The Guest Blog

Although the European elections will only take place in more than a year’s time, in May 2014, the subject already deserves attention now. Today’s exercise aims to present a possible but undesirable scenario.

The financial crises we’ve lived with for the last 5 years have an impact on our European construction too. It appears that the pressure the crisis presents does not lead to deeper integration, but to isolation of countries. Polls clearly show that support for the EU from its citizens is declining. But important to note is that they do not criticize the idea of ??the European Union –they criticize the European system which has been created in recent years.

In Italy, the Left retained a majority in the Senate after the election. However, the results show the obvious uncertainty of the Italian citizens in choosing their leader. The phenomenon is not different in other cases – Europeans generally show reluctance to politicians and how to manage austerity measures, pushed by a long period of crisis.

Greece was “struck” in recent years, and the anti-European feeling was accentuated. And it was not just the European structure that was criticized, but also – as a first –there was a strong message against certain influential national leaders in Europe, such as the German Chancellor.

The situation in which the Cypriot population is living these days is like “Russian roulette”. Cypriot retirees,who deposited their savings at the Cypriot banks, now see their earnings disappear in a difficult to understand ‘banking black hole’.

Unemployment reached alarming proportions. Spain, Italy, Ireland and Portugal cannot find an antidote to offer the basics to their citizens – opportunities to work and have a normal life. Integrating young people seems hopeless as they are shocked by the current situation.

There are countries lucky to have managed the crisis better. For example, at the moment in Germany there aren’t problems with public support for the European project, but this can change in a heartbeat.

Simplifying a bit, the picture of EU 2013 looks pretty distorted. Governments and politicians in power, sail through an endless nebula with too few solutions. Opposition parties in member states try to propose solutions, but the credibility of the political message decreases every day.

Over the last couple of years we have seen new leaders, new moves, new proposals and that’s not bad. The problem is that most of them build their public discourse on radicalization of the anti-system message, including anti-EU connotations. What is even worse is that proposals with those ideals get credit nationally. However, the tangible result is that these parties only manage to clash with the political system without any concrete action that helps their constituency.

How can European citizens understand all that surrounds them? What does one of the 500 million Europeans think? Who put can they trust to provide a pragmatic solution?

If we continue the current trend, the anti-system parties will benefit enormously from the European elections next year. In a disaster scenario there could be up to 25% of the European Parliament dominated by MEPs who are against the EU after the elections next year, who want to return to national matrices, with no chance of maintaining the European system.

There is still time to change the outcome of the European elections. It’s time for new politicians to come forward. It’s time for national parties to discuss the European project transnationally. A European project needs transparency, practical political sense and ambition of leaders to advance the potential.

We should not have double messages. What is said in the European Parliament, please reflect the same story at home on national television. We do not need phrases like “Well, Brussels decided”, when you are an MEP or a European Commissioner.

There are issues that are politically dangerous, nevertheless they should be discussed. The stakes are huge – it’s practically a bet on whether or not to continue the European project. We need to show that the EU is the structure that solves citizens’ problems – it’s the structure built by those who truly believe in improving the quality of life of EU citizens.

Dan LUCA / Brussels


Author :


  1. On another blog I posted a reply with similar content, but due to the relevance of the topic I wish to point out the main thorny FACTS about the EU, which we did not hear in any news from the MSM and which will answer the central questions this article raises.

    Why is the desire towards the disintegration of the EU? In short: because democracy by definition requires small, democratically manageable, people-friendly, geographically and ethnically homogeneous units, with accountability and transparency of the governing bodies; it requires democratically agreed upon constitution with democratic content, a democratically legitimate government and leadership structure.
    However, the EU lacks ALL of these.

    The very structure of the EU federal government is a carbon copy of that of the ex-Soviet Union. The ultimate decision-maker is the UNELECTED EU Commission which has arbitrarily placed itself onto the very top of the EU hierarchy and as such decides on the main economical and political issues affecting 500 million. The EU parliament only passes decision on minor issues. In addition, in any democracy it is unimaginable that whenever members of the parliament express rejection to the anti-democratic tendencies of the EU then they are FIRED – as was the case several years ago with those members who protested against the deceitful ways of the EU and demanded referendum for the reintroduced EU constitution (Lisbon Treaty).

