BullsEye 73

The magazine of European Democrat Students

TRADE WARS 4 EU-JAPAN TRADE AGREEMENT 6 TURKEY’S FINAL IMPASSE 7 MOLDOVAN ELECTIONS 8 FINTECH 10 GIG ECONOMY 12

START-UPS 13 EPP CONGRESS 14 EUROPEAN ELECTIONS 16 PABLO CASADO 18 ELECTIONS IN PORTUGAL 19 POPULISM IN POLITICS 20

IDEOLOGY OF THE NEW RIGHT 22 SINO-JAPANESE RELATIONS 25 NATO AFTER BRUSSELS 26 COLLEGE OF EUROPE 28

No. 73 | September 2018 | 56th Year | ISSN 2033-7809

Dear readers, I am delighted to address you as Editor-in-Chief of BullsEye, the official magazine of the European Democrat Students. With this issue, we will be starting the Working Year 2018-2019, the second under my aegis. I hope that, together with the whole team, we will prove worthy of the trust our Chairman Virgilio Falco and the Executive Bureau expressed. As such it will be our duty to continue, together with the Vice-Chairman for Publications, Tommi Pyykkö, providing you with the best possible articles while increasing our outreach throughout various means of communication. This should imply an increased presence in the social media and a more user-friendly website. At the same time, lengthy discussions led to a final and stabilised graphic design of the magazine for which we must be thankful to our Graphic Designer, Markus Konow.

When it comes to our team, I am happy that we managed to strike a balance between experience and the natural regeneration of the team. This was made possible thanks to the arrival of many new editors who are bringing their matured skills through previous experiences, and thanks to the editors remaining in the team who supported BullsEye last year with the quality of their articles.

Therefore, I am looking forward to working together with Anna, Beppe, Desislava, Elie-Joe, Johanna, Johannes, Mattia, Sabine, Santiago and Vladimir.

With regards to the content of the magazine itself, this year will see a change corresponding to its series, after the end of the previous series “Europe and the World”, started by my predecessor, Henrique Laitenberger. As we are now entering an electoral year which will lead us to the European Elections in May 2019, we felt the need to dedicate space to those crucial elections. This is why we will discuss the issue from different perspectives regarding the process itself and how such elections are envisaged in different countries.

This is why our Issue 73 is covering the developments which will lead us to the EPP Helsinki Congress in November 2018, thanks to Beppe Galea and Tomasz Kaniecki. At the same time, we will inquire, thanks to Leonor Baptista and Veronica Vargas, about the latest state of play in the Iberian Peninsula, now ruled by left-wing governments. Also, Anna Mkrtchyan and Desislava Kemalova will discuss the phenomena of populism and the far-right, which have monopolised the political debate. This focus on the EU should not make us forget that there will be elections in the EU’s neighbourhood, as Mihaela Radu will discuss the elections in Moldova. Next, to the electoral debate, the theme of economics will flower in this issue due to the news on trade disputes and the topic of the Council Meeting in Budapest. This is why Johanna Gruber, Johannes Bürgin, Sabine Hanger, Santiago de la Presilla and Vladimir Milic covered this issue in many aspects. Finally, Andreas Korfiatis, Elie-Joe Dergham and Mattia Caniglia’s articles will provide us with an analysis of Europe and beyond, while I wrote an article as a feedback on the very special experience I had studying European Affairs in the lovely city of Bruges.

CONTENTS: CURRENT AFFAIRS 4

TRADE WARS – IS THE WORLD GOING FOR A COMMERCE SHOWDOWN?

6

IS THE SUN RISING ON TRADE? WHAT CAN BE EXPECTED FROM AN EU-JAPAN TRADE AGREEMENT

7

TURKEY’S FINAL IMPASSE

8

MOLDOVA BEFORE PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS: POLITICAL CRISIS, MIXED ELECTORAL SYSTEM AND HUGE PROTESTS

THEME 10

FROM ONLINE BANKING TO CRYPTOCURRENCY - HOW FINTECH FORMS OUR FUTURE

12

UBER, FOODORA, DELIVEROO… AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE TRADITIONAL MARKET OR MODERN-DAY SLAVERY?

13

START-UPS AND YOUNG ENTREPRENEURSHIP – STRIKING THE BALANCE BETWEEN INNOVATION AND EMPLOYMENT

SERIES - EUROPEAN ELECTIONS 14

ON THE WAY TO HELSINKI – HOW IS THE EPP SETTING ITS ORDER OF BATTLE

16

EUROPEAN ELECTIONS – CHANCE FOR A BETTER FUTURE

18 PP – HOPE IN A PABLO CASADO’S ERA 19

BE ON 20 UNRAVELLING DEMAGOGUES —

THE PERCEPTION OF POPULISM IN MODERN POLITICS 22 NOT ALT-RIGHT – UNDERSTANDING THE

IDEOLOGY OF THE NEW RIGHT 25 THE PACIFIC RIFT – SINO-JAPANESE SECURITY

RELATIONS AFTER TRUMP 26 NATO AFTER BRUSSELS – HEADING FOR A

CHANGE OR CONTINUITY? UNIVERSITIES 28 THE EUROPEAN ELITE’S FACTORY?

THE COLLEGE OF EUROPE

30 BULLSEYE EDITORIAL TEAM 31

I wish you a very pleasant reading,

THE PORTUGUESE CONTRAPTION AND THE EUROPEAN FATE

EDS EXECUTIVE BUREAU

Julien Sassel BullsEye Editor-in-Chief

ISSN: Print: 2033-7809 Online: 2033-7817 EDITOR-IN-CHIEF: Julien Sassel VICE-CHAIR FOR PUBLICATIONS: Tommi Pyykkö EDITORIAL TEAM: Johannes Bürgin, Mattia Caniglia, Santiago de la Presilla, Elie-Joe Dergham, Beppe Galea, Johanna Gruber, Sabine Hanger, Desislava Kemalova, Vladimir Milic, Anna Mkrtchyan CONTRIBUTIONS: Andreas Korfiatis, Mihaela Radu, Tomasz Kaniecki, Veronica Vargas, Leonor Baptista PHOTOS: Àkos Kaiser, Unsplash, Pixabay, Shutterstock

DESIGN: Markus Konow PUBLISHER: European Democrat Students, B-1000 Brussels, Rue du Commerce 10 TEL: +(32) 228 541 50 FAX: +(32) 228 541 41 EMAIL: students@epp.org WEBSITE: www.edsnet.eu Articles and opinions published in the magazine do not necessarily reflecting the positions of EDS, the EDS Bureau or the Editorial team.

Publication supported by the Erasmus + Programme of the European Union and European Youth Foundation of the Council of Europe.

The European Commission support for the production of this publication does not constitute an endorsment of the contents which reflects the views only of the authors, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.

Welcome to our first issue of BullsEye for this new working year.

I want to thank the Editor-in-Chief Julien Sassel, the Vice-Chairman for Publications Tommi Pyykkö and the newly appointed editorial team for their dedication to our magazine.

We presented in Genoa, during our Annual Meeting, our “heaviest” publication, the Annual Report. In this report, all our events, documents and activities of our successful working year 2017/18 are collected.

During our last Council Meeting in Italy, we elected the new leadership of EDS, and we discussed the future and the prospective plans for our organisation. A gathering of new ideas and enthusiasm that we hope to carry on for the whole year ahead.

CHAIRMAN’S LETTER

Dear friends, Another very important moment of team building came during our training session in Brussels where the new board, the cochairs of our working groups and the editorial team discussed and elaborated the priorities of this important year, which will feature the European elections in May. For now, please enjoy reading the new issue of BullsEye and keep in mind that the EDS Bureau is always interested in receiving feedback, hearing your ideas, and discovering more ways to serve students across Europe proudly.

With my best regards,

Virgilio Falco Chairman of European Democrat Students

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

3

History displays trade wars as instruments that show disapproval with existing economic or political systems. Some, like the Boston Tea Party or the infamous Opium Wars, led to armed conflicts, whereas mutually elaborated solutions could conclude others like the Chicken Friction or the Pasta Spat between the US and European countries.

In a world which aspires to trade between countries all over the globe, several tools may help to support the vision of the reduction of trade barriers. The waiver of tariffs, quotas or subsidies on goods and services are well known as instruments to eliminate discrimination on both imports and exports.

However, what if those capabilities are used to obstruct the development of

a global trade area? Economic instruments such as economic sanctions have proved to be more than a political statement or foreign policy within the past years. It is now time to reflect on several appropriate sanctions enforced in the last few months and give an outlook on how creating trade barriers does not only influence global competitiveness but may also be an indication of political disagreement.

Protectionism is the main reason why global trade is harmed. This is the country’s desire to shield its domestic industries from foreign competition by charging taxes on foreign goods and services. In theory, a country could, therefore, hit an industry or specific company so dramatically, that they have to

compensate their potential losses by raising prices.

Speaking of higher prices for customers, it can be said that a trade war may affect everybody, even at the lowest level. As soon as manufacturers and producers pay more for intermediate products, commodities and equipment from foreign markets, import costs will increase, and the nation’s real GDP growth will be affected.

However, why do governments decide to create trade barriers for other countries and what are their arguments for them? The answer is pretty straightforward. It is all about competitive advantage at first sight. The world economy experienced a rupture of several trade relations, due to political disagreement and the desperate attempt

of countries to strengthen their economic competitiveness. Trade protectionism occurs through government intervention. Political arguments to defend extreme sanctions among foreigners are the protection of jobs and industries.

A nation may believe that without trade protectionism a nation could lose not only long-established companies that first made a product in the particular nation but entire industries in general. Therefore, it is likely that quotas will be used to regulate the number of goods and services that may be imported. In theory, it makes sense to protect the domestic industries, but current examples show that in a case of extreme protectionism, third parties can be harmed even more. After the US had charged sanctions on Iran,

“WHAT ONCE STARTED AS AN ACT OF PROTECTING THE DOMESTIC MARKET, 4

BullsEye

several German companies suspended their operations in the country. Their trade volume with the US is worth over 35 times more than with Iran, which may not justify further investment in the East, as long as the manufacturing costs are expected to rise. Consequently, companies try to resettle the location of their industries, which may result in a decrease of the foreign countries’ GDP. Trade wars themselves usually result from extreme protectionism, occurring when a government decides to charge quotas or tariffs on foreign nations to shield their domestic market. In case of clearly unfound-

ed sanctions, the charged country may retaliate with an even harder trade bloc.

These actions are likely to escalate, in case negotiations between the governments lead nowhere. What once started as an act of protecting the domestic market, has now resulted in a potential political discord between two nations.

In the past few months, several sanctions have been used to demonstrate political and economic disagreement between the US and countries like Iran, China and the European Union.

After the US had resigned from the nuclear deal, which had been made in 2015 between Iran, France,

Great Britain, Germany, Russia and China, the US started to charge sanctions on Iran. The world economy reacted instantly and not only by spiking the price of oil, but by the stock exchange value decreasing.

While the economic consequences were immediately visible, the tension behind the sanctions was more revealing. The US tried to show their disagreement with Iran’s behaviour regarding the nuclear deal in the past, reproaching them not having followed the conditions correctly. This is a perfect example of economic sanctions being used to show political disagreement.

In light of the examples and explanations given, the main question is why do countries prefer to lose a trade relationship with other nations, in order to benefit temporarily from the effects of protectionism, eventually. The future will show whether the interventions of big global players may help to stop the ongoing creation of trade barriers all over the world.

