The document "Europe differently - the need to rebuild Europe"is the fruit of consultation with AEPL members over a period of almost two years. In it, they express their conceptions of the future of a European Union capable of meeting the challenges of today's world while respecting their own values.

 

CONTENTS

1) - The facts

2) - Rebuilding Europe: principles and values

            2-a) Solidarity, democracy and transparency

            2-b) A clearer project

            2-c) A shared European identity

            2-d) European sovereignty

3) - Means of action

            3-a) A "hard core"?

                        - Groups of volunteer states                      

                        - The euro zone as the first circle

                        - The end of unanimous voting

            3-b) A budget to meet the challenges

                        - A budget for the euro zone

                        - Better-adapted programming

                        - New resources

            3-c) The right institutions

                        - The European Parliament

                        - The European Council

                        - The European Commission

4) - Community policies to be developed

            4-a) Common policies

            4-b) A genuine economic policy

            4-c) European defence

            4-d) From enlargement to the reunification of Europe

            4-e) A European response to migratory crises

            4-f) A language policy

            4-g) Education for European citizenship

            4-h) A community of values and individual freedoms

5) - Conclusion: The European dream

 

"EUROPE DIFFERENTLY

THE NEED TO REBUILD EUROPE

Preamble

The European Association of Free Thought (AEPL) aims to promote the European project, respect for the fundamental rights of citizens and the separation of religions and the State. It brings together in a European network covering more than twenty countries SS and FF motivated by European integration and sharing humanist values and principles of peace and progress.

The document "Europe differently - the need to rebuild Europe"is the fruit of almost two years of consultation with AEPL members. In it, they express their conceptions of the future of a European Union capable of meeting the challenges of today's world while respecting their own values. This text is a summary of the responses received to date. It covers the main issues raised by our members and presents a coherent whole.

Above all, this document is intended to be the fruit of reflection by grassroots citizens. In this sense, it is a project built from the bottom up and not the other way round, thus fulfilling the wish of European leaders, who frequently declare that they are listening to citizens.

Introduction

Like many European citizens and politicians, the members of the European Free Thought Association are concerned about the risk of seeing the European project threatened or even fail. While we support the principle of European integration with conviction, we note that the EU as it functions today is no longer able to respond to the concerns of the many citizens confronted with the upheavals of the world. These citizens feel that Europe is indifferent or powerless. Parties based on a rejection of Europe are gaining a firm foothold in the political landscape of many Member States. If the EU is to avoid failure, it must be given new impetus, as the status quo will ultimately lead to fiasco.

That's why we want to propose a "different Europe" capable of rekindling enthusiasm.

After a quick reportWe will be reiterating the need for a new foundation and a strong reaffirmation of our values.  principles and values which, in our view, must form the basis of this new European Union.

We will then define the means of action to be implemented. These resources may concern the decision-making processes or the different levels of integration desired by the Member States. The scope for action of a reformed Union is closely conditioned by the level and nature of the budgetary resources allocated to it. This issue will also be addressed. Finally, we will address the question of European governance and therefore the organisation of the Community institutions.

Some of today's major challenges are on such a scale that they are beyond the scope of any single state and call for joint responses on a European scale. Several examples of policies of community interest will be presented. We will look successively at the economy, defence, the response to migratory crises, enlargement policies, the possibility of a language policy and education for European citizenship.

To conclude, a final section will be devoted to what could be the european dream for a movement like ours, committed to the values of solidarity, humanism and progress.

1) - The facts

Our members note that the context in which European integration began (that of the Cold War and the boom in the catch-up economy after the Second World War) has changed radically. The globalisation of trade, the financialisation of the economy and its deregulation, the digital and robotic revolution, the explosion of inequalities, the rise of religious intolerance, the wars against international terrorist organisations (Daesh and others), the alarming consequences of human activities on the environment and the climate, and the depletion of reserves of non-renewable raw materials all combine to create a context of instability and anxiety for many European citizens.

On the other hand, Europe has never been hit by so many major crises at the same time:

• market uncertainties since the systemic global economic and financial crisis of 2008
• specific eurozone crisis
• political crisis in Western democracies (success of populism)
• crises within the EU (unprecedented fractures: North-South, East-West, old-new, regional separatism, Brexit)
• peripheral geopolitical instability, crises and armed conflicts on the EU's external borders (Russia, Ukraine, Turkey, the Middle East, etc.)
• crisis of confidence with the traditional American ally
• major refugee and migrant crisis.

The lack of prospects for short-term solutions to all these issues, and the loss of reference points due to globalisation, are fuelling fears that are leading large sections of our populations to turn in on themselves and cling to familiar historical reference points. In Europe: the model of the sovereign nation-state with the risk of nationalist drift, religions with the risk of intolerance, supposed identities with the risk of rejecting others and turning in on ourselves. These are all risks of regression that directly threaten the foundations of the European project.

