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.
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.
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.
No time to waste in crafting a new narrative for Europe
Post-Brexit Britain is changing fast as key Leave campaigners scurry off the stage, political parties start the tortuous process of selecting new leaders and ordinary citizens grapple with the myriad ramifications of the June 23 decision.
The Leave vote is also impacting on the European Union in many, complicated and yet-to-be identified, ways. The separation or divorce is going to be long and painful. There may even be a last-chance attempt at reconciliation.
Some things, however, look set to stay the same.
Britain’s historic decision to leave the EU has not changed European leaders’ chronic inability to respond to crises with grace and dignity. Britain’s political class has sullied its reputation even further while EU leaders have become entangled — once again — in power struggles and premature battles over the future of an EU of 27 states.
Brexit has not prompted much-needed soul-searching on the EU’s failure to connect, respond and interact with citizens, especially younger ones. And, sadly, as illustrated by the failure of the Remain campaign, it has not yet sparked a serious reflection on crafting a positive EU story for the 21st Century.
Old habits die hard. But now more than ever, if it is to thrive, flourish and exert influence in an increasingly cut-throat world, the EU urgently needs an inspirational new narrative in step with the changing times.
The truth is that Europe does have a convincing story to tell. But it has no one to tell it.
The massive pro-EU demonstration in London on July 2 is proof that Europe resonates and matters. It matters not just to the vocal segment of the 48 per cent of Britons who voted to stay in the EU but also to those who were misled by the lies and myths propagated by the Leave camp and are now having second thoughts.
It matters to young people who feel betrayed by an older generation which voted to withdraw from the EU — and to the others who may not have cast their ballot but now wish they had. It matters to ethnic minorities who face an unacceptable increase in racial and religious abuse in the wake of the referendum.
Most importantly, Europe matters to millions of other European voters who will be going to the polls in the coming months in France, Germany and elsewhere and who may be enticed into voting for Frexit or Nexit if referendums are called in France and the Netherlands by far right leaders Marine Le Pen and Geert Wilders, respectively.
Crafting a new EU story requires more than just countering the lies, misinformation and toxic myths being disseminated by far right and populist politicians. Relying on facts and figures to get the message across is important — but not enough. The success of the Leave campaigners shows that in the midst of fear and hate, facts don’t matter — until it is too late.
What counts are leaders with passion who can get others to listen to them and stay on message. Interestingly, rare but convincing and passionate calls for Remain were made in the last three days ahead of the UK referendum by Scottish Conservative Ruth Davidson and London Mayor Sadiq Khan in a televised debate with Leave’s leading campaigner Boris Johnson.
The EU story needs to be recounted by those who believe in what they are “selling” and know how to discuss, engage and connect with people. A European narrative disseminated half-heartedly as it was by many, including outgoing British Prime Minister David Cameron, just cannot do the trick.
Drafting a new EU narrative also requires a shift away from listening exclusively to the shrill clamour of the populists to also paying attention to the calmer voice and the aspirations of those Europeans who want — and are working to create — a more tolerant, open and inclusive Europe.
The pro-EU banners and placards carried at the recent massive rally in London should provide inspiration for writers of the new EU story. So should the actions of the many ordinary people, non-governmental organisations, businesses and mayors who are going out of their way in many parts of Europe to welcome refugees and migrants with food, shelter and jobs. Their stories are hardly ever told. And yet they — not just the far right that all politicians pander to — are also part of Europe’s “reality”.
Populists are certainly a threat to Europe’s values and to European democracy. But so are mainstream political parties which have embraced their message. The EU’s so-far fractious and incoherent response to Brexit is not going to endear it to citizens.
As it heads into uncharted waters, the EU needs to highlight what is good, constructive and positive about Europe. And it needs to do so with courage, conviction and self-confidence — and with leaders who show grace under fire. Nothing else will work.
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.
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?
Trade discord should not affect EU-China relations
EVERYONE loves a good trade war or at least a trade skirmish. As a reporter, I’ve written endlessly about quarrels between nations over imports and exports of textiles, footwear, bicycles, steel and other equally mundane products.
The battles are over tariffs (too high or too low), market access, quotas, subsidies, non-tariff barriers and other obstacles and restrictions. And they usually involve the European Union — after all I am based in Brussels and the EU is the world’s largest trader — and a motley group of nations including the United States, Japan, China, India, Pakistan and so on.
With global trade in goods running at around 18 trillion or so dollars a year, it is hardly surprising that nations sometimes rub each other the wrong way. Trade is important because it creates jobs, growth and development.
But confrontations over steel, textile and other products have a nasty way of infecting not just the conversation on trade between states but also their overall “beyond trade” relationship.
This is what may happen in the ongoing debate in the EU over granting market economy status (MES) to China.
The story goes back to 2001 when China joined the World Trade Organisation (WTO) and promised to liberalise trade and undertake a swathe of economic reforms. The deal was that China’s partners would continue to treat it as a “non-market economy” until December 2016 after which according to Beijing’s interpretation it would get full MES.
So what’s so important? If China is granted MES, the EU (and other WTO members) will find it more difficult to slap anti-dumping fines or duties on Chinese products believed to be sold in Europe at unfairly low prices.
China believes it should be granted MES automatically under WTO rules. The EU is split on the issue. And the discussion is further complicated by the global oversupply of steel and the recent increase in Chinese steel exports to Europe.
The European Commission is under pressure from many of its member states to step up action to relieve an ailing steel industry suffering from tumbling prices and cheap imports from China and Russia.
The EU is the second largest producer of steel in the world after China, producing over 177 million tonnes a year and accounting for 11 per cent of global output. But 85,000 jobs in the steel sector have been lost since 2008 representing over 20 per cent of the workforce. The EU also has some of the world’s highest energy costs and green taxes.
