Forum

Par tous les moyens Borchgrave essaye de reprendre en mains le Washington Times qui a recemment ete accuse par The Nation de n etre rien de plus qu un repaire de neo-nazis et de racistes enfants genitaux du KKK.
La controverse a fait l objet d echanges acrimonieux entre quelques journalistes ces jours ci et pour eloigner la controverse le redacteur en chef actuel du WP a demande la demission du leader des republicains (Hastert)  a la Chambre des Representants.
Pendant ce temps de Borchgrave essaye de se credibiliser avec un peu d huile sur le feu.

Ca s appelle le “spin journalistique” a Washington ..!!!

Voici présenté sur Le Monde une ébauche du programme de politique étrangère et de défense de Petitbonum…. Je n’arrive pas à comprendre exactement ce qu’il propose (par exemple sur la force de frappe, sur le rapport transatlantique, sur l’Iraq, sur la Tchechenie, la Georgie et l’Ukraine, sur le rapport avec la Russie ...), et demande votre aide dans l’interprétation de cet article, qui me semble traduire une énorme confusion mentale. Ou bien a-t-il un plan très clair et un peu simpliste? La seule phrase positive me parait être celle qui parle d’une alliance avec la Grand Bretagne dans le domaine de la défense….

__________________________________
Nicolas Sarkozy veut briser la tradition du “domaine réservé”
LEMONDE.FR avec Reuters | 06.10.06 | 09h36  ?  Mis à jour le 06.10.06 | 09h54

n abordant de nombreux sujets de l’actualité internationale dans une longue interview publiée jeudi 5 octobre, par la revue Le Meilleur des mondes, le ministre de l’intérieur, Nicolas Sarkozy, s’est exprimé dans un domaine traditionnellement “réservé” en France au président de la République : la politique étrangère. Avec l’intention clairement affichée de briser un vieux tabou français.

L’idée d’un domaine réservé “me paraît contraire à la démocratie”, déclare-t-il ainsi dans cet entretien, dans la continuité de sa stratégie de rupture. “A mes yeux, il n’y a pas de domaine réservé (...). Je demande que les tabous soient levés en matière de politique étrangère, je demande que le Parlement puisse en débattre et je conteste l’idée qu’un homme, quelle que soit sa fonction, demeure ‘propriétaire’ de cette question.”

Il n’hésite donc pas à aborder la politique de défense de la France, en s’exprimant sur la dissuasion nucléaire, apanage jusqu’ici exclusif du chef de l’Etat, chef des armées : “Est-ce qu’il faut revoir notre stratégie nucléaire ? la réponse est sans doute oui, pour partie, dans le cadre de l’actualisation nécessaire de notre politique de défense.” Le président de l’UMP estime que la France doit rester une puissance nucléaire et y consacrer les moyens financiers “nécessaires”.

UNE FRANCE “TROP ARROGANTE”

C’est un Nicolas Sarkozy désireux d’un rapprochement avec les Etats-Unis et la Grande-Bretagne qui se révèle dans cet entretien. Rappelant les limites de l’influence de la France, “trop arrogante” parce qu’elle “se veut un exemple alors que sur bien des points [elle] ne l’est plus”, le futur candidat à l’élection présidentielle de 2007 se dit “partisan d’une France amie des Etats-Unis”. Pour renforcer cette amitié, il se dit prêt à “tourner la page sur les conditions dans lesquelles Américains et Britanniques sont intervenus en 2003”  en Irak.

Pour autant, Nicolas Sarkozy ne souhaite pas laisser aux Etats-Unis le monopole de l’influence internationale, et veut une France plus présente sur des sujets comme la Tchétchénie, la Géorgie ou l’Ukraine ˆ pays actuellement en crise plus ou moins ouverte avec Moscou ˆ, mais aussi sur le problème de la prolifération nucléaire en Iran et en Corée du Nord. “Il est clair que la crise iranienne est sans doute la crise internationale la plus grave actuellement”, souligne-t-il. Aujourd’hui l’adversaire, ce n’est plus l’empire soviétique, qui n’existe plus, c’est le terrorisme et la prolifération”, ajoute le président de l’UMP.

