabolic steroids and testosterone from an early age. Many athletes grew up in state supported boarding schools in which education was combined with top sport. A good example of such an athlete was swimmer Kornelia Ender. Ender entered boarding school when she was ten years old. At the age of thirteen, she participated in the Olympic Games of Munich and won three silver medals. Four years later, she excelled again by winning four Olympic titles. All together she swam twenty-two world records. Konnie was invincible. After the truth came out, Ender stated that she could not deny the interference of the state, but thought she was never

EuroVisie

given illegal performance enhancers. Other swimmers and athletes were in the same position, but were convinced they were drugged since many of them struggled with medical consequences that derived from their heydays. Several female athletes developed ‘manly’ characteristics, were unable to conceive children or struggled with heart conditions. These consequences are quite severe. Although the international sports society was shocked, punitive consequences were minimal since the government of the GDR did not exist anymore and many cases were outdated. Because of the personal tragedies

“Without the support of the never be able to ac

caused by the doping culture of the GDR, the question rises why a government will go this far in order to achieve successful sports results. This seems ridiculous at first, but there are several reasonable - although definitely not legitimate - reasons. First of all, successful athletes serve as a role model for the state that make the state, of course, equally successful. Without the support of the state, the athlete would never be able to achieve victories. This message was literally propagated by many athletes during interviews after performances. Sports are also a really influential

e state, the athlete would chieve victories”

element within a society because they create cohesion among many different groups. We probably all know the euphoric, patriotic feeling we get while at the bar, drinking beer with strangers while watching ‘our’ national team win a match on an important international tournament. Top-class sport can also function as an example of a healthy lifestyle. The opposite seems true, because of all the not-so-healthy consequences top-class sport can have, but successful sports achievements can indirectly fight overweight, obesity and lifestyle diseases since it inspires people to exercise. Victories therefore have an important effect on national health service which benefits the expenses of the state. Especially non-Western, communist linked societies, that are often being criticized for violating human rights, put a lot of importance on successes in top-class sport because it represents discipline, success and unity of the state. Even states that act ‘clean’ are sometimes accused of taking the will for golden success too far. Legitimate accusations towards China have been

September 2016

made, since it drills athletes with controversial methods from an early age in order to win titles for their country. Although sports have proven to be a great means to complement a society and a government, it is striking that the Russian government still decided that drugging athletes was a smart thing to do. It takes a lot of effort, money and people to build a so-called doping culture. A large network of scientists, doctors and state officials has to be established. These groups work together on a huge project that, most importantly, needs to stay a secret. However, secrecy is almost impossible to maintain since new drug tests can trace performance enhancers years back. Thereby both the case of the GDR as of Russia proved that drugged athletes will not always keep quiet. Therefore, governments probably should know better than to invest in a doping culture. Although the consequences of the Russian case are not all evident yet, it is safe to say that the Russian government has gotten a taste of their own medicine.

post-conflict law

Summer Politics and

Transitional Injustice in the Balkans

Since my professional interest in the South-East of Europe summers have been always busy. What I have learned since the political turmoil in the Balkans started is that the notion of a summer recess in the times of war and conflict does not exist. On the contrary, some of the most horrendous events occurred in the summer.

nevenka tromp

EuroVisie

ake for example last summer. In July 2015 I was with a group of students in Srebrenica attending a huge commemoration, marking the 20-year anniversary of the genocide that took place there. In the war that lasted three and a half years, Srebrenica was this critical last stage of a war fought in Bosnia-Herzegovina (BiH) for the western borders of the post-communist Serbian state. Serb armed forces marched to Srebrenica on 11 July 1995 and seized the town, expelling most of the women, children and elderly, and decided to kill almost all men. The commemoration of last year gathered many local and global dignitaries including former US President

“In the procession of almost 200 VIPs I remember waving from my place in the crowd towards the former Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok”

