11 novembre 2009. Le devoir de memoire.

Fusiliers marins bretons (Lorient, Breizh) sous le commandement de l'Amiral Ronac'h en route pour le front. Bataille de Dixmude (Belgique, octobre 1914). Envoyes pour tenir 24 heures, les 6000 marins peu habitues au combat terreste, combattirent 34 jours et au prix de pertes enormes barrerent la route de la mer aux forces allemandes.

.

May the soul of those who perished on the killing fields of

this insane war rest in peace,

May we never forget.

.

Qu'ils reposent en paix.

Is the European Union too big to fail?

Tis the dawn of the “more transparent, more effective, more democratic” Europe, the Lisbon era. Yet curiously, apart from politicians and bureaucrats, no-one is celebrating. In Brussels, no sooner had pen been put to paper in the Czech capital that the pro-Lisbon camp was fêting the capitulation of its most vocal opponent with evident relief. The constitutional treaty will enter into force in December, and a new legal entity endowed with more political, judicial, administrative and legislative powers will come into being. For any rational person, the lofty goal of a better, fairer, greener, more egalitarian Europe can only cause apprehension about the future. Regardless, the EU thinks "big” for us. Like so many giant inefficient corporations and banks, it may have become too big to be allowed to fail.
.
Functionalist integration, or the "paradise" found.
Since its cautious first economic steps (ECSC 1951) in the post-war years, the European integration process has gradually become a one-way road, a one-size-fits-all-system in a one-ideology environment; the “ever-closer” economic, social and political union. The ideals of federalist luminaries - Monnet "federalism with instalement" method or Spinelli's constitutional method - have turned into reality. Give it to our democracy-dodging elite, 2009 is a turning point, one only they will celebrate. Soon too, official publications praising Eurocitizens for "their infinite wisdom" for "supporting" the Lisbon treaty will go into print. Who will remember that in 2005 the sovereign people of France rejected the constitutional treaty by a majority (54.67%)? Irreversibly, the EU bloc is caught in its own functionalist momentum - expansion of competences through spillover effect. Even though there is plenty of empirical evidence that the centralisation of policy and decision-making has led to spectacular failures (The Common Fisheries Policy for e.g.), EU institutions are about to become more powerful. While the Treaty provides for more involvement of national parliaments (ToL, protocols) through a consultation procedure on legislative acts prepared in Brussels (75% of national legislation), it is doubtful that this concession to national sensitivities will have much effect in practice on the incremental aggregation of powers at supranational level. There is simply no stopping the tide.
.
What this all means translated into “ non Euro-speak” is simple: bigger central government in Brussels in the hands of an unelected, unaccountable elite whose tolerance of open and free debate on European integration is dubious. Indeed questioning the integrationist mantra that more central planning, harmonisation and regulation of society is in Europe's best interest, is not welcome. Paradoxically this behaviour is nowhere more evident than in the Parliament. More generally, those who advocate an alternative find themselves isolated in a sort of “intellectual gulag of political incorrectness" as former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovski puts it. Equally worrying is the fact that the growing gap between European citizens and the elite (and institutions) is not seriously being addressed. The issues of democratic deficit and lack of popular legitimacy are mostly subjects of academic debates. Or talk shows during elections. Frustration, lack of trust of EU institutions and uneasiness about the process is increasing amongst the citizenry.
.
Rescuing the “Etat providence” with the super-nanny state.
In France the “malaise” is becoming more acute. The country seems to be teetering on the brink of deeper social and political crisis. President Sarkozy's approval ratings are at their lowest (39%). The silent majority is not fooled by the official rhetoric that the “exception française”- economic dirigisme, high taxation rates, a rigid labour market, high level of welfare benefits - is coping better with the economic downturn. Resentment is seething. The leader elected to unshackle entrepreneurship from its fiscal and regulatory bonds, and to reform the state has gone the populist way. State intervention has increased in both the market and society. The saviour-state is back with a vengeance. Its quest for fiscal revenue to fill the empty coffers now also comes in green (fossil fuel tax for e.g.). A phenomenon aptly described by French economist Jacques Garello as a "green fiscal tsunami". And if over-taxed citizens and enterprises object too strongly, just circumvent the National Assembly. Where there is a political will, the EU backdoor is the way (policy-making in Brussels).
.
More debt does not create prosperity, it endangers it. But in Paris, “C'est la fête" (party time). The government awarded itself the EU presidency budget "gold medal" with an all-time record of €171 million (the €1-million-a-day presidency!). The ruling party is unrepentant. Alarm bells are ringing for the social security - €23 billion in the red. The public debt has hit the €1,500 billion mark. Desperate fishermen caught in a vicious circle of aid-dependence are forced to stage port blockades in order to survive. High unemployment continues (peaked at 15% in January 2009) while the inflated public sector (1/5 of the labour force) weathers the crisis with the safeguard of jobs for life. And, if its privileges (social "acquis") need protecting, "c'est la grève" (strike). The heavily-subsidised agriculture sector is in meltdown. Only a few days after the Commission allocated an emergency aid package to milk producers (€280 million), President Sarkozy went on a statist spending spree promising more regulation and naturally more support (€1 billion in low-interests loans, €650 million in direct aid). "Not enough" said the largest syndicate, “what is needed is the state control of retail prices”. In the health sector, it has been argued that the current reforms are best described as a “soviétisation”. Clearly the decision to close the Commissariat général du Plan - a Gosplan à la française - was premature (2006).
.
France needs the EU. So our self-serving political class (50% of deputies are civil servants, many holding up to three elective mandates) zealously pursues more of the same at the supranational level. The Jacobin state's tradition - and powers - are thus being transferred to the European “nebulous”, namely to more “opaque and undemocratic” pastures. For some diversion from the real issues at stake, the French Minister for European affairs slams British Eurosceptic Conservatives for being “autistic”. A war of words goes down well with the media. Nothing - least of all the “perfide Albion” - can stand in the way of the new Lisbon order.
.
The new Union for ever.
Sadly the positive achievements of the single market – opening of borders, liberalisation of trade, post-war prosperity - are gradually being undermined by the growth of a system the dynamics of which inexorably take it on a path to collective irresponsibility. In these post-democratic statist times, watching the appointment of the new president and foreign minister is starting to look like déjà vu - a politburo election "à la sauce européenne"... The EU has become too big to fail so forward it marches into a brighter future. How ironic that the treaty's fate should be sealed in Prague, the city whose inhabitants stood up to the collectivist ideals of communism (Spring 1968). Once upon a time on the other side of the Iron Curtain, there was a highly centralised union led by an unaccountable elite who over-spent and indulged to sustain a system that was to be for ever. Therein lay its problem.

