Celebrate Europe, or else...

Walking out of the Opéra Metro station, it was impossible to miss the order of the day: "Fête l'Europe" (Celebrate Europe). In honour of Europe Day, the blue flag of the Union is flying above the facade of the Opéra and small versions of the 12-starred emblem flutter on all municipal buses. The flag is on every state building and the Eiffel Tower was floodlit in Euro-blue before dawn, along with the Arc de Triomphe and other monuments. The lights come back at dusk.

For the past 20 years, France has observed Europe Day, the anniversary of the 1950 speech by Robert Schuman, the French Foreign Minister, that paved the way to the embryo European Community. This year, in its zeal to make amends for the voters' rejection of the EU Constitution last May, the state is orchestrating an orgy of Euro-festivities. It really is called fêteleurope.fr. And for an old Moscow resident, it feels like the Soviet Union on May Day or the October Revolution anniversary when the state whipped up patriotic enthusiasm and every bus flew the flag.

For the past week, radio listeners have been bludgeoned with commercials in which jolly Italians, Spaniards, Germans and other Europeans telephone their French "friends" to voice their excitement over Europe day (The "British" friend has an American accent, showing that the Anglo-Saxons are all the same, I suppose) 

For today's climax, the 24 EU embassies in Paris are open to the public and the band of the Garde Républicaine is serenading visitors at the Foreign Ministry on the Quai d'Orsay. The high point -- literally -- comes when the choir of the Sciences Po, the elite political sciences university, sings Bethoven's Ode to Joy, the EU anthem, from a balloon tethered 300 feet above  the Citroen park by the Seine. I am not making this up.

The idea is to show Europe, or at least its institutions, that France remains passionate about the project that it launched in 1950 despite the disillusion that has set in over the past decade. The fête is also supposed to turn French thoughts away from their fear of Polish plumbers and brutal directives from a Union that in the popular mind has become a British-driven vehicle for globalisation.

The degree of French fear has been highlighted by a Eurobarometer survey in March which shows that of all 25 EU member states, the French are most hostile to globalisation.  Seventy-two percent of the French say that they see globalisation as a threat to employment and economic life and only 21 percent see it as a good opportunity. The EU average is 47 percent and 37 percent respectively. The biggest enthusiasts are the Danes, Swedes and Dutch, with the British coming in seventh place.

Catherine Colonna, the Europe Minister, who is leading the celebration, has delivered a stirring mission statement: "The aim is that the 9th of May should become a real celebration, a day for meetings and debate, a day in which we affirm our desire to make Europe live." It barely needs pointing out, but Mme Colonna does not have any voters to answer to. She is a high servant of state who was appointed by President Chirac last May after serving as his spokeswoman at the Elysée Palace.   

Comments

[Sandrine]

"And for an old Moscow resident, it feels like the Soviet Union on May Day or the October Revolution anniversary when the state whipped up patriotic enthusiasm and every bus flew the flag."

Nonsense. We also show patriotic enthusiasm on the 14th of July when all the buses have the French flag...

I think the EU is one of the most important thing that have happened to us, and all the 25 countries of this organisation should prove their attachment to it on a special way.

And for me, opening all the embassies of these countries, opening the Quai d'Orsay, creating a website to answer people's questions and to promote the EU, asking fanfares to play the Hymne à la joie at the same time, well all this is perfect for me, just for people to remember that Europe exists. And maybe we could even do more.

What's the matter with it ? What would you like us to do exactly ? Nothing at all ?

[Jess]

"What would you like us to do exactly ? Nothing at all ?"

Spot on, Sandrine. Please, please, please do... nothing.

France's enthusiasm for 'L'Europe' has always baffled me. It reminds me of the bafflement I felt when, living in Eastern France, I was surrounded by people who loved – no, 'hero-worshipped' would be more accurate – Germany and Germans. And this on the invasion routes. Who in their right mind idolises their mother's rapist?

It's a sort of Stockholm Syndrome, I suppose: it starts with a reluctant effort to make accommodation with bullies in the name of survival, and slowly turns into a masochistic enjoyment of brutality and subjugation. Seen with outsiders' eyes, it's painfully clear that 'Europe' has done only damage to France and the French. Instead of suffering their Socialist hell in painful, but eye-opening isolation (which might at least have inspired them to get rid of it quicker), they have managed to make it appear more normal by spreading the misery.

But hey. Que les enfants s'amusent. Adulthood will come soon enough.

[Victor Tan]

The French rejected the EU Constitution last May, so why is the government encouraging the people to celebrate Europe Day? Is it not like celebrating Victory Day after losing a war? Is this all that the French can celebrate these days?