Sur la question européenne, sujet sensible pour les candidats à la présidentielle, Nicolas Sarkozy estime que l’isolement de la France “serait une erreur” et que l’axe franco-allemand, “aussi indispensable soit-il, n’est pas suffisant pour relancer l’Europe”. Il juge également qu’une politique de défense “crédible” ne peut se construire que sur une alliance “non exclusive” avec la Grande-Bretagne.

Enfin, le ministre de l’intérieur réaffirme son opposition à l’entrée de la Turquie dans l’Union européenne. “J’aime la Turquie”, mais si elle entrait dans l’Union européenne, “c’en sera fait de l’Europe politique”, a affirmé M. Sarkozy, qui plaide pour un simple “partenariat privilégié” entre l’UE et Ankara.

dedefensa;org est penaud. Traduire ‘peanuts’ par ‘noisettes’, quelle sornette. Comme nous le fait remarquer un lecteur, ‘peanuts’ c’est ‘cacahuètes’. Dont acte. Penauds, nous sommes. Pour nous punir nous-mêmes, nous laissons en page notre grosse faute. Elle sera comme l’oeil de Caïn.

Pas de rancoeur mais un chouilla tout de même, non ?

Cela dit, et en premier lieu, merci d’avoir répondu vite et sincérement.

Ensuite ... je ne retire ni ma question, ni son ton, au bémol près que, vieil internaute, j’écris comme je parle et sais que l’on me lit comme l’on lit ... (sans parler du fait que je vous lis au petit matin).

Je vous cite :
“mieux vaut l’esprit critique que l’esprit formaliste”

Ben oui, très précisément. Il était clair de longue date que ce que vous appeliez “source interne” était pour la plupart des citations d’articles, dépèches, etc. Mais sans jamais en donner d’explication. Et j’y trouvais matière à mauvaise interprétation, voire pire, à sous-entendus faussement compris par tous vos lecteurs affidès.

Donc plutôt que de m’abonner à un virtualisme de plus, j’ai préféré ne pas faire taire mon esprit critique. D’où ma question ...

En d’autres termes, il faut toujours expliquer sa démarche, son jargon et ses pré-supposés ...

(et je ne suis pas ce qu’il y a de plus nerveux sur le marché :)

... Le milieu des années 1930 virent l’un des plus grands désastres écologiques de l’histoire américaine: le Dust Bowl. Entre 1934 et 1937, plus de 200 orages de poussière s’abattirent sur les Grandes Plaines. Certains étaient assez denses pour masquer le soleil et former des talus de six mètres de hauteur, d’autres arrivèrent jusqu’à Chicago, Washington et la côte atlantique. En 1938 plus de la moitié des Grandes Plaines (environ 1.300.000 km2, répartis sur seize Etats) avait été érodée et le pays devait importer du blé. Ce n’était pas la sécheresse des années 1931- 1934 qu’il fallait incriminer mais bien sûr les mauvaises pratiques agricoles.

  La Commission des Grandes Plaines, dans son rapport de 1936, souligna les effets des perturbations des équilibres écologiques, la recherche du bénéfice à court terme et de la compétition débridée, et la croyance que la nature peut être maîtrisée à volonté selon les caprices de l’homme. Le Dust Bowl a eu des répercussions lointaines: non seulement la conservation en général a été réorganisée aux Etats-Unis dans une perspective plus large et plus écologique mais la conservation des sols est devenue un souci majeur dans les politiques agraires britanniques, en particulier en Afrique orientale.

