Follow us:
#MEUs2015
Strasbourg Snitcher
Model European Union Strasbourg 2015 Daily News of Model European Union Strasbourg 2015
Sunday, 12. April 2015
Issue No 01/15
Member States Entangled in Eurozone’s New Safety Net
Rikke Mathiassen Trying to avoid Europeans losing their savings to future banking failures, the European Central Bank is tightening its grip on banks in the euro zone. On the sideline, member states worry about losing control over their national banking systems. The Royal Bank of Scotland, the Anglo Irish Bank and the Banco Privado Portugues: these are just three in the long line of European banks that were bailed out during the economic downturn. The crisis that saw banks falling like dominoes and left taxpayers footing the bill. The outbreak of the financial crisis in 2008 and the consequences that followed have forced the EU and its member states to undergo a self-examination: What went wrong? And how can a similar economic disaster within the group of eurozone countries, where economies are so highly interdependent, be prevented from happening in the future? In response, in June 2012, government leaders agreed to create a banking union. In short, the purpose is to stabilise the financial markets and to secure that the next time a bank is on the brink of bankruptcy, it will be the banks themselves – not the European citizens – who have to pay: ”We are learning the lessons of the crisis and creating a sounder financial system,” Jonathan Hill, EU Commissioner for Fi-
nancial Stability, Financial Services and Capital Markets Union, said in a press release in December.
sceptical. They claim that the Commission proposed a EU level solution for a eurozone problem.
The EU’s new financial safety net is made out of three main components: all banks in the eurozone has to comply with a common set of rules, which block unnecessary risk-taking and forces every bank to keep a financial safeguard for future tough times. The European Central Bank (ECB) has then been appointed the grand supervisor, which in short means they will act as the ‘banking police’. If things still go wrong and a bank is at risk of failure, a so-called resolution board is set up decides whether to bailout the bank with money from a fund, which all the banks have chipped into.
Countries such Poland and the Czech Republic fear that the EBU will have a detrimental effect on their own banking sectors, no matter what they do, as banks from eurozone-members such as Germany and France own around 65% of the Central and Eastern European banking landscape. Meanwhile, countries including Denmark, Hungary and Latvia agree that member states should coordinate their efforts. However, they insist that this should happen on the initiative of the national authorities - not on the order of the ECB.
The European Banking Union (EBU) includes all states within the eurozone. However, in order to keep the door open for a potential EU-wide banking union later on, member states that are not part of the euro are allowed to join if they wish. But far from everyone has been satisfied all the way with the banking union’s attempt to act as the solution for avoiding another debt crisis. In Germany, for example, smaller banks initially raised the concern that the outside supervision of the ECB would make the system less effective. And while eurozonemembers such as France, Spain, Portugal and Greece are generally in favour of the banking union, voices outside of the common currency has been more
At the moment, only Eurozone-members can be represented in the supervisory system under the ECB. This would inevitably mean less influence for the non-eurozone-states, and they are therefore reluctant to place their national bank supervision under the control of the ECB. At a Polish-British forum last spring, Poland’s central bank governor Marek Belka explained: “Non-euro zone countries will not have access to the liquidity of the European Central Bank... this is a fundamental problem.” So far, Bulgaria and Romania are the only states that have made notable steps towards voluntarily joining the new banking club within the near future.
