EU frets as ‘Populist International’ moves fast to win votes

Legend has it that the European Union thrives on crisis and shows its true colours — its strength and resilience — when life gets tough. Not this time.

As predicted in this column two weeks ago, Donald Trump’s election victory has dealt the EU a body blow. All 28 EU governments — and yes the EU still has 28 members until Britain actually goes out the door at a yet-undecided date — are still reeling from the surprise election result.

To be fair, the bloc has a lot on his hands. Brexit and the refugee crisis continue to weigh heavy. Relations with Russia and Turkey are at an all-time low. And populists, both in government and in opposition, stalk the land.

And now, their bedrock, the “transatlantic relationship” looks like it is in tatters.

As they bade a teary-eyed farewell to President Barack Obama last week, EU leaders had much to worry about.

First, Trump is certainly unlikely to be a pro-European president. He does not like the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), is sceptical of Nato and if Moscow is to be believed has promised to normalise relations with Russia.

Second, all this would be manageable if EU countries were able to put aside their differences and forge a united stance vis-a-vis Washington.

Alas. Hopes of a united front to deal with Trump have been dashed. A hastily scheduled working dinner of EU foreign ministers called by the German Foreign Minister Walter Steinmeier and EU special representative for foreign and security policy Federica Mogherini last week was boycotted by Britain and France.

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who once said he was afraid of running into Trump while in the US, decided he was tired of the EU’s “whinge-orama” over Trump’s election victory. France said it had urgent business to attend to at home.

Some EU officials like Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker have warned that Trump must get up to speed on how Europe works in order to avoid “two years of wasted time” when he assumes his new role.

“Mr Trump, during his campaign, said that Belgium was a village somewhere in Europe,” Juncker said in his frank remarks to students in Luxembourg, adding: “We must teach the president-elect what Europe is and how it works.”

Juncker said that Trump had called Nato into question, which could have “harmful consequences” because it is the model of Europe’s defence.

The US president-elect had also “taken a view of refugees and non-white Americans that does not reflect European convictions and feelings”, he added.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has lectured Trump on “shared values” and hinted relations depended on the future American president’s respect for “democracy, freedom, respect for the right and dignity of every individual, irrespective of origin, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation or political attitude”.

No surprise then that Obama’s farewell visit to several EU countries, including Germany, last week turned into a long and painful goodbye.

Emotions were running specially high in Berlin where Obama and Merkel praised each other as “outstanding partners”, with the US president expressing hopes that Trump would stand up to Russian President Vladimir Putin when he deviates from US “values and international norms”.

In a joint op-ed, Obama and Merkel defended aid for refugees “because we know it is our treatment of those most vulnerable that determines the true strength of our values”. They hailed the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation — from which Trump has threatened to pull back — as a cornerstone of peace.

Still, even Merkel knows it’s time to move on. As the de facto leader of the EU, the German chancellor has a lot on her plate. The next few months are going to be extremely difficult for Berlin and Brussels.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has vowed to resign if he loses a referendum on constitutional reform on December 4, saying the “decrepit system” that would be left in the wake of his defeat would have to be taken care of by someone else.

Meanwhile in Austria, far-right Freedom Party candidate Norbert Hofer and former Green Party leader Alexander Van der Bellen will run again on Dec 4 after Austria’s Constitutional Court annulled the results of May’s presidential vote and called for a rerun.

The court said the May election, in which Van der Bellen narrowly beat Hofer, would have to be repeated after the discovery of irregularities in vote counting across several districts.

Although the presidency is a largely symbolic role in Austria, the Freedom Party’s potential success would herald a major victory for Europe’s far right parties ahead of elections next year in the Netherlands, France and Germany.

The fear in Europe is that far-right populists Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen will give mainstream parties a run for their month in both the Netherlands and France.

Ominously, Breitbart, the so-called alt-right news organisation that is often described as “misogynist, racist and xenophobic”, is reportedly planning to expand to Europe ahead of the crucial elections next year.

Breitbart is believed to have been instrumental in helping Trump win the elections. Steve Bannon, executive chairman of the organisation, has been appointed senior counsellor and chief strategist for Trump.

Meanwhile, Aaron Banks, the millionaire who helped fund the Brexit campaign in the UK, has also promised to take his campaign to France ahead of the elections.

Members of “Populist International” are moving fast to gain votes while EU leaders wring their hands in despair.

Young, gifted Arabs hold the key to peace

Helle, Hajer and Hussein are young, articulate and ambitious. They dream big and aim high. They want the best for themselves and for the countries – Tunisia, Libya and Syria – they live in.You won’t read about them in traditional newspapers. They aren’t making headlines just yet.But more, much more, than their governments, these young people and millions of others like them hold the key to our future.Almost 65 per cent of the population in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is under the age of 30.  The choices that Helle and her friends make will determine the fate of their own countries. But they will also have a strong impact on Europe and the world.I met these “Young Mediterranean Voices” – teachers, journalists, environmentalists, social entrepreneurs, peace and democracy activists – at the MedForum 2016, organised last week in Malta by the Anna Lindh Foundation.The energy and enthusiasm of more than 500 savvy, young Europeans and Arabs whom the Anna Lindh Foundation had identified as “change-makers” rang through the Valetta conference centre. The talk was of crafting a narrative of hope, dialogue and cooperation that runs counter to the extremist discourse of hate and violence.‘No-one is born a terrorist’, says one young man. Instead of trying to counter the extremists’ poisonous voices, many underline the need to articulate an inspiring vision of societies where people can live in peace.Religion is the last thing on their minds. These young people want to fight for better education, jobs, clean government, stability and hope. And forget the stereotypes: the girls – including the small number who wears headscarves – are even more confident than the boys.The focus on civil society and young people as agents of social change is not new. But there is a consensus on the need to act urgently.The good news is that the Anna Lindh Foundation is getting the attention and support it deserves. The message of the EU High Representative, Federica Mogherini, to the Forum highlighted Europe’s commitment to engagement with young people.And there are growing opportunities for young people to make a difference.United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250, agreed last December, emphasises the crucial role they can play in managing conflicts and establishing peace. And building stronger Euro-Mediterranean bonds is going to be a key priority for Malta, which takes over the EU Council presidency in January 2017.The conversations in Valetta provided many lessons for policymakers.First, stop obsessing about religion and start putting money where it really matters: into schools, job creation and investment schemes.Second, engage with civil society – don’t fear it. MENA governments too often reject the ideas and passion of young people instead of seeking to channel their enthusiasm for change and reform into positive contributions to national policymaking. And while many EU cooperation agreements include an important people-to-people component, these programmes need to be made more crucial and more exciting.Third, even as it seeks to engage with MENA governments, the EU should invest in the region’s young people. This is essential if the region is to have long-term peace and stability.Certainly many parts of the Arab world are jolted by conflicts and wars. Violence and economic deprivation are driving many young people to come to Europe.But the gathering in Malta is proof that Europe’s southern neighbourhood need not be a place of death and destruction. With the right policies, the right people in charge, and sustained support, it can be a region of hope and peace.

The curious contours of a new European conversation

As the European Union gears up for its 60th anniversary next March, there’s good news and bad news.Let’s celebrate the renewed interest in the EU, both at home and abroad. But let’s also be prepared for a long and difficult struggle with those working against Europe.The surge in interest in Europe is encouraging. Demands for change and new ideas to build a more dynamic, vibrant and relevant EU are not in short supply.Interesting ideas – some big, some small – came fast and furious at Friends of Europe’s annual State of Europe brainstorm and conference last week.The voices of those who have thought about, talked about and worked for Europe for many years are valuable. They should be listened to.But importantly, others across Europe are beginning to speak up too. They include young people, women and minority groups whose engagement in EU affairs has been minimal. Business leaders, trade unionists, civil society representatives, academics and journalists are making their voices heard. They should be encouraged to say and do more.Ironically, the shock of Brexit has enlivened the conversation. The Brexiteers may have damaged Britain’s economy (and much more) but they have, unintentionally, also sparked heightened awareness of and popular interest in the EU.Such renewed curiosity is an opportunity to start a new conversation about Europe. It should be one which looks at the EU’s past, present and future.  It must look at the achievements but also at the failures and weaknesses of the Union.The confrontation between different visions of Europe is already part of daily life. This contest was evident in the run-up to the 23 June referendum in Britain and will be an essential part of the negotiations on Britain’s withdrawal from the EU.There are Euro-enthusiasts and Euro-doubters in national capitals and parliaments, and in all EU institutions.And then there are the populists, both in and out of government, who are not just against the EU but also fighting actively to undermine liberal democratic values. In uneasy and uncertain times, their message of intolerance, xenophobia and “Little Europe” is already attracting voters.With elections scheduled in France, Germany and the Netherlands next year, the fight for the hearts and minds of Europeans is going to get even fiercer.France’s National Front, the Dutch Party for Freedom and Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland – like Hungary’s Viktor Orban and his friends in Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic – have no scruples about publicising their dark vision of Fortress Europe. Their voices will get louder.But those who believe in an open and compassionate Europe should be equally passionate about voicing their beliefs. Contrary to what the populists want us to believe, a majority of Europeans do not share their nightmare version. They also need to be seen and heard.In a new world where truth and facts appear to matter less than lies, perceptions and fiction, the confrontation between the two visions of Europe is going to be dirty and ruthless.The naysayers’ simplistic anti-EU diatribes must be countered by equally simple but clever slogans.Those in favour of Europe should be proud of what has worked, and what makes the EU relevant and important – for example, contrary to conventional wisdom, the EU “peace project” still makes sense in a world where violence and war still rage just a few kilometres from Europe’s borders.But enthusiasts must also be frank enough to say what has not worked.Gentle speeches in comfortable settings just won’t do the trick. Those who believe in the EU will have to take their arguments to the people, not wait for people to fill the conference halls.Those who favour Europe must be as charismatic, eloquent and single-minded as those who oppose it.Next March’s anniversary of the EU should trigger a discussion on repairing and renewing the EU, but must also be a moment for reflection on what it means to be European in a complex and challenging world.As former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd told the Friends of Europe conference, Europeans must ‘buck up and not talk yourselves into a funk’.More than ever, Europe is a vibrant mix of people, cultures and religions. The EU is an important part of peoples’ lives, often taken for granted, often criticised and much too often under-estimated and under-sold by self-seeking politicians.French statesman Georges Clemenceau famously said that ‘War is too important to be left to the generals’.  Today, Europe is too serious and too important to be left to politicians.

