European Forum Poděbrady: Preparation Kit by EYP Czech Republic

Introduction from the Session President .......................................................................................................... 3 Links to General Resources about the European Union ................................................................................. 4 Committee on Constitutional Affairs I (AFCO I) ........................................................................................... 5 Committee on Constitutional Affaires II (AFCO II) .................................................................................... 12 Committee on Constitutional Affairs III (AFCO III).................................................................................... 19 Committee on Foreign Affairs I (AFET I) ..................................................................................................... 25 Committee on Foreign Affairs II (AFET II) .................................................................................................. 30 Committee on Human Rights (DROI) .......................................................................................................... 37 Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs (ECON) ........................................................................... 46 Committee on Industry, Research and Energy (ITRE) ................................................................................ 54

Page 2 of 60

Dear Delegates of EFO PodÄ&#x203A;brady2014, First of all, let me wish you a very warm welcome to this incredible summer forum of the European Youth Parliament Czech Republic, also on behalf of Dana, Lea, George, Alysha, Titus, Joshua, Lara, Khalid, Christian and Veronika, the Chairpersons of this session. With this booklet, they present you with an academic preparation kit containing all the topic overviews covering the eight topics that will be discussed at the session. To help you start your own research for this special event, your talented and dedicated chairpersons have written overviews for you that should serve as an introduction to the topic. In these overviews, they have outlined the key actors, the measures already in place, and much more. Use these overviews to start shaping your thoughts, ideas and opinions on the topic. What we ask of you is to carefully and actively read your committee topic overviews, highlighting unfamiliar concepts and words; accessing the sources and links; as well as getting an overview of the most important EU institutions, their field of work and their relevance to your topic. Lastly, we hope you will conduct your own research, talk to teachers and friends about your topic, and actively follow the news in case your topic is covered in national or international media. Good preparation is key to your role as delegate at this conference. The better you are prepared, the more you will enjoy the session. The academic standard of the session is high and so is the quality of the overviews. Your chairs have put a lot of effort into these and we would ask you to honour these efforts by putting effort into preparing yourselves. The minimum amount of personal time you should put into preparations is 12 hours. That might sound like a lot right now, but will pay off all the better during the session itself. I hope you will enjoy reading the overviews and Iâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;m looking forward to meeting you all in person in a couple of weeks!

Yours sincerely,

Hans Maes Session President

Page 3 of 60



https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ht602gj1b6fdgg/EYP%20DE%20Guide%20to%20the%20European%20Uni on.pdf



http://europa.eu/about-eu/index_en.htm



http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/



http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/index_en.htm



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Av2sI0dHXpQ



http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/index_en.htm



http://www.european-council.europa.eu/the-institution?lang=en



http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/00b3f21266/At-yourservice.html;jsessionid=9811E6D5B86542E7A185D43C05DFFDCD.node1



http://www.consilium.europa.eu/council?lang=en



http://europarltv.europa.eu/en/player.aspx?pid=24dd4d92-1193-4ebc-b5d8-9f2800a4a40e



http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCUF5t1kRlI



http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/decision-making/index_en.htm



http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/0081f4b3c7/Law-makingprocedures-in-detail.html



http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/appendix/legislativeprocedure/europarl_ordinarylegislativeproced ure_howitworks_en.pdf



http://europarltv.europa.eu/en/player.aspx?pid=2943a9f1-0a1a-4f7c-9fe8-9f82009fa481



http://europa.eu/eu-law/treaties/index_en.htm



http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm



http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/money/expenditure/



http://europa.eu/pol/

Page 4 of 60

European External Action Service vs. the European Council – With the EU’s stance on the Ukrainian crisis still unclear and many future international issues ahead of us, what is the future for EU foreign affairs? Who should govern it to ensure that the EU is able to attain the role of a decisive and coherent partner at global level? by Veronika Drzková (CZ)



Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP): a policy that enables the EU to speak and act as one in world affairs. Acting together gives the EU Member States greater influence than they would have if each pursued its own policies.



European Council: an EU institution that comprises Heads of States or prime ministers. It sets the main aims and visions for the EU.



Council of the European Union (=Council): an executive EU institution that comprises national ministers. The Foreign Affairs Council is made up of European Union Member State Ministers responsible for Foreign Affairs, Defence and Development. These Ministers attend monthly meetings to discuss foreign policy, trade, security, defence and development matters.



High Representative for Foreign Affairs & Security Policy: he/she represents the Union for matters relating to the CFSP. He/she conducts political dialogue with third parties on the Union's behalf and expresses the Union's position in international organisations and at international conferences.



European External Action Service (EEAS): it supports the High Representative. It cooperates with the diplomatic services of the Member States and comprises officials from relevant departments of the General Secretariat of the Council and of the Commission as well as staff seconded from national diplomatic services of the Member States.



European Security and Defence Policy (CSDP): an integral part of the common foreign and security policy. It shall provide the Union with an operational capacity drawing on civilian and military assets. The Union may use them on missions outside the Union for peace-keeping, conflict prevention and strengthening international security.

Links: 

CFSP outline: •



http://europa.eu/pol/cfsp/index_en.htm

• http://eeas.europa.eu/cfsp/index_en.htm Foreign Affairs Council in a nutshell: • http://www.consilium.europa.eu/council/council-configurations?lang=en#fac Page 5 of 60



High Representative – role and relations to other EU bodies: •



http://www.consilium.europa.eu/policies/fac/high-representative-of-the-union-forforeign-affairs-and-security-policy?lang=en

EEAS policies: •

http://eeas.europa.eu/policies/index_en.htm

The European Union is a unit whose existence is built on the cornerstone of cooperation. National states have decided to enter this unit and agreed to follow EU rules since establishing clear and coherent rules is an indispensable trait of every organised institution. Mostly, the rules apply to internal cooperation within the EU, one of the most important areas being for example the internal trade. However, if a unit wants to be considered as a unit by its partners and other player, it must also act coherently at the international level – speaking in one voice and having a clear and consistent stance. Recent occurrences in Ukraine have drawn attention to (among numerous other issues) to the EU CFSP and its (in)efficiency. The situation in Ukraine was and still is changing from day to day and it calls for immediate reaction from international entities. The EU has certainly responded to the situation, it did not stand mute; however, the agreement process and subsequent measures are subject to wide discussions. They illustrate some of the weaknesses of CFSP and raise the question of possible changes to the EU foreign affairs system. The EU aims at being a strong global player, however, it has to face various challenges, e.g. the inability of European governments to coordinate their positions. National interests usually remain stronger than the need to speak as an EU unit. Simply, the foreign policy is a very sensitive topic for each Member State. That is also why the EU competences are very specific and limited. CFSP does not explicitly fall under exclusive, shared or supporting competences, it is a competence sui generis that preserves its specifics. Typically, these are for example the need for unanimous agreement of all Member States or the impossibility to adopt a legislative act (i.e. through a legislative procedure) in the field of CFSP. All these factors have resulted in a relatively weak reaction from the EU to the Ukrainian crisis. The question is whether that is something to condemn or praise. Yet again, it is a question about the EU vs. Member States but also about EU vs. global players. It is important to look at CFSP from a wider perspective. We may use the example of Ukraine to examine CFSP in action, however, it is crucial to see the bigger picture. The collocation “EU as a global player” denotes the EU as an active participant in all major international matters. We may see that

Page 6 of 60

recently the EU has also been active for example in tackling the situation in Syria1 or terrorist attacks in Nigeria2. Links: 



Euractiv article - EU as a global player – introduction: • http://www.euractiv.com/global-europe/european-union-global-governancelinksdossier-503726 EEAS - The European Union in the world: •

http://eeas.europa.eu/what_we_do/index_en.htm

As outlined before, the CFSP is a very specific area, therefore it also has a specific way of decisionmaking with more actors involved. The European Council defines the strategic interests of the EU and sets the general aims and visions for CFSP. We could use one of the statements on Ukraine as an example3. Then, based on these general decisions, the Council makes concrete decisions in order to reach the pre-set aims. Again, we could see what the Council decided in the case of Ukraine4. (In these examples, the steps are not subsequent, that is why the timing is swapped – they serve as an illustration of what their decisions look like.) For CFSP, the Council most usually meets in the form of Foreign Affairs Council. Meetings of the Foreign Affairs Council are chaired by the High Representative. That brings us to the role of the High Representative (currently Catherine Ashton). The High Representative together with the Member States execute the CFSP, it means they bring the Council decisions to life. The High Representative is assisted by the EEAS (see above for definition). The Commission and the European Parliament (EP) have a special role. In general, they could ask for information from the Council or consult the High-Representative and give advice. That would be the EU procedure as it is after the Lisbon Treaty. However, there are certainly other important players in the foreign affairs field. The United Nations5 (UN) help to facilitate the dialogue on a global scale. With 193 Member States, it provides an international platform where all parties could try to find a compromise.

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/142212.pdf http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/142557.pdf 3 http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/142863.pdf 4 http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/EN/foraff/142561.pdf 5 http://www.un.org/en/aboutun/index.shtml 2

Page 7 of 60

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization6 (NATO) is based on the principle of collective defence. It binds its members together, committing them to protect each other and setting a spirit of solidarity within the Alliance. It brings together European states. The USA have also been quite active in the Ukrainian crisis, which slightly suspended the discussion about its arguable global power. The USA are less limited when it comes to imposing sanctions since their (especially economic) bonds to Ukraine are not as strong as the EU’s. Links: 

The Economist article – a very good insight into the situation – important – national interests,



EU vs. USA decision-making: • http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21598743-europe-and-america-are-outragedannexation-crimea-lack-strong-response-sixes: Al Jazeera article + video: the EU vs. the USA sanctions: •

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/04/us-react-if-russia-crosses-into-ukraine2014429184141957331.html

International situation is a very dynamic and unpredictable organism. Sometimes, the situation remains stable for a relatively long time, however, sometimes it changes swiftly and unexpectedly. In the latter case, the reaction from a true and strong global player should correspond to it – it should be swift and clear. In case of the EU, the reaction can only happen after the agreement of the 28 Member States. Moreover, on important issues, they always have to agree unanimously. That is the greatest weakness and strength of CFSP at the same time. It disqualifies the EU from making quick decisions, on the other hand, it assures the Member States that each of them matters and that no decision will be taken without their approval. Why is it difficult to reach a decision among all Member States? The answer is very simple and it is detectable even from the motto “United in diversity”. Since every Member State is different, it also naturally has different interests – also at the international level. National interests necessarily define international approach of each Member State. Different geopolitical or economic situation inevitably has a major effect on foreign policy. Again, we may look at the case of Ukraine. Some Member States would like the EU to be stricter towards Russia because they also feel personally endangered (Baltic countries). On the other hand, Member States such as Germany or the United Kingdom are reluctant to suggest strict economic sanctions since those would also significantly harm the European internal market. The question of gas is also widely discussed. The difference of interests is clearly visible when we compare the approach of the EU and of the United States. USA do not have so strong economic ties towards Russia so they can afford to be stricter in their 6

http://www.nato.int/nato-welcome/index.html Page 8 of 60

sanctions. In other words, national context is inextricably linked to the state’s stance in international issues. That is a fact that cannot be really changed. Links: 

EU Observer article – discussing the difficult role of the EU – “The EU is in a lose-lose situation: If we do nothing, people will say Europe is hesitating. If one or two EU states impose extra sanctions, they will say we cannot agree. If all 28 move together, they will say we are provoking Russia.”: • http://euobserver.com/foreign/124088



BBC article – about how “the EU's increasing involvement in Ukraine will be a red rag to a Russian bull”: • http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26958822



The Economist article discusses the need for stricter sanctions: •



The BBC article also discusses sanctions: •



http://europeansanctions.com/ukraine/

Ukrainian crisis timeline – optional: •



http://www.eeas.europa.eu/top_stories/2014/050614_eu_support_ukraine_en.htm

EU sanctions in force: •



http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-27282063

EU support for Ukraine: •



http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21604561-west-should-impose-freshsanctions-deter-more-russian-meddlingeastern?zid=307&ah=5e80419d1bc9821ebe173f4f0f060a07

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-26248275

Frequently asked questions about Ukraine – optional: •

http://www.eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140612_01_en.pdf

The legal basis for CFDP is provided in the Treaty on the European Union (TEU), specifically in articles 23-467. That implicitly stresses the importance and sensitivity of this area, since generally EU competences and their definitions would be described in the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU). Generally speaking, TEU usually defines the main aims and visions of the EU, whereas

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:12012M/TXT&from=EN Page 9 of 60

TFEU is being more specific and defines the tools how to reach the aims. In case of CFDP, both general aims and specific tools are contained in TEU. Mostly, it describes the role of different institutions and bodies (European Council, Council, High Representative, EEAS) and the decision-making process. Therefore, if we wanted to change something about CFSP, we would have to change the establishing treaties (TEU and TFEU), which would mean going through a similar process as we have experienced with the Lisbon Treaty. Based on the provisions in TEU, involved institutions can adopt non-legislative acts8 (never legislative!). The Council therefore recommends common strategies and implements them, in particular by adopting decisions defining actions to be undertaken by the Union or positions to be taken by the Union (Art. 25 TEU). That is the maximum it can currently do. The Lisbon Treaty introduces two new actors – the post of the High Representative9 and the EEAS that both represent the EU diplomatically. In effect, the High Representative contributes by her proposals to the development of CFSP, which she carries out as mandated by the Council, and ensures implementation of the decisions adopted. The EEAS helps the High Representative with preparing policy proposals and implementing them after their approval by the Council. If we use Ukraine as an example, we could see that the European Council has decided to impose sanctions. A list of individuals and companies hit by travel bans and asset freezes was published10 (and later extended). The intention to stabilise the situation through multilateral dialogue resulted in the Joint Geneva Statement11, where the EU, the USA, Russia and Ukraine agreed on, for example, refraining from violence. The question is – what should the EU do next? Should it impose more sanctions since the situation is far from being stable12? Or should the EU do something different or even remain silent? Links: 

EU observer article – discussing the difficult role of the EU – “The EU is in a lose-lose situation: If we do nothing, people will say Europe is hesitating. If one or two EU states impose extra sanctions, they will say we cannot agree. If all 28 move together, they will say we are provoking Russia.” •

http://euobserver.com/foreign/124088

http://europa.eu/scadplus/constitution/legislation_en.htm It actually merged the functions previously held by the six-monthly rotating Presidency, the High Representative for Common Foreign and Security Policy and the European Commissioner for External Relations. 10 http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26672800 11 http://eeas.europa.eu/statements/docs/2014/140417_01_en.pdf 12 http://www.euractiv.com/sections/europes-east/nato-warns-russian-military-build-ukraine-border-302936 9

Page 10 of 60



BBC article – about how “the EU's increasing involvement in Ukraine will be a red rag to a Russian bull” •

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-26958822

The CFSP is a tool that the EU has to act as a unity in international relations. Recently, the post of the High Representative and the EEAS have been introduced with their specific role. However, certain weaknesses of the CFSP are still present. The EU is failing to efficiently respond to dynamic international issues, as we are seeing for example in case of the Ukrainian crisis. If we want the EU to become a true global player, something must be changed. Or should the EU completely refrain from trying to form one opinion in case the Member States cannot agree? What is the future of the EU foreign policy?