IN THIS ISSUE REPRESENTATION FOR WOMEN
Not only in social terms, but in economic terms also, gender equality is of the utmost importance... Page 2
DATA REGULATION
Everyone in Strasbourg is looking forward to hearing the discussions that are going to take place all week long in the European Parliament... Page 3
EU ENLARGEMENT
European Union enlargement is the process through which countries are officially recognised as members of the EU... Page 4
DIFFUSE STRASBOURG
The European Union has come a long way. However, the evolution path has started to reverse. Page 7
2 | Sunday, 12. April 2015
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15
A Call for Increased Representation for Women in the EU Sian Morgan Nowadays, 46% of people employed across the EU are women, additionally; on average they have a higher level of education than their male colleagues. 34% of working women have some form of tertiary level education compared to 28% of men and still, women remain under represented. This also represents a lack of return on investment that is crucial to companies and general prosperity in the European Union. So no only in social terms, but in economic terms also, gender equality is of the utmost importance. Various Member States have taken the necessary steps to promote gender equality in company boardrooms; however, despite this, progress is still slow and is not showing the essential results. In recent figures dating from April 2013 we are shown that women account for just 16.6% or one in six of board members (European Commission) with the highest levels of female representation of women on boards being in Finland (29.1%) and Latvia (29%), closely followed by France (26.8) and Sweden (26.5%). We must congratulate these countries for having the highest female representation, but we must not forget that less than 30% is not progress enough. Women have fought for years to achieve the same rights of men and that fight is not over until we have equal representation of men and women. These statistics show that there are Member
States where men hold at least four of every five board positions and what’s worse is that in Romania, Cyprus, Estonia, Greece, Portugal and Malta, women hold less than one in ten positions! These eye-opening statistics prove that not one EU Member State is close to the EU’s 40% objective and that more than two thirds are not even half way to meeting it and highlights the harsh truth that new measures need to be put into place to bring about effective and sub-
stantial change. Furthermore, the fact that the share of women board members from 2003 to 2010 only grew at an average rate of just 0.5% (European Commission) from 8.5% to 11.5% reinforces the notion that rate of change was unacceptably slow. There have been plans set in motion over the recent years and the economic dimension of gender balance has become increasingly prominent in national, European and international areas. The
European Commission launched the ‘Women on the Board Pledge for Europe’ (2011) and in 2012 the Commission adopted a proposal for a Directive with an objective of 40% for under-represented sex among non- executive directors by 2020. It is positive to see that initiatives are being made to promote gender equality but women deserve more than just initiatives, they deserve results and real representation.
The Fight Against Child Poverty in the European Union – Unresolved Francisco Daniel Garcés Almost 27 million minors are at risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU, according to a recent survey by the European Commission. This statistic stands currently at 28 percent; it means that one out of every four persons in Europe live under the poverty threshold, which is higher than any other group and for the EU population as a whole –a total of approximately 24 percent. Additionally, nine percent of children live in places where not anyone is employed, and 11.8 percent lack proper food or clothes. The previous dates evidence the failure of the combat against child starvation over the past decades, especially the Europe 2020 strategy, which aimed to reduce by 20 million the number of poor in the European Union by the year 2020. The lack of a common specific policy
has ballasted its development, as many countries do not proportionate enough funds to prevent the problem or even not include any contribution. In these cases, the reduction in funding for essential public, social and healthcare services is having an adverse effect on the society quality. Nevertheless, in the context of the economic crisis, the situation is unlikely to improve, as UNICEF’s information underscores: during the past few years there was a remarkable increase in rates of famine in the United Kingdom, Italy, Greece and Spain. A prominent case can be found in Spain -the fifth country by population-, which is the second state with the highest rate of child poverty, only exceed by Romania. Specifically, the child poverty rate in the southern country rose from 28.2 percent to 36.3 percent between 2008 and 2012, while the eastern state had an increasing of
nearly 40 percent in the same period. However, there is also good news from Bulgaria and other Eastern countries, where the rates descend slightly (average of 10 percent in some cases). Among the experts, there is no doubt about the cause. The social impact of the austerity measures -including budget cuts at local levels- have had detrimental effects on society, a situation that can last long into adult life if a solution is not found. Unfortunately, the Europe 2020 strategy has failed in its objective: poverty and exclusion are still in advanced, as well as youth unemployment dates are raising to unexpected figures. In other words, this question is not resolved yet. The results achieved do not allow the EU to slow down, although it looks like Europe is on track to stumble over the same stone: many words and few facts - this is not the first strategy to be followed by the European administration,
so it is worth to review and check how the planning fits into the existing EU institutional and government design-. So, the European Union has a challenge ahead: to build up real policies to solve the scarcities of the strategy. However, the member states’ response is not equal to the expected and it is a big deal to defeat: most of member countries have made not any progress on developing poverty reduction policies to ensure social cohesion. For this reason, the EU should encourage everyone and also implement common strategies and plans that aim to reduce child poverty, but from the perspective of child rights. Finally, the best of Europe 2020 is that they are laying the groundwork to establish an agile coordination framework, but you need to be realistic: only when the economies of the European countries are sound may pursue with hope of success the strategic goals.