  Alors que l’Europe, dans les années trente, était absorbée par la montée menaçante du nazisme, les Etats d’Amérique du Nord parvinrent à adopter deux traités internationaux sur l’environnement: le Traité des oiseaux migrateurs en 1937 et la Convention interaméricaine pour la protection de la flore, de la faune et des beautés panoramiques naturelles, dite Convention de l’hémisphère occidental, en 1940. ( http://www.planetecologie.org/Fr_default.html )

http://angryarab.blogspot.com/2006/10/woodwards-state-of-denial-my-selection.html

Voir ce site pour un compte-rendu hors du commun

Et le Fatah menace de liquider les membres du Hamas… Et les européens décident que les négociations avec l’Iran sont terminées… alors qu’hier, tout le monde trouvait que tout allait mieux.

Oui, la visite de Rice au Moyen Orient va surement foutre le boxon.

Moi, je vois cette mini-accélération (je “cite” des dépêches publiées ce soir) comme la dernière ligne droite pour enfin pouvoir tranquillement lancer l’attaque contre l’Iran. La FINUL est là, avec des gros chars d’assauts… Israël est protégé, d’une certaine façon… Et les palestiniens sont quasiment en guerre civile, même plus besoin des israéliens pour que des palestiniens meurent.

Les élections aux US arrivent. Le bon moment pour lancer l’attaque… et laisser la nouvelle assemblée se dépatouiller avec ce bazar.

Je croise les doigts en espérant délirer.

http://www.isn.ethz.ch/news/sw/details.cfm?id=16746

Russia’s stakes in EADS

Russia’s largely state-owned Vneshtorgbank has become the single largest outside investor in EADS, and observers are concerned that Moscow is seeking a seat on the board of the European defense giant.

By Federico Bordonaro for ISN Security Watch (04/10/06)

Recent key events regarding the European Aeronautic Defence and Space company (EADS) are raising political and security concerns in France and Germany, with two important financial developments in particular raising eyebrows in Paris in Berlin.

First, in early September, Vneshtorgbank - 99.9 percent owned by the Russian state - purchased 5.02 percent of EADS stakes. The move was interpreted by many in Western Europe as the beginning of a Russian assault on the EU’s most successful defense corporation, and the issue gained center stage at the 22 September Franco-Russo-German meeting in Paris.

European and trans-Atlantic security experts seem to share the sentiment that Vneshtorgbank will soon try to augment its stakes in EADS in order to win a place on the board for Russia - a move that Sergei Prikhodko, a Russian foreign policy presidential aide, predicted last month when he said Russia would “insist on at least a blocking stake.” However, Russian officials later denied that was the goal.

French observers have expressed anxiety over the development, as EADS is considered to be one of France’s most strategic firms. EADS also holds a 46 percent stake in another top French defense group, Dassault.

Furthermore, EADS shareholders likely would not be willing to accept a strong Russian role in the corporation, as it would violate the group’s charter, which explicitly forbids any seat being taken on its board without the permission of its main stakeholders, DaimlerChrysler, Lagardere, Sepi and Sogeade.

A second financial development in late September also had observers on edge. The German group DaimlerChrysler announced it would diminish its stakes in EADS from 22.5 percent to 15 percent. Immediately following the announcement, sources said the German government would soon take a stake in EADS in order to rebalance the Franco-German equilibrium, both financially and politically.

EADS has in fact a complex management and shareholder architecture. It is a Franco-German giant with significant Spanish and British (in Airbus) participation, whereby Paris and Berlin have always been careful to maintain the same economic and strategic weight. DaimlerChrysler’s decision will mean fewer German stakes and will likely trigger a counter-move by Berlin’s decision-makers, especially in light of Russia’s growing interest in the company.

An official 1 October statement by the German government ruled out the possibility that Berlin, which has consistently worked to avoid any state involvement in EADS, may step in any time soon. Still, observers were left wondering about Germany’s future intentions.

After a turbulent year - during which EADS was involved in a financial scandal (the Clearstream affair) and sharply criticized for its delay in the production of the civilian aircraft Airbus A-380 - the European defense corporation is now the center of attention for political and strategic analysts. The fundamental question is whether a deeper industrial cooperation between Russia and the EU giant would help Moscow gain a significant strategic influence over the future orientation of Europe’s main aerospace player.
Russian courtship, European diffidence

Russia’s interests in deepening its industrial cooperation with EADS are easy to understand.