Page 11 of 60

Striving towards a more democratic European Union: This July marks the celebration of the 62 nd Anniversary of the Treaty establishing the European Coal and Steel Community, the precursor to what is now the European Union. How can the influence of the European Parliament, the only directly elected institution of the EU, be strengthened whilst at the same time balancing Member States right to sovereignty as well as the unity of the European Union. by Alysha Hoare (IE) and Lea Schiewer (DE)



democratic deficit: the theory that some institutions lack the principles of democracy in their operation.



subsidiarity: the principle that where possible decision should be taken at a local level closest to the citizens.



transparency: the condition of being open and direct when performing duties.



accountability: the fact or condition of politicians being held accountable or responsible in their duties; this is usually an obligation directed towards citizens who elected them.



European Parliament: the only directly elected institution of the European Union. Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) sit politically in trans-European political parties, and not nationally. There are 20 standing committees of the European Parliament which organise its work. Its formal rules include the election of the Commission President, it also has the powers to monitor and scrutinise the work of the Commission. There is also the office of the Ombudsman. This office can receive questions and complaints from citizens of the EU. These complaints may include matters of maladministration in the working of any EU institution. The office then has the power to take inquiries and investigate on its own. The European Parliament also has the power to investigate courts or national institutions who may not be applying EU law correctly, within the deadlines, or fail to apply the law at all.



European Commission: The European Commission consists of a college of 28 Commissioners. Every Member State has one commissioner. Commissioners must be independent once elected, and cannot be influenced by their governments. Their role is to promote the general interest of the EU. The Commission has the exclusive right to propose legislation, or introduce new laws. If EU law is not being applied correctly, the Commission has the power to take an infringement action against the Member State.



European Council: Meetings of the European Council involve the heads of government of each Member State. The role of this institution is to define the general policy direction of the EU. The structure of this institution is intergovernmental in nature, meaning that leaders represent their Page 12 of 60

home countries and the particular interests of their State. The European Council is a platform whereby leaders can discuss issues pertaining to the current or long term strategies of the Union. The European Council is also responsible for foreign policy and external relations. It also has the power to review new membership applications to the Union. 

Maastricht Treaty: also known as the Treaty on European Union (TEU), established a three pillar structure for what was to be known as the European Union. The first pillar set out the objectives of the TEU, the second pillar outlined the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP), and the third pillar related to justice and home affairs (JHA). Art. 5 set out the principle of subsidiarity. A new idea of European citizenship was developed.



Lisbon Treaty: One of the core provisions of the Lisbon Treaty is the establishment of an institutional system which means that decisions can be taken quicker, more transparently, with better democratic control and with a strengthened respect for decisions being taken at an appropriate level (the principle of subsidiarity).



Federalism: a group of states that are independent in internal affairs, but are governed by a central body that takes decision for all members.



State sovereignty: the power of a State to govern itself and to make its own laws.



participative democracy: concept exposing the belief that cities should be as involved as possible in the direction and operation of the political system they are subject to. This is the power of the people to direct those who they have elected.

Links: 

Definition of ‘Democratic Deficit’: •



Downloadable handbook explaining how the EU operates as regards institutions, this is a go-to guide for any questions you may have, use this as a reference tools: •



http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/glossary/democratic_deficit_en.htm

http://bookshop.europa.eu/en/how-the-european-union-works-pbNA3212336?

Explanation of the origin and advancement of the concept of state sovereignty: •

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/sovereignty/

Page 13 of 60

A democratic deficit occurs when democratic institutions such as a parliament fall short of fulfilling the principles of democracy in their workings. The democratic deficit is a concept primarily espoused in the argument that the European Union suffers from a lack of democracy and is becoming increasingly remote from the ordinary citizen due to the complexity of its operating structure. The difficulty herein lies in the fact that the EU is comprised of a number of different bodies each with their own specific powers and mandates: the European Council, the European Commission, and the European Parliament. It has been argued that due to the fragmented, multi-tier democratic composition of the European Union, a gap has emerged where citizens feel the Union is inaccessible and not fully accountable or representative of their needs.13 It has been argued in the past that the European Parliament, the only directly elected Institution of the EU, holds the least power in terms of the three major institutions of the EU. The question of the democratic legitimacy of the EU has always been a contentious one. States are reluctant to give up on their sovereignty in favour of the EU. Most notably, during the European Parliament Elections of 2014, far-right extremist political parties in Europe have won many seats arguing that their own national governments have acceded too much power to the EU. Whereas in the past, EU institutions have been quite closed, or secretive in their workings, the implementation of instruments such as the Treaty of Lisbon have gone far to revalidate the authority of the institutions of the Union. This is a positive step as European citizens have now experienced increased transparency between the Union and its demos. The Treaty of Lisbon reaffirms and increases the powers of the European Parliament on issues concerning the legislature and budgeting, and also its hold over the Commission, in that it has the right to appoint the President of the Commission. A strong emphasis is placed on the welfare of the individual through the creation of a citizensâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; right of initiative. In addition to this, increased transparency and access to information and documents are achieved through the provision that general debates of the Council are now broadcast in real time. European citizens are now arguably closer to the workings of the Union than ever seen before. However, do the reforms and developments of the Treaty of Lisbon and previous Treaties such as Maastricht, go far enough in breaching the ever-widening gap between apathetic disillusioned European citizens14 and European decision-makers? Why do European citizens feel so detached from the institutions of the EU? One must think about what is the future of the European Union and, in particular, the European Parliament. How can the influence of the European Parliament, the only directly elected institution 13

Survey revealing European Citizens dissatisfaction with the EU: http://www.euractiv.com/future-eu/surveyfinds-growing-disillusion-news-519696 14 Short Video clip of UK Prime Minister David Cameron outlining citizens disillusionment with the EU: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-27573521 Page 14 of 60

of the EU, be strengthened whilst at the same time balancing Member States’ right to sovereignty as well as the unity of the European Union? The answer to this question falls on the shoulders of national governments. 1. Should they call for greater subsidiarity, transparency and accountability on a European level? Could a restructuring of the decision making process and capabilities of the European Parliament be an option? 2. Or should the Union move towards developing a federalist Union, a European super state? Where States hand over more power to the European Union but have the benefit of decisions being made on a higher level out of the hands of Member States? Links: 

A short lecture by Simon Hix explaining the democratic legitimacy of the EU, as balanced against the national interest of Member States. This film also identifies the problems with the current voting system to the European Parliament: •



An academic paper discussing European citizens’ perceptions of the decision making process of the EU, particularly the balance of power between the European Parliament as against the Commission and Council: •



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6qu6SogtOa0

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/briefing-papers/european-unions-democraticdeficit-bridging-gap-between-citizens-and-eu-institutions

Paper outlining the measures required in order to strengthen the institutions of the EU, as compared with voting patterns in European Parliament Elections: •

http://www.economist.com/node/21555927

{The European Parliament, the European Commission, the European Council, Member States, Citizens of the European Union} The major actors relating to this topic can be categorised in to three distinct groups: Institutions of the EU, EU Member States, and Citizens of the EU. Each has their own particular interest which is distinct of one another. One can say that the interest of the European Commission and European Council is that of advancing the expansion and progression of the EU. The Commission is the most ‘European’ of these institutions, commissioners are appointed objectively to advance EU goals and not specifically the interests of their home country. The goal of the European Council is for state leaders to meet and discuss the challenges facing the EU – here representatives discuss issues pertaining to the vested interest of their own Member State. Finally, the European Parliament is where directly elected Page 15 of 60

representatives discuss issues in a number of working committees. It is the role of the Members of the European Parliament (MEPs) to represent the people who voted for them in their home countries. Member States also have a particular interest in the advancement of the powers of the EU, and in particular the work of the Union. Member States must endeavour to balance their own decision making powers (state sovereignty) against the decision making power of the EU. They must also be careful to keep their own citizens content in their workings with the EU. Links: 

Official Website of the European Parliament: •



General overview of the composition and work of the European Parliament: •



http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/european-parliament/index_en.htm

Chart taken from the EU’s official website explaining various differences in EU countries in relation to GDP, and attitudes towards the Union. This is useful in ascertaining different EU Member States perspectives towards the EU, and how differences can be reconciled in order to facilitate progress on an EU-wide basis: •



http://www.europarl.europa.eu/portal/en

http://europa.eu/about-eu/facts-figures/living/index_en.htm

Explanation of how decisions are made on an EU level: •

http://europa.eu/eu-law/index_en.htm

{Conflict between decision making powers of the various institutions of the EU, issues of state sovereignty} The two major conflicts regarding this topic can be summarised as being on a horizontal level and a vertical level. On the horizontal level, there are tensions between the three major institutions of the EU. The European Parliament is the only body that is elected by citizens of the EU; however, its powers are limited especially when compared to the direct powers of the Commission and the Council. The Lisbon Treaty has served to increase the powers of the European Parliament in that now the Parliament has a veto right in the ordinary legislative procedure. This means that the Parliament may object to new laws and force the other institutions to reconsider or to rephrase prospective legislation. The second conflict is on the vertical level between EU Member States and the institutions of the EU. Each EU institution has its own agenda with regards to the development of the Union. Each Member State has an interest in advancing its own national interests both domestically and on the European stage.

Page 16 of 60

They have also given away some of this decision making power to the various EU institutions. However, each state has the sovereignty to decide issues as they wish. There are a number of different competences of the EU.15 The two most important of these are exclusive competence and shared competence. An exclusive competence of the EU is one whereby only the EU can legislate or make laws in this area – Member States cannot strictly propose new laws in these fields. A shared competence is one whereby Member States can enact new laws to the extent to which the EU has not implemented laws in this area. There are also fields where the EU has absolutely no competence to propose new laws, an example of this is the common foreign and security policy – the EU cannot force states to accept laws in this field. The problem is reconciling the views of 28 Member States towards creating one cohesive EU-wide policy that is not only acceptable to individual Member States, but Member States as a whole. Links: 

Short essay highlighting the conflict between EU decision making power, and the right of states to sovereignty: •

http://cogitariumlancaster.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/does-membership-of-the-euundermine-national-sovereignty.pdf.

 Decision making procedures of the EU, pay particular attention to the explanation of the role of the Parliament in the ordinary legislative procedure: •

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/decisionmaking_process/ai001 6_en.htm

 An in-depth examination of the Ordinary Legislative Procedure: •

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/0081f4b3c7/Law-makingprocedures-in-detail.html

{Lisbon Treaty, Maastricht Treaty, Ordinary Legislative Procedure, VoteWatch Europe} Measures already taken to increase the influence of the European Parliament include the introduction of the ordinary legislative procedure as alluded to in the previous section. The Lisbon Treaty had the effect of increasing accountability, subsidiarity, and transparency between EU institutions and citizens. The role and importance of the European Parliament has been expanded in its veto power in the ordinary legislative procedure. Moreover, it is now possible to watch debates and meetings of the Parliament in real time.

Explanation of the different types of EU competence: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbon_treaty/ai0020_en.htm Page 17 of 60

Are these solutions sufficient in addressing the issues regarding the perceived democratic deficit of the Union? If not what legislation or amendments could be introduced to improve the situation? Links: 

Informational note explaining the major changes brought with the Lisbon Treaty: •



Article highlighting the steps which have been taken to increase the accountability of EU Institutions, in particular, the establishment of VoteWatch Europe: •



http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/111652.pdf

http://www.opensocietyfoundations.org/voices/votewatch-europe-making-euinstitutions-accountable-public

Essay on the democratic deficit by LSE scholar His: •

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/store/10.1111/j.1468-5965.2006.00650.x/asset/j.14685965.2006.00650.x.pdf;jsessionid=F8A5913A37EC0852779A8A18E853CF72.f02t01?v=1 &t=hwzi59ip&s=5aa3fd76925bca861eb28e2ce9c2a1804a6b9b32

The main issue concerning this topic is the advancement of the European Parliament. Is it functioning to a satisfactory level in its current conception or is it in need of reform? Is there a gap between citizens of the EU and the EU institutions, and if so, what positive steps can be made to breach this gap, bearing in mind that all states have the power to decide for themselves and any solution must be acceptable to all 28 Member States? What can be done now to develop on the improvements made by the Lisbon Treaty to increase accountability, transparency, and subsidiarity in the Union?

