European Union

The Monthly Highlights publication provides an overview, at a glance, of the on-going work of the policy departments, including a selection of the latest and forthcoming publications, and a list of future events.
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

The substantial progress made in the Cyprus peace negotiations over the past 20 months risks falling short of success, as politics and grievances resurface, writes Fadıl Ersözer. He argues that true political leadership is required from both sides to achieve a lasting solution, and that the European Union as a framework can still be an incentive in facilitating a workable federated Cyprus.

The Green Line in Nicosia, CC-BY-NC-2.0

Cyprus is home to one of the longest-running unresolved conflicts in the world. The conflict has been ‘frozen’ by a ceasefire since the division of the island in 1974, but without resolution of the political and territorial contestations. The UN-supported peace talks aimed at establishing a two-state federation since late 1970s have repeatedly failed, as Greek Cypriot and Turkish Cypriot sides have interpreted concepts such as ‘federalism’ and ‘political equality’ very differently.

With the efforts of consecutive Secretaries-General and countless diplomats down the drain, George Mikes once famously stated that ‘The Cypriots know that they cannot become a World Power; but they have succeeded in becoming a World Problem, which is almost as good’.

A potential game-changer could be the European Union. The Greek Cypriot-run Republic of Cyprus applied for membership in 1990 and got the answer ‘conflict resolution before membership’. However, after a decade, this approach changed from a condition of EU accession to mere rhetoric, principally over the risk that Greece might have vetoed the entire eastern enlargement.

Nevertheless, the Turkish Cypriot side, whose Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus is not recognised by any county except Turkey, was attracted to the prospect of EU membership. The talks gained noteworthy momentum in early 2000s. However, the Greek Cypriot government’s reassurances that it would do everything possible to support the UN-sponsored reunification plan before EU accession did not materialise.

Having secured EU membership without the need to cooperate with the Turkish Cypriots, Greek Cypriots were not inclined to share power. Instead they played for time, waiting for a future deal on more beneficial terms. As a result, while Greek Cypriots celebrated EU accession in the South a week after the overwhelming ‘No’ vote (76 per cent) in the 2004 Annan Plan referendum on a peace deal, Turkish Cypriots, who voted in favour of the plan (65 per cent) were plunged into disappointment and continuing uncertainty.

While the EU’s influence in pushing for a resolution was severely limited after accession, the Union still has a useful role in play in achieving a united Cyprus. In particular, the EU’s supranational level adds a third level of governance to the two levels of a potential federation (federal and state). Such a multilayered architecture would offer institutional flexibilities in striking a balance between the competing needs for unity and autonomy.

For example, a federal Cyprus would be a sovereign state, but it component sub-states could represent themselves at the EU level on matters on which they have competence, such as regional issues. Additionally, the EU provides a promising environment to consolidate peace after reunification, where notions of sovereignty and power-sharing can be redefined.

Sociological institutionalism suggests that that identity politics and interests are subject to change in the long run through social learning and norm diffusion. This might be the answer to an unexpected crisis in the current phase of the peace talks. The Greek Cypriot parliament recently passed a law that an unofficial Greek Cypriot plebiscite from 1950 seeking union with Greece (called enosis) will be commemorated in schools. Turkish Cypriots were extremely critical, as they see enosis idea as an ‘existential threat’ and as the ‘root cause’ of the conflict.

Turkish Cypriot leader Mustafa Akıncı, who has said that honouring such old ideals is entirely against the ‘mentality of peace-making’, has refused to negotiate until the decision is overturned. Greek Cypriot leader Nicos Anastasiades, who initially said that Turkish Cypriots were ‘exaggerating’ a ten-minute commemoration, later admitted the decision was wrong but has not sought to repeal it.

Both insist that the talks should continue, but neither is willing to step back. The current climate is not ideal, but nobody sees the process as over, yet. Perhaps the UN can find a formula to resume dialogue, as it did in December 2016 during another crisis point during the talks.

I share Akıncı’s criticisms on the commemoration law. The mentality behind the commemoration vote is against peace-making and the decision is entirely wrong. It has only fed Turkish Cypriots’ insecurities. After all, the law was proposed by ELAM, a far-right neo-Nazi party, which got enough support to pass it. It is also discouraging that Anastasiades has not tried to make up for opening wounds with Turkish Cypriots.

However, Akıncı’s response – refusal to negotiate – is also unacceptable. This matter is neither directly related to the talks, nor the chances of agreement in the short run. If the concern is on the longer-term peace, again, I share the concern, but things get more puzzling there. It was in fact Akıncı who earlier abandoned the peace-promoting mechanisms for preparing Cypriots to live together that he championed during his electoral campaign. Instead, he focused on quickly achieving a ‘(comprehensive) solution in months, not in years’. The contradiction is not too different from the ‘mentality’ that he criticises.