Johanna Gruber

CAN RESULT IN A POLITICAL DISCORD BETWEEN TWO NATIONS.” The official magazine of European Democrat Students

5

Is the sun rising on trade?

What can be expected from an EU-Japan trade agreement?

While the leading supporter of free trade after World War II was the USA, as it started withdrawing its backing, the EU and other big players had to step in to take its place. The most recent example is the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA) signed during the 25th EU-Japan Summit held in July this year. This is expected to create one of the world’s largest trade blocs. These two economies make a third of global economic output and have more than 640 million consumers combined.

ment market, services and investment sector will also increase. Protection of intellectual property rights and geographical indications (GIs) have been emphasised and included in the agreement.

According to Eurostat, total trade between the two has declined over past years, but they continue to remain important bilateral trade partners. In 2017, Japan was the EU’s sixth largest trading partner, and the EU was Japan’s third export destination as well as it is the second most important source of imports.

Although Japan benefited in the past from significant surpluses in the trade of goods with the EU, trade has recently become more balanced as Japan experience a surplus in traded goods whilst the EU experience a surplus in traded services. Moreover, the EU was the largest contributor to FDI in Japan, and also, Japanese FDI ranked the EU as their second largest recipient. The EU-Japan Trade deal promises to eliminate 99 per cent of tariffs over the period of 10-15 years, which will save consumers in both countries around 1 billion euros annually. Besides falling prices for imported goods in both economies, the EU hopes this deal will stimulate higher exports of agricultural products such as wine, pork, and cheese. Significant benefits are also expected in the pharmaceutical, chemical, machinery, textile, and clothing industries. It is expected that opportunities for EU’s companies to participate in Japan’s public procure-

Besides lower tariffs, both the EU and Japan believe that this deal will help to shape future globalisation by moving beyond tariff cuts.

Such an agreement on standards and procedures will aid in reaffirming their shared commitment to venture into sustainable development. It is the first time that a trade deal includes a specific commitment to the Paris Agreement on Climate Change of 2016.

Japan is expected to gain most from the automotive industry, as well as the tea and fishing industries. The deal anticipates the reduction of regulatory problems Japanese companies face when trying to do business in the EU.

icies set by Prime Minister Shinzõ Abe. It is expected to lower import prices by stimulating domestic consumption in Japan.

Interestingly, the EPA is just one of the trade deals which Japan is trying to sign. Since the US withdrew from the TPP at the beginning of last year, Japan is trying to keep talks about free trade in the Pacific alive through the Comprehensive and Progressive Agreement for Trans-Pacific Partnership (CPTPP) and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP).

The European Union also has failed to reach an agreement on trade with the USA. The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) was halted by President Donald Trump, who then initiated a trade conflict with the EU. Talks should be resuming in the upcoming months, but it is far from clear if this agreement will be finalised and whether its conclusion is desirable.

FLAG BEARERS FOR THE WORLD TRADE

When negotiations started in 2013, time was not the main priority for either side. However, things changed. Back then, Japan gave higher importance to the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP). Following the failure in the TPP negotiations, the deal with the EU was placed at the top of their list due to the unfolding of the Brexit referendum. Both the EU and Japan gave great significance to finalising and rectifying the agreement before the end of March 2019, in order for the deal to automatically apply to Britain. This would leave a time frame of 2 years to reach a new separate deal with the UK following their separation from the European Union.

This agreement can also be perceived as an additional policy to “Abenomics” which covers a set of monetary, fiscal and structural pol-

FUTURE OF FREE TRADE

The EPA is a significant step forward for free trade and an example that integration of countries remains achievable and benefits all sides involved. It is a clear signal that the rest of the developed world will not follow the protectionist steps of the USA. The EU-Japan trade agreement could empower future negotiations that are in the works for both countries. Such agreements are with Australia, Canada, New Zealand, Mexico and other countries.

Alongside the economic benefits expected, a successful trade deal between these two leading economies sends a strong political message that they will protect the liberal international economic order from populism and trade protectionism.

Vladimir Milic

6

BullsEye

Observing the latest news, one cannot overlook the escalation of the Turkish crisis that brought Turkey to an estrangement with the EU Member States and an economic and political collision with the USA. Shall the crisis be examined as an accidental event, or as the outcome of the volatile situation that Turkey has been in for the last 40 years?

Turkey is a major regional power in South East Europe, especially in the Balkans, and the Middle East thanks to many considerations. Firstly, Turkey’s geostrategic role in controlling the maritime boundaries of the Black Sea, the ground pathway that historically connects Asia to the Middle East and Europe, the silk road, and the exploitation of water resources thanks to the Headwaters of Euphrates and Tigris.

Another important consideration is Turkey’s GDP, which classifies as the 29th largest economy in the world. In addition to this, the influence of Turkey in the region inspires regional policies and campaigns such as those of Muslim Greeks, Turkish Cypriots, and in others in the Western Balkans countries, and so on.

Due to these considerations, Turkey was always in the middle of a political dilemma about which side it has to choose. On one side there is the East, with which Turkey has close cultural, religious and even spiritual relations. On the other side, Turkey is lured by the constant economic and military facilitation provided by Western states.

As a result, Turkey has always kept a neutral position or calling it a silent observer might be more fitting.

An undeniable example is the political drift

of Recep Tayyip Erdoğan from promoting Turkey's EU candidacy in 2002 to shifting to a more populist approach. This was done in the light of spasmodic attempts to disorientate both Turkish media and citizens from various internal issues, while disputing multiple international and bilateral agreements such as the Treaty of Lausanne (1923) and the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS), at the same time.

The most recent actions from Ankara are even more frightening about the stability of the region. Especially after the examination of the violation of the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone and the persistence of Turkey to reconsider the Treaty of Lausanne, which shaped the borders of modern Turkey.

Taking a look at Turkey’s approach to international affairs one can make several observations. First of all, multiple violations of Greek air-space and international waters can be noted. Confirming further that they do not accept the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea, the UNCLOS. Other observations include that of the Cypriot Exclusive Economic Zone, by driving away oil and gas companies that are interested in the exploitation of hydrocarbon resources of Cyprus. It is important to keep in mind that this is an investment with many economic benefits for Cyprus and the EU in general.

The growing trade co-operation with Eastern markets and Russia is another thing to keep an eye on. Another observation is the strong economic collision with the USA, and the well-known depreciation of the Turkish lira compared to the US dollar hitting an all-time low. All this in light of the temporary freeze

at the bilateral weapon market, especially the delivery of the new fighter jet F-35 to Turkey.

It can be said that Turkey is currently living in the following dilemma; it will either go through a democratic drift by the subversion of the current President and his external aid or the current risky internal and external policy will be continued with unknown consequences on the stability of the wider region, of the Eastern Mediterranean sea.

The large-scale crisis occurring in Turkey, a potential member of EU, needs to be recognised by all parties. There is serious concern about the economic alienation of Turkey and the constant disputes with the EU Members States, and also with other countries such as the USA. Europe does not have the luxury of ignoring a crisis that can easily lead to the destabilisation of this specific region, along with the various dangers that lurked.

The new political generation of the centre-right must defend Christian- democratic values such as pluralist democracy, freedom, solidarity & equality, and to aid the people who are fighting for these values in countries in need such as Turkey and Syria.

In conclusion, hopefully, the crisis is averted via a diplomatic route, but history has proven that collateral damage is unavoidable. The Ancient Greeks believed that; “the human who shows hybris, experiences blindness of intellect and eventually that would provoke the anger of the gods, resulting in the punishment of the false act and the restoration of normality”.

Andreas Korfiatis

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

7

Moldova before Parliamentary elections: political crisis, mixed electoral system and huge protests In 27 years since Moldova got its independence the political ground in the country changed a lot and had fluctuated between East and West, between democracy and semi-autocracy, between pro-european and pro-russia forces.

However, when in 2009 Communist party which ruled Moldova for almost 8 year, lost the power and the Alliance for European Integration came into power, it started to reform the Moldovan government and breathe new life into the economy. After years of negotiations, an Association Agreement with the European Union was finally signed in 2014.

Taking the last train to the European Union, Moldova aimed at succeeding in becoming a leader of the Eastern Partnership, obtaining a Liberalisation Agreement of Visas. While these objectives (important in the electoral agenda of the ruling parties) have been fulfilled, the leaders of the Republic of Moldova also chose a path of abuse and intimidation, destroying any hope of democracy.

One of the main characters that did everything in order to destroy the EU path was Vladimir Plahotniuc, an oligarch and one of the richest men in Moldova, the leader of a fake pro-european democratic party. While being part of Alliance for European Union, over the years he build his influence over the government, police and media.

Despite his extremely broad influence, his control over the justice authorities, his huge financial resources and his own personal ambition, Plahotniuc is not in the position to govern Moldova alone.

The key factor is the marginal public support for him and for his party. Only about 1-2% of the public support Plahotniuc, and fewer than 5% of voters will vote for his PDM party. In such conditions, he cannot afford to try and seize power in the country and openly reject the democratic model, as this could lead to violent resistance from the public.

This scenario is also impossible because of the opinion of the Western partners

8

which support Moldova financially and politically, and with whom Plahotniuc, as a nominally pro-European politician, must reckon with. As a result, the oligarch must maintain some semblance of democracy to preserve power, and so he has been forced to work and to build a hidden political cartel with Igor Dodon, the most popular politician with the Moldovan public, and the Socialist party former-leader and current president, which has around 50% popular support.

MOLDOVA’S POLITICAL SCENE SINCE 2015:

1. MPs VOTED A FAKE GOVERNMENT UNRECOGNIZED

BY MOLDOVAN CITIZENS After the alliance made between Plahotniuc and Dodon a new, fake government unrecognized by Moldovan citizens was voted. Afterwards, massive protests started and two new opposition parties were created: PAS - Action and Solidarity Party and DA - Dignity and Truth Party, and together with Liberal Democratic Party started to fight with the current government which claims to maintain a fake pro-eu path.

2. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS In 2016, in November’s presidential elections, the pro-Russian candidate, Igor Dodon, defeated Maia Sandu, who ran on a platform of reform in line with the European path. In the campaign, both Dodon and Sandu prioritized the fight against embedded corruption and the oligarchic system over geopolitical factors, but Dodon’s pro-Russian won grace to his friend Plahotniuc who officially supported Sandu but whose influential television channels promoted Dodon. Moreover, Dodon was allowed to play dirty in the electoral campaign, cheat, distribute fake news about Maia Sandu. No authorized institution had reacted to these serious violations and the Court declared the presidential race valid.

3. MIXED ELECTORAL SYSTEM In 2017, the PSRM (Socialist Party) and PD (Democratic Party) parties started to prepare the ground for the next parliamentary elections and decided to vote a law on mixed electoral system. Even if the Venice Commission advised not to implement the mixed electoral system in the current state of Moldova, the government did not take into consideration the advices. Despite the approval of the MPs, the opposition parties and civil society protested heavily against the new mixed system, stressing out the violation of the principle of a large consensus needed for adoption of a new electoral system.

4. INVALIDATION OF THE MAYORAL ELECTIONS After the Chisinau Appeal Court upheld the decision of a lower court to annul the win of Andrei Năstase in the mayoral elections (won by 52,57% in the 2nd round), hundreds of people took up to the streets of Chișinău on June 20th and June 21st, protesting in front of the capital’s Council building, Chișinău Court, Chișinău Appeal Court and the HQ of the Democratic Party of Moldov. However the Moldovan Supreme Court’s maintained the decision to uphold the invalidation of Chisinau’s June 3 mayoral elections. The court’s decision was illegal and had to do with the political influence of the Democratic Party over the justice system.

