A taste for denying the facts. Defending European construction is currently proving to be a difficult task, which provokes a lot of controversy. It would be so much more simple to go along with the Eurosceptics chomping at the bit and participate in the collective hand-wringing in order to win the approval of certain pundits who would be able to point out that this column has finally buckled to current fashionable trends and is no longer under the spell of Brussels' siren calls. Nonetheless, reality itself is proving stubborn. Countries surrounding the EU are only thinking of one thing and that's joining this obviously lame-duck project or at least managing to obtain a visa-waiver for their citizens, so that they can travel unimpeded in the Schengen area. This latter accomplishment is rather unfortunate because it prevents the free access of illegals (we do have to ask ourselves why these illegal immigrants are doing their utmost to remain in this inefficient and worthless area). We can also see that Europe has created a single currency whose value continues to increase (a little too much, it has to be said) and that Eurozone countries are all making unimaginably huge efforts to remain in this currency. If you consider that Europe has achieved some remarkable results recently, you will find yourself subject to the sarcasm of professional doom-merchants. Despite all this, one particular observation does come as a great surprise. The disappointed and the Eurosceptics are both calling for the EU to open its doors to all candidates, even countries whose geography locates them outside Europe's borders. They fail to realise that some of these candidates are not real friends but, nonetheless, encourage these candidates to join a failed project when they should in fact be advising them to stay as far away from it as possible!
A waste of political breath. That said, one needs to recognise that the direction from which the wind is currently blowing is not the same as it was previously. Objective reasons explain this fact. The generations that were born when European construction was already underway found the mainstay of the European project already accomplished: peace and the impossibility of a conflict breaking out between member states, the elimination of food shortages and so on. Even the borders have now been dismantled and we have witnessed the protests and demonstrations against controls that are re-established for a single evening, as if their eradication had not been a formidable achievement, which required rules. Sarcasm about a botched or non-existent European project is easy in such conditions. It is up to all of us to ensure that any political breath is not wasted.
Respecting national specificities. Reconstructing European inspiration is possible if each nation is aware that it can preserve its own specificities, does not have to give up its national identity and that the European identity does not remove anything from it but, on the contrary, adds something. I read with interest the declarations made by Jerome Clément when, after 20 years of service, he left the editorial board of Arte, the Franco-German television channel (in which Belgium also participates), which can be seen in several different member states. When Arte was first broadcast in 1991, “Europe was very dynamic and a political will existed, which was embodied by Jacques Delors, Helmut Kohl and François Mitterrand. A plethora of projects was launched: the single currency, Eurocorps, Erasmus etc. It would be impossible to launch Arte today because the political will is lacking. At the time, we believed in a continent unified around common values, projects and policies. Arte played an important role in the Franco German relationship and in the development of a European soul. Today Europe is about nothing more than plugging its financial holes. European dynamism is broken.”
The young are not giving up. Mr Clément's conclusion is over the top because I think that the young people of today are not prepared to return to a situation of separation between European countries, the re-erection of borders and the eradication of common rules managed by the Community institutions. The simple truth is that for young people, the situation as it now stands, has been accomplished and is a normal part of their lives. This column explored a number of considerations in regard to this subject a few days ago (EUROPE 10364). Young people are still looking ahead and this is quite normal because what they have known since they have been born cannot be experienced as an objective. They are fighting (and this is all very well and good) for progress in other countries where what exists in Europe is still a dream. Nevertheless, they fail to realise that what they want for others has already been achieved in the EU and that they are direct beneficiaries of it. They are not Eurosceptics for all this!
With some of the older generations, a certain turning inwards at a national level has become quite apparent, as if some of the population feared that the identity of their country could be swallowed up in a uniform European entity. This has resulted in distrust or misgivings about the Community institutions and mechanisms and increased support for the inter-governmental method. This orientation obviously impedes European construction and creates another category of specific problems for the editor of Agence Europe. This will be tomorrow's subject. (F.R.transl.fl)