Disgruntled steel workers have poured on to the streets of Brussels demanding that the EU stop any moves to grant MES to China because it would worsen their fate. Alarmist studies warn that between 1.7 million and 3.5 million jobs would be lost if China gets MES. Washington is also adamant that Brussels should not meet China’s demands for MES access.
While Brussels deliberates over the matter, Beijing insists that the EU must not renege on its WTO obligation. Tempers are beginning to fray, raising concerns that the carefully-crafted overall EU-China relationship is being impacted.
That would be a pity. Total trade between China and the EU comes to almost one billion euros a day. Anti-dumping actions and the granting of MES only account for a small percentage of such trade. And in any case, granting MES to China would not prevent the EU from pursuing anti-dumping cases against China.
But trade quarrels have a way of becoming politicised and spiralling out of control. Which is exactly why both the EU and China need to think carefully about keeping their relations on track while resolving the MES issue.
It’s no secret that China has an over capacity in the steel sector of 400 million tonnes. Much of the surplus is exported to Europe, with 53 per cent increase of steel imports from China last year.
This has led EU Trade Minister Cecilia Malmstrom to warn that “whatever happens to the market economy status, China needs to behave responsibly and to make sure that its overproduction of steel isn’t dumped into the global market”.
According to some reports, the EU may give MES to China on the condition that Beijing reduces the amount of steel it exports to Europe. Other options could include the negotiation of a “package deal” under which China would agree to restrict its exports of steel and speed up negotiations on a bilateral investment treaty in exchange for an EU decision to grant MES and to undertake an exploratory study on an EU-China free trade agreement, a long-standing Chinese demand.
China has already made some conciliatory moves. In a letter sent to the EU, China’s Trade Minister Gao Hucheng has said Beijing is committed to decrease the steel output “by between 100 and 150 million tonnes”.
But the conversation continues. A decision on MES will likely be made by the EU towards the end of 2016. In addition to the European Commission, the European Parliament and national governments also need to give their approval.
It’s going to be complicated. Both sides need to tackle the issue carefully and cautiously. The focus must be on compromise and cool-headed deliberation.
It would be unfortunate if the carefully-crafted and multifaceted EU-China relationship were to suffer because of discord over trade.
Time to move ‘beyond trade’ in EU-India relations
INDIAN Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s visit to Brussels for the EU-India summit on March 30 is good news.
The EU and India have much to discuss. There are hopes that Modi will use the long-delayed meeting — India and the EU have not met for summit level talks for four years — to open a new, more dynamic and more adventurous chapter in EU-India relations.
As John Lennon sang to Yoko Ono so many moons ago, almost 12 years after the EU and India vowed to become strategic partners — but then allowed their relationship to stumble and falter — it’s just like starting over.
Or at least it could be. If they are to reboot ties, India and the EU need a new conversation, a new focus on shared interests as well as new goals and ambitions.
Above all, they need to take a fresh look at each other, replacing tired misperceptions and clichés with a different, more up-to-date outlook.
India, with a growth rate of 7.5 per cent according to the World Bank, now has a more dynamic economy than China. The EU for all its current malaise has an interest in exporting and investment more in India and has the technology India needs for its modernisation drive.
As an increasingly influential regional and global power, India needs to have a more serious conversation with the EU on refugees, peace and security in Asia, Africa and the Middle East. Terrorism and threat from the militant Islamic State group are also issues of common concern.
Opening a new chapter means moving to a “beyond trade” agenda. Realistically, however, the summit’s focus will inevitably be on the Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) or free trade agreement that Brussels and Delhi have been negotiating since 2007 with little success.
Negotiations on the deal stalled over a plethora of issues in 2013. If some of the key blockages can be removed in time by trade officials, the March 30 summit could mark the re-launch of the BTIA negotiations.
Such a scenario is certainly desirable. Trade and business are the glue that bind Europe to India and to other Asian states. Increased trade and investment flows will generate growth and jobs in both Europe and India. And resolving the trade stalemate will inject fresh momentum into the overall EU-India relationship.
But Brussels and Delhi need to be more ambitious. As illustrated by Modi’s high-profile visits to Britain, France and Germany, India has so far favoured its bilateral ties with national European governments over contacts with the EU. Meanwhile, Europe has spent more time and energy on building a strategy for China than on constructing a stronger relationship with India.
India’s new economic programme opens up fresh avenues for increased EU-India synergies which go beyond the two sides’ traditional interaction. This could include cooperation in areas where both sides have a strong economic interest such as infrastructure investments, sustainable urbanisation, renewable energy, innovation and synergies between “Digital India” and the EU’s agenda for a Digital Single Market.
The focus should now be on hammering out a more practical, pragmatic and operational agenda which seeks to find as much common ground as possible between Modi’s aspirational programmes and the EU’s initiatives to boost growth and jobs.
The EU is well-placed to share its experience in building a single market, economic reform and modernisation, cutting back over-regulation and improving the business environment.
A new EU-India action plan should be short, snappy and action-oriented, rather than the long “wish list” which the EU traditionally draws up with and for its partners.
Still, trade matters and it is important that the BTIA negotiations are re-opened and a deal is finally done.
The talks are like an obstacle race, however, with new problems emerging at every twist and turn. The latest bone of contention is over EU demands that India substantially bring down the “high” duties on automobiles as a pre-condition for resumption of the FTA negotiations. India’s import duty on cars range from 60-120pc as against the EU’s 10pc.
But the industry body for automobiles — Society of Indian Automobile Manufacturers (SIAM) — has asked the commerce ministry not to “buckle under pressure” from the EU, adding that this could ultimately hurt the government’s ‘Make In India’ initiative.
India is unhappy about restrictions on temporary movement of skilled professionals to the EU, especially the recent move by the United Kingdom to hike visa fees for skilled professionals as well as increase minimum salary threshold for intra-company transfers. India is also seeking data security status which it says is crucial for India’s IT sector to do more business with EU firms.