Page 18 of 60

Europe and I: With the European Commission's unambitious response to the successful ‘Right2Water’ initiative, what is the future for European Citizens' Initiatives and citizen activism in the EU? by Dana Klímová (CZ) and George Ross (UK)



European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI): an invitation to the European Commission to propose



legislation on matters where the EU has competence to legislate. A citizens' initiative has to be backed by at least one million EU citizens, coming from at least 7 out of the 28 Member States. A minimum number of signatories is required in each of those 7 Member States.16 Direct Democracy: a system of government in which political decisions are made directly by



the people rather than by their elected representatives. Democratic legitimacy: refers to governments striving to maintain policies that are relevant and/or "proper" for the society that they govern. Hence the government is restricted to maintain the wishes of the people it serves.



Democratic deficit: a situation in which there is believed to be a lack of democratic accountability and control over the decision-making process or not enough democratic legitimacy in government procedures. Active democracy: more active democracy corresponds to the fact that there is a will to introduce more participatory democracy in a representative democracy system.

Links: 

The European Commission on ECIs: • http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/full_text/index_en.htm



The EU on democratic deficit: • http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/full_text/index_en.htm

Since the first ECI was launched on 9th May 2012,17 only two have been successful and thus have received an official answer from the European Commission. Furthermore, the result of the elections of the European Parliament in May 2014 shows a growing popularity of the extreme right and euroscepticism. Citizens grow more and more disillusioned with the EU and the political sphere as a whole. As a result, one could argue that the EU does not appear legitimate anymore due to the disconnection between citizens and policy makers that the belief in the ability of representative democracy to speak for all

16 17

http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/basic-facts http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/initiatives/obsolete/details/2012/000001 Page 19 of 60

citizens is damaged and that there is a request for more participation of civil society and European citizens. While the EU claims to foster a union of people, and thus directly regulate for the people, tools for more direct democracy were only created in the 2000s when criticism of the EU’s democratic deficit arose against the “technocratic” EU. However, the introduction of the European Citizens Initiative in 2012 as the first real tool of direct democracy raises the question of the political nature of the EU. Another important aspect of this issue is the broad democratic deficit itself, being a key issue in today’s Europe. With the arrival of the economic crisis, European citizens began distrusting the EU’s decisions and policies. Therefore a gap grew between European decision makers and European citizens. Although this gap was already present due to existing euroscepticism before the crisis, Europe was stronger in the past and therefore people acknowledged the possibility of growth. As a result of the crisis, the future became less attractive and more citizens started to question whether they would be better off during the crisis without the EU. Furthermore, during the economic crisis the European Council, composed of the heads of government, took the lead in responding to the fiscal crisis. This weakened the role of the EP and EC. Additionally, the countries that were hit hardest by the crisis were forced to comply with austerity measures set by the EU in order for their debts to be released. As a consequence of this these, nationally elected parliaments and officials could not adequately represent their citizens’ interests as they did not have another choice during the recovery. Links:  

Full details regarding the 1st successful ECI: • http://www.right2water.eu/ Euronews interview Viviane Reding, Vice President of the European Commission: “Democracy is not an easy endeavour”: • http://www.euronews.com/2012/08/29/viviane-reding-vice-president-of-the-europeancommission-democracy-is-not-an-/



An article in The Atlantic which claims the democratic deficit in the EU is worsening: • http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/05/europes-democratic-deficitis-getting-worse/371297/ Charles Grant’s point of view to reduce the EU democratic deficit based on the institutional framework: • http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/how-to-reduce-eudemocratic-deficit



A video about representative democracy, which explains ways citizens can participate in society: • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v9VERBPU6_c

Page 20 of 60

European citizens have the opportunity to directly influence EU policy making through partaking in the European Parliament elections (although the turnout is rather low), through the European Citizens’ Initiative (ECI), as part of the civil society or through their participation in organized interest groups that can lobby and submit petitions. A citizens' initiative has to be proposed by a Citizens' Committee composed of at least 7 EU citizens old enough to vote in European Parliament elections and living in at least 7 different Member States. They do not have to be nationals of 7 different member states although they do have to hold the nationality of an EU Member State. This Committee is considered as the official "organiser" of the initiative and is responsible for managing the procedure throughout. After the ECI is proposed by the Citizens’ Committee, it is the European Commission (EC) that responds to all successful ECIs and outlines how the EU will react to the call of its citizens through their official answer. The next actor on the field is the European Parliament (EP). Together with the Council of Ministers (Council of the EU), it is the law-making branch of the institutions of the Union. It is the only EU institution elected directly by its citizens. EU citizens elect its members once every five years (most recently in May 2014). The European Council comes in as the EU institution that comprises the heads of state or government of the EU Member States. While the European Council has no formal legislative power, it is charged under the Treaty of Lisbon with defining "the general political directions and priorities" of the Union. It is thus the Union's strategic (and crisis solving) body, acting as the collective presidency of the EU. It also sets the EU aims regarding further integration and citizens’ participation. Links: 

Detailed outlines of who can set up a citizens’ committee: •

 

http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/how-it-works/committee

Video How it works to Launch a European Citizens’ Initiative: • http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HDJxXiYlK48&list=PL57DEB6D9DC38E622 Legislative procedure in the EU: • http://ec.europa.eu/codecision/stepbystep/text/

Indeed, the European institutions still have not been able to initiate such a change in the institutional framework to move towards more direct democracy. The ECI is a big step towards more direct democracy, but the EC does not have the obligation to take it into consideration. Therefore, the first question that needs to be tackled is what is at stake and why was there never any institutional change? What needs to be considered as well is whether the EU should aim to introduce more direct democracy or not. If you think so, which tools should the EU implement?

Page 21 of 60

The most talked about and the most successful ECI was the `Right2Water` Initiative proposing a change to the Commission’s proposal for a Directive on the award of concession contracts. Despite its success, the Commission is not obliged to follow any steps for implementation of such Initiative, with the only mandatory step being the provision of feedback. The European Commission has been trying to promote European identity through actions like the ECI, citizens dialogue, EU citizenship reports or last but not least making 2013 the European Year of Citizens. It is generally believed the indicator for no voice is low participation in the European elections. It has been decreasing rapidly and reaching the lowest record of only 43% of citizens voting in 2009.18 The key issue might lie in that citizens don’t feel they should support the EU anymore, because they simply don’t trust it to be here “for them” and the only body elected by the citizens, the EP, lacks any significant power. However in the May 2014 EP elections, the average EU voter turnout did go up for the first time since the institutions inception. Most specialists see the core issue is in the institutional set-up of the EU that gives the main legislative power, the power which influences Member States the most, to the European Commission. This body essentially makes its own decisions as it is only loosely controlled by the EP. The citizens have been aiming to create a body which would be able to represent their views as well as negotiate with the EC. Last but not least, is deeper civil society inclusion secure? It is generally known that people who are close to the European Parliament as citizen representatives are often lobbyists. Therefore some crucial questions come into place: 

Is the European Citizens’ Initiative a good tool for direct democracy?



What is the result so far of the ECI and how could it be improved?



Would outcomes of the decision-making procedures have in mind all EU citizens’ best?



How could we bring the EU closer to the citizens and what are the concrete tools to bring EU closer to the citizens? How could the voices of the citizens and the civil society be heard?

 Links: 

The Guardian on how to reduce democratic deficit: •

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jun/10/how-to-reduce-eudemocratic-deficit



The press release of the work of Emily O’Reilly working on the feedback of the ECI: • http://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/press/release.faces/en/53306/html.bookmark



Position Paper of the ECI to respond to Emily O’Reilly, that makes an assessment so far of the ECI:

http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sides/getDoc.do?type=WQ&reference=E-2013006531&format=XML&language=EN Page 22 of 60

•



http://www.more-democracy-ineurope.org/sites/default/files/PDF/Publications/eci_support_centre_response_to_the_euro pean_ombudsman_own_inquiry_into_the_functioning_of_the_european_citizens_initiati ve.pdf

This article details how the ECI works and proposes a reform of the ECI: •

http://www.democracy-international.org/eu-citizens-initiative

European Citizenship (Article 20 TFEU) allows every citizen to vote and to be elected to the European Parliament by direct universal suffrage since 1976.19 Since the Treaty of Maastricht in 1993, every citizen has the right to vote and to stand as a candidate in the local and regional elections. In 2000, the White Paper on the Reform of the EU governance20 decided to orientate the democratic issue towards citizens and civil society by:  

Taking into account the reinforced participation of the “civil society”; Setting up the objective to make the decision-making process more open and transparent;



The definition of “civil society” becoming more inclusive, including not only NGOs but also trade unions and employers’ organizations (“social partners”);

The Treaty of Lisbon, in effect from 2009, is a reference moment towards more direct democracy. Article 10(3) TEU stipulates that “every citizen shall have the right to participate in the democratic life of the Union”, while the articles detail the involvement and dialogue with civil society in EU decisionmaking, set dialogue and public debates, explain the citizens’ democratic rights and The European Citizens’ Initiative, that took effect on April 1, allows the citizens to be “co-authors of the law”: if a measure gathers up to one million signatures coming from at least 7 out of the 28 Member States, it will be addressed to the European Commission. However, such initiatives can only be taken into the secondary EU legislation, i.e. not the treaties of the EU25. At national level, the Member States can decide to hold a referendum on EU issues. However, expressing its view is limited to a pro or cons opinion. In 2006, the European Movement France launched a petition that aimed to gather one million signatures in order to create a European Civil Service, which would allow every young European to engage in a project of solidarity in another Member state of the EU. The European Civil Service is today one tool to bring the EU closer to its citizens. Moreover, there are several initiatives calling for more direct democracy, for example the network Democracy International introduced a paper “More democracy in Europe” in 2005. They called for a 19

Decision and Act on European elections  http://www.euractiv.com/future-eu/white-paper-european-governance-linksdossier-188216 and http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/decisionmaking_process/l10109_en.htm 20

Page 23 of 60

new EU convention where landmark decisions would be taken in an open debate between politicians, civil society and citizens. Furthermore, obligatory referenda would take place in the case of a transfer of sovereignty and treaty amendments. Furthermore, Citizens dialogue is an initiative of the Commission to reach out to citizens in debates about the future of Europe. European Commissioners are visiting towns across Europe and asking them directly for their views. The last one was held in Brussels on 27th March 2014. Last, but not least, EU citizenship reports are reports introduced by the Commission assuring that EU citizens can enjoy their rights in everyday life. The first one was introduced in 2010 and included 25 actions, since then Commission has acted on these commitments (they have included them into legislative proposals). The Report from 2013 introduces another 12 actions. It appears necessary to keep in mind as well the involvement of lobby and interest groups in the process of policy making on a European level. Links: 

The guide of the ECI: •



An infographic explaining the ECI: •



http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/treaties_maastricht_en. htm

The Treaty of Lisbon: •



http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/reding/factsheets/citizenship-report/

The Treaty of Maastricht: •



http:/www.developmentprogress.org/sites/developmentprogress.org/files/j1862_odi_polit ical_voice_infog%20raphics_260314-01.jpg

EU Citizenship Report 2013: •



http://www.debatingeurope.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/European-CitizensInitiative02.png

An infographic that sums up the possibilities for citizens to express their voice: •



http://ec.europa.eu/citizens-initiative/public/guide?lg=en

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/full_text/index_en.htm

The ’Right2Water’ ECI summary: •

http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/full_text/index_en.htm

Page 24 of 60

Policy making in an energy-dependent Europe: what should be the immediate priorities of the European Union regarding EU–Russia relations given the fact that Russia supplies 30% of Europe’s gas? by Christian Browne (UK)



Naftogaz: Ukraine’s leading gas importer, which provides the link between Russia (Gazprom) and Europe. Naftogaz owns the majority of pipelines running through Ukraine and Eastern Europe. It played a significant role in the 2006 and 2009 crises.



Gazprom: Russian gas giant which currently exports all of Russia’s gas. Whilst a non-partisan state company, the director is a close friend of Vladimir Putin, and the Kremlin are heavily involved in Gazprom’s functioning even though all decisions made should be in the interest of the state and not the government.



EU-Ukraine Association Agreement: A proposed co-operation agreement which was controversially not signed by Ukrainian President Victor Yanukovych in favour of Russianrelations. It led to the protests and consequent removal of Yanukovych, to the dismay of Russia which led to the annexation of Crimea and parts of eastern Ukraine. Crimea: Southern part of Ukraine which was controversially annexed in a referendum proposed by pro-Russian separatists in March 2014. Victor Yanukovych: The former Ukrainian president who was ousted as a result of what he

  



describes as a ‘coup’. Petro Poroshenko: The recently elected Ukrainian president, known as the ‘chocolate king’ he made his money in confectionary and won the election following Yanukovych’s removal with 54.7% of the vote. South Stream Pipeline: An alternative pipeline which aims to avoid states such as Ukraine and Belarus which have coursed disruption in gas supply – the pipeline has been proposed by Gazprom and is opposed by much of the West21.