Over here in the UK, I have not read in The Times or heard on the radio that we should be celebrating Europe Day, neither have I seen any Europe flags in the streets. Hey, we are more interested in Wayne Rooney's matatarsal recovering on time to play in the World Cup. There are lots of St George flags on cars cruising the streets of London in support of England. The Times today even has a column, The Matatarsal Q & A.

What does it take to convince this government that they should stop celebrating the past, and lead the people to a more prosperous future?

[Sandrine]

We're not celebrating the past, but a better future I hope. (by the way Victor, how do you call the Trafalgar celebration last year, wasn't it to celebrate the victorious past of England ?)

Jess I don't know why you're talking about Stockholm syndrome. Maybe you would prefer us to stay enemies ad vitam eternam, I mean with countries like Great-Britain (our best enemy) and Germany (because of the First and the Second World War) ? That seems so clever to say that today. I think the best lesson from the EU is that ex-enemies can become allies in a stronger way than before.

I really see the EU as a great chance for our future, but maybe I'm wrong, as it's seems that on this blog I'm rarely in the right side of the force !! ;o)

But Jess, maybe you would like the EU to be dismantled ? What a gread idea, all this for nothing ! Let's go back to where we were before, that would be very funny and better for everyone.

Victor, let me tell you something : it's not because the English don't do anything concerning Europe (everybody knows how much British people love it !) that we shouldn't do anything all over Europe. For me, Great-Britain is not really the good country to follow if we wanna have a strong and unified Europe.

[Frank Schnittger]

Don’t worry Sandrine, you are not the only Europhile on this Blog. The EU is very popular in Ireland because they assisted our agriculture and our regional development when we needed it most. Now that we are net contributors to the EU we are still proud of being part of a Union which has managed to find a way to reconcile historic enemies. Even in N. Ireland the historic conflict with Britain is much less pronounced because now we are all part of the EU.

Much of the social modernisation of Ireland – equal pay, anti-discrimination, unfair dismissal, environmental protection, energy conservation legislation etc. has originated in the EU. I have no doubt that the Eastern European accession states will also benefit from such legislation in due course. It does not make sense for small counties such as Ireland and most of the new members to try to reinvent the wheel on every aspect of Government administration, and we are mostly happy to row in behind a harmonised EU approach to such matters.

I sometimes think that countries that have been conquered and administered from abroad in the past have less issues with the “Brussels Bureaucracy” because it does consult more and take our concerns into account then any previous imperial administration. A country such a Britain, which has never been conquered in recent centuries may find it much more difficult to adapt and accept – a case of post imperial pride?

There is a tendency to forget all that the EU has achieved and to criticise disproportionately that which has not been achieved yet. I call it the Ryanair syndrome. No one criticises the EU more than Ryanair boss Michael O’Leary, and yet Ryanair’s success would not have been possible without the opening up of commercial air routes in Europe and reduction in tariffs as part of the single market. I appreciate the EU is not competing effectively with the US at the moment, but is anybody suggesting that France, Britain or Germany could do better on their own?

I’m a bit surprised to find expatriate Brits as passionately anti-EU as their homebound compatriots. I would have thought many aspects of living and travelling in other EU countries would have been made somewhat easier by a reduction in tariffs and bureaucratic restrictions – Visas, import/export documents, currency transactions etc. There are, of course, still more differences than similarities in legal codes etc. but is anybody suggesting that a gradual harmonisation of – e.g. accountancy rules – across the EU is not a good thing?

So celebrate away Sandrine – and have a drink on us – preferably at your local Irish pub!

[Victor Tan]

Sandrine, it has been known for a long time that the British have a love hate relationship with France and Europe. We love your countryside, the seaside, the Alps, great weather, food and wine, but not your dated social system which does not create new jobs for the young, and even worst, your leaders who are only there for self gratification.

Let us not discuss China or Asia, just look at the ten new members of EU, the former satellite states of the old Soviet Union. They are imbued with new energies and the people are beginning to enjoy higher standards of living. If they can do it, why can't the French? Look no further than the Palais Elysee and Hotel Matignon.

[alan morgan]

I was born in England and live in France because I believe in a united Europe and love the French people and way of life. I believe like Sandrine that a united Europe is important; it works because it has stopped old conflicts and brings people closer to live at peace as human beings. It deserves support and we should celebrate it. Sandrine's passion is marvellous.We need more people like her shouting from the rooftops, not intelligent but boring comments.

[John Middleton]

A very eurosceptic debunking of the whole day on the blog post below:
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006/05/whoopee.html

[William Haines]

Sandrine,

The peace in Europe over the past 50 years has nothing to do with the EU and everything to do with the US-led NATO and USSR-led Warsaw pact. In between such titans France and Germany were exhausted pygmies.