5. DELAYED PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS After, unrecognizing the voice of

BullsEye

the Moldovan citizens, Moldova’s ruling Democratic Party delayed the next parliamentary elections, scheduled for autumn 2018, to early 2019. Moldova lawmakers, voted to reschedule the next parliamentary elections to February 24, 2019 in the last day before the summer recess.

Initially, the election should have taken place by the end of November.

administrative moves) to limit the number of votes for the PSRM. The most strong opposition party now is the Action and Solidarity Party (PAS) of Maia Sandu, which is currently supported by around 25% of the electorate. In this situation, the oligarch will try (as he has done in the past) to gradually marginalise his coalition partners and, by means of bribery and threats, bring deputies from other parties over to the PDM.

6. FISCAL AMNESTY LAW The most controversial law voted was the fiscal reform package, in particular, the Fiscal Amnesty Law, that now allows people who obtained illicit money and goods to legalize them by paying a 3-per-cent paid tax to the state.

For sure, the coming months will be decisive for the shape of Moldovan politics and for Plahotniuc himself. The future of the oligarchy and the system it has constructed is currently uncertain, and depends equally on the results of the general elections, and the degree of the oligarch’s influence on President Dodon, which is difficult to assess unambiguously. One thing is very clear, if Plahotniuc’s party will succeed will succeed to take the power for the next four years, Moldova’s democracy will continue on the negative trajectory of the previous years, and the governement will be unable to solve the real problems faced by society such as poverty, corruption, migration, unemployment, or the “billion-dollar theft.”

WHAT’S NEXT?

It is very difficult to conclusively predict the development of events in the coming months. It now seems that one of the more likely scenarios Plahotniuc is considering is an attempt to get the best possible result for the PDM while simultaneously taking action (including

Mihaela Radu

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

9

From Online Banking to Cryptocurrency – how FinTech forms our future As a child, I believed that an ATM is a home to a small banking employee who would give out money to those who wanted. Also, it kind of works like that except for the small employee and; as a matter of fact, you can only withdraw money that you own.

I do not exactly know how I would have imagined cryptocurrency as a child, but I know that there is a lot more technology to it than what comes with an ATM, which makes me wish I still had a child’s imagination.

FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY

FinTech, short for Financial Technology, describes the impact of new technologies on the financial services industry. It includes conventional Online Banking as well as Cryptocurrency. Innovation is growing at an exponential pace in this field; and so are the questions related to it - How safe is it? Do we need an official cryptocurrency? Should there be stricter regulations? Should there be any regulations at all? Also, most importantly – How does it even work?

Although Online Banking, ATM’s and also Credit Cards are considered Financial Technology, Cryptocurrency is the one invention that has caught all our attention lately. In order to get at least a few answers, it is important to understand the greater meaning behind the idea of using crypto-technology in finance.

value. This means that each value-money depends on their direct utility value from traded goods, such as naturals and commodities. Nowadays, we use banknotes and coins as money, if the Head of State declares it as such - so basically, we all rely on them and hope for the best. As experienced in 2008, in the Global Economic Crisis, that system does not always work as we wish it would.

That is one reason why Cryptocurrency was invented, because while it has some similarities in the way it works, it is still radically different thanks to the following characteristics: Decentral

Cryptocurrency is not managed by one institution but instead finds its value automatically through the economic interest of each individual who participates.

Low Potential of Error

THE RISE AND FALL OF CRYPTOCURRENCY

Quoting John Oliver, Cryptocurrency is a topic that combines everything you do not understand about money with everything you do not understand about computers. In order to discuss the impacts and whether regulations are needed, one must understand at least the basics. The usability of currency is based on the abstract concept of its monetary

10

Instead of giving the control to governments or banks, cryptocurrency is controlled by algorithms, codes and protocols.

Dynamic Creation of Value

It is based on a dynamic creation of value which increases the total quantity of available money in a reasonable degree.

Cryptocurrency uses a specific technology called “mining”.

WHO ARE THE BIG PLAYERS IN THIS FIELD AND WHY?

It all started with Bitcoin, and that is why, of course, it is still number one in the cryptocurrency market. Many brands are gaining more and more attention and challenging Bitcoin to keep the crown.

Second in the market would be Ethereum, which was founded by a 23-year-old Canadian-Russian super brain. With his innovation not only money can be transferred, but even contracts (so-called Smart Contracts) can be concluded. Third and worth mentioning is a company called IOTA, which is working on creating an “internet of things” and is trying to solve the technical problems Bitcoin, for example, is facing with respect to its massive consumption of electricity while mining.

SO, DO WE NEED BITEURO?

Nevertheless, the Bank for International Settlements asked itself if we need an official cryptocurrency, let’s call it BitEuro.

They concluded that it would be possible but unpredictable.

The main strength of Bitcoin is its decentralised system, which on the other hand would be the weakness of an official cryptocurrency from the EU, as a single institution would handle it. Such a system hypothetically allows certain people in power to control it rather than a gov-

BullsEye

“This is, indeed, an essential step towards becoming a true digital single market and will gain more and more importance in the future.” ernmental system. Another big problem would be the fluctuations of rates, as having an official currency that regularly and unpredictably put people's money in danger, is, as a matter of fact, illicit.

Last but not least, one should not forget what the initial idea behind Bitcoin, was.

It was, and supposedly still is, to be an alternative to our current banking system.

If one had to invent BitEuro, a centralised digital currency would be created, not a decentralised cryptocurrency. However, whether Cryptocurrency will be successful in the future or not, many people believe that the fascinating thing about the idea is the innovative technology that it is built on, which is called blockchain.

BLOCKCHAIN

Normally, if someone would like to send money across the world, a bank would need to verify that transaction, which could take days. With the blockchain system, one can transfer money within min-

utes, thanks to not having a third party involved. On the other hand, a vast number of computers are used.

Using this technology to keep transactions secure, blockchain creates a decentralised database of transactions that everyone on the network can see. Essentially this network is a chain of computers that must all approve an exchange before it can be verified and recorded.

Let’s break down the innovation behind that technology. Blockchain is not just some technology that rebuilds our banking system - it has the potential to change the internet as we know it. No matter what new step is taken in this fast-moving crypto technology world, it all comes down to the decentralised system, which bears the ability to protect our data a lot better than it is secured right now.

Speaking again in metaphors, let’s say the inventor of Bitcoin and Blockchain, Satoshi Nakamoto, created the first mo-

bile phone. The genius behind Ethereum, Vitalik Buterin, made a Nokia 3210 out of it. This suggests that we are just at the beginning of a fast-moving new world of technology, but it will still take us a while to actually create a ‘smartphone’. Nevertheless, it is something our society and especially our government should be aware of, as there are some dangers related to it, especially because there are currently no real regulations.

However, in March 2018 the European Commission adopted an action plan on FinTech to foster a more competitive and innovative European financial sector.

The action plan focuses on, amongst other things, supporting the uptake of new technologies such as blockchain, artificial intelligence and cloud services. This is, indeed, an essential step towards becoming a true digital single market and will gain more and more importance in the future.

Sabine Hanger

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

11

Only a few years ago it was called the ‘sharing economy’. A term so innocuous that the talking heads and pundits who began to refer to it as anything else were all criticised as ‘Luddites,’ as then-London mayor Boris Johnson infamously said. After all, sharing is caring, right?

Uber, the new enfant terrible of the gig economy, took regulators by surprise when it launched its UberX service in 2012, allowing the average car owner to begin driving app users across most of the United States. It then began a swift expansion across European markets, disrupting the traditional taxi industry by offering lower prices and the comfort of a ‘seamless’ payment. It took the European Court of Justice’s latest ruling for Uber to comply with transport rules, as it ceased to be considered a technology platform. As of 20 December 2017, Uber’s European party was over, at least legally speaking.

For a continent that prides itself on high working conditions, both the EU and its Member States have been too slow to adjust to the realities of today’s job market.

Although not a competence of the European Commission, 40% of the EU’s citizens are part of the ‘irregular labour market’, as opposed to 30% in the U.S., according to the European Commission.

However, for years Uber has been allowed to register all of its drivers as self-employed contractors, therefore not entitled to benefits such as paid holidays and a minimum wage. Only after a surge in traffic accidents earlier this year did the ride-hailing giant introduce a limit on the number of hours a driver can work uninterruptedly in the UK and France. This was deemed as a step in the right direction, according to the usual critics.

NOT SO CONTROVERSIAL?

Food-hailing apps like Deliveroo and Foodora were the least controversial of the bunch, providing the opportunity for small and medium-sized restaurants that cannot afford to hire couriers. This too changed.

On 12 May of this year, on a rainy Philadelphia afternoon, a Caviar app courier was killed in a car accident that was marked as the first high profile case of this level of severity. Caviar, much like UberEats and Deliveroo, claims to be a food-ordering platform, not a food delivery service. These couriers are considered independent contractors. In the current gig economy, the liability for work injuries, even death, falls upon the worker and their loved ones.

Uber has tabled some free-market alternatives to this particular issue in Europe. Since January of this year, a partnership with insurance giant AXA was announced. It offers free insurance to contractors, including sick leave and some small form of paternity leave. Some have criticised the insurance scheme as a blatant PR stunt, as it still pales in comparison to what labour laws in most EU countries require when hiring a full-time employee. The possibility of being with your daughter or son when he is ill is important to many, but that is a perk of working for a good company, not for Uber and Deliveroo.

NOT GIVING AN INCH

Some countries have decided to side with the unions and partially, or entirely, ban these types platform-based services. 9 out of 28 EU countries have done that. These services con-

tinue to grow across the board, particularly in countries with chronic unemployment such as Spain and its neighbours. Spain has the largest share of independent earners across the EU’s top economies, and still, 40% of all of the gig economy jobs are low income.

The gig economy has, of course, its upsides. A worker can download an app and find a job in a couple of minutes, set his or her hours. This has made Britain’s working-age employment rate, for example, “exceed 75%, almost reaching its highest ever,” as per The Economist. As a self-employed worker myself, I enjoy the perks that come with the arrangement. However, is the tradeoff enough?

Nations with double-digit unemployment cannot afford the luxury of shutting down some businesses only to prop-up other ailing business models, but should instead begin the process of smart regulation.

Protectionism and outdated laws make the average consumer poorer and worsen services. This has been proven repeatedly where Uber has been banned in some cities only to see no improvement in the taxi industry, much like London and Brussels.

The gig economy is here to stay. Governments and competitors can close their eyes and pretend it has not changed the way markets operate in their entirety. Alternatively, they can embrace it with common sense legislation that will allow Europe to maintain high labour standards and set an example for the rest of the world: employment benefits and employment do not have to be a choice.

Santiago de la Presilla

12

BullsEye

Since several European countries are facing high rates of youth unemployment, the European Union must find a way, how to overcome and combat the current situation. Therefore, young entrepreneurship and an innovative start-up culture could be a key factor for success. Moreover, it is crucial that Europe guarantees its wealth on the international economic market with strategic and creative solutions.

As the European Union is; facing economic and political pressure from the USA, dealing with flourishing markets in Asia and expecting new economic competitors from around the world, the requirements for a strong economy within Europe itself, are on a high level. Europe needs to have a robust labour market with low rates of unemployment, especially among young people. Hence the European Commission proposes to support young entrepreneurs and founders of startups. The aim is to reduce unemployment by stimulating innovation and encouraging young people to develop new market-ideas and solutions. Therefore, it is important that the European Union focuses on strengthening the labour market by creating new jobs in this sector.

