The Greek members of Parliament have adopted yesterday evening a very controversial measure, by a 154 to 141 vote, that affects the right to go on strike in the country.
Already overwhelmed by many fiscal crises in recent years, Greece must continually face new austerity reforms proposed by its government. This time, the population and more specifically the trade unions, are indignant against this new reform that affects the right to strike. The new law provides that half of the members of a given union can be present during a demonstration, against a third before. Enough to anger the members of the PAME, a powerful Greek communist union.
The government claims that this new law does not in any way limit strikes but rather encourages workers to become more involved in their union’s activities. Trade unions, for their part, find this law aberrant because members of the same union dwell in several regions of the country and cannot travel simultaneously for rallying in the capital.
The new law not only affects the right to strike but also reforms family allowances. These changes triggered many demonstrations in Athens and public and air transports were severely disrupted. The country has been experiencing this kind of upheaval for almost 8 years now and it is not ready to end. Greek citizens should expect further reforms coming from their Parliament very soon.
Déborah Miller
For further informations :
« Manifestations en Grèce après le vote de nouvelles réformes » Le Monde, 2018, consulted online on 16/01/2018, http://www.lemonde.fr/europe/article/2018/01/16/les-deputes-grecs-adoptent-des-reformes-voulues-par-les-creanciers_5242180_3214.html
« Grèce : grèves et manifestations contre une réforme exigée par les créditeurs », AFP, 2018, consulted online on 16/01/2018, https://www.romandie.com/news/Grece-greve-et-manifestations-contre-une-reforme-exigee-par-les-crediteurs/880093.rom
« Grèce : la restriction du droit de grève adoptée malgré les manifestations », RFI, 2018, consulted on 16/01/2018, http://www.rfi.fr/europe/20180116-grece-restriction-droit-greve-adoptee-malgre-manifestations
A Széchenyi 2020 „Mikro, kis- és középvállalkozások termelési kapacitásainak bővítése” című konstrukciója keretében 411,41 millió forint vissza nem térítendő uniós támogatást nyert el a JAVIPA Kft. A békéscsabai cég a 822,82 millió forint összköltségű projektje során nyomdaipari eszközparkját fejleszti.
A megnövekedett gyógyszeripari megrendelések, minőségi elvárások miatt szükségessé vált fejlesztés során a csomagolóeszközök, valamint a betegtájékoztatók és használati utasítások gyártásához kapcsolódó kapacitásbővítés valósul meg. A vállalkozás a dobozgyártás bővítéséhez egy Speedmaster ofszet nyomógép beszerzését kívánja megvalósítani, mert jelenleg B2 íveket használó nyomógéppel rendelkezik, de igény mutatkozik dupla méretű, B1 formátumú ívekhez alkalmas nyomógép használatára is. Az új géphez szükség van CtP levilágító, egyenes vágógép, valamint kivágó plotter használatára is, melyeket szintén a projekt keretében kívánnak beszerezni.
A raktárlogisztika fejlesztéséhez 3 db ollós emelő, 1 db hőalagutas zsugorfóliázó és 1 db gyalogkísérő targonca beszerzése történik majd. A projekt keretében a betegtájékoztatók, használati utasítások és címkék gyártásához kapcsolódó kapacitás bővítéséhez 1 db ROTATEK tekercsofszet nyomógép beszerzése történik meg, mely rendkívüli pontossággal, alacsony selejtszámmal gyárt betegtájékoztatókat és címkéket, valamint különlegessége, hogy ofszet technológiával tekercsről-tekercsre vagy tekercsről-ívre vágással is nyomtat. Ennek a nyomógépnek a munkáját segíti a rakatfordító, a hajtogatógép, valamint a 4 db kötegelőgép is. A hatékonyság növelése érdekében kívánják bevezetni az SQL alapú VECTORY vállalatirányítás/termelés-irányítási rendszert (IPAR4.0), melynek bevezetése szükségessé teszi két szerver, egy adattároló és a vonatkozó szoftverek üzembe helyezését is.
A projekt eredményeként a JAVIPA Kft. újabb, a legmodernebb technológiákat képviselő gépekkel fog rendelkezni, melyek használata jelentős versenyelőnyhöz juttatja a céget. A technológiák használatának eredményeként a cég árbevétele továbbra is dinamikusan növekedni fog és olyan cégekkel tud hosszú távú megállapodásokat kötni, akikkel a kapacitás hiányában nem tudnának kapcsolatot létesíteni.
A GINOP-1.2.1-16 számú pályázati kiíráson 411.410.867 forint támogatást elnyert, 822.821.735 forint összköltségvetésű fejlesztés 2017. augusztus 17-én indult és várhatóan 2019. február 15-én zárul.
A Széchenyi 2020 „Mikro, kis- és középvállalkozások termelési kapacitásainak bővítése” című konstrukciója keretében 411,41 millió forint vissza nem térítendő uniós támogatást nyert el a JAVIPA Kft. A békéscsabai cég a 822,82 millió forint összköltségű projektje során nyomdaipari eszközparkját fejleszti.