Welcome to the world of new ‘diplomats’ who shout and insult

Remember as children we were told to be polite, courteous and to never use “bad” words either at home or in public? Especially never, ever in public.

It was difficult. When you hated a teacher and wanted to use an expletive to express your feelings, you wished you could do so without your mother hitting the roof. And all through life, you had to restrain yourself, turn the other cheek, keep a stiff upper lip and so on. And all you wanted to do was scream insults.

Now you can. You can be rude, abusive and crude and it’s alright. All you are doing is getting things off your chest. It doesn’t matter if you are a politician. You can let it all hang out. And you don’t have to apologise.

So what is this all about? Take the case of Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. At first glance, they appear to have very little in common.

The blandly fresh-faced Rutte is not yet 50 years old and reportedly still takes his weekly laundry to his stepmother. Duterte at 71 is a firebrand politician whose ruthless campaign to wipe out the drugs trade has upset many at home and abroad.

Both, however, have been in trouble recently for using the F word in public. And with their coarse language, both have spotlighted the rise and rise of offensive and abusive language in the public sphere.

Donald Trump, the man who could soon be president of the United States, has of course perfected the art of being offensive to all and sundry. “Mexicans are rapists, Muslims are terrorists” and Hillary Clinton is so many nasty things it is difficult to keep track.

Here in Europe, Eastern European leaders and populists like Marine Le Pen, leader of the xenophobic Front National in France, breathe fire and venom against all and sundry but especially against Muslims.

Boris Johnson, the erstwhile leader of the Leave Europe campaign in Britain famously said Hillary Clinton had “dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital”. He said Obama was against Brexit because as a “part-Kenyan” he had an “ancestral dislike” of Britain.

Interesting stuff. But let’s linger for a moment on Rutte and Duterte. The Dutch prime minister, criticised by some for being too close for comfort to the Dutch populist and Muslim-hater Geert Wilders, recently reacted to footage showing a group of men attacking journalists and their cars at a demonstration against the coup attempt in Turkey in July by saying: “My first reaction would be: Go away. Go back to Turkey. ‘Pleur op’ I would say in Haags”, he said, using the expression for “f… off” in the local dialect in The Hague.

As everyone knows by now, Duterte has of course jolted EU-Asia relations by telling the European Union to “f… off” after officials and parliamentarians in Brussels criticised the Filipino President’s brutal policy of extrajudicial killings of drugs suspects in his war against drugs.

Rutte has had the grace to say his remarks did not represent the position of the government, adding plaintively: “This is a personal opinion. I am not prime minister 24 hours a day.” Duterte, of course, is too macho to say sorry.

Instead, the Filipino President blasted the EU and the European Parliament for harbouring “guilty feelings” over the atrocities Europe had committed in the past. He also called Europeans “hypocrites”.

The EU has responded with dignity, saying relations with the Philippines remain strong and friendly. And of course the still-28 nation bloc is in good company. The Filipino leader has also lashed out at US President Barack Obama and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as well as Trump who he described — rightly — as a “bigot”.

Those shouting out the insults say it’s time to stop being politically correct. And since the Brexit referendum, opinion polls say there has been an increase in hate crimes and racial slurs in Britain.

So what is happening? Why the sudden burst of rudeness in public life? Why, as Simon Kuper of the Financial Times underlined in a recent article is “The Age of Diplomacy Ending”? Why are personal insults becoming the norm in affairs of the state?

Well, for one, politicians have to grab public attention. Being nice and mellow doesn’t get you noticed in today’s tough, dog-eat-dog world. To be noticed by a public used to the crudeness of reality TV, politicians have to be loud and rude. They have to be make things simple. And what’s simpler than a nice, coarse insult?

It’s not just about the public — it’s also about getting the attention of a fickle media. Journalists do not care about nice people doing nice things. It’s the bad boys and girls and the villains who get the spotlight.

So talk tough, ooze venom and get it all off your chest. Say it like it is. Be as rude and tactless as you like. Call a spade, a spade. Diplomacy in the 21st century is certainly not for the faint-hearted.

EU leaders must fight fire with fire

It’s easy to be sucked into the prevailing pessimistic EU narrative. You know the one: the Union is falling apart; Brexit will prompt an exodus of others seeking to leave the bloc; and pure, white Christian Europe is being invaded by nasty foreigners, most of them Muslim.So let’s close down the EU shop. Will the last one out please turn off the lights?Of course, it is not really that bad. As a visiting Chinese scholar speculated last week, Europeans are suffering from a particularly bad case of the blues – and instead of doing everything to make them feel better, dysfunctional European leaders may be making things worse.As she put it: “Why can’t European leaders get their act together and stop whining and whinging about their ‘first world problems’”?That’s harsh. Europe faces a multitude of crises: the Brexit vote and the uncertainty it has triggered; the rise of dangerous populism; the continuing, unresolved financial crisis.It’s bleak. And nobody seems to like anyone anymore.But the recent epic bouts of whining by Europe’s great and good are becoming increasingly tedious.First on the scene to highlight Europe’s grim reality was Jean-Claude Juncker. In his annual State of the European Union speech, the European Commission President told MEPs that the EU is in an existential crisis. It was stark stuff.Not to be outdone, European Council President Donald Tusk gave his own equally downbeat assessment. Then 27 EU leaders (minus British Prime Minister Theresa May) turned their Bratislava gathering – intended to be a show of solidarity – into yet another much-publicised bout of chest-beating over the fate of sad, old Europe.There were some ‘roadmaps’ put forward, but they bore an unfortunate ‘Fortress Europe’ watermark. The undercurrent was to put Europe back together by pulling up the drawbridge and talking tough on security, but to soften the impact with new initiatives designed to distract, deflect and dazzle. Free Wi-Fi in every European town by 2020, anyone?This approach is wrong-headed. The more EU leaders talk down Europe – and bewilder already-puzzled Europeans with more incomprehensible and makeshift initiatives – the more they perpetuate the myth of a lost continent.The truth is more complex. Yes, Europe faces many problems. Unemployment remains high. The European economy has been weakened by years of economic stagnation and budgetary austerity. The ‘Gang of Four’ leaders of Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic want a closed-off, white and Christian Europe that has little truck with diversity and inclusiveness.But despite policymakers’ moans and groans, the European story remains strong.Europe has room for – and a need for – the refugees and migrants who have arrived on its shores. Europe also needs foreign tourists who will pump money into Europe’s service industry.Europe’s intelligence agencies are getting better at working together, foiling plots and catching would-be terrorists who threaten Europe’s “way of life”.The EU still has peace. It has reconciled enemies. It has created a hugely-successful frontier-free single market and the free movement of people.The young people in Britain who voted Remain know the value of being part of the EU. Thousands of Europeans – individuals and companies – are working to welcome and integrate refugees and migrants.But these truths are going unsaid.By endlessly repeating, as Tusk did in Bratislava, that Europeans feel insecure in the face of migration and terrorism, EU leaders are amplifying the voice of populists and bolstering their power.If they are really serious about winning Europeans’ trust and support, EU leaders must fight fire with fire. This means putting as much passion, energy and hard work into crafting a European narrative of peace and openness as the populists are investing in their nightmare version.The populists already have their captive audience. With the battle over Brexit lost, EU leaders need to arm themselves with a vision of Europe that resonates with the aspirations of millions of Europeans who will not be voting for Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders or the Alternative für Deutschland.The 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome next March provides the ideal opportunity for such a reboot. Europe is far from being a lost continent. But EU leaders have certainly lost their way.

EU struggles to deal with multiple ‘first world problems’

Living in Brussels, it’s easy to be sucked into the prevailing pessimistic and heart-wrenchingly grim European Union narrative. The one that says that the EU is falling apart, Brexit will prompt other countries to leave the bloc and there’s no common ground among the remaining 27 members.

So, let’s close the EU shop and will the last one out, please turn off the lights. And please do it quickly. Now!

Really? Is it that bad? Or is it the case — as a Chinese friend said to me this week — that European leaders are just suffering from a particularly bad case of the blues. Or as she put it: “Why can’t European leaders get their act together and stop whining and whinging about their ‘first world problems’.”

And whining they definitely are. In separate public statements last week both Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission President and Donald Tusk, the EU Council President — the two men and rivals who run two key EU institutions from their perch in Brussels — painted a very similar picture of a Europe ready to fall off the cliff.

It was stark stuff. “Our European Union is, at least in part, in an existential crisis.” Juncker confessed in an almost hour-long “State of the Union” speech to the European parliament.

“Never before have I seen such little common ground between our member states. So few areas where they agree to work together,” he complained.

EU member states — with Britain set to negotiate its way out of the bloc — were in a state of fragmentation. “Never before have I seen national governments so weakened by the forces of populism and paralysed by the risk of defeat in the next elections,” said Juncker.

