*** JEAN-GUY GIRAUD, LUCAS BULTHION: 2014: amorcer la réforme de l'Union. Catalogue pour un débat. Presse fédéraliste (Maison de l'Europe et des Européens, 242 rue Duguesclin, F-69003 Lyons. Internet: http://www.pressefederaliste.eu ). 2013, 45 pp.
Political forces are subtly starting to mobilise for the next European elections in May 2014, as is shown by this memorandum of the French federalist movement. Jean-Guy Giraud ended his career as director of the European Parliament bureau after working elsewhere in the European institutions, but this did not dampen his ardour as an activist and one-time president of the French section of the Union of European Federalists. Along with a young man who has followed a similar path and is now at the College of Europe in Bruges, being vice-president of the association Jeunes Européens de France, Jean-Guy Giraud is publishing this memorandum to get the voice of federalists heard before the election campaigns become saturated with communication from the traditional political formations.
The crisis that has been endured now for five long years is always bitterly revealing the yawning gaps left by the Maastricht Treaty when it comes to economic and monetary affairs, followed by what the authors describe as 'shortcomings' in the Lisbon Treaty, and they say it is time to put an end to over-hasty recourse to palliative legislative measures, inter-governmental cooperation and extra-Community treaties. The European Union clearly needs a revision of the treaties as a matter of urgency! The authors are firmly convinced of this and have therefore prepared this paper to open people's minds ready for a public debate on the matter when the new European Parliament and European Commission have been set up. The authors set out a four-part catalogue of reforms. In the first section on treaties and accession, the authors suggest for example that any draft review of the treaties should be deemed adopted as soon as it gets the vote of four-fifths of member states representing four-fifths of the EU population, and ratification should be endorsed in the same manner. Giraud and Bulthion also suggest introducing a withdrawal mechanism in the interests of the European Union, if only as a deterrent, so that the EU can protect itself from a member state acting in a way that is damaging to the Union as a whole.
In the second section, looking at common policies, it will come as no surprise that the authors recommend (and give justifications for) the setting up of a European Treasury and a European Bond Issuing Agency, along with the obligation on all eurozone nations to participate in these in the same way that they are part of the Single Market. Arguing for a Communitarisation of justice and homes affairs, they feel that gradual Communitarisation should also apply (with set staging posts) to foreign and defence policy, with 'reinforced majority' requirements potentially being set for various strategic decisions, with each member state having the right to take part in them - or not - as long as they don't stand in the way. For the budget, the authors recommend the scrapping of the cap on resources, which they say has no real constitutional or democratic basis, and for all the EU's budget to be financed by 'own resources.' The own resources and multiannual financial framework should be set jointly by the Council of Minsters (or even the European Summit) and the European Parliament, with greater EU scrutiny of expenditure and, last but not least, the setting up of a 'budgetary cross-subsidy fund' at the service of inter-regional cohesion.
This particular food for thought may not be so easily digestible, but there is plenty more to discover in the two final sections, on legislative and executive powers on the one hand and the 'foundations' of the European venture on the other. But are these proposals really more difficult and out of place than those being made by some countries and parties that want to start to pick Europe apart at the seams?
Michel Theys
*** The Federalist Debate. Papers on Federalism in Europe and the World. Einstein Center for International Studies (26 via Schina, I-10144 Torino. Tel/Fax: (+39-011) 4732843 - email: info@centroeinstein.it - Internet: http://www.federalist-debate.org ). 2013, No. 2, 64 pp. Annual subscription: €15, $18.
As hazardous European elections approach, Lucio Levi takes advantage of the editorial in this issue to pave the way for positive solutions to shrug off the sorry fate that is threatening the European Union. Many of the authors writing in these pages agree on the severity of the threat, not the least of whom is none other than Prof. Dusan Sidjanski who, in an unblinkered analysis of the Greek situation, says that the no-holds-barred austerity being imposed at the moment hangs like a sword of Damocles over democracy in the country itself, but also in the wider Europe and even the world itself given the globalised economy. Against the very sombre context of a Greek tragedy in modern times, the advisor to the president of the European Commission says that we can understand why the Greek prime minister referred to the experience of the Weimar Republic, that later led to the rise of Hitler and the Second World War. What can be done to avoid the worst case scenario? Well, one can take advantage of the upcoming European elections to fill the gap between the European Commission and European citizens by allowing the Commission to become the expression of the majority in the European Parliament, says Lucio Levi, calling for a politicising of the European project. The editorialist explains that this would cause the Commission to lose its technocratic nature and gain independence from national governments. It could also abandon its role of guardian of the treaties, giving the job to the European Court of Justice, as this would strengthen the constitutional nature of the Strasbourg court. Management of the competition rules could be given to an independent body to enhance the separation of powers. All these suggestions will clearly be viewed by some as unrealistic or at least premature. In another contribution, however, journalist Barbara Spinelli reminds readers of Machiavelli's idea that every innovator has the people who profit from the old order as his enemy. Other essays look at the EU's Financial Perspectives and the new citizens' initiative in the light of the crisis. (MT)
*** Fedechoses… pour le fédéralisme. Presse fédéraliste (Maison de l'Europe et des Européens, 242 rue Duguesclin, F-69003 Lyons. Internet: http://www.pressefederaliste.eu ). September 2013, No. 161, 40 pp. Annual subscription: €30.