Perhaps Anastasiades and his party have changed tack, with an eye to the next Greek Cypriot presidential elections set for early 2018, by – not objecting to the commemoration vote. Similarly, Akıncı might be playing for time. A breakthrough on the Cyprus issue now is against the interests of Turkish Prime Minster Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, who wants to secure nationalist votes for Turkey’s upcoming referendum on a new constitution.

It is saddening that what started as ‘the best chance for reunification’ (and is said to be the last) has nearly come to an end. It was only in January that UN Secretary-General António Guterres said that ‘We are very close to an arrangement’. The leaders seemed not only willing to achieve a solution, but determined to do so. Progress over the 20 months of negotiations has been remarkable, and described as ‘unprecedented’ by the Secretary-General’s Special Adviser on Cyprus Espen Barth Eide.

In Geneva, the two sides presented their respective maps for territorial readjustment within a united Cyprus. The international dimension of the Cyprus problem, particularly security and guarantees, has also been under discussion between Cyprus’ guarantor powers – the UK, Turkey, and Greece – and the two Cypriot sides. While these big advances have reached a new high, currently that optimism now bogged down by toxic blame-games.

Currently, we are not sleepwalking to collapse of the talks, but running towards it. There is still a chance that the leaders will resume and carry the talks the last mile. However, a ‘business-as-usual’ optimism will not be enough. Many contentious issues remain in the talks, among them Turkey’s future military presence on the island, the possibility of a rotating presidency and final territorial readjustments.

Additionally, Greek Cypriots will conduct further hydrocarbon exploration studies this year. Turkey and Turkish Cypriots are expected to follow suit. In 2014, this issue brought peace talks to a standstill.

In view of these challenges, we need a big leap forward with truly responsible and willing leaders working for a united Cyprus. If they fail, we will need to wait for ‘true leaders’ who are able to make peace. Perhaps the peace talks will shift away from the ‘undoable’ objective of a two-state federation. However, success would not only mean resolution of a decades-old frozen conflict, but also that Cyprus would become a true example of peace-making and power-sharing in a problem-ridden part of the world.

Please note that this article represents the views of the author(s) and not those of the UACES Student Forum or UACES.

Comments and Site Policy

Shortlink for this article: bit.ly/2nitUR2

Fadıl Ersözer | @FadilErsozer
University of Manchester

Fadıl Ersözer is a doctoral researcher in politics at the University of Manchester. His main research focus is the limits of Europeanisation and liberal peace in conflict resolution focusing on the EU’s post-accession involvement in Cyprus

The post Cyprus Peace Talks at a Stalemate: What Hope For Reconciliation? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/839c2538-04db-11e7-b10f-bc764e093073_263.04_thumb_169_1489081703_1489081694_129_97shar_c1.jpg

EU Heads of State or Government meet informally on 10 March 2017 to prepare for the 60th anniversary of the Rome Treaties.

Download this video here.

To receive the Brussels Briefing in your inbox every morning, register for a free FT account here and then sign up here.

 

Read more

Plenary sessions : MEPs vote Tuesday 14 March on four directives concerning waste management, mainly waste from households and small firms, representing 8% of total waste. These plans are a first step towards creating a circular economy where products are designed in order to facilitate reuse. One of the key issues is how ambitious targets should be for recycling rates and limiting landfilling, which is probably the most harmful way of getting rid of waste.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Plenary sessions : MEPs vote Tuesday 14 March on four directives concerning waste management, mainly waste from households and small firms, representing 8% of total waste. These plans are a first step towards creating a circular economy where products are designed in order to facilitate reuse. One of the key issues is how ambitious targets should be for recycling rates and limiting landfilling, which is probably the most harmful way of getting rid of waste.

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

On 15 March the Netherlands will hold parliamentary elections, with 28 parties vying for votes – including those of the 850,000 Dutch young people who will be voting in a national election for the first time.

Analysts suggest that around ten seats could swing based on young people’s votes. But this is only if they actually go to the polls. Young people aged between the ages of 18 and 24 belong to the largest group of non-voters. Almost one-third of people in that age range did not vote in the 2012 Dutch parliamentary elections.

For young voters, the political arena is abstract, complex and distant. Interest in politics is very low among young Dutch people because the topics debated by politicians do not relate to their interests. 18-24-year-olds are mostly students, engaged in pursuing education, finding employment and setting up their lives.