Not to be outdone, Tusk in a similarly downbeat mood, called on EU leaders to take a “brutally honest” look at the bloc’s problems, declaring in a reference to the Brexit vote: “We must not let this crisis go to waste.”

“We can’t start our discussion ... with this kind of blissful conviction that nothing is wrong, that everything was and is OK,” intoned Tusk. “We have to assure ... our citizens that we have learned the lesson from Brexit.”

Interestingly, despite their differences and their rivalry, both men came up with a similar solution to putting Europe back together again: pull up the drawbridge, talk tough on security and come up with an array of new initiatives to distract, deflect and dazzle.

Tusk spoke of the need to bring back “stability and a sense of security and effective protection”. The former Polish prime minister echoed the demands being made by many other leaders from eastern Europe to enhance border security, step up counterterrorism and efforts to “bring back control of globalisation” — whatever that means.

Juncker also talked tough. The focus was on building a “better Europe that protects, empowers and defends”, he declared. His cure for ending the EU’s “collective depression” is to convince the UK to trigger the exit talks as quickly as possible, set up a common European military force and appoint an EU foreign minister.

Stronger efforts to “defend ourselves against terrorism” would include more information on “who is crossing our borders”. A so-far mysterious “automated” European Travel Information System will provide information on “who is travelling to Europe before they even get here”.

He insisted that the EU’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, should have a seat at the table in negotiations on Syria’s future. And in case you were wondering, the EU will also strengthen its trade defence instruments and make sure China curbed its steel exports.

And oh yes, there will be free wireless internet in public places all over Europe, in the next four years.

Both Tusk and Juncker have made the headlines of course. Bad news always does.

But the more EU leaders talk down Europe — and bewilder already puzzled Europeans with more incomprehensible and makeshift initiatives — the more they perpetuate the myth of a lost continent.

The truth is more complex. Yes, Europe faces many problems. Unemployment remains high and its economy has been weakened by years of economic stagnation and budgetary austerity policies.

The East-West divide is deep. The “Gang of Four” leaders of eastern European states — Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic — want a closed-off white and Christian Europe which has little truck with diversity and inclusiveness. And so on.

But the bottom line is that despite all the moaning and groaning by policymakers, the European story remains a strong one. Europe has room for — and a need for — the million or so refugees and migrants who have arrived on its shores.

Terror attacks continue to threaten Europe’s “way of life” but intelligence agencies are getting better at foiling plots and catching would-be terrorists. The number of European “foreign fighters” heading off to Syria is going down.

The EU has brought years of peace, reconciliation among enemies, the creation of a frontier-free single market and the free movement of people.

Those watching Europe from outside recognise the EU’s strength and resilience. They also know that it is not the EU that has lost its way, its Europe’s squabbling, fractious and dysfunctional leaders.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Brussels scandal is about ethics, not money or sex

Perhaps I’m missing something but scandals appear to be few and far between in Brussels. And when they do erupt — as is the case just now over former European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso’s decision to join the global banking giant Goldman Sachs — it’s about moral corruption, ethics and integrity rather than money or sex.

Maybe this is because Europeans are overall more worldly-wise, more tolerant and less easily shocked than, say, their counterparts in the United States. It could be that everyone here is so busy worrying about the fate of Europe that other things just pale in comparison.

Or perhaps people in Brussels are particularly well-behaved and orderly. After all no senior Eurocrat has been caught sexting like former US congressman Anthony Weiner. And unlike US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, there have been no nude pictures published of senior European politicians’ wives.

And yet Brussels hosts thousands of European Union officials, foreign diplomats, people working for Nato and of course members of the Belgian government. There are also thousands of hangers-on in the form of lobbyists, lawyers, think tankers, journalists and business leaders — all trying to get a word in when the EU gets busy with legislating and regulating.

This exciting mix of nationalities, languages, interests, religions and colours is visible in the EU institutions and in Nato and in the cafes, streets and markets of Brussels. With so many people meeting, talking, lunching and partying, scandals of all sorts should be rife. They are not.

But the Barroso-Goldman Sachs affair has certainly got tongues wagging. So why all this wrath and fury? After all people change jobs all the time. Senior public servants with clout and influence are in great demand as lobbyists and consultants after they retire. That’s the case the world over. And Brussels is no different. Moving from cushy EU jobs to equally cushy private sector jobs has been the name of the game in this town for years.

Some cases of revolving doors have raised eyebrows in the past. But the noise and the fury soon die down. And then it’s business as usual. This appears to be the case for former EU trade commissioner Karel De Gucht who has joined the board of mining giant Arcelor Mittal. The former EU digital agenda commissioner Neelie Kroes has joined the boards of tech firms Uber and Salesforce.

The Barroso-Goldman Sachs partnership, however, appears to be a step too far even in this town of cosy arrangements. Thousands of people — including EU officials — have signed a petition denouncing Barroso’s new job.

French politicians have called the move “scandalous” and “morally unacceptable” and dozens of members of the European parliament have signed an open letter to current Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker calling for action.

In principle, Barroso, a former Portuguese prime minister who was European Commission president from 2004 to 2014, has not broken any rules. The EU stipulates that its senior staff must respect a mandatory 18-month cooling-off period before moving to a new job after retirement. The former Commission chief has done that.

But the criticism focuses on the ethics of his decision, not its legality. Critics allege that Goldman Sachs is implicated too strongly in the global financial crisis and has lobbied too voraciously against financial regulation to be a suitable employer for a former EU leader.

There is a concern that Barroso is being hired to help the bank navigate the uncharted waters of Brexit. And that the former Commission chief will use his inside knowledge and influence with his former staff to get things done his way.

The former Commission chief has been accused of showing poor judgement. There are accusations of conflict of interest and fears that his decision will further damage already discredited EU institutions.

According to the EU ombudsman Emily O’Reilly, “Public unease will be exacerbated by the fact that Mr Barroso has publicly stated that he will be advising on the UK’s decision to leave the EU.”

Certainly, the European public has a great deal to worry about these days. Fears of terrorism and wariness about the large number of refugees and migrants mix uncomfortably with uncertainty over Brexit, the continuing eurozone crisis and deepening divisions between East and West.

Barroso’s new job is hardly going to give any sane European sleepless nights. But at a time of multiple crises, Europeans want their politicians to be sensitive and responsive to their concerns.

The criticism is that the former Commission chief has shown a striking lack of judgement and understanding of the current anger and unease in Europe. So unlike in the US and other parts of the world, Europeans don’t mind if their politicians indulge in a bit of fun and frolics. But this is no time to be joining the ranks of rich bankers.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Europe’s autumn of discontent: burkinis, borders and Brexit

SO it’s September and Europe is back at work. There is much to discuss and to do. Problems abound. Europe faces a host of difficult challenges, many internal, some external — and next year is set to be even more challenging. Everyone is braced for an autumn and winter of discontent. The world kept turning as the EU took a long summer break. The war in Syria continued to wreak havoc, refugees fled devastation, the earthquake in Italy killed and injured many, there were suicide bombs in Yemen, Turkey and Kabul and strongmen in Russia, Turkey and the US thundered poison and venom.

And oh yes, there were the Olympics, bringing some relief and excitement in an increasingly angry, intolerant and difficult world. There was also a landmark peace deal in Colombia between the government and the main left-wing rebel group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc), putting an end to one of the world’s longest-running insurgencies.

Europe reacted to the events of course — but internal difficulties took centre stage. Europe’s focus is on itself, its challenges and dilemmas. Certainly, many EU policymakers keep a close watch on global events. But in the end, for many, Europe comes first.

Even when it comes to taking a holiday. Its certainly good politics for European leaders to take their vacations in Europe. Trekking in the Alps rather than in the Himalayas shows that a European leader — like Britain’s new Prime Minister Theresa May — is careful with money and committed to Europe.

But staying close to home has its disadvantages. Staying inside the cosy European cocoon may be cheap, comfortable and familiar. But it leads to complacency. If EU leaders had travelled a bit further, say to Asia for instance, they would know that the EU star is rapidly losing its sparkle.

Europe has certainly been in the news over the summer. But the headlines have been less than flattering. Media across the world has focused on three key questions which unfortunately appear to define Europe in 2016: burkinis, borders and Brexit. Gone are the compliments and the glowing words, the soft focus on European cities, museums, and food, abiding admiration for European integration efforts, the noble pledge to steer clear of war and turmoil. No longer, no more.

Step outside Europe and its clear: the EU has lost its reputation and clout. It’s political, diplomatic and economic influence is slipping, its standing is in tatters. Forget talk about European values. A watching world knows very clearly that Europe has lost its mojo. And nobody is celebrating.

For most of the summer, France grabbed the headlines with its bizarre decision to ban so-called ‘burkinis’. Images of Muslim women being ordered to undress on French beaches caught the global imagination, triggering animated debates on what had happened to a country known for its commitment to “liberte, egalite and fraternite”.

The burkini was of course only the tip of the iceberg. As the country heads for presidential elections in 2017, the French debate on Islam is expected to become even fiercer, with Marine Le Pen, the leader of the xenophobic and anti-Muslim Front National, calling the shots and other politicians including the centre-right presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy, frantically struggling to keep up.

The game in France over the coming months is going to be a simple one: who can sound tougher on Islam and Muslims. Le Pen is unlikely to become French president. But she will set the political agenda for the country and dominate the political discourse for months to come.

Which brings us to refugees and Europe’s ongoing struggle to deal with the large number of migrants and asylum seekers who keep knocking on its doors.