It is unsurprising Charles that you noticed similarities with Moscow where I also lived for 7 years. Europeanism comes from the same ideological stable as Communism and fascism in more ways than one.

William

[Curtis LeMay]

Dear Mr Bremner,

I am an American-but I also have, heaven forfend, citizenship-through heredity-of an EU member state.

Sir, I will never accept the totally irrational supposition that the Dutch, the Germans, the French, the Danes, the Swedes, the Italians, the Poles, Britons, and everyone else on the continent of Europe, does not love their countries, the sovereignty of their own countries, the rich histories of their countries, and the hard fought for freedoms and independence-etched in blood-of their own countries, above all else. That is what Brussels wants to rid us of. Brussels wants us to rid us of who we were, who we are, and accordingly, what we will be.

Over my dead body. Brussels can go get stuffed.

[Ian H. Young]

I am a British francophile currently resident in France and have lived in several other western European countries. . . . but this does not blind me to the many shortcomings of so many aspects of life in France (as indeed of any other country, not least my own). However, nowhere else have I encountered such a "touchiness", such a resistance to mild constructive criticism, as here. The sheer inability of otherwise intelligent people to acknowledge obvious absurdities is so frustrating to an outsider who only wishes them well. The British are not anti-EU, but would rather like other members to honour agreements - e.g. open energy markets - rather than retreat into a "protectionist procrastination" when some imagined national interest is apparently threatened. We are interested in substance, not empty gestures with flags and choirs which serve only to try to hide the lack of progress on important issues.

[Sandrine]

Ah la la... Once again I'm against everyone here (lol, except Frank) !

I can't answer to everyone's fears, but I'm sure of one thing, the idea of a united Europe was really good. It's what the recent governments did with this great idea that changed everything. If there's no will, well, there's no way (sorry I can't remember the right proverb).

I don't know why some people still think that Europe hasn't done ANYTHING peace. Of course, it's easier to say that the American did everything (they came, they save us and they told us not to do it again !), people here always love to depreciate european (when it's not French) people.

I think that with this idea of a supranational entity we have learned to live in peace together, it would really be difficult today for a european country to declare the war against another one.

But it doesn't mean that we'll lose our own identity. French people will always be French people, no matter what you may think of them (cowards, lazy, and stuff like that). And they won't change their way of living. On another hand, I think we appreciate not to need a passport or visas to go to 24 other countries in Europe, and also the PAC (which is certainly not the EU's best idea, j'en conviens).

I'm only 28, and I have only known the EU, and so people of my generation. I'm sure they wouldn't say it was a bad idea to invent it. (Thanks Mr Schuman !)

British people don't like the EU that's true, so, if they don't want to celebrate it, that's their problem, or maybe they should think of leaving it. Isn't it the new sentence everybody says : love it or leave it ?

[Frank Schnittger]

Wow – we’re getting some real debate here!

To William I would say that the logical consequence of your argument is that war will now once again break out between EU countries because the Warsaw pact is gone and the influence of the “US led NATO” is much diminished. You seem to feel that Europeans can do and have done nothing for themselves and owe everything to the US and the USSR. I don’t think so…… rather, I would argue that the recent expansion of the EU has helped to overcome the Iron Curtain which the US/USSR confrontational approach to “peacemaking” helped to create.

I don’t mean to diminish the contribution of the US in winning the wars against fascism and communism, but the hard work of creating reconciliation between erstwhile mortal enemies in western Europe could only and in fact was done by the Europeans themselves. The EU is the major part and political expression of this. The EU experience of peacemaking is also now partly the reason that most Europeans do not subscribe to the Bush war on terror (AKA Christian crusade against Islam). War is not the only way to make peace as some Americans seem to think.

To Curtis I would say – unfortunately the EU has been built over rather a lot of dead bodies (fortunately not yet yours) – and one of its great achievements is to reduce the xenophobia and hatred of outsiders that extreme nationalism foments and which has resulted in centuries of wars throughout Europe. There are many positive aspects of Nationalism and the EU does not outlaw them – they remain the preserve of the individual Nation state members of the EU. The EU does however allow us to celebrate our common humanity and build on what we have in common.