In November 2013, the EU proposed an Association Agreement which looked to further EUUkrainian relations. Vladimir Putin had made it clear that Ukraine was not to choose the EU over Russia in such a significant way, even though Putin had said that Russia was happy for Ukraine to work with the EU. The Ukrainian President, Victor Yanukovych, looked to sign the deal but quickly changed his mind. In the following weeks Russia offered to buy 15bn dollars of Ukraine’s debt and

http://www.voanews.com/content/russia-putin-defends-south-stream-pipeline-in-vienna/1945499.html

Page 25 of 60

reduce gas prices by a third. This intensified the protests which had been significantly smaller before the Russian deal. At the beginning of 2014, Parliament passed anti-protest laws due to the rising numbers and impact of the protests in Kiev. In light of the anti-protest laws, the protests had turned to riots with police and protesters being injured and killed. The mass hysteria continued until the anti-protest laws were overturned on the 28th January. With a small period of resolve in mid-February, violent clashes suddenly erupted killing 18 people including 7 police officers. By 22nd February, Victor Yanukovych had disappeared following what he described as a ‘coup’, this led to his ‘removal’ by MPs and subsequent appointment of Olexander Turchynov whilst Yanukovych persisted he was still President. This disagreement led to pro-Russian citizens arming themselves and seizing key eastern Ukrainian points including those in Crimea. Whilst Putin said that Russian troops were not involved in the initial taking of Crimea, international pressure led to him confessing that Yanukovych had formally request military intervention. Following this, Crimean residents voted to become part of Russia in a referendum on 16th March. The referendum led to pro-Russian separatists increasing in numbers and significance throughout eastern Ukraine including Donetsk. This unrest continues to become deadlier as pro-Russian separatists shoot down Ukrainian helicopters and continue to seize key points and towns – even though many citizens welcomed their arrival. The election of Petro Poroshenko, who won 54.7%22 of the vote, has not stopped the violence in much of eastern Ukraine. However, the international community, including Putin, have called for a quick end to the bloodshed23; with Poroshenko declaring a ceasefire on 20th June, which has quickly been ignored by separatists in the east. Gazprom threatened throughout the crisis to stop the exporting of gas to Ukraine and eventually decided to reduce Ukrainian imports to zero on 16th June due to a disagreement over the significant rise in gas prices set by Gazprom in April and subsequent accumulation of debt24. Whilst Gazprom says this will not affect the rest of the EU, Ukraine must now look to limit its gas use which currently is equal to 1/5th of total gas demand in the EU (300-350 million cubic metres). This is not the first time Ukraine has had to deal with their gas supply being stopped. In January 2009, a dispute over unpaid debts between Naftogaz and Gazprom led to the Russian giant stopping it’s exports to the whole of Europe, luckily before gas stores were depleted Naftogaz and Gazprom reached an agreement which meant to that the disruption ended. In January 2006, the effects of the Orange Revolution and subsequent tensions between Russia and Ukraine drove gas prices to unfathomable 22

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-26822741 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-26248275 24 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10902693/Analysis-After-months-of-threatsRussia-uses-gas-weapon-against-Ukraine.html 23

Page 26 of 60

levels which consequently led to a disruption in gas flow due to Ukraine being unable to pay the new price. This was resolved as Russian and Ukrainian officials agreed upon an agreement in an attempt to reduce tensions – echoes of this are being heard at the moment as tensions have once again led to a gas price rise. Links: 

Effects of 2006 crisis on Europe and Ukraine: • http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4573572.stm



EU Energy Commissioner Newsletters: •

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/energy/newsletter/index_en.htm

Whilst tensions between Ukraine and Russia have helped dictate the disputes between Naftogaz and Gazprom during the crisis, it is important to note that even when Putin and Ukrainian leaders are searching for peace (since Petro Poroshenko’s ceasefire in June), Gazprom and Naftogaz still cannot reach an agreement. This is because of the huge debt that Naftogaz owes Gazprom which is in excess of 1.7 billion dollars. The price cut which was agreed in December 2013 has been revoked and this has meant that Naftogaz are only increasing in debt. Gazprom are arguably no longer acting due to the disputes over eastern Ukraine, but simply over the debt which Naftogaz continually builds. Will this be apparent when Poroshenko signs the Association Agreement on 27th June? However, at the moment, the EU’s gas supply is relatively safe and unaffected by the Ukrainian crisis. But as problems with Ukraine’s gas supply in the past have affected the rest of Europe, how can the EU ensure that European countries’ gas supplies are safe whilst the Ukrainian crisis is being resolved? Further to this, how can the EU help Ukraine through their crisis whilst not risking their gas supply? Will this be a recurring problem for Europe? Links: 

Gas, the EU and Russia – is Ukraine the anomaly: •



http://theconversation.com/russia-ukraine-and-europe-are-tied-by-gas-dependency25719

The future for Poroshenko: •

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27749395

The main issue for the EU and nations dependent on Russian gas is because of the dependence itself. One quarter of all energy consumed in the EU is energy produced by natural gas. 58% of the gas that is consumed within the EU is imported. Of the imported natural gas, 42% comes from Russia, and

Page 27 of 60

approximately 80% of EU gas imports from Russia are procured through the Ukraine. Among the eight new eastern European Member States, dependence on Russian imports averages 77%25. The crisis originally started because Ukrainian support for the EU angered pro-Russian citizens as well as the Kremlin. With Naftogaz desperately needing financial support, the EU is in a precarious position as more financial support could once again create tensions between the EU and Russia. This issue is of increasing importance given the fact that Gazprom are no longer supplying Naftogaz with gas. Ukraine’s Poroshenko, whilst wanting to work closer with the international community (especially the EU), will have the reminder of the consequences of increasing relations with the EU; even though these ties could save Ukraine’s gas imports. Further to this, whilst Gazprom is now acting independently of tensions, during the heat of the crisis they threatened to cut off the supply of gas to Ukraine. With Ukraine still in need of aid in the east of the country, the EU must be aware that addressing this crisis may increase tensions which may lead Gazprom, who has previously been effected by political matters, to shut off their gas supply to the whole of Europe rather than just Ukraine. Are there alternative supply lines? The South Stream26 gas pipeline is a new route for Russian gas exports to Europe which aims to bypass transit states which have previously faced problems with gas flows (Ukraine and Belarus). The target markets for gas supplies via the South Stream are Bulgaria, Austria, Serbia and Slovenia amongst others. The new gas pipeline is significant for meeting the increasing natural gas demand in the European energy market. Gas imports to the EU are anticipated to grow in the coming decade by nearly 200 billion cubic meters, or more than 50% of current imports, due to a direct connection between the world’s largest gas reserves located in Russia and the European gas transmission system. Yet, with Russia now focusing on the South Stream, there is a risk of the transit countries losing their own supply from Russia, which includes reduced fuel sources for states such as Ukraine. Nevertheless, there is an immediate priority for the EU and that is helping resolve the crisis in Ukraine. With Poroshenko looking to work with the EU in the future, it is important that the EU make a good start and help the president heal his country and alleviate the domestic tensions. Links: 

EU’s dependence on gas and its problems: •



How does the EU ‘wean’ itself off Russian gas: •

25 26

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-27283466

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-27239734

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Energy_policy_of_the_European_Union http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Stream Page 28 of 60

On 1st May, the IMF approved an emergency bailout of 17.1bn dollars27 which was to be used for economic reforms including raising taxes and energy prices. 3.2bn of this is immediately available given the damage which has been caused to the country. Economic reform is an essential part to the criteria on whether Ukraine is fit to join the EU. Economic stability is on the minds of many EU leaders as Ukraine look to reduce their debt and dependence on Russia. Links: ď&#x201A;ˇ

Overview of Ukraineâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s debt and its causes: â&#x20AC;˘

http://www.tradingeconomics.com/ukraine/government-debt-to-gdp

With fast and effective action needed in order to resolve the crisis in the east of Ukraine, the EU must sure it can balance a relationship with Ukraine and Russia. Petro Poroshenko will look to the EU for financial and political support, something which Yanukovych chose Russia for mainly because of gas and trade. The EU is an important partner for Ukraine, but Russia is more important at this time. How can the EU improve their relationship with Ukraine given that Russia already provides energy and trade? Will the EU be able to prevent the conflict and death happening in Ukraine? The gas supply reduction by Gazprom is a serious problem for Ukraine which needs to be addressed immediately, with Gazprom vowing not to negotiate until their gas debt is paid off, Ukraine look to be in need of aid. However, if this problem is not resolved quickly, like in 2006 and 2009, disruptions in gas supplies could spread across Europe. Is it possible for the EU to maintain a relationship with Russia whilst aiding Ukraine with their gas problems?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27233152 Page 29 of 60

After its annexation of Crimea in March 2014, there are now growing signals of the Russian Federation turning its attention to Transnistria to repeat the process. In light of the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP), what should be the stance of the EU vis-à-vis the Russian Federation in this impending foreign relations affair? by Joshua Giovanni Honeycutt (IT)



Transnistria: a narrow strip of Moldova bordering Ukraine, de facto independent from Moldova since 1990, and closely tied to the Russian Federation. Also called TransDniestr or Transdniestria or Pridnestrovie.



European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP): a foreign relations instrument of the European Union (EU) which seeks to tie those countries to the east and south of the European territory of the EU to the Union.



Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations: an international organisation uniting several states in the former Soviet Union, all of which have limited recognition from the international community.



The Eurasian Economic Union (EaEU): an economic union which was established by a treaty signed on 29th May 2014 between the leaders of Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia. The Union will go into effect on 1st January 2015 if the treaty is approved by the Parliaments of the three countries.



Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE): the world's largest security-oriented intergovernmental organization. Its mandate includes issues such as arms control and the promotion of human rights, freedom of the press and fair elections.

Links: 

Page summarizing the European Neighbourhood Policy: • http://www.enpi-info.eu/main.php?id=344&id_type=2



A New York Times article about the Eurasian Economic Union: • http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/30/world/europe/putin-signs-economic-alliancewith-presidents-of-kazakhstan-and-belarus.html?_r=0



The Wikipedia page on the Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations: • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Community_for_Democracy_and_Rights_of_Nations

There is movement to the East, and it is possible to say that once again the European Union lives difficult times on its borders. After the 2010/11 Arab Uprisings, now again we are witnessing violence just Page 30 of 60

outside our borders. This time, though, it is not simply an apparently grassroots movement to spur the violence, but high-end political and economic interests. After the annexation of Crimea by the Russian Federation, the breakaway of various parts of Ukraine28 which seem to want to be annexed to Russia too, and the official foundation of the Eurasian Economic Union29, the question now is: Is the Russian Federation possibly looking to solve in a Crimean-type-fashion the long lasting Transnistrian issue? Transnistria is a narrow strip of Moldova bordering Ukraine, de facto independent from Moldova since 1990, and closely tied to the Russian Federation. Made famous in the West by the 2009 novel and the 2013 film Siberian Education by Nicolai Lilin,30 no United Nations member state recognises it as a country, but it is rather considered as an autonomous region of the Republic of Moldova. The European Court of Human Rights considers the region "under the effective authority or at least decisive influence of Russia", due to the presence of the Russian 14th army involvement in Transnistria31. Since 1992, the year in which the war of Transnistria took place, Transnistria constitutes an important base for Russian troops and helps the Federation keep pressure on the region. The greatest example of this behaviour has also been seen lately, during the Ukrainian crisis, when Russian troops conducted military exercises in Transnistria32, on the western border of Ukraine, a country divided internally and just stripped of part of its territory, namely Crimea. Since 1990 Transnistria has requested on various occasions the annexation to first the Soviet Union and later the Russian Federation. The last plea came at the beginning of March 2014, amidst the Ukrainian crisis33. The international community, represented mainly by the Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), which has a mission to Moldova, is skeptical about such a move, and therefore called for a session of its regular talks, that have taken place on the 5th and the 6th of June – after the postponing of the original talk, due to take place on 10th-11th April in Vienna34. “The representatives of Tiraspol [the Transnistrian capital] were asked to abstain from unilateral decisions. The political representative of Tiraspol reiterated that the Transnistrian region was in a so-called economic

28 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/ukraine/10721463/Ukraine-the-next-possibleflashpoints.html 29 http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-kazakhstan-belarus-form-eurasian-economicunion/2014/05/29/de4a2c15-cb01-4c25-9bd6-7d5ac9e466fd_story.html 30 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siberian_Education 31 Grand Chamber judgment in the case of Ilașcu and others v. Moldova and Russia, European Court of Human Rights, 349, 8 July 2004: http://www.echr.coe.int/Eng/Press/2004/July/GrandChamberjudgmentIlascuandOthersvMoldovaandRussia.htm 32 http://www.ibtimes.com/russia-conducts-military-exercises-moldovas-breakaway-region-transnistria-nearukraines-western 33 http://www.presstv.ir/detail/2014/04/15/358629/talks-expected-on-moldova-breakaway/ 34 http://www.rferl.org/content/new-round-of-transdniester-talks-starts-in-vienna/25411487.html and http://www.rferl.org/content/transdniester-talks-continuing-in-vienna-on-june-6/25412090.html Page 31 of 60

blockade.” The participants in the reunion talked about the need to assure free circulation of the population from both banks of Nistru River” reports Teleradio Moldova, a Moldovian news agency35. The European Union’s position on Transnistria seems clear. As mentioned before, no member state recognises it as an independent country, but rather as part of Moldova, and therefore the EU’s efforts officially concentrate on this latter country. The EU, together with the USA, has the status of observer in the OSCE talks and have issued sanctions against Transnitrian officials in 2003. Links: 

Page dedicated to the OSCE mission to Moldova: •

http://www.osce.org/moldova



Page giving news feed on the situation in and around the Transnistrian area: • http://www.veooz.com/news/lH0lnU7.html



An academic paper on EU-Transnistrian relations • http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/UNIS/article/viewFile/UNIS0606130247A/28143

Let’s be honest. At the moment the EU is not formally playing a big role in this conflict: it has only been present as an observer at the OSCE talks and is monitoring borders between Moldova and Ukraine, on specific request of the two countries. The biggest roles, on the other hand are being played by the countries geographically and historically the closest to this small strip of land. Moldova is clearly interested in the conflict because it considers the region part of its territory, and bases this on cultural and historical facts – 32.1% of the country is ethnic Moldavian, the largest ethnic group, and the region was part of the former Moldavian Soviet Socialist Republic. Ukraine borders with the country to the east and has had border problems in the past, due to the fact that the breakaway region cannot assure proper control of its frontiers and because the country is not recognized by Ukraine. The Russian Federation on the other hand holds great political interest on the area, as it represents a good base from which it can impose its influence on the whole area. The Russian Federation has always fostered Transnistrian independence claims and is considered by apparently 97%36 of Transnistrians the country they should naturally annex to. Also, Russian authorities have always considered Transnistria as a region to claim as theirs37. OSCE is also a key actor in the conflict as it is the only international body actively trying to solve the issues between the powers in the region.