The EU once captured the headlines for its bold moves to eliminate borders to create a frontier free single market. The image now is of an EU determined to protect itself with barbed wire fences, armed policemen and more. This is especially the case in many eastern European states where restrictive new laws making life difficult for asylum seekers and refugees, anti-migrant rhetoric by decision makers and high-ranking politicians is commonplace.

Asylum seekers and refugees are called “intruders,” and “potential terrorists”, bent on destroying Western civilisation and Christianity. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban himself in July referred to migration as “poison”. Gyorgy Schopflin, a ruling party member with a seat in the European Parliament, suggested on Twitter that pigs’ heads should be placed on the border fence with Serbia to deter Muslim refugees from entering Hungary.

And then of course there is Brexit. The world can’t really believe that a country would willingly leave a much-coveted rich men’s club. And no one seems as confused as Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May.

Her mantra of “Brexit means Brexit” is beginning to ring hollow, not least because the government has yet to decide on just when to invoke “article 50” which will kick-start negotiations on Britain’s withdrawal from the EU.

Many including former premier Tony Blair seem to believe that Britain could change course either through a second referendum or new elections. But others denounce this as wishful thinking.

Who knows? Europeans once stood out for their post-modern values and aspirations, their ability to make friends with former enemies. That’s no longer the case. Europe in the autumn of 2016 appears fragile, fraught and afraid. And it may stay this way for most of next year.

In a crazy world, we need to daydream

So here I am surrounded by evil, wickedness and hate, the world going mad all at once and all I can think of is this: if only Freddie Mercury and Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan had lived long enough to sing together.

Call it escapism. Call it cracking under pressure, the demands of an exhausted mind demanding some respite, a moment of rest in an angry vicious world. There’s just so much a person can take.

The rest of the world is going crazy over Pokemon Go! But as I read, hear and watch the loonies take over the asylum, the mad men raging and ranting, I’ve started daydreaming. And often as the mind wanders, I wish Freddie and Nusrat could have come together to sing and ease our pain.

What a concert that would have been, the meeting of two musical titans, sublime singers whose voices would have touched our souls in so many different unexplained ways, reaching places no one else could reach. Not John Lennon, not Elvis, not even Prince. Any yes, not even Amjad Sabri.

I can imagine their voices merging and mingling, Freddie’s haunting vocals soaring higher and higher and then dipping low — and then, slowly but steadily, Nusrat Fateh Ali adding his magical, spiritual sweetness to the duet. I can hear them now, singing a mixture of ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ and ‘Dam Mast Qalandar’.

If only. My fantasy doesn’t last long. Both men are dead, their message of love and tolerance buried with them. So are Sabri, Lennon and others.

Instead of sweet music, we are doomed to listen to Donald Trump’s nasty rants. The man many once shrugged off as a freak show is now likely to be the next president of the United States. Interestingly, he is best friends with Vladimir Putin, the other tough guy on the block.

I’m sure it won’t be too long before both are bonding with that other angry middle-aged strongman, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, having escaped a military coup is now busy rounding up and punishing all and sundry. Oh yes, and there is talk of reinstating the death penalty.

Here in Europe, there are mad men aplenty too. Hungary’s right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban has described the arrival of asylum seekers in Europe as “a poison”, saying his country did not want or need “a single migrant”.

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch far right Freedom Party told the Republican Party Convention in Cleveland that he is set to become the next prime minister of the Netherlands. “I don’t want more Muslims in the Netherlands…and I am proud to say that,” he told a cheering crowd of Americans.

To much applause, Britain’s new Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson lied and misled his way during the Brexit campaign that he headed. Nigel Farage, the xenophobic leader of the UK Independence Party has promised to help anti-EU protesters in France and other countries. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far right has become even more popular in the wake of recent terrorist attacks.

But there is hope yet. The world is not completely dark and dirty — at least not yet.

At their convention in Philadelphia, the Democrats called on Americans to reject what they called Trump’s politics of fear and division. It’s still not clear, however, if the message of hope and optimism offered by US President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton can successfully counter Trump’s toxic rhetoric.

The divisions in society run deep — and not only in the US. Europe too is deeply divided between those who live in a permanent state of apoplexy over their inability to cope with a rapidly changing world and those who are ready to go with the flow.

For the last few years, like many others, I have been silently thanking the universe for Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor whose ability to show grace under pressure makes her the only true leader in a very messy and chaotic Europe.

Just recently, Merkel delivered a staunch defence of her open-door policy towards refugees, insisting she feels no guilt over a series of violent attacks in Germany and was right to allow hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees to arrive last summer.

“A rejection of the humanitarian stance we took could have led to even worse consequences,” the German chancellor said. She repeated her wir schaffen das (we can manage it) mantra delivered last summer at the peak of the refugee crisis, adding: “We can manage our historic task — and this is a historic test in times of globalisation — just as we’ve managed so much already, we can manage it…Germany is a strong country.”

Interestingly, Merkel’s popularity remains high. In contrast, despite his hard-line response to terrorism and the extension of the national state of emergency, French President Francois Hollande remains intensely unpopular.

Go figure. Just when you think 2016 can’t get any worse, there is another terrorist attack and more innocent and gentle souls are killed.

As Freddie sang all those years ago: ‘this world could be heaven’. Sadly, tragically, it is not.

Lying is the new normal in the post-truth world

Is it just me or have politicians the world over really become nastier, more violent and more vengeful?

Perhaps it’s just a temporary phenomenon. Perhaps I’m feeling especially downbeat in the wake of Brexit, the terror attack in Nice, the attempted coup in Turkey, the nomination of Donald Trump as the Republican candidate for US president and Boris Johnson’s appointment as Britain’s Foreign Secretary. And oh yes, let’s not forget Mrs Trump’s botched attempt at plagiarism.

Recently it seems that everywhere I look, every time I go online, every word uttered by politicians that I hear, propels me into an unpleasant new era dominated by liars, bullies and cheats.

This is a time when being a successful politician means being dishonest, where nastiness is rewarded with votes and where fear and hate have replaced the discourse of tolerance and hope.

It’s not just politicians who lie and deceive of course — more and more everyone appears to have succumbed to the temptation. But while lying by ordinary people is hurtful and harmful, lying politicians are more dangerous because they are changing our world.

The transformation has been rapid. The “new normal” has come upon as almost unnoticed, changing our politics and with it our world in the blink of a Twitter feed.

It really has happened fast. Only a few years ago calling a politician a liar was the ultimate insult. When just like thieves, lying politicians were outcast by society, becoming objects of contempt and disdain. They were unceremoniously booted out, their lies exposed, their careers in tatters.

And remember a time when honesty in a politician was admired and considered a virtue? Promises were meant to be kept and men and women in charge were judged by their word. Just like ordinary fold, they were taught to speak the truth and never, ever cheat, whether at school, in the playground or in the family.

And facts. Remember when facts were important, nay even crucial in political discussions? Facts and figures — data and statistics — determined our views, informed our decisions and shaped our discourse. Elections were fought on the basis of correct, verifiable information.

Finally, think back to a time when politicians were polite and that mattered. People who were respectful and courteous were admired and looked up to as social models. Having good manners was an asset in society. Just like children, the people in power were taught to say “please and thank you”. And oh yes, they often also said “sorry”.

That was then. Today, more than half-way into 2016, it’s official: truth, vows, facts and manners are out. Lies, dishonesty, rudeness and fiction are in.

A close scrutiny of the Brexit and Trump campaigns provides ample proof we are living in what many commentators describe as a “post-truth” era.

“In the post-truth era, borders blur between truth and lies, honesty and dishonesty, fiction and non-fiction. Deceiving others becomes a challenge, a game, and ultimately a habit,” says Ralph Keyes, author of The Post-Truth Era: Dishonesty and Deception in Contemporary Life.

For proof look no further than Trump’s election campaign, and reports that 76 per cent of Trump’s statements are rated either “mostly false”, “false”, or “pants on fire”, which is to say off-the-charts false. By comparison, Hillary Clinton’s total is 29pc.

Boris Johnson and the Leave campaign lied notoriously about many things, including the 350 million pounds that Britain was supposed to be sending to the EU every week and which could be channelled into the National Health Service.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may or may not be misinforming his citizens by linking the attempted coup to his arch-rival Fethullah Gulen but his vengeful rounding up and mistreatment of those involved — and threats of bringing back the death penalty — are worrying signs for a country which was once viewed as a much-needed inspiration for Muslim democracies.

The media is full of other examples of liars, including of course former British prime minister Tony Blair whose “conviction” that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction has been revealed to be false.

Interestingly, however, he isn’t repentant. In the 21st Century, politicians found to have misled and deceived others go on to become authors and much-coveted conference speakers. Or like Boris Johnson, they shrug it off as unimportant. Or like Trump, they rage and rant.

The post-truth era is facilitated by the social media where “misinformation” spreads like wildfire and most mainstream journalists have abdicated their role as fact-checkers, preferring instead to swallow deceptions and lies without much questioning.

Bullies, ranting and lying politicians are certainly not just a phenomenon of the West. Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America have more than their share of deceitful men and women who have turned lying into a long-standing political art form.

In the past, once unmasked, liars and cheats in the West beat a fast retreat. Today, they are foreign ministers and leaders of political parties - and possibly one of them could become the next leader of the “free world”.