Another issue is that many young people in the Netherlands do not fully understand what each party stands for. The policy documents and debates are often technical and explained in a language they are not familiar with. Dutch politicians need to explain their ideas to young people and show them that politics is about their future too.

“For young voters, the political arena is abstract, complex and distant”

Due to a lack of participation in national elections, young people are not well represented in the Dutch political system. And the participation gap between the young and the old is only growing. The older generation governs the country and makes decisions without considering future generations – a result of the passivity of young people and an almost collective decision not to vote.

The Netherlands is not the only country that is struggling to get to grips with an ageing population and a growing generation gap. Many of the people who voted for Britain to leave the European Union in last year’s referendum were from older generation, but the decision will have lasting consequences on future generations – their education and their opportunities.

The younger generation of the Dutch must be aware of the results of the national election. It will not only shape national policy but the position of the Netherlands in Europe.

The current polls demonstrate that Geert Wilders’ Party for Freedom (PVV) is rising in popularity. If the polls are to be believed the Eurosceptic PVV will make decent gains while the parties currently forming the government will lose out: the Liberal VVD will maintain its current seats, and Labour (PVdA) is almost certain to suffer losses.

Given the unexpected victory of Donald Trump in the United States presidential election and the outcome of the Brexit referendum, one can question the reliability of polls, although the election in the Netherlands takes place in a slightly different context, given that to achieve a majority in parliament a coalition is needed – and this can happen only if the parties work together.

“Dutch politicians must build a bridge between politics and future generations”

The upcoming elections are among the most important elections in recent Dutch history. This is especially true for the younger generation, which will be affected the most. For the sake of future Dutch generations it is vital that young people vote, taking their rights seriously, regardless of their view of politics.

First, the media should give those young people who are already participating in politics the platform to inspire and inform other young people about voting. Most young people are more willing to listen to their peers than older generations.

Second, the government should provide an opportunity for young people to vote at colleges and universities, making it easier for them to cast their ballot.

And third, higher education institutions should provide students with information during their classes. These institutions could work together and invite experts to speak to students about forthcoming elections and political movements.

But Dutch politicians also must build a bridge between politics and future generations. They must demonstrate leadership in mobilising this group, encouraging them to vote regardless of their political identity. Should they fail, the consequences could be severe.

IMAGE CREDIT: CC / Flickr – Adam Scotti

The post Young Dutch voters need to understand that their vote counts appeared first on Europe’s World.

DRAFT REPORT on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the European Fund for Sustainable Development (EFSD) and establishing the EFSD Guarantee and the EFSD Guarantee Fund
Committee on Foreign Affairs, Committee on Development, Committee on Budgets
Eduard Kukan, Doru-Claudian Frunzulică, Eider Gardiazabal Rubial

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

https://tvnewsroom.consilium.europa.eu/uploads/council-images/thumbs/uploads/council-images/remote/http_7e18a1c646f5450b9d6d-a75424f262e53e74f9539145894f4378.r8.cf3.rackcdn.com/4477e2a6-04dc-11e7-a852-bc764e093073_369.26_thumb_169_1489073586_1489073577_129_97shar_c1.jpg

This is a selection of images of Donald Tusk, President of the European Council, from his first mandate 2014-2017.

Download this video here.

General : Antonio Tajani made the case for European unity in his first speech as Parliament President at the start of a Council summit. “Today more than ever we can see how important European unity is,” he told political leaders at the summit in Brussels on 9 March. “Europe needs to be changed not weakened. All the institutions need to work harder to find the answers which ordinary Europeans are looking to us to provide.”

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

General : Antonio Tajani made the case for European unity in his first speech as Parliament President at the start of a Council summit. “Today more than ever we can see how important European unity is,” he told political leaders at the summit in Brussels on 9 March. “Europe needs to be changed not weakened. All the institutions need to work harder to find the answers which ordinary Europeans are looking to us to provide.”

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Length of video : 160'
You may manually download this video in WMV (1.4Gb) format

Disclaimer : The interpretation of debates serves to facilitate communication and does not constitute an authentic record of proceedings. Only the original speech or the revised written translation is authentic.
Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

DRAFT OPINION on the proposal for a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a Union Resettlement Framework and amending Regulation (EU) No 516/2014 of the European Parliament and the Council
Committee on Foreign Affairs
Laima Liucija Andrikienė

Source : © European Union, 2017 - EP

Speaking at another Brexit-themed talk in Antwerp this week, I found myself once again noting the matter of issue discovery.