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15
Sunday, 12. April 2015 | 3
Data Regulation tion Regulation.
Anouk Heili On the first day of the session, everyone in Strasbourg is looking forward to hearing the discussions that are going to take place all week long in the European Parliament. One of the biggest issues of this week is whether or not the members of the Parliament and the members of the Council are going to find an agreement on the adaptation of the personal data legislation. Remember that drunk picture you deleted last month ? Ever thought of what your future boss would say if he found it ? And what about that stupid blog of yours you wrote when you were 13 ? Yes you know exactly which one I am talking about. I could probably find it on Google by the way. Oh yes, you would definitely be in trouble. Data protection issues are everywhere and concern everyone. You, me, most European citizens, and even very important people. The NSA scandal, WikiLeaks recently showed us that our data was not as well protected as we could have thought. Personal information and the right to keep them secret and safe has become a burning issue, especially in the European Union. Indeed, a recent ruling of the European Court of Justice has raised the question whether it was time for the EU to adopt a new Data Protec-
In 2012, the Commission already had a proposal, which passed by the Parliament and whose fate now remains with the Council. The future of the regulation however, is uncertain since the member States have been renegotiating their own agreement with the United States. If some argue that the decision should be left to individual member states, the proposal still deals with issues that are common to every European citizen. Firstly, the proposal stipulated the right to be forgotten which enforces the possibility for an individual to ask for the removal of links of prejudicial data, a right that was already included in the 1995 data protection directive and confirmed by the judgement of the European Court of Justice of 2014 Google Spain SL vs Agencia Espanola de Proteccion de Datos and Mario Gonzalez. This right is not absolute and the citizen has to prove that the link is no longer rel-
evant for it to be removed, but that leads us to the second issue of this proposal : how are internet companies reacting to the proposal ? It is obviously not good news for private enterprises and some of their founders even talked about censorship. Google founder Eric Schmidt has criticized the complexity of the procedure since the search engine had to install a request form after the Commission came up with the proposal. Google says it is hard for the company to be both judge and executioner which shows us the lack of cooperation between companies and the European Court of Justice. Besides those criticisms, we cannot deny that a thousand of jobs are being created every year by communication and technology companies, the legislation must therefore prevent harming this field which has an important place in Europe. It is also about the picture Europe is giving to itself : the proposal has been very criticized in the United States for example
and the old continent is always shown as the late one concerning new technologies. To keep attracting companies and to save its place in the international competition, the European Union also has to adapt its legislation to modern issues. The proposal plans, indeed, on punishing companies that would share personal data with a third party. It is going to be up to the the European Council and the European parliament to decide whether this is doable or not, knowing that conflicting data protection rules in different countries would disrupt international exchanges but also that individuals might be unwilling to transfer personal data abroad if they were uncertain about the level of protection in other countries.
On a proposal that is dealing at the same time with human rights, digital rights and economics, we can not wait to see how the EU representantives are going to discuss this very recent and interesting issue here in Strasbourg.
Looking Beyond the Cultural Divide Alexandra van Walraven There is a challenge that politicians fail to acknowledge. What kind of idea is putting together a population of around 700 million people, each with different backgrounds, but still expecting them to form a strong and united union? A union that can represent all these voices and be competitive towards its neighbours. All twenty eight member states decided to delegate some of the powers in the name of the Union and through which it operates to the outside world. At a global level, the European Union is indeed taken as one entity, as a whole, represented by European leaders through one vote. In the World Trade Organisation, the European countries are represented by the European Union. Same applies for the G7 (or G8 as some prefer); the European Union is represented as one of the eight members. This one vote is shared with twenty eight member states, comprising of around 700 million people. Do these 700 million people have the same opinion? Highly unlikely. Yet, their voice is through a shared vote.
