Europe's democratic renewal needs a feminist slant - by Iratxe García Pérez

If the Covid-19 outbreak has taught us anything, it’s that preparedness for crises is crucial to save lives. To be better prepared, we need to have a discussion about the future of the European Union. And not just among politicians. This is where the Conference on the Future of Europe comes in, which had been proposed already before the pandemic because, even back then, it was necessary to update our common vision and to speed up decision-making in our union of 27 member states.

Now, the time has come to get out of the ‘Brussels bubble’, listen to people and advance towards a feminist Europe. We need a new concept of power, a new approach to representative democracy and a new mindset in the EU institutions. This transformation should also be reflected in the institutional architecture. We must ensure that the conference plenary does not just become a political theatre for EU politicians to debate among themselves. Instead, it needs to be a forum to give a voice to citizens

Read more at: Europe's democratic renewal needs a feminist slant – Iratxe García Pérez

EU Grassroots Civic Entrepreneurs: Why Europe Needs Civic Entrepreneurs - by Alberto Alemanno and Michael Cottakis

Europe needs a new breed of entrepreneur. Not just tech entrepreneurs who freeride on our personal data before becoming philanthropists. But civic entrepreneurs who dare to empower society without impoverishing it through their innovative ventures. But who is a civic entrepreneur? She’s someone who dares to be entrepreneurial in the part of society that most needs it: our communities. Where people see gridlock and problems, civic entrepreneurs see opportunity and mobilize their communities on a forward path. Their recipe is to forge powerfully productive linkages at the intersection of business, government, education, and community, thus helping to generate new innovative civic institutions, practices and social norms. By operating at the grassroots level, they create collaborative advantages that empower their communities to compete on the world stage.

The question therefore is: how do we empower our civic entrepreneurs?

The efforts of these organisations are admirable, their impact burgeoning, but their collective – pan-European – influence still small. More widespread social innovation, fuelled by Europe’s civic entrepreneurs, will occur only if conditions exist for their mobilisation. We present some ideas on how to empower our civic entrepreneurs, through five concrete initiatives.

1. Connect the dots to attain a critical mass: Despite their limited visibility, there exist hundreds of initiatives across Europe that offer innovative, low-cost solutions to challenges faced by society and its public authorities. Some of them are grassroots associations, others are social enterprises, sometimes do-thanks and emerging transnational political movements, such as DIEM. Unfortunately, these groups typically work across epistemic communities, don’t know each other, and lack opportunities to meet and exchange. To solve this conundrum, public authorities, civil society and businesses must create an enabling environment for mutual exchange. An EU Civic Innovation Fund, topped up by the private sector, can be geared towards fostering these linkages. Rather than being administered at EU level, it should follow a decentralized model closer to potential beneficiaries. This would support both transnational and local civic entrepreneurial projects which demonstrate the ability to bridge communities, and promote a fresh vision of a connected European society.
2. Grow civic entrepreneurs: Being a civic entrepreneur requires training. Yet virtually no university or other institution offers dedicated academic instruction. What about an MCE – Master’s in Civic Entrepreneurship? Or better still, how about mainstreaming civic entrepreneurship into the school curriculum? More critically, how to shift away from a traditional disciplinary offering to a skills-based, hands-on education capable of streamlining civic skills across subjects? Erasmus was a pioneering programme in the mid-1980s. Today it must be substantially broadened, going beyond the student-exchange mode and be transformed – in line with President Macron’s recent proposal – so as to entail a required six-month stay abroad for students (not only in higher education but also in vocational trainings) and professionals. As such, it should include a core-competence component so as to improve EU literacy, foster civic entrepreneurship and include digital education.
3. Empower the local community: Unemployment, particularly youth unemployment, has plagued the EU economy and society since the 2008-9 great recession. Meanwhile, as large metropolises increasingly dominate western economies, our small communities have become isolated and less productive, whilst providing less space for the emergence of start-ups, or the growth of SMEs. EU Growth and Innovation hubs should be set up across the Europe’s regions to combat this. These would involve partnerships between municipal/regional units, private enterprises, universities and civil society. They would allow a space for these cross-sectoral groups to determine and deliver community priorities together. By pooling financial, technical, and human resources, these hubs will be able to coordinate larger more innovative start-up projects than would otherwise be possible, creating more jobs and attracting outside talent. The EU Cohesion Policy might be re-organised around these hubs, directing towards them a substantial portion of funds per budget. The Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs) in the UK provide a useful template.
4. Get academics’ hands dirty: While academics have been withdrawing to their ivory towers, historically they have contributed to the challenges of their surrounding communities. Time has come to instil a new culture of academic engagement that might inspire a new generation of scholars willing to turn theory into practice through start-up ventures. Recently, we witnessed the emergence of various civic labs and advocacy clinics. These new actors are dedicated to engaging students to provide free legal, policy and business advice to individuals and organisations that might otherwise struggle to pay for such services. Clinics promoting such entrepreneurship within the academic community should be co-designed and offered by universities and businesses working in tandem.
5. Instil a culture of civic entrepreneurship: Recognition matters. An EU award or titles awarded annually by EU political, business and civil society leaders to high achieving civic entrepreneurs would generate a culture of recognition, inspiring others to undertake projects in the name of the EU good. Today virtually all EU-funded awards tend to be tied to ongoing EU research projects, thus leaving aside a wealth of bottom-up and genuine initiatives.

