Academic Preparation Kit Delft2014 by EYP The Netherlands

Academic Preperation Kit

TABLE OF CONTENT

Word of Welcome

Academic Preparation

AFET I

AFET II

AGRI

DROI

ECON

INTA

TRAN I

TRAN II

Links to general resources about the EU

WORD OF WELCOME Dear delegates, With the National Selection Conference only several weeks away, it is high time to start your academic preparation. In this order to significantly improve the academic quality of the conference, and thus making the experience much more fulfilling, a solid academic preparation is essential. We present to you this Academic Preparation Kit to help you with this process. In this document, you will find overviews of all the session topics, prepared for you by the chairpersons. These aim to give you an overview of the problems with which you will be faced, as well as the historical and conceptual background of the topics. . They should be used as the starting point of your preparation, and as such the chairpersons have included various links for further research. You are highly encouraged to thoroughly study your topic overview, after which you should see if you can find some resources on your own. The links in the overviews provide a suitable starting point, but you are also encouraged to search for other materials yourselves. As part of your preparation, there also are a couple of things that we require you to do: to compile a Fact Sheet and write a Position Paper. Once you are confident that you have a sufficient grasp of the topic, and have found enough new resources, it is time to start working on your Fact Sheet and Position Paper. Below you will find guidelines on what these entail, as well as examples of what we expect. Lastly, a prerequisite for participation is to send us a signed Consent Form, wherein you promise to abide by the Code of Conduct of EYP The Netherlands. This approach to the academic preparation differs from previous National Selection Conferences of EYP The Netherlands, and it is perfectly understandable if you have any questions or comments. Please feel free to contact us at academicprep@eyp.nl and we will do our best to help you in whatever way we can. Furthermore, your chairperson will also be in contact with you shortly, and is also available to help you with this process. Yours, The Chairs and Organising Team of Delft 2014

ACADEMIC PREPARATION Fact Sheets We ask you to compile a Fact Sheet, which is a list of 10 facts and their respective sources that are relevant for your committee topic. You can take the topic overview, prepared for you by your chairperson, as a starting point for your research. Once you have found 10 interesting facts about your topic, please enter them, as well as their respective sources, into the template. The Fact Sheet template can be downloaded through the following link. Furthermore, an example of a Fact Sheet can be downloaded here. Once you have filled in your facts and sources, please rename the document as follows. Fill in your committee abbreviation, as well as your first and last name, for example FACTSHEET_EMPL_NAME. When complete, please send your .xls file to academicprep@eyp.nl. We require you to send in your Fact Sheet before Sunday January 26th 23:59 CET, as this will give us ample time to prepare them for the session and send them to your chairperson. Furthermore, this will also give you plenty of time to start writing your position paper. Please do not include more than 10 facts. You are highly encouraged to find facts and sources that are not mentioned in the topic overview. Lastly, please remember to enter in your first and last name, as well as your committee and the words ‘fact sheet’ in the email topic! Please note that it will not be possible for us to collect and process any Fact Sheets sent in after this deadline. Position Papers After completing your Fact Sheet, we ask you to write a short essay on your topic: a Position Paper. In your Position Paper, please give a coherently structured answer to the topic, in which you describe the opinion that you have formed through doing your research. Please make sure that you include the information that you have found, and be sure not to simply copy your chair’s topic overview! Limit your position paper to 1 A4 in Times New Roman 14, with a maximum of 350 words. The Position Paper template can be downloaded through the following link. Furthermore, an example of a Position Paper can be downloaded here.

As with the Fact Sheet, once you have finished writing your Position Paper, please copy it into the template and rename the document. Fill in your committee abbreviation, as well as your first and last name, for example POSITION_PAPER_EMPL_NAME. When complete, please send it as a .doc file to academicprep@eyp.nl, again stating your first and last name, as well as your committee and the words ‘position paper’ in the email topic. We require you to send in your Position Paper before Wednesday February 5th 23:59 CET. Please not that it will not be possible for us to process your Position Paper after this deadline. Consent Forms Not related to your academic preparation, but nonetheless a prerequisite for participation is sending us a signed consent form. By doing this, you promise to abide by the Code of Conduct of EYP The Netherlands, which is accessible on our website www.eyp.nl . If you are under 18 years of age, please print out a copy of the following document, and have your parent or legal guardian sign it. This document can be downloaded through the following link. Alternatively, if you are over 18 years of age, please print out a copy of the following document, and sign it yourself. Subsequently, please scan it, and send it to us at academicprep@eyp.nl before Wednesday February 5th 23:59 CET. In short

When?

What?

Sunday January 12th 12 – 26th of January

Academic Preparation Kit published Research your topic and work on your Fact Sheet Deadline for handing in your Fact Sheet to academicprep@eyp.nl Work on your Position paper Deadline for handing in your Position Paper to academicprep@eyp.nl Deadline for handing in your Consent Form to academicprep@eyp.nl

Sunday January 26th 26th of January – 5th of February Wednesday 5th of February Wednesday 5th of February

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS I (AFET I) Ukrainian protests: Since December 2013, thousands of protesters have poured into the streets of the Ukrainian capital, angered by their government's move away from the European Union in favour of closer ties with Russia. What is the future for EUUkraine relations? By Christian Browne (UK) & Merel Blok (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Ukraine: Republic in Eastern Europe that gained independence from the Soviet Union in 1991. The authorities' attempt to rig the 2004 presidential elections led to the "Orange Revolution". The newly held elections led to Yulia Tymoshenko becoming Prime Minister and Viktor Yuschenko becoming President.



EU Neighbourhood Policy: Policy by the European Union to strengthen its bonds with non-EU Member States. It does aim to enlarge the EU and therefore does not offer the countries involved a possibility of EU-accession but instead focuses on social and democratic development.



Association Agreement: Main instrument of the European Union to bring neighbour countries closer to the EU.



Viktor Yanukovych's: Succeeded Tymoshenko during the elections in 2010 and currently is President of Ukraine, opposing Tymoshenko and Viktor Yushchenko.



Yulia Tymoshenko: Former Prime Minister of Ukraine. She is currently in prison serving 7 years on a charge of perverting her power concerning a gasdeal with Russia. She is an open EU-supporter.



Viktor Yuschenko: Former President of Ukraine. He was poisoned with dioxin during the Orange Revolution.



Gazprom: Russia’s biggest gas company which exports to large areas of Europe. 40% of Europe’s energy supply comes from Russia and Gazprom.

 Naftogas: Ukraine’s largest gas company which deals with Gazprom and imports gas from Russia which is exported to the rest of Europe. Naftogas

was caught in a dispute with Gazprom over rising supply prices in 2006, leading to a gas shortage.

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Being the European Union’s largest neighbouring country, and importing goods from the EU worth almost 24bn Euros in 2012, Ukraine is a very important partner for the EU. It was about to sign an Association Agreement with the EU when it announced a suspension of the preparations on the 21st of November. This decision sparked a series of rallies and pro-European protest which were violently dispersed by Ukrainian police. During this, human rights have been violated and several critics have been attacked. The EU has engaged itself both economically as well as politically to Ukraine by making it a priority partner country within the European Neighbourhood Policy (ENP) and the Eastern Policy (EaP). But with the newly signed agreement between Ukraine and Russia, Ukraine seems to move away from the EU and Europe in general. Therefore, now is the time to revise the situation and develop a new stance on the EU-Ukraine relationship.

Links: 

Report on Human Rights Violations: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25515950 http://www.dw.de/ukraine-activist-and-journalist-tetyana-chornovilbeaten/a-17323804



Report of the Protests: http://www.themalaymailonline.com/world/article/thousands-ring-innew-year-on-ukraines-protest-square http://edition.cnn.com/2013/12/08/world/europe/ukraine-protests/



Council of Europe’s conclusions on Ukraine: http://www.consilium.europa.eu/uedocs/cms_Data/docs/pressdata/EN /foraff/134136.pdf

3. KEY ACTORS After gaining independence from the Soviet Union in 1991, Ukraine has struggled to strike a balance between the European Union (EU) and Russia. This is mainly due to energy which Russia provides Ukraine as well as mush of Eastern Europe. The January 2006 Gas Crisis showed the detrimental effects which a breakdown between Ukraine and Russia can cause. The

dispute between Gazprom (Russia) and Naftogas (Ukraine), regarding increases in prices, caused Gazprom to shutdown supply to the East as well as parts of Central and Western Europe. This caused significant energy shortages which affected the heavily dependent Ukraine. Whilst there is much support for the EU within Ukraine, the government has trouble behaving impartially towards either side due the fact that without Russia’s gas supply there is no alternative currently in place, this was highlighted in 2006. The Ukrainian economy is also dependent on steel export, this has made it particularly vulnerable to the effects of global financial crises, such as 2008. In October of that year the country was given $16.5bn (£10.4bn) by the International Monetary Fund (IMF). An additional IMF bailout of $15bn (£9bn) was approved in 2010 but withdrawn the following year after the government failed to make the necessary financial reforms. The first protests occurred in late November, started because of President Viktor Yanukovych's decision to abandon an association agreement with the European Union in favour of closer ties with Russia. In response, Russia bought $15bn (£9.2bn; 10.9bn euros) of Ukrainian government bonds. This also saw the price of imports of natural gas on which Ukraine's economy depends reduced by a third. Links: 

BBC Overview of Ukrainian History and Infrastructure: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18018002



BBC Overview of the Protests: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-25032275

4. MAIN CONFLICTS The EU is demanding the release of Yulia Tymoshenko, 52, who is serving seven years in prison due to a highly controversial conviction on charges of ‘abuse of power’ over a gas deal with Russia. The EU has made clear it believes the campaign against Tymoshenko has been politically motivated. This request by the EU is an essential part of Ukraine becoming part of the Union, yet, there is a split opinion within the Ukrainian Parliament over whether she should be allowed to travel to Germany for medical treatment, and recently, a bill failed to pass which would’ve seen her released to be treated. The ENP is a joint initiative and therefore requires action from both sides, by the neighbouring nations and by the EU. The EU and the ENP cannot work effectively unless Ukraine choose to provide support, with new legislation Ukraine makes it harder for the ENP to function effectively. The ENP also

requires cooperative states which adhere to EU principles such as democracy and human rights; claims of corruption and the imprisonment of Yulia Tymoshenko again makes it harder for the ENP to work. Links: 

Profile: Yulia Tymoshenko: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-15249184



Profile: Viktor Yushchenko: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/4035789.stm

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK The January 2006 crisis leaves a reminder of Ukrainian dependence on Russian gas. The crisis was an economic dispute about the price Ukraine pays for Russian gas. The Russian gas giant, Gazprom, proposed to increase the price from $50 to $230 per 1,000 cubic metres. Ukraine rejected the increase and wanted any changes gradually implemented. This disagreement led to Gazprom cutting supplies to Ukraine on 1 January 2006. In 2004, the European Union developed its European Neighbourhood Policy with the aim of avoiding a new dividence between EU-memberstates and non-EU-memberstates. In 2011, the ENP was renewed with a focus on “the promotion of deep and sustainable democracy, accompanied by inclusive economic development” 1 The policy does not offer the possibility of accessing the European Union. The association agreement the EU and Ukraine were about to sign was aimed to deepen the relationship between the two. Currently, the relationship is based on the Partnership and Co-operation Agreement (PCA) signed in 1998. In 2008 the leaders of the EU and Ukraine decided the Association Agreement would be the succesor of the PCA.2 The Association Agreement attempts to bring Eastern Partnership-countries closer to EU standards. It consists of four general sections: Common Foreign and Security Policy; Justice and Home Affairs; the Deep and Comprehensive Free Trade Area (DCFTA); and a fourth chapter that covers a variety of issues (from enviroment to education). Links: 

BBC Overview of January 2006 Gas Crisis: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4569846.stm

http://eeas.europa.eu/enp/about-us/index_en.htm

http://eeas.europa.eu/top_stories/2012/140912_ukraine_en.htm



General explanation of the Association Agreement: http://www.rferl.org/content/eu-association-agreementexplained/25174247.html

6. ACADEMIA Statements by state officials: Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany: “I regret the decision of president Yanukovich not to sign the sweeping association and free trade agreement with the EU, at any rate not to sign it at present. But the offer remains on the table.”3 Merkel spoke of "structural problems" in the relationship with Russia. "At the moment, a turn towards Europe is always seen as a turn away from Russia." This "one-or-the-other mentality" must come to an end, she said. The chancellor called for the Kremlin not to pressure former Soviet Republics like Ukraine. "The Cold War is over. Countries must be able to make decisions freely."4 Dalia Grysbauskaite, President of Lithuania: “The actions of Russia towards countries like Ukraine, Moldova or Georgia show that this country still employs uncivilized methods," Grysbaukaite told the German newspaper Die Zeit. It is inconceivable "that a country in the 21st century would still blackmail other countries in this way,"5 Martin Schulz, President of the European Parliament: "I think we underestimated the drama of the domestic political situation in Ukraine," he told German public radio station Deutschlandfunk. “Ukraine has been in a deep economic and financial crisis since the introduction of democracy. They desperately need money and they desperately need a reliable gas supply. It is not especially popular in Europe to help states which are in a crisis ... and if you look at Moscow's proposals, they would offer Ukraine short-term assistance that we, as Europeans, cannot and do not want to afford."6 Victoria Nuland, Assistant Secretary of the United States “I hope the people of Ukraine know that the U.S. stands with you in your search for justice, for human dignity and security for economic health, and the European future that you have chosen and deserve,” Ms.