Cold shower times for French taxpayers.

The latest cold shower for French taxpayers: 245,722€. That's the cost for the installation in the Grand Palais on the occasion of the July 2008 Mediterranean Summit of a temporary presidential space (8 offices) with "douche attenante" (a shower equipped with radio, a seat and various "fonctions jet" for the exclusive use of the president). These revelations have made headlines across Europe (see for e.g. article in regional newspaper Le Telegramme and the Guardian).
.
In France the controversy of "la douche" - the "shower-gate"- came shortly after the "Défense-gate", namely the candidacy - and very near election - of the president's 23-year-old son to the directorhip of the body responsible for managing the Paris business district. The blatant act of cronyism was prevented at the last hour by a massive public outcry leading the young man to withdraw his candidacy (the famous Arche, right). A photo of the now equally fameuse douche here.

C'est la crise but nothing can possibly get in the way of the grandeur de la France and its rayonnement in its own backyard, the Mediterranean basin. The real scandal of course is not the shower itself but the extravagant cost (€16 million) of a summit which yielded little result. According to the Cour des Comptes report, the dinner held for heads of states had a price tag of €5,000 per person. A hearty menu in times of crisis.... And the kind of state cuisine many families who struggle every day to put food sur la table will find very hard to stomach.

Our nomemklature is unrepentent and trumpets that the French EU presidency was a resounding success. History will be the judge but what's very real for now is that it was the most expensive on record (€171 million). Perhaps we should rejoice about this gold medal in state budget management. The new one-man EU European Council presidency , argued a député, would cost less. Some comfort to the citoyens who were not even given a chance to vote on the Lisbon Treaty! (Someone else here believes that its implementation could rein in EU spending, a federalist...).

In the meantime, the sécurité sociale is in the red - €23 billion - and the deficit de l'Etat has hit the €1500 billion mark. French agriculture is en crise (again). A few days after the Commission allocates an emergency aid package to European milk producers (€280 million), President Sarkozy goes on a populist shopping spree promising more central planning, more regulation and of course more "support" - state aid is naturally forbidden - (€1 billion in low-interests loans and €650 million in direct aid). "Not enough" says the largest syndicate, what's needed is the state regulation of retail prices. Since French agriculture is being "sovietised", closing down the Commissariat général du Plan in 2006 was clearly a mistake. Just like in Soviet times' l'Etat and l'élite continue to over-spend in order to sustain a system "that will be for ever", le modèle français....