    And here are some of the thorny details of above:

    Several years ago the leaders of EU secretly agreed to resurrect the formerly rejected EU constitution in a deceitful way (aka Lisbon Treaty) behind the back of the citizens of Europe. Since then the EU leadership has given up their democratic legitimacy.

    To make matters worse, the politicians of each member state – while being blackmailed by the EU leaders – signed this disguised EU constitution without the knowledge and consent of their citizens, this way forcing millions to give up their national sovereignty, including giving up the right of their elected national government to decide on fiscal and monetary policies and to manage the current crisis.

    One of the many incidents in this line is the case of Iceland – which several years ago refused Barosso’s invitation to join the EU, then on the very next day the international financial oligarchy hit back and Iceland suffered a major bank crisis, the effects of which even today it feels. (From the whole story only the bank crisis has gained media coverage – the causes haven’t. )

    Then the very same Sarkozy who had agreed with Merkel to resurrect the rejected EU constitution later forced the former Irish PM Ahern (who brought Ireland into the status of the Celtic Tiger and was against the EU federalisation) to step down by a false accusation of embezzlement, then in his place an EU friendly PM stepped in, who then signed for Ireland to join the coercive EU federalisation.

    I am wondering if the author has ever read the Lisbon Treaty – I have. It is a constitution constructed to protect the federal EU government against its people – which by itself the the proof of the EU’s dictatorial aims. (This is why said EU constitution was rejected by referenda in several member states: Netherlands, France, Luxemburg and Ireland)
    In addition the constitution is promoting the abolishment of the welfare state, healthcare and pension in all member states, while it promotes unregulated globalisation and privatisation – that is the very process that triggered the global crisis, which altogether results in plain death of many millions.

    Moreover, Barosso made the EU’s imperial ambitions painfully clear when on behalf of the unelected EU commission, on the top of the ruling hierarchy, openly abolished the democracy of EU after he ignored the Irish referendum rejecting the treaty and declared the federalisation process to be continued, clearly against the expressed will of the people

    I could continue the list but I think the point has been made. If this isn’t enough reason to thoroughly reject the EU-federalisation, and develop europhobia, then what is?

    What we are experiencing is a silent takeover of Europe – and the whole of the Western world – by this financial oligarchy, which signifies the ultimate reason behind the fact that both the US and Europe are frozen in the crisis. The financial hierarchy backed by the EU is not affected by this crisis, they only accumulate more wealth by it. Those who are engineering the Western world into this direction are NOT motivated to reverse the process – on the contrary – hence the crisis is only deepening.

    This concern is valid and more and more signs show that if we don’t act fast to reclaim our democracy, by the time we wake up will be too late. I devoted my blog to express these concerns, to uncover the fundamental reasons of the crisis in the Western world and to discuss the possible ways out of it.

    Specifically in the recent posts, for example:

    “The only way out of the crisis: a realisable short-term alternative to the dreaded M-word”

    “The end of capitalism: new feudalism via a global-scale foreclosure?”

  2. It’s not a question of Money. The crux is the EU itself. Leaders and the designers in Brussel went too far in their boundless political aspirations for an Organisation which is not a state and never, never can as an Organisation be the Supervisor of independant states. Efforts will be in vain, if the EU continues tot collect more and more sovereign rights, without any structural reforms of itself. This goes far beyond the borders of Democracy in this organization. It requires total new structures.
    By not doing so, and apparently this is happening, the EU will steer entire Europe in an even more downward spiral of trustworthiness, social- and macro-economic future.
    It’s not only about Banking unions, Bankingsupervision, 3% clauses, a EMU, etc.
    It’s about People who are governed by States which has to follow Directives from an organization that is structured on anachronistical structures.