http://www.themalaymailonline.com/world/article/merkel-says-eu-offer-to-ukraine-still-on-

table#sthash.2egtNet5.dpuf 4

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/angela-merkel-open-to-ukraine-cooperation-after-trade-

deal-collapse-a-936155.html 5

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/angela-merkel-open-to-ukraine-cooperation-after-trade-

deal-collapse-a-936155.html 6

http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/angela-merkel-open-to-ukraine-cooperation-after-trade-

deal-collapse-a-936155.html

Nuland told reporters after a two-hour “tough but realistic” private talk with Mr. Yanukovych.7 Catherine Ashton, Foreign Relations Chief of the European Union: “I believe he should sign as soon as possible, because I think it’s in the interest of Ukraine to do so. I have to accept that what the president says to me is what he is saying to me for me to carry back the message. I made it perfectly clear that this is not the way to go forward. I made it perfectly clear that we expect to see discussion and dialogue with people who are using their right to assembly to make a peaceful demonstration.”8

Historical background Ukraine only exists as the republic it is nowadays since 1991, the demise of the Soviet Union. Before this break-up, it was part of the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR). Therefore, during the cold war 9 , it was part of the “Eastern Bloc”. Nowadays, Ukraine still largely depends on Russia for its energy-supplies10 but also has also become an important trade partner for the European Union11. It is safe to

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/dec/12/echoes-of-cold-war-in-ukraine-as-russia-battles-

we/?page=all 8

http://www.euronews.com/2013/12/12/catherine-ashton-in-talks-with-ukraine-about-a-trade-

agreement-with-europe/ 9

Period of policital tension between the Western Bloc (USA, NATO and several other countries) and the

Eastern Bloc (USSR and its Warsaw Pact allies) starting with the end of WOII and ending with the collapse of the Soviet Union 10

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18018002

http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/ukraine/

conclude it has “veered between seeking closer integration with Western Europe and reconciliation with Russia” ever since its independence.12 Not only the country’s external relations are complicated, it’s political and democratic structure and culture are also a difficult problem. The protests that are currently going on, started as a pro-European manifestation but after the violent repression by the government, became more anti-governmental. Its politics are very heavily influenced by large enterprises and business-groups. Almost every political party is either financially supported or established by so called oligarchs.13 With the 50 wealthiest people being responsible for 85% of the country’s GDP, Ukraine can be called an oligarchic democracy.1415

7. SUMMARY Ukraine is in a pivotal moment in its history, as public protest attempts to shape its relationship with the EU. It is the EUs responsibility to help strengthen ties with Ukraine, such policies as the ENP are helping do just that. However, Ukraine, much alike to other Eastern nations, is dependent on Russia for energy and trade. How can Ukraine function without Russia’s support, ensuring that there are no repeats of 2006?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-18018002

http://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/op-ed/ukraines-oligarchic-democracy-314991.html

http://www.jamestown.org/single/?no_cache=1&tx_ttnews%5Btt_news%5D=33765#.UshGh_TuIrU

According to the Oxford Dictionary : an oligarchy is “a small group of people having control of a

country or organization”

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN AFFAIRS II (AFET II) French weapons in Georgia, Italian combat helicopters and German communication technology in Libya: Global military conflicts evoke a booming international trade of arms in which the EU has become the world’s biggest supplier. How can the EU regulate its arms trading with the Middle East whilst not promoting conflict in the area and simultaneously preserving its trade relations? By Hugo Dürr (SE) & Fahad Saher Fahad (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT): United Nations (UN) Resolution 61/89 aiming to contribute to the international and regional peace, security, and stability by regulating the international trade in conventional arms and eradicate the illicit trade. It was adopted on April 2nd 2013



The Firearms Directive: The Directive 91/477/ECC, also known as the Firearms Directive, is a piece of legislation imposing certain restrictions on the circulation of civil firearms.



Conventional weapons: Weapons which are not nuclear, biological, nor chemical.

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM In the recent years there have been on-going efforts at the European Union (EU) level to strengthen and harmonise Member States' arms export policies. Some such examples have been laid out in the 1998 EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports16 (EU Code) and its successor, the 2008 EU Common Policy Position17. The European Union plays arguably one of the most significant roles in the Middle East when it comes to their influence in the international arms trade industry. Its influence is based on a foreign policy acquired through many years of engagement, the current level of EU dependence on Middle Eastern oil, as well as the international cooperation in the region such as the Euro-Mediterranean Free Trade Area 18 The EU Code of Conduct on Arms Exports is a politically binding instrument that seeks to create high common standards for all EU Members to use when making arms export decisions as well as to increase transparency among EU States on arms exports http://www.fas.org/asmp/campaigns/code/eucode.html. 17 Under the EU Council Common Position EU Member States exchange data on the financial value of their export licence approvals and actual exports along with information on their denials of arms export licences. http://www.sipri.org/research/armaments/transfers/transparency/EU_reports 18 The EMFTA is a trade bloc in the Mediterranean Region and the Middle East established in 2010 which eliminates tariffs, import quotas, and preferences on most goods and services traded between them. 16

(EMFTA). Weapon contractors, like other profit-making corporations, are not particularly interested in the general economic development of the countries in which they operate or to which they sell. Their primary interest and motivation after all is in selling their products and generating profit. During 2006â&#x20AC;&#x201C;10, 23% per cent of all major arms transfers to the Middle East went to the United Arab Emirates (the 6th largest arms importer worldwide in that period). These mostly came from the USA, France, Italy and Russia (who are still key suppliers of arms to the UAE), as well as at least 10 other countries that are also supplying major arms to the country. International transfers of conventional weapons to Israel (the second largest arms importer in the region) were on the decline in 2010 after the delivery of 102 F-16I combat aircraft, financed by the USA, completed in 2009. However, US military aid to Israel continued. In light of the United Nation's (UN) efforts to curb the illegitimate arms trade, the UN General Assembly has adopted the Arms Trade Treaty (ATT). In accordance with the terms of the treaty, the responsibilities rest on the supplier or exporter (state) to ensure that the weapons sold are not diverted to perpetrate human rights abuse or genocides. The key focus of the ATT therefore is to regulate the international arms transfers, which include export, import, shipment, and transit. At the same time, the arms trade has become more globalised, with weapons assembled using components from around the world. This has exposed major loopholes in existing arms regulations that allow the supply of weapons and weapon components to embargoed destinations. Faced with an arms industry that operates globally, governments cannot rely solely on national control systems and legislation; effective control of a global arms trade requires new international standards and regulations based on international law. Despite the efforts to create mechanisms of consultation and information exchange to achieve a common interpretation of agreed criteria for assessing arms transfers at the EU level, states continue to maintain final control of all aspects of arms export licensing, leading to on-going differences in how states license arms exports as well as in their decision-making on transfers to particular end-users and destinations. EU Member States have been criticised for their arms export to states in the Middle East and North Africa in the years preceding the Arab Spring. Consequently, longstanding debates about the extent to which the EU Common Policy Position has truly led to a harmonisation of Member States' arms export policies. Naturally, such reasoning calls upon the EU to act in order to fight for human rights. On the other hand, the Middle East provides the EU with a huge proportion of its imported energy; namely 45% of oil imports in 2012 to the EU. Such dependence on Middle http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/regions/euro-mediterranean-partnership/

Eastern countries for its energy consumption translates to a strong relationship with these countries. How can the EU upkeep these trading relationships and ensure continued energy supply while still attempting to reconsider the significance of arms in the partnership?

Links: 

The SIPRI Arms Trade Database: http://www.sipri.org/databases/armstransfers



The social, political, and economic ties between the EU and Middle East: http://testpolitics.pbworks.com/w/page/24737344/Relations%20Betwe en%20Europe%20and%20Middle%20East

3. KEY ACTORS With an issue as internationally encompassing as this, there are several actors and stakeholders to take into account, including the different EU institutions, weapons corporations, and organisations. They all play a vital part in the intricate set up of this subject. The first of the EU institutions to mention is the European Council, which is made up of the heads of state or government of every EU Member State, the Commission President and the European Council President. Its role is twofold: to set the general political direction and priorities of the EU and also to deal with complex or sensitive issues that cannot be resolved at a lower level of intergovernmental cooperation. Though influential in setting the EU political agenda, such as the general direction of the EU’s Common Policy Position on arms trade, it has no actual powers to pass laws. Second to consider is the European Commission, which represents and upholds the interests of the EU as a whole. It oversees and implements EU policies, whose direction are set by the European Council by way of: proposing new laws to Parliament and the Council; managing the EU's budget and allocating funding; enforcing EU law (together with the Court of Justice); and representing the EU internationally, for example, by negotiating agreements between the EU and other countries. All these competencies of the Commission are relevant to this issue, as it will be the job of the Commission to propose any changes to the EU arms trading policy, as well as act as the adjudicator on circumstances where Member States do not adhere to EU policy, and finally also the Commission will be the institute who will be the negotiation link between the EU and the Middle East by means of the European

External Action Service (EEAS). The EEAS, the last of the EU institutions directly relevant to this topic, is equivalent to the foreign office of the EU. The service manages the diplomatic relations of the EU with non-member countries. It aims to make the foreign policy of the EU consistent and more efficient, thereby increasing Europe's influence in the world. Another major role of the EEAS is to support the EU’s strategic partnerships with key international players and its engagement with emerging powers around the world. The EEAS works closely with the UN and other leading powers such as the United States and Russia, and is in constant talks with the Middle East19. In terms of corporations, the Airbus Group, formerly known as the European Aeronautic Defence and Space Company (EADS) 20 , is a global pan-European aerospace and defence corporation registered in the Netherlands, and a defence and military contractor worldwide. The group has several division; Airbus, which manufactures commercial aircrafts, and Airbus Military which manufactures tanker, transport and mission aircraft; Eurocopter, the world's largest helicopter supplier; Astrium, providing systems for aerial, land, naval and civilian security applications including Ariane, Galileo and Cassidian. Through Cassidian, the Airbus Group is a partner in the missile systems provider MBDA, which has supplied the Mica air-toair and Exocet anti-ship missiles in the Gulf region. The Group has a number of representative offices in the Middle East region, and the founding companies of EADS have had a presence in the Gulf region since the 1970s, with more than 600 helicopters being flown by both civil and military users21. EADS has been a longstanding partner of the Gulf Cooperation Council States, including the UAE, and plans to develop its partnership policy further for future programmes.

Links: 

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



Bloomsberg article on EADS target exports: http://www.businessweek.com/news/2013-12-19/eads-targets-exportsurge-from-slimmed-down-defense-operations

The EU’s homepage on its individual institutions http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutionsbodies/index_en.htm 20 EADS changes its name to the Airbus Group http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/9e29cfb0-73be-11e3-a0c000144feabd c0.html#axzz2pQNQ7zAD 21 The Airbus Group in the Middle East and their divisions: http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache :cTvAg8YMc98J:www.eads.com/eads/int/en/our-company/key-markets/The-Middle-East.html+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=se 19

4. MAIN CONFLICTS After the United States, the European Union is the biggest global arms exporter. Therefore a good European arms export policy will contribute to global stability and peace, whereas a sloppy policy comes with great risks. The role of Germany is crucial: Germany is the biggest EU arms exporter, and the third biggest global arms exporter; with an 11% share of all military exports in the period 2006-2010 (after the US with 30% and Russia with 23%)22. Other EU Member States also made up the top exporters: France (7%), UK (4%), Netherlands (3%), Spain (3%), Italy (2%), and Sweden (2%). These percentages remain relatively unchanged today, whilst the value of the traded goods rise. With the arms trade industry as profitable as it is today, we are faced with a worrying dilemma: that death is arguably too lucrative. Based on the aforementioned dilemma, the issue of human rights must be taken into account. According to Article 6 of the ATT, a state may not engage in any form of trade â&#x20AC;&#x153;if it has knowledge at the time of authorisation that the arms or items would be used in the commission of genocide, crimes against humanity, grave breaches of the Geneva Conventions of 1949, attacks directed against civilian objects or civilians protected as such, or other war crimes as defined by international agreements.â&#x20AC;?23 This clause, however, does not carry as much weight as it may sound. A state cannot always know for certain what their exports will be used for; therefore it is an unfeasible feat to keep track of this in all cases. Additionally, even if a state is aware of the intentions of the purchaser, it is difficult to prove that this is in fast the case. Furthermore, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Poland, Greece, Ireland and the United Kingdom reportedly did not supply data concerning the value of arms exports, and Sweden declined to report the number of export licenses issued 24 . Additionally, France and Italy did not provide information on the number of licenses issued or the value of the export licenses. In a time where the western world needs to rebuild its credibility in the Middle East amongst its civil society, the EU becomes subject to discussion. More than ever a strong and transparent policy is needed to reflect Member States' values towards the Middle East. The EU is still seen as a bridge builder and thus expected to act strong in finding consensus. Another issue that one must not forget, as touched upon earlier, is the huge dependence which the EU places in the Middle East region on energy imports, which in 2012 accounted for as much as 45% of oil imports to the EU25. With the future aim The SIPRI Arms Transfers Database: http://www.sipri.org/databases/armstransfers The Arms Trade Treaty (ATT): United Nations (UN) Resolution 61/89, Article 6 24 As reported by the NY Times in March 2012: http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/06/world/europe/06iht-letter06.html 25 EU legislation on energy summary: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/energy/external_dimension_enlargement/l27037_en.htm 22 23

for a reduction of natural gas imports from Russia, and the hope of a more stable supplier in the Middle East, this number looks likely to rise. This means that as the EU being so bound by energy, the Middle East is correspondingly dependent economically. With such strong ties between these two regions, will it be possible to reduce the export of arms, as is the hope of the ATT, whilst still preserving the reliable and stable import of oil, all the while upholding the arrangements of the ATT? A lingering question however, is if this is really a question on trade relations, or is it rather a question of economics vs. morality?