On the other hand, it is crucial that start-ups have good conditions, to grow rapidly. When the economy of a country has a demand for jobs, it is important that there is a high number of positions available, to guarantee the economic growth of the country. Especially when you have a look at the so-called “global players� and bigger firms, you recognise that they often have more positions to offer, due to their financial situation. Furthermore, start-

ups often provide jobs where a college degree is required. Of course, the goal is to reduce poverty and unemployment by education, but society also has to provide jobs with lower requirements for a working position. That is the reason why it is necessary to not only focus on start-ups but also in the industrial and manufacturing sector. Value creation can be fulfilled in different ways.

Moreover, universities and colleges should offer courses and classes, which especially deal with entrepreneurship and founding a company. If Europe wants to reduce the gap between leading states in this field, higher education must create the basis of a new start-up culture. It is essential that students get different perspectives of what they could do after graduation. Since there is a high rate of unemployment among young people in many European countries, entrepreneurship and the opportunity to be their own boss by creating a business idea could lead to higher employment.

The sharp increase in new inventions and the changing environment we are living in, provide enough possibilities for thinking about new economic opportunities.

Also, the mentality and the way of thinking about founding a start-up and being an entrepreneur needs to change. If an idea or a project fails, people should stop blaming the founders and criticising them for their decision. On the contrary! Young people showcase their courage when taking such risks.

Meaning that they are showing an honourable virtue. Sometimes you need two or three attempts to be successful. Young people and students should not be afraid of founding a start-up. Even if the business idea is not successful, the experiences made can be very helpful in the working life, and besides, can be seen as enrichment for personal development.

To conclude it is important to strike a balance between innovation and employment. It is necessary to support start-ups and young entrepreneurs with financial and political incentives, but there needs to be the right mix in society regarding the number of start-ups and the number of conventional companies. In the end, higher education is decisive for the development of a start-up culture. Without talented people developing creative ideas and solutions, politicians are helpless in their efforts.

Johannes BĂźrgin

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

13

The European People’s Party family will convene in Helsinki for its Congress where the highly anticipated EPP spitzenkandidaten process will take place. The Congress, which is the highest decision-making body of the Party, is composed of delegates from EPP member and associated member parties, groups and member associations, the category under which the European Democrat Students fall.

For the past decade, the EPP Congress met every year and a half, primarily to decide on the main policy documents and electoral programmes and to provide a networking platform for the EPP heads of government and party leaders. Every three years, the Congress elects its leadership and presidency, and since 2013, the Congress had the remit of nominating the EPP candidate for the role of President of the European Commission.

This process is famously known as the Spitzenkandidaten process whereby the party with the largest number of votes garnered in the European Parliament election has to nominate a person to lead the European Commission.

14

HISTORY

Right before the European elections of 2014, the EPP and other European parties proposed their favourite candidate to lead their campaign in order to get indirectly elected as the President of the European Commission. The current European Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker, emerged as the winner during the EPP Congress held in Dublin, when he was contested by the current European Chief Negotiator for the United Kingdom exiting the European Union, Michel Barnier. Juncker got almost twothirds (61%) of the votes while Barnier received the remaining 39% of the votes.

At the time, the EPP was the last European political party to choose a candidate, and it was the only one to hold a contested election at its party congress.

Martin Schulz, a German and at the time he was an influential Member of the European Parliament, was elected by 91% of delegates at the centre-left Party of European Socialists congress in Rome. While Belgian MEP Guy Verhofstadt stood unopposed at the liberal ALDE party’s congress in Brussels when the European

commissioner for the budget, Olli Rehn from Finland, dropped out of the contest following a backroom deal with Verhofstadt.

THE JUNCKER COMMISSION

President Juncker has for more than one occasion reassured the public that he would not stand for re-election after his term ends with the European elections coming up in May 2019. No one can describe the past four years as plain sailing for the EU. Many regard them as turbulent, primarily because of the economic instability in the first few months in office, second because of the Greek bailout in 2015, the Brexit issue in 2016 after the UK referendum and the issue of security and migration. The migration issue saw the European Union unable to cater for the large numbers of people passing through the different migration flows to access the EU borders. Four years down the line, these serious concerns for the EU are somewhat diluted and to a certain extent solved. The EU member states have collectively registered successive economic growths, Greece emerged from the eurozone bailout programme

BullsEye

and successfully completed a three-year emergency loan programme to tackle its debt crisis, the EU-27 emerged as a united block after the UK referendum on Brexit while several member states are tackling migration.

SOCIAL MEDIA AND EUROSCEPTICISM

The issues surrounding the social media platforms is of high importance to the success of the European elections, and it will most probably make it a standalone topic in next November’s EPP Congress. The EPP and other European parties are embarking on an aggressive online campaign, bringing together different people from different backgrounds, to gear up for the European Parliament elections.

In a study compiled by a group of European researchers, they have stated that the Spitzenkandidaten process has allowed party groups “to run more focused and personalised electoral campaigns that would

transcend national borders”. They describe social media as a fertile ground for parties to make their voices heard and to improve their message according to the needs and wants of the citizens. In fact, they concluded that political communication through social media reflects a discourse about European issues and politicising the debate over the future and shape of EU institutions and policies. This is in contrast to providing an extension of political competition over traditionally national issues. Similarly, several researchers had found that candidates with an anti-EU agenda used their Twitter account “to politicise further the EU dimension by promoting anti-EU rhetoric as they have in other communication channels”.

As the political parties prepare their strategies to target EU citizens through different mediums, the social media giants are being encouraged to prepare a strategy to eliminate trolls and fake news, from their platforms. With this in mind, the European Parliament called in Facebook’s chief

Mark Zuckerberg to explain their strategies in combating electoral manipulation. Unfortunately, it was reported that he did not offer many answers, but a month later, the members met with senior officials from Facebook and were reportedly assured that Facebook’s tools were more sophisticated than the 2016 US elections meaning that the platform is more geared to combat fake news.

CONCLUSION

This whole package of policies will certainly feature in next November’s EPP Congress in Helsinki. Subsequently, migration, social media and Euroscepticism will also dominate the campaign for the European elections in the first half of next year. The EPP Congress will help generate public interest in an array of policies and once again be at the forefront of European policy-making.

Beppe Galea

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

15

European Elections – a Chance for a Better Future The European Parliament (EP) elections will take place in May 2019. Political parties that are now dominant in the chamber (EPP and S&D) will fight to maintain their position against new movements, and those that until recently have only played supporting roles, both Eurosceptic ones and others with a strongly pro-European character. The campaign will create a debate on searching for a model of the European future. It will reveal problems, accomplishments, threats and hopes for Europe after 2019.

The last few years have seen an increase in the significance of the problems resulting, among others, from four areas: the social consequences of the financial crisis of 2008, which influenced the subjective feeling of the increase in the inequality and the scale of exclusion (especially in young people). The refugee crisis, which generated social and ideological tensions in Europe, and the terrorist attacks, especially directed towards the EU, which inseminated a strong sense of fear in people. Another problem faced in the past few years is the increase in populism and nationalism, the latter, among others, leading to Brexit, although the reasons for Brexit have a much more complex history.

by more than half of Europeans (according to the latest Eurobarometer report). It is an indication of the understanding of the benefits which the European community brings every day to the citizens of all countries; thanks to the functioning of free trade, the facility of movement as part of Schengen, the possibility of working and studying practically in the entire European territory. Free movement is perceived as a value and as an achievement, although, on the other hand, only approximately one-third of Europeans travel beyond their own country. There are countries in which merely a small number of citizens know other European countries from their own experience, such as Bulgaria.

The EP elections must give an incentive to the pro-European bloc to respond to the social, migration-related, terrorism-related and disintegrative challenges. Doing so by solving specific problems and, simultaneously, by defending the cohesion of Europe. They shall pursue the path of achieving common benefits and build up the European identity in the period of the present crisis.

The key to that is the continuous renewal of the European project.

Generally: the fewer barriers, the more benefits. That way of thinking, in the last years, has also included digital matters, starting from the changes in roaming, through the easiness of using digital content internationally, to the common advantage of Europeans. These facilitations are also the result of investments, also within cohesion policy, in transport corridors or the development of cities and the support of economic changes in rural areas.

When we look at the accomplishments of the EU, which are appreciated the most by Europeans, it is clear how and on the basis of what qualities and values of the EU the views are shaped. The freedom of movement in Europe, the flow of goods and services – the beauty of the single market – is appreciated

Two things are still strongly appreciated, although on a smaller scale. These are firstly the acceptance of the Euro in its function of favouring integration and supporting the economic dynamism. Secondly, the advantage of the European bloc over other economic blocs. However, the real significance of the

16

Euro will be revealed only in the forthcoming years. From the citizens’ point of view, a very high position in the ranking of achievements of the EU is occupied by the Erasmus+ programme – that open exchange for pupils and students, favouring the openness of thoughts and attitudes, builds the understanding of European diversity. The Erasmus+ Programme’s importance will continue to increase, with more people taking part in it.

Additionally, in 2018, 70% of surveyed Europeans feel like citizens of the Union. Conversely, 29% do not feel the same way. The highest numbers of positive responses were recorded in Luxembourg (93%), Ireland (85%) and Germany (84%), and the lowest in Greece and Bulgaria (51% each) and Italy (56%). In Poland, 80 % feel like EU citizens.

On the other hand, one cannot take these results for granted. There are still many problems that may hinder the EP elections and the strength of the community as a whole.

The biggest threat is not the potential signals of an economic crisis, nor refugees – because the management of those problems is becoming more and more efficient. Even the current British kerfuffle connected with Brexit is not so dangerous for Europe. The greatest threat of all is populism, and, on top of that, in the nationalist version.

One of the biggest disputes in the contemporary world is the fight between populism and liberal democracy, with the sense of freedom connected to it.

BullsEye

The last thirty years brought great transformations. Technologies changed quickly, and still are, revolutionising the economy, as well as the social life and lives of individuals. Many functions of our everyday lives are dominated by the technological leap which is not available for everyone, due to the digital exclusion of the older generations and the inhabitants of rural areas. The pace of life has changed – we live for the moment. The convergence of the media, the mingling sources of information around the world – credible and completely incredible – spreading faster than lightning.

The comments on the events which force the understanding of those events upon the recipients, create common fears, but also common sympathies. The speed of transferring information enhances its emotional impact. We live more by emotions than by the rational analysis of the world.

Globalisation has brought about a significant reduction of poverty, an improvement in the health of the world’s population, positive development results for obsolete economies, however, it also brought about an increase in environmental threats, caused by climate changes resulting from the accelerated industrialisation in all the areas of the world.

Globalisation also undermined the traditional manners of building success in domestic

economies. Hence the growing number of those experiencing the negative consequences of the processes of economic globalisation in their national economic sectors. Besides, in many countries around the world, and especially in our part of Europe, the fatigue from the transformation can be felt. Not only because some social groups do not feel as its beneficiaries, but mainly as a result of the fatigue of the transformation itself, as it is a process of constant change.

Contemporary populism is built on the grounds mentioned above. It intensifies emotions, in particular, those connected to threats – refugees and terrorists are presented as an everyday fear-evoking threat. Post-truth politics enhance such fears. Lies, manipulation, the false interpretations of facts, the insolence of fake news – function all the more strongly, especially when spreading quickly across the Internet. The more the Internet builds closed groups of followers and adversaries, by breaking its natural openness for which the Internet was created, the more tools for propaganda, resembling the model described in the “Language of the Third Reich” by Victor Klemperer”.

