Archive for June 2013
J’Accuse… !
Some people say that EU politics is
technical, boring and unsexy – a bit Olli
Rehn if you like. They are all wrong. This week’s confrontation between
President Barroso and an assortment of French politicians is an indication of
just how wrong they are. Did I mention that “the Governator” himself, Arnie
Schwarzenegger, came to town?
 |
| Who needs French cinema when you've got Arnie? |
José has never been popular with any
of the French governments he has dealt with as Commission President. An
anglophile, classical liberal, who loves banging on about global
competitiveness, is never going to warm Gallic hearts. In a recent interview with the International Herald & Tribune, catchily
entitled “European Official Takes on the French”,
he let the world know that the feeling was mutual, labelling the French
government as “reactionary”. This was concerning the recent spat between the
Commission and France over the maintenance of l’exception culturelle in the TTIP negotiation mandate,
which will forbid any discussion of the protectionist laws that guard French
cinema and music from trade liberalisation.
By Sunday, Arnaud Montebourg, France’s
industry minister, had let lose a sizzling riposte, accusing José of being “the
fuel of the French National Front”. My favourite put-down came from former conservative PM, Alain Juppé, who said
that José had “a vision of the world that dates from around 1958”. Ouch. Nicole
Bricq, France’s embattled trade minister, went even further by declaring that José
was useless and had “done nothing during his mandate.” Sorry Nicole, you might disagree with
what he has done, but to accuse him of having done nothing isn't the most informed
of observations. Where was President Hollande? Anywhere but asserting his ‘authority’
apparently.
José’s joint press conference with
former Hollywood star and disgraced Republican politician, Arnie Schwarzenegger (he came
to talk about climate change), was a very apt backdrop from which to be asked
how he felt about all the hurtful things that had been said about him. He
claimed they weren't "worthy of comment”. He never wanted their Christmas cards
anyway.
This very public spat is not just a
piece of domestic showboating, it says a lot about the level of French
frustration with the EU and the way in which leadership of the project has
slipped out of its grasp. Until very recently, the clichéd Franco-German tandem
as the “motor of the Europe” was a cornerstone of journalistic reporting. When
was the last time you heard that line in the news? The French government is largely powerless
to shift the policy priorities coming out of Brussels away from fiscal conservatism
and trade liberalism, to meet its own agenda. Barroso is the very personification of
this trend.
This is not what France signed up
for when it embraced la construction européenne. The EU was always meant to
be a way of maximising French influence on the direction of Europe and the world; the interests of France
and Europe becoming intertwined and projected globally. De
Gaulle might be turning in his grave.
The views expressed in this post are strictly my own; but you can borrow
them.
EU Cost-Cutting: Insects Added to Canteen Menu
It looks like the Commission finally decided to put its mouth where its money is. The change in menu follows the announcement of project “PROteINSECT” which foresees the allocation of nearly 4 million euro over a 39 month period to develop a “pro-insect platform in Europe to encourage adoption of sustainable protein production technologies.” While the project was announced in February of this year, the menu change did not take place until late May in coordination with the release of the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nation’s report on Edible insects: Future prospects for food and feed security. “We issue tons of green papers that no one ever reads—us included. We figured we’d get more people on board with UN backing,” commented Director-General for Research & Innovation Robert-Jan Smits.
The Commission has decided to phase in insect protein as an indistinguishable meat substitute in most canteens. When asked whether the cricket burger he was eating was up to snuff, EC fonctionnaire Jean-Claude Martin said mid-bite, “Wait, this is cricket? I thought it was beef! The beef burgers have always tasted like this.” The EEAS canteen, on the other hand, has introduced whole crickets to the menu as toppers for salads, soups, and, for those bold enough to try, ice cream. “Those guys at the EEAS aren’t content eating bugs in Thailand or Ghana. They have to prove how worldly they are even in Brussels,” said one Commission official.
And while EC canteen goers used to lower quality food may not know the difference, European Parliament officials with high standards are decidedly on the picky end. To tackle this problem a cocktail reception is planned in the weeks before Parliament goes into summer recess. At the event members of the secretariat, assistants and interns alike will be able to rub shoulders and try a nice smoked beetle paired with a Super Tuscan, or a caramelized cricket with a crisp Sauvignon Blanc. Spokesperson for the British project Ento commented, “One day we were joking around and said ‘You could serve those guys at the Parliament insects for all they knew and they’d eat it as long as you called it a cocktail reception.’ Well guess what, that’s what we’re doing.”
