Generation Europe

How Young Europeans Need to Step Up and Save Their Continent

Sandro Gozi

• Publisher: Policy Network
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781786607935
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: European Politics
• Index: Politics & International Relations

The decision of the British people to leave the EU was a political earthquake. A seemingly never-ending round of challenges – from the migration crisis, to continuing terror threats and the euro’s woes – has left the EU in a crisis of confidence. The consequent rise in nationalism and populism has too often seemed to leave the continent’s existing generation of leaders floundering. But there is hope. A new generation of European leaders is rising to political seniority. Behind them is a new generation of European voters, less beholden to the past. They are ‘Generation Europe’. Shaped in an age of smartphones, low-cost travel and cross-country initiatives like the Erasmus programme, they share a different perspective. In a passionately argued mix of personal story and policy prescriptions, one of the leading members of ‘Generation Europe’, Italy’s centre-left Europe minister, Sandro Gozi, takes us on a journey through the challenges his continent faces. Exploring causes and solutions, he reflects on his cohort’s commitment to building cross-border policies that will address common problems and start to give Europe brighter prospects.

Towards tomorrow’s Europe

The EU is a magnificent story of peace, liberty and progress. It was able to create unity where there was discord; it acted as a magnet for all those who were seeking a better future; and I am still convinced that it has all it needs to be the most advanced region in the world in the coming years.

However, looking at today’s reality, we see Europe affected by a number of crises that intersect with, and exacerbate, each other: the economic crises and unemployment, social malaise, political weakness, growing insecurity. In short, the Nobel peace prize won by the EU in 2012 risks being a lifetime achievement award.

The EU has gone through difficult periods in its history before, but the challenges we are facing are becoming increasingly insidious. Brexit is a wound that still hurts and, even when things get better, there will not be much to celebrate. We must also consider the fact that, in a founding member state like France, the National Front polled 34 per cent of the vote in the second round of the presidential elections. In recent years, while French and Dutch voters rejected the proposed European constitution, counties like Romania, Bulgaria and Croatia chose to join. However, at the same time, many existing members have been increasingly tempted by nationalism, closed-mindedness and populism.

Thinking European

In this book, I have addressed some of the more important questions facing Europe today and in the future. All of these are important, but not all are central to the ongoing public debate. There is much talk about migration and Greece. Many have looked at how to address the problem of growth or security, but nobody can say that there has been a mature discussion on the management of our borders, the study of demographic fluctuations or new ways to safeguard our rights in a digital era. Politics cannot be limited to only reacting to crises and the problems we face today. Politics must be able to build a future and, to do this, we must be aware of the factors that will determine it. The ability to react swiftly to problems is not sufficient and, to make things worse, in the last decade there have been times when Europe was unable to react in a timely and effective manner to the problems of today.

Returning to acting as Europe requires us first to believe we are European. After the last few arduous years full of rescue packages, cuts in social programmes, ineffective ideas and a lack of courage, we need a new angle in our European policies. I feel that we have suffered from a lack of real political leadership. Weakened European institutions were led by a generation that did not feel that Europe was something they themselves had achieved – unlike Kohl, Mitterrand, Delors, Prodi and Napolitano – but which, at the same time, was not raised taking advantage of the great opportunities that Europe could offer, Erasmus being at the top of that list. If you don’t believe me, listen to the words of the European commission president, Jean-Claude Juncker, who at the beginning of 2016 declared: “My generation is not a generation of giants but of weak successors … who forget quickly and who no longer have a direct knowledge of their own family”.

A Europe of austerity, of hesitation on the big issues, of tactics and deferments, is the Europe we have seen over the last few years. A Europe that is complex and technocratic. It reacted to the financial crises with regulations so complicated that even I – someone who has studied and worked in European policy since graduating high school – had to read and re-read those ‘two-packs’ and ‘six-packs’ (the excessively complex regulations adopted during the euro crisis) of which the Ecofin technocrats in Brussels and our national capitals are so proud. But when I think that those ‘packs’ were drawn up, and further complicated, with the active participation of members of the European parliament, I realise how much work we have ahead of us to revitalise the EU. The reality of the Europe that we are experiencing today is quite different from the one that we wanted to create through our treaties.

When we have weak institutions and a poverty of ideas, when everything is reduced to a power play, inevitably the ‘strongest’ will impose its choices and its will on the others. This was often the case with Germany, which sometimes thought it could face the world alone, if it was able to create an economic space around it, modelled on its image and within which it could safeguard and promote its own interests and national strategies. The reality is quite different. Even Germany is too small to confront these global challenges alone. We can change our policies in Europe if some countries – starting with France and Italy – return to playing the role that is expected of them on the European scene. And we Italians are determined to do just this.