A megnövekedett gyógyszeripari megrendelések, minőségi elvárások miatt szükségessé vált fejlesztés során a csomagolóeszközök, valamint a betegtájékoztatók és használati utasítások gyártásához kapcsolódó kapacitásbővítés valósul meg. A vállalkozás a dobozgyártás bővítéséhez egy Speedmaster ofszet nyomógép beszerzését kívánja megvalósítani, mert jelenleg B2 íveket használó nyomógéppel rendelkezik, de igény mutatkozik dupla méretű, B1 formátumú ívekhez alkalmas nyomógép használatára is. Az új géphez szükség van CtP levilágító, egyenes vágógép, valamint kivágó plotter használatára is, melyeket szintén a projekt keretében kívánnak beszerezni.
A raktárlogisztika fejlesztéséhez 3 db ollós emelő, 1 db hőalagutas zsugorfóliázó és 1 db gyalogkísérő targonca beszerzése történik majd. A projekt keretében a betegtájékoztatók, használati utasítások és címkék gyártásához kapcsolódó kapacitás bővítéséhez 1 db ROTATEK tekercsofszet nyomógép beszerzése történik meg, mely rendkívüli pontossággal, alacsony selejtszámmal gyárt betegtájékoztatókat és címkéket, valamint különlegessége, hogy ofszet technológiával tekercsről-tekercsre vagy tekercsről-ívre vágással is nyomtat. Ennek a nyomógépnek a munkáját segíti a rakatfordító, a hajtogatógép, valamint a 4 db kötegelőgép is. A hatékonyság növelése érdekében kívánják bevezetni az SQL alapú VECTORY vállalatirányítás/termelés-irányítási rendszert (IPAR4.0), melynek bevezetése szükségessé teszi két szerver, egy adattároló és a vonatkozó szoftverek üzembe helyezését is.
A projekt eredményeként a JAVIPA Kft. újabb, a legmodernebb technológiákat képviselő gépekkel fog rendelkezni, melyek használata jelentős versenyelőnyhöz juttatja a céget. A technológiák használatának eredményeként a cég árbevétele továbbra is dinamikusan növekedni fog és olyan cégekkel tud hosszú távú megállapodásokat kötni, akikkel a kapacitás hiányában nem tudnának kapcsolatot létesíteni.
A GINOP-1.2.1-16 számú pályázati kiíráson 411.410.867 forint támogatást elnyert, 822.821.735 forint összköltségvetésű fejlesztés 2017. augusztus 17-én indult és várhatóan 2019. február 15-én zárul.
Chères amies, chers amis : les vœux de EU-Logos pour l’année 2018
Qui dit nouvelle année, dit rétrospective et prises de bonnes résolutions. Nous n’échappons pas à cette loi du genre. Année 2018, année décisive pour l’Europe, reconquérir ses citoyens, les mobiliser dans l’unité et l’efficacité. En 2018, confirmer un renouveau incontestable mais encore fragile, et aussi assumer ses responsabilités historiques. 2018, une année combative pour l’Union européenne, une année solidaire entre ses membres .L’année 2018, l’année du réveil et de la refondation ? année des conventions démocratiques et de leur succès ? C’est ici que les vœux prennent tout leur sens.
L’Europe a su faire preuve de résilience. Un redressement économique et financier réel mais limité et encore fragile pour certains. Les dangers politiques persistent eux aussi, ils rôdent toujours. Le populisme et ses différents avatars ont reçu un coup mais pas un coup fatal. L’opinion publique est à l’arrêt après avoir, pour une bonne partie d’entre elle, tourné le dos à un déni d’Europe manifestement excessif, et au bout du compte, peu convaincant. A l’arrêt, elle observe et s’interroge, elle est prête cependant à faire confiance si se confirment les premiers succès.
Mais c’est une attente qui se prolonge du fait de nouveaux phénomènes apparus entre- temps: le retour inattendu de la menace nucléaire, la confirmation des périls du cyber monde, le désarroi identitaire, la paupérisation des classes moyennes, l’aggravation, lourde de menaces, des inégalités entre pays (1), mais aussi à l’intérieur d’un même pays : l’injustice sociale ne produirait-elle pas une double radicalisation, populiste et djihadiste ? A joutons les déstabilisations de tous ordres créées par des phénomènes migratoires non maitrisés .Que dire des développements de l’intelligence artificielle et des fantasmes qui lui sont liés ? Que dire aussi des futurs bouleversements liés aux changements radicaux dans nos modes et comportements productifs ?
En face, les errements de Donald Trump, et la Chine qui assume de plus en plus ouvertement son ambition de conquérir le leadership mondial que seule l’Europe semble en mesure de lui contester ,en partie, surtout s’il advenait que la Chine se présente, de façon trop assurée et permanente, comme le seul héraut de la lutte contre le réchauffement climatique ou apparaisse comme le promoteur incontesté d’une mondialisation qui serait alors sans partage.
L‘Europe est comme à l’arrêt, dans l’attente de confirmations, d’infléchissements ou d’effondrements imprévus. Mais l’avenir, on ne l’attend pas comme on attendrait un train, sur le quai d’une gare ; l’avenir, on le construit. Pour le construire, il n’est pas de meilleure occasion qu’un bon usage de ces conventions démocratiques initialement proposées par Emmanuel Macron et depuis rebaptisées « consultations citoyennes ».
