By Dora Bakoyannis

Whenever a milestone is reached it is time to ponder on what has been achieved. It is also time, however, to reflect upon the direction in which to proceed. The renowned playwright and dramatist Eugene Ionesco once said that ‘it is not the answer that enlightens, but the question.’ While in most instances this is probably true, in Europe’s case it is both. With regard to the latter then, the pertinent question to ask is what kind of Europe do we want 50 years from now? Herein lies the key to our Europe of tomorrow. With regard to the former, the answer remains a work in progress.

It is important to be very clear: In view of the internal and external challenges to the Union, we need more Europe over the next 50 years, not less. In this spirit, we greatly welcomed the Berlin Declaration on March 25, 2007, which was put forward by the Council, the Parliament and the Commission. The declaration not only marked the EU’s 50th anniversary, but also gave fresh impetus to the debate on the Constitutional Treaty.

For Greece, whatever course the European Union member states decide to pursue, it should have one clear and very specific goal: to bring the European Project forward. We now have a timetable of action which was set at the European Council in June 2006 and was reaffirmed at the meeting of the Council last December. We must help the German Presidency, and the forthcoming Portuguese Presidency, in a positive constructive spirit. Solutions must be reached by 2008. Only a timely solution will enable the Union to fulfill its commitments to its citizens and the countries that aspire for accession.

Our task is twofold. We must, on the one hand, respond to the internal challenges we face. These include addressing the perceived democratic deficit; securing social cohesion and the employment and prosperity of EU citizens; and promoting the EU’s economic development and competitiveness in the international arena.

On the other hand, we must become fully capable of facing the external challenges of our globalized world. Europe’s future does not depend solely upon its internal processes. Our continent is not disengaged from the wider international environment; quite the opposite. As a result, we must link our thoughts about the future of Europe to those on global trends and developments. Examples of such trends and developments include the relative position, and strength, of the rising powers of Asia; the impact and effects of climate change; global insecurity in the face of violence, terrorism, and the disregard for human rights.

Success story

Looking back at Europe’s achievements, the European experiment is, by all accounts, an unprecedented success story. Broadly speaking, its success can be grouped into three main domains which have yielded tangible results: conflict prevention, economic growth, and the consolidation of democracy in countries such as Greece, Spain and Portugal. Despite the present climate of disenchantment, it is indisputable that the past 50 years have created a long-term vision both for its members and its aspirant members. Indeed, EU membership has acted as a catalyst for the democratization and the economic modernization of the former communist countries of Europe in the years following the collapse of the Iron Curtain.

Largely due to our so-called ‘soft-power,’ the benefits of the European experiment are not limited to the borders of our continent. In the international arena, Europe is the world’s largest economy, its major marketplace, and the leading trading power. Europe has also gone the extra mile and stood up to some of its global responsibilities. The Union and its member states account for nearly 55 percent of all international development assistance, as well as for 66 percent of all grant aid. The propagation of humanitarian values, democracy and the rule of law are flagships of the EU’s external policies.

Challenging times

Ironically, Europe’s success has, in some ways, facilitated talk of what some refer to as an internal ‘crisis.’ Yet crisis is too heavy-handed a word. Our core principles are not questioned, neither are the values which constitute the very foundations of the EU. What the EU is called upon to do is find how we can better build on our values. In other words, how we can best address our citizens’ anxieties; how we can best serve Europe’s citizens.

Regarding Europe’s common future, we find ourselves at an awkward status quo. On the one hand, the direction in which we want to take the EU remains ambiguous. On the other, we must effectively address Europeans’ daily anxieties.

With regard to the former, the direction of Europe is mostly centered on the enlargement/deepening debate. Europeans, particularly those of the so-called ‘old’ member states, have become anxious about Europe’s continuous enlargement. Many claim that before proceeding with yet another enlargement, we should provide the Union with ample time to absorb its new members. In congruence, these new members should also be provided with the time to accustom themselves to EU membership. Deepening, proponents of this view argue, should be an essential prerequisite for enlarging. Others argue that we should focus on enlargement, setting aside, temporarily at least, the question of deepening. These two views largely depend, of course, on what future view of Europe each proponent holds. For Greece, the two are not mutually exclusive. To view enlargement and deepening as diametrically opposed is not conducive to Greece’s vision of the future of Europe. On the contrary, for Greece, enlargement and deepening can and ought to go hand in hand.

With regard to the latter, namely dealing with Europeans’ disenchantment, the debate is mostly centered around the economy and the functionings of the EU’s mechanisms. Young people living in Europe today face high unemployment, shaky social security systems, and sluggish economic growth. It must be remembered that what is now the European Union started off as an economic affair and this parameter has been a steady constant throughout the years. The economic benefits of belonging to the European Union have always taken center stage, and today’s economic difficulties unavoidably reflect and have an impact on perceptions of the EU project.

Moreover, young Europeans often perceive a ‘democratic deficit’ of the Union and its ever-present internal antagonisms. They also feel detached and disengaged by what goes on ‘somewhere in Brussels,’ where decisions about their daily life are made. They perceive a lack of information flow, of consultation, and of transparency.

