1 2 3 4 5 >

¿Qué hay de nuevo en la red?

< 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 > ...

Últimos comentarios

  • JEF Official Statement on Paris Attacks

    15 de noviembre de 2015  18:00, de Reimar Glueck

    To all the members of JEF-Europe, ever since JEF has been a symbol for a resisting conviction of a united Europe. After this terror attack, all of you members become a symbol of this quote: «There is no better answer to hatred than fraternity.» So, even more now ... don’t be calm in carrying on the european future.

  • #WeAreUnited

    14 de noviembre de 2015  15:30, de JEF CRETE-UEF CRETE

    Dear French people, our thoughts of solidarity, from all the federalist members from Crete. Democracy,european identity, unity, our values. Vive La France.


  • The European Nation

    26 de octubre de 2015  19:44, de duodecim stellae

    Hey Ludger, nice article. (Wieso gibts den eigentlich nich auf Deutsch beim Treffpunkt?)

    I think Switzerland should be the role model for the European Union in many ways. The big language groups are subdivided in small cantons, so the nationalistic feelings within the language groups are kept smaller and the all-Swiss patriotism is very strong, which is part of switzerlands self-understanding of being one nation, despite the different language-groups. And yes, being NOT German, French nor Italian is part of the Swiss self-image, which makes it difficult for Switzerland to join the European Union, what is kind of ironic.

    It took more than hundred years for Switzerland to become a nation that respects all language groups and unites them in solidarity. The European unification process is only about 60 years old and it is still a long way to go. Guys, we’ll need to push things forward and show lots of endurance.

    The priority should be the promotion of European foreign language education in Europe, and not only English. (Just today I met a refugee from Africa in town who did not speak a word English or German, just French or Italian. If I never had learned a bit of those languages, I would not have been able to understand what he wanted from me and to communicate.)

    And what we really need is European media! Where are the pan-European newspapers? Where are pan-European broadcasting stations? There is Euronews, but we could have a European music channel, European Films... There are so much possibilities, but I doubt that something will grow out of the free market. It is up to the politicians to give us a pan-European public service broadcasting station!

  • Catalonia and the referendum phenomena

    24 de octubre de 2015  20:48, de Giuseppe Marrosu

    I agree. Catalonian independence from Spain could be good for the EU. Spain has no moral right to oppose a free choice by Catalonia on this issue. European democratic values are incompatible with the policy of preventing the self-determination of peoples. Anyway what do the spanish want? As a member of the EU independent from Spain Catalonia would share with them the same currency and external borders, the same EU budget (Catalonian money would still be flowing to Spain although less than now) and probably the same alliances (NATO). That is not OK with them, it seems that what they really want is to dominate the Catalans, force them to speak spanish, obey their king, depend on them. Is that for practical reasons (taxes) or for a need for self-assertion?

    Sure enough, if Catalonia somehow broke free of Spain it would be against the will of the spanish governement; then Spain would keep Catalonia from joining the EU and other international organizations. We should then expel Spain and welcome Catalonia. If Spain prevented that too, we should all leave the EU and the Euro and refound them with Catalonia and without Spain; and the new EU should not be bound to unanimity regarding accession or expulsion of member states. If some members do not like a new member they can always leave. The spanish would then eventually come to their senses and ask to join the new EU.

    This is how we should deal with all the countries who act contrary to european values and common interests. We should not negotiate with them. If they accept these very broad standards they’re in, if not, no one can oblige them, but no one can force us to keep them either.

    Freedom and independence work both ways.

  • The European Nation

    30 de septiembre de 2015  15:50, de giuseppe marrosu

    I agree to most of the article. A language should be democratically chosen, however, to be intended as the official common language, not replacing the existing ones but rather acting as a vehicle of communication so that all europeans can understand each other. The traditional existing languages would be not only be allowed but people would be encouraged to actively preserve them and keep them alive, including those that are endangered now by a linguistic dominator (catalan vs. spanish for example). Unity in diversity.

    More stress should be put on democracy: we europeans need to get to participate actively in european politics. We need a European republic. Monarchies are problematic because they contradict the notion of all people being equal, because they tend to identify with the nation and because it is hard to imagine a king, Queen Elizabeth say, as a european citizen loyal to an elected european president.

    Canada or Australia (or Tunisia, Taiwan, S. Korea or the US) would be welcome in the EU as far as I am concerned if they ever wanted to join. Russia too if it became reliable, pacific and democratic.

  • France, Germany, Italy and Luxembourg want more EU

    25 de septiembre de 2015 23:00, de Jacopo Barbati

  • A spectre is haunting Europe – The spectre of Jeremy Corbyn

    25 de septiembre de 2015  19:21, de Karl G.

