Just watched the prime ministers and presidents arrive for the EU top job summit in Brussels. Most of them passed the pack of journalists without giving interviews. Those who did did not say much.
Former Commissioner Grybauskaite who is now Lithuanian president said that she is not a candidate. Balkenende from the Netherlands told that the (formal?) nomination would only be on the 1st of December. And the Irish prime minister Cowen told that their candidate John Brutton was still available if there was a consensus around the table.
Most noticeable was the Swedish prime minister Reinfeldt who stood at the entrance of the Council for an hour, greeting the European political high society with handshakes. Some halted for a minute to discuss with him, most just stopped for a photo. Reinfeldt look really nervous and uncomfortable, and he seem tired, too. I think that this might have been the worst week of his political life, and it might be the worst night, too.
At 18:01 he left his place in the lobby to climb up to the European Council meeting in the form of a dinner. The night could be long, and we are waiting for the results to come late.
We may expect surprises, but I am not sure whether they will be positive or negative... (I will stay up all night if necessary.)
Thursday, 19 November 2009
The Dinner
What are the Heads of State and Government having for dinner tonight?
Fish & Chips and Pasta?
Pīrags & Sautéed reindeer?
A mix of French fries from Place Jourdan & Central London?
Or maybe just some blowfish, and the two Heads of State and Government surviving decide on their own?
If you know the menu, you know everything...!
PS.: Did I forget any dishes?
Fish & Chips and Pasta?
Pīrags & Sautéed reindeer?
A mix of French fries from Place Jourdan & Central London?
Or maybe just some blowfish, and the two Heads of State and Government surviving decide on their own?
If you know the menu, you know everything...!
PS.: Did I forget any dishes?
Wednesday, 18 November 2009
Euroblogs in the "New Europe" weekly newspaper
I just wanted to use the opportunity to thank the editors of "New Europe" for printing euroblog articles in their weekly newspaper and for linking them on their front page.
I had the pleasure to appear twice over the last two weeks (see page 22 of the issues 559 & 560), first with my post "10 steps to becoming a Euroblogger" and this week with last Friday's article "A European Blog Action against a Commission without gender balance" that became reality quicker than I expected with the campaign for a "Gender Balanced Commission". But it is as much a pleasure to find my own texts published as it is to read the texts of other bloggers, seeing our content distributed in a new way and incorporated into editorial content.
What I particularly like with the blog section in New Europe is that it connects the world of blogging with the readers of classical newspapers, that it brings our texts from the widths of the net into the limited space of physical paper.
They, the editors, still keep their editorial control, they make the choices they would like to make for their readers, but we, the bloggers, do not have to change our style or rhythm, we don't have to follow editorial rules: They like it, they take it - if not, it's still online in our blogs...
I appreciate this a lot, and I can only commend the New Europe team for taking this step to link from the "real world" to us, the euroblogosphere - a different kind of hyperlink story.
I had the pleasure to appear twice over the last two weeks (see page 22 of the issues 559 & 560), first with my post "10 steps to becoming a Euroblogger" and this week with last Friday's article "A European Blog Action against a Commission without gender balance" that became reality quicker than I expected with the campaign for a "Gender Balanced Commission". But it is as much a pleasure to find my own texts published as it is to read the texts of other bloggers, seeing our content distributed in a new way and incorporated into editorial content.
What I particularly like with the blog section in New Europe is that it connects the world of blogging with the readers of classical newspapers, that it brings our texts from the widths of the net into the limited space of physical paper.
They, the editors, still keep their editorial control, they make the choices they would like to make for their readers, but we, the bloggers, do not have to change our style or rhythm, we don't have to follow editorial rules: They like it, they take it - if not, it's still online in our blogs...
I appreciate this a lot, and I can only commend the New Europe team for taking this step to link from the "real world" to us, the euroblogosphere - a different kind of hyperlink story.
We won't be silent!
It's the final countdown: Tomorrow - or aftertomorrow - we will know whom our lowly skilled and unmotivated national leaders have chosen to be their handymen on the European level.
The one will have to play the role of the Secretary of the European Council, the other will represent the lowest common denominator of what the bosses think about the EU's foreign relations, and we might thus have to call him Low Representative.
Together with Barroso they will form the Troika of Death and Boredom, and Jerzy Buzek (European Parliament President) will smile, lower his head and ask the assembly to approve anything these three men do.
And they will tell us that this is what we need. They will inform us about what they have decided after they have decided. And they will hope that we agree or that we don't care.
But if the choices made tomorrow are bad, we won't be silent, and if we don't agree, we won't be silent. And we will let them know, not just on Friday or Saturday or Sunday, but every day of their term.
We will let them and their bosses know what we think of them, and they will realise that the Union of the Lisbon Treaty cannot be "politics as usual" because we will finally have clear targets - and we will learn to hit!
The one will have to play the role of the Secretary of the European Council, the other will represent the lowest common denominator of what the bosses think about the EU's foreign relations, and we might thus have to call him Low Representative.
Together with Barroso they will form the Troika of Death and Boredom, and Jerzy Buzek (European Parliament President) will smile, lower his head and ask the assembly to approve anything these three men do.
And they will tell us that this is what we need. They will inform us about what they have decided after they have decided. And they will hope that we agree or that we don't care.
But if the choices made tomorrow are bad, we won't be silent, and if we don't agree, we won't be silent. And we will let them know, not just on Friday or Saturday or Sunday, but every day of their term.
We will let them and their bosses know what we think of them, and they will realise that the Union of the Lisbon Treaty cannot be "politics as usual" because we will finally have clear targets - and we will learn to hit!
Tuesday, 17 November 2009
Gender balance & "Females in Front"
We finally get to a point where this issue is not just something for the "feminists", we are arriving at the point where even national news start to recogise the topic (right now it's on the top of the front webpage of the Austrian newspaper "Die Presse" and the campaign is mentioned by El Pais).