Their diverging opinions arise from structural differences between the countries. Not every country has the same amount of resources, potentialities and most importantly mind set. Within and across the member states, there are inherent differences in cultures; linguistic divergences to start with. Value systems, religion, social development and traditions are not the same across the Union. Although there might be converging perceptions, one country’s national hero is not the other. Mentalities tend to differ across North and South, East and West. Even though the Iron Curtain has fallen, scholars such as Laura Gongola, still argue that the effects are lasting. She compares the East versus West divide due to deeply ingrained differences in family and lifestyle. Add to that forty-five years of communism which eventually results in an unequal share of resources, an uneven development process and most importantly divergent mentalities. Criticism of the impossible tasks for these countries to catch up is common; how can they adopt to the EU model, without first dealing with local realities and challenges?
This certainly is a reason for the different mentalities across the Union. This underlying issue creates only more challenges. Aligning political objectives is difficult if mentalities do not match. At the domestic level, the struggles are not necessarily the same in a fellow member state; varying levels of unemployment, diverging social welfare systems, different stages of economic growth, etc. As a result, the inhabitants of each country do not have the same wishes in terms of politics. This is one challenge which can be attributed to varying mentalities. A proof of this is the inhabitants’ identification: people still identify themselves with the national country first, according to the Eurobarometer report. First the country, then Europe. Does this mean that we need to give up on this project we call Europe? No. Admitting the problem is part of the solution. There needs to be a will to thrive further as one global Union. It sounds idealistic, but the reality does not have to be so far. The Eurobarometer report also brought up that people can see themselves as inhabitants of their
national country and of Europe. What is necessary is understanding of different cultures and perceptions. A sentence our generation is tirelessly bored with is “you are the leaders of tomorrow.” But there is a lot more truth in it. Therefore, it is extremely important that cultural understanding is created at our level. Cultural exchanges and projects across the Union are valuable for the development of our generation’s mind set. Think of projects such as Erasmus program. Allowing us to experience the life style of other students within the Union, is one of the many benefits. Events such as Model European Union helps us understand the complexities of the political scene we are experiencing. Representing a position that is perhaps not your own, eventually forces you to look at issues from another perspective. The youth is as interconnected as ever before, and this will only help to foster a stronger cooperation within the Union. Cultural differences are perhaps present, but they can only form an asset if there is understanding between countries.
4 | Sunday, 12. April 2015
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15
EU Enlargement: Historical Introduction and a Short Focus on Serbia
Alessandra Sinno
Impressum Editors Sian Morgan Isotta Rossoni
Journalists
Francisco Daniel Garcés Maria Salomé Fernandes Anouk Heili Rikke Mathiassen Daniela Prugger Alessandra Sinno Diana Tavares Alexandra van Walraven
Follow us: /user/MEUStrasbourg /modeleu /beta_europe
European Union enlargement is the process through which countries are officially recognised as members of the EU, thus historically realising the idea of the European Union. Indeed, according to Article 49 (ex Article 49 TEU) of the Treaty on European Union, all European States politically supporting all those values quoted by Article 2, namely human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities, promoted in an equal, respectful and democratic society, may apply to take part in the Union. To be admitted, every country must respect specific criteria and accession conditions, formulated by the EU leaders’ summit in Copenhagen in 1993, the so-called Copenhagen criteria. These conditions are partly political as every country needs to have stable local institutions which guarantee and promote a peaceful society in the name of democracy and fundamental human rights. Some of the conditions are economic, as countries also need an internal functioning economy to be encouraged in being part of trade and market competitions in the EU; the ability to take on the obligations of membership, economically, politically and also monetarily. This innate values expansion force started to be shown in practice 1973, when Denmark, Ireland and the United Kingdom joined the Union, followed