35 http://www.trm.md/en/politic/urmatoarea-runda-de-negocieri-in-format-5-2-va-avea-loc-in-iulie-la-viena/ 36 http://www.euronews.com/2014/04/23/transnistria-territorially-tempting-to-russia/ 37 http://revistas.ucm.es/index.php/UNIS/article/viewFile/UNIS0606130247A/28143 Page 32 of 60

Last, but obviously not least, there are Transnistria and its self-proclaimed government and independence, who plays both an active part, and especially a passive part as the object of this conflict. Links: 

A good summary on Transnistria’s history: • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transnistria



Recent interview to the Transnistrian President: • http://www.euronews.com/2014/06/07/interview-transnistran-president-shevchuk-sayshe-wants-a-civilised-divorce-/



An ethnic map of Transnistria: • http://enjoymoldova.org/moldova-map/

The Crimean crisis, a direct consequence of the larger Ukrainian crisis, appears to be just the most evident tip of a huge iceberg: This iceberg is the role the Russian Federation wants to play in the future geo-political asset of the Eurasian continent. It seems obvious that Russia is attempting to regain a predominant position among former Soviet countries in order to contrast the strength of other global powers, both emerging and emerged38. Through the creation of the Eurasian Economic Union on one side, and the fostering of claims by breakaway regions all around it borders (Abkhazia, South Ossetia, Crimea, eastern Ukraine, Transnistria) Russian authorities seem to be rebuilding a strong block around them. Pressuring on philosophical concepts such as self-determination, but also and primarily on more concrete issues such as Europe’s huge energy dependency39 and the EU’s general weakness when it comes to foreign affairs, the Federation is creating quite an amount of trouble on the international scene, as the recent G7 conference has shown. Coming more specifically to the Transnistrian issue, as the breakaway region’s President recently said40, its main object at the moment is to gain international recognition, something it has never had, even from its sponsor Russia. In the same interview, though, President Yevgeny Shevchuk also declared that the next step Transnistria should be taking, in respect of the will of its people41, is that of associating with the Russian Federation.

38 http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/europe/russia-kazakhstan-belarus-form-eurasian-economicunion/2014/05/29/de4a2c15-cb01-4c25-9bd6-7d5ac9e466fd_story.html 39 http://www.economist.com/news/briefing/21600111-reducing-europes-dependence-russian-gas-possiblebut-itwill-take-time-money-and-sustained 40 http://www.euronews.com/2014/06/07/interview-transnistran-president-shevchuk-says-he-wants-a-civiliseddivorce-/ 41 http://www.electoralgeography.com/en/countries/t/transnistria/2006-independence-referendumtransnistria.html Page 33 of 60

Another conflict is of an ethnic sort: In 2004 Transnistrian authorities closed Moldavian Latin-script schools, sparking international criticism42. With regard to economic conflicts, Russian and Transnistrian authorities claim that the Ukrainian border customs policy implemented in 2006 aims at putting pressure on Transnistria though economic blockade in order to end its succession claims. On the other hand, Ukraine and its western allies, namely the EU, continuously state that this strict customs policy is justified by security reasons43, being that Transnistria is considered to be “a black hole in which illegal trade in arms, the trafficking in human beings and the laundering of criminal finance was carried on”44. The largest conflict perhaps is between large international players: The Russian Federation and its allies on one side and the rest of the international community on the other. While no one actually recognises the region as a country, except for the Russian backed Community for Democracy and Rights of Nations, all parties try solving the conflict through diplomatic means – the OSCE talks – often without apparently taking the Transnistrian or Moldovian opinions into large consideration, and simply have proposed a reintegration into Moldova under various formulas, until Russia’s recent clear interest, due to its new hegemonic policy. Indeed, even if Russia has always shown conflicting interests on the region, keeping its military there but never recognising its independence, it did propose the reintegration of the region into Moldova in the Kozak Memorandum (2003), proposal rejected by Moldova but which satisfied Transnistrian authorities, because it would have basically given them veto-power in a Federation with Moldova. Thanks to this episode, it is easy to see how the real conflict here is one of power balance: Transnistria wants to have a certain independence and autonomy; Moldova wants to maintain its sovereignty; Russia wants to be hegemonic; the EU wants peace at its borders, in relation to the theoretical aims of the European Neighbourhood Policy, and to play an important role in Europe, contrasting Russian hegemony claims, thus meeting also the favour of its American allies. Links: 

The school situation in Transnistria: • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moldovan_schools_in_Transnistria



Article on the boarder customs issue: •



http://www.neweasterneurope.eu/interviews/912-the-new-old-moldovan-transnistrianborder-conflict

The text of the Kozak Memorandum:

42 http://www.eu-un.europa.eu/articles/en/article_3718_en.htm 43 http://www.kyivpost.com/multimedia/photo/ukrainian-customs-on-the-border-with-transnistria-342480.html 44 European Parliament, "Chairman's Report—Ad Hoc Delegation to Moldova", 5–6 June 2002: http://www.europarl.eu.int/meetdocs/committees/afet/20021007/473437EN.pdf Page 34 of 60

•

http://www.stefanwolff.com/files/Kozak-Memorandum.pdf

Keeping in mind the fact that Transnistria is not recognized by any member of the UN, direct and official diplomatic contact with this breakaway region has not been established, and relations to solve the conflict are either non-official or unilaterally held with Moldova, being the latter the recognized state holding sovereignty over the region. The European Neighbourhood Policy applied in Moldova is leading (expected: June 201445, after delay) to the signature of an Association Agreement and a Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area between the EU and the Republic of Moldova, which does not obviously contemplate in any way Transnistria. The Transnistrian President in a recent interview has actually condemned the Free trade area, saying “the signing of this agreement will have a negative economic impact on us because we did not participate in the negotiations”46. The Russian Federation looks to these deals with concern47. OSCE talks have indeed been the only means through which the international community has tried to reach out and solve the conflict by actually building a dialogue with Transnistrian de facto institutions. Due, most probably, partly to their tormented history, and partly to the fact that there is no strong stance on behalf of EU and USA (they are only observers), these talks have not reached any concrete solution. On the other hand, in 2003 the EU and USA set travel restrictions against Transnistrian officials because of “growing impatience with the intransigence of Transnistria's secessionist leadership”48. Even the Russian Federation made an attempt to solve the conflict through the Kozak Memorandum, which set out to create a Moldavian federal state. Due to the political weight – basically veto power – Transnistria would have assumed, Moldova did not ratify this agreement. Links: 

A summary regarding the Kozak Memorandum: • http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kozak_memorandum



EU institutional page on the AA and DCFTA with Moldova: • http://eeas.europa.eu/delegations/moldova/press_corner/all_news/news/2014/20140417_e n.htm

45 "EU brings forward Moldova, Georgia deals": http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/eu-brings-forwardmoldova-georgia-deals/ 46 http://www.euronews.com/2014/06/07/interview-transnistran-president-shevchuk-says-he-wants-a-civiliseddivorce-/ 47 http://www.euractiv.com/europes-east/russia-keeps-threatening-neighbo-news-530198 48 http://2001-2009.state.gov/p/eur/rls/rm/2003/19841.htm Page 35 of 60

ď&#x201A;ˇ

EU institutional page summarising EU-Moldova relations: â&#x20AC;˘

http://eeas.europa.eu/moldova/index_en.htm

A difficult power balance, a question of self-determination, hegemonic wills on one side or the other? One cannot be certain about what to think, at a first look, upon the Transnistrian issue. All sides seem to have good points, all sides seem to be contradictory. As many commentators say, as I have attempted to show here above, the solution might be closer than imaginable: it simply needs a strong stance. Otherwise, a contradictory status quo shall most probably be maintained, and this does not seem feasible in the current situation. The questions we, as the European Youth Parliament, must pose ourselves are essentially twofold: Firstly, whether the EU should take a strong stance on the issue or rather maintain the status quo; secondly, in the case a strong stance is reckoned to be needed, which position should it take, amongst the many possible? Questions are easy to pose and are difficult to answer, but one fact is certain: If we do not actively make a decision, circumstances will make it for us. With the rapidly evolving situation we are witnessing in the area, circumstances may not coincide with our best interest, and more definitely with what is right.

Page 36 of 60

Building inclusive societies and addressing discrimination: How should the EU tackle growing discrepancies in attitudes presented by far-right and far-left parties recently elected to the European Parliament towards civil rights such as race, religion and sexuality in an increasingly diversifying Europe? by Lāra Niamh Eckert Reinfelds (CH)



Discrimination: Can be defined as the “treatment of individuals or groups based on arbitrary ascriptive or acquired criteria such as sex, race, religion, age, marital or parental status, disability, sexual orientation, political opinions, socio-economic background, and trade union membership and activities.”49



Inclusive societies: An inclusive society is one where every member is included in the social, economic, cultural and political systems of said society, without any form of discrimination. Most important is the aspect of social inclusion, which includes the access to society’s collective goods.50



Far-right wing politics: Are also known as extreme-right wing politics and are considered to be on the far right of the political spectrum. The far-right ideology is often based on authoritarianism, nationalism, anti-communism, xenophobia, racism and the rejection of human equality.51 However, this is a simplified explanation and views differ between different far-right groupings.



Authoritarianism: “The principle of blind submission to authority as opposed to individual freedom of throughout and action.”52



Nationalism: An “ideology based on the premise that the individual’s loyalty and devotion to the nation-state surpass other individual or group interests.53



Anti-communism: An ideology opposing the principles and practices of communism.



Xenophobia: An intense and irrational fear of foreigners and foreign cultures.



Racism: “Any action, practice, or belief that reflects the racial worldview – the ideology that humans are divided into separate and exclusive biological entities called “races”, that there is a

49 50

http://www.eurofound.europa.eu/areas/industrialrelations/dictionary/definitions/discrimination.htm such as: health care, education, arts, housing, employment and income

see ‘Definitions and Keywords’ for more information on authoritarianism, nationalism, anti-communism, xenophobia and racism 52 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/44640/authoritarianism 53 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/405644/nationalism 51

Page 37 of 60

casual link between inherited physical traits and traits of personality, intellect, morality, and other cultural behavioural features, and that some races are innately superior to others.”54 

Far-left wing politics: Are positioned on the far left of the political spectrum. The far-left ideology is based on egalitarianism, equality, authoritarianism.55 However, this is a simplified explanation and views differ between different far-left groupings.



Egalitarianism: “A belief in human equality especially with respect to social, political, and economic affairs.”56



Equality: “An ideal of uniformity in treatment or status by those in a position to affect either.”57



Euroscepticism: An ideology that is critical of the European Union or the increased power of the European Union. Some divide eurosceptics into two groups: ‘hard’ eurosceptics and ‘soft eurosceptics. ‘Hard’ eurosceptics oppose membership and the existence of the European Union. ‘Soft’ Eurosceptics support membership and existence of the European Union but generally oppose a federalised Europe.



Populism: A political attitude which promotes direct democracy and rejects established political systems, idealises the nation and its traditions, offers solutions to people’s day to day problems, is tendentially anti-globalisation and aims to protect people from the consequences of a competitive capitalist market. Both right and left wing populism exist.



EU Charter of Fundamental Rights: This charter58 defines the rights of all individuals in the EU in six areas: Dignity, Freedoms, Equality, Solidarity, Citizen’s Rights and Justice. The charter became legally binding with the Treaty of Lisbon59 in 2009 and aims to protect citizens’ fundamental rights.

