EU working at Plan B in case of Brexit

Juncker said there was only one option, Mogherini confessed there is other on the table

by Emanuele Bonini

The European Commission is setting up the Plan B for the United Kingdom, in case the British people decide to leave the European Union voting for a Brexit. For the first time since the beginning of the British affair, the European Commission admitted that the EU is working to the "stay-out" scenario. «If the UK referendum takes a different decision of not staying in the EU, I would do all that I can to guarantee bilateral relations with the UK», said yesterday the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, Federica Mogherini. She said MEPs of the committee on Foreign Affairs of the European Parliament that in case of a Brexit nothing has to be considered as granted, since a new relation «would be negotiated between the UK and the other 27 Member States». This is a clear admission of a change in Commission view. Still few days ago the president of the European Commission, Jean-Claude Juncker, stated that in Brussels «we don’t have a Plan B, we have a Plan A», making clear that the Plan A foresees Britain will stay in the European Union. Listening to Mogherini it appears clear a Plan B is there, with the EU institution already working on it.

EU asked Member States emergency plans on migration

Meanwhile the Council wrote a new paragraph to the draft regulation for the new Frontex: Greece and Italy will be isolated in case they fail in secure the European external borders

by Emanuele Bonini

Europe starts working on worst scenarios. Migration crisis is now more than a crisis, it is close to be a real emergency. In a joint statement issued today by the European Commission and the Dutch rotating presidency of the EU Council admitted to be «concerned about the developments along the Balkan route and the humanitarian crisis that might unfold in certain countries especially in Greece», calling on «all countries and actors along the route to prepare the necessary contingency planning to be able to address humanitarian needs, including reception capacities». The Dutch minister for Migration Klaas Dijkhoff and European Commissioner for Migration, Dimitris Avramopoulos, assured their joint determination to pursue a European approach to the refugee crisis, although Member State are already reintroducing border controls and are ready to isolate Greece in dealing with migrations.
The joint statement confirmed the worried status of the European Council, the EU institutions representing the 28 Member States. Diplomats admitted only few days before the joint statement that there is general concern over the development of the migration flows. «As far as we know at the moment the are not substantial changes in the routes», the diplomats said, but clearly the situation is felt as always more out of control. The Dutch presidency, until June the voice of the European governments, pushed the European Commission to do something, and the results are the emergency measures. «In parallel» with the national contingency plans asked to the Member States, «the Commission is coordinating a contingency planning effort, to offer support in case of a humanitarian crisis both outside and within the EU, as well as to further coordinate border management», said Commissioner Avramopoulos. Europe is basically preparing for the worst, considering there is no way out and no hope to invert the flows. EU officials explained that the number of migrants and refugee already arrived in the EU is too high, and is no higher only because of adverse atmospheric conditions. «To stem the flows» of incoming people is the main goal, and with no trend inversion Member States are acting to close their borders.

Europe to lose anyway in front of British issue

To be smashed by sceptics or to lose political power. For the EU there is no emergency exit, but only lose-lose formula

by Emanuele Bonini

Whatever will happen Europe can't win its game. Blocked in the grip of Eurosceptics and anti-integration forces, the European Union can't do nothing but survive. The choice of accept the UK requests is therefore the lesser evil, which is not good by definition. One of the conditions put on the table by prime minister David Cameron is the possibility to avoid further integration. This is the end of any wish for all those who have been asking the United States of Europe. Letting go the United Kingdom away would open the door to unpredictable scenarios and unexplored situations, and the mild recovery of the European Union could be delete in a while. But on the other hand no further political integration means have a the opposite of a single federal project, so the European Union will be never a Union. The EU is denying itself, institutionalizing a division. There will be a Union of 19 Member States (all those with the single currency) plus all those who will like joining in the future. Europe has already been beaten, in the sense it can't win. What has been proposed to Europe is a lose-lose formula, where the obliged (even forced?) decision will be presented as the a victory for everybody.
It has been said all national delegations are coming to Brussels with a «war room of layers», in order to evaluate the Treaties in the most extensive way possible to have those interpretations needed to answer the British demands. What it has not been said is there is also another war room composed by another special army of experts in charge of making a «wording work» to pack a masterpiece of dialectic whose only purpose is giving the idea everything is OK and will be in the future, too. This is something to agree with. Saying the European Union come to the terminus would be not an easy task, but would be going on with a mutilated Union? The answer comes by its own. The United Kingdom asked to have enshrined the principles of no further union and more power to national Parliaments. The idea of a political union goes right in the opposite direction, that of transfer of sovereignty to the EU institutions. Asking for making irreversible a stop in such a transfer is making irreversible the stop of the European project, with all that it means.

Europe bets on a risky energy package

Too many conditions to be respected as basis of new legislative proposals. Despite the purpose of new regulation, doubts are there

by Emanuele Bonini

Doubts and shadows over the sustainable energy security package presented by the European Commission. Goals and political intention are clear and comprehensible, but what Brussels is proposing is really something achievable? The impression is a general underestimation of the existing risks linked to a real implementation of the package. All the elements of the proposal are surrounded by a certain number of «if». Basically the proposal of the European Commission can work only at certain conditions, whose fulfillment is not given for granted. Thus, the European Union is risking to have a feckless package given the interdependence with unpredictable scenarios. Thus, is the sustainable energy security package what the EU really need? The latest package showed vulnerabilities, and the possibility to have a wear, ineffective and inefficient package is not far away. Let's see the critic point of the proposal.

Solidarity. The idea is to introduce not only in theory but above all in practice a «solidarity principle» among Member States in order to «ensure the supply of households and essential social services, such as healthcare, in case their supply was affected due to a severe crisis». Now, as far as it was possible to see, the European Member States acted during the Greek crisis on the basis of the principle «save Greece to save (our) money». If a Grexit didn't take place was just because of personal economic interests rather than a spirit of real solidarity. Nobody gave the impression to really care of Greece (and indeed nobody did), and the current refugee crises is once again showing that solidarity is not possible in case of emergencies (is this refugee crisis a «severe crisis»? I think so...) or when national scopes are put at stake. So, how can be sure that Member States can be ready to offer any national gas reserve in case of disruption in supplies? The NIMBY approach (Not In My Back Yard) is today the only thing the European States have in common.

Italians, do you know what is right and wrong?

When an unfair episode is avoided somebody is punished, according to media. Is this a demonstration of ethics problems?

by Emanuele Bonini

Italy, what's wrong with you? If wrong is really wrong, of course. There is more than an impression about the huge problem Italy has in distinguish between what is right and what is wrong. It is basically a problem of principles and ethics when the definition of good and evil are put in question, as it is for Italians.  There is a small apparently not meaningful episode which showed the Italian approach. It happened at the beginning of the year, during a football match. For the first time the Italian Serie A tested the goal-line technology, a new generation tool able to understand whether the ball crosses the goal-line. With ASRoma playing in Verona and leading 3-2 against Chievo, the referee man granted a free-kick to Chievo. The striker shot and scored a goal, but it was possible to convalidate it only after have watched the goal-line technology elaboration of the free-kick. In fact the referee man didn't give any goal, then he had to correct himself saying the new score of the match was fixed on 3-3. All the media started reporting that ASRoma was «punished» or «condemned» by technology. Nothing more wrong. No one has been punished, and technology was not responsible fot nothing but making what it has been created for. Technology made clear what was not, avoiding a wrong decision and, as a direct consequence, an eventual unfair defeat. So, what happened is basically fair. People should underline that technology made justice instead of saying it condemned somebody. This clearly shows how in Italy the idea of right and wrong has another nature, well different from that one shared outside the country.