The nationalist/populist challenge in recent years has raised questions over the sustainability of globalisation. It has demonstrated that Europe’s existing civic institutions are exclusionary and fail to harness the true potential of the communities in which they operate. The result: a growing feeling of powerlessness among citizens. So, a new relationship between politics, people and societies, designed to furnish citizens with the tools for their civic and economic empowerment, must be invented. And, while still early, there are some promising signs.

Europe is witnessing the emergence of new forms of citizen activism and entrepreneurialism. Founded less than a year ago, Pulse of Europe organises meetings of pro-Europeans across the EU, bringing citizens to the streets in support of a united Europe and in defiance of populism. WeMove mobilizes 1 million Europeans on transnational causes, ranging from whistle-blower protection to the safeguarding of Europe’s forests. The Good Lobby is the world’s first advocacy skill-sharing community, connecting professionals with civil society organisations to give the latter a louder voice and training a new generation of citizen lobbyists. The 1989 Generation Initiative, with eight branches across Europe, uses a mix of crowdsourcing, citizen dialogues, and data analysis to produce policy proposals for the consideration of key EU decision makers. The Guerrilla Foundation helps activists and grassroots movements build pockets of resistance, through a participatory model of philanthropic giving. These are but few examples.

The health and survival of our European societies hinge on cultivating innovative, empathetic, caring and thoughtful entrepreneurs who have the effrontery to assert their voices in their own spaces and communities. Evidence points to a burgeoning space composed of civic entrepreneurs willing to rethink and reshape European society from the bottom up. Unfortunately, these initiatives are not supported, not even by EU institutions struggling to keep pace with social change.
Paradoxically only civic entrepreneurs will be able to overcome such an impasse. Demonstrating their worth will enable the breeding of a new generation of European entrepreneurs who measure their success not only in terms of revenues/earnings but their beneficial impact on society and the natural environment.

Read more: Why Europe Needs Civic Entrepreneurs

The Netherlands-Almere: Can This City Predict The Fate Of The Dutch Elections?

Solar Island Almere

Founded in 1976, this city 30 kilometers from Amsterdam offers a glimpse into the future of the Netherlands. Leaving behind the tourist droves of the capital, a 20-minute ride on an Intercity train — equipped with WiFi — whisks you through windmills and farmland to reach Almere.

Lying 3.2 meters below sea level, the 7th largest city in the country has a population of almost 200,000 people. One in three locals hails from outside the European Union (EU). The local statistics office says Almere is home to 153 nationalities and 181 ethnicities.

Despite its diversity, Almere voted for the xenophobic right-wing Party for Freedom (PVV) for the last seven years. Headed by Geert Wilders, a controversial figure, the party is leading in national polls ahead of Wednesday’s election. PVV could even unseat the current government of Prime Minister Mark Rutte. The Dutch election is the first in a long line of crucial polls in Europe this year. It comes ahead of votes in France, Germany, and the Czech Republic.