Subsequently, it is relevant to bring up a more intangible debate of international relations: the debate that is between liberalists - or rather neoliberals - and realists. The question, as a realist would argue, is whether a state should hold itself and its own self-interest in highest regard, engage in trade for its own economic gain, all the while perhaps sparring a troubled nation into further turmoil? On the other hand, a neoliberal would argue that, the state of affairs should be evaluated on an international level, where international interests supersede the national agenda. This would entail that reducing the amount of arms traded, and would consequently lead to a decline in national income for exporting nations. As a result though, would this not benefit all states on the whole; reducing the risk of war, benefitting the relations between states and arguably taking the morally correct path? Links: ď&#x201A;ˇ

Economist article on the passing of the ATT: http://www.economist.com/news/international/21575751-vote-unweek-arms-trade-treaty-could-save-many-lives-killer-deal

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Amnesty International on arms control and human rights: http://www.amnesty.org/en/campaigns/control-arms

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK In 1998 the European Union adopted the politically-binding Code of Conduct on Arms Exports26. Since then, several positive achievements and breakthroughs have been made at the EU level, with the Common Foreign and Security Policy (CFSP)27 as one of its ground breakers. Member States have made an effort to agree on a This code builds on the Common Criteria for Arms Exports as adopted in 1991 and 1992. The adoption of this Code marked a new stage in the EU's development of a common approach to arms exports as an important element of the Common Foreign and Security Policy. (Source: http://ec.europa.eu/external_relations/cfsp/sanctions/codeofconduct.pdf) 27 The EU's Foreign Policy relies primarily on diplomacy accompanied by trade and aid where deemed necessary to resolve conflict. This link should provide you with a proper legal framework regarding the CFSP: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/institutional_affairs/treaties/lisbon_treaty/ai0025_en.htm 26

Common Military List28 of equipment covered by the EU Code (which implements the Common Rules on Export of Military Technology and Equipment29), a Common Position on Arms Brokering

, and an EU Code Userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Guide to assist

implementation. In December 2008 the EU Code was replaced with the legally binding EU Common Position31 on the control of exports of military technology and equipment. It provided for exchanges of information between the EU Member States, public transparency and accountability, and a more restrictive arms export. The EU wishes to contribute to improving the regulations of arms trade at global level by enhancing the control systems for the international arms trade. As a result, in 2010 the Council Decision32 on EU activities showed its support of the Arms Trade Treaty by integrating it into the framework of the European Security Strategy33. While UN Treaties are not necessary legally binding in the EU sphere, all EU Member States are signatories of the UN. Thus, with all EU Member States having signed the treaty, the ATT automatically becomes part of the EUâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s policies and therefore integrated into the framework of the European Security Strategy. Subsequently, a motion for a resolution was submitted in order to contribute to the preparatory work for an Arms Trade Treaty and to improve arms trade control system between United Nations Member States. Finally, at an international level, the United Nations sealed the negotiations on the legally binding Arms Trade Treaty to regulate the import, export, and transfers in conventional arms at the highest possible common international standard in 2013. Whereas the ATT is a legally-binding agreement that establishes common international standards, it is not an arms control treaty per se. In other words, the ATT does not have the authority to place restrictions on the types or quantities of arms that may be bought, sold, or possessed by national governments.

The Common Military List is a list of equipment covered by the European Union Code of Conduct on Arms Exports. 29http://www.complianceandrisks.com/regulations/eu-common-rules-on-export-of-military-technologyand-equipment-common-position-2008-944-cfsp-5468/ 30 The EU CPAB is aimed at regulating the arms trade. This Common Position establishes a set of provisions to be implemented through national legislation, requiring the Member States to take all necessary measures to control brokering activities on their territory or carried out by brokers of their nationality. 31 The EU Common Position (208/944/CFSP) defines the common rules of exports of military technology and equipment which contains common criteria which Member States agree to apply when issuing arms export licenses as well as mechanisms of information and consultation. 32 The Council expressed its support by establishing common international standards for the import, export, and transfers of conventional weapons in order to stimulate a common contribution towards the reinforcements of international peace and security. The full Council Decision (2013/43/CFSP) can be found here: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2013:020:0053:0056:EN:PDF 33 The EU's 2003 security strategy aimed at achieving a secure Europe, identifying the threats facing the Union, and defining its strategic objectives for the future. 28

Consequently, the ATT does not impact a state's domestic gun control laws nor does it hold the legislative power over national firearm policies. As of December 2013 the treaty has been signed by 115 states, and has been ratified or recognised by 8. It will come into effect only after being ratified or enforced by 50 states.

Links: ď&#x201A;ˇ

The European Union External Action on Arms Export Control: http://www.eeas.europa.eu/non-proliferation-anddisarmament/arms-export-control/

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Factsheet Arms Trade Treaty: http://www.armscontrol.org/factsheets/arms_trade_treaty

6. ACADEMIA The argument mentioned earlier about how Article 6 of the ATT is not always something that be easily assessed, has been showed several times in only recent history. Examples of this became painfully visible during the 2011 Arab spring, when European arms were used against peaceful civilians demonstrating for democracy. For many years European governments had ignored warnings of Peace and Human Rights Organisations, and had given Arab dictators the benefit of the doubt considering arms export license applications. The French government, for example, granted an export license for tear gas to Tunisia in December 201034. Thanks to an attentive French customs official, the transfer was stopped at a French airport but the French government cancelled the license only after the Ben Ali government had fallen. The United Kingdom exported shotguns, tear gas canisters and stun grenades to Bahrain which were used by the riot police when clearing the Pearl Roundabout35. The Netherlands exported armoured vehicles to Egypt and Bahrain, which were used against civil protesters36. Germany not only sold a production line for guns to Saudi Arabia but also exported anti-tank missiles to Algeria, Egypt and Libya, amongst others37. The armoured cars which literally drove over protesting Copts in Egypt were allegedly of German origin. It is clear that Article 6 of the ATT is

34 35

The SIPRI Arms Transfers Database:http://portal.sipri.org/publications/pages/transfer/splash Article from The Guardian: Bahrain uses UK-supplied weapons in protest crackdown:

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/ feb/17/bahrain-crackdown-uk-arms-sales Amnesty International: http://www.amnesty.org/en/news/recent-bloodshed-underscores-urgent-needhalt- arms-transfers-egypt-2013-08-20 37 Deutscher Bundestag: Drucksache 17/6856, p.28 and: BMWi: Schreiben an Jan van Aken MdB: Schriftliche Fragen an die Bundesregierung, Frage Nr.67, 12.9.2011 36

certainly filled with good intentions, but looking at the history of the issue, it may need to be amended into something more concrete. Germany has always had a greater influence in Middle Eastern affairs than other Western powers, primarily due to Berlin being more focused on its economic interests and soft-power, rather than military intervention. The resolute opposition that Germany took to the Western-led campaigns in Iraq and Libya to enforce a Western-influenced regime, as well as its tendency to avoid partnerships with Israel’s enemies, have impelled experts to describe Germany’s Middle Eastern policy as one of purposeful “benign neglect”. However, a combination of domestic factors and recent geopolitical developments in the Arab world have prompted Germany to become a major arms supplier for the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) states, underscoring the notion that geo-strategic and economic interests drive states’ foreign policies. Germany’s historical past led it to self-impose restrictions on international arms sales, the purpose of which was to avoid the transfer of weapons into the hands of governments in conflict zones or those that disrespected human rights. For decades after the War, most German arms sales were made under the auspices of the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation, but the Merkel government ended this policy after the Euro crisis and “Arab Awakening” erupted. In 2011, Berlin and Riyadh struck a multi-billion euro arms deal whereby the Saudis agreed to purchase hundreds of German-manufactured tanks. In 2012, Germany supplied Saudi Arabia with €1.24 billion of military hardware. The following year, a German defence firm (KraussMaffei Wegmann) won a contract worth €1.89 billion to supply Qatar with artillery systems and 86 tanks. According to the German government, German arms exports to the GCC amounted to €817 million in the first half of 2013 on track to exceed the €1.42 billion reached in 2012 — which was already more than double the previous year38. This is evidence enough to back up the claim made earlier, that Germany is the biggest EU arms exporter, and the third biggest global arms exporter, making it an extremely influential player in the international arena.

Links: 

Dr.J.Jeganaathan, professor at Institute of Peace and Conflict Studies, New Delhi, take on ATT: http://diplomacyandforeignaffairs.com/un-arms-trade-treaty-att-anon-starter/

Foreign Policy: German trade of arms to the Middle East: http://www.internationalpolicydigest.org/2013/08/24/german-arms-sales-middle-east/ 38



Video of Foreign Office Minister Alistair Burt explaining why the British government is supporting the ATT: https://www.gov.uk/government/news/arms-trade-treaty-at-the-ungeneral-assembly

7. SUMMARY “We cannot be both the world's leading champion of peace and the world's leading supplier of the weapons of war.”39 These are the words of Jimmy Carter during a 1976 campaign speech, in the midst of the Cold War. As relevant as it was then, the sentiment is just as valuable now. The EU, as an advocate of peace and democracy and European ways, cannot, by definition, sustain being one of the largest exporters of arms on the global stage. With the EU currently relying on the Middle East, not only economically from arms trade, but also dependent on the Middle Eastern oil, the world is only becoming smaller, and the reasons to this are troubling. This then very quickly becomes a question of morality: can we allow ourselves to potentially fuel bloodshed for our own economic gain? Additionally, with the integration of the ATT into EU Policy, there are several adjustments that Member States will have to adhere to. The question can then be asked: should regulation of arms trade lie within the competency of the EU? Should Member States not get to choose themselves what and with whom they trade? Another issue brought up is if the ATT is solid enough to have an impact on the issue of illicit arms trading? Or if it is too similar to the Oslo Accord, full of loopholes and grey areas, and thus will potentially have little impact?

The Role of U.S. Arms Transfers in Human Rights Violations- World Policy Institute: http://www.worldpolicy.org/projects/arms/reports/testimony030701.htm 39

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND RURAL DEVELOPMENT (AGRI) Harvesting a better Europe: With recent CAP reforms aiming to make agriculture in the EU more competitive and sustainable, how should the CAP resolve dealing with global food markets and non-EU farmers? By Bram van Meldert (BE) & Bernet Meıjer (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) The CAP is the common policy for all EU member states that sets standards for the agricultural sector. The CAP also implements a system of subsidies and other programmes that deal with food safety and production.



Agricultural sector The agricultural sector can also be referred to as farming and it encompasses the cultivation of organisms for products such as food, fibre and bıofuels. In this overview however, we will be referring to the agricultural sector as mostly the food-producing sector.

Links: 

Brief outline of the CAP: http://www.ecpa.eu/information-page/agriculture-today/common-agriculturalpolicy-cap



Introductive video on the history of the CAP: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vu1PYTqupec

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM In 1962, the CAP started operating as a result of strong collaboration in the European Community. Since then, the CAP has been growing as more regulations were added and adapted. Last year, the CAP budget represented 37,8 % of the entire annual EU budget40. This way, agriculture has become one of the EU flagship areas. As such a large proportion of the EU budget is allocated to the CAP subsidies, there has been a lot of criticism on the effectiveness and necessity of the expenses. The 40

Overview of the CAP reform 2014-2020 by the EC: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-

perspectives/policy-briefs/05_en.pdf

CAP has been under constant revision but only in 2013 the entire CAP was reviewed all at once. The European Parliament (EP), the Council and the European Commission (EC) have reached a political agreement on the reform of the CAP for the period of 2014-2020. With this reform, the EU aims to focus on sustainability of the EU agricultural sector. However, besides looking at the European agricultural sector, there is also a significant international aspect on the issue. The agricultural sector is globalising, the EU depends on food supplies in the rest of the world and (even more so) vice-versa. Taking into account national and international interests, what influence has the current CAP on the global food market, and what influence should it have?

Links: 

BBC Questions & Answers on the CAP and its recent reforms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-11216061



‘The Ciolos CAP reform’ by capreform.com: http://capreform.eu/the-ciolos-cap-reform/

3. KEY ACTORS The institutions that are responsible for the legislative area of this topic and that develop the content of the CAP are the European Commission, the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union (not to be confused with the Council of Europe or the European Council). Although in most situations these three EU bodies have different tasks, during the latest CAP reform they all worked together as co-legislators. Therefore they can be considered as equally powerful in the legislative process of the CAP. Their respective interests differ in accordance to the prerogatives of the composing members of these institutions. A second group of people and organisations to which a healthy agricultural sector is a major concern are farmers. Depending on the size of their companies, farmers can either group up in organisations or try to negotiate themselves with national and international institutions. In the EU, farmers can exert pressure on the EU institutions to speed up their decision-making process, as they have done in the beginning of last year41. However they have their biggest power in negotiations with national governments on how to specifically implement the CAP. On the other side, the CAP is also a concern for non-EU farmers. These farmers want to be able to export their goods and sell them in their own countries. They however compete with

Article by Euractiv.com: http://www.euractiv.com/cap/farm-groups-call-cap-deal-june-news-528348

EU farmers, who get large export subsidies that may damage the non-EU farmer’s profits. The World Health Organisation (WHO) has a major interest in protecting citizens around the world from harmful foodstuffs. It has put pressure on the EU to reform the CAP, caused by the organisation’s concerns of the excessive food that has been produced in the EU due to CAP subsidies. Lastly, citizens play a specifically important role in this topic. As the CAP deals with agriculture and thus with the food market, citizens have concern over an efficient and accurate agricultural sector to ensure their food safety and supplies. Food safety has not always been self-evident, as was shown by the horsemeat scandal from last year and the noise about genetically modified organisms.

Links: 

Video outlining the work and bodies of the EU: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCUF5t1kRlI



Website of copa-cogeca, international farmers’ organisation. The first document gives a clear outline on the farmers’ stance on the reformed CAP: http://www.copa-cogeca.be/CAP.aspx

4. MAIN CONFLICTS The two major issues related to the global food market that derive from the CAP itself can generally be divided in two sections that correspond with the structure of the CAP. The CAP consists of two pillars, the first being the production support, and the second, rural development. Production support covers market-related expenditure and direct payments and accounts for 76,6% of the total CAP budget42. Here we immediately come across the first cause of a conflict, namely the direct payments. Direct payments are payments granted directly to farmers that fall under certain support schemes. These payments provide nearly half of the farmers’ income in the EU43. This seems as a good thing to European farmers, yet there have been several criticisms on the current system. The main arguments against direct payments are firstly that the payments are not allocated in a fair way (Western European farmers 42

Overview of the CAP reform 2014-2020 by the EC: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-

perspectives/policy-briefs/05_en.pdf BBC Questions & Answers on the CAP and its recent reforms: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/worldeurope-11216061 43

seem to get more payments than the Eastern, big farming companies get large payments) and secondly, and more importantly for this topic, that non-EU farmers suffer from the cheap products that the EU food market can offer due to these payments. Cheap EU products, sometimes even below cost price, are sold, in particular, on small and open markets in third world countries44. These products might be welcomed by local citizens, but will in the end impede the development of those countries’ economies. Also the second pillar has been under criticism. There is a discussion about the budget for rural development 45 . Agricultural activities in rural areas include agricultural production, farming methods and protection of the environment against negative impacts of these activities.