2) - Rebuilding Europe: principles and values

2-a) Solidarity, democracy and transparency

To respond to these concerns and the widespread disaffection with the European idea, we need to rethink a Europe that is more democratic, more protective, more supportive, more transparent, more efficient and more understandable.

Respect for European values, including individual freedoms, as enshrined in the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union.[1]In order to achieve this, the refounding project must first and foremost be faithful to the principles of individual dignity, freedom, equal rights, solidarity and freedom of thought. This means reaffirming the values of democracy and human rights.[2].

Refounding will in some cases mean profound changes, in others improvements. In particular, this Europe will have to free itself from the excessive postulates of neo-liberalism, which have been so damaging. Stimulating competition will lead the European project to its demise if we forget along the way the necessary solidarity that must unite both States and peoples.

2-b) A clearer project

These principles and values should be able to commit all the States involved in the project to relaunch the European Union.  These principles could be set out in a short text that could have constitutional status. This text would define the objectives of the Union and in particular the objective of creating a transnational entity through the agreed transfer of sovereignty, a text to be ratified, if necessary, after consultation of the citizens of the signatory states. The absence of a project clearly expressed at the outset by the Member States is a major handicap for the EU, fostering doubt and encouraging euroscepticism.

A balanced institutional system recognises rights but also imposes duties. Any failure by a State to comply with common rules or democratic values should be subject to sanctions that are genuinely applied. To respect the principles of the rule of law, the provisions of Article 2 of the Lisbon Treaty on the values of the Union must be maintained.[3]. On the other hand, it would be appropriate a) to supplement the application of Article 7 (which stipulates that a Member State that does not comply with these provisions may lose its voting rights in the Council) with an article providing for the cutting of certain funds and financing in the event of a breach of Article 2, b) to replace the unanimity rule with that of qualified majority voting.[4]

2-c) A shared European identity

What brings us together as Europeans is more important than what separates us. European citizenship now exists by right. But if we are to exercise this citizenship to the full, we need to forge a European identity alongside all the others, one that translates into a sense of belonging, with its own rights and duties.

One of the essential conditions for spreading this sense of belonging is a better understanding of what Europe is. Getting to know it better means becoming aware of the eminent part played by the construction of Europe in recent decades in extending the freedoms, rights and advantages we enjoy today. It also means realising that all Europeans share a common history and heritage.

The full exercise of citizenship also requires information on the institutional workings of Europe and its Member States. Today, these issues are dealt with mainly by national media, often under the headings "World", "Foreign" or "International". Well-informed European news, supported by communication from the institutions to the general public, should have a place in its own right, symbolising not something foreign but an area shared by Member States within the same Union. The role of the media in developing an attractive offering (along the lines of the success of the Franco-German television channel Arte) would enable more people to learn about a European culture and cultivate pride in being European.

To achieve this, the symbols of Europe need to be more widely used and displayed: the flag, the anthem, the motto "United in diversity" and Europe Day on 9 May to celebrate Robert Schuman's founding speech, a date that should be celebrated throughout Europe with symbolic events.

2-d) European sovereignty

In a largely globalised and interconnected world, we know that policies dealing with global issues can only be fully effective if they are dealt with at Community level. It will therefore be necessary to transfer certain exclusive powers from the Member States to the Community level. These transfers will have to be transparent and freely consented to by a majority of the Member States who decide to do so. A redefinition of competences will naturally be necessary in order to have the means to have, for example, a common defence associated with a common foreign policy.

While the power to safeguard the four freedoms of the European Union (freedom of movement of citizens, goods, services and capital) should be reserved for the European institutions, care must be taken to ensure that the powers devolved to the Member States are maintained. This is why the issue of subsidiarity[5] is fundamental and deserves to be re-examined. The main criticism is that this principle of subsidiarity, enshrined in the Treaty on European Union (TEU) and as it operates in practice, has had the effect of absolving the intermediate levels of decision-making (national, regional, etc.) of any real European commitment. It is all too easy to wrongly accuse "Brussels" of dictating its rules to the Member States. If subsidiarity is to be fully embraced by all those involved in political action, it must correspond to a proposal to delegate powers to the European level that comes freely from the local level (from the bottom up) and not be imposed from the top.

In areas deemed to be of mixed competence (EU/States or EU/regions) by the European Court of Justice, institutional mechanisms involving national parliaments in decision-making could nevertheless be preserved. However, if federalist tendencies were to prevail, the notion of mixed competence would surely disappear.

In a context of global crises and threats, European citizens will be better protected by sovereignty on a European scale than they will be by national sovereignty. This is one of the major challenges of the necessary rebuilding of a different Europe.

3) - Means of action

3-a) A "hard core"?

The original plan was for the Member States to move forward together towards an "ever closer union". But the ups and downs of history, national votes and successive waves of enlargement to include states with varying motivations for integration have meant that the reality is one of cooperation and integration à la carte. Not all states have signed up to all the union programmes. There are already de facto "circles" with different perimeters (euro zone, Schengen area, Customs Union, European Economic Area, Police and Judicial Cooperation Area, etc.) which do not overlap with the perimeter formed by the 28 (27) EU Member States.