The EU, meanwhile, also wants lower Indian duties on wines and spirits and dairy products and a strong intellectual property regime. The value of EU-India trade grew from 28.6 billion euros in 2003 to 72.5bn euros in 2014 while EU investment stock in India was 34.7bn euros in 2013 and trade in commercial services quadrupled in the past decade, increasing from 5.2bn euros in 2002 to 23.7bn euros in 2013.
While such horse-trading is important and Modi and his EU counterparts must give the trade negotiations a much-needed push, the success of the summit will also hinge on a political agreement between Delhi and Brussels to start over.
View from abroad: In this dark world, who can still make us dream?
Back in 1963, Martin Luther King had a dream. His vision of empowered African Americans resonated across the world where millions believed in his message of equality and brotherhood, and his calls for an end to racism.
The struggle for the emancipation of black Americans was not easy. Many people died. King himself was assassinated. But eight years ago, Americans elected their first African American president.
Barack Obama spoke of hope and change. He also had a vision of an America at peace with itself and with the rest of the world.
How times and presidential election campaigns change. As Obama’s second term as president draws to an end, talk of dreams and hope have been replaced by poisonous messages of hate and fear.
These days, America’s would-be presidents don’t dream. They have nightmares. They spout ugly words and dark, morbid visions of an America overrun by immigrants, terrorists, Muslims and Mexicans.
Billionaire Donald Trump is of course “hate-monger in-chief”, his anger and loathing for those outside his circle appears to know no bounds. But he is not alone. Others in the US are propagating an equally toxic message.
And here in Europe the political landscape is just as grim. The one woman, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who did harbour a dream of a Europe willing to receive and accept people fleeing war and persecution, is in a minority of one in a European Union which counts 28 states.
Instead of being acclaimed as a courageous leader who lives by the values that so many in Europe profess to believe in — but clearly don’t want to practice — Merkel is derided as naive and irresponsible.
The German leader’s male colleagues have a different agenda. They are clamping down hard on refugees, building fences, reinforcing border controls. And they are joining Trump in disseminating a message of fear, intolerance and hate.
Even as hapless EU officials have warned governments not to take “unilateral actions”, last week Austria and the Balkan states made clear that they will go their own way.
Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have been among the staunchest opponents of EU plans to transfer asylum-seekers arriving in southern Europe to other EU states.
Austria last week announced a daily cap on the numbers of people allowed to apply for asylum or travel through to apply elsewhere, prompting some Balkan countries to introduce restrictions. As a result, migrants have been stranded in Greece, the main entry point into Europe.
There is angry talk by Greece and Italy of stopping funding for the countries who refuse to play the “solidarity” game by taking in refugees, but nobody is really listening.
Meanwhile, in France, a court has given the green light to plans to evacuate hundreds of migrants from the notorious “Jungle” camp in Calais. Worried that the migrants will cross the border, Belgium has decided to impose frontier checks, thereby giving another blow to the EU’s so-called Schengen agreement on the free movement of people.
Europe’s reaction to the refugee crisis is chaotic, inhumane and shocking. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi has warned, for instance, that border restrictions along the Balkan route go against international and European rules.
Europe’s tough-talking leaders have escaped media scrutiny for the moment. Most journalists have neither the time nor the inclination to investigate the reality of Europe’s migrant crisis.
But history will certainly pass harsh judgement on the policies and actions of the European, especially Eastern European, leaders.
And what about Britain? As continental Europe frets over refugees, British politicians are in the grip of a strange self-inflicted wound known as the “Brexit” debate over membership of the EU.
Having secured a “deal” earlier this week with his EU colleagues on renegotiating the terms of Britain’s EU membership, British Prime Minister David Cameron’s hopes of winning the June 23 referendum for his “stay in Europe” campaign were shattered when the quirky but very popular Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, threw his ample weight behind the “exiters”.
With any expectations of a sane conversation in Britain now also buried, people can put aside any hopes of a change in Europe’s politics of fear.
So is there anyone else out there who can make us dream again? Russia’s Vladimir Putin has his cabal of admirers but does not inspire hope among anyone else.
Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may have caught the world’s imagination a decade ago but is now discredited as just another authoritarian leader who has lost touch with reality.
China’s President Xi Jinping is too busy grappling with his country’s “new normal” economic slowdown to pay attention to global challenges.
For all the talk of India’s rise, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is no global leader. Neither is Indonesia’s President Jokowi or Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Iran and Saudi leaders are busy adding to the world’s problems by fighting each other through proxies in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.
Which brings us nicely to Canada. Justin Trudeau certainly stands tall as a man of principle, compassion and humanity. While his counterparts in other countries deafen us with their rabid rants, and European and US politicians paint the world in black, the young Canadian leader is proof of the power of dreams.
View from abroad: The Balkans’ macabre race to be tough on refugees
Western Balkan nations are back in the news. This time, unlike in the 1990s, the headlines are not about war, conflict and massacres in the region but about the thousands of refugees from Syria, Iraq and Afghanistan trekking up north from Turkey, through the Balkans, to reach Germany and other western European countries.
It used to be the dangerous sea routes that were in the news as refugees fled civil wars, deprivation and more to seek shelter on Europe’s southern shores. The focus has now shifted to the Balkan land route and the efforts of the region’s governments to stem or even stop this flow.
It’s difficult to keep a “harshness towards refugees ranking” of the different states in the region. And frankly, it is also difficult to keep track of just which country is sealing the routes, building fences, imposing quotas and the like. Directly or indirectly, they all seem to be doing something nasty.
It’s a macabre race to be the toughest kid on the block. But perhaps the toughest are the so-called “Visegrad Four”, composed of the Czech Republic, Poland, Hungary and Slovakia, which have made no secret of their loathing for the refugees and are clamouring with increasing insistence for border closures between Greece and the Balkan states, especially Macedonia.