‘Flanby’ Wins a Peace Prize
 |
| Contains over 70% of milk! |
On June 5th French President François Hollande received UNESCO’s Félix Houphouët-Boigny Peace Prize for his ‘first war’ against Islamist nutters in northern Mali.
The prize, so aptly named after the Ivory Coast’s slightly authoritarian
first president, is handed out “to honour
people, institutions and organizations that have contributed significantly to
the promotion, research, preservation or maintenance of peace.” ‘Flanby’, as the French President is lovingly called in reference to
the bland, wobbly French desert, gives Nobel Prize winner Barack Obama a run
for his money, receiving his hard earned prize in just over a year.
From an outsider’s perspective the French military intervention
might not have made much sense. After all Flanby is not exactly suited for the
scorching deserts of northern Mali, but the freedom fighting French President
took the risk all the same to assist the citizens of the legendary lands of
Timbuktu from displaced Al-Qaeda disciples. From the onset the moral
high-ground was his: our little caramel tart and his foreign legion were going
to pull a quick in-and-out to protect the UNESCO world-heritage of the Songhay
Empire, the famous mausoleums of the Islam scholars, and keep the crazy
Salafist Bedouins from walking on Bamako.
The mission was such a success that the majority of all UNESCO
monuments in the region were professionally wiped of the face of the earth. But
that doesn’t mean they’re not in good company as ranks of other World Heritage sites
have also been deleted in the name of some invisible spaghetti-monster.
Ok, so perhaps the destruction of World Heritage Sites that have
been “in Danger” since early 1995 isn’t a success, but on the brigher side
France’s political paternalism and Pacte
Colonial may have helped it to strike gold—or Uranium
to be exact.
But
in the end the question to ask is who is it that has really won? UNESCO is in
dire need of cash ever since Director General Irina Bokova campaigned for the
acceptance of Palestine as full-member, and the U.S. crippled the
organization’s working costs by cutting almost one quarter of all funding.
Maybe assuring itself of a good working relationship with the host country
(UNESCO’s seat and bloated administration are in Paris, close to Les Invalides,
if you want to visit), and possibly squeeze out some extra funds in time of
crisis won’t do Bokova any harm, in view of UNESCO elections in November of
this year. Especially if one of her main opponents is African (The Djiboutian
ambassador to France), she can use all of the African support (and French
lobbying) she can get.
To
be continued…
Croatia IN, Iceland OUT
Is the EU Going to Continue to Enlarge?
If an average reader of the EU news were asked for their opinion about the EU enlargement policy, also known as the “most successful EU policy,” he/she would probably say that he/she is tired of it but happy to see that the last week marked the end of it. And his/her answer would be wrong! Ok, at least partly wrong.
The reader would probably base his/her answer on the following three pieces of news. Last week the European Parliament approved the 28th Commissioner coming
from Croatia. This appointment marks the last stage before this “new EU star” joins
the EU next month. Then, the Prime Minister of Iceland made the effort to fly to Brussels in order to inform the Commissioner for Enlargement that his country decided not to join and become another star of the EU. The third news came
from Turkey, country with the longest and most challenged EU membership bid in history.
Turkey is officially part of the EU enlargement agenda, but despite the fact
that the country is an official candidate and has opened membership negotiations,
the most recent developments would suggest that this country is on a safe path
of being taken out of the enlargement agenda. Last week the European Parliament’s motion for a resolution on the situation in this country resulted in a very strong (and anti-EU?) reaction by the Turkish Foreign Minister who said that
Turkey “is not a country which needs advices from a country or a bloc of countries.” This news provides little basis for a hope of rapid progress of Turkey towards a membership in “a bloc of countries?"
The reasoning of the average reader would probably make some sense if they missed the important statement made by Miroslav Lajčák. The Slovak Foreign Minister said that the EU enlargement policy must not be put on hold and must continue. After such a statement the now confused average reader can
only ask: if Croatia is definitely in, if Iceland is definitely out and if
Turkey will continue to be in and out for the decades to come, then what is
left of the EU enlargement agenda?
