Merry Christmas and Happy New Year from BlogEuropa.eu!
The Editors
December 24, 2007
The team of editors and friends that bring you BlogEuropa.eu want to wish you all the best in this Holiday season! We dream of a world with peace and prosperity, non discrimination on nationality grounds, tolerance and diverse identities, strong citizens participation in the public domain, Fundamental Rights respected everywhere and enligthened cooperation and integration amongst countries and peoples!
Mito y realidad del Tratado de Lisboa
José M. de Areilza
14 de diciembre, 2007
Ayer se firmó en Lisboa el nuevo Tratado que reforma la Unión Europea. Una peculiaridad de este acuerdo es que ya antes de su adopción se ha creado un mito alrededor suyo. Los líderes europeos lo presentan como una manera pragmática de sacar de una supuesta parálisis a la Unión, una vez ha fracasado la Constitución europea. Merece la pena separar el mito y la realidad, aunque, como nos recuerda el historiador Fernando García de Cortázar, las historias creadas para hacerlas pasar por verdad muchas veces terminan atrapando a sus propios inventores y la fábula oficial puede acabar triunfando.
En su versión mítica, el texto adoptado se presenta como un rescate de sólo algunas partes de la Constitución, una operación que habría sido posible en buena medida por la renovación del tándem franco-alemán por Angela Merkel y Nicolás Sarkozy. El Tratado de Lisboa permitiría que al menos funcionen las instituciones de Bruselas de modo más eficaz y democrático, en una Unión con 27 Estados miembros muy diferentes en grado de desarrollo económico, político y social. Su redacción a través de un lenguaje oscuro y difícil y las numerosas condiciones, opt-outs, protocolos y declaraciones, todo ello en mayor grado que lo acostumbrado en la UE, se justifica diciendo que versa sobre cuestiones muy técnicas y que la complejidad es uno de los precios que hay que pagar para proseguir con la integración europea. El abandono de los símbolos constitucionales y la palabra «Constitución» se explica como una decisión de posponer los debates más polémicos sobre la identidad europea y facilitar el acuerdo y el paso hacia la «Europa de los resultados» que reclaman los ciudadanos europeos.
Hasta aquí la máscara con la que se intenta hacer más valioso y atractivo el acuerdo. La realidad es otra. Detrás de Lisboa no hay una renovación profunda del tándem franco-alemán con un proyecto europeo compartido y atractivo para todos los europeos. (more…)
Why Finland´s education scores are so high
Charlotte E. Leskinen
December 14, 2007
Now that the last PISA results on Education have been published and as a product of the Finnish education system I’d like to offer a few, completely non-scientific, layman’s speculations on why the Finnish students traditionally score so high.
PISA, the Programme for International Student Assessment coordinated by the OECD, is an internationally standardised assessment of 15-year-old schoolchildren’s scholastic performance. The survey is triennial and the first assessment took place in 2000. The latest results refer to the assessment conducted in 2006.
In my opinion, one of the reasons for the good results of the Finnish students is that there are no tuition fees. This grants a general education for everybody regardless of their socio-economic background. Moreover, the same curriculum is taught to all students and therefore there are no large differences between different regions within the country.
Finland’s harsh climate and geopolitical situation have also forced the country to perform well in general in order to “survive”. As a result, the country does well not only in surveys assessing its education system but also its competitiveness. In addition, education is traditionally highly valuated by the society, which probably encourages the students to commit to their studies. No matter what the reason behind the success is, there is evidently no need “to change a winning team”.
More information on the PISA 2006 results here.
The Comité des Sages: a wise idea?
J. Ignacio Torreblanca
December 13, 2007
European leaders are set to examine a proposal by French President Sarkozy to launch a “Comité des Sages”, a committee of the wise, to address the future of Europe. At a time when the EU is about to close more than ten years of institutional reforms and several years of Treaty negotiations, Sarkozy’s proposal has been received with scepticism.
The concerns are manifold. First, several member states (especially those that failed to ratify the Constitutional Treaty) fear that the work of the Comité could negatively interfere with the successful ratification of the Lisbon Treaty – for example in Ireland, the UK or Denmark. Second, the clear link between Sarkozy’s proposal and his negative stance on Turkey’s EU membership is a cause for concern in enlargement-supporting member states.
Thus, as originally formulated, Sarkozy’s proposal was likely to damage the twin motors of European integration: namely its deepening (the Lisbon Treaty) and its widening (Turkey and further enlargement). No wonder then that for the last couple of months, several member states have mobilized to dilute the proposal and reorient it into something entirely different.
The proposal has been coldly received by the EU institutions. EC President Jose Manuel Barroso warned against undermining “legally binding agreements pertaining to accession negotiations”. EU Communication Commissioner Margaret Wallström criticized the elitist flavour of the Comité and called for civil society to be actively involved in the debate about the future of Europe. And the European Parliament also seemed uneasy with a committee that would be controlled by the Council, with little involvement by other institutions.
Yet, the most important reactions have stemmed from the “Turkish connection”, which President Sarkozy explicitly admitted when presenting the initiative in August: “Pressing questions are being asked, especially in the wake of the latest enlargement: where are the Union’s borders? Should the Union have borders? Are further enlargements compatible with continuing integration?” This led Enlargement Commissioner Olli Rehn to warn against the committee providing an “excuse” for leaving Turkey out. “As to the famous idea of setting up a wise men’s group to ponder the EU’s future in 2020-2030… I am not sure if I am convinced of its added value; if it is really composed of wise men – and women, as it must – I am sure that they will see that enlargement is not the problem but rather a vital part of the solution to many problems that the EU will face in the coming decades”. (more…)
Un libro fundamental: “Europa entre dos luces”
José M. de Areilza
8 de diciembre, 2007
La semana pasada tuve la oportunidad de participar en la presentación en la sede de la Sociedad General de Autores del libro de Fidel Sendagorta, “Europa entre dos luces. ¿Declive o resurgimiento?”, publicado por Biblioteca Nueva y el Real Instituto Elcano. Se trata de un ensayo breve (152 páginas) pero muy profundo y lleno de acierto y lucidez sobre las causas y remedios de la suave decadencia de Europa. Fidel Sendagorta es diplomático, escritor, co-editor de este blog y hasta hace poco ha sido Director de Análisis y Prospectiva del Ministerio de Asuntos Exteriores. Desde ese puesto ha viajado sin descanso y ha participado en los mejores debates y conferencias sobre relaciones internacionales de universidades, revistas, think tanks, action tanks y do tanks de todo el mundo mundo. En medio de este ajetreo, ha desarrollado una reflexión personal y sugerente sobre Europa, basada en la lectura de los mejores pensadores y analistas que ayer y hoy discuten sobre el devenir de nuestro continente.
El ensayo “Europa entre dos luces” aborda asuntos tan sensibles como la demografía europea, el fracaso del multiculturalismo, la inmigración musulmana a Europa, la crisis constitucional reciente, el intento de la Unión de ser un actor global, la relación entre las raíces cristianas de Europa y su conciencia ilustrada y racional y la recuperación del patriotismo. Merece la pena leerlo, es como participar en una tertulia europea sutil, aguda y formidable.