Bill Clinton, Queen Noor of Jordan, Princess Anne of the United Kingdom and many others. In the procession of almost 200 VIPs I remember waving from my place in the crowd towards the former Dutch Prime Minister Wim Kok and the sitting Minister of Foreign Affairs, Bert Koenders. It was at that commemoration last summer that I have experienced for the first time in my life the power of the crowd, also called by sociologist the ‘mob rule’. This was not just a ‘crowd’. We are talking about almost 50,000 people. The event drew a huge mass of people, gathered to show the last respect to the victims whose remains had been identified that year. The dženaza, the Islamic burial ritual, was led by effendi Husein Kavazović, reis ul-ulema of the Bosnian Muslims in the presence of the family members of the victims. After a series of speeches by hosts and guests, the dignitaries started the procession around the carefully guarded route that ran through the mass

of people. Shortly after the dignitaries started the move, the crowd started to react and the roaring sounds ‘Allahu Akbar’ became more and more powerful as more people joined. Young men started throwing stones and the rumour got spread that they were throwing stones at Aleksandar Vučić, the Prime Minster of Serbia. He was only the second leader of Serbia ever to be present at one of the annually held burials of the victims of the Srebrenica genocide. In the backdrop of the post-conflict animosities towards Serbia for never unequivocally recognising the crimes of genocide committed in the territory of BiH against the Bosnian Muslims by the Serbian armed forces, Serbia also did everything to obscure its own role in the war. But in difference to the previous Serbian Prime Minister Boris Tadić, who did not have any war record cleaving to his name, Aleksander Vučić took a huge risk. The risk played against him as he was confronted to look at a banner with a quote he uttered in 1995 saying ‘For every dead Serb, we shall kill 100 Bosnian Muslims’. This banner was caught on the video cameras of hundreds of foreign news outlets that were present at the commemoration. While Vučić was running away and the roars of the crowd grew in intensity, I realised how little is needed to spark a conflict into violence. I felt the empowerment of the crowd that was exiting and scary at the same time. Exciting, as it gave me a strong feeling that the wrongs can be corrected instantaneously, just by the moral reaction of the wronged crowd. It was scary as I knew very well that this was not a correct feeling. The crowd as I saw it for myself was not a political movement with a defined agenda and a clear strategy. I saw men as young as 15 running in frenzy and ready for action. The salvation came not from the police but from the words of wisdom of responsible leaders. Effendi Kavazović took the lead and in a calm tone asked his fellow Muslims to respect their faith and their holy book in which they have to respect a guest in their house, who came on their invitation. The crowd calmed down and effendi Kavazović continued with the dženaza. I was stunned by this

September 2016

first hand experience and the power of the mob rule. I kept thinking ‘What if someone of authority had encouraged the crowd to demand blood and vengeance?’ I shall turn to the students who witnessed the same event. They had previously attended a Master Class on Law, History, Politics and Society in the Context of Mass Atrocities, that University of Amsterdam annually visits at the Inter-University Centre in Dubrovnik, Croatia. The title of the 2015 Master Class was Law and Politics of Genocide: 20 years after Srebrenica. The attendees were students of 15 different nationalities, from different but related fields: law, political science, history, journalism, international relations as well as human rights activists. In two weeks time they got lectures and workshops from lawyers, judges, historians, NGO leaders and politicians about the responses to mass atrocities in the post-conflict societies. The field trip from Dubrovnik to Srebrenica in July last year seemed inevitable. And it was. This was the workshop no Master Class and no university curse could have provided. This year’s Master Class again took place in Dubrovnik and again in the first two weeks of July under the topic ‘Conflict Beyond the Reach of Law:

“While Vučić was running away and the roars of the crowd grew in intensity, I realised how little is needed to spark a conflict into violence”

Emerging World Order and the Search for Adequate Responses to Political Violence’. The topic addressed the new challenges humanity has been facing after the end of the Cold War 25 years ago. It explored military, political, diplomatic, humanitarian and legal responses to

political violence and mass atrocities in armed conflicts and in state oppression based on four case studies – Iran, North Korea, Gaza and the Balkans. For the first time, we have expanded the geographical stretch of the conflicts to be studies to Middle East and Far East. One of the issues to be compared was to see what is the impact of the legal approach to the mass atrocities as it happened by the establishment of the International Criminal Court for Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). We have addressed the legal and extra legal impact of such a tribunal and if its outcome of almost 25 years of active prosecutions would serve as a recommendation for a similar approach for the on-going protracted conflicts where political violence leads to mass atrocities. Again more than 30 students all over the world attended, two of them coming from South Korea. The discussions about the ICTY and its impact on the post-conflict societies led to a general assessment that the expectations raised have been overambitious for a legal institution, especially when it comes to the historical truth and its contributions to the reconciliation process. My contribution to the debate was a short summary of my book “Prosecuting Slobodan Milošević: The Unfinished Trial” that was published before summer by Routledge Publishers. The book takes an example of Milošević’s unfinished trial to argue that mass atrocities trials are not useful and necessary for prosecuting and

