France will elect its new President. Segolene or Sarkozy, or maybe even Bayrou will change the scene of French politics, or at least they will refresh it given that Chirac has monopolized it in the last 12 years.
Very soon, Scotland will also vote for its 'local' elections, perhaps the last. If the SNP (scottish nationalist) wins, then those elections will probably be national in the future. For an European living in Scotland this alone may be a good argument against SNP: why would we vote to lose our vote?
Gordon Brown will look at this election with great interest. If the SNP wins and Scotland goes toward independence, then its chances of becoming a strong prime minister collapse: he could not claim anymore to represent british interests. In any event, UK constitutional politics seemed geared toward a time of change!
All this may contribute to a renewal at the European Constitutional level. France may well have a new referendum on a simplified text, probably a simple Treaty. The UK will have to redesign its European politics. If England remains Euro-Skeptic, Scotland is in general quite Euro-friendly.
Thursday, April 19, 2007
Tuesday, April 17, 2007
Is "La Repubblica" becoming a tabloid?
In its article "Cofferati father at 60: second child in November"normally a serious and distinguished Italian newspaper writes about Sergio Cofferati, Mayor of Bologna and one of the most popular figures within the Italian Party of Democrats of the Left.
Although the article is listed within the politics section of the newspaper it is entirely concentrating on private life of the Bologna's mayor. It states the mayor's age, that his girlfriend is 20 years younger than him, that he left his wife 3 years ago when he won the municipal elections in Bologna, that his wife went back to live in Rome, that he has already a grown up son who is 30 and works and lives in Milan, even the article says referring to the birth of the child that "the boy or a girl, as far as we know, will be born in November".
When I read the article I first laughed then I had a sudden urge to cry. I am truly shocked by it and hope that this is only an exception and that such intrusion into the irrelevant privacy of italian politicians will not repeat itself.
Although the article is listed within the politics section of the newspaper it is entirely concentrating on private life of the Bologna's mayor. It states the mayor's age, that his girlfriend is 20 years younger than him, that he left his wife 3 years ago when he won the municipal elections in Bologna, that his wife went back to live in Rome, that he has already a grown up son who is 30 and works and lives in Milan, even the article says referring to the birth of the child that "the boy or a girl, as far as we know, will be born in November".
When I read the article I first laughed then I had a sudden urge to cry. I am truly shocked by it and hope that this is only an exception and that such intrusion into the irrelevant privacy of italian politicians will not repeat itself.
Witch-hunt in Poland and Polish treason?
Ignacio Ramonet editorialist of the “Le Monde Diplomatique” criticizes the new Polish Lustration law (see). Namely, in March 2007 the controversial law went into effect and it is judged that it goes further than anything similar in the region, requiring hundreds of thousands of citizens in positions of authority, including academics, journalists, teachers, and state company executives, to declare in writing whether they cooperated with the communist secret services -- or risk losing their jobs.
Polish lustration law differs from those of the rest of Europe for it does not narrow itself to vetting people who hold public office -- MPs, ministers, directors who pursue national interests – but it aims at a much wider group of people.
Ramonet argues that in comparison to the Polish Lustration law McCarthyism in US seems as “amateur anticommunism”. The Polish law requires hundreds of thousands of Polish citizens to officially respond to the question, “Did you secretly and consciously collaborate with the old communist secret service agencies?” After filling in the form responding to the question the individual has to submit the answer to his hierarchical superior at work and this one will in turn send the information to the Institute of Memory in Warsaw. There the information will be checked and subsequently a certificate of “political purity”, as Ramonet puts it, will be issued to the individual under scrutiny. In the case of proved cooperation, journalists for example, will be automatically fired. If an individual refuses to respond or lies risks a prohibition to exercise their profession for 10 years.
Many argue that the law is a result of the ferocious anti-communism of the conservative twin brothers Kaczynski, President and Prime Minister. Opponents of this law say that the law is unconstitutional because a citizens is asked to prove something he did not do. The Polish Constitutional Court will pronounce itself on the law at the beginning of May.
It is undisputable that this law is to say the least problematic. The communist-era secret police harassed large numbers of people, forcing many to sign loyalty declarations or to collaborate. Most people lied, signing the declarations but not really spying. The 2000 verdict of the Polish Supreme Court decided that such people are not to be considered collaborationists. The new law legislates differently. A group of journalists from "Gazeta Wyborcza," which is one of Poland's most influential newspapers and was created by anticommunist dissidents, has announced it is boycotting of the law. The country's largest academic institution, Warsaw University, called on March 22 for the suspension of the new law.
For Ramonet the controversial lustration law logically fits into the nature of policies of the new Polish government. He underlines the example of Roman Giertych, vice-premier minister of Poland and Education Minister from the right-wing League of Polish Families who is famous for his outrageous homophobic policies, as well as anti-Semitist pronouncements of the ministers’ father Maciej Giertych, who is also the member of the European Parliament. The later is on the contrary famous for ambiguous statements that can certainly be branded as anti-Semitic.
From there Ramonet stretches his argument in an interesting fashion. He argues that all these measures constitute an attempt of the ruling Polish elite to return to a pre-communist moral order, a “sick nostalgia” for the pre-WW II period when racism was “proudly displayed”. He argues that certain do not even hesitate to glorify collaboration with Hitler’s Germany against the Soviet Union. At the end of his article Ramonet makes a geopolitical conclusion arguing that the above mentioned political spirit in Poland manages to present Putin’s Russia as the old Soviet Union, which in turn facilitates political moves such as the Polish government accepting to install on its territory the US anti-missile system that is perceived by Russia as a direct threat to its security – despite the opposition of the major EU states. For Ramonet all this “demonstrates how in politics, paranoia, can lead not only to spiritual atrophy, but also to a certain form of treason”.
Although I can fully subscribe to Ramonet’s criticism of the controversial Polish lustration law I consider his later geopolitical argument a simplification. It is more probable that the rationale behind the lustration law can be explained through the logic of Polish internal politics (see)
A malicious reader of Ramonet’s article could conclude that, “alas, non-ideological interpretations are impossible and that Ramonet’s article is also marked by the spirit of paranoia – Communist paranoia”, but this is a malicious reader, I limit myself to ignoring the concluding remarks of his article and accept the critique of the Polish lustration law in an openhearted fashion. It is certainly an interesting reading.
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Embryos, Rights and Dilemmas
Ms Evans's embryos will be destroyed. Her and her partner's embryos had been frozen few years ago. The married couple then split, but Ms Evans wished to use them without her partner's consent, since she's lost fertility after an ovarian cancer operation.
The UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights, including the Grand Chamber (the highest formation of the European Court), declined the request of Ms Evans.
Under these circumstances, the case was particularly difficult to decide and probably raised issues that were not legally solvable. The ambiguous position of the judges and the lawyers who 'feel dreadful' for Ms Evans, but can only decide against her is a sign of a widespread discomfort and the symbol of the existence of a dilemma (for my academic commentary see the European Constitutional Law Review http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=ECL, October 2006.
The UK courts and the European Court of Human Rights, including the Grand Chamber (the highest formation of the European Court), declined the request of Ms Evans.