by Greece (1981), Spain and Portugal (1986), Austria, Finland and Sweden (1995). In 2004, there was the biggest enlargement ever in the history of European Union, which involved at least ten countries, including Romania and Bulgaria only three years later. On the 1th July of 2013, Croatia became the 28th EU member. At the beginning of the same year, the EU counted eight more countries, between candidates and potential candidates, six of them belonging to Western Balkan region: Albania, Montenegro, Serbia, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, both Bosnia and Herzegovina and Kosovo (under UN Security Resolution 1244). Serbia seems to be very close to the unanimously admission. Its diplomatic relations with European Union begun formally in 2003, during the Thessaloniki European Council, when Serbia was chosen as a potential candidate country. In 2008, a European partnership for Serbia was implemented, which identified priorities and procedures for the admission application. One year later, Serbia formally applied. Only in March 2012, the official status of candidate country was recognized to Serbia and in 2013, a Stabilisation and Association Agreement between the EU and Serbia become active, coming into force. At the end of the same year, the European Council agreed to organize the First Intergovernmental Conference with Serbia, which took place on 21st of January 2014, opening the official processes to Serbia’s accession negotia-
tions. Recently, on the 19-20th of March, Belgrade was theatre of the third meeting of EU-Serbian Stabilisation and Association Parliamentary Committee: aim of the meeting was the analysis of all the most important aspects of the relations between Serbia and the European Union. Mr Eduard Kukan, form European Parliament, and Dr Vladimir Orilić, from National Assembly of the Republic of Serbia, co-ordinated the meeting, attended by more than 60 participants, from important institutions, both European and Serbian. The most significant topics discussed are mostly related to Serbia’s European Union integration and the implementation of the Stabilisation and Association Agreement mentioned above, such as the state of play of EU-Serbia relations, pre-accession assistance to Serbia, Serbia’s preparations to open negotiations (including a situation of national minorities), dialogue on normalisation of relations between Belgrade and Pristina, regional cooperation, developments in economy (EU-Serbia SAPC, Declaration and recommendations); in particular, minority rights and diplomatic relations with Kosovo led to very interesting and various discussions during this two-days long meeting. Their importance is crucial for the admission itself to the Union; indeed, in addition of the standard accession criteria, there are additional conditions that Western continued on page 5 ...
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15
Sunday, 12. April 2015 | 5
continued ... EU Enlargement ... continued from page 4 ... Balkan countries have to respect, such as regional cooperation and good relations with neighbouring countries. The meeting closed with the active discussion about the Declaration and recommendations.
It is clear that the EU Enlargement presents new political and cultural perspectives, involving geographic areas which always played fundamental roles on world politics, especially during more recent times. In particular, Balkans, the European cultural bridge between the West and the East, one of the most
beautiful anthropological mosaics, allowed huge human flows during the history, which produced great beauties. It is a necessary political process to make Europeans more aware of their cultural identities and historical communitarian memory. To conclude, quoting Štefan Füle, European Commissioner for the
EU Enlargement, “the EU Enlargement policy makes Europe a safer and a more stable place; it allows us to grow stronger and to promote our values, and enables us to assume our role as a global player on the world stage”.
Fortress Europe?
Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we going? Isotta Rossoni As MEU participants, we will soon be preparing for our trip to Strasbourg. We will pack our bags and depart from home, or perhaps from another European country, where we are currently working or studying. We won’t require any visas; we will just have to board a plane, bus or train and show our passports or ID cards upon arrival. Passport control is usually quite swift for European citizens travelling within the Union, so we are unlikely to be held up for long or be subjected to extensive security checks. Most of us won’t even have to worry about looking for a foreign exchange desk. If we are thirsty or drowsy after our trip and wish to purchase a bottle of water or a coffee, we need only rummage in our pockets and extract a couple of euro coins. Communication with airport or hotel staff will hardly prove arduous: not only do most Europeans speak English, but many are also fluent in several other languages. Finally, no real obstacle stands in the way of us
extending our stay past the end of the Conference, except for money or time constraints, of course. All of these considerations are commonplace. We are so accustomed to our lives as Europeans, that we often give them for granted. Yet, we are free. Free to travel across the European continent, free to study and work in a Member State of our choosing, free to pursue the opportunities that are better suited to our desires and aspirations. Our generation, and those after us, can fully relish the benefits of the EU. Should the Union crumble, our personal lives would probably change dramatically, from the grand scheme of things down to the day-to-day technicalities. Just like for many of us the EU signifies liberty and possibility, migrants fleeing war, poverty or famine in their home countries dream of Europe as the land of freedom. Yet, chances are that their reveries will vanish quick as a wink. For to safeguard freedom within the continent, we have built a fortress around our borders.