ASEM: a right platform for conversation on shared global challenges

This is just the right time for a serious Asia-Europe conversation on shared global challenges. With Brexit around the corner, the world economy in poor shape, growing inequalities and discontent with globalisation on the rise, Asian and European leaders meeting in Ulan Bator, Mongolia, on July 15-16, have a great deal to talk about.Add to the list, an increased disconnect and mistrust between governments and citizens — especially between leaders and young people — the rise in populism, fears of uncontrolled immigration and violent extremism, and it’s clear that leaders at the Asia Europe Meeting (ASEM) summit in Mongolia will have a full agenda.Asian leaders and policymakers may believe that most of these issues are of relevance only to Europe. The truth is more complicated. The Brexit referendum last month has certainly highlighted the strength of these and other preoccupations among British (and other European voters). But many of these worries are shared by citizens across the world.Asia is as unequal a continent as is Europe. Winners and losers of globalisation exist on both continents and terrorists pose a challenge to Asian and European states alike. Even though they are masters of grabbing the headlines in Europe, populist politicians with simple messages exist in Asia as well. And leaders in both Asia and Europe need to build stronger connections with young people and respond to their worries about education, jobs, exclusion and marginalisation.It is important to have these discussions within ASEM. Given its informal format and structure, ASEM offers a unique platform for an open, no holds-barred high-level brainstorm on issues of mutual interest. The leaders’ retreat session is especially suited to the debate on shared challenges.In fact, it is the need for such a conversation that led to the creation of ASEM 20 years ago — and that is likely to give ASEM renewed geo-strategic relevance and increased credibility in the coming years.ASEM stakeholders — including policymakers, members of parliament, civil society representatives, academics and members of think tanks as well as young people and business leaders — are engaged in impressive efforts to make ASEM fit for purpose in the 21st Century.The emphasis should be on new ideas and increased connectivity as part of a potent new recipe for injecting new energy and dynamism into ASEM.Transforming ASEM into a hub or network of ideas and initiatives will give the Asia-Europe relationship a geo-strategic raison d’être, which it has lost over the last two decades. The platform for networking, dialogue and cooperation it provides today makes it even more essential in an interdependent and complex world. Asia-Europe connectivity is now a fact of life and reinforcing these networks through stronger institutional, infrastructure, digital and people-to-people linkages is rightfully emerging as a central element of efforts to revive and renew ASEM.ASEM has met many of its original goals by providing Asian and European leaders with opportunities to get to know one another, encouraging greater people-to-people understanding and providing the two regions with avenues to explore new areas of cooperation in the political, economic and social sectors.An array of ASEM meetings allows policymakers from both regions to exchange views on regional and global issues and strengthen their economic relations through greater trade and investment. Additionally, meetings between business leaders, parliamentarians, academics and civil society actors — and young leaders — have allowed ASEM to make important headway in enhancing mutual Asia-Europe understanding and upgrading the quality and diversity of the Asia-Europe conversation.While these connections are important, ASEM can do much more by playing a more central role than it has so far in generating, nourishing and disseminating new ideas about living and working together in a globalised world.This requires the setting up of an “ASEM Brains Trust” or network of think tanks/studies centres, which can help to enliven ASEM by turning into a market place for ideas and initiatives. Proposals and ideas generated within such a studies centre should be fed directly into the work of senior ASEM officials and the activities of other stakeholders. Such tasks could be performed by an ASEM coordination centre of the kind being recommended by Mongolia.This combination of ideas and connectivity allowing for a permanent circulation and exchange of thoughts, knowledge, experience and expertise can revive ASEM for the third decade. The summit in Ulaanbataar can and should set ASEM on the road to renewal. The 21st Century is proving to be turbulent, violent and unpredictable. ASEM can help increase Asian and European understanding of a very complicated world.

China seeks to enhance Asia-Europe connectivity

China is expected to contribute more to the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) by promoting greater relations between the two regions at an upcoming summit.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang will unveil new proposals in deepening cooperation between Asia and Europe during his first foreign visit this year.

Li will attend the 11th ASEM summit in Mongolian capital Ulan Bator from July 15 to 16, after an official visit to the country from July 13 to 14.

ASEM has provided an important platform for political dialogue, economic cooperation, and cultural and social exchange between Asia and Europe.

Launched in 1996, the biennial ASEM summit has served as a venue for dialogue between countries in Asia and Europe. ASEM now includes 53 Asian and European members. The 11th ASEM summit to be held in Mongolia marks the 20th anniversary of the group's founding.

Shada Islam, director of policy at the Brussels-based think-tank Friends of Europe, said that ASEM has performed well in terms of bringing together Asia and Europe.

"The revitalization of this important forum is to a large extent a consequence of the fact that China is very much engaged into it," said Shada Islam in a recent interview with Xinhua.

She explained that ASEM is very flexible but needs some fresh energy, and said she believes that discussions on connectivity will provide that kind of new dynamism.

"ASEM members are expecting more from China, the second largest economy in the world. It should show more courage and wisdom and allocate more resources in leading the interconnectivity between Asia and Europe," said Cui Hongjian, director of the Department for European Studies of the China Institute of International Studies.

Cui noted the importance of linking China's Belt and Road Initiative to existing ASEM projects such as the Asia-Europe continental bridge as well as to more new projects to boost their connectivity.

China attended all ASEM summits ever since its birth, and the proposals it made in the past 20 years have borne witness to its contributions to the platform.

The Mongolian summit is highly looked to as it will work out the plan for priorities in the next 10 years.

The ASEM faces the challenge to enhance its relevance in looking for more spots of common interests between Asia and Europe, said Ding Yifan, an economist with the Development Research Center of the Chinese State Council.

Ding suggested more cooperation between Asia and Europe in technology and environmental protection, as well as increased efforts in dealing with possible differences among Asian and European members.

Ding expects the Chinese premier will touch upon such topics during the summit in a bid to bring out more momentum from the ASEM in the next decade.

Meanwhile, Li is also likely to discuss with other Asian and European leaders the Brexit issue, the South China Sea arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines, and other hot topics across the region.

The upcoming visit by Li is expected to seek more convergence between China's Belt and Road Initiative and Mongolia's Steppe Road program.

More cooperation in production capacity, major projects and finance is expected to inject more vitality in China-Mongolia ties.

There's opportunity for Mongolia's Steppe Road program to get aligned with the Belt and Road Initiative, which will greatly benefit the Mongolian economy as well as the construction of a tri-party economic corridor involving China, Mongolia and Russia, said Gao Shumao, the former Chinese ambassador to Mongolia.

On efforts to aligning the Belt and Road Initiative and the Steppe Road program, Gao said there is huge potential for the two sides to cooperate in rail and highway construction, clean energy, tourism, health care and people-to-people exchanges.

Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Mongolia in 2014 laid a sound foundation for China-Mongolia relations, and Li is expected to strengthen those ties during his trip, said Gao.

Brexit’s EU shake-up and the global fall-out

Brexit has certainly shaken the European Union. But apart from the mess over the timing, pace and substance of Britain’s EU divorce, no one should expect any other major changes in way the now-27 member bloc conducts itself. And, oh yes, don’t expect any rapid EU unravelling either.

True, there has been a spate of statements on the need for “political reflection to give an impulse to further reform”. The foreign ministers of France and Germany have talked in a heady fashion of their vision for further steps in the direction of a political union. And there’s even a brand new EU “global strategy” articulating the bloc’s vision for dealing with the world outside.

The far right, meanwhile, is predictably gloating over the “Leave EU” message delivered by British voters and demanding similar national referenda on EU membership in their countries. Europe’s populists will certainly continue to make gains in elections in the coming years. But the likelihood of other EU referenda is slim.

Similarly, those vowing to show that the Union is strong and unchanged by Britain’s withdrawal and that the EU will push on without the presence of Britain as the perennial naysayer, the sceptic and the doubter are on the wrong track. The truth is different.

Britain’s objections focused on the EU’s overly ambitious plans a further pooling of sovereignty and the bloc’s failure to hammer out a rational and fair immigration policy. These are also opposed by many other EU states, not just Britain.

On questions related to the further development of the EU single market, Britain was usually in the vanguard of states wanting the removal of internal barriers. On trade, it took a strong anti-protectionist line. And for all the anti-immigration talk, Britain’s multi-cultural landscape stands out in an EU where minorities are not as visible as they should and could be.

Europe’s internal divisions are not about to disappear. The squabbling and wrangling over the EU’s future will continue — perhaps even become shriller. There is no guarantee that the advice to act responsibly given to the EU by US Secretary of State John Kerry will be heard.

What Brexit has done, however, is create uncertainty on global financial markets triggered by the fall in the value of the pound. Some of Asia’s biggest economies have warned that Brexit could cast a shadow over the world economy for years to come.

Global business leaders are already rethinking their export and investment strategies to take account of Britain’s imminent departure from the EU.

More is at stake, however. The EU has long inspired nations across the globe with its message of reconciliation among former adversaries and as a project for peace and stability. In varying ways and to varying degrees, many have also looked to Europe in their own quest for regional integration and cooperation.

That reputation has now taken a body blow. Both Britain and the EU appear diminished to a closely watching world. Those opposed to regional cooperation are likely to take heart from the EU’s difficulties. But it would be unfortunate if the EU crisis puts the brakes on other regions’ plans for integration.

Significantly, none of the EU’s foreign partners — except Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for US president and possibly Russian President Vladimir Putin — is applauding.

Much will depend on how British and EU leaders conduct themselves over the coming weeks and months. Britain’s pro-Leave campaigners have already sullied the country’s reputation by misinforming and misleading their citizens and by fanning the fires of hatred and racism. It will be tough to correct their mistakes — if that is indeed what the next British Brexit government intends to do.

EU leaders, meanwhile, face a stark choice: they can either listen to and respond to the real concerns of their citizens, including on immigration, and seek a dignified response to the latest crisis. Or — as many fear — they can engage in yet more squabbling over Europe’s future direction.

