A non-event in Bratislava

For me, the most striking facet of yesterday´s EU summit in Bratislava is clear: it was non-event in terms of the European public opinion. The EU citizens took no notice of it. And that should be a good reason to be worried. At a time of mediocrity and obscurity, when everyone is looking for answers and strategies that could make sense, the heads of State and govern were once more unable to go beyond banalities and piecemeal promises. And, as usual, they announced that it will at the next big summit, this time in March 2017 in Rome, that everything will become clear. 

The 2016 G7 Summit is over

This year´s G7 Summit, just completed in Japan, made no history. It was hardly noticed by the European public opinion, just to mention those close to home. Jean-Claude Juncker, the EU Commission President made some brief references to the steel dispute with China, on top of mentioning that the European economy is now much better than in 2008 and that it is moving in a healthy direction. Well, that´s good to know. Donald Tusk, the EU Council President, said a couple of things as well, but no one remembers a word of it. And that was basically the European side of the story, because Merkel, Hollande and Renzi were too concerned about their own domestic problems to be able to fly higher than their national contexts.

Moreover, there was a small number of heads of State from non-G7 countries at the tail end of the summit. They were certainly very happy to sit with the big people and be part of the group picture. But their contribution to the discussions remains unclear. Most likely, to them as well.

The EU crisis and Chicken Little

The EU sky is not falling

This is a difficult time to be an optimist in Brussels. It is even more challenging to advocate for a positive look at European affairs. And it becomes almost impossible to talk about collective hopes for a more united Europe in the future. Many will say such optimism belongs to another epoch. Now, the dominant discourse is one that announces a new catastrophe every week. Like Chicken Little, these so-called realists shout, “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

As a contrarian, I want to maintain faith in the European project. And be inspired by a forward-looking approach. The best way to build a prosperous and safe future for all of us in Europe is through a united endeavour.  I say it whilst realising the EU is at present facing two major crises. They crowd everything else off the agenda, giving strong arguments to pessimists and those who are against continuing the Union. I mean a possible Brexit and the realities of mass migrations.

With the UK spinning further away from common approaches and policies, arguments for integration and joint responses have indeed become more fragile. In effect, such arguments are practically inaudible because many leaders prefer to focus their attention on their own national agendas. The silence of most of them on EU affairs is deafening.

The UK´s position has brought a lot of uncertainty to the table. At this stage, nobody can predict the outcome of their referendum. It is also difficult to forecast the consequences of a Brexit for the future of the EU.

Nevertheless, the EU would survive a Brexit. Why? Because the UK and the other member states have already learned to go their own separate ways in many areas – the Euro, Schengen, labour laws, justice, and internal security, just to mention a few.  Perhaps the biggest worry is what a Brexit would do to the British themselves, to the status of Scotland, as well as to their tiny neighbour to the west, Ireland.

Brexit or not, the EU shouldn´t be too worried.

The larger question is about immigration. Can the EU survive a continued and expanding mass migration crisis? Many believe it cannot. We keep hearing that without a solution to the current migratory flows, the EU will soon collapse. There is a good degree of exaggeration in the air. The soothsayers of disaster easily capture the headlines. Obviously, the mass arrival of refugees and migrants does pose major challenges and it is essential to recognize this. It is a situation well out of control. Furthermore, this crisis shakes the key foundations of the Union, its values and the role of Europe in the international arena.

More importantly, the migration issue touches the core of a vital dimension of European states—the question of national identity. The people of Europe have shown that they are ready to give away a good number of their sovereign prerogatives, accepting that Brussels can deal with them. This has been the case in a wide range of areas related to economic management, budgets, agriculture, trade, environment, justice, development aid, external relations and other important matters.

Yet, they are not at all prepared to abdicate or dilute their national features, language and everything else that creates a people´s identity. Nor should they. Europe is a complex mosaic of languages, cultures, nationalities and even prejudices. Yes, our views of our neighbours are still shaped by prejudices in significant ways. History and many wars have both divided us and created the diverse assortment we are today. Patriotism is still, and will continue to be for a good while longer, far stronger than pan-Europeanism.

All this must be taken into account. Populists are effective in doing just this, trying to gain the political advantage in the process by exploiting feelings of nationalism. It’s all a little more complicated for an optimist.

This reality notwithstanding, let´s be clear about the present crisis. Let´s imagine we had to face the current migratory instabilities and frictions that the migrations have created in a past context of separate nation states. We can readily assume that some of us would already be at war with our neighbours. We would see coalitions of countries taking military action against others, trying to defend their borders and their own perceived national interests. We would be responding to the threats facing us with weapons drawn upon one another. In the past, this challenge would lead to armed conflict and chaos. We know that the long history of Europe has been written through a succession of wars. 

This all changed when the EU was established. Now, disputes are taken to summits. Summits come and go, often without many concrete outcomes. But, sooner or later, they end up by producing acceptable results of one sort or another. We have learned to take the right decisions at the eleventh hour, that´s true. But we have done so around a conference table and through diplomacy. That´s the kind of lesson we should keep in mind as we get closer to two more summits on the migration crisis: one with Turkey, on the 7th of March and one among the EU leaders on the 17th.

Let´s keep talking and pushing for an agreement. From the cacophony of diverse European voices and the play of varied interests, action will follow. The most relevant contribution of the pessimists, Eurosceptics and  nay-sayers has been to create a greater sense of urgency. Now, the optimists among us have to state that there is only one answer to the big question on the table: Do we allow this challenge to destroy the hard-won political and economic achievements of the EU or do we build on these successes to constructively address this crisis and, in the process, strengthen our union?