Under these circumstances, the case was particularly difficult to decide and probably raised issues that were not legally solvable. The ambiguous position of the judges and the lawyers who 'feel dreadful' for Ms Evans, but can only decide against her is a sign of a widespread discomfort and the symbol of the existence of a dilemma (for my academic commentary see the European Constitutional Law Review http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayJournal?jid=ECL, October 2006.
Tuesday, April 03, 2007
GAL at NYU
A quick post to flag a project that I have recently become involved with: the emerging field of Global Administrative Law, a research project involving a wide network of scholars, based at New York University. The project is driven by two basic insights: firstly, that much of the global or transnational regulation currently viewed under the rubric of "governance" can be properly seen as regulatory administration; and secondly that a body of administrative law is emerging that seeks to regulate that regulation. There is, however, both a descriptive and a prescriptive element to the research agenda: not merely what are the principles of an administrative law character that are shaping global governance, but also what should they be. The website provides the following working definition of the project (which is fleshed out in much more detail in a couple of conceptual papers on the issue):
Much of global governance can be understood as regulatory administration. Such regulatory administration is often organized and shaped by principles of an administrative law character. Building on these twin ideas, we argue that a body of global administrative law is emerging. This is the law of transparency, participation, review, and above all accountability in global governance. We posit an increasingly discernible “global administrative space”, in which the strict dichotomy between domestic and international has broken down, administrative functions are performed in complex relations between officials and institutions not organized in a single hierarchy, and regulation using non-binding forms often proves highly effective in practice. Exercises of public power in the global administrative space are increasingly channeled, and controlled, by mechanisms of an administrative law type. These include rules requiring greater transparency, adoption of notice-and-comment procedures in rule-making, and the opening of new or strengthened avenues of judicial and administrative review. We thus regard global administrative law as encompassing the legal mechanisms, principles, and practices, along with supporting social understandings, that promote or otherwise affect the accountability of global administrative bodies, in particular by ensuring these bodies meet adequate standards of transparency, consultation, participation, rationality, and legality, and by providing effective review of the rules and decisions these bodies make. We describe this field of law as “global” rather than “international” to encompass the enmeshment of national and intergovernmental regulation, the increasing roles of private regulators and public-private hybrid bodies, the wide array of informal institutional arrangements that now operate alongside formal institutions, and the foundations of the field in normative practices, and normative sources, that extend beyond international law sources.
The Project distinguished among, but seeks to encompass each of, five main types of globalized administrative regulation. These are: (1) International Administration, by formal international organizations (such as United Nations Security Council individual sanctions programs, or UN administration of territory); (2) Network Administration, based on collective action by transnational networks of cooperative arrangements between national regulatory officials (such as the Basel Committee of national bank regulators); (3) Distributed Administration conducted by national regulators under treaty, network, or other cooperative regimes (such as the Basel Convention on transboundary movement of hazardous wastes); (4) Hybrid Administration, by hybrid intergovernmental-private arrangements (such as ICANN, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers); and (5) Private Administration, by private institutions with regulatory functions (such as the ISO, the International Organization for Standardization).
New systems of administrative procedures, review mechanisms, and decisional principles have arisen to promote greater accountability in decision-making by this rapidly proliferating variety of global regulatory administrative bodies. The subjects of such global regulatory systems include individuals, firms and other economic actors, states, and non-governmental organizations. Global Administrative Law is an emerging field of law and practice addressing both the new structures of administrative law and international law that have arisen in these different institutional contexts, and their normative dimensions, including regime integrity, protection of subjects' rights and promotion of democratic values.
It seems to me that, from this useful and provocative working definition, a number of interesting questions immediately arise at an abstract, general level: in what sense can these administrative law principles be justifiably characterised as "global" (in that the negative justification offered, in contradistinction to the "international", may be necessary but insufficient to justify this rhetoric)? Does it really make sense to talk of one unified global administrative space, rather than a plurality of spaces? What is the relationship of global administrative law to the emerging, if at least equally vague, sphere of "global/international constitutionalism"? And how do the administrative law ends of transparency, participation, review and accountability relate, if at all, to notions of democratic governance?
Such issues are only a small, if important, part of the research agenda. Much focus otherwise is on empirical studies of actual administrative regimes, in order to discern what the principles and norms guiding there function are, and what elements, if any, seem to be common among them. The website provides access to a large number of articles and working papers on the issue. As I mentioned, it is a project that I have recently become (heavily) involved with, so any and all comments on it are welcome!
Sunday, March 25, 2007
Speech by Dr Angela Merkel, Chancellor of Germany and President of the European Council, to celebrate the 50 years of the EU
Presidents, Prime Ministers, Excellencies, Ladies and gentlemen,
Today we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome. The venue of our celebrations today could hardly be more symbolic. For we are celebrating in Berlin. A city that until 18 years ago was divided by a Wall, by barbed wire, by soldiers with orders to shoot. In which people paid with their lives for seeking to escape to freedom.
I grew up east of this city, in the German Democratic Republic. When the Treaties of Rome were concluded I was just three years old. I was seven years old when the Wall was built. It divided also my own family. I did not believe I would ever be able to travel to the West until I was a pensioner. Only a few metres from here was the point where any walk I took would be at an end. But then the Wall collapsed after all. That was a defining moment for me: I realized that nothing ever has to stay the way it is.
That is a source of immense hope for all those who are not ready to countenance the injustices of our world. It is a source of immense hope, too, by the way, for all those in Europe who still endure oppression – like the people of Belarus. Today they are celebrating their independence day. Our thoughts are also with them today and our message to them is: Human rights are indivisible! Europe is with you!
Ladies and gentlemen, the reason we can celebrate this special anniversary here in Berlin of all places is because half a century ago a number of Europe's political leaders set about building a European peace project the like of which had never been seen before.
For let us be honest: 50 years of the Treaties of Rome – in the context of history that is hardly more than the blinking of an eye. And whether it will one day be more than that, whether on 25 March 2057 the centenary of the Treaties of Rome will be celebrated in a Europe of peace and freedom, democracy and the rule of law? We do not know.
None of all this can be taken for granted. All of it must be repeatedly strengthened and defended anew. Stagnation means regression. Building trust takes decades. And overnight it can be undermined. Any cleavage will soon have Europe out of step - sooner than some might think. In short, European unification must be striven for and secured time and time again. That is our guiding mission for the future. That is what is at the heart of today's anniversary celebrations.
Certainly the world today is not the same as the world 50 years ago. The six founding members are now 27 Member States. What started with freedom from tariffs has now progressed into a common currency. A world dominated by two blocs is today a world with a number of different power centres.
In such a world we must ask ever anew what holds Europe together also in this century, what the essence of its identity is. For me the answer is clear. The source of Europe's identity are our shared, fundamental values. They are what holds Europe together.
Let us not forget: For centuries Europe had been an idea, no more than a hope of peace and understanding. Today we, the citizens of Europe, know that hope has been fulfilled.
It has been fulfilled because the founding fathers of Europe were thinking in terms well beyond their own generation. They were thinking in terms well beyond their own time. They were thinking in terms also well beyond purely economic freedoms.