The route they take will determine whether or not other eurosceptic movements will become even stronger in the days ahead and present their own blueprints for an EU exit.

Europe’s response will be watched carefully not just by the US where fears are growing of a Trump victory in the November presidential elections but also by China, India, Japan and Europe’s other important partners which have invested heavily in Britain as a “gateway” to Europe.

No responsible global power wanted Britain to leave the EU and today no major country wants the EU to unravel. True, some countries may want to negotiate new trade pacts with Britain — but as the US and India have warned, such discussions will not be their top priority. The EU is a much larger trading bloc than Britain — and will continue to count for more on world stage.

For Europe’s trading partners Britain’s absence will be especially felt in EU discussions on trade agreements, whether bilateral free trade accords such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) or the wider multilateral trading system. London has taken a strong stance in favour of granting market economy status to China. It has also been among the lead players in the EU’s trade relations with many South Asian countries, including India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The departure of Britain as the EU’s prime military power, is going to hit hard at a time when Europe is trying to push its security credentials, especially in Asia. A new EU “global strategy”, which cannot rely on and use Britain’s wide network of global partners, will appear less impressive.

In the end, however, once the market turmoil is over and the reality of Brexit sinks in, it is the blow to the EU’s reputation as an agent for change and transformation which will resonate most strongly across the world.

Europe’s real crisis comes from its eastern members, not Brexit

Europe's multiple crises have become the stuff of legend. They dominate the headlines, cast a dark shadow over the EU’s daily life, make EU leaders squirm in discomfort and colour the bloc’s relations with the rest of the world.

Where to begin? There’s the continuing eurozone crisis, with Greece still being squeezed on all fronts, Spain and Portugal struggling to make ends meet and the rest of the currency zone mired in stagnation.

There’s high unemployment across the bloc, with jobless rates over 50 per cent for young people in Spain.

There’s the continuing influx of refugees and migrants seeking to escape war and conflict in the Middle East, Afghanistan and many African countries. And the surge in refugee numbers has in turn triggered an increase in support for far right parties.

And then there’s Brexit. As Britain goes to the polls on June 23 to vote for leaving or staying in the EU, the Brexit debate looms large not just over Britain but also over the rest of the EU.

The discussion veers towards hysteria in the UK, where the Conservative Party is embroiled in an open civil war over the issue and public opinion remains polarised on whether being a member of the EU is good or bad for Britain.

Many fear that if Britain leaves the bloc, other equally restless political groups will begin clamouring for an exit as well, prompting the beginning of the end of Europe.

Yes, Brexit, migration, slow growth and unemployment are major problems facing the EU. They weigh heavy on the minds of Europe’s great and the good.

But the real threat to Europe’s future isn’t often discussed — and if it is, the talk is hushed and fearful.

The danger Europe faces does not come from across the Channel — it comes from the east, from several former communist countries which joined the EU with great aplomb in 2004 and which today are challenging the spirit and the soul of the EU.

The EU’s eastward enlargement was celebrated as a victory of democracy over authoritarian rule and a celebration of the spread of liberal ideas across vast swathes of eastern and central Europe.

But it looks like the bad times are back. Many in western Europe bemoan the emergence of indecent and illiberal democracies in the east as the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Poland — the so-called Visegrad group — thumb their nose at their western neighbours by refusing to fall into line on questions like immigration and openly defy EU institutions on freedom of the media and the rule of law.

In recent months, all four countries have been the most vocal opponents of the EU response to the migration crisis. Hungary and Slovakia have been criticised for their anti-immigrant rhetoric.

Their leaders’ talk has often verged on Islamophobia as they have rejected calls to welcome refugees from the Middle East. Some have built fences to keep the refugees out.

Their words and actions echo those of Europe’s xenophobic and anti-immigrant far right parties — but unlike far right leaders who are outside government, the leaders of the Visegrad group are full-fledged members of the European Council.

Having failed to prevent Hungary from moving toward illiberal policies since Viktor Orban was elected prime minister in 2010, the Commission is taking a tougher stand against Poland which is under a European Commission investigation into the state of the rule of law after controversial constitutional reforms.

The unprecedented EU move — based on a so-called “rule of law framework” adopted in 2014 — is designed to tackle the threat posed by quasi-authoritarian regimes within the EU.

It follows criticism that while the EU is tough with countries outside the EU and those negotiating to join the club, once countries become EU members there is little that can be done to stop them from breaking basic EU rules.

The EU action on rule of law could lead to sanctions against Poland, including the country being stripped of EU voting rights.

But far from showing any remorse for violating European values, leaders of the four countries insist that they are setting the standards for the rest of Europe.

Czech premier Bohuslav Sobotka, Slovakia’s Robert Fico, Hungary’s Viktor Orban and Poland’s Beata Szydlo stood proudly together after a summit in Prague last week to underline they were winning the battle of ideas in Europe.

Szydlo and Orban were the clearest in describing central and eastern Europe as a model rather than as a troublemaker, with Orban saying the region is the “most stable region in terms of economy and politics”.

There are several ironies in the saga. First, even as they refuse to take in migrants and refugees from the Middle East, Polish, Hungarian and other eastern European nationals are part of huge migrant populations in western Europe.

Second, it is the increase in the number of migrants from eastern European states — especially Bulgaria and Romania but also from Poland — which is part of the toxic Brexit debate on immigration in Britain.

Third, Slovakia is set to take over the six-month presidency of the EU Council as of July 1 this year.

As such, Fico, whose anti-migrant rants still echo across Europe, will be in the driving seat of EU policies on crucial questions linked to the refugee and migration crisis over the next six months.

No schedule yet to restart negotiations on India-EU free trade pact: EU official

The 28-member European Union (EU) is “encouraged” by the political momentum the long-discussed India-EU free trade agreement (FTA) gained at the summit held between the two in Brussels at the end of March, but both sides have not been able to fix a schedule to restart negotiations as yet, an EU official said.Both sides have “outstanding issues” to sort out and “the European Commission offered India on several occasions and in different formats to create an adequate forum to discuss outstanding issues...to enable the process to move forward,” Daniel Rosario, a spokesman for the EU trade department, told a group of visiting Indian journalists on Monday.The last round of talks on India-EU FTA was held in 2013 and the discussions have remained deadlocked on issues such as tariffs on automobiles and wines and spirits, Rosario said.In the auto sector, EU is unhappy given that its exporters have to face Indian import duties of up to 100% on cars and car parts. And in the case of wines and spirits, European exporters face tariffs as high as up to 150%, Rosario said.He said the EU had put forward several proposals in 2013 to break the deadlock.“We suggested long transitional periods for their elimination or going as far as accepting asymmetric elimination of these duties in favour of India” in the case of automobiles, he said. In the case of wines and spirits, “the proposal made in 2013 was for a gradual if not complete elimination of these duties and taking into account the Indian sensitivities”, he said.“We clearly identified the areas where we expect India to make some movement and we offered some fora to go into some specific discussions to allow for the general discussion to move ahead and for the time being, this has not happened,” he added.When asked if the EU would agree to re-open negotiations from the start, Rosario said the EU could not “ignore all the work that has been done so far”.Despite the many contentious issues, “we are encouraged to see that in the last (India-EU) summit at the end of March, both sides agreed to re-engage in this process to give it the necessary momentum”, Rosario said, referring to the 30 March India-EU summit in Brussels. India was represented by Prime Minister Narendra Modi and the EU side was represented by Donald Tusk, president of the European Council and Jean-Claude Juncker, president of the European Commission.But Rosario did not seem to have an answer when asked when the talks will get going again.According to analysts, the trade pact could serve as an “anchor” for bilateral relations, besides proving to European businesses that “India is open for businesses”.The March India-EU summit was the first in four years and followed the EU’s refusal last year to confirm the dates of a proposed visit by Modi amid a diplomatic row over the slow progress in India of the trial of two Italian marines accused of killing two Indian fishermen in 2012.Talks on the Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement—the official title of the free trade pact—started in 2007 but progress has been tardy and marked by flip-flops. India cancelled a meeting with the EU chief trade negotiator in August last year in protest against an import ban on 700 of its generic drugs clinically tested by GVK Biosciences for alleged manipulation of clinical trials.“The GVK issue, it’s a decision for us that has nothing to do with the negotiations of a trade agreement, it never had a link,” Rosario said.Later, during a meeting between Modi and Tusk in the Turkish city of Antalya in November on the margins of a G-20 meet, both sides agreed to hold a stock taking meeting between the chief negotiators before resuming formal talks. The stock-taking talks, including a meeting between Indian commerce secretary Rita Teaotia and EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström in Brussels on 22 February, however, did not produce any results.The impression in New Delhi seems to be that with the EU involved in talks with the US on the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership, it is not focused on trade talks with Asia’s third largest economy. Also occupying European mind space is the British referendum, to be held on 23 June, on whether the country should remain in the EU.“There was a long discussion on the trade agreement during the India-EU summit and we have conveyed to them (EU) that we are committed to the agreement,” said a person on the Indian side who is familiar with the developments.On India’s part, disputed issues in the trade talks include the so-called Mode 4, a provision of the 1995 General Agreement on Trade in Services, which seeks to facilitate the movement of professionals from one country to another.According to Shada Islam, director at the Policy Friends of Europe think tank based in Brussels, India-EU ties seemed to be a work in progress with India focused on consolidating ties with countries like the US.“The India-EU relationship is not as vibrant as the EU-China partnership,” she said, adding that the 30 March summit “seemed to be the beginning of a new understanding with misconceptions on their way out”.“At the moment, we (India and the EU) don’t have a strong anchor for our relations and the trade agreement could serve as that anchor,” she said.Total bilateral trade between India and the EU, which is India’s largest trading partner, was €78 billion in 2015, according to EU figures.The EU is one of the largest foreign direct investors in India with investments of €38.5 billion since 2000. 

