Let's go East... Middle East

Having spent around 10 years studying European integration, witnessing the Convention process and elections of Ms Ashton I grew a bit disenchanted. EU does not seem to be an independant entity with its own political forces. It is rather like a big Titanic which is being pushed from all sides (mostly by nationally thinking politicians) and thus far it has escaped the biggest ice bergs. It is more or less business as usual, money being spend, agriculture subsidized, some merger cases making the waves but not many new ideas... think about flexicurity...
The discussion about Turkey has not really started. Anyway Bosfor seems the upper limit of European ambitions and interests. But what I will claim in this blog is that this big ship is heading for a crash with one big iceberg- and this is precisely the issue of East... Middle East in fact.
Being Polish I should concentrate more on the intrinsic danger coming from our Russian imperialist friends. But I do not know why I grow more relaxed with Mr Putin embrace of the ex-empire.
What troubles me more and more is our Southern, East-Southern neighbours. And I mean is not any particular nation, state, but rather the whole puzzle surrounding Europe. The complex relations between the Palestinian political movements, Syria, Lebanon, Iran, Egypt, Saudi Arabia. The only big plan that the West seemed to have is failing right now. If we do not buy into the mercantilist explanations for the Iraq intervention (petrol) there is a political one, which seems more convincing to me. Since most of the suicide bombers on 11/9 were Saudis, the US understood it cannot sustain its regional politics on the basis of the Saudi regime. And in order to unfreeze the stuck situation, they attacked Saddam Hussein who was the apparent threat to the whole region. Sadam out of the playing field, the situation does not look better, despite claims of Tony Blair.

I remember also one cartoon in the Economist: the solution to the Middle East conflicts cannot go without resolving the Palestinian question. But since whenever you speak about Hamas, Hesbollah or PLO you cannot just avoid listing the interests of the neighbours. So a global solution is needed. A global regional solution starting from Egypt and finishing in Iran.

And in my view EU does not have such. It perceives the region as a mix of ex-colonial interests, servitude to Uncle Sam and integration of immigrants within the western societies. The furthest east Europeans dare to look in a strategic way is the bridge over Bosfor. Istamboul seems like a European Muslem town, Ankara is somewhere deep in Asia. Yet it is Ankara who seems play a role of negotiator and power broker in the region. Turkey is both European (legacy of Ataturk) and part of Middle East. So definitely Turkish politicians have a much better understanding of the Middle East then our European ex-colonies. France and UK never recovered after the Suez crisis.
So what is at stake in the whole dossier? Nobody seems to have found the golden solution. Well Germans supported Polish accession to the EU precisely in order to stabilise their neighbourhood. EU should do the same but not by building new spectacular Mediterainean Unions but rather producing a coherent, pragmatic vision which goes beyond the sense of guilt towards Israel and pity for the suffering Palestinians.
Mercosur and Asean are important political blocs, but EU should rather concentrate on stabilising its south-east flank. Once the Americans are out of oil and Iraq we shall have a terrible mess to sort out. Better start now. Ms Ashton, the floor is yours.
In the meantime, in case Europe needs another 20 years to make up its mind, let's start learning Arabic...

So Minister Jeleva is gone

It seemed so boring... Dozens of Commissioners appeared in front of the parliamentary committees and were repeating nice briefings prepared by the Commission staff. Some had even some charisma: I mean Mr Oettinger, Ms Hedegaard. But still after the nomination of Ms Ashton everything seemed set for a safe intronisation. And then we hear that the pressure from EP made one of the weakest abandon her dreams. She was so close of getting to the European Versailles and yet she renounced.
I do not know how serious were the charges against her but still I was happy to hear about her decision. First, because all that shows that EU is not puppet show is good for its life. And second because it seems that EP takes its job seriously.

But this all is a bit like a fog. It covers the interregnum in the EU. Some authors ask themselves who is ruling the EU now. Mr Rompuy, Mr Zapatero, or the golden trio (Sarkozy, Brown and Merkel). What went rather unnoticed is that Mr Juncker has been reelected as the chair of the Eurogroup for another 2.5 years. He might make a come-back one day, like a Batman ressurected.
The EU is almost invisible but it is growing like a tree with the roots deeper in the soil. One day we shall see better the real face of it. Maybe it will look more German than we think...
I was impressed by Mr Oettinger: good German product which is reliable, has his convictions and know how to speak to people and not between them. Same Ms Hedegaard: she started her speech by answering the question why we do politics. Greece will have to be put under stronger control. Spain is realising it is not such a tiger. Maybe the heart of EU will move closer to Berlin. I hope they will be ready to assume the responsibility.