Three years before the signing of the Treaties of Rome the European Defence Community had foundered. But that was not the end of Europe. Despite that disappointment the preamble of the Treaty establishing the European Community began with a statement of determination – I quote – "to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe..." - end of quote.
The founding fathers of Europe knew that in the long run the economic and the political could not be kept separate.
Fifty years of the Treaties of Rome – that means for me, to put it in a nutshell, a dream has come true!
This dream could come true because we citizens of Europe have learned over the past 50 years to make the most of our identities and diverse traditions, the lively variety of our languages, cultures and regions.
This dream could come true because we let ourselves be guided by that quality which for me gives Europe its true soul, that quality which made the Treaties of Rome possible.
That quality is tolerance. We have taken centuries to learn this. On the way to tolerance we had to endure cataclysms. We persecuted and destroyed one another. We ravaged our homeland. We jeopardized the things we revered. Not even one generation has passed since the worst period of hate, devastation and destruction.
Today, however, ladies and gentlemen, we live together as was never possible before.
Each Member State has helped to unite Europe and strengthen democracy and the rule of law. Thanks to the yearning for freedom of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe, the unnatural division of Europe is now consigned to the past.
One of the men who signed the Treaties of Rome in 1957, Maurice Faure, is amongst us today, as I said earlier. Today, exactly 50 years later, we can assure Maurice Faure and his comrades, in the words of our Berlin Declaration, that "we have a unique way of living and working together in the European Union. We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better."
United for the better – how can we preserve, strengthen and deepen what we have achieved so that it stands the test of the next 50 years at least ?
We can do it, I believe, by concentrating on what is our greatest strength - the power of freedom, freedom in all its manifestations:
The freedom to express our opinions freely, even when others do not like them.
The freedom to believe or not to believe.
The freedom of enterprise.
The freedom of artists to create their work as they see fit.
The freedom of the individual in his responsibility for the whole community.
When we count on the power of freedom, we are counting on the individual. The individual is paramount. His dignity is inviolable. And if I may make a personal comment, I would add that this view of the individual is for me also part and parcel of Europe's Jewish-Christian heritage.
This view of the power of freedom and the dignity of the individual was already implicit in the European Coal and Steel Community established before the Treaties of Rome. With the signing of the Treaties of Rome in 1957, for the first time in Europe's history the peoples of Europe came together of their own free will to create a common project with common rules.
That is why today in Berlin we can reaffirm our commitment to a Europe of equal rights for all Member States, both large and small, old and new.
On its own every European country is too weak to successfully tackle the global challenges we face. That is why there can only be one answer: we must not act alone but together in a united Europe.
The age of globalization makes one thing increasingly clear to us: the decision in favour of Europe is also a decision in favour of a certain way of life. It was and remains a decision in favour of our European model. It combines economic success and social responsibility. Only together can we continue to preserve our ideal of European society in future.
Only together can we ensure economic and social standards also internationally.
For we should not deceive ourselves: the world will not wait for Europe. Other regions of the world are developing at a breathtaking pace.
Europe therefore needs one thing above all else: it needs to be dynamic. For if it is not dynamic there can be no prosperity in Europe. And if it is not dynamic, solidarity within Europe will diminish. A dynamic Europe is a Europe of dynamic growth. That creates jobs. That rewards achievement. That will help tackle bureaucracy.
That strengthens Europe's strengths. They lie in the knowledge and ability of Europe's citizens, in education, research and innovation. That is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion.
Europe must also lead the way in renewable energies, energy efficiency and protection of our climate. We adopted an Action Plan on this at the European Council in early March. We want to make our contribution to averting the global threat of climate change. But for that we need allies throughout the world.
For Europe will be increasingly compelled to deal with external influences in future anyway due to globalization.
A common Foreign and Security Policy in Europe is therefore absolutely vital. But, of course, this policy should not be isolationist but must be based on cooperation with partners outside Europe. I firmly believe that close, amicable relations with the United States of America and a strong NATO are and will remain in Europe's fundamental interest.
This is not at odds with enhanced intensification of European cooperation. Rather, it is the other side of the same coin.
A comprehensive strategic partnership with Russia is just as important to Europe. We need both a strategic partnership with Russia and the transatlantic alliance. They are most certainly not mutually exclusive. After all, it is Europe which has developed a modern understanding of integration: embedded institutional structures instead of "them against us" attitudes, the formation of axes and go-it-alone policies. Europe must never divide, or allow itself to be divided, over any issue.
Only if Europe stands together will we be able to successfully fight terrorism, organized crime and illegal immigration. Only then will we be able to successfully defend liberties and civil rights, also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Then racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia will never again stand a chance.
Then we can work towards the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world and ensure that people do not become victims of war, terrorism and violence, that poverty, hunger and diseases such as AIDS are driven back. We want to promote freedom and development in the world.
In our Berlin Declaration we expressly state our commitment to continue promoting democracy, stability and prosperity beyond the borders of the European Union.
The importance of this commitment cannot be overestimated. And it quickly becomes very tangible. For instance, on a day like today we also think of people in Zimbabwe and Darfur. The suffering there is unbearable. We want to take this opportunity to call upon Sudan's President Bashir to finally comply with the UN resolutions. I want to state frankly that we have to consider stronger sanctions.
With this – as well as with the new UN resolution on Iran adopted yesterday – we demonstrate our commitment to shouldering global responsibility together with our allies and partners.
However, ladies and gentlemen, even on a festive occasion such as this we should not fool ourselves. If we are to safeguard the European way of life and assume global responsibility, Europe needs to be able to act, to act more effectively than it can at present.
For we know that the European Union will continue to thrive both on openness and on the will of its Member States to consolidate the Union's internal development.
The internal structures must be adapted to an enlarged Union with 27 Member States. What has to be done here? My answer is clear: the European Union needs more and it needs better defined competences than it has at present: in energy policy, in foreign policy, in justice and home affairs.
It has to determine more clearly for what the Member States are responsible and for what the Community is responsible.
It must concentrate on core tasks and preserve the unique features of the Member States wherever possible.
It must ensure that even with 27 or more Member States its institutions function efficiently, democratically and in a way which citizens understand. Much is at stake.
It is true that anyone who hoped that 50 years after the Treaties of Rome we would have a Constitutional Treaty will be disappointed.
But it is also true that anyone who hoped that Europe would be aware of the need to strengthen its institutional make-up will find that our Berlin Declaration points the way forward. For we know that we must always renew the political shape of Europe in keeping with the times.
It is therefore both important and necessary that today here in Berlin, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are united in our aim of placing the European Union on a renewed common basis before the European Parliament elections in 2009.
I am working to ensure that a roadmap for this can be adopted at the close of Germany's EU Presidency, and I am counting on your support.
I am certain that it is not only in the interests of Europe, but also of the individual Member States and the citizens of Europe, that this process be brought to a successful conclusion.
Not to do so would be an historic failure. What we decide will have an impact for a long time to come, for better or for worse.
But, ladies and gentlemen, there is really no need to talk about failure. Europe has overcome major obstacles so many times. The negotiations on the Treaties whose 50th anniversary we are celebrating today is a prime example of this.
