Euroviews 2014 - on the way to another Europe

EUROVIEWS

WELCOME

On the way to another Europe

Germany Young German eurosceptics: immigration and indifference

P

eace, unification and economic development – That is what the European Union was built for. But what happened to the European story? Today, we only hear about conflict, crisis and euroscepticism.

Therefore, we—17 young journalists— travelled to Germany, Bulgaria, Latvia and Portugal.

There are strong disagreements over the future of the EU, but consensus that something has to change.

Our aim was to get a better understanding of what Europe is for people today and how they see its progress.

With this magazine, we would like to share their stories with you.

Enjoy the reading!

Latvia

42

5

The euro – a symbol of the EU’s problems

43

Pseudo-euroscepticism: German thoughts, EU implications

9

Latvians divided between Russia and EU

48

What Europe is missing

13

Aliens in their own country

54

Born in Latvia

58

Bulgaria

Why did we choose these four countries?

The hateful reactions against the cuts in Greece are well known. So are Le Pen in France, Wilders in the Netherlands —these are the names we hear in the news every day.

In the European elections next month, they are expected to gain even more support, and nationalist and xenophobic voices have clearly become louder over the past decade.

Yet we have learned that euroscepticism is more than extreme movements, and that eurosceptics do not necessarily oppose the idea of the EU as such.

In Latvia they might express a more positive attitude towards Russia, as the historical roots are still very much alive. In Bulgaria it can be the feeling of not being treated as a member of the family. Some Portuguese think that the power of Angela Merkel is destroying their country. And many Germans feel that other countries are exporting their problems.

16

Youth believes in Europe, not in Bulgaria

17

Bad press: how EU media is viewed in Bulgaria

21

Why are Bulgarians wanted back home?

25

Bringing an economy out of the shadows

28

Deciding their own destiny, or plagued by history?

33

The migrational flow: an unpleasant trade

38

Portugal

64

Troika policy in Portugal: trilogy of austerity, sorrow and social upheaval

65

“My contribution to democracy”

69

The team Editors Paul Burgaud, Aliya Iskenderova, Steven Musch, Sophia Schirmer, Tatiana Tilly Editor-in-Chief Asbjørn Jørgensen Graphic Design Henrik Meller, Susanne Sommer

2

4

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

Design Steven Musch, Joe Sutherland, Tatiana Tilly Reporters Diana Bologova, Sofia Gerganova, Mikel Gil Sojo, Stephen Karmazyn, Leyre Latorre, Ksenia Nevmerzhitskaya, Irina Orlova, Camille Petit, Michelle Pucci, Lucía de la Sierra, Joe Sutherland, Fred Tongue

Europe in the World Programme Danish School of Media and Journalism, Aarhus, Denmark www.euroviews.eu

3

GERMANY

GERMANY

Germany A

s one of the EU’s founders and beneficiaries, aversion to European integration has never really been an option. With a history of two world wars and political isolation during the Cold War, entering an ambitious project like the EU was a way to guarantee peace for Germans.

But can Germans call themselves European when the union is still so divided? Euroscepticism in Germany will likely never turn into the same kind of hostility towards the EU that exists in other parts of Europe. Even on both ends of the political spectrum, antiEU political parties in Germany will always remain rather tame and within the boundaries of EU-critical. Yet, curiously enough, the youth of Germany don’t seem to be interested in what the EU is doing, because for the younger generation, Germany’s place in the EU is unquestionable. In Germany, European issues are essentially national issues.

“I don’t think there is something like a new euroscepticism in Germany. It would be wrong to assume that there has been something like a passionate enthusiasm about the EU in Germany, which has now turned into an outright opposition” Carina Sprungk, professor of European Integration, the Free University of Berlin

6

UROVIEWS

Young German eurosceptics: immigration and indifference

Although Germany is hardly known for its negative view of Europe, recent events in the country may point to the opposite. Although youth unemployment is going down, the German government is increasingly trying to introduce new measures to limit young people from abroad coming in.

by Sofia Gerganova

W

hile youth unemployment usually lays the groundwork for growing nationalist attitudes and doubts in the benefits from the European Union, Germany’s youth has some of the lowest youth unemployment rates, with recent figures showing that only 5 per cent of young people are jobless.

However, this didn’t stop the German government from cancelling the European Union initiative The Job of My Life, under the EURES mobility network for young Europeans. This initiative is also a mobility programme, in a way, as it gives young people from across the EU the opportunity to gain vocational training and hands-on work experience in their field of expertise in a country of their choosing.

According a spokeswoman for the labour ministry, overwhelming demand coming from regions with really high unemployment rates, mainly from young people from Spain, has been the reason for the suspension of the programme.

UROVIEWS

They reported that €48m budget for this year has already been spent, from a total budget of €140m from 2013 until 2016 and this led the country to stop processing new applications.

While German Chancellor Angela Merkel addressed the issue in an interview to the Guardian last summer, calling it “the most pressing problem facing Europe”, her coalition government recently introduced further measures to restrict the EU’s mobility programmes leading to “poverty immigration”.

According to the draft document, the newly introduced rules are primarily aimed at curbing welfare tourism in Germany, caused by an influx of immigrants from more disadvantaged member states. This issue was especially prominent due to fears of unqualified migrants flooding the country after the restrictions for Bulgaria and Romania falling on January 1 this year.

On March 26, a special panel, set up by Merkel’s conservative Christian Democratic Union (CDU) pushed forward a draft docu-

ment, calling for a tougher stance on welfare tourism. The paper recommends limiting job-seekers’ stay to three months, and those who haven’t found work in that time, but have claimed unemployment benefits from the state, are to be blocked from returning to the country for a certain period of time.

This decision has had adverse reactions from the left-wing political spectre. The leftist Green opposition have criticised the report as illegal and targeting the wrong people.

“In a free and democratic Europe, people cannot be imposed limits on how long they can seek for a job or stay in another EU country. Bans on re-entry in a country are also illegal,” said Volker Beck, home affairs expert of the German Greens, in an interview.

Unemployed German youth

MP Dr Katarina Barley from the left-wing Sozialdemokratische Partei Deutschlands (Social Democratic Party of Germany, SPD), disagrees with the claim that the influx of

5

Actual freedom of movement

Article 45 of the TFEU says…

1. Freedom of movement for workers is secured within the [European] Community.

2. Such freedom of movement entails the abolition of any discrimination based on nationality between workers of the member states. This refers to employment, remuneration and other conditions of work and employment.

3. It entails the rights to accept offers of employment actually made, to move freely and settle within the territory of the member states for this purpose and to remain in that member state after having been employed in it.

migrant workers is the deciding factor for youth unemployment among Germans.

“We have problems with youth unemployment, when they [Germans] are not very well-educated or haven’t learnt a profession, for example.”

In the fairly newly-booming economy of the east German town Dresden, Thomas Schütze, 28, found himself unemployed for eight years after graduating high school.

Schütze completed a course to be a graphic designer, but he never found a job in the field in Dresden. In that time, he was forced to work illegally doing tattoos and various private handyman jobs around town.

Two years ago, Schütze decided to requalify as a metal-cutting mechanist, repairing old tools and since then, he has been working for BMW in Bavaria, where he works exclusively with migrant workers from southern and eastern Europe. Contrary to Mr Erkens’ view, Schütze believes that mainly under-qualified workers choose Germany as a working destination.

“I think they [immigrants] do jobs that no Germans want to do,” says Schütze.

“It’s work for under-qualified people. I think that Germans are very overqualified.”

Even so, Schütze doesn’t feel that it’s unfair for immigrants to be allowed to stay in Germany, if they have found a better work opportunity there.

“The EU was founded to open the borders for the German industry that need cheaper workers. I think it’s only fair that if they could go to other countries and get cheaper workers, the workers can then stay in Germany.”

For MP Andrej Hunko from Die Linke (the Left Party), the responsibility of fixing youth unemployment should lay with EU institutions, the way it does to the Federal Reserve in the United States.

“The ECB is the only central bank in the industrialised countries in the world, which has no link to fighting youth unemployment,” says Hunko. “The construction of the European Union is very neo-liberal. There’s very few social ideas in the central institutions.”

Similarly to Schütze, Nora Lippmann, 24,

6

from Dresden, has graduated from a threeyear bachelor’s degree in graphic design, after which, she was unemployed for six months. Nora says that the frustration of not having enough money to support herself afterwards has driven her to get a part-time job as an assistant at the Dresden theatre.

She has never worked as a graphic designer and she now has a full time job at a bakery in Dresden.

“It was scary a little bit because I wanted work and I didn’t find anything,” says Lippmann about her unemployment period.

“You try and you try and nothing happens.

You are either too young, you’ve got not enough qualifications or experience.”

Lippmann thinks that immigrants can potentially benefit more from the common European labour market than Germans: “I think it’s a chance for someone who wants this. Maybe it’s not mine.”

“People here, they come in, some are okay, but others, I think, what are you doing here?

They come to Germany and they sit here in a paid flat, getting food and have a big mouth,” says Lippmann. “I don’t like that.”

However, Lippmann believes that immigrants can be more flexible when it comes to finding jobs, not only because employers can afford to pay them less than Germans.

“Some of them who aren’t qualified have the same problems as the Germans to get a job, or a higher job,” she says. “They are creative though, and that’s what Germans are sometimes not.”

Gergana Zlateva, 24, is a young immigrant who, like many others, has chosen to leave her home country Bulgaria in pursuit of a better life in Berlin. This way, Zlateva is also taking advantage of her freedom of movement in the European Union, as a citizen of an EU member state.

Back in Bulgaria, Zlateva worked as a customer service operator for an online casino. She decided to move to Germany after a three-day holiday in September last year, when, she says, she realised that Berlin is the place for her.

“It’s the place where I finally felt at home,” she says. “I was here for only three days as a tourist and those days changed my life forever. So, I decided that I should just live here and left everything behind that I had.”

Zlateva finalised her reallocation to Berlin in November 2013, when the working restrictions for Bulgarians and Romanians across the EU still applied. She says that she didn’t make an effort to search for a job back then, even though she is fluent in German, because she was advised by the embassy to wait until the restrictions were lifted.

“No employer would make the effort to do a lot of paperwork, because it was for three months only. Everyone told me to wait,” Zlateva remembers.

However, in December 2013, just before the end of the restrictions for Bulgarians and Romanians, Zlateva had her purse stolen from a local bar in Berlin, leaving her without any funds or identification. The lack of ID essentially deprived her of the opportunity to look for a job, until she had her passport renewed after three months.

Zlateva recalls that she had some money saved up in her Bulgarian bank account, in order to be able to support herself when she first came to Germany. The lack of ID or a passport meant that she had no access to her bank account. Zlateva says she relied on friends in Berlin for money, and never

claimed unemployment benefits from the German state in the time when she was unemployed.

“Why should I? I haven’t done anything to

“I still don’t regret moving here, even after something like that happened. I feel happier here” Bulgarian immigrant Gergana Zlateva, about being stuck unemployed in Berlin

deserve it. I’ve never worked here, I’ve never paid taxes. I haven’t deserved to get welfare from the state,” says Zlateva.

Things changed for the better for her when she finally got her new passport, which meant that she could start looking for a job.

She says that finding a job in Berlin took her no longer than two weeks. Even considering her position and nationality, Zlateva says that she never faced discrimination, neither from strangers, nor from employers.

“People here are so used to living in such a multicultural town,” she says. “They either don’t care where you come from or if they do, it’s in a positive way.”

Even if immigrants like Zlateva may not feel discriminated against by German employers, German industry have been accused of taking an unscrupulous approach to the freedom of movement of labour in the EU.

The young German eurosceptics

The rapid economic growth and low unemployment rates make Germany a magnet for EU citizens, seeking to take advantage of their free movement rights. In turn, German industry is seduced by the opportunity of hiring cheaper labour. On the other hand, there are also fears of an influx of Romanians and Bulgarians escaping poverty in their home countries, since these countries gained full access to the EU jobs market earlier this year.

“We want to have a clear-cut immigration policy” Rainer Erkens, Alternative für Deutschland

Zlateva decided to move to Berlin six months ago, even though the restrictions for Bulgarians and Romanians were still in place, but she wasn’t too worried about finding a job at first.

UROVIEWS

“We must see that the internal market, the so-called freedom of people, services and goods was never meant to be freedom of social transfers,” says Rainer Erkens, coordinator for strategic campaign planning for the eurosceptic right-wing party Alternative für Deutschland (AfD.) The AfD are well-known in Germany for

UROVIEWS

their nationalist political focus as well as their strong anti-EU and anti-euro attitude. For one reason or another, in the final general election in September last year, they attracted what Mr Erkens defines as “an average voting” from young people of 6 per cent among people aged 1825, which is more than the 4.7 per cent they achieved in January. Still, AfD tend to be, surprisingly even for themselves, popular among the younger generation. Disparities on the labour market and external blame placed on the European Union as an entity tend to be attributed to the rise of antiEuropean moods across the most EU-loving population in Rainer Erkens from Alternative für Deutschland believes that importing migrant workers from abroad is not a sustainable economic policy. the union.

Even considering their eurosceptic stance, Alternative für Deutschland do not completely reject the idea of migration.

“We know that Germany needs immigrants, obviously. In some areas, we will not be able to cope without immigrants,” says Mr Erkens.

“But at the moment what we see is, that we have a rather chaotic process of people coming without knowledge, no qualifications required, no formal process of admitting people and not even an attempt to define what Germany needs,” he continues.

Professor Dr Carina Sprungk, an expert in European Integration for the Free Univerisity of Berlin, sees the newly intro- MP Dr Katarina Barley thinks that the government focus should be focusing on the way immigrant workers are being treated. duced measures to curb welfare tourism as an overreaction before the up- Exploitation coming European Parliament elections.

Germany is currently one of the few EU “I think that [the panel to curb benefit member states to have no minimum wage. tourism] is largely a reaction of the ongoing Since the expansive enlargement that took dispute between the European Commission place upon the beginning of this millenand the German government on how to deal nium, German industries have thrived on with social benefits and whether to open employing migrant workers from poorer them to immigrants or not,” she says. member states for as little as €0.30 per hour.

“I’m totally in line with the European Both parties on the left and right sides of the Commission’s point of view that we cannot political spectrum take different stands on exclude social benefits to new citizens. How why this is unfair. could we, with the free movement of citiRainer Erkens from the right-wing Alterzens being a basic freedom of the European native für Deutschland believes that hiring Union which Germany has agreed to?” cheap labour from abroad is a way for industries to avoid the responsibility of deal-

7

GERMANY

Pseudo-euroscepticism German thoughts, EU implications

Founded just over a year ago, the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) has promised Germany an alternative: a way out of the eurozone, a redefined immigration policy, and a less invasive EU. ing with unemployment in Germany.

“We see that we have people with good qualifications taking jobs which are sometimes below their standard and of course, making it difficult for Germans with low qualifications to find a job,” says Mr Erkens.

He thinks that this creates disadvantages on both sides: “They [industries] can get an architect from Barcelona, working in a hotel, at the reception. Well, great! But that doesn’t help Spain and it doesn’t help the German people with their jobs.”

For the leftist SPD, the issue present is not the fact that this tendency on the labour market enhances youth unemployment in Germany, but that it creates exploitation.

“We have young people coming in, working very hard for a wage that is like €3 per hour,” says Dr Barley from the SPD. “Employers, have an interest of having them there, because they only have to pay them a very low wage. So, is the problem actually the people coming here, or is it the way those people are being treated?”

“We have to look at the people and structures who bring migrants and exploit them for their own petty interests,” German Interior minister Thomas de Maiziere told the Rheinischer Post last month.

In any case, the low wage situation in Germany is about to change. The SPD have managed to push through a project to introduce a minimum wage of €8.50 as of next

8

year, which in turn is expected to attract even more immigrants to the country.

Lack of new narrative, lack of interest

An interesting phenomenon in German politics is that politicians are aware of that young people in Germany are apathetic to the activities of the European Union, because of its complexity. This is why it cannot be claimed that young Germans are particularly eurosceptic, just indifferent.

“There is not much real passion about Europe for younger generations anymore, because the EU does not have a proper story to tell anymore,” says Dr Carina Sprungk.

Martin Hoffmann, chairman of the European Youth Parliament in Berlin, believes that the older generations have been generally more positive towards the whole European project, both because the European Union was smaller at the time and because it symbolised peace-building.

But for young people, who have grown up in the European Union, this idea is no longer tangible for them. Hoffmann agrees with Dr Sprungk that the EU needs a new approach in order to attract the interest of the younger generation.

“The old narrative doesn’t work for them anymore,” says Hoffmann. “So, what is the new narrative? All these accomplishments, achieved by the European Union, they take

for granted: travelling without borders, one currency, that’s standard. That won’t go away for them.”

“From a European perspective, we shouldn’t be so egocentric and think that everybody is coming to Germany. These people move to other countries as well,” says Hoffmann about the misconceptions over migrant workers.

“The other thing is that also German people move abroad. That’s the whole idea of this thing. If you want to have mobility for yourself, why shouldn’t you allow it for other people?”

What both Schütze and Lippman have in common in terms of their perception of the European Union is confusion. They say they aren’t sure whether they will vote in the upcoming European Parliament elections, because they don’t feel informed enough about European politics and they don’t think their vote will make a difference.

This is also the case with Gergana Zlateva, who says: “I’m not really interested in politics and I don’t want to get involved in something that I’m not really familiar with.”

This attitude appears to be really prominent among young people not only in Germany, but across Europe. In general, young Europeans feel the European Union is a concept too distant and too abstract for them, which is why many young people find themselves indifferent to European affairs.

UROVIEWS

Their rhetoric is not as rash as Marine Le Pen’s Front National in France, or Nigel Farage’s Ukip in the UK—this is a party of academics. AfD leader Bernd Lucke and second in line Hans-Olaf Henkel are both professors at the University of Hamburg.

Their proposals are founded in facts and arguments, they say, but their ideas make most politicians uneasy.

Sign: More freedom, less Brussels (Photos by Michelle Pucci)

by Michelle Pucci

P

ro-EU politicians breathed a collective sigh of relief last September, when the AfD failed to reach the 5 per cent threshold needed to enter Germany’s parliament, the Bundestag. But with the country’s constitutional court ruling to abolish a similar threshold to enter the European Parliament, the AfD has a clear shot at making it to Brussels.

Even though these newcomers didn’t reach the 5 per cent hurdle necessary to elect MPs, they came pretty close, mostly by absorbing former FDP voters. The neo-liberal party that was part of Merkel’s last coalition government self-destructed over the years after a series of gaffes and the changing of their leader discouraged their liberal vot-

UROVIEWS

ers. The AfD also won more votes in ridings where the far-right extremist NPD did best in the 2009 election.

This leaves the eurosceptic party with a piecemeal membership of generally unhappy citizens, expansionist-minded people, and a few xenophobic hardliners thrown in—making the image of a ‘professors party which fights for the concerns of everyone difficult to maintain.

Katarina Barley, a social-democrat member of the Bundestag, isn’t shaken by the presence of extreme left and right parties in Germany. Political extremes are not as pronounced in Germany as they are in other countries, she says.

“Germany, I think has this problem less than other countries, maybe because of history, and we’re aware of that,” says Barley. “I

fear that the AfD will be successful at the end of this European election, but I hope that in the long run people will understand that either on the national or European levels, this politic leads us nowhere.”

Too strong for the euro

The AfD tries to argue that leaving the euro is best for everyone, because Germany is too strong for the current eurozone, which now includes 18 EU member states. The German economy benefits from the fact that the other countries with the same currency are too expensive, they say, and southern European countries have difficulty stabilising their economies because they cannot compete.

After an onslaught of criticism in earlier campaigns, the party shifted their focus away from reintroducing Germany’s former

9

currency the deutschmark, and now advocates for redesigned eurozones. The party proposes creating regional euros, for example, a north euro and a south euro, or state opt outs for economically fragile countries such as Portugal or dominating countries like Germany. According to the AfD, allowing Greece to have control over its own currency would give the country room to devalue it and attract investors and tourists.

“Why do we stop Greece from opting out the euro?” says Rainer Erkens, campaign strategist for the AfD. “You go to Greece, you’ll pay €3 to €4 for a cappuccino. You go to Turkey and you pay €1, and it’s 30km away.”

According to Erkens, the current euro is full of distortions. Countries with great economic disparities cannot belong to the same currency without massive state intervention and subsidies.

“There might have been more euroscepticism in Germany had there been a real public debate” Carina Sprungk, professor of European Integration at the Free University of Berlin

Thilo Sarrazin, the controversial ex-social-democrat and immigration critic, declared his support for the newcomers earlier this year.

“The economic competence in the AfD is bigger than in the leadership of the SPD, CDU and CSU combined,” Sarrazin said recently during a press conference.

Sarrazin has written several books with

racist claims concerning immigrants that gained him notoriety in the German media.

Formerly a member of the board of Germany’s national bank, the Bundesbank, Sarrazin’s economic opinions, as well as his views on unskilled migrants, mirrors the AfD’s.

Even though these highly visible figures agree, leaving the common currency won’t be happening in the near future. According to the latest Eurobarometre findings, seven out of ten Germans feel as close to the euro as they do to the European community.

The AfD doesn’t want to abolish or leave the EU, says Erkens—a clear difference from British anti-EU Ukip’s mandate. But it’s unlikely that dismantling the eurozone is even an option.

According to Mathias Jopp, director of the Institute for European Politics, an organization dedicated to studying European integration, there is no way for Germany to leave the eurozone, without destroying the EU. “It’s an absolute illusion to say ‘I’m against the euro. I’ll do European integration minus euro, minus agricultural policy, minus home and justice affairs. I pick and choose what I want and the show goes on,’” says Jopp. “This is absolutely crazy.”

Parties campaigning against the euro in Germany are not new. The euro has always been a controversial idea for a country with the strongest currency. Unlike the Pro-DM, one of the right-wing parties founded in the 1990s with the sole purpose of campaigning against the euro, the AfD is trying to flesh out a programme that doesn’t revolve

The Institute for European Politics has studied European integration since 1959, and is one of the oldest institutes of its kind in Germany. Mathias Jopp, is the director of the Institute and a professor at Eberhard Karls University of Tübingen.

10

around a single issue.

They are now focusing on issues such as a new immigration policy tailored to the needs of the economy, and reducing EU influence in areas that are unnecessary, such as legislations on cucumber curvature and vacuum cleaners.

Permissive consensus

A pro-European attitude fits with post-war Germany’s efforts to strengthen European and trans-Atlantic bonds. European integration was initially seen mostly as a free market expansion and a way to establish a democratic culture within German society.

“Unlike other countries there has never been a real public debate on membership of Germany in the European Union,” says Carina Sprungk, professor of European Integration at the Free University of Berlin.

“There might have been more euroscepticism in Germany had there been a real public debate.”

Further European integration has for the most part remained unchallenged, and the EU is still a part of every German student’s curriculum. Mainstream media and political and cultural elites never criticise the union outright, creating a “consensus” that was transferred to the population. This consensus exists because Germany benefits from being an EU member, says Sprungk.

“I grew up in Western Germany, and I grew up with the feeling that we belong to Europe,” she says. “It was part of my high school education—there was no debate about being part of Europe.”

Any anti-European ideas have been moderate at worst, and usually focus on defending the powers of the Länder, the states of Germany. The government’s checks and balances system ensures that extreme positions never gain much momentum.

On Ash Wednesday, March 5, the traditional gathering of politicians in a beer tent resulted in Brussels-bashing from the CSU head Horst Seehofer and vice-president Peter Gauweiler.

“This urge by the European Commission is strangling the European idea,” Seehofer said after a few beers in Passau. “Get rid of this centralism and bureaucracy.”

Gauweiler went on to compare EU leaders to the Emperor’s New Clothes, calling them “naked, stupid emperors.”

These attacks against the EU are expected of the party, which has always emphasised Bavarian powers, and must now work to keep more sceptical voters from turning to the AfD.

UROVIEWS

But the CSU may end up being the ex- Merkel’s face all over them. Former Luxem- extreme-left and right is the result of the ception. Jopp believes the AfD could be the bourg Prime Minister Jean-Claude Junker, different histories in post-war Germany, exnegative stimulus Germany needs to make who is running in the first-ever EP presi- plains Jopp.

EU issues more prominent. dential race, is nowhere to be seen.

Carina Sprungk agrees that mainstream Treaties and the EU parties will be forced to sharpen their stance Regional differences The European Union, unlike all Euroon European politics. “Some of the parties Experts agree that, to a certain extent, antipean countries, does not have a Conmight take a more pro-European attitude in EU sentiments are bound by regional borstitution. Instead, it governs based on order to delineate themselves further from ders within Germany. In Bavaria, the longtreaties, which are signed and ratified this extreme party with regards to the euro,” ruling CSU has always been more distant in every EU member state. she says. from the EU than its sister party the CDU. The most recent treaty reform estabDuring the 2009 elections, euroscepticism In former East German regions, Die lished the Treaty of Lisbon in 2009. was covered in the media as other countries’ Linke, a leftist party with roots that go back Some important changes gave the problems: a foreign issue. While Germany to the former communist government, reEuropean Parliament more lawmakisn’t always making the first move towards mains strong. East Germany, however, is ing powers and the right to elect the integration, euroscepticism in Germany has also where the neo-Nazi NPD wins more next president of the European Comlargely been taboo. support and is present in two regional parmission.

The lowest reported turnout in 2009 liaments. And in the last federal election, weighed heavily on Germany’s pro-EU im- the AfD won more than 5 per cent of votes age, but European elections were overshad- in many eastern Länder.

“The West Germans were far more acowed by national elections, which were takA higher unemployment rate, notably in quainted with the whole idea of European ing place later that year. the east, also coincides with more support integration, because this was the way to In 2009, 43 per cent of Germans better the reputation of Germany voted in the EP elections, exactly “You can call me eurosceptic because I have criticisms on after the second world war,” says the same as the average turnout the way they are dealing with things, but I am in favour Jopp. “Part of the history which of EU member states. While this of European integration” didn’t play any role for the citizens number isn’t as dismal as the 20 of the East.”

