Event Highlights: Quo Vadis, Europe with Joaquim Fritz-Vannahme
This event began with an introduction by Christoph Mücher, Director of the Goethe Institut Boston, who welcomed both Boston University’s Vivien Schmidt and Joachim Fritz-Vannahme, Director of the think tank Europe’s Future at the Bertelsmann Stiftung. Schmidt opened the conversation by asking the question “Why is the EU in such a mess?” and asked Fritz-Vannahme to speak about the various crises facing the EU today. Fritz-Vannahme began with a personal story about his early career as a journalist in France, and described the emergence of the EU during the late 1980s and early ‘90s. His pessimistic view of the EU is based on his opinion that the EU is being left behind, as the world is rapidly changing while Europeans continue to look inwards, stating “we rare not just a mess – we are lost.” However, in Fritz-Vannahme’s perspective, the EU today is in “Decline? Yes. Decay? No.” He then moved into a summary of what he refers to as the “Seven Plagues of Europe.”
The first is the migrant crisis, caused by mixed flow of people (e.g. refugees and asylum seekers vs. economic migrants) and the uncoordinated European response. Second, Fritz-Vannahme cites the security crisis, or the growing struggle of fighting homegrown terrorism in the EU. He spoke about the “Front Garden” of Europe in MENA, preferring this metaphor to the traditional “Neighborhood” image, as he argued the events in Africa were ignored by Europeans for years and today they are experiencing the consequences of overlooking the instability occurring across the Mediterranean. The third and fourth unresolved crises–of the Euro-Zone and banking union – are cited as the failed cohesion the EU founders had promised, and the systemic weakening of European institutions. Fritz-Vannahme cited the growing divergence between Member States as the fifth criss, explaining how EU has experienced rising nationalistic tendencies in addition to regional divisions (North vs. South, East vs. West, economic divides, etc.), which begs the question “where is this ‘Union’ inside all this disunion?” The sixth crisis is the continuing problems surrounding unemployment rates across Europe, and Fritz-Vannahme emphasized the accentuated impact on younger populations, warning “we are depriving a whole generation of the advantage of Europe. And this will hit back one day.” The final crisis listed by Fritz-Vannahme is the explosion of egotism among European leaders. He explained the “3 Cs of the EU” (confrontation, coalition, compromise) and described how these processes have recently begun to fail in the EU.
Schmidt confronted the “elephant in the room” by asking Fritz-Vannahme’s opinion on the question “to what extent can we blame lots of these crises on Germany?” Fritz-Vannahme responded by countering Schmidt with the idea that perhaps “Germany has not yet realized it is the key country of the EU.” He explains how Germany exists at the heart of the EU geographically, but that since the establishment of the EU Germany has either been economically too strong (today) or too weak (15 years ago), resulting in a “naïveté” in approach, rather than a brutal tactic. He argued that all German decisions, regardless of their consultation with neighbors, have immediate and strong impacts on European affairs. He described the angel and devil imagery painted by the media of Angela Merkel regarding her reactions to the migrant crisis and the handling of Greece in the summer of 2015. Fritz-Vannahme ended by explaining how Germany cannot be blamed as the origin of any crisis, but that Germans must recognize the expectation to act or react to events in a European way to act as a model for other Member States to emulate.
Schmidt continued her questioning of Germany, highlighting the view of many Europeans that “essentially, Germany was a dictator” in the handling of the Eurozone crisis, and that “people were horrified” in the handling of Greece in 2015. She questioned Germany’s insistence upon exercising brute power to enforce European laws and their insistence upon “bullying” other Member States, asking Fritz-Vannahme “Why is Germany pushing these particular rules which aren’t working? Is it about ideology…an assumption that only by stability that you are going to manage things?”
Fritz-Vannahme responded by explaining how the Germans view themselves, not as a reluctant hegemon but as a central player in the EU. He flashbacked to 2004, when Germany was economically weak, and explained the transformation experienced in the past 12 years during which Germany rediscovered the orthodox approach of following the exact text of the laws which “is so typical German that it might offend others.” He then described the disconnection between Member States in how they approach and interpret laws, and how the German version is viewed as extremely constricting compared to the flexible French perspective. Fritz-Vannahme then described the role of Germany influencing the structure of the EU, offering the power to manipulate economic standards to independent institutions rather than politicians. Completely ignoring their own struggles with such a system, Germany insisted on the EU adopting this structure as a condition of joining the Eurozone – but, as Fritz-Vannahme pointed out, the first to complain about the independence of the ECB was Germany.
Schmidt replied by quoting Tocqueville, “the rule is rigid, the application flexible,” before moving toward what she referred to as “the crisis of democracy, the rise of populism.” Frtiz-Vannahme began discussing European institutions and his extreme disappointment with the European Commission in handling the actions of Member States. He criticized the French “police state” following the terrorist attacks of 2015, and explained how the psychological revolt of Poland and Hungary should come as no surprise following 50 years of suppression under communist dictatorship, and that rising nationalism across Europe is logical as a counterbalance to the weakening EU. Fritz-Vannahme then named the major elements of populist movements across Europe: fear of the “other”, distorted view of the past, and tendency to reject all elements of the EU/NATO with limited solutions for replacing such institutions. He emphasized that the origin of this crisis exists at the national level, as the “results of deep homegrown crises in all European countries,” and a rejection of the elite (establishment, media, politicians, academics, etc.). He explained that none of these movements are going away, and their anti-pluralistic tendencies mobilize non-voters to become increasingly politicized.
Schmidt spoke on the shift towards the right in European politics, and asked Fritz-Vannahme whether or not disconnection from Brussels and frustration with the EU has contributed to these trends. Fritz-Vannahme explained his opinion that a combination of many things has caused the rise of populist parties across Europe, emphasizing the fear, anger, and socioeconomic frustrations experienced by the majority of citizens across the EU in the past decade contribute to an idealization of the past, which in turn feeds a “consistent fear of the future.” Schmidt pointed out how leadership has failed to respond to these issues, and asked Fritz-Vannahme to conclude by responding to the broad question: “What is the Future of the EU?” Fritz-Vannahme said the while the easy reply is “always keep calm and carry on,” he admitted that the future of the EU is unforeseeable. He stated his belief that “Europe – and Europe’s leaders – will wake up when they feel pressure from outside becoming overheated and becoming very, very high,” and ended by explaining that once Europe is hot enough, he hopes that the EU will be forced to produce strong leadership to react to the globalizing world.
This event takes place as part of a new initiative entitled “Interferences,” a series of events on issues pertinent to democratic politics in the US and Europe. Organized as part of EU Futures, a series of conversations exploring the emerging future in Europe. The EU Futures project is supported by a Getting to Know Europe Grant from the European Commission Delegation in Washington, DC.
– Claire Coffey ’18
Listen to this event on WBUR’s World of Ideas: http://www.wbur.org/worldofideas/2016/12/04/fritzv