The new media, social games and politics

For some time now I have been reading the British monthly: Prospect Magazine. It brings insightful articles written by interesting authors. Recently I came by an article about the new internet social gaming industry. The title of the piece is 'All the world is play' and it describes how the approach taken by game producers might show the pattern to be explored by politicians and reformers. I advice you to read it however it is not available in the internet version (as far as I see).
The key passage from the article is the age of ideologies and grand social schemes is over. Now we enter an evolutive, iterational world were you can test ideas by the use of social networks, internet feedback tools etc.
Indeed I think that we have not yet grasped the influence of facebooks, blogs and twitters on the future generations. Probably in 2010 we do not know yet the 10 best paid jobs of 2025. Maybe sooner than we think the PR agancies will transform in producing fake internet records.
Another aspect of the article is that social games explore are most precious wants of being challenged, acquiring new skills and being rewarded. These rules from the world of game shall come to the adult society from which they were expelled long ago. So collective power points or money, learning how to jump to the next level etc. need to be introduced into our professional lives. Nothing new, you say...
Still for me it's revealing. The next generation might not want to pass huge bar exams knowing that this is mostly a useless experience. If you can google everything easily it is the putting together of information that really counts.
I still have not thought it over but I think this shall have huge implications for the new jobs, valuable skills etc. For example: a chief product placement officer who will test which websites are used by the youth we are trying to target. And since they will be changing the sites, escaping the traps, we need seduce them into our games, into a jungle of challenges, skill development and rewarding.
So maybe the future society will be one of multiple levels of internet identity. Who knows.
ps. Sorry for being silent for so long but I was either too busy or too clueless. Wish all of you a pieceful and inspiring 2010.

Poland in the making

20 years ago the Berlin wall fell. Or actually the citizens of GDR heard in the radio that they can now cross the border and claimed their right. Was it a revolution? In the European sense it was the high point of a wave started in Poland and Hungary, under the wind of change blowing from the East.

So where are we 20 years later? I just read a short interview with the Polish new Commissioner - Lewandowski. And it is the first time I hear that the EU budget should not only redistribute but bring dynamism to Europe. I am not sure if the French agriculture got the message but a new revolution is on the doorway. EU as a source of dynamism, not the stabilisation of agriculture public anger.

And then I read a story about the girls from Polish public agriculture companies (PGR) who try their chance in Warsaw. Thanks to EU money they manage to leave the villages of malaise, alkoholism and marital violence (sorry to all those who live there without falling into any of these psychological traps). They stay in Caritas house managed by the church in Warsaw. And you see how the nouns try to educate the young girls: teaching how to keep clean, making sure they feel the inferiority due to their background. 'White stripes' in the Polish context. And when you read this, then you know that Europe cannot turn its back on those forgotten in the hinterland. True- direct payments do not solve this issue. But still most of the Polish peasants (agriculture guys) are below the lower quarter of the French or German bauers.

Poland is still very 'peasant' in its thinking. We cherish resentiments which explain our poverty. We do not like the Germans because they invaded us and are cold, obedient and distant. The communism taught us that the state is a place to claim from not contribute. But time is working to our benefit. Many Poles have left Poland during the XX century and their offspring made their lives anew. They climb the ranks of ex-colonial empires. Many Poles got rich during the last 20 years and as part of becoming to the new elite their learn English, travel the world and aspire to be part of the Europeans. And the arriere-Poland has its chance too. Working in Leroy Merlin, Tesco, body-building gyms and new beauty salons. I hope that the next Polish transformation (the cultural one) will be less violent than the one we undergone in 1989-90.

Do we get anything about the EU? Me not!

By reading a provoking article about the state of Polish Universities I came across a very interesting University: The New School of Social Research which is located in New York. I looked at the type of classes they have and I realised how heterogenity of students and their interests make a vibrant community.
I am afraid that most of those studying the EU fall back to finding a single history of why all this happened. Of course there are federalists... but they only claim what is the end game- a federation of states/regions etc. There are functionalists, who say that we did it because we needed. There are realists who say that actually nature is not changing. They claim that states always existed and they have always pursued state interests... There are liberal intergovernmentalist who start depicting the rules of negotiations and the rational decision making. And at the very end we have politicians who write their biographies and depict the life as they remember it/or they want to be remembered.

So why we have direct elections to the European Parliament... I have not read a profound analysis of this break in politics in 1976 (it was decided then). What are the unintended consequences of the establishment of the Convention in Laeken? What was the mindset of the first Secretary General of the Commission? Did he perceive the role of administration according to ENA standards or was closer to the Dutch approach?

After all my studies I see an enormous gap in looking at all the European organisations jointly: Council of Europe, OECD, OECE, NATO. I understand that in 2009 the EU overshadows all the other phora. But how was it in the fifties, sixties?

And we fail to realise the huge complexity of interest formation and articulation within the governments and between them. I must say I know only one eye opening book about integration written by Philipe de Schouteete-a long serving member of COREPER. He does not depict history; he writes about ideas and their incarnations. And when he writes about these ideas, he shows the extremes and the full spectrum in between. OK, I agree I should read the Memoirs of Delors.
I was hoping that somebody (or me) will write one day a huge narrative about the European Union; a narrative which shall clarify who did what and when and with what objective. This would be exactly the story that nation states created to justify their claim to power and control. I understand that this needs to be deconstructed. But maybe we just should not have a new great narrative which will replace the existing ones. Cause then in becomes a religion....