So, what should the next European leadership do?

The European leadership should not only be about the question of efficiency and ethical leadership, or the deficiencies already mentioned. It must be a combination of a vision and the orientation towards the future, simultaneously and positively indicating the priorities and the principles of accomplishing them.

The last two years have brought significant changes in the balance of power between the political parties in the largest EU Member States, namely France, Italy and Spain.

It has also demonstrated that often, in the most recent history, the European Project, in its institutionalised form, that is in the form of the EU, has experienced various crises. On the other hand, it proved how skillfully those crises could be challenged in many areas – by adjusting ourselves to the constantly changing reality. Besides, the EU was created exactly in order to solve problems together, which at that time appeared on the European horizon, are appearing there today and will continue to appear. In this sense – the Union is a historical project, immersed in the process of History.

Tomasz Kaniecki

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

17

Hope in a Pablo Casado’s Era Spain has gone through a few months of great political instability, having seen the Socialist Workers Party present a Motion of Censorship to the President of the Government, Mariano Rajoy on the 25th of May. The plenary to vote upon the Motion took place between May 31st and June 1st of the year 2018 and resulted in the cessation of the government of Rajoy. This event became possible thanks to the support of minority of political groups, characterised by being peripheral nationalist and populist.

The consequences of these acts were the hiatus in the leadership of the Popular Party and the lack of aggregated political stability. Soon, it was noticeable that a new internal organisation was needed. This resulted in the board of the party deciding to rebuild the positions democratically.

After the double round of the primary elections, between July 20th and 21st, an internal Congress was held, and Pablo Casado was proclaimed as the new president of the Popular Party.

This happened in the midst of an unfavourable and delicate political situation for the party, amongst o t h e r

reasons, because it was going through an era of strong tensions with certain secessionist territories and also with parties whose support they expected.

With regard to the political framework within the party, these elections were a challenge in the first place because of the short time available for campaigning. Another reason is the orphanage of the Spanish right, which according to popular opinion, has been underrepresented in recent years due to the lack of ideological unity and strength capable of transmitting sufficient security to citizens.

The leader who emerged from this mechanism of internal democracy would encounter a fractionated party as a result of accumulated neglect and the emergence of new forces as “Ciudadanos� claiming to be at the centre. At the same time, they recklessly approach the area of the conservative-liberal right.

With the welcome of Pablo Casado, a new era of hope for the Popular Party has also been welcomed.

This politician not only brings the freshness that his youth provides, but also, a renewed spirit that seeks to achieve the success of the party and Spain. He has formed a solid and integrative popular direction, but, above all, one with which the unity of purpose is sought.

It is presented as a challenge to ideologically rearm the party following its trajectory of the liberal, conservative and moderate discourse had been diffused. It will be vital for the success of this new composition to achieve the integration of the party, combining the tinge of progress with the preservation of the good work that has preceded them.

The focus of attention proposed

by Pablo Casado to shape the political destiny that is coming, which are necessary for Spanish stability, are to strengthen the constitution, strengthen the penal code and promote political regeneration. On the other hand, emphasis on competitiveness by lowering taxes should also be focused upon. Finally, there should be a serious commitment towards the family and the Christian values that inspired the party since its inception.

It should be noted that, if analysed in the broader spectrum, the European Centre-Right also needs a focused Spanish PP, in a moment of uncertainty and populist, nationalist and xenophobic demagoguery.

Many points are at stake given the social, political and ideological situation that the country is currently facing. It is for this reason that the strength of democracy in Spain will depend to a large extent on the success of the Pablo Casado era.

Veronica Vargas

18

BullsEye

The Portuguese Contraption and the European Fate 2019 will be the year in which the European citizens will have to, once more, go to the ballots and elect their representatives in the European Parliament (EP). However, there will be a country facing elections twice over the next year: the beaming, and somewhat peripheral, Portugal.

The Portuguese are being called to decide the fate of their representation in the EU, as well as regarding their forthcoming National Assembly and their government. With both elections being relatively close to each other, as the EP Elections will be happening in May and the National Elections in September or October, it appears to be a very contemplative year for the Portuguese people. Thus, one can only wonder if there will be a reflection overlap happening during this electoral frenzy that Portugal seems to be in.

With regards to the EP elections, Portugal seems to suffer from a general trend that has been affecting many other EU Member-States over the last decade. The Portuguese frequently chose not to participate actively in these elections, as they feel distanced from the decision-making process of the EU institutions. However, they forget about the fact that by perpetuating this behaviour they are losing their ability to have a voice and to make a difference. Meanwhile, the small number of Portuguese citizens that come to the ballots to vote base their vote on the state of affairs of national politics. They elect their representatives based on the candidates’ national party affiliation, vastly uninformed about their projects and proposals for a possible subsequent mandate as MEPs. Moreover, the Portuguese occasionally use the European elections to penalise the incumbent governments at the time, provided that they are unsatisfied with the executive’s responses to everyday challenges or its long-term strat-

egies, hence turning the EP elections into a real-time barometer of national politics.

beginning of the ‘Geringonça’, the new popular left-wing buzz in Europe.

Thus, in order to get a better grip on the intentions of the Portuguese for the EP elections of 2019, it would be wise to delve into the current state of affairs of this country’s politics, as it appears to influence their voters deeply.

Will this be the new European leftist trend?

The reality is that this sui generis setting has been attracting a lot of attention from fellow liberal EU Member-States, striking as a semi-formal manifestation of a unified consensus between left-wingers that enables different parties to come together for the sake of democracy. The ‘Geringonça’, a rather improvised device or contraption by definition, has now been partially replicated in Spain by Pedro Sánchez and in Slovenia by Marjan Šarec, in an adaptation that still externalises a consensus never obtained before between different leftist parties in those countries.

By September 2019, the Socialist Party will be running for the majority of the National Parliament, possibly providing current PM António Costa with a vote of confidence that would allow him to continue on his efforts aimed at an economic and social recovery from the Portuguese financial crisis of 2010 to 2014. This crisis led to the intervention of the International Monetary Fund, the European Commission and the European Central Bank in Portugal, having reached a Memorandum of Economic and Financial Policies with the government at the time, led by Social Democrat (centrist) Pedro Passos Coelho. After a period of severe austerity, Passos Coelho ran once again for PM in 2015, winning the balloting but unable to form a government.

He even tried to form a coalition with the Popular Party (right-wing), but to no avail, as all leftist parties rejected the new centrist government. As follows, António Costa achieved an agreement with the Communist Party, the Left Bloc and the Ecologist Party, whom validated and supported a Socialist government led by Costa, without actually being a part of a political alliance. This marked the

The future of this new type of political solution will only be dictated over time, either by having similar movements spreading over Europe or by the analysis of the outcomes of present cases, which will start to unfold. After three years of ‘Geringonça’ in Portugal, we have been observing a gradual separation between the four parties involved in the consensus, as the Socialists have always been a more pro-European party compared to the rest of their partners. In a way, the next legislative elections will dictate the future of this model in Portugal, therefore disclosing the plausibility of said circumstances in other EU Member-States as well.

Leonor Baptista

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

19

Unravelling Demagogues The Perception of Populism in Modern Politics Political structures and the main governing bodies in any country result from elections. It is not a secret that electoral strategies mean a lot in today’s political life. Political life is affected by different phenomena that influence the electoral processes in their ways. Some of them have a positive impact, while others have a negative impact. The negative effect is usually due to populism. The fact is that populism is not an ideology. However, it is a strategy to obtain and retain power, which is very often used in nowadays politics.

The idea of populism is used in different spheres of the social environment. However, in politics the phenomenon is used more frequently and, as a result, it also appears in political science. In the article, we will only analyse the negative aspects of populism as a social phenomenon, and we are far from thinking that populism does not have its positive perceptions, though in some cases, it might be useful. In political and electoral processes populism is often used as a method to reach privilege against others.

The words of Cas Mudde will serve as an appropriate introduction to define populism in political science. The theory states that in political science, populism is the idea that society is separated into two groups at odds with one another - “the pure people” and the “corrupted elite”. However, in the current political life, the term is often used as a kind of shorthand political insult. The word is generally misused, especially in the field of politics. The populist usually claims to represent the “will of the people” and stands in opposition to an enemy, often embodied by the current system.

Of course, throughout global history, there have been varie-

20

ties of populist reveals in the past (Russia had its own in the 1870s, the United States during the 1890s, Latin America in post-war years and reappeared in several times). So, in some regards, the phenomenon of what is known as populism is not new. Good evidence of that is the book published in 1969 by the very great duo of Ernest Gellner and Ghita Ionescu entitled Populism: Its Meanings and National Characteristics. So, we might claim there is nothing new here but still has a key role.

One important aspect is that there is no difference between European, American and Asian populism. Populism has assumed a more international form. It has a much more varied landscape and is now spread all over the world.

The difference is in the mentality of the current society. Societies react differently to the same phenomena, and that is why the same actions made in different countries show various results. However, all the people have similar expectations from their government, from their authorities. The expectations lead to having a comfortable life, high income, good education, good health, safety, security, and so on.

Moreover, in some cases when the desire is very high, you do not focus on the real situation, or the possibility of having all the above mentioned in that exact conditions or at that time. Even when the percentage of having these all are very low, people continue to hope that it is real and populist politicians take advantage.

As populism in the 21st century does not have national boundaries, my country will be used as an example for the sake of the argument.

The political landscape of Armenia has never been homogeneous. Some people view it as a threat to the national interests due to our geographical location, but the majority in our society view it as an achievement that was reached. Freedom of speech and multi-party democracy, the realisation of other guaranteed rights and freedoms are fundamental values that were achieved.

The fact is that populism is already ingrained in our political system.

T i m e s h ow s that our society was not ready for that kind of mas-

BullsEye

sive populism that took place several months ago. Our society was not able to differentiate between reality, wishes, and capacities.

All the pleasant words that have been said made society make a rash decision. It was not a long time ago, but time has already shown that after the populists reach their goal, the expected and promised changes either do not take place, or take too long. For example, during a political protest, one of the main points raised was the necessity of changing the course in foreign policy. However, afterwards, reality proved that no changes would take place. In every speech, populists persistently address the same idea, that they have found the key to all the problems that country has during decades. Isn’t that a “classic” populism in nowadays understanding?

It is not always clear and now it might be challenging, even for a political scientist to identify those promises that are made only to attract addition support and sympathy from society.

How should we react to the populism?

What role can common citizens play? Understanding populism will help in dealing with it and will bring more stability in political activities. The perception of populism is very much connected with the consciousness of the society. We are speaking about legal consciousness, political, the consciousness of problems appearing in a daily routine of the country. It is very difficult to demand an objective and similar approach from the citizens, because the specific characteristics and life features that they have, changed

their perception of life and all the activities surrounding them. Also, these peculiarities regularly affect political activities as well.

of invisible causes. Briefly indicating the most important segments of electoral strategies we have stressed the following;

Another aspect to be discussed, is the cause of the existence of populism.

• People are the most important part of an electoral strategy. They are one the primary stakeholders of the strategic plan. If the political parties continue to do what they have always done, they will get more of the same.

Is populism necessary for society or some part of the society? If not, why does it still exist in our societies. The truth is that the things that did not find the “backup” or “support” by society come to an end by time. Unfortunately, it is too early to speak about the end of populism due to its empowerment in the 21st century.