I read that one delegation member – I believe it was a British diplomat – is supposed to have said at the time, and I quote: "The future treaty you are discussing has no chance of being agreed; if it was agreed, it would have no chance of being ratified; and if it was ratified, it would have no chance of being applied" - end of quote. I wonder, ladies and gentlemen, what this negotiator would have said about today's celebrations.
But he was not the only one who was less than enthusiastic about the treaty. One rather prominent French politician is reported as saying at the time that - and I quote: "Treaties, you see, are like girls and roses; they last while they last". Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the rose tree has grown considerably since 1957 and today an admittedly not so young girl is even among the signatories of the Berlin Declaration.
And, finally, a Belgian newspaper, La libre belgique, wrote at the time of the negotiations on the Treaties of Rome that the Germans were all important doctors and well-organized; the French were well bred, loved plans and theories. The Italians wore wonderful ties and stockings and even statistics exploded like fireworks in their country.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we are all of this and much, much more. That is Europe. Scepticism, contradictions, diversity, even some much loved clichés, but not least – courage. Europe is all of that.
Europe is much more than dairy cows and the Chemicals Directive. Just look around – people from 27 European states are gathered here today. There are pupils and students from the ERASMUS programme. There are musicians from the Youth Orchestra of the European Union playing for us conducted by Vladimir Ashkenazy.
Sometimes I think that if we are so much preoccupied with extending and renewing our shared European house, we could easily overlook its greatness and uniqueness in the midst of all the construction work.
For after all the wars and boundless suffering, something very special has emerged.
We, the citizens of Europe, have united for the better. For we know, Europe is our common future.
That was a dream for many generations. Our history reminds us that we must protect this for the good of future generations.
And so I hope that the citizens of Europe will say in 50 years' time:
Back then in Berlin, the united Europe set the right course.
Back then in Berlin, the European Union embarked upon the right path towards a bright future. It went on to renew its foundations so that it could make its contribution here in Europe, this old continent, as well as globally, in this one large yet small world we live in.
For a better world. For people everywhere. That is our mission for the future.
Thank you.
Today we are celebrating the 50th anniversary of the signing of the Treaties of Rome. The venue of our celebrations today could hardly be more symbolic. For we are celebrating in Berlin. A city that until 18 years ago was divided by a Wall, by barbed wire, by soldiers with orders to shoot. In which people paid with their lives for seeking to escape to freedom.
I grew up east of this city, in the German Democratic Republic. When the Treaties of Rome were concluded I was just three years old. I was seven years old when the Wall was built. It divided also my own family. I did not believe I would ever be able to travel to the West until I was a pensioner. Only a few metres from here was the point where any walk I took would be at an end. But then the Wall collapsed after all. That was a defining moment for me: I realized that nothing ever has to stay the way it is.
That is a source of immense hope for all those who are not ready to countenance the injustices of our world. It is a source of immense hope, too, by the way, for all those in Europe who still endure oppression – like the people of Belarus. Today they are celebrating their independence day. Our thoughts are also with them today and our message to them is: Human rights are indivisible! Europe is with you!
Ladies and gentlemen, the reason we can celebrate this special anniversary here in Berlin of all places is because half a century ago a number of Europe's political leaders set about building a European peace project the like of which had never been seen before.
For let us be honest: 50 years of the Treaties of Rome – in the context of history that is hardly more than the blinking of an eye. And whether it will one day be more than that, whether on 25 March 2057 the centenary of the Treaties of Rome will be celebrated in a Europe of peace and freedom, democracy and the rule of law? We do not know.
None of all this can be taken for granted. All of it must be repeatedly strengthened and defended anew. Stagnation means regression. Building trust takes decades. And overnight it can be undermined. Any cleavage will soon have Europe out of step - sooner than some might think. In short, European unification must be striven for and secured time and time again. That is our guiding mission for the future. That is what is at the heart of today's anniversary celebrations.
Certainly the world today is not the same as the world 50 years ago. The six founding members are now 27 Member States. What started with freedom from tariffs has now progressed into a common currency. A world dominated by two blocs is today a world with a number of different power centres.
In such a world we must ask ever anew what holds Europe together also in this century, what the essence of its identity is. For me the answer is clear. The source of Europe's identity are our shared, fundamental values. They are what holds Europe together.
Let us not forget: For centuries Europe had been an idea, no more than a hope of peace and understanding. Today we, the citizens of Europe, know that hope has been fulfilled.
It has been fulfilled because the founding fathers of Europe were thinking in terms well beyond their own generation. They were thinking in terms well beyond their own time. They were thinking in terms also well beyond purely economic freedoms.
Three years before the signing of the Treaties of Rome the European Defence Community had foundered. But that was not the end of Europe. Despite that disappointment the preamble of the Treaty establishing the European Community began with a statement of determination – I quote – "to lay the foundations of an ever closer union among the peoples of Europe..." - end of quote.
The founding fathers of Europe knew that in the long run the economic and the political could not be kept separate.
Fifty years of the Treaties of Rome – that means for me, to put it in a nutshell, a dream has come true!
This dream could come true because we citizens of Europe have learned over the past 50 years to make the most of our identities and diverse traditions, the lively variety of our languages, cultures and regions.
This dream could come true because we let ourselves be guided by that quality which for me gives Europe its true soul, that quality which made the Treaties of Rome possible.
That quality is tolerance. We have taken centuries to learn this. On the way to tolerance we had to endure cataclysms. We persecuted and destroyed one another. We ravaged our homeland. We jeopardized the things we revered. Not even one generation has passed since the worst period of hate, devastation and destruction.
Today, however, ladies and gentlemen, we live together as was never possible before.
Each Member State has helped to unite Europe and strengthen democracy and the rule of law. Thanks to the yearning for freedom of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe, the unnatural division of Europe is now consigned to the past.
One of the men who signed the Treaties of Rome in 1957, Maurice Faure, is amongst us today, as I said earlier. Today, exactly 50 years later, we can assure Maurice Faure and his comrades, in the words of our Berlin Declaration, that "we have a unique way of living and working together in the European Union. We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better."
United for the better – how can we preserve, strengthen and deepen what we have achieved so that it stands the test of the next 50 years at least ?
We can do it, I believe, by concentrating on what is our greatest strength - the power of freedom, freedom in all its manifestations:
The freedom to express our opinions freely, even when others do not like them.
The freedom to believe or not to believe.
The freedom of enterprise.
The freedom of artists to create their work as they see fit.
The freedom of the individual in his responsibility for the whole community.
When we count on the power of freedom, we are counting on the individual. The individual is paramount. His dignity is inviolable. And if I may make a personal comment, I would add that this view of the individual is for me also part and parcel of Europe's Jewish-Christian heritage.
This view of the power of freedom and the dignity of the individual was already implicit in the European Coal and Steel Community established before the Treaties of Rome. With the signing of the Treaties of Rome in 1957, for the first time in Europe's history the peoples of Europe came together of their own free will to create a common project with common rules.
That is why today in Berlin we can reaffirm our commitment to a Europe of equal rights for all Member States, both large and small, old and new.
On its own every European country is too weak to successfully tackle the global challenges we face. That is why there can only be one answer: we must not act alone but together in a united Europe.