La petite histoire will remember that the shower was in fact never used. The mot de la fin must go to Hugo Chavez , a grand admirateur no doubt of France's leadership to make the world a greener place - or was it redder? "We are not in times of Jacuzzi" said he, urging his compatriots to save water (Newsweek, 2 Nov. 2009). Somebody in the Palais de l'Elysée must have heard the call. In France we are in shower times. Mostly cold ones....

Euroscepticism and liberty

Published in French in Un Monde Libre on October 19th.
>

.The EU leadership is not amused and is showing signs of impatience. Czech President Vaclav Klaus is not toeing the yes-line and announced that he wanted an opt-out on the Charter of Fundamental Rights, a move which in turn could unravel re-negotiation requests from other member states. What is wrong with this? The problem is that the EU leadership demands an unconditional ratification even though by granting "guarantees" (July 2009 European Council conclusions) to Ireland, it opened the pandora box of a ratification a "geometrie variable". The problem is that the Union is neither comfortable with democracy nor with dissent.

Yes-democracy.
Citizens are expected to fall in. In France, our political class chose to “consult itself” so to speak (ratification through parliament) rather than risk a public consultation and another rebuke (2005 no-vote on EU Constitution). With the financial crisis and economic downturn of the past year, EU leaders and eurocrats were anxious for good news. After the Irish yes-vote, nothing appears to be dampering their eagerness to have the treaty in force by the end of the year.

“There is no pressure as such” said the president of the EU Parliament Jerky Buzek “all discussions are taking place in a democratic context”. So the yes-camp makes it known that delay from the Czech Republic is not acceptable, diplomatically lambasting its president for pulling an “unfair” rabbit. Apparently the “Lisbon-ned” Union urgently needs to anoint a guide (President) to lead its blighted citizens. If you don’t understand what’s democratic and transparent about that, please try again. The correct answer is “yes” naturally this new phase of supranational governance requires a supreme leader but also new diplomatic staff, more bureaucrats, more budget for more common policies.... When member states are urged to reduce expenditures and downsize their administrations, the EU is preparing to inflate its own.

What kind of a democracy is yes-democracy? A growing number of citizens are no longer amused. Could Lisbon be a “treaty too far” as British academic William Horsley argues? He warns that its implementation will come as a shock to British people. After Westminster's expenses scandal, coping with a new rabbit from the EU hat will prove difficult. Across Europe, disillusionment with EU politics runs high. Politicians - not surprisingly - have failed to prepare electorates for what’s afoot, namely a system of collective decision-making with extensive new powers, and not as they claimed a “mere amendment" to the Nice Treaty currently in force. "Stream-lining" is the buzz word. But what we are talking about is the creation of a Europe-wide government and that means a superstate complete with legal personality.

Yes to British euroscepticism!
President Klaus’ stance for freedom is a beacon of hope, and so is the prospect of the return to power of the Conservative Party in the UK on the other side of the Channel. A healthy dose of British euroscepticism could be the light at the end of this illiberal tunnel... David Cameron’s speech at the party conference last week has hit the nail though his message of “taking on big government and the culture of irresponsibility” has probably not gone down well in the corridors of power in Brussels. Should he stand firm on his principled platform (and the referendum), a Conservative-led UK could act as a counterbalance to a more centralised and powerful EU. Let us see if outbursts of “consequences” by outspoken European leaders will impress or scare the British electorate. In the chess game of Euro-politics, the Lisbon camp is planning its next move, probably the offering of a sweetener. To neuter the rebellious islanders, “Let them have Blair!". Call it a socialist icing on the EU supercake, eurocitizens will need to digest. Citizens are mobilising against him ("Stop Blair" petition campaign) but he has already the support of powerful states.

The wind of liberty coming from Prague.
The fact is that the European project has always been an elite-driven ideal for which democratic legitimacy (direct elections) was never a priority. From its onset, it was influenced by inter alia federalist intellectuals like Jean Monnet - a statist - and Altiero Spinelli - a communist - who believed that peace in Europe would be achieved with the establishment of a superstate. That this ideal would in 2009 turn into reality without public support and legitimacy is fitting. It is no longer possible to question the integration model which in effect has become a dogma.

The plot is thickening but for us the French, the "ever-closer union" dies are cast. As Europe pompously celebrates the fall of the Berlin Wall, it is both ironic and fascinating that, in the immediate future, hope for a freer EU should come from the East. Whatever the outcome, President Klaus dares say "no" and in our brave new world of EU political correctness, it takes courage.

Green movement or green ideology?

Letter to the editor of the University of Porstmouth fortnighly newspaper - Pugwash News - in reply to an opinion by environmental officer Chris Spackman. Published on 05 November 2009.