In Almere, no house is further than 400 meters from a bus stop. Public transportation and bicycles have dedicated lanes on roads. The town square is an enormous open-air shopping mall with three-story buildings that make it reminiscent of a college campus. An atmosphere of order and tranquility prevails in residential neighborhoods — this is not a neglected area where far-right parties often thrive.

A third of Almere’s residents are aged younger than 25 years and only 9% of inhabitants are older than 65 years. Local economic trends match national ones — 2% GDP growth and an unemployment rate of 5.3%, much lower than the Eurozone average of 9.6%. After a day in the city, it’s difficult to find someone who openly admits to supporting the PVV.

Faiza, 50, has lived in the Netherlands for 20 years. She’s waiting for her number to be called in the city hall, a vast open space with comfortable couches and floor lamps that makes it seem like a furniture showroom. "They are ashamed to say so publicly but in private many residents support Wilders’ views," she says. "I don’t know what’s happening to Dutch society, it used to be that respecting rules and laws was sufficient for integration. It’s not like that anymore, especially for Muslims, and our religion is seen as a disease that must be kept at bay."

In recent years, there have been a few cases of radicalized Islamists in Almere but none managed to carry out terrorist attacks. This trend may have contributed to anti-Muslim sentiment in the city. The first point of Wilders’ policy manifesto promises to "de-Islamize" the Netherlands. This would involve shuttering mosques and Islamic schools and banning the Islamic veil and sales of the Koran.

Few people in the country believe the Netherlands will split from the EU.

The upcoming election has also focused on the question of immigration. Denk, which means "think" in Dutch, is a new pro-immigrant party. Founded by Turkish immigrants, the party may gain representation in parliament for the first time.

There are 28 parties contesting the election but only half of them are likely to get enough votes to win seats. Even if Wilders gets the most votes, it will be difficult for the PVV to form a coalition in a country with an ultra-proportional electoral system. It will take at least three months for any winner to put together a credible coalition.

"Wilders definitely won’t be in the coalition government that emerges," says Meindert Fennema, a political scientist at the University of Amsterdam. "No one wants to ally with the PVV and even he has no intention of becoming Prime Minister."

The logic goes that it would be too politically risky for Wilders to govern; it suits him better to stay in the opposition.

This is exactly what has happened to the PVV in its stronghold of Almere. Despite being the single largest party to win there, it has been kept out of local government by a coalition of opposing parties. 

Instead, the city government is controlled by the progressive liberal D66 party. Franc Weerwind, the mayor, is the son of immigrants from Suriname. In 2015, he also became the first person of color to become a mayor in the Netherlands.

Read more: Can This City Predict The Fate Of The Dutch Elections? - Worldcrunch

EU: Juncker to unveil post-Brexit plan for the EU

On Wednesday (1 March) European Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker will unveil his plan for the EU’s future after Britain’s departure, his spokesman said.

Juncker’s so-called “White Paper” will be presented to the European Parliament after Commissioners get a first look at it today (28 February), the spokesman said.

European Union leaders will then consider Juncker’s plan at a summit on 9-10 March, before coming up with their own post-Brexit roadmap at a special meeting in Rome on 25 March.

Britain’s shock June 2016 vote to leave the EU — coupled with crises involving the economy and migration — has plunged the 28-nation EU into a deep bout of soul-searching.

At a special summit in Italy to mark the 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome which founded the EU, the bloc’s leaders will issue a special declaration with new plans for future.

Read more:Juncker to unveil post-Brexit plan – EurActiv.com

Opinion: Brexit poses challenge to peace in Europe

The German government - most of its members convinced, experienced Europeans - knows this, but can't say it out loud. A bitter foretaste of what's to come for the Germans and all the other Europeans is that an issue of existential importance for all is being voted on by no one but Britain: everyone else has no say in the matter.

Chancellor Angela Merkel's government is especially aware of the dilemma. It knows that at least in this question, it's backed by the majority of Germans. But no matter what German ministers or the chancellor herself have to say, it's almost certain to be used against them, and against the EU, in Germanophobe Britain.

The German finance minister - who is considered a hardliner, just ask the Greeks - summarized this dilemma in one sad sentence. Asked in London in March what Germany would do if Britain left the EU, Wolfgang Schäuble said: "We would cry."