Links: 

Interactive Political and Economical Spectra by the University of Alberta: • http://www.learnalberta.ca/content/sspes/



“Europe in a changing work - Inclusive, innovative and reflecting societies” Societal Challenges in the EU’s Horizon 2020 programme: • http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/europe-changingworld-inclusive-innovative-and-reflective-societies

http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/488187/racism

see “Definitions and Keywords” for more information on egalitarianism, equality, authoritarianism, http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/egalitarianism 57 http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/275667/equality 58 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2010:083:0389:0403:en:PDF 55 56

“Q&A: The Lisbon Treaty” by the BBC, answers many frequently asked questions concerning the Lisbon Treaty http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/6901353.stm 59

Page 38 of 60



The European Commission on talking discrimination “EU fight against discrimination”, an overview of different aspects, problems solutions and more: • http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/index_en.htm

This year, between the 22nd and the 25th of May, the citizens of all EU member states participated in the election of a new European Parliament. The 751 Members of Parliament (MEPs)60 are supposed to represent approximately 500 Million citizens of the 28 EU member states. Far-right, Eurosceptic and Far-left parties made large gains, especially in Denmark61, France62 and Greece63. All in all the EU has moved towards political fringes, with the results showing deep dissatisfaction amongst voters, with many calling these results an earthquake that needs immediate tending to. There are currently 7 political groups in the European Parliament. Each group is in charge of organising itself internally and has one or two chairs, a secretary and a bureau. To be recognised as a group, there need to be at least 25 MEPs from at least 7 member states. MEPs cannot belong to more than one group, however, they do not need to belong to a group, these Members are known as non-attached Members. Currently many of these Non-Attached Members identify with right-wing politics. The recently elected NAs include members of the Hungarian Jobbik, the Movement for a Better Hungary and the Dutch Party for Freedom. Jobbik is Hungary’s second largest party ideologically far-right and nationalist and is both anti-Semitic and anti-Roma. The Dutch Party for Freedom is a right wing party whose leader Geert Wilders’ racist comments recently sparked outrage64 in the Netherlands. Although the European Parliament is still dominated by the mainstream pro-European centreright and centre left, the election results are very telling for how the citizens of Europe feel about the EU. Voter turnout has decreased severely since the first elections in 1979, where there was a 62% turnout, with this years elections stagnated at 43%, the same turnout as 2009’s elections. The high numbers of Eurocritics, Eurosceptics and Eurorealists who have been receiving growing support, show a dissatisfaction amongst voters. Amongst many other issues, the Transatlantic Trade Treaty65 is of special concern for many. What the increase in anti-EU sentiment will lead to for the Union remains to be seen. The increase in nationalist, anti-immigration and increasingly extreme views throughout Europe have many people worried about the future also on a national level. 60

The number of MEPs has been cut from 766 to 751 in accordance with the Treaty of Lisbon In Denmark the far-right Danish People’s party won nearly 27% of votes 62 In France the far right National Front secured 25% of votes 63 In Greece far-left party Syriza came in first with almost 27% of all votes and for the first time far-right Golden Dawn, who got almost 10% of the votes in Greece, will also be sending MEPs to Brussels 64 http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/mar/20/dutch-politician-geert-wilders-moroccans-outrage-pvv-partyanti-islam 65 opinion based comment article ob the transatlantic trade treaty between the EU and the US 61

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/nov/04/us-trade-deal-full-frontal-assault-on-democracy Page 39 of 60

The election shows that the gaps between groups, parties, countries and people are growing wider. The further apart ideals, opinions and goals are, the more difficult it is to find common ground and common solutions. This means that, while Europe is continuing to develop, diversify and change, the fears connected to this change are growing. Many extreme-right and left populist movements have softened their image and have profited from charismatic leaders. It remains to be seen how the many differing opinions, ideas and ideologies will work together in the future. In the meantime their agendas are seen by many as a threat to human rights and democratic values. Links: 

“Far-right parties sweep EU polls” All Jazeera article on the European Parliament Elections 2014: •

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/05/far-right-parties-sweep-eu-polls20145261436233584.html



“How many MEPs will each country get after European Parliament elections in 2014?” infographic on the distribution of seats each country gets in the 2014 election: • http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/newsroom/content/20130308STO06280/html/How-many-MEPs-will-each-country-getafter-European-Parliament-elections-in-2014



“European election results 2014: Far-right parties flourish across Europe” Independent article on the European elections 2014: • http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/european-election-results-2014farright-parties-flourish-across-europe-in-snub-to-austerity-9434069.html



Infographic “Far-Right Leads Eurosceptic Earthquake”: • http://www.statista.com/chart/2293/far-right-leads-eurosceptic-earthquake/

The European Parliament is made up of 751 MEPs, most of which belong to political groups. Currently the largest political group in the European Parliament (EP) is the European People’s Party (EPP)66 which holds 221 seats in the newly elected Parliament (having received 29.43% of votes). Politically it is centre/centre-right and pro-European. Second largest force is the Group of the Progressive Alliance of Socialists & Democrats (S&D)67 which currently holds 191 seats (having received 25.43% of votes). Politically it is centre-left/left and pro-European. The S&D is followed by the European Conservatives and Reformists Group (ECR)68 which has 68 seats (having received 9.05% of votes). It is in support of Eurorealism69 and is seen as being centre-right/right politically.

http://www.epp.eu/who-are-we http://www.socialistsanddemocrats.eu/about-us 68 http://ecrgroup.eu/about-us/the-ecr-in-the-european-parliament/ 67

Eurorealism is a ‘soft’ Eurosceptic view which aims for reforming rather than abolishing the EU Page 40 of 60

With only one seat less the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe (ALDE)70 currently have 67 seats (having received 8.92% of votes) and are politically liberal-centrist. The Confederal Group of the European United Left/Nordic Green Left (GUE/NGL)71 holds 52 seats (having received 6.92% of votes) and is politically left/far-left, being made up of MEPs who are mainly of the socialist and communist orientation. The Greens/European Free Alliance (Greens/EFA) holds 50 seats (having received 6.66% of votes). The group consists of Green MEPs and MEPs from parties representing stateless nations and disadvantaged minorities72. The group Europe of Freedom and Democracy (EFD)73 holds 48 seats (having received 6.39% of votes). It is right/far-right wing and Eurosceptic. The remaining 43 seats are held by Non-Attached Member (NA) who received 5.73% of votes. Particularly prominent figures amongst the far-right and far-left in the European Parliament include Marine Le Pen (leader of the French National Front NF) and Nigel Farage (leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party UKIP). Marine Le Pen is a French politician and daughter of former National Front leader Jean-Marie Le Pen, a convicted racist. She succeeded him as party leader in 2011 and has tried to distance herself from the image the party had under her father’s leadership. Her father’s antisemitic remarks have recently caused problems for Le Pen, she herself focuses more on anti-Islamic and anti-immigration policies. Nigel Farage is a British politician, leader of UKIP since 2010, having been a member of the Conservative Party until 1992 and is co-leader of the EFD group in the European Parliament. He is a severe critic of the European Union and it’s single currency system and is in favour of the UK leaving the EU. His party has had several incidents of members making racist, sexist, or homophobic remarks. They are both leaders of political parties that appeal to many people and have experienced a surge in attention as of late. Their views are seen by some as the only way forward and out of the crisis and by some as as racist, even fascist statements that decry what the EU stands for. In the EU human rights are protected under national legislation and enshrined in the Union’s founding treaties, as well as being set out in the Charter of Fundamental rights. Therefore the EU and national governments are key players where human rights are concerned. The European Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA)74 provides expert advice to EU institutions and member states on a range of issues dealing with fundamental rights. To do this it collects and analyses information and data, provides assistance and expertise and educates and raises awareness. It works closely with the European Commission, the European Parliament, the Council of the European Union, the Council of Europe, the United Nations and other international organisations. Human Rights

http://www.alde.eu http://www.guengl.eu/group/about 72 http://www.greens-efa.eu/43-about-us.html 73 http://www.efdgroup.eu 74 http://fra.europa.eu/en 71

Page 41 of 60

Watch75 is a non-governmental organisation (NGO) dedicated to investigating human rights abuses and expose them worldwide. They have a policy of calling out governments in ‘name and shame’ actions on violations of basic human rights, such as in cases of gender-related discrimination. Amnesty International76 is another organisation which monitors human rights abuses internationally. They publish the information they gather regularly and publicly77. The European Association for the defence of human rights (AEDH)78 is a partner of the International Federation for Human Rights79 and tries to influence both institutions and EU citizens to ensure fundamental rights are valued and elaborated on within the European Union. The AIRE Centre80 (Advice on Individual Rights in Europe) is a charity based in the United Kingdom, which provides legal advice on fundamental rights and EU law free of charge. Next to this, it aims to promote information on fundamental rights and their value throughout Europe. Apart from the organisations mentioned, there are many more, some working internationally, others working regionally nationally. It must also be remembered that every government has a duty to uphold fundamental human rights nationally. Links: 

“Europe’s far right, Culture matters more” article in The Economist on the rise in far-right parties throughout Europe: • http://www.economist.com/node/21560294



“Charterpedia” online tool published by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights to access information about fundamental rights in the EU: • http://fra.europa.eu/en/charterpedia



“Populism in Europe: what’s the best weapon against the far right? - Talking Europe. Discussion involving Sophie in’t Veld (Dutch MEP, Alliance of Liberals and Democrats), Philippe Lamberts (Belgian MEP, Group of the Greens) and Bruno Gollnisch (French MEP, National Front) 17min: •

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=74TjpH2AQ7c

The European Union is facing stronger divisions within itself in the aftermath of May’s elections. Not only have many of the EU’s citizens shown their lack of trust in the EU by electing many eurosceptic representatives, the discrepancies between the views of the different politicians make for estimates of difficulties ahead. But the divisions do not necessarily lie in the differences between left and right. What seems to be more problematic is the differences between more radical and

75 76

http://www.hrw.org http://www.amnesty.org

see: 4th link in ‘Legal Framework & Measures Already Taken’ http://www.aedh.eu/?lang=en 79 http://www.fidh.org/en/ 80 http://www.airecentre.org 77 78

Page 42 of 60

moderate groups. However, many right-wing parties have, with their surge in popularity, made intolerance and discrimination more acceptable, some say fashionable even, in European politics. Antiimmigration, xenophobia and nationalism are by some considered to be becoming mainstream. At the same time the EU is moving forward, diversifying. LGBTI rights have been able to document many achievements in the last few years81 as have other groups supporting women’s rights82 and many other causes83. The issue within the EU at the moment is the diversity of incompatible opinions and views on essential topics that will need to be resolved in their time. Especially the treatment deepening on race and religion in different EU countries is cause for concern for many. This can range from deportations of immigrants and mistreatment of Roma in France and Hungary to incitement to xenophobic and Islamophobic acts in all of the EU. Many of the far-rights parties are strongly anti-immigrant and pro nationalism. This could cause more issues in the future. Some see human rights and the EU’s core values at threat. Links: 

EU leaders ponder future with far right and far left after elections: • http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/27/europe-leaders-future-left-rightcommission-strasbourg



The European Union and LGBTI rights: • http://www.ilga-europe.org/home/guide_europe/eu/lgbt_rights “Far-right’s election success worries European Jewry” The Jerusalem Post, article about the EU



elections and fears of antisemitism and Islamophobia: • http://www.jpost.com/Jewish-World/Jewish-Features/Far-rights-election-successworries-European-Jewry-354460 

“The European Union and the Challenge of Extremism and Populism” a policy paper by the European Humanist Federation, 10 pages: • http://ec.europa.eu/justice/events/assises-justice2013/files/contributions/24.europeanhumanistfederationtheeuandthechallengeofextremis mandpopulism_ehf_en.pdf

http://www.ilgaeurope.org/home/guide_europe/eu/lgbt_rights/european_parliament_s_intergroup_on_lgbt_rights_achievements_2 009_2014 82

Committee on Women’s Rights and Gender Equality : http://www.europarl.europa.eu/committees/en/femm/home.html#menuzone 83 such as the tackling of discrimination towards people suffering from disabilities http://ec.europa.eu/justice/discrimination/disabilities/disability-strategy/index_en.htm Page 43 of 60

The fundamental rights are very important in the European Union. In order to be eligible for accession to the EU, each candidate country has to comply with the Copenhagen criteria, which are the rules defining whether or not a country is fit to join the EU. This involves next to economic criteria and the acceptance of the Community acquis, political criteria: stability of institutions guaranteeing democracy, the rule of law, human rights and respect for an protection of minorities.84 The Lisbon Treaty85, which makes the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union86 binding, entered into force in 2009. Following this, the EU was given the power to legislate in the area of criminal law, which it hadn’t been able to previously. The Charter of Fundamental Rights of the EU is made up of 6 fundamental rights and freedoms: dignity, freedoms, equality, solidarity, citizens’ rights and justice. This Charter must be respected by EU institutions and national authorities, including the courts, when they are implementing EU law. 87 Inclusive, Innovative and Reflective Societies are one of the societal challenges the 2020 Horizon88 program aims to tackle. The EU is facing significant challenges concerning social exclusion and inequality. Millions of people throughout the Union are at risk of poverty, unemployment and more. The world is rapidly changing and in comparison to the rest of the world, the EU is faced with an ageing demographic. The programme wants to focus on fostering a greater understanding of Europe, by providing solutions and supporting inclusive, innovative and reflective European societies with an innovative public sector in a contact of unprecedented transformations and growing global interdependencies. The Fundamental Rights Agency (FRA)89, established in 2007, is an EU body which collects and analyses data on fundamental rights, in accordance with the Charter or Fundamental Rights. The European Parliament has in the past produced resolutions on Human Rights issues but the effectiveness can be a bit stunted by the affiliations within the Parliament. The European Commission has committed itself to coming up with strategies to effectively implement the Charter of Fundamental Rights, however, it has had the tendency to only hesitantly confront member states on human rights issues. The Council of the European Union has established a Working Party on Fundamental Rights and Free Movement of Persons (FREMP).