punishing a perpetrator. They can be useful for different reasons as well: they establish a record of the past event; the trial archive becomes a very important historical source and the transparent conduct of the trials and access to its archive contribute to the notion of “right to know” for victims and societies in general to understand why and in whose name the mass atrocities had been committed. Almost immediately after the Master Class, a related debate was incited by the words of Ivica Dačić, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Serbia and one of its Deputy Prime Ministers. Dačić, quoting a Russian source, claimed that the First Instance Judgment in the ICTY case against Radovan Karadžić, rendered in march 2016, had exonerated Slobodan Milošević and Serbia from any criminal or other responsibility in the war in BiH. The debate started by Dačić drew attention to the topics that I have researched for my book. First, that the judgements are not and cannot be used as the definitive historical view on any conflict and the war. The difference between a judgement and a historical account of the same period is that a judgement is fixed in time and cannot be changed after allowed time for legal appeals. Historical truth, historical justice and historical narrative do change with the unpredictable dynamic of new sources appearing and new theories constructed. The determination of factual basis, of forming insights and broader possibilities

EuroVisie

of interpretive turn of the facts, insights and theories make history often an even harsher judge than a short lived legal trial. But the two cannot be equated. When a leading Serb politician like Dačić does it, whose Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) and its ideology are in power again and are symbols of the continuation of Slobodan Milošević’s era (1989-2000), one should seek for the political motives, such as geopolitics. Immediately after Milošević’s fall from power, the post-Milošević elites distanced themselves from his politics, building on this rhetoric their domestic and international legitimacy. In reality, the new elites never recognised or condemned the role of Serbia in the crimes committed in Croatia, BiH and Kosovo under Milošević’s tenure. One of the reasons for that is that regardless of the three wars and tens of thousands of dead, the Serbian state project defined as establishment of a post-Yugoslav Serbian state in its ethnic borders had not been finished. The Belgrade elites with Vučić and Dačić in power still wait for an opportune moment to expand the present day Serbian borders with the northern parts of Kosovo and with the Republika Srpska, a territory under Serb control in BiH. Maybe next year’s Master Class topic should be on ‘Law and Geo-Politics; from Bosnia to Ukraine’.

dr. Nevenka Tromp is professor of Eastern European Studies at the University of Amsterdam.

AN ODE TO THE EUROPEAN BUREAUCRAT by mats licht

n times when the European Union is ostensibly in crisis, it is easy to jump the bandwagon and remind everyone of the many things that are wrong about everyone’s favourite transnational organisation. It is easy to dig into the shapeless blob of red tape, obsessed with standardised vegetable shapes, obscure national minorities, and the wastefulness of light bulbs. It can be fun to expose the weirdest incarnations of bureaucratic power-tripping and marvel at the EU’s peculiar organisational behemoth, like Victorian honeymooners at a bearded Lady. It sells an awful lot of newspapers to predict its imminent demise. There is, however, one force that affords an almost childlike sense of security to those who concern themselves with the inner workings of the

EU, even in the face of Brexit. Those who try to dig their way through the seedy underbelly of the European apparatus will never be afraid of our continent breaking up, for they know it well, that unifying force nesting comfortably within the gut of our beloved administrative monstrosity. The one force that made, raised, and will forever keep this Union: the European Bureaucrat. During these last few weeks, when cultural pessimism has taken over in the face of unhinged migration, British euroscepticism and terrorist attacks, the bureaucrats of Brussels have maintained the reserve they are known for. Even the catastrophically unexpected news of the British referendum, while stirring up widespread cheers among the right

September 2016

wing and shock amongst everyone else, did not upset the relentlessly quiet workings of every cog and belt within the European machinery. Only brief remarks left the halls of European management in reaction to the United Kingdom’s petition for divorce: if they want to go, they need to do it fast. These words, delivered by parliamentary president Martin Schulz with an almost laconic calm, were the manifestation of months of preparation for the worst case outcome the referendum presented. While everyone else was running around helplessly like a flooding colony of ants, Schulz merely had to flick through the undoubtedly numerous files that had been laid out for him in preparation of any possible result the plebiscite could have produced. In times when the

