Rediscover European values

MEP Rui Tavares’ recent report on the situation of human rights in Hungary as well as the manner in which it was welcomed by the Hungarian government have once again raised the question of the viability of the European project in the wake of the fall of the Iron Curtain. Hungary and the recent changes that have taken place there do not correspond with Brussels’ expectations.

The same can be said of Romania and Bulgaria, of Slovakia for its treatment of the Roma question, of France with regard to the same problem, and of Great Britain for its approach to the rights of Romanian and Bulgarian workers... And that is only the beginning.

The point here is not to list all of the irregularities and imperfections of the EU, but to observe the extent to which an entity that appeared to be the dream of so many European leaders is regularly marked by governmental neuroses in EU member states, as it is in Brussels.

The founding texts [of the EU] are increasingly confronted by realities that are incompatible with the philosophy of a united Europe. The process for the drafting of law on the level of the community is too slow and too generalised to address a reality which rapidly generates new contexts and living conditions, while the bid to ensure the implementation of vast tracts of EU legislation is stressful and out of sync with the internal politics of member states.

It is a lack of correspondence that also highlights Brussels’ inability to transmit the values of the grand European project. Regular polls conducted in different member states have underlined the (very) low visibility of EU values, and the limited impact of communication strategies adopted by the European parliament and Council. Compared to EU’s long standing members, the states which joined the EU between 2004 and 2007 speak a different language when they refer to democracy, markets, human rights and transparency — a testament to the continued existence of "barricades" that have enabled the remaining perpetrators of communist barbarism to seek shelter from the onslaught of an imperfect western world.

A foreign alphabet

What seemed to be, and, for many, what “was” the compact perfection of closed societies in the East, was suddenly replaced with a new inexplicable world, a foreign alphabet, which has had to be learned and relearned by heart. It was a change that involved a huge effort, comparable with the drive to bring the East German GDR up to the “level” of the West German FRG after the fall of the Berlin Wall. After a decade of colossal spending, the results of this transformation were hardly encouraging. Today the “new democracies” of eastern Europe often prompt a similar sense of disappointment.

Moreover Brussels does not appear to have fully understood how raison d’état works differently in these democracies. Today, they are required not only to establish and maintain a state that can effectively be reflected by the mirror of Brussels, but also to recognise themselves in this reflected image. The 17th and 18th Century model of raison d’état, as studied by Michel Foucault, sought to limit "excessive government," and, towards the end of the 18th Century, adopted political economy as its main tool. As a result, philosophies of state became focused on the idea of prosperity: a concept that had no currency in post-1945 eastern Europe.

This major oversight, which was exploited with diabolical efficiency under socialism-communism, paved the way for a governance that undermined the the instinct for individual affirmation, the spirit of competition and the notion of responsibility for one’s actions.

Discrepancy between old and new

Community policies must therefore address not only the notorious discrepancy between old and new member states, but also with the consequences of the exclusive pursuit of short term gains, which today are overwhelming. The value of work, investment in training, the regulation of the labour market to take into account new economic polarisation as and when it emerges require a faster response.

And when there finally is a response, as there has been in the case of agriculture, fisheries or the creative industries, the drive to translate it into a legislative package engenders discrepancies and social strife throughout the EU.

Europe remains a Europe of governments that is not sufficiently a Europe of peoples. It is time to rediscover European values, and the communication of these values should be a priority for the EU. Left in the hands of governments and specialised institutions, such communication will always suffer from a lack of creativity that will further contribute to the distance that separates us from Europe.

Only a creative governmental vision can restore progress towards a Europe that is united by its focus on the personal development of member state citizens. At the same time, the realisation of simple goals (employment, housing and an acceptable standard of living) is the only means to achieve more complex objectives. When state governments succeed in convincing everyone and anyone that their homes are worth just as much as anybody else’s home anywhere else in the world, then, and only then, will this challenge be correctly appreciated by everyone.