Can teaching of European integration help Europe? Let me fi rst address another, bigger question: does Europe need help? Th ere is one issue here that I fi nd to be central.
Its paramount importance justifi es, I would hope, the slightly uni-dimensional nature of the arguments I shall now try to present.
Over the last seven years we have been diagnosing ourselves on countless occasions.
I am sure everyone in this room can quote from memory dozens of views on what is wrong with Europe. Personally, I liked quite much the sober, no-nonsense opinion which came two months ago from Saša Vondra, a former dissident and a well-known Czech politician. Here’s what he said:
“Th e future of Europe does not look rosy. Th e South is turning red, the North goes brown, the debate in France is focusing on the islamists, and the British consider leaving. Th e Russians keep pushing at the door, and many Czechs are actually welcoming this. As to the Americans, they just keep looking. At the same time, the agents of change on Europe’s political map – starting with Tsipras and Iglesias, and ending with Putin, Le Pen and the mullahs in European mosques – are authentic and come out to promote and strengthen their truth. Now compare them with those who defend the liberal democratic order – their defensive game is about as attractive, as the famous catenaccio in Italian football”.
I think Vondra is right. Formally, the roots of liberal democracy remain in place.
Emotionally, this model of societal organisation is in retreat. Th is is compounded by the crisis of trust, the evidence of which is visible throughout Europe, with yet another convincing demonstration off ered by last Sunday’s fi rst round of presidential elections in Poland. Voters are disenchanted with politics, losing faith in the capability of the leaders to grasp the developments around them, let alone to fi nd responses and to manage change.
* Vistula University, Polish Institute of Diplomacy, jan.truszczynski@hotmail.com
** Speech transcription.
22 Jan Truszczyński
Th is nagging at the roots of liberal democracy is very dangerous for the European construction. Basically, the equations here seem quite simple. Th ere will be much less Europe, or no Europe at all, if our societies should move towards less respect for human dignity, weaker rule of law, less tolerance, equality and solidarity, and disregard for the concerns and rights of the minorities from the ruling majorities.
Hence, if we want the European Union not to just survive – whatever the practical meaning of this – but to remain useful, even indispensable to our societies, we have to deploy bigger and better concerted eff orts in teaching and promoting the basic values on which the European democracies are built.
While we are now perhaps less of a magnet and role model for Europe’s neighbourhood and for countries farther afi eld, our power of attraction has not vanished. Many would agree with Heinrich August Winkler, who in his seminal “History of the West” convincingly shows how European ideas remain a key reference worldwide. However, Winkler also argues that in order to continue our relevance as standard-setters, we need to develop and further deepen our ideas on the relationship between the individual and the society, the individual and the state. Th is kind of thing cannot be grown in an ivory tower.
It can only emerge through patient work at the grassroots in all corners of Europe.
Th ose who deal with foresight and try to identify trends likely to shape Europe’s future long-term, do believe that one of our key challenges for the coming years is to restore trust in democracy. Th ere are no ready replies to the question how, but suggestions on where to look for them are quite plentiful. And so, many propose to implement models of participative democracy. Others plead for new forms of representation and direct consultation, including at the European level. A better regular use of new technologies is yet another obvious recipe.
So, let us not shy away from sharing with the young people of Europe the basic values that made our joint success possible. Let us consider how the teaching of these values can become a stronger key part of civic education of every young person, be it in the elementary school, be it at a summer camp, be it as part of community projects developed by civil society organisations. Let us be fi rm on values – they must remain our moral and political backbone – but let us at the same time stimulate creativity and innovation needed to modernise political structures and political processes in Europe. And it would be ideal if we were also able to add a specifi c European component to all this work – showing how our shared European machinery can be used to better deal with the challenges of the coming decades:
a meaningful employment and a meaningful life for young Europeans, accommodating the immigration, looking aft er our security, winning partners on other continents for eff ective multilateralism. And so on.
23 Can Teaching of European Integration Help Europe?
Are we equipped to do what needs to be done? I’m afraid we aren’t. Much too little is done on sharing and exchanging the best practice in civic education. Th e same goes for issues of European integration as a component of that education. It is fi ve years ago, during the Hungarian presidency of the Council, that the EU Ministers of Education last looked at civic questions in compulsory education. Th e Eurydice report on these issues, released in 2012, only confi rmed the deep diversity of EU Member State approaches and solutions. Nothing wrong with diversity, but Member States simply do not do enough, do not learn much from each other, do not recognise the importance and urgency of teaching, early on, the basic civic skills and instincts.
Now, looking back at my years in the European Commission, I must say that we, too, have not been doing enough. Instead of pushing the Member States to work together more in a more frequent rhythm, we have been hiding behind the safe excuse that the content of the curricula and the organisation of teaching remain an exclusive national competence. Part of the reason was, of course, that if Brussels goes into active mood it is very easy to accuse Brussels of poking its nose where it shouldn’t, of pursuing a hidden federalist agenda, and so on. Indeed, a proactive approach can at times turn out to be quite counterproductive. And yet, with the benefi t of a hindsight I say that we could and should have done more.
However, it is realistic to assume Brussels will prefer not to play the fi rst fi ddle on all this. And, under such a scenario, others must be more active. Who are those
‘others’? Well, in every Member State we have, for instance, a division of the European Movement; many of these slightly dormant, but should they not all be kick-started into action, with a new sense of purpose? Among other obvious actors are political foundations, human rights organisations, the civic fora for the training of young activists. And, last but not least, it can also be our transnational community of specialists in the fi eld of European integration.
Th e tools for our targeted action are already there. As you know, under the present Jean Monnet Actions we ‘aim at an increased interest in understanding the EU and in participating in the EU, leading to a more active citizenship’. And to get us all there, the Commission wants to support the organisation of dissemination activities ‘geared to the general public and adapted to it’. Th ese activities, events if you like, should be primarily done in co-operation with schools and the organised civil society. So, ladies and gentlemen, let me use this opportunity to appeal for the broadest possible use of Jean Monnet Actions in the promotion of the roots and principles of liberal democracy, on which the entire house of the European integration has been built.