European Union is ostensibly in crisis, the plebiscite could have produced. the 16 years he spent in various prisons it is easy to jump the bandwagon and While the main camps were still and island concentration camps, the remind everyone of the many things that campaigning for their respective ideas, dedicated communist developed his are wrong about everyone’s favourite the bureaucracy was already at work, own ideas for post-war Europe: a true transnational organisation. It is easy to preparing, assessing, analysing and federal union, supranational, based in dig into the shapeless blob of red tape, compiling. It is preparation that explains democratic socialism, and bridging the obsessed with standardised vegetable Schulz’ unexcited media appearance. It abysmal gaps between the peoples that shapes, obscure national minorities, also explains every step the European the war had torn. While his Ventotene and the wastefulness of light bulbs. Union has taken since. Manifesto remained the beautiful dream It can be fun to expose the weirdest of an idealist, he first displayed the one incarnations of bureaucratic powerThe EU’s bureaucracy is seemingly defining characteristic that made the tripping and marvel at the EU’s peculiar endless. It penetrates governments, think bureaucrats so good at shaping the organisational behemoth, like Victorian tanks, schools and tax offices, NGOs, European reality: Compromise. honeymooners at a bearded Lady. It sells dairy farms and supermarkets. It is like After the ECSC was founded to an awful lot of newspapers to predict the Force, omnipresent, yet invisible Spinelli’s mistrust - the new organisation its imminent demise. There is, however, to the uninitiated eye. If asked on the was a transnational one focused on one force that affords an almost childlike street, most people would fail to identify industrialism after all - he nevertheless sense of security to those who concern clearly what the EU is, they could not stayed with the European project. He themselves with the inner workings of the point out its manifestation beyond the relentlessly lobbied for the establishment EU, even in the face of Brexit. Those who faraway parliament and comission. Yet of a European parliament, advised Prime try to dig their way through the Ministers and European seedy underbelly of the European statesmen like Jean Monnet, apparatus will never be afraid of and finally became a our continent breaking up, for they member of the Commission “It is people like Martin Schulz, know it well, that unifying force for Italy. He never let go of Jacques Delors and Altiero nesting comfortably within the his dream of a European gut of our beloved administrative Spinelli that maintain the balance constitution and stayed with monstrosity. The one force that his flawed brainchild until of the Force in Europe” made, raised, and will forever the bitter end. Even though keep this Union: the European a constitution never became Bureaucrat. reality, his unyielding work over forty years made the During these last few weeks, when their lives are universally touched by it, EU what it is today. If it had not been cultural pessimism has taken over in shaped by it, and their ends regulated by for Spinelli, there would probably not the face of unhinged migration, British it. It depends, however, on its followers, be a European Parliament, Europe euroscepticism and terrorist attacks, the the dedicated clerks, the disciples, the would have receded to a bored, League bureaucrats of Brussels have maintained Jedi knights of the European ideal: the of Nations-like intergovernmentalism. the reserve they are known for. Even bureaucrats. Largely uncharacteristic for a true idealist the catastrophically unexpected news is Spinelli’s continued work towards of the British referendum, while stirring While national governments are his goal. Most of us know the type of up widespread cheers among the right indecisive about their commitment to disappointed idealists that one might wing and shock amongst everyone European unity, there has always been a encounter as a literature teacher or a else, did not upset the relentlessly quiet class of dedicated idealists, far-sighted driving instructor. Unrequited idealism workings of every cog and belt within the believers in European federalism, tends to turn into cynicism, but not so European machinery. Only brief remarks who saw the misery of the two great in the great Europeans for some reason. left the halls of European management in wars as an unmistakeable sign that It is relentlessness that makes the reaction to the United Kingdom’s petition things had to change. While national continent. for divorce: if they want to go, they need governments were busy clubbing each to do it fast. These words, delivered by other’s and their own people’s heads in, The story of great Europeans that parliamentary president Martin Schulz they were already busy making plans defy all odds against them in their with an almost laconic calm, were the for what had to come after. The most endeavour is not confined to the EU’s manifestation of months of preparation famous of them was Altiero Spinelli, humble beginnings. Jacques Delors, the for the worst case outcome the every European Studies student’s first champion of the single market, came to referendum presented. While everyone warm acquaintance. Spinelli was the be the President of the EC Comission else was running around helplessly like first of a long line of Federalists, but his quite unexpectedly. He had moved from a flooding colony of ants, Schulz merely example is more shining than anyone national to european politics after serving had to flick through the undoubtedly else’s, if simply because he discovered as the economic and financial minister numerous files that had been laid out for his passion for the European idea while in Mauroy’s ill-fated experimental him in preparation of any possible result incarcerated under Mussolini. During socialist cabinet. In other words, he