India Free Trade Agreement: European Union Expects Both Sides To Move With Caution

Talks on the free trade agreement between the EU and India started in 2007 but there has been little progress since then.

Even as the European Union (EU) is preparing its reply to a letter written by India’s commerce and industry minister, Nirmala Sitharaman asking for a meeting of chief negotiators to resume dialogue on the free trade agreement, the EU feels that this time around the two sides will move with caution.

“You don’t negotiate trade agreements without caution. Caution goes hand in hand with ambition. So you have to be able to deliver in the end a deal that is both ambitious and in the interest of both the sides,” said Daniel Rosaro, spokesperson Trade, Directorate-General Communication-EU.

Last year in August, India cancelled a meeting with the EU chief trade negotiator in protest against an import ban on 700 of its generic drugs clinically tested by GVK Biosciences for alleged manipulation of clinical trials. According to Rosaro, India should not have cancelled the meeting with the EU chief negotiator as the import ban was not linked to the free trade agreement. “For us this (cancellation of meeting) was a step that was not really justified at that time and we have explained it why. The GVK issue had nothing to do with the negotiation of a trade agreement,” said Rosaro.

When asked if the EU is focussing more on Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) than negotiating free trade agreement with India, Rosaro said, “TTIP is a very demanding process and has brought new public interest in trade policy, but it is one of the many processes where the EU is involved in terms of trade policy we have a broad ambitious global trade agenda in which India comes as one priority.” Shada Islam, director of policy at Friends of Europe, a think-tank  that aims to stimulate new thinking on global and European issues said while India needs to engage with the EU at a higher level and focus on its relationship with Europe, the EU too has to keep up the momentum in its relationship with India.

In November 2015,  Prime Minister Narendra Modi and Donald Tusk, president of the European Council, met in Turkey on the sidelines of a G-20 meet and agreed to hold a stocktaking meeting before resuming formal talks. In March, during the EU- India summit the two sides have now developed a strategic partnership for joint cooperation in many areas under the title EU-India Agenda for Action 2020. “The fact that EU and India have identified quite a few areas of synergies whether it’s smart cities or clean India is quite interesting. I hope this will open up ways for businesses to get involved. We think that there is a lot of potential in  Narendra Modi’s drive for modernisation of India. But we need to see how this can work out in reality, “ said Islam. “What we are also watching very closely is also how India works within the G-20 because that’s for us is one of the new global governance tools,” Islam said.

China-Europe: a curious conversation

Early April in Beijing and the sky is unusually clear and blue, cherry blossoms are in full bloom and the roads are eerily quiet. It’s “tomb sweeping” day and most of my Chinese friends and colleagues are on holiday, commemorating their ancestors.I’m in Beijing for meetings on EU-China relations. I need to get my thoughts together, write up my talking points for the upcoming seminars. But I can’t concentrate. And since all offices and shops are shut, it’s the perfect moment to visit the Great Wall.And so here I am, climbing up the long and winding road that takes me to the bus stop that takes me to the cable car that takes me — finally — to one small but majestic portion of the Great Wall.It’s breath-taking. All the pictures I’ve seen do not prepare me for the magnificent reality. Like everyone else I’ve looked up the impressive facts and figures. The Wall is old, long and high — and every stone, every inch has an interesting story to tell. But seeing is believing, and the Wall, with its majestic vistas and amazing construction, does not disappoint.I like the legends and the history. But I’m more focused on modern-day China and the enormous challenge of economic transformation that President Xi Jinping has embarked on. I’m also watching my fellow tourists who are slowly wheezing up the steep slope with me.We are a motley bunch. Chinese grandmas and grandpas with toddlers in tow, young lovers out on a date, foreign tourists from India, Indonesia and the Philippines and an attractive blonde woman on her own who stops every two minutes or so to take a selfie with the Wall as a backdrop. Who needs friends when you have a smartphone?The return journey to Beijing is complicated as the roads clog up with traffic and our driver struggles to find ingenious back roads to get us to the hotel. We get to see more cherry blossoms on the side roads, small carts full of fruit, strawberries for sale in tiny stalls. It’s like going back in time.Tomorrow Beijing will be back to normal, our driver warns. Beware of pollution and traffic jams, he says. Be prepared.I am. And not just for the congested roads and stinging eyes. I’m all geared up for some interesting discussions with Chinese academics and think tank representatives on relations between China and Europe.I’ve been tracking the ups and down of relations between Europe and China for many years and the EU-China “strategic partnership” continues to fascinate and intrigue me.Unlike the US, Europe doesn’t see China as a rival or competitor. Never having achieved the “super power” status, Europe isn’t too wary of the changed world order and the rise of China — and India, Asean and others.Europe isn’t an Asian power but an Asian partner, EU policymakers insist. There is much that the EU and China can do together on the bilateral level and on the global stage. Europe is a strong supporter of China’s new economic transformation agenda. Its mutual say Chinese officials who insist that Beijing wants a stronger and more integrated Europe.Both sides are cooperating on a range of issues, including China’s plans to build a “One Belt, One Road” connectivity network linking Europe and Asia. There is heady talk of an EU-China partnership on urbanisation, building 5G technology and warmer people-to-people relations.This is heartening — but its only part of the story. In the public discussions in Beijing, Chinese academics make no secret of their anger at Europe’s stance on two key issues: the EU’s reluctance to grant China “market economy status” and Europe’s failure to lift the arms embargo imposed on Beijing after the Tiananmen Square clampdown in 1989.There are accusations that Europe is too easily swayed by American pressure to take a tougher stance against China. And since it is not a “hard” security actor, some Chinese colleagues insist that the EU has no business making statements on rising tensions in the South China Seas.Europeans, for their part, complain about market access restrictions facing European exporters and investors, the slow pace of economic reform in China and worry about the country’s increased assertiveness on the regional stage. There are worries about China’s overcapacity in sectors such as steel which is making life difficult for Europe’s steelmakers.But while the talk sometimes gets tough, it’s clear that Europe and China need each other. Trade between the two sides is worth about 1.5 billion euros a day. An estimated three million jobs in Europe depend on relations with China. Beijing needs Europe’s intellectual expertise, technology and experience.Both sides face the challenge of ensuring growth and jobs, looking after their ageing population while also providing hope and employment for young people. There is talk of synergies between the EU 2020 agenda for growth and jobs and China’s plans for a “new normal” of lower but high-quality, sustainable and inclusive growth.As European and Chinese leaders prepare to meet in Beijing in July for their 18th summit, it is clear that EU-China relations have grown and matured over the years. Brussels and Beijing talk to each other on multiple topics and in multiple fora.There are disagreements and occasional bitterness and sparring. But the conversation is intense, much more so than the EU’s relations with other Asian nations. There is mutual curiosity. And the beginnings of a mutual understanding.In a world marked by inter-state rivalries, power struggles and competition between nations, can anyone really — and realistically — ask for more?

FRANKLY SPEAKING – Europe matters to an anxious world

As Europe tears itself apart, the world is watching anxiously. Entangled in their multiple crises, self-absorbed EU leaders appear oblivious to the impact of their conduct and policies on Europe’s global standing. But in this interdependent and inter-connected world, what happens in Europe doesn’t stay in Europe. It sends shockwaves across the world.Europe matters. It’s partly economics. The world needs European markets and investments. In a world desperate for higher growth and more jobs, Europe’s stagnant or slow-growing economies are a source of deep concern.Worries over Europe’s lacklustre economic performance have grown as the Chinese growth engine slows down to a “new normal”. Latest World Trade Organisation (WTO) data shows global trade tumbling 13% last year to $16.5 trillion, from $19 trillion in 2014. In volume terms, world trade remained flat in 2015.European technology, standards, expertise and know-how also matter. It’s no surprise that emerging nations embarked on ambitious economic transformation agendas want access to Europe’s intellectual expertise.For proof, look no further than the EU’s recent meetings with China and India and their emphasis on cooperation in areas like urbanisation, digital development, clean energy and water management.But for many outsiders, Europe is about more than trade and business. It is a major source of development assistance and humanitarian aid. In Asia, Africa and Latin America, the EU’s regional integration efforts are a source of inspiration.Europe is also an agent for economic, social and political change outside its borders. It promotes human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Hardline governments may not like it, but their citizens certainly do.Slowly but surely, Europe is also developing its security credentials. Not as a hard military power, but in its capacity to promote confidence-building measures, reconciliation between adversaries and to tackle non-traditional security threats.These achievements were built slowly, over time. They are now at risk. Europe’s international standing is taking a battering. As they stumble in their efforts to deal with refugees, terrorists and Brexit as well as with the structural challenge of slow growth and jobs, European leaders are sending a message of discord and weakness to the world.Given Europe’s complex relationship with its foreign friends, there could have been some gloating abroad. After all, for years, European policymakers seemed to think their main task was to lecture, harangue and finger-wag their way through world capitals. Appalled critics called Europeans arrogant and complacent.No longer. In an intertwined world, no one is safe. Far from showing any signs ofschadenfreude, most world leaders are genuinely concerned at Europe’s predicament.“Europe is not tranquil at the moment, we are following developments very closely,” China’s Assistant Foreign Minister Liu Haixing told a meeting of European and Chinese academics and think tank representatives in Beijing last week. “We are optimistic about the EU’s future and its ability and determination to overcome difficulties,” he added.Queries about Europe’s future also come from family, friends, colleagues, students and business representatives who want to know if this time, again, Europe will bounce back, come to its senses, regain its reputation as a land of tolerance and humanity.Their collective appeal to European leaders is simple: enough already, stop bickering, get your act together. The world wants and needs a strong and resilient Europe. The message is clear – but is anyone in Europe really listening?