But perhaps, evoking the popular metaphor of the ‘fortress’ may prove inaccurate. The reality of border control is erratic, muddled and generally irrational. Those who had hoped to attain freedom in Europe, become entangled in a suffocating web of bureaucracy. While the maxim ‘innocent until proven guilty’ governs legal proceedings involving European citizens, extra-EU migrants are reserved separate treatment. The burden of proof is on them to prove their motives and intentions, and to disprove their guilt in so-called ‘crimes of mobility’. Unlike most of us, they cannot cherry-pick among Member States. The Dublin Regulation binds them to the first country of arrival and denies them any freedom of choice. Asylum shopping is no option. Yet, our ‘culture of disbelief’ goes beyond the mere denial of freedom of choice for undocumented migrants and asylum seekers. It frequently results in the denial of liberty, one of the founding values of our liberal democracies. Migrants- including, regrettably, children, pregnant women and victims
of torture- are often held in detention centres for relatively long periods of time, and may have to endure inhumane and degrading conditions. Some of us may ask: why should we care? Because human rights are being breached, people are often being subjected to unwarranted suffering, and our current policies threaten to create even more friction among Member States, who incidentally, all feel like they have enough on their plates when it comes to immigration. More crucially, because how we treat the most vulnerable has a bearing on who we are. Europe was born of a post-war project of democracy, peace and liberty. In acknowledging this, can we really turn a blind eye to what happens at our borders, in our immigration detention centres and police stations? It looks like there’s a lot of work to do for Europe to fulfill its promises. As young Europeans we can work towards this goal together. So let’s roll up our sleeves and get the discussion started.
6 | Sunday, 12. April 2015
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15
The Role of the Interpreter Diana Tavares They are the voices we hear in our headphones, telling us what the important figures are saying, when we don’t understand the actual words. But what does it take to be a good interpreter? And how can someone get there? The task for an interpreter is to faithfully translate and reproduce what is being said in EU’s sessions and press confer-
Núria Galarza, one of the interpreters in the Spanish booth, explains how much it is more than just translating. “We do not only translate words, but meaning, intention and culture. Therefore, it is essential to be aware of the cultural gap between the speaker and the audience or the two parties of a meeting so as to send the message with all the possible nuances”. Being a voice for the EU is no easy task, as the interpreter for the Spanish booth
job in the world, because it’s different and once you are in the booth, you never know what is going to happen”. In this particular workplace, the interpreters work in pairs, so on top of everything, one must be in tune with their partner, to ensure a well performed service. Marta Makos, interpreting for the Polish booth this year, signed up for the ride thanks to her school. “Last year, one of my teachers, who taught me note taking, informed my group of the possibility of
utive interpreting in council meetings. There will also be the opportunity to practice the so called “whispered interpreting”, where the interpreting will be done at the side of the MEPs, in the actual plenary. The languages provided will be Czech, French, Slovak, Spanish, German, Hungarian, Italian and Polish. Now, as the event is near, the young interpreter explains that the secret to success lies in knowledge as well as practice. “Basically, the more you know, the better you are. It is much easier to interpret when you are familiar with a given topic/domain and when you understand what is going on. What is more, if you want to become a good interpreter you need to practice a lot in order to improve your reflexes, memory (useful in consecutive interpreting) and become stressresistant”, she says with a smile. Núria Galarza shares the view of her colleague about the importance of knowledge and practice, and adds that a good deal of current affairs knowledge is needed, “moreover, for me it is always very useful to create my own speeches with the vocabulary I need to learn, i.e. in this case, with the Banking Union and Data Protection. That’s a nice way to put every word in context, because if not, we only learn isolated words”.
ences. Mostly, they do it from English to their mother tongues, but the topics are complex in the Institutions these days, and they require preparation and reading long and serious paperwork. This happens because it is asked of MEPs to give a pre-session statement.
explains, “we are always facing challenges and solving them in two or three seconds, no time to over think it! An accent, speed, terminology, cultural references, jokes... That’s why we need extensive training and a wide knowledge of both languages and cultures. But, in any case, for me it is the most amazing
working in the interpretation booth in the EP. I decided to give it a try and sent my application”. During this week’s events in the European Parliament, the interpreters will be asked to do multilingual interpreting in sessions and conferences, and consec-
MEU2015 will run in Strasbourg from the 11th to the 18th of April, gathering about 150 young people from all over Europe to simulate the role of MEPs, Members of the Council, Journalists, Interpreters and Lobbyists, in a one week experience on how the EU works in all its different corners.
Extreme Europe Less Europe – that is - as last year’s European parliament elections revealed – is what many EU-citizens seem to want for their future. In various European Member states a similar pattern has become noticeable: Eurosceptic, populist, nationalist, discriminatory - even racist or anti-Semitic - but especially anti-immigrant parties appear to have become a permanent political phenomenon. However, what unifies all of them – extreme left-wing as well as extreme right-wing politics - is their fundamental criticism of the political establishment.
stream. Europe’s problems are evident: ascending (youth) unemployment and poverty, the financial and Greek government-debt crisis, criticisable austerity measures in southern Europe as well as increased immigration. Motivated by these factors, some people may consider supporting and voting for extremist positions and parties to be a statement for their dissatisfaction, without necessarily identifying with them. They hold hostile attitudes towards foreigners, but mainly want to state their protest by affecting public policies by means of voting. Yet, radical right political parties clearly have a tendency to attract extreme right individuals.
Sixty years after European integration first took its course, right-wing extremism turned to be socially acceptable again, even to be found in the main-
In France, Marine Le Pen’s extreme right-wing party, Front National, won the European Parliament elections 2014 – for the first time. Also, the UK Inde-
Daniela Prugger
pendence Party celebrates a historic victory. The same happened in Denmark, where the far-right Danish People’s party (DPP) triumphed and in Austria, Poland, Hungary, Finland, Germany and Greece, Eurosceptic, right wing parties could gain a considerable number of votes in the near future. Sometimes it’s the Euro, sometimes the whole European Union and lately it is primarily immigration, the battle against terrorism and Islam that rule their political agenda and campaigns. Most European member states lack a clear legal instrument or anti-discrimination law. At the same time, all those parties mentioned before dispraise not only capitalism, globalization, open borders, a common currency, in order to denunciate a “system”, which in their eyes does not pay adequate attention
and listen to what the people want and need - but also practise cultural, sexual, ethnic and religious discrimination. By criticizing they use enemy images, polemics and address to the peoples fears, but on the other hand the do not come up with solutions. Thereby, they generally sympathize and maintain a rather good relationship with Russia’s President Vladimir Putin. In Putin they see an ally whenever there is the necessity to defend threatened values – like tradition, family and Christianity. It is important not to overrate the current development. Alas, the political establishment and large parts of the media mainly focus on the Monetary Union and a possible “Graccident” while little continued on page 7 ...