While they may be grumbling about the crisis, at a conference organised in Brussels last week, many of the regions’ top policymakers were also underlining that the inflow of refugees through the region illustrated the importance of the Balkans to the rest of Europe.
The sentiment was shared by Johannes Hahn, the EU Commissioner for the neighbourhood and enlargement policy. Western Balkan countries can turn the migrant crisis to their advantage given their importance as transit zones, the EU’s enlargement chief said.
“I believe this crisis has opened the window in the way that much more people, politicians, are looking to the western Balkans,” he said, adding: “There is a better understanding among European leaders that the western Balkans are already surrounded by EU member states, and it is quite clear at a certain moment that they should also join the family.”
Joining the “family” is not going to be that easy, however. For all their insistence that they are part of Europe, the truth is that beyond geography, the conduct, values and policies followed by many countries in the region put them firmly outside the European mainstream.
The Balkan states may have found friends among the EU’s “new” member states — Poland, Hungary, Slovakia — whose own belief systems are increasingly un-European, but many in western Europe are appalled by their behaviour. Still, the Balkans’ reputation got a fillip last week when Bosnia Herzegovina formally applied for EU membership, joining Serbia, Macedonia, Albania and Montenegro which are also in the queue to join the EU.
There was much cheer and self-congratulation of course with officials pointing out that even as the EU lurches from crisis to crisis, it’s “power of attraction” for outsiders remains untarnished.
But much as they would wish otherwise, the western Balkan states are years away from being ready to join the EU.
And having learned from the premature entry of Bulgaria and Romania, the EU is in no rush to open its arms to the region.
In fact, one of the first things that EU Commission chief Jean-Claude Juncker did on taking over in 2014 was to decree a five-year standstill on any further EU enlargement.
And even as they accepted Bosnia’s application, EU officials were warning that the country — and the region — needed to carry out a series of reforms.
Let’s not forget that the war in Bosnia in the 1990s, part of the break-up of Yugoslavia, killed some 100,000 people. The country remains split along ethnic lines and is still economically impoverished.
The Dutch foreign minister, Bert Koenders, speaking on behalf of the EU’s Dutch Presidency, has warned that Bosnia’s application would only be considered after “meaningful progress in the implementation of the reform agenda is achieved”, meaning Sarajevo would not be given candidate status for now.
It’s not just Bosnia that has problems, however. As John O’Brennan of Maynooth University wrote recently, “Twenty years ago, the Dayton Agreement was meant to definitively settle the ‘Balkan Question’, but today the region remains politically explosive, an economic basket case and a substantial security risk for the EU.”
Critics warn that corruption is rife across the region, there are major deficits as regards the rule of law, economic growth is low and foreign investors are hesitant about moving in.
The message from the EU is that the western Balkans “must integrate to integrate”, meaning they must first build their own cross-border links before joining the EU. But regional integration is weak and unconvincing, with the region’s politicians admitting that there is much work ahead if countries are to move from being “enemies to neighbours”.
In a glaring example of a dismal lack of regional cooperation, many Balkan countries are putting up their own national candidates for the job of the next United Nations Secretary General.
When asked why they could not throw their weight behind one candidate, the response from one Balkans official was honest: “That’s a step too far for now. We are not there yet.”
Europe - China forum 2015: Video
Trade and business have long been the backbone of EU-China relations. But as both Europe and China expand their regional and global presence, there are an increasing number of areas where EU-China cooperation and consultation have become a compelling necessity. Building on successful efforts to work together in anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, Beijing and Brussels are interested in further developing their security and defence cooperation.
China’s economic transformation continues to intrigue and mesmerise – and create immense business opportunities – for a closely-watching world. The coming decade promises to be even more transformative as China shifts the focus to sustainable, green, high-quality growth, the development of the service sector and speeds up efforts to build a digital economy. China's start-up scene is abuzz with new products, new ideas and new investments. With access to some 640 million Chinese netizens, including 530 million mobile internet users, China now boasts a new class of internet companies which are creating their own business models, becoming increasingly innovative and extending their outreach in rural as well as in urban areas.
[embed]https://vimeo.com/112476744[/embed]
In part 1, Friends of Europe Secretary General, Giles Merritt, moderates the discussion. The panel includes Shada Islam, Director of Policy at Friends of Europe; Chi Fulin, President of the China Institute for Reform and Development (CIRD); Linda Corugedo Steneberg, Principal Adviser at the European Commission Directorate General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CONNECT); Luigi Gambardella, President of China-EU; Jeongmin Seong, Senior Fellow at the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) and co-author of the MGI report: “China’s digital transformation: The Internet’s impact on productivity and growth”;and Guo Wei, Chairman and Executive Director of Digital China
The disussion focusing on what are the key challenges facing “Digital China”? How do China’s ambitions fit in with Europe’s own efforts to create a more competitive “Digital Europe”? What is the significance of China’s “Internet Plus” plan and 5G cooperation between the EU and China? Does China’s service-led economic transformation create new opportunities for EU-China innovation cooperation? What new investment opportunities will be opening up in China’s services sector in areas such as transport, communications, finance and health care?
[embed]https://vimeo.com/112487949[/embed]
In part 2, the panel discuss strengthening connections: “One Belt, One Road”, trade and investments. President Xi Jinping’s plans for the Silk Road Economic Belt and a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (termed together “One Belt, One Road”) aimed at building two economic corridors with important development implications for many nations. China has set aside 40 billion dollars for the Silk Road Fund and another 100 billion dollars are being invested in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).
How will Europe benefit from the construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt? What is the potential for synergies between the Chinese and European infrastructure and connectivity policies? Which sectors are likely to benefit most from such cooperation? What will be the role of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in financing the “One Belt, One Road” initiative? Can the EU and China work together to build and improve the decision-making and governance mechanisms of the AIIB? How are negotiations proceeding on an EU-China Bilateral Investment Treaty? How will the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) impact on China? Could the successful negotiation of the investment accord pave the way for talks on an EU-China free trade agreement?