Brussels, My City

I love my city. I love Brussels. This city has nurtured and supported me through the good times and the bad.On March 22, as bombs devastated the national airport and a metro station that I use occasionally to get to work, killing many innocent people, I realised just how much Brussels means to me.With Brussels bleeding, wounded and in mourning, I am struck by the extent to which my heart belongs here.I love the haphazard beauty of Brussels, the ancient cobbled streets paired with sudden high-rise buildings; the beautiful squares, the leafy forests and parks in the middle of the city; the moody bars and cafes; the crazy mix of cultures, religions and people.Visiting Zurich recently, I was struck by just how boringly white the city was. In contrast, Brussels is colourful and quixotic. And proud to be so.Quite simply, this city is my world. I enjoy visiting other countries, other towns. But after wandering the globe, it’s Brussels that I call home. And it’s Brussels that welcomes me back with open arms and a warm embrace like no other city does.This is where I grew up, studied, married and had children. This is where I work. This is where I want to stay and grow older. This is where I belong.Truth be told, I am an accidental Belgian. It was a complicated and complex quirk of fate that brought me here with my father, mother and sister so many years ago.My family moved on, went to Japan and then back to Pakistan. But I have never looked back. When I came here almost four decades ago, I had no idea what this little country was all about or that I would love and cherish it so very much.Even now, who really knows Belgium? I have difficulty explaining where I am from to most people including taxi drivers in say, India, Singapore and Indonesia.It’s the country between France, Germany and the Netherlands, I tell them.  They look at me quizzically.  Really?   When I say Brussels, they hear “Brazil”. What language do you speak?Of course it’s complicated. Belgium is divided linguistically, culturally and on ethnic grounds. My Flemish friends hardly know my Francophone ones. People live in parallel universes. Contacts between the Flemish and the Francophones are still too few and far between.As illustrated recently, Belgium can go for months without a proper government. We have our regional and city authorities that keep working hard even as the national government presses the “pause” button.We pay our taxes, bring out the trash, drive badly - but most of the time, we play by the rules.As driven tragically home by the terror attacks, Brussels is also clearly home to many of Europe’s most disaffected and angry young Muslims.They live in communes such as infamous Molenbeek,  now referred to as the “jihadi capital of Europe”.  They become foreign fighters who join the so-called Islamic State. They then come back to Belgium and other European countries and wreak devastation.Certainly, too many Belgians of Moroccan extraction live on the margins of society, discriminated and angry, unhappy at school and unable to find jobs.Salah Abdeslam, a French national who grew up in Molenbeek, was the sole survivor of the group sent to gun down and bomb revellers in Paris. He fled back to Belgium and was finally caught last week. The tragic attacks on the airport and the metro station are believed to be in response to Abdeslam’s arrest.But that’s only part of the story. Moroccan Belgians are also successful entrepreneurs, politicians and artists. The city’s transport and health system is in their hands. They are in the police and in the army and in private firms which provide security for the EU and other organisations.As the days of mourning began, according to Rudi Vervoort, the minister-president of the Brussels-Capital region, the city showed “its true nature ... an exemplar of solidarity”, with a massive number of blood donations, taxis giving their services for free and people on social networks offering to open their homes to those in need.Belgian Prime Minister Charles Michel joined crowds gathered at the Place de la Bourse in Brussels to light a candle in memory of the victims of the terror attacks.A makeshift memorial popped up in the heart of the city, with messages of condolence, outrage and love by people from around the world written in chalk on the pavement where the lit candles were placed.Some among the crowd broke out into an impromptu rendition of Imagine by John Lennon. Others stood in sombre silence.Brussels has been a shadow of itself since last November’s terror attacks in neighbouring France which revealed strong connections between the Paris killers and terrorist networks in Belgium.Tourism is on the decline, cafes and restaurants stand empty. Businesses are shutting down.Brussels and its citizens are strong and resilient. But this week as we join the global struggle against evil, we are in pain and in mourning for a more innocent and carefree past which, we know, will never really come back.  

Islam in Europe: The twain shall meet

Aijaz Zaka Syed, a Gulf-based writer, writes on the well documented topic of Islam in Europe. As Shada Islam has covered the issue herself over the years and months leading to the publication of this article, it would be best to have the events and perceptions painted using the words of another writer for once.Fear stalks Europe's fortress. Perhaps seldom in the long history of the continent has it been afflicted by such overwhelming insecurity and paranoia. The scare of “Muslims are coming” dominates conversations everywhere. Images of refugees from Syria and other hot spots pouring into Europe abound. The breathless coverage of the “refugee crisis” by European media and scaremongering by politicians like Marie Le Pen doesn’t help.It is not just the extreme right that is raising the specter of Islamic invasion of the white, Christian continent. Mainstream parties like David Cameron’s Tories have been resorting to the same alarmist rhetoric against migrants both old and new. A new UK law threatens to deport thousands of immigrants who earn less than 35,000 pounds a year. It is this politics of paranoia and hate that has brought an unhinged bigot like Trump to the center-stage of US presidential elections. Terror attacks like those in Paris and the fear of homegrown extremists only add fuel to the raging debate and play into the hands of the Right, which has been steadily rising everywhere.The recent cover of Poland’s popular weekly WSieci, warning of the “Islamic Rape of Europe” perhaps best illustrates the paranoia. It is a graphic and racist depiction of a screaming blonde woman, with eyes closed, draped in the EU flag with three sets of brown and black hands clawing at the flag and her hair.This is but just one example of the extreme fear and loathing being whipped up across Europe. The WSieci cover story also attacks German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who has demonstrated rare humanity and moral courage by welcoming more than a million refugees last year, for “undermining European culture and civilization.”But is Europe really in danger of being swamped by the predominantly Muslim migrants?Jordan with a population of 8 million has provided refuge to 1.7 million Syrians. Turkey has been sheltering more than 3 million Syrian refugees. So if the EU with a population of more than 500 million people and a GDP of more than $27,000 faces the possibility of receiving a million or two war victims, it’s not the end of the world. By the way, as author Kenan Malik points out, a million refugees constitute less than 0.2 percent of the EU’s population. Besides, these are the people who have fled their countries in extremely trying circumstances. Thousands have perished in the Aegean and Mediterranean seas or overland in trying to reach to safety in what they hope is a better life for their loved ones. This is what people have done for thousands of years — migrate — when faced with danger and certain, perilous future. This is why the UN Charter mandates member states to provide refuge to all such people.More important, Europe has a moral and ethical responsibility to do its bit for these migrants considering this is a crisis largely created by the West. While the Arab Spring quickly toppled the regimes in Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, Syria has proved a tough nut to crack. If Assad has survived this long, at catastrophic cost to his people and country, the credit goes to Iran, their ally Hezbollah and Russia of course. This conflict has claimed at least 300,000 lives with nearly half of the country’s population now living in refugee camps in neighboring countries.Can you blame the Syrians if they are fleeing this veritable hell?What will it take for Europe and other world powers to recognize this and show some mercy and humanity to these desperate men, women and children who are fleeing persecution and in most cases certain death? After all, no one willingly abandons his/her home and land of ancestors.  And it’s about time Europe accepted Islam and Muslims as essential part of the continent. They are here to stay. Europe has been home to at least 50 million Muslims, who have enriched the European society in numerous ways. Indeed, Islam has been part of Europe for the past 1,200 years.Muslims arrived in the continent as early as 711 AD when they conquered Spain and created a society that remains a model of religious harmony. The Muslims ruled Spain for centuries in a period known as the Golden Age of Andalusia where Muslims, Christians and Jews co-existed in peace and created a great civilization that produced great art, architecture and scholarship. The expansion of Turkey’s Ottoman Empire marked the second phase of Islamic engagement with the continent, which saw millions of indigenous Europeans embrace Islam. The third phase of engagement came with the arrival of thousands of South Asian, Turkish and North African immigrants who provided cheap labor to countries like UK, Germany, France and Belgium.So it’s not as if this is the first time Europe is opening its doors to Muslims. Islam and the West have co-existed for more than a millennium and there is no need for conflict now. This is possible only when both sides tried to understand, engage and accept each other. Integration is a two-way street.  If instead of viewing Muslims through the lens of security, Europe sincerely try to accommodate them, as Germany, Canada and Greece have done, it would be in the interest of both.The majority of European Muslims are law-abiding citizens who pay taxes and share the same concerns, needs and experiences as non-Muslims, according to the Open Society Institute. And across Europe, immigrants are revitalizing impoverished urban neighborhoods, creating jobs and prompting innovation, reports the European Economic and Social Committee. As Shada Islam of Friends of Europe says, “Europe’s focus is on Muslims as terrorists, refugees, foreign fighters, criminals and misfits, but these represent a minuscule minority of European Muslims. Europe must conduct a sensible conversation on migrants and Islam. People must move from talking about “us” and “them” to a more inclusive language of living in a shared space, with shared concerns and interests.” As the experience of nations like America, Canada and Australia demonstrates, migrants are never a burden and only bring value, dynamism and diversity of experience to host societies.That said, Muslims cannot be found wanting in their efforts to become acceptable and valuable to host societies. They must do everything to integrate and adapt themselves to the values, concerns and sensitivities of their adopted countries. They mustn’t do anything that puts their faith in the dock. There is an opportunity in this crisis for both Muslims and Europe.