Visa liberalization in a hurry

European Commissioner for Home Affairs, Cecilia Malmström, and Turkey´s Foreign Affairs Minister, Ahmet Davutoglu, launched the EU-Turkey Visa liberalisation dialogue in Ankara 13 December 2013.

The aim of the EU-Turkey visa liberalisation dialogue is to make progress towards the elimination of the visa obligation currently imposed on the Turkish citizens travelling to the Schengen area for a short term visit. The dialogue consists of a screening of the Turkish legislation and administrative practices, which will be carried out by the Commission on the basis of a document, elaborated by the latter, called "Roadmap towards the visa-free regime with Turkey".

According to the European Commissions Press Release 13 December 2013 this document 

lists the requirements which should be fulfilled by Turkey to allow the Commission to present a proposal based on solid grounds to the Council and the Parliament to amend the EC Regulation 539/2001, listing the third countries whose nationals must be in possession of visas when crossing the external borders and those whose nationals are exempt from that requirement, so as to move Turkey from its negative to the positive list.

Among the requirements included in the Roadmap many refer, inter alia, to the need to implement in a full and effective manner the readmission agreement, to manage the borders and the visa policy in such a manner as to effectively prevent irregular migration, to have secure travel documents, to establish migration and asylum systems in line with international standards, to have functioning structures for combating organised crime with focus on migrants' smuggling and trafficking in human beings, to have in place and implement adequate forms of police and judicial cooperation with the EU Member States and the international community, and to respect the fundamental rights of the citizens and the foreigners with a specific attention to persons belonging to minorities and vulnerable categories.

Once the Commission considers that all the requirements listed in the Roadmap are fulfilled and has presented its proposal to amend the EC Regulation 539/2001, this proposal will be voted by qualified majority by the Council of the European Union and the European Parliament. 

The Press Release also said that the Roadmap does not set a specific timetable by when the dialogue should be completed or this proposal should be presented, thus 

the speed of the process towards visa liberalisation will depend essentially on the progress which will be made by Turkey in addressing the requirements set out in the Roadmap. 

However, speeding up the process and specifying a timetable was incorporated in EU-Turkey migrant deal of 18 March 2016

with a view to lifting the visa requirements for Turkish citizens at the latest by the end of June 2016, provided that all benchmarks have been met.

Not surprising, 4 May 2016 the European Commission  opened way for decision by June on visa-free travel for citizens of Turkey. First Vice-President Frans Timmermans said

Turkey has made impressive progress, particularly in recent weeks, on meeting the benchmarks of its visa liberalisation roadmap. There is still work to be done as a matter of urgency but if Turkey sustains the progress made, they can meet the remaining benchmarks. This is why we are putting a proposal on the table which opens the way for the European Parliament and the Member States to decide to lift visa requirements, once the benchmarks have been met

Because EU is under great pressure due to migration crisis, there is reason to believe that the European Parliament and the Member States will decide to lift the the visa requirements.

EU collapse ahead ?

The former Italian PM and European commissioner Mario Monti fears "corrupt" national politics, structural holes in the Brussels machine and external crises may trigger the collapse of the European Union. And the return of the bloody past that preceded it.  He said to Francesco Guerra in an interview for Politico.eu  that the problems EU now faces

"leads me and others for the first time to consider whether we are not heading towards disintegration". "The EU has never been hit by such a high number of different crises of this gravity,” he continued, referring to the migration problem, the rise of terrorism, and the bloc’s persistent economic malaise. "What I am concerned about is that, although the EU has developed itself historically through a process of crisis, response to the crisis, and advancement, this time around it may well not happen."...

Monti’s skepticism over the wisdom of Jean Monnet — who famously said that “Europe will be forged in crises” — stems from his low opinion of national governments and the body that represents them in the Brussels’ pantheon: the European Council. “Nobody could seriously pretend that the full-time EU institutions [the Commission, Parliament, European Central Bank, and European Court of Justice] are the ones responsible for the lack of adequate and timely responses to the present constellation of crises,” he said. “That is the Council, in particular in its highest formation, i.e., the European Council.” ...

“I think the turning point was the financial crisis, which coincided with the French presidency of 2008,” he said. “The problem of the day was rescuing the banks and even rescuing states to some extent. That was to be done with money from member states, not from the tiny EU budget. Therefore, it was inevitable that the power largely shifted from the Commission to the Council and, within it, to the top table, the European Council.”...

In his view, the Council’s rise to prominence has been coupled with the steady drift of national political discourses towards nationalism, populism and a focus on the short-term. “The degree of mistrust and sheer prejudices between North and South and between East and West has never been so high and so unashamedly voiced,” he said...

“Unfortunately, this has started to pay off, at least in the short-term, for politicians who cultivate the gut feelings of their citizens. Even heads of government and ministers belonging to traditionally pro-European parties now indulge in this habit. They hit out at the EU and also to other member states in bilateral acrimony.”...