Introductory remarks are made by Lv Fengding, Vice President of the China Public Diplomacy Association (CPDA) and Former Chinese Ambassador to Sweden. Speakers in part to include Jo Leinen, Chair of the European Parliament Delegation for Relations with the People’s Republic of China; Mario Esteban, Senior Analyst at the Real Instituto Elcano; Yonghui Li, President of the International Relations Institute, Beijing Foreign Studies University; Haiyan Zhang, Director of NEOMA Confucius Institute for Business at the NEOMA Business School and Professor of Asia/China Business Strategy and Management at Antwerp Management School; André Loesekrug-Pietri, Founder & Managing Partner, A CAPITAL, Finance committee board member, Friends of Europe and Liqin He / General Manager of Bank of China (Luxembourg), S.A. Brussels Branch.
View from abroad: Xi’s visit to Britain: it’s also about the EU (Originally published 24/10/2015 at Dawn.com)
President Xi Jinping’s recent trip to the United States grabbed global headlines. By going to Britain, the Chinese leader has sent an equally important signal of his interests and determination in deepening and expanding China’s ties with Britain — but also with Europe.Beijing and Washington certainly need to talk to each other on a range of bilateral and international issues. And the Sino-American agreements reached on cybersecurity and climate change will help ease relations between the world’s two leading political and economic actors.But President Xi and Prime Minister Li Keqiang’s many visits to Brussels, Paris and Berlin this year — and now Xi’s high-profile trip to Britain — underline that China and Europe have also made a strategic choice to further develop and expand relations.China’s focus on Europe and on Britain is important for several reasons. Tackling challenges in a multipolar and multi-complex world requires more than cooperation between China and the US. It also demands working in tandem with the European Union and its 28 member states.Britain, given its global role and influence is, of course, especially important. President Xi’s visit, including his high-level meetings, underline to a watching world — and to the rest of Europe — that China still views Britain as a key international player.Significantly, Xi’s visit follows a trip to China by UK Chancellor George Osborne last month, during which he said Britain should be China’s “best partner in the West”.It’s not just Britain that wants closer ties with China, however. Germany remains a strong contender for the title of Beijing’s ‘best friend’ in Europe. And more generally while relations between China and individual EU states are important, ties with the EU are also improving, with the launch of the connectivity platform and the agreement to cooperate on developing 5G networks.Europe certainly has the markets China needs for its exports — and trade is still booming. European expertise and know-how is critically important to help meet China’s urbanisation, climate, innovation and other developmental challenges. Most recently, there is a focus on synergies between the ‘One Belt, One Road’ project and Europe’s own investment blueprint for transport, digital and technology networks. Britain and British companies have a key role to play in such cooperation, both on a bilateral level but also through the EU.True, the EU’s many recent crises have eroded much of its lustre. Last year has been especially difficult as EU leaders have grappled with continuing troubles in the Eurozone, struggled to tackle the influx of refugees fleeing war and conflict in Syria and Africa while also dealing with longer-term problems of low growth and high unemployment.For the next few months, the focus in London, Brussels and in other EU capitals will be on Britain and the country’s upcoming referendum on its membership of the EU.The EU is hoping that Britain will opt to stay in. And while no EU leader would say so in public, many are clearly hoping that President Xi gives a clear but subtle message to British citizens to vote in favour of EU membership. As such, it is especially significant that the Chinese president has met leaders of the opposition parties and parliamentary leaders.But that’s not the only reason that the EU kept a close watch on President Xi’s speeches and meetings in Britain. China-watchers in Brussels and elsewhere in the EU wanted to learn more about the state of the Chinese economy after the market volatility over the summer and what to expect as China’s development priorities in the upcoming 13th Five-Year Plan.Meanwhile, Xi’s speech in London provided further insight into China’s hopes for the internationalisation of the renminbi and also information on China’s priorities as it prepares to take over as chair of the G20.Certainly as in other EU capitals, the focus was on business, with Britain looking for Chinese investments in key projects such as a high speed rail line in the north of the country and a deal on Chinese investments in the Hinkley Point C nuclear plant. The UK is now China’s largest investment destination country in Europe.More investment opportunities for Chinese companies opened up in the railway, energy, aviation and telecommunications industries. Significantly, leading the way for other European countries, Britain joined the Chinese-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), despite opposition from Washington, earlier this year. Within the EU, Britain’s opinion is important as the EU and China negotiate their Bilateral Investment Treaty and will be even more important if and when the two sides start discussions on a Free Trade Agreement.There used to be a time not so long ago when China’s friendships with individual EU member states were viewed with suspicion by Brussels. This was especially the case as regards China’s ‘special relationship’ with Germany and the burgeoning ties between Beijing and the Central and Eastern European states. Fortunately, such unease is now mostly over, with many policymakers agreeing that stronger bilateral ties between China and the individual EU member states — including Britain — help to consolidate and deepen the wider EU-China relationship.