Rural development, to a certain amount

supported by the CAP, is directly linked to innovation and the EU’s 2020 strategy for inclusive growth, set up by the EU to (amongst others) increase international competitiveness of the EU market. Another process in which the EU influences the global food market is EU’s implementation of variable import levies. Through increasing or lowering the duties on food imports, the EU protects its citizens from the pass-through of higher world market prices. Although the EU citizens benefit from the measure, variable import levies have a destabilising effect on world markets. This effect can be particularly high as the EU is, together with the United States, a main player in the global food market. Lastly, an element that needs to be considered while forming an opinion on this topic is environmental protection. The EU has included environmental protection both in the first and the second pillar, although critics say that the reformed CAP does not seem to have much potential for additional environmental benefits 46 . The fight against climate change remains a main goal of the EU 2020 strategy and is therefore relevant to be related to this issue of the agricultural sector.

Links: 

Globalising hunger: food security and the EU’s CAP. Please read through chapter 4: CAP impacts on the global south http://www.tni.org/files/download/CAPpaper-draft_0.pdf

Article by Eurostep: http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/farm-cn.htm

Development of rural areas through the CAP 2020 and Europe 2020 strategies:

http://www.wne.sggw.pl/czasopisma/pdf/PRS_2011_T11(26)_z3_s161.pdf 46

Article: The Ciolos Cap reform: http://capreform.eu/the-ciolos-cap-reform/



Article by Eurostep on the influence of the CAP on developing countries: http://www.twnside.org.sg/title/farm-cn.htm



Development of rural areas through the CAP 2020 and Europe 2020 strategies: http://www.wne.sggw.pl/czasopisma/pdf/PRS_2011_T11(26)_z3_s161.pdf

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK The most important policy aspects of the CAP will be outlined below. It is important to be kept in mind that the CAP encompasses much more than this and it is worthwhile to have a look at details of this policy as well. A few measures that are linked to the direct-payment system have been revised in the CAP reform of 2013. First of all, the EU will continue to eradicate all direct payments linked to production. Secondly, the first pillar will undergo a ‘greening’ process: the EU proposes to link at least 30% of the direct payment amount to environmental requirements that farmers will need to meet in order to get the amount. Additionally, young farmers are stimulated to enter the sector through additional payments. Apart from these measures and directions set to allocate more funds to small farmers, the CAP offers a great flexibility to the Member States in implementation of the direct payments.

The legislation on import tariffs was set in 1987 by the Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87. It mostly deals with the constitution of the TARIC, the online integrated Community Tariff47. This is a database which all measure on EU tax are integrated. Through this system, TARIC ensures that all measures are uniformly applied in all Member States. Agriculture is one of TARIC’s main categories of measures. Links: 

Overview of CAP reform 2014-2020: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/policy-perspectives/policy-briefs/05_en.pdf



TARIC: Taxation and Customs Union by the EC: http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/customs/customs_duties/tariff_aspects/custo ms_tariff/index_en.htm

6. ACADEMIA 47

The community tariff is a rate of duty that applies to import of goods across the external borders of the EU. The rates are the same for all countries but they differ from one kind of import to another depending on what they are and where they come from.

As the CAP has been under revision since its creation and has outlived some crises, it is useful to know what issues there have been exactly in the past 50 years of the CAP. The first goals of the CAP in 1962 were food security and improving productivity. These goals were met soon but the CAP turned out to be a victim of its own success in the 70’s and 80’s: excessive amounts of food were produced that led to food mountains. These surpluses were either stored, transferred to developing countries or fed to animals. In 1992, the CAP solved the problem of the surpluses by shifting to producer support and instead of market support. This was when the direct payment system was implemented. Also, the CAP focuses more on environmental friendliness and food quality. Also development of rural areas started to be supported by CAP funds. Around 2005, the CAP became more internationally orientated. The EU has become the largest importer from developing countries and also opens up their market to developing countries, unlike other developed countries. In 2011, parts of the CAP have been revised to focus on economic en ecological competitiveness. The internationally orientated policies of the CAP have been the same since 2005 until now, even after the 2013 CAP reform.

Links: 

European farm policy down the years: http://ec.europa.eu/agriculture/50-years-of-cap/files/history/timeline_2012_en.pdf



The Common Agricultural Policy: a brief introduction: http://www.iatp.org/files/451_2_100145_0.pdf

7. SUMMARY Agriculture as the flagship of inter-European collaboration: the agricultural sector has been under constant revision and criticism because of its importance to the EU economy. The regulations that resulted from common farmers’ and EU interests have been collected in the CAP. Still now, as the global food market is facing new challenges, the CAP is a vibrant core for discussion. Some have concerns over the effect of the CAP and EU import tariffs on of developing countries, substantiated by economical or moral arguments. These arguments are accompanied and opposed by environmental concerns and protecting interests of the EU’s own citizens. Should the EU view its domestic economy as a priority over everything, or is the CAP merely a result of excessive protectionism? Are direct payments to stay in the future, or what could be the alternatives to enhance the EU’s 28

position in the food market? What is fair and right to do when both European and global interests are at stake?

COMMITTEE ON HUMAN RIGHTS (DROI) Following the 2011 Poly Implant Prosthesis (PIP) scandal, where for up to a decade hundreds of thousands of women worldwide were given substandard breast implants, proposals to toughen up European Union legislation on medical devices was passed. What stance should the EU adopt in matters involving the testing of medicines and medical devices? by Floris Rijssenbeek (NL) and Monica Moisin (RO)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Medical device: is an instrument, apparatus, implant, in vitro reagent, or similar or related article that is used to diagnose, prevent, or treat a disease or other conditions, and does not achieve its purposes through chemical action within or on the body.



Notified bodies: are organizations or companies designated by the EU Member States to carry out control of manufacturers of medium- and highrisk medical devices. There are about 80 notified bodies for medical devices in the EU.



Medical Device Directive (MD Directive): is intended to harmonise the legislation on medical devices within the European Union. In order for a manufacturer to legally place a medical device on the European market the requirements of the MD Directive have to be met.



Transposition: is a process by which the European Union's Member States give force to a directive by passing appropriate implementation measures. The European Commission closely monitors that transposition is timely, correctly done and implemented, so as to attain the results intended.



CE mark: states that the product is assessed before being placed on the market and meets EU safety, health and environmental protection requirements.



Poly Implant Prosthesis (PIP): is a French company, which distributed defective breast implants around the world. The firm's products were banned in 2010 after it emerged industrial quality silicone was being used. Implants should be made from medical quality material that has passed safety tests for use in/on the human body. The implants had double the rupture rate of other implants, but were not found to be toxic or carcinogenic.

Links: 

CE mark: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/single-marketgoods/cemarking/index_en.htm



BBC: PIP breast implants health scare: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-16391522



CNN: Breast implant scandal: What went wrong: http://edition.cnn.com/2012/01/27/world/europe/pip-breast-implantscandal-explained/



Regulatory framework on medical devices: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/regulatoryframework/index_en.htm



How to prevent medical devices from posing a health risk: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/regulatoryframework/index_en.htm

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Poly Implant Prosthesis was a French company founded in 1991 that was once the world's third largest supplier of implants. In 2010 however, breast implants made by the French company were banned after it was discovered that they contained industrial-grade, which has more contaminants than the medical-grade gel they should have used. The implants were believed to have a higher than normal incidence of rupture and in that case they could cause inflammation, scarring and fibrosis, causing harm to thousands of women around the world. Concerns over PIP’s implants have led some to call for greater regulation of medical devices. The vast majority of Medical Devices, are regulated by the Medical Devices Directive (MDD). Medical devices that comply with the national transpositions of the Directive can be affixed with the CE mark and sold throughout Europe. The European regulatory system for medical devices is risk-based. As the risks related to the use of a device increase, so does the level of regulatory control. The MDD requires that manufacturers determine the classification of their devices based on a set of rules.48 The four classes of devices are class I (lowest risk), class IIa (lower intermediate risk), class IIb (higher intermediate risk), and class III (highest risk). 48

Official european of rules for classifiaction of medical devices: Annex IX: http://www.lne-

gmed.com/pdf/en/annex9-directive-93-42-amended.pdf

The conformity assessment procedures, which are necessary for demonstrating compliance with the MDD, are carried out under the sole responsibility of the manufacturer for devices in class I. For devices in the higher risk classifications, the intervention of a third party conformity assessment body, called a “Notified Body” is required. (In the PIP case, that national regulator was the Agence Francaise de Securite Sanitaire des Produits de Sante (AFSSAPS). Another example would be TUV Rheinland, which is notified body in Germany. Notified bodies are designated by Member State Competent Authorities to carry out conformity assessment procedures. Although serious problems were not found until 2010, the fraudulent activity reportedly began in 2001, allowing hundreds of thousands of silicone breast implants of varying quality to be implanted in unsuspecting patients. Why were these problems not discovered by the Notified Body? The Notified Bodies stated that these materials must have been replaced with the substandard materials once the auditors left the premises. It is necessary to examine the Notified Bodies audit reports and relevant PIP design and manufacturing documentation, in ordert to discuss how the Notified Body audits are performed, be informed of whether or not the french Notfied Body preannounced its inspection, and consider any differences between how the Notified Body audits and inspection were conducted.

The PIP incident clearly shows that the EU legislative framework for medical devices, even after the transposition of the last piece of the EU legislation on medical devices into national legislation, still suffers from a terrible lack of transparency and is unsuitable to the necessary surveillance of new medical devices. In short: “The current legislation exposes patients to unjustified risks and harm“.49 Links: 

Explanation EU legislation: http://eipg.eu/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/EIP12-Mar12-P4.pdf



Call for stricter controls on medical devices: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/newsroom/content/20130923IPR20607/html/Health-MEPs-call-for-strictercontrols-on-medical-devices

 49

Patients' safety must be reinforced:

Franz Terwey, President of the European Social Insurance Platform (ESIP) Link:

http://www.euractiv.com/health/medical-devices-regulation-patie-analysis-530419

http://www.euractiv.com/health/medical-devices-regulation-patie-analysis530419

3. KEY ACTORS There are several key actors and but one key actor seems to be right in the middle of all conflicts: Notified Body. These agencies may designate that a medical device conforms to the EU Medical Devices Directive, which defines the standards for medical devices. With this Declaration of Conformity, the manufacturer can label the product with the CE Mark, which is required for distribution and sale in the EU. The French Notified Body discovered the use of substandard device materials in PIP, removed the devices from the market and conducted analytical testing to evaluate the health risks. However there were also the ones which allowed the distribution and sale of PIP implants. In response to this the European Commission published proposals for new regulations. The proposal aims to give member states more control over the organisations that check the medical devices before they are allowed on the market. The proposals also contain boosting public access to clinical data, creating a new approach to labelling medical devices, and creating a new advisory body of experts. The Medical Devices sector demands facilitation of the activities of enterprises and to ensure that the high growth rates to be observed in the medical devices sector can be maintained. Together with the Commission, the European Parliament will in the end, examine the proposed regulations and vote on the proposed amendments.

Links: 

List of Notified Bodies: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/newapproach/nando/?fuseaction=country.main



European Commission proposals: http://www.emdt.co.uk/article/proposed-new-european-medical-deviceregulations



The medical technology industry: http://www.eucomed.org/key-themes/medical-devices-directives/the-eusystem-for-medical-devices

4. MAIN CONFLICTS

In an internal market – the term internal market refers stricly to the EU which comprises 28 Member States – where does this 32 come from? with 32 participating countries and subject to constant technological and scientific progress, substantial divergences in the interpretation and application of the rules have emerged, thus undermining the main objectives of the directives, i.e. the safety of medical devices and their free movement within the internal market. Moreover, regulatory gaps or uncertainties exist with regard to certain products (e.g. products manufactured utilising non-viable human tissues or cells; implantable or other invasive products for cosmetic purposes). Economic consequences for Member States and healthcare systems can be very important, due to costs for replacement of defective medical devices and expenses related to renewed surgical interventions.