 “If it is an irreversible process, we are going to lose our democracies in our member states,” he said. “Because what is at stake now … is the first wave of an earthquake deriving, in my view, from deeper stresses in the underground of politics. But at the same time, there is also a declining trust in national authorities, a declining participation in votes, a growing impatience with the lack of performance by national governments.”...

The question is what he and other members of the traditional European elite can do about this. There is a long pause and then: “Not much.”"...

But Monti is still trying. He chairs EU`s high level group on own resources, which aims to reform and perhaps expand the EU budget. This is necessary because

“over the past eight, 10 months for the first time in many years, we have seen the member states … saying, for the refugee crisis, the eurozone crisis, the fight against terrorism, ‘hey Brussels, this has to be a new function of yours.’ We want to work on the simple logic that if there are new functions, maybe there should also be new resources.”

Hopefully the high level group will make useful analyzes. But to survive and prosper the EU can´t continue to turn a deaf ear to a large and growing number of critics who say "hey Brussels, we are unhappy an fed up with your centralized big government politics, we want a better balance between Union and national level".

Growing resistance especially against Brussels handling of refugee and eurozone crises is expressed through elections both in the Member countries and at Union level. This is how democracy works. Or should work. Because Brussels decisonmakers does not seem to understand that their Majority decisions should take into account the criticism in a better way. If this does not happen the EU's legitimacy will be undermined and nationalism increase. The Union appears to be at a crossroads now. The road followed so far continues straight ahead towards the The United States of Europe or one European country - probably dominated by Germany. The other road leads to a more balanced union, where the differences between Member states and between political opinions are better taken into account.

Mr Montis fear of the Unions collapse and the return of its bloody past is wellfounded. But he seems unwilling or unable to suggest necessary measures to avoid it.

Differences and linking between cross-border cooperation and European integration

2015 marked the 25 th anniversary of INTERREG, the European Union instrument to promote cross-border, transnational and interregional cooperation. The European Commissions way to pay tribute was to publish a study:Territorial cooperation in Europe - A historical perspective . The study analyzes territorial cooperation and provides an overview of cross-border cooperation along the national borders of EU member states.

The preface of the study gives an interesting reflection of differences and linking between cross-border cooperation and European integration.

The first difference is that the pioneers of cross-border cooperation did not, at least initially, have the same goal as the pioneers of European integration, who for their part aimed from the beginning to establish an "ever closer union among the peoples of Europe", in terms of the Schuman declaration of 1950. The first cross-border regions, embarked upon about ten years later, had an approach that was both simpler and more pragmatic, in that they were loooking for practical solutions to border problems that arose when a national frontier was crossed in everyday life.

It should also be emphasaised that the stakeholders concerned have not been the same and they have not been involved at the same level: the process of European integration developed between the Member States of the EEC and, from 1992, of the EU. It is a process of interstate cooperation with a supranational dimension, in which the principal actors are the Member States. Cross-border cooperation, for its part, places public stakeholders acting at the local or regional level ... or private stakeholders ... at the centre of the action.

Secondly, European integration and cross-border cooperation do not use the same tools.

The distinguishing feature of the functionalist Community method, developed by the founding fathers of Europe, especially Jean Monnet, is its supranational dimension. ... The instruments employed in cross-border cooperation have to comply with national legal frameworks.There is no single or obvious method of cross-border cooperation ... Cross-border engineering enables ingenious and appropriate solutions to be put forward for each particular case, where classic national ways of doing things prove to be ineffective.

Third, European integration and cross-border cooperation have evolved in fundamentally different ways.

The process of European integration has a unique history, which has taken place in stages, involves a vast area comprising many countries ... this harmonized Europe may be encountered in numerous aspects of daily life ... In this respect, cross-border cooperation does not to appear unique. It seems to be marked by three characteristics: singularity, diversity and complexity.

A link between European integration and the development of cross-border cooperation began to be established in the mid-1980s,

particularly with the project of creating a single market within the EEC. It was in order to facilitate thye implementation of this project that, following the reform of regional policy in 1988, the European Commission assigned a role to cross-border regions in the task of European integration. In 1990, the Commission introduced the Community initiative programme known as Interreg to support cross-border cooperation, which from that time on gained in strength ... The growing importance of cross-border cooperation in the process of European integration led to the introduction in 2007 of a new objective in European regional policy: territorial cooperation. This comprises both cross-border .., transnational .. and interregional cooperation.

The link between European integration and cross-border cooperation intensified with the geopolitical upheavel Europe experienced after 1989. A new pan-European dimension (east-west) opened up in cross-border cooperation, giving it a role to play in the reunification of the European continent.

Brexit - like escaping from jail ?

Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, used the metaphor "escaping from jail" to describe a Brexit last Sunday. That was a funny, but not an incontestable characterization. Remainers will not agree that the EU is a prison. They say the country´s membership is important for the economy and strengthens its security and influence.