The age of globalization makes one thing increasingly clear to us: the decision in favour of Europe is also a decision in favour of a certain way of life. It was and remains a decision in favour of our European model. It combines economic success and social responsibility. Only together can we continue to preserve our ideal of European society in future.
Only together can we ensure economic and social standards also internationally.
For we should not deceive ourselves: the world will not wait for Europe. Other regions of the world are developing at a breathtaking pace.
Europe therefore needs one thing above all else: it needs to be dynamic. For if it is not dynamic there can be no prosperity in Europe. And if it is not dynamic, solidarity within Europe will diminish. A dynamic Europe is a Europe of dynamic growth. That creates jobs. That rewards achievement. That will help tackle bureaucracy.
That strengthens Europe's strengths. They lie in the knowledge and ability of Europe's citizens, in education, research and innovation. That is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion.
Europe must also lead the way in renewable energies, energy efficiency and protection of our climate. We adopted an Action Plan on this at the European Council in early March. We want to make our contribution to averting the global threat of climate change. But for that we need allies throughout the world.
For Europe will be increasingly compelled to deal with external influences in future anyway due to globalization.
A common Foreign and Security Policy in Europe is therefore absolutely vital. But, of course, this policy should not be isolationist but must be based on cooperation with partners outside Europe. I firmly believe that close, amicable relations with the United States of America and a strong NATO are and will remain in Europe's fundamental interest.
This is not at odds with enhanced intensification of European cooperation. Rather, it is the other side of the same coin.
A comprehensive strategic partnership with Russia is just as important to Europe. We need both a strategic partnership with Russia and the transatlantic alliance. They are most certainly not mutually exclusive. After all, it is Europe which has developed a modern understanding of integration: embedded institutional structures instead of "them against us" attitudes, the formation of axes and go-it-alone policies. Europe must never divide, or allow itself to be divided, over any issue.
Only if Europe stands together will we be able to successfully fight terrorism, organized crime and illegal immigration. Only then will we be able to successfully defend liberties and civil rights, also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Then racism, anti-Semitism and xenophobia will never again stand a chance.
Then we can work towards the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world and ensure that people do not become victims of war, terrorism and violence, that poverty, hunger and diseases such as AIDS are driven back. We want to promote freedom and development in the world.
In our Berlin Declaration we expressly state our commitment to continue promoting democracy, stability and prosperity beyond the borders of the European Union.
The importance of this commitment cannot be overestimated. And it quickly becomes very tangible. For instance, on a day like today we also think of people in Zimbabwe and Darfur. The suffering there is unbearable. We want to take this opportunity to call upon Sudan's President Bashir to finally comply with the UN resolutions. I want to state frankly that we have to consider stronger sanctions.
With this – as well as with the new UN resolution on Iran adopted yesterday – we demonstrate our commitment to shouldering global responsibility together with our allies and partners.
However, ladies and gentlemen, even on a festive occasion such as this we should not fool ourselves. If we are to safeguard the European way of life and assume global responsibility, Europe needs to be able to act, to act more effectively than it can at present.
For we know that the European Union will continue to thrive both on openness and on the will of its Member States to consolidate the Union's internal development.
The internal structures must be adapted to an enlarged Union with 27 Member States. What has to be done here? My answer is clear: the European Union needs more and it needs better defined competences than it has at present: in energy policy, in foreign policy, in justice and home affairs.
It has to determine more clearly for what the Member States are responsible and for what the Community is responsible.
It must concentrate on core tasks and preserve the unique features of the Member States wherever possible.
It must ensure that even with 27 or more Member States its institutions function efficiently, democratically and in a way which citizens understand. Much is at stake.
It is true that anyone who hoped that 50 years after the Treaties of Rome we would have a Constitutional Treaty will be disappointed.
But it is also true that anyone who hoped that Europe would be aware of the need to strengthen its institutional make-up will find that our Berlin Declaration points the way forward. For we know that we must always renew the political shape of Europe in keeping with the times.
It is therefore both important and necessary that today here in Berlin, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are united in our aim of placing the European Union on a renewed common basis before the European Parliament elections in 2009.
I am working to ensure that a roadmap for this can be adopted at the close of Germany's EU Presidency, and I am counting on your support.
I am certain that it is not only in the interests of Europe, but also of the individual Member States and the citizens of Europe, that this process be brought to a successful conclusion.
Not to do so would be an historic failure. What we decide will have an impact for a long time to come, for better or for worse.
But, ladies and gentlemen, there is really no need to talk about failure. Europe has overcome major obstacles so many times. The negotiations on the Treaties whose 50th anniversary we are celebrating today is a prime example of this.
I read that one delegation member – I believe it was a British diplomat – is supposed to have said at the time, and I quote: "The future treaty you are discussing has no chance of being agreed; if it was agreed, it would have no chance of being ratified; and if it was ratified, it would have no chance of being applied" - end of quote. I wonder, ladies and gentlemen, what this negotiator would have said about today's celebrations.
But he was not the only one who was less than enthusiastic about the treaty. One rather prominent French politician is reported as saying at the time that - and I quote: "Treaties, you see, are like girls and roses; they last while they last". Yes, ladies and gentlemen, the rose tree has grown considerably since 1957 and today an admittedly not so young girl is even among the signatories of the Berlin Declaration.
And, finally, a Belgian newspaper, La libre belgique, wrote at the time of the negotiations on the Treaties of Rome that the Germans were all important doctors and well-organized; the French were well bred, loved plans and theories. The Italians wore wonderful ties and stockings and even statistics exploded like fireworks in their country.
Yes, ladies and gentlemen, we are all of this and much, much more. That is Europe. Scepticism, contradictions, diversity, even some much loved clichés, but not least – courage. Europe is all of that.
Europe is much more than dairy cows and the Chemicals Directive. Just look around – people from 27 European states are gathered here today. There are pupils and students from the ERASMUS programme. There are musicians from the Youth Orchestra of the European Union playing for us conducted by Vladimir Ashkenazy.
Sometimes I think that if we are so much preoccupied with extending and renewing our shared European house, we could easily overlook its greatness and uniqueness in the midst of all the construction work.
For after all the wars and boundless suffering, something very special has emerged.
We, the citizens of Europe, have united for the better. For we know, Europe is our common future.
That was a dream for many generations. Our history reminds us that we must protect this for the good of future generations.
And so I hope that the citizens of Europe will say in 50 years' time:
Back then in Berlin, the united Europe set the right course.
Back then in Berlin, the European Union embarked upon the right path towards a bright future. It went on to renew its foundations so that it could make its contribution here in Europe, this old continent, as well as globally, in this one large yet small world we live in.
For a better world. For people everywhere. That is our mission for the future.
Thank you.
Declaration on the occasion of the fiftieth anniversary of the signature of the Treaties of Rome
For centuries Europe has been an idea, holding out hope of peace and understanding. That hope has been fulfilled. European unification has made peace and prosperity possible. It has brought about a sense of community and overcome differences. Each Member State has helped to unite Europe and to strengthen democracy and the rule of law. Thanks to the yearning for freedom of the peoples of Central and Eastern Europe the unnatural division of Europe is now consigned to the past. European unification shows that we have learnt the painful lessons of a history marked by bloody conflict. Today we live together as was never possible before.