Moreover, safety problems involving European medical devices threaten the reputation of European medical devices industry and undermine Europe’s competitiveness. All the stakeholders agree on one point: in order to reverse this tendency and regain citizens’ trust, the European Union must reinforce its legislative framework. In order to live up to this challenge, protecting patients should be at the centre of the debate. Nonetheless it is not to be forgotten that he diversity and innovativeness of this sector contribute significantly to enhance the quality and efficacy of healthcare. Covering a wide range of products, from simple bandages to the most sophisticated life-supporting products, the medical devices sector plays a crucial role in the diagnosis, prevention, monitoring, and treatment of diseases and the improvement of the quality of life of people suffering of disabilities. This unconditionally means that trade-offs will have to be made. A right balance is to be found between transparency, safety, accesses to new innovations, bureaucracy and competitiveness of the medical sector. Links: 

Western Europe’s Medical Device Market under Increasing Pressure: http://www.emdt.co.uk/article/western-europe’s-medical-device-marketunder-increasing-pressur



European Commission on Medical devices: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/index_en.htm

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK

The core legal framework for regulation of safety and performance of medical devices in the EU consists of three elements: 1. The Directive regarding active implantable medical devices 2. The Directive regarding medical devices 3. The Directive in vitro diagnostic medical devices. They aim at ensuring a high level of protection of human health and safety and the good functioning of the single market. The European Commission however calls for a fundamental revision of the existing directives in order to simplify and strengthen the current EU legal framework for medical devices. The new legislation should be in the form of EU Regulations in order to have direct effect in Member States. The current regime is based on directives, which the Commission say have been inconsistently implemented in Member States. The Notified Bodies will have their position and powers clarified and enhanced, while being subject to strengthened supervision by Member States authorities. New powers will include the right to undertake unannounced inspections, also known as dawn-rides. Furthermore greater transparency should be enhanced by the further development of the European databank on medical devices. Links: 

Proposal of the European Commission in 2012: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medicaldevices/files/revision_docs/proposal_2012_ 542_en.pdf



The EU system for medical devices: http://www.eucomed.org/key-themes/medical-devices-directives/the-eusystem-for-medical-devices



C-test explained: http://www.cetest.nl/mdd.htm



Eucomed: A new regulatory framework for medical devices: http://www.eucomed.be/uploads/Modules/Publications/111118_eu_mdd_pos ition_paper_eucomed_final_version.pdf



Current legislation: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medical-devices/regulatoryframework/legislation/index_en.htm

6. ACADEMIA Opinions of officials: 

Carl Heneghan, professor of evidence-based medicine at Oxford University criticized the Commission for leaving the review process in the hands of private firms that are paid by the medical-device industry. This allows companies to "shop around" for the most compliant firm. He also argues that Europe should have one central, taxpayer-funded device regulator.



John Dalli, former European Union Commissioner however expressed that being able to use innovative products at the earliest possible time is a benefit to patients.



"We talk about products which are supposed to help patients in their suffering, in their illness. We should assist doctors in making sure they are using the best possible products when they want to assist their patients. To date, doctors have been telling us that hundreds of hip replacements are defective and have to be taken out again, with huge expenses for the health systems and suffering for patients. We need a better system," said rapporteur Dagmar Roth-Behrendt.



Eucomed Chairman Dr. Guy Lebeau M.D. stated what remains paramount in the current process of revising the regulatory framework for devices: “I know from first-hand experience that European patients and European medical research and innovation are benefitting heavily from our current system that is the world’s fastest in providing patients with lifesaving technologies while guaranteeing the highest level of safety. As a surgeon first and as a business executive second, I fully agree that changes need to be made to the current regulatory framework but let’s make sure we keep the best system for patients and medical progress in Europe.”

Links: 

Negative effects of the proposal: http://www.raps.org/focus-online/news/news-article-view/article/4114.aspx



Wall Street Journal on changes in the medical devices sector: http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702303672404579151781036 297124



Innovation versus Safety: http://www.cov.com/files/Publication/d7e410e3-5be0-40d0-b429675ec89cbeca/Presentation/PublicationAttachment/2705762b-1429-4690-8b7a4015b0bc9a15/Innovation_vs_Safety_New_Proposed_Rules_for_Medical_Dev ices_in_EU.pdf

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Proposal of the European Commission in 2012: http://ec.europa.eu/health/medicaldevices/files/revision_docs/proposal_2012 _542_en.pdf:

7. SUMMARY With the recent PIP breast implant scandal being brought to light, it has turned out that there has been a dramatic increase in faulty medical devices over the last decade that were able to enter the market due to serious loopholes in the current regulatory framework. At the same time many argue that the current system also brings huge benefits, for example the fast access to innovations. One should be aware of the fact that the current system suffers from inadequacy and a lack of transparency, which causes a threat to the life of patients. On the contrary more regulation and bureaucracy can hinder the medical devices industry to provide the patients with new innovations and thereby contribute to the quality of health care. In light of this the following questions may arise:Should there be centralized, European level, testing agencies in order to have transparency or will this only contribute to slowing down the access to innovations? Will the future revision of the Medical Devices Directive go far enough to close the gaps of the current legislation and provide clarity in terms of approval and responsibilities of different stakeholders in the approval process of medical devices?

COMMITTEE ON ECONOMIC AND MONETARY AFFAIRS (ECON) With the United States Department of Justice declaring Bitcoin to be a legitimate financial instrument, the state media of China giving attention to the virtual currency as well and the recent volatility of the value of the Bitcoin, what stance should the EU take on the matter, the opportunities and dangers of digital currencies? by Ioanna Yiallourides (CY) and Titus Verster (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS Before

you

read

the

following

links,

please

watch

this:

http://vimeo.com/63502573 •

Digital or virtual currency: Electronic money that acts as alternative currency. Currently, alternative digital currencies are not produced by government-endorsed central banks nor necessarily backed by national currency.50

•

Cryptocurrency: A type of virtual currency that uses cryptography for security. When a payment is made, an electronic signature is added. It is this signature, and not a name, that shows up in the transaction history. It is close to impossible to link a name to a signature, making the use of Cryptocurrencies almost anonymous.



Bitcoin: The largest virtual and Cryptocurrency in the world. It uses peer-topeer technology to facilitate instant payments, and therefore does not have a central bank. The total number of Bitcoins that will be issued is capped at 21 million to ensure they are not devalued by limitless supply.

•

Volatility: Defined as the amount of uncertainty or risk about the size of changes in the value of security. Commonly, the higher the volatility, the riskier the security.51

•

Economic Bubble: An economic bubble is a situation in which asset prices appear to be based on implausible or inconsistent views about the future.

Links: 

Browse around to see how Bitcoin is presented to users and how it works: http://bitcoin.org/en/

50 51

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Digital_currency http://www.investopedia.com/terms/v/volatility.asp



A talk show that goes into Bitcoin, its possibilities, and its dangers in depth: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6tWtTsvmHJg

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Bitcoins were first introduced to the world in 2009 and their value has been rising exponentially ever since. Being the first digital currency, which has no central authority or an individual behind it – the creators intended for it to revolutionise the banking world. Whilst being a high-valued currency, currently at the average price of 500 pounds per Bitcoin, the digital wallet of individuals or companies using Bitcoins still remains a new phenomenon entailing a great number of risks. This is due to several reasons that need to be considered when looking at the stance of the EU with regards to this digital currency. Firstly, there is a significant lack of regulation and high risks of money laundering. This arises due to the ease of peer-to-peer transactions, where the EU will have no control over. The volatility of the currency leads to the belief that the Bitcoin is nothing more than an economic bubble: something whose value is based on nothing concrete and lasting and will therefore lose its price sooner or later. This is an aspect that also needs to be considered. Users of this currency are uninsured and susceptible to the market forces influencing the value of the Bitcoin. For instance, when the Chinese Central Bank banned the Bitcoin from their market the price plummeted due to the shock. A likewise situation has risen in India where the central bank warned the public of the risks of the Bitcoin this leading to all Bitcoin exchange platforms closing their doors52. The Justice Department of the government of the United States, however, described Bitcoin as a "legitimate financial service". They are now looking into the promises and risks of Bitcoin and virtual currencies in general. A little closer to home, Germany has officially recognised Bitcoin as a ‘unit of account’, meaning the government is legally allowed to tax the users of the currency. This does not mean that Germany’s ministry of finance puts Bitcoin on the same level as the euro but merely means that people making use of the virtual currency are liable of capital gains taxes. However, the problem of taxation still remains as an unlegislated area in the European scene - an aspect of this use of Bitcoins which needs to be addressed by the EU. Whilst the Bitcoin being a very revolutionary financial instrument, the EU needs to adapt a stance on the virtual currency, since the use of Bitcoins removes European

http://www.thehindu.com/business/Industry/bitcoin-exchanges-shut-shop-in-india/article5504407.ece

citizens’ money from national or EU regulated institutions to a decentralised international digital institution. This instantly results in a loss of European, or even national, control over their population’s funds, deemed as unchartered waters for European economic regulations. Bitcoins offer complete economic freedom to the user, moving away from any form of authority and most of the transactions costs. All of the aforementioned make it greatly appealing to the users of Bitcoin. Yet, their dangers need to be considered and a European stance should be developed in the near future to protect Europe from potential economic disruptions. Links: 

Bitcoin price collapse due to China’s banning: http://www.economist.com/blogs/schumpeter/2013/12/bitcoins-collapse



The Bitcoin bubble: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21590901-it-looks-overvalued-even-ifdigital-currency-crashes-others-will-follow-bitcoin



European Banking Authority stance: http://www.businessinsider.com/european-union-eba-bitcoin-warning-2013-12

3. KEY ACTORS At the moment, it is very difficult to tell who will play what role regarding virtual currencies since there is no pan-European legislation to regulate this topic. It is therefore important to look at Potential actors. The European Banking Authority (EBA) is a regulatory agency of the European Union. Its activities include conducting stress tests on European banks to increase transparency in the European financial system and identifying weaknesses in banks' capital structures. The EBA has the power to overrule national bank regulators in case they fail to regulate national banks properly. The EBA acts a banking watchdog for the European Union. It has already issued strong warnings on the dangers of Bitcoins, including risk of money laundering, lack of control as well as hacking. Yet, Bitcoins do not have a central authority or person behind it. Therefore, it is a completely unregulated currency, with market forces and its investors acting as the influence behind value fluctuations. The European Central Bank (ECB) is an EU institution with the purpose of keeping inflation under control and keeping the financial system stable. If Bitcoin or any other virtual currency were to influence one of those two, it would be the Central Bank’s responsibility to react. On a legislative level, it is the European Commission that proposes new laws to the European Parliament and European Council. In the future, it is likely that the

European Commission will propose new legislature concerning virtual currencies that will comply with the general political direction set out by the European Council. However, since Member Statesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; national governments

have a high degree of

sovereignty over their fiscal policy, it is possible that virtual currencies will mainly be dealt with on a national level. Links:

ď&#x201A;ˇ

European Regulation: http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/13/technology/bitcoin-europe-regulation/

ď&#x201A;ˇ

Chinese Regulation: http://money.cnn.com/2013/12/05/investing/china-bitcoin/index.html?iid=EL

4. MAIN CONFLICTS The first question that arises in the discussion regarding virtual currencies is whether they are to be trusted or not. Depending on whom you speak to, Bitcoin is either the currency of the future or the next big financial disaster. These immensely differing opinions are caused by the fact that there are both positive and negative sides inherent to the concept behind the currency. All arguments result from the fact that there is no central bank controlling the currency. Proponents argue that this leads to independence of governmental control and a higher level of economic privacy than regular banks provide, due to the fact that transactions do not require any personal information. Moreover, transaction fees are very low compared to traditional means of payment such as Credit Card, and there is no need for exchanging different currencies since virtual currencies are not bound to a certain nation. However, opponents regard the lack of a central bank as a very dangerous aspect. When the value of the currency suddenly drops, like it did in December 201353, there is no central institution to take measures to sustain the value of the Bitcoin. What is most important though, is the doubt many people have considering the value of the currency. Since a Bitcoin does not represent a physical material such as gold and is not backed by a trustworthy institution like a central bank or government, it is only worth something because people agree it is. Many fear that this belief will soon change leaving the Bitcoin worthless. Another argument opponents often mention is the possibility to buy and sell illegal substances with Bitcoin, due to its near anonymity. The American government recently shut down a website called Silkroad54 that allowed its users to buy drugs in exchange for Bitcoins.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25428866 http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/oct/03/silk-road-underground-market-closed-bitcoin

Putting aside the possibilities and dangers of the Bitcoin, the question is what should the role of the EU and of National Governments’ in the matter be. The outset of virtual currencies such as Bitcoin is that there is no higher power with the ability to regulate the use of those currencies. Therefore, it would solely be the task of the user to make sure they make use of virtual currencies such as Bitcoin responsibly. Theft or loss of money would lay within the sole responsibility of the owner. However, one could argue it is a governmental task to protect its citizens from the dangers that come along with virtual currencies. In a paper the ECB released in October 2012, it said: ‘The legal uncertainty surrounding these schemes might constitute a challenge for public authorities, as these schemes can be used by criminals, fraudsters and money launderers to perform their illegal activities.’55 In the ‘real’ economy, fiscal policies put forward by governments or central banks exist in order to protect citizens from illegal activities such as the aforementioned, and perhaps the same goes for the new dangers that come along with virtual currencies. If, in fact, governments would start to intervene in the use of virtual currencies, a whole new set of challenges arises. Only the seemingly straightforward matter of protecting citizens poses a problem, since transactions are made anonymously. It is therefore very difficult to track down money launderers or other criminals making use of virtual currencies. Another problem that has recently come forward is the issue of taxation. When someone makes a lot of money by speculating with Bitcoin, or has a large transaction in Bitcoin, it would seem logical for that person to be taxed in some way, as is the case with transactions in normal currencies. Some countries, such as Denmark and Germany, have stated they will impose capital tax gains on users of virtual currencies. However, when Bitcoins are not transferred into normal currencies such as the euro, it is impossible for authorities to impose those taxes simply because they cannot look into any trading records in Bitcoin. Links: 

A debate between experts both in favour of, and against the use of Bitcoin: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-25130261



Bank of America’s endorsement of Bitcoin: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/05/bitcoin-digital-currency-wallstreet-strategist



European Commissioner Neelie Kroes on Bitcoin and its use in e-commerce: http://ec.europa.eu/commission_2010-2014/kroes/en/content/art-e-commerce-eu



An example of a case of stolen Bitcoin: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/09/recovering-stolen-bitcoinsheep-marketplace-trading-digital-currency-money

http://www.ecb.europa.eu/pub/pdf/other/virtualcurrencyschemes201210en.pdf

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK Since Bitcoin and other virtual currencies are still very new, there does not exist any European legislation on the phenomenon. Within Europe, only Germany and Denmark have attempted to regulate Bitcoins in terms of taxations through stating that Bitcoin users are to pay a tax even though it is a digital currency. Yet, given the rise of the use of the Bitcoin, most certainly the European Union will be called to address this issue and form legislation to deal with problems that might arise due to the use of this digital currency. Problems which need to be addressed within a legal framework include taxation regulations within the EU, how to protect consumers from fraud, money laundering and the risks of hacking in general. A legal framework that could be seen as a parallel to the use of Bitcoin is that of the stock exchange. Any citizen is free to invest in stocks without limitations by the government or EU institutions, thus the Bitcoin market could be seen as a parallel and similar legal regulations could be imposed. The US government for example has been the only one to introduce regulations so far, which are very broad and new at the moment. Regulatory measures include the implementation of anti-money laundering, know-your-customer and financial information reporting policies and procedures in order to comply with various requirements under the Bank Secrecy Act and USA Patriot Act.