It is a pity that the US has not shared more in this experience. For most American’s (including you?) the highest expression of American patriotism seems to be to kill as many non-Americans as possible. Europeans have learnt that co-existence and tolerance of differences are a surer route to peace. America appears to be able to achieve internal stability only by making war on somebody else – more or less anybody will do - and when mortal enemies do not present themselves America has to invent them – as in the War on Iraq. When Gorbachev ended the cold war he said “we have taken your enemy away from you, what are you going to do now?” The answer is the America can’t cope without having an enemy to attack – and is constantly trying to exacerbate conflicts and create enemies so that it can have an excuse to attack and engage in its imperial fantasies.

I think you, Ian, are onto something. I think there is a growing realisation across Europe that the “social market” which has served us so well in the past is not going to be sustainable in the context of globalisation and ageing populations. We risk the basis of our prosperity by trying to hang onto old privileges. It is understandable that people should be touchy about this. Nobody likes it when a treasured and comfortable lifestyle is under threat and when they are unable to pass on their privileges to their children. The problem is that nobody in a leadership position in France is articulating a vision of where France needs to go next – and how it can get there.

However we shouldn’t cast this as a UK versus France debate. I take part in some UK blogs as well, and there the criticism of Blair/Brown is just as virulent as the Chirac/De Villepin criticism here. Ironically much of this criticism is for similar reasons – over regulation, political correctness, stealth taxes, inadequate and inefficient public services, squalid ethical standards in high places etc. – the similarities are much greater than sometimes admitted by the UK critics of France. We all have a problem, even if Ireland/UK are arguably slightly ahead of the game at the moment. (UK GNP growth is c. 2.2% at the moment – vs. 2% for France/Germany. Not that much of a difference?)

[Edward Johns]

Gosh,
what a lot of dogma and sweeping generalisations !
I find amusing the statement : -
"A country such a Britain, which has never been conquered in recent centuries may find it much more difficult to adapt and accept – a case of post imperial pride?"
Granted there have been no American tanks rolling down Pall Mall but the UK has been subsumed by and is subject to " Uncle Sam" just as effectively as if there had been a military conquest. The UK work, spend , borrow, spend treadmill is all about dancing to the US tune, sneering at social security and despising the notion of paying taxes which might just result in some form of benefit to the disadvantaged. "Come back Alf Garnett, we love you" ought perhaps to be the new UK motto ?
The Brits find it amusing to sneer at popular celebrations of abstract notions like EU unity but our Royal Family worship ( remember the hysteria when Princess Diana died?) must look just as silly to our European neighbours. Why do we have to rain on each other's parades in so childish a manner ?

[Jean-Marie]

I make completely confidence in Europe. That gets an undeniable stability.

However, I think that the last political tendencies showed that finally each country want to keep its own culture but also opening with the other cultures. Well, certain countries always do not play the game (for example, an island which lives at the tea time).

More seriously, the current patriotic fervours frighten me and go against my idea of Europe. As you said Sandrine, the last slogan of Sarkozy is “La France, tu l'aimes ou tu la quittes”. I do not think that Sarkozy (favourite at the presidential election, unfortunately!) would make a good representing of Europe.

I think that Europe could have had more importance if some countries of Europe had not followed the international methods of the USA which quite simply damaged our world.

Wait until all the countries of Europe realize of the mediocrity of the international relations imposed by the USA and thus Europe will be able to finally hatch. The celebration will be more beautiful, believe me

[Erwan]

Sandrine,
As a 27 Year old French Anglophile, i feel compelled to remind you of one thing :
The EU is NOT Europe.
I Love Europe, its rich history, its culture, and varied people, I hate the EU, like many others.

The EU is essentially a bureaucracy whose role was initially to administer the common market. It has become an army of self serving bureaucrats who justify their existence by regulating, regulating, regulating everything and anything they can get their hands on, from Corsican Cheeses to British Weight and Measures.

In the blind faith some people put in the EU, there is this kind of devotion to a greater ideal, this belief that a mighty leviathan will eventually bring about this utopia we all dream of: a fantastic world where everyone is happy, healthy and kind hearted.
In no way is this blind faith different to that of the communists in the 20th century.

The EU may be "democratic" (you get to vote but the result doesn't matter) but the method with which the french government is going at it is in many ways heavy handed : Thou Shalt Love Thy Master And Submit To Its Decisions...

Secondly the idea that the EU is responsible for peace in Europe in the last 50 years seems pretty specious to me, I would tend to think the common market was responsible for this (free markets breed democracy and peace), not the EU which after all was, in accordance with De Gaulle's vision, nothing but a vehicule to extend France's political influence on the rest of Europe.

No wonder the Brits are opposed to it, why should they bow to this coalition of unelected bureaucrat and their funny inflation inducing Mickey Mouse money?