EuroVisie

was shipped off. Yet, despite being marooned within an EC that had been in crisis since the early 70s, he managed to single-handedly sketch, design and punch through the Economic Union. In his downtime he prepared the founding of the actual EU, by spearheading the Maastricht treaty. Within less than ten years, he made a failing common market into the actual EU. Now that is someone taking their job seriously. So Martin Schulz, with his incessant driving national politicians mad and exceeding the boundaries of his office, is actually just one from a long line of professional Europeans. He is one of the people that, through their meticulous work, through their belief in slow progress and through their personal exploitation of every single bit of power they are granted by the national governments that form the EU, build and ever expand the extent of European unity. Without Spinelli, there would not be a supranational Europe. Without Delors, we could not buy and sell the same products everywhere. But they are joined by an immeasurable number of anonymous busy bees, working in the shadows to make the clockwork run smoothly, each one of them slowly expanding the hive, day by day, Comité by Comité, institution by institution. They do not receive any attention of the public, but they are no less vital to the cause

than their glorified superiors. Without the European Court of Justice and the ECHR making the most liberal use possible of their jurisdiction, there would be no European citizenship, no equal rights, no true freedom, just a meaningless pile of papers promising some vague notion of common citizenship. It is not the treaties signed by national governments that made Europe, but rather the myriads of dedicated civil servants executing them. They do it because they believe in the cause, like Spinelli, because they are convinced of the necessity of their work, like Delors or Schuman, or because they just really hate right-wing populism with a passion, like Schulz. But the fact of the matter is that they made our Europe. Not through dramatic and publicly exploited treaty signings, but through simple dayto-day work. Through using their powers as much as possible, and then quietly pushing for their expansion. Why does the EU concern itself so much with such seemingly mundane topics as produce regulations and unified product labelling? Because the EU, as is the sum of its workers, is dedicated to be useful and substantial. If national governments only let the EU make legislation on the shape and straightness of cucumbers, rest assured that they will regulate the absolute hell out of every last EU cucumber. And once they are done, they

September 2016

will proceed to courgettes. This way, coal and steel became the single market, Schengen, Maastricht and Lisbon. This way, cucumbers and light bulbs led to a common debt policy during the Greek crisis. And in the same way will Martin Schulz’ unseemly outbursts against the Eurosceptic parliamentary group eventually lead to something else that is great. Maybe, finally, the formation of a common European democratic identity. Or just some further regulations on the lengths of ties for delegates. Should Schulz be re-elected next year, we will see the parliament once again in the hands of a true European. Because he does not seek personal glory or fame. He is content to head a largely powerless manifestation of a great idea, that he is dedicated to keep in the media. Against the often destructive powers of the national governments, who are conserned mostly with their own short-term re-elections and fame, the bureaucrats have the greater good of the galaxy in mind. It is people like Martin Schulz, Jacques Delors and Altiero Spinelli that maintain the balance of the Force in Europe. They have done so for decades, and they will still do so when David Cameron’s ill-fated attempt at political immortality has long been forgotten. The silent guardians, the watchful protectors. The bureaucrats.

politics

black sea br

ilateral relations between Ukraine and Georgia have, at least for the past two decades, continuously prospered. The two countries have, of course, a shared legacy of being part of the Soviet Union for a major share of the 20th century and even before that, both were subjected to czarist rule for a long period of time. However, it was after the breakup of the communist superstate that a more intimate kinship emerged. In the Abkhazia war of 1992-1993, in which Russian-backed insurgents established a de facto independent state in the westernmost corner of Georgia, the Ukrainian parliament called for interference of the ‘Argo’ troops of Ukraine’s far-right movement UNAUNSO. Although the Ukrainian fighters could not stop the Abkhaz armies and their Northern Caucasus allies, the several hundred Ukrainians were hailed as heroes in Georgia. A close connection was born. During the Shevardnadze rule in the

late nineties, the Georgian government maintained close relations with Kiev. Several initiatives were launched to counterbalance Russia’s influence in the post-Soviet political sphere, the main example being the formation of the GUAM group in 2001. This suspicious and at some points hostile stance towards Moscow made up, and still makes up a main binding factor between the two countries. After the Orange and Rose Revolutions in the early 2000s, things shifted into fifth gear. Many Georgians rallied in Kiev to support opposition candidate Viktor Yushchenko. Both Yushchenko and Georgia’s Mikhail Saakashvili aspired Euro-Atlantic integration, and many economic and cultural events and exchanges were organized to celebrate the close relations between the nations’ people. After the 2012 defeat of Saakashvili in the Georgian elections, a more pragmatic government took office, which looked after normalized relations with Russia.

