EU Enlargement and Ukraine
The Fondation Jean Monnet has published the speech on Ukraine and the EU made by its President, Pat Cox of Ireland, in Dublin on 22 March 2023. The text of the speech is extremely worthy of a read. Its author not only served as a Liberal member of the European Parliament (Fianna Fail) for 15 years, including as President of the institution (2002-2004), but was also a member of the special mission of the European Parliament Ukraine in 2012-2013, together with the former Polish president Aleksander Kwasniewski.
In his speech, Cox stresses how closely the strategic interests of the European Union and of Ukraine are aligned: “post-war, an isolated and impoverished Ukraine trapped indefinitely in no man’s land, or courting a frozen conflict between an anxious EU and a threatening Russia would be a constant source of instability. This is not in the interests of Ukraine and assuredly is not in the interests of the EU and its front-line Eastern member states”. He goes on to argue that “Ukraine’s aspiration to join the European Union is an issue of strategic EU significance and needs to be treated as such. As a matter of self-preservation, the EU cannot afford to risk a threatening and volatile political vacuum on its eastern flank”.
In view of the progress already made by Ukraine and the degree of priority the Ukrainian authorities seem to award to the accession process, even in these times of war, Cox considers that “negotiation potentially could be launched by the end of this year”. But if this accession process is to become reality, the EU must also prepare for it. Disregarding the cost of post-war reconstruction efforts, which nobody knows yet who will pay for, Cox points out that Ukraine is the second-largest European country after Russia in size, that its GDP is only just slightly greater than Poland’s, with a vast agricultural sector, which will have serious consequences for the size and allocation of the European budget, particularly as regards the common agriculture policy and cohesion expenditure. He also points out that in institutional terms, the EU is not ready for any further enlargement and that a revision of the treaties, featuring in particular a reform of the decision-making procedures at the Council, is vital to avoid blockages and guarantee the EU’s functioning in the future. If one contemplates the shock waves and insecurity that would emanate from instability in Ukraine, the “EU needs to draw a lesson from Mario Draghi’s three words that saved the euro and do ‘whatever it takes’”, the former President of the European Parliament suggests.
While Ukraine is undergoing a deep transformation with a view to joining the EU, it needs to be able to count on generous support from the EU, but the EU also has a duty to criticise Ukraine when necessary, as “the ultimate gift of membership must carry conditions”, Cox explains, adding that “to avoid superficiality, membership should not be turbocharged. To avoid discouragement, it should not be unduly delayed. As regards full membership, the EU will need to strike a balance between Ukraine’s determination to get it early and the Union’s imperative to get it right”. (Olivier Jehin)
Pat Cox. EU Enlargement and Ukraine. Fondation Jean Monnet. Débats et Documents series, edition 27, April 2023. ISSN: 2296-7710. 18 pages. Published in paper version, the text may also be downloaded from the Foundation’s website: https://aeur.eu/f/6vr
The future of the English Language in the European Union
Even following Brexit, the use of English in the European Union is here to stay, but Europeans must now take ownership of it by adapting it to their ideals and needs, Anne Parry explains in this article published in the review “The Federalist Debate”.
Using the example of the lexicographer Noah Webster who, at the time of the American Constitutional Convention in 1781, was one of the pioneers of the American version of the English language, Parry proposes defining a Euro-English that might reinforce the European identity alongside the national identities. She substantiates this parallel by referring to the fact that the European Union is in a situation very similar to that of the United States in the late 18th century: in other words, in a constituent phase of a federal future.
What can currently be called Euro-English by common agreement is a mix of idioms deriving from images and expressions unique to the languages and cultures of the various regions of the continent, from false friends, errors, or pronunciation, and from concepts that have no equivalent in conventional English, including some European institutional jargon. From the perspective of England, this is all, logically, seen as wrong. But languages are living things and this may therefore become a new dialectal form that has every chance of ending up in the dictionary.
To speed up this evolution process collaboratively, the author proposes involving all English-speakers in the EU and, more particularly, young people through a digital platform entitled “Conference on Euro-English”. This would comprise three sections: (1) under the guidance of a committee of linguists, schoolchildren and students from various member states could be invited to spend part of their English lessons inventing words and expressions to translate words and concepts that are unique to their cultures: these proposals will be shared by the platform and, if applicable, presented and defended by their authors at an annual conference; (2) a second section would focus on terms in use in the European institutions, with videos of European civil servants or European figures explaining the meanings of these; (3) in a third section, students and their teachers could co-create a shared history and culture, expressed in Euro-English. Every year, the best contributions would be awarded prizes at a ceremony focusing on celebrating European history and culture.
The author concludes that the “European Union is a beacon of democracy in a world where authoritarian empires threaten our existence. In order to guarantee our future, we need a multi-lingual society with a strong identity and strong institutions. A shared language that we identify as our own will make an important contribution to this shared future”.
Other interesting articles of this edition of the Federalist Review worthy of note include one by Antonio Padoa-Schioppa, emeritus professor of the history of law at the University of Milan, who expresses concern at the gap currently opening up between France and Germany. If a political and sovereign Europe is to be seen as a true possibility, Emmanuel Macron needs to show it by declaring that the French nuclear deterrent is an instrument of defence for the whole of the European Union, as Wolfgang Schäuble has asked him to do, and by putting France’s permanent seat at the United Nations Security Council at the service of the EU. In the field of security and defence, France must accept a sacrifice of sovereignty equivalent to that made by Germany when it abandoned the Deutschmark for the euro.