We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better.
I
In the European Union, we are turning our common ideals into reality: for us, the individual is paramount. His dignity is inviolable. His rights are inalienable. Men and women enjoy equal rights. We are striving for peace and freedom, for democracy and the rule of law, for mutual respect and shared responsibility, for prosperity and security, for tolerance and participation, for justice and solidarity.
We have a unique way of living and working together in the European Union. This is expressed through the democratic interaction of the Member States and the European institutions. The European Union is founded on equal rights and mutually supportive co-operation. This enables us to strike a fair balance between Member States' interests.
We preserve in the European Union the identities and diverse traditions of its Member States. We are enriched by open borders and a lively variety of languages, cultures and regions. There are many goals which we cannot achieve on our own, but only in concert. Tasks are shared between the European Union, the Member States and their regions and local authorities.
II
We are facing major challenges which do not stop at national borders. The European Union is our response to these challenges. Only together can we continue to preserve our ideal of European society in future for the good of all European Union citizens, This European model combines economic success and social responsibility. The common market and the euro make us strong. We can thus shape the increasing interdependence of the global economy and ever-growing competition on international markets according to our values. Europe's wealth lies in the knowledge and ability of its people; that is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion.
We will fight terrorism and organised crime together. We stand up for liberties and civil rights also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Racism and xenophobia must never again be given any rein.
We are committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world and to ensuring that people do not become victims of war, Terrorism and violence. The European Union wants to promote freedom and development in the world. We want to drive back poverty, hunger and disease. We want to continue to take a leading role in that fight.
We intend jointly to lead the way in energy policy and climate protection and make our contribution to averting the global threat of climate change.
III
The European Union will continue to thrive both on openness and on the will of its Member States to consolidate the Union's internal development. The European Union will continue to promote democracy, stability and prosperity beyond its borders.
With European unification a dream of earlier generations has become a reality. Our history reminds us that we must protect this for the good of future generations. For that reason we must always renew the political shape of Europe in keeping with the times. That is why today, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are united in our aim of placing the European Union on a renewed common basis before the European Parliament elections in 2009.
For we know, Europe is our common future.
We, the citizens of the European Union, have united for the better.
I
In the European Union, we are turning our common ideals into reality: for us, the individual is paramount. His dignity is inviolable. His rights are inalienable. Men and women enjoy equal rights. We are striving for peace and freedom, for democracy and the rule of law, for mutual respect and shared responsibility, for prosperity and security, for tolerance and participation, for justice and solidarity.
We have a unique way of living and working together in the European Union. This is expressed through the democratic interaction of the Member States and the European institutions. The European Union is founded on equal rights and mutually supportive co-operation. This enables us to strike a fair balance between Member States' interests.
We preserve in the European Union the identities and diverse traditions of its Member States. We are enriched by open borders and a lively variety of languages, cultures and regions. There are many goals which we cannot achieve on our own, but only in concert. Tasks are shared between the European Union, the Member States and their regions and local authorities.
II
We are facing major challenges which do not stop at national borders. The European Union is our response to these challenges. Only together can we continue to preserve our ideal of European society in future for the good of all European Union citizens, This European model combines economic success and social responsibility. The common market and the euro make us strong. We can thus shape the increasing interdependence of the global economy and ever-growing competition on international markets according to our values. Europe's wealth lies in the knowledge and ability of its people; that is the key to growth, employment and social cohesion.
We will fight terrorism and organised crime together. We stand up for liberties and civil rights also in the struggle against those who oppose them. Racism and xenophobia must never again be given any rein.
We are committed to the peaceful resolution of conflicts in the world and to ensuring that people do not become victims of war, Terrorism and violence. The European Union wants to promote freedom and development in the world. We want to drive back poverty, hunger and disease. We want to continue to take a leading role in that fight.
We intend jointly to lead the way in energy policy and climate protection and make our contribution to averting the global threat of climate change.
III
The European Union will continue to thrive both on openness and on the will of its Member States to consolidate the Union's internal development. The European Union will continue to promote democracy, stability and prosperity beyond its borders.
With European unification a dream of earlier generations has become a reality. Our history reminds us that we must protect this for the good of future generations. For that reason we must always renew the political shape of Europe in keeping with the times. That is why today, 50 years after the signing of the Treaties of Rome, we are united in our aim of placing the European Union on a renewed common basis before the European Parliament elections in 2009.
For we know, Europe is our common future.
Saturday, March 24, 2007
EU and Christian Values
While the EU celebrates its 50th anniversary, the Pope admonishes it. Ratzinger is incessantly repeating that the EU needs to recognize its Christian roots.
Can we dismiss his claim or do we have to take it seriously? Secularists, who are the overwhelming majority in Europe, believe that we should not even pay attention to it.
But an increasing number of religious people feel excluded and non-represented by the European and the national institutions.
The biggest risk is the polarization of our European societies, making cohabitation even more difficult than it is now. Moreover, rejecting religion altogether may have the opposite effect of making the religious minorities more vocal and ultimately stronger.
This is a real dilemma which deserves close attention on the part of politicians, the civil society and academics.
Can we dismiss his claim or do we have to take it seriously? Secularists, who are the overwhelming majority in Europe, believe that we should not even pay attention to it.
But an increasing number of religious people feel excluded and non-represented by the European and the national institutions.
The biggest risk is the polarization of our European societies, making cohabitation even more difficult than it is now. Moreover, rejecting religion altogether may have the opposite effect of making the religious minorities more vocal and ultimately stronger.
This is a real dilemma which deserves close attention on the part of politicians, the civil society and academics.
Thursday, March 22, 2007
Europe at 50: Another Perspective
Timothy Garton Ash provides an interesting discussion in Prospect.
Here's an excerpt:
Europe has lost the plot. As we approach the 50th anniversary of the treaty of Rome on 25th March 2007—the 50th birthday of the European economic community that became the European Union—Europe no longer knows what story it wants to tell. A shared political narrative sustained the postwar project of (west) European integration for three generations, but it has fallen apart since the end of the cold war. Most Europeans now have little idea where we're coming from; far less do we share a vision of where we want to go to. We don't know why we have an EU or what it's good for. So we urgently need a new narrative.
Here's an excerpt:
Europe has lost the plot. As we approach the 50th anniversary of the treaty of Rome on 25th March 2007—the 50th birthday of the European economic community that became the European Union—Europe no longer knows what story it wants to tell. A shared political narrative sustained the postwar project of (west) European integration for three generations, but it has fallen apart since the end of the cold war. Most Europeans now have little idea where we're coming from; far less do we share a vision of where we want to go to. We don't know why we have an EU or what it's good for. So we urgently need a new narrative.
Wednesday, March 21, 2007
Attempts of Dialogue on Afghanistan between America and Italy
Italy proposes an international conference for peace and stability.
And America listens interested... Is this a sign of Bush's new multilateral approach?
too soon to say, or perhaps too late!