Andrej Hunko, Die Linke MP per cent turnout in Slovakia, or “But whether this is true for the even the 37 per cent turnout in the Neth- for less EU-positive parties. Euroscepticism younger generation, I really don’t know,” he erlands, it does contrast strongly with the is prevalent where people are unhappiest. added.

71 per cent participation rate at the federal “The less you profit from the European election last September.

Union the higher the euroscepticism is,” Social union This time around, European election says MP Barley.

Sifting through research, a recurring critiposters for the CDU still have the Angela This polarisation of support for both the cism of the EU is the need to improve the union’s social aspect. Despite living in one of the wealthiest countries in Europe, or perhaps because of this, many Germans perceive the EU as a peace alliance, a foundation to improve quality of life.

As a member of the Social Democratic Party, it comes as no surprise that Barley is calling for more social initiatives.

“We come from a European Union that was built on economic freedom, which was fine at the time,” says Barley. “It was a way to ensure freedom and peace all in all, but we have moved forward. We see that the freedom of trade and worker movement is lacking a counterpart: a protection of workers rights.”

Munich’s 18-metre-high bronze Bavaria monument is a symbol of the state’s strength and glory. Bavaria is Germany’s secondrichest and largest state and has its own regional representation in the Bundestag through the CSU.

UROVIEWS

11

The AfD believes the EU is intervening too much in national responsibilities. European politicians have criticised the German government’s efforts to limit unemployment benefits, a policy the AfD actually supports.

“The three freedoms [of the EU], the freedom of people, freedom of services, freedom of goods was never meant to be freedom of social transfers,” says AfD strategist Erkens.

Germany’s left-wing party Die Linke on the other hand supports what some would call a radical reinvention of the EU, to support social values through more regulations and redistribution of wealth.

“The European union is based on treaties, and these treaties are very much orientating towards neo-liberal politics,” says Die Linke MP Andrej Hunko. “We fear on that ground we will lose our social protections in different countries.”

“We are calling for the changing of the treaties of the European Union,” he says.

These two opposing criticisms of the EU want Europe to move in two different directions. Although it is true that large sums of money are transferred to less wealthy parts of Europe through the EU’s social fund and agricultural policies—these make up a majority of the EU’s budget—the amount in proportion to domestic government spending is still minimal.

“From this point of view, if you write it down as a number it looks like a lot, and if you write it down as a percentage it looks too little,” says Christian Baden, researcher at Munich’s Ludwig Maximillian University.

“Both ends of the spectrum can make their argument.”

Germany has an interesting role in this discussion as an important exporter within the EU and around the world. Europe’s single market is the main reason Germany has been able to stay competitive and financially secure, even during the currency crisis.

“Germany has benefitted the most from European integration,” says Jopp. “I think this is also clear to most of the citizens, that without the European Union, perhaps the position of Germany would not be the one that it is today.”

With the elections less than a month away and anti-EU parties gaining support in opinion polls, all eyes are on the AfD, and whom it decides to work with in the parliament.

“At the moment we are not talking anything at all about that,” says Erkens. “We keep all options open. Let’s see what looks promising.”

Erkens made one thing clear, the AfD won’t be working with Le Pen or Farage.

“This is a professor party, we have people with university doctorate degrees,” he says.

“It’s difficult to see them sitting with the Ukip. The Ukip is a proletarian party in its approach.”

GERMANY

What Europe is missing The upcoming European Parliament elections have revealed certain problems facing the European Union on its way to closer cooperation and integration. Every European election, citizens are more and more reluctant to vote. And even in a country like Germany, this problem is more than just tangible.

True colours With the local elections in Bavaria coming to a close at the end of March, Munich is still plastered with one-line slogans and forgettable faces of politicians.

In Bavaria, the official colours are white and blue, making the deep, flashy blue the AfD uses the obvious choice for other party campaigns. But, at least outside of Bavaria, the AfD sees it as an attack.

“The most ridiculous is that all these campaigns have taken our colours,” says the head of the AfD campaign. “’Make them invisible by simply stealing their colours.’”

He points out the SPD posters, which are also using blue and red this year, whereas their last elections only used red.

Although German media isn’t discussing campaign colour choices, the AfD is making headlines for other issues.

“We have a lot of problems internally,” Erkens says. “We are a young party, we have a lot of strange people inside still, a lot of infighting, so that stops us.”

Earlier this month, an AfD board member was asked to step down, after former ties with extremist party had been discovered.

“We have a lot of people who want to do with us things that are against our policies, people that want to destroy the EU,” he says.

“This is not our policy, but we have people like that in the party, who joined us for the wrong reasons.”

European election campaign posters by the Socialist Democratic Party of Germany in Munich featuring presidential hopeful Martin Schulz.

12

UROVIEWS

by Aliya Iskenderova

“N

o, I suppose, I have never really voted,” laughs Anja in response to my question about whether she knows about the upcoming European Parliament elections. Anja is a German teacher for immigrants in Berlin. The course she teaches, “Leben in Deutschland” (Living in Germany), prepares foreigners trying to live, study or work in Germany— an impossible feat without understanding the cultural and political aspects of the country.

In typical teacher fashion, Anja recites what she remembers from the course book about the EU: Germany was one of the founders of the economic union. Robert Schuman, French Foreign Minister at the time, had envisioned Europe as a united nation, a lofty ideal.

“Today the European Union is developing and changing, and partly it happens due to the expansion,” she continues. “It already has 27 countries.”

She hesitates and corrects herself. “Twenty-eight. I have a previous edition of the book.”

Anja’s students come from around the world. The teacher explains that today’s Europe would not exist without globalization. Some of her students, for example, are from Spain, because of the attractive conditions and possibilities of Germany. Quality

UROVIEWS

of life measured by GDP per inhabitant in the purchasing power standard (PPS) differs extremely across the EU. According to Eurostat data, Bulgaria, Romania and Latvia have the lowest living standards; the highest are in Luxembourg, Austria, the Netherlands and Ireland. Even with the attempts of the EU to improve living standards by protecting the environment, encouraging job creation and reducing regional disparities, Europe is still lacking solidarity. “We need some sort of security system that means ‘one for all and all for one.’ We should understand what the union is really made for.

Is it only money and commerce or is it also society and the nation?

“Today we are quite far from Schuman’s ideal,” she says. “We do not have a European identity. That is what Europe is missing in my opinion.”

European – to be or not to be?

According to Eurobarometer, public opinion surveys conducted by the European Commission, 73 per cent of the German population shares a sense of European citizenship. Germany is also among the member states in which respondents are most attached to the European Union. On the other hand, although Germans feel ‘European,’ it does not necessarily mean they acknowledge other nations as part of Europe. More

than a half of the German population has a low level of openness to other EU countries (59 per cent).

Andrej Hunko, Member of the German Parliament from Die Linke, supposes that the reason for this indifference is poor communication.

“It is a shame on the German public and media that the issues of the European Parliament are of little significance,” says Hunko. “We did not bring up the European public. We do not have a common European idea and reality. In Germany everyone knows about the Bundestag, the parties and its members, but the very few people know what is going on in Brussels on the European level.”

His left-wing party has one solution to this problem. The new party program has a proposal for media coverage of political issues in Germany and the EU. He wants to involve European politicians in national politics. For example, if members of the Bundestag, Germany’s parliament, are debating over Greece, they should invite someone from another national government or the European Parliament to discuss the topic. This would be broadcasted in local media and would help shape a European consciousness.

The communication problem between the public and European institutions was

13

Quality of life in the EU. Living standards can be compared by measuring the price of a range of goods and services in each country relative to income, using a common national currency called the purchasing power standard (PPS).

Comparing GDP per inhabitant in PPS provides an overview of living standards across the EU. Eurostat data

also mentioned by Antije Gerstein, managing director of the Bundesvereinigung der Deutschen Arbeitgeberverbänd (BDA), as a cause of the euroscepticism in Germany.

The BDA is an umbrella organisation of employer’s associations across Germany “Our government missed out to explain Europe,” says Gerstein. “And to explain why it is so important to the nation. Today even if media is reporting about the EU, it is mostly negative coverage.”

Lack of communication and the absence of a European identity are not the only reasons of sceptical sentiments. According to Gerstein, wrong implementations of a European directive, or so-called gold-plating, also blends the truth.

“The national governments usually put something on top of the law that came from the EU,” she says. “But the public does not know anything about this internal intervention. So the EU is made a scapegoat. If the German government wants to take people on board, it must explain Europe much better.”

have never ever voted for the EU,” she says.

“I do not think I will vote this time either. I am kind of frustrated because I think that my vote does not have any influence at all.”

Since 1979, when the European Parliament first became a directly elected EU institution, the average voter turnout has fallen. During the last elections in 2009, the turnout in Germany was 43 per cent.

Germany held Bundestag elections last autumn where more than 70 per cent of the population took part. “We have more people not voting at all in the European elections than people who vote for CDU,” says Rainer Erkens, head of the Alternative für Deutschland’s European election campaign. “There are so many Germans that have dropped out from the political system because they have the feeling that politics does not care about ordinary people anymore. And the problem is that the government just accepts that the

nation does not vote anymore.”

But put in context, the problem does not look that frightening. In local elections in German communes, for example, which are figuratively and literally closer to the home, voter turnout is usually even lower.

“The argument of low voter turnout sometimes is used as an argument to delegitimize the EU institutions,” says Reinhard Hönighaus, spokesperson and head of the press office of the European Commission’s representation in Berlin. “Opponents say that people do not care about the European elections so it is not democratic and legitimized.

“And if you look at the presidential elections in the US where voters have quite obvious choices, the voter turnout is also not super impressive. And nobody would ever challenge that they are not democratic elections.”

“Our government missed out to explain Europe, and to explain why it is so important” Antije Gerstein, managing director of BDA

How to engage Europeans this time?

In March, Koblenz, a city on the west of Germany, hosted a Citizens’ Dialogue debate on the future of Europe devoted to the situation in Ukraine. It gathered more than 300 citizens for the discussion. The Koblenz Dialogue is part of over 50 debates in all

EU citizenship. More than 70 per cent of Germans consider themselves European. In contrast, almost a half of the EU population does not identify themselves as European citizens. Eurostat data

member states with citizens on different topics. The idea of is to give ordinary people an opportunity to speak directly to EU politicians about the Europe they want to live in.

It seems like this time the European institutions are more prepared for the elections.

Other than Citizens’ Dialogue there are over 100 Europe Direct contact centres across the union, where citizens can pass by and get information or talk with a competent person on an issue connected to the EU. Citizens can also refer to the representations in each European country. Germany alone has three European Commission representations: in Berlin, Bonn and Munich.

There is also the Europe Direct line that

citizens can call for free from any member state and get advice.

“We have created so many ways that citizens can use,” explains Mina Andreeva, spokesperson of the European Commission.

“But on the other hand how engaged are they themselves? The EU can provide a lot of information, but if there is no appetite from citizens, then we cannot force them.

“If citizens have criticism towards the European Union, then they should express this criticism by giving their voice in the European Parliament elections. People have to understand that if they do not vote, then they are not constructively building the Europe of tomorrow.”

For the first time, the European Parliament elections have personalities that are visible for voters. Every European party has to designate a candidate who could be the next president of the European Commission. Now people can directly influence the structure of the commission by giving their vote to the party whose candidate they want to support. So if Germans vote, for example, for the CDU, their vote goes to the European People’s Party at the EU level because they belong to the same party family.

“We took all the measures to make these elections more transparent and boost participation. So we are looking forward to seeing the results of these elections,” says Andreeva.

The upcoming parliament elections will also be followed with the TV debates. Some national TV channels have already started

“We do not have a European identity” Anja, German language teacher

I will not vote

In Anja’s recent lesson, her students were involved in a discussion about the future of the EU and Germany’s place in it. Students from Turkey brought up a sensitive topic when they asked when their country would become a part of the Union. Germany, one of the most powerful actors in Europe, seems too influential to some students and should relax its grip on the EU and potential members.

Even after touching on such important topics, Anja is not interested in taking part in the upcoming European Parliament elections. Rumors about bureaucracy and the craziness of politics deter her from voting. “I

14

Openness index. The EU conducted the survey that shows the level of openness of Germany to other EU countries. The posed question were following: Have you socialised with people from another EU country; watched TV in a foreign language; visited another EU country, etc? Eurostat data

to host debates with the leading candidates from the two biggest political groups.

According to Hönighaus, the two biggest public channels in Germany will broadcast the debates. Germans can see the main candidates on ARD, which hosts the debates on May 8, and on May 20 and 22, there will be debates between the top German candidates on ZDF. The European debates with all European candidates, organised by the European Broadcasting Union (EBU), will be broadcasted on May 15 across Europe.

“People will see that there is actually a choice for them in the European Parliament elections on the course that Europe can take in its approach towards Russia, energy policy and the best ways to come out of the crisis. I am quite confident that this will create a dynamic in the next weeks, that we will see more interest in the EU elections than we have seen the previous times,” says Hönighaus.

The idea of Europe

”I choose Europe because” campaign on Face Europe website, where users can create memes. On this picture: “I choose Europe becuase I have no idea about politics.”

UROVIEWS

Andrej Hunko, member of the Bundestag belives that it is possible in the future to create the European reality.

(Photo by Aliya Iskenderova)

UROVIEWS

The European Union has a place in Anja’s everyday life. But her critical relation to it is understandable. “The idea of the European Union is brilliant. I can travel across the Europe. I do not have to present my passport at the borders. I do not have to change the currency. And I can help the other Europeans, who want to move to Germany to get their lives back together,” she says. “But now the EU is nowhere near the same as the US, for example. We still have problems that make it complicated to feel united. But it would be great to be European.”

15

BULGARIA

BULGARIA

Bulgaria W

Youth believes in Europe, not in Bulgaria

ith a history laced with that of the Ottomans, Soviets and Nazis, there is plenty of political pull around Bulgaria. A new arrival into the European Union circle of 28, their relative economic frailty has indirectly resulted in some less than ideal reactions from their fellow EU member states. Euroscepticism is rare within the country, though nationalist parties like Ataka attract a fair number of votes. The mood among Bulgarians with regard to the European Union itself is bouyant. The reaction the country has evoked in foreign media, however, is not so good, and has led to some ill feelings among national politicians.

“The European Union is supposed to be the Europe of the nations. Instead of this, it has turned into a Europe of two or three big countries” Kristiyan Dimitrov, member of the Bulgarian assembly for Ataka

They have grown up with the blue flag and its twelve yellow stars. Young Bulgarians were expecting a lot from the European Union. Seven years later, they are mostly happy to be part of it. However, some think the EU could have achieved more things in Bulgaria.

Hopes and disillusions, European member-state but second-hand country, those who have lived through the accession to the Union tell what has changed and what has not.

by Paul Burgaud

S

ofia, January 1 2007. Several flashes of light break through the starry sky of the Bulgarian capital. The beams of light start from the impressive orthodox cathedral, the Armenian Church, a synagogue, a mosque and another church. Fireworks illuminate the crowd. Thousands of people gathered in Battemberg Square to celebrate the event: Bulgaria officially joins the European Union.

“But let’s make it clear, our future success as a nation depends not on European funds and resources, but on our own work,” says Georgi Parvanov, former Bulgarian president.

Seven years have passed and Bulgaria has had time to see how the union has changed the country. Not that much if you listen to people in the street or even if you look at statistics.

When the USSR collapsed in 1989, Bulgaria lost the market it used to share with the other member-states of the soviet Comecon (Council for mutual economic assistance). Today

16

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

Bulgaria is the poorest member of the EU with the lowest GDP. Corruption and mafia still run the nation. However it is not worse than before and Bulgarians do not especially blame Brussels. Quite the opposite, Bulgarians are not among the most eurosceptic population.

In a 2011 Eurobarometer poll, one out of two citizens thought their country membership in the union was a good thing, the same number thought they benefited from it or tend to trust the European Commission. The young generation, the one who has grown up with the European Union, its poster, speeches and flag has quite a good relationship with the organisation.

“I was 15 years old when Bulgaria became member of the European Union in 2007 and I remember very well that people were very excited about the membership in the EU,” Kiril Ganchev, a 22 year old and student says, “I think that the biggest benefit of our member-

ship is that people can travel in the European Union very freely. They do not need visa or any special documents. All they need is their passport or their national ID card and that’s all”.

Kiril studies political sciences in the Sofia University and will probably study abroad for his master. Because with the right to freedom of movement, comes the right to study abroad.

A new privilege that lots of Bulgarians students enjoy and use. “Most young people are not so sceptic about the membership of Bulgaria,” says Kiril, standing near the shadow of the impressive Saint Kliment Ohridski University. “They are the ones who benefit from it because they can study in other countries in Western Europe where education is at a higher level and better.”

Indeed, in 2012, about 10 000 Bulgarians attended courses abroad, mainly in Germany, UK, Netherlands or Denmark. It is twice as much as the number of Romanians studying

17

Gergana Radoykova and Viktor Michailov, PhD students in European studies. “There is a joke saying whatever union Bulgaria joins, it will fall apart.” (Photos by Paul Burgaud)

abroad. The western countries represent real opportunities for them. They think they are more likely to find a job there than in their own country. As a consequence, many young people leave the country and villages are emptying. “People who are younger will not stay here,” wrote a Bulgarian on an internet forum, talking about what do people think about the European Union. “They will all go to live and work in the western part of EU for there is no economy here and no hope that there will be any in the near future.”

Growing up in with the West

It is true that the youngest are those who enjoy the most changes brought by the European Union. “For the younger generation who can live actively, it’s just a natural thing to travel while for the older generation nothing has really changed,” explains Viktor Michailov, PhD student in European Studies.

Indeed, one of the reasons that make young people less keen on being eurosceptic is sim- ply the fact that they were born with it. Even if it can be with some resignation or fatality, most of them consider that there is

no better alternative for Bulgaria right now than being in the union.

The young generation is used to seeing the European flag unlike their elders. They are used to hearing about France and Germany whereas their grandparents know more about Russia or Ukraine. “It was the Russians that who gave us jobs, not the Europeans,” is something that you can hear from them ac- cording to the PhD student and his colleague, Gergana Radoykova.

Growing up in globalised world has made these citizens feel closer to their western friends. “We’re watching the same shows, movies, we live in the same culture,” he adds. “The young people know nothing about Rus- sia.

Their Russia is something dark, terrifying— which of course is not true—because they don’t know Russia just like the older generation don’t know the West,” completes Gergana.

The miracle didn’t happen

The first advantages of travelling and studying abroad mentioned, what else can young Bulgarians be thankful to the EU for? What else changed in the country? If some things have

changed it is certainly less than they expected.

Before January 1 2007, the general feeling was really positive towards the European Union. Everyone was expecting a real improvement to their life standard, and to the national economy. The same miracles that happened to other countries who joined the organisation after the collapse of communism: Czech Republic, Estonia, Hungary, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, and Slovenia: “People needed a goal after these turbulent times, they needed something to follow,” explains Gergana.

According to Kiril Ganchev, one of the most critical towards the EU in his political sciences club, people thought the union would change their life but it didn’t do a lot in Bulgaria.

“I think the biggest expectations were that the EU would help our country more about get- ting the salaries bigger, the life standard and all”. Some hopes and visions that were strengthened by pro-EU propaganda made by the former government. But in the end nothing dramatically changed in the country. The same happened for Romania who joined the EU the same year as Bulgaria. Five years after its membership, Romania GDP increased 14 per cent while Bulgaria grown its own of 21 per cent. To compare, Slovakia, who became a member three years before Bulgaria, increased its GDP of 55 per cent in five years.

“They expected some magical mechanism from the European Union. But there was none” Slavi Binev, Bulgarian member of the European Parliament

“Before Bulgaria joined the European Union we were in a good economic cycle and people thought this would last at least 10 or 15 years,” tells Kiril. “But the 2008 crisis happened and people thought the European Union didn’t really help our country.”

It is true, that the only changes made by the government with the European Union funds are minor ones. “If you look around most of the things that happened in Bulgaria as a progress; construction work, infrastructure, ... Everything is basically done with European Union funds. So If you pay attention you can see more or less positive things,” thinks Viktor, the 22 year-old student. “But people considers their life. If my needs are satisfied I pay attention to these things, if not I don’t care.” “‘the economy will grow up, freedom to travel, goods to export, everything will be perfect’, this was what the government said” tells Ronnie, another Bulgarian disappointed by the EU. When he was 26 he used to believe the membership would bring growth and jobs to Bulgaria. He quickly changed his mind when all the promises made by the politicians did not become reality. Today, listening to him, he makes it sound like Bulgaria was doing better before joining the European Union.

“We had our economy, we could produce a lot of food, and we exported towards Eastern Europe. Our profit was enough for the whole nation,” says Ronnie. Working in a Research and Marketing company, he travels a lot and saw how people live in richer countries. “The money was also concentrated in the government but there was job for almost everybody.

Now there is none, like in western countries.

In the same time the prices raised up after getting inside the European Union. The gasoline is the same price as in Western Europe but our salaries are not the same as there,“ says the 31-year-old man.

Unpopular Bulgarians

The economic boom didn’t happen as it has happened for other member-state like Poland for example. Despite having grown up as Eu- ropean Union citizens, Bulgarians do not think they are part of it. The main reason that

Kiril Ganchev, student in political sciences at the Sofia university, thinks people have to criticise the EU “because it is the only we can change it”.

can explain that feeling is the relationship they share with the others western countries.

“Bulgaria feels unappreciated because in other countries they talk about Bulgarians and Romanians as a threat that’s going to come and take their jobs. Especially Bulgarians living there who have to face it everyday.” criticises Viktor Michailov. “They are seen as second hand Europeans or immigrants. They are not European citizens using their right to travel freely. When you go there you consider your- self educated and you face an attitude... You’re just a second hand.” This is a feeling that many of Viktor’s compatriots experienced.

Dinko Andreev, 28 years old, is one them.

He’s an engineer in Sofia, he studied and graduated to do this job. Once his company sennt him and his colleagues to London for a training week. After a couple of days the tutor, quite surprised, told Dinko’s boss that they were al- ready skilled enough and did not need to learn more. The Bulgarian business man replied “They’re engineer with

Kristiyan Dimitrov, 22 years old and member of the Bulgarian assembly for Ataka. He thinks that He feels like Bulgarians are considered as “second-hand people”.

master degree! What degree! What did you expect?” Again, Bulgarians were underrated just because of their nationality.

This is one of the main problems that feeds the eurosceptic feeling. The extreme right party, Ataka, is the representative of euroscepticism on the local political stage and confirms that this is one of the reasons they are sceptic.

“If the people of certain European countries regard us as some second-hand people and do not respect us, then how and why should we be member of such a union?” Kristiyan Dimitrov asks, 22 years old and member of the Bulgarian assembly for Ataka. “They look down on us, they despise us and do not have

“Thinking that the European Union is a really good organisation would mean being blind about its negative aspects” Kiril Ganchev, student in political sciences

any respect towards Bulgarians.”

“Romania and Bulgaria were left as the crap of the European community,” says Ronnie, former EU supporter. Now he hates the condescending attitude the European politicians have towards his country. “And now they are coming to say you didn’t do that or this. Fuck you! Who didn’t do that? Me, as a Bulgarian worker or my fucking government?”

Blaming the government

A part of the young generation would like to believe in the European Union and its politi- cians. The problem is that Bulgarians see them doing business with their own local govern- ment that the majority agrees to qualify as highly corrupted. In that way the EU is dis- crediting itself.

Slavi Binev, member of the European Pariament and of the National Front for the Salvation of Bulgaria party, agrees with this. “People are very confused. Because

18

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

19

BULGARIA

Bad press: how EU media is viewed in Bulgaria Bulgarians protesting against their government in front of the parliament. The man’s sign reads “resign“.

they know that all these problems come from the government,” he explains. “They are realist, they know that come from the stupid things our government made.

But when the authorities of the European Union come here, they always shake hands with our government.”

Moreover, the mistakes done by this government brings sanctions from the European institutions. In the end, Bulgarians are the first ones to suffer from it. For example, in 2008, the EU froze hundreds of millions of euros because Bulgaria had not solved the corruption problem. It is called the Cooperation and Verification Mechanism (CVM) and it is aimed to follow the progress of the country in the judicial, corruption and crime fields and to

advise the governent to apply lots of different reforms.

Indeed, some of the young Bulgarian generation thought the EU would sanction their leaders directly and change their main prob- lem: the local politicians. “I expected more controls, laws. But they are trying to com- mand the people, not the government” regrets Ronnie, who does not the trust Bulgarians politicians any more.

“Nobody controls my government, nobody takes step against it.”

“Most of them thought that some European experts would come to Bulgaria and would show our politicians how things has to be changed,” says sadly Kiril Ganchev, the political sciences student. “But they are just making some requirements and we just have

to do them.” Thus the problem for the Bulgarian youth is not directly the EU itself but more their own local government, here in Sofia. “They believe in the European Union but not in Bulgaria, they don’t believe we are a real partner and member in the European Union,” analyses Slavi Binev, the Bulgarian politician in his office. “Because the implementation of law here is not exact. We are not a 100% democratic country.”

The union is far from perfect. Young Bulgarians citizens know this but they are happy with what they gain from it so far. The only thing that prevents them from imagining a better future is their government. As long as will remains as corrupted as it is right now, Bulgaria will never truly enjoy the advantages of being a European member-state.

Ataka, euroscepticism and the youth Ataka is the main euroscepticism party in the country. However, it is still a minor party in Bulgarian politics and young people do not worship it. “Stupid”, “dangerous” or “sick”. These are the words they usually use to describe Ataka. A 2005 study made by the Gallup Bulgaria showed that the most numerous group age of its electorate had an age between 30 and 40 years old.