- Voluntary groups of states. It is therefore the idea of a "hard core" or variable-geometry Europe that seems to many to hold the most promise for revitalising the Union. A group of willing Member States[6] can thus increase its degree of integration, but on condition that the others do not block it. These countries, convinced that the European level is not a limitation but the very condition of their sovereignty, could move towards greater federalism, while the others would join them at their own pace and if they so wished. This would have to be done in such a way that the other Member States did not feel that they had been left behind, with the existing acquis communautaire remaining theirs.

Achieving this result marks a federal leap forward, even if the EU is not a federal state in formation in the classical sense. However, it should be noted that the EU already possesses a number of important attributes, such as the European Central Bank (ECB), the Euro, Schengen, the Banking Union, the European Stability Mechanism, the European Court of Auditors, the border and coast guards, etc. As for the approach of going straight to a text with constitutional status, it has little chance of success in the short or medium term, given recent experience (the failure of the 2005 Constitutional Treaty) unless the Treaties are amended.

- The eurozone as the first circle. Many believe that the eurozone, which is already highly integrated through its currency, could form one of the first "hard cores". This would require its own budget, coordination of economic and monetary policies, and procedures for financial solidarity and tax harmonisation, under the authority of a minister responsible for Economic and Monetary Union (EMU). Among other things, this would make up for the shortcomings in its construction, improve its efficiency and strengthen its resilience to crises. A eurozone parliament could be created, made up of members of the European Parliament from the countries making up this "first circle".

- The end of the unanimous vote. With this in mind, and in order to avoid blockage by minorities, it is essential that those Member States who are willing to comply with more restrictive rules in order to be more effective decide to continue extending the scope of qualified majority voting in order to do away with the paralysing principle of unanimity. It is in fact inefficient to have to negotiate as we do today, at the cost of lame compromises that include exceptions, in order to obtain a facade of unanimity. And when it comes to important issues of primary law of the European Union (new treaty or amendment of an existing treaty), it should be possible to adopt a text if 4/5 of the Member States have approved it, whether in parliamentary form or by referendum.

3-b) A budget that meets the challenges.

This is an essential point: to carry out these policies, the EU must have an appropriate budget. The current budget is woefully inadequate (1 % of GDP, compared with 24 % for the federal budget of the United States) and is too dependent on contributions from the Member States, which are always called into question at the cost of distressing negotiations. The budget needs to be considerably increased (initially at least 5% to 10% of the EU's GDP) to ensure the credibility and visibility of the EU's actions.

- A budget for the euro zone. Today, States outside the eurozone have the same power to take decisions on budgetary matters as States belonging to the eurozone. It would be logical for there to be one budget for the eurozone and another for all the Member States. The eurozone budget should pursue several objectives:

• provide incentives for Member States to carry out structural reforms
• financing investment in public goods
• ensure a form of solidarity in the event of an asymmetric shock
• give priority to policies with a social dimension
• act as a counter-cyclical instrument in the event of a severe recession in the eurozone.

- Better-adapted programming. The multi-annual planning of budget expenditure - which currently covers a seven-year period - should also be brought more into line with the five-year mandate of the Commission and the European Parliament. Greater flexibility between categories of expenditure and between years of programming would also be desirable and would make it possible to deal with new priorities imposed by current events, such as the management of migratory flows and the protection of external borders.

- New resources. Alongside or in place of the current resources linked to VAT and the gross domestic product (GDP) of the Member States, this budget will necessarily need to be bolstered by own resources. These could, for example, come from a reduced percentage of all intra-Community VAT, a percentage of corporation tax, or the recovery of taxes from tax-exempt digital giants such as GAFAT.[7]This would make it possible to fight effectively against dumping practices or to favour trade with the most socially or environmentally virtuous countries), a European carbon tax to steer the economy towards less use of fossil fuels, a tax on financial transactions concerning all EU Member States in a spirit of solidarity, or even a tax on plastics.

-Financing transfers and transparency. We must also seize the opportunity offered by the Brexit to promote greater solidarity between richer and poorer countries, and put an end to the obsession with net balances giving rise to compensation. With this new EU budget, there will also be a duty to explain and communicate in order to improve the link with the European taxpayer, who must be able to find out about his or her contribution and monitor the use of these funds and the effectiveness of their use in complete transparency. Finally, in order to ensure that taxpayers are willing to pay, which is so necessary for democracy, we need to further improve the transparent control of the use of European funds and the quality of the results obtained, under the supervision of the European Court of Auditors.

At the same time, it might be a good idea to give the ECB additional powers by giving it responsibility for combating unemployment, as is the case with the US Federal Reserve, while at the same time deepening cooperation with the European Investment Bank, as in the case of the Juncker plans, which provide a significant leverage effect on Community budget funds.

In short, this new Community budget, finally equal to the challenges, would make it possible to support, extend and increase the resources for a revival of the European economy, while maintaining strict control and freeing ourselves from the dogma of budgetary austerity.

