Is instability the new normal in EU member states?

 By David Meier

From: Presidenza della Repubblica Italiana

1 June 2018 was a historic day as a government in Italy was sworn in while another one in Spain was ousted. Only two days later, on 3 June 2018, parliamentary elections in Slovenia resulted in a complex constellation as the party winning the most votes seems to be isolated among potential coalition partners. All three events were just the climax of a series of national elections resulting in complicated political situations without a clear perspective, since the formation of a stable government. The European Union (EU) and the European youth take center stage concerning the underlying reasons for this development and its repercussions.

On June 1, the political landscape of the EU changed dramatically as the Italian parties Lega Nord (Northern League) and Movimento cinque stelle (Five Star Movement) formed a coalition government; while in Spain the Spanish Socialist opposition leader Sanchez won a no- confidence vote against the incumbent conservative prime minister Rajoy.

The inauguration as Italian prime minister of the non-affiliated law professor and lawyer Giuseppe Conte, who is close to the Movimento cinque stelle, marked the end of an emotional rollercoaster that had unfolded after the Italian parliamentary elections. The election result was a blow to the governing Partito Democratico (Socialists), and a triumph for the Movimento cinque stelle being the single party with the most votes (about a third) and the Lega Nord that surprisingly topped the conservative and far right electoral alliance of three right-wing parties. This alliance was the most successful of all electoral alliances.

Both coalition parties are considered populist parties but their programmes strongly differ. The Lega Nord is known as a eurosceptic and xenophobic party that originally advocated for the secession of northern Italy from the rest of Italy, in order to create a new state called Padania with Milano as its capital instead of Rome which is anathema to them. By contrast, Movimento cinque stelle focuses on ecology, direct democracy, and an anti graft as well as anti nepotism stance. However, both parties do also have some points in common, e.g. both reject the euro as Italy`s currency and fiscal discipline and austerity, imposed by the EU, that are attached to it. Therefore, many fear that it will be a eurosceptic government.

The coalition talks took three months, a period unprecedented in Italy`s history. Both parties argued about which parties would be part of the new government and who would lead it. In the end they decided that only Lega Nord and Movimento cinque stelle will participate in the coalition without the right wing allies of the Lega Nord. Instead of chosing one of the two party leaders Luigi Di Maio (Movimento cinque stelle) and Matteo Salvini (Lega Nord) as Prime Minister, they chose Conte.

In Spain, Mariano Rajoy, was reelected as Spanish prime minister in October 2016. However, his conservative Partido Popular did not dispose of a majority in Parliament and he did not succeed to find partners willing to form a coalition with him. As similar situations had occured in two election held very shortly before (December 2015 and June 2016), Rajoy was elected as head of a minority government with the support of the Socialists.

After a verdict of a Spanish court against former high ranking Partido Popular politicians for corruption charges and the judges expressed disbelieve of Rajoy`s claim that the top of the national Partido Popular was not involved in the scandal or did not know about it, Sanchez initiated a no-confidence vote against Rajoy. He won it by forming a short time alliance with the left wing party Podemos (We can) along with some regional and even separatist parties.

In Slovenia,

The Dublin system: the(un)solved refugee crisis in Europe

Author: Elvita Mertins 

Image by Peter Schrank

The refugee crisis in Europe, caused by the emergence of the conflicts from North Africa and the Middle East, has been one of the most important issues and centered attention of European headlines in 2015. However, today, it seems that attention shifted to other issues and we have simply forgotten about it. 

Does it mean that Europe has finally managed to solve the refugee crisis? What steps have been taken to solve the refugee crisis? 

If we look at the European Union statistics on the number of asylum applications, a total number of first-time applicants went down from 1.2 million in 2016 to 650 thousand in 2017. In fact, first-time asylum applications in some member states, for instance Belgium and Sweden, have dropped significantly. However, more detailed analysis of this migration flow suggests a different kind of scenario. While total asylum seekers arrivals in the EU has decreased, more migrants between 2016 and 2017 attempted to cross the sea from Turkey to Greece, or from Libya to Italy. Also, there was a significant increase in boat migration from Morocco to Spain. The Mediterranean crossing remained deadly, with 3,139 people dead or missing in 2017, while thousands of asylum seekers are stuck in Italy’s and Greece’s refugee camps. All this blurs the illusion that the problems of the last several years have vanished or disappeared. EU officials have been working on one issue in particular – reformation of the Common European Asylum System, or so-called ‘the Dublin system’, which the EU has been attempting to fix since its beginning. The system consists of regulations, which has been evolved over the time replacing one another, and they are considered to be the cornerstone of the whole system (Dublin Convention, 1990; Dublin regulation II, 2003; Dublin regulation III, 2013). 