VIEW FROM ABROAD: Turkey and EU (Originally published 10/10/2015 at Dawn.com)
Crises can result in strange bedfellows. Having criticised Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan for his “authoritarian” ways, European Union leaders are now turning to the Turkish leader to help ease the unprecedented influx of refugees on to EU territory.As EU Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker told the European Parliament in Strasbourg: “In the refugee crisis, Turkey and the EU walk together and work together.”Not surprisingly Erdogan is making the most of it. The Turkish president has not endeared himself to democrats and human rights activists at home or abroad with his clampdown on the media, arrest of opponents, the crackdown on civil society protests, lavish spending on his official residence and other actions, including targeting of Syrian Kurdish strongholds.Relations between the EU and Turkey have been on the backburner for several years as the 28-nation bloc has fretted and sweated at the rollback of reforms in a country which is a candidate to join the EU.EU membership negotiations have been put on hold. Turkey has sulked, saying its interests lie to its east, not the west.The EU has raged against Ankara’s disregard for European values. Relations are still strained. But both Turkey and the EU are more vulnerable than in the past.Ankara’s dreams and ambitions of becoming an indispensable regional player have been destroyed by Syrian President Bashar Al Assad’s refusal to listen to Turkey. As a result, Erdogan’s influence in the region is not as potent as it was a few years ago.Europe’s many vulnerabilities are common knowledge. Even as Germany under Chancellor Angela Merkel has opened the borders to refugees from Syria, the sudden and massive arrival of hundreds of thousands of asylum seekers has eroded public and political support for the move.And so to the negotiating table where Erdogan and the EU engage in horse-trading over the fate of refugees from Syria and other countries in conflict even as they try to put their own relations back on track.According to media reports, the Europeans are offering eventually to take half a million Syrians from new refugee and asylum-processing camps they would co-fund in Turkey in return for Ankara tightening its borders to stop people being smuggled in hazardous vessels to Greece, and agreeing to take back migrants who make it “illegally” to Europe via Turkey.As part of any possible pact, Erdogan is asking for a relaxation in visa requirements for Turks travelling to Europe. He also wants the EU to list Turkey as “a safe third country”, effectively whitewashing Ankara’s increasingly repressive policies and deteriorating human rights and media freedoms record.“Europe has to manage its borders better. We expect Turkey to do the same,” said Donald Tusk, the president of the European council, following talks with Erdogan. “The situation where hundreds of thousands are fleeing to the European Union from Turkey must be stopped.”Erdogan responded that Ankara was hosting almost 10 times as many Syrian refugees as the EU. While open to talks with Brussels, he said the key to stopping the flow of refugees was to establish a no-fly zone over the Turkish-Syria border and a buffer zone in northern Syria.This is viewed as a non-starter in Europe and in Washington, but Tusk said: “The European Union is ready to take up all issues with Turkey so we can also discuss a possible buffer zone in Syria.”Turkey is home to two million Syrian refugees and is the source of most of the influx into Europe of recent months. A pact with Turkey is now seen as the key to the effort to turn chaos into control.The aim is to have the Turks and the Greeks mount joint border controls at sea, organised by Frontex, the EU’s borders agency and that intercepted boat people be turned back to Turkey.Meanwhile, in an unusual joint appeal, Merkel and French President Francois Hollande have urged European politicians to pull together amid multiple crises in a bid to heal EU divisions caused by the influx of refugees, debt crises and encroaching nationalist sentiment.In separate addresses to the European Parliament in Strasbourg last week, both leaders underlined the risks now besetting the EU’s 28 nations.“The debate is not about less Europe or more Europe,” Mr Hollande told politicians, evoking the question of national sovereignty besetting member nations. “It is about the affirmation of Europe or the end of Europe. Yes, the end of Europe.”Chancellor Merkel, who has come forward as the champion of refugees flowing into Europe, said overcoming the refugee crisis together is a key challenge for the European Union.“It is precisely now,” she said, “that we need more Europe ... If we overcome that, we will be stronger after the crisis than before.”It was the first such joint appearance in Strasbourg since 1989, when West German chancellor Helmut Kohl and French president Francois Mitterrand spoke days after the fall of the Berlin Wall.“In the refugee crisis we must not succumb to the temptation of falling back into acting in nationalistic terms,” said Ms Merkel, standing next to French President Hollande, adding: “National solo efforts are no solution to the refugee crisis.”Significantly even as the two EU leaders were speaking in Strasbourg, the EU’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, announced that a combined EU naval mission known as EU Navfor Med will now be able “to board, search and seize vessels in international waters, [after which] suspected smugglers and traffickers will be transferred to the Italian judicial authorities”.Yes, Europe is confused, overwhelmed and uncertain about what to do next. President Erdogan, in contrast, knows exactly what he wants: respect and recognition from a Europe that has too often disregarded Turkey as an important ally. And, ultimately, Turkish membership of the 28-nation European Union.
Europeans eager to trade, do business with Iran (Originally published 18/07/2015 at Dawn.com)
Suddenly last week, after weeks of acrimony, arguments and threats, the dark clouds over the European Union appeared to clear slightly.