Colonel Christopher Langton, head of the Defence Analysis Department at the International Institute of Strategic Studies (IISS), told ISN Security Watch this week that given Russia’s growing aerospace industry, Russia needed cutting edge technology and “EADS presents Moscow an opportunity.”

According to Langton, Vneshtorgbank saw the opportunity to buy EADS stakes last summer, when their value declined after the crisis caused by the delay in delivery of the Airbus A-380.

“The whole question must be put in the broader context of Russo-European strategic relations, which entail not only EADS and defense, but also energy security and supplies,” he said.

“Mr [Russian President Vladimir] Putin knows that Europeans are particularly sensitive to energy matters after last year’s Ukraine gas crisis, and thus a grand bargain between Moscow and its Western European counterparts would be welcomed by Paris and Berlin.”

However, in mid-September, EADS co-chairmen Arnaud Lagardère and Manfred Bischoff said Vneshtorgbank’s acquisition of 5 percent stakes would not lead to a Russian seat on the EADS board, since it “would not be in the interest of the company.”

In the official statement, they said they welcomed “any investment in our share base as a manifestation of interest and confidence in the long running success of EADS.” However, they made it clear that “the majority rights held by the controlling shareholders may not be circumvented by individual ownership positions within the free float of EADS.”

Nevertheless, Colonel Langton said it was “difficult to gage the real power of such official declarations” because, he stressed, “if the Russians, through Vneshtorgbank, will get more than 10 percent of the stakes, there will be no way to keep them out of the board.”

“My understanding is that they will try to raise their share sooner or later. We have to bear in mind that Russia aims at the EADS board as part of a national, political - not market - strategy.”

Jean-Pierre Maulny, a specialist in European defense with the Paris-based Institute of International and Strategic Relations (IRIS), told ISN Security Watch this week that “EADS rules protect the company and its shareholders from sudden maneuvers.”

The company, he said, “is obviously interested in a stronger partnership with the Russian aeronautic industry,” but would not let Moscow “take the lead.”

Furthermore, Maulny said: “The Franco-German-Russian cooperation will continue on a very pragmatic basis. There is no room for a structural enhanced strategic cooperation like someone predicted during the 2003 Iraqi crisis, as Paris, Berlin and Moscow aligned diplomatically against the US-led Iraqi war. The partnership will be limited to specific issues in industrial and technological sectors.”
Reassurances from Putin

Before, during and after the September meeting in Paris with French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, Putin has tried to reassure his Western partners that Russia’s interest in EADS was in no way aggressive.

However, Putin’s explanations contradict what Prikhodko said earlier in September: “If we are ever in a position to determine our joint economic interests, then we will insist on at least a blocking stake.”

Prikhodko added: “If we deem closer liaison with EADS to be economically feasible and in our interests, that means the interests of the Russian aircraft industry, then the state should have a hand in decision-making, and decisions are made when at least a blocking stake is held.”

That statement was just enough to cause concern among EADS management and shareholders as well as Western governments.

EADS has sensitive defense contracts with many subjects worldwide in which its board members would not like to see Russian involvement. Furthermore, Western governments view Russia’s Gazprom gas giant as using gas to politically blackmail its former Soviet satellite clients.

With this in mind, Putin’s approach has been predicated upon being reassuring. He called the Vneshtorgbank purchase “a game of the financial markets,” driven by the opportunity opened by the delays in the A-380 schedule and management troubles.

During the September meeting in Paris, the Russian president said Vneshtorgbank would not try to change anything in the EADS constitution, and that it might also hand its EADS shares to the United Aircraft Building Corporation (UABC), a so-called umbrella company for Russia’s aircraft industry, but “only if EADS agrees.”