[Frank Schnittger]

The UK attraction to all things US is commercial rather than political - witness the widespread opposition to the Iraq war. The UK opposition to Brussels is political rather than commercial. It is happy enough to share in the benefits of a single enlarged market - but unhappy to have to share some measure of sovereignty to partake of the benefits.

The British veneration of the Royal family is part of the mythmaking that Britain is sovereign, independent and - well British. All Nations engage this in different ways - but the exercise is getting a little strained in the context of globalisation, mass population movements, demographic changes and the increased interdependence /integration of Nations - as exemplified in the EU.

As myths go, celebrating the EU is harmless enough. The problem is tht it has not achieved near enough cohesion and structural dynamism to meet the economic challenges of a globalised world and the imperial behaviour patterns of its US friend and neighbour.

Criticising the EU for its bureaucracy, ineffectiveness and inertia is one thing. The problem is most of its critics seem to want to tear it down rather than improve it.

The recently rejected new EU constitution may have had many faults. But at least it sought to address the central problem facing the EU today - that virtually all important decisions now require unanimity amongst its 25 members. Have you ANY IDEA how much horse trading it requires to get 25 Nations to agree on something? It makes getting a resolution through the UN security council a cakewalk by comparison.

The irony is that the Constitution was first rejected by France - the country which had most to gain through its adoption. Smaller countries like Ireland - and all the smaller and eastern European countries - now retain their veto on major proposals and have proportionately a much higher vote in those issues that are decided by the current weighted majority voting system. How is it that the French Electorate seemed to miss the point that the constitution actually increased France's relative power within the EU?

The failure of the new constitution undoubtedly pleased the Nationalists in many countries who didn't want too much power devolved to the EU. But you cannot have it both ways and then criticise the EU for its ineffectiveness!

[Gareth]

Isn't the French attitude towards the EU more along the lines of:

- We created it so you new countries the English wanted to bring in can get stuffed

- We'll have this bit, this bit and this bit, but we won't have that bit, that bit and that bit

- We're the most European of the lot, but we won't apply those European directives! No, much rather pay a fine instead.

Or am I much mistaken? Not saying that the UK's view of it is any better, but France always seems to want to have its cake and eat everyone else's.

Gareth
http://www.paris-link.com/blogs

[Rémy]

More surprising than the french celebration of Europe is the british contempt for it. Beyond the natural suspicion toward the continent, Europe seems to embody whatever Great Britain does'nt like : bureaucracy, protectionism, corruption... you know the rest of it. Europe is like a big France, a project dedicated to France's "delusion of grandeur" (as if there were not enough France in the world!). According to Mr Haines (above), europeanism is the new communism and fascism : Great Britain's fight for the next century. To make it short, europeanism is for Great Britain what anglo-saxonism is for France : an ugly word and a scarecrow.

Now I've lived quite a long time in Great Britain - in Chichester and Brighton - and I must say that, in spite of all the euroscepticism they get in the newspapers, the British are Europeans : they share the same opinion about most things, they're fully part of the european consensus (not the western one). How come Great Britain have the same opinions about international relations and diplomatic agenda as the USA ? Because after all, there is nothing in which the british people is closer to the american than to the european - nothing but the economy.

[Gervas Douglas]

I liked your comparison with the Soviet Union. Three years ago I was talking to a senior politician who had had the pleasure of meeting Messrs. Chirac and Schröder and contrasted their enmired countries by saying that at least in Germany he felt there was some hope of recovery. As I remarked to him, "La France est l'Union Soviétique avec la bon cuisine." He agreed.

Things are getting worse in France. Their biggest problem is that the population has become psychologically totally dependent on the State in a way which would thrill any ambitious Fascist or Communist aspirant despot.

Still, compared to a socially degenerating England, at least most of the inhabitants are courteous in a correct, formal way and generally behave in a civil manner.

[Robert Marchenoir]

I am French, and I was not even aware of the existence of Europe Day. I think there should be some distance put between the realm of officialdom and everyday life as seen by the citizens.

On the other hand, I do not see anything wrong with celebrating Europe. Whatever one thinks of its policies today, it is one great post-war achievement. It put an end to decades-long hostility between France and Germany, helped heal the wounds of war, and gave its members a collective sense of pride and purpose which helped them build their way out of the ruins.

This is no small feat, and it would be foolish to dismiss this part of history, just because this sense of purpose is lost nowadays among many older European countries.

We have a new challenge today, redefining what Europe should be about in the 21st century. That does not mean we should not be celebrating past achievements. Quite the opposite.

[Frank Schnittger]

My apologies for my last post. It was written in direct response to some comments by Edward Johns and should be read in that context. There have been so many other posts since that it just reads like a rant.