Finally, there is a must-read article by former European civil servant Jean-Guy Giraud, who stresses that after the forthcoming waves of enlargement, the EU of 36 (the existing 27 + Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia + the six Balkan states) will be “a different Europe”. It will be characterised by the status of countries that have been under the communist yoke. These 19 countries will represent 52% of the total number of member states and 25% of the entire population of the EU of 36 (around 150 million people out of a total of 600 million). The European Union will not only be more diverse, it will also represent considerable gaps in wealth, the author stresses, calling for lessons to be learned from the previous wave of enlargement by making sure that the institutions are reinforced ahead of time. (OJ)
Anne Parry. The Future of the English Language in the European Union – Proposal for a Conference on Euro-English. The Federalist Debate. March 2023. ISSN: 1591-8483. 64 pages. The texts of the Review are available from the website: https://aeur.eu/f/6vs
Islam et libertés religieuses
With a title that is nothing short of confrontational, the lawyer and head of studies at the universities of Paris-Créteil and Picardie, Chihab Mohammed Himeur, presents us with Islam shown in its very best light, its tradition and history, taking the resources for this highly engaging argument from the Quran. More than just an eye-catching title, this work deserves a read, but as always, with a critical eye. Readers must bear in mind the fact that most religions appeared and developed during periods when sources are few and not always reliable. Yet even the ones whose sacred texts call for tolerance, peace and love of one’s fellow man bear the seeds of discrimination and exclusion on the pretext of being the sole truth. They were all ultimately created by man, whether religious or not, clerics or lay, for the purposes of economic enslavement, territorial conquest, repression or the exercise of totalitarian power on the basis of theocratic inspiration.
In the first part of the work, Chihab Mohammed Himeur attempts to bolster Islam by comparing it to Christianity and, more specifically, to Roman Catholicism. And as Prof Bertrand Mathieu (Sorbonne University) puts it in his preface, he puts things quite bluntly and indulges in a few anachronisms, such as “when he compares the Christianity of the Crusades and the Inquisition to Islam as it is lived today, in certain Arab societies” (our translation throughout). “Similarly, the analysis of the Al-Andalus is probably a touch embellished, given that tolerance of Jews and Christians was connected to the specific status to which the latter was subjected (‘the dhimma’), which admittedly afforded protection, but was profoundly inegalitarian and brought with it a number of constraints, including a drastic obligation for religious ‘discretion’”, Mathieu continues, going on to point out that “Islam is a religion but it is an ideology as well, which upsets the universalist conception of human rights”. He adds that “certainly, the author demonstrates that Islam, like all religions, has certain connections to human rights, but the fact remains that beyond a logic of religion, these rights have their source in divinity rather than man himself (…). The question remaining is then whether Islam is ‘soluble’ in a society that is part of the logic of the ideology of individual fundamental rights”.
Himeur sets out to defend a liberal vision of a tolerant Islam that respects the freedoms of conscience and religious worship. He also criticises the excesses of political Islam. Quoting a survey from 2020 conducted by the institute IFOP, he points out that 74% of French Muslim respondents under the age of 25 said that they put Islam before the French Republic, compared to 25% of those aged 35 and above, he recognises that the legal prescriptions and rules of moral conduct in the Quran are increasingly mobilised to justify “behaviour and actions that run counter to the law in force in society”. He adds that “this is where the real danger to democracy lies”. (OJ)
Chihab Mohammed Himeur. Islam et libertés religieuses – Le combat des valeurs? (Available in French only) Bruylant. ISBN: 978-2-8027-7155-5. 232 pages. €93,00
Splendeurs et misères de l’argent
The latest edition of the Revue générale is given over to the “splendours and miseries of money” of its title, with a dossier that begins with an editorial piece by constitutionalist Francis Delpérée on the power of gold, of which Voltaire said that “with gold, you have men and (…) with men, you have gold” (our translation throughout), as well as the harmful effects of ‘Qatargate’. Among the intellectual abundance that always characterises this Review, readers will find a contribution from former prime minister Mark Eyskens setting out a highly amusing fable on writing off debts, and an article by the editorialist of the Bulletin quotidien Europe, Renaud Denuit, examining all dimensions of the relationship between the European institutions and money, own resources and everything from the budget to economic and monetary union via European funds and, of course, not omitting corruption and revolving-door jobs.
Also worth a read is an article by novelist Luc Delisse entitled “La liberté en cash”, in which he reminds us how much our world is every day looking a little more like the one described by George Orwell in “1984”. “Cash is the only form of individual liberty that is independent from the permission or self-deception of power. The only one that can be safely used if you are being tracked. It is no surprise that its appropriateness is being called into question, its use carefully restricted, the possession of it increasingly discouraged and its disappearance scheduled for the medium term. Neither tax fraud (a partly imagined crime) nor the underground economy of the Mafia justify this increasing ostracisation: it is this scandalous invisible currency of exchange available to the holder and which he needs to be dispossessed of sooner or later”. The author goes on to argue that “once all the money in the world is digital, there will no longer be any escape. You will be helplessly at the mercy of the governments and institutions that we will euphemistically describe as democratic. The last bush to hide behind will be gone. The world will be carved up into grid squares, finally and definitively. As the threat of concern to us is not absolute, as the universal police tropism has not yet taken over everything, cash, by its very use, is a form of resistance. It is only a question of years, very few years. Soon, the techniques of control, monitoring and predation of the individual by power will have reached their maximum efficiency”. (OJ)
Frédéric Saenen (edited by). Splendeurs et misères de l’argent. Presses universitaires de Louvain. Revue générale, March 2023. ISBN: 978-2-3906-1341-1. 254 pages. €25,00