Also, General

Accounting Office issued a report describing digital assets and urging the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) to issue guidance concerning the income tax treatment of digital assets (for example, whether gain from a sale of Bitcoins is capital gain or ordinary income) under the Internal Revenue Code and the regulations thereunder. However, currently, no official guidance or determination exists from any US federal regulator that establishes whether Bitcoins are a currency, commodity, commodity money or security for the purpose of determining the tax treatment of Bitcoins. Links: 

Germany’s stance on Bitcoin explained: http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/aug/19/bitcoin-unit-of-accountgermany



Denmark’s stance on Bitcoin explained: http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-17/bitcoin-rules-drafted-in-denmark-asregulator-warns- against-use.html



An overview of Bitcoin’s position in China: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-25443731



US Regulations on Bitcoin Use:

http://www.mondaq.com/unitedstates/x/277850/Financial+Services/Bitcoin+Current +US+Regulatory+Developments

6. ACADEMIA The European Banking Authority (EBA) recently warned consumers on the risks of using unregulated currencies like Bitcoin. According to the EBA, there is no protection or compensation for people that are robbed of their Bitcoins, or if a transaction goes wrong. They did not specifically tell consumers not to use the online currency, but made it clear there is no safety net like the ones mainstream EU banks have when they go bust. Ernst & Young, a professional financial services firm, provides another interesting perspective on the subject by saying Bitcoin should not even been seen as a currency, but as a payment system56. The firm says the currency is not here to replace the dollar, euro or sterling, it is meant to be used in small online transactions. Former chairman of the U.S. Federal Reserve Alan Greenspan has also commented on Bitcoin saying “it’s a bubble” 57 . He says that since for currencies to be exchangeable, they have to be backed by either something physical such as gold, or the credit or trust of the individual who is issuing the money. Greenspan thinks this is not the case with Bitcoin, since there is no intrinsic value to it, and since transactions are made anonymously, leaving no space for a good reputation of a Bitcoin-user. Nout Wellink, the former president of the Dutch National Bank, agrees with Greenspan, by calling Bitcoin “pure speculation”. In his analysis of the currency, he compared it with the ‘tulip mania’58, but says 'at least then you got a tulip at the end'. Links: •

The EBA’s ‘Warning to Consumers on Virtual Currencies’: http://www.eba.europa.eu/documents/10180/16136/EBA+Warning+on+Virtual+Curr encies.pdf

•

The basics of Tulip Mania, similar to the ‘Bitcoin Bubble’: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tulip_mania

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/11/ernst-young-warn-bitcoin-payment-problems http://www.bloomberg.com/video/greenspan-on-bitcoin-i-guess-it-s-a-bubble-

Mu~7aDC9Q8i_b0hSa4i6XA.html 58

http://www.theguardian.com/technology/2013/dec/04/bitcoin-bubble-tulip-dutch-banker

7. SUMMARY The Bitcoin entered the world market in 2009 to revolutionise the banking world and now that it has been getting so much attention, it is undeniable that it has become an important player in the economic world. The digital currency has become increasingly influential and with increased capital being invested to be made into Bitcoins. This includes capital from European citizens and thus it is time for the EU to take a stance concerning the currency. However, does it have the power to take any active measures to regulate the virtual currency? The power of the EBA is rather limited and the lack of authority behind the digital currency makes it an even more complex problem to tackle. We shouldn't forget that it is a decentralised currency, with no central bank to offer insurance and regulation. This completely unlegislated currency could potentially have effects on the European economy. So what should the EU do to make sure these effects are in no way negative? Should it even be the EU that deals with the effects of virtual currencies, or should it be the responsibility of Member Statesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; national governments? One should not forget though that individuals are free to invest or deposit their money in any way or form that is legal. With Bitcoins being a legal form of currency, how can the EU protect its citizens from dangers whilst enabling them freedom to do what they want in any currency? Is it even possible for authorities to regulate virtual currencies, keeping in mind the fact that there is no central bank and the anonymity of its users?

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE (INTA) Value versus values: How can the EU ensure that materials and products imported to Europe are economically viable and in line with European values and sustainability standards? by Christos Papadogeorgopoulos (GR) and Myrna van Dijk (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Protectionism - A governmental policy of restricting the level of imports, often conducted to protect domestic industries. Methods of protectionism include tariff as well as non-tariff barriers, which include but are not limited to anti-dumping measures, countervailing duties and licensing requirements.



Tariff - A government duty imposed on imports of certain products.



Non-tariff barriers - Trade barriers that restrict imports, which are not in the form of tariffs. Examples include technical standards, labelling requirements, administrative fees and anti-dumping practices.



Free Trade Agreement (FTA) - An international legally binding agreement between two parties, to jointly lower tariffs and other trade barriers between them.

Links: 

Further explanation of Free Trade Agreements: http://ec.europa.eu/enterprise/policies/international/facilitating-trade/free-trade/



Analysis on Sustainable goods: http://share.pdfonline.com/f68ad854c6e64f8db43ec4e48f2b6bd9/Materials%20selecti on%20and%20design%20for%20development%20of%20sustainable%20products.pd f

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Imports play a significant role in the economy of all EU Member States. They are needed for a series of reasons, including the fact that countries might need to import resources which cannot easily be found on the domestic economy, oil being an important example. Furthermore, free trade and hence imports increase competition, variety, improve allocation of resources and promote economic growth. Measures have already been taken and tries are still being made, in the form of Free Trade Agreements (FTAs), so as to lower

protectionism measures between regions, as imports are, as mentioned, of great importance. While lowering or even abandoning tariff barriers are considered relatively easy to be agreed upon, the issue of non-tariff barriers, which is often used to protect values and standards, is more complicated. It is important to highlight that the EU has already trade agreements in place with 50 partners and many more are under negotiation. While understanding that imports are essential, the existence of common European values should not be neglected when implementing trade policies or when negotiating trade agreements. In fact, the two Treaties that the EU is based on, namely the Treaty on the European Union (TEU) and the Treaty of the Function of the European Union (TFEU) highlight that the EU is founded on the universal values of the inviolable and inalienable rights of the human person, freedom, democracy, equality and the rule of law. Moreover, values include the protection of human rights and in particular the rights of children, eradication of poverty and sustainable development. It is mainly the European Commission that ensures that trade agreements and policies reflect the views of the European society. In order to underline the relevance of this topic we will take the case of TTIP59 negotiations, which can bring concrete economic benefits, as an example. While removing trade restrictions, the European Parliament highlights that it also is vital to make sure the EU protects its own values. Another relevant case is the on-going trade with China. On the one hand the EU imports from China have a strong economic impact on the economy of the EU but on the other hand some of these imported goods are produced below EU standards by, among others, the use of child labour. Nonetheless China is not the only trade partner allegedly not in line with EU standards as similar behaviour can be observed in trading relations with India, Vietnam and more. The challenge therefore is to seek for policy options which would ensure a balance. While the EU has to make sure that it doesnâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;t harm its economy, the EU must also make sure that its main values and sustainability standards are not undermined by its trade relations. Links: ď&#x201A;ˇ

European Parliament's priority list on TTIP; removing restrictions but protecting values: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/news/en/newsroom/content/20130508FCS08099/11/html/EUUS-trade-talks-keep-Parliament-onboard-MEPs-warn

It refers to the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, a Free Trade Agreement with the US which is currently under negotiation.



How trade agreements and negotiations reflect the views and values of the European society: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2013/june/tradoc_151381.pdf

3. KEY ACTORS The relevant actors are the European Commission, the European Parliament, the World Trade Organisation, the EU’s Member States and the EU’s Trading Partners. The European Commission acts on behalf of all Member States and hence represents the interests of the EU as a whole. In the case of trade negotiations, the EC drafts a negotiating proposal, which must be approved before staring negotiations by the Council of the European Union (also referred to as the Council of Ministers), an institution that represents national interests. The European Parliament can also express its opinions. The final agreement must be approved by both the Council of the EU and the European Parliament. The numerous Stakeholders, covering a variety of sectors (agriculture, banking, environment, to name a few) are also important actors as they interact in the political process through lobbying, public advocacy groups and NGOs. Links: 

A video where the EU institutions are explained by their Presidents: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d0diZ48_q7U



A video explaining how European laws are adopted: http://www.europarltv.europa.eu/en/player.aspx?pid=2943a9f1-0a1a-4f7c-9fe89f82009fa481



EU institutions and other bodies: http://europa.eu/about-eu/institutions-bodies/

4. MAIN CONFLICTS Ongoing trade relations with countries that produce goods or services by methods not in line with European values and sustainability standards are key conflicts. A first example is the trade relationship between the EU and China. The EU is China’s greatest trading partner and China is the EU’s second greatest trading partner. However, China is a state with poor working conditions and still uses child labour. The problem arising is that China doesn’t meet all the requirements but on the other hand it is impossible for the EU to stop trading with China. When China finally joined the WTO in 2001 it was forced to make some huge social reforms in its current economy. One of the implementations to help China with their reforms, and thereby 48

support the European values, was the creation of the EU-China trade project II (EUCTP). It is namely a project where the EU supports the Chinese government in the reforming of its trade economy and sustainable development. However, this project will come to an end in 2015 and China isn’t even near the standards that the EU requires. Another key conflict worth analysing is the trade between the EU and India. The EU is India’s largest trading partner but for the EU India accounts for less than 2% of its trade. While it can be argued that the EU has a stronger position in this trading relationship, India is one of the countries that don’t live up to the values of the EU. It can be argued that the difference with China is that the trade with India is less important to the economy of the EU. Should the EU refuse to trade with India until it starts to improve and live up to the WTO obligations? But would that do the country any good? What would be the right approach be? The same applies to Vietnam. A state that needs the EU more than the EU needs Vietnam. At the moment their FTA negotiations have stopped and a sixth round of negotiations will be held in January 2014. With both India’s and Vietnam’s FTA with the EU there is just one main problem; How far should the EU go to support these FTA’s and if a deal is finally reached, how can the EU make sure if they are being respected? Links: 

China and EU trading relations: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/china/



Opinion raised over China failing to meet the WTO requirements: http://trade.ec.europa.eu/doclib/docs/2012/june/tradoc_149542.pdf



Trading relations between the EU and India: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/india/



Trading relations between the EU and Vietnam: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/countries-and-regions/countries/vietnam/



EU-China Trade Project (EUCTP): http://ec.europa.eu/culture/eu-china/concept_en.htm http://www.euctp.org/index.php/en/project-background.html

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK To protect its own economy and industry the EU has implemented protectionism measures, such as safeguards, anti-dumping and anti-subsidy ones. There are additional Non Tariff Barriers (NTB) implemented as means of encouraging importing sustainable goods into the EU. A representative 49

example is CE marking, which labels that the product and proves that it meets certain requirements. After fulfilling these requirements, the product can be imported in the EU. This can be done by, for instance, fair-trade labels. Another example is the one of the animals and animal products from countries outside of the EU. In essence, they have to be imported via an approved Border Inspection Post (BIP), where they undergo veterinary check before they are allowed to be imported into the EU. The World Trade Organisation (WTO), one of the organisations that promotes and supervises the international trade, makes sure that erga omnes legal obligations are met. The latter is the legal term for obligations or rights towards all. Erga omnes rights or obligations are universal in the international community, which means that every country can be held accountable by other countries. In the WTO, the EU member states are represented by the European Commission and therefore act as a single actor. Links: 

Standard rules and safeguards for imports to the EU: http://ec.europa.eu/trade/import-and-export-rules/import-into-eu/ http://ec.europa.eu/trade/policy/accessing-markets/trade-defence/actions-againstimports-into-the-eu/safeguards/



Import regulations of Europe: http://instruction2.mtsac.edu/rjagodka/Importing_Information/Import_Regulations _In_The_EU.pdf



The EU’s participation in the WTO: http://www.wto.org/english/thewto_e/countries_e/european_communities_e.htm

6. ACADEMIA The democrats in the US are the first ones trying to force Blue and Green standards into trade agreements. Blue, for labour, and Green, for environmental trade standards are added to trade agreements to ensure that certain standards are kept. Both standards are enforceable through the use of sanctions. However these sanctions have yet to be implemented into agreements and are not yet a common procedure, mostly because of the difficulty of keeping up with these standards. Countries are afraid that agreeing to this kind of terms will backfire and have a negative impact. Is the implementation of these methods always realistic? Enforcing such standards on countries, organisations and companies that might not even be able to implement or even fulfil these standards might have an enormous effect on the relations with those trading partners and the global trading system. Links: 50



A trade policy analysis on Green and Blue standards: http://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/tpa-015b.pdf



WTO Green and Blue standards: http://ir.lawnet.fordham.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1749&context=ilj



Use of Green sanction, nationally:



https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/791 10/Guidance_on_Green_Deal_Sanctions_and_Appeals__7_February_2013_FINAL.p df An article criticising the idea of blue and green sanctions: http://www.cato.org/publications/commentary/labor-environment-sanctions-wouldpoison-trade-talks

7. SUMMARY Undoubtedly, trade is of great importance for every economy, and the economy of the EU is no exception. It is important to understand that apart from exports, imports are also essential for reasons including, but not limited to, an increase in competition, in variety, in economic growth. Therefore, although taking steps towards a more fair and free trade is essential, the EU should always bear in mind and take active steps towards protecting its values and sustainability standards. In ensuring that, there are some key questions to consider: What priorities should the EU set? How can the EU make sure that its values and standards are being met by its trading partners? Can the EU develop the idea of blue and green standards and if so how? Is there a difference between trading with developing and developed countries?

