Claus Leggewie

The Future is to the South. How the Mediterranean Union can revitalize Europe¹

(Orig.tit.:Die Zukunft im Süden. Wie die Mittelmeerunion Europa wiederbeleben kann)

Hamburg, Edition Körber Stiftung, 2012

It’s good to hear every once in a while a voice outside the chorus. The common saying in Germany nowadays is that the South- European countries, from Greece to Portugal (Italy included, of course), are victims of their own vices: they spend more money than their revenues should be allowing to, they are highly indebted, and they constitute a peril to the common European currency, but above all to (economically) virtuous countries such as Germany. If a politician, either from the right or from the left, wishes to obtain immediate consensus and easy applauses he must continuously repeat that German tax-payers’ money must not serve to pay other peoples’ debts, particularly those of their “Southern” neighbours. It’s better to divide the Eurozone in two, that of a strong currency and that of a weak one, thus forcing it to resort to continuous periodical devaluations. So let us get rid of the so-called PIGS (i.e. Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) which are a threat to our serenity and well being. Truth be told, although this vision is not dominant, it is surely very “popular” in today’s Germany. Claus Leggewie, a political scientist at Essen University and a member of the Federal Government’s Scientific Consulting Committee for global environment and climate change, wrote a book, also in order to confute this thesis. Its title is significant (“The Future is to the South”) and the subtitle is even more so (“How the Mediterranean Union can revitalize Europe”). The argumentation is addressed first of all to his fellow-citizens, for them not to be misled by the returning lures of nationalism. His reflections are directed to the future, wishing to overcome the rhetoric of Europe’s common cultural roots, of the Mediterranean as the historical place of encounter between different cultures. Certainly, Granada testifies to the important role played by the Arabs in European history, as well as Alexandria in the continent’s culture. The memory of the past must serve, however, only to better look ahead to the future. The whole Europe’s future, not only that of the countries on its shores, depends upon the Mediterranean. Europe’s “mare nostrum” (Latin for “our sea”) is neither the Baltic nor the North Sea, but the Mediterranean. Not because the latter is a popular summer destination for tourists coming from the North, but because it is the arena of the great tragedies and challenges on which everyone’s future depends. A Europe shutting its eyes in front of the problems concerning the Mediterranean area is a Europe that gives up its future.

In order to support his thesis, Leggewie makes reference to four cities in which he lived and worked: Haifa, Dubrovnik, Algiers and Istanbul. Haifa was the place of a shattered dream of peaceful coexistence between Israelis and Palestinians. The Middle-East conflict remains one of the unresolved issues which will determine the future of the World and of Europe in particular. First of all because an anti-Semitic Europe is at the root of this conflict. Then because its political absence weakens the perspective for a lasting solution, capable of putting an end to regional collective violence. It is irresponsible for Europe to intervene, whenever it does so, in such an uncoordinated manner, trying to keep in with both sides, or, even worse, staying behind and watching idly. The last events in the Gaza Strip did confirm the bitter conclusion regarding a substantial absence of EU politics in one of the hottest regions in the world. Also Dubrovnik is a symbol. Not only of a distant past, made of different cultures in the ancient city then called Ragusa, but of a more recent one: the collapse of the Yugoslavian Federation and the breaking out of the Serbo-Croatian-Bosnian conflict. Once more, the European States acted separately, getting in the way of each other’s political measures. Therefore, they were unable to put out the fire they had contributed to ignite, intervening most of the times in support of US-made decisions. The adhesion to the EU of Slovenia, then Croatia, maybe soon of Serbia and hopefully of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Montenegro and Kosovo, nurtures the hope for a different future in the Balkans. However, for the time being, no solutions are to be found against the many risks. Continuing with his symbol-cities, Leggewie arrives in Algiers, with its colonial past, its liberation war, its long dictatorship, as well as with its own “spring”, its uncertain present, swinging between promises for democracy and Islamic fundamentalism, between global openness and the withdrawing into religious identity. Europe’s responsibilities do not only concern the vileness of colonialism but also its support of a corrupted dictator, Abdelaziz Bouteflika, and its ambivalence toward democracy-seeking movements. Besides the Algerian situation, the missed European response to the Arab Spring places Europe’s capacity to understand what happens in the Mediterranean’s Southern shore under serious doubt.

The fourth symbol-city is, quite understandably, Istanbul. A crossroads, both geographical and cultural, between Europe and Asia, Istanbul, as all of Turkey in general, plays a significant role in the Mediterranean. The Ottoman Empire left important footprints in all of Eastern Europe, reaching out as far as Vienna. Today, in addition to its demography and military force, Turkey is a crucial factor in the Middle East in terms of its relations with Israel, the Armenian question, the problem of the Kurdish population living inside and outside its national borders, the geopolitical unrest in Syria, Jordan, Iraq and Iran. But also its relations with Europe are both important and problematic. The relations are important at the economic and commercial level, as well as for the presence of millions of Turkish immigrants working in all the European countries, especially in Germany. Problematic because uncertainties and tensions have characterized initially the first Turkish attempt to adhere to the European Union, followed by both the decrease in the Turkish desire to join and the European will to let it in; a missed opportunity for both sides to open the gates of Islam westward, in the shapes and colours of the EU. The EU’s peripheral southern regions appear to be its “Achilles’ heel”, the litmus test of its inadequacy vis-à-vis the challenging scenarios regarding its own future. Not only does this inadequacy affect the EU outside its external borders, but it equally influences its relations within. Leggewie traces back the phases of Europe’s sad history of its inept reactions to the Greek crisis, a blind politics promoting “too little, too late”, unable to positively face the structural problems of its regions in need. Nor has it been successful in adopting a mid- and long-term strategy for a more balanced territorial development. According to Leggewie, a change of course would be necessary within the EU. He suggests constituting a “Mediterranean Union” that enables European political attention to find a productive new way to tackle the great challenges that the Mediterranean “periphery”encounters. Although Sarkozy had warned Europe, he was too busy countering the political status quo with Germany’s predominance and inventing a French protagonism, for substituting imagination with reality and seizing the potential of his own intuition. Such a potential, according to the author, is anything but imaginary. It “only” requires a Union that knows how to deliver itself, that overcomes its own decline, revitalizes trust in the public opinion and consolidates its democratic legitimacy, and which looks ahead without being hostage of rival short-term national interests. Some of the themes concerning a relaunch of European policies vis-à-vis the Mediterranean are concisely indicated in the book, while others, closer to the author’s heart and interests, get more attention. This is the case of immigration policies and the management of migration flows crossing the Mediterranean from the East Westwards and from the South Northwards. They cannot be stopped, but must be adequately regulated. It is also the case of energy policies, that might be better planned and aimed to cleverly develop solar power in the deserts of North Africa, thus reducing coal and oil dependencies in Europe. It is the case of environmental policies, especially of marine life, which concern fishing regulations, pollution control and the promotion of sustainable tourism, as well as bio-agriculture. Last but not least, there are the policies regarding cultural exchanges, especially between universities in cities near the coasts, where a considerable amount of Europeans live. In short, from Northern Europe we are invited to reconsider the centrality of the Mediterranean as an element for re-launching European integration. The message is important most of all because it is a minority voice in today’s Europe, though not entirely isolated, either in Germany or across other European countries.

Translated by Alon Helled

¹ It is also available in e-book format