3-c) The new European governance: appropriate institutions

To apply these policies, the European Union needs institutions that are efficient, democratic and understandable to its citizens. A few simple rules can be laid down as a preamble:

When you're part of a club, you accept all the rules, not just those that favour you. A state cannot exempt itself from those it does not like, as is currently the case on a number of issues, the most blatant being the Euro and social policy.

It will be necessary to clarify the European institutional triangle, which has grown more complex through successive treaties, often as a result of haggling between Member States, and which today lacks the coherence needed to govern effectively and democratically. Since new common policies will have to be introduced, we will also have to move towards federalising the institutions, which is the only mode of governance capable of fostering the emergence of a genuine European political society.

This is also why we need to reduce intergovernmental management as much as possible and move towards greater federalism in vital areas (see chapter 4). Only a reform of the institutions will enable the efficiency thus achieved to go hand in hand with all the guarantees of a more democratic system.

We need to revisit the separation of powers, principally between the legislative and executive branches, with the judiciary currently regulated by the Court of Justice of the European Union. The legislature should be based on a classic bicameral system (a chamber of citizens and a chamber of states) with redefined roles and powers for each chamber:

- The European Parliament : It is the democratic pillar of the EU. The European Parliament, the citizens' chamber, should see its powers increased, but above all its composition and operation should be reorganised to be more representative of the people and less of national party structures.

It seems essential that voters should be able to vote for European parties and not, as at present, for purely national parties. Each party will have a European programme and its own vision of the future of Europe, which will enable citizens to make a clear decision on European political issues. This vote should take place symbolically at the same time in all the countries concerned.

The European Parliament should legitimately have a role of parliamentary initiative. The powers it will have to exercise include budgetary and fiscal power over the Union's resources, and control of the executive over its expenditure and the implementation of its actions. As at present, it will have the power of censure and the power of confidence. It will have the power to appoint the President of the Commission and each of the Commissioners.

The European Parliament should be made one of the two sources of the EU's legislative programme, which means reviewing the current monopoly held by the European Commission in this area. As part of its extended powers, the European Parliament should also be able to give an upstream opinion on mandates to negotiate international agreements, particularly trade agreements, which are currently given to the Commission alone.

- The European Council The Council should eventually become the second chamber, that of the States. It could also be organised into sectoral councils, as is currently the case with the Councils of Ministers. As the Senate, it will have to co-decide with the Parliament, which implies defining a system of mediation in the event of disagreement.

In this Senate, all the States could have the same number of representatives, as is the case in the American federal system. This is one of the conditions for more complete integration. Votes would be taken by simple majority to avoid paralysis of decisions following the right of veto. However, it must lose its exclusive role as the driving force behind European policy.

- The European Commission : It represents the executive power. It must act on the basis of a general legislative programme adopted by both chambers. It must be the product of political majorities and have the support of the legislative bodies to which it is fully accountable. In accordance with the practices of parliamentary democracies, the head of the executive will be the leader of the party or coalition with a majority in Parliament.

Other options see the President of the Commission elected by direct universal suffrage to further strengthen his legitimacy. He would then represent the majority choice of the people. In all cases, he and his government must implement the policy for which he was elected. He is accountable to Parliament for his policies.

As "head of government", the President of the Commission should be able to choose his own Commissioners, who would no longer be imposed by the Member States. He will be able to choose them for their competence, their political weight, their European commitment and their probity, while respecting gender equality and the balance between countries of origin. The College of Commissioners will have to be reduced to make it more effective and coherent: the current 28 (soon to be 27) Commissioners will be replaced by a smaller number of Vice-Presidents with greater powers, who will be responsible for "ministries" that will bring to power high-quality political staff from across the EU.

The aim is to transform the Commission into a more political, more democratic and more efficient institution, no longer dependent on the haggling at the top to which the 28 (27) Member States are accustomed. This will lead to a Europe that functions according to a simpler system, with better defined and balanced powers, as has proved its worth in most European democracies, and whose powers and responsibilities will be well known to all citizens.

4) - Community policies to be developed

4-a) New common policies

In order to restore public confidence, the EU must be able to pursue a number of policies in parallel to its sovereign policies, which have already become Community policies, the results of which can be attributed to it in complete transparency. European citizens must be able to clearly associate Europe with a concrete improvement in their living conditions.

This is the case in areas where a single State cannot reasonably hope to achieve satisfactory results. Only Community action can mobilise sufficiently powerful resources to be truly effective. To move towards ever closer union between Member States, we can draw up a list of areas of convergence where the Community level is already or would be the most relevant.