Ces conventions présenteraient un premier intérêt : déborder les schémas proposés habituellement par les représentations traditionnelles (les partis, les syndicats, les bureaucraties….) où s’inscrivent d’ordinaire les revendications. Une révolte donc et, pour y être fidèles, consacrer nos énergies à l’organisation d’un vaste débat européen afin de poser les bons diagnostics de la situation actuelle et trouver les meilleures solutions. Nous donner les moyens de savoir ce que nous voulons. C’est-à-dire plus que des consultations, fussent-elles « citoyennes ».
Dans ces moments d’incertitudes à haut risques, nos démocraties européennes doivent savoir se remettre en cause, qu’il s’agisse d’éducation, de croissance économique durable et inclusive, du renforcement du lien social. Sur le plan international, face au renouveau des violences, au renouveau des idéologies et des régimes hostiles à la démocratie, l’Europe doit confirmer ses valeurs, assumer la charge de la défense de l’Etat de droit, y compris, le cas échéant, sur le plan militaire. Rappelons qu’en 2016, après cinq années consécutives de baisse des ventes d’armes, celles-ci viennent de repartir à la hausse et d’augmenter en 2016 de 4%, pour un montant annuel de 217,2 milliards de dollars, les ventes de l’Europe occidentale restant stables.(Données du SIPRI).
Difficile d’imaginer des vœux plus engageants et plus ardents pour ces conventions démocratiques. Sur quoi doivent-elles faire porter prioritairement leurs efforts dans la conjoncture actuelle caractérisée par la persistance de l’extrême droite populiste et sa banalisation ? Dans une Europe où tout repose sur le consensus et le souci de l’apaisement, il est difficile de remettre en cause des pays au comportement peu démocratiques, mais élus démocratiquement. L’Europe est largement impuissante du fait de ses règles (l’unanimité par exemple) mais aussi de ses comportements. Pour toutes ces raisons, cette banalisation de l’extrême droite populiste fait malheureusement l’objet d’un consentement rampant, inavoué : ce consentement est, qu’on le veuille ou non, accepté, toléré. Il faut reconnaître que ces droites populistes, ces gauches radicales sont polymorphes avec une forte plasticité redoutable, ce qui rend malaisée la réplique. Pascal Ory (2) a bien décrit le phénomène : « Une culture politique de droite (…) dans un style de gauche (….) une idéologie de synthèse qui permet à la droite radicale de trouver le chemin des classes populaires en adoptant un style de gauche, avec, à droite comme à gauche, cette stratégie, intransigeante et volontiers paranoïaque, nourrissant une conception simple de l’univers, à la fois manichéenne et symétrique », eux et nous !
La capacité de l’UE à se remettre en cause est essentielle et cela constitue pour elle un défi d’un type nouveau. Elle va devoir se questionner, ce qui est compliqué quand il ne s’agit pas de tout casser, tout faire éclater. Face à la persistance de l’extrême droite, il n’y a pas d’autre issue que d’inviter l’UE à se mettre en cause et proposer « du nouveau », à l’intégrer dans un contexte historique de longue durée , à l’opposé du « court-termisme » actuellement dominant où chacun semble ne vouloir retenir que ce qui l’intéresse directement et immédiatement, dans une course éperdue à tous les opportunismes.
Pas d’autre issue que de confier aux conventions démocratiques cette tâche de la dernière chance. En outre, cette démarche est susceptible d’enlever aux citoyens le sentiment qu’ils ne sont plus maîtres de leur destin, dépossédés de leur souveraineté. La voix des citoyens ne compterait pour rien. Or ce qui est proposé, c’est un processus délibératif d’un type inédit par son déroulement, sa méthode, son ampleur et sa durée, quasiment jusqu’aux élections du Parlement européen en 2019.
Concernant ces conventions démocratiques, nous y reviendrons régulièrement au cours des mois prochains et la première fois le 13 février 2018, où Eulogos organisera au Press Club de Bruxelles, une conférence intitulée « l’Union européenne à la reconquête de ses citoyens ». Ce sera l’occasion d’approfondir et de concrétiser ce nouveau concept de consultations citoyennes ou conventions démocratiques, en organisant leur mise en œuvre. Déclencher une dynamique nouvelle susceptible de produire des « cahiers de doléances » qui, à l’image du précédent historique de 1789, viendraient alimenter les « Etats généraux de l’Europe ».
Meilleurs vœux pour 2018. Que cette année soit une réussite !
Henri-Pierre Legros
New talks between North Korea and South Korea seem to have been fruitful. These two countries, at war since 1950, have agreed in three points and issued a joint statement.
The negotiations lasted for over 10 hours and it was the first official meeting since December 2015. This was a delicate situation, not only between the two countries, but regarding the United States as well: South Korea did not want this meeting to create tensions with one of its greatest allies.
However, president Trump affirmed there would be no military action during the talks, and said that “hopefully it will lead to success for the world, not just for our country, but for the world.” He later also revealed that there have been talks, “a lot of good talks”, between the United States and North Korea. This seems like a positive outcome to what had been a very escalating year between the two countries. Especially since regarding nuclear weapons, North Korea will only discuss it with the United States and not with South Korea, nor China or Russia.
It was the South which had, for a long time, proposed to initiate talks that Pyongyang accepted on 5th January. One of the reasons for it might have been the Pyeongchang Olympics Games, the Winter Olympics taking place in South Korea. North Korean athletes had managed to qualify for them, but did not register in time; however, the International Olympic Committee kept the invitation open for a delegation. In 1988, when the last Olympics in South Korea took place (in Seoul), North Korea did not send a delegation.