I am really glad seeing this, in particular since the issue of gender balance has been one of the guiding lines of this blog. I just looked back and found that my fourth post ever, 1 1/2 years ago, was on "Females in Front", an initiative that demanded that at least one of the three top EU posts would be for a woman and that has almost 200,000 signatories by now.
In two or three days we will know whether this initiative had any success, whether following up was worth the time, or whether the political and social struggle will have to continue - maybe through a rejection of the proposed Commission college in the near future.
On thing is clear for me:
We - men and women - need to stick to this matter, we need to keep it on the agenda until the moment when European leaders will recognise that gender balance as a policy issue has left the back rooms and has become a priority issue for more than just the hard core, an issue strong enough for a campaign like this and strong enough for the European Parliament to act decisively...
Monday, 16 November 2009
Campaign For A Gender-Balanced Commission
On Friday, I called for a European Blog Action in case the next Commission would not be gender-balanced.
Over the weekend, Jon Worth, together with others, has set up a campaign for a gender-balanced Commission, that I am thus supporting with great pleasure.
As usual, Jon doesn't just talk, he acts.
And since we are not just fighting for an abstract number of women in the next Commission, you will also find a list of possible candidates from all 27 member states on the website - and feel free to propose more qualified but politically realistic women candidates. The more we have, the easier it will be to address MEPs and national governments on this issue.
Please go to the website and sign the petition - and let's thus not wait until it is too late to get a new European Commission with at least one more woman than last time!
Saturday, 14 November 2009
Will the High Representative come into office against the Lisbon Treaty rules?
Next week, the European Council will meet informally over a lunch, and the heads of state and government will decide over the two remaining top EU post, the European Council President and the High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy - but it looks as if the latter will be coming into office against the rules.
Grahnlaw quotes a press release of the the Finnish government
This is especially not possible since it would be the old Commission that was formed under the Nice Treaty into which the person would be "nominated". The Nice Treaty doesn't even foresee the High Representative in the future format, so how can s/he enter into the old Commission while already being nominated according to Lisbon rules?
Legally s/he will probably "just" be part of the old Commission. Practically this means that s/he can shape her/his office before the new college will start its work, s/he will be the de facto Foreign Minister in a weak caretaker Commission and s/he won't be confirmed by the EP as all other Commissioners before. The person will thus lack the legitimacy foreseen in the old Treaty for Commissioners as well as the legality of the Lisbon Treaty.
This sounds to me like the Heads of State and Governments are trying to create a fait accompli:
By illegitimately (almost illegally) putting the person into her/his office before a Parliament vote, the governments put pressure on the EP so that it can't vote against the Commission later this year when the de facto Foreign Minister has already shaped her/his office and when the governments could argue that it would be "damaging" to remove the person from office after several months.
Grahnlaw quotes a press release of the the Finnish government
The Swedish Presidency has announced that the High Representative will become a member of the Commission immediately after his/her appointment and the current Commissioner of his/her nationality will step down from the office.This looks like the European Council wants to act against the Lisbon Treaty where it is clearly written in Article 17 para 7 (on the election of the Commission):
The President, the High Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy and the other members of the Commission shall be subject as a body to a vote of consent by the European Parliament. On the basis of this consent the Commission shall be appointed by the European Council, acting by a qualified majority.Since the Parliament's vote shall happen before the European Council formally nominates the Commission, I don't see how it is possible that the High Representative can enter into office right after her/his nomination next Thursday.
This is especially not possible since it would be the old Commission that was formed under the Nice Treaty into which the person would be "nominated". The Nice Treaty doesn't even foresee the High Representative in the future format, so how can s/he enter into the old Commission while already being nominated according to Lisbon rules?
Legally s/he will probably "just" be part of the old Commission. Practically this means that s/he can shape her/his office before the new college will start its work, s/he will be the de facto Foreign Minister in a weak caretaker Commission and s/he won't be confirmed by the EP as all other Commissioners before. The person will thus lack the legitimacy foreseen in the old Treaty for Commissioners as well as the legality of the Lisbon Treaty.
This sounds to me like the Heads of State and Governments are trying to create a fait accompli:
By illegitimately (almost illegally) putting the person into her/his office before a Parliament vote, the governments put pressure on the EP so that it can't vote against the Commission later this year when the de facto Foreign Minister has already shaped her/his office and when the governments could argue that it would be "damaging" to remove the person from office after several months.
Friday, 13 November 2009
A European Blog Action against a Commission without gender balance (UPDATED)
UPDATE: This post has become reality with the Campaign For A Gender Balanced Commission!
Dear fellow bloggers,
in case Barroso proposes a Commission with less women than in the last one, we should call for a European Blog Action addressing as many MEPs as possible asking to reject the proposed Commission.
This is not just about gender balance within the college, this is about the credibility of EU policies in promoting gender equality and anti-discrimination in general. This matter is thus also about the credibility of the EU as a whole, and the former is as important to me as the latter.
We could already start with this European Blog Action as soon as it would be clear that non of the top posts - Commission President, European Council President, and "Foreign Minister" (the High Representative) - would be a woman, since rejecting the Commission also means rejecting the High Representative.
Anyone ready to join?
Julien
PS.: This post is encouraged by the latest bad news in the media, but also by this interview Macarena did with Commissioner Wallström.
Thursday, 12 November 2009
Blogging and the legal mess before and after Lisbon: ECJ, ECtHR, and Protocol 14bis
The beauty of blogging does not lie in the superficial debates on topics of obvious urgency but in the minor but messy issues that are irrelevant to most and thus for the mainstream media (making them even less relevant for most).
Although the former is necessary in the EU case because of the obvious lack of relevant public debates, taking a look at minor issues and debating them often seems to make up the real added value of using social media to advance one's understanding of the world.
Like the following:
When I recently wrote about the foreseen accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), I highlighted the legal provisions set by the Lisbon Treaty and the fact that I expect a long bargaining process before the EU accessing the ECHR will become reality.