Angela Merkel has taken a public vow of silence where the Brexit is concerned. Little more is said than the repeated affirmation that of course Berlin believes Britain should be in the EU - always accompanied by the assertion that it's up to the British people to decide. When there are no microphones nearby, the chancellor takes a more concrete stance, stating that a Brexit would be "terrible."

 Tears and terror aside, the economic cost of a Brexit would be high for everyone, from London and Manchester to Paris, Berlin and Warsaw - but highest of all for Britain. Even Brexit supporters seem to suspect that leaving the EU would be economic idiocy.

So their arguments have come to target emotions instead, and the retreat to a nation of one's own - with its suggested greater self-determination and simplicity. And that's where they cross paths with their right-wing populist European brethren. Nationalists of all countries, unite - in order to separate.

But it is the political consequences of a Brexit that could truly be awful.

For all the historically illiterate talk of an EasyJet generation, the Europe that forged monetary union, and that was built upon the European Coal and Steel Community, the European Economic Community and the European Community always was, and is, a project of peace.

It was never ultimately about coal, but about cannons. This difficult trade-off is only possible if all of Europe's large states are engaged in the major everyday issues and the many small details.

Without London, the EU would find itself imbalanced. Berlin would be pushed into assuming a dominance it doesn't want and can't cope with. The German finance minister knows what that could mean - again, ask the Greeks: People no longer believe Germany is acting in Europe's interests

 In the first half of the last century, European crises resulted in war; the second half - not least thanks to the treaties of Paris, Rome and Maastricht - brought peace to an extent that in this century, it seems a given.

But it isn't. Military solutions seem acceptable once more - just look to Europe's eastern fringes. Hostile warships might one day patrol the English Channel again, not in three or five years, but perhaps 30 years from now - just because back in 2016, quite needlessly, the wrong answers were given to the wrong questions.

Yet right now, no one in the German government can say that out loud.

Europe’s Declining Influence: Europe’s Growing Illiberalism - by Judy Dempsey

European politicians frozen in time on unity

During the heady months of 2004, Brussels was the place to be. The EU was the organization to join. Europe was brimming with optimism and confidence.

On May 1 of that year, eight countries from Eastern and Central Europe became EU members. Poland’s Mission to the EU threw a marvelous party. There was a cacophony of languages. There was dancing, singing, and a real sense of relief. Poland and other countries in the region had returned to Europe.

There was also a sense that this bigger, united EU was ready to exert its influence beyond its borders. Almost twelve years later, that Europe is hardly recognizable.

Europe has retreated into its shell. With the exception of Angela Merkel, the German chancellor, and her finance minister, Wolfgang Schäuble, both of whom understand what is happening to Europe, EU leaders are acting as if they have no obligation to defend Europe’s values and the principles of freedom and openness. More worryingly, they don’t seem to care about the EU’s influence in the world.

This is confirmed by a new report by the World Economic Forum called Europe: What to watch out for in 2016-2017. To say it makes grim reading is an understatement. “European leaders must deliver solutions, and fast, if they want to prevent support for the EU [from] imploding in coming years,” the report states.

The EU has always had its share of doomsayers. But what is particularly worrying about this report is the Eurobarometer survey it cites. Respondents were asked what were the most important issues facing the EU at the moment. The first in the list was migration, mentioned by some 58 percent of those surveyed.

The last was the EU’s influence in the world, cited by about 6 percent. What a depressing indictment of Europe’s priorities: influence doesn’t matter.

The report also reflects how the EU’s influence inside Europe is waning, and this is more troubling. If the EU’s role is weakening or if the bloc is less attractive even to its own members, how can the EU have influence beyond its borders?

The EU’s values are under threat in many member states. The Polish, Hungarian, and Slovene publics are intent on upholding the role of the traditional family only months after the Irish, once a bastion of Catholicism, voted in a referendum to legalize gay marriage. Warsaw and Budapest are meddling in the courts and the media—not that Italy’s former prime minister Silvio Berlusconi had any qualms over how he used his media empire to further his own interests.

The members of the Visegrad Group, which consists of the Czech Republic, Hungary, Poland, and Slovakia, want nothing to do with the refugees (read Muslims) fleeing the wars in Syria and Iraq. They are not alone. Other countries across Europe are closing their borders too, mostly in response to the growing appeal of populists who are Euroskeptic, oppose immigration, and fear globalization. The November 2015 terrorist attacks in Paris gave the populists a boost.