EuroVisie

One of the reasons of Saakashvili’s declining popularity was the devastating 2008 Russo-Georgian war in South Ossetia, which left the country with an enormous financial, geographical and psychological trauma. The new government, led by philosopher Giorgi Margvelashvili (whose main hobby is knitting - not relevant, but still a fun fact), tried to maintain a pragmatic position when dealing with Russia, while still denouncing Russian influence in Georgia’s two breakaway republics Abkhazia and South Ossetia. This softened stance on the big neighbor coincided with the later years of the presidency of Viktor Yanukovych in Ukraine, which caused the two countries to shift into more or less the same direction. Since the Euromaidan protests and the ousting of Yankovich in 2014, however, the situation in the respective countries became diametrically different. Georgia tries to balance its relations with the

rothers When in Tbilisi, a peculiar phenomenon catches the outsider’s eye. On virtually every corner, the yellow-and-blue Ukrainian bicolor proudly waves right next to its orthodox-crossed Georgian counterpart. One can easily spot the slogan ‘slava Ukraini!’ on abandoned buildings. One of the main flight routes from Western Europe features a stopover at Kiev’s Borispol airport. Clearly, there is a more-than-friendly relationship between the two former Soviet states, but there are signs that their love is dying out, Emiel Janssens discovers.

West and Russia while trying to protect national interests. A remarkable side effect of the balanced (or ambiguous) position of Georgia is that, even though the two countries were at war less than a decade ago, one of the major foreign tourist nationalities is Russian outnumbering the Ukrainians.

between the government policies of both countries causes irritation in Kiev. Ukrainian officials thought of their own conflict in the east of the country as a repetition of the Ossetian conflict, but Georgia’s government was remarkably silent about the violence in the Donbas area.

“The diplomatic ties between Georgia and Ukraine were severely damaged when Poroshenko appointed Saakachvili as governor of the Odessa oblast in 2015”

In contrast to the Georgian government, Ukraine’s current government is outspoken nationalistic, anti-Russian, and pro-Western. This dissimilarity

However, the Ukrainian government has one energetic Georgian ally: the proWestern, anti-Russian former president Saakachvili. There is a personal side

September 2016

to his support: Saakachvili and Petro Poroshenko, the current Ukrainian president, have been friends since they met while studying at the University of Kiev. The diplomatic ties between Georgia and Ukraine were severely damaged when Poroshenko appointed Saakachvili as governor of the Odessa oblast in 2015. This event caused a delay in Georgian state visits, and the revoke of Saakachvili’s Georgian nationality. But the friendship between the Ukrainian and the Georgian people is not easily broken. When Russia annexed the Crimean Peninsula in the spring of 2014, hundreds of Georgian volunteers went to fight on the Ukrainian side - several of them have been killed in action. Political relations are indeed deteriorating, but the citizens of Georgia and Ukraine do not seem to keep up with their governments’ positions. As long as nothing really radical happens, chances are low that the yellow-and-blue flags on the streets of Tbilisi will disappear.

ses events calendar 16-18 September - INTRODUCTION WEEKEND On the 16th of September, SES will head to a secret location in The Netherlands for the annual introduction weekend. Two days of fun, games, and meeting new people!

19 September - DEADLINE COMMITTEE APPLICATIONS The deadline for the committee applications is the 19th of September. Until this day, you can apply for a position in one of our committees by sending an e-mail to the addresses mentioned on page 6 of this EuroVisie. More information about all the committees can also be found there.

28-30 October - city TRIP After the exams are finished, a city trip will be organised to celebrate the end of the first study block. The destination is yet to be announced! More information about signing up will be published later, so keep an eye on the weekly e-mail and our facebook page!

November - sESMUN A model European Council meeting will be organised by the debate committee in November. All participating students will represent EU countries. More information will follow.