During the talks, other than the fact that North Korea decided to send a national delegation to the Olympics, the three issues that were agreed to and announced in the statement were “agreeing to work to ease military tensions, hold military-to-military talks, and reopen the inter-Korean military hotline”. Stephane Dujarric, spokesperson for the UN Secretary-General said that “the re-establishment and strengthening of such channels is critical to lowering the risk of miscalculation or misunderstanding and to reduce tensions in the region”. Finally, Seoul also asked that during the Olympics, a reunion would take place between separated families.
All of these events made the EU High Representative for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Frederica Mogherini, make a statement on the very important issue. She sees the talks as “encouraging signal, representing a positive step towards the improvement of inter-Korean relations”. Moreover, she hopes that additional meetings will be “a building block for peace and stability on the Korean peninsula”. Finally, she talked about the European Union’s role regarding the situation, by saying the Union will “continue to work towards this goal”, of mainly maintaining dialogue for the countries’ denuclearization.
The European Union has been very present in the Korean issue, wanting to be a kind of moderator and continually working for peaceful resolutions. With these new developments, it might finally and definitely have that role in the future.
Carolina Duarte de Jesus
For further information:
“EU welcomes outcome of inter-Korean talks as positive step for Koreas’ relations”, Yonhap News Agency, 2018, [consulted online on 11/01/2018]. http://english.yonhapnews.co.kr
“Inter-Korean talks hailed as positive sign to ease tensions on peninsula”, Xinhua News, 2018, [consulted online on 11/01/2018]. http://www.xinhuanet.com
HOLLAND Steve and KIM Christine, “Trump, on the possibility of North Korea talks, says: ‘Who knows where it leads?’”, Reuters, 2018, [consulted online on 11/01/2018]. http://uk.reuters.com
LEE Taehoon and MCKIRDY Euan, “North Korea accepts South’s offer to meet for talks”, CNN, 2018, [consulted online on 11/01/2018]. http://edition.cnn.com
L’Union européenne et la paix, L’invention d’un modèle européen de gestion des conflits sous la direction de Anne Bazin, Charles Tenenbaum, Coll. Relations Internationales, SciencePo, Les Presses, 2017
Le livre intitulé „L’Union européenne et la paix. L’invention d’un modèle européen de gestion des conflits” est un travail collectif de dix auteurs sous la rédaction d’Anne Bazin et Charles Tetenbaum. Les deux co-auteurs sont des maitres de conférence en science politique a Sciences Po Lille et les chercheurs au Centre d’études et de recherches administratives, politiques et sociales (CERAPS, Université de Lille 2).
Anne Bazin dans sa recherche se concentre autour des questions liées a la politique étrangère de l’UE. Charles Tenenbaum s’interesse à la thématique des médiations internationales et résolution des conflits et de multilatéralisme.
Ce livre d’une manière scientifique et méthodique dessine une analyse approfondie et détaillée de la politique de la construction de la paix par l’UE après la guerre froide. Cet Union qui, en 2012 reçoit le prix Nobel de la Paix.
Il démontre quelles sont les logiques politiques et les changements dynamiques institutionnels qui accompagnent dans le temps la création et l’évolution d’un modèle européen de gestion des crises.
L’Union européenne apparait comme un acteur majeur de la paix et de la résolution des conflits au coté des autres organisations internationales comme Organisation des Nations Unis et Organisation de Sécurité et de Coopération en Europe.
La structure du livre, accompagnée par une introduction d’Anne Bazin et de Charles Tenenbaum se compose de deux partis et se compose de 9 chapitres. Dans la première partie nous trouvons les propos théorique, concernant la création et le fonctionnement des politiques de la gestion des crises de l’UE. La deuxième partie décrit les exemples concrets d’implémentation des différents instruments et de stratégies de la politique étrangère et de sécurité: le Proche Orient, la Somalie et le Caucase afin de mieux démontrer les initiatives de la paix de l’UE dans le terrain.
Chaque chapitre est écrit par un autre chercheur venant des différents universités, pas seulement européens (Science Po Lille, Science Po Grenoble, Cardiff University, Université Hebraique de Jerusalem, College d’Europe de Bruges, Université d’Amsterdam).
Dans l’introduction les auteurs souhaitent souligner l’importance de comprendre l’évolution institutionnelle et politique de la gestion des crises made in Europe. Le premier chapitre démontre l’évolution institutionnelle des mécanismes européens dans une perspective historique et sociologique. Dans le deuxième chapitre les auteurs présentent les acteurs majeurs et les pratiques d’implantation de l paix par les institutions de l’UE. Dans le troisième chapitre l’auteur décrit les actions menées par l’Union a cote des autres institutions internationales qui s’activent dans le domaine des missions pacifiques et de gestion de crise. Dans le quatrième chapitre nous avons une analyse de la manière de laquelle sont analysées les programmes de démocratisation dans la stratégique globale de la politique de l’Union notamment la gestion de crise. Chapitre cinq présente une chronologie très détaillée de la création de la politique extérieure de l’UE. Il se divise en quatre parties:
- l'évolution normative,
- la mise en place de la politique de gestion de crises de l’UE,
- le niveau institutionnel,
- les exemples des missions de paix menées par l’Union (Croatie, Bosnie, Kosovo; Afghanistan, Libye; Tchétchénie, Georgie, Ukraine).