I didn't write about more details, thinking that this would be enough for the moment.
Yet, a few days later, the Adjucating Europe blog raised questions on the same issue, probably almost unnoticed because this was in an article on a specific case at the European Court of Justice (ECJ):
Still, it is not clear to us how their relation will be in the future and how the ECtHR might even use the Charta on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (as part of EU law) for its judgements once the EU as an institution joined the ECHR.
And then, yesterday, the ECHR blog took a look at the matter, and while at first sight it just seems to quote a press release of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the post closes with a hint to the debate around the ratification of Protocol 14 to the ECHR.
This Protocol was developed to reform the overburdened ECtHR, which adjudicates on human rights in 47 countries on the whole European continent, but since Russia has signed it but refuses to ratify, it hasn't entered into force yet (which is why it has been replaced ad interim by the so-called Protocol 14bis).
Why is this relevant? Because Protocol 14 to the ECHR also adds a little sentence to the ECHR that reads: "The European Union may accede to this Convention."
What does this mean? It means that even Russia is now an integral part of the debate.
From the 1st of December, the EU, through the Lisbon Treaty, will have the right (and duty) to join the ECHR, but a Protocol that makes this possible legally on the ECHR side is not ratified by Russia that is afraid that this Protocol could make the Human Rights Court more effective and thus would show even more how ignorant Russia is when it comes to human rights.
Kind of complex matter isn't it? Any journalists writing about that mess? Would be glad to see that. But for now, it's just in the blogs.
Oh, and speaking of journalists and blogs in this matter, one could even point to other stories, like the one where the European Court of Human Rights is confused with the EU's European Court of Justice by journalists, which happens quite frequently (see these recent posts by bitmorecomplicated, The European Citizen and Jon Worth) - but that would be to much, wouldn't it?
Although the former is necessary in the EU case because of the obvious lack of relevant public debates, taking a look at minor issues and debating them often seems to make up the real added value of using social media to advance one's understanding of the world.
Like the following:
When I recently wrote about the foreseen accession of the EU to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), I highlighted the legal provisions set by the Lisbon Treaty and the fact that I expect a long bargaining process before the EU accessing the ECHR will become reality.
I didn't write about more details, thinking that this would be enough for the moment.
Yet, a few days later, the Adjucating Europe blog raised questions on the same issue, probably almost unnoticed because this was in an article on a specific case at the European Court of Justice (ECJ):
"This accession – if done in hurry – might lead to an unprecedented mess. A mature reflection is in fact needed.More interesting than these questions is the short discussion in the comments to that post in which we learn that not only is the European Court of Justice already referring to judgements of the European Court of Human Rights (the ECtHR in Strasbourg oversees the ECHR), but that even the Strasbourg court has already been using ECJ jurisprudence for his own judgements.
What would be the exact scope of the Strasbourg Court’s competence? I am curious to see how the Strasbourg Court will deal with increasing litigations involving EU citizens’ rights, residence rights or provisions of the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights not explicitly enshrined within the ECHR?"
Still, it is not clear to us how their relation will be in the future and how the ECtHR might even use the Charta on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms (as part of EU law) for its judgements once the EU as an institution joined the ECHR.
And then, yesterday, the ECHR blog took a look at the matter, and while at first sight it just seems to quote a press release of the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe (PACE), the post closes with a hint to the debate around the ratification of Protocol 14 to the ECHR.
This Protocol was developed to reform the overburdened ECtHR, which adjudicates on human rights in 47 countries on the whole European continent, but since Russia has signed it but refuses to ratify, it hasn't entered into force yet (which is why it has been replaced ad interim by the so-called Protocol 14bis).
Why is this relevant? Because Protocol 14 to the ECHR also adds a little sentence to the ECHR that reads: "The European Union may accede to this Convention."
What does this mean? It means that even Russia is now an integral part of the debate.
From the 1st of December, the EU, through the Lisbon Treaty, will have the right (and duty) to join the ECHR, but a Protocol that makes this possible legally on the ECHR side is not ratified by Russia that is afraid that this Protocol could make the Human Rights Court more effective and thus would show even more how ignorant Russia is when it comes to human rights.
Kind of complex matter isn't it? Any journalists writing about that mess? Would be glad to see that. But for now, it's just in the blogs.
Oh, and speaking of journalists and blogs in this matter, one could even point to other stories, like the one where the European Court of Human Rights is confused with the EU's European Court of Justice by journalists, which happens quite frequently (see these recent posts by bitmorecomplicated, The European Citizen and Jon Worth) - but that would be to much, wouldn't it?
Wednesday, 11 November 2009
Central Europe Activ on the new Hungarian Commissioner
Germany has nominated a very odd candidate for the next European Commission, but now Dániel from the Central Europe Activ blog reports about the coming Hungarian Commissioner Laszlo Andor - and the article doesn't paint the most promising picture:
"Mr Andor’s is a non-executive member of EBRD, Europe’s development bank. He was ejected to this position when his small circle of far-far left intellectuals in a far-far left periodical called Eszmélet (Consciousness) stood behind the most right-wing pragmatist later prime minister and party chief, Mr Gyurcsány [...]I recommend reading the full article - it's a first hand account of somebody on which very few people might actually have knowledge!
He was a kind of a politician, every bending the truth, also a gentle man, a guy who liked to play soccer with the students, who had strange friends ‘in the movement’ in Western Europe. He was never elected to any other position, never ran for office and never took a job in any branches of the government of his country." (via Jon on Twitter)
Monday, 9 November 2009
Europe in blogs - Euroblogs (10): Fall of the Wall Special
Today is clearly a historic day, and the blogosphere and the euroblogs use the opportunity to look back in time, into their own lives, into global moments, into politics and art.
L'Europe en Blogs is just murmuring about the event, and strappato is glad that at least once in his life he was at the right place at the right time.