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM I (TRAN I) Urban mobility: As more than half of European citizens live in urban areas, how can the EU combine the improvement of citizen mobility in urban areas with the transition to green transportation? by Kristýna Stejskalová (CZ) and Rosa Douw (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Industrialisation refers to social and economic change that transforms a human group from an agrarian society into an industrial one. Urbanisation is closely related to industrialisation.



Urbanisation refers to the increasing number of people that live in urban areas that are concentrated near the cities.



Urban mobility refers to mobility needs of people and businesses in cities and their surroundings for a better quality of life.



Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans (SUMP) define a set of interrelated measures designed to satisfy the mobility needs of people and businesses today and tomorrow. They are the result of an integrated planning approach and address all modes and forms of transport in cities and their surrounding area.



Last-mile transport concerns the movement of people and goods from a transport hub to a final destination.

Links: 

Dr. Jean Paul Rodrigue: Urban Mobility: http://people.hofstra.edu/geotrans/eng/ch6en/conc6en/ch6c3en.html



Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans: Official website: http://www.mobilityplans.eu/index.php?ID1=5&id=5



Video about Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GAqzgX-MMmA

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Urbanisation is inextricably linked to industrialisation and modernisation, both historically and among rapidly growing developing countries today. There are good economic reasons for this relation. Cities have been shown to support highproductivity and high-growth activities in ways that rural areas simply cannot. Nowadays, the worldâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population is increasingly city-based. 51% of the population currently lives in urban areas and by 2050 this is expected to reach 70% of the population. Urban mobility is one of the toughest challenges that cities face. Nowadays, 64% of all travel kilometres made are urban and the amount of travel within urban areas is expected to triple by 2050. Being able to get around urban areas quickly, conveniently and with little environmental impact is critical. Existing mobility systems are not sufficient enough. By 2050, the average time an urban citizen spends in traffic jams will be 106 hours per year, which is three times more than today. Moreover, urban mobility will use 17.3% of the planetâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s bio capacities, which is five times more than in 1990. Within the European Union, the maturity of the cities regarding urban mobility differs a lot. In order to meet the urban mobility challenge, all cities have to improve their transportation system. For high performing cities the next stop must be to fully integrate the travel value chain, increasing convenience by aggressively extending public transport, implementing advanced traffic management systems and further reducing individual transport through greater taxation and road tolls. Cities with high proportion of motorised individual transport need to become more consumer and sustainability orientated. Cities that are recently building their infrastructure system have to establish a sustainable mobility core that can satisfy short-term demand at a reasonable cost without creating motorised systems that need to be redesigned later. Effective transportation within the cities requires promotion of public transport. Unfortunately, the means of public transport cannot always fill the needs of all passengers. Not all the buses and trams are prepared for strollers, disabled people often miss announcement that the bus has arrived, the transport system within smaller cities is often not tourist-friendly, and transportation in the nighttime is excessively limited. From an environmental perspective transportation within the cities and commuting, causes serious air pollution with harmful emissions. Solutions to this problem must take into consideration technological advances such as hydrogen and biofuel powered buses with transport policy measures such as traffic management.

Links:



The Future of Urban Mobility: Global study of 66 cities and their approach to urban mobility http://www.adlittle.com/downloads/tx_adlreports/ADL_Future_of_ur ban_mobility.pdf



Urbanisation and growth: Setting the context http://www2.lawrence.edu/fast/finklerm/chapter1urban.pdf



The Economist: Open-air computers http://www.economist.com/news/special-report/21564998-cities-areturning-vast-data-factories-open-air-computers



Video of European Commission describing the benefits of using public transport http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kFeSrG7gjvU



Video: Better and cleaner transport for Europe http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUEA8Q3TV10

3. KEY ACTORS The responsibility for urban mobility policies lies primarily with local, regional and national authorities. Nevertheless, decisions adopted at a local level are not taken in isolation but within the framework provided by national, regional and EU policy and legislation. The European Commission has initiated a European Sustainable Urban Transport Platform to accelerate the large-scale uptake of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans by competent authorities in Europe. The European Commission’s Action Plan on Urban Mobility aims at accelerating the takeup of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans in Europe by providing guidance material, promoting best practice exchange, identifying benchmarks and supporting educational activities for urban mobility professionals. Whenever possible, the Commission will encourage Member States to provide platforms for mutual learning and sharing of experiences and best practices that would foster the development of sustainable urban mobility policies. The Commission will also introduce an urban mobility dimension in the Covenant of Mayors60 in order to promote an integrated approach linking 60

The Covenant of Mayors is the mainstream European movement involving local and regional

authorities, voluntarily committing to increasing energy efficiency and use of renewable energy sources on their territories. By their commitment, Covenant signatories aim to meet and exceed the European Union 20% CO2 reduction objective by 2020. Official website: www.eumayors.eu/

energy and climate change with transport. It will encourage the incorporation of transport and mobility issues in the Sustainable Energy Action Plans to be prepared by the cities participating in the Covenant. The Council of the European Union supports the development of Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans for cities and metropolitan areas and encourages the development of incentives, such as expert assistance and information exchange, for the creation of such plans.

Links: 

White Paper 2011: European strategy towards competitive and resource effective transport system http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/strategies/2011_white_paper_en. htm



Action Plan On Urban Mobility: http://www.eltis.org/docs/sump_library/Action_plan_on_urban_mobi lity_2009.pdf



Covenant of Mayors: Sustainable Energy Action Plans: http://www.covenantofmayors.eu/actions/sustainable-energy-actionplans_en.html



European Commission: Mobility and Transport: http://ec.europa.eu/transport/themes/urban/urban_mobility/

4. MAIN CONFLICTS Urbanisation and economic growth go together, because no country has ever reached middle-income status without a significant population shift into cities. Urbanisation in necessary to sustain economic growth, but it is not painless. Rapid urban development occurring globally implies increased quantities of passengers and freight moving within urban areas. Movements also tend to involve longer distances, but evidence suggests that commuting times have remained relatively similar through the last hundred years, approximately 1 to 1.2 hours per day. This means that commuting has gradually shifted to faster transport modes and consequently greater distances could be travelled using the same amount of time. But while rapid transit solutions such as light rail, heavy rail, commuter rail, and bus rapid transit are popular ways to increase a particular area's transit network coverage, the fact that they stop only every mile on average to maintain a high average speed means that geographically most of an urban area will be beyond an

easy walking distance to a station. The fact that many residences and businesses lay beyond an easy walking distance to a station is known as the "last mile problem" and is a barrier to better utilization of a rapid transit network. Different transport technologies and infrastructures have been implemented, resulting in a wide variety of urban transport systems around the world. The problem is that the management of urban mobility operates globally in an environment that is hostile to innovation. Urban management systems are very often overregulated, they do not allow market players to compete and they do not establish business models that bring demand and supply into a natural balance. Cheap and easy electronic communication should be regarded as a beneficial solution. This electronic communication does have a back draw, as connectivity is usually better in cities than in the countryside, because it is more lucrative to build telecoms networks for dense populations than for sparse ones. Within the EU, one of the biggest conflicts is competence of making innovations in the field of public transport, which lies mainly in the hands of local authorities and the need to solve transport issues on the European level in order to promote transport effectively all over the Union. The toughest goal for the European cities is to find balance between functional transport and green transport. Related to this, public transport has to be promoted. The problem is, that nowadays public transport in many European cities does provide citizens with all the benefits that individual transport offers. “The last mile problem”, the often quite poor management of public transport and independency people experience using their own transport are only a few of the issues that need to be concurred in order to provide for functional and green public transport.

Links: 

The Last Mile Problem: http://publictransport.about.com/od/Transit_Planning/a/The-LastMile-Problem.htm



Video: Estonians on track for free public transport: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6b4a5Mt-eP4



Transport in Europe: How does it differ by city? http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2013/dec/05/transporteurope-differ-city-public

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK Urban transport systems are integral elements of the European transport system and as such as integral part of the Common Transport Policy61 under Articles 70 to 80 EC Treaty. Other EU policies (cohesion, environment, health etc.) cannot achieve their objectives without taking into account urban specificities, including urban mobility. In recent years, EU policy and legislation relevant to urban mobility has been developed. Significant funding has been provided through the Structural and Cohesion Funds62. EU-funded initiatives, often supported by the Framework Programmes for research and technological development, have helped to develop a wealth of innovative approaches. EU-wide dissemination and replication of these approaches can enable public authorities to achieve more, better and at lower cost. Different approaches to sustainable urban mobility planning (SUMP) exist throughout Europe. SUMP is a way of tackling transport-related problems in urban areas more efficiently. Energy-efficient driving is already a mandatory part of the training and testing of professional drivers. The Commission will discuss with Member States, within the regulatory committee on driving licences, if and how energy-efficient driving could be included in driving tests for private drivers, and will consider follow-up actions and give respective support. This topic will also be addressed in the next Road Safety Action Programme. Environmentally friendly policies have been introduced in many cities across the EU. Action at EU level can help to strengthen markets for new, clean vehicle technologies and alternative fuels. This will directly support EU industry, promote healthy environments and contribute to the recovery of the European economy. By making users pay for the external costs which they cause (environmental, congestion and other costs) according to the polluter pays principle, the internalisation of external costs can encourage transport users to switch over time to cleaner vehicles or transport modes, to use less congested infrastructure or to travel at different times. EC rules on the charging of heavy goods vehicles for the use of infrastructure do not prevent the non-discriminatory application of regulatory charges in urban areas to reduce traffic congestion and environmental impacts. The Commission will continue its support for research and demonstration projects funded through the Seventh Framework Programme for research and technological

Common Transport Policy: http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/transport/index_en.htm

Structural and Cohesion Funds

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

development63 (FP7) designed to facilitate the market introduction of lower and zero emission vehicles and alternative fuels, aiming to reduce dependency on fossil fuels. This was done, for example, through the CIVITAS Initiative – an initiative to help cities innovate their public transport64 as well as projects on the use of hydrogen, biofuels and hybrid vehicles in urban transport. In the framework of the European Economic Recovery Plan, the Commission has launched the European Green Cars Initiative65.

Links: 

Sustainable urban mobility plans: http://www.mobilityplans.eu/index.php?ID1=4&id=4



Video - Urban Mobility in Copenhagen: culture of cycling: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hrv5MJGJcpA

6. ACADEMIA Even though the transportation system within the European Union requires innovative solutions for improvement, it is still one of the best transportation systems all over the world. Debates 66676869 regarding urban mobility and needs to improve transportation are one of the most important kick-off of the innovation process. Urban mobility is often taken as an economic and environmental challenge but there are other very important aspects of this topic. Swedish researchers discovered that

Seventh Framework Programme for research and technological development

http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/energy/european_energy_policy/i23022_en.htm CIVITAS initiative: http://www.civitas.eu/about-us-page

European Green ars Initiative http://www.green-cars-initiative.eu/public/

The Commission for Sustainable Development event http://www.urbanmobility.gilcommunity.com/

The Sustainable Urban Mobility Issues and Transport Sollutions project (SUMITS)

http://www.sumits.eu/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderfiles/sumits_leaflet.pdf 68

Electric Mobility Debate: Driving the transpormation of the city: http://electric-mobility-debate-

2013.eu/ Debates about urban mobility: New Urban Mobility Business Models: http://www.urbanmobility.gilcommunity.com/ 69

commuting makes people unhappy and has strong negative aspect on their personal life. Moreover, commuting is causing obesity, neck pain, stress and possibly insomnia.

Links: 

Europe On the Move: Public Transportation Lessons for the U.S.: http://blog.gmfus.org/2013/07/05/europe-on-the-move-what-the-uscan-learn-from-europes-investment-in-a-21st-century-transportationsystem/



The Economist: Commuting Makes You Unhappy: http://www.economist.com/blogs/gulliver/2011/06/perils-commuting



Annie Lowrey: Your Commute is Killing You: http://www.slate.com/articles/business/moneybox/2011/05/your_comm ute_is_killing_you.html



15 Cities for People Who Hate Driving and Long Commutes http://money.usnews.com/money/personal-finance/realestate/articles/2009/11/11/15-cities-for-people-who-hate-driving-andlong-commutes



Buses: not sexy but the only solution http://rio2013.lsecities.net/newspaper/articles/buses-not-sexy-but-theonly-solution/en-gb/

7. SUMMARY Urban areas face today the challenge of making transport sustainable in environmental (CO2, air pollution, noise) and competitiveness (congestion) terms while at the same time addressing social concerns. Such concerns range from the need to respond to health problems and demographic trends, fostering economic and social cohesion to taking into account the needs of persons with reduced mobility, families and children. Urban mobility is of growing concern to citizens. Nine out of ten EU citizens believe that the traffic situation in their area should be improved. The choices that people make in the way they travel will affect not only future urban development but also the economic well being of citizens and companies. It will also be essential for the success of the EU’s overall strategy to combat climate change, achieve the 20-20-20 objectives and to promote cohesion. Urban mobility is also a central component of long-distance transport. Most transport, both for passengers and freight, starts and ends in urban areas and

passes through several urban areas on its way. Urban areas should provide efficient interconnection points for the trans-European transport network and offer efficient â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;last mileâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; transport for both freight and passengers. They are thus vital to the competitiveness and sustainability of our future European transport system. By what means can the EU find the balance between functional and green transportation? How can the EU promote public transport in order to decrease the usage of individual transport? What should be done in order to reduce harmful emissions is the air?

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORT AND TOURISM II (TRAN II) With maritime transport being the most effective, cheap and sustainable means of trade transport - given the constant threat of piracy and robberies at sea: what long term approach should the EU and Europe take to respond to these geo-strategic challenges and the increasing need for maritime safety and security? by Mathieu Lohr (LUX) and Naomi Appelman (NL)

1. DEFINITIONS AND KEYWORDS 

Piracy - The official definition according to the United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) article. 101: Piracy consists of any of the following (a)

acts

any illegal acts of violence or detention, or any act of depredation,

committed for private ends by the crew or the passengers of a private ship or a private aircraft, and directed: (i)

on the high seas, against another ship or aircraft, or against

persons or property on board such ship or aircraft; (ii)

against a ship, aircraft, persons or property in a place outside

the jurisdiction of any State; (b)

any act of voluntary participation in the operation of a ship or of an aircraft with knowledge of facts making it a pirate ship or aircraft;

(c)

any act of inciting or of intentionally facilitating an act described in the sub-paragraphs a and b.