Putin also proposed to launch a “working group with France and Germany on Russia’s role in EADS.”

These assurances notwithstanding, the potential strategic implications of closer cooperation between EADS and Russia have raised concerns in Europe and in the US.

Colonel Langton told ISN Security Watch that two key issues would need to be carefully monitored in the near future. First of all, the colonel said the military technology transfer from EADS to Russia, whose volume and significance was very difficult to assess now, would need to be monitored, though he said “we can be sure that such a transfer will be part of the deal.”

Secondly, the said: “If you take the already improving Russian civilian aircraft industry and you add it to EADS capabilities, you obtain a stronger competitor for Boeing, and in its own market places.”

Certainly, the recent developments have produced one concrete and highly significant fact: Vneshtorgbank is now the single largest outside investor in EADS, and the possibility of an ulterior stakes acquisition by the Russian bank remains the key variable in the medium term.

La dépèche AFP ci-dessous contient en anglais votre texte en citation. Texte que vous attribuez à “une source interne”.

Expliquez vous ?!

U.S. border city declares itself sanctuary for illegal immigrants

Monday, October 2, 2006 at 07:11 EDT

SAN DIEGO — A southern California city on the Mexican border declared itself a sanctuary for illegal immigrants on Saturday, prohibiting local authorities from collaborating with federal immigration officials.

City council members in National City, a small city eight kilometers south of San Diego on the Mexico border, made the decision, infuriating some 200 protesting “Minuteman” border protection volunteers, who called for the deportation of Mayor Nick Insunza.

“This is an example which sets a precedent that can be followed by other cities in the United States, even if it is a symbolic proclamation, because we know that Nick Insunza will be leaving office in November,” said Ron Morrison, a city council member.

The move came two days after the US Congress approved the construction of a 1,125-kilometer wall along the border, over which tens of thousands of mainly Latin American illegal immigrants pass each year.

The wall is opposed by advocates of an easier immigration policy but backed by many who want a crackdown on illegal immigrants, whose numbers are estimated to be more than 11 million in the country.

Among other things, the council declaration orders that National City authorities must avoid using municipal funds to collaborate with federal immigration officials who want to stop the influx of migrants from the Mexican side of the border.

(AFP)

... un département d’Etat qui dépense à lui seul 48% du budget militaire de la planète ...

** Depuis notre naissance, juste après la Seconde guerre mondiale, le dollar a perdu environ 90% de son pouvoir d’achat. Il en perdra encore ; la tendance à la dégénérescence se fait plus forte.
* La chute est inévitable. ... La Fed est prompte à desserrer le crédit, et lente à le resserrer. Au cours du temps, la préférence pour la quantité de monnaie papier plutôt que sa qualité signifie que le dollar s’affaiblit peu à peu. ...

* Une étude du journal USA Today montre que chaque ménage américain est redevable de plus de 500 000 $ de promesses financières non-financées faites par les gouvernements locaux, régionaux et fédéraux :
* Les obligations gouvernementales des Américains représentent cinq fois ce que les gens doivent en matière de prêts immobiliers, prêts automobiles, cartes de crédit et autres dettes personnelles. Cette dette de 57,8 milliers de milliards de dollars est la somme dont le gouvernement a besoin en ce moment, stockée et engrangeant des intérêts, afin de générer assez de liquide pour payer ses futures obligations. Lesdites obligations sont évaluées en dollars actuels, et arrivent à échéance dans quelques jours seulement, lorsque les bons du Trésor arriveront à maturité, et dans 75 ans pour la Sécurité sociale et Medicare.”

” Comme la facture non payée d’une carte de crédit, le bilan s’alourdit d’année en année—d’environ 25 000 $ par ménage tous les ans. Les dettes des contribuables américains ont grimpé de 20% ces deux dernières années, 13% de plus que le taux d’inflation.”

... Le gouvernement a dépassé son budget pour contrebalancer les baisses du cycle économique—mais il a oublié de dépenser moins pour compenser les hausses. Et ainsi, la dette s’est accumulée.