Ok, I need to read more about the school in New York and maybe one day apply to join it. There is nothing more enthusiastic than an opportunity to challenge our mindset with creative people with different backgrounds. Maybe we, the funtionaires, take it to easy to be the guardians of the treaties and Commission spirit. Maybe we should be more challenging?

I think I should read more Weber about administration and bureacratisation of society. So my next post should be about the impact of new communication technologies on the XIX century administration.... Or actually the concepts continues the old French concept.... we the administrators, they --- les administre (please add the accent above the last e).

So the king is naked. European integration despite all the flags, speeches and anathems is an object which should be scrutinised without piety. Let's show the notions in the heads of the directors. Let's show what the promotion mechanisms are; who gets the Commission jobs and for what reasons. And let's show the aculturation of Commissioners- did they change after serving their term... Or they are statist actors as realists claim.

I wrote a Ph.D. about it and I still know nothing.

looking beyond the current affairs

The last 2 months made me quite fed up with the European politics. Don't you have an impression that everything falls on one piece of hair? Barroso nomination, Irish referendum, the psyche of Mr Kaczynski and Klaus, Constitutional Courts. I had an impression of a soap opera when everyday the life of the main character is hanging desperately on a piece of information or the right set of street lights.
This is definetely bad taste. The Americans had a long preparation for elections. Primaries building up the pressure. Big or no so big debates. The final voting and Obama walking in the hall of fame.
The Europeans will finish with somebody taken out of a hat. And Mr Milliband refuses to become the Foreign Minister... unlike Ms Clinton who almost made it to be in the ruling seat.
You will say that the two systems are not comparable. You are right.
You will say that the European drama is of different kind. That we have just concluded the longest negotiations in history. We started by negotiating the Maastricht treaty in 1990 and we finish 2009 with a new set of institutions. So maybe indeed everything started with the fall of the Iron Curtain and the 20 years of changes were needed to work out a sensible compromise. So what we really miss is the historical perspective.
Anyway who remembers that George Washington was not really the strongest speech maker.... He laid foundations to the US. There was no Federal Reserve during his time etc.
We did it the other way round. First we build a central bank, than we chose the President (of the European Council).
Maybe this November is too grey. I miss the perspective. I am in the middle of my 30ties so why should I have it?
Peter Ludlow was actually very optimistic about the state of the Union. I want to believe that he is right. So let's forget the bickering over the name of the first President and let's cherish the moment... No more referenda in front... Hmmm- there are Interinstitutionals Agreements to be seen to.
Shitmerde.... I do not want negotiations all the time. I want a vision.
Change, we can. Preside we can. Draft communicates we can. Joining working lunches we can. I am fed up with diplomacy. I want something that the pupils in schools can learn and grasp. Be it van Rompuy.

The European sense of guilt

I have read today an article in a Polish newspaper under a significant title 'Waiting for the Barbarians'. The author talks about a recent book of Christopher Caldwell „Reflections on the Revolution in Europe". And a very interesting notion is about the Europe whose main reason of political action is the sense of guilt. Guilt for Holocaust (Jews), colonialism (Third World), discrimination (women, homosexuals). And this is right you would say. But actually when guilt is the source of our actions they not always leading to good results.
Many time I struggle to understand why we continue huge packages of development aid know that a big chunk of it finishes in the coffers of corrupt politicians. There are cases when development money turned an apparently functioning state (Ghana) into one driven by corruption. Only in 2000 we managed to come with a kind of benchmark - Millenium Developement Goals. So what were we doing before? Pumping money to keep dependence and pursue our political objectives? Probably partly so. But there is one issue which gets lost from this picture. The whole development sector, the insiders who profit so much from this neocolonial lifestyle and their priviliged roles in the African societies.
Of course there are plenty of people who come to development for ideological reasons and there really exist a lot of good projects. But my deep belief is that it can only function where there is face to face relation. I think that there are only few politicians who can sustain the pressure of easy money.
So what do I propose? I think that the EU should stop to be the biggest development donor in the world. We should rather provide European citizenship with tax deduction for all the money they give for charity. Let them finance projects that they deem beneficial. And we can use all the officials in DG DEV and AIDCO to better control Member States who want to pursue adverse economic policies against the developing countries. Maybe AIDCO should move in the direction of DG Competition... but this time we would talk about world unfair competition. Maybe this would be a better investment than in all the anti-immigration measures, border controlls etc. Policy coherence for development - this is what we try but rarely succeed. The name of the game is global governance.

Coming back to the sense of guilt - maybe it is time to admit that this feeling does not lead us far. A feeling of responsibility towards the future should become the guiding one.