    It’s interesting to see, how after so many years Lenin is still such an important issue. In Germany, where I live, there are always news about Lenin statues or busts and even art projects about him as iconographic icon: www.leninisstillaround.com

  • Mass deportation, razor fences and high walls: What are the concerns of anti-immigration EU countries?

    23 de septiembre de 2015  10:34, de Richard

    Angela Merkel has gravely miscalculated. She made an unusually instinctive and unconsidered response - and was perceived to say that Germany would willingly take unlimited numbers of migrants. This had the entirely predictable result of a flow becoming a mighty torrent and only days later Germany had to start putting up «We are full» signs and to unilaterally suspend Schengen, just as she had unilaterally decided to no longer abide by the Dublin accords.

    Now Germany, with the collusion of France, has pushed through a forced relocation quota by majority voting. The countries that voted against will immediately argue that they should not be bound by this, just as Germany felt it could abandon Dublin agreements and Schengen. They will say they are now being forced to help clean up the mess that Germany created and then found it could not cope with.

    They will also - rightly - argue that Germany’s position has multiplied the problem, many times over, by appearing to issue an open invitation. The 120,000 quota does not even begin to address the numbers involved. It will also mean that migrants will be taken to countries they do not wish to go to (most want to go to Germany or Sweden), knowing they are not wanted or welcome. They will undoubtedly head back out again as soon as possible, and such countries will adopt a policy of passively allowing this.

    It has caused a huge rift within the Union, and is a gift to sceptics like UKIP. It is a sure bet that Nigel Farage is even now writing speeches about «We must leave the EU, or be forced to take illegal immigrants by the Germans»

    Immigration is a very sensitive subject in most countries, and also one where national sovereignty is usually defended fiercely. The forced quota system simply plays into the hands of sceptics who will now point to it as an example of how countries no longer have sovereignty over affairs that most people still view as matters for their own country, not «Europe», to decide.

  • Jeremy Corbyn Vs Europe

    21 de septiembre de 2015  23:07, de Richard

    The Labour Party doesn’t have 600,000 members, let alone that many new members.

    It has attracted a large number of «affiliated members» and «registered supporters». These are persons who paid the nominal £3 fee in exchange for the right to vote in the leadership ballot.

  • Why is the Syrian Refugee Crisis Different ?

    14 de septiembre de 2015  12:06, de Suzana Carp

    Good article on several points, especially as it emphasizes that many of the Syrian asylum seekers (!) are highly skilled/qualified/urbanized.There are 2 factors which haven’t been mentioned: 1. Angolan migrants to Portugal and Somalis in Sweden often integrate along church-based groups (there are studies on this); 2. Daesh/Isis in conjunction with populism have created a fear of Islam in Europe. This is also why the situation is different (also, the other migrations weren’t labeled as a ’crisis’ because the crisis now is on both ends (origin & receiving end).

  • The European Perspective: Europe and the influx of refugees

    4 de septiembre de 2015  14:20, de Marcel Wollscheid

    Dear Iwantout, I try to answer some of your questions with insight from the situation in Germany:

    - Political asylum is anchored in the German constitution (Grundgesetz Art. 16): Therefore, there is no legal upper limit to the acceptance of refugees who are fleeing from political persecution. But of course, there are limits to the capacities of countries, which leads to the demand of a distribution of asylum seekers within the EU.

    - In Germany, there are different forms of rights of establishment for EU-citizens, Non-EU-citizens, asylum seekers in particular, which can include or exclude free movement and residence in the EU. The member states could work together to harmonize their legal setting to make the distribution work.

    - The decision about asylum in Germany is handled by officials of the BAMF (Department for Migration and Refugees) case by case in interviews with the asyulm seekers. It is a difficult, challenging task indeed, but we need to trust those officials to do their job.

    - Which is why there is a strong political movement in Germany to declare Kosovo, Montenegro and Albania as safe countries of origin. The federal government also recently published campaigns in the Balkan countries to emphasize that there is hardly any chance for asylum in Germany for citizens of these countries. Last month, the number of asylum seekers from the mentioned countries decreased by 30%.

  • The European Perspective: Europe and the influx of refugees

    4 de septiembre de 2015 13:16, de Chris Powers

    Let people in first, ask questions later. These numbers are great, but how about the numbers of refugees actually being taken in by the EU compared to tiny Lebanon. We are a continent built on humanitarian and liberal principles, and no country more so than the UK. So I find it desperately sad that the UK is a.) The dark bastion of euroscepticism, and b.) The rhetorical sewage pipe of anti-migration rhetoric.

  • The European Perspective: Europe and the influx of refugees

    3 de septiembre de 2015  22:23, de Iwantout

    Three questions and two facts.

    Ultimately how many refugees / migrants can be accepted by the EU or is there is no upper limit?

    How does a distribution system work when a person distributed to any country in the EU has the right as an EU citizen to immediately transfer themselves to any other country in the EU?

    Given that many refugees / migrants destroy their papers how is it determined which are genuine cases worthy of the support described and which should be quickly returned to their home countries as economic migrants?

    42% of asylum applicants registered in Germany until up to and including July 2015 came from Albania, Kosovo and Serbia.

    Eurostat figures for 2014, when the current wars were already in full swing, show that those fleeing Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Eritrea made up 38% of all asylum seekers. The remaining 62% came from countries such as Nigeria, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Russia, Algeria, Gambia, China etc.

  • How to Govern Disorder at Europe’s Borders

    24 de agosto de 2015  20:48, de Iwantout

    I wonder sometimes whether the realities of situations are actually considered by those with soaring visions of a federal Europe.

    “With its own army, Europe could react more credibly to the threat to peace in a member state or in a neighbouring states”. Six countries in the EU are formally neutral. Are we to suppose that any decision to use / threaten military force is to be on a QMV basis and the voices of those who have democratically decided not to belong to a military part are to be ignored? And in what circumstances would the EU see fit to deploy EU military resources to an EU member state?

    “The measures for the stabilization of the euro have proved unquestionably successful”. Perhaps the transformation of Greece into an EU protectorate and the undermining of the democratic process in the Netherlands and Finland to achieve the necessary votes for the third bail out are just characteristics of success in this context. By the way has anyone heard whether the IMF has agreed yet to participate in the bail out? Last I read they were refusing unless there is significant debt write off which of course was unacceptable to a number of EZ countries. Only a minor problem I am sure.

    Then the mention of “political unification”, anyone seen any evidence at all that a majority of people in any EU state is prepared to move in this direction? Certainly I see evidence of many states backing away from any mention of this. An enforced unification without a clear mandate is not likely to be stable or sustainable. I wonder at anyone who could suggest that the UK could be engaged in this, and as the second biggest economy in the Union its removal would fundamentally alter the balance of the Union itself.

    The question of refugees and migrants is clearly urgent and difficult. Without doubt genuine refugees should be helped. This would include equitable distribution between countries with safeguards to all member states of by removing the ability of refugees to move freely within the EU. (Failure to do so after all renders any distribution mechanism meaningless.)

    But economic migrants fleeing from poverty towards better opportunities, however understandably, are a different matter entirely. Given the growth of public hostility (not least in Sweden and Germany) it seems probably that the overwhelming majority of such individuals will have to be returned promptly to their originating countries if support for genuine refugees is to be maintained. It is a hard and unpleasant truth, but it is not a supportable proposition that everyone who wishes to enter the EU can be allowed to do so.

  • Europa and the bull: The significance of the myth in modern Europe

    21 de agosto de 2015  10:59, de Dustin

    Id say it has a connection with Lillith, Adams first wife before Eve. She would be more plausable here riding Satan.. As she was the one who flew out of the garden to be away from Adam.

  • Migration at the Channel Crossing

    2 de agosto de 2015  14:18, de Iwantout

    Let us assume that all the countries of the EU agreed a united policy of migrant “burden sharing”. Once the migrants have been allocated to ‘Country A’ what is to stop them deciding to use the freedom of travel to transfer immediately to any other country? Or is it being suggested that these migrants will be detained forever in the country the EU has assigned them to? Your solution is not any solution at all in a Union with freedom of travel.

    The situation of the migrants is of course wretched, but many (most?) seem to be economic migrants rather than genuine asylum seekers / refugees. At no point do you mention returning these individuals to their home countries promptly to address one aspect of the crisis and potentially reducing the pull effect we currently see.

    Nevertheless with the demographic issues facing much of the EU many migrants should still be welcomed and given the opportunity to settle. But the question really is how many new arrivals can be accommodated? Who decides that figure and what happens to the numbers who arrive in excess of that? Your item examines none of these critical points. Really what you seem to be advocating is the removal of all form of control which I suspect would be unacceptable to most people.

    Sorry to see you are having technical problems with your web site, hope you can fix them soon.

  • Europe at the point of no return

    19 de julio de 2015  22:15, de Iwantout

    This article was clearly originally written before the result of the Greek referendum and the subsequent EZ treatment of Greece which has been widely recognised as vindictive and humiliating.

