Political anticipation training seminar
Organised with the support of the Robert Bosch Foundation
In collaboration with the Czech Ministry of Foreign Affairs and with the French Embassy in Prague
Theme I : « Democratization : relaunching a European political project / The growing weight of public opinions / The Euro and its consequences on the future of Europe»
The EU is increasingly moving towards a major identity and political crisis. All along the 90s, in a process which can be dated from 1991 with the Maastricht Treaty (triggered itself by the Fall of the Iron Curtain in 1989), a new phenomenon affected the EU: a steadily growing drift of its public opinions, away from the EU institutions and work process. A first major blow to the institutions inherited from the 50s came with the collective resignation of the European Commission. A second visible one was created by the failure of the Nice Summit. All those institutional troubles have taken place in midst of serious crisis affecting citizens’ daily life like the ‘mad-cow’ disease crisis and the growing concern regarding the introduction of the Euro. The Euro seems indeed to be playing a major role far beyond pure economic or financial issues, as it may, for the first time ever in the EU construction, put the public opinions at the core of the EU ‘engine’, creating a de facto power-sharing situation where the EU institutions and the governments will only be one among other players; and not anymore THE players. All sorts of consequences may be generated by such a drastic evolution affecting both internal and external EU policies.
Theme II : « The EU in the world : place and role of an enlarged Europe at a global scale and in a regional context (towards a status of privileged neighbourhood) / Consequences for the EU of the American attacks »
The recent events of September 11th have underlined the need for both new standarts in terms of security, and drastic evolutions on the world scene in order to prevent terrorism and its roots to become stronger in the future. This situation, though not new in itself, is now put on top of the agenda of world leaders, and of course of EU leaders. More generally, the EU, currently a diplomatic and military dwarf, but already for a decade an economic, technology and trade giant understands suddenly that it cannot avoid any longer to develop these new aspects of its integration. The EU is therefore giving a new look at both the world scene and its regional scene (the neighbourhood). Maybe for the first time, it starts looking at them through the eyes of an ‘entity’ and not anymore of a ‘process’. This introduces new factors, including more static and pure ‘powerplay’ elements which will affect the relations of the EU with its external partners. The neighbourhood, being a very sensitive area and one where the EU can seriously try to flex the new muscles it is currently trying to acquire, will most certainly be affected fist by such changes.
Theme III : « The moving context of the question of enlargement : political, institutional and economic parameters – three probable scenarii »
The enlargement issue is more and more obviously stuck into a triple constraint dilemma:
1. public opinions in the EU are becoming an increasingly strong player in the EU powergame … and they do not see enlargement as a short term priority, especially till the Euro is not fully ‘ingested’ and concrete solutions are at least on the table concerning a larger EU ‘management’
2. the EU leaders, and in particular the Commission, have made promises in terms of calendar that seem extremely difficult to meet even following their own conditions; and they all are now stuck into a classical political dilemma issue – ‘voters will not buy it’. This explains that today only the Commission keeps saying that the enlargement will be made on schedule. And even inside the Commission’s college, opinions are not unanimous.
3. the CEEC leaders have themselves also made promises which appear to be very difficult to keep: externally, towards the EU, in terms of compliance with the ‘acquis communautaire’ ; internally towards their own public opinion they ‘sold’ a capacity to join fast … while a more precise understanding of what the EU is, and of the constraints attached to accession are making the EU less and less popular among citizens in candidate countries.
At least with the new ‘Big Bang’ initiative of the Commission, the enlargement is not anymore jeopardized by the absurd (because never true in past enlargements) concept that it was economically driven and judged upon.
Three scenarii can now be seriously envisaged:
1. Scenario 1: The Bureaucratic Vision : Big Bang for all … integrating a disintegrating EU : enlargement, is implemented as a ‘big bang’, in the aftermath of the Euro introduction in the EU, without any solid EU reforms being in place. The ‘jeu de dupes’ has gone till its very end.
2. Scenario 2: The Pragmatic Process : Big Bang for the EU and Big Leap Forward for the EuroLand … integrating a ‘soft EU’ while the core integration process moves on into the building of Euroland (including fasten political integration and new institutions). All faces are saved … but enlargement is partially emptied from its substance.
3. Scenario 3: The Political Vision : Setting up a date for a Big Bang compatible with a renewed and strengthened EU – Giving time to time to prepare a new continent. The EU aknowledges its shortcomings (first of all its public opinion reluctance; and its incapacity to have implemented institutional reforms in due time) and the irrealistic timing of the scenario planned during the 90s while candidate countries leaders assess the numerous ‘missing parts’ on their side. A credible deadline (2006/2008) is set with common work to reach this goal.
9.00 – 9.30 : Welcome of participants
MORNING : Detailed presentation of the work conducted by Europe 2020: major tendencies of the evolution of the EU in the next two decades
9.30 – 10.00 – Opening Session
. Welcome speech by Mrs Marie Chatardova, Director of EU Communication Strategy Department, Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Prague.
. Welcome speech by Mrs Marie-Hélène Caillol, Vice-President of Europe 2020
. Presentation of panelists and participants (round table)
10.00 – 10.30: Introduction to the Anticipation Method, by Mr Franck Biancheri, Director of Study and Strategy, and Inventor of the Method, Europe 2020
10.30 – 11.15: Theme I: ” Democratization : relaunching a European political project / The growing weight of public opinions / The Euro and its consequences on the future of Europe”
Presentation of Europe 2020 analyses b yMr Franck Biancheri, Director of Study and Strategy, Europe 2020
Questions – Answers
11.15 – 12.00: Theme II: ” The moving context of the question of enlargement : political, institutional and economic parameters / The EU neighbour-relations : towards a status of “privileged neighbour”
Presentation of Europe 2020 analyses by Mr Ralf Teschner, President of Europe 2020
Questions – Answers
12.00 – 12.45: Theme III: ” The EU in the world : place and role of an enlarged Europe at a global scale / Consequences for the EU of the American attacks “
Presentation of Europe 2020 analyses by Mr Adrian Taylor, Member of Europe2020’s Scientific Committee
Questions – Answers
AFTERNOON: Presentation of the analyses and trends of evolution of the host country in the next two decades in the Europe 2020 perspective
15.00 – 16.30: Theme I: “Democratisation : Re-mobilizing the Czech public opinion”
Presentation of Czech stakes, by Mr Jan Herzmann, General Director, Sofres Factum
Questions / Debates
Theme II: “Enlargement : a moving institutional, political and social context”
Presentation of Czech stakes, by Mr Ivo Slosarcik, Department of West European Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University
Questions / Debates
17.00 – 18.30: Theme III: “Evolution of the Czech foreign relations once integrated to the EU”
Presentation of Czech stakes, by Mrs Jana Hybaskova, Adviser of State Negociator for European Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Questions / Debates
18.30 – 19.00: Closing Session
Jan Herzmann, General Director, Sofres Factum
Ivo Slosarcik, Dpt of W European Studies, Faculty of Social Sciences, Charles University
Jana Hybaskova, Adviser of State Negociator for European Affairs, Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Ministry of Transport and Communication
National Office of Statistics
Ministry of Justice
Ministry of ’Agriculture
Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports
Office of Public Information Systems
Privacy Protection Office