To convince undecided voters Johnson and the Leavers should do four things:

1. Coordinate the Leave campaignes so that voters do not get confused and uncertain.

2. Give factual answers to the Remainers arguments.

3. Explain in simple terms why UK should leave the Union.

4. Explain in simple terms how the UK should leave the Union. This point includes both the process of leaving and the kind of relationship UK and the EU will have afterwards.

Hollande pushes for new Israel-Palestinian talks ahead of French presidential election

A few days ago France announced its intentions to push for new negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel. Their plan is to kick-start the talks with a conference this summer. Almost everyone will welcome such an effort, even if the prospects for success seems rather dark.

A strange feature of the French initiative, however, is that it contains an ultimatum: if the negotiations efforts fails, France will recognize a Palestinan state. Not surprisingly has the Palestinian Authority President Mahmood Abbas expressed satisfaction with the initiative, while Israel moved quickly to reject the French ultimatum.

So far about 135 of the United Nations 193 member countries have recognized Palestine as an independent state. Many western countries have said they will wait for a peace deal, and only 8 EU countries have given their recognition. So why don´t France just recognize Palestine instead of  connecting the recognition to a negotiation initiative which can not succeed ?

A possible answer is that the French Socialist Party is looking forward to the presidential election next year, scheduled to be held in April and May. This will be a contest where National Front is predicted to be a strong challenger. To gain support from the Muslim population, which accounts for about 8 % of the country's population, will be great advantage for the Socialist Party. Recognition of a Palestine state might be helpful. But France wants to ride two horses at the same time - one for a re-start of negotiations and one for a recognition of Palestine. The problem is that the horses seems to be running in opposite directions.

Court gives blow to EU foreign policy

The General Court  of the European Union has decided to annul the freezing of the assets of five Ukrainians, including two former Prime Ministers.

The General Court writes in a press release that the Council, in response to the crisis in Ukraine - which began at the end of 2013 - decided, on 5 March 2014, to freeze the assets and economic resources of the persons identified as responsible for the misappropriation of Ukrainian State funds. Two former Prime Ministers together with three other Ukrainians were, for the period from 6 March 2014 to 5 March 2015, included on the list of persons subject to the freezing of assets on the ground that they were the subject of preliminary investigations in Ukraine relating to offences connected to misappropriation of Ukrainian State funds and their illegal transfer outside Ukraine. The five Ukrainians brought proceedings before the General Court with a view to having their inclusion on the list annulled.

In today´s judgments the General Court upholds the actions brought by the five Ukrainians and annul the freezing of assets imposed on them for the period from 6 March 2014 to 5 March 2015.

The Court finds that the Council identified the five Ukrainians as being responsible for misappropriation of funds solely on the basis of a letter from the Prosecutor General of Ukraine stating that investigations of those persons had made it possible to establish that large amounts of public funds had been misappropriated and unlawfully transferred out of Ukraine. The Court takes the view that that letter provides no deatils concerning the matters specifically alleged against the five Ukrainians of the nature of their responsiblity. In short the Court concludes that a person cannot be treated as being responsible for misappropriation of funds solely on the ground that he is the subject of a preliminary investigation in a third country, without the Council being aware of the matters alleged against that person in that investigation.

EU reforms - in which direction ?

The European integration process, which started after the second world war, has aimed at preventing dangerous nationalism and instead make Europe stronger as a whole. Mixed results make it difficult to say if the cooperation has been a success or a failure. With "an ever closer union" as a wizard, the EU has met every problem with a call for "more Europe". That is also the situation to day. The Union wants more power to handle the Euro and migration crises.

But there is now a growing resistance in the member states to cede more sovereignty to Brussels. Nationalism has got a strong come back. The EU is now at an important crossroad. Reforms are needed, but should they consist of more or less Europe ? The answer to this will come through political struggle. Two perspectives on the integration reform has recently been presented.

Guy Verhofstadt, leader for the Alliance of Liberal and Democrats for Europe group in the European Praliament, proposes to create a system of two types of European membership: The first type is "full membership" that goes all the way. It makes you part of the "ever closer union" with one currency, one economic policy, one army and one foreign policy. Those European countries who think full membership is not their cup of tea, can apply for a second type: "associate membership". This gives access to to the internal market, you will only have to apply those rules and regulations that are necessary to create a level playing field in internal trade. Obviously, that also means you would no longer have full representation and the corresponding voting rights at EU level.

Former Greek Finance Minister Yanis Varoufakis has said he will launch a "third alternative" to "renationalisation" and the "antidemocratic European institutions" on 9 February 2016 in Berlin. The initiative, under the name of "Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiE25) wants to bring interests together in order to "democratize Europe and stop the creeping fragmentation".

The two perspectives are interesting, but it seems unclear if they can provide adequate responses to the challenges.