President Hollande comes in for criticism in this issue of an ever-biting federalist review in which several contributors slam his refusal to believe in a United States of Europe and his desire to ensure that countries are united for Europe which means, writes Jean-Pierre Gouzy, that for 'François l'incrédule' Europe is still the way De Gaulle saw it, a question of states. Conversely, the review publishes a speech by Emma Bonino, explaining at a conference in Florence in May on State of the Union that the United States of Europe is her life's objective. Bonino, who is Italy's foreign minister, says that if one is to avoid the danger of over-representation by populist parties, one has to put a federal Europe at the heart of the election campaign. She adds that if Europe doesn't solve the problems of recession and populism, then everything that has been achieved since the start of the 1950s could disappear into thin air. The former European Commissioner says that the Founding Fathers of Europe understood full well that all freedoms are closely connected so it's no good wanting free trade while preventing the free circulation of individuals. (MT)
*** Rivista di studi politici internazionali. Casa Editrice Le Lettere (8 piazza dei Nerli, I-50124 Firenze. Tel: (39-55) 2342710 - Fax: 2346010 - email: staff@lelettere.it - Internet: http://www.lelettere.it ). October/December 2012, No. 316, 163 pp, €18 (Italy), €21 (elsewhere). Annual subscription: €60 (Italy), €80 (elsewhere).
This issue of a prestigious Italian review contains an article in French by the late Prof. Romain Yakemtchouk on the chaotic rise of the principle of subsidiarity in the context of the European Community. The former lecturer at the Université Catholique de Louvain points out that the draft European treaty drawn up under the impulse of Spinelli in February 1984 defined subsidiarity not only as a brake on misplaced Community zeal, but also in a positive way as being useful for tasks whose implementation requires action by the Union because in their dimension or impact, they move beyond national borders. This interpretation tends to get ignored these days, and it will only come as a surprise to those unaware that this political concept is in the hands of the people who profit from the old order... Clearly, there has been nothing new under the sun since Machiavelli. Other contributions look at the prospects for enlargement of the European and the thought and action of Italian federalist Mario Albertini. (MT)
*** Diasporiques. Cultures en mouvement. Association Diasporiques et Ligue de l'enseignement (3 rue Récamier, F-75007 Paris. email: postmaster@diasporiques.org - Internet: http://www.diasporiques.org ). 2013, No. 23, 98 pp, €6-50. Annual subscription: €25 (France), €30 (European Union and Switzerland), €35 (elsewhere).
This issue of a review aiming to make an active contribution to the dialogue of cultures contains transcripts of two debates on the future of Europe and how it can be given political and social credibility. Lawyer Pierre-Yves Monjal suggests that realistically one should not dream of a European federation at this stage, but of a 'political union' based on the crucial principle of deliberate strengthening of European Parliamentary scrutiny, extended to the parliaments of the Member States. The author also pertinently points out that the complexity of the European Union's institutional system is no doubt a plus in the eyes of the Member States because it 'gives them a free hand.' This viewpoint is shared in the other debate by former MEP Philippe Herzog who says that leaving the 2014 European elections to the national parties would mean harvesting a rise of popularism. The way he sees it, civil society must give itself the means to be able to assert itself in the European project rather than leaving the national political parties in place to continue with their conflicts and posturing. He adds that it is also important to be able to avoid leaving the drawing up and implementation of the European project in the hands of the European Commission alone, which he says has become a technocratic structure without any political mandate and needs reforming (PBo)
*** Futuribles. L'anticipation au service de l'action. Futuribles Sarl (47 rue de Babylone, F-75007 Paris. Tel: (33-1) 53633770 - Fax: 42226554 - email: revue@futuribles.com - Internet: http://www.futuribles.com ). July-August 2013, No. 395, 178 pp, €22. Annual subscription: €115. ISBN 978-2-84387-408-6.
This issue of this well-known magazine on tomorrow's world focuses on the values of Europeans. In the editorial, Hughes de Jouvenel asks how the fundamental values of our contemporaries are evolving because the economic and social crisis, far from having a purely economic impact, is surely leading to a structural shift between a model of society that is still rotting away and another that is still in the process of coming into being. It is therefore useful to examine the changes under way in individual and collective behaviour, which is what the researchers involved in the European Values Studies since 1981 proceed to do. The fourth wave of the European Value Studies was launched in 2008 in no fewer than forty-seven countries of Europe, ranging from Germany to Switzerland via Norway, Belarus, Albania, Azerbaijan and Kosovo. The investigations cover couples and marriage, social capital, the meaning of work, xenophobia, political values, and the individual's position vis-à-vis Europe and religiosity. The polls all demonstrate that the trend towards the individualisation of society is strengthening (particularly in the Scandinavian countries and the big countries in Western Europe, along with countries with a Protestant tradition), but that individualisation does not conflict in any way with the values of living together. Hughes de Jouvenel points out that the trends thus revealed raise the question of a new way of being and living together, a new way of building the society of tomorrow, which is these days expressed more in local initiatives than through the often paradoxical injunctions from public authorities. The editorialist wonders whether citizens have at last understood what Alexis de Tocqueville said a long time ago, namely that when it comes to producing social well-being, the collective strength of citizens will always be stronger than the authority of a government. (MT)
*** Les hors-série de Politique. Revue de débats. ASBL Politique (9 rue du Faucon, B-1000 Brussels. Tel: (32-2) 5386996 - email: secretariat@politique.eu.org - Internet: http://politique.eu.org ). October 2013, No. HS22, 82 pp, €4. Annual subscription: €40.
This special issue of a progressive Belgian review lifts the veil on the various axes underlying the ninety-first Semaine Sociale of the Mouvement Ouvrier Chrétien, which was wholly devoted to the topic of migration, addressed from the viewpoint of social justice. First of all, social reality and diversity are addressed from the angle of philosophy and anthropology. Living together is then considered in an essay, for example, in which Frédérique Mawet explains that Europe needs a genuine employment policy rather than a police policy. The third section analyses the mechanics of discrimination, looking at ethnic and race discrimination on the labour market and the situation of the Roms, described as an 'emblematic community of the sum of all discriminations.' The final section considers the social movement in the light of diversity. (PBo)