All in all there are only six other (Western Balkans) countries that were
promised a full membership in the EU. This promise was given by the European Council in 2003 to Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kosovo*, Macedonia, Montenegro and
Serbia. The situation in these countries suggests that they will need more time than Croatia to reform their societies and negotiate the membership in the EU, but in the best-case
scenario they would need the same amount of time. In this best-case scenario Montenegro, for example, after implementing required reforms would be able to join the EU in July
2020, Macedonia would need 9 years from the moment they come to terms with Greece on their name issue (if the deal was made today then the membership could come
in July 2022), Serbia would be able to join in July 2022, Albania and Bosnia
and Herzegovina in 2024/25 and Kosovo* in 2026/27. Despite the interest that Moldova, Georgia and Ukraine expressed it seems that the promise given to the six Western Balkans countries will not be extended to them.
As a proponent of EU membership for the six Western Balkans countries Miroslav Lajčák wanted to remind the average reader who is tired of the EU enlargement that 'old fashioned enlargement' will only end with the full membership of the reminding six countries. Lajčák or someone else might recognise and explain to the citizens of the EU that we might be experiencing the beginning of the end of 'the old fashioned enlargement.' Another aspect that might be explained is that the last round(s) of enlargement to these six countries will probably happen one by one, slowly, without pomp and circumstance and go unnoticed by the average reader. This is because the size of all six countries combined together (land, population and GDP) is almost equal to the size of Romania. With their membership, the size of EU will only increase from 4,381,376 km2 (including Croatia) to 4,589,207 km2 and the EU population from 507,8 million (including Croatia) to 526,1 million. The average reader should and will not worry because the enlargement policy is 'learning-by-doing' experience that incorporates mistakes from previous enlargements in future enlargements. Therefore these six countries will go through the best and the most comprehensive negotiations and reform process in the history of the EU enlargement policy. Their membership will lead to the EU of 34 member states with probably the European Commission of up to 22 Commissioners. The benefit of their membership in the EU will (only) be positive as the EU will once again prove to be a peace project capable to reform (even) the countries with history of communism, war, state building, corruption and organised crime. Moreover their membership will mean that the EU was capable to respond to expectations made by the Nobel Peace Prize and make up for the failed promises to these six nations given by the European Communities in 1990s. Most interestingly, by the time of the second half of 2020s and emergence of the EU of 34 we might also see the emergence of the “new fashioned Euro enlargement” with a focus of media and substantial debate on enlarging and enhancing the Euro zone.
As a proponent of EU membership for the six Western Balkans countries Miroslav Lajčák wanted to remind the average reader who is tired of the EU enlargement that 'old fashioned enlargement' will only end with the full membership of the reminding six countries. Lajčák or someone else might recognise and explain to the citizens of the EU that we might be experiencing the beginning of the end of 'the old fashioned enlargement.' Another aspect that might be explained is that the last round(s) of enlargement to these six countries will probably happen one by one, slowly, without pomp and circumstance and go unnoticed by the average reader. This is because the size of all six countries combined together (land, population and GDP) is almost equal to the size of Romania. With their membership, the size of EU will only increase from 4,381,376 km2 (including Croatia) to 4,589,207 km2 and the EU population from 507,8 million (including Croatia) to 526,1 million. The average reader should and will not worry because the enlargement policy is 'learning-by-doing' experience that incorporates mistakes from previous enlargements in future enlargements. Therefore these six countries will go through the best and the most comprehensive negotiations and reform process in the history of the EU enlargement policy. Their membership will lead to the EU of 34 member states with probably the European Commission of up to 22 Commissioners. The benefit of their membership in the EU will (only) be positive as the EU will once again prove to be a peace project capable to reform (even) the countries with history of communism, war, state building, corruption and organised crime. Moreover their membership will mean that the EU was capable to respond to expectations made by the Nobel Peace Prize and make up for the failed promises to these six nations given by the European Communities in 1990s. Most interestingly, by the time of the second half of 2020s and emergence of the EU of 34 we might also see the emergence of the “new fashioned Euro enlargement” with a focus of media and substantial debate on enlarging and enhancing the Euro zone.