Le chapitre six présente l’évolution de médiation comme un des instruments pacifique de la gestion de crise par l’UE. Les trois derniers chapitres décrivent les exemples exacts de l’engagement de lUE dans la construction et du maintien de la paix dans le monde : le conflit Israélo-Palestinien, la Somalie et le Caucase.
Cet ouvrage présente des normes, des pratiques ainsi que des acteurs de l’UE selon une démarche de sociologie des relations internationales:
- les enquêtes sociologiques approfondies,
- les entretiens avec des praticiens, des experts et des diplomates qui participent dans ce processus directement.
Les auteurs soulignent que l’UE développe depuis la fin de la guerre froide les divers instruments de sa politique étrangère:
◦ la gestion des crises,
◦ la prévention,
◦ la médiation,
◦ la réconciliation,
◦ la démocratisation,
◦ des droits de l’homme.
En effet, elle souhaite avoir un rôle majeur dans la pacification des zones de conflit dans le monde.
Les auteurs souhaitent montrer comment grâce aux divers outils de la sociologie et de la science politique, la politique étrangère de l’UE et ses actions extérieurs évoluent. Ils mettent l’accent sur les stratégies alternatives de résolution des conflits développés par l’UE au cours des années.
Il convient de souligner que l’UE et sa politique étrangère sont montrées dans une optique multilatérale, internationale, en comparaison aux autres organisations intergouvernementales, universelles ou régionales qui possèdent déjà depuis plus longtemps les instruments de gestion des crises. En effet, toutes ses organisations participent dans l’organisation du monde.
L’histoire de la politique extérieure de l’UE est animé par l’objectif de mettre les Européens a contribution dans la résolution des conflits. En effet, selon les auteurs, l’UE souhaite devenir conflict manager global.
De la lecture de ce lire découle deux conclusions :
1. la diplomatie européenne sur le niveau régional et mondial reste historiquement liée à la pacification des conflits grâce aux plusieurs modèles de médiations : le soutien financier aux ONG, des expertises externes, le soutien des partenaires,
2. la faiblesse, l’incohérence des moyens entretenus et le manque d’un soutien politique mènent à une baisse d’influence progressive à l’échelle mondiale et à une baisse de la capacité d’intervention de l’UE.
D’ou besoin d’évolution des instruments, de mécanismes et d’institutions spécialisés afin de redéfinir la nouvelle politique de la paix de l’Union.
Il convient de souligner les valeurs scientifiques et même didactiques de cet oeuvre. Malgré son style très technique, qui semble momentanément rude, cette lecture mène à une réflection et un jugement critique envers la politique de l’UE.
*
Chronologie - politique de la paix de l’UE:
NORMES-THEORIE
1. Maastricht - chapitre 5- PESC
1. résolution de conflit
2. missions de Petersberg (UEO) : maintien de la paix, missions humanitaires, gestion de crise, rétablissement de la paix
2. Amsterdam - maintien de la paix, missions de forces de combat
3. St.Malo 1998 - capacités militaires (parallèlement - institutionnalisation de la politique européenne de sécurité et de défense
4. Göteborg 2001 - prévention des conflits = un des principaux objectifs des relations extérieurs de l’UE
5. Stratégie européenne de secouriste - équilibre civili-militaire dans la gestion des crises
PRATIQUE
• 34 missions lances - dans le cadre de la politique européenne de sécurité et de défense entre 2003-2015 (16 achevés, 18 en cours début 2015)
• deux tiers de ces missions ont un caractère civile (coopération police/justice, renforcement de l’Etat de droit)
• taille modeste - qqn dizaines/centaines d’agent.
INSTITUTIONS
• Parlement eu. - groupes de médiation - évolution vers une prévention de conflit et une médiation
• Création de l’Institut européen de la paix (IEP) à l’initiative de la Suède et de la Finlande
▪ médiation européenne de la paix européenne
▪ diplomatie informelle
▪ politisation des enjeux lies a la médiation des conflits (différents intérêts des pays membres de l’UE)
ETUDES DE CAS
Processus Israélo-Palestinien
- jeux d’intérêts des pays membres de l’UE; production normative croissante de l’UE et pas de stratégie politique clairement définie ; par conséquent - une baisse d’influence progressive de l’UE, incohérence entre les normes promues et la capacité d’intervention de l’UE; financement de l’UE majeur (poids financier)
écrit par dr Kinga Torbicka, chercheuse associée de l`Institut Europa Varietas
Tag: Kinga Torbickagestion civile des crisesCSDPBulgaria started its round as the holder of the EU Council presidency on the 1st January 2018, after Estonia concluded its turn by the end of the year 2017. It is the first time the country assumes this position since its entry in the European Union back in 2007. Although Bulgaria has been regarded as the poorest country in the EU – and is said to be the most corrupted one – it will seek to continue on the work begun by its predecessor, most notably by developing the digital single market project even further.
Indeed, one of its main priorities will be to promote competitiveness by using all the innovative and digital means which will be part of the European digital single market. In its work programme published a few days ago, the Bulgarian representatives to the EU Council indicated that they would focus on “accelerating the process of completing a competitive and fair digital Single Market; supporting connectivity within the EU; updating the regulatory framework for telecommunications; enhancing the credibility and security of personal data in the digital space and the development of a European data-based economy.”