Shada Islam quoted in ‘Greek Deal Makes Europe More German. But at What Cost?’ (Bloomberg 13/07/2015)
Europe’s deal with Greece was variously denounced as blackmail, an attack on national sovereignty and an end to the European dream. The accord’s detractors could at least agree on one thing: the chief culprit was Angela Merkel.Having held sway in the unequal struggle with Alexis Tsipras over the terms of a third bailout, Merkel has ensured that the 19-nation euro area remains a club whose members abide by the rules or are shown the door. The question is what toll that stance has taken on her reputation and the extent of the damage to the international standing of Germany and Europe.Shada Islam, director of policy at the Friends of Europe advisory group in Brussels, said that months of EU acrimony since Tsipras’s election in January as Greek premier at the head of an anti-austerity coalition has tarnished the bloc in the eyes of both its own citizens and globally.“They reached a deal on Greece but at a huge cost,” Islam said by phone. “Merkel tried to play the middle ground but Schaeuble will be seen by some critics as the true villain of this piece.”Both Merkel and Schaeuble have become hate figures in Greece, where comparisons with the World War II occupation by Nazi forces have become commonplace. In Germany, members of Merkel’s coalition have competed for outrage against a backdrop of the constant drumbeat of calls by the best-selling Bild newspaper for Greece to be ejected from the euro.For the full article, visit:http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2015-07-13/greek-deal-makes-europe-more-german-but-at-what-cost-
View from Abroad: Europe and the new world order (Originally published 11/07/2015 at dawn.com)
Entangled in the Greek debt crisis, few European policymakers had the time or interest this week to pay attention to the summit talks in the Russian city of Ufa between the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS).True, Europe has its hands full with Greece and the looming possibility of a Greek exit from the Eurozone. But the world doesn’t stop for Europe. And pretending that the BRICS and their self-confident leaders don’t matter — or matter little — is not an option.Discussions about the rapidly-transforming world, the role and influence of the BRICS and Europe’s relations with the emerging powers appear to be off the European Union agenda. For now, the focus is rightly on the existential threat posed by Grexit, the acrimony the Greek crisis has triggered across the EU and the worsening relationship among Eurozone leaders.Solving the Greek problem should of course take priority. But Europeans know that more is at stake. Italy’s Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has so far been most vocal in signalling his fears that the fury unleashed by the difficulties in Greece is damaging the very existence of the EU. But this thought is also in many other minds. If Europe can’t get its house in order, it really does run the risk of becoming irrelevant on an increasingly crowded global stage.For the moment, most Europeans seem to fall into two categories: those who fear the rapidly-changing world order and the increasingly long list of nations clamouring for a stronger role on the world stage and those who hope that if they look the other way, firm up their bonds with the United States, the world won’t change too much and the BRICS will gradually fade away.There are some, wiser, people in the middle: they may not be enthusiastic about the changes being made to the global status quo; but they also know that times are changing fast and that Europe needs to adapt, adjust and accommodate.It was on the advice of such people that despite strong pressure from the US not to do so, several EU countries decided to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) set up by China.While many Europeans voice fear that China is “buying up” European assets, cooler heads are urging the EU to join forces with China’s ambitious ‘One Belt, One Road’ transport networks to boost domestic growth and jobs.Similar arguments for and against cooperating with emerging nations are likely to come to the fore as Europeans discuss membership of the New Development Bank (NDB) being set up by the BRICS to fund projects in member countries.Headquartered in Shanghai, the bank is expected to be operational by end of 2015. Once fully operational, it will become an alternative financing source for the BRICS nations and other emerging markets.Like the head of the AIIB, the first chief of the BRICS bank, India’s K. V. Kamath has been quoted as saying that the NDB sees other multilateral lending institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB) as partners rather than rivals.And yet many continue to be suspicious. The US and Japan have not yet joined the AIIB and many EU policymakers continue to voice fears that the new banks will fall short of high Western standards of transparency and accountability.The BRICS have made clear that they don’t really care. The Old Guard is welcome to come on board, but the world is moving on and they won’t stop for the laggards.Russia, given its tense relations with the West following the crisis in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea, has taken the toughest line in its dealing with Europe and America. As Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov underlined in Ufa, emerging nations represent a “new polycentric system of international relations” and demonstrate new global centres of power.As he shook hands with his Chinese, Indian, South African and Brazilian counterparts, a beaming Russian President Vladimir Putin made clear that he was far from the sad and isolated man that the West wants him to be.And it’s not just about the BRICS. An array of newly-empowered nations and groupings are challenging Europe and America’s dominance of the post World War II order. Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey and Australia are part of MIKTA which claims to act as a bridge between old and new powers.New Zealand says it is the champion of “small nations” without whose support nothing can be achieved on the global stage. The Group of 20 remains relevant as a forum which brings together industrialised and emerging countries.And then there is also the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) which EU and Nato policymakers also tend to shrug off as an impotent “paper tiger”.They shouldn’t. As India and Pakistan set out on the road to membership of the SCO, it is clear that while the security organisation does not see itself as a rival to Nato, it does intend to make its voice heard on global security challenges.Underlining just how significantly the world has changed, the five BRICS countries and the six SCO members which include China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan — joined by India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Mongolia which have observer status — held a joint summit in Ufa.The Greek crisis was on the BRICS agenda of course. While Europe may not like the new world out there, emerging nations know that in an interconnected and interdependent world, what happens in Europe affects them. And that a failed Europe is in nobody’s interest.
Greek crisis endangers Europe’s heart and soul (Originally published 04/07/2015 at dawn.com)