The priorities are to strengthen federal powers in the areas of economic, fiscal and budgetary policy, the environment and energy, social policy, defence and foreign policy, policies to coordinate police, intelligence and justice, and coordination and cooperation on asylum and immigration. A non-exhaustive and non-prioritised list is given below:

Social and environmental

• Stimulus policies and the protection of European social models
• Policy to combat global warming
• Energy security policy
• Protecting the environment
• Quality agricultural production policy

Defence and security

• The fight against terrorism
• Fighting international crime
• Common defence policy
• Intelligence policy and cyber protection
• Civil Disaster Response Fund
• Surveillance policy at the EU's external borders

Migration and cooperation

• Responses to migration crises
• Cooperation and development aid policy

Economic and commercial policy

• A policy of massive investment in new technologies
• Commercial negotiating power against China, the USA, etc.
• Counterweight to the power of the global digital mega-corporations (GAFAT)
• The fight against tax havens
• Fair intra-European tax policy
• Building resilience to financial crises

As far as justice is concerned, after the European arrest warrant, Europol should be strengthened, Eurojust set up and a European Public Prosecutor's Office headed by a European Public Prosecutor. The aim is to advance cooperation between Member States' judicial authorities in the fight against cross-border crime, including VAT fraud. In a second phase, it will be necessary to provide for the creation of European courts.

We therefore need to move towards politicising the European Union in order to provide the means for effective action whose positive effects can be measured by citizens.

4-b) A genuine economic policy

The laudable aim of organising free and undistorted competition internally[8]cannot take the place of a single principle in a Europe that wants to maintain its position and influence on the world stage. Vigilant monitoring of internal economic competition, which prevents major European companies from holding a monopoly position, must not result in their being deprived of any chance of competing with the global giants.

Conceiving of Europe differently means looking at the means to be implemented to encourage the development of European businesses in order to make them competitive in the globalised economy. This requires a strong impetus from the institutions in the various strategic areas: research and development, investment, support for the industrial sector, innovation policy, support for business incubators (e.g. start-ups), new trades and new production methods.

A significant increase in budgetary resources for incentives, direct funding and leverage effects would enable these objectives to be achieved in a federal spirit of solidarity.

A European economic strategy must respect the dual objective of success: economic and social. It is the search for a dynamic, high-performance economy that allows a fair distribution of remuneration between investors and employees, with the dual aim of retaining investors and protecting employees.

The Europe of the future must be a policy of consultation, coordination, control, ethics and solidarity in the face of the technologies of the future (digital, neuroscience, biology, transhumanism, artificial intelligence, etc.) that will have a direct impact on our lives and our future. There is no question of erecting illusory customs barriers, but Europe must demand that imported products be ethically produced (no slavery, no child labour, humane conditions of employment in terms of working hours, safety and social protection). If these conditions are not met, then we should be able to apply a taxation mechanism on entry to the EU or refuse entry if necessary. These conditions should be validated by independent bodies (World Trade Organisation, etc.).

Concerning developing countriesThe European economy should also be able to direct investment towards innovative projects. While the principle of a sufficient level of aid to these countries should not be called into question, the process needs to be controlled. And to do this :

- Review evaluation methods to avoid corruption and ensure that the real needs of the population are better taken into account

- Establish closer collaboration and partnership with the countries receiving aid, which are often in the best position to understand their needs because of their local knowledge.

- Updating aid in line with changing priorities (climate change, geostrategic interests, implementation of a genuine foreign policy and diplomacy, of which development aid could be one of the instruments, etc.).

Thus, while being open to the global economy, the EU must be able to exercise a degree of protectionism at its external borders and equip itself with the means for a genuine economic policy that guarantees its values and interests in global competition.

4-c) European defence

The need for a common defence was apparent from the outset of the European Union project. Blocked in 1954 by the refusal of the French Parliament, the idea of a European Community defence is now back on the agenda.

At a time of increasing threats, Europe is struggling to resolve its security issues. Since the end of the Cold War, Europeans have been steadily disarming, and Member States' efforts to arm themselves are very unevenly distributed. Europeans have become accustomed to the umbrella provided by NATO, which is funded to the tune of 75% by the United States. But today, the United States has other strategic interests, particularly in the Asia-Pacific region. As for the United Kingdom, its withdrawal risks significantly weakening the EU's military potential, even if bilateral agreements with the EU can take over. Europe is becoming increasingly isolated. A common defence would be an essential component for a European Union that wants to be more influential on the international stage. soft power is no longer enough.

This new situation has rekindled interest in finding pooled resources                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                and autonomous forces capable of ensuring the defence and security of the European Union. This concern for pooling also responds to public demand for greater efficiency in defence spending in Europe, at a time when the resources allocated to public spending are becoming ever smaller. Some have proposed the creation of a very large European defence fund. The idea has even been put forward of transferring almost all defence budgets, including their debt since they joined the eurozone, to a dedicated fund guaranteed by the Member States. Be that as it may, the answers to the financing questions are central to the feasibility of an integrated defence.