This point is only one part of a four-priorities programme, which encompasses different areas, namelyeconomic and social cohesion”, “stability and security of Europe”, “European prospects and connectivity of the Western Balkans” and finally “digital economy and skills for the future”. The overall goal of the Bulgarian presidency will therefore be to make the European Union “stronger, more united and more democratic”, as Bulgaria’s representatives stated in the 40-pages long work programme.
Bulgaria will surely face a lot of challenges along the way, before Austria eventually takes over the EU Council presidency by the 1st July 2018, but it will strive to achieve all the goals that have been set up by the three countries – Estonia, Bulgaria and Austria – as they are part of a trio presidency. Moreover, according to the Council of the EU, “working as a trio presidency also means that the three member states have the opportunity to learn about each other and to work together closely, thus strengthening the EU as a whole.”
Raphaël Moncada
For further information:
Bulgarian Presidency: https://eu2018bg.bg/en/programme
EU2017: https://www.eu2017.ee/trio-programme
Euronews: http://www.euronews.com/2017/12/31/bulgaria-takes-up-eu-presidency
European Parliament: http://www.europarl.europa.eu/RegData/etudes/BRIE/2017/614605/EPRS_BRI(2017)614605_EN.pdf
The Weinstein case that shed the light on violence and sexual abuses in the world of cinema and the cases of abuse in the European Parliament, have shifted the attention on one of the dramas of contemporary society, one of the great battles for civilization the Western World has been fighting in the last decades. Over the years, the European Parliament has dealt with the issue on several occasions and to talk about this I met with Elly Schlein, an Italian Member of the European Parliament (MEP), member of the Socialists & Democrats (S&D) group and the Italian party Possibile. During her tenure, she fought for the reform of the Dublin treaty and launched, together with other colleagues, the #MeTooEU campaign against gender-based violence, following the scandals that have hit the European institutions in recent months. These two battles are the result of her presence in the LIBE (Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs) and in the FEMM (Women’s rights and gender equality) committee. During this interview we talked all-round about the issues that are reasons for the violence and culture of gender inequality. The answers and ideas that Elly Schlein gave me will always be quoted.
Media attention on gender violence
In the first days of October, a succession of actresses and women linked to Hollywood have reported harassment and sexual violence by Harvey Weinstein, a famous film producer and a very influential man in Hollywood. Within a month, more than 90 women declared being victims of harassment by the producer and 14 accused him of rape. These accusations have initiated numerous investigations. On the Internet, the social campaign #MeToo was launched and following that Jeanne Ponte, assistant to a French MEP in the European Parliament, publicly reported cases of harassment in the institutions on her and her colleagues. We asked MEP Elly Schlein if media attention was the reason or the result of cases such as those mentioned:
“Surely the Weinstein case has helped turn the spotlight on what is a structural and endemic problem of our society. This problem exists, regardless of how much attention medias are paying to it, and sometimes cyclical facts emerge concerning people who are particularly well-known as it happened in the Weinstein case. Unfortunately, the data tells us that one in three women was victim of sexual or physical harassment since youth. So, it is a problem that exists in all societies and in all work environments, not only in the film industry, but we have dealt with it in this Parliament because in the European institutions unfortunately there are cases of sexual abuse and harassment. And that is why, together with many other colleagues, we asked with determination that legislations should be enforced and prevention should be adopted immediately. Because these two things have to be carried on together, there is certainly a profound cultural work to do, but in parallel there is a strengthening of the legal framework that does not only involve sanctions, which have to be hard and effective, but which also entails the creation of a climate of zero tolerance that allows and facilitates complaints. Because precisely because of the cases we have dealt with here in the European Parliament, we realized that the already existing channels to denounce facts of this type are obviously not yet built in an effective way, they are not yet reliable enough for the people that preferred in some cases to not report. Or just to report only after the Weinstein case, on the wave of this beautiful hashtag called #MeToo.”
#MeToo and the TIME’s cover as Person of the Year
The #MeToo social campaign was launched by the actress Alyssa Milano a few days after the Weinstein scandal broke out. Her call was heard by thousands of women who shared their experiences of social harassment and abuse by demonstrating how widespread the phenomenon is. Just to her and to the other « Silence Breakers« , TIME magazine dedicated the annual cover award of the Person of the Year, identifying the movement of women who joined the hashtag #MeToo as a collective fight; born, however, as an act of individual courage. That was what Elly Schlein thought about this:
“Yes, let’s say that this is interesting, because one thing is true: despite being a structural and endemic problem of our societies, where much more awareness and prevention and contrast of violence must be made; it is also true that after the Weinstein case, these very positive campaigns that were born have created a climate in which women felt much freer to report these facts and this created a positive circuit. It is a situation in which one supports one another in the act of denunciation, which is never easy. We have also seen that in the Italian case, which unfortunately presented some profiles a bit special compared to those of other countries, demonstrating the great backwardness of our country on the issue of gender equality. Great backwardness also from the cultural point of view, in Italy we have seen episodes of victim-blaming. Comments like « you’ve looked for it », « why did she denounce so late? » and « first you benefit and then… ». This is all an indecent blame for the victim who must instead be able to report through reliable channels, to be followed by a team of medical, psychological and legal advisors. In short, the complaint deserves to be seriously considered; then the complaint will give rise to a judicial procedure and we will see if this will lead to convictions for those responsible. But here the important thing is that there is a climate in which people feel free and protected in the complaint and have channels through which the complaints are taken seriously. This is not only necessary in the European institutions, as we have been care to ask President Tajani with a petition in the website Change.org, which has already collected about 24,000 signatures, but is essential in all workplaces. Because in all workplaces, unfortunately, these things happen: there are abuses, there is harassment, there are episodes of stalking or otherwise of gender-based violence. It is necessary that in all workplaces there is an awareness and adequate tools for prevention and counter action”
The legislative proposals of the European Parliament
In 2017, in three different moments the European institutions have strongly pushed for greater legal protection of women victims of abuse and violence: with the accession to the Istanbul Convention and with the two resolutions of the European Parliament on the 12th September and 26th October. The adhesion to the Istanbul Convention is a great boost the European Union gives to the many Member States that have not ratified it yet. It is a way of putting back at the center an argument that some people had set aside. While with regard to the two Resolutions, the European Parliament can act as an open-door to many working environments on issues of prevention and combating gender-based violence.