Ivaylo Donchev, student in law, used to support them, mostly because of patriotism. He stopped when they became too agressive towards ethnic minorities. According to him, Ataka choose to position itself as eurosceptic purely by political strategy. “Their euroscepticism is not sincere. Those people are just taking advantage of certain parts of the electorate. There was room for such vote and they took it.” The party promises to protect the national interests against a European Union which would erase their culture and identity.

To these accusations, Ataka mainly answers by casting the blame at the medias doorstep. Kristiyan Dimitrov, member of the party, blames them for doing a “black campaign” against them. “In a way, this has stopped probably a number of young people to understand what we stand for, our concept and our vision” says the 22-year-old man. According to him, the eurosceptic position has always been the policy of the leader, Volen Siderov, even before 2005. “He was always consistent in terms of his vision and policy about the danger of a membership of such structure as

20

There was lots of talk at the beginning of the year about how the lifting of these limits could impact the EU however, what does Bulgaria feel about this and the media coverage that surrounded the limits being relinquished?

by Fred Tongue

J

anuary 1: the ban is lifted. Bulgarians and Romanians are free to venture as they please across the European Union.

Many predicted a wave of immigration from the two countries with their newfound rights. However, it was not so. In the first month of the alleviation of the rules, less than 30 Bulgarians arrived in the UK halfway through the month of January, hardly a wave as had been forecast.

The bans in place, before being lifted on January 1, were that employers had to apply for an “accession worker card” for higher qualified jobs, and for low skilled jobs in food preparation and agriculture sectors there were quota schemes. Nine countries imposed these limitations, including the United Kingdom, Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Luxembourg, Malta, Spain and the Netherlands.

Reasons for the limits

Graffiti on an Alfa TV advertising sign (Ataka’s channel). It says “Volen is sick“.

NATO and the European Union could bring to Bulgaria.”

Despite the fact that Ataka might not be popular among the Bulgarian youth, the party can point to their younger followers.

Ataka has a really actve youth organisation in which Kristiyan did his first steps. The party enables the young recruits to quickly climb through the ranks and include them in the decision making processes. The seduction method is efficient because the extreme-right party has the largest number of young members in the Bulgarian assembly.

UROVIEWS

The official reason, according to Britain, France and the Netherlands, for the countries limits was to protect their labour markets from disruption.

Other reasons for the limits were that both Romania and Bulgaria have problems to work within their own borders. Speaking to Michael Davidson, head of politics at the British Embassy in Sofia, he said, “Bulgaria and Romania were singled out as having particular issues, with their judicial system, with corruption and with tackling organised crime.”

He goes on to say, “They’re under something called the CVM mechanism, which is the correction verification mechanism, that’s a European commission led reporting cycle that has benchmarks for Bulgaria

UROVIEWS

(Photo by Paul Burgaud)

and Romania to achieve in order for us to be comfortable they are tackling organised crime, that they are tackling corruption and that they are reforming their judicial systems.”

The reasons for the corruption, judicial and problems with organised crimes can be traced back to the political landscape of Bulgaria. After the fall of communism in Bulgaria, the former communist party became the Bulgarian Socialist Party and in 1990 won the first post-communist elections. The country was establishing a democracy after 50 years of de facto rule by the USSR. Bul-

garia wanted to align itself with the EU and NATO. In the ensuing elections the country went through several government changes and as such could not stick to one coherent plan for the direction the country should take. Slavi Binev, a European Member of Parliament (MEP) and member of the National Front for the Salvation of Bulgaria, is very sceptical of the current political landscape.

“They do the voting [for parliament] like in the former Soviet Union, ‘how much do you want?’ Okay,” he said, in regards to gaining seats in the parliament. When asked

21

what the public knew about the situation Binev said, “They don’t know everything.”

For these reasons Bulgaria was put under sanctions in 2007. With many people citing these reasons for the aforementioned sanctions, the first of their kind imposed on an EU member state, by other EU member states.

people felt extremely passionately about.

Elaborating on this, Viktor Michailov says, “you consider yourself modern, civilised, educated… but, ‘ah, you’re Bulgarian’.”

“So I always had a taxi driver. I don’t know if he’d wait for me, but I had him quite frequently, where he’d tell me I hate England, I never want to live there,” said Davidson, he then carried on with another anecdote, “I would meet people in conferences who would say, ‘your papers are all saying we want to come live in England, what’s so great about England?’”

Feeling on the ground

With the wave of immigrants from Eastern Europe set to be a “huge issue”, in the words of Nigel Farage, leader of the United Kingdom Independence Party, how empty is Bulgaria? Upon arrival, the city of Sofia was far from empty. The streets were full of people going about their daily business. So clearly some Bulgarians remained behind.

We spoke to Diana Trifonova, a freelance journalist. We asked her how the limits made her feel.

“Our politicians have problems adjusting to new systems, so I think that adapting things happened alright in this case,” she says.

We also spoke to her colleague Stella Stanislavova, also a freelance journalist, and asked her the same question. She says, “I felt good about it. It’s not something that made me feel bad.” We spoke to many Bulgarians, in brief, about the topic and the feedback was much the same. There is a strong distrust of the government in Bulgaria. There have been over 300 days of protest against the current methods for running the country. The people that spoke to us seemed very trusting of the EU. This is understandable for a country that receives far more from the EU in grants and funding, than it contributes.

The feeling from Bulgarians that spoke

“I have a friend in Britain and she was... offended by the attitude” Gergana Radoykova, PhD student in European Studies

to us is that the limitations were not a bad thing. Even Binev, a strong nationalist, did

The BBC’s error, swtiching the Romanian and Bulgarian flags.

(Photo by BBC)

not single out the limits as a bad thing in our discussion with him. When asked what his biggest issues with the EU were he said, “I’m against the double standard, against two or three speeds [countries plans] in the euro union.” What people had the biggest issue with, was the media portrayals of Bulgarians in foreign press, in particular in the United Kingdom.

When asked about the media coverage, Trifonova said, “I saw some of it online and I think that the basic problem was that not all the information was presented to the public, and it was [portrayed as] just people invading the country and ruining the social system.”

The Bulgarians we spoke to in Sofia felt strongly about their national image and that there was an unfair picture painted of them from the very countries they were meant to be partners with. “The media coverage covers the obvious. If you’re qualified you’re qualified, you will be okay, it doesn’t matter if you are from Bulgaria or somewhere else,” Stella says when asked about whether the media coverage made her less likely to look for work else where in the EU. We also spoke to two students with PhDs in European Studies: Viktor Michailov and Gergana Radoykova. When asked how the limits made Viktor feel, he responded with,

“[I] don’t feel equal.” He said he felt the media coverage was unfair and that he was annoyed at how Bulgaria was being talked of “as a menace”.

Gergana felt similarly, but went on to add, “you’re offended of course, but it’s better than we had before.” Viktor then said that, “people are getting frustrated,” in reference to the feelings of Bulgarians who are thinking of travelling abroad to look for jobs. On the one hand there is more money abroad, however they are worried about the reception that they will receive when do they do arrive.

“I have a friend in Britain and she was… offended by the attitude.”

Slavi Binev, MEP, also brought up another point about the reasons for Bulgarians not immigrating in huge numbers to the UK, Germany and France, for example. “Britain and Bulgaria are not close to each other, culturally we are far. People from Bulgaria would rather live in places like Spain and Greece.” He adds, “and for this reason there is no danger to Britain from Bulgaria.”

Too much too soon?

With Bulgaria and Romania being the only two countries to have a transition period in this way, it naturally led to questions about whether or not the two countries were ready at all. Big questions were asked about the crime situation in Bulgaria. There is a relatively large Bulgarian mafia, with influence from Turkey and Russia. The mafia are credited with crimes ranging from drug trafficking to arms dealing and human trafficking.

Insurance and security companies often front the Bulgarian mafia. Naturally the EU was wary of this; with free movement, an organisation of this kind could multiply untold times and spread across the EU. In a Corruption Perceptions Index for 2013 Bulgaria ranked as the 77th most cor-

Where do they go now?

Anti-government protests outside the government building in Sofia. Despite this they still support the EU. (Photo by Paul Burgaud)

rupt nation in the world, the worst in the EU. With such a bad reputation for political corruption, the EU had to ensure that the funds were being spent in the right place and that those at the top would not take them.

However, Binev gave us some worrying news. “I’m 100% sure the money they spend advertising the election was stolen.

There is nothing [left to spend on advertising].” When further pushed about where the money has gone, he says, “It’s crazy, she [politician’s mistress] wins the tender to advertise the elections in Bulgaria. It is corruption, nothing else.” With this kind of condemnation coming from within the political system, and the ongoing protests outside the parliament, it is easy to see why the many EU states wanted to introduce Bulgaria into the EU slowly. There are problems within the country that could spread to other EU countries with complete integration.

other member states did the same thing.”

He adds, “I think it’s par for the course when you’re joining the EU that you have a certain… we call it a glide path, where you slowly enter and you get all of the rights.”

Davidson goes on to talk about the frustrations that were felt within Sofia in January. “The media speculation and the noise around the removing of the restrictions, that there’d be a wave of Bulgarians… particularly annoyed them because it singled them out.” This is a consensus that was echoed throughout all of our time in Bulgaria and all the people we spoke to, something that

A good question, especially when there are 26 other member states to choose from. The obvious choice would be Croatia or Greece as they are Balkan states, EU members and far closer geographically and culturally. In contrast to the nation states that imposed limits on the Bulgaria and Romania.

All things considered, there are some exceptions to the outcry against Bulgarian immigration in the UK. Many farmers in the UK want more Bulgarians to help them harvest crops. This is because modern, young Britons are moving away from the rural areas and feel that they are over qualified to gather crops several recent surveys have shown. On the contrary Bulgarians are far more willing to do this kind of work and farmers are calling for more of them to help.

There is already a history, under a past act nearly 22,000 Romanians and Bulgarians a year came to Britain for six months to help harvest.

There are other benefits as well. “[The government] educate them, train them to a high standard, particularly in IT and doctors, train in a state hospital for seven years and MEP Slavi Binev

How did frustrations show themselves?

When speaking to Michael Davidson, of the British Embassy, we asked whether there was any animosity towards Britain because of these limitations. We contacted Michael Davidson of the British Embassy because many of the Bulgarians we spoke to ear marked Britain for the negative media image. “Not really,” he says, “because a lot of

Graffiti on the Bulgarian National Assembly building in Sofia. (Photo by Fred Tongue)

22

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

23

then they’re free to go off and earn a much higher wage in the rest of Europe,” Davidson says, to prove that this is not just a one-way street for Britain. With many extremely well qualified IT experts and doctors, it may not all be bad. With the ever expanding IT industries and strain on the NHS in Britain it could be a case of a win-win for both Bulgaria and Britain.

“I would be worried about the brain drain from Bulgaria if I were Bulgarian,” Davidson goes on to say. Yet Bulgaria should not be worried. These opportunities for qualified professionals will only showcase how a good education system can benefit business as well as international acclaim for experts in certain fields. As well as the building of a reputation Bulgaria will carry on receiving money from the EU, mostly financed by the larger countries that imposed the limits on their workers in the first place, to invest back in to their own country. Not to mention the trickle-down money when those who have moved abroad come back to visit or to support their families from abroad.

Bulgaria is poised to benefit massively from the EU and the investment that it will pump into the country. “They (Bulgarians) really do respect the European commission

and the other EU,” Davidson tells me, as we sit one floor above the European Commission headquarters in Sofia.

“They look towards the EU as a place where things just work and people do their jobs for the right reasons,” Davidson adds.

Despite some of the negative press coverage Bulgaria received from fellow member states the country is still very much an EU advocate. “It’s probably the only country I’ve ever been where I’ve heard people say they would be better off if the European Commission came in an ran the government,” Davidson says, “could you imagine that at home [in the UK]?” A point that shows how much Bulgaria has gained for joining the EU and how much there is still to gain from it.

“The EU has the power to influence global politics and with Bulgaria a part of it they have some of my opinion in there,” says Diana Trifonova, freelance journalist, talking about what being a member state meant to her, as a Bulgarian. I then asked her classmate, Stella, what she thought of the EU after January 1.

“I didn’t think less of the EU, I think less of certain political parties around the EU,” she says. Diana interrupts, “The EU made legislation about cucumbers, they have to be

straight and 30 cm. These are the things that make me angry from time to time.”

Both women agreed on most things but the legislation of the EU and the way it was implemented was a slight stumbling block.

Stella went on to say, “What makes me feel like a second class person are the regulations from my country and not from there [EU].”

With the media frenzy at the start of the year now gone, how has it influenced Bulgarians who wanted to immigrate?

“Perhaps now when I enter the UK and meet regular people from the UK they will think ‘oh, you’re poor guys, you’re trying to rob me’,” Diana says, asked how she felt about possibly moving to one of the countries that imposed work limits on Bulgarians.

I then read to them a quote Michael Davidson gave to us: “We’ve explained to them the level of access that is currently granted… is much higher than Brits get when they come here, so lets at least make that level across Europe then we’re not seen as a soft touch.”

Both nodded, and said that seemed fair.

Understanding that there are national interests to take care of, and that Bulgaria is still a young EU state that is yet to earn Union widespread respect.

National Assembly building in Sofia. (Photo by Fred Tongue)

BULGARIA

Why are Bulgarians wanted back home?

As of January 1, Bulgarian and Romanian citizens can move and work freely in all EU member states. This ended the period when some European countries placed limitations on migrating Bulgarians, because they were afraid that thousands of Bulgarians would pack their bags and head west. How will the new rules affect Bulgaria?

by Ksenia Nevmerzhitskaya

U

pon arriving in Sofia, Bulgaria’s capital, a man near the country’s main airport tries to convince us to use his service instead of a taxi. His offer is higher than the standard price, we discover later. A passing stranger tells us to use the “official” taxi, which is cheaper and safer. The taxi driver is an old man, who has surely lived in Bulgaria during communist times. We ask him how he feels — whether he thinks anything has changed in the seven years of EU membership.

“We didn’t have money earlier and don’t have it now,” he responds.

High hopes of the EU accession

“It was a real national festival,” says Krastyo

24

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

Petkov, professor in Economic Sociology in the Economic University in Sofia and head of the Union of Bulgarian Economists, about EU accession.

“Our chances were evaluated to be rather low. I remember how young people were delighted. The government distributed a lot of champagne; it was a sign of a big joy.” According to him, more than 70 per cent of Bulgarians approved of entering the union.

Bulgarians were optimistic because they expected joining the EU would mean more grants and subsidies, says associate professor in the Sofia University, economist Teodor Sedlarski. But latest research shows that Bulgaria actually gets from the EU subsidies very little — they pay the EU to be a member and only get a bit more than that back.

Each member state in the union has to

pay, but sums differ. According to the European Commission website, in 2012 Bulgaria has paid membership revenue of €416,000.

To compare, the EU’s biggest revenue was from Germany and counted €26.21 billion.

The southeastern country enjoys two results of EU membership: new institutional rules and more mobility.

“For the economic environment, it was much better the last ten years, not because of the direct investment but because of rule of law,” says Sedlarski. “As a part of the European Union, Bulgaria is open for investments and has an advantage over other member states because of cheap labour.”

However, the timing of the Bulgarian and Romanian addition in 2007 could not have been worse. Soon after their accession, the economic crisis of 2008 shook Europe. In

25

There are four groups of Bulgarian emigrants, according to professor Petkov

“There are a lot of empty places in the universities and we are fighting for students,” says associate professor Teodor Sedlarski, PhD. (Photo by Teodor Sedlarski)

order to make their economy more competitive and to attract investment, the Bulgarian government lowered the corporate tax to 10 per cent — one of the lowest in Europe.

This encouraged the flow of foreign investments. This prosperity was short-lived. In 2007, GDP was approximately one third of the EU average, at 6.2 per cent growth. In 2009 it was -5 per cent.

Bulgarians believed that with European help their economy would grow and they would get out of the crisis faster than others. Despite these hopes, it is still the poorest country in Europe, according to the 2014 Index of Economic Freedom. A few years ago Bulgaria had the same GDP it had in 1989, when the Iron Curtain fell.

“We are basically in a crisis,” says Sedlarski. “Of course, the structure of our economy has changed from the socialist system.”

What the Bulgarians clearly see from the European Union is money for infrastructure and farming. That is visible. For example, in the sphere of agriculture, a big part of the population lives on European money, Sedlarski adds.

Sedlarski talks about National Rural Development Plan that has covered the period from 2007-2013 and the amount of the resources in the program came to €3,242 billion. 100 000 farmers were expected to apply for the EU’s agriculture subsidies after the country’s EU entry.

European partnership has made the Bulgarian economy more competitive and parts of the country’s economy have also been restructured. For instance, although Bulgaria is not producing cars, it manufactures different devices for the automobile industry.

Some 4,000 Bulgarians are working in this industry. Tourism is making a comeback as Europeans take advantage of Bulgaria’s open borders. But on a European level, the country is lagging behind.

26

Professor Dr Krastyo Petkov thinks if the EU puts in action the principle of freedom of movement, both sides should be responsible for stabilising effects of it. (Photo by Ksenia Nevmerzhitskaya)

How the situation looks now

According to Petkov, a bit more than half of the population now supports Bulgarian membership. Around 55 to 60 per cent of Bulgarians are optimistic about future of the EU, mainly because of the freedom of movement. The economic crisis has influenced the attitudes of people concerning European issues and especially the national government.

From the beginning of 2014, Bulgarians have the right to go anywhere in the EU. Populist claims helped spread fear that thousands of migrants would burden richer countries, but the real threat is in the opposite direction. If many people leave, Bulgaria’s stagnant and unstable economy can only get worse.

Demographic situation • Since 1985 population of Bulgaria has reduced from nine to seven million.

• In 2012, 70,000 people were born whereas 110,000 died.

• 16,000 left the country and only 14,000 immigrated.

country and don’t give birth to children in Bulgaria.”

“We are expecting a much faster decline of the nation and the population in the next years,” Sedlarski says. “At the university we feel this problem, because each year we don’t have enough candidates. We have 15 universities in the country. You can imagine these tens of thousands of places for students and we don’t have that many students finishing high school.

So, actually there are a lot of empty places in the universities and we are fighting for the students, because we are getting financing per student. I mean if we get 200 students this year, we get 200,000 leva [400,000€] in our budget. And that’s why we need students. We have to make it [easier] for them to come, but even if we give them no entry exam, we still wouldn’t have people”.

Petkov divides emigration in two types: in groups and individuals.

The group migration is very strong, espe-

“If somebody else should be worried about that extremely high migration, it should be the government”

Domestic workers

Guest workers

Professionals

Students

The biggest group. The group is defined by female domestic workers. They go for a season or a short-term contract, especially in Greece, Italy and Spain.

They seek any kind of job and agree to any salary, even if it is below their standards. They destabilise the labour markets abroad. “When someone in the West says that Bulgarian and Romanian workers have to go back, they bear in mind mainly this group,” says Petkov.

This is currently the most dynamic group. In the past those were the people in engineering, microbiology, physics. Now, doctors are welcomed almost everywhere in the EU.

Education is a dominant reason for migration. This is because of very intensive advertising of European universities in Bulgaria and the development of bi- and multilateral university networks. Some countries have large groups of Bulgarian students. Until two years ago, Bulgarians in Germany were number two after the Chinese.

the social funds.

“With my colleagues and students we began to study migration more than ten years ago,” says Petkov. “We found that here in Bulgaria the sending regions [the communities that migrants come from] stick to one model. If somebody from the village targets Italy, most of the people [from that community] go there. If, let’s say, in Spain somebody succeeded, he’s attracting his neighbouring community.”

Why do people leave the country?

Since Bulgaria joined the EU, the educational sphere has changed. Erasmus programmes funded by the EU are very popular here.

“When you go abroad you tell everyone that you’re going abroad,” Sedlarski says of his own experience. “There are big festivities. You tell everyone: your parents, your neighbours, and everyone is happy for you.

And if you return, people think you had difficulties there or you couldn’t socialise.The statistics show, on the contrary to the public opinion, that a lot of people actually return”.

“If somebody else should be worried about that extremely high migration, it should be the state, the government,” says Petkov.

“Until now none of all governments [since 2007 now it is the fourth] after the Bulgarian accession to the EU found the way to suggest strategy to minimise transnational migration. They did something which is

important for each institution, especially for the Brussels machine. They’ve developed a strategy for regulating migration, they’ve met the requirements, and they respected the rules. But this strategy doesn’t work.”

“Nobody until now succeeded in implementing a really successful policy or package of measures in order to limit external migration,” says Petkov. “This is one of the weak points of European policy not only here in Bulgaria. I’m involved in big and long-lasting arguments with my colleagues, and journalists from the Western Europe, who are saying, ‘It’s up to you, it is your responsibility to stop people there’.”

“I’m claiming that if you put in action the principle of free movement of people, this is our common responsibility.”

Prof. Krastyo Petkov

The migration problem is on

Bulgaria is facing a big demographical problem. According to all indices, it is in crisis.

“People still continue to leave. In 24 years 1.5 million left the country and we have a potential of another half a million [leaving],” says Petkov. “For the country, it is too much, not only in terms of numbers, but of quality of people who leave — most of them are young and highly qualified.”

If we speak about the impact on the economy, it has more general character, because the population of Bulgaria is shrinking fast.

And that’s the big problem, because young people emigrate or Bulgarians marry Europeans and move to their spouse’s native

The Bulgarian National Assembly building. (Photo by Paul Burgaud)

cially in some of the regions where ethnic minorities are populated. He is refering to Bulgarian Muslims, also Bulgarian Roma who stay together. Bulgaria doesn’t have a huge community-based migration, when large ethnic group suddenly goes somewhere and leaves nobody behind.

Ethnic Bulgarians prefer the individual and family model. They weigh their chances in Bulgaria and abroad. They compare and finally they take decision. Moving as a family unit with children, they rely on the social support, social aid in these new countries.

That is why, for instance, Belgium and Germany are changing their rules for accessing

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

27

BULGARIA

Bringing an economy out of the shadows

Bulgaria has the largest undeclared, or shadow, economy in the European Union. Some reports indicate as much as a third of the Bulgarian economy is undisclosed, which impacts the country’s reputation on a global stage.

What to do in the face of this trend is a growing concern.

“To speak about the grey economy, you have to use proxies, you don’t have exact statistical figures”

by Joe Sutherland

B

ulgaria’s shadow economy is the largest in the European Union. A report

by Friedrich Schneider, PhD, at the University of Linz in Austria, published last year, estimates that, of the €41bn that made up Bulgaria’s GDP in 2013, around €13bn was undeclared.

That means that 31.2 per cent of economic activity in Bulgaria is performed behind closed doors, away from the government.

Various sources disagree over the exact figure thanks to a loose definition of terms, though it seems fairly unanimous that Bulgaria’s figure is startlingly high compared to their fellow member states.

28

What is the shadow economy?

At its most basic, the shadow economy—often called the informal, grey or even nonobserved economy, though the terms tend to be interchangeable—refers to the section of a country’s GDP that is not declared to the government.

Teodor Sedlarski is the Vice Dean for Academic Affairs and International Relations at the University of Sofia. He sits behind his desk in a small, book-laden room on the fifth floor of the Department of Economics.

“You don’t get taxes from the shadow economy. This is the problem,” he says. “The most interesting question is how you fight that.”

“Everybody was paying the minimum wage for all their people in all sectors, and then the other part of the salary was paid cash,” explains Sedlarski.

“So even if you were in the normal economy, you were officially getting the minimum wage, but you were getting ten times more in cash.”

Yavor Alexiev from the Institute of Market Economists in Sofia, also points out that there is a large gulf in income equality between the capital, Sofia, and the rest of the country. “[This], coupled with the country-wide fixed rate of social security payments in different economic activities, force smaller companies from the countryside to quickly lose competitiveness,” he explains.

“In some cases, [they] engage in undeclared activities in order to remain active.”

He concedes that Bulgaria’s economy is perhaps too small for their shadow economy to really impact on European statistics—the country’s output accounted for just 0.3 per cent of EU-wide GDP in 2013, and per capita is one of the poorest economies in the 28.

“Most undeclared activities happen at small and medium-sized enterprises that operate on the local level, where competition from other countries is practically nonexistent,” he adds.

Some analysts point out that economic activity that is not documented can still benefit Bulgaria, despite the impact on tax revenues.

“It’s very hard to estimate the overall impact, because from one point of view of course you can say that you have negative influence because of the lower tax collection,” says Todor Yalamov, economic analyst at the political think tank the Center for the Study of Democracy (CSD).

Estimating the size of a country’s shadow economy is a tricky science in and of itself.

Ivailo Kalfin was Minister of Foreign Affairs of Bulgaria from 2005 to 2009, and is currently a Member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the Socialist Party of Bulgaria. “To speak about the grey economy, you have to use proxies, you don’t have exact statistical figures,” he says.

Indeed, Schneider’s report used just one of the many ways to judge the size of a country’s shadow economy.

Between Bulgaria’s national government and the European Commission, numerous methods for fighting the rise in the shadow economy have been implemented.

UROVIEWS

Ivailo Kalfin, former Bulgarian Minister of Foreign Affairs

“But at the same time, non-observed economic activity might be contributing to economic growth in particular areas, or in particular groups, who have difficulties integrating through the formal labour market.”

“By having additional jobs in the shadow economy, they might actually be less dependant on the social security system, which means that while the government is lacking revenues, at the same time they’re saving on some social programs that otherwise would have been necessary.”

Professor of public policy at the Univer-

UROVIEWS

Teodor Sedlarski of the University of Sofia spoke about the history of Bulgaria’s economy. (Photos by Joe Sutherland)

sity of Sheffield, Colin C Williams, PhD, did an investigation into the motivations behind those participating in the informal economy in the European Union. According to his research, published in the Journal for Contemporary European Research, around half of those questioned felt “both parties benefited” from the undeclared work, and almost a quarter said they could not find work in the regular economy.

Notably, almost one in six said that undeclared work was “common practice in this region/sector so there is no real alternative”, while only one in eight argued taxes were too high.

Sedlarski notes that the liberal view of the shadow economy is far more accepting.