However there is an issue here for you, Mr. Bremner. This blog seems to take off when we start to discuss serious issues. Yet you tend to publish "colour" pieces from a mildly distainful, ironic, paternalistic, world weary, but ultimately very fair and balanced "British" perspective. You focus on the absurdities rather than on the substantive issues.

It's easy to make fun of the peculuarities of a particular culture. How about a few serious pieces addresing the challenges we all face in Europe and the World? Or would you prefer to leave that to some of the other Times columnists?

[Victor Tan]

The celebration of Europe Day with its fanfare of flags and illuminations in euro blue of the Arc de Triomphe and the Eiffel Tower is a publicity stunt by a discredited government to create a feel-good factor to lull the citizens into a momentary elation to mask the dire state of the country and the impotence of a bankrupt president and his scheming prime minister. The rightful celebration for France was the achievement of the football team winning the last World Cup.

My musing in the blog of January 2006, "The Fight for Cheese" acknowledged the resounding success of the Treaty of Rome, creating the present day EU, in preventing war on the continent since the end of World War II. However, this political success was compromised by the creation of a bureaucratic monster in Brussels with a voracious appetite, consuming vast resources in wasteful exercises to create uniformity in Europe to the unending irritation of its citizen. The diversity of Europe is its attraction. I have yet to see a department manifests itself in developing a strategy to meet the challenges of globalisation where Europe, especially of the old variety, is lagging behind. The political weight brought to bear on American hegemony has been generally successful, but political clout has to be supported by economic strength as seen in China today.

I shall now write in the style of the lofty Jeremy Clarkson, The Times motoring correspondent who also presents a motor programme on BBC. He is a bigotted, politically incorrect Englishman when it comes to cars and Europe. Lest I am accused of being a racist in my Ckarkson style writing, I am Chinese by origin.

The Chinese government in the early 1980's, was faced with an increasing population, nearing one zillion. Not only were they content with eating rabbits, stirred fried or hung dried, they aped the rabbit's habit of unrestrained sex, thus procreating increasing numbers of little slant eyed hungry mouths to feed. The government had to find a solution to prevent more deaths through starvation and annual floods. They imposed a one child family, which worked largely, but the farmers and peasants continued their extra curricular activities behind their bicycle sheds unabated. The old method of food production by way of a collective system where hundreds of peasants produced enough food for only six people could no longer be sustained.

The leadership thought of conquering more land to feed its people. An order was sent out to take stock of the arsenal. It was reported back that there were a few rusty swords and spears used in the Bruce Lee kung fu movies. How on earth were they able to conquer the richest land, the US with this motley collection of weapons? It dawned on their chain smoking, tar-stained teeth and spittoon using leader, Deng Xiao-Ping that people must be rewarded to work, and he introduced elementary capitalism. Their principal tools were the screwdriver, and sewing machines.

Thus began the great Chinese workshop, making all manner of electrical goods, and clothes in ginormous numbers and selling them dirt cheap to the Americans. Never mind the quality, as long as they could last an hour for an episode of Sesame Street. Clothes, in sizes that can fit an entire Chinese family in vast quantities, so cheap that they could not resist buying them. Next they turned their sights to Europe, sending pullovers, shirts, jeans, shoes and brassieres at a price that an average French worker earns in an hour. The French government was stunned into imposing a strict quota last year.

The rest is history. Today, China has "conquered" United States, Europe and most of the world without firing a shot in anger. Their economic weapons have produced a record breaking surplus with the US to the extent that President Bush has to beg them to re-value their currency to balance their trade. China holds an eye-popping $200bn in US Treasury Bonds, and there is no end in sight to this growth.

Now, to those sceptics, tell me why the Europeans cannot achieve this with a much larger capital base? Why has president Chirac not able to come up with a clever idea? Ultimately, it is the French people who is paying the price for their inept leaders. Why are celebrating a failed economic Europe?

[Victor Tan]

Correction: The last sentence should read economically failed France.

[Sarah Hague]

Sorry to get flippant here in all this serious debate, but why have a choir in a basket 300ft up? I mean, how many people can you get in a hot-air balloon basket? 20? Must have been a pretty small choir, so not very loud, so why 300ft up? I'm puzzled. Did anyone observe the goings on? I'm dead curious as to the point of it. I'm also a tad surprised that the choir of Science Po has had enough time to practice, having been on strike. Maybe that's why they were 300ft up...