So the time has now arrived to ask hard and clear questions: do we still have time to save the EU? My answer is yes. We will be successful only if we manage to escape this spiral of technocracy and populism that we have been caught in during the long years of austerity. We must have the courage to stand together to confront the transnational political challenges – from growth to security – that we face. Only by proposing a completely different model to that which the nationalists promote can we win this battle, a battle that is critical to our future. We have lived with ambiguity in Europe for many years. Faced with problems spreading like wildfire, the answer was always either nationalist or centred on singular measures that individual countries were forced to implement. Very often, politicians explained these as having been ‘forced on us by Brussels’ in order to hide their own national responsibility or weakness. In some cases, this was to hide the wishes of the ‘creditor states’ or the strong ones among them. In short, we did not want to face reality. We never really accepted the fact that the problems we were (and still are) facing are transnational in nature. When problems cross borders, they cannot be considered as national issues, or as belonging only to southern or northern Europe. When vessels arrived (or tragically sunk) overflowing with migrants, many northern and eastern European capitals considered the problem as one that belonged to Italy, Greece and Malta. Only when migrants began arriving in those countries on trains, on foot and in containers (in which some suffocated to death), did they suddenly realise that we needed to tackle this issue together. This is a short-sighted, cynical and sterile way to confront common problems. It is no surprise that it has been difficult to implement the commitments made in Brussels on border policy, the redistribution of asylum seekers or the repatriation of those who do not have a right to remain in Europe. If one sows the seeds of indifference and selfishness, if one bases everything on idea that creditors are the ones paying the bills and therefore have the right to dictate the rules, you cannot expect the reaction to invoking the solidarity clause will be one worthy of European values or our common interests. Perhaps some of our economic and finance ministers should reflect more on what took place in 2015 and, even if they won’t, we need to build a Europe that responds to our humanity, not just to our national budgets.

Thus from whichever angle one looks at this, the crisis in Europe is really the sum of a number of crises that were never tackled properly and that all lead to the same conclusion. In order to save Europe, we must radically change it. As things seem a little better right now, this is the right moment to do it. Europe needs more consensus on policies. That is the only way to change the current way of doing things.

The card to play

Who can succeed in this ambitious goal of changing the way Europe works? Certainly not those who continue to preach a policy of balanced budgets! Certainly not those who take advantage of every possible opportunity to further weaken European institutions in order to derive some national advantage. It is impossible to change policies without changing those who make them. This is true even at the European level. This is why I believe that the card to play is called ‘Erasmus’: the European generation that feels naturally both their European and national identity. This is the only generation that really has the chance to change Europe. Their work can be continued by tomorrow’s young Europeans, who are starting to take the reins of their own communities. Of course, even among our generation we find different ideas, positions and politics. I have often found myself in disagreement with Alexander Stubb, former prime minister and former economy minister of Finland. Nonetheless, we ‘speak the same language’. We both know – as do many others like us – that our political actions cannot completely ignore the European dimension. To my generation, European policy is no longer foreign policy; it takes on an almost domestic quality. Only some nostalgic diplomats in our foreign ministries pretend that is not the case.

In this light, what role does Italy have to play? After too many years when we left the European pitch, our country has rediscovered an important role. Thanks to the government’s reforms, Italy has recovered its credibility. From day one of taking office, Matteo Renzi refused to mince his words: “We are not introducing reforms because they are being imposed on us by Europe. We are doing so because we believe in our children.” This attitude has paid off. It represents the fundamental difference between the Renzi government and its predecessors, who were immobile and inert and so ended up giving in to demands made by Brussels (and, I should add, some European capitals) as though we suffered from some kind of inferiority complex. We removed this ‘external obstacle’. Italy’s European decisions are now based on a mature and equal relationship, one in which each partner has its own responsibilities to carry out and that recognises all of us need to commit to reforming Europe. Here lies, perhaps, the real break with past European policy. No one is questioning Italy’s European decisions, in terms of our underlying strategy, identity, values, and approach to global challenges. But Italians should no longer see Europe as an external obstacle, or use it as such. We should make decisions in view of our national interest and our vision of, and for, Europe. We should negotiate European policy with determination, in full and clear knowledge of the advantages and disadvantages that our countries will derive from them.

We must be more challenging negotiators, even difficult when needed, in order to obtain the best results possible for the Italy we love and the Europe we want. Our attitude should not be that of ‘Europe is asking us to do this’. This is the wrong approach, both for Italians, as it denotes a lack of confidence in our country, and for European institutions, as we are well aware that without the votes of our government and members of the European parliament, there is very little these institutions can impose upon us. Shedding this view is a vote of confidence in Italy’s abilities and is the right choice for Europe’s institutions, starting with the commission.

For this reason, as well as becoming more determined negotiators, we also need to be more effective in the implementation of the policies we have decided upon and the commitments we have made in Brussels.

I want to focus a little on this, as it is what I have been working on over the past three years. Thanks to both Renzi and Gentiloni, Italy has more credit with the EU. This is due to action taken by our governments in three fields: infringement procedures, state aid, and European budget fraud. In addition, we have also saved taxpayers around two billion euros, which will be used for our citizens, businesses and the state itself. Thus, we have gained political power while also having a positive impact on our budget. I want to give you some figures: when Renzi took office in February 2014, Italy was subject to 120 infringement procedures. By October 2017, this had fallen to 64. We are no longer the black sheep, and our credibility has steadily increased. Thanks to a new approach that allows a faster dialogue with the commission, the number of procedures opened by the commission for the recovery of unlawful state aid decreased from 22 in 2014 to eight in 2017. Lastly, while there were 280 fraud and malpractice cases in 2014, there were only 158 in 2017: a better record than either France or Germany.

Things are much simpler than some media stories would suggest. Italy now has a new generation in government, one that, after many wasted years, has implemented, or is implementing, the reforms required to make the country competitive again. It is natural that some mistakes will be made along the way. As I have already suggested, politics is similar to a penalty kick. If you don’t shoot, you can’t score. And we need to add one more important element. These reforms are not only required to make Italy competitive again, they are also the way we present ourselves in Europe. It is now clear to everyone that, without Italy, there can be no Europe, and that Italy wants to change Europe.

Without Italy and France, the Greek negotiations would have turned out very differently, and, I fear, that the outcome would not have pleased Alexis Tsipras. A ‘Grexit’ in July 2015 would have been the beginning of the end of Europe. Without Italy and our presidency of the EU, nobody today would be talking about investment, and I am willing to bet that the Juncker plan would not exist. Without pressure from Italy, the European commission would never have made the issue of migration a priority and produced a co-ordinated approach.

In conclusion, the generation that began changing Italy is fighting to change Europe. It is based on a very specific idea. If I may use a musical metaphor, the Berlin Philharmonic is no longer enough to govern the EU. Not only is it not enough, but it is not right that it only plays from one score. What we need now is a European concert, where every part of the orchestra holds the final score dear. Ode to Joy is beautiful, but there are other composers other than Beethoven; there is Verdi, Puccini, Bizet. And, more than joy, Europe needs an ode to politics and to good sense – which seems to be lacking in some of our negotiations.

Metaphors aside, it has never been clearer that the only way to revitalise Europe is to change it. Otherwise, the risk of it ending up on a path to suicide is very real. We need to act as soon as possible. This current European legislature must be a catalyst for change, with deeds matching words.

The economic crises that we have been through has not only weakened European institutions (something that is serious in and of itself); the economic crises have, above all, distanced citizens from Europe. How to we regain this lost ground and bring re-engage citizens? I am not just thinking about those who have joined the ranks of the Eurosceptics. I am think of the ever-growing number of euro-frustrated citizens and, even worse, all those who becoming more and more euro-indifferent. We need to respond with new common economic policies that encourage growth and create new jobs. We need European policies that make a difference to the lives of our citizens – spreading mobility programmes, improving policies like the youth guarantee, launching new projects like a European volunteering service, taking full advantage of all the European funds available to us for the development of innovative urban regeneration policies – to name just a few examples. Italy is an important actor in this process. Now we have the duty to create political initiatives that include all our priorities – from a Europe of growth, jobs and young people, to a Europe of security, culture and the rule of law.

The challenge to change Europe is enormous. We feel this is the biggest opportunity we have ever had to bring about change. We should be honest, however. If we are unable to use this difficult moment to launch a new European policy, and not just a national one, we will be doomed to failure, and those that wish to destroy Europe with hatred and fear will prevail. They will win and, in doing so, they will deny a future to all of us. Other powers will reign while Europeans are reduced to spectators of the political games of the new century. This is why we need to think back to the successful schemes of the 20^th century and rebuild them, but, above all, we must do our best to overcome the challenges of government. If we do not accept our responsibilities, if we are not ready to take risks, roll up our sleeves and get to work on revitalising Europe, the best case scenario is that we find ourselves back in opposition and, in the worst case, nobody will be interested in our ideas.

Out of all the political forces, the left has the most to lose. That the historical distinction between left and right has transformed does not scare me much. In some respects, I accept that it has softened or assumed a different meaning. Left and right, are both boxes that need to filling with values, choices and policies, otherwise they will be resigned to the history books.

The problem is a different one: that a new division is overlaying itself onto the historical distinction between right and left – pro-Europeans versus Eurosceptics. It is a divide that is evident in all European countries. Political forces are increasingly aggressive, starting with those at the extreme edges that portray themselves as anti-European, anti-euro, or simply anti-anything, and push for a return to nationalism, to the extreme right or the extreme left. They often mix ingredients from the two extremes and, buoyed by cases of corruption or bad politics in the mainstream, find the yeast they need to rise. Just think of the Five Star Movement in Italy.

This results in the fact that, more and more often, the political forces of a country find themselves pushed to the centre. Pro-European political forces are forced to defend themselves from attacks by Eurosceptics, with the result that they end up having to govern together in coalition. This happened in Germany and Italy, and there was a possibility of it occurring in Portugal after the last election, averted by António Costa’s victory. It is the left, though, that has the most to lose from this forced cohabitation, as it is unable to offer a clear pro-European message and risks having to go along with conservatives, betraying its own fundamental principles. This is political suicide...