“I know European economists that are liberal, and they ask, ‘what is the bad thing about having a shadow economy?’,” he says.

“It’s still producing income, and okay, the state doesn’t get anything from that, but it still gives money to people. It’s producing.

You see this kind of thing in economic text-

books. The mafia is kind of structuring economic activity but in a different way. The

Europe’s shadow economy The shadow economy does not just impact Bulgaria. The figure for the EU as a whole, according to Schneider’s study, was 18.5 per cent, with the highest percentages being found in the east. The next-highest was Croatia, the newest member state, with 28.9 per cent, followed by Romania at 28.8.

state doesn’t interfere there, the mafia itself is the state that makes the rules and gives the income to people.”

While useful to provide economic context for the shadow economy’s prevalence, it is also a good example of the corruption in the country that influences this trend.

Tangible corruption

There is a tangible perception of corruption

29

in Bulgarian politics among the public, and indeed throughout the rest of Europe.

It is certainly not something that is unique to Bulgaria. A report by the European Commission in February, the first of its kind dealing with the topic of corruption in the EU, found that the true cost of corruption was €120bn per year.

Over a quarter of respondents said someone had “asked or expected someone from your company to pay a bribe” at least once.

The EU average was 5 per cent.

Bulgaria broadly performed better in the survey than other countries in Europe’s periphery, such as Portugal, Greece and Italy, but 84 per cent of those surveyed considered corruption to be “widespread”.

“The fact that public opinion towards the government is low is highly related to the fact that corruption remains an unresolved issue, despite public rhetoric and ‘actions’ in the opposite direction,” says Filip Lipev, economic and political analyst at CEEMarketWatch.

“Corruption is well spread in our country.

It is not only in public administration, it is in

police, healthcare, education, and so on. So, one would say that we have a big problem with that.”

“I would say this is one of the main reasons why the state lags behind many EU countries in real GDP per capita, etcetera.

If we tackle corruption problems more effectively, we would become much wealthier, that’s for sure.”

In the Commission’s survey, only one in ten Bulgarians agreed with the statement that “there are enough successful prosecutions in Bulgaria to deter people from corrupt practices”. This is the lowest figure in

“By having additional jobs in the shadow economy, they might be less dependant on social security” Todor Yalamov, economic analyst

the Union.

And in the Global Corruption Perception Index 2013, organised by Transparency International, Bulgaria ranked 77th with a “cleanliness” score of 41. This places them between Italy and Greece, and below the

likes of Brazil, Romania and Cuba.

Slavi Binev is a nationalist politician who was elected to the European Parliament as a member of nationalist party Ataka. He currently represents the right-wing National Front for the Salvation of Bulgaria. He says that the public perception of corruption in Bulgaria is entirely accurate.

“Many of these people [in the Bulgarian government] did not have any business activity before that,” he says, “and when they leave their governmental posts, they walk out with economic empires, banks and become parts of the business elite.”

“The shadow economy could not exist without the umbrella from the government,” he adds. “It is part of the corruption in the country.”

Dutch MEP Sophie in ’t Veld, who represents the progressive left-leaning Democrats 66 in the Netherlands, says the Bulgarian government’s inaction makes it hard for their fellow EU member states to support them in the face of rising populism.

“I am a staunch defender of the accession of Bulgaria and Romania to the EU, to

Bulgaria’s parliament are percieved as corrupt by large sections of the population.

The finance ministry has put several measures in place to curb the shadow economy.

Schengen, and to everything else that we are part of,” she says, “but I also think that they are making it very difficult for their supporters, for their allies like me, to defend their position if they’re not more vigorous in fighting corruption and making their ad-

Corruption still a big problem in Bulgaria • 51% of Bulgarians feel corruption is a “very serious or quite serious problem” • 84% of respondents think efforts to combat corruption by the government are ineffective • Bulgaria were last on the Europe 2020 Competitiveness Index 2012 • Placed 66th on the World Bank Doing Business Rank 2013 • One in ten said they’d been asked or expected to pay a bribe in the last twelve months • Two thirds think corruption is widespread in the police or customs

ministrative systems work better.”

“People see Bulgaria and Romania like they shouldn’t be in the European Union.

Which I think is usually unfair, and largely unfounded. But again, Bulgarian and Romanian governments make it very easy for others to criticise them.”

While corruption is widespread in eastern European states, Bulgaria’s membership of the European Union means this issue is

30

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

placed under further scrutiny. Since joining in 2007, there has been some level of distrust among politicians in other member states who are opposed to expansion.

Anti-immigration parties, such as the Freedom Party in the Netherlands, Front National in France and the United Kingdom Independence Party (Ukip), have been vocal in their opposition to further expansion.

When borders opened to Romanian and Bulgarian citizens at the start of this year, Ukip used this to their advantage and were involved in a hostile media campaign warning of the dangers an influx in migrant workers would carry.

“The general sentiment among people is hesitant at best, and fear for job losses and social security tourism holds sway, which is, by the way, not or barely reflected in the figures on the European labour market presented by the Commission,” says Dutch MEP Judith Merkies, who represents the Labour Party of the Netherlands in the European Parliament.

“Bulgaria is facing considerable challenge to eradicate some of the most important problems that undermine their credibility as an EU partner.”

Curbing the shadow economy

In 2007, the Bulgarian government implemented a flat tax rate of ten per cent for corporations, a fourfold decrease from ten years earlier. This has encouraged many organisations to declare what they perhaps wouldn’t have before.

The personal income tax rate in Bulgaria is also a flat ten per cent, which is by far the lowest level in the EU. In western and northern Europe, the rate for top earners can be as high as 57 per cent (in Sweden).

“Concerning the shadow economy, of course it’s a problem for all the European countries,” says Bulgarian MEP Ivailo Kalfin.

“I wouldn’t say that Bulgaria is an extreme example,” he adds, “just the opposite, because we have quite low taxes, and with low taxes you have much better incentive to be in the legal economy, the light, and pay your taxes rather than go outside of it.”

“Despite rapidly falling employment levels and rising unemployment, personal income tax has in fact been the only tax to generate higher revenues in the most difficult years of 2009-10,” says Alexiev.

“In our view, this was due entirely to the introduction of a flat income tax rate from the start of 2008, which obviously led to reduction of the informal economy in labor contracts.”

But Aleksandar Dimitrov, PhD, and chief political analyst at the Center of Historical and Political Studies, points out that the measures could have gone further to help deal with the problem.

“They promised that they would change it to multi-level tax, rising level tax with the income of the person,” he explains. “But we still have ten per cent tax. They didn’t change it. I don’t know why.”

“I think the prime minister [independent politician Plamen Oresharski] believes in the flat tax. But the socialist party don’t believe in the flat tax. No actual dialogue about the strategic tax policy [between the two parties].”

The socialist party is the second party in Bulgaria and the leading part of the Coalition for Bulgaria. It currently serves as the opposition to the ruling Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria, a more conservative party.

A staggered minimum wage was also introduced as a solution for combatting the size of the shadow economy, as Sedlarski explains.

“One thing was to set minimum wages for different professional areas,” says Sedlarski. “And that actually helped. A lot of firms have to declare how many workers they have and they have to pay the social security for them at a certain minimum level.”

Minimum wage is now a flat 340 lev (around €174) per month, which equates to

31

BULGARIA European impact

The Bulgarian lev. Labour costs in Bulgaria are far below the EU average.

about 2.03 lev (€1.04) per hour. This is the lowest such figure in the European Union.

“People employing lawyers could not pay them the minimum wage, they’d pay them some five times the minimum wage. You had a lot more people employed after this measure, on a wage that was bigger than the minimum.”

Sedlarski also talks about the Washington Consensus, a set of ten economic policy prescriptions applied to, among others, the former Soviet states in the early nineties. “We hosted a professor at Harvard recently, and he gave a lecture about how it was actually something very stupid, and that we should have had institutional reforms.”

“We have seen that we should have given more attention to institutions. Rules, laws… they were missing. The economy, after the changes, evolved as something illegal. From the beginning, everything was initially privatised by directors, as in all Soviet states.

Everything was part legal, part illegal.”

Alexiev says his organisation, the Institute for Market Economists, took part in a project “focused on identifying and transferring best practices in the fight against the shadow economy from other countries within the European Union”.

Of the 20 proposals they put forward, some are common sense. Establishing a legal definition for “undeclared work”, for instance, as well as campaigns to increase the awareness of the impact of the grey market.

Some seem a little more challenging. One such suggestion is to create a registry of law-abiding companies which would then be afforded different administrative privi-

32

leges, while another seeks to craft a set of hiring procedures for businesses to help them avoid accidentally contributing to the shadow economy.

For the most part, these measures appear to have worked. The shadow economy in Europe has been slowly and consistently shrinking over the past decade.

“If you compare 2003, pre-accession, and after accession in 2007, the levels of shadow economy are significantly lower,” says Todor Yalamov.

“In 2013 there was alarming indicators that the economy was not doing well, and a lot of people were engaged in shadow economy activities as a response to that, especially those that returned from other EU countries.”

“But the macro-trend is positive.”

“Bulgarian labor markets are not flexible enough, which makes many employers and

“It turns out that Europe could interfere in North Africa, in Crimea and everywhere else in the world but when it comes to its own yard, it remains silent” Slavi Binev, MEP for Bulgaria

employees reluctant to declare their labor relations in order to avoid long administrative procedures and additional costs,” Alexiev says.

“The continuing social and political turmoil in the country is a problem, since political appointments in key state institutions lower their capacity in the fight against the shadow economy.”

As part of their report into corruption, the European Union released a set of guidelines addressed to the Bulgarian government for how to manage and prevent corruption in the future.

Among these is to establish anti-corruption regulators, shielded from the government, as well as codes of ethics for members of the National Assembly. “[The Center for the Study of Democracy is] also closely monitoring the levels of corruption in different EU institutions,” Yalamov says.

“The institutions that were experiencing positive trends after European Union accession are directly linked with the shadow economy, which means that particular areas like smuggling and the levels of tax collection significantly improved after the accession. So we’re experiencing a positive impact.”

But Slavi Binev is highly critical of the EU response.

“I believe that it is not good for the European Union to close its eyes and not to interfere to defend the Bulgarian citizens from the controlled dictatorship they are subjected to,” Binev says.

“I think that the non-interference of the EU shows its hypocrisy and its double standards. It turns out that Europe could interfere in North Africa, in Crimea and everywhere else in the world but when it comes to its own yard, it remains silent.”

“This undermines the EU institutions, and not people who want their freedom.”

Exactly how the European Union institutions can deal with the size of the shadow economy in Bulgaria, and the corruption that goes with it, is not clear. In this situation it seems that the national governments must take the initiative.

Lipev, however, has a radical solution from Europe’s side—to simply sever the ropes.

“I strongly believe that what the [Commission] needs to do with Bulgaria to tackle this issue and put more serious pressure is simply to stop its EU funds to the country,” he says.

“This will have a serious negative impact on the country and will almost certainly lead to a social outcry, thus putting muchneeded strong pressure on politicians to act and take more effective measures.”

“Such kind of sanctions could do the work, in my opinion. Otherwise, the process could take years.”

UROVIEWS

Deciding their own destiny, or plagued by history?

Bulgaria finds itself torn between the past and present as Russia and Turkey influence relations with the EU. “Take down the Turkish government now! Save Bulgaria!” reads the sign of a protestor in front of the Bulgarian parliament on 300th day of the demonstration. (Photo by Paul Burgaud)

by Stephen Karmazyn

T

here can be no doubt that Bulgaria finds itself mired in political corruption. Bulgaria has the lowest hourly wage in the EU, yet downtown Sofia is filled with high-end cars and well maintained buildings, especially compared to even the closest outskirts of the city.

The current ruling government party, the Bulgarian Socialist Party (BSP), may or may not be in a coalition with two other parties: right-wing nationalist Ataka and centrist Movement of Rights and Freedoms (MRF).

There are claims between members of this

UROVIEWS

alleged coalition that certain parties within the coalition itself don’t have the legal right to exist. If that sounds confusing, it’s because it is. Bulgarian politics—Russian and Turkish influences notwithstanding—are a mess.

The resulting mess is due to two major factors most Bulgarians have plenty to say about: the mafia and oligarch.

This political void left by corruption has made some people, especially Bulgaria’s youth, turn to the EU as an avenue for change.

“Bulgaria is the most pro-EU country.

[With] almost 55 per cent approval,” says Aleksandar Dimitrov, PhD, and chief political analyst for the Center of Historical and Political Studies. “They think the EU can

make their lives better, justice better. Because the problem with the corruption is so big, Bulgarians don’t believe in their inner strength to make change.”

Evgeniy Kandilarov, a professor of modern history at Sofia University, also says the standard of living has risen in Bulgaria since induction into the EU. “From the historical part, the European civilization is from the Balkans. Greece, Balkans, Asia Minor, etc,” says A. Dimitrov.

“As history goes on the heart is in Brussels or in Germany or in France. The Balkans have their place in [the process of Europe building].

“Bulgarians want to think they are part of Europe.”

33

Number of seats

Bulgarian Parliament seats

Parties

Never too far from history

Bulgaria is a country with a long and rich history, with many past events still having political impact today.

Having been under the Ottoman Empire’s rule for nearly five hundred years and then becoming part of the Eastern Soviet Bloc following the end of World War II, Bulgaria is bound to Russia and Turkey.

The occupation by the Ottoman Empire has had residual psychological effects on public opinion of modern Turkey. Many will refer to the occupation as dark time in Bulgaria’s history, with ripples still being felt today in modern politics.

In the late 1980s, the government of Bulgaria at the time engineered a mass expulsion of Turkish immigrants back to Turkey.

“There was a strong violent push for Turks to leave the country, summer of 1989,” says Kandilarov.

He says that between 800,000 and 900,000 Bulgarian Turks were expelled during that period.

“There is no pro-Turkey in Bulgaria,” says A. Dimitrov. “[Whenever history] influences political decisions, they are more or less pro-Russia.”

Bulgaria feels a strong tie to Russia: a country with whom they share linguistic roots, an alphabet, and religion, wheras further east they see a difference in culture and, more importantly, they see a former conqueror.

“Turkey still considers us as some kind of inferior vassal structure. It keeps having its imperial appetite toward Bulgaria,” says Kristiyan Dimitrov, Member of the Bulgarian Parliament and the nationalist Ataka party. He spoke via a translator.

This history and the current political

34

struggles within Bulgaria concerning corruption will affect how the state comes to view the EU in the immediate future.

Couple this with Ataka’s rise to power and how they project in the future, and Bulgaria could very well develop a different view on the EU in the near future.

The political landscape in Bulgaria

This divide between Russian and Turkish influence is no more noticeable than in the politics of two major parties in Bulgaria with major political power as swing voters; Ataka and MRF.

“We would like to defend and put as a priority the Christian and orthodox family values. Recent tendencies to legitimize gay marriage could really confuse young children” Kristiyan Dimitrov, Member of the Bulgarian Parliament for Ataka

Ataka, often in the news facing claims of racism, xenophobia, and ultranationalism, was created in 2005 by Volen Siderov in response to Bulgaria joining NATO in 2004 and its movement towards accession to the EU, which took place in 2007. They have a strong, vocal minority support and many values that align themselves with Russian ideologies.

The MRF, by contrast, was established in 1990, immediately after democracy was introduced after the fall of the USSR. The party’s mandate has been to defend the rights of the Bulgarian Muslim minority.

Ataka has claimed that the MRF is illegal because the “Bulgarian constitution does

not allow parties to be founded on the basis of ethnic, cultural or religious differences,” Kristiyan Dimitrov says.

It is interesting to note, however, that these two parties are also supposedly part of an unofficial coalition between Ataka, MRF and headed by the BSP. All three of them voted against holding a re-election, despite protests from the opposition government Citizens for European Development of Bulgaria (GERB).

This is only the beginning of a long line of confusing deals and political moves that cloud the whole Bulgarian system in controversy, corruption accusations and mass movements of the people calling for the government’s total resignation.

While it would be too facile to boil it down to Ataka equates Russian influence and MRF equates Turkish connections, there is an obvious link between these two parties and Bulgaria’s eastern and northern neighbours.

Russia’s oil, Bulgarian money, Ataka’s vote

“Of course we feel close to Russia,” said K. Dimitrov. “It was Russia that liberated Bulgaria from the Ottoman occupation. We’ll always be grateful to Russia. The USA, they all know this, maybe that is [the] reason they are trying to create some conflict and hostile relations between Bulgaria and Russia.”

K. Dimitrov was also present in Crimea during the referendum, which he says gave him a more “genuine” view of what was happening. He claims that the referendum on Crimea’s secession from Ukraine in favour for Russia was done democratically, and he criticizes the US for imposing democracy across the world “via the help of arms and military conflict.”

They also maintain that “supranational oligarchy circles have always tried to split Europe, the EU, west Europe and Russia.

Because they know if they do this, USA will remain powerful and a superpower. And if Russia and EU get close together and improve their relations this would be [a] heavy hit against the USA.” “Russia should be part of the EU ... because Russia is Europe, and Turkey is not.”

He believes that the US is actively trying to stifle a relationship between Russia and the EU, because the combination of advanced EU technology and Russia’s natural resources would create a superpower to rival the US. Russia currently provides nearly all natural gas and oil to Bulgaria, according to Academic Director of the Centre for Economic Strategies and Competitiveness at Sofia Uni-

UROVIEWS

versity Teodor Sedlarski. Although the EU, renewable and nuclear energy industries in Bulgaria are developing to try and alter that dependence.

Another strong factor of Ataka’s close ties

History of Bulgaria 681: Bulgarian state is established 1396: Ottoman Empire counquers Bulgaria. Next five centuries are known as “Turkish Yoke.”

1876: A national uprising against Ottoman rule is violently suppressed.

1878: Treaties of San Stefano and Berlin end Russo-Turk War and recognise an autonomous Bulgaria and define its territories.

1941: Bulgaria joins Axis Powers.

1944: Soviet army invades Germanoccupied Bulgaria. Soviet-backed Fatherland Front takes power.

1990: Economic collapse of USSR pushes Bulgaria towards democrtiisation. Communist Party becomes Bulgarian Socialist Party and wins free parliamentary elections.

2004: Bulgaria joins NATO 2007: Bulgaria joins the EU

to Russia is in social policy.

“We would like to defend and put as a priority the Christian and orthodox family values, instead of those artificial, most recent tendencies to legitimize gay marriage, incest, and other really dangerous things, the traditional family between people and really confuse young children.”

There is little in the way of substantial difference between Ataka’s social policy concerning homosexuality and Russian justification for homosexual persecution.

Furthermore, Ataka doesn’t consider Bulgaria to be a multicultural society but rather a “unitarian whole structure,” which cannot be divided based on religion, ethnicity, or culture.

Others are doubtful about how hardline Ataka really is in their political motives. “[Ataka doesn’t] stick to ideology,” A. Dimitrov says. “They have a nationalistic way of doing things, but now they are speaking pro-Russia.” They claim they are only interested in political power, says the political analyst, and supporting Russia is one way to gain that power, all else being mainly lip service.

“[Russia] has influence,” says Slavi Binev, an MEP who was elected on the Ataka ticket, despite not being a member of their party.

Binev has since had a falling out with Ataka leadership.

“They [Russia] support very hard the party of Ataka,” he says. “Everyone knows this.

They support some other parties too, but mainly Ataka.”

Binev says Ataka’s reluctance to criticize Russian energy monopolies­—despite their public opposition to other economic monopolies—puts in perspective how favourably Ataka looks upon their cultural relative and political ally in Russia.

Sedlarski believes that even the current minority BSP government, formerly a communist party, has close ties to Russia.

A. Dimitrov also says that Russia has an influence on the entire population of Bulgaria because of the favourable history between the two countries.

Aside from culture, economically, over 20 per cent of Bulgaria’s imports come from Russia.

“Bulgaria is one of the few countries with few anti-Russian views. It extends from the history,” says Ivailo Kalfin, MEP and formerly tied to the BSP. “You don’t have a general anti-Russia mood in the country. At the same time, Bulgaria is very clear in its choices. [It is a] Member of NATO, EU—accepting the values of these institutions.”

Kalfin says he doesn’t believe the lack of anti-Russian sentiments within Bulgaria detracts from a clear path towards western cooperation. He says that international poli-

cies between the two countries, like the high taxes on Russian oil and gas, confirm that idea.

Ataka has vowed to topple the current government if more sanctions from the EU are levied towards Russia after the annexation of Crimea. They are the only Bulgarian party that has outright supported Russia’s military intervention in the region.

A WikiLeaks cable released from the US embassy in Sofia also details questions they had concerning Ataka’s funding—particularly their meteoric rise in 2005 in the polls and questions about their link to Russia, insinuating a collaboration.

K. Dimitrov says there is no such a thing as Russian influence on Bulgarian politics.

“Relations have always been good.”

Kandilarov maintains a different view. “[We are] again separated on two parts,” Kandilarov says. “People who are pro-Russia, and people who say we have to cut with Russia, because our way and our purpose is part of the EU and the democratic world.”

Turkey and the MRF

“Turkey has a very huge influence here,” says Binev. “Political level, national level, social level. I think they also support two Bulgarian parties [MRF and BSP].”

K. Dimitrov and Ataka describe the Ottoman rule as a “true Bulgarian genocide,” and believes that modern day Turkey still owes substantial amounts of money for property seized in Thrace during the Ottoman occupation.

“I cannot even consider modern contemporary relations with Turkey until all the

The Alexander Nevsky Church sits near the parliament building and is dedicated to a Russian saint, even though it is a Bulgarian Orthodox church. It was constructed shortly after the liberation of Bulgaria from the Ottoman Empire. (Photo by Joe Sutherland)

Russian impact

UROVIEWS

35

other things from the past are settled.

“We do not think in terms of a civilization that Turkey [belongs] in the EU or in Europe. As a whole it’s an Asian country.”

Kalfin is of a differing opinion.

“Bulgaria is supporting very much the European engagement of Turkey, although it needs to take time.” Although he is worried about Turkey’s slide towards “Islamic behaviour and culture.”

And then there is the MRF, which appeals mainly to the Bulgarian Muslims and Turks, although they are trying to broaden their voting base.

Due to the MRF’s role as a swing vote and balancer being the third biggest party, they often find themselves part of the ruling coalitions.

“The political power from the MRF comes from communication of the ruling parties,” says A. Dimitrov.

“People from Bulgaria are very upset that the Turkish minority run the country at the moment, and that’s not only at the moment,” Binev says. “[MRF], except for a very few exceptions always run the government. They run the country. The people from Bulgaria are very upset because [MRF] steal their money, they are part of the corruption.” “[MRF] is the party that compared to all other parties was most often in power in the last 25 years,” says Kalfin.

Binev, having been part of the nationalist wing and formerly supported by Ataka, maintains an anti-MRF stance. Kalfin, on the other hand, was formerly linked with the BSP, a party with ties to the MRF in a current coalition, but with a combative history.

“MRF only goal is to encapsulate the Bulgarians of Muslim religion [and] hold them with the help of fear and some other hostile instruments, to keep them as their hardcore voting electorate,” says K. Dimitrov.

MRF has, despite being linked in the unofficial coalition with BSP, in the past called BSP an illegal party, because they are directly descendant from the communist ruling party.

The MRF declined to comment.

Bulgarian Muslims vs. Bulgarian Turks

In a country where heavy political turmoil and conflict is the norm, one thing that academics and members of parties on all sides seem to agree on is the categorization of Bulgaria’s largest minority as Bulgarian Muslims rather than Bulgarians of Turkish origin.

They claim there are few Bulgarian Turks in the country, despite a 2011 census identi-

36

Ivailo Kalfin (Photo by the European Parliament)

fying over three quarters of the near 600,000 Muslims as “Turks.” The total Muslim population correlates to 7.8 per cent of the Bulgarian population.

Whether this is a political ploy to further distance Bulgaria from Turkey or a widely held belief amongst the Bulgarian citizens is difficult to say. It is very much a personal distinction as to when one can be considered fully Bulgarian or still of Turkish origins.

This is critical as K. Dimitrov believes that MRF is responsible for trying to convince Bulgarian Muslims they are of Turkish origins. Others see the opposite, that they are Bulgarians of Turkish descent, but are being pressured to identify as ethnic Bulgarian Muslims.

On the outside looking in: Ivailo Kalfin

Ivailo Kalfin was a rising political star in the BSP party, having served as an MEP since 2009, and in 2011 ran for President of Bulgaria, losing to the incumbent head of Rosen Plevneliev by 47 to 53 per cent of the vote.

In mid-January of this year, Kalfin split with the BSP, sending political tremors through Bulgaria and potentially putting BSP, the current ruling part, on a course towards a party wide schism between old leadership and new. The reason he left was reportedly due to, among other reasons, BSP’s lack of transparency and their unclear connection with Ataka.

“Formerly, [MRF, Ataka, BSP] were not in a coalition, but in practice, they are maintaining the government, which is something many people of Bulgaria don’t find acceptable at all,” Kalfin said.

Protests calling for the resignation of this government have been ongoing for over 300 days due to political corruption scandals, some of which contributed to Kalfin’s disassociation with the BSP. “You don’t have a clear coalition. You don’t have clear commitments of the political parties. You don’t have a clear line of responsibility of who is doing what.”

Kalfin also believes that Ataka and MRF are tapping into this political turmoil and are “feeding each other” by frightening their respective electorates to vote so the other party doesn’t gain an upper hand.

“Ataka is paying a price for [the current government]. Now, in the election they scored very low in the polls.” Kalfin says the maintaining of this government is not popular amongst Ataka members.

“I’m not sure what the long term gains are of [Ataka], all we’ve found is short term benefits.”

Ataka tells a different story, vehemently denying all existence of a coalition.

“We have never helped or voted or contributed in any way to the current government,” says K. Dimitrov.

“The majority of the Bulgarian people, 70 or even 80 per cent are extremely happy that the former government did not get a second term of office. This is thanks to us. Because we did not dissolve parliament.”