I am convinced that realism that will prevail. The European sky isn’t falling.

Three questions about the Brexit

Today´s summit meeting of the EU Council is publicised by some of the key leaders as a decisive one. Why? Well, because of the UK´s demands. The threat of Brexit, the exit of the UK from the EU. Mr Cameron is asking for a new deal between his country and the rest of the EU. He needs it as a major contribution to his political survival strategy. If he can convince the British voters he has managed to twist the European arm that will consolidate him as party leader and also as Prime Minister.

There are many questions that could be raised about all this. But I will save my readers´ sanity and will only mention three of them.

First, this is meeting number 25. I explain. In the last five years or so, twenty-four meetings of the top EU leaders have been presented as critical. Today we have one more. There is a problem here: the frequency of “decisive meetings” has been too high. Maybe Europe is just moving from crisis to crisis, like a dangerously sick person.

Second, Brexit is above all a British issue. They are the ones that should decide if they want to keep the membership or not. Europe will continue and its construction, at a slower or faster pace, depending of the policy areas, is on the way. The leaders and the people of the UK should make their minds. Either they are in and participate in the vast majority of the common projects or they are out and sign some kind of free trade agreement with the EU.

Third, it is almost certain Cameron will lose the support of the British voters. The chances of a Brexit are very high. The EU cannot fall on its knees to please the British. Short of that, they will opt for the exit door.

I am one of those who believe it is time to be clear. Clear vis-à-vis our own citizens and clear regarding David Cameron´s political games. 

Cameron´s doomed days

As we come closer to the next summit meeting of the EU Council, on 18 and 19 February, the Brexit issue gets more attention. It will be one of the heavy subjects on the table during the meeting. And I am afraid David Cameron will not get more concessions from the heads of state and government than those already suggested by Donald Tusk. It will be difficult for him to manage that. The popular media in the UK thinks that Tusk´s proposals do not go far enough. That opinion will have a significant impact on the voters. And I am getting convinced that Cameron is going to be one of the great losers of all this process. His political future is very much at stake. He will not be able to survive a contrarian vote.

Poland is adding new challenges to the EU

Poland´s new political situation, with the Law and Justice Party (PiS) as the governing force, was the top headline in today´s Le Monde. The French newspaper, a reference daily for many in Europe, focussed its analysis and comments on the PiS-supported government´s efforts to take control of the Constitutional Court of Poland and on its very conservative, nationalistic and authoritarian political agenda. It also made reference to the new approach being followed in Warsaw towards the EU. That approach is certainly perceived as not very constructive and is clearly clashing with the policies adopted by the EU institutions and most of the member states.

Poland´s new leaders will bring additional challenges in 2016 to the European project. There was no need for that addition. But it has to be taken into account as the country is an important player within the Union.

Weakening Donald Tusk

By and large, Donald Tusk, the President of the European Council, has measured up to his Brussels job. At a time of great challenges, he has been able to respond much better than initially expected. He has shown leadership and prudence. And that is certainly good news for Europe at a time of great political fragility and uncertainty.  

Now, the outcome of his native Poland´s general elections has brought a bigger problem to him. He has lost the support of his government as the new boys and girls in Warsaw are far from being his political buddies.  Without such backing, in his home country, his presidency job in the Council will be based on a much weaker foundation and becomes much more difficult to perform.

That´s bad news for him and also for the EU.  

Strategic communications are essential and part of the solution

The EU public opinion matters a lot. People have access to lots of information but the average citizen is still very much influenced by what they watch on TV.

My sense is that the leaders are not communicating well on Greece´s crisis. This is a very sensitive matter that can be easily exploited by any camp that promotes populism, and radicalism, and opposes the EU. It can also weaken further the fragile feeling of common interests.

Every leader has his or her part of responsibility. National leaders should address their national audiences and explain what is at stake and the choices that are being made. Juncker and Tusk, in Brussels, they have likewise to step forward and talk about the issue in a way that goes beyond the sound bites and a patronizing approach. It´s very much their call.  

Get the citizens´support back: the priority for the EU at this stage

I wrote today, in my contribution to the next issue of the Portuguese magazine Visão,  that the indifference of the citizens towards the European project is the most critical menace to the continuation of the Union. With the economic crisis, nations got used to look inwards and try to find their own solutions to challenges that were shared and should have been tackled jointly. As such, citizens lost the European perspective. The message they were getting from their political leaders was very clear: if there is a major crisis, each country has to take care of itself.

This erroneous approach needs to be corrected. Politicians and opinion makers have to underline, in very unambiguous terms, that the only way forward is for a joint European strategy to address critical issues of common interest. That will the first step to regain the support of the citizens. And that´s an urgent task. 

The UK is getting close to a very dangerous European crossroads.

Donald Tusk, who has just been appointed as the next President of the European Council, said at the end of the day that he cannot imagine the UE without the UK being a member. This is a wise statement. The UK´s place and future is within the Union. However, what we see more and more, in the UK, is that the populism against Europe is getting stronger and stronger. The chances of a no-vote that would force the UK to leave the EU are real. If that happens then both the UK and Europe would have lost. But that´s the nature of politics. One starts a process and then the process becomes a major avalanche. I am afraid that´s the case with the British referendum on the EU membership.

Unless Labour wins the next round of elections…but even in that case, once the dice are thrown it will be very difficult to stop the game or to nullify the outcome.