“We hope that at least the Parliament can give a boost to all European institutions in this direction. What has already been said in the Resolution we approved on September 12, which strongly condemns all forms of violence against women and welcomed the European Union’s accession to the Istanbul Convention on 13th June 2017. It is good to remember that the Convention has not yet been ratified by all EU Member States. So that the European Union has also been a symbolic act, that wants to push with absolute haste and urgency the Member States to join, implement and ratify the Convention of Istanbul. Obviously, it is not the only Resolution, there have been so many from the Parliament on this issue. The last one was approved on the 26th October, when we voted for a resolution on the fight against violence and sexual abuse in the European Union. This Resolution condemns any form of sexual violence and physical or psychological harassment and also deplores the fact that these acts are tolerated too easily. It also condemns the cases of sexual harassment in the EU institutions recently revealed by the media. This Resolution insists on what I said earlier, namely that we need a more effective legal framework, that we need to take further measures to strengthen the fight against this phenomenon and that we need more prevention. We also had a debate in the plenary session last October, before the approval of this Resolution, which showed that some of the internal procedures are not yet adequate and it is still too difficult to report cases of harassment or we are afraid that this will lead to consequences and to empowering those guilty of these acts. All of this began with the adherence to a letter, which was the initiative of some colleagues and was addressed to President Tajani, in light of what was the Weinstein case and the thousands of women who found the strength to denounce the experiences of abuse sexual in work spaces and public places. We first asked that there was an external audit, for the cases of sexual abuse in the European Parliament, we asked that there was a special commission dedicated to this, which also included legal counselors, medical and psychological staff. All this to investigate these cases reported, obviously maintaining the absolute confidentiality and the anonymity of complaints to protect victims. It was also asked that measures were adopted that could ensure a climate of zero tolerance at all levels in the European institutions. Finally, it was necessary to ask the institutions to fully support the victims during these procedures and to also carry forward the formal complaint to the competent judicial authorities.”
Elly Schlein has also launched an online petition on the well-known « change.org » website, along with MEPs Ernest Urtasun, Linnea Engstrom and Terry Reintke.
“I dealt with the Italian part of this complaint that we called « Stop sexual abuse in the European institutions » with the significant hashtag #MeTooEU, that is the European part of the #MeToo campaign. And just as I said to you, we ask loudly:
The cultural problem of gender violence
Coming to discuss the cultural issue behind gender-based violence, the question that arises is how to combat the cultural problem, in addition to the legal one, behind gender-based violence. Especially if there is a European level in which to fight the culture of gender-based violence or if this problem has to be fought at other levels. The MEP Elly Schlein gave us a long and complex vision on the issue:
“The FEMM committee has always been committed to supporting the fight against gender-based violence. So certainly, there is a European level on which to work in a cultural way on the issue of attracting interest, training and information, and the denunciation of what is sexism, sexist language, stereotypes. On these issues, the European Parliament is very active and there is already support from the European Union. At the national level, there is a long way to go, I think the crucial question is to start early and start from schools. This is why we support the need to educate about differences within schools. A possibility that too often is not explored by the educational plans of our schools, even if there are good practices in circulation. I have recently met the teachers of the schools of Bologna, for example of the Rodari school in the province, and we have dealt with this delicate theme together: it is not an easy operation! We have made an initiative by tackling with experts on this issue what are the challenges for proper training in schools to raise awareness among young people about these important issues. It is from there that the deconstruction of these patriarchal structures that keep our country plastered, more than others, begins. We need to do serious work of support, which is lacking at the national level, to the anti-violence centers that have a long experience and great skills to support the victims. And we need to make an accurate operation on who has been responsible for acts like these, people who are re-socialized and re-educated by fighting these stereotypes and this completely wrong idea of the woman’s body as if it were an object, or as if it were a men’s possession. So you have to act at all levels: local, national and European. This can be done with many tools to support these policies, like find funds available to support courses and training. At the national level a much more serious investment is needed: constant government cuts to funds available for the anti-violence centers are indecent.”
Anti-violence centers and funding for facilities
There is a problem of public funding for a whole series of structures providing protection and support for women victims of violence, facing a reality which is that institutions receive less and less public funding. This is the case for example of the International Women’s Home in Rome, active since the ‘80s and recognized for its role of public utility by the City of Rome since 1992. Today it risks closing for the demands of the municipality that claims to be paid a rent for the structures that host it. So my question is: the problem is political rather than economic? And the second is: the interest about gender problem is a minority in society?