    Obviously the NO vote won despite the interventions of Chancellor Merkel and President Juncker which tells you something about how they might be perceived by the Greek public. There then followed what was described by one EU official as “mental waterboarding” of Tsipras to force him to acquiesce regardless of the voice of the public.

    The fact that Germany was actively suggesting ‘temporary’ exit of Greece from the EZ illustrates that despite claims to the contrary, the euro is not irreversible and is merely a fixed exchange rate system. A position reinforced by the many EZ comments that they had plans in place for a Greek exit from the euro.

    The IMF was engaged in the Greek crisis because the EU institutions and many major states wanted it. The overwhelming majority of Greek debt is to the ECB and EZ governments. It is the refusal of the EZ to tell its tax payers that tens (hundreds?) billions euros have been lost supporting Greece that is at the core of this problem. Austerity alone can never resolve the problem nor recover the money. Until this is addressed the Greek crisis has not been solved, just momentarily paused.

    The IMF, who are the global expert on national insolvency, has described the new ‘third bail out’ deal as unrealistic without “debt relief measures that go far beyond what Europe has been willing to consider so far.” Indeed they have indicated that without such debt relief they are not willing to be involved in this bail out. But Germany (and others) entirely reject such debt relief as distinct to possibly extending time scales yet still want IMF involvement.

    As a final aspect of the ongoing crisis, the decision of the EU to use the EFSM funds for the emergency bridging loan to Greece despite solemn promises to non EZ states in 2010 that this would never happen is destructive of the trust that is supposed to exist between members of the EU, even allowing for the security guarantees for non EZ states.

    As you say, The EU (which is entirely distinct from Europe) reached the point of no return and stepped beyond it. Certainly reviewing the media across the EU suggests deep unhappiness about the actions of the EU Institutions and certain states, together with shock that a member state could be treated the way Greece has. I think we can all agree that the EU abandoned the pretence of “principles of solidarity and humanity” on the 13/07/15.

  • Brexit: a danger for both EU and the UK

    15 de julio de 2015  18:35, de Giuseppe Marrosu

    There is a problem of democracy: Greece said «no» to the compromise that was offered; our representatives at government level in the other 18 Euro countries were not ready to give anything better than that. Today the greek parliament could contradict the referendum result by accepting what the people rejected. That could save Greece, but it would be a black day for democracy.

    There is also a problem of equality: for Greece, but also for the UK, it is about living by the rules that apply to everybody else. Some of my taxes go to the EU. I don’t see why someone with the same economic status as me should pay less, only because he lives in the UK, as long as the UK is a member of the EU.

    Look, I am for an inclusive EU. Every free territory that meets the requirements, wants to join and accepts the rules MUST join, even if it is a Muslim Country in Sub-Saharan Africa. But those who join must stick to the rules or leave, even if they’re the craddle of our civilization, or one of the top net contributors.

  • Brexit: a danger for both EU and the UK

    8 de julio de 2015 19:05, de Chris Powers

    Indeed you should make sacrifices for the things you love, and therefore the creditor countries should sacrifice a little now, to make sure all countries remain in an ever closer union, as per the Treaty of Rome. The Greek opposition to austerity and support for a fiscal union shows they are more in favour (and in need) of Europe than most. I certainly don’t agree with or endorse everything Syriza is doing and saying, but I disagree with austerity even more.

    I suppose there is an ideological difference here between a smaller and faster integration process and a much slower but more inclusive European project with the same ambition as those charged with rebuilding Europe from the ashes of WW2.

  • Brexit: a danger for both EU and the UK

    8 de julio de 2015  18:54, de giuseppe marrosu

    I’m sorry Chris but if you say you love something you should also be ready for all sacrifices its defence requires. The greek are not willing to do that anymore.

    Austerity was necessary for a Country living above its means like Greece and it was beginning to work, too. But even if you think it was wrong, I say Greece could have chosen a better strategy to convince its partners to put it aside: fight privileges, extend sacrifices for a few months, until a new agreement was reached, avoid insulting, provocking and blackmailing your partners and flirting with rivals like Putin, cutting spendings on arms, agreeing to proposals to give Bruxelles control over the budget (they could have counter-proposed to generalize that to all EMU Countries, they turned down the idea as an attack to their independence)...

    There is still hope but time and margins for a deal are running out.

    Also, a smaller group of countries willing to respect the rules might make a better Union than a larger but unruly federation.

    I say if the rebels - Greece, Hungary, Sweden, Denmark and off course (sorry) the British Islands left the EU or accepted all the rules that apply to Portugal, Italy or Estonia, we would be much stronger and better set for more integration.

1 2 3 4 5 >