A Fistful of Europe focuses on the immediate effects, while the New Europe Blog prefers the special effects of films.
The 9th of November reminds Matthias Fekl of his childhood in Berlin, and Shiraz Socialist is reciting a poem on the "Good Town".
More poetry comes from The Lobby with the text of the song “Over de Muur” from 1984, while Carl Bildt is remembering less poetic politics from the time before the wall fell.
Georgia Gotev compares the American 9/11 and the European 9/11 as days where everyone old enough to remembers knows exactly what he or she was doing on either day - and EUonym clearly remembers that she was at Frankfurt in November 1989.
Still looking to 1989, Gavin Hewitt is remembering the time together with Angela Merkel, and European Union Law is remembering communism in general.
Codexpolitic.us takes a much deeper look into the past and reminds us of Kennedy's speech in Berlin in 1963, while the Hauptstadblog sees the changes Germany went though over the last 20 years from different perspectives.
Others have arrived in 2009, and so for Andreas Bock the Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change has to be as important as the 1989 events, while for EU Referendum 2009 is already a failure because the Lisbon Treaty set up new walls.
And although there are probably hundreds of more posts on the subject today, let's just close with the call at Le Taurillon - "EUROPE, tear down this wall" - and then let's tear down all walls that still exist here and elsewhere on the planet!
L'Europe en Blogs is just murmuring about the event, and strappato is glad that at least once in his life he was at the right place at the right time.
A Fistful of Europe focuses on the immediate effects, while the New Europe Blog prefers the special effects of films.
The 9th of November reminds Matthias Fekl of his childhood in Berlin, and Shiraz Socialist is reciting a poem on the "Good Town".
More poetry comes from The Lobby with the text of the song “Over de Muur” from 1984, while Carl Bildt is remembering less poetic politics from the time before the wall fell.
Georgia Gotev compares the American 9/11 and the European 9/11 as days where everyone old enough to remembers knows exactly what he or she was doing on either day - and EUonym clearly remembers that she was at Frankfurt in November 1989.
Still looking to 1989, Gavin Hewitt is remembering the time together with Angela Merkel, and European Union Law is remembering communism in general.
Codexpolitic.us takes a much deeper look into the past and reminds us of Kennedy's speech in Berlin in 1963, while the Hauptstadblog sees the changes Germany went though over the last 20 years from different perspectives.
Others have arrived in 2009, and so for Andreas Bock the Copenhagen Summit on Climate Change has to be as important as the 1989 events, while for EU Referendum 2009 is already a failure because the Lisbon Treaty set up new walls.
And although there are probably hundreds of more posts on the subject today, let's just close with the call at Le Taurillon - "EUROPE, tear down this wall" - and then let's tear down all walls that still exist here and elsewhere on the planet!
Sunday, 8 November 2009
Erika Steinbach, leave us alone!
Erika Steinbach is the head of the German Federation for Expellees, and for years she is ruining German relations to our Polish neighbours.
Her confrontative course regarding the representation of interests of Germans (and their children) who were expelled from what would become Poland at the end and after World War II is a disgrace for us Germans who are working for a united Europe with where nobody needs to be afraid of neighbouring countries.
Steinbach has now repeated her claim that she wants to sit in the Board of the new Polish-German Foundation for Expellees that will try to retrace the fate of expellees at the end of World War II, in a way that doesn't put the emphasis on blaming each other or bringing up the idea of restitution but that focuses on the tragic stories in order to allow a proper culture of remembrance.
Yet, somebody like Steinbach who is not interested in good relations but in confrontation is embarrassing, and I can only hope that our new government will manage to keep her out of the new foundation in order to show to our Polish neighbours that in the European Union of the 21st century we Germans don't support those who live in the past but that we look ahead and look forward in expanding good relation to Poland - something foreign minister Westerwelle has made clear when he spent his first visit in office to Poland.
I am glad that although Erika Steinbach is often presented in Poland as the voice of Germans, she doesn't have much room in our own media - and I hope that our government will make clear that she would be the wrong choice for the new foundation and against the whole idea of the creating such an organisation!
Her confrontative course regarding the representation of interests of Germans (and their children) who were expelled from what would become Poland at the end and after World War II is a disgrace for us Germans who are working for a united Europe with where nobody needs to be afraid of neighbouring countries.
Steinbach has now repeated her claim that she wants to sit in the Board of the new Polish-German Foundation for Expellees that will try to retrace the fate of expellees at the end of World War II, in a way that doesn't put the emphasis on blaming each other or bringing up the idea of restitution but that focuses on the tragic stories in order to allow a proper culture of remembrance.
Yet, somebody like Steinbach who is not interested in good relations but in confrontation is embarrassing, and I can only hope that our new government will manage to keep her out of the new foundation in order to show to our Polish neighbours that in the European Union of the 21st century we Germans don't support those who live in the past but that we look ahead and look forward in expanding good relation to Poland - something foreign minister Westerwelle has made clear when he spent his first visit in office to Poland.
I am glad that although Erika Steinbach is often presented in Poland as the voice of Germans, she doesn't have much room in our own media - and I hope that our government will make clear that she would be the wrong choice for the new foundation and against the whole idea of the creating such an organisation!
Blogging & the EU
Some think blogging is about fame. Some think blogging is about influence. Some think blogging is just about the blogger. Some have misunderstood blogging.
Some think the EU is about economic power. Some think the EU is about global influence. Some think the EU is just about the EU. Some have misunderstood the EU.
Others think blogging is about sharing arguments. Others think blogging is about working together on topics of common interest. Others think blogging is about crossing boundaries and about overcoming stereotypes.
Some might understand.
Some think the EU is about economic power. Some think the EU is about global influence. Some think the EU is just about the EU. Some have misunderstood the EU.
Others think blogging is about sharing arguments. Others think blogging is about working together on topics of common interest. Others think blogging is about crossing boundaries and about overcoming stereotypes.