[Zilch]

The recently rejected new EU constitution may have had many faults. But at least it sought to address the central problem facing the EU today - that virtually all important decisions now require unanimity amongst its 25 members. Have you ANY IDEA how much horse trading it requires to get 25 Nations to agree on something? It makes getting a resolution through the UN security council a cakewalk by comparison.

my point exactly, why do we need to agree, and compromise on everything.
a lot of issues the EU is currently dealing with should have remained national matters.
The EU should be a very small administration ensuring that the common market is working well. And nothing more.

as for Gervas and Gareth, they are absolutely right, france is ripe for a mild populist dictature.

[Frank Schnittger]

Sarah - Maybe the choir was trying to reach the high notes? Or use up some of the hot air generated by the strike? I'm sorry - that was terrible.

Victor - you do the Clarkson bit very well!

But just to bore you with some facts: You decry the "bureaucratic monster in Brussels with a voracious appetite, consuming vast resources in wasteful exercises to create uniformity in Europe to the unending irritation of its citizen"

Fact one: The European commission has 20,000 staff – that is less than the BBC or the number of town hall bureaucrats employed by the cities of Birmingham or Glasgow. According to the British Minister for Europe “Even with irregularities and, sometimes, downright fraud, the Commission delivers a remarkable bang for the euros that it receives”
Source: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200203/cmstand/eurob/st021217/21217s01.htm

Fact two: The entire EU budget for the next few years (following enlargement) is about 1% of EU GNP. Most European Governments spend c. 40-50% of National GNP. Very little of this money goes on Administration – most of it is transferred back to member countries in the form of CAP payments to farmers, regional aids to industry, Infrastructure grants, R&D supports, etc. You can argue to merits of each of these schemes (they have been very beneficial to Ireland and will be vital in enabling Eastern European countries to catch up in terms of infrastructure) but I don’t think you can argue they are enormous in European terms.

Which gives better value: Birmingham town hall for a few million people or Brussels Bureaucracy for 500 Million people with a lower staffing level?

If I may be so politically incorrect as to quote Tony Blair: “''It is easy to knock the Commission. By definition, because it is based in Brussels, it is a remote bureaucracy—but smaller in size than many single Whitehall Departments. It takes unpopular decisions—because it is responsible for keeping Member States to the commitments they have agreed. This role as enforcer is unenviable, but essential. Governments rarely give it credit for its achievements, but are always quick to criticise its shortcomings”

[Erwan]

Very little of this money goes on Administration – most of it is transferred back to member countries in the form of CAP payments to farmers, regional aids to industry, Infrastructure grants, R&D supports, etc.

considering the CAP represents 42% of total spending and about 60% of the CAP is spent on administration, the claim that "very little" money is spent on Administration is rather dubious.

as for British Town Halls employing proportionally more people that the EU, it's like comparing Apples and Bananas.

You might as well compare the EU with, say IBM, if you're going to make use of this methodology.

There wouldn't be so many problems with the EU if it stuck to its role of enforcing respect to commitments, like say, the WTO, unfortunately it had developped into something more, designing regulations for 25 very different countries.

if not,why is there so much lobbying from private bodies going on in Brussels?

[michael robertson]

I wonder if the real agenda here is not so much to revel in the wonder of being part of the European Project, but as much a case of emphasising France's un-American identity, in contrast, so the organisers of this rally might choose to imply, to that of the UK, of being more like a client state of the US! The fact that the so called British caller in the radio advertisements sported an American accent just reinforces my suspicions in this regard!

The term Globalisation would seem to have become code for Americanisation in the minds of those responsible for organising this sort of jamboree, but if they are not careful, the July 14th National day will be relegated to second place, in favour of Europe day, in the not too distant future! (Europska Soyuz, anyone?)

Anyway, several European multinational companies are part of the globalisation phenomenon, but perhaps that is deemed to be acceptable, as they are not seen to be part of the "wrong sort" of globalisation as practised by non-european (and British?)corporations. As Victor Tan suggests, China will hold America to account in time, far more than Europe can ever do, when they decide to repatriate even a tiny amount of the money lent to the USA in response to a fall in confidence in the dollar caused by America's burgeoning appetite for personal and Federal debt! They have much more to fear from "The bill from the China shop!" than any state orchestrated extravaganzas that France may choose to indulge in!

[Frank Schnittger]

For those I haven’t yet bored to tears……

Fact three: As noted by Tony Blair above: the Commission is only empowered to expedite the competencies/functions that members countries have agreed to devolve to the commission. Generally that’s all the unpopular dirty work that Governments don’t want to have to do themselves. It is then convenient for Governments to blame the commission when the inevitable public backlash ensues. The commission itself has promulgated a principle called subsidiarity – the idea that everything that doesn’t have to be done at a central level is best done at a local level. (That doesn’t stop it being dumped with all the unpopular stuff).