  3. Dan – I can’t help but disagree with your presentation of eurosceptic MEPs as “a disaster scenario”.

    I’m in the Brussels bubble just like you, and I’m very much a Europhile, but I think that the more Brussels deneis the existence of dissenting voices, the more trouble it gets itself into.

    Having 25% (or more) MEPs in the EP with a eurosceptic tendency might not be our own political preference, but if it is a fair reflection of the voice of European citizens then it should be the Parliament we want to see.

    The Commission is there to defend ‘the Community interest’. The Parliament and Council should be the democratic representation, directly and indirectly respectively, of their citizens’ wishes.

    I would never dream personally of voting for a Eurosceptic party, but at the same time I wouldn’t say that nobody should do so, or that they don’t have a place at the table. And I certainly wouldn’t say that an elected EP that reflects the sentiments of its people is a “disaster scenario”.

  4. As one of those that wholeheartedly supported the earlier incarnations of the EU, it saddens me to see how this trading bloc has been hijacked and twisted into the dangerous self serving monster we know today. Built on the back of a well concealed devious elite there is little alternative other than the complete destruction of this institution.
    Europe, as one of the leading continents for art, invention and culture became precisely that through the natural diversity of it’s people, and not their similarities! Trying to tie them into a one size fits all union and expecting them to think and act in the same way is, and always was, destined for catastrophic failure.
    As far as I am concerned, I hope the 2014 elections see a much higher rate of Euro- sceptic MEP’s. Then we have a chance of bringing this slow agonizing European death march to a swifter end!

  5. “The Commission is there to defend ‘the Community interest’. The Parliament and Council should be the democratic representation, directly and indirectly respectively, of their citizens’ wishes.”

    I think this is exactly how we used to think, but it remains what it is: wishful thinking.

    The Commission is to defend the interest of the international financial-economical elite. It is an UNELECTED body, effective for an indefinite duration, on the very top of the EU’s hierarchy, yet it is the ultimate decision making body effectively ruling the citizens of the EU member states in any relevant political and economical matters. The Parliament and Council have a say only in irrelevant areas. This is UNHEARD of in any democracy. Just because the EU leaders call the EU a democratic organisation, it doesn’t mean that it is democratic indeed.

    Their powers are fixed as per the Lisbon Treaty -which is ALREADY the effective federal constitution disguised as a regular EU treaty. That Constitution is being implemented – bit by bit – without the consent of the peoples of Europe for federalisation. That Constitution is an anti-democratic one, because it is devised to protect the leadership against the citizens, which is another proof of the EU’s dictatorial nature.

    As Crystal Ball put it eloquently, this organisation is hijacked. It was meant to be an umbrella for multi-lateral trade agreements, not for crafting the United States of Europa, especially not without the consent of its citizens. It is another sneaky step that Barrosso finally confessed the federalisation plan last September, since the process is in place for several years now, as it is enforced despite the will of the people, therefore it is not difficult to predict that it will continue even if it would be voted against, which poses the BIGGEST problem of all. This is by definition dictatorship, and a dictatorship normally doesn’t go away when we merely kindly ask them to leave.

    But even if this new “USE” would be a democratic federal union (which it isn’t), one would still have all the reasons to reject it. Besides the ruling elite no one can benefit from federalisation. The formation of such a large heterogeneous “country” would be another milestone in the global capitalism-based dictatorship, plus, indeed it would abolish the cultural colourfulness of Europe, in addition it would mean a labour market spread over all its members states, the continuing demand to learn all the EU languages (so much about “efficiency”) it would imply torn apart nomad families wandering all over EU to find a new job, right after the recession pushes them out of the former one.

    On a side note, as we speak, it’s already happening for a long time. Just one example of the many, a friend of mine is currently in turmoil, because the company her son works for had to transfer him to work in another office, in a distant member state within the EU.

  6. The European Elections are only a part of further European integration. Ever realized that Dutch Contitutional Law forms probably a bigger obstacle for Europen Integration than whatever rveferendum?

Comments are closed.