This decision to not dissolve parliament and have another vote due to potential election tampering was what sparked the idea of the existence of the current coalition in the first place.

“Attaka wants to be in the decision-making process. And for that, they support the government,” says A. Dimitrov.

Bulgaria and the EU going forward

With claims of corruption rampant on all sides, protestors in the streets calling for their governments resignation (as they’ve done before and were met with success) and most parties unable to agree on what each other stand for, let alone comment on voting records, it seems that despite Ataka’s rise in the polls, many Bulgarians see the EU as modernizing factor and a means to end corruption.

The two parties with the highest shares of the voting electorate of Bulgaria, GERB, and

BSP, have pro-EU tendencies.

But it is not all positive in terms of the EU. “There is a lack of proactive behaviour in these elections in participation. From Bulgaria, [the EU] expects nothing. We are small fish. Only 8 seats, who cares?” says A. Dimitrov of the situation in Brussels concerning Bulgaria.

With an election turnout of around 30 per cent, A. Dimitrov believes the people need to become more active in order to gain EU support.

In terms of the upcoming MEP elections, Kalfin is concerned “mainstream parties

try to follow eurosceptic commitments and language before the elections, which is very dangerous.”

Kalfin believes that creating a more divided Europe would be a repeat in history to the early 20th century.

He thinks the same applies to dealing with Russia and Turkey, in that Bulgaria needs to distance itself from historical viewpoints and progress onward.

“That is sometimes the problem in Europe,” he says.

“You have too much history.”

People gather to protest against parliament, advocating for the EU in fight against corruption (photo by Paul Burgaud).

Turkey, Russia, Bulgaria, EU

Both the MRF and Ataka have potential ties to two of the most impactful countries on the EU, not already part of the union.

Ataka has a wish to move away from EU towards “neutrality,” albeit with a predisposition towards Russian engagement. The MRF is one of the most powerful parties in Bulgaria due to its electorate base. There can be no doubt that both parties are swaying the political discourse either through their coalition partners (BSP being pro-Turkey engagement and close ally to MRF) or outright policy (Ataka advocating for Russian inclusion, as well as obstructing EU energy policy, keeping Bulgaria’s dependence on Russian oil firm). These relations will have implications on how Bulgaria progresses in the EU and how Turkey and Russia interact with its institutions in the long term.

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

37

BULGARIA

The migrational flow: an unpleasant trade Bulgaria has received 13,000 asylum seekers in the last few years. The country gets an influx of unskilled migrants while suffering a ‘brain drain’ towards richer countries in Europe. Meanwhile, extreme nationalists increase their hatred against a largely multi-ethnic Bulgaria, despite losing electoral momentum.

The war in Syria triggerd a huge influx of asylum seekers in Bulgaria, in 2013, 7144 precisely.

by Mikel Gil Sojo

T

he workers in the presidential office of the Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees rejoice in the recent donation of the Spanish ceramics company Roca.

After chatting with the experts that assist President Nikolai Tchirpanliev, seems clear that money-talk is frequent in the Agency.

The influx

As far as the end of February, Bulgaria held roughly 13,000 asylum seekers. 78 per cent of those are Syrians that fled from the Civil War in their country. 70 per cent of these Syrian citizens are Kurds.

“Amnesty International said that the situation here is severe. They were not correct enough and I would say they even cheated” Nikolai Tchirpanliev, President of the State Agency for Refugees

The massive influx of refugees, more than 7,000 in 2013, caught the Syrian authorities

38

off guard.

“The country reacted a bit late but in the most proper way,” says Mr Tchirpanliev.

Numerous reports were done about the conditions of the refugee camps in southeastern Bulgaria, close to the Turkish border.

Amnesty International went to the camp in Harmanli last November and reported “inhumane conditions” at the emergency accommodation centre. There were threats of hunger strike after one thousand asylum seekers were held in “metal containers, tents and a dilapidated building of a former military complex.”

“They were not correct enough,” says Mr Tchirpanliev, “and I would say they even cheated and I can prove it using the words of the interpreter during their visit.”

“At the same time we had another visit of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR). In this particular moment, we moved the people from the tents to the building that was renovated.”

“Amnesty International said that the situation here is severe, that people are sent to

tents during the winter. At the same time, the UNHCR said that okay, it was the past, and now people are moved to a newly renovated building. They [Amnesty International] were not correct”.

The UNHCR report from November 21 2013 had the headline “Bulgaria struggles to cope with Syrian influx at dilapidated camp”, and describes the scarcity of food and resources that the refugees suffered in Harmanli.

Bulgaria is EU’s poorest member. Tight finances were the excuse in November, after the wave of Syrian refugees. On November 22, the European Commission set the emergency measures, and Bulgaria received €5.6 million from the EU Refugee Fund.

The Czech and Slovak Republics also sent €2 million. Since then, the Agency has improved and adapted facilities to host “4,600 asylum seekers in seven different places,” says Mr Tchirpanliev.

Krastyo Petkov, Professor in Economic Sociology in the Economic University in Sofia and head of the Union of Bulgar-

UROVIEWS

ian Economists, explains that Bulgaria is a country with a “really short memory on transnational migration.” It is the first time that Bulgaria experiences the so-called “organic spontaneous wave of transnational migration.”

“The southeast region and the Bulgarian state weren’t prepared for such kind of increasing tide of people coming here and asking to be settled or to be transferred to somewhere else.”

The only precedents of migration in Bulgaria recent history are the “huge Jewish emigration [50,000 people] agreed with the Israel government” in 1948, when the Israeli state was formed; and the Revival Process, as they called it, in the 1980s,” where 300,000 Bulgarian Muslims became refugees in the neighbouring Turkey due to an extremist nationalistic policy lead by the government.

The trampoline

Apart from the big war refugee wave that Bulgaria is receiving because of the country’s geographical location, there is also a minor “immigration from the so-called third world countries, not directly connected to the Syrian conflict,” explains Professor Petkov.

“This wave became obvious after 2007 when Bulgaria came affiliated to the European Union. Citizens of these countries began to come here and in some regions they doubled or tripled in this period.”

A clear explanation is the “possibility of acquiring a Bulgarian passport and, because of this, European citizenship.”

“We have interesting structural changes.

Before 2007 the main migrational inflows were from Turkey and Russia. After 2007 we

UROVIEWS

have another trend in Macedonia and some other neighbouring countries.”

“So Bulgaria is transforming itself into a receiving country, not only a sending country which has already sent abroad 1.5 million emigrants”.

Bulgarian authorities are worried by this trade of cards. While they suffer a brain drain of young people going to work abroad, they receive refugees with no technical skills and in some cases no education. The official statistics of the Bulgarian State Agency for Refugees show that 12 per cent of their asylum seekers have no education at all, 26 per cent have elementary education and 32 per cent have primary education. Hence, seven out of ten refugees have primary level education or poorer.

Furthermore, Professor Petkov says: “According to our estimation, around 25 per cent of the immigrants, if we have in mind the central-south region of Bulgaria, are prepared to move further west in the heart of Europe, either they are labour migrants or business migrants.”

“Some of them want to do business, using Bulgaria as some sort of depot. They register their firms in Bulgaria but their actual business in the Netherlands, Belgium, Germany… The most active ethnic group in this are Turkish citizens which have dual citizenship, Bulgarian and Turkish, which is allowed by the Bulgarian legislation.”

“Around 50 per cent of the economic immigrants in Bulgaria want to stay here. Between 16 and 26 per cent, depends on the ethnic group, want to move somewhere else.

These transnational migrants stay here one or two years and then they move. And 25 per cent dream about going back to their

original regions.”

Using Bulgaria as a trampoline to thrive economically in other EU countries is not only what economic migrants wish, but also asylum seekers.

Mr Tchirpanliev says: “Somebody has told them that once they are in Bulgaria and receive refugee status, they will be able to work everywhere in the European Union.

This is not the truth.”

“So we were not obliged only to deal with the huge influx but also to explain the EU regulations related to asylum seekers.”

“We are giving them information daily. It is responsibility of our officers and servants, but also the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees and humanitarian NGOs who work here in Bulgaria help us inform them about the regulations. Some of them have regular meetings with representatives of their diaspora or embassies, so they get information in their native language.”

Refugees’ top 5 countries of origin (1.1.2014-3.31.2014): 1. Syria...............................................1,328 2. Afghanistan..................................282 3. Stateless (normally Kurds).........108 4. Algeria............................................50 5. Iraq..................................................47

Mr Tchirpanliev makes some analysis: the Agency expected that a huge influx of refugees for this spring, but this didn’t happen.

“Why? Because we made them aware of the regulations and they probably called their relatives in the other side and told them that it is not like this, you cannot expect to come to Bulgaria and receive that kind of status of being free to go and work in any country.”

The wall

Thus, the outcome of Bulgaria being part of an open border EU is people leaving the country to the West and people entering country from the East. These two migrant groups are severely different socioeconomically.

With the 12,000 refugees surviving with a grant of 65 leva (€32.50) per month, Bulgaria has been busy sheltering its land from foreign invasion. In November 2013, before taking care of the poorly stacked up refugees in Harmanli, they stationed more than a thousand policemen in the “Green Border” with Turkey while they were building a €3 million wall.

The 33 km long, 3 metre-tall fence, built to stop immigrants from entering illegally is not the only one in the European Union. Greece already completed a 10.5 km barbed-wire fence in 2012, which caused

39

One of Professor Krastyo Petkov’s expertises is euroscepticism and he has published several articles regarding the subject. (Photo by Mikel Gil Sojo)

a deviation of contraband precisely to the Bulgarian border. Spain has similar fences in its autonomous cities Ceuta and Melilla, Spanish enclaves in continental Africa, to stop the big influx of people that aim for European soil.

“The European Union was created on the base of share of responsibility. Having roughly 15,000 refugees in Bulgaria and having nobody or a few hundred people in other countries is not burden-sharing” Nikolai Tchirpanliev

These projects to build a fenced Fortress Europe are coordinated and funded by Frontex, the European agency for border coordination. The Bulgarian fence is criticised by the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees.

“Bulgaria is a full member of the EU so we are obliged to do everything according to the decisions and the new regulations. We don’t make any division between the people coming to Bulgaria. There are some priorities towards the Syrians, of course, due to the war,” says Mr Tchirpanliev.

“We appreciate a lot the assistance that

40

we have received, but the money is never enough.” The Agency demands for further assistance. “We shouldn’t forgive that the European Union was created on the base of share of responsibility, on the burdensharing.”

“So there are some countries like Poland, Czech Republic, the Baltic Countries, Slovak Republic, in which we cannot find any asylum seekers. Having roughly 15,000 people in Bulgaria and having nobody or a few hundred people in other countries is not burden-sharing.”

Mr Tchirpanliev warns in the end: “We try to explain in every European forum that we have to stick to the solidarity and burden-sharing. Otherwise, these people that do not want to stay here will find their way to other countries.”

The disenchantment

Bulgaria is arguably one of the most proEuropean member states.

“Unlike other countries, including the old members, in Bulgaria we still have prevailing euro-optimism,” says Professor Petkov, “but if we compare it with five or six years ago, we have a drastic decline of euro-optimists.”

The majority of Bulgarians supports

the membership in the European Union (around 60 per cent now, compared to the 75 per cent when Bulgaria joined the EU, according to Professor Petkov.) However, the most enthusiastic supporters have in mind “freedom of movement and career prospects,” or rather a future potentially in other countries of the European Union.

“If we apply the criteria of poverty, inequality and social exclusion, Bulgaria is on the bottom rank of the EU, competing with Romania or Latvia,” says Professor Petkov.

“In a poor country you can’t expect that the level of optimism will be much higher.”

Only right wing populist parties are eurosceptic in Bulgaria, which haven’t managed to achieve a significant part of the electorate so far. In the boulevards of Sofia, even in some provincial roads, the face of Volen Siderov, the chief of the ultra-nationalist and xenophobic Ataka party is omnipresent in countless posters.

Even Ataka made use of the funds coming from their coalition in the Bulgarian government for this massive advertising campaign (that includes their own TV channel) their support is gradually decreasing.

“After their boom in the 2005-2009 period they went down to 2.5 per cent of support,” says Professor Petkov. “The National Front of Salvation of Bulgaria, who defend a democratic nationalism, is now between 2.5-3.8 per cent of support.”

“Someone would say that in Bulgaria we have strong nationalism. It means that he knows nothing about Bulgaria. We are among the first five nations that are most tolerant to other ethnic groups. Traditionally and historically we have been tolerant and now we are still tolerant.”

From the State Agency for Refugees they don’t perceive nationalistic tensions anymore.

“This problem happened in November.

There was an incident, it was blocked. This incident provoked tension between the refugees and this part of the society. But during the last three and a half months nothing happened.”

Mr Tchirpanliev refers to the incident last November where a 20-year-old woman was assaulted by an Algerian man. This sparked racist action against “immigrant crime” among the nationalist movements.

The diversity

Ataka MP Kristiyan Dimitrov claims that Bulgaria is “not a multicultural society.”

“The Bulgarian people and the Bulgarian

UROVIEWS

nationality is a unitarian whole structure which cannot be divided on the following principles: ethnic, religious, or cultural.”

Walking in the central-south regions of Haskovo or Kardzhali is enough to realise that what Mr Dimitrov’s thoughts are biased.

Professor Petkov has an opposing opinion: “While discussing issues with historians, I was so impressed of how conservative is the thinking of classical historians. They said that Muslims that live in Bulgaria are Bulgarians. How do you know? We should ask them.”

“We have some cultural science of their integrations. We have 13,000 mixed marriages between Bulgarian Bulgarians and Turkish Bulgarians, never mind they have different religions.”

25 years after the expulsion of Turkish people from Bulgaria there is no longer tension.

“Thanks to God we didn’t have any conflict that led us to a war like it happened in Yugoslavia,” says Professor Petkov.

Bulgaria has its Turkish Party, the Movement of Rights and Freedoms, which “is trying to divert itself from an ethnic-based to a broader multi-ethnic political formation. A project for the Pomak [Bulgarian Muslims, who still prevail after they converted to Islam under the Ottoman Empire] party is on the way. We have a few gypsy parties. And then I ask myself as a sociologist how many parties should we have, because in Bulgaria we have at least 19 clearly identified microethnic groups. Do we have to have 19 ethnic

Ethnic groups in Bulgaria

based parties?”

“Should ethnic parties be the mainstream of the development of the European political process or do we have to find another approach to distinguish people within political organisations not because their ethnic or religious background, but their social and economic interests?” asks Professor Petkov.

“People should identify themselves according to the present situation.”

The ‘unwantedness’

Another aspect of Bulgarian politics is strong populism, “which is not ethno-nationalism,” says Professor Petkov.

“This is something which is alive, strong and which is driving ethics of people still in Bulgaria.”

“Travelling restrictions create negative attitudes. These are not towards the EU, but to particular countries. People are angry with David Cameron and Nigel Farage, not Barroso” Krastyo Petkov, Professor in Economic Sociology, Economic University of Sofia

Nevertheless, in this political landscape, “even if Northern Europe keeps pointing the finger towards Bulgarians and Romanians, Bulgarian nationalists are not going to contribute to the growing European nationalistic wave, which will be observed on May 25.”

It is not that Bulgarians distrust the European Union, it is that the richest members of the EU distrust the Balkan country. This perception is growing in Bulgaria.

As Aleksandar Dimitrov, Chief political analyst in the Centre of Historical and Political Studies in Sofia puts it: “There is not euroscepticism in Bulgaria, there is unwantedness.”

Professor Petkov gives a warning: “We are not a eurosceptic country yet, but maybe it will come if it continues like this. We can be included in the near future in the growing euroscepticism.”

“When we are restricted from travelling, especially when finding jobs, it creates negative attitudes. But so far, my impression is that these are not towards the EU, but to particular countries. People, including the youth, are angry with David Cameron and Nigel Farage, not Barroso or the European Commission.”

The Schengen Agreement is not the ultimate solution to the problem. “There are other issues that are more important, like equal pay or guaranteed minimum income or recognition of social everywhere,” says Professor Petkov. “We went to Ghent (Belgium) to see how the Bulgarian community is doing there, some 15,000 people. The Chief Commissioner told me that the problem is not the Bulgarian invasion there, but that they work for two euros per day, which is not accepted in Belgium.”

“Let’s work together. We have our problems with failure of integration of migrants, especially Roma people, but you have your problems ignoring for many years this danger and even tolerating the black labour, which existed in your countries and aggravated during the economic crisis,” says Professor Petkov.

“In the same time, there is growing discontent and protests of local citizens. The only solution is to work together, here and there, there and here.”

Apart from ethnic Bulgarians, who are roughly 85 per cent of the population, the most prominent minority is Turks (8.8 per cent of the people and concentrating in some regions like Kardzhali, where they are two thirds of the population).

One out of twenty Bulgarian citizens is Roma, the highest percentage in any country in the world. Pomaks or Bulgarian Muslims are also numerous but they are and they consider themselves ethnic Bulgarians.

Krastyo Petkov explains that the word Pomak (‘Pomatsi’ in Bulgarian) comes from ‘anguish’, because they were forced to convert to Islam during the Ottoman ocupation, even they didn’t belong to a traditionally islamic ethnic group.

UROVIEWS

The turnout of the last European elections was 37.49 per cent in Bulgaria. A low overall turnout in the upcoming May elections will suppose the consolidation of populist parties in the European Parliament, according to Professor Petkov. (Photo by Fred Tongue)

41

LATVIA

Latvia

LATVIA

L

atvia does not fall into the usual frame of hard-right euroscepticism. There is not one specific eurosceptic party.

Rather, several parties criticise the way the EU is currently going, and want to change but not abandon it. For some Latvians, being part of the European Union also means getting away from Russia. Only independent since 1990, the legacy of the Soviet times can still be felt in daily life. About one third of the Latvian population is ethnic Russian.

The current crisis in Ukraine has put the split in Latvian society into the limelight.

Whereas some people feel that close integration with the EU is more important than ever, others stress their belonging to Russia.

“In Latvia, euroscepticism is often presented as pro-Russian activity. If you are eurosceptic, you are automatically in favour of Russia’s interests. That’s why it is hard to be eurosceptic” Ivars Brivers, professor of economics

The euro – a symbol of the EU’s problems In the middle of the eurozone crisis and an atmosphere of growing euroscepticism, Latvia introduced the euro on January 1. In the run-up to the currency change, public opposition was widespread.

Around half of the Latvian population was adamantly against giving up the national currency. Today, almost four months after the euro introduction, some Latvians remain resistant. For them, the euro is only symbolic of greater problems within the European Union.

by Sophia Schirmer

“F

our euros and 98 cents, please!” Ivars Brīvers opens his wallet, takes out his credit card and hands it over to the woman behind the counter of a little cafe in Rīga’s Old Town.

Since the New Year, Brīvers has only used his card for payments in Latvia, even when he merely buys a pot of tea and a pastry like today.

“I don’t want to use the euro here in Latvia,” says Brīvers, a professor of economics at the BA School of Business and Finance in Rīga.

“Right now, I only have four euros in my wallet for example to pay in shops that don’t take credit cards or for the offertory in the church.”

Latvia loses independence

This refusal to use the euro in everyday life has nothing to do with difficulties in dealing with the Since Latvia introduced the euro, Ivars Brivers has been using his credit card for most payments. For him, this is a way of expresseuro. “I’ve visited other eurozone ing his opposition against the euro, Latvia’s new currency. (Photos by Sophia Schirmer) countries,” says Brīvers. “I am familiar with the system of euro notes and coins.” EU. “We need independent policies because giving up its currency has wider implicaFor him and other Latvians, the opposi- the economic conditions will never be the tions for Latvia. “First we lose our economic tion against the euro is based on more pro- same in all European countries.” independence. And when a country loses found reasons. They do not only criticise the its economic independence, the political common European currency but the Euro- Flashback to Soviet days independence is also just like an illusion.” pean Union in its current form.

He compares the euro changeover to Latvia’s He thinks it is necessary to rebuild the EU “It was a mistake for Latvia to join the eu- situation in the Soviet Union. “In the Soviet and return to a union of “truly independent rozone. With the lat, we are not only losing times, Latvia also had its own flag, its own countries.” a symbol of independence but we are losing constitution, its own parliament, its own Prior to Latvia’s euroisation, a majority of a tool of independence,” says Brīvers. He anthem. But of course, this was only an illu- the Latvian people shared the expectation believes that a country needs its own eco- sion of independence. There was no real in- that their country will lose control over its nomic policy for being truly independent, dependence.” During the Soviet regime, Lat- economic policy by adopting the euro. The which also includes monetary policy. This via was denied its own currency. “The same latest Eurobarometer survey on the euro in especially goes for the member states of the is happening now.” Brīvers is convinced that Latvia – requested by the European Com-

42

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

43

mission and conducted by TNS Political & Social in April 2013 – shows that 63 per cent of Latvians held this fear, more than in all other EU member states that have yet to adopt the euro.

so in 2013.

For many euro opponents in Latvia, fulfilling the Maastricht criteria is however not enough. “Yes, Latvia fulfils the official crite-

A symbol of national identity

An even higher share of Latvians (75 per cent) feared that they will also lose part of their national identity by introducing the euro. When Latvia was established as a state for the first time in 1918, the lat was introduced as its currency. During the Second World War and the Soviet occupation, the Latvian people then had to use other countries’ currencies. However, many kept lats during that time. Especially the 5-lat coin with the image of a woman called Milda was seen as a symbol of Latvia.

With the euro introduction, Latvians feel that they lost that symbol. “In the EU, differences between nations vanish more and more,” says Brīvers. “For small countries like Latvia, it won’t take a long time for their identity to disappear completely. And the euro is a factor which makes this process even faster. ” That Latvia would join the eurozone one day was albeit clear from the point of its EU accession in 2004. EU treaties state that all EU member states, except for the United Kingdom and Denmark, commit themselves to adopting the euro once they fulfil the so-called convergence criteria as defined in the Treaty of Maastricht. And Latvia did

ria for joining the eurozone but it violates democracy,” says Andris Orols, chairman of the NGO Antiglobalisti. “A democratic government has to listen to its people. And if people say no, then the government has to do what they want.”

Indeed, a majority of Latvians were per-

“It was a mistake for Latvia to join the eurozone. With the lat, we are not only losing a symbol of independence but we are losing a tool of independence” Ivars Brivers, professor of economics

sistently against the introduction of the euro. This becomes obvious when looking at regular surveys that were conducted by the Latvian research company SKDS. Despite a

gradual growth in support, 50 per cent of Latvians still opposed the transition from lat to euro at the end of 2013. Only 25 per cent answered that they were in favour.

Starting from this public opposition, Antiglobalisti together with two other NGOs tried to initiate a referendum on the euro. However, the proposal was rejected by the Central Election Commission, which decides on the admissibility of referenda in Latvia. The same happened to similar proposals submitted by other organisations.

The Ministry of Finance cites the referendum on EU accession as a justification for not holding another public vote.

“The referendum on the euro in Latvia was made together with the voting on 20 September 2003 on Latvia’s accession to the European Union,” it writes on its website eiro.lv. Back then, a majority of Latvians (67.49 per cent) voted for joining the EU. “Therefore, repeated voting is not possible because in such a case, the state would contravene the international commitments.”

Not asked about the euro

For Antiglobalisti, this justification is unsustainable. “The referendum on joining the EU was held ten years ago. Opinions have changed since then,” says Jānis Cirulīs, member of the NGO. “Also, in 2003, people weren’t aware that they voted for the euro.

The ballot only asked about joining the EU.” In addition, the EU treaties don’t state a

Maastricht criteria Before a country can join the eurozone and adopt the euro as its national currency, it has to fulfil certain convergence criteria: 1. The budget deficit, the difference between government spending and revenue in one year, must not be higher than 3 per cent of gross domestic product (GDP).

2. The national debt, the sum of the budget deficits of many years, must not be higher than 60 per cent of GDP. If it is higher, it should at least fall steadily.

3. Prices must be stable and inflation must not be more than 1.5 percentage points above the previous year’s rate of the three EU countries with the lowest inflation.

4. Long-term interest rates must not be more than 2 percentage points above the previous year’s rate of the three EU countries with the lowest interest rates.

5. The country must participate in the revised Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM II) and the exchange rate between its national currency and the euro must have remained rather stable for at least two years.

44

To provide necessary information about the currency change, communication campaigns were started before January 1. Some are still on-going, for instance the euro cafe in Riga’s Old Town.

UROVIEWS

Andris Orols (right) and Janis Cirulis are among those Latvians who were against the introduction of the euro in their country. Both are members of the NGO Antiglobalisti.

time limit within which the euro has to be introduced after the Maastricht criteria have been met. And, as the example of Sweden shows, there are ways to avoid it: After a majority of the Swedish people voted against joining the eurozone in a referendum in 2003, the Swedish government decided to stay out of the exchange rate mechanism, which means that Sweden cannot fulfil the fifth convergence criterion.

The EU “doesn’t care” about democracy

Andris Orols, chairman of Antiglobalisti, mainly blames the Latvian government for acting in an undemocratic way. Yet he also voices criticism against the EU. “The EU doesn’t care about the fact that the euro was introduced in Latvia without a referendum,” he says.

In a letter to the European Parliament, Orols asked the EU authorities to withdraw their invitation for Latvia to join the eurozone “until not only the economic requirements are completed, but also until the fundamental principles of democracy ... are observed.” This letter was only answered after nine months, and the answer simply says that the “file has … been closed.”

Orols doesn’t want to give up yet. He plans to appeal to a European court. And with his NGO Antiglobalisti, he wants to form a political party. “All parties in the Latvian Parliament are euro-optimists, we are eurosceptics.” One of the points in an already existing party programme thereby reads: “We want our national currency back.”

Most members of Antiglobalisti even

UROVIEWS

The Latvian euro coins feature the image of Milda who is seen as a symbol of freedom and independence in Latvia. Milda was also shown on the first 5-lats coins.

want Latvia to leave the EU, says Orols. He himself had been against the EU system already before the euro arrived in Latvia as well. Now, after the euro introduction, his opinion on the EU “is getting worse every day,” says Orols. “In the EU, only some countries gain, and it’s not Latvia, it’s not the Latvian people. If the system remains this unfair, Latvia shouldn’t stay in it.”

It cannot be denied that the euro brings with it certain benefits for Latvia. Travelling for instance becomes easier for both Latvians and tourists coming to the country. Moreover, businesses and individuals can save money as they don’t have to pay currency exchange fees to other eurozone countries anymore. Still, Orols is convinced that all this only benefits a few Latvians but that the majority gains nothing.

Instead, he is of the opinion that the euro

“In the EU, only some countries gain, and it’s not Latvia, it’s not the Latvian people. If the system remains this unfair, Latvia shouldn’t stay in it” Andris Orols, chairman of Antiglobalisti

has from the beginning been a burden for the people. “The Maastricht criteria were met on people’s pockets,” he says. He refers back to strict austerity measures that Latvia implemented after it had been hit by the economic crisis and received a bailout from the EU and the International Monetary Fund in 2008. Public spending in the areas of education and health care was cut, salaries were

reduced, unemployment grew and many people left Latvia. Joining the eurozone was thereby defined as “a crisis exit strategy.”

The euro and fears of growing inflation

Now, after the changeover, Orols expects that prices will rise due to rounding up. The currency shift was also costly for businesses that had to pay for the adjustment of cash machines. This could increase prices as well.

This concern is shared by a majority of Latvians. According to a survey commissioned by the Latvian Ministry of Finance and conducted by the Factum research group in February, 81 per cent of respondents were still convinced “that the euro changeover costs will be included in the prices” and that the “prices of goods and services” will increase.

The expectation of rising inflation was the main reason why the social-democratic political group Concord Centre – currently the biggest group in the Latvian Parliament – voted solid against the euro introduction when the parliament held its final vote on January 31 2013. In total, 40 per cent of all deputies voted against the euro whereas 52 per cent were in favour.

“We foresee problems,” says Igor Pimenov, member of the Committee for European Affairs in the Latvian Parliament. “The largest one is inflation, which is likely to grow.”

So far, prices have not increased significantly. However, after only four months, the real impact of the euro on inflation cannot be assessed yet, says Pimenov.

Concord Centre bases its concern on the

45

LATVIA

“The Latvian lat will be always in my heart” Rihards Kols is up for the European Parliament elections in May, as a candidate for the Latvian party National Alliance. In an interview with Euroviews, he explains that he was prepared for Latvia’s changeover to the euro, that adopting the euro was without alternatives for Latvia, and that the elections in May will show whether the euro has changed Latvians’ perception of the EU.

by Sophia Schirmer

This Rigan cafe has transferred prices directly from lat to euro, strictly sticking to the official exchange rate of one euro to 0.702804 lat.

assumption that with the introduction of the euro, imported goods from other eurozone countries will become cheaper as currency exchange costs no longer apply. As a result, the consumption of these goods can increase. “People simply would like to buy more of these cheaper things.”

Yet inflationary theories say that if demand increases faster than supply, prices will go up again and inflation will rise. “This would in turn also increase the expenditures of Latvian exporters as they need to import things for producing.” All in all, Pimenov is convinced that the euro will only boost imports and not exports in Latvia. This is a serious problem as the country already runs a trade deficit with the eurozone, meaning

The design of the Latvian euro coins The Latvian euro coins feature the image of a woman called Milda. The same woman was shown on the first 5-lats coins, which were in use before the start of the Second World War and the subsequent Soviet occupation. Milda is seen as a symbol of freedom and independence in Latvia. “We chose Milda from a variety of ideas in order to preserve our national identity,” explains Antra Trenko, Senior Economist at the Bank of Latvia. “Also, we wanted to show something special to other countries.” Many Latvians indeed think that their coins are the most beautiful ones in Europe.

46

In Riga’s famous market halls, many stall owners have already rounded up prices so that the numbers in euro are even.

that it imports more from other member states than it exports to them.

With the euro, this trade deficit could become worse. “No other country in the EU with a similar correlation between exports and imports managed to keep its competitiveness after joining the eurozone. Neither Spain, nor Portugal, nor Ireland. All of them faced serious problems. And that is also what we expect for Latvia.”

These concerns don’t imply that Concord

“We foresee problems. The largest one is inflation, which is likely to grow” Igor Pimenov, member of Concord Centre

Centre is against the euro introduction in Latvia as such. The group is just convinced that it is not the right time for Latvia to be joining the eurozone but that the system has to be changed first.

At the moment, the member states of the EU vary too much, says Pimenov. There are countries with a positive trade balance, like Germany, that export a lot of goods and thus put pressure on the domestic production of countries that import their goods. In these countries, national consumption has to be increased, says Pimenov.

At the same time, it is necessary to reduce Latvia’s dependence on imports. “We would like to make all EU countries similar as far as the balance of imports and exports is concerned. This is a hard job and it will need a decade at least.”

The concern that the euro cannot work for

the EU in its current form is also expressed

by Jānis Ošlejs. He is CEO of the Primekss Group, a Latvian business that has invented and exports a new type of concrete. “The system in the eurozone has created a common currency but has not created a common state, which could foster development in all areas of Europe, including poor ones,” he says. At the moment, periphery countries like Latvia have to struggle with low economic growth, relatively low competitiveness and high levels of unemployment.

A more federal Europe is the only solution to sustain the euro

Ošlejs is convinced that it is the EU’s responsibility to find a solution for the unequal development of its member states. “What we have to do is make a federal European government and ensure that poorer states also get spending.” In contrast to Brīvers and Orols, Ošlejs thus calls for deeper European integration.

Yet if the EU doesn’t want to move in the

“This situation can’t continue.

Europe must change” Janis Oslejs, CEO of Primekss Group

direction of more federalisation and centralised spending, then there is no future for the euro, he says. “Either we create a more federal Europe or we abandon the euro.” In the end, Ošlejs comes to the same conclusion as the other euro opponents: “This situation can’t continue. Europe must change.”

UROVIEWS

I

t has been almost four months now since Latvia introduced the euro. Have you already gotten used to the new money?

For me, it wasn’t a problem at all. I was ready for this transition. And I had experienced living in other countries where the euro had already been introduced. In general, I think the adaptation to the euro has a slow and steady pace in Latvia, so far with no negative surprises. Yet we need to give more time to people to completely adapt to the euro.

For many Latvians, the lat is a symbol of independence and a part of national identity.

Some even say that Latvians have an emotional relationship to their currency. Do you feel similar?

The Latvian lat will be always in my heart.

I have the collection of all the coins, and I will give it to my grand-children. But we have to sacrifice something to achieve something much greater. In my eyes, the Latvian symbols are anthem, language, the country itself. The currency changes from time to time, especially here in Latvia. Our nation has moved from one currency to another, willingly or forced – and it is still there.

Before its introduction, a majority of Latvians were against the euro. How do you explain that?

People are used to what they do, their surroundings and so on. If anything changes, it gives discomfort. But with time, they cope with the new conditions and they move on.

I think it’s the same with the euro. Also, you have to look at Latvia’s situation in the economic crisis. After we got the bailout package in 2008, we were – not forced but let’s say – advised by the International Monetary Fund and the European Central Bank to introduce very harsh austerity measures. That created a negative sense towards the euro and the EU as a whole.

UROVIEWS

I talked to Andris Orols, chairman of the NGO Antiglobalisti, and he complained that Latvians were forced to adopt the euro without getting any chance to express their opinion. Do you agree?

Every Latvian had a chance to say whether they want to join the EU and subsequently also the eurozone in the referendum on EU accession in 2003. So they gave their vote at that time. I mean, there will always be somebody who is against. But we have to think of long-term objectives. It’s not only about economic means, it is also about national security.

And right now, we don’t have any other alternative. Also, the Latvian Parliament voted for the euro in 2013, and the parliament is a legally elected body. We cannot hold a referendum on every question.

In the referendum you are referring to, only about two thirds of Latvians voted in favour of joining the EU. Compared to other countries, this was quite low. Are Latvians particularly eurosceptic?

Maybe it’s our nature to be sceptical. It’s a legacy from the Soviet times. Anything that is introduced by somebody else, we watch with suspicion. After joining the EU, we also had to close some of the manufacturing sectors, and we had to introduce other limitations. That created a negative perception of the EU. Was it right for Latvia to introduce the euro now, even though there was opposition?

I think it was the right moment. And I think we will benefit from the euro. There was no reason to delay that.

The National Alliance voted for the euro introduction in the Latvian Parliament. Yet the party’s programme for the European elections says that one of the main aims within

the EU is “the preservation of Latvia as a national country”, which sounds rather eurosceptic. What exactly is the stance of your party within the EU? As a party, we believe that being in the EU is integral. However, we do not support deeper integration. We are for a European Union of nation states, where the national interests are higher than the European interests. Questions such as family or social policy should remain at the national level.

All in all, how has the euro introduction affected Latvians’ feelings towards the EU? I think that the European Parliament elections in May will be a first evaluation of that.

Right now, the EU has to work hard to reestablish the trust in it. That might also be a factor that influences how many people participate in the elections.

The National Alliance The National Alliance is currently Latvia’s fourth largest party (13.9% of the votes).

Since 2011, it has been participating in the coalition government. It holds one seat in the European Parliament and is affiliated to the European Conservatives and Reformists Group, which is considered to be soft eurosceptic. According to Rihards Kols, the most important items on the party’s agenda are national interest, national identity and heritage as well as culture, language, family, youth and demographics.

47

low salary, so that the Germans and Brits can [do nothing and] get social benefits.”

LATVIA

Russians moved to Latvia during the Soviet occupation

Latvians divided between Russia and EU

With almost 28 per cent of the total population of two million, Latvia has the biggest Russian minority of all three Baltic countries. During the Soviet occupation many Russians settled in Latgale, a province close to the Russian and Belarusian border, and in the capital—Riga. After Latvia’s independence in 1991 some of the ethnic Russians were granted citizenship, while others gained the status of non-citizen. In 2004, Latvia joined the EU and NATO. Nowadays, a majority in Riga and Latgale still has a Russian background. For instance, in Daugavpils – the main city in Latgale— nearly eighty per cent of the population is ethnically Russian. Different studies show that a high percentage of Latvians with Russian roots are sceptical towards the European Union and feel more connected to Russia.

Born in Daugavpils, but living in Riga studying in economics, Pavel says he doesn’t feel like a European citizen.

“Maybe I’m connected to space,” he jokes.

“When I’m in Russia I’m a foreigner, I don’t feel connected to the EU and I’m a patriot of Latvia, but not for this government. They are very nationalistic and some parties say that all Russians are bad.”

of ‘soft power’ in which Russia tries to regain its influence in Latvia.

The book points out that Russia is attempting to enforce its influence in Latvia through non-governmental organisations (NGOs), Moscow Houses, information campaigns, as well as through cultural, educational and other instruments. According to the study, these instruments are used in order to promote a positive attitude towards Russia, which later can be used by Russia for its “geopolitical interests.”

In the Russian Federation’s Foreign Policy Review of 2007, the section “Protection of Compatriots’ Interests Abroad” states that “tens of millions of our people have remained outside state borders as a result of the collapse of the USSR.” Therefore, according to the document, the protection of compatriots’ interests is a natural priority for foreign policy. In this regard, Russian president Vladimir Putin has repeatedly said that his country needs to protect the Russian language and culture in Latvia.

most split nation now and Russkiy Mir or Russian World should reunite the Russians.

This is a little bit dangerous.”

Different historical perspective

A study called The “Humanitarian Dimension” of Russian Foreign Policy towards Georgia, Moldava, Ukraine, and the Baltic States – by Gatis Pelnens from the Centre for Eastern European Policy Studies (CEEPS), shows that there are many forms

But according to Karlis Eihenbaums, spokesperson for the Latvian Ministry of Foreign Affairs, the Russian culture has every possibility to flourish in Latvia.

“There is no need for something extra,” he says. “Also because we see that probably there is a second agenda. President Putin said that the collapse of the Soviet Union was an unfortunate thing that happened.

Another thing he said was that Russia is the

Organisations like Russkiy Mir and Russian International are freely giving away information materials and study books to so called Russian schools and other organisations in Latvia. Often these materials show a different point of view on history.

“They say Latvia freely became part of the USSR and there is also no mention of all the people killed by Stalin,” says Maris Cepuritis, professor in International Relations at the University of Riga and researcher at the CEEPS. For instance Valerij Buhvalov (former MP) and Jakov Pliner (member of Latvian Russian Alliace) received money from the Russkiy Mir Foundation, to write different educational materials about the Great War of the Fatherland (this is how Russia calls the Second World War), as is shown in an investigation by The Baltic Centre for Investigative Journalism (Re:Baltica). The investigation shows that the books offer advice about what teachers should tell schoolchildren about the Second World War, without any reference to sources. Re:Baltice proves that in these education materials there is no mention that after the Second World War the Soviet Union was restored in Latvia.

Maris Cepuritis believes that with these tactics, Russia wants to change the public opinion in Latvia. “Russia wants to make people believe that everything in Latvia and the EU is bad, while everything in Russia is perfect. That Russia is a strong country, a big economic power, where the human rights situation is very good. But this is not true.”

He adds that every country has the right

“Russia wants to make people believe that everything in Latvia and the EU is bad”

“We can see a big influence of Russian media in Latvia. A very small part of our media is independent”

“The locals are not switching to Latvian news, because it’s easier to watch everything in Russian”

Maris Cepuritis, professor in International Relations at the University of Riga

Ainars Dimants, director of the National Electronic Mass Media Council

Karlis Eihenbaums, Press Secretary of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs

Protection of compatriots

“With the current situation in Ukraine we can see that Russia is using the same strategy as in Soviet times” Maris Cepuritis, professor in International Relations at the University of Riga

A protest march for the protection of Russian-language schools. (Photo by Steven Musch)

by Steven Musch

The crisis in Ukraine has increased ethnic tensions in Latvia. Nearly one third of the country’s population is ethnically Russian and many of them feel more connected to Russia than to the EU. This division might grow as Russia increases its ‘soft power’ in the Baltic Country.

W

ith its grey buildings and countless abandoned houses, Daugavpils—the second biggest city in Latvia—looks somewhat desolate.

Old Soviet trams hurtle trough the city and on the streets, in shops, bars and restaurants, almost everyone speaks Russian.

48

Pavel, a 22-year-old student with Russian roots, says that life can be hard in Latvia.

“It’s difficult to find work and the salaries are low. Most people can hardly get by. My parents say it was better to live in the Soviet Union. Everyone had work, everything was cheap and the salaries were better.”

He blames the EU for some of the problems in Latvia. “What do we get from the EU,” he asks. “When we joined a lot of factories closed and the prices became so much higher. At the same time they open factories in Germany and England, where people from Eastern Europe come to work for a

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

49

to use soft power, but “with the current situation in Ukraine we can see that Russia is using the same strategy as in Soviet times.

Portraying the world in black and white and saying that Russia will save the world from the fascist powers in the west.”

Many Russian speakers are sceptical towards the EU

In a referendum in 2003 almost 67 per cent of all Latvians voted in favour of joining the EU. However, sociological data from the Baltic Institute of Social Sciences shows that a large portion of ethnic Russians (44 per cent) voted against the accession, while only 20 per cent voted in favour (36 per cent abstained). The Latvian ethnic group was much more positive as 57 per cent voted in favour and 18 per cent was against (25 per cent abstained).

According to sociologist and director Arnis Kaktins of the independent research company SKDS, not only ethnic Russians but Latvians in general have always been quite sceptical towards the EU. “With the referendum a majority voted in favour of joining the EU, but not with all their heart, I think. One of the main reasons to join had to do with the past Soviet occupation; the aspect of security against the East. Many people thought ‘we don’t have any other option, because our country is too small to survive on its own’. It was either joining Russia or the West.”

Kaktins believes that this is also why, since the crisis in Ukraine, the popularity of the EU has gone up. “Many Latvians are happy to be part of the EU and NATO, because it gives them security against Russia. For ethnic Russians, however, this is different. A lot of them supported the actions of Russia on Crimea.”

Research done by SKDS also shows that

Perceptions on USSR, EU and Russia’s actions on Crimea

euroscepticism is the highest among Latvia’s Russian speaking population. Before the country’s accession to the eurozone on January 1, this year, a majority of all Latvians were against the euro. But statistics from 2013 show that the number of Russian speakers who were against the single currency was slightly higher than the ethnic Latvian opponents.

Kaktins thinks there are two main reasons for the opposition against the EU. One of them is population decline, he says. “This is a big problem in Latvia. Many people are leaving since the borders have opened and we also have negative birth rates. In my opinion this is ruining our country.”

Another reason, according to the sociologist, is Russia’s influence in Latvia through media, education and the economy. “There is a big difference in how Russian and Latvian media portray the EU. A lot of Russian speakers [in Latvia] heavily consume Russian media and obviously this influences how they see the world.”

Banning Russian-language television channels

In cities like Daugavpils and Riga many people only rely on Russian-language media, because they don’t speak the Latvian language fluently, or at all. This has caused great concerns from the national government, because in their opinion Moscow owned media are showing one-sided information.

Especially, since the crisis in Ukraine, the fear has grown that Russian speakers might be influenced by the Russian media in a negative way. As a result of this, in the beginning of April, the Latvian National Electronic Mass Media Council (NEPLP) suspended the Russian-language state television station ‘Rossiya RTR’ for three months. The media council also started a case against the First

A study carried out by the research company “GfK” in cooperation with the news agency LETA shows that nearly one-third of Latvia’s residents believe that Russia’s incursion in Ukraine was justified. The proportion of ethnic Russians who believe Russia was justified in its actions is twice as high, according to the study.

In addition, data from an opinion poll done by SKDS in December 2011 shows

Latvian and Russian-language media.

Baltic Channel, which has a strong connection with the First Russian Channel. Both broadcasts are being accused of violating Latvia’s Electronic Mass Media Law, which bans “incitement to war or the initiation of a military conflict”.

Other countries, including Lithuania and Ukraine, have recently taken similar steps against Russian-language television stations.

In Latvia ‘Rossiya RTR’ and the First Baltic Channel have announced that they want to fight the NEPLP’s decision in court.

“Of course they will argue that banning media is against the freedom of speech, but we have discussed all the pros and cons and we are ready to go to court,” says Ainars Dimants, director of the NEPLP. “After the start of the military aggression of Russia, we can see that, according to our monitoring data, Rossiya RTR started using war propaganda. This is prohibited,” Dimants says. “There are regulations in our law, but also in the European Directive for Audiovisual Media Services, which state that in case of rebroadcasting, there are concrete limitations, such as pornography and other things, including military propaganda and incitement to war.”

dia in Latvia. A very small part of our media is independent. The main alternative is of course public service media, where we also have Russian-language programmes and news portals.”

“But these are not very popular,” he continues. “They can’t compete with the Russian channels, because these have much more money.” So the situation is very concrete, he says. “Russian-language journalists who don’t identify with Putin’s position have very limited options to work in Latvia.”

“Our task is to strengthen the possibilities of public service media in Russian; in the sense that we create working places for European oriented journalists,” Dimants, director of NEPLP, says. For instance, there are concrete ideas to create a pan-Baltic Russian news channels. “And of course there is also a need for independent projects in the Russian language. So for this we need political support from the government, but I think that we can get that.”

“Some Russian speakers might want to join Russia”

Julia, 28, who works in a hotel just outside the centre of Daugavpils, tells she mostly watches Russian language television. “Latvian TV is very poor,” she says. “The quality of the programmes is not as good as on the Russian channels. And on the Latvian news the government pushes their opinion

that nearly 71 per cent of the Russian speakers finds that being part of the Soviet Union was good for Latvia, against a lesser number (43 per cent) of Latvian speakers.

Another study, about ethno-political conflicts and national identity in Latvia, conducted by Mihail Rodin from the Institute of European Studies in Latvia, shows that only 23 per cent of Russians feel any attachment to the EU, while among Latvians this number is higher with 41 per cent.

too much. They say that Russians are bad.”

She finds her government undemocratic: “Switching off Russian channels just because they show different points of view, is that a democracy?”

Coming from a Russian family, Julia, says she sometimes feels discriminated. “I don’t like what is happening in Latvia with the divide by language. Many people are leaving because they feel like a stranger in their own country. If the government pushes us to much some Russian speakers might even want to join Russia.”

Brainwashed by Russian propaganda

This is exactly what many Latvians are currently afraid of, barring in mind the recent events on Crimea. But according to Karlis Eihenbaums, Press Secretary of the Latvian Minister of Foreign Affairs, it is not very realistic that a scenario such as in Ukraine might repeat itself in Latvia.

“In this country I don’t see it as a big danger,” he says. “Even if they [Russia] will select one or two crazy guys from here [Latvia]… I mean, already now, we have such a person [a member of the European Parliament, Tatjana Zdanoka] who went over to Crimea and is participating in events for the reestablishment of the Soviet Union. This is a little bit outdated, I think. But I don’t pay attention to these marginals. For our security policy,

Journalists who don’t identify with Putin have limited options

Dimants finds that the main problem in Latvia is that a majority of the Russian-language media is in hands of ‘Russians from Russia’.

“We can see a big influence of Russian me-

50

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

51

started because of the education reforms in 2004, which made sure that 60 per cent of all classes in so called minority schools in Latvia have to be conducted in the Latvian language. The current government even wants to increase this percentage, which has again led to a number of protests, recently.

if they step out of the constitutional framework, it’s not a big deal.”

Eihenbaums does say, however, that one of the major problems in Latvia is connected to something he calls a ‘neglected information sphere’.

“What is obvious now, is that the information war is there,” he says. “It is so propagandistic that quite many people are so much brainwashed. And they even don’t feel that they are being brainwashed. They are watching a nice [Russian language] television show, but even in this nice show there is a political message.”

“We won’t allow the assimilation of our children”

“We should suspend more channels. Russian media are cultivating hate among nations” Einars Cilinskis, Member of Parliament for the “National Alliance”

We are losing the minds of the locals, Eihenbaums adds. “They are not switching to Latvian news, because it’s easier to watch everything in Russian.” An example of the propaganda he mentions is for instance how Dmitry Kiselyov, presenter of Vesti Nedeli (News of the Week), stated on 16 March— the day of the Crimean referendum—that Russia is “the only country in the world able to turn the USA into radioactive dust.”

Latvia is politically divided

The suspension of Russian language media has caused strong political debates in Latvia and great anger among the Russian speaking population. According to Sergejs Dolgopolovs, Member of Parliament (MP) for “Harmony Center” and member of the European Affairs Committee, banning Russian-language television channels is a ‘stupid decision’.

“You must see the people who live in this country as complete idiots if you make such a decision. This is an obvious case of censorship. If a channel shows opinions which are different from the mainstream opinions in the European Union, it is the right of this channel,” says Dolgopolovs.

Harmony Center (also translated as Concord Center) is considered to be softly eurosceptic and to some extent pro-Russian.

The party opposed the introduction of the euro in Latvia and supported a referendum in 2012 to make Russian an official second state language. The referendum didn’t make it, because a majority – mostly ethnic Latvians – voted against.

With the last elections in 2011 Harmony Center became the biggest party in the Latvian Parliament, however, they weren’t able to form a coalition, which means that they

52

A protest march on the 10th of April for the protection of Russian-language schools. The protesters walked to the Ministry of Education in Riga.

are in the opposition. The party is mainly supported by ethnic Russians and is sometimes even accused of having close ties with United Russia, the party of Russian president Vladimir Putin.

Russian media create an alternative reality

Einars Cilinskis, who is an MP for the “National Alliance” (NA) and the Parliamentary Secretary of the Ministry of Environmental Protection and Regional Development, rep-

resents the opposite opinion, as he believes that suspending Rossiya RTR is ‘not enough’.

“We should suspend more Russian channels,” Cilinskis says. “Russian state media are creating an alternative reality. It is more than propaganda what they show. They are portraying the Baltic countries, the EU and Ukraine as completely aggressive regimes.

Actually, these kind of media are cultivating hate among nations.”

The National Alliance—which is also softly eurosceptic, but to some extent anti-Rus-

UROVIEWS

sian—is currently in a government coalition with the Union of Greens and Farmers and the Unity party of Prime Minister Laimdota Straujuma.

The NA is considered to be quite nationalistic, however, they have become more moderate since they are in the government.

Cilinskis, for instance, recently fell into dispute because he announced that he wanted to participate in a yearly march for the commemoration of the Waffen-SS. Several other members of the party, such as Raivis

UROVIEWS

(Photo by Steven Musch)

Dzintars, have made statements that Latvia should be “only for Latvians”.

Nationalism, discrimination and the European Elections

This rise of nationalism is one of the main reasons for ethnic Russians to be pushed further away from Latvia and the European Union and more into the arms of Russia. In recent years, it has also resulted in a series of relatively small protest actions for the rights of ethnic Russians. Most of these protests

One of the main people supporting these protests is Tatjana Zdanoka, from the Latvian Russian Alliance (former party For Human Rights in United Latvia), who is a member of the European Parliament (MEP) for the Greens/EFA. Since Latvia’s independence Zdanoka has been struggling to make Russian the second state language and to combat education reforms and non-citizenship. According to the MEP it is evident that there is discrimination of Russian speakers in Latvia.

“They are oppressing us and now we are finally reacting. The same was happening with Russian speakers in Ukraine. In Latvia we will not be so flexible as allow the assimilation of our children,” the MEP says.

Currently she is under an investigation by the Latvian security authorities as she is accused of being a Russian agent of influence in Latvia and the European Parliament.

Sitting in her party-headquarters in Riga, Zdanoka laughs about these accusations.

“Here in Latvia I’m always seen as the hand of Russia. But I’m also half Jewish, so I’m working for the Mossad, I speak French so I’m working for France and I can also help some British intelligence services. I’m a multi-agent,” she jokes.

On a more serious note, Zdanoka says that she believes her fellow Latvian MEP, Karlis Sadurskis, who filed the complaints against her, just wants to raise his popularity with his actions.

The Latvian Russian Alliance feels more for stronger cooperation with Russia instead of the EU. However, the party doesn’t have much support at the moment and the chances are high that Tatjana Zdanoka won’t remain in Brussels after the elections for the European Parliament in May. According to the latest forecasts Harmony Center will be the big winner in these elections and this could also be the case with the national elections in October this year. On the other hand the National Alliance remians strong as well. And while many ethnic Russians oppose the EU, because they feel as second class citizens, a lot of ethnic Latvians support the Union and fear for the long arm of Russia. A sign of a country that is politically and socially divided.

53

LATVIA

Aliens in their own country They were citizens of a country which does not exist anymore. They are not stateless, nor foreigners. They are called “non-citizens”. Today in Latvia, about 280,000 people have this complicated status, due to the collapse of the Soviet Union. While the country is celebrating the 10th anniversary of its EU accession, there is no real will to solve the issue. Neither from the Latvian government, nor the European Union.

by Camille Petit

“I

n 1993, I lost my citizenship. I couldn’t work for the Riga City Council anymore. I couldn’t buy a land anymore. I couldn’t work in a political party anymore. I understood that I was a citizen of second-class.”

Aleksandr Gaponenko has been living in Latvia for sixty years and he is today considered as a “noncitizen” in his country. It means that he has no political rights – no right to vote, to be elected and to join a political party – and some professions related to the public and judiciary sectors are prohibited to him. Except for these exceptions, Gaponenko identifies himself as Russian, even if he never lived in Russia. “I do not want to take the Russian citizenship because he enjoys the same rights as Aleksandr I am part of the Latvian society. The problem is that this society is divided in two,” he says. (Photos by Camille Petit) every Latvian citizen. and 13.5 per cent prefer benefitting from about its dark side. Concerning the econoA low rate of naturalisation easier travel to the Commonwealth of In- my, it’s about industrialisation and forced The actual situation of the non-citizens re- dependent Countries (CIS), which includes collectivisation in the agrarian sector. When veals the difficulty of the Latvian govern- former Soviet republics. 8.2 per cent said it’s about people life, then it’s about represment to integrate its Russian minority since that they are satisfied with this status. sion. A friend of mine explained me how he the collapse of the USSR. In almost twenty prepared it. He said, ‘I know what I think years, the number of non-citizens has de- “The exam is very ideological” about the history but for the exam I have to creased from 730,000 to 280,000. It is main- The examination is based on a test on flu- think exactly the contrary to have the corly due to death as only 140,000 have been ency in the Latvian language and on a test rect answers’,” explains Elizabete Krivcova, naturalised since the creation of the status. on knowledge which consists of knowing co-founder of the Non-Citizens’ Congress, Different reasons are given by the Office of national anthem words, significant facts of who decided to naturalise because she Citizenship and Migration Affairs (OCMA) history of Latvia and the basic principles of wanted to be lawyer. “I didn’t like it because to explain this low rate of naturalisation. Ac- national constitution. Considered as “un- it wasn’t really fair. But at that time, I was cording to a survey carried out in 2012, 24.8 fair” by many non-citizens, it is one of the passing a lot of exams in the end of the uniper cent of non-citizens don’t apply because reasons why they don’t want to naturalise. versity, so I considered it as just one more they are convinced that citizenship should “The exam is very ideological. You have to exam.” be granted automatically. 21.3 per cent af- recognise that Latvia was occupied by RusValerij Komarov is also a former non-citfirm that they won’t be able to pass the exam sia. The question about soviet times are only izen who went through naturalisation when

54

UROVIEWS

his first child was born, about ten years ago.

“Passing the exam meant that I recognised that I was an immigrant, even though I’m born in Latvia and I always lived there. It is not my fault if the geopolitical situation changed. So I did it for my son, to avoid him to get this status as well,” he says.

Currently president of the Institute of European Studies and co-founder of the NonCitizens’ Congress—an NGO promoting full democratic rights—Aleksandr Gaponenko always refused to naturalise because of ideological reasons: “To pass the examination it is necessary to confirm that I agree with this model of society and I completely disagree. I don’t want to accept that Latvia is only for ethnic Latvians.”

“I don’t want to accept that Latvia is only for ethnic Latvians” Aleksandr Gaponenko, non-citizen

In response to these statements, the Latvian government answers that if they are not able to pass the exam, then they can’t get the Latvian citizenship.

“There is always a problem of what to do with this people. We didn’t invite them, they came under certain circumstances.

Amongst them, some took part in the repression or were former officers of the occupation army. You need to have a certain period to find how to integrate those who

In Estonia • The restoration of the 1938 Citizenship Act granted automatic citizenship to those who were citizens of Estonia in 1940 and their descendants.

• About one third of Estonia’s population became non-citizens.

• They have the right to vote in local elections if they have been permanent residents for at least five years in that territory.

• Today, 6.5 per cent of the population are non-citizens.

In Lithuania • Adoption of the so-called “zero option” granting the Lithuanian citizenship to all its permanent residents after the independence.

• This was possible because ethnic Lithuanians composed almost 80 per cent of the population when the law was adopted.

UROVIEWS

Gaponenko has a passport and can travel like a Latvian citizen. Above the picture is written “aliens passport”.

would like to stay. It can’t be quick. If they want to change Latvia, they have to become citizen of the country and then they will have the whole rights. It is normal,” explains Karlis Eihenbaums, Latvian foreign ministry press secretary, who assures that there is a total protection and respect of minorities in Latvia.

The influence of Russia

The naturalisation process is even less attractive since the Russian government decided to offer visa-free travel to Russia to non-citizen in 2008. This is one concrete application of the regular use of the issue by the Russian side, according to Karlis Eihenbaums. More recently, in March, the Russian Ambassador in Latvia Aleksandr Veshnyakov stated that Russia is going to “save the Latvian non-citizens out of poverty by giving them citizenship and a pension without having to stay in Russia.” For the press secretary, “Russia is discouraging these people to take the Latvian citizenship. They tell us that we don’t give them enough rights but at the same time, they are not helping us. This is manipulation and demagogy.”

The influence of Russia is also indirectly revealed through a difference in retirement system and economic benefits granted to Russian citizens, that push non-citizens to opt for Russia. Since 2010, it has exceeded the number of those receiving Latvia citizenship and it has continued to rise. Although, there is no research about the reasons why non-citizens choose the Russian citizenship rather than the Latvian one, the

OCMA admits that earlier retirement age may be the reason. According to Gaponenko, it is also a form of protest against the policy of the Latvian government towards the Russian minority.

An issue in deadlock

Today, the situation remains unresolved.

The automatic citizenship asked by the NonCitizens’ Congress is out of question for the government and the Ombudsman.

“Citizenship is not a gift, people have to express their will to be citizen. And expression of will starts with the application for naturalisation,” affirms Juris Jansons, who accuses several NGOs—among them the Non-citizens’ Congress—to “split the society and wilfully distribute false allegations about automatic naturalisation expected as a result of change of the political power.”

“Citizenship is not a gift, people have to express their will to be citizen” Juris Janson, Ombudsman of Latvia

The solution of giving them the EU citizenship – which would grant them the right to vote in European and municipal elections – is not possible as citizenship of the union must be additional to and not replace national citizenship.

“At the moment, unfortunately, I don’t see any interest from the government and the EU. The answer it’s always, ‘we cannot do anything, we know the problem, sorry’.

55

Our government doesn’t want to change the situation because they want stability.

Concerning the EU, we have a lot of consultations with representative of the different institutions and NGOs, but at the moment with this parliament, this commission and these treaties, it will not happen,” says Krivcova, who is running for MEP with the aim to find a concrete solution at the European level.

The Citizenship law amended

Nevertheless, the Latvian government continues to encourage non-citizens to apply for citizenship. Throughout the years, the Latvian language and history exam have been simplified. The naturalisation fee has

been reduced several times for some people (low-income, unemployed, retired) and abolished for politically repressed and disabled persons.

On May 9 2013, the Citizenship Law has been amended. It grants automatically Latvian citizenship to children of noncitizens on the demand of only one parent and exempts from the examinations pupils who have mainly studied in Latvian.

It also removes the requirement of uninterrupted residence in Latvia which was needed to apply.

But the Non-Citizens’ Congress wants much more than an easier naturalisation process. A material compensation, another policy towards ethnic Russians and

The European elections, the next hope

The next hope for changes are on the Europe side. “There is a prospect that social democrats and left wing parties will come to the head of the European commission and parliament after the elections,” says Elizabete Krivcova.

But as Aleksandr Gaponenko points out: “as a non-citizen without political rights, I couldn’t influence on this.”

A status created under international pressure The non-citizenship was originally thought as a temporary solution. Its introduction was closely monitored by the international organisations in the nineties. The EU in particular was concerned by the low rate of naturalisation and the lack of integration of the Russian minority. Until Latvia’s accession.

L

atvia, 1990. The country declares

its independence after 50 years of occupation by the USSR. The Soviet Union collapses one year later and the former Soviet Republics are in a period of ambiguity in regards to territories and citizenship. Two main categories of USSR citizens reside in Latvia after the collapse: Latvians who were imposed USSR citizenship during the occupation; and citizens of the USSR itself, who had settled at the request of the Communist Party in Latvia.

“The Soviet central authorities had encouraged large-scale immigration of the labour force to meet the local demands of Soviet industrialisation and ethnics politics,” writes Kristine Krüma in her report about Latvia’s citizenship for the European Union Observatory on Democracy (EUDO).

restored. It divided the inhabitants in two: Latvian citizens and Latvian non-citizens – the latter represented 730 000 people, mainly ethnic Russians.

The status of the second category remained unclear until 1995. The international organisations—such as the Organisation for Security and Co-operation in Europe (OSCE),

the Council of Europe, the EU and NATO – afraid of possible tension, wanted Latvia to liberalise its citizenship policies as quick as possible in order to avoid statelessness.

“Latvia introduced the special temporary status of non-citizen in 1995 until the final solution to the citizenship would be decided upon,” writes Krüma.

56

“If the question of minorities was a European competence during the accession , why is it now only a national issue?”

Elizabete Krivcova

A negative public debate

The EU, with other international organisations, put some pressure on Latvia after its independence. The country had to fulfill the Copenhagen Criteria necessary to enter the Union, which states that the national minorities have to be protected.

Thought as a transitory solving, the law provided a timetable for naturalisation limiting the rights of non-citizens to freely choose the timing. The aim was to stagger the amount of applications coming in as there were fears concerning many Sovietera settlers naturalising at the same time.

It was also unclear which country’s citizenship these individuals would choose, as many former Soviet Republics had not yet adopted any citizenship laws.

“There is a sharp sense of inequality experienced by many permanently residing “noncitizens’” The Council of Europe

However, the number of applications turned out to be much lower than expected.

According to the Office of Citizenship and Migration Affairs, 984 people – including non-citizens – acquired the Latvian citizenship in 1995, 3016 in 1996 and 2992 in 1997.

The EU concerned by the issue before Latvia’s accession

A transitory solving

Because only 52 per cent of the population was ethnic Latvian after the independence, the country reinstated the 1919 Citizenship Law On Nationality. It asserted that Latvian citizenship had continued to exist, irrespective of the loss of independence in 1940. It meant that only people and their descendants who were citizens of independent Latvia before 1940 had their citizenship

their status, Latvia has only received some recommendations since 2004, but nothing which can be called pressure.

The lawyer Elizabete Krivcova, former non-citizens and head of the Non-citizens’ Congress points out an incoherence: “Theoretically, if the question of minorities was a European competence during the accession, why is it now only a national issue?

It is not understandable for me. There is a contradiction.”

less restrictions would be the first step. Yet the dialogue is totally cut with the Latvian government. People working in this organisation even have the conviction that it “is waiting for the death of all non-citizens.”

Elizabete Krivcova is running for MEP in order to bring the issue to the European institutions. With her catchphrase, “I am a candidate for citizens and non-citizens of Latvia”, she aims to strenghten the European citizenship.

UROVIEWS

At that time, the European Union was worried by two problems: the low rate of naturalisation and the lack of integration of Russian speakers into Latvian society. The country was required to ensure equality of treatment of its inhabitants, in particular for access to professions and participation in the democratic process. The government responded with a promise to lower the application fee, to analyse the causes of slow

UROVIEWS

naturalisation and to examine the restrictions on employment. Afterwards, the green light was given to start accession talks.

As a result of the request of the EU and NATO, Latvia amended its Citizenship Law in 1998 to facilitate the naturalisation process as a large number of people with hybrid status could represent a threat for stability.

The new law provided citizenship for children of non-citizens born in Latvia after the independence on demand of both parents, as well as the abolishment of the timetable.

A peak after Latvia’s EU accession

The European Union put some pressure on Latvia, monitoring it during its pre-accession period and provided financial support. Because Latvia like every other candidate had to ensure respect for human rights and protection of national minorities to join the EU. “Facilitation of naturalisation has continuously been on the political agenda with varying degrees of importance. Since 2004, it has been marginalised,” analyses Kristine Krüma.

The results were not negligible as naturalisation rates peaked after the liberalisation of the Citizenship Law in 1999-2000 and just after Latvia EU joining, from 2004 to 2006.

No longer a priority

But as soon as the country was part of the European Union, the problem was no longer a priority as minorities issues fall under national government. Given that the European Commission has no general power as regards minorities and recognition of

Still today, both the Ombudsman of Latvia and the Council of Europe – in charge of the protection of human rights – expressed deep concerns about the decreasing speed of naturalisation and the lack of integration of the non-citizens into the Latvian society.

“The negative public debate surrounding non-citizens and their alleged lack of loyalty and desire to integrate has intensified in recent years and is made worse by statements of some public officials. There is a sharp sense of inequality experienced by many permanently residing ‘non-citizens’, as access to an increasing number of public positions is barred to them at a time when EU citizens are gaining increased rights after six months of residence,” the Advisory Committee on Latvia wrote last year.

In 2013, only 3217 non-citizens were naturalised. Some say that it may take 150 years to get rid of this status if the rate remains as low, because children born of non-citizens inherit that distinction.

What the EU says about minorities Article 2—European Union Treaty “The Union is founded on the values of respect for human dignity, freedom, democracy, equality, the rule of law and respect for human rights, including the rights of persons belonging to minorities.”

Article 21—Charter of Fundamental Rights “Any discrimination based on any ground such as sex, race, colour, ethnic or social origin, genetic features, language, (…), membership of a national minority (...) shall be prohibited.”

57

LATVIA

Born in Latvia

“We built the school and now it doesn’t exist anymore,” says Sergey Saushkin, showing us pictures of his fellow students. (Photos by Philipp Jeske)

Latvian people: who are they? People with a USSR past, or Russians trying to become Latvians? The question of national identity has become a big issue in this country over the last 20 years.

by Diana Bologova

“I

was born in Latvia, spend all my life in Latvia and suddenly I have to prove that I’m Latvian? What have I done wrong?” Sergey Sauskin, 55, a former Latvian pilot says.

We get to know Sergey from his wife Gundega. “He was the best pilot from Latvia during Soviet times,” she says. “The senior pilot for Baltic Airlines was trained by him a long time ago.”

We are sitting in a big guest room watching Channel One, the main Russian pro-

“It’s really bad to live here. Our small country was completely destoyed after the USSR collapsed” Sergey Saushkin, former Latvian pilot

58

government channel. Sergey casts quick glance at the TV from time to time. “They are washing our brains,” he says.

From the dinner table we see a classicstyle kitchen with a collection of Delft glass, very nice and expensive dinnerware. Gundega and Sergey are baking wild boar, which Sergey shot himself. The house we are staying in has two floors with a big billiard room in the basement. Sergey and Gundega own the land around the house including the forest and part of the river. They called it “Gundegas,” which means “Buttercups.”

“He would never be so wealthy in any other country, but he is still criticising the Latvian government,” says Gundega, when Sergey leaves the kitchen. Later on, we understand what she means by “criticising the government.”

The builder

“It’s really bad to live here. Our small country was completely destroyed just two years after the USSR collapsed,” Sergey begins as we start dinner. “When a large collective of countries collapses, it is always the smallest members that pay the highest price, because business stops flowing to the smaller market, and people suffer.”

Not only Latvian people suffered, he thinks, all ex-Soviet countries were in trouble. The same goes for Kazakhstan, the exUSSR country south of Russia, where Sergey was studying at the Military School of Civil Aviation.

“We built this school and now it doesn’t exist anymore,” he says, showing us pictures with his fellow students.

UROVIEWS

Even after 40 years, he still remembers the way from his home to school in Kazakhstan.

When he starts to tell about it, his eyes light up.

“I am a small kid, sitting in a plane and flying away from home. I have to transfer in Huralsk, a small town in the southeast. My school is in another town, Aktubinsk, which is 500km away from it.

There are about one hundred people waiting for the same plane to Aktubinsk. When the plane comes everybody runs to the ticket window and is fighting each other to fly out somewhere away from this dump. There is no line! I’m a mannered person, finally getting furious!

I have only toothbrush and a costume my father gave me. Three nights I sleep on the bench in the park, because I can’t buy a plane ticket and don’t have place to stay in Huralsk. In the end, I meet one guy from this town, who also has to start his studies in Aktubinsk. We both decide to try find a way to reach our school.

The next flight is approaching. The ticket window in the airport is like hole in the wall nobody can get into. The announcement is uttered. The crowd is gushing towards the ticket window. The guy I met is digging into it with our passports in his hands. I’m protecting him from the crowd by putting my hands around him. He finally gets the tickets and we are leaving this town.

I’m in Aktubinsk in an hour, trying to find the school. The papers say that it’s on the Moldagulova boulevard. I get off the plane and ask, ‘Where is Moldagulova?’

‘There,’ a man on the street points in some direction.

I move in this direction. Moldagulova

UROVIEWS

street. I see adobe huts only and no asphalt roads. I’m walking from the first house to the last one. No school here. It’s an old street with only very poor huts. I ask someone else where Moldagulova is.

‘Maybe you need Moldagulova boule-

“After the collapse of the Soviet Union, my country got independence, while I lost my job” Sergey Saushkin

vard? It’s in the “new town.” You take the tram, in 30 minutes you are there.’

I’m in the tram, staring through the window. The prospect looks much nicer, than

the old town. No huts, five-storey, even 12-storey buildings! I’m walking down the boulevard from the first house till the last one. No school here again!

I’m walking across the town. The road is over, there is a prairie further on. The telegraph poles go beyond the horizon. That’s it.

I deside to ask people again. Nobody know anything about the school for pilots.

(Later I will know, that it hadn’t even opened yet.)

Nothing is around, but suddenly I see some kind of the building 2km beyond the prairie. Me and my suitcase are crossing the prairie. I don’t even know, if I’m going the right way. It’s hot and I’m tired like an old dog after three nights sleeping outside on the park bench, you know.

After a while I reach one the buildings.

New construction is happening all around.

I’m asking with no hope: ‘What is it here?’

‘School for pilots.’

‘Really? I can’t believe that.’

‘You have a third division. Go to this building. Take any room. Here is the mattress. Dispose yourself.’

I’m in the building, there are two beds on the floor in every room. I crash onto one of the beds in a random room. After sleeping for 24 hours, I wake up and run to the roll call. That’s how it started. We were building our school and studying at the same time.”

The first half of the year, Sergey, didn’t actually study, because their course was to complete the construction of the campus and stadium. They lived in the room for physical education classes, because the student dorm was not ready to use.

Sergey was a professional photograper himself. There is no many pictures of him left after the years of studing. This one is the official photo.

59

fens, which is very good for growing berries. “We bought 200 hectares of the land for farming and 11 hectares to built the house on,” explains Gundega. “It happened eight years after Sergey finished his pilot carrier.”

After the collapse of the USSR, people got their land back, so the land became a private property again. “To have a big farm, like that, wouldn’t have been possible in Russia or in the USSR. It’s possible only now that we are part of the EU and have financial funding from the state as a private farmers,” said Gundega.

Gundega and Sergey have a big fresh juice company, called “Very Berry” and their business has grown in the last few years.

“They took my voice away!”

“They didn’t give me citizenship,” he explains. “This is the principal issue for me.

I lived in Latvia for 55 years and suddenly I don’t have a right to vote. They took my voice away! Now that Latvia is independent, I need to prove that I’m Latvian. I have to prove that I’m loyal to the state. Why should I? It’s like you had parents and they were kindred with you, but suddenly you became an alien to them. So you sit with them at the same table, and they don’t treat you like their child anymore.

Latvia is not my homeland anymore.

There is one ancient ‘Law of Taiga’ in the

“Where is the justice, when criminals who just came from the prison can get citizenship easily, because they have the right parents, and I cannot?”

Sergey Saushkin

They are exporting across Europe, and even to Russia and Israel. Almost 80 per cent of their expenses is paid back to them by the EU. Even with these advantages, Sergey remains very critical towards the European Union.

north of our continent. According to it everything in life should be fair and just. And where is justice, when criminals, who just came from the prison can get citizenship easily, because they have the right parents, and I cannot?”

Sergey and his wife Gundega have their own juice company called “Very Berry”. They have 200 hectares of land, where they grow berries and make natural juices.

“I was born in Latvia, spent all my life in Latvia, and suddenly I have to prove that I’m Latvian. What have I done wrong?”

Lucky Russians

Sergey worked as a pilot for 15 years at “Aeroflot,” the main USSR (now Russian) Airline. “After the collapse of the USSR, my country got independence, while I lost my job,” he says.

“Gorbachev [the last Soviet president] busted the union. After weak guys, like Gorbachev and Eltsin [the first president of Russian Federation], Putin is an inheritance,” Sergey starts talking about politics. “I don’t imagine anybody in power in Russia, except Putin. After the situation in Crimea, he got strong support from the Russian society and

60

he can solve important problems and put more pressure on criminals.”

“I don’t imagine anybody else in power in Russia, except Putin.

Russia is becoming a strong and developed country with him” Sergey Saushkin

Sergey believes that Russians are very lucky with thir leader. “He made his power himself. Putin couldn’t be a tyrant, like Stalin or Russian tsars. He couldn’t use expul-

sions or fusillades to gain power. He has to use his brains instead. Russia is becoming a strong and developed country with him,” Sergey says.

The roaches of the EU

“But what do you think about the European Union, then?” I ask him. “EU countries are roaches in a single pot,” he answers. “They are eating each other.”

Sergey believes, that there are too many directives from Brussels, which is good for certain countries, but will never be good for Latvia.

UROVIEWS

“We need our own minister, who will fight for Latvian interests. Everything depends of how strong the Latvian leader will be,” he continues. “If we have a strong leader in our country, we don’t need the EU.”

Squire with no citizenship

Sergey gives an impression of a very strong person. “Behind him, I feel like I’m behind a stone wall,” says his wife Gundega. “My father wanted me to become a landlord and grow cranberries. He was really crazy about them. So Sergey made my father’s dreams come true.”

The land in the north of Latvia, where Sergey and Gundega live, is full of bogs and

UROVIEWS

61

Asja Avenina with her husband in their old house (above). The photos from Asja’s 50th birthday (below). Asja rarely leaves her house, because she has problems with her feet (to the right).

A

sja Avenina, 81, her name means “person, who is consoling others” in Greek. But her life appears to have been so difficult she needed consolation herself.

At the age of 16, she was deported from Latvia to Siberia, in the north of Russia by the Soviet army.

“They took me and my sister from the school. My mother and my 6-year-old brother were at home, so they took them first. They put everybody in the wagons…

Oh, God, how many people were in the wagons. Everybody was scared, nobody knew a word in Russian. We didn’t understand

them, we were stupid,” says Asja.

Asja always says “they”, when she talks about Soviet soldiers. She never call them “Russians” or “occupiers.”

“There are enough stupid people both in Latvian and in Russian society,” she says.

“But there are kind and decent people in both countries as well.”

After the deportation Asja had to learn a new language and continue her studies in Russian. Starving, with no food, Asja worked on the farm at the same time. Even though her life was destroyed by Russians, she still has a warm feelings towards the people she lived with in Siberia.

“We were all the same. We were terribly hungry. There were people from all over Russia, they were also deported. The Russian nation was suffering from communism.

Stalin broke down Russia and the other countries,” she says. “I think fascism is less destructive than communism. The things, that communism did to people, even Nazism would never do, because Nazism was stopped in less time.”

The consolation

When Stalin died, everybody had freedom.

Asja and her family could go back home to Latvia.

“I spent 8 years of my youth in Russia. I strongly wanted to go back to Latvia, my homeland,” she says. “They let us go. We left

62

UROVIEWS

everything and headed there fast, like crazy.

But when we came back to Latvia, it was terrible. Even worse than in Russia,” she continues. “No job, no food in the stores. We were standing in a line for only one loaf of bread. One loaf for 11 people! How would you share it? Somebody was living in our flat. They even didn’t want to let us come in, because people didn’t trust us.”

“Why?” I ask.

“We were filthy people for them.”

“Is it because of the deportation to Siberia?”

“Yes. Exactly. ‘Everybody, who was sent to Siberia, had some blame,” is what politicians are saying about us now.

“Did you have blame?”

UROVIEWS

“What blame you can have, when you are 16 years old? What blame could an old, 90-year-old man have, when he couldn’t even walk? If one of the members of the family is sent to court, all of the family is to blame. My father was in a court, because our family had 30 hectares of the land and didn’t have enough money to pay taxes. If you have the property, the Soviet state doesn’t need you, so they call you a criminal and send you and all your family away.

They sent him to the labour camp in Vorkuta [the town in Siberia] after he spent a year in prison. He was in Siberia for 13 years! They took a young blooming man, and he came back old and broken and with a grey beard. He worked in a coal mine.

Those who died there were transported like lumber. They put tags on their big toes and threw the bodies to areas with permafrost, so animals could eat them.

Most of the Latvians that survived the labour camps didn’t leave Russia all their life.

Sometimes Asja remembers Russia.