For a report have a look here: http://www.corriere.it/english/articoli/2007/03_Marzo/21/Alema.shtml
Here's an excerpt:
Unexpectedly, the United States yesterday did not rule out an “international conference for peace and stability in Afghanistan”, the carefully crafted diplomatic formula adopted by [Italy’s foreign minister, Massimo – Trans.] D’Alema for a political solution to the Afghan crisis.The State Department’s spokesman, Sean McCormack, said that “it could be a constructive suggestion”. “We want to understand some of the details”, he continued. “Fundamentally, you want to get the opinion of the Afghan Government and President Karzai about this. So I think it’s really an idea that merits some discussion”. “And to see”, concluded Mr McCormack, “whether or not, on the basis of that discussion, you move forward or not”.
And America listens interested... Is this a sign of Bush's new multilateral approach?
too soon to say, or perhaps too late!
For a report have a look here: http://www.corriere.it/english/articoli/2007/03_Marzo/21/Alema.shtml
Here's an excerpt:
Unexpectedly, the United States yesterday did not rule out an “international conference for peace and stability in Afghanistan”, the carefully crafted diplomatic formula adopted by [Italy’s foreign minister, Massimo – Trans.] D’Alema for a political solution to the Afghan crisis.The State Department’s spokesman, Sean McCormack, said that “it could be a constructive suggestion”. “We want to understand some of the details”, he continued. “Fundamentally, you want to get the opinion of the Afghan Government and President Karzai about this. So I think it’s really an idea that merits some discussion”. “And to see”, concluded Mr McCormack, “whether or not, on the basis of that discussion, you move forward or not”.
Tuesday, March 20, 2007
50 Ways to Praise the EU
To follow on from my post some time ago on the importance of recognising the benefits, as well as criticising the problems, of the European Union, it is worth flagging briefly this list, compiled to mark the 50th anniversary of the Union and undoubtedly partially tongue-in-cheek, in today's Independent: 50 Reasons to Love the EU, backed up by this more detailed explanation of each item, and by this editorial and comment piece.
As mentioned, some of the "reasons" provided are, well, a little suspect: No. 14, for example, on "making the French eat British beef again", or No. 37, which proclaims that "Europe's bananas remain bent, despite sceptics' fears", are both mildly amusing padding; No. 13, which praises the "small EU bureaucracy" on the grounds that it has less employees than the BBC is certainly contestable (number of employees not being the only, or indeed always the most important, indice of the "size" of a bureaucratic machine); while No. 42's claim that the "EU gives more, not less, sovereignty to nation states" is still at best an open question, theoretically.
These and other asides aside, however, many of the list entries do contain powerful affirmations of the Union's success, even if there aren't - quite - 50 of them: the abolition of the death penalty and the eastward spread and entrenchment of democratic principles; the increased mobility of youth and labour; stauncher support for minority languages; and, of course, the end - for the foreseeable future - of war between European nations, to name but a few.
Also noteworthy is the theme, running throughout the list, that the UK has missed out on many of the benefits that the Union has brought to its other members, from the Euro, through the effective dismantling of border controls, to a general increase in multilingualism; and the idea that this is both symptom and cause of the manner in which debate within Britain focuses almost exclusively on the Union's shortcomings. The editorial on the subject begins thus:
The European Union will celebrate its 50th anniversary this weekend with an all-night party in a rejuvenated Berlin. It is a joyous coincidence that the anniversary should fall in the middle of the German presidency. What more conclusive evidence could there be of what the European Union has achieved than around-the-clock festivities beneath the Brandenburg Gate? The symbol of Europe's post-war division has now become the most potent symbol of Europe's unity.
Of course, the EU as it has evolved from the six-member European Economic Community is far from flawless. From the remoteness of its institutions, through its clumsy administrative structures, to its labyrinthine bureaucracy, the EU can appear all too often as a cobbled-together machine of Heath-Robinson complexity. Nor are perennial complaints about the "democratic deficit" without foundation...
But none of this should be allowed, as it all too often is in Britain, to eclipse the truly remarkable success of the European project.
Amen to that.
As mentioned, some of the "reasons" provided are, well, a little suspect: No. 14, for example, on "making the French eat British beef again", or No. 37, which proclaims that "Europe's bananas remain bent, despite sceptics' fears", are both mildly amusing padding; No. 13, which praises the "small EU bureaucracy" on the grounds that it has less employees than the BBC is certainly contestable (number of employees not being the only, or indeed always the most important, indice of the "size" of a bureaucratic machine); while No. 42's claim that the "EU gives more, not less, sovereignty to nation states" is still at best an open question, theoretically.
These and other asides aside, however, many of the list entries do contain powerful affirmations of the Union's success, even if there aren't - quite - 50 of them: the abolition of the death penalty and the eastward spread and entrenchment of democratic principles; the increased mobility of youth and labour; stauncher support for minority languages; and, of course, the end - for the foreseeable future - of war between European nations, to name but a few.
Also noteworthy is the theme, running throughout the list, that the UK has missed out on many of the benefits that the Union has brought to its other members, from the Euro, through the effective dismantling of border controls, to a general increase in multilingualism; and the idea that this is both symptom and cause of the manner in which debate within Britain focuses almost exclusively on the Union's shortcomings. The editorial on the subject begins thus:
The European Union will celebrate its 50th anniversary this weekend with an all-night party in a rejuvenated Berlin. It is a joyous coincidence that the anniversary should fall in the middle of the German presidency. What more conclusive evidence could there be of what the European Union has achieved than around-the-clock festivities beneath the Brandenburg Gate? The symbol of Europe's post-war division has now become the most potent symbol of Europe's unity.
Of course, the EU as it has evolved from the six-member European Economic Community is far from flawless. From the remoteness of its institutions, through its clumsy administrative structures, to its labyrinthine bureaucracy, the EU can appear all too often as a cobbled-together machine of Heath-Robinson complexity. Nor are perennial complaints about the "democratic deficit" without foundation...
But none of this should be allowed, as it all too often is in Britain, to eclipse the truly remarkable success of the European project.
Amen to that.
Obama like Orwell
Obama launches the first serious attack on Hilary Clinton. In a suggestive video (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NL8FRXO-QV0), Clinton is portrayed as imposing top down her 'conversation' with the people that look brainwashed and uniformised. The video suggests that Clinton is a control freak that would like to transform America into an Orwellian state of permanent control of individuals.
Obama promises that 1984 (the famous Orwell's political tragedy) will not happen in 2008.
Obama promises that 1984 (the famous Orwell's political tragedy) will not happen in 2008.
Monday, March 19, 2007
Chirac's Legacy
In few months, it will be over. Chirac will be a simple citizen after 50 years of politics in France and Europe.
What will be his legacy? there are many sceptics on this point, the most prominent is probably the economist which had a very hard article last week. here: http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8850710
Here's a passage:
Mr Chirac's popularity rating has slumped from a second-term high of 60% during the Iraq war, according to TNS-Sofres, a polling organisation, to just 29% today. Midway through 2006, he became the most unpopular president under the French Fifth Republic since polling began.