Armed Robbery - Essentially the same as piracy only now not conducted on the high seas but in national waters70. This means the coastal sovereign state is the only entity authorised and responsible to act for its suppression.



High seas - International waters. The high seas are open to all states, whether coastal or land-locked and every State has the right to sail ships flying its flag on them. The High Seas are waters that are outside of the jurisdiction of any country and therefore completely open to everyone. The ships in international waters are subjects of the law of the country under which flag they sail. (article 87 - 94 of UNCLOS I)

Links: UNCLOS: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part7.htm

Official definition in the Djibouti Code of Conduct: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Security/PIU/Pages/DCoC.aspx 70

2. RELEVANCE OF THE TOPIC AND EXPLANATION OF THE PROBLEM Shell just completed the construction of the biggest ship ever build. At half a kilometre length, approximately $12billion of costs, and an even bigger successor already in the making the trend is clear: maritime transport is growing at an ever quickening pace. The amount of goods and valuables on our seas is multiplying and so is the risk of piracy. Today, 50’000 ships carry 90 percent of the world’s traded cargo. The oceans and seas of this world hold a tremendous importance for the world economy. Any disruption has far reaching repercussions on businesses and end-users, us consumers, and is thus to be prevented at all costs. The dependence of the whole industry on few principal trade routes exemplifies the dependence of the EU on safe routes that make the passage of the goods we rely on in our daily life. The EU draws its crude oil, as example, from few major suppliers71 that all pose geo-strategic problems due to the routes needed to reach them. Most prominent in international news are Somali pirates that make passage through the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian Sea a dangerous feat. For too long the EU quietly let the USA take over the role of security force in these regions. With the US foreign policy going through a change towards a “pivot to Asia”, a security vacuum has been created that is still being worked on filling. Piracy has impeded the delivery of shipments and increased shipping expenses, costing an estimated. $5.7 to $6.1 billion a year in global trade according to Oceans Beyond Piracy (OBP)7273. Although cooperation between the EU and NATO have brought down recent crime figures, their missions only act as deterrents. The underlying causes of piracy like poverty and weak security forces in underdeveloped countries will not allow for piracy to ever disappear if not tackled appropriately. In addition to land-problems widening out into high sea problems, the very definition of “high-sea” poses problems to policy makers and executives. Due to complications in international law and cooperation with local governments, pirates are often caught just to be released later. A legal framework and a willingness to work on a definite version of it is still missing. Furthermore, African ports often do not allow for harbouring modern vessels. Dated and obsolete infrastructure narrows down the choice of ships used on these routes to older models that are more vulnerable to attacks. The drawbacks to this are not only losses to international trade but mainly the countries in question here. Lacking funds and weak revenue do not allow for the 71

Russia, Algeria, Saudi Arabia and Nigeria

07/01/2014 source: http://www.rakna.lk/our-services-maritime.html

investment into ports and facilities that would allow for the much needed profits to reach land.

Links: 

Article, Reuters: http://blogs.reuters.com/bernddebusmann/2011/03/04/why-high-seas-piracyis-here-to-stay/



Article, The Economist. http://www.economist.com/news/middle-east-and-africa/21588942-newstudy-reveals

3. KEY ACTORS To unravel this complex problem it is of paramount importance to see who the leading characters are and where their interests lie. Because the problem primarily concerns the important trading routes on the high seas, practically every country has an economical interest in ensuring the safety of those seas. This is why the International Maritime Organisation (IMO), a specialised agency of the United Nations (UN), is one of the key actors in the battle for maritime security. In accordance with the resolutions of the UN Security Council the NATO has set up several successful anti-piracy missions among which Operation Ocean Shield (see Legal Framework). NATO and the EU cooperate on most missions due to insufficient means by both to shoulder the missions alone. Pirates, especially in Somalia, are most often small groups of young men backed by militant groups with whom they have to share a substantial amount of the money they bribed. Even then, a single pirate can earn approximately a two to three years’ worth of salary through a single successful attack. The rise of piracy and its profitability has professionalised the equipment of the militia backing the pirates with information. Another important role is reserved for the Weak states that are no longer able to control their country and whose rule is most often in the hands of militia. These states form on the one hand a safe haven for pirates but are on the other hand often the main source of the piracy in their region. This situation is perpetuated by the fact that these states are incapable of tackling the problem. Links: 

International Maritime Organisation: http://www.imo.org/About/Pages/Default.aspx



NATO, Operation Ocean Shield: http://www.mc.nato.int/about/Pages/Operation%20Ocean%20Shield.aspx

4. MAIN CONFLICTS General poverty and lack of prospects in the problematic countries make up the root of problems. Whilst military naval presence is a strong deterrent, the vast sea routes in question only allow for limited protection at major cost. The question of sovereignty in international waters is of lesser concern. More alarming is the EU’s dependence on gas and crude-oil from (Middle-)Eastern countries. By having relied for too long on the US’s now lessened interest in keeping a military presence in these regions, and not having enough own resources to replace the US’s past role, the EU is threading water together with NATO, its main ally in the region. The war-torn countries from which most pirates stem are in dire need of financial and humanitarian aid. However, in a first move, insufficient cooperation between NGO’s, governmental and regional agencies is most often the underlying cause of ineffective help in these cases.

Links: 

US energy information, oil transport: http://www.eia.gov/countries/regions-topics.cfm?fips=wotc&trk=p3



Maritime Piracy: http://www.unodc.org/documents/data-andanalysis/tocta/9.Maritime_piracy.pdf

5. LEGAL FRAMEWORK To fully understand this topic it is necessary to have basic knowledge of the relevant international laws and treaties. The most important piece of legislation concerning this topic is the United Nationals Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), signed in 1982. This document is the framework upon which most of the other treaties are based. It includes the official definitions of concepts such as high seas, piracy, robbery and all the laws connected to those concepts. It states for example that, in internationals waters, ships are subject to the jurisdiction of the nationality of the flag under which they sail. The UNCLOS states that every state has the duty to cooperate in the elimination of piracy on the high seas: “All States shall cooperate to the fullest possible extent in the repression of piracy on the high seas or in any other place outside the jurisdiction of any State.”74 Pirates themselves have the unique legal status of ‘Hostis Humani Generis’ which

04/01/2014 Article 100 UNCLOS source: http://www.un.org/depts/los/convention_agreements/texts/unclos/part7.htm 74

literally means ‘an enemy of mankind’. The implication of this status is that any state has the right to arrest and prosecute pirates on the high seas75. To counter the sudden rise of piracy in the Gulf of Aden and the Arabian sea after the start of the Somalian civil war the surrounding countries decided to sign a treaty. This is the Djibouti Code of Conduct, in which the countries vow to cooperate as much as possible in the battle against piracy in the Western Indian Ocean and the Gulf of Aden76. Another international agreement concerned the free and safe movement of ships through the Gulf of Aden, which is the most important trading route between Asia and Europe. To ensure a safe passage the Internationally Recommended Transit Corridor (IRTC) was established. It consists of two lanes running through the Gulf of Aden that are guarded by the navy of international organisations. Because of the global economic interest in pirate-free trading routes, NATO engaged in an anti-piracy mission in the Gulf of Aden and the Horn of Africa: ‘Operation Ocean Shield’ (OOS) in 2008. They define their goals as follows: “to provide naval escorts and deterrence, while increasing cooperation with other counter-piracy operations in the area in order to optimise efforts and tackle the evolving pirate trends and tactics.” In the same year the EU Council also announced a Joint Action 77 in which the naval force of the European Union (EU) launch a mission to reduce piracy. The mission is called ‘Operation Atalanta 78 ’ and the primary goal is to escort ships of the World Food Programme heading towards Somalia and the protection of African Union Mission on Somalia (AMISOM) shipping. The countries most active in Operation Atalanta are Germany, France, Spain, Italy and The Netherlands. AMISOM is mandated by the UN to support the transitional government, implement a national security plan and to assist in creating a secure environment for the delivery of humanitarian aid in Somalia. Another important international mission is the International Task Force 151, part of the combined maritime forces, to disrupt piracy and armed robbery at sea and to engage with regional and other partners to improve relevant capabilities in order to protect global maritime commerce and secure freedom of navigation. Links:

Article 105 of the UNCLOS Signed in 2009 by the representatives of Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Madagascar, Maldives, Seychelles, Somalia, the United Republic of Tanzania and Yemen. 77 Joint actions are the result of close cooperation between various institutions or stakeholders. They are used for transversal policies (R&D, education) or issues for which having a single level of action is not considered pertinent 78 05/01/2013 source: http://eunavfor.eu/ 75 76



Djibouti Code of Conduct: http://www.imo.org/OurWork/Security/PIU/Pages/DCoC.aspx



Amisom (summary of the war and history): http://amisom-au.org/

6. ACADEMIA A case-study of Somalia is perfect for analysing the roots of most maritime piracy in the world. Following the end of dictatorship in 1991, a still ongoing civil war broke out. The country consequently went through a time of anarchy and split into smaller territories. With the rule of law absent, warlords established themselves to gain benefit from the ongoing struggle. With no party strong enough to establish a new government, it took until 2000 for a first “Transitional National Government” to be established. It took massive support by the international community, most notable Nigeria, to establish its power base, which is completely dependent on outside support. It would take another 12 years until the first new Federal Government of Somalia to be sworn in. Whilst the new government claims to have power over most of Somalia, the truth is that the country is still marked by the legacy of its dictatorship and civil war. Corruption and violence are still running high and the government has no to little control in many areas of the country. Those areas are controlled by aforementioned warlords and their militia and are the cause for the birth of modern day piracy inside Somalia. Famine, violence, and a lack of education offer few perspectives to the mostly on fishing reliant people living along the coast. This situation would not be as bleak as it is today would it be not for the illegal fishing by foreign ships during the years of the civil war. Illicit fishing and dumping of toxic waste hurt the local fishing market without offering compensation. Early pirates/fishermen held the vessels breaching their territory and polluting it until they would get paid said compensation. As time moved on and the profitability of the business increased, so did the number of pirates. Today, those pirates mostly represent groups of young men supported by local militia in the hope for a pay-out worth several years of salary. In 2004 their attack radius reached 50 nautical miles off the coast of Somalia. By 2006, the radius enlarged to 350NM and in 2009 up to 1000NM. With over 40% of the Somali population reliant on food aid and 96% of that aid arriving by sea, piracy is hurting the local population most. Insurance premiums for ships passing the seas around Somalia have risen sevenfold to up to 110000€ and higher. Due to the additional cost to shipping companies, local trade in the region has consequently been suffering. The continuing

efforts of both the EU and NATO on cooperating on military missions, as well as giving additional protection to ships passing the area, has proved to bring piracy down by 95% by 2013. However, many challenges are still in place. The pirates can most often not be prosecuted and are simply released. Advances have been made with Germany or Kenya trying some cases but no definite solution has been reached yet. With on-land save heavens for pirates and a lessened military presence on sea by 2014, the future of Somalia looks as gloomy as ever. Links: 

Timeline Somalia: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-14094632



Maritime Insurance: http://www.igpandi.org/downloadables/piracy/news/Marsh%20Piracy%20im plications.pdf

7. SUMMARY With the different aspects of this overview in mind, some questions need to be asked. The maritime trade industry won’t slow down before long, so how long term are our current answers to the problem at hand? The current emphasis on military missions to protect vessels circulating dangerous areas, do we actually solve the problem we helped create (illegal fishing in Somalia that drove people to become pirates) or do we just deny offering real solutions to the problem. Especially with regard to the fact that it is the international community organising these missions, is the world simply ignoring the root issues of piracy and take the easy way out? What has the impact of these missions been on the communities, governments, and regions been? Furthermore, with the end of these missions in the near future, what goals have they achieved and are they tangible on the long-term or but a fluke in a century old business that got rejuvenated in the past few decades? The current lack of cooperation between the different actors involved should also make us question possible future attacks. Will we always be able to keep the upper-hand or will they find ways around the often regionally restricted programs in place now. How fast can the international community react to new threats? What is the right balance between regional and global responses?

LINKS TO GENERAL RESOURCES ABOUT THE EU A comprehensive guide to the European Union (highly recommended):  https://www.dropbox.com/s/5ht602gj1b6fdgg/EYP%20DE%20Guide%20to%2 0the%20European%20Union.pdf A brief summary of the EU’s history and its goals:  http://europa.eu/about-eu/index_en.htm  http://europa.eu/about-eu/eu-history/ An introduction to the EU’s institutional framework:  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 About the European Parliament:  http://europarltv.europa.eu/en/player.aspx?pid=24dd4d92-1193-4ebc-b5d89f2800a4a40e  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OCUF5t1kRlI An explanation of the way the EU makes decisions (ordinary legislative procedure):  http://ec.europa.eu/atwork/decision-making/index_en.htm  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/aboutparliament/en/0081f4b3c7/Lawmaking-procedures-in-detail.html  http://www.europarl.europa.eu/external/appendix/legislativeprocedure/euro parl_ordinarylegislativeprocedure_howitworks_en.pdf  http://europarltv.europa.eu/en/player.aspx?pid=2943a9f1-0a1a-4f7c-9fe89f82009fa481 An overview of all EU treaties:  http://europa.eu/eu-law/treaties/index_en.htm The Lisbon Treaty at a glance:  http://europa.eu/lisbon_treaty/glance/index_en.htm On the EU budget:  http://europa.eu/about-eu/basic-information/money/expenditure/ An overview of the policy areas in which the EU is active:  http://europa.eu/pol/

Good luck with your preparation!