Those issues aside, the refugee crisis has exposed the inability of the EU to deal with the challenge of migration. Above all, it has shown that most European leaders do not see the connection between helping the refugees and the EU’s influence.

Refugees, migrants, and students who are offered the opportunity to live, work, and study in a democratic country give something back to that country if they remain and integrate. As the Economist argued in its January 29 issue, if migrants and students return to their homeland with new skills, they are more likely to do business with the country that welcomed them.

Other reports make similar arguments about Europe’s dwindling influence. The Eurasia Group’s Top Risks 2016 includes a chapter called “Closed Europe.” In it, authors Ian Bremmer and Cliff Kupchan argue that the rise of populism and nationalism, the erosion of the rule of law, and the risks to the Schengen system of open borders are chiseling away at the principles on which the EU was founded. “Closed Europe is first and foremost a Europe that closes itself up to the outside world, and whose countries close themselves up to one another,” the authors write.

Merkel is key to the EU’s future and influence. She has kept the eurozone countries afloat, although the single currency’s woes are far from over. She has kept the EU together in standing up to Russia despite wavering from her Social Democrat coalition partners and other EU leaders. She has tried to preserve Europe’s values of humanity and decency through her open-door policy toward the refugees.

Yet for all that, Merkel has been pilloried by several European leaders. She has been denied the solidarity that Germany had unflinchingly extended to its EU allies when asked. As a report by Citi GPS argues, the basic tenets of the European model of liberal democracy that Merkel is trying to defend are being challenged. And with it, Europe’s influence.
 
Read  more: Europe’s Declining Influence, Europe’s Growing Illiberalism - Carnegie Europe - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

USA: Oliver Stone's Untold History of the United States

The Untold History of the United States is a 2012 documentary series directed, produced, and narrated by Oliver Stone. This, the final, episode in the series recounts the final phase in the U.S.’s metamorphosis from a republic into an empire. It also outlines the financial, business and geopolitical interests underlying the War on Terror as well as the terrible repercussions that war has had — not just on the populations of “enemy” states abroad, but on the freedoms and rights of U.S. citizens and the application of human rights law worldwide. 

The report is alarming if we put it into the context of the next US Presidential elections and the possibility that the US could be ruled by similar people as those described in this video.

See the video at: http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article41209.htm

The future of Europe - Navel Staring European Politicians - Mrs Merkel the only exception with vision

Mrs. Merkel - a true European visionary with political skills

An Observer editorial notes: "Seventy years after the founders of modern Europe set out to bring stability, unity and prosperity to a war-ravaged continent, Europe and its principal political manifestation, the European Union, face a renewed, potentially defining struggle against the re-energised forces of internal division and fragmentation and external hostility and encroachment.

The scale of this challenge has yet to be fully appreciated. Its outcome is wholly uncertain. In consequence, 2015 may prove a fateful year for all the peoples of Europe.

The challenge comprises many elements, chief of which is whether the politics of austerity will be replaced by a more flexible, people-friendly economic regimen. Austerity, mainly in the form of public spending cuts and attempted deficit reduction, has wrought huge human and social damage. One key measure of pain is unemployment. In Spain, joblessness stands at around 23%. In Greece, the figure is 25%. In some areas of France and Italy, youth unemployment topped 40% at its highest point. Across the EU in 2013, 26 million people were unemployed, or one in eight of all workers. Many millions more are underemployed.

Austerity has caused tremendous political as well as social strain. The tough line dictated by chancellor Angela Merkel of Germany, who will arrive in London this week, is increasingly resented and there are clear signs of push-back. France’s new prime minister, Manuel Valls, introduced a €30bn reform package designed to boost business and jobs. His boss, President François Hollande, an old-school socialist, openly reviles Merkel’s “neoliberal” policy and its main underpinning, the European stability pact governing national budgets.

“To reform is to affirm our priorities, while refusing austerity,” Valls declared. Another newcomer, Italian premier Matteo Renzi, described as “Merkel’s most dangerous rival”, also links structural reform to a loosening of EU rules, notably Merkel’s holy grail, the 2012 fiscal pact. In November, both countries won budget reprieves from the European commission.