The Achilles‘ heel of the Dublin system and the most controversial debated issue is and has always been the lack of solidarity and the fair sharing of responsibility between the member states. In other words, there is a principle that the responsible member state will be the state through which the asylum seeker first entered the EU. And that is where the problem lies. The vast majority of illegal immigrants or asylum seekers enter Europe through countries like Greece, Malta, Italy and Spain. These countries are economically too weak to deal with the extensive number of immigrants on their own. Almost from the beginning of the Dublin system, southern European countries complained that they could not cope with a large refugee flows. For example, back in 2013, when the Dublin III Regulation was adopted, all the countries of the southern periphery of the Union supported a proposal which would allow illegal immigrants to apply for asylum in the country in which they have been apprehended, instead of in the country in which they had entered the European Union. However, this proposal was not approved and included in the amendment of the Dublin III Regulation. Since all three previous versions of Dublin regulation proved incapable of organizing burdensharing, in May 2016, the EU Commission has published a proposal for Dublin IV regulation. The Dublin IV introduces a mandatory asylum seekers relocation from countries receiving disproportionate numbers to other member states. At the moment, the proposal of the Dublin IV regulation is ‘at a reading stage’ and the regulation needs to be approved by both the European Parliament and the Council to take effect. Ever since the Commission brought the new proposal for the Dublin IV regulation, tensions between EU member states occurred. Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland did not agree with the EU established refugee quota, while the United Kingdom not only refused the quota system proposed by the EU, but also decided to leave the EU. The new proposal of Dublin IV regulation clearly challenges the solidarity between the member states, and with rampant populism and xenophobia all over Europe, it is doubtful that all states will share responsibility of refugee problem this time. A lack of solidarity between the member states may be another stimulus towards weakening the community as a whole. The EU’s inability to find the solution of the refugee problem have contributed to the debate concerning the fundamental principles - such as solidarity, integrity and cohesion - on which the European Union is premised. The question even arises of whether the EU is capable to provide efficient solutions to this kind of issue, pointing to the EU’s stability and coherence altogether. Thus, not to lose faith of its own citizens and its credibility among other international and regional organizations, the EU leaders must find proper measures to solve the refugee problem.

Sources

European Parliament, Legislative train schedule towards a new policy on migration; 

European Parliament, Reform of the Dublin system, http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2016/586639/EPRS_BRI%282016%2958 6639_EN.pdf ; 

European Commission, Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament and the Council towards a reform of the Common European Asylum System, https://ec.europa.eu/home-affairs/sites/homeaffairs/files/what-we-do/policies/european-agendamigration/proposalimplementationpackage/docs/20160406/towards_a_reform_of_the_common_european_asylum_system_and_en hancing_legal_avenues_to_europe_-_20160406_en.pdf ; Eurostat, Asylum applications (non-EU) in the EU-28 Member States, 2006–2017, http://ec.europa.eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/index.php?title=Asylum_statistics ; 

Human Rights Watch, European Union events of 2016. World Report, https://www.hrw.org/world-report/2017/country-chapters/european-union; 

Human Rights Watch, Europe’s migration crisis, https://www.hrw.org/tag/europes-migrationcrisis ; Centre for European Reform, Europe’s forgotten refugee crisis, http://www.cer.eu/sites/default/files/bulletin_114_cmm_article3_0.pdf; 

Kamil Matuszczyk, Migration crisis in 2017 – challenges for EU solidarity, https://www.opendemocracy.net/kamil-matuszczyk/migration-crisis-in-2017-challenges-for-eusolidarity.

Co-building an Erasmus+ made up European Union.

From 28th november to 1st dicember Europe HOpes have had the pleasure to support the direction of the project I.T.Y.I., International Training for Youth Integration, settled in Catania and funded wihin the Erasmus+ project.
Indeed, when we have co-written down this project it was astonishing thinking about the fact that many people, mostly unknown, would have travelled around Europe to a unique destination to meet each other, discuss, building theirselves, finding new friends and so many other things we couldn't imagine yet.

Looking for Digital Activists and Freelancers

Europe HOpes is looking for Young freelancers and digital activists, 18-30 years old, interested to cooperate for our campaigns, blog and other social media activities. For more information write to: beready4eu@gmail.com

Different, Dreamers, the Young Europeans.

Personally, since I came back Italy after one year spent in Bruxelles, I didn't imagine I could taken the European Union to my city of origin.

This extraodinary event has happened during these days, thanks to the willing of our friends Associazione Ente Unione, IFALL, ZISPB, PTP Roman to which we gave our support to realize the project "M.E.D.E.U.Y.M.: Making Empowerment Drawing an European Youth Model", funded by the Agenzia Nazionale Giovani under the Erasmus Plus program.

Indeed this experience has been the mirror of the highest level debates at the European institutions with all the annexes advantages and risks.

Microfinance in the EU: an instrument to fight the economic crisis

Author: Matteo Placidini

 

 

On 10^th November 2015, the Employment committee of the European Parliament adopted with a large consensus a report on the implementation of the European Progress Microfinance facility. Commenting the decision, the report author Sven Schulze, a German member of the European People’s Party, said: “The instrument works as a whole, but unfortunately sufficient funding is not always guaranteed. The European Commission must therefore find a solution quickly in order to make Progress Microfinance even better in the future." The instrument is working effectively but it needs some improvements to reach higher results. As the Employment committee added, the grant of money should be combined with other supporting actions, such as the assistance to create effective business plans and with bookeeping.

The programme is funded by the EU and the European Investment Bank and has the objective to increase the availability of loans - below € 25.000 - to start or develop small business. The mechanism is based on giving a total guarantee of € 200 millions to banks and financial institutions so as to obtain more loans and better conditions for borrowers.