But the prerequisite for the development of a doctrine What is undeniably shared is the existence of a Europe that is more united politically, diplomatically, economically and fiscally, but also morally. The defence of Europe by Europeans and for Europeans seems to us to be a necessity, but there are still profound disagreements between Member States depending on their traditional position (neutral, Atlanticist or Europeanist). As with all issues where a vanguard of states should be able to proceed by enhanced cooperationEuropean defence should form part of the hard core. It is conceivable that France, with its experience and current military potential, could take on its share of leadership, closely supported by Germany and soon reinforced by other States sharing the same vision of pooling defence efforts steered by a centralised headquarters, which already exists in embryonic form in the EU, in Brussels. But it is also conceivable that Europe's first "hard core" could be more easily recruited by bringing together less populous states with a less sovereignist tradition, such as the Baltic States or the Benelux countries.

4-d) From enlargement to the reunification of Europe

The principle of enlargement has been part of the European project from the outset. Europe was built on the rejection of nationalism and the transcending of borders, its vocation being to bring the whole continent together around the core of the six founding countries. The reunification of Europe remains the objective of all those who sincerely wish to build an area of peace and prosperity shared by all Europeans.

The Franco-Dutch "no" vote in the 2005 referendum on the European Constitutional Treaty was already largely motivated by the ill-prepared arrival in 2004 of 8 new countries from Central and Eastern Europe. This enlargement enabled these countries to really catch up economically. But after the beginnings of democratic normalisation, some of them ended up drifting towards authoritarianism and ultra-nationalism, questioning public freedoms and adopting a purely utilitarian relationship with the Union. Enlargement has been an economic success, but is proving to be a political failure that is undermining the cohesion of the EU.

Is it now necessary to integrate all the countries of the Western Balkans who have requested it[9] ? The problematic enlargement of 2004 shows that, even if they end up meeting the Copenhagen criteria[10]The candidate countries of the Balkans are not ready, nor are the citizens of the Member States, when it comes to convincing them of the need to rebuild Europe. A transitional solution for these candidate countries could be their participation, with the help of the EU, in a Balkan common market that would first enable them to re-establish the necessary peaceful links, good neighbourliness and trust between themselves. It will not be easy to convince Europeans of the usefulness of such accessions as long as these links have not been established.

Similarly, it has become essential to reassure the citizens of Europe by definitively abandoning the accession process concerning the Turkey. This accession would be against the wishes of the people of Europe, and we must now have the clarity to recognise this and the courage to draw the consequences.

Europe urgently needs to deepen its integration first, avoiding any uncontrolled enlargement that could result in citizens rejecting the European project itself.

4-e) A European response to migratory crises

The influx of migrants and refugees due to the attractiveness of Europe, a rich and ageing continent, seen as an area of peace and prosperity with a long tradition of welcoming displaced populations, continues to represent a major factor of political destabilisation for the States of the European Union. This crisis has reawakened reflexes of nationalist withdrawal in Europe and encouraged the rise of populist and xenophobic forces that threaten the humanist values of solidarity that are the foundations of European integration. It is an illusion to think that Europe can protect itself with walls. Border wars, climate crises, poor governance, demographic imbalances and the lack of prospects in some of Europe's neighbouring regions will continue to attract people to Europe.

While we must safeguard our legitimate interests, we must also respect our obligations in terms of fundamental rights, in particular the right to asylum arising from international treaties relating to the victims of war, but also those due to displaced and threatened persons. In order to maintain the bond of solidarity that must prevail between Member States, it is imperative that we abandon the intergovernmental management of today's European Council in favour of an intergovernmental approach. politique communautaire d’accueil et d’intégration des migrants et réfugiés. Cette politique devra s’accompagner d’actions diplomatiques européennes de stabilisation et de contribution au rétablissement de la paix et de la sécurité dans les pays d’origine.

Concernant la gestion par les États de l’entrée des réfugiés et des migrants dans l’espace européen, il est devenu évident que le système Dublin 3 ne fonctionne plus. Il n’est pas logique de laisser l’enregistrement, l’accueil et les charges de logement et d’intégration aux seuls pays d’entrée que sont le plus souvent la Grèce et l’Italie.

Il faut donc prévoir un mécanisme européen qui s’occupe de l’enregistrement des migrants, capable de distinguer entre réfugiés et migrants économiques, qui prenne en charge leur accueil dans des conditions dignes et se charge de leur répartition équitable dans les pays de l’Union. L’abandon des systèmes nationaux et la création d’ un Système d’asile européen est prévu dans le Traité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne (TFUE).

Au delà de son rôle symbolique, la création d’une frontière extérieure communautaire entre l’Europe et pays limitrophes est également nécessaire, accompagnée des moyens de la contrôler (renforcement de l’agence  FRONTEX).

4-f) A language policy

La diversité des langues parlées en Europe est un fait incontournable.  Si elle peut être considérée par certains comme un obstacle à l’intégration européenne, cette diversité peut tout autant se révéler une chance pour l’Europe. Beaucoup des principales langues d’échange parlées dans le monde sont déjà des langues parlées en Europe. C’est un atout essentiel pour l’Europe dans son rapport au monde.