Maybe the threat of populism was overestimated. Maybe we shall leave it only for the scientific discussions. Unfortunately, populism has much more influence than we can imagine. If we leave the diplomatic formulations aside, we will be able to define populism in a very simple way. We support the idea that populism is the attempt of filling the gaps and the ambition to cover the issues without finding solutions.

The governing structures are a reality in every society. People choose political parties, political plans, political figures and political visions from the first sight. However, if people go deep into the details, they generally choose shortterm, and the way decisions will be made.

From one political culture, the style of making electoral strategies appears to have migrated to the different countries where it did not have much of a grip before. Behind the obvious facts, there are hidden ones among thousands

• The second important aspect is the principles. They need to be realistic but also need to include provisions that will motivate people to choose the country’s political force.

It means that if the chosen strategy is too “honest”, the chances of a political party decrease and its political strategy may not be working.

Maybe it is tediously unoriginal, but the electoral strategy and the political strategy in a whole must be based on the golden section.

The article has arguably raised questions rather than answer them. The attempt is to evaluate the phenomenon objectively.

Indeed, populism stands as the political challenge of our age, and it could easily threaten the whole notion of political structure and ideological perception.

The open question will still remain the same; how can the effect of populism on the political image, be eliminated, or at least, decreased?

Anna Mkrtchyan

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

21

Not Alt-Right – Understanding the Ideology of the New Right

22

There is a single most essential thing one ought to do in order to understand the nature of the Right, and that is to determine what the nature of the Left, is. In the middle of the previous sentence, a reader of average intelligence should guess that there is a catch. There is a largely spread misunderstanding as to the true meaning of these notions. These misunderstandings often lead to their imprecise usage, including by public figures and other mainstream opinion-makers, as well as the social media, and result in many people drawing compromised conclusions and being generally confused about their political orientation.

the left. Therefore, the terms became somewhat synonymous with reactionary or retrograde, and progressive or innovative, respectively.

What many people may not know is that this seating arrangement was subsequently abolished, re-established and re-organised several times during the following century in France, before other countries adopted it. By the end of the Second World War, the meaning of the ‘left-right’ terminology was significantly altered compared to when the terms were initially coined, and it would only be fair to assume that in the post-Cold War world, it has adopted a completely new meaning.

sometimes particularly the common people, and -κρατία for power), which etymologically should suggest that the proletarian coups d’état which overthrew monarchies and abolished the aristocratic classes altogether ought to have installed a ‘democratic’ rule, but instead they resulted in totalitarian oppressive regimes, often perceived as bordering tyranny, to the extent that in some languages, as is the case with some of the countries formerly parties to the Warsaw Pact, the term democracy is colloquially used to depict the downfall of those very regimes which took place around the turn of the 20th century.

It is common knowledge that the usage of the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ in a political context originated during the French Revolution of 1789; when the two rival fractions would take opposing seats in the parliament: with the supporters of the monarchy on the right, and the proponents of the revolution on

The confusion is hugely contributed to the ambiguous names assigned to different political ideologies, such as democratic, conservative, liberal, and so on. Just to give a rather extreme example of this, the word democracy literally means rule of the people (from the Ancient Greek δῆμος for people,

An instance of a wide-spread misconception is the fact that in many people’s minds the Right is more or less identified with Conservatism/ Christian Conservatism. In the science of statistics, this phenomenon is called misinterpreting correlation for causation, a common logical fallacy meaning that people

BullsEye

incorrectly assume the existence of a cause-and-effect relationship between two variables, simply because they sometimes, or often, occur together. Thus, due to the fact that in Europe and the US, the advocates of the Right have often been people who self-identify as Conservative and or Christian Conservative, many are left under the wrong impression that all liberal concepts are inherent solely to the Left. On the other hand, Communism has been perceived as the quintessential Leftist doctrine while in the same time communist regimes, not only in Europe but everywhere around the world, have been anything but liberal in terms of rights and freedoms of citizens.

A couple of things should be made clear at this point. First of all, in modern times it is hardly possible

by the leader of the Conservative Party enacted the legalisation of same-sex marriage and the Prime Minister himself campaigned in favour of the UK remaining in the European Union in the 2016 referendum, both of which are, strictly speaking, a contradiction to Conservatism per se and have been, unjustly, derogatorily labelled by critiques as leftist.

On the other hand, all Nationalist movements are being by default dubbed as pertaining to the Right, most often the far-right, which is inherently wrong. This is mainly because quite a few of them actually advocate for what ought to be considered leftist policies, most notably boosting all sorts of social welfare benefits and government spending. Many political analysts recently have begun to avoid using

from the Middle East and other countries, is completely unfounded and unreasonable. Moreover, this unjustly tarnishes the name of the Right by implicitly suggesting that those who identify as Right or Centre-Right are a more moderate version of the same thing.

In my opinion, in the context of 21st century Europe, the Contemporary Rights has a different meaning to the one that is generally shared.

First of all, probably the only political-economic doctrine I am comfortable with identifying within the Right is capitalism. In simple terms, I would describe it as the inviolability of private property, a free market economy governed by private initiative of enterprise, and all spheres of public life – education, healthcare, social security, and

“...THIS UNJUSTLY TARNISHES THE NAME OF THE RIGHT...” for a serious political party to adhere strictly to the textbook definition of its name, because political expediency requires flexibility and adjustability, and because often the wiser decision, may be an out-ofcanon one. It is also inevitable for political organisations with a bigger mass of members to have inner fractions which sometimes oppose each other on different issues, and that occasionally ones prevail over others. Only boutique parties with no prospects whatsoever of ever having to take actual political responsibility and have a small number of members, that operate more after the fashion of private clubs, can afford absolute purism in their ideology. Secondly, any major political theory assumes a slightly different form when applied to the social reality of a given country in a given historical moment. Instances of asymmetric decisions can be found all over Europe. Without delving too deeply into the matter, it suffices to point out that in the United Kingdom a government headed

the term Right to describe such political parties, at least without putting a sceptical ‘so-called’ in front.

The relatively new term Alt-Right, short for Alternative Right, is now widely used to describe a pretty heterogeneous group of formations ranging from hard-core nationalists to actual white-supremacists, neo-nazis, anti-semits and all sorts of other hate groups. Many of them only profess intolerance towards the representatives of different races, religions, sexual orientations or ethnic groups but do not actually take a stand on other political matters; neither do their manifestos contain any indication thereof. Here something should be made perfectly clear: a position on migration policies in the face of the migratory situation Europe is currently facing, is by far, not enough to determine where on the left-right spectrum a political organisation is situated. Calling these organisations far-right, which is solely based on them being against Europe giving asylum to refugees

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

so on, subject to the principles of supply and demand, competition, personal responsibility, and meritocracy. I am quick to clarify that I do agree that a certain minimum of social welfare benefits ought to be guaranteed for the weakest members of society – those, who due to circumstances beyond their control are, or have become, incapable of providing even that bare minimum for themselves. Other members of society, those who are in a better economic situation, should have a mandatory contribution, proportional to their economic status. This caveat is not dictated merely by humanistic or charitable incentives, but rather by a far more pragmatic consideration about the interests, not only of the former but of the latter group, since massspread poverty, ignorance, disease and debauchery pose a threat to the safety of all members of society. That being said, apart from the minimum sine qua non contribution to the common welfare, as many funds as possible should

23

remain in the budgets of individuals, households and private companies, rather than the governments spending them – that is more or less the doctrine of economic liberalism.

In terms of political and cultural freedoms, and other non-material rights of the individual, distinguishing Right from Wrong, or, for that matter, from the left, may not be that simple a task.

If we take the concept of personal freedoms, which goes hand-inhand with personal responsibility, the Right should promote all policies which give more freedom of choice to the individual, as far as this causes no harm to the other members of society. In this regard, there could be no legitimate argument not to promote women’s right to abortion. This, of course, does not imply that there can be no legitimate ethically, or religion based arguments against the act of abortion itself, but merely denying a person’s right to make such a decision for themselves using their own free will, cannot be justified, neither by ethical nor by religious arguments.

The question of legalising recreational drug use or prostitution is a little more complicated than that, though it is beyond doubt that the right approach should involve legalisation, not just for the mere idea of freedom to choose one’s own lifestyle without inflicting any harm to others, but also because such an approach would give us the power to subject these markets to the regulations which apply to the trade of other goods and services, ultimately for the sake of consumers’ and providers’ protection.

The usual arguments against such policies invoke the health risks posed by drug use

and the moral aspects of legalising trade with sexual services. The counter-arguments to these considerations should also be more or less clear to anyone who has made an effort to give the matter some thought. It is hardly convincing to claim that the use of cigarettes and alcohol, which is perfectly legal even in its most extreme forms, poses a lesser threat to the health of the user, or to the health and safety of others, for that matter. On the other hand, just like any prohibition, with the most notable example, of course, being the ban on alcoholic beverages in the United States from 1920 to 1930, the prohibition on drugs leads to the flourishing of a black market which is in itself a billion-euro trade which we choose to leave entirely in the grey sector of economy.

As for any moral objections to prostitution, however wholeheartedly most of us share them, the fact is that there is no means of forcefully uprooting this social phenomenon1 unless the State imposes regulations on all consensual sexual contacts outside of wedlock – a scenario extremely popular in many classical dystopian novels but, fortunately, not in any contemporary democracy. That being understood, it is better and safer to provide a legal framework to exercise the trade of prostitution and for employing such services, rather than leave it all in the sombreness of legal limbo.

Probably the most controversial topic where the concepts of human rights and social acceptability have collided most loudly in recent years is the debate on the legalisation of same-sex marriages. I do not think that this debate fits into the left-right paradigm; rather it is a matter of zeitgeist and depends on the readiness of a given society to accept a model of a family unit that differs from the one we have known for millennia. Of course,

since some European countries have already taken that step and the European Court of Human Rights has issued several decisions more or less fortifying that line of action, it may very well be a matter of time before we see the universal legalisation of marriage between people of the same sex.

In a nutshell, one may argue that Right means freedom, and freedom means responsibility. To be able to spend more of one’s earnings is freedom; to do so, taking care of the health, education and security of oneself and one’s family, is responsibility. To be able to choose what to consume and what to do for your leisure is freedom; to think of one’s future and to teach one’s children to lead a healthy life, to avoid what is harmful to them and to discern and condemn what is ethically objectionable, is responsibility. As a person born in an Eastern European country on the threshold between two eras, the majority of my life has passed in a transition from a world of restrictions, limits, prohibitions, artificially imposed equality, and an illusionary feeling of safety, to one of possibilities, choices, rights, equality of opportunities, and the dangers of making wrong choices or not being good enough. I am grateful that life has taught me self-reliance and I would prefer to live and struggle, err and learn from my failures in freedom, rather than be secure but deprived of choices. I, too, fear some of the consequences that the liberalisation of particular social phenomena might have. Still, I would rather preach than prohibit; I would rather teach than oblige; I would rather persuade than take away by force. To rephrase Evelyn Beatrice Hall, I may not approve of many of the choices people make, but I will defend to the death their right to make them.

Desislava Kemalova

24

BullsEye

In Geopolitics term, a flashpoint is an area or dispute that has a strong possibility of developing into a war. There are many flashpoints all around the world. From the Middle East to Europe, and arriving at East Asia, the world is scattered with potential flashpoints that might turn the whole region into an allout conflict. One of the most underestimated flashpoints is the dispute between China and Japan. The history of the two countries is bloody and lengthy. The culture and historical links between the two countries are deeply intertwined.