The aforementioned turmoil indicates a lively democratic stage of our European project. The citizens of Europe demand that their Europe corresponds to their ideals, to their benchmarks. We, as politicians who represent them, must ensure that their voices are heard and must seek to make the necessary readjustments. This is what we have been doing during our reflection period. Yet more remains to be done.

The Constitutional Treaty & thinking laterally

We in Europe find ourselves in a stage of transition. After the period of reflection which followed the French and Dutch referenda, we must now proceed in an organized fashion until a final decision on Europe’s institutional future is reached.

Greece stands firmly behind the need to proceed with a Constitutional Treaty. We believe in it for the future of Europe and we are committed to constructively helping the presidencies move the process forward. In the world of politics, however, one must always have an alternative route in mind. Our cherished scheme is to take the Constitutional Treaty forward; of that there is no doubt. Yet, as politicians, we must also think laterally.

In the unwelcome case that we do not reach an agreement on the Constitutional Treaty that is acceptable to all member states, we must be equipped with an alternative strategy. Various alternatives have already been voiced. Others may still be heard. Among those options which have already surfaced, however, one that could potentially facilitate the quantum leap that our European project needs, is to follow a strategy that could allow for a new integrative dynamism to be formed.

The proposed Constitutional Treaty is not set in stone. There is always space for amendments, improvements and alterations. What is of absolute importance, however, is that certain reforms to which all members states have agreed, remain. Among others, it is central that the Constitutional Treaty clarifies the function of the Union as well as relations between the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission. This would clearly distinguish between the legislative and executive powers. It is also important, for instance, that all existing treaties are replaced by a single text that encompasses a legally binding ‘Charter of Fundamental Rights.’ The strengthened role and cooperation between the European Parliament and the national parliaments is also a vital element. Equally central is the institution of a president of the EU and a minister of foreign affairs, both of which enjoy real powers. The extension of qualified majority voting, thereby balancing the voting power of big and small member states; the solidarity clauses; and the EU’s legally binding personality are some other parts of the Constitutional Treaty which we should seriously consider safeguarding.

The above are some of the reasons why Greece is a staunch supporter of proceeding with the Constitutional Treaty. We believe that it will allow for a more proficient and capable internal functioning of the EU. It will also allow us to deal with the challenges of tomorrow in a more efficient and effective fashion.

Finding Europe’s soul

The slippery slope down which many predicted that the EU would slide after the French and Dutch rejections of the proposed Constitutional Treaty has, thankfully, yet to be seen.

On the contrary, a will for change has survived and the process for ratifying the Constitutional Treaty has proceeded smoothly. Indeed, as we did not ignore the two rejections, we must not, and cannot, overlook the overriding consent of so many member states which have already ratified the Constitutional Treaty.

Moreover, we have welcomed two new member states, Bulgaria and Romania, and accession negotiations with Turkey and Croatia are under way despite the well-known difficulties with Turkey.

We have also managed to find what has often been an elusive common voice, in a common European position in foreign affairs. Europe stepped up its diplomacy in the Western Balkans and bolstered its common foreign policy in Lebanon and Iran, for instance.

Furthermore, economic growth in both Germany and France is showing signs of rebounding, and the euro is going from strength to strength.

There is, therefore, a great deal to be proud of and a lot to be optimistic about. The underlying reasons for successes such as these are fourfold. First, there is the enduring strength of the emerging ‘European consciousness.’ Second, the enthusiasm of the new member states and of the candidate states for the European project. Third, there is the revived economic growth of Europe’s historical locomotives, namely France and Germany. Finally, the realization that Europe is an indispensable factor in world affairs. Europe has earned, and widely enjoys, the respect and confidence of people around the globe. Moreover, it represents for many the sociopolitical, economic, and institutional model they want to see in their respective countries.

Setting aside our achievements, however, one thing is certain: No course of action will suffice unless we renew our faith in and enthusiasm for the European project. I cannot agree more with Chancellor Merkel’s remarks, while addressing the European Parliament, that ‘[w]e have to find Europe’s soul. For we do not really need to give a soul to Europe ― it already has one.’

Returning, therefore, to the question posited at the beginning of this article: What kind of Europe do we want to have in 50 years? We want our Europe to continue to be a source of inspiration across the globe. We want our Europe to be an even more influential political entity with political and economic stamina and momentum. We want it to be more cohesive, and to have a more common voice in foreign policy issues. We want it to be even more at the forefront of global issues which are threatening our planet and humanity. We want it to continue to be the most fascinating mosaic of cultures which finds strength and unity through its diversity. We believe that it will always serve as a beacon of democracy, human rights and the rule of law. The challenge for us now is to lay the foundations which will make the kind of Europe we desire in 50 years: a Europe in which its citizens feel that it is a Union of its citizens; a demos in the amplest and most profound sense of the word. A Europe whose peoples share a common identity and a common destiny, parallel to their distinctive national identities.

What kind of Europe do we want in 50 years? A Europe of prosperous, socially secure, competitive, empowered and influential citizens. A Europe of cultural radiance and economic weight. A Europe of political consequence for the world of tomorrow.

A Europe that inspires.

Article by: Dora Bakoyannis(more...)
	Dora Bakoyannis is the Greek minister for foreign affairs.