* Rien que durant l’administration George W. Bush, on ajouté plus de dettes que durant toutes les administrations combinées depuis celle de George Washington. ... L’une des escroqueries ... est l’expansion des dépenses gouvernementales lorsque les temps se font durs. Cette théorie nous a été donnée par Keynes, un économiste à l’intelligence insurpassable et au bon sens douteux. .... En théorie, les dépenses durant les jours difficiles sont compensées par la frugalité lorsque le temps est au beau. En pratique, les dépenses ne cessent jamais, parce qu’il n’y a aucune volonté d’y mettre fin, et parce qu’une fois mis en place, les programmes survivent par pure inertie. ... En d’autres termes, le gouvernement hésite plus encore à réduire les dépenses, diminuer les subventions, éliminer les usines à gaz ou restreindre une dette publique qui grimpe en flèche. ( Bill Bonner, LA LOI DE LA CLAUDICATION. http://www.la-chronique-agora.com/lca.php?id=862 )

( NB : allez, en budgets fous nous aussi sommes patients ! )

Primo, si je puis me permettre cette suggestion, citez vos sources en ce qui concerne les déclarations de frist. D’aprés Goggle on trouve maintenant “christian science monitor” qui cite associated press. Ca a l’air de faire du foin. On se demande bien pourquoi en cette époque formidable que nous vivons. Chaque jour dépasse le précédent.
Deuxio, je m’étonne que vous ne commentiez pas le symptome georgien, ça aussi c’est joli.
A part ça, continuez, l’ennemi est sonné, pour une fois ça sera un plaisir d’assister à un pilonnage en régle de l’ambulance.

U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Monday that the Afghan war against Taliban guerrillas can never be won militarily and urged support for efforts to bring “people who call themselves Taliban” and their allies into the government. The Tennessee Republican said he learned from briefings that Taliban fighters were too numerous and had too much popular support to be defeated on the battlefield. ... ( http://www.newsvine.com/_news/2006/10/02/383378-frist-taliban-should-be-in-afghan-govt )

James Boyce : Bill Frist Is An Idiot ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/james-boyce/bill-frist-is-an-idiot_b_30814.html )
... This is outrageous because it was the Taliban not Saddam Hussein who supported and gave Osama Bin Laden the safety and security he needed to launch the 9/11 attacks and it is the Taliban we need to defeat. Could it be we can’t win and as Newsweek reported in its cover story in every country but right here last week that we are “losing Afghanistan” because we don’t have the resources we need to win ?  Redeploy the troops out of Iraq and finish the war against the Taliban. Go through every cave in the country, find Osama Bin Laden and kill him. End of story.

dailykos.com : Frist urges surrendering to the TALIBAN ( http://danhex.newsvine.com/_news/2006/10/02/383866-frist-urges-surrendering-to-the-taliban ) ... Democrats are accused on “cut and run” (is it really cut and run after 5 years) in their approach to Iraq, but when it comes to the Taliban, an organization proven to have strong links to Al Qaeda, their recommendation from leadership is “integration” with the current Afghan government. How is that consistent with any policy? Republican leadership clearly have no clue on how to proceed.

( NB : ça tire dans tous les sens ! avant de se tirer ? )

Parmis les bibliothèques numériques ‘Les Classiques des sciences sociales’ est originale dans la francophonie : http://classiques.uqac.ca/

Maintenant 7 collections disponibles regroupant 2173 oeuvres originales de 712 auteurs différents. Elles sont gratuitement télédéchargeables aux formats Word ( .doc ), .pdf et .rtf. ( ils respectent les conditions canadiennes de droits d’auteur, vous devrez respecter vos contraintes légales nationales ). Robert Fossaert et Bernard Dantier ont publié certains de leurs ouvrages exclusivement dans cette bibliothèque. La plupart des auteurs sont reliés à d’autres sites ou bibliothèques numériques. Ne pas oublier la fonction de recherche sur le site.

