On Sunday we mark the 12th anniversary of Malta’s accession to the European Union. Thankfully, we are no longer divided on this issue as we were before we joined in 2004. This does not mean that all among us are comfortable with being part of the EU, but as public opinion surveys confirm time after time, the Maltese are among the most enthusiastic supporters of the EU at a time when the Union does not appear to be so popular as it was a decade or two ago.
Last Sunday, in the first round of the presidential election in Austria, Norbert Hofer of the Freedom Party emerged as the clear winner with 36 per cent of the vote. The candidates from the governing Social Democrats and their coalition partners, the People’s Party, came in fourth and fifth each with 11 per cent of the vote, thereby failing to make it into the May 22 run-off.
Hofer will face Alexander van der Bellen, a candidate backed by the Greens who garnered 20 per cent of the popular vote.
Retweeting an article by the Austrian daily Der Standard, former Swedish Prime Minister Carl Bildt described Hofer as intending to steer Austria in a sharp anti-EU path. He already indicated, for example, that he would refuse to sign the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement between the EU and the US even if it was to be approved by the Austrian government, which is currently a ‘grand coalition government’ formed by the left-wing Social Democratic Party (SPÖ) and the right wing Austrian People’s Party (ÖVP), in office since December 2013.
Increase in popular support for eurosceptic parties in quite a few of the 28 member states is a worrying phenomenon. Very recently, Dutch voters rejected the trade deal between the EU and Ukraine. Only 32.2 per cent of eligible voters cast their ballot with 61.1 per cent voting against.
Last October, the conservative and eurosceptic Law and Justice Party was elected to govern Poland. Far right and eurosceptic parties have also fared well in local and regional elections in other EU countries with significant gains for the Alternative für Deutschland (AfD) in regional elections held in a number of German states last month for example.
AfD was set up in 2013 by a group of economists and journalists whose platform includes the abolition of the euro, campaigning against the government’s refugee policy, calling for the reintroduction of border checks in the Schengen area and a referendum on TTIP.
The shakeup of the political system is not confined to Europe as can be seen in the primary elections to select the two main candidates who will be contesting the US presidential election on November 8. The two phenomena called Donald Trump and Bernie Sanders have successfully appealed to popular sentiment that seems to be rejecting the establishment which is perceived as having failed.
Has Europe failed? A high proportion of voters in the UK are still undecided on whether to vote for the UK to remain in the EU or leave, making it very difficult to predict the outcome of the June 23 referendum. Although the British have never been enthusiastic about the European project, they have, so far, managed to balance out their pragmatic approach towards EU membership with support for what the EU represents.
The lack of a common migration policy renders the EU irrelevant in an area where strong united leadership is badly needed
Brexit would not only negatively impact the UK itself, as was so clearly emphasised by US President Barak Obama during his recent visit to the country, but also result in a serious crisis for the EU itself that, some commentators predict, could lead to the disintegration of the EU itself. A vote to leave could strengthen eurosceptics in other countries.
Last November, European Commission President Jean Claude Juncker spoke of the need to revise the EU framework in order to allow member states to share policies at different speeds.
“One day we should rethink the European architecture with a group of countries that will do things, all things, together and others who will position themselves in an orbit different from the core,” he said.
Should the British electorate vote for the UK to remain in the EU, the deal trashed out in February between the 28 member states will come into play. The decision by EU leaders recognises that current treaties and processes “make possible different paths of integration for different member states, allowing those that want to deepen integration to move ahead, while respecting the rights of those which do not want to take such a course”. It was specifically recognised that the UK in the EU “is not committed to further political integration into the European Union”.
Holding a referendum in the UK means that at least the citizens there are being brought into the debate and will have the final say. In many other member states, such a debate is more or less absent meaning that far right candidates are filling the void by using the EU as a pretext to attack mainstream parties that have traditionally been supportive of the European project.
Unfortunately, the result is a strong weakening of the credibility of the EU and its institutions which, more often than not, take the blame for actions taken at national level which have almost nothing to do with the EU.
The apparent inability of the EU to act on the European level on a number of issues has not helped. The obvious issue to mention is that of migration. The lack of a common migration policy renders the EU irrelevant in an area where strong united leadership is badly needed.
I was recently present for a panel discussion during which one of the speakers, Angeliki Dimitriadi, who heads the Hellenic Foundation for European and Foreign Policy (ELIAMEP), described the crisis as a management crisis for Europe.
During the same discussion, Croatian President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarovic said that the long-term solutions required to solve the root causes that are resulting in the massive influx of migrants into Europe include an assertive European common foreign and security policy and a strong development aid policy.
The irony of the situation is that many of the issues that are currently placing the future of the EU in jeopardy require a common European response. The EU is not the problem but the solution. Yet it is not perceived as such and, in my opinion, for the wrong reasons.
Criticism is often levelled at how the EU operates – the complicated bureaucracy and gravy train. How can people gain confidence in the EU when the European Parliament travels en bloc to Strasbourg once a month to hold its plenary session there at a cost of roughly €114 million a year when it has all the facilities to do so in Brussels where it is based?
How credible are the institutions when, for example, the council recently went ahead and appointed as members of the European Court of Auditors candidates who had been rejected by the EP and who did not have the decency and integrity demonstrated by Toni Abela who withdrew his nomination in similar circumstances?
However, those of us who believe in the European project must not allow the debate to be hijacked by politicians such as Hofer, Marine Le Pen or Geert Wilders. We need to be constructive in our criticism and continue to push forward a vision for Europe as well as for a union that makes sense and works. As Malta enters its 13th year as a member of the EU and in the run up towards the country’s presidency of the EU Council during the first six months of 2017, we have an important role to contribute in the debate to revitalise and re-launch our common European project.