Tous les Européens n’ont pas vocation à parler un jour une seule et même langue, que ce soit une langue adoptée comme l’anglais, ou une langue artificielle comme l’espéranto. De nombreuses langues européennes continueront longtemps de coexister. Pour permettre le dialogue et la compréhension mutuelle entre Européens, la parole portée comme la parole reçue devra donc passer par des langues d’échange. C’est pourquoi il sera nécessaire que les jeunes générations, en plus de leur langue maternelle, maîtrisent au moins deux autres langues européennes dont l’anglais. Cela devrait faire l’objet d’une politique linguistique volontariste à l’échelle de l’Europe.

On pourrait conforter ce programme par une vaste politique d’échanges d’enseignants qui deviendraient autant d’ambassadeurs culturels à travers toute l’Europe. Au-delà de l’enseignement secondaire, il faudrait renforcer, là encore, le multilinguisme en favorisant et en finançant largement les séjours de tous les jeunes européens dans d’autres pays membres (un « Erasmus pour tous”…), en réservant des chaires universitaires à des professeurs d’autres pays, en multipliant les séminaires et colloques multilingues, en passant par la traduction de langue à langue plutôt que de recourir systématiquement à l’anglais, en soutenant les revues et ouvrages multilingues, en privilégiant partout la diffusion de films (documentaires, fictions, animations…) en version originale sous-titrée. En effet, toute langue étant le reflet d’une ou de plusieurs cultures, ces mesures permettraient de mieux se comprendre et d’unir davantage les États membres tout en maintenant la diversité de leurs cultures. Une inter-compréhension des citoyens à l’échelle de notre continent européen représenterait une grande avancée vers le partage d’un sentiment d’identité commune, et renforcerait les liens de solidarité entre tous les citoyens européens.

4-g) Une éducation à la citoyenneté européenne

La connaissance de notre  histoire européenne commune devrait faire partie d’un ensemble obligatoire de notions de base dispensées tout au long de leurs études à  tous les jeunes Européens. Un enseignement où il faudrait veiller à ce que la diversité soit présentée sans préjugés et sans arrière-pensées nationalistes ou confessionnelles.

Une pétition au Parlement européen a été déposée en 2017 avec pour titre : « Pétition en faveur de l’éducation à la citoyenneté des élèves de l’enseignement secondaire ». Son objectif est de favoriser le renforcement d’une citoyenneté supranationale fondée sur les droits et les devoirs partagés et non pas sur des sentiments identitaires excluants. Un programme permettant d’aider à «combattre les fanatismes et de favoriser le vivre ensemble, dans une société multiculturelle et diversifiée, comme l’est la société européenne» en se fondant sur plusieurs articles des traités fondateurs de l’Union européenne. De façon concrète, un élève du secondaire devrait acquérir une connaissance minimale des autres États membres et de ses concitoyens européens, une connaissance du fonctionnement des institutions de l’Union et de ses mécanismes de participation citoyenne, socle nécessaire pour un exercice sain de la démocratie.

Cette pétition destinée à être soumise au Conseil via la Commission européenne s’appuie sur une résolution du Parlement européen qui souligne que « connaître et comprendre l’histoire et les valeurs communes de l’UE et de ses États membres est une clé pour la compréhension mutuelle, la coexistence pacifique, la tolérance et la solidarité, de même que comprendre les principes fondamentaux de l’Union européenne ».

4-h) A community of values and individual freedoms

Il y a lieu de mettre en avant ce qui nous rassemble, c’est à dire les valeurs de la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne, et de l’Art. 2 du Traité sur l’Union européenne[11] comme la dignité de l’individu, l’égalité, la liberté, la solidarité et la tolérance, nécessaires pour dépasser les clivages culturels, politiques, religieux, linguistiques ou ethniques. Ce sont les valeurs d’humanisme de l’Europe qui pourraient le mieux constituer un ciment de l’Europe du futur.

5) – Conclusion : le rêve européen

L’idée qui porte le rêve d’une Europe autrement, c’est aussi celle qui consiste à considérer que les enjeux ne sont pas seulement économiques ou institutionnels mais avant tout humains. L’Europe doit être comprise comme une communauté humaine, dont la diversité est à la fois une richesse et un défi. La promesse de paix, de liberté, de prospérité doit profiter à tous grâce à un objectif commun de progrès social favorisé par le cadre européen. Pour cela, chaque citoyen doit pouvoir ressentir les bienfaits d’une Europe qui le protège en exerçant mieux sa souveraineté, et dont il se sent plus proche parce qu’elle aura su se rénover, démocratiser son fonctionnement et se tenir à l’écoute des citoyens.

L’Europe qui ferait rêver serait :

• une Europe garante de liberté : toutes les libertés publiques, la liberté de pensée garantie par la stricte neutralité des institutions par rapport aux dogmes religieux, la liberté d’expression, libertés qui sont aujourd’hui attaquées dans plusieurs États membres
• une Europe qui serait soucieuse de l’égalité des Êtres humains entre eux : égalité des droits entre les genres, les origines, entre les orientations sexuelles. Même si ces droits sont formellement garantis par la Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’UE, on sait que des progrès restent encore à faire dans beaucoup d’États membres
• une Europe plus solidaire et plus humaine, une Europe soucieuse du développement des pays avec lesquels elle a des relations de longue date et qui attendent de meilleures conditions de coopération
• une Europe plus efficace qu’aujourd’hui dans ses prises de décision tout en devenant plus démocratique, plus transparente et plus compréhensible
• une Europe où la recherche du bonheur, comme celle de la qualité de la vie, pourrait devenir un droit fondamental de tout citoyen européen.

