Following the fruitfulness of summer, September, with the new school year, the start of the autumn publishing season and the new parliamentary session, usually marks not simply a resumption of activities, but also a new beginning, of which the intensity of meaning is a matter of perception. In the European Union, the events of the summer bring people and leaders back to the question of sense, in all its meanings, particularly keenly this time.
It means significance, first of all, to millions of human beings: European citizens and their visitors. Then, perception: what do we sense? Where are we going? Finally, quality: and this gives us the notion of “common sense”, which is not some simplistic pragmatism, but “reasonable, sensible; appealing to or in accordance with instinctive understanding or sound judgment” (OED[af2] ). It requires wisdom and reason; let passions go, allow the irrational to extend its empire, and you’re going down the road of a lack of sense.
For the EU, common sense dwells within the Treaties, conventions and standards. It is significant, prescriptive, but wisely so. These days, there are a number of articles of primary law that need to be repeated.
In the TEU, article 2: “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including rights of persons belonging to minorities. These values are common to the member states in a society in which pluralism, non-discrimination, tolerance, justice, solidarity and equality between women and men prevail.”
In the TFEU, article 78: “The Union shall develop a common policy on asylum, subsidiary protection and temporary protection with a view to offering appropriate status to any third-country national requiring international protection and ensuring compliance with the principle of non-refoulement”; article 79: “The Union shall develop a common immigration policy (…); and article 80: “The policies of the Union set out in this Chapter and their implementation shall be governed by the principle of solidarity and fair sharing of responsibility, including its financial implications, between the member states. Whenever necessary, the Union acts adopted pursuant to this Chapter shall contain appropriate measures to give effect to this principle.”
By abandoning a reform of Dublin, by enshrining the principle of the “voluntary basis” of each member state for the management of the various migration situations, the European Council of 29 June infringed the articles quoted above, in a sop to the Visegrád clan (see EUROPE 12051). Its slapdash scheme, based on centres controlled on the territory of the EU, but to which no government has made a commitment, and based on external disembarkation platforms, without even having checked that the countries of North Africa would host them, flouted humanitarian legislation and defied common sense.
To start with, the Commission tried to supply something that would keep everyone happy, before deciding to focus on reinforcing the European border guard and coast guard corps (Frontex), possible financial assistance and the ‘returns' directive.
The closures/reopenings of ports (mainly in Italy), partial agreements on a case-by-case basis and unpleasant statements made by national leaders have punctuated the summer and split the EU, all while the death rate of Mediterranean crossings rose still higher. The discredit into which the European Council, which is supposed to “provide the Union with the necessary impetus for its development and shall define the general political directions and priorities thereof” (article 15 TEU), has fallen, the way its agenda has had to submit to the priorities of populists and the rifts between its members, played out in the media, constitutes the most significant political reality of recent times. No actual progress is expected on the ‘migration’ agenda item at the informal meeting of the heads of state or government in Salzburg this Thursday: the “voluntary basis”, the sum total of individual national selfishness, is likely to confirm its meagre output.
As regards respecting the values of the Union, it was the European Parliament that stepped in to save the day on 12 September, by voting, by a very considerable majority, in favour of activating article 7 TEU against the Hungary of Mr Orbán (see EUROPE 12094). This vote was only possible due to the “conversion” of the EPP, which was driven by its leader, Manfred Weber, a man who is very likely to be returned as the Spitzenkandidat of his political family (see EUROPE 12089).
As for Poland, the procedure is continuing, through a mix of exchanges of letters with the Commission and hearings at the Council of the EU (see EUROPE 12097). For the EU’s credibility in the eyes of all democratic people with a commitment to the rule of law, it is absolutely vital that both procedures go as far as the European Council, even if solidarity between the illiberal stands in the way of unanimity: this is precisely to be expected, in the view of all citizens. Common sense would make a reappearance.
In his state of the union speech, President Juncker went all out against “narrow-minded nationalism” (see EUROPE 12094). He made the case for an ambitious alliance between Europe and Africa, for a multilateralism that is currently losing steam, for breathing new life into the ‘Foreign Affairs’ Council by appropriately dropping unanimity, for the legislative effectiveness of the pillar of social rights. He unveiled a few proposals, for instance in favour of the international status of the euro and to guarantee proper European elections, without external manipulation and in full respect of the protection of personal data by the political parties.
The Commission still has a full year in hand to work calmly yet fruitfully, in an unprecedented context: MEPs busy with election campaigning and heads of government who no longer give each other a hearing. It has the potential to be a pole of stability, no doubt, but also to propose more, to aim higher, to decide to carry the EU and its future: the guardian of the treaties and of the values, capable of charting a new horizon for all Europeans, to say it loud and proud. If it were to take this line, it could also avoid disaster in the European elections. The window of opportunity that is now opening for a rebalancing of the institutions and the return of common sense bears all the hallmarks of an historic opportunity.
Renaud Denuit