Some might understand.
Saturday, 7 November 2009
A critique of "Women's Political Representation in the European Union" by Johanna Kantola
Those of you who follow this blog and my tweets know how much importance I put in women's representation in EU institutions - the latest article on Tarja Halonen or an earlier post on the gender gap in the Commission staff are just two examples.
So with interest I noticed the recent issue (December 2009) of the "Journal of Legislative Studies" and in particular the article "Women's Political Representation in the European Union" by Johanna Kantola.
I was hoping for new insights that go beyond the obvious - women are underrepresented both in the member states and in the EU institutions - something that explains more in detail the dynamics that keep women out of the relevant EU jobs.
But the article is about nothing but the obvious: It mostly presents already existing descriptive statistics, it summarises some of the existing scientific literature on why women are underrepresented in political institutions and it lists some possible reasons why one might be interested in changing this.
This article has no added value in a debate, its just telling what we all already know. It doesn't explain anything, it strings together figures that aren't really new, just newly assembled. And it doesn't even have the intent to do more:
It should have answered why, despite the impression that there is pressure for more women candidates, in the end there are no women brought forward at the crucial stages of selection processes (like Milliband and Van Rompuy now looking to be the only two real candidates for EU "Foreign Minister" and European Council President).
A scientific analyses would be of added value if it could show why women who are official or unofficial candidates for some time disappear from the shortlists later on. Is it because in complex political and regional balances of posts the male majority is not able to fit in qualified women candidates or is it because they think the women candidates are not qualified? Is it because women in power - apart from Margot Wallström - don't support women candidates or because women candidates are never presented by man?
Kantola even takes a short look at women's representation in COREPER I and II, but finding out that women are underrepresented there just tells us that there are probably too few women climbing up to the top diplomatic ranks. By knowing this we haven't learnt anything about the mechanisms that lead to this imbalance. So why aren't women in the upper diplomatic ranks or, if they are there, why aren't they promoted to COREPER I or COREPER II?
What are the real mechanisms? How do they differ between the different institutional settings? Can the same institutional design lead to different representation of women in EU institutions? Do positive dynamics in one member state influence the dynamics in a second member state through personal relations developed in the Council? So many questions, so few answers given by fellow political scientists. Nothing about real mechanisms, just numbers and wild guesses.
This would be my pleading:
Social scientists, political scientists, students of feminist and gender studies, tell us more about the real mechanisms, show in comparative perspective how one could advance gender balance within EU institutions, reprocess unlikely success stories and stories where likely female candidates are dropped. Because those of us in favour of gender balanced power distribution need to know where to "attack", which small or large wheels we need to turn, which level of the hierarchy we need to go to to get the results we want.
But writing descriptive articles about known facts - no matter if the data is presented as "new" - doesn't help at all, it just lowers the interest in the subject, and the next time I will see at title like "Women's Political Representation in the European Union" I might think twice before spending time reading it.
So with interest I noticed the recent issue (December 2009) of the "Journal of Legislative Studies" and in particular the article "Women's Political Representation in the European Union" by Johanna Kantola.
I was hoping for new insights that go beyond the obvious - women are underrepresented both in the member states and in the EU institutions - something that explains more in detail the dynamics that keep women out of the relevant EU jobs.
But the article is about nothing but the obvious: It mostly presents already existing descriptive statistics, it summarises some of the existing scientific literature on why women are underrepresented in political institutions and it lists some possible reasons why one might be interested in changing this.
This article has no added value in a debate, its just telling what we all already know. It doesn't explain anything, it strings together figures that aren't really new, just newly assembled. And it doesn't even have the intent to do more:
"The contributions of the article are empirical and consist of an account of the EU policy on gender-balanced decision-making and numerical presentation of new data on women in political decision-making in different EU institutions."Looking at where we are in the debates today - bloggers and Twitterers lobbying for women in top EU jobs while Barroso asks governments to nominate women Commissioners - this article sounds light-years behind.
It should have answered why, despite the impression that there is pressure for more women candidates, in the end there are no women brought forward at the crucial stages of selection processes (like Milliband and Van Rompuy now looking to be the only two real candidates for EU "Foreign Minister" and European Council President).
A scientific analyses would be of added value if it could show why women who are official or unofficial candidates for some time disappear from the shortlists later on. Is it because in complex political and regional balances of posts the male majority is not able to fit in qualified women candidates or is it because they think the women candidates are not qualified? Is it because women in power - apart from Margot Wallström - don't support women candidates or because women candidates are never presented by man?
Kantola even takes a short look at women's representation in COREPER I and II, but finding out that women are underrepresented there just tells us that there are probably too few women climbing up to the top diplomatic ranks. By knowing this we haven't learnt anything about the mechanisms that lead to this imbalance. So why aren't women in the upper diplomatic ranks or, if they are there, why aren't they promoted to COREPER I or COREPER II?
What are the real mechanisms? How do they differ between the different institutional settings? Can the same institutional design lead to different representation of women in EU institutions? Do positive dynamics in one member state influence the dynamics in a second member state through personal relations developed in the Council? So many questions, so few answers given by fellow political scientists. Nothing about real mechanisms, just numbers and wild guesses.
This would be my pleading:
Social scientists, political scientists, students of feminist and gender studies, tell us more about the real mechanisms, show in comparative perspective how one could advance gender balance within EU institutions, reprocess unlikely success stories and stories where likely female candidates are dropped. Because those of us in favour of gender balanced power distribution need to know where to "attack", which small or large wheels we need to turn, which level of the hierarchy we need to go to to get the results we want.
But writing descriptive articles about known facts - no matter if the data is presented as "new" - doesn't help at all, it just lowers the interest in the subject, and the next time I will see at title like "Women's Political Representation in the European Union" I might think twice before spending time reading it.
Friday, 6 November 2009
The EU's accession to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR): Waiting for controversies...