However, this shared history soon began to unravel, dating back to the Sino- Japanese War in 1894. Japan’s military and expansionist aspirations grew throughout the beginning of the twentieth century. In 1931, a resource-constrained Japan invaded North-Eastern China for its abundant resources. By 1937, Japan expanded this conflict and was able to hold a large share of the Southern Chinese territories. During the conflict, Japanese soldiers embarked on a frenzy of murder, rape and looting in which estimates suggest up to hundreds of thousands of people were killed and tens of thousands of women were raped. These massacres and atrocities marked the low point of the relations between the two countries. Since the end of World War II, The Sino-Japanese relationship can be divided into three main periods in which dominant themes have emerged, with the United States playing an important role during these periods. The Pre-normalisation period (1949– 1972), which is known for the lack of diplomatic relations between China and Japan, however, both sides did maintain channels of communication and informal diplomacy.

During this period, the United States and its

allies occupied Japan till 1952. After signing the San Francisco Peace Treaty, The United States and its allies ended its occupation of Japan. Even though, the US left behind a large contingent of forces that remains to this day. This lead to US and Japan relations to be improved dramatically, with the US providing military and economic assistance to the Japanese. This assistance helped the Japanese economy to grow dramatically. During this period The United States and China did not have any diplomatic relations. In 1972, China and Japan finally normalised relations. The post-normalisation period (1972 to the late 1980s) brought about a boom in China-Japan relations, buoyed by Japan’s economic prowess and China’s reform and opening up policies. Furthermore, in the same year, President Richard Nixon visited China, opening up a new chapter in the US-China Relation.

From the end of the Cold War until today, the relationship between the two countries has improved, and their economies became more intertwined. However, the rise of China and the relative waning of Japan, there is a growing rivalry between them. One of the main flashpoints between the two sides is the security and military situation. Since the beginning of the twenty-first century, both nations have increased their military spending.

China’s military spending has increased from $40 billion in 2000 to around $228 billion in 2017. This increase in military spending across this period has alarmed the Japanese.

Prime Minister Shinzo Abe has called for major reforms in the country’s constitution to allow Japan to have Self-Defence Forces.

These actions have increased tension in the China Sea, mainly in the Senkaku islands.

The Senkaku islands matter because they have great economic and strategic value.

They are close to important shipping lanes, offer rich fishing grounds having a large population of Bonito fish, and lie near potential oil and gas reserves. During the Obama Administration, the US tried to de-escalate the tension between the two countries by warning China about their importance to the US national security interest. This standoff defused the tension in the region.

However, the current Trump administration has reshuffled all arrangements. Japan has long taken a hawkish stance against China's growing influence, but the Asian rivals have recently been working to thaw their relationship after years of tension— in large part because both fear Trump's trade war.

Trump’s trade policies have alienated both Japan and China. This has given the two countries reason to start a high-level diplomatic dialogue. This dialogue has started with economic issues and spread to security cooperation. Japan and China have set up a military hotline to prevent escalation of activity in the East China Sea. This high level shows that the Japanese have seen the US’s role in the region diminish. With high-level diplomatic dialogue concerning trade issues set to continue between the two countries, more stability in the region could be on the cards. With the decreased hostilities between the two countries, the disputes in the China Sea will start to become solvable through dialogue. If a resolution might be reached between the two countries, the main question will become what role the US will play in the region? This is a question that must be addressed by the Trump administration.

Elie-Joe Dergham

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

25

NATO after Brussels – Heading for a dim or dismal future?

Last June, the NATO Brussels Summit could have been an opportunity for the allies not just to articulate, but also to agree on a shared strategic assessment of deteriorating regional and global security and start planning accordingly. Instead, it was monopolised by Donald Trump and strong debates on defence expenditures and burden sharing, showing that the rupture within the alliance is growing. In Brussels, Americans and Europeans failed to address the much more fundamental problems now facing the most successful alliance in history. If they want to avoid a NATO demise, allies on both sides of the Atlantic will need to realign their strategic priorities and see eye to eye on the continued critical importance of the alliance to Transatlantic stability and global security.

A SUMMIT LIKE NO OTHER

As numerous European ministers and NATO Secretary-General, Jens Stoltenberg, stressed, the policy decisions formalised in Brussels were as impressive as any summit in recent memory. The United States and its European allies agreed to improve their military capabilities, do more in Iraq and across Europe’s southern border, and augment NATO’s ability to make decisions in a crisis. They invited a new member to join. They also reaffirmed their common stance against Russia and commitment to collective self-defence.

However, NATO is no longer as it was before US President Donald Trump.

So, the gathering in Brussels showed that the crisis is deepening. Trump’s request that European countries, especially Germany, boost their contribution to NATO expenditures became the central topic of the summit and the subject of intense debates.

Not only that, but despite the official statements, not much was achieved in this regard, with some countries showing again reluctance to spend the agreed 2% of their GDP on defence.

Also, the budgetary issue ended up

26

engulfing the agenda of the Summit preventing member countries from addressing other important issues.

A “TWO-TIERED ALLIANCE”.

In reality, the problem of inequality in defence expenditures is one of the most important elements explaining the current impasse of the Alliance. The incapability of solving this issue reflects the depth of the NATO crisis. However, the debates around it have a long history and were certainly not started by Donald Trump.

The US has repeatedly warned their European allies to bear their part of burden, and as stated by the former US Secretary of Defence R. Gates in 2011: “If currents trends in the decline of European Defence capability are not halted and reversed, future US political leaders may not consider the return on America’s investments in NATO worth the cost”. Furthermore, the promise that 2% of the gross domestic product (GDP) of member countries would be allocated to defensive purposes was made at the 2014 Wales Summit, but as of now, merely eight out of 29 countries fulfil this clause.

Burden sharing and, more generally, military budget restraints have indeed been a problem for several years, but the issue has reached crisis intensity only recently, as tensions grew over the experiences in Libya and Afghanistan. Between 2008 and 2013, countries like Germany (-4.3%), UK (-9.1%) and Italy (-21.5%) have consistently decreased their defence budget, in contrast with the US that, since 2001, has significantly increased its defence spending, and in 2016 spent 3.62% of its GDP on defence, the highest proportion compared to other members of the Alliance. In the aggregate since the end of the Cold War, defence spending by the European NATO countries has fallen by almost 20%, while their combined GDP has risen by around 55%. Furthermore, as reported by SIPRI, the average NATO spending on defence went from 1.9% of the GDP in 2002 to 2.43% in 2016; but while the total defence spent in 2016 for the US was $664 billion, for NATO’s European countries, it was only $238 billion. This huge disparity in spending exposes two elements: a general European military decline, partially due to the European national indebt-

BullsEye

edness, and a worrying transatlantic disconnection.

Although this trend seems to have somehow halted – according to NATO statistics all the European allies in 2018 have increased their military expenditure in comparison to 2015. The burden-sharing problem is only the tip of the iceberg of a much more frightening tendency: the growing gap in capabilities between the US and the other allies. The NATO intervention in Libya in 2011 was a clear demonstration of this: approximately 90% of military actions would not have been possible without Washington’s help; US aircraft have flown 75% of the sorties and 228 out of 246 cruise missiles launched during ‘Operation Unified Protector’ were American. The lack of capabilities and Europe’s dependency on the US were so wide that the then US Defence Secretary Robert Gates argued that NATO had become a “two-tiered alliance, divided between those who bore the burden and free riders”.

These words, which remind us of the ones used more recently by the US President, confirm the depth of a strategic disconnection that represents the most pressing challenge facing the Alliance.

FUNDAMENTAL UNANSWERED QUESTIONS

The questions around this strategic disconnection are precisely the ones that the Brussels Summit should have addressed and instead left unanswered. The core issue that continues to hobble NATO lies in the misalignment between the national security priorities of its member-states and those which the Alliance as a whole must agree on, in order to remain effective.

Today NATO’s member states see their national security dilemmas differently, and the question remains to what extent will they be able and willing to merge these into an overarching strategic direction for the alliance. Although Russia’s military seizure of Crimea shook NATO out of its post-Cold War complacency,

the regional security optic remains the dominant variable across the alliance. Flank countries like Norway, the Baltic States, Poland, and Romania see Russia as the overarching threat; Germany and France recognise that Russia is threatening the rule-based European order, but do not seem to believe that they are threatened in the same way as the flank states. Moreover, ever since the MENA and Sub-Saharan Africa mass immigration wave first crashed onto Europe’s shores; Germany, Italy, and France have increasingly seen the South as the primary area of concern, with France and Italy looking deep into Africa, as far as the Sahel.

There is also the tough question of how Turkey, the provider of the second largest standing military force in NATO, will set its priorities going forward, especially when it comes to its relations with Russia.

on-state competition will require an alignment of interests and priorities across the West that is closer than ever. Confronted with the rise of China’s power and influence in the Pacific, the United States needs the Alliance to ensure that, in the coming years’ security competition in and around Europe remains suppressed at a low-level. In turn, Europe’s problems encompass not only Russia but the challenges coming from African immigration flows and political destabilisation to the faltering European Union project, accelerated by Brexit, to the risk that Western Balkans will once more erupt into open conflict.

The West as a whole faces challenges from Chinese economic power and Russia’s resurgent geostrategic assertiveness, while even the largest and most-established democracies in Europe are shrinking amidst challenges from the extreme Left and Right.

In turn, the United States is faced with increased security competition from Asia, in addition to growing instability in Europe & MENA, and escalating competition for Africa, the High North & the Arctic. Consequently, Washington has put a premium on burden sharing, insisting that the allies increase usable military capabilities and improve logistics. The United States also sees power projection and the global fight against terrorist networks as two important NATO tasks going forward, whereas for Europe the latter has a more domestic focus.

Notwithstanding all these issues and the existing differences in strategic priorities, Europe and the US need each other now more than ever, and NATO is still the best framework for them to cooperate. The Alliance has mastered many ups and downs throughout history, it still holds the world’s most advanced military capabilities and remains the foundation of European security, with the key to its success over more than six decades being its ability to adapt to changing circumstances. NATO’s problems have always been there, as well as divisions and disputes, and to assume that the Alliance was more united during the Cold War would not be true to the historical records. Indeed, in the past, to make NATO into the most powerful collective defence alliance in history, it took a lot of work and compromises. Today NATO’s continued effectiveness requires another similar effort and commitment, as if its obstacles are pre-eminently political, they can be overcome.

In short, almost three decades after the end of the Cold War, NATO walked out of another summit without answering the fundamental questions of what its shared threats and priorities are, and how to build an enduring consensus on the strategy and resource allocation needed to implement it.

A DIM AND DISMAL FUTURE?

The NATO summit in Brussels failed to be the starting point for building a broader, and badly needed, Western global strategy for the future.

However, the coming era of state-

Mattia Caniglia

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

27

The European Elite’s Factory?

The College of Europe In a time of rising and triumphant populisms around our continent, it has become increasingly difficult to accept the term of ‘Elite’, especially if there is a linkage with the term ‘European’: the terms throw back into the public’s face the image of unelected, yet powerful civil servants and Sherpas sitting in the European Commission’s offices in Brussels. Nevertheless, an Institute has sought to shape future European leadership since the very first days of the European integration process. The College of Europe based in Bruges, Belgium, and Natolin, Poland, has been educating hundreds of students every year since 1949. Defined by the media as Europe’s Ecole Nationale d’Administration or as the European Oxbridge, the College of Europe retains a set of specificities which distinguish it from the general European Studies curricula that one can find in most universities.