L’Union européenne doit être capable de faire la démonstration qu’elle apporte une véritable valeur ajoutée. C’est ainsi qu’elle pourra faire reculer le désamour dont elle est en partie victime aujourd’hui. Cette Europe nouvelle qui pourrait être proposée aux citoyens européens devrait être une Union d’États-nations ouverte au monde, avec un projet intellectuel et politique de long terme si l’on ne veut pas que nos sociétés se ferment au monde contemporain; un projet consistant à reconstruire un modèle politique, économique et social proprement européen conciliant la liberté, la solidarité, les valeurs porteuses d’identité commune, la protection et le pouvoir d’influence internationale. L’Europe ne pourra tenir son rang dans la concurrence mondiale que si elle reste fidèle à son projet garantissant la paix et le progrès humain. Alors une telle Europe, refondée par rapport à celle que nous connaissons aujourd’hui, aurait une valeur d’exemple dont le monde pourrait s’inspirer.

BRUXELLES, le 25 mars 2018

[1]          La Charte des droits fondamentaux de l’Union européenne est un instrument juridique contraignant directement applicable alors que la Déclaration Universelle des Droits de l’Homme n’est (hélas!) qu’une résolution de l’ONU .

[2]          Cette question essentielle des Droits fondamentaux sera abordée dans un document consacré spécifiquement à ce sujet et qui fera l’objet d’une publication ultérieure.

[3]          Article 2 du Traité sur l’Union européenne : L’Union est fondée sur les valeurs de respect de la dignité humaine, de liberté, de démocratie, d’égalité, de l’État de droit, ainsi que de respect des droits de l’homme, y compris des droits des personnes appartenant à des minorités. Ces valeurs sont communes aux États membres dans une société caractérisée par le pluralisme, la non-discrimination, la tolérance, la justice, la solidarité et l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes.

[4]          La majorité qualifiée doit rassembler au moins 55% des États membres (soit un minimum de 16 États) et 65% de la population, ou 72% des États et 65% de la population quand le Conseil ne statue pas sur proposition de la Commission ou du haut représentant de l’Union pour les affaires étrangères et la politique de sécurité.

[5]          Art. 5 du TUE : La Communauté agit dans les limites des compétences qui lui sont conférées et des objectifs qui lui sont assignés par le présent Traité. Dans les domaines qui ne relèvent pas de sa compétence exclusive, la Communauté n’intervient, conformément au principe de subsidiarité, que si -et dans la mesure où- les objectifs de l’action envisagée ne peuvent pas être réalisés de manière suffisante par les États membres et peuvent donc, en raison des dimensions ou des effets de l’action envisagée, être mieux réalisés au niveau communautaire. L’action de la Communauté n’excède pas ce qui est nécessaire pour atteindre les objectifs du présent Traité.

[6]          Au moins 9 pays selon les traités européens.

[7]          GAFAT : Google, Apple, Facebook,  Amazon, Twitter

[8]          Articles 105 et 106 (ex 85 et 86) du Traité sur le fonctionnement de l’Union européenne (TFUE)

[9]          Les pays des Balkans occidentaux officiellement candidats sont le Monténégro, la Serbie, l’Ancienne République Yougoslave de Macédoine (ARYM ou FYROM) et l’Albanie. Les pays candidats potentiels ou ayant engagé une demande d’adhésion sont la Bosnie-Herzégovine et le Kosovo.

[10]         L’adhésion d’un pays à l’Union européenne est soumise à certains critères qui ont été définis lors du Conseil européen de Copenhague en 1993 :

1. La présence d’institutions stables garantissant la démocratie, l’état de droit, les droits de l’homme, le respect des minorités et leur protection;
2. Une économie de marché viable et la capacité à faire face aux forces du marché et à la pression concurrentielle à l’intérieur de l’UE;
3. L’aptitude à assumer les obligations découlant de l’adhésion, notamment la capacité à mettre en œuvre avec efficacité les règles, les normes et les politiques qui forment le corpus législatif de l’UE (l’acquis communautaire) et à souscrire aux objectifs de l’union politique, économique et monétaire.

[11]         L’article 2 dispose : «L’Union est fondée sur les valeurs de respect de la dignité humaine, de liberté, de démocratie, d’égalité, de l’État de droit, ainsi que de respect des droits de l’homme, y compris des droits des personnes appartenant à des minorités. Ces valeurs sont communes aux États membres dans une société caractérisée par le pluralisme, la non-discrimination, la tolérance, la justice, la solidarité et l’égalité entre les femmes et les hommes.»