Follow-ups to this article: here, here & here.
With the Lisbon Treaty entering into force next month, one particular issue that has been part of legal and political discussions for years will become pertinent: The EU's accession to the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR).
All EU member states have ratified the Convention and most have also signed and ratified the additional protocols to the convention (including the protection of property rights and free elections [Protocol 1] or the prohibition of the death penalty under all circumstances).
The rights guaranteed by the ECHR are supervised by the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) in Strasbourg. Since through its member states the legal traditions of the ECHR are also informally part of the EU's legal traditions, the European Court of Justice (the EU's court) is already taking into account rulings of the European Court of Human Rights, but so far there is no legal obligation for the Union to follow the Human Rights Convention's provisions.
However, now that the Lisbon Treaty will enter into force, the EU is getting legal personality and is thus able to join international agreements outside the scope of the former European Community, including the ECHR.
And, for those who did not have time yet to read the Lisbon Treaty, the document explicitly foresees that the EU will join the European Convention on Human Rights (which might mean that the EU institutions will be subject to rulings of the non-EU ECtHR). It deals with this matter in Article 6 of the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and in the Article 218 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU) as well as in the Protocol 8 and the Declaration 2 to the Lisbon Treaty.
In short, these provisions foresee that the EU shall in fact join the ECHR, but only after the EU and the member states have agreed on how the EU's legal and practical relations with the different control bodies of the convention will be and after it is clear how one will differentiate between law suits against the EU and those that would go against a member state (which could become difficult when it comes to the execution of EU law in the member states).
In the end, the Council needs to decide unanimously on the accession to the ECHR, and all member states will have to agree individually according to their constitutional provisions.
Although this is now clearly prescribed by the Lisbon Treaty, this is still going to be a very difficult legal and political process, not least seeing the debates around the Charta on Fundamental Rights and Freedoms in some member states or the latest "outrage" in Italy against the Crucifix judgement by the ECtHR.
And so even though the Council of Europe - the international organisation built around the European Convention on Human Rights - is already starting to pressure on the EU start its accession procedures, this could take some time until the EU has ruled out all complex legal and practical problems related to this accession.
Therefore, I expect the process to be quite controversial already between the EU member states and EU institutions (including its legal services), but also between the EU and the Council of Europe (including the other 20 signatory states to the European Convention on Human Rights) - and the result will probably be an unprecedented case of legal interdependencies between two different supranational regimes.
Wednesday, 4 November 2009
10 steps to becoming a Euroblogger
Some time ago, I have already given an answer on why I blog, but I think there might be some interest in knowing how to actually become a Euroblogger - in 10 steps, because anything can be done in 10 steps.
1. You need to become crazy.
If you are not crazy yet, start reading the consolidated Lisbon Treaty from the first to the large page. If you finished reading and you are still not crazy, please apply for a job in one of the EU institutions.
2. You need to make the first and most important choice.
If you finished reading the Lisbon Treaty, you think it is crap and you don't like the EU because of that, you need to call yourself a "eurosceptic". If you think it is crap and you still like the EU you are now called "federalist". As a Euroblogger you will belong in one of the two categories, and officially there is nothing in between.
3. You need a good name.
If you are lucky, you already have a good name or nickname that is easy to remember. If not, invent something. And since you are crazy, don't hesitate to think of really strange animals when choosing your nickname.
4. You need to write a first post.
It doesn't matter what you write, just use "Europe" and "EU" several times, first in the title and then in the text. Since normal bloggers don't use these terms you will be clearly identified as a Euroblogger. Be aware that from now on you are an outcast in the general blogosphere.
5. You need to get the attention of other eurobloggers.
The easiest way is to start at bloggingportal.eu. Go to every post that appears there and comment on anything you read. Eurobloggers don't get many comments, so they are glad about anyone coming their blogs. By commenting, you are telling them that there is at least one person interested, and they will thankfully go to your site, see that you used "Europe" and "EU" in your first post and add your RSS-feed to their feed readers.
6. You need to write a second post.
Since you are now recognised as a euroblogger by the community, you need to show your web 2.0 competence. So write anything that combines "EU" and "2.0", "Twitter" and a Youtube video. Since 95% of eurobloggers organise their life around new communication tools, you will now be seen as a euroblogger who is also a tech geek - which means that you are now formally part of the club.
7. You need to get a Twitter account.
You cannot write a euroblog without using Twitter these days. If you don't have one yet, get one. Follow all the eurobloggers who will also follow you. Then find one MEP from your country on Twitter and retweet every second message s/he writes. Then discuss with other Eurobloggers on Twitter the added value of Twitter for European democracy. Retweet most of what the others are saying. Then address the MEP with an @-message and ask what s/he thinks about the latest Barroso press conference. If s/he doesn't react, write a blog post about how European politicians have not understood the idea of Web 2.0.
8. You need to comment on an important European event.
The added value of euroblogs is that they comment on important European events, i.e. those events that even the national media notice. Having an opinion on these events and writing excessively long posts on EU-related topics everyone understands will finally bring 20 readers (from the US) via Google. So wait until an important referendum, European elections, or a huge corruption scandal and then voice your anger in your blog. Since all eurobloggers write about it, you will be quoted at least twice, bringing 20 more readers (from Brussels) to your blog.
9. You need to write on Twitter that you wrote a blog post about an important event.
If you don't write about your blog posts on Twitter, you show that you don't think you are important enough. So tell your followers that you have blogged. You will start realising that from now on you don't only care how many people read your blog post but how many of the other eurobloggers retweet your tweet on your blog post. Over the next 60 minutes, you will get 10 extra readers on your blog and two new Twitter followers (one of them will be called Mary Lu and her last tweet links to a porn site).