“If I could walk, I would go to Siberia, to the river Zeya, where all my childhood and youth passed. I would take a little bit of water in a jar. This water would have a gold glow.

It’s always does, it’s so beautiful. I would take leaves from the larch, maybe I will grow it near my house after that. I will stand there, cry a little bit and will go back home.

Russia is so beautiful....How could you ever spoil such a country?”

63

PORTUGAL

PORTUGAL

Troika policy in Portugal: triology of austerity, sorrow and social upheaval

Portugal W

hen Portuguese people are asked to describe their culture, there is a great chance that they will answer “peaceful”. Maybe that is why you do not hear about the crisis in Portugal in the media as often as you hear about those in Greece or Spain. Since May 2011, the country has been receiving economic support in form of a €78bn loan from the Troika. In order to receive the aid, the government has been obliged to introduce a broad range of austerity measures. Therefore, euroscepticism in Portugal is often connected to the Troika and these policies. Despite this, people’s ill-feelings towards the EU are often expressed indirectly, through emigration and quiet expressions of mistrust.

“We do not have other choices than obeying the Troika. For me, this is not sustainable for the country. It’s a question of time before it’s going to explode.

People cannot breathe without democracy” Bruno Simões Castanheira, photographer

Three years after Portugal was forced to impose austerity and restructural programs in exchange for a €78bn bailout package, citizens feel the country’s social system is left in shambles. In an effort to balance the Portuguese budget, the government cut spending to wages, pensions, health care and education. Portugal was the third eurozone country, after Ireland and Greece, to receive emergency funds.

by Irina Orlova

“I

t is a mistake to consider the Troika policy as a success,” says José Silva Peneda, former Member of the European Parliament, and the current president of the Economic and Social Council of Portugal (government’s permanent consultative body in the area of economic and social policy).

“If we analyse the programme, I think that the pain and sacrifices were stronger than the results obtained. But when you start the program like this it is necessary to prepare for pain.”

64

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

Stronger than the results

Rui Viana Pereira, 62, is a member of the Committee for the Abolition of Portuguese Public Debt (CADPP). He has been unemployed for five years. Two years ago he gave up on finding work. He’s gained a reputation for his radical publications about the policy of the government and the Troika and now most newspapers don’t want to hire him.

Currently Pereira is living in his friend’s flat, they provide him with money and food. After the government approved a harsh budget in November for this year, implementing new austerity measures, Pereira decided to immigrate.

“It is the only option for me,” he says. “The

future of Portugal is hopeless.”

A lot of Portuguese people like Pereira feel like victims of austerity policy of the Troika—the European Commission, International Monetary Fund and European Central Bank—and as a result lost their jobs and were driven into poverty. The Portuguese financial crisis began in 2010 as part of the world financial crisis of 2007 and 2008 and continued until 2013 as part of the European sovereign debt crisis, which mostly affected southern Europe and Ireland.

“The main reason for that was the indebtedness of a banking system,” says José Castro Caldas.

65

José Castro Caldas, researcher at the Centre for Social Studies, University of Coimbra. (Photo by Irina Orlova)

The culprits

The involved local banks were Portuguese Commercial Bank (BCP), Portuguese Investment Bank (BPI), Banco Espírito Santo (BES) and Portuguese Bank of Business (BPN). According to the Constitutional Court report, the financial needs of the

main stockholders have ties to the government and even Portuguese President Aníbal Cavaco Silva. In a result BPN bank absorbed 40 per cent of the €12bn lent by the IMF. “Let’s make a simple exercise with the BPN bank,” explains Rui Viana Pereira. “Suppose we would close the bank, pay an indemnification to the 1800 workers, tell them ‘go home, we will pay you a salary for five years, in case you don’t find an equivalent job or salary in the meantime,’ and, of course, also give back the [€3bn] to the people who had deposits in the bank. How much would this cost? About €3.11bn.”

“Now that we got this number, it is the right time to remember that the bank, after being nationalized, had already cost the state €5.5bn by the end of 2010—and the costs go on and on till nowadays, even after the re-privatization of the bank.”

Over-expenditure and investment bubbles created through shady public–private partnerships also played the huge role in this matter. This kind of contract involves private corporations and state departments or state-owned corporations. The private part agrees to work on a public project, a highway for example, Pereira explains. As compensation, it can exploit the highway for, say, 30 years, with little risk to the po-

Rui Viana Pereira, a member of the Committee for the Abolition of Portuguese Public Debt (CADPP).

(Photo by Irina Orlova)

banks contributed to the more expenses for the government; these expenses grew to €11.5bn in 2012 (about 7 per cent of GDP.) All these ailing banks needed to be nationalised, and BPN, which is actually a very small private Portuguese bank, was technically in default. BPN’s CEO and some of the

66

tential profit. If something goes wrong, like the highway is swallowed by a volcano, or no one wants to use the highway, (which in fact is happening because it is less expensive to use a common road), the state pays a compensation to the private company.”

The reverse effect

Looking at figures, the social consequences of the entry of the Troika in Portugal are easy to analyse. The shift to austerity took place in April 2011 when the Troika negotiated the Memorandum of Understanding— a document that expresses mutual decision on an issue between two or more parties— and was signed by the four bailout countries: Ireland, Portugal, Greece and Cyprus.

Instead of attaining the objectives, such as recovery of the economy of the state and reduction of the deficit, drastic austerity measures led to the recession.

“The pain and sacrifices were stronger than the results obtained” José Silva Peneda, president of the Economic and Social Council of Portugal

According to Countryeconomy.com, unemployment rates reached unprecedented heights of 17 per cent in 2012. Although unemployment in Portugal decreased in 2013 and 2014, in comparison to other EU member states it was still high, at 15 per cent, while youth unemployment reached 35 per cent according to the latest data for February this year. Government deficits, which averaged 4.1 per cent of GDP in from 2000 to 2008, increased under the impact of recession to 4.2 per cent in 2012. The current national debt is 132 per cent of GDP according to National Debt Clock. Taxes on workers have been raised by about 30 per cent.

About 1.1 million Portuguese are now living in extreme poverty. Over 200 000 have joined the ranks of the poor since 2010. One in 4 people are now poor, a number that has grown 25 per cent in 4 years, with nearly 2 million citizens currently forced to get by with just €409 per month. The poverty rate increased from 21 per cent in 2011 to 25 per cent in 2012. In the last three years there has been an increase of 15 per cent in families who cannot pay their electricity bills, or three out of 10 people, according to the OECD. General Secretary of the Economic and Social Council of Portugal Catarina Braga comments on why the Troika program hasn’t produced tangible results.

UROVIEWS

Protest marked the 40th anniversary of Carnation Revolution. (Photo by Irina Orlova)

“The plenary of the council, amongst other things, has noted in the report about the state budget for 2014 some issues that the plenary considered to be mistaken in the draft of the program. The plenary thought that the issues regarding Portugal were not only about its public finances, the problems were deeper than that. The weight of domestic demand on growth and jobs was underestimated. The state reform didn’t touch structural aspects and timeframe for the

implementation of the program was scarce.”

The president of the council José Silva Peneda also admits that the programme had several weak points. “The austerity is not the best way of solving the problem. The Troika programme wasn’t successful,” he says.

He believes that only a long-term programme lasting 10 years can work in a case of Portugal.

“We need a gradual approach. The objectives should be very balanced. You can’t put as a priority only one of them, that’s how it was with the Troika program—the only priority was the budget deficit. It is a wrong way to define policies.”

He also added that the recovery of Portugal economy very much depends on the situation in the eurozone.

“If there are no changes in the eurozone, it will be impossible for Portugal to change its current situation.”

civil position. He contributes to the Initiative for a Citizen Audit (IAC) and takes part in different protest actions and demonstrations. He believes that people were pushed to accept blame for the indebtedness of the

Take the blame

José Silva Peneda, president of the Economic and Social Council of Portugal. (Photo by Irina Orlova)

UROVIEWS

The year when Portugal started to implement all the austerity measures, numerous organisations against the Troika policy as well as citizen debt audit networks (whose goal is to critically analyse debt policies conducted by the authorities of a country and the impact of them on the population) began to appear in the country.

Besides being a researcher José Castro Caldas also has strong political beliefs and

Graffiti made during the general strike on November 14.

(Photo by Irina Orlova)

government. “The government is trying to convince us that the crisis started only because people lived above their means,” he says. “People really blame themselves for their misfortune and very often the defendant admits his guilt even if he is not guilty.”

Caldas believes that the organizations like IAC, International Citizen debt Audit Net-

67

work (ICAN), Committee for the Abolition of Third World Debt (CADTM), Committee for the Abolition of Portuguese Public Debt (CADPP) etc. are helping people shift from the original way of conceiving the debt problem.

“If you really try to understand what caused the sovereign debt crisis, you won’t feel blame any more,” he says. “Instead you have to demand from those who produced the crisis to share the burden at least. It took a long time to change this perception.”

Rodrigo Cabrita

Alternatives to austerity

“The government is trying to convince us that the crisis started only because people lived above their means” José Castro Caldas Rodrigo Cabrita, photographer. (Photo by Irina Orlova)

Resistance is there

The protest movements in Portugal during these three years under scrutiny of the Troika weren’t as noticeable as, for instance, the activity of the Spanish Indignados or Greek Syntagma Square protesters.

Rodrigo Cabrita, a photographer, is one of the authors of the ProjectoTroika, an online platform, a book and a film about the last three years under the strict economic rules

Strikes November 2011: Hundreds of thousands of workers go on strike a week before parliament. It is only the third general strike since Portugal became a democracy in the 1970s.

January 2012: The country’s two largest unions, the CGTP and the UGT, split over whether to sign up to the labour law reform proposed by the government under the terms of the international bailout.

March 2012: Major cities grind to a halt as public sector workers stage 24-hour general strike in protest at the labour law reform .

September 2012: The EU, IMF and European Central Bank give Portugal another year to reduce its deficit below the EU target of 3 per cent of GDP, after noting progress in rebalancing the economy.

November 2012: Parliament passes a budget promising another year of austerity measures.

July 2013: Several senior ministers resign over the handling of the economic crisis, but the government survives.

November 2013: Government approves more spending cuts, mainly affecting public-sector employees’ wages, conditions and pensions, in order to avoid a second international bailout.

68

PORTUGAL

“We are peaceful people and we don’t want to fight with anyone.

We always hope that someday the situation will change”

imposed on Portugal by the “Troika.” He believes that the Portuguese mentality is to blame for that.

“We are peaceful people and we don’t want to fight with anyone,” Cabrita says.

“We always hope that someday the situation will change. And the government in its turn isn’t afraid of us and does more and more harm, while most of the Portuguese people just don’t care about politics. Instead of protesting, they are watching football. But we should change and be more practical, because hope is gone.”

The Portuguese resistance is in fact there, even though it didn’t receive proper media coverage, Caldas believes.

“If you look at this period in a comparison with other periods in our history, on the average there is at least one bigger or smaller demonstration a day. And some of them were huge, like the one held on November 14 2012, when thousands of people took the streets of Portugal as part of a European-wide general strike. Also this month, a wave of protests across Portugal marked the 40th anniversary of Carnation Revolution. People protest against the new austerity measures. In the end of April Portuguese government will introduce a special temporary tax to pensions payments above €1,000, in an attempt to lower the country’s public deficit. Veterans of the revolution attended rallies where participants sang Grandola Vila Morena, the theme song of the revolution, holding red carnations in their hands and banners demanding the government to “stop stealing citizen’s pensions.”

“But during the difficult periods when people are accumulating setbacks, they tend to be depressed and they simply devote themselves to their private and family live and only occasionally this apparent concept turns into protest,” Rodrigo Cabrita says.

Across Europe it is now being debated whether austerity is the right way for the country to recover its economy. But the question for Portugal is whether there were any alternatives.

Caldas, the University of Coimbra researcher, believes the best alternative to the bailout package was the immediate restructuring of the national debt.

While the problem of the debt itself seems very ambiguous, Pereira says.

“The Memorandum of Understanding with the Troika was actually signed by the former prime minister of Portugal José Sócrates, and in fact he resigned even before the memorandum. Six months later he held a conference in one of the main universities in Poitiers, France and he said there that believing that a debt can be paid is a childish idea. Debts are not to be paid. Debts are meant to be administrated. And he was actually right.”

There is no country in the world without the problem of indebtedness. Pereira believes that a huge debt is something that feeds itself.

“Huge debts give the origin to a huge interest. And in order to pay that interest the government had to ask for more money.”

“Believing that a debt can be paid is a childish idea” José Sócrates, former prime minister of Portugal

Clean exit

The Portuguese government is now preparing to exit its €78bn bailout in May. By the end of last year many investors were convinced that a second bailout is the only possible decision for Portugal. But now Portugal’s chances of making a clean break from its international bailout in May are growing as its economic outlook gradually improves for the first time in more than three years.

The state has yet to decide whether to request a precautionary loan after the end of the bailout to support its market financing.

But some recommend caution given Portugal’s is still fragile economy. The decision will be made by the end of the month.

“But actually it won’t change anything for people,” says, Pereira. “After the bailout exit, the new austerity measures will follow anyway.”

UROVIEWS

“My contribution to democracy”

By Tatiana Tilly

Bruno Simões Castanheira wants to give a voice to the weakest in society, who are affected by the massive austerity measures in Portugal. Therefore he has joined the “Projecto Troika”, hoping that his pictures can make others react to the policies. This month he won Portugal’s most important prize, Estação Imagem, for best comtemporary issue.

UROVIEWS

69

B

runo Simões Castanheira speeds up and leaves central Lisbon behind him.

He is heading for the countryside, where an elderly couple is waiting for him to arrive. Plagued by poverty, they have a story of powerlessness, that they want him to tell.

The car is warm from the beaming sun, and his energy is low, because the past months have gone by with a project which consumes nearly all his time and energy.

As one of the nine photographers in Projecto Troika, he is documenting the consequences of the economic crisis and the cuts in welfare, that the Portuguese government has been obliged to for the last three years.

Searching in the streets

According to recent research, there are 2.6 million Portuguese who live in poverty. And the photographer has made it his purpose to put a face on the epidemic; to show that it is reality and not just statistics.

“I search for people in the streets and in institutions, I travel around the country to meet them and try to understand who they are, which social classes they belonged to before getting into poverty,” Bruno says.

The people he meets are very different, but what their stories all have in common is that something has changed for the worse.

“You don’t see these people in the news, it’s rare. Because people prefer to look to the other side. People who still have work and some money, they don’t want to hear sad stories,” Bruno says.

“And that means that the political power is free to do whatever it wants. Without people asking them to take responsibility.”

This is what motivates Bruno to work without payment for the Projecto Troika instead

70

of one of the newspapers that actually wants to pay him.

Each photographer in the group has their own theme and a personal approach. For instance one is looking at youth unemployment, while others focus on the elderly community.

The photographers are publishing their work in the process on their website, but later this year they also aim to publish a photo book and arrange exhibitions and discussions.

Front photo: Ermelinda and Augusto in their house.

Above: Bruno Simões Castanheira.

To the right: The house of the couple.

(Photos by Bruno Simões Castanheira)

Family life in old factories

Originally, Bruno started working on the subject because he wanted to know what consequences the austerity measures could have for his country.

In October 2012, the curiosity brought him to Greece, where they had already lived with the measures for a while. In Athens he was surprised by how visible the signs of crisis were.

“Already in the subway from the airport you could see it, because there was no advertising there. The billboards were empty and white. There was nothing, and I was surprised, I wasn’t expecting something so clear”.

He never went beyond Athens, because it was all there: the many faces of poverty, the homeless in the streets, the prostitutes, the unemployed parents standing in line for welfare.

Back in Portugal he didn’t hesitate when he was asked to join the Projecto Troika.

While he was in Greece, two other photographers, Adriano Miranda and Lara Jacinto, met at a café in Porto to discuss how to react to the situation. They decided that they had to do something the best way they knew how: by taking pictures.

Because Bruno has won a few photojour-

Portugal received its first loan from the Troika, which is the common name for IMF, the European Commission and the European Central Bank (ECB), in 2011. The financial help package was a loan of €78bn, which the country will be receiving until the middle of 2014. In order to get the loan, the Portuguese government has been forced to introduce major austerity measures in the public sector.

The government, led by the PSD party (which translates to the Social Democratic Party) and some economic experts, are saying that the economic situation is starting to improve. But if you ask Bruno, there is a different story.

“Today I visited two different families.

One of them lives in an old factory. The father is 54 years old and has lost his job. The daughter of the family is pregnant but is staying there as well,” he says.

“Their situation was already bad before the crisis, but with the cuts in social welfare these days, they do not have any perspectives of getting better.”

This month, a selection of Bruno’s pictures for the Projecto Troika won Portugal’s most important award for photojournalism,

Estação Imagem, in the category “contemporary issues”.

The series shows abandoned buildings and elderly, families and children who are affected by the current policies.

Documentation for the future

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

71

nalism awards in recent years, he had the resources to invest his time in the voluntary project, which he finds vital.

“We want to create historical documentation for the future. And it’s important, because it’s the story of our country, of Europe, and we need to document what is happening,” he says.

The photographers are not the only ones who are concerned. According to a Eurofund report made in 2011-12, less than 30 per cent of the Portuguese said they were optimistic about the future, and Portugal was among the countries in the EU with the lowest number of people expressing positive feelings. The results are closely connected to the political government of the country and the direction the economy is moving in.

In a house without windows

Bruno slows down the car and looks one way, then the other. He is lost, but he doesn’t admit it. For more than an hour he has been driving from Lisbon and now there are mostly fields and a few houses. A suntanned woman rumbles by on an old tractor, but be-

sides that, there is only silence. A street sign informs him that he is now leaving the small village of Negrais.

At a sharp turn in the road he suddenly says: “It is here!” There isn’t much to see, but he drives back and parks in a small driveway. Down the pathway, the 61-yearold Augusto comes to welcome him. Together they walk up towards the house.

Along the pathway the garden grows wild, except for a small area that serves as a vegetable garden. The house would better be described as a concrete shed, because it only consists of one room. There is no bathroom, no running water and no windows.

Waiting for food

Ermelinda sits in the door frame. She rises to greet Bruno with the typical two kisses on the cheeks, but immediately after, she sits down again.

“How are you?,” Bruno asks, which removes Augusto’s smile. He says that the car that delivers food from the catholic charity organisation Santa Casa de Misericordia would normally come once a month. But

they haven’t seen it for four months now.

They guess that it’s too busy, with too many places to visit.

Augusto doesn’t say anything for a while, none of them do. Then he explains that the last days of the month are often difficult because they have neither money or food. For a while, the couple has been receiving some help from the private organisation Associação Cris Sacco, that has arranged for Bruno to meet them.

Ermelinda sits back in the door frame.

Arms wrapped around her knees while she moves rhythmically back and forth as if she were cold.

“We do not know how it started exactly, but she became depressed and started showing symptoms of schizophrenia four years ago,” Augusto says and looks at Ermelinda.

She is silent.

There is medicine to treat the symptoms of these illnesses, but they cannot always afford it. Once she worked at a restaurant, but she isn’t able to work anymore. Until two years ago she received €178 a month in financial assistance. But they stopped send-

ing the money, with the explanation that Augusto receives enough to support them both. He gets €280 in pension each month.

The price of cutting costs

A recent report from The Portuguese Observatory on Health Systems shows that there has been pressure on the government to lower the quality of the health care, and that more people avoid getting treatment or medical help because they can no longer afford it. Furthermore, the report concludes that the crisis gives a higher risk of mental disease, addiction or infection. The same conclusions were made in the British Medical Journal in 2013.

When Bruno asks what Augusto thinks about the situation in Portugal at the moment, he responds that it is difficult for him to see a good future with the policies that are made at the moment.

“The debt is impossible to pay and the cuts aren’t good for the economy or the people: higher taxes, cuts in health and welfare,” Augusto says.

More than pictures

Bruno has visited the couple twice now, but he has only taken a few pictures. He wants to meet Ermelinda and Augusto on a human level and create a connection between them before he starts thinking visually.

“When did you meet each other?,” he asks.

It was at a cafe in Lisbon 14 years ago. Ermelinda was a few years younger than Augusto, but they found each other. After getting married, they moved into an apartment in the village nearby. Augusto worked as a stonemason until he began to suffer from the lung disease silicosis. It is caused by inhalation of the dust of siliceous minerals from the stones, which makes it difficult to breathe.

To explain the effect of silicosis, Augusto lays his hands on his chest, while he describes how he loses his breath when he tries to bicycle to the supermarket. He looks exhausted, as if he had actually been cycling.

Today, Bruno drives to the supermarket to buy them some meat. Actually, he should be working on the pictures for Projecto Troika, but he finds it impossible to photograph someone who has nothing to eat.

Divided opinions of the country

Ermelinda and Augusto are only two people out of the around 10 million Portuguese.

And according to a recent report by the European Commission from February 2014, the economy is heading in the right

Augusto on the pathway to their house. Ermelinda sits in the door frame. (Photo by Tatiana Tilly)

72

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

direction. The conclusion is that “most of the economic indicators point to an economic recovery”.

In a report from this month, the IMF concludes that “the economy is on the right track” and that “activity and employment have continued to exceed expectations”. At the same time IMF urges the Portuguese

“The good aspect of the crisis is that people become less selfish, they get together and help each other” Augusto, unemployed

government to continue with the strict austerity measures.

“If you look at the adjustments that we have had to make the last three years, then it is absolutely remarkable. Because the country has been able to severely reduce the national deficit,” says Pedro Santa-Clara, who is a professor in economy at Nova School of Business and Economics in Lisbon.

“In many years we lived above our means.

If you have a deficit of 10 per cent of the country GDP, then you have to pay back the debt at some point. So Portugal’s adjustment is painful, especially unemployment is painful, but it’s necessary,” he says.

He underlines that Portugal had to change something and that there was no option other than austerity. Although it is painful to cut spending, he thinks that the Portuguese should be grateful the European community has been willing to give them loans.

“At the moment Portugal is beginning to grow. And it’s healthy growth in the way that it’s the export that is increasing,” says SantaClara.

A new class of poor

But according to the “Crisis Monitoring Report 2014” from the catholic organisation Caritas, the crisis is not over, but actually getting worse. The report “The European Crisis and its Human Costs” analyses the austerity measures that are in place in Portugal. It says that the organisation “is concerned that the change to rent-controls will be extremely negative for many older people who have already experienced pension reductions” and that cuts to public pensions have been shown to have already been “very significant” in Portugal.

“What we are seeing is growing inequality and the appearance of a whole class of new poor,” said Artur Benedyktowicz, who oversees social policy at Caritas to the British newspaper The Guardian.

“It’s an increase that is not tracked by statistical agencies, because very often these people are too ashamed to ask for social benefits. they come to us because we are there on the ground.”

The good aspect of the crisis

With Augusto and Ermelinda, it seems like time is standing still. Bruno still hasn’t returned from the supermarket, and they are sitting in silence, where they often sit: Ermelinda in the door frame, Augusto in a plastic chair. They laugh about the cat, trying to climb a tree, but otherwise they just sit.

Looking towards the road, looking at each other as if waiting for something. The last time Bruno visited them, they were sitting in the same way. When he asked what they normally do during the day, Augusto answered with a strange look: “Sometimes I work in the vegetable garden,” he said and pointed to the small area with potato plants.

After an hour, Bruno comes walking up the pathway with a white plastic bag from the supermarket, where he bought meat. He understands that professionalism dictates this shouldn’t happen, but he feels obliged.

The couple gushes “thank you” many times.

“The good aspect of the crisis is that people become less selfish, they get together and help each other,” Augusto says.

“When we lived in the apartment, the neighbours never talked to each other, but now people are talking and helping each other.”

But while he has gained trust in other people, he has only lost his belief in the national politicians in the recent years.

“I do not trust our politicians, because they just talk,” he says and illustrates by hitting his throat gently with one hand.

Maybe there is a little more hope to be found with the European politicians, but on the other hand you look at Greece and see what is happening there, he adds. He is concerned that the situation in Portugal will get worse. But then he repeats his point from before.

“In this situation it is good to see that people are coming together, because they can see what is really important.” He smiles.

A contribution to democracy

When Bruno chooses to spend his time working on the Projecto Troika, it is mainly because he has the feeling that he must do something; that he has to react to the changes that are happening at the moment.

“This isn’t democratic, because we don’t

73

Ermelinda sitting on the bed inside the house. Four years ago she began showing symptoms of depression and schizophrenia. (Photo by Bruno Simões Castanheira)

have other choices than obeying the Troika.

For me this isn’t sustainable for the country.

I think it’s a question of time before it’s going to explode. Because people can’t breathe without democracy.”

He believes that democracy cannot exist without the welfare state and some degree of sovereignty. He is also concerned by the growing economic inequality and the passive attitude he sees around him.

“I think someone needs to do something, and I can do it right now. And I want to do it, because I have a social position in life. It’s my contribution to democracy, maybe,” the photographer says.

He hopes that Projecto Troika can change something. Even if one single person sees

74

their pictures and feels an urge to act, then it is enough.

“I think photography is art, and I think art changes people. It changed me, and if you look at the history of art, the artists changed things in society.”

Changing a life

He remembers being very young and seeing Picasso’s Guernica painting for the first time. It is difficult for him to express why it affected him. At first he was attracted to the painting with its violent shapes.

But afterwards, he began questioning the historical events behind it. Later in life, the same thing happened when he saw documentary photos of social issues.

“It changed my life. It showed me things I didn’t know about the world, and made me ask questions. So I believe that you need art to communicate the issues in society. It’s very important.”

After several hours, Bruno leaves Augusto and Ermelinda’s house to head home. He has found one of the many stories he wants to tell, but he is not sure how to create the pictures that can truly express it. He hopes that he can create images that will reach someone, like other photos did with him.

Meeting poverty every day without being able to help those in struggle is tiresome.

But he will continue moving, trying to make a contribution.

UROVIEWS

UROVIEWS

75

euroviews.eu