This column is not about the Greek Eurozone crisis. How could it be — what more would I or indeed anyone — be able to add to the reams and reams of stuff that has already been written, rewritten, said and resaid about the topic?The facts are well known: Greeks will vote on July 5 in a snap referendum that Prime Minister Alexis Tsipras says will give the country’s long-suffering people the final say on whether he should accept the tough terms of a cash-for-austerity deal from creditors at the European Union, the European Central Bank and the International Monetary Fund.Tsipras wants Greeks to say no, apparently arguing that creditors are bluffing and will not take the catastrophic step of ejecting Greece from the club of 19 nations that use the euro currency.The creditors say they’re ready to push the nuclear button. Enough is enough. Throwing Greece out of the Eurozone won’t matter that much. It’s a small economy, the impact will be limited. Eighteen countries will still be in the Eurozone. Life will go on.Of course it will. Life always goes on. After wars, earthquakes, tsunamis and suicide bombings, life goes on. People come out of the crisis, pull up their socks, get back to work.But think about it: life is never really the same ever again.So, Grexit won’t bring Europe to its knees. The Eurozone will not unravel, neither will the European Union. The other eighteen countries of the Eurozone will soldier on even if Greece exits the currency bloc.Also worth noting: even if it does leave the Eurozone, Greece will still be a member of the 28-nation EU.But let’s make no mistake: If Greece is ejected from the Eurozone, it will — even further — destroy the heart and soul of this continent.In fact, the soul of Europe is already half-destroyed. This protracted crisis is taking its toll on Europe’s self-image, self-confidence, its links with ordinary Europeans and its role and influence on the global stage.Born in Asia, grown up in Europe, I have always admired my adopted continent for its ability to put past animosities behind, to work together for the common good, to make sure war never erupts again in our lifetime and beyond.I love the variety and the diversity of Europe, the freedom to travel, work and live in any of the 28 countries, the freedom to say and do what I like, without raised eyebrows or reproachful, critical glances.But Europe is changing. The last 70 years since the end of World War II have been peaceful — but the EU showed its feet of clay during the devastating and blood-soaked Balkan conflict.Tolerance and human rights are universal values but Europe has been their most determined defender. And yet as thousands of hapless refugees arrive on its shores, Europe is showing an indifference which beggars belief.As the Far Right narrative of hatred and racism becomes ever shriller, the voices calling for peace and calm are drowned out. No politician has the courage to say that Europe needs immigration and desperately needs foreign skills and talent.The debate over Greece has polarised Europe, splitting it in half. Those in favour of austerity argue that Greece spends too much, doesn’t save enough money and doesn’t tax its rich people as much as it should.They want Athens to cut spending, slash pensions and increase taxes.Others argue equally powerfully that a country in recession cannot be punished even further and that what Greece needs above all is a fiscal stimulus to get back growth and create some desperately-needed jobs.Greek Prime Minister Tsipras and his Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis have been engaged in a seemingly un-ending battle of wills with their Eurozone colleagues for months.I have lost count of the number of marathon discussion sessions held so far, the constant tweeting by the key players and the false dawns that a deal was just around the corner.But something strange appears to have transpired over the last few days. Initial sympathy for the Athens duo appears to be fading, with more and more insiders warning that Tsipras and Varoufakis have lost the plot.German Chancellor Angela Merkel, whose nation has lent more to Greece than any other in the European Union, is often seen as the architect of Greek austerity. But some of the countries that are now coming down hardest on Greece are the smaller, poorer Eurozone nations that have accepted the bitter pills of austerity and say the Greeks should do so as well.As the debate grinds on in Brussels, Athens and other capitals, it would be heartening to know that the interest of the Greek people was top of the EU and the Eurozone agenda.It isn’t. Europe, which was once about the people, the citizens, the demos, is now transformed into an argument about money. It’s about austerity versus growth.My question is: how will Greece ever get back on track — ever start growing again — without the support, involvement and contribution of its people?
View from Abroad: Can’t live with EU — can’t live without EU (Originally published 30/05/2015 at dawn.com)
The European Union is gearing up for another bout of prolonged, agonising and internal soul-searching.Reflection on Europe’s future, its identity and role in a rapidly changing world is certainly necessary. But the European landscape has become increasingly complicated, making it imperative that even as it ponders over its future, the EU deals with the many crises on its borders — and beyond.Also, at a time when unity is a compelling necessity, many of the 28 EU countries often appear to be headed in different and often contradictory directions.Take a look: Cameron calls for ‘flexible and imaginative’ EU reformsThere is no denying that triggered by demands by Britain’s newly re-elected Prime Minister David Cameron for an across the board overhaul of key EU priorities, the bloc looks set to enter another period of deep introspection on its future direction, main concerns and general raison d’etre.Britain will hold a referendum — probably next year — on whether it should remain in the EU. But London is not alone in envisaging a withdrawal from the Union.There is also dangerous talk of a Greek exit from the Eurozone as Athens struggles to meet its massive financial obligations vis-à-vis its international lenders.Meanwhile, Poland has elected a conservative new president, Andrzej Duda, while Spain seems to have voted in the opposite — leftist — direction in recent regional elections.In addition, the European economy remains mired in stagnation. Jobs remain scarce across the bloc while the debate on immigration and reception of refugees becomes ever more toxic and complex.Ironically, even as Europeans wring their hands in despair over their many interrelated problems, countries outside the bloc can’t wait to get in.Ukraine, Moldova and Georgia have joined the long list of countries which want a so-called “road map” leading up to membership of the EU.They are not going to get any such thing. At a meeting in Riga last week, the EU made clear that while it wanted closer relations with the three countries — and despite the growing influence of Russia in the region — EU membership was not on the cards.Also in Europe, the leaders of six Western Balkan countries have told the EU that they are becoming impatient with their long wait to join the bloc and needed EU funds to keep up reforms.The prime ministers of Serbia, Montenegro, Macedonia, Bosnia, Kosovo and Albania, all hoping to join the bloc, have said their cooperation should be rewarded with projects like new road and rail links.Slovenia and Croatia are the only countries in the region to have joined the EU. The others have lagged behind because of conflicts with neighbours after the break-up of Yugoslavia and a failure to achieve reform.And then there is Turkey which is still waiting on the sidelines, anxious to become an EU member but unlikely to become one any time in the future.For the moment, all eyes are on Britain and Prime Minister Cameron’s calls for a renegotiation of the EU’s Treaty of Lisbon, the latest version of its constitution.Many EU countries are sympathetic to Britain’s demands for an overhaul of the EU — but do not want another long, difficult and complicated treaty negotiation.Details of what Britain really wants are still deliberately sketchy. But, some salient demands stand out.First, Cameron wants Britain to opt out from the EU ambition to forge an “ever closer union” of the peoples of Europe.He wants to restrict access to the British labour market of EU migrants.And he would like to free business from red tape and “excessive interference” from Brussels and providing access to new markets through “turbo charging” free trade deals with America and AsiaFinally, he says Britain would resist any move towards a European army and has ruled out Britain joining the euro.Controversially, Cameron has said that while British, Irish and Commonwealth citizens over 18 who are resident in the UK will be eligible to vote, nationals from other EU countries residing in the UK will not.Very few EU leaders would like Britain to leave the bloc. Britain’s membership of the EU is good for both Britain and other European states.But many in Brussels and other EU capitals are becoming increasingly frustrated with the tone and content of the toxic British debate on Europe.As a result, many are warning that Britain may have to leave in order to ensure the survival of the EU.The prospect of a Greek exit from the Eurozone is equally problematic, with many worried of the repercussions of such a move on the credibility of the single currency.Still, while things may look very complicated for those inside the EU, membership of the club remains a goal for many of the EU’s neighbours. As Turkey has learned, however, getting a seat at the EU table is not easy. It requires hard work, time and effort — and a great deal of patience.