Still the only European leader who can credibly claim international statesman stature, Merkel, who is coming to London on Wednesday for talks with David Cameron on a range of issues, including the European economy, faces increasing criticism at home, not least from her centre-left vice-chancellor and coalition partner, Sigmar Gabriel. He argues the rise of right- and leftwing populism across Europe can only be checked by rapid economic improvements.


Nor can Merkel count on useful support from the new European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, or, more surprisingly, from Britain’s government, fellow champion of austerity and no friend to Hollande. In more skilful hands, David Cameron’s calls for EU reform might have meshed well with German priorities for sound money and stability, but Cameron has recklessly squandered European alliances and opportunities. In any case, he may soon be out of office.

While recent indicators suggest the worst of the recession is over, the full extent of the political fallout at grassroots level across Europe is only now becoming apparent. Elections this year in Greece, Spain, the UK, Denmark, Finland, Poland, Portugal and Estonia will provide further proof of the fragmentation of postwar consensus politics as erstwhile minority parties come to the fore.

In Britain, Ukip, the Greens and the Scottish Nationalists are aiming to usurp the traditional centre-left and centre-right parties. Likewise in Greece and Spain, it seems the centre cannot hold against a surge in support for the populist, anti-austerity leftwing insurgents of Syriza and Podemos respectively. In Sweden, the two mainstream parties, desperate to keep the far-right Sweden Democrats out of government, conspired to form a Merkel-style grand coalition, thereby effectively denying voters real choice. Finland faces a similar dilemma over its hard-right, anti-immigrant party.

Last year’s European parliament elections revealed unprecedented, pan-European dissatisfaction with politics as usual, but Brussels took scant notice, installing Juncker, a quintessential establishment figure, and creating a centrist coalition in parliament. Out of touch hardly describes such complacent behaviour. The significance of the rise of Europe’s new parties can no longer be denied, nor can they be dismissed as mere, temporary protest movements.

Yet Europe’s new politics, organic in nature and fast evolving, cannot be easily quantified or defined. Some, such as the Pegida demonstrators in Germany, are motivated by racist and anti-Muslim views. Merkel was entirely right last week to condemn them. But a new poll showed one in eight Germans sympathises with Pegida. Such views have a more pernicious, formal presence on Germany’s political stage in the shape of the anti-euro, anti-foreigner Alternative für Deutschland, which is eclipsing the old Free Democrats in the way Ukip may eclipse Britain’s Liberal Democrats.

In each country, new parties produce new imponderables. In Greece, for example, the growth of leftwing radicalism is in part a response to the advancing neo-Nazis of Golden Dawn. In the case of some of Europe’s secessionists, meanwhile, self-determination and economic justice have sometimes been confused with an unattractive, exclusionary nationalism. There is one constant: everywhere, it seems, immigration is an issue of concern.

The overall effect of these powerful and often conflicting currents is plain: in prospect is an unstable landscape of weak and fragile national governments, escalating friction over EU policies, intensifying north-south eurozone strains and a growing inability to present a united European front to the world.

A united front is required more than ever, as Europe faces the triple challenge of mass movements of people, Russian aggression and Islamist extremism. Almost alone among Europe’s leaders, Merkel continues bravely to make the case for accepting refugees from conflict in Syria, Libya, Iraq, Somalia and elsewhere. But as the plight of asylum-seekers trapped on the Ezadeen, which arrived in Italy yesterday, again demonstrated, this is an enormous international problem.

Most European states, including Britain, have not begun to face up to their responsibilities in dealing with mass migration and tackling the roots of the religious extremism that often causes displacement.
After Vladimir Putin dismembered a European country by annexing Crimea,

 Europe enters 2015 lacking certainty, for the first time since the cold war, that its borders are secure. It was left to Merkel, again, to point out in November that Putin’s attempt to re-establish Soviet-era spheres of influence affects not only Ukraine, Georgia and Moldova, but countries much closer to Europe’s heart, such as Serbia and Bosnia, and EU members Hungary and Slovakia.

Russia’s expansionist and anti-democratic outlook recalls the worst aspects of the legacy Europe fought to overcome after 1945. The struggle for a Europe whole, prosperous and free has now returned with a vengeance."

EU-Digest