( NB : je télécharge en format Word vers “Open Office”, et sauve ce “.doc” en format “.odt” compressé. La bibliothèque numérique outre sa compacité permet des recherches croisées plus faciles et rapides, l’indexation, le surlignement, la sélection d’extraits, une navigation très rapide grâce aux liens, etc.

J’y ai aimé Simone Weil, Henri Pirenne : ‘Mahomet et Charlemagne’, Robert Fossaert : ‘Civiliser les États-Unis’, ‘Le monde au 21e siècle’ ...)

Voius avez trouve la bonne definition de ce qui se prepare ... depuis le tsunami indonesien et l alliance (impensable) Clinton-Bush Pere: la recherche d un candidat qui assure le “processus normal de developpement du systeme” c est a dire la perennite de la main-mise des deux partis (eternellement) au pouvoir dans la “Democrate a l Americaine”.

Le pays a besoin de se retablir sus ses deux pieds (le pied Democrate et le pied Republicain) et d arreter le processus de delabrement en cours.
Sans revenir sur les apparitions frequentes des deux “comperes” (Bush Pere et Clinton) on peut y rajourter maintenant le duo Laura Bush et Bill Clinton a la conference recemment organisee a New York sur l avenir economique.

La degradation du parti republicain se poursuit avec la demission du congressman Foley de Floride qui aimait -un peu trop - les jeunes ephebes. et ceux-ci apparemment lui rendaient bien, d apres la presse d aujourd hui.

Dans ce contexte il n y a rien d etonnant que Mc Cain - et Dean par la meme occasion - se rangent des voitures et que la “cohesion nationale” prevale.

Ne serait-ce que pour prevenir une eventuelle procedure de Haute Cour et de mise a la porte de GWB II qui pour beaucoup devraiconsacrer le reste de sa vie a etudier les lecons (methaphysiques) de la"La Chevre de Monsieur Seguin”.

Turkey will not join EU by 2020, most Europeans predict

21.09.2006 - 09:58 CET | By Mark Beunderman
EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS -

A minority of around one third of Europeans believes Turkey and Ukraine will be members of the EU by 2020, a new German study has revealed. But EU citizens believe that by that time, the bloc will have a new treaty.

An opinion poll released on Wednesday (20 September) by the Bertelsmann Foundation, a German think tank, showed that 37 percent of those surveyed across the EU believe Turkey will have joined the EU in 2020.

For Ukraine, which unlike Turkey has no official EU membership perspective, this figure came in just a bit lower, at 35 percent.

The poll, for which a total of 12,000 people were queried in 13 EU member states, demonstrated that most Europeans believe the union will be larger in the future – but not necessarily with the Turks and Ukrainians joining in.

Almost two thirds of respondents said they believe the EU will have more than 27 member states by the end of the second decade of this century – suggesting that Europeans are more confident about Western Balkan states acceding at some point.

The survey was conducted in nine “old” EU member states - Austria, Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Spain and the UK – as well as in four “new” states – Hungary, Lithuania, Poland and Slovakia – revealing a clear east-west rift in expectations.

New member states’ citizens are significantly less optimistic about future enlargement than the EU average, with expectations on Turkish and Ukrainian membership not exceeding 22 percent.

New EU citizens are also less positive than their “old” neighbours about the prospect for a revival of the EU constitution.

Only 29 percent of new member states’ respondents believe that the union will have a constitution by 2020, against 45 percent in Western Europe.

Surprisingly, the French and the Dutch, who rejected the constitution in popular referendums last year, showed above-average optimism, with clear majorities of 57 percent and 50 percent respectively predicting the passage of a constitutional text.