Issue No 01/15
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Sunday, 12. April 2015 | 7
Diffuse Strasbourg
Welcome to civic intervention. Welcome to youth decision-making. Welcome to Strasbourg. Maria Salomé Fernandes The European Union has come a long way. However, the evolution path has started to reverse. “I want to destroy the EU, not Europe!” stated Marine le Pen in an interview in June 2014 for the Spiegel. The National’s Front ideology is shared by other politicians within Europe. There is Nigel Farage in UK, Mario Borgheso in Italy, Morten Messerschmidt in Denmark, and the list continues. It is not that eurocepticism is a new concept, but the strength it is gaining through the increasing popularity of extremist parties, constitutes a reason for worries. What is destroying Europe is not terrorism, but the death of its original values. And it is up to you to rebuild them, to spread them, to make justice to a system that has done so much already. Even though there were always disputes on whether there should be a federalist or intergovernmental approach to the EU, opinions converged on the need for long term peace. And the first step towards it was, undoubtly, the
cooperation between France and Germany. States’ egoistic attempts to fulfil their own interests – France wanted to control Germany’s material capabilities to produce armament, and Germany required integration and expansion of trade market – promoted a deviating behaviour from the traditional state survival view, since it resulted in diminish autonomy due to common rules and imposed norms. Dialogues on peace stopped being just a dialogue as economic and trade cooperation created the columns for a project of tolerance, share, and openness. Strasburg represents this. The importance of having monthly plenary sessions here surpasses convenience. It is due to the symbolic relevance of the city, and its proximity to Germany. The franco-german border is the ideal location, as it represents two main forces of the European Union that must be in balance if development of the Community is to continue. Also, taking into consideration France current tendency to anti-Europeanism, the importance of having one of the institutions located in its territory also impacts the importance of France in the construction
of the project and might enhance the adherence of people to it. In fact, from an historical contextualization, Strasbourg has bounced between France and Germany for several times. Originally called Argentoratum, it was a Roman camp of strategic importance because of its international crossroads. It would later become “Strassbourg”, a free city under the Germanic Holy Roman Empire in 1262. It would turn French when annexed by Louis XV in the seventeenth century. Times of modernisation and growth in industry came, until the Franco-Prussian war. In 1870 it was captured by Germany and would only return to France after WWI in 1918. But history could not help repeating itself, and during WWII Strasbourg was again taken over by Germany. In 1944 it was liberated and returned to France, up until the present. The city is now a symbol of reconciliation between the two states. Symbolic ties apart, many are concerned about the Strasbourg “travelling-circus”, which according to a report by
Klaus Welle has an annual cost of 102 million euros and an estimated 20.000 tonnes of carbon into the atmosphere. So make the most out of this experience, and give proof that youth generations are willing to take part in the European Union. Because for much money and oxygen people might have, without prospects for peace there will be no possibility to enjoy it. A project as MEU Strasbourg allows the diffusion of the concept of Europe and the construction of real spirit of belong and citizenship. It is an investment on peace, a weapon against ignorance. It should allow you to realise that you have more similarities than differences and the contact with people from multiple backgrounds should gradually delete from memory any political conflict or racial prejudice. If you are attending MEU, you probably have a rare optimism towards the future, the belief that the path should be towards better condition of life, bet on education, multiculturalism, and peace. And for those goals nationality is a secondary detail.
continued ... Extreme Europe ... continued from page 6 ... attention is paid to the undeniable rise of the far right across Europe and the growing gap between political elites and the citizens. Today, far-right politicians not only focus on their national matters and inter-
ests, but also want to influence supranational, European politics – sometimes, by aiming an exit of the Eurozone or even European Union itself. Over the past years, Front National, Ukip and the Danish People’s party gained more sympathy, support and trust within their own national borders. But their methods
and strategies are often mirrored and have an impact elsewhere. Furthermore, online activism and connectivity facilitate organisation and of course enable a constant exchange of information. Extreme right-wing parties can no longer be ignored or dismissed as temporary
phenomena. Therefore, we need to understand, that leaving the (national) political stage to them puts in danger rather European values, like human rights, democracy or constitutional legality. Awareness and a united European front is required – today more then ever.
8 | Sunday, 12. April 2015
— Strasbourg Snitcher . Daily News —
Issue No 01/15