“First of all, I want to express solidarity and support to the International Women’s Home, which should not be closed. It would be very serious to close it because what it does is precious. Whoever is in the government of all institutions, municipality, regions and central State, must absolutely and cannot afford to have this approach in 2017. For decades, there has been special attention given to the issue of gender equality in the European law, you cannot afford it that the institutions accept the lack of this attention. I take it to the same extent with the government or with a mayor who makes the mistake of removing funds for this type of policy. I do not believe that it is a minority, I believe that society is also ahead the political class on many things, surely there is a widespread cultural problem and in Italy we are behind other countries. But today there is an awareness of these issues much greater than a few years ago, the battle still needs to make many strides forward from stereotypes spread by the media, television and newspapers. How many times do we attack the newspapers as they face the murder of a woman, overturning the question and going almost to justify why he got out of his mind because he loved her and could not live without her? No, he is a murderer and must be treated as such and also the way and the language we use to talk about gender violence makes all the difference in the world on the cultural battle. So you need to have the multi-level high guard, on the language and the stereotypes that television broadcasts: both information programs and films, television series and all programs. There is a need to raise the guard on the language when we talk about these facts in the newspapers, to watch out for the horrendous and sexist commercials that unfortunately still haunt the advertising space of our country. A total contrast of these phenomena and of all this patriarchal culture that sees in the woman’s body an object to be appropriated, which means the cultural battle is not only against this but is connected to the sexist and patriarchal paradigm of our societies. That has to do with the fact that women are absolutely underrepresented in decision-making roles, not only in politics, where in some Regional Councils they are almost absent in a shameful way. Shameful not for them but precisely for the electoral systems and for a political culture that in all the parties does not see the figures of women emerge sufficiently. But we also see it in the boards of companies, women who at the European level are in the boards of companies listed on the stock exchange are 4.7%. We are not 4.7% of society, just as in 2017 it is unacceptable that there is still a wage inequality between men and women for the same job by 15% at European level, this is medieval and is not acceptable in any way. Not to mention the pension gap at European level that is even higher, because women in Europe on average gain 39% less than retired men. Then there is a wide range of battles to be done, we push on the national level for a law on gender equality on the model of the French, that has a comprehensive approach and that touches all these various issues, because the fields in which women are discriminated against today are still very large. As I said, women are discriminated not only in the family, with family work, or when they are victims of violence, but also in the workplace, in the political decision-making, in the areas of responsibility and in the organizational charts of large companies. Here on this there is a lot to do, as Possibile we have proposed that companies that do not respect wage equality could not participate in public tenders; this problem requires very strong sanctions from this point of view.”
Italy has a long way to go
However, compared to other member countries of the European Union it seems that Italy is still behind, especially in terms of the cultural battle and that of information. What is the difference between Italy and other European countries?
“We are a country that is not yet secular enough, by the Constitution and the legislation we should be a secular country, but we have a heavy influence of a certain culture that partly derives from religion, but it is not only that. We also have other models that overlap and see the woman strongly discriminated and as an object of possession. Let’s think, for example, about the organized crime mafia mentality: that is a very patriarchal mentality, so there are many reasons. And then politics in Italy has not yet decided to diverge from this and has not decided to make a strong and direct investment towards gender equality that passes from all these issues. The battles are wage equality, the right representation in decision-making places, the battle not to relegate women to a living instrument of welfare, which in recent years have even made up for institutional shortcomings. In the years of welfare cuts, it is women who have made up for more work at home and cared for the elderly and children. For example, we do not have enough childcare facilities and the right support in the workplace for women who want to carry on with their family and their parenting responsibilities. It takes an appropriate maternal leave and even an appropriate paternal leave; on this there was an attempt for a European directive that then basically ran aground. It takes financial and cultural support to the anti-violence centers, it takes institutions that promote this culture and this also depends on the parties that have to take charge and have a huge responsibility in this regard. I’m lucky because I’m part of a feminist party and that has a secretary, Pippo Civati, that as a man has always been very attentive to the « male » question, as we call it. And so he made us do a series of proposals for which we have also been teased, here is another difference between Italy and the others. It is indicative what happened when we proposed the « Tampon Tax« : a measure of civilization because the basic products of female hygiene cannot be taxed as luxury products, they are essential goods. We were asking for a lowering of the VAT in this sense and we were teased by everyone and everything, even the comedian Luciana Littizzetto who had never deigned to pay attention to this in the follow-up TV program Che Tempo Che Fa. Only after a while did they begin to realize that it was a proposal that the United Kingdom was pursuing, not the feminist groups but the United Kingdom government. For example, Obama has dealt with gender issues also in these specific terms; instead in Italy they are still the subject of derision. So politics are responsible for backwardness as is the interference of a certain Catholic culture; “certain” because instead there are many Catholics who are fully aware of the need to make huge strides on gender equality. There are many tools to combat these phenomena and to promote a political culture and we will try to put them at the center of the debate in view of the upcoming elections.”
This is the result of the interview with the MEP Elly Schlein, wishing us a future where scandals such as Weinstein and harassment within the European institutions will be defeated by the battles for a growing cultural awareness and legal force of our European society.
Tancredi Marini
For further information: