Tip:
Highlight text to annotate it
X
The EU is aware of the importance of good relations with its neighbours.
Southern member states then think about the Mediterranean region,
while eastern members think about good relations with Ukraine, Georgia,
Armenia, that type of countries...
But for France, its relations with the countries
on the southern edge of the Mediterranean Sea
have always been important.
..economic ties, historical ties, political ties..
A few years ago, the EU initiated a process
to bring those countries closer to the EU.
To give them trade advantages, to promote political stability, etc.
So we are investing into the region
with the hope that it will become more stable,
in order to gain a strong trade partner.
This whole process, which used to be called the Barcelona Process,
referring to the city where it began,
has always been overshadowed by conflict in the Middle East.
Israel, Palestina and the frictions it caused within the Arab world.
A few years later, in 2003-2004-2005,
Europe tried a different approach, and created the ENP,
which also involved eastern countries, like Ukraine, Georgia, etc.
to retain good relations with those neighboring countries
in order to address a number of problems together.
We invest in those countries and ask them to become more stable.
In reality, however, not much has come from the European Neighbourhood Policy.
And it seems as if Europe isn't making so much of a priority out of it
as it did several years ago.
And it's partly out of that frustration that Sarkozy and France,
and other southern member states decided
to rejuvenate contacts with the Mediterranean region
and they tried to do so with the concept of a Mediterranean Union.
And that project has now been started.
But if the MU will become more than a Neighbourhood Policy, we don't know yet.
It will be influenced by political priorities and conflict in the Middle East.
European functionaries don't earn more than other international functionaries.
And Europe also has - contrary to popular perception -
Europe has a very low number of functionaries in service.
A medium-size city quickly has more functionaries than the complete European Commission.
The problem is that Europe has a huge communication problem,
and Europe hasn't communicated much these last fifty years.
Europe made laws and Europe thought - and maybe they were right - that they were doing a good job,
but spent little on explaining what its activities were.
And throughout the years, the European people has lost some confidence in the EU.
At first, the project's legitimacy was spontaneous; it was a peace project,
and France and Germany would collaborate, etc.
so it had inherent legitimacy,
but its legitimacy has been crumbling.
In our region, for a while we had a permissive consensus:
"We're no longer terribly enthusiastic, but it probably does no harm."
But even the permissive consensus began to crumble,
and I believe that's because these last years,
people have felt that Europe has indeed become important,
that Europe has deeply entangled itself into the lives of the people,
that Europe regulates lots of things, that Europe prohibits things,
"We must do this, we can no longer do that."
Europe has become a presence,
but we have a feeling we don't control it and don't know where it all comes from.
Europe resembles something like a god that hangs above us,
and sometimes laws seem to emanate from it..
Not explaining what they're doing, is a culture which grew through the years,
and it's very difficult to correct that behavior in such a short time frame.
because it's also a question of shared responsibility,
European institutions are to blame, mainstream media are to be blamed,
journalists who don't really understand what Europe is doing, what the rules are.
..rules which changed during the years..
Journalists with the tendency to cold-shoulder EU news,
and are suddenly confronted with a new European law,
but how it came into being, was never reported,
which boosts the perception of something elusive.
Member State politicians should also be blamed.
The way in which they communicate about the EU is not always very honest.
For example, if Europe makes cool laws, appreciated by the broad public,
and those laws have to be reformulated into national legislation,
member state politicians will rarely say it was European.
National politicians will act as if they invented that law.
Yet, when European legislation might be unpopular,
member state politicians will be the first to blame Europe,
while they themselves sat at the table when the decision was made,
something else they will omit.
The communication story is one with many responsibles, including education without any doubt..
And it will take a very long time to close the information, communication gap.
We noticed the size of the gap during the referenda,
..the referenda about the European Constitution..
..the referendum in Ireland about the Treaty of Lisbon..
people have very little knowledge about Europe,
during those referenda campaigns I heard lots of nonsense,
nonsense that was fundamentally wrong,
in both camps - opponents and proponents -
hence a huge knowledge gap
and in any case, a huge lack of confidence.
And that lack of confidence is an unguided projectile
that hits very hard during those referenda.
live on CNN, very spectacular..
A distrust that has nestled itself deep into the people's mind,
which puts a very dangerous mortgage on the EU project.
According to me, closing the communication gap is an extremely important challenge for Europe.