10. You need to repeat steps 4-9 for three months.
If you don't get frustrated by self-referential and repeating discussions with a small number of like-minded people, if you don't get fed up with boring sources, and if you can draw your motivation to blog out the same 10 people commenting your posts all the time for more than three months, you will be an established euroblogger. After six more months, you will get a comment from an EU Commissioner and some people will start calling you "guru". You will know that this is becoming crazy - and then you realise that this is how everything started (see step 1).
And yes, one day, when you get bored by just being a Euroblogger, you can still organise an anti-religion campaign that becomes news all around the earth...
1. You need to become crazy.
If you are not crazy yet, start reading the consolidated Lisbon Treaty from the first to the large page. If you finished reading and you are still not crazy, please apply for a job in one of the EU institutions.
2. You need to make the first and most important choice.
If you finished reading the Lisbon Treaty, you think it is crap and you don't like the EU because of that, you need to call yourself a "eurosceptic". If you think it is crap and you still like the EU you are now called "federalist". As a Euroblogger you will belong in one of the two categories, and officially there is nothing in between.
3. You need a good name.
If you are lucky, you already have a good name or nickname that is easy to remember. If not, invent something. And since you are crazy, don't hesitate to think of really strange animals when choosing your nickname.
4. You need to write a first post.
It doesn't matter what you write, just use "Europe" and "EU" several times, first in the title and then in the text. Since normal bloggers don't use these terms you will be clearly identified as a Euroblogger. Be aware that from now on you are an outcast in the general blogosphere.
5. You need to get the attention of other eurobloggers.
The easiest way is to start at bloggingportal.eu. Go to every post that appears there and comment on anything you read. Eurobloggers don't get many comments, so they are glad about anyone coming their blogs. By commenting, you are telling them that there is at least one person interested, and they will thankfully go to your site, see that you used "Europe" and "EU" in your first post and add your RSS-feed to their feed readers.
6. You need to write a second post.
Since you are now recognised as a euroblogger by the community, you need to show your web 2.0 competence. So write anything that combines "EU" and "2.0", "Twitter" and a Youtube video. Since 95% of eurobloggers organise their life around new communication tools, you will now be seen as a euroblogger who is also a tech geek - which means that you are now formally part of the club.
7. You need to get a Twitter account.
You cannot write a euroblog without using Twitter these days. If you don't have one yet, get one. Follow all the eurobloggers who will also follow you. Then find one MEP from your country on Twitter and retweet every second message s/he writes. Then discuss with other Eurobloggers on Twitter the added value of Twitter for European democracy. Retweet most of what the others are saying. Then address the MEP with an @-message and ask what s/he thinks about the latest Barroso press conference. If s/he doesn't react, write a blog post about how European politicians have not understood the idea of Web 2.0.
8. You need to comment on an important European event.
The added value of euroblogs is that they comment on important European events, i.e. those events that even the national media notice. Having an opinion on these events and writing excessively long posts on EU-related topics everyone understands will finally bring 20 readers (from the US) via Google. So wait until an important referendum, European elections, or a huge corruption scandal and then voice your anger in your blog. Since all eurobloggers write about it, you will be quoted at least twice, bringing 20 more readers (from Brussels) to your blog.
9. You need to write on Twitter that you wrote a blog post about an important event.
If you don't write about your blog posts on Twitter, you show that you don't think you are important enough. So tell your followers that you have blogged. You will start realising that from now on you don't only care how many people read your blog post but how many of the other eurobloggers retweet your tweet on your blog post. Over the next 60 minutes, you will get 10 extra readers on your blog and two new Twitter followers (one of them will be called Mary Lu and her last tweet links to a porn site).
10. You need to repeat steps 4-9 for three months.
If you don't get frustrated by self-referential and repeating discussions with a small number of like-minded people, if you don't get fed up with boring sources, and if you can draw your motivation to blog out the same 10 people commenting your posts all the time for more than three months, you will be an established euroblogger. After six more months, you will get a comment from an EU Commissioner and some people will start calling you "guru". You will know that this is becoming crazy - and then you realise that this is how everything started (see step 1).
And yes, one day, when you get bored by just being a Euroblogger, you can still organise an anti-religion campaign that becomes news all around the earth...
Three Pillars, Two Treaties, and the One European Union
In the past, the European Union was based on three pillars but in less than a month these pillars will be no more.
Future students of the EU will read about these pillars in history books, they will try to understand the differences between the European Community and the European Union (that no citizen without EU expertise has ever understood anyway), and they will wonder how anyone could see the European Union, based on two interrelated Treaties, the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as different legal entities and not as the one thing that it should have been from the beginning but that it needed to become over a long period of political and legal fights.
Nevertheless, it is now true that from 1 December 2009, the European Union will finally have to stand alone, not on three pillars but on the shoulders of 500 million citizens living in its 27 member states.
Future students of the EU will read about these pillars in history books, they will try to understand the differences between the European Community and the European Union (that no citizen without EU expertise has ever understood anyway), and they will wonder how anyone could see the European Union, based on two interrelated Treaties, the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union, as different legal entities and not as the one thing that it should have been from the beginning but that it needed to become over a long period of political and legal fights.
Nevertheless, it is now true that from 1 December 2009, the European Union will finally have to stand alone, not on three pillars but on the shoulders of 500 million citizens living in its 27 member states.
Tuesday, 3 November 2009
The Lisbon Treaty is ratified
It is like a dream, but the Lisbon Treaty (here: consolidated versions of the two future EU treaties), topic of endless blog posts and uncounted discussions, is finally ratified.
We all know that this is not a perfect Treaty, it's not the massive reform solving all the many problems of the European Union, but I am sick and tired of waiting and discussing a hypothetic reform instead of actually working on making the EU a better place - which is now finally possible.