Greenly incorrect travel log in the Med

19 September 2009: 15h00, motoring into strong headwinds (22-25 knots, NW), sighted an unusually large 3-mast-vessel on a course to enter the Gulf of Hisarönü. N36, 43' 80. E27, 55' 60: came half a mile directly north of it (photo right) and realised it was the flagship of Greenpeace, the Rainbow Warrior II.

Of course, unlike the rest of us leasure sailors, the green warriors were not in the Turkish Aegean to enjoy this sailing paradise and its natural beauty. The organisation was there to save it. This visit was part of its wider Akdeniz/Mediterranean sea campaign (in English) with planned actions against tuna fishing, for a nuclear free region, to fight climate change, etc.... Green is "in" as French economist Guy Sorman remarked with esprit in a recent post (in French, l'ONU, sauce verte). Leaders are now competing to prove their green-ness - or "vertitude". The UN GA in New York was only further evidence of the green political correctness fever gripping the world these days at the detriment of more worthy topics. Lots of talk of "virtuous" green goals but little mention of democracy, economic development, human rights. Was the word "freedom" spoken even once? At least the carbon foot print of the Libyan leader's tent was low...

Funding must be flowing to Greenpeace. Green crusaders have the weather-political gauge (advantage).... Next thing this region will be turned into a marine reserve, anchoring forbidden because every bled of seaweed will be sacred! All hands on deck! Every action counts to counter the ideology of "ecologisme" so expertly described in Vaclav Klaus' new book "Blue Planet in Green Shackles" (published by the CEI and the Press Universitaire d'Aix-IREF). So in order to protest against the pressure Greenpeace is putting on the government of this developping country not to go nuclear for the production of its energy and inter alia to close the coal power plant of Kemirköy (photo above) in the Gulf of Gökova, a spontaneous plan emerged.... :

:

A few days later, sailing in 23 knots of wind (NW) on a close haul , shorthanded and outfunded, the freedom warrior headed towards the conspicuous landmark of the tall chimney of the coal power plant on a course to make a point.

A pod of dolphins joined the protest. Below the final sail powered by the wind, the book and ideas Greenpeace must be cursing everyday.

For thousands of years the peoples of the Mediterranean basin have being trading, adapting to changing times and should continue their economic development on their own terms. Not on those dictated by a new religion of environmentalism, its legal norms imposed by the rich and with green warriors to do the preaching.

And if you are wondering, I too care about the sea and do my bit to keep it clean!

The "maddening" arrogance of the EU elite.

In the Japan Times (08 September) an enlightening article by Domique Moisi on how my beloved country sees itself as the centre of Europe, and how it ought to lead the way to a bright new EU future with "the return of Franco-German leadership".

"PARIS — Regardless of who wins September's parliamentary election in Germany, the time has come once again for a major Franco-German initiative. Regardless of their economic conditions or their confidence — or lack of it — in each other, France and Germany are more than ever jointly responsible for the future, if not the very survival, of the European project.... More here.

My belated letter to the editor of the Japan Times (25 September) published on 01 October in the Reader in Council section (electronic here).

Dear Editor,

I could not disagree more with Dominique Moisi's conclusion from his Sept. 8 analysis that the European Union needs the return of Franco-German leadership". Europe, in fact, needs less leadership from its intellectual and political class. It needs to pause and take into account the will of its citizens who, when given a democratic chance — Netherlands, France and Ireland — have said "no" to the Constitution/Lisbon Treaty. But only a "yes" was acceptable! Is that democracy or hypocrisy?

Has the European project sunken so low that its nomenclature needs to invoke the magic wand of a good old post-World War II European construction dynamic — and a "spectacular security initiative" with Russia — to extricate itself from the troubled waters of the 21st century?
Frankly it is doubtful that incantations for more Franco-German leadership will do much to reassure Irish voters (on Friday).

My compatriot (Moisi) believes that, without France, the EU cannot survive the current institutional crisis, not to mention the economic one; in other words, that Europe needs more dirigisme from, well, its "center" — read Paris. Furthermore, like most members of our nomenclature of politicians and intellectuals, he discards legitimate concerns from British citizens as "provincial euro-skepticism." When disagreement is eloquently articulated by Czech Republic President Vaclav Klaus, it is "stubborn ill will."

Where do we go from here when the EU leadership — and its "enlightened" intellectual elite — go down the road of thinly disguised threats of "consequences," to quote French President Nicolas Sarkozy, whenever peoples or elected politicians happen to stray from the "true path"? So much arrogance is maddening and dangerous. So, consider me one of the growing number of voices no longer prepared to stay silent.