In my (distant and inexpert) view the Commission is generally a highly competent and efficient civil service and much more transparent and open than national civil services tend to be – with all their vested interests and trade union militancies.

However it is just a civil service – and thus it lacks the direct public accountability that national civil services (in theory) ought to have. I would prefer it if the commissioners were directly elected by the European Parliament instead of being party hacks/failed ministers appointed by National Governments. The European Parliament’s powers of scrutiny and rejection of individual measures should also be beefed up to address the “democratic deficit” the commission itself has identified. However all of this is opposed by National Governments (and Nationalists) who want to protect their own patch.

This is a perfectly legitimate position to hold (and dear to the hearts of many Nationalist bloggers here). My main point is simply this: You cannot square the picture you paint of a massive, resource devouring, corrupt and empire building fiefdom of interfering busybodies with 4 basic facts:
1) The Commission is actually very small relatively speaking.
2) Its budget (1% of GNP) is tiny compared to National Governments (40 to 50%)
3) It can only exercise those competencies and functions explicitly devolved to it by member country governments
4) Although there have been some reforms, most attempts to improve the direct democratic accountability of the commission are blocked by national governments anxious to protect their own patch.

The moral is: If you have a problem with how the EU is run – blame your own Governments – don’t be fooled into blaming the whipping boy they have conveniently set up as the fall guy for everything you find frustrating and alienating in the political system.

[Sandrine]

Erwan,
"i feel compelled to remind you of one thing : The EU is NOT Europe. "

héhé, merci pour l'info !

Of course I know that, but I really appreciate being part of the EU, and a lot of countries outside the EU would also like to be part of it.

As I said, the initially aim of this organization was very important, it's what the countries have done with it which is very sad. Now it's only about economical questions and big money. I understand you have the impression that it's only a big "machin" with a huge bureaucracy and so on, but I prefer looking further. For example, the european union has a great role to play on the international stage, but our governments just play for themselves. There's Mr Solana who tries to be an unofficial Minister of Foreign affairs for the EU, but his task is very hard and the governments really don't help him.

What I'm sure is that I wouldn't like the EU to disappear because of the euroscepticism of some people who are a bit disturbing in their selfish private life.

Jean-Marie,

"the last slogan of Sarkozy is “La France, tu l'aimes ou tu la quittes”. I do not think that Sarkozy (favourite at the presidential election, unfortunately!) would make a good representing of Europe."

I agree with you, and I also have to say that this is not my biggest fear concerning this guy. It's frightening...

Mr Marchenoir,
It's sad you haven't noticed this celebration, maybe there was a lack of information, but with this clearstream thing...

[Robert Marchenoir]

Interesting information from Frank Schnittger.

Can anyone explain me how subsidiarity is supposed to be the principle of the EU, whereas its familiar micro-management of national concerns seems to go exactly in the opposite direction?

Indeed, is subsidiarity still inscribed in European law?

Is really the dumping of unpleasant decisions upon Europe by national govermments enough to warrant such a glaring gap between principles and facts?

[Frank Schnittger]

Over to you Mr. Bremner. Time to get on your Bike down to the Commission in Brussels and ask them all the important questions raised by people on this Blog. We need answers!!!!

[john gregory Flinn]

I've come a bit late into this blog, and after reading through the posts including those verbose Irish ones which usually end with "advice", I feel there is little to add.
However the point about the EU's future is important. If it develops like the USSR did it will end up the same way. Perhaps the "Non and Nej" votes were such a warning.
Curiously I do not think that the EU is moving in harmony with France's ideas. The recent inclusion of the ex-eastern bloc was really a British coup to balance up the rival models of economic policy and related decision-making. It has created "old" and "new" EU factions within Brussells.
What's the betting that France will be among the first to defect from this new arrangement?

[Frank Schnittger]

John Gregory Flinn - you will be pleased to know I have no advice for someone who has written – in a previous post on “To stage or not to stage” – that “there could be a unwitting connection as to why M. Bozonnet has censored this theatrical production, to add weight to the pressure for Serbia to deliver its heros! I'm not defending what Mladic, or Karadic are accused of (Milosovic died innocent).”

I find it difficult to engage with someone who thinks censoring an Austrian play in Paris is going to put pressure on Serbia to give up its heroes (aka alleged war criminals) and who supports the notion that Mladic and Karadic can be regarded as heroes. It’s a relief to know you don’t apparently actually support war crimes – just those who are accused of them and who have so far managed to escape justice.

Is that succinct enough for you?

[Juno888]

Mr Marchenoir,
It's sad you haven't noticed this celebration, maybe there was a lack of information, but with this clearstream thing...