I still remember when in 2003 I was reading the Constitutional Treaty for the first time, thinking that it would be ratified soon. I also remember discussions on the diplomatic level in 2006 where it was said that certain things couldn't be done until the Constitutional Treaty would enter into force. I remember a simulation of the Berlin Summit in which I represented the German EU-Council Presidency in which we managed to get a similar result to what would become the final declaration that led to the draft Lisbon Treaty in 2007. Not to talk about the two Irish referenda, the German Constitutional Court decision that will be part of German political science discussions for the years to come, and all the ifs and whens that were part of our lives over the last years.
I am glad that all this is over now, and I am looking forward seeing the changes foreseen by the Treaty entering into force. From 1 December, the European Union will be a single entity with international legal personality. It will get its own diplomatic service with Foreign Minister (called differently but I don't mind); the Council and the Parliament will be official co-legislators and the European Council will get a permanent president. And much more is to be changed and adapted with the new Treaty in force.
Today is 03 November 2009, and after almost a decade of deadlock, the Union can finally move on - and as a citizen of this, our common Union, I am really hoping that it will move on for the better!
Update - the news (good for some, bad for others) in other euroblogs: Eurocrat, Nosemonkey, Jean Quatremer, Open Europe blog, England Expects, Ironies Too, Wiktor Dabkowski, Adjucating Europe, EU Law blog, Brussels Blog, Gawin Hewitt, Eva in Europa, Cecilia Malmström, Jon Worth, A Fistful of Europe, Le Taurillon, Grahnlaw, EU Referendum, Central Europe Activ, The European Citizen, Jochen Bittner, European Journal, Jonathan Fryer
We all know that this is not a perfect Treaty, it's not the massive reform solving all the many problems of the European Union, but I am sick and tired of waiting and discussing a hypothetic reform instead of actually working on making the EU a better place - which is now finally possible.
I still remember when in 2003 I was reading the Constitutional Treaty for the first time, thinking that it would be ratified soon. I also remember discussions on the diplomatic level in 2006 where it was said that certain things couldn't be done until the Constitutional Treaty would enter into force. I remember a simulation of the Berlin Summit in which I represented the German EU-Council Presidency in which we managed to get a similar result to what would become the final declaration that led to the draft Lisbon Treaty in 2007. Not to talk about the two Irish referenda, the German Constitutional Court decision that will be part of German political science discussions for the years to come, and all the ifs and whens that were part of our lives over the last years.
I am glad that all this is over now, and I am looking forward seeing the changes foreseen by the Treaty entering into force. From 1 December, the European Union will be a single entity with international legal personality. It will get its own diplomatic service with Foreign Minister (called differently but I don't mind); the Council and the Parliament will be official co-legislators and the European Council will get a permanent president. And much more is to be changed and adapted with the new Treaty in force.
Today is 03 November 2009, and after almost a decade of deadlock, the Union can finally move on - and as a citizen of this, our common Union, I am really hoping that it will move on for the better!
Update - the news (good for some, bad for others) in other euroblogs: Eurocrat, Nosemonkey, Jean Quatremer, Open Europe blog, England Expects, Ironies Too, Wiktor Dabkowski, Adjucating Europe, EU Law blog, Brussels Blog, Gawin Hewitt, Eva in Europa, Cecilia Malmström, Jon Worth, A Fistful of Europe, Le Taurillon, Grahnlaw, EU Referendum, Central Europe Activ, The European Citizen, Jochen Bittner, European Journal, Jonathan Fryer
Monday, 2 November 2009
The EU in German blogs (10): EU debates health policy - and nobody notices
The well-known German health politics blogger strappato just published an article titled "Die EU debattiert unbemerkt über Gesundheitspolitik" (English: "EU debates health policy - and nobody notices") in which he criticises a recent public consultation by DG SANCO that remained almost unseen by a wider public.
Strappato was so kind to allow me to translate the integral post and to publish it here on my blog:
Strappato was so kind to allow me to translate the integral post and to publish it here on my blog:
The influence of the EU on health policies is underestimated. Not even the recent debates on controversial initiatives like the strengthening of patient rights in cross-border health care or the maceration of the ban on advertisement for pharmaceutical products have been noticed by the public or the media.Did anyone of you notice this "debate" or the event with citizens? I haven't heard anything about it...
Hence, it is no surprise that the EU [Commission] Directorate-General Health and Consumers (DG SANCO) invited to contact the administration in several online fora without being noticed. The occasion: The tenth anniversary of DG SANCO. From 14 September to 9 October, European citizens could use the opportunity to raise their voice in their own languages to address consumer and health policies and to share their views with others, according to the goals formulated.
The response rate was far from overwhelming. In the German forum only eight posts are losing themselves. And not much difference in the other official EU languages. Only the English forum was more lively.
The communication deficit, however, is on the side of the initiators. Established without proper public relation activities, for a too short time period, without moderation. The EU Commission has shown how much she appreciates the participation of citizens. And the announcement that five participants of the "European debate" were to be invited to a seminar together with Commissioners and former Commissioners for health and consumers on 23 October 2009 in Brussels seemed helpless.
Travel and accommodation costs were paid by the EU Commission. A press release on the event? Nothing so far.
Sunday, 1 November 2009
New borders in the Union?
As an EU citizen you tend to forget that borders still exist, and usually you only realise this when you leave the Union.
But in his latest post, Jon Worth is rightfully complaining about the following incident:
If they are doing this, I'd expect the EU institutions to intervene - especially since border controls re-establish the impression that borders are not disappearing, and this would definitely go against the goals and ideals of the Union.
But in his latest post, Jon Worth is rightfully complaining about the following incident:
"On the Amsterdam-München CityNightLine service last weekend Netherlands Police boarded the train at Venlo and shone a flashlight in everyone’s faces at the border."And since I had similar experiences in the night train from Paris to Barcelona and in a normal train from the Netherlands to Germany, I also ask myself whether the member states are trying to establishing new borders within the Union, and in particular within the Schengen area?
If they are doing this, I'd expect the EU institutions to intervene - especially since border controls re-establish the impression that borders are not disappearing, and this would definitely go against the goals and ideals of the Union.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