ANTICIPATING AND ACCOMPANYING EUROPE'S DEVELOPMENTS

As World War Two left Europe in shambles, it had transformed what had been the centre of gravity of international politics for centuries to the object of litigations between the East and the West. Several initiatives were launched to prevent new conflicts and attempt to create the basis for a united and pacified continent. Among them was the Hague Congress in May 1948, which served as a basis to the Council of Europe.

Another conclusion coming out of the Congress was the need to educate and train future European leaders, with the aim of preparing them to a political, economic, intellectual and social supranational entity, as would read the College Statutes in 1950.

This element sets apart the College of Europe from other European Studies programmes as European integration is not only considered as an academic field of study but also as an aim per se.

28

However, it appears that the College of Europe which nowadays focuses most of its teachings on the European Union and its policies actually anticipated the Schuman declaration and rather resulted of efforts linked to another International Regional Organisation, the Council of Europe. The apparition of the European Coal and Steel Community and its further developments led to a slow shift of focus from Interdisciplinary Studies on Europe to the inclusion of European Policy Analysis.

This has implied further diversification, with the number of master’s programmes increasing from one to five. At the same time, the number of students increased more than ten times, from the 35 students of the first promotion to the more than 450 students in the last promotions.

Besides the increased diversification of the academic offer and the multiplication of students, accom-

panying the European integration process implied its anticipation by taking into account geopolitical changes. This is why the creation of a campus with a dedicated Master in Natolin, in Warsaw's outskirts, in 1992, can be seen as an anticipation of the EU enlargements of 2004. At the same time, the College increased its focus on the European External Action by creating a specific Master and increasing the number of students coming from non-EU countries from Europe and beyond. In recent times, this new focus for the external action has also meant a strong focus on Brexit.

A SOCIAL EXPERIMENT

In order to achieve these aims, the promoters of the College opted for a location which would favour promiscuity within the body of stu-

BullsEye

“In many aspects, the College of Europe fell victim of its success...” dents and limit external contacts for a year. The Belgian city of Bruges seemed ideal to this purpose as Belgium lays in between France and Germany, and the reasoning that would eventually bring the European institutions to Belgium applied to the College as well.

Furthermore, Bruges had several characteristics favouring its candidacy: it is a rather small city with a historic city centre enclosed in its walls and a network of canals, making it a very quiet city except for the most touristic areas. Also, at that time it lacked proper Higher Education institutions, with most locals studying in Brussels, Ghent or Leuven. This implied there would be fewer contact with local youth. Finally, the local language, Dutch, has a limited diffusion outside native speakers, limiting, even more, the contacts between students and the local population than it would have happened in an English, French or German-speaking environment. The scene was set for a bilingual English-French post-graduate institute in a Flemish city, creating a bubble.

The students’ living environment reinforced the isolation coming from the location. Students are expected to do everything together: they go to lectures, they live in a small number of residences whose size ranges between 25 and 50 rooms, they eat in the College canteen, they study in the library, and they go out together to residence parties, the College bar or in the few bars scattered in the city centre. At the same time, it is a policy of the College to discourage any activity unrelated to the life in

Bruges. Students are expected to devote themselves not only in their studies but also in various thematic groups, clubs and sports. As such, when not studying, students would remain together.

By taking into account these elements, it is not surprising that such hyper-socialisation between youth from all over Europe and beyond leads to a high number of relationships among students. While many relationships will not outlast the end of the academic year, many continue or emerge after the College. This can be seen with some famous College alumni, as former Danish Prime Minister Helle Thorning-Schmidt, former Finnish Prime Minister Alexander Stubb and former British Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg have met their future spouse in Bruges.

MAINTAINING THE PRIMACY

In many aspects, the College of Europe fell victim of its success, as many universities launched their programmes in European Studies or European Affairs, ensuring the access to such studies to a wider public as they would not apply as strict and lengthy selection procedures than the College do. As such, the study of European Affairs became more popular. At the same time, several prestigious universities in Belgium, France, Germany, the Netherlands or the United Kingdom developed programmes dedicated to specific policies of the European Union. Such a phenomenon is unsurprising as the EU’s role increased and the bloc enlarged, attracting more students from various horizons.

Nonetheless, this implies that the College is now facing an increasing competition at two stages. Part of the response to this competition lies in the distinctive aspect of the College’s life: studying at the College of Europe is not only a matter of choosing an academic programme but also living an experience. This experience is kept alive by an important network of alumni which is kept alive by many activities taking place in Brussels and around the world. This, together with the shared experience in Bruges or Natolin, shapes what is called the Esprit du Collège. This element is instrumental in understanding how such a relatively small Institute with few hundred students per year has been able to provide such a large number of personnel to the EU institutions and the rest of the Brussels European environment.

In conclusion, by setting apart the usual catchwords used to define the College (lifetime experience, challenging yet rewarding, unique, …) that one can find on the advertising leaflets and websites, it appears that the goals and the characteristics its founders made of the College of Europe something more than a simple institute for postgraduate studies. The insistence in ensuring that students build a strong Esprit de corps may recall, in certain aspects, the camaraderie expected within military units. To a certain extent, this comparison is valid as College’s graduates are trained and called to fight for a united and pacified Europe.

Julien Sassel

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

29

EDITORIAL TEAM 2018/19

Julien Sassel (28) is a Belgian and Italian dual citizen and has been an active member in EDS since 2012.

He has a Master in International Relations from the Université Catholique de Louvain and a MA in EU International Relations and Diplomacy Studies at the College of Europe, in Bruges.

Johannes Bürgin (21) is a German student from the city of Nuremberg. He is member of the committee for international relations of the country’s biggest political student organization, RCDS. He is currently studying International Business Studies B.A at Friedrich-Alexander University.

Mattia Caniglia (30) has a Master in Strategic Studies and years of experience in international organisations that gave him knowledge of global geopolitics and economics. He is currently collaborating as a political and economic analyst with media like Foreign Policy, Fortune China and The Guardian.

Santiago de la Presilla (23) is a journalist and communications adviser with a focus on Russia, European affairs and finance.

He previously worked for the American Chamber of Commerce and is now the Warsaw correspondent for Visegrad Insight.

Elie-Joe Dergham (27) is a Lebanese and Canadian dual citizen and has been an active member in EDS since 2015. He has a Bachelor Degree in Banking and Finance from the Notre Dame University - Lebanon and is a certified anti money laundering specialist (CAMS).

Beppe Galea (22) lives in Gozo, Malta and is a European Studies graduate from the University of Malta. He served as Vice Chairman of European Democrat Students during the working year 2017/2018.

He is currently the Deputy News Manager of the church media organisation Newsbook.com.mt.

Johanna-Barbara Gruber (21) was born in Austria and is currently finishing her studies in business economics at the University of Economics in Vienna. She has been writing for student’s newspapers since her first semester. Her academic interest lies in gender studies and diversity management.

Sabine Hanger (22) studies Law in Vienna. Becoming member of the Aktionsgemeinschaft in 2016, she got elected 2017 to be the Chairwoman of AG Jus, offering a situation in which she is confronted with responsibility and political sensitiveness, but also opportunities to work with various people.

Desislava Kemalova (26) is from Bulgaria. She is currently doing a PhD in Law in Sofia University where she also teaches the discipline. She has work experience as a government official, and currently legal consulting. She has been active in EDS since 2015 and served as a co-chair of EU’19 WG.

30

Vladimir Milic (28) has a BA in International Economics and Finance. He is currently working for a cultural centre in Belgrade, Serbia. He considers EDS as a platform on which to discuss issues on Europe’s future. He is a supporter of EU integration interested in the future of EU – China relations.

Anna Mkrtchyan (24) is Armenian, and is an member in YRPA. She has a Master in Law and is in the first year of a Ph.D. course. She has been a member of Yerevan city council for a year.

She is a legal adviser of the legal department of the National Assembly of Armenia.

BullsEye

EXECUTIVE BUREAU 2018/19

Virgilio Falco (28) is EDS Chairman. Graduated in Law and as a president of the Italian association StudiCentro, he worked on writing the reform of the school system in Italy. He has working experiences at the Italian Parliament and in private universities. He writes for the newspaper Il Foglio.

Sara Juriks (23) is from Oslo, Norway. She has a BA in Music, an MA in Politics and is currently studying Anthropolog y.

She has been active in politics since 2011, both nationally in Høyres Studenter and then in EDS since 2014. Currently she is the Secretary General of EDS.

Hubert Tadych (24) pursued a Master of Laws degree in Poland. He used to work not only as a paralegal, but also as an assistant to an MP and as a communication manager to the party.

A former Co-Chair and now within the bureau he is responsible for the communications and the EU Elections.

He also serves the EPP Group.

Tommi Pyykkö (29) lives in Helsinki, Finland. Newly graduated from the University of Helsinki, where he studied French, European Studies and Political Science.

Currently in the bureau he is the Vice-Chairman responsible for publications (BullsEye and the Annual Report) and he also runs the website.

Pantelis A. Poetis (24), from Cyprus is a Vice Chairman of EDS. He studied Law and International Relations - Global Political Economy at Middlesex University London. Pantelis holds the portfolios of Statutory Amendments, Member-Organisations and Website. He works at Dr Andreas P. Poetis LLC Legal Firm.

Gergely Losonci (26) is a Hungarian MBA student at Corvinus University of Budapest. He holds Bachelor degrees in Business & Management and Finance.

Gergely worked in the European Parliament and currently works as a business consultant in Budapest. As EDS VC he is responsible for the EU 2019 Elections and the 2018 EPP Congress.

Carlo Giacomo Angrisano Girauta (21) is an ESADE Law and Global Governance student. He is currently the International Secretary of NNGG (Spain). As EDS Vice Chairman his responsibilities consists of writing event reports and newsletters, as well as being responsible for Latin American relations.

Robert Kiss (29) lives and works in Sfantu Gheorghe, Romania. He holds a BA in Business & Management from Corvinus University of Budapest, and a Msc in Economy & Tourism. Currently he is doing his PhD in Economics. He is active in EDS since 2014. As Vice-Chairman he is responsible for the Permanent Working Groups and the Conference Resolutions

Boyana Taneva (25) MGERB Bulgaria. She served as a Co-Chair of the Policies for Europe Working Group during 2017/2018 year.

Boyana was elected as Vice-Chairwoman of EDS in 2018. Currently, within the Executive Bureau she is responsible for communication, social media and event reports.

Zeger Saerens (23) is specialized in European and Corporate Law. He holds academic degrees from the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven (KUL) and Université Saint-Louis (Brussels). Zeger gained his work experiences in several law firms and public institutions. As a Vice-Chair he is entrusted in the Bureau with Funding and the Statutory Amendments.

The official magazine of European Democrat Students

Libertas Ezako (26) lives in Namur, Belgium. She holds a Bachelor degree in Political-Sciences and pursues her Master’s degree in International Relations at the Université Catholique de Louvain. She has been a member of Jeunes cdH since 2015 and currently she works as Deputy Secretary General for EDS.

31

european people’s party

FIND OUT HOW TO CONTACT US! Visit us at Rue du Commerce 10, BE-1000 Brussels, Belgium Visit our homepage at edsnet.eu

Follow us on Instagram at @edsnet.eu

Like us on Facebook at facebook.com/edsnet.eu

Read previous issues at bullseye-magazine.eu

Follow us on Twitter at @edsnet

Contact us at students@epp.org

EUROPEAN DEMOCRAT STUDENTS IS THE OFFICIAL STUDENT ORGANISATION OF THE EUROPEAN PEOPLE’S PARTY

epp