Despite being over 8 months after the referendum, which itself was confirmed as happening in May 2015, and with years of debate beforehand, we still find ourselves in a position where new elements keep on being discovered.

Sometimes, that’s something really mundane – like Marmite price-hikes – or it’s something surprisingly big – like Gibraltar. Equally, we still find that things we thought were clear, are not: WTO schedules springs to mind as a recent example or a thing that was originally seen as very easy, then very complex and now a bit complex.

What we need is a nice big list of all the things that need to be considered in Brexit.

Of course, such a list is not an easy task to undertake, for several reasons.

Firstly, there is an issue of determining what is an impact of Brexit and what is an impact of something else. Probably one has to differentiate between first- and second-order effects.

First-order effects would be those that are directly and unambiguously the result of leaving the EU. Examples here would be any part of public policy where legislation is at the EU-level (agriculture, for example), or where there is a reliance on EU principles (e.g. free movement across the Irish-Northern Irish border).

Second-order effects occur where the first-order effects change related situations. The Marmite thing is a handy example: the shift in the exchange rate following the referendum has led to higher import prices, which causes price inflation for a variety of goods and, ultimately, impacts on consumer spending and confidence, as well as patterns of industrial production. Kind-of Brexit-y, but also clearly informed by other factors of economic activity.

If the first-order effects are hard enough to pin down, then the second-order stuff is harder still. At some point, everything is Brexit.

The second big issue is that effects don’t just land on the UK government. Clearly there are effects on other EU member states, but also on British society, in ways that are beyond the control of Whitehall or Westminster. To pick a non-random example, the changes in public attitudes towards immigrants since the referendum is something that many EU nationals have noted, but the extent to which the government is willing or able to articulate a reaffirmation of the value of immigrants in society is highly debatable.

Likewise, that Brexit will have major repercussions on Ireland is seemingly beyond the scope of London’s direct concerns, even as there is a realisation that it does have a direct impact on the conduct of Article 50 negotiations.

Finally, to list is to prioritise and the British government appears congenitally unwilling to express anything prior to Article 50 notification that might denote a set of priorities. The White Paper is a list of things that strike Number 10 as important parts of Britain’s future, rather than a comprehensive list of what needs to be dealt with.

Of course, there are lists out there.

The UK government did conduct its Review of the Balance of Competences under the coalition government, completing in 2014. This sought to understand where and how the EU impacted on areas of public policy. Ultimately, that concluded that things were generally pretty good and the balance generally appropriate. However, the Review was driven by this notion of balance, rather than impact, so its utility as a checklist is limited.

The Commission has also worked through its list of points to discuss under Article 50, but this too is limited – by necessity – to matters of EU acquis, which is not as all-encompassing as one might think.

All of this matters for very obvious reasons.

As we all know, Article 50 negotiations are limited to two years, so discovering another pile of things to discuss isn’t a good way to reach an agreement within that timeframe. For a British government that hasn’t yet demonstrated that it is in control of the issues, further surprises cannot help its image and standing.

Moreover, once negotiations begin, the introduction of new elements is likely to make matters more difficult to resolve. Even on a minimal Article 50 package, there are a lot of elements, each pulling in different directions, resulting in what is likely to be a fairly small win-set. Structurally, there needs to be good sight of all the elements from the beginning if that win-set is to be realised.

Brexit is important. It matters in a way that not many other public policy decisions have mattered. To then find that we don’t even have a good sense of the range of issues that Brexit – even in the narrow sense of Article 50 negotiations – might cover should be something of concern to us all, whatever our political standpoint. Public policy works best when it is informed and considered, not when it is being made on the run.

As the clock ticks down to notification, the opportunity to get a firm footing grows ever smaller.

The post Issue discovery and Brexit: How will we know what all the points of impact might be? appeared first on Ideas on Europe.

Piringer
SERV
Member States may reserve to notaries the power to authenticate signatures appended to the documents necessary for the creation or transfer of rights to real property

Zulfikarpašić
Area of Freedom, Security and Justice
Notaries in Croatia, acting in enforcement proceedings on the basis of an ‘authentic document’, cannot be deemed to be ‘courts’ either within the meaning of the Regulation on the European Enforcement Order or for the purposes of the application of the Regulation on the recognition and enforcement of judgments in civil and commercial matters

Manni
Approximation of laws
The Court considers that there is no right to be forgotten in respect of personal data in the companies register

Samsung SDI and Others v Commission
Competition
The Court upholds the fines imposed on Samsung SDI and Samsung SDI (Malaysia) for their participation in the cartel on the market for tubes for television sets and for computer monitors