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/glossary/accession_criteria_copenhague_en.htm also known as the Treaty of Lisbon, see footnote 59 86 http://www.europarl.europa.eu/comparl/libe/elsj/charter/default_en.htm 87 The European Union Explained: Justice, citizenship, fundamental rights: http://europa.eu/pol/pdf/flipbook/en/justice_en.pdf 88 What is Horizon 2020? http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/what-horizon-2020 89 see ‘Key Actors’ 85

Page 44 of 60

Links: 

Europe in a changing world - Inclusive, innovative and reflecting societies, one of the Societal Challenges of the 2020 Horizon programme: • http://ec.europa.eu/programmes/horizon2020/en/h2020-section/europe-changingworld-inclusive-innovative-and-reflective-societies



“To Help Restore Confidence in Europe, Protect Rights” article from the EU Observer via Human Rights Watch: • http://www.hrw.org/news/2014/06/19/help-restore-confidence-europe-protect-rights Strengthening the European Union’s Response to Human Rights Abuses Inside its Own Borders,



a statement by the Human Rights & Democracy Network: • http://hrw.org/sites/default/files/related_material/2013_EU_HRDN%20statement.pdf Open letter of Amnesty International to the members of the FREMP working party: • http://www.amnesty.eu/content/assets/Letters2013/AI_SP_letter_to_FREMP_on_hate_cri me_151113.pdf



What measures can the EU take to tackle discrimination?



How can middle ground be found and mutually acceptable solutions found between representatives of very different ideologies?



Should citizens’ rights be protected on a national or on an EU-wide basis?



What can the EU and its member states do to encourage a more inclusive society?



Should such controversial political parties like Jobbik and Golden Dawn to be represented in the European Parliament?



Are the programmes in place at the moment making enough of a difference or should other measures be taken?



What can the EU do to better protect and support all of its citizens, regardless of their race, religion, sexuality or disability?



Should the EU more frequently call out individual member states on human rights concerns?

Page 45 of 60

Diminishing growth rates of the economy and threat of deflation suggested by macroeconomic projections: What should the EU do to further stimulate economic growth and stability in the Eurozone area whilst taking the recently announced measures by the ECB into account? by Khalid El Ghoul (NL)



Price stability: is defined by the ECB as a year-on-year increase in the Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HICP)90 for the Eurzone of just below 2%. This translates to a predictable inflation level at which potential economic growth is maximalised. As this level may fluctuate, ranging from hyperinflation to deflation, it becomes harder to predict economic development, the effects of which are potentially harmful to a country’s economic performance and to the welfare of its citizens. Price stability is therefore commonly regarded as the single most important macroeconomic objective.



Harmonised Index of Consumer Prices (HCIP): measures the consumer price inflation in the Eurozone area. The HICP is compiled by Eurostat91 and the national statistical institutes. Consumer price indices, which are used to check price stability, are compiled once a month using what is called a “shopping basket”. This basket contains a broad range of products which are typically consumed by a representative household. The total price of the “shopping basket”, as a measure of the general price level, is then periodically checked to see how much prices rise or fall.



Inflation: a general increase of prices of goods and services, as measured by the HCIP, often caused by an increase in the supply of money. Over time, as the cost of goods and services increase, the unit value of currency will drop as its purchasing power diminishes. It is usually defined as too much money chasing too few goods.



Deflation: a decline in general price levels, often caused by a reduction in the supply of capital or credit. Deflation can also be brought about by direct contractions in spending, either in the form of a reduction in government spending, personal spending or investment spending. Deflation has often had the side effect of increasing unemployment and decreasing wages, since the process often leads to a lower level of demand in the economy, and is essentially negative inflation.

90 91

https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/prices/hicp/html/index.en.html http://epp.eurostat.ec.europa.eu/portal/page/portal/hicp/introduction Page 46 of 60



Eurozone area: the area that is made up of those Member States of the European Union in which the euro has been adopted as the single currency.



Quantitative easing: the process whereby a central bank purchases existing government bonds and financial assets in order to inject money directly into the financial system. It is regarded as a last resort to stimulate spending in an economy when lowering interest rates fails to work.



Deflationary spiral: an economic occurrence where the inflation rate is negative and continues to decrease. This occurs when prices and wages drop, strengthening deflation due to lower demand and therefore, lower production. When this happens, the supply of money usually decreases, leading to a stronger currency which would fuel even lower prices and wages, thereby creating a chain of events. Deflationary spirals are often viewed negatively because they generally occur during and tend to worsen recessions.

Links: 

A website providing clear definitions for economic and financial terms: •



http://www.investorwords.com/

A website providing a clear overview of basic economic principles: •

http://www.economicsonline.co.uk/Managing_the_economy/Stable_prices.html

In July 2012, the president of the European Central Bank, Mario Draghi, pledged that he is ready to do “whatever it takes” to save the euro and the Eurozone area from downfall, which is now widely regarded as the turning point of the euro crisis. The Eurozone area is slowly recovering from the crisis, treading out of recession a year ago, and projections suggesting further growth of the economy92. The rate at which the economy grows however, started to slow as consumer spending has decreased, fewer investments are made and unemployment rates remain high. Subsequently, as the demand for, and therefore the price of, services, food and energy diminishes93, inflation slows down, now falling well below the ECB’s target of just below 2%. A prolonged period of low inflation can have damaging effects on the economy and constitutes a threat of deflation. As prices fall during a period of deflation, consumers and investors delay purchases and investments, thus restricting the flow of capital into the market, which forces companies to sell their products at lower prices, generating less revenue. Due to this, production slows down and economic growth comes to a halt, possibly aggravating recession and ultimately leading to a deflationary spiral. Christine Lagarde, president of the International Monetary Fund, said in January 2014: “If inflation is the genie, then

92 93

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-05/eu-reduces-euro-growth-forecast-as-inflation-seen-slower.html https://www.ecb.europa.eu/stats/prices/hicp/html/inflation.en.html Page 47 of 60

deflation is the ogre that must be fought decisively.”94 Deflation also increases the real burden of debtors as the debt’s value increases and creditors are less willing to lend money since its value also increases. As the guardian of the Eurozone, it is the ECB’s primary objective to ensure price stability within the Eurozone95. This is a situation where capital retains its value and its purchasing power remains stable over a long period of time.96 This way, companies can make well-informed investment decisions, allowing for resources to be allocated in the most productive manner and thus increasing the productive potential of the economy and maximising growth. Therefore, in order to combat low inflation and prevent deflation from occurring, the ECB’s Mario Draghi announced a package of measures on the 5th of June97, stating: “The Governing Council is unanimous in its commitment to also using unconventional instruments within its mandate should it become necessary to further address risks of too prolonged a period of low inflation.” In a historic move, Mario Draghi reduced the deposit rate to minus 0.1 %, making the ECB the first major central bank to use a negative rate. The negative deposit rate means that banks are charged to deposit excess funds with the ECB, which should stimulate banks to supply credit rather than hold onto it. Furthermore, Draghi announced a new liquidity program designed to encourage lending. Financial institutions will be allowed to borrow money from the ECB equivalent to as much as 7 per cent of their outstanding loans to non-financial corporations and households, excluding mortgages. As the interest rates can hardly be lowered further, a standard measure to combat low inflation, and the deposit rate entering negative territory, the ECB views quantitative easing, as a legitimate option. It is not an easy one however, as the Eurozone lacks a unified government debt market that would be the obvious target for purchases, making the appropriate assets for an effective quantitative easing policy hard to select. Apart from this, it is a highly unconventional measure only used when all standard measures are ineffective. Draghi is yet to concede that the threshold for quantitative easing in the Eurzone area has been reached, though he has stepped up his warning that “the trigger may be near”. While Draghi has delayed this for as long as possible, others question the effectiveness of the announced measures and whether it will be enough to stimulate the inflation rate. The Eurozone is dependent from bank lending, which is difficult to support while interbank lending confidence is low and the avidity for supplying credit is shrinking. Thus the intended flow of capital to the real economy is not guaranteed. Furthermore, the ECB´s monetary policy may also reduce the incentive for governments to implement measures to restructure their economies. Links: 94

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/82d8e684-7e0d-11e3-b409-00144feabdc0.html#axzz35Hhyvm00 http://www.eurotreaties.com/maastrichtprotocols.pdf 96 http://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/educational/pricestab/shared/movie/Pupils_Leaflet_2011_EN_web.pdf??1a520958b c65553262480cbe830c7ed3 97 http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2014/html/pr140605_2.en.html 95

Page 48 of 60



An article explaining the relevance of the Eurozone’s deflation battle for the global economy: •



A simple video on price stability and the effects of inflation and deflation: •



http://www.ftadviser.com/2014/06/16/investments/europe/draghi-s-deflation-battlemain-focus-for-markets-MWoKtknG3BkMcH7xgOY7JO/article.html

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/ecb/educational/pricestab/html/index.en.html

An article explaining the EU struggle to avoid deflation: •

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/06/04/business/international/europe-struggles-to-avoiddeflations-grip.html



A Bloomberg article portraying the bigger picture: •



http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-05/eu-reduces-euro-growth-forecast-asinflation-seen-slower.html

A recent article on the EU ‘s growth forecast: •

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-23/euro-region-survey-shows-weakeningas-french-woes-intensify.html

The single most important actor in this issue is the European Central Bank as it is within its mandate to pursue price stability, and thereby, a stimulating environment for economic growth. Following the ECB’s Governing Council meeting on 5th June, Mario Draghi announced an unprecedented round of measures, which includes targeted loans to banks and a negative deposit rate, to shield the Eurozone from deflation and stimulate spending and the flow of capital into the real economy in an effort to restore inflation rates to levels closer to 2 per cent. These unconventional measures reaffirmed the ECB’s commitment of July 2012 to revitalise the Eurozone and boost the economy, doing “whatever it takes”. When asked how the ECB would respond, should the risks of a protracted period of low inflation materialise, Vitor Constancio, the ECB’s Vice-President, said: “The ECB stands ready to deploy additional unconventional instruments, should the likelihood of this scenario increase. The policy response would involve a broad-based asset-purchase programme.” He continued to say that central banks cannot avoid their responsibility to ensure price stability even when they have to use “new instruments”. The ECB has at its disposal all instruments and competencies necessary for the conduct of an efficient monetary policy and is authorised to decide autonomously how and when to use them. Furthermore, it has the right to adopt binding regulations to the extent necessary to carry out their tasks. After the ECB, the most important groups in this issue are investors and consumers. As mentioned earlier, low inflation and ultimately deflation, is often caused by a reduction in the supply of capital or Page 49 of 60

credit, but can also be brought about by a direct decrease of spending, either in the form of a reduction in government spending, personal spending or investment spending. When it comes to government spending, some Member States have had to make significant cuts on public spending to bring back budget deficits, especially Ireland, Portugal, Spain and Greece, as a requirement for receiving bailouts. With low consumer confidence and unsettling unemployment rates, consumers remain sceptic and hold onto their savings in fear of losing purchasing power. Furthermore, in a global investor poll98, 74 per cent of investors indicated concerns that deflation is a greater threat to the Eurozone than inflation, causing a more cautious disposition to investments. The European Commission, responsible for initiating economic legislation, has insisted the risk of deflation in the Eurozone is very low, even as officials cut forecasts for rises in prices and trimmed expectations for economic growth next year, in a speech given by Siim Kallas, the Commission’s VicePresident, on 5th May. Nonetheless, it is part of its responsibility to ensure economic growth and stability by proposing or recommending the necessary policy reforms to the Council. The Commission has therefore, mainly focused on the structural reforms as a consequence of the crisis. The coordination of economic policies is done by monitoring the economic developments in each Member State and the EU on the basis of various reports by DG ECFIN99 on behalf of the Commission. This multilateral surveillance also includes a check that economic policies are consistent with the EU's roadmap for growth and jobs. Links: 

The ECB’s mandate to pursue price stability: •



The European Commission’s disposition and considerations: •



http://www.ecb.europa.eu/mopo/strategy/pricestab/html/index.en.html

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/20/us-eu-economy-reviewidUSKBN0EV16120140620

A survey portraying a sudden and unexpected decline in consumer confidence: •

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-20/euro-area-consumer-confidenceunexpectedly-declined-in-june.html

The key underlying conflict to a topic as such is one of a highly practical nature, and with regard to growth and stability in the Eurozone the conflict is twofold: firstly, and essential to this topic, is price stability. In order to establish a sustainable and an accommodating environment to spur economic growth, it is important that price stability is pursued and inflation rates are managed to an optimal level. 98 99

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-05-11/europe-deflation-risk-seen-by-74-in-global-investor-poll.html http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/economy_finance/index_en.htm Page 50 of 60

The risks of a prolonged period of low inflation and the threat of deflation are taken seriously by the ECB, and responded to with a set of unconventional measures. The impact of these measures however, is questionable as interest rates in the Eurozone were already at a record low with little room to cut them down even further. As such, inflation is still expected to be below 2% by the end of 2016 even taking into account the measures announced by the ECB. Apart from the negative deposit rate, there was little else the ECB could do while refraining from quantitative easing, and thus it is regarded by some as merely a symbolic gesture. It is also unclear whether the announced measures address the right problem, since some claim it is not a lack of money that discourages banks from lending, but rather a focus on boosting their own balance sheets.100101 Besides establishing a favourable environment for economic growth, the second issue is to spur growth by stimulating investments in development and innovation and consumer spending, which should result in improved employment rates and the flow of capital. However, as mentioned earlier, partly due to low inflation rates resulting from low demand, investors are reluctant to invest in these areas. Furthermore, as the ECB is independent from other EU institutions, opinions on the threat of low inflation may differ, causing an incoherent response to growth indicators. The European Commission is mainly focused on the structural reform of economic policy, claiming that the probability of deflation is very low and that “recovery is gaining traction”. Economic policy of the EU, while aiming to stabilise the economy on the short term and increase potential growth in the medium term, also addresses different longer-term challenges. Tackling deflation however, is a short term matter which, if not addressed, can be very harmful to the EU’s economy, potentially resulting in a deflationary spiral. Links: 

An article on the European Commission insisting on a low risk of deflation: •



http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/may/05/european-commission-cuts-2015growth-forecast

