"Peut-on parler d'identité européenne ?"

(interview en anglais)

1-How do you define European identity? On which basis should it be defined? On a civic basis, on a cultural basis or on both of them?

I think it is a mix. There is some kind of cultural heritage: the Roman civilisation, Greece, Christianity, secularism (separation of church and state). European identity is a mix of those elements, sometimes in conflict, which are related in a specific mixture, which is totally original in the world.

2- Do you think contemporarily there is another than the EU?

Yes, sure. They are four or five civilisations. For example Japan, China, India, Muslim world are different civilisations. Europe is only one of those, which is very close to the civilisation of the USA and South America. The occidental civilisation.

3- Do you think there should be clear cut boundaries of the EU?

It all depends on the idea you have of the EU. I am a federalist. I try to build up a European federation. To build up a European civilisation, you need to create some kind of boundaries... It is not possible to build a European federation which would be contradictory with cultural identity... So in my opinion, there are some boundaries which are culturally defined, and Turkey does not belong to the same world.

4- European identity has been in an ongoing construction process within the EU?

…there is a kind of rediscovery by European people of the common phase of the culture, but I would not say that they are building a new kind of culture, or a new world…

5-Do you think top-down approaches and initiatives of the EU are enough to construct European identity within the EU? What kind of initiatives can be done to decrease the huge gap between elite identification with the EU and feeling of belonging of ordinary citizens to the EU?

The first thing would be to stop with the EU enlargement. That is one of the biggest problems in the EU now... We are now on a road that accepts a kind of Europe without boundaries, with cultural heterogeneity, with different kinds of religious beliefs... When I discuss with people on the street, they tell me "What is that? We will have Turkey, Bulgaria; I don’t know those people…!" We should tell European citizens that what we are building is something not only they can accept but they want! I think that unfortunately, at this moment, it is absolutely not the case…Especially in a globalised world; people want Europe to be more protective. They don’t want to live in a globalised world without any kind of protection; they want some kind of boundaries, also economic boundaries, to protect the rights of workers, etc… To conclude, I would propose first to make a stop in the enlargement process, and second, to give European citizens a sense of protection against what they feel as the aggression of globalisation. But at this moment, I am afraid we are just doing the opposite and that is why support for the European construction is decreasing nowadays in all European countries

6- The Role of Education Policy

To reinforce European construction and to create a common feeling among Europeans, the best solution would be to have a common language in Europe. The actual lack of common language makes it harder to build a feeling of European community among European citizens. My proposal would be to achieve a kind of language agreement between all European countries, in which each European citizen would have the right to be educated in his home language (what I call the language of identity), then he could learn and practice a common language for all Europeans (I personally do not see another possibility than English, but this proposal seems to be difficult to accept by some people) and then you would have a third one, a chosen language, the language of choice… Thus in my opinion, having a common language for all Europeans would be the most important step to make now in education from a European perspective.

7-In terms of construction of European identity, which policies and institutions are more important and effective?

- If you consider the citizens' point of view, the most important and effective thing, in my opinion, is probably the political attitude of national governments towards Europe, and the involvement of national leaders in the European construction, or the attitude from national parties towards the European construction. If they are positive, if they tend to explain to people what we intend to do by creating Europe everyday, the citizens of their country will probably understand better, and follow them… I do not think that the most important thing for the construction of a European identity would be the role of the European institutions themselves, it seems too far from people and their identity. Let us take the Council of Ministers, for example: citizens usually don't know anything about what the Council is doing..

- Another important thing from this point of view is the EURO, because it has really created a sense of community between Europeans.

- The EU flag could also play an important role, if we had a real European army. But for the moment, when soldiers are sent to Lebanon, they are not going with the European flag: they are going with their national flag... If we could relate it with a common army, it could mean something. But if you do not have a common army, it does not mean anything. It will surely take a long time before people consider it as really important. For instance, when you have a football match in Europe, nobody sings the European anthem. That is a pity.

-I do not think it is by reinforcing the concept of "a European citizenship". As I already said, if you want to create a common feeling among European, it would be more important to learn and use a common language. I am afraid that the "European citizenship" is a concept created by some bureaucratic or intellectual leaders, trying to find theoretical solutions to real problems. In my view, it is a concept that does not make such sense among real people.

- The Constitutional Treaty is also really important and necessary for the functioning and the decision-making process in the European system, but probably not for building a feeling of European citizenship.

-I am a bit sceptical…Contrary to the U.S., Europe has not been able to communicate efficiently, to deliver a cultural product to the rest of the world. If you watch French films, they are mostly for a French public; they don’t really interest Turkish people, because they are made for French citizens. We are too self-oriented, we address our countries, our citizens…So we lack what the Americans have, i.e. the ability to build a strong cultural message that we can send to the world. Cultural policy of Europe is a bit disappointing from this point of view.

8-Do you think that there will be an imagined European community one day, which is complementary to nations of Europe?

It will take a long time! If we are unable to give European citizens the sense of protection they need and a kind of boundary, the support for the European construction will keep decreasing. Europe will not disappear but will probably become a kind of "United Nations"…I feel there is a big danger now, and for sure, it is impossible for me to be a federalist and to support a further enlargement, especially to Turkey…Most of our citizens have already big difficulties to accept the last enlargement ! Are we really willing to go further and that fast?! Citizens complain to me: "We have now Romanian, Bulgarian in the European Community, and now Turkey? Are you sure we have to do that?

9- In which fields do you think membership of Turkey is beneficial and in which fields it may have negative impacts on the EU?

I clearly see the interest for Turkey to be part of EU, but I do not see the interest for the EU, if Turkey will be part of the European construction. We have now a Customs Agreement with Turkey. We also have a military alliance in NATO, and we may cooperate in different fields, for example in the fight against terrorism, or with regards to pipelines supply of energy…but I do not see the interest for the European community, if Turkey will be a member. On the contrary, it will be dangerous, because it would mean for me decreasing support of public opinion, biggest difficulties to finance European policies... Remember Turkey is a big country, with great necessity of money…especially the Anatolian region. Turkey is a state, which is currently unable to understand the functioning of the European institutions. Turkey has always been part of international organizations, where each state has the possibility to say "Yes" or "No". Turkey cannot understand the nature of the European integration, the functioning of the European institutions. The culture of the Turkish state, Kemalism seems incompatible with the functioning of the European system.

10-What do you think about the effects of possible membership of Turkey on European identity? Do you think it will have a negative, challenging or contributing effect?

My position, as a federalist, is the following: membership of Turkey will increase cultural heterogeneity of Europe and will increase tensions, instead of building some kind of "new synthesis". I do not see the possibility of a synthesis. Believe me: I am a friend of Turkey! But Turkey will be tomorrow one of the most important states of the planet…And I do not see that compatible with the kind of Europe I want. It is not only a state, it’s a very “specific model of civilisation”. I consider Turkey as a unique case. Turkey is not Arab, nor Persian, and has a very specific and great history like Russia. They are very specific states.

11-How do you define your identity?

I am European! That is a mix of Greek, Roman civilisation, Christianity, laicism…I am a sort of this mix…I have been working here (NDLR in the EP) for more than 20 years, you know…

12-Working at the EP makes your European identity stronger?

Yes, really! But at this moment, I am a bit disappointed, because of the diminishing support for the European construction among citizens. I feel that everyday. And it is really disappointing.