Across the EU, only a small minority (15%) believes the bloc will continue to function with its current institutional structure, with most people expecting the existing EU treaties to be reformed in one way or another by 2020.

http://euobserver.com/9/22469

——

News Item
Berlin/Gütersloh, 20.09.2006
Europeans expect additional EU Member States, but not Ukraine and Turkey
A surprise in France and the Netherlands: The majority foresee an EU Constitution
The majority of Europeans expect the EU to take on additional members over the next 15 years and grow to include over 27 member states by 2020. Only one in three Europeans, however, believes that Turkey or Ukraine will be among the new members. Those are the results of a poll on the future of the EU conducted in selected EU member states by the Germany-based Bertelsmann Stiftung.

Among the more than 10,000 poll participants throughout the EU, 64 percent percent believe that the European community will continue to grow after the addition of Bulgaria and Romania and that it will consist of more than 27 member states by 2020. Only 11 percent think that the EU will stay at 27 members, while another 11 percent believe the number of EU member states will actually decrease between now and 2020. When asked about the prospects for individual countries, only 37 percent believe that Turkey will become a full member and 35 percent believe that Ukraine will achieve full member status.

Many Europeans see limits to the amount of cooperation that will actually take place in matters of policy. Overall, 52 percent expect that the EU will share a common economic policy, 39 percent see a common social policy and 35 percent expect joint EU armed forces. A minority of poll participants (40 percent) believe that the EU will be governed on the basis of a common constitution in 2020. In addition, 15 percent believe the EU will continue to operate based on current agreements, and 25 percent expect that these agreements will be revised, but that a common European Constitution will not be the result.

A comparison among member states reveals that the most “Europe optimists” can be found in Spain, France, Belgium, the Netherlands and Germany. In many of the new Eastern member states, such as Lithuania, Poland or Slovakia, people tend to view the development and future of the EU with significantly less enthusiasm.

The survey revealed that a majority of people in France and in the Netherlands expect a common EU Constitution as the future basis of EU governance. This is surprising, since these were the two countries in which voters rejected the constitution via referenda. Poll results indicate that a majority of the people in France and the Netherlands - 57 percent and 50 percent, respectively - expect the passage of a common constitution in the years to come.

Also interesting is the fact that Great Britain’s population seems to be less skeptical than most continental Europeans when it comes to the future of the EU. 52 percent of Brits see a common EU economic policy down the road and 54 percent expect even a common social policy. More than half of those living in Britain expect that Ukraine and Turkey will become full EU members.

The survey has revealed that, especially for Europe’s younger generation, the future of the EU is quite clear: Europe will continue to grow and work even more closely together. In fact, the survey did not reveal any conflicting expectations or opposing trends among the countries.

Josef Janning, Europe expert at the Bertelsmann Stiftung, draws the following conclusion: The majority of EU citizens believe in the EU vision up until now and believe in the further expansion of both the size and scope of the EU. As far as the public is concerned, many of today’s points of contention have already been resolved. European policy should be building on this and moving ahead with ideas and plans for EU expansion. If large-scale projects are going to serve as a common orientation for Europe’s citizens, they need to make clear the benefits of a united Europe.

Questions relating to the future of the EU will be the focus of the International Bertelsmann Forum (IBF) this weekend in Berlin, where many of Europe’s top political leaders will be on hand, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel, French Prime Minister Dominique de Villepin, EU Commission President José Manuel Durão Barroso as well as Belgian Prime Minister Guy Verhofstadt and Hungarian Prime Minister Ferenc Gyurcsany. As a jumping-off point for discussion the Bertelsmann Stiftung has prepared a strategy paper in cooperation with the Munich Center for Applied Policy Research (CAP).

The Bertelsmann Stiftung survey, conducted in August and September throughout 13 EU Member States by the opinion research institute tns/EMNID, was a representative survey that polled over 10,000 people. The countries that took part in the survey represent up 88 percent of the total EU population. The survey covered all geographic regions throughout the EU and included old as well as new members, net contributors and net recipients.

http://www.bertelsmann-stiftung.de/cps/rde/xchg/SID-0A000F0A-37FC4F0D/bst_en/hs.xsl/nachrichten_33387.htm