A follow up on the ECB’s announced measures and the situation in the euro Member States: •

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/16/us-eurozone-economy-inflationidUSKBN0ER0TK20140616

In order to combat low inflation and the threat of deflation, the ECB became the first major central bank to introduce a negative deposit rate, charging banks to deposit excess funds. It also launched four-year 100

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2014-06-22/most-europe-banks-see-no-extra-capital-need-afterreview.html 101 http://www.theguardian.com/business/economics-blog/2014/jun/05/european-central-bank-action-eurozonedeflation-lending Page 51 of 60

loans with very low interest rates to banks in order to stimulate lending to companies. Furthermore, it cut its main refinancing rate to 0.15 per cent, and the marginal lending rate to 0.40 per cent. Aside from quantitative easing, there is little, if any, substance left in the ECB armory following these announcements of new measures to try to steer the Eurozone away from the threat of deflation. As the economy is now recovering slowly from the sovereign debt crisis that plunged the Eurozone into recession, Eurozone policymakers are also discussing how to balance the reduction of public debts while at the same stimulating growth. The Eurozone’s fiscal stance strikes the right balance between reducing debt and bolstering demand, said the International Monetary Fund102. Efforts to ensure stability in the Eurozoneare not an end in themselves, but rather a means to revive economic growth and employment in the Eurozone and across the European Union. Parts of these efforts are captured in the Compact for Growth and Jobs, adopted by EU leaders in June 2012, providing a coherent framework for action at national, EU and euro-area levels. The ultimate aim is to make the European economy more competitive by stimulating growth, investment and employment. Another aim of the compact is faster progress towards the goals set out in the Europe 2020 strategy. The European Council is responsible for steering the implementation of both the compact and the Europe 2020 strategy. Member States coordinate their policies and actions through the European Semester process. Furthermore, the EU summit of June 2013 decided to launch a new investment action plan aimed at restoring credit flows to the economy. Funds from the EU budget and the European Investment Bank will be combined in particular to support small and medium-size enterprises (SME’s) and facilitate investment in the entrepreneurial sector which plays an important role in job creation in Europe. The EU's Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF) for the 2014-2020 is of crucial importance in this regard, as it is supports the achievement of Europe 2020 strategies, including initiatives for growth and jobs across Europe. Links: 

Conclusions of the European Council in June 2013 establishing the European Semester and on the Compact: •



An overview of all the measures of the ECB announced on 5th June: •



http://www.ecb.europa.eu/press/pr/date/2014/html/index.en.html

An analysis of the IMF on the ECB’s actions and the EU’s policies: •

102

http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_data/docs/pressdata/en/ec/137634.pdf

http://www.imf.org/external/np/ms/2014/061914.htm

http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/06/19/us-eurozone-imf-idUSKBN0EU1X020140619 Page 52 of 60

What are the dangers of a prolonged period of low inflation and how should these be addressed? Is the slowing inflation rate an indication of deflation, and if so, are the measures of the ECB enough to stimulate inflation and restore price stability? What other instruments does the ECB have and should they resort to even drastic measures? How should consumer spending and investments be encouraged in a sceptic Eurozone? Is sustainable growth feasible in the absence of price stability, or should the focus shift to address the issue of potential deflation first? How realistic is the danger of a deflationary spiral? “But the recovery is neither robust nor sufficiently strong.” says the IMF on the Eurozone’s recovery; how can the EU boost its recovery and stimulate growth even further? Will the measures adopted by the European Council be enough to restore growth and ensure sustained stability in the Eurozone area?

Page 53 of 60

The sky needs a limit: with ever-rising global aviation emissions and ETS requirements being suspended for flights to and from non-European countries until 2016, what measures should the EU take to decrease aviation emissions and to ensure this happens on a global level? by Titus Verster (NL)



Aviation is a mode of transport in which goods or people are transported in aircrafts.



In environmental law, Market-based Measures (MBMs) are policy systems that provide incentives for polluters to reduce their emissions by using markets, price or other economic variables.



The European Union Emission Trading System (EU ETS) is the world’s biggest trading system for the emissions of greenhouse gasses. The core principle of the ETS is to set a limit, or ‘cap’, to the amount of emissions of all industries within its Member States. If, however, a member of the ETS emits less greenhouse gasses than its cap, it is able to sell the remainder of its emissions to other members, making it a market-based system. Every year, each member gets appointed a smaller allowance, and is therefore forced to invest in becoming more energyefficient.



The European Economic Area (EEA) consists of all 28 Member States of the European Union and Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway.

Links: 

The European Commission’s official web portal for the EU ETS: •



http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/ets/index_en.htm

A page of the International Civil Aviation Organisation’s (ICAO) clearly explaining Marketbased Measures and the concept’s history: •

http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Pages/market-based-measures.aspx

Aviation is one of the fastest growing causes of greenhouse gas emission on a global level. At the moment, aviation emissions make up for about 3% of the EU’s total greenhouse gas emissions, and this percentage is expected to increase rapidly over the next few years103. The International Civil Aviation

103

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation/index_en.htm Page 54 of 60

Organisation’s (ICAO) projections say the global aviation emissions could grow by 300-700% by 2050, even after having taken into account improved fuel efficiency104. To halt this worrisome trend, the European Commission (EC) proposed a piece of legislation105 that included the aviation sector in the EU Emissions Trading System (EU ETS), which applied to all flights from, to and within the European Economic Area (EEA). The bill passed the Council and the European Parliament in 2008, and was to enter into force in 2012. However, third countries such as China and the United States objected to the inclusion of emissions that did not take place in EU airspace, saying it was a breach of their sovereignty. This led the European Commission to exclude emissions outside EU airspace in 2012, even if the point of departure or destination was in Europe. In doing so, it gave the ICAO time to come up with a global approach to aviation emissions. In September 2013, the ICAO decided to agree on a global mechanism by 2016, to be entered into force in 2020, which caused the Commission to propose an amendment exempting all emissions outside EU airspace until 2016. Not satisfied, the third countries demanded that the EU go further, and limit the EU ETS to flights within the EEA. In first instance, the European Parliament (EP) decided not to give in to foreign requests, but eventually responded to Member States’ appeals, which feared a trade war with global partners. As a result, on 4th March 2014 legislation has been amended for the period 2013-2016, and the EU ETS now only includes flights within the EEA. Although a step in the direction to tackling the problem, a global mechanism to control aviation emissions is still far away. Both short- and long-term solutions that take into account the environment, as well as relations between Europe and the rest of the world are needed. Links: 

The European Commission’s official web portal for their policies regarding aviation: •



Ten questions and answers by PricewaterhouseCoopers regarding the effects of ETS on the aviation sector: •



105

http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/transportation-logistics/emissions-trading-aviationfrequently-asked-questions.jhtml

An official publication by the European Commission explaining the 4th March 2014 amendment: •

104

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation/index_en.htm

http://ec.europa.eu/clima/policies/transport/aviation/docs/faq_aviation_2013-2016_en.pdf

http://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/GIACC/Giacc-4/CENV_GIACC4_IP1_IP2%20IP3.pdf http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1402658009767&uri=CELEX:32003L0087 Page 55 of 60



A report by British environmental organisation Sandbag, with a critical analysis of the EU ETS and its effects on the aviation sector: •

http://www.sandbag.org.uk/site_media/pdfs/reports/Sandbag_Aviation_and_the_EU_ET S_2012_171213_1.pdf

Right now, the International Civil Aviation Organisation is one of the most important actors in this process, since it will need to come up with a proposal for a worldwide system to control aviation emissions by 2016. When the ICAO was founded in 1947, the specialised agency of the United Nations was tasked with the planning and development of international air transport. Another important actor is the European Commission, which has been elaborating and amending legislation concerning aviation in the EU ETS. After the ICAO presents a global approach to aviation emissions in 2016, it will be the Commission’s job to propose a stance and further approach for the EU. The players probably most affected by the inclusion of aviation in the EU ETS at the moment are European airlines. Although they are taxed for all flights within the EEA, not all airlines have responded negatively. For example, the Association of European Airlines, which represents Europe’s major carriers, has said to be relieved about the changes which were made to the original piece of legislation. It feared retaliatory measures from third countries for European airlines flying to nonEuropean destinations if controversy were to continue. The European Low Fares Airline Association, however, representing budget carriers which operate for the most part only in Europe, has said this change will subject European airlines to charges that their foreign competitors will not face. Lastly, both European and non-European national governments have played a big role in the issue, with Member States pressuring the European Parliament to exclude flights to and from non-European destinations in the EU ETS. The future of a global mechanism is subject to the willingness of countries such as China, Russia and the United States to comply with such a system. Links: 

An article of China and Russia’s stance and complaints regarding the EU ETS: •



An article regarding the United States’ stance on and reaction to the EU ETS: •



http://aviationweek.com/awin/china-russia-seek-support-ets-challenge

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/nov/28/obama-fails-climate-test-aviation

A summary of the ICAO’s assembly were the future of a worldwide MBM tackling aviation emissions was discussed: •

http://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/mbm-agreement-solid-global-planendoresements.aspx Page 56 of 60

Whilst there is general consensus that aviation emissions and other environmental problems must be addressed, it is not seen as a priority by countries such as the U.S. and China. European efforts to implement a system with the goal of decreasing greenhouse gas emissions are not met by foreign governments in order to protect their sovereignty. Therefore, the EU ETS seems to show that a system initiated by the EU that affects aviation worldwide is impossible. However, since this is an international problem, any potentially successful measures will have to have a global character. This means that not only the EU will have to favour it, but also countries such as the United States, China and Russia. In the past, neither of these countries has shown to have a positive attitude towards an ETS-like system. China, for example, banned its airlines from paying carbon taxes to the EU, and U.S. president Obama signed a bill protecting all American airlines from having to abide to the EU ETS. For the current situation, where only flights within the EEA are taxed, this means that mainly European airlines are being affected by the EU ETS scheme. After all, they are subject to laws their non-European competitors do not have to abide to. The European Low Fares Airline Association has already responded negatively to the latest amendment, saying the change unequally burden European airlines compared to foreign carriers. This is something the EU cannot ignore, as it negatively affects its trading position in the world. This is because European airlines will most likely raise their prices in order to make up for the extra charges they are faced with. Hence, flying with non-European carriers will be the logical option for consumers. Especially for the period 2014-2016, the EU must consider whether it wants to pull through with including aviation in the EU ETS and thereby affect European airlines. Last but not least, it is the question whether the EU ETS is an effective system to bring down the emission of greenhouse gasses. Organisations such as the British Sandbag and Transport & Environment have criticised the ETS for its market-based approach, and say that remaining emission allowances should not be auctioned in order for the system to be purposeful. Furthermore, they believe that by letting big emitters simply buy more emission allowances, they are not likely to change their ways and become more energy efficient. Links: 

Rebuttals of commonly heard arguments against the ETS system: •



A critical report on the effectivity of the EU ETS: •



http://www.transportenvironment.org/news/aviations-ets-objections-are-baseless

http://www.sandbag.org.uk/site_media/pdfs/reports/Rescuing_EU_ETS.pdf

A web portal with many interesting articles concerning aviation pollution, gathered and organised by European organisation Transport & Environment:

Page 57 of 60

•

http://www.transportenvironment.org/what-we-do/aviation

In terms of aviation and the EU ETS, one piece of legislation and two of its amendments are most important: in directive 2003/87/EC106 the European Parliament and Council established the original EU ETS after a proposal of the European Commission. On November 19 2008 the Parliament and Council amended107 this original directive, and included aviation activities in the greenhouse gas emission allowances trading system. The most recent amendment108 excluded flights from and to non-European destinations from the EU ETS. Non-European countries have also taken up the pen to create legislation related to the EU ETS. In the United States, president Obama has signed an EU ETS prohibition act. With this bill, the U.S. Secretary of Transportation is able to prohibit American airlines from participating in the EU ETS. The law also allows U.S. authorities to take measures that will keep American airlines from having to pay unilaterally imposed environmental tax. At the 38th assembly of the ICAO, the organisation agreed to develop a global market-based measure (MBM) for international aviation. “This MBM agreement is an historic milestone for air transport and for the role of multilateralism in addressing global climate challenges,”109 said ICAO Council President Roberto Kobeh González after the assembly. The ICAO agreed to draft up a plan for a MBM before the 2016 assembly, to be implemented by 2012. Links: 

A very well-explained article on the most recent development in the EU ETS (please note that a login is required to read this article. For the username and password get in touch with Titus Verster): •



http://www.europeanvoice.com/article/eu-surrenders-on-aviation-in-ets/

An elaborate explanation of why president Obama banned American airlines from paying taxes within the framework of the EU ETS: •

http://theenergycollective.com/jemillerep/150781/draft-progresswhy-did-presidentobama-veto-europe-s-airline-carbon-tax

Was the EU right in excluding flights to and from non-European airports from the EU ETS? Keeping in mind the negative effects on the trading position of European airlines, should flights within the EEA be 106

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1402658009767&uri=CELEX:32003L0087 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1402657949075&uri=CELEX:32008L0101 108 http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/?qid=1402657424503&uri=CELEX:32014R0421 109 http://www.icao.int/Newsroom/Pages/mbm-agreement-solid-global-plan-endoresements.aspx 107

Page 58 of 60

included in the EU ETS? Should aviation be a part of the EU ETS at all, especially considering the period 2014-2016? Is a market-based solution, such as the ETS, an effective measure to decrease greenhouse gas emissions? What role should the EU play in the creation of a global aviation emissions control scheme? What should such a system look like? Should it be a market-based measure like the EU ETS, or something completely different?

Page 59 of 60