What will be his legacy? there are many sceptics on this point, the most prominent is probably the economist which had a very hard article last week. here: http://www.economist.com/world/europe/displaystory.cfm?story_id=8850710
Here's a passage:
Mr Chirac's popularity rating has slumped from a second-term high of 60% during the Iraq war, according to TNS-Sofres, a polling organisation, to just 29% today. Midway through 2006, he became the most unpopular president under the French Fifth Republic since polling began.
Friday, March 16, 2007
Cardinal Martini pleads for a more articulate Church
Martini, the former Cardinal of Milan, spoke in clear terms against the stubborn repetition of the moral superiority of the Catholic Church.
Instead of doing so, the Church should promote its model as a good model. For example, the Church's understanding of family is not intresically superior to others and without reasons. The Church should articulate its reasons why it thinks that its family model may be more appealing that one put forward by competing ways of thinking.
Only speaking to the people in their own words will finally give the Church the moral leverage that it has lost, at least in Europe
Instead of doing so, the Church should promote its model as a good model. For example, the Church's understanding of family is not intresically superior to others and without reasons. The Church should articulate its reasons why it thinks that its family model may be more appealing that one put forward by competing ways of thinking.
Only speaking to the people in their own words will finally give the Church the moral leverage that it has lost, at least in Europe
Thursday, March 15, 2007
Pope against Rights
The Vatican pursues its offensive line against the liberalisation of Italian society, but its message is obviously applicable to the whole world.
The battle is directed at the moment against the same sex union project of law. In Europe, Spain, France, Benelux, the UK and other States have already adopted legislation to this effect.
The Pope's turn of the screw include also some curious policies such as strengthening the use of latin during Mass. Read here.
The battle is directed at the moment against the same sex union project of law. In Europe, Spain, France, Benelux, the UK and other States have already adopted legislation to this effect.
The Pope's turn of the screw include also some curious policies such as strengthening the use of latin during Mass. Read here.
Tuesday, March 13, 2007
Italy: a new immigration law
The draft proposal will be presented in Parliament next week.
You can find a report here.
Here's an excerpt:
The eight-page text, drafted by the legal offices of the Interior and Social Solidarity ministries, is finally ready. It will introduce a series of fast tracks for hiring home helps, carers and those with special skills, such as engineers and university staff, but entry will also be open to unskilled foreign workers.And to all those who already speak Italian.
You can find a report here.
Here's an excerpt:
The eight-page text, drafted by the legal offices of the Interior and Social Solidarity ministries, is finally ready. It will introduce a series of fast tracks for hiring home helps, carers and those with special skills, such as engineers and university staff, but entry will also be open to unskilled foreign workers.And to all those who already speak Italian.
Monday, March 12, 2007
American Universities and Equality
...do not go hand in hand. Rich people have a privileged access to the best Universities, as this interesting study in the NYRB confirms.
here's an excerpt:
The causes and consequences of these dispiriting facts are complex, and the cost to society—moral and material—is high. There is moral cost in the shortfall between the professed ideal of equal opportunity and the reality of rising inequality. As for the material cost, "there has never been reason to believe that all outstanding candidates will be able to pay whatever fees are charged without help," as Bowen and his colleagues put it, and "society at large needs all the trained talent it can marshal."
here's an excerpt:
The causes and consequences of these dispiriting facts are complex, and the cost to society—moral and material—is high. There is moral cost in the shortfall between the professed ideal of equal opportunity and the reality of rising inequality. As for the material cost, "there has never been reason to believe that all outstanding candidates will be able to pay whatever fees are charged without help," as Bowen and his colleagues put it, and "society at large needs all the trained talent it can marshal."
Bye Bye Chirac
President Jacques Chirac has announced that he will not run for a third mandate. After 12 years, and at 74, he decides to 'serve the French people in other ways.'
As a result 2007 will see the end of two heavyweight of European politics, Chirac and Blair, who have dominated the scene for the past 10 years or so.
We can only hope that after them, Europe and the world will be less polarized.
As a result 2007 will see the end of two heavyweight of European politics, Chirac and Blair, who have dominated the scene for the past 10 years or so.
We can only hope that after them, Europe and the world will be less polarized.
Friday, March 09, 2007
Energy and Europe: Not Without Hope
That is what Angela Merkel said yesterday in Brussels:
The European Union should make a binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in relation to 1990 values and to increase by 20% the share of renewable energies. That is the goal Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel has set her sights on. At the end of the first working day of the European Council meeting in Brussels, she appeared confident that on this point the Member States would reach agreement.
The Chancellor also made clear, however, that on the specifics more discussions were needed. "What we can achieve I will only be able to announce at the end of the Council."The atmosphere during the discussion in the evening, Angela Merkel noted in Brussels, had been very positive and constructive. The debate had been a very serious one, since the goal was highly ambitious. "We want the EU to make a binding commitment to this goal," she pointed out.
"It is important that we can tell the G8 members that Europe has made a real commitment. That gives us a measure of credibility," the Council President emphasized. There are two goals at stake, she noted.
The first concerned the share of renewable energies, meaning wind, water, sun and biomass. "Nuclear energy," she made clear, "does not fall into this category."
The second concerned the overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. In this context nuclear energy could count as a low CO2 emitting energy source. This was an issue France in particular had raised.
The European Union should make a binding commitment to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 20% in relation to 1990 values and to increase by 20% the share of renewable energies. That is the goal Federal Chancellor Angela Merkel has set her sights on. At the end of the first working day of the European Council meeting in Brussels, she appeared confident that on this point the Member States would reach agreement.
The Chancellor also made clear, however, that on the specifics more discussions were needed. "What we can achieve I will only be able to announce at the end of the Council."The atmosphere during the discussion in the evening, Angela Merkel noted in Brussels, had been very positive and constructive. The debate had been a very serious one, since the goal was highly ambitious. "We want the EU to make a binding commitment to this goal," she pointed out.
"It is important that we can tell the G8 members that Europe has made a real commitment. That gives us a measure of credibility," the Council President emphasized. There are two goals at stake, she noted.
The first concerned the share of renewable energies, meaning wind, water, sun and biomass. "Nuclear energy," she made clear, "does not fall into this category."
The second concerned the overall reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 20%. In this context nuclear energy could count as a low CO2 emitting energy source. This was an issue France in particular had raised.
Thursday, March 08, 2007
Catholics, pain and Europe
Are Catholics in Europe moving onward or backward?
Some medieval practices that are spreading again in Italy suggests the latter:
Here's an interesting article:
Here's an excerpt:
Catholics and the Return of the Spiked Metal “Cilicio”.
The unfortunate senator and Opus Dei numerary Paola Binetti fell into the trap of admitting on television that she was familiar with the “cilicio”, a spiked metal garter, and attempted to explain why it is used: “It forces us to reflect on the fatigue of living. It is the sacrifice of a mother waking up at night because her baby is crying”.
Some medieval practices that are spreading again in Italy suggests the latter:
Here's an interesting article:
Here's an excerpt:
Catholics and the Return of the Spiked Metal “Cilicio”.
The unfortunate senator and Opus Dei numerary Paola Binetti fell into the trap of admitting on television that she was familiar with the “cilicio”, a spiked metal garter, and attempted to explain why it is used: “It forces us to reflect on the fatigue of living. It is the sacrifice of a mother waking up at night because her baby is crying”.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)